Sitting of 20 September 1841

MINUTES.
New Members. Sir James Graham, for Dorchester; Sir John Nicholl, for Cardiff.
Bills. Read first time:—Administration of Justice (No. 2). —Read second time:—Royal Gardens; Frogmore Lodge: Lunatics.
Petitions presented. By Mr. Plumptre, from various places in Kent. Nottingham, and Monmouthshire, against the Grant to Maynooth.—By Dr. Bowring, from Dublin, for the Restoration of the Rajah of Sattara.—By Mr. Cobden, from Abingdon, and Milton Abbott, for the Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Sir R. Inglis, from Adam Murray, to prevent loss from the Defalcation of an Official Assignee.—By Mr. Wakley, from a Properly Tax Association, for a Tax on Property.

CHURCH EXTENSION.
On the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply being read,
Mr. Hawesbegged to ask a question of the hon. Baronet, the Member for the University of Oxford, whether it was his intention to renew this Session, or next Session, the motion which he made last Session of Parliament for an address to the Crown, praying for some provision for church extension.
Sir R. H. Inglissaid, that it was not his intention in the course of the present Session to renew the motion for church extension, of which he had given notice last Session of Parliament. With respect to any motion which might be made in another Session of Parliament, it was sufficient for him to postpone any answer, and request the House to postpone requiring it till that Session arrived.
Subject at an end.

VACATION OF SEATS.
Mr. TufnellHaving heard that the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Ripon, had accepted the office of Lord Chancellor of Ireland, he wished to know the reason why a new writ had not been moved for for Ripon.
Sir E. Sugdensaid, those measures were not completed which would displace the former officers.
Sir R. Peelsaid, no change whatever had as yet been made. It was the intention that the appointment alluded to by Mr. Tufnell should be made, but the ceremony even of kissing hands had not yet taken place.

STATE OF THE COUNTRY.—IRELAND.
Mr. Otway Cavesaid, I rise, Sir, in the first place, to enter, before you leave the
614
chair, my humble protest against the course which the majority of this House, under the guidance of the right hon. Baron opposite, has thought proper to pursue with regard to the postponement of the great question of the Corn-laws; and I fear and lament that that course will be considered by the people of this country to be marked by inhumanity, impolicy, and gross inconsistency. The noble Duke, who is the organ of the Government in the other House, has told us that every poor man in England can obtain a competency if he be sober and industrious. My noble Friend, the Member for Liverpool, has said, that the distress of the working classes is not connected with the Corn-laws. The right hon. Baronet, the Member for Dorchester, says, "He who lays the axe to the root of protection—who, by forced enactments, would decree, that diminished produce should not be compensated by high price —would depreciate native industry and prove fatal to the agricultural interest." So, then, Sir, there is a class in this country— a class assuming to rule and to feed us—who declare that whenever they fail in the discharge of these giant functions, of this self-imposed and awful responsibility, the consequences of their failure shall fall, not on their pockets, but on the nation's life; that if corn be dear and scarce, dear and scarce it shall remain; and that at any sacrifice of human life, at any increase of crime and misery, high rents and high prices must be kept up; and then last, and not least, comes the right hon. Baronet, the head of the Administration, and shuts the doors of this House in the face of a starving population, telling them that five months' hence he will take their case into consideration. I should be sorry to use too strong language, or I should say, in the words of my hon. Friend, the Member for Finsbury, that such language and such treatment are "enough to drive the working-classes mad." I think the course pursued by this House impolitic, because it teaches the suffering classes to look for redress to other quarters than this House; and when their complaints are silenced—not by argument, but by mere numerical majority—it makes them remember, that though we may have a numerical superiority here, they have a greater majority elsewhere. For the inconsistency of the party opposite I have only to refer to the speech of the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, in April last,

615
when the measures were announced that were to be contained in the budget; the delay of a month on such a question as the Corn-laws was then pronounced by that right hon. Gentleman an intolerable evil; four months had elapsed since that time, and yet he now proposes to postpone it for five months longer. These facts will not be lost upon the country. Already the new Tory alliance totters. The Chartists are beginning to be sorry for the victory they have helped the Conservative party to achieve. It is hazardous to deal in political predictions, but I do believe, that before the winter is over, the middle and working classes wilt make common cause for the repeal of the Corn-laws. They will join with those who are in reality their natural friends and protectors, and it will be impossible for the present Government to resist such a combination. Drowning men, it is said, "will catch at straws" and whatever may be said to the contrary, I believe that an impression prevailed at the late elections in England that the right hon. Baronet was possessed of some peculiar statecraft, some political panacea which would cure, or at least alleviate the evils of the country; this impression was strengthened by language held subsequently by the right hon. Baronet, in which he said, that if rival practitioners were dismissed, and if he were regularly "called in," he might give some salutary advice. His terms have now been complied with, however the reverse of generous; he has been regularly called in; in his own classical language, he has "pocketed his fee," and, in proportion to the hopes and the expectations that have been raised will be, as I think and fear, the anger and disappointment that will ensue. Then will a reaction in reality take place —then will the working classes regret that they have changed King Log for King Stork, and that, instead of lukewarm friends, or neutrals, they will find that they have powerful and uncomprising opponents. That no such disappointment may take place, I most devoutly wish, and if any real remedy be devised by the right hon. Baronet for the evils of the State, I, as an independent Member, will give him my humble support. But there is another subject to which I must now call his attention, and I have a question to ask to which, I trust, he will give an explicit answer: does he or does he not intend to bring forward Lord Stanley's Irish
616
Registration Bill? He stated on Friday last, that his difficulties with respect to Ireland were removed; and much as I regret to differ from the noble Lord who sits beside me, I must say, that I cannot participate in the confidence, that he expressed in the present Cabinet, as regarded Ireland. I have no doubt whatever of the amiable characters and excellent dispositions of Lords De Grey and Eliot; but if they had the highest abilities and best dispositions in the world, they would be obliged to act in accordance with the wishes of the Cabinet at home; and when I see, that the high places in that Cabinet are filled by the present Lord Chancellor, and by the Members for Dorchester and North Lancashire, who hate Irish liberty with a perfect hatred, and who have given us no reason to suspect their change of opinion, and whom, if I believe to be sincere, I must also, therefore, believe to be most hostile to Ireland; I say, that seeing this, I cannot shut my eyes to the fact, that they will not have the power, although they may have the wish, to benefit that most unfortunate country. I fear, also, that the Irish themselves will see in these appointments only another proof of the contempt in which they think they are held by England, and that Ireland is only thought fit for an " experimentum in corpora vili," when they hear that two of the most unpractised of our statesmen are sent to try their "'prentice hands" upon her. Unless, therefore, I receive a plain and satisfactory answer to the question which it is my duty to put to the right hon. Baronet, I venture to tell him that agitation will begin in the sister kingdom in a way that will cause no slight embarrassment to his Government. There are many wrongs and grievances yet unredressed— the tithe question, though some may think it settled, is not dead, but sleeping, and the people in that country have been taught to know, not only their Tights, but how to obtain them constitutionally. They well know the evils of agitation, but they think them preferable to the still greater evils of oppression; and I beg of this House to consider for a moment the hard dilemma in which so often they place the Irish people. If they make no strong op. position to their grievances, then they are told, that the quiet state they are in is a proof that no real grievances exist, or that they exist only in the imagination of their leaders. If, on the other hand, they make

617
such demonstrations as cannot be mistaken i then they are told, forsooth, as I myself have heard them told in this House, that their very resistance disqualifies them for redress, and that "we will not grant to clamour what we denied to justice." There is, however, another contingency to be contemplated, although the very thought of it makes me blush, as an Englishman; it may be, that the boast of the party opposite will be realised—that England will fall in love with Toryism, as they assert, and holding out her hands for the fetters,; be base enough to ask to have masters;: and, in that case, I tell this House, and through this House, the country, that to any such infamy as this, Ireland will not be a party. So long as you continue to; advance in civil and religious liberty at: home, so long as you promote the blessings of free institutions abroad—pursuing that course of foreign policy which has won for the late Secretary for Foreign Affairs the reluctant admiration of even political opponents; above all, if you give to Ireland every right and privilege that you claim for yourselves; so long will you fulfil the true conditions of the connection Ireland will derive advantage from, and be proud of it, and both countries will be eternally benefited. But if you choose to descend to the rank of a second-rate power in Europe; if, after degrading yourselves at home and abroad, you attempt to impose upon Ireland the evils of your own political vices and degeneracy, then will she fling at once her parchment union to the winds, and be justified before God and man in hoisting the standard of repeal; for anything will be better for her than Tory-Orange domination. I trust, that Ireland will be saved the necessity of any such step as this, and that the right hon. Baronet will take this humble admonition on my part in the same spirit in which it is given, and that by declaring that he will give up the late Irish Registration Bill (for which the newspapers and election petitions of his party appear to wish to pave the way, by every species of enormous fiction), he will allay the fears and suspicions on this subject, of such vital importance to the interest of Ireland.
Sir R, Peelrose, he said, to answer the question which had been put to him by the hon. Gentleman. He certainly did not intend to bring forward the identical bill that had been introduced in the last Session by his noble Friend (Lord Stanley); but in concert with his noble Friend
618
and the House generally he should be exceedingly glad to correct such errors as notoriously existed in the system of Irish registration. He should, at the same time, be exceedingly unwilling, in attempting to correct those errors, that the franchise which it was intended to confer upon that part of the united empire under the Reform Bill, should suffer any limitation. It should be his endeavour, therefore, to reconcile these two objects—as he was sure it had been the aim and intention of his noble Friend—that was to say, the correction of admitted abuses in the mode of registration, with the preservation either of the same franchise, or a franchise to a similar extent as that conferred upon the people of Ireland by the Reform Bill. He had no immediate intention of bringing forward any measure on the subject; but he did intend taking the matth into consideration in conjunction with is noble Friend, and when their measure should be brought forward, he thought it would be found to have been framed with a studious endeavour to reconcile the two objects to which he had referred.
Subject at an end.

BOARDS OF ORDNANCE AND ADMIRALTY.
Sir C. Napierbegged to call attention to one of the recent appointments of the right hon. Baronet. He could not conceive how the public service could be efficiently carried on in the absence of a navy officer at the head of the Board of Ordnance. He thought, also, that it was paying a bad compliment to the navy, in which there were 600 captains and 200 admirals, not to find one officer amongst them capable of being intrusted with the government of that board. Why, it would be really as absurd, he thought, to make him Lord Chancellor of England, as to place a civilian at the head of the Board of Ordnance; and he should not be at all surprised if the noble Lord who had been appointed to that office were unable to distinguish between a line-of-battle ship and a frigate. Besides, it was contrary to the usual practice.
Sir R. Peelcould only assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman, that by the appointment referred to he did not mean to cast the slightest imputation or reflection upon the profession of which the hon. and gallant Gentleman was so distinguished an ornament. It was not fitting that he should enter into a discussion upon the question on the present occasion; but he must observe, that

619
the practice of appointing a navy officer had not been invariably adhered to. To enter into a discussion of the question at present would oblige him to refer to the constitution of the board itself, and the officers who formed part of it. He believed, that the constitution of the board gave general satisfaction to the profession. [Sir C. Napier—No, no.] And as regarded this particular appointment, he thought he should be able to satisfy the House, that it had been made upon general views, for the good of the service and the advantage of the country, although it might be a question whether the practice of placing a civilian at the head of the Admiralty ought to be adhered to or not.
Sir C. Napierexpressed a hope that the right hon. Baronet would take the first opportunity of correcting the error. He could assure the right hon. Baronet, that the officers of the navy were not content upon the subject, and Sir G. Cockburn himself had told him that the only proper way to rule the navy was by placing an admiral at the head of it.
Captain Pechellconcurred in the sentiments expressed by his hon. and gallant Friend; and could only refer, in support of what his hon. and gallant Friend had stated, to the satisfaction which his late Majesty gave while at the head of the Admiralty, because he was a naval officer, and understood the nature of the service over which he presided. When the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Launceston, was at the Board of Ordnance some years ago, he admitted the evil of not having a naval officer connected with that department.
Sir H. Hardingesaid, as he had been referred to by the hon. and gallant Officer, he could only say, that, during the five or six years he was at the Ordnance, there was no naval officer at the board, nor had any been appointed in the first instance by Lord Melbourne's Administration. The appointment of a naval officer to this department was therefore not an invariable rule, although he admitted, that advantage might arise from having a naval officer at the Board. With respect to the office of Surveyor-general of the Ordnance, his opinion was, that that office would be better filled by a military than a naval officer.
Captain Plumridgehad nothing to offer in opposition to the appointment, as regarded the noble Lord himself; but still he thought it as necessary, that the navy
620
should be ruled by a naval officer as the army by a military one.
Subject at an end.

SLAVE-TRADE.
In reply to Sir E. Wilmot,
Viscount Palmerstonsaid, that information had been received by the late Government, stating, that as many, he believed, as six vessels were being fitted out at Hamburgh to be employed in the Slave-trade. He could not say whether that information were well founded, and, without implying any opinion one way or the other, he had communicated it to the Board of Admiralty, in order that the necessary directions might be given to the cruisers on the coast of Africa, in case the, report should turn out to be true.

PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE.
Sir Thomas Wilderemarked, that a very important question had been brought before the House, with respect to his right hon. Friend (Sir E. Sugden), after accepting the office of Lord Chancellor of Ireland, retaining his seat in that House. The principle involved in this was a very important one, for it was declared, that a Member of the House having accepted office from the Crown should be remitted back to his constituents. This was imperatively required by the 4th and 5th Anne. But in this case it was said, that the act was not violated, because there were some ceremonies to be gone through, that had not yet been accomplished. It was said, that the patent of the late Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Lord Campbell) had not yet been recalled. He did not think, that face of much importance, but the circumstance itself, as it occurred, appeared to him to be such, that he felt bound to say of it a more dangerous evasion of an Act of Parliament had never been attempted. The right hon. Baronet opposite had, by the authority of the Crown, offered to a Member of that House a high office, so high an office as that of Lord Chancellor of Ireland: He begged then to know whether the influence arising from that office was one that ought not to be remitted back to the constituents? The principle was particularly dangerous when there was a power of delaying the revocation of the patent which could confer office on the Member, who might in the meanwhile be voting the supplies, and on every question affecting the liberty and property of the subject. He wished

621
now to say, that he intended to bring the matter distinctly before the House. At the same time he wished to say, that he desired to make no improper reference to his right hon. Friend, as he was one for whom no one could entertain a higher respect than he did. At the same time, high as was his regard for his right hon. Friend, he had a still higher regard for the privileges of the House, and the liberty of the people. He conceived, that his right hon. Friend continuing to occupy a seat in that House, was, under the circumstances, an evasion of the act of Parliament, and he should bring the matter before the House.
Sir E. Sugdensaid, that as he was not present at the early part of the observations of the hon. and learned Gentleman, he could not make any reply to them; but he understood the hon. Member to say, that he (Sir Edward Sugden) was acting unconstitutionally in retaining his seatin that House, having accepted the office of Lord Chancellor of Ireland. He would beg to say he did so, because he conceived that he did not legally fill that office, though he had consented to fill it. He considered it his duty to his constituents not to abandon the trust they reposed in him, until he had lost it in law. He would also say, that he had not voted on any question since he accepted that office, nor had he been even called upon to consider whether he ought to vole. That he mentioned as a fact, and without attaching importance to it. He had no intention to do an unconstitutional act; but he never was more surprised when, without the least notice given to him, he heard the speech of his hon. and learned Friend, and at the close of that speech, that he was spoken of in terms of civility. He wished that the civility was shown by acts, and not by the terms in which it was expressed. He believed he was standing on his right as Member for Ripon, and maintaining his place in that House. He did not wish to carry the principle to any inconvenient extent; and if it were the opinion of the House that he was stretching the constitutional principle, he would at once withdraw; but he did not consider he had lost his rights as a Member of Parliament, until he actually filled the office which he had accepted. At that moment he was not legally Lord Chancellor of Ireland; Lord Campbell still, legally speaking, held that office. It was
622
not an acceptance of office, within the meaning of the act, until the appointment had actually taken place. It was not an acceptance to say he would accept. The minister might withdraw his offer. The office was held by patent, and the delivery of the Great Seal into his hand was certainly necessary before the appointment could take effect. That seal still remained in the custody of those to whom Lord Campbell had delivered it. The patents were not perfected, and therefore until they were so, and until all the necessary ceremonies had been gone through, he could not be considered as Lord Chancellor of Ireland. He hoped the House would acquit him of any improper feeling, or of any presumption on the subject; but he considered that his constituents would have a right to accuse him of neglecting their interests, if he abstained from occupying his place as their representative, while he had a right by law to do so.
Sir Thomas Wildewished to explain why he had not given notice to his right hon. Friend, and in doing so he would repeat those expressions of courtesy towards him which he had before used, although he knew that his right hon. Friend had a very peculiar method of acknowledging any courtesies. He was not aware when he entered the House, that it was the intention of his hon. Friend to put a question to the right hon. Baronet opposite on the subject; but that question having been put, he felt it his duty, when he heard the answer, to lose no time in giving notice of his intention to bring the subject before the House, and he had consequently no opportunity of giving notice to his right hon. Friend. In that intention he had been confirmed by the very dangerous doctrine laid down by his right hon. Friend, and to-morrow he would draw attention to the subject.
Lord J. Russellthought his hon. and learned Friend was quite right in having mentioned the subject, as the acceptance of the office by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, was publicly announced on Friday last. It was not a question of whether the right hon. Gentleman wished to retain his seat improperly, or to act against the desire of the House; but a question of considerable importance as to the interpretation which was to be put upon the Act of Parliament. The right hon. Gentleman seemed to think that there was not a proper acceptance of office until the office was actually filled. In several offices

623
that could be done at once. The Secretaries of State received the seals of office upon their appointment, and their seats were vacated immediately after. But in many other offices in the state, such was not the practice. In the Board of Admiralty, it required no less than a week to make out the patent, and when he was appointed Paymaster of the Forces, it took three weeks to complete the appointment. It had always, as far as he remembered, been the custom, upon the formal acceptance of office, to move for a new writ in that House, in order that a new election might take place. If that were a right custom, it ought to be continued; but if the right hon. Gentleman were correct in saying that the office must be filled, then he (Lord J. Russell) should be disposed to say, that the practice ought to be uniform, and not to have different rules for different cases. The question had been raised in the case of Mr. Horsman, who had addressed his constituents, stating that he had accepted office, and who subsequently voted in the House. No further motion or discussion, however, had taken place on the subject, but that case having occurred, and the right hon. Gentleman having asserted positively that it was right that he, a Member of that House, accepting office from the hands of the Prime Minister, who spoke as the organ of the Crown, should retain his seat as Member for Ripon, it behoved the House to come to some decision upon the subject, and, without passing any censure on the right hon. Gentleman, or any one else, to adopt some uniform practice, and let the meaning of that law be understood which said, that any Member of that House being chosen to accept office or profit from the Crown, should be thereby declared to be unseated, and that a new writ should be issued for another election.—Subject at an end.

CONTINUANCE OF THE POOR-LAW.
Mr. Yorkewished to know from the right hon. Baronet opposite, whether there would be any difficulty in the way of the introduction into the Poor Law Bill which the right hon. Baronet had announced it to be his intention to propose a clause which would take from the Poor Law Commissioners a power which, directly or indirectly, they now had? The subject to which the clause which he contemplated referred, was that of the indiscriminate separation of map and wife.
Sir R. Peelsaid, he should be better prepared specifically to answer the question at the silting of the House on the next day. But he could at once inform the hon. Gentleman, that he should take care to adopt such a course in reference to the new bill, as would not prevent any hon. Member from bringing the subject in question before the House.
Mr. Yorkefelt obliged to the right hon. Baronet for the general assurance he had given. But, that his views on the subject might not be misunderstood, he would take leave to inform the right hon. Baronet, that should any difficulty arise in the introduction of such a clause into the bill now proposed by the right hon. Baronet, he should, as far as he was concerned, endeavour to procure its insertion in a second bill.—Subject at an end.

CORN FROM RUSSIA.
Mr. Harcourtrose to request from his noble Friend opposite, the Member for Tiverton, an explanation on the subject of a paper which had been some time since presented to that House, and which contained a communication from our consul at St. Petersburgh on the subject of the quantity of grain produced in a province of the Russian dominions. A portion of that paper had been quoted in the debate on the address by his right hon. Friend who was now at the head of the Government. Sir Edward Baynes, in that paper, said, "In order to give an idea of what this country can produce when the harvests are particularly good, I have been assured by one of the principal corn merchants of Ribinsk (one of the greatest grain marts on the Volga), that in 1835 the government of Tamboff alone produced 38,000,000 quarters of grain." In a statement subjoined the cost at first hand at St. Petersburgh was stated to be for wheat from 13 s. 6d. to 14 s. per imperial quarter. Now, this information appeared to him so extraordinary, not to say incredible, that had it not been communicated to the Government twelve months ago, and had he not presumed, from the attention that had been afforded to the subject, that probably some further inquiry had been made as to the truth of the statement, he would not have given much attention to the matter. But either this information was true, or it was not. If it was true, then, as it came out with the sanction of the authorities, it must necessarily have a very great effect on the opin

625
ions of the agricultural body in the impending discussions on the Corn-laws. For although the mere fact of the province of Tamboff having produced 38,000,000 quarters was in itself unimportant, yet when it was borne in mind that the population of the province did not amount to 1,500,000, it was quite clear that upon a yearly product of 38,000,000 quarters there would be an unconsumed surplus of 30,000,000. This was, of course, for many reasons, utterly incredible; but still, as a county Member, and one who felt no indisposition that his constituents should fully enter into the question of the Corn-laws whenever it was brought under consideration, with a view to see whether they might not be modified with some advantage to the consumer, without loss to the producer, and at the same time to the increase of the revenue, he was very unwilling indeed that unfounded impressions should go abroad as to the enormous quantity of corn which in good years could be poured into this country from others. But Tamboff was an inconsiderable province of Russia, and if the rest of that country were to produce corn at the same rate at which Tamboff was supposed to produce it, no Corn-laws would suffice to protect the corn trade of this country. Because it appeared that the first cost at St. Petersburgh was 14 s., the charge of placing it on board was 3s. 2d. a quarter, and the charge for freight was only 5s. per quarter. Thus the whole expense of bringing the quarter of corn into the river here would be, according to this calculation, only 22 s. 1d. So that the 8s. duty proposed by the late Government would, under such circumstances, be no protection whatever to the home grower when the average for the year was 40 s. The calculations made by Mr. West of the whole produce of the united kingdom in 1814 and 1815 did not give a larger amount than did this calculation of the province of Tamboff; yet Tamboff was not half the territorial extent of England, containing only 24,000 square miles. If the supposed produce of Tamboff were compared with the produce of other provinces of the same empire, the error would be still more apparent. The produce of Podolia three years ago was 3,000,000 of quarters, of Volhynia less than 3,000,000. Now, it was impossible that those provinces which were notoriously fertile could have produced 3,000,000 of quarters annually, and that of Tamboff
626
have produced 38,000,000. There was also an error in these returns as to the mode of calculating the cost price at first hand of the corn at St. Petersburgh. That calculation appeared to go upon a valuation of the bank note rouble at 11 d. Now, the value of the silver rouble was only 10 d.; and in reducing the price in rubles into English currency there would seem to have been some mistake made. He had risen under these circumstances to ask his noble Friend opposite if in the course of the last year any means had been afforded by communication from St. Petersburgh of ascertaining whether the report of the consul was worthy of credit, because, if it was not worthy of credit, such a paper ought not to be circulated with the sanction of authority among the agricultural body.
Viscount Palmerstonthought that a reference to the context would at once show that the ciphers referred to by the hon. Gentleman were erroneous, and that some mistake had occurred in transcribing them. In the passage immediately preceding that referred to, Sir E. Baynes said, "supposing the cultivation to continue within its present limits, the provinces that supply St. Petersburgh could send down in the years of average crops, besides what is required for local consumption, from 175,000 to 210,000 imperial quarters of wheat;" and he further added that in, years of abundance these quantities might be tripled, or that, in fact about 600,000 imperial quarters might be produced. Now, if that were the case, it was not very likely that Tamboff, a comparatively inconsiderable province, could have produced 38,000,000 of quarters. The terretorial extent of Ireland was, as compared with Tamboff, as nineteen to twenty-three. A reference to the comparative productions of the two countries would at once dispel any alarm which might have been occasioned, and show that the statement complained of was the result of error only. But there was another ground for supposing that the error was an accidental one. The calculation referred to was for the year 1835. Now, how many quarters of wheat were exported from St. Petersburgh in that year? Two. In 1836 none at all were exported. So that it was quite evident that if the produce of Tamboff had so increased, the appetite of the population had increased in the same ratio. If his hon. Friend would inquire at the Foreign-office or at the Board of Trade.

627
he would no doubt find that there had been an error in transcribing the paper in question. With reference to the mode of converting the price in roubles into the price in English currency, he thought there could be no doubt that the calculation had been made with reference to the actual relative value of the two coinages.
Subject at an end.

SYRIA.
Dr. Bowringsaid, before he put the question of which he had given notice, he hoped he should be allowed to make one or two observations that would make the subject intelligible. For a very long time past there had existed between this country and the Ottoman empire certain treaties known by the name of the Capitulation Treaties. By those treaties, a duty of 3 per cent, was agreed to be imposed upon all exports and imports, and the tariffs which regulated those capitulations had been settled at various times by commissioners, so that the imposts intended to be levied never exceeded this 3 per cent., and from the diminished value of merchandize were in most cases much less than this amount. But in the progress of years, and the general disorganization and anarchy of the Turkish rule, enormous abuses had introduced themselves into many of the provinces, especially those immediately under the sway of the Sultan, and in these the capitulations had become of no effect. One article after another had been monopolized —heavy imposts had been levied on consumption and transits—and commercial operations were interfered with by every sort of exaction and abuse,—and to remedy which grievances, in 1838, a treaty was entered into between Great Britain and the Porte, by which it was agreed that instead of the 3 per cent, formerly levied upon exports, 12 per cent, should be collected by the Turkish empire, and that instead of the 3 per cent, upon imports there should in future be a duty of 5 per cent. At the same time, however, all internal taxes or impediments, that had formerly interfered, were to be put an end to. Now, he was very ready to admit, that, as far as Turkey Proper was concerned, the treaty to which he had last referred was of the utmost commercial importance, supposing it was really carried into effect, which it had not been up to the present hour, for so inveterate were the ancient habits of misrule and oppression, that the feeble hand of the sultan
628
had been controlled by that all-pervading corruption which characterizes the officers of the Porte. But beyond the limits of Turkey Proper, the treaty of 1838 was positively mischievous—for, in many of their dependencies, the ancient capitulations existed in their full vigour, and only 3 per cent was levied on articles of export and import. That treaty exhibited a lamentable ignorance of, or a reckless inattention to, the state of things—and even to the solemn engagements of the Porte in many of the provinces which came, or were supposed to come, under the operation of the treaty. The Porte had no right to interfere with the taxes of the provinces of the Danube—with Servia, Wallachia, or Moldavia—they paid a fixed tribute and regulated their own internal taxation. They had already trampled the treaty under foot and considered it as a dead letter. They would not allow the Porte to quadruple the duty on exports or double that on imports; and the Porte dared not insist on giving effect to the treaty in those districts. To Arabia also, the treaty had been found utterly inapplicable; and the same observation would apply to Egypt, where the payment of fixed tribute by the Viceroy, and the whole system of administration and government placed the ruler in a position wholly different from that of the direct nominees of the Sultan. But in Syria the operation of the treaty had been most injurious and cruelly oppressive, for the Syrians had not been subject to those internal duties, charges, and monopolies, which had made the capitulations of no effect elsewhere. They paid, and had continued to pay up to the period in which Mehemet Ali's sway was overthrown, the low duties which the capitulations had established. Since the restoration of the Turkish authority—if, indeed it be, or can be restored, the Turks had endeavoured to increase the export duties to 12 per cent, under the plea of the treaty; they had been changing the whole system of collection—and had in fact been introducing that state of things to which an experienced Austrian statesman had referred. Prince Metternich's despatch of April 20, 1841, to the internuncio, in reproving the "inept innovators" of the East, had these words:
" If I am not altogether deceived the Porte will have to abandon in the greater part of its dominions, the mode of receipt recently introduced into several of them. By collecting the duties through its own receivers it will only have augmented the exactions so far as its

629
subjects are concerned, and the deficiencies as far as the Treasury is concerned."
It seemed that in Syria, Mouhassils and Defterdars were employed to collect the duties, persons not of the religion of the principal part of the population, who were Druses and Maronites, and that they were imposing enormous duties in Syria, contrary to the engagements entered into by the Government. Our own Cabinet was a party to these engagements. We had stimulated the Syrians to revolt against Mehemet Ali — we had held to them splendid promises. As long ago as 1 836, Lord Ponsonby had sent a subordinate official of the Constantinopolitan Embassy, a Levantine, to sow the seeds of discontent and insurrection; and he had been rewarded by the consulship of Damascus. This gentleman (Mr. Wood) returned again, when it was decided by the Four Powers to eject Mehemet Ali from Syria, and Lord Ponsonby thus instructed Mr. Wood on August 4, 1840:—
" I direct you to declare in my name loudly to whoever chooses to hear you, that I am authorized to acquaint the Syrians that the British Government, in union with the Governments of Austria, Russia, and Prussia, will protect the Syrians who shall return to the direct obedience of the Sultan."
At about the same time Sir Charles Napier thus addressed the Syrians:—
" The allied powers have engaged to recommend to the Sultan to make an arrangement to render your condition happy and prosperous."
And Mr. Wood thus wrote to the Emir Bechir El Sheckaby on the 13th of August, 1840:—
" Four years ago I alluded to the probable separation some day of Syria from the dominion of Mehemet Ali, and he promised them if they would revolt,' peace and happiness, and liberty.'"
To the Emir El Kasim, Mr. Wood thus wrote:—
"My Prince, you must remember the conversation we had together four years ago, and the determination you then declared to arm your countrymen, provided England assisted you in your noble efforts to procure liberty for your countrymen."
And thus to the Maronite Patriarch on August 15, 1840:—
" The sublime Porte has only at heart now the general prosperity of its Syrian subjects, to whom it will grant the free exercise of their laws and perfect liberty, and the powerful intervention of England and Austria Will secure these blessings to them"
630
Again, Mr. Wood wrote to the Emit Bechir, (confidential:) —
" The great powers have decided to relieve the country from the burdens imposed oh it, particularly that part which is governed by you."
On the 29th of September, 1840, Lord Ponsonby thus wrote to Lord Palmerston:—
" The Porte will effectually engage to make a remission of taxes in Syria."
And the Grand Vizier also authorised Mr. Wood "to regulate and settle the actual affairs of the Porte in Syria." To the Emirs and Sheiks of Damour, Mr. Wood thus appealed on the 27th of September, 1840:—
" Come to us armed, both you and your chiefs, in order that you may assist us in making you free and happy."
In his despatch to Lord Ponsonby of the 8th of October, 1840, Mr. Wood said: —
" I had declared to the Syrians that the Porte would grant them their ancient rights and privileges. In consequence of such promises, they were encouraged again to revolt against the Egyptian authority after they had laid down their arms. I was sent by your Lordship, authorised to make a number of promises to the Syrians, and was, in a manner, pledged to see them executed by the Sultan's officers."
Lord Palmerston wrote to Lord Ponsonby, November 9, 1840.
" The honour of the British Crown requires that the promises made to the Syrians in the name of the Sultan by the British agent, Mr. Wood, should be fulfilled."
Mr. Wood'szeal, indeed, seemed to be boundless. This Christian envoy of a Christian Government called upon the Mussulmans in the name of the Koran, which he entitled "the Holy Book"— "the Sacred Law," to revolt, and so strong was Lord Ponsonby's confidence in him that he writes, November 18, 1840,
" I have instructed Mr. Wood to consider himself absolutely free from the authority and control of every body in Syria, in his execution of the duties and trusts reposed in him by the Porte."
It would seem, however, that accounts of the misdoings of the Turks had reached the Foreign-office at this time, for, in answer to a despatch representing "the unusual vexations—-the infamous and unpunished proceedings of the Constantinopolitan troops towards the Christian Rayahs and their clergy," Lord Palmerston instructed Lord Ponsonby to obtain

631
from the Sultan arrangements giving full satisfaction and security to the Syrians; and Lord Ponsonby replied, that the Porte was ready to take any measures for insuring to the Syrians the reward of their loyalty to the Sultan; and in a despatch so late as March 14, 1841, Lord Ponsonby said—
" It is particularly necessary that the Porte should faithfully perform the promises Redschid Pasha authorised Mr. Wood to make to the Syrians."
There can be no doubt therefore that we are bound to give effect to the pledges under whose influence the Syrians had thrown oft' one Government and assisted us to establish another. We have made them promises and they have a right to call upon us for their fulfilment. Every communication from Syria shows that the utmost disregard is shown by the Turks to the pledges that have been given. The Syrians had suffered much; their towns had been destroyed, their fields had been devastated, and multitudes of them had perished. His object was to ascertain from the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, whether her Majesty's Ministers were cognizant of the fact, that the duties on exports and imports had been greatly increased by the Turkish authorities in Syria, notwithstanding their engagement to the contrary, entered into in the most solemn manner; and whether, such being the case, any measures had been taken for the purpose of obtaining a redress of the grievance.
Sir R. Peelcould not help suggesting, that the noble Lord, the late Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, would, perhaps, have been the best authority to appeal to for satisfactory information upon this matter. He apprehended the state of the question was this:—In 1838, he thought it was, a treaty was ratified between the Porte and this country, which, for various internal monopolies, and exactions of different kinds, substituted an export duty of 9 per cent. There had been previously an export duty of 3 per cent., which still continued, and at present the whole duty to which British subjects were liable was 12 per cent, on exports. In some cases he had no doubt the levy of that duty might bear hardly on the native inhabitants, comparing the present amount of duty with what they were before subject to in particular districts of the country; but, on the whole, he apprehended that the substitution of a duty of 9 per cent.,
632
in lieu of various monopolies and exactions which formerly prevailed there must be advantageous. That abuses existed in the enforcement of that duty he was not disposed to deny. It was impossible, however, to form an opinion of the results of that treaty by restricting their view to any one point of Syria; they must look to its general effect, and. so far as British interests at least were concerned, he had every reason to believe that its operation had been beneficial. The inhabitants of Lebanon complained of the exactions to which they were subject under the rule of Mehemet Ali. He believed, however, that commissioners had been appointed by the Porte, who were in communication with the local authorities appointed by the inhabitants of Lebanon, and some arrangement was made to remit certain duties, in the first instance exacted by the Turkish authorities, and of which the inhabitants of that district complained. He believed, also, that the inhabitants of Lebanon demanded exemption from the operation of these duties for three years, in consequence of assurances which had been given them by the Turkish government. That question remained still unsettled. He had only to state, that there was every disposition on the part of the Government of this country to use its influence with Turkey for the purpose of securing to the inhabitants of Syria any advantages which they had a right to expect in consequence of engagements which had been entered into by British instruments acting under the authority of the Porte. But the great object of the Syrian operations being to restore the independence of Turkey, it was not very easy for foreign powers to interfere beyond certain limits in respect to the acts of the Turkish government. It was possible for us to interfere in respect of any contravention of a treaty when British subjects were concerned; it was possible for us to use our interest, in order to induce Turkey to fulfil the engagements she had entered into with her own subjects; but the great object of the recent movements being to restore the independence of the Ottoman empire, the hon. Member must himself see it was, as he had already said, no very easy matter for foreign powers to interfere. He rather thought, from the inquiries he had been able to make in the course of the morning, that some convention had been made between the authorities of Turkey and Lebanon, under which a certain sum was to be paid by the latter,

633
which, in point of amount, was not unreasonable. This was the only satisfactory answer he could give the hon. Gentleman beyond a repetition of the assurance, that so far as this country could consistently with the maintenance of the independence of the Ottoman Power use its influence for the purpose of preventing the great change which had taken place in Syria from operating to the disadvantage of the inhabitants, that influence would not fail to be exerted.
Viscount Palmerstonwished, although it was not altogether regular, to add a few words to what had fallen from the right hon. Baronet. With regard to the treaty of 1838, although the hon. Gentleman considered it a bad one, he certainly thought it a good one: and when he stated that several other powers had, in imitation, concluded exactly similar treaties with Turkey, he thought it might be inferred that the treaty had been advantageous to the Christian inhabitants. He knew that his hon. Friend had a strong feeling in favour of Mehemet Ali, and it was honourable to him that he had not abandoned the Pasha when he had encountered misfortune and failure. It was, therefore, not unnatural that the hon. Gentleman should look with some degree of dissatisfaction on the state of things established in Syria. He was also particularly anxious that this treaty should not be applied to Egypt, because that would of course, diminish those fiscal means which Mehemet Ali had applied in a manner not very consistently with his allegiance as a subject. But first of all, with regard to what had been done in Syria, the statement of the right hon. Baronet was quite correct. When first Syria was restored to the lawful dominion of the Sultan some officers, Mouhassils and Defterdars, were sent to collect the revenues, and it was perfectly true they had committed great excesses. On that being made known to the Turkish Government every desire was manifested to correct those abuses, and persons duly authorized were put in communication with the people of Lebanon and other parts of Syria, for the purpose of making some satisfactory arrangements with regard to the tribute they should pay; and before leaving office he had reason to believe that some arrangement would be made, which for a certain number of years would relieve the people of Lebanon from anything which could be considered oppressive. With regard, how-
634
ever, to the other transactions to which the hon. Gentleman had alluded—the employment of Mr. Wood to hold communications, on the part of the Turkish and English Governments, with the people of Syria, he must protest against the statement that he had been sent there to excite the inhabitants to rebel or revolt. What he had been sent to do was, to assure them that they would be protected, not in returning to their allegiance, for they had never swerved from it, but in asserting within their country the authority of their legitimate sovereign. It was Mehemet Ali who had encouraged rebellion, and not those who promised them assistance in maintaining the authority of the Sultan. The conduct of Mr. Wood, therefore, was perfectly correct. He was authorized by the Ministers of the Sultan, to hold out certain promises and expectations to the Syrians if they supported the Sultan against his rebellious subjects. They did so—they were entitled to have those promises made good, and he believed every step had been taken, as the right hon. Baronet had stated, consistently with the rights of an independent Power, to obtain the performance of those engagements. The strongest representations, consistent with a regard to those rights, had been made, calling upon the Porte to fulfil the promises which had been given to the Syrians, and his firm belief was that they would be performed.
Lord C. Hamiltonwas understood to express a doubt whether Mr. Wood should not properly be regarded as altogether a British agent in the negotiations with the people of Syria.
Viscount Palmerstonadmitted that Mr. Wood was a British dragoman acting under Lord Ponsonby, but he had authority from the Turkish government, and in virtue of it he held those communications with the subjects of the Ottoman Porte.
Conversation dropped.
The Order of the Day being again put,

DISTRESS OF THE PEOPLE.
Mr. S. Crawfordfelt it absolutely necessary to make another appeal to the right hon. Baronet, with reference to the condition of the working classes and the great urgency of some measures for their relief, because since Friday last he had received a statement from Rochdale exhibiting an amount of pressure and distress which it was perfectly frightful to contemplate. It appeared that in that town, which he had

635
the honour of representing, there were 136 persons living on 6d. per week, 290 on 10 d., 508 on 1s., 855 on 1s. 6d. and 1,500 on 1s. 10 d. per week. Of these five-sixths had scarcely a blanket among them; eighty-five families had no blanket, and forty-six families had only chaff beds, without any covering at all. When such a statement had been placed in his hands, he could not in duty to his constituents remain silent at his post. He was compelled to plead in their behalf for some measure of immediate relief. The right hon. Baronet called for lime to consider how these evils could be remedied, but surely five months were too long. If the right hon. Baronet could not propose measures effectually to relieve the people, some temporary act should at least be passed to cheapen the price of food by removing the tax on the importation of foreign corn The right hon. Baronet also proposed a renewal of the New Poor-law Bill and of the commission, which had had the effect, and was intended to have the effect of reducing the means by which the poor were to be relieved. The report recently published by the commissioners showed that they had zealously endeavoured to limit the means of out-door relief. If it should be the pleasure of the House to renew the Poor-law, he should move a clause by which the commissioners should be precluded from extending its operations to districts not already under its provisions, and also from restricting or forbidding out-door relief in any case without the consent of the guardians. He earnestly hoped the right hon. Baronet would seriously apply himself to this important subject. Hp must not rely only on the largeness of the majorities by which he might be supported; if his measures were not in accordance with the feelings of the nation, the greater his majority now, the greater would be his weakness by-and-by. Public opinion would recoil on him, and the effect would be as in the case of the Reform Bill. He did not object to the grant of a supply upon any party grounds; he did so in order that he might have the opportunity pf eliciting an assurance from the right hon. Baronet that inquiry into the condition of the labouring classes should not be postponed till next Session. Unless the right hon. Gentleman gave some intimation to that effect, he should decidedly record his dissent to the present motion.
Sir R. Peelassured the hon. Gentle-
636
man that he heard with the deepest regret any account of the sufferings of any portion of the people of this country; at the same time he had a very strong impression that it was very difficult by any act of legislation suddenly to provide a remedy. He thought he should only be countenancing a fatal delusion if he encouraged the belief that it was possible for Parliament to adopt any act by which immediate relief might be obtained. There must be an universal impression on each side of the House, however differently Members might feel on other matters, that the only hope with respect to the effect of legislation was to lay the foundation for improvement, and work a gradual amelioration in the state of society. Any sudden intervention on the part of the Legislature could afford but little hope of supplying an immediate remedy for evils which all must deplore. He was sorry that he could not purchase the acquiescence of the hon. Gentleman in this motion by holding any language different from that which he expressed on Friday; but in repeating that determination, he begged to assure him that he regarded the statements he had made with feelings as poignant as those the hon. Gentleman had himself evinced.
Mr. Thornelyhad no statistical statements to lay before the House, but he could assure them that there was not a single branch of manufacturing industry which was not in a state of depression. He, for one, should have infinitely greater pleasure in remaining there until next February, than in meeting at that period. He had looked that morning at a statement which was given of the state of our cotton trade. He found, that in 1840, the quantity of cotton taken out of the Liverpool market for the weekly consumption was 23,288 bales, while in 1841 it was 19,304 bales, showing a reduction of one-sixth. This was accounted for by the closing of so many mills, and the working of short time in others, causing, of course, great distress among the labouring classes. He had conversed with men, during the late recess, engaged in commerce; and he must say, that without regard to political opinions, every practical man concurred in the opinion that had there been a duty of 8s. imposed in last May, and the reduction which had been proposed had taken place in the sugar duties, a great improvement must have ensued in the commerce and manufactures pf the coun-

637
try. Let them look at the duly which might have been derived from corn. There were not less than 1,600,000 quarters in bond at the present time, which, at 8s. duty, would yield 640,000 l. At the duty of 1s., these would give but 80,000 l. showing a difference of 560,000 l. Thus would the revenue be benefitted by 500,000 l. while 1s. more would not be charged to the consumer. He was persuaded more had been paid to the foreigner on the Continent than the 500,000 l. that would have gone to the Treasury, if corn had been purchased according to the usages of commercial prudence. In common cases, orders were sent to foreign countries to purchase when goods could be had at certain limited prices, and to be shipped when the freight could be contracted for at low terms; but it being ascertained early in August, that from the working of the averages, the duty would be at the lowest in the week commencing either 9th or 16th of September, orders were sent to the rear ports of the Continent to purchase at high rates, and to give almost any rate of freight in order to get to market so as to reach the low duty.
He was persuaded that the public would pay a great deal more to the foreigner on the continent in the purchase of corn at an advanced price, than the 500,000 l. which would have been levied as duty, and would have gone into the Treasury, if the trade were conducted according to the common usages of commercial prudence. It was usual to fix the duty according to the value of the article, but let them look at the present rate of the duty on corn.

Average price.

Duty.

Per cent. Ad Valorem.

Wheat

73

2

1

0

equal to

1¼

Barley

37

8

6

4

equal to

17

Oats

24

9

10

9

equal to

43

Rye

38

3

12

6

equal to

30

Beans

43

5

5

0

equal to

11

Peas

45

5

2

0

equal to

5⅓

Let the House look to the operation of the Corn-law as regarded its effects upon the United States of America, our best customers. Though, as the law stood, it had proved possible to bring corn into this country from the near ports of Europe, it was impossible that America could send in a quarter of wheat, so as to obtain the advantage of the low rate of duty. Before the Americans could be aware of the reduction in the rate of duty they were
638
shut out from all participation in it. He submitted these considerations to hon. Gentlemen opposite. The Congress of the United States were to meet in December, and the manufacturers of America were already at work to prevent the introduction of British commodities there, except at advanced duties; and unless in the interval the Government of this country would put the commodities of the United States on a fair and equal footing, it was certain that this country would lose the opportunity, perhaps the only opportunity she would ever have, of gaining such an access to that market as she ought to have. He was not surprised that the report of the committee on the Import duties should have produced such an effect. The justice of the views set forth in it was universally admitted, be knew that it was read extensively in America, but he begged the House would consider what the Americans said of it:—
" When you act on the same principles you have so beautifully enunciated, and admit our produce into your markets, then you may lay claim in turn to the sympathy and liberality of other countries."
With respect to the sugar duties, it was the noble Lord the Member for Liverpool who, some time ago, had carried an amendment against the reduction of the sugar duty, grounded, he (Mr. Thornely) believed, upon the principle of encouraging the sale of sugar, the growth of free labour, in preference to sugar, the growth of slave labour. But it appeared that the inhabitants of Liverpool were of a different opinion to the noble Lord; for it was a curious fact that every sugar refinery in Liverpool had ceased working sugars of British growth, and were exclusively engaged in refining foreign sugars in bond. In one week 1,100 boxes of Havannah sugars were sold to be so refined. The fact appeared from the prices current of Liverpool, to which he referred the noble Lord. The sugar so refined was sent all over the world. It was sent to Jamaica, Demerara, British America, and even to the Isle of Man. Everything had been done to mystify the price of sugar. The price of raw sugar in bond might be called 2d. per pound; refined sugar 4d. per pound. All above these prices paid by the consumer, was either duty paid to the revenue, or the price paid for the sugar monopoly. He was of opinion, that if her Majesty's late

639
Government had carried the 12 s. duty they proposed to lay upon foreign sugar, there would not have been a single week in which the grocers and refiners would not have selected largely from that sugar, by which means the country would have been greatly benefited by the reduction in price, and the revenue largely benefited by the duty. In conclusion, he would say, that he had passed a long commercial life; he was now out of business; and he had never entertained any other opinions than those in favour of free-trade principles, of the soundness of which he was perfectly convinced. He had been long an observer of the working of the monopoly system; and he was not surprised at the impression the report of the import duties committee had had upon the country. He was in the habit of being early in his attendance at the House, and he had remarked, that among the prayers read at the Table previous to the commencement of business, there was one, "that we may lay aside all private interests, prejudices, and partial affections." Happy, indeed, would be that day, when Members, upon entering that House, would leave at the door all private and personal interest, whether it be that of the landowner, the manufacturer, of the merchant. True, they had a duty to perform to their constituents, but they had likewise a higher duty to perform to the country and to the world. He deeply regretted that the measures of commercial reform proposed by the late Ministers, had not been carried, as he was sure they would have been productive of immense national benefit. He would urge upon the right hon. Baronet opposite, that if he would set himself in defiance to those who came there for the furtherance of private and partial interests, he would have the opportunity of doing an immeasurable good to the country—a good for which that country would be for ever indebted to him.
Mr. H. R. Yorkesaid, though immediate relief was much wanted by the people under their distresses, he thought the position of the right hon. Baronet, as a public man, with his immense responsibilities, ought also to be considered. It must not be forgotten, that the misery now spoken of was increasing in the spring of the year, and with the misery there was increasing an excess of expenditure over income. The right hon. Baronet, however, having objected to the specific mea-
640
sures of relief proposed by the late Government, was bound to bring forward others in their place. It was, therefore, with intolerable pain that he heard the right hon. Baronet say he intended only to propose a certain sum to be voted for the ventilation of the House—a thing excellent in its way; another sum for the centralisation of royal vegetables, also a thing excellent in its way—and other sums for the public service. The right hon. Baronet also meant to bring in a bill to continue the Poor-law, by the affected detestation of which, and the denunciation of its obnoxious clauses, many hon. Members had gained their seats, and, having done this, the right hon. Baronet would most kindly send the country Gentlemen back to their accustomed avocations.
The House divided on the question that the Speaker do leave the Chair:—Ayes 136; Noes 22: Majority 114.

List of the AYES.

A'Court, Captain

Ferrand, W. B.

Acton, Colonel

Fleming, J. W.

Allix, J. P.

Forbes, W.

Antrobus, E.

Forman, T. S.

Arbuthnott, hon. H.

Fuller, A. E.

Attwood, M.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Baillie, Colonel

Gill, T.

Baird, W.

Gladstone,rt. hn. W.E.

Baldwin, C. B.

Gore, M.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Goring, C.

Baskerville, T. B. M.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Beckett, W.

Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.

Berkeley, hon. C.

Grant, Sir A. C.

Blackstone, W. S.

Greenall, P.

Bodkin, W. H.

Greene, T.

Boldero, H. G.

Grimsditch, T.

Borthwicke, P.

Grogan, E.

Boscawen, Lord

Hale, R. B.

Botfield, B.

Hamilton, W. J.

Bramston, T. W.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Broadley, H.

Harcourt, G. G.

Brooke, Sir A. B.

Hardinge, rt.hn.Sir H.

Browne, hon. W.

Hayes, Sir E.

Bruce, Lord

Henley, J. W.

Buck, L. W.

Henniker, Lord

Campbell, A.

Herbert, hon. S.

Canning, rt. hn. Sir S.

Hogg, J.W.

Carnegie, hn. Captain

Hope, hon. C.

Chelsea, Viscount

Hope, G. W.

Chetwode, Sir J.

Hornby, J.

Clerk, Sir G.

Howard, hn. C. W. G.

Clive, hon. R. H.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Cochrane, A.

Irton, S.

Collett, W. R.

Irving, J.

Cripps, W.

Johnson, W. G.

Dalrymple, Captain

Jolliffe, Sir W. G. H.

Darby, G.

Kerrison, Sir E.

Dawnay, hon. W. H.

Knightley, Sir C.

Divett, E.

Langston, J. H.

Douglas, Sir C, E.

Leicester, Earl of

Egerton, W. T.

Litton, E.

641

Lockhart, W.

Sibthorp, Colonel

Mackenzie, W. F.

Smythe, hon. G.

Manners, Lord G.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

March, Earl of

Taylor, J. A.

Marsham, Viscount

Tennent, J. E.

Masterman, J.

Tollemache, hn. F. J.

Milnes, R. W.

Trench, Sir F. W.

Morgan, O.

Tufnell, H.

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Vane, Lord H.

O'Brien, A. S.

Vere, Sir C. B.

Owen, Sir J.

Veiner, Colonel

Pakington, J. S.

Vivian, J. E.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir It.

Vyvyan, Sir R. R.

Peel, J.

Waddington, H. S.

Pollock, Sir F.

Wakley, T.

Ramsbottom, J.

Walsh, Sir J. B.

Reade, W. M.

Welby, G. E.

Rice, E. R.

Wigram, J.

Rolleston, Colonel

Wilde, Sir T.

Rose, rt. hon. Sir G.

Wood, Colonel

Rushbrooke, Colonel

Wood, Colonel T.

Russell, Lord J.

Worsley, Lord

Russell, C.

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Sanderson, R.

Wyndham, Colonel

Sandon, Viscount

Scott, R.

TELLERS.

Scott, hon. F.

Baring, H.

Seymour, Lord

Fremantle, Sir T.

List of the NOES.

Bowring, Dr.

Napier, Sir C.

Brother ton, J.

Ogle, S. C. H.

Bryan, G.

Philips, M.

Cobden, R.

Plumridge, Captain

Collins, W.

Protheroe, E.

Dennistoun, J.

Rennie, G.

Elphinstone, H.

Thornely, T.

Ferguson, Colonel

Walker, R.

Fielden, J.

Yorke, H. R.

Gibson, T. M.

Granger, T. C.

TELLERS.

Harford, S.

Williams, W.

Hawes. B.

Crawford. W. S.

House in committee.

SUPPLY — MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
On the question that a sum not exceeding 60,000 l. be granted for completing the sum necessary to defray the expenses for civil contingencies until the 31st of March, 1842.
Colonel Sibthorphoped the system of jobbing which for more than ten years had been practised by her Majesty's late Ministers would now be put an end to. He would say nothing of the appointment of a reverend gentleman to the deanery of Armagh, which he designated an insult to the Archbishop—he would say nothing of the appointment of a noble Lord to sit for about seventeen days for the adjudication of important cases at the Irish bar—he would say nothing of all the other jobs that had been perpetrated by the late
642
Government, for he had a confident hope, and a firm belief, that such mal-practices would not be permitted by the party now in office. There were two or three points, however, in the miscellaneous estimates to which he could not help adverting. One of them related to an hon. Member of that House, of whom he wished to speak with no disrespect, for he admitted the talents and assiduity of that hon. Gentleman, and considered that the blame did not attach to him, but to the late Government, which had appointed him to the discharge of certain duties. The hon. Gentleman, now Member for Bolton, but then Member for Kilmarnock, had held a seat in that House for a period of two years, six months, and five days, and at that time was receiving a considerable salary, and sums for his expenses for duties which he undertook and discharged, as he (Colonel Sibthorp) had already admitted, with great talent and assiduity. The amount received by that hon. Member, and shared (as he understood) with two other Gentlemen, was 17,159 l. 15 s. 3d., according to an official return granted on a motion of his (Colonel Sibthorp's) last year, and that sum was for four or five reports. He had not read those reports, nor did he intend to read them; they might be very useful documents, and might contain much important matter, but they were too much for him to understand. He protested against the grounds on which that sum was given to the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. W. Williamssaid, that the hon. and gallant Colonel opposite had often been associated with him in opposition to acts of extravagance by the late Government, and he (Mr. Williams) trusted, that now the hon. and gallant Gentleman's own party was in power, he would continue in the same course. He must call the attention of the House to some of the items contained in the estimates. He objected particularly to the items charged for the expense of ambassadors' outfits, and was quite sure, that the Government would have no difficulty in finding persons most competent to fill these offices for the emoluments annually allowed to them, without any of these additional charges for outfits. He was quite unable to account for one of the charges, and was at a loss to imagine how it could be justified—it was a charge of 319 l. 12 s., for the master of the ceremonies and packing of pictures for her Majesty's ambassador at Paris. It

643
was utterly impossible that the people, in their present distressed and impoverished condition, could afford to pay more taxes; therefore, if expenses of this kind were continued, and further taxation should in consequence become necessary, the inevitable result would be, that the higher classes, who alone profiled from such lavish expenditure of the public money, must bear the additional taxation themselves, by placing a charge upon property. There was another item that appeared to him to be most objectionable, viz., 578 l. to defray the amount expended on account of the visits of the Grand Duke of Russia, the Prince of Leiningen, the Duke of Coburg, the Duchess of Braganza, the King of the Belgians, and Count Mensdorf. Why were the people of this country to be made to pay the expenses of these illustrious visitors? Then there was a charge of 406 l. 14 s. 6d. for the incidental expenses of- the chief bailiff of the Tower of London for one year to 5th of April, 1840. How was that to be accounted for? Again, there was a charge of 2,702 l.. for the Marshal of the Queen's Bench Prison, on account of salary and expenses for one year and a quarter to the 30th of September, 1840, in consequence of the fees being deficient to that amount. He thought that that charge required explanation, and the same remark applied to the charge of 360 l. 4s. 4d. for the amount issued to pay fees to certain officers of the Court of Exchequer upon passing declared accounts. Supposing the officers to be amply paid, he was at a loss to conjecture why the public should be charged with the payment of these fees. Then there was a charge of 387 l. 16 s. 6d.0 for appointing the right hon. Charles Poulett Thomson Captain-general and Governor-in-chief of her Majesty's provinces in British North America. He believed, that this was to defray the cost of stamps necessary to make out the appointment, but surely as the appointment in itself was one of high honour and distinction, and accompanied with a salary of 7,000 l. per annum, the individual who received it ought at least to bear the expense consequent upon its being conferred. He found another charge of 1,455 l. 12 s. 4d. for sums paid to sundry persons, as of her Majesty's bounty. He should like to know what those sums were, and to whom they were paid. No explanation
644
was given of them in the vote. After a brief reference to one or two other items of a smaller amount, the hon. Gentleman concluded by expressing a strong conviction that the chief part of these expenses might be saved to the country, without any injustice to individuals or injury to the public service.
Lord J. Russellsaid, he could not but express an opinion adverse to that of the hon. Member for Coventry, with regard to the last point he had mentioned. The hon. Member supposed, that in the case of ambassadors and others occupying high offices abroad, the expense of their outfits was not properly incurred by the state. Undoubtedly that might be so, if the House were prepared to say this, that none but persons of great fortune should be appointed to such offices. If, however, as he presumed, the House would concur in thinking, men of great talent should rather be preferred, even with small private fortunes, and without the ability to lay out large sums of ready money, to the amounts requisite for their outfits, then these expenses were properly borne by the State. Now, of course, no distinction could be drawn between different individuals appointed to the same situations, and if the allowances were made in one class of cases, they must be made in all. He confessed, that he had often wished, when at the Colonial-office, that governors sent out, instead of being at the expense of their commissions, should have their appointments free of expense; and he was not without hope that arrangements might be made for securing this. As to Lord Sydenham, however, there was no doubt that allowances had been made to him contrary to the usual practice for the expense of his commission, and on this ground, and this ground only—that the appointment had been, out of the usual course, only for a short time, all other governors being appointed for a period of six years at least, Lord Sydenham having to contemplate only a short stay in Canada. Had the noble Lord been appointed for the ordinary period, as in the usual course, he would have been (subject only to the condition of his retaining the confidence of the Crown), he would have had to bear this expense. Having, however, been appointed only for a short period, it was not thought inst that he should have to pay this expense. He would add this as the result

645
of his experience, that so far from public appointments, especially of this nature, being sources of great emolument, the individuals filling these offices were often obliged (as in the case of Lord Sydenham had actually, after all, been the fact) to make no inconsiderable payments out of their private purses. Certainly men were always found ready to accept and even to ask for these foreign appointments, but this was from the natural feeling of ambition, and desire to have honourable and useful employment in the public service, and it rarely or never happened, that the occupants of these offices, even for considerable periods, augmented their private fortunes. As this was the case, it seemed to him, that it would be unjust in the State to take advantage of this feeling in the public mind, and to say, "Since there are always to be found men willing to take these appointments, they shall always pay for them; we will not allow a sufficient support to them, but put the offices up to public auction and give them to the lowest bidder." As to what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member for Lincoln, with respect to the expenses incurred for Dr. Bowring's services, he did not think it necessary to repeat the conclusive answers upon that point which had been formerly given.
Lord C. Hamiltonsaid, without impeaching either the services of the learned doctor, or the justice of his remuneration, he would take the liberty of asking (as it seemed certainly but fair that the country should have the full benefit of those services) whether it were true, as he had heard it asserted (and so commonly that he should think the noble Lord opposite would feel glad of an opportunity of contradicting it, were it untrue), that the reports of the learned doctor had been greatly curtailed and altered by the noble Lord lately at the head of the Foreign-office?
Viscount Palmerstonsaid, he certainly had struck out the word "sovereign," applied in several places to Mehemet Ali, owing to his learned Friend's zeal in the Pacha's cause, which phrase did not seem to him quite correct. He had also struck our various passages, (most of them extracts from other works, eulogistic of the Pacha's character and policy, which appeared to him to have nothing to do with the subject matter of the inquiries. But he had made no alteration
646
whatever in the statistical portion of the reports.
Mr. Milnessaid it seemed to him, that in a case of this sort, where the agent was sent out as the officer of the Government, there was a perfect right on the part of the Ministry to alter his reports in any way necessary to render them official documents; and he would further say that he had for one derived satisfaction from the perusal of these reports, and he hoped that her Majesty's Government would never hesitate on proper occasions to propose a similar course, nor could he well conceive of any mode in which public money could be more advantageously laid out than in the collection of such valuable information.
An hon. Member said this had ever struck him as one of the worst jobs ever perpetrated even by the most jobbing of Governments.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY ROYAL PALACES—PUBLIC DISTRESS.
On the question that a sum not exceeding 51,654 l. 10 s. be granted to defray the expenses of works and repairs in public buildings.
Mr. Williamsobserved, that the sum to be expended on account of the Royal palaces would be greater this year than for some previous years—a sum not less than 49,500 l.; and many of these palaces were not inhabited by any Members of the Royal family, but were tenanted by persons who held them by favour and without any public service or any claim whatever. Such was the case with Hampton-court and Kew. The latter was kept up for a foreign prince. The King of Hanover was no subject of this realm; why, then, should the people of this land be taxed to keep up for him a palace which he never used? Then, as to Kensington, only a portion of the palace there was occupied by a member of the Royal family, and it would be far better if the kitchen and other gardens of the palace were thrown open to the gardens, which formed so valuable and delightful a resort for public recreation. The result would be, not only a great public boon, but a great public economy. There were not less than nine of these palaces kept up—there was (besides the palaces at Brighton and Windsor,) the palace at Claremont, kept up at an expence of 14,000 l. annually, for the King of the Belgians;—that was a

647
charge which ought not to be imposed on the people of this country. A great deal had no doubt been said about the exceeding liberality of the King of Belgium, and that he did not touch any of the money himself; but what mattered it to the people, who had to pay it, whether his Majesty spent it, or somebody else for him? Really, to look at these estimates, one would imagine that we were in a very prosperous condition. If the expenses he had alluded to were at all connected with her Majesty's comfort, not one of her subjects would wish to stop them; but it was notorious that her Majesty never even saw half these palaces. A great part of these expenses might therefore, without in the remotest degree affecting her Majesty, be retrenched; and as the right hon. Baronet the Premier had stated his intention to effect all possible savings, he trusted that to this subject, so open to retrenchment, the right hon. Baronet's attention would be directed.
Mr. Wakleyfeared that no advantage would attend the remarks which had been just made. The hon. Gentleman, Mr. Williams, spoke on that side of the House amidst gentlemen by whom all these estimates and expenses were proposed and incurred. Now it appeared to him that the House should submit with becoming humility to their unfortunate position at this time, to take what the constituencies had been pleased to do at the late elections, and endure what might be submitted to them during the coming year. These estimates, without doubt, exhibited from beginning to end a carelessness of the public expenditure—there was no doubt about that, nobody could deny it who looked fairly and dispassionately at them. Every man in viewing them must suppose, if he knew nothing of the financial condition of this country, that we were in a state of extraordinary prosperity, that there was no distress, no calamity, no diminution of trade, and no complaining on the part of the labouring population. Here was a recklessness of public expenditure from beginning to end; but who was to blame? He declared that since he had been a Member of this House he had observed more recklessness on the part of the Members of this House with regard to the public money than by the hon. Gentlemen who were now in office or by the hon. Gentlemen who had left their seats and gone to the other Bide. The real dif-
648
ficulty the country had to contend with, was the wantonness of the House of Commons with regard to the expense. Only a few Members paid attention to the subject; only a few were captivated with figures; the hon. Member for Coventry was one of these, and he regretted that there was not more of his class in the House. The Administration that was now formed was one of great ability, and carried with it a great part of the wealth and intelligence of the country—and it was perfectly useless, in the present state of the House, to contend against a body so constituted; they must be patient, they must bear and forbear, and submit to the propositions that were made to them. After a fair trial had been given them, then, supposing that measures were not brought forward, and curtailments not made which ought to be made, there might be another appeal to the country, and they would see what would be the result. The noble Lord, the Member for the city of London, and the Whig party, had no reason to complain of the existing state of things, or to speak in a tone of discontent or dissatisfaction. This House was constituted as the offspring of the noble Lord's will— the creature of his own choice. He had been entreated and solicited again and again, within the last six. years, to make that change in the constitution of this assembly which was evidently necessary. But the noble Lord said, "No, we don't want Reform or revolution every year; we are satisfied with what has already been done." How then could the noble Lord complain of the hon. Baronet, when he stated he wished for time to produce those measures which he thought were necessary for the public good. The right hon. Baronet had already found that he was reclining on no bed of roses. He did not find a rich Exchequer, he did not find the finances of the country in a flourishing condition; and he, for one, thought that he ought to have time—that time ought to be afforded. He thought hon. Gentlemen would be defeating their own objects, and inflicting injury on the people, by hurrying the right hon. Baronet to the adoption of immatured and indiscreet measures. He was surprised at the statement on the other side, that the right hon. Baronet would not summon Parliament for five months. Now he had heard nothing of the sort from the right hon. Baronet; all that he had heard was, that

649
he desired time to prepare the measures, which he thought it necessary to submit to the House. He did not know whether those measures would be good or bad, but he knew that hon. Members had not the power to compel him to bring forward those measures until it suited his disposition. There was a very large majority against them, and he would repeat that they must submit patiently to what might be the determination of that majority. This House as now constituted, undoubtedly had not the approbation of the small party to which he belonged; and they did not believe that the House, thus constituted, would consult the interests of the people. They might be deceived— and he sincerely hoped they might be deceived; for nothing would give him greater delight than to see measures of a comprehensive character proposed, that were calculated to impart satisfaction to the public and promote their interests. The right hon. Baronet on this occasion, had merely adopted the estimates proposed by the late Ministers; and probably, if Gentlemen opposite had been placed in a similar position, they would have acted in a similar manner, pressed as the right hon. Baronet had been for time. But he would say that if the Minister, in a future Session of Parliament, should come forward and propose measures of this kind, with the finances in their present condition, he would not be deserving of support. In fact, when they looked at the distresses of the working people, to whom this country owed all its reputatation, power, and wealth, it was a crying sin and shame, that 1l. of expense should be incurred that was not justified by circumstances. The noble Lord who had just left the House (Lord J. Russell) had stated that there should be certain sums granted for ambassadors to foreign courts; but he would ask if it was meet and proper that, when foreign princes chose to come to this country to visit their relations here, the poor English public should have to pay their expenses? Why, it was bringing discredit on monarchy—it was bringing discredit on the aristocracy, and was calculated to make the people look on them as their persecutors, and as the persons who ever and anon were placing them in more extreme distress. Now here was a sum of money mentioned in the estimate as paid for the expense of a foreign Sovereign visiting this country; and a sum of 1,000 l. paid for an
650
ambassador to go to Frankfort. Was this fair? Could any man believe this expenditure to be just? If the appointment of an ambassador to Frankfort were really useful, he did not object, for he was not one who was disposed to complain of the manner in which the noble Lord opposite (Lord Palmerston) had administered the foreign affairs; on the contrary, he considered that his administration of our foreign affairs had the effect of putting this country in a prouder position than it had ever before attained, and that England was never more respected abroad than at this moment; and this was mainly owing to the exertions of the noble Lord. Now he wished that the noble Lord would come forward and tell the House next year what expenses might be reduced and what might not be reduced. He thought the noble Lord could come down with a long list, showing that very great reductions might be made without the slightest detriment to the public. If he would do so it would be received as a happy climax to his great exertions. Many of the offices were utterly useless, and the estimates were framed with an utter disregard of the public interest; and he did hope that the present Administration would see to what extent the people's burthens might be reduced, and that the principle of economy would be unremittingly applied.
Mr. Fieldenwas surprised at some part of the speech just delivered. The hon. Member for Finsbury had talked of the justice of giving the Government time. That was just what he wished to have given them, the old constitutional principle being, that the grievances of the people should be first redressed before the supplies were granted; and this appeared to him the only proper course on the present occasion. The distress. of the country was too serious for delay. Lancashire was fast going. The best workmen were departing to foreign countries, to obtain there that subsistence which at home they could not get. He wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to afford the people any relief before the winter set in?
Mr. Wakleywould ask the hon. Member for Oldham why he did not come forward with a measure for the relief of the-distressed condition of the country? If the hon. Member was so fully impressed with that idea, it was his duty to propose any remedy which he (Mr. Fielden)

651
thought would effect the object which he had so much at heart.
Mr. Fieldenin reply observed, that if it was his duty to have prepared a remedy, he would have done so at once, and without any hesitation.
Mr. Ewartobserved, that if the hon. Member's remedy, patience, were the sole recommendation he had to offer, he feared he would soon have to assist at the inquest on the defunct remains of the country. He would, however, not enter upon the various topics which had been suggested by the hon. Member, but would confine himself to the question before the committee, and he begged to give expression to the satisfaction which he felt in finding that the Regent's Park was now available to the public as a pleasure ground. He thought, that the same course might be advantageously adopted with respect to other parks, and particularly as regarded Richmond Park, which would be a great accommodation if thrown open to the public. There was Kew Park also, which was contiguous to the large and populous towns of Brentford, Isleworth, &c, and which was closed six days in the week, and which might, without inconvenience, be thrown open. He hoped, that Kensington Gardens would be preserved in their present state, and not be encroached upon, as the west-end of town was already sufficiently built in; and unless breathing space was preserved at the present time, there would be no future opportunity for obtaining it.
Mr. Wakleysaid, that there was no more dangerous and unconstitutional doctrine than that which threw upon the executive Government all the responsibility of originating measures. It was the duly of Members unconnected with the Ministry to propose whatever measures they thought would be conducive to the interests of the state. It was the duly of the hon. Member for Oldham to have stated the other night to the House what he thought would be the remedy for the evils of which he now complained. He should like to know whether the proposition of an 8s. duty on corn instead of 1s would have had the effect of relieving the people from the distresses that now pressed heavily upon them? He thought, that the course which the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government intimated to the House his intention of pursuing was both fair and reasonable. The right hon.
652
Baronet did not state that he intended to prorogue, although such appeared to be the general impression. He thought, that it was highly impolitic to wish the right hon. Baronet to come down to the House with ill-digested measures, and trust to chance for their being carried. He would never lend himself to a factious opposition. It was the duty of the House to give the right hon. Baronet a fair and impartial trial.
Mr. Williamsthought the case of the country stood thus:—The patient was suffering from a severe malady; the late Government had come forward with measures of relief, and they had been rejected, and the present Government refused to administer a remedy. He thought, if the measures of the late Ministry had been carried, that the country would not have been in its present deplorable condition.
Sir R. Inglisdid not wish to interfere in the quarrel, it was a very pretty one as it stood. He rose for the purpose of making an observation in allusion to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Dumfries, who appeared to have taken the position formerly occupied by the late Member for Kilkenny. The hon. Member, although he reserved to himself the liberty of doing what he liked with his own fields and gardens, wished to deny to the Crown the right of managing its own property. He considered the right of the Crown to Richmond-park to be as strong as that by which any private gentleman held his estates.
Mr. Ewartthought that the hon. Baronet was wrong in the view which he took of the distinction between the property of the Crown and that of private individuals. The property of the Crown was held for the benefit of the people as well as for the interest of the Sovereign. He did not think that her Majesty at all participated in the exclusive views entertained by the hon. Member opposite.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY—MUSEUM.
On the vote of 21,000 l. for the new buildings of the British Museum.
Mr. Hawessaid, he regretted that ill consequence of the librarian and his assistant being engaged in making a new catalogue for the library and occupying the apartments, the public were still excluded from that most interesting part of the building. He hoped that if the object-

653
tion were made, that the dust created by the admission of visitors would injure the books, proper measures would be taken to obviate the conjectured mischief. At all events, he thought the objection not sufficient to justify the exclusion of the public, and he trusted that the trustees, some few of whom were present, would take the subject into consideration.
Dr. Bowringinquired when it was likely that the catalogue would be completed and printed.
Sir R. Peelwas understood to reply, possibly in the course of a few weeks. With regard to the observations of the hon. Member for Lambeth, the questions whether the public should be allowed promiscuously to enter the library for the purpose of seeing the place, or to examine and read the books, were very different. There was every disposition on the part of the trustees to allow access to the library for the purpose of study, but to make the library a public promenade would certainly be to destroy the design of the institution.
Mr. Hawesdid not think by allowing the public to walk through the room those who went to study would be disturbed, particularly as an apartment was specially provided for their accommodation.
Dr. Bowringsaid, there was no difficulty in the public obtaining access to the libraries on the continent.
Sir R. Inglisventured to say, that the hon. Gentleman had never seen ten persons at one time in the library of the Vatican; and though the visitors to the library at Paris were numerous, sometimes amounting to 30,000 in a short space of time, there were no readers seen there. The quantity of dust produced by so great an influx of persons must certainly be very great, as hon. Members might well imagine, from the state in which that House was at twelve or one o'clock.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY—MODEL PRISON.
On the grant of 15,000 l., for the completion of the Model Prison.
Mr. Williamssaid, it was now too late to object to this vote, but he would observe, that if the system adopted in the United States, of making prisoners work in erecting the prison had been followed, a considerable amount of expense would have been saved to the country.

SUPPLY—CALEDONIAN CANAL.
On the proposal that the remaining half of 50,000 l., be granted for the permanent repair and improvement of the Caledonian Canal.
Mr. Williamssaid he had been one of the committee appointed to inquire and report its opinion upon the subject of the condition of the canal, and the advantages to be derived to commerce from a further outlay of public money. He regretted to say the subject had been treated very summarily, and in the conviction that the interests of trade were not served in proportion to the enormous expense of this canal he had voted against the report; another Gentleman voted for it, two had signed it without having paid any attention to the subject; and the result on the whole was that, the numbers being equal, the casting vote lay with the chairman, Mr. Robert Steuart, who, being a Scotch gentleman, thought it was desirable to secure to Scotland the advantages of this canal, and thus the proposition, originally for granting 200,000 l., according to the estimate of Mr. Telford for the canal, was, in spite of his opposition, carried. It was necessary to state to the committee, that during the last nineteen years, no less a sum than 2,350,000 l. had been lavished by the Legislature upon this object, and of so little advantage was it to the trade, of the kingdom, that the tolls on it produced no more than 2,500 l. a year since 1821. Since which the expenditure had been 26,000 l. above the income derived from it. For the last seven years the actual loss to the country had been on an average 2,070 l. a year. This was not the only aspect in which this great undertaking presented itself to their consideration, for it was stated by Mr. Walker, the present engineer, that, in order to render this canal perfectly complete and useful, a still larger sum than the 200,000 l. recommended by the report of the committee would be necessary. Mr. Robert Steuart, in order to obtain the sanction of the different commercial constituencies in the country, wrote to five of the principal English ports—namely, London, Liverpool, Hull, Bristol, and Newcastle; he also wrote to Belfast, Dublin, Glasgow, Dundee, and Leith. He alluded to Mr. Walker's report, and pointed out the advantages which would arise from increasing the depth of the canal from eleven feet to seventeen feet, and placing, steamers

655
upon it, and he would now read the answers which were received. The secretary to the committee at Lloyd's, writing in the name of the committee, said:—
"Their impressions are, that no advantage could accrue to the shipping and commerce of the country by rendering the Caledonian canal more navigable, of sufficient importance to compensate for the expense."
And let the House recollect, that a great portion of the shipping insurance is effected at Lloyd's, The answer received from Bristol was:—
"This port is not materially interested in the question."
The communication received from the Chamber of Commerce at Hull was to this effect:—
" After having made the necessary inquiry of the merchants and shipowners, we have come to the unanimous conclusion, that the trade of this port does not appear to us to be interested in the matter, and, in our opinion, were the contemplated alterations carried into execution, few or no vessels leaving here to the westward would take advantage of the Caledonian canal."
Liverpool, from which 666 vessels went north about, the year before, did not condescend to send any answer; and as it was thought the letter might have miscarried, a second was written, and according to his recollection the answer returned was that they considered the project of no value to their trade. From Newcastle no answer whatever was received. The communication received from Dublin was to the following effect;—
" I am directed by the council of the Chamber of Commerce to inform you that the merchants of this port, engaged in the Baltic trade, are of opinion that no material benefit would accrue to them if the Caledonial Canal was completed and steam-tugs placed thereon."
From Belfast the following resolution resolution was received:—
" Resolved, that the Chamber of Commerce of this town do not consider the advantages likely to be derived to the trade of Belfast to be such as to warrant them in recommending such a large toll as that contemplated for the Caledonian canal."
The replies from Dundee, Glasgow, and Leith were in favour of Mr. Walker's plan A return was also made by the Custom House of the number of vessels that went north about, from sixteen of the larges commercial ports in the United Kingdom
656
embracing nearly the whole of the trade of the country carried on in that direction, from which it appeared, that in 1838, the number of ships was 2,042, the tonnage being 391,400 tons. The number of vessels going north about from London, Liverpool, Hull, Bristol, and Newcastle was 1,386, with a tonnage of 274,000. Now, supposing all the other vessels that went north about to have used the Caledonian anal, the number would only have been 656, and the tonnage 117,000. The number of vessels that went north about from Dundee, Glasgow, and Leith was 280, the tonnage 49,000. But to the great number of vessels passing through the Pentland Firth the canal was of no value. The number that went through in 1838, was 1,827, of which 1,175 were British vessels, 206 American, 220 belonging to Northern nations, and 26 from the West Indies. Now, with respect to the expenses. During the last few years they had been nearly five times the sum annually received. Such an expenditure he considered a perfect waste of the public money, and he trusted that the Government would send down some person in whom they could place confidence, together with an engineer, both being unconnected with Scotland, to examine the work and ascertain whether it could be conducted in a manner beneficial to the country. If they would take the advice, he was convinced that no further outlay would take place, and that the Chancellor of the Exhequer would save at least 300,000 l. He would now state to the House the evidence on which this outlay was recommended. Mr. Walker was asked this question with reference to the estimate. "And did you make any accurate or minute survey of the canal? "His answer was:—
" I did: when I say minute survey, I mean such a survey as I should make without taking the depth and dimensions of the different parts. This I requested Mr. May to do when I left the canal."
Another question was,
" What time did it occupy you? "To which he replied," I was about a week altogether upon the line; after having finished the survey, I left with Mr. May instructions as to the detailed surveys. About six months afterwards we met, when the full detail of the works was gone into, and an estimate of every part was formed from his (Mr. May's) detailed survey."
Now here was a chief engineer making an estimate without having taken either

657
the depth or dimensions of the canal, relying entirely on the evidence of Mr. May, an ordinary engineer. No doubt Mr. May was a trustworthy man, but from what he (Mr. Williams) saw of him before the committee, he must say that he did not consider him as possessing a sufficient knowledge of engineering to form an estimate of such a work as that now under discussion. The estimate was founded on a very loose calculation, and he thought such a large sum ought not to be expended without some further inquiry. Although the report of the committee was agreed to in 1839, some doubt was entertained on the subject, and the committee was revived in the following year, when Mr. Steuart stated that he had received an intimation that a joint-stock company had been formed, who were ready to take the matter out of the hands of the Government, but the negotiation was not carried into effect. No evidence in favour of the work was adduced except that of gentlemen connected with Scotland; and if the work was likely to confer so much benefit on that country, it was rather strange that some of the commercial towns and counties did not undertake its management. Under all the circumstances, he trusted the Government would consent to postpone the vote until the next Session.
Sir Robert Peelwas of opinion that the towns and counties of Scotland were much too wise to accept of the offer. A sum of money had been expended on the undertaking, which there was a natural reluctance to lose; but if no public advantage was likely to accrue from following it up, he thought the sooner it was abandoned the better. It would be wiser not to proceed than to incur the loss of several hundreds of thousands of pounds more. He, therefore, had no hesitation in agreeing to postpone the vote, and thus afford an opportunity of considering what steps should be taken to prevent the loss of what had already been expended. No further expenditure ought to take place until an impartial inquiry should be entered into with respect to the probable advantages which would result from the carrying out the project.
Sir G. Clerkdid not consider the work likely to be of benefit to Scotland, and had protested against the large sum which had been annually voted. The work was undertaken not on the recommendation of any person connected with Scotland.
658
It was commenced about forty years ago, on the suggestion of Lord Colchester, Mr. Isaac Hawkins Brown, and Mr. William Smith, of Norwich, whose political opinions were essentially different, but who philanthropically suggested that it would afford employment to persons residing in the Highlands of Scotland. After the works had been contracted for, persons accustomed to excavations were engaged; and he believed, that not a single Highlander was employed. He understood that some portion of the work was in a dangerous state. One part of the canal had been constructed by damming up one of the large locks twelve feet above its natural level. The embankment was now rather insecure, and if it should give way a large district would be inundated, and probably a great sacrifice of life and property would take place. He was quite satisfied, that the work would never pay its own expenses. Such works ought not to be undertaken as national works, but by individuals, who would be more likely to take an interest in their management than any public commissioners. He trusted the expense which had been incurred in this instance would be a warning to the House not to undertake the execution of public works. The hon. Member for Coventry had alluded to the committee of 1840, and to a proposition for transferring the canal to the management of a joint-stock company. The canal was to be placed under their control, they undertaking to make all the necessary repairs, and to be restricted to a certain amount of toll. It was true the negotiation had been broken off at that time, but within the last few days another proposal had been made on the subject. It was quite clear, that certain works must be proceeded with forthwith, but he believed, that sufficient sums remained for that purpose out of the supply last voted.
Vote postponed.

SUPPLY—MR. VIZARD.
On the question that the sum of 10,750 l. be granted to her Majesty to complete the payment of the salaries and expenses of her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Home Department,
Colonel Sibthorpsaid, he felt it to be his duty again to object to the expense attendant upon a new appointment which had been made by the late Government of a gentleman, with whom he (Colonel Sib-

659
thorp) had no acquaintance, to the office of solicitor to the Home Department. After no less than eighteen changes in the Government of the country since the year 1798, no such appointment had been thought of, and it was only during a recess, in which Parliament could not interfere, that her Majesty's late Administration had thought fit to make the appointment. Then it was that he found, that Mr. William Vizard had been appointed to the new post of solicitor to the Secretary of State for the Home Department. But on looking to the communications which had passed between the Home-office and the Treasury, he found that the noble Lord at that time at the head of the Home Department, when appealed to on the subject of this appointment, stated, that the business of the office would require the undivided attention of a professional man of experience and talent; and yet the noble Lord had, in point of fact, appointed a man who held another valuable situation—that of secretary of bankrupts, with a salary of 1,200 l., a man who during the period he had held that situation had received no less than 18,141 l. 17 s. 8d. To this appointment he (Colonel Sibthorp) had taken an objection on a former occasion, and he wished now to know from the right hon. Baronet, whom he rejoiced now to see at the head of the Home Department, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's present Government to cancel that appointment; and, above all, whether, in the event of their continuing that office, it was their intention to retain in it a gentleman who held, besides it, the office of Secretary of Bankrupts?
Sir J. Grahamsaid, he could not forget the jealousy with which the hon. and gallant Member for Lincoln had regarded the creation of, and the appointment to, the office to which his hon. and gallant Friend had alluded. He differed from his hon. and gallant Friend in no one particular, but he felt bound to say, that Mr. Vizard had been for twenty-five years his solicitor and private friend, and yet, from a sense of public duty, and concurring with his hon. and gallant Friend, he (Sir J. Graham) had not been in the office he had now the honour to fill forty-eight honrs before he sent for Mr. Vizard, and told him that it was not his intention to interfere with the vote to which Parliament had come last Session, and by
660
which Mr. Vizard's salary was provided for up to the 5th of October next; but he had announced to Mr. Vizard that it would be the duty of her Majesty's Government scrupulously and carefully to review the mode in which the law business of the Home-office was carried on, and in that review he should cordially act in concert with his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer; that his appointment was not to be held as a bar to that review, and that, as at present advised, he did not think it desirable that the office he (Mr. Vizard) held under the Home Department should be continued.
Sir T. Wildewas satisfied that the result of the review to which the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Home Department had alluded, would be that the public service at present demanded and would continue to demand the continuance of the office to which allusion had been directed. Of such an appointment as that of Mr. Vizard he had no knowledge until it had been made; but this he did know, that his hon. and learned Friend Sir John (now Lord) Campbell, then the Attorney-general, and himself had designed making a representation in furtherance of such an arrangement to the proper department of the late Administration. The duties of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, were not only most numerous but onerous in connexion with the Administration of the law. There were very few days indeed upon which the Secretary of State for the Home Department, did not receive letters from magistrates and others requiring instruction and advice upon the construction of various acts of Parliament. Some of these inquiries required the earliest possible attention, in order to save magistrates from committing themselves, or to prevent other similar and equally unfortunate evils. The course had been, it was true, that when the Secretary of State had been asked for advice, for that public functionary to apply to the Treasury in order to obtain the opinion of the solicitor of that board upon the particular point upon which advice was solicited. Now, the Secretary for the Home Department, had various other important duties connected with the Administration of Justice to perform, and yet he had under the old system first to solicit the advice of the solicitor to the Treasury; that solicitation answered, many statements as to the law and facts, frequently elaborate, were es-

661
sential; above all, an early answer was necessary, and upon most of them no man was more competent to give such an answer than was Mr. Vizard himself. Such was the real state of affairs, and on the score of economy, he was of opinion, that the saving of fees to the Attorney and Solicitor-general upon such points would go considerably, if not wholly, to make up the amount of Mr. Vizard's salary. For Mr. Vizard, he was not prepared to speak; but thus much he would add, that he did not believe that a dozen cases could be sent from the Home-office without requiring the party referred to, not only to wade through acts of Parliament, but to examine law authorities—a duty which none but a professional man could discharge. He could also state, that since Mr. Vizard's appointment there had been a great diminution of points and cases referred to the law officers of the Crown. But with regard to prosecutions, admitting as he did the high qualifications possessed for such purposes by Mr. Maule, the present solicitor to the Treasury, than whom a more diligent, indefatigable, and intelligent man never filled the office—still, even that Gentleman, pressed as he must have been with the affairs of his own department, had found it absolutely necessary to employ others to conduct prosecutions which the public safety and protection demanded. At the period of the machine-breaking in the Midland Counties, Mr. Tallents, of Newark, had been so employed, and must have made, as he deserved, a large demand upon the Treasury. Again, the late prosecutions in Wales were of such a character and importance, as to demand an attention upon the part of the solicitor to the Treasury which, consistently with his other avocations and duties, it was impossible he could discharge. And hence, he was satisfied that not only public economy, but public justice, would be advanced by the appointment of such an officer as the solicitor for the Home Department. He knew that no situation required more skill and attention. With regard to Mr. Vizard personally he could say, that with 1,000 l. a-year for himself, and 500 l. a-year for an assistant, he had renounced all private professional practice in the courts. He would only add, that during his practice as a Queen's counsel, and also during the period he had held the office of Solicitor-general, the public in
662
terest demanded, and still continued to demand, the constant attention of a solicitor for the Home Department. The Customs, the Excise, the Mint, each had their separate solicitor, and, that being the case, why should the Secretary of State, before he could act, be compelled to wait for the opinions of the Attorney and Solicitor-general, when, with such an officer near him, the Secretary of State could get, if not the best, at least very competent advice upon such questions within twelve hours? He trusted that the whole matter would be duly considered in the course of the review of the whole subject to which the tight hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department had alluded.
Sir R. Peelsaid, he should be sorry at once to pronounce a positive opinion upon the subject, but having filled the office for some years of Secretary of State, he must at present stale that he did not think such an office as that which the hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down had eulogized was absolutely required. During the time he had held the office of Home Secretary he had an Under Secretary (Mr. Hobhouse), who, though brought from the Treasury, discharged all those duties which the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite had overlooked, as belonging to an under secretary of state. He spoke with the greatest respect for Mr. Vizard, when he said, that with the assistance of such a man as Mr. Phillipps, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, had little to require even upon the most intricate and delicate construction of statute law. And of Mr. Hobhouse he must add, that he very well remembered Sir Vicary Gibbs, remarking, that he would not hesitate to put his name to any legal opinion given by that gentleman. He repeated, therefore, that the hon. and learned Gentleman had apparently overlooked the permanent nature of the appointment of the under Secretary of State, and that the office was usually, as at present, filled by gentlemen of legal eminence. He (Sir R. Peel) was of opinion that the sum of 2,500 l. per annum was quite enough to secure sufficient legal experience and talent to the Treasury and to the Home-office. Without, however, pronouncing a positive opinion now that an inquiry was to be prosecuted, he would say, as the result of his personal experience, that it

663
was better to have an able under Secretary of State rather than a solicitor as legal adviser to the Home-office.
Colonel Sibthorpentertained the highest opinion of Mr. Vizard, but the hon. and learned Member for Worcester had not quite satisfied him as to the propriety of, or necessity for, the appointment.
Colonel Rollestonhad applied to the Home-office for information, in his capacity of magistrate, and had always obtained the advice he sought. In his judgment there was no necessity for the appointment of a solicitor to the Home-office.
Sir T. Wildewould bow to the opinion of the House if, after inquiry, the result should be unfavourable to the continuance of the appointment; but he was bound to observe, that it was an unsafe practice to trust the expositions of legal questions and elucidations of acts of Parliament to any one who was not conversant with what was passing daily in the law courts. Mr. Hobhouse, no doubt, was very talented; and Mr. Phillipps, the present under Secretary, was also talented; but they had been out of practice several years, and, though each might give a very respectable opinion on many legal points, yet he doubted if ever Mr. Phillipps would venture to give an opinion as to the construction of an act of Parliament, without first consulting the Secretary of the Treasury. Sir William Grant, when only out of practice six months, declared his incompetency to give a legal opinion.
Sir R. feel: The hon. and learned Gentleman had told them that Sir W. Grant, after having been out of legal practice for a period of six months, considered himself unqualified to give an opinion upon any legal point that might be submitted to him, and yet the first condition that he had imposed upon Mr. Vizard was, that he should give up his court practice on taking the office of solicitor to the Home Department; and if, as was the fact, he had now been out of court practice for two years, how could he be better qualified to give an opinion than was Sir W. Grant, after only six months' cessation from practice? Let it also be remembered, that the Home-office had an Attorney-general and a Solicitor-general constantly practising in the courts, to whom they could at all times apply for a legal opinion when necessary.
Sir T. Wildedid not imagine that Sir W. Grant meant to say, that the mere fact of his having been out of practice for six months incapacitated him from forming an opinion; but that what he meant to infer was, that a person who was not constantly in the course of professional practice and professional reading was not the most safe adviser. It was true, that Mr. Vizard had been required to give- up his private practice on his appointment to the office in question, but he had not, therefore, given up his professional reading, and could the right hon. Baronet say, that the under Secretary of State for the Home Department had time to read the law reports, and to keep up that course of professional reading which was necessary to enable him to give an opinion as to the construction of acts of Parliament? He (Sir T. Wilde) knew that, from the nature of his official duties, he had no leisure for such a purpose; and that from the moment he entered upon his office he must cease to be a professional man. But it was perfectly reasonable, that Mr. Vizard should give up his private practice, and yet be able to devote himself to such reading as was sufficient to enable him satisfactorily to perform the duties of his office.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY — POOR-LAW COMMISSIONERS.
Upon the vote—29.677 l. for the expenses and salaries of the commissioners for the relief of the poor and their assistants, being proposed,
Mr. Williamssaid, had it not been for the assurance which the right hon. Baronet opposite had given, that the whole subject to which this vote related should be taken into his consideration at an early period in the ensuing Session, he should have felt it his duty to propose a considerable reduction in the amount now asked for; but, relying on the right hon. Baronet's promise, he should make no objection.
An hon. Member,on the Ministerial side, observed, that if there was not a great reduction in the expenses of this department when the estimates came before them next year, he should move that the salaries of the Poor-law Commissioners be reduced to the same amount as the salaries of Excise and Customs Commissioners. He believed they were now nearly double.—Vote agreed to.
Upon the vote of 19,600 l. for foreign and other secret services being proposed,
Mr. Williamssaid, that this was a vote to which he should decidedly object. He found the charge for foreign secret service for the year was 25,000 l.; and for the home secret service, the charge was 10,000 l.; and 6,000 l. also for the same services in Ireland. Now there was an impression abroad that this secret service money was applied to all sorts of improper purposes. It had been said, that it had frequently been used to a great extent at the elections. He did not object to a reasonable sum being allowed for foreign secret services, but he could see no reason for any such expenditure in this country or in Ireland, unless indeed it were required to pay spies; and, as spies were not wanted in this country or in Ireland, he should oppose the vote altogether, as there had been already a sufficient sum voted for the foreign secret services.
The committee divided — Ayes 144, Noes 7; Majority 137.

List of the AYES.

Acton, Colonel

Dugdale, W. S.

Aldam, W.

Egerton, W. T.

Allix, J. P.

Escott, B.

Antrobus, E.

Estcourt, T. G. B.

Ashley, Lord

Ferguson, Colonel

Baillie, Colonel

Ferrand, W. B.

Baird, W.

Fitzroy, Captain

Baring, hon. W. B.

Forbes, W.

Barnard, E. G.

Forman, T. S.

Baskerville, T. B. M.

Fuller, A. E.

Beckett, W.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Boldero, H. G.

Gill, T.

Borthwick, P.

Gore, M.

Boscawen, Lord

Goring, C.

Botfield, B.

Goulburn, rt. hn. H.

Bowring, Dr.

Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.

Bramston, T. W.

Granger, T. C.

Broadley, H.

Greenall, P.

Brotherton, J.

Grimston, Viscount

Browne, hn. W.

Grogan, E.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Hale, E. B.

Campbell, A.

Hamilton, W. J.

Carnegie, hon. Capt.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Chelsea, Viscount

Harcourt, G. G.

Clements, Viscount

Hardinge, rt. hn. Sir H.

Clerk, Sir G.

Hayes, Sir E.

Clive, hon. R. H.

Heathcoat, J.

Cochrane, A.

Henley, J. W.

Cripps, W.

Henniker, Lord

Dalrymple, Captain

Herbert, hon. S.

Darby, G.

Hodgson, R.

Dawnay, hon. W. H.

Hogg, J. W.

Dickinson, F. H.

Hollond, R.

Dodd, G.

Hope, hon. C.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Hope, A.

Douglas, J. D. S.

Hope, G. W.

666

Hornby, J.

Reade, W. M.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Rice, E. R.

Irton, S.

Rolleston, Colonel

Jermyn, Earl

Rose, rt. hn. Sir G.

Johnson, W. G.

Rushbrooke, Colonel

Ker, D. S.

Sanderson, R.

Knightley, Sir C.

Scarlett, hon. R. C.

Law, hon. C. E.

Scott, hon. F.

Lawson, A.

Sheppard, T.

Legh, G. C.

Sibthorp, Colonel

Leicester, Earl of

Smith, rt. hon. R. V.

Lennox, Lord A.

Smythe, hon. G.

Lindsay, H. H.

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Litton, E.

Stewart, P. M.

Lockhart, W.

Stuart, H.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

Manners, Lord J.

Taylor, J. A.

March, Earl of

Tennent, J. E.

Marsham, Viscount

Thornely, T.

Masterman, J.

Tollemache, hn. F.J.

Mitchell, T. A.

Trench, Sir F. W.

Morgan, O.

Trevor, hon. G. R.

Mundy, E. M.

Tufnell, H.

Murphy, F. S.

Vane, Lord H.

Murray, C. R. S.

Vere, Sir C. B.

Neville, R.

Waddington, H. S.

Nicholl, right hon. J.

Welby, G. E.

O'Connell, M. J.

Wigram, J.

Ogle, S. C. H.

Wilde, Sir T,

Paget, Lord W.

Wood, Colonel

Pakington, J. S.

Wood, Colonel T.

Palmerston, Viscount

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Peel, rt. hn. Sir R.

Wyndham, Colonel

Peel, J.

Yorke, H. R.

Plumridge, Capt.

Plumptre, J. P.

TELLERS.

Pollock, Sir F.

Fremantle, Sir T.

Protheroe, E.

Baring, H.

List of the NOES.

Bryan, G.

Pechell, Captain

Fielden, J.

Wakley, T.

Harford, S.

TELLERS.

Hindley, C.

Williams, W.

Morris, D.

Crawford, W. S.

Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY—CONVICTS.
On the vote of 133,500 l. for the expense of convicts in New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land.
Mr. Williamscomplained of the amount of this grant which made criminal jurisprudence very costly.
Sir R. Peelsaid that before next year the whole of these estimates should undergo the most careful revision.
Agreed to.

SUPPLY—EDUCATION IN SLAVE COLONIES.
15,000 l. for the religious and moral instruction of the emancipated Negro population having been proposed,
Mr. Williamsobjected to the vote. It

667
was on the whole as much as was voted I for education in England.
Mr. V. Smithsaid, that his noble Friend (Lord J. Russell) some time before leaving office, had addressed a circular to the different West Indian colonies stating that he could no longer consent to this charge for the instruction of the Negro population, when so small a sum was voted for education at home.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY — FERNANDO PO.
On the sum of 19,987 l. being proposed to defray the expenses of the expedition to the Niger,
Mr. S. Wortleyinquired what had taken place with respect to the sale of Fernando Po to our Government.
Viscount Palmerstonsaid that the Spanish Government had agreed that the sale should take place, but having submitted the proposition to the Cortes, they found them entertaining such a disinclination to dispose of the island, that they thought it best to drop the matter.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY — PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS OF DESIGN.
On a grant of 5,000 l. in aid of local subscriptions for the establishment of Schools of Design in large towns.
Mr. Williamssaid, he approved of this grant, but regretted that he could not find people in any town to combine for the purpose of extending the advantages of schools of design among their fellow-townsmen, and hoped that the Government would use some strenuous efforts to promote their establishment.
Sir R. Peelsaid, he should never object to the grant of public money for such a purpose. He thought that it would be a great benefit to the country if schools of designs were established generally throughout all manufacturing districts, but he was quite certain that Government alone should not take it up, but should invite the co-operation of persons on the spot, who, it was hoped, would take a sufficient interest in the matter as to co-operate actively with the Government. Unless individuals in the respective localities assisted Government, he was very much afraid it would not be as successful as they wished.
Mr. Ewartconcurred in the views which had been taken by the right hon. Baronet.
Dr. Bowringsaid, that there could not
668
be any doubt but the most successful schools on the Continent were those where where the Government had been assisted by the persons residing in the locality.
Mr. Williamssaid, he had heard the opinions of the right hon. Baronet with the greatest satisfaction.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY—MAYNOOTH.
On the motion that a sum not exceeding 4,464 l. be granted to her Majesty to defray the charges incidental to the support of the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth.
Mr. Plumptresaid, that he rose as an individual Member of Parliament to oppose the grant. It was only that day that he had presented thirty-five petitions against any further grant to the College of Maynooth, and he had presented at an earlier period of the year not less than 100 petitions to the same effect. He hoped that the right hon. Baronet below him would not think that in opposing this vote he meant to offer the slightest opposition to his general policy. He had uniformly opposed it on all occasions, and though he, felt it to be his duly to differ with the right hon. Baronet on this matter, he was most anxious to give him in all other things every support in his power. He felt delighted to see the right hon. Baronet Occupying the place he did, and to know that he was, as he had himself expressed it, free as the wind to do as an independent Minister, determined to do his duty to the country. He would prove a blessing to the country, and he invoked the blessing of ALMIGHTY GOD upon his head. He had ever opposed this vote, and he did so still, on the principle that he could not consent to grant the public money in support of what he believed to be the propagation of error. He should say "Nay," to the present vote, and unless some very strong reasons were adduced to dissuade him from it, he should divide the Committee on it.
Major Bryansuggested, that many hon. Members could hardly be expected to vote money for the Church of England, who were opposed to that Church, but who never asserted, that in so voting, they voted for the propagation of error.
Sir R. H. Inglisconcurred with his hon. Friend in the opinion that the grant to Maynooth was most objectionable; but hoped that he would not divide the Committee on the present vote. There had been

669
a previous vote this year taken, and the parties had doubtless calculated upon the remainder being also granted by Parliament, and had incurred certain expenses which otherwise they would not, and, therefore, he was indisposed to disappoint them in the second half of the grant for this year. But let the hon. Gentleman oppose the grant in the first instance next year, and let the parties have due notice of that opposition, so that they may make their calculations accordingly, and he should certainly support him. In reply to the hon. and gallant Member opposite, he would say, that voluntarily he would not give money for the propagation of what he conceived to be an error; but when a positive law ordained that it should be paid, then he should pay it. Individuals were not taxed in relation to their creeds, but in relation to their property.
Mr. M. J. O'Connellsaid, he should like to know whether the argument of the hon. Baronet, the Member for Oxford University (Sir Robert Inglis), did not apply to his favourite motion for Church of England extension? He only wished that there should be a fair division on this question of Maynooth College.
Mr. Pakingtonexpressed his earnest hope that his hon. Friend would not divide the Committee, though he was inclined to doubt whether the money voted to Maynooth College was a grant which was beneficially applied.
Mr. Darbyalso opposed the grant, but hoped his hon. Friend would not divide.
Mr. Smythesupported the vote, because he conceived it to be only an act of justice to the great majority of our Roman Catholic brethren in Ireland, who had strong claims upon us. He did not support the vote on the ground taken by the hon. Baronet (Sir R. Inglis), namely, that of prescription; because it should be recollected, that had it not been for the statute of mortmain, introduced by Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, a statute palpably levelled at Roman Catholics, a rev. prelate would have bequeathed a large quantity of property to Maynooth College which would have been thus rendered independent of all Parliamentary aid.
Sir R. Peel: Sir, I merely rise to say, that I perfectly remember having expressed my opinion upon this vote in the last, or probably the preceding Session of Parliament, and, to prevent any mistake arising as to my motives for proposing and sup-
670
porting it now, I must say, that I do not rest my vote in favour of it on the ground that one-half of the required estimate has been already voted by the House. I have voted for the grant to Maynooth College for the last thirty years, whether in or out of office, without feeling any violation of religious scruples. In order to enter into a full defence of this vote upon the present occasion, it would be necessary to state all the circumstances under which, at the period of the Union, the vote for Maynooth was originally given, and I must, therefore, confine myself to my former reasons for having considered it my duty to make the proposal of the present grant in the estimates before the House.
Mr. M. J. O'Connellsaid, it must have been three Sessions since the right hon. Baronet had expressed the opinions to which he had referred, for he did not think he had spoken upon the subject when it had been discussed in either of the last Sessions.
Sir R. Peel: I really cannot say positively whether it is two or three Sessions from this time that I spoke upon a similar vote to this, but I remember a distinct proposal being made by some hon. Gentleman respecting the grant being withheld, and that I then made a speech upon it, in which I gave my reasons for supporting its continuance. It would have been very easy for me to have avoided giving a vote on the occasion to which I refer, by leaving the House, as other hon. Members sometimes do. I certainly spoke my sentiments upon the grant, however; but if I have accidentally been absent when some similar vote has been discussed in subsequent Sessions, no inference ought to be drawn from such a circumstance than ought, at the present moment, to be drawn from the fact, that the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), the late Secretary of State, is not in the House.
Mr. M. J. O'Connellsaid, he did not want to draw any inference from his absence, but he had heard the matter remarked by some hon. Members in that House.
Mr. Plumptresaid, however he might feel disposed to acquiesce in the recommendation of some hon. Friends about him, he felt conscientiously disposed to press his motion to a division.
Mr. Cochranesaid, that, although he was disposed to allow every man the free exercise of his religious principles, yet as he was conscientiously opposed to the present grant he would vote against it.
Mr. Hope (as we could learn)begged to remind the hon. Member for Bridport that: he bad already voted for a grant that was at variance with their feelings at his side of the House, as Members of the church of England. They were all of that description at that side, but the gentlemen on the other side were of various persuasions.
Mr. Forbes: They differed from the Maynooth principles, not in form, but in doctrine; and he hoped the division would be persevered in. He did think if he voted for the Maynooth grant, he would do what would be an injury to the people of Ireland in a religious point of view; and so far as it might be considered in a political point, be did not think that, from the experience of the last thirty years, they could say that it had tended very much to the peace of Ireland.
Mr. Cochranesaid with regard to the church of Scotland grant, to which allusion had been made, if there had been a division upon it, he would have voted against it.
The committee divided — Ayes 99; Noes 23: Majority 76.

List of the AYES.

Acton, Colonel

Granger, T. C.

Plumridge, Capt.

Aldam, W.

Greenall, P.

Pollock, Sir F.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Hamilton, W. J.

Protheroe, E.

Baring, H. B.

Harcourt, G. G.

Reade, W. M.

Baskerville, T.B.M.

Hardinge, rt. hon. Sir H.

Rice, E. R.

Beckett, W.

Rolleston, Colonel

Boldero, H. G.

Harford, S.

Scarlett, hon. R. C.

Borthwick, P.

Heathcoat, J.

Smith, right hon. R.V.

Botfield, B.

Henley, J. W.

Bowring, Doctor

Herbert, hon. S.

Smythe, hon. G.

Bramston, T. W.

Hogg, J. W.

Stewart, P. M.

Brotherton, J.

Hollond, R.

Stuart, H.

Browne, hon. W.

Hope, hon. C.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

Bryan, G.

Hope, A.

Taylor, J. A.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Irton, S.

Teiraent, J. E.

Chelsea, Viscount

Jermyn, Earl

Thomly, T.

Clements, Viscount

Ker, D. S.

Tollemache, hon. F. J.

Clerk, Sir G.

Law, hon. C. E.

Cowper, hn. W. F.

Leicester, Earl of

Towneley, J.

Crawford, W. S.

Lennox, Lord A.

Tufnell, H.

Cripps, W.

Lindsay, H. H.

Vane. Lord H.

Dalrymple, Capt.

MacGeachy, F. A.

Vere, Sir C. B.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

March, Earl of

Waddington, H. S.

Egerton, W. T.

Martyn, C. C.

Wakley, T.

Escott, B.

Mitchell, T. A.

Watson, W. H.

Ewart, W.

Morgan, O.

Wigram, J.

Fielden, J.

Mundy, E. M.

Williams, W.

Fitzroy, Captain

Murphy, F. S.

Wood, C.

Forman, T. S.

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Wood, Colonel

Fox, C. R.

Ogle, S. C. H.

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Paget, Lord W.

Wyndham, Col.

Gill, T.

Palmerston, Visct.

Yorke, H. R.

Gore, M.

Pechell, Captain

Goulburn, rt. hn. H.

Peel, right hon. Sir R.

TELLERS.

Graham, right hon. Sir J.

Fremantle, Sir T.

@@@

Peel, J.

O'Connell, J. M.

List of the NOES.

Allix, J. P.

Boscawen, Lord

Dawnay, hn. W. H.

Antrobus, E.

Cochrane, A.

Dickinson, F. H.

672

Forbes, W.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Murray, C. R. S.

Fuller, A. E.

Johnson, W. G.

Rushbrooke, Col.

Goring, C.

Lawson, A.

Sibthorp, Col.

Grimston, Visct

Lockhart, W.

Grogan, E.

Mackenzie, W. F.

TELLERS.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Marsham, Visct.

Plumptre, J. P.

Hayes, Sir E.

Masterman, J.

Campbell, A.

Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY—LORD LIEUTENANT OF IRELAND.
On the vote of 6,232 l. for the household of the Lord-lieutenant,
Viscount Clementsobjected to the vote, as he looked upon the office of Lord-lieutenant of Ireland quite as an ante-diluvian one, and one which he hoped to see abolished. He was persuaded that, if the question were calmly considered, the country would see the advantage of doing away with the office. In England there is no public demonstration made on a change of Ministry, nor is the public mind disturbed by any parade connected with that change. The new Ministry go down to Downing-street without attracting any attention whatever. This is not the case in Ireland; the Minister sent over there is also the representative of royalty. On his arrival a royal salute is fired, soldiers line the streets, the drums beat, in honour of his arrival, while vast numbers of people are collected together for the purpose of meeting him, or witnessing his entry; this naturally produces much excitement, particularly as it is only the party to which the Lord-Lieutenant belongs who attend him on this occasion. The Lord-Lieutenant's levees partake of the same character, and are only attended by those who belong to his party in politics, the officials of Dublin, and the officers of the garrison. Thus the Lord-Lieutenant is at once made, in spite of himself, no more than the head of a party, and let him be ever so anxious to be impartial, be never is considered so. [Laughter.] Those Gentlemen who laugh at this description would have much more cause of laughter if they would go to Dublin and witness this absurd aping of royalty. Can there be anything more ridiculous than a Gentleman being sent to Ireland to play the part of King for a few months. He should like to see all this altered, and that the time would come when they might have a Lord-lieutenant like a similar functionary in the counties of England, without the appurtenances of Royalty and all this ridiculous household. Having offered these, few observations,

673
he would not give any opposition to the vote.
Vote agreed to.
House resumed. Committee to sit again.

ROYAL. GARDENS, KENSINGTON.
Sir Thomas Freemantle,in proposing the second reading of the Royal Gardens Bill, hoped the House would allow it to be advanced a stage, though the hour was late, on the condition that the discussion should be taken on a future stage of the bill.
Mr. Protheroesaid, he had yet heard no argument upon this subject which had had sufficient weight with him to induce him to consent to the bill passing through another stage, and he must therefore, however reluctantly, oppose its further progress on the present occasion.
Mr. Wakleysaid, he feared a division would be of no use, if the Government were determined to carry out their measure. He had, the other evening, begged the right hon. Baronet to go and visit the spot on which it was proposed to build, and he was sure, if the right hon. Baronet would personally look at the place itself he would not persevere with the bill.
Sir Robert Peel: I have taken the advice of the hon. Member, and have visited the spot in question—and I must say, that I do not, after having done so, feel the force of his objections to the proposed plan, for I found, that on going from Kensington Palace to the Uxbridge road, the land on which it is proposed to build, is all on the left hand of the path which bounds Kensington-gardens. It is ground which has never been open to the public; and, besides, it is only intended to build villas upon it, which will not occupy the same space as would a street of continuous houses. There will be as much open space left after the villas are built as there is now, and the health of the neighbourhood will be much more promoted by the alteration of the place, as proposed, than by leaving it in its present state, or building streets upon it. If we admit that the object of consolidating the gardens is a useful one, it is surely better to devote the Crown land to the purpose proposed, and that we should vote the money required in this way, than that we should come down next year, and ask for
674
1000 l. under the head of Crown lands in the estimates.
Bill read a second time.— Adjourned.

THE SLAVE TRADE.
Lord Broughamsaid, he held in his hand a petition to which he would beg to call the earnest attention of the House, as it related to a subject of the deepest importance. It was from the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, by whose chairman it was signed; but though, according to the forms of their Lordships' House, it must be taken only as the petition of the individual who signed it, there could be no doubt that it spoke the sentiments of the very respectable body from whom it came. After all the laws which had been passed in this and in many foreign countries for putting down the Slave-trade, it was greatly to be regretted that British capital and British skill were still found engaged in that infernal traffic. The petitioners stated, that several British mining companies were established in the Brazils and Cuba, that these mines were worked chiefly by slaves, and that British capital was employed by British subjects in the purchase of newly imported slaves from Africa, to supply the waste and mortality and other exigencies connected with those mines. Now, though it might be lawful for the subjects of some foreign countries to embark in the Slave-trade in those countries, it was not so with British subjects; for, no matter whether the trading in slaves in some foreign countries was illegal or not, if a British subject was proved to have been engaged in carrying on the Slave-trade in such countries he would be liable to be tried and convicted as a felon and a pirate, and to sentence of transportation for life, as the law now stood; but as it stood a few sessions

609
back he would be liable to the punishment of death. The question then would arise, whether it would according to our law be considered a trading in slaves, to purchase newly-imported negroes from Africa? On that point there could be no manner of doubt that the British subject so employing his capital would subject himself on conviction to the penalty of transportation for life. The petitioners further complained that officers belonging to the British army and navy held appointments under the companies to which he had referred. They also stated, that British banking companies had been formed in those countries where the dealing in African slaves was carried on, and that these banking companies were the consignees of goods from British merchants, which goods they must know were used and could be used only as barter in the purchase of slaves. He did not mean to assert that those banking companies, or the consignees of British goods, even though they well knew the purposes to which they were to be applied, were, as the laws now stood, acting illegally, but according to the statement of the petitioners some of those parties went a step further—a step which, in his mind, left no doubt that they were acting in direct violation, not only of the spirit, but also of the letter of the law passed in this country for putting down the traffic in slaves, for it appeared that they did not dispose of the consigned goods at a price, but that it was a condition of the sale that the price was to be a share to a certain extent in the profits which were to be made from the dealing in slaves. Now it was quite clear that this was illegal, and subjected all the British subjects engaged in it to the penalties he had mentioned. He did not state, that there was direct evidence of this as against the merchants and companies referred to, but in a report made by commissioners sent out to the African coast it was stated, that goods sent to that coast were not paid for at a fixed price, but that the sale was made on a condition that the vendors of the goods should share in the profits of the Slave-trade. Such a dealing was no doubt against the spirit of our laws against slave-trading, and he hoped it would be treated as felony and piracy. The petitioners also stated, that large consignments were sent out of fetters and shackles to the Brazils and to Cuba, the parties sending them well knowing the uses to which they were to be ap
610
plied. He did not say, that as the law against slave-dealing now stood such trading as this came within its prohibitions, but there could be no doubt that the law required amendments, so as to bring such practices within its reach. The petitioners went on to say, that vessels were being built in this country which, from their structure and internal arrangement, could leave no doubt that they were intended for the Slave-trade. One vessel was now nearly completed in one of our best harbours, which was to be sent to the Havannah, and no doubt thence to the coast of Africa. Under these circumstances the petitioners prayed their Lordships to extend the provisions of the 5th of George 4th, to such dealings in slaves as they had described, and to appoint a committee to inquire into the whole of the allegations of the petitioners. He would earnestly urge their Lordships to comply with the prayer of the petitioners, which sought for inquiry. He hoped his noble Friend at the head of the Board of Trade, would have no objection to the production of the report of Dr. Madden, which contained some important facts as to the state of slave trading on the western coast of Africa.
The Earl of Riponsaid, that the report referred to by his noble and learned Friend was not addressed to the department over which he had the honour to preside. It was addressed to one of the Secretaries of State, and as it was not in. his office he was not prepared to say whether it was a document which he could lay before the House. He would, however, make inquiry on the subject. As to the other part of the prayer of the petition for inquiry, he thought if it could be shown that any British subjects were engaged in that degrading traffic it would be a ground for the interference of Parliament. If his noble and learned Friend was prepared to show that, in a moral point of view, British subjects were implicated in that odious traffic, it would form a ground for inquiry.
Lord Broughamsaid, that the document to which he alluded had been addressed to Lord John Russell. As to the remark of his noble Friend about the proof of the statements of the petition, he begged to be understood as not at all pledging himself for the proof of any one of them. He spoke on the assumption that the petitioners could prove their own statements.
Petition laid on the Table.

NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT—VENTILATION.
The Duke of Wellingtonlaid (by command) on the Table copies of the correspondence between the late Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, on a report of the architect of the new Houses of Parliament relating to their warming and ventilation, and also to rendering them fireproof. The noble Duke observed, that it was desirable that this report should be taken into consideration without delay, by committees of both Houses. He would propose a similar course to that adopted last year, when the subject was considered by the joint committees. He would therefore move, "That the Report be referred to a select committee."—Committee appointed.

LOCAL COURTS.
Lord Cottenhamobserved, that it might be convenient to the House if he at once stated the course which he intended to pursue with regard to these bills, relating to the administration of justice, which he had laid on the Table at the commencement of the Session. He did not suppose that it would be possible before the close of the Session to obtain sufficient time to give them that ample consideration which their importance required; he should therefore withdraw them for the present Session. He was anxious, however, to ensure the attention of the House to the subject matter of these bills, and more especially that of his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack, so that these measures might—if the principle was adopted by the House—be carried out as completely as possible. The chief object of these bills was the establishment of courts with local jurisdiction throughout the country, not only for the recovery of small debts, but also for the trial of questions connected with properly to a certain amount. He conceived that the greatest possible public benefit would be derived from the establishment of these courts, which also might be constituted in such a way as to be most useful for several legal purposes. For instance, in proceedings in the Court of Chancery it was necessary very often to institute inquiries in the country which at present were conducted in a way not the most satisfactory, and which at the same time were attended with very great expense. Now, these courts might be rendered most useful in investigations of this nature. Again, the greatest advantages had resulted from the
612
constitution of the present Court of Bankruptcy in London, and many of the advantages which were experienced in the metropolis from this court might be extended to the country, by giving to those local courts some of the powers now exercised by the Bankruptcy Court. Jurisdiction also in inquiries in lunacy cases might safely be entrusted to these courts. He also proposed that the judges of these courts should have power of hearing and determining in insolvent cases. Another provision of the measures which he had prepared was to unite the Insolvent Court and the Court of Bankruptcy. The latter, as regarded the Court of Review, had hardly any business, while the Insolvent Court was overpressed. The House was aware that there had been a great diminution in the number of judges in the Court of Review. The number of judges in that court constituted by the Bankruptcy Act was five; one vacancy had occurred which had not been filled up, and he (Lord Cottenham), during the period in which he had the honour of holding the seals, had transferred two of the other judges of this court to other judicial offices, where their services were required. Under these circumstances there was only one judge in the Court of Review, while the business was not sufficient to occupy his time. He had already stated, that the pressure of business was very great in the Insolvent Court, and a considerable portion of the time of the judges of that court was taken up in the circuits. Now, if the local courts had jurisdiction in insolvency, it would greatly relieve the Insolvent Court in London. It would be in the recollection of many noble Lords, that he had appointed a commission composed of a number of Gentlemen engaged in various branches of trade, as well as in other pursuits. These commissioners had made a report, which was a very valuable document, and many of the recommendations in it he had embodied in these bills. He had felt it to be his duty to bring under the consideration of the House the results of the investigation of these gentlemen, and he trusted that noble Lords during the recess would turn their attention to the report he had alluded to, as well as to other documents on the subject, with the view to the full consideration of these bills, or others having a similar object in view. He would only further add, that he should not at present press these bills,

613
but should bring them forward at an early period next Session.
Bills put off sine die.—Adjourned.