Lords Sitting of 28 July 1831

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Marquis of SLIGO, from Gentry, Merchants, and Inhabitants of Sheffield, in favour of the Manchester Rail Road Bill. By the Duke of NORFOLK, from Roman Catholic Inhabitants of Kilshannick, for an alteration of the Grant for Education (Ireland). By Viscount GODERICH, from 15,000 Workmen and Labourers, in several Parishes in Stafford; and by the Marquis of BUTE, from Land Owners, Tradesmen, and Inhabitants of Merthyr Tydvil, against the Truck System. By the Earl of GLASGOW, from the Provincial Synod of Caithness and Sutherland, for the abolition of Slavery.

BUILDING CHURCHES.
The Bishop of London moved the Committal of the Church Building Acts Amendment Bill, and the House resolved itself into the Committee accordingly.
When the Committee came to the discussion of the Clause by which private persons were allowed to erect and endow new churches in places where 300 inhabitants of the parish were at a distance of more than two miles from the parish church,
Lord Kenyan Lord Kenyan moved, that for two miles, four miles from any existing church or chapel, should be substituted,
The Bishop of London thought, that the Amendment would be unfavourable to the interests of the Church, and refused to agree to it. If the noble Baron persisted in his Amendment, he must divide the Committee on it.
The Committee divided on the Amendment: Contents 7; Not Contents 18—Majority against the Amendment 11.
Some other Amendments were agreed to, and the House resumed.

PAPERS RELATIVE TO THE BELGIC NEGOTIATIONS.
Earl Greyinformed their Lordships, that he had now in his hands the two Papers relative to the Belgic Negotiations, which, as he had stated the other night, he thought might now be presented to their Lordships. These papers were the Protocol agreed to by the four Powers relative to a new arrangement in regard to the fortresses on the Belgic frontiers; and the letter addressed to Prince Talleyrand, as representative of the French Government, communicating the purport of that Protocol. It was not his intention to found any motion on those Papers, and he, therefore, had to move, merely in the usual course, that they lie on the Table.
The Marquis of Londonderry begged leave to ask the noble Earl, whether these were all the papers which he meant at
462
present to lay on the Table, on the subject of these negotiations? It appeared from partial publications of documents in those sources of information to which all had access—he meant the newspapers—that there were other most important papers in existence relative to the late negotiations for the settlement, of Belgium—papers which developed the most extraordinary opinions put forth and acted on by his Majesty's present Ministers, and which, since the recent declaration of the king of Holland, had become of peculiar importance. It was highly expedient that their Lordships should, as speedily as possible, have all these documents before them, that they might be enabled to form a correct judgment upon them without delay. He asked whether our old and most faithful ally had not been sacrificed by Ministers in the recent proceedings relative to Belgium? His own opinion was, that it would appear that the King of Holland had been sacrificed—had been basely and treacherously treated by his Majesty's present Ministers. He had been taunted with being disorderly when, on a former occasion, he had asked his Majesty's Ministers whether the King of Holland had been admitted as a party to the negotiations on the subject of Belgium; but who could say now, after seeing the recent declaration of the king of Holland, relative to the eighteen Articles which had been agreed upon at the Conferences, that he had been disorderly in asking that question? It was now clear, that he was not out of order. He had asked whether the king of Holland had been apprised of these eighteen Articles, and had acceded to them, before the departure of Prince Leopold for Belgium? He had wished to know whether this Protocol had been communicated to the king of Holland by the Baron Wessenberg, on occasion of his most extraordinary mission to that Power. He had wished to know whether the king of Holland was apprised of the changes that were to be made with respect to the fortresses, the erection and maintenance of which had been solemnly settled by the Treaties of 1814–15? He called upon the noble Earl, then, to state to their Lordships whether the Protocol of the 17th of April, relative to the fortresses, had been communicated to Holland—had it been communicated to the Belgic Commissioners, or had it ever been communicated to those whom it most concerned,

463
until the information had been forced from, his Majesty's Ministers by the disclosure made in the Speech of the King of the French, that the fortresses which had been constructed to menace France, were to be demolished? His Majesty's Ministers had communicated the Protocol to the king of the French, who had nothing to do with the matter, and yet he was the first to promulgate to France and to Europe, as a great and mighty feat, accomplished by the French government, that these fortresses were to be demolished, and the great object contemplated in erecting them, defeated at one blow. He hoped, that it was not intended now to transfer to France that power in the Tagus and the Scheldt, that influence with Portugal and Holland, which had formerly belonged to the British Government. He hoped, it was not now intended to transfer our ancient alliance with these Powers to France, with its present impotent and unstable government, which could not reasonably be expected to last long. He thought his Majesty's Ministers ought to be called upon speedily to produce the whole of the papers relative to these negotiations, and that a time should be fixed for the discussion of the subject, especially after the publication of the manifesto of our most honourable, honest, faithful and ancient ally, the king of Holland, who complained of breaches of faith, and of a want of common honesty in others. He wished to know, whether the Ministers proposed to produce more of these papers, and the day when they intended to bring the whole subject under discussion; and he repeated, that he wished particularly to know, whether the Protocol of April 17th, had been communicated to the king of Holland, on occasion of the mission of the Baron Wessenberg to his Majesty?
Earl Grey: Of all the questions of the noble Marquis, the only one which I feel myself at liberty to answer, is the first. The noble Marquis has asked me whether it is my intention immediately to lay any more papers, relative to the Belgic negotiations, on the Table? My answer is, that I know of no commands from his Majesty to lay any more papers on that subject on the Table at present; and I will say nothing more on the matter until the proper time comes, unless the noble Marquis, or some other of your Lordships, should think proper to make a motion on the subject.
The Marquis of Londonderry: The noble Earl seems to think it very dignified and statesmanlike, thus coolly to decline answering my questions. I have put questions home to him on points of the highest importance, and I call upon him to answer them if he can.

QUEEN'S DOWER.
Earl Grey, according to notice, moved the second reading of the Bill for making a provision for her Majesty the Queen, suited to her Royal dignity, in case of her surviving his Majesty. This provision had been framed on the model of that which had been made for the late Queen Charlotte, after the demise of his Majesty. Somerset House had at first been selected for the residence of Queen Charlotte, which mansion had been afterwards changed for Buckingham House. For the residence of her present Majesty, Marlborough House had been selected in town, and Bushy Park in the country. He was not aware that there was any objection in any quarter to the Bill. It had been passed unanimously by the other House, and he hoped, that the same feeling which had prevailed there, would be evinced towards her Majesty here. He was sure that their Lordships would feel the same gratitude to her Majesty for her most excellent and exemplary conduct, and would manifest the same acknowledgment of her virtues and many amiable qualities, and the same disposition to provide, on a liberal scale, for her accommodation and comfort, as had been displayed by the House of Commons; and that on this subject both Parliament and nation would be unanimous. Bill read a second time.

TRUCK SYSTEM.
The House, on the Motion of Lord Wharncliffe, resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill prohibiting payment of Labourers' Wages in Goods.
Lord Wynfordexpressed a decided opinion, that the Bill would not attain the objects which the noble Mover had in view. The truck-system had gone on for years, was going on at the present moment, and was likely to continue for years to come—unless, indeed, recourse was had to some stronger measure, inflicting heavier penalties than the present Bill. He would recommend, that the subject should be referred to a Select Committee, which might devise such a measure. Though labourers might be paid in money, there would still

465
remain a tacit understanding that the money should be spent in the shop of the manufacturer, or in that in which he was interested. The chief objection he had to the present Bill was, that it went to repeal the 19th of George the 3rd, without introducing any other provision in its stead. That bill, which was intended to protect the lace-manufacturers, was much stronger than the present measure; that class, above all others, stood, he believed, the most in need of protection. The poor lace-manufacturers had been actually ground into dust before the bill passed. There was also another branch of manufacture, in which a large proportion of the poor, in a very extensive district of England—he meant the making of shirt-buttons, which was protected by the Act of George 3rd, and which would be left without protection by this Bill. The persons employed in that manufacture were not the servants of manufacturers, and therefore could not claim the protection of the Bill, though no people stood more in need of it. As to the other clauses of the Bill, he had no objection to them; but of this he felt assured, that let the House enact what penalties they might, the master manufacturers would still continue to evade them. He concluded by moving, that those words in the Bill which went to repeal the 19th of George 3rd, be omitted.
Lord Wharncliffedid not mean to repeal the 19th of George 3rd without substituting an equal protection for it, and if the noble Lord thought that any words should be added to that part of the Bill which went to provide that protection, he should be willing to insert them. He could not, however, agree to omitting the repeal of that Act, because he wished to make the Bill general, and the law uniform. He admitted, that the Bill was not perfect in all its parts, nor fully sufficient to accomplish the object which they had in view; but this he believed would be acknowledged on all hands, that it was the only real attempt to put a stop to the system, of the mischiefs of which every noble Lord, who had from time to time spoken on the subject, loudly complained. There was no legislative enactment which could prevent manufacturers from keeping a shop, or being directly interested in a shop; but this, at least, he was enabled to say, that his Bill went as far as legislation could go, by enacting, that no master keeping a shop, or directly interested in
466
one, could recover debts from any of their workmen.
Lord Wynfordonly wished to protect the thread-lace makers, and if that were accomplished, he had no objection to the Bill.
The House resumed.
The Payment of Wages in Money Bill, also went through a Committee.