wished to have some proper understanding of the terms on which they were to separate with reference to the important question of the Poor Law. It would be in the recollection of the House, that when the noble Lord at the head of the Government adopted the Poor Removal measure of the late Government, there stood in his (Mr. Borthwick's) name a notice of Motion, with a view of referring that measure to a Select Committee, instead of a Committee of the whole House. The noble Lord asked him to withdraw that Motion, because, on the part of the Government, he was ready at the beginning of next Session to consent to a close inquiry into the whole law of settlement. Subsequently there had also stood in his name a Notice of Motion for an inquiry into the whole operation of the Poor Law. He had, however, withdrawn that Motion, because he had felt that it was not fair to press it, as the Government had come into office only towards the end of the Session, and had not therefore had time to form their opinions on the various reports, such as that on district asylums and the Andover union. Nevertheless, he had expressed his intention of moving at the beginning of next Session, unless the Government did something on the subject, for a Select Committee of Inquiry into the whole operation of the Poor Law, founded on the reports to which he had adverted; he trusted, however, that he should be spared the necessity of giving notice on the subject, for he felt he might confidently leave the matter in the hands of the Government. At the same time, he would ask whether it was the intention of the Government to take the whole operation of the Poor Law into consideration, with a view to introduce some measure on the subject at the beginning of next Session?

said, he would not venture, in the present state of the Poor Law, and of the inquiries lately made, to say what measure or inquiry Government would propose; but he would give this promise to the hon. Gentleman, that unless he (Lord J. Russell) did propose a full inquiry in the name of the Government, or unless he took some steps to preclude the necessity of it, he should make no opposition next Session to the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the whole operation of the Poor Law.

begged to ask the right hon. the Home Secretary, whether his attention had been called to a letter in The Times newspaper of that morning from Mr. Tasker, a very respectable gentleman living in the neighbourhood of Andover. It appeared from his statements that the witnesses who had been called before the Committee of this House on the subject of the Andover Union had been sadly used since their return to Andover. It was really a matter of grave importance, and the attention of the right hon. Gentleman ought to be immediately directed to it. It was quite clear that the parties would re- ceive no protection from the Poor Law Commissioners, and must throw themselves upon that of the right hon. Gentleman, who was, in fact, at the head of the Poor Law administration. Nothing could be more necessary for the due course of justice than that persons who had been examined as witnesses should be protected from persecution for it.

I saw that there was a letter upon the subject in The Times this morning; I had not time to read it, in consequence of the pressure of other business; but I put it aside to read as soon as I can. I do not know whether the law will enable me to interfere in the circumstances not having read the letter; I intend to do so, but I must of course reserve my decision till after I have read it.