Sitting of 9 March 1840

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a first time:—Horse Racing.—Read a second time:—Printed Papers; Union Workhouses Prisons.
Petitions presented. By Messrs. Baines, Villiers, T. Stewart, Brotherton, M. Philips, Hume, Sir G. Strickland, and Lord Marcus Hill, from a very great number of places,

1051
for the Total and Immediate Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Lord Elliot, Mr. Hope, and Sir J. Y. Buller, from several places, against any further Grant to Maynooth College.—By Sir W. Follett, from Exeter, for the Repeal of the Tithe Commutation Act—By Mr. Hume, Lord M. Hill, and Sir J. Stewart, from a number of places, for an Extension of the Franchise, and Vote by Ballot—By Messrs. Villiers, Baines, Hume, and W. Williams, from a number of places, for the Abolition of Church Rates, the Release of John Thorogood, and against the Jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts.—By Sir E. Sugden, Mr. R. Palmer, and Sir J. Y. Buller, from several places, for Church Extension.—By Mr. Vere, from two places, in favour of Non-Intrusion.—By Lord G. Somerset, from Carriers of Birmingham, against the Railway Monopoly.—By Lord Eliot, from Cornwall, against the Irish Corporation Bill.—By Mr. Alston, from Bishop Storford, against the Rating of Workhouses.—By Mr. S. Barry, from places in Cork, for Municipal Reform, and an Extension of the Franchise in Ireland.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS IRELAND).
Viscount Morpeth Viscount Morpeth moved the third reading of the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill.
Sir G. Sinclairsaid, that having rarely taken part during the last two sessions in any of the various debates respecting Ireland, he intended on this occasion to make some remarks upon the affairs and interests of that country—a country which during so many centuries had been groaning under the accumulated evils of misgovernment, or, in other words, had unhappily been cleaving to the ignominious thraldom of Papal domination, and which could never be permanently peaceful or prosperous without a repeal of the union, not between Great Britain and Ireland, but between Ireland and the see of Rome. He approached this task with unaffected reluctance, because he was afraid that some of the statements which he should submit, and some of the principles which he should avow, might not be assented to by many valued Friends around him, with whom he at all times deemed it an honour to act and accounted it a happiness to agree; but he could not, in the discharge or a public duty, allow himself to be so swayed by personal sentiments of deference and regard as to disguise the feelings of his heart and belie the convictions of his understanding. He was impelled to address the House on this subject by a deep and increasing persuasion—a persuasion not a little fortified by the menacing tone assumed, and the ominous prophecies uttered in quarters of high authority—that the Protestant institutions of Ireland, with which those of the empire stood indissolubly linked, were in fearful and imminent jeopardy. He believed that the very force intended to maintain tranquillity
1052
was so organised as to increase their danger. On the part of the Roman Catholics they beheld combination, energy, and success; whilst they too often found in the ranks of the Protestants dissension, supineness, and discomfiture. Each victory achieved by the former was an encouraging precursor of some new aggression, whilst every defeat sustained by the latter was the humiliating prelude to some fresh surrender. The potent screw of the 6,000,000 argument was as effectually wielded by the Roman Catholics as was that of the six Members' argument by an imperious boroughmonger for the purpose of extorting an unreasonable boon from the hard-pressed Prime Minister of a former era, whom he knew that he had at his mercy; so that the Roman Catholics were almost justified by the result of every past experiment in openly declaring to the imperial Legislature—"Because we are six millions, we must obtain whatever we ask, demolish whatever we dislike, and accomplish whatever we desire." It must, he thought, be admitted, that the Irish Tithe Bill, clogged as it was with so enormous a deduction from the incomes of the clergy, was wrung from their fears, and not conceded by their good-will. That deduction was rendered necessary by the culpable pusillanimity of successive governments, who ought to have enforced (as they would have done in the case of taxes, rents, or debts) the might and majesty of the law. But, though reluctantly assented to by the clergy, and on that ground alone not opposed by himself, it was in principle an act of sacrilegious injustice. They had been generous with other people's money, and he was convinced that through sacrifices which cost them nothing they had only purchased a hollow and precarious truce; by which the Protestants of Ireland had been discouraged in the defence of their not yet extinguished rights, and not yet confiscated property, while the Papists were stimulated to renew every menace, and persevere in every machination. No permanent advantage was ever secured by worshipping the goddess expediency; and a system of concession and compromise was seldom successful in the long run. In compliance with the wish, and in conformity with the example, of his right hon. Friend, he had abstained on several occasions from calling for a division when this bill was formerly before them. His un-

1053
feigned respect for his superior judgment prompted him to wish that he should enjoy the fullest latitude for trying his conciliatory experiment, of which, however, he not only doubted the success, but could not altogether admit the wisdom. His own hostility to this measure remained unmitigated and unchanged. Though the salutary amendments introduced by the House of Lords would have eliminated much that was noxious and much that was objectionable from the provisions of this bill, yet the reasonings so powerfully urged against its principle by his Protestant Irish friends had made so strong and indelible an impression upon his mind, as to convince him that by passing such an act in any form, they would furnish—not peace, but a sword; and thus not confer boon, but inflict a calamity upon Ireland. This bill, even when modified, could not fail to be received with jealousy and apprehension by a large proportion of the Protestant clergy and laity, the best and surest friends of British connection, and at the same time be viewed with perfect indifference by nineteen-twentieths of the Roman Catholic millions, for whose satisfaction it was said to be intended. He should never cease to think that Parliament would have exercised a more sound discretion by abolishing these corporations altogether; they would thus have placed all parties on a footing of perfect equality, and prevent those scenes of almost Guelph and Ghibelline discord and ferocity to which struggles for municipal ascendancy would give birth in many towns and cities throughout Ireland. The hon. Member for Dublin possessed a kind of magical kaleidoscope, through the medium of which he represented the state of Ireland under the most opposite aspects, according as it suited his convenience. At one time it was a paradise of quiet, at another a pandemonium of disturbance. For his own part, he fully concurred in viewing that country as a volcano, and he believed, that the embryo corporations would serve as so many craters to inundate the whole district in their respective neighbourhoods with the lava of sedition and discontent. Abolition was all that the Roman Catholics themselves had asked at no very distant period. But he had seen with sorrow and surprise, that their pretensions had always risen in the ratio of their power; it was even openly and ostentatiously affirmed, that they cajoled us when they were weak,
1054
and coerced us when they were strong; and now they were intent upon effecting not a mere annihilation of Protestant influence, but a palpable transfer of supremacy. There were only two classes of politicians who would derive any benefit from the new-fangled corporations, or who took any interest in their establishment, and those were intriguing priests and turbulent demagogues—the very persons whose despotism he, for one, was most anxious to control or to extinguish. There was one annual, or rather perennial, assertion of the noble Lord, upon which he should take the liberty to comment, because it greatly enhanced the alarm with which he viewed the relative position of Popery and Protestantism in Ireland. "The English," said the noble Lord, "have obtained Municipal Reform, because they are Englishmen; the Scotch have obtained Municipal Reform, because they are Scotchmen; the Irish have not obtained Municipal Reform, because they are Irishmen." He could only characterise such a position as most unfounded and unfair. For his own part, at least, he was opposed to the constitution of these Normal schools of agitation, as they had been so often and so emphatically termed; not because the corporate offices would be filled by Irishmen, but because the new system must increase the power of a party, in his opinion, the most inimical to the true welfare and permanent tranquillity of Ireland—a party who made no secret of their eagerness to overthrow the Protestant Church, and who would not scruple for the sake of effecting that unrighteous object to contend for a virtual dismemberment of the empire. Was the noble Lord prepared to follow out his reasoning to its legitimate conclusion? Supposing that in the next epistolary anathema addressed to him by Archbishop M'Hale, that Ajax Flagelisses of modern polemics were to say, "the Episcopalian English have obtained an Episcopalian Church establishment, because they are Englishmen; the Presbyterian Scotch have obtained a Presbyterian Church Establishment, because they are Scotchmen; the Catholic Irish have not obtained a Catholic Church Establishment, because they are Irishmen." According to the noble Lord's doctrine he could see no confutation of this analogy, and as he had furnished the argument, he trusted he was, prepared to supply the answer. He had

1055
at all times cordially supported the principle of converting upon fair terms the tithe into a rent-charge; but he must confess, that he had not been led to form a very high or sanguine estimate as to the amount of security which that sacrifice was likely to purchase for the Established Church. It would prevent direct collision between the Protestant clergyman and the Roman Catholic occupier of the soil, an object unquestionably of the greatest importance; but had it appeased the inveterate enmity of the Popish priest? Had it silenced the inflammatory invectives of the Popish agitator? Did any one dream that the object for which these conspirators against Protestantism had been striving was to procure for the heretical incumbent an easier and more regular payment of his due, and to extort for the landlord an usurious per centage in his new capacity of banker or tithe-proctor to theclergy? Let the House listen to the terms in which the hon. Member for Tipperary, had denounced the Church of Ireland, that Church which he had sworn at the Table of the House not to weaken or to impair, and then judge whether that hon. Member, and those who thought as he did, could regard the Tithe Bill as a satisfactory and final adjustment. The hon. Gentleman described it in very different terms from those which he would have ventured to employ in 1828. The Roman Catholics were wise men in their generation. They knew exactly what claims it was expedient, under any given circumstances to advance, although the ultimate object of annihilating the Protestant religion was never absent from their thoughts, being not only cherished as a desire, but inculcated as a duty. "This," says he, "is the Church on which a faction fattens, by which a nation starves; the Church from which no imaginable good can flow; but evil in such black and continuous abundance has been for centuries and is to this day poured out, the Church by which religion has been retarded, morality has been vitiated, and animosity has been engendered." He avowed without hesitation, in the face of his country, that he could neither justify nor account for his past or present opposition to the Municipal Reform Bill for Ireland, on any other ground than one which he deemed to be paramount and conclusive—namely, a determination on his part not to strengthen by any act of his the hands of the Roman
1056
Catholic faction in Ireland, who, he was persuaded, were unanimous in their wish and unchangeable in their design to overthrow the edifice of our Protestant Established Church, for the purpose of building up a Popish fabric on its ruins. The state of Protestant feeling throughout this Protestant country was not fairly expressed or adequately represented in that House. He believed, that the Protestants of Ireland were much less dismayed by the unscrupulous activity of their enemies, than disheartened by the paralysing apathy of their friends. The lamp of Protestant light would indeed burn with a dim and feeble flame if it were not supplied from other sources—extraneous to the British Parliament—with the pure and holy oil of devotedness, zeal, and affection. Those who taxed him for giving utterrance to those opinions with intolerance or exaggeration, indirectly charged our illustrious ancestors, the martyrs of Protestant truth, and the victims of Popish tyranny, with all the rancour of bigotry and all the rashness of fanaticism. His disappointment at the results which had flowed from the Roman Catholic Relief Act was perhaps even more poignant than that of his right hon. Friend who introduced that Act in 1829, as the preferable alternative in a choice of evils. He, when first elected a Member of that House, in 1811, declared himself a humble but zealous champion of that measure, as being in itself a positive good. For the sake of contributing, as he fondly thought, to the welfare and happiness of Ireland, he forfeited the goodwill of an Anti-Catholic Cabinent, and gave up all hopes of personal advantage by voting in favour of Mr. Grattan's motion in the spring of the following year. But he was compelled to acknowledge, with deep humiliation and regret, that not one of his predictions had been fulfilled, nor one of his expectations realised. And were such complaints peculiar to himself? He could not, on this subject, help alluding to a very striking contrast which he had seen illustrated by multiplied examples. He had the honour to be well acquainted with many politicians, who, like himself, were from the earliest commencement of their public career most strenuous advocates of the Roman Catholic claims. He had heard not a few of them lament the fatal error into which they were betrayed by false promises and specious misrepresentations,

1057
and a still greater number their grief and indignation at the extent to which solemn pledges had been broken and fresh pretensions urged by those whose cause had been espoused, on the ground of their repeated asseverations, that when the privileges then contended for had been conceded they would prefer no ulterior demands. On the other hand, he also knew many equally conscientious and intelligent persons who opposed these measures up to the latest moment, and he never found that one of them experienced the least compunction for the conduct which he pursued, or manifested the slightest astonishment at the evils arising from the concessions which he had deprecated and resisted. Not one of them had ever exclaimed, "Well, I am really lost in wonder when I reflect upon my own blindness and obstinacy. I am quite ashamed when I contrast the gratitude of the Roman Catholics towards their supporters, the abstinence of the priests from all interference in the turmoil of secular politics, the undisturbed tranquillity of Ireland, and the entire security of the Protestant Church, with all my gloomy anticipations, and all my exaggerated fears." Another objection which he had to this measure was the apprehension that it would ere long be followed up on the part of her Majesty's Ministers by further concessions to Roman Catholic importunity. On this head he was convinced that there was no finality. The principle on which they acted in all their negotiations with the movement party seemed to be this—"We will concede nothing that you will allow us to withhold, but we will withhold nothing that you insist upon our conceding." All the enemies of the Church were their friends, and most of the friends of the Church were their enemies. The news of their resignation was received last year with delight by the Protestant clergy throughout the realm; their return was hailed with a delirium of joy by the priests and precursors of Ireland, and why? Because the former anticipate extreme danger to our ecclesiastical establishment from their continuance in place, while the latter were led to hope that there was some prospect of obtaining through their instrumentality a portion, at least, of those objects which their leaders so strenuously insisted upon out of doors, and within the walls of Parliament as studiously abstained from urging.
1058
It was admitted and even contended by their own partisans that any alternative was preferable to that of resignation. The principle of maintaining a Protestant Church in Ireland was already made an open question in the Privy Council, by the admissions of the right hon. Member for Tipperary, and might become so, ere long, in the Cabinet. There every important measure had both in its supporters and its opponents. It was a kind of concordia discors, where they were usually six of one side and half a dozen of the other. The only maxim to which all must adhere was this, that duty must be sacrificed at the shrine of interest, and office retained' at the expense of principle. He was aware that it was quite hopeless to oppose the further progress of this bill; but he believed that, with all the most honest and zealous Protestants of Ireland it was not less unpopular than the most obnoxious of its predecessors. Her Majesty's Ministers boasted much of Irish tranquillity, which he placed on a level with Ministerial consistency; both were temporary and conditional, both depended entirely for their continuance upon considerations of policy and convenience. This bill must necessarily tend to increase Papal influence in Ireland, and to undermine British supremacy. It was a bill investing Daniel O'Connell, Esq., M.P. with the office of Lord Mayor of Dublin, quamdiu se male gesseret, and for enabling him to appoint vice-agitators to every office in every municipality in order that meetings might be annually held, and petitions annually voted, for the conversion of the rent-charges of the Protestant Church to secular purposes. It was a bill, not for dismantling certain time-honoured fortresses, but for compelling the Protestant troops to evacuate them, that Papist troops might take their place. His noble and right hon. Friends near him might ere long have cause to lament that they abandoned the high 'vantage ground of principle, and allowed themselves to be entangled in the narrow defile of detail amid the miry marshes of expediency. It must be allowed that their conduct was at all events most disinterested, for they would find, if they traversed the whole length and breath of Ireland, that while they had not conciliated a single opponent, they had damped the energy and outraged the feelings and forfeited the confidence of many a stanch and steady friend; how

1059
many true-hearted Protestants would now be induced to exclaim, "Why should we take an interest in the Conservative cause? Why should we canvass? Why should we vote? why should we register? why should we incur obloquy? why should we expose ourselves to danger? The incomes of our clergy have already been diminished by one fourth, our corporations are now recklessly transferred into hostile hands. How long will our Church itself be spared, why may it not also be made over to Popish tyranny and superstition? Our intrepid ancestors engraved on their banner the champion's legend, "No surrender." We their degenerate descendants, must ere long efface that inscription, and substitute in its place the cowards motto, "No resistance." He was persuaded that many a Protestant would ere long contemplate, with patriotic anguish and generous indignation, the processions of the Roman Catholic Lord Mayor of Dublin, in all the splendour of his official insignia, from the Mansion-house to the Mass-house; and he could wish no severer punishment for his hon. Friends near him, who had in this instance deserted the Protestant cause than they should be present as guests or as spectators at this inaugural banquet which would follow. There, "My Lord Mayor O'Connell" would in the first instance, propose "The health of his Holiness Pope Gregory XVI, and may be soon extend his paternal sway over an entire nation of united Irishmen," Next will follow, "Her Majesty the Queen," with, all the honours accompanied by a silent but very general supplication that her Majesty might in due time, like her illustrious predecessor Queen Mary become a nursing mother of the true Church, Then, "Her Majesty's Ministers, the Liberal Members of the House of Commons, and the glorious, pious, and immortal memory of the appropriation clause," After that would be proposed, "The healths of the Duke of Wellington, Sir R. Peel, Lord Stanley, Sir J. Graham, the Recorder of Dublin, and the non-Liberal Members of both Houses, without whose generous co-operations we never could have ousted our bigoted predecessors, or attained those high offices which it is our pride and our happiness to hold." What the fifth toast might be he did not pretend to divine, but it certainly would not include Sir G. Sinclair or Sir B. Inglis. This bill could not fail to
1060
gratify the ambition, to further the interests, and to consolidate the power of a faction which cherished a deadly hatred to the Protestant faith, and was resolved to leave no means untried for overturning the Established Church—whilst at the same time it must enhance the mortification, endanger the security, and annihilate the influence of a party heartily devoted to the Protestant religion, and uniformly attached to British interests. It might, with a few alterations, be described in the emphatic language applied by a right hon. and learned Privy Councillor to the Church—it was a bill by which a faction would triumph and a nation be disturbed—a bill from which no imaginable good could flow, but evil in black and continuous abundance—it was a bill by which religion would be retarded, morality vitiated, atrocity engendered: and, therefore, after respectfully tendering to the House his acknowledgements for their indulgence, he fell the greatest satisfaction in having the honour to move, that it be read a third time this day six months.
Mr. E. Tennent, in seconding the motion, would not take up the time of the House by reiterating the arguments which from the very first had induced him to oppose to the measure; but the question had been under consideration for so many years, and had been discussed in all its bearings in so many successive Sessions, that there was no Member, the most indifferent, who must not have had it forced upon him to form some opinion concerning it, and to become, in some degree, decided as to its bearings. He was not content to rest his opposition to the bill on the same grounds taken up by some of the gentlemen in the corporation of Dublin, whose alarms regarding its political and sectarian effects he could not but regard as highly excited and exaggerated; but these had been so repeatedly canvassed in the House, that be would abstain altogether even from stating the proportion of importance which did attach to them. In Dublin it might, and be had no doubt the change in those respects would be very considerable; but ha did not believe so of Belfast, and the other important towns in schedule A. But independently of these considerations, there were other and important grounds on which he had from the very first resisted the introduction of the measure, and on which be was still as strongly at ever op-

1061
posed to it, namely, its practical working, its turmoil, excitement, and expense—all points so objectionable in a mercantile community; and its cumbrous inapplicability at the present day to the objects which it was designed to accomplish, and which could be far more satisfactorily compassed by simpler, cheaper, and more rational arrangements. It was contrary to all experience to say that institutions and forms of municipal government, which might have been very necessary during the middle ages, and very suitable to a turbulent state of society, in which commerce was insecure and social relations undefined, must as a matter of course be indispensable or even applicable to the same objects now, when all these evils had disappeared, and when the functions of municipal government were confined exclusively to those arrangements which are essential to the health, the cleanliness, and the comfort of the municipal communities. He spoke, of course, of the form of government contemplated by the present bill, which was one referable to very remote antiquity. When the trading portion of the population first congregated into towns, and, separating itself from the agricultural, purchased or obtained the rights of self-government, the form which from vanity perhaps more than utility they chose, was an imitation of a limited monarchy, the mayor representing and frequently even to the present day assuming the very title of the sovereign, and the aldermen and common council representing the two Houses of Parliament, whilst the other attributes of government, the administration of justice, the maintenance of an armed force, the levying of taxes, and the state of royalty, each found an imitation in the recorder and his prison, the local police, the borough rate, and the corporate officers. All this might then, perhaps, have been desirable as well as imposing, but would any man in his sober senses say, that all this array of assemblies and independent departments was either desirable or suitable to the present times, or that a simple committee or a body of elective commissions would net much more effectually accomplish all that was to be achieved? Would any man say that it was essential to the well-being of Ireland that her towns should be watered and watched by a balanced constitution, or their streets paved and lighted on the principle of a limited monarchy?
1062
One great mistake had clearly been made when the corporations of England were under revision—that this absurd system had not been swept away altogether, and the functions of municipal government handed over to a body of the citizens chosen by the community at large and acting for the general good, without ostentation or turmoil or self-interest. But the commission of that error in England had led to a similar infliction upon Ireland in the shape of the present bill; and his opinion had from the first been, as it was now, in favour of sweeping away this absurd and antiquated machinery altogether. On this broad and intelligible principle, he, as representing a business-like and active community, was opposed to the present bill, as one utterly unsuited to their wants, and actually hostile to their peace. He had on a former occasion pointed out, that besides overthrowing a system of municipal government which at present existed to the perfect satisfaction of his constituents in Belfast, simple, cheap, and effectual, and substituting in its stead this complicated and extensive, and turbulent code, the new corporation, when elected, would in reality have not one single function to perform in that town. Its whole affairs would still be managed as heretofore, by boards chosen under local acts which were not to be repealed; and the new corporation, after all its noisy and angry elections, its costly and turbulent contests, would have an absolute sinecure. Such would likewise be the case in Dublin, so far as regarded municipal functions, and on the same principle many of the other great towns, of Ireland, Galway, Sligo, and Clonmel, were, if not avowedly hostile, at least very dubiously inclined towards it. In this way, available for no useful purpose, power would not fail to be perverted to political mischief, and the augmenting of that which but too loudly called for diminution—the bitterness of religious and political asperity and contention in Ireland. Now, if there was one town in that country in which more than another, he looked with indifference as to any positive power of accruing, in the end, to the Radical party by the bill, it was the town of Belfast; but he did see in it an inducement in the meantime to agitation, and a premium to discord, which would not fail, whilst they lasted, to be highly detrimental to the public peace: and to show the

1063
House the spirit with which one party at least word already preparing to carry the new law into execution, he would read an extract from the Belfast Vindicator, a Roman Catholic newspaper of great ability, and certainly of great candour and openness of purpose, which within the last few days contained the following exhortation to the new municipal constituency. The hon. Member was proceeding to read an extract cut from a copy of the abovementioned journal, when
The Speakersaid, that it was not competent to any hon. Member to read a newspaper in the House.
Mr. E. Tennentreplied, that he was about to read an extract from a newspaper as part of his speech—that he had cut out from the paper a slip of the portion to which he wished to call attention, and he conceived that he should not be out of order in reading it.
The Speakerwas sure the hon. Member himself must see that a slip was equivalent to a newspaper.
Mr. Humethought it would have the effect of depriving the House of many facilities in the transaction of business if they were prohibited from reading printed papers in that House, and he conceived that if they were denied permission to read an extract from a newspaper, it amounted to a prohibition against all printed papers.
The Speakerunderstood the rule of the House to be, that unless a Member got up in his place to complain of a breach of privilege, he was not entitled to read a newspaper, and as a slip was equivalent to a newspaper, it appeared to him that the hon. Member for Belfast could not be in order when he read to the House, as he proposed to do, the extract in question.
Sir R. Peelsaid, if he recollected aright, the rule applicable to the reading of newspapers in the House was this—that Members, on account of the indecorum and the inconvenience that would result from any such practice, should not be at liberty to read newspapers in the House which had no reference to the matters under consideration; but he doubted whether it would not be drawing the rule too tight to say that a Member was not at liberty to read an extract from a newspaper as part of his speech. Suppose a public meeting had occurred, the resolutions of which were thought to be of suf-
1064
ficient importance to deserve the attention of the House, and that an hon. Member found reading from a newspaper to be the most convenient mode of putting the House in possession of those resolutions, were they to say that such a proceeding would be out of order? Could they establish a rule prohibiting such a reference? He knew it was irregular to refer to a report of a speech appearing in a newspaper, and purporting to have been delivered in that House; for of course hon. Members could not be held responsible for anything which they had not themselves formally authorized. Reports appearing in newspapers of speeches made in that House were undoubtedly matters which could not be referred to as authorities; but he thought it would be inconvenient if hon. Members were not at liberty occasionally to make extracts from newspapers a part of their speeches. The House could not distinguish between newspapers on the one hand, and pamphlets, reviews, and books on the other; and he presumed it would not be said that they were to refer to no printed paper.
Lord J. Russellsaid, he did not see any difference between printed books and. newspapers, so far as the reading of extracts was concerned; and he must say, that he had seen the reading of such extracts allowed, though it certainly was contrary to the strict rules of the House. If, however, an hon. Member made an extract, whether printed or written, whether from a newspaper or from a book, a part of his speech, be the strict rule what it might, the practice had of late been to leave such a matter to his own discretion.
Sir R. Peelobserved, that on a late occasion large passages from newspapers were read in the House, containing a correspondence between Messrs. Fox and Forsyth, respecting the frontier of New Brunswick, which contained information of great public importance. He should, of course, treat with the greatest possible respect any opinion coming from the chair; but he never before had heard, that the reading of extracts was contrary to order.
Lord J. Russellremembered some years ago, that he had occasion to refer to reports of considerable importance respecting the conduct and treatment of prisoners, that the Speaker of that day held he was out of order, and said, that such extracts as those which he had pro-

1065
posed to read, were out of order, and could not be read without the permission of the House.
Mr. E. Tennentthen resumed, and proceeded to read in the following terms the extract to which he had previously referred.
"As regards Belfast, we have looked closely into the probable state of the franchise in the different wards, and we can safely promise to Reformers a decided majority in the council. It is time to consider what proportion of that majority, or rather of the candidates hereafter to form it, will be selected from the Catholic body. If the 30,000 Catholics in Belfast be permitted, without the heat and excitement of a contest to select eight councillors and two aldermen out of the forty gentlemen to be chosen by these officers, we can promise that they will seek no more; it would not be candid to omit adding, that they will be content with no less. The Catholics of the town will speedily meet to put forward their views in a more distinct manner, and to arrange de-details important to success. An appeal will then be made to Protestant Reformers, the result of which we heartily trust will be a warm co-operation between both."
It would seem that this honest avowal of the Catholic organ had excited the alarm of the more wily ministerial paper in Belfast; for in the next publication of the Vindicator appeared the following:—
"The Northern Whig of yesterday, referring to our late articles on the municipal question, deprecates the idea of sectarianism having any influence on the selection of corporators in Belfast, and declares that people will care little for the religion of the parties if they be otherwise qualified. This would be sad drivel, if it were not something worse. No question was ever agitated from the beginning, not even the question of Catholic emancipation, more completely in reference to sectarianism than this one."
And so the writer proceeds to justify the determination of the Roman Catholics to make it, not a municipal, but a religious and political question. Now, he (Mr. Tennent) had already said, that the issue of such a struggle he held in utter contempt. The Radical and movement party would in the end make nothing by the strife; the influence of property and the good sense of commerce and business would in the end prevail, and keep each party in its proper place; but at the same time he could not express in too strong terms his disapprobation of a measure which, without any practical or beneficial result, would lead inevitably to
1066
such a course of contention and heartburning, and animosity intermediately. He saw in it a system unsuited to the altered circumstances of modern times, and effects highly detrimental to the public peace, and chiefly on these general grounds, though not irrespective of others, he gave his hearty support to the motion of his hon. Friend, that the bill be read a third time on this day six months.
Mr. Shawregretted that his hon. Friend had made the present motion, and he hoped that his hon. Friends who had moved and seconded the amendment would be content with having delivered their speeches against the bill, and would not press the amendment to a division. He felt quite assured that if they did, the division would be misunderstood, and the conduct of those on that side of the House who voted against his hon. Friend's amendment would be subjected to being both misinterpreted and misrepresented. If, however, a division was pressed, then he must act under the circumstances in the way which he believed to be the most consistent with the course he had hitherto taken, and with the general views which he entertained on the subject of the bill, and that would be by voting against the amendment. He might have absented himself altogether, but he was adverse to shrinking from the responsibility of taking one line or other upon a question of so much importance, and in respect to which from first to last he had been obliged by circumstances to bear an active part. He was free to admit to his hon. Friends that he did not approve of the bill in its present shape, and that if the question was whether or not it should in that shape pass into a law, he should vote against it. [Hear, hear, from Sir G. Sinclair.] His hon. Friend cheered, and true it was, that according to the mere technicalities of the House, he might on that account be expected to vote for the amendment of his hon. Friend, but he was not prepared to sacrifice substance to form, and the practical question that would be decided by the vote of that night was whether or not the bill should be sent to the House of Lords for the purpose of being amended there, and then so amended passed in the present Session. He had, in strictness, no right to assume that the amendments which he had proposed in that House would be made elsewhere; but that question was not a new one; they were well

1067
acquainted with the stages through which it had already passed, and he particularly bore in mind that those amendments for which he contended had last year been made in the other House of Parliament, and that the noble Lord opposite, the leader of the Government (Lord J. Russell) had subsequently declared in the House, and in his presence, his willingness to accept of the bill thus amended. Considering then, that the noble Lord was bound by the same honourable obligation, upon which he and others on his side of the House had acted in reference to that same measure, to adhere to the spirit of the declaration he had thus made at the end of the last Session, he felt it his duty not to oppose the hill being forwarded in order to that end. He would not then further advert to those implied pledges or public declarations which had been made on both sides of the House than to say, that if he was released from any share in them, which, after the statements made by the leaders of the Conservative party in both Houses of Parliament, and the condition of the two other Irish measures then in operation having been granted, he did not feel any Member of that party who had not dissented from them well could be, yet he was unwilling to rest his conduct upon that narrow ground; and even if he was free from all such honourable engagement, he should be prepared to say upon the intrinsic merits of the question itself, that he would regard it as more conducive to the public good and to the welfare of Ireland, that the question should be settled on the principle that had been agreed on by both Houses of Parliament, than that it should remain any longer in its present unsettled and most unsatisfactory condition, and they seemed to be reduced to that alternative, for none of his hon. Friends who had objected to his course had themselves proposed to substitute any other; and as his hon. Friend had dwelt so much upon the Protestant interests of Ireland, to which, he trusted, he was as firmly attached as his hon. Friend or any other Member of that House, he could not help saying, that he considered the true interests of Protestanism in Ireland to be rather prejudiced than served by the patronage and advocacy of those injudicious and irrational persons into whose hands some of the present corporations bad too much fallen of late, owing prin-
1068
cipally, he believed, to the fact, that the legislation of the last five years had so crippled the powers of the existing corporations, in regard to the management of their property and the appointment of their officers, as to have driven from all share in their control, the most respectable and influential persons who had been previously in connection with them, and to have prevented all others of that class from joining them. Under all these circumstances, if a division was pressed, he must vole against the motion of his hon. Friend to postpone the consideration of the question for sis months more; but he had principally risen to deprecate any division being taken in that particular stage of the measure, as being calculated to produce misunderstanding, and to countenance the appearance of a difference of opinion which did not really exist on the opposition side of the House.
Colonel Percevalwished to arrest the course of this pernicious measure, and should, therefore, support the amendment. None of those amendments which even his right hon. Friend, the Recorder of Dublin, had considered necessary had been carried. The bill would take the government of the corporations out of the hands of those who were friendly to the connection with England and to the institutions of the country, and put it into the hands of those who were desirous to overthrow those institutions and to destroy the English connection. It was true that the Bill would be purified of much of its dross in another place; but no change which it would undergo there would render it a good measure. He was bound, however, as a Member of that House, to deal with the bill as it then was, without looking to any probable alteration elsewhere, and he would, therefore, vote against the third reading.
Colonel Maxwellwould also vote against the third reading. If he had been able to attend when the question was put upon the second reading, he would have voted against it.
The House divided on the original motion:—Ayes 182; Noes 34:—Majority 148.

List of the AYES.

Adam, Admiral

Baines, E.

Aglionby, Major

Baring, rt. hn. F. T.

Ainsworth, P.

Barron, H. W.

Anson, hon. Colonel

Bellew, R. M.

Bailey, J. jun.

Bernal, R.

1069

Bewes, T.

Hutchins, E. J.

Blake, M. J.

Hutton, R.

Blake, W. J.

Irving, J.

Bowes, J.

Knight, H. G.

Bridgeman, H.

Lambton, H.

Briscoe, J. I.

Langdale, hon. C.

Brocklehurst, J.

Lascelles, hon. W. S.

Brotherton, J.

Lemon, Sir C.

Browne, R. D.

Liddell, hon. H. T.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Lister, E. C.

Busfeild, W.

Loch, J.

Campbell, Sir J.

Lockhart, A. M.

Clay, W.

Lushington, C.

Clerk, Sir G.

Lushington, rt. hon. S.

Clive, E. B.

Lynch, A. H.

Clive, hon. R. H.

Macaulay, rt. hon. T. B.

Collier, J.

M'Taggart, J.

Coote, Sir C. H.

Mahon, Viscount

Corbally, M. E.

Marshall, W.

Craig, W. G.

Martin, J.

Curry, Serjeant

Marton, G.

Dalmeny, Lord

Maule, hon. F.

Darlington, Earl of

Melgund, Viscount

Davies, Colonel

Miles, P. W. S.

Denison, W. J.

Milnes, R. M.

Divett, E.

Morpeth, Viscount

Donkin, Sir R. S.

Morris, D.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Nicholl, J.

Buncombe, T.

O'Brien, W. S.

Dundas, F.

O'Callaghan, hon. C.

Du Pre, G.

O'Connell, M. J.

Eaton, R. J.

O'Connell, M.

Eliot, Lord

O'Conor Don

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Ord, W.

Ellice, right hon. E.

Paget, F.

Ellice, E.

Parnell, rt. hon. Sir H.

Evans, Sir De L.

Patten, J. W.

Evans, G.

Pattison, J.

Evans, W.

Pechell, Captain

Feilden, W.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Fenton, J.

Pendarves, E. W. W.

Fitzalan, Lord

Phillips, Sir R.

Fort, J.

Philips, M.

Gisborne, T.

Philips, G. R.

Gladstone, W. E.

Phillpotts, J.

Gordon, R.

Pigot, D. R.

Goring, H. D.

Pinney, W.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Planta, right hon. J.

Grattan, J.

Ponsonby, hon. J.

Greene, T.

Price, Sir R.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Price, R.

Grimston, hon. E. H.

Protheroe, E.

Guest, Sir J.

Pryme, G.

Hall, Sir B.

Pusey, P.

Hardinge, rt. hon. Sir H.

Rae, rt. hon. Sir W.

Harland, W. C.

Reid, Sir J. R.

Hastie, A.

Rich, H.

Hawes, B.

Roche, W.

Hawkins, J. H.

Rumbold, C. E.

Hector, C. J.

Rundle, J.

Hill, Lord, A. M. C.

Russell, Lord J.

Hobhouse, rt. hon. Sir J.

Rutherford, rt. hon. A.

Hollond, R.

Sanford, E. A.

Horsman, E.

Scrope, G. P.

Howard, hon. E. G. G.

Seymour, Lord

Howard, F. J.

Sharpe, General

Hume, J.

Shaw, rt. hon. F.

1070

Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.

Vigors, N. A.

Slaney, R. A.

Villiers, hon. C. P.

Smith, J. A.

Vivian, Major C.

Smith, A.

Vivian, rt. hon. Sir R.

Somers, J. P.

Wall, C. B.

Somerville, Sir W. M.

Wallace, R.

Stanley, E.

Warburton, H.

Stanley, Lord

White, A.

Stanley, hon. W. O.

Wilbraham, G.

Stewart, J.

Williams, W.

Stock, Dr.

Williams, W. A.

Strutt, E.

Wilsbere, W.

Sturt, H. C.

Winnington, Sir T. E.

Style, Sir C.

Wood, C.

Sugden, rt. hon. Sir E.

Wood, G. W.

Surrey, Earl of

Worsley, Lord

Tancred, H. W.

Wyse, T.

Thornley, T.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

TELLERS.

Turner, E.

Stanley, hon. E. J.

Turner, W.

Parker, J.

List of the NOES.

Blackstone, W. S.

Mackenzie, T.

Broadley, H.

Maunsell, T. P.

Castlereagh, Lord

Maxwell, hon. S. R.

Chute, W. L. W.

Neeld, J.

Darby, G.

Palmer, G.

Dick, Q.

Perceval, Colonel

Dunbar, G.

Pigot, R.

Duncombe, hon. W.

Polhill, F.

Duncombe, hon. A.

Pringle, A.

Fector, J. M.

Richards, R.

Fox, S. L.

Sheppard, T.

Grimsditch, T.

Shirley, E. J.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Waddhagton, H. S.

Henniker, Lord

Williams, R.

Hodgson, F.

Young, J.

Hodgson, R.

Houldsworth, T.

TELLERS.

Jones, Captain

Sinclair, Sir G.

Knox, hon. T.

Tennent, E.

Bill passed.

RIVILEGE—STOCKDALE v. HANSARD —BILL TO AUTHORISE PUBLICATION.
Lord John Russell Lord John Russell moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Publication of Printed Papers Bill.
On the order being read,
Sir E. Sugdensaid, that on a former occasion he had stated his reasons for opposing the bill; not that he disapproved of the bill, but because he could not obtain from the noble Lord opposite any assurance that he would accompany that measure by another which would prevent the publication of defamatory matter. That was the reason why he voted against the bill, and not that he disapproved of the proposed measure. He had a motion fixed for Thursday next, when he intended to move for the appointment of a com-

1071
mittee, to consider and report to the House what steps should be taken in order to guard against the proceedings of the House, which it might think it necessary to publish, containing matter criminatory of individuals; and whether it was expedient to discontinue, or to place under any and what restrictions, the sale of such of the proceedings of the House as might be published. His object was to save individual character from defamation, and he would, where criminatory matter affecting individuals was contained in any printed papers of the House, prevent the extension of those papers by sale. But that was a matter which could be settled by the committee which sat upon printed papers. He would state to the House the the checks which he believed would be sufficient to prevent such papers from being sold, which papers unnecessarily contained defamatory matters as to personal character. These were the "votes" and proceedings of the House, some of which contained an appendix, and others a supplement. He would not object to the sale of the votes as at present, for the judges admitted that the right of the House to publish votes stood upon grounds totally different to the publication which originated the proceedings in Stockdale v. Hansard. With respect to the publication of the votes, there had always existed a guarantee against these papers containing defamatory matter, because it was directed that they should be first perused and finally signed by the Speaker, so that the House provided for their accuracy by declaring that before their issue, they should be previously sanctioned by the Speaker. Hence it followed that, by the vigilance which had been exercised with regard to the votes, no additional checks were required for those papers, and with respect to them he proposed no alteration. Next, as to the appendix, that could be remedied by the committee, although committees had not been always sufficiently guarded in preventing calumny upon individual character appearing in these documents; but they had themselves published, on one occasion, a paper which had contained the foulest libel upon a judge and jury. However, if these appendices were made subject to the control of a committee, there would be no doubt that they would exercise a cautious control over such publications as were unnecessarily oppressive to personal character; but when the public
1072
good required such charges to be made public, then, of course, individual interest must give way to the general good. What he contended for was, that when such necessity did not exist, the House should not wantonly asperse and injure the characters of individuals. In the vigilance of a public petition committee, he would rely with regard to the appendices to petitions. There was another class of paper to which he wished to call the attention of the House. These were the supplements which contained those petitions which were ordered by the House to be printed. That was a class of published papers which required checking. A Member rose and moved, that a certain petition be printed; the Speaker said, that the petition could not be printed unless the Member intended to make it the groundwork of a motion; the Member acquiesced, and on the following morning the petition, containing perhaps the grossest libels and the foulest calumnies, was circulated throughout the country. The check he moved for would be a very simple one, and that was, that no petition should be printed with the supplement, except such as were read at the table of the House, or such as were perused and signed by the Speaker. That would not be attended with the labour which might be apprehended, for he (Sir E. Sugden) would very reluctantly impose additional duties upon the right hon. Gentleman. The labour would be found to be very light, because, when the public knew that petitions were to become subject to such scrutiny, and were liable and likely to be rejected, by reason of their containing defamatory matter, the parties forwarding such petitions would be cautious in preparing them, because they would find that the power of libelling with impunity would be guarded against. This, in a short time, would prevent anything like additional labour being imposed upon the officers of the House. As to the bills which might be introduced into the House, or which might pass that House, no danger was apprehended, because there could not exist the possibility of any libellous matter finding its way into these bills. There were other papers to which he wished to direct the attention of the House. Those papers consisted of reports, those made by Members of the House, and those reports made by officers appointed by the Crown, who were responsible to the Government, and whom the Government would check

1073
as to the contents of their reports. Those papers proceeding from committees of the House, and from committees of inquiry, both required checks. There was a check which he would take leave to suggest with respect to reports emanating from committees of the House, and that was, that the committee should state in the report whether or not there existed matter in that report which ought not to be made public, or which involved the personal character of any individual. That being embodied in the report would attract the attention of the House as to the propriety or necessity of publishing the particular report. The safety of the public, and of the House itself required such security against publication. In commissions of inquiry it would be important that the commissioners should also state in the body of their reports if there were any particular report which ought not to be published generally, and the Government would take care that such report did not generally appear. By these means all the publications of the House would have such checks as would satisfy the the public that they were not likely to be damaged by the sale of the printed papers; and he hoped that the noble Lord opposite would consent that some such measure as he then suggested would accompany his Bill, and for that reason he would recommend to the noble Lord and to the House the appointment of a Committee of publication similar to that which already existed with respect to printed papers—that committee to have the control of the number of papers that should be or should not be printed. At present the directions of the House were to sell all the papers, but there was no control as to the number to be sold. To the sale of the papers he did not object, provided proper precautions with respect to the public were taken; and, indeed, he did not think that a better course could be pursued for the circulation of the proceedings of the House than the sale of the papers, which were sold at one-third original cost. To the sale of the papers, provided these checks were applied, he was favourable, as an excellent mode of circulation. With the Bill before the House he thought it better not to interfere, but to leave it in the hands of the Government; and, for that reason, the papers containing his views upon this subject he would hand over to the noble
1074
Lord; and if the noble Lord would himself move for these or similar checks, or would take time to consider them, he should be satisfied, and he believed that when the noble Lord would give these checks his serious attention there was no doubt but he would accede to the suggestions proposed. However, if the noble Lord would not accede to these suggestions, he should feel it his duty—a painful duty, he would acknowledge—to vote against the third reading. As to that clause which the noble Lord intended to introduce respecting actions then pending against the Sergeant-at-Arms, the noble Lord had not furnished any information, and had made no statements to the House. Although the jurisdiction of the House had been unquestioned by every constitutional writer and lawyer who had written or spoken upon the subject, and though the jurisdiction of the House might be perfect, yet the execution of that jurisdiction might be imperfect; and the officers of the House, in executing its orders, might have exceeded their orders, and hence made themselves liable to an action. For that reason it would be unjust to deprive the subject of the protection of the law against what might be considered an improper execution on the part of the officers of the House. Their privileges secured the House against an action, but the execution of its orders did not and could not secure their officers against the consequence of an excess in that execution. He therefore hoped that the noble, Lord would not retain that clause in the Bill.
Mr. Warburtonhoped that the questions as to the Bill before the House, and the restrictions which the House would impose upon the publication of the printed papers would be considered quite distinct questions. It would not be fair to the Members of that House that they should be called upon to place the printing and publishing of the papers under duress in order to induce parties in that House to pass the Bill. They were not probably called upon to offer a premium for passing the Bill. The vigilance of the Committee as at present constituted, and the rules and regulations of the House, were guarantees amply sufficient, with any additional restrictions such as those suggested by the hon. and learned Member. He was glad to find that the hon. and learned Member was favourable to the

1075
sale of the printed papers as the most efficacious means of circulating the proceedings of the House. To the Committee of censors suggested by the learned Gentleman he was opposed—first, because the duty could not be done by reason of the voluminous publications not affording time or opportunity; and secondly, because that duty would not be discharged on account of the time and labour necessary for the discharge of that duty. Many Committees had suppressed much of the facts which came before them, on account of the injury which the publication of them would Occasion to individuals. By the Committees which sat on affairs respecting slavery in the West Indies a great deal of the evidence had been suppressed; and he believed that the fitness for publication of these facts which might be subject to their review would be amply secured by the respective Committees. He, therefore, hoped that the hon. and learned Member would resume his seat at the Committee from which he had recently seceded.
Mr. Humesaid that it had been his lot to sit upon committees; and, if the hon. and learned Member opposite had had experience of the working of committees, and their mode of discharging their duties, he would find that there did not exist any necessity for several of the recommendations or suggestions which he had given. He was rejoiced to hear the testimony of the hon. and learned Member as to the benefit accruing to the public by the sale of the publications. For his own part, since the papers had been sold he had himself experienced the greatest relief, because persons who on former occasions used to apply to him for the reports had thus an opportunity of furnishing themselves with those documents at a cheap rate. The storehouse contained 2,200,000 volumes, and it was of the highest advantage to the public to have access to that treasury of information.
The Attorney-Generalwas rejoiced to find that the bill was likely to have the support of the right hon. and learned Member for Ripon, and he concurred with many of the opinions which had teen delivered by that Tight hon. and learned Gentleman as to the publication of the printed papers. It was necessary that everybody should know what were the proceedings of the House, and the
1076
only way by which that knowledge could be communicated was by the sale of the publications, which could alone prevent that waste which necessarily arose from the former mode of distribution. If the hon. and learned Member for Ripon would resume his labours in the committee, of which he had been such a useful Member, he could give such suggestions as he deemed requisite, which would no doubt receive from the committee all that attention which was due to the source from which they proceeded. His object in rising upon that occasion was to guard against any prejudice which might exist as to the clause which went to stay actions then in progress against the Sergeant-at-Arms. Into the merits of the clause he would not, however, enter; but he considered it desirable that such a clause should be introduced, for when that clause was carried everything would be settled, for it had reference only to those vexatious actions which had been or might be brought to harass the officers of the House. On that supposition there were numerous precedents in existence for stopping actions by the authority of Parliament. There had been, for instance, a great number of actions stopped which had been brought under the Non-residence Act; and a great number, also, which had been brought against printers. These actions were quoad vexatious, and they were stopped as such by the authority of Parliament. If, then, these actions were stayed by this authority, he (the Attorney-General) did not see why actions of the same nature should not be stayed against the Sergeant-at-Arms. That the actions in question were vexatious, brought to raise the question of privilege, to test the powers of the House of Commons, and not to obtain a remedy for any real grievance, was beyond a doubt; and, therefore, in his opinion, all persons who wished well to the constitution of the country should be glad that these harassing proceedings were about to be put an end to.
Mr. Darbywould not enter into the question of the principle of the bill but he wished to know what was the intention of the noble Lord opposite with respect to the suggestion of his right hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Ripen? He should not oppose the second reading, but unless something were done to ensure the security of parties against libels, as suggested by his right hon. and learned

1077
Friend, take an opportunity of making a proposition to accomplish that in committee. The public were entitled to that security; and he hoped that it would be a real, and not a fictitious, one which was offered them.
Sir R. Peel—Sir, I rise merely to point out what should have been stated some time since, that some of those who have taken the strongest part in asserting the privileges of this House have also not overlooked every other consideration, but, on the contrary, have done all they could, in the preliminary matter which led to these proceedings, to except individual character from injury. And I think I can most satisfactorily vindicate myself from any charge of that nature. For when the report of the committee of 1837 was made to this House on the subject of our privileges, as Involved in the present question, at my suggestion these words were appended to it. And I now wish to be permitted to read them to the House, to show that some, at least, of those who have been the most strenuous supporters of its privileges have also been the last to desire to assert them to the injury of individuals, or the prejudice of private character. In the concluding pages of the report of March 8, 1837, I find the following remarks:—
"In concluding their report, your committee feel it incumbent upon them to observe that, although they have expressed a decided opinion that it is absolutely essential to the effective discharge of the most important functions of the House of Commons that the privilege of publication should exist without restriction, and that the authority to determine the extent of that privilege and the occasion for exercising it should rest exclusively with Parliament, they are not insensible to the evil which may arise from an incautious printing of Parliamentary documents, in cases wherein the character of individuals is involved, and wherein no public necessity calls for publication, or no opportunity is afforded to the party affected to give an immediate answer to the inculpation. Your committee are aware that, without the previous sanction of this House, no publication of its proceedings can be privileged; and that all presumption, therefore, of malicious motives is excluded; neither have they the slightest doubt that, if the attention of Parliament were directed to each individual case, ample precautions would be taken against the infliction of unnecessary pain, and still more against the possible case that the privilege of Parliament may be abused for the mere gratification of resentments connected with personal or party differences. But, amidst the pressure of the important and multi-
1078
farious business which occupy its attention, it is impossible to exercise, on all occasions, that precautionary vigilance which might effectually guard against the evil to which we have thus adverted. Much, therefore, must depend upon the discretion and sense of justice or individual Members respecting the presentation and printing of petitions, and of the chairmen and members of committees of inquiry in respect to the prosecution of their inquiries, and particularly in respect to the printing of the evidence which may affect private character, until the opportunity be given of rebutting it. To prescribe any positive rule upon such a subject is manifestly impossible. The invariable adherence to such a rule might protect public delinquents from a disclosure of their misconduct, or prevent the notoriety of facts important to the ends for which inquiry wag instituted. It appeals, however, to your committee (and they think the practical experience of Members will support the conclusion td which they have come) that it would not be difficult, on a mature consideration of each case wherein the exercise of a discretion may be called for, so to apply it, in the great majority of instances, as completely to reconcile all proper regard for the character and feelings of individuals with the faithful and effectual discharge of public functions. The more essential the privilege the more urgent the necessity for an exclusive and unfettered authority in deciding upon the exercise and the limits of it, the more important and the more becoming is it to take as much precaution as possible against the infliction of individual injury or unnecessary pain to private feelings."
And that this has not been an idle boast, I can bear witness; for I myself have seen, on more than one occasion, the exercise of a similar sound discretion by Committees of this House. I have known a case when reflections cast upon the character of an individual in the evidence taken before a Committee of this House were suppressed in the publication of that evidence and the report of that Committee; and I have known another case where, when a public officer was accused of misconduct, the accusation was suppressed until the party accused had notice, and was permitted to put in his justification. I think, generally, that this rule ought to be followed; and I think, moreover, that in cases of presenting petitions to this House Containing allegations against individuals the greatest care should be taken so as to inflict as little pain as possible. There are cases, no doubt, in which the infliction of pain becomes unavoidable from their necessity; the case of the public officer to which I have alluded, for instance, and others of an analogous

1079
character. But this general rule should, in my opinion, be strictly adhered to and observed, that no pain should be inflicted gratuitously. The stronger our claim of privilege may be, and the more incontestable our right, the more urgent and imperative it is upon us, and the greater it is our duty, to see that no injury be done to individuals. I am sure that it is a rule that all will be unanimous in affirming. I do not mean to enter on the discussion of the Bill before the House, as the noble Lord has agreed to take it on a future occasion, and I shall reserve what I may have to say until then. I but rose to show to hon. Members near me that the privilege of this House has been exercised as far as I was concerned, with every delicacy to character and person, and to place on record my own conduct and sentiments in respect to the main question.
Sir R. Inglisfelt the importance of the measure before the House to be so great, that, though his right hon. Friend had given his assent to the second reading of it without comment, he had such a repugnance to some of its provisions that he should depart from his example, and offer one or two observations on them. In the first place, he objected most strongly to the ex post facto legislation involved in the Bill. It was true the Attorney-General had alluded to precedents; but it was equally true that they were by no means cases analogous to the present; and he (Sir R. Inglis) should be very sorry to see the power of Parliament so far extended as was implied in that ex post facto clause, without sufficient justification. So much for the first clause. To the second clause there was a still greater objection; for it was an objection on principle. The Bill went not only to stop any action against the House for a wrong to individuals, but it also went to stop it against the officers of the House for any abuse, however great, of their functions. Now, that, in his opinion, was carrying indemnity much too far, and he wished to be understood as dissenting altogether from such a stretch of power. There was likewise a great objection to making the plea of the Speaker's license a bar to an action, because he thought it might lead to abuse, and was, at any rate, an undue assumption. These objections, however, he hoped would be removed in committee, and therefore he should not oppose the second reading of the bill.
Lord J. Russell.—I shall certainly give my most serious attention to the suggestions of the right hon. and learned Member for Ripon; but I think it is ranch better not to enter on their discussion at present. It is a very important subject to which they refer, and I think this is a proper time to revise the rules and regulations of this House in respect to it. These, however, I must say, are much more careful to prevent abuses in that particular than perhaps most hon. Members are aware of. However, as I said, I shall take the whole subject into consideration. With regard to the retrospective clauses, many precedents have been cited, and I shall weigh their applicability in every particular before I proceed with the Bill.
Bill read a second time.

ECCLESIASTICAL AND COUNTY COURTS.
Mr. Hawesdesired to know of the noble Lord the Colonial Secretary, what he intended to do with the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill and the County Courts Bill? Whether he meant to abolish the criminal jurisdiction of the former, and whether he designed to press forward the latter? as there were a great many private Bills for the recovery of small debts pending which the General County Courts bill stopped, inasmuch as it would go to absorb their jurisdiction.
Lord J. Russell.—With regard generally to the Eccesiastical Courts Bill, I may say that it was considered very much in the committee of the House of Lords two or three years ago, and the result was that it became the determination of that House not to proceed with it until another Bill then before the House had passed. That Bill is the Clergy Discipline Bill, and there have been various discussions on it since, which led to no result. I have no official information on the subject, but I have reason to believe that a Bill of the same nature is likely to originate in the other House of Parliament, and in that case we shall be in a better position to proceed with the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill here. Some of the parts of that measure, those for the abolition of criminal jurisdiction, I mean to proceed with separately. With regard to the County Courts Bill, it has been delayed at! the suggestion of my noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, until we shall have received the reports of the bankruptcy and insolvency commissioners of inquiry,
Mr. Hawesthought that these reports would not be made in sufficient time to be available this year; and he was, therefore, of opinion that something should be done in regard to the County Courts Bill without delay.
Subject at an end.

SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
On the question that the Speaker leave the Chair to go into a Committee of Supply,
Mr. Humesaid, that from statements laid on the table of the House, hon. Members would find that they were proceeding to vote their establishments upon the old extravagant scale, while last year there had been an excess of expenditure over income of a million and a half, and every probability of that excess this year being two millions. Now, he had always been of opinion that before any estimates at all were voted, the Government ought to give to the House an estimate of the whole expense of all the establishments together, and also an estimate of the expected income of the country. It had been shadowed forth by the noble Lord, that shortly after Easter they were to have some new taxes. He was against any new taxes, and he wanted to see if they could not do without them. With that view he had been looking at the state of the revenue, and he found that the increased expenditure had only risen from those establishments which were annually voted by that House. He was sorry to say that that system was proceeding, and up to the present time, he might fairly reckon the excess of expenditure over income at six millions sterling. Under these circumstances, the House must see the difficulty of avoiding the imposition of new taxes. The balance sheet he held in his hand showed a deficiency of a million and a half, and that was not owing to any deficiency in the revenue, for, on the contrary, the revenue was in an extremely prosperous state. Taking from the year 1833 to the present time, he was surprised to find that the amount of the net income exceeded the average of the last seven years. From 1833 up to the present time (with the exception of 1836, a year of unusual excitement), the average amount of the net income was forty-six millions and a quarter to forty-six and a half millions, but in 1838 the revenue was actually 47,333,000 l., being about one million more than the average of the pre-
1082
ceding years, and yet notwithstanding all that they had the present large deficiency. The whole amount of taxation for the year ending Jan. 5, 1839, was 52,949,000 l., and they now thought of adding to that large amount by the imposition of new taxes, after so many years of peace. That appeared to him to be a very important consideration, and the question was how had the excess taken place? When he looked at the army, the navy, the ordnance, and the miscellaneous estimates, he found the explanation. In 1834, the aggregate of these estimates was fourteen millions and a quarter—in 1835, it was fourteen millions, something less than a quarter—in 1836, it was 13,800,000 l., and then began the increase. In 1837, it was 14,392,000 l.—in 1838 it was 15,229,000 l.—in 1839, it was 16,000,000 l. nearly, and he apprehended that the sum required for the present year would be little short of 17,000,000 l. the excess over the ordinary expenditure on these items would be little less than three millions. The number of men intended to be voted this year, was 137,232, namely, for the navy, 35,651; for the army, 92,899; and for the artillery, 8,318. Now he admitted that it was impossible for any person, except those immediately connected with the Government, to know the exact number which might be required for the service of any year, but he thought it was of the utmost importance to know why so large a military force was required before they went into a Committee of Supply. The Speech of her Majesty from the Throne, and the declaration of Ministers, would lead the House and the country to believe that they, were at peace with all the world; and he would ask the right hon. Gentleman to explain why the force he asked for was so large, when in the year 1822 the entire number for the army, navy, and ordnance, was only 97,072 men. On a comparison of 1822 with the present year, as regarded the army alone, he found an increase of 24,988 men. Of these there had been 11,500 added in the years 1837–1838. It appeared to him extraordinary that the Government should have thought of sending 15,000 additional troops to Canada, when, had the people of the colony been only allowed to manage their own affairs, the country would have remained perfectly tranquil. Now, however, that Canada was at peace, he thought these additional troops should

1083
be withdrawn. Every thing, however, depended on the policy of the Government. Look at Ireland, which was in a state of profound tranquillity.—The hon. and learned Member for Dublin told them that if they were required, three or four more regiments might be spared. What was all that owing to? Why, that the Government had resolved to do justice to Ireland. Look at England, on the other hand. There the people at large were dissatisfied, and the masses discontented and disaffected; and the military which they had withdrawn from Ireland, were now required in England, to overawe and keep down the people. There was a sense of injustice and oppression rankling in the breasts of the people, and they felt that they were not governed by equal laws and equal justice. The outrages at Newport grew from a feeling of that kind, though the immediate cause of those outrages was an accidental circumstance. There was also a police force in every town, and what reason, therefore, could there be for keeping up this enormous establishment? They appeared to him to be going on from day to day like spend, thrifts, regardless of the means by which to pay their debts; and he believed it was a principle that the more a man became involved be less care he took about trifles, leaving them to take care of themselves: Her Majesty's Government were running riot in expenses and establishments, forgetful of their good principles when in opposition. How lamentably had they failed with regard to reform and retrenchment ! Of reform the country had got little.—toe hoped they would get more; and with regard to retrenchment, he did press upon the noble Lord that the course the Government was now taking must bring upon the country the most serious inconvenience, and what would be the result the noble Lord would find to his cost. As soon as difficulties increased, the Gentlemen on the opposite side would lay hold of them, and point out the extravagance of the Government, to show how reckless they were of the public funds, and try to convince the public they were unworthy of confidence. There might be some foundation for this. The noble Lord bad a warning of this a few days ago, and he thought that if those Gentlemen were not so ready themselves to encourage extravagance, but follow his advice and become strict economists, they would find it a
1084
much better means of getting the support of the country than the course they now so unhappily followed. He had done his duty in making these general observations upon the military force (for he had not mentioned the militia, for which we had expended 9,000,000 l. since the peace to no purpose whatever) and he must say that during the whole time he had never known so extravagant a military establishment; and this, too, when there was a deficiency in the revenue of from 2,500,000 l. to 3,000,000 l., and we were in a state of what might be considered perfect peace. He had thought this the best lime for making these observations, and he should consider it a duty he owed to the country, unless he heard from the right hon. Gentleman some good reason for an addition to our military force, to take the sense of the Committee upon it, by proposing a reduction.
Colonel Sibthorpsaid he had heard from the hon. Member for Kilkenny a great part of the speeches he had delivered on various occasions during the last three years, in which he thought he should be more correct if he said twenty years as the period the hon. Member had declaimed against what he and the country thought to be the extravagance and inefficiency of her Majesty's Ministers. He entertained no respect for them so far as political feelings went, but though the hon. Member had been declaiming against that side of the House, he invariably disappointed them—he asked what was the cause of this excess—what could be the cause of it—the want of good working; yet though the hon. Member knew this as well as he, he invariably sat down after making his speech, without taking a single effectual measure to turn them out. Could he effect this no man would rejoice at it more than he. With all this declamation how in the name of goodness happened it that the hon. Member continued to support Ministers instead of taking effectual measures to supplant them, which if he would do he should have his cordial support. The hon. Member talked of withdrawing troops from Canada—he thought a further increase necessary if the Government went on as they did. He had not assented to any one act' of her Majesty's Government—no man living had a worse opinion of them in their political and official capacity—they knew nothing, and he thought if they did they were not

1085
disposed to act upon it. As he had said on a former occasion, there was joy in heaven over repenting sinners, and, therefore, he hoped they would take his advice, and change their course before it was too late.
Lord J. Russellsaid, it was hardly necessary for him to say much, as the hon. Member for Kilkenny had only gone over ground which had been repeatedly gone over. The hon. Gentleman said they ought strictly to limit their expenditure to the average revenue of the last two years, totally regardless of the foreign or colonial relations of the country. That was the principle to which the House was asked to agree, and to which he trusted it would not be disposed to agree. The hon. Gentleman said very truly that he ought to have made these observations on the navy estimates, which was a much more proper occasion for them; for what was the fact? There had been a considerable increase in the navy estimates this year amounting to 400,000 l., whereas the amount in army estimates was about 300,000 l. less than last year; and if the bon. Gentleman had wished to enforce his principle and reduce to the state of the revenue the expenditure of the country, the navy estimates was the proper opportunity for him to have divided on the question. He had stated the reasons for the augmentation of the army in August last, and they had met with the general concurrence of the House. He had placed that augmentation on three grounds—one was, that there was a very considerable excitement prevailing, and a necessity that they should resort to strong coercive measures to reassure those who feared that their property and persons might be attacked. The country was now in a more peaceful state, and he could not agree with the hon. Gentleman that what had occurred at Newport was a sample of the general state of the country; but if it was, it would be a very good argument for an increase in the army. Another ground he had stated for the augmentation was the continuance of the necessity to have a considerable force in Canada. The hon. Gentleman brought forward an argument which he (Lord J. Russell) thought it would be impossible to enter into now—that the whole necessity of an increase of that force in Canada was from the Government not pursuing that policy which the hon. Mem-
1086
ber recommended. His opinion was directly the reverse, for the demands then made went to establish a French Canadian republic in Canada; and he (Lord J. Russell) had thought it necessary to resist by force the carrying of that into effect. Another reason connected with the former reason as to Canada was, that the continuance of a very considerable force in Canada made the reliefs which were necessary, according to a prescribed system in the army, exceedingly difficult to be carried into effect, and that was still so much the case, that there were regiments in Canada which had been twelve or thirteen years absent from the United Kingdom. A very proper system existed in the army, by which the troops sent abroad on colonial service should return after ten years to this country, and remain for a certain period. The proportion of troops now employed abroad was very much larger than usual, and it was found impossible to carry that system into effect, which was another reason why be had proposed to make the increase in the army which the House had granted, and under which the commander-in-chief proposed means by which the system of relief might be re-established, and which, with the approbation of Government, was now being gradually carried into effect. He did not think the House would so far bear on the army as to prevent this relief which was necessary to its due efficiency, as well as due in justice to men who underwent great privation in time of peace. The hon. Gentleman stated, that the whole difficulty with respect to the boundary question in America, was the failure of his noble Friend, and the Government to make a reply to the ultimatum sent from the United States. His noble Friend, in the course of last year, had transmitted a project for the purpose of finally settling this question with the American Government. After the lapse of a considerable period, the American Government sent back a different one, called a counter-project, with various provisions of their own. At the tame time that those provisions reached this country, there arrived gentlemen who had been ordered to make a survey of the part of the country in which the disputed boundary existed. These gentlemen were now employed in making a report of their survey, and as soon as their report was received an answer would be given to thin counter-project of the

1087
American Government. That was the state of things at present, which would show hon. Gentlemen that there was not the want of any attention in making an answer to the ultimatum, as the hon. Member called it, of the American Government. There was another question—namely, of claims made by citizens of the state of Maine, to parts stated to belong to this country, which had led to proceedings between the Lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, and the authorities of the state of Maine. That had led to some correspondence which had appeared, and it had led to the necessity of protecting the road and the shores by which our troops moved from New Brunswick to Canada, and which it was necessary to provide against, as gangs of persons roved about on parts held not to belong to either party. He would not go now into the general statement which his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War would presently make, and he thought that his right hon. Friend would show that they were not liable to be charged with asking for too great an estimate, if they were to retain the means which were necessary for preserving this great empire in its state of safety, and at the same time of resisting aggressions from whatever part they might come.
House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. Macaulaysaid, that his noble Friend (Lord John Russell) had relieved him from the necessity of making some remarks which otherwise he should have thought necessary in reply to the speech of the hon. Member for Kilkenny. He should, therefore, at present only say that any person who had heard that speech, and who was unacquainted with the previous transactions of the country, would have been very slow to believe that the military establishment proposed this year was actually lower in men and charge than that for which the hon. Gentlemen himself both voted and spoke. It was only on the 2d of August last, when his noble Friend proposed a supplemental estimate of 75,000 l. and an addition of men amounting to 5,000, that the hon. Gentleman declared he would not take on himself the responsibility of refusing that sum of money and those men, which his noble Friend declared necessary for the peace and honour of the state. He should be glad to know why the arguments which the hon. Gentleman had used that evening
1088
might not, on the 2nd of August last year, have been urged with equal effect. All the hon. Gentleman had said respecting the refusal of justice to Canada, all he had said as to the refusal of justice to England, all he said of those monopolies, some of which he, like the hon. Gentleman, disapproved, as pressing severely on the people of this country, and all he had said as to the condition of the country, might be said exactly with equal propriety and effect on the 2nd of August last year as it was now. In bringing forward the estimates, which he should have the honour of proposing to be laid on the table, he should have the satisfaction, at all events, of thinking that he could not be found liable to the charge of profusion, if the hon. Gentleman was acquitted of it. The estimate brought forward by his noble Friend, the Member for Northumberland, in February, was 6,119,068 l. To that sum, in August, was added 75,000 l., making the whole charge 6,194,068 l. The whole charge this year would be 40,000 l. more; but in this sum there was included a considerable charge for Indian troops, which would be defrayed out of the Indian revenues. The whole force estimated in February, 1839, including the force for India, was 109,818 men, and this year it was 121,112, making an addition of 11,294, but of these 7,746 were employed in defence of India, and chargeable on the revenues of that country. There remained an increase of 3,548 to be added to the 5,000 men voted last August. The additional force that he should have to propose was 4,088. It might be proper to explain the mode in which this addition was made, and the more so, because it would refute, he thought, conclusively, an invidious insinuation of the hon. Member for Kilkenny. About 500 were to be added by an increase of three companies to the 1st West-Indian regiment, and he trusted that such a sum as was requisite would not be refused for raising a force which would spare our own countrymen from the hardships inseparable from foreign service. About 102 men were provided for Malta, which the local authorities declared to be absolutely necessary, not only for the garrison but for port-guard. A small militia (so to speak) was required for Bermuda. It was thought desirable that a portion of the youth of Bermuda should be formed, not as a separate company, but

1089
as a sort of body appended to the best troops from England, and thus initiated in the best system of military discipline; and after having been for some time so attached, to return to the mass of the population, being relieved by a new set of young men. So that, in the course of a few years, every man would be trained to the use of arms, and be capable of bearing them should the public service require it. In this manner was made the addition of 500 men which he had spoken of. The remaining addition was made by 65 men being added to every one of the 81 battalions of infantry in the United Kingdom; thus raising each from 835 to 900 men. These 65 men consisted of 4 Serjeants, 4 corporals, and 57 privates. To every one of the 20 battalions engaged last year in India 250 men were added, raising each from 853 to 1,103 men; and, lastly, of the two battalions transferred to India, the increase was made from 835 to 1,103, being an addition of 268. And now he wished particularly to call the attention of the House to this circumstance, because the hon. Gentleman the Member for Kilkenny had said, he had observed that every Government had an interest in proposing an increased force, because it placed at their disposal many comfortable things. Now the whole additional regimental charge for the increase to the 81 battalions he had referred to, did not afford the Government or the Horse Guards, the means of obliging a single acquaintance, or conferring a favour on one ten-pound householder. He wished the House to understand, that if the number of 4,408 which were to be added to the army, were struck off, no means of disarming opposition, or gaining support, would be taken away from the Crown. If any Gentleman took the trouble of looking through the different ranks of the service, he would find that the charge for officers this year was diminished by 2,000 l. The only addition to the foreign force which would come out of the revenues of this country was the three additional companies added to the 1st West-Indian Regiment. Of the 121,112 men, who it was proposed should compose the military establishment, 28,213 would be charged on foreign revenue, leaving 92,899, for whose maintenance this country was to provide. This estimate was somewhat confused, by having included in it 572 men, who were not actually charged on this country, but who, as recruiting companies
1090
of Indian regiments, were included in the Mutiny Act. Any man disposed to approve of this measure, would have no difficulty in approving of the many parts of the estimate which contributed to it. The increase in the force sufficiently explained the increase in the regimental charge in the medical department, and the small increase for religious books and tracts granted to the soldiers. Considering that 20,000 men had been raised within the last year, that the applications for works of this nature had been numerous and pressing, and the assistance of benevolent societies not sufficient to supply this want, he thought he was justified in allotting 200 l. to this purpose. Here was one item about which he believed it was usual to make some statement, and he should say a few words respecting it. As to the good-conduct pay, there was not an increase, but a diminution. The full effect of it would not be felt until 1843. The principle of a good-conduct warrant was this, that a soldier who had behaved well during seven years, received an additional 1d. a-day to his pay. Every soldier, since 1836, had the option of calling the old additional pay the good-conduct pay. The former was superior in this respect, that it could not be taken away unless by court-martial, and it was no less honourable than secure, for the soldier entitled to it had the power of wearing the good-conduct badge. The consequence was, that in 1840, at which time the soldiers enlisted in 1833 would have completed their seven years, we might expect a considerable addition to the soldiers receiving good conduct pay. But it was not until 1843 that the effects of the new system, which he confidently expected would be found highly beneficial, could be ascertained. The number of the men wearing the good-conduct badge was about 13,000. He had felt it necessary to make a slight addition to the article of provisions, forage, &c. This he had estimated at 245,000 l., and he saw little reason to expect a falling off in that charge. The reason was this: It was known to the committee that the Australian colonies had suffered severely from calamities, which seemed to be a set-off against the physical blessings with which they were endowed. The men had suffered from the effects of a most cruel drought; they had been excluded from the benefits of tea, and of vegetables to their soup, and

1091
in consequence of the high price of provisions they had been reduced from three to two meals a day, one of which was scanty and unpalatable, consisting only of oatmeal. These privations had fallen with the utmost cruelty upon those to whom our gallant men were most attached, and the medical men reported that the effects of the scarcity were visible upon the women and children attached to the regiments. Under these circumstances, it would be improper to maintain proper and efficient discipline, and therefore, if even all considerations of humanity could be discarded, policy alone would dictate attention to that point. In fact, to a certain and partial extent, discipline had already given way, and in one regiment the crime of theft had spread to some extent. It was, in consequence, therefore, of the distress which the gallant and deserving men serving in the colonies had suffered that he had made this addition of 5,000 l. to the estimates. In the estimate there were three charges upon which, as they were perfectly new, it would be necessary to enter somewhat into detail. The first was a charge of 3,500 l. for schoolmistresses. He saw some of his hon. Friends near him smiled, but they were perhaps not aware, as indeed he himself was not until a few weeks ago, of the strong reason there existed for this charge. The number of female children actually accompanying our regiments, was not less than 10,000. Those children were in the most emphatic manner called "the children of the State." For the public service they were hurried from place to place—from Malta to Gibraltar, from Gibraltar to the West Indies—from the West Indies to Halifax, as the common weal might require. It would, therefore, be inexcusable if we did not provide these, at a small expense, with some means of instruction. Ever since 1811 a schoolmaster had been attached to every regiment, and he thought that there should be a dépôt for the instruction of female children also, under the superintendence of a schoolmistress, who might be probably the wife of a Serjeant, and whose duty would be to instruct them in reading, writing, needlework, and the rudiments of common knowledge; with such simple precepts of morality and religion as a good plain woman of that rank might be supposed capable of imparting to them. The next vote to which he had to call the attention of the committee was
1092
10,000 l. for the formation of a veteran battalion in Canada, where desertions had occurred to an extent unknown elsewhere. About six years ago an inquiry had been made, and it was found—there being there at that time 2,500 rank and file—that desertions had taken place to the number of 663, while, during the same period, the desertions from the whole British army had been only 2,240. These desertions in Canada had not been confined to bad and disreputable characters—non-commissioned officers and men of respectability and good conduct had deserted. Nor was this symptom of desertoin to be ascribed to distress, for many had gone away leaving behind them their necessaries and arrears of pay. Why desertion should take place more frequently in North America than in any other part of the empire it was not difficult to explain. In this country, the situation of the soldier was as comfortable, he might say more so, than that of the labourer, to which class generally the soldier belonged. In many of the colonies physical difficulties opposed themselves to flight. When in Malta, the soldiers were surrounded by sea; when at the Cape, they could only escape from their quarters to fly to the dwellings of savages; and as to India, he could imagine no situation more miserable than that of a deserter in that country, wandering amidst its vast regions, amongst a people of a strange race and colour, and his footsteps pursued by the power of British law. But with respect to the American colonies, the case was widely different. There the facilities of escape to the United States were many, and the temptation strong. The soil was flourishing, and the wages of labour high. The consequence was that there high wages, but still more the exaggerated representations that were put forth of the case and luxury enjoyed by the labourer in America, had constantly drawn away our soldiers from Canada. Several plans had been proposed for meeting this evil. It had been proposed, and he thought wisely, that Canada should be the last point in rotation to which the troops on colonial service should be sent. There would then be a great number of men with additional pay and good conduct pay, and those higher advantages would tend to keep the men faithful to their colours. It had also been thought that advantages would arise, and the temptation to which he had adverted be counteracted, if the

1093
Government were to hold out to the oldest and most tried of the troops in Canada a sort of military retirement, which should serve as a reward to those who remained faithful to their colours. Such had been the opinion of his noble Friend, the late Secretary at War, and of Lord Seaton, and he had reason to believe that that opinion was generally entertained amongst those who possessed the best information upon the subject. The precise details of the plan had not yet been made out, and much correspondence must take place before it could be produced; but as it was not improbable that, before the House again assembled, some regiments would be removed from Canada, it would be desirable that some men of good character should be induced to remain there. On these grounds he was induced to ask the House for the additional grant of 10,000 l. on account. There was also a sum of 5,000 l. on account, for the purpose of forming a corps for service in St. Helena—a place which required to be defended not according to the ordinary system. The whole charge for the land force then was 3,511,870 l. for the present year. That applied for last year, including the supplemental estimate, was 3,496,382 l. 11 s. The increase, therefore, on this part of the charge was 15,487 l. He now came to the staff, in which, in the Home Department, there was an increase, but a corresponding decrease on the foreign staff. On the whole there was an increase of about 550 l., the reasons for which were to be found in the state of the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, where it had been thought desirable that that which had hitherto been a major-general's command should be changed into a lieutenant-general's command, and it was thought that, in consequence of the high responsibility attached to that station, it should be filled by an officer of great talents, and receiving additional pay. Why the charge for Canada was increased, it was unnecessary for him to state. He did not know whether hon. Gentlemen were aware how this part of the estimates was formed—they were framed from the actual expenditure of the last year of which they had the accounts—thus the estimates for 1839 was framed upon that of 1837, and that of 1840 upon that of 1838. With respect to Jamaica, the addition was occasioned by the refusal of the Assembly to vote those allowances
1094
which used to be considered as matters of course. The whole charge for the staff in 1839 was, in round numbers, 155,000 l., while that for the present year was 164,000 l., being an increase of 9,000 l. He was sorry to say, that in consequence of the haste with which these estimates had been prepared, there was an error in the third line of the page, containing the head Public Departments. The item stood there at 5,016 l. 17 s. 6d., but it ought to be 6,016 l. 17 s. 6d. With respect to the Royal Military College, it was unnecessary for him to say anything; and with respect to the Royal Military Asylum, the estimate for this year was 16,701 l. 9s. 8d., while that for last year was 17,486 l. 3s. In the next item there was an increase: it was in the charge for volunteer corps. The vote for last year was 79,136 l. 18 s., while that he asked in the present estimate was 92,993 l. This had arisen from the expenses of calling out the yeomanry in aid of the civil power. He believed all would admit that, in the trying scenes of last year, the yeomanry exhibited all the valour and firmness for which those corps were distinguished; but in no instance, he believed, had they behaved with rigour and harshness, or otherwise than with propriety and discretion. While, then, the whole charge for effective estimates for last year was 3,807,073 l., the charge for the present year was 3,845,450 l. being an increase of 39,377 l. He now came to the non-effective estimates. Under the head of Rewards for Service, there was a small reduction. The amount in 1839 was 16,041 l. 18 s.; while for the present year it was 15,815 l. 10 s. 1d., being a decrease of 226 l. The pay for unattached general officers last year was 102,000 l.; this year it was 92,000 l., being a reduction of 10,000 l. The number of general officers deceased who had received that pay last year was fifteen, and the number promoted to regiments nine. The number of Chelsea pensioners had decreased upwards of 1,000, and he understood there was a balance in the hands of the hospital, and he thought they might venture to make a reduction of 16,667 l. Before he sat down, he could not help making some few observations on what had fallen from the hon. Member for Kilkenny. He knew well how zealous that hon. Gentleman was in the cause of economy; but he must be permitted to say that that hon. Gentleman had never given a vote so

1095
truly in favour of the cause of economy and of civil liberty, as when last August he voted for the increase of the army by 5,000 men, by which he now proposes to reduce it. He believed that that was a just and an economical vote. He had never for a moment doubted, that, on any great crisis that might befal this country, the force marshalled on the side of law and order would be found to be irresistible, and that this great country never could be given over to the hands of freebooters; but at the same time, when he considered the wealth of our great cities, it was not utterly impossible that a mob, exacerbated and infuriated by dishonest leaders, might have inflicted calamities that might have led to a crisis which the ingenuity and good fortune of years could scarcely have effaced. Once and once only, had this great metropolis been in the power of a mob, who for a short time had shown themselves to be stronger than the law, and that was on the occasion of the No Popery Riots in the time of Lord George Gordon. It was a matter of history that, at that time, a sum was awarded for compensation for injuries done to a single house, in a single street, greater in amount than that which was voted last year for the additional 5,000 men. Therefore he would repeat that the hon. Member for Kilkenny had never given a more economical vote than he did in the August of last year. It had been well remarked by Adam Smith, that though standing armies were found hostile to the liberty of the subject, yet that principle must be laid down with qualification. He believed that the remarks of that great man upon this subject were both ingenious and just. He believed that the question before the House a few months ago was simply, whether the force should be increased, or whether the Government should revert to the policy that had been tried by the administration of Mr. Pitt. He would say, then, that whoever voted on that occasion for that increase of force, voted for the House of Commons itself—for the freedom of the people—for the liberty of the press—for the security of property—in fact, for all the characteristics of a free state. Firmly was he convinced that the most happy and beneficial effects flowed from that vote. Nothing had since occurred that could justify her Majesty's Ministers in diminishing their means, or their power of upholding
1096
and maintaining intact and uninjured the peace, the honour, the dignity and security of this realm. He therefore would place the vote in the hands of the Chairman, with the strongest confidence that it would receive the approbation of the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving, "That a number of land forces, not exceeding 93,471 men (exclusive of the men employed in the Territorial Possessions of the East India Company), commissioned and non-commissioned officers included, be maintained for the service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, from the 1st day of April, 1840, to the 31st day of March, 1841."
Mr. Humehad expected some notice to be taken of what had fallen from him as to the number of men employed in the home service. It might have been supposed, from the eloquent address of the right hon. Gentleman, that there were no troops in the kingdom except the 5,000 that he had alluded to. The right hon. Gentleman should remember that there was such a thing as extravagance as well as economy. He remembered an anecdote relating to himself, which, as it was short, he would would tell the house. He was standing at the bar talking to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when somebody asked "Who are those?" The answer was, "They are penny wise and pound foolish." Now he admitted, that he would rather at any time be "penny wise" than "pound foolish." He would like to know how the Duke of Wellington had continued with only 68,000 men, to maintain the honour and interest of Great Britain with as much credit if not more than the present Government. The numbers of men for the army had been gradually increasing. If the right hon. Gentleman would look only as far back as 1837 and 1838, he would find that the number was 81,000, and now the Government wanted 93,000. The right hon. Gentleman said that he voted economically in voting for the increase. What he then said was, that in the state the country was alleged to be in by the Government in consequence of the discontents that prevailed, he could not refuse to place at their disposal the sum they required. The right hon. Gentleman forgot to state what he added, which was, that in taking that course, he hoped they would remove as speedily as possible the cause of those discontents. Had that been done? If not, he then cast the blame upon the

1097
Government. If it had, then there was no want of the five thousand men. Any amount of forces that might be absolutely necessary to prevent disturbance, he held to be economical. So far he, in common with the right hon. Gentleman, was a vulgar economist: but he wanted to know what indication of disturbance there was at the present moment to warrant the maintenance of so large a military force as was proposed in the vote just submitted to the House. He maintained that the army, as at present constituted, was more than sufficient to meet all the demands that might be made upon it. With a regularly established police force, rapidly extending itself over the whole of the kingdom, he could not calculate upon the probability of any circumstance arising within the next twelve months that could call for the service of so large a military body. If the police force were worth anything, it was clear that as its numbers increased, the numbers of the army ought to diminish. Since he had sat in the House, he had always been amongst the defenders of a standing army; because he held that a small regular force was at all times more efficient than one composed of men who were only half and half—half soldiers and half civilians. Hence he had been found amongst the opponents of yeomanry and volunteer corps; but whilst he defended a standing army, he had always been jealous of its extent and strength. He would not have its numbers increased beyond the amount absolutely necessary for the security of the empire. Admitting all the indications of disquiet to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred, he was still at a loss to know what ground there was for proposing so large a number as 93,000 men for the service of the ensuing year. He thought that the right hon. Gentleman had failed to make out a case that would warrant so large a vote. He should, therefore, propose to reduce the number of men to what it was in the year 1837–8. The hon. Member accordingly moved to substitute 81,319 men for 93,471, the number proposed by the right hon. Secretary at War.
Mr. Williamsseconded the amendment.
General Sharpepointed out the total inadequacy of a police force, armed only with small staves to preserve the peace, or restore order in cases of violent disturbance. In such cases, the only security
1098
to the public was to be found in the discipline and steadiness of the armed soldier. He concurred in the propriety of the vote as moved by the right hon. Gentleman, and should give it his cordial support.
Viscount Howicksaid, that so far from agreeing with the hon. Member for Kilkenny, that the number of men was too large, he thought it too small. He could not avoid apprehending that the means provided were hardly sufficient to diminish the severe pressure which he knew to be felt at present by the infantry of the line. Throughout his tenure of office he had considered this subject deserving of the greatest attention, and had frequently impressed upon the Government the necessity of taking decided steps to improve the condition of that portion of the army. He now felt some disappointment in one or two respects. He regretted that much more time and service would be required before the proposed veteran force in Canada could be established, and had hoped to have heard that some further increase of the black troops had taken place. Experience had shewn, and inquiry had proved, that the mortality which occurred amongst the British soldiers in our West Indian colonies was of a most frightful magnitude; and there seemed to him no other mode of effectually meeting that evil but by some further increase of the black troops. He could not understand, if neither of these measures was to be adopted, and if, as he had understood the right hon. Gentleman, the Secretary at War, that no modification of the existing system of depots was to be made, how; consistently with the demands of our colonial service, the right hon. Gentleman would be able, during the present year, to provide that relief, which, in fairness and in justice to the British army, ought to be afforded. The right hon. Gentleman stated, that the army in Canada had been there for eleven or twelve years, and yet he said, it would not be possible to remove more than one regiment this year. The general statement of the right hon. Gentleman he thought highly satisfactory, although he certainly had hoped, that upon these two respects, more could have been done.
Sir H. Hardingeconsidered that the statement which had been made ought to be very convincing to the House that the force which bad been moved for on the 2d.

1099
of August last year was absolutely necessary for the service of the country; and he would beg to remind the hon. Member for Kilkenny, when he talked of our forces being more than sufficient for present necessities, that in one quarter alone in Canada, instead of nine battalions of the line for the performance of the ordinary duties in time of peace, we had there at this moment nineteen battalions of the line, showing in one quarter alone an addition of ten battalions of the line. The right hon. Gentleman, the Secretary-at-War, stated, that two battalions had been transferred to India, so that, instead of twenty battalions, we had now twenty-two battalions in India. Here, then, at once, beyond the ordinary peace establishment had we twelve battalions employed on two stations alone. That accounted for the difficulty under which the service was labouring—namely, the impossibility, he might almost say, of relieving the troops in the rotation laid down. The right hon. Gentleman had properly stated that the rule laid down was, that the troops abroad should remain ten years, and those at home five years. But what was the slate of things? The right hon. Gentleman had very fairly informed the House, that many battalions in Canada were eleven, twelve, and even fourteen years out of the country, and some of those in India, seventeen, eighteen, and twenty years abroad. Exclusively of that, let the House observe the state of the battalions at home which were to relieve those abroad. At this moment there was not one out of the twenty, or twenty-one battalions in this country which had been in England more than four years. It was, therefore, almost impossible to afford the required relief to battalions upon foreign service; and he confessed he thought that this additional force of 5,000 was very useful in having enabled her Majesty's Government to bring home three or four battalions of the line. He also thought that the arrangement now existing, and which had been proposed by the Duke of Wellington in 1825, respecting the division of the battalions, was the most efficient that could be adopted. With regard to an increase of the black troops in the West Indies, as suggested by the noble Lord be (Sir H. Hardinge) conceived that to be a question which could not be fairly discussed in that House, a question not even for the Secretary-at-War or Commander in-Chief, but
1100
for the Secretary of State for the Colonies, who alone could judge whether the state of the West Indian population was such as to enable us to have with safety a black corps in those colonies. It was a question which the Secretary for the Colonies would do well to take time to consider before he made up his mind upon it.
The House divided on the amendment:—Ayes 8; Noes 100: Majority 92.

List of the AYES.

Brotherton, J.

Warburton, H.

Duke, Sir J.

Williams, W.

Hector, C. J.

Rundle, J.

TELLERS.

Turner, W.

Hume, J.

Vigors, N. A.

Wallace, R.

List of the NOES.

Adam, Admiral

Hill, Lord A. M. C.

Aglionby, Major

Hobhouse, rt. hn. Sir J.

Ainsworth, P.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Anson, hon. Col.

Hodgson, R.

Archbold, R.

Hollond, R.

Bailey, J. jun.

Holmes, W.

Baring, rt. hon. F. T.

Howard, hon. E. G.G.

Barnard, E. G.

Howard, P. H.

Barry, G. S.

Howick, Vise.

Bentinck, Lord G.

Hutchins, E. J.

Bewes, T.

Jenkins, Sir R.

Blair, J.

Kemble, H.

Boldero, H. G.

Labouchere, rt. hon. H

Bowes, J.

Lincoln, Earl of

Bramston, T. W.

Macaulay, rt. hn. T. B.

Briscoe, J. I.

Marshall, W.

Brownrigg, S.

Maule, hon. F.

Busfield, W.

Morris, D.

Clay, W.

Norreys, Lord

Clerk, Sir G.

O'Connell, J.

Collier, J.

Palmerston, Lord

Collins, W.

Parker, J.

Curry, Sergeant

Parnell, rt. hn. Sir H.

Dalrymple, Sir A.

Pechell, Captain

Darlington, Earl of

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Davies, Col.

Perceval, Col.

De Horsey, S. H.

Philips, M.

Donkin, Sir R.S.

Pigot, D. R.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Rich, H.

Evans, W.

Rickford, W.

Fitzroy, Lord C.

Roche, W.

Fort, J.

Round, J.

Gisborne, T.

Russell, Lord J.

Gordon, R.

Rutherfurd, rt. hn. A.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Scarlett, hon. J. Y.

Greene, T.

Seale, Sir J. H.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir C.

Seymour, Lord

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Sharp, General

Grimsditch, T.

Smith, R. V.

Harcourt, G. G.

Somerville, Sir W. M.

Hardinge, rt. hon. Sir H.

Stanley, hon. W. O.

Hawes, B.

Stock, Dr.

Hayter, W. G.

Sutton, hn. J. H. T. M

Heathcoat, J.

Tancred, H. W.

Herbert, hon. S.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

1101

Turner, E.

Winnington, Sir T. E.

Vivian, Major C.

Wood, Colonel

Vivian, rt. hon. Sir R.

Wood, Colonel T.

Westenra, hon. J. C.

Yates, J. A.

White, A.

TELLERS.

Williams, W. A.

Stanley, hon. E. J.

Wilshere, W.

Tufnell, H.

Viscount Howickwished to ask the right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Control, whether any change had yet been effected with reference to the pay of the British troops serving in India—he meant in regard to their pay being made in the currency of the country?
Sir J. Hobhousehad to state that no change had yet been made; but he was not, nor was the East India Company to blame that a change had not been effected. The East India Company, as well as the Government, were aware, that it was necessary to make an equalization of the pay of the troops in the different presidencies. At present the rate of pay was different in the Madras and Bombay presidencies from what it was in Bengal, and the company had been perfectly willing to equalize the rate of pay. That equalization would cost the company 45,000 l. a-year; but, understanding that such a step was necessary, in order to prevent jealousy amongst the troops, they were prepared to send out a despatch authorizing the Government to give to the troops in Madras and Bombay the same pay as was enjoyed by the troops in Bengal.
Viscount Howickcould assure the committee that he was unwilling to bring this subject under consideration at that time, but with the views which he entertained upon this question, be felt himself compelled to say a few words in reference to it. This was no question of an equalization of the rate of pay, and the point was, whether it was fair or just that the troops in India should be paid in rupees, calculated each at the value of 2s. 6d., when in England the rupee was only credited to the soldier at the rate of 2s. The British officer serving in India was required to receive the rupee as equal to 2s. 6d., and when it was sent to England, he received for it only 2s., and often only 1s. 10 d. Lord W. Bentinck had taken a great interest in this question, and had strongly condemned the injustice which was done to the British troops in India by the mode in which they were paid. That noble Lord bad recorded his opinion, that the pay of the troops ought to be issued, not at the
1102
nominal, but at the intrinsic value of the rupee. Sir Charles Dalbiac had also informed him, in a letter which he held in his band, that the army complained much of the injustice which was done them in this particular. He said, that the troops with which he went to India were paid at the full rate before leaving England, but when they arrived in India, they were paid in rupees valued at 2s. 6d. each. Loud complaints were in consequence made, and Sir Charles added, that this was the only occasion on which he felt himself in a situation in which no officer ought to be placed, because he knew the justice of those complaints, while he had not the power to afford them redress. Now, it appeared to him, that in justice to their gallant troops, who had ever distinguished themselves in whatever service they might have been engaged, this serious grievance ought to be redressed. They had lately voted the thanks of that House to the troops in India, and while the House had in this manner expressed its approbation of their gallant conduct, it was certainly their duty to see that justice was done them in a matter so seriously affecting their comforts. These troops had entered into a solemn contract to perform certain duties for a certain rate of pay, and as they were compelled to embark for India, and punished if they refused obedience, he thought it was absolutely incumbent on the House to see that justice was done to them, and that they received their pay according to the real value of the coin in which they were paid. Now, the real value of the rupee was not more, if sent to this country, than 2s., while it was often less, and he therefore thought it was a very great hardship for the troops to be obliged to receive it at the nominal value of 2s. 6d. It seemed to him that the case was perfectly clear and simple, and it ought not to be confounded with the question as to allowances, from which it was perfectly distinct. Let the pay be issued according to the real value of the rupee, and having agreed to that, then let them make such alterations with respect to allowances as economy and justice might require. He felt strongly upon this subject, and as he had been unable to get any assurance from the right hon. Gentleman that a change would be effected, and as he saw no prospect of a change being made, he had felt himself bound to call upon the House

1103
to express its opinion on the question, for it was but just, when they required the services of the troops in India, that the House should insist on their receiving the full amount of pay to which they were fairly entitled.
Mr. Macaulayagreed with the noble Lord, that there had been a grievance in reference to this matter, of which the troops in India had a right to complain; but he thought the offer which had been made by the East India Company was a perfectly fair one. That offer was to this effect:—The grievance complained of affected only, he believed, the troops in the Madras and Bombay Presidencies; let them then see what the rate of pay was of a private soldier on any of the stations. A private soldier was allowed daily a ration of one pound of bread, and one pound of meat, and 7d. a day besides as pay. In Bengal, the soldier was allowed a ration of a pound of bread and a pound of meat, and 8½l. a day besides as pay, calculated at the false rate of exchange to which the noble Lord had alluded, and being really equal to 7d. a day. Besides that, there were other allowances to which the soldier in India was entitled. Now, the royal pay warrant sent out by the noble Lord himself gave the soldier 7d. a day and rations, and also an allowance of 1¼ d. as spirit compensation. The soldier in India got more, in fact, than he had a right to by the royal pay warrant. There was, therefore, no reason to consider that in Bengal the soldier was worse off than in any other part of the world. He admitted that there was a grievance as to the difference of pay, and they were prepared to remedy it. The East India Company were prepared to put all the presidencies upon the same footing as Bengal, and to give the troops in India 7d. a day, and rations, besides the usual allowances and spirit compensation. He thought that proposal was a perfectly fair one, and he was ready to take his share in the responsibility which had been incurred by its proposal.
Sir H. Hardingesaid he could hardly doubt, after the statement that had been made by the noble Lord, and right hon. Gentleman opposite, that up to a certain time there had been something wrong in the rate of payment of our Indian troops. He could not approve of fixing the value of the rupee at too high a mark. He hoped the House would see that this false
1104
standard of currency ought not to be continued; that it was wrong to compel the soldier to take the rupee at 2s. 6d., when with everybody else it went only for 2s. The present arrangement pressed more hardly upon the officers, especially young officers purchasing commissions, than upon the privates, for these latter had advantages to counterbalance their loss which the former did not enjoy. He had no doubt that the East India Company acted liberally towards their soldiers; but though the right hon. Gentleman might tell him that the soldier received all that he was entitled to under the royal pay warrant, he could not think it a judicious arrangement to issue the pay at a fictitious value. All that he wanted was, that the soldier should not receive his allowance at a false denomination.
Viscount Howick, in reply, said that they ought to give the soldier his pay in the intrinsic value of the silver in which they paid him; although he hoped his right hon. Friend would not give up the system of regimental contract with which the soldiers were well pleased, in order, that a compensation might be made to the East India Company.
Sir J. C. Hobhousesaid, that this was no new arrangement; it took place in 1792, and up to 1813, there was no difference between the real and the supposed value of the rupee; but the great change effected by the right hon. Gentleman's (Sir R. Peel's) bill, touched India as well as England, and down went the rupee as did everythihg else. The opinion of Lord William Bentinck had been referred to, but he would beg to refer to a despatch framed according to the proposition of that noble Lord, sent by the Board of Directors to the Governor-general of India, with the sanction of the Commander-in-chief. The conclusion of that despatch was to the effect that the object of transmitting it was to explain the incorrectness of the Governor-general's assertion that the King's soldier in India did not receive so much silver as he was entitled to by the warrant, for that, in fact, he received more. He contended, then, that the soldier in Bengal received actually a larger sum than he did under the warrant of his noble Friend. In the year 1798, a report had gone forth, through unofficial channels, that a change similar to that now suggested, was about to be made. What was the effect of that report? A mutiny,

1105
The soldiers stood to their arms, and for ten days resisted their officers, and although the Governor-general at last obtained the restoration of good order, it was only on his giving a promise that he would exert himself to procure the remedy of what they called their grievances. The Queen's troops in India, he contended, received greater advantages than in any of the other colonies, and he thought that this mode of payment was not to be complained of. If, however, this complaint was held by the House to be well founded he would ask, what was to become of the allowances which were made. The noble Lord said, that the effect of the change would be to raise the pay, but, he would ask, was the allowance to be increased in proportion? Such an argument could not for one moment prevail, because, if it were just that the pay and allowances should now be increased, what a cheat had been carried on since the year 1819. The arrears, too, must be paid, but their amount would be awful, and such as he should even doubt whether the East India Company could pay. Upon a due consideration of the whole question, he could not come to the conclusion at which the noble Lord had arrived. The soldier had received all that he was entitled to under the warrant, and he did not see that he had anything to complain of. There was no complaint in India, and he thought, that the strongest evidence which he could produce in opposition to this proposition was the opinion of the Governor-general of India, who spoke in the strongest terms, deprecating not only a change in the system, but even the agitation of the question.
Sir H. Hardingeagain urged upon her Majesty's Government the propriety of coming to some settlement of this question the more especially after what had been urged by her Majesty's late Secretary at War.
Sir R. Jenkinssaid, that the noble Lord (Lord Howick) had sent out a warrant to India without consulting the Court of Directors, who at a subsequent period had unanimously objected to it. Their protest, bearing date the 2nd of December, 1837, directed the attention of the President of the Board of Control to this warrant, which had been despatched without the slightest communication with the directors; and the Court unanimously protested against the warrant, which
1106
would subject the troops of Bengal to a serious loss, would involve a dangerous change, and might produce the most disastrous consequences. The Court also wrote a letter to this effect, which formed the basis of a despatch. This proposal was to raise the allowances of the troops at Madras and Bombay to the standard which existed at Bengal. This despatch had been sent out fourteen months ago. The matter still remained unsettled; but it was no fault of the boards, who had done their duty. It, therefore, remained for her Majesty's Government and for the House to bring this matter to a termination. He believed that the rate existing at Bengal was considerably above anything to which the soldier was entitled under her Majesty's warrant, and left in favour of the soldier in the field the sum of 2½ d. per day.
Sir C. Greythought that the soldier in India ought to receive the intrinsic value of the coin in which he was paid, and that would remove all the discontent which existed. It was utterly impossible, however, in his opinion, for the Government to remove the difficulty occasioned by the fluctuation in the exchanges.
Viscount Howicksaid, that having already spoken, he should not think of detaining the House at any length, but it was impossible for him altogether to pass over what had fallen from the hon. Gentleman opposite, the Chairman of the East India Company. The hon. Gentleman had stated that he (Lord Howick) when he was Secretary-at-War, had been guilty of the gross impropriety of advising his late Majesty to make a change in the rate of payment of the troops in India, without communicating his intentions to the Board of Directors of the East India Company, and of transmitting a warrant to India in accordance with those views. Now, nothing could be so unfounded as that statement. When he came into office he found a warrant in preparation, which, made no alteration in the rate of payment, and in 1837 that warrant was issued to the army in general, but it was not at once transmitted to India, because his right hon. Friend, the President of the Board of Control, called on him to withhold it for a time. It was, therefore, withheld, and it was not till some months afterwards, at his (Lord Howick's) suggestion, that no advantage whatever could be obtained by withholding it, as the question had already

1107
been canvassed in some military publications, that the warrant was sent to India. He, therefore, must say, that he was a good deal surprised that his right hon. Friend, the President of the Board of Control, should have alluded to that warrant. He would now only add, that, in his opinion, it was right to give the soldier his pay according to the intrinsic value of the silver which the rupee contained, and not according to its nominal value.
Sir H. Hardingeobserved, that if a warrant were issued requiring the pay to be given in rupees, the soldier's permanent pay would be in silver, which would be subject to no fluctuation, and this would put an end to these unfortunate discussions, which would continue as long as the present grievance remained unredressed.
Sir. J. Hobhousesaid, that the real facts of the case were these: the warrant of his noble Friend was made by inserting the words "soldier abroad" applicable to troops in India. He had at the time particularly impressed on his noble Friend the importance of his warrant not applying to India, and he pointed out to him that the use of the words "soldier abroad," as well as "soldier at home," must of course make the warrant applicable to India, and that whether the warrant were sent out officially to India or not. That warrant, was, however, sent out officially by his noble Friend to the Governor-General. The Court of Directors were not only not consulted by his noble Friend but his noble Friend took the very course which they begged and implored of him, and he begged and implored of his noble Friend, not to take. He had therefore, acting under a sense of the responsibility belonging to his office, taken it upon himself, notwithstanding the warrant sent out by his noble Friend, to write to the Governor-General, telling him that it would not be desirable to act upon the warrant, as an amicable discussion upon the subject was going on very comfortably between him and his noble friend, which would no doubt terminate in a satisfactory manner. He also mentioned to his noble Friend at the head of the Government, that he could not continue to hold his present office unless some misconception on the part of the Secretary at War was removed. In that condition the matter now stood. The warrant had gone out, but it had not been acted upon, and he could only say now, that the despatch raising
1108
the pay of the troops in the Madras and Bombay Presidencies would, with the concurrence of his right hon. Friend the present Secretary at War, go out, he believed, in the course of a few days.
Viscount Howickasked if his right hon. Friend would undertake to say, in his place in that House, that the warrant which he had sent out contained one line that was not a consolidation of former warrants?
Sir J. Hobhouse.—The omission of the title in the schedule had settled the question in accordance with the opinion of his noble Friend.
Viscount Howicksaid, that this was too important a matter to be left in doubt, and therefore he hoped his right hon. Friend would give him a clear and explicit answer. Was he not stating the fact when he said that the warrant contained no reference to the rupee question? Was it not to this effect, that it merely made it clear that the troops when serving abroad without rations had a right to 1s., and not to 8½d.; that it was not a new regulation, but a mere consolidation and explanation of former warrants. Was it not true that it made no change whatever in the regulations which existed before, but merely rendered them more intelligible?
Sir J. C. Hobhouse.—All he had affirmed was, that the omission before alluded to, of the schedule, had got rid of the difficulty, the question being in doubt before.
Sir R. Peelthought, that before anything was done in this matter it would be well to refer to the evidence which was given before the select committee on Indian affairs by several distinguished officers. It appeared that in 1824 a general order was given that the rupee should be valued comparatively with the sterling money of this country, at 2s. 6d. per rupee, at which it had been fixed in 1797. It would seem to be more analagous to sound principles that the rupee should be issued at its real value. At all events a very distinct, full, and intelligible explanation of the ground on which they were proceeding ought to be given.
Vote for the number of men agreed to.
House resumed.

MINUTES.
Bill, Read a third time:—Horse Racing.
Petitions presented. By the Duke of Beaufort, and the Bishops of St. Asaph, Salisbury, and Hereford, for Church Extension.—By the Puke of Richmond, and the Marquess of Normanby, from Eastbourne, and another place, against the Rating of Workhouses.—By the Duke of Richmond, from a number of places, against the existing system of Church Patronage; also from various other places, for and against the Intrusion of Ministers into Parishes in Scotland.—By the Marquess of Bute, and the Earl of Aberdeen, from several places, against the Intrusion of Ministers into Parishes.—By Lord Redesdale, from several places, against the Repeal of the Corn-laws; and from other places, against the Grant to Maynooth College.

FROST, WILLIAMS, AND JONES. NEWPORT PETITION.
The Marquess of Normanbyrose to call the attention of the House to a petition from Newport, presented on Friday night in favour of Frost and others, which had led to a communication with that town, and which was stated by a noble Lord who had presented it, to hare been signed by 1,500 out of a population of 6,000, among whom were the names of the most respectable inhabitants, and that the four first names were those of four of the most wealthy individuals in the town. This account he had no doubt the noble Lord had received on what appeared to him good authority, and as he had appeared to attach considerable importance to it, and had announced his intention to call the attention of the House to it, with a view to induce it to comply with the prayer of the petitioners, he thought it would not be unnecessarily occupying their Lordships' time to show them the noble Lord had been misinformed in every point to which the noble Lord had adverted. With respect to the population, it was 12,000, instead of 6,000, as stated by the noble Lord. [Lord Teynham: That is the population of the borough. I spoke of the town only.] Then as to the 1,500 signatures, their Lordships would suppose these were all of males; but this was not the case, the majority of them being the signatures of women and children, and the names of several members of a family were signed by the same individual; there was also a considerable number of names evidently in the same handwriting. With respect to the four names at the head of the petition, one of them was that of Edward Frost, the uncle of the person convicted, who was himself in confinement for some time on suspicion of being engaged in the same transactions, but the Government had not preferred any bill against him. Another was that of William Townsend, the father of a person who had been con-
1050
victed at the same time with Vincent With regard to the other two persons to whom the noble Lord had alluded, as being some of the most wealthy inhabitants of Newport, the one was a small tradesman, and the other was a person who had only been resident two years in the place, and who was now selling off with the intention of quilting the place. He had been informed that hardly any tradesman of the least respectability in the place was at all aware that such a petition was in the course of circulation. It was true that a petition had been presented in favour of the prisoners, signed by a certain portion of the respectable inhabitants of the place, but that was against the extreme penalty of the law being carried into effect, and was signed by those persons, not because they entertained the slightest doubt as to the evidence upon which the prisoners had been convicted, but because, like many highly respectable persons in this country, they entertained a conscientious objection to the extreme penalty of the law being carried into effect in any case; but he believed that few or none of those persons who, in the usual acceptation of the term, would be called respectable in the borough of Newport had signed the second petition. As the noble Lord who presented that petition had deemed it of such importance as to take the rather unusual step of giving notice of his intention to draw their Lordships' attention to it after Easter, with a view of interfering with the exercise of the prerogative of mercy by the Crown, he thought it right to inquire into the circumstances attending the petition, and the result of his inquiries had been such as he had stated to their Lordships.
Lord Teynhamhad never himself been in the town of Newport. The petition had been sent to him by parties whom he considered as respectable, and as the noble Marquess had admitted that the former petition had been most respectably signed, he thought he was justified in assuming that the signatures to the petition he had presented, were equally respectable.