The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-06-20 00:00:00

LORDS.-

HOUSE OF

TH u nap AN

On the motion of the Earl of ABERDEEN, the committee
tfii tbo Scotch Church Bill was postponed until next Thursday.
Lord MONTEAGLE complained of the combination of the
Arcbdeaconry of Aghadoe with the cure of souls in a neigh-
bouring parish, which was directly adverse to the recommen-
dation of the ecclesiastical commissioners. Fie moved for
certain papers relative to the subject. No opposition being
offered, the papers were ordered.
The Canadian Corn Bill was brought up from the Com-
mons and read a first time.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TITURSDAY

THE FACTORIES BILL

Sir J. GRAHAM said, he thought it would be convenient
to the house for him now to make a statement as to the
course the government intended to take with respect to the
Factories Bill. He had proposed the bill in no party spirit ;
and he felt it his duty to state, that the house bad not received
it in that light. (Hear.) It would be imrertinent in him, as
there had been no division of the house upon the subject, to
speculate what the opinion of the house might be as to the
clauses as they now stood in their modified form. lie bad,
however, to state that he had fully believed that the success
of the measure would mainly depend on its being received
throughout the country as a measure of concord and peace.
(Hear, hear.) He had so framed it, and had so regarded
it, and he could consider it in no other light. After its first
introduction it was quite clear that the great body of the
Dissenters had considerable objections to the measure.
He was disappointed that those objections had not been
removed by the modifications that had been introduced.
On the part of the Church there had beed a willingness
to make considerable concessions (cheers); but there
had been no such asposition on the part of the Dissenters.
The right hon. baronet then said :—I have to announce to
the house and the public that we have come to the decision
that it will be most consistent with our public duty not to
press the educational classes of the Factories Bill this session
(cheers). I cannot now fix a day when I shall proceed with-
the factory clauses of the bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL asked whether the government would
endeavour to frame another plan, or modify their present
measure ? _ .

Sir J. GRAHAM said he begged to take to Monday to
consider, before he gave an answer to this question.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, as he had not been present at an
earlier stage of the bill, he begged to be permitted then to
present a petition, signed by 55,000 young men of London,
against the educational clause of the Factories Bill. (Loud
laughter.)
On the bringing up of the report on the Queen's message
respecting a provision for the Princess Augusta,
Mr. HUME observed that, in his opposition to this grant,
he had been altogether deserted. having been supported by
only fifty nine members out of the whole, house. He should,
therefore, not persevere in his opposition, but he would re-
commend, as the most profitable course to be pursued, that
the annuity should be purchased out and out.
After a few observations from Lord DUNGANNON and Sir
R.- INGLIs, the report was received, and leave was given to
bring in a bill upon the subject.
On the third reading of the Canadian Corn Bill,
Colonel SIBTIIORP said that he felt that the bill was a
breach of faith with the agriculturist, and he should, there-
fore, divide the house on the third reading.
Mr. LABOUCIIERE said he had no wish to offer any vexa-
tious opposition to the bill, but before it left the house he
thought the Government should state its intentions as to the
the other North American colonies.
Lord STANLEY said it was most inconvenient to give
pledges, but he would say that it was unlikely for such a
trifling object as that of passing a similar measure for New
Brunswick or Nova Scotia that they should again open up
the whole question of the corn laws.
The house divided, and the third reading was carried by a
•
majority or 150 to 75.
Lord ELIOT then moved the committee on the Irish Arms
Bill.

Mr. WYSE could see nothing in the state of Ireland to
justify such an unconstitutional measure as this, and he
should, therefore, give it his determined opposition. They
should endeavour to remove the evils of which the people
complained, instead of making ridiculous warlike prepara-
tions such as making loopholes in the fortress of Belfast and
placing garrisons in the martello towers. The hon. gentle-
man also condemned the recent treatment of the magistracy,
and concluded by moving as an amendment that the bill
should be referred to a select committee.
Mr. BLEwirr seconded the motion.
Lord ELIOT said he felt grateful for the manner in which
he had been spoken of individually by gentlemen on the
opposition benches ; but he conld not accept compliments to
himself at the expense of government to which he belonged,
and for whose proceedings he was prepared to take his full
share of responsibility. Every crime committed in Ireland
was reported by the Irish constabulary, and from these re-
ports it was evident that a measure like the present was
absolutely requisite for Ireland in order to protect the
peaceable portion of the inhabitants from the murderer and
midnight marauder. This bill contained no new restrictions,
and under its operation respectable persons would have no
difficulty in obtaining licences to carry arms. He hoped
that at no distant day the spread of education in Ireland
would render any such measure as the present totally
unnecessary.
Mr. WARD said he had tacitly agreed to previous Arms
Bills. because their operation was to be entrusted to a gb-
vernment in which the people of Ireland had unbounded con-
fidence. He had formerly, while ignorant of the history and
condition of Ireland, supported a bill brought in by Lord
Stanley, which went the length of taking away the constitu-
tional rights of that people. Now, however, be was convinced
that Ireland was not to be governed by mere brute force.
How was it that under the governments of Lords Normanby
.and Fortescue, there was no occasion to keep a large army
there, as formerly, and that those noble lords intimated they
could spare a large portion of even the small army there to
meet exigencies here.' How was it that a country in a state'
of such repose, should now be on the verge of insurrection?
and this with a secretary of a disposition so conciliating as
that of the noble lord (Eliot)? It was because he was un-
fortunately bound up with a system which the mass of the
people of Ireland could never tolerate. The hon. member
contended that peace in Ireland was incompatible with the
maintenance of the established church, and that however
delicate might be the question of " fixity of tenure," it must
be dealt with.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for Ireland was astonished at
the declaration of Mr. Ward, that there could be no peace
in Ireland until the established church should be swept away.
The bill before the house had been sufficiently discussed, and
the government was prepared in committee to give the most
patient consideration to any amendment which might be pro-
posed.
Mr. PIGOTT said that this bill re-enacted an obnoxious
clause, which as long ago as the year 1810 had been aban-
doned, in which year also the rights of the subject were pro-
tected by the enactment that domiciliary visits should be
sanctioned by two magistrates. Now, however, at the ex-
piration of 33 years, not only was this clause re-enacted, but
domiciliary visits were to be made with the sanction of one
magistrate, and to be under the control of the constabulary.
There was a striking diminution of that sort of crime in
Ireland which required such a bill as this, and the tempe-
rance movement atone was a guarantee against such outrages
as were proposed to be guarded against by this bill. It would
be viewed by the people of Ireland as a coercion bill, and its
operation would be well calculated to create irritation and

excitement.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD moved the adjournment of the debate.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, in consequence of these adjourn-
ments, he should postpone all other business in order to give
precedence to this bill ; and he would not, therefore, pro-
ceed with the County Courts Bill next day.
The debate was then adjourned, and the house proceeded
to the otLer orders of the day.