Commons Sitting of 25 March 1841

MINUTES.
Bill. Read a first time:—Maynooth College.
Petitions presented. By Mr. James, from the Board of Guardians of the Penrith Union, by Sir B. Hall, from the Vestry of St. Pancras, and by Sir W. Molesworth, from Guardians of the Launceston Union, against parts of the New Poor-law Amendment Bill.—By Mr. G. Knight, from St. George's, Middlesex, Edgeware, and other places, against the Middlesex Sessions Bill.—By Lord F. Egerton, from parishes in Lancashire, for Church Extension.—By Lord Claude Hamilton. Mr. Colquhoun, and Lord James Stuart, from Ayr, Glasgow, and other places, against Church Patronage. By Mr. Colquhoun, from Bolton, from Wesleyans of Islington, and from Aberdeen, and by Mr. Plumptre, from places in Kent, against any further Grant to Maynooth.—By Lord F. Egerton, from Liverpool, for an Alteration in the Duties of Coffee and Sugar.—By Mr. Thornely, from Operatives in a Mill near Tamworth, for a Repeal of the Bread Tax.—By Mr. Plumptre, from places in the counties of Durham, and Berkshire, against the Toleration of Idolatrous Practices in India.—By Mr. Goulburn, from Clergy of Taunton, against the Art exempting Stock-in-Trade from Rating.—By Sir W. Somerville, from Medical Practitioners of Drogheda, for Medical Reform.—By Sir Edward Lytton Bulwer, and Mr. M. Phillips, from Lincoln, and Manchester, in favour of the Jews Declaration Bill.

PRINTING PETITIONS.
Mr. T. Duncombe Mr. T. Duncombe moved that the petition of Samuel Cousins, of Old Cross, in the parish of St. Andrew, in the county of Hertford, complaining of not being able to obtain a copy of the register of electors of the county of Hertford, presented yesterday, be printed with the votes for the use of Members.
Viscount Howickhoped that the House would not agree to the present motion, because it would be establishing an important principle, which would be attended with great inconvenience. A few years ago petitions presented to that House were printed, as a matter of course. A great majority of the petitions that were presented were moved to be printed, as a matter of course, with the votes. In

591
order to check that practice a different system was adopted; a select committee was appointed to consider what petitions should be printed, and by these means the mass of printing was greatly reduced, and an important security was obtained against printing what was improper. After a time, a practice began to prevail, whenever it was intended to bring the subject on which a petition treated before the House, to move that the petition should be printed with the votes. At first, few of these motions were made, but, by degrees, hon. Gentlemen became dissatisfied at having their petitions printed with the mass, wished to have an exception made in their cases, and the number of petitions that were printed with the votes began gradually to increase. During the last Session, the committee on printed papers having adverted to this increase, drew the attention of the House to the practice that was growing up, and stated, in the report, their opinion, that before a petition was printed, it should be ascertained not only that the subject was to be brought before the House, but that it was of such an urgent nature that it would not admit of the delay of being referred to the committee. This report was agreed to unanimously at a meeting at which Dr. Lushington, Mr. Goulburn, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Warburton, Sir George Clerk, the Solicitor-General, Lord Mahon, and Sir Edward Sugden were present. It must be recollected, too, that the most flagrant case of a libel printed by that House was a calumny against the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, contained in a petition presented to the House and ordered to be printed on the motion of an individual Member. The hon. Member for Finsbury in the last discussion had referred to the rule laid down by the late Speaker, Lord Dumfermline, by whom it was undoubtedly said that, when a motion founded on the petition was to be brought forward by an hon. Member, it was printed for the use of the House. But the late Speaker must have meant only that it would be printed if the House should think fit. It was, however, subsequent to the date of this rule, that the committee on printed papers had come to the resolution to which he had referred. With regard to cases which it was not material should be brought forward on any given day, and within any definite period, he could not see that any inconvenience could result
592
from persevering in the practice which prevailed, of referring the petitions to a select committee; but there were instances of grievance which required the application of immediate redress, and in these cases the House should reserve to itself the right of printing petitions. He had done his duty in presenting these objections to the House; if they should be overruled, he would not further oppose the printing of the petition. In deciding upon the question, the House would virtually decide whether they would return to the old practice, a principle which he should most strenuously oppose.
Mr. Goulburntook a different view of the subject. The only point the House were called upon to decide was whether they would print this particular petition, and he thought they ought to do so if it could be shown that the petition was of such a character as to call for the immediate interposition of the House to obtain an earlier investigation than could be obtained by waiting for a reference to the committee. What was the nature of this petition? An individual complained to the House that by the supposed mistake or misconduct of a public officer he had been debarred from procuring a register of county voters. There was no subject which the House was more bound to entertain than one which concerned the exercise of the elective franchise, and the statement, whether true or false, having been made to the House upon the authority of an hon. Member, who had given notice that he meant to make it the subject of discussion, he thought the House should consent to the printing of this petition for the use of Members only. He thought that there was a special ground for the printing of this petition which did not apply to petitions of less urgency.
Mr. Greenediffered very much from the opinion expressed by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Goulburn). The question merely was, whether this petition should be brought under the consideration of the House at an earlier period than it would have been had it been referred to the committee. To make this petition an exception to the rule would be casting a stigma upon those petitions which were referred to the committee, and would be declaring that those alone were worthy of the attention of the House which were printed with the votes. If it could be shown that this petition was of so much

593
importance as to require that it should be brought forward on an early day, he would then concur in the necessity of printing it; but unless that were shown he thought the House should adhere to the rule laid down.
Sir E. Knatchbullthought, that, as the hon. Member had given notice of his intention to bring the petition under the attention of the House, it was of the highest consequence that it should be placed in the hands of hon. Members before the discussion came on.
Mr. G. W. Woodsaid, that the question was in truth whether the House had confidence in the judgment of the committee appointed to consider the subject of printing petitions. The course which the committee took was to print all petitions of this character, and he was of opinion, that if the petition had last night been referred to them, the hon. Member for Finsbury would have attained his object quite as early as he would now secure it.
Mr. T. B. Estcourtcould assure the hon. Member, that the House in nowise found fault with the manner in which the committee discharged their important duties. He took a different view of the case from that of the hon. Member, and he agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge, that a petition which contained allegations such as those which were here made, relating to the exercise of the elective franchise by the constituency of that House, was one of such primary importance, that it demanded to be at once printed, for the purpose of being taken into consideration.
Lord J. Russellwould not say whether a better rule than the present might not be established, or whether they should not place some further restrictions on the printing of petitions; but the question then was, the application of the existing rule. He found that the law of the case had been laid down by Lord Dumfermline as follows.—
"That all petitions which are presented relative to subjects which Members wished to bring under the consideration of the House are printed with the votes, the Member giving notice when he presented the petition of the day on which he will make his motion."
When, therefore, they refused to print a petition, it should be on some ground of exception why the rule laid down should not be adhered to in a particular instance.
594
There might be various grounds for such an exception. It might be said, for instance, that the matter was one so well known that it did not require any particular notice; or it might be found that the petition was libellous, or such as ought not to be printed unless for the use of Members only. The petition before the House did not, however, seem to him to offer any just ground why the House should refuse its being printed. It did not relate to a grievance which the petitioner alone had felt, but the subject was one of great importance, relating as it did to a refusal to present a copy of a registry, for which the party offered 15 s., while the officer stated, that a far larger sum would he required. The case was one to which the House should look with great delicacy. The petition contained nothing affecting the character of the individual against whom the complaint was made. He might have acted with perfect propriety, and it might have been impossible for him to have presented a copy at a lower price than he named. Laying aside, therefore, every consideration as to the fitness of establishing a new rule with regard to petitions, he should certainly vote for the printing of the petition in question.
Motion agreed to.
Sir E. Knatchbull Sir E. Knatchbull moved, that the petition of Mr. Henslow, presented by him on Wednesday, should be printed and circulated with the votes. The petition was that of a solicitor, who complained on behalf of his clients, of certain proceedings in the Legacy Duty Office in reference to the property of certain individuals deceased, for returns respecting which he meant according to his notice to submit a motion to the House.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobjected to the printing of the petition, which was that of an indifferent party complaining of no personal grievance, but of some acts alleged to be done towards his clients. He very much doubted whether it would be expedient to grant those returns which were to be moved for, but he should have no objection to them, if the right hon. Baronet could procure the consent of the parties who were concerned.
Sir Robert Peelthought, that it was of very great importance that the rules of the House relating to the printing of petitions should be determined, and should be strictly attended to, as well as that every

595
hon. Member should, in this respect, stand upon the same footing. The rule at present was, that any Member might move that a petition which he presented should be printed, upon his giving notice of his intention to found a motion upon it; and conceiving this to be the existing rule, he should have voted for the hon. Member for Finsbury if the House had divided. He apprehended that the result of the state of things which was contended for, that the propriety of printing petitions should be discussed when the petition was proposed to be printed, would be this—that every hon. Member would think his own the most important petition, that debates would arise, which would extend to the matter contained in the petitions, and all the existing rules upon discussing petitions would be set aside. He hoped, therefore, that the right hon. Baronet would withdraw his motion.
Viscount Howickthought that the effect of adopting the course which an assent to this motion would establish, would be to induce many hon. Members to bring forward subjects of small importance. It was to be remembered, that hon. Members had a strong pressure from their constituents and from their private friends, and he contended, that if any impartial man looked back to the number of petitions presented since the late rule had been established, he would find that only one in ten was of such a nature as to be entitled to be printed. He cordially concurred with the right hon. Baronet as to the impropriety of debating petitions upon their being presented, but after the decision which had been arrived at in reference to the petition of the hon. Member for Finsbury, for the future he should always vote in favour of printing petitions, because he thought that greater difficulties would occur by reason of the petitions being discussed upon their being presented than from their being printed.
Sir R. Peelsaw no reason to alter his opinion upon the existing state of the practice of the House. What he thought was, that the rule should be altered, and that there should be a distinct definition of the circumstances under which a petition might be printed, for that the mere intention of an hon. Member to found a motion upon it was not, in his view, sufficient.
Mr. Humesaid, that his definition of the rule was entirely different from that
596
which had been sought to be put upon it by the noble Lord, the Member for Northumberland. He contended that the rule had been adopted only with a view to get rid of the custom of discussing petitions when they were presented; but, according to the rule laid down, when any hon. Member expressed his intention to found a motion upon a petition which he had presented, it was his right that it should be printed.
Motion withdrawn.

LORD WALDEGRAVE.
Mr. Humerose to ask a question, to which he hoped the hon. Under-Secretary of State would be able to give a satisfactory answer. On the 13th of February, 1841, the trial of the Queen against Lord Waldegrave and Captain Duff, for an assault upon some police officers, took place in the Court of Queen's Bench. It appeared that the commissioners of police had instituted the prosecution, and that, at the trial, some conversation took place, during which the judge suggested that there should be some private arrangement. Now, he begged to know, whether there was any intention to bring the case to a close, as the public mind was very much dissatisfied on the subject?
Mr. F. Maulesaid, that neither the hon. Gentleman nor the public need be alarmed lest any compromise of money should be allowed in the case alluded to. His noble Friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department had always set his face against any compromise, and the commissioners of police, from the commencement of the prosecution, had always refused to listen to any offers of the kind. The defendants would be brought up for judgment at the commencement of the next term.
Subject at an end.

EMIGRATION OF FEMALES.
Lord Fitzalanbegged to call the attention of the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies, to a paragraph which appeared in the Observer of Sunday last. The noble Lord read the following paragraph:—
"On Friday, at the meeting of the board of directors and guardians of the parish of Marylebone, the proposition of sending some of the most vicious female paupers to the colony of South Australia, by the emigration ship Daniel Wheeler, which will sail from the London

597
Docks in a few days, was taken into consideration. It appeared, that there would be no surgeon on board, and that the only guarantee of non-communication between the girls and the crew would be the vigilance of the captain. The terms were 20 l. per head, and the requisite outfit would cost for each about 4l.; the voyage takes four months, and in the event of their not obtaining places immediately on their arrival, there is no asylum open for their reception. Ten girls of the most infamous and uncontrollable character were selected, and they all consented to go. They are from year to year a burden to the parish, and obstinately refuse to labour for their support. The subject was viewed differently by the various members of the board, who one and all most amiably considered the young women's probable situation as regarded their morals. At length the question was put, when the numbers proved to be equal, and the chairman by his casting vote decided in favour of these irreclaimable and unfit members of any society being sent off without delay."
He begged to ask the noble Lord whe-the attention of the Government had been drawn to this matter, and whether they approved of such un application of the parish money?
Lord J. Russellsaid, that the only knowledge which he had of the subject was from the newspapers, and, in answer to his noble Friend's second question, he could only say, that he considered the proposed application of the parish funds to such a purpose a very improper one.
Colonel T. Wood, in reference to the question previously put by the noble Lord (Lord Fitzalan), wished to know whether the parish of Marylebone was under the control of the Poor-law Commissioners so far as that they would have the power of preventing the exportation of the unfortunate females referred to in the report?
Mr. F. Maulesaid, that the parish being regulated under a local act, the Poor-law Commissioners had no power.
Subject at an end.

EAST-INDIA SUGAR.
Mr. Goulburnreferred to the East-India Acts laid on the Table during the last three days, and called the attention of the right hon. the President of the Board of Trade to the ambiguity of the wording of one of the Acts, by which, according to his (Mr. Goulburn's) interpretation, it would be supposed that sugar could be imported into the presidency of Madras by land, though prohibited by sea.
Mr. Laboucheresaid, he had taken the opinion of those parties connected with
598
the India Board, who were best acquainted with the subject, and he found it was generally understood, that under the Act passed on the 10th of June by the President of the Council of Madras, the importation of foreign sugar into Madras, whether by land or sea, was as completely prohibited as the importation of foreign sugar into Bengal by the Act of the British Parliament. Of course, if there were any ambiguity in the wording of the Act, that ambiguity would be removed.

COPYRIGHT OF DESIGNS.
Mr. E. Tennent Mr. E. Tennent moved that the House should resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House on the Copyright of Designs Act.
House in Committee.
The hon. Gentleman moved that the Chairman be directed to move for leave to bring in a bill to consolidate and amend the laws relating to Copyright of Designs for articles of manufacture. Resolution reported and Bill ordered to be brought in.
The House resumed.

NEW SOUTH WALES.
Mr. Grotethen rose for the purpose of moving the following resolutions on the subject of the land fund and finances of New South Wales:
1st. That it appears that in October, 1840, the following resolutions were passed by the Governor and Legislative Council of New South Wales, viz.
"1. That in the opinion of this council, the parent state, indisputably deriving a direct pecuniary saving (independently of other advantages) from the assignment of convicts to private service in New South Wales, and its interests being at all events in an equal, if not a superior degree involved in the due coercion and discipline of such transported offenders, ought in justice to bear at least one-half of the expenses attendant on the police and gaol establishments, which are raised to their present large amount chiefly through the introduction of a convict population into the colony. 2. That his Excellency the Governor be respectfully solicited to represent, on behalf of this council, to her Majesty's Secretary of State fox the Colonies, that this council has most reluctantly consented to so large an expenditure for the support of those establishments since the 1st. of July, 1835, and has voted the full amount of the estimate for the same for the year 1841, solely from a conviction that it would not be justified in declining to make provision for the maintenance of the public tranquillity and security. 3. That by the appropriation, for the period from July 1st, 1835, to 31st December, 1841, of so large an amount (about 597,000 l.) of the colonial re-

599
venue, arising partly from the sale of public lands, partly from ordinary sources, in defraying the whole charge of the police and gaol establishments, including buildings, and the consequent diminution of those funds which would have been available for the introduction of free labour, every branch of the productive industry of this colony is in danger of falling into decay, to the great loss and injury not only of the colony, but of the parent state also, more especially of its manufacturing, commercial, and shipping interests." 2. That the above large expenses of police and gaol establishments have, since July, 1835, been defrayed by the application of a considerable portion of the net proceeds of the sales of Crown lands in the colony to the general purposes of the colonial revenue. 3. That it appears, by papers now before the House (No. 511, 1840, No. 81, 1841), that there has been received from the sales of Crown lands in New South Wales, during the period from 1831 to June, 1840 inclusive, a gross total sum of

£958,000

From which deduct—

1. Charges of various kinds, including expenses of the settlement of Port Philip, and of protection to the Aborigines

£41,300

2. Actual charge of survey and management (though for eight years paid out of the general revenue of the colony) about

149,700

Making together about

191,000

And leaving net proceeds of sales of Crown lands to June, 1840

£767,000

Whereof the sum of £502,500 only has been applied to the purposes of emigration from the United Kingdom to New South Wales.
"4. That this House, concurring in opinion with the Governor and Legislative Council of New South Wales, that the charge of gaols and police in that colony ought for the present to be apportioned between the colony and the mother country, will, on Wednesday next, resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, for the purpose of considering what may be the proper amount to be allotted in the way of a fixed annual sum in aid of that charge; and for the purpose of considering what may be the best means of making good to the land and emigration fund of New South Wales the deduction which has been therein occasioned by the entire burden of gaols and police having been unduly thrown upon the colony since 1835."
The hon. Member proceeded to call the attention of the House to the importance of the colony of New South Wales. The shipping freight from London and Liverpool alone, in 1839, was, he said, 49,000 tons, while the exports from the United Kingdom there were 1,700,000. The
600
imports of wool alone, in 1839, were 6,900,000lbs. weight, or nearly one-fourth of our imports from Germany and Russia together. It contained a free population of 110,000, and a convict population of 38,000. He had to complain of a great injury and wrong done to this colony by the abstraction of a large sum from the land and emigration fund of the colony, arising out of an ill-considered measure adopted in 1835 with regard to it—that of transferring to the colony the entire burden of maintaining the gaols and police establishments. Up to that period no such step had been taken. No doubt had existed by whom the gaol and police establishments should be maintained. It was supposed to be a part of the transportation system of this country, and it had never been proposed to apply the resources of a free colony to such an object, either wholly or in part. The measure was adopted by Mr. Secretary Rice, without the colonists having an opportunity of being heard against it, nor was any attempt made to adopt a middle course between making the colony bear the whole of the charges in question, and releasing it altogether. The main reason for the change, as stated in the Treasury minute of November, 1834, was the flattering condition of the colony at the time, the increased value of property, and the apparent surplus in the treasury of the colony; but they lost sight of the fact, that a considerable portion of the surplus was from the land and emigration fund. The estimate of Mr. Rice at the time was, that the annual expense thus thrown on the colony would be 25,000 l.; but in six years, from 1835 to 1841, no less a sum than 597,000 l. had been taken from the colonial revenue to defray the charges in question. The reason for this increase was, that at the time the gaols and police of the colony were in the most neglected and desperate condition. The Attorney-general of New South Wales stated, in 1835, that the gaols in that colony were in such a state, that no person could enter them without a feeling of horror. At that period, the Colonial Department either neglected, or did not choose to inform themselves on this subject, and, therefore, threw all the charge of the gaols and police on the colony. This was one of the grounds upon which he called upon the House to reconsider the whole question.

601
In his mind, this not only constituted a reason for opening the whole question of the state of the finances of this colony, but also justified him in demanding on its behalf, that a portion of the charge for the gaols and police of the colony should be thrown on the treasury of the mother country. He contended, that there was no sufficient reason for taking off the charge from the mother country, in 1835, or throwing it on the colony. To do so, it should be shown, that peculiar circumstances justified the Colonial Minister in saying, that the charge for the future should be borne by the colony, and that for the future, its funds should be made answerable for this branch of expenditure. He thought, that there would be no difficulty in showing, that this was a charge which this colony, in consequence of the peculiar situation in which it had been placed, ought not to have been called upon to bear, and more particularly as long as convicts were sent there by the mother country. He begged the House to recollect, that there were 110,000 free settlers in that colony, and 38,000 convict population; it must, therefore, be obvious, that the expense of gaols and police, for the maintenance of law and order must be very extravagant in comparison with what it was in this country. He did not contend, that if this had been an entirely free colony, that the expense of its gaols and police should be borne by the mother country; but this was a colony which was little more, in the first instance, than a penal settlement, but in which, in the course of time, the free settlers predominated. The experiment in forming that colony was not that of settlers who had gone from this country at their own charge, but of persons who had been sent out not as free settlers, but as convicts to undergo punishment. Looking, then, to this charge, although he admitted, that the colony should bear the expense of its own gaols and police, he thought a certain portion of it, arising, as it evidently did, from the continuance of the transportation system, should be borne by the mother country. He did not intend to contend for the extension of any favour to this colony, but he thought, that it ought not to be called upon to pay the whole of the expense of making this colony a receptacle for the convict population of this country. That colony ought to have nothing to do with our criminal popula-
602
tion, but from 1835, up to last August, it was heavily charged for the expense of maintaining English criminals. The influx of convicts into New South Wales was not stopped until that period, and every previous year they had sent out to them a new importation of persons convicted of the most serious crimes. The way in which the argument for the imposition of this charge on the colony was put in the despatches from the Colonial-office, and the reason stated in justification of it was, that the expense of the gaols and police was to be taken as an equivalent for the system of assignment. They were also told, that the settlements were spread through a wide extent of territory, and were often remote from each other, and that, therefore, there was a larger charge for gaols and police than would otherwise be the case. The chief argument, however, was, that as you assigned the convicts to settlers for their private work, that, therefore, the charge for the maintenance of the police should be borne by the whole colony. This was the way, indeed, in which the matter had been put by various Governments, but the argument had been fully met and answered in various speeches which had been made in the Legislative Council of New South Wales, and in documents which had emanated from that body. The Legislative Council and the colonists said to the mother country, "You deal with the system of assignment as if it was all gain to us and all loss to you; whereas, it was as much a matter of gain to the mother country as it was to the colony." In point of fact, it was a mere matter of arrangement between this country and the colony, and that in consequence of the character of the population sent out being such as to require an enormous police, it was a fair ground for saying, that this country should bear a portion of the expense, and that it was only fair, that the charge should be equally divided between the two. Hon. Gentlemen should recollect the great expense that would fall upon this country for the maintenance of her criminal population, if this system of assignment had not existed. He believed, that the lowest estimate would make it from 25 l. to 30 l. a head, and that the whole charge for a small number of years would have amounted to from 600,000 l. to 900,000 l. He contended then, if the expense of the support and

603
clothing an assigned convict was not a sufficient reward for the assignment of his labour, then the Corollary was, that a premium ought to be demanded in each case as an equivalent. If this doctrine were to be maintained, you should make the assignee of the convict pay as much for the labour of the convict, in addition to his maintenance and clothing, as would be sufficient: but nothing could justify the charge of this payment on the aggregate population of the colony. In doing this, they were going back to the principle of the system which had been so strongly reprobated in this country and were making payments of wages as it were, out of the rates. Many high authorities conversant with this colony had admitted, that this charge should not be entirely thrown on the colony. Lord Ripon, last year, in the course of the debate on the Bishop of Exeter's motion respecting this colony, stated distinctly, that he considered, that half the expense of the gaols and police of the colony should be borne by the mother country, until all traces of the criminal character of the colony were lost. Lord Normanby, also, while Colonial Minister, evidently had this feeling strongly impressed on his mind, and he had urged its consideration in the Treasury. The Lords of the Treasury, in their minute in answer to his communication, admitted and lamented the financial difficulties of the colony, but did not agree as to the cause. They talked of the extravagant and lavish expenditure which had taken place there. It Was not for him to prove, that this colony had always been most putlent in its local expenditure, but whether any mistake or not existed on this point, he cared not, for it was not less true, that by the charge which had been imposed on the colony, since 1835, it had had burdens placed on it to the amount of hot less than 100,000 l. a-year. This was amply sufficient in his mind to explain all the financial difficulties of the Colony. It appeared, that the sum of 265,000 l. had been expanded, in addition to the ordinary revenue of the colony. If this charge had not been thrown on it, the emigration fund would have remained untouched, and the revenue would have been amply sufficient for the ordinary expences and charges of the colony. It was true, that emigration to New South Wales had never entirely stopped; it was going on at the present moment, and it was likely to
604
go on; but what he contended was, that emigration to that place did not go on to that extent which the colony was justified in expecting, or which was at all adequate to its wants. This was the consequence of not less than 260,000 l. having been abstracted from the emigration fund of New South Wales. When the House saw this, he was sure that it would agree with him in thinking, that the colony did not Complain Without cause. He need hardly say, that this was a matter of vital and paramount importance to the colony, and that if the House did not at once interfere the tide of emigration to it would be completely stopped, and thus the future prosperity of the colony would be stopped. There was another topic to which he would only allude—namely, the disproportion which existed between the number of the sexes in the colony, which had led to great evils, and which, if allowed to continue, would be productive of even worse results; but this was one of the effects which was likely to ensue from interfering with the means of carrying on an extensive emigration. Again, this colony afforded ample means for the profitable employment bf labour, and offered great inducements to emigration. Had not, then, the poorer classes in this country, who could not obtain adequate remuneration for their labour at home, and who had been prevented Emigrating to the colony in consequence bf the abstraction of this fund, just grounds for complaining? Was it not obvious that the Government had withheld from large bodies of the poor and industrious population of this country the mean's of permanently bettering their condition by emigration to a place where there was such an urgent demand for labour, by allowing this charge to be made on the colonial funds? In every 1,000 l. taken from this fund fifty poor persons might be sent to the colony. He hoped, therefore, the House would consider the great number that had been prevented from improving their condition when they were prevented doing so in any other manner. In this case there was not merely a demand for labour, but there was a most pressing exigency for it. The strongest feeling existed in the colony as to the necessity of introducing into it a moral and industrious population by means of emigration. On this point he would refer the House to the report of the committee of the Le-

605
gislative Council of New South Wales on the subject of emigration.
"The committee, before they close their report, trust it will not be deemed irrelevant to state their opinion of the justice as well as the policy of applying the proceeds of the Crown lands exclusively to the introduction of a moral and industrious class of inhabitants. The first emigrants were induced to embark their fortunes in this distant colony under the promise of receiving free grants of land, and in the confidence that the same policy would be continued, as the best means of settling the country. If it has since been deemed expedient to sell the lands in lieu of granting them as before, it is considered by the inhabitants merely as the conversion of capital into another form, and that the proceeds of the sale of land should still be applied to the same purposes as the land itself. If there be any justice in this argument, it derives force from the circumstance, that this colony is made the receptacle for the outcasts of the United Kingdom, and is consequently loaded with a vast disproportion of immoral people. That the colonists have derived many advantages from the transportation of convicts cannot be denied; but the system has brought with it a long train of moral evils, which can only be counteracted by an extensive introduction of free and virtuous inhabitants; and the only means upon which the colonists can safely rely for accomplishing this vital object, is the revenue arising from the sale of lands. It is for these reasons that your committee are anxious to record their opinion, as well as that of the whole community of the colony, that the funds arising from the sale of lands should be appropriated exclusively to the purpose of introducing a moral and Industrious population; that they consider this appropriation alike indispensable to the present interests, and the future prosperity and character of the colony; and that they regard the opinion expressed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and approved by the Lords of the Treasury, in the light of a pledge by his Majesty's Government, that the Crown lands of the colony shall be held sacred to the promotion of emigration."
He would here remark, that there seemed to be a disposition in the colony to look at the emigration fund as if it were entirely the property of the colony. He did not regard it in this point of view, for he considered that it was a fund placed under the trust of the Government and the Legislature, to be expended in a manner equally beneficial to the mother country as to the colony. If the colonial authorities attempted to abstract anything from this fund, it was the duty of the colonial department to interfere; for it was equally the properly of the poor of this country as of the colony, and the
606
utmost care should be taken that it was expended in a way alike beneficial to each. The interests of the colony and the mother country were identical as to the proper expenditure of this fund. He was sure that many hon. Gentlemen would be surprised at the large sum that had accrued from the sale of lands in this colony. From papers on the Table of the House, it appeared that there had been received from the sales of Crown lands in New South Wales, during the period from 1831 to June 1840 inclusive, a gross amount of 958,000 l. If the inhabitants of the colony, or of emigrants with capital, had been sure that none, of only a small portion of this money would have been expended in promoting emigration, he felt satisfied that instead of its amounting to 950,000 l., it would not have been 9,500 l. The sales of Crown lands would have been little or nothing, if the opinion had not been generally entertained that this fund would have been applied to emigration purposes; and the inhabitants of the colony had good reason to believe this, after the solemn and repeated declarations of successive colonial ministers. There were a variety of documents, which he could refer to, which would corroborate this statement. He would, however, only refer to two or threes He found in a letter dated 16th July, 1831, from Viscount Howick (then Under-Secretary for the Colonies) to the Secretary of the Treasury, the following passage:—
"Lord Goderich is of opinion, that it would not be wise so to burden the colony as to check the progress of improvement and the development of its resources for the sake of a small immediate saving to this country; and he would more especially call the attention of their Lordships to the impolicy of applying to the ordinary current expences of the colony that portion of the territorial revenue which arises from the sale of land. The funds derived from this source should be looked upon, not as forming a part of the income of the colony and available for the purpose of meeting its annual expenses, but as capital which should not be permanently sunk, but invested so as to produce a profitable return."
Again, in a despatch from Lord Glenelg to Sir Richard Bourke, dated March, 1837, it was stated:—
"I have to request that, in furtherance of the proposal contained in the enclosed letter (from James Stephens, Esq. to the Secretary of the Treasury, 9th of January, 1837), you will, at the commencement of each financial year, transmit to the secretary of State a state-

607
ment of the balance (if any) of the fund applicable to emigration remaining unexpended at the close of the preceding year, together with an estimate of the probable amount of the funds to be derived from the sale of Crown lands within the colony, and applicable to the service during the ensuing year. You will consider yourself at liberty to appropriate one-third of this sum to the payment of bounties on emigrants introduced by private settlers, on the terms of your Government notice of the 28th of October, 1835, and the remaining two-thirds will be expended under the direction of the chief agent for emigration in this country. The extent of the revenue raised from the sales of unsettled Crown lands in New South Wales exceeds the most sanguine anticipations entertained at the time when the existing regulations for the disposal of land were promulgated by Lord Ripon in 1831. The arrangements, however, for the employment of these funds have not hitherto kept pace with the rapidity of their growth, and Lord Glenelg considers, that some more efficient agency should, without delay, be provided for securing the full benefit which ought to accrue both to the colony and to this country from the due administration of the means thus rendered available for emigration."
In another despatch, also from the same noble Lord to that officer, then governor of the colony, dated September, 1836, he found this even more specifically stated:—
"Referring, however, to the concluding paragraph of the report of the committee of the legislative council, in which they strongly urge the application of the whole of the revenues arising from the sale of Crown lands in the colony to the promotion of emigration, I am of opinion, that the funds so derived cannot be more properly or beneficially appropriated than in the advancement of this object; and I am therefore prepared to sanction the appropriation of as large a portion of them as may be required for emigration. With this view, I have to request, that you will, at the end of the year, transmit to me a statement of the revenue derived from the sale of Crown lands, and also of the disbursements made from the same source in furtherance of emigration; and I would recommend, that no portion of such revenue should, on any account, be devoted to other purposes, until this primary object has been sufficiently provided for."
It was hardly necessary for him to multiply quotations on this subject, as the documents which he had just referred to were sufficiently clear and specific, and there could be no doubt as to the Colonial Department being pledged to the proper application of the fund arising from the sale of waste lands.
An Hon. Member An Hon. Member moved, that the House
608
be counted; and as there were not forty Members present, it was adjourned.