The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-25 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 25, 1848.

I hereafter be shaken by the inquiries now going on, he
should be disposed at the proper period to supp, rt such
a ;notion a-3 !he present.
Mr. URQUHART thought every means ought to be
taken to keep clown the expenditure of the country.
The philanthropic objects of the promoters of the pre-
sent system had completely failed. They had laboured
under a mighty delusion, and, recovering from their
insanity, it was their duty to review what they at
tempted. He returned his thanks, therefore, to the
Hon. Member who had brought forward this subject,
and he appealed to Members on the Liberal side of the
House to give the motion their support.
Capt. PECHELL defended the squadron on the coast
of Africa. Our cruisers there were employed in the
most perilous of duties; and, instead of getting re-
warded, they were attacked and sneered at. lie opposed
the motion because it was ill-timed, and because he did
not think the premises were proved.
Mr. uurr, as chairman of the Committee to which
the House had devolved the whole of this most serious
and important question, wished to remark that they
would scarcely he acting a wise or a prudent part if they
were to pass an opinion upon any one particular portion
of it, as proposed upon this occasion.
Mr. MOWATT, having made up his mind to support
this motion, wished to explain vyhy he had done so, lest
be might be charged with being friendly to the slave
trade. After the clear statement the Hon. Member had
made, and in the absence of all explanation, he saw no
other conclusion at which an unbiassed mind could
arrive, except that the system had entirely failed.—
(Hear.) It appeared that the present system cost at
least a million of money and not less thin 250 lives a
year. Were we justified, in the face of this evidence,
in continuing such an expenditure and such a sacrifice?
He thought not, and therefore he should support the
motion.

Viscount PALMERSTON did not dispute that this
was a subject deserving most attentive consideration at
all times, and which might very properly be brought
forward when a vote for supply was demanded. But, on
the other hand, considering that the whole of the sub
ject was referred, not long ago, to the examination of a
Select Committee, he did not think the Hon. Member
bad exercised a sound discretion in now bringing the
subject forward. If the Hon. Member thought he had
anything to prove, the Select Committee was open to
him before which to prove it.—(Hear, hear.) But let
him not be understood on this occasion as admitting the
facts which the Hon. Member had affirmed. This was
not the season to enter on their consideration. The
House must remember that those means for the sup-
pression of the slave trade were the result of no
slight consideration. They had been framed in con-
sequence of anxious wishes - expressed in petitions
by the country, and of anxious consideration of
those petitions on the, part of former Parlia-
ments. It was said that they had tried the
system for thirty years, and that it was proved to have
failed But he denied that they had tried it, for thirty
years in any manner likely to be effective. I.Teitil the
year 1639 the slave trade was to a great extent free
from molestation; and therefore, up to that time at
least, it was riot right to say that the system, in any
degree, had had a fair trial. If it were said, however,
that it felled since 1839, he begged leave to express
doubts as to the accuracy of that conclusion. The Hon.
Member argued that the system had failed because the
prices of slaves were so considerable in America; but
surely this circumstance of great price demonstrated
that the price was not equal to the demand.—(Hear,
hear.) They must also remember that successive Go-
vernments had, by their negotiations, persuaded many
countries to abandon this trade. France and Holland
no longer pursued it, Spain and Portugal scarcely
pursued it, and, as stated by the Honourable Member,
the trade was almost confined to a colony of Spain
and to the empire of Brazil. Ia that way they must
have prevented an immense deal of human suffer-
ine.—(Hear, hear.) Now, people ran away..with the
idea, and the assertion passed from mouth to 'mouth,
that the means taken to put down the traffic greatly ag-
,gravated its horrors. lie (Lord Palmerston) denied
this conclusion. Was there anything in the present day
equal to the horrors of the middle passage in former
times?—(Elcar.) And upon either principle they might
feel assured that these horrors were exaggerated. The
slave-trader's interest was diametrically opposed to any
such cruelties as those described. The more slaves he
landed sakely and in good health the greater his profits;
and therefore it any such cruelties existed as those
described they mieht merely be attributed to the blind-
ness of avarice, which would operate equally whether
we pursued the existing system of prevention or entirely
abandoned it. However, this was not the proper time to
go fully into this great question. His objection at this
time was that the whole subject had been referred to a
Select Committee that was now sitting, and that there-
fore this motion was premature.—(Cheers )
Mr. DISRAELI objected to the proposal made by the
Noble Lord to refer such questions as were before the
House to any Select Committee. They were matters
for the consideration of the House, and not for a Select
Committee. The Cabinet ought to determine upon
them. Two Select Committees had already been ap-
pointed on that same evening, and if that mode of
dealing with public questions was persevered in, the
whole force of Parliament would presently be absorbed
by Select Committees. He wished some Hon. Member
would move for a return of the number of Select Com-
mittees that had been recently appointed. It would be
one of the most singular documents over published by
the House. The Noble Lord (Palmerston) had asserted
that the system of prevention had not yet received a fair
trial. But he (Mr. Disraeli) differed with the Noble
Lord, and was prepared to argue the points on the
broadest grounds. Even, however, admitting that the
system bad been successful in all respects, was it, he
asked, one which it was expedient to persevere in?
Taken in that light, he maintained it would not sustain
examination, much less the positive declaration of the
Noble Lord.—(Hear.) What could be urged in de-
fence of the expenditure of 1,000,000/. a year in addition
to the 80,000,000/. that had been wasted during the last
thirty years ? The Noble Lord had said nothing what-
ever to shake his faith in the statements of his (Mr.
Disraeli's) lion. Friend. The Noble Lord had asserted
that the traders to the coast of Africa were prohibited
from carrying water casks lest they should.bo turned to
the purposes of slavers. His (Hr. Disraeli's) Hon.
Friend asserted that the consequence of that regulation
was to prevent the slaves from having more than one
drink of water in two days during the transit through
the cruising grounds of the African coast. So that he
was entitled to say the sufferings of the slaves were not
decreased by time regulations now in force, and that, on
the contrary, those sufferings,had been very greatly in-
creased by the course pursued in consequence of the
legislative interference. Under these circumstances,
he thought it could hardly be contended that the system
was one which should be upheld in a time of financial
embarrassment like the present. Hon. Members would
incur a great responsibility if they did not attend to the
representation of the Hon. Member for Inverness, and
support the motion which he had introduced to their
notice.
Lord PALNIERSTON explained that the right of
search given up in 1845 was not that which had been
obtained in 1537. The latter referred to the Spanish
flab, and was still retained by this country.
Sir T. D. ACLANI) objected to any chauge in so im-
portant a portion of our policy as our maritime police for
the suppression of the slave trade without due and care-
ful consideration. He did not think that after a single
night's debate, we should hastily overturn a system
which we had perseveringly followed for upwards of 30
vears.—(Hear, hear.) As to the arguments which had
been adduced against the maintenance of the African
squadron on the score of health, he fouad a sufficient
answer to them in the returns of casualties, from which
it appeared that the loss of life on the African station
was as low as might be expected in the most healthy
station in the world. Neither could it successfully be
contended that it had failed in its mission. From Go-
vernor Macdonald's report it appeared that the slave
trade had been effectually checked along a great extent
of coast, and that legitimate commerce was gradually but
surely taking its place. Having these views, he felt
bound to divide with the Government against the motion
of the Hon, Member for Inverness.
Lord J RUSSELL wished to address a few observa-
tions to the Ilouse, not upon the general question as to
the efficacy of our system for putting down slavery and
the slave trade, but upon the particular question as it
stood at that moment. He would venture to submit to
the House thatefor more than twenty years, under dif-
ferent Admini;trations, they had carried on the present
system; and, in carrying it on, had spent eighty millions
for the suppression of slavery. Suppose, then, that a
prima fade ease could be made out against the system,
could anything be more reasonable than that the House
should wait for the report of the Committee of Inquiry
they had appointed, and not hastily decide the question
on a night devoted to the army estimates, and when
many Members must have thought that no such question
would come on ?—(Hear, bear.) The House had ap-
pointed a select Committee on the motion of the Hon.
Member for Gateshead ; that Committee was at present
sitting, and when its labours came to a condo
sion the House would have in the evidence full
materials for a decision, and if such evidence went to
confirm the statement of the Hon. Member for Inverness
it would be competent to them to accede to the course
which he proposed. But it might be advisable to take
other steps to modify the system, without abandoning it
altogether. Part of a system might be founded on a mis-
taken policy, and yet to abandon at once our whole
scheme of maritime police was a thing not to be done
without full and searching inquiry. (Hear, hear.)
He thought there could be no doubt, even in the minds of
those who contended for the non-success of our measures
on the coast, that a large portion of Africa had been
relieved from the slave trade, and that legitimate com-
merce had been extensively established in its place.
Surely then, even if the policy were objected to,
it would not be humane at once to withdraw our squadron
from those parts, and t i expose them anew to all the
horrors of the slave trade.—(llear, hear.) Therefore the
question before the house was not simply a question of
whether the present system of slave-trade prevention
should be kept up. There would be found mixed up
with it various considerations, various questions of policy
on which it would be necessary to deliberate, t.nd many of
which it might not' be found convenient to abandon.
The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, presuming
that the case had been made out, referred to the ques-
tion as merely one of economy; but he (Lord John
Russell) would ask the House whether a system which
had been so long established, and for such a purpose,
should be suddenly abandoned on mere grounds of eco-
nomy.—(Hear.) It was a question of humanity, and
would not be hastily decided by the House, even to save
a million a year. What he wished the House to con-
sider was, that the question should not be decided sum-
marily on the statement of the Hon. Member, on a day
devoted to other business. The Hon. Member fur Mon-
trose had said that with fair play free labour could sue-
cessfully compete with slave labour. He (Lord John
Russell) inclined to that opinion, but from one cause or
other free labour had not
.as yet had a fair trial, and

that in his opinion formed another reason for careful
deliberation. They might tied that a great portion of
the present system was wrong, and if in addition they
found that free labour pi oduce cool.] successfully com-
pete with the pro vase of slave kbevr, they might pro-
ceed with confidence in their alterations without having
at the same time to reproach themselves with abandon-
ing for the sake of economy the higher interests of hu-
manity which they had previously been successful in up-
holding.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir It. PEEL said that the pre: ent was not the occa-
sion to enter into a discusion on the merits of the treaty
of 1845, or as to whether the arrargements then entered
into with France were more efficacious than the previous
right of search. Ilia object in rising was merely to
explain how far that treaty interfered with our pre-
vious right of search. We had then the right of
search with regard to Spain, Portugal, and Brazil;
we retained it still, and with every country except
France, which country had no interest in the prose-
cution of the slave trade. He could only say with
respect to the policy of the treaty of 1845, that when
the subject was discussed with a completee knowledge
of all the facts, the policy of Government received the
unanimous approbation of the House. The Noble
Lord opposite (Palmerston) had questioned that policy;
but so convinced was he that the House did not concur
in his views, that he contented himself with a perfectly
safe and harmless motion for papers, and even in that
he found only 53 Members to support him.—( Hear, hear.)
As to the right of search enjoyed by this country, in
1845, we had not the right reciprocally over the oast
coast of Africa, and only over certain portions of the
west, together with Cuba, Brazil, and Madagascar. His
belief was that our right of search did not extend be-
yond the tenth degree of south latitude, and did not
extend to several parts of the western chest of Africa,
where the slave trade was carried on, and to no part of
the eastern coast. Under the treaty of 1845, France
and England were to grant warrants reciprocally, each
to authorise the right of search to the cruisers of the
other Powers, but England was not permitted to ask
for warrants for more than double the number of ships
employed by France in this service. So that it would
be in the power of France, if' at any time she should
entertain any jealousy as to the amount of our naval
force engaged on the coast of Africa, to decrease it by
limiting the number of vessels employed by herself. But
the right of visit existed as it did before. France did
not carry on the slave trade—it had never been sus-
pected that she did, but it was apprehended that ships of
other nations engaged in that trade might assume the
French flag, and the right of search was effectual as to
these. But the right of visit was still possessed in all
cases, and that right was fully admitted by France.—
(Hear.) It occurred to the Government in 1845 that if
they could obtain the cordial concurrence of France in
the endeavour to put down the slave trade, the moral
influence of the two Powers acting together would be
more effectual in furthering that object than if we re-
tained the right of search and insisted on the treaty of
1839.—(hear.) The House must not, however, suppose
that the right of search had been in any way affected
by the treaty of 1845, as far as it related to the vessels
of those nations which carried on the slave trade. His
impression was now the same as it had been in 1845, that
the treaty then entered into with France was an advan-
tage rather than an injury, so far as the suppression of
the slave trade was concerned. He should vote against the
motion of the Hon. Member for Inverness. He meant not
by that to say that it might not be a proper one
as an amendment under other circumstances. However
inconvenient a course it might be in some cases to call
in the aid of a Select Committee on matters which pro-
perly fell within the province of the Government, he was
not sure whether this was not a case in which the House
was specially called or. to undertake an inquiry, for ha
could not forget that the suppression of the slave trade
was a policy imposed on the Government by the public, of
which the House of Commons was the representative.
He could not forget• that in 1859 the House unani-
mously addressed the Crown to enter into fresh treaties,
and to invoke the aid Of other powers in concert with
ourselves to put down 'the traffic in slaves—(Hear,
hear) —and surely it would not be wise, .without full
inquiry as to the efficacy oflthe system which had been
established under the treaties entered into in conse-
quence of that address, now to address the Crown to
negotiate for the abrogation of those treaties.—(Bear.)
Seeing that an inquiry was going or, in which the
opinions of those engaged in the suppression of the
slave trade would be elicited, and all the facts connected
with the subject brought out, he should decline stating
any opinion he.z.,might have formed, founded on the in-
formation which had reached him, and would postpone
his judgment until.the report of the Committee should
be produced, and the whole evidence 'should be before
the Itouse. Setting aside, therefore, the important
consideration, as to whether our policy in respect to the
sugar duties had given an encouragement to the cultiva-
tion of slave-labour sugar, and without reference to the
circumstances under which the treaty with France was
concluded, he thought that to fetter the hands of Go-
vernment by a resolution adopted, not only without in-
quiry, but in the face of inquiry—(Hear, hear)—would
be, not to increase the influence of the executive Go-
vernment with France, nor add. to the authority of the
House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BOUVERIE said the whole question was, whe-
ther the policy was right or wrong. The motion might
have been inopportunely introduced, but being before
the House, he must vote for it. lie could not consent
to vote the public money for purposed unconnected with
the government of the country.
The House then divided, when there appeared;.F-
For the original motion
For Mr. Beillie'e amendment .. , 80
Majority —l36
DESTRUCTION OF TENANTS' HOUSES BY
IRISH LANDLORDS.
The question for going into Committee of Supply
having been again put,

•
SCROPI rose to move an humble address to
her Majesty, that she will be graciously pleased to direct
an indictment to be preferred by her Majesty's law
officers, against ,the parties concerned in the illegal
destruction of several houses, and the forcible ejectment
of their inmates, which took place within tbe union of
Galway, on or about New Year's-day last, and which
appears to have occasioned the deaths of several of the
unfortunate beings so ill-treated, by the evidqnce taken
on oath before Major M'Kie, poor-law inspectpr of that
union, by order of the commissioners; which evidence
is printed at length in p. 467 of the fifth series of papers.
relating to the relief of distress and state of the Unions
in Ireland; thereby to show, by a practical example to
the people of Ireland, that the law affords its ptotection
to the lives and property of the poor as well as of the
rich, and that it can and will be enforced by the Go-
vernment when broken against the one nu lilts than
against the other.—(The Hon. Gentleman on rising was
received by general cries of" Oh," but on producing the
blue book, and essaying to quete evidence therefrom,
was met by such a storm of disapprobation that he de-
clared his reluctance to proceed iu the face of so much
impatience and discontent, and gave notice that he would
reproduce his motion on the next supply night, which
announcement gave rise to a general cheer.)
Mr. E. 13. ROC.NIE expressed a hope that the Hon.
Member would not allow the impatience of the House
to prevent him from persisting in his motion, which was
really a most important one,—(Hear, hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that there was
no doubt as to the law upon the subject. The landlord,
upon giving notice to quit, or upon the tenancy expiring
had a right to enter peaceably; but if he did so forcibly
he was liable to be indicted for a forcible entry; and if
that force amounted to a riot, he might be indicted for a
riot. If the entry w:s made before the notice to quit
expired, the tenant bad a remedy at civil law; but it
was not at all usual So make what amounted to a private.
wrong the subject of a public indictment by the Govern-'
ment.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that this question was
really too important to allow it to be burned, and he
joined the Hon. Member for Cork in hoping the Hon.
Member for Stroud would not wait for another Commit-
tee of Supply, but at once proceed with his motion. The
barbarity committed in the Union of Galway, to which
his motion referred, wai worse than anything that had
occurred in any civilised country.
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY had ascer-
tained that the act was a most monstrous and cruel one;
and the sooner the Government made it their practice
to insti,ute proceedings in such cases the better. 2.
Mr. REYNOLDS asked whether Irish slavery and
murder of the Irish people were not more fitting for, the
consideration of that House than the mitigation of Afri-
can slavery, upon which subject they, had been engaged
for the last five hours.—(lleur, head.) Mr. Blake, the
landlord involved in these vjectieents, had admitted that
he was guilty of an illegal act in turning these, people
out in the bleak month of December, by which,some of
their lives had been sacrificed ; lie therefore asked the
Government whether that gerAleman was to be per-
mitted to remain in the comission of the. peace for the
county of Galway ?--(Hear i hear.) He firmly but
respectfully cautioned the House against passing over
offences such as Mr. Blake had committed, for if the
people of Ireland were left to think that they were to
have no redress under such `atrocious circumstances, he
feared the total loss of their confidence, which was
every day diminishing, arra likely to lrcotire " small by
degrees and beautifully less."—(Laughter) Ile called
upon the Govorninenteto institute an inquiry into this
case, and if they had not the power to prosecute Mr.
Blake criminally for he murderous offences with which
he was charged, at limst to deprive him of the commis-
sion of the peace.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL said the declaration of the Attorney-
General, that Government had no-power to interfere,
rendered it the more incumbent on that House to exer-
cise whatever moral power they possessed to put aneno
of
to such practices as wer3 described in the motion the
Hon. Member for Stroud. The Right Hon. Baronet
then referred to the report of Major M•Kie, from which
he said it appeared that a more grievous injustice had
been committed than they were likely to find in any
other country.—(Hear, hear.) Major in reply
to the commission, stated that it replied this forcible
ejectment had been illegal; that rouse had not been
served; that it had been under circiunstances of great
cruelty; that the occupiers had been turned out
of their houses at nightfall; that they and thstir help-
less
children had been left exposed to a cold bleak
shore on a stormy winter niliht; that some of the
children were sick ; that their prayers for mercy were
in vain, and that many of them had since died ; that he
had visited the ruins of their huts, and found many of
those unfortunate people still living amongst the ruins,
but many of them so weak that they could scarcely
stand. He was sure that the mere recital of these facts,
accompanied with the expression of sympathy and in-
dignation on the part of that House, would not be with-
out its influence—(Loud cheers);— and he thought that
the House owed an obligation to the Hon. Member for
Stroud, in not having permitted this ponderous volume
(alluding to the blue book) to rest in oblivion, and that
he had done r ight in drawing the attention of the House
to it.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME. wished to ask whether or not there was

a Government in Ireland ; and, if so, why such a
document as that just read by tie Right Hon.
Baia net the Member for Tainworth should have been
allowed to have rem:hied useless for SO long a time ?
Where were the public off.,,ers of Ireland ? le there
were any it would be Touch better to remove tht rn, and
leave the Irish to govern themselves.—(hear, hear.) He
was not surprised that repeal should be demanded, when
such atrocious proceedings as those disclosed in the blue
book before the House were allowed to pass with impu-
nity. Much had been said to-night of the horrors and
miseries of the middle passage, but these were as nothing
compared with the miseries described in this report.—
(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Ilume) put the Government on
their trial, and asked them why they had nut taken
cognisance of these transactions, and if the law was
insufficient to have proposed a statute to prevent the
recurrence of such a state of things? He considered the
Government or its officers were much to blame, and it
behoved them to lose no time in seeking powers to pre-
clude the possibility of such atrocities being repeated.
Sir G. GREY said that if the Hon. Member would read
the papers now before him, he would find that it was
through the instrumentality of the Government that
these transactions had been disclosed and made known.
He begged further to say that the question he had
answered the other day had no relation to this case of
Mr. Blake, but referred generally to the parties who had
illegally destroyed the houses of these poor people. The
opinion he had then expressed had been confirmed by
that of the Hon. and Learned Member for the Univer-
sity of Dublin (Mr. Napier), viz., that the papers con-
tained no statement of facts upon which any criminal
prosecution could be instituted; but at the same time he
had stated his views as to the character of those facts,
and had not attempted to conceal those opinimis.—
(Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friend near him (Sir
William Somerville) was in communication with the
Lt.rd Lieutenant of Ireland upon the subject, and any
measure which the Government could take would be
adopted by his Noble Friend. He must remark that there
was a Member of this House who was connected with
this case; he alluded to Mr. St. George, and on this
matter he (Sir G. Grey) had himself communicated
with Mr. Hatchett, the Solicitor-General for Ireland
who held that though there was an apparent illegality,
still there had been no real illegality in the proceedings
of that gentleman, for the middlemen having been served
with notice, the law did not require service of notice on
the tenants in occupation. He stated this to show that
the subject had not escaped the attention of the Go-
vernment, who had every desire to afford protection to
parties who had been thus treated. Let it not therefore
be supposed that there had been a case
.for prosecution,
and that the Government had shrunk from instituting
it.--(Hear, hear.)

Mr. STAFFORD thought that the conduct of the
Government in Ireland was free from blame, and that
these monstrous evils, and infamous and cruel transac-
tions, originated in the refusal of lion. Members con-
nected with Ireland to enter into an inquiry to reduce
the area of taxation under the poor-law. Such a reduc-
tion would have compelled landlords like Mr. Blake to
support their own tenantry, instead of turning them out
of their holdings and sending them for support on their
neighbours. It was monstrous, after all that had been
said about agrarian disturbances and incendiary feelings
in Ireland, to find that the greatest oppressors of the
poor were those who lived amongst them, and who ought
to be their protectors.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. O'CONNOR conceived that the opposition to
the motion of the lion. Member for Stroud (Mr. P.
Scrope) arose from a general hostility to hear this
question at all.—(No, no.) That hostility had been
manifested, and then up got the Attorney-General who,
he must say, in a most heartless manner, coolly told the
House there was no law to mtet this cafe.—(Oh, oh.)
It was a matter of fact, that when Irish questions were
brought before the House, they were met with cold in-
difference.—(Loud cries of "No, no.") He repeated
that they were met with cold indifference even though
the people of Ireland were known to be in a state of
starvation. If there was no law to punish those
offenders, why had not a measure for that purpose been
brought forward by the Government on this information,
which had already been so long in their possession. If
such acts were committed in England the landlords would
not tol, rate them for one moment. It was time to
legis!ate for Ireland. He would not talk of moral force
or moral impressions, but he told the Gavernment that
the Irish people looked upon them as an exterminating,
crucifying, and destroying Government—that the land-
lords received every advantage and assistance, but that
the lives of the population were regarded as the lives of
so many slaves. He told the Noble Lord at the head of
the Government that, looking at what was passing in
other countries, this was not a time to trifle with the
people of Ireland. Talk of Poland—that land was redolent
with the blood of illustrious martyrs, while the soil of
Ireland stank with the dead carcases of a starved popu-
lation.—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh.")
Sir H. VERNEY denied the assertion that the House
was indifferent to the condition of Ireland; on the con-
trary, he maintained that the great body of the Members
of that House were anxious to promote the welfare,
prosperity, comfort, and advance in civilization of the
whole Irish nation. Let not the Hon. Member for Not-
tingham (Mr. F. O'Connor) hold out anything like a
threat to the English Members, for this country had
nothing to fear from the tempest which had swept over
other portions of the globe.
Mr. OSBORNE remarked that, after the extract read
by the Right lion. Baronet the Member for Tamworth,
he was not surprised at the warmth of indignation which
the Hon. Member for Nottingham had manifested, but
at the same time he thought the Hon. Member had done
a great injustice to the Hon. and Learned Attorney-
General; for nobody acquainted with that lion. and
Learned Gentleman could ever accuse him of being
actuated by heartless or unkiad motives.—(Hear, hear.)
11 Until the extract was read, he (Mr. Osborne) was not
aware of the grave charges which this blue book con-
tained, and he now repeated the question which he
believed had already been put to the Government,—
viz., whether the Lord Chancellor of Ireland had com-
municated with Mr. Blake regarding his position in the
commission of the peace? It was true that Mr. Blake
denied that he had been present, though his son had
been so, but he admitted that the proceedings were
illegal and had been taken without his sanction, and he
had promised to send an affidavit to the fact on the
following day; " but," added Major M‘Kie in his
report, " I have never heard from him since." In
this state of things he (Mr. Osborne) contended that the
Lord Charm:Altar of Ireland should inquire into the
matter, and if Mr. Blake was found to hive been cogni-
zant of these infamous, cruel, and illegal proceedings,
he ought immediately to be dismissed from the commis-
sion of the peace, and, if the law permitted it, to be
criminally prosecuted for this transaction. (Hear,
hear.) Unless the Government took up this question
with a 'strong hand and with a searching inquiry, it
would be impossible to answer f'or the peace of the
country.
Colonel DUNNE thought it was essential not merely
to inquire into the conduct of Mr. Blake, but into that
of the relieving officer of the district, for not having
supplied those unfortunate people who had been turned
out of their habitations without food.

Mr. MONSELL remarked that they had not perished
for want of food, but frcm exposure on a cold winter
night; and he was of opinion that if the Government
proceeded with vigour, they might establish against the
perpetrators of this act the crime of manslaughter. He
entreated the Government to proceed with energy, in
order to show the people of Ireland that they were as
mindful of the lives of the poor as they were careful of
the lives of the rich.

Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that as the question had
again been raised as to whether it was possible for the
Government to proceed criminally against these parties,
ho must state that these papers had ohly reached him
the day before the debate on the quarter-acre clause,
and that their contents snaking a deep impression upon
his mind, he had immediately communicated with Ire-
land on the subject, and he had no doubt the Lord-Lieu-
tenant had lost no time, but that the whole circum-
stances were at the present momeet under his most
serious and attentive consideration.—(Hear.)
Mr. NAPIER said he had heard of this case with
thorough indignation. If the stipendiary magistrates of
the districts would take informations and proceed in the
regular way, no doubt a prosecution might be instituted
for manslaughter. It would be a disgrace to the British
law if it did not reach a case of this description.
Mr. SCROPE said his object had been answered,
since the House had given its attention to the case. It
had been declared on legal authority that the law did not
reach outrages of this kind. Let them then lay aside
the feint of there being equal laws for the rich and the
poor.—(Hear.) If the law did apply, let it be enforced
by the Government; if not, let the Legislature imme-
diately pass a law for the purpose.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord LINCOLN said the House was indebted to the
Hon. Member for having brought this matter forward.
Ile was surprised that, the occurrence having taken
place on New Year's Eve, no information should_have
reached the Irish Government till February, considering
the perfect centralisation of that Government. To cheek
such offences in future, it was desirable that the officers
of the Government should send speedy information of
like cases in future. He hoped the Government would
take this up in some form, and would endeavour to show
to the Irish people that their rights would be protected,
as well as those of the rich.
Mr. HUME asked whether the police had reported to
Colonel I±ll‘Gregor, and if so, why he had not reported
the case to the Government?

Sir w. SOMERVILLE was not aware that any
report had been made by the police. The first informa-
tion Government had received was un the 29th of
January. . _

The motion for going into Committee of Supply was
then agreed to.
COMMITTEE OP SUPPLY—ORDNANCE
ESTIMATES.
Colonel ANSON said it was now his duty to take a
vote for some portion of the money contemplated for the
service of the ordnance department of the ensuing year.
lie did not wish, at that late hour, to raise any discussion
upon these estimates, and he thought the best course
would be for him to place in the hands of the Chairman
the votes which he proposed to take. It was only pro-
posed to take a portion of the money on each of the
votes, which he thought a more correct way than taking
the whole in one sum. He first proposed to take a sum
uf_4oo,ooo/. (the gross estimate was 716,2541.) to defray
the expenses of " the pay, allowances, end contingencies
of the ordnance military corps.
Mr. OSBORNE said it was his intention to take
some exception to these estimates, and wished to know
whether he should be able to do s, afterwards.
Colonel ANSON said' he should have been very glad
to have entered into this question at length ; but, in
consequence of the lateness of the hour, and as the esti-
mates had been submitted to a Committee, he did not
think it necessary to go into the details ; but ample
opportunity_ would be afforded the lion. Member to raise
any objections he thought proper, when the matter came
before the House on a future opportunity.
Mr. MACKENZIE asked the Hon. and Gallant Gen-

tlernan to state the gross sum for which he proposed to
take a vote.

Co'onel ANSON said it was 1,595,0001.—that was
about the sum that would be required.
The vote was then agreed to.
The following sums were voted, without opposition:--
100,000/. (part of a sum of 316,0311.), to defray the
expense of commissariat and barrack supplies for tier
Majesty's forces.
45,0001. (part of 29,5641.) for the expenses of the
Or dnance-office.

On this vote, Mr. OSBORNE said he meant to oppose
the whole of the votes for the civil department; but, on
being assured by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that
he would afterwards have an opportunity of doing se,
he withdrew his opposition.
115,0001. (part of 323,2071.) for salaries and expense°
of establishments in the United Kingdom and colonies.
132,0001. (part of 158,5670 for the wages of arti-
ficers and labourers in tho United Kingdom and colonirs•
230,0001. (part of 502,5851.) for defraying the ex'
Tense of ordnance stores for the land and sea service.
350,000/. (part of 737,5370 for the expense of svoilis,
buildings, and repairs, at home and abroad.
40,000/. (part of 94,4361.) for the expenses of the
scientific branch.
On this vote—

Mr. MACKENZIE complained that Seotland nev6r
had had fair play in the sum granted for the ordnance
survey.
Colonel ANSON said that it was now proposed to.
spend a larger sum for that purpose. Last year it bad
been augmented to 15,000 L; but, up to a certain perieul
no particular sum had been stated. Northumberland
and all the northern parts of gngland had the same
reason to complain as Scotland.
Mr. WYLD said he did not see anything in the esti-
mate for the expense of the metropolitan surrey which
Lai recently been undertaken by the Board of Ordnance:
Colonel ANSON—It had not been accurately settee
what amount would be required for the survey of Lee'
don, but the matter was under the consideration of the
Noble Lord the Chief Commissioner of Woods 041"
Forests.
Mr. HENLEY said a great amount would be incurred
by this survey at the national expense; he wished,to
know if the same benefit would be extended to all the
towns in the kingdom.
Lord LINCOLN said, if the expense of the London
survey was to be defrayed out of the vote now before the
11 ..)use, he apprehended the greater portion of the money
would be thus absorbed, and it would be necessary, 111
consequence, to suspend operations in other parts of the
country.
Colonel ANSON said, if the expense of the Londe°
survey were defrayed out of this vote, it would certainly
absorb the whole ; but much would depend on the de'
gree of perfection to which the survey was carried. At
present, only six surveyors and six assistants were eto'
ployed ; and the whole expenditure for the first
weeks would be under 1,0001. It would continuo at that
rate for some time till the block plan was formed, then
there would be the engraving, which was the great e"
pense. Ile believed the general expense would lae4,oooL,
that of the block plan 9,0001. or 10,0001., and the engra"
ing perhaps 19,0001. It the work were to be carried ea
rapid y, it would certainly withdraw a great deal trete
the other parts of the country.—(Hear.) But a great
many large towns had already been surveyed, and One
made on a scale of five feet to the mile, which were now
in progress of engraving. All the towns in the country
were not included ; whether they should be ao was I
question of expense.
Mr. HUME wanted to know who was to pay for this
survey. He would never have consented to it had ,be
not understood that each town, London included, wio
be surveyed at its own expense.
Colonel ANSON could not say at that moment how
the money was to be paid. That would partly depeq
on the House of Commons. Perhaps, as the city 0'
Louden was to benefit by the survey, it would find the
money.—(Laughter.)
Mr. WYLD did not think there was any need of
new survey. There was a block survey already in e%'
istenee, and it was only necessary to combine the plans
in order to take the levels.
Mr. HUDSON said the question was whether the
funds of the country should be applied to make a survey
of the city of London for sanitary purposes. lie did,
not think the public money should be applied in see",
a way.—(llear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that a sum of money had been voted for the genera'
survey of the country. No order had been given t°
apply any portion of the money for the purpose of a
sanitary survey.
Mr. OSBORNE said that he thotight the vote ought
to be postponed, because he perceived that the watchti
dog of the Treasury had been asleep for the last ha'
hour.—(Laughter.)
Mr. HUME—No, no.—(Much laughter.)
Mr. OSBORNE thought that it would not be right
to make a surrey for London alone at the public ev
pense.
Lord MORPETH said that Sir H. de la Mho sad
Sir J. Burgoyne had represented that the so taking of
levels in London could best be performed under the
Ordnance Survey. He did not think there was anything
so wrong in asking the people of the country to do for
the city of London what the city of London was doing
for the country. The money had been voted forgeneral
purposes, and he did not think that he was asking tier
thing that was wrong in desiring to commence the sur-
vey in London.—(Bear, hear.)
Mr. C. PEARSON said that if they wanted to get this
money out of the pockets of the people, they might will
begin with the city of London.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) He would oppose the vote.
The Earl of LINCOLN thought that if the survey in
other towns was paid for by their inhabitants, it was
somewhat unfair to apply the public money to make a
survey for the city of London alone.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME said that he had already proposed that
the survey of London should be paid for by a local rate,
and not out of the general taxes. If his Hon. Friend
(Mr. B. Osborne) had not been asleep, he must have
heard what he said.—(A laugh.)
Mr. HENLEY said that the plea for the vote of 1,0001.
was, that it was to be expended on a sanitary survey et
London, whereas London was excluded from the sanitary
Bill of the Government. He would not, however, vote
for the postponement of the vote.
Lord MORPETH reminded the House that the survey
of London now proceeding was the Ordnance surveys
and observed that after a suns of 200,0004 had been 'pens
tqi the survey of Dublin, it would be hard to refuse the
same favour to London.

Mr. CARDWELL said the Governmentlhad given no
answer to the question of the Hon. Member for Sunder-
land. as to whether the survey of London was to be de-
frayed by a local tax or out of the consolidated fund. '
Mr. HUDSON complained that the Chancellor of ate
Exchequer Lever gave a straightforward answer to ques-
tions that were put to him.
The vote was then agreed to. .
The next vote was for the sum of 85,0001. to defray
the expenses of the civil and military non-effective ser-
vice,— Agreed to.
The House then resumed ; and—the Chairman having
reported progress adjourned at Half-past One till
Monday.

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.
LIVERPOOL, MAitcn 24.
STOCK EXCHANOR.— The following were the sales to-day:
—Belfast and Ballymena, 151,,i dis.—Edinburgh and Glas-
gow, 3634 -- Ditto, Halves, 7 dis.—East Lancashire, New, 641
dis.—Great Northern, 8% dis.—Lancashire and Yorkshire,
32/. Shares, 7 dis.—Ditto, Halves (late L. and B.) 12 dis.--
Ditto, Fifths (West Riding Union), 314 dis.—Leeds and
Thirek, 2034 dis.—London and North-Western, 126%---
Ditto, New Quarters, 2% p.—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lin-
colnshire (late Great Grimsby and Sheffield), 29 dis.—Mitt-
land, 100—North Staffordshire, Preference (late Trent and
Mersey Canal), 21 4.—North Union (A), 204—Sunth-
Eastern and Dover, 231,1 c.—Ditto, No. 4, 665. 3d. dis.--
South Yorkshire, Doncaster, &c., 2% dis.—York, Newcastle,
and Berwick (G. N. E. Purchase). 4 p.
MANCHESTER, Manor 24.
STOCK EXCILANGK.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lanai*
shire, and Cheshire Junction, 614 dis.—Eastern Count!e*
I:3%—Great Northern 834 dis.—Lancashire and Yorkshire.
Fifths, 04 dis.—Ditto, 32/. Shares, 7 Ditto (Wes
Riding Union), 314 dis.—Liverpool, Manchester, and New-
castle Junction, 2t, dis —Manchester, Sheffield, and Lin-
colnshire, Eighths, 5 dis.—Ditto (Grimsby), 501. Shares,
20 dis.—North British, Thirds, 1% dis—North Staffordshire.
1 5-16 dis.—South-Eastern and Dover, No 4,3% dia.
HULL, Mancit 24.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The "Bears" have taken fright, and
are fast securing previous sales. North British stocks, which
have been heavily Beared, and which varies in price as every
telegraphic communication arrives, have considerably en-
hanced in value; Thirds which were sold this morning at
7s. 91, have been sold at 108. per share, and leave off buyers.
The sales are—Bla:kburn, Darwen, and Bolton, 11% dis.
—North British (Carlisles), 4s. 6d.—Hull and Selby,
H Alves, 48% —North-Western, 6 dis.— North British, Halves,
31. 14s.

[ ADV ER TISEMENT.] —Teas and Coffees delivered, car-
riage free, at tho wholesale prices, by which means, fami-
lies residing in the wintry. whose consumption is large,
are enabled to purchase on the first market terms, thereby
saving all the intermediate profits of retail establish-
ments. Samples and a list of prices forwarded free, ou
application by post. References or cash is expected with
first order. Mansell and Co., wholesale tea-dealers, 2,
I3ucklersbury, Cheapside.
[ADVERTISEDIENT.]—THE VIRTUE OF HOLLOWAY'S
OINTMENT AND PILLS HIGHLY ESTEEMED THROUGHOUT INDIA.—Tb
Editor of the " Benares Recorder," publishes the following exiiaol•-
dinary cure :—Heerah Lall, a cloth merchant, residing at Nagpere,
had suffered for more than eighteen months with dreadful ulcerous
•ores all over his legs and ,body, totally disabling hint frem business,
Ira had expended large sums in medicine from the Hakeems, with-
out relief, when an European gentleman, who hat proved the etti-
eacy of Holloway's Ointment and recommended their 11/00
whielt advice he followed, and in the course of twenty days he W Sli
perfectly restored to health, from a disease which had brought hint
down to death's door. Sold by all Druggists, and at Profeetor 114.
loway's establishment, 244, Strand, London.