said, he rose to present a Petition from the Gentry, Clergy, Merchants, Bankers, and other inhabitants of Kingston-upon-Hull. The petitioners complained, he said, of the great distress, which they felt most heavily in common with many other parts of the country; and they earnestly prayed the House to institute an inquiry into its causes, with a view of giving them relief. They prayed, and in this part of their prayer he cordially concurred with them, thinking it the only effectual method of giving relief, for a large reduction of taxation. He was convinced that the state of the country made it necessary that the House should attend to this part of their prayer. He felt much indebted to the Government for the reduction already made, but he was convinced that greater reductions must be made, to meet the situation of the country. The petitioners also prayed for a revision of the laws respecting the currency, and in this part of their prayer he could not concur. He believed that the alterations which had been already made had caused a great deal of mischief, but further changes would, in his opinion, be still more detrimental. Looking at what had already taken place, he thought the wisest course would be, to allow the laws respecting the currency to remain as they were.

in presenting a similar Petition from the inhabitants of a parish in the City of Oxford, observed, that in his opinion, much of the distress complained of by the petitioners, and by per-sons in all parts of the country, arose from a contraction of the currency, which had reduced the value of every species of property. Unfortunately, the contraction caused by the return to a metallic standard had been greatly aggravated by putting down the small notes issued by private bankers. The Government had, perhaps, a right to interfere with a corporation to which it guaranteed exclusive privileges, but it had no right to prohibit the circulation of any private securities which men in business were willing to accept. In his opinion, the putting down of the small notes was as gross a violation of the principles of free trade as any Minister could be guilty of, and the consequences of that measure had been, as he had before predicted, most disastrous. The widespread distress which had overwhelmed the land was one of its results. A better system of banking ought to have been introduced at the time, but nothing was done, except to make a slight alteration in the law relative to the Bank of England. At present, a solid system of banking was the great tiling that was wanted. We had gone abroad seeking connection and trade, and had so impoverished our own people that they had no longer the means to consume the commodities they were compelled to make. Perhaps it was impossible to go back to the war currency, but to persevere in our present line of conduct was, in the language of Mr. Burke, to be guilty of a most gigantic swindling transaction.

in rising to move that certain accounts relative to Coals and Spirits be laid on the Table, said, he would take the opportunity, although the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not in his place, of recommending to such of his official colleagues as were, the propriety of abolishing the duty on Coals carried to Ireland. He did not object to the increased tax he proposed to levy on that country, because he admitted that a case had been made out which justified that course, but to continue the duty on Coals, would be against the principles of sound policy. When the right hon. Gentleman was about to levy an additional tax on Ireland of 150,000l. it was not too much to ask him to give up 50,000l. The tax on Coals was most unequal in its pressure, and had a most mischievous effect in preventing the increase of manufactures in Ireland. It would be for the interest of England, therefore, that the tax should be repealed. More opportunities would be afforded for investing capital in Ireland,—more employment would be found for the people at home, and England would have less reason to complain of the sufferings inflicted on her labourers by the influx of Irish, with which Gentlemen from all parts of the kingdom frequently entertained the House.

said, that he knew no tax which pressed so unequally on the public as the Coal-tax, nor could he conceive on what principle the consumer of Coals in London was taxed at the rate of 6s. the chaldron, in Ireland at 1s. 8d., in Wales 1s., and in Scotland allowed to have his Coals without paying any tax at all. To him this appeared so unfair that he thought the claim for the removal of the tax altogether could not be refused. He hoped, that his hon. friend, or some other Member, would press this subject on the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

took the same opportunity to express his dislike to the tax, which, as the preceding Members had stated, pressed very unequally on different persons. He thought it extremely unfair, that sea-borne Coals should be subject to this duty, while all Coals carried by land were exempt from it. That occasioned a great hardship in many cases to the poor man, whom the House ought to bear on as lightly as possible. He would, therefore, request that the hon. Member for Limerick would bring the subject under the consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

also expressed his satisfaction to find this subject taken up warmly by hon. Members, for there was no tax that was more oppressive than the tax on Coals.

concurred with other hon. Members, in thinking that this tax ought to be repealed. He knew no tax the removal of which would give greater satisfaction.

said, that he, too, was determined to unite himself with those who should propose to have this tax repealed. To abolish it, would confer considerable benefit on several classes of the community.

was also of opinion, that no tax was so oppressive as the tax on Coals. It was extremely unjust that a difference of a few miles should make such a difference in this tax; that one man might have his Coals without paying any tax, while the other would have to pay 6s. a chaldron. It was to be observed too, that the tax was levied on the Coals where they would naturally cost most. He earnestly hoped, therefore, that the House would co-operate with any Member who should bring forward the subject, and press the Chancellor of the Exchequer to abolish it.

said, he was glad to see so strong a feeling manifested against the Coal-tax, because he was persuaded that to give it up would be of no importance to the Government, on the score of revenue, while the gain to the public would be immense. He had heard the statement of the right hon. Gentleman on Monday with great pleasure, because he was convinced that the abolition of the duty on Beer would be a great benefit to the labouring classes; but since England was to obtain so much relief, and a little additional burthen was to be thrown on Ireland, he should have been happy if the abolition of the Coal-tax in Ireland, which did not yield above 50,000l., had formed part of the scheme. He should not object to assimilating the taxes in England and Ireland, but there were two ways of accomplishing it, and he liked only one of them. The assimilation might be brought about by raising the taxes of Ireland to a par with those of England, or by lowering the taxes of England to the level of those raised in Ireland. Unfortunately, of these two ways, the Chancellor of the Exchequer always preferred the former; and, as unhappily, he always preferred the latter. He did not wish to see the taxes in Ireland raised as high as those of England, but should like to see the assimilation accomplished by lowering, as much as possible, the taxes of England. Since the Chancellor had augmented some taxes in Ireland, he hoped that he would now give up the odious tax on Coals,

was of opinion, that Ireland, since she was placed on a footing with England as to civil and religious rights, ought to bear her equal burthen of the public expenses. She had no Assessed Taxes to pay, nor any Land-tax, both of which fell heavy on England; and he therefore thought, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had done quite right in in-creasing, to a small extent, the share Ireland contributed to the general revenue.

said, the hon. Member forgot one material circumstance, which made a great difference between the two countries. Ireland paid from 4,000,000l. to 7,000,000l. in rent, which were spent out of Ireland, and principally in England. If that sum were spent in Ireland, it would increase her capital, encourage her manufactures, and call forth some of those natural advantages which she possessed. Ireland could then be taxed in her own wealth, and the Irish would not object to that; but now she was taxed in her poverty, and to that she had many objections. England, possessing immense resources, had obtained a remission of taxation to the amount of 3,400,000l., while Ireland, poor and harassed, instead of any relief except the small relief derived from the repeal of the Leather-tax—and, owing to the poverty of her children, that will not be much—Ireland is to have an additional burthen of 150,000l. He hoped, however, that the relative situation of Ireland to England would not long remain as at present.

said, he, like the right hon. Baronet (Sir John Newport), would not assimilate the taxes of the two countries, by raising those of Ireland, but by lowering the taxes of England. If there was a large portion of rent from Ireland spent in this country, let it also be recollected, that England afforded, at all times, a ready market for the produce of Ireland. If it were possible that the ports of the two countries should be hermetically sealed against each other, Ireland would be a great deal worse off than at present.

in presenting a Petition from the Grand Jury of the County of Stafford, complaining of the heavy charge incurred by passing Scotch and Irish Poor, said, that the charge had increased from 454l. in 1833, to 1,254l. in 1828, and to 2,023l. in 1829, and that it was progressively increasing. It was well known that a large number of the Vagrants, particularly the Scotch Vagrants, made a practice of travelling about the country, at other people's expense. After getting passed home, they found their way to Bristol, or some of the southern ports, and then again got passed home, repeating this pleasant excursion seven or eight times a-year, greatly, as he had shewn, to the increase of the expense in the different counties of England.

then rose, to make the Motion of which he had given notice, for leave to bring in a Bill, to prohibit the payment of Wages in Goods. He stated, it was the wish of a great number of his constituents that the Truck System should be abolished; but though he was desirous of attending to those wishes, he was so convinced of the evils of this System, that had they not pressed the matter on him he should have been ready to take it up; and representing, as he did, a large manufacturing country, he should have been greatly wanting in his duty had he not endeavoured to find a remedy for evils of which he had been a witness, and of which the whole of the manufacturing districts complained. He believed that upwards of sixty petitions bad been presented against the practice of paying wages in goods instead of money, and he had no doubt that before the end of the Session the House would receive a great many more such petitions; they had come from all parts of the country, and he had presented, last night, petitions signed by at least 20,000 persons. These petitions did not come from theorists, but from practical administrators of the law, and merchants engaged in business, who daily witnessed the evils they complained of. The manufacturer who paid in money came and told the House, that if it did not put a stop to the system he must embrace it in his defence, and the workmen and labourers, who were its chief victims, implored the House to protect them against its consequences. The petitions, then, were from all classes of persons who were the best able to judge of this system and its effects. The House was not ignorant that the subject was not then for the first time taken into the consideration of the legislature, which has, in truth, from the time of Edward 4th, declared its opinion on this subject, and endeavoured to put a stop to the practice. But if the House looked at its Acts, they would be found flimsy in construction, and inadequate to meet the increasing evil. They had been, in general, introduced by country gentlemen, who were not acquainted with all the means by which an Act of Parliament might be defeated. He had himself, at the request of a part of his constituents, introduced a bill into Parliament in 1820, which, after much difficulty, was allowed to be passed into a law, on condition that it should expire at the end of one year, if not re-enacted; but, like the others, it was defective, from not giving the magistrates power to summon witnesses, which enabled persons continually to infringe the law, or evade it. After the system had been so repeatedly discussed it was not necessary for him to enter into a description of the Truck System. It would be sufficient to remark, that the shop at which the goods must be bought is generally kept by a servant or relative of the labourer's employer, but always by some one acting in collusion with him. Though it may be notorious that the employer has an interest in the shop, that cannot always be proved. He did not mean absolutely to prohibit masters from keeping shops, but though they did, he would make them pay their men in money, leaving them at liberty to buy of their master or not; and if they had this liberty, they would not buy of him unless he kept as good articles, and sold them at as cheap a rate as other people. If there were no compulsion, there could be no objection to workmen buying at their masters' shops. If both parties were free agents he would desire no more; but in the Truck System one party was not a free agent, but under the complete control of the other. The plan was, for a master to suffer the workman to get into his debt, well knowing that he must afterwards be his slave; he is then obliged to accept any goods his master pleases, on the master's terms, and very often whether he wants them or not. The workmen of the Truck-masters could never obtain money, and such masters made enormous profits. In fact, such masters made so much by their shops that they did not care if they lost something on the articles they made. It was no wonder, therefore, that the price of goods was so much depressed. These masters, only anxious to supplant a rival, or beat an opponent out of the field, accomplished it by taking all kinds of advantages of their workmen. The House, he was sure, could have no idea of the great difference of price between a regular shop and what was called a Tommy-shop, and he would beg leave to lay before the House some documents on the subject. He had collected the prices at various retail shops in comparison with the Tommy-shops, and these he would state to the House, without mentioning the names of parties, though every statement he had to make was derived from some individual case. The prices then were, at the

Tommy-shop			Market-prices
Flour, per peck	2s.	6d.	2s.	4d.
Bacon, 4lbs.	3	0	2	0
Mutton, 2lbs.	1	0	2	10
Beef, 2lbs.	1	11	2	8
Sugar, 1lb.	1	9	2	8
Butter, 1lb.	1	0	2	9
Tea, 2 ounces	1	0	2	8
Cheese, 2lbs.	1	6	1	0
Amount	11	8	8	11

At another place, 200 miles distant from where the account he had just read was taken, he found, in the Tommy shops, Bread 1d. more than at the bakers,—Candles, worth 6½d. per lb., charged 7½d. or 8d.,—Tea at a profit of from 2s. to 3s. per lb.,—Butter from 3d. to 4d. per lb.,—Tobacco at a profit of from 25 per cent.—An article used in their manufactories, which I will not name, 100 per cent.—His informant added, "most articles sold by them are of an inferior quality, particularly the meat, which they get a profit on of from twopence to three pence per pound. Some time since I myself saw a sample of flour sold to a poor mechanic, which resembled more the colour of chocolate than any- thing else. In short the mechanic can procure anything he, his wife, or family wants,—bonnets, gowns, ribbons, shawls, boots, shoes, hats, caps, a cradle or a coffin; (strange or incredible as it may appear to you) but he must pay for it by his labour, and that dearly, and thus it is thousands of them eke out a miserable existence. The circulation of the current coin is depressed and superseded; for it is notorious that one sovereign has been sufficient to pay from twelve to twenty weavers, when they have succeeded in procuring from their employer a money payment of 1s. or 1s. 6d. each." In this case the Truck-master made a profit of from twenty to thirty per cent. He would then read an extract of a letter from a medical gentleman. "I hope you will not think me intrusive in mentioning a circumstance which has come under my observance within the last week, and I think, as a medical man, I am entitled to make some remarks upon it. I am, at the present time, attending the proprietor of a public bake house; on Monday last, when in his room, I observed something upon the table resembling a half-boiled West-India black-pudding, but which he called a loaf of bread; he told me that it had been in the oven five hours, and that, when it was first removed he could take it with a spoon, like treacle; the flour, or rather the pernicious materials of which it was composed, I was told, came from Mr. F——to one of his unhappy workmen, and his family must either eat that direct poison or starve. Such food as this is the principal cause of those fearful diseases to which the poor classes of society so frequently fall victims." This was no exaggeration he could assure the House. He had seen workmen carrying about tongs, poker and such things, which they had received as their week's wages, to sell in order to buy food. He did not mean to say that none of the manufacturers conducted their business fairly—he knew that some did, but the exceptions did not justify the abuse. He had some other cases to quote which were certified on oath, and, therefore, he could have less hesitation in stating them. The first certificate was from a man who said, "I was discharged from the employ of a Truck-master in February last, in consequence of having exposed some beef which I had forced on me in payment of wages; and further that the said beef, for which I was charged 5s. 10½d. I sold for 2s., and that, at the time it was forced upon me, I had meat in the house which I had been compelled to take the preceding week, and that the meat sold as above was exhibited in the streets and market-place of Hanley on the 17th day of February last, and afterwards given to the hogs by the person who purchased it from me." Another person said, "I certify that I work under a Truck-master, and that, several weeks since, he forced me to take a silk handkerchief, for which he charged me 6s. the same being worth but 2s., and further, that he forced upon me four yards of Irish linen, at 3s. per yard—worth but 1s. per yard; and four yards of check at 1s. 2d. per yard—worth but sevenpence; twenty-eight pounds of cheese at 7d. per pound, which I afterwards sold at 4¼d, and two pounds of bacon at 8d. per pound—worth but 6d. per pound. I also swear that, for four weeks together, I received but 2d. in money from my master, which money I wanted to purchase soap to be used in my work." Another deposed, "I certify that I am in the habit of taking flour, meat, and groceries from my tenants for rent weekly." And another, "I do certify that I am in the habit of making up cloth for workmen in the employ of Truck-masters, and that such cloth, received in lieu of wages, is in all cases, charged much above the market price; in some cases fifty per cent more than its real value, and further, that I have been obliged to take truck in payment of debts owing to me by workmen, at a very great loss to themselves." Another again said, "I do certify that I have been in the service of a Truck-master; and, in the agreement which I made with him, he inserted a clause, that I should not, under any circumstances, take him before a magistrate,—that my average wages were 15s. per week, and that out of that sum he forced me to take 8s. worth of truck per week, which truck consisted of flour, charged at 3s. 4d. per stone, the selling-price being 2s. 8d. Bacon charged 9d. per pound—selling at 6d. Beef and mutton charged 8d.—the market price being 6d.; and further, I certify, that having an opportunity of obtaining a better situation, my master refused to set me at liberty, although I had a family of six children, with a wife ill at the time. And further, I do certify, that, On one occasion, his foreman, by the orders of his master, forced upon me, in addition to flour, and other articles, fifteen pounds of bacon at 9d. per pound, the whole amount of which he deducted from my wages the Saturday following,—in consequence of which, my family were deprived of proper nourishment." Another certificate was as follows:—

"We, the Assistant Overseers of the poor of the parish, do severally make oath, and say, that there are workmen in the Parish of Stoke-upon-Trent whose masters pay their servants in goods instead of money, who make frequent applications to us for parochial relief; such persons alleging, that it is utterly out of their power to maintain themselves and families without such assistance, in consequence of being paid in the manner aforesaid. And further,—we do make oath and say, that we have had goods produced to us, which have been taken in lieu of money by such workmen, and that such goods have been charged from 100 to 200 per cent above the market price, as we have been informed, and believe."

Another certificate was to the following effect:—"I do certify, that I am in the employ of a Truck-master, and that I have received, in lieu of wages due, what was called wine, and for which I have been charged 4s. per bottle. And I do further certify, that my master will not allow me to draw in money more than a specific sum, and that the extra amount of my labour is expected to be taken in truck, which truck has invariably been of inferior quality, and extravagant prices." Another case he would quote, was this,—a master owed a workman 30s., for which, though he wanted money, he gave him a suit of clothes. The man did not want the clothes, and therefore endeavoured to sell them, which he at length did, to the very tailor who had made them, who gave him for them 12s. But this suit, which the Truck-master forced the workman to take for 30s., he had bought of the tailor for 15s. Another case he would mention was one which came before the Court of King's Bench, in 1823, and was the case of The King v. Kaye; in which, an inventory was put in of the articles a workman had been obliged to take in payment, and which could scarcely be matched in a pawnbroker's shop. He would read only a few of the articles. 29lbs. Dutch Butter, at 1s. 5½d. per lb sundries, a sum of 1l. 8s. 2d.; 14½ yards of calico, at Is. 4½d. per yard; 3 yards linen, at 2s. 6d. per yard; half piece of ribbon; 4 yards broad cloth, at 26s. per yard; 2 do. at 25s.; I dozen of calico fronts; 5½ yards of cord, at 9s. 6d. per yard; a hat, at 18s. 6d.; an umbrella, at 1l. 10s.; 7 yards print, at 2s. 3d. per yard; 22 yards of dimity; half a yard of cambric; 10 silk handkerchiefs; 3 scarfs; a scarf; a parasol; 2 metal foreign watches; a tea-chest; 25 yards of linen; 2 bushels of Dutch onions; 7 yards of broad cloth; 2½ do.; 8 yards of cord; abroach; 15 bags. An old rotten mourning pall, consisting of 10 yards of velveteen, and valued at 15s. When such articles were given as wages, it was plain that the man who had to sell them, to provide for the daily wants of his family, must be a great sufferer. He was liable, too, he believed, to the penalties of the Hawker's Act. But if the system were suffered to continue, the law must be altered in many respects. For example, there is a prohibition to sell damaged meat or flour, but no prohibition to give either to workmen for wages, and therefore, the law suffered the iniquitous master to do that which it would not allow the iniquitous shopkeeper to do. Another case to which he would allude, was this:—A man had received no wages for several weeks, but he had been paid in flour, bacon, and beef. The flour he sold to purchase shoes, losing by it 4d. per stone. He was in debt for his lodgings, and having no money to pay for them, was obliged to give bacon and beef at a heavy loss. He did not mean to say that every case was as bad as this, but the plan had, in all cases, similar features of oppression, and in all the documents he had seen on the subject, similar instances of fraud were mentioned. The persons principally affected by the system were the workmen, whose hardship he had, perhaps, sufficiently described, the retail dealers, and the master manufacturers. The case of the retail tradesman, though deserving of consideration, was not so urgent as that of the other two. In the Bolton resolutions, however, it was stated that, in that town, there were 500 shops and public-houses, at an annual rental of 20l. each, and upwards, and that the owners of these houses could not possibly pay either rent or taxes, unless the wages of the workmen were paid in money. The case of Bolton was, he apprehended, an accurate repre- sentation of all the manufacturing towns of the kingdom where the Truck-system prevailed. In all such towns the retail tradesmen were going to decay, gradually retreating from between the all-engrossing capitalist and the dissatisfied populace, both of whom they had hitherto kept from coining into unpleasant contact with each other. The hon. Member for Aberdeen might, perhaps, ask of what consequence it was that the wealth of one class was gradually transferred to another, provided the whole amount was not diminished, he would answer, that it was better, in a moral and political point of view, to have three or four thousand independent men of the middle class, in every town, rather than allow it to be divided between a few engrossing capitalists, and a multitude of dependent and starving workmen. Either the Government must join with him in putting an end to the Truck-system, or it must look forward to that system becoming universal. The masters who now paid in money informed the legislature, by their petitions, that they could not possibly stand out against this system; that, though they had not embarked in it, from honourable motives, expecting that Parliament would put an end to it, yet, in consequence of the reduction of the price of their commodities, partly caused by the Truck-masters obtaining them out of the goods they forced their workmen to take, they found that it would be necessary for them to act on the same plan, or submit to bankruptcy and ruin. If the Truck-master gained fifteen per cent on the goods he forced his workmen to take, that was equivalent to a reduction of fifteen per cent on the cost, and he could afford to sell so much cheaper than the master who paid in money. The Truck-master was therefore enabled to undersell the master who paid in money, whose only remedy was, to lower the wages of his men fifteen per cent. The Truck-master, however, did the same, and thus there was, owing to this system, a continued and forced reduction of prices, which all fell ultimately on the poor labourer, and starved him out of existence. Necessity on the one hand, and avarice on the other, urged them both on in this cruel race, till the poor overloaded animals who carried them sunk exhausted by the fatigue. The hon. Member for Aberdeen would, perhaps, say, let the workman leave the Truck-master; but that was not so easy, The Truck master did not begin his ex-actions till his victim was in his debt, and then it was impossible for him to escape. Besides, the Truck-master was the man who, from underselling the money-paying master, received the most orders; he could employ more hands on his own terms; while the other was obliged to dismiss his workmen, be cause his low priced-rival would beat him in the market. The continuance of the system would bear down all classes to one grasping, revolutionary equality, and when the spirit of discontent under unjust sufferings was spread through our dense population, it was to be apprehended, that neither property nor life would be safe. The system destroyed, too, all means of determining the value of commodities, by removing the wages of labour, the great element of the calculation. One man paid his labourers in ready cash, but another paid them in goods, on which he obtained a large profit, and for which he did not pay till at the end of three or six months. The hon. Member for Aberdeen had stated, that the distress of the country was the cause of the Truck System, but that system existed during the war, when there was no distress, and when the markets were rising. Those who thought it was owing to the change in our currency were equally mistaken, as was proved by the same fact. The Truck System had originated, and was Nourishing, before our return to a metallic currency. Though that might have aggravated its evils, and extended its operation, he must deny that the change in the currency was the cause. He held in his hand an account of the number of iron-masters who had embarked in the Truck System within a certain district, and by that it appeared, that there were only three who had begun since 1825. In this district there were one hundred and sixteen blast furnaces, sixty-six of which belonged to money-paying masters, and fifty to Truck- masters; seventy-one are in blast, and of these thirty-seven belong to the former, and thirty-four to the latter description of masters; there are forty-five, therefore, out of blast, of which thirty belong to money-paying, and fifteen to Truck-masters. The truck men, however, it was added, are beginning to be afraid, and draw buck; they begin to pay in money, and most probably will decry their old practices when they can no longer carry them on with safety. This account was, he thought, very instruc- tive, for it shewed that of one hundred and sixteen iron-masters not above three had opened shops since 1825. It also shewed, that of the furnaces out of blast, the greater number belonged to the money-paying masters, who were unequal to sustain a competition with those who paid wages in goods. The Truck System had not arisen, therefore, from the change in the currency, but from the spirit of overreaching avarice and competition, which was unfortunately at all times too prevalent in this country. He knew, also, that at no time were gold and silver more abundant than at present, and any man of good credit had no occasion to want either kind of currency. He had been informed by a respectable constituent of his, who turned over 1,000l. in cash weekly, that at present, though that district was formerly the head-quarters of false coiners, that he never thought of examining a single shilling or sovereign. One effect of the Truck System, if allowed to continue, would be to displace the coin of the realm, and substitute for it the truck notes. At present Truck-masters supply their shops with small bills, at three or four months date, which form no small part of the circulating medium of some districts. To any person who should regard the Truck System favourably, as tending to enable us to enter into competition with foreigners, he would remark, that the price of our manufactures must always be regulated by the price of similar manufactures made in the foreign country, and to that price, be it what it may, our manufacturers must at all times accommodate themselves. Our Truck System was not at all necessary as an engine in reducing prices to an equality in all parts of the world. The Bill he proposed to introduce would re-enact the law of 1820; the first clause would prohibit all payments in goods, either directly or indirectly; the second would empower magistrates to compel the production, by persons accused, of their books and papers as evidence; and the third clause would make a very serious addition to the penal ties for offences. It was chiefly by supplying the extraordinary omission of all former Acts, in not giving magistrates the power to summon evidences before them, that he looked for the success of his measure. He hoped something, too, from augmenting the penalties, and it was his opinion, that the second offence should be made a misdemeanor. Magistrates who had had the greatest opportunity of observing the workings of the Truck System were of opinion, that these principal clauses would answer the end he proposed; but he had other means of providing against the continuance of the evils he had mentioned. It would be just, he thought, to give a workman the power of voiding a contract with any master who should attempt to force him to receive goods in payment of his wages. He would also take from the owner of a Truck-shop the power of recovering any debts due from their workmen, and he would give to workmen a power to recover their wages in money though they had been paid in truck. It was only by subjecting the master to great inconveniences, and to considerable danger, that he would be compelled to abandon a practice of which he had reaped the profit. One great advantage which would result from allowing the workman to bring his action for his wages would be, he thought, to interest juries and the public in the cause; and if that were the i case, he could have no doubt that persons interested would willingly contribute, and form a fund to enable workmen to prosecute their claims and defend their rights. He had been asked, would he compel a manufacturer who imported Hour from America to sell that through a factor to a merchant, who might sell it with a profit to a retail dealer, to be sold by him, after making something by it, to the manufacturer's workmen, instead of allowing the manufacturer to sell it to them himself? He had been asked if he meant to deprive a manufacturer of benefitting himself and his workmen by selling them provisions. To both questions he answered in the negative. He meant to take from the manufacturer no right he now possessed. He meant to propose, in this respect, no restrictions not already established by the law. If a master paid his men in money, and they chose, willingly and freely, to lay it out at his shop, the law did not prevent them from doing so. He meant to interfere with the free agency of neither, but to maintain the independence of both. But if the master, holding his workman in thraldom, refused to pay him his wages in money, if he should draw him into his debt, and formally or evasively refuse to pay him for his work, or compel the man to expend his wages in one particular shop, then the law ought, be thought, to inter- fere and stigmatize and punish the offender. If the competition of business required the master to reduce his men's wages to one shilling, let it be so, but let the workman have that shilling in his pocket. He called on the Gentlemen who heard him, to make the case of the workmen their own. In the name of the suffering and starving mechanics he implored the interposition of Parliament. As the law stood there was no standard of wages but the conscience of the Truck-master, and he must protest against so fearful a license. The law incited men to commit evil, and the hon. Member for Aberdeen's remedy would only leave them a choice of evils. The law could not remain in its present state. It allowed plunder and oppression—it sacrificed the honest master and the industrious workman, and it protected the dishonest manufacturer in making both of them his victims. The workman's strength and his skill were his only property, and in the quiet possession of them the law ought to secure him. The number and the intelligence of our artizans were the main springs of the national wealth—the sources of our pre-eminence among the people of the earth—and if the House desired to preserve the national glory untarnished, the national wealth unimpaired, let it take measures to protect the workmen, and not drive them into foreign countries. The House would consult the best interests of the nation by rendering the mechanic and the manufacturing artizan satisfied with the laws under which he lived. He cordially concurred with his right hon. friend the Member for Liverpool, who said, on the first night of the Session, "that it was by studying to benefit to the utmost the industrious classes, that we could alone lay any solid basis of happiness, or revive the national property;" and thinking that the measure he proposed would tend to benefit the industrious classes, he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to render more effectual the laws requiring Payment of Wages in Money.

seconded the Motion. He thought, he said, that it was their duty to put an end to the truck, and he entirely concurred in all the remarks made by his hon. friend. He spoke, he said, the sentiments of the county which he represented, and which stood high and justly as a manufacturing county. He had already presented a pe- tition on the subject from 3,000 workmen, who did not complain themselves of suffering under the Truck System, but who were apprehensive that it might be extended to them, and for their own sake, as well as for the sake of those who were suffering under it, they with great propriety petitioned against if. The workmen thought truly, that if the system were generally to prevail, that their condition would be as bad as that of the West Indian Negroes, and that they would have no wages, and no subsistence, but what their employer doled out to them. He trusted that the legislature would never permit the poor man to be driven to that extremity, and as far as his power went, he would aid such an object. He never would permit, if he could prevent it, the extension of that genuine English spirit of independence which was one of the best features in our national character. The manufacturers of Merthyr Tydvill wished, he believed, to see their people happy, and he knew that one of them had established schools for the children of his workmen, as well as built houses for their accommodation. He would say no more than that it was his determination to give his hon. friend all the support in his power in carrying the measure to a successful termination.

complimented the hon. Member for Staffordshire on the good feeling which prevailed in every part of his speech. With him he agreed, that the House ought to legislate on this subject, but he was not quite prepared to say that the Bill of his hon. friend came fully up to his views. He admitted that the Truck System was a great evil, which ought to be abated, but the interference involved other principles and other considerations which his hon. friend had not taken sufficiently into the account. He would not then argue the question, as his hon. friend, to his regret, had selected a day for introducing the subject which was generally understood not to be a day for debating any question; he would recommend that some more convenient opportunity should be taken to discuss the measure. It involved the contentment and well-being of a portion of the community well entitled to the consideration of the House. He knew that the suffering of those who already endured a great deal would be much aggravated, were the House to allow the value of their labour to be measured by any other standard than that generally adopted by the community as the measure of value. But he must stop, only repeating, that he trusted the House would not then be pressed into a discussion of the question.

concurred with his right hon. friend, both as to the importance of the subject, and the impropriety of then discussing it; he would recommend that the Bill should be brought in, and the amendment which the hon. Member for Aberdeen meant to propose, might be brought forward on the second reading, which would be a better time for discussing it than this evening. The House had heard from the hon. Gentleman what his object was—that he did not mean to prevent a bona fide sale of articles between master and man, but only that system of forced barter of which the workmen complained.

each made a few observations on the course of proceeding, when it was agreed that the debate should stand adjourned to the next day.

said, he agreed with Mr. Hume in his opposition to the Bill, which he thought instead of being an advantage would be sure to operate to the prejudice of the workmen. Wishing as well to them as any Gentleman of that House, he should, on that account, feel it his duty to oppose the Bill, because he thought it would militate against the object the hon. Member had in view.