The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-06 00:00:00

ROYAL ASSENT.

Mr. Pullman, deputy usher of the black rod, ap..
peered at the bar of the House with a message from
the Lords, requesting the attendance of the Commons,
for the purpose of hearing her Majesty's Commission,
and giving the royal assent to several Bills (for which
see Lords' report).

Tl-IE-CORN-LAW DEBATES.
Mr. FOSTER said, the corn-law debates had now
been so long protracted, that gnat inconvenience was
felt from the question remaining so long unsettled.
There were a great number of notices of motion
on the paper for this evening, which must, if persevered
in, be disposed of before the Committee on the corn-laws
could be resumed. He therefore hoped that those Hon.
Gentlemen who had charge of those notices would con
seat to postpone them.
Mr. ETWALL said that this motion had been before
the House ever since the beginning of the session, and
he was surprised at the request which the Hon. Member
had just made. He mild not but demur to accede to his
request, for he believed there was an understanding with
the Government, that his motion respecting the
Andover Union should be brought before the
House to-nigt.t. He was not aware that any-
thing had occurred to prevent that course from
being followed, but if there was, he was quite ready to
submit to any reason that might be assigned from the
Treasury benches.—(Cries of " No, no," from the
Ministerial side of the House.) _ _ _

Sir J. GRAHAM said that certainly no under-
standing had been entered into with the Hon. Member;
but if the motion were to be persevered in, he should cer-
tainly feel it his duty to move an amendment, for the
production of all the papers connected with the affair
of the Andover Union. But he thought a better
course might be pursued, and he proposed to place in
the hands of the Hon. Member, and every Member of
that House, copies of all the papers which had passed
relative to the transactions o u hich the Honourable
Member referred. which would pro (all the infor-
mation which the Gower Li MTh t required on
the subject. In addi4ijen to itc- papers to which
he understood the Ilion Member alluded, he intended
to print arid forward to each of the Members of the
House the report of Mr. l'Arker, as well as all the
letters which had passed between the Poor-law
Commissioners relative to the Andover Union,
between the Ist of September, 1845, and the Ist of
March, 1846. This would place the House in possession
of all the information which the Government had re-
ceived, and he thought it would satisfy the Honourable
Member.

Mr. FERRAND hoped that he might be allowed to
make a few remarks.

The SPEAKER (interrupting Mr. Ferrand)—The
House must first know whether the Hon. Member was
inclined to withdraw his motion.

Mr. ET%VALL was quite ready to withdraw his, and
would do so, but he thought that in the event of his
pursuing that course, other Hon. Members who had
notice of motion on the paper ought to do the same.
Mr. NEWDEGATE was understood to say that,
owing to the importance of his motion, he could not con-
sent to withdraw it.
THE ANDOVER UNION.

Mr. ETWALL rose to move for a Committee of

inquiry into the working of the poor-laws
in the Andover Union. He was certain that it
was the feeling of that House that the poor•
laws should be administered fairly, impartially, and
kindly, and that the unfortunate inmates of such
asylums should be treated with kindness and in-
dulgence.—(Hear, hear.) He felt certain that there was
no hope for the poor, nor did they expect a redress of
grievances from any quarter, save from that House.
The HOPI. Member then proceeded to read some extracts
from the minutes of the proceedings before the Poor-
law Commissioners at Andover, but, in consequence of
the perpetual hum of conversation carried on in al(
parts of the House, it was impossible to catch even the
purport of the extracts. He was afterwards under-
stood to say, that the Commissioners during
their inquiries evinced the greatest anxiety to de-
prive the public of the benefit of their proceedings.
He would not touch further upon the subject, but it ap-
peared to him that the Poor-law Commissioners took
great pains to keep the public from knowing the result of
their inquiries, and if they were desirous of administering
the law in a way which would be becoming to them,
surely it was their duty to make themselves perfectly
familiar with the characters of their officers and depen-
dents. The late master of the Andover Union, who
had been discharged, had received an excellent cha-
racter from Mr. Parker, a Poor-law Commissioner.
He hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet would, in all
future investigations respecting the poor-law, see that
they were presided over by impartial persons, and by
judges in no way mixed up with the administration of the
law. He could nit but feel surprise that the papers connec-
.

ted with the Anilovercase had not been pre‘sesnted earlier.
`.l he bones, which were seized with so much avidity by
the7pauper, hall lain in a state of decomposition in the
workhouse
.)ard for two or three months. There was no
such instance of ill-treatment of the poor on record as that

which occurred at this union. When anew bone was thrown
into the yard, there was a general scramble for it ; one
man, in one -instance, had been fortunate enough to get
two bones, and he had to scamper off with them after the
manner of a dog.—(Hear, hear.) The poor people, it
appeared from the evidence, were a long while before
they could eat the filthy marrow out of the bones.
Ad the witnesses at the inquiry stated that there was an
awful deficiency of bread. Mr. Mundy stated that the
paupers were accustomed to eat potatoes which were
dug out of the ground after the first crop. These
paupers were employed in carrying weights, from 161bs.
to 201b5., and feeling that the labour to which they
were subjected was more than their strength could bear,
they had applied to the master for an increase
to their allowance of food. Now this was in direct
contradiction to the rules of the Commissioners, and thus
were the paupers placed in such a position, that
either their health must suffer, or the rules
of the Commissioners be violated. This matter
had been brought under his notice during the last three
or four years ; fur about the beginning of that time a
new church was begun to be built on the site of an old
During the progress of laying the founda-
tion-stone, a great number of bones had been re-
moved. Part of these had been sold to the -usual
collector of bones in Andover, of whom they
had been purchased by many of the farmers in the
neighbourhoid, but a large portion was carried to the
workhouse, where the paupers were employed to crush
them. It was easy to perceive the difference between these
human bones and the bones of horses. Nothing more
revolting could have been imposed upon the inmates.
The witnesses collected for the board's inquiry were
Collected by the master of the workhouse. No public
notice was given of the inquiry, and he (Mr.
Etwall) was in a condition to prove that many
of the persons examined were constrained wit-

one.

nesses on the occasion. If such matters as these
were allowed to, pass over, there was no knowing where
the system would end; and therefore he felt it necessary
to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the work-
ing of the system of poor-laws.—(Hear, hear.) He
would not go into the details of the second case, because
the object of his motion was not to disgrace the officers of
the union, but merely to call the attention of the
House to the subject. The gentleman who caused
these inquiries to be brought forward had been for
some years the medical attendant in the union.
He was elected in March, 1842, and received a
higher salary than was usually given. For two years
Mr. Westlake had suspected that the aged and sick
paupers . id not receive the full allowance allotted to them,
awl in April, 1844, he suggested to the board of guardians
that these allowances should be entered in a book.
It might be asked, why did not Mr. Westlake inform
the board of guardians of what he suspected, but there

was every allowance to be made for his not doing so, as
he alleged as his reason than, until he had a strong, con-
vincing case to lay before them, it would be impossible to
persuade the Board of the correctness of his suspicions.
He should rather consider it was the duty of the board
of guardians to look into the allegations preferred
against the master, and not have shown such an anxiety
to avoid inquiry. He could quote numerous instances
of hardship committed on the unfortunate paupers by
the servants of the Commissioners—he would refer to

the case of William Lawless, an old man, aged seventy-
six years, and twenty-one days in the workhouse; he
was charged with all those little extras of tea and so
forth, to which he was entitled without any payment.
There was also the case of William Norris, an old man,
nearly blind, who was set to the work of able. bodied
men, and who chopped his own hands in endeavouring
to perform it. He would also allude to the case of Sarah
Webster, who was charged with extras which she never
received, and to which she was entitled. Now, if these
frauds were practised upon the poor, simple, aged, and
infirm paupers, they surely ought to consent to an in-
quiry, with the view of preventing such conduct in
future. But he found that those frauds had
been committed, and the paupers had been
defrauded at the expense of the rate-payers.
There was a certain number of paupers who received
broth on certain days of the week, but When they had
the broth they were allowed no cheese; and the aged
and infirm, when they received the broth, had neither
beer nor cheese. He was not quite aware of the in-
gredients of which this broth was made, for there were
many things of which the paupers in this workhouse
partook which was a perfect mystery. Large quantities
of the butter allowed were saved by the skimmings of
the bacon pot, and sometimes they were treated with hot
water, and as a luxury were occasionally allowed a little
salt. He found, on reference to the books, that in one of
the quarters the paupers had been put on half allowance,
and it had been reduced as much as 1 oz. of meat. But
whether it was 2 oz. or I oz. it was immaterial, for his
only object was to show that there was a great inaccu-
racy in the master's books, which was altogether passed
over in the Commissioner's report. At every weekly
meeting of the guardians the master was bound to lay
before the board an estimate of the stock of provisions
required for the ensuing week, for which a check was to
be given by the clerk and entered in the check book.
New the check books were never filled up until the week
after the goods were delivered and consumed. There
was one fraud arose out of that practice which he should
mention. The teas and sugars sent to the workhouse
were made up in parcels of half a pound each, and it
was not unusual for the master to return many of the
parcels, and get them exchanged for better descriptions,
which he converted to his own purposes.—(Hear, hear.)
There was also another species of peculation. It ap-
peared that out of 901bs. of Chedder cheese, only 701bs.
were converted to the purposes of the union. There
happened to be a man named Watt who was employed

at the union, and this man, when his day's work was
over, went home to his family, and said that he had seen
the inmates of the workhouse eating raw potatoes. A
neighbour of the man beard the story, and it was noised
abroad until it reached the ears of the board of
guardians. The man was summoned before the board,
when, on being spoken to, he confirmed his statement.
He was then told that he would be employed at the
union no longer, and that if he wanted relief he should
go into the house and eat raw potatoes with the rest of
the paupers. He had never witnessed a more extraor-
dinary state of irregularity than was exhibited in the
manner in which these accounts had been kept. Persons
had received sums varying from ss. to 12s. for various
attendances, for which no accounts had been rendered.
Nothing was more detrimental to the character of the
Poor-law Commissioners than these frequent charges of
cruelty and incompetency- He trusted that a searching
investigation would be instituted into the matter; and
he could assure the House that nothing but a strict sense
of the important nature of these charges could have in-
duced him to undertake his present disagreeable task.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM confessed he could not help
regretting that under the present aspect of public
affairs, so much of the precious time of the House bad
been consumed in a matter, which after all was nothing
better than a workhouse squabble.—(Cheers.) It would
be his duty very briefly to follow the Hon. Gentleman
with reference to some of the statements, which had
been advanced with reference to the affair. A trans-
action had some time since been stated to the House;
which at the time left a very strorfg impression on their
feelings with respect to the employment of the poor in
the crushing of bones at Andover Union. He (Sir

Parker from his situation. He (Sir James Graham)
had not the slightest wish to keep back one particle of
the evidence which had been taken on that case, and
thought that it was highly desirable that all papers con-
nected with this inquiry should be laid on the table.
.

Mr. FERRAND,- before the question was put, wished
to ask whether he could second du amendment to the
original resolution.
The SPEAKER having replied in the affirmative,
Mr. WAKLEY said he was for the original motion
and for the amendment also, because he thought it ex-
tremely desirable that the House should be furnished
with full particulars respecting this important matter.
It appeared to him that the better plan would be to ad-
journ the debate for three weeks or a month; and there
were reasons for the adjournment of the debate of which
many Hon. Members were not aware. There was now
a Committee sitting, of which he was a member, which
was inquiring into the appointment of district officers in
poor-law unions. The Commissioners had as much as
they could accomplish in furnishing the Committee with
the necessary documents ; and he felt sure that if
the proposed Committee were appointed, it would be
utterly impossible fur the Poor-law Commissioners to
attend - to them. He (Mr. Wakle) ) had never
known a case which required a more searching scrutiny
than the one now in question; and he felt sure that the
Hon. Member who had moved for the appointment of
the Committee would be of the same opinion. The
remark that the Right Hon. Geutleman opposite had
made, that it was merely a " workhouse squabble," was
not very creditable. He (Mr. Wakley) admitted the im-
portance of the matter that had been brought under the
deliberation of the House. He would not undertake to
obstruct the progress of public opinion on the point in
question. It involved the consideration of something
more than a workhouse squabble. The powers of the
Poor-law Commissioners, which had been characterised
as being extraordinary, and even unconstitutional, bad
now been exercised for the space of 10 years. Until
now no motion bad been brought before the House with
respect to the manner in which the Poor-law Commis-
sioners had exercised their functions. He considered it
was the duty of the House to inquire in what way the
commissioners had fulfilled their office. It was therefore
something more than a workhouse squabble. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had stated that several improvements
had taken place, and that, amongst others, the amount of
the dietary had been increased. But did he know that
even now the increased dietary is not sufficient? It was
a squabble which had led to the dismissal of an assistant-
commissioner, who had performed his duties in a satisfac-
tory manner for a long period previous to the inquiry.
The Commissioners complained of Mr. Parker, and Mr.
Parker complained of them. M'Dougal, the master of
the union, complained that the most outrageous
charges had been made against him. He had
not been allowed the opportunity of defending himself.
On the 2d of August the Right Hon. Baronet undertook
to make inquiries on the subject of the bone-crushing
at Andover. There had been also further complaints
made with reference to the treatment of the paupers, and
the conduct of the governors of that workhouse. He
complained of the manner in which that inquiry had
been conducted with reference to throwing all the res
sponsibility, and providing funds, and the expense of
witnesses, upon the medical officer of the workhouse.
He had to appear before the public as the accuser of
another officer, and upon him was -thrown the
entire responsibility and expense of the examination.
Was there ever such a shameful thing known before,
that an officer is to appear before a Court which was
not, strictly speaking, a tribunal ? There was no judge,
no jury, and no witnesses allowel to be called for the
defence. He (Mr. Westlake) did not, however, flinch
from this inquiry which was thus unjustly laid upon
him. His witnesses were procured at a great expense ;
inquiry was gone into, and proceeded with to a great
extent, when Mr. Parker then considered it was neces-
sary, in order that the master (Mr. M'Dougal) might
prepare his evidence, to postpone the farther inquiry for
five days. He came up to London, and was immediately
sent back by the Poor-law Commissioners, who com-
pelled him to go on with the inquiry, notwithstanding
his promise of five days to prepare the evidence. Under
these circumstances, is it likely that the public will be
satisfied, considering the power exercised at the Poor-
law Commissioners'-office—a power never before granted
to any body of men—superior to any power of either
House of Parliament, which enables them by a rule or
regulation to suspend the operation of an Act of Par-
liament ? We should be jealous of that power. Not
only that inquiry should be made, but even the bare
suspicion of that power being misapplied should lead to
an investigation in that House. If, however, there
is to be no inquiry if we are to remain
satisfied without instituting anyCommittee,otbe so
the
public and the boards of guardians not
easily satisfied. The public will see how the paupers are
treated—how they have been suffering in that work-
house since the passing of the pop-law, from the want of
food. The alteration of the dietry sufficiently proves
this. He hoped the Right Honourable Baronet would
consent to withdraw his opposition to the present
motion, and to appease the feelings of the suffering poor.
Let him reflect upon their feelings if they found that this
House shut their door against investigation of their
grievances. He did not wish to go into any of the
accusations against Mr. M'Dougal, because he had not
had an opportunity of rebutting them, which he said he
could have done, had he been allowed to do so. He will
however, have an opportunity if this Committee is af-
forded him. If the present motion was an appeal from
a law court, he would not support the motion. It is
not, however, one. The inquiry was not complete, it was
held before a gentleman who had not power to do justice
to it. Mr. Parker was the last person to be sent down
who ought to have been sent down to make that in-
quiry. He had to inquire into his own conduct, it was
not to be expected, therefore, that he would make a re
port against himself. He was a gentleman, who, by
virtue of his office, was supposed to have known all
that was going on in Andover ; he was sent down to
make an investigation, and he was the culpable party.
Upon that ground, therefore, he considered that another
investigation should be made.
Mr. CHRISTIE considered that the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet (Sir James Graham) did not always look back
upon the matter in so light a manner as he had done
to-night. He did not always consider it a workhouse
squabble. It seemed, from a pamphlet published by
Mr. Parker, that he received a letter from one of his
brother Commissioners, in which he states that he had
seen the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State,
and he expressed his opinion upon the subject as being
a very serious matter ; but now he thought fit to de-
signate it a mere workhouse squabble. The subject
of the Andover Union had been before the public for
some time; it had assumed many shapes, but from first
to last there had always been a desire on the
part of the Right Honourable Baronet and the Poor-
law Commissioners to keep back all unfavourable
upon the subject. In refusing a Committee of Inquiry
to-night, the Right Hon. Baronet was only acting in
consistency with his former conduct. With reference
to the papers to which the Right Hon. Baronet refers in
his amendment, he (Mr. Christie) would ask why were
not those papers produced before this ? It was more
than a month since they were moved for by an Hon.
Friend near him. The Right Hon. Baronet has kept
these papers back to the last moment, and he then
comes down and proposes to substitute these papers, in
lieu of thoie for which the Hon. Member for Andover
had moved. He did not wish to be unparliamentary,
but he must say he thought that it was nothing more
than a mere juggle on the part of the Right Hon.
Baronet.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Ferrand.) Ile did
not let us have the papers time enough to examine
them ourselves, and he wished by these means to im-
press upon Parliament and the country that he was
doing all that could possibly be done to promote an
inquiry on the subject. The simple facts of the case
were these :—Mr. Commissioner Parker was sent down
on the sth of August to make inquiries on the subject
of the bone-crushing, and other alleged misconduct
of the Andover union. He sent up a report of the de-
positions taken on that occasion. On the Bth August
Mr. Parker called on the Right Hon. Baronet at the
Home-office, and a conversation took place there
between the Home Secretary, Sir Edmund Head,
and Mr. Parker. Immediately after that conversation
the Right Hon. Baronet came down to the House, and
said that Mr. Assistant Commissioner Parker had com
municated to him that he had made inquiries with re-
ference to some paupers of the Andover Union having
eaten the flesh and marrow of putrid bones. He (Mr.
Christie) considered that the report of Mr. Parker went
much further, and contemplated a greater number of
disclosures relating to this horrible practice than the
statement which had been laid by the Right Honourable
Baronet on the table of the House. He says in his re-
ports, that three inmates of the workhouse had eaten the
horseflesh, whi.l had been found attached in a putrid
state on the bones,and other stinking meat. He also stated
that great care was necessary to be taken, in order to
prevent one of the paupers, who was in the habit of thus
acting, and who was considered to be in an unsound state
of mind, from going near the bonehouse or the hog-tub.
These men, who were described as
i men of depraved ap-
petites were, in addition to other inmates of the work-
house, who stated that they had been in the habit of
gnawing the meat and breaking the bones, in order to
obtain the marrow from the bones, which were brought
in a comparatively fresh state from the tables of the
gentry. The inhabitants of Andover and the public
generally knew nothing of this report, with the excep
Lion of what they could obtain from the sources of' daily
information, and they had Just reason to consider them
perfectly unsatisfactory- Mr. Parker had placed in his
(Mr. Christie's) hands a memorandum of a conversation
which took place between the Right Honourable Baronet
himself and another Poor-law Commissioner ; and in
corroboration of his (Mr. Christie's) general Statements,
he would beg to read the mememorandum to the House.
The Honourable Member went on to read the memoran-
dum in question, from which it appeared that Sir James
Graham had stated to Mr. Parker that he did not lik
this employment of the poor in bone-crushing. He said
that if it was not speedily put an end to, there would be
a confounded row in the House on the subjeet. It was
also stated, that should the inquiry be continued it would
furnish a stock in trade for the 7 imes for the next six
months. With reference to the recur; of Mr. Parker,
Sir James Graham had stated that the report must not
be brought for ward in that state. Mr. Nichol, one of the
Commissioners, also expressed an opinion to the same
effect, and, finally, Sir James Graham undertook to
bring the matter before the House, in the most favour-
able manner possible. The Honourable Member went
on to say, that no benefit could be derived from bringing
forward the deposition of witnesses taken upon the second
trial, for no adjudication had taken place upon the subject.
The inquiry bad been productive of no beneficial results,
and it had given satisfaction to no parties whatever.
Ho considered that the Right Hon. Gentleman should
not have gone so far in his condemnation of the master
until his guilt had been decided by the tribunal esta-
blished to try it. The case. of the master was a pecu-
liarly hard one; he had petitioned the House, detailing
the particulars, and stating, that if he had been allowed
time to prepare his defence against the alleged
charges, he would have been able to have met them

James Graham) had in his place expressed his strong
objections to the poor being employed in that particular
kind of labour, and his regret that it should have been
put in force in so many Unions. When this particular
transaction had been mentioned, he had thought it his
duty to call the attention of the poor-law commissioners
to the subject. The Hon. Member who had made the
present motion, had referred to the report of the Com-
tnissioners in 1833, in which they stated their views of
the species of labour in which the poor should be em-
ployed. He (Sir James Graham) thought that the
abour of the pauper should not be of a degrading or
revolting character. So far from vindicating the trans-
actions at Andover, his previously conceived opinions
had been strengthened. He had now the pleasure of
stating to the House that by a general order of the Poor-
law Commissioners, notwithstanding the remonstrances
of nearly 100 unions, the system of employing paupers in
bone crushing had been suppressed from the Ist of January,
and, with the exception of 10 or 12 parishes, the general
order had been maintained, and he trusted the system
would never be renewed. He begged to call the atten-
tion of the House to this remarkable fact, that all the
abuses which had been complained of were confined to
the local management. He did not possess the least
power of controlling the management which the Poor-
law Commissioners might think proper to institute. In
addition to other objections which might be raised to
the employing of paupers in crushing bones, it was a
mode of labour exposed to many abuses. In particular
it led to local jobbing; and therefore on every ground,
whether on account of the objectionable nature of the
labour itself, or because of the local abuses to which it
led, this method of employing the pauper was highly
objectionable. He had already stated to the House that
effectual measures had been taken to suppress that
employment. But bone crushing was only one of the
many abuses, of which the Hon. Gentleman had de-
scribed a great number. There was the insufficient
state of the dietary. He (Sir James Graham) had to
state that a material alteration had been made in the
dietary, and that during one day in the week meat had
been substituted. Then, with respect to the master of
the workhouse at Andover, he had been appointed to
this situation by the poor-law guardians, and not by the
Commissioners. During the progress of that inquiry
the master had sent in his resignation, since
when he had been again called to fill the
office of master by the poor-law guardians,
and had subsequently been removed by order of the
Commissioners. This was not all. A complaint had
been made of the conduct of the medical officers of the
union. In this case it was not doubtful that the medical
officer had been to blame, and had improperly interfered.
Among other complaints which had been investigated by
the Poor-law Commissioners, one was, that, the number
of the relieving officers was not sufficient for the ade-
quate performance of the duties which devolved on them.
The evil had been remedied by the appointment of an
additional relieving officer. He believed that he had now
mentioned all the objections, with the exception of one,
and that was, the insufficient manner in which the audit
of accounts was conducted. During the last year, he
was of opinion that the audit of accounts was not suf-
ficient for the Poor-law Unions. District auditors had
been appointed, and were now in the full discharge of
their functions throughout England ; and the union of
Andover, as well as other unions, now partook of that
benefit. The lion. Gentleman had also complained of
the mode in which the second inquiry at Andover had
been conducted. He (Sir James Graham) did not stand
there to vindicate the mode in which that investigation
had been conducted. He certainly was of opinion that
good judgment had not been displayed in the method of
conducting it. He would not say that the removal of
Mr. Parker from his situation arose out of the
mode in which that investigation had been
conducted. It would appear that the Poor-
law Commissioners, in consequence of their
inquiry into the manner in which the investigation had
been made, had considered it their duty to remove Mr.

THE SUN LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, MARCH 6, 1843.

satisfactorily ; and, moreover, that where he had time
to prepare, he had entirely established his innocecce.
He further stated that Mr. Parker had promised him
time to prepare his evidence, and that that promise had
been fulfilled; in consequence of which, he found
it necessary to resign, or proceed to his de-
fence without being able to furnish any evidence
of his innocence. Under these circumstances there was
only one course open to him to adopt, and that was not
to allow the inquiry to continue, and to throw the de-
nial of justice on the Poor-law Commissioners. There
were two incidents in the;, inquiry, which struck him
in a remarkable manner, and which, he must say, ap-
peared to him inexplicable, except upon a supposition
to which he was most unwilling to give his assent,
namely, that the Poor-law Commissioners, thoroughly
scared by the inquiry, were determined to stop it, at
every hazard, no matter who might suffer or be injured.
—(Hear, hear.) At a time when the public prejudice
was at its height, the Poor-law Commissioners suddenly
sent down an order suspending an inquiry, and with it
a proposal that another course should be adopted,
which he (Mr. Christie) must say was of a
most extraordinary and unjustifiable character,
It was that Mr. Wesley, the party bringing the charges,
should select one case of embezzlement upon which the
Commissicners would prepare an indictment against the
master, and one charge of an attempt to take liberties
with the female inmates, upon which also they would
prepare an indictment, and send the cases for trial at the
sessions. Now he asserted that this was a most unjust
proposal, for if the master was acquitted on one case,
would he not have reason to complain that he had not
been allowed to defend himself from the other charges
which were brought against him, especially when it is
considered that the evidence supporting those allega-
tions was before the public—and even were he acquitted
on that one case, would it not have been said ever after
by the public, that he would not have been acquitted
on the others had the evidence been gone into. He said,
therefore, that such a course would not have been avail-
able for the purpose of justice. The proposal, however,
being unsatisfactory to both parties was refused; and
when it was so the Poor-law Commissioners determined
to resume the inquiry, and accordingly Mr. Parker re-
commenced the investigation. That gentleman pro.
posed that the master should be allowed some few days
to prepare his defence ; this was, however, negatived,
The counsel for the accused then applied for time and
sought a respite of ten days. After much discussion,
however, all parties consented to the propriety of a grant
of five days. Mr. Parker returned to town, and had an
interview with the Poor-law Commissioners, whom he
found strongly disapproved of the course which had been
adopted in permiting the delay of five days. Now he
(Mr. Christie) contended that for a defence to the charges
which had been made, five days was but a short time to
prepare some of those charges ; especially those relating
to improper conduct, which were of a nature diffi-
cult to disprove; and particularly so when the party is inno-
cent. But it should be recollected that many of these very
Niarges referred back to a period many years anterior to
the time when the charges were first made. But the Poor-
law Commissioners overruled the delay, though Mr.
Parker assured them that if they didso the counsel for the
accused would advise his client to throw up the case, •
and throw the odium of the denial of justice on the
Commissioners. His remonstrances, however, were
without effect, and the matter turned out exactly as
Mr. Parker had anticipated. Now he considered he had
made out a case upon strong grounds, which fully jus-
tified him in demanding an inquiry into the conduct of
the Poor-law Commissioners. Something had been
said of the mode in which Mr. Parker had conducted
the inquiry, and he must say he heard with
great surprise an observation which fell from
the Right Honourable Baronet in depreciation
of that gentleman. He bad been dismissed from his
situation, but there was one thing which must strike
every man, that Mr. Parker invited inquiry ; the Poor-
law Commissioners shunned all investigation. If the
Right Hon. Gentleman alluded to the appointment of
Mr. Price to the office of master, he (Mr. Christie) had
only to state, that before Mr. Parker went down to An-
dover, he had an application from Mr. Price, for Mac-
dougal's situation, for such time as would be thought
fit. Mr. Price had the highest recommendations, and
Mr. Parker had an opportunity for same years of judg-
ing of his character and capabilities when placed in a
similar position ; and, from what he then observed,
he highly approved of his conduct, and, be-
sides that, Mr. Price had letters of recommendation
from the chairman of the board of guardians at Oxford,
speaking in the highest terms of him, and urging Mr.
Parker to get some better situation for him. Mr. Parker
had also seen Price when he was applicant for the Swin-
burn Union, and he then examined his testimonials,
which were of the highest character, and he was there-
fore not surprised to receive the application; and having
such a high opinion of Price, he had no hesitation in ap-
pointing him. No person who considered the circum-
stances, could ever blame the course pursued by Mr.
Parker. It would have been much more agreeable to his
(Mr. Christie's) feelings if the Right Hon. Gentleman
had felt it his duty to consent to this inquiry, for he
would then have moved for it without any preface, but
under the circumstances of his refusal, he could not have
sought one without making a case which would justify
his demand. He had the honour of being acquainted
with Mr. Lewis and Sir E. Head. No one could deny
their abilities, and he was sure he would be the last
person who would be a willing party to any harshness.
But he must say, that Mr. Parker had been most un-
fairly dealt with by the Poor-law Commissioners.
Mr. Parker had been in the service of the Poor-law
Commissioners for a term of nearly ten years. He had
been first engaged as assistant secretary, and subse-
quently as Assistant Poor-law Commissioner. Ile left
the honourable profession of the bar to enter their
service; and now, after the lapse of nearly ten years, by
that act, that arbitrary act of dismissal, he was again
thrown back on his profession, though every gentleman
who knew anything of human nature should be aware
that, having given up a profession for so many years,
ind then returning to it, the man who did so laboured
under very inauspicious circumstances.—(Hear, hear.)
His peculiar hardship was that, in the course of the
inquiry, facts and circumstances had transpired, and
statements had been put forward in the newspapers that
caused great excitement, and brought much odium on the
Poor-law Commission, in the administration of which
he held a prominent part ; yet no steps had been taken
to explain why he was dismissed. He (Mr. Christie)
certainly thought, until he heard the statement of the
Right Honourable Baronet (Sir James Graham) that
there had been some cogent reason for his dismissal ;
hut after what had fallen from that Right Honourable
Gentleman, it would appear that the Poor-law Commis-
sioners disapproved of the mode in which he had con-
ducted the Andover inquiry, though everything he had
lone in reference thereto was done under their order.—
,Hear, hear.) However, the dismissal of Mr. Parker at
that time, and under such peculiar circumstances, led
the public to infer that he had been' dismissed be-
..atuse the Commissioners had adopted all the
complaints made to them in reference to the
conduct of the Andover investigation.—(Hear, hear.)
['here had been a petition presented to that House by
sir. Parker,in which he stated that he believed, and was
Cully prepared to prove before a Committee of that
House, by evidence the most unquestionable, that the
Poor-law Commissioners dismissed him (Mr. Parker)
in order to divert from themselves the odium that
naturally would attach to them from such an inquiry.=
(Hear, hear.) And he (Mr. Christie) should say, on
behalf of Mr. Parker, that he had made out, in his
opinion, a strong, a powerful case in support of his
statement.—(Hear, hear.) So strong did he believe the
ease to be, that the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary
ror the Home Department, should, in justice to the
Poor-law Commissioners, grant the inquiry, and
then let these gentlemen produce their re-
butting testimony, when the public could judge
who was right and who was wrong.—(Hear, hear.)
['he Right Honourable Baronet had, however, moved an
amendment which he hoped would be negatived ; and
though it might be said that the Poor-law Commis-
sioners had a discretionary power to remove and rein-
state their assistants at will, yet he (Mr. Christie)
wished to know if that discretionary power was to be
exercised by them without responsibility ?—(Hear.)
He looked on it that there was a responsibility, for the
House of Commons annnally voted these gentlemen their
salaries ; and he then begged to acquaint the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite, that if he should think fit to
shield them from inquiry by negativing his proposition,
he would feel it his duty, when the period for voting
such salaries arrived, to confer with any other Honour-
able Members in resisting the payment of such
until such an act of injustice and harshness should
be inquired into and explained. (Hear, hear.)
One of the principal charges advanced against Mr.
Parker was, that he published documents that became
known to him as a public officer, and in the discharge
of his duty as such. Now if the Poor-law Commission-
ers had the power to dismiss an Assistant-Commis-
sioner, and then refuse all inquiry, such a doctrine, as
precluding the injured party from making known their
grievances, with a view to procure their redress, would
lead to a great hardship, and the result, in his opinion,
would be that there would be no security for any public
servant hereafter. (Hear, hear.) He then left the
case of Mr. Parker in the hands of the Right Hon.
Gentleman ; and he hoped he would, in justice to
the Poor-law Commissioners, grant the inquiry
which he (Mr. Christie) sought for. But it the
Right Hon. Gentleman should persist in refusing the
inquiry, he should appeal to the Hon. Members of that
House, and tell them that the case was not alone the
case of Mr. Parker, but that of every public servant ;
and that, judging from the way in which ho had been
treated—his past services forgotten—no allowance made
for the single indiscretion of a long tried and public
servant—such would also be their treatment, the result
of which would undoubtedly prove disastrous to the
most important interests of the country.—(Hear.)
Sir JAMES GRAHAM (who was quite inaudible in
the gallery) was understood to say, in reply, that it was
true he bad received a written report from Mr. Parker
about the last day of last se,sion; and he did not
hesitate to say that he thought he used that document
for the public good. The Hon. Gentleman opposite
(Mr. Christie) had given it as his opinion that Mr.
Parker had not transgressed the bounds of his duty, in
introducing to the public reports of conversations that
had occurreel between him and the Poor-law Commis-
sioners. Now he (Sir J. Graham) should say that such
a course of proceeding
was indeed very novel. Now, as
regarded the inquiry sought for, he begged the House
would consider what the position of the Poor-law Com-
missioners reaPly was. Parliament had given them the
absolute power of appointing and dismissing their assis-
tants, inasmuch as they were responsible for every act
done by their ass istants. The act of the assistant was the
act of the Comm issioner, for the assistant was the agent,
as it were, of the. Commissioner ; and if there rested not
such a power with, the Commissioners, how was it possible
that any business could be performed, or who would
make themselve a responsible for its due performance ?
(Hear, hear.) It would, in his opinion, be destruetive
of the entire machi-nery, if the power of that body were
questioned and, lie then felt bound to tell the Hon.

Gentleman that it was not on account of the mode
in which the Andover inquiry had been con-
ducted, nor was it for any specific act, that Mr. Parker
was dismissed. Mr. Parker had been the subordinate
officer of the Commissioners, but, in a spirit of insubor-
dination to his superiors, he quarrelled with them ; they
became dissatified, and accordingly dismissed
(Hear, hear.) He would not trespass further upon the
attention of the House, as he wished to confine himself
to an explanation relative to Mr. Parker.
Mr. FERRAND said that he might consider this, not
merely as a work house squabble, but a Somerset House
one. He thought the day had arrived when the Right
Hon. Baronet should declare by what means he became
possessed of those documents, as be considered that his
character required him to make that explanation. He
congratulated the country that bone crushing had, in,
consequence of this exposure, been abolished from work-
houses. He remembered well the treatment he received
from the Right Hon. Baronet, in reference to the erec-
tion of a rag-mill in the Halifax union. The Right Hon.
Baronet then gave a pledge to the House and the
country—and how had that pledge been fulfilled ? The
present question was an answer to that. He, was
travelling on the continent when the news of the pro-
ceedings at Andover union were published—(Hear)—
and the foreigners whom he met were quite disgusted.
He thought it was the duty of the House to grant the
Committee of Inquiry. He gave notice, that afternoon,
of his intention to add a few words to the motion of the
Hon. Member, and he hoped the inquiry would be ex-
tended to his own neighbourhood. He had no hesita-
tion in saying that these reports were drawn up by the
Special Commission, to serve the views of the Right
Hon. Baronet, and that Mr. Mott was employed for the
purpose of drawing up a false report, to crush him (Mr.
Ferrand). Mr. Mott entered the union on the 13th of
April, 1842, and in the June following the Right
' Honourable Baronet got the report drawn up. Mr.
Mott was sent down to the north of Enngland
to make these caluminous statements, and Sir John
Walsham was sent down some time afterwards to con-
firm the statements of Mr. Mott. The Hon. Gentleman,
after referring to the Keightley Union, proceeded to say
that a Committee of Inquiry had been appointed to in-
vestigate the accuracy of the statements, and he had no
hesitation in saying that it was a packed committee.
The Right Hon. Baronet resisted the motion for the
production of all papers. The Noble Lord the Member
for the city of London said that he could not under-
stand the reason of that refusal. Until the Right Hon.
Baronet made some explanation in reference to these re-
ports, he (Mr. F.) should treat any resolution of the House
with contempt.—(The Hon. Member, having been called
to order by the Speaker, withdrew the offensive expres-
sion.)—The Right Hon. Baronet used language towards
him (Mr. Ferrand) for the purpose of holding him up to
the scorn and ridicule of the country. At the time Sir
J. Walsham made his inquiry there were fifty inmates
in the union at Bingley in the state that had been de-
scribed. He could prove that there were at that place
four and five crowded in a bed. The Secretary of State
for the Home Department was to blame for all that had
taken place there. He was, to be sure, backed by the
Poor-law Commissioners and the Assistant-Commision-
ers, but it was in the power of the Right Hon. Baronet
to remove them. He hoped that this inquiry would end
in removing the Commissioners, and that the Ministry
would also be obliged to resign.
Captain PECHELL thought there was a great ne-
cessity for the production of papers for the purpose of
a thorough and searching inquiry. He thought that the
Andover Union called for some explanation, and he
trusted the result of the labours of the Committee would
be the doing away with the abuses complained of. In
one union the guardians say that they have one ton of
bones on hand, and there being a refractory pauper, the
bones were to be ground by him. It was well known
what a punishment this bone-grinding was. They
were green or damp, and it was by the severest labour
they could be reduced to powder. He hoped the Right
Hon. Baronet would reconsider his amendment, by al-
lowing this Committee to take place.
Sir R. INGLIS wished to call the attention of the
Right Hon. Baronet to the facts attending the case of
Mr. Parker. It appeared to him that that gentleman had
been too severely punishied for what was at the most an
act of indiscretion ; for it was not said that he had com-
mitted himself wilfully. He was a gentleman of an
honourable profession, yet by this act of indiscretion his
whole prospects were blighted. He trusted the Right
Hon. Baronet would see that Mr. Parker had been
treated too harshly, and that he would yet be reinstated
in his former position. If any Hon. Member would say
that Mr. Parker had been guilty of anything more than
an act of the most trifling indiscretion, he (Sir R.
Inglis) would consent to the withdrawal of the petition.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that not only had there
been indiscretion committed by the Assistant-commis-
sioner, but the consequences of his conduct were insub-
ordination and want of discipline in the workhouse.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that notice had been given
fur the production of certain papers relative to the
Andover Union, so far back as six weeks ago ; and that
had been complied with. He had read the whole of Mr.
Parker's case, and he (Mr. Duncombe) considered he
had made out a very good case. But if his case was to
be gone into by this House, it would be only to do over
again all that had been done already. He conceived that
the only mistake Mr. Parker made was in resigning his
office at all. He should have waited till the Commis-
sioners dismissed him. It often happened that Go-
vernment Ministers were recommended to resign,
but they declined to do so until a majority of this House
compelled them.—(Laughter.) He would say that as
Mr. Parker was not a member of that House, said could
not therefore lay his own case before it, it would be
much better if the Hon. Baronet opposite, instead of
laying these papers before the House, had agreed to the
vote at once.

Mr. P. BORTHWICK said he did not think that
this matter should be regarded as a mere workhouse
squabble, but as matter of somewhat more importance.
They had sent out missionaries to foreign countries to
alleviate the miseries of the natives ; but would they
not be more ready to make inquiry into the state of
Englishmen who were at home, and within reach, and
where their miseries could be more easily ascertained,
and the manner in which those miseries had been aug-
mented by those to whose tyranny they were subjected ?
He saw by the petition new before the House, that much
had been suppressed before the original inquiry that
should have been made known ; and that through the
assent and connivance of the Commissioners, evasions
had been made in the books of the guardians, and that
the Commissioners and guardians had enter& d into a com-
bination to dismiss the physician for having done his
duty.—(Cries of " Divide, divide.")
Mr. HUME said the Right Hon. Baronet opposite
had stated that acts of insubordination had been com-
mitted by the paupers. Now he (Mr. Hume) would
like to know what the nature of this insubordination
was; for he would contend that there should have been
a minute made and a record kept of the nature of these
acts.—(Hear, hear.) He would defy the Government
to refuse this inquiry, for the House would grant it it
the Right lion. Baronet attempted to screen the Com-
missioners in this way.
Lord POLLINGTON said he would only utter one
sentence, and that was, that from all he had heard this
evening upon this question he would vote for the in
quiry.
Mr. JARVIS said he considered it would be of
the greatest public importance that the Governmer t
should define the duties of the Commissioners. 1-1*
would ask, if Mr. Parker had been indiscreet before the
inquiry, why was he appointed to make this investiga-
tion?—(Hear, hear.) He would say that he was at a
loss to know what was meant by the term " refractory."
Surely, it could not be said that Mr. Parker had made
any admissions of this sort, or any admissior. even of in-
discretion. On the contrary, he made a fair and hum-
ble statement of his conduct, and, therefore, further and
strict inquiry should be made. He hoped the Right
Hon. Baronet would grant this inquiry, regardless of the
consequences to the Commissioners, and he had no doubt
that the result would prove creditable to Mr. Parker ;
but if it were not made, the public would not be satisfied.
—(Criesof " Divide, divide ")
General JOHNSON wished that a Committee of In-
quiry should be appointed. The public were not satis-
fied with the present state of affairs. Even if the com-
mittee of inquiry were appointed at a late period—even
after the recess, the Hon. Member would be content
to withdraw his motion.
Mr. AGLIONBYsaid that the public service was too
much implicated to allow this inquiry to be suppressed
and an inquiry was certainly necessary in order to clear
up the mystery that had hung round this question. The
public mind hal been for some time past absorbed in this
question. They thought that something had been keptfrorn
them, that some instructions to higher quarters had been
kept in the back-ground. A man might certainly
be a Commissioner, but would the public think that he
onght not to conduct himself as a gentlemen. There
had evidently been an act of insubordination committed
by some of the parties employed, and
more
dtohreerefore he
made thought that the inquiry ought to be general.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said that he would
not occupy the attention of the House for any length of
time. He certainly thought that the present question
ought not to pass without the attention of Government.
It was not only the Commissioners but
ut
thatthe had taken
guardians
that were implicated in the proceedings
place. These proceedings had been brought to light by
parties who were not interested. The people were com-
mitted, without any remedy, to the mercy of Poor law
Commissioners and guardians ; so that where miscon-
duct had occurred, both justice and every sound prin-
ciple of policy demanded a more extended inquiry, and
he wished that the sense of the House should be taken
upon the subject
Mr. FIELDING said, that in his opinion a Select
Committee should be appointed to carry out the in-
quiry. The public felt interested in the inquiry. They
would look to the decision of the House on this matter
with more anxiety than they would to the corn-law
question—(Hear)--and if Hon. Members wished to do
what was reasonable, the inquiry would at once
be granted.—( Hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that when it was said that he
was always ready to attend to the general feeling of the
House—nothing more than justice had been done to
him.—(Loud and prolonged cheering from all parts of
the House.) The production of certain papers on this
subject had been moved for, but he believed that a Com-
mittee of Inquiry would not be necessary if the House
should, after the production of those papers, remain of the
same opinion. He certainly was willing to withdraw his
amendment, but with respect to the motion of the Hon.
Member for Weymouth, he should offer the most decided
opposition. The Poor.law Commissioners were respon-
sible for the acts of their own servants, and therefore he
thought that no interference should be allowed with the
power of appointing those office's.
After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORP,
Mr. CHRISTIE wished to say a few words in addi-
tion. After what had fallen from the Right Hon.
Baronet, he must press his motion. He considered that
missal
essainl qoiffirAyininptuorktehre
schaouusleds
he coeval
vhaiadwi
ltehdthte) tihnevecis itsi
gation into the affairs of the Andover Union.

Mr. JARVIS rose, amidst loud cries of " Divider
divide." He should vote against the amendment. He
thought it would be better to inquire into the affairs of
the Andover Union first, and afterwards find a Com-
mitted to investigate the circumstances that had led to
Mr. Parker's dismissal. He was of opinion that many
parties in the House only supported the amendment, not
caring for Mr. Parker, but to embarrass the Right Hon.
Baronet.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") Such was his opinion,
and, under those circumstances, he should vote against
the amendment.

Dr. BOWRING said the remarks of the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir James Graham) decided him to vote for
his Hon. Friend, as the inquiry ought to be full and
complete. He must support the amendment.
Mr. `'PARLEY hoped the House would unanimously
agree to the fullest inqury. The feeling out of doors
was unanimous for an investigation. If the Poor-law
Commissioners had this unlimited power attributed to
them, in Heaven's name, let the country know how they
use it. The Right Hon. Gentleman has shown him-
self squeezable, and he (Mr. Wakley) would advise
him to yield a little further. By doing so a division
would be avoided, and the disagreeable possibility of a
defeat. He must take that opportunity, in justice to Mr.
Westlake, the medical attendant of the Andover Union,
to inform the House, and through them the guardians of
that union and the public, that he (Mr. Wakley) had
never received any communication from that gentleman
till after the period he brought the subject before the at-
tention of the House. He said so that Mr. Westlake
might not suffer in his interest, as he (Mr. Wakley)
understood that a conspiracy was on foot which was to
be carried out next Saturday by driving that gentleman
from his place. It was but proper that this ejection
should be prevented till it was known whether he de-
served dismissal or not. They had shown great sym
pathy to the legal gentleman (Mr. Parker) who had
been dismissed, and he trusted they would also extend
it to the medical profession which was attacked in the
person of Mr. Westlake.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he had always maintained
that the Poor-law Commissioners were responsible to the
Home Secretary, and that the Home Secretary was re-
sponsible to the Honse of Commons. The Right Hon.
Baronet therefore was bound to satisfy the House re-
specting the proceedings of the Poor-law Commissioners.
If Mr. Parker had been guilty of insuborlination, the
Poor-law Commissioners had a right to dismiss him ;
but that ought not to preclude inquiry. The question
was whether Mr. Parker was in the wrong, or the
Poor-law Commissioners ; and in order to arrive at
the truth there ought to be an inquiry. He called on
the Right Hon. Baronet to concede the whole inquiry at
once, and not make the half-concession he had done, as
he was sure to be defeated. Grant the Committee for
the full inquiry at once, and it would soon come out
which party was in the wrong.
Sir B. HALL briefly stated his intention of voting
for the amendment,
The gallery was then cleared for a division.
On our re-admission to the gallery, we found that the
numbers were—

For Mr. Christie's amendment 92
Against it
Majority for the amendment
THE NUNS OF MINSK

-23

Mr. COWPER then rose to move that copies of dis-
patches received by the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, containing information about the persecution
inflicted upon the Basilian nuns of Minsk, should be laid
upon the table. (The Hon. Member then referred to
the punishments which were said to have been inflicted
upon the nuns of Minsk.) The report of the horrible
barbarities perpetrated upon them was authenticated by
the deposition of each of the unfortunate victims. They
were employed in works to which they were altogether
unaccustomed, and of six hundred and fifty-eight that
were alive at the commencement of the persecutions,
which lasted seven years, only fourteen were now living.
If the history of their persecutions was true, it was a
most lamentable and awful one—(Hear, hear)—and one
which cast a stigma upon the age in which we lived.—
(Hear, hear.) It was true that some people were in-
clined to disbelieve the statements, from the very
atrocity of the affair ; but that was no evidence that the
cruelties complained of had not been exercised.—(Hear,
hear.) Indeed, the annals of religious persecu-
tion showed us that such cruelties had never
been exercised within the memory of man.
In past ages we had seen, by the annals of the In-
quisition, that scenes of great horror and unprovoked
slaughter had occurred. In England itself we had had
too many instances of horrid barbarites committed some
centuries ago on account of religion. But the Inquisi-
tion had been put down by the public voice of indigna-
tion of the civilised world. The persecutions to which
he had alluded as having occurred in England had stig-
matised every one connected with them. The leader of
the Reformation had been blamed in the severest manner.
And a sovereign living in those times had been branded
with the name of " Bloody Queen Mary." And although
such barbarities had been perpetrated years ago, it was
no reason why we should not show our utmost indigna-
tion at the late persecution in Russia. On the contrary,
he thought that it became the civilised portion of the com-
munity to protest loudly against such barbarities, and so
induce the Government of every country to prevent the
holding of certain religious opinions to be placed in the
same category with those offences which might be con-
aidered as injurious to private individuals in the Govern-
ment of the country. If they allowed transactions of
this nature to be perpetrated abroad, without attempting
to ascertain whether they were capable of proof, and if
proved, without expressing their sorrows and grief at them,
he conceived that we lived in a country where we had not
the advantage of a free course to pursue with respect to
our religious opinions ; and, further, he conceived that
they should not be discharging the duties which they
owed to society at large.—(Hear, hear.) There had
been many opportunities of disproving the statements of
these offences, if the reports were false. The accounts
had spread all over Euro ,e. They bad been published
in Rome, when the Emperor himself was present, and
when he had, of course, ample opportunities of dis-
proving them.—(Hear, hear.) And until they ha I some
superior information, which he (Mr. Cowper) had not
yet seen, they had no other alternative hut to accept the
accounts as true. Now, he did not necessarily accuse
the Emperor of Russia with being cognisant of the
varieties of torture to which these unfortunate
nuns had heti' subjected ; but he thought that
that illustrious individual could not be acquitted
of having at least permitted the exercise of such perse-
cutions in his dominions. He hoped that the House
would not object to his motion, as the venerable Greek
church, which had been charged with these cruelties,
might then have an opportunity of clearing itself from
the charges. He understood that there were authentic
documents in the hands of the Government respecting
this subject, and he trusted that they would not
have any objection to lay them on the table of the
House.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. T. WYSE seconded the motion, and in so doing
thought that it was well known that the report
of these atrocities, which were of the most ex-
traordinary nature, had been contradicted by the
Warsaw Correspondent of an Edinburgh journal, but
by way of rejoinder to that contradiction, a full detail
had been published at Rome by the abbess of the con-
vent at Minsk, under the sanction of other authentic
authorities. Now, either that document must be a com-
plete fabrication, or the statements of the Warsaw cor-
respondeut were untrue. Now he would ask on which
side was the truth likely to be ? The Hon. Gentleman
concluded by making a few further remarks in support
of the motion, which were not very distinctly heard in

_
Sr R. PEEL—Sir, I am not enabled to communicate
to this House any official dispatches which would throw
a light on the painful subject to which this motion refers.
Her Majesty's Government has not received from its
representative at. the Court of St. Petersburg, or from
any other quarter, any official or authentic information
on the subject. The only communication we have re-
ceived is from the British Consul at Warsaw, a most re-
spectabl.. and amiable gentleman, who, seeing the reports
in the French newspapers that the barbarities—for
they can be called by no other name—had been commit-
ted in Poland, thought it his duty to write to the
Stiencertelytatry hatoift Swtaastea feoor Foreign
napiete error Affairstosappannsde statethat dis-
tinctly
thing of the kind had taken place in Poland, and his
confident belief was that the report must have been with-
out foundation, or must have been grossly exaggerated.
That is the whole of the information we have received,
consequently it will be impossible for her Majesty's
Government to produce any official information on this
subject which would throw any light whatever upon it. Now
Sir, I should feel the deepest regret if there were any
foundation for these reports. I have certainly a strong
persuasion that nothing of the kind has taken place
either with the sanction or with the knowledge of the
Government of Russia. I understand, from private
communication which I have had with the representative
of the Emperor of Russia at this Court, that when the
Emperor was at Rome, on the matter being mentioned by
the Pope, he expressed great surprise, and stated to the
Pope, that if anything of the kind had occurred, it had
been entirely without his authority, and without his
knowledge ; kut a strict inquiry should be instituted.
This fortifies one in the belief that if anything of the
kind had given sanction to these statements, it was with-
out the authority of the Government of Russia, and that
an inquiry would be instituted by that Government into
the facts of the case. Sir, I should therefore strongly
advise every individual Member of this House to suspend
his judgment on this matter. It is very reissible, and I
hope that the result may proreit to be so that these re-
ports are without foundation, or have been much exag-
gerated. But in our capacity as a branch of the Legisla-
ture, I still more strongly urge you not to set the example
of interference with the acts of another Government. It
would be impossible for any minister, 4,r any Govern-
ment, cr any party, to repress the outbreak of those
ft elings which naturally arise on statement of facts like
those to which the Hon. Gentlemqn had referred. I
cannot divest myself of individual feeling, and I declare
that if this statement should be founded in fact, I should
view with the greatest regret such a violation of the
rights of conscience and humanity. But, as a house of
private feelings may be,
Commons, I advise youtoonesntsoblaischcoaupnt, recwehdaetnetvoe your
fr
inter-
ference with the domestic aflairs of other Governments.
How have we ourselves been occupied to-night? What has
formed the subject of discussion for four or five hours
before the Hon. Gentleman brought forward his motion?
An allegation that inhabitants of this country—the
of this realm—have been employed—there being
charge of poverty—
had been employed grinding bones, some of
src
those bones
supposednsub6iteheetharge against them than the
to have been human bones, and that their sub-
sistence was so scanty, that on their tin ling bones in a
decomposed state, from which marrow could be ex-
tracted, a general engagement of the parties employed
took place to get possession of one of those bones, and
that the party getting possession of one of these bones
was obliged to hide it, in order to derive some suste-
nance from it. Can anything be worse than that ?—and
yet we should deeply resent it if one of the Chambers of
France thought themselves justified by a regard to prin-
ciple to take any notice of that. Surely, vv e th)uld re-

quire from them that they should place confidence in
the justice of the House o; Commons, and in
the justice of the Executive Government. That con-
fidence would be perfectly justified, for my Right Hon.
Friend has stated that directions have already been
given by him for the suppression of this practice in
every union workhouse. 'But that is beside the question
—no other Government has a right to interfere in our
proceedings. Ido conceive that nothing would be more
injurious than that we, as our example is looked up to
by other countries, should, prompted by feelings in
themselves natural and laudable, attempt the establish.
ment of a precedent by an interference of this natare in
the domestic concerns of another country. Again I must
repeat that I hope every gentleman will suspend his
judgment with respect to the truth of this story. It is
highly probable that it is untrue, or it has been grossly
exaggerated, and I hope they will be individually satis-
fied with the assurance that the Government of Russia
has undertaken to make inquiry into this subject. I
have stated to the Hon. Gentleman that I have no
dispatches to lay on the table. That assurance
will probably induce him to withdraw his motion, and I
must strongly recommend you not to establish a prece-
dent, which I think most injurious, and fraught with
danger as inducing other powers to act on our example
for worse purposes than could possibly be imputed to us
now.
Mr. COWPER said that after what had fallen from
the Right Hon. Baronet, he should withdraw his motion.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he had stated every thing
that he knew to the Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE called the attention of
the Right Hon. Baronet to the address that was pre-
sented to her Majesty immediately after the visit of the
Emperor or Russia to this country. He was sorry to
hear the Right Hon. Baronet mix up the Andover case
with the atrocities perpetrated on the nuns of Minsk.
Ile c.•nsiderfd that it could not be compared with the
atrocities committed under the Russian autocrat. He
hoped, however, that as an extended intercour:e was
going on between this country and the court of Russia,
we shall be able shortly to hear that the Emperor of
that country has estatilished an inquiry upon the subject
as they had done in this country.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON stated that the principles of
such a policy as that propounded by the Right Hon.
Baronet did not correspond with the efforts which this
country had made, and was still making, to procure the
abolition cf the slave trade. _ _

HOWARD considered that public opinion
should be expressed in a dignified manner upon the sub-
ject. He hoped the time would speedily arrive when all
the subjects under the Emperor of Russia's rule would
have a perfect liberty of conscience in religious matters.
Doctor BOWRING considered that the Emperor of
Russia would be glad for having the opportunity afforded
him of defending himself against these opinicns which
had been gathering around him.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said that in consequence of the
lateneness of the hour, he would withdraw his notice
relative to vexatious objections against' votes, and would
mould move it on Tuesday next.
Sir R. PEEL, in answer to a question of Mr. Philip
Howard, said that he proposed going into committee on
the corn-laws before he went into the committee of
supply.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at Twelve o'clock.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
(YESTERDAY.)

Sub-Committee No. 1.
This Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, Mr. Strutt,
chairman.
The Committee upon assembling intimated to the gentle-
men of the press that they were most willing to afford every
accommodation to the representatives of the various journals
in the execution of their duties. They, therefore, appointed
the side table for them on the left of the Chairman, which was
the best arrangement that, under the circumstances, could
be made.
LONDON, WARWICK, LEAMINGTON,
AND KIDDERMINSTER.
This adjourned case was then called on.
Mr. Coates appeared for the promoters.
Mr. BURKB proceeded with the allegations in the petitions
against the Bill. They consisted of errors in the plans and
sections, but none of them were of vital importance to the
Bill. A few were sustained and many were abandoned.
Mr. Samuel Hughes, C.E., was called by the opponents to
prove errors in the plans and sections.
A few arguments by Mr. COATES were sustained and
others overruled.
The next allegation of any importance against the Bill,
was that the plans and sections deposited with the clerks of
the peace differed from those lodged at the Private Bill.
office.
After some discussion on both sides, it was agreed upon by
the parties to go through the allegations between themselves,
so as to save the time of the Committee.
This arrangement was concurred in by the Chairman, and
the further consideration of the case was adjourned to Mon-
day next.
THE EAST AND WEST INDIA DOCKS AND
BIRMINGHAM JUNCTION RAILWAY.
Mr. Gregory appeared for the promoters of this Bill.
The formal proofs were gone into, and the further hearing of
the case was adjourned till Monday.