The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-27 00:00:00

ig not
Poor-
Roped
satis-
pmber
untie'
would
band.
IL)

man
, that
t was
to re-

aber
;bed
his

1 on
otos

en,
aw
ar.
re-

education was one of much importance to Inland, inas-
much as out of 249 000 inmates of the workhouses in
that country 103,000 were children under 15 years of
age. A system of combination for the purpoe of in-
dustrial education had been attempted; but the Poor-
law Board of the country had not lent it any strenu, US
Co-operation.
Mr. BOOKER said ho heard many complaints that
the boards uf guardians were too greatly controlled by
the inspectors, and he stated the general opinion to be
that a reduction of the cost of these officers—which was
7,8001. a year salary, and 8,712/. expenses—would be a
great advantage to the agricultural and pauper commu-
nity. He fully concurred in the idea of industrial
schools, and hoped from henceforward greater confidence
would be placed in boards of guardians.
Mr. M. O'FERRALL wished to know what the
" other expenses"—viz , 447,0001. out of 598,0001., the
cost of the administration of the poor-law in Ireland,
were?
Sir W. SOMERVILLE was not prepared at that mo-
ment to state.
Sir 11. W. BARRON protested against the reduction
of one-half the expense of the Irish constabulary being
considered as an equivalent for the sum wrought by the
poor•law in Ireland, as well as by the abolition of the
corn-law. It was a mockery to say so. Another injustice
was now sought to be perpetrated as regarded the
medical expense and the school system iu workhouses.
Mr. REYNOLDS said of 211,000/. to defray the ex-
penses of the poor•-law for the three kingdoms Ireland
only got 41,0001., while the grant for hospitals in that
country was now proposed to be withdrawn. If schools
in workhouses were not to be paid for in Ireland he did
not see why they should be paid for in England. He
therefore protested against the grant.
Mr. HUAIE held that if the grant was right for Eng-
land it was right also for Ireland; and if the constabulary
force was made the pretence, it was for the gentlemen
from Ireland to insist on its reduction.
Mr. COWAN again called attention to the state of
distress iu the islands and highlands of Scotland. The
most opposite statements prevailed as regarded the
state of this part of Scotland, and he wished to know
when a report on the subject would be laid before the
House?
Sir G. GREY hoped to have the report next week.
Mr. CLEMENTS again pressed for an answer to the
questions he had asked.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE was still in the same con-
dition. He could not then give him the information he
required.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
assistance to emigration had been given out of the se-
cond rate-in-aid.
Mr. CLEMENTS said the second rate-in-aid had not
been as yet collected. He complained of the mode in
which the returns were mado out.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
advances were made subsequently to the period when the
returns were made up. He thought assistance had been
given out of the rate-in-aid to about six distressed unions
in the south of Ireland.

The vote was then agreed to.
47,0001. for the expenditure of the Mint.
Mr. HUME asked why an estimate had been taken
for the coinage of 3,000,000/. of gold, and 350,0001. in
silver; and on what ground that sum was required?
Also, when the new system would be brought into
operation; and what arrangement had been made with
the " moneyers ?"
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said a
certain quantity of light sovereigns were returned from
time to time to the Mint, and it was necessary therefore
to replace them. The new system would be in opera-
tion in a very few weeks, he believed, the delay having
arisen from an effort to coin by contract.
Mr. HUME asked whether Sir J. Herschell, the new
Master, was to take an active part in the Mint, or merely
to superintend generally the operations?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER bore
testimony to the fact of Sir J. Herschel' being one of the
best men of business he ever met with; and he had taken
a most active part in the proceedings since his appoint-
ment to the Mint.

The vote was agreed to.
8,6621 for the office of the Commission of Railways.
' Mr. LABOUCHERE said, though the Committee on
Salaries had recommended the union of the Commission
with the Board of Trade, it was impossible for the Pre-
sident to dispense with the services of a lawyer of emi-
nence. He had always opposed the reduction of Sir
Edward Ryan's office; but as Sir Edward Ryan was op-
posed to holding the office in the face of the recomenda-
tion of the Committee, it was his (Mr. Labouchere's) in-
tention to unite that office with the Board of Trade, and
he should accordingly bring in a Bill in the course of the
session to that effect. He (Mr. Labouohere) was afraid
that putting the whole of that railway business on the
legal secretary of the Board of Trade would completely
absorb his time. He proposed to wind up all the pre-
sent affairs with Sir E. Ryan, and to commence the new
system in September next. It was his intention also, if
he should next year have to propose those ♦otes, to move
the addition of 5001. a year to Mr. Booth's salary.
Mr. BASS hoped no measure would be introduced to
destroy the efficiency of the railway board.
In reply to a question from Mr. LIUME,
Mr. LABOUCHERE said it was part of the functions
of tho railway board to see that no infraction of a❑ Act
of Parliament took place, and to investigate any com-
plaints made against railway companies.
Mr. BOOKER regretted the board should lose the
services of Sir Edward Ryan. He thought the public
safety and convenience required that the two departments
in the Board of Trade should be kept separate.
Mr. PLUMPTRE thought the public would have no
objection to the expense to make that department more
efficient.
The vote was then agreed to.
A sum of 11,960/. to defray the salaries and expenses
of officers connected with the keeping of the public re-
cords, was voted after a short conversation.
A vote of 14,583/. was then moved to defray the sala-
ries of inspectors of factories and mines.
Mr. WILLIAMS asked why the number of inspectors
had been increased by four?
Mr. C. LEWIS said a reduction had taken place in
the expenses of the factories, but an increase had been
made in the number of inspectors of coal mines.
Mr. HUME asked had these inspectors made any
report?
Sir G. GREY said they had only been appointed last
year, and though they had not yet made a formal re-
port, they were in regular communication with him.
After a few words from Mr. BOOKER and Mr. Huron,
the vote was agreed to.
A vote of 1,700/. was then proposed to defray the ex-
penses of salaries of officers in Scotland, which were
formerly defrayed out of the hereditary revenues of the

Crown.
Mr. WILLIAMS thought they ought to have some
information relative to that vote. He could not under-
stand the meaning of a Queen's limner and clockmaker.
He would move that the vote be reduced by the amount
of the three last items, which included the sum for the
Caledonian Hunt and the Scottish archers. The amount
he proposed to reduce the vote was only 217/. 135., but
he would oppose the grant on principle.
Mr. C. LEWIS said these expenses, formerly defrayed
out of the hereditary revenues, had been of late years
put on the votes. The grant to the Caledonian Hunt
had been made by George 111., and they were all ancient
privileges.
Mr. HUME would put it to the public spirit of Scotch
gentlemen to pay for their own sports.—(Hear.)
Mr. WILLIAMS said he would divide the Committee
on the vote.
Mr. DISRAELI wished to know what was the prin-
ciple upon which the Hon. Member proposed to divide.
—(Hear, hear.) When a proposition such as that was
made, they' ought to look to the origin of these votes
appearing on the estimates. Were not these sums a fair
disposition of the patronage of the Crown, defrayed out
of the Crown estates, when Parliament took the ma-
nagement of these estates upon itself?—(Hear, hear.)
That vote was not paid out of the public taxes, but out
of the funds which Parliament managed. There was
nothing extraordinary in the Sovereign of this country
proposing to give a certain prize for archery, or such
other purposes as wore specified in the vote. He
would not support the motion of the Hon. Member
opposite.
Mr. WILLIAMS said there were nine royal palaces,
and the public did not object to pay the expenses of
these establishments.
After a few words from Mr. MOORE,
Sir R. INGLIS said these discussions were derogatory
to the dignity of the Crown, the loss to which was
100,000,0001. since the arrangement relative to the civil
list had come into operation. Besides the loss, too,
it placed the dignity of the Crown at the mercy of any
Member who could string eighteen or twenty sentences
together.
Mr. WILLIAMS would not condescend to notice the
impertinent language of the Hon. Baronet.—(Order.)
Sir R. INGLIS must say that the Hon. Member for
Lambeth was not the man to tell him that he used im-
pertinent language. He had neither on the present oo-
casion, nor ever since he came into that House, said
anything which should entitle any Member to use such
language to him as the Hon. Member had just addressed
to him.—(Hear, hear, and cheors.)
Mr. WILLIAMS, if he had said anything contrary
to the rules of the House, would withdraw it. But ho
objected to the Hon. Baronet standing up in his place
and saying that he (Mr. Williams) was incapable of ut-
tering eighteen or twenty consecutive sentences.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) The Hon. Baronet was the last
person in the House to whom he would address any lan-
guage that would hurt his feelings. He was satisfied now
that the Hon. Baronet did not make any allusion to him
in the words which had fallen from him.
Sir R. INGLIS thanked the Hon. Gentleman for the
manner in which he had just alluded to him.
Lord J. RUSSELL explained that on the commuta-
tion of the revenues of the Crown for the Civil List
the charge on the latter for the Queen's plates in Scot-
land was transferred to the estimates, while the expense
of the English Queen's plates was placed as a charge on
the department of the Master of the Horse in the Civil
List.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared:—
For the amendment ••• ae
Against it
Majority ... —123
A vote of 6,4647. having been proposed for the house-
hold of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland,
Mr. HUME moved that there be omitted from the
vote a sum of 1,5741.65. 2d. for fifteen Queen's plates
given for horse-racing in Ireland.
Mr. BRIGHT said there were many persons in this
country who objected to horse-racing on moral grounds.
Now he had no wish to interfere with what other per-
sons considered innocent amusements. But he thought
it only fair and reasonable that those parties should
themselves pay for those amusements, and that the charge
should not be thrown upon the public reveaue.
Colonel DUNNE supported the motion.
Colonel SIBTHORP also supported tho vote, and
complained that the Hon. Member for Manchester was
sot a 11000494 in the ananienunta of tho pow.