Sitting of 8 February 1842

MINUTES.
Bills. 1° Copyright Registration.—3° and passed:—Appropriation Act (1841) Amendment.
Petitions presented. By Mr. Hindley, Mr. Barnard, Mr. Ricardo, Mr. Strutt, Mr. Wilson, Dr. Bowring, Mr. Brotherton, Lord Dalmeny, Mr. Ewart, and a number of other Members, from a great many places, for the Total Abolition of the Corn-laws.—By Mr. Compton, from Wymorney, and Porchester, against the Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Captain Beresford, from Presbyterians of Ashline, and by Mr. Litton, from Presbyterians of Coleraine, for an Alteration of the Marriage Law (Ireland).—By Mr. Ferrand, from Keighly, and by Mr. T. Duncombe, from Lyndhurst, against the Poor-law.—By Mr. O'Brien, from Paisley, in favour of Emigration.—By Mr. Rennie, from Ship Builders of Ipswich, for an Equalization of the Timber Duties.—By Mr. T. Duncombe, from an individual, for improving the condition of the Working Classes.

MUNICIPAL LAW—IRELAND).
Mr. Powellbegged leave to ask the noble Secretary for Ireland whether it was in the contemplation of the Government to introduce a bill for the purpose of remedying the technical defects of the Irish Municipal Reform Act. These defects had been productive of great practical inconvenience.
Lord Eliotwould take that opportunity of expressing a hope that any hon. Gentleman who might be desirous of putting questions to the Government of a nature similar to that which the hon. Member had asked would, in the first place, give previous notice of his intention. He did not wish to enter at that moment into the subject to which the hon. Member had alluded, and, as he had not the honour of a seat in the Cabinet, he was the less able to intimate the intention of her Majesty's Ministers. He was, however, convinced that if any practical grievances were pointed out, the Government would be anxious to apply a remedy as speedily as possible. As to the particular question which the hon. Gentleman had put to him, he was not aware that her Majesty's Ministers had any measure in contemplation on the subject.
Mr. Powelldid not wish to press any question improperly upon the noble Lord. He would give notice, however, that he would to-morrow renew his question on this subject.

RAILWAYS—(IRELAND).
Mr. Frenchwished to ask the noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, whether it were the intention of her Majesty's Government to introduce this Session any measure for the promotion of railroad communication in Ireland? And also, whether it were intended to introduce any measure for the better administration of medical charities in that country?
Lord Eliotsaid, in reply to the first question, that various propositions had been made on the subject by parties in Ireland; but he believed it was not the intention of Government to bring forward any measure on the subject of railroads in Ireland, the effect of which would be to involve any outlay of public money, or to entail on this country any pecuniary liability. In other respects, Government were willing, by every means in their power, to encourage railroad communications in Ireland by private enterprise. As

145
to the second question of the hon. Member, a measure with reference to medical charities had been prepared, and would be brought forward hereafter. It was not in a sufficiently forward state, however, to be introduced immediately.

SLAVE TRADE TREATY.
Viscount Palmerstonwas desirous to ask a question of the right hon. Baronet opposite on a subject which had been mentioned in the Speech from the Throne — namely, the treaty between the five Powers for the suppression of the Slave Trade. In order that the House might properly comprehend the bearing of the question he would first state to the House the course of proceedings which led to that treaty. The treaty, as the House knew by the papers which had been laid before it, was the result of a conference held in December, 1838, at the Foreign-office, and which was assembled in order that the plenipotentiaries of France and England might propose to the plenipotentiaries of Austria, Russia, and Prussia the continuation of the negotiations for the suppression of the Slave-trade that had been begun at the Congress of Vienna. There was this remarkable circumstance in that conference, that whereas, at the Congress of Vienna, England stood almost alone in urging the other powers of Europe to take measures for that purpose, on this occasion, in December, 1838. France occupied the same honourable position which England had before occupied alone, and the proposal to enter into this treaty proceeded as much from France as from England, and the two countries were equally entitled to the honour of making the proposition. At that conference a draught of the treaty was proposed by the plenipotentiaries of France and England to the plenipotentiaries of the other powers. The other three plenipotentiaries said they would refer it to their respective courts for instructions; and the plenipotentiaries of France and England stated that they hoped that the detailed provisions of that draught would be found reconcileable with the rights and interests of the subjects of the other powers. Many communications passed on this subject, and towards the end of last summer the matter stood in this situation—the treaty had been agreed to by the three Powers, and nothing but the signatures and the arrangement of some matters of form were necessary to make it effectual. What he Wished, then, to ask of the right hon.
146
Baronet was, whether the treaty as it was concluded had been altered in any material respect from the draught as it stood at the period when the late Government left office; and he also wished to know whether the ratifications of any of the contracting parties had been received, and if so, whether they had been exchanged for the ratifications on the part of the British Crown? He might be allowed to say, that never perhaps did any of the five Powers conclude a treaty more honourable to themselves, or one which was founded on purer motives or more complete disinterestedness, than that to which he referred. If the right hon. Baronet thought that it would be inconvenient to answer these questions he would be satisfied with such an intimation.
Sir R. Peelobserved, that he did not foresee any public inconvenience in replying to the questions which had been proposed by the noble Lord. He could fully confirm, if indeed any confirmation were necessary, the accuracy of the statement made by the noble Lord with respect to the circumstances under which this treaty was considered and signed. The invitation was addressed jointly by England and France to the three other powers, requesting them to join in an united effort for the purpose of suppressing that traffic which had been declared to be odious and infamous by the voice of this country. The treaty was signed by the five powers, subsequent to the appointment of the present Ministers. He was not, however, aware that any important alterations had been made in the treaty, as it was signed, from the treaty as it was originally agreed upon at an earlier period. There were, he believed, some modifications, but they were not of a nature that would at all justify him in characterising them as important. They were modifications intended to further the general objects of the treaty. The noble Lord's second question was, whether the ratifications of any of the contracting parties had been received, and whether they had been exchanged with those of this country. No such exchange of ratifications had taken place. The period allowed for the exchange of ratifications would not expire till the 20th of this month. He had, however, reason to believe that the ratifications of some of the contracting powers had been received in London; but, as the period allowed for the exchange would not terminate till the

147
20th of February, no surprise could be felt that the exchange had not yet taken place.

CONVICTS—HULKS.
Viscount Mahonwished to ask his right hon. Friend, the Secretary for the Home Department, whether it was his intention to act on the decision of that House, and to diminish the number of convicts permanently detained in the hulks at the different seaports in this country, although they had been sentenced to transportation? He wished to know whether his right lion. Friend in the administration of his department had endeavonred to diminish the number of convicts so detained at home, and to increase those sent abroad?
Sir J. Grahamcould assure his noble Friend that the Government had not lost sight of the decision to which the House had come last Session on the motion of his noble Friend. The Government were now endeavouring gradually, and he hoped successfully, to diminish the number of convicts detained at home. During the past year, 1,000 convicts had been sent to Gibraltar to labour at the repairs of that fortress; and his noble Friend at the head of the Admiralty was favourable to sending a number of convicts to the settlement of Gambier, in South Australia. During the next year, he believed the number of convicts at home would be diminished by 1,000 or 1,500.

AFFGHANISTAN AND CABUL.
Mr. H. Elphinstoneadverted to the very disastrous accounts that had just appeared in the public journals with respect to our warlike proceedings in Affghanistan and Cabul, and begged to ask the right hon. Baronet whether any further and official accounts of the alleged insurrection had been received by the Government?
Sir R. Peelanswered, that despatches had been received; but, as they had only just reached his hands, he had not been able to inform himself of their contents.

FINANCIAL STATEMENT.)
Mr.Barclaybegged to inquire of the right hon. Baronet when he would bring forward his financial statement.
Sir R. Peelsaid, it was his intention to develope his financial views with the least possible delay, but public convenience would compel him to postpone his statement for a short time. This postponement had no
148
reference to personal convenience, but to the public interest alone. He should make his statement as soon as the immediate votes of supply were granted. After that step was taken, he should not lose a day. He was sure the hon. Gentleman would not wish him to make any partial disclosures.

WEST INDIAN BISHOPRICS.
Lord Stanleyrose to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the act 6 Geo. 4th., cap. 88, for making provision for the salaries of certain bishops, and other ecclesiastical dignitaries and ministers, in the diocese of Jamaica, and in the diocese of Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands, and to enable her Majesty to separate such diocese. He did not think that any objection would be raised to the introduction of the bill for leave to introduce which he now intended to move. It might be in the recollection of the House, that in the year 1825, a bill had been introduced, authorising the establishment of the bishoprics of Barbadoes and Jamaica, and assigning salaries to bishops and archdeacons respectively. Since then, he need hardly say, that from circumstances the labours of the clergy in our West Indian colonies, had increased to a great extent. It was one of the happy circumstances attendant on emancipation, that there had been of late an increasing desire for spiritual instruction. Churches and chapels had risen in every direction, and there had been an increasing desire to have the superintendence of the clergy. But of course this spread of religious feeling entailed increased duties on the superintendence of the Bishop of Jamaica, and on the Bishop of Barbadoes, whose diocese included all the Leeward Islands and Demerara, and which could not all be performed by him. At this moment the Bishop of Barbadoes had tendered the resignation of his see, and in conformity with the provisions of the act, 6th of George 4th, c. 88, by which, after ten years' service, the bishop was entitled to a retiring allowance. The Bishop of Barbadoes had now served sixteen years, and had laboured most zealously in his office. That Prelate now claimed the benefit of the act, and had placed his appointment at the disposal of her Majesty. He had felt that it was desirable, as the noble Lord who had preceded him in his office had done, to make more effectual provision for the discharge of the episcopal functions of that island; and he was happy to inform the House, that in accordance

149
with an arrangement he had made, with the consent of the Archbishop here, and of the Bishop of Barbadoes, he proposed to subdivide that diocese into three dioceses instead of one, without involving any increased expenditure either to this country, or to any other party. The salary assigned to the Bishop of Barbadoes and charged on the consolidated fund, was 4,000 l. a year, with a retiring allowance of 1,000 l. a-year. There were also two archdeacons, to whom salaries of 2000 l. a year each were assigned, though only 1,500 l. a year each had been drawn, the rest having been contributed for a third archdeacon, who received 500 l. additional from the colony of Demerara. This left a disposable amount of 8,500 l. a year. Instead of giving to the Bishop of Barbadoes 4,000 l. a year, and to each of the archdeacons 2,000 l. a year, the intention of the bill which he was about to lay before the House was, to appoint three bishops, and to give to the first 2,500 l a year, to the second 2,000 l. a year, and to the third 1,500 l. a year, with 5001 added by the colony of Demerara, and he proposed to assign to the three archdeacons the salary of 500 l. a year each, instead of their present salary of 2,000 l. a year, which appeared to him to be exorbitant. He proposed also to add two clergymen to the establishments in Trinidad, and at St. Kitt's, to perform the duties of rural deans; and the same amount of money which went to provide for one bishop, and three archdeacons, would go to provide the services of three bishops, three achdeacons, and two rural deans. He trusted that he had exhibited a proper regard for economy in this arrangement for subdividing the important functions performed by the bishop of the diocese, and obtaining an adequate superintendence in the episcopal government of these colonies. It was only due to the Bishop of Barbadoes to state, that although the pension for his services was not granted till his resignation was actually given, and though the resignatiou was tendered in August last, owing to a doubt as to the form of it, it had not yet been actually received; the bishop had said, though in form he was entitled to receive the salary of the bishopric, he was willing to receive the quarterly sum of 250 l. alone, under the pension he had accepted, though this had not in form been confirmed upon him. He proposed to make similar arrangements with regard to the diocese of Jamaica. He proposed to take power to her Majesty, by letters patent, if she should so think
150
fit, to appoint one or two or more dioceses in Jamaica, providing that the expense of two dioceses should not exceed the sum of 6,000 l., appropriated to the support of the present diocese. He did not anticipate any opposition to the proposition, and should conclude with moving for leave to bring in "a bill to amend the act 6th Geo. 4th., c. 88, for making provision for the salaries of certain bishops, and other ecclesiastical dignitaries and ministers in the diocese of Jamaica, and in the diocese of Barbadoes, and the Leeward Islands, and to enable her Majesty to separate such diocese." Leave given.

COLONIAL TRADE—CLISTOMS DUTIES.
On the motion of Mr. Gladstone, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House on the Acts relative to the Customs Duties now levied on importations into the British Possessions in America and the Mauritius.
Mr. Gladstonesaid, in introducing to the notice of the Committee, or, he should rather have said, on re-introducing to the notice of the Committee a subject of considerable importance, it was a great satisfaction to him to think that he should not have to trouble them at any considerable length by the detail of the main grounds of the proposition which he had to make. It would be in the recollection of all those who heard him that the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the late President of the Board of Trade, had twelve months ago introduced a plan to the House for the purpose of relieving the American colonies from the weight of duties now levied on them under the authority of the Imperial Parliament; and it would be in the recollection of the House that the plan was generally welcomed by the House in its details. It would, therefore, be ill-judged in him to go over at any great length the details of a subject on which the right hon. Gentleman had then dilated with great ability, and in a manner superior to any to which he (Mr. Gladstone) could pretend. He should content himself with stating the general grounds of the bill, and referring to the main propositions which he intended to bring forward. That right hon. Gentleman had shown that the colonial system as it existed between this country and its dependencies was one of extreme strictness in a commercial sense. The relaxation of the late system had commenced sixty years ago, and since the peace in 1815 material changes had been effected

151
in the policy of the commercial system of the colonies. In the year 1822, under the present Lord Ripon, then Mr. Robinson, and again in the year 1825, under the lamented Mr. Huskisson, measures were introduced into the British Parliament, the general effect of which was to substitute protective duties for the prohibitory duties before levied. Although this had been done, and although the result had been, so far as it went, satisfactory, and although the apprehensions of those who opposed that measure had been proved to be unfounded, yet the duties which were still leviable by authority of the Imperial Parliament were fixed at rates which could not be justified either with regard to the interests of the revenues of the colonies themselves, or with regard to the principles laid down by Parliament with respect to its colonial legislation; and in certain cases the operation of the system, as it at present stood on the statute-book, was extremely onerous. He did not think that, saving one or more exceptions, there were any hon. Members who were prepared to object to the statements of the right hon. Gentleman. But if there were alarm existing in any quarter on this subject, he must refer to an illustration which that right hon. Gentleman had used—to the example of our eastern colonies. While we had a system of severe taxation, and almost of prohibition, in our colonies in the West, the Crown, acting under the authority of Parliament, had applied to our eastern possessions, and to the mighty empire of India, principles completely different from those which had been applied to our colonies in the western hemisphere. He was not exactly aware whether the same line of policy was pursued in those countries under the rule of the East India Company, although he believed that such was the case; but he believed that there was not a single case with respect to our eastern colonies in which any differential duty amounting to more than 4, 5, 6, or 7 per cent. was levied for the purpose of protecting British manufactures. When they considered that this had long been the case, and when they considered that it was really impossible to say whether our trade with our eastern or with our western colonies was the most valuable to the mother country,—of such invaluable importance were both,—he thought it would be believed that he had stated sufficient to quell the apprehensions of those who considered it necessary, on account of British interests, that the present rate
152
of duties should be levied in our Western possessions, and that they could not fail to arrive at the conviction that their apprehensions were altogether groundless. At the time when the right hon. Gentleman introduced his measure before Parliament last year, as it was a measure which referred to a great variety of interests, and to places situated at distances so remote, it was to be expected that some Gentlemen would feel that there was a difficulty in submitting propositions of a general nature to Parliament, intended to affect distant dependencies, without having some means of ascertaining how those provisions would be welcomed by the people of those dependencies. For that reason, he considered it a happy circumstance, that the measure had not passed into a law last year, because, from the time which bad elapsed, the bearing of those measures had become known in our colonies, in the West Indies, and North America, and were generally approved of by their inhabitants. The right hon. Gentleman, in bringing forward the measure last year had said he brought it forward on its own merits, and on that ground he asked the sanction of the House, so far as regarded English interests, which might be supposed to be prejudicially affected by the measures proposed. The right hon. Gentleman himself, who was at that time at the head of the Board of Trade, and who had, consequently, the best opportunities of being acquainted with public feeling on the subject, had stated in a subsequent discussion, that the measure he had proposed, received a larger share of approbation from the general commercial interests of the country, than any measure that bad ever been proposed. He was not going to dispute any of the principles which the right hon. Gentleman then propounded; but, on the contrary, to recommend to the committee the application to a somewhat larger extent, of certain of those principles. He thought, that the right hon. Gentleman had shown, by undeniable authority, that he was treading in the course which had been taken by those before him. The right hon. Gentleman had not trusted merely to speculative reasoning, he had been able to point to what had been already done in commercial relaxation; and, on those grounds, he also asked for the support of the House. He was further disposed to take this course, because he thought, that in the time which had elapsed since the plan of the right hon,

153
Gentleman had been laid on the Table of1 the House, no disposition had been shown shown in any quarter to anticipate injury either to British or colonial interests from any portion of that plan. Another reason had swayed his mind to ask the House to go even beyond the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman. If the condition of the West-Indian producer of sugar had been such, twelve months ago, as to render it desirable, that he should be relieved from the restrictions to which he was subjected, much more desirable was it, that he should be relieved at the present time; for although that House was naturally and properly disposed. to distrust all complaints of commercial distress, yet there never was a more real or severe case of distress on the part of any producers of commodities for any British market than that now experienced—he would not say by the East-Indian planter, nor by the cultivator in the Mauritius,—but by the absentee proprietor of estates in the West Indies, a class that he admitted it was most desirable to diminish. Nothing could give the West Indies so fair a prospect of maintaining competition with other portions of the world (if they should ever be exposed to competition), as the transfer of the estates in those colonies from absentee proprietors to either resident proprietors or a resident tenantry. But, without going into these unnecessary details, he would only state, that the distress of the West-India proprietors was very severe, and that they they were subjected to restrictions in supplying themselves with necessary productions, to which other colonists were not subjected. It was most imperative on the House of Commons to afford every relief for the removal of those restrictions. The proposition which he was to simplify the existing laws in that respect. The 3rd and 4th of William 4th, c. 59, was, in point of fact, a simplification of previous laws on this subject; but there were, also, some previous laws on the statute-book, which had introduced some degree of complication into its application and practice; and he believed it would be a convenient course to all the parties concerned, if it were practicable to repeal the acts which had reference to this subject. and to substitute a single and consolidated act. Now, with respect to the changes he was about to propose. He would speak first of these changes which were new in their character, and which were not supported by the
154
precedent of last year. He should propose to the committee to abolish all duties which were at present leviable in the colonies upon articles being the produce of Great Britain. The principal imposition of that kind at present existing was a duty on spirits, and he proposed its abolition, not because it was not desirable that spirits should be taxed, but because he confessed, that it appeared to him, that their taxation, under the authority of the Imperial Parliament, was not in itself necessary, and was scarcely compatible with the promises held out in the Declaration Act of 1778. In that act the Imperial Parliament gave a promise to the colonies that:—
"The King and Parliament of Great Britain will not impose any duty, tax, or assessment whatever, payable in any of his Majesty's colonies, provinces, and plantations in North America or the West Indies, except only such duties as it may be expedient to impose for the regulation of commerce."
Now he did not think, that any duty which was imposed upon all articles alike in the colonies, or any duty imposed upon articles of British growth, could be fairly said to fall within the terms of a duty for the regulation of commerce. It appeared to him to belong to the class of revenue duties, and, as such, he must consider it to fall more properly under the cognizance of the colonies themselves. It was true, that with respect to Canada and Newfoundland, there were considerable sums at present levied by imperial taxation upon British goods and spirits; and, lest any inconvenience should arise from the sudden removal of those duties by the Imperial Parliament, he proposed to fix the day for the commencement of the operation of the act in North America at such a period, as should afford ample time for the adjustment of that subject, and as would enable the colonies to make such provisions in reference to it as might seem proper to themselves. He therefore asked the assent of the committee to this portion of the plan, on the ground, that it afforded them an opportunity, with practical convenience, of giving more full and striking application to a principle which they had long adopted—that of rendering to our colonial fellow-subjects another of those acts of goodwill to which alone he believed they were to look for cementing the connexion between the colonies and the mother country. There was another change in the present tenour of the law which he proposed to make, which was founded on the same principle.

155
It was to this effect: Under the existing law, certain articles not being the produce or growth of the United Kingdom are free, and all other unenumerated articles are subjected to a duty of 15 per cent. ad valorem. Now, it appeared to him, that with respect to foreign articles, which in no degree or manner competed with British productions, any taxation levied on them by the authority of the Imperial Parliament was strictly a taxation for revenue, and could not be called in any way a taxation for the regulation of commerce. There are a great multitude of those articles which appeared in the schedule of the present Possessions Act. Now, it appeared to him, that it would be the most convenient course for Parliament to pursue, and a course most likely to be satisfactory to the colonies, that it should, instead of taxing all articles whatever, not being of British growth, produce, or manufacture, on their introduction into the colonies, select such of them as it might deem necessary to tax for the regulation of commerce, and, that it should be provided, that the importation of all other articles into the British colonies should be left free, as far as respected the authority of the Imperial Parliament. He should also say, that there would be a necessity for naming a distant day upon which any act on this subject should come into operation—a necessity which he believed would be equally felt, even if the provisions which he had mentioned had not been introduced. Even at this moment hon. Gentlemen were aware, that the Customs' establishments in many of the colonies were a source of positive expense to this country, and he therefore took this opportunity of informing the committee, that it was the intention of the Board of Trade to call the attention of the other departments of the Government to this circumstance, and to the anomaly of having two sets of Customhouse officers in those colonies, to the waste of public money arising from the system, and to the necessity for an arrangement with a view to the consolidation of the establishment, and the consequent saving of expense. If the committee should approve of the general frame of the measure he proposed to introduce, he hoped it would also be possible to get rid of (with one exception) certain special exemptions from duties on imports into particular colonies which now appeared upon the statute-book. The necessity for those exemptions was in a great degree done away with by the removal generally (as he had already
156
stated) of the corresponding duties from which they were exempted. The principal exemption he proposed to remove was the exemption from duty on corn, wheat, flour, and salt meat, on their importation into the Canadas. He believed it was in conformity with the desire of the people of Canada, that some tax of a moderate description should be imposed on the importation into that colony of American corn and flour. He believed, that on the American side of the border, a very considerable import tax, amounting to nearly 10 s. per quarter, was levied on the produce of Canada entering the United States. Of course he did not intend to impose any such rate of duty—the duty he meant to propose would be 3s. per quarter. The view he thought on which provisions coming into Canada from the United States should be subject to a duty imposed by the authority of the Imperial Parliament was, in fact, that Canada sent to this country considerable quantities of grain and flour, and he was happy to say, Canada showed indications of sending over still greater quantities, so soon as her natural capabilities were developed by the fostering influence of peace and of wise local legislation. On this account the only articles to which he meant to apply the duty were those he had mentioned. The theory of the law was to afford an advantage to Canadian produce on being sent to the British market and it seemed to him desirable that when this country sent forth thousands of Englishmen to North America as emigrants, the Imperial Legislature ought not to allow those who emigrated to, and became citizens of the United States, to put themselves in possession of a privilege intended only for British subjects—a privilege the American settlers could now acquire by sending their produce and provisions through Canada to this country. Those portions of the United States from which such produce proceeded were those bordering on the lakes, and the farmer there might make his produce appear in the British market as Canadian produce, by sending it through Canada, with as much convenience as he could transmit it to New York, or any other shipping port of the United States. Hence it was, that he proposed really to effect the distinction which Parliament had originally intended between Canadian and American produce. He would now state to the committee what were the resolutions which he intended to submit for their consideration. The first

157
resolution was a resolution repealing all existing duties—the second went to impose new duties in their stead—the third and fourth provided that those duties should be in addition to the duty leviable under colonial enactments—the fifth regulated the exemption from duties of articles for the use of the British fisheries; the sixth gave, according to the provisions of the bill introduced last year by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, to the produce of the Channel Islands the same facilities as to the produce of Great Britain; and the seventh was a resolution declaring that it was expedient to bring in and pass a Consolidated Possessions Act. With respect to the article of wood, he thought, in the first place, it was unfortunate that the British colonies should be placed in the condition in which they stood, in consequence of having to pay a considerable impost on the importation of that raw material, which was so important, not only with a view to the comforts of the people, but to the encouragement of their industry. But, moreover, let him remind the committee that, in point of fact, the tax now levied in the West-Indian colonies on wood was a direct addition to the price which the British consumer now paid for sugar, and, therefore, the relief he in this respect proposed would be a relief more in favour of the British consumer than in favour of the West-India grower. From anything which had transpired since the proposition to reduce the duty on wood was first made, he did not think there was any reason to apprehend that the colonial interests would be affected even by the entire removal; and, as such was the case, he asked the committee with great confidence to consent to their removal altogether. He would now read to the committee the schedule, one of rated, and the other of ad valorem duties, which would be imposed by the resolution which he should have the honour of submitting to the committee. The first schedule was that of rated duties, and the first duty he imposed was on wheat (hitherto free), 3s. per quarter; next, wheat flour, 2s. per barrel, of 196lb; next, on fish, dried or salted, 2s. per cwt.; then upon fish pickled, 4s. per barrel, and salted meat, 3s. per cwt. All these duties were somewhat reduced below those fixed by the measure introduced by the right hon. Gentleman opposite last year. He next proposed to fix a duty on butter of 8s. per cwt., and on cheese of 5s. per cwt., and he did so in con-
158
sequence of the fact that these commodities had become material articles of export from the North American colonies to this country. He ought also to mention that these rated duties were in a trifling degree higher than the duties which the right lion. Gentleman opposite had proposed last year. On coffee he proposed to fix a duty of 5s. per cwt., the same as was levied at present; on cocoa 3s. per cwt., at present it is 5s.; on molasses 3s. per cwt., the same as at present; and on unrefined sugar, 5s. per cwt., the same as at present. He then came to the article of tea, upon which he intended to fix a different duty from that proposed last year—that was to say, he intended to make it a differential duty, leviable in a similar way to that about to be levied on other articles. Unless tea was imported into the colonies direct from China, or from the United Kingdom, or from any other British possession, he proposed to lay a duty on that article of 1d. per pound. A point arose here which it was necessary for him to notice, in connexion with the discussion which last year had taken place on this subject. At present the importation of tea into Canada from the United States was prohibited, and the importation of tea into Canada in a legal way subjected that commodity at present to a duty of 3d. per pound. Now, the effect of removing the prohibition (which he had stated) without qualification would be, that tea imported into Canada would be liable to a duty of 4d. per pound, which would afford a high premium for smuggling. He thought last year it had been stated by the right hon. Gentleman opposite that it was computed that no less than three-fourths of the whole amount of tea consumed in Upper Canada was smuggled into that province, and, therefore, to make this particular provision apply to Upper Canada would rather aggravate than reduce the evil. He, therefore, proposed to provide for this case by a separate clause in the bill to be introduced, postponing the operation of that enactment until the Legislature of Canada should have had time to take the subject into consideration, and to lower the duty on tea legally imported now levied under colonial statutes. The next article with respect to which he proposed to legislate was that of spirits, and be proposed to leave the tax on foreign spirits precisely as it stood now—6d. per gallon on rum, and 1s. on other spirits. The effect of this would be to leave the whole question of the duty which ought to be levied on spirits entirely

159
for the consideration of the provincial legislatures, instead of the present rather complicated manner, in which more than than one British duty was, under the Possessions Act, and by other anterior statutes, imposed. These were the whole of the rated duties which he proposed to submit to the consideration of the committee, and and he would now at once proceed to the schedule of ad valorem duties. Before he did so, be must, however, mention that he was not aware he had omitted any one article, to which a special rate of duty ought to be applied; but of course it would be competent to those who were disposed to claim the benefit of qualified and modified protection to British articles, to urge upon the Government those claims for the insertion of those particular articles in the schedule. The first article mentioned in the schedule of ad valorem duties was the article of sugar refined in bond in the United Kingdom, on which be proposed to fix the duty the same as now—viz. at 10 per cent. ad valorem, and upon other foreign refined sugar a duty (as at present) of 20 per cent. ad valorem. At present sugar refined in bond enjoyed an exemption from duty, while in the Canadas that exemption was defeated by the accidental structure of the law. The Canadian Legislature had levied a duty of 1d. per pound on all refined sugar, whatever might be the tax imposed by the Imperial Parliament. Now, the ad valorem duty of 20 per cent. would be equivalent to the duty of 1d. per pound, but still there was no provision in the act of the Imperial Parliament to the effect that the duty on foreign refined sugar should be in addition to the duty leviable on sugar refined in this country. The effect of this was, that it at present was a case of hardship upon the British refiners of sugar in bond. He should not feel justified in giving new advantages to the British refiners which they had not a fair right to enjoy, but it was perfectly evident that this preference was meant by the Legislature to apply to them, while in point of fact it did not so apply. He now came to a list of articles which would be specified in the second schedule, and upon which he proposed to fix an ad valorem duty of seven per cent.—the same as had been provided in the bill of last year. Those articles were as follows—wine, whether bottled or not, cotton manufactures, silk manufactures, linen manufactures, woollen manufactures, leather manufactures, glass manufactures, paper manufactures, hardware, clocks and
160
watches, manufactured tobacco, soap, corks, cordage and oakum, pitch, tar, and turpentine. On all these articles he proposed to fix an ad valorem duty of seven per cent. There was one other class of articles, the produce of the North American colonies, with respect to which he intended to make a change. The articles of oil, blubber, furs, and skins, the produce of creatures living in the sea, were contained in the tables of the Prohibitory Act. He proposed to remove the prohibition with respect to those articles, and to substitute, in consideration of the value and importance of the fisheries, on maritime grounds, an ad valorem duty of fifteen per cent. He had now gone through the subject, and had only to apologise for the inefficient manner in which he had introduced it to the committee. He entertained hopes that no topic connected with the subject could be open to serious dispute, and lie was confident that the measure he had to introduce would be hailed by the colonies as a measure of goodwill on the part of the Imperial Parliament, and, therefore, both on commercial and national grounds, he ventured to recommend it to the favourable consideration of the committee. With these observations, he would put the first resolution in the hands of the Chairman.
The Chairman put the resolution as follows:—
"That from and after a day or days to be named, the duties chargeable upon goods, wares, or merchandize, imported or brought into any of the British possessions in America, or the Mauritius, under or by virtue of the following Acts respectively, namely: Act 4 Geo. 3, c. 15, imposing certain duties on wines imported into the British possessions in America; Act 6 Geo. 3, c. 52, imposing certain duties on molasses, syrups, and pimento, imported into the British possessions in America; Act 14 Geo. 3, c. 88, imposing certain duties on spirits imported into Canada; Act 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 59, for regulating the trade of the British possessions abroad, shall cease and be repealed."
Mr. Laboucheresaid, he had listened to the statements made by the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down with great, and he might add, with almost unalloyed satisfaction. The bill which was now about to be introduced, was founded on the same principles as the measure which he had had the honour of proposing in the last Session of Parliament. And he could assure the right hon. Gentleman who had just spoken, that though he had not had the good fortune to bring the measure he had submitted to Parliament to a success-

161
ful termination, still he retained for it the solicitude and affection of a parent, and any humble assistance he could render would be cheerfully given to the right hon. Gentleman opposite to pass the present proposed measure into a law. He was free to confess that, so far as he had been able to follow the right hon. Gentleman through his statement, the alterations which he had made, upon the proposition he had made last year, were improvements. The time which had since elapsed had, of course, enabled the right hon. Gentleman to make them; but, at the same time, he must reserve his opinion upon some of those alterations until he saw them in print, and had an opportunity of considering them. At present, he believed, he repeated, the proposed alterations to be improvements. The most important of the alterations seemed to him to be the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to the flour of the United States imported across the border. He trusted there was no intention on the part of the right hon. Gentleman to ask Parliament to interfere to prevent the free importation from the United States into Canada of wheat and flour, unless the Canadian Legislature should order otherwise. It was unnecessary for him to enter at any length on this subject. He retained the opinions he had urged in the last Parliament, and he considered the proposed measure as of the utmost importance—as a measure of justice to the colonies. He continued also in the opinion quoted tonight, that let Parliament take what course it liked, with regard to other alterations in our Tariff, after the advantages it had bestowed upon the East Indies, it was but an act of common justice now to relieve the West Indies from those burthens to which under Parliamentary enactments they were now subject, and to which the Crown had never exposed the East Indies or Australia. He repeated, that he retained this opinion, but at the same time he rejoiced to see this measure again brought forward, because he could not disguise from himself that it would greatly advance those important reforms with regard to the duties levied on colonial produce in this country, especially sugar and coffee, which the people demanded, and which the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman, as it seemed to him, would greatly facilitate. He trusted that the House might take this measure as a harbinger and omen, that as the present Government had now shown that on deli-
162
beration they were prepared to adopt the opinions of the late advisers of the Crown with respect to these duties—that having now done justice to the people of the colonies, they would proceed to do justice to the people of this country, and modify those duties on colonial produce which weighed so heavily on the people of this country. As an opportunity would occur in future for discussing the measure, after time for deliberation, he did not know that he need at present trespass further on the attention of the House. He thought the principles of the right hon. Gentleman's plan sound and just, and he heartily hoped that no opposition would be offered to those principles. If any opposition should be offered from any quarter any humble assistance in his power to give, the right hon. Gentleman might rely upon it should be freely given to overcome that opposition.
Mr. G. Palmerdesired not to be supposed to have made any change in his opinions in consequence of having changed his side of the House, and he hoped that those who now hailed this measure would well consider the consequences which were likely to ensue from it. Seeing that it was the very same measure as that which the right hon. Gentleman opposite had last year brought forward he could not, as at present advised, give it his approval,
Lord J. Russellsaid, that although upon the whole he was quite well pleased with the measure now brought forward, he certainly should not think it necessary to defend the Government against their own supporters were there not one point on which this measure differed materially from that proposed by the late Government last year, and which he thought it very material should be fully considered. At present there was a free trade between Canada and America. That was much objected to by the agricultural party in Canada. Now he, both as to Canada and as to this country, thought that free admission of flour was a very great benefit. But there was now an agricultural and landed interest in Upper Canada, which could state the same kind of burthens and the same kind of prescription for a number of years with the agricultural and landed class in this country as reasons against any interference with them. But if this country imposed restrictions on the introduction into Canada

163
of flour from the United States, he was of opinion that the consequence would be the formation, in Canada, of a body favourable to free trade, which did not exist there at present, and which it might be found very difficult to meet with, encounter, and overcome. He knew that it might be said that flour so imported into Canada might come to this country, but he saw no great evil in that. On the other hand he thought that if the Canadian Legislature were to impose duties, it was probable that they would not find them effectual, because the province was so large that it would be very difficult to distinguish Canadian flour from that of the United States. What the right hon. Gentleman had stated on this point seemed to him as the right hon. Gentleman had stated it, to tend to establish a monopoly, which he should be very sorry to see established, and he hoped, therefore, that it would be maturely weighed before proceeding further. With respect to other parts of the measure, he was very glad to see that the objections which had been made last year by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Goulburn), the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, to this measure, as proposed by the late Government, and which he urged so forcibly and with so much effect, had been removed.
Sir C. Douglasobjected to the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere), that hon. Members of Conservative opinions were now supporting a measure which they last year opposed. To prove that such was not the case, he begged to read the following passage from a speech delivered by Mr. Henries, on the 5th of April, 1841, in the Committee on Mr. Labouchere's resolutions, modifying the colonial duties:
"There was no individual on either side desirous to keep up a rate of duty in any case for the sake of protection beyond what was indispensably necessary; and the object of all parties was to reduce protection to the lowest point, if the right hon. Gentleman proceeded upon that principle (and he trusted he would) he might be assured of receiving as hearty support from that (the opposition) side of the House as from the other, as nothing could be more in conformity with the opinion of those who trod in the steps of Mr. Huskisson."
This being the avowal which had been made on the part of his hon. Friends when in opposition, be did not think it came well from the noble Lord that he should taunt them, as he had done,
164
for adopting the measure of the late Ministry.
Sir R. Peelentreated the House not to adopt any inference as to the future course of her Majesty's Government in consequence of the introduction of the present measure, but that it would wait until he should have an opportunity of explaining fully the intentions and propositions of the Government. He stated publicly in his place last year that notwithstanding the differences which existed between those who sat on the side of the House from which he spoke and her Majesty's then Government as to questions of commercial policy, he should give the measure introduced by the right hon. Member for Taunton his cordial support. The right hon. Gentleman, on the introduction of his bill, said, that he brought it forward as a claim of justice to the colonies, and for the protection of the commercial interests of the West Indies. He stated that there was no correspondent claim on the part of the East Indies; for, while they had admitted the produce of the East Indies to compete with that of the West Indies, they had not removed the peculiar burdens which pressed on the latter colonies; he therefore asked the House to put them on the same footing. The claim of the right hon. Gentleman was, that the measure should pass solely as one of justice, and independent of all other considerations; and he (Sir R. Peel) supported it on that ground, and should have continued to support it, if the right hon. Gentleman had proceeded with his bill on the simple grounds of its justice and its abstract merits. He trusted that the House would not attempt to draw inferences with respect to the other portions of the commercial policy of the Government from this measure, but that it would wait until the other measures were brought forward. He should to-morrow introduce one of the most important of them, and he would take the earliest opportunity of pursuing the same course with respect to others. He trusted that the harmony which had hitherto prevailed with respect to this subject would not be disturbed. He would only add, that he did not think that the noble Lord would taunt him with adopting all his views and measures when he had heard his propositions to relieve the country from the great financial embarrassments under which it now laboured.
Mr. Stuart Wortleywished that some further information should be furnished to the House with respect to the importation of corn and flour from the United States into Canada. He understood that at present there was a duty of twenty-five per cent. levied in the United States on the importation of foreign corn, but there was no duty whatever on the importation of corn from the United States into Canada. At present this country, with the view of benefitting our colonies, admitted corn from thence at a duty of 5s. the quarter; but, by the present anomalous state of the law, the country gave the advantage of this privilege to the United States. He thought, therefore, that if ever there was a fair case for reciprocal restriction, this was it. As he understood the right hon. Gentleman, his proposition was to propose a duty of three shillings a quarter on corn and two shillings a barrel on flour introduced into Canada from the United States. He thought that this duty should be higher. He did not wish to increase the duty to an unnecessary extent, but they ought to take care that the object was fulfilled of putting an end to an illicit trade.
The Chairman to report progress.
The House resumed. Committee to sit again.

RAILROADS.
Mr. Gladstonerose to ask leave to bring in a bill for the better regulation of Railroads. About twelve months ago the late Government proposed to the House to sanction a measure which gate a very large amount of discretionary power in the management of railroads to the Government. This was deemed necessary for the safety of the public in the minds of many persons, in consequence of the numerous accidents which occurred in the course of the autumn of 1840 on several railroads. The bill, after having been submitted to the House, was referred to a committee up stairs, and it was the opinion of that committee, after mature deliberation, that, on the whole, the power hitherto entrusted to the Board of Trade had worked well; and that, as long as this continued to be the case, it was advisable not to place in the hands of the executive Government a control over the management of railroads. The proceedings since last year had shown that the committee was right in the opinion which it had formed, for he thought that it would be
166
generally admitted, that there had been a great improvement in the management of railroads. [Col. Sibthorp: Hear.] Probably his gallant Friend entertained a different opinion, and, no doubt, the House would hear the gallant Member endeavour to show that matters had been growing worse and worse, but he entertained a widely different opinion. He therefore did nut intend to propose to place any general powers in the hands of the Government as respected railroads. Last year an important suggestion was made by an bon. Gentleman opposite, with the view to the prevention of accidents on railroads—namely, it should be necessary that all engine drivers on railroads should be licensed. The opinion of the committee, however, was rather against this proposition; and such was also the opinion of the present Board of Trade, after the most mature deliberation, who conceived that greater care and security would be produced by the operation of public opinion on the directors of the several railroads. If this should be found to be insufficient for the public safety, then it would be the duty of Parliament to interfere, and pass such enactments as might be deemed necessary. It appeared also to be the opinion of the committee that if the Government gave licences to the engine drivers, it would lessen the responsibility of the directors of railroads, and would not ensure the public against misconduct or neglect on the part of the engine drivers. The question also was, whether the character and conduct of engine drivers had improved or not. He thought that the diminution in the number of accidents last year on railroads showed a great improvement in the conduct of the engine drivers. There would be a report laid on the table of the House in the course of a few days, drawn up by the officers of the Board of Trade belonging to the railroad department, and which would show that very few of the serious accidents which had occurred last year on railroads were traceable or attributable to the misconduct of engine drivers, or to the want of caution. He thought, therefore, when it appeared that a great improvement had already taken place in this particular, and also that it was probable that greater improvement would occur with additional experience on the part of the engine drivers, that it would be better not to interfere, although it would be the duty of the Government to take the sense of the House upon the subject anti to act accordingly.

167
He repeated, then, that in consequence of the improved character of the proceedings of last year in this respect, he did not intend to propose any alteration at present. The bill which he intended to propose contained provisions which tended somewhat to enlarge the powers of the Board of Trade, but only on specific points where experience showed that they were called for. He would proceed to describe to the House the most important clauses in the bill. The first was a clause for the more effectual inspection of railroads previous to their opening, and to give powers to the Board of Trade, to postpone the opening of a railroad, in case of the proper officers not being satisfied of its security. In most cases there was little difficulty in this respect, for the directors of most of the railroads readily attended to the opinions of the surveying officers. If his hon. and gallant Friend would attend to this part of the subject, he would find, that all the blame of the accidents that had occurred was not to be attributed to the railroad companies, for in most cases the directors most readily listened to the suggestions and advice of their surveyors. One of the chief dangers attending the traffic on new railroads arose from the unsettled condition of the soil, and a disposition on the part of railway companies to open their lines before the ground was in a proper state to allow of that being done with safety: it was therefore his intention to propose, that the Board of Trade should be authorised to postpone the opening of railroads when they saw occasion. He intended to propose also to enlarge the power of the Board of Trade as to returns in cases of accident on the railroads. At present such returns were required only when injury to life or limb had occurred, but it was obvious that great negligence might be practised, without causing such an injury: his object, therefore, was to adopt measures which would ensure the obtaining information respecting such cases, and he intended to propose, that it should be incumbent on the directors of railroads, to make a return of all accidents that occurred, whether formidable or not in their nature. He also intended to propose, that in cases where roads crossed the railroad on the line, the gates should be closed across the roads, and not across the railroads. In most of the railway acts it was directed, that the gates should be not across the
168
road, but across the railroad; but experience had proved, that this was not the best course; he, therefore, proposed a clause which would lead to the opposite practice. Another clause would require occupation-gates on railways to be kept locked. There were a vast number of these gates on every line, and it was out of the question, that the railway companies could watch all these gates. Great inconvenience and some accidents arose from their being left open, and cattle getting on the line. He thought, therefore, they ought to be required to be kept locked. He would ask, in another clause, for power to require disputes to be settled by arbitration. Cases of disputes, as with regard to crossings on the level, matters of extreme importance, were frequently arising between railway companies and road trustees, where they could not agree on the conditions of the crossing, or whether a road was to be carried under or over the railway. It was obviously exceedingly inexpedient, that because parties chose to stickle upon some minor conditions, the safety of the public should be exposed to serious damage. He should, therefore, ask for power to require arbitration in such cases; and, if necessary, an umpire to be appointed to ensure a speedy decision. He should propose the adoption of a similar principle with respect to branch communications. A right had been given in certain cases, under railway acts, to introduce branch communications, in order to secure to individuals the use of the way. This power, he believed, had not been used to any material extent. It was clear, that if it had been, it would lead to a frightful multiplication of accidents, and it was desirable, that it should be under control; he should ask the House to give the Government power to increase such control. He should also ask for some power with reference to the right of private parties to use locomotive engines on railways. Stipulations of this sort had been introduced into railway acts antecedently to experience; but experience showed, that they required to be placed under control. There were certain other clauses, by which he proposed to give to railway companies powers of a compulsory nature, which they did not now enjoy. There was one in reference to the public safety. It happened, in certain instances, that cuttings were found too steep, and embankments too narrow for security, either ordinarily or from bad weather. In such cases, the companies should be empowered to take land enough

169
to widen the embankment, and diminish the slope sufficiently to make it secure. In doing so, it was not right, that they should be impeded in the accomplishment of their object; he meant, that in such cases the rights of property should be subjected to modification, if it was clearly made out, that the taking of certain lands was necessary for the public safety. There were some other clauses to make provision for certain cases of misconduct on railways, but without further detail he should now move for leave to bring in the bill.
Colonel Sibthorpwas glad the hon. Gentleman had adopted the course which he formerly had the pleasure of suggesting, and that it was placed in such able hands. He was actuated by but one motive in that opposition which he had always given to the introduction of railway schemes, and if accidents increased, as they had done latterly, he could have wished that his hon. Friend had introduced a bill for the annihilation of railways. But when the hon. Gentleman told them, with regard to the measures which he proposed for the consideration of the House, that great discretionary powers were to be given to the Government, it appeared to him that little public good would result from it in regard to the lamentable accidents and loss of life which had of late occurred; and if the hon. Gentleman should not do so, he would take the liberty of moving for a return of those accidents, and of the opinions of the juries on the various cases. He thought, too, that sufficient had fallen from the public press on this subject, and he alluded in particular to one paper, from which he differed in political matters—he alluded to The Sun, the comments of which on the unfortunate accidents which occurred, were of the most salutary kind, and whose efforts in urging that some efficient measure should be adopted to prevent them, conferred great credit on itself. He thought that most of those accidents occurred from want of due precaution on the part of the directors, and he would be glad that a measure was brought forward for settling a greater responsibility on them. He thought it was necessary that such a course of inspection as was mentioned should be adopted, not only with regard to new railways, but regarding all railways. He thought that imposing a mere deodand, even of 1000 l., was not a sufficient recompense to the relatives of the sufferers. The directors of those schemes should be compelled to sup-
170
port the families of those who were killed. He was also of opinion that the losses sustained by the proprietors of stage-coaches should be made a subject of consideration by her Majesty's Ministers. He thought that railroads were a proper subject taxation; they would produce a revenue to the Government, and would not affect the body of the people. He had been conscientiously opposed to the introduction of all railroads, but with regard to this bill, it certainly did not seem to him to be adequate to the protection of the people. It was due to the public at large, and to individuals that life and property should be protected, and he should take the opportunity of opposing certain parts of this bill at every stage.
Mr. Wakleyfelt bound to express his belief that this bill as at present constructed would not carry out the object the right hon. Gentleman had in view. He was decidedly impressed with the opinion that a far more stringent measure was necessary, but he felt also compelled to state his fear that the influence of the proprietors of railways in that House was far too great to allow of any hope that such a bill could at present pass. By and by, when three or four lords had lost their lives, or perhaps some members of the Government, the House would strongly sympathize with the subject, and some efficient remedy would be provided for the prevention of accidents in future; but, until some such event occurred, he was convinced that the House would not pass the kind of law which the circumstances of the case demanded. One hon. Member opposite had himself had his life in jeopardy, and he would probably give the House an account of the circumstances attending the accident on the Brighton line. Some of the cases that had occurred having come officially under his notice, he had had the fullest opportunity of investigating the facts and comparing the evidence, and he had come to this conclusion —that railway travelling, if it were under proper regulation, would be the safest in the kingdom. He entertained no doubt upon the subject, not the slightest. This bill of the right hon. Gentleman was another which Ministers had brought out of the back shop of the Whig store. They had had four already. He wished the Government would take the whole batch, ticket them "Whig bills," and let them

171
know which they meant to stick to. It was not long since he had heard the Whig measures described as the most vicious and most rascally that had ever been exhibited to an intelligent assembly; they had been denounced in that House and in the country. But now, when questions were put to the Government from that (the Opposition) side on their measures, the answer was "Oh! I found a bill in my office" (a sort of legacy of the noble lord), "and, with slight modifications, I intend to introduce it the first opportunity. That bad been done with regard to the all-important question of the factories, and also with regard to the poor-law, though that was not to come on till after Easter—a circumstance which, as the commission expired in July, appeared rather strange. He did not like these tactics. To-night, another bill had been proposed by the right hon, mover of the present measure, for the regulation of the customs of the Wet-India Islands, and there had been no end to the compliments he paid to the late President of the Board of Trade. He had not heard those compliments paid formerly. But it was astonishing how well those who had obtained the victory could afford to be complimentary. This bill was inefficient last year, and he had felt so: it was equally inefficient now. A stringent hand must be applied to the railway proprietors. The director and chairman of one of the great companies was now in the House, and it might be that he had some influence in the right quarter. It happened to him the day before Christmas-day to be on the Great Western Railway, a few hours after the accident that happened at Sonning-hill. He was in the third train. It would be useless for him to describe the feelings of the people, nor need he advert to the distressing, painful, agonizing character of the accident—not less distressing because he knew that every person on the spot concurred in thinking that, had the commonest precaution been used, such an accident could not have occurred. Would it be believed, that on that night, in the darkness, there was no watchman at the cutting at Sunning-hill? He made this statement upon the allegation of persons who were on the spot. And on the statement of the secretary of the company when examined on the inquest. The evidence of the policeman was that it was
172
his duty to be there in time for the train which leaves London at six. But there was another train—a "luggage" train— which left London at half-past four. It was that containing the trucks that held the unfortunate men whose lives were lost. That train was at the place before the watchman arrived, for it was not a part of his duty to be there till day-light. Was this a system that ought to be sanctioned? Railways were a great national undertaking, conducive to commercial advancement, and adding greatly to the convenience of the public; and those who thought they ought to be placed under proper regulations should not object to have a regulating power placed in proper hands. They should not be the parties interested in railways; there ought to be a power above them, and that power ought to be the Government. Then, take the case of the accident that happened on the Birmingham line—a case that had come before him. What were the facts? They would hardly be credited. But, perhaps it would be inconvenient for him to enter into the facts of that case on the present occasion, and he would defer his observations till the second reading.
Mr. Gladstonehad thought he might venture to move for leave to bring in the bill, as no new principle was contained in it beyond what had been already before the House, and he had done so notwithstanding that the report on the subject was not yet delivered. But in a very few days that report would be on the Table of the House, and in that report would be given the detailed opinions of the officers on the accidents that had occurred, and their reasons for those opinions. He thought it was desirable for all parties that the whole subjects should be gone into, but, under the circumstances he had mentioned, not perhaps at present.
Mr. Wakleyhad not hesitated to allude to the accident on the Great Western, because the chairman of the company, being present in his place in the House, would be able to reply on the instant. But as there was no person in the House who could have offered a similar explanation on the part of the Birmingham Railway Company, he had abstained.
Mr.C. Russellexpressed his satisfaction that the right hon. Gentleman had brought in this bill in accordance with the principle recommended last year. As

173
there was to be another day for the discussion, he would confine his present observations to the allusion made by the hon. Member for Finsbury, to the accident that had recently occurred on the Great Western Railway. He could assure that hon. Gentleman and the House that no person in the country more deeply deplored that accident than did the company, nor had any persons in the country laboured more intensely and earnestly to avert such accidents, or, when they unfortunately had occurred, to prevent them in future. He had felt it his duty to attend the inquest on the sufferers by the accident alluded to, and axiously to consider whether any blame could attach to any officer of the company, and he could solemnly and sincerely declare his belief that the accident was more to be attributed to those causes that were under the control of Providence, and which could not be foreseen by man. He could show the hon. Member a section of the embankment where the accident occurred, by which it would be seen that it was caused by the percolation of the water at a stratum much deeper than the superficial portion of the embankment. The hon. Member had complained of the want of a watchman at Sonning-hill cutting. He would surely see that it was impossible to have a watch kept along the whole of a line, from one end to the other, extending 118 miles. Had there been any reason to fear danger at that particular spot, then there would have been a watchman, but there was no such reason. He should defer his remarks on the bill and its details until a future occasion.
Mr. Ewartdiffered with the hon. Member for Finsbury, on the question of Government control. He thought the right hon. Gentleman had acted wisely in not removing so much of the responsibility from the proprietors. Interfere with the personal responsibility of the directors, and you increased the danger to the public. By superintending, without interfering, the Government had exercised a wise discretion. The hon. Member for Finsbury said, that the power ought not to be intrusted to interested hands. Who were more interested than the directors in insuring the safety of the public? He hoped that neither the right hon. Gentleman, nor any Member of any Government would do away with the principle of non-interference, which ought to be the basis
174
of all legislation on this subject. Looking at the effects of past legislation, it should not be forgotten that the older railways were, after all, the safest; and in the case of the new railways, the system of superintendance did not appear to have been attended with that additional safety to the public that might have been expected. He hoped, however, that it would be more efficacious in future. There was this anomaly in the law of England—that if a man survived the injuries he received, he could recover damages from those who were the cause of those injuries being inflicted; but if the man died, his surviving relatives had no remedy or means of recovering compensation. This was a strange anomaly, and ought not to be allowed to continue. He had no doubt that the number of accidents would diminish, as the experience of the railway directors increased; and he would give his cordial support to a measure which, while it would control, would not unwisely and hastily interfere with railway companies.
Mr.Hardysaid, he thought that the provisions of the proposed measure did not go far enough; and he should feel obliged to the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone), if he were allowed to engraft a clause or two, in order to increase the public safety. The late accidents on the railways showed what ought to be done upon this subject. For instance, there was the accident on the Brighton railway, on which occasion he himself had very narrowly escaped, and which had resulted from two engines having been used. One of them was more powerful than the other; and it was his conviction that the more powerful engine, which was the second, pushed the other off the road and overturned it. The consequence was, that the other carriages were driven on the other side of the road. He attached much importance to these facts, because only three carriages was materially injured. One of those who almost dragged to pieces, and the other two were in much the same condition; but none of the passengers were hurt, except those who were in the carriages he had mentioned. Therefore, if something were done to prevent carriages with persons in them being placed near the engine, accidents of this kind to passengers were not likely to occur. There was likewise the recent accident on the Great Western Railway, to which the same observations applied. He would

175
therefore, propose, (and the recommendation would tend to the advantage of the railway proprietors themselves), this contrivance to prevent, in cases of those accidents that might happen on any part of the road from the overturning of the engine, and not merely from slips of land, those accidents being attended by the fatal consequences that had resulted in the two instances he had named. He hoped that he should see in his right hon. Friend's Bill, some provision for this, that would at once be satisfactory to the public, and would be no injury to the proprietors of the railways themselves.
Sir R. Peelsaid, he thought that in matters that were conducted upon so large a scale, by companies with such large capitals, and in establishments that had, to a great extent, superseded other modes of travelling, if the Legislature could devise any precautions against the occurrence of accidents, it would be perfectly justified in so doing; and he felt certain that there could be no influence on the part of railway proprietors who might have seats in that House that could stand against the sense of that House and the influence of reason. He doubted whether all the influence of all the proprietors could prevent the adoption by Parliament of effectual measures for the regulation of railways, if it were shown that the regulations proposed would have the effect of preventing accidents. But he should deprecate the interference of Parliament being carried beyond the proper limits, because he felt certain that such an interference would not tend to the security of the public. It would be impossible for Parliament, or the Government, or any part of the Government, to undertake too minute an interference with the affairs of the railways; and the attempt would, in his opinion, greatly increase the risk of those travelling by them. In the first place, it was the interest of the railway companies to prevent accidents occurring. When accidents did occur, the result was a diminution of traffic on that particular line, and a preference was given to other modes of travelling. That hon. Members might form a correct opinion on this subject, he would recommend them to read the evidence that was received last year by the railway committee, which showed there were certain matters in respect to which Government could take an active part. They could undertake to offer sug-
176
gestions, thus increasing the responsibility of the companies if those suggestions were not adopted; but he thought that, if any department of Government were to direct, as had been suggested by his hon. Friend, a certain interval between this engine and that particular description of carriages, the effect would be to increase rather than diminish the risk of accidents. The railway companies would, in such cases, feel relieved from the responsibility. They would then shield themselves from public indignation, on account of Government having the superintendence of the regulations. Then their vigilance would be relaxed; and they would have the power of asserting, that as the Government had relieved them from the responsibility, the Government ought to assume it. There were certain matters in which the Government could beneficially interfere, as in the instance of the railway establishments, and the management of the gates across roads; but, as to the appointment of a certain number of watchmen, or the regulation that the trains should not travel beyond a certain degree of speed, he thought legislation on those grounds would be impracticable. As he thought, the evidence already given before the committee proved that any attempt on the part of any department of the Government to prescribe rates of speed, or determine as to the engines, or the other matters that required actual experience or local knowledge, would be going beyond the proper authority of Government, and, in his opinion, would fail in the object in view. He believed that the effect of the measure now proposed would be to increase the personal safety of her Majesty's subjects travelling by means of railways.
Mr. Laboucheresaid, that the present bill differed somewhat from that which was proposed last session, inasmuch as his bill was more stringent, and gave greater power to the Board of Trade than this would give. Those portions of his measure that gave the Board of Trade such power had been referred to the consideration of a Select Committee of that House; and the result of their investigations was, that his opinion was altered upon the subject. He believed that the means most likely to accomplish the object that all had in view would be to leave undivided responsibility in the directors and officers of the different railways. He therefore

177
thought that a sound discretion had been exercised in leaving those clauses out of the present bill. But it was a mistake to say, that the committee had been decidedly against the clause that gave the Board of Trade the power of licensing engine-drivers, because, that had not been referred to that committee, and they could not, therefore, have come to any decision upon it. As far as he could collect, the committee was of opinion, however, that at the present time it was not desirable to have a clause of that description included in the measure. He therefore did not blame the right hon. Member for not introducing that clause in the present bill. It was by no means a simple question, and it was not to be so easily legislated on as at first it might appear. He thought, that it would be the safer course to interfere with the companies too little rather than too much. He was not prepared to say, that it would not be expedient, after they had had more experience, for the Government to interfere to a greater extent than was now contemplated; but he thought, that in the present state of the question, the right hon. Gentleman had exercised a sound discretion in bringing forward the bill as now framed, and in giving the Board of Trade power only of making suggestions, and leaving it to the directors to act upon them or not.
Leave was given.

DISTRESS IN PAISLEY.
Mr. Wallacesaid, that in rising to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, on the subject of the misery and destitution under which the inhabitants of Paisley and other towns in Renfrewshire had been so long suffering, he felt it due to that House to be as brief as possible. He should be thus brief in his statements, because he was convinced, that no aid would be required from him in making it evident, that great distress really existed; but the House and the country did not know the extent of the privations that had been brought to light by the committees appointed by the charity of individuals in that part of the country, and who had gone into all portions of the town of Paisley and its neighbourhood, in the course of their inquiries. As far as that misery had been made known, great sympathy had been excited; and he felt assured, that all that part of the country was truly sensible and grateful for the kind feeling that was so generally shown, and for the great sympathy that had been ex-
178
hibited, from the Queen on her Throne, down to almost the meanest of her subjects. The distress of these people seemed to him as if it had been an incentive to them to behave, if possible, with more peacefulness and propriety. The town of Paisley had been, as was well known, for a long period employed in supplying fancy articles to the trade of London and other large towns in the kingdom; and, therefore, any stoppages, in trade, or any revulsion, had almost always fallen upon them, in consequence of orders not coming in for that description of goods. Her Majesty's Government were aware, that 17,500 persons were represented as in the receipt of daily assistance in the town of Paisley, and other neighbouring towns, of whom 15,000 were in Paisley alone. There were also 1,000 hand-loom weavers, and the committee were employed in giving them webs to supply them with occupation; besides whom there were 1,000 labourers, who were likewise employed by that same committee. The weavers could make by these webs at the rate of 4s.a week, but not more, working at them fourteen, fifteen, or sixteen hours a day. On the other hand, those who were supplied with money wherewith to obtain provisions for themselves and families, received about 1s. per week, or perhaps 2d. per day, for each individual. Now all those who had attended to the subject of gaols knew that the inmates were provided with food, which, supplied in the most economical manner, cost considerably more than double that amount, in order to maintain the prisoners in health and strength, Among the sufferers, however, in Paisley and its neighbourhood, there was little or no clothing, and no bedding on which to lie. And here he would draw a comparison between them and those who had the good fortune to be placed in gaol, or in some house of correction. He blamed no one: he would say nothing as to the causes of all this; but he would say, that the distress had reached an extent in his part of the country, that led him to the conviction, that it was his positive duty, or that of some other Member of the House, to make the statement, that he now took the opportunity of making. His proposal was, as would appear from the notice he had given, for an inquiry to be made, and that "an immediate and diligent inquiry." He had been asked by many hon. Members what sort of inquiry he proposed; and he had also been asked (he thought half officially) what

179
was his own view on the subject? He believed that the only proper mode of making this inquiry would be to make it upon the spot, one or two persons being sent from London to carry on the investigation, and to report thereupon to the Government, and if it were customary in such cases, to the House. When he handed his notice to the Speaker, it would be seen that he had inserted the words, "upon the spot," as he deemed such an inquiry to be the only one that would be satisfactory. A Committee of that House had been suggested to him, but such a plan would lead to an endless inquiry, and no good result would be derived from it. It would occupy a committee very long, and would be calculated to raise hopes among the suffering people of Paisley and its neighbourhood that might not he realized, and would make them believe they were entirely neglected. He had been induced to urge this inquiry on the Government, since he had heard the reply given to the question put to the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley), as to emigration. The people of Paisley had a strong belief that a large field was about to be opened to them in the way of emigration. He intended to throw the blame on no one; but still the sufferings of those for whom he now spoke were not the less severe. There were large numbers of destitute who were not provided for by charity. If they came openly forward, they would be provided for, in one way or another; but a vast number of them could not be induced to come forward; and he had excellent authority for saying that such great destitution and misery were exhibited to the Committees of ladies and gentlemen who investigated the state of those classes, that they came home with a degree of sorrow and disgust, and with a feeling of total hopelessness that he could not describe. He had seen with great satisfaction, that a proper gift from the Government stores had been made to those persons, in a similar predicament, in Spitalfields; and he hoped that there would be a disposition on the part of the Government, to make a similar gift to his countrymen, who if the Spitalfields weavers deserved it, deserved it no less. He could assure the House, that nothing could exceed their misery or their deserts; and he therefore trusted that the Government if assistance had not already been sent to Paisley would raise means, by which the inhabitants of that town and its vicinity
180
could be assisted. He would not conceal from the House, or from the Government, that the week before he came to London, a resolution to that effect had been come to by the relief committee of Paisley, presided over by the Provost of the town, and supported by the clergy and the great body of individuals of any station there. There were both clergy of the established Church and of dissenting congregations present at that meeting. A motion was made, that a petition should be sent to the Government praying for stores, either in the way of gift, as to the Spitalfields poor, or at a small cost, on which the committee might expend their remaining funds, and that such food as they could command, might be taken, free of duty, from the bonded stores. He held a copy of that resolution in his hand, but, he did not think it necessary to read it to the House. He regretted to add, that, great as was the distress in Paisley and its neighbourhood, it was still increasing, and that greatly diminished the prospect of employment to the people in the town. The distress was on the increase in Ayr, Renfrew, and the adjoining counties. It happened that many of those unfortunate people had work given for which their looms were not suited, and vast numbers of them went out on the roads to break stones, or undertook other heavy out-door work. At first, their hands were blistered, but after a while they got hard, and would in time become unfit for the fine work in which they would be employed in their own trade whenever it revived. He had now done, and should only offer his humble recommendation that two or three active, sensible Gentlemen out of that House—without the expense of a well paid Commission—should be sent down to Paisley to ascertain the actual condition of the people, and the extent of the distress. If that inquiry was refused to him, he hoped at least that her Majesty's Ministers would be prepared to bring forward some measure to relieve the distress and destitution, which was greater than he had known, even in the misery which had afflicted the people from time to time in the last twenty-five years. He concluded with moving an Address,
"Praying her Majesty will be graciously pleased to command that an immediate and diligent inquiry he made into the nature and extent of the misery and destitution under which the inhabitants of Paisley, and other towns in Renfrewshire have been suffering for so long a period, and are still enduring; and, further,

181
that her Majesty will be graciously pleased to command that the said inquiry be prosecuted vigorously, so that the results may be laid, as soon as possible, before this House, with a view to its providing, with all speed, against the longer continuance of the intolerable distress; as also against the evident and imminent danger of disease and pestilence following in its usual course, thereby causing more numerous deaths from cold and hunger and actual starvation than hitherto, as well as increasing the ruinous tendencies of these appalling evils on the moral character of all who are directly affected by them, or who live within the range of their influence."
Sir J. Grahamsaid, that he would preface the few observations which he intended to make to the House with expressing his opinion that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down was entitled to great praise for the temperate and judicious manner in which he had brought forward this motion. With respect to the distress which the hon. Gentleman so feelingly described, he would admit that the hon. Gentleman had not exaggerated when he said that the number of persons now subsisting upon weekly relief in Paisley and its neighbourhood was 17,000. Under such circumstances it was hardly possible to exaggerate the distress, and that distress could be rendered more painful by no one circumstance more than by the excitement of expectations which must be disappointed. He therefore felt that it was the duty of the Government, as well as of the House, to proceed with the utmost caution. If there were any dispute as to the facts, he could understand the necessity for an inquiry. But he admitted that the distress was great, and he also fully admitted that no praise could be too high for the exemplary patience and fortitude with which it was borne. All the rights of property were observed in that neighbourhood, and the law was not violated. Under such circumstances he should think it the height of imprudence to take any steps which would excite hopes and at the same time disappoint them. He thought that the arrival in that district of two commissioners specially appointed, not to ascertain the fact of the distress—for that was admitted—but to make an inquiry, which in the terms of the hon. Gentleman's motion would "lead to speedy relief"—would raise hopes which it would be most imprudent to excite unless the House saw how that relief could be obtained. If the hon. Gentleman wanted to prove a special case by a searching inquiry, he should say
182
that that inquiry would probably be best conducted on the spot by commissioners; and he could understand that there might be many special circumstances under which such an inquiry might be both requisite and useful, but he had great doubts that it could be so in so large a community as that of Paisley and its neighbourhood. That community had been fur a long time subsisting on the wages arising from a manufacture in which they peculiarly excelled, and their great misfortune was, that the necessity for the use of that article had ceased suddenly, and to a great extent. There had been also a large export of that article to America, and the community of Paisley necessarily became involved in the distress consequent on the failure of the American trade. Then also the magistrates, who were creditors to a great extent of their fellow-citizens, and were the depositories of the money lodged in the savings banks, became involved in the general distress, and added to it by not being able to meet their liabilities. All these special circumstances would be, no doubt, very useful in proving a special case; but if the hon. Gentleman desired to have these circumstances investigated, he should say, that it should not be by a commission. The better course would be by a committee of this House, before whom, not a great number, but a few competent witnesses might be examined, and the facts duly established. He should say, that if this course would be likely to be satisfactory—and on this point the hon. Gentleman was able to judge, he should not object to it; but, as the matter now stood, he should say, that the appointment of a commission would give rise to misunderstandings, and lead to expectations which there could be no reasonable probability of their being ever able to realise. Under these circumstances, if the hon. Gentleman should divide the House on his motion as it now stood, he should, though not without great pain, feel it his duty to vote against it. The Government were not without information on the subject of the present distress. In every county in Scotland they had a sheriff substitute constantly reporting the state of facts to Government, and it was not therefore necessary to bring persons here from Scotland to give that information which the Government was now receiving from those officers. But if there was any specific point which it was necessary to investigate, into which the Government had neglected to inquire,

183
and as to which the hon. Gentleman had some peculiar sources of information, he should be willing to assist in investigating it. But though he should be sorry to do anything which the hon. Gentleman would think unkind, yet, acting on general views and not wishing to raise false expectations, be hoped the hon. Gentleman would not press the motion to a division; if he should, it would be his duty to vote against it.
Mr. Hastiewished to say a few words with respect to what had just fallen from the right hon. Baronet. He had heard nothing from that right hon. Baronet which could afford a hope to the distressed people of Paisley that relief of any description was at hand. It was stated that 17,000 persons had been depending for some time on a sum originally of not more than 6,500 l., and out of which the relief committee had now funds in hand not more than 1,500 l. This had been generously provided by the liberality of the country, but it was impossible that those subscriptions could be long continued, and then, unless some relief should come from her Majesty's Government he would look forward to the consequences with fear and trembling. He threw out these hints that the House might take them into consideration before despair should seize on the unhappy sufferers of Paisley.
Mr. W. S. O'Brienthought this a good opportunity to make a few observations on the petition which he had presented the other night, praying that the Government might assist the suffering people of Paisley by an extensive system of emigration. He held in his hand a document which was signed eighteen months since, by no less than 3,000 persons, that on the part of the Government some aid should be given to the working classes by emigration. The fact was, that the amount which had been since employed in relieving their immediate distress would have been sufficient to place these people in situations where they could obtain ample remuneration for their labour. He was afraid that any change that could be proposed in the Corn-laws would not be a remedy of such a palpable character as those people seemed to expect. Hon. Members would see in all the papers that came last year from New South Wales complaints that the resources of that country could not be made available for want of sufficient hands. Last year 106,000 persons emigrated, but not more than one
184
third of them went to British colonies; and in these colonies the great demand for labour was still unsatisfied. A great country like this, which found no difficulty in raising funds for any wars—no matter how speculative might be their characters —should not say that it could not find funds for so benevolent and beneficial a purpose as that of sending the unemployed and superabundant portion of its population to those colonies where they might obtain employment and food in abundance.
Mr. Wakleysaid, it was impossible to hear the satements of the hon. Gentleman who brought forward this motion without feeling the deepest commiseration for the sufferings which he described; but, at the same time, the case was one presenting extraordinary difficulties, because, if relief should be given in this case out of the public funds, it would be impossible to conceive but that other places would make similar applications, and the consequence would be, that complaints of injustice and partiality would arise from their not doing in other places what they had done in this. The hon. Gentleman, he must say, brought forward this case in a manner calculated to obtain for him the best attention not only of the House, but of the country at large. He made his allegations in such a manner that not a single fact was disputed, and that even the Government admitted that there was no doubt as to the facts. But the hon. Gentleman had failed to suggest a remedy. What was the use to inquire, when the facts were admitted—when every statement respecting them was regarded as rather under than over the mark? The question now was, had the hon. Gentleman any proposal to make for the relief of the distress which was admitted to exist? The proposal of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down was feasible, but a great deal of time must elapse before it could be carried to such an extent as to produce any perceptible effect. His object in rising was to ask those Gentlemen who were acquainted with the law of Scotland what was the nature of the Poor-law in that country, and why the property of Scotland was not applicable as well as that of England to relieving the distress of the poor? He saw the Lord Advocate in his place, and he would ask him was there a Poor-law in Scotland? He understood that there was. And next, because it was no

185
use for Scottish Gentlemen to come here and make application for the relief of that distress for which, perhaps, the existing law of Scotland might provide, he would ask what was the state of the administration of that law? If there were an adequate Poor-law it should be enforced; and if there were not, they ought to call on the Government to say that the poor of Scotland should he provided with an effectual Poor-law, that would give them instantaneous relief. He would undertake to carry such a law in one week if he could command a majority of ninety in that House. He understood that there was something bearing a resemblance to a Poor-law in Scotland, though he could not well understand how that could be, as there were no poor houses there—he did not mean such poor houses as we had now in this country, for such houses he had no desire to see established in Scotland or anywhere else, but such poor houses as we formerly had here. Considering what were now the sufferings of so many human beings in that country—the patience with which they had been borne, and the results to which they might lead if not soon relieved, he thought it would be a satisfaction to the House and to the country to know precisely and distinctly what was the nature of the poor-law of Scotland, and how it was carried into effect; for if it was not effectual for relieving the distresses of the poor of that country, he was confident that an effectual law would be speedily adopted.
Mr. R. Yorkeconsidered the reply of the right hon. Baronet, under the circumstances, an unfeeling one. It struck him that if they were to have a commission, it was one before which he would be competent to appear, as he had been lately in Paisley himself for the purpose of ascertaining the facts respecting it. When he was there, he found 14,000 persons in a state of starvation, and those were depending upon the providential interposition of charity. His hope was, that Parliament would take off all taxes that affected articles used for the sustenance of human life.
Sir V. Blakesaid, as the motion was for an address to the Crown, he should propose, as an amendment, that the inquiry be extended, not alone to the nature and extent of the distress in Paisley, but also to the causes of the distress, as well as its nature and extent, that now unhappily
186
prevailed throughout every part of the United Kingdom. The Parliament held in 1665 passed a bill perpetually to prohibit the exportation of all cattle from Ireland, dead or alive, great or small, fat or lean, which caused the greatest distress in Ireland. He had been informed that the lace and woollen manufactures of Germany could, after paying twenty per cent. ad valorem duty on the importation of those articles into England, and defraying the charges of freight by steam-vessels and carriage by railway, sell them even in Nottingham at full fifty per cent. under the price they could be manufactured for in England. If that was the fact, he added, the landlords were mad who refused to give the assistance necessary to the English manufacturer by repealing the provision laws. Every principle of humanity, policy, and justice demanded this concession at their hands; and if they did not grant it they might rest assured, that by means of the Poor-law, the paupers of this country would be speedily their masters.
Sir R. Peel:Sir, I should be very sorry indeed if any contention of debate, or any other cause whatever, could for a moment provoke the slightest levity of manner in this House on such a subject as that before us; and I therefore earnestly hope that the hon. Gentleman opposite will not press his motion. I hope that nothing will occur to create the least impression, that the House does not deeply sympathise with the distress of the poor of Paisley, as well as with the distress of those in every other part of the kingdom. I give full credit for sympathy with that distress to the hon. Gentleman who has brought forward this motion, and I am sure the House goes with him in that sympathy to the greatest extent. But I also think, that it is a matter of the last importance, not alone to these poor people, but to the country at large, that this sympathy should not betray us into the position of exciting unfounded hopes in their minds, which can end only in disappointment. And I look upon it as a point of greater importance still, that we should not, by any act or deed of ours, directly or indirectly, discourage those local exertions for the relief of that distress which there is no doubt exists—which alone can be effectual for the purpose. Nothing should be done by us that has the slightest tendency to cause any remission in those laudable exertions,

187
but, on the contrary, we should encourage, by all the means in our power, those on the spot, who from their own abundance contribute to the assistance of their poorer fellow-men. If we hold out hopes that cannot be realised, what will be the effect of them upon the community? What, for instance, would be the effect of a scheme of emigration as applied to the distress of Paisley? Two commissioners are suggested by the hon. Gentleman to ascertain the exact amount of the distress of that town, and to suggest a remedy for it. Suppose they suggest emigration. How will the case stand then? The hon. Gentleman who proposed the motion has told us, that the habits of the poor people of that town, and the nature of their previous occupations, render them wholly unfit for any severe out-door labour, and that they are, therefore, incapable, even in their own country, of turning their labour to any employment besides that they had followed, with any chance of a profitable result. If that be the case in this country, how much more so must it be the case in a new country, in one of our colonies for instance—where they could only hope to exist by the severest description of outdoor labour. But there is another point of view in which this case must be looked at if justice be done it. You must also take into your consideration the condition of the colonies themselves. You must not—you cannot, on any ground of justice or reason—send out persons front this country who are unfit for them. If you do, the immediate consequences of your act will be the utmost suffering to the parties whom you send out—persons inadequate to the exigencies of a colonial life—incapable of hard labour, and wholly unfit for the position in which you place them, while you will give the colonies the most just cause of complaint against you. I should dunk the greatest objects of relief in Paisley, for instance, are of all others the least fitted, on the hon. Gentleman's own showing, for the purposes of emigration. Young men of twenty or thirty years of age, whose hands are not yet wholly formed to any particular occupation, and whose frames are not warped into any particular attitude, in consequence of such occupation, may, it is true, earn their bread in Australia, or in Canada, but will any one say, that these are the real objects to be relieved, if you
188
set about applying a remedy to the existing distress. No; the real objects to be relieved are men of fifty or sixty years of age, with large families — with hands formed, as the hon. Gentleman says, to their previous occupations—with bodies which cannot be bent to any other position than those occupations require—and consequently with an utter incapacity to subsist themselves in a colony where their occupations are unknown, and where only the hardest labour is available for a scanty support. But suppose you do send these poor persons out to our colonies. Are you, in the first place, prepared to send all their families along with them, or do you purpose to separate them from one another? If you send them out, unfitted as they are for the labour by which they can alone win a subsistence in the colonies, will you not send them, in such case, to suffer the greatest privations? Then, are you prepared to support them in the colonies? You cannot expect that the colonies will do so? and you know beforehand, from the hon. Gentleman, that these poor people are unfitted by their previous occupations to support themselves. If you do not support them, what will be the consequences? I can see none but absolute starvation for them and their families when they reach the colonies. Sir, under these circumstances, I hope the motion before the House will not be pressed to a division by the hon. Gentleman who has proposed it. If you agree to it, those who have hitherto been the most active and zealous in contributing to the support of the suffering poor of Paisley, will naturally remit their noble exertions, depending then altogether upon the interposition of the Government; and, further, the poor of that town will be taught to look for relief, from those who live among them to the Legislature, which Cannot apply any effectual aid to their distress. That aid, to be effectual, must be local; and the motion of the hon. Gentleman, if acceded to by the House, would be at least but the postponement of the evil day. In the interval of six weeks that he proposes for this inquiry, I doubt not that any two or more men of common sense would finally report, that nothing could be done in the matter, and in the meantime the inquiry would serve but to aggravate and embitter the prevailing distress. I say not a word about hopes excited only to be disappointed—or of the

189
effect that such an inquiry would naturally and necessarily have upon other places distressed, though not perhaps to the degree that prevails in Paisley; but, as in my opinion, it would be the greatest pain to the House to refuse its acquiescence in the motion, while I can see no ground on which they could accede to it, I have that confidence in the hon. Member—a confidence inspired by the temperate and judicious manner in which he has proposed it—which induces me to hope that he will not, under the circumstances, persist in pressing it on the consideration of the House.
Mr. Wallacesaid, that not a single word had fallen from him as to the advantages of a more extended system of emigration. He had only said, that the unfortunate people of Paisley, whose cause he had that night advocated, thought that an extended system of emigration was about being carried into execution by her Majesty's Goment, but that idea would have been already destroyed by the speech which the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley) had delivered the other night, and which would by this time have reached them. When he had first brought his motion forward he did not know that the facts which lie had mentioned respecting the existence of the distress would have been admitted in that House to the full extent to which lie had stated them. He had not been aware, when he had given notice of his motion, that the Government had stepped forward in an unusual mariner, and had assisted the unfortunate people of Spitalfields by supplying them with clothing. The importance of these facts he wished to impress upon the minds of the Government. His motion contained an allusion to the disease, which, according to the opinions of the most eminent medical men, did not accompany, but which followed on the heels of such distress. On that point he would now say no more. He had wished that an inquiry should be instituted, and preventive means should be adopted, but as the Government had been receiving information from the county with which he was connected, and communications from its sheriff-depute, whose office, though not his name, had been mentioned in the course of the debate, and who was entitled to the confidence either of this or of any other Government—as they, too, were more competent than he could be to deal with the matter; and, knowing as he did how inefficacious a commission would be, though
190
he had told his friends around him that he should divide the House before the right hon. Baronet had tendered him his advice, he now, under all the circumstances, would certainly withdraw his motion. He was content with finding that the feeling which had spread through the length and the breadth of the land was felt and had been evinced by the Members of the House of Commons. He now, with the permission of the House, begged to withdraw his motion, and he trusted that the Government would be enabled to perform their task connected with this subject without meeting with any difficulty from the course which he had that night adopted.
Lord Stanleysaid, that he merely wished to say a single word on a remark which had been made by the hon. Gentleman opposite. In his opinion, nothing could be more creditable to the hon. Member than the manner in which he had brought forward his motion; but it was most desirable that no impression should go abroad, arising from the accidental silence, of the intentional concealment of those connected with his department, that an extensive system of emigration was about to be adopted by the Government. It was most desirable that no such idea should be encouraged amongst the distressed people of Paisley. This rumour had been spread abroad. He had had repeated communications from many respectable persons connected with the working classes, asking him to explain the intentions of Government on this subject. He had throughout discouraged any such belief gaining ground. He had again and again said, that the rumour was entirely without foundation. He had not thought it right to make any public declaration on the matter, but in all the inquiries—and they had been numerous—which had come from Paisley, he always discouraged such ideas.
Mr. Wallacesaid, that, so far from the noble Lord misrepresenting the matter to the people of Paisley, he knew that he had had the candour distinctly to tell them that there was no such intention on the part of the Government. He had also distinctly told them that any schemes of extended emigration were not in agitation; but the only answer which he had got was, that "he had nothing to do with the present Government, and that as to the Government themselves they could not believe them."
Motion withdrawn.
Mr. Wakleythought that some explanation should be given as to the system of Poor-laws in Scotland.
The Lord Advocatewould say a few words on the general question. There were Poor-laws existing throughout Scotland, but in many parishes it was not found necessary to put them into execution. They provided for every real pauper, but of course some check was necessary as to the distribution of relief. In England that check was found in the system of poor-houses; but this plan not being adopted in Scotland another was substituted in its place, and, accordingly, no relief whatever was given to able-bodied men. He could assure the House that that relief had not been found wanting in the grievous distress of the people of Paisley. A sum to the amount of ten thousand pounds had, in one form or another, been bestowed on the suffering poor of that place. It was a great and important question, whether a workhouse system was a better system; but into such a question the House could not now expect him to enter.

COPYRIGHT.
Mr. Godson,in rising to move for leave to bring in a bill for better securing the property in Copyright, said that, warned by the experience of the last two or three Sessions, he did not apply his bill to an extension of the duration of Copyright, but merely intended by it to secure the Copyright which existed by having it registered in the Court of Chancery, and having any assignments of the Copyright that might be afterwards made, and sums that might be raised upon it by way of mortgage, also registered, the property being thus made more secure, authors having the advantage of their own works, and the public the benefit of knowing in whom the Copyright existed if they wished to make a new edition of it, or to introduce it in a work of greater extent or invention. Of course, although he did not propose to extend the duration of Copyright, he did not wish to interfere with any gentleman who might think such a measure desirable. In a bill of this kind, which consisted principally of details, it was not necessary for him now to do more than ask leave to bring it in, leaving the details to be discussed at a future stage.
Mr. Cochranehoped that the bill of the hon. Member would be proceeded with without delay. He was desirous that the
192
question of Copyright should be again debated, and if it were so, he should move, as an amendment to the present bill, that the term for the continuance of Copyright should be extended. Who could be more entitled to the consideration of the Legislature than the authors of the country.
Mr. Wakleytrusted that no further restraint should be placed on the literature of the day. Good authors gained their fair reward, and bad ones received as much as they deserved.
Leave given. Bill brought in and read a first time.

THE MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The Attorney-generalasked leave to bring in a bill to explain and amend the 5th and 6th Wm 4th, c. 76, the Municipal Regulation Act. There was a clause in the act which provided against any councillor or alderman remaining in office while, either by himself or by his partner, he had any interest in property held under lease from the corporation. Now this was the case to a great extent in Liverpool, Bridgewater, and many other corporate towns. He had called the attention of the late Government to this subject, and he had received an answer, to the effect that the then Attorney-general had no doubt that a literal construction could not be put upon the clause. The Court of Queen's Bench had, however, thought differently. They laid down as law that the property could not be held, and the office at the same time retained; and also, that the parties doing so would be subject to a penalty for every time they acted as councillors. From forty to 100 actions could now be brought under the operation of this clause, and, consequently the Legislature would be breaking faith with that part of the public who were interested in this question, unless they speedily set the matter at rest.
Mr. Jervissupported the measure. He presumed that it was merely a declaratory act to state what the Legislature had formerly intended, and not to remedy the defect which they had committed.
Leave given.

WRIT OF ERROR.
The Attorney-generalalso moved for leave to bring in a bill to allow of a writ of error in any case of a judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench,

193
upon an application for a mandamus. This measure had met with the approbation of the profession. The Court of Queen's Bench allowed of a writ of error in many cases, but not in all. There was no reason for this, and why should it not be altered? The bill allowed the writ in all cases.
Leave given.

SUPPLY.
The House in a Committee of Supply.
Sir George Clerk moved that a supply be granted to her Majesty.
Mr. Wakleysaid, that he took that opportunity of entering his protest—his solemn protest—against the mode in which the Queen's Speech had been framed this year, and for some years past. He would not detain the House long, but he thought that the manner in which the Speech was framed, was unbecoming the character of this House, and was unsuited to the power, dignity, and interest of the country. Every Session of Parliament had brought with it some excuse for adopting the mode of the preceding Session; and, since he had been in the House, excuses had been sufficiently numerous. On one occasion, he remembered it was stated to be highly desirous that the House should be unanimous on a young and beauteous Queen having come to the Throne; that was considered an occasion on which there should be no disunion, no difference of opinion—unanimity was the order of the day. Her Majesty's marriage was another happy occasion, when nothing was so pleasing to the House as unanimity. Then there were the results: first, there was a Princess, and now we had a Prince. The House was to express gratitude and joy on these occasions, which were perfectly in unison, he was well aware, with the feelings of the House and of the country. But on occasions of this sort, when the Commons of England were assembled to promote the public interests, he did think it was fitting, he thought it was becoming the duties 'they had to discharge, that some exposition in the Speech from the Throne should be made to this House which was calculated to attract attention throughout the world, and command for this House the respect and admiration of the enlightened portion of the universe. Instead of that, however, the speech, year after year, had been made up of a tissue, or net-work, of idle generalities. They could not put their finger upon any part of it to which their
194
attention was particularly directed; and, after the house had heard the speech, and adopted an address which was an echo of the speech, no man in the House considered that either he or the Government was pledged to any one thing by the course of proceeding that had been adopted. He did not say, that the existing Government had behaved worse than the preceding Government, but those who constituted the present Government were free enough in their condemnation of the late Government; and yet When they themselves got into power, they adopted the very precedent established before. He wanted to see improvement; he desired to see some change; he desired some alteration which should be useful to the public, and not to go on, year after year, making the Speech from the Throne a thing to be laughed at, instead of a state document to be respected and admired by the community at large. This Session, there had been reasons for reserve. The right hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury, had said, that he should make an exposition of his views at a certain time, and that time he had named; but he understood, last Session, that the right hon. Gentleman was going to take a careful review of the circumstances of the country, and that the House having been prorogued for five months, on the meeting of Parliament, they should be made acquainted at once with the series of measures which he considered should be introduced for the public good. To-morrow night they were to have the first of these propositions; but he had yet to learn when they were to receive the last. He regarded the Factory Question and the Poor-law Question as two of the most important questions, as two questions which would, in the highest degree, affect the character and stability of the nation; and, in fact, the conduct of the executive Government upon these questions, and upon others which were well known, would determine what must be the issue of the political contests in which of late years they had been engaged. He regarded the aristocracy of England at this moment as on its trial; and he (Mr. Wakley), as a radical reformer, knew full well that when the constitution of England was changed by the enactment of the Reform Bill, it was utterly impossible that those who sought a more extensive measure of reform could complete their case until the other branch of the aristocracy, the branch

195
then out of power, obtained the reins of office, and showed to the public what they would do for the relief of the public grievances. The most wealthy portion, the most influential portion, and, at present, the most respected portion of the aristocracy, were on their trial; they had the power to carry any measure for the public good; they wanted but the will to do so. He knew not whether that will existed. If the will did exist, there was the power in this and the other House of Parliament to accomplish the object. Henceforth there could be no delusion, no deception, no trickery, no intrigue, that would induce the public to be blind with reference to the real merits of the question. The aristocracy had the power, the wealth of England had the power, to pass any measure which might be deemed advisable to enact for the public benefit and advantage. Now, he had hoped that the party with which he had been connected would have been enabled at an early period of this Session to take one step in advance towards the accomplishment of their objects; because, after all, every public man desired to see his principles triumphant, to behold them in the ascendant. It was natural that the human mind should so aspire; but under the present mode of proceeding, as a medical man, he hardly knew what was to be done with the patient. The doctor said he could not prescribe unless he got his fee—he regretted the right hon. Gentleman was not now present —but this was a new mode of practice. It used to be the practice in former times, when a man consulted a physician, to say "This is the system I wish you to pursue;" and it was not the practice to say, "I will attend to your stomach next April, and your extremities afterwards;" but "I will show you the course to be pursued for the constitution generally, for the benefit of the entire system." Now, however, we were to have the remedies in fragments; he did not know when they were to receive the last of them; and therefore it was that on the motion for a committee of supply, in conformity with the recommendations of the Speech, he complained of that Speech as a political anomaly, a vapid, senseless, useless production. He said it was utterly unbecoming of this House, it was unworthy of the Parliament of this kingdom, and it was not calculated to increase in the public mind that respect which it was desirable
196
the people should feel for the Houses of Parliament. He very much regretted that several Members of the other side of the House were not present, or he should certainly have extended his remarks; but he did now enter his protest solemnly and seriously against this mode of proceeding; and whatever might be the pretence, whatever might be put forward another year as a recommendation for unanimity, if the document should be the same as it was now, so full of emptiness, he, for one, would move an amendment, exhibiting, he trusted, a better statement with regard to the public interests; and he most certainly would divide the House on the question, for it was not right that, year after year, the House should be cozened into the adoption of a Speech of this kind, and leave the interests of the country untouched and wholly unsatisfied.
Sir G. Clerksaid, though he did not dispute the right of the hon. Member for Finsbury to enter into any subjects connected with any grievances he wished to bring before the notice of the House, yet he thought his criticism on the speech lately delivered from the Throne, and on royal speeches in general, was extremely ill-timed, because the proper moment to have pointed out these generalties of which the hon. Member complained, or the more serious objection of grave omissions in that speech, was last Thursday evening, when the subject was under the consideration of the House. The noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, was perfectly willing that there should be entire unanimity on that occasion, and he was surprised that the hon. Member was so willing to defer to that noble Lord as not to take that opportunity of stating his objections. It was not on all occasions however, that the House was unanimous on speeches delivered from the Throne; and he thought the hon. Member would recollect that in the month of August last there was one exception to the rule. The hon. Member might if he pleased, frame an address to serve as a model which he might recommend for adoption when he became the principal adviser of the Crown. Though the hon. Gentleman had a right to bring the matter before the attention of the House, he should have preferred his doing so when the Ministers of the Crown, who framed the speech, were in their places, and would have been able to justify it.

197
He did not know what was the nature of the speech the hon. Gentleman would have delivered from the Throne; he always understood the chief object of the speech was to state the principal matters upon which advice was required, and to point out to the House those which were the most important. He did not know that any complaint had been made of an omission of the more prominent and important questions likely to engage the attention of Parliament in this Session, in the speech recently delivered. He had heard but one remark as to omission (and the reason of that had been explained by the right hon. Baronet the Home Secretary)—namely, that no notice had been taken of the bill for a renewal of the Poor-law; the right hon. Baronet stated that that was a question under the consideration of the House in the last Session, and it having been then agreed to continue the measure for a few months only, it was perfectly unnecessary to call the attention of Parliament to that which, as a matter of course, roust come under their notice. The hon. Member had observed that the right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury had said, before the prorogation of Parliament, that as soon as Parliament re-assembled lie would introduce measures as to the distress of the country. He thought that his right hon. Friend had redeemed the pledge which he had made to the House; for he had taken the first opportunity of giving notice of his intention of entering into one of those subjects which had excited the last degree of curiosity on the pert of the public, and he had told them that as soon as the forms of the House would permit it; he would avail himself of the opportunity to be afforded him by the Committee of Ways and Means to move a substantive motion on the finances of the country, and at the same time to develope his views of the financial state of the country, and to state what were the intentions of her Majesty's Government. He would ask how it was possible for a Minister of the Crown to have taken an earlier opportunity of intimating the course which he intended to pursue with reference to these questions? The hon. Gentleman, the Member for Finsbury, indeed, might say, that his right hon. Friend had left out of consideration the state of the factories and of the New Poor-law. Now he must say that if there
198
was any one thing which more than another had met with the concurrence of the House, it was the suggestion of his right hon. Friend (Sir It. Peel) that they should apply themselves to one of these subjects only at a time, and that they should not direct their attention to an immense number of bills at once, a course of proceeding which prevented hon. Members who might be interested in various questions from knowing when it might be the intention of the Government to bring forward particular measures. Under such a system it was impossible to discuss those matters with the attention which they deserved. He again asked whether his right hon. Friend's course was not the best which could be adopted? He would say that, looking to the experience of the former Sessions, the course which his right hon. Friend had chalked out was one which was much more likely to be attended with benefit to the country than if he brought in at the same moment all the important measures which it was necessary to introduce. The hon. Member for Finsbury asked what was the amount of the supply to be granted on this occasion. Now this was a matter of form on the present occasion. It was not necessary in the present stage of the proceedings to do more than move that a supply be granted to her Majesty. He hoped, therefore, that this motion would be agreed to without opposition.
Mr. Wakleysaid, he should certainly not oppose the motion. He had been in the House every evening—he had heard much that had gratified, and much that had given him pain—for he had never expected to he always pleased, and if he had he would have been much disappointed, and therefore he complained no more of the present Administration than he did of their predecessors, in reference to the Queen's Speech from the Throne. He complained that they had for many years pursued a course which was always injurious, and one which the country was disposed and had reason to deplore. He admitted that the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) had come forward as quickly as possible with various statements which he had laid before the House; but, at the same time, he must take this opportunity of expressing his regret, that the Poor-law Commission Continuance Bill would not he brought forward until after Easter. He thought that the public would not be satis-

199
fied with this; he thought that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Knaresborough (Mr. Ferrand) would not be satisfied—his opinions, he presumed, could not have undergone such a mutation by his slight probation in reference to this question. In August last, the bill for the continuance of the Poor-law Commission was passed; that measure would expire in July next, and yet the new measure was not to be passed till after Easter; so that this important bill would have to go through both Houses of Parliament in seven or eight weeks; for most likely the Session was not to continue till the grouse-shooting commenced—till the end of August or the middle of September. It was to be hoped that, as party conflicts were now over, as a good majority was a rare thing, and must produce unanimity, they would have these bills brought in at an earlier period, and that the public would have time to see what those measures were before they became the law of the land; for otherwise it would be better to pass no bills at all than to pass ill-digested measures, he had a right to have expected that the Poor-law Commission Continuance Bill would have been the first of the measures introduced, in order that those who felt a deep interest in the question might be enabled the better to comprehend it; and if they disapproved of its details, they might have an opportunity of opposing them. But it appeared that this bill was to remain in the Home Secretary's office till Easter; so that about the 20th day of April, it would be introduced, and it must be got through before July, when the commission was to terminate. He did not think that this was acting fairly by the people, and on going into supply again, he should strongly express his opinions.
Mr. Ferrandsaid, that without differing from the hon. Member for Finsbury on the question of the Poor-law, he did not regret that the measure would not be introduced until after Easter, as it would enable the people of this country to express their opinions; and he sincerely trusted the people would lay their constitutional opinions before the country. He would say, that he was thoroughly convinced that the right hon. Baronet would be ultimately satisfied that the Poor-law Commissioners could not so abrogate the constitutional law of the land as they had done, but that they must yield to the force of public opinion.
House resumed. Report to be received.
Adjourned.

MINUTES.
Bill. 1a Appropriation Acts (1841) Amendment.
Petitions presented. By Lord Brougham, from a congregation of Presbyterians in Dublin, and by Lord Stafford, from several places in the North of Ireland, for an Alteration in the Law of Marriage (Ireland).—By Lord Brougham, from Paisley, Coldstream, and eight other places in Scotland, by Viscount Melbourne, from Arbroath, by the Earl of Minto, from Falkirk, and by Earl Fitzwilliam, from Ludlow, Nottingham, and other places, for the Abolition of the Corn-laws.

CORN-LAWS—EDINBURGH CONFERENCE.
Lord Broughambegged to call the attention of their Lordships to a petition which he held in his hand, and which he considered of great importance, both by reason of the subject, and of the body from which it proceeded. It was a petition from the conference lately held at Edinburgh, and which, having sat for three days, came to a unanimous determination on the subject of the Corn-laws; that was, to petition for their total repeal. That conference, as perhaps was known to their Lordships, was composed of the ministers and elders of the various dissenting congregations throughout Scotland. He understood, that originally an intention was announced from 712 congregations to send delegates to Edinburgh, but instead of that number, there were more—instead of there being a falling-off in the body of delegates represented as was usual, it generally being the case on occasions where meetings were appointed, that more delegates, where such meetings consisted of them, were named as likely to attend, fewer than was stated appeared—but on the present occasion that was not the case, for instead of 712 delegates, 802 ministers, and members of congregations appeared. The conference assembled, as he had said, in Edinburgh; they met day after day successively for three days, and the number of
132
persons who attended varied from 1,400 to 1,600 daily. The debate was carried on with the greatest possible order. In temper, manner, and tone, there was the utmost moderation. He would not trouble their Lordships with reading the petition, important as it was, for the arguments which it urged were the same as had often been urged in that House, and were familiar to their Lordships. The prayer was for a total repeal of the Corn-laws, and when he read their own words from the statement of the conference, published by their authority, it would be seen with what perfect impartiality they treated the plans both of the late Government and of the present, and their Lordships would see, that if any charge could be made against their proceedings, at least it could not be that of faction. They said, that they viewed with equal disapprobation both plans—both the sliding scale of Sir R. Peel, and the fixed duty of Lord John Russell. They passed an equal condemnation upon all projects for taxing the food of the people. They denounced such taxation as being against the principles of religion, contrary to the precepts of morality, and injurious to the best interests of society. He, however, must say, that he differed from the petitioners on the first two grounds on which they put their objections to the Corn-laws, and he agreed with the noble Viscount (Melbourne) that the question is not a religious one at all, or one of morality. He did not think, that morality or religion was peculiarly connected with this question, unless by a very strained construction. But he agreed with the conference in their last statement, that the Corn-laws were adverse to the best interests of society. Although this was a conference only from dissenting congregations, it was not to be inferred, that the congregations of the Established Church did not hold the same opinions. He was aware of no reason why a conference of dissenting ministers should be holden on this question more than on any other political question. He had stated, that he could not concur in the first two points of objection contained in the petition: nevertheless the petitioners had entrusted it to his hands, and had entrusted it to him be believed, after being aware in what respect he differed with them. He had never in any way placed upon exaggerated grounds his advocacy of the repeal of the Corn-laws. He had never held out the pros-

133
pest of such a repeal very much lowering the price of bread and other provisions in this country, That it would lower them to a certain extent he had no doubt; that it would lower them to such an extent as had been stated by many advocates of the repeal, he did not believe. There could not be a greater error than those persons committed, who in their zeal allowed themselves to be led into exaggeration; it was a mode of diminishing, the effect of their own claims, and not of increasing it, to exaggerate the consequences of any abuse. It was like an unskilful person employing a magnifying glass, which might be so used as to diminish, instead of enlarging. There was, however, an undeniable truth in the arguments by which the objections to those laws were supported, and in the proposition, that the best interests of society required their total repeal. In that opinion, as be had already said, he entirely concurred. The noble and learned Lord presented the petition.

WOOLLEN MANUFACTURES-CORN-LAWS.
The Marquis of Lansdownerose to present the petition of which he gave notice yesterday. The petition he was about to present, was from a body so respectable in their character and position in society, and at the same time so deeply interested in the present state of the commerce of this country,—unfortunate state, be was afraid he must call it—that certainly they had had peculiar reason for applying their most anxious consideration to that particular position, and for bringing their views upon that subject before their Lordships, The parties to this petition were the master woollen manufacturers of the West of England, chiefly situate in the counties of Gloucester, Somerset, and Wilts. Towards the close of last year, business in all those counties getting daily worse, upon a communication between the master manufacturers it was agreed that a conference should take place for the purpose of throwing light upon the subject, and ascertaining the opinions of the general body in that part of the country. A meeting was accordingly held at Bath, and, after exchanging communications, they came to certain resolutions, which were embodied in this petition. The petitioners in the first place, stated, that it was their opinion that there was a gradual decline in the woollen trade, which was fearfully destroying capital, neutralizing skill, and pauperising the working classes
134
of society. They then proceeded to state that the evils they deplored were, in their opinion, principally, if not entirely, occasioned by partial legislation, founded on the principle of protection, and more especially by the unjust and oppressive effect of the corn and provision laws; and thirdly, they declared it to be their opinion that all restrictive and prohibitory duties interfering with the free exchange of commodities, and not levied solely for the purpose of revenue, were, in principle, erroneous and unjust, and in their effects prejudicial to all classes of the community; and they conclude by praying, and by stating it as their desire, that all duties intended for the British manufactures, should also be repealed. Upon each of these points, he should offer a very few observations. With respect to the first proposition, he was afraid it was one which admitted of no doubt; namely, the decline of the woollen trade. There had been, perhaps, too much declamation and loose assertion upon the subject of distress, true and unquestionable as it was, that it prevailed among the manufacturing population of this country. But, although he should not dwell upon any such general statement, and general declamation, it was as well to have recourse to facts which could be proved. Without troubling their Lordships with any details at length, he might state, with regard to that manufacture to which this petition alluded, that the following had been the state of it in some of the principal places in the West of England. In Bradford, there were, in the year 1820, nineteen master manufacturers, producing 620 pieces of cloth per week; in the last year, these nineteen had diminished to two, and the quantity of pieces produced was reduced to 100. Of the nineteen masters, nine had failed, five had declined business for want of success, three had gone into other establishments, and there remained two only. Unquestionably Bradford was, from its local circumstances, one of the places affected by the greatest suffering, but suffering was by no means confined to that place—it extended, in a greater or less degree, to all the towns engaged in the woollen manufacture. In Trowbridge, one-third only of the looms were now employed. In Frome, which was one of the principal towns in Somersetshire, and might be taken as a fair representative of the state of trade in that county, twenty years ago there were twenty-eight woollen manufactories; now

135
only fifteen were employed, and these not wholly, five were only occasionally employed, five were entirely shut up, and three were converted to other purposes; and, from having altogether fifty establishments of cloth and kerseymere manufactures, making 300 pieces per week, there were now only fourteen establishments, making 150 pieces per week. So much for Somersetshire. As to Gloucestershire, it appeared from the reports the petitioners had been able to collect, that ten years ago there were 133 mills at work, but there were now seventy-seven only. In the year 1831 there were in Gloucester 1,083 looms at work, and now only 430; while in the county generally, in 1831, there were 3,200 looms, and now 1,530. He would not trouble their Lordships with details. He was sure he had stated enough to prove to their Lordships the rapid decline of the woollen manufacture; and that which must follow such a decline was, the increased misery of the people, increased Poor-rates, and a diminished consumption of agricultural produce in the neighbourhood of those towns. He had heard it said, and he had been led more to entertain that opinion himself than was perhaps justifiable on former occasions, that there was a disposition in the trade to quit that part of the country, and to take refuge, or rather to establish itself, in other and distant, and particularly in the more northern parts of England. But, upon a communication with these gentlemen, they stated to him (the Marquess of Lansdowne) that they acknowledge no ground whatever for trade removing itself from that district to another, they had advantages nearly similar of fuel and water carriage, and they appealed to that to which, unfortunately, they might appeal with great justice and confidence—to the fact that in the north of England, and even in Scotland itself, the same distress, and the same decline of trade prevailed. The petitioners proceeded to inform their Lordships that, upon consideration, they were of opinion, that the state of the Corn-law, if not wholly, was the principal cause of that decline. He, for one, was not prepared to state, that he considered the Corn-law as the sole cause of the decline of trade. He, perhaps, might not be disposed even to think that it was a cause to the same overwhelming degree that these petitioners considered it to be; but of this he was well convinced, that if there
136
were other causes at work operating that declination, the state of the Corn-laws was that which interfered with all the natural remedies for a declining trade, and that the vis medicatrix which existed in all trades, and which was inherent in commerce, was by those laws deprived of its power, force, and efficiency, at the moment when that efficiency was most required. The petitioners stated to him a fact so strong, so simple, and so strikingly illustrative of this view of the subject, that he was induced to mention it to their Lordships. Some of the principal of these manufacturing establishments had consigned a considerable quantity of cloth to the United States. They sent these consignments upon limited credit, to be paid for at a fixed time, When that time arrived, the disorder of the monetary system in the United States was such, that it was impossible for the parties to effect a money payment, and the agents informed these gentlemen that the consignees could not give money for the goods, but they could procure and send corn. But such was the state of the Corn-law, such was the state of the averages at that time, and such the uncertainty which prevailed in the corn-trade, it was impossible for these persons to venture to take the corn, or to feel any sort of confidence that the corn, if taken, could be advantageously disposed of, and from that circumstance, the distress which prevailed was aggravated, and pauperism was increased. And such was the case among the 70,000 or 80,000 persons who were dependent upon these petitioners. It had been said, that one cause of the decline of trade in the West of England was the withdrawal of the orders by the East-India Company; but the article purchased by the East-India Company was principally manufactured in Devonshire; whereas this petition referred to the declining state of trade in the west of England generally, and was not confined to the particular species of manufacture which the East India Company used to buy. The third proposition which the petitioners took up certainly was one calculated to attract the attention of their Lordships. It was, perhaps, the first time—certainly it was a very remarkable and rare occurrence, as compared with petitions from manufacturers of former periods—that a body of manufacturers should petition their Lordships to repeal all prohibitory duties and all monopoly protections which were not intended to be

137
levied for the purposes of revenue. This might, at least, be allowed to be a striking and unanswerable proof of the deep confidence which they felt in the truth of the allegations which they made. He trusted, indeed, that if any change was to take place in the law upon this subject. It would not be confined to the Corn-law, for the felt that the landed interest of this country, if a change did take place in that law, would be most cruelly and unjustly treated if they were not relieved from any monopoly in other quarters, from which they suffered, and if the great and abundant supplies which the markets of the world furnished were not left open to them, at a time when they were called upon, and justly called upon, to give up their own monopoly. It gave him great satisfaction that this petition, expressing the sentiments of these manufacturers, who were so deeply interested in the welfare of trade, was presented at a more auspicious moment than it could have been a short time ago. He perceived symptoms that the Corn-laws were about to follow the fate of the laws formerly affecting the woollen trade. Some people who once had held and vaunted the opinion that the Corn-laws were the bulwark of their prosperity, were now beginning to come round to the notion that they were not so absolutely indispensable; while others thought that almost any alteration of them would be for the benefit of the community. Some openly and avowedly held this doctrine, and others were silently giving way and abandoning a system to which they had long obstinately adhered. To what extent the intended alterations might go, he was not prepared to say, and future opportunities would occur for discussing the subject. Whatever duty might be allowed to remain, the petitioners hoped that if any it would be a fixed duty in order to avoid injurious fluctuations. The petition had been agreed to at a meeting of the manufacturers of Gloucester, Wilts, and Somersetshire, and only one or two persons dissented from its prayer.
On the question that the petition do lie upon the table,
Lord Broughamagreed that it was rare for persons engaged in manufactures to petition against anything like protecting duties; but there was one remarkable exception, and that was when he (Lord Brougham) laid upon the table a petition from persons authorised by all the great manufacturing bodies in the kingdom. They prayed the repeal of every duty
138
levied under the pretence of protection. He perceived from the petition just presented that the petitioners were not in favour of a fixed duty on corn.
The Marquess of Lansdowneobserved that the petitioners were opposed to any duty on corn but what might be necessary as a measure of revenue.
Lord Broughamsaid, that in that case the petitioners were for a direct bread-tax—a tax on bread for the sake of the revenue; on that point he was utterly at variance with them.
The Marquess of Lansdowneadded, that the petitioners were for only such a duty on corn as was necessary for the purposes of revenue. They felt that the trade in corn ought not to be exempted from burdens to which other trades were liable.
Lord Broughamremarked, that though the petitioners did not call it a bread-tax, it was such, in fact, if preserved only for the sake of the revenue.
The Marquess of Lansdownesaid, that they did not wish for any such duty, but that they were willing to submit to it.
Lord Ashburtonremarked, that the subjects introduced by the noble Marquess were so important that it was impossible to discuss them with all the advantage that became them on the mere presentation of a petition. The question of free trade (continued the noble Lord), the question whether any portion of the distress was owing to the Corn-laws, in part, as described by the petitioners; and the question whether any portion of it sprung from some derangement in the monetary system, would, each of them, probably be sufficient for the discussion of an evening. He could not, however, hear such statements as those made by the petitioners without entering his protest against the conclusions to which they had come. He entertained no doubt whatever of the existence of great distress prevailing among the woollen manufacturers; he had no doubt that it was severe among that class of persons; but he doubted whether there was not some exaggeration in the statement that the number of looms which had been employed in the particular district, being 3,000, had fallen off to 1,500, that being about one-half. If this were, however, so, it was pretty clear that such a declension must be owing to something more than the petitioners had described. There must be, he was induced to believe, something in the local position of those manufactories which placed them in a disadvantageous position. The decline,

139
too, had not taken place suddenly, but somewhat gradually; and it was the nature of manufactures to undergo a change. It had been well observed on a former occasion by a noble Viscount opposite, when distress was complained of as applying to a particular body of manufacturers—the noble Viscount said it was the penalty which was frequently paid for that species of wealth. It was the common course of things that one manufacturer in one place drove out another manufacturer in another. One district often superseded another in manufactures. Their Lordships heard of the distress of the manufacturing population one day, and the distress of the agricultural population another. He must protest, therefore, against the principle of one body of petitioners suggesting a remedy for their own relief, at the expense of other portions of the community. This was a species of doctrine to which he strongly objected, and he would urge their Lordships not to yield to it. As a general principle, change per se in the making of laws was a great evil. In saying this, however, he did not mean to say, that no change should take place; but then he would assert that no change in the laws affecting the interest of the great body of the people ought to be made, except under the conviction that such change was most desirable, and was a change for the better. The legislature ought not to be called upon to interfere to alter or vary the laws on light grounds, or because a partial evil existed, or because one branch of commerce was in a declining state. There was a good deal of fallacy often mixed up in these matters. One instance of a false conclusion the petitioners had fallen into he begged to remind their lordships of. It had been suggested as a remedy by the petitioners, that were the Corn-laws abolished they would be benefited in that way. It was stated, that owing to some derangement in the monetary system in the United States of America, and such a derangement no doubt had existed, the manufacturer in England would not be paid for the goods which he had sent thither. But, the correspondent added, that if there were a free trade in corn he would pay that way by sending corn instead of money. How was this to be accomplished he begged to inquire? Most likely the party who had made that assertion was engaged in the woollen trade in New York, or some other city, and of course he was not a dealer in corn. He must have his corn to
140
buy, and, consequently, must pay for it in money. Now with that same money he might have paid for the manufactured goods. Surely, he might have remitted it to England. He must say he was surprised to find his noble Friend was to be deceived by a fallacy like this. He objected to discussions on such matters taking place night after night, because he was persuaded that they were calculated to mislead the country. He could not, however, hear such opinions as those broached by the petitioners without protesting against them. As regarded himself, their Lordships would not be troubled with any observations of his for some time to come. The petitioners seemed to think that the millennium of free trade was about to take place, but they would be disappointed. If the principles of free trade were, however, to be acted upon by all the world, he should be among the first to hail such a prospect. But this was far from being the case; for every year some exclusive system was brought to light as being acted upon, injurious to our commerce, by different countries. Indeed, scarcely a week passed but some part of the world displayed a determination to act upon the restrictive and condemned principles; therefore it was, that he denounced such notions as he had just adverted to. The principle against which he had entered his protest was this, that distress experienced in any one branch of trade, or even in agriculture itself, however important that interest, or however great the number of persons whose labour was absorbed in that pursuit, was no reason, and should be no reason, to induce the Ministry of the period to propose, or the Legislature to adopt, propositions which would upset and shake the whole commercial system of the nation.
Petition laid on the Table.

CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN MADRAS.
Lord Cliffordrose to beg their Lordships to postpone till after the Easter recess a motion of which he had given notice to the House, on the 1st of October last, for the appointment of a Committee to inquire how far it was in the power of the Government and Council of Madras to afford protection to natives of this country and Hindostan, and to hear evidence on the subject, and report it to the House. The reason why he thought it necessary to bring that motion forward was, that the Governor-general of India bad asked for the fullest information on every point to

141
which he had referred, when speaking upon that subject on a former occasion. He understood, that a report had been sent to the presidency of Madras, stating what had taken place in that House, on the 23rd of September. His speech on that occasion lasted upwards of an hour, but did not occupy more than twenty lines of the columns of the newspapers. He had, therefore, thought it necessary to make a protest in the papers as to the report which had appeared on the 24th, relative to what he had said on the 23rd. If any of the reports which appeared in the public papers of the 24th, had been forwarded to India, those reports were only calculated to promote confusion: and the question on which he had addressed their Lordships was one of so great consequence, that it was absolutely necessary, that false reports should not go abroad. He would not now go further into the motion, which be wished their Lordships to postpone till after the recess, but would merely ask, whether any answer had been received at the Board of Control, with regard to the information which had been sent out relative to the correspondence between Lord William Bentinck and J. Manuel de Castro, the Governor of Goa? He was not disposed to condemn, upon such information as he had yet received on the subject, the conduct of Mr. Blackburn towards the Catholic subjects of Queen Victoria in Bengal, in refusing to allow them access to churches or chapels built with their own money and on their ground, except on the condition of assisting, in defiance of the prohibition of the head of the Catholic church, officially notified to them by their bishop, at divine service performed by clergymen who were not in communion with the see of Rome, on the ground, that in such conduct he was not borne out by the law of Madras, which did not recognize the decision of Sir Peter Grant, at Calcutta, that after the Order in Council of Lord William Bentinck, laid on the Table of the House, Oct. 4, 1841, no one could plead in court, as a Catholic priest, who was declared in court by the Catholic vicar apostolic, recognised by the Governor in Council, as sent by the Pope with the consent of the British Government to be superior of the Catholic missions in the Presidency, "with all the jurisdiction given him by the Pope," and admitted by the Governor in Council as beneficial to
142
the interests of England. This was the statement to which he had drawn the attention of their Lordships on the 23rd of September last, making a motion at the same time for the production of certain papers; some of those papers were laid on the Table; others it was declared could not be found at the India House, which was the case with nearly all the papers relating to the subject. He repeated his motion on the 4th of October, and notwithstanding this declaration, the papers were produced. He entreated their Lordships, between the present time and the Easter recess, to direct their attention, in some degree, to the subject, which he considered as one of immense importance to the peace of India, and one on which he thought it most material, that no false reports should go abroad. He had thought it right to protest against what he had been made to say in the public papers, though he did not think himself called on to state what he did say on that occasion. When the aggrieved parties came forward, as they intended to do with a petition and address to her Majesty, and not till then, he should bring his motion forward. He had expected, that the address and petition would, by this time, have arrived in this country, but circumstances had occurred to prevent it; he expected both the petition and the address, however, would reach this country by the Easter recess, when they would be presented in due form. He was not authorised to state the precise terms in which they were couched, but there was one particular about them, which had pleased him much. In the address to the Queen, it was expressly stated, that if on examination it should be found, that any injury had been done to any one, it was the petitioners' first request, that no vindictive measures might be taken on their account against the persons who might have aggrieved them. They asked for tranquillity and security for the future, and not for vengeance for the past, which they utterly disclaim. He concluded by asking the noble Lord, the President of the Board of Control, if he had received any further communication on the subject?
Lord Fitzgeraldwould confine himself to answering the question put to him by the noble Lord. Their Lordships would not expect, nor would the noble Lord expect, that he should make any observations relative to the speech which he had

143
addressed to their Lordships in September last, or in reference to any observations which he might make in respect of the committee to be moved for. He agreed with the noble Lord as to the importance of the subject, which, when it was brought forward, would, doubtless, receive that attention from their Lordships, which the noble Lord thought it entitled to. The noble Lord had yesterday mentioned to him, that he intended to ask a question on this subject, and he then told the noble Lord, that no answer had yet been received in reply to the inquiry made by Lord Ellenborough, at the period alluded to. He was not prepared to say, nor did he think, that any one was competent to give the information to the noble Lord, as to the nature of the inquiries directed to be made by Lord Ellenborough. Nor did he know how much or how little of the speech alluded to by the noble Lord had been communicated by Lord Ellenborough to the parties in India, to whom the interrogations were sent. This was what he had stated yesterday to the noble Lord; but to-day he observed in the mail that had been received from India, a private communication to Lord Ellenborough from Lord Auckland, in which it was stated, that the information he could give on the subject, was generally imperfect, and not very satisfactory. As soon as he could make himself master of the question, he would lay the information, such as it was, before their Lordships, but he was afraid it was not so satisfactory as it might have been, had more time been allowed for inquiry.
Adjourned.