presented two petitions, one from the miners, iron-makers, and coal-masters of Dudley, praying, that the House would enjoin a more strict observance of the law, which directs that labourers should be paid only in money, and not in provisions or other commodities. The hon. member complained that the law was open to perpetual invasion; that it exposed the poor man to the hardship of taking such provisions, and at such prices, as the master chose; and that when the House came to legislate between the labourer and his employer they ought to be tender of the interests of the former. The health and industry of the poor man were his only portion, and, therefore, the House Should watch over them with the utmost solicitude.

was of opinion, that the existing law was bad, and that no law could be framed, that would not be evaded, and lead to perpetual interference between the employer and the employed. In some cases, masters might make payments to their labourers in provisions which were bad, but there was no way of preventing this but by the imposition of penalties; and, notwithstanding all the penalties that could be imposed, still it might be possible to evade the law. If such a law were to be re-enacted, he would object to it, upon the ground that it was at once unnecessary and inefficient.

thought the law inefficacious and unnecessary. The competition of trade was as full a protection to the workman who was paid in provisions as to the man who received his wages in specie.

thought it impossible to renew so obnoxious an act. Mr. Owen prided himself upon having introduced the provision system. He had opened a shop at New Lanark, in which he sold the best commodities to his workmen cheaper than they could be obtained elsewhere; and he was persuaded that the practice was a beneficial one.

thought the measure injurious, as tending to excite misunderstanding between the labourer and the employer, which was very injurious to the former, as a labourer when turned out of one establishment could not easily find employment in another.

objected to the payment of workmen in commodities, but not to paying them in provisions. On the continent, the practice of farmers was, to pay their labourers as much as possible in provisions; and the same practice would be extremely beneficial in this country. His hon. friend (Mr. Curwen) had adopted it with the greatest success.

said, the practice in Scotland was, to pay in provision, and he had never seen that practice attended with ill consequences. He trusted the law would be repealed.

begged to ask a right hon. gentleman, what farther relief was contemplated for the distresses of Ireland; and how the funds already ob- tained had been applied? The awful situation of Ireland no longer admitted of delay. If any persons supposed that the charity of England, even added to the sums already voted by parliament, would be sufficient to meet the calamities of Ireland for the next six weeks, such persons deceived themselves.

assured the right hon. gentleman, that, from the moment the Irish government determined to assist the people, every course had been taken which could expedite such assistance and render it available. A committee had been formed in Dublin, by order of the lord lieutenant, to communicate with those districts in which the greatest distress prevailed; and certain funds which had been left in the lord lieutenant's hands against exigency, by the act of 1817, had been immediately placed at that committee's disposal. In addition to this, he (Mr. G.) had submitted a measure for the employment of the poor upon public works. That measure was divided into two branches: the one empowering the lord lieutenant at once to use all sums which had been presented by grand juries for such public purposes: the other, placing a farther sum of 50,000l. at his command, and persons had been dispatched into those districts most distressed, with full authority to commence such plans as seemed most likely to give relief to the people. He believed that the works, in many places, had already commenced, and that relief to a considerable extent had followed. In common with the right hon. gentleman, he felt the calamity as a deep one. It was, however, satisfactory to know, that the distress was confined to a limited, and not very extensive, portion of the country; but still there was enough to call upon parliament for farther assistance when the present funds should be exhausted.

said, that, from facts which had come to his knowledge, as a member of the London Tavern committee, he could not but be surprised at the speech which the right hon. secretary had just delivered. The Dublin committee might have done all in its power, but it had not done sufficient in the way of relief; for the last accounts from Ireland were more calamitous than ever. He would state facts to the House, on which it might rely. In the county of Clare, there were now 99,639 persons subsisting on charity from hour to hour. In Cork, there were 132,000 individuals, who must perish with hunger if they did not receive relief. In one barony of the county of Clare, many persons had actually perished from famine. It was for government to say what, under such circumstances, it meant to do; but the first duty of any government that was worth one farthing, was to protect its subjects from starvation. Enough had not been done, and therefore government ought to take more decisive measures.

said, that in the county of Limerick, out of a population of 67,000 persons, 20,000 were subsisting on charity. However great the sums placed at the disposal of the London Committee, it was impossible, even if they trebled their amount, that they could do more than relieve the present suffering, and that only in a very slight degree. He trusted that measures of employing the poor would be resorted to, and speedily; for while the legislature deliberated, the people perished.

said, that if an effort was not made to relieve the Irish before harvest, they would fall upon the new crop so eagerly and prematurely, that next year would be equal to this in misery.

said, that unless means were found to employ the population of Ireland, the foundation of an ulterior evil would be laid, which would not only exist through this or through the next year, but would strike at the root of all industry for a long period to come. Large as the means, and great as the benevolence of this country unquestionably were, those means and that benevolence were incapable of affording efficient relief, unless the means of existence were drawn from the immediate neighbourhood of the sufferers. The aid that might be afforded ought to take the shape of reward for labour, rather than that of a boon to mendicity.

perfectly agreed with the right hon. baronet, that this was not a mere pecuniary question. The importance of the subject lifted it above the ordinary rules of financial calculation. The question was not, whether a sum of money should be advanced to Ireland. The Irish government were endeavouring to give relief in every possible way: not with strict regard to the principles of political economy, for unhappily the case was one that compelled them to set all ordinary rules at defiance. Engineers were engaged to see what works could be commenced, that would afford occupation to the people; and 6,000l. had already been appropriated, not for any public undertaking, but in order to effect improvements of a local and private nature.

declared his decided opposition to such a bill as the present being considered in any degree adequate to redress the abuses complained of by the inhabitants of the royal burghs of Scotland, and confirmed by the three reports of committees of that House. To call it a remedy for these admitted abuses, was a total misapplication of terms. No two things could be more opposite than the reports of the committees of that House and the bill of the learned lord. The bill referred only to the accounts of the burghs. Now, the regulation of the accounts did not constitute a tenth part of the admitted abuses in the administration of these burghs. It did not meet the paramount abuse of self-election, from which alone so many mischiefs originated. The learned lord was mistaken, if he thought such a measure would satisfy the petitioners. Since its introduction almost every royal burgh had petitioned against it. Not a solitary petition had been presented in its support. It was not in the nature of things, that with the feeling of burgh reform that existed in Scotland, such a bill could satisfy the just claims of the people.

said, he considered the bill consistent with the report of the committee up stairs, and that it went directly to remedy the evils complained of. He would receive with attention any amendment which was calculated to remove the grievances complained of, but he would oppose himself to any violation of the chartered rights of the royal burghs.

denied that the bill was at all founded on the reports of the committees of that House. Those committees detailed a variety of abuses to which the present bill not even adverted. As to chartered rights, he knew of no rights, in virtue of which self-elected magistrates assumed the power to vote them- selves into office in perpetuity, and to exercise en arbitary disposition over the property of others, and even the return of members to that House.

denied that the bill afforded the smallest chance of relief. No effectual relief could be given, unless by a modification of the absurd and dangerous principle of self-election. The defect of this measure was, that it did not go to the root of the evil. Its remedies were mere palliatives: the great spring of all the mischief was left untouched, provisions were enacted which could be of no real use, and proceedings in the Exchequer were to be instituted against a corrupt magistrate, which might not terminate, before the parties had descended into their graves. A great deal had been said with regard to the sacredness of chartered rights. Under this name, malversation, and all the varieties of abuse, had too long enjoyed impunity. It was not possible to point out a more wasteful or unjustifiable expenditure than that of the Scotch burghs. To correct this, was the avowed purpose for which the bill was introduced. The chartered rights, held up as worthy of so much reverence, had been violated whenever it was deemed expedient. What he complained of was, that this measure went to perpetuate that root of all the evil and corruption which they deplored, and the existence of which was no where denied—the power of self-election. Against the continuance of such a power he protested, and he must declare himself grievously disappointed that the learned lord had not introduced a more efficient measure. The learned lord had neglected the opportunity of realizing a permanent good for his country, and establishing on a solid basis his own reputation. Since, however, there were parts of the bill which some of his friends conceived might be beneficial, he would not resist its farther progress, although he feared that the effect would be, to perpetuate the system of self-election, and doom the inhabitants of Scotch burghs to a continuance of the abuses set forth in their petitions.

could not but approve of that part of the measure by which legal proceedings might be commenced against a corrupt magistrate, and in the event of conviction a penalty of 500l. be imposed upon him. This would operate to remove a great deal of the temptation to do wrong, and he should not be sorry to see a similar provision extended to every part of the United Kingdom.

said, it could not be denied by any man, that the charters in question were originally granted for the benefit of the parties receiving them. The object of the present measure was, without trenching upon them, to remedy the abuses which had crept in, and become as it were established under the sanction of custom. It had been urged that these charters were in themselves injurious, and had been often violated on former occasions. To this proposition he never could assent. If the convention of Scotch burghs had ever interfered, it was an interference without authority. It was under these impressions that the committee had acted, in preparing the new system of regulation which had been submitted to the House.

argued against the system. He considered its origin as being a revolution, though made by a king. Its first institution was the act of a weak king, advised by an imbecile set of counsellors. He approved of that part of the bill which imposed fines in cases of corrupt practices. The House then went into the committee, and, on the motion of Mr. H. Drummond, the clauses relative to the power of instituting an Exchequer process against corrupt magistrates were omitted, with the view of being made the subject of a separate enactment. Mr. J. P. Grant then moved an amendment, for the purpose of regulating the auditing of the accounts. Upon this the committee divided: Ayes; 35. Noes, 53. Mr. J. P. Grant also proposed a clause, that nothing contained in the bill should operate against the jurisdiction of the head courts. Upon this a division also took place: Ayes; 44. Noes, 71. The remaining clauses were agreed to, and the House resumed.