The Sun.
London, England, 1841-10-02 00:00:00

DISTRESS.

Mr. GIBSON presented a petition from Manchester
complaining of the present distressed condition of the
country, and praying the House for relief.
COMMISSIONS IN THE NAVY.

On the Order of the day for the bringing up the
report of the Exchequer Bills Funding Bill being read,
Lord INGESTRIE said he had intended moving for
a Return of all the Commissions (with the names at-
tached) signed by the Board of Admiralty since the
4th day of June last, up to the issuing of the patent of
the present Board of Admiralty, distinguishing those
Commissions signed after the 30th day of August ; also,
Return of the Ships put in commission during the
same period, making the like distinction, and of the
probable date of each ship being ready for service ;
but if the Secretary to the Admiralty had any objection
to grant it, he would not press the motion.
Mr. S. HERBERT said it was not usual to grant such
returns, and it might create an inconvenient precedent.
Lord INGESTRE would not press his motion.—Mo-
tion withdrawn.

EXCHEQUER BILLS FUNDING BILL.
The Report on the Exchequer Bills Funding Bill was
then brought up, and the Bill was ordered to be read a
third time to-morrow.

EXCHEQUER BILLS BILL.
The Report on the Exchequer Bills Bill, with the ap-
propriation clause, was brought up, and the Bill was
ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
POOR-LAW COMMISSION.

On the Order of the Day for the third reading of the
Poor-law Commission Bill being moved,
Mr. FIELDEN rose to make the motion of which he
had given notice, but the Hon. Gentleman spoke in so
low a tone, that it was perfectly impossible to hear him.
We understood the Honourable Gentlemen to say
he believed that, as the perseverance of the late
Administration in continuing the Poor-law was the
cause of their downfal, so would it also be
the rock on which the present Government
would split if they continued their resolution to carry
it out. The Hon. Gentleman quoted the opinion of Sir
J. Scarlett (now Lord Abinger) and other lawyers as to
the unconstitutional power of the Commissioners. It
was in his (Mr. F's.) opinion, a tyrannical power,
unsuited to the tastes of the people, and he would
never consent to it. He could not understand how such
an unconstitutional authority should be sanctioned by
the Constitution of England. The Conservatives ought
not to forget the great exertions they made on the late
elections, and that they owed much of their strength to
the feelings of the people against the new law ; and
he wondered that so much disregard was exhibited to
their complaints on the subject by the present Government.
The Hon. Member proceeded to state the number of
petitions in favour of the amendment of the law, and the
number of those presented against it, to show the
degree of public support which the measure had
received. He believed the local boards, being
better acquainted with the actual state of the poor,
were far better qualified to administer relief to them
than any central authority could possibly be. If the
owners of property had discharged their duty there
would have been no necessity for this law. The people
were not to blame, nor were the old laws to blame
for it, but the owners of property. He knew it
was said that the poor of this country were idle, and that
they had no one but themselves to blame for their dis-
tress. He rebutted the charge. It was a libel on the
character of our countrymen. The labourers of this
country were the most industrious in the world. Having
had seven years' experince of the Commission, whether
the House were able to judge of it he did not
know, but the people of this country thought they
were able to do so, and their opinion was that
their acts were oppressive and unconstitutional.
The conduct of the Commissioners had been so arbi-
trary as to make the law much worse than it really was,
and obliged even the rate-payers to complain of it.
It appeared to him that the condition of the poor had
been gradually deteriorating under the operation of the
present law. It was no later than that morning that he
had received a letter from Manchester, stating the deaths
of two persons from actual starvation and the horror of
a workhouse. He thought these were cases requir-
ing immediate investigation. The Honourable Mem-
ber proceeded to read a comparative table of
returns from various parts of the country to
show that, under the present system, there had
been an increase of mortality ; but ho spoke in
so low a tone that we could not catch a sin-
gle statement with any degree of distinctness.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving that the Bill
be read a third time that day three months.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD seconded the motion.

Sir C. DOUGLAS thought that the Hon. Mem-
ber for Oldham ought not, upon the third read-
ing of a Bill for the continuance; of the Commission, to
have entered into a general discussion on the subject of the
Poor-law. He understood that the Government would
hereafter bring the general question under the considera-
tion of the House; and he thought it would be factious
to oppose them upon the present occasion. He should
add, however, that he disapproved of many provisions
of the law, although he did not think that was an occa-
sion for urging his opinions.
Captain PECHELL was glad it was not necessary for
him to enter at length into the reasons for voting with
the Hon. Member for Oldham as well as against the
third reading of the Bill. He never made it a party
political question. He had more than one reason for
voting against the Bill. He conceived it gave the Right
Honourable Gentlemen opposite more power than
was necessary. Had Parliament met in the month
of November there would be no occasion to renew the
power of the Commissioners.—(Hear, hear.) His next
reason for voting against the Bill was that the Right
Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department
had stated that the Biil would not interfere with
the Unions under the Gilbert Acts, but he (Captain
Pechell) would undertake to say that the Poor-
law Commissioners were unceasing in issuing rules and
regulations to those unions. These rules and regula-
tions prevented the poor people from going to Church on
Sundays, and made their confinement much worse than
those who were shut up in Chelsea, and other hos-
pitals.—(Hear.) The Commissioners had on left
those unions the power of getting out-door relief; and
their rules and regulations gave dissatisfaction to the
guardians, the rate-payers, and the receivers of the
rate. He considered these strollg grounds fur limiting
the power of the Poor-law Commissioners.—(Hear,
hear.) They had not ventured to issue such rules and
regulations for the place which he had the ho-
nour to represent, but they had tried to impose
upon them a paid chaplain, whom they refused to pay.
Those unions were interfered with by the Poor-law Com-
missioners, and he considered it his duty to oppose the
continuance of the Bill. He considered these reasons
good and valid for opposing it, and ho would on every
occasion express his opinion against it whenever the sub-
ject was brought forward.
Mr. BORTHWICK begged leave to make a few ob-
servations. He had been sent to that House unpledged,
and he thought it on that account the more incumbent
on him not to leave his vote unexplained. He did not
entirely concur with the Hon. Member for Oldham, be-
cause his objection did not lie against the administration
of the law, but struck at the root and first principle of the
Bill. It was stated that the object of the Bill was to
create in the minds of the labouring classes
the most important of all social virtues—inde-
pendence. But h: considered that the effect of the
Bill was directly the contrary. The Bill proposed to
invest dependence with so many repulsive characters,
that the most miserable independence would be preferred
to it. But it made no distinction in the application
of the principle between the industrious and high-minded
peasants and the idle and dissolute. On the contrary,
the law treated the man—who might be actuated in
his humble sphere by as noble an ambition as
that which the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth
avowed a few evenings ago to 'be his governing
principle—as a criminal. He entreated the Govern-
ment not to pledge themselves to any. party in
the House on this question, •but to give it the
most cautious and solemn consideration. The next
principle in the law to which he objected was the
principle of centralisation—a principle which took
the management of the interests of the poor out of the
hands of the Magistrates and local authorities and
placed it in the hands of a Commission sitting in
the metropolis. The principle of centralisation was
liable to this further objection, that it invested
the Commissioners with unusual and unconstitu-
tional power, thus creating an imperium in imperio.
The reason Ni by he voted against the amendment of
the Hon. Member opposite was that her Majesty's
Government had appealed to the House for its
confidence, and had asked for a short time
to enable them to mature plans of a general nature.
He (Mr. Borthwick) gave the Government his fullest
confidence ; and on these grounds he should not offer
any opposition to the course which they had proposed
to adopt.
Mr. C. WOOD was ready to admit that the decla-
ration which fell from the Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Dorchester was, that he would adhere to
the general principles of the measure, and he felt that
those who had to administer till the next Session of Fat--
liament were entitled to such a declaration to enable
them to carry on their duties in the manner they ought.
He thought it would have been exceedingly unreason-
able to press fer„any further statement of the plans of
the Government, so that they might be perfectly un-
fettered to consider any amendments they might think

necessary to propose in the next Session of Parliament
He believed the great portion of the evils that had been.
complained of had arisen more from the defects in the
administration of the law than from defects in the law
itself. Ile did not, however, stand up to contend that
there were defects in the law which might not be
altered.

Mr. B. BALDWIN, like his Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Evesham, was not pledged either to support or
oppose any measure—he was left to exercise his judg-
ment. lie was opposed to many provisions of the Act ;
but he trusted the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for
the Home Department would, next Session, introduce
such a measure as would enable him to give it his cor-
dial support.
Mr. HINDLEY did not know whether he was quite in
order or not in alluding to a former debate—(Cries of
" No, no")—but he trusted the House would allow him,
as it was, to defend himself against a charge made against
him by the Right Hon. Baronet of having exaggerated
a case of distress. He would not complain of the Right
Floe. Baronet in his absence reading a letter from an
anonymous Magistrate. ono who would not give his
name, in contradiction to his statement ; but what did
it amount to ? Why, that the Magistrate, who was
anonymous, was told by the overseer that there was no
foundation for the statement. He was in the coun-
try when the report of the Hon. Baronet's speech
reached him, and he immediately went to the house of
the family to which he had alluded, and found that they
were not in receipt of even ls. Gd. a week. The woman
told him that she had been cursed repeatedly by the
overseer. That might be true or false, hut that was her
statement. During the last six weeks the man had been
in work five, and the woman had been reeling with one
master for a month and another for six weeks, but last
Saturday her master failed, and both of them were now
out of work. She assured him that last Thursday she
was reeling all day, and that was heavy work, it was not
assisted by the steam engine, and went home, and all
the refreshment she had to take was potatoes and
salt, and on the Friday after the same work
she went home and did not even get that.
He was told by the person who-visited a grocer, that
while three years ago he was worth 3,00 CI„ a large stun
for a person in his business; yet such was the state of
destitution in the country, that his trade declined, and
he was reduced as low as his neighbours. He candidly
told the Right Hon. Baronet he did not come to that
House to make false statements. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman read a letter which he received from, he believed,
a Mr. Mills, a Rev. Magistrate—(Hear, hear)—den3 ing
some statements made by him (Mr. Hindley), and he
Legged to read to the House a letter which he received
only a few hours before from his solicitor, whom he re-
quested to inquire into the facts. The Hon. Gentle-
man then read the letter, which stated that the writer
had inquired into the facts from the woman herself, and
she confessed she had received from the overseer es. on the
7th of April, 3s. on the 16th, and 2s. on the 24th, for which
small sums she travelled three miles ; that he asked the
Bench of Magistrates for a copy of her deposition,
which was refused. He (Mr. Hindley) thought it
would be but common courtesy to give the deposition of
this person. He could assure the House he did not wish
to exaggerate any statements. He had in his hand
letters from individuals expressing astonishment that such
a statement as he made in that House should create any
suspicion. The writers stated they knew many indivi-
duals similarly circumstanced. He did not say this for
the purpose of increasing the Anti-Corn-law cry. He
would not endeavour to obtain an alteration of those laws
by having recourse to such means. He thought the
Poor-law and Corn-law did not want any such aid, and
might well rest on their innate merits.
Captain POLHILL wished to make a few observations
on the question before the House. He hoped that a Bill
would, next Session, be introduced in such a form that
all objectionable parts of the present system would be
removed, and that there could be no opposition to it.
The Right Hon. Baronet had the cards in his own hands,
and could secure a lasting popularity by a thorough
amendment of the existing Poor-laws. For his own
part, his constituents bad expressed unanimous approba-
tion of the votes which be had hitherto given on the
question of the Poor-laws, and he should now vote
against the motion of the Hon. Member for Oldham.
Mr. COBDEN would not go into the discussion of
the general subject of the Poor-laws, but he would offer
a few remarks in explanation of the vote which he was
about to give, in support of the motion of the Hon. i
Member for Oldham. In truth, he believed that the
Bill was passed to evade the repeal of another law—
(Hear)—and its effect had been to show more obviously
the necessity for repealing that other law.—(Hear, hear.)
He had no objection, nor had the labourers, that the
latter should be obliged to maintain themselves by their
own exertions ; but the market of their labour ought
not to be restricted—(Hear, hear)—and they should be
allowed to exchange the products of their labour for
food with all the rest of the world.—(Hear. hear.) He
then read an extract from the debate upon the Corn-laws
in 1815, in which it was argued that, although in other
countries, the wages of labour did not rise with the
price of provisions, yet in this country the Poor-laws
afforded a protection to the labourer, and secured to him
that, when his wages were not adequate to his support,
the deficiency would be made out of the poor's-
? rate ; and, in fact, a provision to that effect
was introduced into the Poor-law. at that pe-
riod. But the compact was not kept with the la•
bourers when the landlords found that the operation of
the Poor-law tended to counterbalance the advantages
which they had secured by the Corn-laws, and they
broke faith with the people, and dissolved the partner
ship.(Cheers.) There was only one means by which
the Bill before the House could be maintained, or the
labourer truly relieved from dependence, and that was
by allowing a free interchange of commodities with all
the nations of the world.—(Hear.)
Colonel HAMILTON had not changed his opinions
on the subject. He agreed in the principle of the Bill,
and he thought that the Commissioners of Somerset-
house ought to be retained, in order to protect the
working classes from being at the mercy of the Local
Board. But he thought there were many serious ob-
jections to the present law, and that out-door relief
ought to be afforded in many instances in which it was
refused, even in the Union in which he was Chairman
of the Board of Guardians. He considered this a Con-
servative question—(Cheers and laughter)—for if the
working classes did not see their interests attended to
in that House, they would easily be persuaded by the
agitators for universal suffrage that they were not re-
presented.—(Hear, hear.) With a -perfect confidence
that the Right Hon. Baronet would next Session intro-
duce a satisfactory measure, he would vote against the
motion of the Hon. Member for Oldham.
Mr. RENNIE said, it was quite clear that the Hon.
Member for Oldham would receive apologies only from
those on the other side, from whom he might expeot
votes.—(Hear and a laugh.) The Bill was calculated to
undermine the good understanding which ought to
exist between the aristocracy and the labouring classes.
If the administration of the law, as it at present stood, was
persevered in, the lower classes would feel themselves so
ill-used, that the institutions of the country (as we under-
stood) would be in danger.
Mr. WAN-LEY, who rose amidst loud cries of " Di-
vide, divide," said he would only detain the House a few
moments. He had expected a long debate, and the ex-
treme satisfaction of hearing many express their hostility
to the Bill ; but the die was cast, and the principle of
the measure would be upheld. In the unpleasant situation
in which he was placed—(Cheers and laugnter)—
he might be allowed to state the course which his party
would take.—(Laughter.) In this he would follow the
example of the Right Hon. Baronet. Indeed, their
cases were much resembled.—(Renewed laughter.) He,
like the Right Hon. Baronet, had a united Cabinet, and
all his colleagues were united—(Great laughter)—and he,
like the Right Hon. Baronet, was determined that he
would not propose• any measure in that House which he
did not conscientiously approve of, and that he would
not be deterred by any opposition, or persuaded by any
entreaties, from stating his convictions to the House.—
(A laugh.) No man had been more cordially abused
for not changing his place, as if remaining in the same
place was a proof of mutation of mind. The treatment
he had met with on this account was most unjust, for it
was well known to the House that he first took his
seat on the Opposition side of the house, and from those
benches he moved for the release of the Dorchester
labourers. The Right Hon. Baronet was then in power,
and afterwards, when the late Administration:succeeded
him (Sir R. Peel), he, with Mr. Hume, Mr. Roebuck,
and Mr. D. W. Harvey, continued to sit in the same place.
Could he now, as a Reformer, devoted—earnestly de-
voted—to'the cause of the people, aid by any act of his
to restore to power a party that sacrificed all public
confidence ? He would take no such course, and he
would exhort the people of England, as a Reformer, to
keep that faction in its present impotent position.—
(Ministerial cheers.) What would become of that fac-
tion ? Their shattered forces, if not their broken legion,
would dwindle into small groups of various shades, some
of them holding Tory principles, and some of them re-
taining. Whig opinions. But let them not have two aristo-
cratic parties to contend against. If there was to be a strife,
let it be between the aristocracy and the democracy.
That was his reason for not going across the House and
making common cause against the present Government.
He hoped in God that the Whigs, as Whigs, would
never again be restored to power—(Hear, hear, from the
Ministerial benches)—but that did not prevent his de-
sire to get out the Tories as soon as possible.—(Laughter.)
They should candidly and fairly consider every subject
brought before the House, and if the measures
proposed by the Right Honourable Baronet were
good he would, as he had stated he would do
before the Right Hon. Baronet came into power,
consider his measures as though they were brought
forward by a friend.—(Hear.) That was a duty he owed
to the Constitution, to the people, and to the great national
principles of the country.—(Cheers.) He considered
that no factious opposition ought to be carried on
against any Minister ; he considered such a course
would bo paltry, mean and disgraceful, and such a
course he would not pursue. He thanked the House for
the patience with which they heard him, and for giving
him an opportunity of explanation, after the gross mis-
representations to which he had been subjected.
Mr. CALLAGHAN, who rose amidst cries of " ques-
tion," begged leave to make a few observations, and to
explain, his reasons why ,having on a former occasion
given his vote in favour of the Commission, he
now felt himself called on to adopt a different
course. When he had voted on that occasion
the Poor-law had not yet been introduced into Ireland—
it had not been introduced, at least, into many parts of
that country—and where it had been introduced it had
been found to work very badly. The Hon. Gentleman
then read a portion of a petition from Cork, complaining
of the administration of the law in that city. He felt
himself warranted, from the words in that.petition, to
change the opinion he once held, that the appointment of
the Commission would be beneficial. He felt himself
the more strongly called upon to state that, in conse-
quence of what had fallen the other night from an Hon.
Member who was looked upon as a great authority by
the Right lion. Baronet, that the system had worked well
in Ireland.—(Hear.) He could only say that the dis-

eontent was almost universal in Ireland on the subject
of the law.—(Hear.) The greatest possible confu
sion had been introduced into the meetings of the
Boards of GUardians from the conflicts between the rural
and city districts, each striving to throw upon the other
the burden of maintaining the poor. The law of settle-
ment had been established in England and introduced
into Ireland ; and for that and for the other reasons he
had stated, he felt himself bound to vote against the con-
tinuance of the Commission. _ _ _

Mr. S. CRAWFORD, amidst loud cries of "Ques-
tion," said that he would not detain the House more
than a few moments. The Hon. Gentleman then ex-
plained the reason why he voted for the motion. The
people of Rochdale were afraid of the provisions of the
Bill being introduced into their locality.
After a few words from Mr. WARD, the House
divided—
For Mr. Fielden's motion...
Against it 133
Majority —lls
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
The House then adjourned till Twelve o'clock to-
morrow.

THE CORN LAWS
AN]) COMMERCIAL REFORM.

A portion of the following only appeared in part of
our impression of yesterday :

LIVERPOOL.

THURSDAY MORNING.—A requisition to the Mayor,
requesting him to call a public meeting to memorialize
the Queen not to prorogue Parliament, signed by above
3,500, has been fixed for Saturday evening, at seven
o'clock, in the Amphitheatre, by the Mayor.
ANTI-CORN-LAW OPERATIVE SOCIETY.-011 Friday
evening a meeting of the Anti-Corn-law Operative As-
sociation was held in the Music Hall, Liverpool. The
time announced for commencing business was half-past
seven, at which time the hall was densely crowded. After
several good speeches from the Chairman and some ()pi,
ratives, resolutions in conformity with the object of the
meeting were carried amidst enthusiastic cheering.—Li-
verpool Chronicle.

GIiEAT MEETING OF THE WORKING CLASSES.

EXETER, SEPT. 28.—A public meeting of the working
classes and inhabitants generally was convened by the
Working Men's Association, and held at the Subscrip-
tion Rooms yesterday. About 1,000 persons attended,
although the night was exceedingly inclement, and the
rain fell in torrents. W. Wilkinson, Esq., formerly
Mayor of the city, presided.
Mr. SHEEHAN, a member of the Working Men's As-
sociation, moved the first resolution.

The Rev. Dr. PAYNE was received with great cheer-
ing. He said lam here to-night in the character of a
visitor. I heard with great satisfaction that the work-
ing men of this large and populous City are manifest-
ing the deepest sympathy with their fellow brethren all
over the world, and I wish to join them in a meeting
of that kind.—(Hear, hear.) Ido not know, Sir, that
I can more properly introduce the few remarks that I
intend to make to this meeting, than by quoting the
words of a very famous, if I may not add a very distin-
guished man. As it is of importance to quote that lan-
guage with accuracy, I will take care to do so. That
language is as follows :—" The paramount duty of
every Government is attention to the interests of the
community, of which the labouring population must form
a great majority. The right of property is instituted
not for the good of the few who possess wealth and
honours, but the many who have them not. If the
majority be deeply injured, the public peace is in dan-
ger ; if the majority be in want of bread, private pro-
perty becomes a nuisance."—(Great cheering.) Sir, these
last words are very strong ones—perhaps I should have
hesitated to have expressed them myself, but as they
are the words of another, the responsibility does not
rest upon me, but upon that other. That gentleman
is one of her Majesty's present Ministers—(Cheering)—
one of the monopoly Ministers—no less a man than Sir
James Graham himself.—(Great cheering.) I do feel,
however, and that I am ready to stand forward and say,
that the permanent duty of every Government is atten-
tion to the interests of the community, of which the
labouring population form a great majority. That feel-
ing has brought me hither to-night. I know that
the great body of the labouring population of this
country are in a state of the greatest suffering, and
I felt that it became me as a citizen, as a minister of
the gospel of Christ, to come and express the deep
sympathy I feel for them under their present pri-
vations.—(Loud cheers.) I believe, Sir, with Sir James
Graham, that the public peace is in great danger—l
believe that the present is a time of greater peril to the
country than any which the oldest man in this assembly
has ever witnessed.—(Hear, hear, hear.) I know, Sir,
that tens of hundreds, and tens of thousands, of our
fellow-countrymen want bread.—(Hear, hear.) I know
that many are eating grains and potato peelings, and I
dread—l acknowledge that I contemplate with affright
and alarm the deeds of violence which the worst of all
rebellions—as it has been somewhat forcibly and etnpha-
tically said—the rebellion of the belly, and gaunt po-
verty and reckless despair, goaded on by. disappointed
hope—may perpetrate, if that consideration should be
delayed till February.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Sir, if the
Government of this country can do anything to allevi-
ate the pressure upon the labouring part of the commu-
nity, they are clearly bound to do it—not to do in Fe-
bruary, but to do it now—(Hear, hear)—for who would
venture to take the responsibility which must rest
upon them—the responsibility of the delay ? When the
employmert for the poor is not half sufficient to meet the
demand of the labourer, and his sufferings are conse-
quently increasing, and when hundreds and thousands
are wanting breae—ender these circumstances, I dci say
that the country has a right to say to the Government—
for we ought at all times to recollect that the country
does not exist for the Government, but the Government
for the country—(Cheers)—the country has a right to
say to the Government, You must not prorogue Parlia-
ment until the state of the country has undergone your
most anxious and most deliberate attention. Sir, it is to
me one of the most frightful features of the present time
that there is a diminished confidence on the part of the
poor in the kindly feelings of the rich—a diminished
confidence on the part of the poor in the Government
and Legislature of the country to consult their interests
in political measures and movements. A conviction
is, I fear, pervading the great body of the people, that
legislation in England has but one eye, and that eye
is constantly fixed upon the rich and the great.—
(Cries of " Hear, hear," and loud cheers.) A con-
viction is pervading the body of the people, that the
aristocracy, that the Government and the Legislature
generally, or rather that the extensive landowners, are
sighing after their long-lost feudal privileges ; that they
hate commerce, because it has destroyed predial slavery,
and converted the serf attached to the soil into a Briton
and a free man.—(Cheers.) I do not say that this is
my opinion. I believe better of human nature. Ido
not think it possible for men to withhold their sympathy
from the suffering part of the population, if the state of
the country were known and believed ; but I fear that
that state is not known—l fear that there is the averted
eye, the incredulous ear, and the unbelieving heart.
I believe that there should be no legislation for a class—
(Hear, hear)—that the Government ought not to legis-
late for one class against another ; therefore I should
object to a protective duty even against the rich in favour
of the poor ; but when that system is reversed—when
there is a protective duty in favour of the rich against
the poor—when it goes to take the pittance from the
latter to swell the riches of the former—(Hear, hear)—
when it goes to interfere with the free exchange of
labour—l say that it is so monstrous, that the nation
should rise as one man, with one voice, and demand
that the blot should be wiped away.—(Loud cheers.)
The CHAIRMAN put the resolution, which was carried
unanimously.
Mr. BESLEY moved the adoption of a memorial to the
Queen, which he read to the meeting.
Mr. STANDLAKE, a member of the working class, se-
conded the memorial, which was unanimously agreed to.
The Rev. H. ACTON rose, and after some preliminary
observations, said, addressing himself to the Working
Men's Association—Yea complain, and to me, it ap-
pears, very justly, of the intimation which the present
Prime Minister has given that he does not intend to
bring forward this important question for five months
—not in the present Session of Parliament. Gentlemen,
I scarcely know how decently to express myself on this
subject. I scarcely know how to characterise this pro-
position of Sir Robert Peel. I call it a cheat, and
a most shameful cheat, on the country.--e(Hear, hear,
and cheers.) Most of us who have read the news-
papers must remember what Sir Robert Peel stated. He
said that he thought a dissolution ought to take place im-
mediately, and,l.that there should be no delay, because
the country would be very anxious to have the Parlia-
ment meet together again to know the decision on the
questions brought forward by the late Government, and
that the commercial world might be relieved from the
embarrassment of uncertainty. Well, all this has taken
place, the dissolution was immediate, there was not a
single hour lost ; and there was no blame to be attached
to the late Government for not 'calling the Parliament
together again when elected. Well, then, when Sir R.
Peel is there with the Parliament newly called together,and
has such a majority as enables him to do what he wishes
—does he bring forward these questions ? He does not..
Gentlemen, I know not what course of policy the present
Government may be disposed to adopt next Februaay.
Some persons think they will bring forward a modifica-
tion of the very measures they have opposed. Ido not
expect anything of the kind. I rather expect it to be a
contrary course, by which they will soon cause them-
selves to be driven from office.—(Hear, hear.) The
Rev. Gentleman concluded by reading the resolution
that the memorial be sent to Mr. Divett for presen-
tation, &e.
Mr. HAILLYN, in rising to second the resolution, said
that he stood in a singular position, as he was not an in-
habitant of the town, and was a landlord.—(Hear.) He
hoped he should not be the worse received for that.
He was a landlord—but he hoped and trusted this had
never influenced him in his conduct on the Corn ques-
tion. He was happy to say that in the neighbourhood
where he lived he did not believe any parishes had sent
up petitions in favour of it.—(Hear, hear.) The real
truth was, that his agricultural friends had not given'
that attention to it which they ought to have done, for
if they did they would not have talked of its being a
protection to the farmer.—(Hear, hear.) I grant (said
the Hon. Gentleman) that it may be something to the
landlord, but it is a very uncomfortable protection when
he hears that there is a starving nation.—(Hear, hear.)
The landlord forgets this, thatl if we lose the manufac-
turer we shall lose the best customer we have ; if we do
not fail in corn we shall fail in horn. The deuce a bit
of wool can we get rid of when manufactures are de-
pressed.—(Hear, hear.) The point which ought to be
discussed is whether the Corn-law is beneficial to the
public. The Hon. Gentleman seconded the resolution,
and sat down amidst enthusiastic cheering.

The CHAIRMAN then put the resolution, which was car-
ried unanimously

Thanks were then voted to the Chairman, aid the meet-
ing dispersed.
DISTRESS IN PAISLEY.

We insert the chief part of a copy of a petition to the
Queen on the subject which was agreed to at the meeting
of ministers of all denominations, held at Paisley on
Monday. From that petition, it will be observed that the
appalling statements of distress made by Mr. Stewart, the
Member for Renfrewshire, on the evening referred to,
are fully borne out ; and it is also proper to add that
amongst the ministers of Paisley who were present and
agreed to the subjoined document, were Dr. Burns, who
had been for thirty years a parish minister there, and
the Rev. Dr. Baird, who has been settled in Paisley not
far e.or, of twenty years. Both of these gentlemen
formed part of the deputation which came to London, as
a deputation for their distressed townsmen, in 1837, and
both of them should be good judges of the truth of the
the statements they have set forth :
After setting forth in general terms the deplorable
condition.of the Paisley operatives, and fervently impor-
tuning a revisal of the whole British Commercial Code,
and deprecating the effects of delay any longer so to (10,
the subjoined clauses follow, particular►zing the distress
of Renfrewshire, Greenock, Johnston, &c.:—

" May it please your Majesty,—While all of us are
personally and officially connected with a manufacturing
community, several of us are also very much interested
in the condition of the agricultural and landed interests,
and we would press it on your Majesty's serious consi-
deration that the landed interests are beyond question
vitally concerned in the commercial prosperity of the
country, and in the securing of the means of a comfort-
able subsistence to those masses of industrious operatives
in such large communities as this, who form the best
customers for agricultural and dairy produce,
and without whom the pasture and arable lands
in our vicinity would be of comparatively little
value. Indeed, the whole of Renfrewshire may
be said to form a teeming population dependent
on manufactures and commerce, and the exten-
sion of machinery and public works of all kinds, not
only to Greenock, hitherto an entirely commercial
town, but to many of the country districts where the ad-
vantages of water power are enjoyed, cannot but ren-
der all commercial questions doubly interesting to our
people, while it demonstrates the impolicy of separating
from one another the kindred interests of agriculture
and manufactures. We may also notice to your Ma-
jesty another very ominous feature in, the present state
of our community, that whereas a short time ago it was
extremely difficult to find any number of families ready
to emigrate to other lands, of late the number of emi-
grant societies in Paisley, composed not of aged and
decayed persons, but of respectable and able-bodied men,
has rapidly multiplied, and the reason assigned by every
one of their members, without exception, is the inability
of a poor working man, however inclined, to provide his
family with the bare necessaries of life.
" Nor is it the operative part of our people only that
are suffering under the present depression. May it
please your Majesty—out of fourteen cotton factories in
one district of our locality, one half aro shut up; and as
the town of Johnston mainly depends on cotton-spin-
ning, the distress there has been greatly increased in
consequence. Other factories of the same description,
of which there are many in our town and county, are
going upon half time, and such as are kept up at full
work by their owners are sustaining a very heavy loss.
In this way proprietors as well as labourers are suffering
under the pressure of the times, and thus the ability to
keep the distressed poor is diminished, and is rapidly
diminishing every day. The bankruptcies of late, in
this place, have been to the unprecedented number of
nearly forty houses, and the money invested in them
amounts to nearly 700,0001. Nor can we believe that
the present distressed condition of our manufacturers is
only temporary. For years past there have been un-
doubted symptoms of decline, while at present the pros-
pect is more gloomy than ever. May it please your Ma-
jesty, the time is past for concealing, or attempting to
coneeal, the disease which is consuming the vitals of our
national strength."
The petition then closes with importuning her Majesty
not to allow the patience of her people to be further
tampered with, for fear of disorganiiation and distur-
bance, and concludes with the customary prayer.
SLATEFORD.

The members of Colinton and Slateford Anti-Corn-law
Association, held a meeting on Saturday last, and agreed
to memoralise her Majesty. The memorial is forwarded
by this post to W. G. Craig, Member for the city of
Edinburgh, for presentation.