Sitting of 5 June 1840

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a first time:—Prisons (Scotland).—Read a third time:—Customs Duties.
Petitions presented. By Mr. Hawes, and Mr. Warburton, from Printers and Bookbinders in Manchester, Birmingham, Kendal, Kennington, and others places, against the Copyright Bill.—By Sir R. Inglis, from Sheffield, Leeds, and other places, for Church Extension; from New Brunswick, to support the Colonial Church; from the Clergy of Brighton, against the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bill; from Parishes in Staffordshire, and Suffolk, against Sunday Trading; and from a Parish in Sussex, against the Irish Municipal Bill.—By Mr. G. Wood, from Surgeons and Physicians of Sheffield, against certain Provisions of the Vaccination Bill; and from places in Lancashire, against the Corn-laws.—By Mr. Pryme, from Dissenters of Cambridge, against Church Rates, and for the Release of John Thorogood; and from Birmingham, in favour of Cracow.—By Mr. Aglionby, from Cummersdale (Cumberland), complaining of the Treatment of Mr. F. O'Connor.—By Lord Ashley, from places in Worcester, and Dorset, for Church Extension.—By Mr. Litton, from Attendants of the British Museum, to inquire into their Salaries.—By the Attorney-general, from the Proprietors of Steam Vessels in Edinburgh, against Pilotage and Light-house Dues.—By Captain W. Gordon, from a place in Aberdeenshire, against the Increase of the Duties on Malt and Spirits; and from Al-ford, in favour of Lord Aberdeen's Bill.—By Mr. Wakley, from Electors of Ludlow, complaining of Bribery and Treating; from certain Inhabitants of London and Manchester, complaining of the Treatment to which Mr. F. O'Connor, Mr. Vincent, and other persons convicted of Political Offences are at present exposed.—By Colonel Gore Langton, Mr. Williams, Sir H. Parnell, and others, from St. Alban's, Monmouth, Dundee, and other places, complaining of the West India monopoly in the supply of Sugar.—By Mr. Hindley, and Mr. Easthope, from Stalybridge, Leicester, and Ansted, complaining of the Treatment of Mr. Feargus O'Connor.—By Mr. Easthope, from Leicester, against Church Extension.

REGISTRATION OF VOTERS. (IRELAND,)
Sir J. Grahamwished to ask a question of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Solicitor-General for Ireland. About ten days ago the hon. and learned Gentleman had obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the registration system in Ireland, and he had also notified to the House that he intended to introduce a second bill, to deal with the subject of the new definition of "a beneficial interest," including the direction of an appellate tribunal for the assistant-barristers registering votes in Ireland. He had brought in the first of these bills, but it was not yet printed, though the order had been made. He had also obtained leave to bring in the second bill, but he had not introduced it as yet. He begged to remind the hon. and learned Gentleman of the promise which he had made to him upon that occasion. He (Sir J. Graham) had said that it was most desirable that these bills should both be in the hands of Members before the House was asked to take another step in the bill of his noble Friend the Member for North Lancashire. The hon. and learned Gentleman had given his assurance that both these bills would be in the hands of Members in a few days. Ten days had elapsed but they were not yet forthcoming. One of them might be printed and delivered before Thursday; but unless he presented the second bill either that night or the following day, it was impossible that it could be in the possession of Members on Thursday, when the debate would come on. He wished therefore, to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman, whether to night or to morrow he would present the second bill, for the definition of the beneficial interests.
Mr. Pigot, I can't introduce the second bill either to night or to morrow. The first will be ready by Thursday.
Sir J. Grahamwas then to understand that it was not possible upon Thursday next to have the second bill.
Subject dropped.

WAYS AND MEANS—TIMBER DUTIES.
The House having gone into committee of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he would state to the committee the course he intended to pursue with respect to the article of timber, which he proposed to except from the five per cent. imposed upon other articles. The hon. Alderman who spoke on a former occasion on that subject
956
had stated that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had given no adequate reason for such a course. He thought that he had stated to the House that, after the proposition he had formerly made with regard to these duties had been made public, he obtained information from parties who were competent to give him the fullest information upon the subject, and upon whose opinion he could rely, that an increasing differential duty upon timber would have a very great influence upon the trade by reason of the very close competition which existed in that trade; that a slight increase would displace much of the Baltic timber, and would be the means of introducing colonial timber; and he thought also that he had stated that those who gave him such information represented to him that if such an increase did take place, that so far from his obtaining an increase of revenue by that means, that is, by displacing timber upon which a high duty was paid, and replacing it by limber upon which a low duty was paid, he would, in fact, obtain a reduction of duty to a very considerable amount. When that statement was made to him he felt it his duty after having obtained his information from, and being influenced by the opinions of, capable and impartial persons, who assisted him in the consideration of the question, and after devoting the best attention he could himself give to the question, and feeling also that the result contemplated would certainly take place, that the effect would be in some cases about one-twelfth increase, and in other cases one sixth, upon Baltic timber, and that the inevitable result would be a diminution of the revenue, he felt it his duty to make that alteration with regard to the timber duty which he would immediately develope to the House. The object he had in view undoubtedly was to obtain additional revenue: and it was his duty also to get that increase so as not to affect the consumption of the article; and if he found that so far from the article producing the revenue which he expected, and that, in fact, he should obtain less, he felt it incumbent upon him not to adhere to any rule or regulation he had previously made, or to any decision previously adopted, to come down to the House and to state that he had proposed a plan which would not accomplish the objects that were intended. Among other reasons which had induced him to alter the proposition he had made,

957
was a feeling that a great differential duty already existed between the Baltic and Canada timber, and that if he were to increase that difference, and that from such an increase the result would be a great injury to one class of those engaged in the timber trade at the expense of the other—that, so far as regarded the colonial interests, great injury would arise, that certain parties would inevitably suffer, that they would press the complaints upon the public and upon the House, and seek an alteration in the amount of the duty. It was for these reasons, which were political reasons, that he considered the proposition anew. Under these circumstances, when he came to the decision he had then arrived at, he stated to the House that he gave up the five per cent, duty upon timber, and would make that article a separate question for two reasons; first, he obtained an equal amount of revenue from timber as he expected before; secondly, he obtained that revenue in the shape of duty upon two articles of consumption in an equal proportion. This was his plan. In the first place, he found there was a long list of small articles, such as cutting-boards for shoemaker's occupying two or three pages in the list, which produced a very small revenue. He did not intend to propose any alteration in the duty on these articles. It was the great articles on which the duty was to be collected, which were known by the names of timbers, deals, and battens. The whole amount of the duty collected on timber was 1,602,000 l., and of this the amount collected on timber, deals, deal-ends, battens, and batten-ends amounted to 1,465,000 l. He, therefore, proposed not to interfere with the small articles, but with the large ones alone, from which the whole revenue was collected. He proposed to levy an additional duty of 1s. 6d. per load on all timber imported whether from Canada or the Baltic, and, taking that as a principle, he should adapt it to the different relations of timber imported. He should adapt that principle to the additional duty on deals and deal ends. Gentlemen who were conversant with the trade were perfectly aware that these terms were used to signify different lengths and dimensions of timber. The resolution which he should put into the hands of the Chairman, would render it unnecessary for him to go at length into the details of the bill. In the first place he proposed an
958
additional duty on timber of 1s. 6d. per load, and an additional duty of 7s. 6d. upon battens, and upon batten-ends an additional duty of 3s., and an additional duty upon deals of the first class 1s. 6d. The other different duties would be according to the quality of the article. The resolution he had to submit to the committee would state the duties proposed, and the bill would contain the additional rate of charge upon the different articles. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving,
"That, towards raising the supply granted to her Majesty, there shall be raised, levied, collected, and paid, an additional duty of customs not exceeding the following amounts, on the timber, wood, and wood goods, after specified, in lieu of the duty imposed on all descriptions of timber, wood, and wood goods, by an act of the present Session of Parliament; that is to say, on timber, wood, and wood goods, now chargeable by the load, containing fifty cubic feet, an additional duty the load, of 1s. 6d.; on battens and batten ends, deals and deal ends, an additional duty equal in amount to the sum of 1s. 6d. upon each load of timber contained in 120 of such battens, batten-ends, deals, and deal ends respectively.
Mr. Alderman Thompsonsaid that, without entering into the question of the policy of the differential duties, he was not able to see why any exception should be made in the case of timber. He could not understand why, if differential duties were continued, they should not equally apply to sugar, coffee, and oils. Purchases of timber had been made by parties under the impression that the duties would remain the same as they had formerly been, and a new scale of duties would lead to great inconvenience. He therefore objected to the plan of the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. Laboucheresaid that the hon. Member for Sunderland had not appreciated the arguments of his right hon. Friend at their just value. His right hon. Friend had stated, that, to his former proposition, as to the duties on colonial and foreign timber, there was both a financial objection and a commercial objection; a financial objection, inasmuch as the augmentation of the rate of duty might, as it frequently happened, be attended with a less amount of duty received in the aggregate; a commercial objection, founded upon the consideration that the duties upon Baltic timber were already enormous. Its con-

959
sequent high price was very prejudicial to the builder, and to the permanency of our structures and buildings here; and no one, therefore, would desire any augmentation in the duties upon the import of that finer description of timber. He had lately seen several intelligent persons interested in the timber trade, and from them he had learned that the proposition of his right hon. Friend would be acquiesced in by the dealers in that article. So far from there being anything intricate in the proposed increase of duties, the principle was quite simple, and was applicable to all timber, whether introduced from Canada or from the Baltic.
Mr. Warburtonconcurred in the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman, that already the amount of the differential duties upon Baltic timber, exceeding, as it did, 45 s. per load above the duty on our own colonial timber, was excessive, and felt to be prejudicial in respect to the construction of our buildings. This was a great mistake in a commercial point of view, and did not now admit easily of a remedy. The proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be seen to continue the same preference given to our own colonial produce, and would place the trade in these sorts of timber exactly upon the same footing as it had stood for a long period of time.
Mr. Huttbelieved that the remarks which had fallen from the hon. Member for Sunderland would not be coincided in by his constituents. The proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer met with his approbation.
Mr. Villierswould not let the Session pass without bringing the whole subject of the timber duties before the House. He considered the question was left perfectly open by the arrangement proposed—that the differential duties were as objectionable as they were before—and that the same arguments remained against them as before. The case of those who wished to have the duties altered was, that the present system was a waste of the resources of the country; and the hon. Alderman and his colleague might be assured that he would give them an opportunity of establishing their position, that the system they contended for was of advantage to the colonial and the shipping interests.
Resolution agreed to.
The House resumed, resolution reported.

SUPPLY—MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
The House in committee of supply on the Irish and Scotch Miscellaneous Estimates.
Several votes were agreed to.
On the question that 76,300 l. for law expenses, grants to the Scottish Universities, and other charges formerly paid out of the hereditary revenues of the Crown, and not provided for out of the Consolidated Fund,
Sir James Grahambegged to inquire of the hon. Gentleman opposite, what course was intended to be adopted with regard to a vote of 800 l. recommended by the committee of last year, to be placed in the hands of a university court, to be established for the purpose of its distribution? He did not find that there was any mention of it in the estimates.
Mr. Fox Maulesaid that if the right hon. Baronet would refer once again to the estimates, he would find that they contained a proposition for a grant of 800 l., in lieu of the lease of rents of the archbishopric of Glasgow. All the objects of this vote were set out with the exception of one, which was the establishment of a chair for civil engineering and mechanics. He thought that the importance of this vote would be universally admitted at the present time, and that a sufficient ground of the grant being rather large would be found to exist in the circumstance that the persons who were to be benefited being generally of small means, they could not afford to pay expensive fees. With regard to the disposition of the vote alluded to by the right hon. Baronet, there was no university court yet established, and it was thought best to place the funds in the hands of the Government, with a view to its proper distribution.
Sir J. Grahamdid not mean to dispute the propriety of establishing the proposed professorship; but after the explanation of the hon. Under-secretary, it was clear that the appropriation of the fund was not in conformity with the recommendation of the commissioners, nor was it in conformity with former grants. What he wished to know from the hon. Under-secretary was, whether the appropriation of the sum mentioned in the vote was made in conformity with the recommendation of the commissioners? He thought it was not.
Mr. F. Mauleremarked that although there was every wish to conform to the recommendation of the commissioners, he

961
did not consider that the Government were bound by the report of the commission, if they should think it necessary to make a different appropriation of this grant. The recommendation of the commissioners was, that the grant should be continued, and placed on the same footing as the surplus revenues of the university, to be distributed in the manner most conducive to the objects of the institution. It was true that the commissioners had further recommended that this grant should be left in the hands of the University Court for distribution, but that court was not in existence.
Sir J. Grahamobserved that the chief recommendation of the commissioners was the establishment of the University Court, in which the heads of the universities would have voices, and would dispose of the money in a manner most conducive to the interests of the university. That recommendation, however, the Government had not adopted, and in the absence of the University Court they took upon themselves the distribution of the grant. And the House was called upon to agree to the vote in the absence of all information upon the subject.
Mr. Gillonwas sure the Government would exercise a strict supervision in the distribution of this fund. He thought it was most important that this professorship of engineering and mechanics, which would so essentially contribute to the improvement of those working classes who were not in a condition to pay high fees, should be established.
Vote agreed to.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid he would not go any further into the items of supply at present, and would postpone further proceedings until the bringing up of the report on Thursday.
Colonel Sibthorpexpressed his surprise that so much money should be voted in so short a time. He had just gone to take some refreshment, and on his return he found that above 300,000 l. had been voted away in his absence, short as it was. He would certainly oppose these grants when the report was brought up on Thursday. He saw that the noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, had also only just come in like himself; in fact, nobody expected such a mass of business to be gone into except those who were in the secret of the juggling policy pursued by the Government.
Mr. Sergeant Jacksoncomplained that
962
an undue advantage had been taken of the Irish Members on this occasion. He was only absent ten minutes, and found that a sum of 300,000 l. had been voted away without opposition. This business had not been expected to be gone into on Friday at such an early hour, as the state of the benches on both sides proved. There were scarcely Members to form a House. When serious questions on Protestant education were brought forward, he had wished to have had an opportunity of expressing his opinions on the outlay of 50,000 l. But he perceived the noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, had the same misfortune as himself—a misfortune in which, indeed, almost all the Irish Members shared, for there were only six or eight of them in the House—and even the seat of the hon. Member for Kilkenny was vacant, whom he expected on his return to find speaking. He was sure he was absent only ten minutes. He would certainly take the opportunity of expressing his opinions very fully on the subject of Irish education on the bringing up the report. It was his intention to bring under the notice of the Legislature, at an early period in the next Session of Parliament, the system of education pursued in the College of Maynooth.
Mr. J. Grattanalso complained that the Irish estimates had been carried through in the absence of Irish Members.
Sir R. Batesonexpressed himself to a similar effect. Three hundred petitions had been presented during the Session against the grant to the College of Maynooth. That fact alone was sufficient to demonstrate that the vote was one that ought not to be passed as a matter of course. He should state his views upon the point when the report was brought up. It was also his intention to move for a select committee for the purpose of considering the existing system of education at Maynooth.
Lord J. Russellsaid, that the manner in which the estimates had been proceeded with was perfectly regular. Friday was the regular day, and the House resolved itself into a committee of supply at six or half-past six o'clock. Surely hon. Members opposite would not expect any set of Ministers to create and to maintain a debate upon the estimates which they themselves brought forward. With respect to the sitting of the House to-morrow, he wished to observe that it was merely

963
intended to proceed with one bill (the Irish Grand Jury Cess Bill), for which the Lords were waiting.
Colonel Sibthorpsaid that he supposed that the noble Lord opposite, being at Almack's, or some other fashionable place, could not be present whilst the Irish estimates were brought on, though he thought it was the duty of the noble Lord to be present, holding the lucrative and overpaid office which he did; and he should certainly propose that the noble Lord's salary should be reduced from 5,500 l. to 4,000 l.
Viscount Morpethwas sorry that he had not been in his place when the Irish estimates were brought on; but, as they had passed off so smoothly, his regret was diminished; and, knowing that the hon. and gallant Member had often expressed his intention of moving the reduction of his salary, it might be a matter of delicacy with him not to be present on the occasion, and so to avoid the necessity of voting on that subject.
Mr. Darbysaid he must admit the perfect regularity of the proceedings. He had come down with the intention of making some objection to certain parts of the estimates; but, seeing the state of the House on his side, he could not do so.
House resumed.

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Marquess of Breadalbane, Lord Hatherton, and Lord Hawarden, from Derby, Chester, Tipperary, and other places, for a Repeal of the Corn-laws—By Lord Seagrave, from Stroud, against Church Rates, for Medical Reform, and the Small Pox Innoculation Prevention Act.—By the Archbishop of Canterbury, from Southampton, in favour of the Better Observance of the Sabbath.— By the Bishop of London, from Chelsea, Islingston, etc., against Sunday Trading.

Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR.
Lord Denmanpresented a petition signed by the Chairman of a public meeting which took place at Leeds, praying for a free pardon for Feargus O'Connor in consideration of the sufferings he had endured since his imprisonment in York Castle.
The Marquess of Normanbywould take this opportunity of giving some further explanation upon the subject of Mr. O'Connor's imprisonment, in reference to which he had been almost in daily communication with the visiting magistrates of York Castle. He had received in reply to the various questions he had addressed to them a letter from Mr. Barnard Hague, chairman of the visiting magistrates, dated June 1, from which he would read the following extract—
"Mr. Feargus O'Connor is not subjected to any indignities of the person. He does not take his chamber utensil up stairs, or bring it down to clean it out. He does not scour out his room. He does not perform any menial office. He has had sheets offered him to sleep in, and he refused them. He occupies tonight, and will continue to occupy, the best room on the felons' side. He has tea and sugar, without restriction as to quantity, twice a day. He has animal food at dinner, and two glasses of wine. He is shaved daily, and has clean linen and towels when he wishes. There are no beds but those of iron stock and flock beds, of which flock beds he has four. He has a pillow, chair and table. He eats, and has eaten, his meals in his ward by himself, the first day excepted. He has a large yard to exercise in. He has a bed-room and large hospital to himself. He wears his own clothes. He has not had any newspapers. He has not written or received any letters without the inspection of the governor."
He would observe, that the first day was excepted in some respects, and it was perhaps, to that day that Mr. O'Connor alluded in his petition. He had also re-954
ceived a letter stating what relaxations were proposed, but he did not think it would be well to read it. He would state however, that he thought the result would be that Mr. O'Connor would enjoy in York Castle everything that was consistent with the due execution of the sentence of the court, and with that view still further inquiry would be made as to the correctness of his allegations.
Lord Broughamthought his noble Friend was very right to make further inquiry. He had seen quite enough of statements and counterstatements to induce him to suspend his opinion until further inquiry should be made upon the subject. Without meaning any disrespect whatever to the magistrates themselves who had given those answers, he thought it would be safer to trust to an impartial inquiry which, it appeared, was about to be instituted.
Petition laid on the Table.