The Express.
London, England, 1848-04-18 00:00:00

PMMAAMENT.

- few words words after what had fallen from his noble friend,
whom he heard with pleuure for the first time in that
house, and who was entitled to its attention as the descend-
ant of the great and illustrious name which be bore, and to
the recollection of which no one was more fondly t
th ande
p affreec-
tionately attached than he. (Hear, hear.) Bu-
sent bill was not only a lea stringent measure than the one
opposed by the late Lord Holland, but the circumstance,
under which it was brought forward were totally different.
Besides, in the speech with which Lord Holland prefaced
his protest, he stated, not as his sole objection to the bill,
out as a principal sine, that it would favour the views of the
Holy Alliance. Ile maintained that every society was enti-
tled to prevent the interference of foreignees in its concerns.
The fact that a noble and learned lord (Lord en
coman) itu , who
tion
was eminent for his attachment to the law aDnd nst
of this country, :autl who* joined Lord Holland in hop
is poti.
tion to the former Alien Act, had publicly declared within
the last three days his conviction of the necessity of this bill,
removed all doubt from his mind with respect to the objec-
tions entertained by Lord Holland. The bill they were now
proposing was only a temporary one, to exist for one year.
lie was not desirous that it should become the permaent
law of the land. (Hear, hear.) lie prayed God it might
never be more than a temporary expedient, which was justi-
fied by the state of things existing throughout the world.
(Hear, beer.)
Lord ABERDEEN said the bill would in fact continue
for two years, because it was for a year or to the end of the
next session of parliament.
The bill then pulsed throuch committee.
ELECTION RECOONISANCES BILL.
Lod MONTE.kO LE proposed the second reading of this
bill. The main object of it was to empower the election
committee to inquire into the validity of the recognisance.
As it was a bill relating to the privilers of the other house,
ho hoped their lordships would not oppose it.
Lord BROUGHAM objected to the bill on the ground
that while the existing law enacted that the determination
of the examiner of recognisances should be final and can-
elusive, this bill would give a power to a committee of the
House of Commons to set it aside. lie had no objection
that the matter should be sent back to a committee. It
might be wiry well to alter the law prospectively, but he
objected to their passing an ex pool facto law on the subject.
He thought the House of Commons mistook their
atm p 1
roper
... . .orsc. Ho smut', that the hill ba ton a scowl Time i
- ....
that day six ...the....
Lord REDESDALE supported the second reeding. He
thought it would be a most ungracious thing on the part of
their lordships' house if they wer to say, " You are in •
difficulty, get out of it as you cane we mill Lot help you."
(Hear, hear.)
Lord CAMPBELL said that but for the present bill the
petitioners in the eight cases now pending would clearly
have a right to proceed under Sir R. Peel's act, which made
the certificate of the examiner of recognistmces final.
Against this certificate the bill gave an appeal, to the most
objectionable of all tribanals—the election committee. After
the proper officer, Mr. Booth, had declared the recooisances
in certain cases good, the house had no right to assume that
they were bad, as was done by this bill. The question was
one which ought to be referred to a court of law ; and on that
ground he felt that the present bill was objectionable in
principle, and would move that it be read a second time that
day six months.
Lord STANLEY, while admitting that there were grave
objections to the bill, thought it the only method of c,eaping
from a dilemma and supplying a rams ontissus in the former
act, which had not been anticipated at the time it was
passed. The main consideration for their lordships was how
to do substantial justice between the petitioners and the sit-
ting members and to carry out the intention of the legislature.
Ihe LORD CHANCELLOR concurred in thinking this
a must objectionable measure, contrary to all the rules of
. law and principles of justice. The existing act prescribed
all that was to be done by petitioners. They had strictly
complied with the act, and it would be moat unjust to re-
quire them to do more.
The Earl of DEVON denied that the bill would affect
any parties who had complied with the provisions of the ex-
isting
act. They had net so complied but, by an over-
sight of the officer, had obtained a certificate that they bad
done so.
Lord DENMAN said the examiner of recognisancis bed
performed the duty imposed on him by act of parliament,
and to attempt, by a new act, to set aside Lis decision, would
I open a wide door to abuse. Ho felt bound to oppose the
second reading of this bill.
Lord BROIJOHAM said a few WOTIII in exilatiation.
The Muse divided.—For the second reading .. 19
Against it .............. 9-10
The house then adjourned at half-past S o'clock.

the increased importation of foreign copper, which increase
he was anxious to effect by a reduction of duty, notwith-
standing that the revenue might at first be diminished in
consequence. lie showed that while the importation of cop-
per from Chili into France, and Hamburg, had increased since
1842, it bad decreased in this country; and that smelted
copper, instead of being imported from Engl mil, was now
imported from Chili, and that consequently while the exports
from this country had fallen off, they had increased from
Chili. He corroborated this statement by a refers ace to the
exports of England to France, which in 1815 were 7,000
tons, and in 1817 only 3,700 tons, while the im-
portation into France from Chili of the same des-
cription of copper had increased in 1815 200 tons,
and in 1847, 1,100 tont He also referred to a letter, dated
lest December, from Mr. Petro, our consul at Philadelphia,
and who had been a member of that house, in which he
stated that already two large smelting companies had been
formed there, and that others were talked of. lie was,
therefore, anxious to du in this ease as bad been done in that
of foreign wool, to which he thought it parallel.
Mr. LABOUCHERE contended that the refine:lOn of
these duties would give a great impulse to one of the most
valuable trades of this country. As to one own copper
miners, employers and employed, they would always enjoy
a most efficient protection in the heavy freight of copper ore
from foreign countries.
Mr. ROBARTS supported the amendment.
Mr. CARDWELL could not understand what object could
be attained by a committee. lie strongly advocated the
proposed rerinsion of the duties on articles which formed
material ingredients in some of our most important exports.
Mr. MUNTZ advocated the entire remission of the duties.
Mr. WYLD said that the copper trade in England was a
complete monopoly, and the sole smelt ing•place was the coal
field of Swansea Bain. The reduction of duty would only
increase the monopoly that already existed amonest the cop-
per companies and by no means benefit the Birmingham
workmen ; and, entertaining this opinion, he should support
the motion for a committee.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD would vote for the proposal of the
right hon. baronet. the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. GLADSTONE said, that however zealous and ear-
nest particular individuals might be in advocating
the principles of free trade, they always found
their own postai s in trade or commerce to form
exceptional cases, and the present discussion afforded more
than one Proof .... one truth of this observation. If try
branch of trade was exempt from the general class of objet
tions urred against free trade, it was that which was carried
en in metals by England, and in his opinion this trade
would suffer less than any other from the reduction of pro-
tective duties, for it was a pursuit eminently adapted to the
genius of Englishmen. It was, in his opinion, the beet
course to adopt without any alteration the proposition of
her Majesty's government.
Lord G. 'BENTINCK opposed the proposal of the govern-
ment, because it was one of a bad gang of measures ; because
it proposed to admit into competition with naive produce
the produce of other countries. The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer was about to sacrifice 40,000!. more of revenue under
a deficiency of 4,000,0001. And this sacrihce was to be made .
in favour of copper ore, the product of slave labour in Cuba.
The admission of foreign ore for smelting into England at a
low duty would throw out of employment 21,000 families. Al-
though he needed no committee to prove the impolicy of the
free trade iiroporals of government, yet as he had not the op-
tion of meeting the motion More the house by a direct
negative, he should certainly vote against the motion ot
the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. TURNER supported the motion of the right hon.
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, because it was
necessary to get rich ore from abroad to mix with the poorer
ore of this country, in order to obtain such an article as
was wanted for manufacturing purposes! -
Mr. RICARDO said that in 1839 foreign copper ore was
allowed to be introduced into this country, and to be
smelted in bars free of duty, and the result was that more
English ore was used then in previous years. The amount
of ore raised in England in 1842 amounted to 11,245 tons;
in 1843, to 11,593 tom; in 1814, to 11,850 tons; while in
1839 it amounted to 12,468 tons. hit d
not attribute
much, therefore, to the argument that persons would be
thrown out of employment. The arguments used in the
present case were similar to those which they had heard
with respect to wool, and he predicted the result of a re-
duction of the duty would be the same in both eII:CP.
Mr. HENLEY would support the motion for a committee.
The inconsistencies of the hon. gentleman who supported the
notion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer proved to him
that a committee was desirable. The hon. member for Bir-
mingham admitted that the admission of copper hail ruined
his constituents, and because that was so, he turned round
on the Cornish miners, and said that he would ruin them.
(Laughter.) He (Mr:Henley) would not act on any such
principle. He thought there must be some influence behind
the curtain to induce the Chancellor of the Exchequer to
throw away 40,000/. at such a time. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. WILSON said that if the averagequality of foreign
ore was 21 per cent., it would be impossildqe for this country
to compete with foreigners, because the average of Cornish
ore was only 8 per cent. It should be recollected, also, that
there were many branches of industry into which the con-
sumption of copper largely entered, and it would he bene-
ficial for them to have the duty removed. lie should, there-
fore, support the motion.
The house divided.--Ag For the motion
Against it
The house then went into committee.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that he had a motion of some
importance to offer to the house with reference to this
question, but should defer it until the committee en the
bill. Meanwhile, he wished to know whether government
would be prepared to take a similar murse to that now pro-
posed with reference to tin ?
The CHANCELLOR of EXCHEQUER had received
no representations on the subject of tin, and, therefore,
did not see any immediate necessity for ouch a reduction.
Lord G. BY moved that the Chairman report
progrem.
The committee divided—For the motion l3
Against it
The resolutions were then agreed to and the house re-
sumed.
ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL.
In answer to a question, Mr. ANSTEY atonal his inten-
tion of proceeding as far as possible on Wednesday with the
above bill.
GRAND JURY CESS (IRELAND).
Sir W. SCOIERVILLE obtained leave to bring in a bill
to remove difficulties in the appointment of collectors of
Grand Jury Cesa in Ireland in certain cases ; and to remove
doubts as to the jurisdiction of the divisional justices of the
police district of Dublin metropolis relating to the recovery
of poor rates, and other cases.
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) BILL.
Sir \V. SOMERVILLE moved, that the select committee
on Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill consist of twenty-
one members, and to name the said committee i Sir NV.
Somerville, \lett. Castlereagh, Sir R. Ferguson, Mr. Piney,
Mr. Clements, Lord Courtenay, tho Lord Advocate, Mr.
M. O'Connell Mr. French, Sir J. Young, Mr. 0. Gore,
Mr. G. A. Hamil,ton, Mr. P. Scrope, Mr. Drummond, Mr.
Napier, Major Bhickall, Mr. NV. Fagan, Mr. Mansell, Mr.
Adair, Mr. M. J. O'Connell, and Dr. Power.
The motion was agreed to, and the house adjourned at

VOTES ON THE CROWN AND GOVERN-
MENT BILL.
Sir,—l shall be much obliged by your mentioning
jin your next number, that I paired off on the main division
of Friday night against the words "open and advised Pinsk-
ing " in the third clause of the bill for the security of the
crown and government, with Mr. Hudson, having, front
being unwell, been obliged to leave the house at the time.—
I am, B_n:L April 17-

, 1
4 '
11
11,
1: .
1 1
1
' I i
I 1*
1 .
i 1
s.
1 :
1 !
. i
, 4
I.
1
Ii
11'
II
I I
11 ii. 11
' 1 I
,/ t 11
/iI I
I 11
ill