The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-27 00:00:00

GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY BILL.

On the motion of Mr. C. RUSSELL, this Bill was
read a second time, and ordered to be committed.

Mr. C. BERKELEY presented a petition, com-
plaining. of certain clauses in the Bill.
DUTY ON PAPER.
Mr. MACAULAY presented a petition from the
publishing trade, against the present excise duty on
paper.
Mr. DENNISTOUN presented a petition, agreed
to at a public meeting at Glasgow, presided over by
the, Lord Provost, condemning the. Ministerial policy
in :Ireland, and praying that immediate steps be
taken to investigate into the causes that produce so
much discontent in that country.
.4lr. WALLACE presented a petition from an in-
dividual in Dublin, complaining of injustice done
him by public officers in that city, and praying the
House to take his case into consideratiOn: • •
COUNTY BANKRUPTCY COURTS.

Mr. SCOTT gave notice that he would, to-
morrow, move for returns relating to the Courts of
Bankruptcy in Manchester, Liverpool, and other
towns in the north of England.
THE NEW POOR-LAW.

Mr. B. COCHRANE gave notice, that on the
Order of the Day for going into Committee on the
Poor-laws' Amendment Act, hi would move a resolu-
tion, to the effect, " That notwithstanding thd im-
proveittnt, proposed by that Bill; the provisions made
for the, poor were inadequate, and the provisions of the
Bill were contrary to the principles of the Constitution,
and inconsistent with the dictates of humanity'and
VALUATION OF LAND IN IRELAND.

Sir D. 31 ORREYS gave notice that he would
to morrow put a question to the Noble Lord the Se-
cretary for Ireland, relating to 'the valuation of land
in that country.
-RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN FACTORIES.

Mr. WALLACE rose to move that the petitions
which he had presented from certain preachers in the
west, of Scotland, praying that they should be in-
'eluded in the provisions of the Factories Bill for reli-
gious• instruction, be printed. - -
Mr. BROTHERTON said that there was no need
for t haste in the printing ©f these petitions, as -in a
day or_two they would_ be printed by order of the
Select Committee on petitions: • -
The SPBAKER said that the• motion of the Hon.
Meinber for -Greenock was against the rules of the
House, which referred the printing of petitions to the
Select Committee. ' -
r. WALLACE then withdrew his_motion.
SW'PLY—GRIEVANCES OF THE PEOPLE.

pon the Order of the Day-being read for the
iTollse resolving itself into a Committee of Supply on
-the Estimates

Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD rose to move an
-amendment to the effect,' that the consideration of
'the Estimates be postponed.. In doing so he said he
was -actuated•s by- no party cot sideration% and he
should endeavour as briefly as 'possible to state
his reasons- for the course he was about
, to adopt. During the late • debate, which occupied
they Hottse for. such a length of time, he took no part,
because he was aware that it would be. attended with,
no practical result, for he thought it was little more
than a firing of blank cartridge without any effect.
He thoughtit was merely a vote for party purposes,
in which the great interests of the nation were for-
gotten ; in fact, it w as a question -which turned upon
the numerical strength of the two parties, instead
of being a battle fought for the purpose of protecting
the interests of • -the great amasses of .the people.
When a hostile army 'invaded a country, the best
course to be pursued by the invaded was to cut off
the supplies of, their enemies. He should adopt, in a
political sense, the same movement, and endeavour to,
limit the powers of the intruding party, by cutting off the
means by which alone he could carry on his operations.
It was on this principle that he then came forward
to endeavour to bring forward this motion,' It Was
not an . attempt to rally the broken forces ' of the
Noble. LOrd the, Member for. London. The Noble
Lord had not the country with- him. Ho did not
rest on those principles, which would bring the
people in aid of him. What he wished to do was to
rally a force out of that House' in support of mea-
sures that were really wanted. The resolution he
brought forward on a former occasion had been in
some degree misunderstood.- It recited a number of
grievance's of which the people complained, and said
they ought to be redressed ; but the parti-
cular grievance it recited was that which re-
garded the representation. 'The Honourable
Member ,for Montrose seemed to object to the reso-
lution, because he said it was one that denied the com-
-petency of that. Rouse. He did deny the competency
of that House to vote supplies if the charges that
were brought against the House were true. He still
disputed its, right on the same grounds.. The petition
presented to that House by the Chartists made the
same charges ; :a .petition had at a more recent period
been presented, which still' snore, completely denied
the competency of that House. It was re-
ceived and laid on' the table. It was a
petition from Birmingham, signed by the
Mayor of that town ; it declared that the House did
not represent the people, and that 950,000 electors
returned a majority of the Members of that House.
A large portion of the Members of that House got
into Parliament by the most profligate and corrupt '
means, and such being the case, no attention was paid
to the wants of the people. The Members of that
House betrayed a gross ignorance of .the condition of
the peopi.e, and a recklessness for their welfare ; in short
they made laws for ,the purpose of clepresAng-
people.' Now the petition to which he had been
referring was a petition which charged that House
with not being the representatives of the
,people—
the petition ()hared that direetly.the terms were

not qualified, but direct and peremptory. The House
had received that petition of the people, and had
directed it to be laid on the table ; was it not, there-
fore, necessary for the House to investigate these
charges ? He called upon any Member of that House
to deny, if he could, the charges made in the petition
He would repeat, that that House was not competent to
do any act, or vote any supplies till its Members had
refuted the charges contained in the petition to which
he had referred. He offered to the House, the other
day, a petition signed by 900,000 persons. complain
ing that the House did not represent the people,
and the House would not receive it, on the ground
that it could not be considered the petition of the
people. With reprd to the suffrage, he did not ask
the House to come to the particular opinions he
entertained, before they came to a vote ; but what he
did ask was, were they virtually the representatives
of the people ?—(Hear, hear.) It was true they
represented the landed aristocracy, part of the
middle classes, the moneyed classes ; but a great
body of the people—the working classes—were not
represented at all. He would ask the House
whether they virtually represented the people,
and if they did. not, how, he would ask, could
they do any act, or vote any supplies ?—(Hear.)
The motion with which he had to conclude was,
that the grant of the supplies should be deferred until
after Easter. The first step the House should take before
granting one farthing of the supplies, was to have the
whole estimates before them—to see what the income
was, and what the expenditure was proposed to be. From
the year 1836 to 1844 the national expenditure had
greatly increased, and he thought that House had to
consider why it had so increased. To this end the
estimates ought, in his opinion, to be referred to a
Committee. On this subject he certainly thought
he was entitled to the support of all those
who called themselves economists. The support of
the Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) he par-
ticularly claimed. Those Members, who advocated
the repeal of the corn-laws, ought to support him, for no
greater grievance could there be than those laws in-
flicted. The Irish Members ought to support him for
they had grievancies, indeed, to complain of.
The Irish people demanded the same corporate reform
as that which had been granted to England; they
demanded also a greater number of representatives
in that House ; and lastly, they demanded an equali-
zation of religious freedom with England, and Scot-
land. Now, had the Irish Members any reason to
expect that they would obtain any of those great
objects ? No, they had not; but the Irish
Members should not go home without
having first made every exertion towards obtain-
ing these objects. Ile said unless these demands
were granted Ireland would be justified in using
every lawful means to obtain a repeal of the union.—
(Hear, hear.) He had lately heard the construction
of the law with respect to public meetings
argued most ingeniously by lawyers, but
the. construction put upon the law was to
little purpose, if the Government had a large force at
its command. The Government might take the
opinion of their law-officers, but the real interpreter
they would refer to would be the Field-Marshal com-
manding the troops. The Government, when it
wished to oppress the people, could easily stretch
the law to effect that oppression. The only question
they considered, when they wished to practise such
oppression was, whether they had sufficient force to
enable them to do so; and the Commander-in-Chief
was the officer they consulted. Nothing could more
clearly show this than a reference to Irish history.
In 1782 the people of Ireland asserted their rights,
and they asserted them with arms in their hands.
Did any Government say they were illegal ? No;
because no Government had the power, and the
people of Ireland then had arms in their
hands. Such was the case of the volunteers.
But the state of things was altered now ;
and they leld ms Bills for the Irish
people instead of the Irish people having arms. The
Irish journals of that period record that an address
had been presented by the House of Commons to the
Lord Lieutenant, stating what had been gained for
Ireland by the volunteers as to the independence of the
Irish Parliament and of the Irish judges. The vo-
lunteers continued to assemble in arms for twelve or
thirteen years, and it was never declared that their
meetings were illegal, or that they were guilty of any
conspiracy. On the contrary, they received the
thanks of Parliament on four different occasions for
the' aid they gave in defence of the country,
and also for that which they gave in aid
of the civil power. In the following year
3,000 troops were withdrawn from Ireland, the
ordinary force being 12,000, and those who remained
were recruits and undisciplined soldiers. The
people were left to their own protection. How
different was the state of things now ? The Right
Honourable Beronet in his speech commented
on the nature of the Irish Parliament, and he (Mr.
S. Crawford) admitted that it had become as corrupt
a Parliament as could well be ; but it had neverthe-
less: during its existence conferred incalculable benefits
upon the-Irish people, for it was possible that some-
times the most eotrupt bodies could be influenced by
the purest motives towards the people. In conse-
quence of the corruptions of the Parliament, and
the divisions amongst the people, the Irish
nation lost all power, and down to this
day the evil had remained in full force, after the
consequences of the unfortunate rebellion of 1798.
A state of suffering and violence had pervaded that
country ever since, from one cause or another,
but most chiefly from supporting the domi-
nation of a small party, to the exclusion
of the great majority. He was surprised that no
allusion had been made to the Arms Act, because he
thought a great mass of evil would arise from the opera-
tion of the Bill ; but he supposed the reason for this silence
was that the working out of that Act was found quite
impracticable in the present day. With respect to the
Landlord and Tenant Commission, all he should say
was that many persons looked at it with great doubt,
because it was imagined there was a desire to
screen the landlords from the effects of the Commission.
Now the Government, in excusing themselves for the
use of military power, said that they were not the
cause of the agitation which had been raised in Ire-
land. He must deny them that apology. There would
be no agitation which could be at all dangerous to
the Government if it were not for their
obstinate refusal to redress the grievances
of Ireland. It was this which caused agita-
tion, and what he maintained was, that the
Government ought not to be permitted to keep up an
army which would enable them to refuse redress.
There had been a considerable manifestation of pub-
lic feeling in favour of the course which he had felt
it his duty to take on that occasion. On referring to
the votes of the House, he found that petitions
had been presented from thirty-four different
places, calling upon the House to refuse supplies
until the grievances of the people should have been
redressed. The petition which he (Mr. S. Crawford)
had presented that day from the city of Edinburgh
well deserved tile attention of the House ;
that petition was signed by 17,000 persons.
In order to show that he was justified
by the feelings of his constituents in taking this
course, he need only refer to the memorial which had
been sent 'to him from the borough of Rochdale.
The Honourable Member then read a memorial
to the effect that the refusal of supplies until the
grievances of the people had been redressed, was, in the
opinion of the memorialists, a constitutional, just, and
necessary course,and highly approving of the announce-
ment of that course by the Hon. Gentleman. This peti-
tion was signed by 5,500 inhabitants of Roch-
dale, and by 400 electors—a larger number than
had voted for him at the time of his re-
turn for that borough. He admitted that
opposition to the Government in the voting of sup-
plies ought not to be undertaken on light grounds.
the question was, were there 'sufficient grounds
now to justify such a course? In his judg•
meet the grounds were amply sufficient.
The liberties of the people were in danger. If
such proceedings as had taken place in Ireland
were permitted to continue, the power of the
people to express their opinions would be suppressed.
fhere was a disposition exhibited to restrain the
liberty of speech ; and on this account, among others,
it was necessary to pursue this course. The country
was in a most alarming condition, and it was indis-
pensably necessary that those Members who re-
presented the people in that House should take
such means as were in their power to secure redress.
Those who maintained that no other power than moral
power should be resorted to by the people, and who
deprecated the use of physical force, were bound
to use every means in their power to show that moral
power was not unavailing, lest men should resort to
other means to obtain redress. He might possibly be
asked, what would be the effect of this remedy if it
were capable of being carried out. He admitted
that the result would necessarily be, either that the
Minister must redress grievances or resign.
He did not desire to see the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet in that position, if he would
only hold out the smallest hope of redress. He did
not hope that he alone could make any impression on
the House in reference to this question ; all he could
do was, to ask the Right Hon. Baronet to take the
grievances of the country into his serious consideration.
He wished to prevent any supply being voted until
some indications should he given of an intention, on
the part of the Government, to redress the grievances
of the people. Whether such a course should be
adopted or not, depended upon the other representa-
tives of the people. He had done his duty by pro-
posing the course which he had proposed.
l'he House would adopt whatever course it might
think proper. He had abstained from malting any
mere ad captandunz proposition for the mere purpose
of catching a few stray votes. He thought that is
great stand.ought to be made by the representatives
of the country, particularly when the army estimates
should be proposed. The Hon. Member -concluded
by formally proposing his motion.

optiv o
en said
se,
nsttel
_
that
withoutN , i n sreegrconedtin
himself to the notice of the House. He Preset!
P` aicain st
himself for the purpose of entering
the course which it appeared the oveTry‘rent
aid,
tghattir he
was determined to adopt towards AM
The House would bear in mind that;
the course of the Irish discussion, he had had .10
portunity of addressing the House. The numiWr
English Members Whoho had addressed the Hou ti, gre;
the subject had exceeded that of Irish Members..
thought the social and political condition of 1-
was such as to demand inquiry. Let the I la'
remember what M. de Beaumont, a person x ncos;
nected with any English or Iris;.-1 political par' ki
said as to the state of Ireland. ('ihe Hon. an.
lant Officer here read an extract froZi M. de Bee.;
mont's work, in which that gentlemai: 4atee that
the condition of the North American Indian, ;. ';
as regarded physical comforts, was superb, .bo
that of the Irish peasant—that it was ixnpos slter
to find in the world a race of men subject to g-te, 'nthe
physical privations than the Irish peasantry; th ced
greater portion of the population of Ireland w
upon potatoes, and that whereas, in other coun reesd'
beggars formed the exception, in Ireland they fa 01
the rule. Surely, when such was the state of thecou
inquiry into its condition was imperatively &Melt
He knew it must weary the House to speak on t, r 1,,,"
subject of Ireland after the long debate that had takt"
place on that subject. but the. House must recolleeVt.
that more English Members had spoken than Irish,'
and he hoped therefore the House would alloy
him to say a few words. During the whole
discussion in Ireland the temperance movement had
never once been alluded to.—(Hear, hear.) the
had not had an intelligible answer yet from
Right Hon. Gentleman as to what bourse he
,
intended to pursue with respect to Irel'n".
He had held out no hopes of redress for
the wrongs of the people of Ireland. For the pre-
sent the door might be considered shut against thie,
Irish people. The Irish Members must go ttn,
and tell their constituents that there ivere
hopes for the people of Ireland from that 1-l'ans`.
He had heard the other evening, with some ix:1(141;
60n, an Hon. and Gallant Member express s
that agitation should be put down in that House:'
(Colonel Rawden) said that that House was the Place
for agitation—the constitutional and the proper plaice'
He still clung to the Act of Union, but when he heat'
such expressions as those he had alluded to, his feelingb".,
he must say, began to waver. If there could be found
one way more successful than another to increase
agitation, it would be in attempting to suppress the
discussion of Irish grievances in that House. n°
sincerely believed the time was come when
Irishmen should make themselves more heard in that
House. They must be more heard, for the. Govern'
ment were not determined on what was necessary
and right. He could assure the .Right . Honourable
Baronet (Sir Robert Peel), that however concilie-
tory his expressions were, he could see nothil
tangible in his intentions. he Right Hon. Baili°_ te
might stave off substantial measures for a time, ht"
it would be only for a time. Until he consented W
a great alteration in the Church, and to a franchise
equal to that of England, there could be no hope °(
permanent peace in Ireland. For these reasons he
seconded the motion.
Sir H. DOUGLAS, in reply to what had faill
from the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman, said he con,'
assure him that he had not spoken hastily on the Sub;
ject to which the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman ha'
alluded, and certainly he had not spoken
any bad feeling to Ireland. What he h'‘f
stated was, that he considered the motion
the Noble Lord opposite (Lord John Russell)
to be a motion for party purposes, and not for the go
of Ireland ; and he further stated that when the
l
motion should )''triumphantly negatived, he sh°lll,
be ready to giveeffect to his sincere disposition w t
everything*, faiiourfreland, stopping short 01'19
that point.. to go. beyoe &which _would be elf
injurious to both England and.rridand.
Mr. W. WILLIAIIS said'' he had listened wit/1
great attention to the speech of his 11-012°uri
able Friend, the Member for Rochdale, but he Inn
confess that he did, not think his Honourable•Friene
had made -ont,,any case for the postponement of the
present Committee of Supply. If his Hon. Friene
had introduced into his motion a proposition that th
estimates should be laid before the House, before anl
portion of them should- be voted for the purr's.,
of such estimates being referred to a Select Commit;
he (Mr. Williams) would then have supported
Hon. Friend. His Hon. Friend, however, inel:
proposed a postponement of the estimates until nter
Easter, without showing any distinct or cled,
ground why that course should be adopt,
He (Mr. Williams) thought the House 4as fOr4
• &ta
entitled, not only to have the army gator't jo
but the ordnance estimates also laid before thorns
order that they might be well considered hef°l
they were voted. Ile thought too that the ChaneejA
for of the Exchequer ought to lay his .. financ
budget before the Parliament before any puni:,t
money was voted, in order that the House miC.
see how the money was to be •' obtaine;
The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor efts,,•te,
Exchequer, had stated last year that there hsclL—n-/
a balance of receipts over expenditure of 1,4001,„,,z"
but it appeared that there was not a single Earn,
saved ; for on the other side of the see??,.7ed
it appeared that 1,300,0001. had been receli;oi,
from the sale of the Chinese dollars, and 1,600,0
had been paid for the China opium which had had
seized. It was admitted that the income-tax fer
brought in 5,500,0001., but the public hunt
received any, account of the real 114
of taxation in the financial statement, •11
been 1
were not aware that 4,500,000/. had _
tercepted by the various public officers of
its way to the Treasury. The CommissionerS,...
Customs had been denounced as unfit for the ote`i,
vise of the trust reposed in them. They in, of
ceed an amount of taxation to the amounkyo,
1,200,0001. If there was a Select Committee ptho
perly constituted, not composed of Members ° of,
existing Government, or of the late Govern
but of independent Members of Parliament, attecAbe
to no party, he had no doubt it would prove, frcnntest
practice and experience of former years, top
a large amount might be saved to the :coo tio
He Would ask, what reason could there be krensat•
enormous expenditure of the public money, "pd. the
the opening of the session her Majesty had inforni-f the
House that she had the strongest assurances nreiga
most amicable disposition on the part of all f° tee
Powers, of uninterrupted peace ? What were es'
actual facts of the case ? Why, that in the nns:iTion4
timates there was an increase of nearly two linhoald
sterling over that of the year 1835. Now he !."
call on the Hon. Gentleman opposite to explain ',„°liirea
House why a sum of 25,000/. more was re'erfe
for the expense of the marine force intended to
ears,
on shore, than what it was in former 4.tioes
He (Mr. :Williams) thought this was a surrerivot
mode of keeping up a standing army. 00
else, he would ask, could be their Two'
for keeping up an army of 129,677 men, A uootri
army than ever was known in this e°h 01(1
o
since 'the occupation of France ? 11e. 5°
like to hear this explained, the 134,,°r-itele
when they considered that, independent of
~,.tiPS„.
army, no less than 10,000 pensioners had d also
bodied by a vote of that House last ye-IWO° stir
that they had 20,000 armed police. Did the)" old
port this large military establishment becalssforee'
proposed to govern the country by militar.Y(orsie
for if they did not in the present state of the
referee
relations of this country, there could be no PrA
for it. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite beo'n
he was obliged to support this enormous willies's)
count of the state of Ireland, but he (Mr. 0.00
contended that the necessity for doing the govl'
solely from the policy pursued by the Right *„,el t,n
Gentleman towards the country. It was Pr°P-51,0011`
vote 34,000 men for the navy this year.
like to know how was such a large force as th
rise
quired now, when in 1822 the naval force co 18,000
only 21,000 men, namely, 13,000 seamen, all 18369
marines? In the years, 1832, 1833, 1834, anureeete,
only 27,000 men were voted for this service.
was another important question--to which he.t 096
to direct the attention of the House, and 1 frifet:
matter upon which the Admiralty' had neve",. ci thil"
any satisfactory information to the House,llit,st, for
was the large amount of the naval pension I the
the amount of these pensions was more this lenn tog
it was in the year 1818, after the wart WBieoff, en",,
were a great number of officers pensioned
the
it was likely to have more upon tn
the $a
than at any other riod, owing to
merous casualties incident to the vvnir..; state
should wish the Right Hon. Baronet in the,
why there had been so great an increas!_...A
pensions to naval officers. He coraplatT btia
the manner in which the naval estinlaf ,jaia9
been made out. The army estimates welt° to the
but such was not the case with res?'",.e. pen
navy. Now, what was the amount of tor roe
sions iven to the widows and children ° op?,
officers? In 1818 the whole amount of 18ge
given to those individuals was 18,8001.; in
210,0005 a
was 112,000/., while this year it was ewiebsi
Now, he should like to know why this vast incr
_ewe
taken place: When they tompared the amount Incireal
by the naval officers, and their widows and 01.01,gbb
with the amount given to sailors, the men /it of that
their battles, what did they get? WV' °Wes
10p0,000i., they got about 207,0001-
to he supposed that these men w°94,oset`
satisfied, and not consider themselves de'
He would next advert to the pensions in the.oredee
partment of the Admiralty. After the last pen
tion of the war establishment, the amonntthi,f
Ve
sions in, this department was 99,600/, OA, oelie
t
it came to no less a sum than 162,00-4
double what it was at the close of thewf 0.
ort 1,5
t
wanted to know what circumstances esuLkyal"",
~'
extra expenditure., Then there war. the