The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LoNvoN, WEDNESDA I EVENING, JUNE • 4 1845,

But it must appear that this licence was in the first
instance, to enable Roman Catholics to endow
the College. The Act of Parliament empowered them to
receive donations, but the whole amount of donations re-
ceived by Maynooth College from the Roman Catholics, up to
1814, was 5,0001., and not a penny since then. There was
a charge of miserable parsimony made against the Parliament
towards the Roman Catholic college of Maynooth, which he
considered wholly unfounded. The only miserable parsimony
which he could detect was in the Roman Catholic squire.
arehy of Ireland, and it was for those the Noble Earl who
spoke last night (the Earl of St. Germans) had reason to
blush for the state of ruin and degradation to which May-
nooth had been brought. The words of the Act of Parlia-
ment proved that Maynooth was not regarded originally as a
corporation—it was an institution supported originally by
mere chance endowments ; and Parliament did not, he re-
peated, originally recognise it in the light of an institu-
tion which had any claims upon the State.—( Hear hear. )
They were told that a visitorial power was to be exercised,
but what would be the value of visiting, when they had no
right to interfere with the doctrines which were taught at
Maynooth ? Visitors in such a case would be of no value what-
ever.—( Hear.) Again it was said that the reason why the insti-
tution was not properly supported was the poverty of the people.
This could not he the case. There was no want of wealth among
the Roman Catholics of that country, especially among those
of the higher classes. Wealth was increasing in Ireland, and he
was glad of it, hut it ought to be borne in mind that for the
last twelve years the wealthy Roman Catholics of that country
had contributed from six to seven thousand pounds to an insti-
tution for the propagation of the Roman Catholic faith in
Lyons. If they were satisfied with the character of Maynooth,
it was not necessary for them to go there with their money—
they would not have allowed the state of things, the want of de-
cency, and the absence of proper arrangements for the educa-
tion of the students to have existed. He wanted to know what
good the Bill promised to realise? The great want of Ireland
at the present time was men to teach them the duty they owed
to their God and their country—to remind them that their
first duty was to pay respect to the laws, to live at peace
with all men, and not only to cultivate peace themselves but
to set the example of peaceable conduct to others.—( Hear,
hear.) Reference had been made to the circumstances of Ireland,
and their Lordships had been told that there was some
excuse for the part the priesthood had taken in the
political l roeeedings of that country.—( Hear.) He was
willing to make some allowance for those parties; but the re-
bellious and tumultuous proceedings which they countenanced
and defended were such as, by God's blessing, he shouldtever
assist in communicating to the Christian character, least of all
to a Christian minister.—( Hear, hear.) The evil was, that
the character of the priesthood was taken from the character
of the people, and the real origin of it was in the exclusive sys-
tem of education pursued at Maynooth College. He did not
see how it was possible to educate bOO young men in a proper
manner by shutting them up in a monastic institution, making
them perfect serfs during the seven years of their education,
without connexion with the people, or association with the
superior classes of society. They led the lives of recluses,
destitute of all those associations and advantages that tended to
develop the manly character. They were not allowed during
their servitude, at any time, the privilege of walking in the
avenues adjoining the institution—to pass for a single moment
out of sight of their superintendents. And when their slavery
was at an end they passed at once from a state of complete
servility to a state of absolute despotism. From slaves they
at once were transformed into despots—( Hear, hear)—and went
forth among the people as the representatives of God—vices
genere Deum. In this country the education of
the Catholic clergy took place with the young
members of the nobility and gentry. This was not the
case at Maynooth, and hence the great difference in the cha-
racter of the Catholic clergymen of England compared with
those of Ireland. There was no other institution in Ireland
more productive of evil than Maynooth, and for that reason he
should vote against the motion before their Lordships for the
second reading of the Bill. He was sure the wealthy Roman
Catholics of Ireland must be as desirous of sending their sons
to be educated along with those intended for the University as
were the rich Roman Catholics of England ; and the reason
why they had not done so was, according to his judgment,
because the system of education at Maynooth was so
degrading. The next question was, who should nominate the
students to be educated there? According to the proposed
measure, the patronage was to be vested in the hands of the
Roman Catholic Bishops. They were to have the appointment
of no less than 500 young men. Would not this be putting a
powerful engine into the hands of the clergy?—a power which,
he contended, should alone be vested in the hands of the
Crown. If this would be considered giving undue power to the
Crown, another course might be taken ; the Crown might ap-
point four times the number to be admitted, and they should
afterwards be examined publicly by the Roman Catholic
Bishops in Dublin. Great benefit might be realised if some-
thing of that kind were adopted ; but there should be no such
monastic institution as that of Maynooth. In his opinion the
amount of the money was scarcely worth a moment's con-
sideration if the system pursued were satisfactory. For his
part, instead of one college he would have three or four col-
leges, somewhat analogous to those proposed in the other
House of Parliament for the education of the Roman
Catholic priesthood. But. he would have it a liberal educa-
tion, in connexion with the young men belonging to
the nobility and gentry, and altogether different from the
monastic and exclusive system pursued at Maynooth. A
Right Rev. Prelate had been reflected on the previous evening,
because he could not name a remedy for the evils that affected
Ireland. Such a proceeding was unfair and unconstitutional.
The Rev. I'relate was not responsible for governing the
country. That duty rested with the Government. The
Ministry had voluntarily undertaken the duty of governing the
country, and it was no part of the duty of Parliament to take
the business of the Executive into its hands.—(Hear, hear.)
It was for the Government to bring forward their measures,
and then for their Lordships to judge of their
value and efficacy. Tie thought too much of the
wisdom of the Government to consider the present
measure the best that could be introduced by them.
The Noble Duke (the Duke of Manchester) had, in the debate
of last evening, referred to the conferences of the Catholic
priesthood, and there were proofs amply sufficient to show that
the statements made by the Noble Duke were well founded.
The common law inflicted the punishment of death by burning
those who were guilty of the crime of heresy. He need
only quote the opinions of Dens, for the truth
of this assertion.—( Hear.) If their Lordships would
examine closely into the nature of the studies taught at May-
nooth, they would find that they were not opposed to these
conferences, arid at all events, they were such as ought to
make their Lordships shrink from the pestilential stream they
were assisting by this grant to 'disseminate over Ireland. The
Right Rev. Prelate then preceded to read from Maldonatus,
the favourite commentator of Maynooth, in order to prove
the pernicious character of the doctrines taught there.
A very respectable clergyman who had been educated at
Maynooth had authorized him (the Bishop of Exeter) to say
that if their Lordships granted the Committee sought for by the
Noble Earl, he should be ready to appear before them, and to
detail the results of his experience there. In an examination
before that House, it was proved that Dr. M'Hale, who was
the very impersonation of Maynooth, having been educated
there, having been a professor there, and not leaving it till he
was made Bishop. It was notoriously a fact, that on his visit
to Achill, he had cursed priests who had left their Church and
joined themselves to the Protestant faith. But this was only
the common spirit that actuated them throughout Europe, and
he would instance the protestation addressed by the Roman
Catholic Priests of Belgium, in 18:5, to the King, when he
wished to confer civil liberties on all his subjects, without
distinction of sect. This showed at least the spirit by
which they were actuated, and the same spirit was
inculcated by the Catholic teachers of Maynooth.
Baron Richards, at the Castlebar assizes, in the year 1838,
had avowed the bigotry of the Roman Catholic priests, their
sinister influence on the people, and the effects of the perni-
cious teaching at Maynooth, to which a great proportion of the
crime of Ireland was to be traced. But the character of those
doctrines need not be discovered by a reference to an authority
so unprejudiced, yet unconnected; Dr. M'llale, in an essay on
the subject of dispensation, had set the tenets there held be-
yond all dispute. The deposing power, as acted upon by Pope
Pius XVII., in 1801, in trying to establish the succession of
Louis XVIII., and acknowledged by the Irish bishops in 1809,
was equally and as incontestible the doctrine still upheld, The
class-book de penitentia instructed nothing less than perjury in
its most abhorrent and revolting form, and the question, there-
fore was, were the Government ready to endow, with the funds
of the State, and identify with the Constitution a college that
propounded and instructed a system of unqualified perjury?
He, for one, trusted that the House, when put in possession of
such incontroyrtible facts, would exclaim " Non-Content " to
the provisions of such a measure.
Lord BROUGHAM could not understand the discrepancy
between the line of arguments adopted by the Right Rev. Pre-
late and the opponents of the Bill, either on the Ministerial
or the cross benches. The two Noble Dukes who had so ve-
hemently protested against the measure, exclaimed in horror,
" Idolatry, superstition, abominable doctrines, everything that
the Minister ought most to discountenance, were to be en-
dowed." Such were their arguments, and to say the least of
them, they were intelligible—they were logical, and calculated
to carry conviction. But the Right Rev. Prelate contended
in a far different strain—" I object to a system that would
endow one institution where the false ultra-montaine doctrines
were propounded; but withdraw those tenets, purge the reli-
gion of such abhorrent views, and I will vote for the endowment
of four colleges for the teaching of the Roman Catholic faith !
What, four colleges, for one of which the Noble Duke had ob-
jected so strenuously. The Right Rev. Prelate had said also
that the State did, in 1794 and 1795, not endow the college,
but gave the Catholic faith a power of voluntary establishing
an institution which, though not endowed, was endowable by
the State. But the fact was that, in 1795, the Act of Geo.
111. -was passed, and in all hut the word co-operation, every
trust, even powers for grants of money, and lease of
property was accorded the Institution.—( Hear, hear.)
And as to merely holding of the trusts, it would not be suffi-
cient to make them a corporation, if new powers were not given
to them in their capacity of visitors.—The grand omission in
the Act was that there was no mention of a corporation—that
was all. The words of the preamble of the Bill, that " Whereas
there was a college for the education of Roman Catholics, and
the funds were insufficient, it was desirable to support and
" endow that college," &c. There were three Acts passed in
the reign of George 111. —a Prince above all others distin-
guished for his attachment to the Protestant religion—a Prince
who was most religiously opposed to the anti-Protestant doc-
trines of the Humanists. Under whose auspices was the last
Act (the 48th of the King) passed?—(Hear, hear.) It was
under the auspices of Mr. Percival who succeeded upon Pro-
testant principles—(Heae, hear)—the Government of Lord
Grey.—( Hear, hear.) It vas under his auspices that the
grant was continued, and that in the new Act the word " en-
dowed" was introduced.—( Hear, hear.) He knew as well as
the Noble Earl opposite that the grant was from year to year.
But surely the fact that the grant had been given, year after
year, and in every year for fifty years, was of greater impor-
tance in support of the grant than if it had been given at once
and for ever.—( Hear, hear.) It showed a greater determina-
tion on the part of the Legislature to continue the grant, under
the very name used in each successive Act, than if
it had been made at once a fixed and permanent endowment.
—( Hear, hear.) He placed little value upon the animosities
exhibited at public meetings. He believed that those annual
displays of fanaticism would be happily put an end to by the
Bill before the House.—( Hear, hear.) it was no argument
against this measure that it would go to promulgate the ob-
noxious doctrines taught at Maynooth ; for it was dented by no
opponent of this Bill that Maynooth, with all its doctrines,
must still be supported.—(Hear, hear.) Was it not better—
as it had well been said by the Noble Duke op-
posite—that if the Roman Catholics of Ireland must
be educated by priests, those priests themselves ought
to be educated as gentlemen.--( Hear, hear.) He would
read an extract from an English traveller, who said that on his
visit to Maynooth he found the condition of the pupils one of
great deprivation. The union workhouses were palaces com-
pared to the College.—( Hear, hear.) Nothing could exceed
the povery and squalidity of the establishment. (The Noble
and Learned Lord read the extract at great length, depicting
the extreme poverty of the pupils, and the filthy state of their
accommodation.) It was absurd to say that doctrines were
taught in the College which rendered the controlling power
of the Crown nugatory.--(hear, hear.) For in the Chan-
cellorshipof Lord Plunkett, that Lord Chancellor did, as visitor,
instituteinquiries into the conduct of the pupil-4; and they,
when examined upon oath, gave evidence which proved that
they had no indoctrination opposed to the obligation of an oath,
and the result of the inquiry was, that the abuses complained
of, and proved, were removed.—( Hear.) He did not wish to
give any pain to Members of that House professing the Roman
Catholic faith, nor to persons professing that faith out of the
House; but he must declare that no opponent of the Bill was

I more opposed than he was to the doctrines of the Church of
Rome, or more opposed to the power of an hierarchy governed
by a head with a triple crown.—( Hear, hear.) He did
not like the books which were read in Maynooth College. He
did not say that books were not to be read because he, or their
Lordships, did not like them.—( A laugh.) He then went
through a catalogue of books of various doctors, amongst
whom he mentioned Thomas Aquinas, whose doctrines
he did not approve, but whose works, he thought, might well be
read with advantage. He differed from the Noble Lord oppo-
site in his views; for it was quite a mistake to suppose he could
be correct in those views. There was no doubt that the books
mentioned were /in existence, and that they contained those
bad doctrines that had been mentioned. But this was totally
beside the question now before their Lordships, and if it were
not so, he would be ready to vote for the Committee. Ile had
heard a great deal about Maldonatus and heresy, and all that :
but some of those arguments went to prove that these
bad doctrines were taught in Maynooth. No doubt
the dogmas taught in Maynooth were the Ro-
manist dogmas ; but what other could be taught
there? Surely they were not to invent new books—if so, then,
they were to have their own books ; but even 30, the fact
would be found that all those bad and dreadful doctrines would
shrink into a page or two.—( Hear, hear.) And now let him
remind their Lordships that the Church of Rome was not the
only church that had fallen into error. He much feared that
melancholy indeed was the condition of the ecclesiastical dis-
cipline of another church. He was not now alluding to the
spiritual or ecclesiastical power of that church. That church
to which he alluded hail exercised a great secular power, not-
withstanding all that had been said about the Pope, and the
Councils, and the priests, though he should certainly say that
the former had never carried it so far as the latter.—
( Hear, hear.) In modern times that church had been
as much distinguished for its tolerance as its piety, and this
he had said of it fifteen years ago ; but he should peremptorily
deny, that it was always as tolerant as it was now ; and if he
took the trouble he could find writers amongst the old fathers,
who furnished as strong illustrations against the intolerance of
that Church, as any that had been adduced against the
Romish Church. These things were not confined to the
Episcopalian Church. The Dissenters and Wesleyan Me-
tholists were the loudest and most incessant in their outcry
against it. Well might the bench of bishops say, that these
religionists had no right to look for an extension of
civil and religious liberty for themselves, since they
had been so violent in their opposition when con-
cessions were made to Roman Catholics. They were
the last, too, who should charge other religionists with holdng
persecuting doctrines, for, if he selected a writer who of all
others laldown the doctrine of extirpation with more ela-
borateness—who even went so far as to say that the body of the
heretic should even be burnt—who taught not merely the right
but the duty of destroying the body to save the soul—he should
say that that man was John Calvin.—(Loud cheers.) Among
the various devices which that man resorted to for the purpose
of carrying into effect his diabolical doctrines was the practice
of letter-opening.—(Loud laughter.) The Noble Lord pro-
ceeded to state an instance of this man's cruelty in the case
of a Spanish physican. He got him to come to
Geneva, where, in consequence of his religious opinions,
he was denounced, condemned, and burnt to death forty-eight
hours after, without even the common forms of justice, and in
mockery of every feeling that actuates humanity. The Noble
Lord then went on to adduce another instance of the most
intolerant persecution on the part of the Presbyterians and
Calvinists, from an American author, Mr. Gerard Spottis-
woode, who described the sufferings of an individual whose
only crime was worshipping in the Common Prayer Book of
the Church of England. He would now leave this part of
the subject, and he would ask who would think the worse of
Glasgow, Edinburgh, Hackney, or any other college where
Dissenters were taught?.—who would ever think the worse of
them because there might be found among their dusty shelves
a copy of the works of the persecutor and murderer
of Geneva—the author of the most elaborate treatise on
persecution that the world has ever seen—without any
attempt even to efface the page, palliite its cruelties, or apply
an antidote to the poison which it administered. Who, he
would ask, would think of involving all the students and pro-
fessors of those colleges, and the system of instruction taught
there, in the doctrines which were promulgated by Calvin?
It would be senseless and utterly monstrous to do so. Thomas
Aquinas never could be compared, for a moment, to that vio-
lent and restless exterminator. Let him say one word of King
William, who ought to be revered in this country and Ireland,
not merely becausi: he founded civil liberty, but because he
savel them from Popery. His name might be made a watch-
word by fanatics, but it was not in that sense he used it, and he
heartily agreed with the Somersets and the Godolphins of his
day, that had their Lordships then lived they would have passed
the penal code. Last of all, he was told that you cannot con-
scientiously give money for the propagation of error. Ira the
first place, the money would be given, whether or no. Secondly,
the money partly belonged to Catholics. Thirdly, Maynooth
was only one of a number of establishments recognised and en-
dowed by the State. In Canada the Roman Catholic
Church was established by this country. The Right
Reverend Prelate was wrong in stating that there was
any provision in the treaty of Paris for endowing
the Roman Catholic faith—nothing was guaranteed in
that treaty but toleration. Constant grants were made by
the Legislature for the sustainment of the Catholic establish-
ments in the colonies, and at Malta even the regular clergy
were paid by the State. In Malta the Roman Catholic Church
was of the most rigorous and exclusive character, and yet it
was supported by the Government, while no cry, voice, or
whisper, had been raised against it. Before sitting down he
would say a word respecting the mode in which the grant had
been met. His Right Hon. Friend in the other House, at the
head of her Majesty's Government, had been reflected on for
the course he had pursued on the present measure. It was
said that one reason of introducing the measure was the great
alarm expressed respecting the relations of this country with
America. Another reason given was, that without some step
of this kind agitation could not be put down. He (Lord
Brougham) denied, as broadly and distinctly as his words
would enable him to do, that any such appre-
hension had influenced his Right Hon. Friend in bringing
forward that measure. His Right Hon. Friend might have
referred to the relation of this country with foreign countries,
and the difficulties connected with those relations, but he
(Lord Brougham) denied that any such plea had been advanced
as a reason for introducing the present measure, and for this
reason, that it was a pure anachronism. For it would be re-
collected that last year, before any difference with America was
dreamt of, his Right Hon. Friend, in answer to Mr. Wyse,
distinctly announced his plan with regard to Maynooth, and
alto his views with respect to academical education. The al-
leging that the measure was introduced to still agitation, was
equally unfounded. He kad been represented to say that agi-
tation could not be put down by force, and he (Lord Brougham)
said so too, for he held that it was impossible to put down agi-
tation by such means, until it broke out into violence or insur-
rection. But agitation in Ireland had verged upon that ex-
treme, and his Right Honourable Friend had used
force, when force became necessary, and that force
had been triumphantly successful.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.")
Agitation at all times was an evil, especially in thickly popu.
lated countries, and if the measure now introduced was ea/en-
lated to quiet and improve that country, in this respect it was
entitled to their support. He was told that the Right Rev.
Prelate (the Bishop of Exeter) had made out a case against the
grant to Maynooth, and Bishop Higgins had been cited to that
effect. That Right Rev. Prelate had said, a few years ago,
in a manifesto respecting the repeal movement, that he owed
nothing to the aristocracy of Parliament but contempt, a few
years before, on the occasion of the repeal of the Penal Code.
How such a change had taken place in so short a period, he
could not conceive, or how unbounded respect could be con-
verted into unqualified scorn ; however, his scorn and his re-
spect he valued in the same degree. That Right Reverend
agitator had said—" Why should Ireland be thankful for
17,000/. a year, it was but three farthings a week I" Such
argumentation he (Lord Brougham) had never be-
fore heard.—( Hear, hear.) Why, if 300,000/. a year had
been accorded upon such a principle, the grant
might be said to be only firspence a head, or less than a half-
farthing a week.—( Laughter.) But Dr. Higgins no more
represented the population of Ireland than Mr. Wilkes and Mr.
Alderman Sawbridgo when issuing their mandates from the
London Tavern, and commencing " We, the people of Eng-
land," embodied or represented the population of•this country.

. .
—(Laughter.) He felt gratified, however, that the Govern-
ment, conscious of its own integrity, and regardless of the cla-
mour of party, hail fearlessly maintained its course, believing,
as he did, that the popularity which followed a bravo act was
much more honourable than that sought after by spurious
.pre-
tensions, and that if they persisted in those brave acts they
would deserve, as they would obtain, that enduring and invalu-
able applause.—(Cheers.)
Lord CLANCARTY, amidst great collision, and conflict-
ing cries of " Adjourn," "Go en," "'Question, question,"
moved the adjournment of the debate.
The Bishop of ST. DAVID'S was anxious though at that
late hour to address—(here the Rev. Prelate was interrupted
with reiterated cries of " Adjourn, adjourn," " Qaestion,
question," in the midst of which—
Lord CLANCARTY protested against the irregular course
adopted by the Right Rev. Prelate. The question of adjourn-
ment had been raised, and he for one would persist in it.
The Bishop of St. DAVID'S—I wish to give your Lordships,
in as succinct and short an explanation as possible, the reasons
for my vote on the present occason.
Lord CLANCARTY (rising amid great sensation, and loud
cries of " Order, order,")—l, my Lords, have moved the ad-
journment of this debate, because I consider it my duty to
address a few words before the discussion terminates. Six
addresses have been presented this night in favour of the Bill,
while only two Members have spoken in favour of the amend-
ment of the Noble Earl near me (Lord Roden), and I have
been anxiously waiting an opportunity to state my view, upon
it. Hitherto I have been unable to address your Lordships, and
therefore it was that I secured for myself the tacit right of
commencing the discussion to-morrow, by moving the adjourn-
ment of the debate. —( Loud cries of " Go on.")
The Duke of WELLINGTON—My Lords, I think it will
be more consistent with the convenience of this House that
the debate be adjourned till to-morrow.
The greatest confusion here arose, Members not understand-
ing whether the Noble Duke intended this day, Wednesday
(it being now one o'clock), or Thursday. Cries of " To-
day," " To-morrow," " Thursday," proceeded from all parts
of the House, in the midst of which
Tho LORD CHANCELLOR contrived to make himself
heard, announcing that the House stood adjourned to Fivo
o'clock this day ( Wednesday).
Their Lordships then adjourned.

Mr. EN TWISLE said that the company, on making the
proposition, distinctly stated that the chat ges they had agreed
to were to be only on coals carried fifteen miles,
and that for a less distance they were to be
at liberty to make a higher charge. The com-
pany were quite willing to abide by the rule esta-
blished t y the Committee; and if the Board of Trade were to
direct them to establish a closer position for their stations, they
had no disposition to swerve from the line that might be hid down.
If the Board of Trade were to issue a direction that the stations
should be made at four miles distance instead of six, they were
quite ready to abide by it. He had no authority from the
company to enter into an arrangement with the House, but
he had no doubt but that it would be confirmed. _

Mr. LASCELLES thought that the Hon. Member might
safely enter into an arrangement to make the stations at six
miles. It was merely a question of agreement.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY said that he had no power to
enter into an engagement on the part of the Manchester and
Leeds Railway Company, but he thought that after an interval
for confirming this arrangement the directors had net thought
proper to answer to the appeal which had been made to them,
and he thought the Hon. Member for Halifax (Mr. C. Wood)
might assent to the proposition which had been made.
Sir G. CLERK said that the proposition of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Halifax would give a preference to this line of railway
over the other, but it would depend upon the decision of the
Committee whether the Leeds and Manchester Company
should make their stations at six miles, four miles, or fifteen
miles from each other.

After a few words from Mr. ENTWISLE and Mr. C. Woor,
:he Bill was read a second time.
BELFAST AND BALAMENA RAILWAY.

The report en this railway was brought up, and the Bill was
reed a second time.

The Blackburn, Darwen, and Doltoa Railway Bill was
passed, new clauses having been added.
Captain BERKELEY presented a petition, agreed to at a
public meeting, presided over by Sir Edward Codrington, com-
plaining of the manner in which the merchant seamen's fund is
managed. Also a petition from the surgeons of Gloucester,
against the Medical Bill.
Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from a person
named Scott, who had held a clerkship in the Perogative Will
Office, complaining of abuses in the management of that office,
more particularly withrespect to the inconvenience entailed on
the public with respect to wills. The Honourable Gentleman
said he should make a motion on the subject on another day.
TEN HOURS' FACTORY BILL.
Mr. FERRAND presented several petitions from Manches-
ter, Salford, and other places, in favour of a Ten Hours' Fac-
tory Bill.

SCOTCH POOR LAW.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from Forres, complaining
of the Poor-laws of Scotland.

THE LATE TREATY ON THE SLAVE-TRADE.

Sir H. INGLIS said he wished to put a question to the
Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government with re-
spect to the copy of a treaty between France and England
with respect to the slave-trade, which appeared in the Standard,
and which was copied into the morning newspapers of yester-
day. Now he wished to know whether that treaty was rightly
described in the newspaers in question, and when it would be
laid on the table of the House?
Sir R. PEEL said any copy of the treaty in question which
had appeared in the English newspapers was published without
the sanction of her Majesty's Government. He had not read
the treaty which had appeared in the newspapers, but it cer-
tainly was not the one which he proposed to lay before Parlia-
ment. Before, however, be could do so, a short time must
elapse.

conferred on his country, the Government were more
competent to speak than he was. The Lord Provost of Glas-
gow, at a banquet given to Sir Henry Pottinger in that city,
said that the manufacturers of Glasgow were deeply indebted
to him, for increasing their intercourse with China, and that
though they could not thank him in fine language, they could
thank him with the sincerity and cordiality of British mer-
chants.—( Hear, hear.) Every community which carried on
a trade with China might say the same with equal justice.
Others then, having done so, he limped the House of Com-
mons would do the same, and trusted that the Right lion.
Baronet at the head of the Government would not think it in-
compatible with his duty, as the guardian of the public purse,
even though it might be a little against precedent, to give Sir
Henry Pottinger some reward for the valuable services he had
rendered to his country.( Hear, hear. )
Sir ROBERT PEEL said, the speech of the Right Hon.
Gentleman who had just sat down was, at any rate, a conclusive
answer to a great part of the speech of the Hon. Gentleman by
whom the motion was brought forward. It might be inferred
from the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. C.
Hobhouse), who made many unjust observations that there
was a disposition on the part of her Majesty's Government to
underrate the services of Sir Henry Pottinger. No Occasion
had ever offered itself in that House in which ho had
not cordially done him justice.—( Hear, hear.) He did cer-
tainly state, as a reason for not including Sir li. Pottinger in
the vote of thanks to Sir William Parker—and lie said it was
with regret—that the occasions were so rare, and the service'
whick rendered such a mark of public approval necessary so great,
that a vote of thanks was not proposed, rather on account of
the danger of establishing a precedent than from any desire to
underrate the services of that distinguished man. He (Sir
R. Peel) was prepared to repeat in that House all he said of
Sir Henry Pottinger. Ilaving no personal acquaintance with
him, but well knowing hie name and his character, he should
have as unbounded confidence from the Government as from
their predecessors. The Right Hon. Gentleman said it was
unfair to give a distinguished officer 6,0001. per annum e.fter
long services, and to grant a similar sum to Sir Henry Davis.
But that was because a certain salary appertained to a certain
office.

Mr. HUME was understood to say that he did not draw that
comparison.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said ho understood the Honourable
Gentleman to say that Sir Henry Davis was not so
well entitled to that pension as Sir Henry Pottinger.
Sir IL Pottinger had shown the utmost discretion, and he gave
him the greatest thanks for the kindness with which he had
treated the Chinese, and for the firmness and decision by
which ho had brought about the treaty between this country
and China, for he (Sir R. Peel) knew the difficult position in
which he was placed.—(Hear, hear.) In one respect, Sir H.
Pottinger could say that justice had not been done to him. He
took upon himself the responsibility of opening the trade with
China to all nations, as well as to England. No doubt
he was desirous to form a treaty with other countries, hut
the first instruction which his Noble Friend at the head of the
Foreign Department (Lord Aberdeen) transmitted to hint in
1841 was this :—" Secure and well regulate trade with China,
and constantly bear in mind, that we seek for no exclusive ad-
vantages, and demand nothing that shall not be enjoyed by the
subjects of all other countries."—( Hear, hear.) Those were
instructions which were sent to Sir H. Pottinger by his Noble
Friend before the signature of the treaty; and, therefor!, let
it be said for the credit, not only of Sir H. Pottinger, wad of
the two great parties in this country who bad administered the
affairs of Government for the last four years, since the diffe-
rences with China commenced, but for the credit of the 'whole
country, that no wish was further from their in-
tentions than to secure in their intercourse with
China peculiar and exclusive rights.—( Hear.) Let it be
known to Europe and to the world that there was no mau in
this country who wished to secure narrow and paltry advan-
tages to which the whole world should not be equally entitled.
—( Hear, hear.) Any one would infer from the words of the
Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume) that they had withhold from
Sir H. Pottinger some reward which it was in the power of
the Government to confer upon him, and the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir J. C. Liobhouso) said that they had encumbered
him with laurels. He (Sir It. Peel) did not say that he had
been created a baronet for his services :in China, but for long
services to the country in various ways. He did say that they had
conferred upon him the highest honorary distinction next to the
garter—a distinction which had been conferred on many great and
brave men—a Grand Cross of the Bath. That honour was
conferred upon him by the approval of a gracious Sovereign.
—( Hear, hear.) Did not the Hon. Member consider that a
distinction, unless it was accompanied by money ? He (Sir
R. Peel) believed that Sir H. Pottinger was proud of that
honour, not because it was unaccompanied by money, but be-
cause it was a mark of the approval of his Sovereign. He
thought, therefore, that he had shown that the statement of
the Hon. Member that there 'must be some reason why Sir H.
Pottinger remained unnoticed, was an unjust insinuation—that
there was no foundation for it. There was no honorary distinc-
tion which the Crown had not conferred on Sir H. Pottinger,
and he could not say, so far as the Crown was concerned, that
he had been unfairly dealt with. Then they came to the pe •
cuniary consideration—that the Crown having some power to
grant a pension had not exercised it. lie did not hesitate to
say, that if the Crown had been free to grant a pension, the
Government would have at once advised the Crown to grant
it—( Hear, hear)—but in the case of Sir Henry Pottinger the
Crown had not the power. What then became of these invi-
dious distinctions ?—( Hear, hear.) The last Government had
the power to confer a pension upon him, but the present Go-
vernment could not legally exercise it. You say, continued the
Right Hon. Baronet, that the Crown is niggardly. Who im•
posed that restriction ? Why, the House of Commons and the
Right Hots. Gentleman.—(" Hear," from Mr. Hume.) Tho
Crown could not grant a pension to any one, whatever service
he had seen, on account of diplomacy, except he had been in
the service for fifteen years, and unless in aotual service for ten
years. And therefore the Crown had not had the power to
grant a pension to Sir Henry Pottinger. It was admitted by
the House of Commons that there were claims upon the gene-
rqpty of the Crown for various distinguished services performed
for the public good. Pensions might be granted for personal
service performed for the Sovereign, and pensions might also
be granted as a reward for the peiformance of public services,
or for important discoveries in science, literature, and the arts ;
and to provide for all these pensions, the House of Commons
only gave the Crown 1,2001. per annum.---(Hear, hear.) It
did not, however, imply any reproach upon the Ministry, be.
cause they had not asked the House of Commons to grant a
specific pension for this distinguished officer ; for, had they
done so, it would have been establishing a somewhat dangerous
pr, eedent. But such a step on the part of Government would
have been attended with great inconvenience, for scarcely
a week passed but there were claims brought before him.
which, he thought, speaking comparatively, were as just and
legitimate as the claim made by the Hon. Member opposite ;
and how could they he provided for out of 1,2001. a year?—
(Hear.) He would take the case, for instance, of the late Sir
William Nott.—(Cheers.) Look at the distinguished ser.
vices of that lamented and gallant officer—( Hear)—and
see how easy, how quiet, how equitable, would be the
claim of any Hon. Member to the consideration of Parliament,
were he to make an appeal to that House. on behalf of the
family of that distinguished and gallant officer.—(Cheers.)
What a strong case could be made out in such an instance as
this. Ho returned home, after exhibiting abroad a coestancy
and valour in behalf of his Sovereign and country which en -
titled him to the public approbation. He came home broken
in health, unable to receive that approbation, while others re-
ceived the highest rewards which the throne and the country
could bestow upon them. But Sir William Nott's health pre-
vented him not only from enjoying the merit he deserved, and
the admiration of his fellow-countrymen, but debarred him of
the opportunity of being presented to his Sovereign, and re-
ceiving her public thanks.—(Hear, hear.) Again, take the
case of men of science. How many, there were who had strong
claims upon the generosity of the Crown, for the useful dis-
coveries they had made in the sciences, the arts, or literature,
whose claims might be urged upon the House with as much
force as those of Sir Henry Pottinger.—(Hear, hear.) Why,
he was applied to the other day for relief by the daughter of a
distinguished public professor, lately deceased, and if they were
to establish a precedent, would not Government run the risk
of constantly having these and similar cases pressed upon them
by the House? He would not go so far as to say that these pro-
fessors were as distinguished as the gallant officer, who was the
subject of this discussion, but those. distinguished individuals
had eacriEced the interests and welfare of their families for the
public good, and although their claims were not quite so strong
as those made out by the Honourable Member, they were
nevertheless precisely the same in principle.—(Hear, hear. )
But, considering the general feeling of the House of Commons
on this subject, he was not disposed to interpose his opposition
between the generosity of the Crown and Sir Henry Pottin-
ger.—( Cheers. ) The motion did not imply the slightest re-
proach upon her Majesty's Ministers, because they had per-
formed a painful public duty in opposition to their
own personal wishes and inclinations. Nevertheless, he should
be sorry, now that the matter had been brought forward, that
there should be any division upon a subject of this kind, and he
should certainly not oppose the motion. —( Great cheering. )
In compliance with the wish of the House of Commons, and
contrary to his strict public duty, he should take upon himself
the part of advising her Majesty to make some provision for
this distinguished officer.—(Renewel cheering.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was rejoiced to hear the closing de-
claration of the Right Hon. Baronet, and he could not help
saying one word upon this subject, after what had fallen from
the Right Hon. Baronet. He wished to express his own feel-
ings upon this subject, and to state that he thought her Ma-
jesty's Government had always shown a disposition to reward
merit whenever they could consistently do so.—(Cries
of " Hear, hear.") And let not the Right Honourable
Baronet suppose the House had the slightest disposition
to throw blame upon the Government for the course they had
hitherto adopted in the case of Sir Henry Pottinger.—( Hear. )
He thought, with regard to this case, the House of Commons
was in some degree called upon to express its opinion, because
the Right Hon. Baronet had truly stated that the House of
Commons had placed limits upon the power of the Crown to
grant rewards for diplomatic services. -Government had been
perfectly consistent in acting up to the general rule, but the
case before them was an extraordinary one, and justified an ex-
ception to the rule.—( Hear, hear.) After what had fallen from
his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose it was impossible
for him to say anything more forcibly in favour of the distin-
guished services of Sir Henry Pottinger. He agreed with the
Right Hon. Baronet that they ought not to establish any
fixed precedent for their guidance, but, considering the par-
ticular circumstances of this case, he did think it formed a case
of itself, and the exception ought to be made in its favour.
Lord PALMERSTON could not allow this discussion to
close without expressing his sincere satisfaction in the con-
cluding declaration of the Right Hon. Baronet. He must say
he thought the decision which the Government had come to
with regard to the motion of his Hon. Friend, was as honour-
able to themselves, as its result was flattering to the distin-
guished individual who was the subject of it. He quite under-
stood, and admitted the force of the arguments of the Right
Hon. Baronet, that it would have been injudicious for the Go.
vernment to have made this proposition themselves.—( Hear. )
It would be satisfactory to the Gallant Officer who was the
subject of this discussion, that the reward which he was about
to receive was not only a reward given by the Crown, but a re-
ward given at the suggestion of the Commons of England.—
(Hear, hear.) Government might rest assured they incurred
no risk by establishing this precedent, because the case
stood upon peculiar and exceptional grounds.—( Hear, hear)
He trusted that he (Sir H. Pottinger) might long continue in
that state which would enable him to perform other services to
the country. Every relation which it was his duty to fill he
did accomplish ; and considering the people he had to deal
with, and the distance he was from the Government, he could
not acquit himself in a manner more deserving of the approba-
tion of the Crown. The instructions of Lord Aberdeen in
1841 certainly justified Sir Henry Pottinger in inserting the
article alluded to in the treaty ; and it was one of the acts
which showed his high idea of the responsibility which he was
under. There was no man living more ready to acknowledge
the services of those to whose the Right Hon. Baronet oppo-
site alluded to than Sir Henry Pottinger himself. The suc-
cessful result which took place in China was not owing to Sir
Wm Parker. but to the conduct of those who preceded him.
It would be honourable to the House of Commons, to the Hon.
Member who made this motion, and would give the greatest
satisfaction to the country at large if the Government agreed
to this vote.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. JOHN ABEL SMITH supported the vote, and was of
opinion that the success of the motion would be the more ho-
nourable to Sir H. Pottinger, because he was neither directly
or indirectly connected with it.
Mr. ROSS would mention one circumstance where Sir H.
Pottinger had risked his own character, and the funds which
were at his disposal, contrary to his instructions, by advancing
money to the Hong-Kong merchants, because he felt himself
bound to pay it in support of the dignity of the Crown. He
mentioned the circumstance, in order to show the claim he had

on the Crown, and would support the moticn of his Hon.
Friend (Mr. Hume).
Mr. P. HOWARD supported the motion, and said that this
case of Sir H. Pottinger was one which might be taken out
of the hands of the general rule, without giving rise to any dan-
gerous result,3, and it would be much more satisfactory if this
vote appeared to come spontaneously from the Government
without any interference on his (Sir H. Pottinger's) part.
Mr. HUME then made a few observations in reply.
The motion was then agreed to, nonine contradicente.
BURDENS ON LAND.

Mr. WARD then rose to move the following motion, of
which he had some time given notice :—For "a Select Com-
mittee to inquire whether there are any peculiar burdens
specially affecting the landed interest of this country, or any
peculiar exemptions enjoyed by that interest, and to ascertain
their nature and extent." If it were not for the aspect of the
House, which foreboded its premature dissolution, he thought
he might congratulate himself on the success of two motions
originating on that side of the House on which he sat. He had
generally been deserted when he brought forward any
agricultural question, by the agricultural Members of
that House and the Agricultural Protection Society,
but he thought, when they bad no thirty-ninn Members
to protect them, and when they saw that, eventually,
his motion mast be brought forward, he should be sure of
their attention. The policy of the Government had yet a
great deal to do, although they had done much which had
created a beneficial influence on the condition of the people;
but such being the case, what strong arguments had they net
for going further ?—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Ward) did not
appeal to principles which they on that side of the House
had, a priori, put forth, but to principles advanced by the
Government itself. It was true that the Government had, by
its tariff, taken off the duties on upwards of six hundred
articles, but they had left them on those articles which were
most important tor the comfort and happiness of the people of
this country. He might be told that they on that side of
the House were al says talking and not doing. Why, in
his opinion talking was doing, and they were obliged to talk
for the sake of the character of the Right Hon. Baronet oppo-
site.—(A laugh.) His Hon. Friend the Member for Stock-
port was, in his opinion, as much a member of the Cabinet as
if he had a seat in it.—(Laughter.) His suggestions had, in
many instances, been acted upon, and even the Right Hon.
Baronet had admitted that his Hon. Friend, aided by high and
important sentiments and motives, had rendered important ser-
vices to the country.—(Hear, hear.) That proved that his
Hon. Friend was right, though the House voted against him.
—( Hear, hear.) lie (Mr. Ward) believed that one of the
most important services he had rendered was the course that
he had pursued with respect to the Imports Committee. In
England land legislated for itself, which, he believed, was not
the case in any other part of Europe. In Austria and France the
monarch legislated for it. He was sorry to say that the
history of protection during the last session had been most
lamentable and laughable.—( blear, hear.) It was known that,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have a large surplus
this year, and the landlords of this country had shown a firm
determination to have a large slice of it.—(Laughter.) They
cried out continually against the policy of the Government,
and it had been declared at Hertford that as much as six
millions had been taken by it from the agriculturists of the
country. One gentleman, at a meeting there, alluding to the
course that had been pursued by the Government, had, in the
words of the poet, said—
" That keen were their pangs ; but 'twas keener far to feel,
They'd nursed the pinion that impelled the steel." •
--(Laughter.) The Hon. Member proceeded to refer to a
meeting which had lately been held in Essex on the subject of
agriculture. The Tower of Babel was nothing to this meeting '
in point of unanimity. The parties who had attended this
meeting did not know by who;n they had been called and for
what they had been called. Was it not time to have done with
those sort of meetings? After all, the one question only had to
be considered, and that was, had the land any peculiar burdens?
If it had, let them grant the Committee which he then sought.
What was the use of postponing it for another session? They
could not do so beyond that time, it must come at last. Was
there stability in the present system? Could Hon. Gentlemen
opposite depend upon the continuance of the present corn-
laws? Why, principles opposed to those of protece
tion were gaining ground every day on the opposite
side of the House. The Noble Lord the Member for
Pontefract had lately said that he, as a landlord, did not fear a
repeal of the corn-laws. What was it that justified the con-
tinuance of the corn-laws? If anything, it must be peculiar
burdens upon agriculture. Where were those burdens?
Point them out—this was all he asked. Lord Abinger, when
Mr. Scarlet, said that land paid all the rates of the country,
or at least in the ratio of four to one. The Hon. Member
for Norfolk had said the land paid all the poor-rates, and the
Hon. Member for Sornersetshire paid one-half of the income-
tax. If all this were true, why not have a Committee before
which the truth of these statements could be probed? He
found, upon reference to the returns, that the land paid
1,323,323/. to the income-tax, while the trades and professions
paid 1,466,0001., being a difference of 143,0001., or that
amount paid by trades and professions above the amount paid
from land. Tile Hon. Member then read from the reports
of the Poor-law Commissioners, to show that the land had
gradually fallen off in the last twenty years in its
contribution to the poor-rates, while the amount
from other sources had largely i acreased.—(Hear, hear.)
He would inquire why every householder in London should
pay the poor-rates, the window-taxes, the police-rates, and
other taxes, when it was proposed to amerce them in a Con-
solidation Fund Bill. Before you can do this a police magis-
tracy must be established under the inspection of the Secretary
of State for the Home Department. But, supposing there
might be some little disparity in the result of the Committee's
deliberations to which he trusted the present matter might be
referred. He then alluded generally to the duties paid on
horses, horses let out for hire, sheep-dogs, and other matters
connected with the agricultural interest, and showed that the
reduction on the duties from 1816 to 1834 amounted to
34,000,0001. Now he would inquire, where were the duties
on land? Taking every manufacturing district, including the
iron and the cotton localities, it appeared that
they were creating produce without having any tax placed on
their industry. if the balance were struck, with land in one
scale for a duty on corn, the balance would be vastly in favour
of the public. —( Ilear.l Agriculture cannot at present find a
single individual to advocate its exclusive interests, and any
man placed in office on the Board of Trade after a short interval
invariably came out as a free trader. —( Hear.) If the Duke of
Newcastle should write another letter on the matter of free-
trade with a view to ulterior advancement, he was just as likely
to be elected the Pope as Premier.—(A laugh.) The Right
Hon. Baronet had stated his opinion generally, he meant to per-
severe in the determination of producing free-trade, though he
should lose the support of his agricultural friends, and he (Mr.
Ward) could not see why the Right Honourable Gentleman
should object to his motion. The party of the Right Hon.
Baronet came forward and requested his party to assist them
in cheapening clothes, food, and other articles connected with
the comfort of the public, and why should not the Right Hon.
Gentleman come forward and assist him in the attempt to
equ•dise commercial duties? He was perfectly confident as to
the result of his motion, and even if his hopes should be disap-
pointed, he would leave the decision to the country.
The question was then put from the Chair.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT complimented the Honourable
Member who had just sat down for the good humour
ho had shown in bringing forward his motion. He held
that his argument, that the agricultural interest of this
country possessed advantages over other countries, could not
be maintained, as there were burdens on the proprietors of
land in this country 'which did not exist in any other. The
manufacturing districts were now in a state of great prosperity,
and there was a greater demand for hands than could. be satis-
fied. With respect to emigration from those districts, he con-
sidered that the poor-rates were heavy, because, when em-
ployment was scarce, they would rather avail themselves of
those rates for awhile than emigrate. After glancing at other
topics in the Hon. Gentleman's speech, he said he deprecated
the repeated discussion of subjects of no practical utility, and
which, after all, were speculative, and on which the majority
of the House had formed their opinion, especially to the ex-
clusion of subjects of great importance to the country. The
debate on the resolutions submitted to the House by the Noble
Lord the Member for the City of London had, he thought,
given an ample opportunity for the discussion of the subject in-
volved in the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. He considered
that the motion would not lead to any useful result, and trusted
that the House would not adopt it. In addition to this, he (lid
slot think it was the proper moment to take up the time of the
House by having, a Committee sitting on propositions on which
the House had formed its opinion ; and when the agricultural
interest had not the slightest wish to have any of the measures
proposed by her Majesty's Government modified, and had no
apprehension, if they would-wily give them fair play. They were
investing their capital in improving their land, and as a matter
of course employing additional labourers,' and endeavouring to
overcome the difficulties under which they were labouring.
Mr. COBDEN considered that the Hon. Gentleman who
had just sat down had not given a very distinct opinion on the
questions which had been submitted to the House by the Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Ward). He had
never listened for half-an-hour to a speech so difficult of
comprehension. The question before that I-louse was whether
tithes were not a burden on both the landlord and the farmer,
and whether the landowners contributed more to the support
of the poorer classes than other portions of the community.
With respect to a statement made by the Hon. Member for
Essex, in reference to Messrs. Storr and Mortimer, to show
the difference in the poor-rates paid by landowners and manu-
facturers, he begged to say that if the manufacturers did not pay
poor-rates on their capital, neither did the farmers. Now he
could not tell whether the Right Hon. Gentleman who spoke
last maintained the highway and county-rate were burdens
upon land or not. Let him, however, go and make inquiries
amongst shopkeepers about the local taxation imposed on that
class of tradesmen, and he (Mr. Cobden) would venture to predict
the amount of taxation imposed on them would be found to be
not very considerably less than that imposed on landlords, far-
mers, and landholders.—( Hear, hear.) But even if the land-
holder paid all the poor-rates of the country, he did not believe
their so-called protection, however much it might be increased,
would be of any benefit to them, because it was an obstacle to
trade. It impeded the progress of commerce, and did more
harm to the agricultural interest than all the taxes and local
burdens put together.—( Hear.) How then could this sort of pro-
tection be a compensation for the peculiar exclusive or pecuniary
burdens the landowner had to sustain? He was glad therefore
to see that every day they were coming not only on hint, but on
the other side of the House, to a better understanding en this
subject, and the farmer and the manufacturer were beginning
to feel that they had one common interest in putting an end to
this baneful system of protection. Hun. Members were fond
of quoting Mr. e M'Culloch on this subject. Now, for
' his own part, he was prepared to assert that Mr.
M'Culloch had never added a single new idea upon
political economy. His statistical information was
certainly valuable, but his works upon political economy were
merely commentaries on Adam Smith, and, like the com-
mentators on Shakspeare, rendered that obscure which bad been
clear before.
Mr. NEWDEGATE denied that protection was either the
bane or curse of agriculture, and expressed a hope that Go-
vernment would not withdraw its remaining support from that
interest. Tithes, he thought, were an exclusive burden upon
land, and, taking all the other burdens on land together, he
estimated them at twelve millions per annum. It was clear,
therefore, that if they removed the present meagre protection
afforded to agriculture, it would be quite impossible for either
the landlord or tenant to contribute his share to make up this
amount of taxation. They thought that this country should
be independent of foreign countries. They did not wish to see
the food of this country made a matter of exchange or specu-
lation. He did not wish to delay the House, but he made
these few observations because the Hon. Member for Shef-
field gave them some individual instances of particular hard-
ship. He thought it his duty, on that account, to submit
those few
Air.v.stsatAerrrenftis
staoidthe
that noticeiie of the
regtetteHdotuhsae—t.th(eCsheeecrrse.ta)ry.
Secretary-
at-War
iti-eW burdensar had roenf ulsaenddt, hains
dCootnha
emr idt teesec.r p
tiiioen Isv as
of
o ooppGeirnetiyno,nl
vit he
raet
theprettsy e
cequally y •
at. balanced.\‘ra r
spoke
itthee
roßtuireohst Hofionth. t eman
e Commis-
sioners which were laid on the table of the House, he forgot
that there was a more favourable report made, which was
in the country? The general
e ne manra know
taxaquite unattended to. Did any
taxation
am
one
was
soufnottt
found
taxa-
tiont o
befifteemillions, n and the local taxation was ten
millions,so that
the local taxation was two-thirds of the general taxation. He
believed
that the rate-payers were perfectly ignorant of the
reasons why they paid rates, but they paid it on account of the
manner in which it was imposed upon them. The Right Hon.
i Gentleman then enumerated the different rates which were
I made. Could, he would ask, anybody imagine greater confu-
sion than arose from different rates made for similar
results ?—(Hear, hear.) The greater part of the out-

cry against the poor-law arose from the rating
of small occupiers. That was one reason why he supported the
motion for an inquiry• lie would never shrink from supporting
a measure founded on a principle such as the Hon. Gentleman
stated. One good result from this would be, that the agricul-
tural interest would teel themselves benefited by it. The Go.:
vernment ought to try and relieve themselves, not at the ex-
pense of others, but ought to relieve themselves at their own
expense.
Sir JOHN T YRRELL—He thought if ever there was a
subject that had been exhausted in that House, it was the dis-
cussion of the agricultural interest.—(Cheers from the Oppo-
sition.) He understood that cheer. It meant that
the landlords had practised a sort of legerdemain upon
the agricultural interest. That was not the case. He had
met all the agricultural delegates; and if there was one point
on which they were agreed, it was that the Government had
betrayed their interests and not their landlords. On the part
of the agriculturists, he utterly denied that they were in favour
of high prices. If they were to have benefits, the manufae •
turing iliterests, he thought, oughNo have them also. He be-
lieved, if the Committee was granted, the agriculturists would
some out of it with clean hands. He was ready to go into the
investigation, but he did not think the appointment of the
Committee necessary.

Dr. BOWRING was sure that the appointment of the
Committee would be productive of the best effects, as inquiry
was only necessary to show the necessity of removing the evils
complained of.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House di-
vided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it ..
31aj,:rity against. the motion —73
Captain PECHELL moved for a copy of a letter from the
Secretary of the Admiralty to the Secretary of the Treasury,
transmitting a memorial from certain paymasters and purse: s of
the Royal Navy, relative to an increase of their half-pay, with
a copy of the reply thereto from the Lords of the Treasury.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER resisted the
motion.
Sir C. NAPIER seconded the motion.

109
163

Sir J. GRAHAM said that the whole case of the pursers
had been fully investigated, and specific arrangements had been
made with respect to their pay and half•pay.
(he motion was then put from the Chair, and it was
negatived.
Mr. HUME then moved for an address for copy of any in-
structions sent by the Government to the astronomers of the
several observatories at home and abroad in the years 1837-8.
Also, a return of the number of volumes of astronomical ob-
servations that have been made at each Observatory since that
year: and a statement of the number of reports and Communi-
cations from them to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, to
the Admiralty, and to any other department at home.
Dr. BOW RING then moved for an account of the finally
audited receipt and expenditure fur ordnance services, com-
pared with the sums estimated, for the year ended the apt day
of March, 1814, with explanatory statements of particulars.
and balance sheet, in the same form as the return laid before
Parliament in the session of 1844 (No. 386), relating to the
Army.
After some little discussion he asked leave to withdraw the
motion.

After the disposal of the other orders of the day, the Home
adjourned at a Q..arter to One.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.
TUESDAY, JUNE 3.

The Newcastle-upon-Tyne and North Shields Railway
(Tynetnouth Extension, &c.) Bill,—Report considered ;
amendments agreed to ; amendments proposed, and referred
to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

Standing Orders Committee,—Resolutions reported ;
1. " That, in the case of the Trent Valley Railway Bill
amendments on consideration of report, the amendments are
of such a nature as to justify the House in entertaining
them, if they shall think iit."
2. " That, in the case of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Rail-
way Bill amendments on third reading, the amendments are
of such a nature as to justify the House in entertaining
them, if they shall think lit."
3. " That, in the case of the Cromford Canal Bill amend-
ments on report, the amendments are of such a nature as not
to be adopted by the House without the re-commitment of
the Bill."

4. " That in the case of the Ely and Huntingdon Railway
Bill amendments on third reading, the amendments are of
such a natune as to justify the House in entertaining them,
if they shall think fit."
5. " That, in the case of the Lady's Island and Tacumshin
Embankment petition to report, the Sessional Order ought
to be dispensed with :—That the parties be permitted to re-
port on or before the 16th June."
6. That, in the case of the Lynn and Ely Railway Bill
amendments on third reading, the amendments are of such a
nature as to justify the House in entgrtaining them, if they
shall think fit."
7. That, in the case of the Lyme Regis Improvement,
Market, and Waterworks petition to report, the Sessional
Order ought to be dispensed with :—That the parties be per-
mitted to report on or before the 1 Ith June."
S. " That, is the case of the Durham and Sunderland Rail-
way petition, for leave to present a petition for a Bill, the
Sessional Order ought not to be dispensed with."
Fifth and seventh resolutions agreed to.—Report to lie on
the table.

NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE
Harwich Railway,—Committee on petition, postponed
sine die.
Eastern Union and Bury St. Edmund's Railway (No. 2),
,
—Report, Thursday, June .).
Edinburgh and Hawick Railway,—Third reading, Friday,
Jude G.
Lowestoft Railway and Harbour,—Third reading, Friday,
June 6.
Yarmouth and Norwich Railway,—Third reading, Friday,
June 6.
North British Railway,—Third reading, Friday,-June 6.
Middlcsbro' and Redcar Railway,—Committee on petition,
for additional provision, Friday, June 6.
Londonderry and Coleraine Railway,—Report, Thursday,
June 5.

Leeds and West Riding Junction Railway,—Third reading,
Thursday, J nue 5.
Guildfird Junction Railway,—Third reading, Thursday,

June 5.
North Wales Mineral Railway,—Committee on re-com-
mitted Bill, Thursday', June 5.
Dublin anti Drogheda Railway,—Committee on re-com •
mitted Bill, Thursday, June 5, at one.

Railway Bills (Group GG. ),—Report, that the parties
promoting the Glasgow Junction Railway Bill, had stated to
the Committee, that the evidence of Dr. William Hutcheson
(physician of the Royal Lunatic Asylum), of Mr. John Car-
rick (superintendent of public streets, Glasgow), of Mr.
Robert Marshall (manager of the Dundee and London Ship-
ping Company, Dundee); and of lir. John Hanna (governor
of the Towns Hospital), was essential, in order to enable
them to establish their case before the Committee; and it
having been proved that application had been made to the
above parties, but that their attendance could not be pro-
cured without the intervention of the House, the Chairman
had been instructed by the Committee to move the House,
that they be ordered to attend the said Committee forthwith.
Ordered—That Dr. William Hutcheson, physician of the
Royal Lunatic Asylum, Mr. John Carrick, superintendent of
public streets, Glasgow, Mr. Robert Marshall, manager of
the Dundee and London Shipping Company, Dundee, and
Dr. John Hanna, Governor of the Towns Hospital, do attend
the said Committee forthwith.