Star.
London, England, 1828-04-22 00:00:00

ANATOMY.

Mr. Secretary PEEL presented a Petition from the
President and Council of the London College of Sur-
geons, praying the House to take into its consideration
the state of the law in regard to the providing dead
bodies for dissection. The Petitioners complained that
medical students were obliged, at a great expense,
to resort to France for the purpose of receiving
that instruction from the dissection of bodies; Which

no models were able to afford; and that while
they were thus debarred from perfecting them-
selves in the knowledge of their profession. they
were liable to prosecution for ignorance. He confessed
he could not help admiring and respecting the prejudices
and the feelings which opposed the views of the Peti-
tioners; and although he understood that an Honourable
Gentleman ( Mr.Wdrburton) was about to mike a motion
for an inquiry upon this subject, he was convinced, from
what had come to his knowledge, that little good could
result from it unless it was conducted with the greatest
delicacy and care. The Right Hon. Gentleman can•
chided by observing, that he had done every thing con-
sistent with the present state of the laws to-forward the
vie‘‘s of the Petitioners.

Sir JOSEPH YORKE sugge,ted, that it might be
very advantageous for anatomical purposes, that the
bodies of persons who died by suicide should be given
up for surgical dissection. He did not mean the bodies
of persons who perished by suicide under delicate cir.

_
cumstances—but those whose bodies were unclaimed.

He thought much advantage would follow from the
investigation of the brains of persons dying in that way.
The Petition was then brought up.
Mr. Secretary PEEL, in presenting a Petition on the same sub-
ject from Huddersfield, in Yorkshire, expressed an opinion that by
making the dissection of bodies a punishment, such as the Gallant
Admiral suggested, it would have the effect of strengthening the
prejudice which generally prevailed against the subjecting of bodies
to anatomical dissection.

The Petitions were severally read, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. Secretary PEEL, brought up the Report of the Commis.
sioners appointed to inquire into the state of the Supply of Water
to the Metropolis.— Laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.
Sir J. MACINTOSH presented a Petition from the
Medical Society of Edinburg'', praying for the adop
tion of some mean. for the promoti'm of Anatomical
Science. Tile Hon. and Learned Gentleman strongly

recommended the Petitic n to the attention of the

House. In Paris tfe means of acquiring anatomical
knowledge wer e t enty times as great as in London; and
the con.equence was, that 500 out of 2,000 medical
Audents repaired to France for their education. On.
te.s 1,0,1 e means of improvement were adopted, they

must continue to derive the ple,ent inAdequute supply

- • -
from the clanuiestine and conirabend disinterment of the

deAd. which was a sch, of to fit men for the worst

purposes. His Gallant Friend was wrong in imputing so
many suicit'es to London. It was the greatest capital
in Europe, and had the fewest suicides.—(Hear, hear).
Paris, which was half the size, had three times the num-

ber. It was in vain to look to executions of criminals
tor a supply. He was happy to say that they too were
greatly on the decline. He found that in 1733, the
xecutions for murder, for London and Middlesex, wets
in the proportion of 1 to 10,000; for the last seven
years it was as I to 70,000. The punishment of death,
he thought, should be less frequently resorted to.
Sir J. YORKE was of opinion that all the felons
should be given up to the surgenns after execution.
After a fete words front Mr. WAR BURTON, the Petition was
read, and ordered to be printed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER presented a
Petition from the Dean and Chapter of Peterborough against further
concessions to the Catholics.—Ordered to be printed.
_ _

Mr. HARVEY presented a petition from twenty
thousand silk st eaveis in Spitalfields, praying for a pro-
tection for their labour. He said it was now manifest,
from the conduct of the Ministers in the Cern Bill they
had introduced, that a system of monopoly and exclu-
si-n was to become a part of our permanent policy. He
Asked Ministers in what way it was proposed, while they
gave protection to the strong—the owners of the soil—
to afford protection to those whose only property was
their labour ? The most heart.reii,:ing evidence of their
distress was already before the House, as taken by
the Committees. The p titioners did not ask that their
labour should be prot-cted by the exclusion of other
labour. They first prayed that all labour, and all ex.
change of commodities, should be free; but they also
say, it you choose to throw protection around other com-
modities, afford us protection for our labour; and they
pray that the poor may not be excluded from that pale
of protection which was raised around the privileged
orders. Not only the thoesands who had signed the
present petition, but the millions who had no property
but their labour, united in this demand.
On the question that the Petition be bruutht np.
Mr. FYLER was a wate that great difficulties at-
tended this question. The principle, that labour would
find its own level, held good in infant States, but in
countries where there was a superabundant population,
it was by no means the case. la this country the agri-
cultural interest was supported, and he therefore
thought that labour, the only property of the poor man,
should also be protected. The petitioners did not say
that there should be a scale of wages, but that it should
vary from time to time according to circumstances, and

hai there should be, on occasion's of variation, a meet-

ing between the masters and their workmen, when the
majority on either side should determine the question.
Mr. CHARLES GRANT did justice to the eloquent
and able manner in which the subject had been brought
forward. The Hun. Mover (M,. Harvey) knowing he
was treading on delicate grounds, had abstained from
entering into a general argument. The Spitalfields Acts
had been repealed, because they had been found to be
injurious to the manufacturer; and although many
attempts had been made to renew those Acts, they had
been invariably unsuccessful. The Right Honourable
Gentleman then said, that part of the Petition which
prayed fur a regulation of wages by a majority of mas-
ters or workmen, as it might chance, praying also for
an unlimited importation of corn, the abolition of sine-
cures, &c. proceeded to remark that these prayers were
too extensive in their ramifications for him to enter
into. Several Committees had sat on this question,
and their Reports had invariably set their faces against
meddling with the prices of wages. As far as he had
understood, there was no lack of employment at pre-
sent. The majority of workmen in Spitalfields were
now receiving 16s. or 17s. a week, in the manufacture
of gros de Naples ; but the subject of machinery, to
which the Petition referred, he should be ready at a
proper time to prove that it was essential to the prin-
ciples of free trade, and no case had been made out to
induce the House to alter the laws as at present esta-
blished.
Mr. lIUME thought the Petitioners were decidedly
incorrect in their notions on the subject of machinery,
and agreed fully in the observation of the Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. C. Grant). He also thought that the
Petitioners were wrong in asking for a fixed price of
wages, as he was satisfied it would be injurious to them.
Notwithstanding that he agreed in the general expres-
sion of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he would maintain
that the rich were protected at the expense of the poor,
,ltd insisted upon the right of the latter to have a free
importation of all the necessaries of life in the same
manner as there was a tree trade in their commodity,
ttiir labour ; so that, as there was a reduction in the
price of their labour, there should be a reduction in the
price of provisions.
Mr. ALEXANDER DAWSON said, that the peti.
iioners not ask Parliament to regulate the price of
wages, but to allow the petitioners—the persons most
interested in it—to regulate it from time to time. The
Honourable Member thought, if such a piss could be

properly matured, it would give great satisfaction to
thousands, and-tens of thousands of individtikli. •
Mr. PAULET THOMPSON remarked, that When
the prayer of the Pe ition went to ask for a minimum
of wages, and the re-enactment of the old•Spitalfields
Acts, which were absurd to a degree, he could not but
oppose the prayer sought for. The Spitalfields Acts:had
caused the erection of silk manufactot ie. at Paisley, *ea
clesfield, and other places; and to grant their pre;itni
prayer would be to inftet an injury on the petitioners,
So far from the artizans in the silk manufacture being
badly off, he believed they were in a fairer condition
than the majority of our manufacturers. The Hon.
Member had no doubt, if he were allowed to bring silk-
manufacturers to the bar of that House, they would
admit the correctness of his statement, and say thit the
silk trade was now in a more flourishing state than it
had been during the last forty years.
Mr. Alderman WAITIIMAN could not admit that
the improvement in the trade, mentioned by the Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. P. Thompson) had taken place. The
Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. C. Grant) had said,
that the price of labour in Spitalfields, in the manu-
facture of gros de Naples, had been reduced from SOs.
to 16s. per week—this was the vet y thing he com-
plained of; and although he generally agreed with the
principles of free trade, be thought that having a com-
petition in our own markets of French goods, a must
injurious effect had been produced, both upon the master
and the man, by the reduction of both the profit and the
wages. Notwithstanding that the Petitioners were, in
his opinion, wrong in some of their conclusions, there
were many points in which they were right, particularly
those which referred to the continuance of excessive taza-
ation without the benefit of an unrestricted trade in corn.
Mr. C. GRANT explained. When he stated that
five or six years ago the very best workmen received
25.. or SOs. a week, the majority of the workmen re.
ceived only 101. or 124. a week. At the present moment
eight-tenth; of the workmen in Spitalfields were em-
ployed in the manufacture of gros de Naples, and on
the whole were in receipt of better wages than at the
period alluded to.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY explained. He observed, so
long as the labouring classes were oppressed at the
expense of the rich, so long should he complain of the
injustice done to them, and advocate their cause.
The Petition was then brought up ; and on the ques-
tion that it be printed,
Mr. FRANKLAND LEWIS defended the Govern.
ment against the imputation thrown out against them
by Hon. Members. His Majesty's Government ought
not to be charged with an indifference to the labouring
part of the population, because they had ascert iined
satisfactorily, that a minimum of wages was a measure
highly objectionable. His Majesty's Government were
anxious that all classes should receive protection, and
he was decidedly of opinion that all had it, whether in
the sink of silk, cotton, or corn.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON, in looking at the ques-
tion generally, and at the relative prices of corn at
home and abroad, was of opinion the manufacturer in
this country was prejudiced to the extent of lull 4.0 per
cent. The Hon. Alderman, however, thought that
the silk weavers were not aggrieved by the abolition of
the Spitalfields Acts, and that any obstruction to free
labour was in opposition to the essential principle of
free trade.
Sir G. PHILLIPS was of opinion that the manufr.,:-
toting labourer did not receive the full value of his
labour wising out of the high protecting duty on corn,
any more than the agricultural labourer did :.the party
who detived the benefit was the owners of estates, and
not the formes.
The Petition was then ordered to be printed.
UNITED STATES.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said he rose for the purpose of
putting a question to the Right Hon. Gentleman the
S:cretary for the Colonies (Mr. Huskissont. Tre House
would recollect that last year there was laid-upon the
table Copies of a Correspondence which had been car.
ried on between the late Mr. Canning and Mr. Galatin,
respecting their commercial intercourse with the United
States. The correspondence was brought down to Jan.
1827. The question had not then been terminated, but
was open to further negotiation. Be was sorry to see
an impediment to the free commercial intercourse of
the two countries. He wished to know in'whatstate
the negotiations had been since July last ?
Mr. HUSKISSON said, there could be no difficulty
in answering the question of the Hon. Member. A
.correspondence, as he had stated, had taken place, and in
consequence of a publication in the American Papers,
it became necessary for the British Government to require
some explanations from the Government of the Visited
States. This correspondence would be shot tly laid before
Parliament—together with the Treaty of Commerce,
and the regulations respecting the settlement of the North
West boundary: He admitted the policy of maintaining
a good understanding with the United States—and he
felt satisfied that the correspondence would prove what
efforts were made to secure that object.
SUPPLY.
On the motion of the CH A NCELLOIt of the EXCHEQUER,
the House resolved itself into a Conunittee of Supply to his Majesty,
Sir A. GRANT in the Chair.
The CH A NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved that
the sum of £4,000,000 out of the produce of the Consolidated
Fund, be granted to his Majesty. -
The motion bring seconded, was carried unanimously.
The House then resumed, and the Report was ordered to be re.
ceived tomorrow.
The Scamps on Cards and Dice 13111 and the Crown Solicitor*
Bill were postponed to Friday next.
On the mutton of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the Cotta.
mittee of Suppif was postponed to Wednesday next.
Mr. HOME wished to inquire it any progress had been made
in the Bills relative to the Stamps, to the Excise, Etc. of last Sew
don?-and if any, when they would be introduced?
The CHANCELLOR of the EX CEIEQUER replied, that the
reason why these Bills had not yet been brought forward was b's
newness in office; they would, however, be brought forward es
early as prhsiblet.•
After s few words from Mr. Baton; the subject dropped.
PROMISES AND croasanorrs' BILL.
The Report of the Committee on this Bad was brought up—the
amendments agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be read a third
time on Friday neat.

lITCORDII •AIIAI<CC STU.
The Report of the Committee on this Bill was also brought ur
the amendments agreed to, and ordered to be read a third time
Friday seat.