said, that several days had been occupied by the Committee on this Bill, and many alterations had been made, and new clauses proposed and inserted at the last moment. Many hon. Members interested in the subject had not been aware of the nature of those clauses and alterations. He complained also of the vexatious interference of many provisions of the measure with the ordinary business of the shipowners. Even a seaman's wages could not be paid without the intervention of a third party. Under the circumstances, and considering that important alterations had been made and new clauses inserted, proper time for the consideration of which had not been given, he felt that on the part of his constituents he had a right to ask for further time, and he should therefore move that the Bill be recommitted.

hoped that his hon. Friend would excuse him for not going into the merits of the Bill in answer to his animadversion. It was certainly quite true that the Bill had occupied the attention of the Committee during several mornings, and that it had received several very important Amendments; and he took this opportunity of acknowledging his obligation to the hon. Member for Oxfordshire and to the right hon. President of the Poor Law Board for the suggestion of many improvements. But the alterations that had been made at the last were not of a very momentous kind, and were founded upon points that had before been amply discussed, and they were embodied in clauses which would be brought up on the report, and the Bill would be reprinted, and the whole Bill would be considered on the third reading. He must oppose the Motion for recommittal.

said, he had received letters from his constituents complaining that these alterations had made the Bill very different to what it had been when they had last seen it, and that they had not had proper time for considering those Amendments.

said, he had Amendments of importance to propose, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade would accede to the Motion of the hon. Member for South Shields, as it would be far more convenient to consider such details in Committee than upon the third reading.

thought the only effect of going into Committee again would be to give Members the trouble of going through the clauses again. It was certainly unfortunate that the clauses to be proposed by the right hon. Gentleman had been printed in a way that they were mingled up with the other votes relative to private business; and might have escaped the eye of hon. Members who had no interest in private business, and were, perhaps, not very scrutinising in looking over their papers. The most useful course, however, he thought, would be to consider the Bill as amended, and the Bill would then be reprinted with all the alterations. Hon. Members would then have a fair right to ask the Government that between the reprinting of the Bill and the third reading, ample time should be given to communicate with all parties interested in the subject.

hoped that suggestion would be adopted, and time be given to communicate with Scotland upon these latter Amendments. The Bill, as it now stood, was not, in point of fact, the Bill which was known as the Mercantile Marine Bill No. 2. It was "the Mercantile Marine Bill No. 3."

said, that the only difficulty which pressed upon his mind with regard to any amount of delay was, that they had arrived at a late period of their sittings; and he did attach the greatest possible importance to the Bill passing in the present Session. The most considerable and important of the Amendments that had been lately made, did not affect the principle of the Bill, or the interests of shipowners, but chiefly related to the legal forms in carrying the Bill into effect, and were such as the House was perfectly competent to consider, and involved not the slightest necessity for their sending all over the country to consult their constituents. If hon. Members would facilitate the passing of the Bill, he would endeavour to give as much time as possible between the reprinting of the Bill and the third reading. He was so anxious that the reprint should be done quickly, that he had made special arrangements which he hoped would place the complete reprinted Bill in the hands of hon. Members tomorrow morning.

trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would assent to no delay that would endanger the passing of the Bill in the present Session; and that, the third reading would be taken as early next week as possible, so that the Bill might be sent to the House of Lords in time.

, in moving the adoption of a clause of which he had given notice, said: I shall refrain from pressing on the attention of the House any of those higher and more serious topics which naturally present themselves to the mind, but which this is not a fitting place to discuss. I will only beg to be considered a petitioner, asking in behalf of the seamen of the mercantile marine, a body of between 200,000 and 300,000 persons, that they may receive that protection which secures to all the working classes one day of rest out of seven. Above 100 years ago, when an Act was passed analogous to the present, for regulating the discipline of the Royal Navy, it was required that—

"all commanders, captains, and officers in or belonging to His Majesty's ships shall cause the public worship of Almighty God to be solemnly, reverently, and orderly performed on board their respective ships, and that the Lord's Day be observed according to law."

Will it not be equally strange and inconsistent if, when in 1850 we are legislating for the better organisation and discipline of the mercantile marine, we should neglect to secure to our seamen, who are perhaps more severely worked, by night as well as by day, than any other class, besides being exposed to the vicissitudes of weather and climate, that rest and relaxation which all their fellow-subjects enjoyed on a Sunday? I can scarcely anticipate any opposition to my proposal. The only objection I have heard is that it is unnecessary, because all our best commanders of merchant ships already observe Sunday with becoming decorum and propriety; but we are legislating not against the good but the bad, and I grieve to say that a large proportion of our seamen are still denied that privilege which I am now seeking to secure for them. I am told, also, that; this enactment will give rise to frivolous and vexatious complaints; but we have entrusted the magistrates with the power of giving costs under such circumstances, and I do not, therefore, anticipate any inconvenience of that nature from securing to our seamen this just and necessary privilege. The Bill which we are passing contains many stringent clauses against; them; but the Committee may be assured that we shall more easily secure their attachment to their Sovereign and their by country by consideration and kindness, than by suspicion and severity.

assured the hon. and gallant Admiral that he was not in the least disposed to treat with any other feeling than that of the greatest respect any suggestion emanating from him. For it was well known that in addition to the care and attention which the hon. and gallant Gentleman bestowed in that House upon the welfare and interests of merchant seamen, he also devoted a large portion of time in his private capacity to the same object; and the greatest advantages had arisen from the exertions of the hon. and gallant Admiral, and of several other naval officers. With regard to the present proposition, he (Mr. Labouchere) had communicated on the subject with some of those shipowners who were most distinguished; in that body for their care and consideration of the religious and moral welfare of their sailors, and for their anxiety to promote, by every means in their power, the proper observance of the Lord's day on board their ships; and they had stated their opinion that any interference of the kind was unadvisable, and that enforcing the performance of divine service would, in many cases—he hoped not generally—lead to scenes of profaneness, rather than of sanctity. But he also objected to the extreme vagueness of this clause, which was altogether too general. Even on shore it was often difficult to define what was and what was not a proper observance of Sunday; but on ship-board the difficulty would be far greater; for how was it possible to lay down what a sailor must and what he must not perform, and what was exactly and strictly a work of necessity. That must depend upon the state of wind and weather, the position of the vessel, and a variety of contingents impossible to foresee and define, and impossible for the House to consider. Such a provision would lead to nothing but the most vexatious effects, and so far from causing a reverent observance of the Sunday, he believed it would tend in a direction exactly contrary to that object which the hon. and gallant Admiral was desirous to attain. He repeated that the result of his communications with the most respectable shipowners had convinced him that the proposal was impracticable.

said, that all he wished was that the seaman should have a day's rest: he had said nothing relative to divine service; but, considering the long time which this Bill had occupied, and the opposition now offered to his proposal, he should be sorry to cause unnecessary delay by an ineffectual persistance in the clause. At the same time, he must add that he was extremely sorry to see so many Members ready to vote against a resolution having such an object as this.

said, he was most auxious to record his vote against the clause. He begged to remind the gallant Admiral that upon a former day he had implored him not to persist in moving an impossible clause.

then, pursuant to notice, moved the adoption of a clause to relieve shipowners from a serious grievance. The Merchant Seamen's Act provided that a seaman deserting his ship on a voyage should be subjected to certain penalties, among which was the forfeiture of wages. But by two other clauses it was provided that if a seaman quitted a merchant ship, and went into one of Her Majesty's ships, then he gained a complete impunity. The master of the merchant ship was compelled to pay the wages up to the day the man left the ship, and the shipowner had no remedy. He (Mr. Anderson) had on a former occasion moved a clause to the effect that the going on board a Queen's ship should not be an exemption. It would be in the recollection of the Committee that he divided it on that Amendment, the result of which division he considered entitled him to say that ho certainly had the sense of the Committee with him, although owing to certain Ministerial arrangements, to which he need not more particularly allude, the physical force of it was rather too strong for him. He hoped, however, now to obtain this small concession of relief to the shipowner. It was then argued that this privilege was necessary for the public service; but now it should be recollected that the shipowners no longer belonged to the protected classes, and therefore their claim was now more just than ever. The right hon. Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that no complaints had been made, and that if any representations of hardships had been sent to the Board of Admiralty they would have been attended to. But he apprehended that the Lords of the Admiralty had no power to give redress under the Act of Parliament, and it was to give them that power that ho proposed this short clause.

said, that the question had been already discussed and decided, and he hoped, therefore, that his hon. Friend would not now press his clause. If there were special circumstances that had caused loss or damage to the owner, he should think the Admiralty would entertain the case. But he really thought it would be unwise for the House of Commons to pronounce opinion in this manner by a clause in a Bill upon a matter of this kind, which, in fact, involved a great question of national policy. It was a question affecting the public service in regard to the manning of the Navy, and should not therefore be decided in an incidental manner.

said, that if the right hon. Gentleman would say that the Admiralty had the power of granting compensation in cases of serious injury, ho had no doubt his hon. Friend would he satisfied, and withdraw the clause. But it had been brought forward in the belief that in cases of damage there were no means of relief.

said, that the proposed clause gave no additional power to the Admiralty. To effect its object it should have specified the funds from which the Admiralty was to take the compensation. At the same time the Admiralty might find the means of compensation in very extraordinary cases if they thought fit.

said, it might he true that the clause did not practically carry out its object; hut, nevertheless, the subject demanded consideration, and he gave notice that he would have a clause drawn up in the form which the right hon. Gentleman had just described, and which he should propose on the third reading.

said, it would be most satisfactory to hear the opinion of a legal Member connected with the Government upon the point.

said, that the grievance in question was much felt by the shipowners. He could understand the necessity in extraordinary cases for a ship-of-war taking a seaman from a merchant ship; but it was fair when the act was done, that the owner should have compensation for loss and injury sustained. It would seem that the Admiralty had power to make compensation, but no funds to pay it from.

said, that this was a subject which should receive more consideration from the Government than they had yet bestowed. The shipowner was now in a very different situation from that in which he had been. By this Bill considerable restriction was imposed upon tin1 shipowner, and the Government refused to give any countervailing advantages, and refused to consider the strange position in which they would be placed under the new regulation. The question was, whether, when the Government took seamen from merchant ships for the public service, they were not bound in common justice to give compensation for loss and injury sustained by that act. He doubted, indeed, if this clause would carry out its avowed object; but still if the principle were recognised by the House of Commons, the Government would be compelled to find the means of carrying it into full and active operation; and he was happy to hear that if this clause was withdrawn, the noble Lord the Member for Colchester would raise the question, and the Government might be assured that the question would be raised again and again until a just settlement was made.

said, that to allege that the Admiralty had the power of compensation, but no funds to pay it from, was a more evasion of the question, and nothing else. A great deal was heard about the necessity of a large navy to protect our commerce; but he confessed that so far as his own experience went, he was not able to discern those great services it rendered, especially to merchant ships. It was made the special duty of merchant ships to supply men to the Queen's ships, under a special necessity. It had been suggested that the Government should take one man and give another; but what would be the result of that? Just that that they would take a good man away, and give a bad one in return.

opposed the clause, and defended the Admiralty from the insinuations thrown out by the hon. Member. He considered that the law which enabled a seaman to resort to a man-of-war, was a great protection and valuable privilege to seamen, for it enabled him to escape from a ship where he might have been ill treated, to one where he would be well treated.

then moved after the word "characters" to insert the words "and when thereto required by any owner or master of a ship." The object of this Amendment was to limit the interference of the shipping masters with the ordinary business of shipowners. By the provisions of this Bill all agreements with seamen were compelled to be entered into before the shipping master. This, in the case of men leaving a vessel, as they often did, at the first place at which the ship touched after leaving her port, would occasion great delay. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade must institute very large establishments to do the work on the Bill, and these arrangements must cause positive obstruction to the shipowner's business. He would now take occasion again to put the question to his right hon. Friend which he had on several occasions already put to him, but to which he had never yet received anything like a satisfactory answer, namely, whether his right hon. Friend was in possession of any information showing that it was an extensive practice of the shipowners of the united kingdom to deceive the seamen in regard to the signing of their articles of agreement at the commencement of a voyage, or to defraud them of their wages at the termination of it? Unless he could show that, he (Mr. Anderson) contended there was no justification whatever for subjecting the shipowners to the surveillance of shipping masters. He felt certain that, although a few isolated cases might possibly be found, no extensive practice of the kind could be shown. As to the shipping masters being a protection against the crimps, nothing could be more fallacious, as he had already endeavoured to show. In this opinion he was supported by the opinion of some of the most extensive shipowners of the kingdom. His right hon. Friend, instead of giving a plain answer to this plain question, was in the habit of quoting the opinions of two, no doubt, highly respectable gentlemen as being favourable to this shipping-master establishment, namely, Mr. Richard Green, of London, and Mr. Allan Gilmour, of Glasgow. Now, although it was, no doubt, but natural that his right hon. Friend, like other men, should occasionally "think his own geese swans," he (Mr. Anderson) could name gentlemen, such as Mr. Money Wigram, Mr. Dunbar, &c, whose opinions would carry as much weight among all who were practically acquainted with shipowning, as that of Messrs. Green and Gilmour, without any disrespect to them; and who would decidedly be opposed to the establishment of shipping masters as being useless for any good purpose, and calculated to prove a serious obstruction and embarrassment to the shipping interest. He strongly deprecated the appointment of a public officer to interfere in every petty detail relating to the shipping and crews, and he certainly should press his Amendment.

seconded the Amendment.

said, the alteration of the hon. Member struck at the most important parts of the Bill, and he hoped the Motion would not be pressed. This system of substituting the regularity and responsibility of a public officer for the present irregular manner of performing the duties, was a decided advantage to the shipowners themselves. To illustrate this, he would state a fact relating to the establishing of shipping offices in Canada. The last arrival from Quebec brought a document in the shape of a memoral of merchants and shipowners there, and in which it was stated that after full experience of the Act for the regulation of the shipping of seamen, they had become convinced of its beneficial operation, and they requested the Legislature not to accede to the request of parties locally interested for the repeal of that Act. They stated that they were merchants of Quebec, and were interested in the preservation of a law which protected the shipping interest. So the hon. Gentleman would see that these petitioners did not consider the shipping offices and public functionaries as a vexatious interference. They further said, that the Act for regulating the shipment of seamen had done great service by putting down the combination of "crimps," preventing desertion, and taking care of the welfare of the seamen, and they petitioned the Legislature not to repeal that law. He therefore hoped the Committee would not sanction the Motion.

contended that the case of Quebec afforded no analogy with that of England. There might be a necessity in Quebec for such regulations, which had no existence over here. All those with whom he had communicated entertained great objections to this minute interference, and thought that it would work a great deal of evil.

complained that his constituents greatly objected to this clause, and considered it an evil.

said, that his hon. Friend had called upon him, accompanied by some of his constituents, and had certainly left him (Mr. Labouchere) under the fullest impression that the constituents of his hon. Friend were favourable to this Bill. They had certainly wished him to make two alterations relative to the coasting trade, and he had been unable to comply with their request; and to this circumstance might probably be attributed a great deal of the opposition manifested by his hon. Friend. But the gentlemen who accompanied his hon. Friend were certainly not unfavourable to these shipping offices; but, on the contrary, had expressed their opinion that the establishment of them would be good policy. The corporation of Newcastle had signed a petition also in favour of the measure.

said, the House would feel the importance of sending this Bill up to the House of Lords as soon as possible. He had ascertained now that the Bill could be reprinted and placed in the hands of hon. Members to-morrow morning, thus giving Friday and Saturday to consider the amendments and alterations. He proposed, therefore, to fix the third reading for Monday next. Mean while, the reprinted Bill could be sent by post into the country; and the alterations, though numerous, he considered were not such as affected the great body of the shipowners.

, on behalf of the same I interest in Scotland, complained that the time was not sufficient to consider the recent alterations.

, pursuant to notice, moved to omit the words "guardians of unions," and to insert "committee of management." All the expenses of the union would be greater as the clause stood.

opposed the Amendment as being against one of the main principles of the Bill, which was, that as far as the districts were concerned, local management should be in the hands of the boards of guardians. If the medical officer were to be placed so completely under the control of the committee of management, many of the present evils would be continued, and the committee would probably look more to the interests of the persons who were appointed than they ought; but if the appointment rested with the boards of guardians, it would be in the hands of a more independent body. He did not think this Committee would either improve the constitution of the medical staff, or the general good working of the Bill, by assenting to the transference of these duties to the committee of management.

objected to giving these powers to a local committee, as by so doing all the old jobbing existing under the present system would be revived.

protested against assuming any practice in the English poor-law being applicable to the existing mode for relief of the poor in Ireland. As chairman of it board of guardians ho denied that there was any machinery in Ireland for the operation of English modes. He believed that the committee of management was the best repository for the trust proposed to be committed to them, for it was only consistent with the whole clause, which was to give substantial and effective powers of administration to the Poor Law Commissioners.

said, he had been requested by Mr. Frank Forster to explain to the House that he meant and believed he had signed the returns required from the Metropolitan Commissioners, "Frank Forster," and that he was sure there must have been some mistake in the reading of his name on the part of Messrs. Hansard. The noble Lord then apologised to the House for having taken up so much time in reference to this mistake.

begged to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General whether it was true that he had refused his sanction to an application to the Court of Chancery for an injunction to stay the holding of the Exhibition of 1851 in Hyde Park. If the report abroad to this effect was true, he should certainly bring the subject under the notice of the House.

, in reply, said it was quite true he had refused his sanction to a proposed application for an injunction; but he would reserve his reasons for the course he had taken until after the hon. and gallant Member had made his statement to the House.

Then I shall call the attention of the House to the subject To-morrow.

Sir, I wish to put a question to the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, of which I have given him notice; and with the permission of the House I will shortly explain what is the nature of the question. When the demand for the indemnity to British subjects at Leghorn was first made, at the suggestion of Sir George Hamilton, our Minister at Florence, the Government of the Grand Duke of Tuscany sent a proposition to the noble Lord to refer the arbitration of that question to one of the great Powers. Some three weeks after that communication was made by Sir George Hamilton, the Tuscan Government received a note through him from the noble Lord, making a proposition for the good offices of Sardinia to settle the question of the indemnities, but making no allusion whatever to the despatch from the Tuscan Government sent some time preceding. Upon the Tuscan Government asking for an explanation of this omission, Sir George Hamilton is reported to have said that the despatch so forwarded had never been received at the Foreign Office, and that it had probably miscarried upon the road. I wish, therefore, to ask the noble Lord whether that despatch has been received at the Foreign Office, and, if so, whether the noble Lord has any objection to lay it upon the table of the House?

Sir, when that despatch was received at the Foreign Office, the state of the case was this. The Sardinian Government, through their Minister here, offered verbally the good offices or the arbitration of the Government of Sardinia for the settlement of the differences with Tuscany. He was requested to make that proposal in writing, which he did; and in reply to it he was informed that Her Majesty's Government could not consent to refer the question to the arbitration of any Power, but that they would willingly accept the good offices of the Government of Sardinia with a view to obtaining what might be proper satisfaction from the Government of Tuscany. A despatch was at the same time sent to Sir George Hamilton to inform him of that answer, and there was also sent to him a copy of the overture. About the same time, Sir George Hamilton had written a despatch, stating, on the part of the Tuscan Government, that they would agree to refer the question to the arbitration of some other Power. [Mr. B. COCHRANE: Of some great Power?] To the arbitration of some other Power, which they would name, if the principle of arbitration were admitted. There was some delay in the reception of that despatch, but the delay was wholly unimportant. In the meanwhile the information was conveyed to the Government of Tuscany that we were willing to accept the good offices of the Government of Sardinia. In reply to that the Tuscan Government stated that they declined the good offices of the Government of Sardinia, and they proposed the arbitration of Russia. The answer to that was, that Her Majesty's Government declined the arbitration of any Power, but that they still adhered to their willingness to accept the good offices of Sardinia. There the matter rested. I should object to produce any one despatch connected with a long correspondence. The despatch to which the hon. Gentleman refers is of no value except as containing the offer which I now state on the part of the Tuscan Government to refer the question to the arbitration of some Power, that Power to be named by the Tuscan Government, if the principle were admitted. At a subsequent period, as I have said, we replied by a communication that we would accept the good offices of Sardinia; but the Tuscan Government proposed again, not only the principle of arbitration, but suggested Russia as the Power to whom the arbitration should be referred.

What I want to know, when the noble Lord refers to that despatch, is, whether the suggestion came from the noble Lord that Sardinia should propose her good offices? I want to know if the proposition was not made by the noble Lord in the first instance that Sardinia should offer her good offices? [Viscount PALMERSTON: No, no!] Then I am wrong on that point? [Viscount PALMER-STON: Quite wrong.] I wish to know whether, when the noble Lord wrote that despatch to Sir George Hamilton, he had received the despatch suggesting, on the part of the Tuscan Government, the arbitration of some great Power.

The two despatches crossed each other. When the offer was made, spontaneously, by the Sardinian Government, and not at our suggestion at all, that she should arbitrate, or interpose her good offices, we had not received the despatch on the part of the Tuscan Government offering arbitration by a Power, nameless at the moment, but to he named afterwards. But if we had received it, we should have given the same answer, namely, that we could not accept the arbitration of any Power, but that we would willingly accept good offices. [Mr. HUME: What is the difference between good offices, and arbitration?] I will explain the difference between arbitration and good offices. When you accept an arbitration, you agree to submit to the award; but when you accept good offices, you accept them as individuals between whom there is a difference accept the good offices of a friend—to endeavour to bring the two parties into friendly agreement upon the subject of the misunderstanding.

I rise. Sir, to put a question to the noble Lord at the head of the Government, and I trust the House will allow me its indulgence whilst I allude to a matter which is personal to myself, and in which my character, as well as that of my hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, is, in some degree, concerned. The House will remember that at the commencement of this Session the noble Lord at the head of the Government accused me of having made a statement in this House injurious to the honour and character of a British officer; that I had supported that statement by documents which were said to be forged; and the noble Lord read a letter addressed to the noble Earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies by Captain Watson, who he stated was an officer of twenty years' standing in Her Majesty's service, and the son of a general officer. The letter which the noble Lord read was as follows:—

"22, Craven-street, London, Feb. 7.

"My Lord—Owing to absence from London, it was only this morning that I saw in tile morning papers of yesterday the very cruel and unjustifiable attacks which are stated to have been made on my character by Mr. Baillie and Mr. Hume—who have coupled my name with acts of atrocity more suitable, as they say, for the 'destruction of mad dogs,' than becoming proceedings which involve the lives of human beings. In attendance as I am, pursuant to a summons from Ceylon, and about to be examined before a Committee of the House of Commons, appointed to inquire into recent events in that island, cannot but feel deeply wounded by this ungenerous attempt to damage I my reputation, and discredit my testimony by anticipation. Nor will your Lordship fail to perceive the prejudice to justice which must ensue; from bringing forward such imputations in places where I have no means to meet and repel them, instead of reserving them for the approaching investigation, when opportunity would be afforded; me for defence; and, in any event, the charge and its refutation would go together for the decision of the public. The evidence on which I have been thus assailed, is a document said to have been produced by Mr. Baillie, described as a I savage proclamation; and purporting to bear the name of 'A. Watson, captain, commanding. It threatens with death and confiscation of property all persons who shall tail to make disclosures I as to the abstraction of the effects of Golahella Rata Mahatmeya; and Mr. Baillie is said to have; declared that all doubts as to its authenticity are effectually set at rest by his possessing 'two of the original proclamations signed by Captain Watson's own hand—proclamations winch have received the full sanction and cordial approbation: of Her Majesty's Government.' Had opportunity been afforded me by Mr. Baillie, before thus pledging his own veracity and impugning my; honour, I should have informed that gentleman,: as I now do your Lordship, that the document in question is utterly spurious; that I never issued or authorised such a, proclamation; and that he has been misled by an unprincipled forgery. The other allusions which have been made to supposed acts of mine, by both Mr. Baillie and Mr. Hume, are alike devoid of all foundation in fact, and so soon as an opportunity shall have been afforded me in the approaching Committee, I shall have no more difficulty in disposing of them than I have in denouncing the fictitious proclamation by which these gentlemen have been so grossly imposed on.—I have &c., ALBERT WATSON, Captain, Ceylon Rifle Regiment. To the Right Hon. Earl Grey,&

Now, let not the noble Lord suppose that I mean to attribute the slightest blame to him for the course he adopted on that occasion. Far from it: I think the noble Lord was perfectly right in taking it, and that he could have adopted no other course titan the one he did—the more so, inasmuch as this letter was written not. without much consideration and advice. It was I written by the advice of the Colonial Secretary at Ceylon, Sir James Emerson Tennent, who, from his official situation in Ceylon, ought to he perfectly aware of the existence of the documents, if they did exist, for he was himself residing within sixteen miles from Captain Watson at the time the proclamations were issued, and were distributed in large numbers all over the country; and he remained in Ceylon a year after they were published. The noble Lord, therefore, was fully justified in reading and in believing the letter which Captain Watson addressed to the Colonial Secretary. The answer which I made to the noble Lord upon that occasion was, that I had received the documents as chairman of the Ceylon Committee, from a gentleman in whose honour, and upon whose character, I could place reliance, that the name of Captain Watson was attached to them, and believed to be genuine. Upon a subsequent occasion, when the matter was brought under the notice of the Ceylon Committee, having in the meantime obtained further information, I stated to the Committee that I was prepared to prove the signatures by witnesses. The Committee, however, decided that it would be impossible to doubt the honour or the word of a British officer; but subsequently, upon the advice of the late lamented Sir Robert Peel, it was determined to solicit this House to pray Her Majesty to issue a Royal Commission to proceed to Ceylon, for the purpose of making further inquiry into the subject, and there to ascertain the truth or the falsehood of the statements which had been made. The commission did go to Ceylon. That commission has now made its report, and the report is in the hands of Her Majesty's Government. That report states that the signatures of Captain Watson have been proved to be genuine by the most conclusive evidence—by the evidence of the parties who wrote the proclamations, and who saw Captain Watson sign them; that a large number of them were distributed by his orders through the district over which ho commanded; that a considerable amount of property was confiscated under the provisions of those proclamations, and delivered over to Captain Watson himself. Now, Sir, under these circumstances, I trust the noble Lord will relieve me from the implied censure contained in the statement which he made upon a former occasion, and that he will frankly admit that not I, but that unfortunately he himself, was made instrumental in stating what was not true in this House. I shall make no further observations, but simply ask the noble Lord whether he will lay the report of the commission upon the table of the House?

Sir, With respect to the former part of the statement of the hon. Gentleman, I have only to say that I made the statement that I did upon the letter which the hon. Gentleman has read; and that I still think it would have been better if the hon. Gentleman had reserved the charge he had to make against Captain Watson until the matter could be examined into, either in the Committee or by some person competent to make the inquiry. I must certainly admit, however, that the hon. Gentleman had grounds which were sufficient, as it would appear from circumstances that have been since brought to light, for bringing that charge against Captain Watson. The present state of the case is this:—The commissioners appointed in Ceylon to examine into this matter have made a report, which they say is only drawn up at the moment; but that they are going into a further consideration of the circumstances, and that they shall send a full report of their opinions, together with the documents and evidence which they have taken, by the next mail which leaves Ceylon for England. It is likewise the case, that Captain Watson having been informed of the report of the commission, and having seen that report, still declares that the assertion that he signed any such proclamation is totally false, and that any such signature of his name must be a forgery. Now, that being the state of the case, the commissioners appointed in Ceylon having stated that they are sufficiently satisfied by the evidence of persons who were employed to write them for him, and by the comparison of the signature with other proclamations which certainly were signed by him, that Captain Watson signed those proclamations; and Captain Watson, on the other hand, entirely denying the truth of that report, and still maintaining that his signature was a forgery, I think it incumbent on the Government not at once to arrive at any conclusion which shall be injurious to the honour of a British officer who has hitherto maintained a high reputation. I shall not, therefore, think it my duty to lay on the table that preliminary report of the commissioners, because I think it is our duty to wait till that full and complete report can be received, which the commissioners say shall be sent by the next mail, and then to take into consideration all the circumstances; and, at all events, in this certainly very strange and inexplicable case, to give to Captain Watson—an officer who, as I said before, has hitherto borne an unblemished reputation—every means of defending himself against a charge which, as it now stands, is not only a charge of inhumanity, but one which affects his veracity and honour. Any man labouring under such charges deserves to have the opportunity of refuting them.

said, that the noble Lord seemed to think that his hon. Friend the Member for Inverness-shire would have done better not to ask for the paper; but it was absolutely necessary that they should have this document to lay before the Committee. Ho believed that hundreds of those proclamations had been circulated, and that, it would be proved that property to a large amount had been plundered, and that innocent persons who had never been tried, but who fled from fear and alarm of martial law, bad been robbed under them. The noble Lord blamed his hon. Friend for having brought those proclamations under the notice of the House; but if he had not done so, the commission would never have been granted. He (Mr. Hume) did not want to say one word more on the subject, until the report should be before them in extenso, further than that from information he had received from persons who had attended the inquiry, he was bound to state that the inquiry had been a public one, conducted by two of the ablest public men; in the East—one of them the senior Judge of Madras, and the other Mr. Rowe. They conducted the inquiry with open doors, and with the greatest courtesy towards all parties. He (Mr. Hume) had it from the witnesses who attended, that the whole matter was gone into with the most minute care, and that the proof was so ample that if Captain Watson himself had been present he would have been satisfied that he had made an erroneous statement. He (Mr. Hume) was sorry that the noble Lord did not think that which had already been; laid before the Committee might be laid on the table, as it might greatly assist in any discussions on the subject. He hoped that the noble Lord would reconsider his determination, and lay the document upon the table according to the usual custom of the House, which ruled that whenever apportion of a document was read by any Member of the House, such document was to be laid in its complete form on the table. This report having been laid before the Committee was a public paper, and should, as he conceived, be placed without delay in the hands of Members.

I do not wish to question the propriety of the course adopted by the noble Lord. At the same time, I feel it a duty to express my opinion that my hon. Friend the Member for Invernessshire is perfectly justified in the course he has taken. The second report of the commissioners will not have been received before Parliament is prorogued. My hon. Friend, therefore, would not have had another opportunity of vindicating himself; and in doing so now, he has only been discharging a duty to himself and to the House.

My hon. Friend the Member for Montrose misunderstands me, in supposing that I imputed any blame to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Inverness-shire for now bringing the subject before the House. What I stated was directed to the course he took at the beginning of the. Session, in having made charges against Captain Watson before the Committee was appointed.

rose to move, as an Amendment—"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that She may he graciously pleased to order such measures to be taken as shall ensure the immediate establishment of regular Steam Racket Communication with the Australian Colonies." Before doing so be adverted to a petition in favour of that object from a number of merchants, landowners, stockholders, and other persons interested in the welfare of Australia. His Lordship commenced by observing, that the names attached to this petition were, he believed, a sufficient apology fur, even at this late period of the Session, submitting the present question to the consideration of the House. Among the names in that distinguished list are to be found those of persons connected with some of the most eminent banking firms of the metropolis, as well as the directors of the various Australian banks, and many other houses of the highest commercial character in this kingdom. The evils complained of in the petition are felt by every person connected with these great colonies; and at no period, and on no occasion, had the inconvenience been more severely felt than during the past year. In the late discussions on a most important question, much doubt and uncertainty was felt, occasioned solely by the absence of definite information on some most vital points. It had been admitted by hon. Members on both sides of the House, that owing to the great length of time occupied in communicating with Australia under the present arrangements, there had been no means of knowing what was the real opinion of the colonists upon the Australian Colonies Bill. The consequence was, that during the whole of the debates on that question, the manner in which the proposed measure would be received in the colonies concerned, was made as much a matter for argument as the details of the Bill itself. The noble Lord at the head of the Government was on more than one occasion obliged to refer to the files of the Sydney newspapers for information as to the opinion of the colonists, the intelligence in them having in point of fact been considerably in advance of that received in the Government despatches; and the noble Lord was reluctantly compelled to refer to journals obtained, at the Jerusalem Coffee-house as the only data he had for assuring the House that the colonists were favourable to his measure. During the last year, intelligence received from Sydney direct was often five or six months' old. Letters to this country were, in consequence, frequently sent by various and uncertain routes—some by sailing vessels to India, and thence by the Overland line of communication, to save the long and tedious sea voyage round Cape Horn. It appeared from some interesting statistics compiled by Mr. Lambert, of the firm of Donaldson and Lambert, that in 1847 the longest voyage between Sydney and London was 159 days, and the shortest 99; the average being 121. In 1848 the longest passage was 159 days, and the shortest 94; the average being 119. Out of 520 ships which had sailed between this country and Sydney during the last ton years, the greatest number took from 121 to 130 days on the passage. On the other hand, were steam communication established between this country and Australia, it might be effected within 70 days at the outside, by any of the routes which had from time to time been brought under the consideration of Government. There were three lines of communication now before the public, namely, the route by the Isthmus of Panama, which was 13,600 miles; the route by the Cape of Good Hope, which was 13,230 miles; and the route by Suez and Singapore, which was 12,699 miles by the eastern passage, or 12,565 miles by the western. Steam communication was already established along a considerable portion of the Panama line as far as Chagres, from thence the mails and passengers would have to proceed across the isthmus to Panama, and then take ship again on the Pacific. The steamer would touch first at the Galapagos Islands about 800 miles from the western coast of America, then at Tahiti, and thence to Sydney; the intervening stages would be very long, and give a dead run of 3,400 miles. Though there was no doubt that hereafter there would be much communication between Polynesia and the west coast of America, an event that will be hastened by the great discoveries in California, yet at present he hardly thought that any great or productive traffic could be expected for steamers traversing regularly the great Pacific. The second competing route was one which had attracted considerable public attention; it was that by the Cape of Good Hope, either passing westwards of or touching at the Cape Verde Islands and Madeira; from the Cape it was proposed to run right across to Cape Leeuwin, and touching at King George's Sound, proceed by Adelaide round to Sydney. In returning, the passage must necessarily be made more to the north, touching at the Mauritius. With regard to the Cape of Good Hope route, it was impossible to look at the map and not see that great advantage would accrue from the adoption of that line. There would be no interruption in the communication between this country and Sydney; there would be no necessity for any transhipment of goods and passengers; the passage could be accomplished lay steam in 70 days; and it would establish a postal communication between this country and the western coast of Africa. It was, besides, a more valuable line for the purpose of emigration than either of the others. Though he did not believe that steam is ever likely to be available for the conveyance of the poorer class of emigrants, yet still there is no doubt that the establishment of regular steam transit would be a great inducement to the better class of emigrants. The Cape route by screw steamers would undoubtedly be within the means of those classes now called cabin and intermediate passengers, and he believed that for these purposes alone a re- gular line of packets would soon be established. Persons could be taken in screw vessels by this line for 90l. or 100l. in the best cabin, and for 30l. or 40l. as intermediate passengers. But it must be recollected that on both the lines to which be had alluded the service may necessarily be confined to screw steamers, as in the present state of machinery the long dead run from Galapagos to Tahiti in one instance, and from the Capo of Good Hope to Cape Leeuwin in the other, may preclude the possibility of paddle vessels being employed. The third line was one which had attracted the greatest share of public attention. It was to continue the present line of the Indian Overland Mail, taking up that line either at Point do Galle or Singapore. It was still a matter of doubt whether the passage from Singapore could with sufficient safety be made through Torres Straits. However, there was no difficulty about performing the distance by the western coast, returning the same way, or by Torres Straits, according to the season of the year. This line would have the advantage of giving the Australian colonies direct communication with India, between which two countries there was already an extensive commerce and increasing intercourse, and would confer great advantages on both the Colonial and Indian interests. He would next call their attention to the various steps which had been taken to secure steam communication between this country and Australia. In 1844 the Legislative Council at Sydney moved a resolution declaring that it was highly desirable that such a communication should be established; they addressed the Governor on the subject, and also sent a petition to the Crown. In 1846 they appointed a Select Committee to inquire into this matter, which examined all the mercantile men most conversant with the subject, and naval officers of great eminence who were engaged in making surveys between Sydney and the Indian Archipelago. Captain Blackwood at this time discovered what he considered a safe channel through Torres Straits, and this discovery was confirmed by the researches of Captain Owen Stanley, by whose recent and untimely death the country has been deprived of the services of a most gallant and efficient officer. Such was the zeal of the Legislative Council in the cause, that they voted a sum of 6,000l. a year to forward it. Much interest was also excited in this country on the subject; petitions have been repeatedly presented to this House, various public meetings were held, deputation after deputation waited upon the different Ministers, all embodying the one simple desire that a regular communication with Australia should be speedily established. His hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire (the Hon. F. Scott) bad particularly distinguished himself by his able advocacy of the great advantages which would arise from the completion of this project. Mr. De Salis and Mr. Logan, both colonists, gentlemen of great respectability and practical knowledge, had also been unremitting in their exertions in the same cause; and be might frankly say that the progress which this question had made during the last two years, in public opinion, was mainly attributable to their energy, ability, and perseverance. The consequence of all this was, that the Government issued notifications for tenders, and several overtures were made by parties who were desirous of undertaking to supply the existing defect in our communications. The India and Australian Steam Navigation Company made an exceedingly low tender for the performance of the service, which was approved by the Government; and by some official manœuvring of a most extraordinary kind, they were allowed six months to complete their arrangements, without security; though when their tender was accepted, they were supposed to have raised but little capital, and had but few shares actually subscribed for: the consequence was, that after keeping every bonâ fide undertaking in abeyance for several months, the whole affair fell to the ground, and the company has lately been entombed in the "Winding-up Court." Of all the offers, however, that had been made, the most eligible was that by the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, who, on condition of having given up to them the right of carrying the mails from Bombay to Suez, now performed by the East India Company, offered to discharge the service of the line from Singapore to Sydney free of further cost. The East India Company, for reasons of which they best knew the weight, would not consent to this arrangement, and consequently it was, for the present at least, defeated. Many other offers, both for the Capo and Panama routes, and also for screw steamers from Singapore, were made, but were not approved of by the Government. Thus the matter rests, and it is deplorable to think that at this moment the colonies seem as little likely to obtain this inestimable boon as ever they were. Such a state of things is the more to be regretted as the expense to this country would be only trifling. Grants to the amount of 10,000l. or 12,000l. might fairly be expected from the colonial legislatures, and the whole sum to be raised towards the expense of the services, including postal revenue, might, at the very least, be placed at 40,000l. a year. He arrived at this conclusion from a statement issued by the Association for promoting Steam Communication with Australia. The advantages flowing from the adoption of this line must be evident to everybody who gave the subject the slightest consideration; politically, socially, and commercially, it would produce the greatest possible benefits. Politically, it would furnish us with a steam navy to which the defence of the eastern seas might be entrusted with confidence in case of war; and that it was high time measures of some sort should be taken for defending our ports in those seas against hostile attacks, must be clear to all those who had read the account of the United States Exploring Expedition by Commodore Wilkes, in which it was stated that the American ships were able to effect their entrance at nightfall into the harbour of Sydney without being perceived by anybody, and that it would be easy for a hostile force thus entering to destroy the shipping at anchor. He would read the following extract from Commodore Wilkes' narrative of the voyage of the United States Exploring Expedition:—

"At sunset on the 29th November, 1839, we made the lighthouse on the headland of Port Jackson. We had a fair wind for entering the harbour, and though the night was dark, and we had no pilot, yet, as it was important to avoid any loss of time, I determined to run in. At 8 p. m. we found ourselves at the entrance of the harbour. Here a light erected on the shoal, called the Sow and Pigs, since the publication of the charts, caused a momentary hesitation, but it was not long before it was determined where it was placed, and with this new aid I determined to run up and anchor off the Cove. In this I succeeded, and the 'Peacock,' directed by signal, followed the 'Vincennes' at half-past 10 p. in. We quietly dropped anchor off the Cove, in the midst of the shipping, without any one having the least idea of our arrival. When the good people of Sydney looked abroad in the morning, they were much astonished to see two men-of-war lying among their own shipping, which had entered the harbour in spite of the difficulties of the channel, without being reported, and unknown to the pilots."

The presence of powerful steamers in the Eastern Seas and the Southern Pacific would give additional stability to our Indian empire; and, incase of need, English subjects in more distant regions would be supplied with a great material for mutual defence. Commercially, it would have the effect of at once establishing confidence among our merchants in their transactions in those seas, and prevent the calamity which too frequently occurred of overstocked markets. It would also enable owners to effect insurances on their ships, and tend most materially to increase the growing commerce between this country and her colonies. And the House would recollect what the nature of this trade is. The inhabitants of Australia and New Zealand now amount to 320,000, and consume British goods to the value of 10l. per head annually. Therefore it is a matter of absolute necessity that such a regular communication as is in the power of Government to accomplish should be immediately established. Socially, it would grant the inhabitants of this immense and important region the inestimable blessing of easy and certain communication with their friends and connexions in the old world. It would form the brightest spot in many a poor emigrant's future to feel that he was certain of regular and continued intercourse by letter with those loved ones whom he had left for ever. It would bring gladness to many a humble hearth in this country, when instead of the present uncertain and weary watching, those still at home would hear regularly of the welfare of the hardy son or brother who is pushing his fortune in the Australian bush. For all these reasons he submitted this Motion to the House. He did it in no spirit of hostility to the Government, least of all was it his wish to express an opinion in favour of any particular line; that, he believed, was a matter that could only be properly decided on by the Executive Government. But he did think that this country and her colonies demanded that this noble scheme should at once be perfected. His Lordship concluded by saying, I do hope that this service will be carried out in no niggardly or interested spirit, but that so gigantic an enterprise will be completed in a manner worthy of itself and of the genius and requirements of this mighty empire.

seconded the Motion.

said, that the object of the noble Lord would probably be answered by his having called the attention of the House to this very important subject, and hearing his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) statement of the circumstances which, up to that period, had prevented the establishment of any such plan as that to which the noble Lord had called the attention of the House, and the importance of which he acknowledged as fully as the noble Lord could desire. The noble Lord had, he thought almost unnecessarily, occupied the attention of the House in proving that which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought was pretty self-evident—namely, the advantage and importance, both to this country and the Australian colonies, of a more rapid and certain communication between them. Now, he could assure the noble Lord that he had been as anxious as any one could be to see such a communication established; and he confessed that it was with feelings of great regret that he had to say at the close of the Session that the measures which he had in contemplation for accomplishing that object had not been carried into effect. The noble Lord had very correctly stated the measures which had been proposed on this subject. It was quite true that in the course of the last autumn tenders were invited for the conveyance of the mails between this country and the Australian colonies. Tenders were sent in from different parties for different routes, between which the Government had to decide; but the adoption of the route which Her Majesty's Government considered to he by far the most advantageous to this country and to the colonies did not depend only upon their opinion. The route which they desired to adopt was one that, whilst it would afford a communication between this country and the colonies, would also attain that other very important end to which the noble Lord had himself alluded; that was to say, it would afford a communication between the territories of the East India Company and the Australian colonies—a matter of the utmost consequence to both of them. It would also tend to foster and develop the trade between the Chinese and those Australian colonies: a result which would he of great importance to the latter. The offer of the Oriental Steam Navigation Company was, in his opinion, of a character so advantageous that he extremely regretted that circumstances should have prevented its acceptance. In order that the House might fully understand the case, he perhaps might as well state what was the communication at this moment between this country and the East. There was one line of steam communication in the hands of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, which, for the sake of distinction, he would call the Calcutta line, which carried mails to Calcutta and also to China once a month. That was carried on under a contract, which would expire in the course of two years. There was another line, which, for the sake of distinction, he would call the Bombay line, running from Southampton to Alexandria, and which was carried thence to Bombay. That portion of it between Southampton and Alexandria was discontinued two years ago, and the letters were now sent overland to Marseilles, then proceeded to Malta, and from Malta to Alexandria in a Government steam vessel. The East India Company conveyed them to Suez, and from thence to Bombay. The cost of that portion of this service between Suez and Bombay alone where it stopped altogether, as appeared from the evidence taken before the Committee who had sat upon the subject, was 100,000l., one half of that sum being paid by the East India Company, and the other 50,000l. by this country. He would now state the plan which he had been anxious to adept. The Bombay line was to be confided to the Oriental and Peninsular Company, who would convoy, as formerly, what was called the "heavy mail" from Southampton to Malta, proced thence to Alexandria, and thence to Bombay and Singapore; at Singapore there would he two lines, one line going to Hong-Kong, the second line cm-bracing the whole of the Australian colonies. They were also to establish a line direct from Calcutta to Singapore, joining the other line from Bombay, so as to establish a second line between this country and China, a direct communication between Calcutta and China, and a direct communication between China and the Australian colonies. They offered to perform the whole of these services for 105,000l., that was to say, for an additional sum of 5,000l. beyond the present cost of the line from Suez to Bombay, He considered this to he a most advantageous offer for the public, and he had been most anxious to adopt it. They proposed to carry the mail from Bombay to Singapore and Hong-Kong, and also go round the Australian colonies. The present arrangement, however, being a joint arrangement between this country and the East India Company, it was not in his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) power to make a new arrangement without their assent. For reasons which no doubt to them seemed conclusive, they had declined being parties to any new arrangement such as that to which he had referred. He saw his hon. Friend the Deputy-Chairman of the East India Company present, and he felt sure that that hon. Gentleman would state the reasons which had induced the East India Company not to become a party to such new arrangement. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was aware that they were very anxious to maintain in a state of complete efficiency the Indian navy, an object the importance of which he fully acknowledged. He had endeavoured in vain to overcome their objections as to the supposed effect which such now arrangement might have on the efficiency of the navy, by stating that, as regarded the conveyance of the mails by vessels in the service of Her Majesty, his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty and his predecessors had wisely substituted contract vessels for vessels in the service of the Crown. He believed that in that manner the service could be far more efficiently and far more economically performed. The East India Company had stated that the maintenance of this service, as performed by their vessels, was necessary for the maintenance of the efficiency of the Indian navy. Now he could not think that it really was so, because it was obvious that if any occasion should arise requiring the service of the Indian navy, it would be impossible to withdraw the vessels employed in the packet service: it would be necessary rather to send additional vessels to protect the packet service during a time of war or hostilities. The East India Company had made some objections with regard to the existing contract upon the Calcutta line. With regard to that he had only to say that upon that point he reserved to himself an unfettered liberty to deal with the Calcutta line as he chose on the expiration of that service. The contract with regard to that line was altogether independent of any other communication. When he considered how beneficially the new arrangement, which would embrace China and the whole of the Australian colonies, would be to the commerce of those places and of the mother country, he could not help expressing his extreme regret that it had not been accepted by the East India Company. He had now explained the situation in which the conduct of the East India Company had placed him with reference to this question. He hoped, however, that before the present contract expired, they might be induced to change their views on this matter, and consent to adopt the course which had been suggested by Her Majesty's Government, and which he believed would be most beneficial to all parties concerned.

entirely concurred with the right hon. Gentleman as to the great advantages of a steam communication between this country and Australia. The right hon. Gentleman, however, had not confined himself to the question before the House, but had taken a course uncalled for, very uncandid, and very unfair. The other night, when asked to produce such communications on this subject as were in his hands, the right hon. Gentleman refused to do so, alleging that they were confidential. But now the right hon. Gentleman made a speech, almost the whole of which consisted of the purport of those communications, coloured in such a manner as to support the views of the right hon. Gentleman on this question. He (Sir J. W. Hogg) would now observe that he would move for the production of those papers, which would enable the House to arrive at something like a correct judgment of the merit of the proposition which had been so much commended by the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman, in alluding to the line which the East India Company had from Suez to Bombay, suppressed a most important fact. When steam navigation between this country and India was first established, the first question that arose was, with whom shall the communication between Suez and Bombay rest? There were political considerations of great importance involved in the consideration of that question. Those political considerations were submitted to the Cabinet of that day, and the Cabinet determined that for important reasons the communication between Suez and Bombay should rest in the hands of, and be performed by, the East India Company. Upon that distinct understanding—that being the condition precedent before the East India Company would entertain the proposition—a steam navigation was established, the East India Company contributing largely to it. Now, he would ask the House whether it was fair, by indirect means, to get rid of that condition precedent, which had induced the East India Company to take the part which they had taken with regard to this matter. When the communication was first established, there were what the right hon. Gentleman called "heavy mails." One of them was abandoned. Why was it abandoned? Was it abandoned for the sake of the public? It was abandoned because it was represented to be a useless expenditure. He was exceedingly happy to find that the intercourse between India and this country had so much increased, that the resumption of that double line was deemed necessary. He was glad too to hear that the Oriental and Peninsular Company was in a flourishing condition; but do not let the right hon. Gentleman suppose that the offer which they had made had been made with a view to the public service. That company consisted of enterprising men, and he hoped that they would continue to receive large rewards for their labour. But he did not think that, notwithstanding their enterprise, the House or the country would submit to the renewal, on the old terms, for a further ten years, of the contract on which they had made such, large profits. He had to complain, in the name of the East India Company, that the right hon. Gentleman had proposed to enter into a new contract with the Oriental and Peninsular Company, without communicating on the subject with the East India Company. The right hon. Gentleman, by way of showing the liberality of the former Company, had said that, for 5,000l. additional, they proposed to carry the mails to Singapore and to the Australian colonies. His (Sir J. W. Hogg's) answer to that was—they might well indeed make such a proposition, seeing how extravagantly the Government proposed to pay them for the other portions of their journey. The East India Company wished to see the most efficacious method of communication between this country and Australia. Whatever that might be, they would he happy to lend it their aid. But they did complain that the right hon. Gentleman had unjustly charged them with obstructing the attainment of such an object. What right had he to assume that this was the only plan which would accomplish the object for which they were all desirous? Where were his tenders, his estimates, and their answers? In the public papers of the day there was an advertisement put forward for a communication with Australia and the Capo. Why should such a communication be effected by two different companies? As he had said before, they were willing to support a fair and rational system when it was brought forward.

said, the hon. Gentleman was incorrect in stating that he did not communicate with the East India Board upon the matter. On the contrary, when he had made up his mind—[Sir J. W. HOGG: Yes, when you had made up your mind.] As to the best route—of which the Government, and not the East India Company, were the best and proper judges—he immediately sent to the late lamented Chairman of the East India Company, and stated the facts of the case to him.

although reluctant to take part in any discussion on a question in which his personal interest might be supposed to be involved, felt compelled by a sense of public duty to contradict some of the mis-statements into which—no doubt from an insufficient knowledge of the matter—the hon. Baronet the Deputy-Chairman of the East India Company had fallen. He begged, in the first instance, distinctly to deny that the adoption of the plan and proposal submitted by the Oriental Steam Company involved the renewal for a further term of ten years of the existing contract with the company for the Calcutta and China mails, as asserted by the hon. Baronet. On the contrary, the adoption of the proposal referred to would leave Her Majesty's Government at perfect liberty to deal with that and the other existing contracts with the company, on their expiration, in such manner as might be considered most beneficial for the public interest. He also could not but feel surprised at the observation of the hon. Baronet as to the supposed enormous profits which the company were making by these contracts. The hon. Baronet was Member of a Select Committee which sat last Session to inquire into that very subject, and he could, therefore, scarcely be ignorant of the facts proved in evidence before that Committee; namely, that the company voluntarily placed their books and accounts in the hands of inspectors appointed by the Government, who reported that the company were deriving no more than a fair commercial profit from their contract mail services. The hon. Baronet also spoke of a monopoly enjoyed by the company, and the inexpediency with reference to the public interest of extending it, by adopting the plan submitted by them in connexion with the establishment of a communication with Australia. [Sir J. W. HOGG: I did not use the word monopoly.] If the hon. Baronet did not use the word, his observations certainly imputed to the company that they possessed and exercised a monopoly. Now he (Mr. Anderson) contended that the only advantage which the company possessed was, that of being able, from the position in which they had placed themselves by their own enterprise, to undertake the public service in the East upon more advantageous terms for the public than other parties could do. And to illustrate this he need do no more than refer to the fact, that by their present plan and proposal they offered to the public no less than 332,000 miles per annum of additional steam communication, forming an extensive means of facilitating and increasing the commercial intercourse of this country and of our Eastern empire and colonies, for the same cost as that of the Bombay and Suez service, of 70,000 miles only, as now performed by the East India Company—that service being a mere postal communication, and forming an obstruction to commercial intercourse—that obstruction being in fact the reason for requiring its relinquishment in order to a full development of the plan alluded to. As to monopoly, what had the Oriental Company done? They had not blocked up the ordinary passage to India. They had only opened up a new and improved route for those who might choose to avail themselves of it. There were, in fact, a greater number of passengers to and from India by sailing vessels viâ the Cape of Good Hope now than previous to the establishment of the Oriental Steam Company; and that company has now to maintain an active competition with those splendid passenger ships—the finest merchant ships in the world, besides a competition in the Mediterranean with the Austrian line of steam packets between Alexandria and Trieste, and the French packets between Alexandria and Marseilles—a competition which compelled the company not long since to make a considerable reduction in their fares. With respect to the condition precedent, to which the hon. Baronet alluded, and by which he seemed to infer that the East India Company had a vested interest, in perpetuity, in the retention of the Bombay and Suez service, he (Mr. Anderson) happened to know something of the origin of that service, and would state that it was, on the recommendation of a Committee of the House of Commons, established at the joint expense of the Imperial and Indian Governments, as a temporary expedient only, until private enterprise might be induced to take it up. If any hon. Gentleman doubted this, he would refer him to the speech of Mr. Charles Grant, on moving for that Committee, and which he thought would effectually dispose of the hon. Baronet's condition precedent. The hon. Baronet had expressed his inability to comprehend what the line between Bombay and Suez had to do with a communication with Australia. Now, it was not very easy to explain this in detail without reference to a map; but he would answer the question by stating that the principal object of the company with which he was connected, in combining other lines of communication with the proposed one to Australia was, to obtain the largest amount of commercial traffic, and thereby to reduce the cost to the public of the postal service. That plan could not be fully developed so long as the East India Company retained the Bombay and Suez line, because that company were prohibited by their charter from carrying on commercial traffic—their ships could not carry merchandise—and therefore formed an obstruction in the proposed plan of commercial intercourse. Whether the realisation of the extensive plan of steam communication submitted by the Oriental Steam Company, or the frustration of that object, in order to continue in the hands of the East India Company the monopoly of the Bombay and Suez service, will be most beneficial to the public interest, was a question which he considered might safely be left to rest on its own merits and the decision of the Government; and hut for the mis-statements of the hon. Baronet, he should not have troubled the House with a single observation on the subject.

said, the main, if not the sole objection, taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the Motion, seemed to be on the ground that it prayed for the "immediate" establishment of regular steam communication with the Australian colonies. As some of the statements made had been disputed, and the papers and correspondence between the Government and the East India Company were not yet before the House, he would avoid making any allusion to the objections which were stated to have been raised on the part of the East India Company. He hoped, however, that some measures would be taken on this important subject; and if the noble Lord would leave out from his Motion the word "immediate," he (Mr. Aglionby) would give it his cordial support. He was most anxious that the House, should express its desire that steam communication should, at the earliest practical moment, be established with the Australian colonies. He understood from the right hon. Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that, after deliberate consideration, the Government thought the, best route for steam communication with Australia was that proposed to be established by contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Company. They had heard what the objections to that scheme were, and he hoped they might be removed at a very early period. Allusion had been made to the establishment of a steam communication with New Zealand, and he understood that the Peninsular and Oriental Company were perfectly ready, as soon as the contract with the Government was completed for a steam communication to Australia, without any further stipulation or payment, to establish, by means of an extra steam vessel, a monthly communication between Australia and New Zealand. He believed such a measure would be attended with the greatest advantage not only to the colonies but to the mother country, and he hoped the plan would speedily be carried out.

said, that a petition had been entrusted to him to present to tie House by the Canterbury Settlement, which had just left this country, and he regretted that the forms of the House did not permit him to present it. He had the greatest pleasure in referring to it, and he believed that the emigrants were filled with a high religious zeal and enthusiasm, as well as with the most elevated feelings of patriotism and attachment to the institutions of this country. He hoped the discussion of that night would have its effect next Session, and that if the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer found that the objections to the measure now proposed wore insuperable he would then turn his attention to some other method of establishing a communication with the Australian colonies, either by the route round the Cape, or across the Isthmus of Panama, for instance, which he believed would ultimately be found to be one more conducive to the interests of the colony of New Zealand than the plan which was now proposed.

hoped he might obtain for a few moments the indulgence of the House, since, during a period of not less than four years, he had, to the utmost of his power, endeavoured to show the importance of establishing a line of steam communication with our Australian possessions. He desired to state, likewise, that he had been honoured by having entrusted to him for presentation two petitions on the subject, which the forms of the House prevented him from presenting on that day; the one was signed by from 1,000 to 12,000 most influential persons in the city of London, including the house of Rothschild and others; another signed by persons interested in the Australian trade, both praying for the establishment of steam communication with Australia. These, he believed, had been given to him from the circumstance of his having, four years since, had the honour of presiding over a committee of gentlemen connected with the city of London, who submitted a memorial to the Government, praying that such a line of communication might be established. From that period to the present time, ardent and anxious representations to the same effect had poured in both from the colonies and commercial men in this country, who were interested in the colonial trade; and so frequently had they been alternately encouraged and disappointed, that they were well nigh wearied with the vacillation and uncertainty they had met with—for "hope deferred maketh the heart sick;" and now, when they were again buoyed up with the hope of an arrangement being completed, they were again doomed to fresh disappointment from a new and unexpected quarter. The right hon. Baronet, in discussing this important question, had made it the occasion for casting the blame of the failure on the East India Company; but he did not think that the Government had thereby justified its own conduct in the transaction. While he would not excuse the East India Company for the course they had taken on the subject, neither did he think the Government had regarded, as they ought to have done, the commercial or even the political interests of this country, in so long delaying the establishment of steam communication with Australia. The Government had at different times issued circulars for tenders for a line of steam packets, and they had induced parties to come forward; but they had thrown overboard those who wore willing and able to carry out the plan, and they had entertained the tenders of persons who could not carry the scheme into effect. It was remarkable that though a line of steam communication existed between this country and almost all foreign Powers, as well as almost all our colonial possessions, nevertheless that great agent of civilisation, steam, had not been extended to Australia, which, though the youngest, was certainly one of the most important of British dependencies; and the petitioners stated that the trade of those colonies imperatively demanded that communication. If the House would bear in mind the vast influence which the wools of Australia had upon the industry of Great Britain, giving employment to more than one-third of all the operatives engaged in the woollen trade, if it would consider the falling-off in the supply of cotton, it would see the necessity of extending the advantages of intercourse by steam with the Australian colonies, and that it was of the greatest importance that a squabble between the Government and the East India Company should not be suffered to prevent the commerce of both countries from enjoying the benefits of rapid communication, especially those that would arise from having early and certain information respecting the prices in the market. His noble Friend, in bringing forward the Motion, had declared distinctly that it was not his object to specify any particular route, but to call the attention of the Government to the necessity of establishing some line of steam communication with Australia. Neither was he (Mr. Scott) the advocate of any particular route, insomuch that one petition which had that day been entrusted to him, signed by many most respectable merchants engaged in the Australian trade, prayed for the establishment of a line of steam by way of the Cape of Good Hope. In respect of emigration, he thought the Cape line had decided advantages as a continuous and unbroken route, and the petitioners state that it is equal in regard of speed; still he agreed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in thinking that the line which the Government suggested, offered the greatest advantages as a postal line of communication; and it had this peculiar advantage, that the line was already carried out throughout the greater part of the distance; and that only about 4,000 miles remained to effect its completion; moreover, all the financial objections arising from expense would have been done away with by the proposal now made, if the East India Company, by surrendering the Suez and Bombay service, would have allowed the Australian line to be carried out without any additional cost to the mother country. The hon. Baronet (Sir J. Hogg) had spoken of the large sums the East India Company were paying for keeping up the steam communication with India, but he had said nothing of the large sums the company were receiving for that service. [Sir J. W. HOGG: The Government received all the postage.] But if he (Mr. Scott) was not mistaken, the Government paid a considerable sum for the conveyance of the mails. That sum, 50,000l. per annum, which is now paid for a steam conveyance of 70,000 miles, would, in the event of the proposed arrangement with the Peninsular and Oriental Company being carried out, have been sufficient to have given this country the benefit of a steam communication of 360,000 instead of only 70,000 miles. He could not help thinking that the position the East India Company had assumed on this question was such as would lead the country and this House to inquire somewhat carefully into the propriety of renewing their charter on the same terms. The hon. Baronet had spoken of the importance of maintaining the Company's navy; but is this country to pay 50,000l. a year towards keeping up the Company's navy, and to pay for its own navy into the bargain? It would behove the House in entering into the Navy Estimates to see whether they could not cut down those estimates by the amount of part of the cost of the fleet which is now maintained in the Indian and Chinese Seas. If they were to pay 50.000l. to the East India Company for that purpose, they ought to be relieved of a corresponding sum in the Navy Estimates. When they considered the political and commercial interests involved—when they perceived the strides taken by the United States in occupying seas with regular and rapid lines of steam navigation to our prejudice—when they took all these things into account, he thought the country had a right to claim that the Government should allow no further delay to be interposed in a matter of such vital importance to the commerce and to the interests of this country and its dependencies, as the establishment of a regular and rapid line of steam communication with the Australian colonies.

would not detain the House more than a few minutes; but having presented a petition from his own constituency, signed by nearly every merchant in Glasgow, having for its object speedy communication with the Australian colonies, he felt it to be his duty to say one or two words. The Australian colonies now had a population of 300,000, and produce one of the staple articles of our manufactures in great plenty. It was therefore of the greatest importance that communication with those colonies should be as cheap, as speedy, and as frequent as possible. The contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam-ship Company must be considered at a period when the House would have also to consider the charter of the East India Company. He must say that the conduct of that (the East India) Company was not wise or proper, either in an economical or political point of view. He must express his conviction that that Company had acted unwisely in rejecting the proposition of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He thought that, if the East India Company would reconsider the subject, they would find it to be for their benefit, and for the commercial advantage of this country, that a speedy and effective communication with the Australian colonies should be established, as its necessity was becoming every day more obvious and important. It was a matter of much regret that the bi-monthly communication with India had been stopped, and no doubt could exist but that the present mode of transit between Suez and Bombay was most unsatisfactory, for the ships carrying the mails could carry only a few passengers and little merchandise; indeed, there was hardly room for the passengers' baggage. He believed the wisest course would be to leave this matter altogether in the hands of the Government. believing that their determination was as speedily as possible to take measures for carrying the desired communication into effect.

, having had the honour of presiding over a Committee of the House in which these matters were discussed last Session, thought it right to make a few observations. It was not his intention to enter into the question as to whether or not the East India Company ought to maintain in their own hands any part of this communication. The principal object he had in view in rising was, to express his opinion that the statement of the right hon. Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not satisfactory as to the economical part of the arrangement; for his explanation implied that, without looking at the abstract merits of the question of cheap or dear communication, he had confined himself to the relative, and only considered that it was cheaper than before. The agreement for the carriage of the mails from Suez to Bombay could only be defended on this principle: it was cheaper than before; and that was all that could he said in its favour. The right hon. Gentleman said, "We have paid so much, and we get much more extensive services for 5.000l. a year more." He (Mr. Henley) must say that he thought the present cost of the carriage of the mails between Suez and Bombay was extravagant, it was something about 24s. or 25s. per mile. The Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to run away with the idea, that, because the contract was to be performed with an inferior rate of mileage than before, he had done a great service; but the real question was, not how much had been paid before, but what was the sum which it was fair and just to pay now.

had always thought that steam navigation would prove most useful to the colonies, and remained of the same opinion. He thought that, if this discussion had come on before the proceedings of the results of which they had now to complain, it would have been much better for the public. He had risen for the purpose of suggesting that they ought now to close the discussion, and have the correspondence laid before the House. It was impossible to discuss the charges made against a great public body like the East India Company, without knowing the grounds upon which those charges were made—in short, without having the whole correspondence before them. He was very anxious to see this communication effectively carried out, and must say, in justice to the Peninsular and Oriental Company, as far as he could learn, that they had performed their part ably and efficiently. He much regretted that the Government had felt it to be their duty to leave off the bi-monthly mail, and thought it ridiculous that there should be a weekly mail to America, whilst there was only a monthly one to India. He hoped the correspondence to be laid before the House would show the colonists that the Government was sincerely desirous of promoting speedy and easy communication between them and the mother country. He believed that the contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, in opening a communication with the Black Sea, had increased the trade between England and those countries to an extent which had never been dreamt of. He was inclined to think the route between Ceylon and Australia the preferable one, but had not sufficiently studied the question, and was not conversant enough with the other routes to be able to give a decided opinion. The House had a right to know the facts upon which the Government had come to the conclusion to which they had arrived, and he trusted the correspondence would be produced before the termination of the present Session.

said, that after the able statements of the noble Lord, and his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it would be unnecessary for him to trouble the House for more than a few minutes. He rejoiced that this discussion had taken place; for there had been rumours afloat, which he could hardly believe, to the effect that the East India Company had been throwing difficulties in the way of the advantageous arrangement sought by Government; and the speech of the hon. Baronet (the Deputy-Chairman of the East India Company) more than confirmed these rumours, and put the matter in its true light. Nor did the tone and temper of the hon. Baronet (Sir J. W. Hogg) at all tend to mitigate what would be the indignant feelings of the public, and of those interested in Australia, as respected the Company he represented. His only argument against the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if one, seemed to be rested mainly on his offended dignity, and was utterly unworthy of a man of his high character and talents as a statesman; especially when occupying the proud position of Vice-Chairman of the East India Company. This attack, more- over, on the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was uncalled for and most unjust. He could state, from his own knowledge, that the right hon. Gentleman had no wish to have this question brought forward in the House, and had urged him (Mr. Divett) on several recent occasions not to moot it, under the belief, he supposed, that the East India Company would become more reasonable and accommodating than they had ultimately proved themselves to be. The statement made by him to-night was forced from him, not volunteered, as the hon. Baronet seemed to assume. He (Mr. Divett) had no other than the most friendly feeling towards the hon. Baronet and the East India Company; but be was hound to tell them now, that they had placed themselves in a false and invidious position as respected the question, and one which would be considered by many as of a hostile character. He could say, from his own experience in the long period during which he had been impressed with the necessity of more speedy intercourse with the Australian colonies, as an essential step in the safe development of their vast resources, that it was impossible for a man to feel more strongly than the Chancellor of the Exchequer the importance of steam communication with Australia, or to be more anxious to use all the powers of his official position towards carrying it out as soon as possible. He thought, moreover, that the hon. Gentleman (the Member for Oxfordshire) was quite in error in assuming that the proposed arrangement would not prove an economical one. He (Mr. Divett) thought it very much so; this had been demonstrated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and surely it required no elaborate calculation to show, that procuring a steam communication in the East, to the extent of 350,000 miles, on the same terms as those on which about 70,000 were now performed, could not be otherwise than both an economical plan, and an enormous public benefit—to the effecting which, the East India Company was now the solo stumbling-block. He was glad that a new light had come over the hon. Baronet as to the publication of the correspondence with the Government, as on a former occasion he (Mr. Divett) understood him to dissent to its production; and he now hoped that there would be no further delay in its appearance, that a fair judgment might be formed of the conduct of those who had been parties to it. He thought the Australian public would feel deeply indebted to his noble Friend (Lord Naas) for originating this Motion; what was wished bad been effected; and he (Mr. Divett) hoped the noble Lord would not divide the House.

rose to explain. The hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had represented this as a question of offended dignity on his part. Now, so far from this being the case, he had not the honour of filling the post of Chairman or Deputy Chairman of the East India Company at the time this correspondence took place. The horn Gentleman had made an application to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but none to him, on the subject of the production of this correspondence. No application had been made to him (Sir J. W. Hogg) on the subject.

wished to state most distinctly, in answer to the hon. Baronet's observation, that having first given in notice of the question, he asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he had any objection to produce the correspondence. The right hon. Gentleman stated in answer, that it was of a confidential character, and that he therefore could not do so without the assent of the East India Company; upon which he (Mr. Divett) asked the hon. Member for Honiton for his assent, which his silence induced him (Mr. Divett) to believe he positively refused.

would wish that this communication had been established. They were all well aware that Indian vessels were more vessels of war than of commerce; and, although their officers were gentlemen of great courtesy and nautical skill, still they were not the men to be entrusted with cargoes. They had it in evidence that within seven years after they had extended steam navigation to the Mediterranean, the trade between the Levant and the Black Sea doubled; and if the present project were carried into effect, he doubted not their traffic would treble.

begged to say, it was not his intention to press the Motion to a division, and he would therefore withdraw it.

said, he had given notice of the following Motion, which, with the permission of the House, he should now read:—

"That, in the opinion of tins House, the present regulations for restricting the admission of the public to St. Paul's Cathedral are injurious to the cultivation of those feelings of veneration for religion and of respect for departed greatness which a free access to that sacred edifice and its monuments is calculated to inspire. That the recommendation by the Select Committee on National Monuments, of 'free admission daily, especially on Sundays, reconciling such admission with the due and undisturbed performance of religious services,' having been carried out for some years in Westminster Abbey, and in many of our county cathedrals, the good conduct of the people in those cases, and wherever confidence has been reposed in them, has completely refuted all previous objections, and shown that free admission may safely be granted. That an humble Address he therefore presented to Her Majesty, praying that Her Majesty will be graciously pleased to adopt such measures as may afford to the public free and gratuitous admission to St. Paul's and its monuments."

He did not desire on that occasion to do more than call the attention of the House to what he conceived to be a very interesting subject, namely, the admission of the public to St. Paul's Cathedral. Hon. Members might remember that, on the occasion of Her Majesty's accession to the Throne, an address was presented, signed by 600 artists and men of science, which emanated from a public meeting held at the Freemasons' Tavern. That address or petition was taken notice of by the present First Lord of the Treasury, who was then Secretary of State for the Homo Department, and that noble Lord addressed communications to the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's, to the Bean and Chapter of Westminster, and to the Constable of the Tower, the Duke of Wellington, recommending that facilities should be given to the public for visiting those places; and he was happy to say that the result had been productive of the greatest possible improvement in the population of this metropolis. As a proof of that statement, he might mention that Colonel Rowan, the late head of the police department, declared, in his evidence, that great crowds, consisting of the inhabitants of London, were much more manageable now than they had been formerly. In the southern parts of London and its vicinity fairs were usually held, at which quarrels and riots had been exceedingly frequent; but during the two years preceding the period at which he gave his evidence those scenes of violence and dis- order had nearly ceased. It was the opinion of all who turned their attention to the subject, that a free admission to those places where a liberal curiosity might he gratified, gave the people a habit of assembling decorously, and trained the mass of the community to quiet and orderly habits; so that two constables could now keep a greater crowd in order than twenty could have done formerly. He had observed with much pleasure the deportment of the crowds who visited Hampton-court; and he repeated that such opportunities of enjoyment did much towards humanising and improving them. If they trusted the English people, there would be no cause of complaint; and he was happy to say that the beneficial effect of a reasonable confidence was already felt, not only in London, but throughout the country. Westminster Abbey had been opened by order of the present dean, with the exception of a small fee for admission to the chapels, to which there was no objection; thus presenting a very favourable contrast to the course of conduct pursued by the authorities at St. Paul's. Those who went to attend divine service there were driven out the moment service was over, and all who entered at other times were obliged to pay 2d. and 1s. for viewing the monuments. The building in a great degree was raised at the public expense, and many of the great monuments were paid for by the public. Nelson and others, to whom monuments had been erected, were still objects of popular admiration, and nothing but a narrow spirit excluded the public from them. He hoped, then, that the noble Lord would refer to his letter on the subject, and that the right hon. Gentleman the present Secretary at War, then Under Secretary of State, would also remember that letter. The reasons assigned by Mr. Sydney Smith against opening the cathedral appeared to him by no means sufficient, and had not had the effect of convincing any one. Again, he would say that the best consequences had arisen from the practice of opening the cathedrals; the people entered those vast and magnificent buildings with feelings of reverence and awe. He wished for the present merely to put his resolutions on the table, and if facilities of admission were not granted before next Session he should certainly feel it his duty to take some step; though he probably never in that House would undertake another Committee; yet, if something effectual were not done in this matter, he pos- sibly might he induced to adopt such a course; for he estimated most highly the value of those facilities. As regarded the views which others took of them, Lord Stanley, as one of the trustees of the British Museum, was opposed to letting in the public lest mischief might ensue; but millions had now enjoyed that privilege, and Lord Stanley had the candour to acknowledge that they had not abused it. The noble Lord admitted that on May-day as many as 32,000 persons visited the Museum without any ill consequences—nothing had been touched. He had only to add the expression of his deliberate persuasion that the people would be grateful for any attempt made to improve them, and it was gratifying to observe that the example set in England had been advantageously followed in Edinburgh. He should content himself with these few observations, hoping that the House would not consider he had detained them too long.

agreed in the general opinion expressed by the hon. Member for Montrose, that it was desirable a free admission should be granted to the public to view all objects of national interest. The Dean of St. Paul's, in transmitting to him the return lately moved for by the hon. Member for Montrose, as to the money taken for admission to St. Paul's Cathedral during the last five years, had written him a letter stating that the account was furnished by the vergers, who had been for a long period the sole irresponsible receivers of these payments, of which no account was rendered to the Dean and Chapter, and which do not pass their audits. The dean added, that he had been endeavouring to put this subject on a more satisfactory footing; but the control now exercised over the chapter revenues by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had created a difficulty in providing payment for the vergers in lieu of the tax levied on the public. In consequence of this letter be (Sir G. Grey) inquired how the matter stood with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and he found that the subject had been several times under their consideration; but they had come to the conclusion that they were not authorised by law to sanction the arrangement proposed by the dean. He (Sir G. Grey) thought some alteration of the law might, therefore, be necessary; but he would communicate further with the Dean and with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, in the hope that some arrange- ment might be made by which the object could be obtained.

said, that in 1848 the vote was 14,795l., and in 1849 it was 12,093l., whilst at present it was only 8,500l. He believed the original proposition was to reduce the vote at the rate of 20 per cent, but the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in compassion, only reduced it by 10 per cent. He thought the reduction an open violation, if not of the letter, at least of the spirit of the Act of Union. The House of Industry existed at the time of the Union, and there was an implied understanding that all grants made and allowed by the Irish Parliament should not be disturbed by the English. Therefore he did not think this reduction just. He found on the other side of the paper that the House contemplated voting 800l. to French refugees, which vote was originally passed in 1792, and consequently not one of whom was at present living. The other night the Government forced a vote of 1,675l. on the Dissenting clergy, notwithstanding the opposition of the Dissenting Members, who repudiated it. If he were in order, he would move that the vote be increased to 14,500—l.

said, that at present he could not assent to any alteration of the vote. All that description of votes were being gradually reduced.

objected to the vote, as the institution was of a purely sectarian character. He was opposed to Catholic sectarianism, as well as Protestant; therefore he thought the 700l. should be handed over to the Dublin House of Industry; hut if not, he begged to move it be disallowed altogether.

said, the vote had been granted for many years, and therefore it would not be just at present to disallow it altogether.

thought it better to reduce votes gradually than to abolish them altogether.

did not oppose this grant from any unkind feeling towards his Protestant fellow-citizens, but he did protest that an institution should be sustained in Dublin of an exclusively Protestant character, which appropriated its funds to proselytising purposes. The exclusively Protestant character of the charity was proved by the fact that it professed "to instruct 168 girls in the principles of the Established religion."

thought that charitable institutions, supported by the public, ought not to be purchasers of stock, and yet he found that this institution had purchased Three-and-a-Quarter per Cent stock for 400l.

expressed his regret that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had felt it his duty to reduce this grant. The report of the institution stated that appeals in its behalf had been made to the nobility, and that only thirteen replies had been returned, and 15l. received. It was, therefore, feared that the hospital would have to be closed. He protested against what he considered a violation of the implied understanding of the Act of Union embraced in this reduction; and he hoped, that between the present time and twelve menths hence, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take a more merciful consideration of this grant than he had done to-night.

would remind the hon. Gentleman that the Act of Union only stipulated that these grants should continue for twenty years. Therefore, in 1820, these grants ought to have ceased. He had always protested against the grant of 3,000l. to the Refuge for the Destitute in this country, believing that the less public money was given to such institutions the less misery prevailed.

complained that the hon. Member for Montrose was not quite so economical with regard to his votes when Scotland was concerned, for he had voted or promised to vote 25,000l. of the public money to erect a gallery of arts in Edinburgh. He had compassion, therefore, for inanimate pictures of humanity, while he withdrew all compassion from the 2,000 poor who had last year been confined within the walls of the Dublin Lying-in-Hospital. He was invariably on the side of economy when an Irish vote was proposed.

thought the present an unfortunate time for reducing the grant, and said that, according to letters which were extant, Ireland was, if the Union Act passed, to have a right to all the resources of England, not as a matter of favour, but as one of duty.

wished to call the attention of the House to the case of the Rev. Mr. Dill, Presbyterian minister at Clonmel. The case was one in which a great injustice had been done to a poor clergyman, arising from the withdrawal of the Regium Donum through the acts of a clerk in the castle at Dublin. The practice had been that on a certificate being produced to the Government, the grant was issued. The vote was taken annually, and the grant was paid quarterly. In the first quarter of the year 1847 the usual allowance under the grant was paid to Mr. Dill. In October, 1847, the grant was stopped without any reason being given. Mr. Dill thereupon applied to the Government in Dublin, who stated that an order had been made by the House of Commons which required certain returns from the different Presbyterian congregations in Ireland, and among the rest from Mr. Dill; that this return was not made; and that this was the cause why the payment was withheld. Sir T. N. Redington, upon further representation and inquiry, withdrew this statement as to an order having been made by the House of Commons for returns, and he (Mr. Scully) discovered that no such order had ever been made. It appeared that Mr. Matthews, a clerk, who had absconded from Dublin Castle, and who had two or three names, his real name being, he believed, Duncan Chisholm, had made the statement that Mr. Dill had neglected to make a return to an order of the House. In 1848, the hon. Member for Athlone brought forward the case very ably in that House, when the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland stated that the question was then before the Presbyterian General Assembly of Ireland, and when their decision was come to the Government would announce the course they intended to pursue. They came to, certain resolutions declaring their sympathy with Mr. Dill and the congregation of Clonmel, and expressing their earnest hope that as Mr. Dill had refused to give no information which it was incumbent upon him to give, the Regium Donum due to him should be paid. The Government replied, through Sir T. N. Redington, that as soon as an amended certificate was forwarded, the bounty would be issued. But, with respect to making the alteration required in the annual certificate, a member of the Presbyterian congregation in Clonmel had written to the Castle to represent that, were the congregation to comply with this demand, they would be compromising not only their own rights, but those of the whole Presbyterian Church of Ireland. The Presbyterians had discussed this question at general meetings held last year, and a general meeting had been held only a month ago, at which resolutions were passed calling upon the Government to settle the matter, to pay the arrears due to Mr. Dill, and to repudiate the illegal and unwarrantable acts of their clerk. Mr. Dill had complied with all the conditions legally required of Presbyterian ministers before receiving the Regium Donum; but, supposing he had not, the only thing Government was entitled to do was, to withhold his salary for the following year, not to stop payment of the grant, as had been done, in the middle of the year in which his allged refusal to comply with the conditions occurred. The real cause of the withdrawal of the grant was to be traced to personal animosity on the part of Duncan Chisholm, the clerk, called forth in consequence of some inquiries which Mr. Dill had thought it his duty to make into the character of that individual. He hoped the Government would no longer continue to sanction the proceedings of an absconded clerk, and that, on a consideration of all the circumstances, they would consent to pay Mr. Dill all the arrears of which he had been deprived.

said, that whatever had been clone in this case had been done with the sanction and approval of the Government, and that the Commission appointed to inquire into the conduct of Matthews, or Chisholm, the late chief clerk in the Secretary's office, had nothing to do with the question. The acts of that gentleman, as regarded the correspondence with Mr. Dill, had been sanctioned by the Lord Lieutenant, and it was matter of regret that the time of the House should have been taken up with this discussion. In the year 1848 the hon. Member for Athlone brought the subject tinder the consideration of the House; and he (Sir W. Somerville) stated then that when Mr. Dill chose to do what every other Presbyterian clergyman in Ireland had done, all the arrears would he paid him, and that until he complied with the requisition of the Government—and the Government had a right to require such information as they considered necessary, and there was nothing irksome, onerous, or unfair in the requisition of the Government—the money would be withheld from him. He regretted that anything should occur to interrupt the harmony which existed in Ireland between the Presbyterians and the Government. Although the General Assembly might have passed the resolution mentioned by the hon. Gentleman, yet he did not think, as regarded Mr. Dill, that it could be taken as the unanimous opinion of that body, while the provincial synod, of which Mr. Dill was a member, had recommended him to comply with the directions of the Government. There were in Ireland 483 Presbyterian ministers, and 482 of them had complied with the requisitions of the Government. Mr. Dill alone hail not done so, and till he did the Lord Lieutenant had decided that the arrears of his portion of the Regium Donum should not be paid. The money was waiting for him when he complied with the requisition, not of Mr. Matthews, but of the Government.

said, whatever difference of opinion there might be in other respects, it must be gratifying to every one to see the Roman Catholic Member for Tipperary advocating the cause of the ill-used and persecuted Presbyterian minister of Clonmel. He (Mr. Osborne) was acquainted with Mr. Dill, who was an honest and excellent man, and one who did much to promote the bond of union between the Catholics and Protestants of his neighbourhood. The statement of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland was likely to mislead, because he said that Mr. Matthews was not to blame in this matter. Now, it was notorious to every one who knew anything of Dublin Castle, that till the time of his absconding, he was the government of Ireland as far as related to the Regium Donum. The right hon. Gentleman deprecated the mention of Mr. Matthews; but he (Mr. Osborne) deprecated there being no reward offered for the apprehension of this clerk, who was formerly Duncan Chisholm, of Inverness, who absconded from under the imputation of having committed forgery, was afterwards in the 53rd Regiment, and was next found having the charge of 37,000l. a year, the Regium Donum. This Matthews, or Chisholm, brought an action against Mr. Dill, in which he was cast, and he set to persecute him, and being all powerful with the Government, he got the arrears of Mr. Dill's salary stopped. The answer why Mr. Dill refused to sign the document in question had been given in a court of justice the other day. He (Mr. Osborne) could bear his testimony to the good conduct of Mr. Dill, and to the disreputable character of Matthews. Another and more important question was, how long were they to go on granting this sum, and thus creating another Established Church in Ireland? As long as these grants were made, there would never be any reform in the Church of Ireland. He would ask bow the Roman Catholics liked to see the Protestant Episcopal and Presbyterian churches paid by the State, while they were thrown on their own resources, and had to pay for their own Church establishment? This was a far graver question than that of Mr. Dill and the grant to him.

had entered the House determined to oppose the vote of the sum named, and was more impressed with the necessity of such a course from the speech of the hon. Member for Tipperary. He would state his reasons for opposing this vote. He was an advocate of the voluntary system, and he believed that all sects into which our common Christianity was divided should support their own pastors. He thought it contrary to the common principles of justice that any man should be called upon to support the minister with whom he was not in religious communication; and if there were one nation in the world more aggrieved than another in this respect, it was the Irish people. His Roman Catholic brethren in Ireland amounted to 7,000,000 of the population; and although they contributed to the support of their own ministers, they had also to pay for the Protestant Church, which had a revenue of a million sterling a year, while only 750,000 of the population belonged to her communion. He, therefore, objected to saddling the Roman Catholics with a second establishment for the Presbyterians of Ireland; and he called on the Dissenters in England to be true to their own principles by voting with him against this grant. He understood there were 500 of those Presbyterian clergymen in Ireland receiving this sum of 37.000l., and it therefore gave them 74l. a year each. There were 700,000 Presbyterians in Ireland—an educated, industrious, and high-spirited class—who were able and willing to pay their clergy, and if they were allowed to pay them, the expense would not be more than 5d. per head on the entire Presbyterian population of Ireland. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland had called Mr. George Matthews or Mr. Duncan Chisholm, together with many aliases in which he rejoiced—"a gentleman." Why, the Prince of Darkness was a gentleman, and so was Mr. Duncan Chisholm. It was very safe to scold this "gentleman" there, for he was divided from the House and the Treasury bench by the broad Atlantic. He was surprised the right hon. Gentleman had not set apart some of the money he offered as rewards for the capture of this hypocritical man. That person had applied to him for assistance to deprive a certain sect of Presbyterians of their advantages, and had said to him, "I enjoy the confidence of the Lord Lieutenant, and am in the odour of sanctity with the Chief Secretary." He had said to Mr. Matthews, "Why, you are a Presbyterian Pope;" but he had his misgivings on the subject, and was ill-disposed to assist him. He had since found out he was no better than he should be. He believed that, were it not for the corrupt influence of the grant of 37,000l. a year, there would not be a more independent body in Ireland than the Presbyterians; but, as it was, they were little better than a clerical police—little better than a set of political-ecclesiastical scribes, betraying those in communion with them, and betraying the Government which paid them. If they withdrew the grant, the Presbyterians would be no longer spies on the one hand, or dictators on the other.

said, that no petition had been presented in the name of the Presbyterians of Ireland in opposition to this annual grant; he therefore inferred that it was the desire of that body that the grant should not be withdrawn for the present. With this impression, he considered it the duty of the Committee to support the vote.

complained that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland should have treated the case of George Matthews, or, as he was called, Duncan Chisholm, as being of too trifling a nature to engage the attention of the Committee. Mr. Matthews had always conducted the correspondence on the part of the Government with the Presbyterians of Ireland until the case of Mr. Dill occurred. Since then the Secretary and Under Secretary for Ireland had interested themselves in the matter. For several years previous to 1847, Mr. Dill furnished the return which, in that year, was objected to by Duncan Chisholm, and on those returns Mr. Dill had been regularly paid his portion of the Regium Donum up to that year. The first quarter's money for 1847 was also paid, but since that time he had not received anything. Since that year Mr. Dill had continued to furnish information to the Government, in strict compliance with the Parliamentary form. The conduct of that gentleman had been approved by the great Presbyterian Assembly at Belfast; but the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland had said, that he could meet the public expression of that great assembly by a resolution which had been passed by some provincial synod, in which the conduct of Mr. Dill was condemned. He challenged the right hon. Gentleman to produce any such resolution. If it existed he had no doubt it would be found to be the petty movement of some hole-and-corner meeting held by the creatures of Duncan Chisholm.

hoped the House would not give entire weight to what had been stated till they heard his statement. In 1847 an increase was proposed to the Regium Donum, and he wished to know why, and moved for papers. Mr. Matthews was brought up as a witness to make explanations in relation to certain charities; and no one could have done his duty better, or given clearer answers. Of course he (Mr. Hume) knew nothing of Mr. Chizzle-em—or any other name. Constant efforts had been made to increase the grant, and he agreed that as an endowment it was a bribe to a particular party, made them tools of the Government, and it would be a blessing to Ireland if it was removed. From 1690, when the grant was first made, it was paid to all congregations alike till 1803, when it was divided into three classes, to one of which 100l. was paid, to another 75l., and to a third 50l. There were at present 451 Presbyterian congregations, and they were asked to give in the proportion of 80l. a year, to each, while the congregations only paid themselves 40l. a year. After 1803 the clergy wanted more, and to have the sums equalised, so that they should get 100l. a year each, and the Government came to a determination to fix some rule. At present there must he a certificate that 55l. must he paid to the minister, 20l. of it by his own congregation, before the minister should receive the Regium Donum. There were three or four congregations that came under that rule not subscribing the required sum. For wishing to carry out the views of the Government in this respect, Mr. Matthews was attacked. However, it ended in this, that after that period all incomes of 100l. as they fell in should cease, and all incomes of 50l. as they fell in should cease, and that henceforth 75l. should he paid. Now, he put it to the House, whether the Government were not warranted in checking the gradual increase which was going on. Under the old system they might establish a congregation in every village in Ireland. He had divided the House several times against any allowances to Dissenters in this country, as well as to the Episcopalians in Scotland, who received 1,000l. a year. If Government would take his advice, they would abolish these grants altogether. He had a letter before him from Mr. James Morgan, the moderator of the Assembly, to the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, calling upon Government, in consequence of the failure of the potato crop, and many of the parishioners not being able to contribute towards their stipends, to increase their allowance; and he was very much pleased with the right hon. Gentleman's answer, delining to accede to this. Mr. Matthews, in his report, stated that the average annual contribution of each Presbyterian in Ireland, toward the support of their ministers, was 41 farthings, and no more. He did not think that the Dissenters in Ireland had any claim upon Government; and he should, therefore, oppose the vote.

said, he wished to suggest a course which appeared to him more practicable than that of the right hon. Member for Dublin. He agreed in all that had been said as to the improper nature of this grant. It seemed to him that it made the Presbyterian ministers dependent upon Government, and was likely to cause dissensions between them and I their congregations. It was perhaps as objectionable a grant, and made in as objectionable a mode, as could he contrived. What he wanted to see was, that they should be satisfied that the vote should go no further. At present the vote was in a state of unlimited expansion. Wherever twelve persons or more should subscribe 30l., 25l. of which only need come from the congregation, Government were called upon to pay 75l. more. He would not go into the question generally as to the injury done to Ireland, by buying over a largo number of ministers, who ought, if they were true to their principles, to unite with Roman Catholics in ecclesiastical matters. He left that out of the question, but he wanted to propose something more practical than that which was proposed by his; right hon. Friend; for, after a system like this had prevailed for some time, it would be a very harsh and improper thing to stop without notice the payment of 36,000l. But they might put it in process of extinction. If they were to reduce the vote this year by 5,000l., the result would he that the congregations in Ireland, instead of paying 35l. per annum, would have to pay 45l., and the Government grant would be diminished from 75l. to 65l., and it might go on gradually diminishing 5l. or 10l. a year, and he thus extinguished without, he believed, inflicting anything like near the burden on the Presbyterian congregations that was inflicted on every Dissenting congregation besides in the united kingdom, and upon the whole body of Roman Catholics in Ireland. He, therefore, asked the right hon. Gentleman to withdraw his Motion, and he (Mr. Bright) would move that the vote be 32,000l., instead of 37,000l. Whereupon Motion made, and Question Put—

"That a sum, not exceeding 32,698l., be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Expense of Non-Conforming, Seceding, and Protestant Dissenting Ministers in Ireland, to the 3lst day of March, 1851."

said, any recommendation of his hon. Friend the Member for Manchester would have weight with him; but in this instance it was contrary to his conviction, and he therefore could not adopt it. If, however, his hon. Friend would support him in voting against the grant, and his Motion was lost, he would then vote with his hon. Friend on his Amendment.

said, he had always opposed these grants out of the State funds to religious bodies, and in consequence of that opposition he had had communications with the Presbyterians of the north of Ireland, in which they stated that the ground on which they claimed this grant was that they themselves were required to pay for the support of the Established Church. But, notwithstanding his opposition to this grant, he did not believe that it prevented the Presbyterians from identifying themselves with the interests of the people generally, and never were they more identified with them than at that moment. There were many old clergymen who had no other support than this grant, and it would be a great injustice to withdraw it at once from its present recipients. He would suggest, therefore, to the right hon. Gentleman the Lord Mayor of Dublin that he should accede to the recommendation of the hon. Member for Manchester, and, instead of voting for the abolition of the grant at once, should proceed to attain that end by a gradual reduction.

then declared his intention to divide the Committee on the vote.

objected to the item of 217l. for the minister of St. Matthew's Chapel, Ringsend, and moved that the vote be reduced by that sum.

asked if there was any return of the number of estates that had been sold by the Commission, and of the amounts they had realised.

believed that such a return had been recently laid before the other House.

said, as this court was doing the duty of the Court of Chancery, as they were now paying 13,000l. for duties which ought to be done by one of the constituted courts of the country, he wished to know whether there was to be a proportionate reduction in the expense of the Court of Chancery?

said, he believed the operation of the Incumbered Estates Act, instead of diminishing had materially increased the business of the Court of Chancery.

wished to be informed how long this Incumbered Estates Court was likely to last.

Three years, according to the provisions of the Act.

Then, Sir, I beg leave to move that this Vote be disallowed.

said, he was surprised to see this vote, as there was a Committee then sitting which had under their consideration the salaries of the diplomatic corps. He would suggest a postponement of this vote till the Committee had made their report.

said, that in any case there must be a residence for the Minister at Constantinople.

But the house for a man with 6,000l. a year should not be so expensive as that for a man having 12.000l.

said, that it was impossible to hire a house at Constantinople fit for a European to live in; and as it was necessary to build a house, it was a matter of economy that it should be made of materials that would not burn.

asked what the total expenditure would be?

regretted to say, that it would be much more than was at first expected; for whilst the building of it was going on one portion of it caught fire.

said, that the present vote made the total expenditure 30,000l., and he wished to know if any more money was to be asked for?

believed the present vote would complete the building.

said, he did not rise to object to the employment of money for useful purposes. But he regretted that the Government did not take this department, under their own control, instead of leaving it to be managed by a self-elected company, who expended what they pleased, and levied what they pleased. He regretted that the present First Lord of the Admiralty did not follow in the steps of the Earl of Auckland, who appointed a department in connexion with his office to take charge of this important subject. Now, the matter was left with the Treasury, the Colonial Office, and the Trinity Board, and there was no unity in the system. When he and others voted for the alteration of the navigation laws, they were promised that the shipping interest would be relieved from these dues; but no relief had been afforded up to that time. He believed that the colonies would contribute to the expense of erecting lighthouses if the Government gave them any assistance.

said, he was not going to object to the vote. All he wanted was, that they should not leave the building in the hands of Mr. Barry; for nothing could be more disgraceful to a civilised country than the folly which was going on with respect to the New Houses of Parliament. He did not wish to see any more public buildings, unless there was to be a responsible person to guard against any increase of expenditure. He had not seen the plan of the proposed Record Depository, but he had read the report, and it appeared to him to be a very proper report. All that he wanted was, that they should be secured against any abuse in the construction of the building.

said, that the head of the Woods and Forests Department would be responsible for the expenditure of the money.

Could not be in worse hands.

A Record Office was certainly desirable. He hoped they would provide against the possibility of the building being found too small in a short time for the purposes for which it was to be erected. The report did not appear to be satisfactory as to the amount of accommodation to be afforded.

said, that the plan contemplated a structure to be raised in four different periods. No. 1 would provide for all existing records, and the expense of it would be covered by a sum of 45,000l. No. 2 would provide for all records for 100 years. Then Nos. 3 and 4 were to follow, so that they made provision for the future as well as the present.

said, that the salary of the Solicitor of the Treasury was 1,850l.; but he wished to know whether there were any bills in addition. It was an economical practice to pay the solicitors by a fixed sum; but he wanted to guard the public against the system which had prevailed in the office of Woods and Forests, where certain parties had received immense sums as law charges for duties which ought to be performed by the solicitors.

said, that the Solicitor of the Treasury devoted his entire time to his office, and he received nothing but his salary.

said, that in this country nearly 70,000l. which had been placed on the Consolidated Fund had formerly been borne by the county rates in Ireland. He should be told that a moiety of the police rate in Ireland had lately been thrown on the Consolidated Fund, and that the county rates were relieved from it. The late Sir R. Peel had described this as a kind of gift for the repeal of the corn laws. He did not think they were fairly treated in this matter. He must also advert to the crowded state of the Irish gaols. It appeared from the charge of a Judge to the jury, at the late assizes at Mayo, that prisoners who should be supported by the Crown were left in the gaols. The sheriffs had pressed on the Government the re- moval of these prisoners, but they could not obtain any redress. The Judge stated that it was perfectly illegal that these men should be left in the county gaol. On looking over the estimates it would be found that a sum of 700,000l. had been taken off the county rates of England, and placed on the Consolidated Fund. It was impossible that Ireland could bear the weight of taxation now placed upon her.

believed that it would be found, if the average of the last three years for this charge was taken, that a greater amount had been given to Ireland. Before 1846 the moiety of the charge for criminal prosecutions in this country was paid by an annual vote of Parliament. In that year the entire charge was transferred from the county rate to the Exchequer, and this was done with the view of equalising the allowance to the two countries. Also the moiety of the charge for the maintenance of convicts in gaol, and certain allowances for certain county officers. Compensating allowances were made in Ireland, and a very considerable sum was transferred from the county rates to the Consolidated Fund, such as the expense of the constabulary and certain other charges connected with the poor-law.

felt assured, if he had the papers on this subject, he should be able to induce the Committee to come to a very different conclusion from that of his hon. Friend.

stated, that in the county which he represented (Kerry), there were 1,500 prisoners in the gaol, which was constructed for 130. He had himself visited the gaol, and had seen lunatics and convicts placed together without the smallest regard to classification. There could not be a matter of more importance to the country, than that Government should take some measure for removing all the convicts in the county gaols. In his county the grand jury had been seriously alarmed by its being given out that clothing would be sent to the convicts, which seemed to imply that it was the intention of Government to leave them there for a long time.

hoped that the appeal which had been made to Government would be attended to. There was most dreadful and frightful mortality and disease amongst the prisoners in the prisons of Ireland, and it was not for Government to say that they had not the means and power of removing prisoners who were convicted from these gaols. He called upon the Government to relieve the prisoners in gaols from the scenes they were subjected to, by keeping the prisoners sentenced to transportation in the gaols.

could assure the hon. Member for Kerry that the greatest exertions had been made on the part of the Government to remedy the evil; but it should be remembered that there had been a large and sudden increase in the number of convicts in Ireland sentenced to the punishment of transportation. Government had exerted itself in every possible way, and he was happy in being able to state that an arrangement had been made for the maintenance, at the expense of the Government, of 3,500 convicts, now in the county gaols, at Spike Island. A large number of convicts had also been transported to the colonies, and there were also two ships under orders to convey a further number of convicts abroad from Ireland. It was impossible for the Government to provide at a moment's notice for such a considerable increase in the number of convicts.

asked whether any steps had been taken to produce something like a uniformity in the scale of fees for prosecutions at the various assizes?

had stated the other day that it was very desirable that in all the counties and boroughs there should be something like a uniform scale for prosecutions. At present there was the greatest variety, and although attempts would be made to produce something like uniformity, there still would be some variety in consequence of the peculiar circumstances of different counties.

expressed a hope that the right hon. Gentleman, in his attempt to provide a uniform scale, would not incur an increased charge.

objected to the vote, as the country had to pay it, and there was no person to control the expenditure. If they paid the expenses of these prosecutions, there should be some Government officer I who should be responsible for the mode in which the money was laid out.

said, at present the magistrates exercised the same careful control over the expenditure as they for- merly did. He admitted, however, that there was no sufficient check over the expenditure at the assizes. While on that vote he could not help alluding to the strange schemes which had been put forth by the inspectors of prisons. Mr. Hill, one of the inspectors, proposed to erect one enormous prison for the whole county of Lincoln, and a very large tract of land was to be included within its boundary, which was to be cultivated by the convicts, who were for the most part agricultural labourers. He need hardly say the adoption of such a powerful scheme was out of the question, as all efficient control over the prisoners would be at an end. He would ask whether those gentlemen who were engaged as inspectors of prisons were worth the salaries which were paid to them?

wished to refer the Committee to an Amendment in the Criminal Justice Bill, which he had suggested, with regard to taking the pleas of prisoners in cases of larceny and midemeanour, for the first offence, before the magistrates at petty sessions. The effect of his Amendment would be to save the country 40,000l. or 50,000l. per annum.

hoped the Committee would not consent to this reduction, for he believed the greatest advantage had been derived from the appointment of these inspectors. At the same time he would admit that the reports of some of the inspectors had contained matter which had better been excluded from them. Some of the suggestions made by the inspectors of prisons were suggestions that ought to be addressed to the Secretary of State, and were in no degree binding upon the county magistrates unless they were recommended by the Secretary of State. The duty of these inspectors was defined by law; it was their duty to inquire into facts, rather than to report opinions or make recommendations. They might undoubtedly make recommendations to the Secretary of State for the consideration of the Government, but he thought it was out of their province to make direct recommendations to the county magistrates. The subject had been under the consideration of the Committee on Prison Discipline, and he thought it would be desirable to effect gradually some change in the system of inspection, by rendering it more uniform, and by having one chief inspector, and several sub-inspectors, who should report facts to the chief inspector, leaving him to report to the Government what opinions he thought fit. There was too much disposition on the part of inspectors generally to write essays and pamphlets, and it was difficult to check that description of authorship. The Committee must not suppose, however, that that was all the prison inspectors did, for their labours had led to very valuable results.

said, that in a district with which he was connected as a county magistrate the late prison inspector had been perfectly satisfied with the management of the gaol, but a new inspector had been recently appointed who entertained different notions, and he told the magistrates their arrangements were altogether wrong. Now, it was a very unpleasant thing for the magistrates to be told by the inspector, "Your gaol is very ill managed, and I shall think it my duty to report it to the Secretary of State," although the previous inspector had fully approved of the prison management. He hoped the inspectors would pay some attention to the suggestions which had just been made by the right hon. Baronet.

had visited several prisons, and had never seen a set of more jolly, happy, well-fed, well-clothed fellows than the convicts were. They were much better fed, much better clothed, and much more lively, he was sorry to say, than the agricultural labourers of England were at present. There was too great a disposition on the part of the public to sympathise with criminals. When men committed such crimes as the assassination of Mr. Drummond, why, they were under the influence of monomania. He remembered hearing that on one occasion a jury applied to Chief Justice Hale, as a Christian, to extend mercy to a criminal. The Chief Justice replied, "I hope, as a Christian, that I am disposed to exercise mercy, but there is a mercy due to the country. The prisoner is a notorious scoundrel, and I shall hang him." He (Colonel Sibthorp) thought that principle might with great advantage be carried into effect more extensively that it was at present. He wished to ask the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he would be prepared with some additional prisons and places of confinement, if there should be occasion for them, when the Exposition of Industry took place next year? He understood the right hon. Baronet intended to increase the police force, as he was told, by some 2,000 men; and he cautioned the right hon. Gentleman to be prepared for what might occur, and for what he feared would occur, and not to build a glass house in Hyde Park until he had laid the foundations of a prison somewhat larger than any now existing in the metropolis. Crime was on the increase, and if the accursed free-trade system was continued, they must expect it to go on increasing, and next year they would have London and the provinces inundated with a set of fellows who, if they were not lost before they got here, would prove a great curse to the country.

said, that a considerable reduction had been effected in the expenditure for the Pentonville Prison. The subject had been very fully investigated by a Committee, whose report would be laid on the table before the end of the Session.

begged to withdraw his Amendment, as the object he had in view had been answered by the remarks of the right hon. Baronet with regard to the inspection of prisons. The report of Mr. Hill was almost impertinent, and had given general offence not only in his (Sir J. Trollope's) county, but in York, where he had recommended the abandonment of the gaol after a large sum had been laid out on it.

said, that as the Amendments which had been introduced in Committee had not removed the objections which he entertained to the measure, he should feel it his duty to take the sense of the House on the question of its further progress. Since the Bill was last before the House, a report had been presented from the Commission appointed in 1849. for the purpose of inquiring into those charities which were not reported on to the Attorney General under the authority of the Commission issued in 1835, The House would be surprised to learn that there were 23,746 charities under 30l. a year, and not less than 27,000 charities ranging between 30l. and 100l. a year. The report recommended the creation of some permanent authority, which should be charged with the duties of supervising all those charitable trusts; but the Bill proposed to place those which were below 30l. under the jurisdiction of the county courts, and the charities which were between 30l. and 100l., in the hands of the Masters of the Court of Chancery. The report of the Commission, therefore, appointed by Her Majesty, which recommended the creation of an officer or board for the regulation of these trusts, appeared to him to be in direct contradiction to the present Bill. He would take, in the first place, those charities ranging between 30l. and 100l. which the Bill proposed to vest in the Masters of the Court of Chancery, whose power was to be exercised without appeal. The result would be, that as ten new judges were thus created, there would be ten different opinions on the construction of charitable trusts. With regard to the minor charities falling below 30l., the throwing the appointment of the trustees into the hands of the county courts, would make them entirely subservient to political and party purposes. The judge of the county court would want the requisite local knowledge, and the consequence must follow that these gentlemen would be guided by the advice of their clerks, who were generally political agents. He had no hesitation in saying, that in his opinion great evils had already arisen from the perversion of charitable funds to party purposes under the Municipal Corporation Act. It was true that the Bill gave an appeal from the judge, but that appeal was to be upon facts as settled by the very judge from whose decision the appeal was brought. Again, if a trustee of one of the charities happened to be abroad, he might be superseded by the judge, and the trust might be placed in the hands of the treasurer of the county court. Every lease, therefore, or agreement for a lease, of the charitable property would have to be executed by the treasurer of the county court; and he would leave it to the House to decide whether that was a reasonable course, or one which was likely to save expense. The Bill had not been sufficiently considered; and as he was sure that it would involve charities in litigation, confusion, and expense, he should move that it be read a third time that day three months.

said, he should detain the House for only a very short time. First, as to the report, he wished to say that it was not by any means the intention of the Commissioners to delay the Bill; and if hon. Members only looked at the report they would see that it was the evident desire of the Commissioners to forward the Bill as much as possible. They would see also that the Commissioners had suggested a special mode of keeping the accounts of charitable funds, as well as that of creating a special tribunal; and, though there were strong objections on general grounds to the establishment of special tribunals confined to particular objects of jurisdiction, as contradistinguished from the present mode of administering the law in this country, yet experience had shown it to be highly desirable that small matters relating to charitable trusts should he adjudicated on by the judges of the county courts. There were upwards of 23,000 charities under 30l., and many of them only a few shillings. Now, it was essential, above all things, that these matters should be dealt with cheaply; and it could be easily shown that the Bill would not produce the effects which his hon. and learned Friend apprehended. Of the jurisdiction given to the ten Masters, namely, that of dealing with charities from 30l. to 100l., there might, perhaps, be some apprehension that with ten Masters there might he ten different tribunals, with varieties of practice and conflicting decisions; hut he would appeal to any one acquainted with the proceedings in the Masters' offices to say if there were not great uniformity of decisions there, owing to this, amongst other causes—that the Masters were in the habit of consulting, with a view to the maintenance of such uniformity. He felt quite persuaded that if they did not allow the judges of the county courts to deal with small matters, they would defeat the purposes of the Bill. This was not a Bill for any party purposes, hut was a measure to enable overseers of parishes and trustees of petty charities to administer them in a more satisfactory manner. It gave them a judge to whom they could refer in matters of difficulty, and it provided for the most perfect possible publication of the accounts, which would be the best security against any breaches of trust for the future. He entreated the House to have the Bill read a third time.

objected to the Bill on a former occasion, and did so still. There were two Bills before them relating to the object before them, namely, the Bill itself, and the report of the Commissioners appointed, in June, to consider the question. The Bill had been before the House since the 1st of March, and the report of the Commissioners since the 25th of June. It was remarkable that the Commissioners made no remark on the nature of the Bill, but they laid down a system incompatible with the system of the Attorney General, especially so far as it related to the local tribunals. There were 28,000 charities in England, 23,000 of which fell within the jurisdiction of the Bill—a consideration that ought to weigh heavily with the House in forming any decision; and the more so, since it was the poorer charities that were most exposed to local and particular abuse. Where a charity had 1,000l. a year, or thereabouts, the public eye was upon it; but when they yielded only a few pounds a year, no notice was taken of the charity itself, and its abuse was unchecked. By the Bill, they were about to take the administration of these charities out of the hands of a public individual who was always before the world, and who regulated his conduct accordingly, and they were about to vest them in the hands of one who was not before the public, but who, not knowing the people individually among whom he is placed, must almost of necessity act under such impressions as he may receive from the county clerk of the people with whom he may have to deal. The clerk of course would know every one in the parish, and could consequently employ his office to advantage for political or party purposes. The great objection to another part of the question was the effect it would have on the education of the people, for the greater part of these charities were for educational purposes; and considering the feeling that prevailed with regard to the mode of education that should be adopted, he was convinced that the Bill would defeat the ends of justice and liberality, which its promoter did not anticipate.

proposed that in the 20th clause, which provides that in cases of charities for religious purposes the trustees shall be of the same religion as the church or sect for whose benefit the charity is established, the same rule should be made applicable to schools; and he moved that the words "or any school" should be inserted.

consented to the introduction of the words.

then proposed that in the 35th clause the words "or of any schools" should be inserted along with religious or charitable institutions maintained by voluntary contributions as being exempted from the operation of the Act.

opposed the Amendment.