Commons Sitting of 10 February 1859

MINUTES
. NEW WRITS ISSUED.—For Worcester County (Eastern Division), v. Colonel Rushout, now Lord Northwick; for Hythe, v. Sir John Ramsden, bart., Chiltern Hundreds; for the West Riding of the County of York, v. Viscount Goderich, now Earl of Ripon.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1o Municipal Elections; County Prisons (Ireland).

NAVAL ESTIMATES.

  QUESTION.
  LORD JOHN RUSSELL: I wish to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can state the day on which he will bring forward the Naval Estimates and
  220
  make the statement of which he had given notice?
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTON: As at present advised, I propose to make a statement of the views of the Government on the Naval Estimates on Friday, the 25th inst.

"THE GARDEN OF THE SOUL."

  QUESTION.
  MR. SPOONERsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for War, is the Garden of the Soul issued to any soldiers in the British Army by authority of the Secretary of State for War; and is that book purchased and distributed at the cost of the State?
  GENERAL PEELsaid, he believed that the Garden of the Soul was the Prayer-book in use among the Roman Catholics. A certain number of copies were therefore distributed to the Roman Catholic soldiers, and it followed that a portion of this work was purchased and distributed at the cost of the State. He had made no alteration whatever in the practice of the War Office on this subject. The sum of £2,000 was voted every year for the distribution of religious books to the army, and a certain proportion of this grant was devoted to the Roman Catholic soldiers. The Vote in question appeared in the Estimates, and the hon. Gentleman could object to it when the Army Estimates were before the House, if he thought proper.

SAVINGS BANKS.

  QUESTION.
  MR. GREERsaid, he rose to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he intends to introduce any Bill this Session to increase the security of depositors in Savings Banks; and whether the Government propose to indemnify, in whole or in part, the depositors in the Tralee and Killarney Savings Banks for the losses they sustained by the failure of those banks.
  MR. WALPOLEreplied, that although the question was one not strictly affecting his Department, he could inform the hon. Member that the subject was at the present moment under the attention of the Irish Government.

THE TROOPSHIP "GENERAL SIMPSON."

  QUESTION.
  COLONEL SMYTHsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for India the name of the owner or owners of the troop-

  221
  ship General Simpson, which left England for Calcutta on the 8th of August last with draughts of Her Majesty's 80th and other regiments on board, amounting to upwards of 400 men, and which reached Calcutta on the 22nd of December; whether it is true, that, although the contractor is bound to have provisions and water for 140 days on board, officers, soldiers, and crew were placed for several weeks on short allowance of both food and water, the lower tier of water tanks having been found empty; and, whether any explanation of the unusually long voyage of the General Simpson (137 days from England to Calcutta), and of the circumstances alluded to, has been given to the Indian Department?
  LORD STANLEY:—The owners of the troopship General Simpson are Messrs. Fernie, Brothers, of Liverpool. The General Simpson was engaged for the transport, from Gravesend to Calcutta of 10 officers and 402 men, being draughts for fourteen different regiments. She sailed on the 8th of August, and arrived at Calcutta on the 22nd of the following December, having been 137 days out. The owners were bound to take out provisions, stores, and water for the soldiers, as well as for the crew, for 140 days. Previous to starting the vessel was visited by the embarking officer, and he verified that the proper quantity of provisions was on board. No papers have been received at the Indian Office from Calcutta, where the final settlement of the freight is made, on the subject of this ship, and I am therefore unable to explain the reasons of this unusually long voyage. On the 7th inst. a letter was received at the India Office from the Deputy Quarter Master General containing the following report from the officer who commanded the troops on board the General Simpson:—"The troops were without porter for the last six weeks of the voyage. The provisions very good except porter. Troops placed on short rations of water—an unusually wet passage." It appears that neither the owners nor brokers of the ship have yet received intelligence beyond the following by the last homeward mail. "Simpson was just towing up the Hooghly, and had been spoken a few days before, short of water." No further explanation can be given, but under the circumstances I have thought it right to institute an inquiry.

  MARINE ENGINES.—QUESTION.
  MR. DALGLISHsaid, he wished to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if any ten-
  222
  ders have been recently given out for Marine Engines; and, if so, whether the Marine Engineers of the river Clyde have been asked to tender?
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, that tenders for Marine Engines had been lately called for to a large amount; that a larger number of manufacturers than usual had been invited to tender; and that among them, was one manufacturing firm upon the Clyde—the Messrs. Napiers and Co.

  THE SUGAR DUTIES.—QUESTION.
  MR. HANKEYsaid, he wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether there is any foundation for the report in The Times, that he is about to propose an alteration in the sugar duties?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER:—I have observed the statement in the city article of The Times to which the hon. Gentleman refers—namely, that it is in my contemplation to deal with the sugar duties, and to establish an equal duty upon all sugars. I have only to say at present that there is not the slightest foundation for the statement.

COUNTY PRISONS (IRELAND).

  LEAVE.
  LORD NAASsaid, that the Acts relating to Irish county prisons were fourteen in number, and that considerable difficulty having arisen in their interpretation the consolidation of these statutes was much needed. He proposed to repeal all those Acts and re-enact the law in one concise code, so that all the functionaries of these establishments might be able to see at a glance what their powers and duties were. In addition to this, there were some changes urgently required, to which he wished to draw attention. At present the Board of Superintendence was appointed by the grand jury twice in every year. He proposed that the appointment should be made only once a year—at the spring assizes, when the greatest number of grand jurors attended, and when the subject could be more fully considered. He proposed to make it mandatory on the Board of Superintendence to appoint a deputy-governor, a schoolmaster, and a schoolmistress, in addition to the present gaol officers, and to give power to the Board to fix the salaries of all the officers. He proposed that the Board of Superintendence should lay before the grand jury an estimate of the sum necessary for defraying the ex-

  223
  penses of the gaol for the ensuing year, and that the estimate so submitted should be noted by the jury as an imperative presentment. Great inconvenience was now felt with regard to the mode of procedure as to the salaries of the officers of gaols. According to the present law they could not be paid as their salaries became due, unless there happened to be a balance in the treasurer's hands of the sums left over from the last levy, so that they had often to wait a considerable time before they were paid. He thought they ought not to be in a different position from that of other public officers, but should receive their salaries half-yearly or quarterly, as they became due. Although the state of the Irish gaols was generally very good, and although there were as good county gaols in Ireland as in any other part of the Queen's dominions, still there were a few lamentable exceptions to that state of things. The establishment at Waterford was deficient in almost every requisite for the proper conduct of a gaol. There was little accommodation, no provision for instruction, and even a deficient supply of water. The gaol of the city of Kilkenny was remarked upon by the Inspector General in his last Report as equally deficient, and such was its state of over-crowding and want of accommodation that only a fortnight ago, as Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, he was obliged to make an order for the removal of prisoners to the county gaol. He proposed in this Bill to lay down all the requisites necessary to the proper conduct of a prison, and to give power to the Lord Lieutenant to declare, after notice, that unless those requisites were fulfilled the prison complained of should not be a legal place of detention for the county or city to which it belonged. In a subsequent clause the Lord Lieutenant had power to order the grand jury to provide accommodation in such cases, and there was further power that, in the event of the grand jury refusing, the Lord Lieutenant should appoint Commissioners to provide proper accommodation. While the condition of the county gaols was generally very good, the condition of the bridewells in Ireland was as bad as could possibly be, and he referred the House for proof of that statement to the last Report of the Inspector General on prisons. The bride-wells were 113 in number. In not less than fifty-three there was no supply of water; all of them were small, ill-ventilated, dirty; no means of classification ex-
  224
  isted in any, and many of them were totally unfit for the detention of prisoners. It was contrary to law confine prisoners in them after trial, but they were frequently detained in them a considerable period before trial. It was a barbarous thing to confine prisoners in such horrible places as many of the bridewells of Ireland were, and he proposed to adopt somewhat the same plan as he had stated with regard to gaols; namely, to define certain requisites and to give power to the Lord Lieutenant to close these bridewells if the provisions of the law were not fulfilled. These were the principal provisions of the Bill. It had been prepared with great labour and pains, and be hoped it would receive the support of the House. The noble Lord concluded by moving for leave to introduce a Bill for consolidating and amending the laws relating to county prisons in Ireland.
  COLONEL FRENCHsaid, he did not rise to offer any objection to the introduction of the Bill. At the same time he must say that it appeared to him to contain a most objectionable principle throughout; namely, that it gave the Executive Government a power of taxation for the whole of the year by the election of the Board of Superintendence at the spring assizes. That would render it incumbent on the grand jury to levy the expenditure for the twelvemonth instead of, as now, for the half-year. He also objected to the powers given to the Lord Lieutenant to compel presentments and to tax the counties ad libitum. Such an objectionable doctrine had never been submitted to in England, and he hoped it would never be permitted in Ireland. The prisons up to the present time had been managed by efficient officers, and he saw no reason to change the system of payment. On the whole, while he thought the consolidation of the laws on this subject would be an advantage, he hoped that time would be given for the due consideration of the details of the Bill, which were extremely important.
  LORD NAASsaid, that he proposed to lay down distinctly in his Bill those requisites which the House would see were absolutely necessary. The same power they now possessed would be left to the grand jury for carrying out necessary orders. It would only be in the case of the grand jury refusing to comply, not with the will of the Lord Lieutenant, but with the law of the land, that the Lord Lieutenant would be empowered to step in. He believed that if any bon. Gentleman would read that part

  225
  of the Inspectors of Prisons Report which referred to the present condition of the bridewells he would not come to the conclusion that it was asking too much, that the Government should be invested with this power. He did not apprehend that this measure would cause additional taxation, but believed that the ratepayers would find it, in the end, conducive to economy.
  Leave given.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by Lord NAAS and Mr. WALPOLE.
  Bill presented and read 1o.

MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS.

  LEAVE. FIRST READING.
  MR. CROSSsaid, he ruse for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law relating to Municipal Elections. So long as bribery and corruption prevailed at Municipal elections it was vain to expect purity of procedure at Parliamentary elections. The Municipal Corporations Act had certainly made provisions fur the prevention of corruption at the elections, but practically that Act had remained a dead letter, because the penalties were too severe, and the mode of recovering them too expensive. He, therefore, proposed by this Bill to make the penalties light, and the mode of recovering them summary. It might be said that another measure would shortly come before the House, dealing with the subject both of Municipal and Parliamentary Elections; but it might be long before the Bill would be introduced, and, after all, its provisions might not be materially different from those he proposed. There were other provisions for the saving of expense in the erection of polling booths, by requiring that notice should be given of the names of all candidates to be nominated before the election, so that there would be no need to erect polling places if there was to be no contest; also provision fur saving of expense in the drawing up of the burgess list, and for dividing those boroughs into wards which were not already divided. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for leave to introduce the Bill.
  MR. GILPINseconded the Motion.
  SIR G. PECHELLsaid, there were many Amendments which might he introduced into the Bill, such as lowering the qualification of three years' residence to One year or nine months, prohibiting expenditure in the conveyance of voters to the poll, and others, which would make it much more valuable.
  MR. DILLWYNsaid, he hailed with
  226
  satisfaction any attempts to improve the law relating to Municipal elections, but he would suggest to the hon. Member that the only real mode of remedying the evils connected with them was to take the vote by ballot. That would afford a good test of the working of the ballot in Parliamentary elections.
  MR. RIDLEYsaid, he hoped that, as the Bill was a very important one, time would be given to consider it before the second reading.
  MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he thought there was one defect in the Bill as brought forward. He thought the Bill might go a little further, and take in municipal corporations, where there was a deal of jobbery. Members of town councils were prohibited from supplying articles to the corporation, but this was systematically broken through. The penalty being recoverable in the superior courts, it was too cumbrous to be put in frequent operation. If the penalty were lowered, it would be much more effective, He (Mr. Griffith) would suggest to the hon. Gentleman to alter his Bill so as to take that in.
  MR. CROSSsaid, he proposed to move the second reading that day fortnight.
  Leave given.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr CROSS, Mr. GILPIN, and Mr. COLLINS.
  Bill presented, and read 1o.

STATUTE LAW COMMISSION.

  RETURNS MOVED FOR.
  MR. LOCKE KINGsaid, he rose to move for a Return relating to the Statute Law Commission, as he thought it was absolutely necessary that a detailed account should be given of the very large sums of money expended by that Commission. When the Commission was first appointed, Parliament voted large sums every year to defray its expenses; but of late, in addition to the annual Votes, large stuns were drawn from the Civil Contingencies—a most unconstitutional proceeding. Thus an unpopular and unsatisfactory Commission drew money without the sanction of Parliament. The Commission had already sat six or seven years, and, so far as he could judge, had actually done nothing whatever, He wished to know what course Her Majesty's Government intended to pursue with regard to the Commission, and also with regard to the Consolidation Bills which had been so long promised. He regretted that he did not see the hon. and learned Attorney General in his place; but some member of

  227
  Her Majesty's Government would perhaps answer his question. Last Session the notice paper was continually blocked up from week to week, and at last from day to day, with no less than nine Consolidation Bills, proposed to be brought in by the hon. and learned Gentleman. This year the hon. and learned Gentleman had changed his plan. He had given notice of only one Consolidation Bill. Was that an indication that the Bills of last Session were not fit to be introduced at all? He had very little faith in the Commission producing Consolidation Bills that would become law. It seemed to have contaminated even the Attorney General, for two years ago he made a very long speech on asking for leave to introduce two Consolidation Bills; but those Bills, in spite of repeated promises, were never introduced, frequently as he (Mr. Locke King) had urged him to bring them in. He now asked if the Government was in earnest about the consolidation of the Statute Law, and when the long-promised Bills would be introduced?
  MR. HADFIELD,in seconding the Motion, said he thought it was not so much of the expense as of the unproductiveness of this Commission that the country complained. There was nothing whatever to show for all the money that had been expended. It was discreditable to the country that the revision and consolidation of its laws had been so long delayed.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,—
  "That there be laid before this House, a Return showing the total sum which has been voted for the Statute Law Board and Statute Law Commission, from its commencement to the present time.
  "Accounts, in detail, showing how that amount has been expended.
  "Of the Sums which have been paid to Drafts. men out of Contingencies for drawing Consolidation Bills.
  "Return of the tames of Draftsmen employed to prepare Consolidation Bills, and the Fees paid, or to be paid, to each Draftsman.
  "And, Copy of the Minutes and Proceedings of the Statute Law Commission (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 78, Session, 1855)."
  MR. WALPOLE: Sir, Her Majesty's Government have no objection to this Return, except as to the form of it. Part of the papers for which the hon. Member for East Surrey moves has been already printed by order of the House, and therefore, if he will give me leave, I will put in the Speaker's hands a modification of his Motion, with the view of preventing unnecessary expense. The hon. Gentleman has asked two questions—one with reference
  228
  to the Commission, and the other with reference to Consolidation Bills relating to the criminal law. Now, with reference to the Commission, I think, notwithstanding the observations of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Sheffield, (Mr. Hadfield) that a vast deal of very useful information has been furnished by the Commission, and that Parliament might safely and wisely act upon that information in the future. But, considering the difficulty of carrying on the Commission in the form in which it has been carried on, and the expense occasioned by Consolidation Bills, I think it will be better to act upon the information already afforded by the Commission before we put the country to any further expense in employing them to obtain further information. Her Majesty's Government are therefore considering whether the labours of the Commission may not be stopped for a time. With regard to the other question—namely, the consolidation of the criminal law, I have to inform the hon. Gentleman that the series of Bills which are shortly to be introduced by my hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General for England will not merely consolidate but most carefully revise the English and likewise the Irish statutes relating to the criminal law. The alterations which are going to be made by that series of Bills (which will be submitted to the House to-morrow se'nnight) will, I believe, be an immense improvement of the statute law. Of course I can hardly be expected, nor indeed ought I, to state what those improvements are; but I hope the hon. Gentleman will be in his place, because I think he will be satisfied that, in point of fact, Her Majesty's Government will put the statute law of the country into a much better shape than it has hitherto been. I believe I have answered the only question which the hon. Gentleman put to me with reference to the Commission. I think that the hon. Member for Sheffield somewhat exaggerated the public opinion as to the Commission when he said that the public complained that the Commission had been of no advantage to the country.
  MR. LOCKE KINGsaid, he wished to ask if the form in which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to give the return would show the total expense of the Commission?
  MR. WALPOLE: Yes, the first order will show the total sum.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEobserved that the first part was printed so far hack as 1857, and the sole object in giving the return in the form proposed by his

  229
  right hon. Friend was to save the expense and trouble of reprinting.
  Motion by leave withdrawn.
  Accounts ordered,—
  "Showing the total sum which has been voted for the Statute Law Board and Statute Law Commission from its commencement to the present time.
  "Showing how that amount has been expended.
  "Of the Sums which have been paid to Draftsmen out of Civil Contingencies for drawing Consolidation Bills (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 214, of Session 2, 1857).
  "Return of the Names of the Draftsmen employed to prepare Consolidation Bills and the Fees paid or to be paid to each Draftsman.
  "And Copy of the Minutes and Proceedings of the Statute Law Commission, in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 78, of Session, 1855."

LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND).

  RETURNS MOVED FOR.
  MR. GREERsaid, he wished to move for a Return of a copy of a judgment of the Master of the Rolls in Ireland, delivered on the 4th of November last, in the case of the Rev. Dr. O'Fay against Major Burke, on a petition for specific performance of an agreement for a lease; and for a copy of the judgment of the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Justice of Appeal, confirming the Master of the Rolls' decree.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,—
  "That there he laid before the house, a Copy of the Judgment of the Master of the Rolls in Ireland, delivered on the 4th November last, in the case of Rev. Dr. O'Fay against Major Burke, on a Petition for a specific performance of an agreement for a lease.
  LORD NAASsaid, he believed thsre was no official record kept of the words used by the Judges of those Courts in giving their decisions, and therefore no means of giving the Return moved by the hon. Gentleman. But, in reference to the case itself, he had that morning received two letters, which he wished to make public as soon as possible, in justice to an absent man. The case between the Rev. Dr. O'Fay and Major Burke had attracted a good deal of attention, and the action was brought by a Roman Catholic clergyman against Major Burke, for the purpose of endeavouring to enforce an alleged agreement for a lease, said to have been made between the plaintiff and the father of Major Burke. It was tried before the Assistant Barrister, who decided in favour of the defendant. An appeal was then brought before the Master of the Rolls, and subsequently to the Court of Appeal, by both of which Courts the decision below
  230
  was confirmed. In order to show the opinion entertained by the Lord Chancellor on the case, I will read to the House an extract from his judgment, in which his Lordship made use of the following remarkable observations:—
  "It was to be regretted that before the notice to quit was served, the case was not fairly submitted to Major Burke, who, it did not appear, was made aware before the civil bill proceedings of his father's letter or the other correspondence. He (the Lord Chancellor) could not believe, if the matter had been fairly laid before Major Burke, a British officer and a gentleman, that he would be indifferent to the considerations of good faith and honourable feeling. He thought the opportunity still existed for an amicable arrangement, and he hoped he was not overstepping his duty in suggesting to Major Burke that, under the circumstances, he would best maintain the character of a British officer, the cause of justice, and also the rights of property, by making such an arrangement as to the possession of the farm as would give the petitioner the benefit of the expenditure he had honestly made, with the reasonable expectation of being sufficiently secured. However, in all cases where parties dealt solely on good faith, which it was most desirable should be observed between landlord and tenant, a Court of Equity could not interpose."
  In consequence of these observations, and of representations made to Major Burke by his friends, that gallant officer gave instructions to his solicitor to write to the reverend gentleman, offering to make to him every reparation in his power. The following letter, which he (Lord Naas) would read, in justice to Major Burke, was forwarded by his solicitor to Dr. O'Fay:—
  "65, Upper Gardiner Street, Dublin, Feb. 2, 1859.
  "'O'FAY v. BURKE.'
  "Rev. Sir—The decision of the Court of Appeal in the cause petition instituted by you against Major Burke having been communicated to him, I am authorized to inform you that it is not his intention to act thereon, or to disturb you in the possession of the lands in question.
  "Although the result has established Major Burke's rights to the fullest extent originally claimed by him, he has no desire to take any further steps in the matter, and he will therefore permit you to remain in possession during your life of the house and farm at the same rent as heretofore, upon your executing a formal agreement to that effect.
  "I am further to inform you that it is not Major Burke's intention to require payment from you of the costs of the trial in Galway, amounting to £56 15 s. 1d., and for which an execution was had against you.
  "I am, Rev. Sir,
  "Your most obedient servant,
  "THOMAS DENNIS O'FARRELL.
  "The Rev. Michael Jos. O'Fay, Rue Castle, Craughwell."
  This, he thought, under the circumstances, was as much as Major Burke could be ex-

  231
  petted to do, and he was sorry the letter was not received in the spirit it deserved, as appeared from the rev. gentleman's reply:—
  "Rue Castle, Feb. 4.
  "Sir—In reply to yours of the 2nd instant, I beg to say that both you and your gallant Sepoy Major, aided and assisted by the unjust laws of my poor country, have already deeply wounded me to my heart's core. Nevertheless, I feel, thank God, under better treatment, that I am now convalescent, and therefore I beg to decline your salvo, as it comes too late.
  "I have the honour to be, Sir,
  "Your obedient servant,
  "MICHAEL JOSEPH O'FAY.
  "Thomas D. O'Farrell, Esq., Loughrea."
  Major Burke is now absent from this country. He had thought it necessary to make these observations, in justice to a gentleman whose conduct had been severely commented on, who he knew to be an honourable and humane man, and he trusted that the House would be satisfied that he had done all he could do to make due reparation for any injury that he unintentionally may have inflcted on Mr. O'Fay.
  MR. GREERsaid, he had no personal acquaintance with any of the parties concerned in the matter. He had received no information as to the merits of the case, except that which he had just heard, and that which he had obtained from the newspapers. But the facts, he thought, were calculated, if properly presented to the Members of that House, to put them in possession of the circumstances of one of a class of cases that occasionally occurred in Ireland, and enable them the better to judge of the relations existing between landlord and tenant in that country. They would then be more competent to determine upon what measures would be necessary to improve those relations. It was for that reason he wished to place on record the opinions of three eminent Judges as to the state of the law in that country. If no official record of the words of the Judges' decisions were kept, he apprehended it was the practice of the Judges in important cases to make notes of the judgments they were about to deliver, and to read those notes as their judgments. With regard to the letter of Major Burke or his solicitor, read by the noble Lord, he was willing to admit that it treated the matter in a very handsome manner, by offering to make reparation for any wrong that had been inflicted, and he deeply regretted that it had not been received in a proper spirit. As, however, he did not bring forward this Motion with the view of casting blame
  232
  upon any party, that letter did not alter the state of the case further than this, that if the return were ordered, he should have no objection to the letter being appended to it. He trusted, therefore, that there would be no objection to the production of the documents referred to.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, he would submit to the House whether any good object could be effected by the House making an order for the transmission by the Judges of copies of the judgments they had delivered in the matter in question. He did not know what the practice was in Ireland, but in this country very many judgments were pronounced without any notes whatever. Generally speaking, there were shorthand writers engaged in all important cases, who took down accurately what the learned Judges said, and he had no doubt if the hon. Gentleman were to write to the parties interested in the case they could supply him from that source with full information on the subject. He would put it to the House, therefore, whether it was consistent with their usual practice to issue an order to one of Her Majesty's Judges to transmit a copy of judgment which they did not know had any existence whatever.
  MR. GREERsaid, he might refer to the case of "Stubbes v. Hornsby," in 1853, relating to the Drainage Act, in which an order similar to that for which he moved had been made. He believed, if the order were issued, it would not be considered an inoperative order.
  MR. BAGWELLobserved, that the hon. Gentleman having made his statement, it would perhaps be more conducive to the public interests to withdraw the Motion, particularly as the Attorney General for Ireland was about bringing in a Bill on the subject of the relation of landlord and tenant in that country.
  MR. GREERsaid, he would withdraw his Motion.
  Motion by leave withdrawn.
  House adjourned at Six o'clock.