rose to put a question to the noble Lord opposite respecting the treaty of Washington. By one of the articles of that treaty certain privileges were granted to a district which is now given up to the United States. These privileges related to timber, as well as to corn and other agricultural produce, and they consisted in allowing goods of that description to be brought into British ports at the same rates of duty as if they were the produce of British possessions. What he wanted to know was, whether the corn and timber specified in that treaty could be introduced into England at the same duties as if they had been the produce of New Brunswick; and, assuming that he should receive an answer in the affirmative, he then desired to know whether it would be necessary that an act of Parliament should be passed for the purpose of giving full effect to that part of the treaty in which this matter was referred to.

said he should have no difficulty in answering the question which had just been put. The intention and meaning of the treaty were correctly stated by the right hon. Gentleman, and the arrangement proposed to be made by that compact had for some time past been practically acted on. The district to which reference had been made did not produce any corn. It produced timber; but timber was felled at both sides of the river—it was laid on the ice in the winter, and when the ice melted the logs floated down the stream without its being possible for any one to know whether they had been cut within the territory of the United States or in that of Great Britain. Although it was unimportant whether the trees were felled upon the right or on the left bank of the river Aroostook or the river St. John, yet that circumstance did not necessarily involve a concession on our part of the free navigation of the St. John; but timber having once entered, it was treated as British timber. As to the necessity of bringing in an act of Parliament on the subject, her Majesty's Government would feel it their duty to do so if the necessity became apparent.

asked whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have any objection to produce any instructions which had been given to the Customhouse authorities in connection with the subject.

replied that no instructions had yet been issued.

begged to ask the noble Lord opposite at the head of the commission for inquiry into the frauds in the revenue, what progress had been made with the inquiries, when they would be brought to a close, and whether the names of all the parties concerned in the frauds would be laid before the House.

said, that the inquiries were still in progress, and it was impossible for him to say precisely when they would be concluded. When they were, there could be no objection to laying the evidence before the House.

wished to know whether the noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests would have any objection to lay before the House an account of the expenses incurred in the improvements at Holyrood Palace, and of the funds from which those expenses were to be defrayed.

said, in was quite unnecessary to lay any such returns before the House. He would at once inform the hon. Gentleman that the amount expended during the present year would be about 2,000l., and that the sources from which it was derived were the improvements in the royal parks, and in Phœnixpark, in Dublin.

wished to ask the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department, whether it were the intention of the Government to bring in any bill this Session to amend the law relating to the Registration of Voters in Scotland.

could assure his hon. Friend that he was perfectly alive to the necessity of amending the law for the Registration of Voters in Scotland, but having already pledged the Government to bring in measures, during the course of the present Session, to amend the law relating to the Registration of Voters in England and also in Ireland, he could not pledge himself to bring in a bill to amend the law of registration in Scotland during the course of the present Session.

expressed a hope that the right hon. Baronet would fix the second reading of the English Registration Bill and the County Courts' Bill for such period as would suit the professional arrangements of Members of the House who were connected with the legal profession.

said, he had a great respect for the gentlemen of the long robe, and was sensible of the value of their assistance, but it was impossible for him to undertake to arrange public business with a view to their convenience. He would give notice of motion, for leave to bring in the English Registration Bill in the course of next week, and before the expiration of a fortnight he would ask for leave to introduce the Local Courts Bill. He could not, however, undertake to fix the second reading of bills of so much importance, with reference to the convenience of gentlemen connected with the legal profession.

asked when the Irish Registration Bill would be brought in?

said it was not his intention to move for leave to introduce the Irish Registration Bill until the English Registration Bill should pass through all its stages.

gave notice that it was his intention, on Monday next, to put a question to the right hon. Baronet, as to the state of our relations with the government of Scinde. He wished to know whether the treaty entered into with the government of that country in 1839 was still in force, and whether any act had been committed in contravention of the treaty, which would justify an armed interference on the part of the British Government in India.

felt much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for the notice which he had given of his intention to ask the question, and he would suggest to other hon. Members the propriety of following the hon. Gentleman's example in that respect. He made that suggestion, not so much for the sake of his own convenience as for the sake of the public interest, because it was most important to the public interest that the Government should be enabled to give answers to questions of this nature in such a manner as that they could not be misunderstood.

rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws relating to Turnpike Trusts in England and Wales. The present state of the law he observed, had occasioned great inconvenience. Not that he wished materially to effect the rights of the whole body of mortgagees; but this at least he desired to do,—to render it impossible for any individual to go into the market and possess himself of a mortgage, of the value say of 100l., then exercise his privilege as a mortgagee, bring an action of ejectment, and get himself appointed a receiver. What he proposed in this respect was, that when an action by a mortgagee was decided, he should not then enter into possession, but that a receiver should be appointed by the Court of Exchequer. It was perfectly well known that large sums were raised by mortgage of turnpike trusts, and it was also well known that priority of advance was not followed by priority of payment. Now he proposed, that in future, no trustee of turnpike tolls be allowed to raise money on the security of such tolls without the consent of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who would have all the accounts before him, and who would not refuse his assent where he saw the money was necessary. He would also propose in this bill, that the trustees should appoint auditors from their own number, who should form a finance committee. By these the whole accounts should be prepared and arranged at stated times, and afterwards laid before the general meeting of trustees. He would also propose to continue the 4th and 5th of her present Majesty, by which magistrates might appropriate highway-rates to the purposes of turnpike trusts. Having now stated an outline of what the bill would propose, he would only add an expression of his hope that the House would give it its sanction. He did not expect that the bill would remove all the evils attendant on the present state of turnpike trusts in England; but he hoped that it would put an end to many of them, and tend to mitigate the effects of others which could not be at present removed.

admitted the very bad management of turnpike trusts at present, and he was glad to learn that Government had taken the remedy into its own hands. He hoped that Government would be now induced to bring forward some general measure on the subject.

said, that having been twice chairman of committees on this subject, he could bear testimony to the difficulties by which it was surrounded. As to a general measure which should relate to all turnpike trusts, he thought it was quite out of the question. It would be impossible to arrange such a measure, unless Government were prepared to pay off all the debts of the several trusts, amounting at present to between 8,000,000l. and 9,000,000l. In the present financial state of the country, that would be impossible. He did not think that his hon. Friend who brought in this bill would be able to carry the clause which prevented trustees from raising money on the tolls without the consent of the Secretary of State. When a bill brought in by his right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Fox Maule) was formerly before the House, it failed from the dislike of the country Gentlemen to anything like centralization. They would object equally to the clause which gave to the Secretary of State the power of refusing to sanction the borrowing of money upon the security of turnpike tolls.

said, that his bill was defeated, but it was because one object of it was to introduce some economical reforms into the management of turnpike trusts; and thus he was at once beset by the trustees. He was sorry that a similar provision was not in this bill, for without some such economical reforms it would be impossible ever to deal with the debts of the several trusts, which now amounted nearly to 9,000,000l. As far as this bill went, it should have his cordial support; he was only sorry it did not go further.

rose to move for leave to bring in a bill for the purpose of preventing the fraudulent Personation of Voters at contested elections. He had had sufficient experience of this evil to convince him of its magnitude, and of the necessity of applying some effectual remedy. He could mention many cases in which the practice had been carried to great excess, but he would confine himself to one or two. At the late election for the county of Derby, men were brought in large numbers to personate absent voters. Some of these were arrested by the High Sheriff himself, and several who were sent for trial for personation and perjury were condemned and sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment and hard labour. Others for personation only without perjury, were condemned to six months' imprisonment and hard labour, and others to three months'. The number thus punished showed the extent to which this atrocious practice was carried. In another case— that of Belfast—the practice had been carried to a still greater and more disgusting length, but the committee which inquired into the case acquitted the candidates and their committees generally of any knowledge of the crime; and the man who was known to have taken a very active part in procuring this personation declared in the committee that he was heartily ashamed of his conduct, but that he would not have resorted to it if he had not been informed that it was also practised at the other side. Before he called the attention of the House to the remedy which he should propose, he would observe that the Reform Act had done very little to repress the crime. By the 58th clause it was enacted that at the time of voting no inquiry could be made as to the right of a man whose name was returned on the registry; but certain questions were allowed to be put as to the identity of the man and the qualification. He might be asked, "Are you the same person whose name is here? Have you already polled here or elsewhere at this election? Have you now the same qualification for which you claimed to vote at the registration?" and an oath might be put to him as to the truth of his several answers to these questions. Towards the end of an election, it became known that a certain number of electors would not be forthcoming, and immediately steps were taken to present parties in the booth to personate them. If the person who was brought up to personate the voter was ready to answer the questions and take the oath, the returning officer had no power to refuse the vote; the party was then taken to a neighbouring or other public-house, when his clothes were changed, and it was in very many cases totally impossible even to recognize him. Such, he believed, was a tolerably accurate account of the manner in which the abominable practice was carried on. It was particularly common in seaport towns, for in them many of the persons whose names were on the register were on distant voyages, and it was well ascertained how many electors and who they were who would not be forthcoming at an election, and they were counterfeited by others in the unprincipled manner he had already pointed out. The remedy which he intended to propose was an extremely simple one, and his belief was that it would be an effective one. He proposed that, in the event of an individual being brought up at an election, and it was known to one or two persons in the booth that he was not the person he pretended to be, it should be lawful for the returning officer, or his deputy, on their rising and voluntarily declaring their readiness to make oath to that fact, not to reject the vote, but, that he should put the questions and administer the oath; he should then record the vote, and place against it the words "Protested against." It should then be lawful, he proposed, that the returning officer, or his deputy, upon the oath of one or more person or persons, should hand the personater over to a parish constable, who should be in attendance for that purpose, who should be required, within a specified time, say twelve hours, to take the party before any two justices of the division of a county, or of a city or borough, before whom the charge should be properly and thoroughly investigated. If it should appear to them that the charge was a just one, that the real voter had been personated by the party before them, then the magistrates, acting under the provisions of the Reform Bill, should commit him to the common gaol, and bind over the witnesses to prosecute for the offence. His belief was, that such a law would put a stop to the iniquitous practice, but it was necessary to go further, it was but right that they should protect the bonâ fide voter. It might be possible that there might be some person or persons in the booth who, in the heat of a contested election, and for unworthy purposes perhaps from ill-will, or perhaps in order to gain a temporary triumph, might make such a charge against a bonâ fide elector. To remedy that error he provided that the magistrate, if he saw there was no foundation for the charge, should have the power to fine the party making the false or unfounded charge to the amount of 5l., and if he should not be able, or refuse to pay the fine, then he should be punished with imprisonment. It appeared to him that his measure would prove an efficient remedy for a great evil, and that it would have a double value. If it did not stop the practice altogether, it must, however, prove a material check upon it; but it went further, and provided against the greater evil and gross breach of the privileges of that House—it provided against a representative being sent there who was not elected in a bonâ fide manner. The votes which were obtained by personation were distinguished by the mark of the returning officer, and that would prove easily attained and bonâ fide evidence of the fact before a committee. He had only one other observation to offer. The remedy he proposed attached to the criminal the very measure of his guilt. The profligacy, the perjury, the rascality of any man who consented to be made the instrument in such vile proceedings was open and manifest enough; but what then was to be said of those men, men of character and education, who ought and did know better—what was to be said of them who were the first to set the system going by seducing men to commit such gross and corrupt perjury? The remedy he proposed did not reach them. The ordinary principles of law prevented him from attempting to touch them. However, as the measure was one wholly devoid of all semblance of party feeling, he would be most happy to receive any suggestion, but more especially from hon. and learned Members, on the last point; he should like to amend it so that they might reach the great offenders. The hon. Member concluded by moving for leave to bring in his bill.

seconded the motion.

wished to address a few observations to the House in consequence of the hon. Member having said that he had gained much of his experience on the subject from having been one of a committee which set upon the election for Belfast, in 1841, when the return for that town was set aside. Before that com- mittee, a man named Howler confessed his iniquities with a greater show of contrition, saying that he had been induced to begin the system of personation because the other party were actively engaged in it. Now, he could state positively that there never was a more false statement made, for there was not the shadow of a reason for saying that there was even a single case of personation among those who were his friends upon that occasion. One fact connected with that election he would state to the House. He went into one of his committee-rooms, to which a man was dragged by his (Mr. Ross's) friends, and he had considerable difficulty in saving him from being mal-treated, because he had come forward and tendered his services to personate voters on his be half. From the two petitions which had been presented last Session complaining of returns for Belfast, that town had suffered very considerably in the public estimation. It ought, however, to be known that it was distinctly proved that, although personation had been practised, not one of the inhabitants of Belfast was implicated in the offence; a fact, which, when known, must tend much to restore to the town its good name. He should give the measure of the hon. Gentleman his utmost consideration, and would be most happy to contribute, in however small a degree, to bring so desirable a law into operation. By the present law no power but a committee of that House could remove the name of the voter personated from the poll.

offered his thanks to the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Liddell) for so excellent and necessary a measure. He hoped the remedy proposed would not only be salutary but effectual.

proposed to nominate the committee proposed by him to inquire into the distress of Paisley.

hoped the hon. Gentleman would not press his motion before Monday. A meeting had been lately held in Paisley, at which a resolution had been come to, that no person from Ireland who had not been resident in the town upwards of ten years should receive relief from the funds at the disposal of the relief committee. He would say no more than that the fact had caused considerable dissatis- faction in Ireland. He had no doubt it had arisen from accident, but the fact was, there was not the name of one Irish Member in the list proposed. On Monday he would be prepared to nominate two Gentlemen, and he thought in fairness, Ireland ought to be represented in the committee.

had no objection to postpone his motion to Monday.

begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if it was his intention to introduce during the present Session, a bill for the regulation of the law courts of Ireland, and, if so, whether it would be brought in before Easter.

said, it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to introduce a bill for the purpose of improving the regulations of the law courts in Ireland; but, from the present state of public business, he could not say when it would be brought in.