The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EV

port of a Committee, to proceed to enact measures that would
adjust the law, and relieve prisoners from the cruelty and
degradation they now suffered.
Sir C. DOUGLAS said that with respect to his friend the
clergyman, to whom allusion had been made, no man could
have better discharged his duties, both as a clergyman and a
Magistrate, than that Rev. Gentleman. The lion. Gentle-
man opposite bad said he wished that that clergyman were
summoned and examined at the bar of the House. He (Sir
C. Douglas) also wished he were examined at the bar, when
an opportunity would be afforded him of vindicating his cha-
racter. In a paper which he (Sir C. Douglas) held in his
hand, that Rev. Gentleman stated that only in extremely ag-
gravated eases was recourse had to severity, and he laid it
down as a general principle that mitigation of the penalty in.
creased the repetition of the offence.
Mr. HAWES would only address a few observations to the
House, because he felt himself under the necessity of op-
posing the motion of his Honourable Friend. The Hon.
Member baring founded his motion entirely on the Report of
the Prison Inspectors, who had full opportunity of visiting the
gaols and prisons, it was a better means of arriving at good le-
gislation than any inquiry the House could conduct. Ile re.
joiced to find that the subject had received so much of the at-
tention of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite. At the com-
mencement of the last Session he had called the attention of
the Right lion. Baronet to a portion of a Report that had been
laid on the table of the House, and he was bound to say that
he had paid him every consideration.. He trusted, therefore,
after what had fallen from him, that the inquiry he had evi-
dently made would be attended with some advantage. He
thought great and unnecessary prejudice had been raised
against the system of separate confinement ; by confounding it
with solitary confinement, against ashich there was a well-
founded objection both in America. He read an extract
from the last Report of the American lespectors of
Prisoill, showing that the ill effects consequent on solitary
confinement, had not followed on separate confinement. By
means of the Visiting Magistrates, the inspectors of prisons, and
the rseice that might be taken of their Reports in the House
by a Member of Parliament, there were facilities for de-
tecting abuses in prison management that had never existed
before. Some regret had been expressed that there was not
an uniformity of discipline, but when it was proposed to give
to the Secretary of State some stringent powers
of enforcing such an uniformity, it was strongly
objected to by the House, and it was hardly fair to turn round
and blame the Secretary of State for a want of that uniformity
which he had not the sower to enforce. In the case of the
Penitentiary that had been referred to, he thought much of the
distressing and unfortunate results that had taken place, might
have been avoided if the prison had been more immediately
under the power of the executive. He explained that, in op-
posing the motion, he believed the Hon. Gentleman was more
likely to accomplish his intentions by acting on the report of
the inspectors, and building gradual improvements on their in-
formation, than by appointing a committee. He concluded by
paying a high tribute of praise to the ability and general spirit
of the speech of the Home Secretary.
Lord MAHON concurred in the concluding sentence of
the Hon. Member for Lambeth, who had truly said that the
speech of his Right Hon. Friend would give great satisfaction
to the country.—( Hear, hear.) And he thought that his
Right Hon. Friend had given good reasons for refusing the
Committee. He thought that the reports of the Prison In-
spectors showed that there was a gradual and progressive re-
form in the Government prisons. But he apprehended that
whatever improvement might be effected, whilst there
was in this country the punishment of imprisonment
for a term of years, nothing like a perfect system
would be introduced. To whatever • country they looked
they found everywhere the most lamentable deficiencies.
Opposed to the silent system was that of general communica-
tion of the prisoners; and to it also there were the greatest
objections. In the gaol of Bedford, as appeared from the re-
port of the Inspector fur lest year, it was stated that the most
deplorable moral evils were occasioned by the unrestricted com-
munication of the prisoners. A number of persons were
brought in last year, in such a lamentable state of ignorance
that they did not know the name of the Saviour—( Hear)—
and the meritorious efforts of the chaplain to remove that ig-
norance were counteracted by the contaminating example of
the prisoners. Two of the latter passed the whole of the time
in swearing and other misconduct, to distract the attention of
a third, who was endeavouring to read a religious book ;
and others of them tore up the prayer-books that were
given them, to make instruments of gambling.—(Hear.)
He had a paper from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancas-
ter, which gave an account of John Taylor, who was confined
in Monmouth goal in solitary imprisonment. At the end of a
few days he was dead ; a Coroner's inquest sat on his body ; it
was proved that the unfortunate man had not committed
suicide, but that he died from depression of spirits, and a fear,
that being left alone, he would be haunted by ghosts_a feel-
ing that exercised great terror over ignorant people. There
was also, in the sixth Report of the Inspectors of Pr:.sons, an
account of a young woman in Bristol Bridewell, who, not-
withstanding her entreaties not to be left alone, being locked
up in solitary confinement, twice attempted suicide. He
(Lord Mahon) had been lately told, by a most respectable
Magistrate, that to his own knowledge he had seen no less
than six cases of suicide in the City of London which had re-
sulted from solitary confinement. In the Milbank Penitentiary
several persons had also lost their lives in consequence of the
system of solitary confinement. To what system of punish-
ment should the House have recourse ? Certainly it should
not be to that species of confinement which resulted
in loss of life. If prisoners deserved to lose their lives,
they should be exposed to that punishment by the criminal
law of the land; but they should not be exposed or subjected
to a system of punishment which terminates in death. Again,
he would ask the House to consider what was to become of
the prisoners who were discharged after a long term of im-
prisonment? How was it possible for unfortunate prisoners,
with a blasted character, to obtain employment in this coun-
try, where there was so much difficulty for persons of unble-
mished reputation to get anything to do ? Upon that subject
he would ask the House to consider the expressions made use
of by the Recorder of Exeter, in his address to the Grand
Jury, at the Sessions ending January, Bel. That Learned
Gentleman, having adverted to his own painful feelings in
discharging the duty of passing sentence upon offenders
in his Court for first offences, said he had often
observed that such persons.(meaning prisoners convicted of their
first offences) exhibited proofs of deep and sincere repen-
tance—of such feelings of repentance as lie was sure they did
feel deeply and sincerely—in such cases he felt it hit duty to
point out to the unfortunate wretches the advantages of good
character ; but his heart sunk within him when he reflected
upon what these poor people would have to encounter when
they came to carry out their good intentions, and began to
act upon the feelings of repentance which they then unques-
tionably entertained. When they were discharged, what be-
came of them ?—they were forsaken by their friends, and
sneered at by their old acquaintances, until at length they
were driven to the commission of some greater crime than that
for which they before had been convicted." That was an
opinion coming from a legal authority, and was certainly
worthy of considerable respect.—( Hear, hears) Again,
it was the opinion of the Governor of the Milbank
penitentiary, that it was impossible to provide employment for
prisoners when discharged from prison, and that is very easily
accounted for, because when, as he (Lord Mahon) stated be-
fore, so many persons of good character found it difficult to pro-
cure employment in this country, it must, as a matter of course,
be infinitely more difficult for persons of blemished cheracter to
get employment ; and he. believed that many prisoners in this
country 'were discharged from prison sincerely and heartily de-
sirous to avoid the commission of crime for the future, if they
could but obtain employment. He was in favour of the prin-
ciple of transportation, because then prisoners were removed to
a new state of society, where their former characters was no
bar to their employment, or to their carrying their virtuous in-
tentions into effect. He (Lord Mahon) trusted that his
Right Honourable Friend would turn his attention to
the adoption of some means to provide employment for
prisoners after their discharge. With reference to the Noble
Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, he (Lord Mahon) had
seen a plan which appeared to bins to bo entirely and com-
pletely satisfactory with respect to prison legislation, and he
thought that transportation did afford advantages not only to
the criminal population, but to the public at large--it was be-
neficial to the public, who were interested in repressing crime
--it was beneficial to the criminals, who were interested in
procuring employment and being reformsd—and it was bene-
ficial to the colonies, who would have the advantage of addi-
tional labour. Upon the whole, he perfectly concurred with
his Right Hon. Friend the First Lord of the Treasury, who,
in the last speech he had made upon the subject, stated that
the system of corporal punishment, combined with expatria-
tion, would more completely answer all the necessities of this
country, than any other system which it would be possible to
introduce into it.
Mr. O'CONNELL was rather surprised at the 'speech of
the Noble Lord. He first stated that he was in favour of a full
inquiry, and he concluded by expressing quite a different
opinion. He (Mr. O'Connell) felt himself bound to vote in
favour of the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, though
he regretted it, because the inquiry he sought was much wider
than was necessary. He was not aware that the discussion
upon the subject would have taken so wide a range. otherwise he
would have been able to support the motion more effectually. The
fact was, that he had appointed two o'clock to-morrow for ob-
taining information upon the subject of prison discipline; but
in the first instance lie should protest against what had fallen
from the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley).
.With
respect to the mitigation of punishment, in his (Mr. O'Con-
nell's) opinion, it was one of the most consoling things for the
Legislature and for the country at large, that the number of
persons now put to death all over the country did not amount
to the number of capital convictions that used to
take place in the sessions of the Old Bailey, more
particularly when the number of crimes were increasing
almost daily. In Belgium the punishment by death was com-
pletely abolished, though there was something capricious in the
relative amount of punishment inflicted for crime there. No
later than the other day he saw by the newspapers, that a man
who was convicted of the manslaughter of a woman, by giving
her a blow of which she died,was sentenced to only one month's
imprisonment. Yesterday he saw an account of the con-
viction of a man fur killing a woman, the sentence pro-
nounced upon was six months' imprisonment; and
in the same newspaper, he saw an account of the con-
viction of a man who ran away with a letter, containing
2.55., and lie was sentenced to twelve months. He (Mr.
O'Connell) would not be an advocate for having the punish-
ment quite so capricious, but what he meant to call the at.
tention of the House to more particularly, was the complaints
of Roman Catholics, or rather the complaints of the Roman
Catholic clergy, fur being prevented from attending those pri-
soners who are members of the Roman Catholic persuasion.
The Right Hon. Baronet read the Act of Parliament, and
he said he was ready to work out that Act. He seemed to
think that there was an evasion of it attempted, and
that the object was to keep out improper per-
sons. The complaint was, that the Roman Catholic
clergy were not allowed in the prisons unless they were
specially called on by the prisoners, who were completely in
the power of the gaolers andof the Magistrates, who were almost
in every instance adverse to the admission of the Roman Ca-
tholic clergy, and consequently they were prevented from dis-
charging their duties. What was required was that the Roman
Catholic clergy should be allowed to go into prisons to visit
the prisoners of that persuasion, without being previously re-
quired by the party to do so, There was no person who more
manifestly'required the aid of a clergyman than the party who
hesitated to make the request to have the clergyman called
in—he had little or no impulses towards repentance,
and he of all others was just the man who required to
be visited and roused by his clergyman. He (Fir. O'Con-
nell) would not dwell further upon this subject at present, as
he meant to bring it specifically before the House. There was
one fact, however, which he must state—it appeared that in
the county of Middlesex a number of Roman Catholic ladies
of station, of rank, and of fortune, had formed themselves into
a society to visit the sick; they were prevented from visiting
some of the Roman Catholic inmates of the prisons; there
were no less than three meetings of the magistrates of Mid-
dlesex ; the proposition that those ladies should be
allowed to visit the prison was considered, and very poorly sup-
ported in point of numbers, but it was ultimately overruled.—
( Hear, hear.) Now if it happened in Ireland that a number of
Protestant ladies were prevented by Roman Catholic Magis-
trates from acting sa laudably as those ladies in Middlesex in-
tended, no language could be strong enough to reprobate the
conduct of such Roman Catholic Magistrates.—( Hear, hear. )
He (Mr. O'Connell) should say that it would be an uncharita-
ble and an unchristian act, and no credit would be done to any
party capable of being guilty of it—(Hear, hear)—it was not
likely that the Roman Catholic clergy could be supposed to
nine within the meaning of those whom. the Act
of Parliament called " improper persons. "—( Hear, hear. )
They were educated men, certified for by their Bishops.; there
was, therefore, no reason why they should be shut out from

the discharge of their duties. The question was becoming
every day more and more interesting, not alone to the pri-
soners and the clergy who were directly interested, but the
interest was every day augmenting amongst the upper classes
of Roman Catholics. A clause was introduced into the Act of
Parliament, providing that whenever there were Roman Ca-
tholics in a prison, a chaplain should be had for them at the
expense of the county. That clause was struck out in the
House of Lords—( Hear, hear)—it was to be la-
mented that a proposition so rational in its nature
should not be acceded to; however, the clause was
struck out, and some time ago an application was made to ap-
point a Roman Catholic Chaplain to a prison; the Grand
Jury said they could not provide for him. The Roman Catho-
lie Bishop (Dr. Griffiths) said he would appoint a clergyman
gratuitously, that he would pay him out of his own pocket; but
the Midelesex Magistrates refused him permission to visit the
prison, unless whenever he happened to be specially sent for.
When he ( Mr. O'Connell) should bring tho=e, together with
many other similar facts, before the House, he would respect-
fully claim a legislative measure to allow Roman Catholic cler-
gymen to go into the gaols to attend prisoners whenever they
thought fit- There was also a very just complaint that in some
prisons Roman Catholics were obliged to attend at the Pro-
testant service. Even these were grievances of a peculiar nature.
This was a system which every one must consider cruel, and as
for Christianity, he thought there was very little Christianity
in those who would not. act to others as they would he acted by.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL commenced by alluding, in a low
tone of voice, to certain observations which had been made in
the course of the debate, which bore no reference to the ques-
tion. The question before the House this evening was, whe-
ther it was fit that an inquiry should be instituted into the pre-
sent system of prison discipline. The answer to the proposal
made by the Right llon. Gentleman was, that no benefit would
arise from such a proceeding. He admitted that the present
system of prison discipline was not the most perfect, but they
were making such progressive improvement from year to year
as could not be accelerated with advantage ; and by the system
established by law they had every circumstance first reported to
the Secretary of State, and then laid on the table of
both Houses of Parliament, so that every publicity was
given to abuses. It was only necessary that Members
should ask the Secretary of State for any information, and the
Secretary of State would be able to answer their inquiries, and
he ( Lord John Russell) was sure that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man had shown his readiness to-night to adopt such a course.—
( Hear, hear.) Now, if from the statements made to the Se-
cretary of State it should appear that the law was not sufficient
or that it required to he remedied, there would then be a case
made out for any Hon. Gentleman to propose an amendment for
such defect in the law, but he could net see that any good would
be done by having a general inquiry into this law. His col-
league, his Hon. Friend, gave up half the case when he said he
did not want a general inquiry. The Hon. Member said that
inquiry was useless; all they wanted was a report. Now the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had just spoken had re-
ferred to one case of abuse, and on which he thought the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had not received correct in-
formation. It was relative to the case of Roman Catholic
prisoners ; and he ( Lord .T. Russell) confessed that there
was a defect in the law on this subject, and he regretted that
the law proposed by Mr. Langdale had not become the law of
the land. It had oocurred to him (Lord J. Russell) when he
was Secretary of State, and received applications relative to
the admission of religious instructors into prisons, he thought
first that they should be complied with, but, on hearing the
objections of the Magistrates, he thought they were well-
founded; for though the applicants might be proper persons,
and actuated by sincere zeal, yet if they opened the doors
wide to all those who were willing to give religious instruc-
tion, the probability was that they would destroy the
peace of mind of the prisoners by their contradic-
tory and, it might be, fanatical doctrines. Indeed he did
not think that the state of the prisoners would he at all im-
proved by such indiscriminate • admission. He did not think
that the Right Hon. Gentleman could Isroperly assent to such
a measure, thegh he should be glad to see some improvement
in the condition of the Roman Catholic prisoners. In this
county there must be a great number of Roman Catholic pri-
soners, and he (Lord J. Russell) must confess it appeared to
him that the decision of the Middlesex Magistrates was not jus-
tifiable under the circumstances; he could not see why the Roman
Catholic ladies should not be allowed to appoint their visiting
Committee, or why Dr. Griffiths, a most respectable person,
should not have the power to send a chaplain of his own
to visit the prisoners. But with respect to the motion made by
his Hon. Friend, he (Lord J. Russell) did not see any prac-
tical advantage to be gained from it, because all the improve-
ments which could be made, had better be made by the Execu-
tive Government—( Hear, hear)—to whom it more properly
belonged. And when a case of abuse occurred to a. Member
which required explanation, he was sure every information
would be given on the subject. He must. therefore, vote
against his Hon. Friend if he pressed his motion to a division.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to cor-
rect sonic error which had fallen from his Hon. Friend, who
had adverted to the state of the House of Correction
belonging to the University of Cambridge, called the
spinning-house, and who gave an account of that house
of correction, as described by the Inspectors three years since.
No one could deny that that building was ill-constructed and
ill adapted for the purposes of a house of correction. The
Hon. Gentleman certainly added that there was a law-suit
pending there between three parties, to which those inconve-
niences were owing; but if he had looked at the later Report
of the Commissioners, he would have found that the contest
between the town, the corporation, and the University was
still pending, and that so far from the University refusing to
remedy any inconveniences, the Inspectors of Prisons had
communicated with the Vice-Chancellor of the University on
the subject, who had referred them to his solicitor, in order
that some remedy might be devised, and by the solicitor's re-
marks appended to the Report, it appeared that the law.
suit was still pending, but that permanent arrange-
ments were being made, in order to secure the re-
ligious services of a chaplain, and to separate the male
and female prisoners. He (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) thougnt that it would be found that every thing the
University could do, it had done. But the Hon Gentlemen
had made a charge of a more serious nature, which he (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) could satisfactorily prove to be
without foundation. He alluded to a suburb of Cambridge
called Barnwell, which had grown up lately into a populous
town, and had become the residence of a large number of per-
sons of bad character. He had stated that the lodging-houses
were crowded with persons of the worst description ; and that
there were men going about with dog-carts, who professed
to be distributing religious tracts. If that were so, he
( the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not know but the
Hon. Gentleman having summed every thing up, said that that
was the only religions instruction which the University afforded
to the inhabitants of Barnwell. If the Hon. Gentleman had
taken means to inquire, he would have known that in this in-
stance, instead of there being any want of zeal on the part of
the University, there was no instance where they had exerted
themselves to a greater extent, or with more success. He
would know that one gentleman alone, a Fellow of Trinity Col-
lege, though possessed of small means, had built a church
there capable of holding more than a thousand individuals, and
had taken the entire duties of that church upon himself,
where he acted as minister; • and still finding that there
was a growing necessity for religious instruction in that
parish, he had completed a second church, by which
the means for religious instruction was considerably enlarged.
The Right Hon. Gentleman so far from denying the exertions
of the University would, he, (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
was sure, knowing his candour, be the first to admit that their
exertions had been most strenuous and successful,
Mr. BROTHERTON said he was quite sure that many
prisoners were brought to take their trial who had no right to
be convicted at all, but whose cases should have been disposed
of in another way less expensive to the country. He had
merely risen to represent this fact to the House, If anything
could be done to improve the condition of prisoners confined
in the House of Correction, and to reinstate ;hem in society,
he should be glad to have it adopted; and if the Hon. Member
should divide, he (Mr. Brotherton) would vote for him, but he
would advise him not to divide.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARFORD spoke in so low a tone of voice, that he
was scarcely audible in the gallery. We understood him to say
that having been for some time Sheriff for the county of
Monmouth, his attention bad been called to the prison disci.
pline. He had found in the Monmouth prison no less
than four men sleeping in one bed, and the gaol crowded in
all parts, and the drainage so bad as seriously to affect the
health of the prisoners. He hoped such abuses would be
remedied.
Lord G. SOMERSET, as a Magistrate of the county of
Monmouth, felt called on to explain something relative to the
state of the prisons in Monmouth. The attention of the Ma-
gistrates of Monmouth had lately been called to the subject of
prison discipline, and a new county gaol was now being erected
at an expense of from 15,0001. to 16,0001., and at this moment
an inquiry was going on to consider how far it would be pos-
sible to improve the condition of the other gaols. A new
gaoler from Bristol _had also been lately appointed to Mon-
mouth Gaol to ensure proper discipline, so that he thought it
could not be said that the Massistrates. of Monmouth had neg-
lected to consider this important matter.
Mr. DUNCOMBE was understood to say that he regretted
shouldit
Isis measure had met with so much opposition, as the only ar-
dg
uu
en;
ievnet
ohfea
n; had
good.hea rHe
against
like
eo knowsithatitlh
evoualtdhanromt
do? be pro-
it could
After the kind manner, however, in which his.motion
had been treated, he should not press the House to a division,
but he hoped that when he allowed this motion to be negatived
without a division, he should not be considered as ap-
proving of the present system.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
There was no uniformity in the present system, and what he
desired was, that the whole system of diet, labour, and disci-
pline, should be investigated by a Committee; and he had no
doubt that a Committee appointed for that purpose would
strike out some plan to mitigate the cruelties at present prac-
tised. But he did not intend to press the matter to a division,
and not being able to obtain an inquiry, he was satisfied at
least the discussion would be productive of good.—(Hear.)
He was sorry to be oblised to state what he did respecting
Cambridge, but he believed that the (prison at Barnwell re-
mained without any improvement, with the exception that
prayers had now been celebrated there every Sunday. He
warned the House that a strong feeling was abroad that, though
they mitigated their criminal code, by their present principle
they were only substituting the prison for the scaffold ; and
that those who entered those prisons came out emaciated crip-
ples for life.—( Hear, hear.) He was well aware that there was
a difference between the silent and solitary systems, and also
that there were two systems of solitary confinement ; one in
dark cells with a diet of breath and water, and the other well-
aired and lighted cells. He would not withdraw his motion,
but allow it to be negatived without a division.
The motion was then put,'and negatived without a division.
IMPORTATION OF HILL COOLIES INTO THE
WEST INDIES.
Mr. VERNON SMITH said that having ventured to give
notice of the motion which he was now called on to move
he should be unwilling to call the attention of the House to it,
if the Noble Lard, the Secretary for the Colonies, had
,taken
upon himself to invite their attention to the subject. He
begged to assure the House that it was not his attention to re-
tard the progress of improvement now going forward in the
Mauritius and the West Indies, but because .he believed the
views of the Noble Lord on the subject were calculated to re-
tard that improvement he determined to introduce the matter
to the House. And not only were the Noble Lord's views,
in his opinion, calculated to retard that improvement, but he
believed from the rashness with which he treated the subject
that he would endanger the safety and security of the inha-
bitants of India. In order to put the House in possession of the
precise position in which the subject stold it would be necessary
to recapitulate and go back to the subject as it stood when before
brought under the consideration of the House. The House
would recollect that after the passing of the Emancipation Act
—that noble Act which was obtained by the sacrifices made
by the people of this country to individuals whose estates
would be prejudiced by its passing-s-it was supposed that the
emancipated slaves would rather live in repose in their ener-
vated climate, than undertake those labours which the inha-
bitants of more northern climes were accustomed to. On such
a supposition it was considered that the worst place from
which a supply could be obtained was the East Indies ; and
those who took any interest in the question would remember
that an importation of Hill Coolies into the West Indies and
the Mauritius took place, the former in the year 1835, and the
latter in 1837. He did not wish to enter into any subject that
could give offence to any person, but he would say that when the
question of the introduction of Hill Coolies into British
Guiana was under consideration, Lord Brougham whose eyes
were always open
to anything that affected the black popula-
tion, and who had done so much in this cause, made one of
nding speeches upon the Order
his eloquent and hea rt-re ,
in Council on the subject in 1838, and 'their introduction was
stopped ; and so strong was the impression produced, that tie.
thing would satiate the desire of the country but the stopping

of the traffic, and instructions were accordingly sent to the
Governor of India to prevent their importation. In the year
1840, after his Noble Friend ( Lord John Russell) had been
for six months in the Colonial-office, he conceived that some-
thing must be done on the subject ; but, jealous as he was of
the privileges of Parliament, and upon a question so much agi-
tated, he thought it right the subject should be laid before
Parliament, and he introduced the Colonial Passengers
Act; but the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) suggested he had
better issue an Order in Council, which, however, his
Noble Friend did not do, considering that he could not issue
an Order in Council, for the purpose of its being subsequently
discussed in Parliament. But a few days after the Right
Hon. Baronet opposite, the Member for Pembroke, made
another proposition, that a Bill should be introduced on the
I subject to Parliament, and that a discussion might then take
P• lace That was the opinion of the Right Hon. Baronet,
but his (Mr. V. Smith's) Noble Friend did not adopt that
system, but he did so in principle, for a clause on the subject
was inserted in the Colonial Passengers Act then .passing
through Parliament, and he believed that that course was ap-
proved of by the Right Hon. Baronet. Thus the question
stood; and in the debates that ensued, the Hon. Member for
the Tower Hamlets took an active part in opposition; but, not-
withstanding, the Bill was carried through several stages. In
the meantime, the powerful machinery of the Anti-Slavery
Society was put in requisition, and an outcry was raised
against himsef and his Noble Friend for the part they had
taken in introducing the measure. It was not till the third
reading of the measure that it was. thrown out, and
thrown out, too, by the agency of the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet (Sir J. Graham) who came down with
one of those heavy-pounder speeches for which he was so re-
markable, and destroyed all chance of passing that Pill at that
time.—( Hear, hear.) The course he took was one of delay,
because he said, " that they ought not be called on to
legislate on the subject without any definite plan being
laid before them by the Noble Lord" (Russell).
That was the course pursued by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, and also by another Hon. Gentleman, whom he saw oppo.
site—a Director of the East India Company, who pressed for
delay till information could be obtained from India, and who
presented a petition from the East India Company for that
purpose. Such was the position of the question before the
House at that time, and it would be seen that the House gave
its solemn sanction to the introduction of Hill Coolies from
India to the Mauritius and the West Indies. He knew that
one Government were not bound to the measures recommended
by a different Government; but he thought it a strange course
for one Government to cast blame upon another for
certain measures, and afterwards to adopt the very
course which they censured before.-(Bear, hear.)
He would next invite the attention of the House to a Report
which had been lately presented to Parliament. It was a Re-
port drawn up by six gentlemen, appointed for the purpose by
the Governor-General of India. One of those Gentlemen,
namely Mr. Arthur, had left the country before that Report
had been signed ; but of the other five a majority, consisting
of three, had signed the Report. They stated that " they
were decidedly adverse to the emigration of Hill Coolies from
the East Indies to the Mauritius, under any circumstances."
One of the rive Gentlemen, a Mr. Dowson, who had refused to
sign that Report, was himself a merchant, largely engaged
in the export of Hill Coolies ; and the other recusant, Mr.
J. P. Grant, was iavourable, on the whole, to exportation a
but there were some points in his minute which would lead to
a different conclusion. He acknowledged, however, that
there were abuses in the system, which he divided
into three heads ; namely, abuses in India, abuses
at sea, and abuses in the Mauritius.—( Hear.) He admitted,
among the abuses in India, that the police did not afford the
protection which they might afford to the Hill Coolies; then
among the abuses at sea, was a scarcity of water in the ves-
sels; but the strongest point against the conclusion at
which Mr. Grant had arrived, was his own admission that at
sea some of the unfortunate passengers had thrown themselves
overboard. That did not prove that they were satisfied with
their condition ; and although Mr. Grant had stated that they
had thrown themselves overboard, in order that they might be
picked up again, he (Mr. V. Smith) doubted the accuracy of
that statement. The principal abuse which took place in the
Mauritius was, according to Mr. Grant, that those who had
formerly been slave-owners, did not show themselves fit to be
trusted with the management of Hill Coolies. He (Mr. V.
Smith) did not mean to say that he was decidedly unfavourable
to the exportation of Hill Coolies, but he thought
that Parliament should take no rash or premature step upon
the subject. The next paper to which he should refer, and the
most important of all, was a minute drawn ,up by Lord Auck-
land, the late Governor-General of India. The subject had
been submitted to the four Counsellors of India, but the most
valuable report was that of Lord Auckland, to whose humanity
and good sense such a question might safely be entrusted.
Now, if Lord Auckland had said that he approved of the order
of the Government, and that he thought it might immediately
be acted on, he (Mr. V. Smith) admitted that that would be
a perfect justification of the course pursued by the Noble Lord
opposite, however precipitate that course might be considered.
Ile did not believe, however, that such an inference could
be drawn from the minute of Lord Auckland. That
Noble Lord, after having stated that he had read the Re-
port of the Commissioners, proceeded to express his doubts
upon the subject. He began by saying, that " all the atten •
tion he had given to the matter had not enabled him to arrive
at any satisfactory conclusion. It was upon no understoodprin-
ciple, but by the busy intervention of the Government agents,
that the first emigrants had been induced to seek their fortunes
in the Mauritius ; and whether many had done so for their
own good or evil was a question which there had not been time
or experience enough to determine." Again, at the end of
paragraph the 2d, page the 9th, he stated that " he greatly
feared that no act of the Legislature, and no vigilance on the
part of the constituted authorities, could prevent fraud from
being practisedopon the helpless Hill Coolies in consequence
of their ignorance and their poverty." In alluding to a subject
to which Mr. Grant had also referred, he stated that " the
police appointed to protect these people were a most ineffi-
cient blanch of our service ; and that the establishment of
such a body had, on the whole, ended in disappointment."
Lord Auckland said in another part of the minute, that if
the question were that of opening a sjstem of emigration to
the :Mauritius alone, he would willingly admit that it might
after a time be attended with much benefit ;" hit the Noble
Lord added, that "after they had been satisfied of the safety
of the proposed emigration to the Mauritius, they would have
to consider that such emigration could hardly take place
without its leading also to renewed emigration, chiefly on the
part of British subjects, from Pondicherry and other British
settlements in India." There was another passage which he
would read to the House—" The home authorities alone would
be able to determine how far the cordial co-operation of fo-
reign Governments was to be relied on for a steady enforce-
ment of a measure to protect the natives within the limits
of their settlements." Now he (Mr. V. Smith) did not
think that the Noble Lord opposite had any security
that he would obtain a cordial co-operation on the part of fo-
reign Powers ; and he was-confirmed in his doubts upon the
subject from the late refusal of France to ratify the treaty, in-
cluding the right of search ; and he could not but forget that
that country had always shown herself extremely jealous of the
prosperity of our Colonies. The more he looked at the mi.
mute of Lord Auckland the less did he feel disposed to think
that that minute would justify the Noble Lord opposite in pur-
suing the course ho had taken, without having previously as-
certained the feelings of Parliament upon so important a ques.
tion. It would appear from the minute of Mr. Princep, an-
other of the four counsellors, that that gentleman was
adverse to the passing of any law to protect the Hill Coolies
from the frauds and impositions of traders. Those frauds,
practised by the crafty upon the ignorant, took place in every
society, acaerding to that gentleman, and therefore the Legis-
lature should not interfere in such cases. Now in his (Mr. V.
Smith's) opinion, such a statement was alone sufficient to
throw discredit on the minute of Mr. Princep. He would
next refer to the evidence given by the Hill Coolies themselves,
showing their opinion of the advantages of emigration. Num-
bers of them, who had been in the Mauritius, had been exa-
mined at great length, and, with the exception of a very few,
none were willing to leave their country again, what-
ever might be the indemnity held out to them.
From these statements he inferred that very few wished to
return to the Mauritius, or to go back to the state in which
they were said to be comfortable and well off. Under proper
regulations, he thought that a considerable number might be
fit, that he called the
breeadly)etlioor,eedturtriii,e art,,,dguolatltiieurnss foundwere ntootgo; and it was because
attention Of the House to the subject. Up to October 1841,
there had been no overwhelming evidence that should have
induced the Noble Lord to depart from the course laid down
by the late Government. He would not allude to anything
foreign to the subject, or to anything relating to any other
department than that of the Noble Lord, as to the land of pro-
mise held out to the House and the country during the recess ;
but at the commencement of the present session, the Noble
Lord had introduced, with some appearance of parade in
the despatch of business, two measures, both of which he
might have found prepared in the Colonial-office, the Pas-
sengers' Act, and the South Australian Act. Thepreamble
of the former Act would' appear to do much credit to the
Noble Lord's foresight as a statesman, for it was all proba-
bilities. It went entirely upon, " Whereas it is probable ;"
and then, in case of all these probabilities turning into cer-
tainties, he proposed his Order in Council. If the late Secre-
tary of State had acted in this manner, they would hare
been told that this was an ex .mple of the rash conduct of the
Whig Government, its carelessness of existing institutions,
and its readiness to break through them, to serve a purpose.
He wished to know if that Order in Council was issued with
any knowledge of the opinions of the East India Com-
pany upon it, for it was that body which, on the
last occasion presented a petition adverse to the Bill. lie con-
sidered that the Noble Lord had put the question in the most
awkward shape possible for the realization of the hopes enter-
tained by the planters of the Mauritius, and also' in the worst
shape for the safety and security of the Hill Coolies themselves.
Ile had issued an Order•in Council not to eat/Cute but to Prot
pose to execute; it must have been issued as a compliment to
the Mauritian planters. Was it hot likely that In India. they
would be as anxious to secure and retain their supply of labour,
for which there was a demand in the manufacture of sugar,
and therefore be as anxious to prevent the exportation of
that labour as the :Mauritian planters would
,be to
import it ?—(Cries of " Hear, hear," from Lord Stanley.)
The Noble Lord might cheer that, but if employment and sus-
tenance could be found at home for this class, would it not be
better that they should be so employed, than forced to seek it
CS
fabroad
that the The
Cooliespn e i couldpa principal
reason
not gfor e
t have left them free to seek labour where it could be found, if
they were given protection against imposition.
at home ; the better and wider principle would have been to
the
employment m ea s measure
forasuttblhhil
themselves
ci
ntarhisel
aecadigtvee
dad
great corporation
the House hereafter, but
the Noble Lord might perhaps indulge
Council two days
of
if that- correspondence was in existence,
~g that
betweenseen any
the Nobly a
t
net only had the East India
lLord correspondence
and
telndia
Board,ne dhaonudtbhi
wohetilat
bdhhaptda which
Company
or later be decided by
ou this question, which must sooner
prbiyag
rbtl
right
Parliament.
knowon bt.l c Lord in
Noble
v‘o .batlseh
wait for the '
against himself the
opening
of Parliament, but issued his Order
before. Was it that he did not wish to raise a discus-
sion in Parliament, or to excite
t the similar measure
was so anxious to excite agams
such difference be-
of the late Government? Was there any
and thee tween the position of these persons in 1810
his position
his with
time, as to induce the Noble Lord to change
such a difference,
then to this subject? If there was not
the factious oppo..
id
then the Noble Lord was responsible for
G
the opinion
radt tdebutnoof
t th
nhaat t t e beenp
sition he had given to the measure of the late overnmert in
1840. In introducing the Passengers' Act, the Noble Lord
had never mentioned the question to which he (Mr. V.
Smith) was then calling the attention of the House ; but a
fortnight after the Bill was produced, he foundna a marginal
note attached to it, which might be considered to refer
to the Hill Coolies, as it empowered the Governor-General of
India, to adopt the provisions of that Act, if necessary, in the
possessions of British India. Did the Noble Lord by this mean
to raise the question of emigration from India or not ? If he
did, whsr not state so in the introduction of the Act ? if not,
why had he issued the order in Council two days before the
maelleetdincgroowf
IPl.maralidaemelanwt,,tihnuss-
teasadnoeftiolanwingnisso'he bathe; had himself
c
Parliament?
The motion for which he had given notice was for the produca
tion of the instructions given by the East India Company to
the Governor- General, who was now proceeding thither, on
this subject. It was hardly possible that the Noble Lord had
suffered his Colleague to proceed to India without definite
instructions on this question. He wished to know whatinstruc-
tions
had been given, as the Noble Lord had been a decided
enemy to the exportation of the Coolies, haring, in 1838,
made a strong speech against it, in which he represented that