The Sun. — London, England, 1845-06-25 00:00:00

IMPERIAL Pee se i,1 4 .-1 ..e; Se.e.T. HOUSE OF LOR OS, .Line 24. Their Lonishipe- assembled shortly after Five o'clock this wining. Lord CHARLEVILLE informed the House, that in con 'equence of Lord Gardne.'s rieglectipg to attend his Cerny:A tte. the consideration of the Geaseew Bridge project had been P )4l- eoned. , The Duke of RICHMOYD observed that many of their eordsteps were not aware of the great ineonvenience arieing th to public interest and private e nterpris e t r ,. m su;! 1 ) ni. 47 - 'eet of d ut y as the N iele Lord (tiarileoe) had ay:need. Re was oLrry to pe rc e ive t h e d isinc li nat i on on t h e part of his •Noele Friend to a tt en d th e d uty i mpose d upon h im an should move that a substitute be appointed to sue ' li t iY the pla ce o f th e a b. entee M em b er, and that Lord Garduer .0 ordered t o appear i n hi s p l ace i n that House on Ihui s -0 next, to explain the reasons of his rion-attendance. ;7 5, therefore, Melt the liberty of proposing t o th e i r L or d s h ips .'eet the Select Committee be requested to recommeed another 'welividnal in his place that the parties may not be put to a tseless loss of time and expence, and that Lord Gardner be rMuested to state in hisplace on Thursday next his reasons for toLord Bt attendin ßO g the Committee. .. UGHAAI considered that L or d G ar d ner mus t have laboured under some misapprehension and did not intend 4 eY disrespect to their Lordships. It was a mistake to sup- Pose that the attendance of Nobles Lords in that House was eoluntary, as every Peer was bound to attend, arid the r ee edenfscornpelling attendance were numerous, and a fine of e WI• had in some cases been imposed. In one case a Peer was "'led because he did not attend when requested, and he was ve. -emitted to the Tower fwerefnsing to pay it. Lord CAMPBELL had lately searched the journals of 'the House' in which he f oun d i nnumera bl e i ns t ances a r the House compelling the attendance of Peers I P* only for the serv i ce o f t h e H ouse b ut on ` - orarnittees. It also appeared that all Peers were compelled ee t "lt only to attend in their places when the role was called, but e e eY were not allowed to leave the House until it adjourned.— ' eL aughter.) In the time of Charles I. they were not allowed 'to leave the House until the debate was finished. He rejoiced • that the motion had been made. The Duke of WELLINGTON h a d not t h e sma ll est d ou b t that their Lordships had the power of enforcing the attend (ee of Noble Lords, and that the ler( hie Lord had not att ended th e C omm i ttee t hi s morning frernimere inadvertence. • e tho ug h t i t totally unnecessary to adopt any measures in t onsequ ence . . The Marquis of CLANRICA FIDE thenght they should no 17: 1 3 1 Consider the subject b e f ore t h e H ouse, b ut w i t h respect to es e great quantity of ra il wa y b us i ness b efore it.. Thee who ere in th e h a bi t o f attendieg the Comniii lees had a great. anti w ee responsibility thrown upon ihem-e( Hear, hear).----as th ee e - .1 were entrusted with great and important interests in con eteelion with the railway schemes before them. He put it to ;te e the House, whether they ought not to call upon those Peers country who had taken out proxies, to attend and bear ,ir share in the additional labours thrown upon other Noble - e•ore s. Lord BROUGHAM said he intended to move that _eir L ordships should consider what steps they ought to adopt ' l leonsequence of the imm ense mass of rallwey business befo re e Po• He was about to move that a Committee of the House th e old communicate w ith t h e C ommons ' Committee on the su bject. If all their Lordships were to attend, it would be utterly impossible to get through all the Raiiwey Bills. ',The LORD CHANCELLOR p u t th e mot i on t h at L ord 7 * arilner be requested to attend in that House, on Thursday, stetive o'clock, to explain his reasons for not attendeig the ' -te naittee.—Agreed to. ABERDEEN COMMITTEE tA N OBLE L ORD said, as Chairman of the Committee, he gfeed to re p ort t h at i t had ad j ourned until half-past two L° oek t o - morrow, i n consequence of the non-attendance of A Ormond. b2•ord ORMOND said he was out of elver, when the sum -178 was left at his residence, and that he did not., in conse enees receive it until it was too late to atrene to-day. COMMON LAW PROCESS BILLS. I , Lord CAMPBELL said, at the earnest request of those tr„Whose opinions he had a great respect, he had to lay two k: on the table of the Huse, from which he trusted the el l° would derive great benefit.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord e. e. e,,eharre ) If he had bad only to consult his own ease . and lieererors ;.e would have washed his lands of these Bills, but e t ,7 l g 6arged with a public duty he felt hound to bring them t, e Zee the consideration of the House. Yet the public were very h r rIY losi ng a very great ben tit.—( " Hear, hear," from Lord .*ei °l. Pgham.) When this subject was last b fore their Lord : 4 tt P r s the name of a respected friend of his (Mr. Sereeant th e I t hY) was mentioned i n connexion w i t h if. lie ;vas :err km e Lordships would bear in mind that he said notheig der,- : t e ., ° tY of that Learned Sergeant, or offensive to h m ; on th • 4s-me. been he must say that if he had been present he would 4- been aware that what he said ought not o A ve given him the slightest uneasiness.--( Hear, bear.) lee:V 4 eleprehension prevailed in some quarters as to these et re tes. I t was supposed they would intrench upon the tie di ction of the I r i s h C ourts , an d prove pre j udicial to the sion o f t h e law in Ireland, hut he could assure their ktro:l4hips that a greater mistake could hardly have been fallen in 1448 He hoped, however, upon a reconsideration of the e re in the other House, those misapprehensio ns wou ld t hs and the Bill would meet with a better fate. kiord BROUGHAM agreed with his Noble and Learned end, that portions of the m easure h a d b een gross l y mis 'Tete • Pe e ended. rl LORD CHANCELLOR felt that he owed the Hon. e ld L earned Sergeant some apology for an observation which re irk fallen from him on a former occasion. He had re- Ate, be that c , these Bill s were sacr ifi ce d to a j oke, " but at the ". made that remark lie was not aware that any corres -11;:rlee had p asse d on th e su bj ec t b etween t h e No b le and N "ensared Lord a n d th e H on . an d L earne d S ergeant. H e made let e ‘k, however, in perfect good humour, and with no .l ee ll tioe of wounding the feelings of the Hon. and Learned liteaut. b e Bills were then read a first time. .et PROTESTANTISAI IN MADEIRA. - "l'e Noses Aleecenis said, perhaps their Lordships would k it him to take that opportunity of putting a question to the 4}, Lord opposite regarding certain events which had lately lecplace in the island of Madeira. He had been induced to 4 fte e this question before their Lordships from a strong feeling 'its great i n j ust i ce of the case. The sufferer had still been ette - e to obtain redress for the injury which had been done to ;Se e ' e leld the same s y s t em o f persecution was still practised to -14e -g e most respectable medi ca l man i n the i sland of t _ 'ltl e it e , a Scotchman by birth and a Presbyterian by th e This gentleman had resided for a long time flew i sland, and had obta i ned the respect of all who knew him. iiSt as a gentleman of great p r ud e nc e , of s o und ju t t gmen t, l eet'li e 'bight say, of mod e r at i on i n hi s v i ews , notw i t h s t an di ng et, had exposed himself to the persecution of some of the eseirities in the island. The Noble Lord then detailed with ht s „ ,114inuteness the course of proceeding which Dr. Kalley tPee t e d after his imprisonment. Having appealed in vain to te,,;ePrinr tribunals at Lisbon, he was liberated on the Ist of ty , r 7,s 1' 4 44, after the remonstrances of Lore Howard. In . / i 4 e. Jur. Kalley wrote to Lord Aberdeen of the injuries t te e ;: experienc e d, an d i t was not till the 12th of l following th a t h e l earne d t h at on the 7th of .13,,i4ebee previous his case h a d be en d ec id e d ega i nst h i m. 4 1% 4 the woman M ar i a J oacquina, whose CASE. he had lleest7l Mentioned, twenty-two other inhabitants of the island 4 4 1 s similarly persecuted for apostate, and a large body of 1, 4 ' Ilead.,/ • • , ,-, ,t ,_i *-, by the British Conservator, sent to exterminate , ',no professed doctrines condemned by the Catholics. "re,t e bets were not asserted alone by the •ufferers er repre keel 'I those aggrieved, but corroborated by a friend of his 1,, lir eadathane's), and their truth could nor be doubted. / ti t tle °t ild ask his .able Friend wh a t t hi s treaty was fire, if it s:elle, 4 ` 4 to permit Briti s h su bj ects to wor,hip in their own Le h;,e-houses, and to Ni h ' celrate their reous rites without option whatever? eb He should be li ha gi ppy to hear from ohle Friend what rights and privileges British subjects %, k e ',l, in the isle of Maderia, after the treatment which Il ees,, l4 wY had received 'at the hands of the Portuguese teke ee - elent 5„...9 1- „AI;ERDEEN said, although the Noble Lord had read L'ele%tiguese treaty once, he would have done well to have NO, ee g e elre The treats was protective for Portuguese sub ,-;..(1 at the same time gave them no power of aggression. teN e ' 3 f Dr. Kalley, who was a Presbyterian, from the pro h_Nt the* "I his fellow-labourers in . this country, he suspected o,,,il,3:ntlernan did not always indulge in very select lan teN eeii regard to the yeligien of the State—the Roman Ca- Vette la um). He w a s in the hebit of preachi n g in the Por eseis e lguage, and however much the natives might benefit Ooll„rredlcations, he thought his coutrymen did not derive tte] l'tlefaction front th .in There al n cbj•ic of the privileges te !t. Y gr anted were by the treat y of 1.00 dee,' ire , ' as fol. Sbir l That British subjects should have free permission to c ot es " own forms of religious worship as fre e ly a s th e t o e t ,' With t h e exeeption that their chapels shculd Let eiThie the exterior like privat e h ouses an d without. t. practice existed to the present day. It )Ztx. yeeollected that it was only last year that all the 04 '4 '1 against the privileges of Roman Catholics were tte`tiese e e e to in this country. It was only as recent as the Ves es 7e'een Anne that it was felony by the law for converting 5. : 7,4 ti Tat to Roman Catholicism. And any Portuguese ICllerkit"4 enactment would naturally think he was entitled . to title: , f lt• In Portugal, however, there had been no m e r InY person having been put to death for religious prin- IL e l t eee the time of Martin Gonsalves. As far as the pri -oel et . British su bj ects under the treaty were concerned, ,04, 11 :re intact, and would be resolutely maintained, and e t , e ri r, K a ll ey , i n t h e system of proselytism which, he h i ', e at , Pursuing, bad acted contrary to law, yet, perhaps; he Vest,Pnnishable to the extent which it had been originally Ci te 'r to apply. The authorities had acted prematurely and 10, s e t e!.• In consequence of the irregular proceedings of the s t leeCles in incarcerating him, he (Lord Aberdeen) had ,:,etti - e ,, st ‘Teenary of the loss which he had sustained, and the V al - e ! ti eo which he ought to receive. The amount had hi e d „eyed by the Portuguese Government, and had been Is? 4 ee ° ' but before the payment of the sum. ,Dr. Kelley Is L lse e ,• to Lisbon. But as he subsequently wished to return l'' '4 i t i .ta, he said he would give up all claims to any compen ielttto - i . °ll l the Portuguese Government. if they would allow t . ,Ni,: t4 r l4 . He bad authorised her Majesty's Minister at Pot teLonsent to this proposition, if it coincided with_ the tee. the Portuguese Government. The matter had been Nre, though he trusted he was not now pursuing the sys- Ls 4 Lelelytism, and preaching in the Portuguese language, it,, L i e ttl filb r ,een so offensive to the authorities. `le,* tr ee . ' \JUG HAM considered that It was a new principle I L,tette o • ( If nations, that a person who was prosecuted by the te e Ne t ett, and whose sentence was afterwards reversed, Zty . . eeeive compensation from the Government of this 'e li tie t ll e WAS of opinion that he had no right to c0ur t...1;7 e e, h e , -• k•ALISBITRY and Lord BEAUMONT rose together. er i ts, 'III.IIIIONT said he was desirous of offering a few N. oi Lof SALISBURY—There is no motion before the e t 4 11 74 lee• I N tete e e-A IJAIONT—Then I shall make a motion. He Atti lt tli a ‘e one remark. He must say that he regrettted as 14 14. 1 . 1 3 1 4 his Noble Friend behind him (the Marquis of (Moth e r e the intolerance that prevailed in Portugal, and et, reentries tin the continent, regarding religious Nerl: but he could not help reminding the Noble Earl Keklss eau he arid the Noble Marquis of the great j i l t ti t e l N eo al jeed by the missionaries sent out to those countries it 74.14e,,Oirtsther societies. In this country there were isocie 4 e"° enormous wealth, who employed men of great e % 'o l.9 l 4 eis L e oo te al for the purpose of making proselytes of persons, 'ke I th. e r whose country was Roman 1 atholic, to their 4ts Th• , 4:t er, e , Is was well known abroad, and those m ssir h etheit'rected not to lose any opportunity of gaining 0, 1 / 4 tiel in °pinions those whom they are sent amongst. The dct...,!, th g. in treaties was that these persons should merely ice o re it fellow countrymen, and not interfere with the 0101,44,natives. Therefore, if the objects of these socie 12eltPtio,irri,e4 out, they were carried out in direct opposition 4 „ t h e se t_and understanding of the treaties,_ so that when desies'etekr.r were . taken up by the authorities, they di liZti7t e ,i." pr of the treaties, because they d e e sp ee tt th""e ease of prose') tism. He had heard many corn- Siert, d, Ll° missionaries from persons in a high position. IL, ity rzerefore, suggest the adoption of what had been et„'We --ieu_444Mended by the Noble Earl, namely, to t a oe 114,7 m Own statutes, from their own practice, frnm i k tteZei tiow , all that might say, ur of that intolerance which los t le - 4'eedt,„ eftdemning in other nations. The work was lO tte ett to - Year, end if Noble Leeds h.d read het volume et te e this subject; as he had - done, thee, e. mile have ere were many statutes which were a disgrace to 1 iti.4144. He would conclude by putting this question to (the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack, whet Fe-, before that evenirim closed, he intended to bring in the met,sure sug gested in th'ie volume to which he had alluded? I 'the LORD CHANCELLOR said he had never heard of a question being : ut in the shape of amendment when there was another arnewlment before the House.—( Laughter. ) Lord BE At/MONT -- I then move for the correspondence between the Foreion-office and the Portuguese authorities. The Bishop of SA LIBURY wished to correct a misstate ment of the Noble Lord ( Lord Beaumont) with respect to the Missionaries of the Bible Society, and of the Society for the Pro pagivion ~ f the Gi , spel in Foreign Parts. He had fallen into an erroi., and he wi bed to inform him that the Bible Society was net in the habit of sending. mission ',ries into any foreign countries professing tile Roman Catholic faith, and that the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel confined their mis sionaries to the colonies mil foreign dependencies of her Ma jesty. __ _ fertile 'eyond vile% ny person who was unacquinted with it might expect, and yet, in the midst-of all this fertility, the land was uncultivated and lying waste, while ground that could pro duce five fold more than it del, was in a most uncultivated state. What was the cause of this? Why the cause was that the landlord was either not willing, or the tenant was not able to effect an improvement. The landlord would not or could not make an attempt at improvemeie, and as it was pretty cer tain the tenant was not, able to do so, he should sit down re peating his conviction that Government had very properly come forward with a measure well calculated to remedy this sad state of things.—( Hear.) The Marquis of CL ANRICARDE said he had now heard for the first time what was the object of Government in ap pointing the late Commission. It was sent to lre'and, after Mr. Sharman Crawford's Bill had been disposed of, to see if it could not discover some mode for giving compensation to tenants. The Earl of WICKLOW remarked that he had had no other authority for making that statmcnt other than that of the public papers. The Marquis of CLANRICA RDE was not aware that the public prints had placed the same construction on the object of the Commission as the Noble Earl had done ; but he that as it might, he found noshing in the mandate of the Commis sion, which trade; any allusion to the subject of compensation to tenants. Nor did it say a word about the amelioration of the law of landlord and tenant ; but the Commission was simply to ascertain whether the existing law could not be so altered as to be calculated to encourage the cultivation of the soil and extend a better system amongst agriculturists, as well as to improve the relation between landlord and tenant in that part of the United Kingdom called reland. He denied that the principle of the Bill was to give compensation to the tenants for work they might have executed upon the land, whereby the owner in fee or the lessee was to derive a permanent benefit. That was a principle which had been much talked of, not only in Ireland, but in England and Scot land too, and it appeared to be generally admitted that some amendment ought to be made in the law of landlord and tenant at present existing in Great Britain At all events, how ever, he would venture to assert that the opposition of the peo ple of Ireland to this measure would be withdrawn, if Govern ment would only consent to strike out one clause, the shortest, he believed, in the whole Bill; namely, clause 28, which enacted that this Bill should extend only to Ireland. But if such a measure as this were proposed for England there would be no end to the opposition which would be offered to it. Well, then, it was admitted that as the Bill was a violation of the right principles of legislation and the rights of property, it ought not to be applied to England, and he wanted to know what the peculiar state of Ireland was, that rendered such a measure as the present necessary ? What was the peculiar circumstances in the state of :reland which made it necessary for them to violate the just principles of legislation and the rights of property ? Of all the countries under the power of Government, Ireland was the one in dealing with which they ought to be most cautious not to commit a violation of the right of property. The drift of Government, as dis played in their measures relating to Ireland, had hitherto been to assimilate the laws of the two countries ; and if they intend to maintain the union inviolate, they ought to show themselves to be unvarying in that course of legislation. Ireland was better ' now, in an agricultural point of view, than it had ever been before. The tenantry were not so suspicious of their superiors as they were wont to be, while they evinced a stronger inclina tion to follow their landlords in the path of improvement. The real cau-e of the existing evils of Ireland was, that nothing had been done to check pauperism. The population depending upon the land was becoming greater and greater every day ; and he, therefore, hoped the Legislature would lose no time in taking the subject of pauper ism in Ireland into their most serious consideration He had seen by the public papers that the Prime Minister had been reported to have said, that. in the promotion of this mea sure higher motives actuated the parties to it than merely the considerations of landlord and tenant. Well, he (the Marquis of Clanricarde) had assumed that such was the case; but if it were, he would ask was not the Legislature doing all it could to destroy the good feeling that now existed between landlord and tenant in that country? The Earl of WICKLOW begged to interrupt the Noble Marquis for a moment. He (the Earl of Wicklow) was ready to admit that great. improvements had been going ,on lately in Ireland in agriculture.—( Hear, hear.) The LORD CHANCELLOR then proceeded to put the question on the amendment, upon which The Earl of FORTESCUE rose and said he did not think he would be warranted in sitting there if he did not state it was his intention to give his most cordial support to the general principle of this Bill, without, at the same time, in any way committing himself to the details of the Bill. It was well known to every one in Eneland and Scotland (though of the latter country he could not speak from his own knowledge), that no landlord in those countries ever let a farm without first seeing that all the buildings and offices were in proper tenantable repair—( Hear)—or, if not, that he at least gave the tenant such a term of his farm as enabled him to do so.---( Hear, hear.) Many instances had occurred under his own knowledge, of farmers having taken farms worth a considerable sum, and to repair which the tenant laid out considerable sums from time to time, but which, if the landlord was called on to do, would cost him several hundreds of pounds. Now, in such cases, he would ask what security had the tenant, unless he had a lease?—( Hear, hear.) He would be certain to be evicted either at the caprice of the landlord, or at the expiration of his lease, if it should be a short one.— ( Hear, hear.) It was to remedy such grievances as this that this Bill had been introduced, and to give the tenant a compulsory power over the landlord to recover in such cases, and therefore he fully approved of it, and was very glad that such a Bill had been founded on that introduced by Mr. Sharman Crawford in the other House, and he would again repeat, that it should have his cordial support.—( Hear, hear.) In cases where a good understanding should happen to exist between the landlord and tenant, the measure would be a dead letter ; but under circumstances of a contrary nature he did think that the tenant should have a compulsory power of protecting him self against the landlord.—( Hear. ) The Duke of RICHMOND said it would be impossible for him to give his support to the second reading of this Bill, if he had not heard from the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Co lonies that he intended to refer the Bill to a Committee, in which the various clauses would be reconsidered. At the same time he did think that the Bill, even as it stood, contained se veral provisions which should not only have the effect of law in Ireland, but which should also be enforced in Scotland and in England.—( Hear, hear.) It was a Bill founded upon jus tice and fairness, and so far from setting the tenant against the landlord, it would render the position of each still more sat isfactory.—(Hear.) He would not detain the House fur ther, and would not have done so even now, but for the obser vations of the Noble Marquis who had just left the House, but to whom he would say that he hoped not only to see this mea sure carried for Ireland, but also a similar one for England and Scotland.—( Hear.) Lord MONTEAGLE said he would occupy the House but a very few minu es. He was ready to admit that the present position of the tenantry of Ireland was such as demanded Par., liansentary interference. He was ready to admit that there was a vast mass of the tenant population in Ireland in very great distress, and even destitution; but, admitting all this, he would ask, did t hi s Bill propose a remedy f or the mischiefs complained of? He had heard reasons adduced for sending the Bill to a Committee; but, in his opinion, the very same reasons had been given for not adopting that course.---( Hear, and a laugh.) Not only was this Bill not in consonance with the principles of the law, but it would not even be tolerated in nglantl. Thus much for the landlord. He would now ad dress a few words in reference to the tenant, and he spoke under correction of the Noble Lord at the head of the Com mission in Ireland. There was a great spirit of im provement now afloat in that country.—( Hear.) And of all countries in the world where the principle of agricultural improvement could he effected by chemical and scientific in ventions, Ireland was the most adapted for the experiment ; but this Bill would go far to check and impede that improvement already commenced by these means there.—( Hear, hear. ) Ireland was divided into small parcels of land called, by cour tesy, " farms"' in that country, but which would here require a new name to be invented for them. Drainage was preposed to be carried on in one of these parcels, and the water was to be drawn off and collected ; but where was it to go? Where was the water to flow ? or, into what channel was it to be di rected ? The proposition was an absurdity, and affecting to encourage, would be the very means of preventing an effi cient system of drainage. At present a good feeling was spring ing up between landlords and tenants in Ireland for the purpose of effecting agricultural improvements on the estates. Lord STA NLEY—This Bill w ill not interfere with them. Lord MON TEAGLE felt assured it would stop all such at tempts ; there were systems net susceptible of compulsion, and the interposition of Acts of Parliament, so far from stimulating, too frequently checked exertion. Southey had describe Ke hama as capable of assumingnine characters at once ; but the commission that had inquired into the condition of the landlord and tenant in Ireland had proposed that no commissioner should undertake the duties of adjudicating the rights of property of the whole of that country. A country of 20,000,000 of acres was to be brought under the review of one commissioner; to such a provision he objected, and the Government at least ought to be invested with some responsibility as to the conduct and efficiency of its commissioner. He admitted much might be done for the Bill in Committee on its details, but would he be dlseharging his duty if he sent it to Committee before he saw any prospect of its being amended there ?—( Cheers.) He for one would not advance any measure sub silentio, of whose benefits he entertained a doubt. Disappointment and injustice had been the chief sources of calamity to Ireland, and this Bill would but excite hopes and fears in Ireland, the former never to be realized, the latter unfortunately too-well grounded. The only consolation perceptible in the Bill was the words " consoli dated fund," hence it appeared that all expenses created by the working of the measure would fall upon England. He could not imagine how any Noble Lord, cognisant of the state of Ire land and its existing condition, as respected the rights of land lord and tenant, could, doubting the efficiency of the Bill, give his support to its second reading. Such a man might sleep upon his pillow that night in peace, but he could not see how that course was consistent with his duty either to himself or to the country.—( Cheers. ) The Earl of DEVON did not ground his support of the pre sent measure upon the principle propounded by the Noble Lord ( Monteagle), who.had just sat down, that it implied an entire distrust of the Irish landlord, and he 'shouldbe reluctant to appear as a supporter of the Bill pledged to such an opinion. Although he was aware of what improvements might be ex pected from the Irish landlords, he also knew that there were many others from whom no co-operation could be expected by the tenant; but he concurred with the Noble Lord (Mont eagle) opposite, that entertaining the strong opinion he did,lthe only course was to oppose the Bill. The selection of evidence under the Committee was supposed toihave been partial ; many had said that being composed of five Irish landlords i-s recom mendation would favour that class ; again it had been said that the interest of the landlord had been sacrificed to that of the tenant ; he felt surprised at such conflicting accusations-and denied them both. No one would have introduced such a measure from a theory of preconceived opinions, but from a firm conviction of the benefits that it would entail upon Ireland. One of the great objects of this Bill was to bring into opera tion the labour of the working classes of Ireland, as for, from four to five months in the year, the agricultural labourers of that country were not employed. He beseeched their Lord ships, in discussing this Bill, to consider the great difference between the condition of Ireland as compared with England. In the former country there was a great deficiency of capital, with a superabundance of labour, which did not exist in the latter country, and hence a measure of this kind was necessary to protect those who might make improvements in their land, and to encourage them to greater exertions. Great allowance should be made for the difference in the condition of the two countries, and they should legislate accordingly. It would be necessary for him to go into the large blue-book before him, even at the risk of tiring their Lordships, in order to show the exact condition of Ireland, and the necessity for the improve ments proposed in t he measure under consideration. He denied that the proposed Bill would interfere with the landlords in making improvements on their estates. In his opinion it would rather facilitate their opportunities than other. wise. There were large tracts of land in Ireland which would soon be brought into cultivation and made profitable to both landlords and tenants, if this measure were carried into a law. The Commissioner's Report, so far from deprecating improve ments by landlords, expressed a ssrong opinion that the land lords should make every improvement they could in land, as far as it was practicable ; yet whatever th e landltords might do to this effect, the Commissioners were of opinion that much in the way of improvement would still be left undone, and hence it was, for the object of inducing the tenants to take up and carry out such improvements, that the measure-before the House was recommended, The Noble Lord here read several el:traces from the r.. Tort to the furvg.:l,)g effect, coin menting on them •as he went along. Their Lord ships would moiled that a Mtwara similar to this The Marquis cf IMEADALBANE we's afraid that the ex planation of the Noble Earl would not be satisfactory to the religious people of this ceiretry—they would not be satisfied to hear that Dr. Kalley would be permitted to return to Ma deira—to a country where he had committed no offence, except propazating h:s own religion. His answer was not satisfactory to him, rot was it satisfactory that they had laws in the Statute Book equally as persecuting as those of the Portuguese Government. He maintained that that was no answer to the question he had asked: He would also add that the members of the Free Church of Scotland mould steed competition with the members of the Established Church of England ; they were liberal in their sentiments, they were friendly to other churches, and had made noble sacrifices in the cause of religion. Lord BEAU ' , 7ONT said he should withdraw his motion. The Earl of ABERDEEN wished to say a few words in reference to the remarks about compensation to Dr. Kalley. He was illegally imprisoned for five months in opposition to law, the treaty, and to the Government, and although he was well treated it was yet thought that it furnished a fair case for compensation, which would have been given to him had he not objected to receive it, and expressed a desire to return to Madeira. The subject then dropped. TENANTS' COMPENSATION BILL. The Earl of SALISBURY said, as an important discussion was smut to take place, he must take the liberty of asking the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, before it com menced, a question with respect to this Bill which contained a principle of compulsion, on landlords, with which he, for one, could not agree. He wished to know whether, if he withdrew his opposition to the measure, that the compulsory clauses would he withdreeen ? Lord STANLEY said the question resolved itself into th s, whether by as!enting to the second reading of the Bill. the Noble Lord committed himself to support the compulsory clauses of the Bill in its future stages. He did not hesitate for a moment to say that he conceived no Noble Lord would be so committed. He conceived. however, that, in assenting to the second reading, the House recognised the principle that it was expedient to secure by legislative enaetments compensation to tenants for improvements which they had made of a permanent character at their own expense, by which they added value to the estate, and for which sufficient time had hot elapsed at the time of their leaving to give them fully those advantages which they loeked forward to in making such improvements nt !heir own expense. The question of the right of the land lord to exercise his right to prevent sueh improvements when he thought it necessary to do so, was guise open to discussion in the Sleet Committee. Those who were not satisfied with the Bill mieht reject it o n the 'bird reading. The Earl re SA LISBUR Y said. under these circumstances, he should not press any opposition to the second reading. Li rit BROUs ill k sa•d aei that wa the last day for pre. senting petitions - gains. certein Bills, he should merely pre sent those with which he was intrusted, without opening them, one of which was from Lord Hastings, and another from Mr. Spooner, and would simply move that they be referred to the Railway Cernini:tees on she Bills to which they related. He also moved the appointment of a Committee to confer with the Committee of the Hou , e of Commons with respect to the railway business befere their Lordships. The moti n was then agreed to. Lord STANLEY then moved the second reading of the Tenants' Compensation Bill. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY objected to the measure, as it would endow tenants wish powers nith which they ought not to be intrusted. He considered that landlords should maintain the same influence over their tenants as at present. For a tenant to be allowed to make his application to the Commi ss i oner at D u b lin without the consent M his land lord would he most injurious. He admitted tliat the report out of which this Bill emanated contained very valu ible infermatien. fiat ~,e 1 fermi—inn did nor owe its orie;o to the earties who had brought the Bill forward. He rather thought it originated with the great disturber of Ireland, and that to him alone was it indeb'ed 'or its existence. He thought, also, that the labours of the Commissioners had been con ducted with great rapidity. They only remained for a few hours in one place, unless where they were obliged to examine witnesses front a distance, and he therefore trusted that no Parliament would lee:slate on that report. He would ask if the Commission itself approved of the Bill now brought for ward? If it did, then the House might be inclined to give -credit to it, but if certain of the Commissioners told them that they could not approve of the machinery of the Bill, and if they added that the framers of the measure had de parted from their recommendation, vi hy then it appeared to him that every individual in that House had a right to express his opinion fairly and honestly. This was not a question of party. It was simply a question between the landlord and his tenant. The Bill was defective in another particular, for even what might be applicable to one part of Ireland would not be applicable to another. He could not speak, indeed, of that pert of Ireland in which he had never been, but he would not hesitate to give a conscientious opinion as to its effects on that part of the country with which he was perfectly conversant; and he did not hesitate to say that the results there would be most mischievous. The fact was notorious, that the great ma jority of Irish Peers were opposed to this measure, and he held in his possession a declaration signed by 36 of them to that effect, and when the House examined that paper, he did not think it could possibly be that the Secretary of State would insist on bringing it forward. He did not think that the Noble Lord, after that paper had been read, would present this measure in its present state to the House. The Noble Lord did not say it was his Bill, but he certainly did introduce it in a long and eloquent and able speech, hut that speech did not convince his (Lord Londonderry's) mind that anything could be achieved by this most extraordinary mea sure. Why, one clause in the Bill gave the Commissioner in Dublin power, not only to decide in every case that might occur, but gave him also the power of inflicting in some in stances a fine of Ow. np , n the landlord.-_( Hear, hear.) What was , this if nos subiertin s the landlord to the power of this gentleman ? He did not conceive that this measure was at all required in Ireland—at least, in the north of Ireland—and he should, with their Lordships' permission, just read the " rights" of the tenants in that part of the country. The Noble Mar quis then read a paper which stated that while the tenants or their descendants conducted themselves properly, and paid their rents, they should never be disturbed in their possessions. This stimulated their industry, and caused them to improve their farms, and what more did the measure before their Lordships require ? In order to test the working ef this tenant right, he -fiould only have asked the Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) to exan.ine into the circumstances of these tenants, to look at the improvements effected by them. He should like to know how they were to act with rega' - d to their lea ses under this Bill. What they we re t o d o with them ?—( Hear. ) If new conditions were impesed upon the landlords these leases could he of no use. Why then, without any necessity, entail new arrangements ripen landlords and tenants who were now living balmily ensueh together. It was quite a mistake to sup pee that compensation was what the tenants required in Ire land. What the teeante really required was security for their tenures. They waisted something to stimulate their exertions. Again it was a mistake to suppose that security to tenure was the same with fixity of tenure. Fixity of tenure implied a pro prietary right, but security to tenure did no such thing. The one was mischievous ; the other, well-regulated, had quite the opposite tendency. On this particular point he should ask the House to turn its attention to the evidence given before Partia -1 ment on the subject. The Noble Lord then read an extract from the evidence taken before the Heuse to support the opi nion he had advanced. His own opinion was that the improvements in Ireland were great, and that if Go vernment left them to their own resources, they would be still greater. The Bill introduced by the Noble Lord was disapproved of by every Noble Lord connected with Ireland (with the exception he believed of two) who had seen it. It was disapproved of in the other House of Parliament by Mr. Sharman Crawford, and in fact, it was disapproved of univer sally by every one connected with Ireland. That was the actual state of opinion on the snbject, and yet the Not.le Lord pressed forward this measure upon the House.—( Hear, hear.) He had stated his own opinion upon this most obnoxious Bill, he was supported in that opinion by other Noble Lords inte rested in the welfare of Ireland, but the power of Government was so great that he had but little expectation of their being able to stop its progress. He would now read the declaration to which he had referred in the course of his remarks, and he trusted that the sentiments contained therein would have their due effect upon the Members of the Government. The Noble Lord then read the declaration, which stated that they disap proved of the Bill introduced into Parliament, and while they admitted the principle that the tenant was justly entitled to compensation for all actual; bona fide improvements—( Hear) —they stated that they conceived the tendency of the measure as destructive to the rights of property and as injurious is its operation, and they hoped the Govern ment would not persevere with it. And (continued the Noble 'Marquis, emphatically; there are thirty-six signatures of your Lordships belonging to Ireland attached to it. He had now said all he intended to say on the subject. He had done his duty in that House, and he had dune his duty to his tenants in Ireland, as his forefathers had done before him, and he could not, therefore, concede the right or the necessity of any appeal to a resident Commissioner in Ireland. After a few words from Lord GOSPORT, which were almost inaudible in the gallery, but which we understood sug gested the propriety of referring the measure to a Committee up stairs, Lord STANLEY said that he had at all times stated his anxiety that the details should be fully discussed in the Select Committee by those Noble Lords who were connected with Ireland. But he was not prepared to withdraw the Bill; on the contrary, he was prepared, if necessary, to defend its every principle. He thought, however, it might be possible to avoid any lengthened debate en the question, if it were uncle rstoed that the measure should now be read a second time, the details considered in Committee, and the discussion take place on the third reading, The Earl of WICKLOW was fully convinced that the prin ciple contained in the Bill was a good one, and it appeared to him that the Bill very properly made it a compulsory principle. Until this Bill was introduced he confessed h e d i d not t hi nk that any man was of opinion ;hat the principle ought to be otherwise than compulsory, for what was the ohj Tt of ap pointing the late late Landlord and Tenant Commission ? Their Lordships would no doubt recollect that a Bill, contain. ing a similar principle, was introduced into the House ef Com mons some two or three years ago by a Gentleman connected with the north of treiand. That Bill was withdrawn upon the understasding that a commission should be appointed to investigate the matter, thereby indicating that the commission was to inquire and advise upon the best mode of granting corn nensation to tenants without the consent of their landlords. Mr. Sharman Crawford's Bill contained precisely that Principle, with almost all the exceptions and exemptions to be found in the Bill now introduced by Government. It contained one prineiple,however, ehich he was happy to say was not to be met with in the present measure. The former Bill gave tenants power to undertake works and improvements upon the land without giving ady previous notice of their intention so to do so their landlords. Now, in this respect the present Bill was a great improvement upon the first, for it required that previous to any works being undertaken a notice should be given to the landlord, and an inquiry instituted as to the necessity for them and their probable expense. The only question then for them to consider was this. Was the machinery of the Bill sufficient to attain the object it had in view? For his tart he thought the appointment of a local commission in Dublin was a con siderable improvement upon the suggestion, and he might here remark that it was only on that point that the Bill differed fiom the recommendation of the Commissioners. It had been said that the principle of the Bill was a revolution of the rights of pro perty, and he entirely agreed with those who entertained such an opinion. Ho admitted that in this country the principle would not be tolerated for one moment, but in the present peculiar state of Ireland he thought something of the kind was eneletay—end indiseensahly necessary.—( Hear, hear.) In thai cower ) neiee:terseet could ..or be wade se, the laid, be cause there were cases in operation to prevent it, which could only be removed by legislative iataferme. The country was 1 1 1119' SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY MORNING JUNti: 25 J in effect was introduced into the other House of Parliament by Mr. S. Crawford, before the issuing of the Commission. That was iii 1835, and the measure was then supported by Mr. Wyse and Mr. Lynch, two gentlemen, than whom better land lords did riot exist in Ireland. The principle was therefore not new. Independent of this, he might say, that it was based upon the most carefully collected evidence. The number of witnesses examined by the commissioners, in all, were 303. Of there forty-seven were landlords ; 128 farmers ; the re mainder were unclas s ed. O ut o f t hi s num b er fifty-five consi dered the right way to protect the tenants was by giving them leases; chile 146 decidedly gave it as their opinion that the best mode of securing the tenant for the capital and labour he might expend on his farm, would be by a system of compensa ti m similar to that proposed in the present Bill. These 146 were independent of many others, who gave a more qualifies: opinion in favour of this plan of compsnsation. He would read extracts from the evidence of several of the most important witnesses examined, to bear him out in the statement he had made. The Noble Lord then read the ex tracts to which he referred, from the evidence of Mr. Sharman Crawford, Mr. Balfe, and Mr. Burnes; the former an exten sive landed proprietor in the north of Ireland, and the other two intelligent farmers, their evidence being to the effect that interference between landlord and tenant on the subject of compensation was absolutely necessary. The measure was one which would secure both the property of the landlord and the tenant—neither giving undue privileges to the one or to the other. For many years there had existed a right, on the part of the tenants in Ireland,l to take away, at the expiration of their leases, the trees which they had planted during their tenantry. As the stumps were frequently left in the ground, it deteriorated instead of improved. So that even at the present moment the tenant might leave the land which he had occu pied in an injured instead of an improved state—whereas, under the Bill, this would not be allowed, as compensation from his landlord would be secured to him for the improvements which he had effected. It was only right that a landlord should not have the power of suddenly ejecting a tenant who had effected improvements on the land at his own expense, without making him that compensation to which he was entitled, and which, if not afforded, might reduce him to a helpless state of poverty. Then the impetus which would be given to the improvement of the land under the security given to the tenant be the Bill would call into use during at least five months of the year, a great portion of the unemployed labour of Ireland. Then the Bill would not interfere with the contracts between landlords and tenants, only with those who would not enter into any specific contracts with their tenants. He should like to see contracts carried out to a greater extent than hitherto, to see facilities afforded to those desirous of doing so, and that means should be taken to have such contracts registered. Be sides, a tenant would feel greater ease when there was a fair un derstanding between him and his landlord. The Irish landlord under the Bill would be placed in the voluntary position of an Eng lish landlord. If a landlord would not place the necessary out hous's, &c., on the land which he let, and the tenant was compelled to do so at his own expense, he considered that a reasonable compensation should be secured to him by law, in the event of his leaving the land before he had derived suffi cient benefit from the outlay. He was, therefore, extremely anxious that this Bill should be read a second time. When it was in Committee, those minor alterations which Noble Lords thought necessary, would, of course, be made. Lord CAREW, who spoke in so low a tone that scarcely a word he uttered reached the gallery, was understood to say that he considered alterations by the tenants ought not to be made without the consent of the landlord, but believing that tenants were, in many instances, entitled to compensation, he should not object to the second reading of the Bill. Lord ESSEX said he was one of their Lordships who had some property in Ireland, and that he should not support the second reading of the Bill if improvements were to be made without the consent of landowners, or if the compulsory clauses were retained. The Marquis of SALISBURY would vote for the second reading, reserving to himself the full power of voting against any of its provisions in a future stage. A Noble Earl seemed to avow that the Bill would be of no use, unless it contained compulsory clauses. From this opinion he dissented, and would hereafter express himself more fully on that head. If his Noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies thought it worth while to maintain the Bill without the compulsory clause, he would support it, but otherwise he would be willing to crush it on the second reading. The Earl of RODEN would oppose the second reading of the Bill, and would not support the principle of Government interference between landlord and tenant. On behalf of the tenantry of Ireland, as well as on behalf of the landed pro prietary, he would oppose the Bill on the second reading and every other stage. The Marquis of NORMANBY wished to say a few words on the subject of the Bill. He was one of those who was op posed to the appointment of the Commission, not that he doubted the diligence of the Noble Earl, but because he thought it would raise expectations which could not be justified. He thought it was better that the Government should have brought in specific measures for the evils which existed in the landlord and tenant system in Ireland, than such a sweeping and com prehensive measure. The Noble Earl (Devon) had not ans wered any of the objections which had been urged against the Bill, and seemed to doubt whether it was carrying out the sug gestions in the Report of the Commission. The Government ought to take upon itself the responsibility of the disappoint rnent which would be felt in Ireland from the failure of this Bill. Should his Noble Friend (Lord Stanley) say that he thought it probable no other measure could be brought forward this session to remedy the evils which existed in the landlord and tenant system in Ireland, he would vote for the second reading. The position of the tenant in Ireland entitled him to protection, and to that part of the Bill he would give his unqualified support. The Bill in its present shape was obviously impracticable, and he thought it had better be deferred until the other measures to which reference had been made were introduced. By putting forward this Bill against the practical opinion of all parts of Ireland, they would oppose the feelings of the whole of the country. It was wholly with this desire that he had said those few words, and he did hope that the Bill would be de ferred until the other Bills of which he had spoken should be introduced. Lord CAMPBELL said that the law of England was de cidedly favour of the chief enactments of the Bill, and when he looked to the enactments of this Bill he found that the Government officer was the person who was to carry them out. He was quite ready to give every facility to the arrangements of the Bill, and he should therefore be glad to vote for the Bill, so far as it went, to promote the advantage of Ireland. But this was a direct interference with the right of property. It was in fact neither more nor less than oblig ing a compensation for those alterations which were made upon the estate, whether it was to its advan tage or its prejudice. The law, where there was a lease, pro vided for the evil, and how the Commissioners could come to a conclusion whether these improvements were to the advan. tage or to the prejudice of the estate he could not possibly ima gine. If the landlord and tenant were agreed as to the terms of the agreement, no Bill was necessary. But, suppose the landlord to disagree, the Bill might provide a remedy. They were very much indebted to the Noble Lord for his labours in this field. But during the whole of the time for which a lease was granted the tenant could not be ejected. On these grounds he thought it necessary to give his vote against the Bill. Lord STANLEY—I shall not, at this late hour of the night, attempt to enter into any discussion respecting the merits of this Bill. lam certainly not prepared to enter fully into the feelings of the Noble Marquis and of my Noble Friend who has just sat down. Those Noble Lords might well con ceive that, from their knowledge of their own estates, and from the way in which they were managed, that no complaint could possibly exist as to the management, at least so far as their own experience was concerned, of their estates. But a difference may exist as to the future, and I do not apprehend that any difficulty will arise which will at all affect the working of this Bill. I should feel, my Lords, as if I had no task to perform if I had merely to answer the objections of the Noble Lord, but I feel conscious that I have something more than that to do. And when I look at the objections of the Noble Duke on the cross benches, and feel that those observations require that the Bill should be extended to England and Scotland, I ern com pelled to observe that there is a great difference between the tenant in Scotland and the tenant in England. lam aware that the principle of compensation should be abowed, and that a tenant should receive the advantage of his outlay. In Eng land the relation between landlord and tenant is essentially dif. ferent from that in Ireland. In either of the other two countries there was an allowa nce ma d e f or t h e i mprovemen t w hi c h h ad been made upon th e es t a t e w i t h out any regard to the ultimate benefit of the alteration. But in this Bill the compensation had only reference to the permanent advantage of the property, and in proportion to the advantage which a tenant had wrought upon the estates was to be the compensation , and that, too, not in accordance with the legal rule, but according to the prin ciple which has invariably been recognised as the rule by which compensation should b e grante d . l e bave paid great attention to this subject, and I am compelled to observe th it there is but little attention paid to the improved relation of landlord and tenant. It is suppo se d t h at the mere title of right ex i s t s i n consequence of the o ccupat i on of the lan d, but I am prepared to show that this is not a fair representation of the positions in which the landlords stand. They have another and a greater tie. Almost all the land in Ireland is held by a supposition that a loan has been granted for the cultivation of the land by the original issue; and I think that this Bill is very desirable for establishing the principle that some arrangement should be made by which the permanent improvement of the soil should be effected.—(Hear, hear.) Can you deny that on the vast face of the surface of Ireland there is room for improvement to be effected by labour ? Can you deny that in a vast portion of that country there is not a superabundance,of labour wanting a market ? Those are the circumstances under which I ask you to give security for labour. The Noble Lord sitting at the table had referred to the security given in England by lease, and also by custom which was recognised in the courts of law for compensation for improvements effected without even asking the leave of the landlord. In certain parts of the country it was well known that the custom of the country entitled the tenant to claim compensation for having manured so many acres on the surface of the land. That custom is held as good in the courts of law. —(Hear, hear.) Then, again, in the case of drainage in the greater portion of England. Where a large quantity of drainage is necessary these is no more common system of drainage than to drain with pollard wood. This is not a per manent drainage; it may stand for twenty years, yet, when ejected from the land, the tenant can come upon the landlord for compensation, and this by the custom of the country is acknowledged and acted on in the courts of law. That is the law and the custom of England ; and I ask you to apply the same law in Ireland that is thus acknowledged and acted on in England. That is all we ask by this Bill, merely to allow the tenant compensa tion for the improvements he may have effected. What are the apprehensions which are conjured up by this Bill? The apprehensions are that the Irish tenants shall, out of their own pockets, and at their own expense, lay out a fearful and alarm ing amount of money for the improvement of the properties of their employers. This is the apprehension which we are told to guard against. I think that apprehension is in itself most unfounded, for I have no doubt that the tenant will not lay out his capital indiscreetly or improvidently, or unskilfully in Ireland, however he may do so in England, where he is pro tected by the drainage be has made. Lord BEAUMONT raid that if the custom of the country were allowed, still it was left to arbitration what amount the land ought to pay, but it ought also to be remembered, that with regard to drainage, it would only be allowed for two years, and with regard to dust, one year. Lord STANLEY—I know this, that without the consent of the landlord certain improvements may be made, and the tenant when removing from the land, can require the outlay which he has expended in drainage, without the consent of the landlord. Surely, if this law be good for England, it may with safety be applied in Ireland also. But the tenant has no right in Ireland to apply absolutely his labour or capital to the improvements of his land, without in the first place consulting the wishes of his landlord. He is bound by the terms of the Act to communicate to his landlord his intention to begin those improvements, and with that view he is bound to obtain from the Government a form of application with instructions as to the uroper course to be pursued. H e i s compelled to sub mit that proposal to hislandlord, and for greater security, and in order that the landlord should know it, the Commis sioner is compelled to serve another notice on the landlord, and then the landlord may, if he choses, object to the undertaking. And now with regard to this question, and it is an open ques tion, whether the landlord may be permitted to place his veto on the proceedings, and, for my own part, in the present state of Ireland, I do.not think that he ought to be allowed to place his veto on the proceedings. Ido not conceal my opi nion. I think that if this is allowed it will be a serious detri ment to the efficiency of the measure; It 'hag - been objeetea that there should be any compulsory proceeding between the landlords and tenants, sad it has been argued that a voluntas7 agreement would be the better system. I think that it is an important feature in this measure that there should be one registry office for the whole of Ire land ; but, so far front that being a constituent principle in the measure, if it be ohreted to by the House, I have no desire to adhere to it. I think that the whole principle of the Bill, if carried out, will increase the letting value of the estates. It has been said by a Noble Lord ( Lord Londonderry) that drain ing is going on on scientific principles in many parts of Ireland, and that if we only leave them alone they will do exceedingly well.--( Hear, hear.) On a well-managed e•tate that may do. but, on the other hand, it is likely to perpetuate the present miserable state of Ireland, and hinder improvements which are so much required from being carried into effect. It has been ssid that the landlord has no means of knowing whether the work is done; but there is a provision in this Bill by which the landlord or his agent has power to see the work in every ease in process of being done. How can we secure that this compensation will be awarded ? It has been said, secure to the tenant a long lease, or give hint a fixity of tenure. Now, that is what the Legislature cannot do. A good deal has been said about the infringement of the rights of pro perty, and yet you say, secure to the tenant a lung lease, or fixity of tenure—a thing which it was not in the power of Parliament to do, and an interference which he repudiated on the part of the Government altogether. What we do is this. We will not interfere between the landlord and the tenant ; give him a long or a short lease as you will, but if he lays out money upon the land, by which its valste may be increased, you are not to take advantage of his time, labour, or capital, and he, being a tenant at will, turn him out without giving him some compensation for the im provement he has made.—(Hear, hear.) The question then is, who shall decide the amount of this compensation ? If you leave it to the landlord, it is quite clear he would have an undue advantage over his tenant. You must then have some disinterested person to go between the landlord and tenant to award it. Sonic may ask why not let them go to a court of justice? But, any Lords, in many cases a great proportion of these improvements are of a trivial character in point of ex pense, and a litigious, angry, Or prejudiced landlord might drive his tenant to so much trouble and expense as to render the compensation absolutely nugatory to the tenant. We de sire therefore to establish a cheap and speedy tribunal for the adjustment of these questions, and in establishing such a tri bunal we reduce as much as possible the discretionary power to be given to the presiding barrister. We lay down the principle which shall guide him, and the arbitrator will thus have little to decide except the fact of the time when the improvement was undertaken, the amount of outlay, and number of years which has expired since the outlay was commenced_ We propose that neither the landlord nor the tenant shall be subject to any expense in going to this tri bunal, and the effect of this will be to secure an impartial and unprejudiced arbitration. Can you expect to get a more im partial decision in any other way ? Can you obtain the same advantage of impartiality by refe rr i ng t h e question to a jury or the revising b arr i s t er ? The public may complain of the ex pense thrown upon them, bat the mode of adjustment proposed by the Government is the cheapest and the best that can be devised for securing the interests of the landlord and the tenant. But if you think, after due inquiry, that a reference to a jury or an arbitration is more satisfactory, then in the name of God adopt either of these proposals, but whichever you choose de fine the principles upon which the compensation shall be awarded. I think it is hardly necessary for me to detain your Lordships upon the importance of inducing landlords to encourage and advise their tenants to lay out capital in the im provement of the land they occupy ; but I may here remark, that while ail admit the policy and importance of taking steps of this nature, you one and all oppose a practical measure brought forward for securing compensation for the improve ments. The benefit and importance of the suggestions made by the Commissioners are generally admitted ; but when a practical measure is proposed for carrying them out you feel called upon to oppose it. Well, then, I ask you, under these circumstances, to go into Committee, and in doing so to bear in mind the state of Ireland, apart from the state of England and Scotland ; and I ask vou to bear in mind the inability of a great portion of the landed proprietary of Ireland to contribute towards the improvement of the land, and the great importance of encouraging the tenant to make these improvements by giving them that compensation in Ireland which custom gives to the tenant in England. Do not let the people of Ireland have cause to say the House of Lords is studious to provide for the interests of their own body, but have no con sideration or regard for the interest of the occupiers of the land. Many Acts of Parliament have been passed, which have received the sanction of your Lordships, for enabling the tenant for life who may be advanced in years to recover frem his successor compensation for the money he may have laid out in improving the property, and I ask your Lordships to compare this with that of the landlord and tenant who has no lease, and point out to me the difference between the two cases. 1 hat is all that we call upon the landlords of Ireland to do. Let them take whatever precautions they like to secure that the improvements shall be real ; but secure to the tenant of Ire land that he shall have the same remuneration which you have secured to yourselves and to persons in your own position. In making this proposition we have not taken the opinions of men of any party, or of persons in anywise interested. We have taken the opinion of men of the highest character and the g.eatest experience —men separated from each other by party and local interests —we should deserve the want of confidence which our conduct would produce, and would be responsible for the consequences.—( Hear, hear.) I do not call upon your Lordships and Parliament to agree to this Bill at once in all its details. But Ido say that if your Lordships reject the Bill without sending it to a committee, without fully examining all its details, we shall not be responsible for the consequences. The Earl of ESSEX put a question to the Noble Lord re lating to the 10th clause. Lord STANLEY said that it would be for the Committee to report upon that clause as well as upon every other. In answer to a question from the Earl of RODEN, Lord STANLEY said that the Commissioners had not been unanimous in the recommendation that the adpeal to the Go vernment Commissioners should be final. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY (amidst loud cries of " Order, order,") read an extract from the report of the Com missioners, in which an appeal to the assistant barristers was recommended. Lord STANLEY briefly replied. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he could not agree that this was not the introduction of a new principle. He thought it was a new principle to compel the landlord to pay for an expenditure of which he did not approve.—( Hear, hear.) He regretted that the inquiry had been set on foot with so much ostentation, for it had raised expectations amongst a people well known to be too easily excited to hopes which could not be realised by any measure, and which could only suffer the most painful, and, he feared, the most disastrous dis appointment from the poor result of the inquiry in this Bill.— ( Hear, hear. ) His Noble Friend had intimated to the House that he should be most desirous of passing this Bill if the com pulsory power should be thought fit by their Lordships that it should be omitted in Committee. He wished to know if he was wrong ? Lord STA LEY said that his Noble Friend was entirely wron g in that point. Wh a t h e sa id was only that he did not go so far as some of his Noble Friends, who thought that this Bill would have no beneficial tendency if that compulsory power was withdrawn from it. He thought that it was a great ad vantage. He did not conceive that the Government officer was the principle of the Bill. He was ready to have any other ar bitration which would secure to the tenantry the same advan tages and security for compensation. 'With regard to the Go vernment officer and the Commissioners, they did not wish to pledge themselves to their adoption, but leave it to discussion in the Committee. He reserved also, on the part of her Majesty's Government, the option of receiving the Bill at all, after these alterations were made. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that it was the first time his Noble Friend had mentioned the last sentence. The two former he had repeated for the third time. He thought that it would I,e advantageous to the honest tenants, but it miglt be a weapon of endless vexation and torment in the hands of a litigious and dishonest tenant. The system of agreement was one which was fast gaining ground in Ireland, arid which would prevail to a greater extent in some years hence. It was the bounden duty of their Lordships to adopt it for the purpose of giving the fullest effect to their plans. Every tenant who wished to improve his land, should look to his landlord in the first instance as to the means by which he would effect his improvements. Well then, hearing from his Noble Friend that he did attach importance to this Act, and yet if he still stated that anything would accrue from this Bill to the benefit of Ireland, after altering the objectionable parts, he (Lord Lansdowne) was not prepared to oppose the Hill going into Committee. He would say, before he sat down, that he did look upon the Bill as one of great importance to Ireland, and also of equal importance to England and Scot land, for though the position of the countries was not identical, yet he would say the time might come when the same principle might be recognised in a Bill of a like effect for those countries. The Earl of DEVON said he would occupy but a very few words in explanation. The Noble Earl then read extracts from the proposed Bill, showing the manner in which the power of the Commissioner in Dublin was restricted in refer ence to the duty imposed upon him in the part he should take as mediator between landlord and tenant. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY contended that the Noble Earl who had just sat dow n had said nothing but what the House knew already, merely reading an extract from the report.--( Laughter, and cries of " Divide.") Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House then divided, when there appeared— Foethe Hill 34 For the amendment Majority in favour of the Bill —l4 The House adjourned at a Quarter past Twelve. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 24. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'clock. THE OXFORD, WORCESTER, AND WOLVER. HAMPTON RAILWAY. Mr. BARINEBY moved the third reading of the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway Bill. Mr. GISBORNE believed that the double line of rail pro posed to be laid down by the Bill could not be adopted with safety. Unless the clause which gave the power to make the line was struck out, he should oppose the third reading of the Bill. Mr. SHAW defended the course pursued by the Committee. Mr. GODSON remained of the same opinion he had for merly entertained with respect to this measure. Mr. 0. STANLEY thought there ought to be some clause introduced by which a certain maximum rate of charge was established. At present the company would be at liberty to make any charge they pleased. He believed that the report was not the same as it was when it was laid on the table of the House. He understood it had been altered in many essential particulars by the chairman. He should therefore move that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. Mr. SHAW said that he had merely corrected the report for the purpose of making it sense and grammar, but he had altered it in no important particulars. Colonel WOOD hoped the Hon. Member would not perse vere in his motion that the Bill be read that day six months, after the House had expressed its opinion so strongly in favour of the measure as it did the other night. If the clause objected to by the Honourable Member opposite (Mr. Gisborne), was struck out, the Midland Welsh Railway would have no means of access at all. He believed that the Govern. ment would have to interfere, and make a uniform gauge all over the kingdom. He hoped when the Bill went into the House of Lords a clause would be introduced to make the Com pany adopt a narrow gauge. Mr. 0. STANLEY, seeing the feeling of the House, would withdraw his motion that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. Lord HOWICK thought it would be of the greatest public importance to establish a uniform gauge all over the kingdom. He was aware that the change of gauges would be attended with great expense, but he thought that experse might be well incurred. He hoped Government would take the matter into their own hands, because, if a change was to be made, the sooner it was done the better. Sr, GEORGE OLERK said the question to which the Noble Lord referred was one of very great importance, and certainly required the serious consideration of that House. He thought that he had observed, when last this question was before the House, that it would not be possible to expect those parties who had laid down railways on a particular gauge would be at the enormous expense of changing their line, and changing their whole . stock of carriages and waggons, and making an alteration m their tunnels, embankments, and cut tings. He thought it was most imp , rtant to inquire whether there was any inconvenience, and to what extent that inconvenience would prevail in different gauges being established. He thought this should be the first inquiry they should make. The Corn pittee upon this Bill had come to no decision with respect to 45 the geuge necessary to he adopted. They hd reported merely as to the facility of transhipping goods. An inquiry ought to be instituted as to the degree of danger that would attend the establishment of railways on different gauges, and whether there would be any incoovience to the rublic generally by a diffcren e in the gauges. He was ex tremely happy thst tin? Noble Lord had raised this question, and thought it of the utmost importance that it should be fully comidered and di•cu sed. Ali, BRIGHT wished to say, on behalf of his Hon. Friend the Member for Stockport, that it was his lion. Friend's intention to submit to the Home, as a di-tinct proposition, the reso'ution which he had submitted on Friday night, as an amendment to the motion for die reception of the report on tine Bill. Mr. BARNARD thought it was highly important that this question of gauges should be settled. It appeared to him that no surveyor or engineer had given his opinion as to whether the gauge might not b e p l aced between the n arrow gauge of 4 feet Eq- inches and the broad gauge. This was a point well worthy of consideration. He believed that some persons held the opinion that a gauge of 4 feet inches, Was too narrow, while the broad, or 7 feet gauge, was too broad, and the point, therefore, which he thought they had to consider was, what would be the best gauge between those two limits. Sir G. GREY thought it was rather extraordinary that the Board of Trade had not come down to the House with a clause to provide fur the establishment of the narrow gauge upon this line. He thought this was the more extraordinary after what had fallen from the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite (Sir George Clerk) on Friday night. The Board of Trade now recommended the promoters of this Bill to adopt a clause compelling them to do an impossibility—an impossibi lity -- when the report of the Board of Trade upon this sub ject :was considered—for they now called upon them to lay down the narrow gauge to the satisf ac ti on o f t h e B oard of Trade—the same Board of 'fiade having reported that to lay down the narrow gauge, , under such circumstances, would be impracticable. He must say that he thought the Board of Trade had another duty to perform than coming down to that House, and in plaintive tones endeavouring to smooth down their own reports. sir G. CLERK said that after the majority of Friday night, 1 and the decided expression of opinion given by the House, he had not thought it necessary further to interfere. After a few words from Mr. V. STUART, VS hich were quite 1 inaudible, Mr. HODGSON HINDE suggested that the further pro ceedings on this Bill should be postponed, in order that clauses might be introduced compelling the broad gauge company to lay down the narrow gauge in addition to their own. ( fie was met with loud cries of " No, no Mr. COBDEN understood that the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite had no objection to a commission being issued on this subject, as it would be preferable to a Committee of that House. lie (Mr. Cobden) would, therefore, frame his motion upon the subject accordingly. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. Captain BERKELEY then presented a petition front the inhabitants of Gloucester. The petitioners stated that they had heard with alarm that the Great Western Company in tended to carry their line under the River Severn instead of over it, and they therefore prayed the House to afford them protection.—(Laughter.) The London and South-Western (2) Railway was reported to the House, and ordered to Le read a second time on Thursday. OXFORD AND RUGBY RAILWAY. On the order of the day for the third reading of the Oxford and Rugby Railway Bill, Sir CHARLES DOUGLAS moved that it be postponed, as a great number of lines were at that time before Parliament, which would be affected by the passing of this Bill. A de cision had been come to by the House the other evening, and he thought that the reconsideration of the question might be attended with considerable advantage, as he was well aware that many Hon. Members had voted on the question without having at all considered its merits. He considered that this inquiry would be attended with advantage to all, and he should therefore move the postponement of time Bill. .Ir. P. BORTHWICK opposed the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman, and contended that it was inconsistent and in expedient of the House not to sustain the decisions of the Com mittees, which were governed altogether by a regard for the public interest, to which all merely local interests ought to give way. He could not consent to follow the example of those Hon. Members who supposed that they promoted the interests of their constituents by opposing thegeneral interest of the public. Mr. NEWDEGATE said that no one more deeply re spected the decisions which the Members of those Committees came to than himself; still he did not think the House should always bend to them. Such decisions should not preclude those who had local information from stating their views to the House before the final adoption of any railway scheme. He had no objection to every com pany doing its best to forward their particular plans ; still, before the House agreed to any of them, he considered a full opportunity should be afforded to Members of local experience for laying that experience before the House. He should sup port the motion of his lion. Friend for the postponement of the Bill. Mr. COLLETT—.It appeared that the opinions of the Committee were by no means unanimous, and it was also evident from the evidence which had been adduced, that the traffic of iron and minerals was much better served by the narrow than by the broad gauge. He did not see that the house would at all be interfering with the judgment of the Com mittee in reconsidering the motion which had been put be fore therm The intercourse with Brighton and Norwich was carried on with the narrow gauge, and he wished that this principle was carried out on all the railways in the kingdom. Sir GEORGE GREY wished to say a few words on this subject, and should not have been induced to utter them, but that it was evident that the Committee were by no means una nimous in their decision. It appeared that the decision of the Committee was the difference of two and three ; and he thought, therefore, that it might be reviewed without any interference or disrespect. All, or most of the passengers who went by the Birmingham Railway, either pro ceeded to Birmingham or went on by the Midland Counties Railway, and it was therefore manifest that Rugby would be one of the very worst places at which the alteration from the narrow to the broad gauge could be made. Mr. SHAW did not think that the question was between the relative merits of the narrow and broad gauge. The question was, whether it was the London and Birmingham Company or the Great Western Company who were to construct this line of rail.way. He was of opinion, if it was not made by the Great Western Company, it would not be made at all. It would not pay the other Company, and it would very little more than pay the Great Western Company, but as it would draw the traffic to their trunk line it would be their interest to make it. The Committee thought it was their duty to grant this line. He would not enter again into the broad and narrow gauge question, which had been already fully discussed. Mr. GISBORNE thought the Right Hon. Gentleman was wrong in approving of the narrow gauges. Rugby was the most inconvenient place in the kingdom to make a break of guage ; besides the incenvenience to the passenger by this break, it would greatly increase the expense of the convey ance of goods; and, in the case of coals, very much damage their quality ; the question of delay should be likewise taken into consideration. He considered that this plan of transhipping coals would form a complete bar to any traffic in that article.—( Loud cries of " Divide, divide," and " Oh, oh,")—and so also of lime, and he could speak from experience on the subject, having been one of the largest lime burners in England.—(" Oh, divide.") By giving this branch to Rugby, they would prevent lime being carried beyond that town.—( Cries of " Order, order.") With respect to the broad and narrow gauge, he was not much in the habit of eulogising the reports of the Board of Trade, but in this case he thought their reasons were must cogent.—(Cries of " Divide, divide," " Order, order.") The Hon. Gentleman at length gave way to the loud and re peated calls of " Divide," and concluded by supporting the motion for postp on i ng the Bill. Mr. LOCKHART, who was also interrupted by calls fora division, said that the Bill was brought in by two Members con nected with railways, against the expressed wishes of all the inhabitants of the locality. He supported the amendment. Mr. TANCRED, as Member for the most important bo rough on the line, hoped the House would hear a few words from hint. He had presented a petition against the Bill from the Mayor and 747 of the principal traders of Banbury. Taking Banbury as the centre of the district through which the proposed line of railway was to be taken, in a radius .of ten miles there were 70,000 o f a popu l a ti on , w h o consumed annually 60,000 tons of coals. With the narrow gauge line they would be brought from South Staffordshire, but if the present line were constructed they would have to be supplied principally from Leicestershire, at a much clearer rate tha n if t h e y were supplied fro m th e former place, besides the great inconvenience that would arise from the change of gauges. He did think, under all the cir cumstances, the motion for the postponement of the Bill ought to be acceded to. Lord VILLIERS briefly supported the third reading of the Bill. He had been through that portion of time midland counties where the line was to be constructed, and there had been great rejoicing when the news was received respecting the recent decision of the House on the Bill. Mr. BRAMS TON said with regard to the gauges about which so much had been said, the House should recollect that the Board of Trade had power to enforce double lines of rails on both the broad and narrow gauges, at any time whenever they should think the traffic would require it. He would sup pert the third reading of the Bill. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that they were told by one Member that the question of the broad and narrow gauge had nothing to do with the decision of tine Committee. On the other hand, the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin stated that it was precisely on that ground that the Committee had come to their decision. That Hon. Member, who was the Chairman of the Committee, had asserted that if the Great Western project had not been started, the line to Oxford and Rugby would:never h ave b een constructed. That was an assertion which as Chairman of that Committee ought never to have been made, and was more in con sonance with the conduct of a partisan than of an impartial judge. Opposed to this there was the declaration of the London and Birmingham Directors, that they would apply the whole of tkeir revenues to the formation of this line, rather than that it should not be formed. In addition to all this, they had the decision of the Board of Trade. It appeared that on this Committee there were two Scotchmen and two Irishmen. The two Scotchmen voted one way and the two Irishmen the other, so that it was the vote of the Hon. Member for Essex that had decided the ease. Now he had a greater opinion of the Board of Trade than he had of the opinion of the Hon. Member for Essex (Mr. Darby ), an d as thi s d e cision was in decided opposit i onreviewed. t without any impropriety. The decision of to the Board of T ra d e , h e thought that it might be Board of was in his mind entitled to respect, yet, notwithstanding ea he could not but come to the conclusion that dispensed that the Board Boa w rd ith o . f Trade in this matter might be altogether Looking at the opinion which had beenelp eased by the Hon. Member for Essex, and at the reports of the Board of Trade, he thought the ghtthßeiyil until would tte urs n u ? e at th a e esa sa io f o er . Mr. SHAW rose to explain. course if they were to p He had said, and he repeated the interest of the London and Birmingham that it was not to it., that it had appeared to him, as a Member of the Committee, Company to make a railway from Oxford to Rugby. He had that was his opinion, but to , say that he had b een in sdauiedotehea t d (Cries of " Order, order, " Spoke, spoke.") He was aware that he must confine himself to explanation. He had said, and he would repeat it, that the evidence which had been brought before that Committee had satisfied his mind that it was not for the interest of the London and Birmingham Company to make that line.. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE explained. Mr. L ABOUCHERE considered that it would be more satisfactory if the Committee had been unanimous, but he thought it would be a most dangerous precedent to discuss, except under very particular circumstances, the decision of a majority of a Committee in that House.—( Hear, hear.) He should, by his vote, sustain the deeisirn of the majority of the Committee. With regard to the report of the Board of Trade, lie did not consider it worth a straw in opposition to the report of the Committee. Mr. MUNTZ thought it quite ridiculous that the House should be frightened from its propriety by the statement of an engineer, as to the cost. He had previously voted in favour of the narrow gauge, not because he considered it better than the other gauge, but because it had been more generally used. Mr. HA YTER thought it a little hard that his Right Hon. Friend should have expressed so vehement a determination to obstruct the progress of the Bill. He complained of such a proceeding. He did not wish to enter into any discussion at present. In th e Bill w hi c h h e now h e ld i n hi s h an d for the Oxford and Ru g by R a il wa y, th ere w a s a clause to compel the proprietors of that line to best all the 811=10 of transhipping ~<, j ,~ v _ ~ c.? in whatever case or to whatever extent it tb. ; Rbt be necessary: to adopt the —( Hear, he ar , an d l ou d cr i es o f "Di v id e, a , vide.") Th ere was ai.other cl ause w hi c h f urt h er compe ll e d theta narrow gauge if th e B oar d o f T ra d e s h ou ld &nip):rove of the gauge.—( The cries of " Divide, divide," wem renewed with increased vehemence, and the Hon. Gentleman concluded by supporting the Biil. ) The House then divided, when there appeared, For the motion Against it Major v The St. Helen's Canal Railway Bill was ordered to be re— committed. The Preston and 11'3re Railway Branches Bill was ordered to be recommitted. The Newry and Enniskillen Railway Bill was ordered to lie- on the table. UNIVERSITIES' TESTS ABOLITION (SCOTLAND) BILL. Mr. FOX INIAULE presented a petition from the General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland, and from several other parties in favour of the Bill for the abolition of tests is the Universities of Scotland. Mr. BOUVERIE presented a petition from Glasgow with a similar prayer. TEN HOURS' BILL. Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from the West Riding of Yorkshire in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill. Mr. P. BORTHWICK presented two petitions to the same effect. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. Messengers from the House of Lords brought up several Bills, which were o r d ere d t o b e l a id on the table. SALE OF ARDENT SPIRITS IN IRELAND. Mr. ROSS postponed his motion for the repeal of so much of the Act 6 and 7 William IV., cap. 38, as prohibits grocers in Ireland from selling ardent spit its. DEODANDS BILL—ILLEGAL COMMITTAL IN THE ISLE OF MAN. This Bill was read a first and second time, and ordered to be committed. Mr. BOWRING rose to ask the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of the Home Department three questions of which he had given notice. They were—Whether John Walters Col dicett was committed, on or about the 9th of September last, to Castle Rushen, in the Isle of Man, on a charge of assault, without any examination or hearing before a magistrate ? Whether, on complaining of the irregularity and hardship of his commitment to the Lieutenant-Governor of the Island, the case was referred by the said Lieutenant-Governor to the com mitting magistrate himself ? Whether the original committal was not to corn; el the prisoner to keep the peace for six months, and whether the six motths being passed, he was not, and is not now detained in gaol ? Sir J. GRAHAM thought that he mast be discreet in the reply which he was about to give. The party of whom the Hon. Member had spoken bad been committed on the 9th of September. He had then been required to enter into his own recognizances, and to find sureties of 401. each. This was agreed to by the parties, but a detainer for debt was lodged against him on the 16th of October. Even this had been set aside, and he would have been ready to accede to the petition, but he believed that the Hon. Gentleman was not aware of the character of the person whose cause he had advocated. The detainer for debt had been set aside, and another, and more serious charge had been preferred. In the whole of these pro ceedings the utmost regularity had been observed, and he could not ascertain that any defect had bee n p erm itt e d i n comp l y i ng with the ru l es o f th e island. The character of the individual was best develeped in the circumstance that the individual for whom the Hon. Member pleaded had been convicted and im prisoned for two sears on a charge of attempting to commit a rape on his own daughter. Pr. BOWNING-1 hat was not a committal. which he ought to recognise in his observations. Sir J. GRAHAM was perfectly aware of that circumstance, but still he must. affirm that, as the rules of the island had not been violated, the charge could not be preferred. RAILWAYS. Mr. GISBORNE wished to ask the question, of which be bad given notice, as to whether any new regulations had bee* introduced into the House with respect to railway Bills. Sir B. PEEL was not at the present moment prepared to answer the question of the Hon. Gentleman to its full extent. The Government had been occupied,for some time past in con sidering this subject, and he wished to have the benefit of expe rience with regard to the working of the railway system be fore they decided upon any plan whatever. THE TARIFF. Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to bring under the consi deration of the Government the fact that the Spanish Govern ment had endeavoured to have Spanish sugar introduced at the same rate of duty as that on which the most favoured nation iv. s introduced, He thought that there was a great necessity that there should be some alteration in this respect. He did not wish to enter into the old question ; but if it were inconve nient to the Government to lay the whole of the correspond ence on the table, or the decision at which they had arrived, they might lay the decision without the correspondence, or the correspondence without the decision. Sir R. PEEL did not think that it would be either wise or right to separate the decision from the correspondence. In the course of a few days he would be able to lay the whole of the correspondence on the table of the House, and then, if necessary, the decision might be discussed. OPIUM. Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to ask another question, as he saw the Vice-President of the Board of Trade in his place. Was there to be any alteration in the duties on morphine? He knew the difficulties which would arise from the alteration of this duty. Morphine was a peculiar preparation, of which opium was the raw material ; and he had heard, from an eminent chemist, that the trade in this article was likely to be altogether destroyed. The whole duty on the article was only from 3,0001. to 4,000/. a-vear, and by its remission a great benefit would be conferred upon the public, and no injury done to the trade. He would, therefore, hope that that duty would be remitted altogether. Sir G. CLERK said that the duty was only Is. a lb., and that it had been reduced some years ago. In 1842 the duty was 16s. a lb., but in that year the duty was reduced to ss. a lb., but yet there had been no reduction or increase in the amount of the drug imported. Drugs of this nauseous and unpleasant kind would not be admitted at the same rates as those which were necessary for the comfort and enjoyment of the people, and he should have been glad to propose a redue ti in of the daty if it had been for the welfare and interest of the people. Sir R. PEEL said that his Right Hon. Friend the Chan cellor of the Exchequer would, in the course of a few days, lay on the table a modification of the tariff, and he trusted, therefore, that the House would wait until they saw the altera tions there proposed. The subject then dropped. , in l o lo e the g stie lt d lr b , y H G L' r T ea T t i s i a r id ila t i l n , t s h i e nc r e os l e s t l o 4 THE SLAVE TRADE . ti s l u a p t p th re e ss c i o o u n rse of puthre slave trade, has been attended by large expenditure of the public money, and by serious loss of life to the naval forces of the country, and that it has net mitigated the horrors of the middle passage, nor diminished the extent of the traffic in slaves." In doing this, he could not but express his surprise that a subject so important as this should so long have gone on uninvestigated. It was known that since 1814 an immense sum had been ex pended in the attempts to abolish the slave trade. He was still of opinion that the attempts to abolish this trade would prove utterly futile. During the forty 3ears in which the attempt had been followed up, there had been an energetic attempt to put down the slave trade, and he meat bear his testimony to the zeal and energy with which that attempt had been prosecuted on the part of the Admiralty. There had been an immense expenditure, both in the army and navy, and he must say that nothing more important could be brought under the consideratiou of Parliament. Foreigners looked with a great distrust upon the attempts of this country to liberate the slaves. Since 1614 the attempt had been in creasing, and every Government had used its utmost endeavour to carry this out with varying suecess, but certainly with un tiring perseverance. For nearly thirty years this country had busied itself in nothing more than in efforts to put down the slave trade. Fleets employed to guard the coastse—diplo matic energy unparalleled employed to put down the slave trade. Well, of course we had succeeded. We had put down the slave trade. We had done no such thing—we had cam.; pletely failed, and we had only attained this, that our failure had been attended with the most frightful increase of the evils which we sought to suppress. Such was the opinion of all the most, sincere and ardent enemies of slavery. It was the opinion of Sir Fowell Buxton, of Dr. Lushington, and Lord John Russell, and of the venerable Mr. Clarkson.—( Hear, hear. ) To show the opinion of Sir F. Buxton, he read very long ex tracts from that deceased gentleman's pamphlet, to show that the measures which we had taken for the suppression of the slave trade had only served to stimulate the dreadful traffic, and to increase its horrots. The slave trade never could be put down until slavery itself was abolished.—( Hear, hear.) These opinions were echoed by the Anti-Slavery Society, and by every benevolent man who took part in attempting to put down slavery. Such was the opinion also of the Marquis of Lansdowne. Such, also, was the opinion of the Marquis of Normanby, who had proved himself, as Secretary for the Colo-• nies, one of the most able and beneficent Ministers to whom the colonies had ever been entrusted. The Hon. Gen tleman then . read an extract trom a dispatch from the Noble Marquis, expressing regret at the total failure of the measures taken to put down the slave trade. ( The reading of the ex tract was much cheered.) The next witness he would refer to was the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) who, in a speech at Exeter Hall (from which the Hon. Gentleman quoted largely), declared that at the time when he was addressing the I meeting, the horrors of the slave trade were greater than at any former period.—( Hear.) His next witness was Lord Aber deen, from whose dispatches he read similar extracts, in which the Noble Lord complained bitterly of the bad faith of the Spanish and Portuguese governments, in conniving at the ter rible aggravation of the slave trade.—( Hear, hear.) He then read extracts from a pamphlet published by Mr. Clarkson, in which that venerable author stated that the attempt to suppress the slave trade by force had completely failed, and had led to a tremendous sacrifice of life. He would not detain the House longer than was absolutely necessary to put it in possession of the facts upon which his motion rested. The fact was that so greatly had the evil been increased, that whereas at the end of the last century, the amount of Af r i cans carried off to America as slaves was but 90,000, the num b er i n 1843 was 200,00. From the Bight of Benim alone 150,000 were carried away. [The Hon. Gentleman then went into ex tended numerical statements, but so rapidly read, that they could not be made intelligible, as we caught them, without the aid of the documents. ] 192,000 slaves were now annually ire. ported into Coba and Brazil. Could it be doubted then that taking the whole of America into account, the number imported from Africa was at least 200,000, But it might be said that since these returns were received the citizens of the United States had taken less part in driving the trade for the supply of other countries, that greater precautions had been token, and that fresh treaties had been entered into. But he would call the attention of the House to the report of the Commissioners of Sierra Leone, who stated that there had been a great increase in the trade and a great aggravation of its horrors. He wished to bring these facts before the common sense of the House. If they were to be decided by argumentative disputation he well knew his incapacity to meet the Hon. Gentleman opposite. He thought that he had stated to the House sufficient facts to cause an agreement to that part of the resolution which he referred to. He had another charge to make against the means which were adopted to suppress the slave-trade : the system pursued in order to put it down caused a great many evils. He be lieved that the intelligent people of Cuba and - Brazil looked at the large disproportion that now existed between the numbers of blacks and whites with the utmost alarm. That was the prevailing feeling amongst the intelligent people of those countries. The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to read part of a dispatch sent to Lord Aberdeen, stating the consternation that existed. It contained the most vehement denunciations of the means adopted to suppress the slave trade. He was not astonished at the hostility which was exhibited to that system when it was enough to enlist vast prejudices against it. It was not surprlsin ••g that we excited a disposition to oppose us. He population should like to know what would be the feeling of the . of this country if they were in the habit of hearing that . any . by a foreign chip of from any port in this island was chased p vessel of war, either Dutch or American, and had been destroyed be cause it was engaged in smuggling, because the American or Dutch Government wished to put smuggling down. He be lieved that every person acquainted with the subject was cone vinced that the means resorted to to put down the slave trade were totally p Inoerative. • ' Though they heard of the number of Africans taken away by the slave ships, though their consuls and agents were able to furnish them with those accounts, yet they had no account of the number that were massacred in the course of the proceedings, and no account of those who perished in the berracoolie while waiting' for capitation. There 5 old. over' 1:1 100 e) 1 2 sgst OnC e igatl 0 ct 1 s. eg, lent pan, ting jon• of °VI ry ; tie* the the the red• inns rerl cd 6, 1 .011,