The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1847-04-27 00:00:00

Emptrial Varliaintnt:

-f-
HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY

The first hour and a half of the sitting was occupied
in the presentation of petitions, principally in reference to
the education grant.
On the motion of Mr. GREENE, it was ordered that the
house would not receive any petition Kainst a railway
bill, after Monday the 3rd of May, unless the petitioners
complain of any matter whiCh may have arisen during the
progress of the bill before the committee on the bill, and
that from and after that day the committee of classification
may refer to the chairman of the committee of ways and
means, and the members ordered to bring in such unop-
posed bills as they shall deem it desirable to refer.
Lord J. RUSSELL, in answer to Mr. Ferrand, stated
that it was his intention to bring the subject of the Eng-
lish poor-law forward in the ensuing (this) week. The
noble lord, also, in answer to Sir B. Hall, with reference
to rumours that arrangements had been made between
the government and the Wesleyan committee for the pur-
pose of setting aside their opposition to the education
grant, stated that the communications with the Wesleyan
body on the subject of the minutes of the council of edu-
cation. were originated not by any person authorised by
the government, but by Lord Ashley, who, having been
given to understand that they were about to enter into a
resolution hostile to the minutes, suggested that that body
had better learn from the government whether they had
put a proper construction upon them. The communica-
tion was made through the secretary of the committe of
council, and the answer of himself and Lord Lansdowne
to the first question was, that persons holding ecclesiasti-
cal functions would not be eligible to the office of pupil
teachers; to the second, that the cases in which they
would give assistance to schools would be with reference
to thbse schools in which competent provision would be
made for the instruction of children, the daily reading of
a portion of the Scriptures forming part of that instruc-
tion, by which it was meant that the authorised version
should be used. To the next question, as regarded in-
spectors, they were informed that the government were
prepared to choose a person to inspect their schools, who
should only be appointed by the concurrence of the We-
sleyan body ; and that the committee of education of that
body should have the same power of expressing their
opinion, and of having their concurrence and leave asked
before inspectors were appointed to their schools, as was
enjoyed by the British and Foreign School Society. He
was not aware that any grants had been made to
_Boman

Catholic schools exclusiVely, though giants might have

been made to sc

,nded them

Lere the authoris

t not otherwise,

version o

When the Roman

hOps should express their views on the sub-

len woulc

lie time

ie governmeni

eider whether these grants could not in any way be ex-
tended to that body; and he trusted the time would ar-
rive, when, after due deliberation and consideration, they

tants; but a; regarded the present vote, no portion of it
was intended to be applied to such schools. The noble

lord then proceeded, in an elaborate speech of more than
two hours duration, to propound the views of the govern-
ment on the general question.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE followed, moving as an amendment
which was seconded by Lord DUNCAN, that, previous to
the grant being made, a select committee be appointed to
inquire into the justice and expediency of the proposed
scheme, and its probable expense; also, as to whether the

fluence on the crown, invade the constitutional fun(

of parliament, and interfere with the religious conviction:
and civil rights of the people.
Sir R. INGLis and Mr. MACAULAY strongly supportei
the grant, which was opposed by Mr. ROEBUCK, at th(
conclusion of whose speech the debate was adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

-TUESDAY

The adjourned debate on education was resumed by Mr.
EWART, who complained that the scheme of education
proposed by the government was not a comprehensive
scheme.
The Earl of SURREY should not stand in the way of

education to others, though education was refused

members of his own creed. He would throw over every
jealousy, and would grant his support to the scheme now
propounded by government. _ _

Mr. SEvmduit observed that no ob.

ections which he

the game of those who wished to defeat it entirely

Lord SANDON supported the measure now proposed by
the government, though it was neither a scheme of edu-
cation nor ought to be so considered. He valued it as
admitting the fact, that it was the duty of the state to
educate its people—that religion was the essential part of
everything deserving the name of education—that the
education of the'moral man was, of all other education, the
most important—and that, without it, every other educa-
tion was a snare, a mockery, and delusion. He could not

say that he gave his unqualified support to every detail in
those minutes ; but still, on the whole, they were well
worthy of being adopted, and he considered them to be
part of that process of feeling our way which we had been
pursuing now, year by year, for some time past.
Lord MORPETH, after expressing his regret that he was
obliged to oppose the wishes of many of his constituents,
entered into a general defence of the minutes of August
and December last, against the objections urged against
them by Mr. Duncombe and Mr. Gisborne. He ex-
pressed his regret that the old Protestant dissenting de-
nomination of England should have committed itself to
the course on which it had now entered. He regretted it
for itself individually, but he regretted it more for the
sake of the Protestant dissenters themselves ; for he be-
litvJd that they were in the wrong, and that their proposi-

Mr. BRIGHT commented on the skill with which Lord
J. Russell and Mr. Macauley had avoided the question

really before the house.
, The debate was adjourned

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-WEDNESDAY

On th

motion of M:

FIELDEN the report on the

Factories

was receivet

On the motion that it be agreed to,

" Mr. TRELAWNY gave it his most decided opposition,
on the ground that it was a perfect mockery to introduce
such a bill unless the house was also prepared to fix the
rate of wages and the price of provisions.
Mr. HUME blamed the government for giving any sanc-
tion to this measure. The encroachments already made
upon us by the manufacturers of America were so great
that it was nothing short of insanity to agree to it. He,
therefore, moved that the report be received on that day
six months.

Mr. BROWNE seconded the amendment

After a few words from Mr. M. PHILIPS, against the bill,
Mr. P. HOWARD and Mr. S. CRAWFORD both sup-
ported it. The latter gentleman denounced the opposi-
tion to it as unfair and vexatious. No notice was on the
paper of the day, and yet an attempt was made to defeat
the bill by taking the friends of the measure by surprise.
Mr. B. Escorr denied that the opposition to this bill
bad been unfair. He implored the house, in mercy to
the labouring ciasses, to reject the measure.
Mr. FERRAND taunted Mr. B. Escott with the incon-
sistency of his proceedings on this bill. Formerly he had
supported, now he opposed it.
After a short conversation between Mr. Muntz, Mr.
Tancred, Mr. B. Escott, and Sir D. Lacy Evans,
Lord J. RUSSELL confessed that he would have pre-
ferred to have had the time in this bill limited to 11 in-
stead of 10 hours ; but, as a Ten Hours Bill had been
sanctioned by a large majority of the house, he felt him-
self justified in giving it his support. _ _ _ _ _

Mr. ROEBUCK denounced die- conduct of Lord J. Rus-
sel, in supporting this measure, as weak, wavering, and
unstatesmanlike.

The house then divided, when the numbers were, for
the amendment 46, and against it 104. The report was
in consequence agreed to. _ _

Mr. BROWN then proposed to add a clause to the bill ;
but, after some conversation, in which Sir G. Grey, Mr.
T. Egerton, Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Ferrand, Mr. Roebuck,
Mr. Newdegate, Mr. Aglionby, Mr. M. Philips, Sir R.
Peel, and Lord J. Manners joined, was induced to with-
draw it.

Lord EBRINGTON also proposed to add two clauses to
the bill ; but one of them was negatived without a divi-
sion, and the other did not even find a seconder.

On a clause proposed by Mr. LEADER, for the purpose
of enabling millowners to make up for lost time, in cases
where, from the derangement of the machinery, they had
been obliged to stop work, a division took place, when it
was negatived by a majority of 94 over 31 voices.
The bill was then ordered to be engrossed, and, after
some further conversation, it was ordered to be read a
third time on Friday next. There was, however, a gene-
ral understanding that this arrangement was only made
to enable the house to fix on that day another for the fur-
ther discussion of the Lieasure.

The Life Insurances Bill was then read a second time.

HOUSE OF LORDS

•THURSDAY

The Marquis of WESTMEATH rose to complain of the
reports which had appeared in The Times and Sun news-
papers respecting his motion for leave to bring in a bill
to restrain the waste of land in Ireland. The passage in
Tke Times ran thus, "The Marquis of WESTMEATH
complained of the ridicule with which his proposal had
been received." Now he had complained of no ridicule,
though he admitted that he had felt hurt by the way in
which the Lord Chancellor had replied to his motion. If
this system of malicious misrepresentation, for he was
convinced that it was malicious, were permitted to pro-
ceed, it would end in the destruction of all liberty of dis-
cussion; he should therefore move that the printers of
the two papers in question be called to the bar of the
house.

Lord BROUGHAM allowetlettohat it was absolutely neces-
sary that the proceedings their Lordships should
go forth to the world with fairnessre and accuracy, and
of
would agree with the MarquisWestmeath that the
misrepresentation complained of waswotret
follow
censure.
But he would advise the noble Marquis
occasion the rule which he (Lord Brougham) rdo in this
nvari-
ably pursued for 30 years, and that was, not toa
interferei
needlessly in such a case. He put it to the housew
the reports of their proceedings in 999 cases out of a 10g
were not given, not only with signal ability, but with the
most admirable impartiality ? No good had ever arisen
to e;ther House of Parliament from a needless contest
with the press, and he trusted that the noble Marquis
would be satisfied with having called the attention of the
house to the matter, and that he would refrain from press-
ing his motion.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE also dissuaded the noble
Marquis from pressing his motion, and advised him to
give the papers ,complained of an opportunity of correct-
ing their report.
The Marquis of larr..srmEATH again expressed his con-
viction that the misrepresentation was deliberate and in-
tentional, but would not peoist in his motion against the
opinion of the house.