The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-04-27 00:00:00

iimptrtal

~~iit'~~criiiEl7..

HOUSE OF LORDS.-Tuuuj

The Earl of CHAILLBVILLE adverted to the debate which
took place on the day preceding the recess, respeCting the
trial for the attempt on_ the life of Mr. Biddulph. The noble

marquis (Normanby) had on t
contradic

hat occasion given a strong
1 to the statements made by the noble earl, and

said that if he had mad
Mr. Biddulph himself had expressed his satisfaction at the
jury impanelled to try the cause. The noble marquis had
also stated that a similar course to that pursued in Mr. Bid-
dulph's case had been followed in other cases in the north of
Ireland. In consequence of those statements, be (Lord
Charleville) had received a letter from Mr. Biddulph, in
which he averred that they were by no means correct, for he
had never expressed his satisfaction at the jury impanelled,
but, on the contrary, had asserted, as soon as they were im-
panelled, that they never would agree in their verdict what-
ever might be the evidence. In addition to this letter from
Mr. Biddulph, he had also received a letter from the solici-
citor in the case of Samuel Gray, and from his statement it
appeared that the, same course was not pursued in those
cases, there having been much more extensive challenges in
the case of Gray than in the other. He felt bound to state

'ould have found that

these facts to their lordships in justice to himself, because
the former statement he had made had been so strongly im-
pugned by the noble marquis. _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.
. The Marquis of NORMANBT said he did not know that he
had any explanation to offer, for he had made no statement
of his own. He had at the time, read a statement of facts,
and given his authority for them. He was not responsible
for any misunderstanding between Mr. Biddulpli and the of-
ficers of the crown.

The Earl of WICKLOW said he had heard the charge made
by his noble friend on a former occasion, and he had also
heard the answer of the noble marquis, which he at the time
considered as a most triumphant defence for the govern-
ment. He must now, however, say that after the produc-
tion of the letters read by his noble friend the answer was
anything but satisfactory. An imputation was now fixed
upon these officers of the crown from whom the noble mar-

quis received his information, and he was bound, therefore,
to make further inquiries into the matter.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH said there was nothing to
show that the noble marquis bad not been deceived by his
own functionaries. This he was bound to inquire into, for if
he had been so deceived, it was a serious matter whether the
lives of the people should be entrusted to parties capable of
such conduct.

The Marquis of NORMANBY said he should certainly cause
inquiry to be made into the matter, and the subject dropped.
Their lordships soon after adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY

Sir R. INGLts presented 30 petitions, praying for church
extension ; and Mr. R. CURRIE presented 14, praying for
the abolition of the Ecclesiastical Courts.
Lord MORPETH announced his intention of
'teration in the Registration of Voters (Ire'

Toposing

effect of which would be to augment the pialification of elec-
tors from £5 to £8 in counties.

Mr. O'CONNELL expressed great disapprobation at the
proposed change.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he would move that orders of the
day should have precedence of notices of motions on Thurs-
days after the Ist of June.
Mr. GROTE moved a series of resolutions in reference to
the land fund and finances of New South Wales, and con-
tended that reparation ought to be made to the colony for
the abstractions which had taken place from the emigration
fund, and that the mother country ought to defray at least
one-half of the expenses of gaols and police. The hon.
member's concluding resolution was to the effect, that on
Wednesday next the house should resolve itself into a com-
mittee of the whole house, to consider the proper amount to
be allotted annually in support of that charge, and to con-
sider also the best means to make good to the land and emi-
gration fund the deduction which had been occasioned by
the entire burden of gaols and police having been unduly
thrown on the colony since 183.5.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that many
years back, when the Earl of Ripon was at the head of the
colonial department, an intimation was given to the colony
that it must be prepared to take upon itself the expense of
the convict establishment. More than half, he contended,
of the expenses of the colony was still defrayed by this coun-
try, and under such circumstances he thought it could hardly
be said that they had adopted anything like harshness to-
wards the colony. The right hon. gentleman concluded by
moving, as an amendment, the previous question.
Mr. C. BULLER thought the expense of gaols and police
ought not to be thrown on the colony, now that the supply
convict labour had ceased, in cc--- 4 the abolit;

—.sequence o, aon
of the system of assignment, and at a time too when the
supply of free labour was put a stop to by the misapplication
of the emigration fund.
Lord MAHON supyorted the motion, being fully of opinion
that a strong prima facie case was made out in favour of
New South Wales.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that complaints similar to the pre-
sent were constantly made from all our colonies, and were
supported very frequently by very strong reasoning ; but he
had no hesitation in saying that, of all our colonies, the one
which had been subjected to least grievance, the one which
had received most favour from, and which had reaped most
advantage from the mother country, was New South Wales;
and this to such an extent, that other colonies continually
complained that an undue proportion of favour was shown
by this country to New South Wales. The colony was in a
most prosperous condition, and he did not think it right,
under such circumstances, to remove a burden of £50,000
a-year from them, in order to place it upon the already hea-
vily taxed people of this country.
Sir W. MOLESWORTII said, that in the case of an ordinary
colony, the expense of gaols and police should be borne by
the colony itself ; but New South Wales was an exception to
the general rule. It was a penal colony, being made the re-
ceptacle of the worst criminals of this country ; and as most
of the crime was perpetrated by persons transported from
this country, it was not right to place upon them the whole
expense of supporting British convicts.
Sir R. JEEL said, that if the colony of New South Wales
had a claim of £50,000 a-year on this country, the very last
thing to which he would wish to appropriate the repayment
of that sum would be to gaols and police. He would much
rather hold out to the colony an inducement to repress crime,
and thus render gaols and police comparatively unnecessary.
If the expenses of gaols and police had been, as was said, in-
creased largely by the number of convicts sent thither by
this country, even that would form no ground for relieving
the colony, if it could be shown, on the other hand, that its
prosperity was largely increased owing to the very circum-
stances of our having sent them those convicts. If the co-
lony had derived large advantages from convict labour, it
had no right to object to some attendant expenses upon that
system which had produced to it such enormous benefits.
He was only induced to take part in the debate by the sym-
pathy he felt for that very oppressed and unfortunate thing,
the public treasury. The right hon. baronet expressed his
opinion that no reason existed for throwing this burden of
50,000 per annum on the mother country. He thought it
unfortunate that the system of assignment should have been
abolished at the very time when the funds of the colony were
in such a state as to impede the requisite supply of emi-
grants; but, at the same time, for the interests of the mora-
lity of the colony, it was absolutely necessary that this sys-
tem of assignment should be abolished. It was a remarkable
sign of the times, that in every country in Europe the ex-
penditure exceeded the income, and governments should take
early steps to put their expenses upon a more stable footing.
If not, the results would be alarming, industry would be-
come paralysed, and the eventual results must be ruinous in
the extreme.

Mr. WARD contended that the lands which had been sold
would never have been purchased had it not been for the im-
pression that the purchase money would have been laid out
in the importation of free labour.

Sir R. INGLIS said the duties of a nation should be the
measure of its expenditure, and if it contracted a liability it
should raise the means to meet it. He thought the honour-
able member for London had made out a moral and an equi-
table claim upon this country for that which the colony of
New South Wales sought to obtain.
Sir C. GREY opposed the motion.

Mr. HUME could not see any reason whatever why the
people of England should be taxed to maintain gaols and
police in New South Wales. The colonists admitted convict
labour to be beneficial to them, and if so they had a right to
support the police to keep those convicts in order, by whose
labour they so largely benefited. _

Mr. GROTE, in reply, said that the convicts conferred a
benefit on the colony only by benefiting the masters to whom
they were assigned, from which masters the Government
should exact the benefit of their labour without flinging the
burden on the whole of the inhabitants of New South Wales.
The house then divided, and the previous question was
carried by a majority of 52 to 8.
Lord C. FITZROY moved for a select committee to take
into consideration the papers relating to the lonian states,
ordered by the house to be printed on the 22d of June, 1840.
Mr. HUME seconded the motion. _ _

Lord J. RUSSELL could not gather from the noble lord's
observations any reason to justify the appointment of a com-
mittee, more particularly when he recollected that the lonian
states were not under the direct authority of her Majesty,
and such a step as that proposed could not fail to give rise to
great jealousy in those states. He had in point of fact re-
ceived from the Senate of the lonian Islands a strong remon-
strance when the noble lord last year brought the subject be-
fore the house. He was sorry his noble friend had thought
it necessary again to agitate the question, but as he had done
so he (Lord J. Russell) must meet the motion with a direct
negative.

The motion was also opposed by Sir HENRY HARDINGE
and Sir R. bms, both of whom defended the Lord High
Commissioner, Sir Howard Douglas, from the various
charges advanced against him respecting his conduct in that
character.

Mr. Hymn said that the lonian Islands hpd been most
cruelly treated under the protectorate of Great Britain, and
as grave eharges were advanced, which required an answer,
he thought the committee ought to be granted.
Sir R. PEEL was of opinion that if the House of Commons
were to appoint a select committee upon such grounds as
were laid for it in the present case, the result would be that
they would find it very difficult indeed to find eligible persons
to undertake the responsible duties of governors in any of
our colonies, and the government would have little else to do
than to defend itself, and such governors as might be induced
to undertake the office against continual motions, like that
before the house.

After some observations from Sir C. GREY, COl. RAWDON,
and Sir H:VIVIAN,

Lord C. FITZROY replied, and on a division the motion
for a committee was defeated by a majority of 28 to 10.
On the motion of Mr. Fox MAULE, the Factories Bill
was read a second time, on the understanding that the debate
on the principle should take place on going into committee.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the house adjourned.