The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-14 00:00:00

THE SUNS LONDO.II, THURSDAY EVEN' ne- JUNE 14 1855.

though he had made some slight errors, and it was very
difficult, when there were thousands of rules, some of which
were not known to the profession themselves, to get at the
truth, still it was at the bottom, and, though some mistakes
might be made, it would be reached at last. He did not
think that the ebullition of temper on the part of the house
to which he alluded was owing to the mistake which he
had made ; his experience of the House of Commons had
taught him this, that a man may make as many wilful in-
accuracies—to use no harsher term—as he liked, if he were
with a party, but he must beware of a mistake if he stood
alone, for if he made one, as in his (Mr. Layard's) case, up
jumped a number of indignant colonels, one of whom was
so carried away by his feelings that he wondered at his
(Mr. Layard's) impudence —(laughter)—in touching the
question of the army. Even Earl Derby, forgetting his
youthful days and indiscretion,which had earned for him the
title of the " Rupert of debate," had done him the honour
of saying that he had no connection with him. (Laughter.)
Sir J. Pakington had given him a quarter-session lecture,
and Lord Palmerston—in no very English spirit—seeing
him down, had trampled him under his feet. In the midst
of all this he had derived some consolation from the
anecdote told of the eminent statesman Tierney, who, see-
ing one man knock another down and commence kicking
him violently, went up and remonstrated. " Ala, sir,"
said the man, " if you had had so much trouble to get him
down— (loud cheers)—as I have, you would not let him off
without a few kicks. He trusted that he was now up again,
and when he said that he stood alone he had made a mis-
take, for what he had witnessed that evening convinced
him that he did not stand alone—(loud and prolonged
cheering)—and he would endeavour to be more accurate
for the future. Next to the landed interest, it was said
that the army interest was the strongest in the House
of Commons, but that was not the case. The Guards'
interest might be so ; bat that was not the interest
of the regimental officers and soldiers. He could show them
the way at once to put down the greater part of the evils
in this case. One of the greatest evils of the army wasthe
purchase system. All the greatest military authorities, in-
cluding Sir De Lacy Evans, had said that the purchase
system was a disgrace to the nation, and it was one which
no foreign country could understand. Many attempts had
been made to put an end to it, and Lord Palmerston, and
those who defended it, said, " It is true the system is bad,
but there are vested interests connected with it which you
must not touch. If a man buys his commission, he has a
right afterwards to sell it. You cannot get rid of this at
one fell swoop, nor will the country pay the large sum
required to do so." But he could show Lord Palmerston,
if he were sincere in his desire to abolish this system,
how he might cut off half of it without any expense to
any individual or the country. From the Army List
it would be found that, owing to this war and other
consequences, more than half of the commissions granted
had been so without purchase, and therefore they ought to
declare that every commission which had been given with-
out purchase should hereafter go without purchase.
(Cheers.) The Government had declared it would make
improvements in the army, but they had only united the
Ordnance with the army department ; and Lord Panmnre
had said that when the appointments were made they
would find the right men were placed in the right places.
On looking at these appointments, he found one was given
to Lord Panmure's nephew, who he was told was an ex-
cellent man, and had been private secretary to the pre-
vio us Minister. Captain Ramsay now occupied his place
of private secretary, on the strength of which he would
obtain something good ; then there was Mr. Howell,
the partner of Mr. Hayter's brother, who, it was said,
had not received his appointment on the ground of Par-
liamentary considerations. He (Mr. Layard) was willing
to accept this statement ; but then the question still
remained, would Mr. Howell have received it if he had
not berm, the partner of Mr. Hayter's brother ? With
regard to diplomacy, if there was any branch of
the public service which required a fundamental
reform, it was this, and he should make some suggestions
on it on Friday next. He warned the meeting against
secret diplomacy. It must to a certain extent be so, but
it need not be mystified to the extent it was at present. If
inquiry was more important on any one subject than ano-
ther, it was with reference to the civil service. They had
just had a most excellent report published which gare them
valuable information on thisbranch of the service, of which
they ought to avail themselves. One of the first objects of
the society ought to assist in getting effective men placed
in every branch of the civil service. At present hebelieved
that the number of civil servants employed was too large,
and many of them were underpaid. They ought to be paid
liberally, and he believed that it was a great mistake to
press too much for a reduction of salaries, because gene-
rally the enormous salaries of the great men were left un-
touched, while the smaller salaries of the really hard-
working and deserving men were cut down. (Hear.) At
present there were about 60,900 ; ersons connected with
the civil service, and the appointments of these men were
influenced more or less by politicid motives. A sort of
current of electricity ran between Mr. Hayter and the re-
presentatives of various constituencies. The Secretary to
the Treasury had only to touch the electric wire, and it ran
through the whole of the country. That, however, was a
system which must be put a stop to ; and in considering
what means ought to be adopted to put a stop to it, he
came to what he conceived to be one of the chief objects of
the meeting. He had been told that he had made a great
mistakeiu the terms of the motion which he was about to
bring before the House of Commons, and that instead of
having said, "The house views with deep concern the
state of the nation," he ought to have said, " The nation
views with deep concern the state of the house."
(Laughter and cheers.) Upon the whole, he believed
that such a motion would have better expressed the
feeling of the country, for the people of the country
were beginning to lose faith in the House of Commons.
They saw in it a mere struggle of parties, and no
real earnestness. (Cheers.) In obtaining such reforms as
might be found necessary perhaps the association might
have to go further than they anticipated. He understood
from the chairman that committees were already organised
in almost every principal town throughout the country,
mind ho would c al upon those committees when the election
came—and it must come before lonl—to take care and
elect mon who would adept the recommendation of his
noble friend Lord Goderich, and not darken the dome
of Mr. Hayter. (Cheers.) There wore, however, other
duties which the association would have to discharge.
It was an argument of the old Tories against the Reform
Fill that, if the bill passed and the rotten boroughs were
disfranchised, men of genius and talent would not be
brought forward in Parliament. If that were true, it was
a great reflection upon the country, inasmuch as it showed
that by throwing open the constituencies they had been
enabled to place better men in Parliament than were sent
there before the passing of the Reform Bill. It would be
the duty of the society to obtain a pledge from every
candidate that he would support administrative reform,
and already a happy commencement had been made in the
return of Mr. Tite for Bath. What he (Mr. Layard) wished
to see was a new party in the House of Commons, not re-
presenting a class, but representing the feelings and opi-
nion of the people of the country, and relying for support
not upon family connexions, but upon the people. (Cheers.)
Hitherto a great struggle had been carried on in the House
of Commons without any attention having been paid to
the people. The public voice as yet had not penetrated,
the walls of Parliament, but, like gamblers, the two par-
ties now composing the House of Commons had staked
everything upon a throw. Regardless of the sufferings of
the people out of doors, their great struggle was upon the
question who should remain in office. The police, how-
ever, were already at the door, and prepared to burst it
open, when players, and cards, and lights, and dice,
and tables would be seized and overturned together.
(Loud cheers.) At present the Whigs had won the
game. They had staked very heavily on the Liberal
card and had won, but, having pocketed the stakes, they
left the card to its fate. (Cheers.) Instead of a Go-
vernment which was to have been liberal and pure, the
country found themselves ruled by the old family clique.
With four or five exceptions, such as Mr. Horsman, Mr.
Ball, and one or two others, there was not a man in the
Cabinet or connected with the Government in a more subor-
dinate position who was not a lord or an honourable.
Even such a place as the Chairman of Ways and Means
was no exception. The public were told that a brilliant
career was open to any man of talent in the House of Com-
mons, and to a certain extent that was true • but when a
man of genius and talent, who might be found inconvenient
or troublesome to the Government, accepted office, it was
only upon the condition that he should sacrifice his liberal
opinions and become a Whig. They all knew that there
was as great a difference between Liberalism and Whig-
gism as between the North and South Poles. (Laughter
and cheers.) If this were not the case, would any man
pretend to say that Sir William Molesworth would
not have been upon the platform that night. (Hear, hear.)
He believed Sir W. Molesworth to be a sincere man, but he
was unable to carry out the principles he had always ad-
vocated in consequence of his connection with the Govern-
ment. The Government themselves were ever ready to
sacrifice their subordinates, but not to give way themselves
—which reminded him of the anecdote of the Irish land-
lord who so greatly oppressed his tenantry that his steward
wrote to him at length to say he had been threatened to be
shot, upon which the landlord wrote back—" Tell those
scoundrels, that if by shooting you they think to intimi-
date me, they are very much mistaken." (Laughter and
cheers.) So it was with the Government. When a sub-
ordinate was in the way they said, "You must be thrown
over, for we must Net be intimidated by your being
knocked on the head." If any man ever possessed the
power of effecting a change in the system of govern-
ment it was Lord Palmerston. That noble lord was
carried into power by the united voice of the people
of this country, and though he (Mr. Layard) had
heard of the country having been disgraced and brought to
the verge of ruin by the conduct of statesmen, yet this was
the only time he had seen a man jesting upon the suffer-
ings of the people, and making light of their unfortunate
condition. (Cheers.) And this, too, was done at a mo-
ment when all Europe was looking to the British Parlia-
ment for an example of wisdom, order, and liberal go-
vernment. Indeed, he must acknowledge that he had never
seen Lord Palmerston in earnest except when vilifying the
people of this country. (Hear.) It was said that the asso-
ciation was an attack upon the aristocracy, but its only
object was to obtain a proper system of administrative re-
form. Their motto was "fitness," not "favour." In the
words of Shakepeare

" Who o aout
" To cozen fortune, and beshall hognourbable,
" Without the stamp of merit? Let none presu me
" To wear an undeserved dignity.
" 01 that estates, degrees, and offices
" Were not deriv'd corruptly; and that clear honour
" Were purehas'd by the merit of the wearer !
" How many then should cover that stand bare ;
" How many be commanded that command."
(Loud and prolonged cheering.)

Mr. LINDSAY, M.P., was the nest speaker. He said
that the association was not desirous of making war
against any particular Government; but it was anxious to
obtain that system of government that would be most in
accordance with the sentiments of the people. The gentle-
men who had originated this movement were far from de-
siring to wage war against the aristocracy, as the aristo-
cracy ; but they did assert that it was wrong in principle
to intrust the government of the country to men simply be-
cause they happened to be lords and honourables, and that
801110 other claim to govern ought to be required. (Cheers.)
But in spite of the statements which had been made from
time to time by the Times' correspondent, it was still de-
nied that there had been any mismanagement in the conduct
of the war ; and ho was therefore desirous of occupying the
time of the meeting for a few moments, while he endear
von red to lay before them some plain facts with which ho
had boon lately made acquainted. About six weeks ago he
wac, asked by Sir De Lacy Evans if the scarcity of shipping
was still as great as it had been? His reply was, that ship-
ping might be found to any amount ; when Sir De Lacy
Evans said his statement was very strange, because for
more than a month he had been desirous of sending out
3,000 horses to his division in the Crimea, and he had been
told that it was impossible to find ships to carry them out.
He(Mr. Lindsay) made inquiries into the matter, and sub-
sequently addressed a letter to Sir Do Lacy Evans, stating
that some time ago a friend of his had written toLord Pan-
mure, offering to supply, in 24 hours, a magnificent fleet

of the finest ships in the world, capable of carrying out
2,200 horses, at the low rate of 'l6s. or 17s. per ton regis-
tered tonnage. The answer received was the usual one—that
the offer would be considered. (Hear.) Some time after-
wards another offer was made to the Government to find
a fleet capable of taking out 2,660 hoises, and yet he (Mr.
Lindsay) understood that to this day the larger portion
of the horses referred to by Sir De Lacy Evans had not
gone out. (" Hear, hear," and cries of Shame !") The
Government in this way were making efforts to obtain ships
and he would state what these were. There were some
short time since two magnificent steamers lying in the
Clyde which the Government were anxious to obtain; the
owner, who was a Manchester man, wrote to a friend in
town, desiring him to tender to the Government one of those
steamers. In four or five days an answer was sent impos-
ing such conditions as it was impossible the owner could
agree to, and he wrote to his friend and asked him to try
and fix the ship for the French Government, and this he
succeeded in doing. On Thursday last the other steamer
was offered to the Government, and on Saturday they
agreed to accept it on the condition -that the steamer
should come from the Clyde Eto Liverpool to be examined
there by their officer. (Laughter.) So that a ship of the
value of 100,0001. was to be brought to Liverpool for
the convenience of the Government surveyor, when
he could have gone to the ship for 21. The owner
wrote to his agent to say that he never heard anything so
grossly unreasonable as this demand of the Government,
and told him to apply to the French Government, who en-
gaged the vessel, which was thus lost to the service of this
country. He would mention another case. The Govern-
ment had engaged a steamer, of the value of 50,0001., lying
at Deptford, and, having 12 tons of goods at Newcastle to
be conveyed to the Crimea, the owner received orders to
go to Portsmouth to take on board troops for the Crimea,
and onhis way to call at Newcastle. (Laughter.) The owner
wrote to the Secretary of the Admiralty, stating that the
goods could be brought from Newcastle for 61., but that it
would cost 2,0001. to send the steamer for them. An angry
letter was sent from the Admiralty, ordering the owner to
go to Newcastle; he remonstrated, and then a letter was
sent from the secretary of Sir James Graham, still order-
ing the owner to proceed to Newcastle to take on board the
12 tons of combustibles for the Crimea. The owner said he
could not five 2,0001. of his country's money wasted, and
refused to go be the consequences what they might. (Cheers,
and cries of " Name !") He would give the name to any
one who might in confidence desire it. After his last re-
monstrance, the Admiralty not liking themselves to send
contradictory orders, did so through another department,
and the owner was told not to proceed to Newcastle, as
the goods would be brought to Woolwich. He would cite
one more case. There was a steamer lying at Deptford of
the value of 60,000/_.,and before it could be finally engaged
it was necessary it should be examined by the Government
engineer, who resided at Woolwich. The Government
ordered the owner of this steamer to proceed from Dept-
ford to Woolwich, so that the engineer might walk on
board. (Laughter.) The owner answered to the effect
that it would be easier for the engineer to come to the
ship, and that he might do it for 4d., but it would cost
2001. to take the ship to him. The owner was again
ordered to proceed to Deptford, but he refused, and said
he would rather take away his ship from the Government
than do so. (Cheers.) He had moved for returns to be made
with respect to the transport service ; and, although the
Government had taken five months to make them, yet there
were so many errors in them—even wilful errors he was
afraid—that-if a clerk of his had made 1-10th part of them
he would have dismissed him, and he would not rest
until the men who had made the errors in these returns
were dismissed. He might raise up personal emity by tak-
ing the course he had adopted with reference to this move-
ment, but no threat should prevent him from performing
the duties and carrying out the sacred trust of a represen-
tative of the people. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. TITE, M.P., said that it was unnecessary for him to
attempt to enlist the sympathies of those present on be-
half of the association, after the manner in which they had
responded to the preceding speakers; but he would state
to them that this question of reform was now being re-
echoed throughout the country. The hon. gentleman then
proceeded to refer to the mismanagement of the war,
and quoted the opinion of Sir W. Napier to show that
throughout the Peninsular War the Duke of Wellington
had had to contend against the same misgovernment. He
believed, however, that the Administrative Reform Asso-
ciation would be the means of effecting a vast amount of
good, and he thanked the press for the earnestness with
which it had advocated the cause which the association
had at heart. Ho concluded by expressing an opinion that
it would be a great step towards obtaining an improved
system of government, if in future electors would refrain
from calling upon their representatives to ask the Govern-
ment for situations, and would leave them free and un-
fettered, and entirely independent of the Government.
Mr. OTWAT next addressed the meeting, and said, it was
most gratifying to see that one of the results of the forma-
tion of the association had already been that all parties were
engaged in a struggle as to who should be the best adminis-
trative reformer. He knew of no question so important as
that which bad for its object the reform of the present sys-
tem of misgovernment, and he was of opinion that one of
the first steps in order to obtain reform would be to
open the civil service of the country to those whopossessed
the qualifications that were requisite for admission into the
service. With regard to the army he had long felt that, in
a time of war especially, all promotions ought to be made
strictly in accordance with the merit of the individuals
promoted. A most important branch of the service was the
Staff, and, while in all foreign countries the officers upon
the staff were well educated and organised in the duties of
their profession, the education of those employed by this
country were comparatively neglected. In all the appoint-
ments that were made merit was entirely overlobked, and
the highest posts of honour were given to those who had the
most influential connexion. It was hardly credible—but
yet it was the fact, according to a return which ho had re-
cently obtained—that out of 136 officers employed upon the
staff in the Crimea, only nine had obtained certificates of
merit. The moment the French army arrived at Karniesch
the staff set to work to construct roads and provide
means of communication, in order that the army might
be properly supplied with food and necessaries ; but our
staff did no such thing, and he doubted whether they would
not have been utterly incompetent to perform such a duty.
Some allusion had been made by Mr. Layard to the diplo-
matic branch of the service. He (Mr. Otway) could con-
ceive no profession more important, and he was most
strongly of opinion that it ought to be open to any per-
son of sufficient merit and capacity to enter it. (Cheers.)
At present we had 2 Ambassadors, and both of them were
peers. We had also 22 Ministers, sof whom were peers,
6 sons of peers, 2 baronets, and 3, paternally, nephews of
peers. Of 3 Secretaries of Embassies, 1 was a peer, and
1 the son of a peer • and, of 22 Secretaries of Legation,
10 were peers, and peer;
were nearly connected with the
peerage. Out of 14 persons employed in the diplomatic,
service of the country 64 were either peers or closely con-
nected with the peerage. (Hear, hear.) Such a state of
things was, he thought, highly disadvantageous to the
country, and it was quite time to put a stop to it. To use
the words of Mr. Layard, it was only by putting the right
men in the right place and by entirely changing the pre-
sent system that the sufferings and misfortunes Which had
recently occurred could be prevented in future. (Cheers.)
Ten o'clock having arrived, the Chairman announced
that the proceedings avould then close, but loud calls were
made for Sir C. Napier. -
Sir C. NAPIER, who was received with great cheering,
briefly thanked the meeting for the reception which had
been given to him, observing that it was a reception which
one who had been censured by the Government and dis-
missed from his command had no right to expect. (Cheers. 9
He was quite unprepared to address the meeting, and he
would, therefore, merely give in his adhesion to the asso-
ciation, believing that, after the disasters which had oc-
curred in the Crimea, it was only b 3 placing the right men
in the right place that the safety of the country could be
secured. (Loud cheers.)
The proceedings then terminated,

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.)

The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock,

The Severn Valley Railway Bill, and the Somerset
Central Railway Bill were read a third time and passed.

PETITIONS.

Petitions were presented (4) by Sir J. Walmsley from
the metropolis generally, and from Woolwich, against
the Sunday Beer Bill ; also a petition from Leicester,
praying for amendment of the Poor-law Bill, so as to
give local control ; by Lord Stanley, from 'Colchester,
praying that steps may be taken for the restoration of
peace ; by Mr. Palmer, from Berkshire, against the
Sunday Trading Bill, and one against the endowment
of Maynooth ; by Mr. Pellatt, 12 petitions from Dis-
senting con gregations in favour of the Marriages Bill.
SUNDAY TRADING (METROPOLIS) BILL.
On the order of the day for the house going into com-
mittee on this bill,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a large number of
petitions from various parts of the metropolis against
the bill, complaining that the bill is a gross attack on the
liberty of the working classes.
Mr. WILKINSON also presented a number of peti-
tions from Lambeth with the same prayer, and one in
favour of it.

Lord R. GROSVENOR then presented several peti-
tions from the Tower Hamlets, Finsbury, and West-
minster, in favour of the bill.

Lord.R [GROSVENOR then appealed to the hon.
member for Newport (Mr. Massey) to postpone his
amendment (that the house go into committee on the
bill that day three mouths), as he should have proposed
that amendment on the second reading.
Mr. MASSEY regretted that he had omitted to pro-
pose his amendment at the second reading of the bill,
for he believed it to be a bill unjust, iniquitous, and mis-
chievous in principle, and' one which he felt bound to
oppose in every stage of its progress. He contended
that the bill, besides being bad in principle, was
partial in application, for it would affect only the
metropolis, leaving entirely untouched the great
hives of manufacturing industry in the large towns,
where the habits and manners of the people were pretty
similar to those of the working classes of the metropolis.
(Hear.) Besides, he contended there was not any trading
on Sunday in the metropolis calling for such a measure.
A man might walk through the heart of London—from
the Bank of England along Cheap4ide, Fleet-street, the
Strand, and go on to Hyde Park Corner without seeing
any shops open or any trading. (Hear.) The same
remark would apply to the other great line of thorough-
fare—Oxford-street. (Hear.) He had himself gone through
many of the more humble streets on a Sunday to ob-
serve what sort of trading was going on there, and it was
true he found some shops open. But what were they?
They were small milk shops, bakers, lollipop shops, and
such as contributed to the necessities or comforts of the
working classes—(hear)—and to call that a desecration
of the Sabbath was the grossest exaggeration. (Hear,
hear.) He thought such legislation as this bill belonged
to an age gone by ; he thought those' matters ought to
be left entirely to the judgment of individuals them-
selves. (Hear.) If the bill were passed, the observ-
ance of the Sabbath wouli not be advanced an inch, nor,
indeed, did the promoters of the bill themselves pat it
on that footing. There were thousands of poor coster-
mongers, and others of that Class, who rose on the Sun-
day morning without perhaps a meal in their
wretched dwellings, and were they to starlit) ?
It was said, too, that why should not
the working classes purchase their provisions on the
Saturday ; but it was well known that thousands of
honest working men, who did net frequent public-houses,
who occupied but one or two room,s, and were they to
be compelled to keep their food for four-and-twenty hours
in a close, and often unhealthy atmDsphere ? If they
were, he considered t iat would not be the
way to promote either the self-respect or the
health or habits of those industrious classes. (Hear.)
He contended that, even in those localities where Sunday
traffic most prevailed, the traffic was over at a compara-
tively early hour—say by 11 o'clock in the morning.
The hon. member for Westminster (Sir J. Shelley)
expressed dissent, but he (Mr. Massey) knew that in
those districts the trading was so sensibly dimi-
nished by one o'clock that there was no re-
munerative reason to induce the tradesmen to keep
their shops open after that hour. (Hear.) Was any gen-
tleman in the house prepared to bring in a bill to fix the
time on which a master should pay his servants ? He
believed the dAy for such legislation as that had long since
passed away; yet it was well known the workmen did not
receive their wages till late on Saturday nights, and such
a bill as this would probably compel the labouring
classes to resort to a " tick" system or a " truck" sys-
tem, which would be most injurious. The hon. member
then referred to the evidence given by Sir Richard
Mayne before the Lords' Committee on Sunday trading,
who stated that though the trading was on the increase,
the observance of the Sabbath was at the same time
more and more kept up, and he also stated that the
enforcement of the prevention of Sunday trading was a
matter of the greatest difficulty. Such legislation as
this was calculated to drive the working classes to the
low gin shops, on the windows of one of which he lately
saw an invitation to the people to come in and "get
drunk for a penny ; dead drunk for twopence ; and clean
straw to get sober upon for nothing." He would not
trespass further on the house, but would conclude by
saying the bill was unjust in principle and partial in cha-
racter—that it was uncalled for, and that it would be
much better to leave such subjects to the self-respect of
the working classes, which, he thanked God, was daily
increasing, as was also their knowledge and intelligence,
and therefore he thought it much better to desist from
any legislation on this subject. He therefore moved an
amendment that the house should go into committee on
the bill on that day three months.
Lord STANLEY said he felt bound to give his sup.
port to the bill. The honourable member who bad just
sat down drew a very pathetic picture of a poor
man being obliged to keep his food for 24 hours

in his room ; but had the honourable gentleman

read the bill? Why' the third clause provided that
any article of food, meat, poultry, &c., may be sold on
Sundays up to the hour of nine o'clock. (Hear.) As
to the objection of the hon. member that this bill

would affect only the metropolis, there was nothing
unusual in that; it was quite customary to legis-
late for the metropolis on a separate scale from the
country, and, in fact, there was at this moment
a bill _ before the house for the local manage-

meat of the metropolis, which would mot at all affect the
country. (Hear.) He, therefore, considered the hon.
member had not made out.any case against the bill.
Mr. W. J. FOX said he knew the metropolis now for
a period of nearly fifty years, and he' believed that
the inhabitants of the working order had increased

in knowledge, self-respect, and civilising influences
in that time to a most extraordinafy extent, and he be-
lieved such legislation as this bill proposed was utterly
uncalled for. As to the absdnce Of necessity for making
purchases on Sunday, why, if workmen received their
wages at an earlier hour on Saturday than now their work
would be stopped at au earlier hour; so that, in fact, such
a step would in reality be to inflict a penalty on the
workmen. (Hear.) By our Sabbath, from 12 o'clock
on Saturday night till 12 o'clock on Sunday night, we
restricted a great many useful things. That was not
the original Sabbath, which commenced at sunset of
one day, and ended at sunset of the next day, andthere-
fore he considered we did much mischief by
our modern reading of the Sabbath. This bill
fixed upon trading exclusively, leaving out amusements
and work entirely, and that was a point which the Sab-
batarian legislators shrunk from touching. To interfere
with work would affect our great clubs and coteries ; it
would interfere with the cooks, and footmen, and but-
lers, and carriages of the aristocracy ; and he thought
that to stop short of the legislation that would affect
those was a pitiful and sordid hypocrisy. (Hear.)
Mr. KER SEYMER wished the house would go
into committee on this bill. He was not a Sabbatarian,
but he was not prepared to give up the Lord's-day as a
day of rest. Although Sunday was a day of rest it
should be also the Lord's-day. The hon. gentleman (Mr.
Massey) said there was little trading on Sundays in Mary-
lebone ; he (Mr. Seymer) wished the hon. member had
accompanied him last Sunday to Houndsditch. He went
purposely to see that district, and the amount of Sunday
trading there was very extensive ; and not only trading,
but a public meeting was placarded to petition against
this bill. He did not see many people sign the petition,
for he believed it would be highly inconvenient for
most of the people he saw there to state their names and
residences. (Laughter.) He thought that all that had
taken place on the discussion of this bill showed in the
strongest way the necessity for the adoption of the pre-
sent bill.

Sir J. SHELLEY supported the bill, because he be-
lieved that its provisions were likely to produce the best
results, and the health of the working classes would be
insured.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE deprecated the course that had
been pursued with respect to this bill, and he objected
to it on the ground that it ought to be introduced by
the Government. He looked at the measure as a
cowardly attempt on the part of the promoters of the
bill to effect that of which they would be ashamed if
personally appealed to.
Mr. WILKINSON concurred with the hon. member
for Finsbury that this measure ought to be taken up by
the Government, and hoped that that would not be lost
sight of in the bill.
Sir G. GREY said that the bill, in fact, ought to be
adopted by the house ; he would, therefore, support the
bill and oppose the amendment.
Mr. MAGUIRE. supported the amendment, pre-
ferring, as he did, the testimony of Sir R. Mayne to that
of the policeman, whom the hon. gentleman opposite en-
cou itered in the course of his tour and whose experience
he had so graphically described. He was as anxious as
any member of the house that the Lord's-day should
he kept holy—(bear, hea,)—and no persons were more so
than the Roman Catholic members of the house that,
such should be the case, but there WAS an overpowering
necessity on the part of the poorer classes of society,
and it was consequently unfair that coercion should be
brought to bear upon them. He agreed with Sir R.
Mayne in thinking that the question was one which
must be left to the decision of public
opinion, which would adjust it much better than by
legislation. On that account he should support the
amendment.

Sir J. WALMSLEY said he objected to tip biil on
principle. He thought that the upper classes of society
ought to set those below them a better example in keep-
ing the Sabbath.
Lord R. GROSVENOR, in reply to the right hon.
member for Leicester, said that ho had not undertaken
the bill:at the desire of the upper classes at all, but that
he bad taken it up at the solicitation of the inhabitants
of the metropolis generally, consisting chiefly of
the lower classes, upon the prayer of a nu-
merously signed petition. With regard to the upper
classes setting a better example, he had obtained some

statistics with regard to the number of carriages
and horses passing through Hyde-park on Saturday
and Sunday last. On the former day he found
there were 1,936 one-horse carriages, 2,199 two and
mole horse carriages, and 1,740 saddle horses. On the
following day there were 1,698 one-horse carriages, but
those aboveone had dwindled to 854, and the saddle-horse
to 413, whilst on the Sunday there were 1,228 omni-
buses and 2,047 cabs passing under the Wellington-arch
at Hyde-park. He therefore thought there was nothing
to complain of in the example set by the class to which
he had the honour to belong.
After a few words from J. HEYWORTIE and Mr. BAR.
now,
The houle divided on the question that the Speaker
now leave the chair, when the numbers were-7_

Ayes l5B .
Noes 5l
Majority -107
The Speaker accordingly left the chaif and the house
resolved itself into a committee upon the
Mr. W. J. FOX proposed to add to the bill a proviso
that all persons of the Jewish persuasion should be exempt
from all the restrictions imposed by the bill. He affirmed
that the bill if enforced upon them would be a penalty
upon them not only for their race, but also' for their re-
ligion ; and he trusted the house would excuse his
speaking in their behalf, when it was borne in mind that
they could not speak for themselves. (Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. LLOYD DAVIS,
The proviso was negatived without a division.
Clauses 1 to 3 were then agreed to after a short dis-
cussion upon each.
On clause 4,
Mr. CHAMBERS moved that the words "in cases
of emergency or charity" be inserted, urging that there
were cases in which it might be necessary to take excep-
tion to the provisions of the act.
Mr. DUNCOMBE described the act as a burgling
piece of legislation altogether, and was by no means the
proper course to take to subvert the act of Charles 11.

The clause was afterwards agreed to, amended as pro-
posed.
Upon clause 4 being proposed, a short discussion took
place. The object of the clause was, that no trading
should take place before nine in the morning of Sunday,
or after one of the same day.
Several divisions took place upon amendments that
were proposed to this clause, all of which ended in the
defeat of the amendments and the adoption of the ori-
ginal clause.
In clause 5, which provided that there should be no
hawking or crying of newspapers or] any sale of them
after 10 o'clock on the Sabbath some discussion took
place.
Mr. It. SPOONER thought that no newspaper should
be allowed to be sold after a certain hour on Sunday,
and moved as an amendment that the words nine be in-
serted in the clause instead of ten.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE considered that all restric-
tion should be taken off the sale of newspapers on
Sunday. Their sale was in his opinion essential for
the benefit of society as it at present elasted.
Upon a division 'taking place on Mr. Spooner's
amendment, the original motion was carried by a majo-
rity of 116.
Mr. 0. DUNCOMBE then moved, as a further
amendment, that instead of ten o'clock in the morning
the provisions of the clause should be ten o'clock in the
evening, thereby giving liberty to all parties to sell
newspapers the whole of Sunday.
The committee divided on the amendment, which was
lost by a majority of 93.
Mr. CRA UFURD proposed to insert after the word
"morning" the words "or two o'clock in the afternoon,"
so as to restrict the sale of newspapers? only during
divine service in the morning.

After a few words from Lord R. GROSVENOR and Sir
G. GREY, the committee once more divided, when there
appeared—

For the amendment
Against it •
Majority ....

, . 62
. 140
----78

The CHAIRMAN was then directed to report pro-
gress, and the house resumed ; the committee to sit
again on the 4th July.
The Justices of Peace -Qualification Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed.

The Dwelling houses ,(Seotiand) Bill was passed
through committee.

The report of the Committee of Ways and Means was
brought up and agreed to.

The Validity of Proceedings (House of Commons) Bill
was passed through committee. The bill was afterwards
reported without amendment, and, the standing orders
being suspended, it was read a third time and passed.