said, he must complain of an item of 374l. in the Vote paid for the passage of General Roses to this country.

said, the item was paid by the Treasury in consequence of a communication from the Foreign Office to the Treasury. General Rosas was brought over in a ship of war, and it was always usual in such cases to pay the expenses out of the Treasury.

thought this was carrying civility to an enemy a little too far. There were several other inconsistent and extravagant items in the estimate: he would suggest that in future the Treasury ought to look more closely after them. He hoped that these miscellaneous estimates would be submitted next year to a Select Committee for revision, and that all fees payable on occasions of honours being conferred, should be done away with.

begged to call the attention of the Committee to the item of 2,000l. paid for the purpose of obtaining accurate statistical information with respect to the progress of agriculture in Ireland. He did not complain of the amount, but was desirous that the machinery for obtaining the information to which he referred might be placed upon a more efficient footing than that upon which it was at present placed.

said, he attached the greatest possible importance to the subject to which the hon. Member had called their attention. Captain Larcom, who was at the head of the statistical department in Ireland, was a most efficient officer, and he felt assured that his most zealous attention, as well as that of the Government, would be directed to the subject.

said, he objected to what he termed the desultory character of the entire Vote. He did not see why so many estimates should be referred to one general head, and why, at all events, with respect to several of the items under the words "civil contingencies," a particular Vote should not be taken.

said, connected with this subject, there was a very destructive disease prevalent among the stock of the agriculturists in this country, and large sums had been expended by private individuals and societies for the purpose of instituting inquiries into the nature of that disease, and of obtaining accurate statistical information with respect to it. He thought it extremely necessary that the Government should take the matter into their own hands, and appoint parties to investigate the subject, who should receive their salaries out of the public funds.

said, that when he had introduced the Bill for the organisation of this force, he had stated, in answer to questions put to him, that the probable expense of raising 10,000 men would be about 100,000l. a year, including the bounties to be paid. As half the present year was now gone, and as he did not anticipate raising above 5,000 men before the end of the present financial year, he therefore new proposed to take a Vote of 50,000l. only for this purpose, which was half the anticipated annual charge of the whole force

said, he hoped that the country, now that it had to pay 100,000l. a year for militia, and another 100,000l. for naval coast volunteers, would be very speedily disgusted with the warlike fever which had lately infected it. For his part, he had no faith in bounties, and he believed that the proper way of raising an efficient naval force was by increasing the mercantile marine.

said, he must complain that ablebodied seamen were now the only class which had no bounties held out to them.

hoped the gallant Officer would go down to Spithead on Thursday, and he would there see as fine a body of British seamen as ever were collected together, all raised without bounties.

said, he wished to know, before this Vote was agreed to, what was the tenor of the Report of the Committee which had been appointed to inquire into this subject. He had been informed by very competent men that the effect of voting so large a sum for the packet service had hitherto been to impede to some extent the progress of the facility of intercommunication between this and other countries. Rival companies had been prevented from starting, and of course competition was at an end. He wished to know if a reduction of the amount proposed to be voted, had not been recommended some time since by the Committee which was appointed to consider the subject.

said, the Report of the Committee to which the hon. Gentleman referred, was already on the table of the House, and had been for some days, having been printed on the 29th of July. Having been a Member of that Committee, he could assure hon. Members that the whole subject of the contract packet service had been thoroughly examined. All the details of the subject had been fully gone into, and would be found in the Report. The Committee had not been able to recommend any immediate or great reduction in the service, because most of the sums paid for it were sums agreed to be paid by the Government under contracts for a series of years; and so long as the contracting parties continued to execute their contracts efficiently, it was not possible for the Government to determine them. At a future period, however, when the present contracts came to a conclusion, there was a prospect that arrangements might be made by which the service could be performed as efficiently and more economically than it was at present. A system was practicable by which the Post-office could promote competition among companies. In the present estimate there was a small reduction on that of last year, and the saving had been effected by removing the Mediterranean service from the Queen's packets to the Peninsular and Oriental. Steam Navigation Company. Owing to the great increase of steam navigation, and the application of the screw to merchant shipping, it was possible that agreements might be entered into with the mercantile marine for carrying the mails, by which the Government would not have to pay the greater portion of the expenses of the packets, but only just sufficient to defray the expenses of the freight, with a margin large enough to insure the speed and despatch which were necessary for postal service. According to an estimate which would be found in the Report of the Committee, the gross amount received by the Post-office upon foreign and colonial postage, was 556,492l. The net receipts, deducting the amount to be paid to foreign, countries and the inland postage, were 143,782l. The annual amount paid for the service which earned this, was 822,390l. The total amount paid for all lines, including colonial, foreign, and the British Islands, was 877,797l., and this was paid to vessels which earned 521,613l., carried to the account of the Post-office. It had been found necessary to pay large sums on the chief lines in order to induce the parties to embark their money in the undertakings required. On the whole, he believed that this service had been performed in a manner generally satisfactory. The North Atlantic Ocean was now traversed with a punctuality and regularity which would allow of a journey over 3,000 miles of stormy ocean to be compared favourably, for security and certainty, with one over ant equal distance of terra firma. The Peninsular and Oriental Company had also fulfilled their contracts with a praiseworthy efficiency and regularity. There were certainly, a few exceptions to be made; for instance, the Australian Steam Navigation Company—a company which had been Brought before that House on several occasions—owing to inexperience in its management, had entirely failed in executing its contract, which was consequently put an end to. Many complaints too had reached the Admiralty with regard to the irregularities of the West India line; and; the Admiralty had felt bound to give the Company fair notice that, unless the ser- vice were performed for the future with the requisite punctuality and despatch, the Government would feel bound to take advantage of that clause in the contract which gave them power to put an end to it.

hoped that no new contract would be entered into without the fullest inquiries being made. He thought the country had great reason to complain that, after paying all these large sums for the packet service, they were not allowed the benefit of an ocean penny postage. He believed the main reason why it was not established, was the obstinacy of the departments interested. He was certain the Government did not properly take into consideration the immense number of emigrants who had left our shores in the course of the last few years, and the great interest which this country had in their being enabled to keep up a correspondence with their relations at home.

said, he believed that a postage of 3d.—1d. for the land postage on this side, 1d. for the ocean postage, and 1d. for the land postage on the other side, would amply cover all the expenses of carrying letters to the Colonies. Sixpence per letter was too much, at least for emigrants. He hoped the Government would direct their attention to the establishment of a regular and speedy communication with the Australian colonies.

said, he had alluded to the transference of the Mediterranean service to the Peninsular and Oriental Company, by which a saving was made. No doubt similar transferences might take place in other directions. With regard to the service from Dover to Calais, and from Dovor to Ostend, the Government would ask for tenders, and if the inquiry was satisfactory, then the Queen's packets would be given up. With respect to the service to Australia, he had to say that at present the experiment as to which was the best route was in progress, mails being sent alternate months by Singapore and by the Cape of Good Hope, and the choice of a route by the Government would depend upon the results.

said, as this was the only occasion when it would be possible to bring this subject before the House, he hoped he should be pardoned if he took up a few moments in adverting to the late settlement of the Kafir war. He thought that House, as guardian of the public purse, was bound to see that the war which had lately been raging in Kafraria was settled on such a footing that there could be no expectation of seeing it renewed within a short time. The present occasion was one of peculiar importance, because the Colony had just received from this country representative institutions with all the rights of British citizens, accompanied, at the same time, with a strong intimation that together with those institutions the colonists would be expected to undertake their own internal defence. If the present opportunity were passed by, this country would never again have the opportunity of calling upon the Colony to place itself on that footing. The whole of that Colony was being put entirely on a new footing, and if this House expressed no interest in this new arrangement, and left all to the Colonial Minister—whatever might be the sequel, whatever wars night break out, however bloody and ruinous to this country and the Colony—it would have no right to complain. He wished to elicit from the Under Secretary for the Colonies what arrangement had been made, and what treaties had been entered into, and whether he could hold out any expectation that the settlement effected would be permanent? Generally speaking, he had supported the colonial policy of the noble Duke now at the head of the Colonial Office, but he strongly condemned the noble Duke's policy with regard to the frontier question. In his opinion, the inhabitants of a distant dependency were themselves the persons who ought to fix the territory which they wished to occupy—they should fix the limits, and then apply to Her Majesty, praying Her to take that territory under Her allegiance. He believed that in the annals of this Colony there had been no more fertile source of war than the varied and capricious views taken by the different Colonial Secretaries of the frontier question. It seemed as if each succeeding Minister had determined on this point to indulge his own views to the utmost, and to immortalise himself by a policy of his own. There was not a Colonial Minister who might not be known by his peculiar frontier policy. He believed it was now proposed to hire Swiss troops to occupy and guard the frontier, as more fitted for mountain warfare than British troops. He saw no objection to the plan; but it certainly ought not to be adopted without being first submitted to Parliament, for this was certainly the first time that it had been proposed to hire foreign troops to defend our frontiers. This, he believed, was certain, that so long as we maintained colonial wars with troops sent out from this country, and paid by the Imperial Treasury, so long should we be involved in hopeless incessant warfare there. That was the case in Canada after the capture of Quebec. Army after army of Imperial troops disappeared in unsuccessful warfare, and the end of the struggle was that this country had to withdraw the Imperial troops, and leave the local militia—the hunters and backwoodsmen—men who led the same sort of life as their enemies, to put an end to the war, which they did very speedily. He had talked with Colonel Eyre—a very competent authority on the subject—and his opinion was, that England had so long taken the conduct of the war upon herself that the colonists themselves would not turn out as they would have done once; they had lost all self-reliance, and when they had other people to fight for them, it was not likely that they would be very ready to leave their wives and families and fight for themselves. On the other hand, we had trained the Kafirs to a greater efficiency in warlike operations. Colonel Eyre was of opinion that it would be necessary for the House of Commons to consent to the maintenance of a force of 10,000 men; but, if we could train back the settlers into military efficiency, into habits of self-reliance, no very long time would elapse, he thought, before they would be able to cope with the Kafirs, which regular troops never could completely be made to do. By sending out troops to the Colony we created a moneyed community there, interested in keeping up a state of war for the sake of the supplies which were sent out from England, out of which fortunes were to be made. That, he believed, was already pretty clearly perceived in the Colony. The noble Duke had done three things—first, he had sent out Sir George Clerk to South Africa, with instructions not to report, but to carry out the abandonment of the Orange River Sovereignty: next, he had consented that a constant force of 4,000 men should be kept up in that country at the expense of Great Britain, with head quarters at Graham's Town; and, lastly, he had effected an arrangement of tribes upon the Kei River frontier, such as no doubt the noble Duke supposed would be the best for the maintenance of peace. Now, with regard to the first point, he very much doubted its legality; he doubted whether Her Majesty, having once proclaimed a territory within Her allegiance, not by treaty or conquest, but by occupation, could renounce that territory, and throw Her subjects there off from their allegiance. Certainly She could not do it, he thought, without the sanction of an Act of Parliament. He believed all the colonists, without exception, condemned this renunciation. When Sir George Cathcart first went out, he called the settlers in the Orange River Sovereignty together, and put it to them whether they were willing to be taken under the jurisdiction of the colony, and whether, if so annexed, they would undertake the defence of their own territory. That they undertook to do, under condition that Great Britain would provide them with a force of 500 men for five years, and they were even willing to bear the expense of this force, as he was informed. If such were the case, he put it to the Committee, whether it would not cost the country more to abandon this territory than to retain it. The noble Duke the Colonial Secretary had allowed that, if the territory were given up, we must compensate those who had settled in the territory since it had been made part of the Colony, and he believed these were 15,000 in number. Besides, by giving up the Orange River territory we should be abandoning the best frontier line which we could possibly have; and, if another war broke out, and of course we should not be able to call on the colonists to sustain it, because, having ourselves arbitrarily fixed a frontier, which was contrary to their wish and their advice, we could not expect them to defend it. If we abandoned the Orange River Sovereignty, Natal, which in that case would be perfectly isolated, and which, as it was, had always been a source of great anxiety and uneasiness during the Kafir war, would be for ever lost to this country. The Orange River territory, too, was the best line of internal communication, and if we lost it we should lose the soil best calculated for that produce which Manchester so much desired to see cultivated on our own soil, and within our own dominions. What, too, was to become of the slave trade, for everyone knew that if there was one point more than another where the slave traffiew as assailable, it was on the east coast of Africa? With regard to the second point, if 4,000 troops were to be maintained in the Colony, they must be paid for by the colonists; and with regard to the arrangement of the tribes, he believed it was the general opinion in the Colony that what had been adopted was of all others least likely to lead to a permanent peace. He was informed that it had been found necessary to locate hostile tribes on the territory of friendly tribes, and that, he thought, was an arrangement which could not fail to bring about a speedy renewal of the war. If the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies could not give the Committee satisfactory information on all these points, he should feel it his duty early next Session to move for a Select Committee to inquire into the subject.

assured the Committee that the measures referred to by the hon. Gentleman had received tin approbation of the colonists themselves who recognised in them a security for the good government of the colony, and for the maintenance of peace. That with regard to the first point to which the hon. Gentleman had alluded—the evacuation of the Orange River territory—the opinion which the noble Duke at the head of the Colonial Office had expressed on the subject was very much strengthened by the fact, that the possibility of this course being taken was foreseen by Lord Grey some time ago, and that the right hon. Gentleman the late Secretary for the Colonies, as he was informed, had himself been prepared to act upon the same view. Her Majesty's Government were of opinion that, where it was practicable, instead of extending, we ought rather to contract, the limits of the Colony. The principal difficulty with which the Government in South Africa had to contend, had arisen from the enormous extent of that territory, from the long line of frontier, and from the impossibility of protecting that line, so that not one single point should be left open without a expense to this country disproportionate to the value of the object to be secured; and moreover, far beyond the ability and disposition of this country to persevere in. He was sure that of all measures which had been adopted at the Cape, the most questionable in respect to their policy had been those which had involved the acquisition of territory. When Sir Harry Smith first went out to the Cape, there were very large additions made to the Colony. Not to speak of what took place in the north, the Orange River territory was annexed without any previous communication with the authorities at home, and with very little acquaintance with the feelings of the inhabitants; and even that little, as it had subsequently turned out, was entirely incorrect. Sir Harry Smith annexed that enormous extent of territory, and during the five years which had elapsed, it had been of no advantage either to this coun- try or to the colonists. On the contrary, it had been a source of constant uneasiness and anxiety both to Sir Harry Smith and to General Cathcart, lest there should be a rupture between the Kafirs and Europeans within the territory; and, if anything of the sort had taken place, it would have proved inconvenient to the prosecution of hostile operations against the enemy, and would have greatly retarded the satisfactory settlement of the war. Her Majesty's Government had contented themselves with expressing a general opinion in favour of an abandonment of that territory, and of the withdrawal of the protection which was reluctantly extended to it at the instigation of Sir Harry Smith. Her Majesty's Government were quite aware that, with regard to the manner and time of carrying out that measure, they must depend upon a conjunction of circumstances, which could only be siezed by persons on the spot; and instead, therefore, of laying down any positive directions in this country, they had appointed Sir George Clerk as a Special Commissioner to Kafraria, and it would be his duty to take all the steps necessary for carrying out the object which Her Majesty's Government had in view. The hon. Gentleman questioned the legality of this renunciation of the Orange River Sovereignty; but he (Mr. Peel) was not prepared to say that there was not the same facility for abandoning as for acquiring territory. The hon. Gentleman's objection would equally apply to the case of the Dutch Boers beyond the Vaal River, who had been made independent. At the same time, it might be necessary to grant protection to such as exercised magisterial authority in the territory for the acts which they had done there during the period of its retention; and, if so, such a Bill, containing the necessary provisions, would be introduced at the earliest opportunity in the next Session. The hon. Gentleman's next objection was, that it would be more expensive to abandon the Colony than to retain it, because so many settlers would have to be compensated. Claims for compensation, he apprehended, could only arise on one of two grounds, either that the titles to property had been rendered less secure, or that the value of the property itself had been diminished; but in evacuating the territory, every care would be taken to make the titles to property as secure as they would have been had we retained it, and, so far as the value of land was concerned, he believed it would be considerably enhanced by the change. He certainly saw no rea son why the loss of Natal should be a consequence of the abandonment of the Orange River Sovereignty; there was no connexion between the two, for they were separate from each other by the natural boundary of a range of mountains. With regard to the advantages of the territory in the way of internal communication, though we had now had possession of it for five years, they had been so little appreciated by the colonists that within the last twelve months an arrangement had been made with a steam navigation company, by which a vessel was despatched to Natal once a month, showing plainly that the sea communication had been found much more convenient. We had originally occupied the Orange River territory with the view, not so much of making it part of the Colony, as of exercising an arbitration between the inhabitants, and of composing their quarrels; but that had been found impossible without marching a military force into it. General Cathcart, whose opinion was entitled to some respect, had come away from the territory fully impressed with the opinion that it was not, and never had been, the wish of the natives to be placed under our rule. With regard to the Dutch farmers, there was every reason to believe that they still cherished the same feelings which led them originally to abandon the Cape Colony. It was the wish, they were informed, of the Dutch farmers to be allowed to organise an administration of their own. He felt that the frequent bloody and costly wars in the Colony had rendered it imperative upon the Government to endeavour to make arrangements by which their recurrence should be obviated, or by which, in the event of their recurrence, the responsibility of them should be transferred from us to the colonists. No one would dispute that, he thought, when it was remembered that in the course of the last six years we had expended 4,000,000l, in Kafir wars. The hon. Gentleman's remarks went to this, that we ought to remove our troops from the colony, and so relieve ourselves of all responsibility; but that would only be repeating the error of 1846 and 1847. Everything had been done to relieve the troops in the way of rendering the local forces as efficient as possible; and, on the whole, there was every reason to believe that precautions had been adopted, and an impression made on the minds of the natives which would greatly diminish the risk of a war breaking out at any future time.

said, that if the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Adderley) renewed the subject at a future opportunity, he should be prepared to show that the military views which he had expressed were utterly incorrect. He fully approved of the abandonment of the Orange River Sovereignty.

said, he by no means shared in the opinion that this was the last Vote which that House would be called on to grant for a Kafir war. He believed that more territory must be ceded, and the Colony contracted into more defensible limits, before they could venture to indulge in the hope of a permanent peace there.

Sir, I have to put a question to the noble Lord the Member for London, upon a subject which is deeply interesting to the people of this country generally, but more especially to the mercantile classes, and which, I believe, also very nearly concerns the dignity and the responsibility of every Member of this House. The question I have to ask of the noble Lord is, whether Her Majesty's Government will, previously to the prorogation of Parliament, submit to the House of Commons a statement of the existing relations between this country, Turkey, and Russia, touching the aggressive attitude assumed by Russia towards the Sublime Porte, and whether they will appropriate a day for the expression of the opinion of this House upon this important subject?

Mr. Speaker, in answer to the hon. Gentleman, I have to state, with respect to his first question, that before the prorogation of Parliament, I will give such information on the subject of the existing relations between Russia and Turkey as I may think consistent with my sense of public duty. In answer to the second question of the hon. Member, I cannot say that I think it would be advisable for the public interest that in the present state of the negotiations between Russia and Turkey, there should be any day devoted to a general discussion of that subject.

Sir, a rumour of the most important character has been circulated in the public prints of to day. I allude to the rumour that the Emperor of Russia has agreed to certain proposals which have been submitted to him by the different Powers of Europe for the adjustment of the differences between Russia and Turkey. I wish to ask whether the noble Lord can state that there is any truth in that rumour, and that we are now nearer to a pacific solution of that question than we were a few days ago?

In answer to the question of my noble Friend, I have to state that there is a foundation for the rumour to which he has alluded, and that we have just received a despatch from Her Majesty's Minister at Vienna, which is of a satisfactory nature. The answer which has been received from the Court of St. Petersburgh is in reply to the first proposal which was agreed to at Vienna. I have further to state that the messenger who was to have gone to Constantinople, and who, as I said on a former occasion, would leave Vienna on the 31st of July, did not actually leave Vienna until the 2nd of August; so that the reply from Constantinople cannot be received as soon as it was at first expected.

Will the noble Lord communicate the promised information at such a time as will enable the House to discuss the question?

I beg to explain that what I said was, that I would give such information as it would be in my power to give consistently with my sense of public duty; and I think that it will be more satisfactory that I should give that information at the latest moment before the prorogation of Parliament.

Am I to understand that there will be a discussion of the question before the prorogation?

As far as the Government are concerned, it is not their opinion that it is desirable, under existing circumstances, there should be a discussion.

moved that on Wednesday next the Government Orders of the Day should have precedence until three o'clock.

said, he thought it would be better that the Government Orders should have precedence throughout the whole of the day, and that the words "until three o'clock" should be omitted from the Motion.

said, that it was impossible to mistake the intention and object of the Motion made by the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), when the House considered the nature of the notice which stood first for Wednesday next, that was, the Recovery of Personal Liberty Bill, second reading, upon which an Amendment had virtually been adopted by the House for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the system and practices of Conventual Establishments. The noble Lord and the Government had been in a minority on that subject on the 22nd of July, and the object of the noble Lord was to render the ratification of the decision of the House in favour of an inquiry into convents impossible; the noble Lord, in fact, brought the weight of the official votes, which were at the command of the Government, to destroy the last remnant of sphere for independent action, which remained to the House. For the House had, at the instance of the Government, yielded first Thursdays to Government business, had then consented to morning sittings, then, on other days of the week, to the exclusion of Members engaged on Committees upstairs, and had at last yielded Tuesdays also, until the only days of the week which remained for the business introduced by independent Members were Wednesdays, the morning sittings on which were limited to terminate at six o'clock. The noble Lord now proposed to take away half the six hours in the week which remained for the discussion and decision of measures introduced by Members not of the Government. The noble Lord's proposal was merely limited to the first three hours, in order to conceal the fact that he intended to abrogate the last remaining opportunity for independent action on the part of the House. He (Mr. Newdegate) therefore preferred the more manly and direct abnegation of the right of independent Members, proposed by the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Bouverie), and upon that as raising the true issue would take the sense of the House. The noble Lord was perfectly aware of the difficulties with which those who desired a solution of this question, by a decision of the House, had to contend. Those who took an interest in a question which stood first on the Orders for Wednesday, were seeking, as the noble Lord was perfectly aware, merely to terminate the discussion on that question by a fair debate, and to enable the House to record its opinion distinctly, as he (Mr. Newdegate) had reason to hope, in favour of an inquiry into conventual establishments. A party which adopted practices at variance with the efficient action of Parliament had told them that they were to be defeated by delay. That was a party organised in such a manner (he meant the party called the Irish Brigade) as constituted them, though in the House, scarcely a part of the House; who aimed at commanding the House by an obstructive minority. They might create delay, but with a fair six hours before them, it must become obvious to the country, after three previous discussions on this subject, that the delay they would practise would be simply an attempt to defeat the legitimate action of Parliament, and such conduct would meet with just reprobation. The House could spare the time to test this issue, for on Friday last there were forty-two Bills before the House of Lords; there were thirty-one on their way to it; and all that was asked was, that during the leisure which the House of Commons had shown it had when it had decided on having a holiday on Thursday, the discussion on a question which had stood long on the Votes should be brought fairly to an end. If the proposal of the noble Lord were adopted, the debate, which by courtesy he (Mr. Newdegate) ought to open, would be again interrupted, as it had been before. Seeing, therefore, that the noble Lord was determined to deprive the House of all independent action, he would divide the House on the issue as raised by the Amendment.

said, there would be less difficulty in acceding to the proposal of the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), if he would afford facilities for the termination of that discussion on some other day. An hon. Member, who, like him, had brought before the House a question of that character, had serious responsibility imposed upon him, and could not consent to the indefinite postponement of the decision of the House with respect to it.

said, he would readily agree to the Amendment of the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Bouverie), especially after the statement of the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate), so that Government orders should take precedence during the whole of Wednesday.

preferred the Amendment, merely because it was more direct than the Motion.

thought it a sufficient reason for taking the Bills brought forward by the Government, and others which might require consideration with a view to their being passed, that this was the month of August. It was the only chance of seeing those Bills carried into law with a satisfactory result. He supported the Motion, that the question relating to Nunneries should come to a fair decision; but the House decided by a majority that the question as to reading that Bill a second time should not be Confirmed. The real question, then, was not as to that Bill, which had been completely set aside, but as to the appointment of a Select Committee; and he put it to the House whether there was any use in going into that question at this time of the year? It might be advisable that the House should come to a decision on a question of importance which had been brought before it, and that they should not allow their time to be wasted by long debates, so that no decision could be arrived at; but if they were to make a struggle for that purpose, he thought again that it ought not to be wade in the month of August. There was no chance of success in that struggle, even if they took the whole of Wednesday; and for that reason he should advise the hon. Gentleman (Mr. T. Chambers) to make the attempt, if he wished to try it, in February, and not in August.

said, he agreed with his hon. Friend and Colleague (Mr. Newdegate) that, if there was to be an alteraation with respect to the order of business on Wednesday, he should prefer having the subject of Nunneries wholly postponed. If hon. Members were animated with the spirit which ought to actuate all of them—namely, a desire not to create delay, but to discuss the subject fairly, they might bring the debate to a conclusion on Wednesday. The noble Lord took credit to himself for having voted in favour of the proposition of the hon. and learned Member for Hertford, and cast blame on the Opposition. The noble Lord's memory, he apprehended, was at fault.

said, he must explain that what he had said was, that he wished a fair decision—not that he voted for the proposition of the hon. and learned Gentleman.

said, he thought the Motion nothing but an attempt on the part of the noble Lord to put an end to a discussion which he dared not meet, but which the country demanded. The noble Lord, in the Charitable Trusts Bill, had ex- empted Homan Catholics from inquiry into their charities; and now he said there should be no inquiry into their nunneries. Those were acts quite in accordance with the spirit which the noble Lord had shown of late—the disposition to aid and abet those whom he ought to control. They were acts which were totally inconsistent with the well-timed and well-written letter called "the Durham Letter." The public ought to know at least who wished to have inquiry, and who wished to stop inquiry. He hoped his hon. Friend would divide the House to show who were sincerely desirous to have inquiry.

said, he very much doubted the sincerity of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. Was it fair on almost the last day of the Session to urge a renewal of the discussion on this Bill? What he (Mr. Hume) should desire in the situation of the hon. Gentleman would be, that a full and fair inquiry should be made. The time for discussion would be when that inquiry was moved for.

said, he also doubted the sincerity of the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner), who spoke of discussing the subject at the very time when country Gentlemen and independent Gentlemen were leaving the House.

said, he could not allow the impression to go forth, that hon. Members at his part of the House shrunk from the discussion of this subject. So far from being unwilling, he was anxious to discus it, and he would tell the House the reason why, personally, he was anxious to discus the question. He was anxious to call the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) to account for certain statements which the hon. Gentleman made on former occasions when he (Mr. Lucas) had not an opportunity of answering. If he did not think it most absurd that the House should spend next Wednesday in a discussion which could end in nothing, he should wish to have a discussion. It would be affectation in him not to understand the allusion to a party of whom the hon. Gentleman spoke as being banded together, and as acting contrary to Parliamentary precedent. He (Mr. Lucas) was sure that the party with which he was connected has not conducted itself in a manner inconsistent with Parliamentary usage or practice. If the hon. Gentleman alleged an intention of talking this question out, the noble Lord had given an answer by reference to a discussion in a previous Session, when an example was set from the Opposition side of the House. Had the hon. Member been in the house when the Edinburgh Annuity Tax Bill was brought forward, he would have seen that it was "talked out." That was done from the Opposition side, with a distinctly avowed intention, known to every Member at the time, of not allowing the House to come to a division on the subject. He (Mr. Lucas) should be the last person to take any unfair advantage of the forms of the House to produce an unfair result. He confidently appealed on that point to any Gentleman who paid any attention to the course he had taken since he had entered the House. To proceed at an early period of the Session, when it was possible not only that a division might be arrived at, but that some result might be drawn from that division, and, if the House were to appoint a Committee, the Committee could enter into and conclude an inquiry, was a very different thing from dealing with a Motion made at this time of the Session, when a decision for the appointment of a Committee would only have, as respected the convents, the result of an adverse decision, without there being any possibility if inquiry, and would therefore only give a false colour to the Motion of such inquiry.

begged to explain that the allusion he had made to a party which had a peculiar organisation, and was confirmed by a speech made in Ireland by the hon. Member for Mayo. [And was proceeding, when cries of "Order!" and "Chair!" were raised from the Ministerial benches, and Mr. Speaker interfered.] The hon. Member begged to intimate that he had proceeded on statements made by the hon. Member for Mayo, and Dr. M'Hale, at a dinner, in Ireland, which speeches he had quoted to the House on a former occasion in the presence of the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. G. H. Moore), a well-known member of the Brigade, who had never impugned the correctness of the report he (Mr. Newdegate) had read to the House; that report of the hon. Member's speech gave the description of the party to which he had alluded, and of that party the hon. Member for Meath (Mr. Lucas) was a member. He begged to refer the hon. Member to that report as his explanation of the allusion which he (Mr. Newdegate) had made when he addressed the House.

said, he held very strong views on this question himself. The practical question, however, was, what was the use of spending Wednesday, the 10th of August, in a discussion that would lead to no practical result?

said, that no Catholic Member would shrink from a discussion when so many monstrous assertions had been made by hon. Members who had been led away by their imaginations.

said: Sir, I take this opportunity of making an inquiry of Her Majesty's Government with respect to a question which I understand has been adverted to in an earlier part of the evening, namely, to the account that has been received of the acceptance by the Emperor of Russia of certain propositions which were presented to him by what I may call the Congress of the Great Powers, which has been sitting at Vienna. I understand that the noble Lord (Lord John Russell) holds out no prospect to the House of the papers being laid upon the table, or of any day being appointed for a discussion upon this important subject. And considering the month, and the date of the month, I am not at all surprised that the noble Lord indulged in these observations. But what I wish to know from Her Majesty's Government is, considering, the peculiar circumstances of this case, whether the noble Lord has any objection to state to the House the nature of those propositions which, we understand, have been accepted by the Emperor Of Russia?

Sir, I cannot at present state the propositions which have been made to the Emperor of Russia. I have already stated, in answer to a question, that before the prorogation of Parliament I will give all the information which it is consistent with duty to afford. What that information may be, of course I will not anticipate; but I will certainly state to the House as much as it will be in my power to state with a view to the public interest.

said, he wished to know whether there was about to be introduced any general plan of secondary punishment, for he had not yet heard of any plan whatever being about to be proposed? He found in the Estimates a charge of nearly 1,500,000l. for law expenses and prosecutions connected with our Courts, and when he considered the state in which criminals in this country had been left since the abolition of transportation, he certainly thought that some general plan of secondary punishments would have been submitted to that House. He did not know whether any inquiry had been instituted into a matter which was so important to the social condition of the country; but he looked with great regret at the alarming increase of crime, and at the utter impossibility, so far as he saw, of diminishing it. He had always been an advocate of transportation as affording the best chance of reformation in these cases, and he very much doubted whether the recent experiments which had been made upon the criminal population had come up to the sanguine expectations of the noble Lord the Member for London and others. He knew that the expense of those experiments was very great, and that very little had yet been done. The only remedy which he could see was to provide a more extended system of education for the great masses of the community.

said, he thought that it would be much better to defer any discussion upon this subject until the second reading of the Transportation Bill, which would come on to-morrow. Whatever plan might be adopted, must depend very much upon the change of circumstances from time to time. The alteration with respect to transportation had been in a great measure owing to the present State of the colonies, and the strong feeling that existed there upon the subject.

said, that perhaps he should best consult the convenience of the Committee at that late period of the Session if he addressed to them a very few observations in proposing this Vote for the Militia. The number of men that was now enrolled, as far as could be judged from the last returns, was about 62,000. The whole amount that had been taken upon this estimate was larger; but as the force was now before them for the first time, it had been necessary to make allowance for all contingencies, and an ample margin had therefore been allowed. He should, perhaps, also call the attention of the Committee to the fact that the whole of this amount was not for raising and training the militia, but that there had to be deducted about 100,000l. for the old staff of militia and non-effectives who were annually dying off. He must take that opportunity of congratulating the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Walpole) upon the success which had attended this measure hitherto. It had certainly fully justified his expectations. The efficiency of the regiments had been borne testimony to by the most competent officers, who had inspected them, and who had expressed their surprise at the degree of efficiency to which they had attained in the short period they had been embodied. What was more important, perhaps, was the universal good conduct which had characterised these men, when it might, perhaps, have been expected that the congregating of such large bodies of men of such an age might have produced some disturbance. In every part of the country, however, the civil authorities had borne testimony to the excellent conduct of the men forming the militia. He wished also to express, on the part of the Government, their thanks for the great interest which had been taken in raisin men by the colonels and other officers of those regiments, and for the attention ant diligence which they had bestowed upon their duties, which had led to such beneficial and satisfactory results.

, as one who had the honour of commanding a regiment of militia, begged to express the gratification with which he had listened to the high terms of commendation in which the right hon. Gentleman had spoken of that body generally. He should suggest, however that a second period of training should be allowed, being convinced that both the men themselves and the majority of the civil population also would be favourable to such a step.

said, he wished to ask whether it was the intention of the Government to fill up the numbers of the militia to 80,000, as fixed by the Act of last Session, because Ministers had said that they did not want to raise any more men than was absolutely necessary. Now, the Committee would doubtless remember, that last year there were very alarming rumours spread abroad in the country, and in that House, with the view of persuading the Legislature to re-establish the militia; and the noble Lord who now filled the office of Home Secretary even went the length of saying that he thought it probable that 60,000 Frenchmen might some night be landed on the shores of Great Britain, and, therefore, it was very necessary that 80,000 militia should be embodied to oppose them. Now, the friends of peace had stedfastly maintained the emptiness of these apprehensions; and he thought that subsequent events had shown that they were not the party who were wrong in their anticipation of the events about to take place. He understood even that a Member of the Government of the noble Lord, who was not now in his place, had fixed precisely the time—it was to be within three months—at which this dreaded event was to come off. Upon statements such as that to which he alluded, great preparations had been made; the militia had been embodied, additional votes of men had been passed, and large expenses incurred, but for which the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have been enabled to make his valuable Budget more valuable still, by the remissions of taxes. As, however, instead of those alarms having proved to be well founded, he understood that Admiral Dundas had received the French officers on board of his ship, and that he himself and the English officers had been entertained at dinner on board of the French ships, and that they had drunk the health of Queen Victoria and of Louis Napoleon, Emperor of the French, with so much cheering that it was difficult to hear the artillery. He wanted to know, under these circumstances—when the two nations were on such friendly terms, and when with respect to another matter in dispute there seemed a probability of no war arising out of it—whether Government considered it necessary to go on increasing the militia force, and to fill it up to the whole complement. Having got over the panic of last year, and discovered that we had made fools of ourselves, we might now venture to let the wave subside, and the country might, perhaps, feel itself sufficiently secure to allow this portion of our force to fall into decay, as it did before; by which the expense of its maintenance would be saved. It was said that the militiamen made very fair soldiers after twenty-one or twenty-eight day's training. [Colonel SIBTHORP: Hear, hear!] He was not going to dispute it, because he was not a judge. [Colonel SIBTHORP: No!] But if men could be made fair soldiers in so short a time, it would not be necessary to take them for years before you required their services. The noble Lord the Member for Tiverton (Viscount Palmerston) had turned out to have been wrong as regarded last year; he might be wrong also as regarded the future, and 60,000 invaders might not come over at all; so that the constant expenditure of 400,000l. or 500,000l. a year might be avoided. Unless they were certain that this expenditure was absolutely required, and this force absolutely necessary, they would fail in their duty to the country if they voted it; and, for his part, he did not hesitate to say that he regarded the whole matter as an imposture, got up in order that the public might be deceived and robbed. The only result was to diminish the power of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to remit taxes; and there was a far greater probability of the evils of war when nations pursued the mad system of maintaining great rival armaments. He would, therefore, suggest that, in the present friendly state of our relations with France, seeing the right hon. President of the Board of Control no longer made speeches to his constituents at Halifax discreditable to himself and injurious to his country, it might be proper to make representations to the French Government before any long period elapsed, for the purpose of seeing whether both nations could not agree to reduce their armaments to some extent. It was not his intention to divide the Committee against this Vote; but he was so convinced of the folly of the course pursued by our statesmen upon this subject, that he took this the first opportunity of the Session of raising his voice against it.

said, he should offer but a few words in answer to the observations of the hon. Member. In the first place, with reference to the remark of the hon. Member that a militiaman could be trained into a good soldier in twenty-one days, he begged to say that he had every disposition to give credit to the militia force; but the Committee must not imagine that at the end of that short period the militia would be in as effective a state as the army. They were trained, no doubt, more rapidly than the army, because men coming to the task in the way they did took a greater pleasure in it, and devoted themselves to it with greater zeal than regular soldiers could be expected to do. The hon. Gentleman had asked him whether he intended to raise the 80,000 men which the Act permitted them to raise? In reply to that question he begged to say, that deducting the non-effective part of the service, he believed that, in all probability, there would be raised about 74,000 or 75,000 men, if the enlistment continued to go on as rapidly as it did at present. He certainly was not prepared to assent to the doctrine of the hon. Gentleman, that because there were indications of familiarities between two nations—that, however much good feeling there might be apparent between them—and he sincerely trusted that in the present case the good feeling might long continue—their armaments should be changed and altered up and down according to these indications. Besides, he begged to remind the hon. Member, that a certain amount of force must be presented to that House by the Government on their own responsibility, as that which they considered necessary for the general security of the country. The House had assented to the propositions of Government on this head, and voted the amount of force proposed. He would only observe that the expense would not be much diminished by disbanding the militia, because they had engaged to make for five years an annual payment of 1l. for bounty, and of course the whole payment must be made. He admitted that the original estimate of the expense of the force might have been exceeded in some degree in consequence of the period of training having been extended from twenty-one to twenty-eight days, and in consequence, also, of some few items which were not foreseen when the plan was first mooted. The number of men voted last year was 50,000; it was now proposed to vote an additional 25,000, making in all 75,000.

said, the vote was 100,000l. more than last year, and it would, he supposed, be more next year, so that 200,000l. would be added to the expenditure. Was it intended to fill up the number of men to 80,000 this year?

said, the number to be raised last year was 50,000, and this year 30,000. It was only proposed to raise 25,000 this year.

said, that there was no sufficient reason for the number of men which had been raised, and still less for adding to the number, for the reasons on which the arguments in favour of a militia last year were founded had passed away, and there were no valid reasons for such an expenditure.

would tell the hon. Member for Manchester that he recollected his Delectus at School—cuilibet in sua arte credendum est. He should not expect the hon. Member to be a very efficient soldier, nor would he be extremely anxious to have him in his corps. The hon. Member might, perhaps, possess intelligence enough to know that prevention was better than cure, and he did not hesitate to say, attached as he was to this country, that he wished the French had made an attempt to come here, and that he had had the happiness of being one of those down at the coast to meet them. They would very soon have been glad to go back, and would have got a lesson that he thought they never would have forgotten, for he believed they would never have attempted to put their fingers in the fire again. He did not know where the hon. Member would have been on such an occasion, but he should certainly have made inquiry as to his whereabouts. The militia were not only liable to be called upon in case of an attempt at invasion, but they were very necessary to keep Manchester, and similar places, in good order. Their services would be found useful should any domestic disturbances arise; and the hon. Member ought to know that the French might have a disposition both to invade and to revolutionise this country.

said, he could bear testimony both to the efficiency of the militia as soldiers, and to their good conduct in quarters. He would suggest that it would be a great improvement to have them placed in barracks, instead of being billeted on the publicans, for not only was it advantageous to a regiment to be kept together in barracks, but the publicans would thus be relieved from expense and inconvenience, for which they did not receive adequate compensation as matters now stood.

said, he considered the alarm of last year to have been utterly unfounded, and was still of opinion that we were wasting the public resources, instead of proceeding to relieve them of every burden which could be removed. The military mania now abroad would cost the country very nearly 1,000,000l. The irrational panic that prevailed had now subsided, and we enjoyed the friendship of the French nation. He was of opinion that one of the best things that could be done, by way of showing our confidence in their ruler, would be to reduce our forces. Including disembodied officers, there were not less than 91,819 persons connected with the militia.

said, he would beg to remind the hon. Members for Montrose and Manchester, that when this measure was brought forward by the late Government it was distinctly stated that it was not proposed in consequence of any apprehension of hostile proceedings on the part of any other country. He (Mr. Walpole) then said, that the measure had been propounded by the late Sir Robert Peel's Government, and by the Government of the noble Lord opposite; and it had been urged upon the consideration of Administration after Administration, by those who were most competent to form a judgment upon such matters, that it would be wise and judicious to establish for the permanent defence of the country some such force as that which had last year been sanctioned by Parliament. He thought, then, that the Legislature had not taken a false step on this subject, and that it would be most injudicious to disband the militia force, especially after the testimony which had been borne, not merely to its popularity, but also to the admirable conduct of the men, and to the great efficiency they had attained, after a very short period of training. He wished to take this opportunity of expressing his opinion that the successful working of the measure was attributable in a great degree to the assistance afforded to the Government in carrying it out by the noblemen and gentlemen in the various counties, to whom the country was under great obligation.

said, he would have placed his opinion on record by going to a division, had he not been aware that public feeling was in favour of the measure. The right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Walpole) seemed to forget the addition made to our naval force, which had been augmented by 10,000 seamen. We had now 380,000 troops in arms, or ready to be called out, which, in proportion to the population, was a larger military force than that of France.

begged to ask whether the system which prevailed under the old Act of making mere complimentary colonelships, by giving the commissions to gentlemen of the county, was to be continued in the present time? He hoped not; for the great point was to make the corps efficient. If the old system went on, then you would find some noble Lord or Gentleman being at the same time colonel of a regiment of yeomanry and a regiment of militia; and what was then to be done if a war broke out?

said, he would also inquire, at the same time, whether the old system would be continued of allowing officers who were abroad to hold militia commissions?

said, the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department had been called to the circumstance that persons employed in the colonial service also held commissions in the militia. There were not many cases of that nature, but the noble Lord had insisted that all persons who were permanently employed in the Colonies should resign their commissions in the militia. In future, also, lieutenant colonels commandant, instead of full colonels, would be appointed to militia regiments; so that, if the militia should be stationed in a garrison town where there were troops of the line, the command of the whole force would be taken by the officer Commanding the regular troops, who would probably be superior in rank to the lieutenant colonel of the militia.

rose to bring forward the Motion of which he had given notice. On a former occasion, when he had brought forward a similar Motion, and was near carrying it, the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had glided like a spectre into the House, and while delivering himself of a long speech sent his scouts out about town; and having collected such a number of his supporters as showed him that he must be successful, had succeeded in defeating the Motion by a small majority. He (Mr. Ball), though he had not been fully heard on that occasion, did not think that he should have brought the subject forward again, had it not been that he had been informed by influential persons that the Ministers had been un- happy at having been deprived of his speech; and that being so, he thought him self bound to give it to them on the first opportunity. He was the more disposed to do this, because the Chancellor of the Exchequer had answered arguments he had never used, and had utterly misunderstood the whole case. The peculiar aptitude of the right hon. Gentleman in this respect was pretty well known; but he (Mr. Ball) had not been prepared to find him supposing that the Motion was for the repeal of the malt tax, and the abolition of 5,000,000l. of revenue. He had no such intention; what he had asked was that some small relaxation of the malt duty should be granted to the producers of malt. This was a demand just and reasonable in its nature, and which, while it would prove a great boon to the agriculturist, would be in a very slight degree detrimental to the revenue. It would realise the old adage, "giving is getting," and by conceding it the Chancellor of the Exchequer would ultimately benefit the revenue, while he increased the resources of the country and the means of supporting the people. He could cite the authority of eminent statesmen who had declared their opinion that, in consequence of the ruin of the Protectionists by admitting foreign corn producers to compete with them, the malt tax ought to be abandoned. He did not, however, ask that, but he thought a modification of the tax should be made, which would cheapen the production of meat. The corn laws had been abolished, and it would have been fair to urge that the malt tax ought to be abolished also. But the repeal of the malt tax was not the present proposition. The case laid before Parliament was this: Provisions of all kinds were dear. Allow the agriculturists the means of making them cheaper. Meat was dear; let malt, then, be cheap. The English grazier had to contend with the foreigner, who grew his grain and dealt with it as he pleased, applying it to the feeding of his cattle, anti thus bringing them into the market cheaper than the English farmer could, who was restricted in the use of the grain he grew. What was asked, then, was, that the English farmer might be permitted to use malt in the feeding of his cattle, and thus be enabled to produce meat as cheaply as he could. It was an immense advantage to the foreign farmer that he could prepare and apply his barley as he found best. Allow the English farmer a similar advantage. It was a great griev- ance that he was actually not allowed to use his barley, made into malt, freely in the fattening of his live stock, though it was found that it was the food best fitted for the purpose. This he could not do without first paying a duty of 100 per cent upon it. It was not fair to the consumer, while it was peculiarly unfair to the producer. It was an injustice which could not be tolerated as consistent with the principles of free trade. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that experiments had been tried which convinced him that the farmer would derive no benefit from the boon demanded. But he trusted he might be permitted to say that the farmer was the best judge of that, and might be allowed to know how he could best produce meat cheaply. And there was this great inconvenience—that inferior barley, not fitted to be made into malt for the purposes of brewing, might be very well made into malt for the feeding of cattle, but could be not be so used, and this was practically often lost to the farmer. It was important, also, with a view to this question, to consider the present position of labour. Ordinarily there was a redundancy of labour, but now the reverse was the case. Strikes were taking place everywhere, and there was a deficiency of labour, and no class of labourers were more depressed and worked harder than the agricultural labourer. It was desirable, therefore, to mitigate the hardship of his position by allowing the agriculturists to produce food as cheaply as they could. Let the farmers be enable encouraged to produce good beer for their labourers, that they might recruit their exhausted strength with a more wholesome beverage than they could procure at the public-houses, where they were seduced into drunkenness, which exposed them to physical and moral destruction. The highest moral considerations should lead the Legislature to encourage the farmer to brew good and cheap beer. All the English farmer claimed was that under free trade he should be as free as the foreigner was, and be allowed to find the best and fittest food he could for his cattle, in order that he might in his own markets be able to compete with the foreigner. The result of this would necessarily be to cheapen meat and beer, and promote their consumption. It was most desirable to do this, for there was certainly scarcity in every article of provision; and there was every prospect of a deficient harvest, bad in quantity and quality—in addition to which we had hardly any corn in granary, for it was one of the results of the repeal of the corn laws that whereas we formerly had usually 2,000,000l. or 3,000,000l. of quarters of corn in store, we now had none laid up against the evil day. Then as to cattle and sheep, the supply was smaller than ever. There was a deficiency in animal as well as cereal produce. This was the present result of the vast experiment that had been tried, the ultimate issue of which no one could predict; and under such circumstances surely it would be wise to allow the agricultural producer to use his crops and raise his cattle as well as he could, and thus promote plenty and cheapness of provisions, and tend to banish discontent and distress from the land.

seconded the Motion.

said, he entirely concurred in the speech of the hon. Member for Cambridgeshire, and considering it, as he did, utterly unanswerable, he advised the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to attempt to answer it, for it would be difficult for him to do so, and it would be wiser for the right hon. Gentleman to promise to take the subject into serious consideration previous to the next Session. The importance of doing something with the malt duties ought to obtain the relief suggested.

said, that he had not the slightest intention of endeavouring to answer the speech of the hon. Gentleman, for this, amongst other reasons—that it was answered by anticipation. The hon. Gentleman was well aware that what he had to say on the subject was offered to the House on a former occasion; and although he certainly thought it was in general bad taste in a Member of that House to praise his own speeches, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) could not help saying that he had every reason to be satisfied with the result of the speech that he addressed to the House on that occasion. The hon. Gentleman had himself admitted that while a division before that speech would have terminated in his favour, such were the irresistible arguments which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) then adduced, that by the time he closed there was a majority against the Motion of the hon. Gentleman. Under these circumstances he felt it altogether unnecessary to enter upon the discussion of the question on the present occasion. He would, however, promise to give to the question that consideration which had been asked by the hon. Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire (Mr. Cayley).

said, he must reprobate the jocose way in which the right hon. Gentleman spoke on the subject, and would recommend him to recollect that it was not the force of his reasoning which had secured his success on the occasion referred to, but the number of his supporters, who had given him a majority against reasoning and against justice and good sense. The right hon. Gentleman had alluded to the "experiments" which had been tried under the auspices of the Government; but they were of the most absurd character. A couple of philosophers had conducted them, and having taken a couple of heifers just calved and full of milk, had tied them up by the neck and fed them on dry malt. Why, of course, that was not the sort of experiment likely to succeed. But practical men had found by experience that under proper management malt was the best food for fattening cattle. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been led to an opposite conclusion, all he could say was, that he had been grossly misled. It was of the utmost importance in more points of view than one, that the agriculturist should be allowed to use the produce of his farm for the purposes of production as he thought best. Would the manufacturers submit to be fettered by the Excise as to the raw material they used? By malting inferior barley into food for cattle, it would be made profitable, when, otherwise, probably it would be lost to the farmer, and this was a consideration of the more importance at the present period, when the supply of barley was likely to be large in quantity, but to a great extent inferior in quality. In a moral point of view, the proposed measure was important, because it would tend to draw the labourer from the beershops by enabling the farmer to brew good beer for his labourers. Under all the circumstances, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had consented to consider the subject, he would suggest to the hon. Member for Cambridgeshire not to divide the House, but to rest satisfied with having explained his case and secured this promise.

said, on a former occasion the Chancellor of the Exchequer had certainly with success spoken against time and secured a majority; but, as to his arguments, they were fallacious, because founded on the worthless experiments of the "philosophers" who had taken two couple of heifers, two of whom were diseased. Could anything be more absurd? If the right hon. Gentleman really wished to get at the truth, he would have better experiments tried, and would particularly see that the effect of malt was tried on sheep. As a practical man, he (Sir J. Shelley) could assure him that he had been grossly deceived into imagining that the question was of no importance to the farmer.

said, the right hon. Gentleman had wisely avoided attempting to meet his arguments, knowing their weight. Acting upon the advice of the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner) he should not divide the House.

said, he wished to call attention to the condition of the inferior officers in the Customs, and the impossibility of their obtaining promotion, and would beg to move the following Amendment:—

"That no persons who have not undergone a long training in the lower classes, such as weigher, locker, or superintendent locker, shall be eligible for the office of landing waiter or gauger; that all vacancies in these departments be filled by well-qualified and experienced officers only."

said, in seconding the Amendment of the hon. Member for Southwark, he begged to express the great satisfaction which he felt at the provisions of the Bill, which consolidated the Customs law, and abrogated a great many Acts of Parliament that served only to impede and embarrass mercantile men. A doubt had been expressed that the judicial hearing of disputes between merchants and the Boar of Customs would not be with open doors; but he had no such fears. He believed that the Courts would be opened to the public and to the reporters for the public press.

said, he completely concurred in the views of the hon. Member for Southwark (Mr. Pellatt), who however, seemed not to be aware that the regulations which he was anxious to have adopted were the subjects of a Treasury Minute, and not of an Act of Parliament. There was no attempt by this Bill to make any special regulations or arrangements. General powers only were given to the Commissioners to employ such persons a they should think fit. He could assure the hon. Gentleman that the promise he made at the early part of the Session was being complied with to the letter.

said, he must complain that the examinations of the higher and lower classes of officers were too much alike. It was true that one class were required to read and write, while the others were required to read and write well; but practically this distinction was without a difference. He should suggest also the inadvisability of making the general appointment of landing waiter at twenty-one years of age. The system now adopted at the public docks was a better one. These young men were received at the age of seventeen, and if they went through their duties for three or four years with the approval of their employers, they were at the age of twenty-one made clerks. If on the other hand they showed no aptitude, they were left to some inferior appointment.

said, although the Bill he held in his hand contained 355 clauses, little need be said by him beyond thanking I the Government, and especially the hon. Secretary to the Treasury, for the large measure of relief the Bill afforded to the commercial community of this country. He was happy to think that, ever since the accession of the present Chairman of the Board of Customs, means had been used for gradually improving the regulations of that Board, and he looked upon this Bill as one of the greatest boons ever conferred on a trading and commercial community. Not less than from 1,000 to 1,500 Acts of Parliament were either repealed or consolidated by this Bill. The object of the present Bill was to simplify the law, and that object had been happily accomplished. His constituents had gone through the whole of the clauses, and he rejoiced to say that it met with their hearty approval. With regard to the Amendment of the hon. Member for Southwark, he believed there was a disposition on the part of the Government to do justice to the officers. He wished, however, to offer one suggestion to the Government. He thought the Chairman, or one of the Commissioners of the Board of Customs, ought to have a seat in the House of Commons. If anything connected with foreign affairs occurred, the Secretary of State of that department was present to give explanations; if anything relating to the Home Department happened, even down to the case of a cabman, there was an opportunity of questioning the Home Secretary; and so in regard to our Colonies; but let the most important questions arise connected with the commerce of the country, and that great interest was found to be unrepresented in that House.

, in reply to the hon. Member for Bridport (Mr. Mitchell), said that the hon. Member was under a misapprehension as to the examination of the different grades of Custom-house officers. If the lower grade could read and write their name, it was all that was required; but the upper class were examined in arithmetic as far as decimals, and were also required to be able to write correctly from dictation.

said, he was satisfied with the explanations which had been made by the hon. Secretary to the Treasury, and would therefore withdraw his Amendment.

said, he wished to take that opportunity of saying that he thought that those who were interested in Catholic charities had committed a mistake in coming before the House on a former occasion, and claiming, or having the appearance of claiming, for those charities an exemption from the laws which ought to affect all classes of the community equally. He had a very great objection to taking any course which could have even the appearance of putting forward a claim to exceptional legislation on the part of the Catholics of this Empire. He believed that they had no interest in such exceptional legislation, and he believed that it would be a very great blunder in them to demand it, so far as their own interests were concerned, for it was their own true policy to stand on the ground of common right and common law. But with regard to this particular question, it happened, in fact, that Catholics were not demanding any exceptional legislation in their favour. He believed that the best course that could have been taken would have been to introduce into this Bill clauses which would have placed Catholic charities on a proper footing, and redressed the grievances of which they complained, instead of excepting them from the operation of the Bill. He considered that exception to be of very little value, and he should as soon see the Bill without it, though he was quite willing to acknowledge the readiness with which the noble Lord had introduced it. He (Mr. Lucas) was therefore disposed to move the introduction of a clause to carry out the object which he had in view; namely, the exempting them from disabilities on the ground of superstitious uses, and if it should be found to be impossible to insert it in the Bill, he hoped that the noble Lord would at least give some assurance, on which Catholics might rely, that every effort would be made next Session to place Catholic trusts on a satisfactory and firm basis.

said, he agreed with the hon. Member who had just sat down, that it would be very desirable to modify the law in respect to superstitious uses, in order that some of those practices which were now made illegal by the force of an Act of Parliament should be legalised and allowed; but he was afraid that any clause which could be proposed now would really be too late to effect that purpose. In the first place, many hon. Members were not present in the House now, who thought from the last discussion, that the course to be pursued in this respect had been agreed upon; and, in the second place, he did not think it would be possible in a short time to prepare clauses to effect the object which the hon. Gentleman had in view. He was quite sure that the clause which the hon. Member suggested, would, at all events, be very much opposed. He could not tell how much it might legalise that which the House would consider to be contrary to public policy, whether as regarded Roman Catholic or any other charities in the country. He would state, however, that it was the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill next Session, which might, in an unobjectionable manner, include Roman Catholic charities within the purview of this measure.

said, he thought the right course would have been not to have introduced into the Bill, in the first instance, any clause for exemption for two years. The course which he intended to have taken was, first, to suggest clauses by which the change might have been made, and in the event of these clauses not being agreed to, then to propose such an exemption as had been agreed to for two years. However, when the Bill came on, and the noble Lord agreed to make an exemption for two years, he thought it not desirable to agitate the question further. For his own part, fully agreeing in the opinion that such a change ought to be made, he should be glad to assist in supporting clauses putting Roman Catholic charities on a legal footing.

said, he did not agree with his hon. Friend (Mr. Lucas), that the exemption clause ought not to have been inserted. He thought a protection of that kind was absolutely necessary. He heard, with great pleasure, the observations of the noble Lord on the subject, and begged to express the gratification he felt at the mode in which the noble Lord had given utterance to his sentiments. He did not wish that this Bill should not apply to Roman Catholic charities; he thought it ought, for he looked on the Bill as an excellent one; but there was reason, from a previous state of the law, why for a time protection should be thrown around them, but that protection was to enable the House to legislate, not for Roman Catholic charities alone, but on a broad basis for all charities. As the law at present stood, a bequest for the celebration of divine worship according to the rites of the Catholic religion would be void as coming under the law of superstitious uses. Again, under the 9 Geo. II., if they enrolled in the Court of Chancery a deed of trust for a Roman Catholic charity, the transaction was void, and they were consequently obliged in the deed to conceal the object of the charity. He believed he was not wrong in saying that the Mortmain Committee recommended a repeal of that Act of Parliament, and that the doctrine, for it was not a law, but a principle of Courts of Equity, of superstitious uses should be done away with.

said, he hoped that within two years the law of Mortmain would be amended. At present it was a matter of the utmost difficulty, in some parts of the country, to settle property for benevolent purposes, such as infirmaries, schools, and the like. They could not take a lease for a term of years for building purposes, but they were obliged to resort to the subterfuge of having a nominee as lessee, who assigned to the trustees; and in regard to copyhold property, it was perfectly impracticable to make a title until Lord Tenterden's decision was overruled, because it could not be conveyed in the way that the Mortmain Act required. The noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) would render a greater support to education by removing these difficulties, than by a thousand Education Bills. If he would put the law in a form by which they could have facilities for establishing these institutions, they would have plenty of them in the country, and the law ought to be such as to apply equally to all.

said, he had an Amendment to move, the object of which was to enable the Commissioners to sit in Parliament, if elected, in the same manner as the Poor Law Commissioners.

said, he must oppose the Amendment of the hon. Member for Gateshead, on the ground that if the Commissioners were eligible to seats in Parliament, they might be enabled to exercise undue influence in borough elections by means of the local charities.

said, that he did not consider the case of the Chief Commissioners of the Poor Law Board being entitled to sit in that House as precisely analogous to these Commissioners, because the functions of the Commissioners under this Bill were partly judicial. Generally speaking, however, he was in favour of taking away the disqualifications with respect to persons sitting in that House; and he did not know that if they had had a full discussion of the matter when the Bill was in Committee, he might not have been induced to vote in favour of his hon. Friend's Amendment; but it ought to be recollected that the Bill went through Committee, and was reported without any special notice being taken of this point; and he did not think it would be just, after the Bill had passed through these stages, to make so important a change as that now proposed; and he certainly, therefore, could not consent, on the part of Government, to the Amendment.

said, he did not see what there was to prevent the noble Lord from taking the discussion upon the question then. He thought the matter should not be delayed, because, in his opinion, it would be of the greatest possible advantage that the Commissioners under this Bill should have seats in that House, and be able to state in the face of day, in answer to the inquiries of hon. Members, what had taken place on the Commission.

said, the present Bill was one of the most important that had occupied the attention of the Legislature for some years. For himself he entirely approved of it, and he congratulated the noble Lord on at last finding out the means by which these public estates were to be placed upon a better system than heretofore. But in proportion to the importance of the Bill was the importance of considering who were to be the Commissioners, and whether or not they should have seats in that House. As to whom they were to be, that of course would rest with the Government, and no doubt the whole value of the measure would depend in a degree on the persons appointed. But the question whether the Commissioners should have seats in that House was even more important than that; and, in his opinion, it was highly desirable that they should be brought under the control of the public, and they could certainly not be under that control unless questions could be put to them in that House with reference to the matters entrusted to their charge. In one respect, however, the Motion of the hon. Member for Gateshead (Mr. Hutt) went too far. He (Mr. Walpole) doubted very much whether all the Commissioners ought to have seats in Parliament. He thought they ought to have one Commissioner responsible for the duties of his office in that House; but he doubted if the appointment of three Commissioners with seats would be advantageous to the charities; and, more than that, he apprehended that it would be giving too much authority to the Government for the time being if that were the case.

said, he should oppose the Amendment, believing that it was better that persons holding judicial offices should not have seats in that House.

said, he thought that the feeling of the House had already been sufficiently elicited to show the noble Lord the Member for London that the adoption of the proposition of the hon. Member for Gateshead, in a modified form, would be acceptable. He thought the object of the hon. Gentleman would be attained if he adopted the suggestion of the right hon. Member for Midhurst (Mr. Walpole).

said, he was willing to modify his Amendment, so as to render only one of the three Commissioners eligible to a seat in that House; but he thought it should be remembered that, although he had originally proposed that all three should be eligible, it was not likely that more than one Commissioner would be actually elected.

said, that one of the greatest decisions ever given in the memory of man upon a question of a charity had been recently delivered. In that case, a large charity, yielding upwards of 9,000l. a year, and which had existed for seven centuries, had been shown to have been perverted from its original purpose, and the conduct of the trustees elicited the strongest comments from the Master of the Rolls. If there had been a Commissioner in that House responsible for such matters, he (Mr. Carter) considered that such a state of things could never have continued so long. He should support the Amendment. He was satisfied that reports made once a year were not sufficient to bring the abuses in the administration of charitable trusts under the eye of the public. The Under Secretary for the Home Department was so completely overdone with work that he could not be expected to undertake the duty of answering questions relating to the proceedings of the Charitable Trusts Commissioners; and he (Mr. Carter) thought it was highly injudicious to exclude from that House persons who could afford them the most ample information on the subject.

said, he considered that one of the Commissioners, at all events, might be allowed to sit in the House. He was most anxious to see all important Ministerial departments represented in that Assembly, for he believed that such representation afforded to the public the most effectual security for the careful and judicious management of public affairs.

said, he should oppose the Amendment, because, as the Charitable Trusts Commissioners were to a great extent Judges, he thought it would be most objectionable that persons exercising judicial functions should be liable to be questioned in Parliament on the subject of their decisions. He also objected to the Amendment, because, if it were adopted, a Commissioner who had to inquire into the administration of charities in a particular borough, which charities were made subservient to electioneering purposes, might himself become a candidate for that borough, and thus all confidence in the fairness of his proceedings would be destroyed.

proposed that the clause relating to exemptions should be so altered as to exclude the University of Durham from its operation. The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge were to be exempted; but then it was because the colleges and halls of those Universities had very recently been made the subject of inquiry, and would have to be considered in future legislation. No such reason, however, could apply to either Durham or London, and he therefore proposed to alter the clause, so as to render it subservient to the provisions of the Bill with the University of London.

could not but think that it would have been much better if the noble Lord had left the Bill as it was.

said, the cases of the Durham and London Universities were very dissimilar, the former being regulated in accordance with the provisions of an Act of Parliament. He must say he very much regretted, after the undertaking which seemed to have been entered into, that Her Majesty's Government were now prepared to depart from their announced intention, and include Durham University under the working of the Bill, and the more so as it had passed through all its stages in the other House containing a clause of exemption.

said, he was of opinion that there ought to be no exemptions at all; but if Oxford and Cambridge were to be exempted, he thought London ought to be similarly favoured, and it was his intention to move an Amendment to that effect.

denied that there was any similarity between the position of Durham and Oxford and Cambridge Universities. The former by no means held equal rank as a corporate body with the two latter. And he felt sure that unless institutions like Durham and London came within the operation of this Act, that they could never be made the subject of a particular enactment, and therefore they would be removed beyond the pale of the law altogether. He therefore trusted that hon. Gentlemen would not oppose the insertion of the word proposed.

said, he could not at all comprehend the resons assigned for the proposal of the noble Lord; nor the very nice legal distinctions of the hon. and learned Solicitor General between the positions of the Universities of Durham and London and those of Oxford and Cambridge; for he believed that the University of London had quite as much bodily subsistence as either of the other two. Tine intention of the whole affair appeared to be to cast a stigma upon the University of London, which, it seemed to be forgotten, was an older institution than Durham.

said, he wished to see the exemptions extended to the University of London, which had shown itself fully entitled to every mark of respect and confidence.

could not understand why any distinctions were introduced. What was wanted was a general Act applicable to all the Universities, and one that would improve their condition.

said, he must contend for an exemption in favour of Durham, and could not understand how, after the compact which had been entered into with the hon. Member for Durham, the Government could come forward with such a proposal, Though he regarded the situation of Durham in a very different light from that of London University, as the latter had neither colleges nor halls, he would rather vote for the exclusion of the latter from the operation of the Bill than consent to the inclusion of Durham.

then proposed an Amendment, providing that the Act should not extend to any school or college connected with the University of London. It was not that he wanted to exempt the University of London from the Act, but that he wished to put that University upon an equality with the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, that he proposed this Amendment.

said that, notwithstanding the last division, he must object to the exemption proposed. Whatever might be the reason for the vote to which the House had just come in respect to Durham, it seemed to him there might be mischief done if the House adopted the proposed Amendment. The colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, it was well known, were connected with those institutions; but the only way in which you could connect the colleges and schools in various places with the University of London was, that those schools requested that they might be permitted to send young men to that University, in order that they might pass examinations and obtain degrees. Now, there might be a charity school of which the University of London knew nothing, could not inquire about, had no control over and no other connexion with them than that of having been asked by it, "Will you allow persons to come from our school to be examined and take degrees at your University?" The University of London, with the permission of the Secretary of State, might admit that school to those privileges; but that circumstance did not in the least degree connect that school with the University. He did not, therefore, see any ground of exemption in the case of the University of London. The proposal appeared to him to be a mischievous one, and he must, therefore, oppose it.

said, these colleges or halls in connexion with the University of London were voluntary, and not charitable institutions, and he did not see why the London University should not be placed on the same footing as the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge under the Bill.

said, he should support the Amendment, for he had always considered the University of London to be on the same footing as the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. On this point being brought before Lord Aberdeen, he reinstated the University of London in the clause, and he therefore protested against its being now rejected.

said, he was sorry to sec the manner in which this question was debated, for hon. Members who wished that every institution should be brought under the operation of the Bill, yet wished to exempt this one merely for the sake of a little wounded vanity. He thought it would have been desirable that all halls and colleges should be under the operation of the Bill; and to talk of exempting the University of London, which embraced all sorts of institutions which chose to affiliate themselves to it, would lead to many institutions so affiliating themselves in order to avail themselves of the exemption. Colleges and halls were exempted on account of their being corporations under peculiar charters, and schools and institutions supported by voluntary subscription were not included in the Bill at all. He objected to any endeavour to limit the operation of the Bill.

said, no doubt there were very good reasons for including within the scope of the Bill the schools and colleges connected with the Universities of Loudon and Durham; but he thought the reasons assigned for exempting those of Oxford and Cambridge equally applied to the other Universities. The Solicitor General seemed to consider that there was scarcely such a thing as the University of London. But a University was a mere fiction of law. London had as good a right to be deemed a University as Oxford or Cambridge. The whole difficulty in this case had arisen from an attempt to cast a stigma upon the University of London. Those who were connected with the London University ought not to stand by and see any Act of Parliament pass which applied to other Universities, and did not apply to it.

said, the hon. and learned Solicitor General had not answered the argument of the hon. Member for South Lancashire (Mr. Cheetham), that the question had been brought under the notice of Lord Aberdeen, and that the University of London had been restored to the clause. This was, in fact, a question with regard to the Dissenters' University—that University which alone was open to them.

said, he must disclaim any intention of giving offence to the Dissenters, for he was one of those who was anxious for the foundation of the University of London, and assisted in its progress, and, therefore, he did not wish to cast any stigma upon it; but he had argued that a Commission had issued to inquire into the case of Oxford and Cambridge, and they were become the subjects of legislation, but no such steps had been taken with regard to the University of London, and so far it had been favoured.

said, he thought there was a fallacy in the reasoning of those who, like himself, were friends to the University of London; for, if the authority of the Commissioners under this Bill was to operate beneficially, he did not see why they should wish exemptions like those of Oxford and Cambridge to be carried further.

said the principle of religious equality would be violated if there was this difference of exemption. If Oxford and Cambridge were national establishments, and not ecclesiastical corporations, the London University would never have existed; and, therefore, those who founded that institution claimed to be placed in the same position as Oxford and Cambridge, and they felt that this was an instance of placing it in an inferior and degrading position. He agreed that the operation of the Bill was beneficial, and that there should be no exemptions whatever; but when the alternative was between diminishing the usefulness of the Bill, and violating a great principle and casting a stigma on an institution, he would adopt the latter, although regretting that the operation of the Bill should be curtailed.

said, he must object to this Bill being proceeded with at that hour [quarter past 2]. He would move that the House go into Committee on that day three months.

joined in pressing the noble Lord not to proceed with the Bill this Session. He had seen several members of the manufacturing interest on the subject, who declared to him that it would be utterly impossible to carry out the measure.

said, he trusted the noble Lord would persevere with the Bill. It was perfectly easy to remedy the smoke nuisance, both in steamers on the river and in manufactories, at a very small expense in alterations. The whole objection arose from a disinclination to incur expense in altering furnaces, and from the coalowners in the north, who were apprehensive that anthracite coal would supersede the consumption of theirs in the London market.

said, that at present there was an intolerable nuisance from small steamers above bridge from the quantity of smoke emitted by them. All that was wanted was that they should burn coke instead of coal. With respect to furnaces it was somewhat different; but still it was a question of fuel, and the Welsh coal was always to be had, and he undertook to say that there would be no difficulty in carrying out the provisions of the Bill.

said, the argument of the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Spooner) was an argument against all improvement. He said, "You have borne the nuisance so long that you can bear it still longer." Then the hon. Gentleman said, this could not be done—manufacturers could not consume their own smoke. The same thing had been said by the glove trade and the silk trade, when it was proposed to admit French gloves and silks. They declared that they could not possibly compete with the foreigner; but the trade was thrown open, and they did compete, and successfully too. The same argument had been used in agriculture, and so it was in regard to smoke. The manufacturers said they could not consume their own smoke, but if Parliament would only say, "you must do so," the smoke would be consumed, and the public would be relieved from this nuisance. If ever there was a case in which, he would not say the interests, but the prejudices, of the few were opposed to the interests of the many, this was such a case. Here were a few, perhaps 100 gentlemen, connected with these different furnaces in London, who wished to make 2,000,000 of their fellow-inhabitants swallow the smoke which they could not themselves consume, and who thereby helped to deface all our architectural monuments, and to impose the greatest inconvenience and injury upon the lower class. Here were the prejudices and ignorance, the affected ignorance, of a small combination of men, set up against the material interest, the physical enjoyment, the health, and the comfort of upwards of 2,000,000 of their fellow-men. He would not believe that Parliament would back these smoke-producing monopolists, and he was ready, therefore, with great confidence to go to a division.

said, as one of the representatives of the smoke-producing class, he would repeat the appeal he before made to the noble Lord against going on with this Bill at this period of the Session. This Bill would cause great expense to the manufacturers of London. A second point was, that this Bill would produce a total disarrangement of the northern coal trade. ["Oh, oh!"] Why, what was he sent there for but to represent those interests? Those were reasons, if not for rejecting the Bill, certainly for not proceeding with it at this period of the Session.

said, that the noble Lord had failed to show any necessity for forcing the Bill through in this Session. He had never heard from medical authority that smoke, however disagreeable, was injurious to health. There was, therefore, no reason, on sanatory grounds, for proceeding with it at so late a period. He hoped the Bill would be withdrawn.

said, he took a different view of the subject to his noble Friend and Colleague. In reference to this Bill, he had not had one remonstrance or suggestion against it. Such a Bill would be a great public improvement, and he hoped the House would adopt it.