The Sun.
London, England, 1839-07-18 00:00:00

than to express his admiration of the manner in which
the Committee had made out a case calling imperiously,
in the name of humanity, for legislative interference.
Mr. HUME suggested whether it would not be more
efficient to prevent bad ships being employed, by per-
mitting an increased rate of insurance being taken, be-
cause as long as they could be insured, merchants would
send mere rafts to sea.
Admiral ADAM said that what had fallen from the
Hon. Member fur Kilkenny would be properly discussed
in Committee, and ought to be attended to.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed to-morrow.
The second reading of the Payment of Rates Bill,
was postponed till to-morrow.
On the motion of Dr. LUSHINGTON, the Ec-
clesiastical Districts Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed on Wednesday next.
SHANNON NAVIGATION.

On the motion for the House resolving itself into
Committee on the Shannon Navigation Bill,
Colonel SIBTHORP said he thought, considering
the miserable state in which the Government were placed
at the present moment, the House ought not to pro-
ceed further with the consideration of the Bill during

the present Session. He respected Ireland as much as
any man, and he should be glad to see it improved ; but
he thought the mode in which the money was to be
raised for carrying on the work, namely, by Exchequer
Bills, was most objectionable. So great an objection
had he to the Bill that could he find any Hon. Member
to divide with him, he would move that the further con-
sideration of the Bill should be proceeded with that day
six months.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
trusted that after consideration Hon. Members would,
considering the time the Bill had been before the
House, and taking into account alss that not a single
petition had been presented against the Bill, with the
exception of one from an individual which had been
withdrawn, allow the Bill to go into Committee. The
public had been greatly deluded by statements that had
been put forth relative to his having an interest in the
Bill ; and it was his intention, when the Bill was in
Committee, to rebut those statements.

Mr. W. ROCHE supported the committal of the Bill.
Mr. HUME thought that the House were entitled
to have an explanation from the Chancellor of the
Exchequer relative to the large sum that was required
for this work before they went into Committee.

Mr. F. FRENCH thought that they ought to zo
into Committee on the Bill, in which stage any expla-
nation might be given that was required.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said if the House would only go into a Committee it
was his intention to enter fully into the details of the
Bill,

Captain BOLDERO wished to ask whether the
proposed estimate would cover the whole expense ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said that it would.

Captain BOLDER() wished to know what guarantee
the House had that such was the case ? Every other
public work had exceeded if not nearly doubled the esti-
mated expense.

Mr. O'CONNELL wished to say a few words be-
fore the House went into Committee on the Bill. It
had been stated that he had a personal interest in the
improvement of the navigation ; he had no such thing,
his property was 40 or 50 miles from the Shannon, and
no man bad less personal interest in the measure than
he had.

Mr. WILLIAMS thought the House ought to have
an explanation from the Chancellor of the Exchequer
before they went into Committee.
Mr. ELLIS would not oppose the House going into
Committee, but he must protest against proceeding
with the Bill in the dark. The maps and plans of the
intended work were not yet before the House.
Mr. FINCH must protest against proceeding further
with the Bill, as no explanation had been given yet of
the necessity for so great a sum as was asked for by the
measure. He would move as an amendment that the Bill
should be taken into further consideration that day three
months.

Mr. WILLIAMS seconded the amendment.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, if Hon. Members were determined to persevere
into
an this course he must in justice to himself enter
an explanation of the objects and nature of the Bill.
The interests not only of Ireland, but England were in-
volved in this vote, and if the House were to adopt the
proposition of the Hon. Member they would go in
direct variance to the decision of Parliament and their
duty to the people of Ireland. An Act had passed
that House, which had received the sanction of the
other branch of the Legislature, in which the whole
principle of the Shannon vote bad been affirmed. The
Act to which he alluded was passed in 1835, which
recited that it was expedient that the expenses of the
proposed improvement in the Shannon should be
borne out of the public funds.—( Hear, hear.)
It had been supposed that that measure was brought
forward now for the first time, and for private interests.
No one who had ever turned their attention to the sub-
ject hut must know that it had been under considera-
tion for centuries—that it had been recommended un-
der the secretaryship of Edmund Spencer—alao under
the administration of Sir John Davis, the improvement
of the Shannon was considered as a national object ;
and also in the time of Lord Bacon, who was a high
authority. He was almost ashamed to take up the
time of the House upon the question, but the object
of the Bill had been much misunderstood, and he felt
it his duty to state the matter fully to the House. The
experiment of leaving the improvement of the Shannon
to private enterprise had already been tried, but it had
entirely failed. Private speculation might do very well
for the improvement of a small river, but to improve
one of 170 miles in length it required greater re-
sources. The question had been agitated since the
time of Elizabeth, and was under the consideration
of every Government since that time, and in 1831
Colonel Burgoyne, Mr.. Mudge, Mr. Rhodes, and
Mr. Cubits made a report, in which they said
it was surprising that so noble a river as the Shannon
should be in such a state of neglect ; and they further
said, the improvement of it would be for the advantage
of both countries. Again, in 1834, a Select Committee,
composed of Gentlemen of all parties—of English, Irish,
and Scotch Members sat, and having inquired into the
subject, they reported that the Government ought to
take up the matter—ought to undertake the work.
The Government did not proceed upon that Report,
but upon his recommendation they waited until they
were aware that the whole of the compensations were
settled. The Parliament then passed an Act for the
purpose of ascertaining the amount of these compensa-
tions, and would be guilty of a fraud if they now turned
round and said they would abandon the scheme. They
had a Report before them of the beneficial effects which
the public works, undertaken in Scotland, had been the
instruments of.—( Hear, hear, hear.) No doubt,
hitherto, the Caledonian Canal had been a failure,
but it must be borne in mind that that work
which cost one million, was at the sole cost
of the Government, whereas the present work
would not cost the half, and the half of that
was secured upon the Irish County-rates. Would
the House say they were prepared to vote 1,000,000/.
for Scotland, 120,000/. for canals in Canada—tint they
would vote for the payment of the Danish claims, but
would not vote for that which would not only benefit
Ireland but the whole country ? A more despicable—
a more ungenerous course could not be taken towards
Ireland, for the measure would not only increase its re-
sources, but make it more beneficial to England. It had
been stated that he. had some personal interest in the
question. No doubt he had, but he would put the House
in possession to what extent. The sum proposed to be
expended upon the Lower Shannon below Limerick was
52,1371., or one-tenth of the whole. In that portion he
had an interest to the extent of one mile and-a-half out
of sixty. He had no fault to find with the Commis-
sioners, but certainly they had shown him no fa-
vour, for before any improvement on his property
was commenced, he was compelled to pay 4,000/
—one-half of the whole estimated expenditure. The
generous spirit of that House and the British pub-
lic had not hesitated to afford to other parts of this
empire, and the dependencies of this empire, that might
be much less dearer to them than Ireland, ample
means of carrying on beneficial works ; and he sin-
cerely trusted the House would go into Committee on
this Bill, and thus show the people of Ireland they
were ready to assist them.
Major WOOD was quite willing to vote for any sum
of money that would tend to the improvement of pub-
lic works and the general welfare of Ireland ; but he
would not consent to a reckless issue of Exchequer bills
.—(Hear, hear)—and the incurring of a debt without
providing the means of meeting that expenditure.
There was already a deficiency of the revenue to the
amount of
.2,ooo.,Cool.—that was to be met by an issue
of Exchequer bills ; there was a prospect of a further
deficiency on account of the change in the Post-office—
perhaps to the extent of another million—and that
would be met by an issue of Exchequer bills. If these
works were necessary for the welfare of Ireland
he was ready to take the proper means of pro-
viding the revenue, but he would not assent
to recklessly incurring a debt, without providing the
taxes which would secure the revenue, and the public
faith of the country.—( Hear, hear.) He was quite sure
the course they were taking with regard to the revenue
was not only injurious to the credit and faith of the
Country, but that it was a course likely to involve the
country in difficulties they would never be able to sur-
mount.---( Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
these works would not be completed in a less period than
eight or nine years. In 1817
i , the late Lord Castle-
reagh issued Exchequer bills for the promotion of public
works. Those Exchequer bills were issued for English
purposes, not to the extent of 500,0001., which be pro-
posed, but to the amount of 7,000,000/ and by an ac-
count on the table, it appeared that so. ;
far from that
transaction having been productive of loss, there had,
after deducting the amount of bad debts, been a profit'
on the transaction of 313,0001., independent of the
great public benefit which the promotion of the public
works bad conferred.—( Hear.)

Major WOOD—I object to the issuing of Exche-
quer bills when there is a deficiency of revenue.
Mr. O'CONNELL said the Hon. and Gallant
Gentleman was exceedingly generous towards Ireland ;
but when a proposition was made for a grant of money,
he opposed it.—(A laugh.) For his own part, he
hoped the Hon. Gentleman would succeed, because he
(Mr. O'C.) thought it would do more good in Ireland
than if the Chancellor of the Exchequer's proposition
were carried. It would be one further proof of the
disposition of that House towards Ireland—not one side
of the House merely, but both sides. One side would
not give them franchises or privileges, and others would
not advance money. Both sides, on money questions,
were disposed to vote against them.—(Laughter.)
When the Union took place between the two countries,
Ireland owed about 27,000,0001., and England owed
500,000,000/, and was that justice between nation and
nation which would not be justice as between man and
man in the case of a partnership ? The Session had
gone by without one single advantage being gained by
Ireland. The measure of franchise that was lately
before that House had been but stingily given, and
would be probably annihilated elsewhere. Did Hon.
Gentlemen think they would go back to Ireland without
a determination of telling the people of Ireland those
truths which would make them regret one day or
another the manner in which they had treated that un-
happy country ? Why, a third of the money proposed
to be granted was their own. 120,0001. had been voted
for the Thames Tunnel.—(Cries of " More.")
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER-
-170,0001.
Mr. O'CONNELL-170,0001. for the Thames
Tunnel ! What advantage to Ireland was the Thames
Tunnel ?—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) If these works
were carried on provisions would be cheaper in Liver-
pool and Manchester, and the other manufacturing
towns ; for by the improvement of the Shannon pro-
visions would be brought in 76 hours from thence to the
Manchester market. That was the advantage it would
give to the manufacturers, but yet they refused this
stingy, paltry, and miserable grant, while they had
thrown away millions on other parts of their dominions.
This was a paltry, pitiful sum for a great national and
imperial objycr, and he sincerely trusted, for the reason
he had stated, that the House would agree to the
amendment.—(Laughter, and cries of " Hear.")
Mr. WILLIAMS would not withdraw his oppo-
sition to this proposition, notwithstanding the obscrva
tions of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin.—
(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had
stated that a vast amount of public money had been
squandered away—and in that he (Mr. Williams) agreed.
—(Hear, hear.) But when they looked at the state
of the country—an over-burthened population, and the
distress that existed—when they saw the condition of
the Exchequer, and that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer was increasing the amount of the National Debt,
he thought it was necessary to put a stop to any further
squandering of the public money.—(Hear, hear.) No
man would be more ready than himself to support any
measure for the good of the people of Ireland, and he
would continue to do so until they had full justice ; but
it was quite another thing to give away the public
money. The tolls to be levied on the river Shannon
were to be applied to further improvements.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—
No, no.
Mr. WILLIAMS contended that the 55th clause
expressly provided for that application. If the proceeds
of the tolls were to go in liquidation of one half of the
principal debt, and the payment of the interest on the
other half, it would be quite a different matter. It was
his duty to protect the pockets of his constituents against
the improper application of the public taxes. If the
Chancellor of the Exchequer could show that the profit
from the tolls would pay the interest on the outlay, it
would be another consideration, but he had attempted
to do no such thing. But the proceeds of these tolls
were not to apply.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—
They are.
Mr. WILLIAMS said the clause to which he had
referred showed the contrary. If the House were to
agree to this grant of 290,0001., they would be called on
for a further sum. If Ireland was to be benefited by
this measure, let a tax be laid on the river,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the surplus of the works was to be applied in reduction
of the advance.

Mr. WILLIAMS wished the Right Hon. Gentleman
to point out the clause.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
he should be quite ready to discuss it on going into
Committee.

Mr. PLUMPTRE objected to the proposition. He
did not see why the same principle should not be ap-
plied to public as to private interests—that industry
should be left to its own resources. Our revenue was
falling off—it would not meet the expenditure ; and
here there was a vote of near 300,0001. proposed—not
as a loan, but as a grant, to one part of the country.
He could not conscientiously consent to such an outlay
of the public moncy.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. D. BROWNE said the Hon. Member for Co-
ventry belonged to a class of gentlemen calling them-
selves " Liberals," who were very liberal to Ireland
when it cost them nothing ; but when assistance in
money was proposed to Ireland, they became as great
mo nopolists as Hon. Members opposite. They voted
willingly for measures which they did not think would
pass, to gain a false popularity, but if a vote of money
was suggested for Ireland they rose en masse against it.
—(Hear, hear.) Now this he considered the strongest
argument in favour of a repeal of the Union.—(Hear,
hear, and a laugh.)
Mr. PRYME had opposed the proposition even
before the revenue had become deficient, upon the gene-
ral principle that if grants of the public money were to
be voted for improvements in Ireland, they must equally
be voted for England and Scotland.—(Hear, hear.)
He bad never understood that liberality in politics
meant donations in money.—(Hear, hear, and laugh-
ter.) As to the argument that the Shannon was a
Royal River, and liable to tolls, he would just remark
that these tolls were very insignificant, and quite dis-
proportionate to the outlay.
Mr. WAKLEY said he considered the observations
of the Hon. Member for Mayo wholly uncalled for.—
(" Oh, oh," from Mr. O'Connell.) The Hon. Mem-
ber had accused some Hon. Gentleman of voting for
measures which they did not •expect to pass. Now
that was a most unjustifiable charge.—(lronical cries of
" Hear, hear," from Mr. O'Connell and other Mem-
bers.) No taunts should induce him to consent to this
proposition. Allusion had been made by the Learned
Member for Dublin to the grant for the Thames
Tunnel. Now this was a good argument against
those who had voted for that grant ; but not
against those who, like himself (Mr. Wakley.) considered
it a most improvident and inexcusable outlay of the
public money.—(Hear, hear.) But any proposition for
squandering away the public funds was sure to be car-
ried in that House, and he knew well that this propo-
sition would be carried. The Learned Member had
said that the result of the proposition would be to bring
the produce of Ireland within 36 hours of Lancashire,
the effect of which would be to convey away the food of
the Irish people.—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh," from Mr,
O'Connell and other Irish Members.) It was very
well to cry " Oh," but the fact was, that the House
did not like to hear the truth, they were so unused to
it.—(A laugh.) This proposition was holding out a
premium to absenteeism ; whereas the object of our
Legislation should be to lead the Irish landowners to
reside at home and improve their lakes and rivers.
Did England or Scotland ask for such grants ?—(" Hear,"
from Mr. O'Connell ; " No," from another Member.)
There was a bad principle involved in this measure—
the principle that the public money should be granted
for local improvements. If it were 'done in one case, it
must be done in others.—(Hear, hear.) The effect of
such measures always was to discourage private enter-
prize, and was therefore injurious instead of beneficial.
With an insufficient revenue such a course was pecu-
liarly imprudent, and he should give it his most stre-
nuous opposition. The country was never in greater
distress. Would the House ever stop in this reckless
course ?—(" No," and laughter.) No, they would
continue in their career of folly till the result was
ruinous. The rents in Ireland were higher than in
England or Scotland—(" No, no," from some Mem-
bers)—yet the wages of labour were much lower.
Ought this to be ? And could a measure like this
really improve the country while so circumstanced?
Mr. DILLON BROWNE explained.

Mr. FITZSTEPHEN FRENCH said that the
Hon. Member for Finsbury had said that this 290,000/.
ought to be raised by the Irish counties for these pur-
poses. He would say that if all the money that had
been raised in Ireland for the purposes of public works
had been made available, there would have been no
necessity for them to ask assistance of the United
Kingdom. He found by a return presented to that
House in 1833, that 512,000/. had been raised from
the revenue of the Woods and Forests in Ireland,
which was, he considered, applicable to such pur-
poses as this of the improvement of the Shannon ;
but there had been expended in Ireland of this sum,
including the salaries of clerks and secretaries, only
3,100/. ; under these circumstances he did not think
they were asking too much.

Captain BOLDERO said that the Right Hon.
Gentleman had said that a great reduction had taken
place in the number of troops required for Ireland, and
that, therefore, that sum thus saved ought to be
applied to the improvement of that country. But no
reduction of the public expense had taken place in con-
sequence of this withdrawal of troops who had been sent
to Canada. With regard to this improvement, no estimate
had been given, except in one instance for 7,000/., which
had been refused, and if that had been refused with an
improving revenue, why call upon them to advance so
much larger a sum with a decreasing one ? It had been
said that certain persons had stopped the mills in expec-
tation of these improvements, and would suffer loss if
the Bill should not be passed. These persons must
stand to their own loss, as they had no right to stop the
mills until this money was voted. If the Chancellor of
the Exchequer could show that there was the least ex-
pectation of profit, more especially if be offered ade-

quate security, he would have no difficulty in raising
money in the City for this purpose, but he believed he
could show no such thing. The River Thames stood
in need of improvement ; it would be a great advantage
to have a cut through the Isle of Dogs, but if any one
were to propose a grant of money for this purpose he
would be laughed at. With respect to the Caledonian
Canal he thought the House had committed an error
by which they ought to take warning in the present in-
stance. He hoped the Hon. Member would press his
amendment, and he should certainly vote for it.
Mr. ELLIS, in reply to the taunts of the Hon. and
Learned Member for Dublin, wout.d state that from
certain returns for which he (Mr. Ellis) had moved, it
appeared that 800,827,1411. had been granted for pub-
lic works in Ireland, which was a proof that there was
no want of generosity. He objected to a measure of
this importance being brought forward at so late a pe-
riod. It had not been introduced until the 17th of
June. and various petitions had been presented against
it—it had been hurried forward during every step at a
late hour of the evening, and with little discussion. The
vote for half a million of money had been taken at a late
hour likewise. Not more than half the maps and plans
were laid on the table of the House, and as
they were all referred to in the preamble, he
should like to know why they were not laid before
Parliament. They were called on to le2islate on their
own responsibility, and not on that of the Lords of the
Treasury. He believed this objection to be fatal to the
measure. He cotasidered this Bill as exceedingly ob-
noxious, more particularly that portion of it establishing
the Commissioners, one of whom was to be a paid one.
Was there not a Board already established for this
purpose ?—the Board of Public Works—this was strictly
within their duty—(Loud cheering)—and he could
state, from the highest authority, that that
Board had not enough to do to occupy their time.
He was not unwilling to lay out the public money for
the improvement of so noble a river, but he trusted the
House would pause to consider the best means for doing
so—that they would take time to see whether the plans
of the Government would be for the public good. He
would vote for the House not going into Committee
upon the present Bill during the present Session.
Lord CLEMENTS said the Hon. Member com-
plained of the want of maps and plans—they were be-
fore the House, and any one could see them. He had
never heard more illiberal, more shuffling, or more dis-
graceful arguments against a beneficia: measure, than he
had heard from the other side of the House.--( Hear,
hear.) The Irish people did not want anything in the
shape of favour, they only wanted justice.—(Loud
cries of " Divide, divide.")
Mr. A. YATES supported the Bill amidst confusion.
The Gallery was then cleared. 'The House divided,
when there appeared—
For the motion 64
For the amendment 25
Majority.•... —39
Upon our return to the gallery we found the House
in Committee upon the Bill, and
Mr. ELLIS complaining of the patronage given to
the Government by the Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER de-
fended the Board of the Treasury. They had no
patronage at all in the matter. General Burgoyne
and Mr. Griffiths were not paid Commissioners, and
Major Jones, who was the only paid Commissioner, was
unknown to the Government except through the re-
commendation of General Burgoyne.
Colonel SIBTHORP wanted tb know what the
salary of the fortunate Commissioner was to be. The
Commission would last seven or eight years, and with a
deficient revenue, which he had no doubt would in that
time be seven times as bad, they were appointing a new
Commissioner, with an unknown salary.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said he had omitted to state that the salary of the paid
Commissioner was to be 6001., but it would be the sub-
ject of an annual grant, and had no reference to the
Bill before the House.
Col. PERCEVAL wished to know whether it was
the intention of the Government to supersede the pre-
sent Shannon Commissioners ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER re-
plied that it was not.
Col. SIBTHORP said the very name of Commis-
sioner was as odious to him as the Treasury Bench.—
(Laughter.) He hated the name of it.—(Continued
laughter.) If clay Hon. Member could divide vith
he would move that the Commissioners be no longer
continued under the Bill.

Mr. ELLIS thought no Commissioners need be ap-
pointed, as the Board of Works was quite sufficient
Lord MORPETH said the labour was so great
that it was sometimes impossible to perform it, and an
addition had been suggested to the Board of Works.
Mr. HUME had understood that the Board of
Works, with one additional officer, was to execute
these duties.

The C HA NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that Major Jones, as well as the other Commissioners,
who were also Commissioners of the Board of Works,
would act gratis, and not a single clerk would be ap-
pointed who would not be necessary to the Board of
Works, if these duties were to be imposed on that

Board.
Colonel SIBTHORP suggested the propriety of
transferring these duties to the Secretary for Ireland,
who is said to have a vast deal of leisure.
Lord MORPETH said if the Gallant Officer would
point out his (Lord Morpeth's) leisure time, it would be
a discovery to him for which he should be obliged to
the Gallant Officer.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the clause
Against it lB
Majority

....
The clause was then agreed to, with some verbal
amendments.
Clause 3 was then agreed to.
On clause 4 being proposed,
Mr. HUME objected to the clause, unless the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer could assure the House that
no great issue of Exchequer Bills would be required at
the present time.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
could assure the House that such was the case. He
agreed with the Hon. Gentleman as to the impropriety
of an extensive issue at present.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 5,6, 7, and 8 were also agreed to.
On clause 9, containing the proviso for the 290,000/.,
by way of grant,
Mr. HUME objected that he did not quite see if the
word " grant" would imply the re-payment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was
of opinion that the words were sufficiently clear.
The clause was agreed to, with clauses 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16, and 17.
On clause 18, providing for the annual presentation
of the accounts,
Mr. HUME suggested that the accounts should be
made up to 31st December, and presented before the
Ist February.—Agreed to.
Clauses 19, 20, 21, 22, were then agreed to, with
verbal amendments.
On clause 23,
Mr. ELLIS objected to making the awards of the
Commissioners final.
Mr. O'CONNEL L said none had been hitherto
complained of.
Mr. GISBORNE and Mr. F. FRENCH supported the
clauses.
The gallery was about to be cleared for a division,
when
Mr. ELLIS withdrew his amendment, and the clause
was agreed to.
Clauses up to 46 were agreed to,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
stating, in answer to a question on the last clause,
that the tolls, where they could, would be collected
immediately.
The remaining clauses were agreed to. The pre..
amble was agreed to, and the Report was ordered to be
received on Monday.
METROPOLIS POLICE BILL,
On the motion for the third reading of the Metro-
polis Police Bill,
Major WOOD suggested its postponement until the
Metropolis Police Courts Bill should be disposed of.
Mr. FOX MAULE must press the third reading,
as there was not such a connection between the two
Bills as would render postponement necessary, and it
was time the present Bill was sent up to the other
House.
Colonel SIBTHORP thought this was a most op-
pressive measure.
Mr. WAKLEY said it was not the Metropolitan
Police Courts' Bill, but the City Police Bill that was
to go on in conjunction with this, and as the Bill had
undergone ample discussion, and had been considerably
improved, which would make it work well, he hoped
the opposition would be withdrawn. He had opposed
the Bill as lows as he could, but seeing the House
was determined to pass it, he hoped no further oppo-
sition would be offered.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided—
Ayes ......................................... 42

Noes
Majority for the third reading
The Bill was then read a third time.
Mr. FOX MAULE proposed to bring up a clause
empowering policemen to take persons into custody for
aggravated assaults, without having witnessed the com-
mission of the offence.
Major WOOD opposed the clause.
Mr. HAWES said that this clause had been pro-
posed, after mature deliberation, at the unanimous re-
commendation of the Committee.
Colonel SIBTHORP hoped the Hon. and Gallan
Gentleman would not divide the House.
Major 'WOOD would divide if any one would divide
wi h him.
Mr. AGLIONBY said, this question had been
amply discussed in the Committee of the whole House,
and in accordance with the feeling manifested on that
occasion, the clause had been proposed. •
Mr. WAKLEY supported the clause.