The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-25 00:00:00

tioner. The petition contained a number of charges of
cruelty and misconduct against the Governor of the
prison towards the persons confined in that prison.
These charges could, he thought, be all substantiated, if a
Select Committee were appointed to inquire into the
subject. One of the charges was that the prisoners
were sentenced to seven (lays' confinement, upon bread
and water, for opening their bibles and reading therein.
during the time of oivine service. Another case was
that of a prisoner who was sentenced to receive 100
lashes for cutting a cat on the wall with a pair of
scissors; and that, in consequence of this corporal pun-
ishment, he had been confined for a period of ten weeks,
during which he was not allowed any religious instruc-
tion, nor was the chaplain allowed to visit him. In the
former case the Governor had exceeded his duty by
confining the prisoner for seven days, for by the regu-
lations of ihe prison he had only the power of confining
a prisoner for three days. As to the second case, the
prison regulations regarding corporal punishment, it was
ordered that no whip should be used except such as
had been approved by the prison inspectors, and which
had their seal upon the handle. In this case, however,
the night before the punishment was to take place, the
governor sent out for a lash of double the weight, which
lash he had wound round with wax cord, which in-
creased the severity of the punishment to a considerable
extent. There was also the case of a prisoner who was
confined fin• twenty-five days, and kept on bread and
water, till he died a mere skeleton. Four suicides had
been committed, and twelve prisoners had attempted to
commit suicide, but had been prevented in consequence
of the vigilance G f the warders. There was another
practice to which he would call the attention of the
House. The governor was in the habit of raising a
false alarm of fire, and a hundred and twenty persons
have been called up out of their beds in the depth of
winter for what is called " fire practice;" and this was
in the habit of being done for the purpose of entertain-
ing the dinner friends of the governor. There were also
charges of favouritism, and numerous others, which
he would not then detaiu the House by entering into.
An inquiry into these charges ought to take place, and
it would facilitate the solution of the problem of the best
method to treat the criminal. He said it advisedly, and
in his place in that House he was prepare d to prove
every charge which was alleged in the motion.
Sir G. GREY said an inquiry was made already by
the Government into the facts, and the charges were re-
ported not to have been substantiated. There had been
only four suicides out of 11,000 persons who had been
committed, the whole convict population that were
sentenced to be transported passing first through Mil-
bank. He would promise to lay before the House
the report, and it the House did not consider that report
sufficient, he would agree to any inquiry the lion.
Member chose.
Mr. HUME said, after the frightful atrocities which
were daily coming to light from the Andover Committee,
his confidence was exceedingly shaken in persons who
were possessed of authority. He would, therefore, re-
commend the adoption of the suggestion of the Hon.
Member.
Captain PECHELL would recommend his lion. Friend
to persevere, for the public would not be satisfied, after
the charges that bad been made, that an inquiry should
be delayed.
Mr. SPOONER considered that the Hon. Member
would come with a stronger case to the House if he
would consent to the suggestion.
Mr. AGLIONBY said he hoped no delay would take
place. An inquiry should be made, and not postponed;
the characters of public servants were involved, and
that rendered investigation imperative. The former
was conducted in the walls of a prison, with no one
present to represent the accuser, and it was alleged that
answers were put in the mouths of the witnesses, and
that their answers were stopped when they seemed to
imply the truth of the charges. The public would
never be satisfied unless there was a full and searching
investigation.
Mr. E WART said, that only one side of the case was
referred to the inspectors, and consequently the investi-
gation was of little use. He considered that a pod case
was made out for an inquiry, and he should support the
motion.

Sir R. INGLIS said that the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Secretary of State, merely stated that the House
was not yet in a condition to pronounce an opinion on
the subject, and merely asked for a brief delay till he
male inquiry into the allegations. He thought such a
course was the prop,,r one under the circumstances. He
would support
Mr. B. Escorr supported the motion. He thought
the inquiry should be granted, as it was a very fit sub-
ject for the House to investigate, and he could not un-
derstand why it was refused.
Mr. CHRIS -CIE would vote for the inquiry without
hesitation. flee report referred to by the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Secretary of State ought to have been
laid on the table before this. He hoped the Right Hon.
Gentleman would grant the Committee.
Mr. HENLEY opposed the motion. If the House
went into inquiries of this sort there would be no end
to them. The course proposed by the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was the proper one under the circumstances.
The House then divided when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority

red/StUatSE theU
The House then went into Committee of Supply.
SpoposBRITISH Mau;
Sir R. INGLIS of 45,40GL be
granted to defray the expenses of the British Museum.
Mr. HUME said that the present was a large sum,
compared to what was fOrmerly granted to that esta-
blishment. He thought there should be a responsible
board of managers to superintend the outlay of so large
a sum of money. There was no establishment in the
country where so large an amount was granted without
some control on the part of this House, yet this board
was wholly irresponsible. The trustees consisted of
three classes of high official men, and he asked if the
present system was not one extremely objectionable ?
The board was composed of too many individuals, and
the result was, that the management fell into the hands
of a few individuals. In 1836 a Committee sug-
gested the propriety of forming a responsible board;
and, wish the exception of the raising the salaries of the
officers of the institution, which amounted altogether to
19,0001., no other recommendation of that Committee
was attended to. He thought a change should take
place in this system. He was really at a loss to know
what branch of the Government to address on the sub-
ject, but he hoped the nutter would be taken up, for the
public would require that a responsible body be ap-
pointed. On Tuesday and Thursday the Museum was
open only to private parties. That was the system of
exclusion carried on ; and he wished to know why a
public institution should be open only to private parties.
The public servants were compelled to attend on those
days, and he thought that while the public money was ex-
pended every well conducted person ought to be admitted.
It might be said that it was for the benefit of
artists. He had inquired of artists, and he was informed
that they went on all days whether the Museum was
attended or not, so that this excuse was invalid. There
was another point which required attention, and that
was whether the Museum should be open after five
o'clook. The experiment was tried, but it did not suc-
ceed, for only seven persons per hour entered after that
time, and yet nearly 60 persons were required to be in
attendance. If he had the power the Museum should
remain open on Sundays, for it would afford a means of
amusement to the artisans, which would keep them from
the gin-shop. Daring the hours that the gin-shops were
open, he would open the National Gallery and the
British Museum in competition. The artisans were fond
of going to the country on Sundays, but on rainy days
they had no resource but the gin-shop, unless they
adopted such measures. He would no longer detain the
Committee from more important business, but would
earnestly press what he had said on the attention of the
Government. In the year 1843 no less than 247,929
persons went over the establishment, and in
1845 no less than 685.858 persons went over
it. So large an attendance required more and
better attendance than was at present employed
He regretted, however, to state that the number of
visitors to the reading-room had decreased, as well as
the number of artists who used to attend. He did not
make these observations from any unwillingness to give
the money, but ho certainly conceived that wh:n so
large a sum was expended, it ought to be made as useful
as possible. He therefore recommended to his Hon.
Friend the course which he had pointed out, in order to
etTeet the saving he had wished.
Mr. E WART entirely agreed with the tenor of his
Hon. Friend's remarks, but he did not mean to address
his observations to the whole establishment, but simply
to the library. On the continent any man might enter
a public library without any restriction, and receive the
greatest civility from the librarians. In the British
Museum the rules were, that before any person could go
to read in the room, he must be introduced by some per-
son of respectability, or high rank. Any recommenda-
tion from a public mar. was the only satisfactory
reference, and the only one which would ob-
tain admission for the applicant. Such a vs.
tein existed nowhere but in England. He would
also ask, what was the use of the number of
duplicates of books ? Could they not found another
library at Westminster with them, and so afford in.
creased accommodation. He would say no more, as he
had publicly called attention to what was a public evil.
Sr IL H. INGLIS said, that the complaint made by
the Hon. Member for Montrose was, that there was no
responsibility for the expenditure of this large sum. lie
begged to say, that the responsibility existed with the
trustees, and it remained with the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to see their recommendations carried out.
The Hon. Member also said that the management should
be vested in a Board of Management ; but that, he
thought, would not be a wise course, nor would it lead
to a better system of management than now. The
Honourable Member had also said that the Museum
was only open for three days a week, but this
was not the fact. It was really open for five.
days. There were certain days open to the general
public, while Tuesdays and Thursdays were open for
artists and men of science. He thought it was of great
advantage to the public that these parties should have
the opportunity of pursuing their studies in quietness,
which could not be the case if large bodies of people
were passing through, and therefore it was a wise and
proper arrangement to have three days for the public,
and two for those engaged in artistic and scientific pur-
suits. With regard to children, it had been objected
that they soh
crald be denied admission under eight years
of age ; but as sem* limit must be made, he thought
that age a reasonable period of limitation, Before that
age, there was some danger of damage being done, unless
children were well looked after. The Hon. Member who
last addressed the House (Mr. Ewart) complained of the
way in which the library was managed, and the difficulty'
cf narties not being admitted without a pass. He (Sir
ti. Inglis's believed that in Faris passes had to be ob-
tained before parties could be kids4tted into the
public
library.
Mr. EWART said that he had been repeatedly in the
Paris library, and no pass whatever was required,
Sir R. INGLIS 4.4i.a ie they looked Q th 9 "14