The Sun. — London, England, 1844-03-05 00:00:00

ff erer n i l ,t we cu-it lock, ming• . NC , the 1 4 t i3er 1 64 ikeo to a Ai eo. toj ew f "di k; 0101 00,01 0 be v e, o , , b oos _ r tsk i and (1 ,b;1 141I t 1 01/ 11 05 ! 45 P 5 00 1 4 0 $ P i jo sed , IleLb :es:4ig 1 (Ai lO W 07 Se# 001 #lls _l l ls 4 l , OM -0 ifil o I 111$ : 1 4 (1 a Ste a , IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, 11larch 4. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the WOOl - shortly after Five o'Clock. Earl POWIS presented several petitions from dif rent parts of Wales, against the union of the sees of 41 Angor and St. Asao. IRELAND. The Marquis ofWITSTMEAT H. trusted that their Lordships would excu-e him for a few minutes Zbile he ad ve rted to the letter which the other evening had been p ro d uce d b y t h e N o bl e Marquis opposite, deny - teg:the statement which he (the Marquis of Westmeath) „Tclinade. Upon that occasion, he had stated that in .county of Westmeath, the Roman Catholic bishop had suspended a Roman Catholic clergyman for having Mused to assist in the collection of money for the re kl7ll of the uni on . At the time he (the Marquis of e stmeath) made that statement, he thought it was , • bot when the Noble Marquis read the letter tettrsPth•ting to correct it, he (the Marquis of Westmeath) • hated as to its truth, and, in order to ascertain the the answer he had written to Ireland upon the subject, and p ! answer to • that letter proved that what he had h ',,ted was substantially the fact. What he had It" was, that the Roman Catholic clergyman had have suspended from his living. Perhaps he would to been more correct if he had stated that he had rn superseded. It was intended to hold one of tn "W monster meetings at Mullingar. This clergy tan, had exert e d all his influence to prevent the col- Onn of money, and also to prevent his parishioners in attending this meeting. Previous to the meeting a t. )1 , Mullingar taking place, the clergyman, whose name ts Murray, and who had since died, was informed that a curate would be sent to his congregation for X t ee Sundays. That was done, and the result was, that M r . M urray was superse d e d i n hi s own p ar i s h, Such d were th e re al facts of the case, and in his 1:1 Nlien the titular bishop had . made the denial ad verted to by the Noble Marquis in order to Preve n t • the odium that would attach to him for the co urse he had pursued. Now, in order to show that Lllat he (the Marquis of Westmeath) had stated was r o exagg era ti on , h e wou ld read to their Lordships' nie of the expressions used by this titular bishop at t i,,T.lingar. At that meeting, fifty-one Roman Ca tric clergymen attended. It took place on Sunday 14th May. The Roman Catholic bishop was inthe chair at the dinner which took place after the meeting, he stated during the course of his speech on that occasion self that the Irish deserved and should have government.' He then expressed the great plea s ure he felt at the glorious demonstration that 4d taken place that day, and he expressed the de triination on the part of the Irish people to follow sti e course they were adopting till they w iped off the fa de that rested upon Ireland, and until they again her what she ought always to have been—a nation. Z nothe s person o f th e name o f O'Higgins also made wally of the same tendency, anti in language violent.—(The Noble Marquis then read an bract of some length from a speech of the Roman ttholic Bishop Dr. O'Higgins, in which that re :tend per son declared himself a zealous repealer, d denounced the malignity of the Government, ti n eh he said would be ineffectual towards put t° g down the demands of the Irish people legislate for themselves.) In bringing this "tter before their Lordships, he had only been im- P ° l ll .ed by a sense of duty. It would be much more seeable to him if he could speak well of the Roman w atholie bishops and clergy, but he thought it th 4 Lbis duty as a resident magistrate to bring before ti; Rouse any facts of importance which came under Le i ngnizance in the discharge of his duties as a lord and magistrate. bthe Marquis of NORMANBY thought he would b.‘ meet the substantial justice of the case, denying the statement on the part of the light reverend person who had confided his de otlee to him (the Marquis of Normanby.) il sei the former occasion he had confined him t Li ,to a specific denial of the charge. The 1 4 1 :iLe Marquis seemed to have a strange mode of e,„_in . g . out his case. The Noble Marquis had made t,,,t't'ethc charge, which was met by a specific denial,. b' 0 ": 11 Which the Noble Marquis retorted, by reading k L' only a speech of the right rev. person, but the of another titular bishop also. Certainly f,lWas carrying the doctrine of conspiracy rather a rche r th an it h a d b een c a rried even of late years.— k o !" . I ', hear, and a laugh.) He (the Marquis of Nor ts,4°Y) had received by this day's post a letter i oh nt the Right Reverend person, Dr. Cantwell, °k assured him that he had never either Cen or written a word to the late Dr. m r a7, palish priest of Clonmellon (four miles from to p t esidence of the Marquis of Westmeath), and that fk be the 14 years that he had been bishop of that hi, " 9 , in which Dr. Murray had been 35 years the 6tttl, bent of a parish, he had lived with that rev. ',eltan on terms of the closest friendship, and k ti lt lways regarded him, with respect, esteem, and af v". He (Dr. Cantwell) attended at the funeral ham deceased gentleman, assisted by 30 clergymen, si t ; nearly 3,000 persons attended at the funeral Is % I nnny.—(Hear, hear.) Was not that a complete trer to the charge that Dr. Cantwell had passed tth/teclesiastical censure upon his subordinate ? On klat then did the Noble Marquis rest his charge of 4,,_Pension That the aged and rev. gentleman, after to hag performed the duties of parish priest for nearly tk Years, left his duty to be performed by his p l ate, , for three successive Sundays, shortly before hs va ue ath. He (the Marquis of .1\ ormanby) would iteif ; the statement of the Right Rev. Dr. Cant- in the hands of the House, and he thought ii it .so mp (_Ltlete an answer that he would not add one word sy ear ) 1. 4 ,7 0. e, Marquis of WESTMEATH said, that their ker'nips would decide between them, but he would 51 i ,;, ) , 1t any account state who the person was from he had received his information, for if he did ti e would expose . that person to imminent danger. Shad heard the matter at the time, and he still believed, notwithstanding the contradiction 1;4 s'• had been read to their Lordships, who would 4it its full value when they recollected the language ty e ll he h a d j u st read as having been used kis e re, right rev. person. Their Lordships would lip o 4l lnge whether he would make a personal attack ii an in divid ua l with whom he had no intimacy s sit ‘ever. There was another circumstance which ti ti i:perhap s , of some importance. The Noble Mar titk(l spoken of the parish of Clonmellon, but the it t ° which he (the Marquis of Westmeath) re 4.Cie took place in the chapel of Kilallen. Did the th e Marquis deny that the curate had preached Ise three separate Sundays ? Ism: Marquis of NORMANBY said that he had t the kil i n mention of any matter of the kind to which 444, le Marquis "now referred. He had confined k er 'f to th e. specific charge made by the Noble the . 14 ., 8 1 and there was a distinct denial on the part of 1 8 11 t Rev. Gentleman who had been made the 4s ee t of accusation. Atle conversation then dropped. / 40 ,.., SIR AUGUSTUS D'ESTE. 124. • A" BROUGHAM, in presenting apetition from th at d . ll s:ustui D'Este said, that a former petition of ti t i rinkuished individual, respecting his right to t_tirs e d " of the late Duke of Sussex, had been re altis,to the Committee of Privileges. The, Prussian tvit ti , e ‘er, the Chevalier Bunsen, who was an important day in the matter, was about to proceed on Satur hot next to his own country, from which he would Ntiti n etu rn for three months, and the prayer of the which he now presented was that the Stand ts. us au . r, No. 120, of their Lordships' House, might th at tended ' • and he now gave notice of a motion to of t e ."ect for to-morrow, in order that the evidence tai l h is a t i witness, de belie esse, might be taken previous A ft eaving this country. 14 ) er a few w or ds f Lord CAMPBELL and the k b r , _from ~., t ai tai el i. C .ELLOE, the petition was ordered to lie 14 0 7.1 4 ,1TTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL. "Inb BROUGHAM laid on the table' a -Bill for tee r o t ri th og b the JUrisdiction of the Judicial Commit- Th e 7 ,, -L Council. .411 Was read a first time. L SLAVERY IN AMERICA. fan orct BROUGHAM said that he had received ver y q a pPlications within the last few weeks upon a ti 4, 1 13ai nful subject, and though le had refused the .e Banta to present any petition upon it, still he \ Vhil . 11 , 0 t help saying a few words upon the matter, ft,4 he stated briefly the reasons for which he re be t° Present any petition. N thing could either ,e Painful than any interference ° whatever of any matter thi n 'louse of Parliament with 4r any that was connected with the domestic sd policy minis ttitti-o3;, tea t country, or belonging to the t buu the municipal law of that country. He that N , Nl e ',lt it was no "reason for breaking ti -1 - 4 11 -at it happened that any law of that coun • mkt 48 revolting o our feelings, because we 44e:c:4141 whatever to do except with our °to 41111 our own law, and • the M eye r jurisprudence, and we had no business .n re,t2er.to interfere with any foreign country lti4';t,..wilatsoever, while that foreign country con-. caonoy ttst ' e lf to its own law and the adminstration f p rin i l i Nv. • That he held to be so sacred 414 3' el Ple, that h e h a d re f use d t o t a k e h ith.l whatever on the question brought before e s,elh lc p. at it was a case which greatly interested his n 'ne ' s ' A. man had been condemned to death B,e4te:'nlinal Court of Lousiana, with the `. l. h e e passed by the Learned Judge, as ?Pro m t.ad committed murder—with the It lati 1; 4 ,7 l anguage of such a sentence, as if such With dire ati been guilty of the greatest wickedness— thetbe irvet bestiu o the unfortunate man to improve /541e1rval een the sentence and his dying upon_ teligio„'w3--Vtith reference to the sacred truths of " if the m an h a d c o mm i tte d i mp i ous l y an Wa s lus and cruel and barbarous murder. That tit awn. "se to w hi ch his attention had been *•`e Was bound to suppose that the Louisianian THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING, MARCH 5, 1R44 law had been justly administered, and that the lies fortunate person had forfeited his life according to that law, and he was also bound to suppose that that j udge was by no means ignorant of the law, nor was guilty of maladministration or perversion of it. He believed that the judge had not maladministered the law; it was the law, and he was condemned to die for aiding the escape of a slave. That was the law of Louisiana; it Itas not the law of England —God forbid it should be. But he might humbly, and with every respect towards the Government and Legislature of Louisiana, express his fervent hope that advantage would be taken of the long interval between this and the 26th of April, when he was condemned to die, for the sacred purpose of extending mercy to this criminal. He treated him as a criminal, because the laws of his country had so dealt with him ; but he hoped and trusted that the humane and merciful consideration of the Louisanian Govern ment would be extended to this unfortunate individual. - , this very system of education which had been so de flounced, had been most strongly recommended by , the Education Commission itself. The report of that Commission bore the signature of such names as the Primate of Ireland, the Archbishop of Cashel ; and the report itself was brought up by one of the most distinguished advocates of Protestantism, Mr. Leslie Foster.—(Hear, hear.) He feared the Irish Govern ment did not sufficiently discourage sectarian feuds and religious rancour. The address of the Pro testant Operative Association to the Lord Lieutenant contained sentiments of undis g uished hostility to the great bulk of the Irish people, and should have been replied to in a manner which would show them that the Executive discouraged all such indications. The Noble Marquis then read the answer of the Lord Chancellor of Ire land to the Rev. Mr. Birmingham's letter, in which that Noble and Learned Lord stated that it was not in the province of the Government to review the acts of the Board of Charitable Bequests. He (the Lord Chancellor) was a member of that Board, and if the application was mide to the Board during its sitting he would call their particular attention to it. He could not, however, give any opinion concerning the merits of the particular application. The Rev. Gen tleman had applied since then, but was told the Board had not sat, and so the grievance was left unre dressed. He would earnestly call the attention of their Lordships to the motion. He feared that how ever anxious the Noble Duke opposite (the Duke of IVellington) might be to act in a straightforward and impartial manner, that the Irish Government must have a more determined will, and use a stronger hand in order to restrain those sectarian manifesta tions and govern with impartiality. It was not his intention to move for a Committee at present. He would confide the matter to the management of the Government ; but on a future occasion, if the evil was not remedied, he would feel it his duty to move for a Committee, before which he would be able to sub stantiate all the allegations he had made on that evening. The Duke of WELLINGTON said he had taken great pains to inform himself of the particulars re garding the present motion, but had been unable to obtain much information on the subject. He believed the statement made by the Noble Marquis was nearly accurate. The Noble Duke then recapitulated the facts of the case as stated by the Noble Marquis, and stated that it appeared to him th.t the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland had taken the only proper course, in recommending the applicant to apply to a court of equity, which was the proper method of ob taining redress, as that court alone could have juris diction over the Board of Bequests. The applicant had certainly applied to the Lord Chancellor of Ire land, but as .he had not made the application to the Noble and Learned Lord in his judicial capacity, the Noble and Learned Lord gave him the only answer he could give him, as merely a member of the Board. As to the Bishop of Kildare, or the other matters mentioned by the Noble Marquis, he had nothing whatever to do with them ; but he thought it would very badly become their Lordships to appoint a Com mittee, when the legitimate course of application being to a court of equity had not been resorted to. He would, however, call the attention of the Govern ment to the subject. Lord COTTENHAM was of opinion that a court of equity was not the proper place to apply to in this case. In the first place, the whole amount, a trifle of 71., would be consumed in a single motion in, the Court of Chancery; in the second, the case in volved a point of much difficulty and disputation. What really was the power given by the Act of Par liament to the Board of Charitable Bequests ? The words of the Act did certainly appear to give great discretion to that Board, a discretion which might render nugatory all such bequests as the present, and which might be sought to be applied to the general purposes of education. He would earnestly call the attention of the Government to the state of the law on this matter, with a view to its alteration. The LORD CHANCELLOR did not think this was a case for a court of equity. He thought his Hon. and Learned Friend the Lord Chancellor of Ireland had given the only answer he could give by telling the applicant to apply to the Board when he was present, and he would call their attention to the case. The matter never had been brought before the Board since, else he felt quite sure the Hon. and Learned Lord would have fully redeemed his promise. After a few words from the Duke of WELLINGTON and the Marquis of NORMA.NBY in explanation, Lord CAMPBELL said he feared much time would not be gained by bringing the matter before the Board, considering the opinions that had been ex pressed by two Members of it, Judges Jackson and Lefroy. The Noble and Learned Lord defended the conduct of his countryman, the Bishop of Kildare, who, he felt sure, did not do anything harsh in this case, nay, very little responsibility was attached to him. The Bishop of EXETER contended that the rector of the parish was bound to apply the bequest in the mariner most calculated to promote the prin ciples of the Established Church. He cared not whether there were 70 or 700 Papists in the school, the principle remained the same. The Right Rev. Prelate defended the conduct of Judges Jackson and Lefroy, and said he was glad to see that they had the manliness to act upon their opinions. Did the na tional system of education, he would ask Noble Lords, carry out the principles of the Established Church, and did it not rather pander to the feelings and preju dices of Roman Catholics and Dissenters ? CORN-LAWS. The Earl of DEVON presented two petitions from the county of Somerset in favour of the corn-laws. LANDLORD AND TENANT COMMISSION. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice that he should put a question to the Noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Devon), as to the Landlord and Tenant Commission. Some contradictory reports had been in circulation, and the object of his question would be to elicit from the Noble Earl, the real scope, aim, and object of the Commission. NATIONAL EDUCATION. The Marquis of NORMANB Y rose for the pur pose of presenting the petition of which he had given notice, from John and Elizabeth Ryan, the keepers of the parochial school of BalLisack, in the diocese of Kildare, complaining that the interest of 2001., the legacy of a former rector of the parish, had been unjustly stopped for the last seventeen months by the Board of Charitable Bequests in Ireland, in consequence of the introduc tion of the national system of education into the school: The petition prayed for a Committee of Inquiry into the constitution of this Board. In the year 1794 a Committee of the House of Lords took upon themselves the examination and control of charitable bequests and donations in Ireland, and they instituted - prosecutions with a view to the resto ration of sums which had been misappropriated. Just previous to the union it occurred to the Irish Parliament that something should I e done with refe rence to these trusts, and one of the last Acts of that Parliament was to establish a board of charitable bequests and donations. That board was to be com posed of the Lord Chancellor, the judges of the Pre rogative Court, of all the common law judges in Ire land, of all bishops, and of the nineteen rectors of the different parishes in Dublin. In the year 1829 a Committee was appointed to consi der this subject, and very important evidence was given before that Committee by Mr. O'Connell. Mr. O'Connell said, that many persons had consulted him on the subject of this Board. They complained of its composition. Mr. O'Connell stated that, owing to the Protestant character of that Board, large sums of money had been lost to the charities of Ireland. He, therefore, recom mended an alteration and revision. From that time to the year 1838 nothing farther was done in . the matter. In that year, however, the Hon. Mem ber for Waterford introduced a Bill on the sub ject in the other House of Parliament, but that Bill never reached their Lordships' House. The Noble Marquis then read the will of Mr. Few, the former rector of the parish, by which he left the interest of 2001. towards the support of the school. He would now say one word upon the state of the parish of Ballysack, of which he knew something, having had a residence there, to which he some times retired when his avocations would permit him to do so. That parish was supposed to contain about 3,000 inhabitants, but it had since been ascertained that the number of inhabitants was only 1,300, and of that number only 40 were Protestants. The present rector of the parish, Mr. Birmingham, had exerted himself in a praiseworthy manner to make the school what it was at present. The former state of the parish was this ; there was a schoolmaster, who received the interest of the gift, but there was no school or scholars. At present there were 78 Roman Catholic scholars, boys and girls, who were educated under the regulation of a National Board ; there were, however, only four Protestant children went there, their parents making no objection. Such was the state of the parish of Bally sack. Now, with respect to the Reverend Mr. Birmingham, he was originally curate of St. Bride's. That gentleman had been appointed chaplain to the Lord Lieutenant by the Marquis Wellesley, he had been continued as chaplain by his Noble Friend op posite and by himself. Under the present Ministry the appointment to the chaplaincy had been, he was bound to say, of a more exclusively political cha racter, and Mr. Birmingham had been no longer con tinued chaplain. Mr. Brimingham had been appointed to the rectory of Ballysack. The system which had been pursued there had continued without interrup tion up to last year, when the Board of Charitable Bequests had thought proper to interfere. This in terference had been coeval with the admission to that Board of certain ex officio members—namely, judges who had been appointed by the present Government —gentlemen who had always exhibited themselves as strong political partisans of the Protestant Ascen dancy, who had attended the meeting at the Man sion-house in 1837—he meant Mr Baron Lefroy and Mr. Sergeant Jackson. Mr. Jackson had given utter ance to such strong opinions on this subject that he had been excluded from serving as a judge of assize un der the government:of the Duke of Northumberland and Lord Francis Egerton. Onithe 7th of April, 1843, Mr. Birmingham received a letter from Mr. Mathews, secretary to the Boardof Charitable Bequests, stating that, in the opinion of the Commissioners the school was not properly conducted as a Protestant parochial school ; that in consequence the trust had not been properly fulfilled, and that until the school should be made a Protestant school, the trust;Money left by the Rev. Mr. Pugh would not be paid. , The resolution of the Board, in consequence of which the letter had been written, had been proposed by .111 r. Baron Le froy and seconded by Mr. Sergeant Jackson. It had been passed by a small majority, and among the minority who voted against the' resolution were the Archbishop of Dublin and Chief Baron Brady The Noble Marquis then read an extract from the will, to show that it was the intention of the testator to leave the system of education entirely to the dis cretion of the clergyman. He did not think that the Board had any power to withhold the grant. Their powers were limited to the recovery of charitable be quests which had been secreted, neglected, or misap plied. The only expression in their constitution which they could so construe was, that which authorised them, in cases where the bequest could not be lawfully applied according to the will of the testator, to apply it so as to meet as nearly as possible the intention of the will. The Noble Marquis then read a letter from the Bishop of Kildare to the Rev. Mr. Birmingham. Lord MONTEAGLE reminded the Right Rev: Prelate that the system of national education had ob tained the sanction of the Protestant Primate, the Archbishop of Cashel, the Bishop of Killaloe, the Provost of Trinity College, and Mr. Leslie Foster. The system was working well, and he trusted nothing would occur to embitter those sectarian differences which the national education system was doing so much to remove. _ _ The Bishop of EXETER wished to hear from the Noble and Learned Lord (Lord Campbell), he being the gravest law-authority in the House, as Lord Cottenham was not then in his place, whether it would be according to law for a clergyman of a parish interested, as in this case, in a bequest, to apply it to the puposes of education according to the princi ples of the Established Church ? Lord CAMPBELL jocosely observed, that as the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack was the highest legal authority in the House, he must refer the Right Reverend Prelate to him for an answer. Lord LYNDHURST.—The Right Rev. Prelate is himself, I should say, the gravest authority on such a point.—(Much laughter.) The matter then dropped, and the petition was laid on the table. Their Lordahips adjourned at a Quarter to Eight o'Clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 4. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'Clock. DEVIZES ELECTION. ign, in which the Right Rev. Prelate informed that The SPF,AKER informed the House that he had gentleman, that at a meeting of the Board of Chari- received a communication from the examiner of the table Bequests, severe strictures had been passed upon recognisances in the case of the petition against the his conduct, and the Bishop warned him that he return for Devizes, who reported that the sureties on brought himself within the provisions of the penal that petition were unexceptionable. Act of King Henry VIII., in his 28 th year, "unleas RAILWAY BILLS. he (Mr. Birmingham) should restore his school On the motion of Lord RENDLESHAM, the to its proper uses." But the fact was, the Act of Henry VIII. was the 15th and Beccles Navigation Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. not the 28th, and its object was not to make the Mr. G. DUNCAN presented a petition from schools Protestant, but to enforce the teaching of Dundee, in favour of the Edinburgh and Glasgow English. It was passed at a time when there had Railway Bill. been no change in the intent, and it contained a special enactment that the pupils should "tell their beads in Sir F. TRENCH presented a petition from Scar- English."—(Hear, hear.) That was a Protestant borough, in favour of the Scarborough Railway Bill. On the motion of Mr. WILSON PATTEN, the enactment.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Act Manchester and Birmingham (Macclesfield and Poyn contained other regulations relating to the dress and ton branches) Railway Bill was read a second time, manners of the clergy. They were not to wear " satin shirts," nor to wear hair upon theirupper lips.—(A and ordered to be committed. Mr. GREENALL presented a petition against laugh.) He did not wish to read the whole of the Rght Rev. Prelate's letter. His Grace was eighty- the Norwich and Grantham Railway Bill. i Mr. ESCOTT presented a petition from Exeter six years of age, and it might be ' supposed that the letter contained some expressions which his Grace against the South Devon Railway Bill. Mr. PATTISON presented a petition from various at another time might wish he had reconsidered. not arts of London against the 41st clause in the Great As he did not read the second letter , he would Western Railway Extension Bill. read the answer, but the Bishop, in the course of his Mr. RUSSELL said the Company had decided letter, states "he was anxious to rescue the property, upon withdrawing this clause. They were also ready and place from the hands of the National Board."— to submit to any provisions which the Committee (Hear, hear.) It was not with the Board of Cheri might recommend, or Parliament might think proper table Bequests, but with the minister of the parish to adopt. that the control of the funds rested, till this most ex - SOUTH DEVON RAILWAY BILL. traordinary interference of the Board of National Education. He would not read the Bishop's letter, Mr. C. RUSSELL moved the second reading of this Bill. because he was aware that a threat had been conveyed to the Rev. Mr. Birmingham that if he brought the Mr. S. HERBERT rose for the purpose of stating case before Parliament it was possible a temporary that very grave objections had been made to this Bill. license of non-residence, which he had on account of The Board of Admiralty had received several-memo the illness of his wife, who was the Mother of seven rials from persons interested, in the neighbourhood of children, would be withdrawn from him by his dio- Exeter. In consequence of their representations, the cesan.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped there was no four- Board of Admiralty had sent down Mr. Walker to dation for this. He knew enough of the Bishop of examine into the matter. He should, therefore, make Kildare to make him believe that such a step would no objection to the second reading of this Bill, pro not be taken. Having stated thus much with regard vided a distinct assurance were given by the pro to this case, he would, in a few words, call the atten- moters of the Bill that the Committee would not ba tion of the House to what the state of Ballysack appointed until after Mr. Walker's report should be would be if it were not for their interference. received. This case was an epitome of the state of Ireland. Mr. C. RUSSELL was ready to accede to so rea- The same thing might be the case with five out of sonable a proposition. six parishes in Ireland. It illustrated the struggle Lord SEYMOUR wished to know at what time between the two principles of government for Ireland Mr. Walker's report might be expected. —that which would govern the people w i t h g ood w i ll Mr. S. HERBERT said he expected it in about a and with the concurrence of the g reat mass of the fortnight. population, and that which would govern her by con- The Bill was then read a second time. straint and force. The Roman Catholic pastor had On the motion of Mr. AINSWORTH, the Bolton been acting in concert with the rector of the parish Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to in promoting the education of their respect ive docks be committed. —a happy state of things, which should meet with the RAILWAY BILLS. encouragement of their Lordships.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. GLADSTONE, in rising to propose the re- He trusted the Gpvernment would at once interfere, solutions of which he had given notice, respecting and apply such a remedy as was necessary, in order Railway Bills, said, he would take that opportunity to prevent the malappropriation of these trusts. When of making a few observations upon the subject of some Noble Lords spoke about Ireland,' they not only those resolutions. A question had been raised seemed ignorant of that country, but actually to have before the Committee on Railways with re forgotten what they hadsped to already learned of her. Why, competing lines. It was intended on Thurs- day 'next to move the appointment of the Committee An the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway, and he should on that ocmision propose that the Committee on that Bill should be deferred for a reasonable time, as the question of referring the Bills for competing lines to the same Committee affected this Bill. The principle hitherto adopted by that House with respect to pri vate Bills, had been to appoint the Committees upon these Bills from Members connected with the local interest to - which the particular Bill might apply. The Committee, after mature consideration, had come to the determination of recommending the House to de part from that principle in respect to Railway Bills to be introduced during the present session. It was felt by the Committee that, where two Railway Bills were proposed, the lines 'to run from the same or nearly the same termini, and to be established for the accommodation of the same district, that such Bills ought to be referred to the same Committee of that House. In considering this subject, however, the Committee had had to contend with several diffi culties. One was with respect to the rail way from the town of Ashton to Staleybridge, There were two lines proposed, and both were for the accommodation of the same town. One of those railways joined the Manchester and Sheffield Rail way; and the other, the Manchester and Leeds Rail way. The two termini of these railways were in two counties, for it appeared that the town stood on the borders of different counties. Now, this was a case of some difficulty. In former years an experi ment was tried, with respect to such a case as this, which was, that the Committee should be appointed from Members connected with different counties. This experiment, however, he believed, had worked in a most unsatisfactory manner, and had not been repeated. Although a railway Bill was in itself a private Bill, yet no one could doubt that the public had a great interest in such Bills. The Committee had, therefore, determined to recom mend the. House to depart from the general rule with respect to the appointment of the Committees on Railway Bills. They felt in cases of competing lines that the number of Members on the Committee who were "connected with or represented the local interests, should be materially restricted. He did not mean to say that this resolution had been come to without any difference of opinion in the Committee, of which he was Chairman. But after mature deliberation this was the conclusion at which they had arrived. They pro posed that there should be a limited representation of local interests, in the Committee, but they considered that the local interests ought to be made subservient to the public interests. The Committee, therefore, recommended this resolution to the consideration of the House, bearing in mind that the experi ment was only recommended for the present session. He should propose that this Committee should be composed of five gentlemen totally unconnected with the local interests of the particular places in which the line lay. The number of Bills which were con stantly under the consideration of the House, and the vast expenses which were occasioned to parties under the present system, and the time occupied in the in vestigation, rendered it a most important element for the consideration of the House. He was not aware that there was any other important point to which it was necessary for him to further allude, and he should therefore conclude by moving a resolution to the effect that, when any Bills were brought in to authorise the establishment of two lines of railway to one point, that they should be referred to one Com mittee. _ _ Mr. LABOUCHERE said the Right Hon. Gen tlemen who had just sat down had involved some most important points in his resolution. He thought it was a question to see whether the House would try the experiment of carrying on the private matters of the country—in fact, whether a tribunal could not be appointed to try private Bills, in the manner suggested by the Right Hon. Gentleman, and which mightbe also more largely and more effectively adopted by investing those Committees with a judicial character—(Hear, hear)—and, by purging them of all personal interest, and also by diminishing their numbers so much as to fasten upon each of those in dividual Members a particular responsibility, obtain the result which they sought, and which was so much desired by the public. This would tend to di minish the fearful expenses to which appli cants were subjected, and insure to those. Com mittees that weight which impartiality alone could give them, and which Committees on private Bills did not possess now. He was not insensible to the difficulties by which this matter was surrounded, but _still he should say that he was glad the experi ment was about t© be made, and an opportunity afforded of trying how far it would be safe to carry the experiment. There was another point of so much importance that he could not help alluding to it. He believed the number of Bills would require ' ten Committees, which would call for the services of about fifty Members. The main difficulty would be to find Members who would devote their time to private Bills in which neither themselves nor their constituents had any interest. The working of the plan depended entirely on gentlemen devoting their time to private Bills, and consenting to investigate those that might be referred to them. He hoped there might be no difficulty in finding fifty gentlemen to undertake the duty. He could only say that he gave his hearty support in the main to those resolutions. In some points he did not agree with them, but they were not points of essential importance ; in the main spirit and tenor of these resolutions he entirely con curred. They were a great experiment, and a novelty that he had always desired to see applied. He hoped they would have a fair trial, and he should not despair of this being the first step towards putting the private business of the House on a sounder foundation. If the House could effect this they would effect a very and do that which would tend to salutary change, raise the character of the House in the eyes of the public. Mr. H. HINDE said there was no information before the House to induce it to come to a contrary conclusion from that of former sessions. Before he was called on to give his vote, he thought he was entitled to see the evidence that had influenced the Committee in coming to this decision. No tice was only given of these resolutions on Friday, and between that day and the present was. the time when Members had the least chance of considering these things. Alterations had lately been made with regard to the Standing Orders affecting Railway Bills, but they had not turned out to be of the most felicitous character. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) ought to give them some days for con sideration. If h e did not gran t this, he must at all events request him to aftbrd the House a little more information on the subject of the fifth reso lution. What; however, he (Mr. Hinds) should most prefer would be a Committee of five gentlemen who were for excluding all local interest whatsoever. A system such as this would be far preferable to any vet proposed, and would give greater confidence to the country, and enhance the character of the House. Mr. EWART said he heard, with the greatest satisfaction, the proposition of the Right Hon. Gen tleman, and he believed the House and the country would join with him in that satisfaction. He agreed with the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last in the opinion that when a new principle was intro duced it ought to be worked out. He hoped that the principle which the Right Hon. Gentleman now in troduced with regard to railways would be applied to all private Bills, for it was equally applicable to all private Bills. He was sorry the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite and the Right Hon. Gentleman, the late President of the Board of Trade (Mr.Labou cbere), did not give him a more ardent support than they had done, when two sessions ago he brought for ward a proposition on the subject. The principle now in troduced 'would remove all local and personal interest. He thought it was better that the number of the Committee should be diminished to five. The prin ciple had been most satisfactorily introduced into the House of Lords. There was not a Member of the House of Lords who was not satisfied with the mode in which the principle had worked. The Parliamentary agents agreed that the system had worked well. In 1839 they said that this principle ought, to be applied to all private Bills. In Committees on private Bills with regard to rates, and a variety of other things, circum stances, not only of a local, but of a political cha racter were introduced. If he wanted the highest authority as to the utility of the principle, he need only appeal to the opinion of the Right Honourable Gentleman in the chair and Mr. Greene, the chairman of Committees, who, many years ago, proposed to diminish the number of Members on Committees, to increase their responsibili ties, and to remove all local and personal influence. The principle of the present proposal was sound, and would receive the approbation, not only of that House but of the country. He was convinced that the time was not far distant when the same principle would be extended to all private Bills. Colonel SIBTHORP said it was very well known to that House, and very well known to the country, that he had a great, an unchanged, and, he rather thought s an unchangeable suspicion, in reference to railways.—(Hear.) In his opinion, private pro perty ought to be treated with as much deli cacy as any public department of the Government. He was surprised that the late Vice-Pre sident of the Board of Trade a Liberal, forsooth—should wish to limit these inquiries to five permanent Members, selecting each other for the office which they undertook to perform. He did not mean to impugn the character of these five persons, but he thought it was hardly fair to submit great local interests to the control of so small a body. The Hon. and Gallant Member concluded by moving that the further consideration of the Report be post poned till this day week. Mr. WALLACE had always contended for the adoption of a different principle in the appointment of these Committees, and he was glad to find that his opinions were gaining ground in high quarters. He thought that no difficulty ought to be thrown in the_ I way of the formation of competing lines. It was the only why of mitigating the existing monopoly. He thought that the further considera t tion of these resolu tions ought to be postponed. In the infancy of railways he had endeavoured to prevent the establishment of these monopolies by permitting competing lines, but' Mr. Spring Rice, the then Chancellor of the Exche quer; had overborne him, and persuaded the House that it was in the power of the Minister of the Crown at any time to prevent the establishnient of monopoly by imposing taxes on the railways. The railway interest, had, however, proved too strong for the Ministry. He wished in every in stance in which capital sufficient could be subscribed to see a competing line of railway established. He could not see why railways should be defended against competition any more than turnpike-roads. He should vote for the amendment, and if the Hon. Member would not press it to a division, he (Mr. Wallace) would take the sense of the House on the subject. Sir JOHN HANMER said that considerable in terest had been excited among the proprietors of steam-packets in consequence of a report that it was the intention of several Railway Companies to devote their surplus capital to the establishment of steam packets in connexion with their several lines. He was aware that that subject was fitter for the con sideration of the Committee than of the House, but if such a course of proceeding were permitted, it would tend to aggravate the evil of the existing monopoly. Mr. ESTCOURT would support the resolution, because a similar resolution had been agreed to by the Committee of Selection, and as a Member of that Committee he felt bound to support it. At the same time he could not but admit that the adoption of that resolution was an abandonment of the principle upon which they had hitherto acted. Mr. JAMES STUART WORTLEY wished it to be understood, if they were to come to-a vote upon the resolutions at once, his vote would be given on the grounds laid down by tlie Right Hon. Gentle man (Mr. Gladstone) in the opening of his speech, and not on the grounds laid down by the Hon. Gen tleman, the Member for Newcastle. It was some what startling to him (Mr. J. S. Wortley) to hear that Hon.. Gentlemen maintain that all local influence and local action should be excluded from these Committees. It was impossible for any one who had watched for a few years past the progress of private Bills in that House, not to say that the influence of parties locally interested bad been materially diminished. Such a portion as now remained could hardly be looked upon as other than legitimate. In giving his vote in favour of the reso lutions it must be understood that he did so merely as an experiment. Lord SANDON said he totally differed from those Honourable Members who desired the exclu sion of all local influence and local mediation in the course of private Bills through that House. He was not prepared to give his support to any such proposi tion. They must consult the local interests of their constituents either in that House, or in the Committees to which private Bills were re ferred. If they were precluded from considering and attending to those interests in Committee, it was only in that House they could endetivour to do so, and this, he thought, ought, if possible, to be avoided. It would not be worthy of so large and important an assembly to do so—it was not the best place for it, nor the best way to effect that which they might feel it their duty to their constituents to attempt. It would be better that such business should' be done quietly in Committee, than scrambled for in that House. The question was, would they be able to find a suffi cient number of independent Members who, having no local interest or connexion with the Bill, would give sufficient attention and time to its consideration ? So long as they confined themselves to five or ten Committees, they might be successful, but what would they do if they had forty or fifty Committees ? He did not think that an experiment with five or ten Committees would be sufficient. For these reasons he would give rather a reluctant consent to the mo tion before the House. Mr. GREENE said, the great and practical ob jection to the old system was, that the interested parties were in reality the judges with respect to railway matters. Even the existence of suspicion would form a sufficient ground for appointing some other tribunal than that which was regarded as partial. After some years' experience of private Bills in that House, he still adhered most firmly to the opinion, which he had long entertained, that it was desirable to render these Committees as nearly judicial as pos sible ; and he believed that the present motion was a step towards securing that object. Dr. BOWRING was aware that, independent of anything like political interests, there was a deal of local influence actuating some of the decisions of those Committees. He could say that, from observa tion, those Committees had not been improved, so far either as local or the public interests were con cerned. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Lancashire, that by doing away with any imputation that could be attached to a member of the Committee, of being actuated by motives arising from local in terests, it would tend most materially to elevate the character of that Committee. The measure would tend to give the Committee a judicial character, and also to enforce the attendance of the Members and the more efficient discharge of their duties. Mr. STRUTT - Said, he believed the feeling of the House was, that, in many cases injustice had been done in consequence of the influence of local interests. Such was his opinion, because he had frequently observed that a particular question had been carried by a majority of the Committee, although all those who were quite unconnected with local interests dissented from the resolutions of the Committee. By the fact of those tribunals being known to be impartial, all appeals against their de cisions would be lessened. As a Member on the Committee of Selection he must say, in answer to the Hon. Members for Taunton and Oxford, that he found no difficulty in getting the attendance of Members. Although many Honourable Members had ob jected to this resolution, yet they had not themselves proposed any one in substitution of them. H e per fectly agreedin the principle of this resolution. Mr. DENISTOUN expressed his opinion that his constituents would be much better satisfied with a public Committee. After a few words from Mr. JAMES, The House divided, when there appeared— For the resolutions Against them Majority for the resolutions —l97 The resolutions were then read seriatim. In answer to a recommendation from Mr. LA BOUCHERE that the House should be put in pos session as quickly as possible of the names of the Hon. Members the Government proposed for the Committee, Mr. GLADSTONE said the list should be laid on the table of the House that evening, and he would propose it to-morrow.--(Hear, hear.) Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from Rochdale against the Gas Bill. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. Messengers from the Lords reported that their Lordships had agreed .to the amendments made by the Commons, in (we believe) the Racing Penalties Bill. POOR-LAW BILL. Mr. J. S. WORTLEY gave notice that in Com mittee on the Poor-law Amendment Bill, he should move, in the second clause, to substitute one year for the six months therein named. THE WIDOW OF COLONEL FAWCETT. Captain BERNAL gave notice that on bringing up the Report of the Army Estimates, he should move for a copy of the letter from the Secre tary-at-War to the widow of Colonel Fawcett, which conveyed the information, that a pension would not be accorded to her on account of the way in which her husband met his death. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN gave notice that he would to-morrow move for a return of the number of unions in England and Wales in which chaplains had been appointed up to the Ist of January last, and the number of inmates at that period. Mr. S. CRAWFORD gave notice That he would that evening, on the motion that the Speaker do leave the Chair, for the House to go into Committee of Supply, move a resolution to the effect that the large military force now kept up was dangeroui to civil liberty. Mr. WILLIAMS also gave notice of a motion to be made at the same period. The SPEAKER said that the notices given by the two Hon. Members were not those which were ordinarily given. They had the abstract right, before the House went into Committee, to make the motions of which they had given notice, but it was not according to the ordinary practice of the House. MILITARY PUNISHMENTS. Mr. HUME moved for an address, praying her Ma jesty to lay before the House abstracts of the number of men belonging to the Royal Marines who, since the Ist day of January, 1839, to the 31st day of December, 1843, have suffered corporal punishment or imprison ment; showing the nature of offences, in classes, for which such punishment has been awarded, and the number in each class; and showing the greatest number and the smallest number of lashes, also the longest and shortest period of confinement awarded as punishment to each person, and the average period of confinement for each class of offence. Of the number of soldiers belonging to the Royal Artillery in Great Britain and Ireland who, between the Ist day of January, 1839, and the 31st day of December, 1843, have suffered corporal punishment or imprisonment; showing the nature of the offences, in classes, for which such corporal punish. ment or imprisonment has been awarded, and the number in each class; and showing also the greatest and the smallest number of lashes, also the longestand shortest period of confinement awarded as punishment, and the average period for each class of offences ; returns of the number of soldiers belonging to regiments and depots in Great Britain and Ireland, who, since the Ist day of January, 1839, have suffered either corporal punish ment or imprisonment ; and, whenever either corporal punishment or imprisonment has been inflicted on the same person more than once, specifying how often it has been so_inflicted ; with abstract of the number of soldiers belonging to regiments in the colonies and pos. sessions of Great Britain, who, in each year since the Ist day of January, 1839, have suffered corporal pu nishments and imprisonments ; showing the nature of the offences, in classes, for which such corporal punish ment or imprisonment has been awarded, and the num bers in each class ; stating also the greatest number and the lowest number of lashes inflicted on any person in each year ; also, the longest and shortest period of con finement awarded as punishment, and the average period of confinement for each class in each year. Of the number of soldiers . who, since the Ist day of January, 1839, have suffered corporal punishment or imprisonment, and whether either corporal punishment or imprisonment has been inflicted on the same person more than once, specifying how often it has been so in flicted, and distinguishing numbers in regiments in the colonies and possessions of her Majesty from regiments in depots in Great Britain and Ireland. Of the number of corporal punishments inflicted in the. Royal Navy, in each of the years 1839 and 1840 (in continuation of Par liamentary paper, No. 242, of session 1841).—Agreed to. POOR-LAW BILL Mr. BAILEY COCHRANE begged to put a question to the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary for the Home Department. The Right HOR. Gentleman would recollect that when the Poor-law Bill went through its second reading, it was understood that an early day would be fixed for discussing its provisions. It was now stated that the discussion of the principle of the Bill was to be deferred till after Easter. He begged to ask whe ther that was the fact? Sir J. GRAHAM said the House would remember that the Factories Bill was introduced before the New Poor-law Bill in the present session, and that it was also introduced at an early p er i o d o f th e last session. The Factories Bill stood now for Friday. He would suggest to the House that. the order should be read for the purpose of discharging it, and fixing the Bill for Monday next. Until the House had gone into Committee on that Bill, he could not fix a day for going into Committee on the New Poor-law Bill. On the motion of Mr. FIELDEN leave of absence was given to General Johnstone until the 20th day of April, on account of ill-health. ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES. Mr. O'CONNELL begged to ask the Right Hon. Ba ronet (Sir Robert Peel), whether it was in the contem plation of the Government to bring in any Bill in the course of the present session to alter or amend the law with respect to Roman Catholic charities ? Sir ROBERT PEEL said he entertained a confident hope that, her Majesty's Government would be prepared in the course of the present session to bring in a Bill on that subject, carrying into effect the object stated by her Majesty's Government in the course of the recent debate. Mr. O'CONNELL inquired whether the Right Hon. Baronet had any objection to his bringing in a Bill with respect to Roman Catholic charities. All he desired was to bring in a Bill, in order that it might be printed and placed in the hands of Members. He did not wish the Government to give their sanction to it. Sir 11. PEEL said, that if the Hon. Gentleman gave notice of the Bill, her Majesty's Ministers would not feel it their duty to oppose it. Mr. O'CONNELL then gave notice, that on Monday next he would move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the laws relating to Roman Catholic charities in Ireland, and to the disposition of property left for the purposes of Roman Catholic worship. VALUATION OF PROPERTY (IRELAND). Sir DENHAM NORREYS wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to make any inquiry with respect to the present system of valuation in Ireland as applicable to the purposes of th9'new poor law in that country. . Sir JAMES GRAHAM said there was an under standing, last session, that if it should be the general wish of the Members for Ireland in that House, and of the Irish Peers in the other House of Parliament, to institute an inquiry into the operation of the poor-law in the present session, her Majesty's Government would accede to that wish. To this statement he adhered. Considering, however, the large number ,of Irish Mem bers who were now attending the assizes in Ireland, he thought the matter would undergo amore fair discussion if it were postponed until after Easter. With respect to the subject of valuation, to which the Hon. Baronet had referred, her Majesty's Ministers had been lately in communication with Mr. Griffiths, with a view to an alteration in the present system, and the adoption of an uniform system of tenement valuation throughout Ireland, PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES' (IRELAND). Sir ROBERT FERGUSON wished to put a question to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, respecting a subject of great interest in the north of Ireland ; he meant the question of Presbyterian mar• riages. The question had been brought under the ju dicial consideration of the House of Lords, in a case from the Courts of Ireland. The House might not, perhaps, be aware that a very considerable difference of opinion existed upon the matter among the judges, three of the law Lords having given an opinion as to the validity of these marriages, and three other law Lords having given an opinion that they were not valid marriages. The question which he put was, whether there was any objection to • laying those judgments on the table of the House, and whether the Government had made up their minds as to whether they would pro ceed by legislation upon the subject, or how they would proceed ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM said the judgments of the six law Lords had been printed for the use of the other House of Parliament, and if a communication were made to that House, there would be no difficulty in ob taining a copy of those judgments. With respect to the second question put by the Hon. Baronet the facts of the case were as he stated them. As yet no unanimous judgment had been pronounced, and considering that there was a variance of opinion amongst the six law Lords, he presumed that the effect would be that the Irish judges would be affirmed. In that case legislation on the subject would be indispensable. He had every reason to believe that the Committee of the other House of Parliament, to which the Hon. Baronet had adverted, would be re-appointed. Of course he could not tell how that Committee would proceed, but he had no doubt that the fullest consideration would be given to the facts of the case. COURT OF REQUESTS (BIRMINGHAM.) Mr. W. 0. STANLEY said it would be in the recol lection of the House that a trial had lately taken place in Birmingham, in which two prisoners, named James Smith and John Taylor, were charged before the Re corder with assaulting a police-constable of the name of William Butterfield, who had been called in to quell a disturbance which had taken place in the Court of Re quests' prison, in Birmingham, the two persons charged with the assault being at that time confined for debt. The question he wished to put to the Right Hon. Baro net the Home Secretary, was, whether his attention had been called to this trial ? and also whether his attention had been called to the state of the prison attached to the Court of Requests in Birmingham ? and whether he would consent to lay on the table of the House any cor respondence that had taken place between himself and the Recorder of Birmingham ? Sir J. GRAHAM said that immediately upon seeing the report of the trial in the newspapers, he sent down a prison inspector to investigate the case. That inves tigation had taken place, and a report had been made, and upon that report he (Sir James Graham) had been in correspondence with the Birmingham authorities. That correspondence was not yet completed, but on its completion he should have no objection to lay it on the table of the House. Having said so much he would just state that the Home Secretary's power was limited to sending down inspectors and to receiving reports. He had no ulterior power. Mr. W. O. STANLEY wished also to know if the Right Hon. Baronet had directed his attention to all similar prisons throughout the United Kingdom? Sir J. GRAHAM said a general inspection had taken place. PAUPER LUNATICS. Sir R. FERGUSON wished to put a question to the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, with reference to the management of criminal and pauper lunatics in Ireland. He wished to know whether any measure was about to be proposed on the subject. Lord ELIOT said, that in the course of the recess copies of the Report of the Committee appointed last session to consider this subject, had been sent to each district lunatic asylum in Ireland, with a request that the persons having charge of such asylums should give their opinions of the comparative merits of the different planalsuggested:by the Committee. These Reports were now in the hands of her Majesty's Government ; and he hoped, at no very distant period, to be able to in form the Hon. Baronet of the conclusion to which the Government had arrived. POOR-LAWS. On the motion for going into Committee of Supply, Mr. BORTHWICK rose and said that he bad heard with great disappointment the answer which had been given by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department to his Hon. Friend the Member for Bridport (Mr. Cochrane), as to the time at which it was proposed to go into Committee on the Poor-law Bill. When the Right Hon. Baronet moved the second reading of that Bill, he (Mr. Borthwick) did not oppose its pass ing through that stage sub szlentto, on the understanding that an opportunity . would be afforded of discus s i ng an d en tering fully into its details, and also of discu ss i ng it s principle. The Right Hon. Baronet now p ro p ose d t o go into Committee on the Factories Bill on Monday next. Now he (Mr. Borthwick) confessed that the time was now arrived when it would not be presumptuous or im pertinent in him to remind the Right Hon. Baronet of the interests which were affected by the Poor-law Act— he might say the most important interests in this great empire. He said that no time ought to be lost in re modelling the New Poor-law Bill, and he hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would not allow Easter to pass before the discussion of the new Bill took place, for he (Mr. Borth wick) knew, should that discussion be so delayed, that another session would pass over before the Bill would be fully considered. Sir J. GRAHAM could assure the Hon. Gentleman that he had as sincere a respect for the time of the House as the Hon. Gentleman himself, and, therefore, he would be as brief as possible. He could assure him that he by no means depreciated the importance of a discussion, involving, as it did, the interests of the most numerous and most important class in this country. He, therefore, cordially joined the Hon. Gentleman in hoping that that discussion would be entered into with the least possible delay. Still, there was another important matter waiting for discussion, and that was, the employment of children in factories. He appealed to the House whether, on a former occasion, the principle as well as the details of the Poor-law Amendment Bill had not been fully discussed in that House ? He thought that the most expedient course to pursue, therefore, would be to go through the Committee on the Factory Bill, and then to have it printed and circulated through out the manufacturing districts, and after that to go into Committee on the details of the Poor-law Bill. Mr. BORTHWICK wished to know if there would be two Committees on the Factories Bill ? Sir J. GRAHAU the Bill would go through Committee, and in Committee he would be ready to listen to any alterations that might be proposed. He should then propose that the Bill, with the alterations in Committee, should be reprinted, not for re-committal, but in order that it might be circulated throughout the manufacturing districts. After that was done, he should propose to take the discussion on the details of the Poor law Amendment Bill. , THE RIVER PLATE. • Mr. EWART wished to know if the Right Hon. Ba ronet at the head of her Majesty's Government would, on Thursday or Friday next, be prepared to answer a question as to whether he could hold out any hope of a conclusion to the unfortunate state of affairs which at present prevailed in Monte Video and the surrounding country, and whether any measures had been taken to secure British property therein ? Sir R. PEEL said he would give all the inforrugtion in his power whenever the Hon. Gentleman should think fit to put his question. SUPPLY. On the motion for going into Committee of Supply, Mr. WILLIAMS rose, and after apologising for the shortness of the notice he had given, said he had been greatly astonished on looking over the estimates, at the vast amount of force which it was proposed to maintain, as well as the enormous, sum of money pro posed to keep it up. He found that the number of men proposed this year was larger than in any year since 1815, at the time of the battle of Waterloo. Ile must con fess when be looked at the tranquil state of Great Britain at the present moment, that this fact did strike him with great astonishment. The number of men pro posed for the efficient service of the country was 129,667, to which were added 10,000 pensioners, for whom provision was made in the present statement ; artillery and engineers, 8,811; marines on shore, 6,000; the Irish police—he took the number as stated last year, and he understood that they had since been increased 9,000; making altogether an effective military force, capable of being called into action at any moment, of 163,458 men. This was in the twenty-eighth year of peace too, and at a time when her Majesty had announced from the throne that she was at peace with all nations of the world. Now some persons, who had not seen the Irish police force, would doubt that it was a military force. He had, however, seen it, and he would confidently say that he had never beheld a finer or a more efficient body of men. Before the Committee of the House of Lords on the Irish constabulary force, a letter was put in in evidence, written by Major Brown, its present military commissioner. He said, " They are one of the most noble corps that ever were seen, and I am satisfied they are equal to, and will do, anything. I wish I was out of Dublin at the head of them, for there is not a man amongst them that would not arrest the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury."—(Loud laughter.) This force, let it be remembered, the Lord Lieutenant had the power to increase when he liked, and to any extent he liked.—(A voice—" No, no.") Ile begged pardon—that power was vested in him by the 6th Wm. IV., ,cap. 12, sec. 13. That Act gave to the Lord Lieutenant the power to increase that force to any extent that he liked, to draw for the money to support that increase, and to enforce a summary application to the grand juries of Ireland for payment. So much for the efficient force of the country. Now for what was called the non-efficient. The number of yeomanry under this head was 14,263 ; of militia on &if-pay, 6,000 ; of general and other officers, 4,574; of private soldiers, 51,777 (deducting 10,000 for pensioners enrolled under the late Act); of retired ar tillery, 8,586; of marines, 6,000; of metropolitan police, 4,390; and of borough and county police, 7,000. Now all these men, inefficient as they were called, could be armed, He had himself seen policemen who were sent down into South Wales standing at the Court-house, armed with drawn swords, where heretofore the service was in variably done by the sheriff's officers, with their javelins. Now here, in this non-efficient branch of the public service, was to be found above 100,000 men, which, added to the efficient service, made a grand total of 266,000 men. Now he asked the House if that was an amount of force which could be justified in the present state of the country? • With the privation and suffering which still existed to so lamentable .a degree, and with the country as tranquil as possible, they could not justify such establishments. Eight millions sterling had been added by the income impost to the taxes of the country, and he could tell the Government that it was impossible, if they asked for such votes of men and money as they proposed to do—it would, he said, be impossible for the Government to keep faith with the people by the repeal of the income-tax at the end of the third year, as by their own promise they were bound to do.—(A laugh.) Now, was there any thing in the state of this country, or in the relations of this country with Foreign Powers, to justify the Government in de manding more men than were asked in the years 1822 and 1823 ? He would take the average of the last 24 years—from 1820 to 1843—and compare it with the number of men demanded for the present year. The average amount for each one of those years was in round numbers 108,000 men. Compare this with the present time, and there was an excess in round numbers of 33,000 men during the present year over every one of the last twenty-four years. When he saw such an increase, he felt bound to tell the Government it was their duty to show the grounds for, and prove the absolute necessity of, this vast augmentation. When he (Mr. Williams) first took up the estimates, he naturally expected to find a reduction in them; he was sadly deceived. The number of men voted last year was 129,400. He and others objected at the time to the vote ; and the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) stated the difficulty which at the moment was in reducing the large amount of force in China, and he further stated, that though he considered the amount he asked for absolutely necessary, at the same time he proposed to effect a reduction of 5,700 men, which would bring the strength of the army down in round numbers to 123,000 men. Now there was no pretence whatever for not acting up to what had been promised, for we were at peace with foreign Powers, and if there were a few more men in Ireland, there were so many the less in England, which was as tranquil as it well could be. Again too, there was no decrease in the cost of the army. Last year, the amount was 6,225,0001.—in the present year, it was 5,984,000/. ; the difference in the amount not being a reduction, but a carrying over to another de partment—the commissariat. And here he must do the Gallant Officer (Sir Henry Hardinge) an act of justice, in saying that the way in which the accounts were pre pared did him infinite credit; they were clear, simple, and intelligible, and he wished every other department of the Government would take an example from his.— (Loud cries of Hear, hear.) Now, in his opinion, these accounts ought to be referred to a Select Committee. If that were done, he doubted very much if the Govern ment would be able to make out a case for such demands upon the public purse. Look at the Foot Guards, con sisting of 5,253 men, at a cost to the country of 58,400/. more than what the same number of men in other regi ments required. He did not understand what was called the stock purse in these favoured regiments. 9,257/. was given to the Guards, but he did not find it given to any other corps; and there was a special table allowance and other gratuities, amounting altogether to 58,000/. He said not a word about the Life Guards out of respect to her Majesty —he merely alluded to them. But it was different with the Foot Guards, the partiality for which had a tendency to produce great dissatisfaction among the officers of the line. He greatly deprecated the system of giving colonelcies to generals, who never, perhaps, saw the regiments to which they were appointed, andi who, most improperly, as he thought, made considerable sums from the clothing of their regiments. He did not wish to see merit and services go without just and ample reward, but he wished to see it rewarded directly, as in the navy, and not by such unworthy means as that of clothing regiments. Again, why should the privates of the Guards get a penny a day more than the men of the line ? The men in the Guards ought, in his opinion, to be chosen from other regiments, for their services and good conduct, and they would then have a body of men that would be looked up to by the whole service, and would be a pride to the country. Reverting to the subject of the large sums made by colonels from the clothing of these regi ments, he asked the house to look at that noble corps. the artillery, which was clothed by the Government, and not by its colonel. See how superior was the cloth they wore, how much better their clothes fitted, how far more commanding was their appearance. He contended that there was no fair or regular rule in - the different corps of the army, either in pay, dress, or service. Why, for instance, should not regiments of the line, after en during the burning sun of India, and the bitter frosts of Canada, be entitled to take their comfortable service in London in their turn, and allow the guards to reap some of the honours they had left behind them ?—(A laugh.) Again, how was it that no one, unless closely connected with the aristocracy, or possessed of great influence in the House of Commons, was permitted to get a com mission in the Guards? The next point he wished to refer to was that lumber known as the yeomanry cavalry. He was satisfied, if he could only get a Committee of that House, the yeomanry cavalry would very quickly be abolished. Why, the fact was, that in any place where there was a yeomanry corps, they could not go into a single shop or house, where they would not see the landlord with a large pair of mustachios on his upper lip, serving his customers.—(Laughter.) He had witnessed such things himself at Harrowgate, in Yorkshire, and he believed it was general. This force had never been of any the, and could not be ; if any outbreak was to take place, could the thought be entertained, for one moment, of bringing them out to assist the civil force. He was happy that the Government had had the good sense not to make use of them.—(Hear, hear.) He had now stated various points with regard to these estimates, which he thought ought to be considered by a Committee, and he could point out a great number of their extravagancies, but he would not fatigue the House by doing so. It was true the people were in a better state, and there was not so much depression in trade, but he was afraid • that the present improved state of things was not of a lasting character. He called upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to be led away by the present cheapness of money, as it had not been produced by trade, but in a great measure by the pay ment of light gold into the Bank. The Government, in his opinion, ought to be careful not to make estimates upon the present prosperous state of the Bank, but they should look forward to times of trouble and difficulty, which would as surely come as the darkness followed the light. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite had pro mised them that they should not have the income-tax beyond next year. Sir R. PEEL—I never made any such promise. Mr. WILLIAMS said that the Right Hon. Baronet had held out to that House and to the country that the income-tax was only required for three years to bring into a healthy state the finances of the country. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving that these esti mates should be referred to a Select Committee of the House. If any objection was taken to this motion, he would not divide the House upon it, but content himself with having made the statement he had done. Sir 11. HARDINGE trusted that the Hon. Member would not consider any remarks which he might make B 6