The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-14 00:00:00

COUNTY TOWNS BILL.

Mr. HOPE presented a petition from the inhabitants
of Southamrton in favour of the County Towns Bill.

hEALTH OF TOWNS BILL.

Dr. BO%VRING presented two petitions from the in-
habitants of various districts in London in favour of the
Health of Towns Bill, and praying that the House
would pass it into a law.
RAILWAY BILLS.
Mr. lIUME said that as he did not see any of the
embers of the Government in their places, he
would postpone until to-morrow the following motion,
of which he had given notice:—That in all railway Bills,
where railway companies apply for power to raise addi-
tional capital to pay for the completion, extension, pur-
etthe exuinsttiiel
gthAeet.
chase, or amalgamation of railways and canals which
have been sanctioned by Parliament, it be a condition,
that such additional capital shall not be raised or bor-
rowedcapital
shall be actually realised according to the provisions
raised in shares or by loans shall be applicable to any
proposed extension, purchase, or amalgamation of rail-
' whole
t such of
previous the
p rceavpi iotuasl ,
ways rind canals, and that no new capital shall be raised
under such new Bill until the whole of the previously
sanctioned capital shall have been realised. whether
Mr. ENT WISLE begged that the Hon. Member would
give the railway companise a little more time. They
could not understand the entire object of the motion.
Mr. to is, very simple, it will not take five
minutes to understand, and I can not consent to a further
postponement.nt.

111 r. MACKINNON said that he would, on next
Thursday, move that no railway company,
whose Bill
had been passed this session, and who, as yet, had made
no call, should be empowered to do so until the first
day of January, IBso.—(Laughter.)
ANDOVER INQUIRY.
Mr. FERRAND gave notice that he would put a
question to-morrow to the Right Hon. Baronet the
Home Secretary, whether certain letters to the Poor-
law Commissioners had been
printed by the Govern-
meat and circulated in the country, and, if so, was that
expense to be borne by the public ? And if it was to be
at the expense of the country, he desired to know what
the amount was.

CAPTAIN WARNER'S INVENTION.
Mr. AGLIONBY wished to ask the Hon. and Gallant
Member for Liverpool the question of which he had
given notice, with reference to Captain Warner's inven-
tiou. He wished to know if it was the Hon. and Gallant
Officer's intention to follow up the returns, which he had
asked for, by any motion upon them?
Sir H. DOUGLAS said that it had been found upon
examination that this new destructive power proposed
by Captain Warner was entirely an illusion, and, there-
fore, it was utterly unworthy of the further attention of
the House.
DUTY ON FOREIGN WINES.
Dr. BOWBING rose to bring forward the motion of
which he had given notice; that it was expedient that
this House should immedately resolve itself into
a Committee for the purpose of reducing the
duty on foreign wines. This country had already
made great alterations in the import duties, and
he considered that they should extend their
liberal policy still further. The best method
of carrying out the principles of free trade, was
by admitting the products of foreign countries on
such terms as they should like the products of this
country to be admitted abroad. It was a remaltable
fact that several hundred years ago the im-
portation of wine into this country was greater
than it was now. In the fourteenth century
no less than 200 vessels loaded with wine brought car-
goes from the Bordeaux district into England. Now,
if they reduced the duty and increased the supply, he
could this apprehend, that the price would be enhanced
or the supply be reduced. It was a remarkable fact
as bearing on this point, that notwithstanding the large
exportationh
e of
ir'
fruit t
o tea
af neither
freo every r y wastheChina,
price increased,
temperate
Europe, great as is its production, that production may
be increased to an almost unlimited extent, and placed
within the limits of the working classes. He believed
that no limit could be placed to itsainmapeorttaotok pl
ion. All
will
in
osi
w.n eetlsrhdee.di in France
,i.
eobamrt, tt7ll bottle of duty.
3d. paidwd
thuoets3ns's; s
.t6hdAe change
on wine wash . a gallon, or about
6d., while Spanish and
Portuguese wines were raised from 4s. 10d. to ss. 6d.
per gallon. The consumption, singular to say, was less
now than it had been twenty years ago. In 1803 and
1804 the revenue received
and the duty received was 1,900,0001.
was 2,500,000/. for wine
alone, the consumption being about 6,000,000 or
7,000.000 gallons. In 1845 the consum
wine was so cheap as to he within the
the wines which were above the com-
pion was
qualities paid a duty of 3,000,000/. sterling. Wines
history. The •
afforded a curious hist ) found that of the
limitsml6 I,l7olBler,aoonofcoea,gl
wla
classes,
hlloaenrs
ess ,e s ,
did not ap-
proach consumed in this country within the last two cen-
turies, the consumption was, from 1728 to 1744, one-
twelfth of the whole consumption; from 1744 to 1785.
the duties levied on French
wines exceeded
n
On the wines of
other
duties levied on French wines had not been
one seventeenth
of the whole which had been collected.
Neriw, t
no
ca.
e,
he 7
not but feel great interest iu our con-
nexion with France, and he was
eoe hlper6 within countries,6 t c
h couldee cent.
t.
0 n the
andhe
importationorthe whole demand.
Since
happy to be in-
strumental
or commercially, our connexion with the
country, and which might promote the consumption of
in tiny legislation which promoted, either
politically

French wines. Much had been done by the southern
provinzes of France, and he might instance the exertions
or the Chamber of Commerce of Bordeaux, who had in
their memorial peessed upon the Government the neces-
sity for taking some measures to promote free trade.
It appeared from the statement of the French Excise, by
whom he had been favoured with due information, that
upwards of 800.000,000 gallons of wine were annually
produced in France, of which not more than one-
thirtieth part found its way to foreign countries ; and of
the gross quantity thus produced, the greater quantity
was sold in France, at sevenpence per gallon, or rather
more than three halfpence per quart ; and he did think
that there were strong reasons for allowing some altera-
tion of the duties on the introduction of French wines.
A considerable quantity of wine was produced in the
Austrian dominions, as they found from the statements
of Dr. Springall, who said that 2,300,000,000
gallons of wine were produced is that coun-
try. In Hungary there were 300,000,000 gallons
of wines produced, and in Wes tphalia 700 gallons per
annum. No doubt if they took th e wines of these coun-
tries the inhabitants would take t.tieir manufactures in
returm. Important statistics innc cted with the
trade had been laid before the House. Wine
might be obtained at 3/. per hogshead, which might be
retailed at an equally low price. There was no country
in Europe which had not the mealis of uffordiug this
country a great supply of wine. Though they could
not taste the ancient Scian and Talernican wines, still the
land where these were produced existed, and they had
still an opportunity of tasting the vintage of that land
which was so much prised. There were excellent wines
to be obtained in Tenedos, in Cyprus, and in the islands
of the Archipelago, provided the absurd regulations of
hostile tariffs were broken through. He did know any
better mode by which friendly relations between those
countries could be strengthened than by receiving
the commodities which those countries could produce.
In 1801 the consumption in this country was half a gal-
lon per head; in the present year it was not more than
one-fourth of that amount. In ^France the consumption
was stated- by some persons to be 19 gallons, by others
25 gallons per head. In a state of vassalage, the slaves of
Rome were reported to consume 68 gallons per annum.
If England consume only one-fifth of the quantity of
wine used in France, namely, five gallons per head, the
sum which would be raised for revenue at ls. per gallon
of duty: would amount to 7,000,0001. And,; looking
to other countries, the diminished consumption of
this country is made the more striking. In the Nether-
lands the consumption was twenty-four times greater
per head. In the Hanseatic towns it was five
times greater. In Denmark, with a population of
two millions, there was as much wine imported
as into Great Britain, with twenty.eight mil-
lions. The facts to which he had drawn attention
with regard to wine were borne out also by a reference
to the consumption of other articles in this country.
With reegard to tea, it was a most remarkable thing that
in 1821, when the price was ss. Bd. per lb., the con-
sumption per head was only one pound, and from
1831 down to 1841, when the prices fell to 4s. 2d.
and 4s. 4d. per pound, the consumption was
increased to lib. 40z.; and in 1846, when by a combina-
tion of circumstances the price fell to 3s. 9d. per lb., the
consumption increased to lib. looz. Now, what
was the effect of the reduction of duties on the revenue?
In 1821, with a duty of 2s. 10d., the revenue
on this article amounted to 3,738,000/4 in 1841,
when the duty was reduced to 2s. 20. per lb., the
revenue amounted to 3,978,0001., and in 1846 to
5,100,0001. The results of this reduction of the
duty was as strikingly apparent on the com-
forts of the people. In 1811 the total consumption
was 23,000,0001b5, in 1821, when the price was reduced
to ss. 2d.. it was 27,000,0001b5., and when it was re-
duced to 4s. 3d., the consumption was 31,000,0001b5.
In 1841, when the duty was 4s. Id., the consumption
was 36,000,000 lbs. ; in 1843, at 3s. 4d., it was
39,000,000 lbs. ; and the latest test which they had, viz.,
the year 1846, it was 47,500,000 lbs. He could not
but think that matters like those must make an im-
pression on the House and the country. What, again,
had been the case with brandy. That had been one of
those experiments ; they had reduced the duty
from 225. 10d. to 15s. per gallon. In 1841, when
the high duty was in operation, the consumption was
1,164,000 gallons, and the revenue receipt was
1.329,000/. ; in 1844, the consumption was 1,023,000
gallons, and the revenue 1,167,0001. ; in 1845, it was
1,000,000 gallons, and the revenue 1,200,0001. It did
not require a certain number of years for the revenue
to rise to the same condition it was in before the duty
was reduced. The same year was sufficient to reinstate
the revenue in the same condition; in 1846, the quantity
of brandy imported was 1,500,000 gallons, and the re-
venue now was as much as it had been when the duty
was at 225. 10d. This gave them great encouragement
to pursue the same course. The article of coffee
bore out the same result. In the year 1841, the consump-
tion was 28,000,0001 b., and in 1846 it was 36,700,0001 b.,
and the reduction of duty had been at the rate of 50 per
cent., or nearly. The duties were one time 6d. and 9d.
a pound, but now it was 4d. and 6d. What, then, had
been the effect of that reduction ? In 1841 the revenue
was 987,000/. ; and now, with so great a reduction, it was
757,0001., a much greater amount than was returned in
the year, 1843, when the duties were 4d. and Bd. To take
the result still later, the months of the present year
showed the amount. For the first three months of the year
1846 the sum was 186,0001, and for the corresponding
months of the year 1847, 213,0001. So in the matter of
brandy. For the first three months of this year the
quantity entered was 362,000 gallons; in 1846 it was
only 214.000 gallons ; but in 1847 the consumption
during these three months had been 271,000 gallons.
Wine ought to be an article of universal consumption in
this country, but the duty imposed on the article was so
excessive that it was practically excluded from consump-
tion in England. He wanted it to be accessible to the
poor man. Ile wanted to enable him to purchase a
bottle of wine at the same price he would give
for a bottle of beer. It appeared to him that he had
made out his case. He thought he had proved to de-
monstration that if Government would only make the
experiment upon a large and liberal scale the
.article of
wine might be in universal demand for home consump-
tion. He believed it would improve the public health. It
would augment popular enjoyements, increase the revenue,
extend trade, and altogether give general satisfaction.
On these grounds, without troublin4the House further,
he took the liberty of moving that the YousP should ;m-
-mediately resolve itself into a Committee: to consider
the desirability of reducing the duty on foreign wines.
Mr. EWART seconded the motion. He thought his
Hon. Friend had made out a case in favour of a modifi-
cation of these duties. If they were informed of the
quantity of wine consumed in other countries; they would
be perfectly astonished at the small quantity con-
sumed here. In Denmark, for instance, the popu-
lation did not exceed that of London, yet the
consumption of wine was far greater than the
quantity consumed in this country. The consumption
of wine in Holland was about a gallon for each of the
population, but by a calculation made by the free-
trade; association of Cologne, it appeared that not
more than a quarter of a gallon was consumed
by each individual in this country. He did not see why
the same consumption should not take place in this
country as in Denmark. But there was a time when
there was a great consumption of wine in this country;
and no doubt his lion. Friend the Member for the Uni-
versity of Oxford (Sir R. H. Inglis) could recollect the
time when port wine was not the orthodox beverage of
Oxford.—(A laugh.) At the beginning of this session
claret was the common beverage there ; but the Uni-
versity, headed by the Dean, petitioned the House
against the high duties imposed on the importation of
wine, and subsequently some alteration was made, and
port wine became the favourite beverage. Wine was a
great and beneficial stimulant, and if the duties were
modified, instead of having the adulterated wines of
Portugal, they would have the more wholesome and nu-
tritious wines of France. No doubt, like the question
of the tea, tobacco, and other duties, which still re-
mained upon the statute book,: the repeal of the wino
duties would be loudly demanded by the people.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that when a reduction had been made on wine the
consumption had greatly diminished. He feared,
then, that he could not calculate on in in-
creased revenue by a reduction upon' that article.
It was quite clear that this country had reduced its duty
on wine' irrespective of any concession by any foreign
power. He would not, however, be inclined to make a
large experiment, and under these circumstances he
must-objact to the Hon. and Learned Member's motion.

Mr. I.:. BENNETT was surprised at the Hon. Member
for Bolton proposing to repeal the duty on wine, when
so many other articles might be better considered. If
any duty was to be removed, why not that on tea, coffee,
or that most oppressive tax, the malt•tax.
Mr. FIUME could not see any objection to the reduc-
tion of the duty, when it was quite certain that
the revenue would not suffer. The reduced duty
would occasion an increased consumption in the ar-
ticle, and the aggregate duty would be quite as
much, if not more.---(Hear, hear.) He called the at-
tention of, the House to a recent dispatch re-
ceived from Mr. Pakenham, in which it was shown
that in America, with a reduced tariff, in one
year the revenue had increased one million of dollars.
Were the duty on wines reduced one half, the revenue,
he was persuaded, would not suffer. It would also be the
carrying out the free-trade principle, to which the
'louse was pledged.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN denied that the mere
reductio❑ of a dray would constitute free trade, which
meant the total abolition of duties. He thought that if
any aleration of duty was made to benefit the labouring
classes it should be in the malt tax._

Dr. BOWRING replied, and said, after the expres-
sion of opinion elicited he would withdraw the motion.
LAW OF MARRIAGE.

Mr. STUART WORTLEY presented several peti-
tions from various pluses in the north-west on the
subject of the law of marriage, praying that some
alteration might be made. Among the petitioners were
123 clergymen, 126 solicitors, 6 mayors of towns, and
24 common councillors, and taking the whole of the
petitioners together there were not less than 1,062
members of the board of guardians. In the presenta-
tion of these petitions he would not disguise the truth
that he was personally desirous of effecting some change
in the law of marriage. But in doing so, he was per-
fectly aware that he was approaching a subject in which
there was much delicacy and difficulty involved, and on
which many arguments had been stated quite irrelevant
to the subject. Now, with respect to the object of the
motion which he had to submit, he would say that
the House had been pressed in 1841, by
one, whose absence from that House all would
regret, if it were not known that he was now
engaged in a better place. His Friend Lord
Ellesmere—(Cheers)—had again, in 1842, renewed his
motion, and in a House when only 290 Members were
present lost his cause only by a ihajor
the
ityof
qtuweesntitoyn.
Since that time five years had passed, and
had every day been gaining ground, and was now even
stronger than ever, for it was necessary t.ssetat rest the
kb) did not wish
anxiety of a great number of families.

. 4
in the slightest degree to disguise the matter before the
House. He did not desire to disturb the general law of
marriage, but he would not be dealing fairly with the
House if he did not state that his object was the same
as that which had been advocated by Lord Elleauirre,
for he desired to obtain the repeal of the law which
prohibited a marriage with the sister of a deceased wife.
But under whatever circumstances that Act might have
been passed, it had totally failed to effect the object for
which it was framed. Its effect, instead of rendering the
law more certain, had the effect of rendering the law
still more uncertain than it was before. The object of
the Act intended by Lord Lyndhurst was to make void
.
those marriages. And, upon a subsequent occasion, his
Lordship said that it was not his intention by that Bill
to set the question at rest. This Bill was brought into
the House of Lords by Lord Lyndhurst in June 1835 ,
the Bill, as originally introduced, enacted, that where
marriages had taken place, they should be held
good and valid, but with respect to marriages which
might afterwards take place, it was enacted that they
should be held as actually void. No discussion took piae
upon the stages of the Bill in the House of Co:Drawls.
Subsequently, however, the second clause was rest( rtd.
Now that was the history of the Act ; and if Hon.
Gentlemen would take the trouble to look into the de-
bate which arose on the occasion of its passing, they
would find that a feeling then prevailed in the House
that the subject ought to be more minutely diteussed
and considered in another session. A number of re-
spectable persons made an inquiry in some districts of
the country, which occupied them three months, for the
purpose of obtaining some statistical information on the
subject, and they found that 1,648 casts had oc-
curred, exclusive of the marriages amongst the work-
ing classes, which were within the prohibit. d
degree, as specified by the Act of 1845, 196 took place
before the passing of the Act, and 1,364 since ; and out
of the whole number 1,501 were with deceased wives'
sisters. One of the highest civil authorities had in-
formed him that he had induced many persons not to
marry on account of the objections which might arise
owing to their relationship ; and, with the exception of
one case, he had invariably succeeded. Amongst these
marriages, there were seventy contracted by magistrates,
barristers, and physicians, thirty by the middle classes,
including merchants, manufacturers, tradesmen, &c. ;
and it had been calculated that there must be at
least 6,000 of these marriages prohibited by the
Act now existing, which affected, at least, 1,300
persons. The principal object of the framers of the
Bill of 1835 was to render the law certain and final;
but the introduction of the clause rendering many mar-
riages invalid, had counteracted the benevolent inten-
tions of the authors of the Bill, and had caused the ut-
most unhappiness in families, the heads of which had
married in opposition to the Act. The number of these
marriages amongst the lower classes was small, but this
might be accounted for by the fact, that many lived to-
gether in a state of concubinage. Every effort had been
made to expose the evils which existed from the Act,
and to bring about a healthier state of the law. Many of
the facts ascertained were laid before that eminent judge,
Mr. Justice Erle, whose elevation to the bench had given the
utmost satisfaction, and after devoting much attention
to the subject--for he was one of the counsel in the
Sussex peerage case—he stated it as his firm opinion,
that notwithstanding the Act of 1835, marriages of that
kind then objected to were valid,—(Hear, bear)—and
many other eminent men bad supported the same view;
but still great uncertainty prevailed, and great doubt
hung over many marriages, and a man named Chadwick,
who had married his wile's sister, and who was charged
with bigamy, as he had married during the life of his wife,
was acquitted on the ground that it was an invalid mar-
riage in accordance with the Act of 1835, and the case
was now pending at the Court of Queen's Bench. Then
great diversity of opinion prevailed with respect to mar-
riages contracted abroad. Some said a marriage
solemnised abroad between narties who had gone
abroad for that purpose, and who immediately afterwards
came back to this country was a valid marriage, while
others entertained an exactly opposite opinion, and that
such marriages were illegal. The question was one
which affected both rich and poor; but as the rich pos-
sessed property and held titles that were exposed to
much danger, and the transfer of property was sur
rounded with difficulties, litigation, and interminable
expense would be the result. One object of the Act was
to relieve children from the suspense they were in dur-
ing the lives of their parents, who had contracted mar-
riages not strictly legal, but the Act had not accom-
plished the good for which it was designed; and at a
distance of a century hence, the descendants
of persons who had contracted a marriage of this
nature, might be called upon to show that their ancestors
were domiciled in Holland or Germany at the time of
their marriage, so that they had not violated the law of
their own country. Thus every title in this country
was insecure. In Scotland, for instance, marriages
within the prohibited degrees, if they had taken place in
England, were ralid.----(Hear, hear.) Now, this was an
intolerable state of things, and ought no longer to exist.
A petition in 1841 was presented to the House of Lords,
signed by 75 solicitors, complaining of the anomalous
state of the law ; and another to the same effect had
been presented from a large body of the clergy. It was
under these circumstances that he asked the House
to give him the means of making an inquiry. He thought
he had made out a case for inquiry.—(Hear, hear.)
With the exception of some cantons in Switzerland, no
Protestant country save this allowed such a state of
things to exist. For instance, George 111., whilst many
marriages were prohibited in this country, was in the
habit of giving dispensations for the solemnising of simi-
lar marriages in Hanover, a portion of the British domi-
nions. The only objection which I shall venture to meet
upon this occasion, is that a Committee upon this sub-
ject would raise a great feeling of doubt in th 3 minds
of families. With respect to this objection it was futile,
inasmuch as doubts already existed ; but, even if it di-;,
it was nut, nor ought to be, a valid abjection.
—(Hear, hear.) He had numerous cases where
he could prove that a young woman could not live
under the same roof with her deceased sister's husband.
The breath of scandal was too great for her to do so,
even if her care was necessary for the welfare of the
children. He had established that there was very great
doubt upon the subject, and he had also proved that
there were many cases of flagrant evil, he therefore
considered that he had made out his case for a coin -
mission. The Noble Lord then read a petition from Lin-
coln, signed by all the clergymen in that diocese, stating
that great and enormous evils arose from the present
state of the law. His first intention was to seek for a
Committee, but, from the lateness of the session, and
from a variety of other motives, he was desirous to ask
for a Commission. The high character of such a body,
the seal of confidence under which they could obtain
evidence, all imparted to such a plan the requisites so
much to be desired.—(Cheers.)
Sir G. GREY said that he was anxious to rise early
in this debate, after the able speech of the Hon. Mem-
ber, in order to express his full concurrence in his pro-
position. He considered the law to be in a most unsa-
tisfactory state, and he, therefore, was of opinion that an
inquiry should take place ; at the same time, he desired
that it should be distinctly understood that he did not
express any opinion as to what ought to be the state of
the law.—(Hear, hear.) He also was of opinion that the
very best course to be pursued was that one proposed by
the Hon. Member, as they would be able to place upon a
commission many men well qualified to act upon such,
and who would be able to devote a much greater portion
of time to the subject than any Member of the House.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS was sorry that the Right
Hon. Baronet had consented to the proposition of the
Hon. Gentleman, as the concession went to prove that
some change in the law was absolutely necessary. The
Hon. Gentleman said that the grievance extended to
six thousand marriages in the year. Well, what was
the amount of marriages celebrated throughout England
in the same period ? Why, one hundred thousand !
(Hear, hear.) It was, therefore, in favour of a fractional
portion ; they were about to change their existing law,
and not in favour of the majority. The Hon. Gentle-
man said that the law had already, in a thousand in-
stances, been violated, and he therefore argued that it
should and ought to be repealed. Now this was a rather
extraordinary method of argument, for he considered
that those who disobeyed the law, ought to be punished
instead of rewarded.—(Hear, hear.) ,
Sir BERNAL OSBORNE said that he would not enter
into the question. He only arose to tender his thanks
to the Hon. Member for having brought forward this
Bill. He formerly did not record his vote upon this
question, as he had not sufficiently made up his mind
upon the subject, but every day convinced him of the
necessity of doing something.
Dr. NICHOLS said the same difficulty attended mar-
riage both within the prohibited degrees of consan-
guinity and affinity, and the law of England always con-
sidering the law of marriage to be in the region of
canonical disability, had never interfered. He could not
agree to the motion.
Mr. W ATSON thought the state of the law was such
as to demand inquiry, and he would therefore support
the motion.
The motion was then agreed to.
IMPROVEMENT OF FISHERIES (IRELAND).
Sir W. BARRON rose to move for a Select Committee
to inquire into the means of improving the fisheries of
Ireland, and thereby affording profitable employ-
ment. He said there were 400,000 individuals
connected with the trade, but the want of
capital had rendered these fisheries unproductive. His
reason for making the motion at present, was that the
House had voted large sums of money for the Scotch
fisheries, which were fostered, while the fisheries of
Ireland were left unaided. The consequence was, that
the Irish fisheries were worthless, while the Scotch were
selling their fish at a very high price in Ireland. No-
thing would more efficiently benefit the people of the
country whose fisheries were to be the subject of the in-
quiry which he proposed ; the best proof of which was
the success that had attended the advances to Ireland
and to Scotland on this head. The Hon. Member con-
cluded by moving for a commission of inquiry.
Mr. FREWEN seconded the motion.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he would not express an
opinion different froth that expressed by the Hon.
Baronet, t, who had
cmfiusophvi
fisheries
drdi e forss ucocf
et hel edr
ei
nlComte,agndG.moivtleteri%n,
ma
saesna tt
ciso_
uatehns ed..
t ion
which importance
hadef the o
c
the House for many years, and there had been com-
missions of inquiry, so numerous, that there
inofnormathtieon tablepon of the House
swueffireciendtocumfoernts
H growth of
e believed that the the subject.
II
-the fortunes of
Scotland were to beattributed to the private
enterprise, and not to any encouragement derived from
same
time,
Government. At the s
he was not prepared to
deny that these were the modes in which Government
might twit and beneficially employ its influence, and he
would instance two
Onemethods
orb
these
ews he ic h
modes h e
wtahso, thought
votingt. thi
grants ofthis
benefit might be had.
money to the building of fishery piers in diffe-
rent parts of the coast of Ireland, where they were much
wanted. The late Government had devoted a sum 0t50.0001
to this object, and the present Government had, in like
manner, voted 40,000/. for the same purpose. The. second
mode was by erecting curing stations, a means which had

been only lately adopted in
thought the Hows had a right to antifipatiNerery
cess. These stations had b-en irectetrita7#iff;trent parts
of the coast, where " th- tak-s " werenhe,.‘roost
dant; and where, therefore, the fish cettiti-iriTr,bq
posed of in their fresh state. There haiil `alioadY
erected six staions in that country, nod the success
which had attended them. was beginnine to attract the
attention of private speculators. Onlv that day IS letter
was put into his hand, aunouncii,g the fact that a
vessel had arrived on the west coast of Ireland,
from Gravesend, sent out by an intelligent person who
wished to try whether his enterprise would be repaid in
that country. The writer, a most intelligent man, dee-
cribed the vessel as well supplied with ail the necessary
articles, as nets, trawls, &c., supplied, indeed, to an ex-
tent altogether unknown in that country. This was the
enterprise the Government wished to encourage, and they
believed that such examples would he of more use
than any commercial exertions on their own part.
Ile did not apprehend any good from a Committee of
Inquiry, as already they had every information on the
subject the House c,,01d desire. It would further be the
means of eating r, way t hose
teL I:,
11
required at present 10 Ite%f,d. I3e;orc the er:d of the
session he misted to lie able to lay on t 0 table of the
llwaso important infurnr.:thm the curii,g. of
fish, and the progres ut the 11.4:ere4 Irelar:d, Lod cu
the present oeca,icn the lion. Mernhcr would Withdrew

his motion.
t
filsotugi
joh,iLtllelercP.aslgurl,tst
ILT;n°.I.GI ettil4tlTnallnGhEadllgEivNeiTi the
o
4o the cuthotity of Mr.
mar
treerfui
a issi nbg the
&.t,re mtcheei e
House. Ie a e
icipArrelientie 't,od
ti
;hire
those
e i%e
1%,
IrBe r. 44
end yet in that year, according
Randolph,the mostthe
clumsylawlantinedg to the
fl]citsolirylisheriesl.as
in character.
eitherH e deniedndo
wereto tenet oarll e
pursue that mine of wealth which had been so much
gation
indisposedtlle
to
oThaeo lirnitsoh
ifihsehdeerempensens
alluded to, and there ought to be a Select Committee to
inquire into_ this matter. He would support the motion,
and divide with the Hon. Member who proposed it,
if he
pressed it to a division.
Mr. HUME said that year he intended to visit the
west coast of Ireland, but he was detained, and his col-
league went. He was sorry to say, that from his infor-
mation, the fishing stations were in a most imperfeet
condition, and he thought the Government ought to take
the question and provide a remedy. He did expect that
ere now the Government would have brought in a Bill to
effect the improvement of the fisheries all round the
coasts of the country. He was not sure whether a Com-
mittee was necessary, but he considered the subject
was one of such importance that the Government
ought to take it up and appoint a competent officer to
superintend all the improvements carried forward by the
Government.
Mr. M. GORE entered into a number of dwells to
show the advantages of establishing fisheries in Ireland.
Mr. WATSON thought it of great importance to the
interests of both countri. s to promote as much as pos-
sible the fisheries in Ireland. Ile represented the town
of Kinsale, and he wished to impress upon the Govern-
ment the necessity of assisting the poor fishermen of
that town, either by means of boats, or by huts, or by
establishing drying stations fur there. and also by a
cheap and ready means of conteyance of the products
of their industry. He hoped that the effects of this dis-
cussion to-night would be to induce the Government to
adopt some means to assist the poor people of that
country in carrying on their trade. It his Hon. Friend
should press his motion to a division, he should cer•
tainly vote with him.
Mr. F. FRENCH said that he opposed the Bill of the
Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, for the construction
of railroads in Ireland by a grant of 16.000,0001, on the
ground that not one sixpence of that money would have
been expended in the employment of the poor in the
west of Ireland.
Mr. HUDSON thought it was hardly fair for the Hon.
Member to say that the western districts of Ireland were
not provided for by that measure. If the Hon. Member
would loOk at the Bill itself, he would see that special
provision was proposed to be made for the districts of
Roscommon end Galway. He thought that the appoint-
ment of this Committee would be a wise one, and the in-
formation which it would give to the House as the result
of its inquiries, would, no doubt, be very valuable.
Sir H. W. BARRON thought that a very strong case
had been made out for the appointment of a Committee,
so strong, indeed, that he believed no Government could
or would resist ; and, feeling as he did, that the Go-
vernment were bound to push forward the encourage-
ment to fisheries, he thought that he should be only im-
pedingmotion tthoe
acoduirvsiesioonf
._thec_Grioivse
ornfm,,epiltiviifd,.,h
de
ipviudsohy,d) hislie
thought that he should now best consult the interests of
the Irish fisheries by leaving the subject in the hands of
with-
drawThehims
t(hCerniepsootffr`o`mNot„hneee.")air.
tile Government. He, therefore, begged leave to
The galleries were cleared for a division ; no division,
however, took place.
On our re-admission to the gallery we found
Mr. AGLIONBY urging the Noble Lord opposite
and his friends to withdraw their opposition to the
motion. He thought the subject was not one which
should be treated in the jocose manlier with which they
appeared to regard it, and that, under all the circum-
stances, they should permit the lion. Baronet to with-
draw it.
Mr. B. DISRAELI was rather surprised to hear the
charge made by the Hon. Meunier for Cockeraloulh,
that the Noble Lord, the Member for Lynn, and his
friends on that side of the House, had trkaitcl the moil, n
of the Hon. Member for Wae word joeuse:y. Ile do-
nied that there was any foundation whatever for such a
charge, and he considered the course now propos; d to be
pursued by the Hon. Baronet the Metribur for Water-
ford was exceedingly strange after the private volieita-
lien he made to die Noble Lord to come down to the
House and support his motion. He had asked the Noble
Lord to be present at the debate, and vote for the
'notion for a Committee of Inquiry, and the Neale
Lord at once assented to the proposal of the
Hon. Boronet, and along with his friends did suptort
the motion with that frankness and sine. rite which were
characteristic of them. They had actually made a
House for the oceasion.—(Cries of " No, no," from the
Ministerial bench.) Well, if they did not make a House,
did the Government make the Hous ?—(Hear, hear,
and cheers.) Was it nut a fact that, even on Govern-
ment nights, when the most important measures
were brought forward, the present Government had
the greatest difficulty in making a House. It was too
bad, however, that they should be accused of treating the
subject jocosely after the inconvenience to which they
had been subjected in making a House, and the support
they had given to the motion of the Hon. Baronet.
Mr. AGLIONBY explained It was to their oppo-
sition to the withdrawal of the motion that he applied
the term " jocose."
Colonel RAWDON was opposed to a division. as
after the explanation they ree, wed it could lead to no
useful result, more especially at this late period
of the session. He hoped, therefore, the 11. el. Baronet, the
Member fur Waterford would be allowed to withdraw it.
Mr. TRELAWNEY moved that the words, " and
Cornwall," should be added to the motion, as he con-
sidered that that locality had as gocet claim as any ether
to be included in such an inquiry.
llr HUME seconded the motion, and suggested that
the words " South Sea and North Sea whale
fisheries" should tie added—(Laueliter)—tor if the in-
vestigation was extended to these quarters be believed
the best results would follow.— ( lig titer )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
it would be well if the Noble Lord opposite would give
way and allow the motion to be withdrawn. Atone period
of the evening there were only two my-three members
present at the debate, and he did not think, therefore, that
the present House was in a condition to form a correct
judgment of the merits of the case —(Hear, hear.)
It was not true that no eucouragemeet had been given to
the fisheries of Ireland, as grants vad been voted for the
purpose of promoting them, and further aid was to be
given for the erection of piers ; and in the cours of the
session he ,had moved a grant of 40,0001. for the pur-
pose of erecting curing stations in various parts
of Ireland ; but if discussions were to take place
with respect to the requirements of every seaport in the
United Kingdom, the time of the House would be
wasted to little purpose. The practical effect of the ap-
pointment of the Committee would be to Impede the
very object which the Hon. Baronet had in view, as the
officers now engaged in superintending the erection of
evidencefor e ,
that b ourne. theG en t
lemo
enmi ttee Cm. onp,e)td,urgtheetrhee-
piers and curing-houses, would ee required here to give
e Hweoulhd
lion. Baronet to press his motion to a division ; but
'leave the course which he might feel disposed to adopt
with respect to it to his own discretion.
Mr. DISRAELI was not surprised that the Hon.
Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had been
mistaken as to what had been said by those on that (the
opposition) side of the House, because he was absent
- during a considerable portion of the debate , and he (Mr.
brief
Disraeli) was nut sure that he had lust much by
absence from the House so brief, that he had heard every
speech—(Hear, hear)—if he had not had the good for-
tune the
to hear the whole oration of the Hon. Baronet
Member for Waterford (Sir IL Barron)—(Laughter)—
but he was reconciled
to the proemium, as he understood
that the catastrophe was to be omitted. He did not recom-
mend the House to proceed to a division, because his
Noble Friend (Lord G. Bentinck) had attended the
House that evening, but what he did say was, that the
Hon. Gentleman wished his Noble Friend to attend,
because the question was one of great interest ; and he,
therefore, appealed to him to be present to support him.
hear,) But there was a moral tale drawn
from this. If Irish Members thought right to make
speeches in order to receive a " flashy" demonstra-
tion—if they were in the habit of
going te the
Treasury, and
accepting just as much or as
little of their
propositions as the Government
thought proper to give them,—(Hear, hear, and laugh-
ter)—they must take the consequence when their
motions came before the House.—(Hear, hear.) He
and his Noble Friend, and those around him, had, as he
had said, attended because the motion had reference to
a subject of considerable importance, but when these
ad captandum motions were made, which Hon.
Members on his side of the House, from their
previous conduct, could not avoid the discussion—
(" Hear, hear," from Lord G. Bentirck)—they must
abide by the result. He wished it still a real debate,
and that it should lead to a real result. Those on his
(Mr. Disraeli's) side of the House had, as the House
would perceive, no desire to inconvenience the present
Government—(Hear)—but when the term "jocose" was
d
applie
• to them he considered that it was wholly unde-
served—that it could not apply to them, and if
it was not addressed to them it must have been ad-
dressed to the Hon. Gentleman in the chair.—(Laughter.)
But if such Members chose to put their faith in the Go-
vernment, were they responsible for the ridiculous posi-
tion in which they got themselves ? He thought that
the Government should grant the Committee. He was
told that they might anticipate a dissolution, and the
best way for every Hon. Member to do, in order to se-

3.1

,Itt)

Cr',mrl

oil

wou

14 say th

awl w n h
Zot C

e. —(11

Mr. ebi,ere,ti„n,
which had bean made on the conduct of his Hon.
Friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) he wished to
sar 9 few words in his defence He readily acknow-
ledged r- at Hon. GeiHern. r ,rho opposed the Govern-
ment had been fair and candid in their opposition, and had
supported t tem ist the most diaintereated wanner ; and
theseeore he had no desire to speak of them except in
terms of courtesy—(Hear)—but he could not avoid
stating that the Hon. Gentleman the Member fur
Shrewsbury, and his friends round him, had fallen into
the " bese-ting sin " of oppositit n, of which he
bad often complained.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr
Labouchere) had frequently had to regret that the
time of the House was wasted, for apparently useless
purposes; but he was Had that those who opposed
Government had not had the chance which they antici-
pated of p set ti.- ii .vernment in a minority. 'rh-
Ron. Baronet the Member for Waterford, had breught
forward his motion for the single purpose of promoting
Dish fisheries; he was satisfied with the statement of the
Gavernment, and expressed his intention of withdraw-
ing his motion, in order that he might leave the mattern
in their hands. He apprehended that the opposition
which the Hon. Baronet bad made to the Noble Lord
and other Hon. Members was not to support his motion
whatever might be said by the G ivernment, or other
Hon. Members—not to promote a party principle, but
to promote the prosperity of Irish fisheries. He hoped,
therefore, that he would not accede to the pro-
posal made by Hon. Members opposite, but that
he would take the course he had intimated. What
he (Mr. Labouchere) stated was this—that a
vast quantity of information, with respect to
Irish tisberies, had been laid on the table of the
House, that the appointment of the Committee would
bring over gentlemen from Ireland, who were actively
engaged at present in sup-rintending the erection of
curing stations and eth r public works—employed in
the beginning of this exp.riment, and he thought it would
be a most unfortunate thing to withdraw them from
the scene of their labours, at the present juncture. The
Hon. Gentleman, the Member tor Shrewsbury, said it
was an easy course to appoint Committees; and if he
wished to consult his convenience, he mightbe of the same
opinion ; but when he thought, that no public good
would arise from it, he felt it right to press his Hon.
F.-fend not to push his motion further than it had gone.
Lord G. BENTINCK said that if the Hon. Member
fur rmazh would give them the list which he had taken
el the .',/embers preaknt, his would find that out of the
three and twenty there were only three who were Irish-
m-n, and there was but one Cabinet Minister.
Sir G. GREY-0 I was here the whole debate, on
your aid.- of the House.
Lord G. BEN riNca apologised, but he did think
that the Treasury benches la eked most deserted, and
the Secretary looked very much forlorn. But he did
wlsli that the people of Ireland should not misunder
stand the feelings of the Gentlemen with whom he
acted. _ _ .

Si; IL W. BARRON said that he made his motion
with only one object—that of benefitting his countq7--
ando not to brinkr about a party division, but to elicit
pub!ie opinion. When he saw that it was about being
made a parry question by two or three gentlemen, he
ton,stly enne,ssed he shrank from the motion.
I3ANKES said that the question assumed a new
eth-tiplexion by what had fallen from the Hon. Baronet,
and :re considered it would be very difficult for Gentle-
on his aide of the Hou-e riot to vote upon the ques-
ti,m. The lion. Gentlemen the Member for Stroud had
n: :n 'even respecting, the waste lands—one of the
tire- plans of the Government—was this to be
a ,a am motion ? He and others had been pre
viii!ed upon to put off their motions, and it
now 'ppeLred that they did so to facilitate sham mo-
tioe.. He would not wonder, should the people of Ire-
land consider that their interests were neglected, if they
ivt!rt... in future to be conducted in this manner.
.`yir. P. SC;ROPE said that his motion was not by any
fri,,ins a sham motion, but he would be inclined to post-
li as he saw no reasonable chance of obtaining for
it as fair discussion.
If. W. BARRON said, when he referred to a
pi: ry spirit, his observations meant particularly to refer
to the Member f;)r Shrewsbury.
The SPEAKER then put the question whether the
motion should be withdrawn, and a loud dissent having
been expressed,
The gallery was revered for a division, when there ap-
peared--

For the withdrawal of the motion 73
Against it 22
Majority
TRE CASE OF JAMAICA.
Mr. HUME proceeded to call the attention of the
House to the petition from Jamaica, signed by 4.000
persons, praying for free trade for that colony, and for
an additional supply of labour, as requisite for the pros-
perity of that island. He trusted the Government would
take the subject into their serious consideration, and de-
vise measures for increasing the supply of labour for
those colonies. Inasmuch as the only way of putting an
end to smuggling, was to reduce the duties on the pro-
duce taxed, so in the same way the best means of getting
rid of slavery, as long offering every facility to the intro-
duction of free labour. The best method would be for
the merchants of the West Indies to go to Africa
and secure as many slaves us they could, and when
they took them to the West Indies, liberate them, and
make tilt in free labourers. By this means alone could
the colonies hope to compete with Cuba and Brazils.
BARCLNY thought that if free trade were to
regulate the dealings of the mother country, the same
principle ought to he extended to the dealings of the co
!tittles. He thought that the prayer of the colonists was
a perfectly fair and proper one.
Mr. HAWES stated that the petition which formed
the subject of the lion. Member's motion had been for
some time untivr the consideration of the Government.
With respect to one of the prayers of the clients with
rce,rgd to the free emigration of labourers, he begged to
;tete that a considerable increase had taken place in
number of labourers employed in the colonies
After a few words from Mr. FORBES M'KENZIE,
VI% HUME replied briefly, and said he would not
press the petition further on the attention of the House.
SEDUCTION AND PROSTITUTION.
Hr. SPOO\ER rose to ask Dave to introduce a Bill
:t.% prevent seduclion and prostitution. He said he would
not waste the time of the House further than state that he
intended confining it to the point recommended to him
by the Right H n. Baronet.
Mr. HUME thought the Hon. Member was wasting
the time of the House, and really doing harm by draw-
lie; attention so closely to a subject which many, per-
haps, would think less of. He did think the Hon.
Mienber had much to account for—(Great laughter)—
in thus keeping the subject beore the House.—
(Laeghter.) He was sure he might appeal to the Hon.
Gee rlernan's experieace—(Laughter)—for experience he
nets: have, unle.s he had a particular taste. He would,
ther,fore, take the sense of the House upon it.
Sir G. GREY said he had no wish to provoke any
discussion; but he telt it necessary to say that having
yesterday p anted out the reasons that weighed with
him against the former Bill, and the points which he
thought should form the nucleus of a Bill on the subject,
and understanding that the present Bill was to be con-
lined to these, he would support the lion. Member for
Birmingham.
Mr. HUME said he had not been present yesterday,
atee. he would be no party to the concern.—(Laughter.)
The gallery was then cleared for a division, when there
eppeared—
For the motion 57
Against it
Majority
Leave was given to bring in the Bill.
MEDICAL REGISTRATION.
W.IKLEY moved that the subject of the regis-
trarion of legally qualified practitioners in medicine, and
the state of the law relating to the practice of medicine
in Great Britain and Ireland, be referred to for consi-
deration to a Select Committee.
Sir G. GREY said that he shoal feel it his duty to
oppose the further progress of the Bill brought in on the
subject of medical registration by the Hon Member for
Finsbury.
Mr. WAKLEY hoped that the Committee might be
appointed in order that the evidence given before that
Committee might enable him to shape his measure in
accordance with such evidence.
Mr. SPOO NER stated that the opinion of all the me-
dical practitioners of Birmingham was favourable to this
Bill.

The motion was then agreed to.
HOSIERY MANUFACTURE BILL.
On the order of the day fur the second reading of this
Bill,
Sir H. HALFORD was desirous not to proceed with
the second reading at that late period of the evening,
a-id consented to postpone it till Wednesday, the 9th of
Jane.

An !Tow. MEMBER suggested that the Lion. Baerotnailet
should give up hi, motion altogether, as it would n
great evil on those whore it pretended to relieve. Sir J. C. HO BHO CSE concurred in this suggestion,
be
,g. B
the ill would be found to be utterly inoperative if it
became law. They could not regulate wages bAct of
Parliament, and this Bill was an Interference with labour
lerollr. eola would pOM r“d
Buce more evil than good.
DUNCE
thoughttho that this was not the way
ji Halford)
t, me.t the Bill of Honourable Gentleman (Sir
would Pr seed , asl he trustrd the Honourable Barnnet
" With hh Bill, as he (Mr. Dun-
combo believed it would confer great benefit on
the: Not king. hosiers. fir whose hen,-fit it was intended.
He tjpii..ved the condition 4 the frame c
b, w,
f-
ors., than at present. Several we s could not
receivin in t':^ Keightley union, and it was the duty of theg 'relieflouse
tee .31! ,ke an inquire inn the it conditio!. He hoped the
-1-1 - Ge.talt.man would proceed with his Bill.
e• further considera!ion of the Bill was then post-
I`until the 9th of June.
f i

I°' ; ; ftREMOVAL (ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND:
BILL.
This Bill %as read a third time, and (sassed.
TURNPIKE ROADS (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill p iss.d through Committee. —ll,-;port to-day,
LUNATIC ASYLUMS BILL.
This Bill also pa=seel through Committee.—Report

LOAN DISCOUNT BILL.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
tth -econd reading of this Bill. He propos,ed to move
ti : lommittee on the Bill to-mirrow, before the o. her
of the day, and the contUwation of the del ate
could, therefore, be taken on the motion that the Speaker
do wave the chair.
Tne Bill Ras then read a second time.
RAILWAYS' REGULATION BILL.
be CHANCELLOR of th• EXCHEQUER said thfa

is return :t the next eiecticn, was to have a Bill stood on the list for to-morrow, but it was not the
on ,very th• intention of the Gtv_rnment to proceed with it on that
e credit of being good workitiT. mr,r. day. Ells NAle Friend (Lord J. Russell) would state
country with-better cialies niTn P,ernorr •w.(thi: day) his views with respect to it, and
confidence in them.—(Lau2hter.) when he propo'ed proceeding with it.
4-.uld do them good service because Mr. UUDSON that the discussion would not be
rhet in his head would be i.aken vio son, ottierwise railway companies would have
little time to consider the Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was un-
derstood to say that ample time would be given.
TOWNS' IMPROVEMENT CLAUSES BILL.
The report upon this Bill was brought up.
Colonel SIB FIIORPE gave notice, that when this
Bill went into Committee, he would move that the Speaker
do not leave the chair for six months.—(Li ughter.)
PREVENTION OF PROSTITUTION.
Mr. SPOONER. moved the first reading of this Bill.
Captain BERKELEY moved that it be read a first
time this day six months.
The gal.ery was cleared for a division, and there not
being forty Members present,
The House adjourned at a Quarter to One o'clock.