The Express.
London, England, 1849-07-05 00:00:00

MINES AND COLLIERIES BILL.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved the second reading of this
bill. He did not thaw it up himself it having been agreed
to by a deputation of workmen from all the collieries
of the kingdom. If the bill in its present shape
might be considered objectionable in its details, he would
at present content himself with having the principle affirmed.
If in the meantime the government took the alit ject into
their bawls, and introduced a measure, retaining the prin-
ciple et the present bill, but altering the details, ho was sure
it mould meet with no objection from those hose interest
he represented. The object of the bill was to provide an in-
spection of mines, in order that the lamentable loss of lifa and
property which is occurring Every day in the collieries might
be prevented, as far as that could be done. The bill pro
aided that there should be four inspections in the year. It
also provided that the workmen should be paid according to 11
weight, and not b) measurement, as was the case at present.
The coal owners sold by weight, and there was no reason
why they should not also pay the men according to the weight
of coals brought to the surface. That system, he believed,
prevailed in Northumberland and other places in the north,
but in the tuailand counties the men were paid by mea-
surement. The consequence was, that if any stones or foul
matter gat into the coals, the workmen lest a great deal of
their weak. No person could say tnat this was a fair or proper
system. It was also a matter of complaint that the workmen
were not paid tiL after a litre of some weeks. It was not
necessary for him to c ll the attention of the house to the
appalling accidents which had lately taken place. Within
the last two years he believed that no less than 5,000 lives
had been lost in the various mine+ of this country. He was
aware that there were certain accidents which it WWI not in
the power of human precaution to avert ; but so far as human
ski.l and experience could avail, they ought to apply a
remedy to mitigate these dreadful disasters. (Hear.)
Mr. lIUME seconded the motion.

Sir G. GREY said he would shortly state the view which
the government tall of this mrature, but iu the first place
he begged to express his satisfaction at seeing the hon. mover
of this bill once more amongst them—(loud and general
cheering)—and finding that his health was so completely
restored as to enable him to take part in their proceedings.
Since the attcnti n of government and parliament bad been
celled to this subject two years ago, most valuable reports
had been laid on the table as to the practice in foreign
countries, where large mines existed, with respect to in-
spection. The result of that information led him to believe
that it would be impossible for them to have recourse to the
same means which were adopted on the contihent. The
right hen. gentleman here read a statement from Mr.
Trementeere's report, to the effect that the minute
system of inspection and interference which was
adopted on the continent could not be practised
in this country without injury to the principle of individual
reepoesibility. and private enterprise which existed here.
But to the principle of inspection, and even of a compulsory
inspection he would make no opposition on the part of the
government. He had been preparing a measure on this
subject, but having had communicatious with persons in-
terested on the subject he thought it better in the first in-
stance that inspectors should be appointed who would make
a general report on the state of the collieries in this country,
and especially with regard to the ventilation. When that
report was presented they would be better acquainted with
the points on which they ought to legislate. But be theueht
it would be extremely undesirable that any principle should
be adopted which could remove the feeling of individual re-
sponsibility. He therefore thought that there ahou'd he no
compulsory power of imposing on the owners the regula-
tions which the inspector might think it r'ght to pro-
pose. But he thought that there should be an
exposure of the defects of the
.system of yen.
tilation and management, and that immediate notice
should be given of these defects to the owners, the managers,
and even to the persons employed, if r eceeeary, and likewise
to the government. (Hear, hear) lie also intended that
there seould ample notice of all serious accidents, ere as to
give an opportunity of instituting an inquiry into the
cause of the se accidents. The honourable gentleman
proposed to hate every mine inspected four times a year,
in order to carry out which an enormous staff
of inspectors would be necessary, who would have
to be paid out of the consolidated fund. Now, with regard
to the expenses of the inspectors under the bill which the
government was preparing, he was not without hopes—
though he could not speak confidently on this ;mint—that
they might be provided in some other way than by a charge
on the consolidated fund. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Hum-.)
He also objected to m.xing up the qyestion of the inspection
of collieries with the question of wages (Heir, hear.) It
was inexpedient to re gulate the wages, and even if expe-
dient, he believed that it would he impossible to lay down
any one rule which would apply to all plates. (Hear.)
There was one subject of great imp stance, namely, that
which related to the education of the miners. (Her.) What
they desired was to raise the education of the persons who
superintended the mining oeerations. Mr. Tremenheere
spoke in his report of the advantages which the mining
schools in France Belgium, and Germany conferred on those
coun'riee, and raid it was to be regretexi that so obvious a
means of usefulness had been so lent neglected in this
country. They, therefore, proposed to found a mining school
in connexion with the Museum of Economic Geology.
(Hear, hear.) He Mei frequent communications with Sir
H. de la Beebe on this subject, who was most fav-urable to
the idea of having that establiehme nt made the foundation
of each a school. He had strong hopes that the effect of such
an institution would be to diffuse sounder visas of mining
eperatiens amongst the miring population of this country.
(Hoar, bear.) He b Reseed that an inspection of the nature
he had stated, in connexion with public opinion, would do
more to prevent the recurrence of accidents than any re-
strictive mew urea which they might propose, or the enforce-
ment of any particular system. propose,
h regard to Mr.
Gurney's experiments, if they proved to be success-
ful—as he had strong reason to hope they would
be—he hoped the e weep of coal mints would
adopt them. This subject was one of importance;
and it required rather delicate treetment ; and by proceed-
ing slowly he believed they would do more to effect the ob-
ject they all had in view than if they mimed all that was
asked for in certain quarters, but which it was impossible to
carry into effect.

/it. LACY did not think the bi l likely to effect the
object it had in view. It gave no op, cific by which explo-
sisns in mines could he prevented. He lwlieved that 99 Cut
of every 190 accidents arose from the cartlearners of the men
themselves. (lieu, hear.) If the men were paid by weight
at the mouth of tke wino it would enhance the price of the
teals by 131. a ten. By the hos. irrntisman's bill each in-
►ppeecctor would hive to visit sev..,n collieries every day. He
ehoul I therefore move that the bill be read a second time
that flay three week•.

Mr. M'OREGOR suggested to the hon. gentleman to
withdraw the bill, and to leave the subject in the hands of
the goverment. (Ht ar, bear.)
The Hurl of LINCOLN made a similar appeal. He
believed that the bill ut the hon. aro Leman would be im- !
practicable, sad if practicable, wouldhe mischievous. He
wise anxious for the object which the hon. member had in
view, but he differed irom him as to toe means by which it
should be effected.
M. AGLIONBY hoped that the principle of the bill
would be affirmed. If thet were dons, the details would not
be pressed.

Mr. J. BAILEY, jun. wanted to know if an accident
occurred after the regulations propelled, whether the owners
would be liable to an action in a ce,urt of law.
Mr. BRIGHT said, that the right hon. pietism= had not
stated what omen he meant to take with regard to the bill.
Toe principle laid down by the right hon. gentleman was
one which the house, he believed, unanimously agreed to.
That principle was, that there should be some system of in-
struction, and that miners should have the means of obtain-
ing all the information that science could 'dad them. By
these means they hoped for a better management of mines.
But this was not the principle of the present bill. (Hear.)
It was of a totally different character, and the boo. member
for Finsbury would himself seknowledge that. He was
in favour of the principle laid down by the right hon. gentleman
but he sas net in favour of the principle of this bill. (Hear.)
He hoped, therefore, the right hon. gentleman would not
press the house to a division, and oblige members to vote
against the bill, which would have the appearance that they
were opposed to any inspection, which, however, was not the
ease. (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY said he did not move that the bill be read a
second time that day six moathe, because he merely wished
to swiftest reasons which might inffut nee the hcn. gentle-
man to withdraw the hill. (Hear, bear.) But ifhe premed
it to a second reading, he would vote against its further pro-
gress. (Hear.)
Mr. DUNCOMBE said he had already stated that he
would leave the matter in the bands of the government, if
the house sanctioned the principle. A voluntary inspection
would be quite tireless, and unless the government pledged
themselves to the principle of a compulsory inspection, he
would divide the house. All the opposition to the bill came
from the master class with the exception of the hon. gentle-
nr.n opposite (Mr. I:acy), who volunteered to become the
representative of the fitedamp interest. (Much laughter.)
The house wag cleared for a division, but none took place,
the bell having been withdrawn.
THE STATE OF THE NATION DEBATE.

Mr. MACKENZIE wished to know from the hon. mem-
ber for Montrose whether ;he would postpone the motion
which stood in his hand for to-morrow (this day), in order
that the debate on the motion of the hon. member for Buck-
inghamshire might be misused. The other gentlemen who
hut motions for that night would waive their right, if the
hon. gentleman did the same.
Mr. HUME said be had given way already on two occa-
aim, but he could not do so again, unless the government
promised Lim a night.
Sir C. WOOD Paid that two hon. gentlemen had motions
on the paper before the hon. member for Montrose, which
would (recopy the whole night, so that he would lose very
little by giving way.
Mr. HUME said that the right hoe. gentleman could
easily settle the matter by withdrawing his Marriage Bill,
which is opposed by the entire of Scotland, and giving him
(Mr. Hume) Friday night to bring ou his motion
8:r J. GRAHAM naked whether they were to understand
that they were to hove a university debate or the adjourned
debate to-morrow night ?
Mr. HUME said he could not give way.
It Wing no .v ti: o'clock, the house adjourned.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION.

THE PEOPLE'S CHARTER.

fisoarrr of 13 to 212 who votedin favour of Mr. F. O'Connor's
motion, "That this house, recognising the great principle that
labour is the source of all wealth, that the people are the only lee-
Wage souroe of power, that the labourer should be the lu st par.
taker of the fruits of his own industry, that taxation without
representation is tyranny, and should be resisted, and believing
that the resources of the country would be best developed by laws
made by representatives cloven by the labouring classes in conjunc-
tion with those who live by other indu.trial pursuits; that (in re-
cognition of the above great truths) this house adopts the principles
embodied in the document entitled the People's Charter, namely,
annual elections, universal suffrage, vote by ballot, equal electoral
districts, no property qualification, and payment of members.
Fox, W. J. O'Connell, John Walnisley, d.r Joshua
Greene, John Pearson, Charles
lleyworth, Lawrence ficholetield, William
Hume, Joseph Tattered, 11. W. O'Connor, Feargus
Lushiugton, Charles Thompson, Col. Crawford, Sharman
Nugent, Lord Thompson, George

Vitt erprtglS.

OUTGOING MAILS.

Malls for British North America and the United Btate. will be
made up to-morrow evening, July 6.
The malls tor Vigo, Oporto, Lisbon, Madeira, Carlin, and Gibraltar,
will he made up on the morning of the 7th of July.
The malls, ria Marseilles, to the Mediterranean, Egypt, Ceylon,
haiti, lioug-kong, rge., will be made up on the evening of the 7th of
July.
lee Wert India Mails, excluding Bermuda, norms, Nuns;
qmidnrar, New Orleans, and Merino, i'll including those ter
Madeira, tit. Juers.de-wicaranua, New Granada, Chill, and Peru, will
be made up on the 17th of July.
Tbs malls for Gibraltar, Mate, Greets, the lonian Islands, Egypt,
Ceylon. India, and China, via .iouldunpton, will be midi, up on the
morning of the Roth ofJuly.

NIGH WATRII. AT LONDON MUM%
Tnis Thy —l‘sndar.B7 WA. past 1. AAMIIIIS. if Eft I.
Tu Noasow—lforalig.34 W. pan 7 ; ismoses.ama.mas 1.

LONDON, THURSDAY, JULY 5.

WE are not partisans of universal suffrage, in this
country, at this time. And yet there is no principle
fcr which wo have a greater respect, for it is one to
which all people are obliged to come at certain
periods of their history, at certain grave crises in their
body politic. There are but three principles on which
the government of a country can be base d. The first is,
the hereditary right of a sovereign, whose right after
all, like that of the High Priest, consists in the im-
plicit bi lief in it by the people. The second is an old
constitution, founded on usage or on compact, with
its foundations hosed too deep in the earth of an-
tiquity to be shaken except by those convulsions
which rend the very soil in which it stands.
The brute force of the soldier or the
tyrant we do not esteem a principle. In
countries, where either brute force or absolute
power has prevented the growth of a con-
stitution, what is to be done, when the faith in mo-
narchic right is shaken or destroyed? In such
countries, reduced to such a condition, there is but one
principle left, but one anchor for the state to hold by ;
and that is, universal suffrage.
It is impossible to tell what would have be-
come of France, or of the German powers, in the late
, wreck or suspense of the monarchic principle in
those countries, if universal suffrage had not floated as
the life-boat, to which cord every life and every
interest was instantly attached. These people, the
Germans at least, were not perhaps advanced enough
to keep, or to continue, universal suffrage as a work-
ing principle of government. But it served
them for the time. And bad the sovereigns
known how to make due use of the powers
and institutions springing out of the great
popular principle of universal suffrage, they would
have been in a far more prosperous, and more fair
position than they are, or ever can be, whilst trusting
to their divine right, or their paid armies.
Universal suffrage is, indeed, something so simple,
so natural, and so indispensable to recur
to in great convulsions, that wo may now
be certain that the tendency of all governments
and all conglomerations of people will be
towards it. A very limited franchise, su:h as that
which has hitherto prevailed in constitutional coun-
tries, was only possible whilst' the people were ill-
informed, and careless alike of their rights as of the
social slur implied in being denied them. But every
year makes Englishmen more alive to these thioga ; '
and every year makes the governing class of English
more alive to what people beneath them think and
feel. A system, therefore, of some hundred thousand
voters in the midst of some millions of adult and
well-informed meo, is utterly impossible of duration.
Lord Joni RrssELL must feel it quite as much as
Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR.
Lord Jong RUSSELL, however, is but the head man
of a parliamentary majority. He can go no father
end n r faster than that majority. a certain portion of
which are fools enough to thick that the electoral
franchise and system can stand where it is, whilst the
more intelligent hold merely to the " let•us-down-
easy " system of renderir g reform merely as gradual
and as slow as possible.
The worst of this school of resistance is, that it
combats reform not by fair weapons or conscien-
tions arguments. It does not meet its ever
advancing opponent with a bold front, and be-
hind a marked entrenchment. It does not'
take up any natural line of defence, but stands
where it happens to be, and defends itself with
what weapons may be at hand—a jok'., or a sophism,
or an absurdity, or a nos sequitur. Enough for the
parliamentary day is the parliamentary evil. Pro-
vided it can baffle reform this session, it cares little
what may happen next ; and it thus allows democracy
to advance with a giant and an angry stride, whilst
no preparation is made for the change, and no anti-
dote discovered for what may be dangerous in its
triumph.
Lord JOHN ItessEEt's arguments against re form are
unworthy of so reflecting and so liberal a statesman ;
and they are also at variance with his own former argu-
ments and reasoning?. He denies the right to universal
suffrage, and says it is a mere matter of political
expediency. Tnis we could well deny, and
easely disprove. But there is no necessity. Let
a fair or an unfair franchise be a matter, not ofjustice
bat of expediency, and who is to be the judge of
that expediency ? Surely not the present governing
dam, who profit by the present governing system, and

of course uphold it. Tbe unenfranchised mats are
distressed : they attribute their distresses to the sys-
tem. How argue with millions that it is expedient
that they should have no vote in their own government
or their own taxation. We maintain that it is highly
isexpediect, because it is utterly impos,ible long to
use such language as this.
This weapon, this first argument, need by the
prime minister against reform, appears to us there-
fore a dangerous one; it must snap, and prove worth-
less in the combat. But bis second argument is
more dangerous still. Lord JOHN RUSSELL tells us
that universal suffrage may do well fur
• republic, but it is incompatible with monarchy.
Thiiis dealing a blow, not at universal suffrage, but
at monarchy. There is, however, no reason whn'ever
in such an assertion. For the lower down you look
for op'nion in advanced societies, the more monarchic
do you find it. We are confident that universal
suffrage is more monarchic than limited suffrage.
And we think that the events of France and Ger-
manyßmEenve coitn,cfrusiomni.ore than they prove Lord JOHN

Universal suffrage, that is, popular suffrage, is im-
possible, said Lord JOHN, in our sys'ern. For with
us all powers exercise moderation. Were the Queen,
the Lords, or the Commons, to push their power to
extremes, there would be an end of the constitution.
But the people could not be so moderate. flow
does Lord JOHN know? The people of this country
already possess immense power; their united opinion,
loudly and unanimously expressed, would sweep away
the very constitution. But de theyexert that power ?
Contemplate England and the English during the
last memorable year, and do we not see that there
has been a suspension of every complaint, a hushing
of grievances, a resigned bearing of burdens and dis-
tress, lest the giving vent to them might be construed
into an echo of continental revolution ?

If there is any quality of Englishmen that the con-
stitution has to fear, it rs their apathy, not their want
of moderation ; it is their ignorance, not their enthu-
siasm ; it is the universal links of di prneence which
drag down the poor before the rich, and the employed
before the employer. This is what is to be feared; this
is N% hat makes us dread the results of widely universal
suffrage until there is more education, more (quality,
mord independence, and until (uncial reform has paved
the way for the last stage of political prcg:ess.

ALTHOUGH the first and loudest to condemn the ab-
surd, impolitic, and unjust intervention of the
French, and, still more, the barbarous and insane ex-
tremities to which the precipitate filly of General
OUDINOT and his principals carried it, still we by
no means regret to learn that a compromise has been
entered into by the Romans. However bigot and
stupid the motives of some Frerch politicians who
urged the attack on Rome, and however reckless the
soldier who attempted to execute such an order, there
were still many in France, and several even in the
French cabinet, whose motives were not b;grit, and
whose ulterior aims were not illiberal. The coun-
sels of these, represented by M. DE COURCELLES, have,
we hope, prevailed in the French camp. It is im-
possible to conceive that MAzzINI, or his brave and
able colleagues, would have at once abandoned
resistance, and even authority, unless they were
induced to make such a sacrifice to peace, by stipula-
tions on the part of the French envoy, guaranteeing
to the Roman people such liberal institutions as would
rescue them from falling again under the uncontrolled
dominion of the priesthood, or of the present jesuitical
and absolutist knot of councillors who surround the
Pope.
If such be the case, however regretting and cen-
soring the first fatal step of intervention, we cannot
but wish the French success in an undertaking, no'
lees critical and difficult than even the s'ege of home.
With Austria and Naples arrayed against them, and
the Pope in the hands of these peers, we can con-
ceive no position more difficult than that which a
French general and a French envoy mint take up in
Rome. And we are not as onish, dto learn that a
general accustomed to large and important commands
has been sent to supersede OUDINOT, whilst an envoy
is to ba sent to the court of Russia to explain to the
autocrat how unambitious are the views, and how
modest is the policy,of LOUISNAPOLEON'S government.
Such an attitude of &mime, coupled with such
efforts at conciliation, was required. For Austria
has assumed a tone in Italian affairs more provoca-
tive than it has yet done since its misfortunes; up to
the French intervention in Rome it was somewhat for-
bearant, but since then its march into the Legations, oc-
cupation of Florence, and dictation to l'iedmont, present
an aspect of unmistakeable defiance to France. We
stated on Monday what were Austria's demands of
Piedmont. These are no longer limited to leaving
the King of SARDINIA at the head of a neutral sate,
independent alike of France and of Austria, but seek
to link Sardinia to the car of Austria by
an offensive and defensive alliance directed
against France itself in some degree. As
it is quite evident that Austria would not and
durst not make known such aims unless supprted by
Russia, it behoves the French government to lock to
it. And hence the attitude which we presume they are
about to take in Rome. Austria is t xerting itself to the
utmost to overcome the scruples of the court of Turin.
For this purpose it has evacuated Alessandria, and for
this itpubliehes magniloquent accounts of its Hungarian
victories. Austria thus puts itself forward as the
great reactionary power, net merely in its own in-
terest, but as the cat's paw of Russia. And, should
Russia enable it to triumph in Hungary, such re-
actionary attitude on the part of Austria will be
formidable indeed. But France, whatever be the
wish of several of its eminent men and parties to be
reactionary too, and to return to monarchy and aris-
tocracy, can Lever turn the national prow in that
direction. No helm could bear up against the
strong wind and tide of the national sentiment. And
the French government, despite of its FALI.OUX and
its fanatic moderantist', will be forced to fling itself
upon liberal ideas and the liberal Catlett for tupporr,
both in Italy and elsewhere, unless it consents to be
taken in tow and remodelled by the new holy
alliance. _ _ .

Notwithstanding all these elements of antagonism,
we see in them no probability of war. Austria and
France will look for a long time at each other, rather
than take the dangerous resolve of war.
Neither of them have any thing to gain. Half a
century ago the two countries might have quarrelled,
because bith would have aspired to the acquisition of
new kingdoms and tracts of territory. But that
mania is pretty well over. Even kings know now, how
impolitic and costly it is to get possession or a land
containing a population full of spirit and of hate.
Fifty years ago, Italian provinces and men w,ro
transferable from hand to hand by conquest or
by treaty. They offer themselves no long. r as
such marketable commodities. Like animals of com-
bat, they will henceforth cost more to keep than they
can be worth to an oppressor. There is not now
an Italian breathing, that does not feel in his resus-
citation, the antique pride and indomitable spirit of
hi, race. The last year has been a second birth to
all from the Alps to the Sicilian waters.
The despotism of priest ■nd tyrant has
been for centuries sowing Italy with dragon's
teeth, and lo ! they have sprung up soldiers. The
tyrants may come with their swords to slay—nay,
may slay; the priests may hasten with their hoods to
blind and to extinguish. It is too late. Italy has
had her Thermopylae, in which, though her
brave men may have succumbs], the legacy which
this glorious struggle has bequeathed is that of self-
trust, self-government, self-subs'atence. Ten years
cannot pats away, ere Italy is a nation.

SIR GEORGE GREY was at One time regarded as
an amiable gentleman and a fair debater. He has
done very much during the last two sessions to and-
lice all the reputation of that sort that he ever pos-
sessed. It has ben frequently remarked that the
Home Secretary has grown testy and irritable ; that
he seems to take a delight in unfairly exciting unta-
favourable impressions against individusls ; that he
has a habit of attaching to their observations con-
structioca which they will not fairly bear, and that,
having assumed this unwarrantable position, he pro-
ceeds to evade charges against himself by a sort
of parliamentAry slander on his neighbour. It is a
common remark that whenever the givernment can-
not fairly and openly meet an accusation the BONE
SECRETARY is put forward to repel it. In thr /Arica]
phraseology, he has taken up their dirty line of
business. _ _ _

These observations would be apropos to very many
of the debates of the present sesgion. We fttnev that
Mr. HORSMAN, for example, could give some stiikittg
illustrations of Sir GEORGE GREY'S p‘culiar tac-
tics in debate. But that which peculiarly calls

for this present animadversion is Sir DE,.EGE
GREY'S speech on Lo d DUDLEY STUART'S in“tioa
resptcting the 'retro') ditan assessment to the
pol•co rate. It is a very long time tittle ere
have heard of anything mote unfair than toe c urea
punned by Sir GaORGE GREY upon that steiject
Lied DUDLEY STUART brought under the notice of
the hews a question which involves a subqsntiel
public grievance. In the course of his addro4 he
diverged it to a minor point, namely, the general con.
du .t of the police. Lord DUDLEY expressed that which
c trtAir.ly a very large body of Londoners feel,
' with rega'd to the forte, and that which, within the
last twenty-four hours, we happen to have heard ere
influeirial London magistrate very decidedly expose.
Ls tad of answerinor Lord DUDLEY on the reel
points at issue, Sir GEORGE GREY 'civil upon this
topic t f irritation, inflames and excites the house re..
specting it, and rifts off altogether from the question
of dedate. He knows that he is utterly arable to
meet the motion on the merits, so he divergt s in o a
collateral subject, and obtains a majority by now.
presenting the mover.
Now, what was the real charge wh!ch it was the
duty of the Home Secretary to have met? There
will, perhaps' roes
when less wonder at his avoiding tie
when we explain
the facts ; for these facts Mc' hie
own public reputaton. In the course of 1847 tte
dlesex authorities made a new valuation of property,
the effect of which was to crave an r tor-
moos increase in the amount levied for
police rate. The increase was not required. It was
so large that in one year a surp'us of upwards of
60,0001. was hft in the hands of the police t onions-
sioners—a surplus for which they had no need, bat
which was, nevertheless, wrung from the pockets of
the poorer class of rate-payers. Well, this RIO, in.
,justice was represented to the government ; th, r felt
that tht re was good ground for complaint, at.d they
actually brought a bill into parliament to re.
medy the evil. The bill was read a second
time. It stood upon the booker of tire
house for commiral for a month. One right,
however, towards the end of the session, Sir GEORGE
GREY, just b fore the rising of the house, got up and
moved that the order of the day far its commirsl be
discharged. And thu., in silence and with ut the
eliixl:teret notice, the bill was altogether droppeti !
Die vestries of St. l'ancraa and of Maryleboto , re.
presenting the intere-ts of their respective ra.tpa3crs,
very properly inquired the meaning of this
breach of fah. They could get no saris.
factory explanation. At length Sir GEoRGE
GREY was forced to receive deputations from these
parishes. He promi-ed "to consider." Qu shoes
were subsequently rut to him in the house upon the
eubjec', and then it came out that he had been ugly
playing with the ratepayers, for that, in pin of
fact, it had been arranged between the Home Se.
cretiry and the Commissioners of Pulte to
drop the bill last year, in order that the
commit siohers might be put in funds to pay
dn
twheitiltOlheof Asppyril,syasatdemin order
‘hiei
also that they might increase the police force, a yea-
snhneede
sure for which they suddenly found that there war
great necessity, although no one else had era disco-
tehxePeynseesstabel
vcred it.

The question, therefore, rc;olved itself into a qua
tion of breach of faith on the part of Sir GEORGE
GREY. That breach a faith wee most conehhively
proved in the debate of Tut adav night. S:r L W. I loco
told the Home Sveretary that he had positively pledged
himself to a dept.tatdon to go on with h s h 1 last
Tear. Sir GEORGE GREY distinctly dented it.
Whereupon Sir J. W. HoGd produced atd nwl the
Home Secretary's own letter, giving such an aatur.
ance ; and Str Geonue GREY had not another word
to say.

t