The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-20 00:00:00

ion
of
Olt
lett

commending mercy in the case of the two persons to
whom he had alluded. He (Mr. M. Gibson) was glad
that the Right Hon. Baronet had adopted such a course,
because he was convinced the crime was increased by
severe penalties. He thOught the Hon. Gentleman,
!Wore he questioned the prerogative of mercy, ought to
have inquired within himself how many of the crimes
r which men were convicted the State was responsible
for, in consequence of bad legislation. No step was taken
,to remove squalid want and distress, and the result was,
Tat a strong feeling existed among the labouring classes
Vjlatthey were neglected, and that ail the legislation of that
louse was for the bejiefit of the higher and of the middle
classes. There was a feeling among the lower classes
that
the Legislature did not care for them, and the
clergy of the Church had contributed to spread that
feeling. What had the Rev. Godolphin Osborne told
thetile Duke of Richmond ? Why, he stated this to him,
t if the Legislature would only give the labourers' half
the attention that was given to the landlords condition, they
!ould arrive at the conclusion which he had' arrived at,
that there was not a single animal used on their 'farms
that suffered so much neglect as the labourer.
Was it, therefore, to be wondered at, tßat a feeling of
discontent had greatly increased? It had been said that
clime arose in the manufacturing districts from want of
Pastoral care. Why, these counties to which he had al-
tided were counties of churches and clergymen.—
(Rear, hear.) There was plenty of pastoral care there.
ut more was wanted than that. Mr. Osborne stated
further, that neither the law nor the Gospel could pre-
vail when men were deprived of the bread which they
rlll fr.olt to have, and were treated worse than brutes. He
M. Gibson) did not think any increase of the
churches or of clergymen, or the keeping up the price
°I Corn, would conciliate the labouring classes with the
oWners of the land, or would ward off those evils which
would assuredly come some day. When the limited'sur-
fce of this island, and its increased population, was
insidered, he had to charge gentlemen opposite with
being themselves the means of strengthening the preju-
dices against them among the labouring classes. One
leason given mach incendiarism was the dislike the la-
ourer had to inery. He saw that machinery was
taking his labour out of his hands; and what had been
the course adopted by the landlords on that subject?
thy, even at public meetings on the corn-law question,
ieu they chose to revile the manufacturer, they en-
ered into tirades against the use of machinery in menu-
tsetories. The labourers, hearing them using these
armaments, and finding that machinery was used by the
tenants of the landlords greatly to- their detriment,
they were led to the conclusion that machinery was
ill:Platy bad to them as it was for the la;
these
in manufactories. The landlords had fomented
feelings for party purposes, to raise a prejudice
against the manufacturers, and now it. had. recoiled
against themselves they would come forward to advocate
the use of it. With respect to wages, the same attempt
I'l_l4 been made to delude the poor labourers. They had
been told that the farmers could afford to give them
better wages if they chose, Now that he (Mr. M. Gibson)
• •
denied to be the case. Farmers, generally speaking,
could hardly afford to give the wages they did. The
landowners stated that the farmers were screwing the
fires
down, and that was the cause of the incendiary
les that had taken place. He believed that the control •
°,l,` wages was entirely out of the farmers' power;—whilst
ue rent of the landlord increased the money would
Into landlords' pockets, derived, as it was, from the sweat
2f the brow of the labourer. The expectations that had
been held out by the promise of protection had induced
haveZFie farmers to g v
ie hi.gher rent than the otherwise would
done, and to join in so us an enterprise.
beginning
was happy, however, to see that the farmers were'
the
to open their eyes. He had been lately into
•,. country, where he had no doubt the Right Hon.
Baronet would be glad to be at the present moment,
and it was his opinion that the farmers began to think
that the Right Honourable Baronet's protection was
:_quivocal, and he (M. M. Gibson) wished to en-
uraec such a feeling. Such he believed to be
the`" feelings of the present time, and he had no doubt
ethat these feelings would tend to good. The less con-
fidence the farmers had in protection, the more likely
„Ivere they to conduct their business in a profitable man-
rr• The agricultural labourers were deeply interested'
$l,l, the prosperity of the farmers, and the prosperity of
the farmers would be, best consulted by not depending
ert that House, but on their own exertions. He.trusted
thatl he should be met fairly on this subject by the Right
(,°P. Baronet opposite. Inquiries had been made by
utrimittees into the state of the Aborigines, the
4‘.fricals, and even the Esquimaux, but no inquiries had
been
made into the condition of the agricultural
labourer. Some gentlemen got up in that House and
Stated that there was no distress, while others of high
jiathority had stated that there was deep distress. 'They
had magistrates stating that the working classes lOoked
on with a sort of satisfaction at the terrible destruction
or their neighbours' stacks and farms. Mr. Bevan, the
chairman of the quarter-sessions, stated that the
People at Middleharn Hall did all they could
h?remote the fire, and another person at Hitcham
With made a similar statement. The motion
wit,;h which he intended to conclude he had pet into
111.:ting, but he did not wish to confine the Right Hon.
ettalet to the words he had there used. If he would
sub? send down some gentlemen to inquire into the
ki,Ject, who were unconnected with the Poor-law Com-
„,--s,eners, or who did not hold any situation that would
7,41'0 them a biased character—if he would do that, he
have
M. Gibson) would agree to any proposition that would
I,ave the effect of carrying out the object he had in view.
re would conclude by moving that a humble address to
reason Majesty, representing to her Majeity that there was
Jason to believe that the incendiarism now prevalent in
the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, and Cambridge,
arose from distress, and praying her Majesty to issue a
Commission to ascertain what was the cause of that
distress. It might be said that this was a partial motion,
because it was confined to certain counties. With respect
to that, he would only say that, if,'after this inquiry was
terminated, it was thought _desirable to extend it to all
the rural districts of the country, he could have 'no
tc,"lcie tion to 'it ; indeed, he thought it would be most wise
res,„° 80. • He thought there had been greatneglect with
ha:tv to the condition of the working classes, and he
Would id,' if they put' off this inquiry much longer, they
Sir :Toe the delay.
just • GRAHAM said, after the speech that had
wouideea delivered by the Hon. Gentleman, the House
tei„ see that it was his duty to offer some observitions.
-ug the time of the delivery of that speech it oc-.
Curved to his mind, to ask himself what the object of the
Pourable Gentleman could be in delivering thelsenti-
trts he had done, and he had come to the conGlusion
hiat only a deep sense of duty to the public had ilduced
PI to make the speech he had done. He had, heard
_ith if great satisfaction what,the Hon. Member had
tot stated, he should have felt it his duty to have com-
municated to the House, that this crime, though so
:graceful, and having such a tendency to spread, being
a contagious nature:, was diminishing. Cer-
tn;al7 it was an extraordinary period to make tbat ads
e;s81011, and, knowing that fact, that he should have
it his duty to have addressed to the House
speechhe had just made. The Hon. Member had told
dim not to take a chief constable's view of this matter ;
was bound to say, whether the Hon. Member con-
sidered it a chief constable's duty or not, he thought a
discussion of this kind forced upon the attention of Par
1 -
Lament, had a direct tendency to increase' the crime.—
;'car, hear.) There was such a thing as fannteg the
Mouldering flame, and it was quite possible that a dis-
eassion such as the Hon. Member had introduced that
extinguished.-(Hear,
would cast fuel upon the flames which were:almost
-"t,ulguished.—(Hear, hear.) What good, let him ask,
could arise from the various topics the Hon. Member
:d introduced ? Why, what had been the occupation
0
that House for the last four or five weeks ? Late and
erq,
g, morning and evening, they had been
:cussin with the most intense desire to promote
'lie interests and add to the comforts ?f the
labouring classes, the amendment of that law; which
Provided for their relief; and the Hon. Gentle Man ad-
rted himself that while they were so employed, he
thought that great advocate of the rights and comforts of
poor—(Lond cheers from the Ministerial bendhes)—
the)*
been seeking elsewhere that gratification which, if
-e)* had consulted merely their own pleasure,
they should have sought' with. him.—(Hear,' hear.)
4
had been absent consulting that enjoyment,
at'ne they had been devoting much pains and earnest
t the
to devising some means by which the misfor-
tunes of their poorer fellow-subjects might be alleviated.
ti Pat was the meaning of the comparison the Hon. Member
which
between the poor of this country and the inquiries
i,;-"ieb had been instituted into the state of the Abori-
Vies of various parts of the world—the Hottentots and
„,:cluitnaux on which he founded an analogy for the pre-
'tent inquiry ? What wan the meaning of the allusion
le Made to the coldheartedness and selfishness of the
ana
Gird proprietors?
GIBSON—I quoted the words of a clergyman.
-1r JAMES GRAHAM had a great respect for the
tier
gYmen of this country, but among that
:dY there might be indiscreet • individuals ; there
the uich a thing—he did net say he admired
character—as a popularity-hunting parson as well as
a' agitating Member of Parliament.—(Cheers:) ,The
11,°a• Member had quoted from the letter of a clergy-
:l ; but, at a time when anything like excitement. re-
eZied, was it likely to add to the peace or order of the
entry, which it was the doctrine of the religion of
.I.lv,ieu that gentleman was the minister to diffuse
'"ung all , classes? But the Hon. Gentleman would
oerleit him to tell him, that there was no need for a,
,Ttainittee of Inquiry into the condition of the labouring
-asses of that district. He (Sir J. Graham) had stated
0
a former occasion that the assizes now in progress
wtettlr'ls not fail to throw a distinct light on the crime to
Cations, lie had adverted. He had had communi-
ee,"' ei•om the Judges who ' were now em-
'led 'in truing the criminals in that district. He had
14'''''at •ss •
satis,actison in stating that there was no difficulty
I, administering the law throughout that district. There
Rra' great willingness to disclose the truth ; there_ was
ei.l at impartiality on the part of juries, and great 'dis-
atidraivtn.ation in their verdicts. The guilty were convicted,
here there was fair cause to doubt the proofs ad-
"(I, the innocent had had the benefit of that doubt ;
and
Nsa, he was told, upini the highest authority, that there
thro"° symptom whatever of a diseased state of society
lighout that county, and, generally speaking, the
erim_
t es that had been committed there had been traced
oPersonal enmity, or had been committed by very
e„ngoffenders. He believed lie stated the fact—and
-ere w
, ere
gentlemenpresent who were better acquainted
ae'vteriat,i than himself-"-- when he said that, at C,helmsferd,
of I._ children had ,been committed for trial on charges
t 1
.endiarism, of the ages of 8,9, and 12 years. He
,
also heard from Huntingdon, that two children, one
4°29, and the other 11, had been convicted of this
die • He had received a suggestion. to which he was
..a,posed to pay attention, that he should insert` in the
the _wrhich had gone up from this House, in reference to
bring which the Hon. Gentleman had felt it his duty
1,11,71, g under their consideration, a clause inflicting the
eotou'lnBr. ent of whipping in reference tothis offence, when
ferenc_"!4 by juvenile offenders. The House, in re-
e to another offence, to which he would not more

particularly refer where notoriety was sought by juve-
nile offenders, did add that penalty to the.F:other infiidL
by the law. It bad been suggested to him that they
should_follovi this example. He was bound to state that,
with regard to these juvenile offenders, as far as thei
could discover, it was bad example that had produced
that effect but he would repeat that there was no proof
whatever ofa generally. .diseased state of societyamong
the labouring classes in the district the Hon. Gentle-
man hiul alluded to. If he could believe that a Commit-
tee of Inquiry was necessary, he would not hesitate to
appoint one, but at the present moment, with the crime
decreasincs, the law being carried into execution without
tlifficultyi7those
.who perpetrated the crime being com-
mitted. for. trial, and being about to be tried, it was not
under such circumstances that he thought it expedient
to advise the Crown to depart from the usual course
of administering the law, or to appoint a Committee
for investigating the circumstanees. With respect to the
other topics the Hon. Gentleman had thought fit to in-
troduce, it would be enough for him to say that he did not
think 61E61 the language the Hon. Gentleman had ad-
dreSied to. the House, or the train of argument, if argu-
ment it could be called, which was rather a course of
invective, was likely, on the present occasion, to induce
any large portion of the House to concur with him in
the motion he had made. He was quite satisfied that
neither the speech of the Hon. Gentleman, nor his mo-
tion, if it could be carried, would have the effect of
diminishing the evils which he declared he was desirous
of alleviating, 'On the contrary, he was quite satisfied,
though it did not become him to impute motives to the
Hon: Gentleman that he had acted with indiscretion in
the course he hadi taken—one which was more likely to
produce than to prevent the evils of which he complained.
On these grounds he should offer his most decided op-
position to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. WODEHOUSE said there would be other op-
portunities of replying to the speech of the Honourable
Gentleman, of which he should not fail to avail himself.
He should only address himself, at present, to the ob-
servations the Hon. Gentleman made with respect to him-
'self. The Hon. Member had stated that he (Mr. Wode-
house) had arraigned the exercise of the royal preroga-
tive of mercy. He was standing in the presence of that
'House, and he distinctly denied any such intention.
The case alluded to was of a peculiar nature. Two per-
sons were tried for incendiarism, found guilty, and sen-
tenced to fifteen years' transportation. A few weeks
•afterwards 'they received a free pardon. It was utterly
imposiible to deny that that was a circumstance calcu-
lated to create surprise. But when the Hon. Gentleman
said that he was an advocate for the dungeon, he begged
leave to tell him that the more he inquired into this sub-
ject the more he would find that these fires were not
the effect of the ill-usage—the impression which the
Hon. Member intended to convey. As far as his own
County was concerned, ihere was an instance of three
fires being caused by a child between 11 and 12 years
old. There was no doubt of his guilt, but somehow he
was such a favourite with his master and mistress that
they could get no conviction against him. There was
another ease. in. Leicestershire of a fire caused by a deaf
and dumb..man, who had previously been convicted of the
crime .of.cutting the throat of a donkey 'belonging to a
neighbour. Of his guilt there was no doubt ; but a me-
morial -was presented to the 'Secretary of State in his
favour, and a poor woman who had given evidence against
-him- was burned in effigy. It had been proved that eight
fires bad been caused in the county 'of Sussex by one
man who was not at all connected with the agriculture
ofthat county, being a cooper. He believed that the
discontent that prevailed among the working classes
might be materially attributed to the nonsense which
-the... Hon. Gentleman and others bad industriously
circulated among them with respect to wages. With re-
gard to the assertion the Hon. Member had made of his
having arraigned the prerogative of mercy; there was no
foundation for the assertion, and he gave it his most un-
qualified contradiction.
Mr. DARBY alluded to the quotation that had been
made-from the letter of the Rev. Mr. Osborne, and de-
fended the Duke of Richmond from the charge that that
letter made upon him, of being careless of the interests*
.of the poor labourers. He could speak from his own
knowledge that no man was more studious of their in-
terests than the Noble Duke. He strongly condemned
the-course the Hon. Member had taken of originating.,
such a- discussion, as it might tend to increase the com-
mission of the crime.
Mr. BRIGHT said he had noticed ever since he had
had the honour of holding a seat in that House, and ever
since he had been in the habit of reading the accounts
of its proceedings in the public journals, that there was
a great disinclination to inquire into anything connected
with. the agricultural districts. If such an inquiry was
proposed,-it was sure to be discovered that the time was
most inconvenient for it. Why all this sensibility should
exist -was more than he could understand, except by re-
ferring it to some questions with which many Hon.
Geetlemen opposite did not think it advisable to trouble
the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman had alluded to
the absence of the Hon. Member for Manchester, who,
he said, had been enjoying himself in the country, while
he and his colleagues bad been employed in looking
after the interest of the poor, in arranging
the clauses of the Poor-law Amendment Act. It was
an excellent occupation, and one there was much occasion
for ; but it was just as useful to the country for some
Members of that House to apply their minds to disco-
vering What were the true causes of pauperism, as in
treating pauperism as it existed, and devising schemes-
for relieving it. The Right Hon. Baronet had spoken
of a certain clergyman as a " popularity-hunting
parson." Nothing was more easy than to use
phrases for the purpose of getting rid of, a fact which
any, individual might state. But this popularity-hunting
parson happened to be connected with the aristocracy of
the country. He wrote-or somebody else wrote for
him—Honourable before his name; and connected
with the aristocracy and the Church, it was
not likely that he would- run away with by
an absurd or vulgar sympathies' with the popu-
lation among whom he lived. Any Hon. Gentleman ac-
quainted with. the county of Dorsetshire must know that
that gentleman was most active and zealous in discharg-
ing the .duties of his office, and was most anxious in his
desire to promote the well-being of those among whom
he resided.- The Right Hon. Gentleman had spoken of
the favourable account he had received from the Judges
he had sent' into the counties' where these crimes had
taken place;—why no one supposed that witnesses could
not be had • no one supposed that convictions could not
be obtaieed; they knew perfectly well that during the
last few weeks there had not' been so many of these
outrages committed, as during some previous weeks. But
was it to be premised from that, that the causes of incendia-
rism had been removed ? Why, he knew, if the Right
Hon, Baronet or Hon. Gentlemen connected with those ,
counties did not, that there had been many threatening '
letters sent in various parts of these districts within a
very recent period. It was because his Hoz. Friend
did not wish to add to all the alarm that prevailed, by
stating the circumstances that had come to his know-
ledge during his visit to Suffolk, that he had not men-
tioned them particularly. He believed that the causes
of these outrages had not been by any means removed,
and that they might increase rather than diminish.
With respect to the question of wages which had been
alluded to • by the Hon. Member for South Norfolk, he
could assure' him that -there had never been a single
meeting' in an agricultural county at which his Hon.
Friend the Member for Stockport and himself had. at-
tended Airing the,
last year, at which they had not
endeavoured to elucidate the subject of .wages to the
meeting, so as to show that the rate of wages was not
at the disposal of the farmers, but depended mainly on
the number of the labourers as compared with the
amount of work to be done.- If the Hon. Gentleman
opposite had, in discussions in that House,
taken an equally wise course, there would have
been much less ill-feeling between the employers and
the employed than there was at present. But, for him-
self, he could say that there was no man living whose
conscience' was clearer of any imputation of having
endeavoured to stir up the labouring population against
those by whom they were employed, and on whose lands
they lived. He had spoken of the sensibility which
Hon. Members opposite displayed upon agricultural
questions. Now, at an early period of the present
session, a motion had been made for a Committee of
Inquiry into the effect of the protection duty on farmers
and farm-labourers. How was that motion met ?
The Right Hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board
of Trade, argued that there were persons on whom the
appointment of the Committee would have an unfavour-
able effect, particularly considering the quarter from
whence the proposition came. The sensibilities of Hon.
Gentlemen prevented him from granting that Committee,
though it would have been granted to any other interest.
The Right Hon. Baronet stated that this crime had uot been
so frequent during the last week as it had been before,
and that there was no disposition in the district itself
that these things should be inquired into. Now, there
was a meeting of the inhabitants of Rattlesden to take
into consideration the statement which appeared in the
Times, and they wished that a Commission should be
appointed to inquire into the causes of incendiarism.
That fact was not only a justification of his Hon. Friend,
but a condemnation of the Member for Essex, who had
never sought for an inquiry into their cause. Why, if only
one fire every month had occurred in the manufactur-
ing districts, nothingshould have been left undone to in-
vestigate a state of things so alarming. And was it not
alarming that so many fires were taking place in those
counties ? Was it nothing :that the insurance-offices
were suffering ?—that the tenant-farmers were suffer-
ing?—and that there was such an increase of one of the
worst of crimes? And yet they were taunted with inter-
fering with what was not their concern. Butif the Govern-
ment hadinstituted noinquiry, the Times and Chronick had,
and they , differed as to the cause of these fires.. The
Times stated that the new poor-law was the cause of
them. The Chronicle said "No ; for the crime existed
under the old law, but the no longer bearable distress of
the labourer was,the cause of it." He was yesterday in
Kent, and he stopped at an inn, kept by a respectable
person -who was a Tory, and.always supported the Right
Hon. Gentleman, the Paymaster of the Forces. He
(Mr. Bright) had asked him if there was any truth in
the statement, that the new poor-law was harsh upon
the lab aurer 2 He replied that no person who was rated
at less than 25 per cent. could be a guardian, and there-
fore'no person but the farmers could be elected guardians,
and 'that the labourer had no chance under Such a
system, for he had. a great difficulty to make both ends
meet. But there was a grievance before the poor-law
which pressed upon the labourer, for there were more
persons in those counties than there was employment
for, and he believed that on the landlords rested
the responsibility of such a state of things. The Mem-
ber for Northamptonshire had, on a former occasion,
accused him of saying that that House was a club of
landowners, and legislated for the benefit of landowners ;
but the public must -have come to that conclitsion,
though he had' not said so. Rents in Suffolk were
-as high,. or higher, than they were fifty years agog
but the return of capital employed by tenants was
net much higher now, than it was then, and the condition
of the labourers was becoming worse and worse. There
was the keenest competition amongst all the classes-of
the community, except amongst the landowners, who

`'

„:1J

had sheltered themselves from that competition, which
wailltugliaefad kin consequence of the laivs which4ey
had passed to-priitect themselves from it. With regard
to the number of labourers in Suffolk, he would ask
Hon. Gentlemen connected with that county to look at,
the returns which had lately been laid on the table of
that House. It appeared from those returns that in
that county alone 39,489 persons were relieved during
the quarter ending 1843, from the poor-rates. It ap-
peared that the number of paupers was 13 per cent. of the
whole population of the county, that in Sussex the
number of paupers was fourteen per cent. of the whole
population. Here was another proof that the popula-
tion was • greater than the employment that could be
afforded. It appeared from the late census, which was
made up to 1841, that the increase in the population,
during the last ten years, had been something more than
fourteen per cent., and there was reason to believe that
the increase of births over deaths was as great in Suffolk
as in any other county. Now, how great a portion of
fourteen per cent. had Suffolk maintained on its own
soil? Not more than six per cent. Only six per cent.
had remained to increase the population of the county,'
and the rest were, by the necessity of the case, driven
to seek employment elsewhere. In the purely agri-
cultural counties they had retained on their
own soil a quarter of the per tentage of
births over deaths as the population of those counties
for the last ten years. But where had the surplus found
an asylum ? The returns would show ; for in Mon-
mouthshire the population had increased 36 per cent.,
though the number of births over deaths was 14 per
cent., or the same as that of the agricultural counties.
In Lancashire the increase was 24 per cent. In Durham,
where the mines were numerous, the increase was 27 per
oent. In Staffordshire, 24 per cent. In Warwickshire,
where the great manufacturing town of Birmingham
was, 19 per cent. ; and in the West Riding of Yorkshire,
where the linen and worsted trades were carried on,
18 per cent. Thus it would be seen that the manufac-
turing districts had absorbed the surplus of the
population which the agricultural counties were unable
to employ. The effect of restrictions on trade was
such as to make the natural source of employment less
than it would otherwise be, and even to make the culti-
vation of the soil less efficient than it would be if trade
were unrestricted. They might fail in their attempts to
frie the industry of the labourers, but the increase of the
population would at length force them to do that which
they might have it in their power to yield to the wishes
of a large portion of their countrymen. He believed
that that House was accountable for the crimes that were
taking place in Suffolk, Sussex, Norfolk, and Cam-
bridgeshire, and that this state of things arose
from their own vicious legislation, and would
continue till their return to sound principles.
They forgot that property had any duties.—(Hear.)
They considered that they had nothing to do but to put
their rents in their pockets. Quod tuurn tene seemed to
be their motto, and those who were under them were
helpless because they were poor, and they had no political
power, beceause the landlords usurped it themselves. He
had seen, in one newspaper, ninety-eight advertisements
for the sale of farming stock at one time. One would
say that the landowners suffered by this, but in
consequence of another law, that was just less
bad . than the one which he was condemning,
the landlord seized upon everything when one of his
tenants failed, and left nothing for the wheelwright and
grocer, to whom he might be indebted.—(Loud cries of
" Hear, hear.") Then, had they nothing to answer for
the mode in which they kept game? A Noble Lord, a
relation of the Hon. Member for Suffolk, quoted the
opinion of Mr. Neave, who said that the farmers justly
complained of the enormous quantity of game, by which
their crops were quite eaten up. That these deprived
them of more food than would keep the Poor of the
parish; and he instanced one farm of 200 acres, on which
2,000 rabbits had been killed, and he calculated that
these destroyed more than'3oo sheep would in the same
time. It was necessary that those things should
be • stated. If they were • true, it was a dis-
graoe to the landowners. If it were untrue
he should.be glad of it, and he would not state 'it again,
either there or elsewhere. A rural poliee was kept up
by the gentry to watch-game, and to prevent poaching.
Look to what had taken place on the estate of the Noble
Lord the Member for North Lancashire. A gamekeeper
had been killed, for which one person was hanged, and
four others were in the Penitentiary, or on their way to
the penal 'settlements: Thus six. families were deprived
of their husbands and fathers PA. the purpose of main-
taining those puerile and childish sports .which should
be coridemned,in a country so densely populated as this.
A circumstance of a similar nature occurred on the
estate of the Marquis of Normanby, and also in the
county of Surrey and in Coventry. In,Scotland, the
' farmers complained of this system as destructive of their
farms, and demoralising to the minds of themselves and
their labourers. Misery, from suffering, was at the bot-
tom of th.e outrages which had taken place, and though
the Hon. Gentlemen opposite might seem to deny it, he
believed in his conscience that they knew it to be case.
He had yesterday travelled from Gravesend to Canter-
bury, and from thence to town, and no person could see
the country through which he travelled without coming
to the conclusion that the labouring population of the
country was grossly ignorant, and upon them rested the
responsibility. The consequence was, that their toil
was reqnited by a gaol,' as poachers, or by the work-
house, as paupers. They said that this law was passed
Ito protect native industry. He asserted it was
passed to protect native idleness, and to impoverish
native industry. The Hon. Member for West Suffolk
made a speech, in which he beheved he said that severer
punishments ought to be established in order to repress
the crime of burning. A return lately presented to the
House of the number of persons convicted and punished
for the crime of arson for some years past, showed that
from 1831 to 1836 the committals were 493, the convic-
tions 119, and the executions 58. Was it not a horrible
state of things which produced the destruction of so
much property, and then ended it—but it did
not, end it—by the execution of fifty-eight of
their fellow-men ? He thought it was one of the
proudest boasts of the late Government, that they had
mitigated the terms of the criminal code, and he trusted
the present Government would follow their example.
From 1838 to 1843, during which time there was no
hanging for burnings, the, number of committals was
344, and the number of convictions 117, thus showing that
the number of convictions was greater in proportion to
the number of committals; than when the, punishment
was capital, because the juries were not desirous to
convict when they knew that death was the penalty.
Whoever might be anxious to return, to the system of
hanging, in order to put down this system, the feeling
must beengendered by apprehension. The landlords lived
in a state of great diffiulty; they kept watchers, upon
nearly every farm ; being apprehensive of these dis-
asterS, they became timid, and there was nothing. so
near timidity as cowardice. Hanging would have no:
effect in suppressing incendiarism. To suppose that
such a state of things was to be, put down only by the
halterwas absurd in the extreme. They knew that the
population was in a hopeless, miserable, and despairing
condition, and yet they had allowed the session to pass
by, and, not one of them- had proclaimed the calamities
which had afflicted their own districts ; but' they now
taunted them, which was inimical to the interests
of those districts. Not one of their greatest flatterers in
their own counties would refuse to acknowledge that
they had on all occasions told the labourers that they
were not to blame the farmers, for their low wages, but

the system which unhappily •prevails in this country.—
(Hear, hear.)—They need not tell the farmers to rely
upon the assurance of the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R.
Peel), made in a tone of triumph which he did not as-
sume when he expected to be in a minority, that the,
corn-law was to be continued for ever • but they should
teach them to rely upon that which all men had relied
upon, who had succeeded best in every decription of la-
bour—whether agricultural or manufacturing. There
were Gentlemen on the other side of the House, who as
much disapproved of such conduct as he (Mr. Bright) did.
They had protected the labourers into miserable
hovels, gaols, and workhouses. The population was con-
stantly increasing, and they had no work for them ; the
manufacturing districts were continually drawing off a
portion of the population, which would otherwise in-
crease the existing calamity. He asked them now to do
a very small thing, in order to see whether farming
could not be carried on prosperously as well as other
trades. He had only yesterday read the life of
William Caxton, the first English printer. It ap?
peared from that that an ordinance was passed in
1441, in which the landlords of that time stated
that the. people engaged in husbandry in this coun-
try were greatly damaged by the reason of the bring-
ing of corn beyond the seas to keep down the price
in this country. Here were their ancestors, of
four hundred years ago—men who had no Adam
Smith to go to—men who received no such
lessons as had been given to Honourable Gen-
tleman epposite, session after session, by those
whom they had placed in power, using precisely the
language common in the present day. They had denied,
because they had not the power to give, protection to
labourers and manufacturers; and then, with a vast deal
of paint on the panels of their coaches, they came down
to the House to legislate for themselves. The worst
thing he wished them was, that when that retribution
came upon the landlords of this country, which must
come on such legislation, it might please Heaven to
bless them with greater mercy than they had shown to'
the labourers of this country.
RUSHBROOKE said the Hon. Gentleman had
accused hiin of advocating the infliction of the punish-
ment of death for this crime. He certainly understood
the language of the petition which he had presented on
that subject held it best that in a crime of this na-
ture capital punishment should be inflicted in extreme
cases. The Hon. Gentleman had charged him with
stating that there was no destitution whatever in the
county with which he was connected. He had spoken'
only of his own neighbourhood ; what might be the case
in other districts he.would' not pretend to say.
' Mr. BRAMSTONE said, the Hon. 'Gentleman, had
said that there would be no difficulty in obtaining con-
victioes in these cases. If a Commission were issued in
the tone and temper of the speeches of Hon. Gentlemen
opposite, they would have a general conflagration, instead
of a decrease in the number of fires. It was stated by
Mr. Baron Parke, in his charge to the grand jury, that
the great majority of the fires were not committed by
agricultural labourers in distress, but by' girls and boys
under ten years of age. Three children were to be
tried, whose respective ages •were 8,9, and 10 ; and it
appeared that, instead of being in a distressed condition,
they were living comfortably with their masters and
mistresses. He, for one, begged to 'thank the Right
Hon. Gentleman for refusing to grant this Commission.
Lord HENNIKER said it had been his duty to apply
to the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Graham) on more
than one occasion on this subject, and he begged to bear
his testimony to his, earnest endeavours to ascertain the
causes of this incendiarism.—(Hear, hear.) The' Hon.
Member for Manchester formerly joined in the teed of
Traise paid to the landlordi and irmers of Suffolk, for
their conduct to the working- classes.— (Hear, hear.)
That they were no less anxious now to promote the in-
terests of the working classes than in former times, was