The Sun. — London, England, 1845-03-14 00:00:00

seven in the evening, and the effect was, that in 50 seconds the dog which had received the smaller eh se fell, and in ten minutes he died. The second died in half the time. He opened the bodies of the dogs eighteen hours after death, the s= me period at which the deceased was opened, and he could ascertain no smell of prussic acid. On opening the stomachs of the dogs the prevalent smell was that of some beer. The food was but half-digested. He shouldhave expected a smell of prussic acid in the case of a person who had died in a quarter of an hour after its being administered. He attributed the absence of smell to the admixture with the stout. He had examined the body of Mrs. Hart, and he would on opening the body have expected to find the cause of death, and if prussic acid had not existed in the stomach he had no doubt he could have traced some other cause. The `body was perfectly healthy. He was much in the habit of opening bodies, and he was satisfied that less than one grain would cause death. Cross-examined by Mr KEULY—He had never attended any one who had taken prussic acid. When taken as a medicine, the ordinary quantity was, of Scheele's, five minims, or drops. Prussic acid, be thought, might with advantage be used in varicose affections. He agreed with Dr. Thomson, of London, that, ex ternally applied, prussic acid might be found useful in cance rous diseases. He had the sense ofsmel! very acutely, and he could not detect the smell of the acid in the stomachs ofthe dogs. The dogs were kept in an outhouse after they were dead, and before they were opened. He tried these experiments on the dogs on the 18th Feb. succeedins , the death of the deceased. Headache and vomiting frequently followed a disorder of the stomach occasioned by something being taken into it. The quantity vomited bore no proportion to the quantity taken into the stomach. He had given medicinal doses of prussic acid to allay irritation of the stomach. Mr. KELLY—In the whole course of your experience did you ever find vomiting produced by prussic acid ?—I have seen dogs affected to vomiting. Mr. KELI,Y—I speak of the human being. Witness (emphatically)—The stomach of the dog is ex actly similar to that of the human being. Mr. KELLY—You speak very dogmatically, but I would wish a plain answer to a direct question. Have you, Sir, in the course of your experience, seen vomiting from the stomach of a human being induced by prussic acid ?—No ; I have not. Two witnesses were then examined, but they established - no important fact, and added nothing new to the evidence already edduced. Henry Thomas, chemist, Bishopsgate- street—He remem bered Wednesday, the .Ist of January, perfectly well. He saw the prisoner on that day between twelve and two, at his shop. He asked for two drachms of Scheele's prussic acid. He brought a half-ounce phial, labelled " Scheele's prussic acid." He gave that bottle to put the prussic acid in. The phial had a glass stopper. Witness could not get the stopper out, and was in consequence obliged to give Lint a stopper of his own. He thought the prisoner said, " You need not put a label on ;" but the circumstance was so common that he did not pay any attention to it. He said he wanted to apply the acid externally to a varicose vein. (The book in which the entry was marked was produced.) Witness saw the prisoner on the following day, between the hours of ten and twelve, and he asked for two drachms more. He said he had had a misfortune, he had broke the bottle. He had the same quainity as formerly in the bottle he had originally bought. .Ele had been frequently to the shop before that time. By Baron PARKE—He might have sold him prussic acid before, but did not recollect perfectly. The prisoner said he had been an apothecary and chemist. He was in the habit of covering these phials with leather. Witness first gave information that the prisoner had bought prussic acid on the Tuesday following. He afterwards came down to Aylesbury on the 13th, and he was told on the day fallowing that the prisoner was in the gaol. lie there saw the prisoner, and at once recognised him. Cross-examined by Mr. KELLY—If he covered the phial at all, it was with leather and not with paper. Ile had no doubt that the prisoner was at that time affected as he stated with varicose veins. Ile eid not believe that Scheele's prussic acid could be taken into the stomach and yet net ascertained by the smell. Ile had mixed thirty drops of Scheele's with eleven ounce., or nearly a tumbler full, of porter, and the smell wes slightly percepti hle. The bottle does not contain the quantity of eleven ounces. It is the property of this acid while it is volatilizing to give out a smell. He was aware that apple-pipe contained prussic acid. He saw fifteen small apples tested by distillation, and then with sulphuric acid and sulphate of iron. The quantity of prussic acid that re sulted was one grain and one-fifth. Mr. Smythe, clerk to Barnett, Hoare, and Co., examined —The prisoner had been in the habit of banking with them. On Wednesday, the Ist January, he came between two and three o'clock, and drew a cheque for 141. Paid him in gold. His account was overdrawn at that date. Ile believed the paper shown him to be his handwrit:ng. (The paper re ferred to was a prescription for varicose veins.) Cross-examined—There was not the slightest objection to his overdrawing his account. A letter was handed to the witness, which he thought was in the handwriting of the prisoner. The letter was addressed to Mrs. Hart, 93, Crawford-street, Portman-square, and was as follows . " Dear Friend,—l wish to ineorm you that I expect to be at home in a fortnight and therefore you Led better not write to me.—Your friend, "A. HART." Mary Ann Moss— W tn ess lived with Sarah Hart, at 93, Crawford-etreet, Bryanston-square, about four years since. She was pregnant when she went there, and a child was born in March, 1841. The only person who used to visit her was the prisoner. Ile came about once in six weeks, or perhaps oftener. The deceased lived in Crawford-street about twelve months, and then went to Farringdon-green, where she lived twelve months. She then went to Bath-place, at Slough, and witness called on her about eight or nine months befhre, her death. When the prisoner first came to Crawford street, he asked if there • was a person living there the name of Hart. She heard him, and said " Here I am ; it's all right." She had, at first, a back room furnished, but she aftewards bought furniture herself for the front-room. She saw a parcel once conic to the deceased, and the prisoner called afterwards, and asked " if it was all right." Witness observed that she had got some blankets. When Mrs. hart was confined, the prisoner called upon her, and went into her room alone. The last time she saw the deceased was in October last. She had not seen the prisoner for a long time before. Mrs. Bacon, the wife of a carpenter in Gray's Inn-lane. She knew Sarah Hart before she went into the prisoner's service, about six years. She was taken upon witness's re commendation to nurse the first Mrs. Tawell. She then went by the name of Hadler. Witness noticed that when she lived with prisoner after his wife's death, she was in the family-way. That was in April, 1839. Witness recollected that once at tea, in Mr. Tawell's house, the deceased sat down by the side of her. Witness slid, " I know what you are going to say, and you had better begin." The prisoner said Le was about to be married to Sarah Cutmore (}xis present wife), and it would be greatly against him to have the affair of Sarah's being in the family-way spoken cf. He bid Sarah not to excite herself, and she said that from that day she would be dead to the world—no one should know anything about her—not even her own mother. Grace Hadler sworn—The deceased was her daughter, and was, when she last saw her, living with Mr. Tawell. She never heard of her after leaving Bridge-street till this occurred. That was the case for the prosecution. The iurvmen were allowed some short time for refreshment. Oa their re -assembling, and their names being called over, Mr. F. KELLY, in rising to address the jury, said that the responsibility of his present position was so great, that even be, hacknied as he was in courts of justice, shrunk under it. What then must be their feelings, sitting there to pronounce, perhaps, the death-warrant of a fellow creature. But on what evidence were they called on so to doe On the unsup ported opinions expressed in two books like these (referring to two medical works on the table)—with the exception of one case to which he would afterwards refer, this was the only other instance, and a jury was call -d on to fix the doom of a fellow creature upon such evidence. He was aware of the prejudice which must exist against the unfortunate pri soner, in consequence of a fault committed in his earlier vears, and for which lie (Mr. Fitzroy Kelly) trusted he was fully re pentant. That he was repentant, he firmly beiieved, and it would be his duty to bring before the minds of the jury, persons to shew that the prisoner had been, since his return to his country, distinguished for his kindness, for his humanity, and for his strict feelings of rectitude. The jury must bear in mind that the witnesses called for the pro secution had come there prejudiced in their epinions, and pledged, in . fact, to support a certain theory. He would state to them what, in his humble judgment, the prose cutor was bound to prove, betides calling upon them for a verdict of guilty against the prisoner. They must first show that this unfortunate woman died of poison—they must also show that the poison of which she had died was prussic acid. Ile was sure that when they examined the statements of the different witnesses they must be agreed, that, as regarded these points, the prisoner was entitled to an acquittal. The prosecutor was bound to show by clear, positive, and certain evidence, nut only that the individual was murdered, but that she was murder ed from the cause charged in the indictment. There was not sufficient evidence in this case that would justify them in giving even a month's imprisonment against the prisoner. The Learned Counsel referred to the chemical evidence given in this case, and contended that the prosecutor might to have brought before the jury inen of practical experience in che mistry—men who derived not their knowledge from Taylor's and other works, but from experience itself. Instead of doing so, some two or three (they mast pardon hint for say ing so) green, inexperienced young men, of little know ledge and of less practice. They were called on to pronounce a verdict of death, because this woman had died of prussic acid, and yet the witnesses thernsclve had not been agreed as to the quantity of poison found in her body, or, in fact, that that acid was found, in sullicient quantity, to cause death at all. That the, woman had died suddenly was not denied, but there were many causes which might account for this. The tables of mortality published every week, and eventually every year , proved that there were at least one sudden death in every hundred ; and could they say that paralysis of the nerves of the heart, or of some other part of the human frame, might not have occasioned this death. They had no evidence upon oath that a grain of prussic acid would occasion the death of a htrmae being. 'They had merely the opinion of a man who read a hook, founded upon the opinion of the man who wrote the book. They had tried to prove that a grain of prussic acid had been found in the deceased per son's stomach, but they ought also to have proved that a grain of this poison would take away the life of a fellow- creature. They indeed referred to a couple of in stances recorded in Taylor, and he would test the value of that opinion. The Learned Counsel then, in the most mas terly manner, analysed the correctness of the authority re ferred to, and showed from internal evidence and the writings of other and more distinguished chemists that the opinion was founded upon uncertainty and speculation, and not to be weighed against the life of a human being. In that -case Wee- witnesses had assumed that the woman was poi soned, and having started with this theory, they said," Well, if this woman is poisoned, it must be with prussic acid," and immediately they commenced their experiments, not for the purpose of testing a doubtful theorv, but for the purpos e of c, ntirming a favourite and cherished impres sion.t. It was said t h at pruss i c ac id was f oun d i n h er stomacb. I'gilt perhaps be truly said, but then the question arose, whence came it ? To what cause was its existence to be at tributed? They had been informed that the woman had eaten a number of apples, and the • must be • informed that nothing in vegetable nature, ex cepting bitter almonds, produced the les i . n unf ortunate t e acid in greater quantities than the pips IX a Counsel then referred to the construction put bv r. Sergeant Bytes, in his opening address, on a letter referring to the pri soner's circumstances. The Learned Sergeant Lad assigned, as a motive fur the commission of the murd e r, a deSire on the part of the prisoner to retain the altos ance which he had made to the deceased. but would the crime lessen any part of his circumstances? Would the clalren not survive if the mother were dead? Would it not have been easier for him to allow the trifling sum of 50/. a year, than to take these children to his own home, where, owing to his superior posi tion in society, an additional expense woule be entailed upon him, and perhaps domestic disagreements follow their intro duction. The evidence given by the witnesses was then ex amined piecemeal, and explained away in the most ingenious manner. The Learned Counsel concluded by solemnly ap pealing to the jury to weigh the doubts in the case, and to give the prisoner the be::efit of them. Mr. Baron Pau; Wll3.summing up when our express left. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. . HOUSE OF LORDS, March 13. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his scat on the Woolsack at Four o'clock. SCOTCH BANKING. Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from the magis trates and town-council of Irvine against any interference with the present system of banking in Scotland. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. The Duke of WELLINGTON rose to give notice that.on Tuesday next, with the permission of their Lordships, he would move that the House adjourn for the holiday!, from that day till Thursday, the 3d of April. POOR-LAWS (IRELAND). The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from the poor-law guardians of a union in Ireland, praying for an in quiry into the working of the poor-laws in that country. CORPORATION MONOPOLY (LONDON t. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition to which he called the attention of the House, and especially of the Lord Chan cellor, and his Noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade, from a great number of householders in the City of London, complaining that they had been threatened by the Corporation with legal proeeedings if they d , d not take up their freedom, which, at the lowest, would cost them each 111. 41. Amongst these petitioners was a poor widow, who had been in business but six months, obtaining with difficulty a few pence a day f.,r her subsistence—and • if their Lo!dships would not interpose she would be absolutely ruined, for she could no more pay 111. 4s. than she could pay the national debt. The only way that he could effect what the petitioners desired was to bring in a Bill to extend to the City of London the 14th section of the sth and 6th Wm. IV., which abolished the same grievous monopoly in all other town s, cities, and boroughs, in the realm, in which, as well as in London, the same oppression was in force. Messengers from the Commons brought up the Bill for ex tending the income and property tax for three }ears ; also, the Consolidated Fund Bill, for appropriating 8,00t1,60C1. for 1845; and aßill for carr3ing into effect certain public works in Scotland. FREEDOM OF THE CITY OF LONDON. Lord BROUGHAM brought in a Bill, which was read a first time, far extending the provisions a the sth and i:th William IV. to the City of London. The object of this Bill is to enable non-freemen to carry on business in places where freedom was previously a title. DIVORCE. Lord BROUGHAM presented a Bill, which was read a first time, for extending the suggestions in cases of divorce (not to cases of divorce, for that made a considerable difference), the object of this Bill being to facilitate the remedy of the poor man in such cases. RAILWAY SCHEMES. Lord BROUGHAM said that he wished to ask a question of his Noble Friend at the head of tt.e Board of Trade, re specting the decisions to which the Board, cf which he was the bead, had come, with reference to the several lines pro jected between Lund and York. He would not ask this question; to-day, =if it were inconveti'ent to answer it, but be would give notice of it for a future day, as his object was to found a motion which would bring before the House the day and the time of the day—for the time of the day was important, when this decision was come to. His reason for asking the question was this :—lt was well known in the City, at 12 o'clock on Tuesday, that the London and York had been decided against, and the consequence was that the shares of the other two lines had risen 2 and 3 per cent. premium, long before the Gazette which contained that decision was pub lished. The Earl of DALHOUS'E said that he had not the slightest objection to give the information which his Noble and Learned Friend had asked, as far as it laid in his power. The fact was that the precise time at which this decision was made was in the afternoon. The Board on that day was held in the afternoon, and, therefore, it was utterly impossible that this rise could have resulted horn any communication with the Board of Trade. The inferences which his Noble and Learned Friend drew from the facts which he had stated, was, that either a com munication had been made from the Board of Trade with parties in the City, or else that proper concealment had not been used in order to prevent the decisions of the Board of Trade from being made use of in the stock market, and he could not conceive that the decision in this particular case had had any t ffect on the operations cf the stock market. There were three distinct parties to the communication between Lonuon and York. There was the London and York line, the Caasbridge and Lincoln line, the objet t of which wag to extend the communication to York by means of Cambridge, and the Direct Northern. These three parties were each pre pared to carry out their des;gns to the fullest extent. They were possessed of large capital ; they were supported by a h.ng following, and were backed r( spectively by immense iefluecce. They appeared to carry out their design to the very utmost. A circumstance, however, occurred, of which he was taut cognisant until the Tuesday. This circumstance had occurred on the Monday. Upon con sideration the Cambridge and Lincoln and the Direct Northern had come to the decision of coalescing. had come to the decision of coalescing. Was it to he wood red at that those who were cognizant of this fact would fail to per ceive that where two lint's had coalesced against a third, that the great probability that Parliament, cr the Board of Trade at least, would certainly decide in favour of those companies which lied coalesced, and against that which had thus gene to the wall , and that they, therefore, who had interest in the third line, would be cog. r to sell out of that line and buy into the ether taco, and that the shares of the other two should rise? But he would defy his Noble and I earn( d Friend to produce one person who had received any communication from the Board of Trade, or whol could prove that the proper measures fur concealment had not been taken. He was ready to give every information that he possessed. Lord BROUGHAM said that all he could observe was, that he derived his information from a very important merchant and broker, that that gentlemen had no knowledge whatever on Tu:ssday of the coalition which his Noble Friend at the head of the Board of Trade tad said took place on Tuesday, and he lelt that it was not only a matter of courtesy but a bounden duty on the part of the Ministers of the Crown, to give the fullest and most extensive information on any subject which was brought before Parliament. It was their duty not only to Parliament but to the country. There was sufneient reason for his question in the fact of this rise having been realised at twelve o'clock, when the Gazette, by which the property ought to have been affected, was not lublished until the evening. The Earl of DALHOUS'E said that he had already stated that the Board was not held until the afternoon, and that therefore the shares could not have been affected by the deci sion at winch it had arrived. He was ready, he repeated, to give every information, and he felt that it was a matter of duty, and not one of courtesy--.though he was not aware that it was the duty of a. 3linister of the Crown to give that in formation which he did not. possess. If his Noble and Learned Friend had seen as much of railway schemes within the last few months as he had, he would have learned that railway polities was an exce( dingly intricate matter, and that it was a policy among railway shateholders to conceal as much as possible the knowledge which they possessed from each other. Lord BROUGH ANI said he could not but say that the ex planation of his Noble Friend, so far as it went, was satisfac tory; but he must, at the sarce time, assert that a judicature like that which was exercised by the Board of Trade over rail. way schemes, was one abhorrent to the constitution, and odious to the whole country, and that should such accidents as these frequently occur, he should feel it his duty to bring a motion before the House for a considerable modifieation of that Board. The N o nee Ea al.then presented a petition, very numerously signed, from traders and shopkeepers of Exeter, against the 201. clause in the Bill of last session for the Abolition of Imprison ment for Debt. _Lord COT FEN H AM took that opportunity of disclaiming the authorship of this clause. It wai true that he had proposed the abolition of imprisonment for debt, but he had cuopled that pro position with affording the creditor the means of getting his debt. Lord BROUGHAM s'id the means which his Noble Friend proposed was that of taking the wages of the debtor, and this was found not to answer iu Scotland, although it was still in operation in that c.untry. Lord GOTTEN it AM said he had proposed to give the cre ditor the power of examining hi, debtor as to what property he possessed. After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL the matter dropped. JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL. On the motion being.put for going into Committee on this Bill, . . The Marquis of LANSDOWNE asked if the provisions of the measure were not to be extended to Ireland and Scotland ? The LORD CHANCELLOH said that the declaration did not apply to Scotian and, therefore, the extension of the Bill to that country was not necessary. But he did not know with certainty whether or not it applied to Ireland. He was in clined to think that it did not, and if so the Bill would not be necessary in that country. Lord CAMPBELL hoped that in another session a Bill would be introduced to do away with the declaration alto gether. In fact there was no legal necessity for any man to make the declaration. When once elected he was protected by the Bill of demnity. The declaration was not taken by the Lord Chancellor or the other high officers of State, and there was no obligation by law upon any other officer to,take it. The Bill then went through Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. Lord DALHOUSIE moved the second reading of the Corn. panies Clauses Consolidation Bill. Lord MONTEAGLE took that opportunity of calling at tention to the extent of business that was likely to come before them in the present session. Their Lordships would remember that, at the end of last session, they were very much pressed for time in getting rid of the private business; and he believed a fri3 of great public importance was all but lost, owing to the want of a Committee. The Duke of WELLINGTON begged to remind the Noble Lord that they got rid of all these difficulties towards the latter end of last session. Lord MONTEAGLE reminded the Noble Duke that the business of this session wi.uld be considerably increased, by the immense number of railway Bills coming before Parliament ; and it was this circumstance which had induced him to call their attention to the subject at this early period of the session. If their Lordships adopted any new rules with regard to the dispo,al of this private business, he hoped they would du so speedily, in order that the public might be fully warned of their nature. The Bill was then read a second time, and their Lordships immediately afterwards adjourned. lIOUSB OF COMMONS, March 13. The SPFAICER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock. On the motion of Lord G. SOMERSET the House went into Committee on the RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL Lord G. SOMERSET said he wished to postpone the 70th clause, which gives a railway company power to vary its fares and tolls under certain circumstances, till a future day. Ile did io to ac commodate his Right Hon. Friend the Vice President of the Boald of Trade. Mr. RICE suggested that some portion of the 71st clause should he struck out, in order that the power and discretion given to a railway company to rai4e their tolls, should be restricted. Mr. HAYTER expressed himself favourable to the amendment, the real cbject of which, it would seem, was to compel railway companies to abandon the old system of increasing the fares and tolls on those portions of the railway which had originally coat most in the construction, and required an additional expense in the present workings. Mr. W. MARTIN said that he thought it was but fair, where there was an inerrare in the original cost of the railway, but espe cially where there was a continual expense on a pat ticular part of the line, that there should be an increase in the charge. There was a, instance in one line with which he was acquainted. There was such a r se that the gradient was, he believed, 1 in 27j, and upon that particular portion of the line it was necessary to use a sta. tionary engine. He did conceive that, in this instance, the com pany CT(' ['WWl,' to an extra charge. They might say that this was a particular case, and perhaps hereafter such particular cases !night be provided for by clauses in the special Acts. But yet he thought the matter was worthy of attention, while considering the general Bill, by which those special Acts were to be regulated. Tha South-Eastern Company, in their negotiation with the Greenwich Company, deemed it of importance to avoid the toll, and he cou!d not conceive why they should now throw aside all the arguments they had then used, and change their opinion upon such a point as this. There was a particular tunnel on the Brighton line called the Godstone Tunnel, which had been formed at an immense expense. There was also a viaduct en the Soutli-Ea s tern line near Folkestone, some of the ;acts of which were upwards of 1)0 feet high. Now he thought, from the expensive na t ure of the works, there ought to be some increase of charge, and he did not gee what pretence there as for charging Ws. en the Brighten THE SUN, LONDON, FR line, while the South. Eastern Company only charged ss. 6d. trans Folkestone to Reigate--a similar distance. For these reasons he, thought that an equal mileage system was a tight principle to adopt on those line where the company had been put to only ordi nary expense; but in those instances where the expenditure had been increased, he thought that there ought also to be an increase of charge. Perhaps these particular instances might be met by clauses in the Special Acts, but he thought it requisite to draw the attention of the C - :mmittect to these points. He thought the companies ought to be protected, which by the clause they would be ; for he felt the public were able to protect themselves, Mr. TATTON EGERTON said, it appeared to him, that the view of the case which had just been taken ass, in some instances, incorrect; but yet that something •f the kind ought to be adopted, so as to carry the object of the clause into effect. As it stood it would tell heavily against the lower classes. It the companies were obliged to adopt equal rates, they could not give those favour able terms to thiri-class passengers which they all destrei to grant. Li the neighbourhood of large towns this would prove a great grievance. The Manchester and Leeds Company, he knew, were anxious to ac. commodare the third class passengers, and if they could obtain a remuneration for expenditure by other means, they would be ab:e to do so. He did not see why the principle of different rates, which had been used by canals, should not be applied to railways. • Sir H. HALFORD said, that on the Peterborough Canal, by a certain law the public had a right to have oxen and sheep carried not only aat ort distance, but all the way to London; while with respect to other parts of the country they were under no such limitation. Now, he thought the principle which they had adopted on that car.al, which was that of public convenience, might be ap plied to railways. He should support the amendment. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said that this was no novel proposal. It had often been mooted in Committees, which had beers very hilly attended by Members of that House, and in all those Committees it had been decided that the principle of the clause was a good one. By the arrangements into which the Siert h- Eastern Company had eiitered, coal was carried cheaper from Dover to Tunbridge than ever it had becon before; and no one could deny that the effect had been very much to reduce the price of coal at Tunbridge. Passengers from London to Tunbridge were carried for the same rate as they were to a place ten miles short of it ; so that the charge for travelling forty miles was the same, and this he conceived was a great advantage to tire public. 111_1 object was to equalise the charges ; and the mover of the amendment, the Hon. Member for Dover, might as well say that a person travelling one hundred miles should be carried at the same rate as one who only travelled ton. He really thought that if the Company had not stirred in the matter the house would have been better affected to wards •he proposition, and he hoped the elause would be retained, Mr. BROTHERTON said that lie could not exactly agree in the principle that the public should be oarziesi forty miles at the same charge as they could travel thirty. As an instance, sup posing a colliery, which was largely used by the public, was situated thirty miles on a line of railway, and another should be established at forty. The difference of charge between these two places was 2s. Ad.; yet something in the nature of the amendment ought to be adopted. Bur to keep out a certain colliery, you put on double the toll for the ten miles; and although it appeared to be advantageous to the public in the first instance, it might prove doubly disadvanta geous in use end. It was absolutely necessary thet persons having warehouses in the neighbourhood of a railroad should have the right of sending their goods by the rail at a uniform rate. Such was the case upon the canals. Any person could send his goods by the Bridgewater Canal upon paying one fixed rate of toll. It the railroads had the power of refusing to carry goods, or of charging what tl.ey pleased for different parts of the line, they would have a complete monopoly, and be able to ruin any man who expended his capital in building works in their neighbourhood. He admitted that there would be great difficulty in framing a clause to guard against the inconvenience, but he thpught it was desirable to take it into ccnsideration. Mr. D.A RBY agreed with the Hon. Member for Salford that there would be great difficulty in properly framing a clause. Ile had been upon a Committee in which the subject had been fully discussed, and he was of opinion that it would give the companies a great advantage over the public if this amendment were passed. An HoN. Megarss said they could not charge more than their maximum. Mr. DARBY—They could not charge more than their maxi mum, but they would raise the toll all through the country. He would vote against the amendment; but lie hoped his Noble Friend (Lord G. Somerset) would introduce an addition to the clause, to meet the views of the Hon. Member for Salford. Lord MA IISH AM was in favour of the amendment proposed by the Hon. Member for Dover, as it would have the effect of checking the monopoly which railways were acquiring at the expense of the canal companies. In his county, what was called the " competi tion" of the South-Eastern Railway with the Medway Navigation Company was, in fact, to raise the price of carrying goods. For instance, the price of coals had risen since the opening of the railway, and such would be the case throughout the country. He would support the amendment. Mr. MORRISON also supported tire amendment. He thought that it would be a great protection to the public, and that there would be no difficulty to the companies In equalising their rates. They had almost suppressed every other means of conveyance, and it w.,s necessary to guard against their monopoly. Mr. ENT WIbLE said that some gentlemen, in discussing questions connected' with this subject, dealt with them as if the railway companies were something else than carriers—as if they were coal.mitie proprietors, or something else than companies es. tablished for the accommodation of the public. He was understoo to support the clause. Mr. FLU MPTRE said that' the fact was, that railway com panies, almost invariably, did act in some t.ther capacity than tha of railway shareholders; and by the admission of his Hon. Friend, the Metnber tbr North Lancashire, he was bound to support the amendment. Mr. If ORSM AN said that, in the case of . a particular line with which he was acquainted, the conwany charged a low rate on the tarts where they had to compete with the canal ; but they raised the rate as soon as they got out of the competition. He supported the amendment. Lord G. SOMERSET defended the clause as it stood. It was perfectly just for a railway company to increase their fares and tolls en that portion of the line which required an additional expense in the working, or which had originally cost more than another part in the construction. Mr. GLADSTONE admitted that the law as it at present stood was far from satisfactory, but still all the existing companies possessed the same power proposed to be given by the clause, and he could see no reason why future lines should not have the same advantage. In some cases individuals might be exposed to hard. ship, but on the whole he thought the present system worked well. Considerable inconvenience would be produced if they were to establish the principle of charging equal fairs along the whole line of railway ; but, independently of this objection, the Hon. Gentleman would not gain his object it he persisted in the amendment, seeing that if the Bill were nut passed before Easter the necessity for it would have passed away, and then the same clause would be introduces; into every railway Act that came before Parliament. Just let them see what would be the effect of an equalisation of fares along the whole line of a railway. It might be extremely important that on one portion of a long line of railway the rate of charge should be reduced so as to Accommodate the public convenience; but did they think a railway company would consent to make this reduction if the Hon. Member's amendment were in operation ? For instance, on the Manchester and Dir. mingham line it was extremely important that trains should be con. stantly kept running between Manchester and Stockport, and at low rates of fare, to accommodate the la. bouring population of the district. —(Hear, hear.) Now, would it be fair for them to say to the Manchester and Bir mingham Company, " If you choose to carry passengers between Manchester and Stockport at one halfpenny er three farthings per mile, you shall not be allowed to do so, unless you are prepared to establish the same rate throughout the whole line ?" Why, if they did that, it would seriously inconvenience the operative population, whose avocation! required them to be constantly passing and re. passing between Stockport and Manchester. Then, again, to ac commodate this traffic, it was necessary for the railway company to increase the fires between those portions of the line which were better able to bear it.—(Hear, hear.) They were going to have a complete chain of railways from London to the north of Scotland, passing through Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee, and Aberdeen. In some part of this route Hon. Members were aware that steam-boats were constantly plying, and it was desirable, for the public convenience, that the whole of this chain of railway should be enabled to enter into competition with these steam-boats. Now, they could only do this by establishing low rates of fares for carrying passengers direct from London to Aberdeen. But how could they do this if they were to say to the London and Birmingham and Grand Junction Railway Companies, " You shall not enter into this competition to carry passengers at this low rate, unless you are prepared to make the same reduction throughout the whole of your lines." It was quite clear the Bir_ mingkam and Grand Junction hallway Companies would not agree to this proposal, and thus the public would lose the mivan tage of this railway convenience, and the railway company the secondary advantage of competing with the steam-boats. He would just mention a point which was analagous to the case he had mentioned. As the present moment tbL. railways had a considerable, and perhaps unfair advantage, over canal navigation —for instance, a railway company had the power of being carriers, but the canal company had not. The canal companies did not wish the power to be taken away from railways, but, on the con trary, they thought it an advantage which they desired to possess themselves. Under these circumstances, he should resist the amendment. Mr. RICE said that he did not wish to bind the nous to the exact terms of tl:e amendment, but he desired that the House should confirm the generul principle abieh the amendment sought to establish. It would be sufficient for thous to strike out the word "either," ai.d leave it to after oowideratitra to settle the precise terms of the slause. Mr. HAWES said some railway companies were in the habit of running what were called excursion trains, while others issueddaily tickets, which enable poroons to go from one ;"ace to another, and return for the same fare. There could be no doubt that this was an alvantage to the public generally, but to the inhabitants of populous districts and large towns it was of incalcdable benetit.—(tlear, hear) Now, if they adopted tie amendment of the Hon. Member for Darer, they would entirely put an end to this praiseworthy system. After some further discuasion, the Committee divided, who* there appeared— For the amendment Against it Majority aga:ll6t it Lerd MARSHAM moved the expulsion of the clause alto. tether 1 and a long disrussien ensued upon the effect which the clause would be supposed to have, in giving a peculiar power monopoly to railway companies. Mr.Oaborne, Mr. Martin, Sir Denham Norreys, Mr. F. Maule„ Colonel Wood, Mr. H. Stansfield, and Lord Granville Somerset, took part in it, but it was entirely con versational in its character, and the result was, that on a suggestion of Mr. BrAherton, Lord Marsham refrained from dividing the House, and the clause was agreed to, as was also the 71st clause. On the 72d clause being put, Colonel WOOD suggested the introduction of some words Which would render the object of the clause mere specific and clear. The object of the clause is to oblige com panies to affix a board, containing their rates of toll, at each of their stations ; and another long conversation similar to the present one, occurred on the power which the word "toll " would have of fixing the charge for the use of locomotives ; and Lord Granville Somerset de cided that the word " toll" included everything that could be carried along a railway. Clauses 73 to 80 were then agreed to. On the 81st clause being read, Colonel SIBTHORP said he conceived that the power which this clause gave of levying a distress upon the goods of the collector of the company for the wrongful detention of any property was insufficient, and he thought that the distress ought to be levied on the goods of the company itself. Mr. HATTER and Lord G. SRMIERRET explained that the object of this clause was to enable the company to punish their servants for misconduct, and the public had a right of redress provided by the 80th clause, which enabled them to sue the company. Clauses 81 to 00 were then agreed to. Mr. HAYTER admitted that great difficulty frequently arose from railway companies taking London time. He had no doubt that, before long, this evil would be remedied. Lord G. SOMERSET said nearly all the trunk lines had got their own clocks ; it would be difficult perhaps to remedy the evil ci-mplained of. Mr. PLUMPTRE called the attention of the Noble Lord to the subject of excursion trains on Sundays. He had frequently received complaints from persons living in towns to which these excursion trains went of the inconvenience that was felt by the people who went by these excursion-trains walking about. Colonel SIBTHORP thought, if they stopped these Sunday ex. cursions, they ought also to stop omnibuses.—(Laughter.) Mr. SPOONER recommended the Noble Lord to take this sub ject ir.to his consideration. In many cares these excursion trains arrived just at the time when public service was commencing. Colonel SIIITIIORP—You may as well rneve to shut up the park gates.— (Hear, hear.) Mr. MLINIZ thought these excursion trains did more good than harm. It must be recollected that the persons whe availed themselves, of these excursion trains were persons who could not enjoy themselves on any day kut Sunday.—(Hear, hear.) If they put down the excursion trains, they ought to put down gentlemen's carriages, which rolled about and interrupted Divine worship at all tames.—k" Hear, hear," from Colonel Sibthorp.) Lord G. SOM ERSE T said t►at if they attempted to legislate on this subject they would have to interfere with the running of steam-boats and coach, s on a Sunday.—(Hear.) The clause was agreed to. The House then resumed, and the CHAIRMAN reported progress, after which the House adjourned till Fire o'clock. The House resumed at Fire o'clock. The Bedford, Birmingham, and London Railway Bill was read a first time. _ It was reported to the House, on behalf of the Committee on the Waterford and Kilkenny Railway, that the standing orders might be dispensed with. D A RTMOUTH ELECT I ON. The following Members were sworn in as a Committee to try the merits of the petition against the return of Mr. Somes: —Mr. Pakington, chairman, Mr. Henry, General Lygon, Mr. Parker, and Mr. Darby. COIiNWALL RAILWAY. Sir J Y. BULLER presented several ptitions against the Cornwall Railway Bill. POST-OFFICE ESPIONAGE. Mr. SHEIL begged leave to p esent a petition from Signor Palliotti, in reference to the transactions connected with the Government opening of letters addressed to foreigners resident in London. The petition was one of some length, and the petitioners declared that they had found it impossible to reconcile the treatment of the Bandieras with the declarations of her Majesty's Govern ment, for this reason—that the letters were opened in the Lon don Post-office, at a time, and under circumstances totally at variance with the statements of the Government. The petitioners then went on to state that the Bandiera party that they were in Calabria on from thence until the month of ji w t e ei r y e s; i ti n but o f t r h f Ae u ina i , n yi .ftt6.te April, 4 , and ta e.i ; Government assertion be correct, it would be difficult to understand how they could reconcile the opening of tho4e letter: with the alleged fact that they were ignorant of this meditated descent, and, therefore, of all participation in the mur der of the s:x persons who had been executed at Bologna. On these grounds the petitioners argued that the English Go vernment were participators in this perfidious conduct, and prayed that a law should he introduced on the subject. CHARITABLE REQUESTS ACT (IRELAND). Mr. SHEIL also presented a petition from a parish in the County of Down, against the Charitable Bequests Bid. Mr. B. ROCHE presented a petition to the same effect from the County of Sligo. POST-OFFICE ESPIONAGE. Mr. WAKLEY presented the following petition from the Electors of the Borough of Finsbury :—" The humble ',sit ition cf the undersigned persons, appointed by the electors of the Borough of Finsbury in public meeting assembled on Feb. 26, 1845, for the purpose of signing a petition in reference to abuses alleged to have taken place at the London Post-office, and which petition was presented to your Hon. House on February 28th last by one of their representatives in Parliament, SHZWETII,— " That your petitioners submitted to your Honourable House an express:on of the mortification and disgust they felt at the existence of the abuses in the Post office complained of, and prayed your Honoarable House to examine into all the matters therein set forth, and that you would do full and substantial justice, —first, to the public at large; secondly, to their repre sentative, T. S. Duncombe, Esq. ; and thirdly, to the consti tuents of that gentleman ; and your petitioners further prayed, that your Honourable House would immediately adopt such measures as would effectually prevent the continuance or the recurrence of the abuses complained of. " That your petitioners feel and know, that such abuses in volve the personal rights and liberties of every member of the community, that they affect the general tone of morality throughout the nation, injure its reputation in the estimation of foreign countries, prevent the free communication between a representative and his constituents, and, in particular, im plicate the ch aracter o f T. S. Duncomb e , E sq , which your petitioners feel to be a great and grievous injury to that gen tleman, as well as to those whom he represents. " That your petitioners cannot consent to matters of such importance being neglected or g ossed over by mere personal apologies anti official evasions, but feeling, as your petitioners do, that a grievous public wrong has been done, they are of opinion that a public inquiry, and an adequate remedy, are im mediately and imperatively called for. " Your petitioners, therefore. pray tlfat your Honourable House will forthwith institute such a full inquiry as shall satisfy the public at large, and the electors of Finsbury in particular, whether any, and what warrant existed for the opening of Mr. Duncombe's letters, and whether any suspicion justly attached to his character, so that they may judge if that gentleman is any longer fitted to continue the representative of a free and independent constituency, and that you will enact a full and sufficient remedy, so as to prevent the recurrence of such abuses as are now complained of. " And 3our petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pm), (Signed) " George Rogers, 58, High-street, St. Giles's. " Edward Medley, 42, Brick-lane. " Charles Tapperell, 14, Smith's-buildings, City-real. " W. D. Cooper, 13, Bloomsbury square. " Rid hard Moore, 25, Hart-street. " W. J. Linton, 65, Hatton-Garden. " Charles H. Elt, 18, High-street, Islington. " Thcznas Savage, 213, Tottenham-court-road. &e. &c. &c." The How. MFMBER then gave notice that he should, to morrow, move that the petition be printed, wi . .th the votes. Lord J. NI AN NER S presented a petition from several Spanish officers who were resident in this country against their will. They had taken refuge in France, but they had been seized by the French authorities, anti transported by those authorities to this country aeainst their will. When they were landed here they were without money, and since their residence here they had hems supt•orted entirely by charity. They prayed the House to take their case into consideration, and either to supply them with the means of subsistence, or with the means of leaving the country. Mr. WYSE presented a petition from the guardians of the poor-law union of Nenagh, praying that. they might be relieved from the payment of the money due for the erection of a poor house in that union. Mr. HUME presented a petition praying that no further prosecutions might be instituted against persons for blasphemy. The petitioners stated it as their opinion that truth did not re quire the intervention of laws for its ♦indication. RAILWAYS. Sir G. CLERK pre,ented certain papers from the Railway Department of the Board of Trade. NOTICES OF MOTION. Mr. SHEIL g ave notice that he should, on Tuesday next, brin g forward the moti o n of which he had g iven notice on Tuesday la,t, on the sub j ect of the openin g of letters of forei g n. era at the Post-office. Mr. S. CRAWFORD gave notice that if the Govern ment did not propose any measure for the amendment of the law of landlord and tenant in Ireland, he should himself, after Easter, move for leave to taring jn a Bill to enable the tenant, if ejected, to recover compensation from his landlord for any improvement he might have made upon the land, and also to amend the laws regulating the value of property in Ireland. Mr. WYSE gave notice that, after Easter, be should renew the moticn which he had made last session on the subject national education. Mr. WARD postponed his motion in reference to burdens on land until after Easter. In reply to a question from Mr. BELLEW, Sir R. PEEL said he would, on Monday next, state in what order the ' rish measures would be brought forward after Eastee. Mr. DUNCOM BE wished to put two questions to the Right Hon, Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; one, whether he thought it right that annuities paying the legacy duty should be subject to the income-tax; the other referred to the subject which he mentioned last night, in reGrenee to the books of the Bank of England. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the law imposed a tax on all legacies, whether paid in gross or in annual incomes; and there was no provision for exempting them from the income-tax. With respect to the Bank books, the answer which he gave yesterday from general recollection was perfectly correct. He held in his hand the answer of the Bank clerk on the subject. and he would read it as the most satifactory method of answering the question. "l'he Right Hon. Gentleman then read the letter, stating that the books were not referred to by any other person but himself and the other two clerks of the Bank of England. No other person was employed in the room. He and the other two clerks had been upwards of thirty years in the service of the Bank of England. Lord MA lION wished to renew a question on the subject of the Portland vase in the British Museum. The Right Hon. Baronet must be aware that there was no adequate legal penalty r>r the offence, and that the offender wa- punished, not for breaking the vase itself, but the glass case which hap.. pened to cover it. When he put a nearly similar question on a previous.occasion, he was told by the Right Hon. Gentleman that a meeting of the trustees was about being holden on the subject. That meeting having been held, he wished to inquire whether it 'r as the intention of the Government to introduce a measure on the subject? Sir B. PEEL begged to state that the trustees had c n-idereil the subject, and the Government also, and it was the opinion of both parties that the law in its pre sent state, as regarded the destruction of works of art, was ineffectual—that no sufficient protection existed for the preservation of works of art against malicious darn Sge. The Government, therefore, had resolved upon intro ducirg a Bill on this subject, and his Learned Friend the Solicitor-General had a Bill prepared which would he . introduced at an early period. He wished now to correct a mistatement of a portion of his speech in the newspapers. Indeed, he felt surprised the reporters were so correct. In. the debate on the Now Zealand question he was represented as having said that the Go vernment had received information of the arrival of in convertible ds bentures by Lord Fitzroy, and that his NolA Friend, 14-)rd Stanley, had signified his disap proval of inconvertible debentures. The Colonial De partment had received no official notice whatever on the subject. Ile said that convertible debentures had !Ten issued, anti that his Noble Friend, Lord Stanley, had taken the earliest opportunity of stating that he did not approve of them. Mt. COLLETT wished to know whether the Chan cellor of the Exchequer meant to exempt holders of Thrq e per cent. Consols, on which payment would be made on the sth of July next, from the income-tax ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he did not know any reason why those persons should be exempted from[the tax while it was in operation. POOR-LAWS (IRELAND). Mr. F. FRENCH - said he wished to know from the Right Hon. Gentleman ojposite when the House would be rut in po session of the decision come to by her Ma jesty's Government, with regard to the money spent by Mr. Nicholls over and above the original estimate for poor-houses? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the papers on the subject would be laid on the table in a day or two. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. Mr. COBDEN said that, in rising to bring forward his motion On the subject of agricultural distress, he was relieved fr,,in the necessity of apologising to the other side of the House, for he had put a notice on the book so long ago, that it could not be said it came from a suspicious quarter, and he had so arranged the terms of his mo:in. as to embrace ',nth the amendments which had been made to it, so that he did not think those lion. Gentlemen who gave notice of those amendments would press them. The object of his motion was to appoint a Select Committee to inquire into agricultural distress, and how far the present laws with re,4ard to the importation of agricultural produce affectecE the agricultural labourers. And, with regard to that: distress, he could no t h ave hi g her autho r ity th a n those , Hon. Gentlemen who professed to be the friends or farmers and protrction.—(flear, hear.) And it RAS ad mitted by them that there was great distress amongst the agricultural labourers. One Gentleman, Mr. Hud son, stated that, in Norfolk. the farmers paid their ret l t 4 from thei r cap i ta l an d not from tnt'ir profits ; and MT Turner, of Devonshire, stated that the distress or t4s AY MORNING, MARCH LI, 1846. farmers was such, that, unless some remedial measures were adopted, they would be redeeed to the utmost misery and wretchedness. Ths accounts which he quoted of the state of these counties were not those that had come within his own knovsledee, but such es he had 'read, or had been fu:nished with. It would appear that the farmers in the county of Suffolk might be somewhat better off than those in Not folk and Devonshire ; but he would ask this Roust were not the Government in a position somewhat embarrassing uron this position? He contended that they were, and that. then-fore, they were bound to brie g ferward some rerncelial measure upon the subject ; end he felt quite assured that if' the Duke of Buckingham were a Member of this Hetne, he would do as Lord Chandos had done on a freer oe eas i ee , name ly, to move a resolution to this effect.—(Hear.) The next point he would a lvert to was, What was the present state of agricultural distress in those counties ? In endea vouring to ascertain the facts on this point, he had dis covered great discrepancies in the various accounts, and in the causes of it. The Bight Hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury had stated that these causes were not owing to legislative enure, but to local causes; while the Hon. Member for Dorsetehire contended that the distress was great, and that it did arise from deficient legislative measures. It had 'also been said, on the part of the Government, that their corn law system hail been steady in its operation, and it had been asked, had any one been disappointed in the predictions of the Government that such would be the result of their corn law measures. But at that time the price of corn was 56s per quarter, and now it was ibis n to 455.; and, therefore, he would ask hi w that discrepancy could be reconciled with the statement of the Government, who had taken so much credit to theirs , Ives for havieg con cocted a measure which would keep the price at 56e. ? —(Hear, hear.) He would ask, then, what was the meaning of this declaration, if it resulted in this fluct un tion of prices ?—(lkee.r, hear.) There was a greet de lusion abroad among the farmers on this sutijs ct, and it was the duty of that Ilou4e to dispel it. There was this difference of opinion on that side of. the House, and there were Members on this side representing important eenstitueneies, who thought the farmers were sulk:Ting because they had this legislative protection; there mere all these differences existing, and was not that sufficient to make it a fit and proper subject. of inquiry ? He was ady to go into a Select Committee, and to produce witnesses to show that the farmers had long been suffer ing under great evils, which he would connect with the cern-laws, though to some they might appear alto gether unconnected with them. The first great evil under which the farmers were labouring was the want of capital. No one denied it. It was notorious that they Ideoured under a want of capital. He did not say this in disparagement of the farmers ; they were of the same race, arid if placed in the same sin's tion as manufacturers and traders, would be as successful as men of business. But it was notorious that the farmers suffered under a deficiency of capital ; and he would ask how any business could be eltrried on successfully with out it ?—(Hear, hear.) Hon. Gentlemen acquainted with farming would, perhaps, admit that 101 per acre on an arable farm was a competent capital fee carrying on the business of such a farm successfully ; that was a fair capital for an arable farm. He had made many inquiries in all parts of the kingdom. and it was his decided con viction that at that moment the farmers did not ea-craze 51. per acre of capital on their land.—(lfear, hear.) He was speaking of England ; he would take all England south of the Trent, and though there were exceptions— there were in every county men of large capital, men farming their own land—yet, taking it as a rule, he did not hesitate to state his opinion, and he was prepared to prove it by witnesses before the Committee, that the farmers did not average 5/. per acre of capital. Let them only think what an evil this was ? He gave them a tract of country extending south and north, containing 20,000,000 of cultivatable acres, and there could be no doubt there was a want of 100.000.000/ of capital upon that land.—(llear, hear.) What was meant by this word capital ? It meant more manure, more labour, more cattle, and larger crops.—(Hear, hear.) Let the House fancy a country in which they could say there was a de ficiency of one half of the blessings that might exist, and then let them judge what must be the condition of the labourer on it, wanting employment and food ?—(Dear, hear.) Perhaps he should hear that capital was abundant in the country ; then how was it in a country pos -easing a plethora of capital. where every business was so overflowing with it, that it went to France for railroads, and to Pennsylvania for bonds—(Hear, hear, a-id laughter)—when it went to connect the Atlantic and the Pacific by canals and railways—when it was sent to the bottom of Mexican mines? How was it, when the country was rich with capital to overflow ing, when it was sent for investment to every ce , rner of the globe, that capital did not fin I employment in that most attractive of all forms, the cultivation of the soil of the country. Admitting this, they had not in England •any cause for not investing their capital ; he believed that the measures they were passing were calculated to decrease the popularity the Government had hitherto obtained. Now, with regard to leases, he had found, in one lease, that the farmer was bound by the following covenants:—He shall pay the landlord 201. per statute acre for every acre of ground converted for tillage. He shall pay the landlord 5/. for every Toed cf straw, or of manure not converted to the uses of the farm. He shall pay the landlord la for every tree fallen, felled, lopped or topped.'He shall pay 20/. for every person employed by him who shall in conse quence gain a settlement in the parish.—(Hear, hear.) He shall pay 101. per statute acre for every acre that he shall under-let.--(Hear, hear.) He shall perform six teen days' work in the year for the iandlord. He shall keep for the landlord one dog. one cock, and one hen.— (Laughter.) . He shall make no marl without the land lord's consent in writing, and shall fill up the pit, whenever called upon so to do. He shall kill no sheep, but such as is used for the consumption of his family.— (Hear, hear.) Neer, what was such an instrument as that. It was a trap for the unwary.—(Hear, hear.) It was a barrier against men of intelligence and capital. —(Hear, hear.) It was a barrier against free men.— (Hear, hear.) No man could farm property under such a lease.—(llear, hear.) It was a perfeet absurdity. What were these leases in fact ? They were perfectly antediluvian. When a lease was required to be drawn up, a lawyer's clerk took from a pigeon-hole one of these antiquated forms, which had been in use for centuries, and copied into it .all these absurd restrictions. They did not give the farmer credit for the introduction of any improvement. In fact, the covenants of these leases were such as absolutely to prohibit any attempt at improve ment. Now, he observed the Hon. Member for the Rape of t'iramber cheering while he was stating the covenants in this lease. Now, let that Hon. Member look over his own leases, and although they might contain nothing about dogs, or cocks, or hens, yet the covenants in them would be found to be not one whit the less absurd, or the less obstructive of all improvement than the covenants to which he had drawn the attention of the House. Why did they not make these leases in the same manner as they made leases for manufactories or for plants of business ? Why should not farmers be permitted to ireprove if they were desirous of so doing? He knew many men who took leases of manufactories for which they paid 1,000/. a year. He knew sonic who paid 4,000/. a year. There was an Hen. Gentleman near him who paid 4,000/. a year rent for his manufactory. Now, what was the nature of his lease ? Did they think that there was any covenant introduced into that, stating the exact number of revo lutions that every epitelle was to make in a minute ? (Cheers and laughter.) He was rather disposed to think that the Anti Corn law League was likely to form a joint-stock association, and hsve nobody but free-traders members of it. They would have a mods-1-farm in the most princely agricultural county in England, in which, no doubt, there was the greatest need of it—perhaps in Buckinghernshire.—(Laughter.) They would have model homestead, a model cottage, a model garden, and would place the whole in the hands of a man of intelligence, skill, and capital. But his great de sire would be to have a model lease. When this security would be given to him, he would not have the slightest fears for the payment of the rant. The lease would be without clause or covenant, and if the tenant shonld make more by ploughing it, why let him plough it. And if he.wished to grow white crops every year, he should be at liberty to doso.—(lronical cheers from the Ministe rial benches.) Honourable Members did not seem to approve of this, but he knew several farmers in this country who farmed in this mariner. The tenant would of coulee be required to leave the land in as good condition as when he became possessed of it; and if it were deteriorated in value, he 1...mi1d give a paever of making him pay the amount of deterioration. If on the cnntrary, the land was in a superior condition, he would oblige the landlord to remunerate him.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches.) lie wonld give the tenant absolute 'control over the wild as well as over the tame animals. There would be no gamekeeper or sportsman prowling about to annoy him. He would make the payment of rant the sole test of the tenant's well doing. It had been said by an Honourable Member on a previous occasion, that it was very well to preach about leases, but some farmers would not have leases.—(Cheers.) Hon. Gentlemen might cheer that, but what was the fact—the tenant did not choose leases because he _had been rendered servile and de graded by their abject treatment, and did not want to be independent. Professor Low said, " The argument has again and again - been used against the extension of leases that the tenants themselves set no value upon them ; but to how different a conclusion ought the ex istence of such a feeling amongst the tenantry of a country to conduct us I The fact itself shows that the absence of leases may render a tenantry ignorant of the means of employing their own capital with advantage— indisposed to the exertions which improvements demand, and better contented with an easy rent, and dependent condition, than with the prospect of an independence, to be earned by increased exertion." It might be said this state of things. was not connected with the corn law sor protection. He had received the following letter on the subject, from Mr. Hayter, M.P., which he woe ld read. Mr. Hayter says," The more I see of, and pram ttise agriculture, the more firmly am I convinced that the whole unemployed labour of the country could, undt -r a better system of husbandry, be advantageously pee ;into operation ; and moreover, that the corn-laws ha ye been one of the principal causes of the present sy 'stem of bad farming, and consequent pauperism. Nothing short of their entire removal will ever induce be average farmer to rely upon anything else than the Legislature for the payment of his rent ; his belief being that all rent is paid by corn, and nothing else than corn, and that the Legislature can, by enacting corn laws, create a price which will make his rent easy. The das of their (the corn-laws) entire abolition, ought to be a day of jubilee and rejoicing to every man in terested in land."—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He would not stop to connect the cause and effect, whether the corn-laws were the occasion of the absence of capital among the farmers and their want of leases. They adopted a system of legislation in that House which pre cluded the necesaity of his entering into these ereuments. After thirty years trial, what could be said of these cairn-laws ? That they had been a cause of the de pression which prevailed in agricultural 'districts, and that it was high time to try if some other and better sys tem could vot b. devisid. He contended that a free trade in corn would be tare advantageous to the f liner and the agricultural labeurer ; nay, more beneficial to them than to any other class ef the community. flow incon sistent was it in the Right Hon. Baronet to admit fat cattle which sold at Smithfield at a nominal duty, and refuse to admit the food with which they were fattened. He (Mr. Cobden) said, give a free trade in corn and we can make cettle flit at home. lie contended that by this protective system farmers throeghout the ceuntry were rendered more ignorant of their own interests than any otht r cless. Let the House consider the Right lion. Bari net's policy. Take the crude of clover for instance. There was now a higher duty upon it. How many coun ties were benefited by the protection of clover ? Scot land imported clover from England. He would venture to say that not ten counties in England were interested in the importation of clover. Certainly, Ireland was not. Take the article of beans—in the rich. districts of Essex they grew wheat and turnips. The cultivation of beans was very limited. In Wiltshire they could not grow beans enough fur their own consumption. How many counties were exporters of beans?— very few. How many would be benefited by the one strict, d imparta tion of them? Even where they were grown in great quantities, and on strong soils, they were not grown for exportation in one case out of ten. The majority of farmers grew beans—not for sale, but for home con sumption—and, therefore, it did not matter to them what the money price was. Take next the article of oats. How many farmers calculated upon oats as a means of paying tie it rent—a very insig mficant number. They grew oats to feed their horses, and for domestic consumption. Then, as regarded the article of hops grown in Kent and pa • t of Wereestershire. Was it worth while to tax so many for the benefit of the few ? Then as to cheese. There was not one farm( r in ten who manufactured his own cheese. Cheese was manufactured in Cheshire, Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, and partially in Derhyehire and Leicester shire. Were these cheese manufacturers willing to eve dure the duty upon oats, in order t o h ave th e i r c h eese protected ? He thought not. They wished to fatten their cattle, and have oats duty free.—(Hear, hear.) Take the whole district of Wales, the Deans of Wilt shire and Sass, x, the Cheviot Hills and the Grampians, where the fleck masters were, and they would one and all exclaim, t` We are not benefited by your protection." What they wanted was provender of the cheapest and best kind, which they coul i only have by the free im portation of the article. Thus they would be enabled to fatten their cattle and fertilise their lands. The far mers in Hertfordshire and Sussex, who are mostly arable farmers, were deeply interested in having a free import ation of food for their cattle. Their chief object was to fertilise the land, which, under the present system, they could not do. lie had conversed with several practical farmers in various parts of England, whose views en tirely coincided with his on the subject of free trade. A Mr. Nathaniel Hutherton, a farmer in Wiltshire, assured him that, upon 400 acres of land he could in crease his profits to the amount of 280/., paying the same rent as at present, provided there was a free importation of foreign .grain of all kindre He would buy 500 quarters of eats at 155., or the same amount in beans or peas at 14s. or 15s. a sack, to be fed on the land or in the yard, by which he would grew additional 160 quarters of wheat and 230 quarters barley, and gain an increased profit of 300/. upon his sheep ar.d cattle. His plan embraced the employment of an additional capital of 1,0001„ and he would pay 150/. a year more for labour. Another farmer, Mr Lattimore, a mest intelligent man,and ho stood as high in public estimation as any farmer in Hertfordshire, said that last year he paid 2301., the en hanced price on beans - and oats, in consequence of the restrictions. In short, the fa mers were as anxious for a free trade in corn as the members of the Anti Corn law League themselves. He could enumerate a long list of farmers who were as much in favour of free trade principles as he (Mr. Cobden) was. Upwards of a hun dred farmers were subscribers to the League fund, com prising some of the most intelligent men to be found in the kingdom. Last year he paid a visit to the Lothians, and had interviews with twenty-two farmers, some of whom. paid more than 1,0001. a.year rent. He spent two or three days there, and never met with kinder or more intelligent people. They were all adverse to re strictions. They said, "Let .us have Indian corn, Egyptian beans and Polish oats to feed our cattle, and then we can compete with any country in the world. It was the greatest absurdity to deal with coffee in the way they at present did. They sent coffee from Cuba to the Cape of Good Hope, in order to bring it back again under the law ; but it was not a greater absurdity than to send ships to Icheboe for guano, whilst they ex cluded the Indian corn, Egyptian beans, and Polish oats, which would be productive of a thousand times more benefit.—(Loud cries of " Hear, liner.") The Anti- Corn-law League had hull reproached with edeocatieg a system which would throw land nut of cultivation ; but his (pinion was, that, so far from doing so. they would make poor land productive. I) not let it be said that they desired to draw labourers from the cultivation of the soil, in order to obtain cheaper labour at the fac tories. Let the landlord and farmer act on the same principle as the manufacturers, and there would be no idle hands in the rural districts. A great deal had been said about disturbing the revenue, but he believed that neither the revenue raw the agriculture of the country would be permanently settled until the corn laws were abolished. It was pretty clear that the condition of the labourers could not be much depreciated. Men with wages of 7s. a week had not. much to lose. It was further stated that the manufacturers should be most anxious for the welfare of the agriculturists. be cause the home consumption of manufactures was by far the best. He admitted that the interests of manufac ture and agriculture were in a great degree identical, and because he was anxious to promote the interests of both he wished a free trade in corn. How could a pauperized rural district—for paupers they were and must be on 7s. a week, purchase from the manufacturer? Why, they had exported more of manufactured goads in one year than had be , n consumed year, after year, by the whole of the agricultural peasantry. He did not believe that throughout the whole of Eng land and Wales, if they might take the experience of the last few years, that any labourer consumed through out the agricultural districts manufactured goods at the rate of more than 68. 6d. per annum. By the returns which he had seen, the agricultural population did not consume more than a million and a half per year; and if they referred to the consumption of exciseable articles, they would find that, on an average, no agri cultural labourer consumed more than after the rate of Iss. the year ; and that if the whole amount were to be calculated of those articles which were subject to the excise duties consumed by the peasantry, the amount would not be more than 700,0001. He would, therefore, unhesitatingly assert, if there were to be an alteration of the present system, the gentry of England would have nothing to risk by the chance. Quite c, rtain was he, that there was nothing to risk by inquiry. During the last session there had been great belief entertained that much was to be feared from competition. But he believed that after his statements were made that all the assertions which had been made to excite that fear would go for nothing. It was apprehended that if the ports were opened for the free importation of corn, that corn itself would be procured for next to nothing. But this session, he believed, would be the last in which such a feeling would be entertained. Jr twenty shillings were imposed upon a quarter of corn, it just enhanced the price to the people of this country to that extent. But it was not to be supposed that if such duty of twenty shillings were to be reduced, or altogether taken off, that the price of corn would necessarily fall ,to the extent of that reduction. The fact was, that all the corn introduced into this country bore a double character.—(Hear.) The chief part of it came from Dantzic, and the price at.Dantzic was nothing more than a nominal price—a price ruled by the condition of cir cumstances in this country. But the price of corn when introduced into this country was a real price. He would ask the Hon. Gentleman to refer to the circumstances of 1838. During July and August in that year, when there appeared a prospect of a bad harvest in this coun try, wheat, before that it nowledge bemuse a certainty, was little more than 20s. ; while in December, when this knowledge became a fact, and the country was requiring large supplies, whe,,t, rose to nearly double that price. And, if Hen. Gentlemen would tax their memories, they would recollect that during the three following years, 1839-40-41, the price of wheat at Dantzic ranged at 40e —(Hear, hear ) The leaders of the agricultural interest did not allow their tenantry to partake of the advantages which they scorned so assiduously to desire for them. — (Hear, hear.) As an exemplification of this assertion — he would refer to the conduct of the Hon. Member for Shoreham (Sir C. Burrell). He was the chairman of the National Flax and Agricultural Improvement Society. He (Mr. Cobden) held in his hand the first report of the state of the flax agricultural population ; and he should be surprised if, after the complete digestion of the state ments in that report, the Ministry ventured to talk any longer about protection.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Wawns paid a visit to Sussex some time a: o. Ile had had the opportunity of hearing the opinions of the Hon. Ba ronet the Member for Shoreham. Now he (Mr. Cobden) felt a great interest in Sussex, and he was glad to have the opportunity of citing authority of such unexcep tionable character. He hoped the Honourable Ba ronet would forgive him—indeed he felt assured that he would forgive him—if he referred to the circumstances of a certain dinner, which was ap pointed for the purpose of celebrating the anniversary of this association, After the usual toasts of the even ing, the Hon. Baronet had given as the great feature of the day," Success to the flax-growing population of the .country." Now, what was the fact—a quarter of wheat was precisely of the same value as a cat. of flax Yet, on a quarter of wheat they imposi d a duty of 20s. while on a cwt. of flax they imposed a duty of ld. They might perhaps say, that this was all very true ; but it was nectssary to impose such a duty on wheat, because it came from abroad. Why, the whole of the flax, or nearly the whole which was consumed in the country, came from the Baltic, as well as the wheat which we received from Dantzic. Now, according to the notions of the Hon. Baronet, the protection on flour ought to be tvt ice as much as on wheat. He expected to hear that the Hon. Baronet had turned agitator, in order to restore the duty on flax. Yet what was his surprise to see in the Times, a week after, and that positively stated, without any doubt or circumlocution in the assertion, that the Hon. Baronet had forbidden his tenantry to grow flax.—(Hear, hear.) He was aware that there was a prejudice in existence that the growth of flax was injurious. But this was a prejudice very much like other prejudices, he believed with but little foundation; and he believed that the culture of it would tend to improve the condition of the labourer. What was the condition of the agricultural labourer at the present time ? He believed that the agricultural labourer was in less distress, and that this alleviation had arisen solely from the low price of food. Ile knew that in the manufacturing districts it was an invari able rule that wages varied with the price of food. That when food was low the position of the workmen was im proved prove(land he re'oiced to find that the agri cultural ; labourer was in a better state, a nd he could .not but trace this improvement in his condition, oft 4 " - 0 0 and so severe a winter, to the 10;0/ food which had prev a iled since its t iosi enent.—(Hear.) Still he did not int K A . as the sole cause of the improvement. BO L i l li. that to a very great extent, th a t imprbrenv 3l " . occasioned by the price o f f o od. But why w i , - / 11 0 1 labourers in a better state?--why were starve, even with all this improvement, upolli A It had b:-en said that the farmers were resr-olkir the condition of the labourers, but to this h e m ,. •4 . 9 by any means, assent.—(Hear, he ir.) In the farmer stood entirely exonerated fry to charge, and it was to the l a ndl or ds they wer e w or the cause of all the distress which, and terribly I,revailfd throughout the d Lord Hardwick, in his address to the laboure r :o denham, had said, " Conciliate your enifiqbegi r o they do not perform their duty to you and address yourselves to the landlords ; and 1 " te e: A that you will find us ready to urge our 0 it or, the proper cultivation of their farms, and ( 3 °, 1 , 0 g bel to the just employment of the labourer.' , - " ifi gioS l lords, then, they were to look Zr any alt e „ re t might be obtained in the condition of thelo" so sell i landlords were responsible, the landlords Il it iotte' solute power. They could influence the con 8R net t°' I t po ro : ta b ri u c t e rn i,f r . e , 1 - --- 0 ---...._ 11,. i 'fir:Il l ; I t 41: 4 17:1 1 . 4 b °: I s 0 1: i3 ifi l i nb:l n ile f f :g s wu e l idt:-.. r n l :t i ( .lll:r: l tl iv:etea l. ( t- n iltd v ' r it vi , latit,US peri(, Piro into th !.° did not re geNueed an ‘ -o . ll olittee v 1 1131° t° cut °Us e ; but , oequent ( qli teul i ito thus .n I k ti, refor ' 4 % Se 6 , and t L Re folio v nirt0......, th at k Ilea ' 0 . C unn , 4: 1 , in thn fit Were ' ► of L iris °' around them; nr.d it was to them, and n , „A EP' I , . 1 0 ..•nc th3t the country had to look for the regn,o o ' ..6 . ( tret cultural distress. And how did th e t ' d rip' ' th iti llile r, i h tt ,,a l r . A l e s, - e „ motet e ; act towards their' tenantsand labourers?---tiieolat. s h ,den. m, He would cite the opinion of the Hell• h eee°, / , it - a :P l ace, tl Berkshire (Mr. Pusey), as expressed at the t bis t o hj neces sa , the Staillt Agricultural Society:—" He he esf n i s ea , r , 1 0 - '6l 9 coat ( try well, and he knew that there was not a r i eigb' 1 1 4 -41 ' l' it 3 Plymouth to Berwick, in which the landlorcieoo6) o Tvec ) ,, ti. , I make impr, vement; but a hen the tenant e t 0 10' money, the landlord generally woull v. h , e; er b :a r n e jiiet l :.: . ; ti tif tra ::;: o d in , R p r 4 f t u oo n . d — s. (ll T e h ar e . l ) .e vv ß .( a r t e h m e an w y ou d l i d str te ie ll ts therm l e re 70 ki l li g ti eulturt great superfluity, not only of useles , , but 0 1 , he ro, Tier were 1 timber; and if they would cut that town wh/c II 111 01 I , sai d thar the sun and air, and fed on the soil, and se . 0 0 )1 41 of l and, would benefit the farmer by cutting it cl" arti ,:lBo 4l i I: 'W .huw co would benefit the farmer and labourer too, e-l . ,(ek tr:inerea s ,, the proceeds . in underdraining the t °ll. o 4 l ' l o / ..Fit I LD. M There was another mode in which they oil 1 ante of sub money. I-Iy knew that on soma properties f e c horii b t ,7,ing th e e was spent in the preservation of garne. --1 40 ,i lit, ilvarlitt; was not at alt unusual fer the game to c s o n s o t t : ;00 :: 00 . itt ip . ::::: t o r e, g a year ; and if this were given up, the E . ll op; t tn I 'd to e c . employ or.e hundred able-bodied labourers it' .. , f Mute, h ow , the propertv.—(Chters.) This was the landlords' of England to benefit the t is hare G o e se llll , i i : 4: 4 :1 14 17 ,:m ir p ni r u o: the farmers at the Fame time." Ani if Il o °' t ot ° 0 li l .2"igua e conceived the responsibility for the irripre' e° l e/ i.':" of condition of the labourer was to be thre e l iOr I S '17 1 . 1., absurd farmer, they must at least allow that ment could only be obtained through se li fi o est e ,;o 4 i p u tiunt ti l farmer's produce, and by a larger proP °r o f 11 '., f ili b ot e lted 11e of that produce heing applied to the eeral°ooePre, kr petted su f fer 1 bourer. Yet he wou'd show them a hig h ;he 4 „11J 4 14 istress the other side of the House in what "Y o f lbe'',,V i i tt t quite i were rewarded for rendering the tillage 0 0 4 1 , Itii: ll etal res more valuable. He (Mr. Cobden) wou ld / 1 0 0.° d ,, the - 0 } ,,,, ? , Had House some observations made by th e '' the leo, l , hkr u ieet? for Lincolnshire (Mr. Christopher) , ° ll Sallc or ipi u Pon 0 14 of his Ifoneurable Friend the Member kri,: co , h e tlit k ip . il icals o f (Mr. Milner Gibson) for agricultural slsil l , o - 10 1 ° 11 ,0 4 tad e on , "It was most de , irnble for the farmer k ir! , 1 5 ,,ti l %D ott ie them actual quantity of corn grown in this cel l° ellile Re,. the al kraal ledge weuld insure steadiness of Pric e ; thi ll if , th e y infinitely more valuable to the aeTiculturts eo , s) t i l l e lla i t • e lie- a V A , Anti.w'eull tinting prices. But to ascertain this /he e l : ei a er 'O r 4 i iCor difficulty. The)'. could not leave it to the 91— for AO t hen for a return of the quantity which he produc ed : o . t „ h if ° jrj, ell on trh, not for his interest to do so. If in any c i lle n a et°l . :„lsr tio t ,' - ` l , till t he produced four quarters per acre on land Ai"o o ' . ) 14, 1) ,„,' this c previously grown but three, he might t l ' a ' re Pr",; 4 th e c, trill' lord would say, ' Your land is l ll° ' IS P- fe ' •(teenant than I imagined, and I must, therefeere,ell-Igook, Wee 4. 14 1; hen rent.' The interest of the farmers, th e is 0 0 g l i hia_ - "lnt Fit be to underrate and to furnish l iche itor t fr u ktOt rs Another authority at a meeting of the C° diat t i o er iie . -7 0 Ntt n be h r for cultural Association—" Tnat he was awf lre o icli 0 1 " Neel' for a 1 of improiement was abroad. Much w°, l 9 a te / . 4 It'"lt swa t tenant-farmers doing more. He agree," e fgrerat,f ill' have more; the soil of the country was caPah',',4l o ,o l ` I;tiee. duction ;if he said one-fourth more he s"` t bel' A ' e ai t i t'. C. p . • compass.—(Hear, hear.) But that could ° e atito l ht r • 8, ut the tenant-farmer alone ; they must hav e es ,-( - , if rho alt if , (Lend cheer.)—it must be done by le ss.. eft° .if h tnil `nscus a i cheers)—hy draining, be extending the k n iii i h i O i l 0 / ..t ; . % % Ars . Op ! b w y bi l e tn h o r e l k ov‘ ing sh d ie o l T e i d h:e h d e ge c - o r r ( a m ., 7, a A nd nd e w le h a s r i n its si? e ,), ,,, , No tio i dth b e f or u t s : T ii , tail t °t ti l le ti authority at the meeting c f the South Dev ° lie htliroold , Association?—" Ile knew it had been th e ° ;0,0; 0 lords were ready to avail themselves e l ifer defl i e lier e , ~ tip ti t ruino l Lions, on account of the opportunity it a j o g 19 it:, " , ,%Itai ll i•-•(1] diving into their tenants' affairs anti oPen,„ i l iOl d , A t it?,%; and —(Hear.) An instance of this occurred t s u nee t!r 0 9 ti N b , etipi t: cent ploughing match, where he met a r ,5 - 0 if be l ift; U ntil tl culturist, whom he well knew, and as ked.L' l es ese 0 ant Part going to it ?He said no. ' Why?' Pa o odd l y 74 of en not approve of such things. This Ink/ P: $ 11 1;0 4 11 t ro ,j'et of , why. And the man gave a reason ?ri ot bo- 10 0,' ) ',. ia tn, i sent a plough and man, with two soP e . joilt,llil ef,th L 'lttr , landlord at once would say, ' This nian,,, e ,(lo:y hi e 1 114',. one: on my estate,' and increase the rent e ffiev i - tioe ti,:roas .. i. t _,. ,o After these authorities, was it a Matte l :, jo be the ty direct', the farmers should conceive themselves •. 7 o f :-,/, 41, L , li ear. ; justly, exonerated from any responsi t h i l i Y ew l tli thr ipo tee4 ~ . 4z 4 o l4 % a s d e e e vc :, dition of the labourer ? Was, then, landlords any alleviation of the evil? fr oo til. 0 4 , 1 1 C tia,,, ch. them a document which had been taken f ul datiP; b ' o lo, re agri, piece of a labourer, residing at St eer fealt l es :;" hat i Need county of Suffolk. It was a certificateboed 4 N vi . :try f Suffolk Agricultural Association, eat e e t he _kor , %I" Ho e for the advancement of agriculture 111 1 1 `,; c opa r , igl s.•:conned meat of industry, and skill, and gou'• . t aior i ki t ": 44 , ll .) l Q t_t tertl i stti, labourers and servants in husbandry l -- & Die° , i tl 441.f1e mans " President the Duke of. Grafton, raor ...de,' le.:•) A , the County. . .. 1,11, e .701' „Cli tpo `l s a r " This is to certify that a prize of 2 i . st io l .l* t h, . 1 147 14 a b William Burch, aged 82, labourer, of the P l op, "1 of ~1 2 , tit the upland, in West Suffolk, September, 25 t l ie, ISO , AV e llli a e s , brought up nine children without ° wo rk 0 . ilk: the II flour was very dear, and for haying mo iill ) 0 0 lltA,ltis s tein , same farm twenty-eight years. 0, v 000 11 N mi ttres. (Signed) "R. RUSHBRO° Je d o, be t 0 4 vi t h i tqt t h i ; This was the way in which they rew er tog e k ed, D ;l4/ ' ll tat t , tllff.-e i was pining for want. The whole thing r i o o ,e i 0 .tt i i lee b ee was a bad case. The fact was they n e r t he r;i 0 .11 0 •t, 'Ace them and provided for the necessities 0 _ 101 obi ki4,NTPTI were, in fact, legislating to make th!,, s ietitt et ilill Ith:Pro mi , paupers. They had tried the allottnetlit 7thiligl e .s,:::o was the allotment system ?—a mere PI? e oalk is et '' s te rn , than a plaything. That might be Iv e l be ea c l o y .14 0 h t t '..6 o ,„ *tilic' l l l ,l ;ri would tell them that had there nq le cou ° „foril :i than their own below them, the w", 1 .1 i e tat e LOP;jll mOn'y r istit t long before this have been in a fright' u oil env, ,01 11 l i s t i l %r 4 hi e Look at the state of Ireland. Tile,Y ig ibliftr"; ia i lltari e , preserve the rights of property in ° e n ; 9 , 1 be XOl, i tlA:4t W il the English Exchequer and 20,00 0 of t wo ulo it 01 ti r s , 1110 i g the events were to occur in England, va', e pre§ e/ g , e ", e N . ° pe a dition of the whole population at W ee d ye t iro? 1 , l'', 'ti e 'l tha He was aware that this might be to that tlO .O . I 0 lit o :Illt w i t tical matter, but he did not think tR i os t l l ietie le e : "te t t the looked upon as a merely po litili sst e o p Il i ili„ lv 4th agricultural districts. At the , eue oce e eet3. 2 4 Ilt Apft tle a whole %%eight of the political 10 1 " rot eli.' l lloplg ri o a lier, forced by the action in the agrie 9lll t e' i f 1 1 '04 b ili t i k la a 1 hundred Memb rs had come dow n „ l a , geld be th e ', 44 p to , sat on the b •nches behind the gu1i e '.,.0, 911 aii o e.. llj i I liti,i l t I t the weight of the agricultural int e r; h o o lsjl oo °/ ; i r rig N il. qi af t ,. fore hoped that he should eneee he s g ee t re •eo, et tt co-operation, though he feared thot, jo hia; oo lo ifi, a l 114 4 . a or deed he did not ( xeecet to su cceen hes itatl l diat t or r , ,llititortllid a he had dere his best, and he had 9 ° itte e I.,,,erif r ff ° ,,, 0.) a-l i i them that it' they obtained a Col lesion °% O hr i r d ° o l a • At that he would explode the whole de ' able to hr Nit w as. I, tt, protection.—(Hear, hear.) Ile r e lls e ce, t ie n elt tic l ll kt 1, 14)1 4 ward such an immense mass of ev e lal liti e Y: r fe v lj 1 L . Tilii, derance of talent, that when th r - A , t • he' e bafje t c , Ik ih s w i forth, as they could now send it, th T l _ l ". e ctio ll , t r. ,be n, i ll t(1 , old information, that the system of Pl it e e i r beari e itorieti ° ; . "-,,,, i t 5 tt0 0 1 d live for two years afterwards.—Clfent mod l ot e 4 I11 1 ;4 \ I I Or' of protection had proved a convente_ , t 0 0 0 ap ." o r "!_t r 4 tle t i liticians, for it carried the countle' i e :oin el t el, S isl° 4 .o' % I•i' not and the politicians gained honours,setornisit oiit ic, o y 40 k lt ... of , by it. The old tattered flag wa„._ of t he P . ,,j fl io t,,, tet r ! t o it to be hoisted still for the benen o t ~s , if t i ii e te eo elter N i , on,4, would they c: me forward and li i r t ie not tie rio ;b of t? Il hi 1 .,. /3 , )a quire into the question ? lie el e i g e ee ' c eie e r / I 0 J• k I , ° ltnr, p . i iii, t . gentry of England would be mu° 60 101 .0 reP o g, kt , e ,] be beaten by others, and give ne ° ho d o' o f ' iii l i es - 744 Soul own. They were the gentry ofE n .,, o rari. hi et he ir . - Ne.i4 l 4, i the counties. They were the areea ee ol ee i otis s c i -h a e to Their fathers t he I ri s fathers, 11/id i t f u ti j lel 0 0 11 ef ` I IV 141 i ' t tilt la if they went the right way. bu t 00 ;10, 0 0 01 0 1 1 ~f 1 to ? l a the spirit of the age, by opposing, j 1 ,4i, I t,. in ter el i he 'ta be 'lla 0 ,, days, he warned them, were nun 'el err t i ' l llitali„ —in the battle-field or the hum b 'es " ete 1; r s A * it , ; fitt ca 0 our moo N tth • contests of manly vigour, the.r.,.. c , flog e , r) c lo y 14 in the strife. The aristocracy , I rniais of 1 0 r 00 11 1 1 i i I•ea t the aristocracy of France, mere.tri jo int! a fi e , , ~, ‘ 4 ,:. e e i, like the aristocracy of' SPat n ' r a nd k a gbe ll eel f # tt'll Cr brigands. They were Englishmen ure,ge of 0 1,1 14 11 4 44 t, a want of firmness or c° ,rhis w s l 6 , ~,,:, lea tl., had been made upon then& ...... 7 he age, e pore A o°' 114 It was the age of improvement ,`', ree daa r ' e fir et aa' Itl d a l " tib lr . 'V 4 vancernent—net the age of waifln:_ e eot ie elle i ~ ,o, *, . 84 lived when the whole wealth til r e ise , e'-,!..d. peg .4 kk a h al into their lap by mercantile ent! r ,P rg tea Alldeos:,,c,rofiligl het yhavejieget,l7baudt they might, ( g ) . h f t c , o a m s m i,h P ei r y 7 l , :f... d ai d:li t ; e... ' t o i r o i l l:1 0 1 ,11 1 0 1 , , '..%_ 44iill tl be e selves with the people, and lets..lad'uno b f tit' of plZote, P r ile ) b h :era Eegland.—(liear, In- ar.) had n sbe •of 1 k , i them there was .-. deep rooted, an t keep to 0 ) It 0 _,.Q, e , their favour. But they could n ° se lv o r cel i i iy o /li t fief sed the in d i ct • ditfe 1 2 ve ti ,lisu, that prejudice if they opPo , erg in 1 .0.5 9 1 00 , 0 p i G,„! al, the age. But if they la ee l 030 P i le tY a ere ice .11$ icql - peasantry—if they obstruct % _,. 1 , i n t ~ ei .. I! 0 I, ii,.. e, calculated to knit nations t0gew ..... . r i f thecife,pte Pi ‘ 1 4 4 ;" 1 1( 1 11 il hil against through streamrcial whichmtt.re oh u a r l sy oublrou s e t t Sidt r bog; r ooo / 0 13 ,0 0,1 A ., , la ico.: breath to material nature, d o e n c u ree d s o h d o o o . oi ll l cr ip ih. : 4 , l4t o ii: ll : ) ai t community at large had) of Fin gla , ite e r or 0 VI they would he the gentry (.31'. their pi in * , 4 , li ii ( t ' lley,, , others would be found to talc toot! Los 01 1/ if, t 1 th he s SO 0 1/ tIIV Me 4 e no hesitation in saying --- 81 „ jin n. 9 0 e0 01 00 ei ifr it , i 1 tti position. There was a sp e r.r'_' s ,! ; ,"f tt i v. . o ol l o, t i l i o to h' fi ght i l , w ,,ti-la e e r sm e t t ri a ee m a dc p a e tsh r t i ,e. n i g r o w LA i e t n i t t ( t ,tr h igl e eatu f n e s :: st n n ig lentt, he wse y li • ro: siou t ip b rit , lie; :ttl iiiroft,l , o„ .: j r k ' l l ‘ a t Ni l ) *ht * th n i.3 ( , ) , '11,? mere t i rl f i ici t,l , :i ( ! ) B o nf i i;* ' l/8: 0 ti t :,41 qq, would give them a a , oritY ° v s ° oer'i e s ti e " I ' It nay, they should have a Ina &intil ittec Co l lte si ol it e I S' li I lia tien Society itself on that into ° le gal'. e at, If P I tl' e ti ltt.,) for inquiry—a fair inquits re t he . n' eti cl (I7r er ' llB tura! distress. and he l ici t s t e s to tu i s y o lt,e r ol d e ; t tp ...s t he tl / 1 11 i 1 intended to move amenomen „„ o e D O 0 :- 0 g) t,illf 4 1)] principle of Hon. Gentlemen en jelit io t 0 ;i 0 0. e!, t itr 04 House, he did entre it the hider_ on ti eig o . „ 4 l , p .Ac i, Itie, L t quirt'. interf ‘ l a . e n b d ya whethern'ere clittlibebt,l:;blir:oll:eatbtleisio;,Poe_t,,etlO::ic,lllo I : ot , tl'll ll , ll l/11 : t i do q N l il 4t ' ll House that they would not rent ine es ; .Ir - Dte e ti 4 e,.°: into a fair, a rid', and an imp* s,id tinhe, 4ed O lt Mr. SIDNEY lIERBEHT t c 1e. 1 ,00 11 sa 49 tit Hon. Member who had jUS t „iv so guished by a degree of ingell'