The Sun. — London, England, 1847-05-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 21, 1847. specified. He thought it most desirable that when this measure was brought under discussion in the House, that the House should have been prepared to deal with it on a wider and more extended scale. Lord JOHN RUSSELL then rose and said—Mr. Speaker, Sir, it has been very justly said that in the Course of this debate, not one question alone, but three questions, have been under discussion ; and those three questions have been mixed with various others, of which it is hardly possible to take any sufficient notice, and much less to settle, in the course of this debate. Yet, Sir, I cannot avoid, before I proceed immediately to speak to the question of the second reading of this Bill. adverting in some degree to the important questions no doubt connected with it, and on which some Honour • able Members have already spoken at considerable length —I mean es p ec i a lly the question of the poor law amendment itself, and the question of the administration of that law under the Poor-law Com missioners, as brought to light by the voluminous eviden ce g i ven b e f ore t h e A n d ov er Committee. Now, Sir, with respect to the poor-law amendment itself, let Gentlemen consider what was the nature of that kind of administration which the poor-law amendme n t is intended to supersede ; how far it was liable not only to the obj ect i on of a b use, an d o f corru pting the labourer of the country, and of destroying his property, but like wise to some of the very objections brought against the present system. W e were told that here was an arbi trary power given to a single commissioner—a power at variance with the constitution—that any three men should have a power to make laws which should regu late the laws and conditions on which relief should be given to the pauper population of this country. Will You have again this state of poor-law administra tion--(Hear, hear)—because I am not without apprehension that unless this House is determined to persevere in the present system in its plan and objects, we may, in a few years, find ourselves again falling into the system of vicious legislation.—(Cheers.) Sir, it un fortunately happened that the price of provisions rose toward the end of last century to be extremely high, far above any period that had been marked for severity previously, and there was a great difficulty on the part Of the labourers in being able to provide for the sub sistence of themselves and their families out of the wages which they received. What was the course adopted A certain number of justices assembled together, and reside a new law on this subject. They made a law, in total disregard of the law of Elizabeth—they Made a law that the labouring man receiving wages should have a certain amount paid out of the Poor-rate, which was to be measured by the price of the quartern loaf, and the food on which he was ex pected to live ; and reference was also had to the num ber of his family, and the mode in which they were to subsist. Now it was quite evident that the poor-law of Elizabeth never contemplated such a measur. The Act Of Elizabeth provided for the poor children who were left:destitute and unprotected; as for the able-bodied la bourers who might be idl- and out of work, it set them to h work and, as the condition of their work, provided at they should be paid out of the rates to be raised in ther parish or district. Such was the principle of the Learned of Elizabeth, as read in the House by the Lion. and rarned Member for Bath, on the last day of the de :to ; but the plan of giving an addition to the m e ths, and giving that addition eut of the district a rs, giving it also without providing employment, with a plan was at total variance with the letter and r ah the spirit of the Act of Elizabeth, and yet, Sir, natur e gentlemen who complained of the unconstitutional th e fi rst of 'eture of this power should be aware that that change in the law was made solely by resolutions adopted at a justices.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Sir, l e r , i ) first meeting of this kind was held in the were of Berks, and afterwards similar meetings re held in the various counties in the kingdom, but ,T, L w e 'hich no other rule than their own was discussed. decision was perfectly arbitrary. There is no doubt that the new law was adopted with the vie w of benefiting the people. They thought it was desirable t rss this law in order to enable the people to have tior They beyond their wages on which t o subsist. Y did not allow the ordinary rules of society to ave t • hen. sufficient weight, by which wages would un doubtedly i n t i me have b een ra i se d ; they interfere with ra ' e t of Elizabeth with a benevolent intentio n, but in oti _ ► miner totally arbitrary, and solely regulated by t heir 1 ,."n vie w o f pu b l i c expe di enc y a nd public safety. het to whom th e om are those magistrates responsible ? Sir , C hancellor would not dismiss them from the coin henel°n of the peace because they had acted from the the relent i ntent i on o f prov idi ng f or the labourers of th em; in the exercise of the power entrusted to w i.. oula to dismiss them from the commission of the peace ey not, therefore, be just towards them, acting as had . from a mistaken sense of duty. But are those o„lTelssioners of whom we are now speaking ? They oat he dismissed to day, or at any hour, at the pleasure tartnosCrown, represented by the Right Hon. the Secre wh-Y t t, State. If the Secretary of State defends them notescafeY do wrong, if their rules and regulations wore to this and the c lming to the laws as decided by this House pervisioother House of Parliament, being under the su n of the Secretary of State, they were also liable invests wit seconhel check and control; thus they were not existed that power and that authority which , b efore the amended But It was f amended Poor-law Bill was enacted. was a dust 'and that although the legislative enactment t h a t an . t e s tt ' in n n e — although it was made with a berievo iZPeops,and a desire to elevate the condition of ' ll sl e d to gross abuses. These abuses have been • tested , n illustrate great length, and they have continued : wne ltoing ki d e " bY an evidence of the most over• I need scarce ly abuses advert to the various points in this report, or to the mode in which those th e Fre known to spring up; to the manner in which vestries had abused their power ; to the manner i n which the labourer was reduce to the lowest possibe wa ges, and was dismissed in certain cases by the far mers for a day or a day and a half, and thrown upon the rates. The intention was good, but the effect was not SO. The Act of Elizabeth w,.s intended to raise the pauper class to the condition of independent labourers, while the effect of this enactment was to reduce the inde pendent labourer to the condition of a pauper.— ( Hear.) The wholecountry was overspread with labourers receiving support, and a portion of their assistance from the poors-rate, depending on the vestry for elee mosynary aid; depending on the individual caprice of the members of those vestries, who took their own dis likes against particular labourers, and regulated accord ing to those feelings of spite, the relief which ought to have been given according to the law. But, Sir, when the Government of Lord Grey attempted to reform th,ese abus es , it was observed that they could not do so Lttput encountering, and encountering not for a period noting which the Bill was passing through Parliament, eir one year or two years, but for ma n y y ears, the moat f ormidable opposition, and every kind of i t. If I ma y sad 1 83 , t a t n b extract from Lord Althorp's speech in the year which House will see what he proposed in the Bill Adra leistra -e brought forward in the name of the Grey was to ts hoe (The Noble Lord read the extract which at 'lie effect °P the eet that, the effect of the Bill would be to the Pow all owance system; to deprive the magistracy of er Of out-door relief; to give a larger discre bsiag in Y Power to th e Poor-law Commissioners; and to to and re , a good state and condition the system of laws guiatiou for What were the • pauper relief.) Now, Sir, observe was the e interests, what were the prejudices, what Power he proposed to run counter to? His first al easur e eve s was to stop the system of allowance. What l a b the effect o f t h at system ? T o degrade the oure r l e , a also , yet althou g h thi s was a grea t evil, it was doubt %nee b a e system of indulgence which had the appear nefiting the labourer, and therefore could not thing he . said was that the Bill was y intende ' d to deprive Magistrates of the power of ordering outdoor ref. C t W hy, although the whole body of the magistracy re s l aid thata:a power which they beneficially exercised, yet as not the case with the whole body of the magis- Ir_a e,y. There were many who cherished this power, ..._ 1111 , 4 who left not the pauper to receive relief from those m wr were their own neighbours. These were popular gistrates, to whom the improvident labourer travelled Ps five or ten miles out of his parish in order to get an order to the overseer for outdoor relief. The alteration which was made in the constitution of parochial vestries gave great offence to those who were interested in their abuses. In many instances it was found that the greatest evils existed which the measure was calculated to remove. In the parochial vestries the pareses who had the ordering of the relief, in a great proportion of cases, contracted for the same--(Hear, hear)—and made a profit on the transaction.—(Hear, hear.) They increased their own funds out of the rates of the parish, and then when the change was proposed, those and the assistants who were under them expressed themselves shocked at the cruelty and impiety of the new law, and the oppression to which it subjected the poor.—(Hear, hear.) It was therefore necessary, under such a state of things, to give large discretionary powers to the commissioners. This W . . 45 absolutely necessary ; as-the difficulty, as well as Ia impropriety of acting on a uniform system was clearly apparent. The measure had to be adapted to the i c t ircurnstauces of the various districts into vvhich as to be brought into operation, and hence vr it was considered right to constitute a centr a l These power w i t h l arge di scre ti onar y authority. They h commissioners have been much attacked ave,been styled three kings, tyrants, and other terms founded in truth equally oeprohrious. Sir,so far from these charges being entitled to such d — id e truth--so t h f far epithets, from t the ean t era t sboei farng from this, theyeboernsmililoiwasnio, every eff thing in their power to give fair and impartial effect to the law which they were called on to administe In one or two instances, there may have been some r reasonfor calling the discretion of the commissioners in question, and I regret that it was 80 , though it is easy to conceive how much of th tion arose from e opposi tion those who clung to the abuses of th e o ld la R', and who, in declaimed tyranny a _ , consequence, ab eit the and oppression of the new. It was a great quest' • We ton in proposing the law of 1834, as to whose hands the administration entrusted, andafter of the measure should be 43 , f : board of much consideration the constitution the principle o commissioners was finally adopted. To ment thews I the board the leading parties iu Parlia ment been tal!ereed, though in late years great objection coriduced.4 l i i to the mode in which its affairs has been resolution s es ar, hear.) We have heard of certain dover Union, the Committee on the affairs of the An made to this House, of the report which that Committee report was preseueste. It was suggested at the time the should be presented, that the resolutions of the Com mittee of censure agreed to by the House, and that a mo tion f should be passed on the Poor-law Com missioners,reports T. .sounded on the allegation on that This, however was not done, and I do not think it , Should have was advisable. Had it been proposed I that felt it my duty to oppose it. Ido not by mean to with justif y what may have taken place in con nexionorami f* may tne Andover u n i on . Th e r e solutions of lie- wronhave been right or may have been but with regard to or thethe Committee or the conduct P oor - law compet"`"ss , Commissioners, I do not think it was 11l them to form an opinion of the circum- stances under which they had acted. From the experi ence we have had of the proceedings of those gentlemen, I cannot allow the resolution of the Committee to take away my confidence in them. Having general faith in their character, abilities, and integrity, I cannot suppose that they have acted in the affairs of this union without duo consideration.—(Hear, hear.) Meanwhile, with regard to the Assistant Poor-law Commissioners, I think that what has fallen from the Hon. Baronet the Member for Radnorshire is extremely true. I do not think the House of Parliament would give to the Assistant Poor-law Commissioners a freehold of these offices, and remove them from all con trol of .the head commissioners. With the ordinary officers of the Government departments, absolute power was given, though it was seldom used, to the heads of the several departments to effect any removal they might deem necessary. If a clerk under me was incompetent, and if his retention was not for the benefit of the public, I should feel it my duty to remove him; and I cannot conceive that the different offices can be satisfactorily filled unless such powers are placed in the hands of the different departments. It is said that the Andover Committee intimated that there was no ground for the removal of Mr. Day or Mr. Parker; so that I must say, I cannot say that such a Committee had any such experience of the conduct or proceedings of the gentlemen in question as to give a just and correct opi nion. —(Hear.) But it is further stated that Mr. Chad wick has said that there was a division between him and the whole of the Poor-law Commissioners, because they were desirous of correcting abuses, and would not en courage and promote any Assistant Commissioners who br-nght any errors or mal-practices before them. But let us look for the proof of this. When Ido so, I find them meagre in the extreme. Mr. Parker says that he complained of the state of the workhouse accounts in 1843, and had done so on several occasions since. To this it was mentioned to him, at the time he first named it, that a Bill was about to be introduced on the sub ect, and that he had better refrain from doing any thing till he saw the result. The Bill was given up at the end of that session, and again introduced the session fol lowing. And because this has been so, it is stated by Mr. Parker that the Poor law Commissioners had set their faces against him. How, on anything so meagre could they make a founda tion for such a charge?—(Hear, hear.) But I must say, if this were so, if the Poor-law Commissioners had set their faces against correcting abuses, it was not fair for the secretary, or an assistant-commissioner, like Mr. Parker, to go on countenancing such a state of things. They ought either to have resigned at once, or to have complained to the Secretary of State, instead of con tinuing to act under commissioners who were not doing their duty.—(llear, hear.) 1 think it was a great dere liction in them not to have brought the question under the notice of the Secretary of State, if they thought the head commissioners were incapable to the task. There is no department, be it what it may, that will be able to stand if those who are appointed,to administer it, instead of acting under the direction of their superiors are continually making their complaints—(Hear, hear) — and instead of performing the orders of their superiors, are undermining, and contriving,—(Hear, hear)—and plotting against those commissioners who are placed over them. No department can, under such a state of things, be expected to act efficiently and beneficial to the interest of the public.—(Hear, hear.) It is that kind of House, which we know, upon the highest authority, will not be able to stand. I think that while these charges is made, and made very loudly, there has not been any sufficient proof of it, and, therefore. the Poor-law Commissioners are, in my mind, acquitted of this, the only grave charge brought against them—that with respect to the making of the law, their ideas of it may have been different from that of the Secretary, they may have con ducted their business in a way which some gentlemen may think—and which all Secretaries of State thought— in conformity with the law ; while there was no doubt that with respect to certain individual cases, such, for instance, as the case of the Andover Union, they com mitted faults of a want of discretion—that several of their decisions with respect to the Andover Union were not guided by sound judgment—that with respect to some other particular cases they may have failed in hitting the regular rule, and that their conduct was not altogether such as might be considered the wisest. All these I consider however as very minor charges ; I con sider them as very inferior in importance, in considera tion of the duties which I have shown were so difficult, and which excited so much odium ; and they are such as I think they should not be arraigned upon.—(Hear, hear.) lam told that, with respect to the working of the law, that although there may have been complaints in particular instances, yet that the general working of the law has been more satisfactory during the last two years, and during the present year, and I can answer for it more especially since my Hon. Friend has been the Se cretary of State for the Home Department. I can say that, considering the number of the unions, amounting to 590, the complaints have been remarkably few; and the guardians in general say that they are satisfied with having to receive the orders of the Poor-law Commis sioners, and that they would rather have some rule to guide them, than be left to act entirely according to their own discretion in the administration of the law.— (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member who opposed the second reading of this Bill, and who moved that it should be read a second time that day six months, made various accusations both against the law and against the corn missioners; they were, however, accusations so extrava gant, going so far beyond anything that he could prove, so completely resting upon assertion, that I do not feel it necessary to give a reply to those accusations.—(Hear, hear.) I have taken notice of what I think is a serious charge, viz., that of endeavouring to suppress inquiry; with respect to these other matters such as conveying paupers to Manchester, and exposing them to misery and starvation,—such charges as those, necessary t t t l eotyua though, , e wph s tori o c hpleien,t properly enter ey e r the ifnouton third d th e ce speaking„ m , a h s eecs l ht r eon e enl aryl them.—(Cheers.) under u d Ne o vste n i not think sometfil o i ts i r n s ni k (oml i y t dis cussion this evening, viz., whether the plan proposed in the present Bill is such as to deserve so far the sanction of the House as to allow this Bill to be read a second time—(Hear, hear)—and here we must fi rst ask the qusstion whether there should be any central control— should we have any central control at all, should we allow the Poor law Commissioners to expose and leave the law to be administered by the unions and the board of guardians, and in those unions leave each board of guardians to exercise its own discretion ss to the mode of administering t'se Poor-law of Elizabeth and the Poor-Jaw Amendment of 1830. The result of the dis cussions its this House, shows that there should be some central control. I think such a system desirable, both in order to prevent the oppression of the poor, and likewise to prevent the occurrence of that which seemingly favourable to the poor is most injurious to the independent labourer of t tis country. I feel convinced that in many instances the boards of guardians might administer the law in a manner which might be culled more harsh and strict than they would if they were amenable to some central body, and that central body one that had to answer for their conduct before this House. Now, suppose with respect to the Andover union, or any other union —sup pose some gentlemen had discovered that there were great abuses in the Andover union, this House might probably appoint a Committee to inquire into the abuses of that union, you might find in the course of the in quiry that the master of the workhouse had misused his power, and had acted in a manner totally at variance with the trust reposed in him, and the report of the Committee would no doubt be that such workhouse master! should be dismissed, and that the poor law guardians had acted very negligently in not dismissing him before.—(Hear, hear.) There might be perhaps three or four of such cases in the course of the year, but I think there would be very few persons disposed to give their time to such Committees, in which I do not know how many thousand questions were to be asked—we were told to-night by an lion. Member how many it was—and sit for 60 days for the purpose of in terrogating these matters, and perhaps in the next year have five or six similar cases to inquire into, and re commence an inquiry of the same length and end with a similar result. Those are not objects that would induce Hon. Members to devote their time, tlles*: there were a whole system involved, and some general system in question. We should not find that Committees of this House would enter into the details of the management of every union, and declare its opinion of the competency or incompetency of each board of guardians who were at the end of the year to go out of office, and when some other persons should be elected to fill up their places as guardians, to that particular union. The house must be con vinced that such a system would not be any security to persons suffering hardships under the operation of the poor-law. Would it prevent abuses ? I feel convinced that it would not. In some parts I feel convinced the law would be administered with greater security and harshness, in others " allowance system" would spring up again—(Hear, hear)—in lieu of wages. That system would be disguised by every sort of excuses when there was no assistant commissioners or inspectors over those unions. These abuses would gain renewed strength, and in a few years we should find ourselves in a no better position than in the year 1830 when that system of indulgence and liberality ended in rural insurrection, and setting fire to farm houses during those times and in those administrations which are now appealed to as the good old systems.—(Cheers.) I come then to this conclusion—that there should be some central control, and that is the conclusion in which I have heard Hon. Members in this House, who are adverse to the Poor-laws, and still more so to the Poor law Commissioners, concur. Well, then, what should be the kind of control ? The Hon. Member for Radnorshire said that he remembered when Lord Althorp brought in the Bill, his saying that he thought it desirable to re move the Poor-law Con.missionera from all party or po heal connexion, and make them a body separate, as it were, from the influence of party and politics. I be love I knew what induced him to take that view; I know, from communications which I have had with him, that his original intention was to propose that the Se cretary of State should form a part of the Poor-law Commission, and that he should have the superintend ence. And along with the other commissioners should have the direction of the Poor-laws. I stated my views on the subject to Lord Althorp and I succeeded in persuading Lord Althorp to abandon any plan placing the Secretary of State in the Commission. 1 had hoped that the removal from party struggle, that the choice, in every instance, of the Poor-law Commissioners, solely with a reference to their fitness and adapta tion for the office, and without any regard to their party and political attachments or their political party, would, I had hoped, have prevented the administration of the poor-law being brought, as an exciting topic of debate before this House. But, in that respect, I own I have been disappointed. The acts of the Poor-law Commissioners have been brought into that House ; the Secretary of State for the Home Department has been obliged to defend them ; a nd if the House had not supported him in that defeice, but disapproved all that he bed supported and approved—if they had condemned all that he thought worthy of praise, it is obvious he would have been as much committed as if he had been himself the real of fender. The fact, however, has indeed been that in every instance, whatever Government has been in power this House has supported generally the defence which the Se cretary of State for the Home Department has made in reply to motions implying censure on the Poor-law Commissioners. Therefore, you have not had a total removal from the affairs of Government, or from the Ministerial interest, that connexion with the Poor-law Commissioners which was originally supposed to be ne cessary. We have had certainly freedom from party squabbles, but from the year 1834 to 1847, with some few exceptions, with the leaders of party in this or the other House of Parliament, the Poor-law has not been made a political question out of doors. But the question then arises whether, as it has been necessary for the Secretary of State for the Home Department to become aware of all that the Poor-law Commissioners had to do, is it not batter that the person who has guided that machinery, who has directed and dictated its decision, should not be a member of this or the other House of Parliament, and should he here ready to de fend his own acts and conduct, instead of having them to the defence of an imperfect explanation. I admit that in so doing you do connect the poor-law more directly, and I will not deny that evils may not arise in that particular. But let us see where we have arrived ; we have arrived at the point that there shall be some kind of central con• trol, and we have arrived at the point that experi. ence has shown that no control vested in persons debarred from being Members of this House, is a con trol which does not prevent the Government of the day from being in a great degree responsible for its actions, but does prevent full inquiry and discussion in this House, which it is so desirable should be gone into. For these reasons we are about to try that which we now propose. You see I have stated two plans, the one re quiring a defence on the part of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and the other a direct representative of the Poor-law Commissioners in this House, and in principle the two plans are identical. They are both connected with the poor-law administration and with Government —both liable to all the objections of being calculated to excite party opposition, and, by that means, get party and Government support to that which Members of this House might otherwise see reason to object to.—(Hear, hear.) I confess, however, that, notwithstanding these points—being persuaded that you must make some cen tral control—being persuaded that the system upon which we have gone since 1834 has been greatly and seriously defective, and that defect has been injuaious both to the Government and Poor-law Commis sioners—that the Government have suffered from that which they did not originate—that the Poor-law Commissioners have suffered for acts of which the whole history was not gone into by this House ; seeing such has been the case there remains no alternative but to connect the poor-law administration with a department of the Government. I come then to the further ques tion, whether we ought to connect it with an existing department ? I own I think the Secretary of State for the Home Department has, with the powers of Secretary of State, the various businesses that have been imposed upon him by Acts passed within the last few years—the attention he must give to all the other business of the Cabinet, both foreign and domestic—the attention he must give to all the business of this House—he has suffi cient, if not more than sufficient, to absorb the whole of his time and attention without connecting him specially and solely with the administration of the Poor-law. If that be the case, we must have another secretary, or another board. I confess I have no great reverence for one plan or the other, but I do not think the plan we have proposed, if liable to the objections that were stated against it by the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire, in the course of this evening. He said there will be Members of the Cabinet, who will not be able to pay all the attention to the business that is required, in order tojorm proper opinions upon points connected with the poor-law ; but still being members of the board, they would feel themselves bound to defend particular decisions. I do not think the plan is open to that objection. It is in fact only adopting the plan used, with regard to other departments of the Government. It is in some instances found inefficient to secure responsibility to have a a secretary or president to devote his attention to one particular department, and carry on the business of that department with the assistance and counsel, if necessary, of the other Members of the Administration. The Board of Trade, for instance, has a president, and has various colleagues connected with him. There is only one person, however, responsible as the President of the Committee of Privy Council upon the affairs of trade ; and with reference to all minor points of detail, either the president or vice-president acts, without reference to the Cabinet ; but if there is a question of considerable importance, all the Members of the Privy Council take part in it. It is not very different with regard to the administration of the affairs of India—with reference to the Secretaries of State, and so on—but as I said before, that is a matter, rather of detail—a matter rather to be considered in Committee, than matter to be discussed on the second reading of the Bill. The real principle of the administration that we propose is, that there should be a head—that there should be a president, who should be responsible for the administration of the poor-law—that that head should have a seat in Parliament—that he should be called upon in Parliament to give any explanation upon all points connected with the poor-law administration.—(Hear, hear.) I quite admit that it exposes Government to odium and obloquy that Government was not formerly exposed to. I admit that it was far easier for the Go vernment, when every parish depository decided upon every question of relief that came before them, and when all cases of abuse and hardship or cruelty occurred, all the indignation of the pubiic was thrown upon and directed against the particular vestry, and no part of it fell upon the Government of the day. But we have attempted to make a great social change in the adminis tration of the poor-law ;we having attempted in 1834 to reform those abuses which had sprung up by a depar ture from the statute of Elizabeth, of 1796. I think that this reform cannot be carried out or completely effected, unless you have a central control responsible to Parliament. I believe in that manner you may get the machinery to work more truly than it did in the beginning ; you may get it to work so truly, that the cases of complaint brought before this House would be few, and that the answers to those complaints would take up but a little part of the time of the House in debate. What I wish to see is, the Act of Elizabeth, conferring relief should be carried into effect in all its spirit, and in a manner which is conformable with the state of our institutions of the present day. The exact words of Elizabeth are not exactly applicable to the present time, because if you were to set the poor to work in manu factures, they would either be competing with those who have independent labourers earning wages, or their work would be insufficient and useless. But the workhouse system is in accordance with the spirit of the Act of Elizabeth naturally applied—where relief is wanted, relief would be given. That the relief should be large and liberally given, in conformity with the spirit of that Act. I believe it is necessary for the maintenance of the forming of society of this country, and therefore it is that I do not think that the expenditure which now exceeds the whole sum raised by the property and in come tax of the country—l do not think that expendi ture ought in amount to be complained of, if the source of administration were that which it ought to be.—(Hear.) Admitting that it is an experiment—admitting that it is a change in the present law—admitting that as there were certain defects in the law of 1834, which no one could then see, there may also be similar defects in this measure of 1847 ; admitting all this, still I think that it is, under present circumstances, the most expedient course you can adopt, and in a path beset with difficul ties, the only one that can be recommended to Parlia ment, and 1 therefore pray the House to assent to the second reading of the Bill.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. B. DISRAELI regretted the lateness of the evening, but hoped that lie would be able to compress the few observations he wished to make on this measure, so as to finish before the arrival of the midnight hour.— (Hear, hear.) Although he thought the Noble Lord was of wi bu siness asserted, na a great authority on subjects of that character, he could d ts a osf,o d (nt h i hi e ,e,a t n o r, not assent to some of the propositions which he laid feltt b d, country t persuaded, h eLi nhear.)contrary,mu s It ht occasional be ww thateai was very r thebrou ghtplausiblyv e ry generalb truef before r t mi gh e P a that r in doing so there might be a ce t r . i r a i, in osi.t ti :f ri n fuso o n . factious sentiments, but without the interference nc Par liament these measures of a special character must al ways prove a failure, and the situation in which they at present found themselves proved the accuracy of that position. Throughout the entire argument of the Noble Lord, and of all those who agreed with him, this falla cious assumption pervaded all their speeches. They said that central control was necessary, and the Noble Lord assured them that that control must be a metropolitan control.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") There was no middle state —no halting-place, between the most obscure parish in the kingdom and Somerset House.—(Hear, hear.) For his own part, he never for a moment challenged the right of control over the parochial administration of the law, and he thought it would be wrong to agitate that question; but if it was not considered right to leave this parochial authority to itself, it did not follow that metropolitan control was the most eligible mode by which the abuses which re sulted from it could be remedied. The laws of charity must be local in their administration, as the feeling it self was prompted and kept alive by local residence. — (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, however, said there was no difference between the control of a parish and the control of a Minister of State, and however inju rious it might be to bring the parochial administration before Parliament, that there was no middle course for them to adopt. He (Mr. Disraeli) begged the House to consider that central control did not involve metropolitan control.—(Hear, hear.) —and he did not see why a cen tral control should not bo deposited with every county. At any rate, he did not see why it should be set tled in London. The advocates of the measure admitted the evil of largo unions, and yet the basis of the present system was a union comprising all the unions of the country.—(llear, hear.) Let them look for a moment at the scheme of control now before them. The Noble Lord proposes to bring the central control into Parliament. Well, then, suppose a labourer felt aggrieved in a remote parish, and that he did not get redress from the poor-law guardians, what was the next step? The case was brought before Parliament; and who, he would ask, was responsible for that? Why, her Majesty's Mi nisters. It was very well for the Noble Lord to say that party feeling had never yet crept into the dis cussions on this subject. But he apprehended that time might arise and circumstances might occur when the great principles involved in this question would degene rate into a party struggle.—(Hear, hear.). Withregard to the Bill ilea', he did not find fault with it, because of the increase of patronage it gave to the Crown; for he maintained that the amount of taxation, and the reduc tion of priyi4eges, hail always in this country borne a proportion to the decrease of patronage.—(Hear.) But he objected to it, and objected most earnestly, to that which still further made the parochial constitution of this country the Parliamentary ccnstitution. The moment that they had a Poor-law Minister in that House —the moment that parochial affairs were brought into that House—all that time which was at present devoted to railways—all the time which was devoted to private busi ness—would be otherwise consumed, and none left for those purposes when they had converted the Members into a parochial—(Loud cries of " Time, time.") The Hon. Member said the quarter was not yet exhausted.— (Ironical cheers.) There was one other topic which he wished much to avoid ; it had nothing to do with this question. Why it was introduced into the discussion was no matter of his ; but it was enough that no one in the course of the debate had avoided mention of the An dover Union Committee.— (Hear.) He was a member of that Committee, and he wished to make one remark upon the subject. The Noble Lord himself, with the ability which distinguished him, referred to the members of the Andover Committee. That Committee lasted for a considerable time—he believed for a space of nearly four months. It represented every section of opinion in regard to the law itself. But he was hound to say that various as that opinion was, and strong as was their conviction, he believed that every member was satisfied—impressed with the deep conviction that the result of that investigation was beneficial to the public. But the Noble Lord said he would not listen to those accusations when he found an officer had so forgotten his duty, that an officer was so chargeable with derelic tion that in an underhand manner he should be discovered creating a factitious public opinion against his chiefs—he would not hear anything that made against the Poor-law Commissioners. He (Mr. Disraeli) thought, and he admitted there was a great deal of truth in what the Noble Lord said on that head. But could they then believe that such a man as Mr. Chadwick was still at the board of the poor-law? — (Loud and ironical cheers.) Though the Noble Lord (John Russell) nodded his head as insinuating that to be the case, he yet could not believe it.—(Renewed cheers.) He ha i heard a gentleman who had been a Poor-law Commissioner, and had a great distaste for family honours, himself the father of a head Commissioner—( i fear and laughter) —say, that Mr. Chadwick was a dangerous person—a most dangerous person to the Poor-law Com missioners. —(Ironical cheers.) Having heard Mr. Chad wick denounced by one of the Commissioners—(Hear and laughter)—by the father of a head Commissioner — (Increased laugh ter)—Sir Frankland Lewis ; having heard him denounced by the Noble Lord, but for whom they might not have had the Andover Union Committee or this Bill, he could not believe that he was still at the board.—(Great cheering and laughter.) What state secret was he the depositary of that he was still there ? (Renewed ironical cheers.) If the Noble Lord had con descended to leave his red box, and gone to the green table with a few plain men like himself, and there, with pen and paper, taken close notes of evidence, he might have come to &different conclusion. He had heard that gentleman make statements which he received as evidence. But they had heard that gentleman characterised as poisoning the fountains of all truth. If a different spec tacle had been presented that night, and if he had seen the Noble Lord rise that night and say that he would take upon himself the disgrace and the odium of one who, to the extent of his abilities, had served him—if he had done so, although at the moment of dissolution, and on the eve of a general election, he (Mr. Disraeli) would have admired the Noble Lord that night as one who would not desert an old servant at the moment of attack. —(Cheers.) But the Noble Lord was willing to benefit by the services of a man whom he denounced. Yes, the Noble Lord required a scape- goat and a iCtiln ; and, he said, I am obliged to make a Secretary of State with two secretaries, on account of the underhand proceed ings of the secretary or the Poor-law Commis sioners. Yet that man remained at that moment secre- tary at the Poor-law Commissioners' board--(Cheers.) He knew him but by his works—his works on the sana tory state of the country, and in treating of that subject, the only places he appears to have passed were his own office and the secret recesses of the Cabinet. '['he House should remember that that Committee was called under very peculiar circumstances. As regarded this Bill, it was to be considered only as a Bill for the re construction of central control, to which they all agreed. Let the House not forget the peculiar circumstances under which this Bill was brought forward. When these charges were made against the members of the Andover Committee, he felt bound to remind the House of the circumstances under which that Committee laboured. His Hon. Friend the Member for Peter borough had put into his hand a resolution which was adopted with the joint approbation of the Committee, and which, as it was very brief, he would take the liberty of reading to the House. The Noble Lerd the chair man of that Committee had stated to him personally the reason why he had voted against that resolution, namely that he could not agree in the latter part. The resolu tion stated that the conduct of the Commissioners Messrs. Parker and Day was not in accordance with the statute under which they exercised their function's, and was such as was calculated to shake public con fidence in the administration of the law. That resolution was agreed to by a large majority. As to their conduct being irregular and arbitrary, which referred to a matter of fact. Now, of those Gentlemen who had spoken that evening, not one pretended that their proceedings was not irregular. Whether they were arbitrary, was a matter for the consideration of the Committee, who decided that they were. The Noble Lord, to whom he had referred, agreed, in his opinion. with the Committee on that point, but stated he could not do so with respect to that part of the resolution which asserted that they had not acted in conformity with the statute. Ilut by that statute they were bound to keep records, and the evidence brought before the Committee proved that they had not kept any records, but that a person in his private room conducted the whole business, who, in fact, was only scribbling his own memoranda.—(llear, hear.) To show that public con fidence was shaken by the administration of the Com missioners, was it necessary for him to bring any evi dence on that subject. That resolution was not, he asserted, an intemperate, but on the contrary, a mode rate resolution, founded upon fact, after duly weighing the evidence before the Committee. No one entering upon that inquiry could help arriv ing at the same conclusion to which the Com mittee had arrived, and no one except by loose assertion had challenged that conclusion, or challenged that resolution. He would now say a few words with respect to an individual because he had no friend in that House except himself. That gen tleman's name had been brought f orward in a most unnec essary and wanton manner. He was not go i ng to support Mr. Day because he happened to be an intimate certainly knew hi m as a man o f atta i nme nts and a good scholar, and he k new noth i ng aga i ns t him without it acqua i n t a nce of his. He was that he was a widower.—(Laughter.) Lord J. R USSELL—What I said was that he had not a freehold. Mr. DISRAELI—Why, the Prime Minister had not a freehold, but they had no means of removing him without telling him the reason. The Noble Lord said himself that no man ought to be dismissed unless he conducted his business in such a manner as was unsatis factory to his employers. Why Mr. Day was, dismissed without any reason being assigned, and that not even in an official manner. The manner in which Mr. Day was appointed was as follows:—He had not a public friend in the world, but he published a pamphlet before the reform of the old law was contemplated, and he reformed his own parish on the principle of the 43d of Elizabeth, he described the reforms which he effected in that pamphlet. Having no public friend, it was the last effort of a desperate man; for every one who ever wrote a pamphlet must admit that no one ever read it. In 1831, when the Government introduced their plan, they were looking out for clever men, who, to use the fashionable language of that House, could carry out their system, a Noble Lord, resident in the county to which Mr. Day belonged, said there is a distinguished country magistrate who reformed his own parish see to him, he has written a pamphlet. The pamphlet was sent to the Minister, who read it. Mr. Day was sent for, was offered the post, which he accepted, and he became a zealous officer.—(Hear, hear.) He was sent to that part of the kingdom which was declared wholly and the most incapable of reform, South Wales.—(Hear, hear.) He did reform it. Was it any wonder, however, that he should have become unpopular ? In his labours, how ever, he broke his leg, and when he had recovered, he wrote a noto, to say that he was still prepared to resume his labours. In reply to that communica tion, he received a letter, marked private, which merelyPhobnreeiwvnacamslvi :d'utso system supporte n t t ; v a l) s u t advised him as a friend to send in his resignation, Now in all this there was a great deal of hardship and arbi trary conduct. Mr. Day bad broken up his establish mentwhere, on a moderate income, he in his county, supported a large family. He zealously conducted the duties of his office, accomplished what was admitted to be a most difficult task, and received a compound frac ture in the service of Cr, but o wvhr Mr.ne Government, D e a n wy t , a brought hsi wro y eun: e hu in t hagn trobtthl hardly these s 7rheee ri ' ea credentials possible,taoi facts. would tl h s lss d.t g 3. confidence in him. He (Mr. reward, after all.—(Hear, dia h n e s ar w .) hich M b r. o Dhaady been triets expressingenalit might systemh t n their t ob fe eoninit condo lencerimo I Bill itself, looking at it forfr o accused mh mwe ivtt o eoh f r byho u i bin n oo p t, o iave p dnr u dw l aoi otherwise, an improvement.—(Hear, n p g r o a y s e h m e e n d e a — o ( n ll this brought A u du now, iwnn i ,onctt comparison ps o hp.a n or n ris e ese X ogdn i aotrwnod their ist with, ahtliyu thttheab l aaep l l Disraeli) cAoniutlddmnisgoohttroefafrrriatinmaifsgrohmttnhmoatten; give the Government the advantages of believing that ear, hear.) tlseot hs Bill as one meant to p er petuate the system s i n e ric metropoli tanoos control, and iNeVhhihchadhe brought the e e o fatal, r n of e o countrypernici ous, which bad been complained of, he would vote for the amendment of the lion. Member for Knaresborough. Mr. P. BORTHWICK moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord J. RUSSELL said that he hoped they would finish the debate that night. Mr. FERRARI) said, that after the speech which had been made by the Noble Lord, it was most unfair of him to press the measure. The Hon. Member for Finsbury was determined to answer it, and he, for his part, was determined to offer every opposition to her Majesty's Government, if they attempted so unconstitutionally to press the second reading.—(Hear, and cries of" (h.") And now, as to a question personal to himself, he desired that the Noble Lord would explain what statements of his were unfounded which he made on Monday last; he al luded especially to those statements which he had made in reference to the manufacturing districts. Ile asked the Noble Lord to stand up in his place and state what was the statement he had made. Mr. VILLIERS said he had stated that they took peasants from the agricultural districts, and sold them as slaves in the manufacturing districts. He said also, that they murdered children in the workhouses. These were two of bis misstatements, and the House need wait no longer. Lord JOHN EVE.SELL mid these two were state- ments which he believed were unfounded, and did believe them unfounded still. He made no attack on the Honourable Gentleman's character. But when the Gentleman's statements were so characterised by passion, when he represented that the Poor-law Commissioners delighted in the murder of children—(Great laughter)—he was but justified in saying they were unfounded. Mr. FERRAND denied the statements attributed to him. He did not say that the Commissioners delighted in murdering children.—(Cries of " Divide.") Strangers were ordered to withdraw, when _ _ . Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, as some Hon. Members wished still to speak, and if Hon. Members would not postpone the debate over to morrow night, he would consent to the debate being adjourned. The debate was then adjourned. HERRING FISHERY (SCOTLAND) BILL. This Bill was read a second time. HERITABLE SECURITIES FOR DEBT (SCOT- LAND)! BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. BURGAGE TENURE (SCOTLAND) BILL. This Bill was also read a third time and passed. CROWN CHARTERS (SCOTLAND) BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. PASSENGERS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Mr. HAWES moved that the House go into Com mittee on this Bill. It was a very important measure, and should be passed as soon as possible, as it was mainly to protect passengers. The House then went into Committee. Upon Clause 1 being proposed, Lord G. BENTINCK said that at the request of the shipping interest of Liverpool, he would move several amendments on the Bill, which it would, perhaps, be as well that he should state at once to the Committee. In the first clause he proposed to move—page 2, line 15, after "tons," insert "having a space of fourteen superficial feet to each person." Page 3, line 7, after "hatchway," insert " provided with ladders and protected by • a companion hatch fitted with sliding top and side doors." Line 24, after " ship," insert " having a space of fourteen superficial feet." Page 4, line 10, leave out " fourteen," and insert "eight." Line 16, leave out "in the said recited Act mentioned," and insert "of one person to every four teen feet, including berths and personal luggage." After clause 5, he proposed the insertion of clause C, the object of which was, that the seaworthiness of the ship should be ascertained by survey. And be it further enacted, That to remove doubts as to the seaworthiness of any vessel about to proceed with passengers, as afore said, the acting government emigration officer shall cause such ship to be surveyed by two duly autho rised and responsible surveyors, and if it shall be reported by those persons that such ship is not in their opinion in a state of repair and efficiency as would entitle such ship or vessel to be classed in Lloyd's Registry of British and Foreign Shipping, IE 1, such ship or vessel shall not be cleared out. Then, after clause C he proposed to add a clause D, providing that in the event of wreck or unseaworthiness, the passengers were to have another conveyance pro vided for them or to be indemnified. The clause would be as follows :—And be it enacted, that in case any ship carrying passengers on any such voyage as in the said recited Act is mentioned, shall be wrecked or otherwise destroyed, and shall thereby or by any other cause what soever be prevented from landing her passengers at the place they may have] respectively contracted to land ; or in case such ship shall put into any port or place in a damaged state, and shall not within a reasonable time be intended voyage to proceed with her passengers on her voyage after having been first efficiently repaired, and in all respects put into a sound and seaworthy condition, then and in any of such cases they:sh.all be provided with a passage by some other equally eligible vessel, to the port or place at - which they respectively may have originally contracted to land ; and in default thereof, within a reasonable time, such passengers respectively shall be entitled to recover by summary process, before any two or more justices of the peace, in like manner as in the said recited Act is provided in the cases of moneys thereby made recoverable, all moneys which shall have been paid by or on account of such pas sengers or any of them, for such passage, from the party to whom the same may have been paid, as from the owner, charterer, or master of such ship; and also such further sum not exceeding 5/. in respect of each such passage, as shall in the opinion of the jus tices who shall adjudicate on the complaint be a reasonable conpensation for any loss or inconve • nience occasioned to any such passenger, or his or her family, by reason of the loss of such passage. The last was the most important amendment. It was to provide that in all cases where a ship was lost, the owners should return the passage money, or provide the passengers with another passage. This would in volve an additional expense of Is. 6d. per passenger for insurance ; but he was quite sure, with such a guaran tee, the passengers would readily pay that charge. Mr. HAWES objected to assimilate the measurement of English ships with American, as that would have the effect of putting impediments in the way of the emigration now in progress from Ireland !gild:this coun try. Lie hoped, therefore, his Noble Friend would not press his amendment. With regard to the survey pro posed by the Noble Lord, the present law provided for that, as no ship could convey passengers without a cer tificate of her seaworthiness ; and this, he apprehended, was a sufficient guarantee of security. Under these circumstances, he hoped the House would see that the amendments suggested were unnecessary. He hoped the Noble Lord w ould allow the Bill to go through Committee, and move again the clauses he might feel it necessary to have inserted on the bringing up of the report. Lord G. BENTINCK said he could not give way on the clauses referring to surveying. He would agree that the Bill should go through Committee, and so much of it be confirmed as did not bear upon the surveying, and on the bringing up of the report, he would move his clauses. Mr. HUDSON concurred with the Noble Lord in the desirableness of the survey. On clause tcn, Sir G. CLERIC thought there ought to be some scale of boats adopted in the Bill for the security of passen gers. It mattered not whether they adopted the scale of last year or the year previous, but some scale in propor tion to the passengers ought to be adopted in the Bill. The clauses were agreed to, the Bill went through Committee, and was ordered to be reported on Monday week. The House then resumed, the other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Two o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons, THURSDAY, MAY 20. CUSTOMS. Acts read; Motion made, and Question put, " That this House will resolve itself into a Committee on the said Acts, for- the purpose of assimilating the warehousing privileges on Colonial and British Spirits." The House divided:— ..._. _ MINORITY--AYES, 51. Bailie, Col. Feilden, Sir W. Marton. G. Baillie, II.:J. Forbes, William , MoleswOrth, Sir W. Baillie, W. Fuller, A. E. Norreys, Sir D. Baine, Walter Gordon, Admiral O'Connell, M. J. darkly, Henry . Hallyburton, Lord Palmer, R. Bennet, Philip Halsey, T. P. , • Pattison, James Bentinck, Lord G. Hamilton, Lord C. Rashleigh, William Blackstone, W. S. Hodgson, Richard Ross D. R. Bouverie, E. P. Hope, Sir J. - Bandon, ViscOunt Browne, R. D. Houldsworth, T. Sheppard, T. Buck, L. W. Jolliffe, Six W. H. Trelawny, J. S. Crawford,'W. S. Jones, Captain Turner, Edmund Dennistoun, John Lockhart, A. E. Waklcy, Thomas I )ivett, E. Lockhart, W. Watson, W. U. Drummond, IL Mackenzie, W. F. Williams, W. Duncan, George Macnamara, Major TELLERS. Duncombe, Thomas M'Carthy, Alex. Moffatt, George Ewart, William Manners, Lord J. Hume, Joseph PROVINCIAL BANK OF IRELAND. The twenty-second yearly general meeting of the proprie tors of the Provincial Bank of Ireland was held at twelve o'clock yesterday, at the offices of the bank, 42, Old Broad street. Oliver Farrar, Esq., was called to the chair, on the motion of Sir ➢loses Monteflore. The advertisement convening the meeting having been read, The CHAIRMAN proposed the re-election of the four follow ing directors, who went out by annual rotation :—John Allis ton, Esq., James Farrer, Esq., John Petty bluspratt, Esq., and Alfred Thorp, Esq. The motion was unanimously adopted. The CHAIRMAN then said that the next duty he had to perform was to call on the Secretary to read the report of the directors upon the proceedings of the establishment during the last awful and eventful year. He would enter into no state ment until that report should have been laid before them; after that he would be happy to give any information that might be required of him ; and he trusted that the report would be satisfactory to the meeting. The SECRETARY then read the following report In submitting to this meeting the result of the business of the bank for the year ending the 27th March last, the di rectors feel it to be necessary to notice the calamitous circum stances resulting from the failure of the potato crop of last year, and the very great distress and suffering that has in consequence existed and still prevails in Ireland; but while a matter of such importance, affecting every interest in the kingdom, and calculated, immediately or more remotely, to exercise great influence on the welfare of the community, cannot be passed over in silence, the sufferings of the Irish people have occupied so great a share of attention and sym pathy in this country, and may be said to have beCosie so painfully familiar to all, that it is not necessary on this occa sion to detain the proprietors by attempting to state any de• tails, the leading features of which must be already so well known. "In their report to the last yearly general meeting, the directors in referring to the distress that had existed in Ire land prior to that time, stated that they had felt it to be their duty to contribute on the part of the bank, in aid of the local subscriptions far promoting employment and providing food. Urgent applications for pecuniary assistance in relieving the destitute have since continued from time to time to be re ceived by the directors, with which they have not hesitated to comply. The directors, however, have not made a general subscription to any of those associations through which large amounts have been contributed by the benevolent in this country and elsewhere, it having been considered that through the instrumentality of the bank's officers in Ireland, and the local committees formed in the districts in which the several branches are situated, the sums voted from the funds of the bank could be more beneficially and economically applied. " The directors cannot omit to notice that the necessity which arose for large importations of grain, at a period when apprehensions of scarcity and a consequent demand for it ex isted, in order to supply the wants of other European king doms, has led to greatly increased prices, which, combined with other causes, has had a material effect upon the money market. To this the directors have for a considerable time looked forward, and they have accordingly throughout the whole of the past year exercised the utmost vigilance and caution. The proprietors will readily understand that, in consequence of the comparative cessation of exports from Ire land, and the large imports of food into that country, a great change must necessarily have taken place in the current of commercial and of banking business there, and to this change it has, of course, become requisite from time to time to adapt the regulations under which the business of this bank had been previously conducted. This has required and has re ceived the daily and anxious attention of the directors, and it has been their object to afford every reasonable facility to those engaged in commercial and agricultural pursuits, but, at the same time, to keep the operations of the bank within prudent limits, and they are happy to say the results, up to this time, have been satisfactory. " The new branch opened at Carlow, in March, 1846, not having received that support and encouragement which was expected, the directors, towards the end of last year, re solved to withdraw it,- and the business has accordingly been wound up, and the branch closed. _ " The - directors have now to call the attention of the pro prietors to the statement of account which they are enabled to submit to the meeting. The account submitted Co the yearly general meeting in May, 1846, showed the amount of rest, on undivided profits, at March, 1846, to be £114,923 10 4 From which has been deducted the amount of two half-yearly dividends paid to the proprietors, viz.:— At Midsummer, 1846, 4 per cent. £21,600 At Christmas, 1846, 4 per cent. 21,600 Together 43,200 0 0 Leaving a balance of £71,723 10 4 To which there has since been added the amount of nett profits for the year ending on the 27th, being the last Saturday of March, 1847, after deducting property-tax and all expenses, and providing for all bad and doubtful debts Making the rest, or amount of undivided profits, at the 27th March, 1847.... £126,196 12 " In this state of the bank's affairs, and five years having elapsed since the proprietors had any participation in the reserved profits, which have during that time been gradu ally accumulating, the directors feel themselves justified in appropriating a portion of the present reserve, and they have therefore the satisfaction of announcing it to be their in tention to pay in July next a bonus of 1/. on each 1001. share, and Bs. on each 10/. share of the capital stock of the bank, in addition to the usual half-yearly dividend of four per cent., which will make the sum to be then paid 21, on each 100/. share, and 16s. on each 101. share, for the half year ending at Midsummer next; and the directors purpose also to pay the property-tax for the proprietors as heretofore. (Signed) "ROBERT CAMPBELL, Chairman." The Rev. FRANK HEWSON said he believed—and he was sure it was also the belief of every other proprietor—that the management of the bank during the last eventful year did the greatest credit to their board of directors and to the other officers of the establishment. He could state from his per sonal knowledge of Ireland, and from what he had read in the newspapers, that no company could have exerted itself more for the relief of distress than the Provincial Bank of Ireland had done of late; and it was a most gratifying fact that after a year of such an awful character the nett profits of the bank should be greater than they had been during the preceding year. He thought they were very much indebted to the present board of directors for their successful efforts to advance the prosperity of the bank ; and lie was sure that the handsome manner in which they had come forward on that occasion to propose a bonus must meet with the appro bation of every proprietor.—(Hear, hear.) Ile wished to take that opportunity of putting a question to the chairman with respect to the withdrawal of the branch at Curlew. It had been stated last year that the branch at Lurgan had been withdrawn ; but, as Lurgan was an insignificant place, that statement had excited no surprise. Carlow, however, ' was a prosperous town, surrounded by a rich agricultural dis -1 trict ; and, although he felt the utmost confidence in their board of directors, he wished to asked the chairman if he could give any explanation with respect to the withdrawal of the branch of their bank from that town? The CHAIRMAN said that the directors had been led to suppose that Carlow required further banking assistance, and they had therefore established a branch there. But as they found by experience that that assistance was not required, and as it had never been their policy to intrude themselves on a district of which the wants were already adequately and satisfactorily supplied, they had thought proper to with draw their Carlow branch. Before that withdrawal had taken place the branch had been established during the greater part of a year, and its business had, towards the latter end of the period, fallen off rather than increased. The Rev. Mr. HEWSON said he thought that explanation was quite satisfactory. He took it for granted that the Bank of Ireland had ensured to itself the banking business of Carlow during the period when it possessed a monopoly in all towns so near Dublin, so that there was at present no opening there for another bank. [The Chairman intimated that that was the case.] He should not detain the meet ing further than to propose that "The report just read by the secretary be adopted, and circulated among the pro prietors." The motion, having been seconded, was put from the chair and unanimously agreed to. The CHAIRMAN said, he could not allow the meeting to separate without addressing to them a very few words. In the first place, he thought he should be acting with great injustice to those officers of the bank to whom its prosperity was in a great degree to be attributed, if he did not take that opportunity of expressing his gratitude, and the gratitude, he behaved, of all his colleagues, for the zealous and efficient services of those gentlemen.—(Hear, hear.) He did not wish on that occasion to particularise too many of them, and he would therefore only refer to the services of the three principal officers of the establishment,lllr. Murray, Mr. Raw lins, and Mr. llewat. He had no hesitation in saying that he did not believe there was an establishment in the kingdom which possessed more admirable officers than those three gentlemen. The exertions of Mr. Murray were almost be yond belief; and the only fault the directors of the bank found with him was his earnest anxiety to do with one head and with one pair of hands the duties of several.—(Hear.) Mr. Rawlins had been a member of the establishment ever since its formation, and fur him every member of the board of directors felt the utmost respect . ; while his attention to business had been to the proprietors of the highest import anoe.—(Hear.) Of Mr. Hewar, who sat beside him, he could ' wily say, as he was then present, that his business had very greatly increased—that in indefatigable zeal and industry he could not be surpassed, and that every day added to the respect entertained for him by the directors. He had also to state that to their local officers, in this trying year, they owed much, and that those g en tlemen had their most cordial thanks. It could hardly have been expected that, with so many branch establishments as they had, their officers would have escaped the ravages of that fatal disease which prevailed; throughout Ireland, and he was sorry to have to state on that occasfon that Mr. Mackenzie, one of their most useful and ,respected managers, had lately fallen a sacrifice to fever. That gentleman was a person whom they all esteemed; he had been in the service of the bank since the year 1828; he had been for some time an inspector, and then, at his own desire, had been again appointed a manager in Waterford, where he had been acting to the entire satisfaction of the directors, and where he had unfortunately lately fallen a victim to the fever which was raging throughout * Ireland. He had left a widow and eight children, with the early expectation of a ninth; and he (the Chairman) believed he need hardly say that, the directors would consider it their duty to take Into their consideration the situation of that family.—(Hear, hear.) Leaving the melancholy topic, lie would next observe that it might appear extraordinary that, in such a year as the pr e- I sent, the directors should propose that a bonus be give n ud t l the proprietors. In the first place , however, he ho ob serve that there was no year, be believed, in which a bonus would be more acceptable.—(Hear, and laughter.) In the next place, he should state that during the five years during which the proprietors had patiently waited for a bonus, the reserve fund, out of which it was to be paid, bad gone on gra dually increasing; and after the bonus was paid, the reserve fund would amount to about 104,0001., whereas after a bonus had last been paid the reserve fund had amounted to only about 93,0001., or 11,0001. less. Ile had only further to ob serve, that it bad been their endeavour throughout the year to give every accommodation in Ireland that could be fairly ex pected from them. He had no h es it at i on i n saying that the amount of accommodation they had been able to give during the year in Ireland had considerably exceeded that which they had been able t o g i ve in other years. At the same time he was sur e th at every gentleman must see that when it became expedient and necessary for an establish ment like the Batik of England —the source of all money transactions in the kingdom —to restrict the amount of its accommodation to the public, it behovel all other establi,h ments, which m us t necessarily be guided by the movements of the Bank of England, to follow to a certain extent the cautious policy of that bank.—(Hear, hear.) It could. therefore, have hardly been expected that the managers of the Provincial Bank of Ireland should not have been iu some ' instances forced to place a check on what they considered undue speculation.—(Hear, hear.) But they had earnestly endeavoured to give, throughout Ireland, every accommo dation which they could afford consistently with a due regard for the interests of the proprietors of the establish ment.---(Hear, hear.) A PAerAlizoii said he believed that the exertions of the MAJORITY-NOES, 56. Baring; F. T. Graham, Sir James Richards, Richard Barrington, Viscount Grey, Sir G. Russell, Lord John Bowles, Admiral Hamilton, W. J. Rutherfurd, A. Bramston, T. W Hodgson, F. Scrope, G. P. Brotherton, Joseph Hogg, Sir J.W. Shell, B. L. Buller, Edward Hussey, T. Smith, Vernon Carew, W. P. Inglis, Sir R. Somerset, Lord G. Cripns, William Jervis, Sir John Sotheron, T. H. Davies, D. A. Lemon, Sir C. Stansfield, W. R. C. Denison, W. J. Loch, James Strati, Edward Denison, J. E. Macaulay, T. B. Tattered, H. W. Dodd, George Mitcaife, Henry Thornely, T. Buncombe, A. Monahan, J. IL Troubridge, Sir B. Dumlas, Sir David Morris, David Vivian, Capt. Eiaeott, Illekbain Mundy. E. Miller Wood, sir Charles 1 Fonder, Matthew O'Brian, A. station!. Wrightson, W. D. Gardner. J. 11. Ogle, S. C. Oaskell, J. M. Pakington, Sir J. S. TELLERS. Gladstone, J. N. Fatten, J. W. Parker, John Goring, Charles Powell ,Colonel Berkeley, Craven EXCISE. Acts read; Motion made, and Question put, " That this House will resolve itself into a Committee on the said Acts, fer the purpose of permitting British Spirits to be rectified in bond for exportation, and permitting Rectified Spirits and Compounds to be Ni areho us e d for exportation." The House divided:— MINORITY-AYES, 56. Adderley, C. B. Duncombe, T. Lockhart, W. Balllie, William Farnham, E. M'Carthy, Alexander BaMe, Walter • Feilden, Sir W. M'Taggart, Slr J. Bankes, George Ferguson, Sir R. Manners, Lord J. Barkly, Henry Forbes, W. Marton, G. Beutinck, Lord G. Fuller, A. E. Molesworth, Sir W. Blackstone, W. S. Gisborne, Thomas lieeld, Joseph Bouverie, E. P. Gordon, Admiral Newport,;Visct. Browne, R. D. Hallyburton, Lord O'Brien, A. S. Bruce, C. L. C. Hamilton, Lord C. O'Connell, H. J. Buck, Lewis W. Hastie, Archibald Sheppard, T. Burroughes,'H. Henley, J. W. Spooner, Richard Carnegie, Captain Hodgson, R. Trelawny, J. S. Collett, John Hope, Sir J. Wakley, Thomas Crawford, W. S. Houldsworth, T. Walsh, Sir J. B. Dennistonn, J. Hurnphery, Ald. Yorke, E. T. Disraeli, B. Ingestre, Visct. - Dlyett, Edward Jolliffe ' Sir W G. 11. TELLERS. D ru mmond, H. 11. Jones, Captain Moffatt, George Duncan, George Lockhart,lA. E. Hume, Joseph MAJORITY-NOES, 63. Baillie, Colonel Grey, Sir G. Rom' ll Y John Baling, F. T. Grosvenor, Lord R. Russell, J. Barrington, Viscount Hawes, B. Butheritird. A. Bellew, R. M. Hodgson, F. . Scrope, G. r. Berkeley, Craven Hogg, Sir J. , Shell, R. L. Borthwick, Peter Hussey, Thomas Shelburne, Earl of Bowles, Admiral Inglis, Sir It. Sheridan, R. Bramston, T. W. Jervis, Sir John Smith, A. Brotherton, Jose ph Lemon, Sir Charles Smith, R. V. Carew, W. H. Polo Lygon, General Somers, J. I'. Denison, W. J. Macaulay, T. B. Stansflcid, W. R. Denison, J. E. Mangles, R.D. Stanton, \V. 11. Dodd, G. Marjoribanks,:S. Strati, Edward Duncornbc, A. M arshall, W. Tattered, I. W. Dundas, Sir David Mitcalfe, 11. Thornely, T. Escott, Bickham Monahan, J. li. Troubridge, Sir E. Forster, Mathew Morris, David Ward, 11. G. Gardner, J. D.; Ogle, S. C. Wood, Sir Charles Gaskell, J. M. Pakingtou, Sir J. Wrightson, W. B. Gladstone, Captain Polhill, F. Muss. Gore, Robert Richards, Richard Tattle% H. Graham, Sir James Rice, E. R. Parker, John Fourt DAIS OF EPSOM RACES,. WITS A PORTRAIT of CossAca.—The very extensive publication of Bell's Life in London will commence, at No. 170 Strand, two hours earlier than usual, namely, at ten o'clock on Saturday morn jug, instead of twelve, for this week only. g cot) ry ia_Ue l h a lie but e, [ O O , th e i uce loted ,d pO-- ~i ~~~. t . , •~ , \ directors during the year just passed had exceeded their exertions on any former occasion. He certainly had not calculated that their affairs could have been placed in so prosperous a condition as the report had just made known to the meeting. The directors had hiti,.,orto entitled themselves to the thanks and the confidence of the proprietors; and if that had been the case in former years, those thanks and that confidence were peculiarly due to them for their services dur ing the past year. tinder these circumstances, he felt much pleasure in proposing to the board of directors the cordial thanks of that meeting for their great attention to the inte rests of the bank.—(Hear, hear.) A PROPRIETOR rose to second the motion. He wished to take that opportunity of mentioning a circumstance which had occurred to him in Paris. He had been at Rothschild's —one of the head banking establishments i n th a t c i ty _ and on his inquiring th ere w h at was t h e i r op i n i on of the Provincial Bank of Ireland, he had been told that they en tertained the highest opinion of the secure and wise manner in which the affairs of that bank were conducted. He felt very happy in seconding the vote of thanks to the board of directors. The vote was carried by acclamation. The CHAIRMAN said, that, in the name of his colleagues and himself, he begged to return the meeting their sincere thanks for that vote. They had been fortunate enough ever since the bank had been established to meet every year with the kind approbation of the proprietors; and he could assure the meeting that they would eutteavour to continue to de serve that approbation. The Rev. FRANK HEWSON proposed a vote of thanks to the local directors of the bank, Mr. Murray, Mr. R aw li ns, and Mr. Hewat, for their zealous and efficient services. li e thought it desirable that such a vote should proceed from the general body of proprietors. Captain PORTER, R.N., seconded the motion. He wished to take that opportunity of expressing a hope that any as sistance which their directors might think proper to afford to the widow of their deceased manager in Waterford would be afforded promptly. He could not help adding the expres sion of his high admiration of the great ability and the sterling honesty with which the affairs of the Provincial Bank of Ireland were managed. The CHAIRMAN said he had much pleasure in assuring the Hon. and Gallant Proprietor that his opinion, as to the pro priety of the directors at once taking into their best consi deration the case of the widow of a deceased manager of their establishment, completely coincided with the views of the directors themselves upon the subject. He felt much plea sure in putting the proposed vote of thanks to the local di rectors, Mr. Murray, Mr. Rawlins, and Mr. Hewat; and he sad every one of the directors were convinced that they de served it most richly. The motion was then put, and unanimously agreed to. The meeting immediately afterwards separated. COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL. Yesterday a Court was held. The principal business of the day was mentioned in the court paper under the follow ing N.B. :—" It is intended at this Court to present the freedom of this City to Major-General Sir Harry George Smith, K.C.8., agreeably to theresolution of the 6th of April, 1846." The members appeared in their full-dress gowns, and the gallery was crowded with ladies. _ At oueo'clock the Lord Mayor took the chair, and imme diately afterwards the hero of Aliwal entered, introduced by Mr. Anderton and Mr. John Wood, the mover and seconder of the resolution, amidst loud cheers. Sir Harry Smith sat on the left of the Lord Mayor. The Chamberlain of the City of London read the follow ing resolution :—" That the thanks and congratulations of the Court, with the freedom of this City, in a gold box of the value of 100 guineas, be presented to Sir Harry George Smith, for the eminent services rendered by him in the ar duous and successful operations on the 18th, 21st, and 22d of December, 1845, at Moodkee and Ferozeshah, and for the distinguished skill, valour, and judgment he manifested in the important battle of Aliwal, on the 28th of January, 1846, when a greatly superior force of the Seikh army was totally defeated, and increased lustre shed upon the reputa tion of the British arms." Sir Harry Smith was then sworn in with the usual cere monies as a citizen of London. The CHAMBERLAIN having addressed the Gallant Officer in an appropriate and highly-complimentary speech, which was much applauded, Sir HARRY Smrn bowed to the crowded assembly, and said—My Lord Mayor and Gentlemen of the Court of Com mon Council,—For the distinguished honour you have thus conferred upon me in the name of the City of London, I return you my most grateful thanks. To the elegant speech in which your sentiments were delivered tome by the Cham berlain it is impossible for me to reply paragraph by para graph, but I must say that the terms in which I have been addressed increase, if possible, my gratitude to this great Corporation.—(Cheers.) It is true her Most Gracious Majesty has conferred upon me high honours and distinctions; it is true that Parliament has given to me a proud testimonial of its approbation ; and it is true that at this moment I am re ceiving in this great city, which has been celebrated from the days of Alfred for its glorious spirit of liberty, the privi lege of its citizenship—that I am put in possession of the freedom of a city which has never been trod upon by the foot of a foreign enemy.—(Great cheering.) Freedom is the first word we are taught to lisp in this mighty empire. Con nected with that bright principle are all the honours and ad vantages to which England lays so unanswerable a claim in the comparison with other nations, and in this city are ex hibited the most authentic evidences of the effects of the noble principle which was framed for the protection of all. —(Loud cheers.) It has been my fate to see many countries—to observe the institutions by which the machinery of many nations is worked, and the contracted force of their operation. There is no human institution without defects; but England possesses so dignified a station, the genius of liberty has poured in upon her so rich a flood of benefits, commercial, moral, and intellectual, that it is impossible to contemplate ber without a deep feel ing of pride and admiration.—(Cheers.) It is impossible to behold her without pride and admiration, struggling to avert the horrors of war, to atop the effusion of blood.—(Great cheering.) Let England continue to be but true to herself; let her people flock round their Sovereign with their accus tomed zeal and vigour and loyalty, and the presence of a foe will never excite alarm or apprehension. She will still maintain her superiority at sea, and victory will still wait upon the energies which necessity may call into action, sup ported by the John Bull rectitude of intention by which all her actions have been distinguished.—(Cheers.) 1 return you thanks for this great honour. I return you thanks in the name, too, of the army to whose exertions the success which you are celebrating has been mainly attributable. There are probably several members of this court who have relations amongst those lately engaged in the operations abroad. It has been my fate to call upon the British soldier to follow to victory; and never have I known him to fail. The fear of defeat never entered the bosom of any one man whom I have seen with the blood of John Bull in Iris veins. —(Great cheering.) So long as England is true to herself and loyal to the Sovereign she will stand as she now stands —the paramount power of the world.—(lmmense applause from all parts of the Court.) Mr. Annearos moved that the address of the Chamber lain and the reply of Sir Harry Smith be entered upon the minutes of the Court. Mr. J. Woon seconded the motion, which was carried by acclamation. Sir Harry Smith, and Lady Smith and their daughter, who accompanied the Gallant General upon the platform of the court, then retired. The departure of the hero of Aliwal was marked by the most enthusiastic applause. TIM HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL. Dr. LYNCH wished to ask the chairman of the Commis sioners of Sewers a question affecting the interest and the lives of the citizens of London. He wished to know, now that the refusal to accept the Government measure threw the, responsibility upon the commission, what measures they were about to adopt to meet the frightful evils which existed. —(Hear, hear.) It was the duty of the commission to pro cure a short Bill at once empowering them to abolish cess pools and to make each house communicate b 1 drain with trapped sewers, and possess a plentiful supply of water. Mr. PEACOCK (the chairman of the commission) said the Commissioners were indefatigable, and the City, under their watchful care, was rapidly improving. They were about to apply to Parliament for the power of which Dr. Lynch spoke, and he trusted they would soon be able to exer cise it. ORPIAN SCHOOLS. Upon the motion of Mr. W. S. Hale, it was referred to a committee to consider the propriety of founding an estab lishment for boarding, clothing, and educating orphan children of necessitous freemen of the City, the management of which should be vested in the Corporation, and to consider the propriety of appropriating the whole of the redemption fees, in respect to freedoms, towards defraying the charges of the establishment, and also to consider the propriety of ap plying to Parliament for leave to appropriate the capital and revenue of the Corporation School to the same purpose, the Corporation undertaking to provide the deficiency out of its own funds. GOVERNESSES' BENEVOLENT INSTITUTION.—Yes terday a general meeting of the members of this institution VMS held at the Hanover-square Rooms, for the purpose of receiving the report of the past year, and to elect three annuitants of 15/. each per annum from a list of 84 can didates--Earl Manvers presiding in the room of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, who was unable to at tend. The report read by the Secretary stated that the society was increasing in prosperity. There are now, with yesterday's election, nineteen ann u it ants o f 151. per annum. The cases of more than 400 distressed gover nesses have during the year been investigated, and temporary grants have been made to 267 individuals to the extent of 5591. For the purpose of founding annuities to aged governesses, 10,0001. have been invested in the public funds. A provident fund, for securing deferred annuities to governesses upon their own payments, amounts to nearly 30,0001., being the savings of about 300 individuals. A " Home" has been opened in Harley-street, at a cost, for lease and furniture, of more than 2,0001., for the reception of the disengaged and unprotected, where they are maintained at a small weekly payment for board and lodging, into which nearly 100 have been received since its opening in in May last. The receipts for the year were 8,3361 . 2s. 4d., l eaving, after expenditure, a balance of 8341. Hs. 10,1. The report was adopted. INDIGENT BLIND VISITING SOCIETY.—Last even ing the thirteenth annual general meeting of the members and friends of the above excellent charity was held at the M us ic Hall, Store-street, at which were present a large as. semblage of ladies and gentlemen. The Right lion. Lord Ashley presided, and on the platform were the Rev. D. Hol loway. the Rev. E. Pisey, J. Labouchere, Esq., J. D. Paul, E sq ., and several others. The meeting having been opened with prayer by the Rev. Dr. Holloway, the Noble Chairman briefly addressed the meeting, observing, that the class of persons for which the society was established now to so great an extent derived sympathy and aid by the great exertions of the committee and excellent secretary • yet, out of the 3,000 or 4,000 bli n d now in the metropolis, no loubt there were hundreds m ore w hi c h should be brought within the sphere of the society's operation, for which more funds were required. Much was said of the generosity of the Britiah public ; but that generosity was confined to a very small section—the great masses of wealth were never reached by God or man, except where the law reached them in the shape of taxes. The Noble Lord concluded with an eloquent ap peal on behalf of the charity whose objects were so excellent. The report wes then read by the secretary, C. A. Harman, Esq., and showed that the funds of the society were not in a satisfactory state. It concluded by calling for the aid and sympathy of every sincere Christian. The report was then adopted. Resolutions were afterwards unanimously carried in furtherance of the objects of the institution, concluding with thanks to the Noble Chairman, which closed the pro ceedings. For the fullest and most correct report cif Epsom four days' races, with a portrait of the Winner of the Derby, see Bell's Life in London, of May 23.—A sixpence sent to Mr. Clement, jun., 170, Strand, wilt insure a copy, by return of post, to any part of England, Scotland, or Ireland. The average sale of Bell's Life exceeds 26,000. Bell's Life of may 9, which contained the explanatory chart of Newmarket race courses, can be had all this month of May. A DONKEY DEFYING STEAM.—A funny scene occurred on the Taff Vale Railway on Saturday. A donkey got on the line just as a train was passing, and ran down the line pursued by the puffing monster, but the donkey, remem bering that discretion is the better part of valour, ended the chase by jumping aside, kicking up his heels in nocsu as the I train passed bp—Taunton Ourien . n:4 • • • • • , f