Dzbates anb Vrorttbings in Warliaturnt.

THE CORN-LAWS.

The House of Commons on Monday resumed the Committee ; and the Government scale of Barley-duties having been moved, Mr. WODE- MOUSE moved an amendment to exclude barley from the proposed alteration. He expressed a dread of competition from Denmark and France ; and he called upon Sir Edward Knatchbull to give adequate protection to agriculture. He complained that, in an interview which he had had with Sir Robert Peel, he could not learn what were the intentions of Government in respect of the duties on foreign malt. He warned Sir Robert, that if prices of farm-produce were approximated to the Continental level, wages also must approach that level ; and that in such a case the new Poor-law could not be enforced. He concluded by moving that the Chairman do report progress and ask leave to sit again. He conceived that the effect of carrying that motion would be, that the proposed duties on barley would be erased from the scale, and left for after consideration.

The CHAIRMAN said, that the motion would merely leave the House in the same position as when it resumed the Committee : he suggested that Mr. Wodehouse should move that the resolutions be reported.

Sir ROBERT PEEL observed, that Mr. Wodehouse had given no explicit reasons for the protection which he claimed : but he would state that Government had no intention of altering the import-duties on malt ; for the revenue derived from that source is considerable. With respect to barley and oats, he conceived that the rates of freight paid on these species of grain, which were higher in comparison to their value than those exacted upon wheat, in themselves constituted a protection; and he believed that the soil and climate of England were, on the whole, better suited to the production of barley than the Continent.

After a short conversation on the point of order, the question was put, not that the Chairman should report progress, but that he should report the resolutions.

Major Custrinzso BRUCE said, that the charges of transit from Scot- land to London were higher than those from the Baltic. He hoped that Government would reconsider that part of their scheme ; though, rather than endanger the stability of the Government, he was prepared to make even a larger sacrifice.

Lord WORSLEY would give the measure every opposition in his power ; and he called upon agriculturists to stand firm to their prin- ciples. Mr. CHRISTMAS, as well as Mr. CHRISTOPHER, would support the amendment if it could have had any practical result; which it would not. Mr. Swew advocated the claim of Irish oats to protection ; and quoted Mr. Meek to show that the average price of oats free on board at Elsinore would be from 12s. to 159. Mr. CHARLES Bum.= would vote with Government, as he could not lend himself in any way to raising a duty; but he asked why the agricultural Members could not pluck up a little courage, like the Duke of Buckingham, to resist the Government?

Mr. WODEHOUSE, satisfied with Sir Robert Peel's declaration that he should not alter the Malt-duties, withdrew his motion ; and the Govern- ment scale of Bargy-daties was agreed to.

The scale of Oat-duties was then moved ; and the discussion, which had already turned upon the subject of oats, was continued by Mr. Siam O'BuuN, again urging protection for Irish produce-

At almost any time when oats were at 20a, foreign oats could be imported

and sold at a profit, after paying the 6s. duty which the new scale proposed to levy. When oats were selling at 20s. in the London market, the correspond- ing prices in Ireland would not be more than 13s. or 14s. Kiln-drying and other expenses in Ireland could not amount to less than 6s. or 7s. ; and from 7d. to 7id. would be the maximum price per stone on the Western coast of Ireland. At those prices much land must necessarily be thrown out of culti- vation. In 1837, no less a quantity than 322,274 quarters of oats paid a duty of 9s. 11d. ; and in 1839, 355,000 quarters paid a duty of 6s. 5d. This was enough to show that he was not giving way to any imaginary fear. The im- portation of oats last year from Ireland into England amounted to 841,000 quarters.

Sir ROBERT BATESON sneered at Mr. O'Brien for his present course, after having voted last year for Lord John Russell's fixed duty of 3s. 4d. on oats.

Mr. W. 0. STANLEY had consulted several of his constituents, Cm Anglesey,) who were quite satisfied with the proposed scale.

Mr. REonwrox, referring to Sir Robert Bateson's taunt, remarked that it was unfair ; for Lord John Russell's duty never came before the House at all, as his opponents would not let him go so far with the question. Sir Robert Peel was the man that made the converts ; one great and courageous nobleman alone withstanding his efforts at con- version. He should oppose the reduction to 7s. at 19s. price.

Mr. GLADsToxis entered into minute explanations to show, that in the comparison with wheat, barley and oats had been taken at the very highest standard of value, and that ample protection was given against foreign competition. Foreign barley is not fit for malting, and that- proves that it is not of the best quality. In 1829, 193,000 quarters of barley paid Ils. duty ; but in that year 550,000 quarters were imported. If, therefore, only 193,000 quarters were brought out of the warehouses, it showed that the transaction, in a mercantile sense, was not a good one ; and that one-third only was brought out, rather than the expenses of bondage' &e. should be incurred- Looking at Mr. Meek's Report and the Consular Returns, he inferred that the price at which large quantities of barley might be computed to be put on board at the principal ports of export en the Continent was 18s. 2d., and that the quantity to be imported at that price was about 825,000 quarters. To that he would add, for freight and other charges, 55. per quarter ; which would raise the price to 23s. 2d. The duty of 9s. would further increase the market-price to 32s. 2d. He thought few would say that was an unreasonable amount of pro- tection as applicable to barley ; and he conceived that, under ordinary circum- stances, no large importation of that grain could be expected to be brought in under 32s. The present average price of barley was 34s. With respect to oats, they could be put on board at Ils. 2d. a quarter. To that add 5s. a quarter for expenses, and 16s. 2d. would be the price at which large quantities might be expected to be imported. Add the duty, and 22s. would be the mar- ket-price; which he thought every gentleman who made reasonable calculations and demands would consider as a fair and steady protection.

Mr. MORGAN Joss O'CONNELL complained that the scales for barley and oats had not throughout their length been exactly apportioned to the scale for wheat. Last year he voted for abolition of all duty : he now opposed unequal measures, whether of restriction or relaxation.

Sir ROBERT PEEL was surprised at the inconsistency of speakers opposite- "Row the honourable gentleman can look with such minuteness into some difference which he thinks he discovers in the proportions between the duties, which are proposed on wheat and oats, and declare that Ireland will be ruined because she has not got some sixpence more, which she has a right to claim- how he who considers oats one of the great elements of her prosperity, should then take the great leap of depriving this produce of all protection whatever- this, Sir, I confess myself unable to comprehend. You were all loud in cheering the sentiment that my proposition was an insult to the people of England; but the moment the interests of your own constituencies are touched, then al the outcry is raised on the other aide. You then demand explanations for those enactments which touch the protection of Irish oats. The longer these debates continue, the more the people see that, amidst all the difficulties and embarrassments by which the question is encompassed, the course I have taken is just and moderate, and intended to reconcile, as far as possible, those con- flicting interests which are affected by the subject under consideration. r have endeavoured to give facility and regularity to commercial intercourse, without doing that which, in my opinion, would have the effect of increasing commercial embarrassments by too great a disturbance of the agricultural in- terests, which would react upon the other interests of the country.

Mr. ORMSBY GORE supported increased protection to what Mr. Pitt called Ireland's sole manufacture, her agriculture. Dr. Bowniasu would vote against Sir Robert Peel's motion, because it implied that food might be taxed. Mr. F. T. BARING regarded the question now as simply one of proportion between wheat and other duties ; and he would vote with Sir Robert Peel.

The first item of the Oats scale was agreed to. On the second item, that at 198. and under 20s. of price the duty should be 7s., the House divided ; when the proposition was carried, by 256 to 53. The other items of the scale was confirmed. The resolution relating to Rye, Peas, and Beans, was affirmed.

On the resolution that the duty on every barrel of wheat, meal, and flour, of 196 pounds, should be equal to the duty on 34 gallons of wheat, Lord SANDON urged the claims of the millers to further protection. The sending grain to this country from Poland, Prussia, and North America in the shape of flour makes a difference to the merchant's ad- vantage of 5s. lid. in the barrel, and pro tanto deprives the miller of protection. The usual policy of this country bad been to encourage the import of the raw material rather than of the manufacture.

Sir ROBERT Pam.. said, that the claims of the millers were fully con- sidered in 1827, when the present proportion between the duties on wheat and flour was fixed by the Government of which he was then a member. Suppose that proportion were altered-

The countries that would suffer the most would be our own province of Canada, and the United States. They all felt that our relationship with the United. States was such, that if they were to give a preference to one country above another in respect to the importation of corn, it would be to the United States. As an advocate of a qualified, free trade against monopoly, he was glad to find that he was now balding the same opinions that he expressed in the year 1827. In that year he said, that "he did not believe that the quantity of flour imported into this country by America could ever in any way injure 1113 ; but he felt that if the House did prevent the importa- tion of almost the only article we obtained from that country-if it did appear to say that it availed itself of the first opportunity of excluding the only article they were enabled to send us-America would conceive the mea- sure to arise from some lurking animosity ; and this country would lay itself open to the danger of retaliation, which would infinitely outweigh any evil that might be dreaded by our millers." That was the language he held in 1827, and it was the language he must hold now. The millers have a com- plete monopoly : they grind the whole wheat of the country. It was esti- mated by some that the produce of the United Kingdom was 24,000,000 of quarters of wheat, besides oats and barley ; but let the estimate be 22,000,000 of quarters : the grinding of all this quantity was possessed by the millers as a complete monopoly. It was impossible that any foreign miller could enter into competition with them : and this too was equally true with respect to foreign corn imported; for the millers of this country had the monopoly of grinding that also."

Mr. LABOUCHERE expressed his approval of Sir Robert's declaration. The resolution was agreed to; as well as the resolutions regulating the duties on oatmeal and other foreign grains.

The resolution having been moved fixing a duty of 5s. on Colonial wheat when the home price is under 55s., steadily sliding down to is. duty at 58s. and upwards, Mr. Sarrrst O'fintER moved as an amend- ment, "That for every quarter of wheat the duty shall be is."

Lord STANLEY remarked, that the agricultural interest of this country felt no jealousy of bond fide importations of grain or flour from the Canadas : they only objected to the introduction of grain or flour from the United States through the Canadas. A duty of from 8s. to I Os. per quarter was at present imposed by the United States upon grain from the Canadas; but the quantity of floor brought into Canada from the United States was enormous. In order to prevent fraudulent importa- tions, it was necessary to maintain the duty of 5s. per quarter upon grain from Canada.

Mr. LABOUCHERE apprehended that the amount of importation into Canada from the United States had been greatly exaggerated. Frauds might, no doubt, be occasionally committed ; but certificates for flour, not only of manufacture but of growth, were required, and afforded due protection. By far the greater part of the flour brought from Canada was Canadian produce, because the Canadians sent their own grown wheat and flour to this country, and suppliO their own wants from the United States. Referring to another bill shortly to be introduced, Mr. Labouchere wished to know why a distinction was kept up between American grain and American flour passing into Canada ? was it for British or Canadian purposes ?

Mr. GLA.DSTONE said, the real question was, whether the bulk of the grain imported from Canada was really Canadian or American grain— It was capable of demonstration that for the last few years the greater part of the flour imported from Canada had been the growth of the United States. From 1838 to 1839, the amount of importation had been only about 40,000 hundredweight of flour; but in 1840 it ascended suddenly to 380,000 hun- dredweight, and in 1841 it was no less than 682,000 hundredweight. No such increase could be accounted for but upon the supposition that nine- tenths or at all events four-fifths of the flour came, in fact, from the United States.

With respect to the collateral question put by Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Gladstone said that the object of the 28. duty into Canada, Government pro- posed to lay upon American flour imported nto Canada, was neither British nor Canadian, but intercolonial. Canada had a free importation of flour and grain ; and yet the Canadians claimed a protection in other colonies for their produce, and in those colonies there was a duty on foreign flour of 5s. a barrel : under the proposition to be brought before the House there would be a uniform duty of 28. per barrel in every colony. He was about to do only as Mr. Labouchere had done in equalising the East and West India rum-duties.

Mr. LABOUCHERE having signified his strong disapprobation of that proposition, Mr. CHARLES BULLER asked what colony besides Canada grew corn for the use of other colonies ? The object of the prohibition on the importation of rum into the East Indies was very intelligible: we admitted East Indian runs on the same terms as West Indian ; we therefore prevented the importation into the East Indies of other rum to supply the place of any sent here on so favourable terms.

The House having divided, the amendment was rejected, by 135 to 38. The other resolutions relating to Colonial grain were agreed to.

The House then resolved, "That it is expedient to amend the laws relating to the mode of taking and determining the average prices of corn "; Sir ROBERT PEEL promising Mr. HAWES, who said a few words on the subject, that information on that part of the measure should be laid before the House before going into Committee on the hill. Colonel SIBTHORP rose to move that the duties on corn be levied or paid at the period of importation, instead of when taken out of bond ; but ultimately he postponed his motion till the Committee on the bill. The House then resumed.

The report of the resolutions was brought up on Wednesday. On the reading of the first resolution, Mr. EDWARD BULLER moved his scale, by way of amendment. He said that Sir Robert Peel's plan would give satisfaction to nobody. Like the present scale, it would always force the price of corn up to a maximum ; for though it reduced the gain by the saving of duty at each successive advance in the price, it also diminished the risk ; and so corn would not flow in while the price was rising, but after it had reached the maximum. He quoted a number of figures to illustrate his position by a reference to the past ; and he concluded by moving a scale commencing with 20s. duty when the price is under 51s., and gradually sliding down by a shilling at a time as the price rises, until at 64s. or more the duty should be 6s. ; which he described as giving free-trade in corn at that price.

Sir ROBERT PEEL remarked, that if his plan pleased nobody, Mr. Buller was in a more deplorable predicament, for he could not even find a seconder. However, he declined to weary the House by renewing the debate.

Mr. BULLER urged Sir Robert to accept his proposition as a compro- mise: a proposal which Sir ROBERT PEEL and Mr. WARD repudiated for either side of the House ; and so Mr. 13uller withdrew his motion.

Mr. HAsrrE then proposed another amendment. He explained a pe- culiar evil to be apprehended— Sir Robert Peel's scale imposed a prohibitory duty when the price is 50s. Now, in years of comparative plenty, as in 1834, '5, '6, when the price aver- aged 44.s., greai9.uantities of grain would accumulate in the Continental ports or in bond in this country. A sudden demand would ensue, and would cause an immense circulation of bills upon the Continent, and the exchanges would thus be turned against this country. The Bank would at once feel tne effects of this state of things in the dram of gold which would follow : the monetary and commercial relations of the country would be disturbed, and the interests of the manufacturer and the merchant would be seriously injured. And would even the farmer benefit ? The prohibitory duties deranged the currency and embarrassed the manufacturer, trade was paralyzed, workmen were thrown out of employment, the wages of those retained lowered ; and in these circum- stances was it likely that, with reduced means, people could afford to buy the quantity of food they otherwise would consume ? Ile had no hesitation in saying that consequences such as he had described would probably be felt in the present year, from the want of consumption and the quantity of wheat im- ported.

The remedy which he proposed was, to admit a yearly supply of corn equal to the average deficiency— Supposing that 1,000,000 quarters of wheat were allowed to he annually im- ported at a duty of one shilling, he did not believe that the consequent redac- tion of price would injuriously affect the interests of the farmer, but it would have the excellent consequence of forming a steady trade with corn-growing nations, to the amount in value of the quantity of corn regularly imported. And not only would these good effects as regarded extension of trade follow, but the imported corn would be mixed with the second class of English wheat, and thus give it a currency and price which in bad seasons it would not other- wise obtain.

Having pointed out some incidental advantages, Mr. Hastie proposed a resolution declaring,

"That, as it appears from the returns laid upon the table of this House by her Majesty's Government, that at an average of years with average mope, a sufficient quantity of corn is not produced in this country for the food of the population, the deficiency, amounting to about 1,000,000 quarters of wheat, 250,000 quarters of barley, and 250,000 quarters of oats ; that in each year, and before the scale of duties comes into operation, the following quantities of grain shall be admitted for home consumption, at a duty of Is. the quarter, viz. 1,000,000 quarters of wheat, 250,000 quarters of barley, and 250,000 quarters of oats."

In the resolution, however, which he formally moved, the expression of opinion at the commencement was omitted.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, of all the schemes that had been submitted to the House, this seemed to him the most extravagant. A certain quan- tity of grain was to be admitted annually, no matter what was the price of corn or what were the wants of the people. How should the limit be applied?— It would be necessary to define the year—say from the 1st January to the 1st January : then suppose that on the 2d January, 2,000,000 quarters were in bond, the holders of 1,000,000 quarters of this quantity would be entitled to introduce it at the duty of Is. per quarter. What a scramble there would be among the holders ! Suppose 2,000,000 quarters were to be im- ported, one-half of which was to be Imported almost duty-free, who was to de- cide between the rival holders? Mr. IlasTrE said, the point would be settled by the order of the arrivals of the importing-vessels.) Supposing corn to be at the time of the introduction of the duty-free quantity about 56s. in price, im- porters would be entitled to introduce it upon paying a duty of 16s. Suddenly, without any peculiar necessity or demand, 1,000,000 quarters would be poured in, prices would immediately fall, and duties would be as soon raised as regarded the holders of the remaining stock in bond : the price would fall to 50s., the duty would rise to 20s.; and how the honourable Member could pro- pose a measure having such effects as a remedy for the evils of the sliding scale, he could not understand. Then the measure seemed intended to benefit America : but if corn to the extent of 1,000,000 quarters were to be admitted every year, say on the 2d January, the ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp would have a great advantage over those of America, for vessels from the nearest ports would have the best chance of arriving soon after the 1st January.

Mr. HAsirrE feared that, from want of practice in addressing the House, he had not made his plan sufficiently intelligible; and so he should withdraw his motion.

The resolutions were then agreed to; and the bill founded on them was ordered to be brought in by Mr. Greene, Sir Robert Peel, and Mr. Gladstone.

LOCAL COURTS.

Lord BROUGHAM introduced to the House of Lords, on Monday, his bill for the establishment of Local Courts. It was almost the same, he said, as that which he had nearly carried nine years ago. He insti- tuted a comparison between it and a bill laid on the table by the late Lord Chancellor to establish County Courts— That only gave jurisdiction up to 20/.: his gave the courts the power of trying all actions of a personal nature under 50/. For instance, all actions of tort, cases of seduction, assault, &c. as well as questions regarding land or tolls, provided the damage did not exceed 501.; and any action for any amount of damages might be tried before these courts with the consent of both parties given in writing. His bill also established Courte:of Reconcilement, which had proved productive of the greatest benefit in all countries where they had been established. In Denmark, where they had long existed, he had the judicial returns for one year, and he found that 31,000 actions had been commenced; but before these cases could go into court, they were sent before a Judge sitting in a Court of Reconcilement : the result was, that not two- thirds of the cases proceeded, for he found that 21,800 had been settled.

The LORD CHANCELLOR had also prepared a bill on the subject, which he should lay on the table in a few days, and then their Lord- ships would have three measures ; and it would be for them to say whether they should have a measure amalgamated from the three, or adopt one of the three.

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

Lord CAMPBELL, on Tuesday, brought three bills before the House of Lords, to improve the administration of the House as a Court of Appeal, to alter the system of appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and to amend the administration of the Court of Chancery. Formerly appeals at common law lay to the House of Lords, and in Equity to the King in Council. In 1833, Lord Brougham introduced a bill which gave to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council power to hear appeals from the Admiralty Court, from certain Ecclesiastical Courts, and from the Colonies. He thought the time Was come when improvement should be carried further. It would be admitted that two coordinate appellate jurisdictions, that of the Privy Council and that of the House of Lords, were inconvenient and did not work well in practice— A suitor in certain cases might take his appeal either to the House of Lords or to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council; and it might sometimes happen that a question of law arising in one court of appeal might be sent for trial to a court below, and have an appeal from the decision of that court to the other court of appeal. A case of that kind had occurred in the case of the will of the late Mr. Wood of Gloucester.: _ The formation of one Court of Appeal would lead to the formation of a good bar. At present barristers have to be brought from other courts, at a great expense to the suitor. If, then there were to be only one Court of Appeal, which should be retained, the House of Lords or the Privy Council ? He should prefer the former— The House of Lords had the advantage of being able to command the attend- ance of the Judges, and consult them on all questions of law. This power the Com- mittee of Privy Council had not; and to supply the defect, it had been found ne- cessary to make some of the Common Law Judges Privy Councillors, in order to have the advantage of their legal assistance. Now they ought to make all the Common Law Judges Privy Councillors, or none. The selection of some gave rise to feelings of vexation and annoyance; and ft was objectionable, on constitutional grounds, that the executive power should be used in this way with respect to a body of men who ought in every thing to be independent of the Crown. The appellate jurisdiction of the Lords worked well. It was well known, that that whatever number of Peers were in attendance, the decision of the appeal was left to judges of profound learning, most fully competent to enter into all its bearings. He would then propose, that all appeals from the Consistory Court, the Court of Admiralty, and the Colonial Courts, which were now car- ried before the Judicial Committee, should be transferred to the House of Lords ; and that all appeals in lunacy cases should be carried also to their Lordships. He proposed that the Court of Appeal thus formed should be perma- nent— This was a principle not wholly new, for it was found that in the reign of Edward the Second a Committee of the Lords sat during the recess. To have a court of appeal limit its sittings to those of Parliament, would be to limit its utility to half of the year, and to put many of the suitors to great expense and other inconvenience. He would therefore propose, that notwithstanding the prorogation, the Crown should have power to summon the Peers for judicial business only. He thought that the Lord Chancellor ought still to preside in that House, and be included in the Cabinet ; and therefore another Judge should be appointed to sit permanently in the Court of Chancery, who might be selected from among the Vice-Chancellors; and that would remove the absurdity of appeals from the Lord Chancellor in Lincoln's Inn to the Lord Chancellor in the House of Lords. His plan would occasion little change and no additional expense to the country. His first bill would transfer the jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee to that House; the second would authorize the Queen to summon the Peers during the recess for judicial business ; and the third would appoint a permanent judge to preside in the Court of Chancery. The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that the bill of last session had received the support of both sides of the House, and it had been attended by the results which had been anticipated from it. In November there were upwards of 500 cases waiting for hearing in the Court of Chan- cery, and since November 230 new cases had been set down ; yet, in- cluding the new cases_, there are already only 132 causes in arrear. It was anticipated that there would be an accession of business with the in- creased facilities, and accordingly the increase of cases amounted to 30 per cent. It had been of the last importance to get rid of the arrears in Chancery, for the grievances to which they subjected suitors were inconceivable : the term-fees alone in a single year amounted to 42,999/. Coupled with that decrease was the fact that at that moment there were but 24 appeals ; and he was satisfied that when the business fell into its regular course, there would not be more than 15 or 20 in each year. As to the absurdity of appeals from the Lord Chancellor to himself, it was forgotten that in the House he had the assistance of other Lords ; nor had the weight and importance of the judicial character been suffi- ciently borne in mind. Then, the tribunal which Lord Campbell called upon them to abolish had but a few years back bad its jurisdiction en- larged and placed on a more solid basis. And it seemed to him to be admirably adapted for the consideration of the subjects that came before it— Questions were brought before it involving almost every kind of law on the face of the earth. There was the Colonial law' every kind of European law, every kind of Eastern law, Spanish law, French law, both according to the new code and the old, Dutch law, English law, both Common Law and Equity, the Colonial statutes, and in addition to these, the Oriental law, the Indian law, and the Mahomedan law : there was also the Ecclesiastical law. The consti- tution of the tribunal was admirably adapted to the purpose of dealing with questions embracing so vast a range of judicial knowledge. There were judges of England to decide on questions of Common Law, and the Equity Judges to decide upon matters of Equity. There were the Judges of the Ecclesiastical Courts to decide upon questions arising out of the Ecclesiastical law and with regard to Eastern law, there were among the Judicial Committee two honourable and learned individuals who had filled the highest judicial situations in the East, and who were able to give advice to the Committee on questions connected with Oriental law.

He had heard of no difficulty in calling the tribunal together except on very particular occasions. As to the coordinate jurisdiction for two hundred years that the Privy Council had exercised that jurisdic- tion there had not been a single instance of conflicting decisions. Lord Lyndhurst made some further general remarks in answer to minor points, and concluded by saying, he was convinced that the measure would receive from the House that countenance to which it was entitled.

Lord CorrEsHem had heard much to approve in Lord Campbell's explanation of his measure ; but he deprecated premature interference with the experiment now making in the Chancery Court under the bill of last session.

Lord BROUGHAM had predicted that there would not be enough busi- ness in the Court of Chancery for two additional Judges, and the event justified his prediction. He doubted whether the appellate business would in any case be sufficient to occupy a bar: there were only eight or nine cases for hearing in the Judicial Committee, and no arrears. Lord Campbell objected to a removable judge, and to depending on the voluntary attendance of members of the Appeal Court ; yet his plan proposed a Chief Justice of Appeal who would be removable, assisted by Judges whose attendance would be voluntary! Lord Brougham be- lieved that some of the evils of which Lord Campbell complained existed in theory rather than in practice, and that others were absolutely in- evitable.

The bills were laid on the table.

Panost-DmorcusE.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the rules, regulations, and discipline of the several Gaols and Houses of Correction in England and Wales ; to report what alterations appear to be necessary in the laws now in force for the government of the prisons, in order to insure a more

uniform system of discipline throughout the whole ; and further to re- port upon the expediency of abolishing the infliction of corporal pu- nishments upon criminal offenders. He did not wish to say one word

in disparagement of the Reports of the Prison-Inspectors ; but those very reports had drawn attention to the subject ; and moreover, within these two years some three or four hundred persons had been confined in our gaols for what were termed political offences—men of greater intelli- gence and ability than usually filled the prisons; and they had called at- tention to what they witnessed, and insisted on a rigid investigation. There were precedents for inquiry : in 1822, a Committee was appointed,

and the Gaol Act was the result ; in 1833 there was another Committee; and a Committee of the Housesof Lords in 1835 recommended a uniform

system of prison-discipline, and the appointment of Prison-Inspectors ; who bad been appointed accordingly. They had effected great im- provements, but much remained to be done. The increwe of crime alone would show that ; the commitments having increased from the annual average of 8,044 in the seven years ending 1817, to 13,264 during the next seven years; 17,395 in the next seven years ; in the

single year 1838 to 112,515 ; in 1839, 112,182 ; and in 1840, 129,327. The expense of gaols in 1840 exceeded that of 1838 by 64,000/. What was the cause of that increase ?- So far as he could judge, it was owing to the ignorance, to the great want of education among the people ; to the want of employment, which produced

poverty and distress; and, in some instances, to intemperance on the part of those who had the means of gratifying their passions. The total want of edu- cation among the people would be found from several returns made by the Re- gistrar of Births and Marriages. They would find that out of 121,000 marriages which had taken place during the last year, there were 40,587 males and 58,959 females who could not write their names. The report also stated the remark-

able fact, that the chief deficiency existed in Lancashire, Bedfordshire' and Monmouthshire: in Bedfordshire, the number of men who signed with their marks was 55 per cent, and of females 66 per cent. It might be said that this did not apply to the criminal population. There were other returns, however, which did. Oat of 129,000 persons who were committed in 1840, there were 35,552 who could neither read nor write ; out of 65,000 persons summarily convicted, there were 26,238 persons who could neither read nor write, 13,644 who could read only, and 21,483 who could write very imperfectly.

Mr. Duncombe then quoted a number of extracts from the Fourth Report of the Inspectors of Prisons, beginning with an account of seven

youths who were confined in dark and solitary cells for refractory con-

duct in a workhouse: a Magistrate ordered the gaoler, verbally, not to permit the Chaplain to visit them. The Chaplain of the House of Cor-

rection at Lewes had made a very interesting return : he had been at some pains to investigate the parentage and descent of the prisoners : out of 943 prisoners' felons, vagrants, and misdemeanants, 57 were the children of criminals, 28 were illegitimate, 232 orphans under nine

years of age, 133 had been orphans between nine and sixteen years of age, and 27 had been deserted by their fathers and mothers. The

Chaplain was strongly impressed with the importance of workhouse- schools. The state of the manufacturing districts would remove all surprise at the increase of crime : in Captain Williams's report is this passage respecting Manchester- " On Saturday September 5th, I accompanied Sir Charles Shaw, who was attended by two intelligent Inspectors of the Police force, on a walk through

Manchester after twelve o'clock. The public-houses most frequented by dis- orderly persons were found all open and in full trade at a quarter past twelve, and were only closed on the appearance of the Police. They were crowded with men and women, several of the latter with infants in arms, and many of both sexes in a state of intoxication; who became noisy and irritated at what they appear to consider the improper interference of the Police. We then proceeded to visit the low lodging-houses and brothels in the part of the town

most frequented by the criminal population. They presented the usual scene of indiscriminate connexion of the sexes and low dissipation, and I think a more than usual one of filth and wretchedness."

But this state of things was not confined to the manufacturing dis- tricts: Cambridge, the seat of all that was pious and orthodox, was dig- graced by a gaol thus described by Captain Williams— The University has made no provision for any instruction. Some bene- volent ladies have occasionally visited the prison; and a clergyman, a member of King's College, some time back attended voluntarily on a Sunday, but dis- continued it for private reasons; since which, no divine service has been per-

formed This prison appeared, upon first inspection particularly that por-

tion applied to vagrants, to be in a neglected and uncleanly state; but on a

second visit it was much improved in this particular. There is no sort of dis- cipline maintained; several escapes have taken place. The prisoners are not searched, nor deprived of money or any other article. They occasionally

climb over the walls of one airing-yard into another ; they pass their time hud- dled round the fires, in obscene talk, or occasionally in singing and dancing.

The keeper gives it as his opinion, that any girl not very bad would be far worse on going out than when she came in. Be has observed shades of differ- ence as to feeling their situations, among some of the females upon first coming in, hut this has worn off by association.' The confinement has no other effect but that of keeping them out of the streets in term-time. The females now come in at a much younger age than formerly; they have generally been ser- vant-girls in lodging-houses in the town. The inutility of this establishment

cannot be better exemplified than that the number of unfortunate females com- mitted from 4th November 1834, to the day of inspection, 29th October 1835, was 66; the number of committals, 176; averaging nearly three commitments of each individual; and the .gross amount of imprisonment which they under- went was 2,634 days averaging 39 clays for each." . The want of uniformity in the punishment renders it impossible for a judge to know what would be the effect of his sentence, the chief varia- tions lying in labour and in the quality and quantity of the diet— Let it be supposed that ajudge in Devonshire sentenced a man to six months' imprisonment and hard labour, and another individual was sentenced to six months' imprisonment and hard labour in Northumberland. In Exeter the hard labour lasted for six hours and a half in the day; the height of the step [in the tread-wheel] was eight inches, the rotation of the number of steps in a mi- nute 24; making an ascent of 3,120 feet by that individual. If that individual had the same punishment to undergo in Newcastle-on-Tyne, the number of hours for labour were eight ; the height of the step WU 10 inches, the steps mounted in a minute were 52, and the ascent performed was 13,866 feet. In

Worcester the hours of labour were ten hours and a quarter; the height of the steps seven inches and three quarters, the number of steps in a minute 48, and

the ascent 12,716 feet during the day. Though the sentence was the same in each of these counties, yet it was plainly much more severe in some than in the others.

Then as to food, the dietary at Worcester was abundant ; at Bedford it

was much more meagre; and at Aylesbury, women with children at the breast were not allowed more than the other prisoners— How did they know but that the females who were thus treated were the ob- jects of another law that they had made ? They first of all made a law—the new Poor-law—by which they deprived females of being entitled to obtain that sup- port from the fathers of their children ; and then, having done this, they sent the mother to gaol with her child; and they did not leave her enough of sustenance, as the Inspector of Prisons said, for one person even without a child !

Another abuse was the arbitrary power of the gaolers and turnkeys— In Warwick Gaol, the turnkey confined William Griffiths, a boy, for quarrel- ling with another boy, in a cell under ground, for three days and three nights, in the depth of winter ; and the boy was crippled for life by the loss of two toes. In Wakefield House of Correction, John Reilly, who was in prison for a political offence, was troubled with asthma. By the rules of the prison, when the men were brought into the yard they were not allowed to turn their heads to the right or left. Reilly was not only obliged to keep his head straight, but he was not allowed to expectorate; and his throat and chest swelled to such RD extent that his life was in danger. He was released by the order of Lord Normanby ; but he had never recovered his health.

In respect to spiritual instruction, he would mention one circum- stance. Not only were 131 Roman Catholic prisoners confined in Sal- ford Gaol deprived of the spiritual assistance of their priests, but the Chaplain preached controversial sermons against the Catholics. As an instance of the feeling produced, one of the prisoners suggested that they should ask the Chaplain to preach one of those controversial ser- mons over again ; because, as it was said, it would make their Roman Catholic fellow prisoners "as mad as blazes." The objectionable mode of corporal punishment has increased from 322 cases in 1828 to 1,207 cases in 1840. In some cases the whipping is so lightly inflicted as to make the sentence merely nominal : in others, as at Swaffham in York- shire, a horrible instrument is employed, and no medical man is in attendance. Mr. Duncombe warned the Government against conti- nuing in the new Model Prison the experiment of solitary confinement at Milbank Penitentiary : last year eight persons were removed from Milbank to Bedlam in a state of insanity. Reports on the Eastern Pe- nitentiary at Philadelphia, a report of the Lower Canada Legislature, on the prisons of Auburn, Sing Sing, and Philadelphia, and Captain Basil Hall, all depicted the evils of solitary confinement. Mr. Dun- combe concluded by making his motion.

Sir limas GRAHAM deemed it inexpedient to appoint a Committee. The subject was fully considered by the Committee of 1835, which re- salted in the existing system ; and, in his opinion, it was impossible for a more judicious selection to have been made than that of the five gentlemen who had been appointed Prison-Inspectors in accordance with the measure— Under that act, at least four times in every year every gaol in the kingdom was visited by a responsible officer of the Government ; from time to time full reports were made by those officers to the Secretary of State as to any causes of complaint in any of the prisons of the kingdom ; and every year a complete and detailed report was, under the provisions of the act of 1835, pre- pared by each Inspector, with reference to every gaol in his district, in which he gave a full account of every thing which had occurred in these gaols con- trary to the act of Parliament, and not only of what was contrary to the act, but of every thing which was worthy of particular remark and attention. That report being made to the Secretary of State, was required to be laid on the table of both Homes of Parliament. What, then, was the effect of this mea- sure? That the utmost possible publicity was given to every thing which occurred in these gaols.

The Secretary of State has the power of negativing new regulations made by the Visiting Magistrates, and of recommending regulations of his own ; and most of the recommendations of Lord John Russell had been adopted-- They had been adopted by the counties of Berke, Bedford, Carnarvon, Car- digan, Chester, Devon, Gloucester, Hertford, Hereford, Kent, Lancaster, Mid- dlesex, Surrey, Sussex, Wilts, and many others. In all these the entire regula- tions of the noble lord had been adopted without variation : this, then, was a great approach to uniformity of discipline ; and where those regulations had not been entirely adopted, they were still, in all their most important points, in full force.

Mr. Duncombe had dwelt on the increase of crime ; but the summary convictions should be excluded. He would take from an admirable statistical register, which Lord John Russell had caused to be prepared, the numbers of committalsfor trial— Now the number of persons committed for trial in 1830 was 18,267, or one in 744 of the population; and the number of persons committed for trial in 1840 was 27,187, or one in 580 of the population ; showing an increase of 45 per cent, whilst the honourable Member calculated the increase at 600 per cent. Now, he wished the House to observe the practical effect of the improved pri- son-discipline. In 1835 the number of committals for trial was 20,731, and in 1840 the number of committals for trial was 27,184; showing that in the last five years the increase had been reduced from 45 per cent to 30 per cent. Still, on the face of the documents, there was an increase of crime, he admitted : he deplored it ; but many causes might be assigned for that increase. In the first place, during the last ten years the population had increased 14 per cent ; and besides that, great crimes, which were formerly no doubt often committed with impunity, were no longer so, on account of the increased efficiency of our police establishment, on account of the wise and salutary mitigation of our criminal code rendering prosecutors more ready to prosecute and Juries more willing to convict, on account of our improved prison-discipline, and also on account of the measure of his right honourable friend the Member for Tamwortb, which threw half of the expense of prosecutions upon the public purse. Sir James deplored the ignorance of the people ; and in any measure relating to the pauper population of the country he should consider it a paramount duty not to overlook the subject of education. The abuses of which Mr. Duncombe complained were in rapid progress of diminu- tion; and indeed, for almost all his instances Mr. Duncombe had gone back to the Fourth Report of the Inspectors, two years old. Sir James took no credit to himself—he was speaking of his predecessor ; and he had only to adhere to the course that had been pursued. He had, how- ever, recommended to the Inspectors a new classification in their re- ports, and they had promptly acted on his suggestion— In the course of September he had been able to deal with the case of each separate gaol, and to write letters to any of the Visiting Magistrates where there had been any ground of complaint or objection to their proceedings. In the course of a month or six weeks he had received answers to those letters ; and almost in every case the Magistrates had declared their readiness to correct in detail any thing which might be considered objectionable in their regula- tions: there was a very free admission of irregularities where they had oc- curred, and hardly in one case was there any refusal to adopt the recommends- tions of the Secretary of State; but they stated, with respect to some points of discipline, their inability at once to carry into effect all that might be ad- visable, because they depended in a great measure on the Separate system. Mr. Duncombe seemed to confound Solitary and Separate confine- ment ; the latter being confinement in a large, light, well-aired place, with daily visits from authorized instructors. Lord John Russell had not only appointed Inspectors, but he appointed also an Engineer officer of the highest merit, Major Jebb, whose gratuitous advice and assist- ance was to be available for all the counties and boroughs of the king- dom in which there was a desire to improve their gaols for the purpose of adopting that Separate system— As soon as such a desire was conveyed to the Secretary of State, that officer communicated with the local authorities, and supplied them with a plan at no expense to them, and gave them the full benefit of all his experience : the con- sequence was a general readiness on the part of the counties and towns to pro- ceed with the improvements of their gaols on that system simultaneously, and before the Model Prison had been completed. In Hertfordshire there was an admirable new gaol completed ; in Bath one would be opened in a few months ; in Hereford a new gaol had been completed ; as also in Peterborough, Salis- bury, Wilton, Cheltenham, Reading, Penzance, Tewkesbury, Plymouth, and many other places. Operations were in progress with the same object in Red- ford, Coventry, Leicester, Wakefield; in the county of Stafford the gaol was about to be greatly enlarged ; so in the counties of Berke, Monmouth, and Durham. These were proofs that this matter was not at a stand. With respect to diet, Government had not been altogether inactive. The case represented by Mr. Duncombe, where a number of Catholics had been denied spiritual assistance, was a clear violation of the law. As to corporal punishment, of 70,000 male adult prisoners in 1840, only 70 were so punished : Sir James: thought the punishment suitable to young offenders. [On Thursday, Sir James admitted that the number of adults who suffered corporal punishment was 418; but 348 were punished in pursuance of sentence of law courts.] He urged the House not to interrupt the progress which is already making in the improve- ment of prison-discipline ; and he hoped that Mr. Duncombe would not think that he was treating him with disrespect in giving a negative to his motion.

Mr. WAELEY was amused at Sir James's praise of Lord John Rus- sell— The late noble Secretary for the Colonies had received a testimonial from the right honourable gentleman which was to be looked at somewhat in the light of a valentine. The right honourable gentleman praised all that the noble lord had done : "every thing was going on well—precisely as it was when the noble lord was in office; all the noble lord's recommendations be faithfully adopted, and the improvements were so great that no change was necessary." Now it had been said of a number of great men, that their merits were seldom known until they died : the noble lord, however, though officially dead, lived to hear his merits testified. He had lost nothing by his political suicide. The noble lord had certainly no reason to expect such a biographer ; for he had heard the right honourable gentleman speak in a very different tone of the late Go- vernment.

Mr. HAWES expressed his entire confidence in Sir James Graham's zeal and ability on the subject; and, thinking that Mr. Duncombe's object would be better answered by:acting on the Reports of the Prison- Inspectors, he could not support his motion.

Lord Matiox concurred in approving of Sir James's speech ; but ire- ceeded to argue against long terms of imprisonment. Transportation, he maintained, is the proper outlet for criminals ; and it is beneficial both to the public and to the criminals themselves.

Mr. O'Cozettei.x. advocated the rights of the Roman Catholics.

Lord Jerez RUSSELL briefly supported Sir James Graham's views.

Mr. THOMAS DuNconue, after the kind manner in which the House and Sir James had received his motion, would not trouble the House to divide, but would allow it to be negatived. It was negatived ac- cordingly. EXCHEQUER BILL FRAUD.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought forward, on Thursday, the motion, of which he bad given notice, relative to the late issue of fraudulent Exchequer Bills. He said that it was not his intention to enter into any examination as to what might have been the defects in the system of the office, or into the changes which it might be ad- visable to make in the laws or iegulations of the issue : that would be the subject of future and more deliberate discussion. He briefly re- traced the past history of the affair— An individual, who had received the strongest testimonials to his ability and integrity, from Lord Grenville, Lord Auckland, Sir .11ohn Newport, and Lord Monteagle, had possessed himself of papers intrusted to him in his confidential capacity ; taken them from the office ; and, assisted by agents, had forged the signature of Lord Monteagle, which the Exchequer Bills were bound to bear. The Exchequer Bills so forged were given as deposits for loans of money, on the condition that the very bills deposited should be returned to him on payment of the money, or on other Exchequer Bills being given in the room of those origi- nally deposited. On the 20th October, a person came to Mr. Goulborn, and told him that he had had an offer of Exchequer Bills in deposit for a loan of money at a rate of interest so much above the market-rate that he suspected the bills to have been dishonestly obtained. Mr. Goulburn instituted inquiries; and the result was, that on the 25th of the same month the whole fraud was discovered and the guilty author was taken into custody. Five days had sufficed to bring to light a fraud which had been so long in pro- gress: an important fact to bear in mind, for it proved that if one of many individuals who were cognizant of the suspicious circumstances which attended the proceedings had given information, the forgeries might have been detected instead of continuing from 1836 to 1841. Govern- ment instituted further inquiry ; and Beaumont Smith made a partial confes- sion, which led to the detection of the principal agents. Both Smith and Re- pallo asked to be admitted to give evidence, in order that they might receive lenient treatment. Smith was told that the law must take its course ; but as it was of the utmost importance to convict the principal offender, the other was admitted as Queen's evidence. To Smith's plea of guilty the Government had not been in the slightest degree accessory. Another duty now devolved upon Government, to restore the shaken credit in Exchequer Bills. The only mode was to call in the whole, and to stamp such as were genuine ; and to Lord Monteagle's assiduity it was owing that that process had been completed in so short a space of time. They then instituted a fuller inquiry, to ascertain the defects in the regulation of the office, in order to prevent the recurrence of such frauds; and to the gentlemen who bad been selected to perform that duty, under a commission, he could not sufficiently express his obligation for the manner in which they had performed a most irksome task. Something more, however, was required than the mere examination of official persons or the conviction of offenders. '1 he e House would per- oeive that there had been two circumstances in operation—within the office a want of caution, which originated in a hundred and fifty years of uninterrupted security ; and abroad something which he would not call connivance, but "some knowledge of the transactions which were going on," and which it was the duty of every individual having that know- ledge to denounce. The very first detection led to details from various quarters of suspicious circumstances in antecedent years—

Some gentlemen had been asked for loans on Exchequer Bills, and offered

interest so large that they at once rejected them as suspicious. Other persons had informed him that the greater number of persons employed to circulate these bills were totally devoid of character, but nevertheless had always a large supply of these bills. These were facts which required to be inquired into, so that the real nature of the transaction should be understood, and why it had so ong escaped detection.

He now, therefore, called upon Parliament to make that inquiry ; to

be conducted, not by a Committee of the House, nor by a mere Com- mission appointed by the Crown, but by a Commission appointed by Parliament. One subject had been much pressed upon his attention, that of compensation. To admit such a claim would be to deprive the public of the greatest security which it had against the repetition of such offences—

If he, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, were once to pronounce an opinion

that a man taking a forged security was to have his remedy against the public, what could he do more effectually to remove from individuals who were in the habit of receiving such securities all care and caution, or what more effectually to induce criminal individuals to seduce public servants, being sure that the fraud must terminate in the receipt of the money which had been so im- properly lest? Before they entertained questions of that sort, they should satisfy themselves that some distinction was to be drawn between the law as it applied to forgery against an individual and forgery against the public. They should make up their minds that it was not expedient that the holders of these forged instruments should have their remedy against the individuals from whom they had received them, and so by tracing them • from hand to hand to come at the person who had committed the crime. He did not mean to say that there might not be particular instances in which the House might forego the rule ; but the best advice he could give was to resist all application until the whole nature of the transaction was fully before them. If it should appear that these crimes had been committed by means of putting confidence in suspicious individuals—nay, in individuals more than suspicious, whose conduct in previous transactions had given a taint to their proceedings in society,— and if it should further appear that there was a degree of secrecy enjoined when these bills were deposited as security that was not usual in similar transactions—if it should appear that the interest de- manded was greater than under similar circumstances would be demanded upon fair and honourable transactions—if it should appear that when even a bill escaped from its imprisonment a premium was offered to get hold of that particular bill and to prevent its being presented at the Exchequer,—if these results were elicited from the inquiry, then lie thought that until such cir- cumstances were satisfactorily accounted for, the House ought to abstain from holding out any expectation that it was called upon to interpose or to interfere in any proceedings that might take place in any courts of justice.

Mr. Goulburn moved for leave to bring in a bill for the appointment of a Commission, with power of examining and inquiring as to the re- ceipt, circulation, and possession of certain forged Exchequer Bills.

A long conversation, rather than a debate which followed, may be very briefly summed up. Mr. BEMBLE complained that Mr. Goulburn seemed to cast something like a reflection on the holders of the bills ; and, referring to a petition of which the rules of the House prevented the presentation, he said that the inqtilry recommended by Mr. Goul- burn was precisely what the petitioners wished. He averred that the rate of interest charged by the lenders was not more than the current ra a of intereski The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that a particular case, of which he had information, was present to his mind; he meant no re- flection on the general body of holders.

Mr. LEADER remarked, that there was a question of carelessness on the part of the office as well as of the holders : but he admitted that some had no claim to compensation—

He had the authority of a banker, a Member of that House, for stating that,

long before the discovery of the fraud took place, there bad been rumours in the City that something was wrong in the Exchequer Bills. That gentleman had stated to him, that shortly before the discovery of the Exchequer Bill fraud had taken place, a person came to him and said that he wanted a loan of 60,0001., or any part of 60,0001., on a deposit of Exchequer Bills. Exchequer Bills were at that time at a premium of from 12s. to 15s. The person wanting that loan offered 6 per cent interest for the currency; money at the time being easily piocured on good security, such as Exchequer Bills, for 4 per cent. The banker thought there was something about the transaction that he did not

/like; and he told the person, on making the application, that if he was in want

of money he had better sell the bills than borrow money on them at such a rate of interest. The same person, on the reference of the banker, afterwards went to one of the greatest capitalists in London, and made the same proposal; and the answer of the capitalist was the same as that of the banker had been.

However, Mr. Leader was informed, that at the time the Exchequer Bill Office was remodelled, a person acquainted with that department had called the attention of those in authority to the fact that Mr. Beaumont Smith was possessed of great power, and that there was no check whatever upcn him. He would ask Mr. Goulburn whether that was correct ?

Mr. BLEworr, who had given notice of an amendment to appoint

a Committee of Inquiry, concurred in Mr. Goulbarn's motion ; but he expressed a doubt as to the bills having been proved to be forged. Sir ROBERT Imams objected that Mr. Goulburn had prejudged that question. Mr. BARING concurred in the motion ; and said, in answer to Mr. Leader, that there had been no information as to any fraud until the late inquiry. Upon which Mr. LEADER repeated, that Smith was proved to be under no check. A good deal more conversation elicited nothing material, except Sir ROBERT PEEL'S concurrence in Mr. Gonl- burn's caution as to compensation ; and ultimately leave was given to bring in the bill.

RAILROADS IN IGRIAND.

Mr. FITZSTEPHEN FRENCH moved a Committee of the whole House, to address the Queen, praying that she would recommend Parliament to take such measures as may appear most likely to secure to Ireland the advantage of railway-communication. Mr. French said that time had only confirmed the conviction which he had often expressed, that until Government should undertake the construction of railroads in Ire- land, that country must be deprived of one great means of social im- provement. The proof was the feeble attempts of private enterprise : up to the year 1838, 112 private acts of Parliament had passed for railways in England and Wales : in Scotland, 21 ; in 'rag.: t, S ; and out of those eight acts, five had not been carried out. The aid ot

vernment had been recommended in the reports of the Government Commissioners in 1836 and 1838. The Parliamentary litigation conse- quent on private legislation enhanced the cost of railways in England

100 per cent; thus imposing a tax of 2,400,000/. on the travelling com- munity by making railways private speculations. In France, Belgium, Prussia, Austria, and Saxony, railway-communication is rapidlyin- creasing under the fostering aid of Government.

Mr. &taw seconded the motion ; one of his objects in doing so being to dissuade Mr. French from pressing the question on Government; and on the other hand, he deprecated a hasty declaration against the scheme on the part of Government.

Mr. REDINGTON doubted whether a system of railways would benefit Ireland ; but he recommended to the notice of Government a propo- sition to join the Portadown and Dublin and Drogheda Railways, in which the shareholders asked Government to guarantee an interest of four per cent on half the principal advanced on the security of the whole of the sunken capital and works.

Lord ELIOT could not regard railways an absolute want in an agricul- tural country like Ireland. Lord Morpeth bad proposed a plan which recognized the ',principle of Government undertaking railways, and the proposal comprised some sort of security on the county-cess : but in times of distress Government could not call upon the counties to pay ; while the county-cess of 3s. 6d.:, or 4s. an acre would be increased by 8d. or 9d., and the addition would fall very heavily on the occupying tenantry. He could not hold out delusive hopes; and therefore he would meet the motion by moving the previous question.

The original motion was supported by Mr. O'CoNNEEL ; who com- plained that the Commissioners had put an effectual damper on priva e enterprise, in stating the profits of railroads in Ireland at six per cent. It was also supported by Mr. S. O'BRIEN ; and opposed by Captain JONES.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that if the state of the finances were a matter of indifference to Ministers, the expenditure of 6,000,000/. or 7,000,000/. to conciliate the Irish Members might be a very good party move ; but they could not act on such considerations-

" But still, if I really did believe that an undertaking by the Government to make 540 miles of railway in Ireland would be a substantial and permanent benefit to that country, I do think all my scruples on the subject would be re- moved. My opinion is, that it' would prove a fatal gift ; and I say this because I look at what took place in the Irish Parliament, and the result of the grants which they made. I know [addressing the Irish Members on the Opposition benches] that grants of public money were given for the construction of your Grand Canal, your Royal Canal, and your Laggan and Tyrone Navigation ; and what was the result ? Why, that so far from these undertakings turning out profitable, the contrary was the case. My belief is, that an undertaking to construct an extensive system of railways in Ireland would not pay the ex- pense; but even if it did, what would be the consequence? Why, you would bring. together an immense mass of labourers by the incentive of the advantage to arise from undue exertion ; but when the works were finished, and those labourers could find no employment, was it not probable that the evils of Ire- land, instead of being mitigated, would be increased?"

If railways could be constructed in Ireland, why not let it be done as it had been in this country ? Government would give the advan- tages of Government superintendence. Irish gentlemen might, if they wished, obtain powers from Parliament for Commissioners to fix the prices of the lands taken for railway purposes. They might also obtain such powers as would enable them to avoid the evils and embarrass- ments against which English railway-companies bad to contend in pri- vate legislation. He could not but believe that Ireland herself, with those facilities, might furnish the means- " I cannot act on the supposition that the people of Ireland are unable of

themselves to undertake the construction of railways, if they make up their mind to forget party divisions and animosities, and apply themselves to such an object in right down earnest. But if not, why does not Ireland exhibit such a state of peace and tranquillity—such an absence of agitation and disturbance— as will show that capital may be safely vested in that country ? If peaceable and tranquil, there could be no doubt that English capital, for which it was now so difficult to find profitable employment, would flow into Ireland." The SrEagEn objected to the motion as a bad precedent, since it pointed at a grant of money ; an objection which Sir ROBERT PEEL en- forced. Mr. WAHLEY having commended Ireland to Sir Robert Peel's improving care, Lord Joss RUSSELL hinted to Sir Robert that he should apply the objection just raised against Mr. French's motion to motions which might be repeated, like that on the 30th June 1840, for a grant of money to relieve spiritual destitution : for that, no fewer than 149 Members, whom he saw opposite, voted. Mr. FRENCH withdrew his motion. Sir ROBERT PEEL then stated, that he would give to Ireland the same advantage as England possesses, by the advance of Exchequer Bills on proper security, in order to enable the works to be completed.

MISCELLANEOUS.

ELECTION COMMITTEES. On Wednesday, Lord GRANITILLE SOMER-

SET brought up the report of the general Committee on Elections, who had appointed the following gentlemen to act as Chairmen of Election Committees—Lord Ashley, Sir J. Y. Buller, Mr. Divett, Mr. Drum- mond, Mr. B. Hall, Sir E. Hayes, Mr. Hayter, Mr. Hogg, Mr. Paking- ton, Mr. Redington, Mr. P. M. Stewart, and Mr. C. Wood.

AMERICAN CORN. In reply to Sir CHARLES NAPIER and Mr. FITZ- ROY, on Monday, Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that if the information could be procured, returns should be made showing the number of vessels that arrived from America laden with corn in 1841, specifying the number of days on the passage and the quantity of the flour imported.

COPYRIGHT. Lord Minos obtained leave, on Thursday, to bring in a bill to amend the law of copyright. He merely stated that he pro- posed to limit the extent of the period of protection to twenty-five years, and to give a discretionary power to the Privy Council to prevent the suppression of works by the survivors of the authors.

PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES. In Committee on the Marriages (Ireland) Bill, on Monday, Mr. &urn O'BRIEN proposed to omit clause 2, which declares that the act shall not render valid any marriage previously de- clared invalid by a competent jurisdiction. The clause was carried, by 159 to 63; Mr. Taos...sox, at the suggestion of Sir GEORGE GREY, pro- mising to consider whether parties availing themselves of the late dect-

sion of the Irish Judges should not be liable for the support of children by the first marriage.

At the third reading of the bill, however, on Wednesday, Mr. JACK- SON said, that as the ease which suggested the amendment was a soli- tary one, and as it would not be just to deal with the party in question without his being heard, he thought it not expedient to insert a clause on the subject. Mr. SneameN CRAWFORD brought forward an amendment, the object of which was to make marriages celebrated by a Presbyterian clergyman between two Episcopalians, or between an Episcopalian and a member of a different sect than the Presbyterian, valid. But after a short discussion, the amendment was withdrawn. The bill then passed. NONINTRUSION AND BAYONETS. Mr. Fox MAME, on Wednesday, said that he had understood that troops had been removed from Aber- deen to Huntley, in the neighbourhood of Glass, where a minister was about to be inducted on the presentation of the patron ; and he begged to ask whether that removal had taken place in consequence of a representation from the Sheriff of the county of Aberdeen ? and if so, whether that representation had been accompanied by a de- claration from the Sheriff that he had reason to anticipate such disturb- ance in Glass as rendered it necessary to have troops in the immediate neighbourhood ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM positively declined giving any answer whatever, except that her Majesty's Government were respon- sible for the maintenance of the peace in Scotland. FRANCE IN AFRICA. In answer to Mr. Sam, on Tuesday, Sir Ro- BERT PEEL said that M. Guizot, in giving to the Chamber of Deputies, on the 19th January the particulars of a conversation between Lord Aberdeen and the French Ambassador, had not stated it quite correctly, when he said that Lord Aberdeen used the phrase "that he had no ob- jection to the retention of their possessions in Algiers": Lord Aber- deen said, "that he had no observation to make upon the subject." THE WAR DT AFGHANISTAN. In reply to Mr. MANGLES, on Wed- nesday, Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that Government had no accounts direct from Cabal or Candahar of a later date than those of which the public were already in possession. Accounts had been received through Cal- cutta of a later date : but they were not founded on official information, it was very improbable, however, that the private letters upon which they rested could be called in question. That intelligence was such as to create considerable anxiety ; but there were no accounts of any nego- tiations for a surrender having taken place, and still less of an actual surrender.