presented a petition from Derby against further Concessions to the Catholics. The hon. member said the petition was signed by eight thousand eight hundred and seventy-six persons, among whom were a great number of the clergy, several magistrates, many Wesleyan and Baptist ministers, and the principal yeomanry in the neighbourhood. The Catholics had always manifested anxiety for political power. The petitioners, therefore, trusted that the laws which excluded them from the legislature, and the councils of the king, would be held inviolate.

said, that the petition had been got up by the True Blue Club, and contended that the public mind, having been inflamed by placards and other publications, the petition could not be said to represent the sober sentiments of the people.

said, he had uniformly opposed the Catholic claims from conscientious motives, and had not taken any part in getting up petitions. For that which he had presented, he could, however, say, on the best authority, that in originating and forwarding it all care had been taken to prevent the possibility of its character being impeached. A most respectable committee had been appointed to conduct it, and to watch over the signatures, who interrogated every person who desired to affix his name to it, whether he knew what he was about to sign? One boy of thirteen had by accident signed it, but when the circumstance became known the signature was withdrawn.

begged to call the attention of the House to one of the placards which had been circulated in the place whence the petition proceeded. It stated, that the Catholics in the Spanish Armada brought with them thumb-screws, bilboes, and other instruments, for the purpose of torturing Protestants, and concluded by saying—"If you do not wish to see the thumb screws, &c., introduced into England, sign the loyal Protestant peti- tion." Members on his side of the House had been accused of a desire to depreciate the petitions of the people; but he held, that petitions which were signed under such inducements as those contained in the placard were already depreciated in value before they came to that House. Such appeals were addressed, not to the reason, but to the worst passions of the people. Placards similar to that which he had read were distributed all over the country. He considered this to be the last expiring effort of the monopolists and exclusionists. He would wish that some of those gentlemen who were in the habit of forming collections, would gather together the placards now in circulation, in order that the historian might be able to describe the real nature of the arguments employed by the monopolists and exclusionists, to induce the people of England to support their cause.

expressed his belief, founded upon a knowledge of the great respectability of the parties with whom the petition had originated, that they could not have resorted to any improper means to procure signatures.

said, he had in his possession some placards containing the most base and stupid assertions. The person from whom he procured them stated that he had received them from the "Constitutional Tract Society," for the purpose of distribution. In this man's shop he saw a parcel of placards addressed to the constituents of the hon. member for Dover. There was one placard very widely circulated, which was addressed to all Protestants and Dissenters. In this were several extracts from the notes to the Rhemish translation of the New Testament; which it was stated had been some years ago republished under the sanction of Dr. Troy, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin. Some of the notes published in this placard were to this effect—That the Protestant church was guilty of schism and heresy, and was on that account damnable; and that the Protestant religion did not lead to heaven. Now, would the House believe that this very translation of the Rhemish Testament, first published in 1562, was decidedly condemned by Dr. Troy, on account of the notes of the translators? In a letter which that right rev. divine published on the subject of this translation, he observed—"I think it necessary to reject these notes, as harsh, false, and uncharitable." Was it not shameful, then, that such gross misrepresentations should be made of the opinions of a most respectable Catholic divine, and of the whole Catholic body? This very Catholic prelate had, on another occasion, published a pastoral letter enjoining peace and obedience to the laws, for which he had received the thanks of the lord-lieutenant. Upon what ground could such a petition as the present be received as that of the loyal inhabitants of any place—as if those who signed it were the only loyal inhabitants? The notion was absurd and ridiculous.

said, that if hon. gentlemen were not acquainted with the inflammatory language held by many persons opposed to the present measure, he could state what had occurred in Leicester. A person had there said, that if the duke of Wellington endeavoured to pass the measures, he hoped he might be assassinated, and if the king put his hand to the bill he hoped it might be paralysed for ever.

said, that if pamphlets or placards had been sent to Dover, such as those alluded to, it was without his knowledge; but, although he made that statement, he saw no harm in giving the people information of the proper nature of the question at issue. The Catholics and their friends had been most industrious in sending through the country publications calculated to promote the success of their own cause. The Protestants had a right to make similar efforts to defeat their views. With respect to the publication referred to by the hon. member, he should say that, whatever the disavowal of Dr. Troy, or any other Catholic priest, might be, there was no doubt of the fact of the publication of the Rhemish Testament; and, having cast his eye over it, he could assert that the extract from it contained in the placard read by the hon. member for Dublin was a fair specimen of the opinion of the Catholics with respect to our Protestant church. When he observed that the most artful attempts were made to deceive the people of England, with respect to the Catholic claims, he would himself bear a part of the burthen of disabusing the public mind. He, for one, would not be put down by the menaces of the hon. member for Dublin, or of any other person, or deterred from the performance of his duty in defending the rights of the Protestant people, He was sorry to observe attempts made in that House to put down the rights and privileges of the people ["No, no"]. He would repeat his words; for he had not seen a single petition presented to that House against the Catholic claims, without attempts being made, by the friends of the Catholics, to impugn the motives of the petitioners. But neither he nor those who thought with him were to be deterred from the performance of their duty, notwithstanding the majority against them. They were not beaten; and, please God, they would fight to the last.

said, he would fearlessly do his duty, whatever might be the majority against him. If the measure contemplated by ministers should be carried, he was satisfied the constitution would be totally subverted. With respect to placards, he should state his own firm belief that all those of a violent and inflammatory nature were put forward by the hon. member for Dublin's own party.

expressed his surprise, that an hon. member should state, in the face of the House, that there was any attempt to undervalue the right of petitioning. At no former time had so many petitions been poured in, or such attention paid to them, by the House. The charge as to the placards had not been met. All that was said in answer was, that the signatures to the petitions were respectable. No doubt many of them were those of respectable and intelligent men; but were the tens and twenty thousands who signed all as respectable and as competent to decide upon this important question as the immense majority of that House, who had already so unequivocally expressed their opinions by their votes? The question was not, whether the petitioners were respectable, but whether the great mass of the petitioners—whom some members called the people of England—were not influenced by undue means, in order to get a show of strength,—intended to intimidate that House and his majesty's government? He called on any opponent of the measures to put his hand on his heart, and declare whether he considered the majority of the petitioners as competent judges of that important subject as the majority of that House? He respected the right of petition, and he hoped it would be the last of our privileges which should be restricted; but in what way was it applied? To complaints of wrongs, to redress of grievances, or corrections of mal-administration; but not to abstract questions, much less to questions requiring close investigation, on which the sense of the people was to be collected in that House alone, and not sought for in petitions from alms-houses and charitys chools. If this practice of general petitioning on all occasions should prevail, it would tend to introduce a sort of universal suffrage on every public question.

said, he would admit that the House had passed many a weary hour in receiving petitions, but he certainly regretted that those documents had not been treated in a more constitutional manner. He could assure the House that their proceedings on this momentous question were watched by the public with the greatest anxiety. In a Letter to him one of his constituents had complained that the petitions opposed to the Catholic claims were received in that House with obloquy.

said, he had never known more attention paid to petitions. At the same time he thought there should be no allusions to the manner in which they were got up and signed; for it was well known that on both sides, upon measures exciting great interest, means were resorted to not strictly justifiable.

expressed his thanks to the hon. member for the spirit of forbearance that he had recommended. He had ever opposed Catholic emancipation, and should continue to do so. As to the change of opinion that had lately taken place in the minds of some gentlemen, he could not but express his decided disapprobation of it. They appeared to have turned round at the beck of a finger held up by a single individual. That was a weathercock system which he could never approve of.

presented a petition from an enlightened body of clergymen, residing in the county of Norfolk, in favour of Catholic emancipation. The petition was signed by two archdeacons and seventy clergymen. It had been very differently got up from a petition which had been presented as the petition of the clergy of Norfolk. He had been requested to state, first, that the archdeacon never heard a syllable about that petition, until after its presentation to the House; and secondly, that only one hundred and ten out of the three hundred and fifty clergymen of the diocess had signed it. So enlightened was the public mind in Norfolk, that he had no doubt, if a dissolution of parliament were to take place to-morrow, there would be one general feeling throughout the county, in favour of returning two supporters of the Catholic claims. A short time before the last election, his hon. colleague, with whom he was not in the habit of agreeing on many points, came forward in support of Catholic emancipation. Some of the former supporters of his hon. colleague were so much displeased with the vote which he then gave, that they threatened to turn him out of his seat. The consequence of that threat was, that he assured his hon. colleague, if any attempt were made to throw him out upon that score, he (Mr. Coke) would give him every support in his power; and he had no doubt that if any opposition had been raised to the return of both of them, on account of their votes on the Catholic question, the county would have enabled them to triumph over it. At the county meeting, he had told the freeholders what his opinions were on that question. He had told them, that he had voted for it for five and twenty years, and intended to vote for it whenever it was brought forward again; and with that declaration in his mouth, he offered himself to his constituents. He had likewise said, that if his hon. colleague were opposed by his own party for the change which had taken place in his opinions, he and his friends would take him by the hand, and support him against any third man whom his party might set up. No one, however, was set up against them. Could there be any doubt, after that, as to the opinion entertained on this question by the county of Norfolk? He declared before God, that he believed the county of Norfolk to be nearly unanimous on this question. Certain he was, in spite of the petitions which had been recently got up in that county, that all the intelligent inhabitants of it were decidedly in favour of abolishing all civil distinctions, among all classes of his majesty's subjects.

concurred most cordially in the prayer of the petition, but could not flatter himself that the feeling in favour of Catholic emancipation was so unanimous as his hon. colleague supposed.

congratulated the county of Norfolk on possessing a clergy so liberal as to desire to impart to those who differed from them in religious opinions the full benefit of the constitution.

, in presenting a petition from Mallow in favour of the Catholic claims, said, that knowing how irksome it was to hear these by-discussions on the principle of a measure which had been, and would be, so fully discussed in a few days, he would not say any thing on the general question of Catholic emancipation; but he would, with the leave of the House, express his regret, that the bill for the relief of the Catholics had been so worded as to leave undecided a question of very great importance, and which must now be brought hereafter before the House; he meant the return of Mr. O'Connell. Had that gentleman been admitted under the new bill, it would have been a most popular measure in Ireland. This was a solitary case, which it was not worth while to have omitted. He also begged to call the right hon. gentleman's attention to that part of the bill which referred to the Universities. He found that Oxford was still to retain those regulations which prevented a Catholic from residence, even for general education. Cambridge, on the contrary, had broken through those restrictions; there, he believed, a Catholic could remain, at least for a time. He thought this course was against all true policy. Their object ought to be to unite the youth of both countries in one common education. The Irish were accused of bigotry. How could it be otherwise, while they had been thus excluded from society, both in Ireland and this country. Bounties were out of fashion; but instead of preventing an Irish gentleman from sending his son to Oxford, he would rather say, give a bounty to him to do so.

said, he had seven petitions to present from Essex against any further concession to the Roman Catholics. He had just returned from the assizes, and had had an opportunity of learning the opinion entertained on the subject under discussion, by the most respectable inhabitants of the county of Essex. He could assure the House that, with few exceptions, the inhabitants of the county were decidedly opposed to the bill now in progress, and conceived the proposed concessions extremely dangerous to the Established Church. The gentlemen of the county were equally decided in their opinion, as to the conduct of the right hon. Secretary, who had departed from that line of proceeding on this subject, which was so congenial to the feelings of the country, and which he had so consistently supported for many years. The county felt at a loss to conceive, upon what principles of accommodation or convenience, the right hon. gentleman could consent to belong to a government, which had advised his majesty to assent to the admission of Catholics to the legislature.

denied, that the feeling of the county of Essex was strongly opposed to Catholic emancipation. He regretted that the assertion had been made in the absence of the other member for Essex; who would have been able satisfactorily to refute it. No exertion had been spared to get up anti-Catholic petitions. Circulars had been sent into every parish, calling on the churchwardens, as they loved their king and country, to petition parliament and the king against the measure now before the House. He was not surprised, therefore, at the number of petitions which had been presented.

, in moving for leave to bring in a bill to extend the power of summary conviction in certain cases of Juvenile Offenders accused of Petty Larceny, observed, that when Gaols and houses of Correction were first established, it was under very different circumstances from those which now existed. Persons were sent there not only for purposes of punishment, but of correction and amendment. Now, it was notorious, that from the crowded state of our prisons, and the indiscriminate mingling together of offenders of different ages and various degrees of criminality, results directly the reverse of those originally contemplated took place. The ill effects of the present system were peculiarly apparent in cases of juvenile offenders. Every gaoler whom he had consulted was decidedly of opinion, that when boys were sent to prison they were initiated in every sort of vice so rapidly, as generally to render their condition irretrievable. This was the natural consequence of their being allowed to mix with hardened offenders. His object in moving for leave to bring in the proposed bill was to prevent this evil. He wished to dispense with the intervention of juries, in the trial of youthful offenders, wherever it could be done. But, in cases where a jury was necessary, he would prefer taking bail for the appearance of the accused party, to committing him to a house of Correction. Another feature of his measure consisted in the substitution of trials at petit sessions, under certain restrictions, in lieu of trials at quarter sessions. He recommended that two or more magistrates should be empowered to take cognizance of the cases of persons under a certain age, say sixteen, who were charged with petty larcenies. The magistrates should have a limited power to punish and dispose of such offenders on conviction. Many gentlemen had great confidence in the efficacy of the lash, and brutal natures might require brutal treatment; but how far such a punishment was applicable to juvenile convicts, more particularly in cases of a first offence, he did not know. The right hon. Secretary in some of his salutary acts for the improvement of the criminal law, had recognized the principle now contended for: in cases of assault, trespass, and other minor offences, the right hon. Secretary had substituted summary convictions for more regular trials. He recommended that the principle should be extended to the cases of persons of tender age accused of petty larceny. In doing so, he had not the slightest wish to increase the power at present possessed by the magistracy, except for mild and useful purposes. His wish was, to substitute short, cheap, and effectual, punishment for tedious, expensive, and inefficient penalties. If they corn-pared the present state of the criminal lists, in the part of the country to which he belonged, with their state twenty or thirty years ago, and considered the relative condition of the people now and then, they would be at no loss to attribute the increase of crime to the concomitant increase of poverty. It appeared to him, that it was not only just, but wise in a legislature to proportion the punishment as well to the degree of temptation as to the extent of criminality. Nothing could be fairer than to graduate the scale of punishment according to the tender years of the offenders. The hon. member concluded by moving for leave to bring in the bill.

said, he would not oppose the motion; at the same time, he considered the measure to be one surrounded with great difficulties, to get rid of which required serious deliberation. It was impossible to deny that great evil re- sulted from the committal of young persons to prison to abide their trial. At the same time, he thought the power of summary conviction, in cases alluded to by the hon. member, who had rather laxly specified the age of the parties and the nature of the offences to be dealt with, required great caution in the arrangement of the details, even if the propriety of the principle and its applicability in this instance were admitted. He himself had had under his consideration for some time, and intended to bring forward, if matters of greater importance had not interposed to prevent him, a measure for the regulation, qualification, and jurisdiction, of magistrates; and also with respect to the management and holding of petty sessions. He certainly thought the hon. member's proposition would come forward under more favourable circumstances, if the measure which he had had in comtemplation, relative to the jurisdiction of county magistrates, had been first carried into effect. He acquiesced in the introduction of the present bill, without pledging himself to any opinion in its favour. It should receive his best consideration; but he feared there were more difficulties in the way of the adoption of the plan than the hon. member appeared to be aware of.

said, he wished to encourage the continuance of the use of juries, and, in the cases contemplated by the proposed bill, he would have a jury ready in attendance, so that any person accused might have the benefit of that mode of trial, should they desire it.

agreed to the principle of the bill, but would wait for its being printed before he pronounced an opinion on the details.

, as an additional objection to the measure, alluded to the possibility of persons of tender age being stimulated to commit offences by individuals of greater experience, if it were determined that youthful criminals should, in all cases, be more favourably dealt with than others. He therefore objected to the principle of fixing a certain age to which, without reference to other circumstances, the bill should apply. He would take occasion to mention, with reference to the police of the metropolis, that his attention had been given to the subject during the entire of the last summer, and that he had prepared a bill, founded on the report of the committee, which circumstances al- ready alluded to had prevented him from submitting to the attention of the House.

observed, that there was already a severe provision with respect to offenders in the second instance, and it would be unwise to render guilty persons in adult age subject to the penalties incident by law to a second offence, because they had been found guilty in early life.

Leave was given to bring in the bill.

entreated the House to bear with him while he called its attention to a subject which, from recent occurrences, he considered of the utmost importance. He meant the supply of Subjects for Anatomical Dissection. He hoped the report of the committee appointed last year had satisfied the members of that House that the evils complained of, arising from the present state of the law upon the subject, were not wholly imaginary. The first point which the committee had thought it necessary to establish by evidence was, that there was an actual necessity, if the science of anatomy was to be pursued, that a moderate number of subjects for dissection should be supplied. It had been urged by correspondents in some of the public papers, that the practice of dissecting for anatomical purposes was quite unnecessary, and ought to be abandoned. He confessed that he very much doubted the sincerity of the individuals who put forth such statements to the world; for he would ask them, if they were attacked by severe illness, whether they would not immediately seek the advice of those very physicians who had obtained their skill, and consequent eminence, from that identical practice which they professed to consider unnecessary. The committee reported, as the result of their inquiries, that, as the law now stood, the science of anatomy must rapidly sink into decay; as the difficulty of obtaining subjects was so great, that the students were themselves obliged to have recourse to the practice of exhumation, in order to attain such a knowledge of anatomy as was necessary to render them capable of practising on the human frame. Independently of this, if some alteration were not made in the law, the trade in human bodies, which it appeared led to the commission of so many other crimes, could never be effectually put an end to. In the bill which he had the honour of submitting to the House, he did not intend to impose any penalties or prohibitions: his wish was, that legality should be given, in certain cases, to practical anatomy. He proposed, therefore, that anatomy should be considered lawful, if practised either in those cities or towns which have universities or corporations having the power of conferring medical preferment or degrees, or in those cities or towns which have hospitals established for the reception of not less than fifty patients at a time. This would extend the practice of dissection to many of those larger towns, where every means was afforded for studying with advantage. In those places proper persons should be allowed to practise and to teach, and by that means many important advantages he thought might be gained.—The greatest difficulty which arose in the consideration of the matter, was the source from whence the supply of subjects which would be required by the teachers of anatomy should be derived. The committee had made many inquiries as to the practice in foreign countries, and the measures which he now proposed to introduce would, in its nature, be nearly allied to the practice which had, for some time, existed at Paris. If no supply was to be derived by legal or authorized means—and he was convinced that every one would say that no necessity could warrant a violation of the sanctity of the tomb—recourse must be had to the public institutions; and if they would not afford a supply, the practice of dissection must be put an end to altogether, or remain in the same state that it did now. What he would recommend, therefore, was this: that it should be lawful for the overseers and managers of the poor-houses or work-houses, for the governors of prisons and of hospitals, to give up to any physician who may be a teacher of anatomy, for the purposes of dissection, the bodies of those persons who might not be claimed within a specified time by any friend or relative. He was fully aware, in recommending such a measure, of all the objections which might, and probably would, be made against it. It might be said, that such a course would give rise to many unpleasant circumstances, and that much unfairness might be practised in the disposition of bodies, which, if proper notice were given, might probably be claimed. But he would ask those who objected to the measure, from what other sources than the public institutions could subjects be obtained? He begged those who were most interested in the subject, namely, the poor and middle classes, to remember how deeply they were indebted to the faculty for the uniform attention and kindness they received from the members of it, and not to allow themselves, upon the ground of any erroneous feeling, to raise objections to a measure which, in the end, must prove beneficial to them. Let them consider what had so lately occurred in the city of Edinburgh, and let them attribute it to what he attributed it—the intense degree in which the inhabitants had allowed themselves to be run away with by their feelings. The idea that the rites of the tomb were denied to any of our fellow-creatures was naturally repulsive to their feelings; and he therefore proposed, in the bill which he now laid before the House, that, after the purposes of dissection had been completed, the remains should be interred, according to the custom of the country in which the person had expired. He felt assured, from calculations which he had made, and which some men eminent in their profession had sanctioned, that the supply thus created would be more than adequate to the exigencies of the profession; and he was happy in contemplating, that if his project was adopted, it would be the means of exonerating hereafter a beneficent and humane profession from the possibility of being implicated in the charge of being confederates with either resurrection-men, or a class of villains whose atrocities had so very recently been brought to light. The hon. member concluded by moving, for leave to bring in a bill "to legalize and regulate the supply of Subjects for Anatomy."

, in rising to second the motion, observed, that the practice of exhumation, which had been resorted to, in order to keep up the supply of subjects for anatomical purposes, was alike insulting to the dead and offensive to the living, and the means of raising up a crew of the worst and most abandoned characters. But, bad as that practice was, it could not be prevented, unless a substitute were found, and that substitute could alone be found in the public institutions. It could not be denied that the study of anatomy was absolutely necessary to the public good. It was the lamp of science which illumined the path to skill; it showed the when, the where, and the how; it gave firmness of nerve and dexterity in operation; it shortened the suffering under the knife; it triumphed over disease, and robbed death of its prey. Exhumation, therefore, in his opinion, could not be prevented, unless a substitute were found. That substitute had happily been discovered, and was set forth in the bill proposed by his hon. friend. It was the mode adopted in foreign countries where exhumation was unheard of—it was a mode which could not be offensive to the living, since the subjects operated upon would be those who had no friends to claim their remains; and it was a mode which could not be insulting to the dead, since all that remained after dissection would meet with a decent and Christian burial. It would, indeed, be a melancholy satisfaction to those whose last moments received consolation from the public charities, to know that they would be able after death, in some measure, to repay the debt they owed to those who administered comfort to them during the last stage of their existence. He hoped, therefore, that the House would accede to the proposition, as a measure which would ultimately lead to good.

was satisfied, that the plan of his hon. friend had originated in the most humane feelings. The great object which would be obtained in the first instance, was the repression of crime, by depriving it of a ready market for the produce of its abhorred industry. It would tend also to rescue humanity from the disgrace entailed on it by the practice of what at present appeared indispensable, and redeem an honourable profession from the obloquy in which it had so unjustly participated. This had been well styled a measure of charity; for it was the poor who would reap the great benefit of it.

said, he was friendly to the proposition of the hon. member, for it was admitted on all hands, that dissection was necessary to the perfection of medical science, and it was evident that without subjects there could be no dissection. By the law, as it at present stood, anatomy could not be prosecuted without its professors being compelled to have intercourse with the most depraved characters, and oftentimes not without being liable to the suspicion of being accessories to the most atrocious acts. The expediency of a measure like that of the hon. member was evident, then, not only as an act of justice to the members of an honourable profession, but also as the safety of life was materially involved in it. He had been engaged for some months past, in an anxious and minute inquiry into the mode of supply of subjects, to which the anatomical schools with which he was best acquainted were compelled to have recourse. The result of his inquiry was, his conviction, that the present high price of subjects—a price consequent, in a great degree, upon the existing law—was the origin of all the evils that had arisen from the practice of procuring dead bodies for dissection. He was also convinced, that unless some means were devised for checking those evils, they would not only continue to exist, but would extend more and more. He trusted, that the atrocities that had lately taken place in his native country, would have the effect of hastening some attempt to remedy the existing evil; for, until some such attempt was made, no man could say that there would be no renewal of those atrocities. The inquiry in which he had been lately engaged, showed how easy it was to elude the heavy penalty of the law for murders, with a view to obtain the present high price of subjects for dissection; for it was impossible, as it appeared on that inquiry, to discover by the appearance of such subjects that they had been murdered, rendering it impossible, therefore, to obtain from professional investigation the evidence of the crime which the law demanded, as necessary to the detection and conviction of the murderer. The bodies of those who had been murdered, on the occasion which led to the inquiry in which he had been engaged, afforded no indication of murder, and therefore no means of detecting the murderer. Neither did the character of those who usually supplied subjects afford any security against a renewal of the late atrocities; for it appeared, in the evidence furnished by the report of the committee of that House, that the majority of those who trafficked in dead bodies were capable of any crime; that upon their atrocities there was no check but the fear of the law. Sir Astley Cooper, among other competent witnesses, had said, that, but for the fear of detection, he was convinced his own body would not be safe from the hands of those who usually supplied the medical schools of the metropolis with subjects. Under these facts, he must think, that some measure for securing the necessary supply of dead bodies for the purposes of medical science should be brought forward with the least possible delay; and he was disposed to support the intended measure of the hon. member for Bridport. He considered it to be freer from objections, than any proposition he had heard of. Its tendency was entirely permissive; for by it the governors and managers of hospitals would not be compelled to dispose of the unclaimed bodies of the poor, but only permitted to do so, under certain wise regulations. No measure appeared to him so unobjectionable, as giving permission to the managers of hospitals to devote the bodies of such persons as had no relations to claim them, to the purposes of anatomy; for in that case no feelings could be outraged. It was objected by some, that the fear of being dissected, in the event of death, might prevent the poor from availing themselves of the advantages of an hospital; but the report of last year showed that that objection had no force. The poor went into the hospitals with the hope of being cured, and were regardless of the fate of their bodies after death.

hoped, that care would be taken to ensure a due regard to public feeling, in the mode of transmitting bodies for dissection. He also thought it would he advisable to have the constitutional security against unfair death of a coroner's warrant, for every body handed over to the professors of anatomy.

said, he considered that nothing would be-more useless than for him to waste the time of the House in discussing the importance of anatomy. The necessity of anatomy to medical science had been admitted on all hands; and if its existence were necessary, it would follow that a supply of subjects was also necessary. The question, then, for the House to consider was, the mode of obtaining that supply. By the present law, the teachers of anatomy were compelled to resort to illegal means of procuring dead bodies, and to associate with those who committed the most egregious violations of decency, and were too often capable of any atrocity. That such was the fact, the answers to the questions contained in the report of the Committee on Anatomy must carry conviction to the mind of every hon. member. One of the witnesses who was much engaged in the supply of subjects for the London schools, stated, that he had, in one year, himself supplied three hundred and five adults, forty-four children, and forty-three infants; in another year three hundred and twelve subjects; in the next year two hundred and thirty-four; and in the following summer, two hundred and forty-four subjects. He stated also that he was paid at the rate of four guineas each for the adults, and that he sold the children at so much per inch. This in itself showed the great demand that existed for dead bodies, and the great temptation that was held out for furnishing the necessary supply. But, if proof were necessary on this point, and that something ought to be done by the legislature, the atrocities that had come to light within the last six months, afforded more than sufficient. It was absolutely necessary that something should be done to check the evil, were it only out of regard to those feelings which they all held in the highest respect; and no proposition with that view appeared to him so unobjectionable in principle, and so likely to be beneficial in practice, as that just submitted to the House by the hon. member for Bridport. He thought however, that the bill should contain a clause, by which it would be obligatory on parties demanding subjects, not only to give their names, but to prevent professional jealousy, that they should be licensed teachers of anatomy. Such a clause, he thought, would add to the beneficial effects of the hon. member's measure. It could not he objected to the measure, that it would render the bodies of the poor more liable to dissection than those of the rich; for, in consequence of the present practice, the bodies of the poor were more readily acquired. It could not, therefore, be charged as an objection to the bill, that it would render the poor who died more liable to be dissected than the rich. Besides, the poor themselves would be the parties most benefited by the measure; for the rich possessed the means of obtaining professional efficiency far beyond those within the reach of the poorer classes; upon whom, therefore, all improvements in medical science must have a more direct effect. He would give his support to the bill; which, he trusted, would contain provisions which, while they promoted medical science, would effectually prevent a renewal of those atrocities by which public feeling had been lately outraged.

said, he should be most happy to avail himself of every suggestion likely to secure the object they all had in view. He therefore should adopt the recommendation of the right hon. Secretary as to the security of having the names of, and a notice from, the medical gentlemen to whom dead bodies would be made over. He could not, however, see the expediency of requiring a coroner's warrant with each body; unless, indeed, it was intended to include within the operation of the bill the bodies of those who had come to an untimely death, or had committed suicide.

Leave was given to bring in the bill.

moved for going into a committee on the laws regulating the Growth of Tobacco in Ireland. His object, he said, was to bring in a bill to assimilate the laws in England and Ireland, with respect to the manufacture of Tobacco of domestic growth. By the present law all Tobacco of Irish growth was prohibited from being employed in the manufacture of snuff, &c., though no less than seven hundred hogsheads had been, during the last year, smuggled into this country, to the great injury of the revenue.

thought the subject of a reduction of prohibitive duties on the domestic growth of tobacco well worthy of the attention of the House and the government; the rather, as the home cultivation of that commodity was every day extending and no valid objections to encouraging it could be found on the comparative inferiority of an article, the growth of which was yet in its infancy.

said, he would not object to the House going into the committee; but he should take another opportunity of calling its attention to the expediency of considering all the prohibitive duties on domestic tobacco, with a view to their reduction. He would merely observe, that the original cause of those prohibitive duties no longer existed; for they were enacted, in order to encourage the cultivation of tobacco in Virginia and Maryland, then, but no longer, British colonies. He thought mature deliberation necessary, before the House agreed to prohibit the growth of Irish tobacco, by means of the present enormous duties on that article. He was aware that those duties were defended on the ground of the great revenue they afforded; but he submitted it to the House, whether the enormous rate of those duties—not less than from one thousand to one thousand two hundred per cent—did not tend to encourage smuggling.

conceived, that the opera- tion of the proposed bill would be injurious to Ireland; where the cultivation of tobacco would be highly advantageous to the agricultural interests.

said, he had been instructed by some members of the agricultural society to state, that the cultivation of tobacco might be carried on with great advantage to the agriculturist in parts of the west of England, where the soil and the climate were well adapted for its growth.

said, he would give every consideration to the suggestions which had been made on this subject, without pledging himself unequivocally to adopt them. The object of the present bill was simply to assimilate the law between the two countries, to prevent smuggling, and to protect the revenue. To such a bill he conceived there could be no objection, and hereafter the whole subject respecting the cultivation of tobacco could be taken into consideration.

The House then went into a committee; and, on the motion of Mr. Dawson, it was resolved, that it is expedient to assimilate the laws in Great Britain and Ireland relating to the growth of tobacco. The House having resumed, the resolution was reported to the House and agreed to, and leave was given to bring in a bill founded upon it.