The Sun. — London, England, 1847-05-19 00:00:00

11 " ter, the 0 be 4.]Yer be s back tinge 'card the us to East, m ost atra d for Taal bas such lit it eacll been ilurs s , its :heal t to ,evir• Pro jest. htet cats sing irk ived 4 THE SLIN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY MORNING, MAY 19, 1847. IMPERIAL PA ki E.,AMENT (it)GSL OF LORDS. May IS. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool sack at five o'cloi k. MESSAGE FRI ) THEII OUSE OF COMM N. Messsnarrs Irons the House of CialllllOPS brought up several Bills. which were ordered to lie on the table. COUNTY BUILDINGS BILL. is Bill was read a second time. DRAINAGE OF LANDS BILL. On the motion of the Earl of ST. GERMANS, this Bill was read a second time. FACTORY BILL. Lord BROUGHAM presents: d a petition from Mac clesfield, in favour of the Ten Hours Bill. Also a peti tion from Inverness, against the Police Bill; and a petition from the Standing Committees ut the three denominations, the Presbyterians. the Inde- P en dents, and the Baptists of London, against the Government scheme of ducation. HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL. The NOBLE Lean also presented a petition from the printersßil aan (.l Lond on , i n favour of the Health of Town' made some observations with respect to the exemption of the City from the operation of the Bill. Lord CAMPBELL, said that the tone of the Noble Lord on this, and his tone on the other, side of Temple . bar w as very differeno—(Laughter.) There was some thin,„g i n the atmosphere of this House which induced the ;noble oble L or d to declaim with respect to the Corpo ration of London in terms of censure, and there was something in the atmosphere of the other side of Temple bar to induce him to speak in the most eloquent terms is their praise. —(Much laughter.) Lord BROUGHAM said that of all the misrepre sentations ever uttered by the Noble Lord—(Laughter) --of all the misstatements ever made even by him— (Laughter) —this was without exception the farthest removed from truth —(Laughter.) POOR REMOVAL BILL. The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from the poor-law guardians of Londonderry against the reor Removal Act fur Ireland and Scotlsnd. The Petitioners complained, and, as he thought justly , of the Power th at was given by that Bill to remove paupers to any of the eight places named in the Bill. Earl FITZWILLIAM begged to give notice, that on the third reading of the Poor Removal (Iri land) Bil l, h e t‘ would mOvea-clause to the effect that this Bill should e of a temporary character. ARMY SERVICE BILL. Oa the ord er o f t h e d a y f o r going into Cemmittee on this Bill being read, The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to move that tl s i :Bill h e comm i tted this day s i x mont h s . H e ex p ress( d h opinion on this Bill at a time when he moved for certai n information, but it so happened that he was n easarily absent at the second reading. He was suf.. r a ed that on that occasian the Noble Earl should "e a s ta ken so much notice of his speec‘ , when n - P, e , a ch much more able had been made by a Noble Lord on the same bench (the Marquis of Londonderry) asked the 1 : 11-i o t l h-- I e h': 'n? " l'sUblieee Earl whether he could support all these changes a Y th e opinion of able officers in the army. He had taught none of these forward. The e react majority of ''ritl Yst - nine-tenths of the officers were opposed to oft hneut the Noble Earl, far from answering the speech pefroeepnia 's\sT , soubblje Earl, had employed his eloquence on more 0 in the milior improvements that had been T he E army. he o,m, sari of CARDIGAN said it was w 4h great pain by t ir s tal the present measure, supported, us it was, h authaeity of the Noble Duke. But thus sanction it'irn`4odoeln given to it with such qualifications and in such a ar u h t i heo h lued manner as to lessen very materially , the value Euro rit h y e . would be otherwise inclined to attach to that carriedls t i erns,t over pean • army, measure might do very well for any i n ev y e s ry bu q t u t a e r r te t r he of ßr th it e is g h l, a ,b r e m , 3hedditiplenrostedconas 'would be found at all applicable, and if it were trod into effect there must be very great changes in heltwe'd with regard to those in the colonies. He p'eyed that with regard to the pension, that two ence Was additien to the original sixpence, end hee thought it but justice to the soldier that li tisibould obtain a fair reward for his services. sYste °u ght tbcre should be some change in the present sho u lT Ile thought that the two periods of service enable altered to fourteen years and seven years. That would those who entered the service to retire at a proper period of life. Marquis. GREY said that he did not understand the Noble Al n a tand illig.iontretnhdeedNotobleo p E p a o r s l e , who had spoken that even ing, bo'rellsetriC'°tlllyid' therefore, mention only one fact that going into Committee on on the question before the House. An officer in her Maj-sty's service, who had been pre war from the reeks, when he heard of this Bill J l t y or a p se p y rz 3 d .e o ur f s i . t, for, as he stated, he had been " a ent t f t te a , r a few words from Lord Ellenborough, Vis th_ „out onabermere, and the Marquis of Londonderry, 1 ! J o t .tse went into Committee on the Bill. ‘ - i c i sliuse 1 being proposed, years i earl of LUCAN moved to substitute twelve Years in n the i nfantry for ten, and fo ur t een for twelve ter m fizeti the cavalry and artillery. He considered the short, as b Y the Bill, as it at present stood, was too periio:;noftiting the soldier his discharge just at the period whiernhahielbewas best adapted for the service. The proposed was, he believed, the very the Bill was. 1 Y intetided by the Right Hon. Gentleman had eve s - .Y " t- War. The only argument which he th hear urged in favour of the provisions of the at a loss at it should popularise the service He was e servie to . Hail they know what t h ey meant b y popu l ar i s i ng th e not tried to popularise the service ? 151 _ me an' of l arge b ounty an d l arger pensions , b ut i t fatle.d ? Let th ere l ee k at the year 1807. In that year they had 19.144 men in the army ; but i n 1846 they employed actually 1,600 more than they did in 1807. This slices ed that the service The same might be derived from the number popular. e_ number of deserters. He would not detain their Lord ships, but he begged to assure them that he was actuated by no party spirit. He was too much attached to the army as a service to be so actuated iu speaking on such a measure. Earl GREY said the speech of the Noble Earl was not a speech in favour of a particular amendment, but against the whole Bill. As their Lordships had already affirmed the principle in the Bill, he would not, incon sideration of their Lordships' time, do more than ad dress himself to the amendment of the Noble Earl. The Noble Lord, after speaking against the whole principle of limited service, concluded by eying that he was in favour of it. And why ? Because it would enable them to get rid of those who were vicious in a regiment, When he (Earl Grey) moved the second reading of this he did say so much ; he considered this to be a Most desirable advantage to every regiment. But limited service carried this other advantage with it, that man, when he left the service at the end of his enlist °sent, would not be useless for any other employment. If they were to adopt the present Bill at all, he could not consent to the Noble Earl's amendment. lie would rather that the Bill was rejected altogether than incur- Porate it in the measure, as it would cause the principle (14 u n l imited enlistment to be tried under every disad rtaa'es If the principle was to be fairly tested, the s te n must be carried through in its integrity, iratead - -i l ,7•T' v isions being frittered away. supiZ r u t t mt COMBER\IERE, as an old soliEe a must (Earl L i th e amendment proposed by the Noble Lord whothe He would ask their Lordilips what a ou'd seh n w a th that nondescript person, a diacharged suloier, th e sei . o l i ld thus at the end of ten years be thrown out of dre n. . v " ? He would be cast, with his wife and ehil wo „ i s burden on the community and the greatest evils • Th e ) ensue, neettai uke of WELLINGTON said that on a former sa, Bill, ands had fully stated his vi‘sws on the principle of bee sf i 't and why he considered it would be ler the Nitt or the service. He did not apprehend any da te., yin retaining the service of the men at the end of the Years, The increase of their pay would be an effec taatt means of s ecur i ng them in the future. He advised f,eir Lordship s to agree to the Bid as it had come up ; u m the ot h er H ouse, an d recomaien d e d b y h er Ma 4,esstY's Government. He did not thiak the Noble Earl ( Lucas) had made out a case for the alteration to twelve Years, lle considered ten years wool 1 be as effectual in retaining the soldiers in the army at the end of the period of their service. The law had hitherto auttie ?sised the raising of men for six, seven, fourteen, and twenty years, as well as for unlimited service, and it had been found to operate well.—(Bear, hear.) He saw therefore, no reason whatever for the adoption of the presen t rimer. &neer. Lnrd STANLEY thought the Noble and Gallant Duke had M isunderstood the purport of the amendment proposed. His object was precisely the same as the Noble and Gallant Duke, and so. he believed, was the object of the clause proposed by the Noble Lord (Earl Lucan); and the sole question they had to consider was, the best means o f secur i ng t h e serv i ce o f t h e soldi ers after they had been the proposed ten years in the ser ycicee. The s i mp l e question for them to consider was, should able under at thenderthi this Bill, p as a n t p i? r f es t e e n ti t st y oo ea d r ,..t . o erc e ie ta e in ? the be He appr e h ended not, an - d ira therefore and his Nobl e F r i ends who acted in concert with him were so anxious t o i ntroduce this amendment. Now, he hoped their Lordships would adopt the amendment, and thereby offer some inducement to the old and efficient soldier to remain in the army after a long term of servitude. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Com mittee divided, when there appeared--. For the Amendment 3O Against it Majority against it... 8 The Earl of LUCAN moved an amendment, providing that the soldier should be allowed to decide upon re-inlistment at a u time during the last twelve months of servitude. Earl GREY saw no o bj ec ti o n to the amendment, p rov id e d t ae tinie was limited to six instead of twelve months. Lord STANLEY thought if the suggestion of the Noble E °POosite were adopted, a distinction ought to be drawn tWeen troop s engaged on home and foreign service. Earl GREY sa id it wou ld be better to let the clause stand in its present form, and to add a proviso to carry out the view of the Noble Lord who had just sat down. The Cause so am en d e d was then agreed to. The E ar l of ELLENBOROUGII proposed an amendment to the third Claim., to the effect that any person whatever to "horn the S ecretary at War might issue his warrant , s h ou ld 1 1e the piiwer to enlist soldiers into her Majesty's service. Earl GREY had no objection to the amendment, which was agreed to. _,,T er t 3 P Earl sif ELLENBOBOUGH proposed another clause ! e l% clause 4th—" That if after the expiration of such first or rvned term of limited service, or of such term of prolonged ; e ei _3 P. any soldier entitled to his discharge, being on a fo ist: Station , is shall not be willing to re-engage or to continue r lajesty's service, or in the service of the East India h e 'Jul, the commanding officer of the regiment in which ho _ig . a . y e be serving shall, as in the case of soldiers invalided, eol e v :h a usual measures, with all convenient dispatch, for the Y so ze of such soldiers to England, and on the arrival of sUch bctween the England , be shall be finally discharged. Provided Isierlwiyis that during suck time as may elapse s ubject to all the provisions. of the Army Act. which may then for punishing mutiny and desertion as fully as he Kay have been subject thereto before MIMI of lo n i cs . the expiration of such s provided alio, that if, at the expiration of any first or second term of limited service, or of such term of prolonged service. any soldier being in any of her Majesty's colonies, 'belt claim his discharge, and shall sign:, to • the Governor of such colony, throuAh the commanding officer of the reeiment in which he may be serving. his desire to re main in such a colony, it shall be lawful for such,Governor, if he shall think fit, with the consent of such commanding officer, to permit such soldier to remain 'herein ; and, thereupon, such soldier shall be finally discharged, and shall not be entitled to claim to be conveyed to England at the public charge at any future period. Earl GREY said that he could not assent to the amendment. The number of men discharged in the Indian army was very small, and so great was the disposition of the soldiers, who slight be discharged there. to remain in the country, that very few of them would avail themselves of the privilege of going home at the expiration of their term of service. The prin ciple, therefore, of keeping soldiers in the army longer than was provided by their term of service, was both inexpedient and unnecessary. Besides the object which this clause con templated was secured by other provisions in the Bill. After a few words from Earl Grey, the Earl of Ellenbo rough, and Lord Combermere. Lord STANLEY thought this was a question of very great importance, and he appealed to the Noble and Gallant Duke, whether the soldier should not be discharged in England atter having served his term of service in India. He believed that the disbanding of a number of soldiers in India after their ser vice would, in some circumstances, be attended with the greatest danger. From the moment these soldiers were dis discharged, they were left uncontrolled by any military law, at the same time provided with subsistence. What must be the effect of discharging those s 'ldiers and leaving them to wander through the country without any military discipline whatever. Earl GREY said he would call the attention of the Mouse to the fa-ts of the case. By the fourth cause of the Bill it would be seen that some of the objections that had been advanced against the measure had been met, and they would find that the soldiers were to be sent home by the first convenient oppor tunity that might occur, of which they were to be judges; for they could not deprive them of the right to exercise their judgment, which must regulate the question. The Duke of WELLINGTON said that he agreed with the Noble Earl that it would be extremely inconvenient to allow a number of soldiers to he without control in India. There should he some control over them, at the same time that ar rangements should be made to provide the soldiers with the means of returning home.—( Hear.) The amendment was then withdrawn, and the remaining clauses of the Bill were agreed to. The House then resumed. POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion for the order of the day for the third reading of this Bill, . Lord MONTEAGLE, in moving the amendment of which he had given notice (which was the same that the Noble Lord had proposed on the second reading of the Bill), said there were great inconveniences connected with the working of the Bill. He had heard of a case of great hardship with respect to a clers. gyman of the Established Church. if the present Bill was agreed to. it would be productive of very much of what was objectionable with respect to the endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy. and retained all that was objectionable in the voluntary principle. They would be not only endowing the Bo man Catholic clergy, which he wished their Lordships had the energy to do, and which they must eventually do, but they would be doing that at the present time by the sacrifice of the Protestant interest. This Bill was not only objection able on this point but on other points also. It would in its operation be dangerous to the elective franchise of Ireland. There was no constitutional principle better understood in Par liament than that the receipt of parochial relief disfranchised the voter.—( Hear.) He need refer only to one authority on the subject. In the statute book there was an Act of Parlia ment which declared that the receipt of parochial assistance did disfranchise the voter, and that he could not register. In looking at England they must be practically acquainted with the work ing of the law. It was said that they would, by opposing the present Bill, be infringing the privileges of the other House. But the subject was too important to be affected by such a con sideration, and called for the notice of their Lordships. He gave notice that he would ask these questions of her Majesty's Government, thich he proposed to do. and it was no matter whether he asked those questions on the second or third reading. of the Bill. The present was a question which certainly was one that ought to be considered as very peculiar. They must look at the Bill with reference to its administration. Under the system, that the present measure would introduce, they would find it most difficult to afford relief without very serious inconveniencies. The Earl of WICKLOW said that his Noble Friend had stated to them a circumstance which had come to his know ledge, and of which he also had taken cognisance, but he could not conceive how any one landed proprietor could withhold double the amount of the rate levied for the three months under the existing law. He was informed from very good authority that the deduction of the whole year's rate, out of the six months charge, had taken place, and he certainly thought that some remedy should be found fur a system which admitted of so much abuse. If it were not too late, and in his opinion it was never too late to do an act of justice ; he called upon her Majesty's Government to take such measures as would prevent the repetition of these acts of injustice. • - The Earl of LUCAN (who was very indistinctively heard) said he could mention severA cases in the county of Mayo in which this abuse existed. The law had nothing to do with the amount of these. A rate was struck, and was deducted in due course from the rent charge. He did not mean to say that if a rate was struck on the 2d of May it could be deducted from the rent charge of the lit of May, it would be charged upon the next rent charge in the whole sum whenever that might be. The Earl of CLANCARTY said that under the Temporary Relief Act, food only was given out of the workhouse, but under the Permanent Act, clothes and money were given. The Tem porary Act was already sufficiently successful, and he, there fore, thought that the Noble Earl was a little too sanguine as to the effect of the Permanent Act. This measure ought not to he applied to Ireland at all, it was better calculated for English towns. He was extremely surprised to see sent up to that House the other day a Bill called the Poor Removal Act, by the provision of which Ireland was compelled to support Sot only her own poor—but the casual poor of England. and Scotland who went over there, whilst the Irish poor who came to England and Scotland were entitled to claim their being sent back. Upon such a state of things it was scarcely possible toloek with patience, and he hoped that when the measure came under discussion this irregularity would be re medied.s.owr eab wo uld , t better rh e et h foo o r p m: r e : he a te l y s t o hwe t e h wr a t np t ta h .s e soe clauses cwo o u f t t tw h r,y i s ht present ohdme t heyl el wereead s Lu t ;d o b ß e E a A p p u l i i d o . NT said that the clergy had one cause of complaint ; they were empowered to levy rates according to their incomes, and therefore if the rate was 20s. they took it, but if it were 255. they lost ss. This was a matter which ought to E b a e r r l e G me a d E ied y i t d h e t h G a t o v w e t n h m er lt. regard to the observation of the Noble Lord (the Earl of Clan Cart ) h N e iri w t s not then matter pre- Lordwh fu o ll h y ad last s o re k g e ar n d the the observations t e o r i u t h p o ot N a othhiee m me e di f e u d tu b r y e t t i e Ch be u th brought e'reernvi l h po e r c a r i t i m complained could o w f ul h c ic o h r m l y t a l 7 s r o e under their notice. The Marquis of HERTFORD wished to make a few observa tions upon tuts measure before it received the assent of their Lordships. It was true that for the last 32 years the landlords of Ireland had been drawing their incomes tree of all taxation, and this measure was the only one which could have been de vised to remedy that. It would be the commencement of a new system, under which he hoped that the country would emerge from the trouble and difficulty under which she had been so long labouring. This measure had been long required by that country, to effect an equal distribution of the expense of maintaining the poor, and also create a new description of labourers who, under its operation. would no longer be sub jected to the misery with which they had for many years past been too constantly afflicted. He felt that this Bill was likely to effect the social' revolution which was so absolutely essential to the welfare of Ireland, and therefore he should give it his cordial support. Earl FI FZWILLIANI said that in his opinion the measure would ne attended with not only un , atisfactory hut disastrous results, and in that opinion all those who were, like him, con nected with the two countries were ready to concur. A great responsibility existed with regard to this measure, but he did not think, with many others, that that responsiblity rested upon the Ministry. He felt too deep an interest in their successful government to admit that the responsibility rested entirely with them. It rested uuon others, who, if they had not been first in the introduction of this measure, had at least, in igno rance of its real effects, carried it into operation. It was the duty of every one to assist those who were in distress, if they had it in their power, but he thought that some discrimination was necessary as to the nature of the relief to be given and from what source was it to come? They would find in the Act of Elisabeth the evident intention that the land alone was not to bear the burden of the maintenance. Such a provision could not stand for twelve months—( Hear, hear)—and, he would be bound to say, that if Parliament were to dissolve in July or August, and meet again in Septem ber or October, that before the end of six months they would be under the discreditable necessity of acknowledging that their legislation had been wrong. After a ew words in explanation from the Marquis of HERTFORD, The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that he thought that the way only by which the preamble of the Bill was affirmed, both in that and in the other House of Parliament, contra dicted the assertion of the Noble Lord, that all who were con nected with the two countries joined with him, in his opinion, as to the inefficacy of this measure. They had heard much of the dangers of this measure, and the ends which were to result from the adoption of the principle of out-door relief. He begged to remind the Noble Earl who had last spoken, that in the west of Ireland, in the counties of Galway and Mayo, there was hardly such a thing as a poor-house at all. He believed that for souse years to come the maintenance of the poor would be a great incumbrance upon the land of Ireland, but that was an unavoidable evil. He for one took upon himself a share of the responsibility of the measure, and he entertained a fervent hope that it would prove successful. Lord MOUNTCASHEL was just as convinced that it would not prove successful, as the Noble Marquis opposite was that it would and therefore he could not refrain at that late hour of the night from entering his protest against the measure. Ireland had no manufactures to depend upon like this country, and he was afraid the law would press heavily upon the landed proprietors. Be that howeve r itfn,as,touoan in a idedt s hnGi wholly thatmay, h e r h e e ta w in as ed st t r h o e ne o ly pin im io - n pre A sse ft d er w a ith a conviction that the land of Ireland would never e be able to sustain the poor of the co r u higo n eelm t nnl r yet y ;rd , ianel either in times of prosperity or in times of depression. few words from Lord MUNGER and Lord Moir- EAGL E , the latter of whom moved the insertion of a clause, Earl GREY resisted the insertion of the clause. After some further conversation, the clause was negatived without a division. On Clause 10, El an e B d b which ontThree hEe GREYa be l lieved clause, of i e En wouldt.°pEo enteredN.3 e was no machinery to carry it out. Bill on each separate merits few inoperative, rrai observations e at r hs v e a t t hß i o ei n rl Ear l GREY eeprecated the discussion of the merits of the The Earl of WICKLOW. would not hallow the Noble f e r a m ase E , a a r n l d G h ß e E ho y p , ed that their Lordships After few Earl in so unusual a course. b L e ord h s a l s i h ip e s x . Priiisetdhethe ob jectionoth er night on the subject before their the now made were the only one that could b e urged, they e" ex Three E. d E 'd insert a c l ause t o enable the tenant to surr en d er i n same way as if th e l e ase had not arl of CLANCARTY • 1 he could not agree with what was urged in favour of them, san The same power was still given of subdividing the m land, arid there was no improvement effected nrti b n y E t Et h presenteEs A L r w o bi l t : h r t i w e t t ph o e r en to ee e m n a p k ie e r, ar u r n a l n e eblemathtteerEp said, ' that at present there was no to to en th a make some arrangement p re n s w p e e r ct the landlord and tenant on g ss em th e e n y ts could with and he would, therefore, take the this point, they could not expect that e the measure could work, notice, to empower the landlord to an m se ak n e f w an ht a ch g the tenant. r h e e em ha e d nt g w iv i e t n h not prepa red likely to endanger the to oppose the Earl GREY said that he was c ß la il u l s i e n , a b n u o t th h e e r t p h l o a u ee gh t t f t h o t: e t i a t mvierniunlmd e b n e ts of his Noble Friend were agreed to. Lord AIONTEAGLE said that as he h a d a l rea d y state d h e thought they should not be influenced so far by any interference with the privileges of the other House, and he would certainly pm: fora IL icon on big clause. . Lord CAMPBELL thought that the Noble L.ed ought:not to persist in the course he was adopting. Lord AWN TEAGLE called tne attention of their Lord ships to the Duke of Wellington's clause in the late Poor-law Bill which was introduced into the House of Lords. The clause was of a similar character to the one now under consideration, and the House of Commons accepted it as an amendment, which the House of Lords had a right to make. Lord REDESDALE could not see on what grounds the House of Commons could reject the clause after accepting the one of the Duke of Wellington referred to. Earl GREY said the effect might be, whatever right this House bad in the matter, to make the amendment, the House of Commons might not so readily accspt ether amendments, as they would otherwise do were this clause not introduced into the Bill. The clause was then withdrawn. Earl GREY moved an amendment on the 16th clause, which had been referred to the other night, which was to enable the agents of great pi oprirtors to act as cx officio guardians in their absence. After a few observations from Lords REDESDALI and MONCEAG LE, The amendment was agreed to. Lord ABINGER then - moved a clause to the following ef fect; -" And whereas it would be expedient to fix some rea sonable limit on the amount of the rate to be levied for the relief of the poor, be it therefore enac•ed that the who'e of such rate, whether levied on the landlord or upon the tenant, or upon both, shall in no case exceed one-sixth in the pound on the net revenue." Earl GREY said the effect of the clause 'Pi ould be to raise no rate whatever above 3s. 4d. in the pound. He thought it would be very enormous to make any such restriction in a case of great destitution such as prevailed in Ireland. The clause was then withdrawn. Earl FITZ WILLIAM proposed a clause that the Bill should continue in operation for three years, and to the end of the next then ensuing session of Parliament, and no longer. After a few words from Earl GREY, the clause was nega tived, without a division. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Earl GREY gave notice that, on Thursday next, his Noble Friend, the President of the Council would move that the House, at its rising, do adjourn till Friday week. Their Lordships then adjourned, at Twelve o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 18. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD JUNCTION RAILWAY. On the motion for taking into consideration the re port of the Committee on the Birinieghatu and Oxford Junction Railway, and Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley Railway Amalgamation Bill, Sir F. TIIESIGER moved that the Bill be referred back to the same Committee, with an inten tion to hear the petitions of Sir Henry Verney and others, aid the petitions of other shareholders in the Birmingham and Oxford Railway, against the said Bill. The lion. and Learned Memb,r entered at considerable length into the details of the proceedings which had beets taken by the shareholders and the directors of these lines. The Birmingham and Oxford Railway, he said, was passed in the last session of Parliament, and power was given in the Act to sell or lease the line to the Great Western Company. It appeared that the shareholders of the Birmingham and Oxford line were dissatisfied with the price which the Great Western Company gave them, nam ly, 101 55. 1 a share, and a meeting was called, at which reso.u , tions were passed expressive of such opinions, and requiring the directors to re pudiate the agreement, and a requisition was signed, calling upon them to convene a meeting under the cl ioses of the Dis , olution Act. This, however, received no attention, and the allotted number of days was allowed to pass over without the meeting being called. The shareholders, howeeee then called it themselves, and the shares repress)• ted were no fewer than thirty-live thousand ; the directors were present also, but they only represented one thousand shares. It was p, oposed at that meeting and carried unanimously, that the proprietors wholly disap proved of the amalgamation, and the sale to the. Great Western Company ; and that they d:d not consider themselves bound by the proceedings of the di rectors. A petition was then preseeted to the House stating these facts, which was referred to the Committee, who in their turn refused to entertain it, considering that the petitioners had no locus standi. It was stated also that there was a rule that se sr, holders should not be heard against their directors. There was no such rule, and if there was, the sooner it was abolished the better. Let him suppose a number of persons in a canal company, and that a general meet ing resolved that they should turn it into a tailway, by a small majority, did they think the minority ought to be bound by such a decision ? Would it not be a very hard case that they should be so ? Now, he should hardly have thought it necessary to cite precedents from the Courts of Chancery on this point, but he could also quote from precedents of their own, and he would, in the first place, instance the ease 01 Henry Smith'''y. the Exeter and tpalmouth Railway, in the year 1837. The petitioner objected that his money should be expended on the con struction of a portion of the line for which he had signed the subscription deed , an d the Committee, after due deliberation, decided that the petitioner having signed the Parliamentary contract which empowered the . provisional committee to make any,. or such portion of the line as in their decision they might thick fit, they could not grant him redress. In 1842 Mr. Harkhurst was heard on his petition against the Bolton and Preston Railway, and there the decision was in his favour, be cause the provisional directors had extended the powers with which they were in the first place invested. Thus the House would see that the same prin ciple was affirmed by two very opposite dec'sions. In 1844, in the cases of the Northern and E istern Railway, and the Glasgow and Garnkirk Railway Com panics, petitioners, being shareholders in the two com• panies, appeared before Committees, and were allowed to be heard. lie confessed that this appeared to him to be an sit fortiori ease, because it as not the case of individual shareholders, but the case and petition of the whole company. It was the unanimous petition of almost the whole body of shareholders, holding upwards of 35,000 shares. Would the House for one moment permit him to call attention to the mode in which the parties who were promoting this Bill were compelled to proceed under the ex traordinary circumstances in which they were placed. Allow him to call the att e nti o n of t he House to a recital contained in the preamble of this Bill. Of course it was the duty of the parties promoting the Bill to prove the whole of the preamble. Now the preamble stated that the Birmingham and Oxford Junction, anti the Birmingham, Dudley, and Wolverhampton Railway Companies were desirous of being united into one company for the purpose of jointly executing th e t wo li nes aforesaid. It was a most material element in proving the preamble to the ail that it should be shown that the Birmingham and Oxford Junction Company were desirous of forming the amalgateatiou for the purpose of being afterwards sold and transferred to the Great Western Company ; but what was the course pursued by the counsel promoting the Bill ? Why, he called Mr. Phillip Henry Munta, the chairman of the Birmingham and Oxford Junction Company, to prove that it would be highly advantageous to unite the two lines; but he never asked him whether the Birmingham and Oxford Junction Company were desirous of uniting the two companies, or he must have answered that question in the negative. And yet, in the face of all this, without calling any further evidence, the Committee passed the Bill as au unopposed measure. Now he did trust that he had brought a case before the ouse which demanded its serious attention. He had stated the facts us clearly ae.d distinctly as he possibly eould, and in his °pillion they were more than sufficient to justify the House sending this Bill back to be re committed. Perhaps, before he concluded his observa tions, the House would permit him to advert just for one moment to certain proceedings tha: had taken place, both in law and equity, in connexion with this matter. The Hon. and Learnt d Gentleman then related the pro ceedings which have been instituted its law and equity d Bill Junction br h t.ei 0 s 0 ruGe co h co a oum r m e Lm h pß o iat l tr.tey e ßd r :Ns with of the concludedut de instructions B n o i t m n n b g t eyhtroammit moving vte a oi d gth O eh a x lte t rd legal the Committee al m te r h r i e t a s r t f h t e h e o p p ci o u s e i s n t g i p n e , t i b t i u o t n e a r:. Chairman of the Com mittee on this Bill h e wou ld s i mp l y state the course c to sTs t n e s n i dtewr ithhowp.fabriiethieusparco.v.i.sinodnshoowf 'Their the Com m i t t ee h a d taken i n the matter. far its provisions could be carried into effect. The ques tion upon this particular Bill was, whether the share holders were at liberty to impungn the Acts of the ge neral corporation, or Acts which effected their interests. He was far from admitting such a preamble, and the result of a contrary doctrine must appear to be per fectly inconsistent with the conduct of a railway Bill through Parliament. It might, in such a case, be in the power of the minority to come before that House, and delay and obstruct the progress of the Bill by their petitions. His Right Hon Friend informed him that rule must not be taken as a general one, but he thought that the general rule ought net to be taken in the other direction, and that the Com mittee should be at liberty to entertain the peti tions and complaints of the shareholders. It was upon this ground that the petitioners against this psr ticular Bill were not allowed to proceed with their oppo sition by the Committee. Whatever might be the existing law applicable to the case before the Commit Se An Act of the previous year gave the Birmingham and Oxford Company powers to lease and sell themselves to the Great Western Company. The Great Western Company had no concurrent right in the provision, for the power was to be entirely in the hands of the Birmingham and Oxford Company, to exercise the provisions of the Act of Parliament. An agreement had been entered into by the directors of thecompany, under the authority or the shareholders, but the shareholders state that they were precluded from ex pressing their opinion at the time that the reslutions had been passed, and, therefore, that these resolutions were passed in defiance of the wishes of the shareholders. Now how stood the fact upon the very statement of these gentlemen themselves ? They told the House that they were precluded from voting, not having received the sealed certificates. But if Honourable Gentlemen would look at the Acts, they would find that share holders were permitted to vote under certain conditions. He thought that this question ought never to have been discussed, after the decision of the Committee. In the last se .sion of Parliament there was a decision in a Committee, of which `Jr. Edward Buller was chair man, on the merits of which Mr. Here was heard on the part of the Liverpool Railway, in which he openly stated that the merits of the two companies were the same.—(Loud cries of " Divide, di vide.") It had there been decided that the petitioners had no locus standi before the Committee, and the reports were made accordingly to the House. He believed that that decision was premature, contrary to public policy, and unworthy of the consideration of the Committee, and that the amalgamation should take place in opposition to the votes of a majority of the shareholders. He thought, therefore, that the House ought to abide by the decision of the Committee.—(Loud cries of "Divide, divide.") Mr. EDWARD BULLER !.aid, that having Chairman of the eftmalrfee t hich reference had h2eii made, he trust.d that the Ilouse would hear him, a 4 he believed the d( cis;on h>ot been quite correct Had they agreed to what their .ipponents wanted it would have been almost impossible to proceed with any Bill. Having said these few words respecting the peculi4r circumstances which it was Stated made the present case an exception to the general rule, it was his opinion no body of Aar holders ever had a: worse care to come before Parliament. What wer, the real facts of the ease ? An arrangement had been proposed y for an amalgamation with the Great Western Railway Company. Powers were required to enable the directors to lease or sell the line to that com pany, and also to unite with the Oxford, Dudley, and Wolverhampton Railway. In pursuance of this, a meet ing was called, which took place on the 30th October. At this meeting oun gentleman, and one alone, ob jected to the proposition submitted, though he made no amendment, and the resolution for an amalga mation was unanimously carried, giving directions to the din ctors of the company forthwith to enter into negotiations with the Great Western on the subject. An agreement with that company was the result, and a meeting was announced for the 4th of December to ratify that agreement. In the meantime an offer had been made by the London and North-Western Company to the eff,ct that where the Great Western Railway Company only proposed to — give 10/ , the London and North Western of 151. The directors, however, felt as men of honour, that their agreement was binding, and they determined to give it effect. This led to the proceedings in the railway market, which led to the transference of the shares into the hands of parties favourable to the London and North-Western Company. The parties purchased shares which were subject to all the liabilities and contingencies to which the shares in other lines were liable. He should, therefore, feel it his duty to oppose the motion.--(Loud cries of " Divide," " Order." and great uproar.) Mr. BERNAL rose amidst great demonstrations of impatience on the part of the House. lie said it was not his intention to travel through the facts of the case —(Cheers, and cries of " Divide.") He repeated it. No doubt those Gentlemen who had been canvassed, and who were prejudiced one way or the other, were tenxious for no delay—(Cheers and groans)—but in the face of them he would say, that on former occasions he had onjected to that tribunal deciding upon railways ; and he asked the House if his views had not been confirmed ?—(llear, hear.) The fact of Honourable Gentlemen who knew nothing of the case coming down to vote on this subject, was an evidence of this.— (Cheers and counter cheers.) He asked the Right Hon. lentlinnan in the chair, who was the representative of the honour of that House, if he considered that branch of the Legislature a fit tribunal to decide upon rail tae Billst—(Hea-, hear.) The Committee, of which the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge (Mr. Goulburn) was the chairman decided in a particular way, and Hon. Members came down without any par ticular allegation against the decision of the Committee, to ask the House to destroy that opinion. If this were done would that tribunal be respected 'either by themselves or by the country at large ? They were about to set aside the decision of a Com mittee up stairs, though tht:t decision had bees ;arrived at after a careful examination of all the facts in the case. This, if it were nothing more, would be suf (tient to determine him to vote against the motion. of his Hon. and Learned Friend. And what was that motion? It was to refer the question back again to another Committee; but although such was the wording of the motion it did not follow that such was the intention of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman. This was not the Hon. and Learned Member's first attempt to thwart this measure, for he had on a previous occasion moved that the Bill be read that day six monthst He thought that this was a most improper tribunal to decide the matter. and he called upon the Right Hon. Baronet opposite to support the decision of the Committee. That decision should only be set aside where corruption or improper conduct could be proved against the judges, and where such could not he adduced they were bound by every princ;ple of justice to uphold tneir authority. Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR said, that if the House would hear him, he had something to propose which he thought was worthy of its attention. His pro position was, that all those Members who had a pecu niary interest in either the Great Western or the London and North-Western should leave the question to be decided by those Members who had no such interest.— (Cheers and laughter.) After a few words from Mr. R. D. MANGLES and HAYTER, who declared their intention to vote according to the dictates of their own consciences, Mr. MUNTZ complained that his name had fre quently been taken in vain, for, the real truth was, he did not hold a share in any railway. The town, how ever, which he represented was particularly anxious that this railway should pass as a competing line to the London and North-Western, and he should therefore oppose the amendment of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite. Mr. STRUTT said no case had been made out to in duce him to oppose the unanimous opinion of the Com mittee on this Bill. The House then divided when there appeared— For the amendment 62 Against it Majority for the Bill —ls2 The report was then atreed to. REPORTS. The following reports were likewise agreed to : Birkenhead Commissioners Dock Acts Amendment (as to Con struction of Sea Wall along Wallasey Pool). Birmingham and Oxford Junction, and Birmingham, Wolver hampton, and Dudley Railways Amalgamation. C C a a l l e e dd betweenoo n r, i i n D a a n un d nd t D o Ge u h m l ea r b s gaor Limet w o , n s h Worksi Paisley,r e Ju nc na t d i n o d n Railway Bowling,Greenock a ( e D .)R e vi a i a l w t i a o y n s s Amalgamation. Caledonian Railway (Purchase of Lease of Wishaw and Coltness Railway). Dublin. Dundrum, and Rathfarnhatn Railway (Extension to Stephen's Green). ci i n eTs a te n err d maiand DroghedadaßiroaßailwaysielwayßEai Forestl Extension. a nm y s ai ona (Branch m a t(io Amalgamation. r . o m Nav a n to KeII s ) . General Terminus and Glasgow Harbour Railway Branches. Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston Direct, and Glasgow South ern Terminal Northern Railway Railway ( Hertford, Hatfield, Hatfield, and St. Alban's Branch). Great Western Railway (Branch to join the West London Branches Valleyay En s Widening clhyes t oßailway Hammersmith,a d Deviation Enlarging anadn od of Lynn, Westonjtr ii r n u o L c et o h t k i n e o s d.nLo et :R d : o o c i n l Railway, a a s n ß a r D an e c v h ia t t o ions South-Western Railway near Lambeth). Lynn L i)aß':adi i a l Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland (Extension from nearn Athlone ski nßnel, en t d o t Galway). haanmd, iwiaiitthr Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland (Newcastle, An- Newry and Enniskillen Railway. (Cannock, Norfolk Railway (from Thetford to the Lowestoft Railway South Staffordshire Railway yr ey, and Branches, &c.) Swansea Valley Railway. Halesworth). k ) wi Waterford, Wexford, Wicklow, and Dublin Railway (No. 1). Westminster Improvements. Windsor, Staines, and South-Western Railway (Richmond to Windsor. &e.) Norton Windsor, Staines, mad S outh - Western Railway (Staines to Ascot and Wukingham, with branches). THIRD READINGS. The following Bills were read a third time and passed: — Edinburgh Markets and Customs. Leith Harbour and Docks Dues. THE CALEDONIAN RAILWAY. Mr. HOPE JOHNSTONE moved that the Caledonian Railway (purchase or lease of Wishaw and Coltness Railway) should be re-committed to the c ommittee on Group 49, of Rail way Bills. The Hon. Member s lid not an ticipate any great object ion on the part of the Chairman of the Committee, and there were circumstances in the case which would amply justify the re-commi tal of the Bill. Mr. CRIPPS would be exceedingly sorry to offer any serious opposition to the motion of his Hon. Friend, but he yet thought that great care ought to be taken in contravening the decision of the Committee, for he was quite sure that they would be very careful before they sanctioned the insertion of any clause that would be injurious to the interests of the several parties. The clause as it at present stands would throw a great burthen upon the company, and he trusted, therefore, that when the Bill came before the House again on Thursday, that it would be so modified as to suit their interests, and he should only say, that when it so came before them, that he should feel it his duty to secure the interests of the share holders. The motion was then withdrawn, and the Bill was read a second time. Mr. CRIPPS said he should certainly recur to tke subject in .he third reading of the Bill. NOTICES OF MOTIONS. Mr. HUME begged to postpone the motion of which he had given notice for to-morrow till this day fortnight. PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS BILL. SE—THE DERBY Lord JOHN RUSSELL postponed his moti on on thi s sub ject till Friday next. WASTE LANDS IN IRELAND . Mr. P. SCROPE postpone d his motion on this su bj ec t t ill after the holidays. Lord GEORGE BEN TINCK—Mr. S peaker,as to-m orrow is the Derby day—(Loud laughter )—which for h a lf a century ADJOURNMENT OF DA Y. HOU had been held as a holiday, I rise to move Mr. HUME—I rise to _ order. The N o bl e L ord ought to propose his motion in rotation., is out of i ts p l ace here, being No. 18 in the lilt. — (Cr ies of ' Chair, chair, Order, order.") The SPEAKER said that all motions relating to the adjournment of the House were usually considered at an early and when so many hour. on the attention Of Mr. HUME objected to such motions as the present, as it would lead to great inconvenience and abuse. The SPEAKER again reiterated his decision, that such mo • tions always were considered at an early hour, for the conveni ence of the Members. Mr. SH ARNI AN CRAWFORD protested against the questionstl i h o e u Government.sHou s e risingotvivital atl t h e e i mportf -r pres e nt h nw o t u e s l r d tea addtperoe of things,oingmore, with this expression of his opinion. The adjournment of thePRISONS. Hu , se was then carried. rp o n f ra t t h i e nn ln n s f pe t c h t e or n s it o y f h un t t he fullest information on aAnoNthDe°r Nprison, which of the Giltspur-street would Sir G. r Y n3toh statedne discipline. inthat teh inconvenience e reports n cee Corporation Compter. DEATH OF THE LORD.LIEUTEN ANT OF IRELAND the subj Londone ct —APPOINTMENT OF A SUCCESSOR. Mr. HUME wished to know whether the Noble Lord obviate GREY R EP Prisons Inreplywould t h oo f a a s b d e e question c f i u d u e n d d upon frtoum contain building Vi scTo at the head of the Government had made any arrange up the vacancy ment with respect to filling Icy caused by the death of the Lord Lie utenant of Ireland, as it was important that the intentions of the Government should be known as soon as possible.—( Considerable sensation. ) Lord .1. RUSSELL ( w h o appeared to labour under consi derable emotion) said —Perhaps the House will permit me, in 1 answering the question of the Hon. 11 .e mber, which I must say pressed very closely on the death of the Noble Lord, the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.—( Loud cheers.) The House will permit me to state what are the feelings of the Government with respect to the molancholy loss which has occurred—(Hear, hear) —the loss of a Noble Lord whose in timate knowledge of Ireland, whose clear judgment, whose conciliatory qualities--(Cheers) — had so well adapted him to soften the animosities that had been so long the bane of that country, and to point thw; way to an improved state of things. —( Cherrs. ) Having said thrse few words with re-pect to the calamity which bas occurred, I will tell the Hon Gentle man who has si , ked this question that her M jetty's Gnirnnment have felt it their duty -to advise her Majesty im mediately to filt up the office of the Lord Lieutenancy of Ire land. Whatever may be the opinion of her Majesty's Go vernment with respect to the general nature of that office and with respect to the policy of maintaining it for any length of time, as a part of the Government of the United Kingdom, we are clearly and unanimously of opinion that the present cir cumstances of Ireland do not admit of such a change of autho rity as would be necessary by the legislative measures which would have to be introduced by any change in the mode of ad ministering the affairs of Ireland. We have therefore thought it necessary to advise her Majesty to fill up the office of the Lord k Lieutenant g but I do not intend during the present ses sion of Parliament to introduce any measure by which an alte ration may be made in the constitution of that authority, and acting upon our own responsibility, it will be absolutely neces sary for 'he Government to advise her Majesty to appoint a successor to the Noble Lord just deceased. SITTINGS OF COMMITTEES. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that it was his duty to make a motion, in consequence of that which had been just carried. The Hon. Member for Rochdale had announced to the House that he was well placed for to-morrox.--( Laughter.) He (Sir J. Graham) was very badly placed, for he wa.s summoned to attend two Committees, one a Railw iy Committee and the other a Commi.tee on matters of general interest to this House. It was, therefore, his duty to move that the Committees should have leave to sit to-morrow.—Agreed to. SIR EARDLEY WILMOT. Mr. SPOONER gave notice that on Tuesday, the hi June, he should move that a copy of an address from the in. habitants of Hobart Town to Sir Eardley Wilmot, late Lieut.- Governor of Van Diemen's Land, in consequence of a publica tion of a dispatch from Mr. Gladstone, be laid upon the table. DR. BOWRING AND THE POOR-LAW COMMIS- STONERS. Mr. FERRAND wished to give notice to the Hon. Mem ber for Bolton, that on Friday it was his intention to put a question to him relating to the positive contradiction made last night by the chief Secretary of State for the Home Department, of a most solemn declaration made by a late Secretary of State that Mr. Mott had been dismissed from his office as Assistant Commissioner for conduct of which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was acquainted, and which declaration the Hon. and Learned Gentleman stated at the time was sufficient to clear his character as a Member of that House. Dr. BO WRING said he should be much indebted to the Hon. Gentleman if he would put his question. Mr. FERRAND was prepared to do so. It was. Whether the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was now prepared, after the positive contradiction—the solemn declaration—of the late Se cretary of State for the Home Department with regard to Mr. Mott, to take any further steps for further clearing his own character, and the character of his constituents in reference to the same subject ? Dr. BO WRING did not know in what manner his charac ter was involved in any thing that had taken place on a former aight.—(Cheers. ) FLOUR. Mr. FERR AND desired to ask the First Lord of the Trea sury, as it was calculated that 183,120,000 lbs. weight cf the best flour was annually used merely for the purpose of dres sing the warps for weaving, besides an immense quantity for the purpose of daubing cottons with flour paste, to defraud the public, whether it was his intention to bring in a Bill to pro hibit the use of flour for such purposes ? Lord J. RUSSELL said that he begged to assure the Hon. Gentleman that he had no such intention. EDUCATION. Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE moved that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, that she will be graci ously pleased to give Cirections, that there be laid before this House, by the Committee of Council on Education, within twenty-one days next after the commencement of every Ses sion of Parliament, the following returns, made up to the Ist day of the month in which such returns are so presented : Of every school, alphabetically arranged, to which Govern ment aid has been voted in the preceding financial year, dis tinguishing Church of England from British and Dissenting Schools, showing the amount advanced in each case, and specitying whether given for building, repairs. furniture, books, field gardens, or workshops, or for salaries or pensions of schoolmasters, schoolmistresses, pupil teachers, or stipendiary monitors; of the name, profession, date of appointment, amount of salary, allowance, and travelling expenses of each inspector; of every school making application for aid, distinguishing the applications wanted from the applications refused, and the grounds of such refusal ; and, in all school-building cases in which the application has been successful, showing the sum which, according to a certified estimate or other reasonable calculation, would have to be provided by voluntary subscription. He considered that the Government measure conferred a vast amount of too much patronage upon the executive. He also was of opinion that the salaries of these inspectors was exceed ingly high. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he should not have any ob jection to the return, but the Hon. Gentleman was quite mis taken if they were to have seventy inspectors in that House. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE would call the attention of the House to the petition of the inhabitants of the borough of Sheffield (presented May 13), complaining of the Magisterial conduct of Wilson Overend, Esq. He moved for a copy of the con victions which had taken place before him, and a re turn also of those which had afterwards been quashed. It appeared that Mr. Overend was a gentleman in very exten sive medical practice, but he hoped that his physic was better than his law. He was generally called in where there was any disagreement between the employers and the employed, but it was very singular that he never sided with the employed. The trades in the town of Sheffield were attached to trades unions, but the magistrates not taking the same view of the benefits of such a system as the tradesmen themselves, they accordingly set their faces against them. However, most of his convictions were quashed. The first feelings of the inhabitants was to have Mr. Overend dismissed, but they afterwards considered that the course which they ought to adopt was the one which he now was pursuing ; and by these returns they would see how much justice was done to the character of Mr. Ove rend. He believed that the administration of justice on the part of this gentleman was very much open to challenge. The Government aught to appoint in these districts stipendiary magistrates, who would be far removed from local anti trade prejudices. There was no objection made to the other magis trates, and certain,y it was very singular that such a number of convictions obtained before Mr. Overend should subsequently be quashed. It was prima facia. evidence that there was some thing wrong in the matter. It was quite proper for trades men to combine if their masters combined ; but he considered that when a combination existed for the purposes of intimida tion, the guilty party ought to be punished. Sir GEORGE GREY said he had no objection to the re turn, but he was bound to say that no communication, save in praise of Mr. Overend, had reached the Crown. He under stood, however, that a fearful state of intimidation and com bination existed in the town of Sheffield. He would be glad if the opinions expressed by the Hon. Gentleman respecting in timidation were generally adopted by the parties whom he re presented upon the present occasion. Mr. B. DENISON said that he knew Mr. Overend, and could bear ample testimony to his character as a most upright and humane gentleman. He should inform the House that Mr. Overend was the only active magistate in the town. Others came in from a distance, and certainly gave valuable assistance. He would beg leave to move, in addition, for copies of the me morial sent to the Crown from the Town of Sheffield upon this subject. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he was bound to bear testimony to the character of Mr. Overend, which he always understood as most unexceptionable. Mr. STUART WORTLEY said that he knew Mr. Over end, and there was not a more upright or more conscientious gentleman in the kingdom. All the convictions which had been quashed were so by reason of some informality, as parties na t sas p oi e cn r if m aotr i i m t o t n e a t t ohs otherii n n c t e e rf t e hm r thatgi st latera at w et st e a r cw e kh i i n uc t hp e o r r e ne s nt his public e a d n d th i e t l. is Mr. Overend had received numerous letters from te v cPww oo h a rae n ; r i e d r b o eaet ue u hce c n s tde t eo i l p r n 'u b Ta l i h e me b os o ts a d t t i e e s 0 , f bea fearful ring twe n w , i o t af n n e ds ss h re the effi o 4eu t lidrewd p a s r o t phrei wellet y exercisek o n f o w h i n s of the utmost fortitude on the part of those who administered the law. A law had been passed upon the subject a short time since, and the consequence of the state of things existing in Sheffield was most deplorable. He would, therefore, entreat the Hon. Member to use his influence with the persons belonging to the different trades unions in that town, to alter their course of conduct, which would if perse vered in lead to the utter destruction of the trade in that town. preparedt o estimate, dtbhuettthot ahti w a ne n nv nde, sositfntehpetl Mr. HENLEY thought that if the magistrates hadacted •rongly, the Court of Law was the proper place to set such conduct right, and if the interference of a Court of Law was not advisable, then he thought that the Crown was to be called upon to exercise its high functions. He thought that if the proposed motion were to be agreed to. it would be setting a premium for persons asking this House to decide as judge and jery in all matters that might be brought before it. Mr. WARD entirely concurred in many of the observations which had fallen from the Hon. Member opposite. He lie lieved that these unions were the most difficult thing which a magistrate had to deal with ; and if ever there was a case in which it was necessary to show exemplary patience and free dom from prepossession in opinion, it was the question of the trades' unions as at present existing in Sheffield. There was no doubt that some of those unions were beneficial to the par ties, resolutions among themselves to obtain their ends , carry imorat force or by moral influence , but by some thing bordering upon threats, and always followed by and were deserving of support; but when theyca me no to t hteea sincerely e e iti tlryy tceffectshhhaeapoidrip c apita l duty ldi w irt e nih r g e athttoht felt eagt ioevlse m iittnat o ulbt s ee: t irtsfthieh o mmr t eeee a ibnwn l ylttoeutinhnl of -de acts of violence, he thought that such conduct indicted an injury upon the working classes such as was almost impos sible of depression. He had known several persons who w sib er ie e so. He was sure that there might be faults upon manufactories in that town, but who had, in con sequence of t tbf h ieool e tnth s t oas a fsi t :i e dueo o rsi f :n g bring both parties into some amicable arrangements; but he influence of threats and violence, which were sure to be visited at last by the strong arm of the law. Mr. PARKER concurred in the opinion expressed by the Hon. Member for the West Riding (Mr. S. Wortley) and the Hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Ward) as to the injurious effects upon the trade of the town of Sheffield by the improper conduct of some of these unions. Mr. T• DUNCOAIBE said that it was for the purpose of promoting a good understanding between the masters and men that he was induced to connect himself with the cause of the workmen to the extent which he had done. He had no oppo sition to offer to the motion of the Hon. Member. The motion was then agreed to. DUTIES ON COPPER ORE. Mr. MUN TZ postponed his motion for a Select Committee to inquire into the operations of the law regulating the existing duties on copper ore until Ist of June next. FEES IN COURTS OF LAW AND FQUITY. Mr. B. ESCOTT moved that the following Members be ap pointed a Select Committee to inquire into the fees of the Courts of Law and Equity—Mr. Watson, Sir J. Graham, The Attorney General, The Solicitor General, Sir F. Thesiger, Stuart Wortley, Mr. Romilly, Mr. Walpole, Mr. B. Escott, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Parker, Mr. Hume, Sir J. Hammer, and Mr. Ewart. Motion agreed to. COMMITTEE ON RAILWAY BILLS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved for a Select Committee to consider whether it is expedient that any measures should be adopted for suspending further proceedings in all or any of the Ra►lroad Bills in the present session, and er s Hume, :—The i‘ir . Ch an - for enabling the parties, under certain conditions, to proceed with the same in a future session of Parliament; also, whether standing orders of this House relative to Bills for the construe it is advisable that any future provision should be made in the tion of Railroads, and to report their opinion thereupon to the House from time to time. He would also move that the Cm oatl her, manner,immediately s o as to Hud son, Sir G. Clerk, Mr. Charles Russell, Mr. Baring, M r . Y h d e e r wpol l is m iieth p k ortant point was that of Strutt, Mr. Chaplin, Mr. Ellice, and Mbry. existing n ting Abel eoin S p m an it i h e . , and before having remove as much as possible any opposition4s ctlovartihyeanmeevaassuiroen. xocfhtehqeuefr°,llS7riJng. Gliroanh.amb,l'A'ln/rb. c m e i l t l o t e r e of consist t i t ie E There were several ►mportant points to be referred to the Committee, (Ale of them was the important question with The motion had been worded in m a p v a e n r y y g to en a e n r constructed o r p: e ueip s rto p tmuoi e , ife c ht t t:ahit t vnae o gi:f t dug h tni e niiigeb p s ta a ,,,o y :rtii m nieteeh e rdo n esi t tcho o oenm f Ai re t in, h Aaoc e ,tc,o t , .I.; their line. He thought that some cheek should be put to in 18'31 proceeded from the work'ng of the la such a course of proceeding. He begged, therefore, to we ye mistaken ; it arose from the low rate of wages the appointment el the Commi tee to inquire into these The Government had been ee , •grateleted subjects. which was proposed to be made, and ti e au, Mr. HODGSON thought that an interval of a day at least spec•ors. Now, he did not see any reason foi should have been allowed, in order to allow Hon. Members ter gratulation. He found the name was only ch\ move some amendment, if they thought proper. He thought office of inspector was precisely similar to that os it his duty to move an amendment on this motion, and would commissioner. Moreover, there was to be mad. - take the sense o f th e House upon it. Th e re was no doubt it of three to the number. He found there were testie r- Ad fewer_; was to the i n t eres t o f th e o ld com panies to strangle as than twelve inspectors. Of all the unions with which he was much as p oss ibl e a ll net , compan i es _ ( H ear , hear.) acquainted tie Union of Stockport was the one which gave To place c h a i rmen o f o ld compar i iii upon t hi s C omm i ttee , the greatest satisfaction. He :bought the visits of the assist and ask their opinion upon this subject, was like con•• ant commissioner hod not been produ, tive of any beneficial suiting the wolves as to what was best for the sheep. result to the country. Complaints had also been made of the He would now read to the House the amendment which it was bad and irregular mode in which the books were kept. The his intention to make upon the original motion. With part of accounts were, he bel ieve d, kept in a system of short-hand that m o ti on , h e f oun d no fau l t w h atever, b ut he propose d t h a t, which nobody but hims e lf could understand. He concluded from and a f ter t h e wor d s " f uture sess i ons of P ar li ament, " t h ere that the proceedings of th e P oor-law Cemmis-ion,rs ought to should b e ins er t e d instead, •• that the Select Committee do in- beithrown open to the public. The Duke of Wellington had quire wh e th er i t b e exped i ent that restrictions shall b e i mpose d expressed it a . s . h ,• his opinion is thereopinion said or d one i n rev parish that that th e b oard . should be thrown t on railw a y Bill s , passed i n the present session, so as to prevent open. He said the abs or pti on o f an undue amount of capital in those under- I s h ou ld s hut out he public from knowine."—( Hear, hear. 1 takings." In the Select Committee appointed t o enqu i re into the Andover The CHANCELLOR o f th e EXCHEQUER exp l a i ne d union, he moved an amendment in a p roper manner. Thatnr to the eff , et that M r . P ar k er that his obj ec t was not to prescribe to the Committee the course had not conducted the inqui _ they should p ursue. The Committee would still report to the amendment was defeated only by t h e casting vote House th e i r op i n i on upon the Bills submitted to them, so that of the c h a i rman, w h o o f course which h e proposed. ccurse gave his vote i n the Hon. G ent l eman ' s amendment would not, in fact, amend favour of the original resolution, in any de cree t h e difficult), which h e en d eavoure d to meet . The Right Hon. 13 ironet, the Secretary tor the lime D e - Mr. HINDE did n o t a t a ll o bj ect to the names on the Com- partment , sa id l ast n i g ht that it was trot intended t o compe mittee, and rather than divide the House, he should withdraw uniformity under this Ac t. He ( Mr. Etwall) thou g ht that his amendm en t. above all things, this was the object of the Bill. Even the la- The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that South and the West o boar test which was enforced in the since he had come to the House he found that Mr. Barin be dared to could not serve, i n consequence of absence from town. He ! then could be the value of such a law, as could not England, was not dared to be put in force in the north. What , proposed, th ere f ore, to substittee Lord Seymour's name in be carried out equally over the countrs. With re poet to the room of Mr. Harin g ' s . H e al so propo se d to substitute Mr. ' conduct of the Commissioners, he begged to state that, in his Pattison in room of Mr. John Abel Smith, who had . • got leave —wn up, nor from the House. officere of the Crown, was not correctly do. opinion, the case submitted by the Commissioners to the Law The amendment was then withdrawn, and the original founded upon accurate data. One portion of the case sub motion agreed to. mitted was, that every letter received by the Cornmissioners was THE ADJOURNED DEBATE . entered in the books of the office. Now it was expressly On the order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate Proved before th e C omm i ttee , t h at some o f th e c - rrespon on the poor-laws, dente had not been so entered.— (Hear, hear.) Numerous Mr. CHRISTIE said, that having given a great deal of letters were also written by Mr. Nichol, calling upon Mr. Par attention to this subject, he was anxious to address a very few ker to resign ; of those letters, also, no retards were kept. observations to the House upon it, and the result of all his Although he had spoken very strongly upon the mode in observation was that a central Board of Commissioners, in- I which Mr. Parker conducted the inquiry at Ando.. er, still be vested with large discretionary powers, was absolutely i thought that the cur duct of the Commissioners towards that necessary. He could not agree with the objections gentleman had been most uncalled for and vindictive. His which had been urged against the. Poor-law Bill, Hon. Friend the Member for W'eymnuth had told them how that it was a cruel and obnoxious law, and the measure many days Mr. Nicoll had transacted the business of Somer he believed had b een supporte d , and it was still set-house alone. It era; he who h a d or d ere d t h e i t qu i rt' to b e supported by the intelligent of all classes in the country. All made about the bones ; but th en t h e H ouse should know that that was now wanted w as , t o p l ace i ts machinery above sus- . all these proceedings were in oppositissn to the Act. He had picion ; and instead of having these removals every five years . to thank the House for the kind indulgence it had shown him, to have a well digested and permanent measure. The Hon. and he could assure them that he supported the amendment of Member for Knar es b oroug h h a d , i nstead of making out a case, his Hon. Friens because he conce i ve d t h at t h ere was nu neces exhibited to the House a melancholy failure. He (Mr. Christie) sity for a central board. had listened in v a i n t o h ear i n t h e speech of the Hon. Gentle- Viscount COURTEN AY said th a t a l t h oug h h e did not in man a corroboration of hi s assert i cn that the Act was crumbling tend to follow his Hon. F r i en d s t h roug h t h e d eta il e d statements to pieces. The only p roo f t h at h e could have alleged of the which they had address e d t o t h e H ouse , st i l l as h e had had the failure of the m easure was i n t h e case of the Andover union, honour of being chairman o f th e comm i ttee , t h e report o f wh i ch but to that he (Mr. Christie) would come presently. He had been so much referred to that night, he trusted that he would now leave th e H on . G ent l eman and refer to what had might be permitted to address a few obse rva ti ons to t h e H ouse. fallen from th e H on . G ent l eman the Member for Dorsetshire He did so for two objects, first. that he was anxious, not havi ng had the opportunity as chairman of the Committee of doing so, (Mr. Banke s )— w h o a l so opposed the Bill. He (Mr. Christie's) to express the reaso a which influenced him in dissenting from answer to the s t a t ements put forward by that Gentleman wits, that th e present Bill would afford several important addi- some of the resolutions to which they had arrived; and, se tional s e cur i t i es for the better administration of the law. There condly, because he wa s an x i ous t o recor d hi s op i n i on on t h e were three ways in which this was proposed to be done, Bill then before the House. It was his misfortune not always first, by a direct responsibility to agree with the members of the Andover union upon the to Parliament of a minister who would be ready at any time that a question was put to him to subjects befote them. but he was yroud and grateful to acknow afford the House and country every - explanation. - The second was, that with this president of the Board, who h aving ledge that the discussions were carried on throughout in a spirit of kindness and friendliness A series of resolutions were propoeesl should be assisted by four Cabinet M e inisters the House would be guaranteed Cabinet deliberation s in all important , matters reference to three distinct eubjects; these were the local administration of the law in the workhouse itself, the conduct regarding the administration of the law, exercise of the fromof thepon „. sr- o l e awComrniestoners, and the dismissal of Mr. Day discretionary powers to be conferred on ' it e s r o t ffic e ers. The third his . oat oftoor-law assistant. He would ` take the liberty security was the new foisting on which the ' Commissioner s of staring to the House what the general impression was that would be placed with regard to the officers under them. The he derived from the evidence taken before the Committee ; he Commissioners hitherto had been responsible for all the local felt himself unable to avoid coming to the conclusion that there abuses which had arisen under the operation of the law ; but had been gross mismanagement. in the board of guardians, and the arrangements now would be to make the local officers res- that the administration of the law was marked by an unusual possible for the l oca l a d m i n i stration, leaving to degree o f h ars h ness at Andover, and that owing to •he genera the Commissioners a paramount and a central control. irregularity which prevailed, the inmates of the establishment Ha was well aware that it was of Se highest importance to were kept in a wretched and lamentable state Ttiat investiga ascertain what was the precise meaning of the assertions that tion had been so far attended with good results, that public at had been made last night by the Hon. M em b er f or K nares - tention had b een d i rected to the subject On some of these borough, that the Poor-law Amendment Act had proved to be resolutions he had hehl different opinions from some of an utter failure. Then it was important to ascertai n wh e th er his friend s , as h e did also on the second series of these resol u ti ons , namely, on the conduct of the Poor-l aw the Act of 1844 was impolitic, or whether it had been a g oo d law, although doomed to failure from the evil administration of Commissioners themselves. Their conduct had been severely it by its Ministers, local and central. The point on which the censured in the m a t ter ot M r. Parker, but he raid nut know that they deserved a ll t h e censure which had been accorded t o Andover Committee inquired, were tho se points be a rin g a lm os t them on the subject. C erta i n l y , a• tar as Mr. Parker' s appear 'entirely upon the a d m i n i s t rat i on o f t h e poor -l aw , as di st i nc t from the law itself. Th e Ri g h t H on. G ent l eman t h e S ecre - ante before the committee went, he ,Vise .ant Court rosy) did tary for the lion i se D epartment, state d yester d ay t h at h e h a d not think that it was chara c t er i se d b y eit h er vigilance or atten attentively read the r e p ort o f t h e A n d over C omm i ttee f rom t h e time. While stating this he must at t h e same time state in beginning, and he did n o t fi n d one wor d i n t h at report a ff ect i ng justice to Mr. Parker, that s t rong ev id ence was given of the ability and perseverance he had ex hibi ted while in his former the principle of the measure . Th e fi rst ser i es of po i nts to position of secretary to the Peor-law Co mm i ss i oners. He which the Andover U n i on C omm i ttee h a d di recte d t h e i r at f tention, were those bea r i ng on l oca l a b uses an d d e f ects i n t h e fully agreed with his H on . F r i en d who had spoken that evening, administration. The A n do v e r wor kh ouse was ill- regu l ate d that the Bill before the H ouse would be se far superior t o t h e former . Bill, that it would have st direct Parliamentary resists ,- disgusting.ethtah,olutgilliet ottiatmtshtat.tmporsiveisiens!which and filthy, and the practices of the inmates were necessarily s , i r b o i v l r i t d y e di inset t h lectors House. s r e a . , II e H r The local authority there had very extended ce arsti,onwsaswaonuoldtheeerritmaillovtetnndenttooinnethreeasol..ditlsawva. luelisnhetshe powers, which he exercised with the utmost severity, thus in- I ommission flieting the utmost hardship on the poor. The harsh e mndi i public - mode in which the law was administered defeated one of the pureoses for which workhouses were originated. estimation, and secure a more efficient and equable admmistra- The workhouses were considered a terror instead of a relief.— tion of the law. (Hear.) The labourers near Andover were, therefore, left Captain PECHELL ' sard, after such an inquiry of so much at the mercy of their employers, for rather than meet the importance the country must be surprised_ that the Noble Lord horrors of the workhouse, they accepted any wages that were had not introduced a more complete measure for the adretnis offered them. The Committee, afterwards inquired into ' f h the con- tration o sa id as p or-law to the I resent day. The Noble Lord, duct of the Poor-law Commissioners, and a series • of resolutions indeed, said as much as that the present Bill was not founded were passed, expressive of the Committee's disapprobation of on the information which had been acquired by the late inves their conduct. Then they came to the question of the dismissal of tigation. He was surprised. and he begged to ask a reason for the Assistant Poor-law Commissioners, resolutions of a still all this. Was the Noble Lord prepared to sanction the stranger character were passed upon their conduct in this par- proceedings of the Commissioners. Those proceedings were ticular, and of their being brought forward by the well known to the country and the House. Yet, after the ' Right Honourable Gentleman, the Member far Dorchester. expose which they had had of these proceedings, they were told The conduct of an Assistant Commissioner, Mr. Carter, while that that inquiry formed no reason for the present measure. sitting on an inquiry —the conduct of the Commissioners on What, then, was the reason? He begged their attention to inquiries—their conduct in dismissing Mr. Carter, were ques- the evidence. When in the Committee, they were told the tions all aff cting the administration of the law. The Com- C immissioners acted a, a board—they were under the necessity mittee of the House had entered upon these questions b cause "f asking what was a board. The seeretary, a most able and they felt it necessary, having begun to pursue inquiries which well-deserving gentleman, defined a hoard as a tab eat which th• were incidental. They found that same of the conduct of the appointed functionaries at in deliberation. The fact, however, Commissioners was illegal, some irregular; and their conduct was that scarcely a single Commi , sioner ever .air at the board. in removing Mr. Chadwick from the business of the Commis. But this opinion of Mr. Chadwick, about the constitution of a sion was not to be approved. These Commissioners exhi- board, was found troublesome in the Commission. Now, he bited distrust in th e i r su b or di nates , an d i n j ust i ce to did not kno w w h e th er t h e N oble Lard would state the reason many of their se rvants . O n t h ese po i nts ev id ence wi ich had oper a t e d on hi s m i nd. b ut perhaps he had not seen a had 'been taken at le ng th, an d occup i e d pu bli c op i nion f ora letter whi c h h a d come to hi s (Capt. Peehell's) hand. The long time. All these questions affected the Administration Gallant Gentleman read a letter from China on " Board,: and the administrators of the law ; and having now referred to which excited a good deal of merriment in the House. He all these points, he thought he might say to the Hon. Member 'aid he could show that the employment of the poor n •d• that he was not at liberty t o re f er t o th e repor t o f th e A n d over ing bones, to w hi c h attention had been d -awn in the i grin smar 1842, Committee in support of his opinion—that the new poor-law was allowed to continue, without one effort, on th e ,art of the had been a failure. That rep or t w as mad e a t th e c l ose o f l ast Com Commissioners. t o d o away with it. Instead of that ' .he held in session. The present Ministers had but recently taken office. his hand a document from an Assistant Commissioner in the The Secretary of State for the Home Department, West of England, written in office,practice. He said 1844, propos• mg a ne w system of not being in not having been in office during dhe did not care fer mills, but he referred the greater part of the sittings of the Committee, boxes and iron rammers with which to set the poer p to grind could not have been expected to have made intimate inquiry bones small enough to pass through a half-inch slit. It was into some of the matters referred to in the report. He did, bars' work, but it was necessary for paupers. Such was the however, institute an inquiry, and the result was already on the language of the subosdinat es of the Commissioners in 1844. when table. The present session began with the Commissioners still it was expected that they would have put down the making of sitting. But in answer to a question by the Hon. Member for bone manure. He trusted that no such conduct would be pur- Montroee, the Noble Lord at thehead of the Government made sued by the new Commission. He might r. fer them to the a statement which gave the public to understand, that with the treatment received by Mr. Parker, as an instance, of the way re-construction of the Poor-law Commission, the present Corn- in which the Commissioners were wont to sacrifice the most missioners would cease this cession. He would not say valuable servants. That Gentleman was sent down into the that the Government in thus proceeding, had no' county of Sussex as his (Captain Peehell's) opponent. an'f was acted with a wise discretion ; but he must say that there employed thy by day to oppose. But h e d:sohar red his the Home Secretary had not taken the best method t o e li c i t 'iuty mo s t impartially, anti here was h e (C aptain Pee/fell) to the truth. Mr. Chadwick impugned the conduct of the Corn- state that he was dismissed from his office without a recommen missioners so early as the year 1842, a copy of which document datisn for any place under the Gov't.. ment. Similar was the appeared in the appendix to the report of the Commissioners. case of Mr. .Day• two cases the most fl .grant that could be The Commissioners appeared to have conducted their business instanced. He was anxious for a change. But what were in a most extraordinary way. Mr. Chadwick made most mar- they to get by this change ? If he should not vote fur the vellous revelations before the Commissioners. The Commie- second reading of the Bill, it might be said that he would sioners denied these, and they and Mr. Chadwick joined issue thereby leave the Commissioners out, but these who said o ild on matters of fact. (Th e H on. G ent l eman then read at h a d not heard the few words vosich he m ant tos a res. , to the some length extracts from the evidence wl.ich has House. He hoped if the Government passed thi s Bill, as h e that they w ou ld already appeared i n t h e pu b lic prints to show believed they would, - fairly grapple with t h e the irregularity of th e procee di ngs of the Commissioners, es • law, and that it would b e materially amended. The Noble pecially in the matter of the Minute-book, which appeared, by Lord had intimated that the law required amendment • there conflicting stateme n t s , t o h ave b een kept in a very irre- fore he hoped, in t h e words of the Hon. ' . and Learn e d Gentle gular way from the year 1834 to the year 1839.) It appeared man the Member for Bath, that the new beard would Ise free likewise from page 3of the report, that, in the case of orders. from suspicion. He wished, in the words of the report of the these had been issued sometimes with the signature of only one Committee on the Andover union, to express his opinion that ! Commissioner, sometimes with the signature of net one Corn- the Commissioners were'not deserving of support, but they must missioner at all. not imagine that they would entirely alter the Gilbert and At this moment an Hon. Member moved that the House be other unions which did not adopt the bad system of the new counted, and the galleries were cleared, but as there were more poor law. He would, therefore, support tile amendment of than 40 Members present, the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Knaresborough Mr. CHRISTIE resumed. He said the opinion of the law Mr. M. SUTTON said, as the measure did not propose any officers of the Cro wn h a d no t b een c l ear l y stated to the public material alteration in the law, h e s h ou ld not d eta i n t h e H ouse and they were, therefore, left to draw their own inference. with anYboobserTat t r . 7 .o i r thLm:pe e c t, t b t i o re it— i i i iii r fac i t h th o e k Hon. Gen- They stated that it was not usual to produce the opinions of the de l m y a ll n fem t ber ill who m had applied rs himself ( to . t 9 was the he subject legiti law officers of the Crown - but an opinicn of the Attorney- ae only under discussion, namely, the Bill of the Government ; neral had been produced by' the guardians of Pancras and Mary am d although he intended to support tli e motion of the Hon. lebone. There was, however, he understood, some distinction " the Member for ' Gentleman fanaresboroueh, he differed with as it was not given his capacity as in one of the law officers of Hon. Gentleman on thegrounds the the Crown. The commissioners were required to record all had not done so. The commis. it forward. Subsequently a third subject had been • their proceedings, but they introduced sinners had stated that they had recorded all their letters, but before the attention of the House, uet which h e admitted was equal they had written letters marked "private ," or intend e d t o b e in importance t o t h e others, namely, the cond was o the ard private, to their assistant-commissioners, o f w hi c h no cop i es entruste d w i th the administration of file relief of th e poor.bo It had been kept—(Hear, hear.) The commissioners also stated was well known that he ( Mr. M. Sutton) did not concur in the that they had acted as a body, when it was notorious that report of the Committee on some of them h a d ac t e d i n di v i dually. The Honourable that report of it which had the Andover i nqu i ry, b ut especially d reference to the con d uct of the Gentleman then r e f erre d to a l etter written by the Poor- Poor-law Commissio ' law Commis s io ners w i t h respect to the Andover Union. The } the conduct of herAniearjse, and hi s o pi n i on was strengthened by Government, w h o r i n not agree stated, in their d e f ence , t h at the guardians of the union didie' Cin the rep or t o f that "'Y ommittee ; it they had agreed in the not require explanation on the points to which thersport, th e y report of would not have felt it consistent with their duty the Committee had reference, but the Commissioner s had the evidence tak en b e f ore t h e Committee transmitted to them a to have ret a i ne d men any longer in office who had been guilty sd the conduct which was imputed to them He reted. soon as it was published, and as soon as it came into the pm- therefore, that he 11 . h H • * did e ig t on. Baronet (Sir G. Grey) not session of the Committee, and they might therefore have come express the views of the Government more fully than he did before the Committee, and made any explanation they when he addressed the House last night, because it would have thought proper. He considered that the annual reports, which relieved him from intruding upon the House; but he believed were presented to the House, should be printed in a small the Noble Lord would state his views on the subject before the form, in order that they might be the more easily circulated— conclusion of the debate. He admitted that there was great on the part o not ex ports st a t ements se l ected from the reports of the Com- want of good conduct and cruelty to the poor, missioners' r e p or t s .— ( H ear, h ear.) Then the digest which the Poor-law C omm i ss i oners ; b ut then,it should be borne in mind, that the bod y partook more of an had been published of the evidence by the Barrister appointed character ; but if they inspecting than et. dany other to make it, merely adopted, the words and sentiments al neglected t o l amend evils which were made evident. the Poor-law Commissioners; and appeared as if it wk,y of they were misco n duct , but they surely were not written by the Commissioners themselves.—(Hear, hear.) misconduct guit if their assistant The introductory parts are full of mistatements— goilty of . Hear.) Then with commissioners were guilty respect to Andover, he enter. (Hear, hear,)— and, therefore, the digest was biased,of and could not b e d epen d e d upon. —(H ear .) Th e C omm i s - mined the opinion that the Guardians are r esponsible for all that t had taken place—( Hear) a sinner stated that a majority of the committee consisted of lace, Mr. Parker re orte—d shsometime before the inquiry took friends of Mr. Parker, and opponents of the Poor-law; P vourably.—He did nopt tat the unton was going on fa whereas, eight out of the fifteen were in favour of it. Eight defend the Poor-law C hesitate to say that he td h s oo t ere to were nominated by the Hon. Gentleman who moved the appoint the Poor-law ornrnissis ners, but he could not defend all ment of the Committee ( Mr. Etwall), and seven by the Noble Commissioners had done. He the y were free from ne. He did not say that Lord the Member for Cavan, the chairman of the Committee.limme, but he But there was another point to which he would wish to call the every man to defend thosepublic thought it wrs the duty of men with whom attention of the House, namely, to the statements relative to they had been connecred in a public caps k e g hear.) Mr. Chadwick, who was termed "a discontented secretary." One of the allegations against Mr. Parker was that he had Now he was anxious to say that Mr. Chadwick was most not conducted the anxious to subject his conduct to the strictest investigation. way in which inquiryhe properly, and he thought that the inquiry was conducted had not been He had abstained from making any mention relative to the conducted with ' Poor-law Commissioners until the present eccasion, in con- med u thei impartiality. The Committee had not aura r report that there was not sufficient reasons for the sequence of the statements of the Noble Lord at the corn_ dismis P s 1 th e Poo of the Session. He had always been a warm friend and the of Mr. Parker and Mr. Day, but that the time e mode in which it was done inflicted grea t of the Poor-law, and at the time he made his motion for an and therefore he was justified in say ing that the Committee inquiry into the conduct of the s2ornmissioners, relat. Parker, he did net foresee the facts which would tve to Mr. had uotadopted a resolution so sweeping as that stated by the come to ligla lion. Gentleman. The general accusation against Mr Parker before the Andover Committee. He denied been influenced by hostility to the that he had ever was, that he had lost their conidenec, and, therefore, he had a seat in that House,Commissioners even before it was not good or advantageous for the public that undergraduate of Cambridge, he ho While yet an that he should be retained. Now, in his opinion, written a pamphl e t in it s there were different grounds for that loss of confidence, but defence, he would conclude by observi ng t h at he thought the whether there were or not, they had no right to i mpute cor present measure involv e d an excellent principle. rupt motives, unless theycould be proved. N ow what was the he did not see the reason or the case against Mr. Parker? That gentleman distinctly stated, necessity of a central board r es id ent in London. The law that the Commissioners had come to a r eso l ut i on to dismiss was most objectionable, and inthe him, in order to cast the blame from their own west of England was most unpopular. He w as h had his; but this statement e at a loss to conceive why local boards been unable to prove. He constituted as they now . now came to the case of Mr. Day • were, were not permitted to carry out his and the difference between the poor-law. He did case and that of Mr. Parker ' was, that none of the Poor not see the advantage to be gained by the public, in respect Commissioners, or, l a w . indeed, anybody else, imputed to him to the proposed alterations. It ap peared to him thatthey • • i n tentional neglect. Their . were beginning to legislate upon this in whole ground of objection to Mr. all-ins Day was, that while in the discharge of a very diffie all-important question, and that he would sa •• was in the ) in the cult duty, they found him unequal to the task ; anti while direction. There was something so erroneous whide they, therefore, system that it was impossible that it could be a ltere d _ re, thought it not safe or expedient ta confide the care of that district, to which he had been advantageously. Although there were many Members in favour of the poor law, yet he were a how man who wo uld I appoi n t e d, any longer. And, therefore, in the di s c harge Irise in that House and sa y th a t th e l aw had succeeded. The lof a very painful discretion, they considered it right to require Hon. ;Vente r f or B a th conce i ve d th a t th e burning of hayricks his resignation. O ne o f th e c h arges b roug h t against t 17.• Coa • N ' -t6 ) A:* _ - ) t mg. , --. IPS. ler to ite of Inv uillY 1 th° uine lade ion vets ung .....• 1r - Xif IA