The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-19 00:00:00

frbirt V2Vition SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. (THIS DAY.) The Sub-Committee appointed to ascertain if the promoters of the Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Rail way had complied with the standing orders of the House of Commons, re-assembled to-day at two o'clock, and proceeded wit h the investigation. After sitting for about an hour the Committee concluded their labours with a llowing about 16 out o f 98 trivial objections which had been urged against the project by Mr. Platt, the Parlia mentary agent, on behalf of Mr. G. I. Smyth, of Heath Hall, Wakefield, who had entered a protest against the scheme, declaring it to be unnecessary and uncalled for. The Chairman, Sir John Yarde Buller, intimated to the agent of the promoters that it was the intention of the Committee to report specially on the line, and there was no doubt the objections would be overcome on being re ferred to a Select Committee on Standing Orders. QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.) (Sittings at Nisi Pi ins at Guildhall before Lord DENMA' and a Common Jury.) SMYTII V. SMITH. This ma an action for false imprisonment brought under the following circumstances :—The plaintiff and defendant entered into partnership in August, 1443, for the purpose of printing publications of various kinds, but a disagreement shortly oc curred between them. ,They had a quantity of type, which was at the defendant's office, in Mincing-lane. On the 13th of August the plaintiff went with a p:rson named Griffin, and others, to the defendant's, and having broken open an inner door, they were taking away the type, when the defendent perceived them, and gave Griffin in charge of a policeman. The plaintiff said, " Who is to take me?" whereupon he also was given in charge. They were conveyed to the station-house, and were afterwards taken to the Mansion-house. They were charged with felony, but there were no grounds for such an accusation. The defend ant now brought his action. Lord DENMAN, in charging the jury, said that there was no doubt the plaintiff acted wrong in breaking through the defendant's door; but that did not justify the defendant in preferring a charge of felony against him. The plaintiff was entitled to their verdict, but to what amount it was entirely for the jury to say. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff.—Damages one farthing. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF TIIIS DAT. GLOBE.—Lord Ashley says—in anticipation that the corn-lows will be thrown in his teeth—that " if he believed the repeal of the Corn-laws would place these much suffering thousands of their fellow- creatures in a condition of comfort, and kaep them in it, ho, in spite of all his predilections, would vote at once for their entire abolition. We do not doubt the sincerity of his lord• ship's assertion ; bnt we doubt whether he seizes exactly the point of view in which alone the corn-laws would be objected to his regulative proposals by any reasonable opponent. We have never, for our part, undertaken to say that no regulation of infant labour was necessary ; though we have frequently declared ourselves against in terference with that of adults. And when the condi tions of adult labour have been stated to be widely unsatisfactory, we have affirmed that no direct regula tions about them could render them otherwise—and that the defect must lie in the demand existing—or wages available—for labour. It is as affecting these that the policy of Food-Restriction has, by ourselves and others, been held to render nugatory the policy of Employment-Regulation. For example, if a hettger and ditcher, in Lord Ashley's neighbourhood let us say, in Dorsetabire, is seen to be seeking piece-work with the greatest anxiety, and doing it at the lowest rates, in dear years—the dearth of corn is deemed to have some con nexion with the excessive toil of that man. Regulation of the hours of hedging and ditching, it is not imagined would materially mend the matter ; and would only alter it by dividing employment (already scarce suffi cient fur one man's wants) between two or more. In a word, if it is dearth of subsistence that stimulates this over• toil, no regulation (that does not increase the supply of subsistence) can prevent the consequence of dearth showing itself in one shape or other. The shape of extreme toil is that which is chosen by those who can find work. That may be forbidden, in this or the other instance—but extremity of some kind must be suffered ; and extreme toil will, after all, not be pre vented, without inspectors for every cottage, every fie:d, every hedge and ditch. Turning to manufactures — slackness of demand, competition of workers, readi ness for over-hours, will in like manner slim them selves. The plague of dearth is at the root of all —men or women do not volunteer intense toil from love of suffering. You undertake to stop the intense toil. In the great proportion of cases (cases, namely, outside the walls of factories) you cannot stop it. In cases in which you can, it may happen that you atop the power of making up orders, of dispatching shipments—of competing with unrestricted employers in foreign markets. If you do this—all you do is to force capital to fly from the seats of your distressed labour. If you stop short of ooing this, you stop short of doing great mischief—but in any case you stop short necessarily of cutting up the misery by the roots. The Anti-Cord-law advocates, with reference to measures like Lord Ashley's for regulating employ ments, assume that the corn-laws do produce periodical dearth of subsistence, slackness of employment, and consequent lowness of wages, and over-work. They assume that those only who are distressed to live are likely to distress themselves by toil ; and they infer that no remedy, which does not tench the former distress, can ever meet the latter. All this, of course, proceeds on the assumption that we are right in our theory of the corn-laws. That assumption granted, there is nothing unreasonable in bringing it to bear on these Time Bill questions. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT (THIS EVENING.) lIOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. RAILWAY BILLS. Mr. Mackenzie and other Hon. Members brought up re ports from the sub-Committees appointed to inquire whether the standing orders on certain private Bills had been complied with. The Committee reported in favour of the York and Scarborough Railway Line, the Leeds and Bradford, the Ashton and Stalybridge, the Manchester and Leeds (But nley Branch), the Leeds and West Riding Junction, the Bull and Selby, the Kendal and Windermere, the Chester and Birkenhead, the Manchester and Carlisle, the Cockermouth and Workington, the Leeds and Dewsbury, the West York, and other lines. The Guildford, Chichester, and Portsmouth, reported not to have complied with the standing orders. INCOME-TAX. Sir J. MORDA UNT presented petitions from several places against the continuance of the income-tax. Colonel WOOD presented a petition from Worcester, pray ing that the owners of houses rented above 61. in that city should be rated to the poor-rates instead of the tenants, as a present. MEDICAL REFORM BILL. An Hoe'. MEMBER presented a petition, signed by the surgeons of Wrexham and its neighbourhood, against the Medical Reform Bill. Mr. HOGG presented a petition from certain East India sugar growers, praying for a reasonable protection against the importation of foreign sugar; also from the East India and China Association, expressing apprehension on account of the proposed discriminating duty between Muscovado and cloyed sugar—an attempt which, the petitioners stated, must be attended with trouble, delay, vexation, and fraud. Lord SANDON presented a petition from the Liverpool Peace Society against the proposed additional grant for the navy. Also a petition from certain tradesmen of Bethnal green, praying the House to take measures to prevent the de secration of the sabbath. Lord ARUNDEL presented a Petition from Burton, in, Lonsdale, in the county of York, against the increase of li censes granted for the sale of intoxicating liquors. NOTICES OF MOTION.—COLONIAL ACCOUNTS. Dr. BOWRING gave notice that to-morrow he would move for sundry returns relating to colonial accounts. WINDOW-TAX. Lord DUNCAN gave notice of his intention, en a future day, to bring forward the following motion :—" That the taxes levied on windows were a great burden on the country—unjust and unequal in their operation, most oppressive on those who had to bear them, and ought therefore to be immediately repealed." While he was on his legs he would take the oppor tunity of answering the question put to him the other evening by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, who, he regretted to see, was not in his ;lace. It appeared to be the general opinion that they should go on with the adjourned debate to-morrow evening, and, as he understood all other Honourable Gentlemen who had notices on the paper for that night agreed to postpone them, it would be most injudicious in him if he persisted in pressing his motion. He, therefore, begged leave to give notice that he would bring on his motion on the subject of the window-tax on Monday evening, on the question being put that the Speaker leave the Chair to go into a Committee of Supply.—( Hear, hear. ) Sir WILLIAM CLAY moved that the petition of George Smith, distiller, and James Scott Smith, rectifier, presented 38th February, be printer.—Ordered. HOUSE OF KEYS. Dr. BOWRING moved for copies of any memorials which have been presented to her Majesty's Government from the Isle of Man on the subject of a reform of the House of Keys.— Ordered. On RAILWAYS—MORNING SITTINGS. u the readi ng c f the orders of the day fur Committees on the following Bills :—Companies Clauses Consolidation Bill ; Railway ; Cl_auses Consolidation Bill; Lands Clauses Consolida liry 13 ci it l um taids Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Bill ; Hail- Consolidationcn!olidation (Scotland) Bill ; Companies Clauses Lord G . s aeg t and) Bill, be intended toting e SET rose, and was supposed to say that proceed by morning satins that those Committees should , atings on to-morrow, but, on considera- I ton, he thought Friday vent, though of vld be better. His Lordship's state ment, in the gallery. t Ale, that it was entirely-lostconsiderable length, was delivered in so low a Mr. HAWES, wh o almost equally indistinct, was un- Y• aerstood to ask whether the a , rangement compulsory ? Noble Lord intended to make this Mr. AGLIONBY said he felt deeply interested in this sub ject, and therefore had listened with attention, in order to en ;d but he regretted to d , avour to catch the Noble Lord's w gi j o o r ni) had said had been say that not one word that the Noble L s him (:U r. A .hear.) But, beard by either that the else at his side of the House.-01 Y) ' or any one 1 1 , would ask, was he right in resuming Noble Lord intended that those Comrnitteuemsinsigh hold ittings, and those sittings should take place on I ( ? ) r t i l d d that be se, he (Mr. Aglionby) was rather unfortuara.t.e i n being obliged to object to that arrangement, as he had already n made appointments for that day which would prevent his at tendance. On Friday morning he would be obliged to attend as Chairman of a Committee on private Bills, and, therefore , it would be quite impossible for him to attend on that day upon his Lordship's Corn arittees. It was not for him (Mr. Aglionby) to say whether the Noble Lord had acted right or not in making this arrangement ; but others might be placed in a situation similar to his (Mr. Aglionby's), and in addition to that, he would say it was rather to be regretted that those morning sittings had been fixed at so early a period of the session.—(Hear.) Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET assured the Hon, 1 THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 19, 1845. Gentleman (Mr. Aglionby) that it was for the general con venience of the House he had appointed Friday. SIR J. GRAHAM'S RAILWAY SPECULATION. Sir J. GRAHAM said that as the House was on the subject of railways he thought he:might be allowed to correct an error in fact into which he had fallen when he last addressed the House on the subject of railways. On that occasion he stated that he had never had any connexion with railroads in his life. The general statement was perfectly true, but it was made in forget fulness of the fact that when he had the honour of representing Carlisle a railroad was projected, which, it was supposed, would be of advantage to that city. On that account he purchased a share of 1001.—(Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh ")—which he need not assure the House he sold without any view to profit. Mr. MONCKTON MILNES said that he wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman a question of which he had given notice the other night, and in putting that question he wished to do it with all deliberation. When last he had named this matter in the House he had deemed it better to give notice to the Right Honourable Gentleman of his intention to put this question, and to ask what instructions had been sent out to the agent of this country abroad, with respect to the matter on, which he intended to speak, and this he did because he believed it to he a matter of much interest in that House. The question, then, which he wished to ask was whe ther. at the time that representations were made to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the insurrection which was likely to ensue in the Italian States against the Government of Austria, any instruction had been sent out by Lord Aber deen to the Governor or other authorities in the Island of Corfu, that the British Government were in possession of information respecting such insurrectionary movement, and whether any information or other intimatien had been given to the persons at that time in the places under the dominion of the British Government, who were likely to engage in such insurrectionary movement, of their designs being known, and of its having been communicated to the Austrian and Italian Governments the movements that were likely to take place, and the persons of the parties who were likely to be engaged in them. Sir ROBERT PEEL said he was happy to give an an ample, and I think a sufficient answer to this question. As the Hon. Member has given notice of the nature of his question, proper attention has been paid to the subject. The Hon. Member has said that a deep interest was felt in this question, and I believe he is perfectly correct in that statement; and he should, therefore, feel it his duty to give a full reply to that question. But lam sorry to say that 1 cannot do so, Sir, without entering fully into the question.—(Hear, hear.) I hope the House will excuse this, and 1 will give the information we possess as briefly and suc cinctly as I can.--(Hear, hear.) When the British Go vernment last year received information that an insurrec tionary movement was contemplated in the Italian States, they felt it their duty to put the Austrian and Italian Governments on their guard, and particularly as this movement was organised by individuals residing at that time in possessions under the protection of the British Go vernment. In reply to this, they had been informed that some parties engaged in that movement were resident in this coun try. His Noble Friend had also been informed that the Aus trian Government had given instructions to the General at that time in command of their forces at Milan, to the effect, that if any attempt was made to trespass on the Austrian ter ritories by insurrectionists from the Papal states, in which it was believed the insurrection was chiefly organised, to resist and destroy the rebels to the utmost of his power, without any further reference to his Government. There were certain intimations conveyed to us which led us to apprehend great danger to the public tranquillity in the shape of an insurrectionary movement in Italy. My Noble Friend did convey to the Austrian Government, front time to time, the general purport of any information which he re ceived in respect to the proceedings of those who had designs against the tranquillity of Italy.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.) He communicated no letter which he had received or extracts from any letter, neither did he state the name of any individual within the power of the Austrian Government. But as it is sated in the report of the Select Committee, he did from time to time communicate to the represen tatives of the Austrian Government in this country, the general purport of any information connected with the designs of those who resided within the dominions of her Majesty—particularly in the Mediterranean—calculated to disturb the public tranquillity. The parts with respect to which apprehensions were chit fly entertained were in the Papal States. My Noble Friend has not a very perfect recollection of the circumstances, having destroyed such letters as he re ceived, except those of a public nature. He has not now a distinct recollection of the purport of them ; but, as far as his recollection serves him, he never saw any communication of a public or private nature which led him to apprehend that a particular attack was to be made from Corfu. Atany rate, be never took any steps whatever on such communications; he never communicated either to the Austrian Government, the Neapolitan Government, or to the authorities at Rome ; he never made any communication to them respecting any par ticular designs meditated in Corfu. Consequently, the impression which some gentlemen appeared to entertain, that these individuals were led into a trap by an act of the British Government is entirely without foundation. So little reason had he to apprehend that any particular attempt would be made from Corfu, that no communication whatever on the subject was made to Lord Seaton, the Gover nor of the lonian Islands. The fact is, that the at tempt. toak every party by surprise—it took Lord Seaton by surprise, and it took the Consul completely by surprise. With out referring to the dispatches, he would state to the House what were the facts. It appears that there were residing in Malta, in the lonian Islands, several persons refugees from their own country, on account of political disturbances. They were permitted to reside there without molestation. The two sons of Admiral Bandiera resided at Corfu. They conducted them selves very quietly without exciting suspicion on the part of the Government of the lonian Islands. It ap pears that on the night of the 12th of June twenty-two individuals, and twenty-two individuals only, left Corfu in two small boats, without arms, and no preparation whatever was made for directing a foreign attack. It was not until after that expedition—if it could be called an expedition which consisted of twenty-two unarmed individuals, who sailed from Corfu—that the Austrian Consul for the Papal States, and the Russian Consul, made strong representations to Lord Seaton on the subject. They remonstrated strongly against it. Lord Seaton said he had been taken by surprise, or he would have made previous communication. The Austrian Consul requested that the British war-steamer there should be sent after the boats con taining the twenty-two individuals. Lord Seaton said he de clined sending an armed steamer in order to arrest them ; that he was not authorised to do so ; and that he thought the reports were exaggerated. Lord Seaton said that he felt confident no invasion could be contemplated on the coast of Calabria, but he would send a small boat as quietly as possible to Otranto, in order to ascertain the nature of the project. That boat had not sailed to Otranto till after the 12th, on the night of which the twenty-two individuals had set sail. Intelligence of this was given to the authorities there that it might be conveyed to Naples; but no information upon this subject had been received by the British Government until July, when they received a letter from Sir Robert Gordon, our Ambassador at Vienna, stating the facts of the case. The Aus trian Government strongly remonstrated with the British Go vernment for permitting the boat containing these 22 indivi duals to sail, which clearly showed that there had been no collu sion between the two Governments. These 22 individuals did land; the only account the British Government had received was conveyed to them in a letter from Mr. Temple, the British Minister at Naples. The British Government made no communication whatever to Mr. Temple, because his Noble Friend never suspected that 22 individuals, unarmed, and seemingly defenceless, would direct a project against the coast of Calabria. On the 26th of June Mr. Temple in formed the Government of what occurred on the landing of these individuals. He said that a party landed, twenty-two in number, thus confirming the previous report; and, on the night of the 19th of June, they fell in with a small force, con• sisting of a few civic officers and three gcns-d'armes. An engagement took place, in which one of the twenty-two was killed. St. Giovanni, the judge of the town, collected a num ber of the inhabitants, by which the project was entirely de feated, and the result proved highly satisfactory to the Nea politan Government, inasmuch as the defeat of the party was oning to the courage and fidelity of the natives themselves. This answer to his Noble Friend was : that as they never suspected that 22 individuals, who had up to the present mo ment resided quietly in Corfu, would attempt to in vade the Italian shores from boats, they had never made any communication with them warning them from it, at the same time they had never made any communication to the Austrian, Neapolitan, or the Roman Governments, and the reasons why they had not done so was, that they never suspected any such attempt was contemplated. He had now givers the only answer he could give. Any im pression that the Government had allured these individuals to destruction was erroneous, and totally without foundation. THE IMAUM OF MUSCAT. Mr. HUME wished to know whether there would be any objection to the production of the correspondence between the Imaum of Muscat and the present Government relative to the affairs of that country. Sir R. PEEL hoped the Hon,. Gentleman would put the question to-morrow. Mr. ESCOTT wished to know from the Chancellor of th Exchequer, whet her any time would be allowed to those who had paid the duty to clear off their stocks. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it.) was not the intention of the Government to allow any time. Mr. HUME wished to know whether, as the duty on sperm oil was to be taken off, the duty on common whale oil would also be taken off. Sir R. PEEL said it was the intention of the Government to take off the duty on whale oil, and at an earlier period than that at which it was to be taken off of sperm oil, because the same reasons did not exist in the case of whale oil for continuing the duty for so long a period. Mr. R. BLEWITT, before the Speaker left the chair, wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer respecting a paper that had been put into his hands this morning. He referred to the copy of the Naval Receipts and Expenditure for the year ending the 24th of March, 1844. It was a paper laid on the table of the House, in accordance with the provisions of an Act passed in the fourth year of the reign of William the Fourth, cap. 40, sec. 30. A certificate was attached to the paper in the following terms :—" We, the Commissioners for auditing the public accounts, hereby certify that this account has been audited by the officers under our employ, and we declare the statements made therein to be correct and satisfactory, subject to the notes and remarks by the Commissioners made thereon." This certificate was signed by three Commissioners, and he wished to call the attention of the Right Honourable Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the terms in which it was written. It is stated to be examined not by the Commissioners themselves, but by officers under their direction, and notwithstanding they had not done it themselves they certified that it was correct. This was the most extraordinary document that he had ever seen submitted to Parliament.—( Great laughter.) If these gentlemen are to be paid for this work, and do not perform the duty themselves, he should consider it necessary for him to move that the office be abolished altogether.— ( Hear, near.) Now, what he wanted to ask the Hon. Gentle man the Chancellor of the Exchequer was, what were the salaries paid to these three gentlemen ? He wished the Right Hon. Gentleman to explain to this House and the country what he considered to be the value of their certificates. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said those accounts were audited the same as of any other public accounts. The Hon. Gentleman must be aware that if the Com missioners were to examine every account themselves it would be impossible to_ get through the public service The SPEAKER then left S U tte PL ch Y air, and the House resolved ;self into a Committee of Supply. INCOME-TAX. Mr. ROEBUCK rose to propose his amendment. He said, as it was understood, that he would this evening move the addition to the Right Hon. Baronet's resolution in reference to the income-tax, of which he had given notice, he would now at once proceed to do so. In the statement be was about to make, he would apply himself to the principles and to the declarations of the Right Hon. Baronet, and upon those he could call upon him for his sup port. He would next address himself to the majority of the Right Hon. Baronet, or, in other words, to the agricultural aristocracy on the Opposition benches; he would apply his arguments to their principles and declarations, and call upon them for their support. He would then apply his arguments to the Irish Members in this House, except such of them as represented the landed interest of that country ; he would re mind them of their principles and declarations, and then call upon them for their votes—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear ") and therefore he would say that, whatever his explanations might be, he ought have an ample majority on his motion. Now in the first place he would ask, what were the principles of the Right Hon. Baronet? The Hon. Baronet said that he had a difficulty to encounter, and he proposed to remedy it by the continuation of the income-tax. But he went one step far ther, and said he would make such alterations in the tariff as would give an additional impuke to trade.—( Here the Hon. Member was rendered almost inaudible by the noise created by conversations going on in all parts of the House.) The Honourable Member was understood to say he would give a further impulse to trade by re moving certain taxes, and their vacancy he would fill up by continuing the income-tax upon England, Scotland, and Wales, but made an except ion in regard to Ireland. But if the tax was to be applied by a rule, he would ask, why make this exception ? chHe Ireland. oerierneewouldhis reasons show shi firafie g iivciaeenhs otthtnrhi r t soe h oesuwp a gf t eßonhcr i tt t was ght tthehthtoaeotnHEe n wuxo o nshen taccording goemol nnaupltri exemption. boeenlaue.ns 03hrd sauftrici t dollo o enit ohleteanthanx.,hed, have shown rule dto of 'laid e x e downpo mrpt exigency n ntcy.wo fa t ps h r a oo t n. , the ßri t a w i n h whole o and e r t e h l e a n U d i taendd their Kingdom—it united w t a v n a t s s common should e t o met Greatb by their united means—which meant their united income and pro perty. On that principle the Right Hon. Gentleman taxed the property of England and Scotland. Now he (Mr. R.) would ask him to go one step further, and to tax the realised capital of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) He did not ask him to tax professions, trade, and even office. —(Hear. ) But he asked why should the realised property of Ireland be ex empted, when it did not differ one iota from the other capital of this portion of the United Kingdom?—(Hear, hear.) He would now approach another part of the question ; and he would ask the agriculturis s how it was that they supported the Right Hon. Gentleman in this exemption ?—( Hear.) They came in tones of mingled hope and despair to, demand relief ; but the Right Hon. Baronet left them as they were ; and when he asked them why they complained of him, they answer like the puny child who has fallen over a stool, " because you did not kiss the place that was hurt."—(Laughter.) He found means, however, to extricate himself from this exi gency which the Right Hon. Gentleman went himself to create or promote. The Hon. Member for Somersetshire was complaining of distress. In the most touching strains he spoke of the touching distress of the classes to which he was attached, and of the touching conduct of the Minister by whom they had been thus so grievoutly touched. He hoped that, on this occasion at least, he should have the vote of the Hon. Member for Somersetshire. What were his plans ? He could not tell; but in this measure he had some intimation of the protection of him whom he had created. "Had they received any favour at his hands? Had their interests been in any . way pro moted? No. But of this they did not complain. They felt that they could get no relief from their burdens ; they felt that the exigencies of the State left them without relief, when relief was afforded to every other class. Yet of this they did not complain. No; but they did feel it a grievance that the Right Hon. Baronet had not expressed even sorrow for their griefs. They had created him—they had brought, him into existence—they hail breathed into his nostrils the breath of life—and what was the return they met with ? Why, the creature, who had life only by their means, turned round upon them, and was ready to strangle his creators. By this time they found that the Right Hon. Baronet had an opinion of his own. and those who had placed him in his present position found that that opinion did not tend to their advantage. He did then appeal to them, and on this occasion he did hope that they would no longer crawl on their bellies. They wanted a leader, they had found one, and they might find another if they would try. And what did the Irish Members expect in this matter? How could they expect to be freed from this tax ? He did, there fore, appeal to gentlemen opposite to extend this tax to Ireland. The agriculture of the country could not be relieved but by extending the tax to the realised capital of Ireland. The land in Ireland was as fruitful and as valuable as any acres in the county of Somerset. What did the manufacturers say to this ? Why they were delighted with the scheme of the Right Honourable Baronet. It was said he relieved the springs of industry—why, what was the fact? Manchester was bribed—Glasgow was bribed—and so were Newcastle and Sunderland. They said they could not compete with foreign countries unless their labourers worked certain hours. It manufacturers were honest in their measures to aid the labouring population, they would vote with him in endea vouring to put this tax upon the rich landlords of Ireland. They were beyond any appeal he could make; if he were a money lender he might be able to appeal to them, but not dealing in that commodity he could not reach their understandings. But he was about to appeal to those professed to represent the Irish people. What, did not the Right Honourable Baronet say all his phrases were significant, and he watched him always, not to find, like the Hon. Baronet, that he was a difficult bird on whose tail to put salt.—(Laughter.) The Right Hon. Baronet had put a stamp duty on Ireland, but he asked him to tax the land of Ireland. The Right Hon. Baronet taxed the capital engaged in the employment of labour in Ireland. The stamp duty was a tax on the transfer of all sorts of property, and was almost entirely paid by the middle class of that country, and a large portion of it bell on both the middling and labouring population. Now the Hon. and Learned Member for Dungarvon had hinted to hint the other evening that he should take advantage of the adjournment of this debate to read Burke's speech on the con ciliation of America. Now, what was in the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's mind when. he remiuded him of America? Why, revolution ! that the English Government might be fright ened into an unjust tax, because the people of Ireland were in such a turbulent state that they could not put a just tax upon their. That was the intrepretation of considering the speech of Mr. Burke, but he was sure the Right Hon. Gentleman could not have had this notion in his mind. The grand argument of that speech was, that America was not politically represented. Did the Right Hon. Gentleman mean to say that Ireland was not politically represented? An HoN. MEMEER—Not fully. Mr. ROEBUCK—Wait a minute! They had given Ire land some Members. Where were they now ?—(Cheers.) What was the use of giving them any more if those they had already given them were of no use to them ? they ran from their posts—they deserted them like a sentinel placed in a dangerous situation, who could not keep his heart up to the difficulty of his position, threw down his muiket, turned tale and ran away.—(Hear, hear.) They had de serted, on which the battle of the people of Ireland must be fought.—(Cheers.) He did not accuse the leading Irish Member upon that occasion—he did not mean him individually, but the whole of his followers, who, like him, had ran away. They had done so because in that House they felt they were unable, from their own personal in significance, to gain the attention of Honourable Members. That he took to be the rationale of Conciliation-hall. He hoped the Hon. Member wouldabstain, after that night, from plead ing the unequal representation of Ireland as any justification for the existence of unequal taxation between the two coun tries. He would not impose any injustice upon any one. He would be the last person to sanction an act of injustice, but he wanted the Irish Members to show to him the injustice of his proposal.—( Hear, hear.) If they pointed to the stamp duty, he would say change it, because it was a tax which fell upon the retail capital of the country. [LEFT SPEAKING.] would be returned to represent that noble county—the county Louth ; and if Mr. Bellew showed his face, ugly as it was, it would be handsomer going there than it would be going away. Mr. O'CONNELL again rose, and said he had to hand in 521. Ils. from Washington, in the district of Colombia, and 250/. from Baltimore.—(Cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman expressed his deep gratitude, and that of the Association, to their :American friends. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by moving that it be referred to a Committee to prepare suitable replies to the American correspondence. Mr. SOME,RS seconded the motion, which passed. Mr. O'CONNELL wished to make an observation or two, in reference to the increased grant to May nooth. Ile had been informed that Peel intende4 making the grant 26,0001. per annum, besides which, the buildings were to be repaired, under the superintendence and at the expense of the Board of Public Works. He had been reproached with neglecting to oppose this grant, and reminded of his oft-repeated prin ciple—that every religion should pay its own clergymen. That, certainly, was his principle, and he should like very much to see it carried out ; but, while the Established Church took money from the Catholics and Dissenters, for which it gave no value, he would take all lie could get tbr Maynooth. Mr. R. D. BROWNE, having expressed his full concurrence in the Liberator's observations respecting American sym pathy, referred to the recent speech of Mr. WAley, in which that hon. Gentleman alluded to the absence of Irish Members from Parliament, and invited them to come forward and expose the grievances of their country, if any existed. Mr. O'CONNELL proceeded to comment upon the speeches recently delivered by Mr. Wakley in the debates on the Ad dress and the Budget. Mr. Wakley had been made a mouth piece of, to insinuate charges against Irish Members, which were totally without foundation ; and he (Mr. O'Connell) charged him with the grossest ignorance regarding Irish affairs. This ignorance was so " crass," that it seemed to be pretended, and Mr. Wakley was in the position of " Abegoil, who went to hell without sin." In reply to the demand made by Mr. Wakley, that Irish Members should make a distinct declaration of the measures they required and would be contented with, Mr. O'C. read a number of do cuments published by himself, and other members of the Repeal Association, when the Precursor Society existed, in which the required list of grievances and their remedies, were put forward. Mr. Wakley's ignorance, pretended or real, of these public documents, proved him unfit to legislate for the country, and _lreland could put no confidence in a Par liament composed of such persons. The Hon. Gentleman concluded his speech, which was a comparatively short address, by moving that copies of the reports, and other do cuments, to which he had alluded, should be forwarded to Mr. Wakley by the Secretary of the Association. Mr. E. B. ROCIIE seconded the motion. Mr. O'CONNELL mentioned, that on the next day of meet , ing he would give notice of a resolution to the effect, that a petition to Parliament should be prepared, praying for a re f peal of those clauses in the Emancipation Act which affected the Jesuits and other regular clergy.—(Cheers.) The rent for the week was announced to be 751/.los. sd. the 'case would be somewhat analogous to that of an unequal income-tax protracted to similar periods. If, therefore, it is impossible to impose any other in come-tax than the present, it is impossible to de fend its imposition by any other plea than necessity. That plea abandoned, the ground is cut from under its continuation. It behoved Sir Robert Peel, who was pre-determined, it seems, to continue it, to have overthrown this position, which not only strikes every reflecting mind, but which is irrefragably deduced from that which he himself assumed in laying on this im post. It was on the plea of necessity that the objec tions against it were met. It was on that plea—on the case of urgency for suppporting the public credit—fur filling up the deficit which for one or two years had existed, after indirect taxation was said to have reached its limits that this war tax—this income impress ment—was alone defended. It cannot he defended so now. It must be fairly admitted that the public allowed the plea—so far as silence gives consent. It was an honourable feeling that prompted them to take the word of the responsible Minister both for the necessity he alleged, and for the concurrent duration of this forced requisition with that necessity. Ilis " supplemental noses" should have sympathised (like Tallaeotius's) with that which they first were cut from ; his grand excision was justified by necessity; and with that neces sity its product was bound to drop. Even then, it is true, certain Whigs declared there was no necessity in the matter. They were not listened to : we are not sure that they should have been listened to on so vital a point. The great advantage which Sir Robert Peel had, at that time, over his opponents, was, that while their propounded resources were hypo thetical, and discovered very suddenly—his were direct. perhaps vulgar, but there was nothing untried, nothing experimental about the in. Had the Whigs been in force to propose a property-tax, along with their other changes —as an interim measure awaiting their full effects—they would have pre-occupied that strong ground which a Minister holds in England (long may it be so) who confronts boldly the worst emergency. This ad vantage Sir Robert Peel took at starting ; but how can lie claim it now ? The strength of his case then was the exceptional nature alike of the crisis, and of his provision for it. That the one would pass away, and the other would vanish along with it—that the extraordinary effort would cease with the extraordi nary occasion--was the fair prospect held out. Well— the occasion has past ; and woat has become of the pros pect, anu of the promise ? If the income-tax is to be permanent, it must be on grounds opposite to those of its imposition. The arguments en which the one was justi fied will so far from "coldly furnish forth" the other — that they must actually be reversed. We were then told that it was a measure of last resort, to meet an exigency of instant peril. Such measures in their own nature must be bad. The more complete the Premier endea voured to make his demonstration of the urgency—the more evident is it that a measure of urgency belongs not to a season of no urgency. He has had time for setting his house in order. If this direct tax was to be perpetuated, he has had time for turning it into something else than a perpetuation of injustice. It is alleged that all taxation must press un equally. Yes—but taxes upon expenditure have this element. of equality in them—that expenditure generally will be proportioned to means. In proportion as taxes strike objects of more luxurious expenditure, they be come fairer in their incidence ; though, unfortunately, a large taxation cannot be levied mainly on such objects. But, more or less, a man can limit his expenditure, in proportion as prudence demands, and deny himself such taxed enjoyments as would curtail due provision for the future. He is not left this refuge in the case of direct taxation on gross income ; and therefore it is the snore imperative to graduate such taxation with some approach to equity. There is no such approach even pretended in the impost now sought to be prolonged. Alexander Stewart, Esq., father of the Irish bar, and the oldest magistrate in Downshire, died at his seat, Ballyedmond, Rostrevor, in his 93d year, last week. IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN T. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 18. EMPLOYMENT OF CHILDREN IN FACTORIES. Lord ASHLEY, in continuation, proceeded to say— It had been at first stated that such children might be safely left to the affectionate solicitude of parents and masters, but the Legislature thought and enacted other wise. The measure of 1832, though an imperfect mea sure, had been productive of relief to thousands. Per petual attempts had been made to drive them from their purpose, but no taunts would drive him from his purpose. He had been told that there had been far worse evils than those he had brought under the notice of the House. In the first introduction of the Factories Bill, when he had invaded the collieries, he had been referred to the printing-house, and thence they wished to drive him to the corn-laws. Let it be so ; but he would ask the ad vocates of abolition of the corn-laws, what more that abolition would do than perpetuate the present state of commercial prosperity. They had cheap provisions and abundant employment; and yet in these favourable cir cumstances what was the actual condition of the chil dren ? The repeal of the corn-laws would leave those children as it found them. Whatever good it might do to other classes, it would do no good to them. But here he would most solemnly declare, that if he believed the repeal of the corn-laws would place these many thousands in a condition of comfort, and keep them so, he solemnly declared that, in spite of every difficulty, he would vote at once for the entire abolition of the corn-laws. He had been asked where he would stop. In reply, he had no hesitation in saying, Nowhere, so long as any portion of this great evil remained to be abated. He confessed that his desire and ambition was to give the labouring' children of this empire the opportunity of education. He would continue to labour in this work while he had the slightest hope of success. Would any man deny that this was a subject well worthy of the deliberation of that House ? Let the House look at the increasing facilities which had taken place for mischief. What was called the march of intellect had facilitated the means of mischief. He would only just refer to those valuable tables which had been prepared at the Home-office on this subject. In 1843, 13 persons were hung for murder. There were three females who had murdered their hus bands, two males who had murdered their wives, one person who had murdered a child, and one who had murdered her father. In a summary of this state of things, published in a magazine in 1844, and written by Mr. Symonds, a barrister, it was stated that murder and rape had increased 38 per cent. on the average of the last four years, rapes 57 per cent., other horrid offences 53 per cent., arson, which exhibited malice in its worst shape, 28 per cent. The newspapers con stantly detailed crimes which iu novelty and atrociousness exceeded the imagination of mankind. He would not dwell on the subject, but there were two cases so gross that the records of sin in England pre sented few instances of similar wickedness. One mother had poisoned four of her children in succession, merely for the sake of the burial fees ; another had held her daughter over the fire till it was burned to death. If they would not, as a nation, undertake the task of re moving such crimes, let them not, by the continuance of the present system, render it impossible 'to re move them. Means had been taken of late years, schools were multiplied, and qualified persons, both within and without the Established Church. were ready to devote their energies to this work. But the entire absorption of the children, by almost unceasing toil in so many departments of industry, had defeated all their efforts. Time was when men maintained that utter ignorance and exclusive labour were the best gua rantees for the tranquillity of a people—a most aweful delu sion. The people in the ale-houses listened to composi tions in prose and vere, written with great force and power, and embellished with all the attractions of modern art, compositions so seductively written that in them they found vice and violence dignified into heroism. The guilt was the guilt of the Legislature, who encouraged that guilt by conniving at it. The Legislature could not disguise from themselves that they were standing on a very rotten foundation. They might augment their revenue, they might increase their navy, and extend their commerce. These were all very good things, but they were very little in themselves, and afforded but a very weak foundation, whilst they neglected the moral and physical welfare of the great mass of the people.—(Hear, hear.) All might appear very well and prosperous; but the hour of difficulty would discover that the Government of this country had done nothing to secure external liberty or internal peace.—(Hear.) But sti.l they were left without hope, nor, perhaps, had they anything to fear but from indifference and neglect.—(Hear.) He trusted still in Providence.—(Hear, hear.) There were great and increasing means of good.—(Hear, hear.) The vast progress of human ingenuity and power, as de veloped in the increase:and improvement of steam-boats, railways, and machinery of every kind, might be con verted into instruments of mighty benefit. Let the State direct its efforts to these ends, and the Almighty would prosper their endeavours, and its children would rise and bless it.—(The Noble Lord sat down amidst cheers.) Sir J. GRAHAM said that although he had the mis fortune often to differ from the Noble Lord in the views of the questions which he brought before the House, yet he recognised the purity of motive—(Hear)—the single ness of purpose, and the honesty of means with which the Noble Lord endeavoured to attain the great objects which he had at heart, and also the touching eloquence with which he enforced his views. The Noble Lord regretted that he should be obliged to bring this subject under the consideration of the House, but he was sure that there was no Hon. Member in that House but gave the Noble Lord credit for the purity of motive which influenced him in this matter. The Noble Lord had introduced many other topics to the notice of the House, which were well worthy of their attention. He (Sir James Graham) was happy to observe that the Noble Lord did not overlook, in addition to the moral condition to which reference had been made in such choice language, the physical con dition of the working classes of this count r y. A n d, without undervaluing in any degree the moral tuition necessary to the bettering of their condition, he could not, at the same time, concede that the physical training should be less neglected. The observations made by the Noble Lord upon the subject were of a most im portant character. The Noble Lord had informed the House that a very largo number of the master-manu facturers took a paternal interest in the condition of their workers. They tried to insure their health and comfort, and he stated that, in consequence, the condition of the children was materially improved—greatly improved as compared with that of children employed in other branches of our manufac tures.—He (Sir J. Graham) thought that, if they were to go on regulating for the labour of children in fac tories, they could not have a measure more moderate and better in principle than that propounded by the Noble Lord. It now became his duty 'to call the attention of the House to the step which his Noble Friend asked him to take. There were several marked and strong distinc tions between the labour with respect to which his Noble Friend asked him to interfere, and factory la bour. In the first place, it could not be denied that those particular processes of tnanufactures-- namely, prints and dye-works—were, speaking generally, healthy occupations. Many of the processes took place in the open air. Some of the processes must be carried on in a high state of temperature, but, speaking generally, the children employed in these works were healthy, and the operation could not be said to be unhealthy. The marked feature of fac tory labour, with which they dealt last year, was labour conducted by machinery. Now, what were the facts with respect to it ? Why, that it was easily regulated with respect to time,and the labour might be stopped with out injury. All these circumstances were wanting with respect to calico-printing, because, when once the process began, it must be continuously carried on without inter ruption until completed, otherwise the work runs a risk of being destroyed or irrevocably injured. With respect to the work there were months in the year when they were deemed to be slack, and there were other periods when the works must be continuous Now, with regard to the employment of young children, it would not be possible for the manufacturers to avoid employing them; and fur this reason, that unless the manufacturers were satisfied to sacrifice a large amount of profit, the employment of children would be indis pensably necessary. His Noble Friend had mentioned another branch of manufacturing employment, that which was called block-printing. Now this was a branch of trade to which the profits would not admit the appli cation of manual labour, as it would not pay, and therefore it was that children were employed in that department; they did the work as well as adults, and therefore their services were required to carry it on. If, then, the Legislature were to raise the wages of children to the amount of that of adults, the result would be, either the total suspension of that branch of manufac tures, or the wages would be so much increased that the article, the produce of block-printing, would be so in creased in price as to materially retard the consumption. He had mentioned those circumstances in order that the House might see the necessity of drawing a line of dis- tinction between the different departments of labour in manufactories. But now permit him to mention a few of the peculiar and increasing difficulties that exist to prevent legislation upon this subject. He believed it had been stated that in France the legislative regula- Lions with regard to the mode of employing children were very satisfactory. But in France the machinery used was not the steam power, and the labour was not so con centrated ; and the consequence was, that, according to the reports of the medical men, it was not so easy to deal with disease as in the English factories ; that eva sion was practical to a great extent, and th result of that evasion was, that while the idle and dishonest man benefited by it, the honest labourer was placed under the most cruel disadvantages. Now, he begged to observe, that in the particular trade to which the Noble Lord had directly alluded, the hours of labour were comparatively short, and in many instances there was no night- work at all. If the system of inspection advocated by the Noble Lord were carried out, the honest manufacturer would be placed in an unfavourable position, while op portunities would be afforded to the dishonest employer to evade the law. He was bound to state that late hour work had existed, but not to the serious extent stated by the Noble Lord. Late hour work was disadvantageous to the manufacturers, and it s as to their interest to repress it. WI .en late hour work did occur, it was occasioned by competition, and the House ought to be cautious how they legislated with the interests of the labourer. He did not object to the introduction of the measure, but he was bound to give his consent to it with considerable reluctance, because the Noble Lord appeared to proceed further with this system of legislation. The question, then, was, how far were they go, and where ought they to stop ? If they went too far in interfering with the re gulations of the working population of the country, there was no doubt it would be attended with serious results. At the same time, he could not refuse to consent to the introduction of the Bill, but he must reserve for himself and the Government the most perfect discretion with respect to the mode in which the details of the Bill were to be carried cut. Mr. WALLACE was happy to find the Government gave their consent to the ititVOuction of this measure. From the cautious manner in which the Right Hon. Baronet had allowed the Bill to be introduced, it would be necessary for all parties to make out an extremely good case before they could be admitted to partake of its exemptions. The Right Hon. Baronet had distinctly stated there were three classes of persons who might be said to be included in the proposal of the Noble Lord. Now he did think the dyeing and bleaching departments ought to be considered as coming under the category of the Noble Lord, and he would take leave to intimate that it was his intention to make an effort to prevail upon the House to include these branches in the Bill. It would be his duty to bring their case under the consideration of the House when the Bill arrived at the proper stage for his doing so, and he trusted be should succeed in prevailing upon the House to include them in the Bill. Mr. HUME was glad to hear the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet, and the conclusion he had come to. He agreed with the Noble Lord in lamenting the pre sent condition of the labouring classes, but he must, at the same time, remind the Noble Lord that the manu facturing population was not the only suffering part of the community. Distress existed as well in the agricultural as in the manufacturing dis tricts. He only differed from the Noble Lord in the remedy he proposed. The Noble Lord was taking a wrong course to effect his object ; and although the Government had yielded last year—reluctantly, no doubt —to some of his proposals, thinking them to be of a beneficial tendency, still they might unconsciously carry this system of interference too far. He warned the Government of this, and cautioned Honour able Members to watch the progress of the Bill when it should be again brought before them. Every act of legislation on such a subject was an act of useless interference in the affairs of manufacturers—an unjust interference between masters and labourers which could not but be mischievous. If this were a country where persons were obliged to labour—if this were a country of slaves, then, indeed, legislative interference might be necessary. But the English artisan was at liberty to work where he liked—he might make what agreement ho pleased, he might work as he liked. There were some who thought the Legislature ought to stand in the place of a parent, and to interfere to protect women and children. He was not one of those. He admitted that isolated acts of oppression might take place, but he never would admit that any stranger could step in effectually to supply the place of a parent. Doubt less in some cases, under existing circumstances, parents might be found who would urge their children to undue labour, but where food was cheap and labour abundant, where, in fact, society was properly constituted, he could not believe that such a state of things could exist. He did not believe that such a state of things existed generally,at present. He believed that the Noble Lora had been told of certain extraordinary cases, and he must protest against any legislative interference in the matter, which, in his opinion, would do more evil than good. If the rule were laid down, it should be made applicable to all parents and all children. He was at a loss to know why the Noble Lord should select one class of the commu • nity for legislative protection, while he left the others destitute. It was contrary to nature to interfere in this manner,—it was bad—it was erroneous—children ought to be left to the management of their parents. If so ciety was in that state which the Noble Lord had stated, let him direct his exertions towards removing the root of the evil. Why was it that in England, which was reck oned the most enlightened country in the world, there were so many monsters who disgraced the human form, and why was it that parents, in order to obtain a liveli hood, were obliged to place their tender offspring in situations of difficulty and danger ? If the Noble Lord would visit the dwellings of the poor in the Metro polis—(Hear, hear)—he would find there misery equal to that which he had depicted as existing in the manufacturing districts. Before he sat down he would call the attention of the Noble Lord to a pamphlet upon the working classes, addressed to the Right Rev. the Bishop of Exeter. The Hon. Member proceeded to read extracts from the pamphlet, one of which said that phi lanthropy was a good thing, when under the guidance of wisdom and prudence ; but highly mischievous and pro ductive of great evil when used by meddling persons. The extract quoted went further to speak of the acts of certain persons high in station, and to say that all busy bodies were dangerous, but the worst of all a Govern ment busy-body, for the one interfered only with the welfare of units, the other with the existence of mil lions. The Legislature, continued the Hon. Gentleman, should give the people an opportunity of making the most of their labour, and should remove those fetters which monopoly and class interests had placed upon in dustry. The working classes, so far from asking pro tection, desired to have protection abolished—they want a fair day's wages for a fair day's work, full employ ment, and an opportunity of sending their labour to the best market.—(Hear.) Mr. COBDEN did not altogether coincide in the ob servations of the Right Hon. Baronet regarding calico printers, but would offer a few observations on the speech of the Noble Lord. He gave the Noble Lord great cre dit for his motives, but he must say that he did not see what reference the numerous instances of great demora lisation had on the question before the House. He did not pretend to say that people employed in calico-printing were treated worse than other people. But surely it was not necessary, in speaking of calico-printing, to relate how many people had been sentenced to death for mur der, arson, and other great crimes ; nor could he, for the life of him, see what the burnin4 of a child to death by its own mother had to do with the subject under the consideration of the House. These things led the public mind to suppose that calico-printing was necessarily of a demoralising nature; and he left the House to say whether it was fair to encourage such a belief. The Noble Lord had said a great deal about the duration of the employment of children in this branch of manufac ture, but the fact was, where children were employed in an apartment where the temperament was mild, and not hurtful to their constitutions, and where they were shel tered from the inclemency of the weather—they had 3s. a week, whilst the children in agricultural employments were exposed to the severity of the weather, and had to work hard for Is. 6d. a week. The Noble Lord said that children engaged in calico-printing were addicted to lying, stealing, and quarrelling. He confessed he could see no reason why children in this department should be more vicious than others; nor had the Noble Lord shown any reason. In one or two matters the Noble Lord had cer tainly exaggerated—for instance, in stating that children of three and four years of age had been employed in calico-printing. The Noble Lord had not given his authority, but surely he should know that it was morally and physically impossible that children of such tender age could labour.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord quoted cases in which children worked for long periods without any intermission ; but he, Mr. Cobden, could only say he had never heard of such cases. The Noble Lord had attempted to give a tone and bearing to this subject which did not naturally belong to it. In calico printing, and other trades of the same kind, the time of labour was not fixed or compulsory ; they did not begin and cease with the steam-engine, as in other branches— it -was the wish of their parents that children should be employed—they worked iu the lime room with them, under their eye, and might leave off when they tlicargn! proper. It was not here as in the cotton initls; t heft time was free ,and if they overworked themselves it nal their own or their patents' fault. The No ble Lord sought to bring them under the Chinese system of le e ' gislation ; he would have inspectors go into every 1100, and prescribe the hours of toil. He thought the N )bie Lord meant well, on the whole, but was sometimes led away by misstatements ; he, Mr. Cobden, would b.? very happy, as a practical man, to give the Noble Lord any information which he might apply for.—(Hea r. ) Mr. WAKLEY said that the Right Hon. Gentleman, had, as an act of civility towards the Noble L ord, allowed him to bring in his Bill ; but the Right Hon. Gentl eman _ had determined to give the Bill the most stren uous opposition in his power. Sir JAMES GRAHAM—I studiously avoided making any M such declaration. r. WAKLEY—And I as studiously inferred it• llj hinted the Government had determined to give th all the opposition in their power. If the Noble Lord proceeded, and the friends of humanity were nn , in the matter, he anticipated for the Noble Lo rd a vi ' ' ' —a splendid victory, and he called upon the Noble Ler) not to be dismayed when he obtained it. — Wear' he , He should press on his forces after triumph, NU"' - or same ardour as before, until the object was fully acco ° plished. Ile could not forget 14 bat occurred last seasi The Noble Lord did not expect success on a forme, occasion, and seemed dismayed when lie obtaise.al it. The Honourable Member for Stockport Olt, that it was impossible that children of three ('n four years of age could be enll3 l °Y ( ' d he the manner stated by the Noble Lord, and in this a agreed with him ; but the Hon. Member had not stat. e s, at what ages they were employed, whether at five, of V ie , or seven years, and he refrained from denying th e : for gations which the Noble Lord had made in movie , ' • ° , O leave to bring in the Bill. A truly painful descriPitrelto had been given of the toil to which these poor chilanuid were devoted ; and was it possible that the House w i " no t evince so keen a sympathy for foreign slaves, on ( ' T he protect their own infant slaves ?—(Hear, hear.) o . Noble Lord had stated that 25,000 children we re 60 e,to played, and from what lie could learn, he was inth lcee ' s a think the system denounced by the Noble Lord gas a system of infant slavery, and, notwithstanding t h ron e, servations servstions of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Montr not he thought the benevolence of the Legislature could loss be better employed than in rescuing those heilldis, creatures from such cruelty and thraldom. It Was t e al grace to Parliament that they had not striven W r 011 this evil, and he wished the Noble LeSi t al. the success which his efforts so well 02 7. s hea The Noble Lord should, however, extend his reser' be and inquiries into the agricultural districts, "h ere , as had found quite as much destitution and sufferiZot elsewhere, and, until he did so, his exertions vv° ll :, o uld be divested of suspicion and oness'cledne:s. Ileiota be very anxious to vote for a Committee to inqinr'l the the condition of the rural districts. He considereuwo question, as the Right Hon. Baronet had statedlinos one of profit; but was profit to be put in cowr i e /fet es with the lives of thousands of poor children? - i t tir io hear.) In Ireland, men performed the smile la b sish calica-printing which was done here by childian , 5 t hat showed that their services were not essentia l, ati`' they were employed became their wages was 1 0 ' 3 '0 0 vi e garding the question of education, he though t tl h e i greatly to blame for neglecting it so grossly. Friend (Mr. Hume) said, educate the men ; but be Friend Wakley) said, educate the children, for you n e 'siti° l/ make a bad man a good boy.—(Laughter.) The co ll s .olo' of the poor of this country, in point of education, `,eisio mentable. He entreated the Noble Lord to Per sei pefi ts his labours, which would produce the greatest hi l:o to to society; and he hoped the Noble Lord see the fruits of his benevolent exertions. Ba t s ti b e itoe l f not be dismayed or discouraged when he fount' sa il° unsuccessful, but must go steadily onwards in Ptir of the great object he had in view. matter a Mr. MARK PHILLIPS thought it was o os eb e „ great importance that this question should beaPPrdeo in a candid spirit, and stripped of all exagg 4.s iied prejudice. The term "slaves" had been W oe !) ° 25,000 children employed in a particular hr the Or would 001 manufactures. He entered his protest again't olia b le t bs plication of such a word, which was wholly InePr s to The greater part of the children were brough t 1 ;,, r factory by their own parents, and worked no ions" roo f , their parents pleased. The parents were ine c , o ie' e il r e concerned in their labour than their masters to hs'a not bound to work for any specified period, no r ia tio l 7: c a certain quantity of work performed by cep No such thing— their time was free, and 5 0 ' 4 - ii ot,T.s hands, and if they worked long the master dv - ` them. The parent sought to perform a grea t (/,, of work, and if the energies of the child w e t r o - c 's, b . " taxed, the fault was not, he repeated, the Ines ' be d the parent's. ' Lord ASHLEY, in replying, said that he mar th e fl Fes to thank lion. Members on both sides of to r s s' iti for the kindness extended to him. His great i t ifig fie to ameliorate the condition of the children "r°_„ l wh o the different branches of their manufactures, "' n6 9,° 00 , preserving his own principles inviolate, he ° dor ready to receive any suggestions advanced by °„ to c ° o , Members upon the subject. He was quite re ever cede anything short of the principles he had e v „3 cated upon this subject. Mr. LABOUCHERE hoped that the l''" o tia would fix an early day fur the second retr l'l9f bf his measure, as the House and the c on e t ape singularly situated, in consequence of the line 'e sl,e,, by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for she Department and the Government upon this que-ctlyolfli-ri was surprised that on a question of this natur e '', be, f 'i l l principles which had been brought so freque e t t l i 'e the House, and considering the ample mea ns '0614 Hon. Baronet possessed of inquiring into its oli f considering the liability that lay upon him ° c s the Factory Commissioners with his advice ti tc sO). s 0 ment, he (Mr. Labouchere) thought it strange' po t no t go o f least of it, that the Right Hon. Baronet I l . gu , c eti °l3s So the House and the country some clue to the in'afcee'r her Majesty's Ministers. Whatever difference It o; c o l might exist upon that question, one thing wa s : n ,..0r taro, that any postponement of the qu es4( , ) ; 0 0 ,, y e sr, mystery as to the intentions of her Mole st Y c entbo l oie ment, would create and keep alive a feeling bet" o p SI ployera and the employed, which would be Me st „P s O l d to to both their interests.—(Hear, hear.) It vv s - t ion':',,gs intention to enter into the merits of the cle e 'dorc t ' a ot argue as to the necessity for this resolution ecoal3 regulation of the hours of labour, but h e ld ren ill o te avoid giving his concurrence to the made by the Hon. Member for Stockport, t ° bar/ 151e °3 servations made by the Noble Lord the 03 01) ,or Dorsetshire as to the amount of crime i 0 turing districts, was rather overcharged. "` w ere ° s'a,e o3 lions would seem to infer that those crime s (.45 1 s);" ti ot the result of evils peculiarly attending the s° „ in the manufacturing districts, and that dies p a t, fi be found at all in the agricultural counties; to ost all these faults, he (Mr. Labouchere) wand member of his rank and character stain' to m m' 134' House, endeavouring to relieve misery', e' rl o bieo t crimes, which they all acknowledge to the so pe r , while admiring the spirit in whie ll ih .ht b e ss io r s ° excelle,,t for was brought before them, he toa; ha Ins. s „ios' mitted to doubt the utility of 'f ee t in ' O O itself, as a preventative to crime. Hi s obi t t hat_ c itea however, was simply to express his reg:bieh question of this importance—a question _ as estt ° ol ° such intense interest among all classes—,a. n i t iee s o or e volving in such a degree the principles oitidiven humanity, the Right Hon. Baronet had n°,:ent. decided opinion on the part of the Gov Xll. 0' Leave was then given to bring in the - 11) „ 1 TOE COMMITTEE TO INQUIRE INTuirs, eso.ober NAGEMENT OF LIGHTHOOOO,I4SOert" Sir GEORGE CLERK requested the;i s e r t ° s :Sfi for Montrose to postpone for a time hissing ligh,,yo ing the management of lighthouses, flos_ l 4, it Ivo It would be exceedingly inconvenient to rog ues that evening, and therefore it was that n', 0 , 0 , no e) Hon. Member to postpone it for a day or 0 40 13 . , 50 Mr. HUME had no objection to it301')11 He had nothing to son a Baronetsubject so In. ton4_, therefore if the Hon would allo,o'iciat 0: 00 0 ,1 duce it, on some Government night, he ' s ae cede to the Right Hon. Baronet's retit le :d r- a y vr ee '' e 'on fe if i f t in the meantime, postpone it till Ther_antiase,4 the Right Hon. Baronet might, in the mine) low with his colleagues, and let him (gr. could be brought forward on that day. The motironowsaTsmthFennpcoEstp;serdiosAGot thenifosttoi°llo Mr. DUNCOMBE, in rising to bri,°A ts satt_ o itt_f of which he had given notice, name)" , w' re t CA )l , ' .s e s ee . 0 and evasive nature of the report of in o. an d deu , ale ti bo appointed to inquire into the oPeei n ' f i c use,e oo of t , b e letters, said that he had promised h t lthe ett"nterof day of the session, that he should eo , . ye c harac., tc e House to the unsatisfactory and evar3et Cori well te t j ecl report emanating from the see, _ might refit as pointed to inquire into what he a he the iniquity of the Post-office, 0 ,1 5 painif eg retV i o much that it should then he ran u d regre t at to fulfil the promise he had then the stivi the fs • more that he could not have brougns wa s, that _ la te . , anwa was earlier no h period,s. Thebut re report toad n o 1 a h t e i e o: l l : l,ol, :ii :c l i period of the last session, thateit `vas House.t ° it t he s he ep him to call the atten:lon of the ea to ca t bad boo It was not his fault that he was f tha t relW r vicu ld s to tion of the House to it now, for, a c ourse 050 as t o satisfactory, the necessity for remind the . t roal tbe, been avoided. He needed not to n was fi rs t in , e ha what occurred when the c l uesw a‘Zre,. th „r I d i li p A t z ter 3 the House. They were all tida l their be honour of presenting a P7 ainiu s. that , , e a to itt Or °e' t a and another gentleman had been opened. Thatc°PwefPtistit°ante latest was s he t t i i n rri a c re g l ° ts tiv 4s t ; his place to give the House eXP laria o rtail 3 tha t ante d hc ra ot printed, and the Secretary oszed, the matter. He had then s wa rrant g r saft. by virtue the e_ a eatesfst , e a r re v ;_ r e inc i s , a r e : visc e e r , b bu ad t h b e ee re n f o u p se e d ne t d o was issued. A very shortt: her petition sfri..oo buncombe) presented ano t h r°. • had „' ; ',ht letter s a P'c that h is a l s o t • s ter , oc casion the r 4 opened and read, and on.t Captainwhohad st h e e i l t d rh a n ti high h'inself hin d hoe lt. tea t Hon. Baronet had screened en_inpod t ri s in t i e ica in which he had originally " wa rren no pe)„ e i tset refused to say when he e o g r . pan e L ci to tif d t o case were issued, and he bo role° . wa s -eslsestir moved that that petition ski U. objectionse ho asr a 00 . Committee of the Hous e : o f the o° ll o i s ing l fee; by c i wit th3t ed " i 00:0 prop' he House, andlet° p th o a rt t e m d o b t y ion l 6;4 bauntdonorapdoiPsve?isqii. appointed her jcoormitymoitftees6bieninhgis favour. lice of that department o Charaber, t° l o s conch t „i the Government influenceeddr:vtiess6osa. tiencisitirceeitlitttoortivi; manly called the Secret . wh i c h na WI? if isb e ` e workings and the authoritycoy the lax'' bi n o ltti and report on the expedient y flap' ie 3 : the C , ° o li bje Cr delay in the delivery of t too- ss hes ..ever® d . m b e e t a bseyereain oname:ll:o(ll...,ar' pa/W., WINDOW-TAX. Lord DUNCAN postponed his motion with respect to the window-tax, which stood for to-morrow, till Monday. He had stated his intention to do so in the early part of the even ing, and he now repeated it in the presence of the Right Hon. Baronet. Mr. FERRAND wished to put a question to the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Three sessions ago, Mr. Muggeridge was appointed a Commissioner to go into the inland counties, to inquire into the distress existing there. He had made his report, but it had not been laid on the table of the House. lie wished to know whether it was intended to lay it on the table of the House ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the report had been made, but not printed, as far as it was it would be laid on the table of the House. _ _ Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that Members had been in formed that yesterday or to-day they were to be fur nished with the list of the articles on which the duty was to be taken off. Sir H. PEEL said that it had been found to be convenient to arrange the articles alphabetically, and as soon as that was done the list would be laid on the table. SPERM OIL. Mr. GEORGE SMITH wished to ask a question of the First Lord of the Treasury, which w a s of i m p or t ance t o a l arge class of persons. It was, whether it was the intention of the Government only to reduce, or altogether to take off, the duty on sperm oil? Sir R. PEEL said the duty on sperm oil was not to be given up at once, but the Government did intend to provide for ulti mately relinquishing that duty ; but they would postpone it to such a period as not to interfere injuriously with existing inte rests. He might as well state now, that after the sth of Ja nuary, 1849—(Hear, hear, and laughter)—the duty on sperm oil should cease. SUGAR DUTIES. Lord JOHN RUSSELL asked when the exact resolutions proposed by the Government on the sugar duties would be laid on the table ? Sir R. PEEL said the House would be in possession of the resolutions to-morrow, and he was in hopes that he should be able to furnish them this evening. In that case he hoped, in the discussion of the income-tax this evening►, the sugar duties would not be debated, but would be left till those resolutions were seen. Lord J. RUSSELL thought it would be more reasonable for the Right Hon. Baronet to postpone the consideration of the sugar duties till Monday. Sir R. FEEL thought the Hon. Member for Manchester had given a notice for equalising the duties on foreign and co lonial sugars on Friday next, and that there was no objection on the part of the Noble Lord to that discussion having prece dence of the Noble Lord's own resolution. . L supli o o r sin .l g . It a U fte S , S t E he LL ßig h l a i t t l n u o on .objection Gentleman's to that emans motion otionw.as arrangement, dis posed of, no further proceedings should be taken till Monday. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, his only object in all this was to prevent confusion in the trade, to which it was of gret im portance that the opinion of the House should be known. He should have no objection to the discussion taking place en the motion of the Hon. Member for Manchester, on Friday next ; and on Monday they could take the discussion on the proposal of the Noble Lad. Dlr. GIBSON said it was then to be understood, that the question of the equalization of duty on sugar weuld take place on Monday next, and forthtate particular purposeh detailseditlnooft tthheink it asary to be provided u h Go ment measure. THE BUDGET. TIMES. —The Budget is now before the nation, and has already been subjected to an examination more deliberate than that whizh was necessarily biassed so largely by the grandeur of the financial changes proposed, and the wonilerful command of facts, readiness, and perspicuity displayed by the propounder. Thus far there is something siDgnlar and ominous in the result of this examination. There are two things most undeniable in the Budget : first, that it is such an one as the nation would have expected from the Whigs, supposing that unfortunate party ever to have been in a condition to give it ; secondly, that it is decidedly popular in its tendency; for, except in the matter of the income-tax, it emancipates commerce at the expense of property, and ostentatiously favours the poor. Accordingly, it was received by the Ministerial side in comparative silence, by the Opposition with hearty cheers, and by the people generally with satisfaction. The walla of the metropolis are placarded with Sir Robert's " Free Trade Budget." The economists are delighted. Yet, after all, that silence is worth more than those cheers and accla mations. The Whigs immediately set to work disc )ver ing short-comings in the most liberal measure. In the multitude of grievances now to be redressed, they dis cover only that some have been omitted. If Sir Robert, instead of reducing taxes to the whole extent of the existing surplus, leaving the augmented estimates for the ensuing year to be pros ided for by the probable improvement of the revenue, and leaving the void of the income-tax to be filled up from that source also, had quietly laid on three or four millions of new taxes, he could not have been met with more strenuous defiance. The metropolitan delegates and their Par liamentary allies set up their backs at th, Premier, measure their obstinacy with his, and accumulate on his devoted head the sins of all the tax-gatherers for the last thirty years, merely because, while he utterly sweeps away five important branches of re venue, and immensely reduces a sixth, a seventh also is not added to the list. After all, the flattery of foes is not worth the patience of a friend. We entirely agree with the gentlemen we have just referred to, and whose speeches we print in another column, that the window duties aro most inconvenient, most unsalutary, most un equal, most unphilosophical. They spoil the inward com fort and outward appearance of our houses. Their exces sive and stupid rigour is a constant provocation to the man of taste and the thrifty householder. They mar the process of building as much as the duty on glass does, or rather did, the process of that manufacture. But, in our humble opinion, they who insist so valiantly on an immediate abolition of the duty, are bound to provide for the deficit in as distinct and categorical a form as the Premier has provided for his six reductions and six deficits. Let them bear in mind the various necessities of the case; that the only portions of our expenditure which are not absolutely and irreversibly fixed do not amount to 13,000,000/. ; that under existing circumstances, as Sir C. Napier himself will acknowledge, it is impossible ade quately to reduce those portions, or go on safely and re spectably, without some increase ; that the window sar a y nd tha t n hey sim i p v l il se u e t i des tha p t r o s d o u m c e e h i a n b g out else l,7 i o s o,o n o e o c L es , y voting the tax a bore. At least, the ,linister whose caution. The comparison of the not a window i n h d e o i nwgduties althat unfortunate responsibility it is to ma k e , as we ll with there h the er e as to unmake, will proceed with a li tt l e more duty on glass is simple enou g h. S ir R o b ert enumerated four subjects of reduction, were, but as being particularly applicable at the present junoture, when there is an obvious necessity to choose such reductions as shall themselves heal the wounds they make in the revenue. There were duties on articles of general consumption on the raw materials of manufacture those which require expensive establishments, and those which restrict demand, and consequently trade. By ' these four tests at least the duty en glass has better claims than its competitor. it affects more than 3,500,000 houses, instead of only about 450,000, besides that windows are only one branch of the glass manufac ture. Notwithstanding what was said on Isaturday at the meeting referred to, the window duties are chiefly raised classes b ; more than four-fif ths uted by houses with more of 12 requir e no di s ti nc t establish theft rhoamn whole beingndo:vs. wealthier Tonhter3i Ille glass must originate. The impossibleprermenmits isfeio remission n m t h ote e ofn i r tt ihoen e duty collection calculate w ae the incr ease o f d eman d w hi c h a t , and, on th e other hand, it is on h springs, pipes, tiles, and chimney ornaments ; he might have added conserva tories, now only within the reach of the wealthy. They talk even of glass bas for churches. There are of course important grounds of reduction besides the above four. But just now those four have the pre-eminence. Moreover the window duties are a mode, a very clumsy mode perhaps, of taxing houses. They are a property-tax. Evidently the day is approaching, as one of the speakers at the meet ing we have referred to intimated, when the whole question of property will be reconsidered with a view to a fairer, less v exatious, and more permanent duty than what the nation now groans under. So, while there can be no possible harm in demonstrating from facts the injurious character of the window duties, we must recommend patience for a year or two longer. But, having given this general approbation of the Minister's proposed remission of taxation, and in truth of the Budget generally, we cannot let the tax upon property and income pass without saying a few words upon our previous opposition to the tax affect ing the latter ; for we still maintain that a tax upon income—that is, upon industry—to say nothing of its inquisitorial character, is unjust and inju riou'. First, with respect to the duration of this tax ; the profession that it is only to continue so many and so many years reminds us forcibly of the follow ing little anecdote :--A person who kept an asylum for the better class of lunatics had invited a friend or two to dine with him, some of his patients being admitted, sub rosa, to the same table. The host being called out on some occasion, one of the patients says to one of the guests, " What's the state of your malady, Sir ? How long have you been suffering ?" " Suffering ?" replied the guest, "I am not suffering at all. I was invited to dine with Mr. So-and-So (the host), and I am going home again this evening." " Ah, Sir," said the patient, "so they told me, in order to get me here. I thought that I should go home again the same evening, but now I faney lam in for life. My only escape hence will be to the grave." And just so it will be with the income-tax. We were tempted into it at first for only three years ; now we are to have it for other three ; and when those are e nded, and w e are ex pecting a reease, like the man in the madhouse, we shall find our burden commensurate with the lives of all of us. It will be a perpetual tax. If the people suffer it let them ; but let them not be deceived ; let them, like, the patient in the asylum, enter in freely, and know that they are to be detained there for ever. The unfairness of the tax we have argued and proved agai n an d again till argument and p roof are needless. O the present occasion Sir Robert Peel puts the question fairly and temperately in every other respect except that of duration. He says, in effect, will you have it, or have it not? Between the produce of the property-tax, as separated from income, and the casual fruits of industry, on the one b and, and the amount of taxes remitted, on the other, the re is ver y little differ ence; and we firmly believe that the deficiency which would arise from the abolition of the income part of this general tax might be easily supplied in another way. GLOBE.—We are not amongst those who consider direct taxation of property, —or income so far as it can b e considered as representing property—objectionable in princiFle. But we must have an ardent a pp etite in deed for direct taxation, if we could acquiesce in the unamended continuation of the income-tax as it stands. If it is impossible to a djust the incidence of that impost, so as to render it less unequal than it has been repeatedly shown it is at present, then nothing but a case of urgency could justify its original imposition, and nothing but a continuance of the same urgency can now justify its continuance. It sta nds on somewhat a similar footing to the system of impressment for manning the navy in war—supposing, for the sake of the argu ment, impressment distinctly indispensable to that object. It is admitted that impressment is a peculiar hardship on merchant seamen; and if that hardship were pro tracted (without the alleged necessity) in time of peace IRELAND. DUBLIN, FEB. I7.—The usual weekly meeting of the Repeal Association, held to-day, in the Conciliation Hall, was very much crowded. Mr. O'Connell made his appear ance amid loud and enthusiastic peals of acclamation. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was accompanied by Robert Dillon Browne, Esq., M.P., William Smith O'Brien, Esq., M.P., Edmund Burke Roche, Esq., M.P., James Kelly, Esq., M.P., Morgan O'Connell, sq., M.P., P. J. Somers, Esq., M.P., Thomas Davis, Esq., Thomas Macnevin, Esq., and some other members of the Committee. Mr. MACNEVIN, on the motion of the Member for Lime rick, having been called to the Chair, addressed the meeting at some length. Mr. JOHN O'CoNNELL, M.P., referred to a subject of some interest in the financial statement of the Prime Minister in Parliament. He confessed he did not take quite the grateful view that others were inclined to take of the benefit which it was thought one portion of his proposition would confer on the people of Ireland. He was fully aware of the benefit that the reduction in the duty on glass would confer on the poorer classes, for it would enable them to have more light, and make their cabins more conducive to the health of the inmates; but their gratitude, or rather, their joy for such a boon, should not make them lose sight of the gross injustice continued upon them by the omissions of the Minister in other respects towards Ireland.—(Cheers.) Mr. O'CoNNELL rose amid loud cheers, and announced the receipt of a remittance from the county Louth, and in doing so he took occasion to observe, that when Mr. Montesquieu Bellew was canvassing that county he avowed himself a de termined repealer. That gentleman was now praising Peel, and appeared quite forgetful that he had obtained his scat by professing the strongest repeal principles. He hoped he got something for being a renegade. He (Mr. O'Con nell) pronounced him, from that spot, to be " a most un savo:xy renegade." At the next election some other person a t once jtetQd t M l cn