The Sun. — London, England, 1839-02-26 00:00:00

upoy their property arose more from misconception of their claims than purposed injustice, and stating that the whole annual income of Hereford Cathedral was cot above 4,7001. divided among such a number of persons that th ere was not on an average 901. a-year to Nara. When the Ecclesiastical Commission consented to make these recommendations, they seemed not to have borne in mind how soon after the dissolution of smaller monasteries the dissolution of larger mo s eeeries followed. Did it neveroccur to them that when mitred Abbots consented to the dissolution of the tretler monasteries they were sanctioning a precedent ahich they soon after owed not their own reduction ett their total destruction? The first success of the Hselesiastical Commission in the measures which they teeposed to adopt with regard to these Cathedral !igoitasies, would furnish just such a precedent with o r lard to the existing Establishment, and would inflict a it such a blow as no advantages to be derived from ss measure could possibly counterbalance ; not that he els by any means inclined to undervalue any measure aviog for its object to supply the spiritual wants of large ei extensive districts, but he would contend that we were not at liberty to take away the property of other for that purpose, but those spiritual wants ought to upnlisel at the expense of the nation at large. Such as the one on which this measure was lit suit very well with the feelings of certain in that House, who held that the State pos the absolute power of disposal over the property ha Church. He (Sir R. Inglis) held no such doc a_'s ; he contended that the State was merely the trus f the property of the Church.lf the duties consequent rt the enjoyment of that propertyremained unexectited, be property enjoyed by the Church be abused, such et:se would furnish a subjeet for legal inquiry, and by teans of legal inquiry, and of legal inquiry only, could a case he adjudicated and such wrongs remedied. t he would ever deny the right of the Legislature to e . .and alienate this property, not for any wrong— for any misappropriation —not for any just cause forfeiture—but merely as a matter of conve -am. It had been said that as four canons were retained, that number was quite sufficient. Ithl it be said that that number was sufficient as a ar,l fur learning or for piety ? In every other , Fession there existed rewards for those who had dis piished themselves, and why should the number of •se rewards he less in the Church than in other pro ,ions? Parents w-.)uld be guided in the selection of a 'rescion for their sons.by the prosvet of these rewards ; I when the number of clergymen was considered, he t gay that he considered that the number of sup dignitasirs bore too small a proportion. He would that this was a low view of the subject, but it was —.7 not to be wholly overlooked, inasm uc h as it is operate very powerfully on parents in the choice profession for their sons. Whenever the State, or r the governing power—fur frequently the govern sower had overruled the State and Church—whenever eiverning power had interfered with the Church such ference had alwa3s been detrimental. The govern power !fad in the tisress of Henry VIII. and Eliza , compelled the Church to give up their broad and to depend upon the tithes ; and it was rather then the Government had originally created that it should now turn round ulna those upon vrong had been inflicted, ani seek to remedy xpense. It had been said that four Canoes each Cathedral, and that that number else suth. ient ; but what said the Chapter of the dral Church of Carlisle on this subject? Why, from the natural infirmities of age it would he in)- We to reckon upon the regular attendance of more Iwo out of the lour Canons ; and until a new order gs should be introduced into human nature its drone kti nii I must necessarily be the case. He was sorry that d been thought necessary to destroy in instsnces the names by which these digni s had been always distinguished. Where the necessity of calling the Canons Resi iary by any other title ? And where these (.alts had borne the name of Prebendiazies, why that appellation to be dropped ? He considered it was unworthy of the Legislature to waste its in such puerile alterations as these. It had been d by his Noble Friend that both the Bishops and Crown had consented to give up a large portion of • patronage. He considered that this was a great I, more particularly as regarded the Crown. He was to certain that this was neither the time nor the 3.itry in which any diminution of the patronage of the Levu could be considered as necessary. The time ould soon arrive, and perchance bad already arrived, her instead of its being laid down as formerly that the, atlas/Ice of the Crown had increased, was increasing, i and ou g ht t o b e di m i n i s h e d, i t wou ld b e ac k now l edged 4 that the influence of the Crown ought rather to be in creased, creased, a n d h e cons id ere d t h at any measure b y which 1 the patronage of the Crown should be at all lessened, i e mini be in itself an evil not to the Crown only but 1 also to the Church. As long as the Church and the Crown Ishould remain in connection with each other the country would have confidence that each would attend to the 1 1. - elare of the other, that the State would not interfere I with the privileges of the Church, nor the Church at- I tempt to meddle with the administration of the State. Ile had a.iready said so much that he would not enlarge Further on this subject, but he felt that he should have been guilty of a dereliction of his duty, had he not re -t' the further progress of the measure, w hi c h, , 0 :•'iout being so intendd, would operate most fatally , •••: -I , - interests of the Establishment. The existence i .• .. s Canonaries was not perhaps essential to Chris ; ti-.nity, but at all even t s it was e ssen ti a l t o th e Constitu • • , s •:: of the Established Church, and any measure i ii ving for its object the destruction of these offices, 1 would also tend to the destruction o Ith e Establishment itself, and be must again protest against the doctrine that the property of the Churc (considered as the property of the State. Mr. STANLEY hoped he shoal nermitted to Is , r7 at few words respecting certain nardships in the dioceses of North Wales ; which ho trusted would in il lure the Noble Lord to modify his Bill. The dioceses in North Wales had been formed from benefices in ivarious times, all of them of comparatively recent date, !lie earliest being in the year 1681. The tithes belong ing to parishes containing fully one-third of the whole e. illation of Wales, had already been alienated. In thu diocese of Bangor, the Bishop and Rector drew their tithes from a district containing 16,000 inhabi tants. There was a parish in Anglesea, which before was attached to an archdeaconry, that was afterwards ess%gned by the Act to the Bishopric of Bangor. Some time ago this parish was not populous--now it con tained 7,000. It produced 9001. a year, and had been most ably served for 26 years by a most exemplary curate, who from the tithes, and Queen Anne's Bounty, and.6o/. a year from the Bishop, had an income of 2001., while 700/. or 800/. a-year were taken away from the neneral funds to augment the benefices of England. The length of that parish was seven miles. Those wive -were not acquainted with the surface of N'izsles, and judged by the good roads and easy communication s of England, would think this a very convenient extent. But the fact was, a parish of seven miles long in Wales would be a whole day's I Jearney. One of these parishes was 17 miles long, and was held by the Bishop of Bangor, who did the duty 1 7 , a Cur a t e . T here were many other cases of equal ' rd slin•—( Hear, h ear .) As regarded Dissenters, there Iwas no part of Great Britain which required so much at tention at the hand of the Government as Wales. Atter)- , i ion was required not only on behalf of those who belonged tat the Ch urc h , but also on account of those who had I's. , it, but who, if carefully treated, were still inclined to riw - n to it.—(Hear, hear.) Although he (Mr. S.) ea, on that side (the Liberal) of the House, he was a i , iend to the Church, and wished to see it in an effective ,(O. —( Hear, hear.) He did not agree with an Hon. Member who had averted that the House had no right to interfere with the Church. He thought the House had a right to interfere, but it should use that right with moderation and for the benefit of the Church. He was certain that the Noble Lord was actuated by a sincere anxiety for the welfare of the Church, and that he - ...0ut.1 not attempt anything that would militate against i'3 it. t -rests. Mr. HUME was anxious to make a few observations tar t -diet had fallen from the Honourable Baronet, the Member for the University of Oxford, or he might he accused of inconsistency regarding the evils of the Church. The fact was, he and the Hon. Ba ronet had always maintained a pretty consistent course on sus.h subjects, the Hon. Baronet to protect the abuses of the Church, and he (Mr. Hutne) to put them down.— ( Laughter, and Hear). Ever since he had had a seat in -let House,he had always regarded as amongst the greatest ' uses the abuses of the Church of England, and while he ' a seat in the House he should, please God, never e to point out those evils, and what lie considered to the cause of those evils, which rendered that Estab• }intent, intended for the religious and moral benefit of ; ,o ei+qy, a means for promoting ignorance, fostering pre judice, and misapplying the very means which had been placed in its hands for the general instruc nn out of the property of the pubic. This was toe course in which the Church had ton long fcieseded.—(Cheers from the Opposition). If not, :ea what were their reforms for, and what. were the !,,i,crts of the Church Connni_sioners for ? Had it ras ben tried even by Archbishops and Bishops, and ..sdernned ? otherwise would a Noble Lord have ac rioaledged before the House the existence of evils if In"Y were not too bad to be denied ? If they were to '',,l,•iate. until the Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford . 1 : , 1 : l t(. d out abuses, they would never begin to reform. I;,,nugli lie (Mr. H.) had before opposed the Noble i,.,. ? it was riot because he objected to his principles, t e ' n ' t‘d ec4 b u i se he did not then go far enough—he con n,.,,aa wi m tb self with reforming by piece-meal. He 189,000/. the Bishops. Those that sanctioned 1: v : . _ ,,, f or the Bishops, while there were 3,000 „;"-toutniidoerBBor/. each, were ' not friends of the Church, promotion ~ P e , td of religious instruction, nor to the , or education. I t :;,: „ ( g ic o u ate l lvat H.) had always ev ery man e who p did his duty should be e s , ,b o ii tiotl P c aid• Ho had always contended for . 0.. . • sieecure,, . s Bill, a i He was, therefore, a friend it x w o 9n e ld put down . some abuses, but he - ' ' I7 Y the Noble Lord did not go further. Ile ..........,... hoped it was not necessary to touch upon what the Hon. Baronet had said, to the effect that Parliament had no right to interfere here. Why, who gave the property to the Church but Parliament ?—(Oh, oh.) If not, then he should be glad to know how the Pro testants obtained the property from the Catholics? He supposed they did not steal it ?—(Laughter.) The Protestants got the property by the sanction of law, and if the law gave it it might take it away.—(Hear, hear.) He regretted the Noble Lord had not courage to go further with his reforms, and proceed to a greater extent to provide for that religious destitu tion which existed in many parts of the country. In his opinion every one of the Prebendaries ought to be put down—the Chapters were entirely useless. Those ought all to be reduced, and ample funds ought to be provided for the maintenance of those Clergymen who were now without the means of decent subsistence. He approved of this Bill as far as it went, although it was a Bishop's Bill. He thought there were few real friends of the Church who would oppose it., although to him, and those who thought with him, it must appear only a partial reform. But perhaps that reflection had induced the Noble Lord to expect far greater support than he might otherwise look for. So far as the warts of the Church were concerned the measure did not go far enough. He would be glad to see the Hon. Baronet try in that House a motion for a large grant to the National Church. The Bill gave au thority to revalue the property of the Church, and when the returns were made up it would be found that a large surplus would be at the disposal of the Howse for general education, and religious instruction, by re ducing the enormous salaries of the Bishops and other dignitaries. He considered the Church as a Corpora tion, and that any portion of its revenues might be taken by Parliament and applied to different purposes. He would give his cordial support to the Bill. Mr. ESTCOURT would not trespass long upon the time of the House, but he could not omit entering his protest against a great many of the provisions of the measure. Although some of its provisions had been ap proved of by the Commissioners, yet some parts of the Bill did trot emanate from that Commission, but were the production of the Noble Lord, and probably of the Government to which he belonged. His object in rising was, after protesti ng aga i ns t th e secon d rea di ng of th e Bill, to advert to expressions used by the Noble Lord, although, perhaps, not so intended by him, in reference to a petition presented by his Hon. Colleague, the Member for the University of Oxford. The Noble Lord had given a tone and colouring to the expres sions it: that petition, as if the object of the petitioners was to prevent any alteration taking place in the Church Establishment, to prevent any improvement being effected, or any abuses being retnedied. If Hon. Members would read the petition, they would find that so far front that being the case the petitioners did admit the destitute state of some parts of the Church Esta blishment, and with reference to the subject under con ,ideration, they expressed a readiness to inquire into the state of the Church Establishment, and stated that they could raise no objection to any improvement or reform that might be required. He thought it his duty to set the Hoene and the Noble Lord eight upon that, subject. It was unnecessary for him to answer the observations of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny because they were precisely of the same attract, r as those he had repeated on former occasions. The Hon. Member :Mated then, as he had on former occasions, that he was a ft iend to tl:e Church, :led that lie never wished to abstract from its revenues, but he would venture to say, that there never was any proposition made for ab stracting from the revenues of the Church, whether they were to be well cr applied, that the Hon. Member had not given it his most cordial ,upport He had now stated that he would neverrest satisfied until the Prebends were destroyed and the Canons were destroyed, and, in feet, it was well known that the object of the Hon. Mem ber and his friends was to reduce the Church from a Na tional Establishment to the state of an ineffieient and inferior sect. He would conclude by entering his protest against the second reading of the Bill. Lord DUNGANNON also felt it to be his duty to protest against the measure. The Hon. Member for Kil kenny had acted with his usual candour, in approving of e very measure which was calculated todestroy the Church. In the present case he had travelled another step, and had thrown out a hint that he would not be sorry to see the property at present belonging to the Church applied to other than ecclesistical purposes. He (Lord D.) would be sorry to see the Church reduced to such a provision as the Hon. Member for Kilkenny would concede to it ; not only the interests of the Church but the best inte rests of the country at large would be destroyed. The Hon. Member stated that the Bishops were overpaid, and that their incomes should be reduced to 3,0001. a year. He hoped if such was the case the Hon. Mem ber would find out some fund for supporting the chari table institutions and schools which had been hitherto done by the Clergy of the Established Church. When ever these premeditated wholesale changes took place they must be for the worse. He (Lord D.) was un willing to see those institutions lowered and de graded, although he had no objection that, all real abuses should be remedied.—(Hear, hear.) He most cordially concurred in every remark which bad fallen from the Right Honourable Bart. the Mem ber for Oxford, and be must enter his solemn protest against the second reading of the Bill. In such a cause, if only six went out along with him he would be proud to form one of such a minority. Mr. LAW did not intend to offer any opposition to the second reading of the Bill, but he begged that in doing so it might be distinctly understood that he did not concur in all its details. He was anxious for ouch a reform of the Cathedral establishments as would render them more efficient for all ecclesiastical pur poses. He was anxious that the great and extensive object of religious instruction might be effected by con ditions imposed upon persons holding Cathedral prefer ments. He begged it to be understood, that in not dividing the House against the measure, he reserved to himself the right of opposing any of its details. He protested, in the names of those he represented, against the passing of the Bill, and he hoped that his silence at present would not be taken as an acquiescence in the measure. Mr. G. PALMER said, he had not intended to take any part in the debate on this measure, but there was one point which he considered of importance, which had not yet been touched upon. The Bill proposed to do away with a great many of the a pp o i n t ments h e l d b y persons in th Cathedral, but still it left some places behind. He wished to know how the property attached to those livings which were left were to be managed ? That was a question which might fairly be put to the Noble Lord. Mr. WHITE was surprised to find the friends of the Church coming forward to oppose a Bill of this nature, brought in by the Secretary of State, and sanc tioned by two Archbishops, and set eral of the Rev. Prelates : he was as great a friend to the Church as any Hon. Member opposite, but he could not avoid saying that it was impossible for him to support the pluralisms and sinecures existing in the Church. He felt bound for the interests of real religion to come forward and protest against their existence as useless. He thought the Bill did not go far enough. He wished to do away with every sinecure of the Church. The Noble Lord, the Member for Durham, said that he would vote against the Bill, but upon what ground be could not conceive. He (Mr. W.) had the honour to represent a large seaport in the county, and he could assure the House that there was not Church accom modation in that town for three-fourths of the population. Had it not been for the exertions of the Dissenters of that country, the min ers , o f w h om the population pri n cipally consisted, would be in a state almost approaching barbarism. Lord CLIVE trusted that the Noble Lord would postpone the Committee on the Bill until after Easter. As the sessions in %Vales shortly came on, and many Members from the Principality would be absent, it would be very desirable that the Committee should be postponed. Lord JOHT' RUSSELL would propose that the Bill be committed on that day fortnight. He would propose then to go into Committee on the Bill, so that if any motion was moved by the Hon. Members oppo site, the Bill might be got through the Committee before Easter ; but if any opposition was intended to be offered, he would propose that the Bill be reported, and that the further consideration of the Report be post poned until after Easter, for the purpose of hearing any observations opposed to it. He did not wish to press the Bill in the absence of the Noble Lord, or any other Members, but he could not agree to put off the Committee on the Bill for so lengthened a period. Sir ROBERT PEEL, however sorry he might be to differ with many of his friends whom he highly re spected, still felt himself obliged to support the Bill. He would not now enter into the details of the mea sure, as it was altogether unnecessary. He would only consider the principle involved, which was, that in the present state of the Church it was desirable that some portion of the Cathedral revenues should be applied for the purpose of supplying the acknowledged deficiencies in the moral and religious instruction of the people— that was the great question involved in the principle of the Bill. If he understood it rightly the main provi sions of the Bill were in conformity with the recom mendation of the Commissioners appointed by the Crown a few sessions ago. When that Com mission wa s appointed there was a prevailing impression on the minds of many, both lay and eccle siastical, that it was the true interest of the Church, considering the evils that arose from the want of spi ritual education were so enormous, that it became the bound en duty of the Executi ve G ove rnment t o consider materially the state of the Church in that respect, and to point out a remedy. Under this impression the appointment of the Commissioners took place. That Commission consisted exclusively of persons well affected to the interests of the Church, and its appoint ment gave almost universal satisfaction. The ex t, ndcd demands for an alteration in the Church greatly exceeded the views of its supporters, but there was a general wish on their part that the reforms recommended by the Commissioners might be adopted as safe and expedient. It was true that the I demands for alterations in th e Ch urch were not now so vehement as they were some ti me ago ; b ut he thought that if the House took advantage of the cessation of clamour to postpone reforms which might be effected consistently with the security of the Church, he did not think they would place themselves in a very envious position. His Hon. Friend, the Member for Oxford, in the extract which he read from the Report of the Commissioners, had left out one very material part of the duty which they had to perform, because one of those duties was to suggest measures calculated to remedy the evils complained of. His Learned Friend had certainly stated abundant ground to justify his de cided opposition to the Bill. He lied stated that it was net competent for the Legislature to pass a Bill divert ing from the Church the property which belonged to it. Now he (Sir. Robert Peel) could not agree with him in that, because he considered that any measure making a disposition of Church property entirely depended upon the animus with which it was brought forward.— (Hear, hear.) If any person attempted to divert the property of the Church to any other objects than those that were calculated to benefit the spiritual interests of the community, he should be the first to oppose it ; hut if measures were proposed that were inteuded to add to the efficiency of the Church, and to the spiritual in terests of the Church, he could not say that he for one would resist that measure upon simple grounds. —( Hoar, hear.) If he saw benefit was likely to arise from any measure to the Church, that mea sure should have his support, according to the principles laid down by his lion. Friend the Member for Oxford. The deanery of Durham, for instance, Parliament : could not strip that deanery of a single shilling, how ever great the benefits to be derived might be. The deanery of Durham, he believed, was now worth about 9,000/. a year. Supposing that that 9,0001, should amount to 140001., and supposing that there were tens of thousands of persons in that district who had not the advantage of Church education, could ho (Sir Robert Peel) as a sincere friend of tile Church, say that the deanery of Durham should remain as it was ?—( Hear.) He should feel not only that the money was wanted in another source, for the purposes of religious instruction ; hut he should also feel that the existence of a great sinecure under such circumstances ' was against the interests of the Church itself.—(Hear, hear.) He might see the contrast drawn between the splendour on the one hand and the destitution on the other, and, seeing it, he should come to the discussion of the appropriation of the property of the Church to the relief of that destitution ae a sincere friend of the Church, and with the deepest reverence.—(Hear, hear.) But, when he consented to interfere with Church property, it was always accompanied with this condition, that he must be cans inced that that in terference was for the interests of the Church and re ligion.—(Hear, hear.) If he was convinced cf that, then lie could not consent to adhere to the rigid courso pointed out by his Hon. Friend. It was upon convic tions of this kind that he would be induced to allow any interference with the property of the Church, and looking at. the state of the Church as it at present ex iisted, and looking at the destitution that prevailed n religious education, he asked himself whether there was any other means of providing for that destitution but by an interference with Church property. If he believed it possible that there could be a Constitutional Parliament from which he might hope So obtain a public grant for the purpose, he might rely upon that and postpone the present measure—(Hear, hear)—but could he believe—when he considered the great wealth of the Church and the great demand for public edUcation he could not bring himself to believe— that Parliament would make such a grant. Things could not remain as they were; he looked at the Cathedrals with the highest respect—he looked at them in connexion with the monarchy, but he could not forget, at the smite time, the state of the smaller benefices ; he could not ex clude from his view that there were no less than 1,926 benefices in England and Wales under 100/. per annum, and that there wore 3,528 under 150/. per annum. He admitted that it was right that the higher situations of the Church should be filled by persons fitted to main tain their dignity ; but was there nothing to be said for those who were in the possession of benefices, the in come of which hardly afforded a sufficiercy for the common decencies and necessaries of life? He could not exclude from the consideration of the present ques tion the following facts with respect to London : In London there were 1,170,000 persons ; there was only Church accommodation for 101,000. There were 34 parishes, and in those 34 parishes there were only 69 Churches, and if the proprietary Chapels were added there would be only 100 places of worship. Sup posing that each parish contained a population of 3,000 it would be necessary to have 379 Churches in those 34 parishes, and therefore there was a deficiency of Churches to the number of 279. Now, if the Esta blished religion was in that state, and it was left so, would not Dissent tell in those new and increasing popu lations, where no provision was made for Churches, and would he leave the Church in a safe condition if he disregarded altogether what was going on am ong th e myriads—the thousands that were brought into exist ence—at the rate, he believed, of 1,000 a day, and no provision for introducing the ordinances of the Church and attaching them to its ministrations. In Lancashire there were 83 parishes with a population of 10,000 in each parish, the aggregate being about 816,000. There was church-room for only 97,000, or about one-eighth, and as the Commissioners justly remarked, the compari son between church-room and the amount of population gave no accurate idea of the provision made for spi ritual attendance on the people, because many of the chapels included in the Bill had no district assigned them ; whereas there was no Minister to perform those or dinary parochial duties which at least were of as much im portance as the duties attending divine service. He could not consent to view one side of the question only—he must view the other ; and believing as he did that the great encouragement for the laity to rally round the Church mainly rested on a disposition in the great 'body, the Corporate body, of the Church to set an example of liberality—of re-distribution in some cases, confining that re-distribution strictly to spiritual purposes—that on the whole he could not withhold his assent from the second reading of the Bill of time Noble Lord.— The Commission had been appointed by himself. The mere desire to support the authority of persons who had exposed themselves to considerable obloquy by man fully stating what they considered the interests of the Church required, would induce him to go far to do so, because he would not abandon those who incurred obloquy by carrying out the Commission he himself appointed— but it was not from a desire to support authorities, who required no support, it was because he professed his ut must attachment to the Church of England, believing that danger was to be apprehended from increase of Dissent among the lower classes of Society, and despair ing of procuring from the public funds any grant commensurate with the object, particularly unless the Church showed a disposition to lead the way and to set the example. Those were the main grounds on which he gave his support to the second reading of the Bill. (Cheers from both sides of the House.) Mr. PLUMPTRE said, that if any thing coul d m e him dissatisfied with this Bill it was because Members on the other side of the House said it (lid not go far enough. He thought they ought to learn how far those Hon. Members wished to go and where they meant to stop. Tho Hon. Gentleman concluded by saying that his feeling against this Bill was so strong, that had there been any intention to divide the House, he should have voted against,the second reading. The Bill was then read a second time. Mr. GOULBURN requested that there might be ample time for considering the measure and asked if the Committee could be put off until after Easter ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he could not agree to that.—( Hear, hear.) REGISTRY OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. On the motion of the Hon. FOX MAULE the Bill went through Committee. The LORD ADVOCATE moved the second read ing of the SUPREME COURT (SCOTLAND) BILL. Mr. WALLACE opposed the Bill. He said it carried into effect none of the improvements which had been recommended by the Committee which had sat upon the subject. Of that Committee be bad been a Member ; and Lord Eldon, Lord Brougham, Dr. Lush ington, and Mr. O'Connell, who were examined, gave it as their opinion that the great length of the pleadings in writing and printing, ought to be much reduced ; but that was not effected in this Bill. There was another point very objectionable ; and that was, that the Lords Ordinary often acted as solicitors and barristers, in pre paring the cases they were afterwards as Judges to decide. It was most improper that Judges should have any other than judicial duties. He put it to the Learned Doc tor the Member fcr the Tower Hamlets, whether i was not most improper.—(Laughter, in which the Learned Doctor heartily joined.) The Learned Doc tor when asked that question before the Committee had declined giving an opinion—(A laugh)—but had said to the best of his judgment it was very improper, and the weight of authority was to that effect. The fifth clause of the Bill provided two Judges to sit in the " Court of Exchequer ;" why there was no Exchequer in Scot land—there was a nominal Exchequer certainly, but there was ❑o money in it—(Laughter)--and what wa s the use of putting Judges in a Court where they would have nothing to do ? Great stress had been laid on the abolition of various Courts. The Judges of these Courts were sinecurists, and their abolition would not be looked upon as any great boon, and although a reduction in the number of Courts had taken place, there had been no improve ment in the manner of conducting tl.e business in those which remained, nor would there be, as long as thirteen Judges were retained for the purpose of providing work for one another to do. If the whole of the Judges did their duty in that Court, there would be soon no work for them to do. He could prove that there was no ne cessity for more than nine Judges, and their salaries might be increased by doing away with the remaining four to the great advantage of the business of the Court. The next clause shifts the duties from one set of Judges to ancther, -... and allows the Judges them selves to determine the mode in which the people of Scotland should app) , to them for justice. By the next clause the Tiend Court, the most tedious Court of any, was allowed to have nine Judges. He would refer to the Lord Advocate, whether four Judges were not quite sufficient on the bench at one time for the due administration of justice. By another clause it was provided that the sittings of the Courts should re main as at present, that is io say, five months in the year. The Court of the Lords Ordinary sitting for three weeks longer, leaving in the one seven, and in the other case six months unoccupied. He would ask whether the provision of the 10th clause was decent or decorous, by which the Judges are permitted to de termine whether they shall sit or no. This is a new system entirely. It is true that at the end of the clause there is a provision by which the Queen and Council m ty, if they see fit, extend the time a mouth, but he considered it was not very fit to place the Queen end Council after the Judges of Scotland. This was another exhibition of that grasping desire for power, by which they had always been characterized. He next came to the proposed regulation and increase of the sa laries. It was proposed by the Lord Advocate that the salary of the Lord President should be increased to 5,000/. a year, with 5001. or 600/. a year for his clerk, making 5,600/. a year to be taken out o f t h e poc k ets o f the cle people. Clerk . vould Theproposed increase to the Lord Justice make his salary amount to 4,600/. per annum, in addition to which th ere was an a ll owance o f 1 (1 1 to at tention of the representatives of Etgland and of be -IHe be gee d to call the or h e i x s te c t l , e si rk ee:s of salary. He called r upon them, because he had no h ope w h atever 'O. ae a these f that his own countrymen would assist him in his endeavours to introduce a better system of adm;nistra don into these Courts. He did not understand whe ther Lord Gillies and the other Judges who at present receive 2,300/. a year, are to csntinu e t o rece i ve t h e i r s dories, as also this addition. He wished to ask the Lord Advocate this question —as the Lord Advocate remained silent he supposed they were to do so.— (Th e L or d Advocate was understood to answer the negative, but the noise in the Hons.: was so great that we could not distinctly hear what fell from his Lordship.) This measure renewed the objec tionable power of making laws with closed doors, and of the existence of which the people were ignorant until the penalties were inflicted upon them. No such power existed either in this country or in Ireland, but the contrary was the case in Scotland, for these acts of sederunt were not laid on the table of this House until they Lad been in existence for three or four months. Refering to the expenses of the Justiciary of Scotland, hs found that for last year there were under the 1: sad of general expellees, connected with the Judges, 74,443/., for general prosecutions, 18,500/. for salaries, and the Sheriffs about as much more. It was for Par- Lament to decide, during what length of time, the Judges should perform their duties, so as to avoid dis. respect, and satisfy the just expectations of the country. He should conclude by moving that instead of b,ing read now, the Bill should be read a second time that day six months. Mr. HUME seconded the motion. The LORD ADVOCATE was thankful to his Hon. and Learned Friend, for bringing forward his measure. He had shown a good disposition, as he always did, but in this case he had shown the most co7n plete ignorance. If lie had spent only a month in per sonal attendance at the Courts, he would not have made half the statements they had just heard. Now he (the Lord Advocate) had spent rather more than a month about those Courts—about thirty years— ( Laughter) —and he could say that neither in the Court of Session, nor in the Court of Ordinary, did the Judges do the duties of solicitors, If the Learned Gentleman alluded to the preparation of reports, he was right, but then that was a most important pert of their judicial duties, which the EngliSh Judges had also to perform.—( Hear, hear.) His Learned Friend said that there was no Court of Exchequer— that there was no money in Scotland—and that was perfectly true—(Laughter)—but there was a Court of Exchequer, although no money was been trusted to the Judges. But many useful retrenchments and reforms had already been made in the Courts of Scotland, and since the death of the late Chief Baron 4,0001. had been saved. In other departments, such as the reduction of the sinecure office of Soliciten General and of two Judges of the Court of Session 54,5671. Os. 83-d. had been saved to the country. No one could suppose that any gentleman deriving 6 or '7 or 8,0001. a year front the Bar, would accept the office if the proposed reductions were to take place. What was the case with the late Lord Elgin ? Was it not, admitted on all hands that he should have been raised to the judicial seat ten years previously ? The fact was, however, that neither he nor any other gentleman in extensive prat flee would give it up for an appointment which only tended to degrade him. The question therefore came to this, with a salary only such as persons wishing to retire from the bar would accept, was it possible to fill tip with efficiency the vacancies in these judicial situa tions ? If, then, none of these five judges were to be reduced, the question was whether any of the four Chamber Judges were to be reduced.—(Heir, hear, from Mr. Wallace.) The Hon. Member said " hear, hear," as if he assented to that proposition, but he questioned very much whether it would be athisable to to place the whole judicial power in civil eases in Scotland in the hands of three or four individuals. As Trial by Jury became known in Scotland, it would become more popular. The Bill was one of much im portance to Scotland, and be hoped it would be allowed to pass. Mr. GILLON felt bound to oppose the Bill of the Learned Lord, because, in his opinion, there was not one clause in it which was not very objectionable. The Learned Lord had often appealed to the Report of the Committee of a former Session, but he did not use it fairly, for he only carried into effect part of its recom mendations. He did not equalize either the salaries or the duties of the Judges. It was proposed that two of the Judges should attend to the business of the Exchequer. Now there were only six causes in that Court last year ; true, there were 108 other causes, but what were they ? Why, the signing of the name of a party to a deed, which might as well be done before any clerk in Court. It was now per fectly in their power to have the best men at the bar on the bench ; indeed he would go further, and say that the bench had exhausted the bar. Considering the Bill of the Lord Advocate did not carry out the representa tions he had made, and that to give the Judges of Scot land additional salaries would be a wasteful application of the public money, he should support the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Greenock. Mr. HUME thought, notwithstanding the com plaints made against him by t h e L earne d L ord, that he wou ld do him the justice to admit that he had given him and his predecessor, Sir William Rae, due credit for the great good they had affected in the alteration of the law in Scot land. The Learned Lord had said, that he (Mr. Hume) knew nothing of the Report now ; for the purpose of convincing him that he was wrong, he (Mr. H.) had brought down that Report, and from it it appeared that the Judges sat upon an average only one hour and a half a day ; in such a state of things was it to be said, that their salaries were to be increased ? He should support the motion of his Hon. Friend. Mr. WALLACE said the Lord Advocate had not replied to one allegation he had made. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided— For the Second Reading .. 139 For the Amendment 2l Majority for the Second Reading —llB FACTORIES BILL. Mr. FOX MAULE then rose to move the Second Reading of the Factories Bill. He thought it was right that the House and the Legislature should endea vour to ascertain the working of the present Act so that the principle of the law might be clearly defined, and put in such a state that the officer whose duty it was to administer it might carry it into effect. He would now proceed to detail as shortly as possible the alterations which he proposed in the present Bill to effect. He did not propose any alteration in the prin ciple of the Factory Act. By that principle he meant the age at which children were to work, and the number of hours during which they were to work. There was one important alteration, however, he meant to propose connected with the latter point—viz., that no child should work in more than one factory in the same day. Ike proposed that on this ground—it had been found by the inspectors of factories that children were worked four or five hours in one factory, and that then the re mainder of the day they were worked in another fac tory. NOW with respect to the certificates of iige which were required to be granted, it was almost im possible that the existing Act could work effectually. Mr. Horner an d ot h er i nspec t ors h a d often found that certificates were granted by perso ns professing to be surgeon s , b ut who were in fact only cow-doctors.—(A l a u gh•) Certific a t es gran t e d to one child were often fraud u l ent l y palmed off upon another of a muc h younger gage• Ttohaotbvsivartgeeutuhs should eseclefeetbs,ethspeeepiraellsyenatußeiilul appointed d ou t l u d providee. grant these certificates, and that these certificates, ex cept w h en another surgeon certified, an d . a magistrate measure, ln this, wek a u s u i i n v other uet i particulars e ofq quite prop ose d an accurate account, for indeed the Honourable Gentlem an spo k e so indist i nctly, turn i n g his back to the g a ll ery, that he was o f ten altogether in audible.) Th en with respect to the recovery of lost time, th ere was no part of the exist i ng A c t in which there was less efficiency. He could e numerate, from the r e p orts of the inspectors, a great num b er o f instances in which fraud s of all kinds bad been perpetrated under the pretence of recovering lost time ; for instance,a small anhdenuir s o u r i t t a e n d t p t a h r e t ofputlripeoisneacleif e machinery be stopp e d, w millowner, and though th e rest of the machinery was going on , t h e children would be worked to recover the lost time. To prevent this in future, the power of recovering lost time, except in cases of mills worked wholly by water, would be entirely taken away- With regard to educa tion, the twel ve h ours which by t h e ex i s ti ng A c t were provided every week for education would not by the present Bill be distributed over the whole week, but would be divided at two hours each for five days, and the remaining two hours added either to the portions of EVENING EDITION,-FEBRUA RV 26, 1839. each of the five days, or occupied in a Sunday school, by which means the half-holiday of the children would be secured. There would be power to the millowners to erect schools for factory purposes in large towns under certain regulations. The Bill would also pro vide that the hours of labour should ha from half-past seven in the morning to half-past seven in the evening, that every six hours there should be at least thirty minutes for meals, and that they might take their meals in the mill if they pleased. He would also propose that they should all to ke their meals at One and the same time, if possible. Ithad evi dently been the intention of the Legislature that Christ mas-day and Good Friday should be observed by the children in the same manner as Sunday. But the words of the Act were that the children should be in titled to a holiday on those days. Thus it was left by , the wording of the Act to th e c h o i ce o f t h e c hild ren ' which was, in fact, leaving it to the necessities of the parents. In the present Bail he had endeavoured to correct this error by introducing an enactment rendering the observation of Christmas-day and Good Friday as holidays incumbent on the mill-owners. The next question to which he would draw the attention of the House was the increased power which he pro posed to give to the sub-inspectors. He under stood that this proposition had occasioned consider able alarm to many of the nets ; but he considered that this alarm was altogether poundleog, because the powers which he proposed to give them by law had already been conceded to them by many of the owners of the factories. The only alteration which he would propose with regard to the inspectors would be that their powers to act as Justices of the Pe 'ce should cease and determine ; hut he proposed to give them the power of summoning witnesses and examining the over seers. He proposed to give to sub•inspectors the same power to enter factories that inspectors, posses , ed at present, and which power he proposed to continue also to the inspectors. These were the principal po.vcrs with which he proposed to invest the inspectorsand sub inspectors, and they would be found in the 2,7 th, 333, and 43d sections of the Bill. Tile next question to which he would direct the attention of the House was ae to the penalties to be inflicted on millowners for breaches of the laws ; and he could not but express his wonder that the state of the law on this subject at present had not attracted the attention of the practical lawyers who were Mem bers of that House. At present, a person who worked the children beyond the proper hours and another who had omitted to hang up in his mill some paltry regula tions were subject to the same penalty. Now he pro ' posed that, for the punishment of all offences which were punished by fine, a minimum penalty should ha fixed as well as a maximum, and that this penalty should be increased for a second and a third offence in an adequate ratio. He would also propose that mill owners employing children and young persons contrary to the provisions of this Act should not be punished as at pre sent, by affixing a penalty to each offence, which might include ten or twelve persons in one class, but that they should be liable to a penalty for each individual so itn ploycd. He next proposed a penalty for altering the time books ; and he also proposed that the penalty fir not white-washing the mills shonld be at least equal in amount to what it would have cost to have white-washed them. He would further propose that in all cases the penalties should be inflicted in the first instance on the occupiers of the factories, reserving, however, to them the power of recovering those penalties from their ser vants, should they be in a condition to prove that the offence was occasioned by their negligence. Under the present law one-half of the penalty recovered from the offender against it went to the prosecutor ; now, as in most instances, the prosecutor was either the inspector or the sub-inspector ; he did not consider it fair or pro per that they should have part of the penalties, for the recovery of which they had instituted the prosecution. The remainder of the penalties had been applied at the in stance of the Justices for the maintenance of schools for Factory Children. When the Act first came into ope ration these portions of the penalties had been given by the Magistrates to different schools in the neighbourhood at which Factory Children were educated. These small amounts could not be considered as of any very essential service to the schools, in fact, they might be said to have frittered these portions of the fines away. Mr. Horlock was the the first who had suggested the funding these fines for the purpose of accumulation, by which much good might be accomplished for the schools. Ho proposed, therefore, that these penalties should be funded and the proceeds applied by the inspectors to the promotion of schools for the education of the Fac tory Children. The next alteration which he would propose would he as to the extension of the time for laying informations for offences against the Act. Under the present law all informations must be laid within fourteen days of the time of the commission of the offence. It was scarcely possible in many instances that the inspector could lay these informations within fourteen days. Many offences might take place of which he himself would not have notice in time to lay the informations, and many offenders might, in conse quence escape unpunished. He proposed to extend the time for laying informations to three months. Since tbis Bill had been in the hands of Hon. Members he had been told by many persons that three months was too long, that it was unjust, injurious, and oppressive to the mill-owners. He should be most happy to hear arguments on this subject in the Committee, and if he found that the ends of justice could be accom plished by fixing on a less period, he should be happy to make the alteration. He proposed that all persons occupying new factories should give notice thereof to the inspectors; He would also propose that the inspectors should have the power of permitting the occupiers of factories to compound for their offences, instead of being brought before a Magistrate. He did not think that there was any danger in allowing this, because the inspector already had the power of con victing on view ; but he proposed to give him the power of representing the case to the occupier of the factory, who might admit that the case was unrepre sented, but not wishing to injure his character by going before a Magistrate, he mi g ht consent to pay such penalty inspector as the might appoint. He thought that tins was fair to the factory owner. These were the measures he proposed in the present Bill. He did not imagine there could be many reasons on the part of Hon. Members for opposing it, and as there had been no notice of motion in opposition to it, he trusted that there existed no intention of moving an amendment to his motion. He trusted that this Bill would not be considered altogether unsatisfactory to those who had taken up the question of the employment of children in the Factories. This was a subject upon which much misapprehension had existed, and trivial as it might appear, it had been made a subject of agitation. It had been made an instrument of stimulating the people against the laws, and he did hope that it would be discussed with a view to ameliorate the fate of the children, and put the Laws upon a better and more in telligent footing. He trusted that by settling this Bill, they had put an end to the uncertainties which at pes sent existed not only as to the law, but also as to the intentions of the Legislature. He would now move that the Bill be read a second time. Lord ASHLEY was glad to perceive that the statements just made by the Hon. Gentleman opposite completely justified him in having so repeatedly urged the case of the factory children on the House. The Bill introduced by the Hon. Gentleman was a very great improvement on the existing Act, and even on the Bill of last year.—(Hear, hear.) He corepletely agreed with the principles, and though he differed as to some of the details, he would not now detain the House by any argument upon them. The only point to which he had a strong objection was, however, a matter of detail, involving a very strong and important principle. It was contained in the 36th clause, which con ferred powers upon the inspectors, that if not con siderably limited would enable them altogether to set aside the operations of the Act in parts that were of the greatest consequence, for the protection of the children. He also objected to the new plan introduced, as making Sunday as one day under the Act, on which schooling might be attended to. Mr. MAULE explained by stating that under the present Act, twelve hours a week schooling were neces sary, but under this Bill, two hours a week at a Sunday school, in addition to ten hours during the other days would be sufficient, and the attendance at the Sunday school would not be compulsory. Lord AS HLEYresumed.—He was most anxious that the existing Act should be improved and carried out according to its intention. If that were impossible let, it be repealed. If the existing measure were, however,:really carried out, it would. be a great benefit to children employed in the factories. He had other suggestions to offer, which he would reserve for another stage of the Bill. Mr. HINDLEY said, that at all events the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Manic) had been very fair and candid in his address to the House. He had said a good deal about agitation that had been got up about this measure, but then he said nothing about putting it down. He said that this measure would settle the question for some time. He (Mr. H.) should go into Committee with that intention ; but if the Hon. Gen tleman thought he should stop the agitation by a mea sure which was characteristically a Police Bill, he entertained himself with the most fantastic idea that ever entered into the mind of a man, much less of a Statesman. He (Mr. Hindley) would not now go into the principle s or details of the measure, but would merely confine himself to one or two points. The Hon. Gentleman said that as regarded penalties the existing Act was insufficient, yet in the measure he now introduced he gave the mill-owners an opportunity of getting off with a fine of 51., for not having the Books of Registers ready for the Magistrates, whereas under th e present Act if a mill-owner violated the law, he might be fined 1001.—(Hear.) He also said that an inspector would have the power of compounding the penalty if the l aw were v i o l a t e d.—(H ear , hear.) Now this was holding out a very dangerous encouragement to the mill-owners, as under it a transgressor might say to the inspector—Sir, instead of bringing me before the Magistrates or entering my name in those returns (which the Hon. Member for Salford was so anxious to have said before the House every year), please to take cc a;~ THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY,- them in money, and do not put ma your report.— (Hear, hear.) His Hon. Friend had said that under the present Act it was possible to work children eleven hours consecutively without apprehension, on the part of mill-owners, of being interfered with. This permission, indeed, spoke little of the care of the House, for the factory children.—(Hear, hear, hear.) But the pre sent Bill would permit them to be worked six hours without intermission. Now, he would ask Hon. Mem bers who were accustomed to the bar and other engross ing occupations, who knew well what long abstinence was, was it possible or right that children should be made to work six hours without nourishment.—(Hear, hear.) Indeed six hours was by far too long a time, and he trusted that when the Bill came into Commit tee hia Hon. Friend would agree to diminish that pe riod. He thought. there was a material alteration respecting surgeons' certificates. Now, at present a .urges;: certified to the age of a child, and was fre quently under tho real number of years in his judgment, hot the present Bill provided that if it were proved that the surgeon was incorrect, it would not be allowed to set the child to work for some time.—(Hear.) Mr. SL ANEY said that having for a long time felt a deep interest in this question, he had much pleasure in now offering his thank s t o hi s H onoura bl e Friend, for the great improvements proposed in his measure. He agreed with the Noble Lord that there was something false iu the details, but he was certain that if the spirit of the measure were generally carried out, it would effect many beneficial alterations, and do much on behalf of the poor factory children. He should not advert to the details of the Reports of the inspectors, but it was quite clear that the Bill which the House before agreed to was not adequate to pre sent children of improper age from being set to work, or all those who might work from being kept too many hours employed, as could be proved in a number of instances, with which he would not now detain the House. Hitherto the form of cer tificates issued by the surgeon was not sufficiently stringent ; so that in many cases, children under the eges of nine and thirteen had been cruelly overworked. Under the new form to be substituted by his Hon. Friend, it would be almost impracticable for a surgeon to set down the age of the child at less than it really was. There was only one other point which he would refer to—the clause respecting the education of children. lie would venture to suggest to his Hon. Friend that the clauses which had been introduced were not suffi cient for the purposes he had in view. They required, indeed, that the attendance of the child should be cer tified—that die master should have a certificate without which the child should not be allowed to work. Unless something more was done, contests would he continually taking place between the master on the one hand, and the mill-owner on the other, that the child should not attend any school, and it was likely the whole thing would be a farce. He said that in consequence of the Corn inittee which sat last year, of which he had the honour to be Chairman, when it was demonstrated that the attendance of children at the factory schools was little better than a farce, he considered the moral and religious education of these children, with the evil example they had before them, of the first consequence to the country. He ventured to impress upon her Majesty's Government the necessity of appointing inspectors to visit those schools, and make due returns of the attendance. The expense would be very trifling, not perhaps more than one or two thousand pounds per annum, and he believed that a sufficient number of inspectors would ensure the due education of the children ; and he believed on the score of eco nomy, the money would be soon repaid to the country. He would not do more at present than mention the point, Loping that it would meet the views of her Ma jesty's Government. It was proved before the Com mittee to which he had alluded, that in the three great factory town.; of that kingdom, there was no edu cation worthy of the name. In Leeds, there was only 1 in 41, educated ; in Birmingham only one in 38 ; and in Manchester, 1 in 35 : whereas it was found requisite on examination, after making every due allowance, that education should be afforded to 1 in B.—( Hear, hear,) If that small number only were receiving edu cation in Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds, he would ask how much fewer were the number in other manufacturing towns. The working classes were as 66 to 1 in Manchester, while they were as 80 to 1 in Ashton, and upwards of 90 in Staleybridge and Dukinfield. Mr. BAINES said the principle of the Bill had been very clearly explained by -his Honourable Friend. It was that children under thirteen yeers of age should work 48 hours per week, or eight hours per day. If, instead of eight hours a-day, the time had been limited to six hours, he should deem is - an improvement, be cause it would divide the day into more definitive parts. A great deal of confusion had arisen from eight hours being proposed instead of six, because the latter would divide the day into two equal parts. With respect to the agitation of which they had heard so much, the country, he contended, was never more free from it. In fact, there was none. Not a single petition had been laid before the House. There were no petitions from either the masters or the workmen. In reality they were now legislating under very different circumstances than when the Bill was first enacted. Then the whole country was in a flame, but now the agitation had subsided. Nothing should inter fere with the free course of legislation, and if they did their duty as they ought, they should not suffer any interference from either of the parties interested, either the employers or the employed. At the same time he must say that the Bill was an anomaly, because he found that only one class of people in the country was placed under these restrictions. The Factory Masters were placed under restrictions, but there were others who should be restrained in a similar degree. Were not the Colliers obnoxious to these restrictions—nay in that City where so much of humanity, so laudably prevailed, where last year the wives and daughters of Members of Parliament were solicited to interfere on behalf of the factory children, if they went into the shops where the milliners and dress-makers of London were em ployed, they would find a great many more abuses than in these factories.—(Hear, and a laugh.) It might be said that was not an abuse when the number was so great. He believed there were more persons over worked in the milliners and dress-makers' establish ments than in all the factories in England.—(Much laughter.) He was told—of course not on his own knowledge—(Great cheering, and laughter)—he had been told that it was not at all an unusual thing for young females of tender age to be employed in those places for 12, 14, 16, and 18 hours in the day. He did not know how the Noble Lord could reconcile such facts with his professed humanity.—( Hear.) The number of persons so employed was larger than in the factories, and they had never attracted the attention of his Noble Friend. He gave the Noble Lord credit for the purest feelings, but he thought his humanity should have extended to persons entitled to his best consideration. There was another point connected with this subject by which the number of hours might be diminished, and that was by making food more cheap ; by repealing the taxes on food.—(Cheers.) Then, in stead of having the children employed twelve hours a day, ten would be sufficient ; that would apply not only to children but to adults, and he hoped the Noble Lord would turn his attention to the subject in the course of his legislation on factories. On the Continent the chil dren were not restrained from working any number of hours in the day they and their masters thought proper to appoint. It was a grievous hardship upon the manufacturers that they were compelled to re duce the number of working hours.—(Cries of of " Question.") He hoped he was not speaking from the question, but he contended that the restraints im posed upon the manufacturers of that country tended to banish them to the Continent. If the manufac tures were destroyed what would become of the landed interest ? Food was 60 or 70 per cent. higher in that country than on the Continent, and yet the hours of labour were restrained, so that persons on the Continent worked 20 per cent. per day beyond the time the English manufacturing operative worked, These were considerations which the House should not lose sight of. If they proceeded in their present course of legs lation they would drive the manufacturers from that country, and they would place both them and the landed interests in a most deplorable situation. If they were to have factory legislation they could not proceed more wisely than in the course suggested by his Hon. Friend, and the restrictions introduced by him seemed well calculated to attain the end he proposed. He had no intention todivide the House ; he would sup port the Bill to the best of his power, reserving to him self, when it was in Committee, to offer any suggestions that might present themselves to his own mind, or might emanate from his constituents, who were deeply inte rested in this measure. Mr. B ROTHE RTON could not agree with his Hon. Friend, that no legislation was required upon this sub ject. All his experience proved that legislation was not only necessary but highly beneficial. The distinction was very clear between the case of factory children, and milliners, and dressmakers. In factories, both old and young, both weak and strong, were obliged to work together, and at the same time—if one part of the machinery was stopped the whole was stopped ; and of course every person b€longing to the factory was for the time out of employment. With respect to trades not dependant on machinery if one workman was taken ill his place might be supplied by another, or his loom, or whatever he might work at, might stand idle— hut with spinning factories the case was very different. It was perfectly clear from the number of frauds which had been practised under the late Bill, that new legisla tion was necessary. It was perfectly clear that there was something radically wrong. He was always in favour of a simple law upon this subject. It was not his object to oppose the second reading of the Bill, but in Committee he would hold himself at liberty to propose certain amendments, which in his opinion would simplify the Bill and render it more easy of being carried, into effect. As his Honourable Friend the Under-Secretary for the Home Department had consented to make alterations in the Biil as to the time, he trusted that he would also make alterations in other respects. He had a l ways been in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill, and he thought that if they were to assimilate the working of cotton manufactories to that of silk mills, it would greatly greatly improve the Bill. He should like that the age should he raised to twenty-one year; according to the regulations proposed by Sir John Hobhnuse's Bill, the hest which had ever been passed by the, House. ‘Vhen the Bill came before the Committee :be would propose his amendments, and he hoped they -would be agreed to. Mr. LANGDALE wished to speak to that clause of the Bill which related to education—that clause was contained in the former Bill, but had never ,been carried into effect.—( Hear, hear.) The Bill noW before the Housed aye great power to the inspectors, as the children attending Factories were obliged to at tend the schools approved of by them. Religion must be introduced into their education, and he trusted that some precaution would be taken, that the children would be educated in their own religious persuasion. It was expected that the children would attend the schools erected by the Factory Masters. In the manufacturing districts, there was a great difference of religion, and he trusted that his Hon. Friend would make some pro vision by which the children would be educated in the principles of religion profe,sed by their parents. Mr. F. MAULE denied that any clause in the 8 . 111 deserved the character which h a d b een asc ribed to it. There was no part of the Bill which went to com pound felony. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed that day fortnight. SUPPLY. Mr. F. BARING brought up the report of the Committee of Supply. SALMON FISHERY (SCOTLAND) BILL. Mr. WALLACE moved the second reading of this Bill. Mr. CHALMERS considering the Bill totally un called for, would move, as an amendment that it be read a second time that day six months. Mr. WALLACE said that the Bill had been intro duced with a vi,2rr of improving the fisheries generally throughout Scotland ; he believed it would be produc tive of great good, arid that it met with the sanction of the whole country ; under such circumstances he must divide the House upon the Bill. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the second reading Against it . . 55 . . . 29 Majority . . . 26 The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed. WATCH RATES. Mr. BAINES brought in a Bill for more equally assessing and levying Watch-rates in certain boroughs. Lord DUNG AN NON moved for a return of the number of licensed victuallers having licenses from Ml' gistrates, and the number of keepers of beer-shops licensed to sell beer only, from the Excise, who have been charged with breaches of the laws in the years 1830 to 1838, both inclusive, in the towns of Liver pool, Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds ; stating the number consicted and the number dismissed in each near ; and the number of licensed victuallers and licensed beer sellers in their respective towns, in each of these years.—Agreed to. METROPOLITAN POLICE. Mr. FOX MAULE brought in two Bills for regu lating the Police o 1 the Metropolis, which were read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time to- morrow. PRISONS BILL. Mr. FOX MAULE Lrought in the Prisons' Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday. The House adjourned at a QUARTER PAST ELSVEN O'CLOCK. FRACAS AT THE DOOR OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. About half-past nine, last night, a sturdy artisan took his stand outside the House of Commons, and began to give utterance to various disjointed fragments of a democratical oration, expatiating on the evils of an imperfect political representation —on the manifold sins of the present House, &e. This roused the ire of the special constables assem bled round the door, and excited the constitutionalism 01* one patriotic policeman, to such a degree, that he roughly desired the " unwashed" to move on. To this direction , the stern democrat positively refused obedience; and held forth rather strongly about the incompetence of those who professed to represent the people. Policeman shocked at such outrageous sentiments at the very entrance or Parliament, expressed his horror, /hat such a row should be kicked up at the door of the House of Commons• D mocrat answered that they would have a much greater row before long. The order to "move" on" was repeated with increased violence. The contemptuous refusal was reiterated with the additional reproach—Who are you 1 1 pay you—if it were not for my money you would not walk about in a:blue coat. I pay you your eighteen shillings et week." Policeman felt irritated at these personal allu sions to his pecuniary affairs, and proceeded to lay hands upon the impracticable republican, who resisted the attack to the utmost of his strength. A scuffle ensued, which was occasionally interrupted by loud cries from the assertor of the popular rights, of " Don't lay your hands upon me-- you instrument of tyranny 1" and the result might have been attended with serious consequences but, for the inter vention of some b; standers ; the " Radical Reformer,"- after all, gaining his point so far that he was allowed to walk up and down the pavement opposite the door. NATIONAL CONVENTION. (YESTERDAY.) Mr. MILLS in the Chair. Mr. MARSDEN, one of the Delegates, in bringing for ward a motion for the purpose of inquiry into the state of the manufacturing districts, as to the best mode of remedy , gave a great many heart-rending descriptions of the miseries endured by the great bulk of the hand-loom weavers, among which was his own case—wherein he and his farni:y existed without food for three days, and during that time his wife was nursing a stout healthy infant, who in continuing its tugging at the exhausted receptacles of nourishment, drew forth the mother's swop, which caused her to faint ; and from which she was relieved by shaking the flour that remained attached io the meal-bag into some. water, for th e purpose of making out some means o f giving her relief from exhaustion. The motion was seconded by Mr. FEARaus O'CoNN O R , and was after a long debate finally adjourned to Monday next. After a great many notices of motions had been post poncd the Meeting broke up. After the business was concluded, Mr. FEAROUS °TON', NOR moved the a pp o i ntment o f a comm i ttee to inquire into an d obtain information with regard to the searching and deten tion of the letters of the Delegates at the Home-office' a practice which had been going on for some days. Mr. DOUGLAS, of Birmingham, gave notice of a motion to adopt measures for the purpose of inquiring into the causes of the di sm i ssa l o f M r. F rost from the Commission of the Peace, a circumstance which had come to his ears, but of which Mr. Frost had not yet received official notice. Another Borough rate of Is. in the pound has just been levied on the people of Bath. They at least pay dearly for their whistle—Municipal Reform, as such a thing was never heard of previously to the Corporation being remodelled. EXTRAORDINARY FATALITY.—The Dutch vessel Belissima was wrecked at Whitsand Bay during the gale of November last. On that occasion the crew were saved by the gallant conduct of the officers of the Preven tive Service. Three of these unfortunate men were shipped in the Indus, from Fuwey, and two others in the Ditch burn, from Devonport, to return to their respective homes; but, melancholy to relate, these vessels have also been lost, and the whole five unfortunate men have perished. LORD ST. HELENS.—Lord St. Helens, whose death, at the ach - anted age of 85, appeared in les t week's obituary, was the fourth son of William Fitzherbert , Esq., of Tissington, in the county of Derby. He united the qualities of a man of the world, a man of business, a scholar, and a philosopher, in a remarkable degree. n e , enjoyed the c on fid ence an d f avour o f ki ngs, b ut preser ved his independence. He had the welfare of his country at heart, and in that profession to which the more active portion of his life was devoted he was not surpassed by. any of his conte m p orar i es , w h et h er as regards a b il i ty, go od faith, or success. THE EARL OF STIRLING—EXTRAORDI NARY CIRCUMSTANCE. —Our readers may remember that some time ago, in the proceedings in the Court of Session relating to the Peerage of Stirling, the person claiming the title produced in Court documents in evidence of his claim, which were written on the back of an old French map of Canada, and which he said he had procured in France. The claimant was, at the time, examined Per sonally before the Court respecting the authenticity of the document. Since then, we understand one of the law ofo - of the Crown has been in France making inquiries on the subject; and, on his return, the claimant was appre hended and committed to gaol on suspicion of forger,' Various examinations have since taken place ; and, Thursday, we understand he was fully committed for trial .h.dinburgh Evening Cuurant. HORIZONTAL FLAT WATCHE S ' with accurately finished jewelled movements, warranted, in Ovej offered in Silver cases, price Fi ve G u i neas each ; or Go cases, price Nine Guin eas eac h , at T . COX SAV ORY Watchmaker, Jeweller, anti Silversmith, 47, Cornhill, Loild °ll (Seven Doors from Gracechurch-street). N.B.—Sccond-band Watches purchased in exchange' _ BIR7HS. On the 22d inst., at the vicarage, Easton Mavtduit, S of : thamptonshire, the l a dy o f t h e R ev. Joseph Wiz t of a daugh ter. On the 22d inst., i n Alontagu-square, Mrs. I. Isaacs, of a eon . On the 23d inst at No. 3, L ang f or d -p l ace, Abbey-road, St. r. , John's-wood, Ai rs . Flock, of a daughter. On the 24th inst., a t Cl apton, Mrs. Francis Toulm i n , of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 22d inst., at St. Georg o e's Church, Norwich, g u g t h Jane, you nges t d aughter of Joseph Stanuard, Esq P. Fuller, Ki ng William -street, London-bridge, surge•nt h f NOTV"C ~ On the 21st inst., at BridgDen/oErt.hD;salop, late merchant of Birmingham. On the 21st inst., at Clifton, Mary, fourth daughter of the late John Stewart, Esq., aged 30. • . ~ 7---- —r-r_mwsm - aa g46 :ln 1.,iid,;,, Primed and Fubli:theci by NIITRDO YOUN'-'9. John Dectons Esc'' , No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, 111 the county of Aliddlesoz.—Tuesday, February 26. 1839.