The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-25 00:00:00

FRIDAY. EVEN IN FEBRUARY 25, f 448.

e few days ago, that if the Government were abeut to
propose a large increase of taxation, as was then ex-
pee:ea they would s;rnultancously with a reduction o:
iaxati-n, this was the very first tax that ought to be
effaced from the statute-b.,ok.—(lleac, bear.) But h..
coupled ttrit epiniou with this cleclara:ion, that he vvi.uld
not give a vote that might have the Affect of impedie2
the machines of government, or of endangering in the
least degree the credit of the country. And he could
not but feel, looking to the present state of the revenue,
and to the announcement of the Prime Minister that
there was a deficiency of 3,000,000/, which, compelled day n,x
him to propose a large increase of taxation, that to call
for a further reduction, by the repeal of this tax, of
1,600,0001., would be almost tantamount to proposing a
species of national bankruptcy. Ile could not, therefore,
concur with his Noble Colleague in the proposition he
now made to the House. It was extremely painful to
bin to act in opposition to the wishes of a constituency
who had trusted him with such siugular•gencro,itv, but
he conceived that Members of that House had duties to
perform from e li:elt such a consideration should nut in•
duet. them to swerve.
Mr. A(; LION 131. fully agreed with the Noll, L
that a Member of that !louse, even to please his ronsti
merits, ought not to give a v..te whi..h he eol,Litle,ed
would have the ett.ct of impeding tlAt machine of go-
vernment or endangering the public credit; but he (Mr.
Aglionby), in voting for the repeal of the window-tax,
while he acted in accordance with the feelings of his
constitut nts, did not consider that he would iecur either
of the disasters pointed out by the Noble Lord. lie
believed, on the contrary, that such a reduction of the
national expenditure might be made as would enable
the Governuaent to remove this odi. us tnx with..ut
ree,mrse to any otlit-r in its stead.—(lirar.)
Mr. COW AN gave a hearty support to the motion.
and took occasion t comment upon the hardships to
which the paper manufacturers were subjected by the
operation of the Excise, and to declare his determina-
tion to support every measure, come from what quarter
it might, which should tend to diminish the burdens and
consequently the sufferings of the poor, or to promote
the industry of the people.
Mr. MO WATT likewise supported the motion, be-
lieving that the window-tax, both in principle and effect,
was most unjust and unequal, and nothing more nor less
than a blundering, circuitous, and demoralising income-
tax. Even the Right lion. Gentleman the Chancellor'of the
Exchequer had admitted the evils of this tax, and that
at the very same time that the Government were pro-
posing sanitary measures which would lose their very
basis unless this proposition were carried out. He (Mr.
Mowatt) contended that there existed other sources of
revenue more likely to be less objectionable and injurious
to the public at large. He (Mr. Mowatt) protested
against the argument of the Right Hon. the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, that those who opposed these window
duties were bound to find a substitute to supply the de-
ficiency to the revenue which their repeal might create.
That duty properly belonged to the Government of the
country, and unless the Government discharged that
duty he (Mr. Mowatt) held that it failed in the fulfil-
ment of the functions which it had undertaken.—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that his Hon. Friend the
Member for Cockermouth (Mr. Aglionby) had remarked
that it would have a bad effect upon the public if on the
present occasion all the argument should be in favour of
the present proposition, and that the rotes of the House
should run in an opposite direction. Such, however,
might be the case if any particular tax was discussed
upon its own merits. He (Lord J. Russell) had yet
never heard any Hon. Gentleman say that any tax was
a positive good in itself—(Hear, and a laugh)—and he
defied any Chancellor of the Exchequer to prove that of
itself that tux was good, or that it ought to be kept up
for the good of the community. The Hon. Member for
the city of Edinburgh (Mr. Cowan), who had just spoken,
had declared that the excise duties upon the com-
modity (paper) which he manufactured were vexatious,
and imposed an annoyance upon the subjects of the
realm engaged in its manufacture. That allegation
he (Lord John Russell) did not deny.—(Hear, hear.)
He admitted that all excise taxes were liable to that
objection. Again, the Honourable Member for Dumfries
(Mr. Ewart) had announced his intention to move this
day for the abolition of the excise duties on paper, soap,
and bricks, the reduction of the duties on tea, tobacco,
and wine, as well as for the repeal of the duties on
butter and cheese—any loss of revenue which might
thereby occur to be supplied by a direct taxation on
realised property. These points might be discussed, but
when the House came to the end of the discussion they
would find themselves, by the adoption of the arguments
by which each proposition had been supported, minus
not 9,000,0001., but some 10,000,000/. or 11,000,000/
(Hear, hear.) Then came the argument stated by the
Hon. Member for Plymouth (Mr. R. Palmer), and the
Noble Lord the Member for Bath (Lord Ashley), that
the revenue could cot spare the loss of the resources
derived from this quarter. But it was said that it be-
hoved the Government to lay down the system of taxa-
tion which they, as a Government, would adopt as a
substitute for the loss sustained by the repeal of
the impost arising from the window duties.
The experience of former years, coupled with
that which the events of the last few days fur-
nished him, did not convince him (Lord J. Russell)
that the course recommended by the Noble Lord was
that which the Government ought to adopt. lie (Lord
J. Russell) thought that by indirect taxation much good
might be done; but at the same time he was of opinion I
that if the window-tax was taken off, the country would
find that there were limits beyond which direct tax ttion
could not be earried.—(llear, hear.) Indeed, in the
course of the present debate some Hon. Gentlemen had
expressed their regret that the Government should have
adhered to the window duties—a tax, us they said, only
less odious than the income-tax.—(hear.) On the
whole he was obliged to come to the eoncluiion, that
although the window-tax was objectionable, still the
Government had nut the means to give it up; and
though his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had been challenged to find a substitute, he
(Lord J. Russell) could not recommend to the House
the adoption of any such repeal or alteration as that
which had been proposed. Ho must also confess that,
considering the merits of this particular tax—consider-
ing the obligations by which the country was bound to
the public creditor—considering that those obligations
were bound and secured by Acts of Parliament—be
should certainly, and with a good conscience, vote against
the motion of his Noble Friend.—(llear, hear.)
Mr. EWART supported the motion, and contended
that it was the duty of the Government not merely to
abandon the window duties, but to take a large and
comprehensive view of the whole system of taxation; if
not the people would demand a rigid and searching in-
vestigation in order to secure justice to the commerce,
manufactures, and labour of the country.—(Hear, hear.)
Dr. BOWRING supported the motion, and contended
that a dimunition of the expenditure of the country would
enable the Government to remove the obnoxious window
duties. Since 1835, the expenditure of the country had
increased from 14,100,0001., until, in 1847, it had
reached 22,800,000/., being an increase within that corn•
partitively short space of time of nearly 8,000,0001.
Such was the real state of things, and though he sup-
ported the present motion, he was assured that no bene-
fit would accrue to the nation except from a very conside-
rable reduction in its expenditure.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord R. GROSVENOR, who spoke in so low a tons
as scarcely to be audible, was understood to support the
motion brought forward by his Noble Friend the Member
for Bath (Lord Duncan).
Sir R. PEEL said that he, for one, could not assent to
the proposition that it was the duty of the Government,
in the present state of the financial affairs of the country, ,
to consent to any diminution of the window duties.—
(Hear, hear.) He was glad to hear from the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer that
he intended, and had it in his power, to effect some
alteration in the anomalous manner in which the tax
was levied, and which existed under the laws now in
force and effect. He (Sir R. Peel) hoped that the Go-
vernment or the Right Hon. Gentleman would not be
deterred from pursuing the course they had laid down,
by the fact that some metropolitan deputations had
waited upon them on the subject. He assured the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government that no
deputation, metropolitan or otherwise, would be able
to reply to the question, " Will you find a substitute
for the tax you seek to abolish?" On the contrary,
if these deputations were asked to propose the substitu-
tion of another tax for that which they sought to get rid
of, he would advise the Noble Lord and the Government
to throw overboard the adoption of suggestiens and
principles which, as regarded taxation of articles of con-
sumption, would prove to be futile and unavailing. He
(Sir R. Peel) could bear full testimony that the Noble
Lord the Member for Bath (Lord Duncan) had exhi-
bited on this question a zeal and ability on the present
occasion ; but he ought to have waited until the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer promised a diminution of taxa-
tion, when the Noble Lord might put in his claim that
the window tax should be included in that diminution.
Without going into the question of the demerits of all
taxes, or to the question of the substitution of one tax
for another, feeling that it would unpalatable in any
shape, he should reserve himself until Monday next for
the exposition promised. At present he could not give
a silent vote, because in his opinion it was impossible,
under the existing circumstances of the country, to dis-
pense with the tax upon which the Noble Lord the Mem-
ber for Bath had to-night made an attack.
Mr. CABBELL expressed his entire concurrence in
the motion, the object of which was to get rid of an
impost whick was not only severe but prejudicial to the
health and best interests of the whole community.
Lord DUNC AN briefly, replied, and the House
divided, when there appeared 68
For the motion
Against it ... 10-92
APPEAL IN CRIMINAL CASES.
Mr. EWART moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
establish a power of appeal in criminal cases. lie
regretted the absence from the House of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman (Sir F. Kelly) who hail originally
introduced a measure on this important subject; but as
such a Bill had already been considered he would
content himself with stating its leading features. By
this Bill he (Mr. Ewart) proposed to grant an appeal in
criminal cases in three forms—first, in the form of a new
trial; secondly, in the form of a motion in arrest of
judgment;
asatnijidgment prius by the process of
for the prisoner.
The Bill also gave power to the judge before whom a
prisonerenteringafterandlastly, might be tried to assign him counsel and
appeal
heard au
attorney, and contained also a proviso that the prisoner
should be furnished with a copy of the indictment.
The Bill also contained clauses providing for the pay-
ment of the costs incurred by the prosecutor and his
witnesses in the case of an appeal. Such were the
general provisions of the measure be sought to intro-
duce; but on the second reading, which he would fix
for some day in the ensuing week, he should be happy
to hear, and, if possible, adopt any suggestion w hich
might be' made. He, however, now moved for leave to
bring in the Bill.
Lord NUGENT seconded the motion.
Sir G. GREY said it was not the intention of the

had made an excellent speech against the window
tax, and how he could have the firmness to resist the
influence of his own arguments, and vote against the
motion, he (Mr. Wakley) could not understand.—
(Hear, and a laugh.) The Hon. Member had not
only spoken generally against the tax, but had adduced
a special case agains` it, and though he represented
the injured people of Plymouth, they were to find his
vote recorded against the proposition. Of what use
could representation be if this was the mode in which
they acted ?—(Hear.) The declaration of the lion.
Member must, he thought, be very discouraging to
those who sent him there, thought it must be very
encouraging to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
And as that Right Hon. Gentleman had commenced
his speech by alluding to the unfortunate position of
the person who filled the office of Chancellor of the
Exchequer, he hoped now, after the speech of the
Hon. Member for Plymouth, and his declaration that
he intended to support the Government against this
motion, that he felt himself more comfortable. A
strong dose of chloroform could scarcely 'flake him
more easy.— (A laugh.) The public, however, would
after this feel no disappointment at the rejection of the
inotion. All hope of retrenchment from the present
Ministry had gone by. lie was sorry to say it ; but
that was his conviction, and that, too, was the irn•
pression of the public out of doors.—(liear, hear.)
The public had looked with great confidence to the
present Government. lie had never seen more public
confidence exhibited for any Ministry than that of
the Noble Lord. The public had entertained gr.-tat
respect for the present Mii.ii,try ; bat that wag all
over now.— (llear, hear.) lie wished the Noble Lord
would go down to the City, and see his com•
I mittee there. He would be astonished at the recep-
tion he would meet with now in the turtle-soup-
eating quarter.— (Hear, and a laugh.) He (Mr.
Wakley) regretted that there should be occasion
for suck a change of feeling; but it had taken
place, end not without reason.—(Hear, hear.)
Still Ministers must have great hopes of the House
of Commons after the speech of the How. Member
for Plymouth. He hoped, however, that though this
motion might fail, many others of the same kind
would be made, and that the feeling of the House
would be tested over and over again on the
subject of reduction of taxation, and that the people
might, know who were and who were not for re-
trenchment. But with regard to this window duty it
was one of the most odious taxes ever imposed. It
was only second to the income• tax in iniquity. It
was injurious in a variety of ways. The Chancellor
of the Exchequer was evidently, mistaken in his view
of the case. The Right Hon. Gentleman believed—
and, no doubt, sincerely believed—that this tax did
not press unjustly upon the industrious classes. The
Right Hon. Gentleman made use of the term " lower
orders " more than once during his speech. He (Mr.
Wakley) did not understand exactly where the lower
orders were to be found as amongst men, though he
did as amongst animals. But the Right Hon. Gentle-
man argued that the tax did not press upon the indus-
trious classes, because small houses were exempt ; but
did not the Right Hon. Gentleman know that in all
large towns, where land was valuable, the object
of the proprietors was to build high houses, and
locate as many people in them as they could ? Did
he not know that the great mass of the working
classes were lodgers and not housekeepers ? How
many instances were there in which eight, ten, and
even twelve persons were living together in one
room with a single window ? That was the case not
only in the metropolis, but in all large manufacturing
towns throughout the kingdom. This tax operated
therefore as a curse upon the labouring classes ; it
was injurious to their health, destructive of their
comfort, and highly prejudicial to their morals.—
(Hear, hear.) They were told that this was the
nearest approach to an income-tax. If so, that with
him would be a sufficient reason for detesting the
income-tax. Had the Right Hon. Gentleman, who
had resolved to maintain this tax, considered how
it interfered with trade and industry? Had he con-
sulted architects on the subject—and did he not know
that it prevented all improvements in architecture,
and in that way robbed the people of at least
100,0001. a year in the employment of labour ? On
that ground, if there was no other, the tax
ought to be repealed.—(Hear.) He was aware that
there was no hope of the repeal of this tax from the
present Government. Ministers would however know
in a few days that the people would not submit to
any increase of taxation for any purpose.—(Hear,
hear.) If the Noble Lord (J. Russell) still laboured
under that hallucination by which he had recently been
possessed, as to the probability of war breaking out,
common sense out of doors would soon restore his
mind to perfect sanity.—(Hear, and a laugh.) The
Noble Lord had denied that his speech, on intro-
ducing his financial statement, was intended as a war
speech ; but, though he did not intend it to be a war
speech, his language led people in that House and
out of doors to believe that we were approaching a
period when this country would be liable to attacks
from a foreign nation.—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said he had explained, yester-
day, what he had intended to say.
Mr. -WAKLEY was glad to hear the explanation
But the people were informed that they must submit
to increases taxation, and it was but natural for a
thinking peeple to inquire for what purpose they were
to be thus over-taxed. An ignorant people might
submit to injustice, but an enlightened and thinking
people would not submit to it long. The people of
England considered the principle of taxation was un-
just, and that it was in favour of property and against
the industry of the country.—(Hear, hear.) That
was the general opinion out of doors, and he hoped
there were many in that Home who concurred in it.—
(Hear, hear.) Considering the great talent of the
Government, the means they had of acquiring in-
formation, the many times subjects of finance had
been considered by them, he did expect that they
would have exercised retrenchment and have practised
economy. He believed, however, that they had made
no inquiry, but had come down recklessly and
thoughtlessly with their budget and their project
for ad ding to the burdens of the people—a
proposition which had created much excitement and
discontent both in and out of the House, and which
would increase unless the Noble Lord relaxed in his
propositions. The equalisation of the land tax would
produce almost two millions a year, but that the
Government would not entertain. The legacy and
probate duty on real property would also produce a
large revenue. Could any man contend that personal
property should be subject to the duty now imposed
upon it, while real property escaped ?—(Hear, hear.)
If a man died, leaving 100,0001. in land, his successor
paid not one farthing; but if a man left 1001. to a
faithful servant, he must pay 10/. to the Government
before he could have the money. What could be more
unjust? For years past the principle of taxing in
this country had been most unjust to the industrious
classes, and the window duty was one of the most
unjust taxes of all. It commenced at a low scale,
but when it touched the shopkeeper and the; trades-
man—the man who had to get his bread by the
exercise of his industry and his intellect—the screw
was put on to the highest point ; and, when, again,
it reached the aristocracy, it was reduced to
the lowest point.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the
House would apply itself to the subject of finance
and taxation, and resist every extravagant expendi-
ture on the part of the Minister—that they would
Ifevery item with the most strict scrutiny.
If they did this, he believed they might greatly
reduce the taxes, and then it would be for them to
apportion what remained fairly, over the surface of
society. He hoped the Noble Lord (Duncan) would
press his motion to a division, and he would support
him.—(Hear.)
Mr. A. STAFFORD remarked upon the differ-
ence of opinion between the advocates of free trade,
some being in favour of direct taxation, and others
against it—which difference had been foretold by the
Protectionists. It was a fallacy to say that the
lower classes were benefited by the reduction of the
duties on the necessaries of life ; and the more taxes
y protected particular
thein-
working classes suffer.
wtHe erere es ts,
contendedtin-
the e removed
more
thateb re
ec a
wouldu e they
re e a t
aggregate of the taxes
must be levied by indirect, and not by direct tax-
ation.
Mr. WGREGOR would support the motion if it
public service would not
couldsufferodious f this
beta shown on
not
even the taxwn werethat
repealed.
There was no more
excise ; and if they could
find the means of raising an equal amount of revenue
ix
by any other means, it ought to be at once repealed.
This tax was most oppressive upon the poorer classes,
and ought at least to be equally distributed. lie
should much prefer a house tax, if deducted from the
rent paid to the landlord, but not otherwise.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR, inferred, from the statement
that while 500,000 houses only were subject to the
tax, 3,000,000 were not liable to it, that many of
those 3,000,000 of houses had their windows shut up'
in order to avoid the tax.—(Hear, hear.) As the
representative of a popular constituency he would
vote for its repeal.
Captain PECHELL. opposed the tax on the ground of
the injustice and grievances which it gave rise to ; in
proof of which he bad only to refer to tho fact, that out
of GPO c..ses of assessed taxes determined before the
judges of appeal between 1840 and 1847, 265 of them
were for windows. He Opposed it also as an obstacle
to the fill carrying out of sanitary reform.—(Hear.)
Lord ASHLEY, as Member for Bath, felt it necessary
to explain the vote he should give. He concurred in a
great oeal that had fallen from his Noble Colleague, from
the Hon. Member for Finsbury, and indeed from all
those lion. Members who had spoken of this tax as in-
juriois to and oppressive upon all classes, but particu•
larly upon the occupiers of small tenements and lodging-
howes ; and when he viewed it in a sanitary point of
vies, he felt it was impossible to exaggerate the mischiefs
tha. arose from it.—(Hear, hear.) He had no hesitation
in saying, that without a total and absolute repeal
of the window duties no sanitary measures would
bt effective, or place the people in that physical
c'ndition which acted so directly upon their moral
volfare. lie told his constituents at a public meeting

Government to offer any opposition to the introduction ! GAME LAWS.
of this Bill. But, in consenting to its introduction, he Me; BRIGHT postponed his motion respecting the
‘ei,heel to be elsarly understood that he by no means ' game-laws till that day fortnishe
ess.eieed to the p ovsi:als which rnig!,t be a,mhodied in i
LAW OF ENTAIL.
tie! r.-“,a ure. The sub'), et was one of great importance, 1 The LORD ADVOCATE reeved for leave to bring
and he had net been alife to coil• et from the Hoe. in a Bill to amend the law of entail in Scotland. lie
Gentleman's statement what the provisions might be. considered that the evils of the present system were
It was, therefore, desirable that the Bill should he Led such as to call for ]no ffectual remedy. The remedy he
en the table of the House, and then they would be proposed had beenog matarine; be was fully disposed
better able to discuss it. He hoped the lion. Gentleman to respect direct vested interests, but he thought it most
would - fax so early a day as he had named (Wedges- desirable to remove the inconveniences now resulting
for the second reading. Much would depend from the more remote contingencies which attended
in the inacbii:ery by which he proposed to carry the entails in Scotland. He wished to give Scotch entails
measure into effect ; he feared great difficulty woad(' be the same protection, and in the same way that was
famed in carrying out the plan proposed. It was of given to entails in England. Ho proposed to alter
great importance that the promptitude and certainty of the age at which the heir to an entail should be
punishment which attached to the conviction of tsuilly legally qualified to act from twenty-one to twenty-five
preens should he preserved. If the llon. Gentleman ye ars. The Bill would give power to such heir to
proposed to assimilate criminal trials to civil proeeedings, disf mail 'an estate—,,hich was a qu;valent to whit was
he would find that that plan would al:reset/ler fail ; ter styled in England "suffering a recovery," which
the ver.fiees were given in a wee entir.-Iv differsnt, tine shoald have been entailed after it had passed into a
if a doubt exist. d in a eritniiial proses, ding the prisoner law, ufun his reachiug the age of 25 years. The fill
had the b,•netit aif that doubt. Ni.u,d also have a retrospective action, tar he proposed
leave was thsia give
to hrin,f in the Bill. lo insert a provision whereby all entails already existing
,
EX(lIel,: DU 11 ES ON l' At'Ell, :;tia Is, se„. shoula be deterred as d stine from the perint of the
Mr. 1::\V ART ssid he shoutl net pei severe in his other ptis,iug of ilio Act, and the text succeisor to the
motien, e bieli stood next in the. lisp r:—" Tea mese the eseee bore at,,er the Act should tie' entitled to disen-
abolition of the excise duties on paper, soap, and bricks;
wtai l it On his at
enttaniing tthe nexthe ago
heir should ot 25 ) ears.
nlnceossaar es
the reduction of the duties on tea, tobacco, and wine ; here the cons of be y
and the repeal of the duties on butter and cheese ; any for the :possessor of an estate to diservail it, he pro-
loss of revenue which may occur to be replaced by direct posed to give such power to the next immediate son,
taxation on realised property ." He would net press this disregarding the claims of ulterior or collateral heirs.
motion for these reasons ; the sill j. ct of taxavien had The 'Learned Lord entered into some further details
been under discussion all ills evening, Red it would be respeetine the measure, which wet e imperfectly cern-
re argued more fully anal generally neat Monday.— pra bonded in the I-porter's gallery, and concluded by
(IL.lir, Le:tr.) Ile therefore thought it mare desirable moving for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law of
to wait anti sea whether a general committee on taxation entail in Seethand.
was appointed, or whet other measure was adapted. Mr. C. BRUCE said that the Hon. anal Learned Gen-
lie should postpene this motion until a future day. tleman had rightly characterised the two principal laws
KILLING OF II A RES. of entail in Scotland, namely, the Montgomery Act and
Mr. COLVILLE moved for leave to bring in a Bill the Aberdeen Act, as being at the root of all the evils
"to enable all occupiers of land having a right to kill that prevailed in the system of land in that country.
hares on that land to do so, by themselves or persons He had not in the least exaggerated the bad conse-
authorised by them, without being required to take out a quences of those laws which, notwithstanding they had
eume certificate." Under the existing laws, he observed, been framed for the express purpose of doing good, had
farmers were subject to great inconveniences, particu- rendered the position of landlords in Scotland
quite in-
l'trly those who occupied small holdings. He had ape- tolerable. He should defer all observations on the
cially guarded in the Bill against any abuses that might details of the Bill until he had enjoyed an o
dppertunity
arise from the permission proposed to be given ; and ho oF examining it and of understanding its etails. In
hoped the Government would not oppose the introduc- the meantime he gave his cordial assent to the principle
don of the Bill. on which it was based.
Sir G. GREY said he thought the proposal a very Mr. B. COCHRANE concurred with the Hon. Mem-
reasonable one, and as he conceived it would not deduct ber who spoke last in his praise of the Bill, but thought
a shilling from the revenue he should raise no objection it was deficient in not possessing a retrospective power
to its introduction. over entails.
Mr. STAFFORD was sorry to observe that the Hon. Mr. SCOTT said, that in so far as the prospective
Member fur Manchester (Mr. Bright), who had a notice operation of the Bill was concerned, it might do good in
on the paper for a Bill to repeal the game laws, was not preventing the entailing of property at present unre-
in his place. stricted, but he feared that its retrospective provisions
Sir G. GREY—He is not going to bring it on. would find very little favour with the landed proprietors
Mr. STAFFORD was sorry to hear that, as the of Scotland.
Honourable Member for Manchester was the person Mr. F. MACKENZIE saw many features in the Bill
who had obtained the appointment of the Committee on to which objection might be taken. He trusted that
the game-laws, and had taken up the question so as to the Learned Lord would reconsider it previous to
make it his own ; otherwise he (Mr. Stafford) might moving the second reading.
have submitted a motion on the subject. However, Mr. J. S. WORTLEY would not commit himself to
he would now call public attention to the fact that an opinion on the Bill until he had become acquainted
the first movement on this subject did not come from with its details. All he could say was, that, as a pro-
a free-trader, but from a Gentleman on the opposite fessional man, he should be glad to give the Noble Lord
side of the House, and holding opinions in favour of every assistance in his power in carrying it through the
protection.—(Hear, hear.) House. One feature of the Bill
lie had heard described
After a tew wog ds from Mr. TRELAWNY, with great pleasure, namely, that which gave it a re-
Colonel SIBTHORP alluded to the two bulky volumes trospective as well as a prospective action. Nothing
of evidence which had been taken before the Committees could be more injurious to the interests of the country
on the game-laws, and said that the motion of the Hon. than the present state of the law of entail in Scotland.
Member for Manchester, like many other of his motions, Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
appeared likely to end in smoke; there would be "much SELECT CONS MITTEE ON PASSENGERS DILL.
cry and little wool."—(Laughter.) Two volumes of Mr. LAI3OUCHERE moved the nomination of the
evidence had been produced, and witnesses without end Select Committee on the above Bill.
had been examined, at an enormous expense to the coon- Mr. WAKLEY asked whether it was intended to
try.—[llere Mr. Bright entered the House, amidst loud make the superintendents of passenger-vessels medical
cheering.] lie was now glad to see that Hon. Gentle- men, or to make the employment of the latter cotnpul-
man on his perch.--(Laughter.) It seemed that Hon. sory? He could assure the Right Hon. Gentleman, that
Member had failed in eliciting any good result out of there would be no difficulty in finding a sufficieat num-
the aumerous allegations that had been made; and had her of professional men for the duty. The lion. Ment-
he (Colonel Sibthorp) done so, he should have cones - ber then read a letter from Mr. Carmichael, of Dublin,
dered himself called on to pay the expenses to which the to the effect that that city alone could supply the neces-
country bad been put by the inquiry.—(Laughter.) lie sary numberbf fullr. LABOUCHEy qualified pra had given the subject
ctitioners.
hoped the House would " largely pause' before granting MRE he
any more Committees on the motion of the Hon. Gen- his best consideration, but could not think of rendering
denian.—(Hear.) the employment of surgeons compulsory, in opposition
Mr. BRIGHT said he had no intention of being ab- to the advice of the Emigration Commissioners. Besides,
sent when the Hon. Member for South Derbyshire in- he feared that medical men could not be got to fulfil the
troduced his motion ; nor had he any intention of office of superintendent for the small remuneration of 201.
opposing that Bill. But he was sure the House would and a free passage back. It' qualified gentlemen would
not consider it sufficient to meet the evils now known offer themselves on those terms, there was no doubt but
to exist in connexion with the preservation of game. that the Emigration Commissioners would give them
The Hon. Member for South Derbyshire must know the preference. Six hundred and twenty vessels had
extremely little of the working of the game-laws if he sailed with emigrants last year, and, notwithstanding
supposed that the placing of hares in the same category what had been said by the Hon. Member for Finsbury,
as rabbits would put a stop to the outrages which had he feared that there would be a difficulty in supplying
taken place throughout the country, and the thousands
such a number of vessels with surgeons. The Bill
of convictions which every year occurred for offences would be referred to a select Committee, where he would
be happy to hear and to attend to any suggestions which
under the game-laws. He had announced his intention,
soon after the recess, of introducing a Bill to repeal the Hon. Member might offer.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought that the best mode of pre-
these laws; he had nut yet been able to bring it on,
serving the health of passengers would be to give the
owing to other engagements, amongst which was the
captains of emigrant ships a bonus for each passenger
Committee on the growth of cotton in India. When
they landed at the port of debarkation free from disease.
that Committee had finished its labours, which he hoped
The Committee wns then nominated:—Mr. Labou-
would be in about a month, then he proposed to ask
and immediate chore, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Vernon Smith, Mr. Gladstone,
leave to introduce a Bill for the entire
repeal of the game laws, in order that the law might no Mr. Stafford, Mr. Herbert (Kerry), Mr. M. J. O'Con-
nell, Mr. Clements, Viscount Melgund, Cul. Thompson,
longer give any sanction to the practice of preserving Mr. Forster, Mn.Mr T. 'l'. Hodges, Earl of Shelburne, Mr.
game iu a country so populous as this. The measure now
proposed would nut hinder him from bringing in thisßill, W. Brown, and Hr. Monseli.
which would go much further. Though considerable LEASING OF MINES (IRELAND.)
delay had taken place since the Committee on the game- Sir W. SONIERVILLE, in moving fur leave to bring
laws had reported, he did not think that the question in the above Bill, explained that its object was to remove
had suffered in consequence. It would Low cease before certain restrictions which were at present imposed on
the House with a much greater chance of a fair censi. the lessors of mines in Ireand. —Leave given.
derstion and of something real being done, for the SLAM) TRADE.
public attention had been called to the evidence durine Mr. HUTT moved for the nomination of the following
the recess. lle had no intention of abandoning the' Select Committee on the Slave Trade : —Mr. Hutt, Mr.
Gladstone,
gut-scion; and he hoped that when it was brought for- Mr. E. Stanley, Mr. Hume, Earl of Lincoln,
ward he should have the support of the Hon. Member Mr. Cobden, Lord H. Vane, Mr. Jackson. Sir R. IL
for North Nortbanaptonshire.—(Cheers.) Inglis, Colonel Thompson, Mr. E. Denison, Lord Cour-
Mr. NEW DEG ATE said that if the game-laws were tenay, Mr. Simeon, Mr. M. "shines, and Lord J. Hay.
repealed. large districts of the eauntry would remain Captain PECIIELL hoped the nomination would be
Ile regretted to see that no Member of the
unprotected, and it would be necessary to enact a law postponed.
of trespass, which would be more burdensome and Government was named.
onerous than the :present ga ne-laws. He highly up- Mr. lIINDLEY asked why the name of the Hon.
ropos Baronet, the Member for South Essex, was not included
proved of the measure now p ed.
Mr. 11. BERKELEY wished to ask the Hon. Member in the Committee ?
for Manchester whether, in proposing the repeal of the Mr. nu rr explained that the Hon. Baronet was en-
game-laws, he would substitute some adequate protec- gaged on the West India Committee, which sat four
lioneoaws,
for the land? times a week. For the Noble Secretary for Foreign
Mr. F. MAULE said h© had endeavoured to intro- Affairs, whose avocations would prevent his attendance,
duce a measure, two " years ago, givin., the tenant corn- he had substituted the name of the Hon. Member for
Cheshire.
pensation trom the proprietor for thedamage done by Lord PALMERSTON was of opinion that the list
preserving game. A farmer had told him that 200
was
hares came in one day into a field of young grass. aies fair a
Committee wa one as could have been made.
„l
This proved the necessity of some such measure as
".1: t PAYERSs appointed.
TO BE PRINTED.
that now proposed; he should therefore support it. Bat
On the motion of Mr. SCIIOLEFIELD, it was
if it were proposed to do away with the game-laws
ordered that the petition of the electors of Walsall be
altogether, the House would ba bound to provide some
rioted with the votes.
adequate protection fur the occupiers of land, whose I)
fields would otherwise be run over and devastated On the motion of Mr. GROGAN, it was ordered that
ut remedy. the copy of the judgment pronounced by the Court of
without
Mr. AGLIONBY, while admitting the evil of the Exchequer Chamber, Ireland, in the case of " Dickson
game-laws, felt the necessity of giving landlords and v. Pape," laid on the table of the House, Feb. 3, be
printed.
farmers some protection, and, if possible, taking away
the temptation to kill game. Whatever they did the
rights of property must be maintained.
Sir R. PEEL believed that the most effectual remedy
for the evils attending the game-laws would be a strong
impression, on the part of lauded proprietors, that hares
and rabbits in excessive quantities were very injurious
to the productiveness of the soil. They would then be
willing to consent to diminish that excessive quantity,
and, by voluntary arrangement, would consent to the
destruction of' much of the game.—(Hear.) lie could
not help feeling that hares contributed very little to the
enjoyment of real sportsmen. With regard to winged
game the damage done was very little.—(Hear, hear.)
Ho thought the Hon. Member for Manchester would
find it a more difficult matter to deal with the game-
laws than be seemed to apprehend. Did the Hon.
gentleman mean to go so far as to prevent gentlemen
from preserving game? lie did not suppose he meant
to propose anything so arbitrary; if that were so, and if
persons were allowed to traverse a gentleman's property
for the purpose of killing game, they would have the
country in a state of rural insurroction.—(Hear, hear.)
He had no objection to the motion of the lion. Gentle-
man, but he should like to know what construction he
was to put on the word " occupier" having a right to
kill hares.
Mr. COLVILLE said that he did not mean that the
word occupier should extend to the case of a landlord
who preserved hares himself, but only that the tenant
to whom permission was given to kill hares by the land-
lord should be allowed to do so without a license. He
meant to deal with hares as rabbits were dealt with.
Mr. HUDSON was not aware ',bat any objection
could be made to the Bill of his lion. Friend ; but he
entirely disapproved of the measure which the Hon.
Member for Manchester signified his intention of intro-
ducing. It would be a gross violation of the rights of
property to allow persons the right of coming on a man's
land to kill game. He might as well enter the ware-
house of the Hon. Gentleman and take out a piece of
cotton. When the tenant took the land he took it sub-
ject to the preservation of the game; the matter was a
mere bargain between him and the landlord, and he had
no right to complain of the injury done by the game.
Mr. C. WOOD did not think the Hon. Member for
Manchester intended to introduce any Bill which would
interfere with the rights of property. With regard to
the Ball before the House, the Hon. Gentleman had
clearly explained what his object was, anti it would have
his concurrence.
Mr. BRIGHT said ho had no intention of introdue-
ing any measure which would interfere with the rights
of property.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
S HALL TENEMENTS.
Mr. SCROPE, in introducing a Bill to exempt small
tenements from local taxation, said that great hardship
had been experienced from the operation of the law as
it stood at present. The law had not clearly defined
the line of exemption, and poor persons were obliged
to prove before two tribunals before they could establi,h
their right to be exempt. Mr. Rushton,- the magistrate,
of Liverpool, declared that be found the utmost diffi-
culty in deciding who ought to be exempt, and who
ought to pay rates. What ho wished to effect, there-
fore, was to draw a clear line of distinction :between
those two classes of persons, and for this purpose he
proposed, that, in the rural districts, houses under the
value of 51. should be exempt ; that in towns, which had
a population of between 10,000 and 50.000 inhabitants,!
the exemption should extend to houses of the value of
Si. ; and in large towns, like Liverpool, that it should
extend to houses of the value of 101. He considered
that his measure would be a most beneficial auxiliary
to the Sanitary Bill of .the Noble Lord.
Sir G. GREY did not object to the introduction of
the measure, but he by no means undertook to support
the Bill on its introduction. His objection to time prin-
ciple of the measure remained unimpaired.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.

MR. ANSTEY'S MOTION.
On the order of the day for the resumption of the de•
bate on this motion, deferred from Wednesday,
Mr. C. ANSTEY said he believed it devolved upon
him to appoint the day for resuming this debate. The
Noble Lord opposite, however, was in possession of the
house, and he (Mr. Anstty) should be glad to consult
his convenience on the subject. He would either sit
there and hear his defence out now—(Great laughter, it
being nearly one o'clock)—or he would name any day
that would suit him.--(Cries of " Go on," followed by
laughter and ironical cheering.)
Viscount PALMERSTON was of course exceedingly
anxious to proceed, but he really would not trouble the
Hon. Gentleman " to sit there to bear him" to-night—
(A laugh)—for he feared if he did they should be very
shortly performing a duet together.—(Much laughter.)
The order had better stand for this day (Ertday).
The order was fixed accordingly.
The House adjourned at Ten Minutes to One.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.
From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.)

TIIIIRSDAY, FEB. 24.
STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
The following Resolutions were reported from the above
Committee:-
1. That in the case of the River Nene Improvement
and Drainage petition, the standing orders ought to be
dispensed with:—That the parties be permitted to pro-
ceed with their Bill, provided that the same be presented
not later than three clear days after the presentation of
this report.
2. That in the case of the Plymouth Great Western
Dock Act Amendment petition, the standing orders
ought to be dispensed with:—That the parties be per-
mitted to proceed with their Bill.
3. Thr*, in the case of the Norwich and Yarmouth
Navigation petition, the standing orders ought to be dis-
pensed with:—That the parties be permitted to proceed
with their Bill, provided that the same be presented not
later than three clear days alter the presentation of this
report.
4. That in the case of the Penzance Waterworks
petition, the standing orders ought to be dispensed
with:—That the parties be permitted to proceed with
their Bill, provided that the same bo presented not later
than three clear days alter the presentation of this report.
5. That in the case of the Penzance Corporation
Waterworks petition, the standing orders ought not to
be dispensed with.
6 That in the case of the Great London Drainage
petition, the standing orders ought to be dispensed with:
—That the parties be permitted to proceed with their
Bill, provided that the same be presented not later than
three clear days after the presentation of this report.
7. That in the case of the East and West Looe Har-
bour and Bridge petition, the stardirg orders ought to
be dispensed eith:—That the parties be permitted to
proceed with their Bill, provided that the same be pre-
sented not later then three clear days after the presen-
tation of this report.
8. That in the case of the Merchant Traders Ship
Loan and Insurance Company petition, the standing
orders ought not to be dispensed with.
g. That in the case of the liilcullen Bridge Road
petition, for leave to deposit a petition for a Bill, the
standing orders ought to be dispensed with.
The Ist, 2d, 3.1, 4th, 6th, and 7th Resolutions agreed
to.—Report to lie on the table.
The undernamed Railway Bill was ordered to be
brought in:—
Eastern Counties (Enlargement of London and Stratford
Stations, and Amendment of Acts) Amendment of Act.

CONFIRMATION OF THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTER-
BURY ELECT.—The thy named for confirming the elec-
tion of Dr. Sumner us Archbishop of Canterbury, is
Friday, the 10th of March next. The ceremony will
take place as usual at Bow Church.