The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-23 00:00:00

LAW OF MARRIAGE.

Lord ARUNDEL and SURREY gave notice that, in
consequence of the latencsi of the session, he would post-
rone the IllarriagelAct Amendment Bill until next year.

IRISH POOR-LAW.

Colonel DUNNE rose to ask for leave to bring in a
Bill to amend the lash Poor law. Ho and several other
Members who had addressed the House on this subject
hadbeen accused of wishing to aki,lish,the Irish Poor-law
altogether, but he distb.ctly disclaimed having that ob-
ject, although he was of opinion that unless the poor law
was amended, the country would continue to remain in
that state of wretchedness in which it was at present.
The amendments shich he proposed were based upon
four resolutions, which were agreed to at a meeting of
Irish Members, and bad been submitted to the Govern-
ment. Ile proposed, first, to abolish out-door relief, but
in doing so he knew that he must provide some
other substitute
for it, and be had inserted in his
Bill a plan for affording employment to the poor. and as
he now only asked the House to read the Bill a first
time, he hoped it would receive the serious consi-
deration of the Hun. Members during the recess. The
second part of his Bill provided a mode for reducing the
poor- law expenditure,, while the third object of the meet-
sure made provision for securing paid boards of guardians.
The taxation of Ireland was 85. 4d. in the pound on the
actual value of the landed property in Ireland, while it
was only 2s. 4d. in this country. Ile thought he had
said enough to justify the request which he had made—
viz , leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Irish poor-law.
Mr. HAMILTON seconded the motion.

Mr. P. SCROPE thought the motion was meant to sub-
vert the Irish Poor-law, though be did not think that was
the intention of the llonoureble and Gallant Member
who proposed it. The Honourable and Gallant Mem-
ber said his object was to do away with the system of
out-door relief. That was the main principle of the
Act of 1847. The Hon. and Gallant Gentleman also ob-
jected to establishment charges; but he (Mr. P Scrope)
should like to ask him how ho reconciled that with his for-
mer opinion that there should be no relief in workhouses?
He would take the opportunity of stating his own opi-
nion as to the Irish Poor-law. The diminution which
appeared in the last report of poor relief must of course
be very gratifying to every Hon. Gentleman, and he be-
the price of provisions, because he perceived that the great
lreductionieved that
wiat swi out-doornasen tirl)
relief,Owingto the depreciation in
which had been almost
altogether put an end to. Now, he thought that if this
were the case it was a sine gad non that the in-door relief
should be perfect and ftlicient, and that there
should be no mismanagement in the workhouses.
But was this the case ? It was very easy
to show that there were very few workhouses in
Ireland which were not over-crowded. The fact was
that the Poor-law was superseded in Ireland by mis-
mantle eatent, and he held the Government responsible
for all abuses which they thus suffered to continue.
He had often urged vainly, it was true, upon that
House and the Government to introduce some system
of reproductive labour either in connexion or discon-
nected with workhouses. It but needed that they should
turn to the report of the Board of Works to see what ad-
vantages there were in Ireland for reproductive labour.
Thousands of people were starving while the work-
houses were full of paupers, and yet the land was allow( d
to remain unproductive. It did not produce one-fourth
of what it might be enabled to do by :the adoption of
some tester system than the existing poor-law.
Mr. F. FRENCH said the Hon. Member for Stroud
proceeded on the principle that the proposition of the
Hon. Memter (Colonel Dunne) was to put a stop to out-
door relief, which would make the Irish Poor-law worse
than it was at present. He was surprised to hear the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Stroud advocating the
right cf the nominees of the Crown to tax the people
'of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) The very idea of
such a
doctrine, if applied to this country, would be scouted
from one end of the land ts the other ; and he, there-
fore, hoped it would not be tolerated, when it was pro-
, posed to continue it in the sister kingdom. The im-
provement which he wished to introduce into the present
law was some test against deception and hypocrisy, and
that was all he asked for.
would Legislature
Major BLACKALL thought all the improvements
which had been suggested could be accomplished by
the board cf guardians under the existing law
ttwohietarlideoofueptrte tthehis hoped
Bill.t interventionhe
Still, house
i of
of
theand he
not be induced
it would afford any satis-
faction to the Honourable and Gallant Member who
proposed it, he should have no objection to its
being introduced for the purpose of being considered
during the recess.:
Sir G. GREY would not stand in the way of its intro.
duction, but be begged it to be distinctly understood that
Government in no degree sanctioned the principles
laid down by the Honourable and Gallant Gentleman
who had proposed the Bill. For instant, Government
altogether differed with him in supposing that out-door
relief could be abolished, nor could he sanction any ex.
tensive scheme of employing the poor upon public works.
He believed the law to no a very valuable one, and he
should to sorry to see any course adopted cut of doors
that would prevent its full operation. i
Mr. STAFFORD supported the introduction 'of the
Bill, and &Lied that Members on that side of the House
were opponents of oitt door. relief. There could b 4 now
duty of the Government to
possible the fatal cala-
adopt some course to avert if
no doubt of the failure in a great degree of the pewee crops
in Ireland, and he thought it the du
mity which would otherwise fall
upon Ireland.
Sir H. W. BARRON rose to address the House,
and was

( LEFT SPEA RFS G

COURSE OF EXCIT
Amstercam 12 2

►NGE.-(THIS DAY.)
Gibraltar • • • • • • • • • • •• • .
Leghorn • • . • • • .. • . 30 70
Genoa •• •• •• •• •• •• •• .. 26 10
Allan •••••••• ........
Naples •• •••• •• 40%
ralormo, per0z........ 12114
5/e9slna • • • •• 122
53u
..)porto • • • • • • 63„72
Rio Janeiro • • ......
Buenos Ayres .. •
New York, 60 days'ilight
Philadelphia .. •

Ditto, three months 12 3
Rotterdam .. 12 3
Antwerp • • ............ 25 70
Brussels."... .• 25 70
Hamburgh MX, 13 1134
--
Paris, 3 days'sight 25 42%
Ditto, 3 months .... 25 67%
Slarsellles 25 70
80urdeaux......... .
Frankfortouplains...• 12016
Vienna, effec. f 10...... 11 55
Trieste, ditto.... „ 11 57
Putersbargh, 511. Rhin.. 57 •7,'
Madrid
Barcelona
BeTille•• •• •• •• •• •• • •

- Palms 01 BULLION, 1.E31 oz.
Foreign Gold in bars.. X'3 17 9
Portagal Gold Coin .. 0 0 0
Spanish Doubloons .. 0 0 0
Now Dollars ••.. • . 0 4 10;6
Silver in bars ...... •• 0 0 0

The
Attorneys Certificateßill with Mr. llornby against.
O'Gorman Abbon paired in favour of the
Sn"wsnuar AND HEREFORD RAILWAY.—The
directors have just concluded a contract with Messrs. Bras-
sey for the construction of this line for 345,8221.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Cambridge, July 22.
C.IOW-2.1 courtT.—(lidfore Mr. Justice PATTESON.)
BttUT.IL ASSAULT.-Thomas Dirk in, Michael Ginty,
Thomas llirl in, jun., and Marlin Dowling (all Irish-
men), were charged with having, on the 26th of May
last, at Chatteris, violently wounded Edward Jones with
a large weeden scoop, with intent to do him grievous
bodily harm.
Mr. C. Mills appeared for the prosecution, avid Mr.
Naylor for the defence.

The prosecutor is a navvy, and employed on the
drainage works now in progress at Chatteris. On the
2Gth of June, Jones was employed to sit up all night
to watch the tools used by his fellow-workmen. About
one o'clock in the morning a party of a dozen Irish-
men (reapers) came up to him, and one, having a large
wooden scoop, struck him a violent .blow on the head.
He fell; and several of the party commenced kicking
him till he was insensible. He was then robbed of his
cap add five shilling.. When he came to his senses
be gave an alarm, and a party proceeded to the farm
of a Mr. Jones, where, in a barn, were found eight or
ten Irishmen. One had the prosecutor's cap, and
another a couple of half-crowns. One ran off, and was
overtaken. The prosecutor then identified the f•aur men
who had beers most prominent in the affair. To three
ho distinctly swore. The other, though certain about,
he would not swear to. He was afterwards confined to
his bed a fortnight.
The extent of the injuries was proved by Mr. Dean, a
surgeon, of Cbatteris.. There was a dangerous wound
of the scalp, and for seven or eight days the prosecutor's
life was in danger.
Tne jury Acquitted Dirkin, the elder, and found the
others Guilty of a common assault.—Sentence deferred.
AnsoN.---The jury acquitted Wing, charged with set-
tinpoire to precaLei at Dry Drayton. And in the case
of John Hayward, charged with setting fire to out-
buildings at Cettenhani, by which a fourth of the village
was burned down, the grand jury ignored the bill.

POLICE IN TELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

DISGRACEFUL ASS AULT.—A tailor named John hlana-
ga•t and his wife, and a young fellow named John Long,
were charged with having desperately assaulted William
Rawley, one of the same trade.
The complainant scent eut at rather an unseasonable
hour on Saturday night, to get some beer, and meeting
with the defendants, asked John IJanagan for the
amount of a debt which ought to have been paid long
ago. lie received an answer from each of the three, viz.,
a frcra'ch from Mrs. Hannan, a blow hem Long, and
from John Ilanagan a bite which actually made a mouth-
ful of his ear.

The biter stated that the complainant provoked him
by the most dreadful language to wand up to fight, and
at the commencement of the conflict, seized him by the
ear and endeavoured to drag it off his head, that the row
became general, and every one in it got the worst of it
till the whole busiuws was finished by an interview with
the inipector at the station-house.
The woman said she only had done what any woman
ought to do when her husband was attacked—defended
w hen the complainant and two other persons at-
tacked him.

The ecr•biter was sentenced to imprisonment for ore
month, his wife to imprisonment for 14 days, and Long
impisonment for 14 days.
WORSHIP-STREET.

TIIE ALLEGED ATTEMPT CF A SURGEON'S APPREN.
TICL To MURDER lIIS ISTAZTER.— George Frederick
iliasterman, an apprentice to Mr. William Finer, sur-
geon, in Nurth-placr., Kingstand-road, who stood
charged with having attempted to strangle his master,
surrendered in discharge of his bail fur final exami-
nation.

The faces of the case have already been fully detailed
i❑ this paper.
The prisoner, whe, by the advice of his solicitor, re-
e:ved his defence, was fully committed ; but the magis-
trete consented to his liberation upon the amount of bail
he had prviouLly put in, muscly two sureties in 100/.
each, for his appearance at the next sessions of the Cen-
tral Criminal Court.

Petitions have just been presented for the winding-
up of the following railway companies:—Dudley, Wolver-
hampton, Walsall, and Tamworth ; Wolverhampton, Wal-
sall, Leicester, and Peterborough; Sheffield and Retford ; and
Narborough and Watlington.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, July 22.
COUNTY COMICS BILL.

Lord BEAUMON r moved the third reading of the
County Courts Extension Bill, and moved the introduc-
tion of an amendment, giving the clerks of the county
courts a Permanent tenure of office.
Lord BROUGHAM objected to the amendment.

The LORD CHANCELLOR thought the power of
removal should be retained in all cases where it could be
exercised consistently with justice.
Lord STANLEY supported the amendment, and
thought the extension of the jurisdiction should not bo
se.zed on as an opportunity for removing individuals
without compensation.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... ... 19
Against it ... ... 13
Majority for the amendment ... 6
Lord BROUGHAM moved-the insertion of a provi-
sioa conferring on the superior courts a concurrent juris-
diction with respect to sums between 201. and 501. It
might be said, perhaps, that the judge bad already a
discretion to allow the costs of proceeding in the supe-
rior courts in such cases; but he was averse to leav-
ing the delicate question as to whether an action ought
to hare been brought in a superior court or not to the
discretion of a judge, knowing that it had not worked
satisfactorily. , The great traders in the City, and of
Ma wehreter and Liverpool, were not heard before the
Select Committee on this point at his (Lord Brougham's)
instance, because ho did not wish to delay the measure,
and he felt therefore the more bound to urge it on the
attention a their Lordships on the present occasion. It
might be urged that the Select Committee were opposed
to him on this question, but it was too late to urge this
argument when they had ,just shown how easily they
could disregard its decision.
Lord BEAUMONT opposed the amendment. It was
a mistake to suppose that, by refusing to agree with the
amendment, they were ousting the jurisdiction of the
superior courts, and ho thought the matter might safly
be left in the discretion of the judge. The adoption of
the amendment would create an anomaly at variance
wilt the principle of the Bill. There could not be a
better answer to the Noble Lord's amendment than the
Noble Lord's own arguments in the Select Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM. said this was the consequence of
having the candour to state, as every member of a Select
Committee ought, the arguments en both sides. He
certainly had not the courage of the Noble Lord, who
had stood up against all the highest legal authorities
upon a question involving one of the most important
changes in the jurisprudence of the country which had
taken place within his experince.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said it wou'd be im-
possible for the plaintiff to make apparent the grounds
on which he preferred a superior court. He could not
help thinking, looking at the great advantages which
were anticipated from the operation of the county
coutts, that these ought to constitute a sufficiently
powerful motive to induce men to resort to them. Ile
did not by any means agree with those who thought that
parties would bo induced to select the superior courts,
acting under the influence of attorneys who were anxious
to increase the costs. Such practitioners might be em-
plo3 ed once, but their clients would not be apt to return,
and they would be killing the goose that laid the golden
eggs. Influenced by the result of long experience, and
by many considerations which he could not then eater
ieto at length, he was undoubtedly of opinion that the
proposed discretion should be given.-
Lord WHARNCLIFFE supported the amendment.
He thought that the opinion of the two Noble and
Learned Lords who had just addressed the House ought
to have great weight with their Lordships.
The Earl of CARLISLE said he did not think he
could, with propriety, oppose the amendment after the
opinions they had heard expressed by the highest authoe
cities in the House upon such subjects.
Lord BEAUMONT said that nothing he had heard
bad removed his objections to the amendment; but as he
found that he could not successfully resist its adoption
he should not press his opposition to it to a division.
The amendment was then agreed to.
Lord LANGDALE proposed an amendment, giving
a judge sitting in chambers the same power of issuing
writs of prohibition which was at present possessed by
the judges sitting in banco.
The clause was agreed to, and the Bill passed.
On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, the
Borough Courts of Record (Ireland) Bill and the Court
of Exchequer (Ireland) Bill were read a second time.
The remaining Bills on the table were forwarded
a stage, and their Lordships adjourned.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, July 22,
PROGRESS OF PUBLIC BUSINESS.

Is answer to Mr. STAFFORD,
Lord J. RUSSELL stated, that he propoied to take
the Lords' amendments on the Irish Franchise Bill into
consideration on Tuesday se'nnight (this day week). His
Lordship proceeded,—l propose on Friday at 12 o'clock
to take into consideration the Lords' amendments to the
Australian Colonies Bill. After the report upon the
Mercantile Marine Bill on Thursday, I propose to con-
sider the Lords' amendments upon the Metropolitan In-
terments Bill. I believe that they are not of very great
importance, and it is desirable to complete that Bill as
soon as possible. There is another Bill with respect to
which a question was put to me on Friday last,—l mean
the Oaths Abjuration Bill, which has reference to the
oaths taken by Members of,Parliament. I was in hopes
of being able to bring on the consideration of that Bill
next week; but I find that there is still a considerable
quantity of business in the Committee of Supply, which
will probably take four or five nights. I could not, on
this account, hope successfully to carry that Bill through
this House in time to secure for it that consideration in
the House of Lords which it would deserve; and I
therefore do not intend to proceed with it in the present
session, but I shall go on with it at the earliest period
next session.—('' Hear, hear," and a sarcastic " Ou, oh!"
from Colonel Sibthorp.) I may also state that to-night,
after supply, I shall propose to proceed with the third
reading of the Ecclesiastical Commission Bill.
THE PETITION OF MR. G. C. REDMAN.
Mr. HUTT rose to call the attention of the House to
the petition of Mr. G. C. Redman, presented on Ile
12th of April last. There mere circumstances
in the case of Mr. Redman which, in his (Mr.
Hutt s) opinion took it out of the common
kind. It WIJS not the case of an individual; it was the
case of the British merchants in general, and of all who
might be involved in similar calamities. In the year
1833-34 Mr. Redman, in conjunction with other

merchants, was anxious to open the trade with
Portendic, on the coast of Africe, in conformity with
the treaty if Paris of 1783, which specially secured the
right of commerce there to British subjects, which right
had, notwithstanding, been monopolised by France.
Mr. Redman accordingly is that year sent a cargo to
Portendic for that purpose, and the governor of the
French colony of Senegal seized and detained the
Brhish ships engaged in the enterprise ; but the
outrage did not end there. The following year the
French Government, as if to close for ever the territory
of Portendic against British commerce, in defiance of
the faith of treaties, declared that port in a state of
blockade, and again seized the British vessels that had
been sent out. The consequence was, that great loss
and almost ruin fell upon the parties who had under-
taken to engage in the trade. For the portion of those
losses which Mr. Redman sustained he had been utterly
incapable to obtain any redress whatever, and it was
under those circumstances that he made an appeal to the
House. He (Mr. Hutt) should further state, that pend-
ing the experiment of opening the trade with Portendic,
Mr. Redman had, in reply to an application which he
had made on the subject to the Foreign-office, received
an assurance, dated the 12th of December, 1834, that his
Majesty's Government would be prepared to extend to
British subjects at Portendic every protection, and to
secure to them every right guaranteed to them by treaty.
Mr. Redman and his friends were thus encouraged, as
Lord Aberdeen expressed it, to engage in the trade
which they were entitled by treaty to enjoy; and a
second time they sent out vessels to Portendic. The
vessels, however, had scarcely left British waters when
Mr. Redman obtained information from private sources
that the French Government meant to place Portendic
iu a state of blockade, and he applied to the Foreign-
office for protection. At the interview which Mr. Red-
man had on the occasion with the Noble Lord (Palmer-
ston) Lord Auckland was present, and the Noble Lord
(Palmerston) assured him that be might implicitly rely
upon the protection of the British Government, and
that a British naval force should he sent out to enforce
the right of treaty. A British , neval force was
accordingly seat out to Portendic, but it arrived too
late—Mr. Redman's vessels had a second time fallen
into the hands of the French authorities. Thus
those British subjects who had engaged in the most
lawful trade, under the special promise of protection
from the British Government, became thereby
involved in losses of a most ruinous character. Mr.
Redman then applied to his own Government for redress,
and the Noble Lord (Palmerston) immediately preferred
demands for losses against the French Government.
The French Government offered 10,000/. as indemnity
for the losses sustained by British subjects in the affair—
an effer vihich was rejected, and the matter was then
referred for arbitration to the King of Prussia. Up to
that point Mr. Redman was supported by his Govern-
ment, but hero arose some little point of difference. The
ease laid before the King of Prussia was a very ambigu-
ous one. Whilst Lord Aberdeen teed the British Go-
vernment contended that the illegality of the blockade
was made the subject of reference, the Fr oneh Govern-
ment had always maintained tbat no such reference had
been made to the King of Prussia, and that, on the con-
trary, the French Government had never submitted to hav-
ing that subject called in question. llowei er that might
be, it was certain that Mr. Heiman was no party what-
ever to the reference; ou the contrary, when he applied
to the British Government, as to whether the grounds of
reference were in every degree satisfactory on the sub-
ject of the losses, he was told that the question at issue
was one between the French and Englisn Governments,
with which he as an individual had nothing whatever
to do. The Kirg of Prussia, however, made his award,
granting 1,700/. as a sufficient indemnity in a case in
which the British Government had refused 10,000/. Mr.
Redman heving then applied to his Government to ob-
tain reparation for his losses, was referred to the award
of the King of Prussia, and was offered some small share
of the 1,700.. That was the case which he wished to
submit to the House, and he should make no comment
on the injustice and hardship, which were moat palpably
evident. The Hon. Gentleman was about to submit a
motion for an address, when
The SPEAKER intimated that as ono motion had
been already disposed of on going into supply, it
was not competent for the Honourable Member to sub-
mit a second.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
as by the rules of the House his Hon. Friend could not
make a motion on the subject, he need only say a few
words on the matter. He agreed that the case was one
of those in which no doubt British subjects had sus-
ta'ned considerable loss; but he could not admit that
there was, therefore, any claim against her Majesty's
Government in the matter. They had endeavoured to
get reparation as much as they possibly could for the
aggrieved parties, and Mr. Redman was, practically, in
the situation of a man who, having gone to law to obtain
damages, and obtained them, found that the amount he
received was not sufficient to cover his losses. The
amount awarded to him by the King of Prussia had been
given to Mr. Redman; and he (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) could not see on what grounds he asked the
whole case to be re-opened.
Mr. AGLIONBY hoped that the Hon. Member for
Gateshead would seek another opportunity for bringing
on the motion.
Mr. NEWDEGATE observed that the case had never
been fully or fairly stated Wore the proper tribunal,
and bad not therefore teen justly decided. Ho hoped,
theref ire, that the Government would allow the sub-
ject to be again brought forward, the more s 3 as the
principle on which the reference was made to the King
of Prussia was, that the decision should not enhance
the difficulties between the French and English Go-
vernments.

After a few words from Sir C. BURRELL, which
were inaudible, the subject dropped.

SUPPLY.

The House went into Committee of Supply, Mr. BER
iist, in the chair.

On the vote that a sum not exceeding 41,7401. be
granted to her Majesty to defray chargcs fur New
Zealand,

Mr. HUME objected to those items cf the vote ap-
plying to the support of the bishop and the chaplains, and
schools, and moved as au amendment that the vote be
reduced by 600/.
Sir R. INGLIS opposed the amendment.
Mr. AGLIONBY said the present would be the last,
or nearly the las:, year the vote would have to be moved,
as the lion. Member for Lambeth had held out hopes of
a representative government, when, of course, the co-
lony would pay its own expenses.
Mr. HUME did not object to the amount of the vote;
but to the pricciple. The colony had a revenue of
36,000/. a year, and he (Mr. Hume) feared that the vote
would pledge the House to a Church establishment.
Therefore he should take the sense of the Committee on
the subject.
Lord J. RUSSELL slid if the vote was put on the
ground that it was the first, it would be untenable.
Siuco 1842 the House had agreed to an annual vote of
that description. It would very much tend to the set-
tlement of the colonies if the Church missionaries were
under a proper ruler. The calm of civilization had
been much promoted by the establishment of bishops in
New Zealand; and he (Lord J. Russell) would rather
pay bishops than police magistrates.
Mr. HUME had objected to the vote in 1848, but he
was then told that they would revise it next y ear.
Mr. HOWARD saw no reason why Dissenters should
not be established in New Zealand as well as the Church
of England. He supported the amendment.
Mr. KERSHAW also supported the amendment, be-
cause the motion went to disparage the Dissenters in
favour of the Established Church.

The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... 24
Against it
Majority ... —66

20,0001. for Hong-Kong.
Mr. SCOTT objected to the vote, on the ground that
it was disproportionate to the necessities of the case.
There was no trade whatever at Hong-Kong. All the
vessels bound to China go from seventy to nine
hundred miles beyond it—to Whampoa or Shanghae.
The Governor, however, had a higher salary than
any other colonial governor except the Governor-
General of Canada. The population of the island
was usually about 20,000; it was now about 28,000;
in consequence of the disturbances at Macao.
The salary was therefore disproportionate to the services
of the governor. There were consular agents in China;
and the governor was only paid because he was a super-
intendent of trade—where trade did not exist. The
consular establishment in China cost 33,0001. a year,
one-third of the whole cost of the consular establish-
ments of Great Britain all over the world, which was
102,0001. The Governor of Hong-Kong was paid in ad-
dition 6,0001. a year; while the Governor of Heligoland,
which island stood in the same relation to Hamburgh as
the Government of Hong-Kong did to Canton, was only
paid 5001. a year. The Governor's aide-de-camp received
3001. a year, while the colonial secretary and establish-
ment received 3,7001.—in all 10,0001. a year fur the cost
of government in a miserable colony where only ten
British merchants resided. There were 23,0001. a year
revenue derived from the colony, while the cost of
collecting it was 2,3141.—fu11y 10 per cent. The Honour-
able Member went into a detail of the abuses of the
government in the colony. The harbour master, for in-
stance, received 1,168/. a year, while the duty was dis-
charged by a lascar for 3001. The law and justice de-
partment cost 15,318/. 6s. Bd., than which there was no-
thing more monstrous in law, in justice, or in equity.
The chief justice got 3,0004 a year; the attorney-general
1,5001.; and the chief magistrate 9001. Nothing could'
exceed the expenditure of the gaols end the police than
their inefficiency. The roads at a certain distance from
town were not safe, yet the police and gaols cost 7,842/.
6s. Bd. a year. Since the last year the trade of Hong-
Kong had been reduced, and the feelings of the Chinese
had teen much altered towards Great Britain since Mr.
Jardine gave his evidence in 1839. The service that
was now performed for 40,000/. or 50,0001. a year might,
he conceived, be properly done for 17,0001. His amend-
ment was that the sum of 15,0001. be the sum voted
for Hong-Kong, instead of 20,000/.
Colonel SIBriIORP hoped his Hon. Friend would
persevere in his amendment, for at another page in the
estimates he found Hong-Kong down for another sum of
public money to the extent of 4,621/., in addition to the
20,000/. tor the vote under debate. There were also
other sums for consul's expenses, consulate expenses, and
miscellaneous expense?. The sums in addition amounted
to 21,C00/. This was the way the Government mystified
the subject. They put one sum in oae place, another
sum in another, and so on, in order to get one vote
passed, and then another vote, so as to prevent the House
from seeing the enormous total which a particular esta-
blishment costs.

Mr. HAW ES said the votes in question did not pro-
perly come under one head, cad that wa., the reason why
the sums appeared in separate placer. The Honourable
Gentleman who had moved the reduction of the vote to
15,0001. had not assigned any special reason for this
reduction. Ile presumed he had done so on the
general principle that Governtneus ought to re-

trench in all public) departments.
not come under the notice of the Governm
to the charge that the Hong-Kong esrarbitlhishraentreefnetre.!lniati
first
the view to' reduction of expenditure, ha weal
refer to the fact that the first vote was 49,0001, w,,e,lce,
had been successively reduced to 36,0001, then to 31,-I:l3roy,r;
then to 25,0001. in 1849, and to 20,0001. in 1850. :
would prove that Government had not been extravalseu;
in respect to thr expenses of this establishment. in
/.bias
with regard regard to the assertion that Hong•Koe" t
or'
riorated, and that no respectable person, ;
otherwise, would reside there, ,he begged to assn
House that this was not the case. The reports whir::
had been laid before the House would show that tahe, eat
spectability or efficiency of the establishment 0,1.1;_
nb iesetnra(ti dams
a beenged.ea,b
va :01
lostN oari
ghhatdcetco nicimanyg
considerable importance in relation to the trade
wedieut
carrying on with Chinese ports, Etna it was complaint'e
therefore to keep up its efficiency. As to the .b.
of the terms on which laud was granted, that was ausilec.
fficial awoLuld
ject at present under consideration of the
rities; sled if any hardship was found to exist, , to,
i...raKtohneginlytaersnaapl
no doubt be taken into consideration, With the vies as
its remedy. If Ito showed that population Wa singhie par-
ing, trade increasing, and that reduction was h,;,,ey
severed in as tar as was wise stud expedient, he 'vino,
thought he had made out a case which o eon
the House that the proposed eduction of the out
not put forward on tenable grounds, and also ong";
justify him in asking the House to support the oriel°
vote.
Mr. MITCHELL considered the vote was 3° extra
ant that he hoped the Hon. Member would rig had
in his amendment. The Right lion. Gentle:l3o;i
asked whet item required reduction. His reply was'
not one item, but every item ought to be reduced.
ive*,
/l s,
for
Governor a Hong- Kong, whose main duty was to
dinner now and then to the merchants at ag- stea
bad a salary of 6,000 e This was higher than the
given to similar appointments. He should proposbad a
be reduced to 3,500/. Then the chief secretarya
•
salary of 1,8001.; 1,0001. would be ample for th t Pro,
tionary. The chief justice had 3,000/. a Yearlersoet
amount might be reduced to 2,000/, and this PI Or
would not be underpaid, The attorney
1,5001. a year, but that sum might be reduced to `1
a year. The harbour-master had 600/. a year. •Le'actioa
that amount to 2001. a-year, and the total re('
_ovca
would amount to 5,0001. This sum could be out
without inconvenience and without ile.les,ticee: with.
there was also other items which Wig"' would
equal propriety be reduced, and this toed,
very much add to the sum he had tho
Government had promised last year to eoesluenot
subject el reduction. Government met the /to' de-
for economy now with the same excuse, and t's nve 13°
pendeace was to be placed on Government prersl.rec' es,
hoped was the
would see the necessity for intsrle owe
But it was the system of appointing individuals to out
-general
_Ol,
colonial offices that be objested to most. N' by high
as governors Lords and gentlemen to wh°ll3 Maio Isl.-
salaries were a consideration, and indeed the ells°
decement? They had sent cut a governor todlie, to
who was a Lord, but a bad governor. 815 Ors'
goer
Government was to pay proper salaries to eeii tbes-
- to send out working, competent men " root
posts. Such a system would be preferable to the Pot fe
system of sending out some Lord, who Wight 0d 4
little fresh air, and who might find the air 0, ca'
salary of a colony very convenient. The vote woe it.,
of unexampled extravagance, and he should (o%ooo'
Mr. DRUMMOND said the vote had heee .1" theY
before by Government on the same bees
oiti
justified is now. The lion. Gentleman very falfr god'
if we compared the salary of the Grovernur would
be found to be too high. That was
"one to the salaries given to other governor and for
considering whether it could not be reduced. the repo.Al4
Mr. SPOONER referred t ) a paragraPh
of 1847, which stated that much cotninereeurt tie liter
not yet been derived from Hores-Kong, led festal Poitidt
existed it would be of much value its a e°tue're-r'n e 3, ir;.
of view. It was important to that Pe---t la 0-1
,baearotary,, be • would b id
With respect to the Governor
make much observation; but there° was sTrttl lie li.;
been overlooked, and which might he re'll—freerega'n-t
cfehrarregclatfourthpeolpicoalieweaaanadhcaount t,i,n,ogoeonit.,cveht'ahrigfoeesotd'h gereneuti'ie ge0"0
and ei - dental police charges amounted to fit°. °E; goo
thought the House had a right to aonae exPlanti°9 ~4
these points. tieeist-
ke 5
Mr. HAWES could not bear in mind all the Pat tecr
of every vote. If the Hon. Member would tea .ofortail
tion on the subject he had no doubt all proper
r posea *
Lion would then be drawn out.
Mr. SCOTT said the reason why he had 11-13 bat baa
gross sum without going into particulars "5'1,-00
he gone into items, the reduction he should
II
posed would have amounted to a much larger °call f°r
N
Mr. PLOWDE said it was all very we- to ow.
a reduction in the salary of this person or thait tPce rs(i
but ho thought when reduction was conteasP'a..o,so:l
gard ought to be had to the position of the Per'als we
to the psculiar position of the coloey• It
ge
known that Hong-Kong had been esteblished for to iso
tent commercial and naval purposes, and be th°l3:ter to,
ought to consider that we had a national ehsl.ltoe eflative r
sustain by those appointments in that colonypenscs at Hong-Kong, he believed, were re Do-tier
greater then in most other colonies, and that
ought to be taken into consideration. Mr. HUME said the establishmnt at fo°
HwaosnalKtog, altogether an experimeet. It was stlPP,°set it l'f'd
ggawitoeultdhaberetvheersceen; tarnedofthceommestricoen,
turned outn lit to
whether such an expensive establishment CO,"
kept up as a mere military pour.—(Hear,n soar.) 0 et'
sidering all the circumstances ho thought the eicrlii
turf ought to be reduced nearly one-half (11°5„."..10,%
Viscount PALMERSTON said that Islel4l.j'.oP:
could not be regarded in precisely the same light°!eir
other colonies. It was not merely a colony iu theosso
nary sense of the term, but a port for trade with
iu general. When instructions were given !I'te 01:
Henry Puttinger on his departnre for Ciflloooo.
conclude a treaty with that empire, he (;110111/
Palmerston) felt it his duty to gain whatever tier, OP,
tion he could from every possible rleartsof tbee-
had interviews with persons from different Pare-000'J'
country who possessed any knowledge of tbil5°e acs
and he received a great deal of valuable assisll;
Sir George Staunton. There were two th'tiel°oool.o-.
appeared to be of considerable importance---thA pot tome
to obtain access to a larger number of parts, 811",,taitis°1-00.
satisfied with Canton only; the other was, to 0"ooler"
For that purpose Hong-Kong
insular position for head-quarters for our eg,°- Sir as
the opinion of persons connected with Ghlaaneo °it
insular position was of the greatest imPerfil,:ololt9
many doubted whether it would not be eV; Cito',3'
admission to any other China ports beyon"Tracg
Was chosen. -011
But both objects were accomplished. 1104-"; to 1.,1°.
not to be considered merely with refereec' tbe:.o
amount of trade in the island itself, althelleging
wherewa was 63,0n0a0v
naval
tons;
and b u
crease of tonnage last year over the preeee-sa p"
t it
military mu s t a
sbsei s
tlaonoakae
was.
4,5(1
00c o.ati7
to support our merchants in the China ports' a ,
Our position at Canton was by no zneahs 1,„ 09" p
factory one, for great hostility was frcqueel'ireforeve
felted by the people of that city, and it was tebe',l' lelbi)s)
matter of importance that our merchants see hee.;;
assistance ready in case of an ernergency.--(lfeeili If*setti;
Now with regard to the amount of salaries 000:‘,00
question quite independent of the other. wed
given was on a far more ccenomical sealgh. cl)1116
given by the East India Comeany----(1:511.°,e-t eree'efis°
amount now proposed was only the scale for
expos tea
year, and his Hon. Friend had said that the etre oteoii
of former years justified him in saying 031%,titv dire dc
Lion of the colonial department was constant vie tee
to those different heads of expenditure, with I'o,o obi
reducing them as far as possible consistently odd sof
interests of the public service. It had Vet:tare:re'
the salaries were kept at a high rate for tee/ the feet
furnishing appointments to the-members as a eta
tocracy. But on the present occasion that that
unjust assertion. It had also been 551- lei bot:o0,
didt e choicehe
offer w
of business ought to be chosen. News' To el
it? To
hTias NaohmleaFnriwenhdomhadhtne 01110:1Ii!;A'
f 00
the high character he bore—not a member e 110
medic family, but a man of business, whe„l,*iedllitt
himself to distinction by his own judgment s"e-srfbe-er
and by the ability with which he had disae,erpo'
duties—he meant Mr. Bonham.—(Bear,
that was not a single instance of such aPPees'orgsple"
would just mention the appointment of Sir ‘.'lt, to
derson to the Mauritius; Sir George qerreierotiliq
Zealand; Mr. Gregory to Benares; Sir v"„d ,
Australia; Mr. Higginson to Antiglea; a" e$
Colebrook to Barbadoes.—(Hear.) wed tot "asir
Mr. COBDEN said the Noble Lord eel' eivi
wfa4rhno4i
()h inhabitant,
ot
oah
le.
that the Committee was now considering tPee ereeta-ett'
matesm
and not the military expenditure for tele Je,
IdmwCeiert
vtgoeu'odft
which would come before them in another shart:ea 70'
f ael local
yaeyl.rra,ner
vso2ew6na:,:upcpeoo.os4ws
elaostsfs
be odwandhlayi
cbchsei
evbo,o:_iat
tie ole0:00:0
ji0,010,1
the same scale as the establishments of et;;T,:: girt
most important colonies, and for a poptlia,teer,„:Boi
persons there was a governor, auditor, ire equal
trar-general, a chit fjustice, with a salary tarrr,,
of the judges in Scotland, an attorney-gel:Ll4sooll,a
police magistrate, &e. The whole of the 3-171 %VA
1, of justice in the island might be conducteui add "or
magistrate and his clerk at salaries of I,°le'd o°°t the
each.—(Hear, hear.) He though a dee'ie th„,
been made out for a diminution of 5,0001 e 17,0pePe'-
Committee would stultify itself if it did het 01
Pa I
reduction.—(Hear.) hes tha ~0 11:3)d
Viscount PALMERSTON ex rained t-- e'
p,si
lions ofchief • "
justice and attorney.gener
cools is
confined to Hong-Kong, but that the court! obje
at Hong-Kong had jurisdiction over Itritise
he' cl#
any part of the China seas.
that the fIoOS
Mr. COBDEN said it was quite true at 0 tr:
quarters of our judicial establishment icloreeenfth4
Kong; but let the Committee mark the re that;ere
tweeenbbe
the expense of our establishment 51et e:
United States, whose trade was equal to o"°state./ ib
the trade with this country. The United erelf
constils who discharged their duties effect eob,
five different ports at salaries of 1,000 dollar- et'
fit
After a few remarks from Mr. F. '
PLOWDEN. Its
00
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY could find 001,,„1001„trat,"6
[long-Kong charges in any of the othAern-t-seesif-0-tet:o
Western Australia there were six resi'es-osssl6-
i with salaries of 100/ each, while the chief salad ,°000;
Bong-Kong received 900/. Whi:e the „si, to l'qui`
judges in other countries varied from 3°' web ‘'
a It the le
that of the • judge of Hong-Kong was 3,00-1 fort ete„,
startling to think of such a sum as 15,8(14,°4, oofe Gh
penises of adjudication in lione-Korig• o til-
id $ 00°
Lies in • •
which such large salaries were P 5 „,,clO,
vernrs were the important colonies lea 11"
41,
Ceylon,
and the Mauritius.—(Hear,./ •pPa'
The Committee then divided, when there