4 MAY 1850, Page 2

Pthatto nu ti Vrarrthingo inVorlintatit.


Roues OF LORDS, Monday, April 29. No business of interest.

Tuesday, April 30. Process and Practice Ireland Bill, read a second time—Pirates (Head-money) Bill, reported.

Thursday, May 2. Address to the Queen on the Birth of a Prince—Agricultural Distress; I'etitions—West India Appeals Bill, read a third time—Leasehold Tenure of Land (Ireland) Act Amendment Bill, read a second time pro forma. Friday, May 3. Pirates (Head-money) Bill, read a third time and passed—In- demnity Bill, read a second time. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Monday, April 29. Mr. Barry and air. Reid ; the Ventilation Squabbles—Imprisonment of a British free Negro at Charleston—Ecclesiastical Commission Bill, read a second time—Court of Chancery (IreMnd) Bill, in Com- Mittee—Naval Prize Balance Bill, read a third time and passed—Defects in Leases Am Amendment Bill, read a sec-ad time—Irish Smings-banks ; Select Committee neappointed—Savinge-banks ; Sir Charles Wood's Bill—Court of Chancery Bill, read a first time.

Tuesday, April 30. Merchant Steamers ; Statement—Oaths of Members • Lord John Russell promises to introduce a Bill—Episcopal Nepotism ; Registrarship of the Canterbury Prerogative Court—Public Salaries; Mr. Henley's Motion, negatived by 269 to 173. Wednesday, May 1. Address to the Queen on the Birth of a Prince—Landlord and Tenant's Bill, read a second time—Railway Traffic Bill, thrown out on second reading—Benefiees in Plurality Bill, considered m Committee ; amendments made— Tenants at Rackrent Relief Bill, as amended, considered—Parish Constables Bill, read a third time and passed—Schools (Scotland) Bill, [to reform and extend the School Establishment of Scotland,] read a first time.

Thursday, Slay 2. Attorney's Certificate-duty; adjourned debate on Motion for leave to bring in a Bill abolishing; Ministers defeated, by 153 to 136, and leave given; Bill brought in, and read a first time—County Court Extension Bill ; con- sidered in Committee, and reported—Larceny Summary Jurisdiction Bill, as amended —Factories Bill deferred, from lateness, till Wednesday neat.

Friday, May 3. Factories Bill ; Statement by Sir George Grey—Distressed Unions Advances and Repayments of Advances (Ireland) Bill, Parliamentary Voters, 8m. (Ireland) Bill, as amended, and Court of Chancery (Ireland) Bill, considered in Com- Mittee.

TIME-TABLE, The Lords. The Commons.

Hour of Hour of Hour of Roar of

Meeting. Adjournment. Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday bh 511 55m Monday 4h .. (os)lh 30m

Tuesday — 13i0 Tuesday — (mph ra WednestinY No iiiitin6g. Wednesday Noon,... 55 50m Thursday 511, . ih 85m Thursday 4is .... 12h 46m Friday — 5h 30m Friday .... 12h 30m Sittings this Week, 4; Time, 4h 13m - this Session, 46; — 88h rins Sittings this Week, 5; Time, 4111 35in this nektinni,48; —4375 8210


Tho happy event in her Majesty's family called forth loyal manifesta- tions from both Houses. The address in the Commons was moved, on Wednesday, by Sir GEORGE GREY, and seconded by Sir ROBERT INGL/S ; who declared, amidst cheers from all sides, that every hour of her Ma- jesty's reign from the first moment of her accession has added to her name new claims to the affection and gratitude of her people. The ad- dress of the Lords was the first business transacted at their meeting on Thursday. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved it, with characteristic appropriateness of feeling and expression. The Duke of RICHMOND ex- pressed the gratitude felt by himself and those Peers with whom he is connected, to that All-wise Providence who watched over and preserved her Majesty in her recent trial.


When Sir GEORGE Gruev moved in the House of Commons the second reading of the Ecclesiastical Commission Bill, little was added to the ex- planations already given in the House of Lords. The main recommendations of the Select Committee appointed in 1847 have been carried into effect. The constitution of the Commission will not be remodelled, but some machinery will be added. An Estates Committee will be constituted, of which two members will be paid members,—one ap- pointed by Government, who will preside, at a say of 1,200!.; and one appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, at 1,000/. The functions of the Estates Committee will be to consider all matters in any way relating or incident to the sale, purchase, exchange, letting, or management of any land, tithes, or hereddaments, and to devise measures touching the same. No quorum of the Commission can be constituted without the attendance of one of the Estates Commissioners ; but the Commission at large will not be bound by the recommendations of the Estates Committee. The Government proposes to reintroduce the clause rejected by the other House of Parliament for the consolidation of the Episcopal with the General Fund ; and also to restore the original provisions of the bill respecting the salaries of several l)eaneries which the Lords altered to a higher scale. Mr. HoesVaw vigorously criticized the bill ; showing how it falls short of the recommendations of the Committee, and how little it will secure responsibility and effective management in the Commission. The whole Episcopal body remain members of the board, at once perpe- tuating its unnaeldiness and the undue preponderance of Episcopal influence. Of the five members of the Estates Committee, two are nominated by the Crown and three by the existing Commissioners. Of the first two, one will be an unpaid layman. experience shows that he will become honorary and irresponsible ; so that the public is represented by one paid Commissioner, and the Episcopal Bench by three. Never was anything more shallow than the sudden fit of economy under the influence of which the Commission ob- 'eels ts the reestesmendelimaff the Select Committee that all three of the y Cemmissimrem should be laid and responsible. So tender a regard for the Cforch's hnd resommee *ernes strangely from a board whose manage-

menit $a evecy ermelee& le wasteful "without parallel. But why are Bishops necessary in ar Commission at all ? The Bishops are not the Church ; it is the kity who compose its numbers, life, and strength, and who may fitly guard its property. Looking to such gen- tlemen as Sir James Graham and Mr. Goulburn, surely that property would be as safe in the hands of a devout layman as a devout ecclesiastic. The Church has been plundered often ; by the Monarchs first, then by the Nobles, in the laid century by tile Bishops, in the present day by the Fecle- roastacal Commissioners. (Laughter.) The Bishops are not exempt from hu- man infirmities, and think they are taking care of al/ when sometimes taking care of themselves alone. In earlier days, the Bishop's residence was in the cathedral city • he was at the centre of a religious community, ever at home, ever m the public gaze ever accessible to clergy and people : now lie is metamorphosed into a rural dignitary, secluded in an aristocratic man- sion, which the clergy penetrate with difficulty, the people not at all. In this age of active speculation and cultivated intellect—in this age so minis- ceptible of belief—who should be the guides in the arduous and critical war- fare ? Surely, men of a higher spiritual order than those who now, styled Fathers hi Co041," are yet wholly engrossed with worldly affairs, vigilant only of the Church's monies, tenacious only of her dignities and ranks—more likely to smite and sink her than to save her in the struggle. Mr. Goulburn had once complained of Mr. Horsman's low idea of the episcopal office : Mr. Horsman had yet to learn that political functions have aught to do with spiritual office, or indeed are aught but tumours and excrescences upon that office. That office he deemed divine in its origin, spiritual in its essence— too high to be exalted by worldly pomp, too holy to be profaned by worldly occupation ; and if so large an amount of worldly duties be involved in its functions, it is impossible to advance anything more fatal to the establiik- ment of which it is an office.

Mr. Goinsintri zealously vindicated the Eight Reverend Bench, thus " assaulted and vilified with laboriously prepared eloquence." He recurred to statements made by Mr. Reisman on a former occasion to east obloquy on the memory. of demi d Prelates by exaggerating the wealth of which they diecl possessed. It is a painful thing to be obliged to examine into the private affairs of families with a view to refute unjust and unworthy imputations ; yethat task had been imposed upon him. He had been


obliged to make inquiries which no other motive would have induced him to institute, and which for the gratification of private curiosity it would have been disgracefal to make, in order to test the accuracy of the grounds on which the honourable gentleman had thrown imputations upon the Bishops. The honourable gentleman had said he believed that twenty-six Bishops had died since 1828, and that probates had been taken out upon their property to the amount of 1,500,0001. This statement was calculated to oreate an impression that the lives of these Bishops had been lives of avaricious hoarding and accumulation ; and lie accused the honour, able gentleman of having made a statement which he must have blown prejudiced parties unjustly in the opinion of the House. The honour-. able gentleman had been a Lord of the Treasury, and knew upon what principles the probate-duty was paid. The honourable gentleman must have made himself master of the business of the Treasury, because, if report said truly, he had thought himself entitled-to a higher situation- (A laugh, and art ironical cry of "Hear, hear !" front Hr.Horsinan.) The probate- duty, like other stamp-duties, was levied upon sums between two amounts ;


and f the sum was a shilling above 20,000/. the same probate-duty was charged as upon 25,0001. Upon the higher sums there was a differenee of 10,0001. between the amounts on. which the same duty was chargeable. The honourable gentleman had selected in every instance the highest sums upon which the duty was payable ; and on that principle his calculation was tolerably correct. But if he had taken the lowest sums, there would have been a diminution in his estimate of 200,000/., and, taking medium amounts, a reduction of 100,000/. The Stamp-office gives no mformation of the duties returned. From other sources Mr. Goulburu has ascertained, that in eighteen out of twenty-84 cases the average sum left was not 50,000/. but no more than from 20,000/. to 30,000!.; in fourteen of these cases 122,0004 was due to insurances originally effected by the deceased Prelates when struggling in life with moderate mcomes ; one of the Bishops had a private fortune of 10,000/. a year. Yet none of these fasts were allowed for in Mr. Horsman's unfair statements.

Lord Jonitr Enssr.u. could not subscribe to Mr. Horsman's opinion of the Bishops; who, so far as he had any knowledge of them, are a learned, pious, and hospitable body of men ; and such, he believed, lathe charac.- ter they enjoy in the country. It was true he had been disappointed in not having their support in some matters in which they differed from him ; and when the bill of 1840 went up to the House of Lords in their opposing the then Archbishop of Canter- bury, and making the Commission so numerous that it would not work ; but as to the general character of the body, he believed it to be as he had de- scribed it.

Mr. OSBORNE had little to say on the plan of the bill : in the present condition of the Church, it must be a sort of "pull-bishop pull-curate" affair, rendering it very difficult to produce a bill satisfactory to all. But he rose to call attention to the extraordinary language used towards Mr. Horsman. He had heard the sneer of "laboured eloquence" ; he had noted the laboured reply—four weeks concocted—but had noted very little eloquence with the labour : a speech with more vituperation and less argument he never heard. It might suit an Ecclesiastical Member to wink at the Commissioners under the gallery, as much as to say, "See what a speech I am making for you!" but the right honourable gentleman might tell it to the marines—the sailors wouldn't have it." (Laughter.) Such a tissue of misrepresentation could have fallen only from an Ecclesiastical Member. The Bishops giving up their incomes, indeed !—the incomes of their successors they had given up to be taxed ; but none of their own. There was the Bishop of London with his 50,0001. a year and his princely palace at Fulham—the right honourable gentleman knew well he bad not given up sixpence of his income but had given up a portion of it in future to tax his successors. He certainly was surprised to hear one who had been a Minister throw out such a low-bred taunt against the honourable Member for Cockermouth. The right honourable gentleman said, "You are a disap- pointed man—you expected to be a Cabinet Minister." He did not think that came with a very good grace from one who had been tied like a tin kettle to the tail of the right honourable Member for Tam worth—(Laughter, and cries of "Oh, di ! ')—so that in all the changes of that right honour- able Baronet, as he ran from one aide of the House to the other, they always heard the tin kettle rattling behind him. (Renewed laughter, and some murmurs.) The man who voted against Catholic Emancipation one day and for it the next, against Free Trade today and for it tomorrow, turned at Mr. Reisman, and because he had taken a stand before the country where the honourable gentleman could get no footing, exclaimed, "You are a disap- pointed man, because you are not a Cabinet Minister." Mr. Osborne could

not sit still to hear taunts so low, so unworthy. He motested against them, and hoped Mr. liorsman would pursue his course, paying them no sort of regard.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS appealed to the Speaker as to the low language which had just been addressed by Mr. Osborne to Mr. Goulburn—his equal in everything—his superior in statiou,. in talent, in temper, in eloquence. As to the bill, instead of increasing the incomes of Deans, as is complained o4 it simply plunders them less than otherwise they would be plundered.

All the act would do was to leave them, a little more of their own. Older far than any of our nobility was the property of the Bishop of London with- in five miles of the House. (" Oh, oh!" and a laugh.) That property had been in the possession of the see of London thirteen hundred years. (" Oh.," and a laugh.) Certainly above twelve hundred years. (A Member—" Since the days of the Reformation ?") "lam asked,' sal Sir Robert, turning to the bench behind him, "by =honourable Member who has, I take it for granted, sworn to maintain the property of the Church, if these possessions have net only belonged to the see of London since the days of the Reforma- tion: I tell him they have belonged to the see of London since the year 610. ("Oh, oh !" and a laugh.) I don't know if he has the unhappiness to disagree with the Bishop of London in the views he takes of religion. (" Oh., oh ."' and renewed laughter.) I am not to be put down by cries of "Oh r from those who would never have beems admitted into this Rouse but for the too easy credulity of some of my right honourable friends. (Laughter, mingled with renewed' Oho r and cries of "Order, order .1") The honour- able Member for Cockermoutb. appears to be uniformly in the situation of those unhappy men to whom the sight of water is an evil produring strug- gles and convulsions. Nothing will relieve him from his paroxysm but the removal of the object of his dislike."

,Mr. Ifonsires made a remark, which was inaudible.

Sir ROBERT Itteras—" I have received so habitually the indulgence of the Rouse when I address them, that I should be the last to complain of inter- ruption; but I own it is more than usually difficult to go on, when sounds, exclamations, and addresses to myself, proceed from the honourable gentle- men behind me.

Mr. HoRsuArt bowed apologetically, and said a few words, which did not reach the gallery., Sir ROBERT, went on without further comment. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT and Mr. PAGE WOOD expressed regrets at the tone which the debate had taken • the latter condemning Mr. Goulburn for introducing idle gossip, to which he should not have condescended to give weight Mr. Holleman called on Mr. Gonlburn to specify for what office he had ever known him a candidate. Lord JOHN Ressera. interfered, with a tribute to the political independence of Mr. Horsman, and the =im- peached integrity and public character of Mr. Goulburn. Mr. GouLsurtie admitted that he had spoken under feelings of vexation ; and retracted his allusion to what he admitted might have been a veq. foolish rumour.

Harmony -being thus restored, business resumed its course ; and the bill was read a second time.


Mr. HUME attempted to modify the Benefices in Plurality Bill in Com- mittee, by a motion taking the sense of the House on the principle that pluralities should henceforth cease and determine. Mr. Hume's principle met very general concurrence ; but Sir GEORGE GREY, Mr. SIDNEY HER- BERT, and Mr. GLADSTONE doubted the propriety of carrying it into ex- treme operation immediately ; recalling to mind the difference between Scotland and England in this matter—that no benefices in Scotland are wider 150/., whereas in England several must sometimes be united to make even aless sum. Mr. Al rare took a division on an amendment em- bodying his principle ; and was defeated, by 166 to 53. Immediately afterwards, however, Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT moved an amendment on clause 1, which made residence compulsory in every benefice endowed with so much as 100/. a year ; an improvement which Mr. Hume accepted in failure of his more sweeping proposals, and. which Sir GEORGE GREY also supported, as within the spirit of the bill. On a division, this im- provement was carried, by 162 to 16.


Sir BENJAMIN 1=Lcyr, made a statement and put a question regarding the patronage of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The emoluments of the office of Registrar of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury have been from 9,0001. to 12,000/. a year ; the office itself is it sinecure. The usage has been, that the Archbishop for the time being should nominate the incum- bent of the office and two successors. Archbishop Moore appointed his two sons, and they in succession held the office. Dr. Manners Sutton appointed his grandson, the present Lord Canterbury, to the reversion of the office—that grandson being then ten or twelve years old. The late venerated Dr. Howley made a communication to the Government, that, in the conscientious fulfilment of his duty, he could not fill up the reversion of this sinecure when it became vacant in 184.5; and it remained vacant at his death,—not the only similar me- morial of his pious self-cleniaL When Dr. Sumner, the presentArchbishop, succeeded, he found the reversion of the office vacant, and immediately filled it up, by appointing his son, a young gentleman studying in the Temple. By the 10th and 11th Victoria, e. 98, see. 9, every such person appointed after the passing of the act is to hold office subject to the re- gulations made by Parliament. It is tolerably clear that Dr. Sumner, with archiepiscopal forethought, imagined that Government would not interfere : but what is the intention of Government with regard to the reversion of this office ?

Lord Joust RUSSELL assented to the correctness of Sir Benjamin's re- cital of the facts ; and. added, that there were several offices which the late Dr. Howley in like manner declined to fill up. The nature of the present office is under investigation • it appears to be one that should be either abolished or vastly altered. is to the enormous income, the young gentleman whose appointment is now in question will have no claim whatever to compensation.


Mr. HENLEY'S long-announced motion was in them words- " That an humble address be presented to her Majesty, humbly to request that she will be graciously pleased to direct that a careful revision be made of the salaries and wages paid in every department of the public service, with a view to ajust and ade- quate reduction thereof, due regard being had to the efficient performatute of the several duties."

In 1821, an address was voted praying a general revision of public salaries ; in 1831, one Committee considered official salaries received by Members of Parliament, and another considered the offices paid out of the Civil List. Each inquiry produced some inconsiderable reductions. Committees have sat since, and at last Lard John Russell has appointed a Committee to in- quire into three branches of public) service—the salaries of Members of

the House, Diplomatic salaries, and Judicial salaries. The Army, the Navy, and the Ordnance Estimates come under annual revision. This annual or peiiodical revision of the great establishments justifies the proposal to consider and revise the large mess of expenditure which Mr. Henley would now bring under notice. In 1848-9, the amount paid under the head of salaries and wages in the departments of the Customs, Excise, Stamps, Taxes Post-office, and Crown Lands, was 2,813,0001.;

various Commissions coat 271,2731. ; 140,0001. ; Justice and Police, 1,097,524/. ; making a total of 4,327,0001. a year, not one farthing of which over conies under the annual revision of Parliament The amount for salaries and wages in the Navy., Army, and Ordnawie, which have no- thing to do at all with fighting, is 1,500,00W. ; Connuissariat, 100,0001. ; Miss cellaneous, about 1,031,0001. ; making a total of 2,647,0001. which Parliament does annually revise. Certain fee balances add 500,00W. more. So that the grand total for salaries is about 7,500,000L—actually more by 1,000,000/. than the cost of all the effective railitary service of the country. Parties who maintain that savings can only be made on warlike establishments are giving " false hallos' to turn attention to those parts of expenditure for which it is easy to make out a good case. The cost of salaries and wages for the collection of the four great branches of revenue—Customs, Excise' Stamps, and Taxes, in


1838, was 1,93,515& ; the same cost in 1844, when 200 articles of the tariff had been relieved from duty, was 2,034467/. In 1838, the cod per cent of collecting the Customs was 51. Os. 54., the Excise 61. 68. 4d., the Stamps 21. Is. 741. ; in 1848, the cost had risen to 51. 4s. 2td., 61. 8s., and 21. 2s. 8fd., respectively. The percentage increased although the amount collected was larger. Thus it is plain, that such continued reductions of expenditure have not been made as to justify the refuted of revision. The cost of various Corn -

missions is extravagant : no one would think, if new establishing the late mitio Commission, of giving the C,ommiseieners 2,0001. a year—twice as much as the County Court Judges.

Within the last twenty-five years there has been a great change in the cost of all articles of necessity or luxury. With reaped to the interest of money, the capital of the National Debt had somewhat hicreaeod between 1829 and 1849, when it was 774,022,638!.; yet the yearly charg.e was reduced from 25,342,000/. to 23,862,0001. The prices of the main articles of common expenditure had fallen in the following proportions—Beef and mutton, pen- baps 17 per cent (at present more than 20 per cent) ; bread, 20 per cent (at present more) i - grocery (he had a list of fifty-two artioks) 26 per cent; LI, rage—hay, straw, and corn, 20 per cent; furniture, ironmongery, &e., 20 per cent ; linen, 16 per cent ; cottons, 30 per cent ,• woollens, 10 per cent ; shoes, 7 per cent ; hosiery, 25 per cent; fuel, 25 per cent; wine, 10 per cent; beer, 20 per cent. With such a great reduction in the prices of the necessaries and luxuries of life., why should not the public expenditure undergo revision? There is in the country at large a feeling on this subject of economy, but he did not believe there ex- ists anywhere a disposition to carry the system of reduction beyond what is just ; and it might be found, perhaps, that the principle of an equal per- centage off all salaries would not be quite fair. It is due to the public ser- vants of the Crown to say, that, speaking generally, they are a very zealous, able, and efficient body of men ; nor is he one of those who think this alter- ation of prices ought to be carried to its extent against any clam; but it ie an element that ought to enter into consideration, and there ought to be a periodical revision of these large establishments. Consideration for the par- ties themselves should induce the Government not to refuse all revision.

Sir ClIARLES WOOD Went into statistical details of divers sorts to refute Mr. Henley.

He quoted from the Marylebone Workhouse accounts, to show that a pau- per costs more in 1849 than in 1843, in the proportion of 5s. fd. to 4s. tid. He showed once again, as has often been shown, that considerable reductions have been made in late years on the numbers of departmental employe's, and in the aggregate of their omit ; in the Excise alone, since 1833, there have been reductions of 2,054 persons, receiving nearly half a million in aalariee • in the Pay Office consolidations which save 16,000/. a year. Affirming that

the cost of collecting revenue has no fixed relation to its productiveness he quoted figures to show that the cost of collection is lower for 1850 then in 1848, in all the departments. Lastly, he referred to the salaries of the ser- vants in the great establishments organized by private enterprise—the Bank, the East India Company, &c.—the scale of which is equal to that of the Go- vernment establishments. Ministers desire to promote a just economy. Sir Charles expressed entire agreement with Mr. Disraeli, that in all offices dis- tinctly under their control it is their duty on their own responsibility to introduce salutary reductions. The Government has done 130, and is doing so now, and does not deserve the vote of censure implied in the motion before the House. Sir Charles therefore moved "the previous question."

The motion was supported by Colonel SIBTEORP ; on the principle that it does a great deal of good to " stir these people up " •' just as the press does good to all of us," "for if the press did not touch us up sometimes, we should do nothing." Kr. NEWDEGATE contrasted the able and coin. prehensive statement of Mr. Henley with the captious speech of Sir Charles Wood ; and argued, that as a rise in prices has ever been deemed' good reason for a rise in salaries, so the converse should hold good of 144 reduction in salaries when every sort of produce has so declined. The debate then exhibited some political crossing. M. Hums hoped the House would assent to the motion, and show "the people" that they are honestly endeavouring to enforce on the Government a system of economy, retrenchment, and reform. Mr. Hume threw out a suggestion for a more improved mode of enlisting public servants—

If the Government wished to have really good and useful men appointed as officers in the public service, and to get rid of the annoyance and the evil of being pestered with applications made on political grounds, they would. ap- point a board to examine all candidates, and to ascertain their qualifications for the particular offices they wish to fill. Until some such mode were adopted, they would never have the country freed from a greet many useless persona, who could not possibly, from their previous pursuits, be tit for their situations.

Mr. ROEBUCK supported the motion ; although he knew that, with its "guarding clause " at the end, it was only made to gain for the mover the popularity of being an economist by moving a mere truism.

The noble Lord would have done it far more injury if he had accepted it at once, and said, "I take the proposition you move, I cannot deny

that it is true, for it ie a truism • but you must have known when you moved

it that you were occupying the time of the public utterly uselessly—that xeit had no object but to cast odium and to obtain popularity ; and I will deprive you of what you wish to obtain." Mr. Roebuck rejoiced at the exceeding love of economy which has sprung up on the Opposition side of the House.

Mr. Law—" Reciprocity. Mr. RoEBUC1E—" Ay, reciprocity ; the honourable gentleman is right." They were smitten with a new-born zeal now that they found—and lie was

delighted they did find—there was no longer any protection for them ; and they very honestly said there should be no protection for any one clse ; and the people of England was the gainer. He would maintain, as he had main-

tained elsewhere, the unpopular doctrine that the hard-working men of out offices are not overpaid. He took the case of the Treasury, where thirtyo

seven persons are employed, who have entered at the age of twenty years. Look at any man who has attained honours at either of the Universities and entered the Treasury; he enters there unused to business, as much a learner as in a pleader's chambers, and remains two years with 90/. a year. There are four classes ; he remains in the first clam till he is thirty-three years old, and then obtains 2001.: he then reaches the second class, in which he may rise to 5001. by the time he is fifty. And so he goes on to the fourth class, at the head of which he obtains 1,0001. a year ; but not before he is fifty- nine years; old. Mr. Roebuck appealed to the House of Commons—looking to the habits of this country, and they must look to those habits—looking to all the exigencies a man must go through before he could fit himself for o i

ffice—looking to the station he must hold n this great town, to meet others in the position of gentlemen, in the position of life in which he was, to be

beyond the ordinary temptations of life—was it to be said that in the high- est office of the working people of the state of this country a man must be sixty years old before he could attain to 1,0001. a year, and that that should be considered overpaying in a hard-working service ? Would any one say that a lawyer in business might be deemed overpaid if when he began life he hoped at sixty to attain 1,000/. a year? And let them recollect, it was amongst all the doubts and difficulties that surrounded a man in that position from day to day, from hour to hour; his family dependent on his life, on his strength, on his being able to perform the duties of his office. He had heard it stated that the heads of his own profession were overpaid : he at once boldly said he did not think they were. If, then, the heads of that profession were not overpaid, and the heads of the Government were not overpaid, and the subordinates were not overpaid, where was the overpay- ment? It could only be in the number of persons employed ; and he was sure the noble Lord would do well to allow the inquiry, to show that the numbers were not over what they ought to be ; for if it could be proved that they were over what they ought to be, the noble Lord would be the first to be benefited by the reduction. Well, then, why should not an inquiry be

made ? ' Why should they have what he always considered a subterfuge— the previous question ? The noble Lord, by that, professed that inquiry should be made, but that the time was inconvenient for it. (caw of "No !"

from the Treasury bench.) The noble Lord must forgive him for reading the orders and forms of the House according to the ordinary mode in which they were taken; and according to the ordinary forms of the House such is the fact. The noble Lord said, by the previous question, he would ask the House of Commons whether that was the proper time to entertain the mo- tion, that is the meaning of "the previous question" ; and there could not be a fitter time than the present one of transition for such an inquiry.

Sir Roemer PEEL agreed with so much of what Mr. Roebuck had said, as to be surprised to find he arrived at a different conclusion from him.

The reason perhaps was, the different construction Sir Robert put on the invert of "the previous question." The House cannot accept the motion simply because it is a truism ; else the House might have nothing to do but rieeept truisms. "I think," said Sir Robert, "the House of Commons ought not to vote truisms unless they have a practical meaning. I think that are- solution of the House of Commons, particularly a resolution interfering with the ordinary functions of the Executive Government, ought not to be voted unless it be justified by sonic act done or directed to some object to be at- tained. I think this motion, if it mean anything—and I am certain it is brought forward by the honourable gentleman Who made it with a bond fide intention—would seem to imply that a considerable reduction could be made in the salaries and wages paid in every department of the public service, and

particularly amongst that class of officers who the honourable and learned gentleman the Member for Sheffield thinks at present are not sufficiently-, or

at tenet more than sufficiently, remunerated. It is because I agree with the honourable and learned gentleman in that opinion, that I cannot countenance a delusion by voting for this resolution. By voting for the previous ques- tion' I do not negative inquiry. I say, let every inquiry be made by the authorities fitted to conduct it, namely, the Executive Government. If this resolution were voted it would lead to disappointment ; it has no practical object, and therefore I will not consent to it. I shall vote for the previous question ; but in voting for it, I do not mean therefore to imply that this is not a time at which a revision should take place and a reduction be made in every department in which it can be effected."

He refuted Mr. Henley's assertions that reductions in the Excise establish- ment, and its cost, had not been carried out in proportion to the promises made before the tariff alterations in 1842. He paid a tribute of admiration and gratitude to those officers of the Treasury—such as the late Mr. Brooks- bank—who practically conduct so large a portion of the business of their su- periors in the public departments. "You have heard-how in other countries

means have existed of obtaining knowledgeof state affairs, and important se- crets and documents have become known; but you never heard of a case in which there could be a just imputation cast on the honour of the humblest man employed in our establishments. When I was appointed to the office of First Lord of the Treasury, I was allowed salaries for two private secretaries, 3001. for one, and 1501. for the other • those were two men who were as cog- nisant of everything that was wanted in a public office as I was myself: I had no alternative but to select two young men in the Treasury ; and when I left office, I left it without the means of marking my sense of their ser- vices except by the expression of my gratitude. But if they had received 1,000/. a. year it was Impossible they could more faithfully and honourably fulfil them duties; and the account I give of them is similar to that which can be given of other persons occupying similar situations in the state."

Hie opinion did not materially differ from Mr. Henley's in many respects. He thoughtthat the reduction of prices might fairly be considered in forming new establishments; but he doubted the justice of telling those who had toiled thirty peen in the public service, that as the price of wheat has fallen, they must submit to a diminution of their income.

Mr. COBDEN opposed the motion; because if he accepted the reduction of price as a plea for a reduction of salarie* in public offices, he was a party to a proposition for a general reduction of wages throughout the corintry ; a measure uncalled for, impracticable and therefore absurd.

'So far from a reduction of price leading to a reduction of wages, the ten- dency is the other way ; a diminution of price leading to increased demand, increased employment, and increase of wages. During the very process in question, there is a tendency to advance the wages of skilled operatives. The Members for Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire can state that the stocking- makers, laceworkers, and others in the Midland Counties, have had during the last twelve months a succession of strikes, and advances of wages, not known for fifty years before. With regard to agricultural labourers, however, they are always at the slavery state of wages—at the point where their labour only just amounts to a subsistence; their employers advance and sink wages with prices so as to give the labourer about the same amount of

food : but even in agricultural ffi.stricts, though there has been a reduction in money wages, the labourer's family is better off now than in 1847, the

boasted year of prosperity among the Protectionists. He admitted that the time is come when we should endeavour to deal with the non-effective branch of the military service by preventing its extension. Considerable advantages have generally resulted from Committees : the Import-duties Committee did more than anything for the triumph of free trade ; the Woods and Forests Committee paved the way for reform there; and the Committee on the African Squadron would ultimately lead to the abolition of that fame. The public press uses the evidence, and operates on opinion, which operates on the Legislature. He hoped Government would appoint Committees on all the departments ; but he would vote against this motion, for many reasons: he would vote against it because he objected to the reduction of the aalaries of humble clerks and labour- ers in the public departments ; he would vote against it became he could not be

a party to casting a blemish on free trade by making it the pretence for inflicting a wound on any class of the community ; he would vote against it because he was unwilling to make it appear that the country was less able now than before the establishment of free trade to pay itsofficers and servants; he would vote against it because he was not to acknowledge, as a con- sequence of free trade, that the people are in the enjoyment of fewer com- forts than before ; and finally, he would vote against it because he could not admit that the people are not entitled to the full benefit of the advantages which free trade gives them.

Mr. Minim= observed, that there was one thing at least upon which the House and the country were agreed, notwithstanding some delicately- toned dissentient murmurs which had been breathed that evening,—name- ly, that the pressure of taxation on the country is excessive.

He defended the policy of his party from the taunts levelled against it by Lord John Russell last Friday; and maintained that his party, have given no votes for the remission of taxes which were not authorized by the condition of the public finances or regulated under a due consideration of the claims of the public creditor. He ridiculed by turns the statistical researches of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the pauper accounts of the parish of Mary- leboue, and Sir Robert Peel's objections to curtail the salaries of those mysterious and rare individuals who are virtually the Government of the country. But he would ask, did a young man who desired the post of private secretary to a Minister of State look to the immediate wages he received ? No ; he looked to the immediate reward of the confidence of his chief, and to the future rewards which were open to him. That, there- fore, was an amiable but ad captandum answer, which had nothing what- ever to do with the motion before the House. The honourable Member for the West Riding said he would not vote for the motion, although he admitted its abstract justice, because it would be a condemnation of the new system. He would tell the honourable gentleman, that this was not a condemnation of the new system, but it was one of the consequences of it. Its condemnation would come in due season. But one of the re- sults of the new system was, that they were sal obliged, in consequence of the increased burdens of the people, to examine the public expenditure of the country. Now, here was 7,500,000!. to begin with. He wanted this fairly to be understood out of doors. He did not want them to run away with the sentimentality of the right honourable gentleman the Member for Tamworth, and suppose that they were dealing with a very small and insignificant sum distributed among a very few hard-working men. No such thing. He esti- mated that the motion, if carried, would probably lead to a saving of 1,000,000/. per annum, and perhaps more ; and those who would form a Judgment upon their conduct that night with regard to that important question were hard- working men who were suffering hardly. Lord Joing RUSSELL observed, that as this motion was made after the mover had so repeatedly heard the Government' state its determination to proceed to the utmost in the course of revision and reduction, the only conclusion to be drawn' was that he had no confidence in the proposals of the Government, and conceived it his duty to force it into some further mode of revision. But the motion was more than a vote of want of con- fidence.

It could not be assented to without exciting an expectation throughout the country that Government proposed a reduction of wages in every depart,. ment of public service. Lord John stated on official information, that, ex- cept in some few of the agricultural counties, there have been no reductions in wages ; and that the labouring classes of the country. are now in a better condition than they were in before the adoption of the policy of free trade. Under the guise of motions for a reduction of taxation, the skilful general of the Opposition veils his attack on free trade ; for, whether he marches to the right or to the left, for a feint, it is plain that the real object of his attacks is the Free-trade intrenchments. "We have no chance of escape," said the honourable gentleman and his friends, "in our own anti011r as Tories;. but if we appear as great .eeonomists, as great friends of reduction, as men who wish to diminish taxation, then we may earry some motion which will be, at all events, exceedingly hostile to the Government; and thus, by certain roundabout and circuitous modes, we May at length attain our real object-7 the restoration of a protective duty upon- grain." So far from saving 1,000,000/. the resolution would not save one pound. The only true mode of economy was that adopted by the Government—to make a gradual revision of the public departments ; to treat no individual with injustiee, but in the case of any vacancies not to fill up places which are unnecessary; and if any other departments besides those which have been mentioned should here- after seem fit subjects for inquiry, to let such inquiry be made. The other speakers were Mr. HENRY Daummown and Sir CHARLES BURRELL, in favour of the original motion. r

The House divided on the "previous question," and decided, by 269 to 173, that Mr. Henley's motion should not be put to the vote.


In support of his motion for leave to bring in a bill to amend the law relative to Savings-banks, Sir CHARLES WOOD sketched the origin and progress of those institutions. The first society of the sort was established at Wendover in 1799, and in 1804 one was established at Tottenham. Six benevolent persons received the savings of the poor up to the amount of 6001.—one hundred pounds for each person ; and their custom was that a new person was induced to join his se- curity as often as a hundred pounds additional had been deposited. The-per- sons thus acting used the money at their own discretion, and paid a moderate interest. In 1817, an act passed which enabled such trustees to invest the money in the Funds at interest., and to transfer to Government the responsi- bility of the amounts invested ; in 1824 this investment was made compulsory ; in 1828 rules were prescribed, and the trustees were exempted from liability for all but wilful or neglectful losses in 1844 the rate of interest -was re- duced, and trustees were exempted ?rem all liability whatever.With the growth of the institutions laxity of management crept in, especially as in legislation every effort was made to preserve as much as possible of the ori- ginal voluntary character of the associations ." the zeal and benevolence of the promoters slackened and fell off from that height which originated the institutions and preserved them in healthy working: the trustees exercised less personal attendance and vigilance over the working officers ; and at last dishonest .practices and serious defaulting,s have become frequent. The small beginnings of fifty years ago have now ripened into institutions that afford a place of deposit, for the earnings of the poor to the amount of 28,000,0001. The importance of the interests, and the imperfect legislation hitherto attempted in the matter, render it absolutely necessary to grapple further with the subject.

One of the chief evils is that exemption from any liability which was ex- tended to trustees in 1844: it is proposed to restore the liability of the trustees for wilful or neglectful losses. Neither the Government nor the trustees are now liable for loss by the treasurers of the savings-banks; the

Government cannot be answerable for officers it does not appoint, and the trustees are unanswerable for anybody or anything. It Is proposed to place these officers lathe appointment of Government, and to make Govern- ment responsible for their acts. One of the chief sources of fraud under the present system is the loose practice with regard to receivingmoney ; the treasurer or actuary frequently receives monies at his own house—most of the defaults have originated in this usage. It is intended that the treasurer alone shall receive money, and he shall attend at certain stated times for that purpose. The Government will generally appoint a local banker to fill the office; and the duties shall no longer be wholly unremunerated. It shall be a mis- demeanour for any other person than the treasurer to receive money as a savings-bank deposit. Daily accounts shall be rendered to the Commission- ers of the National Debt; and those Commissioners shall appoint auditors, who shall exercise a constant auditing of the accounts, subject to super- vision by special inspectors despatched at discretion. Sir Charles Wood re- commended the general adoption of an excellent practice pursued at the Barnsley. savings-bank : there the trustees publish with their annual ac- counts the amount of each depositor's balance in juxtaposition with the number of his deposit-book As the depositor alone knows the number of his own book, he thus exclusively gains a knowledge which enables him to audit his own account once a year. The Government has sustained a loss of about 40,000/ a year by following a larger rate of interest than it ob- tains. Considering the .general reduction in the rate of interest, and considering that the primary object of the great majority of depositors is to obtain a safe place of deposit rather than a lucrative investment, Go- vernment proposes to reduce the rate of interest allowed to banks from 3l. 6s. to W., and the interest allowed to depositors from 24 to 2/. 158. Deposits will be limited to 1001.; when they reach 100/. Government will, at the op- tion of the depositor, hold the money safely without paying interest, or it will, free of charge, invest the 100/. in the Funds for the depositor. The power of investing in annuities will be enlarged—at present 4/. yearly is the lowest amount, 1/. yearly will be the future minimum. • In the debate which followed Sir Charles Wood's explanation; Mr. Hume and Mr. Slane), were the only speakers who expressed an opinion on the bill ; and they took opposite sides. Mr. HUME objected that Govern- ment had interfered too little—they should have either let the matter alone or insured perfect security by taking the management wholly. Mr. SLANEY congratulated the House on the measure generally, and particularly on that part which enabled the depositor to become a fundholder. The other speakers—Sir HENRY Wi.ixoranniv Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD, Mr. W. FAGAN, Sir J. jonicsroem, Mr. H. A. HERBERT, Mr. BANKEE3, and Colonel Tnompsom—confined themselves to an advocacy of the claims on Government possessed by the depositors who have suffered by the numerous defaultings. Mr. SHARMAN Caawvoan urged that it is no- torious that poor people are induced by the rich to deposit in savings- banks, and equally notorious that the nch and poor alike generally sup- posed Government was responsible for the whole deposits. Sir CHARLES Woon put aside these topics, with the observation that the present was not the proper opportunity for discussing them.

Leave was given to bring in the bill; and the bill was subsequently presented and read a first time.


The debate adjourned from 26th February, on the motion of Lord Ro- BERT Gnosviccoa, for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the duty on at- tornies' certificates, was resumed on Thursday, and brought to a quick and unexpected conclusion. Sir CHARLES WOOD declared he could not af- ford the money-117,0001 a year; especially as the attornies do not ap- pear to be suffering under any deep or unusual distress. On a division, the original motion was carried against the Chancellor of the Exchequer, ,by 155 to 136. Leave therefore was given to bring in the bill. Later in the evening, the bill was read a first time.


Sir GEORGE GREY stated to the House of Commons on Thursday, that after the House had so decidedly expressed its opinion that the jurisdic- tion of the County Courts ought to be extended, he would not offer any . further opposition to Mr. Fitzroy's bill. The House then going into Com- mittee on the bill, the chief matters debated were the scale of fees, and the restrictions to be placed on suing for small sums in the superior courts, or the inferior local courts. The bill proposed a higher and lower scale of fees for debts above and below 20/. Sir Joinc JERVD3 and Sir GEORGE GREY objected to this arrangement, and urged the House to establish uniformity on a single scale throughout. Mr. Frrmor resisted the alteration at first; arguing that it is unjust to take as much from the man who owes 19/. as from him who owes 49!.: but as the general feeling seemed against him, he submitted. Mr. ROEBUCK insisted much on the advantage and propriety of doing away with fees altogether, and paying a salary for a man's whole time and undivided services. The plan was generally applauded, and met the qualified approbation of Sir GEORGE GREY; who, however, had found that practical difficulties pre- vented its being carried out so far as Mr. Roebuck demands. Mr. CROWDER opposed the provision which mulcts in costs the plaintiff who shall sue for debts under 50/. in the superior courts : he would retain the present limit of 201. for that provision, and give an option above that amount. Sir Joins Jnavis opposed the compromise, and would not concede this "de- parture from the principle of the bill." No alteration was made. The clauses being agreed to, Sir Joins JERVIS moved the addition of clauses, restricting judges from practice requiring the residence of clerks, author- izing the Treasury to pay by stilary in lieu of the mode now used, and vesting subordinate appointments in the Treasury.


Presenting above a hundred petitions from agricultural sufferers, the Duke of Ricumorm renewed the irregular discussions of last week on agricultural distress; particularly calling Earl Grey's attention to the ap- pearance of sixty advertisements in a Northumberland paper for local sales of farming stock. He complained that the income-tax of the farmer is proportioned to his rent, while that of the trader is proportioned to his profits. Earl GREY replied, that nearly the same number of sales is usual at this season—the period for changing tenancies; and he quoted an instance of seventy similar sales, in a Sussex paper of September 1844, when protection was high and effective. As to the mode of leving the

• income-tax, Lord Grey himaalf complained of it when it was imposed,

• as unjust to the farmers : but he was overruled by the leaders of the agricultural party. The Duke of ARGYLL, and the Earl of Sr. Ocam a Ns, objecting to these irregular discussions, supported the "exceptional" theory, from which such ponderous deductions had been drawn; but they con- curred in thinking that burdens must be readjusted, and the income-tax more justly levied on the farmer.


Mr. Coexatran called attention to the circumstances of the case at the Thames Police Court, which showed that the Black steward of a British vessel had been seized out of his ship at Charleston and imprisoned during two months, for the simple cause that he was a free man of colour. Such a practice, though possibly authorized by some local law, appears to be, if not a direct infringement of the law of nations, in direct opposition to all the principles which ordinarily regulate the intercourse between lized nations.

Lord PALMERSTON stated, that, unfortunately, the subject was by no means new. A law exists in Carolina, and in Louisiana, by which free men of colour, of whatever nation or country, whether foreigners or citi- zens of some other State of the Union, are subject to imprisonment with a view to their removal from the territories of those States. The law directs that all such persons corning in ships be taken and kept in prison till the ships depart; and it makes the master responsible for removing such persons when he leaves the port. No opinion need be expressed on such a law : it arises from that unfortunate institution of the United States which has become the subject of serious differences in the Congress itself. In 1847, our Government remonstrated against the law as a viola- tion of established polity, and also as against the articles of the treaty of 1815, which give the subjects of the two countries reciprocal rights freely to enter, reside in, and quit, the states of the other. Mr. Buchanan replied, verbally, that the Federal Government was powerless to revoke the law; and that if the English insisted, the American Government would find the question so utterly unmanageable, that, however reluct- antly, it must terminate the treaty of 1815. The English Government did not think that commensurate advantages would result from further press- ing the matter. It should be remembered that the law is well known, and that those who go there voluntarily expose themselves to it.