The Express.
London, England, 1853-07-06 00:00:00

INDIA DIRECTORS.

Mr. FIUME inquired of the President of the Board of
Control whether he bad any objection to lay on the table
any recent correspondence which had taken place between
the Board of Control and the Court of Directors ?
Sir C. WOOD bad signed a letter only five minutes be-
fore. He should not object to lay it on the table.
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND)
Mr. Serjeant SHEE begged to ase the Secretary for
Ireland if he had any objection to lay upon the table of
the house, and to have printed for the use of members, a
paper on the Roman and foreign laws, considered with
reference to the relations between landlord and tenant in
Ireland, lately communicated by him to the members of
the committee on the Irish Land Beds.
Sir J. YOUNG—There would be no objection.
ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.

Mr. COLLIER moved for leave to bring in a bill to
transfer the testamentary jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical
courts to the courts of common law and to the county
courts. He adverted to the great number of ecclesiastical
courts ; the uncertain nature of their jurisdiction; their in-
creased expense; their deficiency of machinery; their
abuses, such as sinecurism ; and their deficiencies as regarded
the registration of wills and provision for their safe custody.
His object was, that all wills with regard to which there is
no dispute shall be proved in the county courts, the circuit
of each county court judge being formed into • district
for ecclesiastical
.purposes. The will to be proved
within the district where the testator diet. The
same courts shall provide registration, and suited
shall take place in London. In cases of disputed
wills he proposed that where the property does not exceed
3001., the dispute shall be settled in the county court of the
district where the property is situated. Where the property
exceeds 3001., be proposed that the case should go to the com-
mon law courts. He also proposed that an appeal from the
decisions of the inferior courts should be to the courts of coin-
' man law. There could be no doubt as to the applicablity of
them marts to decide such matters, and the pecuniary ad-
eneleges would be very great. The circumstance of the
memos law court being moveable was another advantage.
These courts at present decided questions of fact ; and be
now wished to extend that jurisdiction, leaving equitable
questions to the Court of Chancery. He proposed to attach
to each of the common law courts an officer to be called the
clerk of probate, who would generally be an officer dim
charging similar duties in the ecclesiastical courts. Witt
regard to compensation, he would limit it to those who as'
tually hold office. As to proctors, they might be permitted
to practice as attorneys in any court in the kingdom. For '
the purpose edmiebats, he would consolidate the metro-
politan ernegy marts into one.
lir. SHIM said that, having seconded the motion of
hie ban eel learned friend, who had introduced this subject
ea a home emit= with so much ability, he begged to do
VII Nal ille the nt occasion. As his hon. and learned
Mead bed waited to know whether the government would
bike any step in the matter, he was justified in bringing in
Me bill ; and, as the abuses which be had pointed out were
admitted by all, he trusted that the government would give
bin the opportunity of laying the bill on the table of the
bean. (Cheers.)
Viscount PALMERSTON said he should with great
pleasure support the motion of his hon. and learned friend.
(Hear, hear.) Indeed, he should say that the house must
feel anxious to see the result of the working of a mind
which had shown itself so capable of grasping the whole of
this complicated and difficult subject, and proved
by the speech they had just heard, that it had the pewee
and ability to dive into the deepest recesses of the matter.
(Hear, hear.) At the come time his hon. and learned
friend had shown, by his able and comprehensive speech,
that the subject to which the bill related was of a very
complicated nature, and one full of considerable difficulty.
(Hear.) His hon. and leered friend said it was one of the
peculiarities of law rennin that they had no meetings at
Exeter-hall or Covent.garden on the subject. Now from
this fact, which was not to be questioned, it was fair to
infer that, however cumbrous and complicated their pre-
sent system might be, the ends of justice were well and
effectually obtained. (Hear, hear.) But though this
was the case it did not remove the fact that those
ends were often arrived at by a circuitous and
thorny path, leading through many sloughs and quagmires
of delay, in which numerous persons were borne down, and
came to the end of life without ever being able to reach the
desired result. (Hear, hear.) There were difficulties sad
complications in the way, but that was no reason why they
should not apply a remedy. (Hear, hear.) The hon. mad
learned gentleman had clearly pointed out the evils of the
resent system, and indicated a remedy, and he (Lord
P.) could assure him that her Majesty's government
were no less sensible of those evils, and of the necessity et
applying • practical remedy to remove them. (Hear, hear.)
The hon. and learned gentleman bad shown that there
might be many different ways of applying a remedy which
would be more or less effectual to cure the evil ofiwhich
he complained, and this circumstance would in itself show
that the govenumat would not be justified in dealing with
the subject without t deliberation, in order that the
remedy they might be the best. (Hear' hear.)
He had stated beim that the government would be pre-
pared, though amt Immediately, to introduce a measure ;
het the timed the been had been so engrossed with other
twin et damsons that it would have been hopeless, even
theybed a masers aetnally prepared, to carry it through
duke the present envies. But, besides, there was • com-
ing/rim appointed, he believed by the late government, to
consider the subject, and the government thought it would
be better to wait for their report, which would no doubt
throw light on the matter, and offer suggestions which
would be worth the consideration of the government. (Hear.)
All he could say was that if the government had not proposed
a measure themselves, it was not from any indifference to the
subject or from any change of intention, but it arose in Use
first place from the great pressure of other public business,
and in the next place because they thought it better to
delay any measure till they bad the advantage of the report
of the commissioners who were considering the subject.
He should therefore agree to the motion of the hon. and
learned gentleman, and be trusted that her Majesty's go-
vernment would be able, early next session, to propose •
measure which would be well calculated to correct the evils
which the bon. and learned gentleman pointed out to the
house. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HADFIELD was glad that the hon. and learned
gentleman had again introduced this matter, which ex-
cited great interest amongst the people of this country.
Sir B. HALL said that when his bon. and learned
friend moved for a committee to inquire into this subject,
the government opposed, and very properly, that motion,
because in the year HMO a voluminous report had been
laid on the table with regard to the ecclesiastical courts,
which rendered any further inquiry unnecessary and inn:-
pedient. (Hear.) His noble friend said that the subject
was complicated and full of difficulties. Was not that •
reason why the government should take it up themselves
instead of leaving it to a private member to do so ? (Hear,
hear.) The noble lord had not stated when it was expected
the commissioners would make their report; but be (Sir
B. Hall) concluded, from what the noble lord said, that
it would be laid on the table by the end of the present
session or early in the recess. so that members might have
an opportunity of considering its suggestions before the
government introduced any measure founded upon
them. (Rear, hear.)

The ATTORNEY-OENERAL said that all men were
agreed—and even Doctor'. Commons did not raise a dissent-
ing voice—that the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts
did require a groat and complete reform—(bear, Isear)—
Int tie mode of carrying out that reform was a matter of
eleedderable difficulty. Under these circumstances he did
met think the government were to be blamed for waiting to
eel what their report would recommend. Tear, hear.)
Great good would come from having the question discussed
and ventilated, and be trusted that another session would
not pass over their heads without a reform of the ecclesias-
tical courts. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DUNLOP said, that as far as Scotland was cos-
crereed, they already pome.sed there a speedy and cheap
mode of administering justice in these matters by means of
the Sheriff.' Courts, and he was happy to sly that they did
not require any measure on this matter for that country.
Mr. A. PELLATT thanked the hon. and learned mem-
ber for Plymouth for introducing a bill to remedy the
loboes of the ecclesiastical caurts, which would prove a
great boon to the commercial portion of the community.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
HOURS OF FACTORY LABOUR.
Colonel SIBTHORP presented several petitions in favour
of a Ten Hours' bill.
Mr. COBBETT said ha rose to ask for leave to bring in
a bill for the purpose of limiting the hours of labour of
womenend children in factories to 10 hours on the first five
days of the week, and to seven hours and a half en Satur-
day ; practically speaking, a bill for the purpose of restoring
the ten hours' bill of 1847, including children of from eight
to 13 years of age, who were excluded from that bill. The
reason which had induced him to offer himself to the house
on that occasion was that he had been strongly urged by a
large number of his own constituents, and of other persons
in the factory districts, to bring in a bill which should
shorten the hours of laLour, and also secure
a perfect inspection of factories. The object would pried-
pally be to restrict the labour of all those who were at pre-
sent restricted to ten hours in the day, that limit not to
be exceeded by women, children, or young persons. That
was the first main provision, and the next was a pro-
posal that the motive power in factories should be
stopped from half-past five in the afternoon of every one of
the first five days in the week, and on Saturday, so as to
limit the working, nine to seven and a half hours. Now,
many members of that house who had spoken to him seemed
to fear much mischief from the stoppage of the motive
power. (Hear, hear.) They seemed to imagine that it was
some crotchet of his, but the fact was that it was as old as
the agitation of the factory question. The late Mr. Fends'
had frequently said that there never could be an efficient
factory act, until there was a power to stop machinery, but
he sought to obtain from the legislature in the first in-
stance a recognition of she principle that labour should be
restricted, well knowing that that principle could not be
carried out without a subsequent law, regulating the time
for stopping the motive power. If hon. members would
only read the reports, they would see how utterly hopeless
it was to expect the carrying out of a ten hours' act, until a
stoppage of machinery was enacted. When the factory
commissioners sat in 1833, one of the witnesses examined
before them was Mr. John Cheetham, the present member
for South Lancashire. That gentleman was in favour of
a ten hours' bill, but said it could not be car-
ried out without restricting the moving power,
and a prohibition of making up lost time. The
members for Salford and Ashford-under Lyne, brought in
a bill in 1835, the third clause of which limited the labour
of all persons under 21 years of age to 10 hours, and the
fourth clause provided that the hours for working the ma-
chinery should be the same as those permitted for the
labour of women and children. The house would thus see
that there was plenty of authority for his motion, and he
could assure them that the question was making a great
stir in the manufacturing districts. The people who
worked in factories were, ho believed, perfectly unanimous,
and wishing the limitation of time he proposed, and also that
the moving powershould be restricted. The petitions had been
moat numerous in favour of his bill, and not one hod been
presented against it. The petition from the borough which
he represented had the signatures of 21 master manufac-
turers, including the mayor; the last-named from having
adopted the ten hours' system without any legal compul-
sion. (Hear, hear.) He had informed him (Mr. Cobbett)
that it would be impossible fully to estimate the good that
had resulted from that proceeding. (Hear, hear.) He
(Mr. Cobbett) had also consulted the overlookers, an
important and respectable class of men, and they
had informed him that little or no loss would
result from the substitution of ten hours for twelve.
They said that when women and children worked 12 hours
they became so faded, that the work of the last two hours
was exceedingly bad, and the consequent abatements coun-
terbalanced the increased amount of wages. (Hear, hear.)
With respect to the recovery of fines, he proposed to give a
direct encouragement to information and power to recover
the penalties in the County Courts. He proposed that the
informer in giving notice to the inspector, should have
power to proceed by action or information, provided he did
so within a certain number of days. To show the necessity
of legislation he would, in conclusion, quote the report of an
eminent surgeon in Bury, by which it appeared that of tqe
children of factory operatives 60 out of 100 died in infancy,
while in other classes the proportion was only 33 in 100. '
(Hear, hear.) The surgeon had informed him that the real
cause of this frightful mortality was that the women were
obliged to remain to long in the factory as wholly to neglect
their children. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member concluded
by moving for leave to bring in the bill.
-Mr. FEILDEN seconded the motion.
Mr. WILKINSON looked upon the principle of the bill
as dangerous.
Lord PALMERSTON did not intend to oppose the
introduction of the bill of the honourable mem-
ber, but would reserve to himself the right to take
whatever course he might think fit on the second
reading. He intended himself to bring in a bill for the
purpose of limiting the hours for the employment of
children in factories. (Hear, hear.) What he should pro-
pose would be to enact that children should not be em-
ployed before six in the morning, nor later than six at
night. (Hear, hear.) At present it had been stated by the
hon. gentleman who brought forward this motion, young
children might be brought out to work in the mills as early
as half-past 5 in the morning and kept there till
half•past 6 or 7 o'clock at night, and he really thought that
where little children of eight or twelve years of age were
brought out from their homes at the early hour of five or
half-past five in the cold winter; mornings to find their
way to the factory where they worked, and then again at
night had to find their way home again alone in the dark
winter's night amid snow and rein—he thought where such
a practice prevailed no one could be surprised at the ex-
treme mortality amongst the factory children, to which the
hon. member for Oldham had referred. (Hear, het ) It
was undoubtedly a matter of considerably delicacy to inter-
fere by legislation with the employment of persons who
were of full age, and who must be considered free agents,
to determine when and how they should work. (Hear.)
But his own opinion was that the mill owners were not
pursuing their real interests by dealing with the persons in
their employment as if they were mere machines, which the
longer they could work the more they could make out of
them—setting aside an other considerations but what
was the largest
.quantity of work that could be
obtained in a given number of hours. (Cheers.)
Employers generally, he thought, would do better—and he
was happy to say that he knew of many who did act in
that spirit—they would do better he thought to reflect that
these workmen were moral and intellectual agents, and
that a moderate degree of leisure was essential to their
well being, and that by allowing them that leisure they
were not diminishing their usefulness, but really enhancing
the value of their labour. It was said that the limitation
of hours that he proposed for the employment of children
would indirectly tend to limit the employment of persons of
a more advanced age. All he could say was, that it was so
essential to protect the children from being over-omployed
that he could not look at that result, which it was saidj by
same would follow from it, as any reason why they should
not be so restricted. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, without
pledging himself as to the course he might pursue on
the second reading of the bill, he should offer no objection to
its being introduced.
Lord JOHN MANNERS did not wish to enter into
any lengthened discussion of the merits of this
question ; but, after the declaration of the noble
lord opposite, be thought it would be only can-
did in him to state that, while admitting the credit of
the measure which the noble lord proposed to intro-
duce, and which to a limited degree would meet
the evil complained of, he still could not regard
it as a permanent settlement of this important question.
No, the noble lord might depend upon it that nothing would
set the question at rest but returning to the spirit of the set
of 1847; and he must therefore express his earnest hope
that the house would consent unanimously to the introduc-
tion of this measure, and be prepared to consider its details
with a geserous feeling when the proper time arrived for
going Into them. (Hear, hear.)
Sir GEORGE GREY deprecated any measure which
would disturb the settlement of 1850. He would say
nothing now with regard to children, because the pro-
position of the noble lord was wholly distinct and sepa-
rate from the proposition now before the house, hut he
must be permitted to express his regret that his noble friend
the Secretary of State for the Home Department by
assenting to this motion had induced an impression that the
government were favourable to its principle. Parliament
had never yet sanctioned the restriction of power in lac-
tones, or interfered with the hoer. during which adult
labour might be employed, and he hoped before the second
reading his noble friend would have so far reconsidered the
matter, as to be prepared to refuse his sanction to the entire
principle which this bill involved. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. I. BUTT contended that the reports of Mr. Horne
and the other inspectors distinctly proved that the act of
1850, which was a disgrace to parliament, was continually
being violated ; while the reports also showed that the ma-
nufacturers resorted to the most scandalous means to defeat
the inspectors. That .proceeding was a disgrace to the
honour of parliament, because if protection was
due to the operatives in 1847, why, in the name of common
sense, should parliament, in 1850, turn round upon them
and say, " No, we will not give you such protection unless
you give up the half hour which you now possess." And yet
the right hon. baronet said the question was settled its 1850.
It was no such thing, the question—the great ten hours'
question---never had been settled yet, and it n ould be
upon such a basis as that. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. W. J. FOX trusted the house would allow him to
say a few words, feeling, as he did, that he owed it to many
thousand of the inhabitants of the borough which he had
the honour to represent, to express his entire concurrence in
the object contemplated by his boo. colleague. He could
bear witness to the intensity of the interest which they felt
upon this question, it was almost the burden of their
thoughts ; while to many of them it had been a matter of
earnest exertion through 20, 30, aye even 10 years. The
regarded it as paramount to all political questions, and
there was no subject whatever in which their feelings were
so deeply and so firmly entwined as they were in

this. He heartily concurred, then, in the object
of the motion, understanding that object to be
the restoration of the bill of 1847, and giving
but to the labouring classes in factories the half hour of
which they were so unjustly deprived by the act of 1850.
Mr. W. PATTEN said that nothing could be more mis-
chievous to the interests of the manufacturer than that the
motive power should be used to carry out the law which it
was net impossible to enforce by other means, and he hoped
it would not be resorted to as long as there were any other
means of enforcing the law.
Lord PALMERSTON said the only motive power he
had talked was the motive power of children. (" Hear,

hear," and laughter.)
Mr. LA.BOUCHERE trusted that some member of the
government would state that however they might desire to
amend the factors acts, yet they were determined steadily
to oppose any attempt to limit adult labour in the manu-
facturing districts.
Mr. BOOKER, while unwilling to interfere with the
motive mechanical power of manufactories, would yet
heartily and cordially assist in passing any measure involv-
ing the principle of enforcing laws which the legislature
had deliberately passed, and he should give his support to
the present bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL wished to correct a misapprehension
which appeared to rest on the minds of his right hon.
friends, the members for Taunton and Morpeth. They
seemed to imagine that his noble friend (Lord Palmerston)
had held out false hopes on the question of the restriction
of motive power. The fact was, that his noble friend, in
assenting to the introduction of this bill, said nothing about
motive power, and reserved any opinion on tho bill till the
second reading; and the only observation he made which
bore on the question of motive power was, that he would
not consent to any restriction on adult labour. That
was a principle which, although supporting restriction of
labour in the eases of women, young persons, and children,
he (Lord J. Russell) had always admitted. There was no
necessity for restricting adult labour, and it would be such
a violation of all the principles which governed legislation'
on that subject, that he would not assent to any provision
of the kind. It was shown in the statement of the hon.
gentleman the member for Oldham that there were many
evasions of the present Factory Act, with regard to which
it would be advisable to adopt increased fines or other
means in order to obtain an observance of the law. That
appeared to be • legitimate mode of introducing
a bill, and one according to the forms of the
house. When the secund reading came on the
principles introduced by the bill would be open
to discussion. The bill of ISSO had been alluded to, and he
entirely supported the statement which had been made by
his right hon. friend the member for Morpeth. The ques-
tion was, then, not as to the mere verbal amendment of the
bill of 1847, but it was intended to interfere with a system
of relays, which had been carried on in manufactories,
which was injurious to those who were protected under the
bill of 1847 ; and it was true that his right hon. friend bad
agreed to extend the number of hours to ten and a half.
The whole matter was then much considered, and his right
hon. friend had consulted the interests of all parties in the
support he gave to that bill.
Mr. NEWDEOATE was not desirous of interfering with
motive power in factories, but as the law was systematically
violated, not by a mwjority but by a minority, of manufac-
turers, it would be an injustice to those whom they had
sought to protect by factory legislation, and to fair
traders, who abode by the provisions of the act, not to
enforce the law, and if there were no other means effectual
fur that purpose, then he would be prepared to consent to
restrictions on motive power in factories—at all events, in
those where the law was systematically infringed.
Mr. E. BALL having hitherto appeared before the house,
chiefly as the advocate of the agricultural interest, was
anxious on an occasion like the present to express his
sympathy for the working classes of the towns. It was a
very remarkable circumstance that he should have been se-
lected for the honour of presenting petitions from Man-
chester, complaining of oppression. 'Why had not those
petitions been sent to the members for that city ? (Hear.)
Really, if be should ever quarrel with the constituents of
Cambridgeshire, he should give the members for Man-
chester a turn, for the many good turns they had done him—
by turning them out. (Laughter.) With respect to the
question before the house, he bad only to say, that if any
persons had been guilty of any oppression of the poor, it was
the most terrible transgression that men could be guilty of;
and the reports of the inspectors showed that there was
great reason for concluding, that the law had in too many
instances been infringed. (Hear, hear.)
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
THE DOCKYARD PROMOTIONS AND THE LATE

BOARD OF ADMIRALTY.
Mr. KEATING rose in pursuance of a notice he had
placed upon the paper to move the following resolution:—
That, referring to the report of the select committee on
dockyard promotions, and the evidence upon which it is
founded, this house is of opinion, that during the adminis-
tration of the late board of Admiralty, the patronage of
dockyard promotions, and the influence of the Admiralty,
were used and exercised for political purposes, to an extent
and in a manner calculated to reflect discredit upon that
department of the government, and to impair the efficiency
of the service." Before, however, the lion. and learned
gentleman commenced his address,
Mr. DISRAELI interposed—The motion was one of
censure upin the late government's administration, and
especially upon the Board of Admiralty, for a course which
in the hon. and learned gentleman's opinion had impaired
the efficiency of the service. The hon. gentleman would
hardly with at that hour of the night (a quarter- past eleven)
to bring forward a motion of such a character? (Hear,
hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli) could assure him that the lots
government were ready and anxious to meet any charge.
that could be made against any branch of administration
for which they were responsible; and with respect to the
particular branch which the hon. and learned member
thought had been impaired, he need only in reply refer
him to the fleet at Spithead. (Loud cries of "Order," and
counter cries of " Hear, hear.")
Mr. KEATING—If the right hon. gentleman has any
question to ask me, or any intimation to convey to me
under the present circumstances of the case, I for one
shall be most happy to hear any proposition which he may
have to make ; but it stems, I must submit, scarcely ia
order—(cheers)—that he should anticipate the subject mat-
' ter of the motion, and ilo, what he supposes I am about to
do—make au ex parte statement. (Loud cheers.) I trust,
' therefore, the right hon. gentleman will confine himself to
directly a-king me any question, or making any proposition
he may wish, or else that he will allow me to proceed with
my motion. (Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI—I believe that I shall be In order, if
I move that the house do now adjourn. (Loud cries of
" Oh," and counter cheers.) I wish—
Sir J. SHELLEY—I rise to order. (Tremendous shouts
el "Oh ! " and confusion.) I wish to appeal to the chair
whether, while the hon. and learned member is in posses-
sion of the house it is competent to the right hon. gentle-
man to move the adjournment of the house until the hon.
sad learned gentleman has made his motion ?
The SPEAKER was understood to say it was not
regular to move that the house adjourn after he had called
ea the hon. and learned gentleman.
Mr. DISRAELI—Web, I did not intend to make that
notion; but I rose to ask the hon. and learned member
whether it was fair to make such a motion at that hour of
the night, when it would be impossible that the answer to
the charge could be given ? (Hear, bear.)
Mr. KEATING—I have very great pleasure in answer-
lag the question which the right hon. gentleman has put to
ate. I certainly should be exceedingly sorry to have the
appearance of doing anything in the slightest degree unfair,
especially upon an occasion which involved a motion of as
ordinafy importance. At the same time, the right hon.
gentleman will recollect this— that as a private member of
this house, I am in a very considerable difficulty. We
have passed—l do not say it is not a very usual thing—but
we have passed now some four hours and a half or five
hours in a debate about bringing in a bill as to which there
seemed to be but one opinion. (Loud cheers.) At the
same time I should be extremely sorry to do anything
which, as the right hon. gentleman says, would have the
effect of making a statement ex parte, and without hon.
gentlemen having an opportunity of answering it ; but I
am in this peculiar position, if I put it off I know not when
I shall be able to bring it on. (Cheers.) Mating given
notice of it, I thine I am bound to proceed with it now, I
unless the right hon. gentleman can assist me in any. way I
in fixing an early day for the purpose ; in which case it will I
afford me great pleasure to accede to his wishes. (Cheers.)
But in the absence of a certain day being given me for
bringing it on—by the only power that can do it—by the
government, I mast proceed to lay it before the house.
(Cheers, and erica of " Oa on.")
Mr. DISRAELI—The hon. gentleman must know that
it is not in my power to give him a day ; but perhaps he
can induce his friends on the Treasury bench. Perhaps
if he appeals to the noble lord he will be successful. (Hear.)
Sir J . PAK INGTON —(l.Jproae)—l rise in pursuance of
what has fallen from my right hon. friend, to make au
appeal to the noble lord who sits opposite, and I hope I am
not out of order in making that appeal. As a member of
the late government, I feel no hesitation in saying that I
shall be rejoiced if the noble lord, consistently with his
views of his public duties, can allow a day for the discussion
of this question. (Bear, hear.) I beg, as a member of
that government, to say that I do not shrink from this dis-
cussion, and that I shall be prepared to meet both the terms
of this resolution, and—(Cries of " Order.")
Lord J. RUSSELL—I beg to say 01 it the government
business before the house is of such vast and pressing im-
portance that I cannot assent to a day being fixed for this
motion. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. KEATING then proceeded to move his resolution,
which he did at considerable length, detailing circum-
stances already known to the public.
Sir J. PAKINGTON rose to move the adjournment of
the debate, a step which he said was rendered necessary by
the extraordinary course the hon. and learned member
had felt justified in taking. (Opposition cheers.) The hon.
member might be learned in the law, but he certainly had
but slight knowledge of the principles of justice. (Opposi-
tion cheers.) The hon. member had, in a speech of two
hours duration, charged honourable men with dishonour-
able conduct, and the late government with misappropria-
tion of their patronage at a time when he knew it was
physically impossible he could receive an answer.
He (Sir J. Pakington) had come down prepared
to contend that Lord Derby's naval administration had
entitled itself to the gratitude of the country. (Loud cries
of " Oh.") He had come down prepared also to take ex-
ception to much of the report of the committee, and to
show that the committee, while declining to give an opinion,
had insinuated sarcasms which were most difficult to grapple
with. (" Oh," and "Hear, hear.") He should also saw
been able to show that his hon. friend the member kr
Northamptonshire had been most harshly dealt with, sad
that no man had been more anxious fen the good d
the naval service than his grace the late First Loot 1
of the Admiralty. One of the harsh expressions ha
the report referred to his rank and station es

keying been deemed sufficient security for the upright
management of the naval affairs of the country,
There were other subjects connected with that department,
and patronage was one of them, and he contended that the
distribution of patronage by the Duke of Northumberland
was moat unobjectionable, and he instanced the appoint-
mpocirtsmeefutidtmo ieroamllaannslideaowf se,hAipt. Admiral
maParker,jority and
odthosee ahpe-
appointed having bean either of no politics at all or of poli-
' tics adverse to has own. Not only, therefore, could there
be no charge against the Duke of Northumberland
on this score, but his grace deserved the thanks of
the house and of the country. lie appealed also,
es showing the attention his grace paid to his de-
partment, to the steps he took by the appointment
of a committee, and otherwise for the purpose of improving
the mode of manning the navy, which step was now about
,to be carried out by the present board. He took credit for
the late Board of Admiralty, also for the measures they had
taken to protect the South American Fisheries.
Mr. DISRAELI thought there was very little prospect
of the debate being renewed, and the:efore he hoped his
right hon. friend would not persevere in his motion to
adjourn the debate, but that they should be allowed at'
once to take a division on the main question. (Cheers.)
He could say there was never an instance where more
energy, more ability, and more devotion brought to the
discharge of any department of the government than
had been brought to bear by the Duke of Northumberland
as First Lord of the Admiralty. His grace bad been only
in office tea months, and during that time he had protected
the ports, defended the coasts, and manned the navy.
Lord SEYMOUR defended the report of the committee,
which, he said, was not open to the animadversions of the
right hon. baronet. If the debate was not adjourned, how
was it possible the right hon. baronet could prove the
charge he brought against it ? lie contended that the re-
port woe fair, by no mesas overstrained, and in all respects
fully borne out by the evidence. (Hear.) He should, at
the proper time, be prepared to defend the conduct of the
committee, and, therefore, he should vote for the adjourn-
ment.
The house then divided on the question that the debate
be adjourned :
Fur the adjournment iP
Against it
Sir T. D. ACLAND said it was too lute to move the pre-
vious question, and he would therefore move that the house
do now adjourn.
Mr. LABOUCHERE did not think the house could ac-
cede to this motion with credit to themselves, and while ho
regretted the tone and temper in which this question bad
been discussed, he must object to disposing of it in the man-
ner now proposed. Not only had charges been made against
the late Board of Admiralty, but the dockyard committee
had been unjustly attacked, aid he did not think it would
be for the interest of any party in the house that, the ques-
tion should be stiffied. (Hear, hear.)
Sir B. HALL having first brought this matter before
the house was anxious to make a few observations. Ile
denied that the dockyard commitee was nominated for a
party purpose, while as for the charge that
its members were vainly selected. ho need only
mention that it was not nominated until the
names had received the sanction of the secretary
of the late Board of Admiralty. As for the report of the
committtee, which bad been unjustly attacked to-night, he
begged to remind the house, that although the committee
represented every shade of political opinion, they were per-
fectly unanimous in the conclusions they came to,
and therefore, in justice to the committee, an opportunity
ought to be afforded them for justifying their report, which
he was prepared to do. He could show that the words of
the report were used by the witnesses examined before the
committee, and he therefore hoped the house would ad-
journ the debate.
Lord PALMERSTON said there were two points in this
dispute about which there could be no doubt : first, that
after the course which the debate had taken, there
must be a considerable discussion upon the topics
which had been introduced into it; and secondly,
it was impossible that the discussion could take
place then. The best course to take, under these circum-
stances, was to adjourn the debate, and make some arrange-
ment to resume it again on Tuesday next.
- -

---- . .
Mr. DISRAELI said it was quite clear that a change had
come over hon. gentlemen opposite since midnight, fur now
they were all anxiety for discussion, while then the hon.
and learned gentleman was urged on in his manifesto of
spite by the cheering of his friends, although they
well knew that at this period of the session
not a single member of the late government
could have an opportunity of saying one word
in reply to this unjust attack. (Opposition cheers.) He
should not himself countenance any attempt to evade the
decision of the house upon the original motion, and if hon.
gentlemen opposite chose to sneak out of the unenviable
position in which they had placed themselves, why the
country would know who it was that shrunk front coming
to any vote upon this question. (Renewed cheering.)
Sir J.V. SHELLEY retorted upon the right hon. gentle-
man that his charge, which had been conveyed in such
elegant expressions, came with an ill grace from him, seeing
the line of policy which his friends had adopted. Sneak-
ing indeed l why the right hon. gentleman's own colleague
the member for Droitwich moved that the debate be
i adjourned, and then voted against his own motion. That
I fact alone would show the country which side was anxious
to shirk the discussion of this question.
Mr. E. BALL expressed his surprise at the noble lord the
member for Tiverton saying that the subject of his motion
was unimportant. He must decline to give up the ad-
-1 vantage he now possessed, of bringing on that motion on
Tuusday neat.
The house then divided:
For the adjournment of the house 0
Against it

Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE moved the adjournment of'
the debate.
The house divided :
For the adjournment
Against it
On our return to the gallery, we found
Mr. DRUMMOND addressing the house, and proposing
to move as an amendment to the original motion, "That
referring to the report of the dockyard committee, it ap-
pears that during the administration of every Beard of Ad-
miralty—(great cheering from the Opposition)—patronage
and influence have been used and exercised for political
purposes, and that the report of the Chatham election com-
mittee states that there has been no instance of an election
' in that place not terminating in favour of the government
candidate." (Loud cheers from the Opposition.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE thought that, from the high stand-
ing and character of the lion. member for West Surrey,
that he would not have stooped, at that hour of the morn-
ing, to make a bridge fur the late Board of Admiralty to
escape. (" Oh, oh, ' and cheers.) Since the truth must be
spoken, it was not the Duke of Northumberland or the
late Secretary to the Admiralty that were on their trial, but
the character and conduct of that house. They had ap-
pointed a select committee, which had made a report on
the facts; and the right hon. baronet (Sir J. l'akington), at
two in the morning, deprecating debate and moving an ad-
journment, voted against his own motion, and took the op-
portunity of making the strongest charges against the com-
mittee. Ile (Mr. Osborne) had not a word to say against
his predecessor, who had been ill-used and thrown over by
his party, who only oared to worship the Doke of North-
umberland. ("Oh, oh," and cheers.) He put it to the
right hon. gentleman if he did not wish to sneak from the
debate to use the little influence he had to bring the matter
to a full debate, to use his influence with the hon. member
fort Cambridgeshire, who was one of his few followers.
(Laughter.) Let them bring the matter to a full discus-
-6ioo and do not let it be met by a shabby cour,e of pro-
ceeding which would damage the character of the house.
Lord D. STUART said they had got into a difficulty,
and he did not see how they were to get out of it unless
they had a full discussion, for the country would other-
wise not be satisilsed. There had been grave charges against
the late Board of Admiralty, and against the committee,
and for both reasons it was desirable that they should have
discussion. The bon. member who brought forward the
question no doubt commenced it at a late hour. Ile did so
because of the difficulty of getting a day. There were those
in the house who might get them out of the difficulty. It
was in the power of the government, and he hoped out of
regard for the character of the house the government would
grant a day. With that view he moved that the debate be
adjourned.
Lord PALMERSTON regretted the matter had been
brought forward at all. lie thought it might have been
left in the report of the committee. Nevertheless, as it had
I been brought on, he put it to hon. gentlemen opposite that
there should be a full discussion. It was obvious that the
feeling of hon. gentlemen opposite was to weary out the
house, and to take a division to-night. If they had a
division now it would not be satisfactory to the country, and
they would gain nothing, as the parties might bring the
matter forward again in order to have the discussion. His
noble friend, who had left the house, said the state
of the business was such, that he could not give a
day. The motion of the hon. member for Cambridge
was not of such importaace but he might postpone it and
I bring it on on some subsequent Tuesday ; and there would
be no lack of Tuesdays. (Laughter.) At all events let
there be an adjournment.
Sir J. PAKINOTON said the course the noble lord had
indicated was the best that could be taken—namely, te
take a division now and leave it open to have a discussion
afterwards. He certainly had proposed the adjournment
because he did not with the house to come to a decision
without discussion ; hut he was now against the adjourn-
ment, because if it was adjourned it would be to an indefi-
nite period.
Mr. BALL said the Secretary to the Admiralty had ad-
mitted that his predecessor was exonerated, but they were
' not to screen his superior. That was a condemnation of the
I report of the committee. (" Divide.")
, I Mr. PIOOTT said, if they divided now they would he
i in just the same position. There-was no motion for Tuesday
week, and if the hon. member fur Cambridgeshire would
take his motion on that day, this might be taken on Tues-
day.
Mr. HILDYARD said he had himself, at half-past ten,
I earnestly urged on the hon. member not to persist in bring-
ing forward the motion at that hour. Ile, nevertheless,
thought proper to persevere, and it would be a salutary
lesson to the bon. member for going against the general
I wish of the house, that they should take a division to-
. night.

After a few words from Mr. C. BitucE.
The house divided on the question of the adjourn
of the debate :

Ayes 64
Noes 9B
Mr. PIGOTT then moved the adjournment of the debate.
He put it to the government whether it was to their credit
that these divisions should be continued.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE thought the house ought, in common
justice, to be allowed to come to a decision to-night.

Mr. C. BERKELY moved that the orders of the day be
now read.
Lord PALMERSTON was afraid that the house was
getting into • very unseemly position; he would ask the
bon gentleman to adjeurn the motion to this day.
Mr. DISRAELI thought it would be best to fall in with
the idea of the hon. gentleman (Mr. IliPlyard) who had
proposed the adjournment of the house. Ile would eon,
eider the amendment, that the house do now adjourn, was
in effect disposing of this question, leaving the hen,
and learned gentleman (Mr. eating) at liberty to bring
forward another motion on this bultject.
Mr. KEATING said that the late hour at which he
brought forward this motion was caused by hon. gentle-
men on the other (Opposition) side ; he charged them with
having spoken against time on the Factory Bill.
Lord J. MANNERS retorted this cl.arge upon the
ministerial side of the house.
After a few words from Lord GALWAY, Mr. C. Berktler
motion not being second.d, the house then ditnied upon
Mr. Hiltlyard's motion, " that the house do now adjourn."
The numbers were—

Ayes
Noes
The house then adjourned at taeuty unnulLs foul

10,1

PAIR.—Mr. Bennet has 'mired with the II"n. Henry
Fitzroy till the 12th July. Mr. I'ii,;ll with Mr. Bus;
against Mr. Keatinu's motion.

vitit