Debates anb glroutbings in liarlianunt.

STATE OF THE LABOURING CLASSES.

In the House or Commons, on Monday, Lord JOHN RUSSELL brought for- ward the resolutions of which he had iiriven notice some time ago, develop- ing their purpose in a long speech. 'I hese are the resolutions-- . I. That the present state of political tranquillity, and the recent revival of trade, afford to this House a favourable opportunity to consider of such measures as may tend permanently to improve the condition of the labouring classes.

2. That those laws which impose duties usually called protective tend to impair the efficiency of labour, to restrict the free interchange of commodities, and to impose on the people unnecessary taxation. 3. That the present Corn-law tends to check improvements In agriculture, produces uncertainty in all farming speculations, and holds out to the owners and occupiers of land prospects of special advantage which It fails to secure. 4. That this House will take the said laws into consideration, with a view to such cautious and deliberate arrangements as may be most beneficial to all classes of her Majesty's subjects.

5. That the freedom of industry would be protnoted by a carefhl revision of the taw of parochial settlement which now prevails in England and Wales.

"6. That a systematic plan of colonlzation would partially relieve those districts of the country where the deficiency of employment has been most Injurious to the la- bourers in husbandry.

"7. That the improvements made of late years in the education of the people, as well as its more general diffusion, have been seen with satisfaction by this House.

"8. That this House will be ready to give its support to measures, tbunded on liberal and comprehensive principles, which may be conducive to the bother extension of reli- gions and moral instruction. "9. That. humble address be presented to her Majesty, to lay the foregoing resolu- tions before her Majesty.

In his preliminary explanation, Lord John maintained that the several subjects embraced in the resolutions ought to he considered together, in order that a cor- rect view might be taken of each. You cannot, for instance, expect to advance the moral and religious state of the people unless you at the same time adopt measures to improve their physical condition: persons struggling for subsistence cannot make those efforts which are necessary for the education of their children. It would have been idle in him to frame a specific measure, since Government have taken steps to discountenance the introduction of measures by private Mem- bers, and had expressed an opinion that Government should be responsible for all legislation. He took a retrospective view of the condition of the poor; going back before the period of the Trench Revolution. At that time, the National Debt was 250,000,0001., bearing an interest between 14,000,000/ and 15,000,0001. The relief given to the able-bodied poor was 2,500,0001.; and the practice of paying advances to labourers out of the poor-rates was then unknown to the country. In the course of the wars which began in 1793, occurred various changes much for the worse as concerned the situation of the people. The Debt was increased by the sum of 400,000,0001., so improvidently contracted as to entail the, annual pay- ment of an interest exceeding 21,000,0001.- a mode of contracting the Debt winch has prevented any subsequent Minister from reducing the interest during the peace by one half its amount, as Sir Robert Walpole did in the long peace that tegan in 1714. With a taxation of 50,000,0004 the greater part of which is necessary to maintain the public faith, the whole difference which we can make in our expenditure, between the amplest and narrowest limit of a peace establishment, amounts to 3,000,0001. Some particularly detrimental taxes— such as those upon coal, salt, and candles—have been abolished; but still the country has to bear that great burden the interest of the Debt.; which can only be alleviated by a commutation of taxes, distributing their pressure upon all clew:es. The Bank Restriction Act of 1797 inflicted lasting evils on the country: by the sudden enjoyment of high profits, it induced an extravagant mode of living and absence of forethought on the part of persons in trade; and it tended greatly to degrade the labourer, by diminishing the value of his wages. Those wages were never increased in proportion to the depreciation which took place in the value of money. Sir Robert 'Peers Currency Bill of 1819 was founded upon sound principles; but the contraction of the currency produced its evils, and among other things contributed to injure the industrious classes, at least for a considerable time. _Another error of legislation during the war was the policy. of commercial restriction and monopoly, or, as it is called, "protection of native industry." This was once called the "municipal system," because it was devised in favour of the trading classes in the towns; but our manufacturera have now adopted the theory of Adam Smith,—namely, that restriction is a mis- chievous system, which favours one class in preference to another, and that it is injurious to the lab:ening class above all other classes in the community. Its, mischievous effects Lord John illustrated by the history of the Timber-duties. During the war, there were difficulties in obtaining timber from the Baltic, and a preference was given to Canadian timber; which was carried in 1813 to an ex- travagant height; and the result is, that, whereas we used to have annually 9513 or 1,000 British ships trading with Memel, we have now but 200 or 300. • The Wool-duty, the alarm at its proposed reduction, and the beneficial results, formed another illustration on which Lord John dwelt somewhat elaborately, to prove that those laws called protective "tend to impair the efficiency of labour, to re- strict the free interchange of commodities, and to impose on the people unneces- sary taxation." Some persons still retain the theory that without protection cer- tain branches of industry cannot be maintained. I do think it necessary that we should express one opinion or the other: either let us adopt the policy of Mr. Vansittart, and protect all branches of industry, whether manufacturing or agri- cultural, or let us abandon that system as vicious and unsound. For my own part, I think the system is vicious and unsound. I do not think that Parliament has a right to say to any man, You shall go to the cheapest market,' or 'you shall go to the dearest'; but that every man should be at liberty to go to whatever market he pleases. If you have any crime or any mischief to prevent, then let the Legislature, as it ought to do, interfere. But when a hand-loom weaver makes a yard of cloth and wishes to exchange it for some other article necessary for his family, what business—viewing it as an abstract question of right—has the Legislature to say to that hand-loom weaver, You shall not make that ex- change—you shall not go to a foreign country to make that exchange, where you think you may make it best for yourself; but we will point out the person with whom you shall deal, and in what manner you may dispose of your article for the best.'" In 1842, Ministers made great alterations in the Customs-duties, involving. the interests of many labourers, artisans, and others; but Ministers applied the new theory in a totally different nianner to such persons and to others. "I my- self, as a member for the city of London, saw many persons who were in a state of panic-.-as that is the word used with respect to agriculturists I may use it with regard to them. The ropemakers said that ropes would be fabricated in Russia, as Russia grew the raw material. Then there were the cutters of cork, bootrnakers, shoemakers—all were very much alarmed at the Free-trade prices which would be introduced by the right honourable Baronet. Now, these were men who earned from a guinea to five-and-twenty shillings a week—who were not in a state of affluence or wealth. One of them told me, that although he was a skilled workman, and earned good wages, yet he was only enabled to have meat for dinner, himself and wife' one day in the week. Such was the sort of persons affected by the alterations introduced by the present Government. Now, I must say, that to in change and excite alarm among these men— even upon sound principles_-is hardly feu, unless you introduce measures founded upon the same principles that shall be applicable to other classes; not making them applicable to men earning a guinea and five-and-twenty shillings a but to men who are represented by Peers of ancient descent—men of hereditary honours, of great wealth, and possessing vast power to resist your propose/. It is not just that with regard to the first class—the labouring class—we should be called upon to be guided by the principles and authority of Adam Smith and Mr. Ricardo, while with regard to the second—the wealthy, the titled, and the powerful —we should be required to be governed by the principles of protection and should be called upon to maintain for that class these protective laws." Lord John cited several figures from Mr. Gladstone's pamphlet, to show that the importation of manufactures under the reduced duties was not overwhelming, and that native manufactures are quite able to bear up against foreign competition. "If, then, those principles were just—if it were right to reduce protecting duties within a moderate compass, if not to abandon them altogether—why has not the same course been pursued with regard to other articles of more importance than an contained in the Tariff of 1842? If that tariff imposes a duty, as was calculated, of twenty per cent, some may consider that degree of protection extravagant, and that it ought to be diminished. My conclusion is, that the system is altogether vicious, and that we ought to abandon it."

He now came to the question of the Corn-laws; of whose history he gave a brief sketch; telling how Mr. Fox fixed the point of protection at 54s., how Mr. Pitt raised it, and it was advanced in 1815 to 808.; how the attempt to fix a point of protection has universally failed to secure steadiness of price or to protect the farmer from large importations just in the critical part of the year—during the harvest-months, when the farmer is a seller; while in the winter, when the farmer and labourer are merely consumers, the high price of corn presses very heavily upon them; and how the reliance on protection tends to discourage the farmer's efforts at improvement. In proof of this, he read a pamphlet by Mr. Davenport, who combats the attacks of the Anti-Corn-law League on old leases, which liesays are necessary to protect landlords from the beggary that would be inflicted by farmers, as "poor, ignorant, prejudiced, and unscrupulous" as "the generality" are. Mr. Davenport says, he has taken such pains to improve laud, that a tract which formerly yielded him only 500/. now pays him 800/. a year. He observes—" But a great part of England has been consigned from time imme- morial to the weeds and waters; and the leases or agreements under which it is held may be regarded simply as so many bolts and bars against the robbery and murder which used constantly, and are still at times, inflicted on the land by tenants without capital, and who, to use their own phrase, 'must nevertheless try

to make a living out of it.' • * Farmers of this sort are, in fact, mere labourers, living and toiling as such; and so long as a large proportion of the country is in their hands, its powers are locked up as regards the supply of our existing and constantly-increasing population. To give leases to men of straw would be ruinous to the granter." Elsewhere he tells us, that "there can be no doubt that dairy and grass farms are managed in such a way as to keep all in comparative poverty." With respect to a change, Lord John contended that the present time is particularly favourable•' because, whereas formerly the tenth of any Increased produce would have been taken from the cultivator in the shape of tithe, by the Tithe Commutation Act the sum to be paid is fixed, and everything beyond will now be for the profit of the cultivator.

To substantiate his third resolution, he cited the complaint of farmers, that although they have protection of more than forty per cent upon the food of the people, they have been in a state of difficulty, and have been unable to employ the regular number of labourers, during the last two years, on account of diminished means. Even taking it for granted that alteration of the Corn-laws would have the effect of reducing wages, Lord John contended that greater cheapness would give the labourer a greater command of the necessaries and comforts of life: it would cause a greater demand for labour, the commodity in which he deals; and by that he must be a gainer, whatever the money-denomination of his wages. He cited a variety of statistics from a pamphlet by Mr. Kent, to show, that although wages have generally risen with the high price of wheat, and fallen with a low price, they have neither risen nor fallen at all in proportion to the value of food. "But let us consider what would be the probable effect of the introduction of foreign corn. My belief is, that the introduction of foreign corn to any considerable extent would lead to such an increase to oar manufactures, that although at first the price of corn would be low, there would soon be established a steady, fair, average price, quite sufficient to remunerate the farmer. If what I have stated be the effect of the Corn-law—if it injures all classes of the community—if it deprives the consumer of his bread—if it disappoints the farmer of his price—if it leads to careless and slovenly cultivation of the soil—and, finally, if it obliges the labourer to pay for his food a sum which he does not recover in the increase of his wages— I ask, what system can be worse, and what system will you adopt instead of it?" Lord John said, that if he were to make any specific proposition, it would be a fixed duty; but not that which he proposed m 1841: ' My opinion is, that after all the discussion which has occurred, we could not fairly and reasonably propose the eight-shilling fixed duty of 1841."

Sir JAMES GRAHAM--" How much, then?"

Lord JOHN RUSSELL—" The right honourable Baronet asks how much: my answer is, that it is no great mystery; eight shillings would certainly be more than I should now propose: nobody has gone lower with a fixed duty, I think, than fear shillings; and four, five, or six shillings, would be the duty I should recommend." He glanced at other propositions,—a "vanishing-scale," or gradual reduction of duty, to cease entirely at a definite time; and a five-shilling fixed duty. "My own opinion is, that- a small fixed duty would be the preferable pro- posal, because a vanishing-scale has the disadvantage of change in the amount every year. However, if I were asked whether I think that it is desirable to have any duty on corn at all, I should say, as an abstract question, that it certainly is not. Corn is one of the worst articles you can tax: but in making changes in your commercial policy, I know the evil that is produced by a sudden alteration." The difficulty of sudden and total abolition he likened to the sudden relinquishing of intoxicating drinks; and he added—" That there may hereafter come a time, as there has done with regard to wool, when the population, and commerce and manufactures, may require a total abolition of all duty, I should not deny: 'but I should say, the scale you could adopt with a view to the interests of the country, and that which would at once give the greatest relief and inflict the slightest amount of evil, would be such as I have mentioned."

He next adverted to the alteration of the Poor-law. He alluded to the inju- rious practice, before the new law, of making allowances in aid of wages, and to the necessity of a change from paying labourers in that shape of compulsory cha- rity to the wholesome shape of wages; expressing his belief, that had the former stystem gone on, the labourers, with their increased numbers, would have been in a most miserable condition. He quoted a statement by Mr. Tufnell, that on 600 semi, at Battle in Sussex, he had on an averagespent in wages, in two years be- fore the Battle Union, 695/.; after the Union, 81b1. —an increase of about 1151. a year; while the amount of poor-rate which he paid Lid decreased from 1121.10 86/. But the old Corn-law has left many injurious traces. "We are now little more than ten years from the time when that amended law came into operation. The children who had then been born under the old and vicious administration, when allowances were made according to the number of children in the family, are now become young men, and are looking for employment for their labour. Unfortu- nately, they find that the artificial increase of the number of labourers made by the law, has not brought with it a corresponding increase in the demand. There is, therefore, in many of the Southern counties at this moment, under the im- proved administration of the Poor-law, a number of labourers who during the winter-months cannot find employment. Then, I say, it is not sufficient to have altered your Poor-law—it is not sufficient to stand steadily, as the present Go- vernment proposed to do, by that law; but we must consider salutary and re- lieving measures, by which we can remedy the disorder thus created by the faulty administration of the Poor-law." Lord John expressed a strong opinion that the

proposition made by Sir James Graham last year, but abandoned this year, for enacting that five years of industrial employment should convey a settledient, would greatly improve the condition of labourers, by preventing their being sent i back n times of difficulty, from the towns, whose wealth they have increased, to the agricultural districts.

He had framed his resolution recommending a " systematic plan of colonists tion " very cautiously, because he did not wish it to be implied that a very iveat scheme of colonization could be adopted by the country: the cost would be OD very large that he doubted whether any Government could propose it. At the same time, voluntary emigration had done great good to agricultural districts. On this subject he had some information from Mr. Hedges, formerly Member for Kent. With that gentleman's concurrence two ants for emigration to Aus- tralia and Canada had engaged many of his best labourers to emigrate. On. agent expressed his surprise at his readiness to part with some of his best labour.. era. But he said it was for the advantag,e of all parties—that they would do very well as colonial emigrants; they would be useful men in the Colonies: but he should find those labourers who were left behind, and who were comparatively of little use, become skilful and good labourers; and he would therefore be benefited as much as the Colonies by the change. With scarcely an exception, those emi- grants are perfectly satisfied. Again, the Colonization Commissioners report, that the emigrants to Canada during the last year have been doing remarkably well; and they refer to a table of wages, by which it appears, in East Canada the wages of the farm-labourer are 28. 6d. a day, and in West Canada Sr. a day. In the conduct of emigration, two cautions are necessarv—not to send out those who are unfit for the hard labour and privation of colonies, and not to encourage a sort of indiscriminate emigration, carried on by a number of persons meeting to- gether who never have known each other before, and who go to some distant country without any connexion or association. " I think, if possible, they should be persons from certain districts, who are known to one another; and that some one should go with them who can take the command—who can lead them in those colonial establishments which they may have to make. And I do not see any difficulty in such a scheme. You give officers in the Army and Navy on half- pay some benefits in the purchase of Crown-lands, as inducements to emi- gration: why not with such persons send out fifty or a hundred of these emi- grant-labourers, and thereby make the foundation of a small district establish- ment, in which persons may live happily together, and continue the practice of the old customs and habits they take from this country ? In such a transaction all parties would be gainers: for they would become the consumers of our pro- ducts at home; and while you are sending to Canada the manufactures of this country, they can be sending to you food which they have raised by their labour." With respect to education, there have been very great advances of late years, not only in the amount but in the opinion as to what education should be. S • much remains to be done. The recent Report of the British and Foreign School Society says—" Those incessant witnesses against ignorance and neglcet, the gaol- returns of the kingdom, have again borne fearful testimony to the extent of moral darkness which still broods over large portions of the population. Of ths nals of Berkshire, one third have been again found unable to read; in Cambridge- shire and Staffordshire, one-half were in this condition; in Denbighshire, two- thirds • in Devon, out of 71 offenders under sixteen years of age, only four could read well; in Essex, one half were in total ignorance; while of 212 convicted pri- soners, 48 had never been at school at all, 40 had been there less than one month, 45 less than two months, 43 less than four months, and only 36 above six months; in Hereford, out of 385 prisoners, only one could read well" With respect to re- ligious instruction, the Report says—" In Sussex, out of 877 prisoners, 141 did not know the Saviour's name, 498 just knew his name and no more, 179 had a confused acquaintance with his history, and only six per cent of the who', 'Ser had any reasonable knowledge of the Christian faith. Some said they; ea- sionally been in a place of worship, but that when they did attend, all is Jerk- ness and confusion to their minds—that so they gave it up. And the e coward steps of their career speedily succeeded: all were strangers to any pleasures but those of gross sensuality—all had been left a defenceless prey to the many tempt- ations of a precarious life." "Now, Sir, I do say, when you take measures to promote the physical wellbeing of the people—when you take measures to remove any restrictions that may stand in the way of their procuring any articles neces- sary for their food and their clothing—do not shut your eyes to this gross state of ignorance. Do not forget, that while in this month of May, there are ex- cellent and pious men meeting almost' day by day to consider what sums they shall give to distribute in China, or the South Sea Islands, or in Africa, for the promotion of the Christian faith--do not forget that you have close at hand, in the county of Sussex, and in almost every other county of England and Wales, numbers of persons who become inmates of your gaols and fall under the lash of your criminal laws, being totally ignorant of every duty which a Christian should perform. Sir, I cannot entertain a doubt that the House would wish that measures should be taken to remedy this gross ignorance." It is said that there is in the country so much sectarian difference, and jealousy of interference, that you cannot, consistently with religious liberty and the rights of conscience, have any general system of education. "But this you can do—you can make grants to those who apply for them, and you can assist and promote the education which is given. One plan would be, to give MOM to pupil-teachers, in the various schools throughout the country, by which they might learn of the schoolmasters to undertake the management of schools; there might also be a greater number of training-schools supported by the Government. Another plan would be, to add more comfort to the situation of schoolmasters by giving them small pensions and gratuities." Assistance might be given to schools already founded. "Now, I understand with regard to the Church Schools— with regard to the National Schools—alone, if the Commissioners were to give all that would be required, they would have to give 130,0001. in the present year; imply- ing a total expenditure of more than 400,0001. in the erection of schools alone. If this is the case, and there are other subjects to be provided for, I say the grant you propose is insufficient I should say, without any bill for compulsory edu- cation, which would raise up a host of objections—and probably very sound ob- jections too—you can proceed safely in that course, and ask for a grant of 150,0001. in the present year to improve the education of the people of England and Wales." There are also ninny existing endowments of schools which can hardly be applied to any good purpose; and if the parties were to go to the Court of Chancery, it has been said that the whole amount of the endowment would be absorbed. But these stuns might be placed under the Council of Education ; and in that manner, large sums, not hitherto well applied, might be efficiently directed to the education of the people." Having quoted the terms of his resolutions on this point, Lord John said—" I mean by those words, that you should not refuse it to any who propose to give education in populous districts, when they may not have the means of accomplishing it; that it should not be objected to a school that the greater part of the children are Roman Catholics, and must therefore read the Bible ac- cording to the Roman Catholic version; that you should make no sectarian ob- jections of that description, but that the aid, as given by the State, should not be

on the principle of exclusive support of the Established Church, but on the lay principle of educating equally all the inhabitants of this country."

Lord John wound up by urging the necessity of adopting measures of improve ment in a time of quiet rather than a time of distress and clamour, when the measures would be tinctured with that heat and violence which such times are sure to produce. Having reread his first resolution to that effect, he said— "Adopt that resolution, and add to it asy further resolutions you may thisk according to your own principles and your own views of what the interests of the country require. But whether you do so now or not, my thorough belief is, that

our laws will not remain long in the state in which they now are; that the condition of the people of this country does require legislation, not for a purpose—which I should think a most inconsiderate attempt of this House—to provide directly for the wellbeing of all, but for the purpose of relieving as far as you can the people from all the restraints and all the evils which your own legislation has imposed. It is for this purpose, then, that I now put this first resolution, Sir, into your hands."

' Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD moved as an amendment, that the following words be inserted after the word" opportunity," in the resolution- " To give immediate attention to the claims so repeatedly urged in the petitions of the people for an extension of the Parliamentary sufliage, as well as" He drew attention to the petitions for extension of the suffrage; the signatures to which, in 1842, amounted to 3,324,000; in 1844, to 60,000. The petitions complain of non-representation, only 100,000 individuals possessing the elective franchise out of the 7,000,000 adult male population of the United Kingdom. They complain of taxation in which they have no voice. Mr. Crawford expressed disappointment at Lord John Russell's speech, especially at his making no defi- nite announcement with respect to repeal of the Corn-laws; and Mr. Crawford utterly denounced the Poor-law, as indirectly abolishing the poor man's right to relief. He would prevent the necessity of emigration by increasing the poor man's employment and comfort at home; and he would increase the number of small proprietors. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he could not but agree to the first resolu- tion moved by Lord John Russell, though not to the rest; and he should move the previous question. While he admitted the absence of party ran- cour in Lord John's speech, and its conclusiveness on the great subjects to which it referred, he found a difficulty in following bins through the Par- liamentary labyrinth which he had raised. He denied that Ministers had discouraged legislation by private Members; appealing for confirmation to the measures introduced by Lord Ashley. Sir James proceeded to reply to the speech; discussing the resolutions seriatim.

The first resolution he regarded as complimentary to the policy of Government; claiming some credit for the revival of trade to which it alluded. He denied that wages in any county are so low as is. a week—he believed 10s. to be nearer the average; for wages are now higher than they have been for five or six years. Passing to the second resolution, he explained, that the great object of the policy of Mr. Huskisson (advocate of the Corn-law of 1815, and author of the law of 1828) was, not the abolition of the system of protection, but the substitution of protect- ing duties for the prohibitory system previously existing; and also, the cautious and judicious reduction of protection, corresponding with the growth of the popu- lation: and he contended that this policy, in the main, had been steadily pursued, without distinction of party, by all the subsequent Administrations; it had more particularly been the guiding commercial policy of the present Ministers. Taking the reductions from 1815 to the present time, it would appear that not less than the removal of 6,300,0001. of indirect taxation was the result of their measures. This had principally been done by the taking off taxes on articles of consumption used chiefly by the working-classes. The number of articles subjected to cus- toms has been reduced from 1,152 to 579.

The dexterity with which Lord John treated the subject of the Corn-laws was amusing. If any Member, however, objected to the present system, it was his duty to make a substantial proposition: but Lord John, disregarding the argu- ments for free trade, disregarding Lord Palmerston's principle that a duty on corn ought to have fiscal objects, and departing from his own 88. fixed duty, pro- posed in the responsibility of office, ROW recommended a Si. protective duty. Sir James contended that a fixed duty would be utterly delusive as a protection, since it could not be maintained in time of scarcity; and he entered into some defence of the sliding-scale in its present modification, as tending to steadi- ness both of prices and of imports. The duty in the harvest-months has never been less than 17s. 6d. or 20s.; while the quantifies imported prove that it is not prohibitory. Since the termination of the war and coincidentally with protection, great improvements have taken place in agriculture. Sir James referred to re- ports of the Factory Inspectors for 1841-42 and 1844-45, to show the great:change which has taken place. Mr. Clements, the Assistant-Poor-law-Commissioner in the cotton districts, states, that during five weeks ending 3d May 1845, the mill- hands of a particular mill worked thirty days, and received 3841.; and during the five weeks ending the 3d April 1842, the same number of hands worked only nineteen days, and received only 2161.; a decrease in the sum total of wages re- ceived by the same number of hands of no less than 1681. The average of wages, excepting in one or two towns, is now higher than it has been in any of the five 'antecedent years. On the part of Government, he claimed some credit for the change. LORD Ilowics—" The sun has more to do with it than Government."

Sir JAMES GRAHAM admitted that a deficient or abundant harvest would render human legislation comparatively inoperative; but he read the prices of several articles of necessity, which would show that many reductions are distinctly trace- able to their legislation. For instance, the price of wheat has fallen from 64s. per quarter in 1841, to 46s. now; beef, from id. per pound to 5id.; mutton, from 7d. to 6d.; sugar, from 7d. to 5d.; coffee, from 2s. to ls. 44.; tea, from os. to 4s.; currants, from 9d. to 6d.; candles, from id. to 6d. Nothing affects wages more disadvantageously than changes of price arising from variations in the amount of the circulating medium: that evil has been checked by prudent legis- lation: in 1841 the amount of bullion in the hands of the Bank of England was only 6,000,0001., and their notes in circulation amounted to only 16,400,000/4 the amount of bullion in the Bank of England is now 16,000,0004 the cir- culation 21,163,0001.; and the banking measures of Government will con- tribute to further steadiness. Speculation has been checked; yet at no period of our history has speculation been founded on more secure grounds, or carried so far as at present. Before the year 1844, there had been constructed in this country 2,355 miles of railway, at a cost of 66,700,0001. In 1844, 728 miles were added to those 2,300, with an outlay. of 10,304,0001. There are now rail- way projects in agitation for the creation of no less than 6,000 miles, at an outlay approaching to 18,000,0001. sterling; promising ample employment to labour for many years to conic. He cited, some other statistics to show the improved state of the country. Crime has diminished: the number of persons convicted in 1842 was 31,309; in 1843,29,591; in 1844,26,542. Pauperism has diminished; the poor-relief for the able-bodied having decreased in 1844 as compared with 1843 by 20 per cent. In passing, Sir James stated that he had found great difficulty in making industrial residence for five years the basis of settlement; and he proposed that it should merely confer a right to irremoveability.

• He found it difficult to understand what Lord John meant by a "systematic colonization." He enlarged on the difficulties arising from Parliament's having made over the control of waste lands in Canada to the local Government, and from the expense of the voyage to Australia, where there is at present an excess of labour. However, voluntary emigration has not been neglected; and the num- ber that went out in 1844 was 70,000.

Nor has education been neglected: the Government grant for that purpose was increased from 30,0001. to 40,0001. in 1842, and it is now proposed to make it 75,0001.; while liberal grants have been made in aid of normal schools. since 1823,320,0001. has been expended from the public parse in erecting schools—im- plying a gross expenditure of 1,000,0001. The National Board of Education in

Ireland may challenge comparison with any similar establishment in any country of Europe. Further, 97 new churches will have been built during eighteen months, offering accommodation for 626,000 persons, and accompamed. by the endowment of 206 ministers.

Sir James concluded by saying, that as the carrying of the resolutions would I imply censure on Ministers, he should move the previous question.

Sir Joan Triintr. reiterated the charge against Ministers, of having deserted the agriculturists; who might perhaps look for support elsewhere. He could not vote for Lord John Russell's resolutions, because they were not of a practical nature, which they were never intended to be: the speeches in support of them were not intended for consumption in that House.

Viscount POLLINGTON could not support the resolutions; but declared that he did not feel so much alarmed as others at the prospect of repealing the Corn-laws. He advocated a plan of systematic colonization, as dis- tinguished from that emigration which is the mere getting rid of our super- fluous poor; and he earnestly deprecated eonvictism as a means of colonizing.

Mr. CHARLES VILLIERS seized upon Sir James Graham's admissions, as making him an excellent witness for repeal of the Corn-laws- The right honourable Baronet told them that he was happy to announce that the labouring classes generally were well off; and he had contrasted the present period, when prices were low, with the years 1840 and 1841, when the price of food was high; and having described the amount of distress and misery that existed in those years, had shown the effect of low prices in diminishing them, and in adding to the comforts and happiness of the poor. The right honourable Baronet had shown them that crime had diminished since food had become cheap; and crime, he had stated truly, was necessarily connected with poverty; and he had shown them also, that wages had increased, not only in the manufacturing but also in the agricultural districts; he had shown them that in every village and in every parish the rate for the relief of the poor had diminished—that there were fewer people receiving parish-relief, fewer out of employment, and much less destitution m the country, than when the price of food was high. The right honourable Baronet actually proved the case of the advocates of free trade; and he gave them the prices of the various articles of consumption, namely, of wheat, flour' meat, and sugar, and had shown the redaction in the price of each, and how that reduction affected beneficially the condition of the labourer. And this was the argument by which the question, whether the total abolition of all pro- tective duties was not the means of improving instead of deteriorating the con- dition of the people, was met Mr. Villiers applauded Lord John Russell for asserting that legislation was the cause of the deteriorated condition of the people; but objected that all Lord John's arguments tended to total abolition—

Lord John was ready to abolish protection on manufactures; why not on agri- culture? What is there in the argument respecting wool that does not apply to corn? He did not believe that a four-shilling fixed duty would be more satisfac- tory to any one than the proposition which he should bring forward—total aboli- tion. He was obliged to his noble friend for having brought forward the resolu- tions, as it required some moral courage to do so; and they paved the way for his own motion, of entire relief to agriculture and the country from the present system.

About one o'clock on Tuesday morning, the debate was adjourned to Wednesday.

The debate was resumed on Wednesday, in a very thin House. When Mr. Bickham Escott began to speak, there were but thirty Members pre- sent; and soon afterwards an attempt was made to count out the House; but that was frustrated by some who came in, and made up the required number of forty. Later in the evening, the numbers increased.

Mr. PHILIP HOWARD opposed the resolutions; because they would im- ply a censure on the Government, and therefore naturally lead to a re- signation of the Ministers, before any other compact body of men were/ ready to supply their places.

Mr. Brcitrusi Escorr opposed the resolutions; objecting to them in detail.

Ile did not know who but Lord John Russell adhered so romantically to the fixed duty. If the noble Lord were to form an Administration, who would join him? Lord Howick ? The adherence was the more remarkable, because Lord John himself has pronounced "protection the bane of agriculture." However, Mr. Escott sneered at those agriculturists who attack the policy of the present Corn-law and Tariff, instead of striving to hold by what they liave. It is utterly impossible that any Government could be formed on the principle of increasing protection and going back to the former system. The old system of protection is shattered, and is tottering to its fall. Every argument on that question tends to knock out some other stone from the arch which is so badly cemented. The endeavour to throw out the Maynooth Bill by attarking the faith of a large class of the people of Ireland, was not unlike the endeavour to prop up protection to agriculture with osier twigs for its timber and grease for its cement. From the time when a remarkable speech was made by the late right honourable Member for Kent, in which he stated that protection was necessary to put money in the pockets of those who had burdened estates, protection received a blow from which it will not well recover. If protection cannot be defended as the means of in- suring a certain domestic supply of corn, and, on an average of years, of procuring corn at a cheaper rate for the people than they otherwise would obtain it, it can- not be defended at all. He had no notion that any legislature or any statesman could, abstractedly, defend protection on the ground of artificially raising the price of corn, or, in other words, causing an artificial scarcity of the first n

of life, specifically to put money into the pockets of those who owned 171192 He believed that the majority of the people of this country have come to the same conclusion, that the defence which has been made for protection by those who have put themselves forward as its exclusive advocates, from the time when the late right honourable Member for Kent made the speech to which he had referred, down to the delivery of the last speech either of the honourable Member for So- merset (Mr. William Miles)in that House, or of the Duke of Richmond in another place, has only convinced the people that it is impossible by such arguments much longer to defend protection.

Mr. Escott pointed out a mistake in Sir James Graham's speech, where he said that meat is low in price; for it is now higher than it has been for fourteen years; and he urged the House to consider whether it would not be well to introduce a little mom" keep" for cattle in this country.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM insisted on the correctness of his statement—

The return of prices which he had quoted the other evening was a return pre- pared by the Board of Trade at his request It did not refer to the price of prime meat in the hands of retail butchers. It was prepared, at his desire, with reference to the price in the first week of April in the present year, and in the corresponding week in the six antecedent years, begmning in 1839 and ending in 1845, of meat sold by the wholesale butchers to the labouring classes in the neighbourhood of Smithfield. He had every reason to believe in the accuracy of the statement.

Lord HOWICK supported the resolutions, in a rather low; speech. He strongly animadverted on the course taken by Ministers, in moving the "previous question"; arguing, that unless they could prove the condition of the working-classes to be satisfactory, they were bound instantly to grapple with the question of improvement. He commented on the scanty attendance of Members; and especially on the absence of Lord Ashley, who ought to have helped in bringing the condition of the working-classes before Parliament- He insisted that dependence is not to be placed on the present aspect of prosperity, and that measures ought to be taken to pro- vide for more adverse times; and he vindicated the comprehensive nature o f the resolutions, as embracing subjects closely connected, and all neces- sary to a correct view of the main question, the condition of the working- classes. He maintained that they were practical in their nature; for what Lord John Russell proposed to improve the state of the working-classes was the simple and he believed effectual course of removing restric- tions and setting the labouring man free to snake the most of his industry. Lord Howick thought that the system of restriction ought to be at once and entirely abandoned; the time for compromise having quite gone by. He could wish to go through the whole Tariff, and at once abolish every duty which was not levied bona ide for the purpose of revenue. Sir ROBERT PEEL began by replying to Lord Howick's allusion to the apparent apathy with which the debate was treated- " Sir, if I thought that this indifference, this apathy, could be justly charged upon this House,—if I thought that when the question really was the improve- ment of the condition of the lower classes, and that indifference was shown m this House on a matter of Each extreme importance, not merely to these classes alone but to every other class of the community,—I should think that this House gave a decisive proof of its incompetence to discharge the functions intrusted to it. But I believe that both this indifference and apathy are to be attributed to the circum- stance alone, that there is a predominant feeling that the mode in which the noble Lord brought forward the subject was not calculated to lead to any practical re- sult." Lord Ashley certainly had manifested anxiety for the interests of the working-classes; but then, the measures which he proposed, unlike Lord John Russell's resolutions, were practical. "I will not imitate the noble Lord. I will not take the course he has thought fit to adopt, and remind him that there were those on each side of him who did not accompany the debate during that dreary period when it was almost impossible to keep a House together. Perhaps the House was not aware, that at an early period of the evening an unsuccessful attempt was made at terminating the debate by counting out the House. I am sure that circumstance did not arise from any disrespect to the working-classes, but was solely attributable to the deeply-prevailing conviction that the noble Lord's resolutions, as proposed, could not be of the least practical benefit to them."

Sir Robert proceeded, but much more briefly and rapidly, to repeat some of the arguments used by Sir James Graham.

He reminded Lord John Russell, who now recommended systematic coloniza- tion, that when in office he had not adopted a specific plan proposed by the Colo- nial Land and Emigration Commissioners. For his own part, before he assented to any scheme of colonization, he should like to see the details. He repeated the reference to what Government had done for education. "I admit that considera- tions of economy, perhaps I should say parsimony, should not induce us to spare any vote for the purposes of education: but we have done nothing with regard to this subject of education to disentitle UB to the confidence of the House. I think our great object, in promoting education, ought to be to carry out the system that may be adopted by the voluntary coiiperation of the people themselves. Depend !mon it, in this free country, any system of education in which the Government intervenes, and which is superintended by Government Inspectors, will be of little avail unless those whose motel duty it is to contribute some of their means to the promotion of education zealously cooperate with Government for the purpose. Grants of public money are not alone what is necessary; you must also have the voluntary coaperation of those whose aid and countenance are essential to any scheme of education, if yon hope to have it succeed. It is not merely that the aid of such persons is necessary, but I know of no connecting link between the lower and upper classes but that of those who are willing to contribute to the improvement of those to whose industry and labour they owe such great oblig.a- lions. The noble Lord asks us to give our support to measures founded on libe- ral and comprehensive principles for the further extension of education. Why, we have lately had practical experience of the result of our dealing with the question. It shows me that we ought not to be too lavish of our promises to carry out measures founded on liberal and comprehensive principles. It is very easy to make affirmations and to give pledges: but let us recollect the contest in which we were engaged last session. We also thought that we were acting on a policy founded on liberal principles when we undertook to improve the education of the Roman Catholics of Ireland; but when we come to the details, I think we may rejoice in not having given any pledges which may not be verified. I therefore think it is better that we should deal with practical measures, rather than pro- mise beforehand that we will give our support to a resolution. I do not, there- fore, so much object to the resolutions of the noble Lord because they mix toge- ther subjects that would require separate consideration, but I object to them be- cause they invite us to pledge ourselves to the passing of measures with respect to local settlement, colonization and education; and because we thereby raise expectations which, when the tiMe comes for practically carrying them out, we cannot agree among ourselves to carry." He bantered Lord John on his "cautious and deliberate" resolution about alter- ing the Corn-laws--" If I thought it advisable to come to the abstract resolution on this subject, I do not see how I could differ from the noble Lord; because, when he asks us to consider the subject with such cautious and deliberate arrange- ments as may be most beneficial, I consider that that is the very course we have taken; and I confess I thought the noble Lord was going to pay us a com- pliment on the course we pursued. We have added to no protective duties. Our course has been to withdraw protection, combined with such 'cautious and deli- berate arrangements' as we thought would most benefit all classes of her Ma- jesty's subjects.' I do not see how it is possible for any gentleman who thinks with the noble Lord the Member for Sunderland [Lord Howick] that the Corn- laws ought to be immediately and unconditionally repealed—that there should be an indiscriminate repeal of all prohibitmy duties, and without any delay—to vote for the resolutions of the noble Lord, combined with his cautious and deliberate ar- rangements.' Why, the two noble Lords expressed opinions decidedly adverse on the subject of the Corn-law."

It was for the House to decide whether the course taken by Ministers should be marked for disapproval: Sir Robert could only say, that during former years he did not remember any such great improvement as that which has taken place in the condition of the country during the last two or three years. To the principle of the second and third resolutions—that protective duties are in themselves an evil—he could not but give his ac- quiescence; though their remission requires great deliberation. It seemed that Ministers had forfeited the confidence of Sir John Tyrell and his friends for going too rapidly-

" How far he is authorized to speak the sentiments of a very large and power- ful party, I know not; but this I meet say, that I cannot consent to repurchase their confidence by the expression of any regret or penitence on account of the course which we have pursued. I believe that that course has conduced to the general interests of this country. I will not draw the contrast for the purpose of exalting one Administration at the expense of another; but when I contrast the position of this country in the winter of 1842 with its position at the present moment, I never will admit that we have taken any other course than that which became the Ministers of the Crown, and Ministers professing Conservative prin- ciples. It may be true that the prices of agricultural produce are low. Whether that be or be sot deemed to be the effect of the law in respect of the importation of cattle or of corn, I believe the effect of that law has been to interpose aal, effectual precaution against a great increase of price, rather than that the law has , acted unfavourably on the agricultural interest. I am not prepared to alter those laws; lean give no assurance with respect to any alteration. I proposed them after due consideration and I think nothing so unfortunate as the constant altera- tion of a law of this =hire. But with respect to the effect of the law, so far as it . has had any, I believe it to be a beneficial effect, in tending to prevent an increase of price. I 'believe it has had a beneficial effect upon all classes of the community, and especially upon the proprietors of land. Sir, the interests and the welfare of the proprietors of land do not depend upon the mere nominal sum which the quarter of corn may fetch. If I looked to the state of the North of England, and the details received in 1892 of distress, of privation, of consequent suffering and crime—I will not now repeat them; the time has passed—God grant it may never return! God grant that the precautions taken against it may be effectual !— but if I read to the House what were the accounts of the state of that district, I think I could convince the most zealous advocate for the landed interest, the advocate most disposed to consider that the predominant interest, that it was not benefited by the continuance of such a state of i things as then existed. I will not read you the accounts we received then; but here s the contrast. Here is the account given by that distinguished man who commands in the Northern district, and who did command in 1842. He writes, in the present year= York, March 1. Uninterrupted tranquillity has prevailed in the district under my command during the past month. Trade and manufactures continue to flourish. So completely has all disposition to political agitation of any description ceased, that an attempt made the other day at Hull to muster a Chartist meeting proved an entire failure.' Again, under the date of May 2d, the same writer mentions 'uniform and universal tranquillity,' 'the total absence of all political eg,itation among the mass of the people, and the total indifference that seems to exist among the same class on the particular subject which is now so generally agitated by a portion of the regular and Dissenting clergy, namely, the Maynooth grant: at all events, it seems quite out of the question that any feeling could be raised in the mass of the population on this occasion so as to disturb the peace of the country for one moment.' I say, set against some reduction in agricultural pro- tection the immense social benefit of such a change as that."

If Ministers had lost the confidence of one set of men by the rapidity of their movements, and, through their caution, had failed to secure the confi- dence of another set, he hoped that both sets would join to express want of confidence in a Ministry which could not satisfactorily administer the affairs of the country: but he repeated, that he would not attempt to gain that confidence by departing from the course which he had taken, be- lieving it to be based on sound principles.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in his reply, said that the real question before the House was this—whether, in their opinion, it was wise to make a further alteration in the Import-duties, and especially in the Corn-law? whether they ought to commence the change now; or whether it would be better to wait for another period before they commenced that change? Opinion in favour of protection, he gathered even from some of his opponents in the debate, grows weaker every day: it is obvious that a duty of 40 or 50 per cent on the food of the people cannot much longer be retained; and he again urged the policy of making the change in a time of tranquillity. As to the improvement which has taken place, he attributed it in part to the favourable seasons—La fact which makes all the difference in the argument. And he reminded the House, that just the same boasts of prosperity were made in 1836; while the rise of the price of corn in 1838 was followed by the disastrous years of 1839, '40, and '41. He differed from Sir John Ty- rell and others opposite, who thought that the importations under the new Tariff or the new Corn-law had been injurious; but when those gentlemen went on to say that they had been led to expect that the present Govern- ment would be in favour of protection and against free trade, he thought they were fully justified in that observation— In fact, the truth of it was undeniable. The speeches of the right honourable Baronet and his friends, in 1839 and 1840, tended to produce, and no doubt did produce, an impression that they were the determined friends and advocates of what was understood as protection to the industry of this country: and while he said that their subsequent measures had been in many respects useful and not pernicious, that was no ground of confidence in them by any party; for it could not be denied that they had, by declaring against "our course of policy," carried the election of 1841, and, having thus obtained office, had proposed measures, which he admitted to be beneficial to the country, but at the same time directly opposed to those declarations. As the right honourable Baronet had raised this question of confidence, this was Lord John's answer.

But if Sir John Tyrell, imitating Sir John Yarde Buller in 1841, were to vote "want of confidence' in Ministers, Lord John would hesitate in voting with him; for lie thought, if those Whig principles be and his friends advocated were to be carried into effect, they would, under present circumstances, be more likely to be carried into effect by the present Go- vernment than by their opponents.

Viscount CLEMENTS rose, amid some deprecatory exclamations of sur- prise, and complained that the resolutions omitted all mention of Ireland: it might be supposed from them that the Union had been repealed. They spoke of general tranquillity, while there was the agitation marked by the meeting of Tara; and he came from a county in a state of anarchy, Ri- bandism being there the governing force.

The House divided first upon Mr. Crawford's amendment; which was negatived, by 253 to 33.

The House next divided on the "previous question" as opposed to the first resolution; which was carried, by 182 to 104; majority against the resolu- tion, 78. The rest were successively put, and negatived. Mr. CHARLES HINDLE; Sir EDMOND FILMER, and Mr. HAWES, COM- plained that they had been shut out, not only during the first division, but also till the second had taken place. The SPEAKER said, that was wrong; and steps should be taken to prevent a recurrence of the mistake.

The House adjourned at a quarter to two o'clock on Thursday morning.

SPEAKERS IN THE TWO-DAYS DEBATE. For the Resoltdions—Lord John Russell, Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Charles NIlliers, Captain Pechell, Lord Howick. For Mr. Sharman Crawford's Amendment—Mr. Sharman Crawford. Against both—Sir James Graham, Sir Charles Burrell, Sir John Tyrell, Viscount Polling- ton, Mr. Philip Howard, Mr. Bickham Escott, Sir John Walsh, Sir John Hanmer, Sir Robert Peel, Viscount Clements.

REFORM OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, Lord Corrniensm moved the second reading of the Ecclesiastical Courts Consolidation Bill; of which he gave a very brief explanation, remarking that the subject is one above all others exhausted.

After alluding to the failure of previous measures since the recommendation of the Select Committee in 1836, he glanced at the grievances which arise from the 370 courts spread about the country, with imperfect, varying, and conflicting jurisdictions in matters of marriage, divorce, legitimacy, will, tithes, church-rates, and some criminal matters of a cognate nature—defamation, incest, quarrelling

and brawling in church-yards, &c. Almost all the Judges of those courts are ap- pointed by individuals—as many as seventy by lords of the manors to which the courts are attached. Some are under the "peculiar' jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical dignities; but those peculiar courts lose their jurisdiction in cases where the tes- tator leaves property to the amount of 5/, within another jurisdiction; a limita- tion which occasions inextricable confusion. Every objection alleged against the small Ecclesiastical Courts is applicable in a minor degree to the Diocesan Courts; to which parties are often compelled to travel a great distance, so that they have not even the advantages of local courts. He proposed that there should be a Central Court in London, to which all wills should be sent: but, in order to relieve individuals residing in the country, where the property was small, and the saving of expense was an object, it was sug- gested, that through a Surrogate acting in the town where the Diocesan Court was now held, the will should be transmitted to the court in London, to be there registered and deposited; but the party might obtain a probate at the local court, and a copy of the will must there be kept, for the inspection of persons in the neighbourhood. All business respecting litigated wills will be transacted in Landon. With respect to church-rates, the proposition was, where a rate had been illegally proposed, to provide the same appeal to Quarter-sessions, and the same power of enforcing it, as existed in the case of poor-rates. With respect to tithes it was proposed to abolish the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts and to transfer pending suits to the Court of Chancery; it was also proposed to .abolish Ecclesiastical jurisdiction in criminal matters. With some exceptions from the Bishop of LINCOLN and the Earl of WINCHILSEA, and decided support from Lord BROUGHAM, Lord CAMPBELL, and the LORD CHANCELLOR, the bill was read a second time.

INSOLVENCY LAW.

In the House of Commons, on Thursday, Mr. HENRY BERKELEY moved

km a Select Committee to inquire into the effect produced upon debtors and creditors by the operation of the Insolvency Act of last session; sar- castically expressing admiration for Lord Brougham, as "a bill-begetting Peer." He explained that he did not desire to reenact arrest for small debts; but the act of last session has substituted one evil for another—

One consequence of it evidently was, that every debt under 20/. became now a

debt of honour. One of the arguments used in favour of such a system was, that credit ought not to begiven. That, indeed, was a strange doctrine—it was pass- ing strange to maintain such a doctrine in a country avowedly dependent upon mercantile credit for its commercial prosperity: the accumulated capital of this country was estimated at not less than 164,000,0001., while the cash in circula- tion did not exceed 46,000,000/. If there were to be no credit among tradesmen for the working-classes' the effect of such a denial would be often to compel the poor man to follow his departed child to a pauper's grave. He could produce to the House many cases showing an unjust and uuequal operation of the act of last session. Among others was one of a widow resident at Bath, upwards of ninety years of age, who was imprisoned for a debt of 34l.; whilst there were owing to her several debts under 201., but in the aggregate more than sufficient to pay the amount for which she was imprisoned.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that as soon as the effect of the act was ascer- tained, an alteration of the law was contemplated. A bill for that pur- pose bad already made some progress in the other House; and therefore he hoped that Mr. Berkeley would not press his motion.

In a short conversation, some Members favourable to the object of the motion also suggested its withdrawal, lest the inquiry should hinder the bill. . Thus urged, Mr. BERKELEY agreed; and the motion was withdrawn. RAILWAY LEGISLATION.

On Monday, the House of Commons resumed the adjourned debate on the resolution moved by Mr. JOHN STUART WORTLEY, with Lord Ho WICK'S addition. This is the resolution- " That the following clause be inserted in all railway bills passing through this House: 'And be it further enacted, that nothing herein contained shall be deemed or construed to exempt the railway by this or the said recited acts authorized to . be made from the provisions of any general act relating to such bills, or of any general act relating to railways which may hereafter pass during the present or any future session of Parliament.' That the said resolution be a standing order of this House." And the following is the addition by Lord Howick—" That no- thing contained in any railway act should preclude the House from any future re- vision, or prevent any alteration to be made by authority of Parliament in railway acts regarding the rates, fares, and charges made under such acts." The resolution and amendment were supported by Sir ROBERT PEEL, and were both affirmed.

Mr. LABOUCHERE asked, whether Government meant to introduce any measure to continue in the next session the railway bills which would inevitably be left imperfect by the close of the present session? Sir GEORGE CLERK declined to give any opinion on the subject until a later period; as he was afraid that any announcement at present would encourage the pro- moters of railway bills to procrastinate.

„„ „ _

DRAWBACK ON MALT. On Thursday, Mr. bTAFFORD O'BRIEN moved the second reading of a bill to allow a drawback of the tax on malt when used for the feeding of cattle. Mr. CARDwELL opposed the motion. He cited reports made to Government, by Professor Playfair, Professor Graham, and Dr. Thomson, stating the results of experiments; the substance of which was, that, in the process of malting, barley, by losing great part of its nutritious qualities, becomes unsuitable to the feeding of cattle; and that no means could be devised for allow- ing a drawback with due security. against fraud on the revenue. Lord Ho WICK suggested that Mr. Stafford 013nen s main object, of enabling the farmer to feed cattle more cheaply, might be accomplished much more simply and better by the free admission of maize and Egyptian beans. After a short conversation, Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN, wishing that Ministers would consult Professors less and farmers more, withdrew the bill.

PENAL LAWS AGAINST THE ROMAN CATHOLICS. On Thursday, Mr. WATSON moved the second reading of his Catholic Relief Bill; the object of which is to abrogate certain penal laws against the Roman Catholics in England which re- main unrepealed. Sir JAMES GRAHAM requested Mr. Watson to postpone the second reading; because the Criminal Law Commissioners had taken into con- sideration not only the laws against the Roman Catholics in England, but also the laws affecting members of that faith in Scotland and Ireland, and Protestant Dissenters. Mr. WATSON urging that the bill should be read a second time, although the debate on it might be postponed till that day fortnight, Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he should object to one part of the bill, which altered the pro-. vision in the Relief Act of 1829 relating to the monastic orders. Eventually, how- ever, the bill was read a second time; the discussion to be taken on going into Committee that day fortnight.

IRISH MEASURES OF IMPROVEMENT. In reply to Earl FonTasous and the Marquis of CLA/4RIC.ARDE, on Tuesday, Lord STANLEy said, that a measure to Secure to tenants compensation for improvements was in a state of forwardness; and that several other measures founded on the Tenure of Land Commissioners' Report would also be introduced, though he could not say when.

MINISTERS-MONEY. On Thursday, Mr. Sergeant MURPHY moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the mode of raising and applying Ministers- money in Ireland. By an act passed in 1665, means of sustenanc,c were provided for Protestant ministers in eight towns in Ireland, out of a tax laid upon Ions • in those towns. The whole amount thus raised was a fraction above 12,0001. a year; and in asking Parliament to dispense with this, he was asking them to re- move a great source of disquietude and heartburning. He suggested, that the proceeds of certain livings without congregations should be substituted for this method of raising an income. Sir THOMAS FREAIANTLE admitted the evil ; but the difficulty was to find a substitute: that suggested by Sergeant Murphy had already been appropriated to other purposes. However, he promised atten- tion to the subject. The motion was withdrawn.

MR. O'DRISCOLL AGAIN. On Monday, Lord BROUGHAM drew attention to a newspaper paragraph about Mr. Alexander O'Driscoll; who was represented as brawling with his brother Magistrates at Skibbereen Sessions, and offering to fight a duel with one who differed from him about a matter before the Bench; while the other Magistrates threatened to bind him over to keep the peace! Mr. °Driscoll had twice been dismissed from the commission, and twice restored; and Lord Brougham wanted to know whether he was now to be retained? The Earl of MouriTeasliaL said, that the other Magistrates, who are Roman Catholics, bore a great spite against Mr. O'Driseoll, because, being a Roman Catholic, he was also a Conservative. Earl FORTESCHE insisted that -Mr. O'Driscoll ought never to have been reinstated. Lord WHARNCLIFFE admitted that Magistrates ought to conduct themselves like gentlemen; and he said that the newspaper report should be referred to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

The subject was also discussed in the House of Commons, by Mr. Ross and Sir Tnomas FREDIANTLE; with a like result.

LORD ASHLEY RENDERING ACCOUNT. On Thursday, Lord AEHILEY fat- plained why he was absent from the debate on Wednesday. "I was engaged in a practical duty. I was absent from this House in consequence of an engagement to take the chair, at half-past six o'clock, at a meeting of Sunday School teachers, who prosecute their labours in a most destitute and wretched part of the Metropolis—in a very remote district of Lambeth. Having sat there tilla very late hour at night, I did not think it necessary to come down to this House to attend to a debate on resolutions which, whether they were carried or whether they were lost, could lead to no practical result."

TREATY WITH BRAZIL. In reply to Lord JOHN RUSSELL., on Thursday, Sir ROBERT PEEL stated, that negotiations were now in progress for a treaty with reference to the persons and property of British subjects in Brazil—if he might use such a term when the proceedings were so dilatory.

NEW ZEALAND AFFAIRS. On Thursday, Mr. CHARLES BULLER gave notice, that he should, on the 17th June, move that a Committee of the whole House do take into consideration the petition of the New Zealand Company.