The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-01 00:00:00

POOR LAW IN IRELAND.

Mr. BELLEW presented petitions from several places
in the county of Louth against the unequal assessment
under the poor-law in Ireland.
MEDICAL PROFESSION.

Lord DUNCAN presented petitions in favour of some
provision for upholding the respectability of the medical

profession.

NOTICES OF MOTION.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE, on the part d the Hon.
Member for Leicester (Sir John Easthope) gave notice
of the presentation of a petition from two persons con-
fined in the House of Correction at Leictster' com
plaining of imprisonment for the non-payment of poor-
rates.

Lord LINCOLN gave notice, that on the 14th, he
should move for leave to bring in a Bill to facilitate the
drainage of lands.
Mr. WARD postponed his motion relative to the
burdens on land till that day fortnight.
Mr. HUME said he should bring for ward his motion
respecting Sir Henry Pottinger on that day fortnight.
Mr DODD gave notice that he should move, on
Thursday next, at the time of private business, that the
report of the Board of Trade respecting the extension of
the Croydon Railway to Ashford be referred back to
the Board of Trade.
Sir CHARLES NAPIER gave notice that, on going
into Committee of Supply, he should call the attention of
the House to our naval ports and arsenals, and harbours
of refuge.
MR. AGLIONBY AND THE " TIMES."
AGLIONBY, in allusion to an article which had
appeared in that day's Times, said it was not his
intention to found a motion upon it, inasmuch
as to do so, he would have to move that the publisher of
that paper should appear at the bar. The article in
question referred to a letter which had appeared, ad-
dressed by Mr. Carrington to Lord Howick, the Chair-
man of the Committee on New Zealand, in which
it was stated that be (Mr. Aglionby) between
the first and recond days of the examination
of Mr. Carrington before that Committee had induced
that gentleman to modify his evidence. He only now
mentioned this subject, as he intended to take the earliest
opportunity of calling the attention of the House to it ;
but he would, at once, state that the assertion which
had been made had no foundation in truth.
QUARANTINE LAWS.
Dr. BOWRING wished to ask the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite a question. It was in the recollection
of the House, that during last session it was resolved
that measures should be taken to modify the quarantine
system, and that such steps should be taken as would
lessen the grievances which the commercial world
laboured under both at home and abroad. Now, he
wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet what had been
done to carry out the wish of the House on that subject ?
Sir GEORGE CLERK begged to state that her
Majesty's Government entered into anegotiation with the
Governments of France and Austria, that the three. G-
overnments should agree to carry these measures into
practice. In France there was no objection, but the
Austrian Government wished to have a report from me-
dical officers of their own. He would inform the Hon.
Gentleman (Dr. Bowring) that no such report had as
yet been received, and that the matter now stood in pre-
cisely the same state as it did when brought before the
House in July last. He trusted, however, that they
would obtain information on that subject very soon.
NORTH KENT RAILWAY.
Lord HOWICK said that he observed in a news-
paper of Saturday last an advertisement for the report
of the promoters of the North Kent Railway ; on the
last notice given it appeared that the Board of Trade
made their decision without that document. The
promoters sought an interview on a day when it was in-
convenient for the Board of Trade to receive them, and
on the day appointed it was inconvenient for the pro-
moters of the line to attend, and the decision was made
in their absence. He would wish to know whether that
was true, or whether the Board of Trade had published
that they gave their decision before they considered the
subject ?
Sir G. CLERK said the terms of the advertisement
to which the Noble Lord had referred 'did not contain a
correct account of the circumstances connected with this
railway. If any mistake had arisen with regard to the
announcement of the decision of the Board of Trade on
the subject of that particular railroad, it must have arisen
entirely on the part of the railway company. It was not
the practice of the Board of Trade to request personal
interviews with the promoters of railways, but he be-
lieved the system they pursued had been this :—They
required the parties to send in the fullest do-
coumentary evidence, detailing the advantages to
be derived from the scheme of which they were
the promoters. In a great many instances these
parties had requested to be allowed to have a per-
sonal conference with the Board of Trade, for
the purpose of elucidating many points which docu-
mentary evidence could not fully and clearly ex-
plain. The Board of Trade had always expressed them-
selves ready to receive all parties, and he believed
the promoters of this railway applied for a personal in-
terview on the 6th of January last. They were, how-
ever, informed that upon that particular day it was not
convenient for the Board of Trade to have a conference
with them, and they therefore named a subsequent day,
he believed the 22d January. On the 21st of that month
however, the solicitor for the promoters of this scheme
called at the Board of Trade, and stated that it was
impossible for the parties to attend on the 22d, but that
gentleman did not, at the time, make any request to
have any further day named, or the Board of Trade
would have been perfectly ready to receive the promoters.
The Board of Trade waited till the last moment before
giving their decision, but no application was made by
the promoters of this line ; and it would be remembered
that the Board of Trade had intimated to the House and
the public that they should be prepared to give their de-
cision upon the majority of railway schemes before them
by a particular day. The House would recollect that
the Board of Trade had all the documentary evidence
which the promoters of this scheme considered
essen'tial to their case before them, but it appeared
from the advertisement that they had some further
documentary evidence, which the solicitor had not pre-
sented to the Board of Trade. The Board of Trade, how-
ever, had had sufficient facts before them to enable them
to come to a decision upon the question before them,
and the result of their decision they announced in
the Gazette of last Friday. Subsequently the solicitor
called at the Board of Trade, and expressed his regret
and surprise that the Board had riot had an opportunity
of considering certain documents. There was no doubt
the solicitor was informed that the fullest consideration
would be given to these documents if he deposited
them with the Board, and he (Sir George Clerk) had
not ahe least doubt that if these documents
contained important information upon this question,
his Noble Friend at the head of the Railway Depart-
ment and the Board itself would not only give it the
fullest consideration ; and if it contained sufficient
grounds to induce them to alter their decision,
they would not have the slightest, hesitation in doing so.
But he must candidly tell the House that he did not think
these documents would disclose such information as to
induce the Board of Trade to come to a different decision
to that which had already been announced. If any mis-
apprehension had risen, it was on the part of the pro-
moters of the railway, and not on the part of that de-
partment of the Board of Trade. Nor could they com-
plain that no intimation bad been given to them that
further evidence was required, because it was left to
them to request an interview, which they had neglected
to do. It was clear, therefore, that :no blame could be
attached to the Board of Trade. The report detailing the
reasons upon which the Board of Trade had come to
decision in the case of this railway would be laid upon
the table of the House in the course of the present week,
and it would be for the House or a Committee to judge
whether that report contained sufficient reason to justify
the decision of the Railway DepartMent of the Board of
Trade.
Mr. DUNCOMBE. begged leave to ask a question
upon this subject. It was this—he would wish to know
if the decisions of the Board of Trade were the decisions
that were Gazetted? and if they were, w ere those de-
cisions final? The reason he asked this question was
this—if any new information should be acquired upon
any line so announced as decided Upon, and that the
Board of Trade should find that information of such a
character as to induce them to alter their opinion, would
there then be a new announcement in the Gazette ?
Sir GEORGE CLERK said he had not the least idea
that the Board would make any alteration in
their decisions ; but at the same time he could say,
that the Board of Trade would, as an act of justice,
alter the whole bearing of the announcement made in the
Gazette, if the additional information were of such a
nature as to demand that course.
Mr. LABOUCHERE understood that the practice of
the Board of Trade was to announce their decisions in
the Gazette; now he wished to 'know if the Board
made any announcements in the Gazette before they
had made up their minds ?—(Laughter.)
Sir G. CLERK begged to say that the Board of Trade
were always ready and anxious to give their fullest con-
sideration to every information sent them on this sub-
ject ; and when the parties giving this information
should state to the Board the nature of the information
they were always told that such information would be
sure to receive the fullest and most careful consideration.
Lord HOWICK conceived that his question bad not
been quite answered yet. What he wanted to know
was, was this a decision of the Board of Trade, or was it
not ?—(Hear, hear.) If it were not a decision why was
it Gazated? And if it were, why should the announce-
inept be made in the advertisement in the papers that
he had already read ?—(Hear, hear.)

REPEAL OF DUTIES.
Mr. E. BULLER, seeing the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir
R. Peel) in his place, begged to ask him when the deferred
discussion on the repeal of the duties on tallow and other
articles of commerce, could be brought on without in-
convenience to the Government. He was anxious to
consult the convenience of the Government ; but it was
necessary that the country should know when these duties
would cease.
Sir R. PEEL said that he could not, at the present
moment, say when the business could be taken up by the
House, but he would take the very earliest oppor-
tunity of naming a day. In the course of the week
he would be able to see the progress of the business in
the House, and when he knew what position it stood in,
he should be able to fix a day. He believed
the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) had a
notice on the books which stood for Tuesday, and if not
before, he believed he should be able to state on Mon-
day what day could be taken for the purpose.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Government busi-
ness was usually taken on the Wednesday,
Sir R. PEEL said that whenever Government mo-
tions were taken on the Wednesday, it was by the
courtesy of the House, and not as a matter of right or
according to rute ; but he had no objection to take the
business on Wednesday, but, in the course of the week,
or on Monday at latest, he would name a day.
SANATORY REGULATIONS OF LARGE TOWNS
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN begged to call the atten-
tion of the Noble Lord at the head of the office of
Woods and Foresfs (the Earl of Lincoln) to an
extremely important petition which he had presented the
other evening from Limerick, and to ask the Noble Lord
whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Govern-
ment to extend the provisions' of any Bill which they
might introduce upon the sanatory regulations of large
towns to Ireland.
The Earl of LINCOLN said that the report of the
Bommissioners had only been presented to her Majesty
in January last, and he could, therefore, say what the
provisions for the Bill might be, but without pledging
the Dovernment to any particular course of proceeding
he might say that he anticipated the power of the Bill
would be extended both to Scotland and Ireland.
AUCTION DUTY.

Captain PECHELL wished to know from the Righ,
ion. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer when
it was his intention to go ipto Committee upon the
auction duty, and he also wished to know at what period
the duty would cease atter the passing of the resolu-
tion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
should be happy to bring the question forward at the
earliest possible moment; and it was only because he
understood that it was to be opposed that he was not
enabled to bring it forward heretofore. The time when
he would be able to bring it forward would depend on the
army vote. The moment that vote was obtained he would
name the day on which he would bring forward the
question of the auction duty. The reduction of the duty
would be effected at the earliest possible period after the
passing of the resolution.
Captain PECHELL wished to know from the Hon.
Gentleman opposite, the Member for Dorsetshire (Mr.
Bankes), whether it was his intention to oppose the re-
duction of the auction duty, and whether he would
divide the House upon it ?
Mr. BANKES said it was his intention to follow up
the motion of which he gave notice at an early period of
the session ; and he would take the sense of the House
on the question of the auction duty, and the propriety
of applying the auction duty to a certain particular pur-
pose 2—(Laughter.)
Mr. WARD said he would postpone his motiou rela-
tive to the burdens on land till the House was in pos-
session of the Hon. Gentleman's statement.
MR. AGLIONBY AND MR. CARRINGTON.
Mr. AGLIONBY said, that as he felt called upon to
bring under the notice of the House a letter of Mr. Car-
rington's, reflecting upon his conduct as a member of a
Committee, and as he understood that the most conve-
nient time for doing so would be when the House was
going into a Committee of Supply on Friday, he begged
to give notice that he would call the attention of the
House to the subject on that day. He was anxious that
a member of the Committee should not rest under such
mil imputation.
COLONIAL ACCOUNTS.
Dr. BOWRING then rose to move that a Select Com-
mittee be appointed to inquire into the state of the colo-
nial accounts and the means of improving them. It
would be needless for him to urge on the House the im-
portance of the subject, which must be apparent to any
one. A paper had been laid on the table of the House
a few days ago which showed that this country had
forty-one colonies, with a population of 5,000,000,
of people; the imports from them to the United 'Kingdom
amounted annually to between 10,000,0001. and
11,000,000/. sterling, and the exports represented
17,000,000/. sterling, of which nearly half was of Bri-
tish produce, and British manufactures. These colonies
employed 3,000 vessels, and 900,000 tons of shipping.
Whenever colonial questions were introduced, the
House must be surprised that no accounts could be bad
or at least very imperfect ones. The two latest ac-
counts came down to the 2d of August, 1844,
and the Bth of 4pgust of the same year.
There were no accouEts of many of the colonies
later than 1843, and of others none later than
1842, whilst from the important colony of Newfound-
land there were no accounts at all. Neither were there
any accounts from Fernando Po or the Falkland Islands
later than 1840, though a sum of 20,0001. had been granted
to the Falkland Islands at various times by this House.
There was no uniformity, no general plan or purpose.
They all stood on an independent basis, and each
returned accounts as the functionaries pleased. Many of
them gave no account whatever. In some of the colonies a
very few lines were sufficient to dispose of the receipts
and expenditure. In St. Christopher's seven lines dis
posed of the receipts, but ten lines were devoted to the
expenditure. In some colonies there was no distinction
made between fixed and incidental revenue. In others what
was elsewhere called fixed revenue got the name of inci-
dental; in others the application of the terms was reversed.
In the Cape of Good Hope the accounts were kept in a
manner different from that adopted in all the
other colonies. There was one column for abso-
lute receipts—another column for arrears and debts—
In some cases they had charged for the collecting of the
revenue ; in others they had not ; and in others that
charge was under a different head. The Hon. and
Learned Member then entered into a statement of the
accounts furnished by the different colonies. He thought
they should know how the sums advanced to the colonies
had been disposed of. He would also draw attention to
the mode of auditing accounts for these places. When
Sir George Murray was Colonial Secretary he had pro-
mised that the colonial budget should be regularly
brought before Parliament. That had not been done.
It appeared from the evidence given before the Com-
mittee, that in 1837 the colonial accounts of 1831 had
not been audited. The accounts of all the colonies
were in arrears. The accounts of Ceylon had not been
audited for eleven years ; those of South Australia had
not been audited for seven years ; those of Mauritius
for seven wars ; those of the Cape of Good Hope for
eight years ; those of Malta for six years ; those of
Upper Canada for six years, and those of Wes-
tern Australia for five years. The most extra-
ordinary :rensons were given for the non exa-
mination of these accounts. They said they
had not clerks enough to get through the work.
That the persons whose duty it was to examine them
were ill. The arrears were continually accumulat-
ing—after a few years the accumulation was sent to
the audit office, and there they declared that it was
impossible for any human being to examine the
accounts, and then an order was issued from the
Treasury to allow all these accounts to pass
without audits—(Marks of dissent from Sir Robert
Peel.) The Right Honourable Baronet expressed his
dissent from that statement, but if he would inquire he
would find that it had been done again and again, He
was quite willing to do justice to the efforts of successive
Governments to accomplish this object. One great
object had been accomplished—the separation of the
military from the civil. accounts. If a proper system
were not adopted in keeping the colonial accounts, ure-