Commons Sitting of 11 May 1848

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1°Borough Elections (No. 2); Incumbered Estates (Ireland).
2° Lunatic Asylums (Scotland).
3° Removal of Aliens; Petty Bag Office.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. Bright, from one of the Manufacturing Districts of South Lancashire, for Extension of Elective Franchise.—By Viscount Morpeth, from Members of the Congregation of General Baptists, in the Town of Louth, Lincolnshire, for Discouragement of Idolatry in India.—By Mr. Joseph Baily, from Talgarth (Brecon), and by other Hon. Members, from a number of Places, for Better Observance of the Lord's Day.—By Mr. George Duncan, from Members of the Presbyterian Congregation of Hiltown Free Church, Dundee, and by other Hon. Members, from various Places, for Alteration of the Law respecting Sites for Churches (Scotland).—By Mr. Edward Ellice, from the Town Council of Cupar, and by Mr. W. Morison, from Freeholders of Clackmannan, for Inquiry into the Excise, Laws.—From Attorneys and Solicitors, practising at Ormskirk and Southport (Lancaster), for Repeal of the Duty on Attorneys' Certificates. —By Mr. Gardner, from several Lodges of the Independent Order of Odd Fellows, Manchester Unity, for Extension of the Benefit Societies Act.—By Mr. George Hamilton, from Solicitors practising in Ireland, for Inquiry respecting the Court of Chancery (Ireland).—By Mr. Tatton Egerton, from Cheadle (Chester), and by

835
other Hon. Members, from several Places, against the Diplomatic Relations, Court of Rome, Bill.—By Mr. E. Ellice, from the Town Council of Pittenween, in the county of Fife, for Improvement of Elie Harbour; and against the Law of Entail (Scotland) Bill.—By Colonel Muir, from Justices of the Peace of Renfrewshire, for Regulating the Licensing System (Scotland).—By Colonel Watkins, of the Board of Guardians of the Brecknock Poor Law Union, for Alteration of the Law respecting Mendicancy.—From several Clergymen of the Church of England, respecting Certain Pictures in the National Gallery.—By Sir T. Acland, from the rural Deanery of Torrington (Devon), for Alteration of the Law respecting Parochial Assessments.—By Colonel Mure, from Paisley, for Amendment of the Poor Law (Scotland).—By Mr. E. Ellice, from the Town Council of Cupar, for Alteration of the Law for Regulating Prisons (Scotland).—By Mr. Cardwell, from the Committee of the Liverpool Guardian Society for the Protection of Trade, and by the Marquess of Granby, from Stamford, against, by Mr. Bagshaw, from the Mayor and Burgesses of Harwich, for Alteration of, and by Lord Robert Grosvenor, from Brentford, and its Vicinity, in favour of, the Public Health Bill.—By Mr. Ewart, from the Burgesses of Lochmaben, for Amendment of the Royal Burghs (Scotland) Act.—By Mr. Bulkeley Hughes, from Llanbeblig (Carnarvon), for Alteration of the Law of Settlement.—By Lord George Bentinck, from the Rev. Henry Palmer, M.A., of Withcote Hall, Leicester, for Repeal of the Slave Trade Felony Act.—By Lord Newport, from Samuel Bright, and Others, Bishops Castle district, to take the Turnpike Trusts into Consideration.

AMERICAN POSTAL REGULATIONS.
MR. BRIGHT begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it had come to the knowledge of Her Majesty's Government that a Bill was under the consideration of the American Legislature, having for its object the establishment of a retaliatory system of increased postage so long as this country retained its present postal regulations?
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER had received information somewhat to the effect stated by the hon. Member; but he thought the hon. Gentleman was mistaken on one point, for he conceived this could not be regarded as a retaliatory measure, as the effect of any law the United States Legislature might pass would be to impose a higher rate of postage upon American citizens, and would affect them much more than the people of this country.

DENMARK AND SCHLESWIG.
MR. URQUHART, in the absence of the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs, would put to the noble Lord at the head of the Government the question of which he had given notice. It would be in the recollection of the House, that some time ago, on a question being put to the Government on the subject of the dispute between Denmark and Holstein, the reply was that, in the then state of circum-
836
stances, Her Majesty's Ministers did not consider that the guarantee of the Treaty of 1720 could apply. He now wished to know whether, as the English Government had recognised the right of Denmark to blockade the ports of those enemies or pirates who had invaded her territories, the noble Lord and his Colleagues still considered that the stipulation or guarantee of the Treaty of 1720 did not apply?
LORD J. RUSSELL said, it was the opinion of Her Majesty's Government that the guarantee of the Treaty of 1720 did not apply to the present state of circumstances between Prussia and Denmark.

NEW WRIT FOR HORSHAM.
MR. GORING rose to move the issuing of a new writ for the borough of Horsham. In his opinion circumstances had very much altered since the House had consented to suspend the writ for that borough. His noble Friend who made a similar Motion upon a previous occasion, withdrew it, on the understanding that the First Minister of the Crown would immediately bring in a Bill upon the subject. The noble Lord took up the subject in such an energetic manner, that it was supposed that the Bill would have gone through the House without much opposition, and the writ was accordingly suspended. But what was the course which the noble Lord subsequently adopted, instead of proceeding with the Bill, which he pledged himself to introduce as regarded Horsham? The noble Lord awaited the introduction of the measure proposed by the hon. Member for Flint, and proposed to include in that the case of Horsham. He considered that a most unconstitutional measure. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth supported the proposition of the noble Lord, on the distinct understanding that no indefinite suspension was intended. He could assure the noble Lord that the electors courted, and by no means feared, the result of any inquiry which might be instituted. The hon. Member moved—
"That Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a New Writ for the electing of a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Horsham, in the room of John Jervis, esq., whose Election has been determined to be void."
LORD J. RUSSELL: I certainly advised the House not to issue the writ for the borough of Horsham, because I thought it advisable that a full inquiry should take

837
place into the facts of the case. After the proposal which had been made to the House, that inquiries in all cases of a like nature should be conducted by Commissioners, it did seem expedient to me that Horsham should be ranked amongst the other boroughs, and that the inquiries should take place together before a commission, rather than that I should proceed with the case by a separate Bill.
MR. HUDSON said, that the noble Lord had shifted the responsibility of the measure from himself upon a private Member of the House. With regard to the borough of Horsham, if a clear case were made out, there would be no objection to a Bill for disfranchisement; but if it were included in a general Bill, it would become a case quite of another nature, more important interests would be involved, constitutional rights would be called in question, and there would be a powerful opposition to the Bill. If the noble Lord did not speedily promote his measure, the constituency of Horsham would have a right to complain.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL said, he never gave any intimation that if the House suspended the writ, he would take the matter into his hands. The House suspended the writ upon no pledge given by him. The noble Lord moved the issuing of the writ. The hon. Member for Montrose moved as an amendment that the writ do not issue. He (Lord John Russell) then observed, that it was a case of grave suspicion, and one which called for an inquiry. After the House had decided that the writ should not issue, he had been asked to introduce a Bill, to which request he assented.
The EARL of MARCH had understood the noble Lord distinctly to promise the introduction of a Bill, and upon that understanding he withdrew his Motion. As he remembered, the facts of the case were simply these:—He moved that the writ should issue; the hon. Member for Montrose moved as an Amendment that it should he suspended. The noble Lord, who came in late, got up and said that the circumstances of the case demanded inquiry, and therefore that it was necessary that the issue of the writ should be suspended for a time. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth inquired whether the suspension should be for an indefinite period? The noble Lord informed him that it should only be while the Bill was being brought in. Upon that understanding he withdrew his Motion. He considered that
838
it would not be discreet in him to press his Motion after the opinions which had been given by the the noble Lord, supported as they were by the right hon. Member for Tamworth. He considered that by this postponement the electors of Horsham had not been fairly treated, and he would support the Motion that a writ do now issue.
MR. HUME considered that the establishment of a general Commission would be very beneficial, as it would save the expense to the boroughs of having to send up witnesses to London. The business could be done in a much cheaper manner by sending down two Gentlemen to make the necessary inquiries. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Sunderland might consider that it was very unimportant whether an inquiry should take place in one borough; but it certainly was a matter of consequence to the nation that these acts of bribery, which were of frequent occurrence in different boroughs, should be inquired into. It was his opinion that Her Majesty's Government were taking the proper course, and that the inquiry to be made before the Commission would be attended with the proper result.
MR. F. O'CONNOR was as anxious that abuses should be inquired into as any man, but he must protest against the proposal to select a few boroughs out of a number, in order to strike an average of the amount of corruption in each. The proposition of the Government resembled the fact of trying eight men, on the same evidence, for different offences, and then striking an average of guilt for each. He did not see how they could, in any justice, include the several boroughs in one indictment. There ought to be a separate inquiry for each.
SIR GEORGE GREY: The hon. Member is quite mistaken when he says it is the intention of the Government to include these boroughs in the one indictment; all we want to do is to establish one tribunal before which the different cases can be tried.
MR. MANGLES trusted that the House would not stop with the cases which had been brought before them. He hoped they would go further. Every Member of the House knew that in almost every small borough throughout the country, say of from 500 to 550 voters, about 220 voters were sincere and honest Tories or Conservatives, and the same number Liberals or Whigs; and there were between forty and fifty dishonest men who could turn the scale either

839
way, and were disposed to sell the election to whatever party chose to buy. However they might shut their eyes to the fact, every person knew that it was the case, and that there was no chance of getting the election unless with the assistance of these men. It was very gross hypocrisy for hon. Gentlemen to appear so excessively shocked when a case of bribery was brought before them, for they were well aware that conduct such as he had described was pursued in almost every small borough. The hon. Member for Cocker-mouth shook his head, as if his borough was pure par excellence. He was willing to concede so much to him; but he earnestly hoped the Government would take measures for throwing the smaller boroughs into larger ones, thus enlarging the constituency, and thus preventing these men from selling the country.
MR. JOHN STUART wished to know whether the Government could either explain or justify the course which they had taken with respect to the borough of Horsham and the other boroughs involved in the Bill of the hon. Baronet. He contended that the course which was proposed to be taken was unconstitutional with regard to the House, and not creditable to the Government. If the Government meant to do justice
in punishing the offences, they could not do so by inquiring all over the kingdom where similar offences had been committed, but by applying themselves to one case of gross delinquency when they found it out. The question now before the House related only to the borough of Horsham. He was persuaded that the House would consider the Bill most unconstitutional, and that the borough of Horsham had been treated most unfairly.
SIR R. H. INGLIS said, that they had received reports from seven Select Committees, more or less impugning the purity of election. In seven of these cases new writs had been moved for and granted, and he did not see in the case of Horsham, upon what grounds of justice they ought to refuse it. He trusted that his hon. Friend would divide the House in favour of the issue of a new writ; if he did so he would support him.
MR. STAFFORD did not see why they should suspend the issuing of the writ in consequence of some conversation which took place outside a tavern door. An ostler and a potboy had been summoned to prove a case of treating, and then the defendant resigned the seat. Who those
840
mysterious persons were, the Committee did not determine. A sufficient case had not been made out for depriving the electors of their privilege of a representative, and he would support the Motion of his hon. Friend, especially as, should the case be suspended in order to its being included in a general Bill, there would be little chance of the question being decided for a long time. They were all aware that a private Member had very little chance, at that late period of the Session, to press on a Bill, especially if it were keenly opposed.
LORD J. RUSSELL said: I have been asked what is the course I intend to pursue with regard to this Bill. I shall wait until the discussion takes place upon the measure of the hon. Member for Flintshire (Sir J. Hanmer); if that measure succeeds and includes Horsham in its schedule, I shall accept it; but if otherwise, I shall go on with the Bill which I have proposed.
SIR J. HANMER was willing to bring on his Bill at any time.
MR. HENLEY observed, that if the hon. Gentleman intended to get his Bill through at all, his best course would be to withdraw it at present, and then to bring in a new measure. The people of Horsham were hanging between heaven and earth, between the noble Lord at the head of the Government, who would not go on with his Bill, and the hon. Gentleman opposite, who would not go on with his.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL said, that with respect to the Amendments which had been introduced into the Bill, they involved no alteration in the principle of the measure, which involved an inquiry into all cases in which the House had reason to suspect that corrupt practices had prevailed, by means of a Commission, which was to be sent down; in each instance, to institute an inquiry on the spot. This was the principle of the Bill. The machinery by which it was proposed to carry out this system was complicated and delicate, and many suggestions had been made for its improvement. As these suggestions, however, refereed in great part, if not entirely, to matters of detail, he thought that the second reading might be taken now, and the Bill could be more particularly discussed as to detail, in Committee on a future occasion
SIR R. PEEL had great doubts as as to the propriety of suspending the writ for Horsham. He thought that the case was one into which they ought to

841
make inquiry; but he had some doubts, from the nature of the report of the Committee, as to the suspension of the writ. When, however, the noble Lord at the head of the Government had stated that in his opinion there should be further inquiry, he certainly considered that declaration on the part of the noble Lord as entitled to carry very great weight, and he had therefore consented to the suspension of the writ. This he had done under the impression that the noble Lord had so spoken, intending himself to institute an inquiry; and he must say that when the noble Lord the Member for Sussex asked whether the noble Lord at the head of the Government intended to institute an immediate inquiry, that he (Sir R. Peel) understood that such was the intention of the noble Lord; and the noble Lord the Member for Sussex had, he believed, withdrawn his Motion upon that ground. He would have had very great reluctance in consenting to a postponement in the issue of the writ, if the borough of Horsham had been left to be dealt with by the Bill of the hon. Gentleman, and if no day had been fixed for the consideration of that Bill. He understood, however, that the noble Lord at the head of the Government would give up Thursday next to the hon. Gentleman for the second reading of the measure. Still he feared that even this arrangement would fail to solve the difficulties which might arise upon the question. Many important subjects of discussion might be mooted in the Committee; for instance, the extent to which the inquiry should be carried, leaving the fate of Horsham undecided for a lengthened period. He was willing to consent to the further suspension of the writ for the purpose of inquiry; but what he would suggest, as the most desirable course, would be for the Government to undertake the conduct of the Bill by means of which the inquiry was to be made. This he recommended, feeling most strongly that the indefinite suspension of writs was a source of very great evil. Were the hon. Gentleman to attempt to carry through his own Bill, he would find that there were very great difficulties in his way, and considering that Wednesday was the only day on which the her. Gentleman could bring forward his measure, he did think that the hon. Gentleman would have great difficulty in conducting his Bill to any satisfactory conclusion. Considering then that the hon. and learned Gentleman the Solicitor General had already been consulted upon the
842
Bill as to the drawing up of the new clauses, he put it to the hon. and learned Gentleman whether it would be any addition to his trouble were he himself, on the part of the Government, to undertake to bring forward the Bill and support its clauses, instead of allowing his arguments and information to be filtered through the hon. Baronet, who at present had charge of the Bill?
MR. J. E. DENISON said, that it would not be satisfactory to the House to leave the matter in the hands of any individual Member of Parliament. He hoped that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Shoreham would not press the House to a division on the present occasion; but if after Thursday next some satisfactory conclusion should not be arrived at, he would not withhold his vote from the Motion for the issuing of the writ.
MR. GORING hoped that the House would not mete out to Horsham a different measure of justice from that apportioned to the other six boroughs the purity of which had been called in question, but for which writs had been issued.
House divided:—Ayes 73; Noes 167: Majority 94.

List of the AYES.

Baldock, E. H.

Hope, Sir J.

Benbow, J.

Houldsworth, T.

Bentinck, Lord H.

Hudson, G.

Beresford, W.

Hughes, W. B.

Blackstone, W. S.

Ingestre, Visct.

Bolling, W.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Bowles, Adm.

Kildare, Marq. of

Bramston, T. W.

Lascelles, hon. E.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Lockhart, A. E.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Lygon, hon. Gen.

Burroughes, H. N.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Christopher, R. A.

Macnaghten, Sir E.

Christy, S.

Mandeville, Visct.

Cobbold, J. C.

Masterman, J.

Colvile, C. R.

Meux, Sir H.

Conolly, Col.

Miles, P. W. S.

Cubitt, W.

Miles, W.

Duncombe, hon. O.

Napier, J.

Dundas, G.

Newdegate, C. N.

East, Sir J. B.

Newport, Visct.

Forbes, W.

O'Brien, Sir L.

Frewen, C. H.

O'Connor, F.

Fuller, A. E.

Prime, R.

Galway, Visct.

Repton, G. W. J.

Godson, R.

Robinson, G. R.

Greene, T.

Seymer, H. K.

Halsey, T. P.

Sibthorp, Col.

Hamilton, G. A.

Sidney, Ald.

Harris, hon. Capt.

Smyth, J. G.

Henley, J. W.

Somerset, Capt.

Herbert, H. A.

Stafford, A.

Herries, rt. hon. J. C.

Stuart, J.

Hildyard, R. C.

Sturt, H. G.

Hildyard, T. B. T.

Taylor, T. E.

Hodgson, W. N.

Walsh, Sir J. B.

843

West, F. R.

TELLERS.

Willoughby, Sir H.

March, Earl of

Wynn, Sir W. W.

Goring, C.

List of the NOES.

Abdy, T. N.

Hawes, B.

Anderson, A.

Hay, Lord J.

Bagshaw, J.

Hayes, Sir E.

Baines, M. T.

Hayter, W. G.

Barnard, E. G.

Heywood, J.

Bell, J.

Hindley, C.

Bellew, R. M.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Bernal, R.

Howard, hon. C. W. G.

Blake, M. J.

Howard, hon. E. G. G.

Bouverie, hon. E. P.

Hume, J.

Bowring, Dr.

Humphery, Ald.

Boyle, hon. Col.

Hutt, W.

Bright, J.

Jackson, W.

Brotherton, J.

Kershaw, J.

Brown, W.

King, hon. P. J. L.

Buller, C.

Langston, J. H.

Buxton, Sir E. N.

Lascelles, hon. W. S.

Carter, J. B.

Lewis, G. C.

Cavendish, hon. G. H.

Lincoln, Earl of

Charteris, hon. F. W.

Lindsay, hon. Col.

Clay, J.

Loch, J.

Clay, Sir W.

Lushington, C.

Clements, hon. C. S.

M'Cullagh, W. T.

Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G.

Maitland, T.

Clifford, H. M.

Mangles, R. D.

Cochrane, A.D.R.W.B.

Marshall, J. G.

Colebrooke, Sir T. E.

Marshall, W.

Craig, W. G.

Martin, J.

Dalrymple, Capt.

Matheson, Col.

Dashwood, G. H.

Maule, rt. hon. F.

Davie, Sir H. R. F.

Melgund, Visct.

Denison, W. J.

Mitchell, T. A.

Denison, J. E.

Monsell, W.

Divett, E.

Morris, D.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Moyston, hon. E. M. L.

Drumlanrig, Visct.

Mowatt, F.

Duncan, Visct.

Mulgrave, Earl of

Duncan, G.

Muntz, G. F.

Duncuft, J.

Norreys, Lord

Dundas, Adm.

Norreys, Sir D. J.

Dundas, Sir D.

O'Connell, M. J.

Ellice, rt. hon. E.

Ogle, S. C. H.

Ellice, E.

Palmerston, Visct.

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Parker, J.

Estcourt, J. B. B.

Patten, J. W.

Evans, W.

Pattison, J.

Ewart, W.

Pearson, C.

Fellowes, E.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Fergus, J.

Pendarves, E. W. W.

Fitzpatrick, rt. hon. J.

Perfect, R.

Foley, J. H. H.

Pilkington, J.

Fordyce, A. D.

Power, N.

Fortescue, hon. J. W.

Pugh, D.

Fox, R. M.

Rawdon, Col.

Fox, W. J.

Ricardo, O.

Freestun, Col.

Rich, H.

Gibson, rt. hon. T. M.

Richards, R.

Gladstone, rt. hon. W.E.

Romilly, J.

Glyn, G. C.

Russell, Lord J.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Russell, F. C. H.

Grenfell, C. P.

Rutherfurd, A.

Grenfell, C. W.

Salwey, Col.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Sandars, G.

Grey, R. W.

Simeon, J.

Guest, Sir J.

Smith, rt. hon. R. V.

Hall, Sir B.

Smith, M. T.

Hallyburton, Lord J. F.

Smith, J. B.

Hanmer, Sir J.

Somerville, rt. hn.Sir W.

844

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Wall, C. B.

Stanton, W. H.

Walmsley, Sir J.

Strickland, Sir G.

Watkins, Col.

Stuart, Lord D.

Wawn, J. T.

Tancred, H. W.

Westhead, J. P.

Tennent, R. J.

Willcox, B. M.

Thicknesse, R. A.

Williams, J.

Thompson, Col.

Williamson, Sir H.

Thompson, G.

Wilson, J.

Thornely, T.

Wortley, rt. hon. J. S.

Towneley, C.

Wrightson, W. B.

Towneley, J.

Wyld, J.

Townshend, Capt.

Wyvill, M.

Traill, G.

Yorke, H. G. R.

Tynte, Col.

TELLERS.

Verney, Sir H.

Tufnell, H.

Vivian, J. H.

Hill, Lord M.

Motion negatived.

LUNATIC ASYLUMS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE moved the Second Reading of this Bill, the name of which, he said, would be sufficient to gain for it the favourable consideration of the House. A Committee of the House had sat upon the subject in February, 1847, and had reported the most startling facts relative to the want of accommodation for pauper lunatics in Scotland. In many of the Scottish counties there were absolutely no asylums whatever for the reception of pauper lunatics. Amongst others, the important counties of Argyle, Ayr, Inverness, Clackmannan, Kincardine, and Peebles, were in this predicament. In fact, in no less than twenty-four counties in Scotland there was absolutely no accommodation for lunatics in the shape of public asylums; and where they did exist their accommodations were generally very inadequate. There existed in Scotland 3,410 lunatic paupers, supported in whole or in part by parish relief: of these were accommodated in asylums in different parts of the country 1,619 paupers; for the remainder of these unfortunate persons there was not a cell in any asylum in any part of Scotland; and it was to the way in which they were maintained in the dwellings of their relations and friends that he now wished to call the attention of the House. That was one of the subjects referred to in the report of the Committee. With the permission of the House he would lay before them a short list of counties in Scotland in which there are establishments for lunatics, distinguishing public from private establishments, and showing the total number of patients, and also the number of paupers in each. The learned Lord read the following statement:—

845
Lunatic Asylums

Counties

Establishments.

Public.

Private.

Total Number Number of Patients.

Number of Pauper Patients.

Aberdeen

1

—

210

165

Aberdeen

—

1

15

Bute

—

2

2

—

Dumfries

—

1

130

66

Edinburgh

1

—

467

344

Edinburgh

—

12

259

92

Elgin

1

—

30

30

Forfar

2

—

336

252

Forfar

—

2

2

—

Inverness

1

—

10

10

Lanark

1

—

545

388

Lanark

—

4

117

70

Linlithgow

—

1

1

—

Perth

1

—

164

90

Renfrew

—

2

129

112

Total

8

25

2,417

1,619

Ho would next direct their attention to the number of public and private asylums in each county, the rate per head for the maintenance of pauper lunatics in each, and the number of those lunatics who lived with their friends, with the sum allowed for their maintenance. The abstract was as follows [see Table below]:—
It would thus appear that there was no accommodation whatever in any asylum, public or private, for 1,791 pauper lunatics—that those who were so fortunate as to obtain admission into public asylums were maintained there at rates varying from
846
16 l. to 20 l. per head, while those who lived with their friends were allowed sums of 3l. and 4l. per year, and in some cases but 14 s. Was it possible that those who had such a miserable pittance could exist in any state but that of the greatest misery and degradation, painful to contemplate? He had made inquiry into their condition, and the result was, that in many instances he had become acquainted with the most distressing particulars. It appeared that many of these poor creatures were confined in dungeons, chained on their beds of straw, and lived on little better than garbage. In fact, it was impossible to feed them on wholesome food at a rate of 3l. or 4l. a head. A few cases taken from the report of the Poor Law Commission Inquiry for Scotland would show how pitiable was the lot of the latter class of lunatics:—
"John Livingston, a violent maniac. Lying upon straw on a wooden floor, in a loft above his brother-in-law's smithy. Has no clothing on him whatever. He tears all his clothes off him. Had a coverlet over him. He is very ill just now. Has not slept for two nights. Has been a lunatic for eight years. Was said to have had a stroke of the sun when he was at Buenos Ayres. He is obliged to be constantly chained. Betty Fraser, aged forty. Unmarried. A maniac. She was taken charge of by her father and mother, and was kept in constant confinement in a garret over the room in which they lived. Her father was a mason, aged sixty-nine. They had no other children living with them. 4l. a year was allowed

Counties.

Public Asylums.

Number.

Price.

Private Asylums.

Number.

Price.

With Friends.

Number.

Price.

£

s

d.

£

s.

d.

£

s.

d.

Aberdeen

114

15

12

0

—

—

—

148

5

12

0

Argyle

25

26

13

0

2

20

12

0

107

5

4

0

Ayr

39

22

17

0

—

—

81

7

12

0

Banff

17

22

9

2

—

—

68

7

12

11

Bute

9

26

9

6

—

—

10

5

5

10

Caithness

9

23

17

9

1

21

10

0

81

2

9

1

Dumbarton

20

24

2

0

1

20

0

0

24

9

11

3

Dumfries

28

20

10

7

1

22

0

0

80

6

5

2

Edinburgh

242

15

10

7

24

17

4

0

56

7

19

4

Fife

62

21

14

1

17

21

1

3

80

7

15

3

Forfar

155

15

16

9

1

24

0

0

78

6

19

8

Haddington

8

16

8

8

16

18

18

7

46

8

9

3

Inverness

11

25

6

4

—

—

80

4

0

2

Lanark

239

24

19

0

13

19

9

3

109

6

6

9

Nairn

1

25

0

0

—

—

14

4

13

3

Orkney

4

14

14

0

—

—

41

2

4

0

Perth

86

20

11

7

—

—

132

7

9

2

Renfrew

43

23

14

0

39

17

2

6

57

8

10

0

Ross

12

20

4

0

1

20

0

0

101

4

16

4

Roxburgh

9

16

10

0

13

19

7

8

51

8

14

0

Sutherland

4

23

2

6

—

—

28

5

0

0

Zetland

9

21

2

8

—

—

16

0

14

3

847
for Betty Fraser's support. She had been for many years confined. She generally lay in bed with a blanket, and no other clothes about her. She was very violent if any one went into the room, and would attempt to escape when the door was opened. Her mother said she went into the room every day, but that, had it not been for a hurt which Betty Fraser got in her foot, she could not have withstood her. Her habits were filthy. She was never washed, and her food was put in for her at a hole in the wall. Alexander Anderson, aged twenty-five. Fatuous, and sometimes very violent. Allowance 2s. 6d. a week. Lives with his mother and sister. The mother is a widow forty-nine years of age. She sews muslin. Her daughter, aged twenty-nine, also sews muslin. Alexander Anderson is confined in a bed, which is boarded up so that he cannot get out. He has been kept in this way for nearly six years. He has no debility, but is strong and active. He sometimes gets out of his box bed, and is with difficulty got back, He was out of bed last Sunday, and a man who lives next door, was called in to help to put him back. He is outrageous at times, and threatens his mother and sister. They would not object to his being sent to any asylum. His food was put through the door."
There were many other cases of a similar nature; but he would not refer to more of them, because it was as painful to him to read as it must be to the House to hear them; but he could not avoid reading an extract from the evidence of Dr. Browne, of the Crichton Asylum, Dumfries, showing the prejudicial effects to the patients of such treatment as was detailed in the extracts which he had referred to. The passage in Dr. Browne's evidence was this:—
"From the state in which pauper lunatics are brought to your asylum, have you formed any opinion as to the mode in which they have been treated previously?—I have. And what opinion did you form? —That it was entirely inconsistent with their comfort and cure, and with the dictates of common humanity. They were generally brought bound, galled, in a state of shocking filth, crouching, with their limbs contracted, showing that they had long been confined, or that they had been long in bed. This applies not to all, indeed, but to many. Though we do not receive fatuous patients and all cases whatever, it is my belief that none are sent to us who can be managed in any way at home, nor until they became nuisances, or dangerous to themselves and others."
It must, he thought, appear surprising to the House that such a state of things should have existed up to the present moment in a country like Scotland; but still more surprising would it be, if the House, having been made aware of the existence of such evils, and having been asked to apply a remedy, refused to step in and sanction the passing of this measure, to which he expected their unanimous consent. For the honour of the country, and
848
more especially for the credit of those hon. Members representing Scotch constituencies, he hoped this Bill would receive the speedy approbation of the House. He proposed that the expense of the measure and of the new system should be borne by assessments on the various counties; and in order to lessen the burden, he would divide the counties into districts proportionably to their size and wealth. He would not ask the House to do anything for Scotland which they would not do for England, and did not seek to impose any additional burdens on the imperial Treasury. The Bill would be referred to a Select Committee upstairs, in which all the details would be most fully and carefully considered; but meantime he might state, that he would take the responsibility of the measure upon himself. The working of the plan would be placed under the direction of a board composed of members of different classes in society, and constituted in the same way as the board in England, but on a more economical scale. Those institutions which were in possession of funds or property, left by charitable individuals, would be duly credited with the money belonging to them, which would be included in the amount of the assessments. The main object of the Bill was to provide lunatic asylums for the poor; but he proposed that those lunatics in more comfortable circumstances, whose friends might place them in the asylums, should contribute a fair amount of payment for their maintenance. He hoped the Legislature would support him unanimously in carrying through this good work, which, when accomplished, would remove a great reproach and gangrene from the social system of Scotland, and be in accordance with the dictates of Christian wisdom, of humanity, and of justice.
MR. F. MACKENZIE would offer no opposition to the Bill of the learned Lord, as he was satisfied from the speech he had just heard, and from the statements conveyed to him from Scotland, that some such measure was absolutely necessary; but he could not pledge himself to the details without further consideration.
MR. HUME had no objection to the principle of the Bill, but objected to some of the details. He did not see any absolute necessity for creating any new board under the Bill, particularly as those persons who at present managed the affairs of the poor in Scotland did not seem to be very much occupied.
MR. AGLIONBY would not oppose the Bill, as it was to be sent upstairs to a Select Committee; but he wished to call the attention of the learned Lord to the great complaints which were made, particularly from Kirkcudbright and Dumfries, as to the heavy expense on the landed interest of maintaining the insane poor, for the district boasted of a most extensive and well-managed asylum, situated in the latter town, which was amply endowed with funds, and could be devoted to the reception of those who were now a burden on the landowners.
MR. FORBES wished to ask the learned Lord how many new places the proposed board would place at the disposal of the Government, and what salaries would be paid to the persons whom Government might appoint to fill the newly-created offices? He quite agreed with the hon. Member for Montrose that the country might be saved the expense of two boards, as that body which at present managed the poor-law in Scotland could easily superintend the working of this Bill.
MR. EWART gave his warm support to the general principle of the Bill. So far as he understood the opinions of the people of Scotland, he believed that such a measure as this was very much required. But he confined his support to the principle of the Bill. He begged to call the attention of the Lord Advocate to the fact, that there existed in die county of Dumfries as good a lunatic asylum as was to be found in any part of the United Kingdom. Owing to the benevolence of an individual whose name would be immortalised for the bequests which he had made in favour of that and other institutions—the asylum in Dumfries had the power greatly to extend relief to pauper lunatics. He hoped, therefore, that the right hon. and learned Lord would take into consideration the peculiar circumstances of the county of Dumfries, and, he might add, of the counties of Kirkcudbright and Wigton, and make an exception with regard to them on account of the accommodation which they already possessed.
MR. MAITLAND said, the Bill had been submitted to the consideration of every stewarty in Kirkcudbrightshire, and had received their warmest approbation: he might, he believed, say the same with respect to the county of Dumfries; he thought, therefore, that his two hon. Friends who had just spoken were in error.
SIR G. CLERK wished to tender his thanks to the right hon. and learned Lord for having introduced this measure. If it should impose any expense on parties, they would have the consolation of knowing that it was for an object of the very greatest importance. The Bill having, as he believed, been considered by every county and borough in Scotland, there was not a dissentient voice raised against it. With regard to the peculiar case mentioned by the hon. Member for Dumfries, if he gathered the explanation of the Lord Advocate correctly, that right hon. and learned Lord stated that any county which possessed means for providing for the
care of pauper lunatics would have the full benefit of those means, and of course a proportionate diminution of charge would be imposed upon them. In the county of Edinburgh, where the Lord Advocate had an opportunity of stating his views about a fortnight ago, he met with unanimous support, and the people of that county expressed themselves quite ready to adopt whatever further measures might be necessary to provide for these poor suffering persons. He considered that referring the Bill to a Committee upstairs was the wisest course that could be suggested.
MR. S. WORTLEY thought that all comment upon the details of the Bill would be much better reserved for the Committee upstairs; but he was anxious to join his right hon. Friend (Sir G. Clerk) in thanking the right hon. and learned Lord for having brought forward this measure. From his connexion with the county of Bute, he was enabled to state that there were many of those poor afflicted creatures for whose benefit this Bill was intended, who were sent to the most beautiful and salubrious part of the isle of Arran; but not for the sake of the salubrity of the situation, but in order that they might be kept out of sight; and it was perfectly shocking to think of the nature of the treatment which those unhappy creatures experienced when they arrived there. He rejoiced, therefore, that the right hon. and learned Lord had introduced this measure, and he entirely approved of its being referred to a Committee upstairs; but he would suggest to the right hon. and learned Lord, that it would be unsafe to establish a system which would not secure ample control on the part of the Government.
SIR D. DUNDAS wished to add his testimony to the praise given by all parties in Scotland to his right hon. and learned

851
Friend for the introduction of this Bill. He considered the statement made to-night could not fail of carrying conviction to every bosom as to the integrity and propriety of this measure. When he thanked his right hon. and learned Friend, he would tell him, for his comfort and consolation, that whatever might come of this measure, it was a work of charity to help those who could not thank him themselves—that it was for a class of poor unhappy people for whom they, the Members of the House of Commons—blessed with the possession of their senses—ought to be ready to do everything that could alleviate their attention.
The LORD ADVOCATE replied, and said, in reference to the case of Arran, which had been adverted to by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bute (Mr. S. Wortley), that it was his intention to lay the whole particulars of it before the Select Committee. It was a case of most intolerable cruelty inflicted by the parochial boards of some of the largest, most wealthy, and principal towns in the west of Scotland. It was mainly in reference to cases of that nature that he brought forward a Bill in 1840, and which was passed into a law—a Bill by which he thought he had provided that a penalty should be imposed both upon the senders and receivers of lunatics under such circumstances as the Arran case presented. He knew not how it was, but in that case the penalties were not inflicted: he wished there had been shown grounds to inflict them. He, however, knew enough of the case to say—for he had inquired into it, and he durst say that the right hon. Baronet the late Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir James Graham) would bear him out in saying—that it was one which most satisfactorily proved that no trust or confidence could be placed in parochial authorities when the question to be attended to was one between saving expense and that of a work of humanity.

REMOVAL OF ALIENS.
On the Motion for the Third Reading of the Removal of Aliens Bill,
The EARL of ARUNDEL AND SURREY said, he had received a letter from a distinguished Member of the ex-Chamber of Peers of France, the Count de Montalembert, an extract from which he was desirous of reading to the House. The illustrious individual to whom he referred said that he had been mentioned as one of
852
those who incited Ireland against the British Government, and he went on to say—
"Nothing can be further from my language and opinions on this subject. I have always, it is true, felt and expressed the deepest sympathy for the wrongs and sufferings of Ireland, but at the same time I have always professed a sincere respect for England, and a heartfelt interest for her welfare. I hope and trust that for her own sake, as well as for the sake of religion and humanity, England will as soon as possible do justice to Ireland, but at the same time I remain true to the doctrine of moral force as professed by the illustrious Daniel O'Connell. As for the Repeal of the Union, I have never expressed any opinion on the subject."
He (Lord Arundel and Surrey) considered it his duty to read that extract from the illustrious Gentleman's letter.
MR. MOWATT, conceiving that the present Bill was totally uncalled for, thought it his duty to move that it be read a third time that day six months. No one could deny that the Bill was a direct violation of the spirit of the British constitution, as well as an outrage upon the public opinion of the present day. The measure proposed to invest the Secretary of State with powers which could only be justified by the most stringent necessity, and that had been fully admitted by the right hon. Baronet who had introduced the present Bill. But yet the right hon. Gentleman had not stated any distinct ground in support of the introduction of the Bill; he had only given them an indistinct idea of the circumstances which led to it. He would not ask the right hon. Baronet to make any disclosures which might be inconsistent with his duty; but it was necessary for him to make out some case in support of the principle upon which the Bill was founded, and which he had heard the right hon. Baronet himself heretofore frequently condemn. Whenever such measures were brought in formerly, sufficient reasons had been given for them. The present measure was directed chiefly against the French; now he thought it was impossible for any of that people to enter into any practicable conspiracy which would have the effect of disturbing or exciting the people of this country. Why, our very language was an insuperable barrier to their attempting to excite by any inflammatory speeches, or even to address at all an English audience, as it appeared to be so much apprehended by the right hon. Baronet they might do. For his own part he thought the idea was preposterous. But even if the most substantial grounds should exist for supposing that there were swarms of dangerous

853
foreigners in this country, associated against its peace and tranquillity, as asserted, he felt persuaded that the ordinary law was sufficient for their suppression. He was aware that a sort of panic had recently seized a large portion of the people of this country; and he believed that, in consequence of that panic, the Government might carry any measure of coercion. He had reason, however, to think that the alarm was now subsiding; and, for his part, he felt ashamed to see a British Government, calling itself progressive, devoting all its energies and attention to the adoption of measures of a repressive character. Her Majesty's Ministers had proposed to them, during the present Session, an Irish Coercion Act, and afterwards a "Gagging" Act, and, at that moment, they had before them an Aliens Bill. It had been stated by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General that no necessity would, perhaps, ever arise for enforcing the provisions of that measure. In that statement he entirely concurred. He believed that it was a silly and a useless Bill; but he nevertheless strongly objected to its principle. He believed that it would arm the violent party in France with a good excuse for retaliating against Englishmen by a similar measure, should they be so disposed. He could see nothing to account for the introduction of such a Bill. It was true that they had had a revolution on the Continent. But for his part he should say, that whatever might be the errors to which that event might have led, he heartily rejoiced at its occurrence; he thought that it was perfectly justifiable; and he hoped that the Government of this country would draw from it a more useful lesson than they had hitherto done. He could perfectly understand the introduction of such a measure by a Tory Government, for it would be consistent with the principles their party had always advocated. But the Bill was directly opposed to the opinions professed by every liberal statesman in this country. He believed it was neither more nor less than an attempt to widen the channel between England and republican France. Her Majesty's Ministers might, however, as well attempt to stop the advancing tides as to stop the onward progress of liberal principles; and as to the outcry against propagandists, why all liberal men were propagandists at the present day, and no persons were more so than our own countrymen. There were no people so prone as English travellers to
854
censure, in the most violent manner, the institutions of foreign States, on the ground that they were less liberal than those of their own country. The hon. Member concluded by moving that the Bill should be read a third time that day six months.
MR. HUME seconded the Amendment. He believed the Government had made a very great mistake in proposing such a measure. He did not agree with his hon. Friend that the Bill would be utterly inoperative. But it appeared to him, that Her Majesty's Ministers were placing themselves in the category of the most retrograde Governments by the introduction of such a measure. He felt it his duty to protest against the Bill, as he had before on more than one occasion protested against a similar measure in company with many Members of the present Government.
LORD D. STUART denounced the Bill as unwise and unnecessary, and said that he had given notice of two clauses which he proposed to add to the Bill if it should pass the third reading, but that he could not consent to let it pass through that stage without recording his opposition to it.
MR. MUNTZ supported the Amendment, and wished it was in his power to throw out such a disgraceful measure. It was said some time ago that there was an old woman in the Cabinet, but he thought that the Cabinet was composed entirely of old women now.
MR. EWART also opposed the Bill. He did not so much regard it as a measure which would prove injurious to foreigners, as one which implied a want of confidence in the people of England, and a want of confidence in the good working of our constitution. He believed that there were even Members of the Government who most reluctantly gave their support to this measure.
MR. FORSTER would support the Bill if he thought it in the slightest degree necessary for the support of the institutions of the country; but he opposed it because he regarded it as altogether unnecessary for such an object, while it would have the effect of leading foreigners to believe that we had good grounds for alarm.
SIR H. VERNEY said, it had been strongly contended by the opponents of this Bill, that we should in no respect interfere with the Governments of foreign countries. Then, why should we not have the power to prevent people from foreign countries interfering in our affairs, and plotting against our Government? Persons who

855
went into any country to which they did not belong, and endeavoured to plot against the constitution of that country, deserved the most condign punishment; and he believed that, in present circumstances, Government would have failed in their duty if they had not taken steps to secure us against the interference of foreigners. Something had been said about the existence of a panic; but the whole conduct of the people of London on a late occasion was as unlike that of the people labouring under a panic as could well be imagined. That was just one of the reasons, however, why Government should be armed with the powers given in this Bill.
MR. DUNCAN had voted against the Crown and Government Security Bill, because it contained a clause which he thought might operate injuriously to the free expression of opinion; but he was quite prepared to support Government on the Bill now under discussion; seeing that, thought it was a somewhat harsh measure, it was nevertheless stated by them to be one which in present circumstances was necessary to the country.
SIR G. GREY had to express his thanks to those Gentlemen who held opinions adverse to the Bill, for the manner in which those opinions had been expressed in the course of these discussions. Nothing could be more fair than the manner in which the opposition to the Bill had been manifested throughout. The hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment complained that he had not given sufficient explanation ,of the necessity that existed for the Bill; but he thought that when moving the second reading of the Bill he had very decidedly referred to the general state of Europe, and also to the fact that circumstances had come within his knowledge, in the course of the discharge of his duties, with reference to foreigners who were at that time in the country—not foreigners driven from their own countries by political persecution, but persons who had come here for the purpose of exercising influence in the affairs of this country—which justified the introduction of such a measure. He did not mean to say that this Bill was essentially necessary to the security of the institutions of the country; he did not say that were such a Bill not passed he should despair of those institutions. They would ill appreciate the sound, loyal, and peaceable disposition of the people if they did not believe that any outbreak or disturbance whatever, whether fomented by foreigners or not, would be put down by the sound, loyal, and consti-
856
tutional feeling happily so prevalent in this country. But when they looked to what had passed both in England and Ireland, he thought the Government had a right to take credit to themselves for the precautionary measures they had taken, and at the same time to appeal to them as proofs of the necessity of the present measure. He maintained that the loyal and peaceable people of this country had a right to look to the Government, under the peculiar circumstances in which foreign countries were placed, and considering the spirit of propagandism which existed, not on the part of foreign Governments, but on the part of individuals; and accordingly, Her Majesty's Ministers thought they were bound in justice to the loyal and peaceable subjects of the Crown, and for their security from tumult and disturbance, to ask for powers from Parliament—powers not of a very stringent character, and for a limited time only; the great feature which distinguished this Bill from all former measures of the kind being that it was proposed for the preservation of the internal peace and tranquillity of the country. Allusion had been made to what fell on a former occasion from the Attorney General as to the probability of the Bill being inoperative. He had no doubt that the occasions would be rare on which it would be the duty of the Government to exercise the powers conferred on them by this Bill; but if it was known that the Government did possess those powers, and was ready to exercise them upon those who were disposed to abuse the hospitality of the country—if it was known that those who came here for lawful and honest purposes would have the hand of friendship and hospitality extended to them, but that with regard to those who came for unlawful purposes, or on invitation from others living within the realm, to assist in disturbing the public peace, the Government would not shrink from exercising the powers conferred upon them by this Bill, and removing them from the country—if this were known, he had no doubt it would have the best effect, and so far tend to promote the peace and tranquillity of the country. The hon. Member for Birmingham had referred to what had passed betwixt him and certain foreigners on the subject of this Bill. He need hardly say that the foreigners with whom the hon. Member came in contact were not likely to belong to the class of foreigners who would come under the operation of this Bill, or to whom it would in any way apply; but that was no evidence that there were not other

857
foreigners in the country with regard to whom such powers as the Bill contained were required. He trusted that when the Bill became law those Gentlemen who had formed the opposition to it would have no cause to complain that such powers had been confided to the Government; and that those powers would not be exercised in a single case in which they were not able to give the most satisfactory explanation of their conduct.
MR. M. GIBSON was anxious to make one or two observations on this measure, as an explanation of the vote which he felt it his duty to give. He was quite willing to admit, for one, that those persons who imagined that the ordinary laws and statutes of the realm were not sufficient to deter foreigners from committing crimes against the public safety had an ample justification in introducing and supporting this measure; but, for his part, he confessed that he had the greatest difficulty in bringing himself to the belief that it was necessary to add anything whatever to the power of the Executive or to the criminal law of the country in order to prevent aliens from disturbing the public peace. If he was asked how he would punish an alien for interfering with the institutions of the country, his answer was that he would punish an alien as he would punish an Englishman for committing any offence against the laws of the country. He considered that while an alien was in this country he owed a temporary allegiance to the laws; but he considered at the same time that he was entitled to the protection which others enjoyed for their personal security. It might be an extreme opinion, but he could not for the life of him understand why, if they thought it necessary to surround an Englishman with safeguards against the success of a false accusation, a foreigner should not also stand in need of the same safeguards. Was it that an alien, not speaking their language, and having no means of calling witnesses to character, or of exciting the sympathy in his behalf that an Englishman could, had less need of those invaluable safeguards against false accusations than an Englishman? It appeared to him that unless it could be shown that they could dispense with these safeguards with propriety in the case of their own countrymen, they could not dispense with them in the case of foreigners. He would not trespass between the passing of that Bill and the important business that was to succeed; but he could not satisfy his own mind, entertaining as he did a very
858
strong objection to the principle of the measure and to placing an Alien Act on the Statute-book, without at once declaring his opinion; and he trusted that in so doing he had not been guilty of any disrespect to the House.
MR. BROTHERTON had not the least doubt in his mind as regarded the people of this country; and he wished the Government to have the fullest confidence in them also. He would like to see the Government leading public opinion rather than opposing it; and he was satisfied from what he knew of the state of public feeling that if the Government but adopted a liberal course they would be supported by the great body of the people. It was, therefore, not from any distrust of the people of England that he voted for this Bill. He had supported liberal measures in that House for fifteen years; and every man who knew him would say that he had never courted any Government whatever. He never had looked for any favours from Government; and his support had always been independent and disinterested; and, with regard to the course he now thought it his duty to take, it was simply a question of confidence. He had watched the conduct of Ministers many years, and he found that they had always been on the liberal side, though they had not proceeded in the march of improvement as rapidly as he should have liked. He did feel, therefore, that he was bound to give his confidence to men who had hitherto shown a regard for the liberties of the country; and he had no right to suppose that they had changed their opinions any more than he had changed his. When be found that the Government recommended a measure which they believed necessary for the preservation of the peace of the country, he considered it his duty to support it. Though he was in favour of the most liberal measures with regard to the power of the people, he would support nothing that conduced to disorder, or led to anarchy and confusion. He was the friend of peace and peaceful reforms. He set his face against all attempts to effect changes by physical force, as he set his face against war; therefore he gave a vote of confidence to the Ministry on this measure. He was not in the secret as to the necessity of the Bill, and of course he could not know what circumstances influenced the Government; but he believed they were looking to the peace and welfare of the country, and therefore he gave them his support on the present occasion.
MR. COBDEN: Sir, the speech of the hon. Gentleman who preceded me appears to me to be not so much in favour of the measure before us as of the Ministry. This speech has confirmed me in the opinion which I have some time entertained, that we are liable to pass bad measures here, not because we approve of them, but because there happens to be a peculiar state of parties, whereby a large number of Members on this side of the House support the Government in good or bad measures because they had been for fifteen years in the habit of voting for them; and the state of parties on the other side induces a large number of Members to vote with the Ministry because they are not prepared to take the Government themselves; and another large body supports the Administration because they would prevent the other section on their own side of the House from taking the Government at all. I think this a very unfortunate state of parties; because we get rid of all our responsibility, and instead of voting for or against certain measures on conscientious considerations, we are apt to be swayed by the thought of who is in office or who is likely to get into office. I have made up my mind to give my vote independently of all parties; and I believe the country will never have a chance of getting good measures until we totally fling aside the whole distinctions of parties, and decide on measures according to their merits. I am quite sure that the great measure with which I have been connected —I allude particularly to that of free trade —would never have been passed bad we not commenced its advocacy by resolving to regard Whigs and Tories as identically the same; and I beg to say that I shall so regard them in all future questions in which I may take a part. This Alien Bill has been so exhausted by preceding speakers that I need not dwell upon it. One view, however, has not been taken. The fact that Government are passing Alien Bills and Bills for the protection of the Crown and Government, is to me a proof that they are taking the wrong direction altogether—that they are not adopting that which is the best course for strengthening and preserving our institutions. They seem to me not to have profited by the example set on the Continent, where repression and coercion have failed in the purposes to which they have been applied, and Governments have fallen because they have not taken the opposite course of conciliation and concession. Still we see our Government following the old course, resorting to
860
coercion and repression, to Alien Bills and to Crown and Government Security Bills; but we have had no measure propounded to the House and the country which is calculated to increase the attachment of the people to the institutions of the country. I venture to say that the country is looking most anxiously at the present time, not for Coercion Bills, not for Gagging Bills, nor for Bills to protect the people of this country against aliens; but they are waiting to hear from the Government the announcement of remedial measure. They expect to hear that the Government are prepared to put our representative system more in harmony with the spirit of the age. The people of this country are not prepared to see all the world in motion while they are standing still—still less, making a retrograde movement. The country is also looking for retrenchment and economy; and I venture to say that if you wish to maintain the monarchy of this country against republican innovations, you will do more to accomplish that object by cutting away some of that barbarous splendour which belongs to other times, which is maintained at so great a cost to the country, and solely for the aggrandisement of the aristocracy—you will do more to reconcile the people of this country to monarchical institutions, by removing some of those useless and cumbrous appendages of royalty, than by resorting to legislative enactments to prevent the people from discussing republicanism, or adopting such violent measures as the one we are now discussing. And I entreat the Government not to think that there is a passive acquiescence on the part of the country in the measures they are now passing. I have already explained why it is that you have a majority in this House; the feeling outside, I assure you, is very different; and if you want to maintain the institutions of the country, do not trust to coercion, but resort to concessions—to remedial measures; reform yourselves and retrench your expenditure.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL: I wish to address a few words in reply, partly to the observations made by the hon. Gentleman who moved the rejection of this Bill, and partly in reference to some observations which have fallen from the hon. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Falmouth, who moved that the Bill should be rejected, complained that the Government had in the beginning of this Session introduced various measures of coercion, were abandoning

861
the principles they formerly professed, and were acting against the constitution of this country as generally recognised. It has certainly been our fate to introduce measures which were intended for the purpose of repression. If such measures were not necessary, then we were not justified in introducing them; but if they were necessary, I think, then, we should have been much to blame if we had refused to perform that which was a duty to the well-affected and well-disposed people of this country, from any fears of such imputations as the hon. Gentleman has thrown out. But I think there are two tests by which such measures may be tried. The one is, whether such as we have hitherto introduced, of which the operation has been in some degree seen, have been successful in diminishing crime and excitement to crime—have been successful in diminishing that state of disturbance and uneasiness which prevailed in one part of the United Kingdom; and the second is, whether those measures have operated with as little disturbance as it was possible to give to the ordinary and usual enjoyment of the liberties of this country. In so speaking, I do not mean to make any distinction, more than the hon. Gentleman who spoke last, between Whig and Tory, because I believe that both parties in these times, whatever may be the character that belonged to some of the parties which existed in former times of our history, are earnestly anxious to maintain those constitutional liberties which are the birthrights of the people of this country. With respect to the first measure we passed, there began to prevail in the course of last autumn a dreadful state of crime in Ireland, making the life of every individual unsafe, driving men from the country, exposing them whilst they were going home from market or from any visit to be waylaid or assassinated from behind a hedge, and, in short, reducing the country to such a state that in a short time none of those who had been possessors of property, or who had anything to do with property, down to the smallest farmers, felt that they could safely inhabit the country. We introduced a Bill which I do not think interfered with the ordinary enjoyments of the people of Ireland, which had not the objection I have heard taken to Acts passed at various times, of confounding the innocent with the guilty—which left the innocent in the possession of every privilege they could enjoy, but provided means of deterring
862
those who were guilty of crime. I rejoice to say that the last accounts we have received of crime in Ireland tend to show that a great change has taken place in the condition of that country. I find with respect to the whole amount of crimes of violence, that in April, 1847, they reached 2,109, and in April, 1848, they had sunk to 1,196; the homicides in April, 1847, were twenty-four; in April, 1848, they were only nine. There are some other instances which are not a little remarkable, Crimes of firing at the person diminished from nineteen in April, 1847, to three in April, 1848; the crime of demand or robbery of arms diminished from sixty-seven in April, 1847, to twelve in April, 1848; the offence of appearing in arms, from sixteen in April, 1847, to seven in April, 1848; and several other crimes in the same way have diminished very greatly. Even in the last month the diminution has been from 1,429 to 1,146. I should certainly not omit to mention that in two of the proclaimed counties, Queen's County and Roscommon, there were no offences against the person reported in the month of April, 1848. I say, then, that whatever language may have been used against the Government for having introduced the Bill carried through this House before Christmas, it is a great satisfaction to me to have been instrumental in passing an Act, of which the consequence has been to afford greater safety to life, and to enable men to carry on their business in that country without the continual apprehension of barbarous murder. Again, Sir, we introduced very lately a measure for the better security of the Crown and Government of this country. That measure the hon. Gentleman very fairly said he had supported in its main features. The main features of that Bill, however, it must be recollected, were features of mitigation. Its main features were mitigations of the law of treason as it previously existed; but it also proposed to do that which no one could well object to. We said that if a measure of that kind were necessary for England, it was no less necessary for Ireland. If it were proper that we in England should be subject to such a law, it was no less fit that the Irish should be subject to the same law. That Act has been in operation but a very short time, yet its success is already very visible. Every one will remember that six weeks ago it was impossible to read any of the accounts from Ireland without seeing that men making a

863
great bravado of their courage, with great emphasis, with great demonstration of what they were about to do, declared that their intention was to make war against Her Majesty and Her Majesty's troops, and to sever Ireland from its due allegiance to this country; and they spared no kind of invective against not only the Crown and the Government, but against the people of England. But, Sir, it has appeared lately that these persons, although they spoke in this way, did so very much because they were in Dublin under the security of that very Government which was the subject of their attacks; and it did happen that when the commander of Her Majesty's troops had not forces immediately at his
disposal, in order to protect the persons of some of the worst of those would-be traitors, it appeared that their persons were in danger —not from Her Majesty's troops—not from the police—but they required the assistance of the troops and the police in order to save them from the consequences of those harangues and writings in which they had indulged. But it now appears that these very persons who were so willing a few weeks ago to submit to the penalties of high treason, who declared that either they must put down Lord Clarendon, or Lord Clarendon must put them down—it appears these persons have entirely changed their opinions; it is now the most mitigated treason—the most milk-and-water sedition; it is now so weak a mixture of treason and rebellion it has become quite flat to those whose appetites had been spoiled by the very high diet which had been administered by those persons. Well, then, I say, with regard to that Act, which met so much opposition in this House, that it has been very useful for its purpose, and has had the effect of a good deal curbing this very inflammatory and dangerous language; and, at the same time, I will venture to assert, that it has not diminished or curbed the proper liberty of discussion in Ireland of any measures of the Government. I will venture to say that if any one really wished to discuss the measures of the Government, whatever fault might be found with them —whatever epithets might be applied to their conduct—he would be as fully at liberty to do so now as before the Act was passed. He must keep within certain limits—he must not, of course, use seditious language. Such was the law before the Act passed; such is the law now. Well, then, we come to the Bill now before the House. I certainly cannot
864
speak very confidently of the facts, though, at the same time, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department gives me reason to think that it already appears, if this Bill be passed, that it will have a beneficial effect. What I wish to do now is, to disclaim its being intended against any particular Government, or any particular nation. It is quite untrue to represent it as at all against the French Government, or against the people of France. With respect to the Government of France, I am sure that we have all of us reason to recollect with the strongest feelings of admiration that in a moment of great peril, when no one could say what might be the fate of the members of the Provisional Government, the next day, one of the members of that Government, M. Lamartine, held language to the Irish deputies who went to Paris for very questionable purposes—language which, while it exposed him to the assaults of any ruffians who wished to carry terror and insurrection into this country, was most honourable to him as a man, honourable to him as a Minister, and showed that, whatever might be the risks to himself, he really had at heart the maintenance of amicable relations between these two great countries, whose amity and friendship are of such benefit to the world—whose discord and whose quarrels are full of the greatest calamities to all. I think, however, that after what has happened in different countries on the Continent—after the rapid succession of revolutions we have seen—in the uncertainty that at present prevails—it is right, it is wise, to take precautions against contingencies that may arise. I sincerely trust these contingencies may not occur. I sincerely trust that those who wish to destroy all order, to put an end to all property, and to found the future condition of the world perhaps on some dream of philanthropy, but more probably on some plan of plunder, will never gain the ascendancy either in France or Germany; and that we may not have to dread the evil of the presence of their emissaries amongst us. But still I do think that in the present state of Europe it is wise to take some precautions against the occurrence of such events. I am sure I shall be quite relieved, I shall feel it a great satisfaction, and I have no doubt the whole House will concur in our feeling of satisfaction, when we can say that it is no longer necessary to bring forward any measure of restriction—that our

865
course for the future will be only to consider measures of relief and improvement. We feel, as the House in general will feel, that it is an irksome and painful task to have to bring forward measures like this; but, at the same time, the peace of the country is committed to us—the business of Administration from day to day in the present state of the world is a most responsible task—and, while we feel it necessary to bring forward these measures, we shall do that duty. I most sincerely hope that the present is the last measure of its class that we shall have to introduce, and that the ordinary application of the ordinary laws may be sufficient henceforward to preserve the peace of the country. The hon. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire has pointed out the course which he thinks the Government ought to pursue, in order to conciliate the affections of the people of this country. With regard to the measures which he has alluded to, we shall have occasion to express our opinions on them when they are brought forward for our consideration by the hon. Member for Montrose and other Members of this House. For my own part, I cannot bring myself to believe that the representation of the people of this country is in such a state as the hon. Member seems to imagine that it is. Without now pausing to discuss whether this House be properly formed or not, whether there ought to be such a number of small boroughs, or whether all enjoy the franchise who ought to enjoy it—questions which it will be well to consider on a fitting occasion—I will say that it is my belief that this House, since it met in November, has pursued a course which commands the sympathy and approval of the country. I believe that the votes of this House and the majorities by which they were carried, have not been owing to any peculiar state of parties, nor do I think that they have unfaithfully represented the opinions of the majority of the people. Neither can I think that the reduction of the royal expenditure, the taking away of what the hon. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire calls "the barbarous pomp of the Crown belonging to past times," and diminishing the appendages of royalty, are the methods whereby Government or this House could succeed in conciliating the general feeling of the people of this country. I believe myself that the people of this country are thoroughly and strongly attached to the institutions under which
866
they live. I do not know that there ever was a time when I perceived such strong evidence of devoted attachment to the Crown of this country. I know that the conduct of the Illustrious Person who now occupies that Throne—that the example given by the Sovereign of this country in every relation of domestic life, and in the discharge of every constitutional duty—have met with that reward which they merit in the confidence and affection of Her people. I do not believe that that which is necessary for the maintenance of the royal office—that which I admit is not necessary for the comfort or requirements of the Sovereign herself, but which is necessary for the due maintenance and dignity of the royal office—is at all grudged by the people of this country. I believe that they wish our institutions to he maintained; and I do not think that any changes that we could propose which would risk or impair those institutions would meet with the approbation of the people. I believe that we should be acting in a manner contrary to their wishes if we were to embark on a sea of speculation—setting everything afloat, and making it doubtful what the future constitution of England is to be. I think that whatever may have been the necessity for violent changes in foreign lands, all classes in this country, from the highest to the lowest, see the advantage of a system of well-regulated liberty, and understand that order and peace tend to the welfare of the working classes quite as much as to the prosperity of all other grades in the community. I believe that the example of peace and order which has been recently afforded has not been lost on the population of this country. They have too much good sense, too much reflection, to believe in many of the idle stories which are put about. Whatever proper retrenchments can be made, let us make them. They are due to the state of our finances—they are due to the state of suffering in which unhappily many of our people are placed. Let every kind of economy that can be safely practised, be practised; let every amendment of taxation that can be well carried into effect, be carried into effect; but let us not imagine that by shaking any of the great pillars of the State, or disturbing the basis on which the constitution of this country rests, we shall be doing good to the country. Above all, let us not be ambitious of the immediate and vile purpose of winning a little applause at the expense of our duty to the State.
MR. BRIGHT: Except the Bill under consideration, there was scarcely any political topic on which the noble Lord had not touched in his discursive address. The noble Lord had talked of the attachment of the people to institutions as they at present existed; but assuredly there was one part of the empire at least to which the remark did not apply. That part was Ireland, where the anxiety for repeal became every day more intense, and where the progress of the movement was witnessed in a new phase by the formation of a Protestant Repeal Association. With respect to the measure more immediately under consideration, ho would take occasion to observe, that from the hour it was first introduced to the present moment, when it was about to receive its third reading, he never had heard an argument in its favour. To say that it ought to be passed simply because the House had confidence in the Ministry, was to talk in the silliest and most childish strain imaginable. To assign such a reason for assenting to such a Bill, was really amongst the most preposterous of all conceivable things. Why, on the same plea, the House ought to support the Government if they were to bring forward ten times as oppressive a measure for our own people, as this Bill of pains and penalties was for foreigners. If the Bill had been introduced three or four years ago, by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, there could be no doubt but that the noble Lord now at the head of the Government would have vigorously opposed it, and treated the House to one of his most able and elaborate speeches in defence of the constitutional rights of the country. The Bill was totally unnecessary. If any danger were really to be apprehended for England, it was more likely to accrue from the presence in her dominions of certain illustrious exiles who had to take shelter here, having found their own country too hot for them, than from a few obscure foreigners who might chance to hold republican doctrines. London was the very last place in the world to which any one would come to get up an insurrection against the Government, or to engage in the practical business of plunder. It was childish to say that the Bill was necessary; and, indeed, the noble Lord seemed to have almost admitted as much himself. Why pass it then? It would have at least two evil effects. In the first place, it would create amongst foreigners a fainter belief than he wished them to
868
have in the stability of the institutions of this country; and in the second place, it would create in the minds of the people at home a belief in the ignorance and pusillanimity of the men who were at the head of affairs—the very men who ought to be best acquainted with the slate of the country, and the most courageous in their public conduct. The people of this country did not complain of the Crown, or of any expense necessary for the due maintenance of the regal dignity; but what they did complain of was, that there was a large expenditure which did not add to the honour or dignity of the Crown, but which did aid, in a very large degree to hand over the revenues drawn from the taxes to the aristocratic hangers-on of the Court. He would take leave to ask the noble Lord whether he thought it essential to the honour of the Crown, or to the preservation of the constitution, or to the upholding of public order, that there should be in connexion with the Court such an establishment as that of the buckhounds, which cost the people of this country a larger sum annually than was paid by the Americans to the President of the United States? Was it essential to the dignity of the Crown that there should be a grand falconer, and other hereditary officers of a mischievous and absurd description? He thought not. If it was true that the proceedings of the present Parliament expressed, as the noble Lord alleged they did, the feelings of the people, all he (Mr. Bright) could say was, that they did not represent the feelings of that portion of the people with whom he was in the habit of coming in contact. It was idle for a Minister to contend that because his majorities were large, he faithfully represented the wishes and feelings of the people. It was well known that there had been periods when Ministers carried everything before them in that House by sweeping majorities, and yet were in a miserable minority out of doors. He ventured to predict that if the noble Lord did not mind what he was about, his Government would ere long die of majorities. The noble Lord had no vision beyond that which was bounded by the two lobbies of that House, and, interpreting everything by majorities, could recognise no representation of public feeling except in the persons of Mr. Tufnell and Lord Marcus Hill. The noble Lord had fraternised with his old enemies. He was now in intimate alliance with the very party with which he had been engaged in deadly

869
conflict all his life. Either the Gentlemen opposite were changed, or the noble Lord was. The hon. Gentlemen opposite could not be changed, for the leopard could not lay aside his spots; and it was clear that it was the noble Lord himself that was transformed. He was sorry for it. Yes, he was. He spoke rather in sorrow than in anger. The noble Lord was infatuated. He was pursuing a course which, whatever effect it might have on his majorities, would estrange from him the affection and confidence of the people, and bring on the downfall, the unpitied downfall, of a Government which he had hoped would have lasted for many years.
SIR J. WALSH could not agree with the hon. Gentleman who had just addressed the House, in thinking that the measures of Government had proved inefficacious in Ireland. On the contrary, there had, simultaneously with their introduction, been a cessation of those horrible outrages, those premeditated assassinations, which had disgraced that country. There had also been considerable change of tone on the part of the demagogues even in the short time which had elapsed since the introduction of the measure which was aimed more particularly at the mischievous agitation in Dublin. It was quite true that the people of England had recently exhibited great and glorious proofs of attachment to the institutions of their country, and that it would be quite safe to rest those institutions upon that attachment; but were they therefore to expose the English people to the danger of mischievous agitators? Were hon. Members ignorant that there was a class of people in Paris who made a trade of getting up revolutions? And was it not notorious that there was a number of those persons at present in England—persons discountenanced, no doubt, by their own Government, but who, unless kept in check, might probably meet with some encouragement from the mischievous and ill-disposed both here and on the other side of the Channel? Some taunts had been thrown out against the Government, that the present measure had been addressed to the Opposition rather than to their own side of the House. The support which had been rendered to the Government on this occasion by the Members of the Opposition benches was owing rather to a change of circumstances than to a change of opinion on either side. It was impossible to see the storm which was at present sweeping over Europe, and not feel that, however
870
firmly our institutions might be seated, they were exposed to a certain degree of risk; and when this was the case it would always be found that, however they might differ with Government and their supporters on subordinate points, they would be ready to rally round them in protection of the institutions of their country, to which, he was convinced, the majority of the people still felt unalterable attachment.
The House divided on the question, that the word "now" stand part of the question:—Ayes 146; Noes 29: Majority 117.

List of the AYES.

Baldock, E. H.

Hope, Sir J.

Benbow, J.

Houldsworth, T.

Bentinck, Lord H.

Hudson, G.

Beresford, W.

Hughes, W. B.

Blackstone, W. S.

Ingestre, Visct.

Bolling, W.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Bowles, Adm.

Kildare, Marq. of

Bramston, T. W.

Lascelles, hon. E.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Lockhart, A. E.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Lygon, hon. Gen.

Burroughes, H. N.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Christopher, R. A.

Macnaghten, Sir E.

Christy, S.

Mandeville, Visct.

Cobbold, J. C.

Masterman, J.

Colvile, C. R.

Meux, Sir H.

Conolly, Col.

Miles, P. W. S.

Cubitt, W.

Miles, W.

Duncombe, hon. O.

Napier, J.

Dundas, G.

Newdegate, C. N.

East, Sir J. B.

Newport, Visct.

Forbes, W.

O'Brien, Sir L.

Frewen, C. H.

O'Connor, F.

Fuller, A. E.

Prime, R.

Galway, Visct.

Repton, G. W. J.

Godson, R.

Robinson, G. R.

Greene, T.

Seymer, H. K.

Halsey, T. P.

Sibthorp, Col.

Hamilton, G. A.

Sidney, Ald.

Harris, hon. Capt.

Smyth, J. G.

Henley, J. W.

Somerset, Capt.

Herbert, H. A.

Stafford, A.

Herries, rt. hon. J. C.

Stuart, J.

Hildyard, R. C.

Sturt, H. G.

Hildyard, T. B. T.

Taylor, T. E.

Hodgson, W. N.

Walsh, Sir J. B.

843

West, F. R.

TELLERS.

Willoughby, Sir H.

March, Earl of

Wynn, Sir W. W.

Goring, C.

List of the NOES.

Abdy, T. N.

Hawes, B.

Anderson, A.

Hay, Lord J.

Bagshaw, J.

Hayes, Sir E.

Baines, M. T.

Hayter, W. G.

Barnard, E. G.

Heywood, J.

Bell, J.

Hindley, C.

Bellew, R. M.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Bernal, R.

Howard, hon. C. W. G.

Blake, M. J.

Howard, hon. E. G. G.

Bouverie, hon. E. P.

Hume, J.

Bowring, Dr.

Humphery, Ald.

Boyle, hon. Col.

Hutt, W.

Bright, J.

Jackson, W.

Brotherton, J.

Kershaw, J.

Brown, W.

King, hon. P. J. L.

Buller, C.

Langston, J. H.

Buxton, Sir E. N.

Lascelles, hon. W. S.

Carter, J. B.

Lewis, G. C.

Cavendish, hon. G. H.

Lincoln, Earl of

Charteris, hon. F. W.

Lindsay, hon. Col.

Clay, J.

Loch, J.

Clay, Sir W.

Lushington, C.

Clements, hon. C. S.

M'Cullagh, W. T.

Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G.

Maitland, T.

Clifford, H. M.

Mangles, R. D.

Cochrane, A.D.R.W.B.

Marshall, J. G.

Colebrooke, Sir T. E.

Marshall, W.

Craig, W. G.

Martin, J.

Dalrymple, Capt.

Matheson, Col.

Dashwood, G. H.

Maule, rt. hon. F.

Davie, Sir H. R. F.

Melgund, Visct.

Denison, W. J.

Mitchell, T. A.

Denison, J. E.

Monsell, W.

Divett, E.

Morris, D.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Moyston, hon. E. M. L.

Drumlanrig, Visct.

Mowatt, F.

Duncan, Visct.

Mulgrave, Earl of

Duncan, G.

Muntz, G. F.

Duncuft, J.

Norreys, Lord

Dundas, Adm.

Norreys, Sir D. J.

Dundas, Sir D.

O'Connell, M. J.

Ellice, rt. hon. E.

Ogle, S. C. H.

Ellice, E.

Palmerston, Visct.

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Parker, J.

Estcourt, J. B. B.

Patten, J. W.

Evans, W.

Pattison, J.

Ewart, W.

Pearson, C.

Fellowes, E.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Fergus, J.

Pendarves, E. W. W.

Fitzpatrick, rt. hon. J.

Perfect, R.

Foley, J. H. H.

Pilkington, J.

Fordyce, A. D.

Power, N.

Fortescue, hon. J. W.

Pugh, D.

Fox, R. M.

Rawdon, Col.

Fox, W. J.

Ricardo, O.

Freestun, Col.

Rich, H.

Gibson, rt. hon. T. M.

Richards, R.

Gladstone, rt. hon. W.E.

Romilly, J.

Glyn, G. C.

Russell, Lord J.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Russell, F. C. H.

Grenfell, C. P.

Rutherfurd, A.

Grenfell, C. W.

Salwey, Col.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Sandars, G.

Grey, R. W.

Simeon, J.

Guest, Sir J.

Smith, rt. hon. R. V.

Hall, Sir B.

Smith, M. T.

Hallyburton, Lord J. F.

Smith, J. B.

Hanmer, Sir J.

Somerville, rt. hn.Sir W.

844

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Wall, C. B.

Stanton, W. H.

Walmsley, Sir J.

Strickland, Sir G.

Watkins, Col.

Stuart, Lord D.

Wawn, J. T.

Tancred, H. W.

Westhead, J. P.

Tennent, R. J.

Willcox, B. M.

Thicknesse, R. A.

Williams, J.

Thompson, Col.

Williamson, Sir H.

Thompson, G.

Wilson, J.

Thornely, T.

Wortley, rt. hon. J. S.

Towneley, C.

Wrightson, W. B.

Towneley, J.

Wyld, J.

Townshend, Capt.

Wyvill, M.

Traill, G.

Yorke, H. G. R.

Tynte, Col.

TELLERS.

Verney, Sir H.

Tufnell, H.

Vivian, J. H.

Hill, Lord M.

List of the AYES.

Abdy, T. N.

Galway, Visct.

Alcock, T.

Godson, R.

Arkwright, G.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Armstrong, Sir A.

Granger, T. C.

Arundel and Surrey,

Grenall, G.

Earl of

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Baines, M. T.

Grey, R. W.

Barkly, H.

Halford, Sir H.

Barnard, E. G.

Hamilton, G. A.

Bell, J.

Hanmer, Sir J.

Bellew, R. M.

Harris, hon. Capt.

Bentinck, Lord G.

Hawes, B.

Berkeley, hon. Capt.

Hayter, W. G.

Berkeley, hon. H. F.

Heald, J.

Bernal, R.

Henley, J. W.

Blake, M. J.

Hildyard, R. C.

Boyle, hon. Col.

Hobhouse, rt. hn. Sir J.

Bremridge, R.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Brisco, M.

Hodges, T. L.

Broadley, H.

Hodgson, W. N.

Brockman, E. D.

Hood, Sir A.

Brotherton, J.

Hope, Sir J.

Brown, W.

Hotham, Lord

Browne, R. D.

Humphery, Ald.

Buck, L. W.

Jervis, Sir J.

Buller, C.

Jocelyn, Visct.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Keppel, hon. G. T.

Busfeild, W.

Knox, Col.

Cayley, E. S.

Labouchere, rt hon. H.

Christy, S.

Lacy, H. C.

Clerk, right hon. Sir G.

Langston, J. H.

Cowper, hon. W. F.

Lascelles, hon. W. S.

Craig, W. G.

Lewis, G. C.

Dashwood, G. H.

Lindsay, hon. Col.

Denison, W. J.

Lockhart, A. E.

Denison, J. E.

M'Cullagh, W. T.

Dick, Q.

Maitland, T.

Divett, E.

Mandeville, Visct.

Drummond, H.

Marshall, J. G.

Duncan, G.

Matheson, Col.

Duncuft, J.

Maule, rt. hon. F.

Dundas, Adm.

Morpeth, Visct.

Dundas, Sir D.

Morison, Gen.

Ebrington, Visct.

Mulgrave, Earl of

Egerton, W. T.

Napier, J.

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Newdegate, C. N.

Evans, J.

O'Brien, Sir L.

Fergus, J.

Owen, Sir J.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

Paget, Lord A.

FitzPatrick, rt. hn. J. W.

Palmerston, Visct.

Fordyce, A. D.

Parker, J.

Fox, R. M.

Pendarves, E. W. W.

French, F.

Perfect, R.

Frewen, C. H.

Pigott, F.

871

Pinney, W.

Thesiger, Sir F.

Power, N.

Thicknesse, R. A.

Powlett, Lord W.

Thornely, T.

Rice, E. R.

Tollemache, hon. F. J.

Romilly, J.

Tollemache, J.

Rushout, Capt.

Turner, E.

Russell, Lord J.

Verney, Sir H.

Russell, F. C. H.

Walsh, Sir J. B.

Rutherfurd, A.

Ward, H. G.

Shafto, R. D.

Watkins, Col.

Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.

Wawn, J. T.

Sibthorp, Col.

Wellesley, Lord C.

Smith, J. A.

Willcox, B. M.

Somerville, rt. hn. Sir W.

Wilson, J.

Spooner, R.

Wilson, M.

Stafford, A.

Wood, rt. hon. Sir C.

Stanley, E.

Wyld, J.

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Yorke, H. G. R.

Stanton, W. H.

TELLERS.

Stuart, J,

Tufnell, H.

Talfourd, Serj.

Hill, Lord M.

List of the NOES.

Blewitt, R. J.

Muntz, G. F.

Bright, J.

Pilkington, J.

Cobden, R.

Salwey, Col.

Crawford, W. S.

Scholefield, w.

D'Eyncourt, rt. hn. C. T.

Smith, J. B.

Ewart, W.

Stuart, Lord D.

Forster, M.

Sullivan, M.

Fox, W. J.

Tancred, H. W.

Gardner, R.

Thompson, Col.

Gibson, rt. hon. T. M.

Thompson, G.

Greene, J.

Urquhart, D.

Henry, A.

Walmsley, Sir J.

Kershaw, J.

Williams, J.

Lushington, C.

TELLERS.

M'Gregor, J.

Hume, J.

Meagher, T.

Mowatt, F.

Bill read a third time and passed.

TITHE RENT-CHARGE RATING BILL.
MR. G. A. HAMILTON stated, that as the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department had permitted him to introduce the Bill of which he had given notice, relating to a most important subject, and designed to remedy an injustice and grievance of no ordinary magnitude, with the understanding that by permitting it to be introduced, the Government was not to be considered as pledged hereafter to support it, unless on consideration that they should approve of it, he (Mr. Hamilton) without further observation, and reserving the discussion for the second reading, would move—
"That leave be given to bring in a Bill to alter and amend so much of the Act 1 & 2 Vic., c. 56, as relates to the mode of making Tithe-Rent Charge in Ireland liable to Poor-Rate poundage; and, also, to empower the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in Ireland to allow poundage deducted from ecclesiastical persons on account of Poor-Rate, among the deductions from the Valuation of
872
Ecclesiastical property, directed to be made under the Act 3 and 4 Will. IV., c. 37, for the purpose of a certain Tax thereby imposed upon such property in Ireland."

PUBLIC HEALTH BILL.
On the question that the Speaker leave the chair for the House to go into Committee on the Public Health Bill,
COLONEL SIBTHORP said, he had no wish to throw any unnecessary obstruction in the way of the Speaker leaving the chair, but as the Attorney General had informed him in the lobby, during the recent division, that the Bill had been so modified that the principle of centralisation to which he objected was almost entirely abandoned, as well as the proposal to appoint a numberless host of inspectors, he wished the further progress of the Bill delayed till the Bill with its new modifications was reprinted.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL admitted that, in concert with the hon. Member for Warwickshire, he had urged the hon. and gallant Colonel not to oppose the Speaker leaving the chair; but the hon. and gallant Member was quite mistaken in supposing that he had stated what he had just attributed to him respecting the extent of the alterations in the Bill.
COLONEL SIBTHORP said, that all he wanted was to know what the alterations really were; and for this purpose he thought it was a most reasonable proposal to have the Bill reprinted. He was very much disposed, therefore, to take the sense of the House against the Speaker leaving the chair at present.
MR. JOHN STUART begged to take that opportunity of stating that, having in the course of the former debate on this subject attributed the authorship of a certain pamphlet to Mr. Chadwick, he had since learned that that gentleman entirely disavowed its authorship; and he thought it due to Mr. Chadwick to state that he had been mistaken in his supposition. He believed it was perfectly true that the opinions contained in that pamphlet were the same as those which Mr. Chadwick was understood to have advocated; but in referring to those opinions he had no wish to speak disrespectfully of that gentleman, although he did intend to blame the Government for being guided by him.
VISCOUNT MORPETH begged to state to the hon. and gallant Colonel (the Member for Lincoln) that in Committee he would be ready to state the modifications

873
he intended to propose in the Bill; and when they came to the clauses which were affected by these modifications he would then move that the clauses as amended be printed.
MR. FREWEN said, no doubt many hon. Members were aware that not very distant from that House a most malignant fever had been going on for some time. Two persons had already died of it, and Westminster School had been broken up. That fever had, it was stated, arisen in consequence of the Dean of Westminster, who was one of the Sanitary Commissioners, having conveyed some composition, of which he (Mr. Frewen) was ignorant, into the sewers, for the purpose of preventing fever and infection; and a medical man of very great experience had informed him only that morning that if these sanitary improvements were persevered in, the doctors would very soon make their fortunes. These were things that ought to be taken into consideration. There appeared to be amongst hon. Members a general feeling in favour of some measures of sanitary improvement; but he objected to this Bill on account of the centralisation system which it involved. A similar measure was brought in last Session, and, after having occupied a considerable time in discussion, was at last withdrawn. He thought that one more simple, resembling that of the year 1832, at the time of the cholera, would be more favourably received, and might be passed in a short time.
SIR. C. BURRELL believed, that the statement made by the hon. Gentleman who had just spoken was well founded, and he thought it was worthy of consideration how far the disinfecting fluid of which he had spoken could be used with safety and benefit.
House in Committee.
VISCOUNT MORPETH said: When the hon. Member for Oxfordshire, in the discussion on the Motion that the Speaker do leave the chair, in order that the Bill might go into Committee, had expressed his general views in rather a cursory manner, I stated that I could not undertake to pledge myself that I should be prepared in Committee to assent to the various suggestions which he had made. Since that time, the hon. Member has been good enough to favour the Government with a statement of the alterations which he wishes to introduce; and as I recognise, on the part of the House generally, an unaffected sympa-
874
thy in the real objects of this Bill, and a wish to carry some practical measure into effect—as I think the hon. Member for Oxfordshire is one who pre-eminently shares in that feeling; and, above all, as I look upon the suggestions he has made as embracing a considerable improvement and advance in the present state of the law, including in themselves great positive and immediate good, and laying the foundation for much public improvement hence forwards—Her Majesty's Government, after due consideration of those Amendments, have thought it expedient to acquiesce in them so far as their general effect is concerned. I say, for myself, that I have on all occasions invited the attention of the House to this subject, with a simple desire to promote some good practical legislation, and I care for this a thousandfold more than I care for any credit which might attach to us on account of positive adherence to our original intentions. I will briefly state those suggestions of the hon. Member, to which we are prepared to give effect. As the Bill stood, it was proposed that one-fiftieth of the rated inhabitants must make application before any inquiry could take place. I felt, indeed, that as regarded large places, that proposition might appear ridiculous; but as I hoped that this Bill would apply to small places as well as large, and as I did not know the boundaries of the several places to which it would apply, I thought it necessary to propose a number which would not exclude any place from the benefit of this measure. I think, however, that this difficulty may be provided for. We are prepared, therefore, to agree to the following:—When one-tenth of the rated inhabitants of any corporate city, town, or place, with ascertained and defined boundaries, makes an application, inquiry shall take place in the manner prescribed by the Act. If it is found expedient to add any further district to the town or place, inquiry shall take place with the same regularity. When it is not proposed to include any new district, or to interfere with any local Act, the general board shall proceed, as in the Bill, to submit a report, which shall be applied to the district by Order in Council. When a district is included, or a local Act is interfered with, the general board are to frame a provisional order, which is not to be applied to the district till it has received the sanction of Parliament. The matter will not be referred to a Committee upstairs, or be made the subject of a private Bill; but

875
a public Act of Parliament will be provided to meet the case.
MR. HENLEY could only express his thankfulness to the noble Lord for the kindness with which he had taken into consideration the suggestions he had ventured to throw out, giving thereby the best evidence he could give of his great anxiety to make this a good practical measure, and one that would be beneficial to the country. This was not a question that any of them could care from which side of the House it proceeded. They could have but one common object, and that was to render a measure of this sort, surrounded, as it was, by all kinds of difficulty, such as would be useful to the country.
VISCOUNT MORPETH said, he could state, on accurate information, that there were about 300 towns in England without any local Acts. Where there was such an Act it was not intended to interfere with it by this Bill, without an Order of Council, coming under the knowledge of the House, and an Act of Parliament applying to the place in question. Where there was no such local Act, the Queen in Council was enabled to apply this Bill.
MR. HUDSON said, he knew not what were the Amendments proposed to be made in the Bill; they should be printed, and the Chairman had better report progress.
LORD G. BENTINCK wished to add his request that they should see the Bill reprinted. He had himself given notice of several Amendments, and he could not tell how they would stand after the
Bill had been remodelled upon the wise advice of the hon. Member for Oxfordshire. That hon. Member had proposed to strip the Bill entirely of its old machinery, and to give it a new machinery, founded upon the Bill of the noble Lord the Member for Falkirk; and he thought he asked nothing unreasonable in asking that the Bill should be reprinted.
The CHAIRMAN put the Interpretation Clause.
COLONEL SIBTHORP moved that the Chairman report progress.
MR. SLANEY complained of the delays thus interposed. Every concession had been made, sufficient to satisfy those who desired to see such a measure carried, though they might differ as to the mode, and he grieved to think that these obstacles should be offered.
LORD G. BENTINCK had no objection to going on in the dark, if they pleased, if
876
the noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown would get up and explain how the Bill would stand in its new shape. He wished to have the opinion of that noble Lord upon the subject.
SIR R. H. INGLIS said, on a question of social policy, in which the hon. Member for Oxforshire co-operated with the noble Lord the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests, he was bound to say that he had more confidence in their united opinion, than in the opinion even of the hon. Member (Mr. Hudson) who had just cheered; and when his noble Friend the Member for Lynn said he wished to hear the opinion of the noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown, as to how the Bill would stand with reference to particular clauses, he said, Wait until those particular clauses came on. Concurring in the general prinple of the Bill, he would not delay its progress by another sentence.
LORD J. RUSSELL thought the course proposed by the Government not an unreasonable one. They did not propose that the Committee should at once assent to the clauses which would be effected by the alterations adopted by the Government; but they proposed that such clauses should stand over, and that the alterations should be printed. Those clauses were few in number, and there was nothing to prevent the Committee going on with the other clauses of the Bill.
Motion for reporting progress withdrawn.
Clauses to the 5th disposed of.
House resumed.
Committee to sit again.
House adjourned at One o'clock.