;Banta anb Vrottebings in Varliamtnt. THE INCOME-TAX.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, the debate on the Income-tax, in Committee of Ways and Means, was resumed.

Before going into Committee, Mr. HUME made a cautionary remark, that the subject to come before the House was the imposition of the Income- tax for one or for three years, and not the general merits of free trade. Mr. BANKES threw the blame of setting the example in digression on Sir Robert Peel. Sir Roaster PEEL transferred the blame to the Marquis of Granby and Mr. Newdegate; who had been the primary offenders. Mr. MACGREGOR, speaking from experience and opportunities which ought to enable him to supply practical conclusions, was convinced not only of the inequality and unpopularity of the tax, but also that its con- tinuance for three years would not answer the purposes of the Exchequer, or without other measures provide the necessary revenue. Mr. Alderman SIDNEY supported Mr. Hume's amendment. So did Mr. HEADLAY up to the close of his speech; when he acknowledged he could not refuse the tax for three years, on considerations of policy. Mr. Boos and Mr. E. B. ROCHE opposed the tax. The Government proposition was supported by Mr. Bros, Mr. LENNARD, Lord Danau...kreina, and Mr. HENLEY; the last objecting to do anything to produce a bankrupt exchequer.

Mr. Mowarr, having entered the House as a Liberal Member and one hoping to give a Liberal Government a hearty support, stated reasons for opposing their proposition.

The budget and the whole financial scheme of Ministers had been such that he not only would regret but would feel ashamed to be their advocate. He feared the Government were too aristocratic and too regardless of the middle classes is their sympathies. If not, why have they not proposed a probate dutyand legacy-duty on land? The transfer of other property by bequests subjects tween seventy and eighty millions' worth of property annually to duties; while land, which might in the same way afford two millions a year of revenue, renders not one farthing. The Crown lands and forests, too, are lying culpably worn_ proved, because the Government shuns any new or bold course. The plea for the renewal of the Income-tax in its present unjust form entirely failed. Be felt ashamed at the ineepeeity which is content with the one excuse for an increased expenditure of 600,0001. a year, that steam-ships of war have been adopted in place of sailing-Ships. Would any Minister have dared in past times to stick an item of 1,000,0001. for the Caffre war in the bill, as though it had been but for whitewashing the Houses of Parliament? He had lost all sympathy with such Ministers: he referred them to greater men for guidance—to Sir Robert Peel, to whom the commerce of the country is indebted for a remission of 7,000,0001. of taxation. No doubt the Income-tax is most inquisitorial and vexations; but it would be readily borne again if any honest attempt were made to redress or miti_ gate its inequalities. 'his tax should be brought under the notice of the House every year. ("Hear, hear!") Mr. HUDSON supported Mr. Hume's proposition, but upon grounds very different from those on which it was proposed. The Goyernment were not bold enough in carrying out their own measures. It they had persisted in the additional two per cent, he would have supported them. As they had abandoned that demand, he would pant them the tax but for one year, and in that way force on them the early revision of their measures, so as to equalize expenditure with revenue. It were better if they had now possessed a full exchequer, and had paid off a large amount of debt, than to have removed so much taxation. They must make up the deficit by returning to the old sys- tem, or by augmenting the Income-tax. Mr. Hudson had no objection to the latter course, and would Pike at the same time to have the Window-duty and Assessed Taxes removed. Ile by no means shared the gloomy views of some gen- tlemen: the legislation had of late been false, but the country has power to rise above its difficulties: still, a revision of the whole system of taxation is called for; and this would be hastened by the adoption of Mr. Home's proposal to renew the Income-tax for but one year. Mr. COBDEN refused once for all to reenter on a Free-trade discussion, until the purposeless ravings uttered on the subject were reduced to some tangible form and measures introduced based on contrary views. He put right a misapprehension that Mr. Hume had fallen under—indeed, his honourable friend was sometimes liable to misapprehension. (Laughter.) It was, that on obtaining a surplus we should dispense altogether with the Income- tax. This tax is the last his honourable friend would abandon on obtaining a surplus: indeed, under a fair system, he would grant even a ten per cent tax, to reduce other taxes. Mr. Cobden was convinced not only that the Income-tax must be perpetuated in order to diminish indirect taxation, but that object must be still further pursued by means of reduced expenditure. Imports must be facilitated, in order that the incidence of taxation on consumption be lessened. Justice to the working classes demands this. He bad estimated to some extent the character of the pressure which indirect taxation now throws on the con- sumption of the poor. While the House frets over its sevenpence in the pound, the poor are paying twice that number of shillings in the pound on the great staples of their consumption. The details show this. "For every 20s. the work- ing classes expend on tea, they pay 10s. of duty; for every 20s. they expend on sugar, they pay 6s. of duty; for every 20s. they expeitiled on coffee,, they pay es. of duty; on soap, 58.; on beer, 4.s.; on tobacco, 16s.; on spirits, 14a. of duty, on every 20s. they expended upon these articles. When you bear in mind that the working classes expend much more income on those articles than ,people of our class, you cannot but see that this amounts to an income-tax not of id. per pound, but sometimes of 12a., 15s., or 16s. per pound; while men of some thousands a year' expend a dust deal more in buying furniture, horses, carriages, books, and other things which pay comparatively little tax. And begs that in this country, where we derive so much revenue from articles which enter largely into the consumption of the workingclasses, you find, when trade is bad in Lanr.eshire or throughout the country, the Chancellor of the Exchequer reminding you that the state of the revenue has been affected by the state of trade. Both for the sake of trade, then, and in justice tb the people, you must diminish your ex- penditure, or increase the amount of your direct eaxation." Mr. Cobden would make the tax just in order to make it permanent. The question is, how can this be done? It is ridiculous to deny the broad demarcation between the incomes derived from trades and professions and those drawn from land. Take the case of a tradesman with 10,0001. of capital: he gets 5001. a year interest and 5001. more for his skill and industry. Is this man's 1,0001. a year to be mulcted in the same amount with 1,0001. a year derived from a real property ca- pital of 25,0001.? So with the cases of professional men, who literally live by the waste of their brains. The plain fair dealing of the country revolts at an equal levy on such aorta of property. Professional men and men of business put in mo- tion the wheels of the social system: it is their industry and enterprise that mainly give to realized property the value which it bears: to them, therefore, the State first owes sympathy and support. Every leading Member has admitted the injustice of the tax; yet Government has neither taken any means nor shown any disposition to apply a remedy. Mr. Cobden even now urged an inquiry with this object. "Appoint a Commit- tee, and let there be upon it—what there is not in the Cabinet—an equal propor- tion of merchants, manufacturers, professional men, and landed proprietors or other possessors of realized property; and I engage that in less time than yon would take to fix the tariff of a railway company, to determine whether coal shall pay a penny a ton, lime three halfpence, and corn twopence, they will find a mode of adjusting the dtx upon equitable principles. ("Hear! ") But no attempt of that kind has been made, and no promise is held out that such an attempt will be made. it is the dry, pedantic adhesion to the letter of the law, which has roused the indignation of the country. If a distinction were made between permanent and precarious incomes—if a gradation of duty were established-1 undertake to say that you would have no remonstrances from the great manufacturing seats in the North."

Part of the debate seemed to assume that if the tax were not given for three years the revenue world fail: but this is a gratuitous assumption. Next Febru- ary, just as last month, the House can renew the tax if it think proper; mean- while, and long before twelve months have passed, if the House approved of the amendment before it, the Government would find means to render the tax accept- able to the whole people. The classes Mr. Cobden represents, who favour more direct taxation, would suffer far the most of any class by the catastrophe of a na- tional bankruptcy; but for this very reason, they press for substantial reductions of Government expenditure, and the introduction of the same prudence and eco- nomy which are necessary to success in manufacturing and commercial pursuits. Mr. Cobdeu concluded with a reference to affairs abroad. " I draw from that event very different conclusions from those which are generally received. I per- ceive in the events which have occurred in France reasons why the Government of this country should not depend on a numerical majority. of this House, but should endeavour by every means to make themselves acquainted with the oenti- malts of people. Take the division upon the motion of the honourable Member for Cockermouth. 1 ask the Government to analyze the division-list upon that occasion, and to see whether public opinion was not in the lobby with us who were in the minority. Ay, and it will be so tonight again. Do not depend upon your whippers-in and the votes of a chance medley majority. Take warning from what has happened elsewhere. Bear in mind that the danger which menaces this country is not from abroad; it is not from the want of fortifications and arma- ments, on which you are expending such vast sums: the danger is not from with- out, but within. I apprehend no disturbance here. We shall have no tumults in this country similar to those which have occurred in a neighbouring state. There would be no excuse, no justification for them. There is no necessity for tumults here; because the people enjoy all the rights and privileges of free discussion and of public meetings, the want of which caused the revolution in France. The

danger to be feared in this country arises from the state of this House—from the circumstance of a large number of its members being elected by a faction, in con- sequence of which their views are not in accordance with the prevailing feeling

and public opinion out of doors. The danger arises from this House not basing its legislation on those strict rules of justice and fair dealing which alone can secure the institutions of this or any other country."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL enlarged upon the various and opposing reasons which were combining to draw into the lobby the motley minority who supported Mr. Hume's amendment—

"It would be very amusing when those gentlemen meet in the lobby to bear the i conversation which is likely to take place between them as to the motives which have led them there. ("Hear!" and laughter.) We may imagine that one of them will say to his neighbour, ' I am happy to see you here, Sir, and to find that you are for making a great reduction in the Estimates.'—' I, Sir,' the person addressed will reply; I beg to inform you that I would rather increase than re- duce them by a single farthing: (Cheers and laughter.) Another gentleman would say to a friend, Lam glad to find that you are at length convinced of the necessity of putting an end to the system of free trade, and reverting to the taxes upon corn and cotton.' The friend, with a look of horror, will exclaim, Why, I am here to promote the principle of free trade; and I vote for Mr. Home's motion because it implies free trade.' (Laughter and cheers.) Mr. Hudson was anx- ious to support the credit of the country, and complained that the ways and means proposed were inefficient; and Mr. Cobden was willing to increase the tax to even ten per cent: thereupon they both will vote three per cent for but one year. (Laughter.) The question betore the House was simple. In the year when the tax was last proposed, and the following year, taxation was reduced 4,000,0001., and an addi- tion was made to the Navy Estimates: was it ever rationally supposed that if the revenue did not flourish the tax would be taken off at the end of three years, notwithstanding that a deficiency should have appeared by that time? In 1846 and 1847, food had been imported to supply the place of failing harvests, which required some 30,000,0001. to pay for it. Two commercial panics followed, and failures of the greatest and strongest houses in the country. It might be before • hand inferred that such circumstances would cause the revenue to flag. No one could expect that in five years of such times 5,000,0001. could be replaced.

Lord John admitted the inequality of the tax; the discussion of which he thought had already been disposed of. " Those who argue for rendering the tax fighter in its pressure take either a particular schedule of trades or professions, or a schedule of particular kinds of occupation, but they leave many cases of hard- ship and injustice more glaring than those they remedy; or, if they do not take that course, and attempt to go further, then they must go almost into the indi- vidual cases which were alluded to with so much force by the honourable and learned Member for Newcastle, such as rent-charges for life, leaseholds, money' in the Funds settled upon distant relations, and every species of kinds of woperg, tenure, and provision. But, in a country where tb,e transactions of society are so complicated and intricate, if you attempt to do that, you will not only find your- self engaged in a task of inextricable difficulty, but the tax will be far more inquisitorial than it has ever yet been, and thus, in the end, you will find that you have made the tax only half as productive, whilst you have rendered it twice as vexatious. The only fair line you can take is to treat all classes justly. Whether they have land, or whether they are engaged in trades or professions or whether they have money in the Funds, assess your tax as justly as you possibly can—(Ironwal cheers)—and never miarany question as to the merits of those who are engaged in trade or professions beyond those who are to be run down because they are the possessors of land. But the honourable gentleman says, it would have been some consolation if we had attempted to make this distinction. Why, Sir, I said on a former evening that my right honourable friend and myself had attempted to draw some line by which we could make the tax, according to the sense of this House, appear more just; but we could find no line which would not have been immediately attacked and invaded, and which would not have obliged us to leave other cases of still greater hardship. Of course, having Caine to that conclusion, we should have been deserting our duty to this House had we taken a different course. We stated our conviction to the House; and the honourable gentleman cannot say that we have not made every attempt to render the tax more fair."

Lord John dismissed the proposal of Lord George Bentinck to return to import- duties on corn and such staples of consumption, as a retrogression that no party could for a moment attempt in practice. There remained only the alternative of Mr. Hume, greatly to reduce the Esti- mates. To the question, is it possible to make such reduction in the Estimates proposed as to enable the House to dispense with the Income-tax after one year, Lord John gave a decidedly negative reply. The Government desired even an additional two per cent for two years; but this being refused, they could not pos- sibly do without a guarantee of the present impost for three years to come, in order that the years 1849-1850 might cover any deficiency likely to arise. The Estimates were proposed at a time when everything appeared tranquil: even then, Lord John had refused to prophesy the events which a year might bring forth; much less would he now attempt to forecast the future. Observers had predicted, that when the reigning King of the French should die, or at some other indefinite but not near period, a revolution would arise. But no man alive expected that, within a few weeks, that monarchy, which appeared SO firm, should at once vanish and disappear like a mist, and that nothing should remain behind of what appeared so strong and powerful. He hoped that Europe was about to bind itself still more than ever in friendly and peaceable relations. "Still, no man can venture to say what the times may bring forth; and, for one, I will not consent to disarm England—for one, I will not consent to reduce the Estimates for the Army and Navy in the present state of Europe. (Loud cheer- ing.) I say again, that I may not be misrepresented, as I think I have been be- fore, that with every wish to see the peace of Europe and the peace of the world Preserved, and seeing nothing immediately before us which is calculated to en. danger that peace, it is but the part of wise and prudent men, while everything is uncertain not to affect security, and while there is darkness around not to pre- tend that we are walking in broad daylight." In view of all these circumstances, he would not consent to take the Income-tax for one year, either that taxes on corn and cotton might be reimposed, or that large and permanent reductions be made in our.naval and military forces.

Lord John alluded to some loose remarks that had been dropped on the ques- tionable value of colonies. " Some gentlemen proposed that our Colonies should be reduced in number, and some of them abandoned. I shall only now beg honourable gentlemen not to make up their minds on that question without very serious consideration. I, for my own part, have always considered our Colonies

as a part of the strength of this empire. (Loud cheers.) I may be mistaken in that view; but if they are part of the strength of this empire, then I say, I am not the person who would be willing, by reason of any notions of economy and retrenchment, to reduce any part of that strength. (Cheers.) If it be the choioe of England to descend lower in the scale among nations—to say she has been too long powerful, that she wishes no longer to influence the destinies of the world, that she will be contented with a humbler part,—then it is for this country to say so; it is for this country to carry those words into effect. Only let me not be the instrument—(Great cheering)—let me not, I say, be the instrument for carrying into effect that which I should think to be the degradation of the country, her pride and glory." (Loud and continued cheering.) It is doubtless the peculiar task of the Government to go through the taxes with the view of adjusting them to the least burdensome pressure; but such a work could not be done in a session, nor in the one year for which the tax was now proposed by Mr. Hume's amendment. A complete review and adjustment of the Stamp-duties alone would form work for a whole session, such is the complication of that subject. Therefore, to pledge himself to a review of the whole system of the taxation, and the production of a new scheme cut and dried by next Febru- ary, would be the extreme of rashness. hi the absence of any other plan likely to receive the assent of the House, to refuse assent to the Government proposal would certainly be to injure the public welfare by endangering its credit.

Lord John concluded by referring to two difficulties which Ministers had been called to grapple with, and which none could trace to an ignorant management of public affairs,—the total failure of the food of five millions of the people; and the raging of murderous conspiracy and assassination throughout Ireland. (" Hear, hear!") The latter evil had been met partly by a new and stringent law, and partly by the administrative abilities of the Lord-Lieutenant. (Cheers.) Lord Clarendon had been accused of gagging the people. " I should have thought," said Lord John, "that if any man had looked at the Irish newspapers, he might have seen—so far from gagging the people,' so for from preventing the free ex- pression of the public voice—that treason was never openly professed with such audacity." (Loud cries of " Hear, hear! ") Lord John finished with this de claration—" If power is to remain in our hands; if my right honourable friend near me, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and the Lord-Lieute- nant of Ireland, are still to wield the powers of the law in Ireland; I trust that we shall be able to meet those expressions of sedition—those determinations to join any enemy, whoever he may be that may be opposed to the Sovereign of these countries—(3frich cheering)—that we shall be able to put down those con- spiracies—(Renewed cheers)—aud to maintain, for the welfare of the people of Ireland, that supremacy of law and order without which they cannot hope to im- prove in industry, in civilisation' in morals, or in religion. (Great cheering for some time, and from all parts of the House.) Sir, such at least will be our at- tempt. We are not blind to the difficulties of the situation in which we stand. We are not unaware of the perils which may surround us on every side. If we have the confidence of this House, we may hope to meet and to surmount them. (Cheers.) If we are not honoured with that confidence, we can only hope that the administration of affairs may be placed in other hands better calculated to carry on those affairs to the welfare and prosperity. of her Majesty and her demi- mons." (Lord John sat down amidst much cheering.) Mr. WAHLEY warned Lord John, that he had received cheers from the " Tory " side of the House, while his own side had been ominously silent. The Tories knew that he was pursuing the road to ruin and rejoiced accord- ingly. Whatever the House itself might think, he assured it that the opinion out of doors was a growing one, that Parliament is indifferent to the sufferings of the people. The public asks for economy, and will have it. Look at the example of one of the first countries in Europe: the stipend of its Ambassador has been re- duced from 15,0001. to 4001. a year. Mr. Wakley continued to enforce these views, till compelled to resume his seat by what he termed "the unpleasant and asinine noises" with which "young Members just out of leading strings," and old ones impatient for a division, assailed him. Mr. Minuz still obtained a short hearing, and stated his support of Mr. Hume's amendment. Colonel SIBTIIORP, Mr. GEORGE Ttioursori, and Mr. PEARSON, followed on the same side; but at last the impatient House forced a division. Mr. Hume's amendment was negatived by 363 votes against 138—that is, by a majority of 225. The House theareamned, and soon afterwards adjourned.

MEDICAL RELIEF FOR PAUPERS.

On Thursday, Lord ASHLEY brought forward seven resolutions on the subject of medical relief for the poor; which in effect made these pro- visions-

1. That every pregnant woman should be entitled to medical attendance, on her first confinement at all events, and on all subsequent confinements if the medical attendant during her first time shall certify that her case was peculiar and that she will require attendance. 2. In serious cases, the union surgeon to have the power of calling in the aid of a competent brother practitioner; who should be paid. 3. Medical inspectors to be appointed, at salaries of 6001. a year, with extras, who should inspect and regulate the medical treatment of the poor, the diet and sanatory condition of the union houses, and the salaries of the union medical officers.

4. That the medical officers of unions shoud after March next be irremoveable except by the Poor-law Commissioners. 5 Union medical and surgical practice to be restricted to practitioners duly qualified by the recognized medical corporations. 6. The medical officer of each union to be furnished with a list of the poor entitled to his attendance; and be bound to attend those contained in it, on their application, for twenty-four hours without special order. 7. Casual poor to be treated in the same way.

Lord Ashley stated that these resolutions were founded on the evidence taken before the Committee in 1844. The pressure of business had preventeddue con- sideration of the evidence in 1845, and Lord Ashley was absent from Parliament in 1846 and-1447. If medical relief be administered at all, it. should be efficient; but the general feeling of the country is that the administration of medical relief is at present on the worst possible footing. He held the first resolution to be the most important of the seven; and went into painful details to prove the cruel de- fects of the present system. ,Persons are sometimes employed of such ignorance that the most shocking mutilations, tied even permanent injuries, had resulted from their acts. Lord Ashley was checked in stating these details by the repug- nance of the House; and in deference to that feeling he desisted. A medical officer cannot secure remuneration for his attendance, unless it be given on order by the Board of Guardians or the applicant be on the list of paupers; and if her husband gains a miserable six or seven shillings a week, the order is withheld. Lord Ashley combated the notion that immorality would be increased by his pro- position: the greatest care should be exercised lest in avoiding encouragement to one species of immorality another of a far more heinous nature might not be in- creased—infanticide. Mr. CHARLES BULLER felt aggrieved that these resolutions had been proposed without any notice of what had been done by the l'oor-law Commissioners since the sitting of the Committee of 1844.

The resolutions proposed to rectify some deficiencies and abuses which had been already for more effectually rectified. It is impossible, through the Poor-law to give relief upon any general system more satisfactory than the present. If a larger, a more complete system be wished for, it cannot be administered by local

agency or on the payment of local fonds, but must be based on some system of central administration and draw support from the national funds. The House should consider how immense an improvement there had been in the administra- tion of relief. The augmentation of the sums paid is proof that the economy which has ruled over Poor-law administration has never been at the expense of the suffering sick. In 1838, the estimated population of England and Wales was 15,155,000, and the sum laid out in medical poor-relief was 136,7751.; in 1846, the population was 16,851,000, and the awn poor-relief increased to 175.1901., or in the increasedproportion of one-sixth of the first sum. The system of extra nourish- ment, in fact, first arose under the new law. In regard to salaries of medical officers, some improvements might still be made. The salaries are insufficient: there is great difficulty in laying down any general system on this subject. There are great abuses in the payments by fees, and in the dispeneing of drags: but remedies are difficult; and Mr. Buller had no plan in which he felt sufficient confidence to make it the ground of a general order. Again, with regard to cases of illness, the discretion of the relieving-officer should be narrowed to the smallest limits. The beat administration would confide to the medical officer the discre- tion of attending or not any sick applicant, on his own responsibility, subject to approval at the next meeting of the Board of Guardians. On all these difficult points Mr. Buller would thankfully receive suggestions.

He objected to the resolution proposed by Lord Ashley, on the ground of its undiscriminating charity: it was an open offer of medical relief to every woman in the pariah, married or unmarried. Now, medical relief in these particular cam has at least the peculiarity that it is never needed without previous notice. A general order is already in existence, which directs attendance in cases of diffi- culty without a relieving-officer's order, subject only to the determination of the Board that the person attended was in a destitute condition. Now, who are fitter persons than the Guardians to have this power of protecting the expenditure of the rates/ How otherwise could better attendance be provided, on application for attendance, by the wife of the richest farmer in the parish? Mr. Bailer con- cluded by moving " the previous question."

Mr. WAKLEY supposed that Mr. Buller had got a complete sinecure in his office—the present system, the work of his predecessors, being so per- fect!

Bat nothing was farther from what it ought to be than the present system. Medical men are not only discontented, but exasperated, at the position they are placed in. Mr. Wakley undertook the task of detail which Lord Ashley's deli- cacy had declined, and supplied the House with horrifying information—women childbed lacerated and exenterated by ignorant or intoxicated midwives. The sick poor are not treated with the same care that sick criminals receive.

In reply to a question by Mr. WAKLEY, Mr. BULLER stated that he bad requested the opinions of the Poor-law Inspectors on the proposed first resolution: all of them but one had concurred in condemning the resolu- tion; Sir John Walsham, who saw no objection to the resolution, required a reasonable definition of the class of persons to be benefited.

The motion was supported by Captain PECHELL and Sir HARRY VER- NEY; opposed by Mr. HUME, Mr. HENLEY, Sir WILLLare CLAY, Lord EB- RINGTON, and Mr. ADDERLEY. On a division, Mr. Buller's amendment was carried by 50 to 37.

The second' resolution was withdrawn; Mr. BULLER promising to act in the spirit of it. Lord ASHLEY having relived the third resolution, Mr. BULLER again moved " the previous question "; objecting to the plan on the score of ex- pense and interference with local control: but he promised to direct his attention' to the subject of medical inspection. If necessary, a medical inspector should be appointed. After a debate very similar to the fore- going, the previous question was carried by 101 to 19. The debate on the fourth resolutions-bad. a similar issue: the previous question was carried by 98 to 36.

The three remaining resolutions were withdrawn.

DEATH PUNISHMENT.

On Tuesday, Mr. EWART brought forward his annual motion for leave tie bring in a bill for the total abolition of punishment by death, Mr. wart ably retraced the usual arguments ant facts in support of his propoe salon.

A debate arose, and was carried lo a oonsiderable length. The motion VAS supported by Mr. OSBORNE, Mr. LENNARD, Alderman SIDNEY Lord NUGENT, Mr. HUME, Mr. BRIGHT, Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON, Mr: Pasant:re O'CoNtuaa, Mr. BROTHERTON, and Mr. MITNTZ. It was opposed generally by Sir GEORGE GREY, Sir CHARLES BURRELL, Sir ROBERT bunts, and Mr. DRUMMOND; and also by Mr. ROMILLT, Mr. WOOD, and Mr. NAPIER, in so far as it aimed at the punishment of death in all cases —they would support a bill to abolish capital punishment in all cases but .those in which it was protective of life. We select a few of the more sali- ent points in the debate. Sir GEORGE GREY thought that there might well be alteration and improve- ment of the present 1/09 ; indeed, he had a bill prepared on the subject; but It would not be wise to bring it in just at the present time. He would not abolish capital punishments in every case, for the very reason alleged to jus- tify the contrary course—his high estimate of the sanctity of human life. He thought that life would be violated to a far greater degree than now on removal of the restraints of this punishment. Sir George cited the statistics of crime du- ring the years preceding and following the great changes made in the criminal code in 1837 and 1841; and from the results, which appeared to tell against the changes as regards the prevention of crime, he drew a caution against any sup- position that if the punishment of death were abolished in cases of murder there would be no increase of the crime.

Lord Nuclear supplied another inference to that drawn by Sir George Grey from the apparent increase of commitments and convictions which had followed ameliorations of the code: the explanation is, that when capital punishment was repealed, attornies no longer advised prosecutors to select the lesser offence as more sure of conviction. Moreover, the attempts at murder have increased though the punishment of death has been retained. The statistical increases are there- fore fallacious in some latent point. The law should be mild in its punishments, but inexorable in its administration: under the present system, the law is san- guinary, but the administration is overruled by the mercy of the Crown. The principle of gambling ought to be taken out of the administration of so grave a law, and the culprit cut off from the universal tendency of the public to sympa- thize with him. Lord Nugent reminded those Members who would take away life, that the onus probandi rests on them to demonstrate that no other punish- ment would be efficacious. He dwelt on the grim truth, that by the present practice en irrevocable pnnishment is put into the hands of a fallible tri- bunal. Before Sir James Mackintosh's Committee, it was proved that one inno- cent person had perished every three years: in the last fifty years, forty-one per- sons have perished whose innocence has afterwards been proved. That vengeance belongeth to God only, is of high import to this argument; for vengeance should be arrogated by no tribunal whose decision could either be questioned or with- stood.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS still believed, that God had not repealed that law which he gave to his own peculiar people, " Whoso sheddeth mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed"; the reason assigned being, "for in the image of God created

he him." There is no doctrine of prevention of crime or of reformation of criminals in the Scriptures; but only is it said that the shedding of man's blood requires the shedding of the shedder's blood in expiation.

Mr. HUME gave the result of his experience in every part of the world he had been to—wherever the authorities hold life cheap, it is held cheap by the people also. One murder frequently leads to others; so men and women by seeing executions have violence and murder put into their breasts. Mr. BRIGHT quoted a letter from a brother-in-law of the unhappy soldier who had been shot in the Park. After alluding to a meeting Mr. Bright had attended, at which a resolution for mitigating the sentence of the condemned was the writer went onto say—" However much we may deplore the melancholy catas. tro he which has cast a gloom over so many families, yet we can deeply viz. pathize with the perpetrator of the awful tragedy, when we take into consideration the extenuating circumstances connected with it. I have corresponded with various members of the family on the subject, and find a strong and earnest desire to second the endeavours you are making to mitigate the awful sentence. Should it be necessary to draw up a petition with the signatures of the bereaved parents, to be presented to Sir George Grey, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, I will immediately attend to it. Or if you think the above state- ment sufficient, I am authorized to say you are at liberty to use it to the heat advantage." Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR related one of his own experiences of the uncertainty of the law under its present heavy punishments. On one occasion he was men. eel for two men who were indicted for the murder of two soldiers near Cork. Begging pardon of the Attorney-General, he was going to show the horrors of the profession to which he belonged—the extent to which professional vanity would carry a man, snaking him forget moral obligations, be guilty of dishonesty, pros. titute his talents to unworthy purposes for the purpose of gaining a professional triumph. Two other men were indicted for the same offence. Having said to Mr. Freeman, their counsel, when that gentleman was cross-examining a witness, "I think I could point out a way to save your clients," Mr. Freeman responded, "Mind your business, and I will mind mine." The two men for whom he ap- peared were acquitted; the other two were convicted. He succeeded in proving that two really guilty men were innocent; and two innocent men were found guilty. (The Attorney-General intimated dissent.) The honourable gentleman shook his head. The circumstances occurred in 1834: they were represented to the Lord-Lieutenant, and the men were pardoned; and he believed, on inquiry, his statement would be found to be strictly accurate.

Mr. ROXILLY would take life only ou the absolute commission of murder, in order to establish the same standard among the people.

Mr. Ewear replied, and the House divided: the motion was negatived, by 122 votes against 66.

HARWICH ELECTION.

On Tuesday, Mr. Minna moved the issue of a new writ for the election of a Member for Harwich, in the room of Mr. John Attwood, who had been unseated on petition.

Mr. BLACKSTONE opposed the motion. Harwich was one of the five boroughs the corrupt practices in which had been the subject of inquiry by Mr. Roebuck's Committee in 1842. The electors were 182 in number. The sum expended by Mr. Attwood for the return of himself and Major Beresford had been 6,3001.; of which 3,0001. had been divided in bribes between thirty-three persons. Sir Denis le Merchant had spent 1,5001. on the election, 5001. of it improperly; and Mr. Bagshawe the sum of 5001. The greater part of the constituency were bribed. Mr. Blackstone read extracts from the evi- dence before the Committee. Among other statements then made, was one by Mr. Bagahawe, that there were more persons from Harwich employed in Govern- ment situations than polled at the election. This was doubtless the secret of the difference of cost to Sir Denis le Merchant and Mr. Attwood. Mr. Blackstone, however, would not prejudge the case; but, with the object of delaying a new election till the evidence had come before the House, he moved that the writ be not issued before the 10th of April next. He also moved that the minutes of proceedings before the Harwich Committee be laid on the table. Sir GEORGE GREY advised the suspension of the proceedings till the Committee's report had got into the hands of Members, and its nature had become known.

Oe this understanding the matter dropped for thq time.

On Wednesday, the subject was resumed; Mr. &Lona repeated his mo- tion for the issue of the writ, as the report was now- in the hands of Mem- bers.

Mr. BLACKSTONE renewed his opposition; on the ground that, in so gross a case, the House should have the evidence which the Committee had beard, as well as their report.

Sir GEORGE GREY supported the motion for a new writ. The report stated that but one man had been clearly bribed at the last election, though numbers more had received sums which it was not possible to trace to the agency of any candidate. The report made no suggestions on the ground of extensive or systematic bribery, and there was therefore no occasion to proceed in the direction of disfranchising the borough. The debate was animated, but desultory. Several Members on both sides of the House supported the delay of the writ—Lord PALmaneron among them: few supported the immediate issue. Mr. ELmor, one of the Committee—afterwards corroborated by Mr. STUART WoRTLEY—averred that a full and searching inquiry had been made. The very general alle- gations of the petitioners had failed. There had nothing come before the Committee which of itself would justify disfranchisement.

Mr. ROCHE said, if the borough were disfranchised, he should put in a claim for Ireland. (Great laughter, and cries of "Kinsale! ") It was no laughing matter. Corrupt government had smothered the voice of the peo- ple in France, and produced the revolution. At one time the discussion became personal. Mr. MoWaTT accused Sir George Grey of sanctioning corruption. Sir GEORGE GREY threw him- self upon the Hones. The House had anticipated his appeal by loud signs of dissent; and Mr. Mowsrr retracted. Eventually Mr. Blackstone's motion was adopted.

GLoticasren ELECTION. The petition referred to a Select Committee of the House of Commons for inquiring into the conduct of Lord Fitzhardiuge in the late Gloucester election has dropped. The Committee gave a delay for the production of more specific charges than were at first brought before it. None having been brought, the Committee resolved, that no case was made for inquiry ; and that it is inexpedient to proceed further in the matter. Their report to Lis effect was printed on Saturday last. ELECTION RECOGNIZANCES Bn.L. On Wednesday, Mr. WALPOLE moved the second reading of the Election Recognizances Bill. A discovery has been made that the recognizances entered into by the petitioners against several returns in the last election are of a questionable validity, owing to the mistake of some officer of the House. Mr. Walpede's measure, based upon the recommendation of a Com- mittee, proposed, on the one hand, that the petitions should not be capable of prosecution till valid security for costs and a boml fide prosecution were green; and on the other, that the petitioners whose recognizances have been found de- fective should be empowered to eater into fresh ones of a valid description. Mr. spooNwn opposed the bill; and moved as an amendment, that the petitions against returns in the cases of Bodmin, Cheltenham, Leicester Walsall, Dublin, and the county of Longford, be discharged, and no further proceedings taken in them The discussion was divided by every shade of opinion; but ultimately, both the motion and amendment fell to the ground ; the Ilousestanding adjourned at six o'clock, in the midst of divisions. RAILWAY LEGISLATION. On Tuesday, Mr. STRI-IT brought up the first re- port from the Select Committee on Railway Bills, and moved certain resolutions which the Committee recommended as all that was at present necessary in the way of railway legislation. These resolutions propose that no bills in future shall reeed unless on two conditions,—that the standing orders of the Select Commit- tee on Railway Bills have been complied with; and farther, that the Committee have approved both the bon& fide character of the subscription contract and the sufficiency of the subscribers to it. The House agreed to the motion. Prrry BAG OFFICE. On Tuesday, Mr. ROMILLY obtained leave to bring in a bill for abolishing certain offices in the Petty Bag in the Court of Chancery, and for regulating the Petty Bag Office. His object was, to put an end to certain sinecure offices, and to remunerate the sole and single clerk by whom he proposed that the entire business of that office was to be carried on. He also proposed to put an end to certain privileges enjoyed by the persons employed in that office: The measure was sanctioned by the Master of the Rolls. MR. O'CONNOR'S LAND COMPANY. On Thursday, Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR obtained leave to bring in a bill to alter the Friendly Societies Act (9 and 10 Victoria, c. 27); the object being to legalize his system of proprietary allotments for the working classes. Sir GEORGE GREY observed that he had derived no distinct notion of the plan from Mr. O'Connor's explanation. The Attorney-Ge- neral had objected to the plan, that it was illegal as involving a lottery. However, Sir George permitted the bill to be introduced. AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS. In reply to Mr. SANDARS, on Tuesday, Mr. LanoticititaE stated, that last session he prepared a measure on this subject: this session, however, the Chancellor of the Exchequer objects to the expense of the scheme, 30,0001. or 40,0001.; it is therefore postponed. LIABILITY OF THE HUNDRED. With reference to the damage lately done by mobs, Sir Wrr isell CLAY inquired of the Attorney-General, whether the per- sons who had suffered by those outrages had any claim for compensation upon the county, or upon any other parties; and if so, he wanted to know what the nature of that claim was? Sir JOHN JERVIS replied, that the law rests on the 7th and 8th of George IV. cap. 31, which gives a remedy against the hundred where a house, shop, or building, is feloniously demolished, pulled down, or de- stroyed, wholly or in part. The question which generally arises is., whether or not such " a beginning to demolish" has occurred as the statute intends; and this question is for the jury to determine. The statute does not apply to the case

i

of breaking shop-windows in the streets: the injury is too partial. The demoli- tion must be complete, or, where interruption has occurred, the intention to de- molish must be clear. Parties who have means are personally liable; and those whose poverty places them beneath civil remedy are still criminally responsible. THE LONDON COAL-WHIPPERS. On Monday, Mr. GLADSTONE alluded to the statement in the public papers that 2,000 of the coal-whippers of London had offered themselves to be sworn in as special constables and conservators of the publicpeace. He considered this gratifying occurrence to be in some measure a fruit of the legislative interference on behalf of that body in which the House of Commons assisted six years ago ; and was desirous that the House should pay a marked tribute of its approbation to such patriotic conduct Mr. LABOUCELERE confirmed this statement: some 2,500-whippers had offered their services • 300 of these offers had been accepted, and the number would be extended if need arose. Sir GEORGE GF.EY thought such manifestations to be most valuable elu- cidations of the recent attempts at disturbance. Throughout the kingdom the same feeling has shown itself, of firm determination in the operative classes to aid in the preservation of order and the protection of property against those whose only object is Vander. (Great cheering.) NORTH-WEST EXPEDITION. In reply to Sir ROBERT INGLIS, on Wednesday, Mr. Wenn gave sonic information on the subject of the Arctic Expedition. Be. feared there was too much cause for anxiety as to the present situation of Sir John Franklin's'expedition. Though its/left England .ip Jaly'1845, in the most perfect state of preparation, the ships were victualled only * three full years, which would expire in the summer of the, present year. Thei were accompanied by a transport, which was required to complete their ainramt of provisions for the period of three years. Three expeditions were now in course of preparation. The Plover departed early in February, for Beb,-"ig's Straits; there to be met by the PearL the two vessels were to enter ti :'6traits, were they would winter; and the boats of the Plover weretto sweep the whole coal Eastward. The expedition Which Dr. Rae woufd accompany-would descend the Mackehzie River with fifteen' sappers and eight or nine seamen in four boats stored _rah provisions. Sir dames Ross would sail early in May with Captain Bind-Cad the Enterprise and Investi- gator had been sent no Baffin's Bay with,provisions sufficient not only for them= selves but for Sir Jolts Franklin and his companions, should they be discovered. A reward was offered to the whale-ships, now beginning to sail from Hull, which should give intelligence on the subject, or afford assistance. Rewards of 100 guineas would 6e offered for information, and this amount would be increased ac- cording to the assistance which might be rendered. BRITISH AND PRUSSIAN ALLIA.NCE. Oa Tuesday, Mr. HINDLEY inquired whether it was true that a treaty offensive and defensive had been concluded be- tween Great Britain and Prussia? Lord PALMERSTON replied—" There is no troth whatever in the report. The only foundation I can imagine for it is, that the Prussian Government are determined to pursue in such a state of things as at present exists the same course of policy as the British Government,—namely, not

i

to interfere in any way whatever in the internal affairs of France; and to abstain from either saying or doing anything which could be interpreted as indicating any feelings of a hostile nature." (Great cheering.) CitraustAL APPEALS. In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, Lord CAMPBELL introduced a bill to establish a rightof appeal I n criminal cases upon any ques- tion of law that might arise during a trial at Quarter-Sessions, or before the Judges at the Assizes.