The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-04 00:00:00

IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT BILL.

Lord BROUGHAM, in presenting a petition from the
debtors confined in Dublin Gaol, in favour of the Imprison-
ment for Debt Bill, was anxious to correct an erroneous im-
pression which had gone abroad in consequence of what had
fallen from a Noble Lord last night. That Noble Lord was
understood to have said that several important measures had
been, postponed for the Session at his suggestion. Now, he
had not proposed to postpone any measures; but had con-
sented to do so at the request of his Noble and Learned
Friend, who objected to their being proceeded with at such a
late period of the Session. If the House of Lords was to
continue to exist as an independent body, it must have time to
consider the measures sent up from the other House before it
passed them. So far from his proposing the postponement of
these measures, he had said that he was willing to sit for a
month longer for the purpose of getting through them.
. .

Lord FIT Z GERA Lt) and VI sci obsen;"ed that all that
he meant to say last night was, that important measures had
been postponed in consequence of the lateness of the session
at the request of the Noble Lords opposite, as well as at the
desire of those on his side of the House. The wish to
postpone these measures did not altogether arise on one side
of the House.

Lord LYNDHURST stated that it was utterly impossible
to proceed with the Imprisonment for Debt Bill at such a late
period of the session. He had not stated that he was opposed
to it, but had requested that it should be postponed that suffi-
cient time might be given to it, as it involved the most im-
portant alteration in the law.
Lord BROUGHAM was perfectly aware that that Bill
could not be proceeded with at this late period of the session.
Indeed, the Learned Gentleman who drew the Bill had ad-
mitted to him, that it was impossible to go on with it in that
House at that time, if any thing like a full consideration was
to be given to it.
Lord LYNDHURST remarked, that the most extraordi-
nary observations had been made respecting the delay of
this measure. The Attorney-General could hardly be sup-
posed to possess common sense, if he made use of the lan-
guage imputed to him in the newspapers ; it must, therefore,
have arisen from some misapprehension on the part of the
reporters, who had put words into the Learned Gentleman's
mouth.

After an observation from Lord ASHBURTON, the pe.
tion was laid on the table.
EDUCATION IN IRELAND.

The Earl of RODEN wished to put a question to the Noble
Marquis ( Lansdowne) relative to the state of national education
in Ireland. The Noble Marquis had always taken a prominent
part in the discussions on this subject, and seemed to take a
deep interest in it, and therefore could probably give him the
information he desired. When this question was formerly
mooted in that House, the Noble Marquis stated that all the
information that could be furnished as to the working of the
system would be readily given. With this view he ( Lord
Roden) had moved for the returns relating to the subject as
far back as the 12th of March last, but up to the present
time only four of the returns had been laid on the table,
and these were by no means the most important that he
had called for. The question which he wished to put to
the Noble Marquis was, whether he could state the reason
why the returns ordered by the House had been withheld for
such a long period.

The Marquis of L A NSDO WNE replied, that since the
Noble Earl had mentioned the subject to him, he had exerted
himself to procure the whole of the returns moved for, so that
they might be laid on the table without delay. The whole of
these returns were now ready, and he would lay them on the
table before the end of the session. There was an exception,
however. It appeared the Commissioners had no means of
procuring the information called for in one of the returns. The
return was for the purpose of ascertaining the proportion be-
tween the Protestant and Catholic children in their schools.
The Board of Education said that it was wholly out of their
power to make this return. The members of that board had
ceased to keep up the distinction between the children of dif-
ferent religions, at the request of a number of Protestants and
Prostestant clergymen.

The Earl of TiODEN felt obliged to the Noble Marquess
for the returns which he had procured, but regretted that the
other returns had been withheld, as the information which it
would afford was of great importance. In the course of next
Session, he should make a motion on the subject, and he
trusted that the House would not allow their orders to be set
aside, because the Commissioners did not choose to make the
return.

WORKHOUSE BILL.

The Marquis of L A NSDO WNE, in moving the second
reading of this Bill, stated that its object was to facilitate the
means of building workhouses for unions of parishes. He
could not let the opportunity Eass without communicating to
the House the gratifying fact7that the measure of last year
for the reform of the Poor Laws had been entirely successful
as far as it had been carried into effect.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
The progress made by the Commissioners in the union of
parishes, and in promoting improvements in the administration
of the Poor Laws, exceeded the most sanguine expectations
of the most earnest and zealous friends of the Bill of last year.
No less than 2,066 parish has been united, making alto-
gether 112 unions. The whole of some counties had been
brought under the operation of the Bill. For instance, the
whole of the 275 parishes in Hampshire had been formed
into 21 unions. In Burks the parishes had been formed into
eleven unions. The 185 parishes in Oxfordshire had been
formed into five unions. Again, all the parishes in Buck-
inghamshire, Hertfordshire, and other counties, had been
formed into unions. This had been done with the full ap-
probation and consent of the great portions of the persons re-
sidine• in those counties. Notwithstanding the prejudices
which existed as to the evils which would result from these
unions of parishes, the system now met with the approbation of
all classes of the inhabitants of the counties, the magistrates,
gentry, the farmers, and other rate-payers, and in many in-
stances the poor themselves expressed the greatest satisfaction
at the change that had taken place. The adoption of the new
system had led to the most material economy in the adminis-
tration of the poor laws. On referring to the reduction in
the poor-rates that had taken place in these unions, he found
that on the average in the nineteen first unions (which were
chiefly made before the end of last year) the saving amounted
to between one half and one-third of the expenditure of the
corresponding time of the former year. In almost all the cases
in which the unions had been formed, the food supplied to the
workhouses was superior in quality to that formerly sent to
those places, and at the same time it cost much less to the pa-
rishes. The poor were much better off, and the expense to
the parishes was considerably less than before. Through the
agency of the Poor-law Bill, the poor had been encouraged to
migrate from parts of the country where there was a super-
abundance of labour to those places where there was a demand
for it. Thus great numbers of labourers had been removed,
with their own consent, from the agricultural districts to the
manufacturing parts of the country. In Buckinghamshire there
was some manifestation of dislike on the part of some labourers,
on its being proposed to them to be sent to Lancashire.
Some, however, did proceed there ; and such was their satis-
faction, that they induced many who were a burden to the pa-
rishes in which they resided to remove to the same districts,
where they obtained constant work in the manufactories. He
could not conclude his observations without alluding to the ma-
terial assistance rendered in carrying this Bill into effect by
the magistracy, who, in numerous instances, had become guar-
dians of the poor, and had exerted themselies most beneficially
in aiding the Commissioners.
Lord BROUGHAM was a more competent witness than
even the Poor-law Commissioners as to the improvement that
had taken place in the condition of those persons who received
maintenance from those parishes in Buckinghamshire, and who
had been removed into the manufacturing districts. When he
was recently in Lancashire, he went out of his way several
miles on pv.rpose to examine into the condition of those people
employed, as manufacturers, and who were formerly agricul-
tural lalJourers. He visited the manufactories where they were
employed—he went into several of the cottages, and saw those
persons and their families, and examined them as to their con-
dition; and he had no hesitation in saying that he never saw
people more comfortable, or more entirely content with their
situation, or more satisfied with the change which had taken
place in their being brought from their former residences to
their then abodes. They all expressed a determination not to
go back to the places they formerly lived in. They all were
in the receipt of good wages, which were likely to be increased
instead of being diminished.
The Duke of RICHMOND was one of those who had
looked with considerable apprehensions to the Poor Laws
Bill ; but really the conduct of the Commissioners was such
they had carried it into operation so gradually, and with so
much discretion, that he thought they well deserved the
thanks of the country. He thought it a great hardship that
the tenantry should be bound to pay the money borrowed by
the parishes under this Act within so short a period as ten
years, and he hoped the Government would take an early op-
portunity of remedying the evil.
CHARITIES' COMMISSIONERS BILL.
This Bill went through a Committee, and was ordered to
be read a third time to-morrow.

Several Bills were then advanced a stage, and the House
adjourned.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Conference between the Commons and Lords,
on the subject of the Municipal Reform Bill, took
place last night. The reasons of the Committee of the
Commons were partly read in the House, before pro-
ceeding to the Conference. Lord John Russell and
the other managers were about a quarter of an hour.
On their return, his Lordship stated that they had de-
livered the reasons for disagreeing to some of the
Lords' Amendments, and that they had left the Bill
with the Lords. The question is, therefore, again be-
fore the Peers. A debate, to which the country will
look with considerable interest, took place in, the
Commons. On the moving of the third reading of
the Appropriation Bill by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, Mr. Hume said he hoped that the Right
Hon. Gentleman would not press the third reading, as
the House had no right to be much satisfied with the
proceedings in another place ; and if the Bill were
passed, the House might let slip the opportunity of
withholding the Supplies, and discussing the measure
just sent to the Lords again. He moved that
the Bill be read a third time on Monday.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said that if he
should stand alone, he would resist the post-
ponement of the third reading. "At a moment like
the present, pregnant with important interests, he en-
treated the House not upon any imperfect and partial
view tcr take a step which would materially (and he
spoke advisedly,) most materially prevent the comple-
tion of its wishes." Mr. O'Connell observed, that
" whatever the Honourable Member for Middlesex
could gain by his amendment, he would gain equally
when the Appropriation Bill had passed, if the Muni-
cipal Corporations Bill were to be returned from the
House of Lords." The Honourable and Learned
Gentleman, alluding to the disgraceful proceedings of
the preceding night in the Lords, observed that, " if
he were not afraid that his (Mr. O'Conn9ll's) advo-
cacy of the Bill would be injurious to its passing—
(Cheers and laughter)—he should say that he sup-
ported it heartily and unequivocally. If poor, paltry
considerations of this individual, or of that, were al-
lowed elsewhere to interfere with the sober consi-
deration of a legislative enactment, it might be taken
that the postponement of the third reading was an
intended insult, and it might be urged as a reason
for rejecting the Bill just sent to the Lords, that
the Member for Middlesex had ventured to object to
the appropriation clause." Mr. Hume was by no
means satisfied with arguments resting on assurance,
the grounds of which were not communicated to him.
" He could not (he said) help looking back to what
had occurred last year, when men, in full possession
of the confidence of the country, had been excluded
from office. By whom this had been done, he knew
not ; but. certainly not by the individual who had been
principally responsible in the new Government, for he
was at a distance of some thousands of miles. There
must, however, have been some adviser, and, for aught
he knew, what had happened last year might happen
again." These observations led to an explanation as
to the power really possessed by the House of Com-
mons over the Supplies. The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer denied that lie had ever counselled or taken a
course which countenanced the stopping of the Sup-
plies, but still avoided answering the question whether
the House could stop the Supplies. On Mr. T.
Duncombe, however, putting the question distinctly,
whether the House did or did not possess the power,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer answered in the nega-
tive. Mr. Warburton, in the way of explanation, ob-
served, " that any course which they could take
would have no effect, as there were already in the
hands of Government Exchequer bills sufficient to
carry on the functions of the Government until Par-
liament should again meet. If it were proper to
exercise any power of stopping the Supplies, it ought
to have been resorted to before they were voted ; there
was no such power now." Mr. Hume said be would
make no further objection to the third reading ; and
indeed, according to this reading of the power pos-
sessed by the Commons over the purse, further op-
position would have been useless. Should, however,
the Lords persist in their determination to control the
Commons, and recur to the revolutionary tactics of
November last, it will be necessary to inquire into the
means by which the Commons can show that holding
the purse-strings of the nation is something more than
a fiction. To have a rialat to hold the purse-strings,
without possessing the power of preventing any Mi-
nistry, however unacceptable to them, from putting
their bands in the purse, and thus conducting the
Government in spite of them, is little better than a
mockery. Without stating what we ourselves think
on the subject, we heartily wish this great constitu-
tional question were better understood than it seems
yet to be.—Morning Chronicle.
In giving their assent to a species of compromise
with respect to some points of the Corporate Reform
Bill, and acquiescing in certain alterations in the de-
tails of the measure, not from a sense of their own
merits, but from a willingness to show a deference to
the opinion of the other House of Parliament, and to
waive objections, however striking, which did not in-
terfere with the vital and essential objects of free, open,
and popular election, the Representatives of the peo-
ple have, we think, adopted that course, which, under
all the circumstances of this difficult and embarrassing
position, was not only the most constitutional, but also
the most dignified and prudent. The measure itself
was designed to secure to the inhabitants of our towns
and cities the advantage of good municipal govern-
ment, founded on a broad and popular basis. The
alterations of the Lords bad so mutilated and vitiated
the Bill, as essentially to mar its efficiency, and de-
stroy its equal and popular character. The Minis-
ters of the Crown have again succeeded, with the

general consent of the people's Representatives,
in replacing and restoring the principal features
thus marred and mutilated, and, yielding on
some points of undoubted importance, though
of a less essential character, have again transmitted
the Bill, thus restored and amended, for the acquies-
cence of that House which had so ill-treated the for-
mer measure. What the Lords will now do is of
course entirely a matter of surmise and speculation.
We trust that the spirit of conciliation which has
marked the conduct of the other branch of the Legis-
lature will have its full effect upon their Lordships'
conduct. We trust that, appreciating the universal
feeling of the country to obtain a speedy settlement of
this important question, and to secure the benefits of a
liberal municipal government, the Peers will not now
listen to the counsels of the more prejudiced and vio-
lent of their number, but will give their unqualified
assent to a measure so much desired by the public,
and for the sake of securing which so much has been
overlooked, and so much has been conceded. This,
however, is evident, that conciliation and compromise
having been already pushed to extreme lengths, in
deference to their Lordships, it will be useless for
them to push the subject further, and the mea-
sure must now be passed essentially as it stands,
or rejected, and, therefore, for a time post-
poned. It would be impossible for time Minis-
ters, or their supporters in the Commons or out of
doors, to go further in the way of compromise than has
been gone—it would be a sacrifice of principle, and
would involve a loss of dignity and of public approba-
tion. In fact, the difficulty now is to advise the ac-
quiescence of the public in the measure as it at present
stands. There are provisions—particularly those re-
specting qualification and the election of aldermen—
the operation of which will require to be very closely
watched, and which, unless found to work better than bets
been anticipated, must undergo future alteration. Still,
on the whole, we believe the country is willing to ac-
cept, and will rejoice at, the passing of the measure as
it now stands; but to suppose that it will admit of any
replacement by their Lordships of the obnoxious provi-
sions first introduced by them, and erased by the con-
sent of all parties in the Commons—to suppose that
these features can be again altered by their Lordships,
and the Bill still continue acceptable to the country, is
a gross and dangerous fallacy. No. In the way of
compromise and concession the country has already
gone far enough—too far, indeed, unless the settlement
of this important question, and the happiness and
peace of the country, can be thereby secured. And
we can only hope, that all these concessions to their
Lordships' prejudices may not be in vain. The Peers
should recollect that the measure intreuches upon no

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, SEPTEMI3ER 4, 1835.