The Press.
London, England, 1856-08-02 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

posed and nominated a committee to inquire into the
subject of the forms of the house, and to ascertain whether
those forms really were obstacles to the conduct of public
business, and how they might be modified in order to
facilitate its prosecution. The noble lord the member for
the city of London, who was .:hen Prime Minister, was a
member of that committee. Among its other members
were the late Sir R. Peel, the late Mr. Goulburn, the right
hon. member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham) I believe, and
Mr. Cobden ; and the committee had also the advantage of
the valuable experience and judgment of the hon. member
for Mahon. I, also, was a member of the committee, and
we gave great attention to the subject. We examined a
member of the American House of Assembly with respect
to the rules which applied to public business in the United
States. We examined an illustrious exile then in this
country, who had been Prime Minister of France, and who
was a great master of debate—M. Guizot—on the subject,
and the results of the deliberations of the committee are
now among the records of this house.
I did not want the information I obtained as a member of
that committee to convince me that it was neither the
forms of the house nor freedom of discussion that had pre-
vented the satisfactory accomplishment of public business
in 1848; and it was in accordance with the feelings and at
the desire of many of my friends that I undertook the
laborious task of reviewing a session which had lasted for
ten months, and of proving, I hope—however I may have
failed in other objects—that neither of the causes alleged
had the slightest influence upon the course of public busi-
ness during that session, and of vindicating, as I trust
completely, the House of Commons in that respect.
It is for the same object, and actuated by the same feel-
ings, that I have brougbt forward this motion to-day. I
do not think it is a motion that ought to be made except
in particular circumstances, and circumstances of great
emergen.q. I think it is of the utmost importance that
we should discover what is the cause of that general
discontent and dissatisfaction with the labours of this
house which could not have been anticipated in the
session, but which, I think, it is almost acknowledged has
within the last six weeks or two months suddenly arisen
in the public mind.
I will admit that I do not by any means maintain that
it is a matter of course on the part of the Minister of
this country to be too prone to legislation. On the con-
trary, I think that the Minister is the last member of
this house who should interfere in matters of that kind.
I think that, as a general rule, it is beat that the Minister
should not interfere with any subject which requires
legislation unless he feels convinced he can deal with it
satisfactorily and conclusively. I should say that when
there may be questions that greatly interest the public
mind, though there may be a restless and, even in a
certain degree, a rational feeling in the nation that these
questions should be dealt with, it is possible that the time
may not be ripe for their solution, and in these circum•
stances they rather fall to the lot of independent members
of this house, who may shape their preliminary discussion,
and by imparting knowledge and ultimately eliciting
truth place them in a position with which the Minister, ulti-
mately, may advantageously deal with them. Therefore,
sir, I should never impute blame to any Minister if I
found that he was somewhat reserved in the matter of
legislation, and was not prepared to ask the house to
sanction measures upon any great topics unless lie felt
convinced that there was an urgent necessity for their
introduction. In that way, I can conceive a state of affairs in
which a Minister, anxious to do his duty to his Sovereign
and his country, may yet discharge that duty in Parliament
by merely asking the house to fulfil theirhighest function—
viz., that of granting supplies to her Majesty for the ser•
vices of the State. He may not feel it to be his duty, or
necessary, to ask for the attentive consideration of the
house to questions of another character.
Again, I can easily believe this—for I am anxious to
state the case as fairly as possible—that though a Minister
may be conscious that there are subjects of great im-
portance that demand the. consideration of Parliament,
yet there may be circumstances at the moment which
would not authorise his soliciting the judgment of Parlia-
ment regarding them. The country may be involved in
war in a great struggle—and I can understand the Minister
then—though he may be of opinion that there are subjects
of internal interest that require a speedy and ultimate
settlement,—holding the opinion that, in a crisis of that
nature, all the exigencies of the Government being re•
quired to prosecute the war, he has a right to appeal
with confidence to the forbearing spirit and temper of
Parliament, and not bring forward those measures.

I can also conceive that there may be another occasion
in which a Minister may find he has a claim to legisla-
tive forbearance. We may not be positively at war, but
we may be on the point of accomplishing a peace. All the
intelligence and vigilance of the Ministry may be required
to carry on the important negotiations which are to con-
clude the war in which we may be engaged, and to form
the foundations of a settlement that may possibly insure the
enduring peace of Europe. In these circumstances I also
can easily conceive that the Minister may be justified in
not applying to Parliament for any legislation but such as
may be necessary to insure the supplies for the year.
But these three pleas the noble lord cannot avail him-
self of, should he think it right to answer the frank and
fair criticism which I may offer on the course he has pur-
sued. The noble lord, in the first place, cannot say to-
night that it is his opinion we have legislated enough, and
that there are no pressing questions of greet importance
which require our attention, because the noble lord has
voluntarily, in this session of Parliament, introduced to our
notice not only questions of great importance, but, as I
think I shall be able to show, a greater number of questions
of great importance than probably any Minister ever intro-
duced to Parliament. Nor can the noble lord avail him-
self of the second plea, that, this country being involved in
war, and in a considerable struggle, Parliament had no

SATURDAY,

right to expect that any of these legislative proposals
should have been made to them, because the noble lord at
the commencement of the session, when the country was
in a state of war, advised her Majesty in her gracious
Speech, while she thanked her faithful Commons for the
devoted mattner in which they had supported her in the
struggle, to recommend them to give their attentive consi.
deration to many subjects of internal importance. Nor can
the noble lord avail himself of the third plea, that, though
the state of war might have terminated, important nego-
tiations for peace were the reason why he could not bring
forward legislative measures of importance, because, besides
the measures which, in a time of war, the noble lord re.
commended her Majesty to call our attention to, and after
those negotiations for peace had commenced, he added
other measures, that are not of secondary importance, ca
which he solicited the consideration of Parliament. There.
fore I think I need not argue the question whether legisla-
tion on important questions is necessary or not, because,
so far as the Ministry are concerned, they are my principal
witnesses that legislation, and legislation on a great scale,
is necessary. We need not appeal to a state of war as an
apology for the conduct of the Government, nor to nego.
tiations for peace as an excuse for their behaviour, because
it will be shown to the house in the course of my observa-
tions that, in a time of war, the noble lord recommended
her Majesty to invite our attentive consideration to many
questions of internal improvement, and that when nego-
tiations for peace commenced he introduced further and,
if possible, still more important measures.
I wish to guard myself in a statement of this kind from
any language that would savour in the slightest degree of
exaggeration. I have stated that the noble lord has, in the
course of this session, introduced to our notice measures
of great importance, and perhaps a greater number of
measures of great importance than probably any Minister
that ever occupied that bench. I think I shall be able to
substantiate that statement without mentioning many
measures the magnitude of which, when I refer to them in
detail, will speak for themselves, but yet of secondary
interest compared to the principal features of the legisla-
tive scheme of this year.
Let me remind the house now of some of the principal
subjects that have been brought under our consideration.
We have been asked, in the first place, to construct a
high court of appeal, the highest court of appeal in the last
instance. All will acknowledge that that is a question
which may be described as the greatest of legal questions.
In all countries it may be described as the greatest of legal
questions ; but in this country it is more than the greatest
of legal questions, because it is also the greatest of e onsti•
tutional questions, for, in having to consider the
creation and constitution of a high court of appeal, we
have, from the nature of our institutions, not only to fulfil
that great object, but we have incidentally to consider
the very elements of a Senate, or rather of an Upper
Chamber. We have been called upon this year to consider
a new law of partnership, framed upon new principles and
adapted to this advanced age, which should facilitate the
application of capital to commerce in the most commercial
country in the world. We have been called upon to con-
sider the whole law of divorce and an important change in
the law of marriage. We have been called upon to con-
sider the whole discipline of the Church; the testamentary
jurisdiction of the country; the police of the country ; a
reform of the most ancient, the most wealthy, and the most
powerful municipality, intimately connected with the
history and liberties of England; the superannuation of
the whole civil service of the country; the criminal apprc-
priation of trust property; the education of a whole king-
dom ; the retirement of bishops from their sees; and last.
but not least, the correct means of ascertaining the mos
important produce of the empire by a system of agricult
tureel statistics.

Why, sir, these are not light questions. They are not
only among the most grave that concern a State, but they
involve the very principles upon which society itself is
based. Sir, Ido not know that I can place the legislative
scheme of the Ministry more fairly before the house than
by referring to the Speech from the Throne at the com-
mencement of the session, and reminding the house of the
propositions that then, upon the highest sanction and au-
thority, were submitted to our consideration.
There were four measures, or, I would rather say, four
series of measures which, in the heat of war, her Majesty
recommended to our attentive consideration. The first—
which was the simplest—applied to the assimilation of the
mercantile law of England and of Scotland. The second
was that improvement in the law of partnership, founded
altogether upon new principles and aiming at the increased
application of capital to commerce, to which I have already
referred. The third was a measure which was to relieve
the mercantile marine of this mercantile country from
charges of great weight under which it had long laboured,
and against which it had long complained. The fourth
series of measures, and perhaps the most important, con-
sisted of large and extensive reforms, first in the law of
Great Britain, and next in the law of Ireland. These, sir,
were the measures which at the commencement of the ses-
sion, in a time of war, were recommended, to use the lan-
guage of the gracious Speech, to the " attentive considera-
tion " of the House of Commons. How have we dealt with
these four series of measures ?

With respect to the first question—the assimilation of
the mercantile law of England and Scotland—l cheerfnlly
admit that the Government may he considered to have
fairly redeemed their pledge. A measure to change the
mercantile law of Scotland has now passed, I believe, both
houses, and a measure to change the mercantile law of
England was introduced in this house. It contained. in-
deed, a principle of the most dangerous kind, which aimed
at terminating the necessity in commercial transactions of
written contracts; but the practical sagacity of the House
of Commons, and the protest of the whole commercial
community, saved the country from the dangers of that
unfortunate proposition. That portion of the bill was de-
feated, and the measure so amended was passed. We may

AUGUST 2, 1856.

therefore admit that the Government, on the whole, have
fairly redeemed the pledge they gave with respect to the
first series of measures mentioned in the gracious Speech.
How, air, did we proceed with regard to the improve-
ment of the law of partnership ? What were the fortunes
of that great bill which was to be founded upon new prin-
ciples, which was to be adapted to this advanced and en•
lightened age, and which, in this peculiarly commercial
country, was to facilitate the application of capital to com-
merce? I am bound to admit that there was every
evidence of sincerity on the part of the Government with
respect to this second head, for on the first day we met—
the Ist of February—the important measure was intro-
duced by the Vice-President of the Board of Trade. After
discussion—after being amended and reprinted on the
2.5 th of February—on the 10th of March that measure was
abandoned. But her Majesty's Government, determined
to deal with a question which they believed to be of para-
mount importance, lost no time in profiting by the discus-
sion which had taken place, and on the 7th of the ensuing
month a second bill to amend the law of partnership and
to accomplish all those great objects which I have enume-
rated was introduced by the right hon. gentleman. I find
that this second bill was introduced on the 7th of April,
sad on the 1 ith of J uly I find it was abandoned. Here we
have an important subject recommended to our "attentive
consideration " in the gracious Speech from the Throne,
and not only one bill brought in and abandoned by her
Majesty's Ministers, but a second bill on the same subject
introduced, and also abandoned. That, sir, is every remark-
able and unfortunate catastrophe for any department to
experience; but I would take the liberty of reminding the
house that it is not peculiar to the Vice-President of the
Board of Trade, hitherto thought to be so particularly un-
fortunate in his legislative enterprises. (A laugh.) I
find that the President of the Poor-Law Board was not
much more successful. On the 3rd of April I find that
functionary introducing a bill for the amendment of the
poor law ; and on the 23rd of May I find that measure
abandoned. (Hear, hear.) I find the same Minister,
profiting equally by his experience, on the 23rd of May in-
troducing snother measure on the same subject, and on
the 10th of July I find that measure also abandoned. (A
laugh.) Here we have two Ministers introducing bills
upon subjects of the highest moment, and not only failing
in their efforts to carry their measures, but recurring
again to the experiment, and again encountering failure.
(Cheers.) But, sir, this double failure is not peculiar to
the Vice-President of the Board of Trade and the Presi-
dent of the Poor• Law Board. The Irish Government, re-
presented, I believe, by the Chief Secretary of the Lord
Lieutenant, introduced on the 15th of April a bill to regu-
late the lunatic asylums in Ireland, and on the 21st of
May I find that measure abandoned. But the right hon.
gentleman, also, not losing heart, two days afterwards in-
troduced another bill on the same subject, and on the 14th
of July I find that second measure on the lunatic asylums
of Ireland also abandoned. (Cheers and laughter.) I
have mentioned these cases incidentally to illustrate, and
in some degree to soften, the position of the Vice-Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade—(a laugh)—but the result is
that upon three subjects of great moment three Ministers
try their hand at legislation, fail in their efforts, not
disheartened again make the attempt, end are again
self•balHed. (Cheers.)
Let us now look to the third subject mentioned in the
gracious Speech. What was the fate of the great measure
which was to relieve the whole mercantile marine of Eng-
land from those local dues and passing tolls of which it
had so long complained ? Here, sir, I am afraid I shall
not find any of the colleagues of the Vice-President of the
Board of Trade to be his equals in mischance. (A
laugh.) On the 4th of February the right hon. gentleman
introduced a bill to accomplish the purposes mentioned in
the Royal Speech, and on the 26th of February I find that
mess are abandoned.
Well, I come now to the fourth series of measures which
were referred to in the Royal Speech. The first of these
related to the improvement of the law of Great Britain,
and it appears—so far as I can ascertain—that five mea-
sures were brought forward with that praiseworthy object ;
and when I refer to these details 1 think that hon. members
on both sides will agree with me that no Ministry ever )et
introduced to the notice of the house subjects of such deep
interest and such extensive application. First, there was
a bill to establish a jurisdiction in the matter of wills and
administration. That bill was introduced on the 4th of
March, and on the 10th of July it was abandoned. The
next bill was the great measure to found an appellate
jurisdiction in the lust instance. It was brought from the
Lords on the 9th of June, and on the 10th of July it was
abandoned. The third measure related to a subject of no
less importance than the law of divorce, which was intro-
duced to us on the 4th of Jul). Let me remind the house
of the circumstances under which that bill came down to
nt. After great di ti culty it had passed through the House
of Lords, where it had been subjected to the criticism of
some of the greatest intellects of the country, and it dealt
successfully with most of those great points which are the
opprobrium of our law of marriage. That bill was intro-
duaed into our house on the 4th of July, and on the 17th
it was abandoned. The next measure of legal reform re-
lated to a subject which is a disgrace—l hesitate not to
lay—to this civilised and enlightened age—it dealt with
the criminal appropriation of trust property. I can con-
ceive no subject more deserving of the attention of the
Government than this. The most iniquitous consequences
have for a long series of years resulted from the state of
the law upon this subject; and I am bound to say that,
speaking upon the highest authority—without which I
should not presume to allude to the question—l believe
that what is taking place in this country almost every day
renders it still more necessary that a bill of this kind
shonld pass. That bill was abandoned on the 21st of
July. Tho next measure—the Church Discipline Bill—
Was not abandoned, but it was introduced into the other

THE PEERS.

house, and there rejected on a division; so that none of
those five important projects of law, which no one can deny
deserved the deep and attentive consideration of

ment, were passed:
I will now allude to the measures proposed with a view
to reforming the law in Ireland, in order to see whether
we have been more fortunate there. Soon after Parliament

met, a bill was introduced by the Government for the re-
form and reconstruction of the Court of Chancery in Ire-
land. That measure proposed to create two Vice-Chancel-
lors at a salary of 3,6001. each, to be appointed by the Lord
Lieutenant; six chief clerks, at a salary of 1,0001. a year
each ; and six junior clerks, at a salary of 3501. each.
That bill was followed immediately by another with rela-
tion to the courts of bankruptcy and insolvency in Ireland,
which was introduced on the 29th of February. It con-
stituted two judges with salaries of 2,000/. a year each, a
chief registrar with 6001., a chief clerk with 5001., two
assistant-registrars with 4001., and conferred the power of
pensioning off, at the full salary of 1,2001., a gentleman
who was once a member of this house, and who has held
his present office for a space only of two years. The effect
which these bills produced was of a startling character.
At first it was supposed that they were an ingenious means
of compensating the sister country for the failure of the
Tipperary Bank. (A laugh.) That was the popular view
of the case as it was brought before us. On the 17th of
July that bill was abandoned. But this is not a solitary
case in Irish legislation. A bill with regard to the juries
of Ireland was introduced on the 5111 of February, and on
the 27th of June it was abandoned. Again, a bill with
respect to juvenile offenders in Ireland was introduced on
the 4th of February, and on the 27th of June it was
abandoned. The bill to deal with the metropolitan police
of Dublin also was introduced on the 22nd of April, and
on the Ist of July it was abandoned. Thus we see that
five great measures of legal reform in England, and an
equal number in Ireland, were introduced by her Majesty's
Government, and that every one of those measures has
been abandoned. 1 admit—because I wish to state the
case fairly for the Government—that there were two mea-
sures passed with respect to the reform of Irish law which
I think will prove to be highly beneficial; but I believe
that they are both founded upon measures which were
introduced by my hon. and learned friend the member for
Enniskillen (Mr. Whiteside).
I have now gone through those four great subjects
which were referred to in her Majesty's Speech from the
Throne ; and I have placed before the house, with, 1 hope,
no rhetorical efforts, what has been the result of those
projected measures of the Government. But her Majesty's
Government have introduced many other measures which
cannot be included in any of the categories mentioned
in the Royal Speech. Let us see what has been the fate
of those measures.
First, there is a bill for the superannuation of the mem-
bers of the civil service, which is a very difficult question,
and which has been under the consideration of the Exe-
cutive for more than twenty years, and has taxed the
utmost efforts of successive Chancellors of the Exchequer.
I had the matter before me, and I proposed to take action
upon it; I know that the right hon. gentleman who was
my immediate successor gave his utmost attention also
to it, and that the present Chancellor of the Exchequer is
a perfect master of the subject, yet soj difficult is it that
the Government have found themselves unable to grapple
with the question. That bill was introduced on the 15th
of February. On the 18th of July it was abandoned, and
thus were terminated all the hopes of that most merito-
rious and ill-used body of her Majesty's servants.
There is another question with which her Majesty's
Government determined to deal ; and this, again, is no
new qnestion, but one which has long engaged the atten-
tion of Parliament. I mean the reform of the corporation
of the city of London. That question has been before
Parliament more or less for the last twenty years. There
have been, if I recollect aright, two Royal Commissions to
investigate the subject, and never were there more ample
materials ready upon which legislation could be founded.
'f he position of the Government with respect to that ques-
tion was unusually favorable and advantageous, because a
colleague of the noble lord, a Secretary of State, and one of
the most distinguished members of the Cabinet, had been one
of the Royal Commissioners in the last investigation. Her
Majesty's Government having resolved at last to settle this
important question, they had the advantage of possessing
in the Cabinet one who was completely master of the sub-
ject. They had, therefore, such facilities for drawing up
a measure eo completely adequate to the occasion, so well
matured, and so perfectly adapted to the circumstances of
the case, that the moment it was announced that they were
about to lay a bill in reference to the subject on the table
there was a general belief in this house, in the City, and, I
may say, in the country, that at last this great reform
would take place. But what has been the result of that
measure? It was introduced on the 4th of February, and
on the 26th ofJuue it was abandoned.
I have here another catalogue of measures to which I
must advert at the risk of wearying the house, because
it is of the utmost importance that we should accurately
know the data on which the conclusion we may arrive at
must rest.
A bill for the local management of the metropolis was
introduced by the President of the Board of Works. He
is a man, one would suppose, who knew what he was
about, and yet this bill, which was introduced on the 28th
of February, on the 9th of May was abandoned.
I will now proceed to a department over which another
officer—the President of the Board of Health—presides.
That right hon. gentleman was originally a member of the
profession of Mars, 1 believe, and he was therefore not to
be daunted by the failures of his colleagues. He was
resolved to show a martial courage befitting his situation,
and when he introduced his bill on public health on the
26th of May, he would not abandon it. He demanded
battle—and the bill was rejected. (A laugh.) But I am
sorry to say that after this fitful blaze of valour the courage

doned.

725

of my right hon. and gallant friend seemed to evaporate.
On the 26th of May be introduced a burial bill, which on
the 12th of July he abandoned. lie also introduced, on the
7th of March, a vaccination bill, which on the 10th of July

was abandoned.
I have referred to the efforts which were made by the
President of the Poor-Law Board to amend the poor law,
but I did scant justice to the legislative enterprise of that
right hon. gentleman, for I tied that, besides the two efforts
which I have mentioned, the right hon. gentleman intro-
. . _ _

duced a bill on no less difficult a subject than pauper re-
nioval. That bill was introduced on the lat of April, and
_ _

on the 27th of June it was abandoned.
There was a bill of the Government which aimed to deal
with a difficulty which many Administrations have had to
encounter—the claims of the coalwhippers of London.
That bill was introduced on the 28th of April, and on the
4th of July it was abandoned.
I will shed a tear over the fate of the bill which was to settle
the site of the National Gallery. It was introduced on the
sth of June, and on the 12th of the same month it met a
fate which I deplore. It was not abandoned, but it was
dealt with in a manner which did not permit us to see
more of it this session.

There was a bill introduced with respect to the
Dulwich charity, which demanded legislation ; it was in-
troduced on the 17th of July, and on the 21st of July it was

abandoned.
The Queen's Colleges in Ireland engaged the attention
of the Government; they introduced a bill on that
_ _ _

subject, and on the 15th of July that also was abandoned.
The education of the people of Scotland had long en-
gaged the attention of the Government, and this year they
introduced a bill which everybody thought, from the spirit

of the Lord Advocate, from the uncompromising tone
which seemed to animate his interesting rhetoric, was

sure to be persevered with. But, no ; it was introduced
on the 9th of April, and on the 27th of June it was sban-

There is another bill before me, scarcely second to any
of these in importance,—l mean the Agricultural Statis-
tics Bill, which met the same melancholy fate. It came
down from the other house ; it was never brought on here,
but was abandoned.
Now, sir, I ask any gentleman in this house—l care not
where they sit—whether they he votaries of Conservative
progress, as we are, or whether they be disciples of
Liberal movement, as hon. members opposite I suppose
are, or ought to be—is this a satisfactory state of atiiiirs ?
I ask those hon. gentlemen who take a great part in our
business and who are habitual attenders here whether,
before this clear and accurate statement which I have laid
before them, they were aware of the extent and importance
of legislative failures of the present session? Not wish-
ing to understate what the Government had done, I mei
tinned that they had passed two measures which did nut
come within the group of measures to which I referred at
the commencement of my observations. One was with
respect, to the retirement of bishops. I regret that that
was a measure which did not deal with the question, and
which, therefore, has settled nothing. It really is not a
measure which settles the question of the retirement of
bishops. It is a private and personal arrangement and
settles only the retirement of two individuals, and though
the question is one which raises considerations of the hie.•
est interest and importance, none of them are disposed of
in that bill. The County Police Bill was also passed by
the Government. That was an excellent measure, and I
have no wish to depreciate the merit of the Government
in passing it by reminding them that the subject is one
which had long engaged their attention, and respecting
which a very matured measure was introduced by the
Government of Lord Aberdeen, when the noble lord
opposite was Home Secretary. I make that observation
only for the purpose of showing that though the measure
was important the house was prepared for it, and the
discussion of it did not greatly occupy the time of the
house.
We cannot, therefore, be surprised, I think, at the gnat
dissatisfaction and discontent which have suddenly arisen
—more I believe out of doors than here—and which is
therefore more dangerous—with the manner in which
public business has been conducted this session. 1 frankly
admit that the house and the country were perfectly pre-
pared to treat the Government with the utmost indulgence
in the matter of legislation. Inasmuch as they had just
terminated the war in which we were engaged, and as a
considerable portion of their time bad been taken up in the
protracted negotiations for peace, they were in a position
to appeal to the indulgence and confidence of Parliament.
If they had said, " We are engaged in these great affairs,
and therefore you must not expect us to attempt to deal
with any of those great questions which must ultimately be
settled by legislation,"no onewould have murmured. But
it is not in the power of the Government now to put for-
ward that plea. Having duly considered their own position,
and having greater advantages fur ascertaining it than we
could have, they resolved to draw the attentive considert.
tiou of Parliament to a variety of the most important sub-
jects which can engage the attention of a Legislature.
They have held out to the countries these expectations, and
they cannot be surprised that the country is disappointed.
If it were merely a question of transient disappointment I
would not have made these observations; but I cannot help
feeling that the time has come when the house would do
well calmly to consider what has been the cause of a state
of affairs which all must regret, which is most mortifying
to us as a legislative assembly, and which cannot be very
satisfactory to her Majesty's Ministers. It is to ascertain
that cause, and not to make a bill of indictment against
the Government, that I wish to engage the attention and
the consideration of the house to-night, trusting that, in
the coulee of discussion, suggestions may be made which
may ultimately lead to the devising of some remedy for this
evil state of affairs.
Now, sir, it cannot be said that this catastrophe hasheen
occasioned by the forms of the house. Ido not believe