The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-16 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 15.
LUNATIC ASYLUMS BILL.
( Continued from our .Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Lord SEYMOUR believed that the plan of the Noble Lord
would have the effect of preventing cruelties which had been
practised in lunatic asylums.
Lord ASHLEY said there were 34 board-days last year, and
he had attended every one.
Sir C. NAPIER would be glad to have the attendance of
the other members of the Board.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it 45
Majority against the amendment
On our return to the gallery we found
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE complaining that Dr. Turner had
been placed on the Commission, he being at the time between
70 and B'. years of age, and consequently would soon be entitled
to be placed on the petition list.
Lord ASHLEY said that Dr. Turner was a most efficient
officer, and was well calculated for the duties which he had to
perform. The Lord Chancellor fully approved of the ap-
pointment.
Sir C. NAPIER understood that when the Commissioners
under this 13ill should become unfit for work they should retire
on a salary • but he thought a little provision ought to be
made for those who had been all their lives acting as Commis-
sioners in the same way, and that they should not be turned
adrift in their old ace.
Mr. WAKLEY was opposed to such a proposition upon
principle, for if such a principle were to be recognised by this
Act he would like to know where it would stop ? Certain per-
sons accepted situations for a certain amount of remuneration,
and it was evident they were contented with it, for they per-
formed the duties, but the public and the labouring classes
should not be made to pay large sums as retiring pen-
sions. He would ask the House what it did last night?
It came to a resolution to refuse relief to a man
who might not be able to get employment, yet a monstrous
allowance of the description now proposed was asked to be made
for men in their old age who had received a large salary for the
discharge of their duties.
Mr. ARBUTHNOTT would wish to know if this clause
should be discussed now, or at any other time ?
Sir J. GRAHAM said he hoped it would be discussed now,
as it was desirable to make some progress with the Bill.
Mr. DUNCOMBE did not approve of the Bill being passed
through the House at this railroad pace, for he was anxious that
the public should see how matters of this sort were disposed of
here, and how the public money was applied. Now, the Bill
provided that these Commissioners should have a retiring
pension after fourteen years service; how did the
House know but that many of these Commissioners had already
served 13% years ? fie had asked the Noble Lord opposite
to state shut the age of 1)r. Turner was, hut he could get no
information at all on the subject. He could not ascertain
whether he was a young man or an old man, or likely to remain
long or short in his situation. He fully concurred with the
Hon. Member near him, that though the Noble Lori opposite
was a very humane man, it was an extraordinary thing that this
Houseshould refuse relief to an able-bodied poor man who could
not get employment, but let him starve, and then in twenty-four
hours after come down and ask for a provision of this sort, in
the shape of a retiring pension.
Lord ASHLEY said he had no objection whatever to answer
the question, but he could not really say what the age of Dr.
Turner was ; but this he knew, that he believed him to be per-
fectly equal to the discharge of the most delicate and arduous
duties.
Mr. WAKLEY said he did not object to the individual, but
to the principle of connecting past duties with future; and he
would again repeat, that the public money should not be dia-
p )sed of in pensions, when that money was taken from the
poor man in the shape of taxes upon every article he consumed,
and to whom relief from the public money was refused, because
he was ab'e-bodied, though he might be starving.
Sir J. GRAHAM said the Committee was now only dis-
cussing the names of those who had been recommended for the
officers, and he would not shrink from the responsibility of
having recommended them. But the subject of the amount of
salary was a matter for future discussion.
Mr. DUN COMBE said it was putting the cart before the
horse, to first nominate persons and then tell them that they
were to have certain salaries and retiring pensions, if the Go.
verement did not intend that such should be the case.
Lord ASHLEY said there would be no breach of faith
towards those parties if this clause should be left out.
Mr. DUNCOMbE said he had no objection to give the
medical man 1,5001. a year, but he did think it too much for
the lawyer. The police magistrates, who were obliged to be
barristers of ten years standing, had only 1,0001. a year, from
which 5 per cent. was deducted, which went to a fund for a
retiring pension. The prison inspectors also had but 7001. a
year, with no allowance for travelling expenses. On these
grounds he did think 1,500/. a year would be too much for
these Commissioners. He conceived 1,0001. a year would be
abundant, and he would undertake to get barristers of ten
years standing who would be very glad to get it, and who
would discharge the duties most ably.
Mr. HINDLEY slid not see why the doctors should be
favoured beyond the lawyers.
Lord ASHLEY contended that the proposed salaries were
not so high as those paid to other public officers in the same
position, and he was quite sure that less than 1,5001. would
not secure the services of men whom it would be desirable to
employ.
Mr. WAKLEY never heard of anything so easily done as
finding excuses for giving men large salaries.
Mr. CHRISTIE believed that a salary of 1,0001. a year
would command the services of many most intelligent and clever
men.
Sir C. NAPIER did not see why the proposed Commis-
sioners should not be satisfied with 1,000/. a year, when the
Lords of the Treasury and Admiralty only received that sum.
Mr. BOUVERIE did not think 1,5001. a year a large salary
when the duties required to be performed were taken into con-
sideration.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE thought, after the valuable sug.
gestions that had been thrown out, it would be better
that the Chairman should report progress, in order to
enable the Noble Lord to improve- the Bill by adopt-
ing some of those suggestions. The Honourable Member
then withdrew his amendment as to the word sir.
At the suggestion of Mr. WAKLEY, the words barrister of
ten years' standing were struck out, and the words barrister of
five years' stsncling inserted.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE then moved as an amendment that
the salary of the six paid Commissioners should be 1,000/., in-
stead of I,boo/. a year.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the original motion
For the amendment
Majority against the amendment —24
The amendment was consequently lost, and the words,
1,5001. were ordered to stand part of the clause.
On the question that the clause stand part of the Bill,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE again divided the Committee, when
there appeared,
For the clause
Against it
Majority in favour of the clause ..
The clause was then agreed to, as was also clause 4.
The Chairman then obtained leave to report progress, and
left the chair at half-past four oclock, and the business of the
House was suspended till five o'clock.

The House resumed at Five o'clock, when the SpzAxis
took the Chair.

The reports on the Epping Railway, the Rye and Tenter-
den Railway, the Launceston and South Devon Railway, the
South Devon (Tavistock Branch) Railway, the Dublin Pipe
Water, and the Gravesend and Rochester Railway Bills were
received and agreed to.
The Darby Court Bill was read a second time.
MANCHESTER AND LIVERPOOL RAILWAY.
Mr. BROTHERTON moved that the Lords' amendments
on this Bill be agreed to.
Sir G. CLERK objected to the reception of the Bill, on
the ground that certain clauses were opposed to the report of
the Board of Trade, and to the standing orders of the House.
Mr. M. GIBSON proposed that the consideration of the
amendment be deferred for a week, in order to give time for
the alteration of clauses.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment 2
Against it
Majority 4l
GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN (IRELAND).
RAILWAY BILL.
The Lords' amendments to this Bill were read and agreed to.
RICHMOND (SURREY) RAILWAY BILL.

The Lords' amendments to this Hill were read and agreed to.
Mr. HUME moved for certain returns respecting the
sewers, of which the House had never received any account.—
Ordered.
Mr. YORKE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to extend
certain provisions in the Act for Consolidating and Amending
the laws relating to Highways in England.
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
Mr. MACAULAY, who was almost inaudible in the gal-
lery, from the noise which prevailed at the time, was understood
to say that, a few evenings ago, he had put a question to the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite as to whether or not the Go-
vernment countenanced certain proceedings which had been in•
stituted against Sir David Brewster and others, for not taking
the test of the General Assembly. lie now repeated the
question, and wished to know whether the Government would
undertake and conduct such a prosecution, and whether they
would lay on the table of the House the communications which
had taken place between the Government and the General Assem-
bly on the subject?
Sir J. GRAHAM said he had no further knowledge of the
sulject than the Right Hon. Gentleman himself possessed.
With respect to the prosecution of sir David Brewster, he did
not understand that any resolution had been come to by the
General Assembly respecting his prosecution. He was not in
a condition to lay before the House any communications on the
subject. SCOTCH POOR-LAW.
Mr. P. M. STEWART asked when the Scotch poor-Jaw
would be next brought on ?
Sir R. PEEL was understood to say on Thursday_ next.
NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND).
Mr. OSBORNE wished to know when the vote would be
brought forward for the purpose of national education in
Ireland.
Sir T. FREMANTLE said on Friday next.
After some further conversation respectingthe fixing of the
Committee of Supply,
Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that he had no objection to
fixing Friday evening for that purl
An How. 1I ESUPPLEMENTARYsaas asked when ithE"leS.T l[AsupplementaryAT E S
estimates
of votes of the division on the New Zealand question would be
ready for delivery ?
Mr. CARDWELL said, that they were in course of pre-
paration.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.