The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-28 00:00:00

llotse of Lords, in order that the Government might ',aye the opportunity of laving the report of their
'll:4' Committee b-fore the House.
CEIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Committee on Miscellaneous Estimates exeressed a hope
htthoiatttetehe be and expenditure of the House of Lords
would be submitted to a searching revision by a Coma-
of that House. This revision was going on, en e_should therefore oppose the motion.
HUME replied that the House had at present no
proof of this searching investigation.
.the Rouse divided. The numbers were—
Per Mr. game's amendment ...
Against it
***
Majority against the amendment
Aaa vote WaS then agreed to.
On se THE TREASURY.
of
the vote of 56,100/. for the salaries and expenses
irthe Treasury,
th,,'41% FORBES moved a reduction of 10 per cent. upon
th: sum of 30,8361., being the amount of the salaries of _ assistant-secretary clerks, and other persons on t
t'bsteat'clei6binent. He grounded this. motion as well upon
i"eapness of the necessaries of life as upon toloie-
to heigut of the public burdens, and the necessity for. e e
tht°Y. Such a reduction as he proposed would, h
°,tl,,,ght, greatly add to the popularity and stability of
he
;0 aiesty's Government. He therefore moved to re-
the total sees by the sum of 3,096/,
lo
tt. ° he'
„ THOMPSON begged to remark that the pro-
s. of his constituents had gone up 20 per cent., not on
cout
bat er, of any wrong which they had done to any e
de had "" account of the cessation of a wrong that been
efrt° them. He considered himself, therefore, as
0%7 to te SlBon. Gentleman.—(A laugh.)
had HO RP said his Hon. Friend (Mr. Forbes)n
1aei.617 Properly excepted the salaries of the first
the
tzere Lords of the Treasury and the Chancellor of
highslit quer from his motion, because the salaries of_ those
~r offices were now under the consideration of a ban-
ceo Emittedkd. He thought, however, that the Ch
to
(4. the Exchequer was bound to pledge himself °Nth d • •
be, a e decision of that Committee, whatever it might
%rine whatever reduction theyrecommend in the
might
and
his
toile " Upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman
Ti'llgties had fattened.
110 t ° CRANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would..
terseer into the question whether her Majesty's
fhes, had grown fat or lean since their accession to
kho-ni,,"(A laugh.) But if the Committee upstairs
hi „C recommend a reduction of the salaries paid tod
fr° Political offi those salaries would be reduce
ea, ,s_. eers,
ale, (Hear, hear.)
tia • -4111 E should not be disposed to agree to a Fe-
Non
asd pryerol 10 per cent. in the salaries of the 45 juniorfom
06 clerks, who were now in the receipt of r
k rec.? 2904 or 4001. per annum. He was favourable to
thei.ltetion of the number of the clerks, rather than of
be
VlllBsalaries. He trusted that some examination would
tt,ituted into their qualifications before clerks were
4'4447> because young men very unfit to enter the
4%841' Were sometimes appointed. Was there any
'sat „'Y to have 20 messengers in the Treasury, at a
The annum of 2,3151.?
iitilli''',..l"lA-NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER areed
'bele •nton. Friend that the true principle of reductionho
414114 reasnry was rather a reduction of numbers t an f
,haei A reduction of 5,800/. in the salaries and ex-
'est ultra of the Treasury had been made within the last
l'oP-48est, He did not think the number of messengers
!ell 4,4I4OGREGOR believed that at the Treasury, as
'4 at the Board of Trade, there were too few mese
Ite.rl%nstead of being a superabundance.
14e4er 44811AELI said there were two circumstances. at
4. et which made it impossible to carry any motion_
runt of
reform. The first was the existence of
Zs% Committee whose influence upon the deliberad-
m'e sii-e‘"e House he'would not venture to foretell; an
,`,(Obe.nd was, the existence of the financial reformer::
and laughter.) As long as those two o
stiwr'aele
eteained, any motion for retrenchment was per-
head and he should therefore recommend his Hon.
Att ,to withdraw his motion.—(Hear, hear.)
44t h. °RBES said that his Hon. Friend had stated
po-e believed to be a melancholy truth, and as it was
liktionti.B6 to divide the House he would withdraw the
foals
'sals°-ei THOMPSON hoped the financial reformers
ties
ft% th vet agree to any motion for a reduction comingnrom
Nei) e Other side of the House—(lronical cheers t
,Ithebr,lteetionist ) p efaced, as he was aout to say
~tide`clue37 stopperliirm, by the assertion that.. it was
Ohs °Pon the sufferings of the country arising out
recentni. changes in our commercial policy.—(Hear,te
Thsiateiwthe financial reformers were always readyf
as
41)17' in opposition to any such views, that so ar.
law
bol 4,4 of the country to bear the burden of taxation
o 'ernes it was vastly better able than ever it was
L'1411(1--"(Cheers ) This was no reasen why economy
Fhttiett't b_e pursued, but it was a reason for not 89)-
bk 6 4 ‘4°tlons for retrenchment upon grounds to which
. paniTeial reformers could not subscribe.—(hear.)
te'd-4' RR protestedagainst the doctrine of the Hon.
esi tab),
e_ "t Colonel. He would support a proposal for
be.,.onaing from any side of the House. The
m!ales .neat. wing
at present before them was, whether the
Lthe given Were more than was necessary, consider-
ki.sqi,mlount of business done.
07%4sA3DEN wished th 3 House distinctly to iiniderer:
.4 Was the diffetsince between the financial
ittal 'elven his side of the House and those who
,e;8 os acting with the Hon. Member for uck
thalratm4,-ere. *The proposition of gentlemen oppositea
b 4), IN-: the country could no longer continue to p
y
bk.,etlticssisaliarie.s and wages, because it no longer en
1)e, blessings of a corn-law.—(Hear, hear.) That
klpl'ot'triltioiple on which they proceeded; and the
h!14144:1 of the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire (Mr.
41C'"se, simply this, that they should reduce the
,i,ssti I,nade toall their servants, whether in yearly
11,,,4 as,d- eekl wages, and that they should not step till
-eirTue /own to the very postman, who deliverer)
a.ef;tfatiht". a-weels. Now, it was here that the financialhe
Vlaiet;arld the Protectionists parted company, and
41 54 tb willin& that they should join issue on that su.fb subject
14% 4°,coutistry; for what would be the result
liptste, 'tared that the wages and salaries of all public
4,ett s,sti"ld be reduced? The Government was the
14 •usse-"PleYer in the country. It had 8,000 or ,
; -sre •
°Yed in the dockyards, and tens of thousands
"office, besides an immense number of persons
1414 t qd ki,dePartraents, and the proposition was that
t' the signal to the country of a universal andr
to','.) 4°43 reduction of the rate of wages.—(Hear,
kl:Pßages had already pronounced that to be a wato
hY etitße.l; and unless gentlemen were prepared
s_
ki'tB 1, this
principle in their own private h
' e
I% th anted to know how in common icejusor
ly could propose to deal with the Government
tb,,,:ilrerently from their own? If they meant
Itile'Ooili,e,shetild be a universal reduction of wages it
tt,j`, it ~
he would be no party to it. He did not
i
't 4 ar
tecess he did not think it was just, and
tiel th live it•y
was; practicable.—(hear, hear.) So
et pa . mmercial policy of this country disabling
'At4l4l', h‘lcg the same wages, or. rendering labour
:r ?ould positively say that in Yorkshire at no
°ftd the people been so well employed, or
ek„,TPle remuneration as at present.—(Hear,
1110 "e" when they measured the earnings of the
,IN;ollaltriv,l4 comforts they enjoyed—by the amount of'
p(emw Power that the money they received
the
otter used, it was found that never were
ett4l:,,4lll'eet-r ciff—(flear, hear)—while, so far from
Ny aa,tendency to reduce wages in Yorkshire, the
6'4 tiNy, A. the last 12 months had been all' the
when, therefore, they argued that wages
011) i."B should be reduced, because the country was
tt,,„4 our commercial policy, the facts
.weren
'het:4t state If the agricultural labourers were in _
ktie„-,wes,atLe from others, why not employ them?
Chit iftuundant means of giving employment in
.t
•(shratiltah,tlistricts if they only increased production,
V, stY"ll In more capital to be expended on the land
ese-f )---but let them not come to that House and
t; I'Lisfloluetion of wages, on the ground that free trade
14-'lsin when all the facts went to prove that it
lea successful.—(Hear, hear.)
.He
t,tl'„)httt werciere, go in with a universal reduction. of
lk ;4,1'010 ,",1 quite ready to join with them in reducing
114-h,.4 ao?,l4rie, and making them more in accordance
~.."4tnt of labour performed. He would join
'talst °C2ting by every possible way true retrenchat
t4:l it-e.ttitite Would never support them in giving h
rehl aPiteful, malicious vote, intended, inw the
si',ll.,tect;:ciee4t'd petty spirit of retaliation, in order to
1014,1 S tt A unpopular in the country. (Cheers.)
see"4l, ELI said these occasional conversations on
V'ttrclies-ed to create considerable disturbance on
sv°,st't° he-i:PPosite, and their occupants always ap-
salt ea his naore excited state tha those Members
'4,lllshe t,Ne tide of the House.—(Hear, hear.) The
othe
rei'lher for the West Riding had assured
rishiirstit''esPerity of the country, and of the success
Vls theeTomercial changes which had taken place
litiqt°llll% Lit were hardly referred to before he rose.
Mt s.. Mtle"uld be glad, no doubt, to hear that the
`ts ,iltss.,which the Honourable Gentleman had a
t -J the
was in a more flourishing
oto 0"lte 5°410 had been led to imagine; but
4 wiscther districts not in so flourishing a
ii*:4l,4;l°,,4o,_the Honourable Gentleman told them
kemployment for labourers%he might
t!elk Ise thatth ° Ron. Member for Manchester if the
?4t to,„„°°. Gentleman who was one of the most
lOts-ss(R4r°Y‘er‘s of labour', were not at that moment
11.)44 tsolas_.) •t hat was a circumstance, he believed,
01141, ford nature.—(Hear.) He did not suppose
kh'eti:hslievr kanchester was so deficient in capital
s:11 tiemt, bet kfind it necessary to shut his large estab-.
ftii,hti/d ir believed there was no doubt of the fact!
tb,,tith tiro as a state of thinos that did not at all
441,t1lititryvVe,t 4;,,eseription given by the Hon.. Member
11%1 te>(flea„''',!ig of the general prosperity of the
110'41) lilt'keis-t's"ear.) The Hon. Member had en: i
rh etirl•de of th line pursued on that (the Protec
:1, s:, the, "e House with respect to retrenchment.
4,14 n0t1,,. °sited themselves financial reformers.
stinciat of the kind ; but he believed they
tk'elorteers—more so than the gentlemen
~,,,Iteticeseernselves by that name. What were the
't Zeig (1 the ease? They found distress preva-
; sd d ese classes whom the Honourable Gentle-
as the most important, the
tll f NQd very The agricultural middle class was in a
wvolderiLest distress ._a fact which the Hon. Ger.-
eo,„°t deny. But the middle classes c.on-
estneeee
'tte. and manufactures were also in a
qqt'te kletbb An non. Gentleman sitting close to
,004414,
,th er for the West Riling had told the
lost the last year not less than
[!%4, thNe Atlear, hear.) That being the case,
1 , • %route e.
At 44 ftl • • 'mu, who represented the middle
et and it to be their duty to support measures
°7Bl
il,,tht,„ retrenchment, not founded, how-
'Y wtst",4 .0w view that the Honourable Member
nt g had asserted as their sole basis;
to, h set'ev or t. ught forward any measure for re-
lltOt (~a %ceps, tit of the distress of any particular
yteount Ll' the distress of the middle classes
8 tionovable Member for Oxfordshire

48
110
- 62

and other Gentlemen had produced measures of reduc-
tion in fixed salaries, but the Honourable Member for
the West IZiding bad on every occasion confounded
wages and fixed salaries. Because they had proposed
reductions in fixed salaries in consequence of the altered
state of affairs in the country, he stat,d that they were
attacking wages.—(Hear.) They were not attacking
wages; they were only saying this, that the country
lbeing in an altered position, the paying power of the
country being reduced, and the middle classes being in
a state of great distress, all fixed payments should un-
dergo the ordeal of a severe and well-considered revi•
sion ; but none of them said a word about wages.—
(Hear, hear.) The Honourable and Gallant Colonel
(Colonel Thompson) denied the distress of the middle
classes; but had not his constituents lost a great deal of
money?
Colonel THOMPSON—Gained a great deal; they
were now in a better condition than ever they wore in
their lives.—(A laugh.)
Mr. DISRAELI—The Hon. and Gallant Colonel had
merle a sally, and he had given way with great pleasure;
but had his constituents not lost by the railroads they
had heard so much of?—(01), ob.) He would rejoice if
it was not so; and to learn that what they were told the
other night, that there was not a large town in the north
of England that was not ruined by these railroads, was
not the fact.—(llear.) He hoped that he had at least
put the question as to the motives which influenced the
gentlemen on his side of the House on its fair basis, and
shown that they voted for retrenchment, because the
middle classes were not in a position in which they
could endure those expensive establishments that in other
circumstances they were accustomed to maintain.
Mr. V. SMITH thought it very inconvenient to be
always running bark into the disputed question of
free trade on occasions like the present. He thought
that instead of the paying power of the country being
reduced it had been increased; but, whether it was so or
not, he thought that all public salaries should, from
time to time, be considered with relation to the
price of provisions. in his opinion, however, the
time had not arrived for doing so, as they had not yet
sufficient experience to guide them in that matter.—
(Hear, hear.) He objected to the anomaly of the secre-
taries to the Treasury receiving as salaries 2,5001. a
year, while 2,0001. a year was the amount allotted to the
heads of all those departments which bad been recently
established. These were questions, however, that would
be considered by the Committee which had been ap-
pointed, and he therefore objected to any reductions
being now made by the House.
Mr. NEWDEG A.TE thought the House should not
lose sight of what the real principle proposed by the
Hon. Member for Oxfordshire was. The proposal of
his lion. Friend was, that as a great alteration had now
been made in the cost of productions, mainly brought
about by legislative enactments, it was just to accommo-
date the remuneration of the public servants to the
altered circumstances of the times; but ho did not pro-
pose, as seemed to be imagined, a per-tentage reduction.
Such a proposal the lion. Member (Mr. Cobden) cha-
racterised as spiteful and malicious. Why was the Hon.
Gentleman so tender on the civil service, and so severe
on the naval and military? Was it that, looking for-
ward to future contingencies, he was afraid that he
might yet lament to see in his own case that he was
bereft of those great benefits that were conferred by the
civil service? Or was it that the Hon. Gentleman, under
cover of retrenchment, was taking advantage of the coun-
try ? Did he wish to protect the commerce of the
country? He showed himself the other night an able
advocate for pirates.—(Hear, hear.) Was he really so
jealous of the greatness of this country that he wished
to strike down her defensive establishments, and verify
his own saying that it was time for them to break off
singing " Rule Britannia?"—(A laugh.) Oue thing
was clear, that he would never give his cordial eo-ope-
ration towards reducing the salaries of those who, resi-
dent in this country, had reaped the full advantage of a
reduction of prices.—(Hear, hear.)
The amendment of Mr. Forbes was then negatived,
and the vote then agreed to.
A sum of 26,000/ was then agreed to towards defray-
ing the expenses of the Home Department.
THE FOREIGN OFFICE.
On the next vote, of 71,000/. for the salaries and other
expenses in the department of the Foreign-office,
Lord MAHON said there was one item connected
with this vote to which he wished to call the attention of
the House, and with respect to which a strange
anomaly existed. He meant the system of pass-
ports granted to British subjects travelling to foreign
states. He made not the slightest charge against
the Noble Lord the Foreign Secretary. Ile, like his
predecessors, had found the system established, and
had merely continued it; hut he (Lord Mahon) wished
the 'House to consider whether great improvement
might not be made in it. Happily and wisely, we re-
quired no passports here; but on the continent a dif-
ferent system prevailed. Foreign Ministers resident
here granted passports to British subjects, or passports
might be obtained at the Foreign-office; but the former
were supplied gratuitously, whilst the latter cost
2/. 2s. 6d.; and the result had been that out of the tens
of thousands of British subjects proceeding to the con-
tinent very few, scarcely 200 or 300, procured them
from the Foreign-office. At the same time many per-
sons thought it more desirable to travel under a British
rather than a foreign passport, and the payment for it
was evaded with perfect ease. If a person wished to
travel to Madrid or Vienna under a British passport he
took a French passport as far as Paris, and then ob-
tained gratuitously from the British Minister a passport
to Spain or Austria. He thought, therefore, that the
charge of 21. 2s. 6d. for a British passport here should
be reduced to 4s. or 55., and the same charge might be
made abroad. The result would be that a very large
number of passports would be granted at the Foreign-
office. Until the system on the continent of requiring
passports was altered we must consider what course it
was the most desirable for this country to pursue as to
granting them; but he was quite sure the Noble Lord
would see that the present system was quite indefensible
as to its effect, and that in another session it might not
be unworthy of the consideration of a Committee of the
House.

Lord PALMERSTON admitted that there was an
apparent anomaly in the arrangements of the Foreign-
office as regarded passports, the expense being much
higher than the amount, which was very trifling, if any,
required by the Foreign Ministers; but his Noble Friend
knew perfectly well that the sum for a British passport
at the Foreign-office consisted partly of the stamp and
partly of a fee, which went to the aggregate fee fund,
from which part of the expenses of the office was paid.
If the change which his Noble Friend suggested were
adopted, and passports were given at the Foreign-office
at a very small charge, the consequence would be that
a great number would be applied for and a con-
siderable addition to the establishment of the
office would be necessary, interfering very much
with the business transacted there, and being at-
tended also with considerable expense. As to
the convenience to individuals, he was not sure there
was a material advantage in a British passport; any
person might get a foreign passport, and if he wanted to
change it for a British passport abroad he could do so
on easy terms. Considering the great number who
started for the continent only to stay there for a short
time, he did not see that any inconvenience arose from
their taking a passport of a foreign minister.
Mr. HUME thought it hardly consistent with the
dignity of this country, which the Noble Lord was so
anxious to uphold, that an Englishman should travel
under foreign colours. He know no man in that House
who was more anxious to maintain the dignity and cha-
racter of England than the Noble Lord—(Hear, hear)—
and yet on this point he allowed this strange anomaly.
lie (Mr. Hume) wished the Noble Lord would tell the
House how many passports wore granted last year by the
Foreign- office ?
Mr. ROEBUCK hoped the Noble Lord would not an-
swer the question.—(A laugh.) If there were no pass •
ports every person would travel on an equality; and he
wished that that was the case on the continent, as it was
here. Travelling with the passport of the British Secre-
tary of State was supposed to be a great thing; the indi-
vidual went through all countries protected by the dig-
nity of England; and fur 21. odd he might have that
passport. He wished all our passports were entirely
abolished.—(Hear, hear.) Throughout the republics of
America no passport was required, and we ought to set
a similar example to Europe.
Mr. COBDEN did not know whether any large
amount was brought to the fee-fund by passports granted
at the Foreign-office. If there were he should be sorry
to say anything to reduce it—(A laugh)—but his expe-
rience had taught him that the passport of the British
Minister for Foreign Affairs was not of more value than
the passport of a foreign consul.

Mr. V. SMITH ohserved, that if the suggestion of
the Honourable Member for Sheffield were acted on, it
might lead to great inconvenience to British subjects,
and therefore the consideration should be, whether a
better system of granting passports could not be adopted.
As there appeared to be a general wish for the abolition
of passports altogether, and as he understood there had
been some negotiation on the subject with France, he
would ask the Noble Lord whether he had had any com-
munication with any other Power of Europe, and whether
there was any probability of that most absurd system of
passports being abolished?
Lord PALMERSTON said be certainly had a very
good reason for not answering the question of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Montrose, as he was not able to
do so—(A laugh)—but he could say that a very small
number of passports had been granted at the Foreign-
office. As to the question of his Right Honourable
Friend the Member for Northampton, there had
been no communication made by her Majesty's
Government to any foreign Government in re-
gard to this matter, which peculiarly belonged
to their own internal regulations. He did not know
of any ground upon which we should be justified
in asking any foreign Government to dispense with re-
gulations which they adopted for their own internal pur-
poses; but certainly, some time age, there was reason to
think that the French Government was going to recon-
sider these arrangements. He had not heard that they
had carried that intention into effect, nor had he heard
that any other Government had any intention of abolish-
ing the sy-tern of passports.
Mr. ROEBUCK wished to know whether there was
any passport between this country and Belgium?
Lord PALMERSTON believed that passports con-
tinued to he given.
Lord MAHON said the system to which the Hon.
Member for Sheffield referred still existed, but was
leniently administered. Passports were required, but
were not ofcen asked for. The Noble Lord, however, had
not met the objection of the facility of evading the ex-
pense of obtaining British passports at the Foreign office
under the present system.
Mr. HUME called the attention of the Noble Lord to
V:e charge of 22,000/. for Queen's messengers and extra
couriers. He thought, since the facilities of travelling
by railway had been afforded, that expense might be
considerably reduced; though, certainly, his desire would
be to reduce the number of dispatches.—(Laughter.)
Lord PALMERSTON said, that both at home and
abroad considerable reductions had been recently made

THE SUN,

in the amount of travelling charges for messengers and
couriers.
Mr. ROEBUCK understood that English messengers
travelled much more slowly than foreign messengers;
and he had been informed that the cause of it was, first,
that English messengers were paid a certain mileage;
and, next, that instead of travelling as other messengers
and couriers did, namely, on horseback, they travelled
like gentlemen, in carriages.
Lord PALMERSTON could assure the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman that he was misinformed when he
said that the British messengers were at all less expedi-
tious than the messengers of other countries. They al-
ways went by railway when that mode of travelling was
available, otherwise they travelled in carriages. It was
impossible they could carry their bags containing dis-
patches on horseback. As a proof of the zeal with which
these messengers rendered their services to the Govern-
ment of this country he would mention an instance in
which a gentleman (for they were gentlemen) per.
formed his duty on an occasion when it was
required that he should make an extraordinary
ffort. One of the Queen's messengers, Colonel
Townley, in order to carry a dispatch of very consider-
able importance from the Foreign-office to Constanti-
nople at the time when a question was pending between
Russia and Turkey, was three days and three nights in
the saddle without quitting it, and performed that jour-
ney in the worst weather and under the greatest possible
difficulties. This showed that these servants of the public
wore willing to perform, and capable of performing duties,
when required of them, which one would think it was
almost impossible that any human being would be able
to go through. He (Lord Palmerston) was glad at having
this opportunity of doing justice to that excellent courier
whose great exertions he had mentioned, tied whose zeal
bad not been surpassed by any person who had been
employed in that department of the public service.
Mr. ROEBUCK had no doubt of the truth of the
Noble Lord's statement; still he understood that while
the distance between Paris and Madrid was performed
by foreign couriers in five days, en English messenger
always took seven days to accomplish the journey. He
was informed also that an English messenger always
took some person with him, who paid the expenses of i
the journey to the messenger, although that messenger
was paid by the British Government. This was a sort
of stigma upon the public service of England; and, at
the same time, made it appear that our messenger system
was used to subserve the private interest of individuals
to the detriment of the public service.
Lord PALMERSTON said it very often happened
that it was of great advantage to the public service that
the messenger should have some one with him. The
messenger never allowed the bags containing the dis-
patches to be out of his possession, and yet his presence
was necessary at different places in order to show his
passports, to hire horses, and so forth. It would be very
difficult for him to do this and to carry his bags with
him. He (Lord Palmerston) did not believe that the
British messengers were slower travellers than the mes-
sengers of other countries. They were required to state
the time of their arrival at, and of their departure from,
every place, and his impression was that the opinion of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was not founded upon
a true stet° of the facts.
The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 37,400/, for the salaries and expenses of
the office of Secretary of State for the Colonies was then
agreed to.
The vote of 43,0001., for defraying the salaries and
expenses of the Privy Council-office and the Board of
Trade was postponed.
A vote of 2,0001., to pay the Salary of the Lord
Privy Seal, and a vote of 24,1001. for the salaries and
contingent expenses of the Postmaster-General, were
agreed to.
On the sum of 6,5761. being proposed to pay the
salaries and expenses of the department of Controller-
General of the Exchequer.
Colonel SIBTHORP repeated his denunciation of the
appointment of Lord Monteagle to the office of Con-
troller of the Exchequer, as being one of the most
corrupt jobs that had ever been practised. He (Colonel
Sibthorp) had, however, done some good in moving for
a return of the number of days the Noble Lord attended
at his office, as it had been the means of making that
Noble Lord more punctual in his attendance. Unfor-
tunately, the salary of the Noble Lord was not included
in this vote, but was paid under an Act of Parliament
out of the consolidated fund, otherwise he would have
moved that it be deducted from the vote. Ho considered
the whole of the duty of this department might be per-
formed more economically and satisfactorily by the Bank
of England. He would not object to add 500/. a year to
the salary of the Assistant-Controller, if it were taken
from the salary of the Controller-General.
Mr. HUME said the Hon. and Gallant Member might
with great propriety propose to abolish the office of
Assistant-Controller. [Colonel SIBTHORP.-.-" No: he is
the best of the two."] But they could not touch the
Controller-General, who held his appointment under an
Act of Parliament. By abolishing the office of Assis-
tant-Controller they would be recognizing the principle
that there ought to exist no office to which duties were
not attached.
The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 2,7001. for salaries and expenses for the
State Paper-office was agreed to.
On tho sum of 3,6401. being proposed to defray a por-
tion of the expenses of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
of England,
Mr. V. SMITH expressed an opinion that this vote
ought not to appear in these estimates. In the report of
the Committee in reference to the Ecclesiastical Com-
mission it was stated that it appeared that the duties per•
formed by that establishment were confined to the
management of ecclesiastical property, and generally to
the control of ecclesiastical business, and that the Com-
mittee were of opinion that the vote might fairly be de-
frayed altogether out of the funds of the Commission.
On the 15th of March, 1844, the Commissioners agreed
to the proposal for throwing upon the property intrusted
to them such portion of the salaries as might be con-
sidered immediately connected with that property and
the management of it. Now, ho could not conceive what
other duties the clerks who were mentioned in this esti-
mate had to perform, except what were connected with
that property. Therefore the Commissioners had, in
fact, assented to defray the whole expense of their estab-
lishment. Perhaps some arrangement might be made
by which the payment of these expenses would be pro-
vided for in the Bill respecting the Ecclesiastical Com-
mission now before the House?
Sir B. HALL concurred in the opinions expressed by
the last speaker. He also complained that the Commis-
sioners had furnished no report for a considerable time.
They were equally backward in making returns ordered
by the House. The Commissioners were directed to
make a return on the 2d of this month, which they had
not yet complied with. The House of Commons knew
nothing of what the Ecclesiastical Commissioners were
about except this, that the episcopate body had spent
143,0001. in building their own palaces in eight dioceses,
whilst only the miserable sum of 5,0001. had been appro-
priated in the same dioceses to the augmentation of
small livings.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY thought it only reasonable that this
vote should be postponed until after the Ecclesiastical
Commission Bill had been discussed. The returns to
which the Hon. Member for Marylebone had referred
were returns with which the Ecclesiastical Commis-
sioners, as such, had nothing to do. The returns must
be made from the various dioceses, and their preparation
would occupy considerable time.
The vote was then postponed.
THE POOR-LAWS.
The next vote was 277,5001, to defray the expense of
administering the poor-laws.
Colonel SIBTHORP was of opinion that the new poor-
law had been productive of no benefit to the country,
whilst it had aggravated the misery of the poor by shutting
them up in bastiles. If there were any chance of suc-
ceeding he would propose to r‘duce the vote by 10 or
15 per cent.; but there was no chance of carrying a
proposition for retrenchment in the face of a well-filled
Treasury Bench, and such an array of " financial re-
formers" as he saw opposite These gentlemen on the
hustings declaimed loudly as to the necessity of' reducing
the expenditure by ten millions, but in the House of
Commons they invariably supported Ministers in resist-
ing every practical measure of economy.
Colonel I)UNNE suggested that the salaries of au-
ditors, schoolmasters and mistresses, and medical officers
in Ireland should be defrayed out of the consolidated
fond, as was done with respect to those charges in
England.

Mr. HUM.E, on the contrary, thought it would be a
better arrangement to remove all those charges from the
consolidated fund, and impose them on the unions.
Mr. BRIGHT found that the two secretaries to the
Poor-law Board—a Noble Member of that House (Lord
Ebrington) and Mr. Nicholls—had salaries of 1,5001. a
year eaoh, whilst the President of the Board received
2,000/. The salary of the secretary appeared large in
proportion to that of the president, and he thought that
1,0001. was enough for the former.—(A-cry of "Move.")
Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND expressed a hope that
the London board would continue to maintain some con-
trol over the medical department of the administration
of the poor-laws, otherwise the sick poor would be ne-
glected.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY referred to the fact, that
the large sum of 9,152/. was set down for the incidental
expenses of the Poor-law inspectors. That was equiva-
lent to 700/. to each of those gentlemen, independently
of their salaries, and would allow them nearly 2/. 10s. a-
day fur travelling expenses, if they travelled 300 days in
the year.
Mr. BAINES said that the two secretaries might be
looked upon as representing the former Poor-law Board,
the members of which had a salary of 2,000/. a year each.
The expense of the old Board was 6,0001.; that of the
present ono was only 5,000/. Allusion had been made
to the Peor•law inspectors. It was to the inspectors,
who came in place of the former Assistant-Commis-
sioners, but discharged some additional duties, that the
boards of guardians first applied in cases where advice
was desired; and on them also devolved the task of mak-
ing inquiry when it was necessary for the central board to
inform themselves on any question by means of an impar-
tial authority. He was certain that those who as members
of boards of guardians rendered gratuitous and most
efficient service to the country would be willing to beer
their testimony to the services rendered by the inspec-
tors, whose duty it was to make the poor-law work as
well and harmoniously as possible, each in his district,
and than whom there was no more valuable body of
public servants. The item of 9,1521. for travelling and
incidental expenses included the allowance made to in-
spectors for travelling expenses, the allowance at the
rare of one guinea a day each for other expenses, and
also the salaries of inspectors' clerks.
Mr. SEYMER concurred in the remarks made by the
President of the Poor-law Board with reference to the
inspectors; the guardians had only to complain that they
did not see them often enough.
Mr. BAINES observed that an inspector, whenever a
union expressed a wish for the presence of one, forthwith
proceeded to the spot.
Mr. BRIGHT proposed to reduce the vote by the sum

~ ~

LONDO N,

Mr. MILES approved of the office of auditoorst,
obfutthhieg
thought the amount of their salaries ought to be given.
item,M on Mr. HUMS
tthe
ground w ould
that
te
efauerh unionthe striking
u
ought to pay the
expense of its audit.—(Oh.)
Alderman COPELAND said be would undertake to
get efficient persons to audit the accounts of the unions
for 801. a year.—(Hear.)
After a few words from Mr. SLANEY and other Hon.
Members,

frtdhat the
number was
Mr. BUCK said it was the union charges that were
complained of universally.
Mr. BAINES said, on looking at the appendix, he
found the names and services of the auditors set forth in
full. The averages of the salaries of the auditors was
2701., and the number about fifty.
a uAd i lt do er
sr mfaonr SIDNEY
wsaasi d si hx e.number of
sufficient fur Ireland, then fifty auditors were too many
for England.
Mr. BRIGHT remarked the Hon. Member (Alderman
Copeland) had said he would get the accounts of each
union audited for 501. each. But on looking at the
number of unions, and the sums paid in the aggregate,
he found that the cost to the country was not more than
about 221. per union.—(Laughter.) Now, though he
was always willing to vote for the retrenchment of any_
rthanindom gsumpeortfliounosuss,ueshtilul
shececrotualily appealed to him to
dnnot give his support to
be that of the Hon. Alderman opposite.
Colonel SIB 1110Rr said Hon. Members opposite
gave a very singular support to her Majesty's Ministers
in that House on these questions, which contrasted very
found
be wherever
es
o there h
ratherer e
oddly with their reform and retrenchment speeches on
the hustings.—(Hoar, hear, and laughter.) But
of Honourable Gentlemen opposite showed them to be as
far as the principles of economy were concerned,
mereshams and shadows. Every day he passed through the
wdreosnes.h—en(Leyaughttheerr.; The conduct would be
streets of the metropolis he met persons who cautioned
him to beware of the traps of the Free-traders, who
would, he hoped, some fine morning be caught in their
own traps.—(Laughter.)
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the vote ... ... ... 181
Against it ... ... ... ... -56
Majority ~ ••• —125
Mr. W. MILES then called the attention of the Com•
mittee to the charge for schoolmasters and schoolmis-

necessary to bring the salaries of the secretaries down to
1,000/ each.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
that there were two Secretaries, one in Parliament,
the other not. The latter used to receive 2,0004 as
a Commissioner, had served thirteen years, and now
discharged duties es important for 1,500/. ' It would be
exceedingly hard to deprive him of that amount ; a
piece of more false economy could not be proposed. The
salary of the Secretary who held a seat in that House
would come for consideration before the Committee on
official salaries recently appointed, and pending the in-
quiry of the Committee it would not be dealing fairly
with the office for the House of Commons to interfere.
The Government were prepared to act on the recom-
mendations of that Committee when they were made.
Mr. BRIGHT admitted that there was some force in
the remark of the Right Hon. Gentleman, with refe-
rence to the salary in the second case being under con-
sideration of the Committee on Official Salaries. All
gentlemen were declared efficient when their salaries
were made the sulject of discussion. He should not
divide the House on his proposition.
Mr. EVELYN DENISON recalled the attention of
the House to the allowance of a guinea a-day given to
each of the inspectors. He described it as a salary under
another name.
Mr. BAINES acknowledged that the allowance was
really a part of salary. From the first it had been ar-
ranged that a certain portion of salary should be so
paid. The travelling expenses charged were the actual
expenses of locomotion.
Mr. MONSELL thought the charges for medical
officers should be paid from the consolidated fund in
Ireland, as in England and Scotland.
Sir G. PECHELL inquired why the judges of
County Courts should be allowed only 15s. a day, when
the Poor-law inspectors were allowed one guinea a-day ?
He did not approach the subject with the feelings he
had on former occasions had to express. He had nothing
to say of mismanagement, for he was satisfied the pro-
ceedings of the Poor-law hoard were now conducted on
a very different footing; and he trusted the President of
the Board would continue to give the satisfaction he
had hitherto given.
Colonel RAWDON thought the allowance fur me-
dical officers ought to be extended to Ireland.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed
that in 1846 it had been arranged to pay certain charges
for medical officers, ecc., out of the consolidated fund in
England and Scotland, where the county police were not
paid by the Government. But the cost of the constabu-
lary in Ireland was paid out of the public Exchequer;
for the year ending February last it amounted to
of 90,0001. within
tsh7o4,loaosotlt,whoayveiaorgs.increased upwards
Colonel DUNNE observed that the police in Ireland
ought to be reckoned as a military force. The expense
of the poor-law in Ireland had much increased since the
arrangement made in 1846.
Sir R. FERGUSON reminded the Chancellor of the
Exchequer that a portion of the constabulary expenses
had always been borne by the consolidated fund. The
portion borne by local taxation had never exceeded
160,0001 or 180,000/
Mr. E. DENISON briefly supported the view of the
Hon. Member for Limerick, with respect to the payment
of the medical officers of the unions in Ireland.
Mr. BRIGHT did not think that Ireland was so badly
used in this matter after all, seeing that last year 62,8001.
was voted for the Poor-law establishment of Ireland, and
only 35,000/. for that of England.—(Hear, hear.) With
respect to a general local taxation, ho begged to say that
a thorough reform of the grand jury system would en-
able Ireland to obtain a reduction of that without coming
to that House.
Mr. MONSELL said that supposing the grand jury
system were reformed, the only saving that could be
effected by that means was upon the 1,100,000/. of grand
jury cess—and of that sum the Hon. Member would
perhaps be surprised to learn that the grand juries had
the control over one-fourth only, the rent being compul-
sory.--(Hear, hear.)
Mr. V. SMITH wished to know what was the meaning
of the Irish Poor-law Board keeping an architect?
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that the ordinary duties
of the architect were to visit and inspect the workhouse
buildings; and at present there was a large number of
additional workhouses in the course of erection.
Mr. VESEY considered that hitherto the architect had
been a nuisance rather than otherwise, and he should be
glad to see the office abolished. There was no such office
in connexion with the English Board.
Sir. W. SOMERVILLE said, that the cases of Eng-
land and Ireland were totally different. In England the
building of the workhouses was undertaken by the
boards of guardians themselves, who employed theirown
architects.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. ARK WRIGHT moved as an amendment upon
the vote then under consideration, that instead of 13
inspectors—eight at 7001. a-year, and five at 5001. a-year
each, the number should be reduced to eight, viz., three
at 7001. a-year each, and five at 5001., making a total re-
duction of 3,500/.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND felt it to be his duty to
support the proposition, because with the great diminu-
tion which had recently taken place in the value of pro-
perty, it was impossible that the existing taxation of the
country could be supported.—(Hoar, hear.)
Sir R. PRICE was aware that a strong opinion pre-
vailed in some quarters in favour of a considerable di-
minution of the Poor-law Board in London; but in his
opinion that board would be of little value, and would
but ill perform the functions for which it was ap-
pointed, if it were diminished in any considerabl degree.
Sir G. GREY said, that the Government originally
proposed that the number of inspectors should be 12, but
it was afterwards agreed by the House, upon the recom-
mendation of the Committee who investigated the sub-
ject, to leave the number to be fixed from time to time by
the Government according as they should see fit. He
hoped, therefore, that, without seine better reason than
had yet been urged, that arrangement would not be
disturbed.—(Hear, bear.) The amendment had been
put upon the ground of economy; but he trusted that
some other 'branch of expenditure would be found to
exercise economy upon, rather than that the poor should
be deprived of the security they at present enjoyed for
the due administration of the law.--(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT could not consent to vote for the amend-
ment without some further information upon the subject.
13 inspectors were perhaps too many; but, on the other
hand, eight might be too few.—(Hear.)
Mr. BAINES said, that Mr. Buller had, upon mature
consideration, come to the opinion that fewer than 13 in-
spectors would be insufficient, and his own experience
fully confirmed that opinion.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE was not disposed to support the
amendment, considering itnecessary to have that efficient
inspection, the want of which had been a complaint
especially prominent in the Andover Union inquiry.
There were, however, many items in this enormous esti-
mate which he thought objectionable. For example, be
wanted to know how many auditors there were, and in
what proportions the large item of 13,500/. was dis-
tributed among them.
Mr. BAINES could not exactly say at the moment
how many auditors there were, but the salaries varied
from 2501. to 500/. per annum, according to the districts.
The increase is the charge under this head, from 13,0301.
to 13,500/., was occasioned by the expense of advertising
the various audits.
Majority .......................
The Committee divided; the numbers were—
For the amendment ................... 36
Against it ................................. 157
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY then ...... that the vote,
salaries of auditors in England and Wales, be reduced
from 13,5001. to 5,500/. The smaller sum would furnish,
orce
at 5501. per annum each, ten auditors, a number quite
sufficient for thoroughly efficient auditing. ---121
Mr. BAINES considered that the auditors were not
at all overpaid. They received from 2501. to 500/. per
plivYr°eilndvgifilogr their settlement
the year, very laborious,a great portion of
many questions
considerable professional qualifications.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND Wished,
before they
acfnnaum
came to a division on the vote, to have in detail the
legaleac each
character for
services
tha andt
amount of the salaries paid to the auditors.
Viscount EBRINGTON could not at that moment re-
collect the number of auditors—(gear)—but as long as
he bad had the honour of a seat at the Poor-law Board
the number had remained the same.
Alderman SIDNEY said if the item of auditors was
postponed there would be no necessity for dividing the
House. The number of auditors for Ireland, with the
number of clerks and other minor employsts, were given,
but no account was given of the number of the recipients
of this 13,0004; and if he received no better information
than had been given, he was afraid he must divide the
House

TUESDAY EVENING,

TIIE KILRUSII UNION.

-0:11 PI

! tresses, and inquired whether the system recommended
in 1846 was completely organized; whether a sufficient
number of persons had been appointed, and whether the
sum annually voted had been expended i❑ the payment
of their salaries?
Mr. BAINES regretted that he was not in a position
to answer the questions of the Hon. Gentleman, as he
had not given him notice of the questions. Great pains
had been taken to increase the efficiency of the school-
masters and schoolmistresses, and every opportunity had
been taken of making improvements in the schools.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND did not think the ex-
planation satisfactory, and felt it his duty to move that
the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. LAW trusted the Hon. Gentleman would not di-
vide the Committee, because it might imply a censure of
the distinguished President of the Poor-law Board,
whose labours had been so highly appreciated.—(llear,
hear.) If notice had been given be was quite sure the
Hon. Gentleman would have explained all the particulars,
as he had done o❑ previous questions which had been put
to him.

Mr. MILES said his intention was not to object to the
vote, but to elicit some explanation. A sum of 35,0001.
for educating 56,000 children was most reasonable, and
he did not nink that any such sum could be more bene-
ficially applied.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND having withdrawn the
amendment, the vote was agreed t
The next vote was 35,000/. to defray the expenses of
the Mint.
Mr. THORNELY wished to know what had become
of tiro florin—(Laughter)—and also whether it was in-
tended to make a new issue of threepenny pieces, which
were found so convenient to the retail trader?
Mr. SHIEL said he had already stated the reason
why the issue of the florin had been suspended, and that
it was intended to issue the coin in another shape with
the addition which public opinion appeared to require.
—(hear, hear.) With respect to the smaller coin,
instructions had been given that a large quantity should
be coined.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND wished to call the at-
tention of the Government to a matter of great import-
ance to the trading portion of the community who
suffered severely from the circulation of base coin. It
was only last week that the solicitor to the Mint re-
fused to prosecute a person for uttering base coin, when
the magistrate thought proper to commit the party; and
he knew many cases in which individuals had been pro-
secuted to conviction by the City authorities when the
Mint had refused to proceed against them. This was a
power which ought not to be vested in the solicitor to
the Mint, and he trusted that the Attorney-General and
the Master of the Mint would turn their attention to the
subject.—(llear.)
Mr. HUME wanted to know when the change recom-
mended in the Commission of last year would be car-
ried out?
Mr. SIIIEL said that no time weuld be lost in making
the changes recommended by the Commissioners.
Mr. LAW said the grievance referred to by his Hon.
Friend (Mr. Alderman Copeland) was well worthy the
consideration of the Government. The Mint was in a
different situation to other public bodies, so far as prose-
cutions were concerned. Although a magistrate might
recommend a prosecution, the Mint might prosecute or
not as they thought proper; and if, when they did pro-
secute, the expenses of the witnesses should be disallowed
by the court, the Mint authorities could pay them out of
a Government fund.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the practice was,
that no Mint prosecutions should be instituted without
the depositions being laid before the Attorney-General,
and without the sanction of the Attorney. General, and
in all cases where penalties were inflicted the prosecu-
tions were instituted under the authority of the board.
Mr. LAW said his remark applied to ordinary cases of
misdemeanour.
Mr. SHELL said that all the business of that kind had
been transferred to the Solicitor to the Treasury, assisted
by Mr. Powell.
Alderman SIDNEY called the attention of the house
to the case cf a noted " smasher" brought before Mr.
Alderman Farebrother on Saturday, in which the soli-
citor of the Mint declined to prosecute, and withheld
evidence, but ultimately consented to do so on the ma-
gistrate committing the man. lie hoped the Govern-
ment would not continue to connive, through their officers,
at the escape of persons detected in passing bad money.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the Govern-
ment did net connive —it only hesitated to bring its
weight to bear when there was no decided chance of
a conviction. It was, however, competent for the ma-
gistrate to commit them, and the parties aggrieved to
prosecute.
Alderman COPELAND complained of the power
vested in the solicitor of the Mint in the matter of such
prosecutions.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE alluded to the inconvenience and
expense entailed upon counties by the course taken in
regard to parsons accused of passing bad money by the
authorities of the Mint.
The vote was then agreed to.
12,678/., for the care and arrangement of the public re-
cords, keepers' salaries, &c.
Mr. A. lIOPE protested against the vote, on the
ground that their condition was not satisfactory. Some
of them were kept in the Chapter House of Westminster,
others in the Tower of London, others in the riding-
house at Carlton-ride, while the building erected for the
purpose was wholly insufficient. There was a fire-proof
chest in every parish church in England; but on the
Carlton-ride a policeman was kept as the only preserva-
tive against fire. It was a disgrace to the country. He
should not, however, divide the House on the subject.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had
stated at an early period of the session that it was his
intention to ask a vote to erect a building for keeping
the records on the Crown estate. He trusted, there-
fore, that the House would agree to the vote then
before it.
Colonel SIBTIIORP said the records were at present
in a worse state than they were forty years since.
The vote was agreed to after a few words from Mr.
H (ISLE and Mr. F. MAuLE.
10,9941. for the salaries and expenses of the inspectors
of factories.

Mr. HUME said the vote was a reflection thrown
upon manufacturers, and he hoped it would soon be
dispensed with altogether.
Mr. BRIG LIT said, whenever there was a Home Se-
cretary appointed, a near relative of his was commonly
sent down into Lancashire as an inspector of factories,
who was generally ignorant of the subject be was sent
down to superintend. Such places should not be so dis-
posed of. It was not satisfactory.
Sir G. GREY said, only ono place had fallen in dur-
ing his tenure of office, and he had consolidated it with
another, so as to make one person perform the duties of
both.

Lord J. MANNERS considered that inspectors o
factories wore a great advantage to the working classes.
The vote was then agreed to.
1,6101., salaries of certain officers in Scotland.—
Agreed to.

6,4641., salaries of officers in the household of the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland.—Agreed to.
24,2501., salaries and expenses in the office of the
Chief Secretary of Ireland.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE said there was an item of 2,7011.
for contingencies, which ho thought required some ex-
planation.
Sir G. GREY said it was almost impossible to state
those contingencies in detail.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that the items were all
specified in the appendix cf the report last year.
Major BERESFORD thought that 3,0001. was a large
sum for contingencies in such an office us that of the
Chief Secretary of Ireland. The contingencies in the
Home Secretary's office were last year only 1,8641.
Colonel SIBTHORP observed that the salary of the
Chief Secretary was 5,500/ He thought it ought to
be reduced, and begged to move that 500/. be struck off.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... ... .. 41
Against it ... ... ... 156
Majority
_ll5
The vote was accordingly agreed to, as also was the
following, viz.:-
5,4641. charges and expenses of the office of the Pay-
master of the Civil Service in Ireland.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and ob-
tained leave to sit again.
COURT 01? CHANCERY (IRELAND) BILL.
On the order of the day for the third reading of this
Bill,

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL proposed the insertion
of a clause giving compensation to officers of the court
after twenty years' service—the compensation not to ex-
ceed two-thirds of their annual salary.
The clause was agreed to, and the Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The third reading of the Elections (Ireland) Bill was
postponed after a short discussion.
The Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Bill and other
Bills were postponed.
The Metropolitan Interments Bill was committed pro
forma, and reported, with amendments.
The Petty Sessions (Ireland) Bill was read a second
time; and the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill was
understood to pass through Committee.
The Vestries and Vestry Clerks Bill was passed
through Committee and ordered to be reprinted.
ACTS OF PARLIA MENT ABBREVIATION BILL.
On the motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. STANFORD rose and said, that though ho con-
sidered this altogether an unobjectionable measure, he
hoped the Hon. and Learned Attorney-General would
consent to its being, referred to a Select Committee.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The Bill had come
down from the House of Lords, and he could not. there-
fore, consent to the suggestion of the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman.

The 13il1 was then passed through Committee and re-
ported to the House.
COURT OF PREROGATIVE (IRELAND) BILL.

On the motion of Mr. KEOGH, 'this Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to bo referred to a Select Com-
mittee.

On the motion of Mr. P. SCROPE, the following.
Members were nominated a Select Committee on Kil-
rush Union:—Mr. Poulett Scrope, Sir William Sonat r-
vine, Sir Lucius O'Brien, the Earl of Arundel and
Surrey, Mr. Monsen, Lord Naas, Mr. Stafford, Mr. Her-
bert, Mr. Fagan, Mr. O'Flaherty, Mr. Shaft° Adair,
Mr. Bright, MrCornewall Lewis, Sir Robert Ferguson,
and Mr. Clempnts.

THE DERBY DAY-ADJOURNMENT 01? THE
HOUSE.

Mr. BERESFORD gave notice that to-morrow he
should move that the House at its rising do aljourn to
Thursday.—(Hear, hear.)
The other business on the paper having been disposed
of, the House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock.

Dispatches were received yesterday at the Colonial-
office from the Governors of Canada and the other
North American Colonies, and also from the Governors
of New South Wales and the Gold Coast.

MA Y 2B, 1850.