The Sun.
London, England, 1839-06-22 00:00:00

EVENING EDI rioN

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
Az.
HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE 21.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack
it Five o'Clock.
Lord W YNVORD presented a petition from the
1 Clergy of the diocese of Canterbury, signed by 57 Clergy-
ttenagainst the Chit oh Discipline. Bill, as moat destructive
or the in'erest; of the Church, and he (Lord Wynforci)
thought the petition well deserving of the attention of the
Right Rev. Beech.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY need not assure
the House that he had too high a respect for the peti-
tioners to feel in'the slightest way dissatisfied with
them for having petitioned as they had done.
rle had a petition of a similar nature to present from five
clergymen, and which he now did, but the petitioners must
not be offended with hint for entertaining a contrary opi.
pion to them. The Right Rev. Prelate then complaint d
that be had been greatly misrepresented by a speaker in
another place which he would not name, nor should
It" name the speaker, though that speaker had
tot hesitated to name him. The misrepresentation
It!s in reference to what he was supposed to have
111(1. in regard to the clergy upon the subject
°' the Church Discipline Bill when it was before
he House last Session. Expressions had been attributed
to him which he never could have used, and, having alluded
to the terms of the accusation, he put it to their Lotd-
silil'lV recollection whether they could suppose he could
a'e used the offensive expressions. He would submit
180 that it was a most inconvenient practice for
thel Members of one House to take notice by
tame of the Members of another in reference Ito
!that they did or said in their public capacities. Un-
'o,obtedly the clergy were of all others the persons best
competent to form an opinion upon the sutject of this Bill.
,Ilte Right Rev. Prelate then presented a petition from
;Luc Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, against
le proposed plan of a Government system of national
titleation, and in the principles stated by the petitioners
he entirely concurred. The Right Rev. Prelate next
Djesented a petition from certain Clergy in the county of
eat against the Church Discipline Bill, with the prayer
of Which it was unnecessary for him to state that he did
tot agree.

JAMAICA BILL.

Lord LYNDHURST presented a petition frcm Mr.
'loge, praying that he might be heard at the bar against
th, preamble, tk.c. of the Jamaica Bill now on their Lord-
rrups 'table.
Lt,rd BROUGHAM presented a petition from certain
Nestl India planters and merchants, praying also that
they might be heard both by Counsel, and by giving evi-
oenee by witnesses against the same Bill.
, Lord LYNDHURST moved, according to the no'ice
he had given, that their Lordships would order that Mr.
Hurge should be heard at the bar.
'Lord BR OUG ll AM moved that counsel might be heard
440 for the petitioners whose petition he had just pre-
tented. He submitted, that if their Lordships granted the
PraYer of one::petition they must grant the prayer
Zr_ the other, and for his own part he should thank it would
rby far the best that all the petitioners should join in
l'ltrructing the same Counsel, and that the same Counsel
laould appear for all, as was the case upon the Municipal
Corporation Bill.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH wished to ask his Noble
led Learned Friend opposite if he meant to move that wit-
nesses should be examined at the bar ?
Lord BROUGHAM'S own opinion was, that it was
much more a case for argument than for the examination
r.
any witnesses.
h Lord LYNDHURST said that Mr. Burge prayed
e might himself be heard ; he was a very learned counsel,
441 the other parties might perhaps agree to be heard by
°lle Counsel for them all. He would submit that if they
Were to be heard by a Counsel, and if Mr. Burge was to
be heard also, they could not both be heard at the same
cline, nor on the same day.
The Marquis of NO RM ANBY would snggest that an
I,rrangement might be made by which Mr. Burge might
ga heard for all parties.
Lord LYNDHURST said Mr. Burge was heard
tainst the previous Bill, as was also Mr. Tal'ourd for
ather interests.
Lord BROUGHAM said, that if they would follow his
4dvice they would all employ the same Counsel.
The Earl of HARE W 00 D said that he had a petition
Which had been agreed to at a meeting o'f merchants and
'Pharnaica planters, held at Willi,'s Rooms, soon after the last
alill was withdrawn. He (the Noble Earl) was surprised that
the present Bill should have been brought forward after
that Bill had been withdrawn, because if anybody objected
to the principle of the former Bill in removing power from
tile Colonial Legislature, they would find upon examination
tact precisely the same objection applied to the present Bill.
Flo therefore presented that petition on behalf of the pro-
prietors of Jamaica against the whole Bill, and praying to
he heard by Counsel at the bar.
The Marquis of NORM ANBY said it would be con-
!Lenient if some decision was come to by the House as to
tae second reading of the Bill previous to hearing Counsel.
, Lord BROUGHAM—Suppose we give up Wednesday
`ol* once.—( Laughter.)
Lord LYNDURST had no objection to hearing Coon-
lel on Wednesday and fixing the second reading fur Friday,
but he feared there would be few of their Lordships there
eft Wednesday to avail themselves of the statements of
Counsel.
The Duke of RICHMOND was about to ask the Noble
Ind Learned Lord ( Brougham) a question relative to post-
Doting the Beer Bill, when
Lord LYNDHURST said the question before the
"ouse had not yet been disposed of.
I,The Marquis of NORM ANB Y would not press his
ii°l,.lon for the second reading of the Bill on Friday,
iltere found to be inconvenient.
"(4'd LYNDHURST moved that Counsel be heard at
the bar on Friday next.
Lord KENT ON said they could not expedite the read-
,.'l2,c of the Bill after having once fixed it. Ha did not see
"Y Counsel might not be heard on the same day as was
axed for the second reading. Unless there was some
Peculiar advantage to be gained, he did not see why they
should deviate from the usual course.
Lord BROUGHAM said the usual course was, that
Counsel be heard on the question that the Bill be now
read a second time. Ile submitted whether it could not
be done in this way. The prayer of Mr. Burge to be
heard was on petition, and not by motion. Could they
not, then, make it an Order of the Day, that the petition
of Mr. Burge be taken into consideration on Thursday
next, and then hear him in support of the prayer of the
petition ?
The Duke of WELLINGTON believed the usual
course was, that on the question that the Bill be read a
second time Counsel be heard at the bar.
Lord ELLEN BOROUGH was not aware that there
was any precedent for hearing Counsel on a petition.
Lord BROUG HAM said it had been frequently done.
It was ultimately agreed that Mr. Burge should be
heard on Friday next, and another Counsel for the rest o
the petitioners.

EDUCATION.
Lord E LLENBO ROUG H asked when the Education
Bill would be brought on ?
Lord BROUGHAM said he would propose that it should
he taken on Tuesday. He looked with great anxiety to the
Course taken in the other House respecting the Government
plan, for though he felt that the fate of that plan by no
Means necessarily involved that of his own, yet he was aware
that the Government plan did somewhat bear upon that
Part of his own system, which was likely to excite the
greatest controversy among their Lordships.
Earl RIPON—I am afraid you anticipate too speedy
a termination of the disputes respecting the Government
Plan.
Lord BROUGHAM (sarcastically)—l am afraid 1
don't.—( Laughter.)
The Marquis of SALISBURY presented a petition
from the Town Clerk of Sandwich, praying for compensa-
tion.
Viscount MELBOURNE thought the subject con-
tained in the petition was a far more proper subject for the
other House of Parliament than that House. He would,
however, say the determination had not been come to with-
out the most serious consideration, and he believed that
the compensation was sufficient. He had no objection,
however, to look again himself into the case.
After a few observations from the Marquis of SALIS-
BURY, the subject dropped.
Lord DUNCANNON, in answer to a question put to
him by the Marquis of Westmeath the other night, rele-
vant to the 100,000/. borrowed from the one million loan
for the Board of Works in Ireland. stated that that sum
was still due, and that repayment was shortly expected.
DUBLIN STEAM PACKETS.
The Earl of WICKLOW wished to make a few ob-
servations to the House relative to a subject that he had
referred to the other night. He alluded to the agency
of the steam packets between Liverpool and Dublin.
Captain Chappell, to whom their Lordships would recol-
lect he had alluded, had written to him as well as Mr.
Purcell, to know whether he meant the allusions he had
made to have an injurious effect on his character, and re-
questing if he did not, lie would state so in his place in
the House of Lords. He could assure the Gallant Cap-
tain that he intended in what he said to cast no imputa-
tion either upon him or Mr. Purcell. The only observa-
tions he had made with respect to any party were directed
against the Admiralty, whom lie considered not to have
done their duty in the course they had adop'ed with re-
ference to this subject. He was so convinced of the in-
justice of the appointment that had taken place, that un-
less he heard from the Noble Earl opposite that some ar-
rangement was made to remove the evils, it was his inten-
tion in the course of a few days to make a motion oa the
subject.
The Earl of MINTO agreed with the Noble Ear: that
nothirg whatever had been said either by him or himself
(Lord Minto) that could impeach the conduct of Captain
Chappell. He was merely the superintendent at Liver-
pool, and; upon his being applied to, to know if he could
get any person to conduct the business, he had stated that
nobody could be found who was willing or desirous of
taking the employment. Regarding the circumstance of
there being no competition with Government, he would
say that he should think it extremely inconvenient to in-
troduce a variety of Government agents. It had been the
object to appoint only one, and in the selection the
Admiralty had no knowledge whatever of Mr. Purcell
except the fact of his being a respectable man and a large
coach proprietor. Indeed he did not understand the
Noble Earl now to say there was any objection personally
t o Mr. Purcell. And as to the packets they were held to
be exclusively for the conveyance of letters and mails.
Whatever might be made from the conveyance of passen-
gers went towards the maintenance of the packets : and
with respect to the parcels they conveyed, why in one year
they had only brought two hundred to Liverpool. He had
directed inquiry to be made in refei ence to any irregularity,
extortion , or went of due attention to the public generally.
on the part of Mr. Purcel, dttermined, as he was, that
nothing of the sort should be allowed to take
place, and no
inquiry that had been made had discovered any.
The Earl of WICKLOW had not brOught any charge
against Mr. Purcell as an improper man in himself; but
his charge was that the Government had given him the
poi.; er of extortion. He had been appointed in such a
manner as that the public generally could not be equally

sA-vcd by him ; and the very circumsta-Ace of his
being a large coach proprietor showed that he had the
means of monopoly in his own hands, as he might refuse
to receive or to forward any parcel that was not sent to
him by his own coaches.
Lord MINTO said Mr. Purcell bed no interest whatever
in the sea conveyance of the I.a eels, nor had he any com-
mission. He had nothing bat his chargts upon the par-
c,ls that were sent to hire by his own coaches, if they came
to him by them ; nevertheless, 1;e could no more venture
to refuse to receive a parcel that was sent to him by any
body in any way, than he could venture to refuse a parcel
from the Admiralty.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH rose amidst cries of
" Order, order!" when
Lord BROUGHAM put an end to farther discussion
upon the case, amidst laughter, by exclaiming—" Surely,
surely, their Lordships must consider that they had had
errnigh of Mr. Peter Purcell."
Upon the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE
a Bill to make perpetual an Act which had passed for
the last two years for the purpose of exempting from the
laws of usury bills of exchange, was read a second time ;
and, with a view to accommodate.
The Duke of WELLINGTON in proposing a clause
in Committee to limit the operation of the Bill till per-
haps the Ist of January, 1812 or 1843, for the purpose
of obtaining more information as to the operation of the
measure than the House was now in possession of, the

1301 was ordered to be committed on Monday.
On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON the Windsor
Castle Stables Bill passed thron,h a C .mmittee.
ROMAN CATHOLICS.
The Eail of WINCHILSE A rose to present the peti-
tion of which he had given notice, which prayed for the
repeal of the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act of

10 Geo. IV, c. 4. If the petition had related to
a measure that was agcy in progress of corn-
ing before their Lordships he should bore abstained
f, ern saying anything upon the petition until that measure
was before the House, but as it related to a measure that
had b reo passed, and was signed by nearly 3,000 respect-
sable individuals, he could 'not avoid drawing attention to
the feelings expressed by the petitioners—feelings, a par-
ticipation in which he believed was increasing throughout
the Protestant society of this country daily against that
measure falsely called the Roman Catholic Emancipation
Act. He believed that many of those who had in bygone
+nes advocated the passing of that measure conscien-
tiously believed, that by the removal of the disabilities it
was intended to remove, peace and tranquillity would base
been the result to the country. But, instead of
that having proved to be so, be did not belieVe
there was an individual in that House or out of it
who gave their support to the measure, who could put his
hand on his heart and say, that if he had known then
what he knew now he would have supported it. Certain
he was his expectations had not been disappointed because
he had never thought that the equality °frights then asked
for would content those who as-tied the Established
Church. lie meant no disrespect to the Raman Catholic,
but he would say that the Roman Catholic Papists in this
country had employed the power which they had obtained
in a very different way to what it had been employed by
the Roman Catholic Papists in Ireland. If he had a
Committee of their Lordships he should be prepared
to show most clearly that in the year 1836 there
had been re-embodied in a manual issued by the
Roman Catholic Hierarchy in Ireland for the direction of
the clergy and laity of the Catholics in that country,
the most intolerant and persecuting doctrines that ever
marked the character of Rome in her most intolerant
days. Some of the most obnoxious bulls of that Church
were now in full force in Ireland, which were denied at
that time to be in force at Rome, and the denial of which
he believed induced in my of their Lordships to give their
consent to the measure. It was impossible to know that
without seeing that so far from the Church of
Rome in Ireland being contented with what she had
got, she had set forth the whole of her power for
the overthrow of the Protestant Church and Pro-
testant institutions in that country. The Noble
Viscount opposite had himself admitted that those mea-
sures which he was giving his consent to levelled a
heavy blow at the Protestantism of the country. He was
prepared to contend that the concessions that bad been
made from time to time to the Roman Catholic Papists
of Ireland, had tended not only to weaken the Protestant
Church there, but to shake it to its foundations throughout
the empire, for no one could say but that if the
Protestant Church was upset in one part of the empire,
it must fall universally. He was prepared to contend
that those measures of concession were expected to be fol-
lowed by others, and that the measure which had given
rise to the present petition had proceeded from a scheme
in Rome, and the ingenuity of man could not devise a
scheme so well calculated to promote the power
and dominion of that Church, and he was now
convinced that the people of this country were at
last roused to see the danger to which the civil
and religious liberties of the country were destined, unless
a bold step were taken. Would to God their Lordships
had attended to what they had heard before they had
passed this measure, not from the individuals only who now
addressed them, but from others. He remembered that
he had been called at that time an intolerant bigot, al-
though he could safely say he was not entitled to be so
called, because there was not a greater or a sounder
friend to religious liberty than himself in the country.
He had hoped that the power conceded to the Church of
Rome would have been used with gratitude to this
country, and not as a certain party were now usir:g it for
the destruction of every thing that belonged to us as Eng-
lishmen and Protestants. He believed the power con-
ceded to the Roman Catholics would be exercised ‘:or the
destruction of all that was valuable to Protestants, but V, e
people would not surrender without a struggle, and the
Dissenters to a man would unite with the Members of the
Church. England must retrace her steps on this ques-
tion. The Noble Earl concluded by saying that be wes
not prepared to make any motion on the subject, but if the
feeling of the country showed itself in the way he ex-
pected it would, unworthy as he felt himself to be as
a leader of a great body of his countrymen, he would as
far as he could honestly and fearlestly, advocate in that
House the repeal of the Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM having been one of those who sup-
ported the Catholic claims, begged to detain their Lord-
ships for a very few moments while he answered the appeal
of the Noble Earl. The Noble Earl bad asked if those
who supported the Catholic claims could lay their hands
upon their hearts, and say, that had they known then what
they knew now, they would have supported that
measure. Reflecting on all the events that had
taken place since 1829 he ( Lord Brougham) conscien-
tiously declared that be would now have adopted precisely
the same course which he had taken from the time of his
entering public life down to the year 1829, in regard to the
Catholic Relief Bill. lie knew that some men were dis-
appointed because they formed extravagant expectations. If
any man had been so sanguine as to suppose that in six or
seven years the whole course of a century and a half of
misgovernment would be rectified, and the people of Ire-
land put in the situation they would have been in if
these Catholic disabilities had never been enacted—if
any man was sanguine and romantic enough to entertain
hopes of that sort. he bad no right to complain of being
disappointed. Many had supposed that the delay in
granting Emancipation would be fatal to the measure :
for the longer an act of justice was delayed, the less be-
nefit did it confer when conceded. If it was true that be
gave doubly who gave quickly, it was equally true that he
halved and quartered his gift who delayed it till that was
extorted with violence which ought to have been conceded
as a right. If any evils were now experienced, they were
to be attributed, therefore, to the delay in granting the
measure, and not to the measure itself. Ile would also
add, that Catholic Emancipation itself was never
said by any one to be alone sufficient to create
a new and better state of things in Ireland.
Most of the supporters of the measure had said it was a
foundation to build upon, but had never supposed it
would cure all the evils, any more than giving fresh air to
the lungs merely wood support human life. If their
Lordships had nothing but air they wou'.d not live
( Laughter)—and they could not expect to better the con-
dition of Ireland unless they improved the habits of the
Irish people. But he should be misstating h s own opi•
nion it he did not, tell their Lordships that his belief was,
the evils at present existing in Ireland arose from that
habitual factious disposition which had grown tip undo r
the old and bad system, and which existed i i the
mind of the Orangeman against the Catholic
and in the mind of the Catholic against the
Orangeman. He did not with to apportion the blame
so as to give one party an ounce of it more than another.
There was a religious combined with a political feeling in
that country—it entered into all the ordinary communiel-
tions of society, polluted the stream even of domestic in-
tercourse, and ate, as it were, like a foul ulcer, into the
body politic of the State ; it was found to work day and
night, both in public and private ; and a long course of
firm, paternal, equal, arid impartial administration of the
law, as well as an improvement of the law itself, to era-
dicate the evil, was required to allow the Irish to enjoy
that happy state of society that was enjoyed by the people
in England.
The Earl of WICKL 0 W said the first act of his as
legislator was to give his support to the Catholic Relief
Bill, and he could lay his hand on his heart and say that
all the good he had anticipated from it had been attained.
It was easy to say that certain evils had resulted from a
measure, although it wan not easy to prove that fact; but
it was impossible to tell what might have been the evils
if that measure had been resisted.—( Hoer, hear )
What would have been the condition of this country
if the Government of that day had refused to
accede to the unanimous wish of the people of Ireland,
and a great proportion of the people of this country ?
(No, no, from Lord Wincliiisea.) The majority of be
Representatives of the other House of Parliament, Session
after Session demanded it, and at last no Government was
ale!e to carry on the affairs of the country without conceding
the Catholic claims, and if the Emancipation Act had not
been carried, the power of the Roman Catholic priesthood
would have been greater than it war now.
The Earl of LW DEN dffered from both the Noble
Lords who had last spoken. The ceuetry now stood in a
situation very inferior indeed to that in which it
stood before the passimg of the measure. They now fou.id
in England and Ireland a large influx of Jesuits for the pur-
pose of propagating the doctrines of the Roman Catholics.
He conceived it was most important, if it had been pos-
sible, to prevent the evils to which he had referred—the
power exercised by the Jesuits through the. country ; it
had been the habit to smile at a reference to that power,
but he believed that there was an under-current going
forward in England, extending largely and widely the
Roman Catholic faith, and admitted by the Roman
Catholics themselves, to have for its object the advance-
ment of the temporal influence of that religion. It was
rather a curious circumstance that he had iately seen in
Dublin, a book entitled " Secreta Morita," of the Jesuits,
in which was a passage translated thus:—.." Princesses
and Ladies of quality are easily pract'sed upon by their
women of the Bed-chamber, therefore we must by all
means devote great address to them, wherby we shall
knew the secrets of families."_( Laughter. ) He believed,
however, that the Protestants of England were awaiting
from the lethargy in t% nich they had been involved ever
since the passing of the Catholic Emancipation Bill, No-

thing could save this country from the crisis, to which it
was fast approaching, of utter ruin—but the acting upon
Protestant principles, by which the prosperity of the na•
tion had so lung been p:eserved.—( Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of WESTMEATH said he did not
charge the evil; which had been dilated upon to the Ca-
tholic Relief Bill, but to the Irish Reform Bill, which had
Leen flung into the hands of the democracy of Ireland,
when it was really unasked for, by an injudicious Mi-
nistry.

GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.
Lord WENLOCK brought up the Rcport on the Great
Western Railway Bill.
BANKRUPTS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the reccnd
reading of the Bill affecting bankrupts, the exact
title of which we could not catch ; but the object
of which we understood to be, the placing transactions re•
spccting advances upon deposit under the same b_►nkrupt
law as the common transactions of trading.—Agreed to.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR introduced a Bill for
confloing the practice in the Court of Common Pltas to
the Sergeants-at-Law (agreeable to usage, the origin
of which, even at the time of the Conquest, was declared to
be " lost in antiquity"), .except in motion; respecting
trials on Circuit ; in which cases the Counsel who had
bren engaged at the trials might address the Court, see-
ing that they were more conversant with the question to
be decided than a stranger could be. It was most desir-
able to co, fine Learned Counsel to particular Courts, for
great inconvenience and delay had been occasioned
through Counsel, when wanted in one Court, being en-
gaged in another'.—( Hear, hear )
Lord W YNFORD agreed in the object of the 8.11,
which was read a first time.
Their Lordships then Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, ✓UNR 21.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual h•Atr.
On the motion of Mr. BA RNA RD, the Deptford Pier
Bill was read a third time and passed.
REDCAR HARBOUR.
Mr. CA YLE Y presented a petition from the ship.
owners of Tynemouth, in favour of the R. do Harbour
Bill, and also from the mariners of the eastern coast
of England in favour of the same Bill. He then moved
that the Bill be read a second time. He could not under-
stand the wounds- of the opposition to this Bill, and
would therefore reserve what he had to say until he had
heard the observations of other Hon. Mrmtcrs.

Mr. ORD protested against bringing forward a private
Bit at this late period of the Session, it was in opposition
to•the Standing Orders. He would not enter into par-
ticulars, but on this ground he would move that it be
reed a s c )nd time this day three months.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON ccondel the amend-
ment. It was not proposed to erect this harbour by means
of a joint stock company, but was in fact the act of an
individual st eking to provide for himself by means of an
Act of of Parliament. He hoped the Hon. Member would
not persevere in pressing his motion. (Mr. Caylcy sig-
nified his intention of doing so.) He would then state
his objection. It was proposed to establish this harbour
on the north-east coast of Yorkshire, and to sul,j !ct all
ships passing it to the payment of a toll. It was to extend
three miles into the sea, and any ships passing within
twenty miles of the harhour was to be liable to toll, wheTher
they were laden or unladen, whether they passed
it often or not ; and an invidious distinction was
attempted to be drawn between British and foreign
ships. A Committee of that House had recommended
that passing tolls should be put an end to ; and when the
Fishguard Harbour Bill was passed two Sessions ago, in
which a clause authorising the levying of a p, ssing toil had
been inadvertently permitted to rema'n, the President
of the Board of Trade had, in the fdlowing, Session, in-
troduced a public Bill for the repeal of that clause. They
had no security for the efficiency of this harbour--there
was no subscription list. He hoped that the House would
reject this Bill by a large majority, and that the
House might not be again annoyed, Session after Session,
by the persevering efforts of an individual, to effect his
purpose.
Sir F. TRENCH rose to order. He believed that ac-
cording to th." Standing Orders of the House they could
not receive a Report upon a Private Bill after the 21st cf
June.

After a few words from the SPEAKER,
Mr. P. 'FI-I OM SON complained of the Bill having been
introduced at so la'e a period of the Session. He should
most certainly o`.,j ct-to any clause imposing a passing toll;
and the House had decided against the principle of such a
clause being introduce din any Private Bill. He regretted
that the Hen. Member opposite ( Alderman Thompson)
bad not been correctly informed with respect to the Fish-
guard Harbour Bill. Instead of his (Mr. P. Thom-
son) being able to repeal the Bill, he had been com-
pelled by the forms of the House to introduce a Pri-
vate Bill, and had carried it with considerable dif-
ficulty, and tie parties who had smuggled the Bill
through Parliamesit actually obtained compensation.—
( Hear.) He hoped the Hen. Member would withdraw the
Bill, or if not, that the House would do summary justice
on it by rejecting it.
S:r E. CODRINGTON was a member of the Com-
mittee on Harbours of Refuge, and had heard very important
evidence with respect to the necessity of appointing one
or more of these harbours on the north-eastern coast of
England. The safety of the lives of seamen, and the
property of the country, was, in a peculiar manner, the
business of the Board of Trade and Admiralty, and he
was surprised, therefore, to find the Right Hon. the
President of the Bo3rd of Tr,ide oppsing the Bill.—
Her.) Why did not the Right lion. Gentleman himself
introduce a Bill on the subject ?—( Ilear.) It was his ab-
s Aute duty to do so, and it was a neglect.of that duty to allow
atom. in the_ Alt vopeola_passip_g
year after year so vast a number of vessels and valuable lives
to he lost on that eoaat...
direction were obliged to effect an insurance of 10 per
cent. upon their cargoes in consequence of the dangers of
the coast. The halfpenny a ton, which it was proposed
by the Bill to impose upon shipping, was a very trifling
sum in proportion to that charge. It that harbour had
existed the Forfarshire steamer would not have been lost.
—( Hear, hear.) There existed at present a natural har-
bour on the spot, in consequence of two reefs of rocks run-
ning out into the sea; and not long since a foreign ves-
sel drifted upon the coast, and between these two ledges
of rocks found itself saved, how it knew not. He con-
tended that in a case of this sort, where the lives of sea-
men, and the property of British merchants was in peril;
it was the imperatise duty of the Government to de-
' fray the whole expellees of the construction of the harbour.
He was sure when the case was properly represented to the
country they would not hesitate to pay for so desirable an
object.
Those who had never been in the perils of the
sea knew not what danger was, and that was the reason
why many objected to the Bill.
He jests at scars that never felt a wound."—( Hear.)
If the Government
.did not choose to bring in a measure
themselves upon this subject they ought to give every
facility to private adventurers.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. A. WHITE would oppose the Bill because he
thought its object ought to be carried into effect at the
expense of the country.
Mr. CHAPMAN opposed the Bill, because he thought
the measure it was intended to support was visionary. He
thought they would form a bad precedent if they placed
tolls on ships. If this harbour was constructed there would
be f,,r more danger than at present. If the Gallant Admiral
were on that coast he would keep to sea, and never at-
tempt the harbour. It was a mere speculative, visionary
scheme, and no one but the engineer and his Gallant
Friend wished for it.
Sir G. STRICKLAND would give his humble support
to the Bill. He was astonished at the opposition given to
it by the Hon. Member for Whitby, as he had been a
member of the Committee on harbours of refuge, and well
remembered the harrowing description given by the lion.
Member of the dreadful sufferings and loss of life which
happened on the north-eastern coast. He was not inte-
rested in the matter, as it was situated a hundred
miles from his residence ; but when he stated that on
that hundred miles of coast there had been within the
last twelve years no less than 7SO shipwrecks, Han.
Gentlemen would think some place of refuge was neces-
sary. Redcar was a proper place for such a harbour, and
no doubt would be the means of saving many lives. He
objected to the principle of a passing toll when any other
means were ay/dibble. Let the Government appoint their
own engineers; let them establish a series of harbours of
refuge and he would oppose all passing tolls in future.
Sir F. TRENCH—There is no doubt a passing toll
was necessary on that coast, but Redcar was not the proper
place, for it ought to be at Scarborough—(Laughter—
and ought to be made at Government expense lie had the
authority of eminent engineers for saying Scarborough was
the proper place, and that it could be made at a very small
expense.
Mr. CRE SS WEL L would not have said a word upon
this subject had it not been for the attack made by the
Gallant Admiral upon the shipping interest. He said
they were careless of human life because they opposed
this Bill. Now he supposed the Gallant Admiral would
give them credit for selfishness—yet he said they paid 10
pen; cent. insurance, because of the dangers of the
coast. Now would not their interest lead them to sup-
pert such a harbour, if it was a good one, for the
purpose of having the rate of insurance lowered.
He (Mr. C.) was a native of Northumberland, and had
been brought up in the neighbourhood of the coast. He
had had the misfortune to see many wrecks, but he was satis-
fied that out of twenty wrecks that took place on the coast of
Durham and Northumberland, not one would be saved by
the herb air. The lion. Gentleman opposite ought to
establish this point, that those wrecks he had mentioned
would not have taken place had the harbour been there.
Coasting vessels, light in ballast, and caught by an east
wind, would be driven 100 miles to the southward, and
would never be able to work round the point
so as to reach this harbour.—(Hear, hear, hear )
Then with respect to the proprietary of the harbour. No
case had been made out for calling on the shipowners, to
defray the expense of this harbour. It was said this
harbour ought to be erected on the ground of humanity,
but he would ask why should they gratify their humanity
at the expense of theshipowners?—( Hear, her. )
Admiral ADA NI had taken the greatest pains to inves-
tigate this matter and he Lai done so will a person, than
whom no one was more capable of forming an opinion on
this subject—be alluded to Captain Beaufort —( Hear,
hear.) The conclusion he had come to was, that there
was no ',lace on the cost more appropriate for a harbour of
refuge than Redca-.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. L A NIBTON was opposed to the principle of in-
troducing a system of general taxation into a Private Bill,
and therefore should vote against it.
Mr. HUME thought it was very bad economy to allow
our ships and sailors to be wrecked for want of proper
harbours, and he was sure any reasonable and well digested
plan would be received with the greatest readiness by the
House.—( Hear, hear.) He would go further, and say
that there were many measures of great public utility that
the Government might have brought forward connected with
our naval establishments, but which they had not done. It
was useless grants of mosey he had always opposed, but
he
I was convinced there could not be a more judicious 9)-
plication of the public funds than to the protection of life
and propeqy. The whole of the coast ought to he examined.
Whilst he should vote against the Redcar Harbour Bill,

he shcu'd he ready to support any measure which could
remedy the evil.
Mr. CA YLEY s.aid the [ion. Member for Whitby had
represented this as a visionary scheme, but there was
ample evidence to show that Redcar Harbour was the
best point on the coast for a harbour of refuge. He
trusted that some good would arise out of this discus-
sion. Life and property were interested in the question,
and it was the duty of the Government to come forward to
:So; d them protection.
Sir S. L LTS Id I NGTON said, if this were a question
whe h-r harbours of refuLe were necessary or not, or whe-
ther Redear wz.s a proper place for the erection of such a
harbour, he would not have troubled the House with any ob-
servations. But that was nut the question. The question was,
whether they would impose a tax on the shipping interest,
for the purpose of creczing a harbour at Redcar, when that
interest had rot expressed any opinion in favour of such
harbour. This was a private Bill, for the purpose of
promoting a private interest, and imposing a passing
toll on the shipping of the country. There were
no persons more astute in discovering their in
terests than the shipowners of this country—there were
no persons more anxious for the preservation of
human life, and if they believed it would be for ther
benefit and advantage tl pay this toll, no doubt the ship-
owners would have given their consent. If the inquiry
was made amongst the whole body of shipowners in Lon-
don, they would not find half a d, z.m in favour of this Bill.
Mr. INGHAM expressed his earnest hope that the
Government would accede to the suggestions of the Gal-
lant Officer opposite and the Hon. Member for Kilkenny,
and take some step to inquire into the subject.—( Hear.)
Mr. BELL opposed the Bill.
Sir C. LEMON said, if the principle was adopted that
the public money should be laid cut in harbours of refuge
there ought to be some inquiry,
Mr. O'CONNELL said he con- ilered these refuge
harbours necesiry : the question was how the expense
should be repaid? He certainly objected to passing tolls:
but he thought the question might fairly be considered in
Committee.

Mr. HUME sad it must not be imagined that those who
voted against the Bill were opposed to harbours of refuge.
The House divided, and the numbers wer.
For the Bill 32
Against it
Majority against the Bill
The Sidmoutli Improvement and Market Bill was read
a third time, and passed.
The Norwich Improvemen: all was read a third time,
and passed.
LONDON CITY POLICE.
On the motion of Mr: - -Ft7X MA ULE, the London
City Police Bill was read a third time.
Oa the question that this Bill do pass,
Mr. FOX M AUL E sail that he had several Clauses
to propose which lie wished to introduce into the Bill ; he
would therefore move that they be read at the table a first
and a second time, and that. they should be referred to
the Select Committee, to whom the Metropolitan Police
Bill had been referred, in order that they might report
tbcrecn.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE thought this a most extraordinary
mode of proceeding; one day the Bill was stated to be a
Private Bill, and another day it was represented as a public
Bill. This Bill had been now read a third time,
he had not objected to the third reading-, because
he did not object to the Bill as it at present stood
—but he did object to every one of the clauses
which were now proposed to be brought up. He
should like to have the opinion of the Chair, for the
purpose of knowing whether it was possible when a Bill
was read a third time, for it to be referred to a Select
Committee in order to have clauses introduced.

Mr. FOX MAULE said that the only object they had
in view was to refer the clauses to a Select Committee.
Mr. T. DU N COM B E considered that the clauses were
most objectionable. The Government and the City of
London were Loth ashamed of them, and they wished
to smuggle them in before the Cimmittee. If he under-
stood the Bill rightly it would h .ve the effect of entirely
altering the law upon this subject, in fact he might desig-
nate it to be a pattern Bill for a rural police. It isas
necessary therefore that the House should look to its clauses
with great jealousy. He should object to their being
referred to a Select Committee, because if the clauses
were good for anything they ought to be discussed in
public. It was his intention, it the clauses were persevered
in, to divide the House upon every one of them.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought that those who
had attended the discussion the other night would
consider the course now pursued by the Honourable
Member to be rather , xtraordinary. The plan now
proposed to he adopted with respect to these clauses,
was in consequence of a desire on the part of the Govern-
ment to yield with readiness to the suggestions of the
Hon. Member for Finsbury.
Mr. T. DUNCOMIIE begged to explain. He objected
to the clauses in the Metropolitan Police Bill the other
night, and having done su fur his own constituents, he
wished to do by others as he would be done by, and there-
fore he objected to there being added to the City Police
Bill.
Mr. GOULBURN was certainly one of those who
o
t
ss
Idpeps rof
course
hioTnoeu Temple-bar, nshs
them.
ps
takenl
occasionet
Buto b at rhh,t andete,agcn;
ore
ti
there
,dtt hi
nbnerocrictoneohngf
uoevlrledeupnpnicheoaenclt
thought that the law ought to bp the same on both
bwenue
gas
ofsi
the
clauses
et i
bhos
ypre
e o
attention
ws
incon-
venientea ly course to o f
oa adopted
riders and send them to a Select Committee; he objected
to that course on a Public Bill, and he did it the more on
a private one. He thought the only way of getting out of
the difficulty was to discuss the
_clauses as they were
brought up to the table.
Mr. F. MAUL E said when the Metropolitan Police
Bill was first introduced, it included the City ; that part
of it was struck out, and these clauses wcr: forgot
City_ Pollee Bill, till sortie Mdillbets-aarggirsteitr the
fact in the committee on the Metropolitan Police Bill.
The fact was, that the clauses, with the exception of one
or two, were now actually the law of the land, and the
City Authorities were bound to take notice of them.
Mr. WILLIAMS said the citizens of London had been
treated in a most unfair and unjust manner by the Govern-
ment, and be should offer every opposition in his power to
the introduction of those clauses which were perfectly at
variance with the understanding that took place between the
Government and the citizens of London regarding this Bill.
The city of London bad enjoyed the right of managing
their own police and protecting their own property for more
than 700 years. They were satisfied, unreformed as the
Corporation was, to continue the protection of the property
in the hands of tl:e Corporation. After the changes which
had taken place, how did the question now stand ?
Why, that the very provision introduced in the ori-
ginal Metropolitan Police Bill was to be introduced
into the City of London Police Bill. He therefore
thought the citizens of London bad been dealt with most
unfairly, and that they ought to be put in possession of
the alterations made in the Bill.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed in the suggestion
of his lion. Friend ( Mr. F. Maule) that it would Le
better that the clauses should be introduced into the Me-
tropolitan Police Bill, when the House would have an op-
portunity of discussing them.
Sir R. PEEL said it would be better to adhere to es.
tablished usage on the third reading of Bills. What
ought to be the law of a considerable part of the metropo
lis ought to be. the law of the City of London. The best
course, in his opinion, would be to withdraw the present
Bill, and to bring all the clauses approved of into the
Metropolitan Police Bill, on the understanding that no ob-
struction should be thrown in the way of the progress of
the Bill up to the present stage.
Captain WO Od, we believe, was for the recommital.
Mr. FOX MAULE objected to the course proposed
bythe Right 1i0n.13 ironet the Member for Tamworth, be-
cause it would re-open the discussion on the City Police
Bill. He should propose first, a clause giving the Secre-
tary of State, power on emergency, to enable:the metropo-
litan police to act in the City, or the City police in the
metropolitan districts, the object of which was merely to
provide for casual disturbances.
After a few observations from Mr. GOULBURN
and Sir M. WOOD, which were inaudible in the gallery,
Mr. WAKL EY hoped that the Government would ac-
ct
oepdpeo
stiot
et.h e
Two
owuor sue
lation of the police of the metropolis, one was a Private Bill,
Islusgwgeersetebde
fboyr
et
thheeßui gohutscHf
for
rn .t
hßearreognue
and the other a public one. Now, looking at these Bills,
he could not hut observe that there was no uniformity in their
statements. He wished to know, therefore, from her
Majesty's Ministers, which Bill they would recom-
mend to the consideration of the House, end the
adoption of the public. If the clause now proposed
were introduced, Hon. Members would not see them in
truth till the Bill had passed, and he would ask whether
that was fair either to the House or the public. If the
clauses in the Metropolitan Police Bill were just, he would
ask why they should not be adopted in the City, preserv-
ing to them some of the privileges they were desirous of
keeping, but taking care that the preservation of those
privileges did not interfere with the establishment of an
efficient police. Tire other Bill had gone through Com-
mittee certainly, but he knew that there were other
clauses to be proposed, they could rot know what it
might be until it was passed. For the sake of uniformity
then would it not be better to postpone the present Bill till
that time. He thought the proposition of the Right
lion. Baronet a very fair one. The clauses might then
be received, and the question that the Bill do pass be
postponed till the other Bill was at the same advanced
staae-
Mr.
and he had a pocketful of celraeuswesa,ssoonmee
F. MAULE had not the slightest objection to pur-
sue the course proposed.
Mr. LEADER said there was great confusion in these
of them. The prooapinotd.sedrrahmendments were not
Bills, and on looking at them one could not tell what to
did not understand. The 7th clause
printed,
Commissioner from holding a seat in that
others to oppose ; but be
toupei
wanted to know the ineanincgolfaouwfsietlihciahnt
leintgthere was a hidden meaning in it.—
(No,Now
no.) It was very easy to say so, but he believed that
it was aimed at an Hon. Member of that House ; and un-
less good reasons were shown for the necessity of that
KINNON said the clause in question was a per-
mrht
cptiehel
raaaeocklii
le.usyseacenis ane sed‘ktivwethehdi no
thought
hit t oo
hNiuVrbeegl
clause being retained, he would give it every opposition in
his power.
feci‘tiar.nol‘mPaly—it was unprecedented. No person was ever
before debarred from sitting in that House. by a clause in
a private Bill.
Two principles were adopted upon that
point. One was when the person was appointed and heldc
Executive his place under the influence of th Govern-
ment ; the other, where the person represented the place
in which his appointment was. The Commissionership in
question was not in the appointment of the Treasury or
the Government, but of the City of London. They might
carry
, andthe then
might bring in a Bill to exclude the principleßecorder. a little further—carry it out to its full ex-
t
They might introduce a clause disqualifyng any person
a Commissioner of the city police from being a member
for the City of London, but he thought they could not
extend that disquacation to the country at large.
Mr. G REENE then rote to address the House, but was
interrupted by
The SPEAKER, who said, the question before the
House was as to clauses to be introduced into the Bill;

‘vbereas, Lion. Members were: discussing clauses already

in the body of the Bill.—( Hear.) _
Mr. FOX 11AULE said he would:postpone the 8.1
till Wednesday next, so that the other Bill might come
before the House in the same stage as this was.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in reply to a question by
Mr. Hume, said, that the clauses might be brought up
and added to the Bill, and then any amendments could be

considered.
Ou the motion of Mr. WILSON PATTEN, 11IeIlin's
Divorce Bill was read a second time.

Oa the motion-of the same lion. Member, Hodson's
Est to Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. F. PALMER, the Reading Cor-
poration Estate Bill was read a second time.
A Message from the Lord.; brought up certain Bills.
HULL DOCK BILL.
Mr. GREENE gave notice that on the third reading
of the Hull Dock Bill he should move certain amend-
ments.

PERSIAN MISSION.—OUTRAGE ON SIR F.
MAITLAND, AT BUSIIIRE.
Mr. M‘KI NN ON, seeing the Noble Lord the Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, wished to ask
him a question relating to the Persian Mission. In her
Majesty's speech at the opening of the Session it had
been stated that our Envoy to the Court of the Shah of
Persia had been withdrawn. Since the❑ Sir John M'Nicl

had returned to this country, and had been here some
time. It appeared that the Secretary and the other offices
of the embassy had retired to a town in Turkey, about
eleven days' journey, as a courier would travel, from
Teheran. Those ofEccrs who had been sent out for the

purpose of instructing the Persians in the art of war had
retired to Bagdad. This was a most extraordinary state
of affairs. It had Inen stated that diffcrenccs existed

between this country and the Court of Persia, and that
we had refused to receive an Envoy %%horn the Shdh had

sent to this country—( Cries of " Order !" " Question !")
—it was necessary that the House should be acquainted
with these circumstances. A sum of 12 0001. per annum
wr•:as allowed by the East India Company to pay the ex-
penses of the diplomatic mission to Persa, and
_tills allow
ante, although made by the East India Company, he
considered to he under the controul of the House.—(Caries
ut " Order, order.") The question he wished to ask was,

In what manner the sum of 12,000/. per atlnura was at

present expended; and if the members composing that
embassy still continued to receive their salaries?
Lord PALNIERSTON said the lion. Gentleman hail
introduced his question by rather a longexordium, he would
set him right us to one or two of his facts. Every one
knew that when differences arose between different Courts,
it was frequently the case that missions were withdrawn.
This did not put an end to all communications between
the two countries—it was a temporary state of suspension
of amicable relations short of en absolute rupture. That
was the present state of our re!ations with Persia. Sir
John M•Niel had obtained leave of absence before the
interruption had taken place in our relations with Persia,
:nd he was at present home on that leave. Ile had had
an audience on his arrival in this country, not on the con-
clusion of his mission, but as all Ministers have who return
leave. All the other officers of the mission had been
withdrawn on account of our differences with the Shah,
but it had been deemed advisable, instead of permitting
them to return home, to order them to return to Erzeroum,

in order that they might be at hand to receive any communi-
cation the Persian Government might be desirous of making.
On the other band, the Persian Government h .d sent an
Ambassador to this country, and although he had been
informed before he left Persia that he would not be re-
ceived until the differences were adjusted—that Ambas-
sador had thought it his duty to proceed to this country in
his private capacity, and although he had not been publicly
received, yet he had had one or two private interviews with
1:m as a private individual. Now to the question that had
happened in this case, which happened in all similar cases,
the mission was not at an end. Sir John M'Niel, like all

Ministers who were home on leave, was sulject to a deduc-
tion being made of half his salary, all those who vvtro on
duty were in the receipt of their regular sAlaries, which
was the case with the other officers attached to the mission.
Mr. AI AC LE AN understood, Ohm, th it we were not at

war with Persia. He wished to ask the Noble Lord if any
reparation had been made by the Shah for his attack on the
messengers of Sir J. INPNieI. He would likewise take that

opportunity of asking if her Majesty's Government were
satisfied with the explanations of C,)unt Nesselrode as to
the conduct of Count Sirnonviteh and another hessian

officer at Cabool. He would also ask if any accounts had
reached this country of an outrage which had b en perpe-
trated on Sir Frederick Maitland and the crew of the
Wellesley, off Bushire. He had seen an account which
had been sent home by an individual on board the
Wellesley, which stated that when Admiral Mait-
land wished to land at Bushire, he was told by the
authorities, that he would not be allowed to land at
the usual state place of landing, but must land at the
Custom House Quay; this he refused to do, and in conse-
quence had been fired on by the soldiers; that several of
his men had received bullets in their hats and several parts
of their clothes ; that they returned the fire and killed two
or three of the individuals who had been engaged in the
perpetration of the outrage; he would ask if he had re-
ceived any despatches from the Wellesley relative to this

outrage.
Lord PALMERSTON said, in reply to the first ques-
tion, that, as yet, no sufficient reparation had been made by
the Shah of Persia. With respect to the explanation of the
Russian Government he must refer the Hon. Gentleman to
the papers on the table of the House, which contained the
correspondence which had taken place relative to that ex-
planation. We were certainly not at war with Persia,
though our relations with that power were interrupted.
He had received an -recount of the outrage on Sir P.
Maitland, and the circumstances were not exactly as had
been stated, there was no difficulty in landing, and after
wit. `4Grjoekrnittgn tjodts-niral, had had
ithamicaEle relations
to the embarkation. It had been required that hea.")scoout:l
embark from the Custom House instead of from the usual
state place of embarkation in front of the Governor's
residence. Sir F. Maitland or, being informed that
' this was an insult he ought not to submit to, refused to
embark at the place pointed out, and took the proper pre-
cautions to enforce his desires : the boats of the Welles'ey
were brought opposite the place, shots were exchanged,
and he succeded in embarkir', from the usual place. The
Resident of the East India Company had returned with
him to the Island of Carrack ; after that a communication
had been opened by the Governor of Bushire, with Sir
F. Maitland, expressive of his regret for what occurred ;
and when the last accounts were received, Sir F. Mait-
land was going back to Bushire to receive explanations
on the subject.
Sir S. CANNING was understood to ask if the ne-
gocia tions were still going on between the Noble Lord
and the Persian Ambassador in this country.
Lord PALMERSTON said he had had an interview
with that personage the other day, and perhaps he might
see him again before his departure from this country.
Mr. M•KINNON moved for a return of the manner in
which the sum allowed by the East India Company for the
expenses of diplomatic missions had been expended.
MINISTERS MONEY—IRELAND.

Mr. S. O'BRIEN asked when it was intended to bring
forward the Ministers Money Ireland Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
he thought it would be better to postpone that measure
until the valuation had taken placa undr the Poor Law

OUTRAGE AT PORTENDIQUE.
Sir S. LUSHINGTON wished to know what had
been done relative to the negociation with the French
Government as to the attack made by the French on the
property of the British merchants at Portendique, on the
coast of Africa.
Lord PA LMER ST 0 N had referred the documents to
the Judge Advocate, and had received his report two
days since, so that there had been no opportunity to apply
to the French Government on tho subject.
BANK OF IRELAND.
In answer to a question from Mr. HUME,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
that he would on an early day bring forward his measure
on that subject, so as to give the Hon. Gentleman an op-
portunity of bringing forward his motion ; he had thought
it his duty, in consequence of the notice the Hon. Gentle-
man had given to write to the Bank of Ireland on the
subject, in order that they might be prepared to defend
their interests : he expected some Gentlemen connected
with that establishment in London in the course of a few
days, and then he should be able to fix a day for bringing
the subject forward.
SHANNON NAVIGATION.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the Irish
Canal Company, against the Bill for the improvement of
the River Shannon, which Bill would deprive-them of their
righTs without adequate compensation, paying to be heard
by Counsel against it. •
On the motion tor granting the petition,

The CHANCELLOR. or the EXCHEQUER said,
that as the petition was merely egainst certain clauses of
the Bill, he apprehended they could not be heard by
counsel against the whole Bill ; he did not wish to prevent
their being heard by counsel, but he apprehended some
other mode must be adopted.
Mr. O'CONNELL said the petitioners objected to the
second clause, which was the principal one in the Bill.
COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH NAPLES.
In reply to L?rd S ANDON,
Mr. P. THOMSON said, tnat the negociations were
pending with the Court of Naples, with a view to do away
with the Sulphur monopoly in Sicily, and he hoped they
would end in a general commercial treaty which would be
for the advantage of both countries.
CUSTOMS.
In reply to Lord G. SO MERS ET,
Mr. P. THOMSON said !:e should not be able to in-
troduce any Biil on the subject of the Customs this
Session.

vice and diminishing crime, as the advocates of solitary
confinement had anticipated—that was particularly the
case in the United States. He opposed the Bill, but he
gave the Noble Lord credit for the best intentions.
Mr. DARBY seconded the amendment of his Hon.
Friend, on the ground chiefly that there was no evidence
to show that the system was practicable in the country.
Lord J. RUSSELL explained. He stated that the
separate system had been alroady examined and approved
of by the highest authorities.—and he assured the Hon.
Gentleman that the powers to be invested in authorit'o;
under the Bill, which they so strongly objected to, had
been as much reduced as would be compatible with its
efficient administration.
Lord DUNG '‘NNON fully concurred in all that his
lion. Friend ( Mr. Pakington) had stated of the inhu.
mat-11v of the separate system of depriving the prisoners of
ax and exercise, and impairing the powers of both mind
and body. It appeared to him that the third clause of
the Rill was mantfestly unjust in its provisions. It was
an extremely dangerous power to give to any body of men
to confine a prisoner for an unlimited period in solitary
confinement, and it might lead to the most lamentable
results. lie was unwilling to adopt any course which
would put an end to the further progress of the measure ;
but his oljcet.ons to its provisions were so strong and so
numerous, that he should certainly support the amend-
ment of his lion. Friend. _ _

Mr. MILES rose an-midst loud criei of " Divide." He
thought the Noble Lord was entitled to the greatest credit
for the introduction of the present measure.—( Hear.)
It was calculated to bring into effect prospectively a good
system of secondary punishments. It appeared to him
that there was no system which had been productive of so
salntary an effect in reclaiming prisoners as that of solitary
confinement. He condemned it, however, when carried
to too great an extent, it seriously affected the health and
faculties of the prisoners.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The
Honourable Member who had moved the amendment
could not have read the Reports of the Commissioners,
on the system pursued in the United States.—( Hear,
hear.) Tne system of discipline at present pursued in
the gaols of that country was exceedingly lax, and he
believed that many parties were in the habit of commit-
ting offences upon the chance of being sent into gaol and
living there comfortably. The whole Bill being permissive,
he hoped and trusted it would speedily be carried into
operation. His Hon. Friend would, he believed, best
consult the feeling of the House by withdrawing his oppo-
sition to the measure.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw and the
Clouse divided :
For the third reading
For the amendment
Majority
The Bill was then read a third time.
Sevenl clauses were brought up, and after goin
through Committee were added to the Bill by way o
riders.
On the motion that the Bill do pass,
Lord TEIGNMOUTII rose to move the omission o
the 14th clause. He did not know, after the recent
division, that he would divide upon the motion—he was
very certain that it could never become port of an Act of
Parliament—it was sure never to pass the other branch of
the Legislature, or he would have opposed it in every
stage. He complained of the conduct of Gentlemen on
the oiler side with respect to the clause—they heard all
that was said from the Conservative side of the House
upon it, but being unable answer the arguments they
trusted in numbers. The clause was introuced not to
remedy a grievance, but to set up a most dangerous pre-
cedent. He spoke with authority upon this subject, as he
had, since last discussion, sent queries to the chaplains of the
gaols of all largetownsandthey had most obligingly answered
him, from all their letters (the Noble Lord read extracts
from several) it appeared that it was a very rare circum-
stance for any one Catholic out of a thousand to ask for
the attendance of a priest. The effect of the clause would
be to extract money from the Protestant Church of Eng-
land fur the purpose of endowing another system of re-
ligious instruction. It was, in fact, another appropriation
clause upon a small scale. The Noble Lord concluded by
stating that he should not divide the House, but content
himself with stating that he believed the country was
becoming more and more alive to the subject.—( Hear.)
Mr. FOX MAULE did not mean to discuss the ques-
tion again, because it had already been debated on four
cifferent occasions, and opportunities had been given to
discuss it in the fullest manner.—(Hear, hear.) But
on this occasion, when the fullest notice had been
given, scarcely one of the leaders of 'are other side of
the House were in attendance to discuss what the
Noble Lord considered to be of so much importance; and
therefore he was bound to infer that they were absent on
the conviction that this clause was so reasonable in itself
that they did not feel justified in opposing it.—(Hear.)
Mr. PRYME supported the clause. If there was one
class more than another that needed instruction, it was the
inmates of prisons, in order that they might be induced to
pursue a better line of conduct. He was convinced that
much good might be done in prisons by the administration
of religious counsel to the inmates, according to the prin-
ciples in which they had been educated.—( Hear.)
Mr. LANGDALE had introduced this clause with no
feeling of hostility to the Church. He had never done
anything in his capacity of a Legislator which had a direct
tendency to injure the Church ; and what he had not done
directly, he would not do indirectly. He considered it but
reasonable that those who were called upon to attend pri-
soners should receive some remuneration for their services.
Lord TEIGNM OUT H explained that lie did not in-
tend to cast any reflection on the Hon. Member opposite.
On the contrary, he was convinced that he had acted from
conscientious motives, and had he (Lord Teignmouth)
been a Roman Catholic, he should have pursued precisely
the same course.—( Hear.)
Mr. ESTCOURT objected to the appointment of
chaplains being regulated by the number of prisoners. I
it were necessary to have a chaplain for fifty prisoners, 1
might be necessary to have a chaplain for every other de.
seription of persons in the gaol. He did not think any
Member of the House would advocate such an altera'ion
in the kw, and therefore must protest against the introduc-
tion of the principle.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said if there was any
danger to the Established Church, in the plan
now about to be adopted, it already existed in
Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) The fact was that the whole of
the opposition raised against the proposed plan was part of
that "no Popery" cry which Hon. Members had evoked
for their own purposes, and which they would probably in
the end find too strong for themselves.—(Hear, hear.)
The absence of the leaders on the other side was rather re-
markable, if the proposal was so dangerous; but he sup-
posed they were trusting to the force of prejudice in
another place.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. A. YATES said that there were not above four
or five prisons in England to which the regulation would
be applicable. The Inspector of the Goal at Liverpool
reported that he could see no evil from the establishment
of these Chaplains, provided they did not interfere with the
discipline of the goal, and after all it was left to the dis-
cretion of the Magistrates to decide
_whether a case was
made out for their appointment.
Mr. O'CONNELL had to make an apology to the
Noble Lord for not speaking on this subject. He had pro-
mised to do so, but he knew there was no offence which
the House would sooner pat dun than not making a speech.
—( A laugh.)
. The clause was then agreed to, and the Bill was read a
third time and passed.
Mr. FOX MAULE moved that the House at its rising
do adjourn to Monday.—Arced to.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. FOX MAULS moved the reading of the Order
of the Day for the House resolving itself into Committee
on the Metropolitan Police Courts Bill.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD objected to this course.
He understood that the Copyright Bill was to have pre-
cedence.
Mr. FOX MAULE said that if he would look at the
notice given by the Noble Lord, he would see that he had
given notice that the order of precedence should he, first
the Prisons Bill, then the Metropolitan Police Courts
Bill, and then the Copyright Bili.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD had certainly read the
notice, hut he had understood from the Noble Lord that
the Copyright BM wee to have precedence.
Mr. FOX MAULE said there must have been some
misunderstanding on this subject, as he had understood
directly the contrary. The House would not be detained
a moment by the Committee, and then the Copyright Bill
could be proceeded with.
Sir R. INGLIS agreed with the Hon. Member for
Reading, and hoped he would be allowed precedence.
After a few words from Colonel SIBTHO RP and the
SOLICITOR-GENERAL,
Major WOOD said he should certainly oppose the vote,
because this money vote was to carry into effect certain
clauses of which he disapproved, and against which he had
a petition to present. The Hon. Member then proceeded
I to read a petition against the rural police.
Mr. HUME apprehended that the Member was under
a mistake, this Bill was not for a rural police.
Sir R. INGLIS apprehended his Hon. Friend could
not present a petition against one Bill while another was
under discussion.
Sir EDWARD KN ATC H BULL said he might read
it as part of his speech.
Mr. W ARLEY said that although it might be consi-
dered matter of form in that House to vote away money,
the people considered it matter of extortion. Although he
admitted there were some good provisions in the Bill there
were many bad ones of which he disapproved, and which
he should oppose. He objected to the salaries of the Ma-
gistrates, which were too large, and he could see no reason
for increasing the salaries of the Commissioners of Police.
It should not be proposed to increase the salary of the
Commissioners to 1,2001 a year each. When their salary
was appointed at 8001. each, the interest of money was
3 per cent. ; now it was 51 per cent., and really he
thought that with our enormous debt, and in such a dis•
tressed state of the country, the House ought to proceed
on a principle of the strictest economy. He really
thought the House was more reckless of expense
than the Ministry. When it was proposed, the
other night, that 70,000/. should be allowed
for the building of stables at Windsor, he moved an
amendment of 50,0001., and not one Member on either
Bide seconded him. But two Members of the opposition
gave the proposition their highest approbation. The Go-
vernment would not be so extravagant if the House
would insist upon economy. He would not vote for the
resolution unless it were distinctly understood that the
House should not be pledged to the 1.200/. salaries.
Mr. B A RING assured the Hun. Gentleman that all
that was wanted was, that the Committee should be al-
lowed to introduce a cleuse proposing a salary, and then
the House might reject or confirm it.
After a long discussion, which turned mainly upon the
question, whether or not the House would be pledged to
the increased salaries if the Committee were entered into,
and in which the interesting point was that the Hon.
Members seemed mutually unable to make themselves un-
derstand each other, the House went into Committee.
11Ir. FOX INI AU LE then proposed that a salary of not
more than 1,200/. should be allowed to each of the Police
Commissioners.

-105

-7M-r-.-WA KLEY hoped tinol.tant a proposition

would not be discussed until they had a full House.
would oppose t'le proposition.
Mr. M.KIN NON hoped the House would allow 1,20074;
considering the services the Commissioners had perforaiNt
to the public.
Mr. HUME said that the resolutions only enable tfig-
Government to introduce a clause, and when it was
traduced then was the time to object to it. This was`" ,
only an initiatory p,oceoding.
Mr. T. DUNGOMBE wished to understand on what
Bill they were going into Committee, for aught he knew
they were going into a Committee on the Irish Tithe
Bill.—( Laughter.)
Mr. F. M A ULE said they were not going in'o a Com-
mittee on a Bill at all, they were going into Committee
upon a resolution.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE could not understand what they
were about, he never witnessed such a system of legisla-
ture in his life.

Mr. GODSON rose to order ; he wished to know from
the Chair whether they were discussing a Bill or a
resolution.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the object of the present proceeding was to enable
the House to discuss the very proposition the Honourable
Member for Finsbury, was anxious to bring forward.
Mr. WAK LE Y, notwithstanding all that had been
stated, could not but think that they were in
Committee of Supply, and being of that opinion
he should move that the sum should be 800/. in-
ste id of 1,2001 , and he would divide the House upon it if
lie could find any person to second his motion.—( Hear
hear, and cries of " Divide.") lion. Members might cry
" Hear, hear, and divide," but he would tell them that
after five years' experience he had invariably found that
ul ol any proposition to economize the money of the pcop e
that H)use was always most unwilling to entertain it.
What sum of money had they given to obtain their present
efficient Ines ? Why, 800/. a year ; and he could not see
why they should give au addition of 400/. a year to these
Gentlemen. The House must be aware that there was
was great national distress at the present moment, and he
feared ere long they would be plunged into the grea'est
difficulties. —( Hear, hear ) On these grounds he should
move an amendment that the sum be reduced to 8001.

a year.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE supported the motion of his
objected Hon. Friend and Colleague. Ile object, to voting the '
money of the people unnecessarily, and that he believed
was (notwithstanding the observa ions of the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer) the only
object of his Hon. Friend's amendment. If he (Mr.
Duncombe) came down there to oppose the Copyright or
any other Bill, he would do it independently and openly,
and would not arrive five minutes too late for the Hastings
coach.—( Much laughter.)
After a few words from Mr. WARBURTON,
Mr. II LTM E said he had been a Member of the Com-
mittee on the Metropolitan Police, and it was distinctly
understood that if their duties increased the salary would
be increased.—( Hear, hear.) He had never heard more
s itisfactory evidence of the efficient manner in which the
duties of these important effices were discharged by Col.
R)wan and Mr. Mayne,—( Hear, hear.) If the Howe
took that into consideration it would not consider I 2001.
too much. Ile believed that no public men in London,
not even the Coroners—( A laugh)—had their time more
completely devotel to the performance of their duties.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no divi-
sion took place ; and on our return to the gallery we
found that the resolution had been agreed to.
The next resolution was that a sum not exceeding 2d.
in the pound on all the additional rental assessed in places
that might hereafter become parts of the Metropolitaii
police district be granted fur defraying the expenses of the
police force.
Mr. HUME objected to any increase being made in
the amount granted for defraying the expense of the police
force.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought charges of that natu-e should
not be placed upon the Consolidated Fund. Ho had some
old Constitutional notions, which were epposed to grants
of money being made, which did not come under the
notice of Parliament.
Mr. F. M AUL E then moved a vote of 20,0001. for the
payment of the Horse Patrol and of the Thames Police.
This added nothing to the annual charge, as it was a mere
transfer from one fund to another.
Mr. HUME doubted the policy of the transfer of this
sum to the Consolidated Fund. It ought to be an annual
vote, because the House ought to have an opportunity of
reviewing the conduct of the police force. He submitted
that this was a new charge, and it was also a new way of
adding to the standing force of the country. By putting
the charge upon the Consolidated Fund they were taking
away the only opportunity of discussing the whole affairs
of the police. He supported the police force when it was
very unpopular, especially in Middlesex, but lie con-
sidered it important, and he supported the Right Ho-
nourable Member for Tamworth even at the expense
of a little unpopularity, still he thought there ought to
be an annual opportunity for the House to make obser-
vations upon the force.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
thought it was a matter of consideration whether Parliament
should not reserve to itself the power alluded to by the
Hon. Member ; but would it not be better to allow the
vote to passe and have the discussion on the further progress
of the Bill ?
Mr. GOULB URN asked why they should make a
separate charge for separate forces, when all were to be
under one head ?
Mr. WILLIAMS said there was a great degree of
prejudice in the public mind against the police force.—
(No, no.) There was. He considered that placing the
grant for the force upon an annual vote, would tend to do
away with that prejudice very materially.
Mr. HUME moved to leave out the words " From the
Consolidated Fund."
Mr. BERN AL said it could not he paid unless out of
the Consolidated Fund. They must be paid out of some
source, and no other had been mentioned.
Mr. HUM E then proposed to postpone it, until they
could understand the matter.—(Laughter.)
After some further conversation, the resolution was
agreed to.
Mr. F. MAU'LE said he should postpone the other
resolution, and move that the Chairman report progress.
The House then resumed.
COPYRIGHT BILL.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD moved the Order of the
Day, for the House going into Committee on the Copy-
right Bill.
Mr. F. BARING wished to proceed with the Com-
mittee of Supply.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD said the agreement of the
Noble Lcrd (Russell) was that if the Copyright Bill lasted
till half-past nine, the Committee of Supply should then
come on. He complained of a breach of faith in anot her
order having been moved beforehis Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
suggested that a vote should be taken in Committee
of Supply, and that then the Copyright Bill should pro-
ceed, or that it should proceed now, and the vote be
taken afterwards.
Mr. HUME objected to any money being voted
after 12 o'clock.
After some further conversation, the House resolved
selfinto a

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.
Mr. F. BARING moved that 70,0001. be granted for
civil contingences for the year 1839-40.
Mr. HUME objected that the items for clothing to the
Gentlemen at Arms (wc believe), and for the silver trum-
pets to the Life Guards, should be in the Civil List.
Colonel SIBTHO RP had observed an item of 2,2241.
for reimbursing the Captain of the Hastings for the enter-
tainment of the Earl of Durham and his suite on their
pusslge out to Canada. He should like to have an account
of the whole of those expenses. He thought her Majesty's
Ministers ought to be mulcted of their salaries until the
expenses of that mission had been paid.
Mr. GOULBURN was of opinion that the discussion
on the Miscellaneous Estimates was always most unsatis-
factory. Each Gentleman started his hare, and before it
was killed some one else started another. The Hon.
Member for Kenny had started the first hare, and he.
A
should prorose that they hunted that down first. He
to o
inquireed t he
lynottoe
the or thp
eP
r(2lextpveonfs egsraonfti ntig' ea
cCh emr its;
hiA)dn e°rl)s
M ,neliester—he was of opinion that as the granting such
charter was for the benefit of the inhab.tants of Blanches-
ter, ttey ought to be at the expense of the necessary pre-
liminary inquiries.
Lord 110 WICK said that if the maintenance of good
order in large towns was considered a subject of cational
importance, they could not object to the expense of insti-
tuting those preliminary inquiries, without which it would
be impossible for the Privy Council to determine whether
charters should be granted or not.
Mr. HUME said that these expenses should be paid in
the same manner as the expenses of watching or paving
large towns. The Noble Lord's justification. of this item
was by no means satisfactory.
After a few words from Lord SANDON,
Lord DU NG ANN 0 N said he was taken by surprise
at finding the House in a Committee of Supply. He came
down for the purpose of supporting the Bill of the Hon.
Member for Reading—(Laughter)—he meant the Copy-
right Bill.
After a few observations from Mr. C. BARING, Lord
SANPON, and Lord HowicK,
Sir T. FR EEMA NTLE opposed the public being called
upon to make any payments on this matter.
Mr BROTH ERTON thought the opposition did not
come with a very good grace against this grant. He did
not begrudge any money that had been paid to Commis-
siones, bee,use he considered them to have done a great
deal of good.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not expect that
the Hort. Member for Kilkenny would have persevered in
his opposition to the vote. These were not the expenses ,
of the Commissioners at Manchester, but expenses incurred
by order of the Privy Council, without which they could
not have discharged their duty. The Privy Council could
not ascertain whether these charters cught or ought not to
be granted, until they had obtained information on the
subject, and that could be done much more easily by
sending Commissioners down to Manchester, than sum-
moning a host of witre;ses before them. They certainly
could not ask the parties seeking the charters to defray
these expenses, and all would admit the importance of
cenferring charters upon such towns as Manchester,
Birmingham, Shefli Id, and Balton. The expenses were
admitted to be fairly acd properlyincurred, and he hoped
there would he no further objection to the vote.
Mr. GOULBURN did not quite agree with the views
of the lion. and Learned Gentlemen. There were two
parties before the Privy Council,. the one seeking for, and the
er opposing, the gr.ant ot the charter. He thought the
expense of obtaining it should be defrayed by the former
party.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. WIL LI A NIS had a decided objection to this vote.
He thought the country should not be taxed in order to
confer charters upon these towns. They sought the charters
thata' d svheoruyld
pay the xpenses incurred.. He
Manchester and elsewhere for that put pose. He was f a
themselves,understood
tisfied they were all too wealthy and too independent to
large sums had been subgcribed at
allow the public to be taxed for their benefit. He should
move that this item of 95011 be disallowed.