Sitting of 8 February 1839

MINUTES.
Read a first time:—Registry of Births; Authentication; General Affirmation; Highways; and Registration of Electors.
Petitions presented. By Mr. HANDLEY, from Spalding, against any alteration of the Corn-laws.—By Mr. Sergeant JACKSON, from St. Peter's (Athlone), against the present system of Education in Ireland.—By Mr. W. DUNCOMBE, from Selby (Yorkshire), against any alteration in the Corn-laws.—By Mr. WALLACE, from Pollock shaws, for the total Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Mr. KINNAIRD, from Perth, to the same effect.—By Mr. WARD, from Sheffield, in favour of Free Trade, and a total Abolition of the Corn-laws.—By General LYGON, from Worcester, against the Sale of Beer Act.—By Mr. CHRISTOPHER, from Lincoln, against any alteration of the Corn-laws.

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS.
The Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned debate on the presentation of public petitions having been read,
The Speakersaid, before the clerk read the petition, it would be desirable to read the resolutions of the House of the 6th of February, 1833, which necessarily had relation to this subject. It was to the following effect;—"That when a petition has been presented, and the prayer stated by a Member, the Speaker do desire such Member to bring the same to the table, and direct the clerk to read the same, without allowing any other Member to speak or put any question on such petition before the same has been read, unless it shall appear to the Speaker, or any Member, that the matter of such petition relates to a breach of the privileges of the House, or that, according to the rules and orders of the House, such petition ought not to be received."
Mr. Humesaid, that it would probably be as well if the resolution of the 11th March was also read. It provided, that any Member who presented a petition should have previously read it, and be able to state the substance of its contents, and be prepared to say that in his judgment it was couched in proper language, and contained nothing disrespectful to the House. He suspected that this resolution would answer the intention, as it would leave it to hon. Members to say whether the petition contained matter for discussion or not, leaving it to the Speaker to interfere if he were wrong. He considered it would be better to abide by the resolutions of 1817.
The Clerk read the resolution and also what had been stated by the Speaker on this subject last night.
Mr. Wallace, was desirous that the petitions that were presented should be printed with the votes to be distributed to the Members. He would state to the House a practical fact, illustrating what at present took place with regard to the presentation of petitions. He had presented a petition to that House on the 27th of July last, hoping that it would be taken into consideration on the first notice day. He had been in his place every day during the time that Parliament had sat, and that petition had never been taken into consideration yet. One day during the interim, an election petition had been presented to which there was no opposition. A delay of half an hour took place, the House actually sat twenty-five or twenty-six minutes without transacting any business, and he proposed in desperation that the petition which he had previously presented should be then taken into consideration, when the Speaker interferred and prevented him, no doubt very properly and the petition had remained unconsidered up to the present hour. It was a petition of the greatest public importance. It prayed that the Acts of Parliament should be printed in a cheap form and sold at a price not dearer than the votes of that House. Unless some regulations were adopted, it would be totally impossible that petitions could be considered, as if he were to rise to speak on the subject, the hon. Member for Salford might get up and say, it was twelve or one o'clock, that it was a new subject, and that no hon. Member was entitled to enter on it at that hour. He thought that it would be better that no entry should be made of any resolutions on the Journals but that it should be left to the discretion of Members.
Lord John Russell Lord John Russell moved that the resolution adopted by the House last Session, with respect to receiving petitions should be adhered to.
Mr. Wardsaid, that after the full discussion the subject had received yesterday, it was not his intention to occupy the time of the House. He should content himself by entering a protest by a division against laying down a rule which he conceived to be extremely bad and detrimental to the interests of the people, as it prevented discussion upon important questions. Having the House he should present the petition according to the rules now laid down, observing only that he

199
wished to be bound by a distinct rule, and not by one liable to be mis-understood.
The House divided. Ayes 183: Noes 43.Majority 140.

List of the AYES.

Abercromby, G. R.

Ferguson, R.

A'Court, Captain

Filmer, Sir E.

Alsager, R.

Fort, J.

Arbuthnot, General

Fox, G. L.

Ashley, Cooper

Fremantle, Sir T.

Bagge, W.

Gaskell, Jas. Milnes

Baillie, H. D.

Gibson, T.

Baines, E.

Gladstone, W. E.

Baker, E.

Glynne, Sir S. R.

Bannerman, A.

Gordon, hon. W.

Barnard, E. G.

Gore, O. J. R.

Barneby, J.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Barrington, Lord

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Bell, M.

Grimsditch, T.

Benett, J.

Hale, B. R.

Bethell, R.

Halford, H.

Blakemore, R.

Handley, H.

Blennerhassett, A.

Hardinge, rt hon. Sir H.

Blunt, Sir Charles

Harland, W. C.

Bolling, W.

Hawkins, J. H.

Broadwood, H.

Hayes, Sir E.

Brodie, W. B.

Hayter, W. G.

Brotherton, J.

Heneage, E.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Hinde, J. H.

Bulwer, Sir E. L.

Hodgson, R.

Burr, D. H. D,

Holmes, W.

Busfield, W.

Hope, hon. Jas.

Calcraft, J. H.

Hope, G. W.

Canning, rt. hon. Sir S.

Hughes, W. B.

Cayley, E. S.

Ingestre, Viscount

Chetwynd, Major

Ingham, R.

Christopher, R. A.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Clerk, Sir G.

Irton, S.

Clive, E. B.

Jackson, Sergeant

Clive, R. H.

James, Sir W. C.

Codrington, C. W.

Jenkins, R.

Colquhoun, J. C.

Johnstone, J. J. H.

Conolly, E.

Kemble, H.

Craig, W. G.

Kinnaird, hon. A. F.

Crawford, W.

Knatchbull, Sir E.

Cresswell, Cresswell

Lascelles, hon. W. S.

Darby, George

Lefevre, C. S.

D'Israeli, B.

Lefroy, rt. hon. T.

Divett, E.

Lennox, Lord T. G.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Lister, E. Cunliffe

Dowdeswell, W.

Long, W.

Dugdale, W. S.

Lucas, E.

Dunbar,

Lygon, hon. Gen.

Duncombe, hon. W.

Mackenzie, T.

Dundas, F.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Eaton, R. J.

Macleod, R.

Ebrington, Visct.

Marshall, W.

Egerton, W. T.

Maule, hon. F.

Eliot, Lord

Mildmay, P. St. J.

Ellice, E.

Milnes, R. M.

Euston, Earl

Mordaunt, Sir J.

Farnham, E. B.

Morpeth, Lord

Feilden, W.

Murray, rt. hon. J. A.

Fenton, J.

O'Brien, C.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

O'Brien, W. S.

200

O,Callaghan, hon. C.

Somerset, Lord G.

O'Conor, Don

Speirs, A.

Ord, W.

Stanley, E.

Packe, C. W.

Stanley, Lord

Parker, John

Stanley, W. O.

Parker, M.

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Parker, R. T.

Stewart, J.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Stock, Dr.

Pendarves, E. W.

Strutt, E.

Perceval, Col.

Stuart, V.

Phillips, Sir R.

Sturt, H. C.

Philips, M.

Style, Sir C.

Pigot, R.

Teignmouth, Lord

Planta, rt. hon. J.

Thomson, rt. hon. C.P.

Polhill, F.

Trench, Sir F.

Ponsonby, C. F. A. C.

Verner, W.

Protheroe, E.

Waddington, H. S.

Pryme, G.

Walker, R.

Pusey, P.

Wall, C. B.

Redington, T. N.

Walsh, Sir J.

Rice, E. R.

White, A.

Richards, R.

Williams, W. A.

Rickford, W.

Wilmot, Sir J. E.

Rolfe, Sir R. M.

Wilshere, W.

Round, C. G.

Winnington, H. J.

Round, J.

Winnington, T. E.

Rushbrooke, Col.

Wood, T.

Russell, Lord J.

Wrightson, W. B.

Sanford, E. A.

Wynn, rt. hn. C. W

Sheppard, T.

Young, J.

Shirley, E. J.

TELLERS.

Smith, B.

Campbell, Sir J.

Smyth, Sir G. H.

Grey, Sir G.

List of the NOES.

Aglionby, H. A.

Maher, J.

Attwood, T.

Molesworth, Sir W.

Blewitt, R.

Norreys, Sir D.

Bryan, G.

O'Connell, M.

Butler, hon. P.

O'Connell, M. J.

Chapman, Sir M. L.

Parrott, J.

Codrington, Sir E.

Pechell, Capt.

Collins, W.

Salwey, Colonel

Dennistoun, J.

Scholefield, J.

Duncombe, T. S.

Strickland, Sir G.

Fielden, J.

Tancred, H. W.

Grote, G.

Tennent, J. E.

Hawes, B.

Thornley, T.

Hector, C. J.

Vigors, N. A.

Hindley, C.

Wakley, T.

Horsman, E.

Wallace, R.

Hume, J.

Williams, W.

Hutt, W.

Wood, Sir M.

Johnson, W.

Wyse, T.

Langdale, hon. C.

Yates, J. A.

Langton, Col. G.

TELLERS.

Leader, J. T.

Ward, H. G.

Lushington, C.

Villiers, C. P.

SUPPLY.
On the motion of Lord John Russell the House wen into Committee of Supply. That part of her Majesty's Speech relating to the estimates for the year was read.
Mr. Humesaid, it had been usual on such occasions as the present, when ob-

201
jections were taken to the policy of the Government, to state those objections, particularly when the grievances of the people were not attended to, or when they had complaints of serious moment to bring before the House. He was sorry to say, that the chance of obtaining a redress of their grievances was every day farther off. The first day they had met they had been told by a very large majority of that House he admitted–426 to 86—that the Reform Bill had answered all its purposes. [No, no.] It was the same thing. One side had put the proposition, and the other side denied it. He was sorry that hon. Members had come to that decision, for the people of the country would think the House meant to stifle their petitions. He said so, and thought so. Hon. Gentlemen might excuse themselves for the vote they had given on the plea of the time being improper, but he could not help expressing a hope, that the time might come when the trammels of an Address would not prevent men from expressing what their opinions were upon such important subjects. It appeared to him, to take from them the right of stating the nature of, or interpreting the wants with which petitions were charged. That this resolution would be taken by the great bulk of the people in the country, as a practical resolve to prevent a proper statement of their grievances, there was no doubt. It was on that account that he voted as he did. They had declared that this was to continue, notwithstanding that its introduction was so novel, and that it had so little to recommend it. When the House was about to vote away the money of the people in the Committee of Supply, he hoped some hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House would make a specific motion, that this question should be settled by a confirmatory vote of the House. They ought to have the public Minister put on the same footing as individual Members in regard to giving notices. He would submit, that when they went, the Speaker took the chair—all notices should be given by the Minister of the day, in order that Members might know what was likely to be brought on. For instance, last night a notice of a Committee of Supply was given just before the House adjourned, when there were only about ten Members present, so that scarcely any One was aware of that notice until they
202
saw it in the votes the next day. He submitted it would be desirable that Members of the Government should give notices at the same time that other Members were bound to give them. He wished to enter his protest against money being voted as heretofore, while all redress was refused to the people.
Mr. Warburtonwas not present during the discussion of the motion of the hon. Member for Sheffield, not being aware that it would come on so early, but if he had been present, he would have stated, that although he was perfectly willing to admit the convenience of the rule generally that had been adopted, yet that they ought not to take away the right of deliberating on petitions. During the first ten years that he sat in Parliament, he remembered that debates occurred upon this very Corn-law question, until nine o'clock in the evening, when each Member who presented a petition, had not only the right of debating upon one question, but of debating on four. There was first the question—"That this petition be brought up;" next, there was the question, "That this petition be now read;" then there was the question, "That this petition do lie on the table;" and then came the fourth question very often, "That this petition be printed." So that every Member presenting a petition had not only the opportunity of speaking on the full merits of all the subjects adverted to in the petition, but had the opportunity of speaking not less than four times—a right which applied to no other sort of motion. He could not disguise from himself, that except from the right of repeatedly debating questions on which petitions might be presented from the people, it would have been impossible to have carried many great questions that had been carried. Where would Negro Slavery—the emancipation of the Catholics, and the Reform of Parliament have stood, if it had not been possible to debate the question again and again until the people were excited upon them, and came forward with petitions. If this right were taken away, there were other modes left. It would not be difficult to introduce Poor-laws, or any other subject. He would recommend those individuals who thought the attention of the public had not been sufficiently drawn to the Corn-laws to take that step.
Colonel Conollycould say, from his

203
own experience of what had taken place for the last four years, so far from limiting the right of the public, it had done much towards facilitating the object of petitions. He thought that the speech of the right hon. Member for Tamworth had exhibited the subject in a proper point of view. But that the motion recently disposed of was shewn not to be intended to increase the right of the subject to petition, but to give a facility to every person to dilate, and give a paraphrase separate from the petition itself. His mind was satisfied that the right of a petitioner remained unimpaired. He had remarked last Session that many petitions sent from London to the country had been forwarded to the House. He concluded that these were the class of petitions which the hon. Member for Kilkenny thought 300 might be classed as one. His purpose in alluding to them was to shew that they had no other object than the excitement of the people, instead of their legitimate object —the submitting their grievances to the deliberate assemblies of the country. He presumed, as the hon. Member for Kilkenny had passed the whole of the vacation among his constituents, he referred to their particular grievances.
Mr. O'Connellthought the hon. and gallant Member had made a trifling mistake, for he had called this a deliberative assembly. That was certainly going a great way. The gallant Colonel came here quite uncertain how he should vote; it was only by the result of the debate that he was induced to vote either one way or the other, but all hon. Members were not so unprejudiced; and it was therefore a mistake to say that this was a deliberative assembly. His hon. Friend near him had also fallen into a mistake, in stating that petitions formerly were spoken to four times, for the old practice of the House really gave an opportunity of speaking on them eight times. There was a great difference between that plan of proceeding and a Gagging Bill to prevent petitions from being discussed at all, which was the greatest violation of the old principle that could possibly take place. It would make the House disreputable in public opinion. The sooner the public were aware that the House treated their petitions with contempt by not deigning to listen to them the better; the remedy would come the sooner, and the public, who petitioned in vain would then clamour in such a way,
204
that though the gallant Officer might not be intimidated, a strong impression would be made on others, which would be likely to induce them to go a little further in the career of Reform.
Mr. Claysaid they were now acting on the plan of deciding first and speaking afterward. The practice which had been formerly pursued by the recent division, seemed to have become a rule, and hon. Members had been securing convenience to themselves at the expense of the rights of the public. He believed that short and animated debates on petitions, were much attended to by the people, such debates presented opportunities for stating facts.
Resolution, that a supply be granted to her Majesty put and agreed to.

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Lord BROUGHAM, from Edinburgh, in favour of Mr. R. Hill's plan of Post-office Reform.—By the Duke of PORTLAND, from Leicester, against the Sale of Beer Act.

ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he had to acquaint their Lordships that her Majesty had been attended with the Address voted to her by their Lordships' House, in reply to which her Majesty had been pleased to return the following most gracious answer:—
"My Lords, I thank your Lordships for your loyal and dutiful Address. Relying entirely on your wisdom and patriotism, I can have no greater satisfaction than finding myself supported by your agreement and concurrence."

MAURITIUS—SLAVERY.
Lord Broughamseeing his noble Friend, the Secretary for the Colonies, in his place, wished to ask whether any satisfactory information had been received respecting the termination of slavery in the Mauritius?
Lord Glenelgsaid, that in answer to the question of his noble Friend, he had sent a dispatch to the Governor of the Mauritius, requesting him to bring the termination of the apprenticeship system before the Council, with a view to have it put an end to by the 1st of February. He had not yet had an answer to that dispatch, but he had no doubt the Governor would bring it before the Council without delay, and as little doubt that the Council would accede to it. He had further to add, that if the Council did not accede to it he had taken a measure to effect the termination of the apprenticeships without the Council.
Lord Broughamsaid, that nothing could be more satisfactory to him; nor, he was Sure, to every person who took an interest in this question. But he wished to ask his noble Friend whether the dispatch had been so recently sent, that it was impossible now to have an answer, and also whether the measure which the noble Lord had adopted had been a conditional one.
Lord Glenelgsaid, that the dispatch had been sent out in July last. The measure he alluded to, was simply passing an order in Council enabling the Governor by proclamation to name a day for the termination of the apprenticeship system, if necessary, without the consent of the Council.

RESIGNATION OF LORD GLENELG.
Lord Glenelgthen spoke as follows:—My Lords, I will take this opportunity of saying a few words referring to myself personally. Although I have answered the question put by my noble Friend under the idea that I was responsible for the measures of the Government, I am not at this moment any longer in possession of office, having felt it my duty to tender my resignation to her Majesty, which her Majesty has been pleased graciously to accept this day. I make this communication with a full sense of the peculiar inconvenience of such a step as that to which I have alluded at this period, and with a consciousness that it may cause great delay in your Lordships' proceedings,
184
and cannot but produce considerable embarrassments. But, my Lords, in a few moments I can state the reasons which induced me to come to this resolution. A communication was made to me on Tuesday morning, utterly unforeseen and unexpected by me, which involved—it was a communication from the Cabinet—which involved alterations in, and a fresh disposition of, office—utterly, as I before said, unexpected on my part, but which, it was said, had been resolved upon. My Lords, to that change in the disposition of office, after the maturest consideration, I found it impossible for me to accede; consequently I felt it my duty to tender my resignation. My Lords, among my regrets on this subject, it is painful for me that this event should take place at such a moment as this, when colonial subjects occupy so much of the attention of Parliament. But, my Lords, I can truly say that no other reason but the necessity under which I felt myself placed could have led me to such a step—in fact I found no other alternative before me. I had but one course to pursue. At the same time, my Lords, any of those measures connected with colonial affairs which I have been instrumental in carrying into effect I shall, of course, be ever in my place ready and anxious to justify, and I shall always be ready to give any information and supply any explanations which it may be in my power to give with respect to the discharge of that duty which has been intrusted to me.
Nothing further was said on the subject.

CORN-LAWS.—PETITIONS.—EXPLANATION.
Lord Broughamrose to present a petition of very great importance; and it was the first which had issued from the body from which it came; it was a petition from the new municipality of. Birmingham—was signed by the Mayor on behalf of the Corporation, It was upon the subject of the Corn-laws, and prayed for a speedy and effectual relief from the pressure of those laws. He wished to state, that he believed some worthy and respected individuals were anxious for something, which according to his recollection of what had formerly taken place in the House of Commons, if the orders of both Houses were the same in this respect—he believed was not according to precedent, namely, to be heard by counsel and evidence at tale Bar

185
against the Corn-laws. Now, he was afraid—he wished it were otherwise—that there was no instance of counsel being heard against a law which had actually passed, though they had been heard against a bill while pending before Parliament. He believed, however, that there was this exception, that counsel might be heard against a tax the year after it had been imposed, The petition which he had presented, did not pray to be heard by counsel. He would now give notice that on Friday—although from the unavoidable absence of some noble Friends, he might be induced to postpone it till Monday, he would bring forward a motion on this subject, which motion would be, "That evidence be allowed to be produced at the bar against the Corn-laws, not by counsel and parties, but evidence in the regular mode for the satisfaction of their Lordships." This, he believed, would be in accordance with the precedent of the Orders in Council. He thought their Lordships would consider that, upon this important subject, the sooner the attention of Parliament was called to it the better.
The Earl of Riponcould not allow the first opportunity that offered, to pass without asking the indulgence, of their Lordships while he attempted to set himself right with the House, and defend himself from what he considered an imputation. It was, with respect to a subject which agitated the public mind—he meant the Corn-laws. He always understood, that the present Cabinet had been formed upon the principles with respect to those laws laid down by the noble Viscount in the debate upon the Address. With respect to that he knew nothing. He had since, however, seen it stated, that a very high authority had said, that Lord Grey's Administration had been formed upon the same principles; and that the Corn-laws was considered an open question with that Cabinet. He did not say that high authority had said so, but that it had been so stated. Whether it was said or not, he felt himself bound to state, that, while he had the honour of belonging to that cabinet, there existed no such understanding. It was utterly impossible for him to suppose that Lord Grey's Government was formed upon such principles, because, in 1833, when a noble Friend of his brought forward the question, Lord Grey asked him to oppose the motion, and to prepare himself to answer the observations of his
186
noble Friend, and he did so because it was the duty of those who administered the Government of the country, to take the earliest opportunity of giving a direct and unequivocal statement of their sentiments upon a subject of such great importance. Upon his honour, if he had the slightest suspicion, that there was any doubt whatever as to the principles upon which that Government was formed with respect to the Corn-laws, he never would have made such a speech; for he certainly at that time considered that he spoke the sentiments of the Government, and as a Government, and if he had made such a speech as he did upon that occasion, while there was even a doubt as to the principles of the Government, he should have degraded himself and the House, and abused the confidence of the public. He knew, that, as in all Cabinets, there was a difference of opinion upon many subjects, and amongst others, upon the Corn-laws, but he solemnly declared; that he knew not, that upon that question they would not act as a Cabinet—a combined Cabinet upon the question of the Corn-laws, and according to the speech he then made. He felt it, due to himself—he felt it due to Lord Grey, and he also felt it, due to those not now belonging to the Cabinet—and he called upon them to support him in the assertion—to give a flat denial to that which was reported to, have fallen from one high in office in the present Government.
Earl Fitzwilliamdid not rise to answer any accusation against himself, for every one knew, that upon that subject there was no accusation to be brought against him. The question he believed was not whether Lord Grey's Government was formed on the principle of the Corn-laws being an open question, but whether that formed the principle of her Majesty's present Administration. With respect to the opinions of Lord Grey's Government, there could be no doubt of the opinions of that Government as proved by the conduct of the Government on that subject. He begged to state, that fie was intrusted with a great number of petitions on this important subject, which he was about to present to that House. He did not know whether his noble Friend had been judicious in fixing so early a period for the discussion of that question—he was not quite decided on that point; but he would say, that the repeal of the Corn-

187
laws would be eventually wrung from them by the petitions of a suffering, but nevertheless a most loyal, people; suffering through the infliction of injudicious laws—he would say injudicious laws, because he thought they had been enacted in ignorance of the injuries they might produce and which they were still likely to produce. He confessed it was a matter of great regret to him to see the exaggerated statements that had been made on both sides of the question—on one side exaggerated statements of the effects of the repeal of the Corn-laws, and on the other side exaggerated statements of the evils those laws have actually produced. That these effects were mischievous—that they were dangerous to the future prosperity of the country—and that hitherto they had been found mischievous—he entertained no doubt, but he did believe, that the effect of these laws had been exaggerated by those who had felt them; and he was convinced, that the fears and apprehensions of those who resisted their repeal, were equally unfounded: Of course, on an occasion like the present, he would not enter into the arguments upon the subject. It would be out of place on the present occasion to do anything more than to express his opinion, but he believed, that when the opinions of the manufacturing classes themselves were examined into, and when their petitions were before the House, and he trusted, that their Lordships would examine them, he had every reason to believe, that their Lordships would find, that the manufacturing classes would be satisfied with much less than they were represented to claim, and perhaps did claim, in some of the petitions which had been presented to their Lordships. They all knew, that it was the common course of mankind to be in the habit of asking somewhat more than they expected, and, therefore, if these petitions went to the full length of calling upon their Lordships to abrogate all Corn-laws and put an end to every regulation, even for fiscal purposes, he apprehended they would not form a just estimate of what were the views and expectations of the reasonable and thinking portion of the petitioners. That there might be among large classes of people collected together many of sanguine temperaments and extravagant views, there was no doubt; but his conviction was, that if they acceded to the motion of which his noble and
188
learned Friend had given notice, and entered, as he trusted they would, into the whole question, by both Houses giving the petitioners an opportunity of proving their case, he was convinced, that their Lordships would discover a satisfactory adjustment of the question, and would be able at least to meet the just expectations of the people; but if they turned a deaf ear to the petitioners, then he did not think, that it was in the power of any man to answer for what the consequences might be if it should please Providence again to afflict this country with a harvest as deficient as that which they had just passed. He trusted their Lordships would approach the question with calmness and deliberation and not foster in their minds an opinion which, upon examination, might turn out to be an unfounded prejudice, but would listen to the petitioners and allow them that opportunity they claimed of making out their case, and produce the impression they expected upon their Lordships and upon the other House of Parliament, though it might not lead to the entire repeal, but to a better adjustment of the present Corn-laws. The noble Lord concluded by presenting a petition from Pudsey, in the West Riding of Yorkshire for the repeal of the Corn-laws.
Lord Broughamwould not follow the noble Lord in the very able remarks he had made upon the subject, but after having received a rebuke from the noble Lord, he wished to speak in extenuation, although after judgment had been pronounced, for he was in the unfortunate situation of a party punished—who was allowed an opportunity of speaking afterwards in his own vindication. He was happy to think, that his noble Friend would be found with him, but he was sorry to find that there was any difference upon the subject of time, for it was only on the question of time, that judgment or discretion could be exercised. His noble Friend seemed to think, that he had not acted very judiciously, and that he had not chosen the very best time for his motion. He however had no choice; and he was now about to show, that if he had said anything in that House upon the question, for it must be observed that he never alluded to what passed elsewhere, and who ever stated otherwise stated an untruth. He alluded to what passed out of doors, which was his duty, and if any one in the other House of Par-

189
liament, be that individual the highest authority there, said that he had done otherwise, such individual was misinformed by somebody having told him an untruth. By the votes of the other House which were public, and which were even sold, so that any person could know what they were, he observed that a notice of motion similar to the one he had given was entered on those votes, and stood for the 19th of February, and which was only a day later than that for which his motion stood. Now, his opinion, which he had stated to the Birmingham gentlemen whom he saw in November last, was, that this was the fit course to take, and he stated to them, that he should, at an early period, make this motion. And his opinion also was, that if there was any evidence to be taken—that if there was one place better than another to take that evidence in, it was that House where they were fettered by no technical rules, but acted strictly on judicial evidence. He grieved to observe, that his noble Friend had adopted a different course upon another point which was of great importance to himself. His noble Friend had taken upon himself to say, on behalf of their common clients, that it was not a total repeal his clients wanted—their Lordships were not to believe that was what they meant; they would be content with a great deal less. Whether that was discreet or not in his noble Friend he would leave to his own consideration; for his part, when he was at the Bar, he had never entered the Court, and said that his client, although he claimed 1,000 1.: never dreamt of getting more than 20 1. He had never thought of such a thing; but he ought to set their Lordships right as to the fact. His noble Friend was totally mistaken; he had had communications, not with wild enthusiasts, or sanguine individuals, but with some of the most temperate advocates of a repeal of the Corn-laws, with whom he had discussed the matter over and over again, and with some even from this very town, that morning, who were neither enthusiastic nor immoderate in their expectations of what ought to he done for their relief; but men more likely to know their own minds—less likely to mean one thing when they said another—less likely to say they meant a partial repeal when they called for a total repeal, could not possibly be found; and if he mentioned the name of Mr. Joseph Sturge, a great corn factor
190
for the last twenty-four years, he apprehended that those who knew that most respectable individual, would be convinced that any man more able to understand a subject to which he applied his very perspicacious mind, it would be difficult to find. Other gentlemen he might also mention highly qualified to judge of the question, with whom he had consulted. He, therefore, could not join his noble Friend in saying that the petitioners did not desire an entire abolition; and to show that this was a practical opinion of theirs, he had been furnished with a resolution which, if he had thought he should have been called upon to have entered thus fully into the subject, he should have read to their Lordships in the first instance. The resolution was unanimously agreed to yesterday by the delegates on the Corn-laws and when they came to him he told them he would have nothing to do with taking away what they called the protection of the farmer if he were not also to take away what they called the protection of the manufacturers and the shopkeepers. Upon that they came to the resolution, unanimously, to remove all restrictions on the importation of goods generally, and of putting them precisley on the same footing as they desired their Lordships to put the Corn-laws upon. He thought if anything could be, that was, a proof that their views were not limited to a partial, but to a total repeal, which in his opinion was the more safe, the more convenient, and the more judicious course.

COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH AUSTRIA.
The Earl of Aberdeensaid, that he was happy to find that the former treaties of commerce and navigation, which had recently expired, had been renewed; but a new article had been introduced which he could not quite understand. That article stipulated, that British vessels should be placed on the same footing with Austrian vessels on arriving at the Danube, and at the ports of the Danube, and he wanted to know what security they had for the fulfilment of that article, that British vessels should be on the same footing as Austrian vessels in ports not belonging to the Austrian dominions; and how it happened that Austria and Great Britain stipulated in a treaty for the treatment of British vessels in ports belonging to a state which was no party to that treaty, and over which they had no

191
jurisdiction. The fact was, that there were no Austrian ports in the Danube accessible to any vessels; all the ports were below the Austrian dominions; and, therefore, what he wanted to know was, what security they had that British vessels could be admitted in the same manner as Austrian vessels into the Turkish ports?
Viscount Melbournewas understood to say, that that advantage must be secured by another treaty.
The Earl of Aberdeensaid, that he still highly approved of the treaty, which was the same as the former one, with the exception of this new article; but he had been induced to ask the question, as it had been thrown out that some great and important addition had been made, which secured the free navigation of the Danube. At the time when he had the honour of signing the former treaty with the Austrian government, there was no necessity for any such stipulation, because, then there was no steam navigation; but now it might be an important advantage, and as all the ports of the Danube were below the Austrian dominions, he had sought an explanation of the matter from the noble Viscount.
Subject dropped.

SALE OF BEER.
Lord Broughamsaid, that last year he had given notice of introducing a Bill to repeal certain provisions of the Beer Acts of 1830, 1831, and 1835, which allowed beer to be sold and drank on the premises. He would now place that Bill on their Lordships' table; and, in doing so, he wished to state that a great mistake had gone abroad of his having changed his opinion on this subject. He brought in a Bill in the House of Commons to enable beer to be sold, not to be drank on the premises; there was a prohibition against its being on the premises. Mr. Calcraft's Committee recommended that it should be drunk on the premises. He protested against that; but the House of Commons decided in favour of that recommendation of the Committee. Therefore, he had never altered his opinion, and every day's experience convinced him more and more that that opinion was originally well-founded. There was one clause which he had thought necessary to add to the bill which he had introduced last year, and that was a clause to prevent evasions, by consuming beer in the neighbourhood of the premises. The noble
192
Duke opposite, last year suggested, that this measure had better originate elsewhere. He had taken that suggestion into consideration, and given it all the weight which a suggestion coming from so high a quarter deserved—and, upon the whole, he was of opinion there were reasons why the bill should be brought into the other House. A noble Friend of his there, was likely to bring it in; but that noble Lord being ill, he laid the bill on their Lordships' table, intending to go on with it if that other bill should not be brought in, or if it should be dropped or fail.

REPORT ON CANADA.
Ths Earl of Durhamdesired to ask the noble Viscount at the head of the Administration, whether he had been able to fix any day on which it would be convenient for him to lay the papers relating to the North American colonies do the table of this House, which had been referred to the other evening? He was induced to ask the question more particularly, because he had seen, with the deepest regret, a publication of a part, and a part only, of the Report. It was not doing justice to the Report, or to the great question involved in it, that there should be a publication of the conclusions adopted, without the arguments upon which they were arrived at being also given to the public. It was bringing the matter unfairly before the public, and therefore he roust press on her Majesty's Government the paramount importance of laying all the papers immediately before the House, in order that their Lordships and the country might have an opportunity of judging of their contents. He had the less difficulty in asking this favour of the noble Viscount, because he had had the honour to receive an official communication from the noble Lord, then at the head of the Colonial department, but who was now no longer so, as their Lordships had that evening heard, conveying had him the assurance that the report ad been laid before her Majesty, and stating also her Majesty's approbation of the attention he had paid to the subject. Having, therefore, received this communication, he could not conceive any difficulty in laying the whole of the report before the House. He would call upon the noble Viscount, as a matter of fairness to himself and to the country almost, as well as to those provinces which were so deeply in-

193
volved in the importance of the inquiry, to take an early opportunity to produce the papers to their Lordships. Before he sat down, he hoped their Lordships would allow him to say a few words upon another subject connected with his mission. He had been informed, that in some quarters attempts had been made to prejudice him, in the public mind, with reference to the expense which had been incurred in the matter. In order that there might be no mistake on that subject, he begged to state, that every shilling of the expenses which could relate to himself personally, and all those items which had been so much spoken of and calculated upon, had been defrayed out of his own purse. His position, therefore, would be this—that he had not received any salary for his services, and that he should incur a loss of a sum of money not far short of 10,000 1.
Viscount Melbournesaid, that as to the report of the noble Lord which had been laid before her Majesty, how it had happened that so large a part of it should have transpired almost before it was known to either House of Parliament, or before it was made known to the officers of the Government, it was impossible for him to comprehend. It was a matter, which he lamented most exceedingly; but the publication of it certainly left no discretion at all with respect to the question of whether it should be laid before the House or not, because it would be idle to withhold from the Houses of Parliament that of which so large a part had been communicated to the country, and the whole of which it was evident the parties who had already published a portion evidently possessed the means of laying before the public. He should, therefore, fix Monday next as the day on which he would lay the report before the House.
The Earl of Wicklowavailed himself of this opportunity to advert to a statement which had gone abroad that the report in question had been sent to that journal by the noble Earl (Durham) himself. This evidently could not be correct. But how a document of this nature could obtain publication before it was communicated to either House of Parliament he could not, conjecture.
The Earl of Durhamobserved that it was not very natural that he should communicate with a journal in which his proceedings were generally mentioned so unfavourably. The fact was, he was not in
194
the habit of taking it in; and it was only in consequence of being informed of the publication that morning that he had purchased a copy. The paper had given no foundation for such a report, for it only spoke of having received the report on the affairs of British North America from the Earl of Durham, [hear, hear!"]yes from the Earl of Durham to her Majesty.
Lord Brougham: Every one must see that it was not likely that the noble Earl would do a thing so injurious to himself as to allow his report to appear in a garbled state. There could be no reason for such a supposition.
The Earl of Wicklow: It was not stated that the document in the Times was a garbled report. It did not appear in toto, only because there was not room for it.
The Earl of Durham: If the noble Earl would take the trouble to look at the newspaper, he would see that I furnished no foundation for the statement that had been made.
The Marquess of Londonderryinquired when the noble Earl opposite (Durham) would bring forward a discussion upon Canada?
The Earl of Durham: My Lords I do not know that I am at all in a position to answer that question. I have been as a servant of the public, and I hope a zealous and faithful servant. I have given an account of my mission, and that report it is for your Lordships to decide upon. As to the course I may feel called upon to pursue, I do not feel myself at liberty to communicate to anybody, and certainly not to the noble Marquess, of whom, from his political opinions, I am least of all disposed to make a confident.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, I am not at all ambitious of the honour. There are certain circumstances, not relating to the question, between the noble Earl and her Majesty's Government, upon which I am desirous of making some animadversions on a future day; and I supposed that as the noble Earl would naturally be anxious to have a discussion at the earliest possible period, that he would from courtesy, inform me of the course he meant to take that so I might shape my course accordingly.
The Earl of Durham: I am happy to learn what is the motive of the noble Marquess which appears to be to have the best opportunity of making animadversions upon my conduct. I can assure the

195
noble Marquess that either upon this or any other occasion I shall be willing to answer any allegations he may bring against my public conduct, convinced as I am that however it may fail to meet his approval, it will secure the approbation of my country, and I trust eventually of my Sovereign.
The Marquess of Londonderry: The noble Earl had gone out of his way to speak about animadversions which he thinks I am to direct against him. Now, I have said no such thing, and I don't know what induced the noble Earl to think so—he must be very sensitive to fancy so; I said expressly, that the animadversions I was desirous of making, were not upon the question between the noble Earl and her Majesty's Government. I have stated distinctly that I conceive no person ought to censure the noble Earl till full information was presented, and I should be the last person to take such a course, and I think it rather hard that the noble Earl should charge me with what I have shown no intention of doing. It is my intention on Thursday next to propose certain questions to her Majesty's Government relative to what I conceive to be not a military but a very unmilitary proceeding according to the information that has been publicly promulgated at a certain military festival. I am desirous of knowing what communications have been made to her Majesty's Government on the subject, and what measures have been taken to admonish the individual in command, who unless I am much mistaken, is greatly to blame for what has taken place.
The Earl of Durhamdid not understand exactly what the noble Marquess alluded to. He understood him to refer to something that had taken place at some military festival, upon which he meant to found some resolution. If it was in reference to the affairs of Canada while he was in the office of Governor there, he should like the noble Marquess to state with a little more particularity what it was to which he alluded; because if it alluded to anything in which he was concerned, he should be prepared to give the noble Marquess the fullest information; but he felt at present quite unable to know what it was to which the noble Marquess referred, inasmuch as he had not even mentioned whether it was in North America or in Canada, the affair took place that he
196
wished to inquire about. He hoped, therefore, the noble Marquess would state it a little more particularly.
The Marquess of Londonderrybegged the noble Earl to understand the notice he gave this evening for Thursday should be confined to an inquiry of her Majesty's Ministers relative to a proceeding which had taken place, and which, if it had not taken place, the noble Earl (Lord Durham) would be able to deny. [Cries of Where? where?"] He thought the noble Lord could not doubt where that military festival was, which had been known, he believed, as much as that those who ran might read the proclamation of the noble Earl. He did not think it necessary to do more than to give notice, that on Thursday next he should put certain questions to her Majesty's Ministers relative to a proceeding which he believed had created as general a sensation in this country as any other circumstance which had occurred during the administration of the noble Earl, and he should put those questions relative to that matter, which must have made an impression on the mind of the noble Governor who was a Member of the Government, and who ought to have a constitutional, as well as a military feeling. Under these circumstances he did not think it necessary to state more than he had done.
Lord Hollandasked what use could there be in giving a notice of motion when the ground on which that notice was founded was not stated? The question ought to be such as would desire information, and in his opinion should be such as should state definitively the nature of that information, and the particular grounds on which it was desired.
Earl Mintothought that there should be a notice given of the time, place, and circumstances, to which the noble Marquess alluded, in order to enable the parties concerned to know to what point the notice tended.
The Marquess of Londonderry: The individual to whom he alluded, and who was one of the noble Earl's council, had made declarations of principles, which he (Lord Londonderry) confessed had astonished him. He did not think it was the province of that individual to have put forward such declarations, either in his civil or his military capacity.
The conversation then dropped.