The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-03 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, May 2.

Their Lordships met at Five o'Clock.
Moesengors from the Commons brought up several
Bills, which were read a first time,
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from per-
sons engaged in the woollen manufactures in certain
parts of Scotland, against any interference by the Legis-
lature with labour.
RECOVERY OF DEBTS (IRELAND).
Lord CAMPBELL laid on the table of the House a
Bill to facilitate the recovery of debts in Ireland. The
object of the Bill was to provide a remedy for creditors
in Ireland against their absentee creditors in this country.
He expressed his surprise that the Government had not
broht such a Bill forward before this time.
9411 W Earl of WICKLOW defended the Government,
and'Oxpressed his surprise that the Noble and Learned
Lord did not, while one of the law officers of the Crown,
introduce such a Bill as the present if he thought it was
so necessary.
Lord CAMPBELL said he would have done so had
he known that the inconvenience of which he complained
was in existence at the time he was in office.
The Bill was then laid on the table.

Lord LYTTELTON presented a petition from a per-
son named Wharton, residing in Stourbridge, praying
their Lordships to adopt a plan which he proposed for
the payment of the National Debt.—(Laughter.)
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
5t18642X, in favour of protection to agriculture.
HOLYHEAD HARBOUR.

In answer to a question from LoWifoNTEAGLE,
The Duke of WELLINGTON said the question of
facilitating tikcommunication between this country and
Ireland had Gen under the consideration of the Go-
vernment, and they had determined to continue that
communication by means of Holyhead. With regard to
granting money for this purpose, the Government had
posVened their decision until after the railway to Holy-
head, which was now before Parliament, had been dis-
posed of.
Earl FITZWILLIAM thought a Commission
ought to be appointed to inquire as to what points of the
country required railways, and what parts did not ; and
that no other railways ought to' be sanctioned, except
those approved by such Commission.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said he thought the
appointment of such a Commission would be like shut-
ting a stable door when the steed was stolen.—(Latighter.)
Lord BROUGHAM thought such a commission was
necessary for the purpose of protecting individuals.
The house of Earl Grey for instance in Northumber-
land had been greatly injured by a railway passing
close under it, and it was but poor consolation to that
Noble Earl, after being driven from his house to be
told, that he must yield to public convenience.
After a few words from the Marquis of LANS-
DOWNE,

Earl FITZ WILLIAM gave notice that he would
more the appointment of such a commission on Tues-
day next.
SANATORY REGULATIONS RESPECTING THE
DWELLINGS OF THE POOR.

The Marquis of NORMANBY rose to present a pe-
tition.from the working men of Edinburgh, praying the
House to pass a Bill which would establish better
sanatory regulations with respect to the dwellings of the
poor. The petitioners prayed that steps might be taken
by which the dwellings of the poor might be abundantly
supplied with good water ; and they also prayed for the
repeal of the duty on soap. They had formed them-
afolves into a society on this subject, and they acknow-
ledged with gratitude in the petition the receipt of a
magnificent donation from his Royal Highness Prince
Albert towards the funds of the society. The Noble
Marquis then enlarged upon the necessity for immediate
legislation upon this subject. He reminded their Lord-
ships that 50,000 persons annually died in this kingdom
of diseases which might be prevented if there wore good
sanatory regulations in existence. It was now four
years since ho first brought this subject under the
consideration of their Lordships, and he hoped that
another session would not be allowed to pass without
the subject. being fully considered by Parliament.
The Duke of BUCCLEUC II said that the Bills which
the Noble Marquis had brought forward, on this subject
had been passed very rapidly in that House; but when
they were sent to the other-House of Parliament, they
were found by practical men to be quite inefficient for
the purpose for which the Noble Marquis intended
them, for it was found that the remedies which
the Noble Marquis proposed were found to be such, that
to carry them out would be attended with an expense
equal to a confiscation of the property to which it
applied.
Lord CAMPBELL hoped the Government would
take the prayer of the petition into their serious consi-
deration, coining as it did from a city which had been
properly ta.rined the Modern Athens, and which was
wortty of the term, both on account of the beauty of its
buildings and the intelligence of its inhabitants.
Lord BROUGHAM said that if his Noble and
Learned Friend had been the representative of Edin-
burgh now, he certainly would not have had the support
of his constituents in what he had stated, for they con-
rsidered it as an insult to have their city termed the
Athens.—(Laughter.)
Lord CAMPBELL said that Edinburgh had produced
hie Noble Friend, and he was an Alcibiades, a Pericles,
end • Demosthenes, in his own person.—(Laughter.)
Aiker a few words from the Marquis of NORMANDY
IPA the Duke of BUCCLEUCII, in explanation, the peti-
tion was laid on the table.
WRIT OF ERROR BILL.

Lord CAMPBELL rose to move the second reading
of this Bill, which he had been already permitted to
place nn the table of their Lordships' House. A great
defect at present existed in the law, and one which re-
quired a speedy remedy. A writ of error could be had
from all the inferior courts to the Queen's Bench, and
from the Court of Queen's Bench to that House, and
this was necessary to preserve a uniform administration
of justice., Whatever opinion might exist as to the mode
in which the House of Lords discharged its political
duty, he believed
.there was but one opinion of the man
tier in which their Lordships executed their judicial
functions, and which gave the greatest satisfac-
tion. There was a great difficulty with re-
spect to what was done in cases of misde
meaaour, where the writ of error was brought after the
setitenee of imprisonment had been passed. With respect
to aunt cases a difficulty existed, but it was surmounted
e:
securitywssus
tospended until the writ of
pay the sum adjudged to
bk
error was tried. But with respect to writs of error in
cases of misdemeanor the most serious evils remained to
dguiev,inthge grendten ce
be remedied. No writ of-error could be brought on any
interlocutory matter until the final judgment of the Court
was given ; and when the sentence of imprisonment was
pronounced it must be carried into immediate execution.
He knew no exception to this rule except, perhaps, one
cede in Yorkshire, where the experiment was made on a
small scale. He was a notorious poacher, and the Court
sentenced him to six months' imprisonment, but the sen-
tence was not to be carried into execution until the first
day of the shooting season (September), so that he might
..tie kept in prison the whole of that period. He believed
that though this was a very ingenious and salutary sort
of suspension, it was yet contrary to law, for the impri-
sonment must commence in a court of criminal jurisdic-
tion frana the day of the sentence being passed,. If the
prisoner was already under sentence for another offence,
the punishment for the second must begin when the first
ended. The Court had no power to pronounce a sen-
tence of future imprisonment, nor had any criminal court
.the power to suspend the execution of a sentence pending
a writ of error. Even the Crown had no power to in-
terfere. The Crown might pardon or remit the punish-
ment, but it could not suspend an execution
pending a writ of error. By the law of Eng-
land, in cases of misdemeanor the party was
entitled to liberty until the law finally determined he
should be punished. - When a sufficient- security was
given that the party charged with the misdemeanor had
come forward to take his trial, he was de jure entitled to
be discharged; and even after the verdict of the jury he
was still entitled to be discharged on good security. If
wrie4 of, error was brought to review the sentence,
was it not monstrous that that sentence should in the
meantime be carried into execution? It might happen
that a writ of error was obtained just before the long
vacation commenced; the Court of Queen's Bench did
_not sit from June to November, nor their Lordships
from July until February, and yet the sentence upon the
individual must be enforced during the interval, whether
the writ of error succeeded afterwards or not. He was
not aiding any merely visionary case. There were ure
fortunately come illustrations of it. It was contrary to
Magna Charta that such 'should be the case, for it set
forth that no man should be deprive& of his liberty ex-
cept by the law of the land. Yet a-few years ago a ere
(secured in Ireland, that of Mr. Radford Roe, who, having
been coneicted and imprisoned, brought a writ of error
to that Hasse; and the case having been reviewed, the
objections urged by the prisoner were found valid, ana
he was discharged, but not until he had undergone
twelve months' imprisonment. Was not such a thing a
scandal to.the administration of justice, and a disgrace
to the law? The Bill he introduced would remedy this
grievance, and he apprehended its principles were un-
objectionable. A writ of error, it should be recol-
lected, was not obtained as a matter • of course, it
,could enly lee had under the fiat of the Qut rn's
Attorney-General—the accused should then enter into
such securities to be forthcoming at the proper time as
would_ be every way satisfactory to the Court. He pro-
po4e+2l that when the fiat was obtained, and when the
securities were entered into that the defendant mould be
forthcoming to receive punishment, punishment should
not be inflicted until the superior court had decided
whether it was in accordance with the law, or contrary
to the law, that that punishment should be inflicted.
That was the principle which he now asked their Lord-
ships to affirm. It was said that, if such a principle
were laid down, writs of error would vastly multiply ;
but it should be recollected that they could be brought
upon no frivolous objection, and on no false pretence.
The sanction of the Attorney-General was indispensible,
and the scrutiny of the Court would act as a prevention.
A writ of error could not be brought upon the bare
facts or merits of the case upon which the jury had
already decided ; but solely upon a question of law.
The Attorney-General's guarantee might be considered
sufficient that the objections were not frivolous or raised
for the mere purposes of delay, and theyinight rely on
the caution of the Court that the securities were ful-
filled. The Attorney-General had, in other matters,
groat powers cnnferred upon him, and if he neglected
or abused his duty in any manner, he might bu
impeached in Parliament. But, another objection was
urged, of a very futile nature indeed, that the
present state of things had been going on fora very long
time, and that no great objection had been made to the
law in its present form. Surely their Lordships would
not consider these objections arguments, for the very
same sort of pretexts might have been urged for the con-
tinuance of every bad lavv,"and for the prevention of
every species of improvement. Torture was once ap-
plied in this country to extract a confession from the

criminal, and history told them how a predecessor in
office of the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack,
Lord Chancellor:Wriothesley, had assisted in stretching
the rack. The Noble and Learned Lord who now filled
that office, might be accused of some peccadilloes, hut he
felt certain he would not act as Lord Chancellor Wrioth-
esley had done. A practice also prevailed of never con-
fronting the prisoner with the witnesses for the Crown—
their depositions were taken in private. The prisoner
who refused to plead under all these disadvantages was
subjected to what was termed peine forte et duce, so as to
make him plead. Weights were placed upon the unfor-
tunate criminal, in the language of the law, " heavier
than he could bear." It was further laid down that no
witness " against the King" should be sworn, lest the
my might believe him ; and this vile practice
sontinued until after the Reformation. In their
own time, timid women, or infirm old men,
or persons ignorant of the language, or deaf and dumb
persons who were tried for their lives, could not employ
counsel to defend them. He regretted to say, that
although the Noble Lord on the woolsack possessed
much of the milk of human kindness, he opposed
the Prisoner's Counsel Bill. However it passed into a
law and worked well, and removed disgrace from our
laws, and a scandal from the administration of justice.
But to all these bad laws he had quoted, the pretext
might have been urged, that they had been borne by the
country without exciting much complaint. He was
happy to say that Sergeant Starkie and every other
person to whom he had explained the principles of the
present Bill, expressed their entire accordance in them.
Ye hoped their Lordships would approve it. He trusted
the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack would
approve of it, and that he would not act the part of Rha-
damanthus.

" Gnossius lime Rhadamanthus habet durissima
regna ;
Castigatque auditque dolos, subigitque fateri.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said his Noble and
Learned Friend who had moved the committal of the
Bill before their Lordships had sat in that House for
now a period of three years. During that time he had
shown himself anxious, on every occasion that presented
itself, of introducing some measure or other to the
House, partly for the purpose of occupying himself, and
partly for the purpose of conveying information and in-
struction to their Lordship's minds.—(Laughter.) And
yet it was most singular that during the whole of this
period; it had never occurred to his Noble and Learned
Friends mind to suggest the propriety of adopting any
measure of this kind; and it was only on the eve of
Easter term now progressing, when a case of some
notoriety was depending in another part of the
kingdom—(Hear, hear)—a case of the deepest im-
portance—it was not till then, when he supposed that
that case would come to a speedy termination, and that
judgment would be pronounced upon it, that his Noble
and Learned Friend, for the first time, had thought it
right to bring forward this measure.—(Hear, hear.)
Never had he (the Lord Chancellor) heard him make
mention of the subject before. And he (the Lord Chan-
cellor) did not hesitate directly to state that the Bill now
before their Lordships was brought forward for the pur-
pose of being applied to that case.—(Hear, hear.) He
(the Lord Chancellor) was not in the House when the
Bill was brought in, and he knew that his Noble and
Learned Friend on that occasion had protested that no
reference to the pending trial was in his mind when he
first concocted it. Of course he was bound to believe his
Noble and Learned Friend's declaration ; but in doing
so, it could only be by supposing that his mind had been
led away by its own enthusiasm and zeal, for he (the
Lord Chancellor) was quits persuaded there was
not a single person in that House, or in the
country, coul I came to any different conclusion
than that to which he had come, namely, that the Bill
was directed to the proceedings'enove- speeding -against
certain parties in Ireland. But his 'Notile and Learned
Friend would say it was impossible he could be so in-
fluenced, acid that their Lordships need not rely on his
professions alone, inasmuch as he had introduced a
clause int.) the Bill deferring its operation until the Ist
of August next. But let their Lordships look to that
clause, and say if it was possible for this Bill to pass
with it. Was there ever so thin and so flimsy a veil ?
Why, was it possible that if this Bill should pass into a
law that their Lordships could retain that clause ?
Could they, as men of common sense, -retain it ? What
would be the effect of it .but this—that their Lordships
would pass a law which they thought 'a proper one,
whilst at the same time they would pass another law, or I
rather a clause of a law, expressly against those indivi-
duals who, between this period and the Ist of August,
might be found guilty of misdemeanours?—(Hear, hear.)
Was it possible to be supposed that their Lordships were
to be led astray by such flimsy pretexts as those ad-
vanced by his Noble and Learned Friend? For his own
part, he declared if that Bill pissed into a law, he
(the Lord Chancellor) would be the first to move the
omission of that clause which, in fact, was put in merely
to lead their Lordships to the conclasioe that the ori-
ginator of it was not thinking of Ireland, and Ireland
alone, when he drew it up. But let them not look only
to the clause itself, but let their Lordships reflect upon
the history of the proceedings which had been going on,
and then say whether this Bill had not been brought in
for a temporary purpose, and for one single object alone.
But, after all, what was this Bill ? A more miserable
specimen of legislation it had never been his (the Lord
Chancellor's) fortune to have witnessed. Worse than
ill, it was a law for the rich, and not for the poor. The
poor man who had been convicted had, by that convic-
tion, lost his character—with that he had lost all pe-
cuniary means, and all friends—and therefore all power
of getting bail. The poor offender, then, was condemned
to abide and suffer his punishment, whatever it might
be. But the wealthy man—the rich offender—had re-
sources. He obtains bail, either by the application of
his own means, or the aid of his friends. Such would
be the impartial operation of that Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
Mark again how the Bill would operate. A man
is convicted of a grave misdemeanour, which subjects him
say to two years' imprisonment. He is advanced in
lite, and a few months' imprisonment may probably have
the most serious effect upon him. He obtains a writ of
error by means of his purse ; he crosses the water, gets
out of the jurisdiction of the court ; if the judgment is
reversed :he returns, and if it is confirmed, he con-
tinues on the Continent, living in luxury and ease, and
laughing at the judgment: against him.—(Hear' hear.
Suppose he was a political partizan, and had coin=
witted some crime about politics, but bad many sup-
porters and friends, as was too commonly the case.
What does he do ? He says " I will wait tfi'e
course of events ; a few votes in the House of
Commons just now are of importance, my influence will
assist in this." He waits, receives a pardon, and returns
In triumph, having set the laws at defiance. 'rake
another case. A man commits a crime which expels
him from society ; he is tried and convicted, but get* his
ii
writ of error. He goes off, and, as a matter of cliVi , •
it is not very material where, so he also sets the law t
defiance. Such would be the effect of the indiscrimina e •
appeal here proposed. But there were misdemeanours
of various character, some of them being liable to the
punishment of transportation. Perjury was, only in
name, a misdemeanour, but it was visited as a punish-
ment by transportation: Obtaining goods under false
pretences was a' misdemeanour, but it was frequently,
and most properly, punished by transportation. But'
1 what would be the effect of this law, supposing the mis-
demeanant had means at his command ? Why, he also
would get free from all punishment, preferring, ast
doubtless he would do, to live in Paris rather than:
to go to Van Diemen's Land, or to. the rocks of Nor
folk-island;—(Hear, hear.) He (the Lord Chancellor)
mentioned these as some of the instances- and some of
the consequences of the passing of this Bill. There,
were many others be could adduce, but he saw no ne-,
cessity for so doing. The subject of appeal was in the
hands of his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of the'
Home Department, who, with the assistance of the law'
officers of the Crown, had nearly prepared a general
measure, which his learned Friend the Attorney-Gene-
ral would' submit to the consideration of Parliament
within a very slice period. He did not say this for the
purpose of giving an answer to the present Bill. He
objected to it because he' was satisfied it was brought for
a-particular purpose alone. As such, it was a vicious
1 principle; and upou such grounds he had now to move
' their Lordships that the Bill be committed that day six
months.

Lord BROUGHAM said, in his opinion, legislation,
to be useful and sound, ought always to be grounded on
a general principle, and not to originate under the
pressure of any. peculiar
,circumstance or ease. Their
Lordships, in legislating, should never be induced to
look at any subject through one particular medium; and
fearful that this was the case in the present instance,
though he was sure wholly unintentionally, he thought
it better the Bill should not be carried any further. He
wished it, however, to be understood that he was strongly
in favour of some sound amendment of the law upon this
subject. As, however, it was now understood from
authority that the subject had been fully entertained by
the Government, and that a measure was all but ready;
and as he was happy to say, from a personal interview
yesterday with his Learned Friend, 'Sir William Follett,
that his health was so far renovated as to enable him tb
attend to business and intikduce the subject at once to
the notice of Pa liainent7ohe thought their. Lord-
ships would be acting a most discreet part to leave
the matter for the present moment as it was.
His leisure would no doubt be most usefully employed
for the public in digesting a proper measure upon the
subject. He could not agree with his Noble Friend thiit
the Attorney-General had the discretion he had stated
upon writs of error. He thOught they should adopt the
course in this country which they did in France, and
have so excellent a Court as the Court of Cassation,
which was one of the greatest benefits that had been
conferred by the Revolution of 1789. The Noble Lord
would support the Bill.
Lord COTTENHAM supported the Bill. It was with
satisfaction that he had heard that this very measure was
under the consideration of the Government, because it
showed that the measure was unobjectionable, as had been
asserted, and that was an admission that the law ought
to be altered. As the law at present stood it was most
absurd, and required revision.---(Hear, hear.) Was it a
wholesome state of the law if, when a party was orii-
victed and sentenced, and who questioned that sentence
,n a superior Court, he was to be imprisoned during the
time the propriety of that sentence was being discussed.
The LORD CHANCELLOR. said that the subject
under the attention of her Majesty's Government and
law advisers, was an appeal in criminal cases.
The Earl of WICKLOW opposed the committal of
the Bi- I.
The Marquis of CLANIIICARDE supported the
committal of the Bill. He had heard many speeches
from the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack with
great pain, but he had never heard one with more than
that which he had delivered that evening. lle had
shown that the opposition to the Bill was:mainly and
entirely founded upon the chance of not being able
wrongfully to imprison the individuals now under trial
in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord CAMPBELL replied_flis Noble and Learned
Friend on the woolsack had not the courage to oppose
the principle of the Bill, because be admitted that the

law was in such a state as required alteration. He had
never used any political allu,ions in introducing the
Bill, and he was ast:mishecl at his Noble and Learned
Friend's having done so.
The committal of the Bill was negatived without a
division. and the House ajjourned at Half-past Eight
o'Clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 2.
The SPZAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
NEW MEMBER.
Mr. BURST took the oaths and his seat for Horsham.
The Hen. Gentleman was introduced by Mr. J. A. Smith
and the Earl of March.
The Bow Brickhill Estate Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The Newbury and Basingstoke Railway Bill was read
a third time and passed.
The Lords' amendments to the Norwich and Brandon
Railway Bill were agreed to.
The Lords amendments to the Great Western Railway
Bill were read and agreed to.
Mr. BOYD presented thirty-six petitions from the
North of Ireland, praying for an Act to legalise Pres-
byterian Marriages in Ireland.
Mt'. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from
Bridgewater, against a continuation of the war in India;
also a petition from Crediton, in favour of the extension
of Parliamentary reform; also a petition from the Lei-
cester Complete Suffrage Association, for redress of
grievances.

Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a petition from a place
in Devon against the grant to Maynooth College ; also
a petition in favour of the abolition of the duty on
foreign sugar ; also a petition against any alteration in
the corn laws.

Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition from twenty-
nine solicitors at Plymouth, against the Ecclesiastical
Courts Bill.

Mr. COLVILE presented a petition for the aboli-
tion of the duty on policies of insurance against hail-
storms.

Mr. YOUNG presented a petition from the north of
Ireland, praying for an Act to legalise Presbyterian
marriages._

Mr. I)UNCOMBE presented a petition from the
parish of St. James, Clerkenwell, complaining of the
employment of the-police in the collection of poor-rates;
also a petition for the amendment of the Itef .rin
also several petitions against the Masters ;:n.! servants'
Bill.

Lord ASHLEY presented a petition from Glas2ow,
with 33,000 signatures, in favour of the Ten flours'
also several petitions from other places to the same
effect.

Mr. BECKETT presented a petition from Halifax
against the Manchester and Leeds Railway Bill.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Oldham-
cum-Fell, nraying that the 30th and 31st clauses of the
Factory Bill might he expunged ; that children under
eight years of age should not be worked more than eight
hours a day ; and that there might be nu restriction on
labour of persons above that age.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE postponed the following return,
of which he had given notice for to day, for a fortnight—
Return of all moneys paid to Mr. Hodges, or any shert-
hand writer or writers, for notes taken of the proceedings
in the Court of Queen's Bench, Dublin, previous to and
during or since tile trial of the Queen v. O'Connell and
others ; also, a return of all moneys paid for any notes
taken of the proceedings at Conciliation Hall, between
the Ist day of August, 1843, and the present time.
Mr. WYSE postponed the following motion, of which
he had given notice for to-day, for a fortnight T a
Committee to inquire into, the allegations contained in
the petition, presented the 21st day of March. from the
memberkof the Rep 'al Association and others, respecting
the late State proseentiim inl:frolariti,' •

Mr. GODSON, on the part, of Mr. F. Kelly, postponed
for a fortnight his nl,tion for leave to bring in a Bill
to provide an app••al in criminal cases.
L,ird SANDON presented a petition from Liverpool,
against the application of any money for the establish-
ment of a harbour of reftig,-. at Holyhead.

UNION 'WORKHOUSES.
Mr. WM. EVANS, seeing the Hon. Member for
Berkshire in his place, wish..d to know whether it was
his intention to proceed with his motion with respect to
union workhouses ?

Mr. PALMER said it was not his intention to do so.
ART-UNIONS: •

Mr. WYSE. seeing the Right Hon. Baronet the First
Lird of the Treasury in his place, wished to ask him
whether the opLnion of Counsel, which had been deli-
vered to the Treasury on the legality of the Art-Unions,
could, without inconvenience, be laid on the table of the
House ?

Sir R. PEEL said he had no objection personally to
produce it, but the House had generally felt an objection
to have the opinions of lawyers laid on the table. He
thought it a good rule, and he should adhere to it in
this instance. He did not apprehend that the Govern-
ment had any intention of instituting proceedings against
the Art-Unions. It did not rest with the Government
to institute such proceedings ; but he apprehended that
the Art-Unions were liable to be prosecuted by the com-
mon informer. These bodies hid received the earliest
intimation as to the illegalit• of their constitution.
Mr. WYSE hoped that any measure for legalising the
Art-Unions would have the support of the Right Hon.
Baronet.
CHURCH-RATES.

Sir C. DOUGLAS put a question to the Hon. Mem-
ber for Finsbury, as to whether he intended tea bring for-
ward any motion respecting the petition he had pre-
sented, impugzing tha conduct of two magistrates
in Warwickshire, with respect to a process for church-
rates. The Hon. Member had got the petition printed
and circulated, with the intention of making a motion ;
and he had not done so, though he had an opportunity
of doing so on Tuesday evening. He thought he had a
right to complain, on the part of those whose characters
were censured, that he had not done so.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said the petition which he pre-
sented had impugned the conduct of the magistrates on
the subject of church-rates. He (Mr. Duncombe) be•
lieved that the magistrates had acted most illegally
in the affair. However, the present was not
the proper time for discussing the subject. The
motion relative to the matter stood for next Tuesday
week, when the-Hon. Baronet would have as opportunity
of vindicating the conduct of those magistrates if he
thought fit.
THE TARIFF.

Mr. GISBORNE wished to know from the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite when it was likely the pro.
posed reductions of the duty en coffee would come into
operation.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that, with respect to all the
duties which it was proposed to reduce, they would all
come into operation on the same day, that was the day of
'the passing ofthe Act embodying the r>solutions which had
been proposed to the House by his Right Hon. Friend the
Chancellor of the Bxchequer. Those resolutions he
was prepared to lay on the table of the House, and
he took that opportunity of saying that they would
not contain the article vinegar, because
there were some inquiries requisite respecting
the use of malt in the making of vinegar. Some time
would he requisite for the necessary investigation on
that point, and hence it was that vinegar would not be in-
cluded in the resolutions.
Lord SANDON would like to know whether the
alteration of the duties would he passed in ten days or a
fortnight?
Sir. GLADSTONE said it would be rather ha-
zardous to predict how long the resolutions would
take to pass through the House. However, from
the disp.sition which he was sure existed in
the House not to retard any measure affecting
commercial interests, he was of opinion that in the
course of a fortnight, or the furthest three weeks, the re-
solutions purporting to repeal the duties in question
would have become the law of the land.
COMMUNICATION WITH IRELAND.

In answer to a queition from Mr. PENNANT.
Sir R. PEEL said that the subject of the Hon. Gen-
tleman's question was of considerable importance, inas-
much as it related to the speedy coininunication between
this country and Ireland. With respect to the relative
merits of the ports of Holyhead and Port Dynllaen for
the departure and arrival of the packets, the question
had been discussed by professional urTtn of the highest
eminence, and the opinion of the President of the Institute
of Civil. Engineers, Mr. Walker had been taken upon
it, and that gentleman's opinion was in favour
'of Holyhead in preference to Port Dynllaen. There-
fore, he (Sir R. Peel) might say that her Majes-
ty's Government, drawing their conclusions from the
highest professiOnal authoritie,,, were clearly of
Opinion that Holyhead was the preferable harbour, and
as far as his own experience went. he (Sir R. Peel)
would draw the same conclusion. With respect to the
question as to whether the Government had decal:led to
lay out a sum of money -in improving eithet of those
harbours,' he had to say in reply that they had
come to no decison upon the matter. Tins
Government wanted first to know whether any
railway company was inclined to make a railway
communication between Chester and Holyhead.
It should be remembered that whatever money they laid
out for Holyhead Harbour. they were laying out fur the
terminus of a railway. They had a right, therefore,
to demand that the railway should be perfectly construct-
ed:- In his opinion it would be for the Interests of a:,,y
railway company to make that r.tilway in tile most
direct line. It would be !muds better for them, to make
a perfect line at once than to make an imperfeet line, and
have to amend it afterwards. He was Anxious that the
line selected through Anglesea should be brought
from Chester to Holyhead in the . most direct line. He
thought it would be good. economy in any railway
company to make the outlay necessary for the forma-
tion of the line in the first instance. Then with
regard to the Straits of Menai ; it would be a
highly improper mode of passing the Straits
of Menai to take advantage of the present bridge. It
was never intendoi fur railroad einninunication. It
would bo impossible to use it with locomotives. In
his opinion a bridge over the Menai Straits, tit for e,
proper communication of railway, might easily be ;
constructed so as not to interfere with the nav,;lglstion.
It might have the same elevation as the. pres,ent bridge,
which he believed was 120113,1 above the level of the sea,
and if they erected a railway-bridge of equal height
there would not be any risk of interfering with ilia n ,vi-
gation. Unless they could enable those residin,4- in
Dublin to answer letters from Lund, ,d by return of post,
they would do little to jestify an e,utlay of public money.
H .
Ile wanted stT the day when a letter posted in London
at 8 o'clock on Monday should be answered front Dublin
by letter received in London on Wednesday morning
—(Hear, hear)—when the party receiving the letter in
Dublin on a Tuesday 'should be enabled to answer that
letter by the return of the Tuesday's po-t—when
thirty-four hours only should elapse between the depar-
ture of the letter from London and the receipt of the
answer from Dublin. Let them take the hqur of the de-
parture from London at eight o'clock on tly. n.nday. In
fifteen hours the letter would -arrive in Dublin. - There.;
would be four hours allowed in Dublin for the writing of
the answer, fifteen hours for the transit of the letter; and