The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-26 00:00:00

T_FIE SUN, LONDON,
_TUESDAY 'MORNING, JULY 26, 1842.

a public
grie,mtnee ; and if that right hal Ileen vio-
lated the Magistzatos of Staffordshire, he hop6l
ll°use would aid him in obtaining from the Go-
*th ent " that , information for which he was
aboUt to move. it appeared a report had
r.i.i3l)read that a statement had been made
eYIL some gentleman in ;•_•:edgeley, that if a
474iAt ,dared to show his face in the town, he should
tvaltuniediately arrested. Mr. Mason, however,
;'2,4111g-that-the Magistrates had no right to make
rid.o. statement, determined on holding a meet-
ing Sedgeley. He had proceeded about ten :Ili-
e`"s in.. his lecture, when he was interrupted by a
arstable of the name of Beman (as we understood),
Is'ilioh.constable, it should be observed, was the
;'-'fitness who appeared on the trial against the
to
.Iso6eii. And what, after alt, was the language
tr,t,W.,11111 the constable deposed ? A.ceordhg
r.c count, Mason was telling the peo-
beettii_. and telling them, as he (Mr. Duncombe)
leved truly, that the laws of this country were
'e
414(1 by the aristocracy—that the people had no
vtce- in the election of their representatives—that
Rhe laws which were to be obeyed by all
th!llid be made by all, and consented to by all;
the the individuals in this country who worked
,e 'hardest received the least; and that those who
starftked the least received the most. The con-
thnbile then interrupted the lecturer, saying
dc7i;_jte could stand that no longer ; that he should
a€,A,().lalething• for his pay ; that Mason was using
"tions language; and that it would be his duty
Up the meeting. Mason told the con-
Allitt. he had no business to interrupt him,
• "t 3, only _ business would be to go before a
~.and lodge an information against him
ch might be tried on a future day. The constable
t'slsted in putting an end to the meeting; he removed
11,44,,,e4 upon which the lecturer was standing, but
tit ,o?t4gr‘breach of the peace took place. Mason con-
on the ground for some time. Next day
stip -tools out a warrant for assault against the con-
v,..b,Who, however, immediately obtained a counter
1,1 4,4 at against Mason. The consequence was that
baltri was called before a Magistrate, and held to
44 .3 appear at the sessions. In the meantime the
gistrates intimated that they. would dismiss the
ege against the constable. But on the other hand
.4ttsi°4 and those who joined with him were prosecuted
ue instigation and instance of the Magistrates.
1141 e Parties were committed for sedition, attending an
otia\v,ltd meeting, and for assault. The meeting was
it; \lllicit no lawyer would call unlawful or illegal.
kas
;liae perfectly peaceable til. interrupted by the eon-
'
GREEN E hero announced; that the hour (five
th‘eq`,') appointed for the ,111anagers on the part of
the of :Commons, meeting the iSlanagers on
of the IlOuse of Lords, in con erence on the
levy klarbour Bill, had arrived,
sir l'•. (ireene, With Sir apier, Air. Hawes, Mr.
the Capri, and other _Members, then retired to meet
atitir,"4°l'd3, and after' a short absence returned and
them -uneed to the House that they had delivered to
for !,altagers on the part of the Lords, their reasons

rairee* 'n theirLordships' amendments.
Ai _Lps:

.• 12 InT.&COMBE continued his observations.
Prosecuting counsel, not satisfied with the
tuYib that had tried all the other cases, selected
Ai4"els jury for this particular case,. who found
44(1°,4 guilty of attending an unlawful assembly,
Th. the other-seven men guilty of a common assault.
coltle-bjects, then, of his (Mr. T. buncombe's)
ko Plaint were, the illegal interruption of the
tioneting) the _arrest of the men, and the prosecu-
and- certain circumstances which took place
pass g 1.14 the trial ; also the sentence that was
ititissed nn the men. Another cause of complaint he
f0,,2•40t forget was, that after those men had been
t,,,a7rid guilty the Chairman did not pass sentence of his
to,n„ accord, but immediately applied to the
tollBtable upon whose testimony the prisoners were
atiPetedi and consulted him as to their character,
as to the amount of punishment to be
ao ~!I\led to them. Ditierent sentences were
tZtdingly passed. On Mason six months' im-
.lolnnent, and on the other from four to two
rlau.2l. imprisonment. The counsel for the prosecution
adding-applied for costs the application was granted, •
star men were now lying in confinement in
zi,,r.tord Gaol. 'They. were sacrificed to the party
fordl! iof the agistracy,of the district. Were Stal-
tteliar theytterY districts, he wanted to know, in
pit the. • eat present as to admit of such practices
rt of the authorities, as he had .mentioned ?
;_t ere the days. of Castlereaoth and Sidmouth about
f':eihe revived ?- Would the House look without a
pf tiell.ZT9firnijr4lsY at the violation of the sacred rightof
NitijePP,:e-,P3r4lPet in. public ,for the discussion
ierievances ? • would not, at that late
41'% „Ole , session, move for a Cominittee to
ht:atigate- ;this matter, but under all circum-
V,Qesi the lost course: he could pursue was
4101Ze for of the depositions upon which
-,stit*n, • a Chartist lecturer, ThomaS Caswell,
41icts,- ,Were 'committed for trial at the late
t(,B.et
rr,_'lssions- for the county of • Stafford ;
'414 Wiflicopies of the indictment or indictments,
of the Magistrates and Jury before
!fir were. tried.
‘11):sf ,'" 4.1.TA1t seconded the motion, and made. some
SllYatti°l-1 on the subject which did not reach us. •
°Nt ;'• GRAHAM, after briefly commenting on the
I,4itltLati•°ns- .of the.. Hon. Member for Montrose,
ld
shortly
advert to the speech of the
-ad for Finsbury, and in. the first place
''l•4-4'd committed any error he thought he_ might
"eti- Pardon on the part of the House, there. having
j 'AO cases of committals referred to him in
tYof Secretary of State. But when this case
Nt—ilte before' him upon an application on the part
4,,'re‘.l prisoners, the first of whom Was not John
„then Thomas Caswell, he had merely looked
the 4letnorial, but he afterwards found the verdict
till itury was for the conviction of Mason only for
twfui-assembling, and he saw no reason to alter
to 'ctitence of the Court, and he refused
11 t ,qplication. All the circumstances of
„
'octio,,r'.4l were brought under his notice, and he
Q~ytt- that the Honourable Gentleman took
stringentthe
El
- steps in seeking to constitute
douse a tribunal of appeal from a
l.
lcuit „t a jury, and a competent. yariAliction. He
1"t go into the question as to whether the assem-
ik:::,„illegai or not. The. Hen.
.Gentleman, stated that
,able exceeded lui duty in ..pprelumiling the
'I, committed, but he (Sir J. Grahitiv) had yet to
hsste-'l'it it was not the duty of a constabl,,, when he saw
4,411 tending t a breach or the peace, and heard
itp44,,'Y'. of an exciting. nature addreSsed to a multitude,
(Oathat,
•tclond the party so offendiw. It was true he did
i44' own peeil.—(Hear, hear, from Mr. Hawes.) lie
ocl24*al ) is not a high legal authority on mat-
tZilltle4ll description, but there were Hon. and Learned
t,ti' kit o near him who would inform the Hon. Gen-
toPposite, what was the state of the law
litlbject, and he (Sir J. Graham) would repeat
,fr 1. nl 'lawn, that he conceived it to be competent to
theta Lt'• to apprehend the party exciting. to a breach
k'tY, P,aee., though he believed, if he exceeded his
t;'l4 thy' was liable to an action.—(Hear, hear.) , That
ropth'tlitil,'e question submitted to the jury, and the Hon.
would hardly contend that they were not
-Ltetm to bring in the verdict they did. All the cir-
k,,e js,'"'es were fully detailed in the evidence given be-
tury, and the- accused had the benefit of coun-
k:e Right Gentleman then read a letter from
t Mivriitrates, stating that neither he; nor
et,Uf other Alligiitrates who acted with him,
"'it trey
any . pression to political opinions to show
G~ct -"ey Wei.eintiuencvd by political feelings with re-
. the- case. The Hon. Gentleman relied much
lie
vignature of the counsel for the prisoners.
tl,-(' (SI,- J. Graham) was told that the language was
1;
llloat exciting description, and of a political cha-
,•,-' but. he would repeat, as far as Government was
,
t he apprehension of Mason was not ordered
T hat prisoner had been convicted upon two
'"rier'+ ;' ne nein," for an ulawful assembl, and the
h?l' o a
pie it, arid the heaviest punishment was inflicted
4141m,ti, alio' justly so in his opinion, because it was his
t`,A he whicki constituted the illegality of the meeting,
t 4
Ottiri, being only preSent. God forbid that they
as t arrive at the :itne, when. the people should
MoWed lawfully and peacefully to discuss griev-
nil aNi`petit • - •
khthi, ion Parliament. • But the real question.
'W. • • whether they did really meet lawfully
tic'ca'ret,7'w.tilil:l:' and tWelve !nen up. on their oaths hial
bNq,„" "tat they did not, and the impartiality of their
1-hc' covia noa be impugned. It had been said that
4%.'0ral con'Versetl with the Chairman. Now the trial
retina a nine o'clock in the morning, and had not
i,t-17i9,,ollatrZ.1..Itiititt'ifour. The
*Chairman then retired from
Ilti,`3l the: (.1 tvw.of the jury men also i•equeste,ditetyrrestliarpe:
tii&ecite,"(bd ;al the custody of an officer. r 1
whr,°():_ultqW the Court by the Same door us the Chair-
P,.(itrced out Ale passage. to them, and that, he
to ed
II." the only o.onyersation they had. Under
G-ell'osta nee- he sh (mid oppose the motion of the
11,,Aatt• for' the producti.on of the papers.
ttiSt th LL ER said, that with regard to the charge.
tr,-",,,Derea(en .:.,91air man of the Quarter Sessions of having
4t, with the, Jury, he cou;d.state as hehad been
4litd that the chat WAS altogether.
un-
kqF t td that the Chairman had accidentally
kl,;tll„`,l' ~the )'men in a passage ; but he neither
Iv 4, ,r had lie volten to them in
Ctt,r shau'i 'it further say that
the high dia.-
ttt: Chaim; uof the Quarter Seroi•nis,. at
.whit...h
I 4 air" had bee„ tried, would place that gcntlea ~n
‘l4l)iti,n, Parties to whom he was known above di
kilt had h°l having lischarged his duty so improperly
110 be alleged . For (Mr. E. t;aller's) part, he
gu
Reitlernun whose impartiality and judgment
'''l4l.4(tnPi'ace gretti.er coofidence than in those of the
gi questioat.
ter. en loxiiy that be was not prepared to
as to the eiee4 of the case which hind
beftr:•e the. House? ; but he rose for the
the down -xPcessing his total icscent from a doetrity!
his Se,,ret by thi ? Right, li:Mourable Baronet,
(Atr. for the Hone Department. In
411,'sdi 4 one 4-‘ ar
gliOnby's)opinion, the present sub.ret
' • which•• came within the
• ati unq alesna 3
that ase as the t.aipreme Couvt of, the
14, the co. was 110 e bin'g, he thought, unconstituttanul
•trisal'lts" Pursued bi his Hot!. Friend the Member
411 ta
ti„ these .depositions. He did not
nnber woultl .1-Jeified in moving.

Ines
1,

Dal 4:

-

case like the'
doubt and smpicion, lie thought his lion.
Member for Finsbury was perfectly justified in taking
the course lie ILA pursued. As he (Mr. Aglionby) un-
derstood the case, no breach of the peace had taken
place until after the constable had interfered. The con-
stable thought that language, was held which made the
meeting ari urnurfal one, but the constable could
.not be
a judge on such en occasion. In his (Mr. Aglionby's)
opinion, an assembly was to be considered unlawful when
convened for the purpose of carrying out something
illegal, or when, according to some authorities,
any violence took place which would lead to a
reasonable belief that a breach of the pace
was about to follow. But the constable had, as he
thought, no right to decide that a meeting was unlaw
ful because something was said which, in his opinion,
might remotely lead to a breach of the p ace. He
should, therefiire, support with the greatest pleasure the
motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury.
Mr. HAWES said he hoped the law officers of the
Crown would rise and protest against the unconstitu-
tional doctrine laid down by the Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary of State for the Home Department. Ile
should not say else word with respect to the facts of the
present case. But he wished tco disclaim against the
doctrine of the Right Hon. Gentleman, that it -was com-
petent for a constable, who might be attending a public
meeting, to constitude himself a judge whether the lan-
guage used was seditious or not, and to arrest any
speaker who might use what he might conceive to be
exciting language. He wished to ask whether the At-
torney-General and -Solicitor-General would maintain
that doctrine.

Sir J. GRAHAM said that he did not say that a
constable was justified in taking such a course, but that
if he took it it should be on his own responsibility. He
had said that a constable thinking that language was
used at a pu lie meetinz which might tend directly to a
°reach of the peace might interfere, but at his own peril.
Mr. HAWES protesed against the doctrine that a
constable was to be the judge of what was illeg He
understood that the opinion of 'the Right Hon. Baronet
was, that the verdict of the Jury justified the constable.
But he (Mr. Hawes) did not think that the verdict afforded
any justification for the constable's interference. The
doctrine of the Right Hon. Baronet viola in his opinion,
worse than that laid down in the circular of Lord Sid •
mouth, which gave the Magistrates the power of acting
upon the deposition of a constable, expressing his belief
that a certain statement was libellous. That doctrine of
Lord Sidnieuth had been scouted at the time by public
opinien. He firmly believed that if a constable were ad-
mitted into that house, he might have found much in the
speeches of the Right. Hon. Baronet himself, which
would have appeared to hire to be saditiouse -(Hean)
The ATTOIZNEYsGENERAL said that he was
ready to accept the chalenge which had been thrown
out by the Ha:. Gentleman opposite. He confessed
that he had no eibahnioo to wake to the doctrine
of his Right i fon. Friend the Secretary' for the Hoe.:
Department, unless that doctrine were misunderstood.
He should first, howeveremake a few remarks with re-
spect to the motion belare the House. lie would ask
any lion. Member who lead a reverence for the Consti-
tution whether it Ivied(' r of be one of the mnost.fatal cir-
cumstances to the administration of justic.e.ir that motion,
which would go to cast a slur upon the verdict of a Jury,
were acceded to. • He loieW no other object for which
those papers could be moved except to throw contumely
upon the Magistrates and the Jury by whom the case had
been tried. It appeared that the motion for the notes of
the Chairman, which formed the only important docu-
ment in the matter, was net to be persisted in. The
Hon. Member for Finsbury, however, asked for copies of
the depositions and of the indictment. But, it should
be observed, that copies of those had already been.
furnished to the prisoners previous to their trial. He
confessed, therefore, that he now saw no necessity for
their production. With regard to the motion for the
names of the Jury,- he contendad that it could only be
made with the view to *cast reproach upon teem : and
further, he believed, that that House was the last assembly
in which the verdict of a Jury ought to be made
the subject of commentary inquiry. He felt per.
suaded that the verdict of a Jury was not a fit sub-
ject for discussion in that House.—(Hear, hear.)
He condemned the appealing from the verdicts of Juries
to the verdict of this House ; and he considered the
statement in. the petition that the Jury had acted from
factious motives,_ was hardly decent ; the decision of the
Jury ought to be treated with respect by that House,
even if it were not considered final. A constable was
bound to interfere the moment he saw the public peace
endangered. Thus, if he saw persons measuring ground,
and others standing by, he was not called on to wait
till lie heard pistols fired before be interfered. Nor was
it necessary that he should even see the pistols. • It was
sufficient if he saw enough to make him reasonably sup-
pose that a duel was about to be fought. To state the
occasions on which a public officer ought not to inter-
fere was it matter of considerable delicacy and difficulty ;
but he was justified in interfering on any act
containing any incitement to a breach of the peace. He
(the Attorney (:eneral) did not know what was the lan-
guage made use of on this occasion, but the result was
that the Jury found it an unlawful meeting. He could
draw a distinction between a meeting and alecture on
an abstract suWeet, which could have no reference to the
present. state of things. He should be sorry to counts
name anything that would tend to repress tee freedom
of discussion ; but the interference of the constable had
been justified by the verdict of the Jury, and, under
these circumstances, he trusted the House weuld feel
that this was not a case which called for the exercise of the
inquisitorial powers of the House in calling for the
papers. They could hardly call for the names of the
Jury without passing a reflection on them, and express-
ing great doubts of the correctness of the verdict.
Air. O'CONNELL said the offence really alleged
against Mason was, that he used seditious language ;
this was the charge, and the depositions were necessary
to prove it. But he would forego that part of the motion '
which called fur the names of the Magistrates. He
thought this was a case in which they ought to require
the depositions. Let them see What was said, that could
justify th© Jury in the verdict they had come to.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said that the Hon. Member for
Finsbury had thrown overboard thief part of the motion,
which referred to the production of the names of the
Magistrates. The motion, he thought, would, if car-
ried, tend to destroy the value of trial by Jury. That
House.was not the place to rescind the decision of a
court of law. The motion of the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury would stignatise the conduct of the Magistrates and
the Jury, for which there were no grounds, in his
opinion. And with regard to the constable, there was no
evidence to justify even the hypothesis that he exceeded
his duty. Fur these reasons, he opposed the motion.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL objt cted to the mo-
tion, IR cause it would cast at censure on the Magistrates
or jury. The Honourable Gentleman denied that isuch
was hi:, intention, hut the motion was founded on
the petition which was printed with 'the Votes, and
that accused the Magistrates of being influenced
by factious and improper motives.— (Hear, hear.)
He protested against that House being made a place
of appeal from the decision of a Judge or the verdict.
It was wholly ineempetent fur that purpose. The Hon.
Gentleman had asked for copies of the indictment and
depositions. What was that for, if not to cast a censure
upon the Magistrates or Jury? The law with regard to
unlawful assemblies had been laid down by the Chair-
man, and he quoted the authority of the Queen's Bench
upon the point, and the Jury found that the meeting in
question was an unlawful assembly. He could not sanc-
tion a motion of this kind, which would cast a censure
on the Magistrates and. Jury; and he believed that if the
present motion were assented to, there was no case where
the parties who were discontented would not come to
that House, and the Hoese would then feel itself bound
to have the evidence, and set itself up as a Court of Ap-
peal. With'rega-d to what had fallen from the Hon.
Member for Lambeth as to the law laid down by his
Right Hon. Friend (Sir J. Graham), he (the Solicitor-
General) agreed with his Right Hon. Friend, that a
constable was authorised in interfering when lie con-
ceived the meeting was unlawful and tended to an im-
mediate breach of the peace ; but, as his Right Hon.
Friend said, he did so at his own peril. Iu the present
case the verdict of the Jury showed that the constable
acted properly.
Mr. SHEII, said that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Duncombe)
leaving stated he did not mean to cast any imputation on
the :Magistrates or Jury, he thotight they ought to be
content with that. The motion was not founded upon
the petition, as stated by the Learned Solicitor-General.
The real question they had now to ditcnss was, whether
the circumstances were such as to justify the proceedings
which took place. The Attorney-General admitted it
would be inconvenient to exercise the power of inter-
fering with public meetings, and that- such a power
ought not to be resorted to unless under strong circum-
stances. It could not be countenanced that a constable
should take on himself to decide a most difficult question
of law, about which Judges differed and volumes might
be written—to decide what assembly was unlawful, and
what not so. If by granting the papers they would cast
a censure on the Judge and Jury, by refusing them they
would give authority to an illegal act.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said the Hon. Gentleman
allowed that the motion was brought forward irrespec-
tive of what was stated in the petition, and that the mo-
tion was to be judged on its distinct merits. The pf ti-
tion alleged that the conviction was obtained contrary to
the evidence ; the charge, therefore, was against the
Judge and Jury, not the constable. It was stated, too,
that before the sentence was given the Chairman of the
Sessions and two of the Jury left the Court together.
But this had been utterly dewed, had been shown to be
quite accidental, and was, in fact, abandoned as a chargo.
All they were called on now to decide was the conduct of
the constable. He did not deny that. this House had a
jurisdiction in the administration of justice, though it
was very difficult to define its limits ; but he thought
nothing could be more dangerous than anintermeddling
by the House with the course of justice, as such inter-
ference would always
,be liable to the suspicion of being
influenced by party. The Hon. Gt rifleman moved for
tlietlames of the Magisfrates and the Jury, but not for
that of the constable. Why the Hon. Gentleman might
have left out all the rest of the motion.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE—The constable's name is in
the petition.
Sir R. PEEL—Esery decision of Court had been in
favour of the constable. irlie parties, if they felt ag-
grieved by those decisions, should have appealed. But it
was not till after till the law courts had been exhausted
that the House of Commons should be applik d to to in-
terfere. He hoped, under all the circumstances, that the
House would uphold the principles upon which the ad-
ministration of justice was f'ounded, and would not en-
danger those principles by consenting to the motion.
Viscount PALMERSTON concurred with the Right !
Hon. Baronet that they should not lightly interfere with
the administration of justice in the law courts ; but at
the same time it must also be admitted that cases might
arise in which notice might be taken of n hat passed in
tbpse courts. The highest authority had so decided
lately in ano.her part of .the kingdom. In Ireland a
I.L•arned Judge had lately maintained that grievances of

•;‘'- !:}rd ought rot to be soljt-u,, of d;seussion

11 itc, eat, thewscives ag-

either appi:,- to the Executive Go-
vernment, or to Parliament. Now application
had been made.to the Executive Government, and the
Right Hon. Baronet, after having More or less carefully
considered the case, had thought proper not to interfere.l
Thee tor co,rse purr:tied by the Hoi. Member for
Finsbury—an application to Parliament—they bad the
highest Legal authority in another part of the kingdom.
The Hon. Baronet had takea upon himself to determine,
whether a meeting was lawful or unlawful ; he had
stated that parties were entitled to arrest others, if they
thought they were going to commit a breach of the
peace ; now this put him in mind of what he had b.ten
told era party playing at cards; One of the party thought
the other was secreting the ace of spades under his hand,
he instantly picked up a fork, and run it through his hand,
and said, I beg your pardon, if you have not the ace of
spades under it.—(Hear, hear.) If one individual had
told another to pull down a house, and that information
was given tea a constable, that officer would be justified
in interposing; but if he (Lord Pahnerston) under-
stood what had passed at this meeting, he was con-
vinced that doctrines of a highly objectionable nature
were brought forward, but those doctrines were upon
abstract notions, whether certain classes were better
paid than others ; he titought it a dangerous position to •
establish that constables were to be judges of whom they
should arrest, and whom they should not. Why, he
would ask, did not constables take down the words? be-
cause, if they did so, the law afforded the means of bring.
ing improper parties to justice. For these reasons, be-
lieving that sufficient ground had been shown for in- •
quiry, and as his Hon. Friend had omitted part of his
motion, he should vote for it ; bocause he considered it.
showed that the House thought the- matter afforded suffi-
cient ground for further consideration.—(Hear, hear.) .
- Mr. VILLIERS thought that the present applica-
tion was a very reasonable one, as everything ob-
jeetionablr; had been withdrawn. His Hon. Friend had
moved for depositions, those depositions containing the
grounds on which the constable had acted. It must be
admitted by all that it was important to know upon what
grodndS it was that the meeting was broken up.—
(Hear.) It was true that it was the province of hulk..
ment to amend the law ; but how, he would ask, were
they to do so, unless they had the evidence upon which
it was broken ? Ile should therefore vote for_the motioa.
Mr. EWART supported the motion.

Mr. M. PHILIff; denied that any implements had
been exhibited in the way that had been stated ; it
might hav,-e been so stated in evidence, but such.aas nut
the fact. At the same • time, he thought the case was
ue which called icr inquiry, it boing improper for the
constable to inter ere as he had d:;ne.
Strangers were thim ordered to withdraw, and the
House divitice, when there appearedT:
For the motion
Against it
Mnjority, against the Motion
DITBLIN COL-Ri,s

tifTa
32
116

• 84

In reply to a.question fro:a Mr. Si IML,
The CHA'.'XELLOR of the EXCHEQUER con-
sented to postpone the above Bill till Thursday.

DIS'T'RESS IN IRELAND.

On the motion for going into Committee of Supply,
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD rose, in pursuance
of notice, to call the attention of the House to the present
distressed condition of the poor of Ireland. The Hon.
Gentleman said that in Ireland the guardians had no
power to administer any outdoor relief to the poor of
Ireland; and he wished to know what was the intention
of her Majesty's Government with respect to_ that sub-
ject. He had made statements of distress on former
occasions in Carlow, Clare, Mayo, and other places
which had not been denied ; that distress had rather
increased than decreased. The Hon. Gentleman then
read a document stating that 500 families in
one district were in a state of destitution.
—(Hear.) He had received similar accounts from.
Belfast. The distress in that town was on the in-
crease, and whatever might be the price of food, its con,
tinuance appeared inevitable. In the west and south of
Ireland, the distress was amongst the agricultural class ;
in the north of Ireland it was amongst the manufacturing
class. It was said that the Corn-laws had benefited
Ireland. How could that be possible when so large a
portion of the manufacturing class were distressed ? In
his opinion the Corn-laws had done the greatest injury
to Ireland.—(q,ar, hear.) They had taught the land-
lords to depend on high prices instead of looking to the
improved cultivation of their land. The Corn-laws
were injuring the trade which was the great source
of prosperity in the north. He was firmly persuaded
that nothing would tend so much to benefit Ireland us
the repeal of the Corn-laws. It was absolutely necessary
that before the recess of Parliament, means should be
taken to prevent the people from starving. The esablish-
xnent of the Poor-law had cut off the poor from the usual
mode 'of relief, namely, voluntary charity, and had thus
caused great privation amongst the population. The
Commissioners had in some cases applied the prin-
ciples of the Poor-law so strictly that they would
not allow the distribution of funds which were
voluntarily contributed for the relief of the people.
Ile would submit it ;o the humanity of the House,
whetho. some means ought not to be devised to better
the condition of the poor Irish. What, he asked, was to
become of the poor in the state of misery in which they
now were ? W bile the experiment of the Irish Poor-law
was being worked out, he implored the House to adept
some means of rescuing the distressed people from star-
vation. He wished he could get the Right Hon. Baronet
to pledge himself .to have the Irish Poor-law revised
next session. Though not an Irish representative, he
considered that his countrymen had not the less claim on
his services in their behalf. The Hon. Gentleman con-
cluded by moving that the distressed state of Ireland
required the immediate attention of the House and her.
Majesty's Government, with the view of adopting such
measures as might be deemed most desirable under the
present circumstances of extreme destitution among the
working classes in that country.
Mr. FIELDEN seconded the motion.

Lord ELIOT would not remain silent'on this question.
lest he should be supposed wantirg in yespect to dm
Hon. Gentleman who brought forward the motion, or void
of regard for the subject now under discussion. No one
wculd more than he respect the co:lduct of
the Honourable Gentlrman as a resident land
lord, and while he (Lord Eliot) gave- him credit
for cnteriairing feelings of compassion. for the state
of the poor in Ireland, and a desire to alleviate it, he
hoped the Don. Gentleman could give credit to the
Irish Goveindient for entertaining similar feelings. The
Members of the Government in Ireland had adopted
every measure consistent with their duty to remedy the
distress which prevailed in that country ; but he con•
tended that that distress was but partial, and similar
to what had occurred in the South and South7western
and Western districts of the country at this period of
the year, fur the last time or lour years. (The Noble
Lord read an extract from a communication from Mr.
Griffiths, Superiutendant of the Boundary Department
of the Ordnance Survey in Ireland, showing that agri-
culture was steadily improving, and that ill a short time
the people's condition would be greatly ameliorated.)
He trusted the House would nut concede the granting of
out•dour relief, as it would tend greatly to increase
the rates.

After a few words from Major BRYAN and Mr.
FRENCH,
Mr. O'CONNELL said he was not sure that any
object would be attained by continuing the discussion ns
it was at present conducted. He thanked the Hon.
Member for Rochdale for the feelings evinced in bringing
forward his motion, and the Hon. Member for Oldham
(Mr. Fielden) for supporting the motion, which, though
he saw no practical results likely to ow from it, he
would support in case, the House divided upon it. He
condemned the application of the Poor-I was a panacea
fier the distress of any country, but especially for
that of a country circumstanced as Ireland was.
The Noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, read a pro-
phecy of the future amelioration of Ireland. He (Mr.
O'Connell) had often head such prophecies. The Re-
port of the Committee which sat in 1830. held out
splendid anticipations of the future condition of Ireland,
but, in two years after, when the people came to be enu-
merated, there were found to be 2,300,000 paupers in
the country. The Hon. Member for Oldham regretted
that the Act of the 43d of Elizabeth was not applied to
Ireland. How could it? At the time it ought to have been
applied, her troops were putting in execution the recom-
mendation of the poet Spencer, to destrerthe harvests,
and it was not until that practice was employed that Ire-
land was perfectly subjugated. So that to have the 43d
of Elizabeth applied to Ireland was, he should have
thought, a flight even beyond the poetic imagination o.
the lion. Member for- Oldham.--(Laughter.) He did
not agree with the' Noble Lord that the present
dis-
tress was similar to that which had occurred be-
fore in Ireland, and the Hon. Member for Kilkenny,
who had claims upon the MAI people, as an excellent
resident landlord, had given his testimony upon that
fact. There were periods when there were less pro•
visions than at present, but there never was a perion
when there was greater inability on the part of the
people to purchase food.--(Hear, hear.) k‘' hat was
the use even of • having food cheap, if there were no
means of purchasing it ? The circumstances of Ireland
were peculiar. He should like to see the person who
would point out the real causes of her distress, and stile
more the person who would point out the proper remedy.
He did nut think the Poor-laws were that remedy.
On the contrary, he ventured to anticipate that when
ti.e rate became universal, it would be met by a more
sanguinary resistance than any other.--(Hear, hear.)
It required great sagacity, combined with great hu-
manity, to legislate for Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) At
present the distress was very severe and very extensive,
but he was bound to say that there was no locality where
the distress was severe that the Irish Government did
not afford relief.—(llear, hear.) He mentioned that
with pleasure. There were many causes for melancholy
reflection in the Irish 1 nor-taw. One consequence of
the Poor-laW was that it kept the able-bodied labourers
at home to support their aged parents, and prevented
them from emigrating to places where labour was better
rewarded. There was no country in the world where the
family ties were stronger, and they would not, unless
fore, d by the strongest necessity, allow their parents to
go to the workhouse.—(Hear, hear.) He
take up the. eof the House any
mtoloct tn
the call inlgl‘ta' ibledagi
.)
(hi his motion,
ned
ah reii(ileAnbdNyvtiFot
.(...) withdrawieaacr
upon
him by the Right lion. Gentleman.
The motion was then withdrawn.
DISTRESS IN FORFAR.

Mr. HUME said that befime !louse went into
Committee, he wished to call its attunion'to the state
of Forfar. Since the discussions which took place rela-
tive to the distress of the country, he received commu-
nications from Forfar, requesting him to do all in his
power to obtain relief for that _plaeo. Ile did not know
anything which would be more likely to do that than the
opening of the ports, which could only be a temporary
relief till the Corn-laws were repealed. He had no con-
ception that the distress was so extensive there.

SUPPLY.

The House then went into a Committee of Supply.
• Mr. GnEENF, in the chair.
.10,500/. was voted for the Dublin Society.
23,1331. for the salary and expenses of the Chief
Secretary and Privy Council.
04 the, vote of 12,4331. for the expenses of the Lord
Lieutenant's household.being proposed,
Mr. HUMS said he -did not see what object was ob-
tained by the office of Lord Lieutenant. I3c heard that
the Nobleman who exercised that office in Ireland at.
present was about to be-recalled, and he hoped that no
person would he sent to take his place.
Sir R. PEEL said, 'that so far from his Noble Friend
beinr, withdrawn from the Government of Ireland, his
conduct in the. administration of that country had met
with the decided approbation of her Majesty's Govern-
ment. The duties of his 'Noble Friend were so many,
and .his zeal in performing them was so great, that he
was obliged to leave Ireland tO restore his health.
Mr. riumE said that the object he had in view was,
that the Noble Lord might have full time to restore his
health, and to relieve the public from the expense of his
office.—(Laughter.)
The vote was then agreed to.
4,8191. was voted for the-payment of the civil service
in Ireland.

3,9801. for the printing
dons. inci publishing of proelama-

• •
On 35,630/. being proposed for the payment of Non-
conformist and Dissenting Ministers in Ireland,
Mr. HUME said he did not see how the Dissenters
could, consistently With their principles, receive this
money._ .

Dr: 130 WRING agreed with what had fallen from
his Hon. Friend.

Sir G. CLERK said that the ministers in the North
of Ireland were differently circumstanced from the Pres-
byterian ministers of Scotland.
Sir R. TEEL thought the lion. Gentleman was wrong
in supposing that there was any violation of the con-
science in receiving this money.—(Laughter.) If any
individual felt it a violation of his conscience to receive
this money, he had an easy remedy by refusing it.
The vote.was then agreed to.

On the question that a sum of 90,0001. should be
granted - to her Majsty to defray the expense of Criminal
prosecutions, and other law charges,
Lord ELIOT, in answer to a question from Mr.
Hume, stated .that, in future, the law-officers of the
Crown in Ireland, instead of king paid by fees, would
be remunerated by salariA.s., which would effect a great
saving. • .
The vote, after a short discussion, was agreed to.
85,6001. was voted lhr defraying the charge of the
Public Offices, and the Metropolitan Police c~f'l)ublin.
2,714/. was voted to deflV-#4?.'penkes of Public
rgotks in , • •
•5,3001. was voted-for the Town Survey of Ireland.
• On the motion that a sum of 13,000/. should be granted,
to defray
.the charges .of the Commissioners for the int-
. provement of the river Shannon,

Mr. F. FRENCltobjected to the- expenditure of so
larg,, a sum •of money, and complained of a violation of
the Act of Parliament by the C•anmissioners.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended
the vote. In the future proceedings of the Commission,
it would be his duty to take care that its expenses were
as light as possible. •
Mr. WILLIAIS.wish,,d to know what was the whole
4wount, required to complete this object ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
6.10,00C1, altogether, 300,000/ of which was to be found
by Government, and the rest by the counties. -
Sir R. PEEL thought that what had fallen from the
Hon. Memb:T for Roscommon, was a discouragement to
the Government to make grants of public money for local
improvements —(Hear, bear.)
Mr. F. FRENCH observed that the scheme was com-
pulsory in the county. of Roscommon. They knew
nothing at all of the Act, until they were called upon to
contribute their money.
Mr. lIITME recollected perfectly well the Hon. Mem-
ber for RoLcommon supporting the Bill when it was
brougphutbl rcperrm
1
bio'Merdtheir i
. Slriigßice.—(Hear, hear.)
part The of the contract, and
he did not see why the country gentleman should not
perform theirs.
After a few words from Lord ELTor and Mr. M. T.
O'CoNNELL, the -vote was agreed to.
A vote of 3,500/. was then proposed for defraying the
expenses of postage, for services connected with the
census of the population of Ireland.
Dr. BOWRING inquired when it might be expected
that tl:e Report of the Commissioners would be pub-
lished ?

Lord ELIOT replied (as we understood) that the
Report would probably be published in the course of
another month.

Mr. HUME expressed a hope that the Government
would lay on the table of the House, in the course of the
next session an account of the exicienses of taking the
census of the United Kingdom.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the account would be laid before Parliament as soon as
it was prepared ; but it embraced various items and
could not be got ready without some delay,
The vote was then agreed to.
MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES—THE CALE-

DONIAN CANAL.
Sir G. CLERK said he should next move certain Mis-
cellaneous Estimates, and he should commence with the
Note for the Caledonian Canal. It was the determination
of the Government to recommend the adoption of the
recommendations of a Report n hieh had been laid before
the house for deepening and improving the Canal, and
insuring ttirough it a quick and certain transit. The
works would cost, it was calculated, 1.50,000 L, and would
take three years. He proposed that 50,0001 be voted
for the expenses of the Canal during the ensuing year.
The vote having been put,
Mr. WILLIAMS rose to oppose the vote. He did
not think that the returns from the Canal were ever
likely to equal the proposed expenditure ; and he felt
assured.that a still greater outlay would
yet be required.
He sound that in a period of seven years the Canal had
cost 31,6631., or 4,5231. a year, while the tolls and dues
amounted during the same period to no more than
1,781/.; or 2,6834 per year ; so that the charge of
keeping the Canal was nearly double the returns which
it brought in. The people of Scotland might be proud
of the canal, and talk of it as a national work, but
he was sure it was one from which they derived
little or no benefit. It was certain that the in-
habitants of the great commercial towns of the
empire generally looked upon the work as one of little or
no value. (The lion. Member cited the resolutions of
the inhabitants of different towns in proof of this asser-
tion.) No improvement had taken place since the
vote was last before the House. He entreated the Com-
mittee before it voted this sum to pause; it was begun
as a job and as a job it would end. The Canal was of-
fered to Scotland by the Committee of 1833, and it was
refused, He 'called upor. the Right Hon. Baronet in the
present distressed state. of the country, not to sanction
such a waste of money.
Sir ROBERT • PEEL said, . though he had come
to a different Conclusion from the Hon. Member, yet in
most of his observations he was disposied to concur. He
had wished to be relieved front the vote, and he thought
it would be fur the benefit of the public if the Canal were
abandoned altogether. He would say more, that he
thought the project was a very absurd one at its com-
mencement. Had it not been for the fortuitous circum-
stance of the application of steam power to vessels, the
canal would have been worth nothing. It would require
an expenditure of 40,00 e/ to destroy the canal, and there
api e :red something so glaring in expending that
amount to destroy a work that cost more than a million,
..hat the mind did recoil from it.. But he could assure the
Committee that this vote should not be supplied, unless
under a strict guarantee that the work should be completed
for that sum, or the canal should be abandoned altogether.
—(Hear.) Were the question now the commencement of
such a foolish work, he thought it ought not to be un-
dertaken even it' it would only cost one-eighth of the
amount it had done.

Mr. HUME said the statement was a very candid one,
but he thought the first expense would be the best. In
1822 he had urged the House to abandon it, and had re-
peated his objections in every subsequent year. If they
were to expend 300,000/. the public would not
derive a benefit of 2,000/. a-year, It was of no
use, and the commercial community did' not consider it
if any advantage. Vessels were often detained in it, if
he wind was unfltvOurable, for six or seven weeks, and
he merchants preferred the voyage round, to the risk of
detention. Having cost so much, the question was,
should they throW away more ? He thought they ought
not.

After a few words from Mr. FITZJAMES and Mr.
WILLIAMS, the vote was agreed to.
10,3001. was voted for completing the Prison in the
Isle of Wight.
and that that the 337,120 sove.
whole
1,5001. to meet the deficiency in the funds for the
ereoctniuthueofvothtee lokfsse3m2l:olyooy.11
to defray i,n Pences eon•
uected with the new coinage,
a,
d a
et
f Edtbhuergeix, was voted.
Edinburgh,
Dr. BOWRING asked what amount of silver coin-
age had been issued ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
rtheiagtntsl, earieldh4a.ll9b,oeoeon
hiassifilesdovferoreigis
from the Mint,
;t
amount of silver issued was 260,0001.. including 86,000
half-crowns, and 334,000 shillings. This, together with
the issue of half-crowns that had taken place, would, he
;loped, remove. the dirficalv that had arisen from the
scarcity of silver, whielf, he was happy to say, .had much
diminished.
The vote was agreed to.
1,4301. was proposed to defray the expense of purchas-
ing pictures for the National Gallery during the past
year.
Mr. HUME hoped a report would be Printed, giving
the names of the parties who had recommended the pu,._
chase of these pictures.

In answer to a question,
Sir R. PEEL said thal the apartments appropriated to
the Royal Academy, were given to them in exchange
RbeGET grantedilE to her Majesty
FOURTH.
for the rooms which they had held in Somerset House by
Royal grant. . • ,
After a very desultory conversation, tne Vote was
p
agreed to.
'COHnEtheSTmAotTioUnEthaOt 6,30
OF GEORGE
to defray Sir Francis Chantrey's expenses ogf._a(steartinees of
f
,
George the Fourth, .
Mr. HUME said that he did not think any statue of
G,
Hear, eorge
hear," and ~ Order."),
er,Fourthwa
swo tha l'rhiivialit estate of the
shilling,.
The
King ought to bear the expense.
ThoellfA or theNCE payment.4Lroßo d are
of the EXCHEQUER said that
the order ad
bean made by
a '1 reasury minute.
The vote was then agreed to.
THE CAMPAIGN IN SYRIA.
On the motion that gO,OOO/. he granted to her Majesty
to he distributed amongst the soldiers, sailors, and ma-
rines engaged in the )yar. in Syria,
.• .
.Mr. HUME objected to the vote,and requested to know
upon what principle the money was to be distributed ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended
the vote. The services of the troops, military and naval,
had gained the admiration of all Europe.
C. HAMILTON thought that the naval forces
engaged in Syria, had already boon sufficiently rewarded
bv promotions and other mea;i,:. Instead of rewarding
those who were en.,-aged in Syria, they should rather re-
wa,rd those who took no part in the war. He was
astonished at the reference to Navarino. At that
battle they had taught Mehemet Ali to be a rebel, whilst
at Acre they were punishing him for rebellion. He
hoped that the vote would not be agreed to.
Captain PECHELL supported the vote.
Sir CHARLES NAPIER. said he had never heard
a more extraordinary argument than that used
by the Noble Lord opposite.—(Hear, hear.) He
would not propose a vote of this description in the
present distressed state of the country, but he would not
oppose it.—(Laughter.) The Noble Lord said, those
who were engaged in Syria ought to be satisfied with
the honour they obtained. What honour had the poor
soldier received ?—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord
called it a gratuity. Why it would not pay for the
clothes the soldier wore.—(Cheers.) It would not pur-
chase a pair of shoes for him. Were the House pre-
pared to refuse such a sum ? He did not think the Bri-
tish Government ought to pay this sum of 60,0001. at all,
but that it ought to be paid by the Government of
Turkey.—(Loud cheers.) They restored a kingdom to
Turkey.—(Hear, hear.) He was sorry they had done
so. Ile did not think she deserved it.—(llear, hear.)
They also restored her a fleet, so that if the vote was
three times 60,0001., he thought it should be paid by
the Turkish Government.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble
Lord had said that it was not a war. If it was not a
war, he (Sir C. Napier) did not know what to call it, for
it was something very like it.
Mr. HUME wished to know how many persons there
were to receive the money. He understood there were.
1,500 persons in the Mediterranean at the time. He
believed each person would not receive more than 4s. 6d.
Sir G.COCKBURN was surprised at the turn the debate
had taken. lie believed that the men engaged in Syria
would have done their duty, whether they were to re-
ceive this money or no.---(hear, hear.) The money was
oaly to be distributed amongst those actually engaged
in the operations of the war.' He looked upon the war
in Syria, as one which was very creditable to the nation,
and the great operation of taking Acre reflected the
greatest honour on those who were engaged in it.
The vote was then agreed to.
1,6001. was voted to Mr. Gurney for his services in
assisting to light the House.
On 159,545/. being proposed for the disembodied militia
of England and Ireland,

Mr. HUME said that the militia was now in a very
inefficient condition. He did nut see why the militia
should not be paid from the War- office as well as the
regular soldiery.
Sir G. COCKBURN admitted that the militia was
not in such a sAtisflictory state as formerly. Considerable
reductions had been made in the expense of this body.
In 1830, a reduction of 93,000/. was effected ; and in
1835, a farther reduction of 33,000/. was made.

The vote was then agreed to.
The CISAIRMAIN then reported progress, and obtained
leave to sit again this day.

A Message from the "House of Lords brought up a
Bill, the title of which we did not.hear, which was read
a first, and ordered to be read a second time on Wed-
nesday next.
The St. Briavel's Small Debts Bill was read a third
time and passed.
ST. ASAPH AND BANG OR CATHEDRAL BILL.

On the motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
Sir J. GRAHAM moved that it should be committed
that day three months, and gave notice that he should
move to introduce a Bill to ccntinue the Suspension
Act for one year.—Agreed to.
The Ordnance Services Bill went through Com-
mittee, and ordered to be reported to-morrow.
The Court of Exchequer (England) Bill also went
through Committee, and was ordered to be reported on
Wednesday next.
The Bonded Corn Bill (No. 2) was reported, and
ordered to be engrosed, and read a third time this day.
The Stamp Duties Assimilation Bill (Ireland) also
went through Committee, and was ordered to be reported
this day,

The Stamp Duties Bill was read a third time and
passed.

The Game Certificates Bill (Ireland) was read a third
time and passed,
The Lunacy Bills went through Committee.
The Grand Jury Presentments (Ireland) Bill was read
a third time and passed. •
Lord ELIOT obtained leave to bring in a Bill to alter
the number and define the boundaries of the several
baronies of the county of Dublin.
Lord STANLEY obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
continue for two years the Western Australia Act.
The House then adjourned at Half-past One o'Clock.

DEPUTATION FROM THE ANTI-
CORN-LAW CONFERENCE TO SIR R. PEEL,
LORD STANLEY, AND LORD WHARNCLIFFE.
A deputation from the Anti-Corn• law Conference consisting
of Mr. Pawson, the Mayor of Leeds, Mr. Holdforth of Leeds,
Mr. Alderman Chappel of Manchester, Mr. Gardener of Man-
chester, Mr. Ashton, Mr. Brook of Huddersfield, Mr. Akroyd
of Halifax, Mr. thggs of Leicester, Mr. .1. Walker of Bury,
Mr. Ashworth of Bolton, Mr. Boole of Salford, and one 6r
two other ?gentlemen, waited upon the First Lord of the Trea-
sury yesterday at one o'cick for the purpose of laying. before
the Eight Hon. Baronet an account. 01 the distressed condition
of the country. The Right Hon. Gentleman received the
deputation standing, in which position himself as well as they
remained during the whole conference, which lasted precisely
two hours.

111 r. PAwsoh having stated that they were a deputation
appointed to wait upon the Right lion. Gentleman to state
once more the distress of the country, proceeded to state that
he had been for 40 years a resident of the Upper township of
Leeds, and was in the woollen line. He described
the distress of the poorer classes as most appalling,
so n nett so, that the charitable people had been induced
to raise subscriptions on their behalf. At the first subscription
6,5t;0/. was collected; when that was gone another subscription
was made, but 1,0001. more was all they could raise. When
that was exhausted they established a soup kitchen, and the
eager clamour with which the poor surrounded the doors
showed the distressed state in which they were for want of food.
Sir R. PEEL—Some branches of the woollen trade are much
less depreciated than others, ate they not?
Air. PawsoN—Yes, the fine cloth is much more in
_demand
than the lower article.

Sir 11. PEEL—The quantity of the lower article consumed
is greater this year than hitherto, is it not ?
Mr. PA wsoN-1 believe it. is as great.
Sir IL PEEL—What is the chief market for your manu-
factures?

Mr. PAWSON—The home market and the American.
Sir R. PEEL—Has there been no indication of improvement
in trade within the last short period?
Mr. PAWSON—NO, Sir, none.
Mr. HOLDFORTH stated that he was a silk spinner. He
was an old inhapitaut of Leeds, and having been ever since his
boyhood identified with the working classes. he had noticed
progressively the changes which had taket place in their cir-
cumstances, and at no period did he recollect the working
class to be so deplorably depressed as at present. He had
traversed through numerous streets in the town, calling at
every house, and the wretched condition in which he found
them far exceeded anything he could have imagined. In
some families nut an article of furniture or property could be
found, nor was food of any description whatever to be seen in
their dwellings ; in another he found four potatoes, and nothing
store, and in another nineteen potatoes and a herring. Most
of these people depended for their very existence upon a pre-
carious charity. • l'heir condition now was infinitely worse than
at the beginning of the year, for they had nothing now to fall
back upon ; their furniture was all gone; the clothes from
their backs were pawned to buy food. One of the largest
manufacturers of that district, who manufactured plaids for the
American market, stated that until the present time for thirty
years he had never been without orders at this season, and now
he had not one ; and though upwards of 1,000 people were de-
pendent on him for support, he had not work for them to do.
Several mills had recently stopped working ; and one-third
less butcher's meat was slaughtered during the last six months
than usual.

Mr. P6I7SON stated that in Leeds, where the population was
between 40,000 and 50,0000, one-fourth of the inhabitants were
dependent upon parish relief.
S:r R. PEEL—What kind of union is it ?

Mr. PA wsox—The Gilbert union.
Sir H. PEEL—The New Poor-law has not come into force
then. You give out-door relief ?

MI% PA WS'.Ol4-W0 (10.

Mr. CIIAFPEL said he was no party man, he was no poli-
tician, he had never given sixpence to ally political purpose,
nor ever would. He had been fifty years an inhabitant of
Manchester, and he could sr.y that there never was such general
and heart-rending distress in that town as there was at present,
Nut only were the poor suffering from the inability to procure
labour, but the capital of the manufacturers was meltii,g like
snow before the sun. Only twelve years ago he himself pur-
chased a mill, which cost him between 30,0001. and 40,0001.,
and during the last few years he had been losing money
by it. He owed no money, he paid no rent, he was
extra-parochial and paid no rates, he was situated near
the sp!)1, whence the coals were excavated, and
if he, with all these advantages, and an experience of fifty
years, could not but lose money by his mill, he should beg to
suggest to the Right lion. Gentleman what must be the condi-
tion of those manufacturers who laboured under less favourable
circumstances. He had been obliged to stop half of his ma-
chinery, and he had now such a stock of goods on hand, as
would take six months' ordinary sale to dtspese of. He would
just mention the cases of a few other miltowners, which had
come under his own notice. A manufacturer of Stockportwas
worth 90,000/, a few years ago ; the whole of his property was
sold for the b.hoof of his creditors a few days ago, and his son
was now an inmate of a union workhouse. In Derby a mane-
li faxturer, lately worth 200,0001., had just failed, and would not
pay one shilling in the pound. In Salford, a manufacturer,
paying an annual rental of 4,9001., employing between seven
and eight hundred hands, and whose wages amounted to 4001.
a week, had stopped. Numerous other-mills had stopped, eadh
of them turning out between seven and eight hundred 'bands.
The machinery belonging to one firm, which had stoPpek cost
40,0001., it was valued to an incoming tenant at 22,0004 ; it
was ultimately sold under the hammer, by order of the Sheriff,
for 7,000/.
Sir 11. PEEL—What was the business carried on by the firm.
that ;topped for 200,000/. ?
Mr. CHAPPEL—It was a paper concern.
Sir R. PEEL—The paper trade in some districts, you know,
has not suffered the general depression. Is it 'owing to the
general depression in other branches that they failed?
Mr. CHArren said he did not know what was the cause of
the failure, not Leing in'that line. He was fi Director of the
Manchester and Birmingham Railway ; and a short time back
they found it necessary to take on between 50 and 60 hands-
engineers, police, porters, clerks, &c., and they. received no less
than 1,200 well written applications, accOmpanied with excel-
lent testimonials. The effect of the distress upon the morals
of the people was shocking ; grown-up people of both sexes
were compelled by pr.verty to pass the night in the same room ;
the people were ashamed to go to church without decent
clothes, and the Sunday school of which he was the superin-
tendent, and which had always been supported b 3, voluntary
contributions, was now two years in arrears of rent. Hundreds
of females were being forced upon the streets to seek their live-
lihood in a disgraceful manner, and the men were sent out to
equally wicked employments.
Mr. GA ItnENEa stated the destitution in Manchester to be
very great. A great number of the people were going to
America, all the best hands ; he asked one who was in full em.
ploy, and received gond wages, what was his reason for going
to America, the answer was, " its not wages I care so snuefi
for; my reason is, that manufactures will soon bedone for here."
Half the people in Manchester were quite out of work, sub.