The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-03-22 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS-THURSDAY

When the Wigan election committee were called upon to
be sworn at the table, it appeared that Sir James Howard was
absent, whereupon the sergeant-at-arms received instructions
to take the hon. member into custody. _ _

Mr. LINDSAY moved, that on April ith the house should
resolve itself into a committee, for the purpose of addressing
her Majesty, prayinc, that a sum of money equivalent to the
losses of those merchants whose opium had been destroyed
by the Chinese authorities, at Canton, who had surrendered
no less than 20,283 chests of opium, on the assurance of Cap-
tain Elliot that they would be paid for it by the government
at home, should be granted to them.
Sir G. STAUNTON seconded the motion, and said that the
loss was so serious as to have driven several of the merchants,
whose property had been destroyed, to commit suicide. He
thought the government was bound in honour to make com-
pensation.
Sir G. LARPENT took a similar view of the case, and hoped
that no financial difficulty would prevent the Government
from doing justice to the sufferers.
After some observations from Sir C. NAPIER,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Bri-
tish merchants were in the power of the Chinese, their lives
as well as property being at stake. Under such circum-
stances, although the course pursued by Captain Elliot was
honourable to him, yet still neither the late nor the present
Government considered the pledges given by Captain Elliot
binding. •Compensation could not be obtained from the
Chinese government until the cessation of the war, but in the
meantime inquiries were proceeding as to the value of the
opium destroyed, which lie feared had been greatly ex-
- Under these circumstances he opposed the

aggerated

motion. '
Lord PALMERSTON admitted that the merchants had re-
ceived pledges that her Majesty's Government would en-
deavour to obtain restitution from the Chinese government,
and had been informed that in that case it was only the true
value of the opium whiCh could be made good. Under the
peculiar circumstances, however, of a great many of the suf-
ferers, he was of opinion that the money obtained from the
Chinese government might be drawn upon to afford them
provisional relief.
Mr. M. PHILIPS said that until brought to be given up as
a ransom for British subjects, the opium was not within the
Chinese jurisdiction.
Mr. JARDINE said that if the question were viewed in a
mercantile light, all the argument lay on the side of the mer-
chants, who would, he hoped, receive justice at the hands of

the Government.
Mr. J. A. SatrrH was decidedly favourable to the motion.
Mr. C. W. WYNNE was of opinion that if the merchants
had not a strictly legal right, they had at all events an equi-
table claim to compensation.
Sir R. PEEL said he rose for the purpose of doing justice
to another party—namely, the people of this country. We
were embarked in a war with China, with a view to obtain
redress for injury and insult, and also to obtain compensa-
tion for our merchants. Surely, then, the ransom paid for
the city of Canton should be appropriated, in the first in-
stance, to meet the expenses of carrying on the war with
vigour; and if compensation should be given at once to the
merchants, why, he would ask, should it not be done by a
parliamentary grant.
Lord J. RUSSELL was of opinion that there were circum-
stances which entitled the merchants to favourable consider-
ation, which might be given in a committee of the whole
house.
On a division the motion was lost by a majority of 87
to 37.
Lord G. SOMERSET moved for leave to bring in a bill for
the more effectual inspection of houses licensed by the ma-
gistrates in quarter sessions for the reception of insane per-
sons in England and Wales.
Mr. WAKLEY thanked the noble lord for the attention he
had given to this subject ; but his proposal, after all,
amounted only to the appointment of two barristers to inspect
hospitals for the medical treatment of persons labouring
under this dreadful disease. He requested the noble lord to
name a distant day for the second reading ; and he (Mr. W.)
would then be prepared to enter into the whole subject
fully.
Lord ASHLEY expressed a wish that Mr. Wakley would
enter upon his proposed analysis of the conduct of the me-
tropolitan commissioners as soon as possible. He thought
the appointment of legal examiners a matter of immense
importance, and likely to be attended with beneficial results.
Lord G. SOMERSET said he should move the second read-
ing before Easter; but he would give ample time before
going into committee.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved for a select committee to in-
quire into the administration of relief to the poor in parishes
incorporated under Gilbert's Act, and to report whether it
would be expedient or just to repeal those acts for the pur-
pose of substituting in lieu thereof the Poor-Law Amend-
ment Act.
Captain PECHELL seconded the motion.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM opposed the motion. He had already
given notice of a bill on the subject of the poor laws, to be
brought in immediately after Easter, which bill went to make
several alterations in the existing law, and until that bill was
introduced, he did not think it would be well to state the
nature of those alterations.
MY. WAKLEY said he did not approve of this secret prac-
tice, the result of which would be to prevent the possibility
of ascertaining the feelings of the country upon the proposed
alterations before they should have become the law of the
land.
Mr. C. COLVILLE also disapproved of the silence of the
government as respected their intentions relative to the future
existence of the Gilbert unions. It was not a manly mode
of treating those unions to keep them in ignorance of what
they had to fear, in order that they might be unprepared to
resist the attack when made upon them.
Mr.'S. WORTLEY was not disposed to blame the govern-
ment so much as other hon. gentlemen on the ministerial
side had done, for not disclosing prematurely its intentions.
There was nothing unreasonable in the motion, and he should
therefore support it.
Sir R. PEEL said it was requisite that the house should
take an early opportunity of stating explicitly whether it would
stand by, or abandon, the principle of the new poor law. As
far as the convenience of the government went, it would have
been easier for them at once to have agreed to the motion ;
but be felt that the new poor law act could never be advan-
tageously carried while there was a feeling through the coun-
try that it was doubtful whether the principle of the law itself
would be maintained by parliament. It was therefore that
he deprecated this committee, as the very worst course that
could be pursued, for its effect would be to paralyse existing
authorities.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBEt in reply, said he was glad to see so
many hon. gentlemen, on the ministerial side of the house,
prepared to redeem the pledges, respecting the poor laws,
which they had given on the hustings.
On a division, the motion was rejected by a majority of 108
to 41.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS—FRIDAY.
The Bishop of DERRY took the oaths and his seat.
Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from a Roman Ca-
tholic, who was imprisoned for declining to swear to his ba-
lance sheet, having conscientious objections to taking an oath.
The noble lord thought that in conscientious scruples, affir-
mations might be allowed, as in cases of Quakers and Mora-
vians.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said the object was to get to
the truth, and before he came to any decision on the bill
placed upon the table by Lord Denman upon this subject Ile
should like to hear the opinions of the judges.
In reply to a question from the Earl of MALNIESDURY, as
to whether the new timber duties would come into operation
on the sth of April,
The Earl of RIPON said that the progress of the measure
in the other house was so much slower than had been antici-
pated, that there was little doubt but that the period of those
duties coming into operation must be postponed.

Adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS—FRIDAY.
The Hon. James Howard, who was taken into custody for
non-attendance at an election committee, was brought up
sergeant-at-arms, and after an explanation on his
part, was discharged, on payment of his fees.
On the motion for going into committee of ways and

by the

means,
Mr. F. BARING entered at great length into the financial
condition of the nation, contending that the right hon. bart.
had fallen into an error of £lOO,OOO in his statement of
.the
deficiency in the finances, the deficiency being less by th at
amount than the right hon. baronet's calculation. This
£lOO,OOO he begged to present to Sir R. Peel as his (Mr.