Commons Sitting of 2 August 1861

AFFAIRS OF CHINA.—QUESTION.
COLONEL SYKESsaid, he rose to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether any further Papers regarding affairs in China are to be given to Members?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that no additional papers with regard to China were in preparation at the Foreign Office, and he was not aware that any more were required.
On Motion that the House at its rising adjourn until Monday.

IRISH DISTRICT LUNATIC ASYLUMS.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. BLAKE,in rising to call the attention of the Chief Secretary for Ireland to the want which existed in the Irish district lunatic asylums of sufficient necessary appliances for promoting the happi-
  1846
  ness and recovery of the insane, said, he desired to draw the attention of the right hon. Baronet to this subject with a view of inducing him, by personal inquiry, to satisfy himself as to whether the statement which he would make regarding the defects in the Irish asylums were correct or not; and besides, if the things he complained of were not remedied before next Session, he would, if nothing prevented him, take an early opportunity, after the assembling of Parliament, to again bring forward the subject. Up to about thirty years ago the places for the detention of the insane poor in Ireland—for they did not deserve the name of institutions—were, he believed, in as deplorable a state as those of the United Kingdom generally—lunatics being for the most part treated like, and incarcerated with, criminals. About that time, however, a much better state of things arose. District asylums were erected in various parts of the country, which in point of construction, management, and comfort, were far beyond anything of the kind which had previously existed. The arrangements made for the care, treatment, and recovery of the patients were also very superior, as compared with the old system, and quite as good in every respect as anything of the kind then in operation in the kingdom, and very great results for the happiness of the insane followed. But he was sorry to say that those institutions by no means kept pace with the advance made by others, to which he would presently allude, in certain important particulars for alleviating the condition and promoting the recovery of the insane. It was difficult to know to whom to attach most blame for this; but those holding the highest positions in the administration of the affairs of the country certainly deserved their share of censure; and this might be said of every successive Government, as they each helped more or less to perpetuate a state of things calling strongly for amendment. There was, however, one honourable exception in the right hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Horsman). When that right hon. Gentleman was Chief Secretary he had sagacity enough to see that there was much in connection with the asylums calling for change, and he moved for, and obtained, a Royal Commission "to inquire into and report on the state of the asylums" The Commissioners consisted of Sir Thomas Redington, Robert Andrews, R. W. S. Lutwidge, James Wilkes, and

  1847
  sitions, experience, and intelligence. Their labours occupied more than a year, and the result was a very admirable Report, to one part of which he wished to direct the attention of the House—that in which the Commissioners recommended agreeable employment and recreation for those not disposed or able to take a part in agricultural labour. The hon. Member read the recommendations of the Report, and also passages from the reports of Dr. Hood, the Resident Physician of the Royal Hospital of Bethlehem, in which he advocates "those occupations for the insane which tend to divert the mind from its delusions, and which rouse and invigorate the healthy exercise of the reflective faculties." The patients had been permitted to visit many different public exhibitions—the National Gallery, the Crystal Palace, the Zoological Gardens, &c., with marked beneficial effect. Dr. Hood says—
  "If we can succeed in giving a patient the impression that we repose confidence in him—if we can make him sensible of the importance of his parole d'honneur, we are greatly improving his mental state; for the recovery of self-respect is often the first indication of impending cure. Hence we find the reports of many lunatic asylums attesting the advantages which patients derive from such excursions."
  Acting on the principle of occupying the patients' minds by agreeable employment and suitable recreation, Dr. Hood left no means untried to interest them, and no better proof could be shown of the soundness of his views than the results which followed, for, whilst in other institutions 20 per cent of discharges on admissions was considered a very satisfactory result, the discharges on admissions at Bethlehem sometimes amounted to 68 per cent. Last year they were nearly 60, and yet the whole first cost of the various matters required in a large asylum for the indoor recreation and employment of the patients would not exceed pound;100. Dr Hood frequently sent his patients in walking parties about London, without any unpleasant results occurring, and with great benefit to the patients themselves, an idea that would be and had been ridiculed at some of the Irish asylums. The example of Bethlehem had been followed in some of the English county asylums with good effect. He could speak particularly of Derby, Gloucester, and Leicester, as it was best known to him. There, under the able manager, Dr. Buck, the very same state of things might be seen in operation; and though wages and provisions were higher, the cost
  1848
  of the patients was not more than £2 a head per annum over some of the Irish asylums; and, what was most singular, there was not a wall or sunk fence around the entire of the outer grounds to prevent the patients from escaping. But the reason was easily told. The place was divested, as much as possible, of a prison aspect, and for those not equal to or disposed for agricultural labour there were ample means of occupation and amusement—music, games, books, pictures, birds, pet animals, &c., &c.; and since these things were introduced the patients were manifestly quieter, happier, and recoveries greater. In describing these asylums he by no means meant to convey that they represented England generally — by no means—as he believed the Irish asylums, taken as a whole, were beyond the English, ones; but there were in England a few far beyond the others, and better than anything in Ireland, and his object was to bring the latter up to the right standard. It was difficult to know who was to blame for their being so—whether the Government or the higher officials charged with their administration. Sufficient care had not been taken to make appointments from men who had previous experience of the treatment of insanity. For instance, take the inspectors of asylums. Dr. White, since deceased, was, no doubt, an able man well skilled in his profession; Dr. Nugent, who was private physician to Mr. O'Connell; and Dr. Hatchell, also eminent in his profession, were the first inspectors appointed; but not one of these, however eminent they might otherwise be, had any special knowledge of lunacy, or any especial experience in diseases of the mind. Now, he certainly thought that the Inspectors might have done much more than appeared to be done in the way of providing such occupations as he had spoken of for the patients' minds. Go into any county asylum in Ireland, after visiting Derby or Leicester, and the difference was very apparent in this respect. Let them take the instance of Waterford, with which he was best acquainted, and there they would find the patients not engaged in agricultural labour, shut up in yards, with walls so high that the poor lunatics had no prospect but the sky over their heads or the gravel under their feet; and when obliged to remain within doors they were huddled together in day-rooms, such as those described in the Report of the Royal Commission, without having anything to interest them, and the con-

  1849
  sequence was you would see more real signs of insanity in a room containing twenty patients than all over the Leicester asylum, with its nearly 400; and yet he had no hesitation in saying that Water-ford was quite as good in every respect as any other asylum in Ireland; but there was a great absence of the many things, trifling as they were, that would alleviate the dreadful tedium of the poor patients' lives, and help their recovery. There was no reason why the very same resources should not exist in the asylums in Ireland. The expense of everything he had described, even for a large institution, would not cost £50; but the utmost apathy, if not, indeed, prejudice, against such improvements appeared to exist. He had lately gone with a deputation from the Grand Jury of Waterford to visit the district asylum there; they had drawn up a report recommending increased recreation, which appeared to excite the surprise and draw down on him the disapproval of the resident manager, as he wrote to the papers stating there were pictures, plants, birds, and music, to amuse the patients, and wound up by expressing his fears that if patients were too much amused sane people outside might feign madness in order to join them. Now, the whole collection of pictures might be purchased, he thought, for 5s., the plants, perhaps, an equal sum, the birds, which for a long time consisted of only one, had to be caught by an enterprising patient, and the strains of music were only heard when some lunatic was in the vein to play on the fiddle or tambourine; however, when a manager of an asylum was found to express apprehension that if these joys were increased, people might endeavour to get themselves placed amongst lunatics, he thought he could not do better than hand in his letter, as the very strongest piece of evidence in support of his assertion that the Irish asylums needed reformation. All he now sought was to interest the right hon. Baronet in the subject, and to induce him to visit the two or three English asylums he had described, and then visit some of the Irish ones. He was quite sure when he had done so that he would agree with him that his description had not been exaggerated. He advocated no other reform than that recommended by the Royal Commission, and in successful operation in the places he had been describing. The late Chief Secretary had promised that new Privy Council rules
  1850
  should be introduced in place of the Bill of his predecessor. In addition to the Inspectors, a Commission like that which formerly existed ought to be formed, and each of the Inspectors ought to have separate districts assigned them, which would cause an emulation which did not now exist. He would now, until next Session, leave the matter in the hands of the right hon. Baronet. He hoped he would visit the asylums of both countries and judge for himself. The illustrious name he bore was associated with some good done for Ireland, and, though he differed with him in many of his opinions, still he believed he usually meant what he said. A few days before he had given expression to kindly sentiments towards Ireland, and, as he (Mr. Blake) was confident there was no subject more worthy of his attention than the one he had that day brought under his notice, he had every hope that ho would not lose sight of it, but would give to it that consideration which the claims of the poor beings for whose amelioration he pleaded deserved from one occupying a position enabling him to benefit them.
  MR. BERNAL OSBORNEsaid, he had no doubt the right hon. Baronet would devote himself during the recess to the consideration of the question which had just been submitted to his notice, and bore testimony to the efficiency of Dr. White, who up to the period of his decease had discharged his duty as an Inspector of Lunatics with the utmost zeal, adding also the expression of his opinion as to the manly and able manner in which Drs. Nugent and Hatchel performed their duties in a similar capacity.

IRISH BILLS.—QUESTION.
MR. HENNESSYwished to know from the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for Ireland, What had become of the Bill relating to the removal of certain penalties now imposed by law in the case of clergyman marrying a Protestant and Roman Catholic in Ireland, which had been introduced in the early part of the Session by the late Lord Chancellor in the other House of Parliament: also what had become of the Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Ireland) Bill, as well as that relating to the better regulation of Fairs and Markets in the country, which had been introduced early in the Session by the right hon. Gentleman the late Chief

1851
Secretary (Mr. Cardwell)? In calling attention, however, to the postponement of those Bills, he must not forget to be just to the Government, and to give them credit for a practical piece of legislation in the shape of the Salaries of County Surveyors Bill, another measure called the "Drunkenness in Ireland Bill," which he could never understand, and another giving two gentlemen £200 a year each for doing something in connection with Irish voters. There was, at the same time, a subject of great importance—Education in Ireland— which had not been dealt with, and which would come under the attention of the right hon. Baronet almost the instant he set his foot on the pier at Kingstown. With that question he hoped his right hon. Friend would at once grapple, using his own judgment in the matter, and setting aside the suggestions which might come from quarters on which reliance ought not to be placed. In conclusion, he had merely to add that he did not think the late Chief Secretary for Ireland was much to be blamed for the absence of legislation for Ireland in the present Session, seeing that he was deprived of the assistance in the House of both the law officers for that country — a position in which no Chief Secretary had been placed since the Union. Blame attached rather to the Prime Minister and the Government. He was afraid that the present Chief Secretary would remain for some time in the same unenviable position; but still he hoped that the right hon. Baronet would do something during the recess to promote the social happiness and the material prosperity of the Irish people.
SIR ROBERT PEEL: I am obliged to the hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Blake) for drawing my attention to the important subject of lunatic asylums in Ireland. I concur in the humane views which he has expressed with respect to the necessity and importance of introducing into those institutions everything that may tend to alleviate the sufferings of the inmates and to facilitate, as much as possible, their restoration to a sound state of health in mind and body. Happily in Ireland, as well as elsewhere, the time is long past when lunatics were treated like criminals; but I really admit that, in addition to kindly treatment, it is highly desirable that the monotony and desolation of mind endured by patients in lunatic asylums should be relieved by occupation and amusement. I do not think that the
1852
recommendations contained in the Report of the Commission of Inquiry to which the hon. Member has adverted, and which sat in 1858, have been sufficiently attended to. The Commissioners urged the necessity and advantage of introducing a system of recreation and amusement into lunatic asylums; but the hon. Member must know that the remedy for the evils which he has pointed out is a matter not within the province of the Government, but depends upon the local Boards. The district lunatic asylums are governed by Boards which are sustained by local rates, and, although it is true that the law gives the Lord Lieutenant considerable powers, yet it is obvious that it would not be desirable that he should exercise them, except in extreme cases. The hon. Member says that the monotony of lunatic asylums should be relieved by books and music. No doubt such means of recreation and amusement would be very valuable; but their introduction depends upon the Board of Directors of each asylum, and if the Lord Lieutenant were to exercise the power conferred upon him by the law, I am afraid such exercise would be regarded by the local Boards as an unwarrantable interference with the rights and authority of the cess payers. The hon. Member, in contrasting the lunatic asylums in Ireland with those of England, found fault particularly with the asylum at Clonmel. I believe that the condition of that institution is not so unfavourable as the hon. Member has described it to be. The hon. Member told us that the condition of the asylums in England—and he particularly mentioned those of Glocester and Leicester—is much superior to the condition of the asylums in Ireland. I find it stated, however, in the Ninth Report on the district asylums in Ireland that "the sanitary condition of such asylums from 1857 to 1859–60 was most favourable," and that "the comforts in Irish asylums are daily on the increase." The hon. Member gave us an unfavourable account of the asylum at Waterford, and I am aware that he made similar statements in a recent address to the grand jury of that city. Since the delivery of that address I have received a counter-statement from a person who visited the asylum in consequence, and who says—
"We found the whole building clean and orderly, pictures on the walls, draughts, &c., for the amusement of patients, books, and an instrument of music, which had evidently been in frequent

1853
use. As regards employment, patients were engaged in making shoes, knitting, sewing, making clothes, gardening, farming, &c. There are ten acres of land connected with this asylum, divided and sub-divided, the entire work on the land and gardens being performed by patients."
I think, therefore, that the condition of the Waterford Asylum is not such as to warrant the severe censure which the hon. Member has pronounced upon that institution. The hon. Member referred to some assurance given by my predecessor in connection with a Bill which was dropped two years ago on the understanding that steps would be taken by the Government to improve the management of the Irish lunatic asylums. I am happy to be able to inform the hon. Member that steps have been taken in the matter, and that new and improved rules have been drawn up under the orders of the Privy Council. I cannot agree with the hon. Member that the condition of the asylums in Ireland is so very unfavourable as compared with the asylums in England. The reverse is the case; and it is somewhat remarkable that the condition of the asylums in Ireland is considerably better than the condition of the asylums in England or in Scotland, or even in France. I have read the report to which the hon. Member has referred, very carefully, and I find that the percentage of recoveries, whether considered by admissions annually or by total number of patients under treatment, is greater in the Irish district lunatic asylums than in those of other countries. It is more favourable than in Scotland or than in England. Of the daily average under treatment—and this is very important—16 per cent are cured in Ireland, about 13 per cent in France, and about 10 per cent in England. In four years the deaths by casualties in Ireland among the insane in lunatic asylums were sixteen in all; but in England during the same period they were 124. Those facts show, I think, that the lunatic asylums in Ireland are, upon the whole, well and satisfactorily governed. No doubt improvements may be introduced, and when I go to Ireland I shall be happy to give this matter my best attention.
Turning now to the remarks of the hon. Member for the King's County (Mr. Hennessy), I am afraid I cannot state the reasons why the Bills to which he has referred have been dropped; but I may be permitted to say that next Session, should I continue to hold the office of Chief Secretary, and should any measures relating to Ireland be dropped, I shall be quite
1854
prepared to give the reasons. I have no doubt my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Cardwell) will be able to reply to the observations of the hon. Member opposite. In conclusion, I wish to take this opportunity of assuring Irish Members and the House generally that I shall never grudge any time or attention for the purpose of considering whatever may be necessary for the interests of the lunatic asylums and all other public institutions in Ireland, and that I shall cheerfully co-operate with hon. Gentlemen on both sides in endeavouring to promote whatever measures which may tend to the improvement, progress, and advancement of Ireland.
MR. CARDWELLsaid, he thought the hon. Member for Waterford was not aware that new regulations for the administration of affairs in lunacy had been prepared by a Commission specially appointed for the purpose, and that those regulations only waited the arrival of the right hon. Baronet in Ireland to be finally sanctioned. With respect to amusements in lunatic asylums in Ireland, his experience did not correspond with that of the hon. Member; for when he visited the Belfast asylum the patients were drawn up in military array, and were obviously enjoying a recreation well calculated to divert their minds. He believed, moreover, that in a curative point of view no asylum stood higher than that of Belfast. A great deal had been done during the last two years to supply the deficiency of accommodation for the care and cure of lunatics in Ireland. Many new asylums had been ordered, and he had no doubt that in a short time the whole of the accommodation recommended by the Redington Commission would be furnished. In reply to the questions of the hon. Member for the King's County (Mr. Hennessy) he had to state that the Bill for repealing the penal statute affecting Roman Catholic mixed marriages was withdrawn at the request of a large number of the Roman Catholic Members of that House, including the hon. Gentleman himself. He had received a communication from those hon. Gentlemen which led him to believe that the measure was not acceptable to them, and that he should not receive their support in proceeding with it. The other two measures to which the hon. Member had referred—the Registration of Marriages Bill and the Fairs and Markets Bill, related to subjects of great difficulty and importance, subjects which had en-

1855
gaged the attention of Parliament for many years, and were introduced early in the Session. These two measures were referred to Select Committees which made their Reports to the House. "Why, then, it was asked, did they not make progress in the House? The reason was not any unwillingness on the part of the Government, for they were most anxious to complete them, but because many of the Irish Members had to attend the summer assizes, and such measures could not be proceeded with in their absence. With regard to the Bill for the Registration of Marriages, it was quite true that the Committee had come to an all but unanimous conclusion; but, contrary to his protest, they had inserted a clause in the Bill giving to clergymen registering a marriage in Ireland exactly five times the remuneration that was given to clergymen in England, and charged it not on the local rates but on the Consolidated Fund. Now, it must be quite manifest to the House that it was totally impossible for him as a Member of the Government to recommend that clause to the adoption of the House; and it must be equally manifest that in the absence of the Irish Members he could not ask the House to reverse the decision of the Committee. There was no alternative, therefore, but to leave the matter over till next Session. So, also, with regard to the Fairs and Markets Bill, the Committee arrived at a unanimous conclusion. It touched vested interests and affected the regulation of traffic, both wholesale and retail, throughout the whole kingdom; and any Minister would be most culpable who attempted to make progress with such a measure in the absence of the Irish Members. The first of the three Bills then was not proceeded with, because those it was intended to relieve were desirous it should not be proceeded with; and, with regard to the two others, notice had been given by the Government on the very first day of the Session that they would be introduced on an early day; they were so introduced, they were referred to a Select Committee, but they could not be proceeded with in the House in consequence of the absence of the Irish Members at the summer assizes.
COLONEL DUNNEthought the chief fault of the lunacy establishments in Ireland was the appointment of the Governors, who were nominated by the Lord Lieutenant, often as a matter of caprice. They ought, in his opinion, always to be con-
1856
nected with the financial distribution of the country.

SPAIN AND MOROCCO.—QUESTION.
MR. DARBY GRIFFITHwished, on the last day of the Session, to elicit some words of wisdom from the noble Viscount at the head of Her Majesty's Government in relation to a question which had lost an eloquent exponent in that House, owing to the acceptance of office by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth (Sir Robert Peel). The despatches published by the Foreign Minister in the autumn of 1859 were all that could be wished; but his answer to the right hon. Baronet the other day seemed to give a new version to the case. The noble Lord the other day appeared to consider that he had made an engagement as to Tangiers, but that as to Tetuan he said nothing in direct terms, and that in harmony with his despatch he could allow Tetuan to be occupied permanently by an European Power. The fact was that Tetuan and the country up to Ceuta was nearer to Gibraltar than Tangiers was. The passage by land to Tangiers was easy, and there would be no difficulty in a force from Tetuan taking possession of that town. There could be no doubt that if the Spanish forces held possession of the coast of Morocco our communications with Gibraltar and the Mediterranean would be greatly interfered with. At present the Spaniards held possession of Melilla, upon the confines of French Algeria, and the extension of their power over the coast between the two points, which must follow, would leave the whole seaboard in the possession of Spain, who might at any time be made a catspaw by France to injure this country. If the recent conduct. of the noble Lord had been actuated by any desire to make a firm friendship with Spain it was an entire mistake. The only means of obtaining a sincere alliance with Spain must be by the surrender of Gibraltar. So long as we retained Gibraltar, which was a thorn and offence in their side, every Spaniard would detest the name of England. We had taken Gibraltar by a coup de main, and the Spaniards had repeatly made attempts to recover it, in alliance with France; and it was vain to expect that they would prefer the alliance of England to that of France so long as they hoped to wrest the fortress from us. It was futile to expect any gratitude for our exertions during the Peninsular War, because Spaniards argued, first that what

1857
we did was with a view to our own in-tests; and next, that if we had let them alone they would have driven Napoleon out of the country much sooner than was the case with our assistance. He would remind the noble Lord of the opinion expressed by Mr. Fox that if Gibraltar were given up to Spain the Mediterranean would become a lake from which she could exclude us whenever she pleased. He wished to ask the noble Lord, Whether there was any intention on the part of the Government to allow any European Power to obtain possession of Tetuan or of any part of the coast of Morocco in the Mediterranean, with reference to the security of the fortress of Gibraltar?

THE STATE OF NAPLES.

  QUESTION.
  SIR GEORGE BOWYERsaid, that before the noble Lord rose to reply, he wished to ask two questions of great importance. By the capitulation of Gaeta the Swiss troops in the service of the King of Naples were allowed to remain in Naples; but it appeared from the accounts in that day's Times, that this portion of the capitulation had been violated, and Baron Ricasoli had ordered that the Swiss should leave Naples. Remonstrance had been made by the Minister from the Swiss Republic, and he (Sir George Bowyer) was anxious to know the rights of the matter, and whether Her Majesty's Government would exercise their influence to insure justice to the Swiss? Seeing upon the Treasury bench the great champion of Swiss rights, he had no doubt the subject would receive due attention from him, and he hoped the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) who, while out of office had shown such desire to protect the freedom of Switzerland, and to prevent the encroachment of Prance through corrupt transactions between Sardinia and France would, now he was in office, show a like amount of zeal. The other question which he wished to ask related to a matter of still greater importance. He wished to ask whether Her Majesty's Government would exert their influence with Foreign Powers, and especially with Italy, to obtain justice and fair play for the population of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Without going into particulars, he might say that all accounts, public and private, showed that the state of things in that kingdom was most dreadful, bordering
  1858
  upon anarchy, if not anarchy itself. There was not even the ordinary security for life and property which Governments afforded to their subjects. The country was exposed to an armed despotism, and ruled by a cruel repression. It had been said that the Piedmontese had been received as deliverers by the population of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies; but how incorrect that statement was was shown in the correspondence of The Times, which was probably the most accurate of our sources of information. The disbanded army had nothing to do with the state of feeling which prevailed. The people were put down by movable columns, directed against persons who were called brigands, though it was a perfect absurdity to call them anything of the sort. He could produce evidence that these persons were not merely disbanded soldiers, nor in any sense of the word brigands, but the population of the country, who, if they had a chance, were ready to rise as one man to recall their rightful Sovereign, to whom they were still attached. They did not wish their country to be a province of Piedmont. Naples was the fourth city in Europe in importance and population, and that great city did not like to become a provincial town under Turin, and would never submit to such a fate. He had been informed that the Emperor of the French remonstrated against the cruelties committed by the Piedmontese in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Last year, when he called attention to the bloodthirsty proclamation issued by General Pinelli, he was told that Pinelli had been dismissed. He did not believe that that was so, but, however that might be, Pinelli was now in that country with full powers. General Cialdini was in Naples with full military powers, superseding the civil authority altogether. The Government of Naples was one altogether of martial law. General Cialdini was a soldier, and nothing else, and he would stick at nothing necessary to carry out the object he had in view. The people were trampled under foot, and ho wished to know whether the (Her Majesty's) Government would use the influence they undoubtedly possessed to put a stop to this state of things? No doubt the noble Lord would tell him that by a vote of the people—a plebiscite as it was called—Naples was united to the pretended Kingdom of Italy. He was sure, however, that the noble Lord could not attach any importance to this so-called

  1859
  plebiscite, which had been carried out without any freedom of election. He knew of an instance where a person went to give his vote for the recall of Francis II., but was trampled under foot by the Garibaldians, and died of his injuries. There were no voting papers to be got for the recall of Francis II. The process of taking the votes of the people for the annexation to Piedmont was a cruel and wicked mockery, as was abundantly proved by what had subsequently occurred. If the people had really been in favour of annexation martial law would not be necessary, and it was only by martial law that Naples was now governed. If Francis II. had had less moderation and humanity, and had not dreaded the bloodshed which would have followed, there would have been a general uprising throughout the country for his recall. But the people were now kept down by a large military force, and by a rigid and cruel military despotism. They had no chance of asserting their own rights. The rights of the Neapolitan people to self-government, and the nationality and independence of the ancient and noble Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, were as sacred as the rights of Poland or of any other of the nationalities of which so much was talked now-a-days. The people of Naples detested Piedmont—the Piedmontese soldiers could not show themselves, but had to be shut-up in fortresses. The people of the city of Naples Were only kept under by the fear of a bombardment from St. Elmo, which Garibaldi wished to destroy, but which the King of Piedmont, knowing how necessary it would be to him, had preserved. Francis II. left Naples because he did not wish its inhabitants to be exposed to the horrors of war; but the Piedmontese monarch had no such feelings, and the Neapolitans knew that they would be crushed by a bombardment from St. Elmo if they moved. Her Majesty's Government pretended to be great friends of liberty and of nationalties, and he wished to know whether they would take into their consideration the position of this unfortunate people? He did not want from the noble Viscount any party speech, or any commonplaces about Italian unity and Italian nationality. He wanted him to apply himself to the facts, which were undeniable. He wished to hear from him whether he would use his influence to obtain for the people of Naples fair play—deliverance from the tyranny under which
  1860
  they were placed, and the opportunity of deciding for themselves, without the interference of Piedmontese soldiers, whether they would be under the Piedmontese Government or not? He was sorry that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not present. The right hon. Gentleman had written a pamphlet some years ago about Baron Poerio, and other persons, who were imprisoned under the authority of the King of Naples, and he (Sir George Bowyer) wanted the right hon. Gentleman now to write a pamphlet giving an account of the imprisonment of thousands and thousands of persons in Naples, and the execution by military law of hundreds—not men with arms in their hands, but men who were merely considered to be disaffected and reactionaries — that was to say, men who were loyal subjects—even priests, who were loyal to their King. He was afraid, however, that the right hon. Gentleman's sympathies were all on the other side, and that his indignation was all directed against the lawful Sovereign, who had punished those who had attempted to overturn his throne. He hoped that the noble Lord would use all his influence to put a stop to the present state of things in Naples, and to obtain for the people of the Two Sicilies the real liberty of determining for themselves whether they were satisfied to become a province of Piedmont, or whether they would prefer that their own King and their own Royal Family should return to rule over them.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTON:—The hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Darby Griffith) wishes to know what has passed in regard to the disputes between Spain and Morocco as to the occupation by Spain of certain points in the territory of Morocco. The original dispute between Spain and Morocco was a very unfortunate one. It is not for me to enter into the merits of it, but I think more explanation and a clearer understanding might have prevented the war. The result of the war, however, was that the Emperor of Morocco was to pay a certain amount of money to the Spanish Government as compensation for the expenses incurred in that war. This was to be paid by instalments, and the town of Tetuan was to be occupied by the Spanish Government for a certain period until a certain proportion of that indemnity was paid. The Emperor of Morocco, however, was under a mistaken impression as to the amount of treasure which he possessed. He imagined that he had in the Treasury

  1861
  of the State a larger sum than afterwards turned out to be there. That created a difficulty in regard to the payment of the instalments. Moreover, the present Sultan had succeeded to his father during the contest, and his authority was not firmly established in every part of his dominions, there being another brother who had the support of a certain party; and there was not, therefore, entire acquiescence in his succession to the Throne. This, also, created an additional difficulty in the way of a settlement with the Spanish Commissioners. The Moorish people, with a good deal of national feeling and religious enthusiasm, were indignant that money should be sent to the Spanish Government to pay the expenses of the war, and the Government of Morocco was unable to pay the stipulated sums. This gave rise to long negotiation and a protracted occupation of Tetuan by the Spanish forces. Those negotiations are still continuing, and, as far as Her Majesty's Government, by any good offices in Morocco, can assist the settlement of this dispute, I can assure the hon. Member and the House those good offices will be employed. In fact, Mr. Drummond Hay has gone to the seat of Government in Morocco to endeavour to make some arrangement. I have no reason to suppose that the Spanish Government has any intention of keeping a permanent occupation in Tetuan. The occupation is very expensive to the Spanish Government; and I believe that it only holds the place till peace is restored between the two countries. Any apprehensions, therefore, that may be entertained of a permanent occupation of Tetuan are not founded, as far as we are informed, on any real basis. With regard to the questions of the hon. Baronet who has just sat down (Sir George Bowyer), he wishes, first, to know what has been done in reference to certain Swiss troops that formed part of the garrison of Gaeta, and that have now been ordered by General Cialdini to leave Naples. I am rather inclined to believe that the Swiss Government has recalled these troops; but except generally I am not informed of the nature of the transaction. As to the other question of the hon. Baronet, he says the people of Naples are not willing to transfer their allegiance to Victor Emmanuel, and that their country should become part of the Kingdom of Italy. But if they were not willing to become subjects of the King of Italy, they must be a Very extraordinary
  1862
  people; for it is well Mown that the Government of Naples was, with the exception of that of Rome, the worst Government in the world. The Neapolitans must have been the most extraordinary people on the face of the earth if they were unwilling to transfer their allegiance from their former Government to that of Sardinia. But the fact is notoriously the contrary. It is perfectly well known to everybody that when Garibaldi, with six friends, arrived at Naples in a railway carriage to deliver the people from their former Government they were received with acclamation. At that moment there were in Naples 3,000 or 4,000 troops, in the service of the late King; but, instead of assembling at the railway station, and seizing and shooting Garibaldi, these troops quietly acquiesced in the transaction. As far, then, as that goes, the matter turned on the spontaneous feeling and general acclamation of the people. The hon. Baronet says the country is in a very disturbed state; but in doing so he makes two assertions that are rather incompatible with each other. He says the country is governed by martial law, its power, of course, exercised by the Sardinian troops; but he also says these troops are so hated that they dare not show themselves, and that they are obliged to be confined to the fortresses. If that is so the troops cannot exorcise the authority of which the hon. Baronet speaks. [Sir GEORGE BOWYER: I said, except in moveable columns.] Well, if these are moveable columns they are not confined to fortresses and dare show themselves.
  SIR GEORGE BOWYER: What I intended to say was that when these troops were in arms and traversed the country in moveable columns they exercised control over the country; but that individual soldiers dared not show themselves and they were confined to the fortresses.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: I do not wish to raise any discussion on that point. No doubt, there are bodies of troops traversing the country for the purpose of preventing every sort of outrage being committed, and restoring security for life and property. The hon. Baronet says, the people who commit these outrages are not brigands. Well, perhaps they are not brigands in the ordinary sense of the word. Brigands rob and plunder for a subsistence; they take what they want for their own use. They seize travellers and carry them up to the mountains to extort a

  1863
  ransom, sending their prisoners down whole if they get the whole of the money, and piecemeal if they get it in portions. But these men of whom the right hon. Baronet speaks are much worse than brigands; they commit every sort of atrocity, not for money, but as a political vengeance. They are the instruments of the political vengeance of persons who live in safety in the city of Rome. These persons send out these men by hundreds. They are furnished—I will not say by whom—with arms and money in great quantities. Some of their arms were those which some time since were handed over to the Roman Government to be kept in security when a portion of the garrison of Gaeta made their escape and took refuge in the Roman States, when they were disarmed by the French troops. Their arms are sent by parties in the holy city of Rome, to commit the most unholy acts, to disturb public tranquillity, to murder, to torture, to burn people alive, to perpetrate every sort of atrocity. These are the sort of persons the hon. Baronet takes into his tender compassion, whom he is sorry to see put down by these moveable bodies of troops, and in whose behalf he wishes the English Government to exert itself to procure them impunity. I can assure the hon. Baronet, with great satisfaction, that the English Government will do no such thing. We hope that the vigour of Cialdini and Pinelli will succeed in restoring security in the disturbed districts of the Neapolitan territory; we trust that by a vigorous application, where alone these outrages are committed, of these moveable columns the wretches who perpetrate these crimes will receive their proper punishment, in the course of no great length of time; and that the population will be relieved from the misfortunes that have been brought on them from Rome. I have no doubt at all as to the general feeling of the people of the Neapolitan territory. My opinion is diametrically opposite to that of the hon. Baronet. I am convinced that they are fully sensible of the benefits that will accrue to them from forming part of the Kingdom of Italy, governed by a constitutional Government, instead of the iron despotism under which they have so long groaned, and under which their fathers and grandfathers have been so much demoralized.
  MR. SEYMOUR FITZGERALDsaid, the noble Lord had rather avoided than answered the question of the hon. Mem-
  1864
  ber for Devizes. There was a singular contradiction between his statement as to the Spanish dispute with Morocco and the statement of the Foreign Secretary some time since. Lord John Russell distinctly said that he had received from the Spanish Government an official intimation that it was their intention permanently to occupy the fortress of Tetuan. The noble Lord now said the Government had no information that led it to suppose Spain intended such an occupation of Tetuan, or any part of the coast. But not only was Spain occupying the place; it had been officially announced that it intended to convert it into a fortress of the first class, and to occupy the whole of the country adjoining, so as to make the Spanish possessions extend from Ceuta to Tetuan. Further, they intended to convert Tetuan into a fortress capable of containing a garrison of 15,000 men. He must press upon the Government the necessity of not allowing any such occupation. The Duke of Wellington had pointed out the importance of continuing this coast in the hands of the native Powers, and the noble Lord himself had once said that no permanent occupation of these points by Spain could be permitted. This was no new design on the part of the Spanish Government; they had persistently pursued it for many years; and it might be ascribed to the former opposition of the noble Lord that it had not been carried into effect sooner. The Moorish debt never could be paid; and the pretence, on the part of the Spanish Government who was in debt to all the world, and never paid even when they had the power, was a piece of unparalleled impudence and assurance. Remembering that the noble Lord had himself charged the Spanish Government with breach of faith in regard to their obligations with foreign Powers, it was surprising that he should permit the Spanish Government to shelter itself in their occupation of this territory under the plea that the Government of Morocco had not fulfilled the stipulations of the treaty. The noble Lord said he regarded this as a temporary occupation; whereas he (Mr. S. FitzGerald) was convinced that this was the first step in the occupation of the whole coast from Tetuan to Ceuta, and from Ceuta to Tangier. Any English Government, however, that would permit such an occupation of the African coast by the Spanish Government would neglect, in the highest degree, the interests of England.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTONwished to ex-

  1865
  plain that the difference between his statement and that of his noble Friend (Earl Russell) might be explained by what he was about to state. There had been a great misunderstanding between the Governments of Spain and Morocco. At one time the Emperor of Morocco was supposed to have said that he would not fulfil his engagements, and that he would not pay a shilling more. The Spanish Government then said, "We will take permanent possession of Tetuan." He was, however, in hopes that the Emperor of Morocco would fulfil his engagements, and he could not doubt that under these circumstances the Spanish Government would fulfil theirs and evacuate Tetuan.
  MR. SEYMOUR FITZGEEALDsaid, it was only a week since the authoritative announcement was made in the Spanish Gazette.

CONVOCATION AND THE CANONS.

  QUESTION.
  MR. DANBY SEYMOURwished to! ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is true that the Convocation of York have postponed discussing the repeal of the 29th Canon of 1603 until next November: if they have done so, whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to recommend that the Royal Assent be given to the Canon which has been recently passed by the Convocation of Canterbury, repealing the 29th Canon, and enacting another Canon in its place: and, whether the Canon law, as contained in the 29th Canon of 1603, respecting sponsors, is not part of the statute law, it having been incorporated in the English and Irish Acts of Uniformity of Charles the Second; and if so, whether the Convention of the Irish Province, as part of the United Church of England and Ireland, have, in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Acts of Union, been consulted respecting the proposed alteration in the law respecting sponsors?
  SIR GEOEGE GREYsaid, the Government had no information which enabled him to answer the first question of the hon. Member. It was possible the Convocation of York had postponed the consideration of the canon. No application had been made for the Royal Assent to the canon passed by the Convocation of Canterbury, and the application had probably been postponed until the matter had been
  1866
  considered by the Convocation of both provinces. In answer to the third question, he might state that an opinion had been taken, not by the Government, but by private persons, as to the effect of the statute law. The opinion was that it was doubtful whether the Royal Assent would give validity to the proceedings of Convocation without the sanction of Parliament.

THE STATE OF ITALY.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, he wished to express his thanks to the noble Lord at the head of the Government for the explanation he had given with respect to the position of affairs in Italy. The fact was, he (Mr. Newdegate) believed, that Italy was at the present moment the victim of disturbances created by the Jesuit party in Rome, and that the state of things in that country was only a parallel to that which they had attempted to produce in this, and in every country where they had lost power. A most remarkable document was in existence, showing what was the spirit by which they were animated at Naples. In the year 1854, if he remembered the date correctly, a difference arose between the Minister of the late King of Naples and the Provincial of the Jesuits. The Minister conceived that the Jesuits were maintaining their power over that Sovereign in an offensive manner, and he called the Provincial of the Order to account for that assumption of power. In the apology which that ecclesiastic then made he stated that he and the whole body with which he was connected were devoted to the system of absolute monarchy; he offered to produce the signature of every Jesuit in Naples to attest the fact that they were bound by their constitution to promote that system of government; and he tendered to the King the allegiance of the Order, because that Sovereign governed Naples and Sicily upon the system of absolutism. When, therefore, it was pretended in that House, or elsewhere, that these disturbances in Sicily and in Naples were created for the purpose of restoring liberty to those countries in any form, he (Mr. Newdegate) begged to state the fact he had referred to as a proof that the instigators of those movements which had been denounced by all Europe were men who were firmly devoted to the promotion of absolute government, and that if they should unhappily succeed in overturning the present state of things in Italy,

  1867
  it must be for the purpose of re-establishing a despotism as grinding as that from which the Italians had just escaped. Recent events in Mexico showed that that party were as much attached to absolute power in the hands of a President as in those of a King, and that they could use it with not less frightful cruelty. The first exertions of Garibaldi had been directed against the domination of the creature of the priests in Mexico, Santa Anna, and at this moment, when this party had lost power, the most grievous outrages were committed against British subjects, as well as against the natives in that country. When, therefore, the advocates of the Jesuit party represented them as the friends of toleration and of freedom he trusted that no one would be so blind as not to see that this was a mere pretence, and that the re-establishment of despotism could be the only result of the triumph of a party which had already been guilty of every enormity that could outrage humanity. Such was the history of that Order, and he sincerely hoped that the future liberties of Italy would be established and guarded by stringent measures which were absolutely necessary in order to free the country from these political marauders before it could enjoy either peace or freedom.

STRIKE IN THE BUILDING TRADES.

  OBSEBVATIONS.
  MR. AYRTONrose to call the attention of the Secretary of State for War to a Petition which he had to present on a subject that had excited great interest throughout the country. The petition emanated from 6,000 working men, who complained of the employment of Sappers and Miners in building the new barracks at Chelsea. The circumstances stated in the petition were these:—Some time ago a builder named Higgs had taken a contract from the Government for the construction of these barracks. After he had made that contract he determined to alter his mode of paying his workmen, and to pay them in future by the hour. His men, thereupon, declined to continue in his employ. He believed that out of about 400 masters in the Metropolis only about twenty-five had adopted this new and as the men believed most objectionable and demoralizing mode of paying their workmen. The consequence was that the men refused to work upon these terms, and the contractor could not get persons to carry
  1868
  on the building. Instead of calling upon Mr. Higgs to fulfil his contract, and if he failed to do so giving the work to other contractors, the Government had, it appeared, sent for a body of Sappers and Miners, and let them to the contractor. This proceeding had astonished the working people, and the only justification he had heard of it was that the work was to be done for the army, and it was necessary that it should be completed at as early a period as possible. That would be a good reason for rescinding the present contract, and putting a new one in the hands of some person who, by the proper employment of men, might command any amount of labour, but it was no justification for the Government letting out to a private contractor the services of soldiers in the army. It was stated in the petition that the workpeople considered it a grievance that they should be taxed in the first instance to raise an army, and then that that army should be let out in order to prevent them settling among themselves in what manner and under what conditions they should be employed. The petitioners, therefore, prayed that the House would take some steps to put an end to this proceeding. He had no doubt that the course taken by the War Office had been inadvertently adopted without considering its serious consequences. If, whenever a dispute arose between masters and workmen, the Government assumed such an attitude, though they might obtain the cheers of the employers of labour who generally sat in that House, yet just in the same proportion they must alienate from themselves personally the good feeling of the great body of the English workpeople. He trusted that the Secretary of State would be able to announce that the Government would withdraw from the position which they had inadvertently taken up, and that they would at an early day put an end to the employment of these soldiers. He was told that, notwithstanding any topics in dispute between the workmen and the employers, the workmen took a just view of their position, and gave an assurance that they desired to make no difference with respect to works under existing contract; but these masters, with an arrogance which they had better have avoided, insisted on introducing a new system, and the workmen in self-defence withdrew from employment. It was a mistake to say that they "struck" in the technical sense of the

  1869
  term, for it was, in truth, a "lock out" on the part of the masters, because they chose to change the conditions of employment.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that a definite Vote was taken in the present year for the construction of barracks at Chelsea, and a contract was entered into for the building. A difference arose between the contractor and his workpeople, and a number of the latter were discharged. Without going into the causes of the difference, he might state that the result was that the contractor was unable to continue the work with the same number of people as had been previously employed. Under these circumstances the contractor applied some time ago to the War Department for the assistance of the Sappers and Miners, and a company was furnished on the arrangement that the contractor should pay for their services according to the plan which had been previously pursued in such cases. The single object of the War Office in so doing was to accelerate the work, as its speedy completion was of importance to the army and the Government, and it was not at all their wish to interfere in any dispute between an employer and his men, though incidentally it might have had that effect. It certainly was not in contemplation of the Secretary of State that any such feeling as had been adverted to should be produced; and as it was represented to him in strong terms that the workmen considered this as an interference on the part of the Government in the struggle now going on between a portion of the masters in the building trade and their workpeople, and as undoubtedly it must always be a great object that the Government should hold a perfectly neutral position in a matter of that kind, he had caused notice to be given that from the 1st of September this assistance was to be discontinued.
  SIR MORTON PETO, as "an employer of labour sitting in that House," said, that no far from the masters with whom he was acquainted having any desire to oppress their workmen, he believed that they would, by the arrangement now being carried out, largely benefit the workpeople. In reference to the subject of the petition, he was very glad, indeed, to hear that the right hon. Baronet had intimated his intention that the employment of soldiers in connection with public works should entirely cease under the circumstances. He could only say that the employers would deprecate, as strongly as possible, the in-
  1870
  terference of Government in any way in this matter. They felt that it was simply an affair between the workmen and themselves, and that the course of conduct which they had adopted would enable the workpeople to continue on more beneficial terms their engagements. The matter being left between the masters and the men, he was quite sure that the issue would be the universal adoption of payment by the hour, as the fairest mode for both. He fully concurred in the prayer of the petition; and he had another to present with the same object; and though he was sure that what the Government did they did for the best, yet he conceived it was an inadvertence, and was glad it not to be persisted in.
  Motion agreed to.
  House at its rising to adjourn till Monday next.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

  RESOLUTIONS.
  MR. W. EWARTthen moved the following Resolutions:—
  "1. That, as soon as the Estimates are ready, one night in each week be given to their consideration; Motions on going into Committee of Supply being on that day not permitted, except by express permission of the House.
  "2. That on other nights, when Supply is an Order of the Day, the speeches of Members who bring forward Motions on going into Committee of Supply be restricted to the limits of a quarter of an hour.
  "3. That when a Bill is referred to a Select Committee the Report of such Committee shall be received, and the Bill stand for further consideration, without the intervention of a Committee of the whole House, unless the House shall order the Bill to be Re-committed.
  "4. That such Committees, and all Select Committees, consist of not more than five (or seven) Members, named by the Committee of Selection, who shall choose them for their knowledge of the subject to be submitted to their consideration, and ascertain that they will be able to attend regularly in such Committee.
  "5. That no opposed business be proceeded in after the hour of one o'clock in the morning."
  The hon. Member said that he had a strong opinion that these Resolutions, if adopted, would be found to be productive of considerable advantage in enabling the House to dispose of the business which came before it, adding, with reference to the last of them, that although the noble Lord at the head of the Government, with a vigour which was quite unexampled, might be able to sit out the discussion which took place night after night until two or three o'clock in the morning, yet

  1871
  the great majority of hon. Members were unable to do so without suffering so much as to look rather like spectres of themselves than living realities. He should not, he further observed, press his Motion on the present occasion if any opposition were offered; but it would, he hoped, be taken into consideration by hon. Members during the recess, and acceded to, if deemed to be calculated to effect the object which he had in view, next Session.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That, so soon as the Estimates are ready, one night in each week be given to their consideration; Motions on going into Committee of Supply being, on that day, not permitted, except by express permission of the House."
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he was not surprised that his hon. Friend did not ask the House to express an opinion on these important Resolutions at present, for it was quite clear it would not be right, in the absence of the great majority of hon. Members, to make such alterations as the hon. Gentleman proposed, particularly when it was borne in mind that the subject with which he dealt was one with reference to which the House had come to a decision already in the course of the present Session. He might, however, observe with respect to the First Resolution, that he thought it was one which very well deserved the attention of the House. If the recommendation of the Committee on Public Business, to the effect that Supply might be set down for Tuesdays, had not been acceded to, the termination of the Session would not, he believed, be so near at hand as it now was; and if, in addition, the suggestion of his hon. Friend, that Supply should be fixed for one day in each week were adopted, and a reasonable certainly afforded that it would come on in due course without any preliminary discussion, increased facilities in the despatch of public business would in all probability be found to be the result. The House would, therefore, he hoped, at the beginning of next Session see reason to agree to the first Resolution, the adoption of which would not, he thought, be found to infringe unduly on the rights of private Members. So far as the second Resolution was concerned, he would simply say that, though he thought it would hardly be advisable to adopt such a rule, he wished hon. Members might be induced to act on the advice which it contained. With respect to the appointment of Committees, hon. Members must feel that there was an
  1872
  important distinction between private and public Bills, and, however desirable it might be to limit the number of Members in the case of Select Committees appointed to inquire into the former, it was not so evident that good would result from applying the same principles to the latter. Any absolute rule on that subject had, he thought, better be avoided. The same might be said with respect to not bringing an any opposed business after one o'clock. As a general rule such was not done, but towards the close of the Session it became of great consequence sometimes to be enabled to do so after that hour. If the House adopted the suggestion of his hon. Friend it would lead to the unavoidable lengthening of the Session; and though hon. Members, and especially the right hon. Gentleman who occupied the Chair, might occasionally feel the inconvenience of sitting so many hours at a stretch, he was sure they would prefer doing so to having the length of the Session increased by three or four weeks in consequence of rising earlier.
  MR. PAULLsaid, that at one time he thought some restriction might advantageously be put upon the liberty of Members to bring forward Motions on going into Committee of Supply, but after consultation with the noble Lord at the head of the Government, and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bucks, he had seen reason to change his opinion. The views of the noble Lord and the right hon. Gentleman were identical, and might be expressed as follows:—Members of the House of Commons were not elected for the sole purpose of passing Bills and voting money, but to express the wants and wishes of the people, and to provide remedies for acknowledged grievances. Unless it were competent to every Member of that House to state what was rising in the public mind, and to demand immediate redress, the probability was that discontent would grow and spread out of doors until it reached a height dangerous to the peace of the country. That very afternoon the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) had brought forward a grievance only lately known, and had obtained a prompt and satisfactory answer from the Secretary for War. He did not see how they could pretend to limit the extent of speeches; nor did he see what good could arise from superseding the reference of Bills to Committees of the Whole House. He could not ap-

  1873
  prove the Resolutions of the hon. Member I for Dumfries.
  MR. BASSsaid, that almost everybody bad some reason to complain of the unbusiness-like mode in which the House conducted its affairs. He congratulated the hon. Member for Dumfries, whose Resolutions were exceedingly opportune, upon having obtained to some extent the acquiescence of so high an authority as the Home Secretary, and expressed the hope that early next Session the House might be induced to adopt the suggestion of the right hon. Baronet with respect to the first Resolution. He trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would soon come to see the advantage of curtailing the speeches of Members. Improvement in that respect was not impossible. He believed, indeed, that if Members took one-tenth part as much labour to be concise as they did to be diffuse the grievance would be removed at once; but he was afraid that if they trusted to Members altogether they would be disappointed.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  House adjourned at Five o'clock, till Monday next,