The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-07-15 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--MONDAY

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice, that on going into com-
mittee of supply he should move that it be a❑ instruction to
the committee to grant the supplies not yet voted for a
period of three months only, with the exception of the sup-
plies for Canada, Syria, and China.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM, in a reply to a question from Mr.
Stansfield, said he had received a verbal communication
from the commissioners to inquire into the condition of
mines and factories, to the effect that they would very
shortly be enabled to make a second report. He also said,
in reply to another question, that it was not the intention
of Government to bring in any bill this session for the pur-
pose of altering the Factory Bill.
Sir R. PEEL gave notice that he would this day move for
leave to bring in a bill to provide more effectually for the
security of her Majesly's person.
The CHANcELLor. of the EXCHEQUER postponed the
Tobacco Regulation Bill until Friday, and would then state
whether he would proceed with or abandon it.
Mr. LEADER complained of a breach of faith committed
by the Government, in passing the Municipal Corporations
Act at half-past two o'clock on Saturday morning.
Sir R. PEEL said he did not know that the bill had passed,
and he was quite certain that there was no intention on the
part of the government to do anything unfair or adverse to
any pledge that had been given.

The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER, in reply to a
complaint from Mr. Hume, said that since the last time the
hon. member had mentioned the subject, the Mint had
coined no less than £240,000 in silver money, and were still
at work to supply the deficiency.
Sir R. PEEL, in moving that the house should resolve
itself into a committee of supply, adverted to Lord Pal-
merston's announcement that the
present government had
asked Lord Auckland to continue in the government of In-
dia, and to the noble lord's inference therefrom that the
whole of Lord Auckland's policy in Affghanistan was ap-
proved of by the present government. Against this infer-
ence he protested, and he must say it was hardly fair of the
noble lord to make the use he had done of a private letter.
He (Sir R. Peel) never recollected being a party to any
such offer to Lord. Auckland, nor could he find any official
letter or document warranting the assertion. He knew that
Lord Ellenborough, by whom the letter was said to have
been written to Lord Auckland, entertained the highest
regard for that nobleman, and in a spirit of high-minded
generosity might have written a letter to him expressive of
his wish to the effect stated, but were it so he must say the
noble lord was not justified in making the use he had done
of a private communication from one noble lord to another.
Lord PALMERSTON would at once withdraw his inference
from the fact if the letter of Lord Ellenborough was written
without the sanction of his colleagues.
Lord Howtcx said he had personal cognizance of the
fact that a very pressing letter had been written to Lord
Auckland by Lord Ellenborough.
Mr. kioGG said it was not competent for the noble lord to
have written such a letter without the sanction of the direc-
tors of the East India Company.
Sir J. HOBHOUSE said, not a word in the shape of dis-
approval of Lord Auckland's policy had been heard of until
intelligence arrived of the disasters in Affghanistan. Indeed,
at an earlier stage, the directors of the East India Company
had gone beyond the government in approving of that policy.
After all that had been said, however, it was gratifying to find
that policy approved of by a man so capable of judging of
it as Lord Ellenborough.

Sir R. PEEL, in reply to Mr. Hume, said it was impossible
that the intentions of government, as to the period of pro-
roguing parliament, could be known to the public, for it
was necessary the supplies should be granted before the
government could come to any decision upon the subject.
On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. VILLIERs moved, as an amendment, that the house
should resolve itself into a committee to consider the best
mode of repealing the corn laws. He grounded the necessity
of such a proceeding upon the failure of the recent corn
laws to cheapen prices, and upon the distressed state of the
population, which was such as to demand a supply of cheap
food. _ _

Mr. FIELDEN contended that a repeal of the corn laws
would save the whole system of our manufacturing industry
from absolute prostration.
Mr. P. HOWARD was opposed to the total repeal of the
corn laws. _

Mr. IkGLIONBY said be had advocated a fixed duty, as
equally advantageous to agriculturists and manufacturers;
but the dreadful condition of the country induced him now
toli‘liirte for the total repeal of the corn law.
law . HAwEs cautioned the house against allowing the corn
to remain untouched until it was compelled to take it up
in ma sre.aGl,o.o. perhaps, of public excitement, and even tumult.
law wouidKNIGHT would not admit that a repeal of the corn
would im-Titigate the distress. He was confident matters
end put toPaTie as soon as parliament was prorogued and an
mr.
BlNDuLthis talking.
chief cause otetfl_codni:ternecsV the high price of food was the
Mr. F. See'
sake of the rich i!eaid the corn law was maintained not for the
regretted
for the sake of the poor.
Sir C. NAPIER
forward, for he thoilgrted that the motion had been brought
ciently discussed. g t the subject had been already suffi-
Sir R. PRE'. said, thw
and a proper one. rt
the- of Sir C. Napier was a manly
renewed the gentlemen on the opposition which were constantly
position benches were pre-
venting, no doubt without intending
passed from having anything like nagf 4, the corn law recently
harvest had It was begin-
ning to work well ; the wheat ha d commenced; wheat
had fallen in price ; and he believed if speculators were
holding back, for the purpose of profitttmihn7ig.l the is. duty,
they would eventually discover their
which would attend it. He sympathisj
pp.rbloyydywut
chi
tteihv le
to
hsoaesf
distress which unhappily prevailed; and if eeimmed that
material alteration of the corn law would he
permanent relief, he would at once concede it. It as to be
remembered, however, that the alteration of the tariff had
produced a temporary stagnation of trade, of course adding
to the distress, but which, he trusted, would now pass away.
He had received from Portugal the intelligencethat thecom.
mercial treaty with that country had been
signed, from which
be anticipated beneficial results. The right hon. baronet
went on to say that he admitted the correctness, in the ab-
stract, of the principles of free trade, bu.t. contended that
those principles should not be hastily appliedin a country
where large protected interests bad grown up. He only
sought for s fair trial of the measures of the government, and
if they should not be found to contribute to restore the coun-
try to prosperity, he would be amongst the first to propose
their revision.
Lord J. RUSSELL inferred, he said, from the speech of the
right hon. baronet, that he had himself no great confidence
in the efficiency of his own measures, and thought it was
tantamount to an admission that the distress was to be at-
tributed to the corn law. The government had gone a certain
length in applying great principles in its legislation, but in so
doing they had adopted nearly every thing they had previ-
ously opposed. The tariff
/was good, but it was not new ;
the poorw law was gooll, but it was not new ; while the income
tax was new, but it was not good. He should move au
amendment, if that of the hon member for Wolverhampton
should be defeated, to the effect,. not of asserting the repeal
of the corn law, but
thattheiptlef e house, instead of going into
supply, should resolve
plo a committee to consider
the corn law which had
passed
Mr. COBDEN urged at daring the present session.
considerable length in support of
the motion, contending that the utmost quantity of land
which could be thrown out of cultivation by a repeal of the
corn laws would be about 2,000,000 of acres ; and it would

be better at once to place this quantity upon the consolidated
fund, and get rid of this odious law. The aristocracy of
England was the most privileged class in the world. They
had the colonies, and the army, and the navy, and the church
to themselves, and having all these, they ought to blush to
fight over the poor man's slice of bread. He believed they
well knew that this law could not be maintained. They might
kill Sir R. Peel ss they had killed Mr. Canning. because he
was endeavouring to legislate beneficially for the people, but
it was in vain for them to hope to preserve this law.
Mr. GRIMSDITCH opposed the motion, and contended that
the distress was to be attributed mainly to the increase of
machinery.
Lord Howtcx disliked as a general rule such interference
with the supplies as the motion before the house occasioned,
and he also thought it was going too far to call for a sweep-
ing repeal of a law which had been so much discussed, and
so recently agreed to by the legislature. He could not,
therefore, support the motion of Mr. Villiers, and he thought
that it would suffer much from the manner in which it had
been brought forward, as an amendment on going into a
committee of supply.
Sir J. HAMMER said, as the representative of a great com-
mercial community, he felt himself called upon to turn his
attention to the subject of the corn laws, and he felt bound
to say that his opinions had undergone a change, and he
should vote for the motion of Mr. Villiers, as a means of in-
dicating his opinion, which was not for total repeal, but for
the imposition of a moderate fixed duty.
The house then divided, and Mr. Villiers' motion was de-
feated by a majority of 231 to 117.
The house then resolved itself into a committee of supply,
and a vote on account of the expenses of the China war was
agreed to, as was also the vote for Canada.

HOUSE OF OF LORDS.-TUESDAY

Several bills were brought up from the House of Com-
mons, and were severally read a first time.
Several bills on the table were forwarded a stage.

Some petition; were presented against portions of the
Mines and Colliers Bill.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition signed by 1,600
persons, educated in classes at Exeter Hall in singing,
writing, arithmetic, and linear drawing, praying for assist-
ance to enable the system to be carried out. He took that
opportunity of saying that the grant of £30,000 for the pur-
pose of education in a country like this was altogether in-
sufficient. _ _ _

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was glad that the present
government was prepared to follow up and extend the prin-
ciple of proposing public grants for the purposes of education.
Lord BROUGHAM also expressed his gratification.
The petition was then laid on the table.
The LORD CHANCELLOR postponed the bankruptcy and
other law bills from Thursday until Monday.
Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY

Sir. R. PEEL moved, pursuant to notice, for leave to bring
in a bill to provide for the better protection of her Majesty's
person, and in doing so observed that he did not propose by
the bill to create any new treasons, nor did he propose any
additional undue severity of punishment, for he thought a
remedy might be found without those aids. He first pro-
posed to do away with all those useless solemnities of the law
in cases of high treason, which were only capable to feed the
vanity of the miscreants who were tempted to commit crimes
of this description by the false dignity with which they ima-
gined themselves temporarily invested. He proposed that
in the case of such offences as those which had recently been
committed, of endangering the life, or, at all events, disturb-
ing the tranquillity of her Majesty, the criminals should be
tried in the ordinary way. He also proposed that after the
passing of the act, any person who should present a gun,
pistol, or any other fire-arm, even though unloaded, or who
should strike, or attempt to strike, or throw any missile of
any kind, with intent to injure the person or to alarm her
Majesty, such person should be liable to the same punish-
ment as was inflicted for larceny ; and it should be in the
discretion of the judge to imprison the criminal, and to sub-
ject him to personal chastisement. This, he thought, would
deprive the offender of the false dignity which attached itself
under present circumstances to his trial, and would, he be-
lieved, materially tend to the security and tranquillity of her
Majesty.
Lord J. RUSSELL seconded the motion, and the bill was
brought in, read a first and second time, and ordered to be
committed this day.
On the order of the day for going into committee on the
poor law bill,

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE asked if it could really be the intention
of the government to proceed with the bill now that the
commission was so near its termination.

Sir J. GRAHAM said the bill was one of great importance,
and he felt bound to ascertain the sense of the house respect-
ing it.
After some discussion,

Sir R. PEEL said he confessed that the government was
placed in considerable difficulty upon the subject, but be
thought the best course would be for the house to decide
whether the commission should be allowed to continue for
five years.
After some further conversation,

Sir J. GRAHAM recommended that the house should dis-
cuss the question as to the continuance of the commission.
Mr. O'CONNELL, however, and other hon. members, re-
quested the government to bring in a temporary bill, and to
bring forward, early in the next session, a general measure.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he considered the continuance of the
commission for five years essential, upon which he must ask
the decision of the house. With respect to the other por-
tions of the bill, he was disposed as far as possible to meet
the wishes of the house.
The house then went into committee.
On the clause for continuing the commission for five
years,

Mr. S. CRAWFORD moved, as an amendment, that it
should be continued only for one year.
Mr. FERRAND seconded the motion, and once more en-
tered upon a vindication of the guardians of the Keighley
union.

Sir C. NAPIER contended that there were gross abuses in
the Keighly union.
After some observations from Mr. HARDY, Mr. AGLI.
ONBY, and MT. LIDDELL,
Mr. HAWES expressed his regret government did not in-
tend to press the whole bill during the present session.
Mr. C. WOOD argued in support of the continuance of the
commission for five years, and expressed his opinion that it
ought to be permanent. _ _ _ _

Lord SANDON contended that when such enormous power
was entrusted to the commissioners, the only security for the
proper exercise of that power was by subjecting it to a pretty
constant revision by parliament.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that there could not be a greater
mistake tha❑ to suppose that the power exercised by the com-
missioners was irresponsible, for they were responsible to the
ministers of the crown, and in fact there never was a power
exercised in this country so jealously watched or subjected to
such a rigid supervision as that of the commissioners. The
right honourable baronet argued at considerable length
against many of the objections urged against the bill.

-After some observatiOns from Sir B. -HALL,
Mr. TROTTER supported the bill. He had sent a copy of
the bill to every union in Kent and Surrey, and not having
received any communication in reply, he assumed they were
satisfied with the bill, which he should, therefore, support.
Mr. BUCK supported the amendment, grounding his oppo-
sition to the bill chiefly on his disapproval of the conduct of
the poor law commissioners.
Captain PECHELL spoke at considerable length in support
of the amendment. _ _

After some observations from Mr. AGLIONBY and Mr
DARBY♦ _

Mr. IZEMBLE said he had heard no argument in favour of
the continuance of the commission for five years, which
would not be equally forcible for its permanency. It was an
arbitrary and unconstitutional power to repose in any body
whatsoever, and he should therefore vote for the limitation
of the period to one year, believing that if the power were
granted for five years, they might make up their minds that
it would be imposed upon the country for ever. He would
prefer if the amendment had been for three years, but he
would, at all events, support it in preference to five years.
Mr. MuNTz feared that the system of the present law was
not to relieve those who ought to be relieved, but to prevent
those who ought to be relieved from obtaining any assistance.
He protested against the law altogether.
After a few words from Mr. LAWSON, the committee
divided, and Mr. S. Crawford's amendment was defeated by
a majority of 164 to 92.

_ . _ _ _... .....
On the motion that the clause should stand part of the bill,
Colonel SIBTHORP objected to the existence of the com-
mission at all, and therefore moved that the clause be struck
out.

Lord WORSLZY supported the clause.
General JOHNSON moved that the chairman should report
progress, upon which the committee again divided, and the
motion was defeated by a majority of 178 to 16.
Mr. FIELDEN then moved that the chairman should leave
the chair.

Sir R. PEEL said it was advisable to retain the power of
moving continual adjournments it was most desirable that it
should not be abused.

Lord PALMERSTON also expressed a hope that the public
business might not be thus obstructed.
Several hon. members censured the course pursued by the
hon. member for Oldham as factious.

Mr. WARD, Mr. AGLIONBY, and others, begged of Mr
Fielden to withdraw his amendment.

After a short discussion, Mr. FIELDEN pressed his motion,
which was, however, negatived without a division.
The clause was then carried by a majority of 146 to 26,
after which the house resumed. _

...
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—WEDNEsnity

Mr. MACKINNON postponed his motion for a new writ for
Southampton until the 25th instant.
In reply to a question from Mr. GRIMSDITCH,

. . .
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that his noble
friend at the head of the commission appointed to inquire
into the amount of forged exchequer bills, &c., had informed
him that the commission would shortly be enabled to make a
report. He would make inquiry as to whether they would
be able to do so during the present session.
On the motion of Sir R. PEEL, the Queen's Protection
Bill went through committee, was read a third time, and
ordered to be engrossed.
Sir J. GRAHAM, in reply to a question from Lord Pal-
merston, said that when he pledged himself to support the
principle of the Mines and Collieries Bill, the pledge was
given on the part of the government.
Sir R. PEEL, in reply to a question from Mr. Hardy, said
it was not the intention of the government to bring forward
any grant for church extension.
After a speech from Mr. HUME, recommending all
manner of reductions, and one from Mr. W. WILLIAMS,
respecting the remuneration of clerks in public offices, the
house went into committee of supply.
Sir R. PEEL moved the usual vote for the British Mu-
seum, which led to some conversation as to the propriety of
the rule excluding young children irom the Museum when
with their parents, a rule which did not prevail at the Na-
tional Gallery.
The vote was ultimately agreed to.
On the vote of £62,000 for the expenses of the two houses
of parliament,
Mr. HUME required an account of the expenses of the
House of Lords.
Sir R. PEEL said, that from time immemorial the House
of Lords had refused to give this information. It was the
only portion of the public money that they could at all deal
dposedttootbhee
sCorffioweineo,
twthoicsho p
p o r
support ordered
tbo suchdigri i
tay soufmtheasH
with, and and it was placed at their disposal by means of an ad-
Peers Peers.
jealousies
, under these circumstances he hoped for so small a
sum as 421,000, the h .
Mr.
requiring information on. member would not persevere in
jotusseupo -f
which was so calculated to revive for-
merto know the item
HOME betweensaid
the two houses of Parliament.
that the House of Commons had a right
it he would move
of this expenditure, and in order to obtain
over: e's
£21,000. e that the vote be reduced to the sum of
majority
ikir.
HOME o9ottboe
121,3
tn.
On a division Mr. Ha
wasterrainated by
proposition was defeated by a
tohiozdnce it by the sum of X 12,000,
and a discussion ensued w
of the motion, and the votethe withdrawal
The house was occupied the agreed to.
discussing the estimates. remainder of the evening in
After the house had resumed, the p
Ma-
jesty's Person Bill was passed. Protection of her
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned.

President Tyler has recently had a daughter married. No
intoxicating, beverages were allowed at the mystical festi-
vities.