The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-04-28 00:00:00

finperial Varliatnent.

HOUSE OF COM NIONS.—TUESDAY.
Lord G. BENTINCK comulained of the falsification of
the returns made to the 11,:u5,.: respecting the prices of
Memel and other timber in the English market during
the last six ye,rs, wbich he feared was done for a purpose.
Such falsification should he severely visited by the house.
Sir It. PEEL said he had caused inquiries to be insti-
tuted, and round that the error, which was unintentional,
bad arisen in quoting the prices, which were not cfficill,
from the prices current. Tne officer copying the prices
had added the duty, which, however, had be+•n previously
added in the prices quoted. A correct return would be
laid on the table.

Sir it. PEEL. in reply to questions, stated it was the in-
tention of the Government to propose that monuments be
erected to Sir ft. Sale, Sir J. M'Caskill, and Sir It. Dick.
The evening Weis occupied with a discussion on two mo-
tions: one on the part of Mr. CHRIS: Zs:, for copies of all
correspondence relating to the dismissal of Mr. Day, the
Assistant Poor-lasz Commissioner, in 1844, which was
assented to by Sir James Graham, on the ground that the
house had overruled his objections when they bad de-
cided by a majority against him to appoint a committee to
inquire into the dismissal of Mr• Parker. Sir James de-
fended the Poor-law Commissioners.
The other motion was on the part of 141 r. T. Duncombe,
for a select committee to inquire into the allegations of
the petition of Mr. Jonathan Duncan. on the mal-admi-
nistration of affairs in the General Post-office. He
entered into several details, to show that if there were not
great mal-administration in the Post Office, the letters
would he delivered an hour and a half sooner in every
part of the metropolis. He also stated that the later-
carriers complained not only of the scale of their remune-
ration, but also of the mode in which they were treated by
their superiors. He then entered into a history of the
manner in which the information for Kelly's Post Office
Directory was obtained by the letter-carriers at the pub-
lic expense for the benefit of a private individual, and
stiamat zed it as a gross job, which converted the Post
Office into a lucrative printing-office, and filled its subor-
din ate officers with discontent and dissatisfaction. Now,
if this committee were granted, he would prove that the
profits of that publication, got up, as be described. at the
publ'c expenses, enabled Mr. Kelly to put from £12,000
to X 15.000 into his pocket every year.
Mr. CanowELL insisted that there was not, on the
part of the Treasury or the Postmaster-General, the
slightest desire to screen fr,rna detection, exposure, and
puni•hment, any such mal-practices as Mr. Duncombe
bad just denounced. provided that proof was tendered of
their existence. There was no occa-ion to bring forward
such charges in the House of Co mons, as the Treasurer
and the Postmaster-General were at all times ready to re-
ceive memorials complaining of such mal-practices, and
to investigate into their truth. He then defended Mr.
Kelly from the charges which Mr. Duncombe had pre-
ferred against him, and in the course of that defence gave
tt history of the Post-office Direct ry, and the mode in
which it had been originally purchased, and subsequently
got up by that gentleman.
A long debate ensued, when the motion was negatived
by a maj ,rity of 92 to 49.
A motion of Mr. S. O'BRIEN to take evidence in Ire-
land on Irish railways, was ueotived by a majority of 69
to 25.