Sitting of 6 December 1830

MINUTES.
Returns ordered. On the Motion of Mr. BELL, the quantity of Coals exported within the last year, and the amount of Duty paid thereon, distinguishing the Exports made in Foreign, from those made to British Ships:—On the Motion of Sir R. PEEL, the money levied for Poor, County, and other Rates, according to papers prepared with great care and ingenuity by Mr. Rickman: —On the Motion of Mr. S. RICE, of the number of persons employed under the Commissioners of public Records, and the charges incurred for publishing them:—On the Motion of Colonel SIBTHORPE, the number of Convictions for Adulterating Beer, in England and Wales, since the year 1827; and of the Informations ordered by the Board of Excise on the same subject within the same period:—On the Motion of Mr. RUTHVEN, of the number of Summonses and Decrees issued by the Court of Conscience (Dublin), during the last three years:—On the Motion of Mr. WARBURTON, of the number of Commitments for Capital Crimes in Middlesex, from May 1827, to April 1830.
Petitions presented. For the abolition of Negro Slavery, by Sir E. KNATCHBULL, from Footscray, Ashford, and Woolwich:—By Sir C. LEMON, from Meneage, Cornwall:— By Mr. LITTLETON, from seven places in the County of Salop:—By Mr. J. BROWN, from Newbridge and West-port:—By Mr. BROWS LOW, from Boyle and another Town in Iretand:—By Mr. BELL, from Holy well, Walls-end, and other places:—By Mr. LOCH, from Kirkwall and Stromness:—By Mr. CALLAGHAN, from the City of Cork:—By Mr. MUNDY, from three places in Derbyshire: —By Sir R. B. PHILIPPS, from the Parish of King's Castle, and four other places:—By Mr. H. DRUMMOND, from the Borough and Corporation of Stirling:—By Mr. ADEANE, from a place in the County of Cambridge:— By Mr. OWEN, from Ford, and other places in Pembrokeshire:—By Mr. BETHELL, from Rothwell:—By Mr. DENISON, from Dorking. By Mr. J. BROWNE, from the Parishes of Kilmena, Kilcoleman, Kilgeeva, for an equal distribution of the Funds destined to promote Education in Ireland; from Kilbride, for amendment of the Grand Jury Laws; and from Westport, for a continuation of Bounties on curing Fish. By Mr. H. DAVIS, from the Parishes of St. James, St. Mary, St. Thomas, and St. Peter, Bristol, praying for the Repeal of the House and Window Tax. For the Repeal of the Metropolis Police Act, by Mr. DENISON, from St. Giles', Camberwell:—By Mr. C. CALVERT, from St. George the Martyr, Southwark. By Mr. WIGRAM, from Wexford, for the Repeal of the Sugar Duties. By Mr. HODGES, from the Owners and Occupiers of Land in the County of Kent, and from certain Inhabitants of Appledore, Kent, complaining of Distress, and calling on the House to investigate the present extravagant system of Tithes. By Lord KILLEEN, from Dunsaney and other places in Ireland, praying for the Repeal of the Subletting and Vestry Acts; and from Nun's Island, in the County of Galway, praying for the extension of the Elective Franchise. By Mr. DALRYMPLE, from Haddington, for Burgh Reform.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.
Mr. Brownlowpresented a Petition from the Town of Armagh, praying for Parliamentary Reform. He stated, that the persons who had signed the petition constituted the most respectable and intelligent portion of the inhabitants of that town, and the conduct of the meeting, at which the petition was agreed to, was most rational and moderate. The petitioners, amongst other allegations, complained that, under the present mode of election, those who possess the right of suffrage are compelled to vote at the will of their landlords, or other powerful persons, for the candidate of whom they do not approve; and they believed that the independence of voters might be effectually maintained if the vote were taken by ballot. He thought it right to mention that the petitioners had requested the members for the county of Armagh to transfer the petition to the hon. member for Middlesex (Mr. Hume) if they themselves could not support its prayer. Now, for his part, he (Mr. Brownlow) could not be induced to make up his mind, 'on the spur of the moment' for the gratification of presenting any petition; and, therefore, if his mind had not already been made up on the subject of that petition, he would have declined to present it. But as he had considered the matter, and entirely concurred in the statements of the petitioners respecting the necessity of the ballot, he found no difficulty in presenting and supporting their petition. He was anxious that every man who had the right to vote should be enabled to use that right in accordance with his conscience.
Mr. Cresset Pelhamsupported the Petition. He was convinced that the representation throughout was corrupt, and he hoped to see that House entirely reformed.
Lord Acheson Lord Acheson, was fully aware how unacceptable any discussion upon the subject of a petition was to that House, but, circumstanced as he was with regard to the petition which had just been presented by his hon. friend and colleague, he trusted that he might be permitted to say a few words upon it. The meeting at which that petition originated, came to a resolution, that it should be intrusted to the Members for the county, provided they would give it their support, otherwise that it should be sent to the hon. member for Middlesex (Mr. Hume). His hon. friend and colleague consented to support it; he, on the contrary, declined doing so, and he felt it his duty—

769
a duty he owed to those who sent him there—not to let this petition pass without stating his reasons for dissenting from it. It was not his intention to enter at all upon the general subject of reform, but this much he must say, that the abuses which had crept into the representative system of this country were so numerous, and his conviction of the necessity of their speedy removal was so firm, that he had no hesitation in avowing himself a decided friend of reform. He looked to the present Government to do much in this respect, the country expected it. of them; and he, for one, should give his most cordial support to any measure they might bring forward tending to reform the Parliament, so far as he could do so without compromising the spirit and integrity of the Constitution. Among all these abuses, he knew not one which it would be found more difficult to remove, nor one which called more loudly for correction, than the undue influence at present exercised over the votes of electors. No man was more anxious than he was, to see freedom of election existing in substance and reality, —not, as now, a mere empty name. But how was that to be effected? Undue influence might be gradually diminished; the evil might, to a certain extent, be remedied, but how it was to be totally eradicated he knew not. He was told, indeed, that to vote by ballot would effect all this; for that it would establish secrecy and security for the voter. In considering this subject, his first inquiry naturally was, how that could be proved? He must confess, that he had not succeeded in this inquiry at all to his satisfaction. The assertion was every where made, arguments were founded upon it, but he saw nothing to satisfy him that the assertion itself was well founded. The voter might conceal the actual fact of his vote at the time of delivering it, but of what avail was this secrecy, unless it was to be followed by security afterwards; for he could hardly call that a state of security in which a man lives, as it were, by a perpetual falsehood, and in continual fear, lest by a breach of confidence in some friend, to whom in an unguarded moment he may have disclosed the truth, or by some other chance, the whole should come to the ear of the landlord, and his total ruin should ensue. He did not wish to enlarge upon the subject of security. He owned that a speech made last Session by an hon.
770
and learned Member, now a noble Lord, holding a high and important situation elsewhere, was to him very satisfactory in proving the extreme improbability of the existence of that security. The landlords would use every endeavour to obtain the promises of the votes of their tenants for themselves or their friends, and if disappointed in the result, after having received these promises, that they would make every exertion to discover the defaulters he had not the slightest doubt; and as he conceived it to be more difficult for a man to adhere continually to a falsehood than to avoid, by some chance or other, the letting out the truth, he had little doubt of their general success. At all events, the system of chicanery, trick, and perjury, and the total destruction of all confidence between landlord and tenant which would arise from this measure, were, in his opinion, serious objections to its introduction. In addition to this, bribery would still exist. Though it might no longer be worth a man's while to bribe individually, corruption would still have its effect when applied collectively. It would be easy to say to a number of voters, "If I succeed, or my friend, (whichever it might happen to be), such a sum of money shall be distributed among you." Those who would take a bribe now would do so then, and the ballot would fail to put a stop to the influence of money. In corroboration of this, he must beg leave to state to the House a fact, which had come to his knowledge within the last few days, and which he considered to be of the greatest importance; it was the opinion of a very high American authority now in this country, asserting, that not only had vote by ballot failed in the United States to counteract corrupt and authoritative influence, but that such corruption and such influence still existed, and were frequently and effectually exerted; and that, with regard to secresy, it had by no means been established by this system of voting. That high republican authority ought to have weight with those who advocated this principle upon popular grounds. He believed that he was speaking before some Gentlemen, decided friends of vote by ballot, who were acquainted with those opinions, and also with the quarter from whence they sprung. He felt that he had said enough to authorize him to dissent from the petition now before the House. He should not now trouble the House by

771
offering his opinion as to the probable effects of this measure in Ireland. Suffice it to say, that in addition to the general objections he had mentioned,—objections which would apply to either country— there were other and most important objections to this measure, which would more particularly apply to Ireland, and which he should take another opportunity of stating to the House. He should only add, that as a warm friend of reform, he was sorry to be obliged to dissent from the prayer of the petition. Though he differed from his hon. friend and colleague as to the remedy, no man agreed with him more fully than he did as to the existence of the disease, nor could be more anxious than he was to see it removed. His opinions on this subject had not been hastily formed; still they were those of a young man, and he trusted that, whenever he was proved to be in the wrong, he should have the candour to come forward and acknowledge his error. At all events, he should always feel it his duty to turn his attention to any measure which might have freedom of election for its object; and most gratified should he be if he met with a plan which should hold out a reasonable probability of success.
Mr. O'Connellhad been solicited to support the petition. There were few boroughs in which the franchise was limited in a manner more grievous and unconstitutional than in the town of Armagh. The right of voting was possessed by only twelve inhabitants, and they held offices in the Corporation, to which they were appointed by an ecclesiastical dignitary. He complimented the noble Lord (Acheson) for his talents, and for the candour with which he had stated his opinions. In answer to the noble Lord's objection, that the ballot, without some more effectual security, would not promote the independence of the vote, he (Mr. O'Connell) must say, that, if so, it would at all events not make matters worse than they are. In fact, allowing the utmost force to the noble Lord's objection, the ballot could not fail to do some good. If it could not effect the concealment of all the votes, it could not fail to conceal a great number. Secresy would be secured, at least for those voters who stood in need of it. As to what had been said respecting the inefficacy of the ballot in America, it should be borne in mind that there can be no very extensive corruption of voters in that country, for
772
the share which any man can possibly obtain of public plunder by a seat in Congress, is too little to induce him to lay out a sum of money for the chance of it. The noble Lord might have found in a neighbouring country an illustration of the efficiency of the ballot. He was fully convinced that France owed to the ballot the rejection of the fatal Ordinances. He believed, that the protection which the electors of France found in the ballot had secured the liberty of Europe; and he believed, that to the same cause the people of England owed the prospect of reform which was now held out to them. He was much gratified to hear the noble Lord express himself in favour of reform; and he had no doubt, that when that young nobleman should apply his reason to the consideration of the whole subject, the reformers would receive his powerful support in their efforts to obtain universal suffrage with the protection of the ballot.
Sir H. Bunburysupported the petition, and expressed his hope that Gentlemen who had frequently advocated the cause of reform and retrenchment in that House, and who now had the power of promoting it by their exertions in the other House, and by the influence of the Government, would set a noble example by the surrender of their own patronage. He expressed himself favourable to the vote by ballot, and declared that it was necessary for the national security that measures should be taken as speedily as possible to reform the Parliament. He also expressed his confidence in the Ministry, but he was firmly persuaded that no Ministry could remain in office who did not pluck up corruption by the roots.
Petition to lie on the Table.

REPEAL OF THE UNION.
Lord Brabazonpresented Petitions from the inhabitants of Bray, in the county of Wicklow; of Grange Gorman, in the county of Dublin; and of other places in Ireland; and from the Carpet Weavers of the City of Dublin, praying for a Repeal of the Act of Union of Great Britain and Ireland. The noble Lord could not support the prayer of the petitioners. He was convinced that the measure which they desired would, if carried into effect, involve Ireland in civil commotions and in bloodshed. Perhaps some partial benefit might be derived to the City of Dublin from being again the seat

773
of the Irish Legislature; but much as he desired to promote the welfare of that City, with which his interests were closely connected, he could not do so at the sacrifice of the national welfare. He expressed his regret that the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Mr. O'Connell), whose exertions had already done so much good for Ireland, should exert his great talents and his powerful influence in the pursuit of an object so chimerical, or, if attainable, so pernicious, as the Repeal of the Union.
Mr. O'Ferrallpresented a similar Petition from the inhabitants of Naas, in the County of Kildare, also complaining of extreme distress, which the petitioners attributed chiefly to the consequences of that Act. The hon. Gentleman could not support the petition, which, however, he had thought it his duty to present. The petitioners thought that a repeal of the Union, would produce a Reform of Parliament, and an amendment of the tithe system; but he hoped that these objects would be effected without the repeal of the Union, and he had great confidence that the present Ministry would do much for the country.
Mr. O'Connell Mr. O'Connell, at the request of the petitioners, supported their prayer. He stated that there were in that town, amongst a population of 4,000, more than 1,200 persons depending wholly on casual charity for their support. He concurred in the statement of the petitioners, that the Union was the principal cause of their distress. That measure had greatly increased the evils of absenteeism, to which, during the existence of the Irish Parliament, an effectual check had been put by the imposition of a tax of seventy-five per cent upon the property of absentees; which tax was levied for several years previous to the Union. He hoped to see the day when such a tax would again be imposed. At present Ireland paid a tribute of 8,000,000 l. a-year to England, in the revenue she remitted to absentee proprietors. Next to absenteeism, he considered the extravagantly expensive Church Establishment a principal source of the misery of the people. Those two causes, together with the oppressive taxation, produced in Ireland a degree of distress and suffering unparalleled in any other country. The hon. and learned gentleman presented petitions in favour of a Repeal of the Union, from the Sedan-chairmen of Dublin,
774
and from the Bricklayers and House-smiths of that City. These persons felt severely the effects of the Union of the two countries. At the time of that Union there were 1,800 public, and 600 private Chairmen in that City; at present there were not more than twenty public Chairs, and one private. The mention of the parties from whom these petitions came might create merriment in the House, but he must say, that the present was not the moment when the petitions of any portion of the people ought to be laughed at. The hon. and learned Member presented a similar petition from the Corporation of Tuam, signed by the 'Sovereign.' The petitioners begged the House not to give credit to any statement which might be made to them from any quarter, that the great mass of the people of Galway were not favourable to a repeal of the Union. The hon. and learned Gentleman, after presenting similar petitions from parishes in Cork, Waterford, and Longford, adverted to what had been stated on a former evening, as to the opinion of the late Mr. Grattan, that the Union of the two countries, once passed, was irrevocable, and read an extract of a letter from that Gentleman, dated October 4th, 1810, in which be stated, that he would accede to the wish of parties who had intrusted him with a petition for the repeal of the Union, and would support its prayer, because he wished the connexion between the two countries should be more firm. This was also his (Mr. O'Connell's) humble opinion; but Mr. Grattan thought it would not be prudent to bring a Motion forward for the repeal until it was supported by the general voice of the people of Ireland. In this he also concurred; hon. Gentlemen did not seem to be aware of the extent to which the Anti-union feeling prevailed in Ireland. Anti-union meetings were spreading every where; and he might say, that in three of the provinces, ninety-nine out of every hundred were in favour of the repeal; and it was worthy of remark, that as those meetings spread, meetings of White-boys and other illegal associations disappeared, so sanguine were the people in the hope that a repeal of the Union and a resident Legislature would be the means of affording them relief.
Sir J. Bourkehoped, that as he was the individual whose statement as to the opinion of the people of Galway, on the subject of the Union, was alluded to, he

775
might be allowed to say a word in explanation of that statement. He was asked on the hustings, when proposed for the county of Galway, whether he would vote for a repeal of the Union, and he distinctly stated, that he was opposed to that measure. He had a right therefore to infer, as his opinion was not then opposed, that it was not at variance with that of the county which returned him. It was however true that the people of Galway had not at that time had the advantage of being enlightened by the letters which the hon. and learned member for Waterford had since written on the subject, the publication of which he owned he viewed with regret.
Sir John Newportrose for the purpose of showing, that the most strenuous opposers of the Union in the Irish Parliament were clearly of opinion that, once completed, it was indissoluble. He wished to call the attention of the House to a letter from the predecessor of the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite in the representation of the county of Waterford. [The right hon. Baronet then read an extract from the letter in question, distinctly showing, that the opinion of that Gentleman was directly adverse to any agitation of the question of a repeal of the Union at the present moment, or at any time; for he had never ceased to regard that measure as irrevocable.] Such was the opinion, he also stated, of all the public men at the period when that measure was agreed to. Both from their speeches in Parliament, and from the evidence which remained of their private meetings, there could not be a shadow of doubt that Mr. Ponsonby, Chief Justice Bushe, Lord Plunkett, Lord Oriel, and all the great men of that period agreed, that if the measure were once carried, the idea of repealing it would be perfectly visionary. He hesitated not to say, that he himself had always looked upon the Union as irrevocable. He was old enough to remember the proceedings of that local Parliament which it was thus vainly sought to restore; and he could well remember that the country under its government, was in such a state of confusion and anarchy that he believed it could no where else be paralleled—the country was in such a state that no peaceable man could live in it. He deprecated most earnestly the agitation of the question of the Union, for he looked on it as sure to produce results which could not
776
fail to alarm English capitalists, and deter them from investments calculated to create employment for the people. He would, let the consequences be what they might, repeat his conscientious conviction against the proposition for a repeal. He was aware that in expressing his opinion against the repeal, he was stating that which was contrary to the opinions of a respectable portion of his constituents, and he had been intrusted with a petition signed by several of them in one parish in the city of Waterford, in which they called upon him to surrender his opinion on this subject to that of his constituents. Such a call he never could obey. He had for fifty years of his public life expressed his opinion freely, conscientiously, and independently, on all occasions, and he would not now depart from that consistency which he had ever maintained. Let the duration of his public life be long or short—and in the course of nature it could not now be much longer—he would continue to act in the same independent manner. If his constituents thought proper to withdraw their confidence in him, they had only to express that wish, and he would resign his trust into their hands; but, so long as he held it, he would vote according to the best of his judgment on every subject, without reference to any consideration but that which, he trusted, always had and ever would operate with him—that of promoting whatever tended most to the good of the country. In this feeling he never could support the repeal of the Union, unless it could be proved that such a measure would be to the benefit of Ireland; but, that he believed, could never be proved.
Mr. A. Lefroy Mr. A. Lefroy, alluding to the petition which had been presented from a parish in the county which he had the honour to represent, said, that he could not support the prayer of that petition. He did not deny that the signatures to it were numerous and respectable; but he must say, that he had received letters from most respectable individuals, Protestants and Catholics, in that county, expressing their decided hostility to any such measure. If he had taken a course similar to that of the hon. member for Waterford, he might have got up a petition, most numerously and respectably signed, against the measure; but his great wish was, to do every thing which could unite both parties, and to encourage that disposition which would tend

777
to promote the prosperity of all. He did not mean to say, that distress did not exist in Ireland, but he felt convinced that if the cause and nature of that distress, and the means of removing it, were fairly put forward, it would stand a much better chance of relief from a united Parliament than from a Parliament resident in Ireland.
Mr. O'Connell Mr. O'Connell, in moving that the petitions do lie on the Table, said, that the statement made by the right hon. member for the city of Waterford had not met his case as to the opinion of the late Mr. Grattan. As to what had fallen from the hon. Member who had just sat down, about the union of Protestant and Catholic, he must say, that the repeal of the Union would, more than any other measure, tend to unite all parties. He added, that he had lately received a vote of thanks at a public meeting, which was moved by an Orangeman and seconded by a gentleman who was secretary to an Orange-lodge. The hon. Member, after a warm eulogy on the public conduct and consistency of the right hon. Baronet (Sir J. Newport), expressed his regret at hearing from such a respectable source the opinion which had been given as to the last Parliament of Ireland; but he must say, that except during the last six years, when that Parliament had been corrupted to carry the Union, it had shown as much independence as any Parliament that ever met. During the twelve years prior to the last six, it had five times defeated the plans of Ministers, and carried its own point in favour of the country, which could not be said of any Parliament that had sat since the Union. In conclusion, he observed, that the petitions for a repeal of the Union could not be put down by clamour within or without that House. He imputed no improper motive to any person who opposed this repeal, and any motives attributed to him he despised.
The Petitions to lie on the Table.

DIVISION OF LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.
Mr. O'Connellmoved for a return of the number and names of persons who had been sent out in judicial capacities to the East Indies and the British colonies, from the 1st of January, 1801, to the present time, with the dates of their appointment, the amount of salary, and, as nearly as could be made out, the amount of their other emoluments, and the Bar, whether English,
778
Irish, or Scotch, to which they respectively belonged. He called for this information, because he believed that, since the Union, there had been but three appointments from the Irish Bar.
Mr. Cutlar Fergusonsaid, that in his knowledge of five Advocates-general that had been sent out to India, two were Irish. The only persons who had reason to complain (the Irish having a fair share in those appointments) were the Scotch. He repeated, though it was not generally so supposed, that no persons had more reason than the Scotch to complain of exclusion from judicial offices.
Motion agreed to.

VICE-TREASURER OF IRELAND.
Mr. O'Connellwished to put a question to his hon. friend opposite, relative to the situation of Vice-treasurer of Ireland. Amongst the papers laid on the Table, there was a Treasury Minute relative to that office, which it had been proposed to abolish. But on looking at the Act of Parliament, he found that the office, under the provisions of the Statute, could not be abolished. He therefore requested to know what was meant to be done.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that though the office could not be abolished, still the contemplated saving would be effected. At present the Vice-treasurer had 2,000 l. a year, there was a deputy at 800 l. a year, and an establishment. The Government, in effecting a reduction, had made this arrangement. They found that the deputy Vice-treasurer had for many years acted also as Chief Clerk in the Irish department of the Treasury here at 1,000 l. a year, and they proposed that that gentleman should execute the duties of the Vice-treasurer, which he had acceded to, for an additional sum of 200 l. a year. The salaries of Vice-treasurer and of the deputy being discontinued, the entire saving would be 2,600 l. per annum. They could not abolish the office of Vice-Treasurer, for that was fixed by an Act of Parliament. He was also Auditor of the Pells and of Taxes; and an Act of Parliament would be necessary for the purpose of doing away with the office. The Government had already done something, but what it was disposed to do would not rest there; for it would be the duty of the gentleman who was to fill the office to inquire what other savings could be made, and what number of clerks could be dispensed with, and if

779
possible still greater reductions should be effected.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.
Mr. O'Connellpresented a Petition from John Howard, of Portarlington, for Parliamentary Reform, stating, that out of a population of 5,000 or 6,000 in that borough, there were only fourteen persons entitled to vote. The hon. Member added, that he was satisfied with the statement of his hon. friend as to the office of Vice-treasurer of Ireland; but much of his present labour in other departments might be easily transferred to two Prothonotaries, who were receiving large salaries with but slight duties attached to them. He had now also to present four petitions for Reform—one from Glastonbury, signed by Mr. H. Hunt, as lord of that manor; another from the Society of Radical Reformers meeting at the Rotunda; another from reformers at Stockport, and a fourth from reformers at Ipswich. They prayed for a great extension of the elective franchise, and for vote by ballot. One of the petitions expressed their joy that the Tories had gone out of office, but their dissatisfaction that the Whigs had come in, for they suspected that, when in office, they might forget the promises made when out of it. The measures of the Whigs, the petitioners stated, had been most injurious to the country—they had begun the national debt, they were the authors of the Excise, and of Septennial Parliaments, as well as of many other abuses. The petitioners, therefore, prayed the House to watch the Whig Administration narrowly. He hoped and believed, that the petitioners would find themselves mistaken with respect to the present Ministers. They had on that evening given an earnest of their disposition to economy, and were the only Administration which had ever come in on a pledge to maintain peace abroad, and to effect reduction and reform at home.
The Petitions to be printed.

POSTMASTER-GENERAL OF IRELAND.
On Mr. Spring Rice's Motion, that the Speaker leave the Chair for the House to go into a Committee of Supply,
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that he wished to say a few words relative to what had fallen from the hon. Gentleman on a former night, concerning the Post-master-general of Ireland, and at which time he did pot happen to be in the House. He did
780
not wish to derogate any thing from the present, or to arrogate anything to the past Administration. All he wished was, that the case should stand on its true footing with the House; and he begged to inform it that this saving would have been equally effected if the present Ministers had never come into Office. It had been said, that the office ought to have been abolished; but this was impossible till a new measure had been introduced into Parliament for the purpose of putting the business of the office on another footing. The office, however, was virtually abolished. This assertion did not rest upon his dictum, but was known in the office to which the hon. Gentleman now belonged; and if he had remained in Office, it was his intention to bring forward a measure for the consolidation of the Post-offices, and to get rid of the place in question. The present Government, therefore, had done no more than the former Government intended to do. There was a legal difficulty in the way of abolishing the office and he repeated, that the moment that difficulty should have been removed by Parliament, it was the intention of the late Government to have abolished the office. If the present Government should accept the resignation of the Postmaster-general of Ireland before they made any alteration of the law with reference to that office, they would leave that department of the public service without a responsible head. Without the authority of the Postmaster-general, the Government could not legally transmit letters, or demand money for their transmission.
Mr. Ricedisclaimed all idea of taking advantage of his right hon. friend's absence, for the purpose of mentioning any statement. What he had said had referred to Lord Ross, and not to Lord O'Neil, and the resignation of the former was made to the present First Lord of the Treasury; so that, of course, his right hon. friend could not know of that. If he had been aware that it was the intention of the former Government to abolish the office, he should not have withheld that information from the House.
Sir H. Hardingesaid, that Lord Ross had only held the office till the legal difficulties could be removed; and when that took place it was determined to abolish the office.

SALARIES, PENSIONS, NATIONAL DISTRESS.
Mr. Alderman Waithmanwished to say, that as he found the subject of Salaries and Pensions had been taken up by the Minister in whose hands it could be most successfully prosecuted, it was his intention to forego bringing that subject before the House, according to a notice he had given on a preceding evening. He would at the same time give notice of his intention, after Christmas, to lay certain facts before the House relative to the state of the country; and he trusted that the House would adopt them, as they were facts—not opinions. It was also his intention to move the repeal of the house and window taxes, though he trusted that the Government would take this matter on itself.
Mr. George Dawsonthen adverted to the impression which had been made on the public mind by the reports which had been published of the salaries and pensions enjoyed by public men, and the reports which had been circulated of the intention of the present Ministers to reduce them, which, if allowed to be circulated without some explanation, might have some bad effect. He knew what was the wish of the House, and he knew in what manner the present Government was pledged to encourage economy; at the same time he thought the House ought not to forget what had been effected by former Administrations. It was only justice to former Governments to remind the House of what they had done, and he determined when he heard the hon. Members opposite taking such credit to themselves for reducing the situations of Vice-treasurer and Postmaster-general of Ireland, to make a statement of the reductions which had been made by the former Administration. It was his intention to have made such a statement on the present, occasion, but finding the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not in his place, he should postpone it, and take the earliest opportunity, when it was convenient, to make it. Such a statement ought to be made. It was equally due to the dignity and character of the late Administration and the House of Commons.
Sir George Warrenderwished to take that opportunity of stating that, he hoped the present Ministers would continue to enforce that rigid economy with which they had begun. If they should zealously pursue the course they had marked out for themselves, they would be entitled to, and
782
he had no doubt that they would obtain, the cordial concurrence of that House, and the support of the country. Their course of proceeding hitherto had been such as entitled them to his fullest confidence. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer were in his place, he would ask him if he did not consider it desirable to refer the papers, giving an account of pensions and salaries, to a committee, in order that its errors might be corrected and explained? He remembered being on a committee formerly —the committee moved for by the hon. member for Dorsetshire; and in that committee, which sat for two years, several errors in the documents laid before it were corrected. It was desirable, in his opinion, that such a committee should now be appointed, in order that the truth should be known. It was most desirable that misrepresentation should be checked, and error put down. The truth was itself painful enough, but if it were separated from error, and only the truth were told, that would allay much of the irritation which now prevailed in the public mind. He ventured to recommend some measure like a committee, with no view of hostility to the present Government, which he regarded from its proceedings as eminently entitled to confidence, but as tending to promote a public benefit. He was scarcely able to express the satisfaction with which he had heard that the present Ministers had not filled up several situations in England, Scotland, and Ireland, which had fallen vacant since their accession to Office. If they pursued the same prudent wise career, they would fix themselves firmly in public opinion.
Mr. George Dawsonwas willing to give the present Government credit for their reductions, but they must carry them much further than at present to surpass the reductions of the last Government.
Mr. Baringwas understood to say, that the paper describing the salaries and pensions of public officers had created a great sensation in the public, and was calculated, if uncontradicted, and if unexplained, to shake the general confidence in all public men, and even in the Legislature. He wished that the paper should be examined, by a Committee, and if so examined he was sure that none of the objectionable items would be found to belong to the last ten or fifteen years. He wished that that paper should be brought

783
fairly before the public, and if it were brought fairly forward, he was sure it would be seen that none of the corruption of which it was supposed to be evidence had taken place of late years. He should say, that very little of such corruption had existed since he had been in the House, and he recollected little or none of such corrupt influence being employed as might be presumed from that return. He repeated, that the paper in question was calculated to produce a most painful effect, and to shake the confidence of the public in all public men, and in the Legislature itself. It would be proper, therefore, that a Committee should analyse that paper, and separate the truth from the falsehood, and show what part of it was derived from late and what from former Administrations. He wished to say one word on another subject—the subject of an inquiry into the general distress of the country. A worthy Alderman had previously alluded to this subject; but he must express his doubts as to the utility of that general inquiry which he suggested. An inquiry into all the causes of the national distress could not produce any good, and he should be sorry to see the House go into an inquiry which could not end in conferring credit on itself or benefit to the public. A parliamentary inquiry into the condition of the southern parts of the kingdom, into the districts which were now visited by disturbance, would be very important, and might be very useful. Commissions had been issued to support the authority of the laws, which had been violated in those districts, and which must be supported for the benefit even of the poor themselves, for it was essential to their happiness that property should be protected, and that all men should have confidence in the protection of the law; but those Commissions, it was known, were likely to punish a class of persons who had been driven into outrage, partly by distress, and partly by the terror of others. He knew that the papers moved for by the right hon. Baronet would show the sums of money raised and expended for the poor; but he wished for an inquiry into their condition, which would show the general nature of the payments they received, the extent of their remuneration, and the defective system under which the Poor-laws were at present administered. It was a great misfortune, that in many places the labourers were
784
paid wages out of the poor-rates, and he should like, therefore, to have an inquiry into the mode of administering the Poor-laws. The evils of the poor-rates were very great, but whether any remedy could be found for these grievances was a grave consideration. After all the schemes which had been brought forward on this subject, he must say—after applying his mind to the subject too—that he had no hopes that any legislative remedy could be found for such extensive grievances. At the same time he should think that the House abandoned its duty if it did not examine the subject, and ascertain what was the state of the administration of the Poor-laws, and if any remedy could be found for the evils which existed. To that extent he hoped that the House would institute an inquiry, and, so limited, it would produce a very good effect; but he could not think that an inquiry into the general causes of distress would be useful. He would repeat, as he had before stated, that generally the great interests of the country were not in an unfavourable position, and that what the country wanted was quiet, order, peace and confidence. To ascertain the state of the agricultural districts was most important, for the other interests, he must repeat, were moving well.
Colonel Sibthorpwas of opinion, that the country was in an alarming crisis, and if any proof were wanting of the correctness of the reports that were circulated in the newspapers, it might be found in the circumstance that a great number of Members of that House had received leave of absence on account of the disturbed state of those parts of the country with which they were connected. He wished to say nothing of the defunct, though not absent Ministry; but he believed, that all the economy and reductions for which they took credit had been forced on them by that House echoing the demands of the people.
Mr. George Robinsonremembered, that the hon. member for Callington had been one of those who last Session resisted an inquiry into the state of the country, which was then proposed. There was no subject of more importance, which called more earnestly for the deliberations of the House, than the condition of the labouring classes, with a view to remedy their distress. He and others thought such an inquiry necessary last year; but the hon.

785
Member had then deprecated it, as leading to no satisfactory conclusion. He would request hon. Members to turn their serious attention to the situation of every class in the country, and not confine themselves to the state of the southern counties, but inquire into the state of all the industrious classes. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer were not absent, he would venture to throw out a suggestion which he thought worth attending to. It would be recollected, that last Session the hon. member for Dover had proposed a general inquiry into the state of taxation, with a view of better adapting it to the present state of our circumstances. The motion was negatived, though supported by many members of the present Administration, and he hoped they would now take an early opportunity of proposing such an inquiry, with a view to a revision of taxation. It was most important first to inquire into the distress, but after that was accomplished, and all possible relief afforded by the reduction of taxation, he hoped that an inquiry would be set on foot as to the propriety of improving the mode of levying taxation. After every retrenchment had been made, it should be ascertained what were the best means of levying the taxes necessary for the payment of the National Debt and the public service, so that they should be equally levied on all classes. At present, industry was most unequally oppressed by taxation, and it ought to be relieved. Hints were given several times last Session of the propriety of imposing a Property- ' tax, though they had not been favourably received. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer, he remembered, stated, that the measure of a Property-tax had been under the consideration of his Majesty's Government; and he recollected that the right hon. Gentleman, the member for Liverpool, now unhappily no more, said, that he considered the imposition of such a tax would be necessary. The noble Lord who was at present Chancellor of the Exchequer was, he believed, not unfavourable to a tax on property, and under such circumstances, he hoped, after the Government had retrenched, that it would consider the propriety of revising our whole system of taxation—after it had done all it could to lighten the burdens of the country, that it would consider of measures to levy the necessary taxes more equally, and with greater facility. He
786
did not say that funded property ought to be taxed, but at present that went quite free, while taxes were levied on the necessaries of life, which operated most injuriously on the poorer classes. That was a subject which he should, perhaps, enforce more at length when the Chancellor of the Exchequer was in the House, and he would then only observe, that he hoped that the inquiry, if one were instituted, would not be confined to the southern counties, or to one part of the administration of the Poor-laws, but extended to all the causes of national distress.
Sir Robert Peelthought the hon. Gentleman had shown, by his own observations, that such an inquiry as he had recommended would be vague and unsatisfactory. He had mentioned one topic on which he desired a special inquiry, namely, the operation of taxation in producing the general distress. For that he wanted a Special Committee. If a committee were appointed to inquire into the causes of the general distress, that cause would undergo investigation; and was he to be told that it would be possible for one committee to inquire into all the causes of distress? That one committee would have to inquire into the effect of the Corn-laws—of the Poor-laws—into the effect of taxation; and, after having inquired into the effects of all these things, it would have to find out remedies for the distress. If, however, a committee could be appointed to inquire into the subjects mentioned by the hon. member for Calling-ton, he thought it would be beneficial. The time was come when it would be most expedient for the House to institute some inquiry into the state of the agricultural districts, and into the causes of the disturbances in the southern counties; and particularly into the practical operation and administration of the Poor-laws. An inquiry, limited to the defects of the administration of those laws, might be most useful, and he would willingly go into it, without any reference to party or politics, but solely with a view to better the condition of the labouring classes. It was of great importance to get a few facts, so that the present condition of the labourer in some counties—in the weald of Kent and Sussex, for example—might be contrasted with his condition in other counties, under different physical circumstances, and with his condition in past times. He should like, also, to contrast

787
the condition of the agricultural labourers in those districts where wages were paid out of the rates, and where roundsmen were common, with their condition in those districts where the wages of the labourers were wholly paid by the employer, and roundsmen were unknown. The practical operation of the two systems would then be accurately known, which would be of great use. He would inquire also into the influence of rents, and into their amount. At present, it was generally stated that high rents had contributed to the distress. That was not his opinion; but in the Committee those who supported that opinion could be heard, and the land-owners might have an opportunity of proving its incorrectness. The Committee might inquire, too, into the probability of our population finding a vent in our colonies of North America. A gentleman, who had been sent thither to make inquiries into the quantity of land yet unappropriated, and into the best conditions of making grants, had lately returned, and he had made his report to the Secretary of State for the Colonies; and a Committee, having his information, might examine how far voluntary emigration might be looked to as a means of relief. If he only had complete information as to the present state of the agricultural labourers in two or three counties, and their condition in the same counties forty years ago, and some knowledge of their condition in other counties, he would not say that some remedy for the distress might not be devised; for he still remained of opinion, that a correct arrangement of a few prominent and leading facts was the best foundation for future measures. If he were placed in the Committee, he should make it his object to devote his time to the inquiry; and the public time of public men could not be better employed than in investigating such a subject.
Sir E. Knatchbullfor one, courted a full inquiry into all the particulars of the county he represented. Justice would not be done to the landowners and the farmers unless such an inquiry were instituted. Charges had been made against them which ought to be refuted, and which he was sure a Committee would refute. The actual state of the tenantry and of their landlords ought to be ascertained. It was said—most unjustly he believed — that rents were too high, and must be re-
788
duced; that was a subject that ought to be investigated, and, if they were too high, they ought to be reduced. The situation of the labourers, too, demanded investigation. Many of them, when employed, obtained adequate wages; but there were too many of them; and many of them got no employment, so that their condition was most unequal. At the same time the farmers who paid these men proper wages, and those who did not, had both to contribute equally to the poor-rates, so that as long as the present system continued there were strong motives for the farmer in no case to pay adequate wages. He was convinced that an inquiry would do a great deal of good, he implored inquiry, and he hoped that it would relieve the sufferings of the labouring classes, and restore them to that place in society which they ought to occupy.
Sir Robert Peelhoped it would be understood that he attributed the present condition of the agricultural classes to no particular persons, nor did he speak of it as caused by the fault of any body of men. He was afraid that the condition of the agricultural labourers had been gradually deteriorating for several years past but he did not attribute that as a fault to any one class. He wished it also to be understood, that he had never once thought or said, that the deterioration in the condition of the agricultural labourers was caused by the conduct of the upper classes.
Mr. Ormsby Gorecomplained of the unjust interference of the parish officers with the labourers' wages, and condemned the payment of wages out of the poor-rates. The hon. Member referred to the conduct of Lord Gage, but was set right by being informed that the noble Lord had explained that matter in the newspapers. He had heard that many people had only 1s. a week, and were compelled to live on that. That was a sad blot on this country. It was cruel, unjust, and impolitic. He believed that what an hon. friend had stated on a former day, that the negroes were better fed and clothed than English labourers, was quite correct. It was necessary to state this, for there was, he believed, a bill to be read tomorrow, to make a compulsory rate for the relief of the poor. The House could not be too cautious, for the newspapers found their way into every cottage of the country as well as into the drawing room. In the

789
county with which he was connected (Salop), there had been no disturbances, and there no interference took place with the labourer, and wages were never paid out of the poor-rates. Generally the people received 9s., 10 s., or 11 s. a-week, and he | had not heard of any complaint. An endeavour was there made to keep up the spirit of independence by fixing a stigma on those who, being able to work, consented to receive or made any application for parish relief.
Mr. Long Wellesleyexplained and defended the conduct of Lord Gage, as it had been already explained and defended by his Lordship in the public prints. He wished to suggest that, should a committee be appointed, it would be proper to inquire into the sums of money expended out of the poor-rates for litigation.
Mr. Owen O'Connorwished the inquiry, should one be gone into, to be extended to Ireland. The distress of the people there was very great. When he saw the comfort of the English people, he was astonished at their complaints and disturbances. The Irish had nothing but a few potatoes and salt to live on, and wretched cabins to dwell in.
Mr. O'Brienalso wished that a committee should be appointed, and that its researches should be extended to Ireland. The arm of justice was about to fall on the extremely poor, and he thought that care should be taken to heal the wounds which might be inflicted. The committee ought to be appointed immediately.
Mr. Curteissaid, Lord Gage was a most upright and honourable man, and he was satisfied that no blame whatever could be justly imputed to that nobleman. He denied that it was the practice to pay wages out of poor-rates in Sussex, but he wished to ask, how it was possible that a man who was earning 12 s. a week could maintain eight or ten children? The distress was not caused by low wages, but want of employment. He had paid 1s. 9d. per day for wages through all last winter as an amateur farmer, and he knew that where the farmers could afford it they paid 2s. per day; but they could not find employment for all the labourers. He wished that an inquiry should be instituted into the condition of all classes; and he was sure, if something were not done, and speedily done, society would fall into a most lamentable state of disorganization.
Sir John Bourkecomplained of Con-
790
naught being much neglected by Parliament. Ulster, Munster, and Dublin, had received large grants of public money; but Connaught had never received any. There was great distress at present on the sea coast of that part of the country, and the potatoes had been a very short crop. He suggested the propriety of reforming the Grand Jury system, and of granting some part of the public money to promote inland navigation. Advances to promote the industry of the Irish at home would be the most effectual means of improving their condition, and of keeping them in their own country.
Mr. A. Trevorsaid, he agreed with the member for Sussex (Mr. Curteis), that an inquiry should be made into the state of the agricultural interests; and that means should be taken to afford the labourer a fair rate of wages without injuring the farming or landed interests. He could not agree with the member for Callington in his view of the state of the country, which he considered to be in a state of lawless insubordination, and till that was put down, he could have little hope of any good arising by any other means proposed.
Mr. P. Howardimplored the House, as it was about to vote away the produce of the taxes, to direct its attention to economy, and by all means to endeavour to manage the income and expenditure in such a manner as to allow of the repeal of the Malt-tax, which now pressed so severely on the agricultural classes.

SUPPLY—ARMY.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. Spring Rice Mr. Spring Rice, before he called on the Committee to consent to the Resolutions which he had to propose, felt it his duty to say, that the Estimates, which he now wished to provide for, were those framed by the late Government. His Majesty's present Ministers had rather directed their attention to those Estimates which were to be prepared than to those which had been already made up; and as the sums now required were merely directed to supply the expenditure of the two months of the quarter, and to provide for expenses already incurred, he did not anticipate any objection to them from the hon. Gentlemen opposite. Having said thus much, he should at once move that a sum not exceeding 137,500 l. be granted to make good the extraordinary expenses

791
of the Array up to the end of the year 1830.
Resolution agreed to.
On the Resolution granting a sum of 113,000 l. to defray the Army services for seven days, from the 25th to the 31st of December, 1830,
Mr. Cresset Pelhamcondemned the extravagance of the Estimates for the Army, and observed, that at the commencement of the American war the whole annual amount required for the Army was only 613,000 l., a sum scarcely sufficient to pay the expenses of the present force for a single month.
Resolutions—granting 93,872 l. to complete the sums required for the expenses of the Commissariat; 40,000 l. for the Civil Contingencies; and 50,000 l. to de- fray the expenses of works completed under the direction of the Board of Ordnance were agreed to.

SUPPLY — WINDSOR CASTLE.
On the Resolution requiring a further sum of 25,000 l. to defray the expenses of repairs and improvements of Windsor Castle,
Colonel Sibthorpprotested against the expenditure of money in such a lavish manner, without the prospect of coining to any termination. They had already expended a sum of above 900,000 l. to complete alterations, which had been originally stated in the Estimate laid before the House at only 150,000 l. In the present state of the country he thought it would be highly culpable in the Members of that House to sanction the continuance of this extravagance.
Mr. Spring Ricebegged to remind the hon. Member, that the sum now required was for the purpose of defraying expenses already incurred. It should also be recollected, that when this subject was mentioned in connexion with the Estimates of the year on a former occasion, the House refused to sanction the expenditure of any further sums until a committee was appointed to inquire into the nature of the Estimates and the state of the works. That committee was accordingly appointed, and its Report was now on the Table of the House. He could assure the hon. Member, and the House, that the suggestions contained in it would be maturely weighed before the Government attempted to come before them for any further sums on the same account. No such Estimate was yet formed or determined on; but he was
792
certain, that when it was presented it would be found to be regulated on the strictest principles of economy.
Sir G. Warrenderexpressed a hope that Windsor Castle, the ancient Palace of our Sovereigns, would, now that the country had gone so far, be thoroughly repaired, and rendered fit for the residence of the Monarch. He felt that the situation of the country required the most rigid economy; but he was confident that real economy would be more effectually consulted by the completion of the edifice than by leaving it in its present state. He was quite confident that it was the wish of the great majority of the people of this country, that this ancient and splendid edifice should be placed in a proper condition; and he thought, that as they had engaged in the work, and already spent a very considerable sum, they were in some degree bound to complete it.
Mr. George Robinsonsaid, the expenses already incurred were more than four times in excess over the original estimate; and it should be recollected, that the work was commenced on the assurance of the Government, that the expense was to be kept within the Estimate. He protested against the doctrine of the hon. Baronet, that they were bound to go on with this extravagant expenditure because they had already assented to it in so many instances before. Such language was always held to that House when the Government wished to procure money to gratify a taste for architectural extravagance. At the time when they were called on to make a large grant for the triumphal arch opposite Buckingham Palace the very same language was used; and it was argued that as a very large sum had already been expended (without any estimate be it recollected), they were bound to grant the money required, lest the first sum should be lost. In his opinion, it would be much better that the first expense should be lost than that they should, in the present state of the country, persist in such foolish extravagance. He hoped that, at all events, the present Government would adopt a different course, and that they would produce a full and satisfactory estimate of every work before they called on that House to advance money for the purpose of carrying it on.
Mr. Cutlar Fergusonagreed with the hon. Member respecting the propriety of having estimates of every work laid before the House when it was called on to vote the

793
public money to pay for them. In his opinion the whole course they had hitherto pursued was contrary to law, for it was distinctly declared by Mr. Burke's Bill, that no sums were to be expended on public works by estimate, but always by contract, if the amount was above the sum of 5,000 l. He trusted, however, that the times in which the House found itself placed in the dilemma of either going on with useless and extravagant works, or of abandoning what it had already expended as lost, were now passing away, and that the present Government would feel the necessity of pursuing a course more consonant with those principles on which it sought the approbation and support of the country. By these principles the present Government were now to be tried, and he trusted the House would find them sensible of the distresses of the country, and that economy would at last be construed in its true meaning—that of unsparing retrenchment.
Mr. Curteisprofessed his determination to divide the House as often as its forms would permit, if any attempt was made in the present state of the country, to obtain money for carrying on the erection of two palaces at the same time.
Mr. Warburtonsaid, he understood, from good authority, that the architect employed in the erection of Buckingham Palace had sent in an account for one quarter, greater by some thousands than the sum originally required for the whole of the improvements. He understood that an immense sum was yet required to complete that palace; but he hoped that the present Ministers, before they made any demand for that purpose, would take care to ascertain by estimate what was the probable amount required for this purpose. It was but justice to the late Ministers to say that they had, on learning the return of the expenditure going on, ordered the works to be suspended, but he thought it would have been more to their credit if they had given that order during the life of the late King, rather than after the accession of the present Sovereign. He trusted, however, that the time was passed when they would be required to vote money for estimates prepared in secret. The precedents of that kind were productive of bad effects, and should be carefully avoided.
Mr. Spring Riceassured the House that the strictest economy would be adopted in
794
every branch of the public service, and that any attempt to obtain money on unauthorised or unrecognised statements would be carefully avoided.
Resolution agreed to.

SUPPLY—RIDEAU CANAL.
Mr. S. Rice Mr. S. Rice, in calling on the Committee to assent to a Resolution, granting 40,750 l., to complete the sum required by the estimate of the year 1830, for the Rideau Canal, called its attention to the expense which had already been incurred. Several estimates had been framed in the progress of the work, and a sum of 300,000 l. had been added to the original estimate in consequence of difficulties occurring from the nature of the ground. A Committee of Engineers who last examined the works had reported that they might be completed for 160,000 l. in addition to the 572,000 l. already expended. This sum it was proposed to spread over the four years up to 1831; but it was now found that 440,000 l. would be necessary; and as the Government were not prepared to make a demand to that extent, or to any extent without the most diligent inquiry into its propriety, they required merely the sum which would become due for the present year, according to the original agreement.
Mr. Warburtongave the Government credit for its candour, but protested against any further expenditure, as the regulations with respect to trade would render the canal totally useless for the purposes which were originally contemplated. No commodities, such as the canal was intended to convey, would now be required from Canada.
Mr. Maberlyalso protested against any further expenditure of British capital on the canal, and ridiculed the idea of fortifying 1,700 miles of frontier at the expense of 5,000,000 l. to be paid by this country.
Mr. Laboucherehad, from a conviction of its necessity, always voted for this expenditure on the canal and fortifications, and he was still prepared to contend that; they should be completed. It was the duty of the Government to provide for the adequate defence of its possessions; and by no other means than those now in progress could they procure a thoroughly defensible line of frontier, although he was not prepared to say that the Government might not have been much deceived with

795
respect to the amount of expenditure required for that purpose. The most efficient barrier against an invader was, however, a contented and satisfied population; and he hoped that some attention would now be paid to the Civil Administration of Canada, as he was confident all matters in dispute could be adjusted with very little difficulty.
Mr. Goulburndefended the conduct of the late Government with respect to Canada and the Rideau Canal; and contended that it had never agreed to advance a single shilling without calling on a Board of Engineers to examine the works, and make a report of their condition, and the probable expense of completing them. The original sum stated to be required for the canal was only 150,000 l.; but when the forest was! cleared, and the ground opened, it was found that 300,000 l. more would be necessary; and a Board of Engineers were twice called on to examine the works before it was agreed that this sum should be expended.
Mr. Maberlyrepeated his protest against the expenditure of so much British capital upon the fortification of the frontier line of Canada.
Sir H. Hardingewas sure that it would be found, on inquiry, that the Rideau Canal expense had been much exaggerated as compared with its advantages. It should be borne in mind, that the mere transport expense of the British army in the last war with America up the St. Lawrence was very nearly 1,000,000 l. per annum, the charge being 630,000 l. for the transport of ammunition and provisions alone, and that that charge more than exceeded the cost of the Rideau Canal, by means of which these transports could be made with great facility and little charge in future. Then, when it was recollected that our maritime, and thence our commercial superiority over America, depended in a great degree on our maintaining a good line of frontier, of which the Rideau Canal was the main chain, he was sure hon. Members would not be too eager to cavil at the expense we had already gone to, and might feel necessary to continue till the original design was complete. He was confident that the day on which we gave up that frontier, with all our works on it, to America, would be the date of her maritime superiority, and, as a consequence, of our maritime decline.
Mr. Alderman Waithmanconcurred in opinion upon the subject with his hon. friend the member for Bridport.
Resolution agreed to; as also a Resolution for granting the sum of 71,758 l. 9s. 7d. to complete the sum voted in the last Session for Miscellaneous Services in Ireland.

ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
Sir E. Knatchbullwas desirous of asking the noble Lord a question with respect to the Adjournment for the holidays. He did not wish to embarrass the noble Lord, but it was of great importance to hon. Members, with reference both to private bills and to election petitions, to know when it was intended to move the Adjournment, and for what length of time.
Lord Palmerstonanswered, that the day of Adjournment must depend upon the progress of public business. As far as he was able to judge, he thought that the Adjournment might probably take place about the 16th inst. It was impossible for him, however, to state the precise day. What the probable length of the Adjournment might be he could not exactly say. He was sure that it must be generally felt, that in the existing state of the country the presence of hon. Gentlemen for a time in their respective counties was exceedingly desirable; and that they would be almost more useful there than in their places in that House. It was also expedient that the Members of his Majesty's Government should have the means of looking round them, and arranging the various measures which it would be their duty to propose to Parliament. It was probable, therefore, that the Adjournment would be for as long a period as was consistent with the practice of the House.
The House resumed.

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. For the abolition of Slavery, by the Earls of ELDON and GROSVENOR, the Duke of RICHMOND, the Bishop of LLANDAFF, and Lord WHARNCLIFFE, from Wolverhampton, Stirling, Cardigan, Halifax, from the Females of Christchurch, Hants, from Loughborough, and several other places. By Lord KING, from Wm. Cobbett, for a Reformation of the Poor-laws, for a repeal of all the Taxes on the necessaries of life, particularly the Assessed Taxes and the Excise, and for the abolition of Tithes. By the Marquis of CLANRICARDE, from Westport, for the continuance of the bounties on Fishing; and from the Catholics of Ballinasloe, and other places, praying for a better distribution of the Funds granted to the Kildare-place Education Society. By Earl GOWER, from the Staffordshire Potteries, against the Truck System. By the Duke of RICHMOND, from Hargood Snook, of Portsea, for an extension of the Elective Franchise.

REGENCY BILL.
Lord Lyndhurstmoved the Order of the Day for the third reading of this Bill.
The Lord Chancellorwished to take that opportunity to state an important circumstance connected with the principle of this Bill. It appeared that the whole of the arrangements of this measure were such as to meet the exigency of the occasion, while they were so framed as to steer clear of the various conflicting interests connected with such an important question. As the principle upon which this Bill was founded, was capable, and likely, of being drawn into a precedent in after times, it was necessary and fitting that the measure should go down to posterity clear of all doubt and uncertainty, not only as to its arrangements, but also as to the observations and arguments which might have been stated in reference to it by any person either there or elsewhere. It had been said, he believed, that this was a case entirely of the first impression, and that this Bill was framed upon no ordinary principle, much less in accordance with any example to be found in the former periods of our history. He thought it right,

765
therefore, if there was an example to be found which, though not exactly, yet substantially bore out the principle of the present measure, that such an example should not be withdrawn from the attention of their Lordships and of the public. He concurred with the statement of his noble and learned friend who had introduced this Bill, that there was no direct precedent to be found for the principle of it in the history of England. He had, however, been referred by a learned friend of his, a member of the legal profession, to a case which bore greatly upon the present measure, and he conceived it his duty to inform their Lordships, of the particulars of that case. It was satisfactory to be enabled to state to their Lordships, that that case was disposed of both by France and England, who had a common interest in the decision of the question, precisely in the same way that his noble and learned friend had disposed of the present case. He alluded to a period so far back as the reign of Henry 2nd. The son of that King, Geoffrey, Duke of Brittany, held his dukedom as a fief under the Duke of Normandy, who was likewise King of England; but the claim of Lord Paramount was set up by the King of France, both Normandy and Brittany being held of him. Geoffrey died, leaving his widow enceinte, and a daughter Eleanor, but no son. On his death two rival claims were put up for the wardship of his daughter Eleanor, and it would be seen that, in the proceedings to which they gave rise, the principle of the present measure was admitted by both claimants. Philip Augustus of France, as Lord Paramount, put in his claim to the guardianship of Eleanor, the Duchess of Brittany, and Henry 2nd put in his claim, as Duke of Normandy, and therefore superior Lord of Brittany, to the guardianship of his granddaughter. Both the claimants acknowledged Eleanor to be Duchess of Brittany, though her mother was enceinte at the time. Now, according to the doctrine which had been broached elsewhere, allegiance was due not to Eleanor, but to the child en ventre sa mere. That was not the principle upon which the rival claimants in this instance acted. They held that the allegiance was due, not to the child en ventre sa mere, but to the eldest born child of Geoffrey, to whom, as in cases of real property, the possession at once passed. Eleanor being the eldest born child of Geoffrey, they acknowledged
766
at once her right to the Duchy of Brittany, at the same time admitting that that right was defeasible (and this was the point upon which he wished to show that that case approached so nearly to the principle of the present measure)—at once and instantaneously defeasible by the subsequent birth of a child, if that child should happen to be a son. Their Lordships were aware that his Majesty's Government, who had introduced this measure, had brought it forward, founded distinctly upon those two principles; they said that no allegiance was due to the child en ventre sa mere, but to the eldest born child, and that that right, as vested in a female, was defeasible by the subsequent birth of a male child. But they, it seemed, were not the first to assert those principles. How did the parties act in the case to which he had drawn their Lordships' attention? In the course of a few months, Constance, the widow of Geoffrey, was delivered of a son —a son who was well known, unfortunately, in the history of this country, and whose name did not belong alone to the history, but to the drama of the country too; for he had been immortalized by Shakspeare. That son, Prince Arthur, who was subsequently murdered by his uncle, King John, became at once Duke of Brittany. The moment he was born the defeasance of the title of his sister took place, and at once an end was put to the dispute between Henry 2nd and Philip Augustus, and to the preparations for a war which was about taking place between them, to settle the question with regard to Eleanor. The birth of Arthur at once produced a defeasance of the title of his sister to the duchy, and that settled the question which had been raised between the two kings with respect to her wardship. That portion of our history which was connected with the fate of Arthur was involved in much obscurity. All that was known with certainty of it was, that Prince Arthur came subsequently into the possession of his uncle, King John, who murdered him some years after. Eleanor was also carried away by him to this country, and placed in captivity somewhere in Wales, and she was succeeded in the possession of the Duchy of Brittany by her sister Alice, the daughter of Constance by a second marriage. It was satisfactory and gratifying to find that the present instance was not the only one in which the principle of this Bill had been acted upon.

767
Here was proof that the principle upon which his noble and learned friend had founded this measure, had been distinctly adopted and acknowledged by the learned feudalists of France and of England so early as the time of Henry 2nd. The discovery of that precedent removed all doubts and obviated all objections, and he cordially approved of the Bill.
The Bill read a third time, and passed.