Commons Sitting of 29 June 1837

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a first time:—Bankrupt Commissioner! (Ireland).—Read a third time:—Sugar Duties; Wills; Robbery; Burglary; Piracy; Burning Ships; Transportation for Life; Limitation of Actions; Tithes Commutation Act Amendment—Read a second time:—Beet-root Sugar; Masters and Workmen Arbitration; Reform of Parliament Act Amendment (Ireland); Sheriff's (Scotland); Malt Duties Regulation; Ecclesiastical Appointment Suspension.
Petitions presented. By Mr. HUME, from Coffee-house keepers in London, for the reduction of the duty on Sugar; from Fife, for abolition of the Corn-laws; from London, and Tunbridge Wells, for free admission to public monuments.—By Mr. DENISTOUN, from Glasgow, for relief in distress.

THE MAGISTRACY OF IRELAND.
Mr. Sergeant Jacksonpresented a petition from the Deputy Lieutenants and three other magistrates of the county of Kerry, complaining of the conduct of Government in Ireland. They complained that a chief constable, named M'Donogh, had grossly insulted them on several occasions, that a memorial had been addressed to the Lord-lieutenant, and, after repeated applications, inquiry had been promised. After very considerable delay an investigation took place before the hon. Thomas Browne, Vice-Lieutenant of the county, and Mr. Shea Lalor, who had been a member of the Catholic Association, was sent by the Government to conduct it. All the charges brought by the magistrates against M'Donogh were established satisfactorily, and all the charges which M'Donogh alleged against them fell to the ground.
Lord Morpeththought he could shortly and simply meet the statements contained in the petition, by merely reading a letter which within the last few days had been addressed, by command of the Lord-lieutenant, to the hon. Thomas Browne, Vice-lieutenant of the county of Kerry. The noble Lord then read the letter. The Lord-lieutenant, upon mature consideration of the evidence, was of opinion that the ad-

1701
ministration of justice in the district of Listowel, conducted as it had been, did not merit the respect and confidence of the public; and with respect to the conduct of chief constable M'Donogh, his Excellency considered that he had been guilty of great want of respect to the bench, and that his conduct was reprehensible, and he had commanded him to be reprimanded and removed from the station. With regard to two of the magistrates, his Excellency thought, that they had shown much indiscretion on the bench; and with regard to another, his Excellency considered that it would conduce much to the peace and quietness of the district of Listowel, if the Lord Chancellor were advised to remove his name from the Commission. His Excellency also intimated the intention of the Government to appoint a stipendiary to the magistrates of the district, and he condemned the practice proved to exist, of magistrates receiving gratuitous labour from the poor. It would appear from that letter that the delay arose entirely from accidental circumstances, and he was sorry to add, that the Report which was so anxiously called for, did not at all amount to an acquittal of the magistrates. He would lay upon the table the evidence taken respecting the case.
Petition laid on the table.

IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.
The Order of the Day was read for the House to resolve itself into a Committee on the Imprisonment for Debt Bill.
On the question that the Speaker do leave the chair,
Mr. Shanobserved, that the House was somewhat taken by surprise in this case. Many hon. Members who took a lively interest in this question were not in the House; and the hon. and learned Attorney-General could surely not seriously suppose that the Bill would be passed into a law this Session.
The Attorney-Generalobserved, that his noble Friend the Secretary for the Home Department had in his (the Attorney-General's) own hearing declared, that this Bill would be proceeded with this Session, and he himself had yesterday given public notice that he would bring it on that day.
Sir Edward Knatchbullsaid, that the impression of the House decidedly was, that it was not intended to go on with it in the present Session.
Sir Robert Inglisprotested against hurrying this measure through its stages, un-
1702
less there really were a bonâ fide expectation of its being carried through the other House of Parliament.
The Attorney-Generalsaid, he could not boast of any understanding with the other House of Parliament; but he could declare that this Bill would go to the upper House in the fair expectation that it would pass this Session.
The House in Committee.
On Clause 32, to secure compensation to gaolers of prisons in certain cases,
Mr. Williams Wynnobjected to the principle of compensation to gaolers; and, though he would not revert to what he had before stated fully, yet he must contend that if compensation were to be given in all these cases, it would be just as reasonable to contend, if the punishment of death in all cases should be abolished, that the last functionary of the law (the executioner,) in capital cases should be compensated for the loss which he might sustain.
The Attorney-Generalobserved, that it was not intended to grant compensation in all cases. It was intended only to apply in the case of the warden of the Queen's Bench prison, or others who were similarly placed.
Clause agreed to.
The remaining clauses of the Bill were agreed to.
The House resumed, Bill to be reported.

FINAL REGISTER OF ELECTORS.
Lord John Russell moved the committal of this Bill.
Sir Edward Knatchbullobjected at that period of the Session, and on the eve of a general election, to proceed with a Bill upon the merits of which there was so much diversity of opinion.
House divided:—Ayes 70, Noes 17: Majority 53.

List of the AYES.

Baines, Edward

Dillwyn, Lewis Weston

Baring, F. Thornhill

Barry, Garrett Standish

Donkin, Sir Rufane

Bernal, Ralph

Duncombe, Thomas

Bowring, Dr.

Dundas, hon. John C.

Brotherton, Joseph

Ellice, rt. hon. Edw.

Byng, right hon. Geo. Stevens

Fenton, John

Gordon, Robert

Callaghan, Daniel

Grey, Sir George

Campbell, Sir John

Grey, hon. Colonel

Chalmers, Patrick

Grote, George

Chapman, Lowther

Hawes, Benjamin

Curties, Herbert Barrett

Hay, Sir Andrew Leith

Denison, J. Evelyn

Hindley, Charles

Dennistoun, J.

Hutt, William

1703

Jephson, Charles D.O.

Seale, Colonel

Labouchere right hon.

Seymour, Lord

Henry

Sheil, Richard Lalor

Lennox, Lord George

Smith, Robert Vernon

Lennox, Lord Arthur

Stanley, Edw. John

Maher, John

Steuart, Robert

Morpeth, Viscount

Strickland, Sir George

Mullins, Frederick William

Strutt, Edward

Thompson, Colonel

Murray, right hon. John A.

Tulk, Chas. Augustus

Vigors, Nicholas Aylward

Musgrave, Sir Richard

Parker, John

Walker, Richard

Parnell, right hon. Sir Henry

Wallace, Robert

Ward, Henry George

Pease, Joseph

Whalley, Sir Samuel

Ponsonby, hon. John

Wilbraham, George

Potter, Richard

Williams, William

Power, James

Winnington, H. J.

Price, Sir Rob.

Wood, Charles

Rice, right hon. Thomas Spring

Wood, Mr. Alderman

Woulfe, Mr. Sergeant

Rolfe, Sir Robert Monsey

Wyse, Thomas

TELLERS.

Russell, Lord John

Mr. Hume

Scrope, Geo. Poulett

Mr. Elphinstone.

List of the NOES.

Alsager, Captain

Henniker, Lord

Barclay, Charles

Inglis, Sir Rob. Harry

Canning, right hon. Sir Stratford

Jones, Theobald

Mackinnon, Wm. A.

Clive, hon. Robert Henry

Perceval, Colonel

Rushbrooke, Col.

Cole, Viscount

Stanley, Lord

Duncombe, hon. A.

Vere, Sir Charles Broke

Fox, Charles

Gaskell, Jas. Milnes

Goulburn, right hon. Henry

TELLERS.

Sir Edw. Knatchbull

Goulburn, Mr. Sergeant

Mr. Estcourt

House in Committee.
Lord Stanleyasked whether it was intended to extend the provisions of this Bill to Ireland?
Mr. R. Steuartsaid, that the provisions of the Bill would not apply to the voting at elections in Ireland, but it was intended they should apply to all Irish election Committees.
Lord Stanleyobserved, that if that was the case, he hoped the Committee would consider for a moment how injurious this Bill might possibly be to the parties before an Irish Election Committee, inasmuch as the system of Irish registration stood upon a very different footing from that which existed in England. It was admitted that the Irish registration was so defective that, except the matter were brought before a Committee of the House of Commons, it was impossible to obtain any relief whatever against fictitious votes, there being no
1704
appeal from the original decision of the barrister.
The Clauses of the Bill agreed to. The House resumed.

BILLS OF EXCHANGE.
Mr. Grotemoved that the House resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.
Viscount Sandonwas not himself competent to discuss the question involved in this Bill, but he understood that it involved a great alteration in the law of the land. If so, he thought it ought not to be brought forward in the absence of Gentlemen on his side of the House who were fully able to enter into the merits of the subject.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that the object of this Bill was one which deeply interested the commercial community; and the measure itself had been much pressed by the commercial interest on the Government. The clause inserted in the Bank Charter which legalised the discounting of bills not exceeding three months' date at a higher rate of interest than five per cent, (and to that extent repealing the usury laws) had been proved in the recent crisis to be extremely beneficial, and had completely established the soundness of the principle of the Bank of England Charter Act. It was well known that a vast proportion of the commercial transactions of this country was not represented by bills of three months date. Much of the foreign commerce of the country was transacted through the medium of bills running through the period of twelve months. By the operation of the present law, the holders of such bills could not get them discounted (except at the ordinary rate of five per cent.) until nine months had expired. The consequence was, that means were taken to evade the usury laws by drawing four bills at three months each, and getting them renewed from time to time. But this imposed a very great expense on the borrower, without giving any advantage to the lender. It had been suggested that the measure should only extend to the operation of the clause in the Bank Charter. to bills of six months, but if that were to be the limit, the measure would not embrace that class of commercial transactions which was the most important. Under these circumstances he hoped his noble Friend would not oppose the progress of the Bill, the loss of which would be a serious calamity to the trading interests of the country. He begged in conclusion, to state that if his hon. Friend

1705
the Member for London had not moved that the Bill be committed, he himself should have felt it his duty to do so.
Mr. Wakleyfelt convinced by the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that this Bill ought not to be passed during the present Session, It was a subject of very great importance, the importance of which was not lessened by the fact stated by the right hon. Gentleman, that the subject had been pressed on his attention by the whole of the monied interest. The rich men, no doubt, were anxious that the Bill should be passed into a law. But what he wished to impress on the House was, the necessity of previously ascertaining what had been the effect of the experiment which they had already tried by the measure that had abolished the usury laws as far as regarded bills of exchange at three months' date. He was perfectly aware that the usury laws were unsound in principle. But at the same time he was bound to say that the whole structure of the monetary system in this country was artificial. He had been told that the alteration of the law, with regard to bills at three months had been injurious to the trading classes of the community. He could not, therefore, conceive why, at the end of the Session, with out investigation or discussion, the Government should press such a measure as this so hastily through the House. The trading classes had not petitioned for it. He had been informed that as much as ten, twelve, and fourteen percent. had been demanded for discounting bills which had only two months to run. He knew it had been said, that unless that interest were paid the parties would not have been able to obtain any money at all; but might it not be replied that those who knew they might legally receive such a high rate of interest would combine to prevent a lower rate being taken? He was aware that there were several bankers around him laughing at his statement because they knew that they were secure of a majority; but he would nevertheless declare that this was a Bill to promote the monied interest against the interest of the trading community. Had not this country, he would ask, prospered under the old law? At all events, had the trading classes called for its repeal? He trusted, therefore, that the House would not, in common decency, allow the measure to pass in the present period of the Sessin.
Mr. Humewas very sorry to hear such opinions fall from his hon. Friend as those
1706
he had just expressed; and particularly the curious argument he had made use of as to this country having prospered under the old state of the law. If this really was an argument weighing with his hon. Friend, why did he ever vote against the Tories? Why, in fact, was he in favour of changing any of those measures he had so strenuously opposed, notwithstanding the existence of which this country had somehow or the other managed to get on? His hon. Friend had said, that no doubt the monied interest wished this Bill to pass. Why, the monied men did not want to get bills discounted. They discounted bills for others. Men of small capital could not get accommodation at the ordinary rate of interest, but by procuring it at eight or ten per cent, they were often saved from ruin. It was for this reason that the provisions of the measure relating to bills of three months ought to be extended.
Mr. Robinsoncould assure the hon. Member for Finsbury, that he (Mr. Robinson) had never heard amongst his extensive connexions any one express a doubt as to the beneficial working of the clause in the Bank Charter, and for himself he was decidedly favourable, since the experiment they had had of that clause, to extending its operation. The hon. Member for Finsbury had said with a degree of simplicity which was rather surprising, that the country had gone on well under the old system. But surely it might be well said, that the country had gone on under other bad laws. It was said by the hon. Member, that this Bill was for the advantage of the bankers; but in this respect he was entirely wrong, for the persons who would benefit by it were the smaller traders.
Mr. Grotewished to add his testimony to that which had been already given as to the beneficial effects which had arisen from the working of the clause in the Bank Charter Act with reference to the usury laws; and his strong conviction was, from the events of the last few months, that the present measure was essentially necessary, more especially in times of commercial difficulty. In the present state of the law a man holding a bill having five months to run, and having no other assets, was absolutely driven to an evasion of the law, because the law would not permit him to pay that rate of interest which such a bill would necessarily bear in the money market if discounted. There was an absurdity in the present state of the law; because a bill having six months to run

1707
was really worth a higher rate of interest than a bill which had only three months to run. That was to say, the risk was greater in discounting a bill at six months than at three months, and, therefore, the interest ought to be higher. But the law allowed ten per cent. interest, or any other rate, to be paid on a bill at three months, whereas, it would not permit more than five per cent, to be paid on a bill at six months although the rate in the market would necessarily be fifteen or twenty per cent. He did not think the hon. Member for Finsbury would find a second man to bear testimony to any evils having arisen from the working of the clauses in the Bank Charter Act, which relaxed the operation of the usury laws. There could not be a greater mistake than that of supposing that the interests of borrowers were forwarded by imposing restrictions on lenders.
Colonel Thompsonsaid, he was not a banker. He was the son of a banker, if there was any taint in that in the eyes of the hon. Member for Finsbury. But he would invite that hon. Member to consider, whether the cry that borrowers could not get money unless the lenders were made by force to lower their prices, was not of the same nature as the old-fashioned outcry against corn-dealers for not lowering their prices; and whether the contest after all, was not between having the respective articles at the price for which men would furnish them, and going without.
Mr. Wakleyfinding his maiden effort to become a Conservative altogether unsuccessful, would abandon the attempt to check the progress of this Bill; but he certainly should make it his business to go into the city to ascertain what were the feelings of borrowers of money upon the subject.
The House in Committee.
The clauses were agreed to. The House resumed.

JEWISH MARRIAGES BILL.
The House went into Committee on this Bill.
Colonel Thompsonsaid, the object of this Bill was to authorise Jews to follow the direction of the Mosaic Jaw, by marrying their brother's widows. Now, if we who were not Jews presumed to obey the Mosaic direction, we were persecuted in consequence; and, on the other hand, in the case of the Jewish sabbath we were persecuted for not obeying. The inference he wanted to draw was, that the Mosaic law was used against us as an engine of
1708
persecution, to be shipped and unshipped as suited the users.
The clauses were then agreed to; the House resumed, and the Report ordered to be received next day.

AUSTRALIA.
Sir George Grey Sir George Grey moved for leave to bring in a Bill to continue in force for another year an Act passed in the reign of his late Majesty King George 4th., to provide for the administration of justice in New South Wales, and Van Diemen's Land, and for the more effectual government thereof, and for other purposes relating thereto.
In answer to a question from Mr. Patrick Stewart,
Sir George Greystated, that the subject of giving an elective council to the colony of New South Wales had occupied a great deal of the attention of Government. He could bear testimony to the value of this colony, and the great progress that it was making. The difficulty of drawing up a bill on the subject was one of no ordinary-nature, but the subject would not be lost sight of during the vacation; and he trusted that early next Session they would be able to submit to Parliament a measure which would not only satisfy the colonists, but which would be well adapted to their peculiar situation.
Mr. Henry L. Bulwerhad had several petitions confided to his charge from the colonies of New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land, all earnestly praying that a change in the constitution of those colonies should take place correspondent with the change that had taken place in their condition. He begged then strongly to corroborate what had been said by his hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster, as to the expectations which prevailed. He must add, that he regretted exceedingly that his hon. Friend the Under Secretary for the Colonies had not brought forward, at an earlier period this Session, the new measure he had announced at the close of last Session. It was at the end of last year that his hon. Friend obtained permission to keep the existing act in force for one year longer, but he obtained this permission only on the distinct pledge that at the meeting of Parliament another Bill should be proposed; and yet, though he had repeatedly jogged the recollection of his hon. Friend to force the subject upon him, weeks and months had passed away until that melancholy event which necessarily occasioned the greatest portion of

1709
public business to be postponed. He could not, of course, now object to a course which the Crown had recommended and the House adopted, and so far he agreed with his hon. Friend that the further postponement must take place. He would, however, take that opportunity of stating two or three of the reasons which made him earnestly hope that such measures were in contemplation as would shortly operate effectual changes. In the first place, no party was satisfied with the existing state of things. The more liberal party desired (he thought properly) an elective assembly? but even the Tory or Conservative party objected to the existing Legislative Council, as furnishing, from the number of Government functionaries it contained, from the want of publicity in its debates, and other causes, nothing like a fair or well-constituted body for the purposes of impartial legislation. Again, there was not, perhaps, in the history of the world one single example of any country which had advanced in the same rapid manner that these colonies had advanced during the last few years. There was then on the bare face of things clear and evident proof that the institutions which had suited New South Wales and Van Diemen's land a few years ago could not possibly suit them now. He had, moreover (and this was all he should now allude to), the authority of the highest personage in the colony of New South Wales—a personage of whose ability and good sense he could not speak too highly,—he had the authority of the present governor of New South Wales for stating not merely that the prosperity of that colony was unexampled, but for urging also that that prosperity admitted, authorized, and called for, an improved and more liberal legislation. "It is but a few years since," said the governor, "that Australia issued from the wilderness: she is now among the most flourishing of the British possessions, and her children justly claim to participate in British institutions." Such being the opinions of so able an officer employed by the Government, he could not but trust that they were the opinions of the Government also, and that the earliest opportunity would be taken for carrying them out.
Motion agreed to.
Bill brought in and read a first time.