The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-15 00:00:00

FLANDERS MAIL.

BRUSSELS, MAY 11.—The Chamber of Representatives in
its sitting this day heard a report on several petitions. It
then adopted two projects of law, one granting a supple-
ment ary credit of 48,000 francs to the Minister of Marine,
and the other for a vote of credit of 24,000 francs for the
public veterinary school, to meet the expenses of the last
month of 1845.
It will commence to-morrow the discussion of the Budget
of the Department of the Interior.
The King has given audience to-day to a great number of
persons.
Baron d'Arnim, the Prussian Ambassador at Paris, is now
at Brussels. He had an audience yesterday of the King, and
visited several members of the diplomatic body. We under-
stand that he will return to Paris on Wednesday. General
Fleischmann, Minister Plenipotentiary of his Majesty the
King of Wurtemburg at Paris, has arrived at Brussels.
ANTWERP, MAY 12.—A report has been in circulation on
'Change to• day that the King, on the representation of M.
Liedtz, had given up the Ministry of M. de Theux, and had
commissioned M. Liedtz to form a new Cabinet, and that
M. Liedtz had composed his Cabinet of Messrs. Rogier,
de Brouckere, Lebain, d'Hoffschmidts, Liedtz. The
Minister of War was not yet chosen. All this, of course,
needs confirmation.—Journal du Commerce, May 12, 1846.
VIENNA, MAY 6.—The Emperor has commissioned Lieut.
Field-Marshall Baron Von Hess, Chief of his Majesty's
General Staff to compliment the Sultan on the occasion of
his visit to the provinces on the Danube. Major Baron
Spiegelfield, Count Festelics, Count C. Zechy, and Count
Troper will accompany General Hess. The mission will
wait on the Sultan at Rustscheck.
PRUSSIAN FUNDS.—Bgamr, MAT 8.
Bills. Money.
St. Schuld Sch., 3% per Cent
Prusa. English Bonds, 1830, 4 er jent.• • •
Foreign Exchanges .. .• .•• • • .13.... •• • • •••
Exchange on London, XI Sterling, 3 Months. 6 251,4
Hamburgh, 300 Marks, 2 Months. 149% 149%
Faris, 300 fr., 2 Months •• • • 80 1-12
Two months. • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Universal Prussian Gazette, Max 9.

AUSTRIAN FUNDS.—VtaxprA, MAY 6.
5 per Cent. Metalliques• • ••• • •• •• • ....... 112
4 per Cent. ditto• •• • •• • • •• • • •• • • •••• • • • • 100‘
3 per Cent. ditto• •••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • 74%
Lean, 1834
Ditto, 1839 • • • • • • • • •• • • • 122
Bank Shares • ••• • ••• • • •
Esterhazy's Loan • • ••• • •• • .. •• •.......

RAILWAYS.
The Northern, or Ferdinand • • ••••• • • • • • 193%
Gloggnits • • • • •• • • •• • • •• • • ........ • •• .• 13935
Vienna—Milan •• • •• ••
Leghorn •• •
Sienna • • • •
Grosetto • • •
Oldenburg
Pestoja • • • • .. • •
Apennhien • • •• ..
Pesth Bridge ..........................120
—Aligemeine Zeitung, May 9.
BELGIAN FUNDS.—Bxussns, May 12.
Actual Debt, 2% per Cent
Rothschild's Loan, Five per Cent
Loan of Thirty Millions, Four per Cent • ...
Ditto Three per Cent •
Ditto Thirty-seven Millions, ditto ......
Ditto, ditto,lB4o • • •
Ditto, ditto, 1842 • .• . 102
Ditto, 1844..• • ..... • • ..... .• ... 100
Ditto, 1836.. •••••• • • • • • •
Ditto, 1838 • • .• • • • • • • • • • • • • 74%
Ditto of the City, 1832 .
Ditto, 1843 •• 100%
Bank of Belgium • • .• • • •• • 892
,--Brussels Papers. May 12.
DUTCH F HEITERDAM, MAT 11.
Money.
Bills.
Actual Debt, 234 per Cent........... 60 603(
bitto, 3 per Cent ••••.• .• • • ........ 72 72%
Ditto, 4 per Cent.•. •••••• • . .. • ..... 9314 844
Amort Syndic, 4% per Cent. ..... 99% 100
Ditto, 3% per Cent •••-•••• • • • • • • • • 885 i 88%
Commercial Company, 4% per Cent • 1683 169
East India Loan, 4 per Cent. ••••• • • • • 93% 93%
Exchange on London, at sight • • • • • 12 27
Two months... .... • . 12 20
On Hamburgb, at sight •• .. 35 81
Two months.. • • • • • • • 35 43
—Dutch rapers. May 12.

THE CROPS IN GEORGIA.—The Macon Advocate of
the 20th instant says :—We learn from a
Lee,
who has
just returned from a tour through Baker, Sumter, Dooly,
and other counties in Sout-Western Georgia, that the crops
of small grain, particularly wheat, were never more pro-
mising than at present. The corn looks well, but cotton,
in consequence of the wet and cool weather experienced in
that section for some time past, appeared rather backward,
and in some places fears were entertained that it would die,
and the land have to be re-planted. The weather having
become clear and pleasant, however, with a prospect of
continuing so, the plants may revive, and prove thrifty in
the cnd.
PROTESTANT ASSOCIATION.-011 Wednesday the anni-
versary meeting of the Protestant Association was held at Exeter-
hall. J. P. Plumptre, Esq., M.P. presided, and was supported by
the Very Rev. the Dean of Ardagh, Sir Digby Mackworth, Bart.,
the Rev. Hugh Stowell, the Rev. W. M'llwaine, the Rev. Dr. Hollo-
way, the Rev. Dr. Marsh, the Rev. Tennison Cuffe, the Rev. A. S.
Thelwall, the Rev. G. Campbell, the Rev. E. Dalton, the Rev. R. H.
Thomas, the Rev. W. Shirley, the Rev. W. Ayerst, General Latter,
Major Hanley, and other gentlemen. The side galleries were filled
with ladles. The usual resolutions were adopted, together with a
petition to the House of Commons for the repeal of the Maynooth
grant,

IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN T.
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 14.
Their Lordships assembled at the usual hour.
ROYAL ASSENT.
The Royal Assent was given to-day by Commission to the
Exchequer-bills Bill (18,380,200/. ), the Indemnity Qualification
Offices Bill, the Insolvent Debtors' Continuance Bill, the
Burghs ( Scotland) Bill, the Great Western Railway Im-
provement Bill, the Monckton Navigation Bill, the
Ellesmere and Cheshire Canal Bill, the Manchester
and Salford Waterworks Bill, the Boston Waterworks
Bill, the Glasgow Waterworks Bill, the York Waterworks
Bill, the Sunderland Docks Bill, the Birmingham Cemetery
Bill, the Rochester Bridge Bill, the Welsh Charity School Bill,
and several other Bills.
The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the
Duke of Buccleuch, and the Earl of Haddington.
SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS ON SUNDAY.
The Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition, praying
their Lordships to adopt some measure whereby the sale of in-
toxicating liquors might at least be prevented on Sunday, if
not entirely prohibited on all days.
LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY
Earl FITZ WILLIAM presented a petition from the Bishop,
Dean, and other inhabitants of Peterborough, against this Bill,
SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
Earl PO WIS presented a petition against the union of these
two sees.
Lard CAMPPELL presented a petition from the members
of a society, entitled " The Society for the Improvement of
Ireland, irrespective of sect or party," and also from various
religious and other bodies, praying their. Lordships to alter
the present financial relations bet ween Ireland and England.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL presented a great number of petitions
from Churchmen, Wesleyans' Independents, Unitarians, and
Roman Catholics against the Charitable 'f rusts Bill.
SITES FOR CHURCHES (SCOTLAND).
Lord CAMPBELL also presented a petition from a con-
gregation in the county of Dumfries. praying their Lordships
to adopt some measures by which they might be enabled to
obtain sites for churches.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
Lord ASHBURTON presented a petition against the Cha-
ritable Trusts Bill.
Lord COTTEN HAM also presented a number of petitions
from the trustees of Wesleyan property, in different parts of
the kingdom, against. this Bill.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition from
Cork, signed by 9,000 persons, in favour of the above mea-
measure ; also a petition from the University of Cambridge—
not in favour of the Charitable Trusts Bill—but in favour of the
Eastern Counties Extension Railway.—( Laughter. )
Lord CAMPBELL begged to move for a return of the
number of petitions and petitioners for and against the
Charitable Trust Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM conceived that all trustees connected
with charitable trusts in this country, and numbering between
3,000 and 4,000 persons, would prefer to have no inquisition
into the mode in which they manage their trusts. They
would no doubt petition against this Bill and every offer Bill
that was introduced for that purpose.
The motion was then agreed to.
The Earl of ELDON presented a petition from the Wes-
leyan body of King's-cross, Lincoln's Inn-fields, and other
places in the vicinity of London, against the Bill.
IMPORTATION OF GRAIN.
Lord STANLEY called the attention of the Noble Lord
(Dalhousie) to the propriety of laying upon the table
two returns connected with the importation of grain into this
country. He wished to have the fullest information on this
point. A return had been made of the coin which had been
imported from Ireland in the month of February last. Ile
wished this return to be extended to the months of March
and April. He also wished to have a return of the number of
corn laden ships from the different countries of Europe, and
America, specifying the proportion of British ships, shins
belonging to the places whence the corn was imported, and
other foreign ships. In addition to these returns, to which be
hoped the Noble Lord would not object, he would now beg to
ask for an explanation of certain discrepancies which appeared
to exist in the returns already on the table with regard to this
matter.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said he had no objection to the
laying of the returns wished for by the Noble Earl upon the
table of their Lordships' House. His Lordship briefly ex-
plained an error to which the Noble Lord had alluded as
having been made in the returns already made.
Lord BROUGHAM moved for a return of the quantity of
corn taken out of bond during the last two years.
Earl DALHOUSIE said the motion was perfectly unneces-
sary, inasmuch as that return was already on their Lordships
table.
After a few words from Lord ASHBURTON, the motion
was withdrawn.

REPEAL OF THE UNION.
The Marquis of NORMANBY presented a petition
from a certain town in Ireland in favour of the repeal of the
legislative union.
DISEASES OF THE CHEST.
Lord NORMANBY presented a petition, the prayer of
which, he said, was rather of a singular nature. The peti-
tioner stated that he had invented a new medicine for diseases
of the chest, and he prayed their Lordships to appoint a Com-
mittee to investigate the merits of his icvention. That meant,
the Noble Earl supposed, to try it themselves.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOrt presented two petitions from
congregations of Independents in favour of the Bill.
Earl FORTESCUE presented several petitions from Wes-
leyan and other religious bodies against the Bill ; also petitions
in favour of the repeal of the Catholic Disabilities.
SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from the
clergy and rural deans of Chichester against the union of the
sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL.
Lord PORTMAN moved that a Select Committee be ap-
pointed to inquire into the merits of this Bill.
After a few words from Lord HADDINGTON and the Duke
of RIIIHMOND, the motion was negatived.
POLLING-PLACES IN IRELAND BILL.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE moved the second read-
ing of this Bill. The Noble Marquis expected no opposition in
that House, as it had met with none in the other, and therefore
felt it unnecessary to enter into any argument or detail on the
subject, especially as the preamble of the Bill spoke for itself.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.

DEEDS REGISTRATION BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition from
the solicitors and attorneys of the city of York against the Bill
introduced by his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Camp-
bell). At the same time he wished to intimate that he would
express no opinion either for or against the Bill.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition against
this Bill from the Braziers' Company of the city of London.
SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
The Bishop of EXETER preseated apetition from the Dean
and Chapter of Westminster against the union of these two sees.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mayl4.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
REPORTS.

The following reports were brought up and agreed to, and the
Bills ordered to be engrossed, viz.:.--
Harrogate Gas.
York and North Midland Railway (Whitby and Pickering

Extension).
Edinbutgh and Peebles Railway.
Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Railway (Humber

Ferries).
Carshalton Rates.
Northumberland Docks.

Edinburgh, Leith, and Granton Railway (Extension and
Branches).
Edinburgh and Leith Atmospheric Railway.
Edinburgh and Northern Railway (Branches from the Dundee
and Arbroath Railway and Tay Ferry Improvement).
Edinburgh and Northern Railway (Stratherne Deviation).
Edinburgh and Northern Railway (Newport Railway and St.
Andrew's Branch).
Rye and Derwent Drainage.
Newcastle-upon-Tyne Improvement.
Manchester Markets.
Arbroath and Forfar Railway.

Airdrie Police.
Salford Hundred Court.

East Fife Railway.
BILSTON GAS-LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY.

This Bill was read a third time and passed.
ST. AUSTELL "MALL DEBTS.

This Bill was also read a third time and passed.
LONDON, BRISTOL, AND SOUTH WALES DIRECT

RAILWAY.

Mr. GREENE made the following motions, all of which
were agreed to :--That the order made on the 13th day of
111 arch last, referring the London, Bristol, and South Wales
Direct Railway Bill to the Committee of Selection, be non
read ; and that the said order be discharged ; and that
the said Bill be withdrawn ; and that the Midland
Railway (Nottingham and Mansfield Branch) Bill
be read a second time this day, notwithstanding the breviate
of the same has not been laid on the table one clear day pre-
viously; and that the Committee on the Caledonian Insurance
Company have leave to sit and proceed on Friday ; and that
the ord,r of the sth day of May last, referring the Birken-
head and Llangollen Railway Bill to the Committee of Selec-
tion, be discharged. That the said Bill be withdrawn.
METROPOLITAN SEWAGE MANURE COMPANY.

Colonel WOOD proposed the second reading of this Bill.
Sir DE LACY EVANS objected because the Commis-
sioners of the Metropolitan Sewers had had no opportunity of
opposing the Bill before the Standing Orders' Committee. He
did not pretend to say that there might not be very great ad-
vantages to agriculture if the principle of the Bill were carried
into practice. He thought, however, that an experiment of
the kind that was contemplated had better be tried in some
less populated district, but instead of that the most densely
inhabited part of the metropolis had been selected. The
effluvia from these operations would be very offensive.
And Le understood it would be necessary to have a chimney
100 feet higher than St. Paul's to carry off the effluvia. A
noxious gas would be generated, which would tend greatly to
injure the health of the inhabitants of the metropolis. A similar
experiment had been tried at Edinburgh ; but in consequence
of the numerous deaths that were occasioned, the scheme was
abandoned. Other experiments had been tried, but all had
been abandoned in consequence of the injury to health that re-
sulted from the noxious effluvia. He should move, as an
amendment, that the Bill be read a second time this day six
months.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS seconded the amendment, and al-
though the promoters of the Bill contemplated conferring be-
nefits on agriculture, he would not be a party to benefiting the
agriculturists at the expense of the health of the inhabitants of
towns. The scheme was one which, if undertaken at all, ought
to be undertaken by the Government, and not by a public com-
pany. The Bill contemplated raising a large reservoir of ma-
nure, and then squirting it up to the height of Highgate-hill.
The effluvium would overtop the neighbouring hills of the me-
troColis, and would give rise to typhus fever and other diseases.
Mr. MANNERS SUTTON said it was a general rule that
pinuprt;ivbautet
tßhiellismeSsleenmtbßerilsi owfasthoeneGtohvaetrnimoteenrft shld
eredouwithtapkoebnhoo
health, and therefore the Government were bound toive an
opinion upon it. It appeared that the public health was
likely
to suffer if the principles of the Bill were allowed to be carried
into practical operation, from the malaria and noxious effluvia
which would lTd.bwre
TgoenoeDratsetdat.ed,
reply, that he considered in Go-
vernment should not interfere in the measure--at any rate not
on
Sir
re
G. GREY
reading.thought the Government had acted quite
properly in causing an inquirytotibe instituted into the matter.
Sir J. GRAHAM proposedpoetill tat the consideration of the
pqouretstpiorenpsahroeudldfobretopeosGtMonday next, when the re-
port would be placed in the hands
of
Lord R.
Members.
GROSVENOR supported the proposition.
The further consideration of the questien was then postponed
till this day week.

RYE AND DERWENT RAILWAY.
Mr. EVELYN DENISON called the attention of the House,
at the time of bringing up the report on this Bill, to the opposi-
tion of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to the preamble of that
Bill. The Hon. Member stated that it appeared strange to himself
and other Members of the Committee that the society should
have fumds to spend in this opposition, while it could not pay
the sums required for the carrying out of its legitimate pur-

poles. It was, however, accounted for by the circumstance
that Mr. Charles Knight Murray was Secretary to the Com-
mission ; Mr. J. Murray, his brother, was the solicitor who
conducted the case; and Mr. Murray, the third brother,
was the Counsel before the Committee.

The Speaker was here summoned to the House of Lords to
hear the Royal Assent given to several Bills. On his return,

Mr. E. DENISON said, that during the absence of the
Speaker from the House, a paper had been put into his (Mr.
Dennison's) hands, whip h was addressed to himself, and which
was signed White and Murray ; bu'. he begged to say
that, until he came into the Hon e. he had had no
knowledge whatever of it. He now begged to say that it ap-
peared to the Committee that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
had failed to prove their ease, and he appealed to several
members of the Committee whom he now saw present to state
whether he was correct or not.

Mr. G. PALMER said, that hr, as Chairman of the com-
mittee, quite concurred with the Hon. Member.

Mr. HA STIE said it appeared to him that no case had been
made out • from all he had heard of it, he should say it ap-
p ared to him very like a job.
Mr. E. DENISON said that he did not know now what the
House would think of the paper he held in his hand.
A similar case existed at the present moment in that House.
The Hon. Member for Sunderland had been obliged to leave
the House, and had placed in his hands two cases, which he
desired him (Mr. Denison) to lay before the House. One
of these cases was on the Newcastle and Darlington Railway
Bill, against which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners peti-
tioned, and required their costs to be paid by the parties
againstwhom they petitioned. He had, in speaking of this
case, gone somewhat beyond what he ought to have said. He
had stated that no reasons had occurred to the Commissioners,
instead of which he should have said that no reason presented
itself to the minds of several members of that Com-
mission that there was no cause for those proceedings,
except the fact that Mr Charles Knight Murray petitioned,
a.,other Mr. Murrray was the solicitor, and a third Mr. Mur-
ray was the counsel for the Bill. Another reason which in-
duced him to bring the subject under the notice of the House
was, that he thought that the time when it was necessary that
some reconstruction of the Ecclesiastical Commission should take
place.—( Hear, hear.) He did not say so without great respect
to every member of that Commission, for when he stated that
it was composed of the Archbishops and Bishops of England
and Wales, the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justices, the
First Lord of the Treasury, and other gentlemen of the highest
respectability, no one could doubt that they were all honourable
men. There was not sufficient individual responsibility, the
business was entrusted to too few ; but it there was a secretary
in whom the public could rely, the business would be better
conducted. He did not think Mr. Charles Knight Murray
was a man of that description. He had been put down in va-
rious railways as a subscriber to the amount of 500,0001., and
he wished to know whether the reports current were correct—
th.,t Mr. Knight Murray had had railway clerks waiting
in the office of the Cornmissioters while he signed scrip up
stairs. He did not think that the public interest would be pro-
perly entrusted in the hands of Mr. Murray.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that the question had not been
brought under his consideration, and that therefore he would
confine his ob-ervations to the report which was then under
discussion. He had no opportunity of knowing the exact
merits of the case. But if he was rightly informed,
the whole charge consisted in the alleged improper
sale of two hundred acres of ecclesiastical lands, from the cir-
cumstance of the secretary to the Board of Ecclesiastical Com-
missioners being a brother of the solicitor engaged for the
Company, and a third brother being the advising Counsel.
This commission had most invidious duties to perform. In
behalf of the church it was their bounden duty to defend their
reversionary interests. Reference had been made to the con-
duct of these commissioners with regard to railway Bills.
Now no less than sixty notices had been served upon the com-
mission, and they would, have neglected their duty if they had
not presented petitions to have clauses inserted in the various
railway Bills for the protection of the Church. They were
compelled to present petitions, because it was by that course
alone that they obtained a Lens standi before the Committee ;
but in no case had they opposed the preamble of a railway Bill.
With regard to Mr. Murray, he could see nothing in that
gentleman's conduct which should render him censurable or
unworthy of the greatest confidence.
Sir G. G EY, who was most inaudible, was understood to
say that a petition was necessary for the protection of certain
rights, ano, :hat being the case, he could trot see anything
wrong in presenting it. The question for the House
was, whether the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had
carried their powers as Commissioners out too far,
He could only say, with regard to Mr. Murray, that he bad
done nothing which could be blamed in the slightest manner,
for he considered that he had discharged his duties with great
efficacy. He hoped, however, that some arrangement would be
come to so as to prevent any mistake occurring in future.

Mr. STEWART said it was very satisfactory to him to
see the turn which this case had taken. Bnt it appeared. to
him that some Honourable Members laboured under some
misapprehension as to the actual injury which the
property of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners would sustain.
Here was a Bill which was proposed to drain two hun-
dred acres of land, and in addition to that, this same
property would also be most injuriously affected to the extent
of 4'4:1 acres by the manner in which this Bill proposed to deal
with them. No doubt the manner in which the Committee
had dealt with the matter might be right, but the effect of it
would be to burden these 400 acres of land, which the tenants
would not have to pay, bat which would fall exclusively upon the
commissioners. And now let him ask, was it because those
commissioners had thought proper to suggest that they could
deal with those lands in a more advantageous manner than was
proposed by the Bill, that therefore they were not justified
in adopting this proceeding? He should say also that he did
not think that the Honourable Member who had brought
the motion forward had stated the matter quite fully.
He considered it was a very strange charge to make, that a
brother of a batrister employed by the commissioners could
not be secretary to the board ; and he understood it was made
for the first time, for it was not considered as such by the mem-
bers of the commission. He,knew the gentleman in question, he was
a member of the Chancery bar, and he hoped the House would
forgive him for saying that he considered that it was very
im-
proper to make charges against a gentleman without giving any
notice either to him or his friends, so as to enable him to ex-
plain his conduct or even defend it. He could state
that he knew the gentleman some years ago, and he
knew him to be a man of honour and integrity--( Hear, hear)
—and he fully deserved the commendations which he had re-
ceived from the Right Hon. Baronet.
Mr. EVELYN DENISON said he would not take the
trouble to again advert to the various circumstances
of the case ; his opinion remained unchanged.—
( Cries of " Order, order ' ) Well, then, as a matter of ex-
p'anatien, he would say that he acquainted the gentleman of
what he intended to say in the House ; so, therefore, the com-
plaint of the Hon Gentleman that due notice was not given was
by no means well founded.
Mr. SPOONER, in pursuance of notice which he had al-
ready given, moved that " the petition of the Company of
Proprietors of the Oxford Canal Navigation, presented on the
12th of May against the Midland Railway Bill, be referred to
the Committee on the Midland Railway ( Burton-upon-Trent)
to Nuneaton Branch and Ashby Canal Purchase Bill."
Mr. WILSON PATTEN opposed the motion. He did so
with regret, as he did not wish to interfere in any motion on
private business, but he thought his friend the Member for
Birmingham had relied too much upon the Report of the Com-
mittee of A malgaraation.
Sir G. GREY thoughtit was quite advisable that this matter
should be referred to the Committee of Amalgamation.
Mr. SPOONER. thought that a clear case had been made out,
iwe
co(uilodn
.b e
ybeett, t ears
tthoe wait
etrh
now
orwe psotroot
do, ft
ht
eh e
pCr
oohmamh
til
tt ey e of
and his impression was that under the circumstances it
Se-
was the
House would not agree to his proposition, and that the report
of the Committee would be consequently of little use.
Mr. W. PATTEN would wish to guard against any sup-
position that this petition was treated with disrespect, or bad
not received sofficientattentionfromnotwhestflod t would be bet-
ter Mr. SPOONER said as matters
ter to withdraw the motion, and it was accordingly withdrawn,
on the motion to that effect being put from the Chair.
Mr. C. BERKELEY presented five petitions against the
Oxford and Cheltenham Railway.
Mr. SEYMER presented several petitions against the Eas t
Cornwall Railway.
Mr. MILLS presented a petition from the landowners on
the line against the Oxford and Worcester Railway Extension
Elll.

Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition in favour of the
Manchester and Sheffield Railway.
Mr. H. HINDE presented a petition against the West
Yorkshire Railway.
MR. SMITH O'BRIEN.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented petitions from Dublin, apt
several other places in Ireland, regretting the detention of Mr.
Smith O'Brien in custody, and stating their belief that it was
unjustifiable in a constitutional view.
Mr. P. SCROPE presented a petition from the poor of
-Ballingarry, stating that they received sixpence a day with two
meals during the winter from the farmers in their district, end
that they received eightpence a day during the summer, making
an average of sevenpence a day, and with what they received
they were obliged to pay debts incurred during scarce seasons,
and for the credit which they received then they were obliged
to pay a most usurious interest. The petition was signed by
upwards of 300 persons. It appeared by this petition there
were 600 families at the present moment in a state of star-
vation, whom it was the bounden duty of the Legislature to
relieve.

CORN-LAWS.
Sir John Easthope, Lord George Bentinck, Mr. Esteourt,
and Mr. Hawes presented petitions on the corn-laws.
MAYNOOTH.
Mr. P. BORTHWILK stated that he had postponed his
motiontheof th
other nig:
debate on th
tonthe Poor-lawern.lw,
eo Settlement
and
lement
he
should
lin
consideration
bring it on this day fortnight.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition praying for the re-
peal of the Bth and 9th Victoria, which provided a grant for
Mr. B. ESTCOTT presented a petition from
the College onf
0111AalyAnoNothcoAuTt otifothLe puicßblEil,fluEnFds.
.
Richmond,
in Surrey, in favour of the Roman Catholic Disabilities Re-
lief Bill.
THE RAILWAY MEETINGS,
Sir JOHN EASTHOPE A ished to ask the Right Hon.
the Committee,
thep EBEiiLl ,
saani dortethqher whether,
bßeafroorneetthaet
Bt
illi
le headras. e
dotfh thethrough
ou gh Government,
Committee,
thei
of scripholders in a particular railway con;
pang to be hex'
Committee should
meeting of the scßriiplhl oalfdteel*re:
Sir ROBERT
i alterpaßblaelosysneßedEe es,a r y ?
was, that he did not think it
of the scripholders to be held •- . his answer to that question.
m:assrutedil
read-
ing to the Bill. The
:rT hold a further
mfoortioannyon further
the g-aa
third
ee..et-ti
render Air.
si t. ocbloigLa:Er to in order to obtain a third
rpeossot resolutions oendsuahitsiositf the Government did not
think such a course at all desirable. '
meeting, and he did not
GAME-LAWS. lass
until Monday next.

Mr DUNCOMBFEAwCiTshOedRItEoSknBowILLh. n
venient for the Government to fix dayw e it
would
her con-
sideration of the Factories Bill ?
Sir R. PEEL proposed • h he bad
to adhere to the plan which
f public
made some time since with respect to the progress o the
business. He intended, in the first place, to go on with
Corn Bill, and, immediately after that Bill was disposed (4+,11
should proceed with the tariff ; and as several gentlemen u.au
expressed a desire to have a discussion on the Settlement 0"
ould be COn..
it would be advisable to take the outline of that Bill before
going into Committee. He should take the tariff immediatelf
alter the Corn Bill, and then proceed with the discussion
n_
the Settlement Bill. With respect to the Factory Bill, he wa!
willing to give the earliest day that he could which would e?'
interfere with the progress of the more important publicusi-
b
ness. He could not name the exact day which he was willinf
to set apart for the Factories Bill, but it should be the earli.es:
day possible after the Bills he had mentioned had been aIS
posed of.
CASE OF MR. TOULMIN SMITH.
consider
Mr. SPOONER moved for a Select Committee to
the petitions of Mr. Toulmin Smith, and the papers presented
to the House relative to the case stated in those petitions.
he
Mr. WAKLEY thought it would be inconsistent for the
. _
Hon. Gentleman to press his motion at that period,
there was public business of so great importance before the
House.
Mr. SPOONER said, it would not be ansistest, big
opinion, with public duty, if he did not proceed with the
motion of which he bad given notice. The character of a mall

•
!

of high respectability had been publicly aspersed, and he really t
felt that he would not be doing justiee to his own conscience if ,
he consented to postpone the mo, ion. It would not be neces-
sary to detain the House at any groat length. He had two
objeces in view. The first was to put .11r. Smith riot-.t with
that House and with the public, and secondly he intended to
call the attention of the House to the imperfect state of the
law, which allowed so gross an indignity to be put on Mr.
Toulmin Smith, with a view to having it altered. The
short statement of the facts was that a member
of the legal profession, at home, in the middle of the day,
had his house entered by two policemen and an
excise officer, under the pretence of searching for an il-
licit still. The only eescound upon which the warrant to search
the house was grareee, was an assertion contained in an ano-
nymous letter., that a Mr. Smith, of a certain place, was keep-
ing still. The Hon. Gentleman then read some ex-
tracts P: a statement made by the servants of the family, to
pro ;e the alarm that was occasioned among them by the en.
trance of the police with the exciseman, who searched every
room in the house. It was conduct which ought not to be to-
lerated. There was another question which ought to be con-
sidered, and that was the rower of the Principal Secretrary of
State.—(Order, order. ) He would not impute that the ma
gistrate was in fault. On a full investigation of this inquiry, he
believed that the Government would grant that inquiry. Would
they leave this question to that inquiry? He believed that
they would, and in order to prevent fraud, the
most searching inquiry ought to be made. If that
inquiry were to be made, he felt assured that it
would be granted. He asked for inquiry, and he there-
fore requested the inquiry, because if they brought in the Bill
there would be cause of such an outcry that. would altogether
preclude the opportunity of an inquiry. On these grounds he
should move for a Select Committee for inquiry.
Mr. NEWDEGATE seconded the motion.
Mr. CARDWELL felt that on the only ground on which the
petition rested there was no discussion, but that which had
reference to the inquiry into the character of Mr. Toulmin
Smith. What actually took place was this. The Commissioner
on the 15th of March had made a report on which the report
was founded. Now it happened that the Commissioner had
been absent from his place of business on other business con-
nected with the office, and the officer acting at the time had
sough the necessary warrant, and did obtain that warrant
although its grounds were perfectly unjustifiable. That
officer did obtain the warrant. He would not deny that this
was unjustifiable, because he believed that it was not required
by the Act. The supervisor had proceeded on the authority
which he derived from the magistrate, and with
a policeman had proceeded to the premises, and had
gone over them. In the course of this inquiry the parties had
found that there was a summer house in which there was a
chimney, and in retiring from the premises there had been an
acknowledgment on the part of the Commissioner, or rather of
the officer engaged by the Commissioner that, therewas no in-
tention whatever on their parr to bring this accusation. A
recent communication had shown, both from letters of the officer
himself as well as from the proceedings of the office, that no spirit
of malice whatever had existed. It was the rule of the office of
Excise that on the Thursday every breach of these regulations
should be reported to the Commissioners of Excise. They
did not receive that report until the Thursday, and they only
then received it from the letters which his Hon. Friend had
read. Mr. Card well then read letters to show the facts which
he had stated, that the petitioner (Mr. Smith) had
felt the proceeding to he a grievance. The answer of the
Commissioners of Excise was that in answer to the letter of Mr.
Smith they felt it necessary to inquire of the officer, but that then
would decide after they had get that information. The wince-
tor of Excise, as the Commissioners supposed, had la d infor-
mation before a magistrate, and if there was anything unjust
or tyrannical they would revise the magistrate's decision.
Mr. Smith by improper means got possessed of a written apo-
logy from Mr. Mann, and made use of it afterwards in pub•
lie, and refused to forego his action. The apology which he
had now in his possession was given without prejudice. Mr
Mann had been " reprimanded " by the Commissioners of
Excise for what he had done in this matter ; and he (Mr
Cardwell) begged to explain to the House the meaning of that
word amongst the officers of Excise. To" reprimand" a man
in the employ of the Excise Commissioners was to deprive him
of the possibility of promotion for three years. As to the
question of damages, that was a cese which the laws of Eng-
land left in the hands of the jury ; and they would decide—
not upon the mere amount of damages as claimed—but the
real injury which would be sustained. The Excise had under
it six thousand persons, and was presided over with great
ability by a Noble Lord, who was a Member of that House.
The present case was one of the abuse of law ; the person
committing that abuse had been punished. So far as these
things were concerned there was no need whatever for Parlia-
mentary interference, and so far as he was concerned his Hon.
Friend had stated that for sixty years the public had felt no in-
convenience whatever. There was, therefore, no need for
further inquiry.
Mr. 11IUNTZ considered that an opinion which fell from
the Hon. Member who had just sat down, at the commencement
of his speech, was a very strange one. If a person were to enter
his house without a warrant he would break his head. That
would be the most speedy and summary way of doing justice.
Sir T. WILDE said the motion of his Hon. Friend was.
,founded on an act of public aggression. Mr. Smith, he be-
!teved, was a special pleader of considerable talent, and who
bore a high character. There had been nothing in the nature
of the visit of Mr. Mann at all exceeding what would be
necessary for an officer in the discharge of his duty ; there was
a great difference between a visit of that kind and a merely
complimentary visit.—( Hear, hear.) The excuse for entering
the House was certainly a very strange one. It was this,
that in some houses not worse than his own he had found an
illicit still, therefore he searched his house. The law
required consideration by the House, and he thought
the Committee should be appointed. He did not think, with
a view to Mr. T. Smith's case, there was any necessity for a
Committee ; but the public really ought to have some protec •
tion against these unwarrantable attacks by public officers on
their property. He considered that the magistrate, in issuing
his warrant upon the application of an individual whose only
ground of suspicion was an anonymous letter, had rendered
himself unfit for his situation as a public magistrate. There
was gross misconduct on the part of the officer for swearing to
a circumstance which he did not know to be a fact.
But there was greater misconduct in the magistrate
who granted the warrant upon insufficient grounds. What was
the safety of the public if such conduct is tolerated? Did it
not deserre some severer punishment than a loss of a chance of
preferment? If a gentleman's house is to be searched on the
authority of au anonymous letter, so much the worse for the
public.—( Hear, hear ) It was at present uncertain whether
the officer deceived the magistrate as to the facts of the case.
But if he did not deceive the magistrate, his conduct was most
reprehensible, and the public had a right to be made aware of
the circumstances, and an inquiry ought to be granted.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said. that be was at a loss
to know what was the real object of the Hon. Gentleman's
motion for an inquiry. No person had defended the conduct
of the officer. 'The Government did not defend it ? What
then was the object of the inquiry ? Not into the facts—thee
had been already admitted—but for the purpose of deciding
whether the Commissioners had done enough tor the punish-
ment of the officer. But the House should recollect that
illicit stills had been discovered in the very same neighbour.
hood, in houses far superior in appearance to that of Mr.
Smith. And his Hon. Friend should remember, that at times
the only method of reaching frauds committed upon the revenue
was through the means of anonymous information. The col-
lector put the case into the hands of an experienced officer, one
who had been employed for more than two-and-thirty years hi
the revenue, and had always conducted himself well. He
considered, however, that the officer had not acted cautiousls
in the matter, nor should the House deem that he was defend-
ing his conduct on that occasion, for he did not consider that
persons should come before a magistrate and make oaths upon
loose information ; and if the magistrate did not see that such
was done, he admitted he was hardly justified in granting a war-
rant. However, Mr. Smith had his remedy against the officer.
for he had an action against him, and could recover damages.
It
vras asserted that great violence had been done its the execu-
tion of the warrant; but let the House remember that Mr. Smith
had in his letter to the Commmissioners laid them at 101., and
now
he came before the House and told them that it was not a
Personal but a public question. This was the way. Mr.
Smith, disappointed in his personal views, made it a public
question. Mr. Smith was not an illiterate man, and his con-
duct upon that occasion ought to be narrowly looked to. He
took advice of eminent counsel, and was advised that he
could maintain an action, and obtain damages for 500/.
tie sought an interview with the officer, and endeavoured to
obtain a written apology from him, which would implicate the
Magistrate, so that he might be afterwards able to put him, as
k witness, into the box, and obtain a mass of evidence. The
officer offered every apology which a man could offer, but he
refused to implicate the magistrate. He would ask, what was
Meant by asking for this Committee ? If it was called for upon
hblic gronnds, he would maintain that it was necessary for
the Excise to have the extended powers which they possessed
for the detention of subtle evasions of the excise-laws. The
law was perfectly well known, and had been in operation for a
!lumber of years, and he considered it necessary for the pro-
tection of the revenue. No one attempted to defend the con-
duct of the excise-officer in the present case, but it was a case
with which the House ought not to interfere. Mr. Toulmin
Smith brought his action in a court of justice, and this was
still pending. It would be worse than usoless, therefore, for
the House to interfere under such circumstances. No public
d
grounds whatever had been stated why they should be
so.
Mr. HAWES said, that however imprudent might et e
conduct of Mr. Toulmin Smith with regard to the pecuniary
claim made on him by the Board of Excise, he considered that
he was 'a respectable man. He would not, how-
ever, go into the question on account of his case
alone ; at any rate, the documents were not fully before them,
and until they were he was not able to form an accurate jwig.
ment of the circumstances. He admitted that it was
necessary for the Excise to have large powers, but these
powers ought to be under due control, and such cases as the
present showed that there was not that responsibility which
Ought to exist. Nc, grounds whatever had been shown for
the course pursued upon this occasion. There was no outrage
he admitted, but the officer had evinced such zeal as to go uji
stairs into the bed-rooms, and he actually searched the maid-
servants' boxes.—( Laughter.) He knew of several cases of
very great oppression—particularly in reference to srezures o:
tobacco—which worked the greatest injustice. This ought
riot to be permitted. He thought, that sufficient inquiry had
not been made before procee inga were taken in the present
case, and under all the circumstances he was of opinion that
the
Committee should be appointed.
Mr. BRIGHT thought it desirable to state one or two
matters in reference to what was stated by the Hon. Member
for Clitheroe. The charge
of extortion made against Mr.
n"br
scouted
on the Excise, was per-
fectly absurd, and would ctoouted by all who knew him.—
agt Hear, hear. ) With regard
eed to be taken by Mr. Smitl„ the
f- apology
referred to, as
away by the officer, and afterwardsornbrtol:ueghoffit chearclitswoasalttaekree:i
haadeesztnitre
regarding
private let-
that Mr. Smith could not
f,ellhlar.d Smith's
convinced thatg
tars which he (Mr. Bright)
in view
.
character, he was perfectly
Was to expose a gross perversion of the law with a view to its
remedy, and he bad no s lfish object to serve in making his
claim on the Excise for compensation, as it was well-
known that he intended to hand over
(thneear, amount
arhe
received to a charitable institution.—
,lie believed that Gentleman was incapable of anythin:e)
dis-
honourable, and he hoped this inquiry would, in justice to his
character be granted.—( Hear, hear, and cries of " Divide,
Mr. 'NEWDEG ATE said that the thanks of the House were
due to the Hon. Member for Birmingham, for having brought
this question on by a motion, and the thanks of the House were
also due to the Hon. Baronet the Member for Worcester for
supporting so very proper a motion. A charge had been made
against a gentleman, and he now wished to hare 't properly
' ' nquired into. He considered this a case for a Committee of
Inquiry, and he could not see the justice of refusing it.
Mr. WAKL EY should be sorry for the House to divide
Without the result being for granting an inquiry into this most
singular case. The Learned Gentleman the Attorney-General
"ad adverted to the character of Mr. Smith. When parties
Came before this House, to seek redress for injury, at the hands
of
public functionaries, charges the most despicable were
urtirtglst against the complainants. Who before this case had
dared to say a word against the character of that gentleman ?
t Was said that Mr. Smith had entrapped the officer into a
fault.hi? If that was the case, why dread an inquiry ? why refuse
It had been complained of that Mr. Smith did not conduct
s Case in a judicious manner. Why, how could it be ex-
ItTset,ed that he should ? Mr. Smith, a lawyer, had himself for
client, and he put to his Hon. and Learned Friend
4rie,),Acttorney- General, if a lawyer without the fee could pos-
.l:olf.4tiduet a case without the pleasurable excitement of the
".1(Mal usual,—(Laughter.) He was surprised at the

want of feeling displayed by the Learned Gentleman towards a
professional brother.—Charges had been made against this
gentleman, and it ss as but fair to give him an opportunity of
refuting them. He hoped the Government would not refuse
the inquiry, for if they troubled the House with a division he
thou,sht he might surely say they would be left in a minority.
by the debate of that evening the character of Mr. Smith
was brought into question, and it would be not only ungene-
rous, but unjust, to refuse him an opportunity of clearing
himself.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, it
appeared to him that no case had been shown which warranted
th • inquiry asked for by the Hon. Member who proposed this
motion. lie was sure that there were many Members present
who had not heard the whole case, so as to judge of the ques-
tion in all its bearings. It was said by one Hon. Member that
they should make this in-juiry in fairness and justice to the
character of Mr. Smith. Another Hon. Gentleman said, that
in fairness to that gentleman, he should have au opportunity of
disproving charges brought against him. There had been
nothing brought against his character. Certain statements had
been made, which were necessary to the explanation of the
case, and surely this could not be called a charge against
character. Nothing had been stated but what was correct.
The character of Mr. Smith had been alluded to only by those
Hon. Members who had taken up his side of the question.
As far, therefore, as inquiry was concerned, in Mr. Smith's
case, it was perfectly unnecessary. The Hon. Member then
entered, at considerable length. into the details of the transac-
tion, as stated to the House by the Right Hon. the Secretary
to the Treasury. The Hon. Member for Lambeth had stated
that, of all parties connected with the transaction, Mr. Mann,
the•otficer, was the least to blame. He fairly confessed, there-
fore, that if the House should go into Committee, he, for one,
would not have the slightest knowledge of what would be
the course pursued by the Committee in their inquiry.
He should therefore oppose the appointment of this Committee.
Mr. ESCOTT (who ace amidst loud cries of Divide,
divide," and " On, oh,") said—The Right Hon. Baronet had
alluded to the conduct of the persons who set these proceed-
ing in motion. In his opinion, the magistrate who granted
this warrant had acted unjustly and illegally. He had granted
a warrant to search a house on no information, except an ano-
nymous letter. He would not discuss the question as to whe-
ther the letter was sufficient for the Board of Excise to act
upon, but there was certainly no ground for the interference of
a magistrate. The proceedings were not consistent with the
just and proper operation of the laws, and he should vote for
an inquiry into the conduct of the magistrate.
Mr MILES ( who rose amidst a great uproar) said that a
most unjust assertion had been thrown upon the conduct of the
magistrate. Proper reasons had been adduced for the grant-
ing of the warrant; for on the face of the document it was
shown that the proceedings were by no means anonymous, and
hat the magistrate was perfectly justified in his conduct. The
excise officer swore that he had reasons for suspecting, and
hat he did suspect that a private distillery was concealed on
the premises of Mr. Smith, and ai plied for the law to be put
in force in the case. He (Mr. Miles) did not attempt to de
tend the night search. The police force frequently acted on
suspicion, and in this case he thought the information was
,uite sufficient to justify the conduct of the magistrate.
Mr. SPOONER said, that a statement made by his
Learned Friend, the Attorney-General, showed that he was
;lot correctly informed on the sub,ect he had stated, that se-
veral actions had been brought..
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—No, that notice of action
liad been given.
qr. SPOONER—The service of a notice, and the bringing
'if an action, were very different things. Even if the actions
sere pending now, the proper time haci elapsed for bringing
them. It had been stated that his Hon. Friend the Member
for Worcester had said that no warrant ought to have been
granted against a man of the rank and character of Mr. Toul-
inin Smith. He did not understand his Hon. Friend to say
o ; he understood him to say that the station and chwacter of
Mr. Smith required that the warrant should be executed with
great care. and that there should be a iull and complete inquiry
nto the circumstances. Another assertion had been made that
its Hon. Friend said that this was not a poor man's case, and
that there ought not to be any inquiry into it. His Hon. Friend
had stated that this was not a poor man's case, and that a man in
Hr. Smith's station could have inquiry into it, which a poor
man could not. There had been no acting on anonymous pro-
••eedings, for the officer swore that he had reason to believe
•hat a distillery was in the house, and an inquiry was therefore
iecitssary.
The gallery was then cleared for a division.
On the re-admission of strangers to the galisay there ap-
peared—

For the motion
Ag.inst it
Majority - 9
AS.

TI-1E CANADA.
Lord G. BENTINCK in rising to move that an humble
iddress be presented to her Majesty, praying that she may be
pleased to direct that copies be laid before this House—l. Of
-he Governor-General Earl Cathcart's speech to the Legisla-
tive Assembly of the Canaoas. 2. Of the dispatch, or dis-
patches, referred to in the Governor-General's speech as having
been addressed to her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Co-
lonies, remonstrating against certain presumed changes in the
Imperial Commercial Policy. 3. Of any petition from the
Quebec Board of Trade, addressed to her Majesty's Principal
Secretary of State for the Colonies in the course of the present
sear, on the subject of apprehended changes in the Itnpe-
rial Tariff affecting the produce of the Canadas.
The Noble Lord said that he had given notice that it was his
,ntention to propose a discussion on the question of the dangers
TO their colonies in the present alarming state of their relation

kith Canada ; and, under any circumstances, more particularly
considering that the trade of the country with Canada compre-
hended three-eighths of the entire trade with America ; con-
sidering that the shipping interest engaged in North America
comprehended one-sixth of the foreign trade ; considering all
this, he thought that any question which concerned the pros-
perity of Canada was well deserving the attention of the House.
But, under the present cirumstances, seeing that news had
trrived only yesterday of the rejection by the Legislative
Assembly of Canada of the Commercial policy of her Ma-
jesty's Government—(Great cheering) —considering that
the rejection of that policy and the defeat of her Majesty's
Ministers converted a majority of sixteen, which the Govern-
ment of Canada in that assembly held at the meeting of the
Assemble, into a minority of seven on that question, which was
immediately connected with that before this country—he meant
he Corn Importation and Tariff Bill—he thought it would
be most desirable that the attention of the House and
,if the country should now be directed to the
ituation of their Canadian colonies, before they proceeded to a
final decision on these measures.—(Cheers.) And although
he felt that at this hour of the night there would be at any rate
no question of their proceeding with the Corn Importation Bill,
he thought that no apology would be due either to the House or
to the country in thus at the earliest hour interposing this dis-
,•uQsion, before they took any further step in that Bill. He felt
that the position of the Canadas wss a matter of vital import
ance to this country, and therefore it was, he thought,
that this House should consider the subject before
they proceeded with the other Bill. It, was generally known
to the Members of that House, that a dispatch had been ad-
dressed by Mr. Gladstone to the Governor-General of C nada
n the early part of March, in which he notified to Lord Cath
cart the nature of the measures which were to be introduced by
her Majesty's Ministers. It appeared, by the speech which
Lord Cathcart addressed to the Legislative Assembly, that he
r.ad written a remonstrance to Mr. Gladstone against these
neasures, and Lord Cathcart, in the conclusion of
his speech to the Assembly, thus addressed them.
( The Noble Lord then read an extract from the Governor-

General's speech, to the effect that the cl anges about to be
.ffected in the commercial policy of the country were viewed
with great jealousy by the Canadians, but it would be insdvi
able to express a decided opinion on these measures until they
had a full exposition of the schemes which would so materially
affect those provinces.) Then it was evident from the speech of
the Governor-General that he had addressed a strong remon-
strance against the commercial policy which was now about to
be proposed by her Majesty's Ministers. This appeared to him
(Lord George Bentinck) a matter of grave consideration, but,
coupled with the speech of Lord Cathcart, there were other
,ndications of great dissatisfaction on the part of the consti-
tuted authorities. A meeting of the Board of Trade, in which

the mercantile and agriculturial interests of the country were
represented, took place at Toronto a few days previous to the
meeting of the Legislative Assembly, with regard to the
measure about to be proposed by her Majesty's Ministers,
the Vice President of the Board, Mr. Workman, stated that
the mercantile classes of Canada were in a
most undecided state of mind at that moment
in consequence of these measures--that they were, in fact, in
he situation of men precipitated from an eminence, and
labouring under concussion of the brain. These sentiments
were responded to by the other speakers. It was only in the
year 1843 that the Canada Corn Bill was passed. That measure
was held to be a sort of compromise with this Government.
The Noble Lord then referred to the opinion entertained in
the United States with respect to this subject, and quoted from
the New York ',Teddy Herald, which stated that the advan-
tages which the British Colonial Secretary had pointed out as
likely to arise to the Canadas were looked upon by those en-
gaged in the trade with the mother country as of little
worth. They believed that the advantages only existed
in the mind of the Colonial Secretary. The same news-
paper stated, that notwithstanding the differential duty,
Canadian flour could be carried through New York, and
landed at Liverpool much cheaper than if sent direct from
Quebec or Montreal. Now there was 36,000 British seamen
engaged in the Canadian trade, while only 9,000 were engaged
in the trade to the United States. The polity of the Govern-
ment was calculated to destroy this great trade, and to render
the Canadian colonies utterly useless to this country. There
was little to render this debate interesting to the House.
thus much he would say, that there was a strong
feeling in the United States on this subject. He
trusted that the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the
Government would not express any indifference as
to the prepossessions which had been manifested on this sub-
ject. He was anxious that there should be no misunderstand-
ing on the point, because he believed that there would be
measures introduced which would render the Government
proposition inoperative. He was more anxious upon this
point, as he believed in the present experiment there was
'iothing to justify its adoption. It would appear, from corn-
munications which he had received, that there had been one
hundred thousand pounds received on the duties upon timber,
and he was not disinclined to bel eve that such was the fact.
He held in his hind a letter f. om a Liverpool merchant, who
stated that Canada required a prott-ction, as compared with
New York, of not less than 4s. or ss. per quarter upon wheat.
Anybody who knew anything of commercial interest—any-
body who knew anything of shipping interest, mutt be well
aware that those ships that were to be laid up during the
whole course of the winter, must trade at a great disadvantage,
as compared with those that traded during the whole of the
year. Her Majesty's Ministers, when they introduced this
measure, held out to the Parliament and to the country, that the
friends of free trade in the United States would be encouraged
by the removal of the restrictions on the importation of corn.
Dear as would be the purchase of an unrestricted trade between
this country and the United States of America, at the cost of
the loss of our Canadian colonies, it might be a matter of grave
consideration, whether it would be to the advantage of this country
to adopt the scheme proposed by her Majesty's Government.
He found in the 7'imes newspaper, in a leading article, opi-
nions expressed to the same effect. There was, therefore, no
hope of a reduction of the tariff in that country on the import-
ation of British goods. It appeared from the returns of the
exports of printed goods and calicoes to our Canadian colonies,
that a considerable increase had taken place during the two
last years. The value of the raw c at°u id othergoods im-
ported into this country, exceeded by threea millions the value
of the goods exported frm this country to that. This circum-
stance arose from the general feeling that existed in the United
States to preserve the independence of their home manufae. .tie
The export of cotton now exceeded that of former yestrs.Trhasi
of 1827 was 278,000 tons, while in 1840 it amounted to
1,241,900 tons; and in 1845 to 1,409 60 They hart
h aot
fl
the opinion also of ail the leading men
o, f tezjrnr Ca. i
favour
protection to industry. Wa•hington maintained that position.
Jefferson also coincided with him. It en
uld a
wise measure to risk their connexion with theirn (olanSaudriealny cboel
nies. Their export trade with the United States had, within
the last few years, been almost doubled, while that with their
coloeies had gradually dimished. Feeling strongly that the
measures now before Parliament would alienate the
of their colonial brethren, he thought it right toe affections
question before Parliament. He would, therefore,
an humble address be presented to her Majesty, prayingnlove that
she may be pleased to direct that copies be laid before
House of the Governor-General Cathcart's speech to the Legis-
lative Assembly of the Canadas—of the dispatches referred
to in the Governor-General's speech, as having been addressed to
her )Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies -znoustrating

1 against certain presumed changes in the imperial commercial
policy, c f any petition from the Quebec Board of Trade, ad-
dressed to her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the
Colonies, in the course of the present year, on the subject of
apprehended changes in the imperial tariff affecting the
Canadas.
Mr. ROEBUCK seconded the motion ; but he recollected
a time when the wishes of the Canadian people were not treated
with the same respect by the Noble Lord or by his party. Nor
did he think that the vote of the Canadian Parliament was con•
elusive; it was carried by a small majority, and he could con-
ceive a Ministry placed in such a position as to be in favour
with no party.--( Cries of " Hear, hear.") Instances were daily
occurring of such a state of things, and he could suppose that
an adverse party influenced by personal feeling might conduce
to the vote of the Canadian Parliament. The party in power
was not the popular party of the Canadian people. That
party knew that loyalty meant profit, and that was the party
which had loyalty on their lips, and now they were to be found
ready to tarn round and threaten them with an annexation
with the United States of America. Those loyal persons,
those loyal Irish Orangemen, talk of an annexation with a
foreign power. What was their loyalty? Nothing but pro-
tection. He would now suggest to the Noble Lord, and to
those who acted with him, that which, if applied to the people
of Canada, would materially benefit them. Ile would ask the
Noble Lord if he was prepared to a form of free-trade with all
the shipping of our colonies.—(Cries of " No, no," from
Lord G. Bentinck ) Well, then, what was the meaning of
their sympathy with the Canadas ? Their sympathy was
protection, and nothing else. (Hear, hear.) The
Canada Corn Bill was introduced at a time when the Noble
Lord and his party opposed it, and they went on the hustings
and cried out against the Right Hon. Baronet for having
passed it. Well, what followed ? They now, in their places
in that House, complained that Canada was greatly benefited
by the measure. He denied that so much benefit had
resulted to the people of Canada by this measure.
The Noble Lord says the exportation to Canada amounted to
three-fourths of the value of our exports to the United States.
Why, we need not shut our eyes to the fact that those exports
are not to Canada, but through Canada to the United States.--
( Hear, hear.) The danger which the Noble Lord feared from
those measures was a mere chimera. The three great articles
of export from the Canadas were timber, cotton, and corn.
The Noble Lord might be sure that no Legislative measures of

a round-about trade would ever produce that beneficial effect
which would arise from a direct course. It had been said that
adversity brings us in company with strange bedfellows,
and he certainly thought that the straits to
which that great party opposite were now reduced
had brought them to the humiliating position which
he did not expect to see. He did not expect to have seen the
great leader of the aristocratic party quoting the democratic
Jefferson and Washington, and making their statements his
own. He was obliged to the House for the kindness with

which it had listened to the arguments which he had already
adduced, for he should, were it not for the late hour, have
wished to avail himself of its indulgence to make a few more
observations.—( Hear, hear.)
The motion having been put,
Sir G. CLERK said that he did not rise for the purpose of
offering any observations on the motion made by his Hon.
Friend. His object in rising was to notify his intention to add
to the list of papers the dispatches of the Secretary of State for
the Colonies in this country in reply to those papers for
ohieh the Noble Lord had moved. Amongst them was
a letter to the Secretary for the Colonies on the duty o 3s. per
quarter charged on wheat imported into Canada from the
United States. As the Hon. Member for Bath observed, it
was now several weeks since any information had been received
from Canada. Although no official information had arrived,
there could be no doubt they would have that information in
the course of a few hours. The Noble Lord commenced his
speech by stating that the question now assumed a great de-
gree of importance on account of the news published this
morning with reference to the rejection of Sir Robert
Peel's policy in Canada. They would find that
he question under consideration was not con-
nected with the legi lative policy of Canada. 1 f they looked
at the evening papers of a few hours since, they would find that
•he Bill was carried by a majority of 7. The news was dated
the 24th of April, and it was stated that they had passed the
kill repealing the duty of 3s, on wheat imported into Canada.
No official information had been received by Government, and
no certain information as to the minority. He would have en-
tered into an examination of the statement of the Noble Lord,
but as no opposition was intended to be offered to the produc-
tion of the papers, he would not venture to enter on the
subject any farther.

Klr. HODSON HINDE said that there was some misap-
prehension in the mind of the Hon. MembTr with regard to
the conduct, past and present, of the Hon. Gentlemen sitting
near him, and it was necessary that the minds of the Hon.
Members on that side of the House should be disabused on this
point. The Hon. and Learned Member said that his (Mr. H.
Hinde's) friends sitting near him had stated that in the im-
portation of wheat Canada never had any advantage. Canada
had had a very material advantage in the im-
portation of corn under the old system, in which
corn was admitted at a duty of ss. per quarter.
He said they had a right to ascertain the sentiments of her
Majesty's Ministers with regard to the measures they intended
to adopt with respect to the colonies. He did not say this in
any disrespectful manner, but he thought the House had a right
to know how they intended to act with regard to Canada.—
( Loud cries of " Question.") The Noble and Learned
Member for Bath said that it was true the exports to Canada
were large, but he said also that Canada was only a means for
introducing exports into the United States. But he would
ask, what would become of this country if the measures
now in progress were to deprive them of Canada,
even as a means of introducing their exports into the United
States? He was much mistaken if the accounts to which
the Vice-President of the Board of Trade attached so little
importance would not strike dismay into the shipping inte-
rests of Great Britain.

SERVICE OF HEIRS.
The LORD ADVOCATE gave notice of his intention to
introduce a Bill for the purpose of simplifying and economising
the law which related to the service of heirs; and he purposed
also to introduce a clause into the Bill which had received the
.auction of the Legislature in the last session relative to Crown
charters.

BRIDPORT ELECTION.
Mr. G. BANKES postponed his moti9n that Wm. Rockett
be heard at the bar of the House till Tuesday next. He also
on the part of Mr. Christie postponed his amendment till the
same day.
COUNTY RATES IN ENGLAND AND WALES.
Mr. PRAED gave notice that he should move for leave to
bring in a Bill for the more effectual making of County Rates
in England and Wales.
RAILWAY CONIPANYS BILL.

On the motion of Mr. HUDSON this Bill was read a second
time, and was ordered to be read on Thursday next.
FACTORY BILL.
Mr. BA NKES moved that the debate on this Bill be post-
poned to Friday next.
Sir R. PEEL consented to take the debate on Friday, pro-
vided the Corn Bill and the tariff were disposed of by
that day.
After a few words from

Mr. HINDLEY, who stated that Mr. Greg, who had
written a pamphlet in favour of the Ten Hours Bill, had
changed his opinions on the subject, and was now opposed to
it, the debate was adj ,urned till Frick), next.
The House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock.