Dtbatts anti 13rocetbings in Varliamcnt

THE LOAN.

The House of Commons went into Committee of Ways and Means on Monday, in order to a further statement by the Chancellor of the Exche- quer. Sir CHARLES WOOD announced that he had entered into an ar- rangement for a loan of 8,000,0001. He had consulted every person whom he could consult, and was unanimously told the easiest terms on which the money could be obtained was to give so much Three per Cent Con- sols for every 1001. stock. That morning, two offers had been made at the Treasury: they were in fact identical, and were the result of a pre- vious arrangement. The offer was 891. 108. for 100/. in stock. The in- terest charged on the country would not be equal in amount to what it would have been at 3j- per cent— "I believe that the interest payable on this loan will be, as near as may be, 31. 78. 6d. per cent. A calculation has been made in the Revenue-room of the Treasury, that it would amount to 31. is., deducting the interest due on the stock from last dividend-day. The annual interest on the loan will be 268,1561. 8s. 6d.; and, adding to that the charge of management payable to the Bank, 270,8001., the interest will be within a small fraction of 31. 7s. 6d. per cent. That may fairly be taken as the rate at which the loan has been raised. My right honour- able friend the Member for Portsmouth will therefore observe that this is 28. 6d. less than 81 per cent. I have in some particulars departed from the previous ISpolleakacting loans; not being in immediate want of money, I have n.r<1.10`

but I have adopted the usual practice of giving stock, if re-

eats except the first, as they are paid. In some respects '"IhNkfrAP. traction of the loan, without any loss whatever to the Go- - OML 11. oney." Sir Charles Wood moved resolutions incorporating and embodying the arrangement made on the previous Thursday. [Inserted under the head of " Money Mallet " in the Spectator of Saturday last.] Mr. HUME complained that the terms were not so favourable to the pub- lic as those which might have been obtained. The country is to pay 8,938,947/. for 8,000,0001. He did not doubt that the stock would be at 3 or 4 per cent premium tomorrow.

Mr. Wlisaams objected to the mode of contracting the loan: it might have been contracted at par. The Chancellor of the Exchequer might have issued 4,000,0001. of Exchequer Bills at the interest increased by a halfpenny a day, without exceeding 3 per cent.

In the course of some further conversation, Sir CHARLES WOOD stated that the offers were made by Messrs. Rothschild and Messrs. Baring. The resolutions were affirmed, and the House resumed.

THE linen INDEMNITY BILL.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Marquis of CLANRIGA.RDE moved the second reading of the Labouring Poor (Ireland) Bill. Lord BROUGHAM took some technical objections to the delay which had been made in seeking indemnity for the violation of law, and also to the sweeping terms of the bill. The Marquis of WESTMEATH said that he had undertaken for the whole sum apportioned on an electoral division, and he hoped he should not be liable for any part of the baronial works. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH objected to the unproductive nature of the public works in Ireland, especially to the absence of any measures for ena- bling the people to cultivate their land effectually. If they were at liberty, they would have no seed to sow it with. Earl FITZWILLIAM complained that England does not understand the Irish question, and that there had been an ill-judged parsimony which was really a prospective extravagance. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE repeated the usual arguments in vindica- tion of Government, with a new illustration against interference in the grain-market. The undertaking of Government to provide seed to limited amount had had the effect of raising prices in some quarters, so that in effect it diminished rather than increased the facilities for procuring seed. He kneW that for some time past some proprietors had been actively, though quietly, engaged in providing to a certain extent seed; and their efforts would operate favourably with respect to the next harvest.

The bill was read a second time.

IRISH POOR-LAW.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated the amendments which he proposed to introduce into the permanent bill for amending the Poor-law of Ireland. A fresh clause was substituted for clause 2: it would now authorize the Poor-law Commissioners to offer out- door relief in any union of which the workhouse is full, or rendered unfit for the reception of poor by infectious diseases; such authority not to be given for more than two calendar months; and power being reserved to the Commissioners to revoke their order before its expiration. Clause 3 (con- veying the requisite power to Guardians) was also remodelled so as to suit the new form of the previous clause. Clause 9 was altered. The liability of the charge for out-door relief was originally imposed on the union; but in the modified clause it is im- posed on the electoral district; unless the charge shall exceed 2s. 6d. in the pound per annum, in which case the excess will be charged on the union at large.

In Ireland, the ex-officio Guardians form a fourth of the number of the board; and the amendment in the bill authorizes the selection of Magi- strates as ex-officio Guardians in an equal number to the elected Guardians; thus forming one half of the board. A further amendment was still under the consideration of Government. In England, a cottager may obtain relief, and is allowed to return to his cottage afterwards. It is desirable that in Ireland no relief should be given to a person possessing land; but it was no doubt desirable not to deprive a destitute person of his cottage, and half an acre had been mentioned as en amount of holding which should not disqualify for relief. On the other hand, there is a great objection to perpetuating small tenements. The object should be to withhold relief from those really possessing other means of subsistence; and that would be the general scope of the amendment.

Several Members made objections to the increase of ex-officio Guardians, and the abandonment of the uniform rating; namely, Mr. JOHN O'CON- NELL, Sir DENHAM NORREYS, Mr. MORGAN JOHN O'CONNELL, and Mr. DENIS CALLAGHAN. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN said, the best thing would be, not to abandon the uniform rating, but to have a new arrangement of the electoral districts. Mr. PouazvT SCROFE strongly objected to the greater restriction put upon out-door relief by the new form of the second clause. Mr. LEFROY rather approved of electoral rating.

In reply to Mr. SHAW, Lord Joins RUSSELL said that a vagrancy bill for Ireland should be introduced; but as to the time for introducing it, he had not yet made up his mind.

The bill went through Committee pro formic, in order to be reprinted and further considered in Committee on Monday next. Lord Jona RUSSELL having moved to postpone the Committee on the Landed Property (Ireland) Bill, some farther conversation arose on the state of Ireland and the proposed Poor-law.

Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN averred that the 1,500,0001. for the improvement estates authorized by the Landed Property Bill would not find occupation for the people now employed on useless and valueless works. Other mea- sures ought to be pressed, especially the Waste Lands Bill and Tenants Compensation Bill.

Mr. HUME and other Members urged Ministers to expedite the bill for the sale of encumbered estates; so that landlords might be able to expend their capital on improvemoments. Lord JOILN RUSSELL said, that bill involved considerable-difficulties; and it had been thought better to refer itto the Lord Chancellor in Ireland, in order that it might be made as complete as possible. He repeated his ar- gument that the object was not to make works productive, but to provide employment for the people; though he believed that many of the roads would be useful. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that it was of importance to spend the public money in such manner that it should be as reproductive as possible, and conducive to the wealth of Ireland. He objected to leaving the bill for facilitating the transfer of property to the lawyers; And as an instance of the objection to such a course, he mentioned that a clause included in the Drainage. Bill of last year, for regulating a charge on the estate, was de-

ffiated in the House of Lords after it had received the general concurrence of the Irish landowners: four great authorities conjoined, without dis- tinction of party, to mutilate the bill,—namely, Lord Cottenham, Lord Langdale, Lord Campbell, and Lord Lyndhurst, then Lord Chancellor. Sir James suggested that Government should consider which of these measures it was desirable to submit to the Law Lords, and should intro- duce such bills as soon as possible into the House of Lords.

Mr. LABOUCH.ERE hoped that the other House of Parliament would soon be engaged in considering measures for facilitating the sale of landed estates in Ireland.

On Thursday, some questions drew from Mr. LABOUCHERE the state- ment of two important facts. The numbers employed on the relief works, for the week ending on the 20th February, amounted to not fewer than 668,000 persons. In advancing seed, the Lord-Lieutenant has come to the resolution to give seed for green crops only, and not for corn.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE POOR-LAW.

On Tuesday, Mr. BANKES drew the attention of the House to a report from the Select Committee on the Law of Settlement and the Poor- Removal Act. The Committee declared that doubts on the working of the Poor-Removal Act ought to be solved, but did not advise any tem- porary measure for that purpose before a general dealing with the law of settlement. Mr. Bankes contended that the ill working of the Poor-Re- moval Act demands immediate amendment. It works ill for rate-payers, having caused an enormous increase of rates in towns; and harshly for the poor, especially for the old and infirm. Ho understood that there was great difference of opinion on the legal force of the act. The Commis- sioners had put six questions to the Law-officers of the Crown, implying that the Commissioners themselves had six doubts: the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General gave an opinion one way; a learned gentleman and Recorder [Mr. M. D. Hill] gave an opinion another way. Mr. Bankes moved for the case which had been submitted to the Law -officers of the Crown; intimating that after Easter he should move to repeal the act.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER objected to the production of the opinion, as un- usual. Sir GEORGE GREY thought it best to postpone the discussion until Mr. Bankes should introduce his motion for repeal of the Removal Act.

A long conversation followed; in which the motion was supported or opposed by several gentlemen in short speeches.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM admitted, that the construction put upon the act had given it a more extended operation than its framers intended; but in point of fact, it is pro Saito more beneficial to the poor. On some classes, those resident in one union and settled in another, it has operated with harshness; but on much larger classes it has conferred an inestimable benefit,—on the numerous class of sick poor, on Scotch and Irish poor re- sident in England. This beneficial operation had been established by per- sons of practical experience,—by Mr. Gulson, by the Auditor of the Nor- folk and Suffolk and Cambridge Union, and by the Chairman of a Board of Guardians in the North of England.

Sir WALTER JAMES contended, that at least Government or the Poor- law Commissioners should make some declaration, which, though not of legal force, would remove sources of doubt and embarrassment from the mind of the local authorities. Sir GEORGE GREY said that the Commissioners had already taken such a step.

Eventually Mr. Bankes withdrew his motion.

In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, the Doke of Rrenstown moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the operation of the Poor-Removal Act of last session. It had been avowed by the framers of the bill, that the Law-officers of the Crown had put upon it a construction which they did not anticipate ; and that ()Onion still left. the matter iridoubt. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought that good Parliamentary grounds had been shown for the inquiry. It was right that the doubts should be removed as early as possible.

Lord BROUGHAM observed, that the act received the Royal assent on the 26th of August. Now, for a fortnight preceding that day, it was not likely that deliberate attention would be given to the subject of poor-removals: many of their Lordships were busy with removals of another description— removal not from one parish to another, but from one state of being to an- other—from the Legislature to the larder. The act in question was very badly drawn up. It was an instance of the want for which the Law Amendment Society suggested a remedy—the appointment of a board to assist in drawing up bills. Lord Brougham adverted to Mr. Hill's " opinion," on which Lord John Russell had made a passing animadversion— That opinion was given thirteen months ago, long before the controversy had arisen on the conduct of the Poor-law Commissioners; and was given on a case laid before Mr. Hill, by an attorney, in the usual way. In that opinion it did so happen that Lord Lyndhurst concurred. Mr. Hill had given his opinion as a lawyer upon the case submitted to him. Their Lordships were well aware that the slightest difference in the facts might make the greatest difference in the re- sults. Mr. Hill had not the least conception that it was intended to make that opinion public. For aught he knew, it was sought on behalf of the Commissioners themselves; and it was by no means certain that it was not. In 1833 and 1834, when the Poor-law Bill was under consideration of Parliament., Mr. Hill, who was at that time Member for Hull, was not an adversary, but a strenuous supporter of that measure.

Motion affirmed. EMIGRATION.

On Thursday, Mr. VERNON SMITH moved as follows—

"That in order to assist and encourage voluntary emigration to the Colonies, it is expedient to increase the importance and authority of the Land and Emi-

gration Board, to add to their agency in Great Britain and Ireland, and promote

their vigilant superintendence of the passage and future location of the emigrants." The necessity of emigration is shown by the redundant numbers in our urban districts, and by the fact that 668,000 persons are employed on the public works in freland. Mr. Smith advised that the emigrants should be encouraged to go to the Australian Colonies, where they would be gladly received, rather than to America. He contrasted the aid furnished to "exiles," or pardoned convicts, with the refusal of aid to the honest father of a family desiring to seek employment in the Colonies. He proposed that the Emigration Commissioners should collect and distribute informa- tion as to the parishes desiring to send out emigrants, and the advantages offered by the several Colonies; that the number of agents at the outports —much wanted in Ireland—should be increased from ten to twen; and

that the Chief Commissioner should have a seat in Parliament. -He also thought the dependence of the Board on the Colonial Office highly ob- jectionable.

The motion was supported by Mr. MACKINNON, Mr. LEFROY, Mr. Kean, and Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN. Mr. O'BRIEN advised, that when emigrants are sent out, ample provision should be made for administering to their reli- gious wants, according to their persuasion; and he asked what Government would do to aid emigration? Dr. BOWRING called for a declaration as to the extent to which responsible government would be carried into effect. [For answer, Mr. Hawes referred him to Lord John Russell's general declaration last year, in favour of giving the Colonies control over their own affairs.] Sir WALTER JAMES said, that if Government did not resort to some large plan of emigration, there would be no resource for the starving Irish but to lie down and die.

Mr. G. W. HOPE opposed the motion; pleading lack of " the sinews of war."

Three of the Ministers also opposed it,—Mr. HAWES, Lord JOHN Roe- SELL, and Mr. CHARLES BULLER. Mr. HAWES said, that the Board was not intended to promote the spirit of emigration, but to give assistance and advice, to remove impediments and difficulties where parties emigrated of their own accord. He maintained the efficiency of the Board: under its su- perintendence, 48,000 persons have emigrated to the Australian Colonies in ten years; and from 1837 to 1846, no fewer than 856,000 persons left this country. Mortality in emigrant-ships has greatly decreased; the migration of Coolies from India and of Africans from Sierra Leone has been conducted with a decreasing ratio of mortality. Such emigration is not colonization— he did not speak of that—the Board was not constituted to undertake that. He wished he could speak of colonization definitely; but it depends upon sufficiency of funds. Its first and great elements are free institutions and good government; and in that direction a beginning has been made in New Zealand. Not wishing to meet the motion by a direct negative, he moved " the previous question."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied to Mr. Smith O'Brien's inquiries. Govern- ment possesses no means of forming an estimate as to the number of emi- grants that could be safely located in the North American Colonies. It was not the intention of Government to pay the passage-money of emi- grants in any case—it ought to be carried on by landlords, or by the friends of the parties wishing to emigrate. As much as 100,0001. had been sent from the United States last year for that purpose. In the Co- lonies, Lord John Russell said, there is a feeling against emigration. To apply any additional stimulus at present, would only add to the general distress, and might have the effect of inundating the Colonies with labour which they do not want.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER did not deny that improvements might be ef- fected in the machinery of the Emigration Board; but the difficulties of colonization did not lie there. The great difficulties now are, the imper- fect state of colonial governments, the utter impossibility of getting any land-fund to defray the cost of emigration, and the want of any effectual control over waste lands, alienated in the most lavish manner by past Go- vernments. Mr. Buller quoted instances of this alienation from Lord Durham's Report—in particular, the case of Prince Edward's Island, alienated in a single day, and still in the most backward state. The way to fit the Colonies for colonization is to give every settlement self-govern- ment from the first, and to establish a system for the disposal of waste lands.

The amendment was affirmed.

THE CHURCH CHURCH IN SCOTLAND.

On Tuesday, Mr. Borrveatz moved for a Select Committee "to inquire whether, and in what part of Scotland, and under what circum- stances, large numbers of her Majesty's subjects have been deprived of the means of religions worship by the refusal of certain proprietors to grant them sites for the erection of churches." Mr. Bonverie supported his motion with general arguments in favour of religious freedom, and of self-government in matters ecclesiastical. A large and influential body of persons in Scotland have left the Establishment of that country; and the schism is not temporary, as many affected to believe it. To show the importance of the Free Protesting Church, Mr. Bouverie men- tioned, that that Church had, in less than four years, collected for eccle- siastical purposes no less a sum than 1,254,0001. It had built 630 churches, and established a vast number of normal and other schools. It was the Free Church which was the first to take steps for investigating and reliev- ing the distress in Scotland. Mr. Bouverie mentioned cases in which sites for churches had been refused. Two occurred on the Duke of Bue- cleneh's property: one of those was at Canobie; the minister attending that meeting had to travel a distance of thirty miles, and then had to offi- ciate in the open air. The Duke of Buccleuch, who is himself a Dissenter, [from the Scotch Establishment—he belongs to the Church of England,] has erected a chapel at Dalkeith, where the service is performed in stribt conformity with the liturgy of the Church of England. Lord Macdonald has thought fit to refuse sites. On the property of Sir James Riddell, 4,000 people are obliged to perform public worship in the open air; add the minister of a district in the Isle of Mull is obliged to officiate in a boat. Mr. Bouverie mentioned with approval the Earl of Aberdeen, who had waived his own opinions in favour of more tolerant conduct. On the for- mation of new parishes in Scotland, the Court of Session has the power of granting authority to reserve four acres of land whereon to build a manse: a similar power might be given in favour of the Free Church. Such powers are taken for " the public convenience " in cases of railways, Metropolitan improvements, amatory regulations, and enclosure acts. At present, how- ever, he only asked for inquiry.

The debate that ensued was more polemical than animated. The mo- tion was supported by Mr. EWART—who said that the grievance needed exposure; also by Mr.. Fox MAULE, and Colonel Mune.

Ministers assented to the inquiry. Sir GEORGE GREY said he had hoped that the landowners of Sc'otland would take Sir James Graham's advice and supersede a direct legislative remedy by deference to public opinion: but they had not done so. Perhaps there might be reasons for refusal in certain cases; and in order to come at the truth, lotquiry would be very proper. Sir ROBERT Nails led the opposition to the motion. He contended that regard ought to be paid not only to the conscience of members of the Free Kirk, but also to the conscience of those who belonged to the Estab- lished Church. If the right to free sites were granted to seceders, ho did not see how a similar right could be refused to Roman Catholics. And the question remained, whether they were to impose on any man the obli- gation to find sites on his own property for places of worship where tile doctrine to be preached was hostile to his own.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM objected to inquiry. The facts were not disputed; and inquiry was more likely to provoke than to allay bitterness and rell- gloms animosity. Mr. Ewart avowed that it was meant for " exposure." Refusal of sites is the exception, not the rule; and the cases are rapidly diminishing in number. The opposition was followed up by Lord GEORGE BENTINCK, Mr. Flux- OS SCOTT, and Mr. STUART WORTLEY—who reminded the House that the Duke of Buccleuch's refusal had been provoked by insolent demeanour on the part of the persons claiming the sites. Mr. Fox Matrix denied that the facts were admitted. It is true that the number of cases is diminished, but there are still thirty cases of re- fusal.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL reminded the House, that he had formerly resisted the claims of the Free Church, before the unfortunate secession. He did not agree in the grounds of that secession; but a great number of people in Scotland having followed their ministers in separating from the Estab- lished Church, everything which could be done to enable those ministers to preach the doctrine which they believed to their followers ought to be done; and when they saw the congregations meeting in the mud and in boats, exposed to wind and rain, it must be admitted that there was a considerable grievance. These things were justified on the score of the rights of property- " I must say, with regard to a legislative remedy for these things, I am, on the one hand, very unwilling to adopt any legislation on a subject touching so nearly the conscientious opinions of men; but, on the other hand, if I should have it proved to me, by a Committee of inquiry, that those grievances are suffered, and that there is no such sufficient defence—that there is not a special and pecu- liar case in which the proprietor's personal character is attacked, in which he finds it quite impassible to grant sites without sowing division among all his tenants and the people living on his estate, but that all refused on the ground that this is a religious sect of which the proprietors disapproved, and that in thirty cases those refusals still exist—that in thirty cases the congregations are thus obliged to attend Divine worship on the Sabbath without any shelter to cover them, without any roof over their head,—I most say, that if after a patient hear- ing, and hearing the facts on both sides, if those facts should be established, I should not be indisposed to interpose with some legislative remedy."

The case is especially one for inquiry, because it involves a great prin- ciple— " If you establish it in the Free Church in Scotland, if at any time any com- plaint comes from the Roman Catholics of Ireland, or from the Society of Friends, or from any other religions society or persuasion, you must carry out the same principle. It must be universal, and what you do in the one case you must do in the other. But that would not convince me that you ought not in an extreme case to assent to a lsislative remedy: because nothing is more sacred—there is nothing which the House ought to consider more sacred, than to allow every in- dividual in this country to worship God according to his conscience; and, if ob- stacles are interposed which would prevent that free worship, to remove them."

The House divided; and the motion was affirmed, by 89 to 61.

SHORT TIME.

On Wednesday, the order of the day having been read for going into Committee on the Factory Bill, Mr. BICKHAM Escorr moved as OH amendment, " That the House do go into Committee on that day six months." He declared that an eleven-hours bill, into which this was to be converted, would not satisfy, the working people, but would only be the vantage-ground whence to continue the agitation for an eight-hours or even a six-hours bill. He pointed out the impolicy of im- posing restrictions on industry at a time when the price of food is so high. He charged Lord Ashley with garbling evidence in favour of such mea- sures; and quoted from the report of the Commission from which Lord Ashley usually read whole pages, to show that it contained evidence of a very opposite kind. For instance, working men declared that they never grumbled about over-hours; that they liked sixteen hours as well as twelve; that the pay was very acceptable when it came; that they were dissatisfied when there were no over-hours; that the children were fond of being employed in mills, on account of the warmth; and so forth. The Reverend H. Fielding said that wages would be reduced in proportion to the time. Mr. Escott had that morning laid a memorial on the table of the House from the master-manufacturers and mill-owners of Lancashire protesting against further interference.

The amendment gave rise to a debate of some length; in which the usual arguments were reproduced with considerable emphasis, but with- out much novelty in themselves.

Mr. BECKETT advocated an eleven-hours bill, as a concession to the working classes which would not eutail serious injury on the manufacturers.

Mr. WARD argued, that the bill was decidedly against the interest of the working classes. There was not a man amongst them who would take a ten-hours bill with ten hours' wages. All the efforts of their voluntary trades unions showed that their object was restricted time without reduc- tion of wages. But if the reduction were made, let the experiment be de- cided: go even to the extent of an eight-hours bill.

Mr. BROTHERTON said, the question was whether females from thirteen to eighteen and upwards ought to be compelled to work in a heated atmosphere for twelve hours a day. He declared that the working classes desired the re- striction, but could not effect it by voluntary agreement, on account of in- dividual dissent. Mr. Brotherton touched the feelings by repeating a statement he had made some years ago, that when he was a boy he had him- self been acquainted with this wearisome toil, had resolved to endeavour to obtain shorter time, and was proud to say that he still retained the feelings of his boyhood.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM was proud to sit in the House on terms of equality with a gentleman who had risen from the humblest classes of society by honest industry and unblemished character; but he reminded Mr. Brother- ton, that he had attained his success in life through long hours. The question was, not whether women should be compelled to work twelve hours a day or not, but whether industrious men should be restrained from working twelve hours a day when they desired to do it. The bill would affect the four staple articles of manufacture—cotton, woollen, linen, and silk. In 1846, the total amount of the exports was 51,279,7351. declared value; out of which, the cotton, linen, and woollen manufactures, amounted to 37,385,0001., being about four-fifths of the whole of the exports. That amount showed a decrease as compared with the previous year of about fifteen per cent. The price of food is higher • and at such a juncture is it that it is proposed, for the first time in the history of our manufactures, to Malt the running of machinery in those four branches of manufacture. The manufacturers must do something to retrieve themselves: machinery would be improved; but in order to that end, old machinery must be cast Out of use, the newest only retained, and newer devised at the cost of great

outlay to the manufacturers, whose leases had been executed on the sup- position that the standing machinery would run for a certain time. Sir James pointed out various admissions in Sir George Grey's speech in the previous debate, such as that the bill would reduce wages, &c.

Sir GEORGE GREY repudiated the fall meaning imputed to those ad- missions : for instance, the bill would tend to reduce wages, but there might be other influences called into play which would have an opposite effect. He should prefer eleven hours to ten; but if the House should decide in Committee in favour of ten hours, he should still cordially vote for the bill.

Lord MoRvEvn spoke in favour of the bill; and cited experiments in the mills of Mr. James Marshall of Leeds, showing that his machinery had worked only sixty-four hours a:week, and that the produce was only a half per cent less than that of sixty-six hours. Lord Morpeth would vote for a limitation to eleven hours; but, could not share the confidence of Sir George Grey and vote for a further limitation. (Great laughter.) Lord GEORGE BENTINCK contended for granting that which the working classes demanded by common consent. Mr. MILNER GIBSON addressed himself to the task of exposing various defects and inconsistencies in the arguments for the bill. It was proposed to give compulsory leisure to certain persons; but there they stopped, with- out taking any security for the way iu which the leisure should be em- ployed in order to that moral and physical advantage which they professed to aim at. He for one must positively decline to share in the responsibility of this measure. It is said that the Factory Bill is to guard the operative from the tyranny of the capitalist: it mast lead to some loss; and if the capitalist is stronger than the operative, he would soon have it in his power to shift the loss entirely on the working classes. Mr. Ferrand said that the working classes were unanimously determined to have the mea- sure: if so, why not secure its objects at once, by combinations amongst themselves? Much was said about the absence of mothers, their intrasting the infants to hirelings, and consequent mortality: but if mothers were absent from their homes thirteen hours instead of fourteen hours, would they not equally be obliged to intrust their children to hirelings, or would any great amount of life be saved? The expe- rience of past legislation will not serve; because it has related to children, whereas this relates to adults, and goes to arrest the work- ing of the whole manufacturing system. A case was brought before a police-court the other day, of a Mr. Plummer, in which several poor women were prevented from working at the harmless occupation of wind- ing cotton-balls in the evening: a woman forty years of age was brought before the Magistrate for that offence! Now, what twaddling tyranny that isl They had not interfered with the labour of others who suffer still more from long hours and unhealthy employment: for instance, hos- pital nurses work from eleven to sixteen hours out of the twenty-four; washerwomen work longer than the distressed needlewomen. lie would not vote for any piece of rash legislation calculated to impede the progress of society. Viscount EBRINOTON spoke in favour of interference on behalf of chil dren and women, but deprecated interfering with adult men. Sir ROBERT PEEL, who rose at half-past five, promised to speak for a very short time, leaving space for another speaker on the opposite aide; but he warmed with his subject, and, with the manifest concurrence of the House, filled up the whole of the remaining half-hour. He had some- times excited a smile, he observed, when, as First Minister of the Crown, he had said that three courses were open to him: Lord John Russell has suc- ceeded to his position in that respect—with this difference, that he had a colleague established in each of the several courses! Mr. Labouchere was against extended interference with labour • Sir George Grey would vote for eleven hours, and even for ten hours; Lord Morpeth would vote for eleven, but would rather vote against the bill than for ten hours. It is a difficult mathematical problem to determine at what point a body will rest when it is exposed to the attraction of three great bodies at the same time: at what point would Lord John Russell take his final repose?

Replying to some animadversions of Lord George Bentinck on the Free- trade measures, Sir Robert Peel quoted figures to prove their perfect suc- cess. The exports of the country have decidedly advanced—from 47,000,0001. in 1842 to 60,000,0001. in 1845; and though there was a slight reaction in 1846, he challenged any one to show him a time at which, with so high a price of food, the country had exhibited so buoyant a revenue, such popular contentment and submission to the law under pri- vations, such a feeling of confidence in all classes under fluctuations and difficulties. The reason is, that the people are convinced that no arbitrary regulations and restrictions are responsible for the high price of food, or for their difficulties. Had such a calamity as the failure of the potato oc- curred with restrictions on the importation of corn, what might not have been the consequence?

Sir Robert argued against the bill on the broad ground that it is not for the interest of the working-classes. He was prepared to argue it on the broadest ground, that of the Italian economists, who reproach our political economists with discussing only the accumulation of wealth, regardless of its distribution. What are the three securities for the present state of things? Our capital, machinery, and labour. Now we are exporting our machinery; there is nothing to prevent increased investment in foreign countries; fa- cilities of locomotion and communication may enable the working man to seek employment abroad. There is no exclusive command over capital, machinery, or labour; and perhaps we are too apt to rely on our pre- eminent energy. Under such circumstances is it that you propose to re- strict nominally the labour of women and children, but practically that of adult men. Labour is to be restricted to five days out of six. One argn- meat for the measure almost tempted him to make the experiment; but on closer consideration it strengthened his conviction against it---

" If you could convince me that the present measure would tend to the moral and intellectual improvement and the social welfare of the great labouring class, I confess I should be almost tempted to make the experiment; because I do feel that the point at which we ought all to strive, is to improve the condition and elevate the feelings of that class of society. I tell you it is not safe unless you do it. You are giving these classes intellectual improvement; and unless you remove every law inconsistent with that intelligence, the institutions of the country will be in danger, especially in the event of a calamity occurring la this country such as is now desolating Ireland. I tell you that if your legislation is found to restrict, to diminish, or to interfere with the comforts of the working classes, then their intellectual improvement will become a source of danger. I feel that we should all work at this point, and, whether it is by the improvement of the sanatory condition of the people or in any other way, that we should do all in our power to increase the enjoyments and improve the character of the working classes. I firmly believe, as you do, that the source of the future peace, happi- nese, and prosperity of this country, i lies in the improvement, religions as well as moral, of the different classes of society. But it is in thus advocating the eleva- tion of the people that I oppose these restrictions. Sir, I do not deny the advan- tage of leisure; but of this I am perfectly convinced, that the real way to improve the condition of the labourer, and to elevate the character of the working classes of this country, is to give them a command over the necessaries of life." He believed that the bill would force the manufacturers, in order to com- pete with foreign rivalry, to increase the efficiency and speed of their ma- chinery; thus putting a greater strain than ever on the faculties of the working man. As to the reduction in wages, let wages be called " income," let any deduction from them be an " income-tax," and then ask what would be the effect of an income-tax to the extent of one-sixth; curtailing the re- ceipts of industry, and depriving the working man of the opportunity to lay by a surplus for evil times— "I would have the father of a family left at liberty. to imitate the example of the honourable Member for Salford, and by his praiseworthy industry lay the foundation of a fortune which hundreds have acquired. (Cheers.) Why, Sir, I could name a dozen cases, and I have no doubt they are all familiar to the honour- able Member, of men who were once living upon 20s. or 25s. a week, but who now possess fortunes of 100,0001. But who is to answer for the result, if you paralyze the efforts of such men by your legislation ? "

The House divided; and the amendment was negatived by 190 to 100. But it being already past six o'clock, the House adjourned without going into Committee.

ARMY ESTIMATES.

The House went into Committee of Supply on Monday, to consider the Army Estimates; Mr. HUME and Mr. WILLIAMS making some preliminary objections to the continually increasing expenditure.

Mr. Fox Matrix stated the amount which would be required for the military service of the year— The aggregate number of men to be voted in the ensuing year was 138,895; the gross charge for which was 5,155,8481. The gross non-effective charge was 2,175,2271. The total gross charge was 7,331,0751. From this must be deducted the cost of 30,497 men defrayed by the East India Company, amounting to 978,2101. The appropriations in aid on effective service were 53,3751.; there was a balance of 17,0331. from the Royal Military College; a small appropriation in aid of the Military Asylum, 2451.; and an appropriation in aid on the non- effective charge of 7,1371.; making altogether a deduction of 1,056,0001.: which left 6,275,0751. as the whole charge of the present year, and 108,398 the number of men to be voted.

Mr. Menlo entered into several details; which do not, however, affect these general conclusions. In the course of his speech, he mentioned that in the Cape of Good Hope the attempt to deal with the " little war " in a little way had practically led to a considerable expense; but that the more vigorous action which had subsequently been adopted had at last com- pletely paralyzed the Natives. He explained that the votes for the present year were nearly identical with those of last year, making allowance for a difference in the circumstances— The votes of last year were only taken for three quarters of the year, while the votes for the present year were estimated for four quarters. It was thought ad- visable last year, in order to effect a proper audit of these accounts, to place them in the same position as the accounts of the Navy; and for that purpose, most of the votes for this branch of the Army Estimates were only taken for three quar- ters of a year.

He explained the vote of 6,0001. for organizing a body of Chelsea Pen- sioners to proceed to New Zealand— It was intended to send a body of pensioners, amounting in number to five hun- dred men, with their families, to the colony which he had mentioned; and the ob- ject which the Government had in view was twofold. In the first place, the men were to be located under certain advantages, which he would state more particu- larly hereafter. Certain duties were to be required from them for seven years; after which they were to be put in possession of the localities in which they had been distribute and they would become settlers, and valuable settlers too, in the colony. In the mean time, however, they would be obliged to afford defence to the colonists, whenever they might be called upon by the Governor holding the supreme command in the colony. Thus the twofold object of defence and colo- nization would be effected at a moderate charge. Mr. Manle supplied some information on the social improvements which are going forward in the Army— The Army Lists for this year contained the gratifying statement that 1,0401. had been appropriated in rewards to meritorious noncommissioned officers, in an- nuities of 101. and 201. a yesr; and the difference between that amount and the SUM of 2,0001. voted last year for this purpose still remained to be distributed. He had framed a vote for 2,0001. for the establishment of normal schools at the Royal Military Asylum. It was intended to establish there a school for the training of schoolmasters; a model school, on the principles of which regimental schools were to be established; and an infant school, the scholars at which, as had hitherto been the case, would consist of the orphans and children of British sol- diers, admitted under certain circumstances. This was a plan which he found left as a legacy by the right honourable gentleman who preceded him in office. It was a plan which reflected infinite credit upon the right honourable gentleman; and for being the author of which, the Army would in a very few years look upon him with gratitude.

Libraries were gradually and progressively increasing in number. In the course of the past year the number of books had increased by 10,000 volumes; and he proposed a vote of 2,0001. in the present estimate for purchasing more books. The best proof he could give of the improved discipline of the Army was the bare statement of the fact—and he was sure it would be received with satis- faction by the Committee—that, from the month of July up to the close of the last year, only five instances of corporal punishment had occurred in the Army.

The nine military prisons now existing—four in England, four in Ireland, one in Scotland—are working as well as could be wished. The reports from the go- vernors of prisons and captains were most satisfactory as to the effect produced upon the morals of the soldiers who were subjected to punishment. Soldiers were frequently punished for offences which involved no moral guilt; and being now free from the contamination of a civil gaol, they returned at once to their duty when their period of confinement was over•' whereas, under the former system, weeks and sometimes months would elapse before they could enter upon the dis- charge of their duties. There had been no instance of a soldier having been in the least degree injured by this imprisonment; their feelings, however violent when they entered, had been softened, and in many cases reformed; whereas, from the civil prisons under the old regime they never came out better, always worse. The labour in the military prisons was severe, and some complaints had been made against it; but he was not disposed to attend to them, provided no in- jury resulted to the prisoner's health. The labour was so severe, and the disci- pline so strict, that there was no temptation to the soldier to commit offences for the purpose of shunning. duty.

The Clerk of the Ordnance would ask a vote of 5,0001. for the establishment o washhouses in barracks. He should that evening lay on the table a bill to limit the soldier's term of ser- vice for the future.

This statement was received with general approbation. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT, in particular, reciprocated compliments with Mr. Maule. He hoped, however, that the plan of normal schools would be carried still ILA farther; and suggested whether some system of examination of officers pro- 19 moted from the lower ranks might not be introduced with advantage.

The several votes proposed by Mr. Maule were adopted; not without discussion, but upon the whole with less opposition than usual.

RAILWAY FINANCES: IRELAND.

On Tuesday, Lord GEORGE BENTINCA moved for returns relating to expenditure on divers railways; and entered into a long argument in reply to a speech by Mr. Goulburn some time back. Mr. Goulburn, endeavour- ing to show that expenditure on railways does not create financial pros- perity, produced a comparative table showing the Government revenue and the expenditure on these railways; according to which, in 1839, a year of deficiency in the revenue, and therefore of national adversity, 37,729,0001. was spent on certain railways. Lord George met these figures by a very detailed statement; according to which, although those railways had been authorized to spend 37,729,000/ since they were established, in point of fact the expenditure on them in the two years 1839 and 1840 was only 9,780,9081.—an annual average of 4,859,0001.: Mr Goulburn was wrong to the extent of 28,000,0001.

Mr. GOULBURN replied, also at considerable length. The gist of his an- swer was, that he had not made the statement imputed to him: the table which he quoted did not state the sums expended, but the capital raised in particular years.

Mr. DISRAELI rejoined. Mr. Goulburn's argument was either refuted by Lord George or it was abandoned. Lord George had argued that railway enterprise was beneficial to the nation on account of the expenditure; and if Mr. Goulburn's argument was not meant to meet that, it amounted to nothing.

On Tuesday, Earl FITZWILLIAM presented a petition to the House of Lords from the Grand Jury of the county of Wicklow, praying for measures to stimulate industry in Ireland by the construction of railways. Lord Fitzwilliam estimated the loss of the potato crop and live stock at twenty- four or twenty-five millions; and he contended that the measures hitherto passed would do little to aid in replacing the loss; though he did not gain- say the fact that a large measure of assistance had been rendered to the Irish in the way of charity. The 1,500,0001. for the improvement of es- tates would be but 19d. an acre; and those landlords who were most in need of the aid would be precisely the persons least likely to borrow— The estate in bads circumstances needed it, but the owner of that land would not venture to borrow it. [A Peer—" Why not 2') Why, it had been calculated that the land in Ireland was mortgaged to the extent of 70 per cent of its value; but take it at 60 per cent: suppose an estate of 20,000 acres, and the rental of which was 10,0001. a year, 6,0001. ayear of that sum going to the encumbrancer— would any person conversant with rural affairs say, that it would make much im- pression if such a landowner borrowed less than 10,0001.; or that any prudent man with a dear income of only 4,000/ a year from such an estate would bor- row 10,0001. for improving it, and subject himself thereby to an immediate pay- ment (whether it was to be called interest or sinking-fund) of 6501. a year. The improvements ought to be enormous indeed, and immediate too, to make it worth his while to do so. Except in the case of persons already in good circumstances, no prudent man would engage in such an undertaking as that. There cannot be a greater mistake than to say that the soil in Ireland is the richest in the world—

That was an error,- promulgated by a little Irish vanity, and received with a good deal of English credulity. The Dean of Westminster once said to him—" I travel all over Ireland as a geologist, and I find no land there to compare with

the rich land of England." The Golden Vale," in the county of Tipperary, was not more fertile than the vale of most of the rivers in England, and nothing like so fertile as the vales of many of them. The question was, what was the ave- rage of the whole land of Ireland ? and there was no comparison between the fer- tihty of England and of Ireland. Mark how much of Ireland was covered with mountains and with water, and, even where the land was fertile, with rocks and stones.

The difficulty would never be got over by a little money—by charity— by eight or nine millions, large as that sum might seem: given in charity, it would be but a prolongation of the scene of distress and desolation, and the country would never revive from it.

Earl GREY said that there were measures of more importance than the advance of 1,500,0001.; especially the one about to be introduced for fa- cilitating the sale of encumbered estates. Throughout Earl Fitzwilliam's speech ran the dangerous delusion that Ireland was to look to England and to the English Government for employment, instead of to herself. Was it meant that if England did not exist, Ireland could not rise to wealth?

Petition laid on the table.

CRACOW: STOPPAGE OF TILE RUSSIAN SUBSIDY.

On Thursday, Mr. Hume called attention to the question of Cracow, and moved the following resolutions-

" 1. That this House. considering the faithful observance of the General Act of Congress, or treaty of Vienna, of the 9th day of June 1815, as the basis of the peace and welfare of Europe, views with alarm and indignation the incorporation of the free city of Cracow, and of its territory, into the empire of Austria, by virtue of a convention entered into at Vienna on the 6th day of November 1846, by Russia, Prussia, and Austria, in manifest violation of the said treaty. "2. That it appears, by returns laid before Parliament, that there has already been paid from the British treasury towards the principal and for the interest of the debt called Russo-Dutch Loan, between the years 1816 and 1846, both inclu- sive, the sum of 40,493,750 florins, equal to 3,374,4791. sterling money; and that the liquidation of the principal and interest of the remaining part of the loan, as stipulated by the act 2d and 3d of William the Fourth, cap. 81, will re- quire further annual payments from the British treasury until the year 1915, amounting to 47,006,250 florins, equal to 3,917,1871. sterling money,—making then the aggregate payment 7,291,6661., and the average for ea, h of the hundred years, 72,9161.

" 3. That the convention of the 16th day of November 1831, between his Ma- jesty the King of Great Britain and Ireland and the Emperor of All the Hussies, was made to explain the stipulations of the treaty between Great Britain, Russia, and the Netherlands, signed at London on the 19th day of May 1815, and in- cluded in the treaty of Vienna; and by that convention it was agreed by Great Britain to secure to Russia the payment of a portion of her old Dutch debt, in consideration of the general arrangements of the Congress of Vienna, to which she had given her adhesion; arrangements which remain in full force.'

" 4. That this House is therefore of opinion, that Russia, having withdrawn that adhesion, and those arrangements being, through her act, no longer in force, the payments from this country on account of that debt should be henceforth suspended."

He reminded the House, that he had done so at the close of last session, when the free state of Cracow was occupied by Russian and Austrian troops. Lord Palmerston then assured the House that the occupation was to be only temporary, and begged them not to believe any statements to the contrary. In the House of Lords, the Duke of Wellington expressed equal confidence in his own allies and friends. At the opening of this session, the Queen made a declaration that the treaty of Vienna had been violated by the extinction of Cracow. Mr. Hume quoted the diplomatic correspondence on the subject; criticizing it as he went, and showing the falsehood of the Austrian share in it. Lord Palmerston " protested "; but what would men who could so violate their sacred honour and engage- toents care for a protest? England is pledged not to sanction these un- holy robberies. No one had made such sacrifices as this country to promote the objects of the treaty : it had cost her 600,000,0001. The Three Powers had violated it repeatedly, and now it is destroyed; and with it the arrangements of the peace. The partition of Poland is no longer legal, the parties to it having violated the stipulations; every state is free from its obligations; be had no hesitation in saying that the people wren of Austria, Prussia, and Russia, are absolved from their allegiance. One stipulation of the treaty was the payment by England of the Russo- Dutch loan. That stipulation was continued in the convention in 1831, "in consideration of the general arrangements at the Congress of Vienna." Russia has violated one article of the treaty; let England refuse to execute another. On that point Mr. Hume road the following passage from Vatel, with which Mr. Watson had furnished him-

" The party, therefore, who is offended or injured in those particulars which constitute the basis of the treaty, is at liberty to choose the alternative of either (impelling a faithless ally to fulfil his agreements, or of declining the treaty dis- solved by his violation of it. . . . We cannot consider the several articles of the same treaty as so many distinct and independent treaties; for, though we do not see any immediate connexion between some of those articles, they are all con- nected by this common relation, namely, that the contracting powers have agreed to some of them in consideration of the others, and by way of compensation.

By refusing payment of the interest on the Russo-Dutch loan, England would give an earnest that she did not remain quiescent under the infrac- tion of the treaty.

Lord SANDON seconded the motion. He quoted further correspondence, to show that the Three Powers, and especially Prussia, had distinctly re- cognized the necessity of referring to England before disturbing the ar- rangement of Cracow. He proved from the history of the Congress of Vienna, that, so far from being a separate arrangement between the Three Powers, the settlement of Poland formed the most critical point in the dis- cussion between the representatives of all the Powers. Lord Sandon in- timated that he was not quite confident in the grounds which made him deposed to concur in the fourth resolution.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL opposed the motion; stating his general view on the subject. He did not admit that the arrangement respecting Poland was anything but a constituent and important part of the treaty. The mere size of the iudepeudent state was of no moment, as the object was to retain for some part of the Polish nation a separate existence. As to the allegation that Cracow was " a focus of conspiracy," it is of no force, because the Three Powers perfectly surround the territory, and could easily prevent any danger. He could not but suspect that the "disorganization " imputed to Cracow was not unwelcome. All the rea- sons for the course taken by the Three Powers seemed to him to be inade- quate. With respect, however, to Mr. Hume's resolutions, the House would remember that it is the prerogative of the Crown to manage foreign relations and to make treaties. If a treaty of commerce or of subsidy is signed, requiring the intervention of Parliament, it is usual to ask the concurrence of Parliament; but for the House to affirm a resolution merely declaring an opinion on a matter which is not thus brought by ne- cessity before the House, is not the correct or regular course of proceeding. It is not necessary, in the ordinary course of foreign affairs, that the House should at all interfere or declare its opinion on these sub- jects. It would not do to declare an opinion without following up the resolution by some action on the part of the Executive Government; and, for that reason, he had never admired the annual declarations in the French Chambers with regard to Poland. In respect of the loan, Lord John Russell said, it is not quite clear that the violation in respect of Cracow releases this country from the payment: the Law-officers of the Crown think that, accerding to the spirit of the ar- rangement under the convention of 1831, the sum ought to be paid. Ac- cording to the letter of the agreement, perhaps, in a court of law, such a plea might be urged to get rid of a contract: but England was not used to avail herself of such advantages; to refuse payment as a revenge for the violation of treaties—to reduce it to a mere question of money value— would lower the position of this country; and he exhorted the House to continue its acquiescence in Lord Palmerston's protest- " Let us be able to say that we have sought no interest of England in this mat- ter. We have not looked to any interest, either large or petty, in regard to our- selves; we hare regarded the great interests of Europe; we have desired that the settlement which put an end to a century of bloodshed should remain in full force and vigour. We have declared that sentiment to the world; and we trust that the reprobation with which this transaction has been met will in future lead all Powers, whoever they may be, who may be induced to violate treaties, to consider that they will meet with the disinterested protest of England, so that her charac- ter shall stand before the world untarnished by any act of her own." (Great cheering.)

Some dispute arose as to the adjournment of the debate; Mr. Hymn and his supporters pressing for the next evening. Lord Joins RUSSELL pleaded for Government business on the Government night; and Sir ROBERT PEEL took his part. Then Tuesday was proposed; but as the paper for that day was very full, it was ultimately arranged that the adjournment should stand for Thursday next.

RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION.

The following Standing Order was voted by the House of Commons on Wednesday, at the instance of Mr. Syrenrr- " That the Committee on every Railway Bill shall fix the tolls, and shall de- termine the maximum rates of charge for the conveyance of passengers, with a due amount of luggage and of goods on such railway; and such rates of charge shall include the tolls and the cost of locomotive power, and every other expense connected with the conveyance of passengers, with a due amount of luggage and of goods, upon such railway; but if the Committee shall not deem it expedient to determine such maximum rates of charge, a special report explanatory of the grounds of their omitting so to do shall be made to the House, which special report shall accompany the report of the bill."

NEW DRAINAGE Btu. In the House of Commons on Monday, Sir GEORGE Gruff introduced a bill to amend the 9th and 10th Victoria cap. 101 (the Drainage Act): the object of the bill was, to extend the operation of the act to cases which do not now fall within its terms, and at the same time to impose some moderation on the demands for advances, by restricting grants to such amounts as could be actually expended within three years.

PROGRESS OF RAILWAY BILLS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

BILLS READ A FIRST TIME. Monday, March I.—Great-Indian-Peninsula. Col- chester-Stour-Valley-Sudbury-and-Halstead (lease to the Ipewich-and-Bury-SI-Ed- mund's Company). Leeds-Dewsbury-and-Blanchester (Oasett branch and Dewsbury and Morley stations). Oxford-Worcester-and-Wolverhampton (No. 2, extensions and amendment). Mold (from Mold to Join the Chester-and-Holyhead). Birmingham-and- Oxford-Junction, and Birmingham-Wolverhampton-and-Dudley, Amalgamation. Tuesday, March 2.—Edinburgh-and-Bathgate (deviation and amendment). Edin- burgh-and-Glasgow. Edinburgh-and-Perth. Wexford-and-Valencia (Killarney to Valencia). Great-Northern (deviations between Peterborough, Boston, and Gains. borough). Great-Northern (deviations near Doncaster). Great-Southern and-West- ens Extension (Portarlington to Tullamore). Thursday, March 4.—Edinburgh-and-Northern (Improvement of the ferry between the Ferry Port on Craig and the North shore of the river Tay). Friday, March 5.—Manchester-Birmingham-and-North-Staffordshire. Enfield-and- Edmonton Extension. Axholrne (from the Leeds-and-Selby Railway to Gainsboroeigh, with branches). Oxford-Worcester-and-Wolverhampton (No. I) (extensions and amendment). Parkgate-and-Chester and Birkenhead Junction.

BILLS READ A SECOND TIME AND COMMITTED. Monday. March I.—Eastern-Union-

aud-Hadleigh-Junction (sale to the Eastern-Union Company). Ipswich-and-Bury-St.- Edmund's (extension to East Dereham and to Aylsbam). Ipswich-and-Bury.SL-Ed- mund's (branch Prom Ipswich to Woodbridge). Royston-and-Hitchin (extension from Royston to Cambridge, &c.) Caledonian (extension of Motherwell branch of Clydesdalle Junctions to Auchinheath Mineral field, with branches to the Wishaw-and-Coliness and Cauderslde and-Hamilton). Caledonian (purchase and lease of Wishaw-and-Coltness). Caledonian-and-Dumbartonshire-Junction (deviations between Duntocher Lime-works and Bowling, &c.) Strathtay-and-Breadalbane Extension. Wilsontown-Morningside- and-Coltness (branches to Benbar Coal-works and Edinburgh and Glasgow). Newry- and-Enniskillen. Colchester-Stour-Valley-and-Halstead (extension from Lavenham to Bury St. Edmund's). Colchester-Stour-Valley-Sudbury-and-Halstead (extension to hfelford, Lavenham, and Clare). Colchester-Stour-Valley-Sudbury-and-Halstead (Stour Navigation purchase). Taw-Vale Railway and Dock (deviations and Bideford and South Molten branches). Aylsham-and-North-Walsham. Duffryn-Llywil-and-Porthe Cawl and Llynvi-Valley Amalgamation. London-and-South-western.

Tuesday, March 2.—Groat-Western (amendment and extensions). Newmarket-and- Chesterfield. Cork-and-Bandon. Cork-Blackrock-and-Passage. Wednesday, March 3.—Ipswich-and-Bury-St. Edmund's (No. 3) (extension from Bury St. Edmund's to Thetford). Coventry-Nuneaton-Birmingham and-Leicester. London-

and-North-westem (Kenilworth to Berkswell, branches, and extensions, &c ) London- and-North. western (Coventry and Nuneaton branches). London-and-North-western (Atherstone-and-Whitacre branch). Birmingham-and-Oxford-Junction (deviation of line). Birmingham-and-Oxford-Junction (Warwick-and-Stratford line). Birmingham- Wolverhampton-and-Dudley (Stourbrtdge and West Bromwich). Eastern-Counties (Somersham to Ramsey). Eastern-Counties (Lynn-and-Ely, and Ely-and-Hunting don, and Lynn-and-Dereham lease). Eastern-Counties (purchase of the North-Wool- wich). Eastern-Counties (Maldon-Witham-and-Braintree purchase). Midland (exten- sion of the Nottingham-and-Lincoln branch at Lincoln). Newmarket-and-Chester- field (repeal of provision, /cc.) Edinburgh-Leith-and-GrantotaLeith-and-Granton Junc- tion). Waterford-Wexford-Wicklow-and-Dublin. London-and-North-western (Birming- ham-and-Lichtleld line, k.c.)

Thursday, March 4.—Edinburgh-and-Northern and Edinburgh-Leith-and-Granton Amalgamation. Great-Northern (deviation between London and Grantham). New- castle-and-Berwick (East coast line, Blyth Seaton Sluices, and other branches). Di- rect-London-and-Portsmouth, Brighton-and-Chichester, London-Brighton-and-South- Coast, and London-and-South-western. York-and-North-Midland (Hull station and branches). York-and-North-Midland (Harrogate branch extension and terminus). York-and-Newcastle (Weannouth Dock enlargement). York-and-Newcastle, New-' castle-and-Berwick, and North-British, Amalgamation. Friday, March 5.—Cambridge-SL-Neot's-and Bedford Junction. Great-Northern (branch to Horneastle, and at Brayford Mere, Lincoln). Taw-Vale and Dock. Newcas-

tle-and-Berwick (Cramlington-and-Percy-M aim and KIR ingworth, and other branches). Edinburgh-and-Northern (St. Andrews and Newburgh Harbour branches). York-and-• Newcastle (Hartlepool.Dock and Railway, and Great-North-of-England, Clarence-and- Hartlepool Junction, &c.) London-and-North-western (Lime Street, Liverpool, station extension, &c.) London-and-North-western (Portobello-and-Wolverhampton branch, &c.)