The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-06 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 5.
Their Lordships assembled at Five o'Clock.
HER MAJESTY'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR communicated to the
House her Majesty's answer to the address presented by
the House on Saturday. The answer was as follows:
My Lords, I thank you for your loyal and dutiful
address. The . first object of my wishes is to promote
the welfare of my people, and I rely with confidence on,
your assurance of support in framing such measures as
the ipterest of the country may require."
On" the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, her
Majesty's most gracious answer was ordered to be en-
teied on. the Journals of the House.
THE SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
The Earl of POWIS presented four petitions
against the unions of the two Sees of St. Asaph and
Bangor. The Noble Earl said he should, on an early
day bring the subject under the consideration of the
House.

SLAVERY.
Lord BROUGHAM wished to put a question to her
Majesty's Government. A great deal of anxiety and
uneasiness had been excited amongst persons who wished
for the abolition of the slave trade, in consequence of
some report respecting negotiations that were at present
taking place with respect to the treaties of 1831 and 1833
between England and France on the subject of the right
of search. Pending any negotiations, he (Lord B.) certainly
did not wish to press for any information that it might
be inconvenient to the public service that the Noble
Earl should give. Perhaps, however, his Noble Friend
might be able to say a few words that might answer the
purpose he (Lord Brougham) had in view by allaying
the anxiety, the great anxiety, which prevailed in the
country upon this subject.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said he should have been
glad if he had been in a position to give to his Noble
and Learned Friend the fullest information he might
desire. The subject was undoubtedly of a very weighty
nature, but from the part taken by his Noble and
Learned Friend on this subject for so many years, it
was natural he should show great interest in reference
to it. It was perfectly true that the French Govern-
ment had expressed a desire that such modifications
might be introduced into the treaties which established
the right of search, as without impairing their efficiency
might render them more conformable to the feelings of
the French people. It was not for him (Lord A.) to say
what would be the result ofsuch propositions, but his Hon.
and Learned Friend, and the House might rest assured
that nothing should be done that in any degree might
impair the means of suppression of the abominable traffic
in slaves. He could assure the House that the French
Ministry was as desirous of the total abolition of the
slave trade as he (Lord Aberdeen) was, and this would
be kept in view by them in any propositions they might
submit to us. With respect to the right of search itself,
he had witnessed with some regret that it had been
sometimes referred to in a way tending to con-
firm the unwarranted and calumnious representa-
tions which had been made respecting it on the
other side of the water. It had at times been repre-
sented in this country, as it had been constantly over the
water, that the real object of England in the
right of search was to degrade and insult the
French marine, and to obtain certain informa-
tion respecting French ships, in order to turn it
to our own advantage. Incredible as this might appear,
yet was it certain that such a notion extensively pre-
vailed. Now it was not very likely we should attempt
to inflict a degradation upon another nation that might,
with five-fold weight, be retaliated upon ~ourselves ;
for certainly the right of search being mutual,
where one French cruiser might be subjected,
five English ones would be subjected also. In
the ports of France, so* near to us, surely we could
get, did we desire to do so, far better and fuller infor-
mation as to the French marine than on the distant
shores where the right of search existed. He (Lord
Aberdeen) had sometimes seen the right of search
spoken of as a great good in itself. It no doubt
might be made an available means of narrowing the
detestable slave-trade, but of, and in itself,
he looked upon the right of search as a great
evil, and only to be justified by the great
object they had in view. There was nothing else that
could justify so great a sacrifice on the part of his coun-
try. He of course was not prepared to say what might
be the result of the negotiations for the modification of
these treaties, but he hoped the few words he had now
uttered would allay any anxiety that might have been
felt by his Noble and Learned Friend or other old and
staunch friends of the abolition of slavery.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord BROUGHAM said he should be very unreason-
able indeed if he were not satisfied with what had fallen
from the Noble Earl, and he could add that he agreed with
him in giving the fullest credit to the Govern-
ment of France for its hearty wishes to put down
the detestable traffic. There certainly was a feeling
abroad in France that the mode of putting it down was
not consistent with their feelings of national honour and
dignity. His Noble Friend had given an unanswerable re-
ply to this by reminding their French neighbours that we
equally conceded the same right on our parts, and as
we gave the right of search over five or six ships for one,
we gave up more than they did ; yet we did
not in the slightest degree consider ourselves disho-
houred by it. Ile entirely agreed with the Noble Earl
in thinking that instead of its being a desirable arrange-
ment or a good per se, he wished that some mode could
be devised for repressing the slave-trade without it, as he
looked on it rather as an inconvenience than a burden.
They must always keep in mind one of two propositions
in dealing with this question. One of these was, that
when England had entirely abolished her own slave
trade, she had done nine parts out of ten of what was
her own duty, and that, strictly speaking, it was that
alone which she could be called on to do, anything beyond
that being in the nature of a work of supererogation.
God forbid that they should in the slightest degree re-
lax from their efforts to repress the slave trade, and
that having washed their own hands of the stain, they
should not for the sake of humanity and of Africa,
seek out other nations to do so also. One thing
they must also always bear in mind, that though
they were philanthropists and statesmen legislating
for Africa, they were also European and English states-
men, and that their primary object must now be the
preservation of peace among the nations of Europe.
They must not risk that first and greatest blessing for
the sake of any work of supererogation or humanity.
To do so would be the most preposterous attempt any
great nation could engage in.
STATE OF IRELAND.
The Duke of WELLINGTON, seeing the Noble
Earl (Fitzwilliam) in his place, rose to inform him that
it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the
hope the military and police in Ireland.
motion of the Noble Earl relative to certain accounts
andreturns respecting
that the Noble Earl might
continue nall reference to recent events in
Hstated
tot rhfigsersbc
the

Ireland.
Earl FITZWILLIAM said he had no inclination
whatever to break the understanding which prevailed
as to the expediency of abstaining from all allusion
to Ireland at present. He was glad to hear that the
Noble Duke and her Majesty's Ministers did not intend
to offer any opposition to the motion he was about to
make. His Lordship then moved for the production of
accounts, according to notice.—Agreed to.
Lord NORMANBY, from the same wish not to in-
dulge in any remarks on events now pending in Ireland,
deferred his motion on the state of Ireland till Tuesday,
13th inst. Between the present time and that day, he
would announce to the House the precise shape in which
he meant to make his motion. If it was probable that
the trials would not terminate by that day,
.he would
give due notice of further postponement.
OPERATIONS IN CHINA.

The LORD CHANCELLOR communicated to the
House that he had received a letter from Admiral
Parker, acknowledging the vote of thanks of the House
for the gallant conduct of her Majesty's naval force en-
gaged in the operations in China. His Lordship then
read the letter, which was dated from her Majesty's
ship Cornwallis, Hong-Kong, June 15, 1843.
Earl MINTO expressed some degree of disappointment
that some further mark of her Majesty's approbation
bad not been conferred upon Admiral Parker. He
stated that some feeling of dissatisfaction existed in the

navy that a baronetage had not been bestowed upon the
naval commander, as Inid been done in the case of the

army.
The Earl of HADDINGTON believed that it was
stated to their Lordships at the time the Noble Duke
(Wellington) made the speech which never could be
forgotten by the navy, when the thanks of that House
were given to the naval and military commanders who
had served in China, that the reason why the two re-
wards were not bestowed on Sir William Parker
at the same time, that they were on Sir Hugh
Gough was, that it would have appeared to
be giving more to one than the other. The Govern-
ment had no anxiety but to deal fairly by both parties,
and the Noble Lord could well say that her Majesty's
Government duly appreciated the services of the navy
upon that occasion. They were certainly most extra-
ordinary. He did not advert merely to the gallantry
displayed ; that was a matter of course, for the navy
had frequently gone against more formidable
enemies than the Chinese. But he knew
that taking the large ships to the walls of Nankin was
considered by the navy as a very extraordinary per-
formance indeed. It would be in the recollection of the
House that Sir Hugh Gough had earned the Grand
Cross of the Bath before Sir William Parker arrived in
China. At the conclusion of their joint services, for
their gallant, distinguished, and meritorious conduct, a
baronetcy was awarded to Sir Hugh Gone and the
Grand Cross of the Bath was given to Sir William
Parker. Sir William Parker had since been informed the
reason why both rewards were not conferred upon him
at the same time. He (the Earl of Haddington) trusted
that Sir William Parker was satisfied. Sir William

Parker had also been informed of the intention of her
Majesty's Government to bestow upon him the other
honour. It would be in the recollection of their Lord-

ships that at the time of the former discussion on this
subject, it was said that it was the intention of her
Majesty's Government to confer upon Sir William Par-
ker the further honour ; " Aye," said the Noble Earl
.on that occasion, " when he hauls down his flag."
Lord MINTO said that he did not recollect ever hav-
ing used the language attributed to him ; but he would
not rut his recollection against that of the Noble Earl
opposite.
Earl HADDINGTON said that it had always been the
intention of the Government to mark, in every way they
could, their very high sense of the great deeds which
had been performed. Sir William Parker, however, had

not so great a share in the achievements of the China
campaign, as Sir Hugh Gough, who had conducted not
only the naval operations, but those of the army, into
the very heart of China.
Lord BROUGHAAI begged to interpose. He thought
that it was most unconstitutional for Noble Lords to
interfere with the prerogative of her Majesty as the
fountain of honour.—(Cheers.)

After a few words from Lord MINTO and the Earl of
HADDINGTON, in explanation,
The Duke of RICHMOND said that in order to put
an end to the discussion, and for the satisfaction
of both sides of the House, he would take the oppor-
tunity of presenting a petition from Morpeth against
the bastardy clauses in the Poor-law Amendment Act.
The petitioners stated, that out of 476 births in the
Union, 49 were illegitimate children; and that, of the
births in the town ofMorpeth, one in six were illegitimite.
BETTING ON PUBLIC SPORTS.

On the order of the day for the second reading of this
Bill being read,
Lord BROUGHAM wished to put it to his Noble
Friend who had just sat down, whether, instead of
the Bill of which he had given notice, to legalise
betting upon certain sorts of public sports, to which
there was a great objection in certain quarters, it would
not be better to postpone for a time his prospective
measure, and in the meanwhile to bring forward a short
Bill to the qui tam actions which were pending.
The Bishop of LONDON said that he could not allow
the occasion to pass without expressing his disapproba-
tion of any measure which would go to legalise gamb-
ling.
The Duke of RICHMOND said, he had a right to
complain of the Right Rev. Prelate assuming that his
Bill was intended to promote gambling ; on the con-
trary, he firmly believed that if the Bill
was carried into a law it would diminish
betting. He was not a better himself, but he
was convinced that if something was not done the pre-
sent system would ruin the " Turf" altogether. His
only object was to compel the fair loser to pay the fair
winner. He wished to encourage the manly amuse-
ments of the people, which had been of late
too much discouraged. He had rather see
the people enjoy.the manly sport of cricket, than sit in
sullen sottishness in a beer-shop. He would not place
himself in oposition to the Noble and Learned Lord
opposite (Lord Brougham) on a subject of law,
and he would therefore postpone the general Bill,
and bring in one for stopping the qui tam
actions and defeating the objects of those "scoundrels,"
who, because last year their own practices were dis-
covered, had raked up Acts of Parliament, of which
oddish constructions had been made.—( Hear.)
Lord BROUGHAM thought it would be well to refer
the whole of the laws relating to betting to a Select '
Committee.
The Bishop of LONDON had not attributed to the
Noble Duke any wish to increase the evil of gambling.
He thought, however, that the tendency of
the Noble Duke's measure would be to in-
crease that evil. He had always wished to
co-operate with the Noble Duke in his efforts
to promote the happiness, the morals, and the indepen-
dence of the people. He agreed with the Noble Duke
respecting the expediency, the policy—and he would
say, the duty—of proinoting the manly recreations of the
poor. Whenever these recreations were placed under'
restraint, nothing but paramount necessity could justify
the restriction.
Lord CAMPBELL said that he hoped their Lord-
ships would not sanction the Bill of the Noble Duke,
which would have the effect of encouraging gambling
and making all kinds of bets recoverable in Courts of Law.
Lord DENMAN thought the Noble Duke had a right
to complain that when he had agreed to postpone his
Bill, Noble Lords thought proper to enter into a dis-
cussion on it. He (Lord Denman) thought that:the
whole Bill ought to be referred to a Select Committee.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that the gamblers
against which he meant to legislate had no characters to
lose, and cared not what risk they incurred. He entirely
agreed with his Noble Friend the Lord Chief Justice,
and therefore suggested that the order of the day for
the second reading of the Bill be referred to a Select
Committee. A hundred thousand pounds might be bet
upon a horse in London, if the better could learn
intelligence of the winning horse by a carrier
that bet
ebym
That
couldnah enayyt wasdebtbe n
other
was l
betegfaa
recoverable
means
legally
mre,leoybi lu decided.ofr
the b t tht if
recovered
pt
tw lately
at the and
da a
race whatt
tcould
liai
not be recovered ; if they bet at a race at which no
money had been contended for, then the bet was reco-
verable. In fact, the present law was full of
absurdities, and was very well worthy of the attention
of their Lordships. The Noble Duke concluded by
moving the discharge of the order of the day.—Agreed to.
The Duke of RICHMOND said he would, to-morrow,
in all probability, bring in a Bill on the subject himself.
It was then ordered that the laws relating to guming
be referred to a Select Committee of their Lordships:
HEALTH OF TOWNS BILLS. is was
was
common

The Marquis of NORMANBY said he had a question
of some importance to put, which he hoped some
member of the Government would be in a position to
answer. It was on a, subject entirely distinct from that
which had just occupied their Lordships' attention, but
one which he was sure they would all concur in con-
sidering of vastly greater importance. When he stated
to their Lordships that his question had reference not
only to the cleanliness and comfort, but to the morals of
the poor, he was sure none of them would for a moment
underrate its importance. The question was in reference
to some measures which had passed their Lordships'
House no less than three times, and he could not but say
that it was with feelings of grievous disappointment he
now again called their Lordships' attention to them.
Some considerable time back—in the year 1839—a
Right Rev. Prelate, whom he did not then see in his
place, made a motion on the subject of the state of
the dwellings of the poor, especially in large towns,
and in consequence of this motion a Commission was
appointed by the Secretary for the Home Department,
to further investigate and report upon the subject. • In the
following year, in consequence of the information for-
warded to the Government, the Secretary of State for
the Home Department extended its powers and func-
tions to Scotland. Such a case for interference was
almost immediately made out, as the result of the labours
of the Commission, that he (Lord Normanby) at once
brought the question before his colleagues, and, in 1841;
he also brought the subject before their Lordships, and
introduced Bills, with a view to commence remedial
mettsures as quickly as possible. To the principle of
those Bills, their Lordships assented unanimously ; but
in order to make the details of them as perfect as pos-
sible, it was suggested that they should be referred to a
Select Committee up stairs. Never did a Committee
work with greater assiduity or success. The Bills passed
through their Lordships' House, but in consequence of
the session becoming short, they did not pass through
the House of Commons. Next session they were again
submitted to their Lordships, and again passed. The
session of 1842 concluded, and upon it came a circum-
stance which gave a very particular consideration to the
subject. The Poor-law Commissioners took the matter
in band, and, after due investigation, made a Report upon
the subject, and a most important Report indeed it was.
That Report might perhaps be an accumulation of facts
that were' not palatable to the general reader. But it
showed that no less than 56,000 persons died annually
to
ofpreventdiseases which
or r wasove. in power
s was
th oe f s theam eL eg ila t
as
sif ue
the r
whole population of Huntingdonshire or Rutlandshire
Was annually swept away by disease, which the Govern-
ment might prevent. More information on this subject
was certainly not what the Government required—of
information they had enough. The suggestions of the
Report might or might not have been adopted, but ad-
ditional information was not required ; even if it had
been, the Commission ought to have been appointed at
once ; but from the time the Report was made till the
present session of Parliament, not one step had been
taken. It he should now hear that it wig not
likely a measure would be introduced on this subject, he
should feel it his duty again to call on their Lordships
to affirm the principle which he had already been fortunate
enough three times to receive their approbation. Whe-
ther or not a Bill were brought in this session, he could
not exempt that department of the Government with
which this measure rested from some blame for not bay

ing taken up the former Bill, and amended it, if re-
quired amendment, or, if further inquiry were neces-
sary, for not having caused that inquiry to be made.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH said the Noble Marquis
had found fault with her Majesty's Ministers for not
having taken up this subject in the former session of
Parliament. But the fact was, this measure was drawn
up when the Report was not completed. In 1841,
when the Report was presented, the Bill for the
improvement of the town of Leeds was introduced.
The Commission met on 3d of June, and sat three days
a week until the end of July ; up to this time there had
been no delay. The Commission had laboured even
during the recess, and visited fifty-one towns. The
Noble Lord seemed to think that the report made by the
Commission could be legislated upon immediately. No
person who retd that report could doubt of the misery
and wretchedness which existed in several towns, and
even in the metropolis itself—a condition -truly dis-
graceful to this country. Disease was of a- very de-
structive character and very prevalent. No person pos-
sessed of the commonest feelings of humanity but would
exclaim against these things remaining as they were.
But it was a very different thing to legislate on
the subject—to introduce an effectual remedy. The
Commissioners found more difficulty than was
generally imagined. In suggesting a proper mode for
curing these evils, a new system of drainage was the
principal•thing ; but could this be effected for nothing.
Let them look to the metropolis itself. Those who had
not heard the evidence laid before the Commission by
scientific men, could have no idea of the extreme diffi-
culty 'of carrying out a regular systematic drainage in
the metropolis under the existing state of things. Some
regard should be paid to another point, the supply of
water, without which the drains would be choked up
and rendered useless. Now, the supply of water in
London, as the Commissioners would wish_ it to be sup-

plied, was a most difficult thing. They had to
contend with vast and complicated interests—large
companies—and it WM really hard to think how
they could be compensated; but with all the in-
formation contained in the Report, and with all the
curious papers that had been laid before the Commis-
mission, he was not prepared to lay before the House
any measure for their Lordships' consideration. If the

Bin recommended to their Loradships were carried into
effect, the surveyors' fees alone would amount to
80,0001. Ant Bill that could be introduced would be-
come a dead etter, from the difficulty of carrying it into
effect. The Commission had everywhere been received
in the most favourable manner by the working classes
and by the municipal authorities. Most curious infor-
mation had been laid before the Committee regarding
the drainage and supplying of water to towns on the
Continent and in America, but he repeated that he was
not at present prepared to offer any recommendation on
the course which should be pursued.
The Marquis of NORMANBY never heard a more
unsatisfactory explanation than that offered by the
Noble Duke ; he considered that the Government were
greatly to blame in allowing these evils to continue so
long without proposing some remedy.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH explained.
Lord. FITZWILLIAM was understood to say that he
considered it very difficult to legislate 011 the subject.

The Committee for inquiring into the laws on gaming
was then appointed.
The Duke of RICHMOND gave notice that he should
to-morrow move for the copy of a letter from the As-
sistant-Secretary of the Treasury to the clerks of the
peace, and dated Dec. 2, 1843, his object being to induce
the Government of the country to withdraw it.
Lord MONTEAGLE gave notice that he should to-
morrow move for certain returns from the Bank of Eng-
land. His Lordship also 'gave notice that he should at
the same time put a question to the Government with a
view of ascertaining if it was their intention to take any
measures in respect to the Bank of Ireland at the time
they proposed those measures having reference to the
Bank of England. His Lordship laid on the table of
the House a Bill to facilitate the recovering of sums of
money by certain teachers in Ireland, which had passed
their Lordships' House last session, but had dropped in
the other House in consequence of the late period it ar-
rived there, and the heavy pressure of other business of
greater importance.
The House then, at Five Minutes after Six, adjourned
until to morrow.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 5.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock.
PRIVATE BILLS.
On the motion of Mr. STRUTT, the following Mem-
bers were appointed as a Select Committee on Petitions
for Private'Bills, viz. :—Mr. Strutt, Mr. Robert Clive,
Mr. Rice, Mr. Villiers Stuart, Mr. Wrightson, Mr:.
George Cavendish, Mr. Crompton, Mr. Brotherton, Mr,
Pakington, Mr. Forbes, Mr. Beckett, Sir John Yarde
Buller, Mr. Bramston, —Mr. Richard Walker, Mr.
George „Philips, Mr. Bell, Mr. Gibson Craig, O'Conor
Don, Mr. ForbeS Mackenzie, Mr. Horsman, Mr. Mott
Yorke, Mr. Kemble, Mr. Aglionby, Captain Jones, Mr.
•Thornely, Mr. Barneby, Mr. Benjamin Wood, Mr.
Tatterton Egerton, Mr. Stansfield, Lord Worslev, Mr.
Henry Baillie, -Mr. Edward Buller, Sir William Heath-
cote, Mr. Hspe Johnstone, Mr. Morgan John O'Connell,
Mr. Packe, Mr. Acland, Mr. Evans, Mr. Home Drum-
mond, Mr. Parker, Mr. Marshall, and Mr. E. P. Shirley.

THE LEAGUE.
Sir ,J'OHN TROLLOPE presented a petition from
Boston, and other places in Lincolnshire, praying that
protection might be afforded to agriculture, and com-
plaining of what the petitioners termed the machina-
tions of a body of persons calling themselves the Anti-
Corn-law League.