The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-08-22 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY.

The order of the day was read for going into committee
on the Chelsea Hospital Out-Pensioners Bill.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE wished to know what the expense
to the country would be in clothing the out-pensioners,
and whether they were to be exercised in public or private.
Sir H. HADDTNGt said the cost of clothing would not
exceed 7s. each per man per year. With respect to dril-
ling and exercise, the same rule would be attended to as
in all other cases.
Mr. MACABLEY briefly supported the bill.
Colonel T. WOOD defended the measure. The force to
be raised by this bill was in his opinion a constutional
force, and the opposition to it was only to wear out and
worry the Government. (Hear.) It would however turn
on the heads of the hon. gentlemen opposite. Government
wished to protect the lives and property of her Majesty's
subjects, and if hon. gentlemen opposite dared to oppose
such a precaution, it would have its effect on the country
—it would promote disgust against the opponents of the
bill, and strengthen the hands of her Majesty's Govern.
ment. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the expense of
the force, they must be provided for every year by a vote
of Parliament, and therefore there would he frequent op-
portunity of discussing the subject.
After a few words from Mr. ItocHE in opposition to the
measure, Mr. HUME moved the adjournment of the
house, on which the gallery was cleared, when there ap-
peared—
For the adjournment .
Against it

Majority .

On the question being put that the Speaker do leave the
chair, Mr. HUME again addressed the house. The hon.
member moved as an amendment that the further consi-
deration of this bill should be postponed for three months.
He did not mind being told that he was acting factiously,
even if he divided the house 500 times.
Sir R. PEEL, in a masterly speech, justified the mea-
sure. It was clear the hon. member for Montrose iu his
own judgment was in favour of the provisions of the bill ;
be admitted it, as he was willing to give un opposition if
it was confined to two or three. years. (Hear.) lie (Sir
R. Peel) was not surprised at the opposition which this
measure met with. The same opposition was offered to
the Police Bill which was introduced in 1829 ; it was then
said, as now, that it would interfere with the liberty of the
subject. What had been the result? Why, the subject
had not been deprived of a single right, and life and pro-
perty were better protected. It was never the intention of
the Government to enrol more than 10,000 men, but to
make a provision for the maintenance of the public peace
they considered that this measure was necessary. It was
not a coercion bill—(hear, hear)—and they had a right to
ask the House for a vote of confidence. (Hear, hear.)
With respect to the duration of the bill, he thought two
or three years would not be sufficient time to test its opera-
tions. The government asked for no new law—or new
Powers—but to call into exercise, if necessary, the ser-
vlCeso f those whom the country might justly demand.
(Hear.) He, therefore, trusted the house would agree to
the bill,
•

After some observations from Mr. Forster, and others,
the house divided—
For Mr. Hume's amendment ....... 10
Against it
Majority against the amendment —64
On the motion of Mr. BROTH ERTON, the following re-
turn was ordered :—" Return of the number of days on
which the House of Commons sat in this session of par-
liament, stating the total number of hours occupied in the
sitting of the house, and the average time; and also dis-
tinguishing the number of nights on which the House
sat, and the number of hours after midnight."
Lord J. MANNERS, after alluding to the fact of some
labourers being fined by the magistrates of Beaconsfield,
for playing at cricket after divine service, on a Sunday,
asked the Attorney-General whether such fines were
legal? If they were, he thought the nobility and gentry
ought to be fined for riding out in their carriages and em-
ploying their servants on a Sunday.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not wish to give a legal
opinion without consideration, but he believed there was
an act in esistence which imposed a penalty for playing
cricket on a Sunday out of the parish to which the partial
playing belonged.
Mr. C. B OLLER said it was not his intention to bring
forward the important subject of colonization, of which
he had previously given notice, at the present advanced
stage of the session, but he hoped to have an opportunity
of doing so early neat session. The hon. and learned
gentleman concluded a very long speech by moving for a
copy of an act of the Canadian legislature, which after a
short conversation was agreed to.
• Mr. B. COCHRANE moved for certain papers relative to
the affairs of Greece; and after speeches from Dr. Bow-
ring, Mr. Milnes, and Lord Palmerston, Sir R. Peel con-
sented to the motion in a modified form.
Lord PALMERSTON then moved for papers relating to
the affairs of Servia, and after a stormy discussion, in
which " Young England" was very conspicuous, the mo-
tion was withdrawn.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM withdrew for this session the
Prison Discipline Bill, and the house adjourned.