The Sun. — London, England, 1853-03-08 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARL TAME NT MOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented a peti tion praying for Parliamentary papers. Lord LYTTLETON presentented a petition from Staffordshire against the admission of Jews into Parlia ment, also from the working men of Stourbridge against the opening of the Crystal Palace. The Earl of CARLISLE presented a great number of petitions praying for Parliamentary papers. Lord CLANCARTY presented a petition from Bur ton - upon-Trent and several other places against the admission of Jews into Parliament, and the Maynooth Urant. The Bishop of NORWICH presented several petitions from places in Norfolk against the admission of Jews into Parliament. THE ESCAPE OF MAZZINI. The Earl of MALMESBURY asked the Noble Earl at the head of the Government, whether it was true that Mazzini, having escaped from Lombardy, had been taken on board her Majesty's ship Retribution at Genoa and carried to Malta. The noble earl characterised the act, if the report was true, as one of ill-judged humanity. In Sardinia, Mazzini would have been secure of not being g i ven up to Austria, and al though he would no t have been able to obtain a perma nent refuge there, he would have been able to escape by the ordinary conveyances, without giving employment to a British ship of war. The Earl of ABERDEEN said, that not having re ceived any i n f orma tion on the subjec t, he could not an swer the noble earl's question. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH presented several Petitions against the admission of Jews into Parliament. NATIONAL EDUCATION IN IRELAND. The Earl of CLANCARTY rose to call the attention of the house to the operation of the national system of education in Ireland. The noble earl (who . was very indistinctly heard) said that the national system of edu cation had now been 21 years in operation in Ireland, and when first established it was an experiment with respect to which very great expectations were held out, and it had certainly received no ordinary support both from Government and through the liberality of Parlia ment. The returns which he intended to move for, and which he rejoiced to find were not to be opposed, ought to be laid upon their lordships' table, in order to enable them to form an accurate opinion, from official evidence, as to the actual working of the system, and its alleged great success in the attainment of the object of its origi nal institution, viz., the education of the Irish people, founded upon religion ; the union of Roman Catholic and Protestant children in the same schools, and also the union of Roman Catholic and Protestant clergy, as the patrons and managers of the schools, in the same Parishes ; and the general concurrence of the people of Ireland in the carrying out of the system by the amount of thei r l oca l contributions. Now, he was sure that the returns would bear him out in saying that the system had failed in all those particulars ; but should it be otherwis e' there would at least be great advan tage in having the official information in support of its alleged success produced. And here he must corn „Plain, that the annual reports of the commissioners were e r esented to Parliament at too late a period to be of any u se. The report for 1851 was only communicated to their lordships on the 15th of February, 1853, a date Which must altogether defeat the object of its being pre sented to Parliament at all, namely, to enable Parlia inent to judge of the efficieney of the system when it was vo ting the public money from which that system was to c supported. With respect to the working of the system the opinions were various. It had been zealously s upported by ever y successive Government since it had b een instit u t e d, an d s t a tesmen had had a prejudice in its 40 our, not wishing to shake its prestige, and perhaps un consciously overlooking some of its defects. The corn tissioners, t oo , i n th e i r re ports had certainly represented o workin g of the system as very favourable, and the p o sits o f L or d Li eutenants t o th e mo d e l schools in D ublin, and the accounts which were always given to the tended these admirably-managed institutions , all to prepossess the public mind in favour of the $Y stem. ' s tem. gentleman who was recently staying on a v isit at Chair Castle, however, visited one of the rural school s , and looked at some of the writing that was tislecuted results scholars. Bearing in mind that one of t :Le good that was anticipated from these institu ions was the spread of loyalty and good feeling towards o ,„ ll g l and, what was the gentleman's surprise, when, upon tvenin.• the first copy-book, he found that it was headed Hurrah for Repeal !" Another was headed P atrick was a gentleman." (L a ughter.) He (Lord Clan !.-.„ '4 certainly believed that St. Patrick was a gentleman a Protestant, too. But to return to the causes woe had excited a prejudice in favour of these schools. wi ," B , justifiable ground was the admirable elementary va ," r ss that were used in them. But there were many 67° thought that the system had failed to effect that W a ,l l -lectual and moral improvement of the people which f been regarded as one of its legitimate results. He, 6 0- ° ne, did not hesitate to express his opinion that the 4 11 4 3 ° 1 8 had failed from an endeavour to force all the "dren under one system, and from a very wrong prin `l3lo, namely, the restrictions which were put upon the , i t ,e,adin g of God's' Word by the poor people of Ireland. Ape commissione rs th emse l ves , however, took a different view, and i n th e i r report for 1851 t h ey d ec l are d t h at they were convinced that the system had deep root in the affections o f t h e people, and that no other plan of instruction for the people could have been devised which, under the peculiar circumstances of Ireland, would have conferred such inestimable blessings upon the great ma jority of the population. The commissioners further stated, that in 1851 the schools were 4,704 in number, and the Ipupils 520,401 ; showing an increase of 157 schools and of 9 , 162 pupils over 1850. Further on, they stated that they had made grants to other schools, and th e y summed up by saying that there was reason for believing that the total number of pupils benefited °Y the system was 529 , 637 . This was certainly a very s trikin picture of progress in education, but he took llave so foq' t g o uestion the aof these figures, and he r this reason.ccurac In their second report, at the outset of their labours, the commissioners calculated the number of children between the ages of seven and thir en for whom they would ultimate l y have to p rovide education. The total number of children between those os in Ireland they estimated at about one-seventh of e Population, and they calculated that about one-half 7 . 13. that number would require to be instructed in their +l,_ --cuu ° lB . Now, the census of Ireland j ust issued showed that the population had diminished very considerably t li b il ice that time. In 1851 it amounted to 6 , 500,000, and g., s emigration that had gone on so rapid l y since then further reduced it to 6,300,000. Now, out of that total amount of population, one-half of the children be ell seven and thirteen years of age, would only g ive 4 450,000 ' ;so that it would be seen that by taking credit ~c ' t havi ng 530 , 000 sc h o l ars i n their schools in 1 851 , the n l t amissioners had actually exceeded their own maxi iii 80,000. But this was not all. The Church 4 : l ,, l ication So c i e ty had 100,000 children in their scho ols ; 1 1 „`` adding 50,000 more for the other schools uncon e-ted with the National Board—a very moderate com sotiou—this, added to the 530,000, gave a total of eh ,000 children, leaving but 220,000 to include all the as ses, of that age belonging to the upper and middle Ire all all the children of the thirty-five union houses, I t ' a l all the poor children who did not go to school at all. d oti t 3 l , l ought, therefore, that there was some reason to th at the accuracy of these figures. Now, he found eel , the total amount of local aid contributed to 178 *Zola out of the entire number of the national schools, 4 441 , only 1931., or at the rate of 4,593 to the entire ti en °er of s c h oo l s i n o p era ti on , w h ereas th e subscrip t° 8 0 in aid o f th e Ch urc h Ed uca ti on S oc i e ty am oun t e d say t 7 ° 4 /. and he could not be far wrong if he were to tieanat 6 0,000/. more were raised by local subscrip oietn„ aid of the Irish Church missions, the Irish So scht",tbe Wesleyan and Presbyterian missions, and the li maintained at the expense of the Roman Catho e-.Ler,. °a lp , s3r, independent of the National Board. The ,sYst e ,,""son was, therefore, decidedly against the national 4 0 and in fa vour o f such' systems as enabled patrons g* th e lve religious instru c tion to the children who attended Ni tt Bc hools. He should be most happy if he could th e out any results beneficial to the country from which had been acted upon, but was un -1/4,10 11 0 do so. 1 system w hi c h pre tended to be re the- a O ught to manifest itself in an improvement of the ril° ral and religious character of the people, in t prod uction of those habits of industry and order and tivn i ° u IY which were the distinguishing characteristics of ie N a t ed nati ons. H e, h owever h a d w it n essed n o such 4 4 611 . 1 Before this s y s t em was called int* existence the a nd 67, tits of the north of I r eland were as provident Flu e industrious as the were at the present moment. t he vie w B which tat . • ich he entertained were strengthened by Pro v .i s n istics of the census of 1841. Although in the 111 4 t ce of Munster the proportion of children attend as 1 he nati , onal schools was as 1 to 11, and in Ulster k; st er yet the predominance of ignorance in t • li e 7 compared with that in Ulster was as 46 to 4 ° . N . v oe , vvi, %•ould take a later period, and compare two t CUrai advantages, Poor-law unions—the towns possessing great be ing t .,.wantages, and the population of the unions ck th 7 arly the same in extent. He found that in Lime '3,!.attel;e were 5,512 pupils in national schools, and in L u i Th ill Lir number was 4,774, the proportion being 1 to Pro-•*eriek e ri.ck, and 1t027 in Belfast. Now, in the 17 ,55 !mi0n the number of persons receiving relief Posti n .: 4 against 6,671 in the Belfast union. The L to 18 ion relief was 1 to 8 in Limerick, and :lerette'duaitlfast. Taking Ireland generally crime had t't,c°olMittal not diminished ; for in 1841 the number n yti h av , f_iiwas 20,796, whilst in 1851, the popula iiTOnettt'a,g diminished nearly 1,500,000, the number of r e 4 td, t i a ' a. ,..ve 24,654. He trusted, after what he had 4 . their lordships would not consider him un otojeet. ; I T entreating their prompt attention to this t . th e e noble earl concluded by moving for a copy I°ll 1 tet urn • b b .] s furnished by„ the Commissioners of Na t•g‘icitit.o,;k:ncation in Ireland to his excellency the Earl of 4 4 4 1 ,t 1 ren the lord-lieutenant, " Of the number of l ot of ti, e "lug each of the national schools in Ireland, a s l - e lgio denominations to which the be ite?,.rt referred, to in the 14th page of the eighteenth p e. trela e f u e Commissioners of National Education 1 , 1 .11 1 81 1 in • l, ist of the vested school s , s t at i ng -1 bo at , d W hich situated ; 2, date of connex i on ' ki3 O ,7 l lut of ! 3 , name and religion of teacher • 4, ti ea 's 'a s lary from board ;5, amount of local' aid 44 1 : du r i n nl teacher's salary in the way of subscrip the.erit ° f lir t the year referred to in 18th report ; 6, ertris i s . s school fees paid during same teacher; 7, whether e eV; sidence provided for the ash B „'" l ,c'f patron • 9, number of children on the roll bllBl l 'ea sc hool ellt e distinguishing the number of the re, a h "urch, of Presbyterians, of Protestant Dis 9-111°Inali Catholics s r ; 10 , whether the Scrip. ture lessons were habitually used during the hours of united instruction for the same period. Similar returns respecting the non-vested pchools. Return from the clerk of this house of the respective dates at which each of the annual reports - of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland have been laid upon the table al this house, and of the dates at which they have been respectively distributed to the members of this house. The Earl of ABERDEEN (who spoke very inaudibly) said he wished to make a few observations in reply to the speech of the noble earl who had introduced the sub ject to their lordships. The noble earl had stated, first, that this system of national education had entirely failed —that it was vicious in its conception, and had entirely failed in its results. Now, he was quite ready to admit that it had not succeeded so extensively as it was expected to do when proposed by the noble earl oppo site. But if its success had not equalled the expecta tions then entertained, to what was the failure to be attributed ? (Hear, hear.) Was it not to be attributed to the noble earl and his friends ? (Hear, hear.) He lamented to find that a large proportion of the clergy of Ireland had from the first opposed the operation of this system. (Hear, hear.) Wherever it had been supported by the clergy it had been successful, and if they had but followed the example of that most learned, zealous, and enlightened prelate who had so long been at the head of the National Board, the success of the system would have been commensurate with its extent. (Hear.) But it had been the misfortune of Ireland that the attempts made for the improvement of that country had been almost always subverted to the purposes of sectarian difference, whether religious or political. (Hear.) It certainly was the duty of every public man to view with forbearance the opinions of those who were hostile to him ; but when he saw this noble system so obstinately opposed, and the chance, the best chance, and perhaps the only chance for the permanent improvement of Ireland rejected and wantonly thrown away, he confessed that he had some difficulty in repressing his feelings of indignation. (Hear.) Although he believed the system would have been more successful had it been supported as it ought to have been, he denied that it had failed in the manner described by the noble earl. The noble earl had very cavalierly set aside the reports of the commissioners, stating that ho could place no trust or confidence in them, they having been signed by the secretary, and not by the commissioners. Now he (Lord Aberdeen) relied with perfect confidence on those returns, believing that the commissioners had most anxiously discharged their duty, and that the returns were perfectly accurate. (Hear.) It appeared that from the commencement of the system up to the end of 1851, the increase had been constantly progressive, with the exception of the years 1847 and 1849, for reasons which were explained in the report. In the last year the increase in the number of schools was 157, and of scholars upwards of 9,000. The whole number of schools at the end of 1851 was 4,811, and the total number of pupils 529,000. (Hear, hear.) Now, with such a result, he thought th e s y stem could not be said to have failed. It might have been greater, and undoubtedly would have been greater, but for the obstacles to which he had alluded ; but still the num bers which he had mentioned certainly showed a very great extension of education under the system complained of by the noble earl. He had stated the , increase of the schools in 1851 to be 157. During the last year a still greater number of applications had been made, and especially from the province of Ulster, and these appli cations were a proof that education was increasing, and not diminishing, in that province. (Hear.) The main object, he apprehended, in the establish ment of these schools had been non-interference with the religious tenets of the children. It was a system of joint secular education, but separate religious instruction. That great object had been perfectly at tained, and he believed that since the very commence ment there had not been a single instance of proselytism in any quarter. The noble earl appeared to object to the omission of Scripture lessons of Scripture extracts. But he believed that Scripture lessons were most strongly ob jected to by the noble earl and his friends. It was said that it was a mutilation of the Word of Life—that free access to the Scriptures was the fundamental principle of Protestantism, and now the noble earl complained that the extracts were no longer used. But they were not proscribed. The use of them were encouraged in the vested schools, and recommended there. The noble earl wished for separate grants to each education society, and to all schools without distinction. But was he prepared to admit that the Roman Catholic population should re ceive their full portion of the public money for their schools, or was he not ? If so, the noble earl spoke the language of the most liberal of the Roman Catholic party. They would most cordially support the noble earl in his proposal, and he believed that some of the most distinguished prelates warmly advocated that course. Now, what would be the effect or such a proposal ? A grant could not be refused to the Roman Catholics in the ; same proportion as to others, whatever that proportion I might be. Whether the proportion might be five to one, or any other number, proportionate grants must be made ; and if so, Parliament and the Government would recog nise that system of separation which, as he had already said, must lead to that sectarian spirit which was the bane of Ireland. (Hear.) He did not profess to possess an accurate knowledge of the details of tie working 'of the system. It might in some respects be susceptible cf improvement, rules might be modified and made more clear, and additional regulations might be introduced. That possibly might be the case. But he did think it would be the greatest misfortune for Ireland if this system of education should be put an end to. (Hear.) He would venture to say that the noble earl opposite (the Earl of Derby), who first introduced this system into Ireland, had never conferred a greater benefit on that country (hear), or done anything for which he had greater reason to be proud and happy. (Hear, hear.) He believed the noble earl (the late Lord-Lieutenant) had made inquiries into the working of the system , and if he recollect e d r ightly th e no bl e ear l th en a t th e head of the Government declared at the beginning of the ses sion that he had looked into the subject, and although he might contemplate some alterations and improve ments, it was not his intention to make any suggestions to Parliament on the subject. (Hear, hear.) He thought such testimony as that ought to weigh with their lord ships. (Hear, hear.) He should be sorry to reject any practical improvement in the regulations by which the system was administered, but he trusted their lordships would preserve the principle of the system (hear) ; and he did hope, notwithstanding the opposition of a large portion of the clergy (which opposition he hoped and believed was diminishing), that the system introduced by the noble earl opposite would prove a blessing to Ire land, and that it would be attended with the happiest results. (Hear, hear.) The Earl of EGLINTON thought the subject well worthy of their lordships' consideration, involving as it did the education of several hundred thousands of chil dren. (Hear, hear.) Knowing that a very large pro portion of the clergy of the Established Church in Ire land were opposed to the system—that proportion amounting to more than three-fourths of that body— knowing that amongst the opponents of the measure were such men as the primate, the Bishop of Ossory, the present Bishop of Meath, and many other eminent indi viduals —knowing that it was also opposed by such men as the noble earl who had just sat down, the best resi sident landlord in Ireland—he confessed that he went to Ireland with the impression that there must be some thing wrong in the system, and that a reform ought to be introduced. (Hear, hear.) He, therefore, paid the most unremitting attention to the subject, and came to the conclusion that although there was much that might be altered, if alterations could be carried into effect with propriety, still he saw no plan by which the wishes of the noble earl could be satisfied without run ning the risk, and he might almost say incurring the certainty, of driving away almost all the Roman Catho lies from the schools. (Hear, hear.) Feeling, therefore, that he could not recommend any change which would I not have that most dangerous tendency, he did not dare to propose any alteration ; and when he wrote to his noble friend (the Earl of Derby) previous to the meeting couldo f not Parliament, take thheein any halthough thought a h e Parliamentary committee mig ht advanta g eously inquire stated initiative hs into the subject. The failure, if failure it was, of the present system, was very much owing to the refusal on the part of so large a portion of the clergy and laity to join in it. (Hear, hear.) He though t it ver y unfortu nate that any persons in Ireland should refuse to make even a trial of the national system of education, but he did full justice to the sentiments with which they were animated. He was sure that the parties to whom he alluded felt themselves unable to agree conscientiously to a system by which the reading of the Bible was ex cluded, and he confessed that this did seem a startling proposition to any Protestant. (Hear, hear.) But although it was unfortunate that they should have done so, he thought their refusal to countenance the system had tended to increase the number , of Roman Catholic pupils. There was no doubt that the Roman Catholics had gained possession of the greater number of the grants, and had accordingly more power over the schools ; and he could not but think that the partial failure of the system was very much owing to that. But he regretted that the noble earl wh o had preceded him in the government of Ireland—and thi s was the only instance in which he laid blame at his door —should have avowedly refused to extend the Government patron age to any but those who concurred in the national sys tem. He thought this line of policy ill-judged land unfair—unfair, because it deprived the greater portion of the clergy of Ireland of an opportunity of rising in their profession ; and ill-judged, because it almost barred the door against men of high feeling and high principle, and prevented their coming into a system by telling them that they must come into it if they wished to be pro moted. If there was, as the noble earl opposite had stated, any feeling gaining ground among the Protestant Clergy in favour of the system, it was very much owing to the policy of which he spoke having been abandoned. He could not go so far as the noble earl near him had done in condeming the system entirely. It appeared to him to be a good system for a country situated as Ire land was ; probably the best that could have been selected for that country. The Earl of CLARENDON observed that his noble friend, in saying that it was unjust and unfair to select only those persons for preferment by the Crown who were favourable to the national system of education, had only repeated that which had been constantly said in Ireland. It had even been stated in Dublin that clergy men were tortured, so to speak, into the declaration of their opinions with respect to the national system; and he was glad that his noble friend had alluded to the sub ject, because it gave him an opportunity of meeting the statement with a distinct and unqualified denial. (Hear, hear.) He never, that he remembered, asked a clergy man his opinions on the subject in his life, because when he had to discharge the most sacred duty of selecting a fit person for Church preferment, he could assure their lordships that he previously instituted every inquiry within his power as to the piety, learning, habits, and an tecedents of the candidate ; and amen those antecedents . must be reckoned the course • which he had taken with re spect to the momentous questilon of education. He fairly admitted that, cceteris paribus, he always gave preferment to the clergyman who agreed rith him in the views which he entertained himself ; and h.e should not have done his duty if he had placed a mar in, a position to thwart him in a policy which ho conceived i w. as advantageous to Ireland. If their lordships, however, wt rre to form their judgment from what had been stated by his noble friend, they would suppose that the whole Churc h. patronage of Ireland was vested in the Crown, whereasi, the fact was, that where there was one case in which a clergyman looked to the Crown for preferment, there were ten cases in which he looked somewhere else. Ho was very glad to hear his noble friend affirm that, though ho went to Ireland preju diced against the system, yet, having exercised on that, as on every other subject, his own excellent judgment and clear understanding, he had come to the conclusion that it was the best system that could 'be adopted in the country. He believed most fully that the clergy of the Established Church had foregone a great .opportunity of doing good, and had omitted to perform ii part of their most sacred duty by refusing to adopt the national system of education. They would attend no school, nor give any religious in struction, unless the doctrines taught were entirely in ac cordance with their own religic vas belief. To his mind this appeared a great mischief, beca also it would leave the poor in igmorance and all the concon iitants of vice. They might as well refuse a morsel of bree I to a starving man, or re fuse medical relief to a man ati a 'eked with the cholera, be cause he had not observed tho same regimen. The late Bishop of Meath said last yea: r that the clergyman of the parish was the minister by ls.-w established, and it was therefore his duty to attend the school which was esta blished by law ; and that the ugh he might not like the law, yet, so long as it was the 1,14 w, it was his duty to ad minister religious instruction to those who attended the school. He had heard with r( ;gret, but not with surprise, various other topics referred to by his noble friend, but he would not detain their lordshii e; by dwelling upon them. He would only say that he a b om aid. with his noble friend in hoping that their lordships w euld not now sanction any change, or even hold out any. hope of a change, which would injure the great cause of education among the poorer classes of the people of Ireland.. The Bishop of LIMERICK said that the national system had been much misrep resented and calumniated. lie had been resident thirty-t-ivo years in Ireland, during which period he had occupied 'lost responsible situations. Ire had resided nine years in Dublin ; he had been seventeen years rector of the 'Large and populous parish of Roscrea, in Tipperary ; he eras then appointed to the deanery of Limerick, the see oiF which he now filled ; he had had ample time and opportunity to observe the working of the system ; and it - was his sincere conviction that no system of education vras so well suited for Ire land as the national system. <Hear.) The Bishop of LONDON said—Opposition to the system, as it was carried ou t in Ireland, was more necessary now, because attempts would shortly be made to introduce it into England. Their lordships could not be too often or too much upon the alert against the in sidious attacks upon the Established Church of the land. The Bishop of NORWICH believed they were all agreed in this, that no private or national system of education could be considered a t all perfect if it did not embrace the religious element, but to apply the religious element to schools open to diffi ;rent denominations was a difficult if not an impossible task, nor was the. diffi culty at all removed, as some noble lords seemed tt; fancy, if in the country where -the schools existed there was a vast disproportion between Protestants and Roman Catholics. The Earl of HARROWBYthought after the lengthened period that the system had now been in operation they ought to be able to produce some evidence of its results. Had the animosity between the Roman Ca- tholic and the Protestant be,come less rancorous than formerly ? Surely the system must have produced its effect one way or another, and now after twenty years' experience of the system, they - ought to be able to pro duce some evidence of its results., (Hear, hear.) It was really most unjust—most ungenerous, to be con tinually casting odium upon those who were conscien tiously opposed to the system as it was at present ad ministered, and he would therefore suggest that instead of indulging in such uncalled-for censures, they ought to busy themselves in ascertaining, through the instru. mentality of a committee of inquiry, what had been the effect of the mixed system of education in Ireland. (Hear.) The Earl of DERBY fully concurred with the noble earl who had just sat down. It was high time that they had some fruits of the working of the system and until they had some positive evidence of the working of the .System, it was most unjust and most ungenerous to be continually laying its failure at the door of the Protes . tant clergy Of freland. (Hear.) He also conceived that after the lapse of 20 or 21 years a great many ex periments must have been made, and a great many com munications passed, upon the operation of the schools ; and he thought the time had arrived when an inquiry might be beneficially instituted, both by this and the other house, into the effects arising from the system. (Hear.) The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that so great a preponderance of the argument had been in favour of the national system of education, that it was not neces• sary for him to add anything ; but as to the expediency of entering into a large inquiry now on the subject, he would recommend their lordships to pause, and seek for all the information they could, obtain before they con. sented to such a course. The Earl of CLANCARTY replied. The motion was then agreed to, and their lordships adjourned at 20 minutes to 10. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY. The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. Mr. BLAKE took the oaths and his seat for Galway. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a second time :—Copper Miners in England Company, Midland Railway (Amend ment Acts, &c.), Scottish Midland Junction Railway, and the Lands Improvement Company; BOSTON ELECTION. The SPEAKER intimated that he had received a letter from Messrs. Fearon, the Parliamentary agents, stating that it was not intended to proceed with the pe tion against the return for Boston. GUILDFORD ELECTION. Lord SEYMOUR attended at the bar, and reported that the committee,l on the Guildford election petition, had determined that Captain Mangles and Mr. J. Bell were duly elected for the borough at the last election. They had also come to a resolution that the allegations of bribery and treating were made without reasonable ground, and were frivolous and vexatious, and that, therefore, all expenses ought to be borne by the peti tioners and their agents. HULL ELECTION. Mr. LABOUCHERE reported that the Hull election committee had determined that Mr. James Clay and Viscount Goderich were not duly elected for Hull at the last election. They had also come to the following reso lution :—That Mr. James Clay and Viscount Goderich were guilty by their agents of bribery and treating, but it was not proved with theirknowledge or consent ; also, that corrupt practices had prevailed to a considerable extent at the last election ; and further that there had existed at the last, and at many former elections, a system of bribing poor voters by the payment of 30s. a-head. On the motion of the hon. member the evidence was ordered to be laid on the table. The hon. member also gave 'notice that to-morrow he would move that no writ for' the borough be issued before the 12th April. RYE ELECTION. Sir J. PAKINGTON reported that the committee had determined that Mr. Wm. Alex. Mackinnon was not duly elected for Rye ; that the last election was a void election ; and that Mr. Wm. Alex. Mackinnon was, by his agents, guilty of treating at that election, but it was not proved that it was committed with his knowledge. The committee recommended that a further inquiry should he made, under the sth and 6th of Victoria, cap. 102, into the allegations of bribery contained in the petition ; and they thought that no new writ should be issued until the resul.t of that inquiry was made known. PETITIONS. Mr. PHINN presented several petitions from the metropolis, in favour of intervention in the case of Ed ward Murray. Mr. COWAN presented a petition from Edinburgh, against any endowment to Maynooth. Mr. W. PATTEN presented several petitions from Lancashire against opening the Crystal Palace of Sun days. Mr. TURNER presented a similar petition from Liver pool. Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition in favour of the London University being allowed to return mem bers to Parliament. Mr. CHRISTOPHER presented several petitions agains M t the admission of Jews into Parliament. Mr. ONCRIEFF .presented several petitions from Scotland and Ireland, praying for the abolition of Uni versity Tests.. Mr. W. J. FOX presented several petitions from the working men in the Tower Hamlets, Southwark, and London, in favour of the Crystal Palace being opened on Sundays. Mr. SPOONER pres ented several petitions against the grant to Maynooth. Mr. ALCOCK presented a petition from Surrey, in favour of interference in the case of Edward Murray. Mr. HUME presented a petition from Mr. Wallace, formerly a member of the house, praying f f o rm worr the refking orm of the Scotch Sheriffs' Courts ; a Pettit men belonging to the Montrose Library, in favour of institutions. Papers being sent to literary a nd scienti fi c Sir F. KELLY presented several petitions from Suf folk against the admission of Jews into Parliament. Mr. CRAWFORD presented a petition from Stirling against the occupation of Rome by the French troops. SCOTCH UNIVERSITIES. The LORD-ADVOCATE of Scotland gave notice that on an early day he should move for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the admissions to lay chairs of the Universities of Scotland. SCOTCH BANKRUPTS. The right honourable gentleman also gave notice that early after Easter he should move for leave to introduce a bill to improve the Bankruptcy Law in Scotland. THE SHIP HERCULES Mr. MAHONY said, on the 20th of January the emigrant ship Hercules, with a large number of emi grants on board, put into the port of Queenstown. It was then found that the small-pox and typhus fever were raging to a fearful extent among the passengers, and he wanted to know what the Government intended to do in the matter. Sir J. YOUNG said it was perfectly true as stated by the hon. member, that the Hercules had put into Queenstown. She was an old man-of-war and had been sent to the Isle of Skye to lake in a large number of emigrants. A few days after she went to sea the small pox and typhus fever broke out, and she was forced to put into Queenitown, where all the THE SUN, LONDON .. 2 . TUESDAY ]EVENING, MARCH 8, 1853. passengers had been landed, and the shi . p herself fumi gated. DAMIEN SHIP CANAL. Mr. HUME seeing the noble lord the m ern] ier for the city of London in :his place he wished to aka h im a ques tion on a subject of great importance to the whole world. It was as regarded the forn 18, 1 Lion of a ship canal across tl &Isthmus of Darien. :publication had been made upon the subject by the Prosic lent of the United States, and, as anything connected wit h the com merce of the world must be interesting to th e country, he wished to ask thc.t noble lord whether the G overnment had received any information on the subject of the undertaking for to rming a ship canal to connect the Atlantic with the Pacific, aad whether tl Le noble lord was prepared to &Ate the views of the Government on the subject Lord J. RUSSELL said the question related to a subject of much importance. Some time alto, a project was formed in America for constructing a ship canal across the Isthmus o f Dariea ; but the scheme -was after wards changed, so that the canal should only admit coasting vessels, instead of merchantmen and her Majesty's G overnment therefore did not ai and of it. More recently, however, another plan had be en proposed to make a ship canal across the Isthmus 30 feet deep, and although the Government at present coulc . not meddle with the details of that Scheme, they would :rot be quite ready to co-operate with the United States in carrying out the scheme. All that he could say now was, that so far as the general outline was concerned, the Govern ment approved of it, and they thotight if it could ulti mately be adopted, it ' would tend very it iaterially to favour and increase the commerce of the world. LETTERS FOR AUSTRALIA. , Sir De L. EVANS wished to know if i ;he Govern ment could supply the public with any inforr nation as to the letters which had been received from the Australian and forwarded en to their destination ? (H ear, hear.) Mr. J. WILSON said, in reply to the galitant officer, he had to state that the only letters which. were da maged by being on board the Australian we re in a bag for Melbourne. The bag was brought back to London, and after the letters had been sorted and dried they were packed in boxes and sent on by thLe overland mail. The directions of all the letters were made out, with the exception of seventy, which were so much damaged that their directions were quite unintelligible, and they were, therefore, depositsd in the Dead Letter - Office. (Hear.) Of these seventy letters, twenty-two had been since returned, and the remaining fifty were open to the inspection of those persons who might be anxious to ascertain if they were their own. (Hear, hear.) ENCUMBERED ESTATES COURT. Mr. WHITESIDE wished, to ask the Chief Secretary of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, what are the inten tions of her Majesty's Government with respect to the continuance of the Encumbered Estates Court ? Sir J. YOUNG E aid the question was still under the consideration of the Lord-Lieutenant. SILVER COINAGE. Mr. BASS wished to ask the right hon. gentlenian the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether Government intended to take any steps to increase the supply of silver, which had been found ;very scarce of late ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the demand for gold was so extremely pressing at pre sent that there was no chance of the Govern ment being able to increase the production of silver coinage for some time to come. At present the Mint was coining half a million sovereigns a week, just twice as much as the maximum supply for which arrange ments had been made. With regard to silver coinage, some time ago 92,0001. worth were struck off, and the Mint had been given to understand that the pressure was not now so bad that the public could not wait until the demand for gold had decreased. Mr. HUME wished to know if there was any inten tion to establish a mint in Australia ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the subject had been under the anxious considera tion of the Government. The mind, however, of the Government was made up on the subject, and their views only remained to be put into shape before being brought before Parliament. AVERAGE PRICE OF CORN. Sir G. B. PECHELL wished to ask the President of the Board of Trade when he intends to introduce a mea sure for amending the present system of ascertaining the average prices of British corn ? Mr. CARDWELL said the whole subject of collect. ing the agricultural statistics was now under the con sideration of the Government. THE CA SE OF MURRAY. s Lord D. STUART wished to know if the noble lord the member for the city of London had ascertained if Mr. Edward Murray was a British subject. Lord J. RUSSELL said he had looked through all the papers and dispatches upon the case of Mr. Murray, and he found that Mr. Murray was uniformly treated as a British subject. LONDON BRIDGE APPROACHES FUND. In answer to a qtestion put by Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, Mr. WILSON mid that two-thirds of the return referred to had already been laid on the table of the house. The rema'ning third was not in the power of Government to furnish, but it was the duty of the city of London to furnish it. He had, on Saturday, die patched a messenger to request that that return might be made as soon as possible ; and he was able to inform the house that it had been received, and could be pro cured by honourable members before the debate on the subject came on. RAILWAY ACCIDENTS. Sir J. PAKINGFON said, that seeing the President of the Board of Trade in his place, he wished to put to him a question, of which he had not given notice. He wished to ask him I his attention had been directed to the great sacrifice of human life by means of railway accidents, and whdher it was his intention to consider any measure which might prevent such frequent catas trophes. Mr. CARDWELL said that the right hon. gentleman had only done him justice in supposing that he could an swer a question of such a description without notice. Before entering office he had been an eye witness of one of those catastrophes. Upon coming into office he had communicated wit'. the railway authorities, and re quested them to give their attention to the subject of establishing a means of communication between the guard and driver. The subject was at present under going the most careful consideration, and he had sent Captain Symond to observe the plans adopted on the French and Belgian railways, and that gentleman would shortly be able to g.ve his evidence before the committee now sitting to inquire into that subject. SHERIFF'S COURT (SCOTLAND) BILL. In reply to a question put by Mr. CRAWFURD, The LORD ADVOCATE stated that it was not his intention to take the debate upon the second reading of this bill before next Thursday week. In reply to Mr. J. MACGREGOR, Mr. WILSON said the Commissioners of Customs had shown the greatest anxiety during the last three or four years, obviating the inconvenience arising from the examination of the luggage of persons arriving from France. He, in conjun c ti on w i t h the commissioners, had considered the subject, and they had made arrange ments by which officers would be in attendance at the Lon don-bridge station to meet the night train from Dover, and thus the detention of passengers would be provented. DETENTION OF PASSENGERS AT DOVER. Mr. JAS. MACGREGOR begged to call the attention of t'he honourable gentleman opposite, the Secretary of the !Treasury, to the delay that is at present experienced at Dover by persons travelling between this country and France. It happened that on various occasions the per sons travelling to London from Paris by the night mail were unable to reach London at the early hour they might have done were they not detained at Dover to have their luggage examined, and thereby prevented from travelling by the first train. It was not his intention now to press the question of which he had given notice on this subject, but he thought it would be well if the house were put in possession of some data on which to form an opinion as to the policy of introducing some modification of the present spstem of examining passengers' luggage between Dover and the metropolis. The number of passengers travelling , last year 'between England and France was 172,600. Of that number 22,272 made the journey between London and Paris by night, leaving by the half-past seven train, and accomplishing the distance in 12 hours; 10,210 persons came from Paris to London by the night packet. He would suggest, in such a case, that the same facilities which the French Custom-house afforded to travellers should be extended by . our Custom-house officers. Mr. WILSON—The question of which the honourable gentleman gave notice had reference exclusively to the night mail from Paris—departing from Paris at seven o'clock, and arriving in London at eight o'clock in the morning. It is but fair, in justice to the commissioners of customs, to say, that it is their desire to afford the greatest possible facility to passengers. One of the arrangements that has been made by them in reference to this particular question is, that their officers should remain up all night, in order to examine the baggage at the station, prior to the departure of the London mails. lam further bound to say that it appears, on inquiry, that the arrival of the boats, especially in winter, is uncertain, and that, on the departure of the mail trains, it frequently happens that passengers are left behind, and more frequently that their luggage is left behind. I have had a co mmunication with the commissioners of customs on the matter, and, after consideration, they have made an arrangement to meet the difficulty. It is proposed that officers of the custom-house shall be in attendance at London-bridge station in order to don, that at wa th s they sh ou ld meet the night train from Dover; but as it would fre quently happen that the boat would arrive i n D over long before the departure of the train, and passengers proposed while complain that they had an hour to spend in D over need lessly,while facilities wtieersewaegraeinagdoertdaiend in detained in London, Lo not take away the facilities in Dover. If the passenger arrives in time, his luggage will be examined in Dover, and if the time does not suit, the examination will take place in London. (Hear, hear.) I hope the officers in Dover will receive instructions to telegraph on the departure of the train, so that the authorities an London m a y b e in formed whether the examination has taken place in Dover or not, so that if it has taken place in Dover it will not be necessary to detain them in London. To enable the autho rities to take the names of aliens, it will be necessary that the ship list of passengers should be sent forward with the baggage apply to it—if you look to the aggregate amount of Bri tish tonnage entered inwards and cleared outwards, or the amount of tonnage that is owned in the ports of the Bri tish empire, ,or the number of men that is employed in the mercantile marine, or the activity that prevails in all the great ports where the building of ships, is carried on—if you measure the question by any one of those tests, they present to ,you but one uniform result—a result of unex ampled prosperity. (Hear, hear.) Sir, it is no part of my province —and certainly I shall not trespass into that ground—to account for this prosperity. Perhaps the time has come when I might enter into those topics without any fear of reawakening ancient controversies ; but, irrespec tive of those controversies altogether, there are peculiar reasons which present themselves, and enter largely into the case ; but whatever they may be, I shall not run any risk of awakening controversies on an occasion on which I am merely asking for permission to introduce a bill, and may anticipate that I will receive the concurrence of the committee. (Hear, hear.) The committee are well ac quainted that, from the time of the peace to the time of Mr. Huskissori, instead of there being an increase in the number of ships owned by the subjects of this country, there was a positive diminution, and also a diminution in the number of men employed. In 1815, the tonnage amounted to 2,681,000 ; in 1825 it had fallen to 2,533,000, and the men had fallen in the same proportion. From the time of Mr. Huskisson down to the present, there is scarcely an instance that does not continuously show the reverse ; and if we compare the year that has just expired with the year 1849 we will find that, while the total amount of British tonnage inwards and outwards amounted in 1849 to 8,152,000 tons, it amounted in 1852 to no less than 8,727,000 tons. (Hear.) And if you take the number of ships built in 1849 you will find them amount to .121,000 tons, while in 1852 they had risen to 167,000 tons. (Hear, hear.) But is it only in material prosperity that the shipping interest has been elevated ? (Hear, hear.) The community is indebted to the right honourable gentleman the member for Taunton for a mea sure of great importance, and which has tended to elevate the character of the mercantile marine. Ido not mean to say that the details of the measure may not be susceptible of improvement ; that might naturally be expected when he had to deal, for the first time, with a question that in volved such complicated arrangements ; but I think if you look to the broad result, the house and the country have reason to be grateful to my right honourable friend for the policy which he has mainly inaugurated. (Hear, hear.) Let me ask you to look to the result of that important question—the examination of British masters and mates. (Hoar, hear.) It was painful to see, during the discussion on the navigation laws, the reflections that were made on that hard working body of our fellow-countrymen ; but it appears that the total number of masters and mates that have obtained certificates of competence in two years, amounts to s,o69—(hear, hear)—and let me call your par ticular attention to this, that whereas my right honourable friend had provided in respect to those that had already served, that they should not be obliged to pass an exami nation to obtain a certificate of competency, their certifi cate of service entitling them to the same privileges as those who had passed an examination, yet so gre a t i s th e value set in th e mercantile marine on the circumstance of having passed the examination, that out of this total num ber of 5,069 who obtained certificates of competency, no less than 1,879 had already obtained certificates of service, and need not be subjected to examination. (Hear, hear.) There were to be found in the naval service, men who were thus corning in voluntarily to pass an examination and to obtain certificates of competency, and this is a proof of the moral prokress that is being made by our mercantile marine. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman, as it appears t o me , most judiciously put an en d t o that baneful system which went by the name of the Merchant Seamans' Fund, from which in return for a compulsory tax they had b. precarious provision for declining years, and also an insolvent fund ; and I am happy to say that by the new arrangement that which was a complicated process works most agreeably under the officers appointed to manage it. (Hear, hear.) There is now in pro gress a s y s t em f or providing for the comforts of sailors in their declining years, and for ad ministering to their material as well as to their moral ne cessities. There has grown up a system called a system for the establishment of sailors' homes, having comfortable accommodation, a re g istration, savings b an k s , an d a ll ot h er appliances calculated to secure the comfort of the seaman and to elevate his character. (Hear, hear.) With the permission of the house I shall read a short extract from the report of the Sailors' Home, with which I happen myself to be more particularly acquainted, having known it from the time it was founded, in the year 1846, by Prince Albert, up to the present time. (Hear, hear.) I think the committee will listen with interest to a passage from the report that describes its material progress. The following extract is taken from the report in reference to the Liverpool Sailors' Home : " All seamen visiting this port have now not only the great advantages, hitherto presented to them under the temporary arrangements of theinstitution for the last seven years, of recording a good character, of depositing th e i r money in safety, an d o f h av i ng it transmitted to any quarter they may desire ; but they have now the oppor tunity afforded them of enjoying in this spacious and splendid establishment a degree of substantial comfort and security to which they have hitherto been strangers." Now, sir, I mention these things bacause in introducing this subject to the house it is nght you should know what is the present state, both material and moral, o f th e dif ferent branches of th e service to which my measure refers. I have endeavoured to compress this within the shortest , space that would allow me to give an accurate view of the subject to which I call attention. And now permit me to tell you what are the subjects which the Government have had under their consideration with regard tothemercantile marine. (Hear, hear.) First, they have had under their consideration the question of lights ; secondly, the question of passing tolls ; thirdly, the restrictions that exist with respect to the manning of the mercantile marine ; fourthly, the question of volunteering into the navy ; fifthly, sal vage ; sixthly, desertion ; seventhly, the fees to consuls ; and eighthly, the question of pilotage. (Hear, hear.) On every one of these it will be my duty to trouble the com mittee, but I shall do it as shortly as possible ; and first of all I will enter upon that important subject of the lights. The complaint made by the mercantile marine is this, they say that under the system as it now exists in this country dues are compulsorily levied on the mercantile marine and disposed of by the independent action of a self-elected body, without being subject to the control of Parliament. That is a grievance of which the mercantile marine complains. To the principle involved in that demand the Government strictly and without reserve subscribe, and I hope I shall satisfy you before I conclude that the object which the mercantile marine has in view will be efficiently and com pletely met. (Hear, hear.) Now let us b ear i n m i n d what is the history o f this question. By the original law the erection of beacons and lights at sea was part of the royal prerogative, but so long ago as the Bth of Elizabeth the Trinity House was entitled to exercise that power. (Hear.) The mode in which they proceeded was this—when the mercantile marine desired to erect lights they mem ora li se d the board of the T r i n ity House : they required them to advance their capital in erecting the light, and they agreed to contribute a certain toll as a remuneration for that out lay ; and the usual provision was, that the surplus revenue should be employed for the purpose for which in part the Trinity House was incorporated, namely, for the relief of distressed persons engaged in the mercantile marine service. (Hear, hear.) The practice has continued from that day to the present time. With regard to the lights in Scotland and Ireland, ,they are placed by statutory provision under two bodies known as the Commissioners of Northern Lights and the Ballast Board of Dublin. (Hear, hear.) Now the question is, how have the powers possessed by them being exercised—have the lights of this country been effi cient, and have the powers been exercised for the purposes for which they were given ? In the year 1845 a committee was presided over by my hon. friend the member for Mon trose, whose services on this subject have been eminent, and that committees had the satisfaction of reporting ac cording to the evidence laid before them, that generally tho public lights on the coasts of England, under the ma nagement of the Trinity House—on the coasts of Scotland, under the management of the Northern Commissioners in Edinburgh—and the lights on the coasts of Ireland, under the management of the Ballast Board in Dublin, were all maintained in an efficient state. I beg to read the follow ing passage from their report :—" Your committee has the satisfaction of reporting that, according to the evidence before them, the public general lights on the coasts of England, under the management of the Trinity House in London ; those on the coasts of Scotland, under the ma nagement of the Northern Commissioners in Edinburgh ; and the lights on the coast of Ireland, under the manage ment of the Ballast Board in Dublin, are all maintained in an efficient state. Among the witnesses, Captain Moore, who has been for 23 years in the trade between the United States of America and England, states that he cobsiders the English lights ' on the whole, b e tt er th an those of the United States, Captain Washington, R.N., of the surveying department on the coast, says that ' ge nerally speaking the lights, light vessels, buoys, and bea cons are efficient ; the lights brilliant, and the lighthouses clean, and in high order.' Captain Denham, R.N., also a marine surveyor, and long employed on the coasts, bears the same testimony to the efficiency of the lights of the United Kingdom. On the 19th of February, 1844, the secretary to the Trinity House in London, in a letter to the secretary of the Ballast Board of Dublin, ' expresses the great satisfaction with which the Trinity House had . received the report of their visiting committee, and of the efficient state of the lighting apparatus throughout Ire land.' And, on the 21st of February, 1844, the secretary to the Trinity House, in a letter to the secretary of the Commissioners of Northern Lights, states :—" I have it in command to request you will express to the commissioners the satisfaction of the elder brethren at being enabled to communicate that the lamps and entire apparatus were found to be in perfect and efficient order throughout the lighthouses in that part of the United Kingdom." Now, sir, those were the opinions which the committee thought it only duo to those bodies to place emphatically on record. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, it is some time since 1845, and the committee will naturally ask, are you in possession of any evidence with regard to the present state of the lights of the United Kingdom, and can you show from unimpeach able testimony the state they have been in down to a later period. (Hear, hear) ? Now, sir, who are our great rivals in maritime supremacy, and to whose example or authority do we appeal when we desire to see whether our institu tions are in a sound and efficient state ? Sir, in all matters of material prosperity and maritime supremacy, if we seek for a rival amongst other nations, the palm will be assigned to our competitors in the United States ; and certainly, in the committee of 1845, the somparison that ran through the minds of its members was, as my hon. friend the member for Montrose will remember, a comparison chiefly between Great Britain and the United States. (Hear.) In the year 1851, a board of inquiry was ordered by the American Government to inquire into the condition of the lighthouse establishments of the United States, and in the year 1852 their report was laid before the Senate. The committee will naturally be very anxious to hear what they say abo u t the lights in Great Britain, and I beg to call attention to a remarkable passage in their report, which finds fault with the system as it exists in the United States, and quotes, for emulation by the United States, the example of Great Britain. (Hear.) The following is the passage to which I beg to call the attention of the' committee : " That the lights of the United States do not compare favourably, either in efficiency or in economy, with those of Great Britain and France. In the Trinity House corpora tion of London, the important subjects of experimenting upon different descriptions of combustibles for lighthouses, testing the mathematical perfection of apparatus, investi gating the important subject of ventilation, &c., are con fided to the world-renowned Michael Faraday; upon the subject of constriction and its accessories, Mr James Walker, a distinguished civil engineer, is employed. In Scotland, the lights and other aids to navigation are under the immediate direction and superintendence of the able and distinguished engineer Mr. Alan Stephenson. In Ireland. also, the lights are in charge of a competent engineer, Mr. George Halpin. . . . To expect that our withligphetes st should compare, in point of excellence and econ omy, 80 constituted as thos e name d would be to ex y stems er out of anarchy and confu s i on , an d perfection out of osruch various and imp er f ec t elements. In England, the Duke of Wellington p res id es, while the prince, the peer, the admi aranld, tdheevicesominionaonns for alleviatingeandere the hardshipstiredseacapt ain an si d t l to ess g e e n th in e g r the dangers of the mariner in approaching their dangerous coast." With respect to our success under that system, whatever may be its -faults, which we have hitherto pur sued,tghattha tot e x t e p n e d e t s th to ei m r lairightitma e to su u c o c in es p s a es re , , - w and ithythoueyr this is th e t es ti mony of your great rivals—rivals in c e o v ns erY ile h r in lights would be to expect order out of confusion, and per fection out of imp er f ec t e l ements. (Hear, hear.; A pi•e judice has prevailed with regard to the application of the funds of the Trinity House, and no person who hears me can fail to have heard remarks made with respect to the enormous receipts paid into their coffers, and doubts expressed as to the mode in which they have been em ployed. It is very natural that, where there is no system of perfect control in reference to the accounts, there should be misapprehension and misconstruction, and I am not making any complaint that those impressions should prevail, but let me ask of the committee to consider the real circumstances of the case. In the year 1836 you im posed upon the corporation of the Trinity House the ne cessity of purchasing a great number of private light houses, and incurring an expenditure which amounts on the whole to no less than one million and a quarter. During the interval that has elapsed since 1836, they have not been occupied, with regard to their surplus revenues, either in funding them for their own benefit, or in dis tributing them in some improper channel ; but what are the facts? That money has been applied for the purpose of liquidating the debt which you imposed upon them ; and, the debt in 1836 of a million and a quarter has been reduced to 97,5001. (Hear.) It should also be recollected that the differential dues, abolished by th e rec i proc it y treaty, have be en compensated for to private individuals out •of the tolls paid by the mercantile marine ; that, at least, is no fault of the corporation ; it may have been wrong or it may have been right, but justice requires that this should be stated, because it is the truth. (Hear, hear.) Concurrently with this reduction of debt, there has been the following reduction of light dues : —ln 1849 there was a reduction that by estimate amounted to 80,0001., and in 1852 there was a reduction of 38,000/. ; and witheue en tering into details at the present moment, I have the pleasure of informing the committee that I do not think the budget of reductions has been exhausted. (Hear.) Then comes the question to which, with the permission of the house, I will apply myself, namely, what is the proper mode of providing that the mercantile' marine shall .have those advantages of control over receipts and expenditure, and the accountability and responsibility to Parl*noti which the mercantile interest, justly in our opinion, think they are entitled to? (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Montrose considered the constitution of the Trinity House in two committees, and here is the recommendation that was given by the committee that sat in 1834 :—" Your committee recommend one board resident in London. The constitution of the (Trinity House) board is that of self election, and your committee have been anxious to ascer tain whether any and what constituency could be obtained to give the board a more liberal character • but they have been unable t o fi n d ou t any proper constituency, and do not at present see how they can recommend any great alteration. Upon the whole, your committee are of opinion that the corporation of the Trinity House, of Deptford Strond, having be e n c h ar t ere d ' f or the good government and increase of navigation,' and the office of bnoyage and bea,conage having been granted to that body upon the sur render thereof by the Lord High Admiral, and the greater part of the lighthouses in England having been erected, and being now maintained by that corporation, and this committee being satisfied, after inquiring into the lights now under their charge, that the said corporation are well calculated, after some modifications in the regulations under which they admit their members, to have the management and control of the whole department of lights, recommend that all gen era l p u bli c li g ht s i n the United Kingdom be placed under the management of the said corporation." Again, in 1845, there was a committee over which my hon. friend presided, and a recommendation was made that there should be only one board resident in London, and that that central board should be the Trinity Board ; and that one-third of the Trinity Board should be nominated by the Crown. The Government have carefully considered those recommendations. (Hear.) We think that there should be an additional control over the accounts of're ceipts and expenditure by some person whose station in the executive Government renders him responsible to Par liament. (Hear.) That is the opinion which the Govern ment entertain, and we shall be ready to state our reasons for holding it. (Hear, hear.) We think there are objec tions to the proposal to consolidate the lights of Ireland and Scotland under the management of the Trinity House, because the commissioners act gratuitously in Scotland, and because it would raise in Ireland an impression with re gard to centralization which we have no regard to give any suspicion of in regard to our arrangements. (Hear, hear.) Then with regard to the composition of the Trinity souse, the power of nominating one-third of the elder brethren by the Crown would confer patronage on the Crown, but leave its nominees in a minority of one to two within the walls, and it might have a great tendency to create what is always most undesirable in any governing body—a need less hostility between those who owe their seats to one mode of election and those who owe it to another mode of election. (Hear.) It is, therefore, desirable that these three bodies should not be changed in their own constitu tion, but should be placed under the control of an authority responsible to Parliament for all their receipts and expen diture ; and therefore this" house, acting directly on the Executive Government, will virtually exercise that con trol which my hon. friend stated ought to be exercised on behalf of the mercantile marine ; and I venture to say that is a more constitutional and efficient control than could be attained by any partial change in those bodies. Those being the views of the Goveanment, they were communi cated to the Trinity House, and they returned an answer which I shall lay on the table of the house—an answer agreed to unanimously by the Trinity House, and signed by the Master of the Trinity House, his Royal Highness the Prince Consort. What the Government desired was, first, to establish a control by a Government authority directly responsible to Parliament over the collection and expenditure of their revenues ; secondly, a periodical audits ; and, thirdly, to suspend the granting of new pen sions and charities. The. Trinity House authorities were pleased to state their entire acquiescence in the first two propositions; and with regard to the third, they put in a plea, which came from trustees appointed by charters dated from the earliest period, for the purpose of distri buting charities to decayed mariners, which I am sure the committee will receive with respect. But that claim has ' not been acceeded to by the Government. The Govern ment consider that whatever may have been the origin of those light dues, the time has arrived when, from the increase of commerce and the change in the practice and feeling on those matters, the mercantile marine are entitled to have this tax levied for light dues and applied to light dues. (Hear, hear.) And in my answer to the Trinity House I have spoken in these words :—" The principles which regulate the receipt, control, and expenditure of moneys compulsorily levied upon the public for the general purposes of the community, will henceforth be applied to the sums payable to the Trinity House for lights, buoys, beacons, ballastage, in short, to all sums without exception levied upon and paid by the mercantile marine. The gross receipts will be carried to a separate account at the Bank of England, from which no payment can be made except by the authority of a department of her Majesty's Govern ment responsible to the houses of Parliament. The ac counts will be regularly forwarded to the Board of Trade, and thence, after examination, will be transmitted to the Commissioners of Audit. A full statement of the accounts of the past year will be regularly laid before Parliament. The provision of the statute 6 and 7 Will. c. 79, for re ducing the dues upon the requisition of the Sovereign in Council, will at at all times be carried into effect so soon as, in the opinion of her Majesty's Government, the state of the fund will admit, without any regard to any consi deration whatever except the efficiency of the several ser vices for which those dues are levied. It appears to her Majesty's Government that the mercantile marine is justly entitled to these advantages, and that the scheme proposed by the Trinity House will secure them." Then, in answer to their demand to be heard on this subject, the Govern ment have stated that they are prepared to give an impar tial consideration to the views that may be urged for the continuance of those pensions. But, in vindication of the opposite view taken by the Government, I ni,,,y appeal to the report of the select committee on foreign trade so long ago as 1822, by which that view is confirmed. Then the Trinity House took the opinion of the Attorney and Solicitor General as to the right in question. But nobody questions their right so long as the charters remain ; nor does any body charge them with any dereliction of duty in adminis tering the funds which they are empowered to distribute. In 1824, however, the Government said the opinion of the law officers appeared to have been taken under a mis taken impression of their views ; for the objection of the committee did not apply to the distribution, but to the principle. Well, th ese are the views which the Govern ment thought it their duty to communicate to the Trinity House—that there ought to be parliamentary controul and parliamentary responsibility ; and that, further, there ought to be a strict 'application of the funds to the pur poses for which those funds were levied. And here let me pay a tribute to the spirit in which we have been met. I have referred to the Master of the Trinity House. Let me acknowledge the obligations of the Government to the Deputy-Master and Elder Brethren for the sincere spirit with which they have endeavoured to recognise the dis charge of their important duties with their sense of the public requirements and the national benefit. (Hear, hear.) And let me ask you to enter upon the assumption of this controul in a similar spirit of confidence and sincerity. Now, I have said nothing on the subject of harbour lights in all this, because those lights are very numerous, and are mixed up in most cases with other funds. That sub ject, we conceive, does not fall within the province of im perial legislation. If we do not intend by the bill to deal with the harbour lights, it is not because we wish that any thing should remain improper or inconsistent with regard to them, but it is because it does not belong to the regula tion of the imperial lights of the kingdom. Now, there is a connection between the harbour lights and the next sub ject to which I shall call the attention of the committee. That subject is one of much more difficulty than has been commonly supposed. It is known as the question of passing tolls, but it was much more accurately described by the (Mr. right hon. gentleman opposite• Disraeli) , when he laid down the rule that tho taxes on shipping should be confined to those payments in return for which the shipping received a benefit—a canon to which I cordially subscribe. But I want to draw the attention of the com mittee to some of the details of the question connected with this subject of passing tolls. I think it would be nn. fair in the highest degree to suppose that the right hon. gentleman opposite would think of charging those tolls on the Consolidated Fund, if he was in possession of all the information appertaining to the subject. When the right honourable gentleman left office, the report of Capt. Vetch on the harbour of Ramsgate had not been received. Capt . Vetch—whose report has been recently received—after -re viewing the inquiries of those w h o h ad formerly preced him in the investigation of th a t h ar b our, said he differ ed ed very materially from those predecessors as to the tude of the toll necessary to be levied at mag-ni. all, and he had come to the conclusion that by a proper arra bour of Ramsgate might be made self-su 41gement the har also says there is an old duty of 2d. a Ptr mg. Capt. Vetch the town Of Ramsgate under its oli non coals levied in be repealed, for it is monstrous to P ee act which ought to as that should continue to im o suppose that such a town such a purpose. (Hear, head ) 1 a thll of that kind for information before him, woSurely no one, with this rates of Ramsgate should be bornecommend that the local of this kingdom. (Hear hear. ) by the general taxpayers the whole truth befor 'we I think we ought to know Now, I had a visit from e t c assent to such a proposition. member for Scarborough wo gentlemen—the poble lord the —and they said ther g. and the hon. member for . IT e u n l for abolishing what ? is a private bill before of rar n - m whitby. That bill they said is called the passing tol l of Neweas" was promoted by the people d that such tle-upon.m.- ~ . -upon and Sunderland, upon the ground un just. The a toll is inconsistent with public olicy, "", % c onsistent noble lord and the hon. member with public policy, but considering tary title of 150 years' standing, liament • and they the peoPle of No sayw°•oll,Vniatter for P.ar that i st ma y be iinJ u L it say it InaY.ol,lparliamen but considering Lee rate on the export t' una- support of their a for t h e of coals from their i t own ri ves _ borough fund, we do not exactly see the justice of their de mand. Now, observe -the position in which you stand. These tolls are not tolls exclusively upon the ship, but tolls, in many cases, on goods carried in the ship. (Hear.) Ifs that a tax on the shipowner or on the coal' consumer, or is it a mixed tax shared by both? If it be a tax on the ships owner, then the coal is taxed at the port it; leaves, at the port by which it passes, and at the port to which it comes, (Hear, hear.) But can you draw a distinct line of demar. cation between the cases of those four ports, and the cases contained in the two voluminous returns which my hon ourable friend the member for Montrose, firsa, in 1845, and again in 1846, laid on the table of this house ? I say it is necessary to have a more complete inquiry before we can decide on this question, and before we can place this charge on the Consolidated Fund. And when we talk about "injured interests," let me say one word about that "in. jured interest," the Consolidated Fund. The Consolidated Fund is an aggregate of the hard-earned taxes of the people of this country ; you impose 40,0001. on the Consolidated Fund, and you do more harm to the people of this country when you ask for a remission of taxes and do not furnish the grounds on whi c h it i s t o b e ma d e. Th e C onsolidated Fund has already paid an aggregate of 802,001)/. for various local dues, and the annual charge upon that fund is now 39 , 0 001. Under these circumstances the Government in. tend to institute such an inquiry as that to which I have referred. But there is another reason why inquiry should become, if not necessary, at least desirable. There is a grievance to which the mercantile marine is subject, and re pealed o is oc earnestlyau te r the navigationgreat directed from which they desire to be relieved, and that is the laws, to n concessions The obtain et ttethe attention which tni o w e no necessary re luctance on the part of some important foreign powers to when we lowered our tariff, and particularly when we re peosmfanat d ry h the reliefth t hfeGovern mentthenmr mercantile marine in this matter ; though it is my duty to s t a t e it is attended with muchpractical difficulty. I hav e now stated the views which the Govern ment entertain with regard to the questions of lights and harbours, whether they be harbour lights or other dues. For the first there will be a complete parliamentary con trol, and for the second a complete investigation and in quiry. I will now proceed to touch upon the Adminalty question. First comes the question whether it is expedient that we should continue to retain the restriction which requires a British crew to consist of three parts British subjects, and only one part foreign. (Hear, hear.) The advocates of a continuance of that restriction say, " look at the returns and you will find there can be no great ad vantage in employing foreigners, because the privilege ;which now exists is by no means appreciated." It is ii * Alfest that that is no answer to the case, because the 'object is to have the choice of emploniggforeign or British seamen in such proportions as may be ' lll.l. ought neeessary. I doubt very much whether the time ever was when this regulation presented so sensible an obstruction as at the present time. I have here a letter from the Peninsular and Oriental Company to the Secretary of the Admiralty . , in which they say that it is not now a question of freight at all ; but it has become a question whether you can have ships and sailors. I have just received from our consul at Christiana a letter, dated 6th December, in which he says it has been asserted that Norwegian vessels are navi gated much cheaper than British, because the master is ill-paid and the crews are badly fed ; but he says the fact is the reverse —that the Norwegiamaster is generally b e tt er paid and his crew better astthan the English. Now, after the observations I have made, the committee will be prepared to be told that the Go vernment do not propose to retain such a restriction. (Hear, hear.) I well remember the noble lord the member for the city of London saying that Protection was the bane of agriculture. I hope the time will come when everybody will believe that to British seamanship, as well as to Bri tish ship-owning and British ship-building, you may with safety apply the maxim of free intercourse, and that neither on behalf of the one nor of the other is there any reason for British seamen to fear competition. (Hear, hear.) The next question relates to the system of volun teering into the navy. I think it would be a great dis couragement to British subjects to go on board of ship if they heard in whatever part of the world they might be-- if they should chance to happen to have ever so tyrannical a master—if their diet was ever so insufficient —or their condition ever so undesirable—that there was no hope of relief for them until the completion of the voyage ; and I think some right of appeal to a British authority may be safely given to a person so poor and defenceless as the British seaman. (Hear.) I will here relate an anecdote which ought to be known for the honour of the Queen's service. The difficulties that are felt in Australia at the present moment must be familiar to the minds of every gentleman in this house connected with the business of ship owning. Those difficulties were felt three years ago in California;• and what was d one b y a British officer ? On the 4th of October, 1849, Captain Shepherd, of the Incon stant, arrived at San Francisco, and immediately after wards set about ascertaining the condition of the British ships there. He found that four of them were ready for sea, but were stopped for want of men ; but on the 16th of October, through his exertions, they were all on their way to Valparaiso, manned with officers from his own ship. (Hear.) I only mention this circumstance in order that you may see that there are two sides to this as to every other question. While, however, the Government do not intend entirely to abolish the power in question, they do intend to bring in enactments on the subject. If pecu niary loss arise to the shipoWner in consequence of such volunteering, it is proposed that he shall be entitled to receive compensation out of the funds of the Admiralty. Thus both the seaman and the shipowner will have justice done them. Then I next approach ,the question of sal vage. There are persons who think that the right of salvage in regard to the Queen's service ought to be entirely abolished. I hold it to be no dispa ragement to that service that the entire removal from them of everything in the nature of reward in cases of help af forded in cases of extreme hardship would be regarded by them as a great injustice. Lord Tenterden, a great legal authority, says the law of Great Britain is more liberal than that of Europe upon this subject. But there is a grievance connected with this question • and that is,_ that the law gi ves a t emporary l i en in certain ; cases on things which are the subject of salvage, and I am authorised to state on the part of my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Admiralty, that arrangements are in preparation whereby in cases of that nature that claim of lien may be released. I find from the representations of a deputation with whom I had a recent interview, that the jurisdiction of the Court of Admiralty is objected to in certain quar ters. But when I consider that Lord Stowell once pre sided over that court, and that it is now presided over by Dr. Lushington, I think we should have been very pre sumptuous to have taken the advice of ALM, deputation. I come next to the case of desertion ; and there again, I say, clauses are in preparation which are intended to remedy those difficulties under which the shipowners labour in Australia by reason of the desertion of their men in quest of gold in that colony. That question then will in a short time be dealt with by the Government. I next come to the question of consulates. There must be some erroneous impressions abroad on this subject. Those consulates are all regulated by act of Parliament in conformity with the re commendations of committees of inquiry on the subject, and I think those who make objections cannot be aware that according to the latest returns from the Foreign-office the general tax-paying body of this country paid in one year 105,0001. in respect of consuls' fees. I have heard that in one department, one consul had received nearly 5,0001. It is true, however, that recent amendments of the Mercantile Marine Act have thrown additional duties on consuls in fo reign ports. This subject, however, is one which rests en tirely with the Foreign-office. I have ' had interviews with Lord Clarendon on the subject; he entered very readily into the spirit in which the complaints had been made, and I hope that the committee will be satisfied that, as respects the consulates, her Majesty's Government are not disinclined to effect any remedy that may be called for. I now come to the question of pilota.ge. The right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) announced to the house the inten tion of her Majesty's late Government to appoint a com mittee to inquire into this subject, justly thinking than an inquiry was needed before any effectual legislation could be adopted for the purpose of meeting the numerous grievances alleged on this subject. lam not sure that I know with perfect accuracy how many separate pilot juris dictions there are in the three kingdoms. I have had a list transmitted to me of between 50 and 60 of them. (Hear,) I venture to submit to the house that its past experience with respect to committees of inquiry has not been so en tirely satisfactory upon the subject of pilotage as that we ought to confine ourselves exclusively to that mode of in the late Sir R in quiry. So long ago as 1835 R. Peel appointed a commission to investigate the subject. That commission was composed of many eminent men, and there were among them those to whom certainly it could not be imputed that they were rash, or ready to recommend precipitate steps on the subject. I find amon g th e names o f th e commissioners those of Lord Lonsdale, the Marquis of Bute, Sir John Hardy, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Chapman. If inquiry is neces sary in the case of some of the ports, it cannot be denied that with respect to some others we have ample evidence to warrant us in proceeding at once. What are the instance, griev ances, for ns of the port of London ? The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) justly treated in a vein of ridi cule the idea that a person who was competent to navigate a ship up the river was incompetent to navigate the same ship down the river, ier that a person who was compe. tent to navigate a ship down could not be trusted with her up the river. (A laugh.) I am told that there is some difference between navigating a ship up• and down the river. Be this as it may, I think that he who would trust his ship to the care of a man who could navigate his ship up the river, and was not able to navigate it down, would certainly be a rash man. (Hear, 'hear,) ) There is no doubt, however, that this system le a d r. higher charges, and to the employment of t t sons per sons to do the work of one ; it leads als o t o uniformity of system in the control over the ila want of Majesty's Government fully subscribe to the P ota. H er control over the pilotage is necessarily a l opinion that that it should be left as far as possible local matter, and That is no reason, however, why the e to local control. not confer upon the Trinity House t G overnment should pilot, who has navigated a shi p . o or the Cinque Port from Dungeness Point, the p either down the river or power o back, instead of travelling home by la f a 8.4' bill which I have to submit to lid. (Ilear, hear.) In the rights of the pilots are' ca f the committee, the vested their superannuation f re ell preserved, and neither in rights will the slighte t nnda nor in any other of avg.!' made. The principle laid of the rights of jnstbr jurisdiction. I .Pie laid down in the bill is that of local I will ask e interests of the Cinque Ports those who represent claim to the ri h to what commerce it is that they lay gts of pilotage ? Is it not the great T e merce of the city of ought not, therefore, th e e London jurisdict. London ? and sr hear.) We pro pose, then, in thi! s s o til t i ° w p h r i e l va e preservingil.ll the rights of the existing bodies of pilots, to amalgamate l e r as that of and Place them entirely under the same por t —the the London Pilots. Let us take the next grea t so to which I have lile rßeY• Lord Lonsdale, in his system r has been such alluded, states that in this port the r aise the value by inter -arrangement among th 1,4001. t o 4,000/. c s r of a pilot-vessel from I ' 2 100 tons burden, thse:searle 5 ,0001. ; the coasters above trade for six or seven 1110: 0 heavy not employed in that ilotage i n other eve boat entirely exempt from P th e insian ee of en oneyear were comare the dues that for pilotage for _ an 1319 , V the charges the two ports of London . d 1- 2 89 0 - -or this concludes by stating— not less than ' report on port notthe risk merely LiverP°°l• The • a question_ ver is lives of hundreds who embark in " This, hovre , rtv but the conceive that some re ions of prc'P e- - and we of yew the ports in which steam-vessels this class well for necessary, as we those in which they are compelled to are nee now e xempt as become the more necessary as steam are . A n t, This has. take plots This so ra pidly increasing and extending." In i n t vi 3 ga° r i - eht hon. member for Taunton (Mr. Labouchere) Ad the bill by which the pilot authorities were empowered pass — a t o confer upon masters of vessels, as comp e t en t as the pilots themselves to conduct their own vessel s , th e r i ght of so doing. No persuasion, however, could induce the pilot authorities of Liverpool to exercise this power, and examine masters with respect to their competence. It is true that they made an offer to exempt them from some of the con tributions in respect to pilotage which other people paid, but when that offer came to be submitted to the law officers of the Crown it was found that such exemption was against th - provisions notlocal acts of Live I. Th th " e e orities, how- ever, havettempted to bring in any bill to amend their PILOTAGE. The house having gone into committee, Mr. CARDWELL said—ln rising to move for leav e t o bring must, n with a the bil 1 p t e o rm am iss e i n o d n tohfe the e w e r o e mmi latin t g tee, to pil o t age , I state what are the views of the Government with respect to the mer cantile marine. In doing so it will be necessary for me to trespass to some extent on your time, for the subject is one on which the complaints and demands of the shipping interest have been divided into , numerous p ar t s - ; but I shall occupy as short a time as possible, and to trespass on no portion of your time by any needless observations or superfluous remarks. With regard, to thie present state and prosperity of the shipping interest,' it cannot be neces sary to occupy your time at all. It is well known to the committee that if you test the present condition of the shipping interest by any of the tests which this house can