The Sun. — London, England, 1844-03-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 29. Their Lordships sat to-day to hear appeals. The Peers present were Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell. BYRON V. COOPER. The arguments in this case were concluded to-clay, and their Lordships postponed their judgment. IRISH PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES. THE QUEEN V. HILLIS. THE QUEEN V. CARROLL. This case stood in the paper for final judgment to day at half-past four o'clock. It will be recollected that some time since their Lordships stated their opi nions on the matter seriatim ; three of them being in favour of the validity of the marriages, and three against it. At the hour appointed the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, Lord Campbell, and Lord Camoys, were in attendance. Shortly before five o'clock the Duke of Wellington entered, and after some con siderable consultation between the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, and Lord Cottenham, •Lord BROUGHAM moved that the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland, declaring the first marriage illegal, should be reversed ; whereupon the House divided, when there appeared, for the reversal, 2, against it, 2 ; the effect of which will be that the judg ment below will stand, by which it was declared that the first marriage was invalid. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool %la at Five o'Clock. IRISH PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, as the opinion of the House on the case of the Queen v. Millis and the Queen v. Carroll had been such as to affirm the opinion ..f the Court below, he should move for the re-appoint ment of the Committee on the Irish Presbyterian Mar • liege Law, with a viewto legislating upon it. Lord CAMPBELL fully agreed that legislation upon this subject was indispensable, for, according to the forms of the House, the judgment of the Court below had been affirmed. The judges had been equally divided in their judgment, and when this equality existed, it was consi dered as a decision in the negative • but the law re ssained by such judgment in an unsettled state. fiord COTTENHAIt could not agree in the opinion just expressed, because the judgment which had been given was, to all intents, a judgment of the House, and that judgment of course asserted and settled what the law was. He quite agreed in the propriety of having a Committee to consider an alteration of the law. The LORD CHANCELLOR said the decision which luid been come to was, in fact, an affirmance of the deci sion of the Court below. Lord BROUGHAM considered it was necessary to Ihave a Committee, with a view to legislative interference, trithoutdelay.. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. Messengers from the Commons brought up the Guild ford Branch Railway Bill, the Norwich and Brandon Railway Bill, and another private Bill. CRIMINAL LAW. _Lord BROUGHAM said, that at the time he held the great seal a Commission was appointed to inquire into the state of the criminal law of this country. A report had been published by that Commission, which report constituted a digest of the whole criminal law of this country. It did not extend to Scotland or Ireland, but St was a code of criminal law in England, excluding procedure. A code of criminal procedure was intended to follow. He had, therefore, drawn up a short Bill founded upon the report, and he now presented it to their lordships, and prayed them to give it a first reading, mid he hoped the Government would take the Bill into their consideration, and give it the support it deserved. Lord CAMPBELL said he felt some apprehension on account of the somewhat irregular mode in which his Noble and Learned Friend had introduced the Bill. He certainly thought, when his Noble Friend rose, that he intended to introduce the Bill on the part of the Government. He (Lord Campbell) was extremely glad that the Bill had been introduced ; and he would have been glad to have heard his Noble and Learned Friend say he introduced it on the part of the Government, for he knew that the Bill could never Le carried out unless it was zealously sup ported by the Government. It would appear, however, that the Government had not yet even seen the Bill. Tre hoped, however, that they would take it up, and that this country would no longer be the only nation in Europe without a criminal code. Lord BROUGHAM could not allow his Noble and Learned Friend to say that this was an irregular pro 'ceeding. His Noble and Learned Friend forgot that the report of the Commissioners on this subject was a public one, and had been published fifteen months, and had been in the possession of every Member of both Houses of Parliament. Lord CAMPBELL explained. POOR-RATES (IRELAND.) The Earl of CLARE presented a petition from Limerick complaining of the mode of assessment for the poor in that district. The Noble Earl presented also a petition from Limerick praying for a Bill to improve the sewerage and the arrangement of the streets in that city. The Noble Earl presented also a petition for a tax upon ,absentees. IRISH MAGISTRACY. The Marquis of NORMANBY wished to call the 'attention of their Lordships to a recent appointment to the magistracy in Ireland, to which his own Attention was not called until this day. He jested to the appointm en t o f M r . O'B r i en as a stipendiary magistrate, because only a few years ago he was a violent Repealer. True, he might have altered his opinions • and if this was done in a way to p rove It it had been done in sincerity, he certainly did not ce,* that office should be barred against a gentleman. Intention not to give any of the patronage of the Crown in the direction of those persons who were declared and known Repealers. And the fact was, that this gentle man's reason fur abandoning repeal was such as to dis entitle him to any credit for his conduct; for, from his extreme vehemence in the cause—from the lengths to which he went in support of it, the heads of the Repeal Tparty had refused any further co- o p era ti on w ith hi m . hi s was the cause of his secession from repeal. He had first abused all those who were against repeal, and then an those who, like himself, had been in favour of it, but, unlike himself, had been more discreet and decorous in ,their support of if. He should leave it to the Govern ment, now they were made acquainted with the character and conduct of this gentleman, to correct an appointment which they must feel was not a proper one. The return he had moved for lately did not include this objection able appointment, and he should therefore move that the return be completed to this day, with the date of the last appointment made by the government, of a stipendiary magistrate. .The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said if the Noble / 40k 1 who had just sat down thought that this matter would be allowed to rest in the manner which the tenor .of his speech indicated he was much mistaken. He (the Marquis of Clanricarde) intended himself to submit, safter notice, a direct motion to their Lordships, because lie thought there was nothing of more importance than 'to have the administration of justice beyond suspicion in Ireland. The passing over of so many gentlemen, who had been eonnected with this particular branch, and who bore the highest characters, and selecting Mr. O'Brien, cauld not but tend to bring into contempt the adminis tsa,tion of justice. He stated those facts merely to show th a t \ when Government professed ignorance of the sub ject that it was only a reiteration of their old defence, that they' never read the newspapers. Now all the Irish newspapers teemed with this matter—but, strange to tatty, the " Government paper" (if that word were allow able) had not taken the slightest notice of this appoint anent. Ile wished to say nothing disrespectful of Mr. 'O'Brien, but he trusted that the Government would find some other situation for him besides one which would ;tend to injure the respect in which the administration of justice should be held. The Duke of WELLINGTON thought that the allu vs ion about reading the newspapers was unfounded 'and baseless. He had never heard that Mr. O'Brien had *been named in any prominent manner before. It would :le much better, he thought, if notice had been given of tthis motion by the Noble Lord opposite. Lord BROUGHAM thought the best mode of putting adown repeal was by promoting those who were the most Solent in support of it. In the year 1834, a Right Hon. G'entliman, who was then a Repealer, and who was one oft , he tellers on a motion for repeal, was, instead of being • persecuted for his opinions by the Government, promo,ted to the office of Vice-President of the Board of Trade, .and they had heard no word about repeal from liim a i /Ls o. When that appointment was made they heard no' ,objection to it from anybody on account of the Right Hos/. Gentleman's opinions. Now, no doubt the 4 Governme nt had dealt in the same manner with Mr. I'Erien. ..Ye had been appointed, doubtless, after giving sip his untamable opinions, and he (Lord. Brougham) L a i no doubt that many others would give up their tqaa , lly unalterable opinions, if they had an equally • reon for doing so. God knew tat any thing strongas • to the dispensation of justice was a h serious mat ter , an t relatin k anything relating to the management of the trade of -,the realm was a serious matter ; but, still, if the Goveri, 'meat tho z ught that persons were qualified for th ose offices, they were right in appointing them. The Marcri.....is of CLANRICARDE said, if Noble ords opposite e ,auld show that Mr. O'Brien was a fit erson to be app.:a:wed, he should be contented to have kiis motion negativ, The Margins of - .N 7 ORMANBY thought that the best -anode of putting down repeal was by means of promo- Rion, though the Govern h ient entirely forgot it when they 'superseded local magistrates, on account of their repeal aoptnions.—(Cheers.) The _Noble Lord said that, when :Mr. Sheil was appointed to th'e office of Vice-President sof the Board of Trade, no one* complained of the ap )aointtnent. Why, did the Nobl,,.Lord forget the out cries ,that were made respecting its,, at what were called ConseiTative gatherings, which took place about that 'time ?--(itlear, hear.) He (the Ma rquis of N orman b y) Could not conceive that any opposition'. would be made to the motion, which he did not think w, to either unusual br irregular.-6 Hear, and a laugh.) Lord WHARNCLIFFE did not so muCil object to the ' , lotion itself as to til , e irregular and uncou sous manner in which it was brought forward. The Earl of RIPON did not complain or the Noble Alarqinis making the wotion, but he did c( of the speech, which was very violent.—(Hear, I tear , a nd tries of " No, no.") The gem`leman who was spec tking was not alwtsys the best judge o' his own violence.- • --(Hear , hear, and' a laugh.) The speech of the Noble larquis v,as a bitter attack upon the t iovernment andm)on the Noble Lord who was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. It - vas quite impossible that a GI wernment could vindicate itself upo n such questions without notice. He. did not t.bject to the motion, but to tb.e want of notice. After es desultory ,lonversation, the motion was geed to. STATE OAF IRELAND. The... Marquis of CLANiVICARDE rose, y nrsuant to /loticit, -to present a petition respecting the sta to of Ire land. 'This petition was signed by many Peei is, and by lii tna j or Zty of the represontativeg of Ireland in phe other House of Parliament. He should move that the peti tion should be read at length ; and he trusted that the moderate and sensible prayer with which it included, would receive the most serious attention of that House and of the Government. None of the promised mea sures of the Government were yet before their Lord ships'; and, therefore, it *ould be folly to attempt to form opinions upon what they would be ; but, he sin cerely trusted they would be characterised by a spirit of conciliation that would be acceptable not only to Ireland but to the whole United Kingdom, The petition was then read at length, and was ordered to lie upon the table. IRELAND---THE JURY SYSTEM. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, he rose ac cording to notice to move for the production of any in structions that might have been given to any of the Crown solicitors in Ireland as to the mode of impanelling juries in Ireland. He was satisfied, having received yesterday a notification from the Noble Lord opposite (Wharncliffe) that there would be no objection to the production of these returns, that it would be unjustifi able in him to make more than a very few observations to their Lordships in reference to this subject. He should, therefore, merely say what he considered requisite to justify him in occupying the attention of their Lordships. He need not say in that House that every thing connected with the administra tion of , justice, but most of all with that great feature of it which affected the constitution of juries, was one cal culated to excite the most anxious attention of the coun try. When a prisoner, or a culprit, heard the first forms of the court by which he was to be tried—and which were so important in their nature—when he was asked, how he would be tried? and responded, by his God and his country, he considered he had thrown his liberty, perhaps his life, into the hands ofpersons with the same feelings, sympathies, and habits as himself. Now, what, for a long time, had been the practice in Ireland? They had too often been in the habit of using the powers and forms which were placed in the hands of the Crown for a very different object, to the purpose of ex cluding a great majority of their countrymen from taking their share in that branch of the administra tion of justice which it was their right to do. The system adopted in these prosecutions had been de nounced by Chief Baron Joy, and some of the most eminent men connected with the legal profession. From equally high authority he could assert, that in all cases when Roman Catholics had acted as jurors they had discharged their duties with impartiality and fidelity. Sir Michael O'Loghlin gave instructions that no dis tinction should be made in the appointment of juries ; and he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) rejoiced that such instructions had been issued, because he thought that the powers of the Crown ought not to be exercised to reject persons because of their religious opi nions. He was deeply impressed with the value of trial by jury, and of its being essential to the fair ad ministration of the law, and of supporting that confi dence between man and man which was necessary to a good state of society. He would again say that he be lieved it was not the intention of the Government to bring the law into contempt, but he thought it was quite as well to give to them an opportunity of expressly dis claiming any participation in a course which was likely to produce such a result. In submitting this motion to the House, he was not actuated by any feeling s with respect to a particular trial ; but in the hope that some responsible member of the Governmentwould give an as surance that no sanction would be given to such a course, and that those who adopted it did so without their consent. The Noble Marquis concluded by moving for copies of instructions given to the Irish Law Officers of the Crown relative to challenging juries. Lord WHARNCLIFFE, who spoke in so low a tone as to be scarcely audible in the gallery, read a circular addressed by the Attorney-General for Ireland, which was to the following effect:—" The Attorney-General presents his compliments to the Crown Solicitor, and, having read the instructions given by Mr. Brady, when Attorney-General, with respect to setting aside jurors, requests the Crown Solicitor to continue to act upon those instructions." He (Lord Wharncliffe) thought this was a sufficient proof that the Government had not acted on any new principle with respect to striking off jurors. With respect to the motion of the Noble Mar quis, there was no objection to produce the instructions, or portions of them, relating to the particular subject to which he had referred. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE expressed himsi satisfied with the offer of the Noble Lord. Lord BROUGHAM thought his Noble Friend (the Marquis of Lansdowne) had acted very fairly in the manner in which he had brought forward his motion. Lord CAMPBELL expressed a hope that the prin ciple which was applied to the striking off jurors in Ireland, with respect to Crown cases, would also be ap plied to special jury cases. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said the Government officers ould always endeavour to do so. The motion was then agreed to. GWALIOR. The Marquis of NORMANBY wished to ask his No ble Friend, the President of the Board of Control, when it was likely any further papers relative to Gwalior would be produced. The Earl of RIPON said he would endeavour to lay the papers alluded to by the Noble Marquis on the table of the House Wore Easter. The Marquis of NORMANBY said he would abstain from making any motion on the subject until the papers were on the table. - INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT. On the motion of the Earl of DALHOUSIE the In ternational Copyright Bill was read a second time. Several other Bills were advanced a stage. Their Lordships then adjourned. ROUSE OF COMMONS, March 29. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock. The Guilford Junction Railway Bill, and the Norwich and Brandon Railway Bill, were read a third time and passed. Mr. THORNELY presented a petition from Liverpool against the Liverpool Docks Bill. The Wells (Norfolk) Harbour and Quay Bill, and the Wells (Norfolk) improvement Bill were read a se cond time. ATMOSPHERIC RAILWAYS GRAVESEND RAILWAY. Mr. SHAW rose to call the attention of the House to a petition which he had presented a few nights ago from certain parties who had projected a railway, to be con structed upon the atmospheric principle. He called the attention of the House to this subject upon public grounds, in order that the atmospheric principle might be fairly applied to railways in this country. It had al ready been tried in Dublin on a short railroad, but the engineers who had been sent over to observe the work ing of the principle, amongst whom was Mr. Brunel, were of opinion that the Dublin and Dalkey Railway was too short to enable them fully to judge of the merits of the principle and they therefore recommended that the principle should be tried on some railway . in this country, and upon that recommendation a project had been started for constructing a railway to Gravesend upon the at mospheric principle. The parties had presented a peti tion to the House, praying to be allowed to bring in a Bill ; but their petition prayed for a Bill to construct a common railway. They afterwards, however, presented another petition, praying to be allowed to 'con struct a railway on the new principle. This peti tion, however, was presented too late to be re ceived by the Standing Orders' Committee, and there fore the Company were prevented from bringing in their Bill. Now, what he wished was, that these par • ties should be allowed to present a petition to the Stand ing Orders' Committee, to grant them permission to bring in their Bill this session, as it was highly im portant to the public that the new principle should be fully tested. He was anxious to bring the question be fore the House, because twelve months' delay might be of serious consequence to the projectors of the Gravesend Railway. The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by mov ing that the petitioners for the Gravesend, Rochester, and Chatham Railway Bill have leave to proceed with the Bill, and that the Standing Orders be suspended for that purpose. Mr. STRUTT said, that as Chairman of the Standing Orders' Committee, it might, perhaps, be expected that he should give some explanation of the reasons why he should oppose the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman. He would not throw any difficulties in the way of the railway, but the non-compliance with the Standing Orders, which the Right Honourable Gentleman said were mere matters of form, were, in his opinion, very important. In few cases were they so important—and ho believed they were over twenty in number. There were two sections on the line, one for the atmospheric system, the other for the ordinary mode, and one or either of these plans must be adopted. But though the Bill enabled them to adopt either, they gave no notice at all with regard to one. It was necessary that parties whose property was to be cut through should get notice, in order that they might be able to defend their interest. The Committee were of opinion that the question was of that kind in which they should follow the rules upon which they ordinarily decided. There were two schemes before them, and they would have neglected the duty which they owed to the House if they had showed any favour to one part of the scheme in preference to the other. They were decidedly of opinion that this was a case in which it would be impossible for them to allow the proceedings to go on. The House would also bear in mind that the Gravesend line was a competing one, and that there was another competing line before them at the same time. They would, there fore, be guilty of great negligence if they dealt with one line in a manner different from that in which they dealt with the other.—(Hear, hear.) The question, therefore, was not merely whether they would allow one particular scheme to be carried out in opposition to the Standing Orders, but whether they should allow to one com peting line what they did not allow to another. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that it was a most im portant invention—indeed it was of national importance, and that it was necessary that it should be tried during the present year, as there was no other mode of making the trial except through this Bill. Those were material allegations, and he thought they should receive some better proof of them than that of their being merely alleged in a petition. The Right Hon. Gentleman wished the subject referred to:the Standing Orders' Com mittee. In his (Mr. Strutt's) opinion that was not the tribunal before which such a question could or ought to be received. He would, therefore, suggest to him that it ought not to be referred to the Standing Orders' Committee. If the House chose to appoint a Select Committee to in quire into the merits of this atmospheric railway, and if the Committee were of opinion that the national ad vantages to be derived from it were so important, and that the urgency of the case was so great, that the in terests of the competing railways ought to be disregarded, it would not be for him to oppose it ; but all he would suggest, then, was, that the Standing Orders' Committee could not act upon principles different from that on which they usually acted. If it were referred back to them, he did not see how they could come to a different decision from that to which they had already come. lie must, therefore, give his most decided opposition to the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman. Mr. SHAW said it was not his intention to divide the House upon the motion, but if the House approved of it, he would move, in pursuance of the suggestion of the Hon. Gentleman, that the subject be referred back to the Standing Orders' Committee. He begged to say he did not intend that the Committee should decide on ap plying the atmospheric principle, but upon trying it. Mr. STRUTT said he made no suggestion about re ferring the matter back to the Standing Orders' Com mittee. On the contrary, he said that if it were referred back to the Standing Orders' Committee, be did not see how they could come to any other decision than that which they had already arrived at. Mr. GLADSTONE must warn the House against permitting parties to invalidate the Standing Orders of the House merely on the ground of scientific experi ments or improvements. He wished every encourage ment to be given to inventions and improvements, but they ought to be careful in putting aside any of those rules and regulations by which their proceedings were governed. He was by no means adverse to the propo sition of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Shaw) to in • quire whether the experiments made at the particular place alluded to were successful ; but the House must recollect that there would be no want of applications to them if they showed themselves too easily disposed to constitute a tribunal for the consideration of scientific experiments. Mr. HUME said it was only yesterday he had met with one of the most scientific men of the day, who bad gone to Dublin with a decided feeling of disapprobation of the atmospheric system, and had returned highly de lighted with it. In this gentleman's opinion the experi ment now in progress near Dublin would lead to one of the greatest improvements of the day. He hoped the House would grant a Select Committee, in order to give to the country the best information that could be gained on so important a subject from the opinions of men com petent, by their scientific attainments and practical ex perience, to arrive at sound conclusions upon the subject. Lord HOWICK said he understood the Right Hon. Gentleman to wish for the appointment of a Select Com mittee, to ascertain whether or not it was possible to try the atmospheric principle on a larger scale during the present year. He entirely concurred with the Hon. Member for Dundee as to the desirableness of that ob ject. This was not one of those ordinary projects to which the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, had referred. It was a scheme which bad been tried to a certain extent, and which, in the opinion of the most scientific men, had, so far, been eminently successful; but before a judgment could be formed, it was absolutely indispensable that the experi ment should be tried on a more extended scale. With regard to the question immediately before the House; he quite admitted that the objection, founded on the Standing Orders, was altogether insuperable ; but he hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would endeavour to provide facilities for trying this plan. Mr. GLADSTONE said that, of all persons, he should be the last to offer any obstruction to the fair trial of the experiment. The Inspector-General of Railways had paid the greatest attention to the subject.—(Hear,) Sir R. INGLIS begged to remind the House that they were not trying to benefit the atmospheric plan by con sidering whether a certain Bill should or should not be brought before the House in compliance with the Stand ing Orders, the Committee of which was composed of Members on both sides of the House. He thought the experiment ought not to be made at the expense of parties who were bringing forward the Bill. Mr. ESTCOURT said it was a matter of considerable importance, not only that this experiment should be tested, but that it should be tested at as early an oppor tunity as possible, inasmuch as the construction of many railways might depend in a great measure on the results of that experiment. Mr. SHAW said that he did not want to re verse the order of the Standing Orders' Committee ; but he thought it might be left open to the applicants for the Bill to petition for a new Bill, and to lay before the House the grounds on which th e y res t e d th e i r proposi tion. Such an arrangement would not bind the Standing Orders' Committee. The motion was then withdrawn without further dis cussion. BRANDES BURTON INCLOSURE. The Brandes Burton Inclosure Bill was read a third time... MIDDLE LEVEL DRAINAGE BILL. The Middle Level Drainage Bill was read a second time. THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 30, 1844. SWANSEA HARBOUR BILL. The Swansea Harbour Bill was read a second time. SOUTHAMPTON MARSH IMPROVEMENT BILL. Mr. G. W. HOPE presented a petition in favour of the Southampton Marsh Improvement Bill. Lord PALMERSTON presented a petition against the Bill. Mr. G. W. HOPE, in moving the second reading of the Bill, said that he was not aware that it was to be opposed. The Bill was for the inclosure of a marsh near the town of Southampton, and the profits to be derived from the inclosure were to be appropriated to the improvement of public walks in the neighbourhood of the town. The only objection that he had heard to it was that it interfered with a cricket-ground. Now the supporters of the Bill had given up the intention of in terfering with the cricket-ground, and therefore he could not understand what ground there could be for opposition to the present Bill, which did not interfere with any waste land used for the purpose of recreation. Lord PALMERSTON said that the parties who op posed the Bill were apprehensive lest the ground should be built upon, and the inhabitants be thus deprived of the advantages which a salubrious place of exercise now afforded them. Sir R. INGLIS said that the Bill proposed to take away from the recreation and health of a great portion of the inhabitants of Southampton between forty and fifty acres, and they ought to obtain an assurance that their place of exercise should not be interfered with. Mr. HUME wished the Bill to be referred to a Com mittee. Sir J. EASTHOPE presented two petitions against the Bill. The Bill was read a second time without opposition. PUBLIC ACCOUNTS. Dr. BOWRING postponed his motion on the public accounts till after Easter. NOTICES OF MOTION-AMERICAN RICE. Mr. HUME gave notice that, on Monday next, he should move for copies of, or extracts from the correspon dence between the Government and the American Am bassador, relative to the admission of rice, the produce of the United States of America, into this country at the same rate of duty as rice from the East Indies. PROCESS SERVING (IRELAND). Ths HoN. MgMBER also gave notice that he should move for a return of the items, showing how 2551., set down as the expense of serving processes in Ireland, was_ expended. Mr. 'l'. DUNCOMBE gave notice, that on the motion for going into Committee on the Masters and Servants' Bill, he would move that the Bill be committed that day six months. SMOKE. Mr. PROTHEROE said that, seeing the Hon. Mem ber for Lymington in his place, he wished to ask him whether it was his intention to bring in a Bill to remedy the evil of smoke?—(Laughter.) He hoped that the in quiries of the Committee would not end in smoke— (Great laughter)—as great interest was felt on the sub ject in the manufacturing districts.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. MACKINNON said he had received several appli cations on the subject to which the Hon. Gentleman referred. It was impossible for him to state what course he should pursue, until he knew what were the inten tions either of the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, or the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests. The recom mendation of the Committee, that the Government should bring in a Bill in the first instance ; and that, in case they declined to do so, he (Mr. Mackinnon) should bring in a Bill, as Chairman of the Committee. He thought the best course he could adopt was to give notice of his intention to put a question to the Govern ment on Monday next. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he was fully aware of the importance of the subject, and if his Hon. Friend would introduce a Bill in accordance with the views of the Committee, that Bill should have his best support. DROPPED NOTICES. Lord PALMERSTON gave notice that he should bring on his motion in reference to the Right of Search, after Easter. FISHERIES. Captain PECHELL called the attention of the Go vernment to the state of the fisheries, in consequence of the regulations adopted by the Convention between England and France. It appeared that two French fishing boats had been fined for not having the requisite numbers and letters on the bows of their boats. He wished to know whether arrangements had been made for the purpose of informing the fishermen of France in what manner they were to regulate their conduct in ap proaching the English coast. Sir R. PEEL said that he had informed the Hon. Gentleman some time ago that he believed it was the intention of the French Government to submit a project of law on the subject to which he had referred to the Chamber of Deputies. He would make inquiries in the two cases to which the Hon. and Gallant Member had referred.—The subject then dropped. EXPIRING LAWS. On the motion of Sir G. CLERK the following Mem bers were appointed on the Expiring Laws' Commit tee :—Sir George Clerk, the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, Sir Thomas Fremantle, the Attorney-General, Mr. Pigot, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Sheil, Lord Eliot, Mr. Baring, Mr. Wilson Patten, Sir George Grey, Mr. Charles Wood, Mr. Greene, Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Home Drummond. ATMOSPHERIC RAILWAYS. Mr. SHAW gave notice of his intention, on Monday next, to move for a Select Committee, to inquire into the important principl e of atmospheric railways. _ ADJOURN MENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion of Sir R. PEEL, it was agreed that the House at its rising do adjourn till Monday next. FACTORIES BILL. Sir J. GRAHAM said, that before moving the Order of the Day for proceeding with the Factories Bill, in order to withdraw it, perhaps the House would allow him to present a petition of great importance, from sixty-two firms in Manchester, employing upwards of 30,000 labourers, who were assessed to the poor to the amount of 44,000/. a-year, and embracing, as he had been credibly informed, nine-tenths of the capital employed in the cotton manufactories of that town. The prayer of that petition was, in his opinion, well entitled to the consideration of the House. They stated that they had heard with excessive alarm that an attempt had been made to reduce to ten hours the employment of persons in factories. They stated that that would reduce their profits one-seventh— that it would reduce the capital which was em ployed to the same amount—that it would have the effect of reducing wages, and also the exporta tion of manufactures abroad. It also stated that the ultimate reduction of wages from it would be from 15 to 25 per cent. upon the average—that it would deprive the labouring people of the enjoyments they at present possessed, and would tend to excite generally a spirit of discontent. The petitioners, therefore, earnestly prayed the House not to sanction such a proposition. Lord HOWICK presented a petition from the Short Time Committee, praying the House not to allow the Bill to be withdrawn. Mr. BULLER presented a petition to the same effect. Mr. TATTON EGERTON presented a petition from Hyde, in Cheshire, against the limitation of the time of labour to ten hours. Mr. ESTCOURT presented three petitions from Trowbridge, in the county of Wilts. The first was signed by 54 operatives in the employment of Mr. Samuel Brown. The petitioners stated that they had heard with alarm of the intention of the House to restrict the hours of labour in factories to ten. That reduction - would inflict serious injury upon them, inasmuch as it would necessarily lead to a reduc tion of wages ; and they prayed the House not to restrict further the hours of labour. He had also another peti tion to the same effect, from the operatives in the em ploy of Mr. Allen ; and another, with a similar prayer, from the operatives in the employment of Mr. Appleby. An Hort. MEMBER presented four petitions from the operatives of Trowbridge, with a similar prayer. Lord ASHLEY presented petitions from Preston, Wigan, and Warrington, in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. Mr. HINDLEY presented a petition which had been agreed to at a public meeting at Ashton, in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. Mr. FIE LDEN presented a petition in favour of a Ten Hours' BilL THE NAVAL FORCE IN IRELAND—POOR RATES. Sir G. CPCKBURN, seeing the Iron. and Gallant Member for Brighton in his place, would take that op portunity, before the Orders of the Day should be read, of alluding to a question which the Hon. and Gallant Member had put to him the other evening. The Hon. and Gallant Gentleman had asked him if he was aware that the naval force had been employed in assisting. in the collection of poor-rates in Ireland. To that he had replied, that there was a naval force stationed on the west coast of Ireland, and that perhaps they might have lent the assistance of their moral influence to the aid of the civil power. The fact was that two steamers had been stationed on the west coast of Ireland, in aid of the civil force, the consequence of which was, that the presence of the mili tary was rendered unneccessary, and the effusion of blood, probably, prevented. Captain PECHELL said that on the Navy estimates he had pointed out that one, if not two, war steamers, was employed in the collection of poor-rates in Ireland. The Right Honourable Gentleman opposite (Sir George Cockburn) denied the statement, and said he was not aware of any such circumstance. He (Captain Pechell) subsequently produced his authority for his statement, and the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the Home Department made au, apology for the Right Honourable and Gallant Officer, and he (Captain Pechell) was satisfied with that apology, but since that the Right Honourable and Gallant Officer came down to the House and revived the subject, and acknoWledged, in fact, that the poor-rates had been collected under the guns of a war-steamer. The difference between him (Captain Pechell) and the Right Hon. Gentleman was, that the latter said he had no cognizance of the fact of the steamers being so employed, and he added that the officers of those vessels had received no instructions from the Admiralty to collect the poor-rates, but merely to aid the civil power, whereas he (Captain Pechell) inferred that those"ships of war were kept on that coast, in order that the police and officers of Government might the better insure the collection of the poor-rates. One of the steamers was, in fact, converted into a sort of Somerset House.—(Cheers and laughter.) The col lectors went on board and claimed assistance of the offi cers, and one person went on board to pay his rates. Mr. FRENCH stated, on the authority of Dr. Kir wan, the Vicar-teneral of the diocese of Galway, that, notwithstanding the employment of naval men in the collection of the rdte, there was still a large amount un collected ; and if ten steamers were employed instead of one a great portion of the rate would remain uncollected. FACTORIES BILL. On the motion of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, that the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the Factories Bill, for the purpose of its being discharged, be read, Mr. .B. COCHRANE said that he would venture to tell the Noble Lord (Ashley) that he should never have a g itated the country upon this question, if he had n o t calculated beforehand, not merely every probable, but also every possible combination of circumstances which must arise respecting it—(Laughter from the Opposition)— unless the Noble Lord was prepared to overstep all the obstacles which the Government might throw in his way. It was under this impression that he voted with the Noble Lord. He therefore expected, after the ener getic manner in which the Noble Lord expressed him self the other evening—he thought he would be pre pared to carry out those views to the full extent. He would say that he considered the conduct of her Ma jesty's Government had displayed infinitely more ap parent earnestness than that of the Noble Lord. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State was de feated on the twelve hours' clause on Monday ; on Friday he brought the question before the House again. It was an unusual course; but no doubt the Right Hon. Gentleman thought himself justified in adopting it. He was again defeated on the twelve hours' clause, and succeeded only by a very small majority in de feating the ten hours' clause. He then asked for f ur th er delay in order to decide what should be done. The Right Hon. Baronet said he would enter into no com promise whatever, and then proposed to withdraw the Bill. Now what he wanted to know from the Noble Lord was this, why he did not carry out his principal object by opposing the withdrawal? What was the Bill the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to introduce—was it not the very same as the present Bill with the twelve hour clause left out ? Why that clause was already struck out by the Committee. Everybody in that House and many out of it knew that the object of the Right Hon% Baronet was to gain time, for after Easter there would be no probability of carrying the ten hour clause.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord might tell him that it was an unusual course to object to the withdrawal of the Bill. Had he not himself told the Right Hon. Baronet that he had adopted a most unusual course? He thought this question was one in which if any man put his hand to the plough he ought not ever to look back again. —(Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Government had declared this question was a party question. Would they not equally declare it a party question after Easter as they did now? To those who knew what the House of Commons was, the consenting to the withdrawal was " keeping the word of promise to the ear, and breaking it to the hope." The fourteen or fifteen days that would elapse would give Government an opportunity for agitating the ques tion. He had understood , that it was the intention of _ the Noble Viscount to go into certain districts, and there agitate the subject. Now this he would say, with re spect to agitation. He had supported the Noble Lord on this question; he had taken the deepest interest in it; but he objected to all agitation out of doors, whether with respect to the corn-laws, or repeal, or factories. He thought questions of such vital importance to the country should be discussed calmly, dispassionately, and solemnly in that House.—(Hear.) Even though the measure were a good one, if it could only be carried by exciting all those who had an interest in it out of doors, that was, prima facie, an objection to it.—(Hear, hear.) There was one point in the Noble Lord's speech the other night, to which he could not help alluding. He was never more astonished than when the Noble Lord said that, in his opinion, the ten hours' clause would reduce wages. If he (Mr. Cochrane) believed that the Bill would reduce wages, he would have no thing to do with it.—(Hear, hear, and cheers from both sides of the House.) Hon. Gentlemen must allow him to have his own opinion in reference to the effect of this enactment. He had supported the ten hours' clause, and he would continue to support it ; but he had his own reasons for the course which he pursued.—(Hear, hear.) He conceived that in most cases the clause could not reduce wages much. Most of the manufacturing towns had arrived at the minimum of wages.—(Expres sions of dissent.) He thought the manufacturers would be amply compensated for the reduction of time. He was not one who would stand up and abuse manu facturers or any other class of persons, as though they had not the same feelings and sympathies as other men ; and he believed they would fin d themselves compensated for the two hours labour at night, by the additional nerve and energy'Which Ihe work-people would bring to their morning's work. He believed that the effect would be that the employed would have a fair day's wages for a fair day's work. But even if the Bill should ulti mately be found to reduce wages, his opinion was that the Noble Lord should in that case follow the example of Mr. Whitbread, in 1795, and bring in a Bill to regu late wages.—(lronical cries of " Hear, hear.") He was not afaid that this discussion would not have the result which he bad desired. He was afraid that the time of the House had been lost.—(Laughter . and ironical cheer. ing.) He would ask any unprejudiced person to look at the state of the case. The Noble Lord had appealed to the House the other night in terms most unusual. He appealed to the House—to his supporters—not to give way an inch —not to give the ground they had taken ; and yet, on Friday night, when he had kept Members in town for the purpose of voting with him, then he told them that, after Easter, he would decide upon the course he would pursue.—(A laugh.) He un derstood that to be so, and if he was wrong he was sorry for making the statement.—(Hear.) He was afraid the country had been agitated, and the time of the House had been frittered away, for no purpose. He believed this had occurred not from want of sincerity on the part of the Noble Lord, but from a want of the exercise of that firmness which was necessary in all the relations of life.—(Rear.) Mr. T. Buncombe and Lord Ashley rose together, when the latter gave way. Mr. BUNCOMBE then proceeded to address the House. He thought it was better to do so before the Noble Lord, as he would probably have to make some answer to the amendment he was about to propose, and also to the statements that had been made by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite. If Ministers had made a House yesterday, it was his intention *to have given notice of the amendment he was now about to propose. He par ticipated in.the surprise of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, and also in his expressions of regret at the course the Noble Lord had thought it right to pursue. He (Mr. Buncombe) had fought with the Noble Lord in the ranks which he had commanded, up to the present moment, and it certainly was extremely to be regretted moment of victory, he should have adopted he had pursued.—(Hear, hear.) The amendment that,the verywhichcourse he was about to propose would take from. those who had voted with him the charge of being inconsistent. He thought it would be better that he should now read the amendment he intended to propose. It was as follo w s : That after the words, " for the purpose of being discharged," to add the words ;—‘, With a view, not only of carrying into effect in any future Bill, the recorded decisions of this House, that the labour to be performed by young persons and females in factories should be less than twelve hours per day; but also with the view of maintaining good faith with those whose confidence in the integrity of the votes of this House is indispensable to its character and its existence as a deliberative and representative assembly." Three times had the House told the work ing classes and the public, by these separate divisions that twelve hours labour in the factories was too much for females and young persons—(Hear, hear)—and the Government told the House and the country that they would withdraw the Bill, and introduce another which should still continue twelve hours as the time for labour, and they told them that the better course would be to take that Bill, because if they did not they would get nothing at all. On Friday the Noble Lord had made a solemn appeal to the House, and had asked them to uphold their former decision, and now they were about to permit the Government to withdraw the Bill without giving any pledge as to the na ture of their future measures.—(Hear, hear.) They owed it to the dignity of the House—they owed it to themselves—they owed it to the people—to put on record some such sentiment as that contained in the re solution which he proposed.—{Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State had stated that there were three courses which it was open to the Government to pursue ; but it had not suggested itself to the Rigbt Hon. Baronet and his colleagues that there was a fourth course which they might pursue, and that was, instead of withdrawing the Bill, to withdraw themselves.— (Cheers and laughter.) He believed that under existing circumstances, nothing would give greater satisfaction to the country than the adoption of such a course. The Right Hon. Baronet said, .that the Cabinet had delibe rated on the course which they should adopt, and that course was, to reverse the solemn decision of the House which had been three times recorded. The Government told them frankly and openly that in any fresh Bill which they might introduce they would not have anything short of twelve hours, and this House calling itself a Reform Parliament and an elective assembly, was about to permit them to withdraw the Bill without placing on record their solemn opinion, and without pledging themselves as to the course which they would for the future pursue. The Right Hon. Baronet put him in mind of the captain of a merchantman who freighted a ship to the West Indies, loaded with grind stones and cheeses. There was a great demand for the cheeses, and none whatever for the grind-stones ; find ing this to be the case the captain said, " If you take a cheese you shall also take a grind-stone—l will not part with one without the other."—(Cheers and laughter.) And there sat the Right Hon. Gentleman with his factories amendments in the one hand, and his twelve hours grind-stone in the other—(Laughter)— saying you shall 'IA have the one without the other; and he believed the result would be what it had been in the case of the captain, that the Right Hon. Gentleman would have his whole freight left on hand.—(Cheers and laughter.) He hoped the House would not allow any Bill to pass which would continue the twelve hours clause. Motives had been attributed to those who sup ported a ten hours' clause, which ought not to have been attributed to them. The Right Hon. Gentleman said, the other evening, that their social system was so altered that it required an alteration in their legislation. Nothing could be more true. They had arrived at a new social system, particularly in the manufacturg districts. Let them look to the distress bothlith fie agricultural and manufacturing districts. Let them look to the state of crime in tfiose districts. The popu lation had increased, in ten years, twelve or thirteen per cent., and the returns made with regard to the state of crime showed that the criminal commitments had increased from fifteen to eighteen per cent. Mr. Justice Cresswell, in the charge which he made last summer assizes, in Yorkshire, and Lancashire, stated that crime had in creased twofold in the last seven years; and Sir A. Henneker declared that the state of crime in Suffolk was such, that they ought to use their endea vours to remove the discontents and grievances under which the agriculturists laboured. Well, then, he would ask, had not a state of things taken place which re quired the vigilance of the House ? Political economists who argued the question of the repeal of the corn-laws, said that, if they were removed, all difficulties in the way of the present subject would vanish. He (Mr. D.) believed, that if the corn-laws were repealed to-mor row, it would be more than ever necessary to restrict the hours of labour in the manufacturing districts. He regretted the course which gentlemen connected with the Anti-Corn-law League had taken upon the subject.' If they had come forward in a different manner, he thought they would be in a better position to ask the landed gentlemen to agree to a repeal of the corn laws. Sacrifices should be made by those who were better able to bear them than the working classes. If they allowed the present Bill to be withdrawn, they would stultify themselves, and be the laughing-stock and ridicule of the country. He would not be dragged in the mire with the Noble Lord, or any other person. He would entreat of the House, in the words of the Noble Lord, to uphold the decision to which they had come. It had been said that it was for the convenience of Goverment they should not oppose the rescinding of the Standing Order. He (Mr. Duncombe) offered no opposition to the re scinding of that order. He only put on record his rea sons, at all events, and those of the gentlemen who might do him the honour of voting with him, for not allowing the present Bill to be withdrawn; and also the views which he thought ought to be entertained in that House of the introduction of any new Bill for the better regulation of labour in factories. Sir C. NAPIER seconded the amendment. Lord ASHLEY said, that not having had the advan tage of hearing the first part of the speech of the Hon. Member for Bridport (Mr. B. Cochrane), it was impos sible for him to reply to any imputations which the Hon. Gentleman might have thrown out against him. He should, therefore, be content to let those imputations rest as they were, merely observing, that in many instances the Hon. Gentleman had applied to the Noble Member for Sunderland (Lord Howick) much that ought to have been said against him (Lord Ashley), and that he ought to have directed against the Noble Member for Sun• derland much that he had applied to himself (Lord A.) With respect to one point, he wished to say a word. The Hon. Gentleman had, at some length, argued on the monstrous absurdity of his (Lord Ashley) pressing for a Ten Hours' Bill, when he admitted it would lead to a reduction of wages. What he (Lord Ashley) had said was, that, for the sake of argument, he would sup pose that the measure would lead to a reduction of wages ; and that if it did so, the party whose interests he represented were perfectly ready to meet the reduction; and that they would state the means by which they would be able to render the reduction not hilarious to them. He would explain this course he had taken in a few words. He had begun by doing that which the Hon. Member for Bridport had not done. He early took advice from those who were capable of giving it When the Right Hon. Gentleman had proposed the course of withdrawing the present Bill ; be (Lord Ashley) was taken by surprise as was te House also, and the House certainly required some time to be granted before coming to a decision as to the course to be pursued. During that interval he had consulted ftiany gentlemen who had voted with him—not gen tlemen on one side of the House who might be supposed to have a sympathy with Ministers, but a great many on the other side, who gave him the advice they thought best on the question, totally irrespective of any consequences but those which must arise to the general benefit of the question. By the vote of the House ox the second clause, the principle of ten hours had been affirmed, but by the vote on the Sth clause, it was de clared that there should be no such thing ; the Bill had thus become a mass of inextricable confusion, and it was quite impossible that it could go forward ; and the Go vernment suggested, as the only means of relieving the question from these difficulties, to withdraw the Bill before the House, with a promise (for this was a very important matter) that another Bill be substituted in its place.—(Hear, hear.) His own impression was, that this motion ought to be acceded to ; but that impression was confirmed by the advice of gentlemen of the greatest experience. If he had persisted in saying to the Go vernment, "You shall not withdraw this Bill, I will try a debate on that subject," what would be the effect of such a course ? It had always been his policy, during eleven years, to avoid as much as possible taking debates and divisions upon mere technicalities, upon mere points of order. He never had consented to take a debate or division except upon a great issue, and he was happy to say that that cause had been crowned with prosperity. Questions of that sort, so conducted, led to no satisfactory result. And even if he had succeeded, he would not have been in a better posi tion then than now. But to succeed was impossible. Instead of succeeding, he would have been left in so small a minority, that he would venture to say, that the majority of the Government, instead of being 7 or 10, would have been 70 or 80, or perhaps nearly 100.— (Hear, hear.) And in what position would the ques tion be then in ? Would it not be taken by the country and by the great body whose opinions he (Lord Ashley) repre sented ; would not the operative classes, who felt so strongly on this measure, consider such a majority as a decisive expression of the opinion of that House against the great principle which they had so long cherished ? (Hear, hear.) That was the reason why he (Lord Ashley) formed that opinion ; but when he found his views confirmed by those of gentlemen of the greatest experience—not only on that (the Ministerial) side of the House, who might be supposed to have a sympathy with the Government—but also from Hon. Members op posite, who had none, he could no longer hesitate to adopt the course he had adopted, and which the interests of this very question required. And let it not be said, because insinuations had been thrown out that he had some personal feeling in these matters, and that he had considered other interests than those of which he spoke. —(No, no.) Such had been stated, per vulgus spargere voces ambiguas. He would fearlessly maintain the position he had maintained irrespective of any Govern ment which existed or might exist. The Hon. Gentleman said he (Lord Ashley) had compelled the House to meet on Friday, and then announced his intention of aban doning the Bill. Why, if the Hon. Gentleman had been in the House on Wednesday, he would not have said that the House was taken by surprise.—(Hear.) Again, the Hon. Gentleman said he had asked for time to make up his mind ; he had done no such thing ; he had stated what course he intended to pursue as to this Bill, but of course he could not say what course he would take oa a Bill that was not yet introduced. (Hear, hear.) If he could see the Right Hon. Baronet's Bill on Monday morning, he should have no objection to come down to the House and state the course he in tended to pursue with regard to it immediately after the sitting of the House.—(Hear, hear.) He did not know that he had any other point to refer to, as he did not wish to detain the House on matters that were personal to himself. But he must say that he did not think the advice of the Hon. Gentleman to discuss this question with calmness was very applicable to himself.— (Hear, hear.) This he might say, that in all the discussions on this question, he had mainlained his tranquillity up to this time, and he could‘saure the House that that tranquillity was not only external but internal. He had never felt angry or exasperated with any one gentleman opposed to him, and indeed if he had he must have been one of the most unreasonable and ungrateful Members who ever sat in that House, for he was sure that no Hon. Member had ever received from all sides of the House, and from every Member in it, such constant and unmerited kindness and courtesy. But they would allow him to say that he did implore the House to stand by its recorded decision on this question. He declared that no earthly consideration whatever should turn him from the course he had endea voured to pursue, and in pursuing it he cared not what personal consequences might fall on his own head. Mr. B. COCHRANE said the circumstance of the Noble Lord not having been in the House while he ad dressed it, might excuse him for having misrepresented what he (Mr. Cochrane) had said. He totally denied that he had insinuated that there was any understanding between the Noble Lord and the Government. He de , clared his belief that the Noble Lord was perfectly sin cere, and he begged the Noble Lord now to withdraw that expression "insinuated." He would not have in sinuated such a thing, even had he believed it. But he certainly did believe that the Noble Lord had cpminitted a great error in judgment. Lord ASHLEY could assure the Hon. Gentleman that he would withdraw any expression of which he complained. He explained that he did not impute to the Hon. Gentleman the having charged him with com ing to an understanding with the Government, but, as he was reported to him, to have said that he (Lord Ashley) did not press on the measure from a sort of sympathy for the Government. Lord HOWICK said he had, on a former evening, expressed a very strong objection to the withdrawal of this Bill. He wished now to state why he concurred in the course which the Noble Lord was now about to take. His Noble Friend had, two or three evenings ago, informed him, that he had ascertained that if he resisted the discharge of the order he would be in a small minority. He thought that, under these circum stances, it was necessary that the Noble Lord should defer to the wishes of his supporters.—(Hear, hear.) Still, be must say, that, in his judgment, the course taken by her Majesty's Government was anything but respectful to the House. What was it which they asked the House to do ? They asked them to disckarge the order for proceeding with the present Bill, stat ing that they would afterwards bring in a new Bill. This Bill, though it would have a new title, would be the same in substance as the old one. Like that Bill, it wolild introduce the system of relays with regard to children, and the regulations with regard to education. Like that Bill, it would impose restrictions upon the labour of grown-up women and children; and, unlike what the House determined, it would provide that the period of labour for young ehildren and grown-up women should be twelve hours. The effect of the course which her Majesty's Government had taken would be that without any division, with the tacit consent of the House, they would reverse the former division, and this by an indirect and altogether unusual proceeding. The Government virtually defeated the decision of the House, and would place them once more in the situation in which they were before they began this discussion, or began to divide. Now that was a most strange course to pursue. If the Government thought they could in duce the House to reconsider their decision, their proper course would have been to have moved the recommittal of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) But, in order to gain some advantage, and in order to do exactly what they had succeeded in doing, they threw confusion into the ranks of those who were in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill. Her Majesty's Government, by these means, had brought ' them into the same situation they were in before the de bate began. He thought that this was a most extraor dinary course ; and he could not but express his regret that the Noble Lord seemed to have deserted those who went along with him in resisting the withdrawal of the Bill. Supposing that in Committee his friend should carry his proposal—why, her Majesty's Government might repeat the manoeuvre they had just performed. Now, as to the inconsistency of the two divisions that had taken place, he thought that of no importance whatever, because if the House had only made up its mind what amendment it was prepared to support, an end Would be put at once to that incon sistency. He thought from the course that had been pursued in the House that a compromise was intended— that the House, having stated that it would not adopt a Twelve Hours' Bill, or a Ten Hours' Bill—that the medium between the two would have been taken, and an Eleven Hours' Bill passed. Now, he should have thought that the Government would have adopted a wise course if they had brought in such a Bill. He firmly believed that if a Bill reducing the hours of labour to eleven had been passed it would have met with cordial support. In his opinion, a reduction of wages would be the con sequence of a diminution of the time of labour ; but lie thought it would be less than the Right Hon. Gentleman supposed, and he (Lord Howick) thought it would be quite consistent to support the clause under that belief. This was in itself an evil, no doubt ; but the question here was a choice of two evils—one was a reduction of wages, the other that the continuance of l a b our f or t we l ve hours broke down the strength of those who were sub jected to it.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") That was his (Lord Howick's opinion ; he was no judge on the subject, and he only derived his opinion from the inspectors of factories, on whose reports the Government acted, and who quoted the authority of medical officers, that a perseverance at labour for twelve hours was too much for women or children. These were the two evils, and he confessed that he would rather see a reduction of wageo than a con tinuance of labour for twelve hours.—(Hear, hear.) He thought it his duty to waive his own individual opi nion in deference to the opinion of his Noble Friend and of those who acted with him—of course, therefore, it was impossible for him to vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He would wait till the new Bill was brought in, to discuss the principle upon which he thought the clause of his Noble Friend was necessary. Sir R. INGLIS said that the fault committed by his Noble Friend, if any, was a fault of omission. He had not stated, he thought, with sufficient distinctness what line he intended to pursue with regard to the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, but he had every belief that his Noble Friend intended to give his motion a decided negative. He wished they were all able to follow the example of his Noble Friend, for he had never introduced into discussion anything like excite ment.—(Hear, hear.) He regretted he could not say so of others.—(Hear, hear.) This was not a party ques tion, but it was of a character which excited leelings higher than one of party would.—(Hear, hear.) He trusted that the example set them by his Noble Friend would be followed by them all. He regretted that such an apple of discord was thrown amongst them as the proposition of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, which, though it was not inconsistent with the course he pursued, yet it was inconsistent with the understand ing upon which his Noble Friend addressed the House a few evenings ago. With regard to what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Bridport, he did not under stand that Hon. Member to insinuate anything against his Noble Friend, but merely that he had not carried his principles forward with such sternness as the Govern ment had carried them. Mr. ACLAND said he was one of those who, feeling the great responsibility which attached not only to those in office but to every indivi,slual Member of Parliament, upon this subject, had made up his mind to vote with the Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire, and he did so from the general feeling that this question was not to be dealt with exclusively upon humane or commercial grounds, but upon the ground that it should be considered in both points of view. —(Hear, hear.) He was inclined to adopt this course, in consequence of speeches from his side of the House, in which he thought there was too rigid an application of the principles of political economy. He did not understand the senti ments of contempt which had been cast upon those who adopted a middle course, and were in favour of eleven hours.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that after what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Leeds, who said that it was the universal practice of a large body of manu facturers to work for eleven hours, such a modification might be adopted. With regard to the position of the Government, he confessed that he was not prepared to place some person in the Home-office, who would execute as well as carry a Ten Hours' Bill.—(Hear, hoar.) He knew that taking this course would subject him to per, sonal insinuations, but he was prepared to submit to them, because he knew they would be undeserved. The Noble Lord the Member for Lancashire had very clearly shown that this was not a question of principle, but one of detail. He thought that if the hours of labour were to be curtailed, it ought to be done with the good will of the Government, and that if carried it ought to be by those who had to work the measure. He had expressed his honest opinion with regard to the course he had in tended to pursue. He did not suppose that the Govern ment would turn round and say they were prepared to carry a Ten Hours' Bill.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") The Noble Lord did not intend that his clause should come into operation till two years and a half. By that time he hoped that the question of protection to labour would be cleared of some of its difficulties. Lord J. RUSSELL said that before alluding to the speech of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, he would make a few remarks upon the position in which the House was placed by the course which the Government pursued on this question. He thought that in consequence of it, coupled with the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, the authority of the House of Commons would receive a blow.—(Hear, hear.) No doubt the course pursued by the Government was the most convenient for i them, but the authority of the House must suffer by it.—(Hear.) He certainly under stood from the Noble Lord, the Member for Dorset shire, that he came to some understanding with the Government that the discussion as to twelve hours or ten hours should be taken on the Bth clause, instead of the second.—(Hear, hear.) The House de cided by two separate decisions on the subject after two nights' debate, separated by Saturday and Sunday, so that there was an opportunity for a full attendance of Members who chose to be present in favour of the Noble Lord's proposition.(Hear, hear.) There were two decisions on the eighth clause ; by the first the House negatived the proposition of twelve hours, and by the second they negatived the proposition of ten hours. There were three decisions—two against twelve hours and one against ten hours. It became necessary therefore either that the former decision of the House should be reversed, or that it should be avowed, or that the middle course of eleven hours should be adopted. But the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed to withdraw the Bill, which would frustrate the three decisions to which the House had come, and substitute for it another Bill, which should continue the twelve hours for those persons who, by two decisions of the House, were to be subjected to no more than ten. It was impossible that this could be done without shaking the opinion of the country gene rally as to the authority of the Houso.—(Hear, hear.) Why, then, did not the N o bl e L or d oppose that course ? Upon grounds which appeared to him (Lord J. Russell) to be quite sufficient ; which, while they met the mischief and injury which would ~'?~i ------------ et be done to the authority of the House, were the hetch suited to the °Teat interests which he had so ranch heart.-(Hear hear.) He agreed with his Noble . ted to near him, that if the Government were not permitted withdraw the Bill which they themselves introuor_. they would say they were not treated with that c 0,47, to which the executive government was entitled.--400 hear.) The question would be then changed. r: tig of arguing the question as a legislative one-as liner 00 the hours of labour-it would be changed into a 4°` be of confidence in the Government. Therefore the concurred with his Noble Friend as t° oriel course he adopted, and considering the z ni i i i i t he against him on the question he thoug,,,, eo ) could not have acted otherwise than he had ia He differed with the Hon. Member for Finsburkse thinking that the Noble Lord had disappointe d we re whose case he advocated. As far as their interests ,he concerned, he thought the Noble Lord had tak!n . 'id most wise and prudent course.-(Hear, hear.) ni l ?, b e not attempt to influence his Noble Friend, and lA, came to the opposite course and opposed the withdraw...l of the Bill, he should give his vote. He now 7 e b to a very different question, which was themode in w m a t the Noble Lord proposed to deal with the Bill w.• t was to be brought in. The Government had alreayE. rid of the whole of the decisions of the House by c s ()az which, though it might be convenient in itself, w as t i t least fair that could be adopted.-(Hear, hear.) . der would therefore remain for the Noble Lord to eons i o• in what way he wished to have the issue tried. He 0 sure the Noble Lord would do it in such a W 7b e make it a proper question of legislation, and the' vs .. would bring it before the House as a House of P er _ of ment-because, let them recollect, after the doct rine the Right Honourable Gentleman when in ° PP: t i so sition, and which it seemed he now A fol oi low o f in Government most consistently-that -...... Parliament were not passed by the Queen's Mo st of cellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent , Le the confidential servants of her Majesty, but by l is P . advice and consent of the House of Commons, in re r 0 .. ment assembled.-(Hear, hear.) What we have to r ° . „a sider with respect to the Bills brought forward, 7 e ^ i , which may be hereafter enacted, is, whether we h ' ese take upon ourselves the responsibility of passing„ t o e provisions into a law-whether these will, or will i ,; ( beneficially affect the great body of the people oft7: t country.-(Hear, hear.) Hon. Gentlemen have no Ilig_`. l . to escape from the responsibility which attaches to M e e . : as Members of Parliament, merely by saying, it is a v er y great hardship that persons of thirteen or fourteen Ye ars of of age should be obliged to labour twelve hours $ .:4, and yet, at the same time, consider themselves as %i e . - , to agree with a Government which puts forward $ u' 44 d rent opinion. He did not think the Government vt_. any right to make this a question upon which th ei r fluence must be ascertained, a n d u p o n which Mei n , the of Parliament should shut their ey es to the merits 01 4 question, forget the responsibility of their position, t b say they had such confidence in th e present Execut e and such dislike to a change, th a t they must witted that support from th e Bill w hi c h they wool otherwise conscientiously have given.-(Hear, he7 ,w o , He (Lord John Russell) must d ec l are th u s his °pin t a because he saw that this question of responsibili t Y.., Members of Parliament was und ergo i ng great ohn'ai in the manner in which it was put forward. Il e 03 understood in the first instance th a t th e Governmen't o . was their peculiar duty, and as would be most con tb• nient to the public, would consider the subject wit • best attention, and, having done so, frame a Nl' • te careful manner; then bring it bef ore th e House thGt g i o provisions might be fully considered as by a leestbe body they should be; and that th ese p rov i s ions tuig'" affirmed or negatived, as the ca s e mig ht be. - But it fr o peered from the statements of the Hon. Gentleman ; i s spoke last, that hereafter, wh en a difficult questio n des , to be considered, and that th e G overnment were '7 O . posed to say, "We think this so detrimental to o ust views, so injurious to our i n fl uence , t h at our po wer in se be exerted, and we must call upon our support e _ ll ,lo vote with us, regardless of th e mer it s o f t h e cine: l , - e ir itself," hon. Members were not to be prompted in ;0 votes by any statements th a t m i g ht b e ma d e inthere be of the debate, but as they wished the Government t o t e maintained, and no change to t a k e p l ace , t h e y floe e for a twelve hours' clause instead of ten.-(Hear.) belt feared such was the noti on th a t preva il e d on the be11 . ,., c opposite-a notion which, he feared would be of mental to the character and use f u l ness o f that Pa °- it and even to the Constit u ti on it se lf. H e did no t thine r was for the advantage o f th e country t h at t h e Gov 1 s .. ment should consider it se lf b oun d to carry ( well, sure and every provision which it presented to r a • e ment.-(Hear, hear.) H e h a d h ear d t h at doerl • stated by some, and especially by th e Ri g h t Hon. G a e , i t, tleman, the Secretary of St a t e f or th e H ome DePart°2;es, and by the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colons. when sitting on these b enc h es . Th ey were then ee ... ° ' • posed to require mo re th an per h aps cou ld be Pr t , tically effected. If that H ouse was a b out t o coin° "ibe decisive vote, and s h ow it s want o f con fid e nce in Ministry as an executi ve , th en it might be consi der :. as a question of party su pp or t ; b ut with respec 4 w questions affecting the whole body of the people, OD l e a legislative questi ons , h e h ope d t h at t h at H ou sf. s w° maintain its legislative authority, and not rote in ere as puppets, at the will of the Ministers.-celear, by"' i Having stated these opinions, he would not say $,14 0 as to the merits of the Bill itself ; and, as his i1e . ,,,i" Friend had come to what he (Lord J. Russell) CO7; 1 ; dered a wise decision in the course he had taken ;,, that evening, he trusted he wou ld steadfastly perseve re in the same course.-(Cheers.) A oSt' Sir ROBERT PEEL .aid l ie qu i te admitte d the / 0 , distinction which the Noble Lord had drawn het w i „, ee r e the functions and resp ons ibiliti es o f individual Men 1.,.."" of the House of Co mmons an d t h e f unct i ons an d resY7, t, sibilities of members o f th e E xecut i ve G ov ernmen t ' The Noble Lord said that the members of the Go"`"1,,;. ment were immediately res p ons ibl e to t h e S o vereign,'" e the advice which they might give-that they stood ' u m different position to th e S overe i gn w i t h M em b e rs of t he House of Comm ons , an d th at i t was i ncum b en t on t b, House of Commons w e ll t o we i g h t h e mer it s of e_t r question, and to consider whether or not it would eT:a practical benefit on th e country. T he N o ble" L ° "" admitted that the me m b ers o f th e Government, altu°' they stood in a certain relation towards th e t vereign, and had certain peculiar duties. t il t he did not seem t o consider sufficiently , ge , the members of the Government had the _Ti f privileges as o th er H on . M em b ers, and were bow , " the same obligations, an d th a t i t was necessary t for th ; 3o, 0Y in their capacity o f l eg i s l ators, to see whether or no " o f would be responsible for the practical consequon e l o .. of certain acts.-(H ear .) If t h e M em b ers of the ur° ., ,1 1e ir ment doubted the poli c y o f certa i n measures i t wag ' t he duty and their privilege to consider such measures ing r capacity of M em b ers o f P ar li ament, and to give %thad; advice to Parliament, and to take their course in ~,;Ar individual cap ac ity. Th e N o bl e L ord said, and heu -. admitted, that in man y measures the sense of the lature ought to pr eva il ; th at if no great principle use involved-that if no very d angerous consequen ces In I , be apprehended, the Government ought not to call l e e Parliament to supp or t th em , nor sta k e t h e i r e xists upon carrying such a measure. But they ought to e a certain deference to the will of the majority. was Noble Lord was not always of this opinion (and .. .„h e i,.). not disposed to speak in a tone of personal aslo'''' e d The Noble Lord, he said, had not alw a y s been Pl e . to act upon thos e principles, as, for inst a nce, in the . - siastical Courts' Bill. Ot her Lord J. RUSSELL-Th e ma j or i ty was on the side in that question. T,ord'f Sir ROBERT PEEL b egge d t h e N o ble - - y o s, pardon. The measure would not have succeeded• li i i he did not mean to taunt the Noble Lord with iors former policy. He (Sir R. Peel) was certainly nil,_ i t s s eor that the Government had on this occasion adopte" - t , unseemly means, or held o u t an y th reat or i n dugetrA: n i They certainly had a strong feeling on the inattr..r, :, 0 they felt it their duty to persevere. They calked , A ti rj o the House for its deliberate consideratior , , 'nor alle at i., apprehend that they were acting otherwise than o ° °- i a tutionally, even where there was a small majority,thot bringing the matter again under , discussion, e° ens;- Hon. Members might have an opportunity of recedo-stio dering the subject. Was the Noble Lord prepar At say that the decision of the House was always e ° „ P i e ll sive ? If that was the case what was the use s', it those stages through which a Bill must pass b e ' °- ith was finally disposed of ? It was nothing inconsisteirtioo, constitutional usage in Parliamentary practice t 6 0 0. the sense of the House again on the same q ue „ r s s er Now, why had the Government pursued this e?T v of Was the House perfectly convinced o f the ProP r 'ea of the change? Were Hon. Memb ers on th e other a id t he the House quite agree d as to the proposition 01 for Noble Lord? Did not t h e N o b le Lord the Member his: Sunderland say he had great difficulty in makingg thee mind on the subject? Did not th e Noble 14 ths t to Member for the City of London himself sait ot trio had the greatest doubts on the matter? Dia li tion etlf prominent Members of the late Government, Re n 410 09- of the greatest experience --the Right Hon. uen"prerai the Chancellor of the Excheuer and the Vic e " - ii dent of the Board of Trade, express opii; t _ i f la r ' or i c! eci trary to those which were sou ht to lie s' g t ° into law, and declared themselves unfavoura ble ro ve placing a n y restra i nts upon labour as l ik e ly to Proiel injurio us t o t h e working classes, and to the conun r e dt a t interests of th e country ? Did not the Noble Lo oi one time, expr ess o pi nions regar di ng th os e very Pr: ed ? pies very diff eren t f rom w h at h e f ormer ly xe prese_ his Not that he m ean t to taunt t h e N o ble Lord W e it change of opinion on this matter ; for he was eti n . r e o r ; was owing to the result of conscientious ohena,, o opinion, and to new lights having been thrown in. "'n' t , the subject. But the Noble Lord should not iniplY '74 censure on the Members of the present Government the opinions they entertained. But, it was said, and in should not the Government admit a compromise, iu :„ was urged that a compromise was often very desira ble, rts; order to prevent this union ; but he (Sir Robe e rr i S. must say that the policy of such a Prof ern' altogether depended upon circumstances. The Gov.% tmheanttitapwporuoladchneodt be e hi w s isseubojrepctrowpeirthtoaplflerome ancyonftufirctriiheerr limitations upon labour--they believed that restraints would be injurious to commerce, to Ina,n u ffi: tures, and to the working classes themselves. 4 ',",!,,. for ta ti ° f e n m h a a l e d s been factories already eighteen. It was enacted, that they should not of Chi b p e l t a w ce e r e l n up t o h n e t a h g e es ho o u f r t s h o ir f tee n tee n e tev longer than twelve hours. Now, in consequence t restraint on young females-adult females became more i generally employed ; and the Government thoug ht to necessary to apply the same principles Y rs] e r, l Y adult females which the Legislature had sanctioned in females who were not adults. Heo(Si_r , s ' t ; Peel) was adverse to interfere with labour-it had De` p - r o ( d n u e c a t r i : e he o a f r d .) isad T v h it e nt n a the principle of Interference with labour in an y sea goeu,seamndighhte dependfeared wupoounldit,betso. i w n a t e s k l e a r n e g n e c r e o us. was E r a x t p h e e r r i e to n c e be h a a v d o s i d h e o d w t n h a t l n i em s a t n h e a ti t o s n u e 4 , It was a dangerous precedent. But it was sai d that it the 3overnment had acceded to a limitation of eleven rihours, they would have had a majority, and might have ,~..,~: ,e - ssentis I t i e l r o feetly of tlght it k the H k it this billy.maand bz to I be hi 1,7 Course, ZWhich he lord Pair 0 1 11ber for eons in fa b linions vel 're beneE Zer that o b o ught, aft 1,7 4111 .,. e, that Q _. , te cowl fternrnen 17 17:1 41 ° Itt p i p o o n s: t °ou r of g °l : t e l. that fi for wu Pinsbu light it lueficial r ,The lune '"ig the on t