The Express.
London, England, 1847-03-18 00:00:00

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

The 0011;o “Ecrazes..
have been OVER ben 90 MEET-817MT, to Na to,
owed tIVIDLIWIDINE, FLEEMILEZT, serlevau le the Prlndas
Pabilehlas Olken.
edartieetneale htteeded kw The Expeue,Loadia reesdag pew,
unit be of the Mee by Two *Week on the day et palittaticet.

MOH WATER AT LONDON-RRIDOE.
Two DAT —llandag, Irt min. put 2; Aftersoam, IS AWL pet 3.
To-Moasow—NQthag, 35 ml a. phut 3 ; Aftwocas, 51 Ws. put 3.

LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 18.
AT the morning sitting of the House of Commons
yesterday, the desire to proceed with the Factory Bill
was evinced by the fact that two divisions took place
on moving the previous orders of the day for the
second reading of the Rating of Tenements and Ju-
venile Offenders Bills, which questions were resolved
in then ece by large majorities, the second read-
ings sten • postponed achoordingly. The order of
the day for e committal of the Victory Bill having
been read, Mr. DEN NIBTOUN, in a speech of consider-
able length, condemned the moisture, designating it
as a delusion, a mockery, and a snare, but
that its objects might be carried out by wortiffiggvturill
alternating relays of labourers and reserves, those
persons working twelve hours a day one day to work
only eight the next from Monday to Friday, and on
Saturday nine, on the same principle, which would
give 67 hours labour a week instead of 69, as contem-
plated by the bill. The advantage of much a system
would be, that while it would restrict the hours
of labour, it would tend to keep ap the
productive power of the country. With a view
to the consideration of this proposition, and
being desirous to promote harmonious feelings be-
tween employers and the employed, he moved that
the committee be postponed until Wednesday, the
31st inst. Mr. Esnrrr seconded the motion. Mr.
Fracs being of opinion that the effect of the bill
would not be to reduce wages, he should give it his
support. Mr. AGLIONBY thought no good would 16
salt from taking the opinion of parties out of the
house, and considered it an unfortunate circumstance
as regarded the master manufacturers that the system
of working now suggested by the hen. member for
Glasgow, on their behalf, had not been propounded
at an earlier period. Lord loaN RtIIIIELL enter-
tained the belief that the proposition in question

was one not originating with any body of manufac-
turers, but came from an individual, and that at the
eleventh hour; he trusted, therefore, that the house
would at once proceed with the bill. Mr. F. MAULS
considered that as the proposition of the hon. member
for Glasgow showed something like a desire on
the part of the manufacturers to meet the
wishes of the labourers, it was one deserving of
consideration. Mr. W. DROWN expressed his surprise
that the advocates for commercial freedom should sup.
port a bill, the effect of which must he to banish
skill and labour from the country, he should give it
his determined opposition. Mr. P. BORTHWICK, con-
sidering that the bill had already virtually received the
sanction of the house, shoald give it his support.
Mr. BRIGHT was in favour of an immediate decision
on so momentous a question ; and taking, as he did,
a strong interest in the welfare of the working classes,
he would rather oppose than deceive them ; there.
fore, he should support the motion of the hon. member
for Glasgow, or any other which would interfere with
the progress of a measure which could ;oily lead to
the most disastrous results. Mr. HINDLET defended
the free traders from the attack of the hon. member
for Lancashire, and quoted the authority of Mr.
Cobden to show that they had been of opinion that
free trade would lead to a diminution of the unrea.
amiable hours of labour to which the working classes
were exposed. Mr. FIELDER alluded to the fart of
Mr. BRIGHT'S mills being at the present moment in a
state of idleness, and argued that had a ten hours' bill
been paned last session, every cotton
nmill in Man.
cheater and its neighbourhood won d have been now
at work. Sir R. PEEL thought sufficient grounds
had not been laid for delay, and, therefore, he should
oppose any motion that would have that effect. Mr.
DUNCAN was in favour of postponement. Lord J.
Russell., in an elaborate speech, in the course of
which he took a review of the state of the cotton
trade in England and abroad, and of the relative
social condition of the persons employed in it, con-
eluded his observations by eating, that he could not
look with indiffereace on those whose lot had been
described as only to work, to eat, to sleep, and to die.
As regarded such persons, generally, but particularly
the young, it was the duty of the state to inculcate
tke doctrines of religion, to cultivate their domestic
happiness and affections, and to induce them
to look up to the laws, and the government
of the country, for protection from oppres-
sion, with a view to the affording time
•
for the acquisition of these desirable objects, he was
ready, at a risk—for risk there was—to vote for the
clause restrictag the period of labour in the case of
females and children under eighteen years of age to
eleven hours a day. Mr. DENNIWTOUN having with-
drawn his amendment, the house went into committee,
when the first clause enacting the foregoing proposi-
tion, to come into operation on the Ist of May next,
was agreed to. On the second clause limiting the
hours of labour to ten hours a day, after the let of
May, 1848, being put, some discussion ensued, after
which the committee divided, when the clause was •
affirmed by a majority of seventy-eight. The re•
maining clauses were then agreed to, and the report
was or Bred to be received on Wednesday the 21st of

THE common-sense view of the Cracow question,
altogether lost sight of in the course of a three days'
debate—and naturally enough, for consistently with
that view it was ire 'ble for honourable members
to make fine speeches—was at the close presented
with great plainness by Lord PALMERSTON, and of
course prevailed. The treaty of Vienna was broken,
not a doubt of it, admitted the Foreiga Secretary,
but it was inexpedient for parliament to say so.
We said all this so long since, that we should not
think of recurring to the subject but for the very re-
markable speech of Mr. DISRAELI, not so much
upon Cracow, as upon the science of treaty-making
, and interpreting, on the past history of Poland, and
upon the moral worth and the political weight of
'Austria in the affairs of Europe.
With respect to treaties, Mr. Dleassu laid it
down as a rule, that a special treaty, concluded be-
tween two or three powers, and afterwards inserted in
a general treaty between many powers, did not, when
broken or infringed, necessitate the interference of
the powers the general treaty. Lord Parr
mimeos ed, that it gave the right, but did
not create ine obligation, to interfere. These are
general assertions, hkely to create dangeions prece-
dents and a vary lax state of international and diplo-
matic law, unless carefully explained.
A difference between two powers, whether of terri-
torial or of another kind, may be either such as to
interest other powers by its threatening to disturb the
general peace, or by. its affecting the balance of power
and the permanent interests of all. In either case,
the two differing powers may be left to negotiate ex-
clusively; and, when they come to terms,other powers
may sign and guarantee the treaty ; or, if the other
powers be at the same time making • general treaty,
they may insert the special treaty therein, and give it
their solemn and general guarantee.
What is the meaning and end of this guarantee !
In the ease that the two powers differ upon a subject
exclusively concerning themselves, the guarantee is for
the purpose of future arbitrage and the preservation of
peace. If the subject of difference affect all the powers
generally, the guarantee is something more, and
either allows or calls upon the guaranteeing powers
to interfere and forbid changes, even though the
powers more immediately interested should agree is
that change.
The question is—was Cracow and its independence,
in the Bret er the second category ? It was noto-
riously in the second. Russia, Prussia, and Austria,
first endeavoured, in 1814, to settle their respective
delimitations in Poland alone—at least excluding
France. England and subsequently Austria in-
sisted and succeeded in letting France join in the
conference. The result of their conference was a
statement by Count NESSELRODE, on the 31st of Dee.,
of the bases on which Russia would negotiate. One
of these was the independence of Cracow ; another
was, that Prussia and Austria should be forced to
leave their provincial institutions to the Poles who fell
to their share. On this basis the three powers were
allowed to negotiate apart; and having adhered to
these bases a their special treaty, it was accepted and
admitted into the general treaty. From these facts,
there cannot be a doubt that the independence of
Cracow was under the guarantee of all the powers
by the clauses of the treaty of Vienna, that guarantee
being given, not merely for the preservation of peace
between Austria and Russia, but for the sake of the
balance of power, and the independent existence of a
certain number of Poles, and of a certain relic of
Poland.
On Poland Mr. Dmitsett was unusually hank
yet the lion. member deserves credit for speaking oat
that, which many think, who keep their opinions to
themselves, and call themselves friends of Poland.
"Nations," said Madame DE STALL, "merit their fate,
whatever that fate may be." And it might be argued
that the Poles, by being so exclusively either aristo-
crat or serf,--abandoning the powerful position of •
middle and commercial class to be occupied by
that race which Mr. Distiazu extols as
peculiarly and pre-eminently Coucaaian,—did, in fart,
leave the nation without pith to resist the encroach-
ments and conquests of its neighbours. Mr. DISRAELI
is, however, completely wrong in denouncing all the
patriotic and emigrant u nobles and aristocrats, in
an English sense of the term. The great body d
Polish exiles, and malcontents, and patriots, amid
at the present day of a class more noted by intellect
:dim= than by birth, men of the middle, the
, the professional classes. To stigmatise
these as a selfish and in gamg aristocracy, re a
very great and a very unjust mistake.
We do not all belong to those red-hot friends of
Poland, who would put England forward in a mili-
tary or political crusade for the restoration of Poland..
That restoration we desire and believe in, chiefly be-
cause the present demarcation of Eastern Europe
seems so untenable, and its existing empires endowed
with so little unity, adhesion, or compactness, that we
cannot conceive their going through the troubles of
another general war or revolution without breaking
up altogether.
As to Austria, which Mr. DISRAELI Mollies, and
which, according to him, is to play so supreme a part
in the future history of Europe, we do not think its
existence worth half • century's purchase. Mr-
DISRAELI brought to view the period when
Austria was threatened with parhtwo, and when its
ambitious neighbours menaced and wanted to domicil
the young princess who had just inherited the throne. 1
But what saved MARIA THERESA? Had she had but
the dominions and 'objects proper of Austria
to
sustain her, the home of Hapsburg and Lorraine min
then have gone the way of the Jagellons, and been
numbered with the dust. Mears 'Tiesaim's crown

._..~

woo wed and given to bee by the Hungarians, •
more akin to Poland than to Austria, and with
sympathy for the &laconic than the Ger-
-IVho can ROW suppose either
any or Hungary, or even Bohemia, as long
obeying that most leaden of dynasties and dullest
boinigrations, which sits at Vienna. To our
aye% the restoration of Poland seems probable,
;bast the maintenance of the Austrian Empire ap-
ars imPsibl.e*
p
break nthem quarters we look upon as a
natural and inevitable result. And our great desire
n that it should be natural, and that the powers or
mrtents or cabinets of the west should
• nowise interfere by armies, or by votes,
The
by propagandist or communist intrigues.
The east of Europe will right, and liberate, and re-
• tinitse, without consulting France and Eng
land. stead of the present dovetailed and prepoa-
woo delimitation of empires, race and the other
physical canoes of congloration must prevail,
a and
the world will see a Germeman, a Sclavonic, nd a
Russian or Tartar empire, the arrangers of which
will make very little account of the treaty of Vienna.

The published copies of
.Mr. SHARMAN CRAW-
FORD'S bill have just been distributed, and, we must
confess, that its provisions struck as as neither prac-
tical nor fair. We are by no means unfavourable to
the principle of compensation to an outgn tenant
for actual improvements made by him during. his
tenancy, but the adjustment of such claims is a
matter of such practical difficulty, es to make it very
doubtful whether the evils which it would seek to
gaud wind, be not the more tolerable mischief.
If, however, mach compensation can be adjusted,
we feel no doubt whatever that it should
be given only in the case of the outgoing and
not of the nataying tenant. The practical assertion
of tenant right in the south of Ireland is this— that
the tenant matinees to hold possession of the land till
his demand for relinquiehing it is satisfied. The plea
put forward in defence of his conduct is, that if he had
made any improvements on the land during his men-
patioe, the law would not regard him as entitled to
any compensation, and that he is willing, if allowed
to matinee on the ground, to say he will pay
ma much rent for it as any one elm. The facts,- al-
most without an exception, are, that there is not
even the pretence of any improvement having
been made during the tenancy, and that many
years' rent are in armor. Compensation is but
just where there are actual improvements —lst
them be estimated by a jury, and no power given of
beiszing an action to any tenant till his occupancy of
;he bad has ceased ;—but nothing can be imagined
d worse tendency than allowing an overholding
Mint to retain the land as a sort of pledge for any
each demand, be it capable et being sustained or
ethervrise.
The claim to be compensated for improvements
increasing the permanent value of the land, rests
an grounds wholly different from what has been
called fixity of tenure ; and, perhaps, the great im-
Frtaace of rendering the soil as productive as pork
ibis in a country where both landlord and tenant
WO to have strangely neglected their common in-
tent, may render it reasonable for the legislature to
endeavour to effect what the occupiers have not done.
Lord STANLEY and Lord LINCOLN have endeavoured
in former sessions to do something on the subject,
and the experiments made by them go far to
show the subject to be a very immana,geable
me, Improvements made in pursuance of
any antecedent agreement with the landlord
ire, of course, out of the question, as each cannot be
the subject of dispute. The principle of some of the
bills heretofore introduced was, that improvements
mixtioned by, a board of commissioners, after notice
to the landlord of the intended application, were to ler
allowed for in proportion to the outlay which they
involved. Such machinery would, probably, be found
cumbrous and ineffective. We incline to think am
action in the local courts would be the least objets.
double course,—the right of action not to arise tall
after possession was actually restored to the landlord.
Its probable that there would be few such actions;
that the right being made to depend on a tenant's fel-
Sling a very important part of his contract, in re-
storing possession at the tune stipulated in his agree.
meat with the owner of the lead, would de much
to'
prevent all litigation between the parties.
Where there is a really improving tenant it is a
mistake to suppose that his landlord, in almost
any case, wishes to get rid of him ; but in behead,
is elsewhere, alterations that are actual); la.
thievoos are sometimes ueaeribed by tenants as
improvements. In the Devote commission a ease is
dated where a man claimed to be compensated for
building a mill on a site where there was no com-
mend of water, and against which absurd expgt
tine he had been warned by his landlord.
are cases, too, in which industrious tenants carry their
pawn for improving land somewhat too far; and the
Wlmd, who has his own engagements to meet, finds
that his tenant is unable to pay a shilling, from having,
without any communication with him, employed the
whole profits of the land in improvements, which,
often undoubtedly advantageous, are yet advantages
which a tenant is scarcely authorised by. any abstract
teams of what is good for the estate, in making at
another man's expense. We have heard the late
Lard OUILIANOPA when Chief Baron of the Bache-
gore in Ireland, complain of the very serious grievanoe
Mined on a man "by improving him out of
his_ estate.* In the reconstruction of society

in Ireland, it should not be forgotten that the new
take mint be made very much out of the old mate-
rials. We may, each of us, indulge oar fancies as to
the advantages of resident landlords of extensive
nuts, or peasant proprietors, either or both. We
nay randy ourselves that intermediacy of any kind
between them is a bed thing, and Tight to be got rid
of. Still to get rid of it without injustice ought to
be a necessary condition of the problem. To increase
the pro of the Irish nobleman or the Irish far-
"by the dames that at this moment exist
between them, is useless intermediacy, and not only •
*try dishonest act, but a very foolish one. We think
that the spirit of the government measures is through-
good ; and that, under circumstances of great diffi-
alt7, their Proposed legislation is reasonable, and
to be efficient for good ; but we cannot
feel in the same way with respect to the
measures with which Ms. SHARMAN CRAW-
-I°ll° would, ea it seems to us, both embarrass
_„
Peoper dealing with the subject, and, could we
imagme his meanies becoming law, convulse society.
His relieving the tenant from poor rates, at the same
time that be makes the landlord's portioa of this rent,-
charge an imam tax, recoverable from every part of
hm property except that on which it is alone a charge,
is in principle a melioration. If Ireland can bear an
income tax, in the name of common honesty let it be
charged with cue; and the more nearly in this, and in
athar respects, it bears the mine taxes with
the other parts of the empire, the better do we think
it will be, not akne for the whole realm, but for Ire-
land itself. If an income tax be proposed, however,
let it be imposed plainly, directly, manfully, at%
at once all , and not by a measure
sesta to &era of the ambiguities of languor to
disguise from the legislature its real pair-
Pose of tisasferring the property of one
class in society to another—bribing the legislature
late ecipussoence with a measure, that requires but to
be distinctly understood to be felt to be plainly and
°nit*, b the promise it offers "of foci&
roe the collection of poor rates." This expecte-
LIVOt even, we think, may turn oat to be • mistake.
ne facility of collecting what •• man does not regard
la a debt, is not always in direct proportion to the
sashess of the demand and the solvency of the
tea; but these considerations are of little moment
exceered to the injustice of the measure.
, la England, the occupier alone is rated, and we
warn from Mr. Nicnoue's report (on which the
.laws were hosed) that a part of his plan
'Futile gradual assimilation of the state of the law in
Leland to that of England. The occupiers were (see
le Gott repeal, sect. 89), "after a certain period, to
Pates,_a 1j responsible for the payment of the
in
as they now are in England." Mr.
CL"Marill act "mums directly the opposite prin.
trPla

the
Tam mediae of restricting the hours of labour, in
dose hithwto administered, haviag not killed the
:last bat cc the contrary, as he seems to thrive
e it, the doctors very naturally iinrepot-
affine
nudrwanafact in will liesr a
tkitrad uring
increase of the dose. The House of Com-
tics It lut sight drew up and Eigned the prescrit)-
frees m is melee to muumetrate
and
the berday Cl his practice,a andwith no