The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-03 00:00:00

altogether unnecessary. He thought that Bill
ought to be purified of the objections that had been
raised against it. He believed the present Government
were anxious to do all in their power for Ireland, and
they ought not to be taunted with not bringing in mea-
sures. He trusted that some measure would be brought
forward to make provisions for the Catholic Ministers.
If measures of this sort were adopted, satisfaction would
be given to those people in Ireland whose object was not
agitation.
Lord CAMPBELL supposed that this debate was to
be looked upon as the consideration of
the state of Ireland; and how they could do it
without considering how the State trials had
been conducted, he was at a loss to conceive. To attempt
to consider the state of Ireland without mentioning the
name of Mr. O'Connell, was like performing the play of
Hamlet with the part of Hamlet omitted by particular
desire.—(A laugh.) The Noble President of the Coun-
cil said the Government had asked for no fresh power
or sought to suspend the Constitution, but something
which had a worse aspect than either had been done.
He wolud much rather see the Constitution suspended
than the law perverted. When the Constitution was
suspended it acquired vigour at its restoration; but when
the law was perverted a dangerous precetlent was estab-
lished, which might be permanently hurtful. He felt great
alarm at the apathy which existed regarding Ireland.
It was true tranquillity existed, but could they trust to
the continuance of that tranquillity ? Was there not
universal and deep discontent ? Was not the repeal
rent increasing ? Had the feeling they so much de-
plored subsided ? He feared not. Ile hoped England
would be ever united to preserve the union as it then was,
for the repeal would be more hurtful to Ireland than to
England. But at the same time measures of concilia-
tion should be adopted. During his stay in Ireland an
election for Dublin took place, when Mr. Hutton and
Mr. O'Connell were the candidates. Mr. O'Connell, the
hero of repeal and the favourite of the people, obtained
a less number of votes than Mr. Hutton, the non-repeal
candidate, showing that repeal was then, at all events, i❑
a less popular condition than at present, when the repeal
rent was weekly on the increase.
Here the Noble Lord suddenly stopped, in consequence
of a loud conversation which was carried on between
Lord Dalhousie and the Duke of Wellington. The
Noble and Learned Lord said, " I stop, because I must
needs bear every word those two Noble Lords are say-
ing." The conversation here ceased, and
Lord CAMPBELL resumed.—The Catholics and
Protestants of Ireland should be put on an equality, and
until they were so, there would be no lasting peace or
tranquillity in Ireland.
The Bill was then read a third time.

The Controverted Elections Bill was read a second
time.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
their Lordships adjourned at Half-past Ten o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, August 2.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly after Twelve.
The Bishop of Down and Connor and Dromore's
Estate Bill was read a third time and passed.
Lord Lovat's Estate Bill was road a third time and
passed.
The Duke of Hamilton's Estate Bill was read a second
time, and ordered to be committed.
Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition from 500
tradesmen of Bristol, against the Insolvent Debtors Bill ;
also a petition from certain solicitors in London, to the
same effect.
Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from tradesmen of
Finsbury, Marylebone, and Southwark, to the same
effect. The petitioners prayed that the Bill might, at
least, be postponed until next session.
Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition from Finsbury
to the same effect. The petitioners prayed that if any
law were passed, greater powers should be given as
against goods.
NEW WRIT FOR DUDLEY.

On the motion of Mr. J. YOUNG, a new writ was
ordered to be issued for the election of a Member for
Dudley, in the room of T. Hawkes, Esq., who had
accepted tho Chiltern Hundreds.
The report on the Charitable Donations and Bequests
(Ireland) Salaries and Expenses Bill was brought up, as
was also the report on the Marriages (Ireland) Bill,
which were ordered to be read a third time to-morrow, at
Twelve o'clock.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.

On the motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL proceeded to explain
its principal provisions. The provisions branched into
three different heads, each of which required a
separate and distinct consideration. The first part
of the Bill related to the amendment of the
law of cessio bonorum ; the second, and, undoubtedly,
the most important part, proposed to abolish
imprisonment for debt in executions under 201. ;
and the remaining part of the Bill introduced
some amendments into the machinery of the Court
of Bankruptcy. It was his conscientious conviction that
the measure would be found extremely beneficial. It
had been stated, as an objection to the measure, that it
would injure the humbler classes of society by diminish-
ing the facility of credit, but he was rather inclined to
doubt whether that was a good objection. For although
it might, in some cases, be of advantage to people in
bumble circumstances to get credit, it was more generally
attended by consequences quite the reverse of advan-
tageous.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman then proceeded to read several passages from the
evidence taken before a Committee of the House on
the subject, tending to show that the abolition
of imprisonment for debt would not have the effect of
abolishing bona fide credit, but only of making trades-
men more careful. Mr. Dampier, who presided over the
Stannaries Court, in Cornwall, and had jurisdiction over
one hundred thousand persons in cases of small debts,
but who had no power of ordering the imprisonment of
debtors, gave it as his opinion that the abolition of im-
prisonment for debt would only have the effect of making
tradesmen more careful. Any possible injury which
might arise from this Bill, was not to be weighed in the
balance against the evils inflicted by the present system.
Had the House rend the evidence on this subject ?
(Hear, hear.) They read of six or seven persons con-
fined in a dungeon, with nothing but straw to lie
upon. When this Bill was objected to on the
ground of mercy to the debtor, he asked them to
consider the evils attending the system of imprisonment.
—(Hear, hear.) What benefit was it to the creditor to
be able to incarcerate the body of his miserable debtor ?
Was the debtor any more likely to pay what he owed ?
Certainly not ; for the class of persons affected by the
Bill had not the means of doing so. In the arguments
against this Bill he had not been able to discover
any which were entitled to consideration, except
that to which he had adverted ; and after
what he had stated, he trusted the measure would be
allowed to go into Committee.
Mr. M. PHILIPS. did not mean to stand up as an
advocate of imprisonment for debt, but complained that
he had not had sufficient time to communicate with his
constituents on the subject. He also thought they would
disturb the operations of credit if they passed such a
measure as this, without having explained it more fully
to the public at large. There ought to be more caution
in legislating on such a subject, and he thought he was
not asking too much when he required a little delay.
Mr. S. WORTLEY felt himself in some degree in the
same position as the Hon. Member for: Manchester.
There had not been sufficient time to consider all the
consequences of this measure. He had that morning re-
ceived a petition from Sheffield, stating that the peti-
tioners were creditors to no less an amount than 40,000 L,
which would be affected by this Bill. Undoubtedly the
Bill was sanctioned by the highest legal authorities
of the other House. But Hon. Members had not before
them the evidence on which the Bill had been founded,
and he thought when a Bill came down to them at the
very end of July, they ought not to be called on to pass
it at the beginning of August in the absence of those
legal Members, who were alone able to judge of the
effect of its intricate and technical language. He could
not but express the strongest opinion that they ought not
precipitately to pass such a measure.
Mr. AGLIONBY also objected to passing such a
- measure so late in the session, and without discussion.
He concurred with the two Hon. Members who had
preceded him. Such hasty legislation was most inconve-
nient and injurious. It ought to have been brought in
earlier in the session, and at any other time than a
morning sitting. He protested against its being sup-
posed that those who opposed the Bill wished to keep
unfortunate debtors in prison. He objected to the 36th
clause. He thought if all power over the person was
relinquished, it would operate unfavourably to
the working classes, by diminishing the disposition
to give 'credit. Many descriptions of workmen being
thrown out of work during portions of the year were
enabled to obtain credit during that time on the security
of their wages in the period in which they are employed.
But the inclination to give this credit would be
disninished ; nor in its present shape did the Bill give
any increased power over the goods. This would tend
to diminish the business of the Courts of Requests, as
persons would not apply to them when they could only
give judgment against the goods which in many
cases would be of no avail. On the whole, balancing
the evils of both systems, he thought the abolition of the
power over the person would act injuriously on the
working classes. He should not oppose the Bill on ge.
neral principle, but he must object to the time at which
it was brought in, and to some of its details.
Mr. SPOONER fully agreed with all that had fallen
from the Hon. and Learned Member. He admitted that
the learned Solicitor-General had made an able and
powerful appeal to their feelings—one which it was
difficult to resist. But they must legislate from judg-
ment, and not from impulse. He thought the Bill would
injure the working classes, by restricting the amount of
credit they now obtained. Again, why make the mea-
sure a partial one? If imprisonment for debt was wrong
in principle, why not abolish it in all cases? Why
should they take from the small shopkeeper a remedy
which they still continued to the rich merchant and
manufacturer? Feeling that great practical evils would
be the result of this measure, he must press on the Go-
vernment the necessity of some delay.
Sir J. GRAHAM, alluding to what had been said
about the absence of Members of the legal profession,
said if the principle was laid down that the House was
only to legislate when they were present, it must give
up legislating at all for four months out of the six. The
early part of the session was always occupied by the
great annual struggle for power, and practical legislation
did not commence till after Whitsuntide, and soon after
that came the summer circuit. Both in the

spring and' summer circuits they were deprived
of the presence of the legal Members, who
were only present during the great annual contest he
had alluded to. In their absence the House must use
its judgment and common sense, and do without common
law as well as it could.—(Hear, hear.) He traced the
progress of the measure through the Upper House, and
read the opinions of the Commissioners who had reported
on the subject, to show that public attention had been
'sufficiently called to the question. Nor was experience
wanted in the matter. In Scotand arrest for debt was
Unknown, and they had the recorded opinion of several