The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-03 00:00:00

THE LSTIN, LONDON, WEEINESD-A-V EVENING. JULY 3,t 1844.

after the speech of the Hon. Gentleman—(Hear, hear)—
and, in the first place, he was most anxious
to assure the House, on the part of her Majesty's
Government, that there was the most earnest desire
on their part that this discussion should not be post-
poned, and that there should be a House this evening ;
and if there was any Member more anxious than another
on the subject, he was that individual.; and ho was now
most glad that he had the opportunity of addressing
them.--(hear, hear.) The lion. Gentleman said that
this was a question of confidence, and that it was their
wish to conceal some portion of the truth, and to mistify
the matter. Now, he thought he might appeal to the
Rouse whether it was not, in a great measure, owing to
his strict adherence to truth that this question was now
before the House?—(hear.) He might have given an eva-
sive answer, which would have prevented this question
from being brought under the notice of the House ; but
he scorned such a subterfuge.—(Hear, hear.) He thought
he was in honour bound net to give an evasive answer ;
and whatever the consequences might be to him-
self, he thought he was in duty and in honour
bound to state the facts as they were. On a former oc-
casion he had said that a legal remedy was open to the
party injured. He did not think that was an improper
though it might be an unnecessary answer. He thought
it a justifiable answer, and he could not conceive any great
illegal injury inflicted by a public servant where the law
did not provide a remedy. But it was not his intention
to repeat that answer now; it was considered unnecessary.
On the former occasion the Hon. Gentleman said this
was a question between the people of England and the
Government. Whatever it might have been he admitted
it assumed that aspect now.—(flear, hear.) He stated
on a former occasion he did not undervalue the
importance of the discussion from the moment it
was brought under the notice of the House.—(Hear.)
Re said it was a grave question, involving great national
interests, and exciting national feelings. He repeated
that
, now, and he said he regarded this as a question of
hahthathe
t- importance. and it was his intention to prove
so esteemed It.—(Hear, hear.) He regardc-d this
sos,._ea question between the people and the executive
verinont_—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman said
years—for —the
that within the two last he specified the time
solar
re
),
had been a most unscrupulous use of this parti-
nore
Power, which was exercised contrary to law. A
Government by any Member of the House.
Mr' r• DUNCOMBE said he made use of the words
" o 9 a former occasion."
Sir J. GRAHAM said he hoped, considering the
gravity of the question, the House would permit him
to proceed without interruption.—(Hear, hear.) He
was sure the Hon. Gentleman did not intend it. He
"as about to state that the importance of this question
was greatly magnified by the assertions made, not only
on the former occasion by the lion. Gentleman, but re-
iterated through the pre,ss, and it had groWn in magni-
tude from the assertions made that evening by the Hon.
Gentleman. The Hon. Gentleman said it was notorious
that as the mails arrived there was a cry first for the
Dublin bag—then for the Brighton bag—then for let-
ters directed to particular streets, and he stated that he
believed everybody's letters were opened.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he did not say that.
Sir J. GRAHAM said be begged the House would
not allow him to be interrupted. If he made any mis-
statement, he was open to correction after he sat down.
Rat he appealed to the justice of the House whether he
„,...was not entitled to a fair hearing.—(Hear, hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman said that he was now called on to say
more than he had on a former occasion, and that he said
so much that it was necessary that he should say more.
lie (Sir J. Graham) was disposed to agree with him in
that. He thought the time was arrived when he must
sal* rnore.—Cheers from both sides of the House.)
When he considered the state of the public mind, so sen-
sitive on this point—(Hear, hear)—the efforts which had
been made to inflame the public mind—the assiduous,
successful, designed attempts—(Hear, hear)—which
were made for this purpose, he agreed with the Hon.
Gentleman the time was come when he must say more—
yhen he was desirous to say more—(Cheers)—and when
Ise was desirous, to use the words of the Honourable
Gentleman, " that the truth, the whole truth, and no-
thing but the truth, should be made known."—(Renewed
cheers.) When he last addressed the House, he ad-
dressed it under circumstances different from these
,‘inch now presented themselves for consideration, for
"of s immediate predecessor in the office he had the honour
holding, had stated in the most solemn and authentic
manner, and in his place in Parliament, that he had no
reason to believe that the power given to the Secretary
and which
with regard to the delaying and opening letters,
State which power was necessary for the safety of the
ha, should be exercised by a responsible Minister,
th: been exercised by him in a manner different from
ores ay in which it had been exercised by his
swees:ssors. It was in those circumstances he last
orn seat he House on this subject. But, since then,
versed
habits of!lc, the iants of her Majesty, Privy-Councillors, men
Right Hon.
isant of'
do, co n' • affairs of State, conversant with the
ce, well knowing what it was their duty. to
what their predecessors had done, the
t Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh,
th_ not think it unbecoming his station and abilities, and
ose powers of declamation which were unsurpassed by
allY Member of that House, to come down to the House.
and apparently—prepared for the occasion—(Hear, hear)
--and address to it an impassioned speech, raising the
indignation of the, House and the public, not against the
law, not against the system, but against the individual.
The Right Hon: Gentleman stated it was not of the ex-
istence of the law that he complained, but of the de-
parture from established usage, and of the mode in which
the Power had been exercised by her Majesty's present
Government ?—(Hear, hear.) Did he stand alone ?
(Hear, hear.) Were there no other sworn Members of
her Majesty's Privy Council ?—(Hear.) What was
theTheytone might not be conversant with the peculiar details
of the Home-office; but the Noble Lord, the Member for
L'ndon, who though not his immediate predecessor in
office in the Home Department, had for several years
,been connected with that office, he also did not think it
inconsistent with his duty to vote for inquiry—
gear, hear)—not because he objected to the
l power, but because he was not of
oP inion that it was exercised by him (Sir J. Graham) in
the accustomed manner and according to constitutional
n'age•—(Hear, hear.) What had been the effect of this
on the public mind ? It bad been to induce a convic-
tion that he laboured under a stigma peculiar to himself,
9f introducing a new practice and of departing, in some
Important particulars, from the precedent set in former
times, and pursued by his predecessors from an early
period of the history of England. Now, he would tell
the House frankly that no load of obloquy (though
he would not sal- it was unworthy to seek
to crush him under a load of obloquy), no
amount of injustice cast upon him, would induce him to
anent to inquiry, if he thought it was not for the public
good t but he was satisfied, after what had taken place
within these ten days—after the votes which had been
given on the former occasion by the Noble Lord the
!Umber for Sunderland, the Noble Lord the Member
ndon, the Right Hon, Gentleman the Member for
D's's_thtlrgh, the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
tmore or l"Yoneort, all of whom were Cabinet Ministers, and
ess acquainted with the practice of the execu-
tive Government—after the votes they gave for inquiry
rthe ground of a departure from established usage—
'lid stay that from that moment the maintenance of
thaist power, without inquiry, was impossible, He was glad .
he could eonsent to this inquiry without any sacri-
Yee of his duty to the Crown or to the public, and that
ee. Could remove from himself this unjust load of obloquy
Without any risk to the legal power, now not only in
71..tger, but destroy-ed. He repeated, that he could now
dulge his own feelings consistently with the public
go:d, and ho would be a party—a willing.party--eao the
st searching inquiry—(Loud cheers)—into the state
of' the law, and the practice under the law, from the rrlieat period to the latest times.—(Cheers.) So far as
was concerned, nothing should be concealed, and he
tg prepared is? go before a Committee of Ow House,
Lit nature of which he would state, and to
meteeti fully everything he had done.—(Hear and
Wouldees) and he hoped that the Committee
peninetiree
call not only his colleagues but his predecessors
--(Loud cheers)—and that there should he full and
examination and revelation of what had taken
insur.
He would propose terms as general as would
cone,;:titrull inquiry. The power given by law was not
Lord to the Secretary of State, but was given to the
would 113eUtellfIllt of Ireland, and he hoped the inquiry
oe that ? extended to him.--(flear, hear.) The result
that the inquiry would be, as far E 1,3 he was concerned,
fortuity"eexercised him had b in strict con-
not Pokerthe usage of his office—that the usage was
recognised by statute, but that in
particularthe ; eases it had been brought under
notice or the House by reports a Committees ap-
trsted by the House. Neither in the mode in which
povver had been exercised, nor to the extent to
whicho it had been used, would his conduet suffe by
comparison with that of his immediate predecessors,r and
wfas now rejoiced to think there would be no mysti-
nee ation.—(Loud cheers.) He hoped the result would be
at: o
satisfactory to the Hon. Gentleman himself, and those
satt around him.—(Hear, hear, and Tory diem')
onf ihtte nded to move an amendment to the motion
for to Hon. Gentleman. He stated on a
turner
occasion that he did thinkrevela-
we in that House of the exercise of this
Power would not be eonducive to the public good. He rer
tame that
._lllesl that opinion, and he thought there should he an.
.
not before a Select, but before a Secret Com-
Hra thought it was expedient to follow prece-
dent, and that et Secret Committee should be typointed
o
inquire into the extent he had stated. It was of the
last be that the powers given to the Committee
should be a 1
large rap e, and he was prepared to grant them as
e_ as the House might require.—(Hear, hear.)
matittehewonld depend on the composition of this Com•
that n dNow, he was most particularly anxious
Porten° Bela should take place. Considering the inf-
. 0
thought
of the subject, aide hen tate of the public mind,
Idteia ught this inqui gh to take place without He did not know who the strict rules of the
amendment
permitted, but it was his intention to move as an
drpent to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman that a
s-urnnuttee of Seer r be • " • into the
of of th law in appointed to inquire
of letters e respeet to the detaining and opening
which_leat the General Post,oftiae, and into the mode in
the the
given for such detaining and opening
"oitleen exercised, and that the Committee report their
Pigeons
and observations to the House. A great deal
Ie ld
depend upon the composition of the Committee.
atoconceive no higher trust delegated by the
use to an
Proposed ; and, as a proof of that wish, he
u. that there should be a Committee of nine, and
n shouldw his intention to propose that five out of the nine
1.11 be gentlemen who opposed her Majesty's Gor
y ment.—(Hear, hear,) He proposed that four should
,00 geutlenien who generally voted with her Majesty's
oiernment, and that those four should be Lord Sandon,
!?.?_-___.lionse Drummond, Mr, Thomas Baring, and Sir am Heathcote. _The five others who opposed her
Jesty's Government, he proposed -4901-d be

Sir Charles Lemon, Mr. Warburton, Mr. S trutt, The
O'Conor Don, and Mr. Ord, the Member for 11Tewcastle.
He should say, that he had carefully excluded: from his
list every gentleman connected with offict i—(Hear,
hear)—and he had also excluded the Hon. G entieman
who brought forward the motion, not from any want of
respect, but because he thought it better that the accuser
and the accused should have nothing to do with the
Committee. To those he surrendered his case, and his
personal honour without fear.—(Hear, hear.) They could
report what the former usages had been, whitt was
the state of the law, as it existed from the 'earliest
time, sanctioned by men long since gone to their great
account—men of spotless private honour, who dearly
loved the liberties of Englund, for the use of which an
attempt was made to crash him. He entrusted the
matter to the Committee, confident that they would
discharge their duty, and though there were some evils
in the late discussion, and the agitation of the public
mind on the subject, yet he hoped, he helieved, and he
prayed that good might ensue, and with this feeling,
thanking the House for the patience with which they
had heard him, he would place this amendment in the
Speaker's hands.—(Loud cheers.)
The amendment having been put,
Mr. SHEIL said it seemed to him a most extraordi-
nary circumstance, that a Committee to inquire into the
state of the law and the manner into which it had been
carried into effect, should not contain a single lawyer.—
(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman expressed a
wish that the investigation should be of the most search-
ing character.—(Hear, hear.) He presumed, therefore,
that he had no objection to have the different function-
aries of the Post-office examined respecting its various
details.—(" Hear, hear," from Ministers.) Then it fol-
lowed that they must have some persons on the Commit--
tee who were accustomed to putting questions.—
(Lau7,hter.) If they wished to have a thorough investi-
gation, they must have, if the Committee would allow
him to use such a phrase, a forensic inquisitor.—(No, no.)
Observe, they wished to have the course pursued
by their predecessors, as well as their own,
investigated.—(Hear, hear.) It was a cause, and
plus cause.—(Hear, hear.) The predecessors of the
Government were as much interested in the issue at
stake as they themselves were. They said that they
were not more criminal than those who had gone before
them. Was it not desirable, then, that the Committee
should contain two individuals, one on one side and the
other on the other side, both of whom were accustomed
to the examination of witnesses ?—(No, no.) He cer-
tainly could not help thinking that when they were re-
ferring to the consideration of a Committee the con-
struction of the law, and the manner in which this law
had been acted upon. that Committee should consist of
persons who would be able thoroughly to investigate the
whole subject.—(Hear.)
Sir GEORGE GREY said, as the Right Honour-
able Gentleman had alluded to the vote which
he (Sir George Grey) had given on a former
occasion, he wished to disclaim altogether, if such dis-
claimer were necessary, the attempt which would be
made to throw upon him all the responsibility connected
with this power. It was hardly necessary that he should
refer to the arguments which he had used in support of
the motion of his Hon. Friend. He had, however,
stated distinctly that the single ground on which he sup-
ported that motion was, that the Government had been
utterly silent, not only as to the details of a particular
case, but as to the broad principle upon which they ex-
ercised the power which was admitted, on all hands, to
be vested in them by law.—(Hear, hear.) He felt that
the real charge which would be brought against the
Government was, that a power given for one purpose
had been exercised for another—(Hear, hear)—that the
power which had been given for the purpose of
securing the throne of this country from con-
spiracy—he did not say whether the charge
was well founded or not, but in the absence of all asser-
tion to the contrary, he was bound to assume its cor-
rectness—had been exercised by_ the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, not for that constitutional object, but for purposes
entirely unconnected with these dominions, and exclu-
sively connected with a foreign country. That, he
repeated, was the single ground upon which he supported
the motion ; and he begged to remind the Hon. Gentle-
man that he stated, that if he disavowed such an exer-
cise of power, he, for one, should be satisfied.(Hear,
hear.) Having said so much as to what passed on a
former occasion, he begged to say that he entirely ap-
proved of the course now taken by the Right Hon. Gen -
tleman.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the terms of the
motion were not very material. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had distinctly stated that he wished for a full and
comprehensive inquiry.—(" Hear," from Sir J. Graham.)
As they had the substance, therefore, he did not think
the precise form was material. As to the constitution
of the Committee, he thought it was desirable to avoid
expressing any final opinion upon that subject on that
occasion.—(Hear, hear.) He presumed that, in con-
formity with the ordinary practice, the names
would be laid on the table to-morrow. The Right
Honourable Baronet (Sir James Graham) shook his
head, but as the House met at twelve o'clock,
to-morrow, if his suggesti mi were complied with, it
would only cause a delay of about 12 hours; and was it
desirable to violate the ordinary rule of the House for
the purpose of gaining twelve hours? He saw no ob-
jection to the names proposed, except that of his Right
Hon. Friend in reference to the absence of gentle-
men connected with the law. He begged to correct
himself. He understood that there was one gentleman
who possessed that advantage. If that were the case,
he thought there should be one from each side of the
House. He could not help expressing his satisfaction
at the change of tone on the part of the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite, after the avowed ignorance of his
colleagues. He was sure that not one of his predeces-
sors would shrink from the most full and complete in-
quiry as to the manner in which they had exercised the
power which was vested in them. After the observe•
don which had been made in that llouse, and by men
of the highest authority on the subject, it was of the ut-
most importance that the law should be placed on
grounds which would render it clear and unambiguous.
Mr. ROEBUCK said he understood that the object
of appointing the Committee was to create a feeling of
security in the public mind, that feeling of security
which had been so much shaken by what had taken
place within the last few days. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman wished to have a thorough scrutiny into all the
circumstances connected with the administration of the
Post-office, for the purpose of creating a feeling of se-
curity out of doors. They, were about to institute a
Committee—first of all to inquire into the actual state
of the law on that subject, he thought it would be
found that there were great doubts in the minds of the
most learned lawyers. The next question was, how
that law had been administered—whether it had been
departed from or acted upon, by whom departed from
and by whom acted upon. He would ask the House,
if they thought the most likely means of creating se-
curity out of doors was to make this Committee secret ?
—(llear.) He had no objection to the inquiry being
carried on with closed doors, but what he wished to
insure was the full and complete publication of the evi-
dence.—(Hear, hear.) He had stated that the state of
the law was doubtful. After what had passed else-
where, could they for , a moment hesitate to admit that
such was the case? They found Learned Law Lords on
one side opposed by equally learned authorities on the
other; and taking directly opposite views of the sub-
ject. If, therefore, they instituted an inquiry into the
actual state of the law, the Committee should be com-
posed of very sagacioua persons, and persons accus-
tomed to common law. Whilst referring to the state of
the law, he begged to state one or two facts bearing on
this subject. By an Act of Parliament of the 9th of
Queen Anne, certain powers were given to the Post-
office, and a proviso was introduced into that Act
by which persons opening letters under the warrant
of the Secretary of State should be free from the penal-
ties imposed. The 9th of Anne had been repealed, and
an Act was passed in 1837, by which certain powers were
also given, and a proviso was inserted in that Act. Now,
he asserted, on the very highest authority that the proviso
in the Act of Parliament simply protected the persons
who opened the letters, it gave no authority to any
Secretary of State to issue any warrant, and if the
Secretary of State had any authority at all, it was a power
which he possessed in the common law.---(llear, hear.)
He was only stating this for the purpose of showing the
sort of inquiry upon which this Committee was about to
enter, The Hon. and Learned Member then referred to
the Act of Parliament in support of the statement which
he had just made, He begged now to direct the attention
of the House to the language of Lord Camden, in the case
of the seizure of Mr. Wilkes' papers. "Papers," said
Lord Camden, " were the owner's goods and chattels,
they were his dearest property, and were so far from
enduring a seizure, that they would hardly bear an in-
spection ; and though the eye conld not, by the law of
England, be guilty of a trespass, yet the carrying
goods away which were of a secret nature, was an act
of trespass." There was no law which gave any man
the power to do that ; and it was too much for them,
without such authority, to pronounce a practice legal
which would be subversive of all the comforts of
society, Now he (Mr. Roebuck) wanted to have per-
sons appointed from that House, who would be able
to report as to the actual state of the law, as well as the I
manner in which it bad been carried out. In an ordi-
nary ease they had a judge, whose duty it was to tell
the jury what was the state of the law ; and he did
net think that the Committee now nominated
would be able to decide that question. He fully sym-
pathised with the Right Hon. Gentleman in what he had
said as to the advantage which had been taken of this
incident to call down public indignation upon a public
officer who had done nothing more , than follow in the
footsteps of his predecessors.—(Hear, hear, from the
Ministerial benches.) That feeling had been created out
of doors by all those vile arts which attached to the daily
press.—(Hear, hear.) A. viler instrument of calumny
could not be used, and all its vileness bad been used on
thp present occasion, and poured on the head of the Right
Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial
benches.) He woi4d pot do honour to one more than
another of those detestable chennels.(Laughter.) He
was delighted at this inquiry. He was convinced that
the moment this power was understood the people of this
country would consign it to destruction.—(Cheers.)
It was not necessary for the safety and peace of
the country.--(Hear, hear.) It was only used to
gratify a bop passion.—(Cheers from the Opposition.)
It was used fur paltry, disingenuous, and detestable pur-
poses—(Hear, hear),,,,and it could not be of any use to
a Government which rested on the affections of the
people. Those affections could not be gained but by a
streightforward and honest course. They could not be
gained unless the people were suffered to perform all
those acts which society considered harmless and useful,
He held in his hand a paper which he desired to bring
before the House. The Hon, Member for Finsbury said
that M. Guizot had thought fit to say, that he was not
aware that any breach of the privacy of letters in France
now took place, go did not attach much credit to that
statement as a piece of information. The Hon. and
Learned Member then read a letter from M, Carnet, the
Minister of the Interior, to M, le Prefet du Department
!les Postes, stating that he had bees itiforthad that
wceroia. parts of- the empire - Zh. privacy. of lottery

had been violated; and deprecating such proceedings.
The letter concluded with these words—" The thoughts
of a citiz'in ought to be as free as his person."—(Hear,
hear, from the Opposition.) He, hoped it would nut be
Said that, in England, at that period, they were not able
to realise the wishes: of a Minister of. France in .1615.
Under an e:tablished and regular Government he believed
they were not reduced to the fatal necessity of employ-
ing so degrading a means of securing the public safety.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he was anxious to take
that opportunity of making some explanation to the •
House on a point which involved his own personal cha-
racter. It had-been asserted that, in consolidating the
Post-office Acts in 1837, the late-GoVernment gave a
fresh sanction to the power under discusSion, and actu-:
ally pushed that power beyond its previous extent. Now,'
he begged to state distinctly, that if that were the effect:
of the Consolidation Act, he abine was responsible for,
ItLwas suggested to him, as a'member of the Post-

office CommisiOn, that great inconvenience arose from
the Post-office Act being spread over 130 separate en-
actments. That suggestion was made by the Hon.
Meniber for Gre,mock ; and hecomplied with it, on the con-
dition that the Act should simply be a Consolidation Act,
and that the merits of the question should not be discussed.
His Hon. Friend the Member for Greenock in particular
had kept most sacredly that bargain, he did not raise
any of the questions he had threatened to do; he had
allowed him (Mr. Labouchere) to proceed with the con-
solidation ; that was an act of consolidation, and that
only ; there was no fresh power given, nor was it in-
tended, the object was to leave the Act where it was.
The only alteration he had proposed in the Act was to
take away the punishment of death in cases in Ireland,
where it had been taken away in England. He felt no
doubt by the consolidation that had taken place they
had not made the law more stringent, but if it was so he,
and he alone, was responsible for it. He had endea-
vouredto discharge his duty to the 'best of his abilities,
and if he had failed he was to blame. With respect to
the question before the House he rejoiced at the course
taken by the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the
Home Department ; he was glad that the whole ques-
tion would be looked into, and he was sure his Noble
Friend. the Meniber for the City of London would not
shrink from having his conduct inquired into when he
was in the Home-office. He (Mr. Labouchere) could not
think there was any real public object gained by opening
letters, in the manner and for the purposes they had
hitherto been. He could not see any State necessity for
exercising the power in that sweeping way in which it
was exercised by Mr. Fox, in 1787, when he opened all
the letters to the ambassadors from foreign countries; but
this he could readily conceive, that there might be occa-
sions when it was necessary to adopt such a course—
such, for instance, as a conspiracy against the life of the
Queen. The Hon. Gentleman who had spoke last had
raised an objection to the Committee being a secret one.
Now, he could not see any objection to that. He could
not see any difference between a Secret Committee and
one with closed doors, except that the Secret Committee
might exclude Members of that House, and for his own
part he could not see why Members should claim a pri-
vilege which they refused to the public. As to the
names of the Committee he hoped the Right Hon:
Baronet would adopt the usual course. He was glad at
the course the Government had pursued, and he thought
if they had at once stated their views and reasons for
the course they had taken, instead of refusing to do so,
public anxiety would not have been so excited as it had
been, and the only way to allay that anxiety was to
have a, strict and searching inquiry into the whole
matter.

Sir R. PEEL cordially and personally shared in the
satisfaction expressed by Hon. Members that there would
be an opportunity given of obtaining full information on-
the subject of the invidious power of opening letters.
He rejoiced in it, because these acts were not the acts
of an individual member of the Government, but of the
Government itself.—(Hear. hear.) It was not right that
those on whom the law placed the performance of a cer-
tain duty should bear the obloquy of it. The great
object for which the Committee was to be appointed was
to obtain full and complete information as to the usages
and circumstances under which the authority had been
exercised, and there would proceed from the Committee
an opinion as to whether or no, in the case of a particu-
lar Administration, the power had been perverted from
the c nurse it was intended to pursue ; whether it had
been used for the promotion of party interests or private
curiosity, or for the indulgence of private malignity, or
for the great purpose for which it had been given, viz.,
the maintenance of the public interest. That was the
great object the Government had in view in proposing this
Committee. They had left out lawyers purposely in
order that there might not be any squabbling as to
what the law was. Suppose they had proposed to ap-
point the Hon. Member for Worcester, and the Hon.
Member for Exeter, on the Committee, and they had
disagreed, in what situation, would they be placed? The
law was not the question the people wanted to be
satisfied upon what they wanted to know was, why
the Government had pursued the course it had done,
and whether they had pursued. it properly. He thought
the gentlemen they had named to form the Committee
had intelligence enough to come to a right conclusion
without the aid of the Hon. Members for Worcester and
Exeter. -He hoped, therefore, the House would not call
upon the Government to appoint lawyers on the Com-
mittee. As to Mr. Home Drummond, it had never
occurred to him that he was so acute a lawyer; they
had named him out of respect for his character; and
if it was supposed that any advantage would accrue to
the Government from his appointment, they would forego
it, and appoint another Hon. Member in his room.
Objections had been made to the Committee being a
secret one; it was made so in order that persons who
had held high stations might more fully detail what had
been done. The Committee, having heard the statements
of facts would have a full opportunity of stating whether
the statements were satisfactory or not, without disclos-
ing names ; if they wanted to get at the real state of the
facts as to the motives of the Government, they would
or.ly accomplish it by having a Secret Committee, that
was the only way in which they could get at the whole
truth. He trusted that the House would think there was
such manifest justice in the appointment of the Com-
mittee that they would at once agree to it. Every one
of the five Members the Government had chosen had
given their votes against them on the last occasion the
question was brought forward. He hoped the House
would allow the Government to substitute some other
name for Mr. Home Drummond, and would permit the
Committee to be appointed that night in order that they
might not be involved to-morrow in an invidious discus-
sion as to who should be members of the Committee.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed so entirely in the
course taken by the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, that he should not have considered it ne-
cessary to say a word to the House, had it not been for
some allusion the Right Hon. Baronet made in his
speech on laying grounds for the appointment of the
Committee. The Right Hon. Gentlemen had referred to
what he had stated on a previous night ; he had come
down to the House on that occasion thinking he should
vote with the Right Hon. Gentleman, but he found he
could not do so. There was one special allegation made
by the Hon. Member for Finsbury when ho brought
forward his motion with respect to the letters of Mr.
Mazzini and Captain Stolzmann—he said that those
letters had been opened, not for the purpose
of finding out a public enemy, but for the pur-
pose of aiding a foreign country against some of their
discontented subjects, who had taken refuge in this
country. Now he (Lord J. Russell) did not consider that
a legitimate exercise of the power. He had given the
Right Hon. Baronet credit for having properly exercised
the power he possessed, although he had refused to give
any explanation to this House of his reasons for doing so.
He thought the Right Hon. Gentleman's refusal to give
any explanation was, as far as the suspicions of the pub-
lic were concerned, most unfortunate. But he (Lord J.
Russell) could not lament the course he had taken on
that occasion. After the refusal to give any explana-
tion, the suspicions of the public could not fail to be
awakened ; the same inflammatory statements would
have been made, the same excitement would have existed
in the public mind ; and even then, according to the
Right Hon. Gentleman, he would not have granted any
inquiry. But as the members of the late Government had
taken the course they had done, the Right Hon. Gentleman
now thought it necessary to appoint, a Committee on the
subject.— (Hear, hear.) He thought a very good con-
sequence had resulted.—(Hear, hear.) He should sup-
port his Hon. Friend, the Member for Fiusbury, think-
ing it quite fair that, as the Right Hon. Gentleman's
conduct was attacked, the conduct of his predecessors
ought to be inqnir, d into also by means of a Committee,
But he entirely agreed with the Right Hen. Gentleman
in the reasons he had stated why this Committee should
be a secret one ; by that means, its purpose would be
much better answered, the inquiry would be more strict,
and the Members would be more able to make up their
minds on the subject, than if it was made an open Com-
mittee, and its evidence canvassed day by day. For his
own part, he was ready to agree to any selection of
names for that Committee which the Right Hon. Gentle
man might propose, and he could see no objection to
those he had chosen. He thought it much better that
they should now close this part of the discussion, and
proceed at once to appoint the Committee. He was
ready to give, himself, any:evidence before that Com-
mittee that he was able to give, though there were many
others who could state better than he could, the manner

in which the power had been exercised. At all events,
let the whole subject be investigated, and, if the power
was to be retained, let the terms of the law be made
clearer; and, on the contrary, if it should appear that the
power was not necessary fur any public interest, let it be
discontinued.

Mr. WAKLBY was quite sure that the public would
not be satisfied with the reasons either of the Right
Hon. Gentleman or of the Noble Lord (J. Russell) for
making it a Secret Committee, and he must say it ap-
peared to him a most extraordinary mode of satisfying
public curiosity on the subject.—(Hear, hear.) Did the
Members of her Majesty's Government think they mono-
polised all the curiosity of the world ?—(Laughter.)
The Government had the power of looking into people's
letters, but the people wanted to know to what extent it
had been done, and why it had been done ? The public
had expressed much surprise and indignation at the
course that had been pursued ; but the Right Honourable
Secretary at first said boldly, " I won't tell you what has
been done. I feel it consistent with my public duty to
be silent. You shan't know any thing about it." But
the public were still very anxious, and the press, he
thought, in contradiction to his Hon. and Learned Friend
(Mr, Roebuck) had very laudably, and in a very excel-
lent spirit, excited the feeling that then existed through-
out England—(Cheers)—a feeling that had so far
brought the Right Hon. Gentleman to account that he
now consented to some inquiry, and it was to the press
they were indebted for that inquiry.—(Loud
cheers.) The public said give us investiga-
tion, and it was a deference to public opinion
which the Right Hon. Baronet stated as his reason fur
granting the inquiry. He stated that public feeling had
been so excited on the subject, that he felt it his duty as
e, Minister of State; to consent to the investigation.
Yes but how were the public to be satisfied, by being
told that all the secret .was to be Confined to the keeping

.or nine lion. Gentlemen, Members of that House, whose
()pinions upon what had been done would- he communi-
cated to the House ; but who could make no revealment
of the Manner in which"this odious practice had been
exercised or of the extent to which it had been exer-
cised.--(fin Member—" They can;") Yes, by a
.I general declaration ; but he would put it lo the Speaker
whether it would be competent to the Committee, to
present that evidence to the House an l have it printed.
The Right Hon. Baronet had alluded, with great clear-
ness to the part taken by the late Members of the Go-
vernment in the debate, and had alluded to what they
had done when in office.' Now, he inferred from what had
transpired that all the Right Hon. Gentleman meant,
to do was this:—to admit what he had done, not to
get out of it by saying that his conduct had not been
worse than theirs. He means to prove to the Committee
that if letters had been opened to this extent, it had been
done in a greater degree by his predecessors. Now,
would that be very satisfactory to the pablic ? It was.
said that when persons of a ee-tain, description fell out'
honest men got their own.—(A laugh.) Now, if it had not,
been fir the hostility manifested by the Members of the
late Ministry, they would have 'got no inquiry at
all. He was glad of the falling out of gentle-
men on both sides of the House, but he questioned.
much if the Government would get their own. He
believed that if great care were not taken, the practice,
so much condemned, would be carried on under the au-
thority of the Secret Committee ; for, from the manner
in which the inquiry would be conducted, it would be
admitted that the power ought to exist ; and if the power
was to exist, who was to place a limit to it? He had
heard no reasons why there should be an exception to
the general rule of Committees in that House. The Com-
mittee was to inquire into the state of the law. Now,
1% hat had transpired in another place with regard to the
law ? In that place they had the first legal authorities
in the kingdona, persons to whose judgment, in legal
matters, the whole public were willing to submit. They,
had the Lord. Chancellor, the Chief Justice of England,
and some • half-dozen ex-Chancellors. There' they' sat,
on both sides of the House, maintaining diametrically
opposite opinions. The Lord Chancellor main.
tained that one warrant was sufficient to open a
number of letters. The next Chancellor sup
ported him in that opinion. Another high legal
authority backed the Chief Justice in maintaining
that an express warrant was necessary in every case,
and notwithstanding these differences, and the turmoil
between these high authorities, his lion. Friend pro-
posed to put lawyers on the Committee.. If the Lord
Chancellor did not know the law, where would they find
lawyers in this House who did ? If the lawyers on the
Committee were to debate'the laW of the question for a
mouth, they would not understand it at last. He ad-
vised Hon. Gentlemen to apply the principles of common
sense and common justice to what they found with regard
to the practice of opening letters, and what was the

statute-law of the ream, then the public might be satis-
fied with their decision. If they did not, nothing would
satisfy the public that this odious and detestable power
ought to be continued. A more odious and unfair prac-
tice was never exercised, or one more calculated to give
offence and annoyance. It was a remarkable thing that
the Right lion. Baronet had not contradicted a single
allegation made by his Hon. Colleague. All the Right
Hon. Gentleman stated was, that if he had done it, it had
been done by his predecessors. The Right
Honourable Gentleman did not deny that there
was a secret office—he did not deny that whole
bags of letters were sent into that office. Ills
Hon. Friend did not say they were opened there, but
from representations made to Members of that House,
he believed the practice had been carried to an enor-
mous extent. He believed the letters had been opened
again and again at the instigation of foreign Govern-
ments. These were the allegations, and such was the
impression on the public mind ; and he would ask, was
it not the duty of that House to meet the question at
once by appointing an open Committee? He was con-
vinced the public would not visit the Hon. Gentleman
with any more condemnation than they would the Hon.
Gentleman opposite ; and if it were proved that they
had done the same thing, so great would be the obloquy
cast upon them, that the Right Hon. Baronet would
escape, and, in that case he would be glad to have voted
for an open inquiry.
Mr. M‘GEACHY supported the motion for a Com-
mittee, and was glad that the Government had consented
to grant it, as having been a sufferer from the reconside-
ration of the decisions of the House on two former occa-
sions—(Laughter)—he should have voted according to
his sense of duty as an independent Member without
regard to the Government.
Mr. WALLACE agreed with the Hon. Member for
Finsbury, that it looked more like the two official sides
of the House coming to an arrangement, by which the
public should have the least possible information. He
was convinced the public would not be satisfied with a
Secret Committee. He really did not know what was
meant by a Secret Committee. Independent altogether
of the practice of opening letters for which warrants
were granted, the great body of the people believed
that the system was practised irrespective of those war-
rants. In consequence they had no confidence in the
• Post-office. He had in his pockets letters sent to him
within the last few days—some of them with printed,
others with written, notices on their backs, saying it was
not worth putting seals upon them, to give the Govern-
ment the trouble t.f opening them. He wished to see the
Post-office put upon the best footing. This Secret Com-
mittee would have no effect upon the people, and unless
the evidence were published there would be no use in
granting it all. It would be considered a mere delusion,
a mere mode of getting rid of a disagreeable subject, and
which nould be no use whatever. The lion. Member
for Finsbury seemed to have the power of guiding both
sides of the House, and of compelling her Majesty's Go-
vernment to take what course he was pleased to direct,
and he hoped, should there be any embarrassment in form-
ing a new Government, her Majesty would not forget
his lion. Friend, and he hoped, following his usual
course, he would divide the House on this occasion.
Mr. M-ACAULAY said he should not have addressed
the House, had not some allusion been made to him in
his absence by the Right Hon. Baronet. If he under-
stood rightly what had been stated, the Right Hon.
Baronet had imputed to him, first a dereliction of his
duty as a sworn servant of her Majesty, and, secondly,
of having made a personal attack on the Right Hon.
Baronet himself. Now he denied that in any respect
he had ever violated the oath or the duty of a Privy
Councillor; and he denied having divulged any secret
which had come to him in that capacity. He also de-
nied that in that character he had been informed of the
practices of the Post-office, and no one in that House was
more ignorant of those practices than himself. He de-
nied with equal confidence the charge of having made an
attack on the Right Hon. Gentleman. He came down
to the House intending to express coneisely a very
strong opinion on the state of the law. If he had de-
parted from that course, it was in consequence of the
Right Hon. Baronet having himself refused to give any
explanation of the principles on which he had acted.
That refusal was at variance with all his ideas of Minis-
terial responsibility; and there was a wide difference
between the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet in this
respect and that of those who had preceded him. There
was never before any Minister called to account for the
exercise of that power except Sir R. Walpole, and he
stated immediately on what principle he had acted; but
this the Might Hon. Gentleman had repeatedly refused
to do. With respect to the appointment of a Com-
mittee he saw no objection to its being a secret one.
He thought it likely that some secret connected with
their foreign department might transpire if the Com-
mittee were made public. But with respect to their
internal affairs, he thought the people might be allowed
to judge for themselves. The principal question the
Committee had to report upon was the state of the law,
did not report
tahned
nheec
es
shsoi
tnyl dfobre
Lord JOHN RUSSELL briefly explained that he
lia
gureeha tsurprised
o ni f i theyn it
had never intended to state that there should not be a
permissive exercise of that power.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS feared that " the Committee,
composed as it was exclusively of Members of the two
great political parties, would not command the confidence
of the public. The public would not be convinced by
any report they might make, unless there were some in-
dependent Members appointed on that Committee. lie
should, therefore, be inclined to move that Mr. Dun-
combe and Mr. ume be added to that Committee.—
(Cheers.) The lion, Member for Finsbury, who had
made the charges, ought to have-an opportunity of prov-
ing them ; and the lion. Member for MontrOse, in whom
the public had great confidence, and who was used to
conducting investigations, ought also to be a Member of
the Committee.

Mr. CURTEIS thought that the thanks both of the
British and the foreign public were due to the Hon.
Member for Finsbury for having brought forward this
subject.—(Cheers.) It was an indefensible and cruel act
to oren the letters of foreigners and to betray their con-
tents to their foreign Governments.—(Hear, hear.) In
the name of humanity, he thanked the Hon. Member for
Finsbury.—(Cheers.) Nothing could be more unjusti-
fiable than to reseal these letters after opening them. By
I:l)Higoliwtevheer severely the press might have
so doing, the Government rendered itself a party to any
committed in consequence.—
Baronet, he believed that if it
had not been for the independent press of this country,
they would never have stood, with regard to this ques-
tion, in the situation which they then occupied. The
oratory of the lion. Member for Finsbury would have
The Hon. and Learned Member for
in speaking of the press in the
crime(bhi leaenendalreld"nh'ahetvlittalcrehi.l)i unavailing Rightif hei oh d not been aided by the press
done.
manner which he bed The Right Hon. Gentle-
man's Baththe
w
man's colleagues had manfully come forward to his aid,
country;as
not
justified
and to share any obloquy which
might attach to it. The
thanks of the country were due to the Hon. Member for
Finsbury for his conduct on this occasion.
Mr. 'I. DUNCOMBE, in reply, observed that if he
possessed the power which the Hon. Member for
Greenock had attributed to him, of directing the Minis-
try, he should certainly have induced them to go further
than they had done • He felt convinced the public would
not be satisfied with the investigation which had been
proposed that night. He did not believe that there was
any necessity for having the Committee a secret one, and
he did not believe that the country would be satisfied
with the Committee which the Hon. Gentleman had pro-
posed. The Right Hon. Baronet had proposed a Com-
mittee of Secrecy to inquire into the state of the law
directing the opening of letters at the General Post-
office, and the mode in which it was exercised. Now,
under those terms, be did not think the Committee could
investigate the ease of Mr. Mazzini and others, he
thought the words "the circumstances under which, and
the extent to which it has been exercised," ought to be
added to the motion, as under those words, the Com-
mittee would have the power of investigating the circum-
stances under which the letter of Mr. Mazzini and other
f,,reigners had been opened ; for one of the principal
charges against the Government was, that they had
opened the letters of foreign exiles at the instigation of
foreign Powers.; - ,
Sir H. PEEL said there would be no objection to the
words. Govormont desired the fullest_l4vestigittion.
. .....

Mr. T. DITNCOMBE was glad to hear that. The
public wished to know the fill 'extent to which the
power had been exercised by the Government and their
predecessors. The Right lion. Baronet had said that
he wished to state the truth, the whole truth, and no-
, thing but the truth; lieliad hoped: that the Right Hon.
. Baronet was ah rat to make a statement of the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ; but he had
not stated one word about Mr. Mazzini. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had stopped short, and had said that he
(Mr. Duneombe) had asserted that the Dublin bag and
the Brighton bag had been called for, and that he had
said that every bady's letters had been opened. Now
that was not what he had stated. He had said
that there was a secret department at the Post-
office where these deeds of darkness were done ; he said
that not only had the letters of individuals been opened,
but that, o Tasionally, • different bags had been carried
there, kept for an hour and a half, and then returned to
the sorters.—(;fear, hear.) The sorters, of course, did
not know chat lAters had been abstracted. He said, for
instance, the Dublin bag, or the Brighton bag, might be
called for. Ile had every reason to believe that those
bags had been ea'led for.—(Cheers.) Ile had not said
that everybody's letters had been opened at the Post-
office, but ho had said that the'rovingcommission which
had gone down into the manufacturing districts had, per-
haps, opened everybody's letters, and he hoped the Com-
mittee would inquire into the conduct of the roving
commission in 18-t2.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped they
would have no scrupe if any letters. of his had been
opened in saying so.—(Hear, hear.) He called upon
them to repeat specially it any letters from the Albany
had been opened. He had been informed that the Al-
bany letters had been stopped. He had no doubt the
Right lion. Baronet thought he was only in the execu-
tion of his duty if he had so done.-(Cheers and laughter.)
He did not know why the Committee should be secret.
As it was, the responsibility of the. investigation would
rest wholly upon the Government ; and if he should
have reason to believe that the Conimittee had not done
their duty, and had not satisfied the public, he should
not be preclude I from acvain opening the question, and
proposing some other mode of investigation.— (Hear.)
The" motion was then withdrawn, and the question was
put on Sr dianes Graham's amendment for the appoint
ment of a Sf.cret Committee. •
Mr. I'. D'UNCOMBE wished the words to which he
had alluded to be introduced. •
Sir R. PEEL had no objection to the introduction of
the words " the extent to which, and the circumstances
under which that authority had been exercised."
Mr. ROEBUCK suggested that the words should be
rendered Still 3nore stringent.
Sir R. PEEL thought there was no necessity for any
alteration. The Committee had full powers, and was
not composed of lawyers, who would quibble.
Mr. WAKLEY said that there was not one word
about resealing letters, and the Committee were not
bound to make any observations on that part of the
question. He suggested that the words "to report as
to the reclosing and resealing of letters" should be in-
troduced.

Mr. ROEBUCK reminded the Right Honourable
Baronet that it did not require a lawyer to quibble.
Mr. MACAULAY thought the powers which were
given to the Committee included everything necessary
for the fullest investigation.
Sir J. GRAHAM had carefully considered the terms
of the motion, and had studiously made them as wide as
possible. He proposed to have a most complete, thorough
investigation, and he hoped the motion would be per-
mitted to stand in its original terms.
The motion was then agreed to.
Sir J. GRAHAM having been given to understand
that Mr. H. Drummond had practised as a lawyer, pro-
posed to substitute the name of Mr. Wilson Patten in-
stead of Mr. H. Drummond on the Committee.
Mr. HORSMAN did not object to any of the Mem-
bers of the Committee, but he thought it extremely
desirable that the Hon. Member for Finsbury should be
on it. He would, therefore, suggest that two names be
removed, and the names of the Under Secretary of the
Home Department, and the Hon. Member for Finsbury
be substituted for them.
Sir R. PEEL hoped the House would be satisfied to
let the Committee stand as it had been originally pro-
posed. Let it not be said of that Committee, as had
been said of another tribunal—" I looked for a judge
and I found an accuser."—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Gentleman had expressed strong opinions on the sub-
ject—so strong that he was satisfied he himself would
not wish to be on the Committee. They meant no per-
sonal disrespect to the Hon. Gentleman, but they followed
the precedent which had been set by Hon. Members
opposite in the case of the Hon. Member for Cork,
against whom the Hon. Member for Blackburn had pre-
ferred an accusation, which bad been referred to a Select
Committee, from which the accuser was excluded. As
they had acted in conformity with that precedent, and
as the Committee was composed of five members oppo-
site to four members on that (the Ministerial) side of
the House, he trusted there would be no further oppo-
sition to the appointment of the Committee.
Mr. SHEIL said that the case alluded to by the Right
lion. Baronet was the case of an individual—this was
the case of the public. A more analogous case was
the Election Committee of the Hon. Member for Bath,
who was a member of the Committee himself, although
he was the accuser. It was objected that this was a
Secret Committee—one great point of that objection
would be obviated if the Hon. Member for Finsbury,
who would thoroughly investigate the subject, and in
whom the public had confidence, were appointed
a member of it. The name of Lord Sandon was then
proposed as a member of the Committee and agreed to.
On the question being put that Mr. Wilson Patten
be a Member of the Committee,
Mr. HORSMAN moved as an amendment, " That
Mr. Thomas buncombe be a Member of the Committee."
Mr. DUNCOMBE hoped the Hon. Member would not
divide the House on the subject. He could assure the
House he had not the slightest wish to be a member
of the Committee. —(Hear, hear.) He had certainly
made strong allegations, and as the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman stated that there was no foundation whatever for

them, he trusted there would be the fullest investiga-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) He must say, however, that he did
not think the Committee had been fairly selected— not
according to the customary forms of the House. The
selection of Committees had been partly by Mem-
bers of the Government and partly by Members
of the Opposition—he thought that was the course
which ought to have been pursued on this occasion.
Lord J. RUSSELL would vote for the Committee as
at present constituted. He thought they had been
named in a fair spirit ; but he must say that he could
not consider the Hon. Member for Finsbury in any way
disqualified from being a member of it.
Dr. BOWRING thought the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury ought to be a member of the Committee, as that
Hon. Member represented public opinion without the
walls of that House.—(Laughter.) That Hon. Member
had exhibited peculiar delicacy and modesty on this
occasion.—(Great laughter.) He was quite sure the-
Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government
would admit that his Hon. Friend had acted with pecu-
liar modesty.—(Renewed laughter.) It would very
much allay the feeling which existed in that House, if
the Hon. Member for Finsbury were appointed on the
Committee.

The amendment was then withdrawn, and the members
of the Committee as already proposed were agreed to.
Mr. JAMES begged leave to move the appointment of
Mr.lluneombe as a member of the Committee.

'The House divided on the motion, when there ap.
peared—

- For the motion
Against it .... ....
Majority against the motion —76
Mr. WILLIAMS then moved that Mr. Hume's name
be added to the Committee.

Dr. BOWRING seconded the motion ; but it was
withdrawn after a few words from Sir R. Peel and other
Hon. Members.

Mr. DUNCOMBE then moved, that indemnity be
given to those witnesses who might be examined bofore
the Committee. • Officials at the Post-office, whose bread
depended on their situations, would not give evidence
unless they were guaranteed against loss. If those
men employed in the inner office admitted before the
Committee that they had opened letters, they laid them-
selves open to an indictment, as they could not produce
the warrant.

Sir R. PEEL said the Government would, of course,
take upon themselves the whole responsibility which
might attach to the matter, and nope of the subordi-
nates should be subjected to punishment for acting ac-
cording to orders. Regarding indemnity to witnesses,
any suggestions made by the Committee on this head
would, of course be attended to.

Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice of his intention to more
that the evidence taken before this Committee be printed.
The Committee was again named as originally consti-
tuted, and finally agreed upon.
STATE OF PRISONS.
Mr. MACKINNON rose to move for a " Select Com-
mittee to consider the reports of the inspectors of pri.,
sons, and the ,state of discipline in the gaols, for the
adoption of an uniform system of punishment, with such
improvements in the management, as can be safely
adopted." Improvements had been made in the state of
prison discipline by the Noble Lord the Member for
London in 1835, and great advantage was derived from
those improvements. The reports of the inspectors sug-
gested several improvements, but there was a great
variation in their views. Under those circumstances, he
thought it desirable that a Committee should be up.
pointed to inquire into the subject, and till they made,
their report the country would not be Ratisfled. There
was a variety of systems recommended, some re-
commending the silent system, some the factory system,
and others other systems. If a Commission was ap-
pointed it would not satisfy the pnblioi but if a Com-
mittee was appointed, he thought it would give satisfac-
tion. Before the system of solitary confinement was
adopted, he thought they ought to have a Committee to
inquire if it was not the most dreadful punish-
ment that could be inflicted on human nature.
This system had been tried in Pittsburg in America,
and it was not successful. The silent system bad been
tried in Pentonville, and the Penitentiary, but that
produced the most disastrous cad upon the minds of
the convicts. It was the object of several persons to
take away from the magistrates the power they possessed
and to give it to a central hoard. Tie wanted it Com-
mittee to investigate whPther this was desirable. He
doubted of the principle of centralisation, which seemed
to be the order of the present times. There was cen-
tralisation of the poor-laws, centralisation of turnpikes,
centralisation of banks, and centralisation of railways.
He would not object to the Right Hon. I3aronet being at
the head of a Board for carrying out a system of uniforM
prison discipline, but there was no guarantee that some
person in which he could pl4co leas confidence
would not be placed in the Home-offiee.—(Hear, hear.)
He believed there could be no Government who wished
to centralise less than the present Government and
yet, from peculiar eircinstqnees, a system of centrali-
sation was spreading which might lea to serious inroads
on the liberty of, the subject. It had been said that the
of ect 4 sought would be effected better by a Commis-

sion than by a Committee:- He was of a different opinion.
A Commission.worked in the dark, apd The country felt
no satisfaction in reading. tkie report. But a Committee
examined openly and fairly', and. the publiC4 saw the
grounds of their de !isiiiti.--Vhe Hon. Member Concluded
by moving for the Committed;
. ✓ Mr. WILLIAMS seconded the motion. There was
no subject of more importance than that. He was
alarmed at the intention of the Secretary of State to intro-
duce the solitary system before conviction. A more in-
human scheme he could not imagine. The Hon. Member
then read a letter from the Under-Secretary of State to
the Middlesex Magistrates, stating that Sir James
Graham wished arrangements to be made for the intro-
duction of the system of solitary confinement before con-
viction. .In America the effect of this system had been
to produce idiotcy and insanity. Did the Right Hon.
Gentleman feel justified, as a Christian, in enforcing such
a system against those wha might proved to be innocent?
The greatest delusion existed in reference to the cost of
prisoners confined under this system. He had shown,
some time since, that the cost of maintaining each
prisoner in Pentonville was not less than 401. a year.
The prison at Pentonville, which wa; sufficient to hold
500 prisoners, had already c05t870,0001., and the prisoners
there cost not less a sum than 481. 12s. yearly ; while a
poor labourer in Suffolk, to keep himself, his wife, and
family, did not get more than 201. a year. Then, with
respect to Parkhurst prison in the Isle of Wight, that
had already cost this country 76,0001., and 5,0001. or
6,0001. was being spent upon it every year. He thought
a check ought to be put upon these things, and that the
Committee asked for by his Friend should be granted.
He would cheerfully second his motion.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that it appeared to him rather
inconsistent that the Hon. Member for Coventry should
second the motion of his Hon. Friend, considering that
they held such different opinions on the subject of prisons
and their discipline. His Hon. Friend, who had brought
forward the motion, thought the local magistrates should
retain their power, while the Hoe. Member for Coventry
designated them as an ignorant and malignant body.
The Hon. Member had fallen into several errors in the
statements he had made ; he had talked a good deal
about the solitary system—solitary confinement was un-
known in this country. There was what was called the
separate system, but that was as different as light and
dark from the solitary system. He thought, upon the
whole, that the system, as it now existed, was a good
one. Solitary confinement he considered to be indefen-
sible, as it often led to madness and idiotcy ; but sepa-
rate confinement, when the party was properly watched,
he believed to be the best system that could be adopted.
As to the statements that had been made by his Hon.
Friend who had brought forward the motion, that pri-
soners were not allowed to speak even to the gaoler, they
were totally without foundation; the truth was, that the
prisoners spoke, if they chose, to 8 or 10 persons in the
course of the day, and they were instructed by masters.
The separate system in England was combined with
what was called the factory system, and by means of
that system the prisoner was preserved from the risk of
contamination from intercourse, and from the effects of
total solitude. The Government had no intention of
forcing the separate system on the magistrates of Mid-
dlesex. All he wished to do was to give the magistrates
the best information in the power of the Government as
to the mode either of enlarging old prisons or building
new ones, and that best mode he believed was to be
found in the construction of separate cells. But it must
not be imagined from that reason, that it was intended
also to force the separate system of discipline on pri-
soners. As to the motion of his Right Hon. Friend, he
could not believe that at this period of the session it
would be advisable to appoint a Committee. That would,
only have the effect of throwing confusion and uncer-
tainty into the subject. He hoped his Hon. Friend would
not press his motion ; but if he did, he trusted the
House would agree with him in not acceding to it.
Mr. WILLIAMS explained. He had not made any
charge against the magistrates as a body.
Mr. ESCOTT said, in the early part of the session he
had asked the Right Hon. Baronet to give his opinion
as to the legality of applying the separate confinement
to prisoners before trial. He believed that the law
merely contemplated the security of the persons of pri-
soners, that they might be forthcoming on the day of
trial; they were not placed there for punishment. What
he wanted to know was this, where was the authority
for applying punishments to persons not proved guilty
of any offence? He should not go into any controversy
as to the various shades and degrees of punishment con-
tained in the various systems, the silent, or the separate;
he wanted to know where the Act of Parliament was to
be found that authorised magistrates in England in in-
flicting punishment on those who were merely placed in
prison for safe custody before trial. He had never heard
of any such statute on the book ; he should be glad to
hear if no such statute existed. But if no such statute
existed there arose a much more serious question, for it
would then be the bounden duty of the House, in the ab-
sence of any law, to see that no such practice was
continued.

Sir J. GRAHAM said the General Prison Act gave
the magistrates the power of classifying prisoners; and
if that was desirable in any case, it was the most so
between convicted and unconvicted prisoners. The pri-
soners waiting their trial had separate sleeping cells, but
they were permitted an intercourse with others during
the day, which was not allowed to those who had been
convicted. He referred the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man to the 2d and 3d of Victoria, sec. 56,
Mr. WAKLEY perfectly agreed with the lion. Mem-
ber opposite. He believed that when that Act was
passed it contemplated merely the personal security of
prisoners before their trial. He had been much struck
with what he had heard in one of the gaols in this
country two or three days ago. He found, on inquirT,
that the lowest kind of diet was forced on prisoners in
that gaol on their remand ; they wore not allowed any
animal food for the first fourteen days of their detention.
Now was that fair or just ? These men were merely
suspected of offences.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM—What gaol is that ?
Mr. WAKLEY—The New Prison, Cleikenwell. Had
he known this motion was coming on he would have
brought down the dietary of the prison. He had the
statement on the best authority ; the diet was gruel,
bread, and broth ; they had no meat till after fourteen
days. He was so struck with the circumstanco that he
stated he would mention the subject in the House on the
first opportunity. He believed the Committee, at this
period of the session would be useless; but he hoped, from
the manner in which the subject was treated, that he
would not object to grant it at an early period of the next.
The subject was one of immense importance, and not
only ought they to inquire into the subject of prison
discipline, but into the manner in which persons in
authority exercised the power of commitment. He had
known cases of persons sentenced to hard labour when
suffering in the last stage of disease, and living only a
few days after their commitment. He had known per-
sons who had been sent into the infirmary the day
they had been committed, and who in a week after
had expired. At the present moment, there were a
number of idiots in the House of Correction
who had been committed by police magistrates fi!:
various offences. These were matters whicli de
manded a searching scrutiny. The Right Hon, Gentleman
had complained of the different views entertained by
the mover and seconder,. on tine subject of solitary and
separate confinement. Tae fact was, the solitary system
ought to be knowia as the demoniacal system. Nothing
could be more atrocious or horrible, and when the
separate system made any advances towards the solitary,
it became objectionable in the highest degree. The
Right Hon. Baronet had alluded to the Pentonville
prison, He (Mr. Wakley) had originally entertained
the strongest objections to that system. He had opposed
the erection of it when it had been originally proposed,
and had used all his efforts to prevent its establishment,
because he considered that the system would produce
the most horrible effects on the prisoners confined
there. He had been called upon to exercise the
functions of his office in that gaol, and, knowing
the desire there was to ascertain what was going on there
he had gone a little beyond his duty, in order to know
the effects produced by the system on the prisoners.
The result had been most surprising. The prisoners
were brought before the jury ; all persons in authority
in the gaol were ordered to leave the room; the pri-
soners were informed that they need be under no fear of
consequences—that they need entertain no apprehen-
sion of any danger or inconvenience to themselves
from any communication which they might make, and it
was again and again intimated to them in the broadest
manner, that no person in connexion with the gaol was in
the room. They were questioned as to hew they were situ-
ated, awl asked if they preferred el, discipline of that
gaol over any other? Every prisoner examined gave his
most unqualified approval of the Pentonville over every
other gaol, They all stated that the diet was ample,
and that the education they received, and the trades
they were taught, were of the greatest service to them,
and afforded them amusement. They were asked if, on
suffering separate confinement, they found the solitude
annoying to them? The reply was, not in the slightest
degree. They were asked if they had any complaint to
make against anything they found in the gaol? and the
answer was, they had not one complaint to make. These
results had astonished him, and, having previously ex-
pressed himself as hostile to the system, he thought it
but right to state these extraordinary results of his ex-
perience to the House.—(Hear.) No doubt separate I
confinement had the effect of depressing the spirits, and
ho thought he had noticed something of that sort in the
manner of those prisoners; but they all spoke most
gratefully of the treatment which they had received, and
seemed much rejoiced at the idea of going to the. colonies
on tickets of leave, and gaining an honest livelihood as
respectable persons there. He could easily believe that
they would be buoyed up by the hope of n
bettering
Baronetteringtheir
condition, and he hoped that the Right
might be induced to shorten the period of con-
finement from eighteen to twelve months, if he
found that period sufficient for the correction of
their moral character. There had been three cases of
lunacy removed from Pentonville to Bedlam. He did
not believe that either of those cases had been produced
by the discipline of the gaol, and in two instances it
had been proved that there had been an hereditary pre-
dispusition to the disease. He thought it his duty to
IBake these statements to the House, as he had origi-
nally opposed the institution of that prison.
Mr. MACKINNON replied. He would not press the
motion to a division,

Mr. COLLETT, on behalf of Viscount Ingestre,
postponed the consideration of the petition of Captain
Dickenson respecting the ship Thetis.
The motion was withdrawn.
Captain VOLHILL moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to exempt from payment of the stamp duties all policies
of insurance made for protection against loss of growing
crops, &e.,

But the SPEARER having ruled that, in the first in-
stance, notice of the motion should be given ; and, in the
sPetsild, that it could only be ma.de in a Committee of the
House on the Stamp Act, the motion fill to the ground.
Mr. MILNES' mutton to call the attention of the
House to the papers lately presented respecting the trial
of a Maltese at Tunis, for murder, was postponed iu con-
secivieneo of the absence of Sir Robert reel.