said, he would beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, whether any steps had been or were about to be taken, to obtain statistical information with reference to agricultural produce?

Sir, in reply to the question of the hon. Gentleman, I beg to state that with respect to three counties in Scotland, a full return was laid before the House last Session; and it appears that there was not a single case of omission, and only three cases of refusal to give the information asked—a result which I consider highly creditable to the agriculturists of those counties. With respect to Norfolk and Hampshire, I have received within the last few days the report of Sir John Walsham and Mr. Hawley, who have been charged with the inquiry in those counties, and I am happy to inform the House that there is only an omission of 3 per cent upon the whole return. I think that for a first experiment this will be felt to be highly satisfactory. The whole cost has been for Norfolk and Hampshire, 850l.; and for the three Scotch counties, 667l. What we have obtained is an accurate return of the acreage and of the quantity of stock; and in the case of Scotland there was added a voluntary estimate of the produce. I have stated that the Scotch return has been already laid upon the table, in answer to a Resolution of the House, and the papers with respect to England will shortly be produced. I think that to Mr. Hall Maxwell, the Secretary of the Highland Society, and to Sir John Walsham and Mr. Hawley, the thanks of the farming interest are due for the ability and success with which these inquiries are conducted.

said, the Bill which he was about to submit to the consideration of the House had for its purpose the remedying of the defects of the law relating to gaming-houses. Hon. Gentlemen who had taken the trouble of reading the reports appearing daily in the newspapers must be perfectly well aware that very numerous instances had recently occurred of the law being set at complete defiance by the keepers of such establishments, which he was very sorry to say abounded in this metropolis. As the house was well aware, the law had made very wise and salutary provisions against the practice of gaming, and those provisions had succeeded happily in putting down the practice of public gaming—thus forming a very proud contrast in favour of this country as compared with some foreign States, where not only the practice had not been eradicated, but it was actually encouraged for the most unworthy motives. But although the practice of public gaming had thus been prevented by the law, unfortunately all legislation on the subject had hitherto proved inadequate to repress the existence of private gaming-houses and the practice of play in such places, and every day brought to light some fresh instances of young men of hope and promise being inveigled away into those dens, having their fortunes impaired, oftentimes ruined, and their prospects most seriously blighted by the arts to which they fell victims. And yet it would seem that at first sight the existing law was perfectly strong enough to put down these establishments. Penalties had been imposed by various Statutes against those who kept gaming-houses, and against those who frequented them. By the existing law the Police Commissioners had abundant powers to authorise officers of justice to enter—and, if necessary, by force—into these places, to see if persons were to be found there with instruments of gaming about them. No one would have supposed but that such measures would have had the desired effect; and certainly no blame attached either to the magistrates or to the police, for both had been as active and as incessant in their endeavours to put an end to the practice, though, unfortunately, all their efforts had proved fruitless. But the reason of this failure was ascribable simply to the fact that the present gaming establishments, being maintained in private houses, the parties who kept them contrived to exclude all persons in whom they could not place the most unbounded confidence; and they were enabled, by the effectual means they had recourse to, to keep out the entry of the police until they were enabled to get rid of all the proofs of gaming which were required for their conviction. He might mention to the House that he had been in communication with a police officer who had been frequently employed on such occasions, and from him he had become fully acquainted with the mode of procedure with regard to these cases. It would seem that keepers of these places regularly fortified their establishments—that either the outer door or some other defence was fortified in a manner from which the Board of Ordnance itself might learn a lesson in the matter of fortification. And to such an extent were these obstructions carried, that the officer he had just alluded to told him that it was frequently quite impossible to effect an entry into these establishments in less than half an hour, thus affording time to make away with the implements of gaming. As he had said, they took very good care not to admit any one in whom they had not the most thorough confidence. They admitted old hands, because they were known to them; they admitted young hands when they came introduced by old ones. But the police, of course, they did not admit; they were too well known to the wary guardians stationed inside and out to have any chance of that. The moment a policeman came in sight, the bolts, chains, bars, and locks were brought into use, and a warning by a bell or otherwise was given to the persons overhead, so that long before the police could effect an entry every article used for the purposes of gaming, such as cards and dice, was removed by means of a convenience already prepared, which communicated with the common sewer, and carried them away to the main sewer. Hereupon the bars and bolts were removed, and the police received with all possible politeness—were begged to walk in—to find, however, nothing more than a pleasant convivial gathering assembling round the supper-table, or a social party recreating themselves with some innocent game. Notwithstanding all the persons found on the premises are brought before the magistrate—though the policeman admits at once that he had neither found them in the act of gaming, nor could he discover any instruments for the purposes of gaming anywhere about. The failure, therefore, was quite complete, there being no case against the parties. Perhaps the magistrate, if he chanced to be a grave man, shook his head—if, on the contrary, of a mirthful disposition, he laughed, so that every one laughed except the poor discomfited police. So that the party implicated was free to open his house again the very same night, and re-commence his abominable practices. Such, then, was the objectionable state of things which it was most desirable to remedy. Indeed, instances of such cases had latterly been so frequent as to give occasion for great public scandal. He was most happy, however, to see that the press had commented on them in the right spirit, and in that House the attention of Her Majesty's Go- vernment had been directed to the subject by the noble Lord the Member for Ludlow (Lord W. Powlett). Now it was perfectly clear that the cause of the constant defeats of the law arose from the difficulty of obtaining evidence; for there was no hesitation or doubt for a single moment that these gaming-houses existed. Indeed, it was a melancholy fact that they swarmed and multiplied throughout the metropolis, and they were perfectly well known to the police officers—as well known as the hotels and taverns in the quarters where they existed. They were frequented by a class of persons who were either habitual gamblers or sharpers, and by young men, oftentimes of rank and fortune, who had the misfortune to be inveigled into them. And while, therefore, on the one hand, they knew of the existence of such places, and were perfectly aware of the consequent evils, how they swarmed and abounded throughout the metropolis, they had, on the other hand, the humiliating fact of the equally great and enormous evil of seeing the law defeated, defied, set at nought, and made the subject of mockery and derision by persons who every day violated it. Now, as he had before observed, the difficulty of obtaining evidence was no doubt very much increased by the means which these parties had recourse to in order to shut out effectually the entry of the police. For if the police could only procure an entry at all times into such places, as elsewhere, they would very soon detect the gamblers, and bring the owners of the establishments to that punishment which the law directed, so that in a very short time nothing more would be heard of them. But as long as this power of barring out the officers of justice continued, so long would it remain impossible to reach these keepers of gaming-houses by the existing law. He was prepared, therefore, to strike at once at the root of the evil, and with that object he proposed to make it a substantive offence wilfully to take means for the purpose of excluding the entry of officers of police when those officers were authorised by the law to enter. It was quite obvious, however, that he might be met at once with the objection, "What! would you make the barring the door of one's own house a matter of offence?" But, on the other hand, he might be allowed to observe, and as was very well understood by the police, there was a most essential and unmistakeable difference between an ordinary case of fastening a man's door, to prevent the ingress of improper persons, and the means resorted to by gaming-house keepers, for the purpose of guarding against by any possibility the entry of those who came armed with the warrant of a magistrate, and in order to defy that magistrate. He believed that magistrates would have no difficulty in coming to a decision on this point. He proposed, therefore, that when a case fell within the existing Statutes, when information was laid before the magistrates by competent persons, and when the magistrates or the police commissioners had issued their warrant, if it should appear that unusual and unnecessary means had been resorted to by the occupiers of the house to keep out the officers, that should be a substantive offence, liable to punishment. In the second place, he proposed to extend a principle already recognised in the 8 & 9 Vict., cap. 109, the 8th section of which provided that where any cards, dice, or implements of gambling should be found, although the parties might not be found in the act of gaming, that still it was competent for the magistrate, under those circumstances, to presume from the fact that the house was used as a gaming-house; and it placed upon the owner the burden of disproving the allegation. He proposed, therefore, to extend that provision to all cases where those unnecessary contrivances were resorted to to fortify the avenues to the house, and to constitute that circumstance primâ facie evidence of the guilt of the accused parties. The next steps, however, which he proposed to take would be much more efficacious in suppressing the evil and overcoming the difficulty of obtaining evidence. A number of persons were found on the premises. Of these some were liable to heavy punishment; others, perhaps, to none at all. Some were victims and dupes, the others old hackneyed gamblers, the sharpers and decoyers—keepers of these establishments, that inveigled the young and the unwary. Now he, therefore, proposed to enable a magistrate, when a body of persons were brought up before him, either at the instance of the police-officer, or through the exercise of his own judgment, to select from amongst them the most objectionable, and hand them over to be prosecuted, while others of the party might be admitted as witnesses against them. At present no power was given to a magistrate enabling him to obtain the evidence of such persons, for, inasmuch as they were liable to punishment, they would refuse to answer questions which might inculpate themselves. It was proposed, therefore, to allow of the magistrate obtaining from any person evidence, by converting him into a witness; and he was perfectly sure that amongst every twenty or thirty persons seized on such occasions there would be always some, more or less respectable, that would not hesitate, merely to screen persons guilty of offences of this kind, to put the authorities in possession of evidence so as to enable them to enforce the law against such notorious offenders. He would also make this further provision; he believed nothing tended so much to prevent young men from going into these establishments as the risk of being discovered and exposed before the public, with their identity fully fixed and established. Now, at present the way such persons got over any difficulties of that kind was by giving false names and addresses. For the future, however, he proposed to constitute that an offence against the law; and any one, therefore, giving a false name or a fictitious address to a magistrate will be liable to penalties. He felt sure that, if consent was given to the enactment of such provision, the evil so much complained of would very soon cease to exist. The House would remember, on the occasion of the introduction of a Bill last Session for the suppression of betting establishments, they were told that it was impossible to adopt such a measure. He was happy, however, to be able to say that those pest-houses had been completely put down; and he believed, in reference to the present evil, if the House would but accept the plan embodied in his Bill, that a similar success would be attained; and that they would be adopting the surest means of overthrowing the last remnant of those gaming establishments, which were a disgrace to the country—a work which he hoped to see speedily and effectually completed.

said, he only rose as the representative of that part of London which was unfortunately cursed with those establishments, for the purpose of tendering his best thanks to the hon. and learned Gentleman for the measure which he had just proposed. He thought its provisions gave a right to hope that its effect would be to put an end to those establishments.

said, he would now beg to nominate the Committee to consider the Grand Jury Laws of Ireland. As the constitution of the Committee was objected to, and its proposed objects so completely mistaken, he would take that opportunity of stating that his object was to correct abuses, not to alter the law, and, therefore, that was the whole scope and tendency of his Motion. With regard to the selection of the names, his aim had been to select Gentlemen whose opinions were unbiassed in favour of any particular course, and in whose regard he felt assured that they would proceed to consider the subject in a fair and temperate manner, and who would make no recommendations which the House could not safely adopt. He had, however, been urged to withdraw his Motion, but he believed that in doing so he should not be fulfilling his duty to the ratepayers of Ireland. In that country, as hon. Gentlemen from England might not be aware, all the roads and public works were made and carried on at the expense of the ratepayers, so that whilst here in the year 1851 the average county rate was not more than 5d. in the pound, in Ireland, during the same year, it reached to a poundage of 1s. 6d. The whole of the expense of the gaols were also thrown on the county rate.

here interrupted the hon. Member, and said that in going into the whole question of the Grand Jury system of Ireland he was quite out of order, his Motion only extending to the nomination of a Committee.

said, that the House was aware a promise had been made by the right hon. Baronet to the Chief Secretary for Ireland that he would introduce a Bill to improve the state of the Grand Jury Laws of Ireland in the course of the present Session. Under such circumstances, therefore, and after all the Committees and Commissions which they had had during the past twenty or thirty years, he was perfectly astonished at the proposition emanating from the hon. Gentleman opposite, and could only regard it as an attempt to cushion and retard immediate legislation. They had had a Select Com- mittee on the subject so far back as 1836, before which the hon. Member himself was a witness, and they had another in 1842, constituted of fifteen Members, eleven of whom were from Ireland, and on which no less than 3,600 questions were asked, and nineteen witnesses examined. It was quite evident, therefore, that further inquiry was superfluous; though, if it was conceded, he would not shrink from it, but would show that other classes of the community besides the ratepayers were affected by the injurious system at present in existence. He would call upon the House, therefore, not to bother the representatives of Ireland with needless investigations, but to press upon the Government the necessity of dealing with the ample materials before them and of introducing the requisite measures. He would move that the Order of the Day for the appointment of the Select Committee be discharged.

seconded the Amendment. He would put it to the right hon. Baronet the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he would not, in consenting to the appointment of a Committee, be passing judgment on himself and the late Mr. Anthony Blake, both of whom had been members of the Commission of 1842. Twelve years had now elapsed since their Report had been made, and he would, therefore, beg the right hon. Baronet not to leave them once more at the mercy of chance legislation.

said, he hoped the House would pause before acceding to the Motion of his hon. Friend the Member for Tipperary (Mr. F. Scully). He might observe that at the moment he was interrupted by the right hon. Gentleman in the chair, his hon. Friend the Member for the county of Antrim (Mr. Macartney) was proceeding to observe on the Report of a Commission which had been appointed in 1842. Now that Commission had recommended most important alterations in the present Grand Jury system of Ireland, and which, if carried into effect, would involve a saving of not less than 160,000l. a year for the landed property of Ireland. The Report, however, of that Commission had been laid aside for twelve years, and the object, therefore, of his hon. Friend was to investigate how far their recommendations could be usefully carried into practice. He must say, in contradiction to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Tipperary, that the Grand Jury system of Ireland was, on the whole, an admittedly good system. He believed it was a mistake to say that the abuses which formerly existed in the Grand Jury system existed at present, inasmuch as great improvements had been made of late years in that system. He hoped that if the Committee was appointed, it would be limited in its inquiries.

said that the only way to deal with the Grand Jury system of Ireland was to get rid of the fiscal duties of the Grand Jury altogether.

said, he was placed in a somewhat difficult position on this question. He had stated that he was not prepared to consent to a Bill being laid on the table, but thought it desirable to see the result of the discussion on the measure regarding the county rates of England. When his hon. Friend the Member for Antrim proposed a Committee, knowing that he was one who had given great attention to the question, he (Sir J. Young) had acquiesced in the proposal; and he could not well withdraw his acquiescence. He had merely suggested the alteration of one name in those proposed for the Committee. He saw no ground for dissenting from the appointment of the Committee. It was said the question of religious toleration was involved, but he could not see in what way. Much was said about representation accompanying taxation; and he approved of the principle. The Act on which the valuation was founded contained a clause attempting to regulate the rating by the net rent. Adam Smith and other authorities laid it down that local rates were a part of the rent and should be deducted from it; and the Commissioners who reported on the local rates of England in 1844 said it was well known that landlords had nothing to gain by the shifting of rates from one class to another; they assumed that all local rates came out of the rent in one shape or other. Therefore, whatever the representation in a county, the landlords or rent receivers ought to have a predominance in the management of the rates, otherwise an injustice was committed. It was most important to oppose the erroneous notions which prevailed on this subject, by the dictates of common sense. There were many points in the present Grand Jury Laws which might be advantageously retained, though the constitution of the Grand Juries was altered. Boards of guardians might be delegated to act on the Grand Jury, but the owners of property, as the great ratepayers, ought to have a predominance.

said, that, under the circumstances, he was desirous of ascertaining with what view the Committee was to be appointed, and what were the precise subjects they were to inquire into? He thought the Committee ought to be agreed to as it was proposed by the hon. Member for Antrim, or not at all. The understanding upon which the proposition was at first made was, that it was to carry out the views of the Commission that had already reported on the subject.

said, he wished to state fairly that he did not understand that the Committee, as proposed by the hon. Member for Antrim, was to be limited in the way alluded to by the right hon. and learned Gentleman.

said, this was a question which was sure to create great difference of opinion amongst Irishmen. The benefits of the Grand Jury system had been exaggerated, as had been its disadvantages. He doubted whether anything new would be elicited by the inquiry of another Committee. It would lead to dissension, and the expression of a variety of opinions, which would probably end in nothing. The number of notices now on the paper with reference to it showed that it would create great dissension. They would most likely have a division every day, and they would produce no Report of any value.

said, that with reference to the statement of the right hon. Baronet (Sir J. Young) as to the objects of the Committee's inquiry, he could not, as the promoter of the original Motion, assent to the view of the right hon. Baronet, because if that were adopted the entire question would be opened—a proceeding which he had never contemplated. He had never contemplated carrying out the Report of the Committee of 1842, which would have made practical improvements in the law as it stood, but he could never consent to make an alteration in the fundamental law respecting Grand Juries. Before, therefore, asking the House to proceed to a division, he would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he intended to support the reference to the Committee of the instruction contained in his own Motion? [Sir JOHN YOUNG replied in the affirmative.] He saw so little chance of effecting a just settlement of this question, and of carrying out the Report of the Committee of 1842, that he was quite ready to agree to the discharge of the Order.

said that, after the discussion which had already taken place upon the earlier stages of this Bill, and in the present state of information before the House as to what would be the future policy of the Government in regard to it, he felt it would be a waste of the public time at all to oppose the further stages of the measure. In making this statement, however, he reserved to himself the right hereafter, whenever the measure should come before the House in Committee, of calling for further information from Her Majesty's Government upon several points affecting the financial condition of the country, and connected with this Bill; and it would depend upon the nature and extent of the information which the Government might give him whether he should offer any opposition either to the further progress of the measure, or to the levying of the tax in its doubled form during the first half year.

said he had not been able to hear the purport of what his hon. and learned Friend said, but he wished to observe that, though he did not intend to offer the slightest opposition to the second reading of this Bill, he guarded himself against the supposition that by allowing the measure to pass he was to be supposed to agree in its provisions. Should the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer propose any addition to the tax during this Session, he did not wish it to be supposed by the course he now adopted that he in any way gave his sanction to the measure, because he had no hesitation in saying that he considered the provisions of this Bill to be so unjust that he should think it his duty to do what he could to oppose it in the event of a second application respecting it being made to the House.

, in rising to move the second reading of this Bill, said, that he felt great difficulty in his position, inasmuch as the measure was one which required more power than he possessed in order to command the attention of the House. He would, however, endeavour to describe the present position of the medical profession and the objects of his Bill. There were at that time nineteen medical corporate bodies in the country. We had the College of Physicians, the College of Surgeons, the Apothecaries' Hall, the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, both of which granted medical degrees. There was, also, the University of London, together with our other English Universities and Colleges. But there was no possibility by which a man belonging to any of those bodies could be recognised or known. He proposed by his Bill to remedy that evil, and to show that in doing so he was acting in conformity with the constitutional practice of the country. He found that every one of the great establishments of the country was regulated by a system of registration. The courts of law, the officers of the Army and Navy were registered, the clergy of the country were registered by their bishops, and if any of them were not so registered they would not be eligible to hold livings. He looked upon the condition of the medical profession as perfectly anomalous. Many of the evils which were now complained of in connection with the admission of improper persons to practise medicine would be completely remedied by his measure. This was a question of grave necessity, as the lives of many persons were placed in jeopardy from their ignorance of the competency of medical men, except from their title of "doctor" being placed upon their door. The profession itself suffered seriously by this system, for many individuals who had been mere tradesmen gave up their natural avocations for the purpose of vending quack medicines to the public. As the measure he now proposed was efficacious, simple, designed for the protection both of the public and of the profession by whom it was essentially required, he trusted the House would agree to the second reading.

said, he should be glad to know what was the intention of the Government with respect to this Bill, and if in the absence of the noble Lord the Home Secretary, no Member of the Ministry was prepared to make any statement with regard to it, he should feel it his duty—as the Bill was not in a form which he could altogether approve—to move its adjournment for some short period in order that it might be further considered.

said, he believed the hon. Member for Leitrim (Mr. Brady) had had some communication with the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who had stated that he had no objection whatever to the introduction of this Bill, and to its being read a second time. Under these circumstances he (Mr. Fitzroy) should not oppose the motion before the House.

said, it was his opinion that the Bill was a useful one, though there were some points in it upon which in Committee he should have to propose an amendment or two.