said, he would beg to ask the hon. Gentleman the Clerk of the Ordnance whether the building for the Lancaster shot manufactory at Woolwich was erected by Messrs. Fox and Henderson without the supervision of an officer of the Royal Engineer department; and, if so, what was the reason for adopting such a course? also, whether that work has been performed, in respect to construction and materials, to the entire satisfaction of the Ordnance, and whether an officer of the Royal Engineer department has been directed to examine and report upon the same?

, in reply, said, that in the month of November last, on account of reports that had been received from the East by the Government, it was considered desirable to increase very largely the manufacture of Lancaster shells. He had communicated with Mr. Nasmyth on the subject, who had placed at the disposal of the Government his great works, but, on consultation with the Engineer Department at Woolwich, it was found impossible, in consequence of the absence of certain things, that the work could be carried on in Mr. Nasmyth's factory. They, therefore, found themselves obliged to erect the establishment at Woolwich to which the hon. and gallant gentleman had alluded. The plans were prepared by the inspector of machinery, in conjunction with Messrs. Fox, Henderson, and Co. They were submitted to the commanding officer of Royal Engineers at Woolwich, Colonel Foster, who declared that upon the whole, considering the rapidity with which the building had to be erected, he considered the price to be a fair one. The works were accordingly commenced in the course of December, and within a few days afterwards Colonel Foster called upon him and informed him that, in his opinion, if the materials brought upon the ground were used, and if the building were constructed in the way Messrs. Fox, Henderson, and Co. proposed, it would not stand. But Colonel Foster informed him also that if a guarantee were given by Messrs. Fox and Henderson that the building would stand even for six months, he was quite sure the building might be considered to be a permanent one, in consequence of the great force of the Nasmyth's hammers, and the great amount of machinery that would be set to work from the moment that the works were put in operation. He (Mr. Monsell) accordingly sent to Sir Charles Fox, who gave the guarantee required entirely to Colonel Foster's satisfaction, and the building was proceeded with; and in two months from the day of the commencement the first shell was forged. He might mention that the building covered 3,000 yards, was 240 feet long, and 180 feet broad. The factory had been in operation for some time, and had been working very well; but on account of certain representations made, chiefly with regard to the firebricks, Major General Hardinge, of the Royal Engineers, was requested to go to Woolwich, to inspect the building, and to report upon it. His report was in some respects unsatisfactory, and it was referred to Sir Charles Fox; and if the hon. and gallant Gentleman would, when the reply of Sir Charles Fox was received, put another question, he (Mr. Monsell) would be happy to communicate to him the result. All he could then say was, that the building was working perfectly well, that it had stood the severe test to which it was exposed, and, so far as he could learn, the works appeared to answer the purpose for which they were intended. In the first instance the building was to some extent under Colonel Foster's superintendence; but after the guarantee was given by Messrs. Fox, Henderson, and Co., it ceased to be under Colonel Foster's superintendence, and Messrs. Fox, Henderson, and Co. having given the guarantee, they had the undivided responsibility of the erection of the building.

I wish, Sir, to make an inquiry of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control with regard to some financial operations of the Indian Government. The House will, perhaps, recollect that about a year ago a complete conversion of the Indian Five per Cents. was carried into successful operation by the Government of India, and they were converted into Four per Cents. The price of the Five per Cents, at the time of the conversion was 112l. in English money, and the conversion was effected at par to Four per Cents. Of course, that was a legitimate operation, or at all events if illegitimate, it was a beneficial one. Now, I understand that, this conversion from Four to Five per Cents having been effected about a year ago, the Indian Government have since opened a new loan of Five per Cents at par. The consequence of that operation has been that the Four per Cents, upon which a loss of 12 per cent by the original conversion from Five to Four per Cents took place, have fallen by the last advices to 85l. There is, therefore, of course, a loss of 27l. upon them. Wishing to confine myself within the strict limits of the question, I do not intend to offer any remark at present upon this remarkable operation of finance by the Government of India; but I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will lay upon the table of the House any correspondence that has taken place on the subject of this financial operation between the home Government and the Government of India.

Sir, I have to inform the right hon. Gentleman that no official intelligence has been received concerning the transaction mentioned by him. All the information the Government have on the subject is that which is known to him and to the country through the public press—namely, that, in order to raise money for the purpose of defraying the expenses of public works, a loan was opened at 5 per cent. Of course the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Governor General of India has the power to open a loan whenever he pleases, without consultation with the Court of Directors or the home authorities. But of course he will send borne some notice of the transaction; and when the correspondence arrives, I shall be perfectly ready to lay it on the table of the House.

In consequence of the observations of the right hon. Gentleman, which certainly are very unsatisfactory to me. I will, without waiting for that correspondence, take an early opportunity of putting before the House and the country the nature of the operation as I believe it to be, with respect to this loan; so that when the correspondence shall arrive, the House will be better able to appreciate its value.

said, he would now beg to move, in accordance with the notice he had given, that the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider such clauses of the Act of Uniformity of 1662, as impose religious tests. If the Resolution were adopted, he would introduce a measure to repeal that portion of the Act of Uniformity, by which it was directed that the schoolmaster of public schools should take the affirmation prescribed by the Act of Uniformity. One clause of the Act required every public schoolmaster to sign his conformity to the Church of England, and the result of which was, that they had made every grammar school in the country a Church of England institution, The schoolmasters consequently considered themselves entitled to make all the boys, without exception, learn the Catechism of the Church of England, and attend its service on Sunday. That was, of course, quite agreeable to the members of the Establishment, but was very hard on those boys who happened to be the sons of Dissenting parents, and who were obliged to attend a service in which their parents could not conscientiously join. To remedy the evil he was prepared to adopt the clause proposed by the right hon. Member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington) in his Education Bill, by which it was declared that he would not require any child to receive religious instruction to which the parents objected. The question was one that called for the interference of Parliament, and he had the authority of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge for saying that an alteration in the tests at present imposed was highly necessary. One of the first duties of a Representative of the people was to take care that the religious scruples of the people were attended to; and he believed that great advantage would be derived from the appointment of a Committee to consider the subject. One of the earliest reformers in this respect was Lord Bacon; but since the time of Lord Bacon 300 years had passed away, and very little alteration had been effected in the meantime. In the rules of the colleges themselves, which had become national institutions, there were many objectionable religious tests. Those could not be a better example of the abuses and malpractices prevailing in the Universities than that of Trinity College, Dublin, the fellows of which had so long been rigidly bent on maintaining the sacramental test. An attempt was made in the Irish Parliament to open that institution in 1793 which was unsuccessful, in spite of the excitement caused by the case of Hearne, who was deprived of a scholarship of the value of 80l., because he refused to take the sacrament according to the rite of the Church of England, being a Roman Catholic. Again, in Trinity College, Cambridge, when a gentleman was appointed to a fellowship, he was obliged to take an oath that he would make theology the end of his studies, and that after the expiration of seven years he would either take holy orders or surrender his fellowship. Many able men professing the Roman Catholic religion, declined to take the Sacrament, and were consequently deprived of their scholarships. He contended that an alteration in the law was called for, and that the House of Commons was the proper body to originate a change. In 1828 the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Colonies (Lord J. Russell), brought forward a Bill for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. Those Acts were abolished with regard to the magistracy and other individuals, but with regard to the colleges no change was made, and a separate measure was now required to effect an alteration. In most of the grammar schools throughout the kingdom the trustees, in appointing a master, were confined to the election of a graduate from the Universities of Oxford or Cambridge, graduates of the other Universities being excluded; but he believed that an institution which selected the best men of the day from all parts of the country was the most likely to advance the interests of the people. We were now arrived at a critical period in the history of the country, when men of talent and ability were more needed than in former times. He called on the House, therefore, to sanction the attempt he now made to set free the educational system of the country, and to affirm the preliminary Resolution he should now lay before them, a Bill founded on which would much tend to the improvement of our educational system.

seconded the Resolution, feeling, he said, it an honour to be identified with the Dissenters of England in one of the most important movements in the cause of civil and religious liberty which had taken place for the last 200 years. Motion made, and Question proposed—

"That this house will resolve itself into a Committee, to consider such Clauses of the Act of Uniformity of 1662, as impose religious tests, limiting the advantages of academical, or grammar, or free school education; and so much of any Regulations of National Institutions, either in England or Ireland, as impose religious tests as conditions or qualifications for any advantages connected with Education, in the English or Irish Universities or Public Schools."

Sir, I waited before making any observations upon the proposal of my hon. Friend the Member for North Lancashire (Mr. Heywood), because I considered that hon. Gentlemen who are connected with some of those institutions to which the Motion refers might wish to express their sentiments on their behalf to the House. I have, however, no difficulty in at once stating the course which it is my intention to pursue respecting it. The Motion of my hon. Friend seems to me to divide itself into two very distinct and different portions. The first part of the Resolution relates to the consideration of those portions of the Act of Uniformity winch require religious tests from schoolmasters and tutors in private families—from persons, in short, from whom generally no religious tests have for a long period been required, and which imposed very severe penalties upon those who neglected to comply with the enactments. The second part of the Resolution, if I properly understand its purport, would appear to me to tend to disturb the settlement which was made last year with regard to the University of Oxford. Now, with regard to the first part of my hon. Friend's Resolution, so far as he has explained it and as I comprehend it, I shall have no sort of difficulty in going along with him. I think these obsolete enactments, which have long ceased to be of any practical effect, and which are no longer in accordance with the spirit of the times, may, with great advantage, be swept away from the Statute Book. With regard to the second part of the proposal, I think it would not be right for Parliament to interfere and disturb the settlement of last year, at ail events until we have had some practical experience of the working of that measure. I shall not, therefore, be disposed to go along with my hon. Friend with respect to that part of his Resolution, so far as I understand it. If my hon. Friend should not consent to withhold the doubtful part of his Resolution, and to propose only the first clause, yet, as agreeing with him to some extent, I shall not object to the House going into Committee. I must, however, beg my hon. Friend and the House clearly to understand that, in doing so, it is with the full reservation that I have entire liberty to deal with my hon. Friend's Bill when it is brought in, according to the opinion I may form of the provisions which it contains. I shall be prepared to concur in such portions of my hon. Friend's Bill as will sweep away the old and obsolete enactments to which he has referred, but I shall not be disposed to assent to such portions of the measure as would disturb the arrangement of last year. There may be other points in the Bill which are not included in the Resolution of my hon. Friend, and with regard to them I beg to reserve to myself perfect freedom to consider them when they are explained and developed. I hope, therefore, my hon. Friend will understand, if he persists in leaving his Motion in its present form, that in acquiescing in it I am by no means committed to the full extent of his proposal, but for myself and for Her Majesty's Government I shall be at perfect liberty to object to any portion of the arrangement he suggests, which upon full consideration we may think it is not desirable or expedient to adopt.

said, the declaration which his noble Friend had just made was, it appeared to him, quite fair and satisfactory, but he went beyond his noble Friend in this respect, that he was disposed to urge upon his hon. Friend the Member for North Lancashire, the expediency of amending his Motion forthwith, because he thought it was neither convenient nor satisfactory that the House should go into Committee upon a matter affecting the Act of Uniformity, not on the proposition of the Government, but upon that of a private Member, in order to allow a Bill to be brought in and read a first and second time, with the view of cutting it down to comparatively insignificant proportions in Committee. He felt bound to give notice distinctly to his hon. Friend the Member for North Lancashire that, so far as the University of Oxford was concerned, after the arrangement of last year, he (Mr. Gladstone) would think it his duty, without the smallest compunction or hesitation, to resist any attempt to interfere with the settlement then made by Parliament. He considered, however, that the omission of the latter part of the Motion would not entirely and satisfactorily attain the object of his noble Friend at the head of the Government, for a clause in the Act of Uniformity, which was in fact a fundamental part of the settlement of last year, limited college offices to members of the Church of England. He thought that any alteration of important Acts of Parliament, which might unsettle the condition of ancient institutions, was a matter of very serious consideration, and that it was most inexpedient and unadvisable that the discussion of such subjects should be renewed year after year. No doubt it appeared a very slight thing to his hon. Friend the Member for North Lancashire to cut out of the Statute Book any measures which were opposed to his views of the manner in which these venerable institutions should be regulated. He (Mr. Gladstone) thought, however, that in the case of institutions so ancient, and possessing so many rights of a complex character, a strong case was requisite to justify the interference of Parliament, and it was especially desirable that such interference should be rare. He considered that his opinion would be borne out by those who recollected that it cost the House the labour of half a Session only last year, to pass a Bill for the reform of the University of Oxford. He considered that in a matter of this kind, those who desired to attain reasonable objects should proceed cautiously and step by step. Commissions had been appointed to inquire, time after time, into the old Universities of the country; they had made their reports; and Parliament had addressed itself with laudable care to the object of applying such parts of their reports as it approved to the case of the University of Oxford. It appeared to him that the recommendation given by his noble Friend at the head of the Government on a former occasion was very wise and sound—that to the Universities all minor establishments for the promotion of education should be made to conform. The system introduced by the Act of last year could not have been established, had not the University, in pursuance of clauses contained in the Act, applied itself with great good faith to carrying into effect the intentions of Parliament, by framing regulations for its better government and discipline. He considered, therefore, that it would be but an ill return for the disposition so dutifully manifested by the University, if, before an opportunity had been afforded to the University authorities of carrying any of the new arrangements into effect, they interfered with a fresh set of Parliamentary stipulations, and threw into confusion the regulations which had already been devised at Oxford. The Universities must be the key to the system of instruction in the public schools; and as Parliament had already passed a Bill with respect to Oxford, as a Bill relating to the University of Cambridge was now before the other House, and as he took it for granted that these measures would be followed by one affecting the University of Dublin, he would call upon them first to fix, by a Vote of that House, the principles applicable to the Universities, and then to consider the principles applicable to the public and grammar schools of the country.

said, he thought the most important portion of the Motion of the hon. Member (Mr. Heywood) referred to the endowed grammar and public schools, and that the House ought not, without careful and mature consideration, to proceed to legislate upon a subject of so much importance. The hon. Gentleman must be aware that, in order to open these schools to Dissenters, the trusts of the endowments would have to be, not qualified or altered merely, but entirely subverted. He therefore asked whether, on the present occasion, the House would sanction a proposal which must necessarily have so gigantic an effect? He trusted the hon. Gentleman would listen to the advice which had been tendered to him, and would consent to alter the terms of his Motion in such a manner as would have the effect of removing those merely obsolete enactments to which the noble Lord at the head of Her Majesty's Government had referred.

said, he had no objection to modify his Motion. The most important and urgent cases were not at Oxford, but at Trinity College, Dublin. For the scholarships there sacramental tests were required, when they were abolished everywhere else, If it would meet the wish of the House, therefore, he would alter the Motion by inserting Trinity College by name, as that was the most important case.

said, he considered that the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gladstone) was a satisfactory answer to the speech of the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) and afforded the strongest reasons for the rejection of the Motion altogether, because the Motion that the House should go into Committee in order to find out what was the meaning of the hon. Member (Mr. Heywood) was perfectly absurd, and was a most unjustifiable task to be imposed on them. The hon. Gentleman, however, said that he was willing to qualify his Motion provided he were permitted to do something with the University of Dublin. Now, it was a most remarkable fact that that University was the most liberal of any of the Universities of the United Kingdom, and there was extant a speech of Mr. Grattan, which was spoken in 1794, in which that eminent man pronounced a panegyric on the Dublin University as being the most liberal in Europe, because it had permitted the education of Dissenters within its walls fully a century before any other University. He visited the University last week, when he saw a list of scholarships for election, and he asked whether they were to be open to all classes of Her Majesty's subjects, and the answer was that they were. But what did the hon. Member propose? He proposed that scholarships also should be open to Dissenters; but he did not yet go so far as fellowships. Now, he (Mr. Whiteside) admitted that the Dissenters in Ireland were a very respectable body of men; their language was more moderate than that used by the Dissenters of England—and in which he thought they showed their good sense; but the proposition, that the doubts raised as to the meaning of the hon. Member's Motion should be solved by fastening on the unfortunate University of Dublin and seizing upon its scholarships was one which he did not think even the noble Lord himself would assent to.

said, that he was wiling further to alter his Motion by omitting the latter section, and stopping at the words "religious test." It would then read thus—

"That this House will resolve itself into a Committee to consider such clauses of the Act of Uniformity of 1662 as impose religious tests."

said, he thought the hon. Gentleman was committing a mistake in supposing that the noble Lord at the head of the Government had actually assented to the Motion in the qualified terms in which he had proposed to submit it to the House. It was quite clear that the noble Lord did not know what were the intentions and objects of the hon. Gentleman. It was obvious that they were not those indicated by the noble Lord. He (Mr. Disraeli) thought it would be extremely unwise for the House of Commons to go into Committee on a Statute of not less importance than the Act of Uniformity, when absolutely the hon. Member who made that proposal had not indicated to the House in precise language what was his object, and when the First Minister of the Crown, who had sanctioned the Motion, had described it in a manner which proved that he was unacquainted with the intention of its proposer.

said, he was very sorry that he had been misunderstood. The object he had in view was that boys, not merely belonging to the Church of England, but to other denominations, should be allowed to partake of the advantages of academical or grammar or free school education, without having religious tests forced upon them of a Church to which they did not belong.

said, that although but a humble Member of the House, he thought it rather an insult upon his own common sense if he were called upon to vote upon a Motion such as this before it had been explained by its proposer what was the object of it. Upon the suggestion of the noble Lord (Vscount Palmerston), indeed, some alteration had been made in the Motion; but it appeared to him that that alteration was anything but satisfactory. The subject to which it referred was one of the most important with which that House could have to deal, and it appeared to him that the best course the hon. Gentleman could pursue would be to withdraw the Motion, and bring it on again at a future day, when he might be able to explain to the House what he really did mean by his Motion.

said, he considered that the Motion would be rendered only the more objectionable by the alteration the hon. Gentleman proposed. It was objectionable enough as it stood originally; but it would be still more so when amended in the manner suggested. Not only would it be useless, but positively mischievous, for the House to go into Committee upon a Resolution framed in such general terms; and if the hon. Gentleman did not withdraw his Motion, he would recommend that it should be met with a direct negative and ejected altogether.

said, it appeared to him the hon. Gentleman had done himself injustice in not folly explaining what it was he wished to submit to the Committee. The hon. Gentleman did not read the whole sentence, and by not doing so he seemed to propose that the House should inquire generally into the effect of the Act of 1662 which imposed religious tests. That no doubt would be a very wide inquiry indeed; but that evidently was not what the hon. Gentleman meant. He begged to be permitted to read the first part of the hon. Gentleman's Resolution—

"That this House will resolve itself into a Committee to consider such Clauses of the Act of Uniformity of 1662 as impose religious tests, limiting the advantages of academical or grammar or free school education."

This was what he believed the hon. Gentleman meant to propose to the House. He should like the hon. Gentleman to say whether he did not mean that his amended Motion should read on in the following way—That this House will resolve itself into a Committee, to consider such clauses of the Act of Uniformity of 1662 as impose religious tests, limiting the advantages of academical or grammar or free school education?

said, he wished to put the Motion in the shape most satisfactory to the House, and was ready to adopt the suggestion of the learned Serjeant. With that view he would beg to be allowed to withdraw the original Motion. Question put, and negatived.

said, that, in bringing forward the Motion of which he had given notice, he had no intention of making an attack on any official, but merely wished to bring before the country the principles of conduct adopted in certain offices. The expenses of the Charity Commission were very great; the last Return showed an expenditure of 78,000l. They had, indeed, examined 238 charities, and no doubt a large benefit had accrued to the public, and considerable funds had been rescued from misappropriation, He thought the Commission, instead of any one else, ought to have the appointment of their own secretary and counsel. It appeared that Mr. Hine had been at once secretary to the Commission and solicitor to the Attorney General, and on his resignation Mr. Fearon was appointed to fill the two offices. As secretary he might advise the Commission to institute a suit, which he would conduct as solicitor. If the Return was granted, the House would see in what manner the suits in this office were conducted. He held in his hand a letter from Mr. Hume, written a short time before his death, in reference to the Hospital of St. Cross, The veteran reformer expressed his opinion that what had occurred was owing to the neglect of the parties conducting the suit, and declared his intention, if again able to enter the House, to move for a Committee to investigate what he believed was a fraud on one hand, and gross neglect on the other. If the Return was granted, they would find the solicitor acting in his professional capacity for both plaintiffs and defendants, and the standing counsel holding a brief first on one side and then on the other. The Commission, therefore, ought to have the appointment of these officers, and it was so provided for by the 38 Geo. III., c. 91. A large amount was now derived by the officers from fees. He thought it would be better for the country to alter the system altogether, and pay them liberal salaries instead. He knew nothing personally of Mr. Fearon, and it was from no feeling of hostility towards him that he brought forward his Motion. He made the Motion solely with a view to elicit information as to what had really been done by the Commission, and as to the manner in which that expenditure had been incurred. He thought there was just reason for complaint as to the amount of fees paid to counsel in many cases.

seconded the Motion. Motion made, and Question proposed—

That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, that She will be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid before this House, Copies of Treasury or other Order appointing Robert Wray, esquire, Standing Counsel to the Attorney General in Equity Crown matters, or the date when and by whom and under what circumstances he was appointed."

said, that he did not like to oppose Motions for Returns, but really the Returns asked for by the present Motion was so unprecedented, and would be so voluminous, that he should not feel that be was doing his duty to the House unless he afforded them some information, so as to enable them to see what was asked for. He was sure that the hon. Member who had brought forward this Motion had done so with the utmost innocence and simplicity, and with out having the slightest idea of what he (the Attorney General) believed was the case—that he was made neither more nor less than the puppet of a discontented solicitor, who had applied to other Members of the House to bring forward the same Motion, but had failed in the attempt. The Motion of the hon. Member included twenty-two returns, the greater part of which were already on the shelves of the House, while others could only be produced at a cost wholly disproportioned to the value of the information which they would afford. With regard to the first portion of the Returns moved for, it was sufficient to say there were no such orders as those referred to. The counsel in question, who acted as the juniors of the Attorney General in charity matters, were appointed by him. The same reply might be made in the case of the solicitors, who were also appointed by the Attorney General, as it was right and fit they should be, seeing that he was responsible for the manner in which they conducted the business in which they were engaged. With regard to the next Returns, he must inform the House that they were the first of a series of covert attacks on Mr. Fearon, than whom a more valuable officer never conducted the business of a public department in this or any other country. No doubt, a number of ex-officio informations had been filed by the Attorney General without the previous recommendation of the Charity Commissioners; but that was sufficiently accounted for by the fact that there were no Charity Commissioners in existence from 1839, while there were numerous cases in which it was necessary to file informations, and in which they were accordingly filed at the instigation of parties interested in the charities. In the Motion for the other Returns which followed, he could detect the same animus he had already pointed out; while if the information required by others were furnished, it would be exceedingly voluminous and altogether useless, especially as the very information had, in many cases, been already furnished to the House. If the hon. Gentleman thought there was anything wrong in the proceedings of the Attorney General, he ought not to ask for useless and expensive returns, but to move for a Select Committee.

said, he deprecated the printing of such a mass of trash as the returns moved for by the hon. Member for Southwark.

said, after what had fallen from the hon. and learned Attorney General he would not press his Motion. Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

said, he rose to call the attention of the House to the system under which the Post Office was administered, and to move—

"That, in the opinion of this House, the orders given by the Treasury to the Postmaster General, in the year 1848, to establish a Post-office communication, at the expense of his department, between the islands of North and South Uist, Harris, and Barra, should be carried into effect without delay."

In point of fact, the House should bear in mind that the Postmaster General had not perfect control over his own department, but was under the direction of the Secretary to the Treasury, who held in his hands at the same time the patronage of the Post Office, the Customs, and the Excise, and distributed it with the object of gaining political support for the Government. Thus, the head of the Administration, as First Lord of the Treasury, presided over a department engaged in something which fell little short of bribery and corruption. The patronage of the Post Office was distributed not among the deserving clerks and subordinates, but mainly for political purposes; and the administration of the department, with its double system of management, was in every way cumbrous and absurd. The case to which he wished to call the attention of the House furnished an instance of this. Near the coast of Skye were five islands, which contained somewhere about 20,000 inhabitants, and possessed Post Offices established by the Government. Practically, however, the inhabitants of these islands had never received the advantage of the penny postage stamp, for they had been compelled to maintain the packets which conveyed their letters to the islands. In 1848, during the pressure of the famine, the people refused to pay for these packets, which consequently ceased to ply, and all postal communication was cut off. At the request, however, of his constituents, he had waited upon the right hon. Gentleman the then Secretary for the Home Department, and he wrote to the Treasury, who at once consented to bear the expense of these packets. The Government, from that time, undertook to maintain the communication as far as the island of North Uist, but they had never carried it further. The charge thrown upon the poor inhabitants of the islands for keeping up the communication was very heavy, the cost of maintaining the boats being about 80l. a year. That sum was raised by subscription, but as many of the inhabitants refused to contribute, the cost was borne by those among them who were unwilling that the postal communication should be altogether interrupted. He did not ask any favour in this case at the hands of Her Majesty's Government, but he contended that those whose cause he urged upon the attention of the House were entitled to be placed, with respect to facilities of postal communication, upon the same footing as any other class of their fellow-subjects. He trusted, therefore, that neither the House nor the Government would suffer the inhabitants of these islands, poor though they were, to be subjected for the future to the inconvenience he had described. Notice taken, that forty Members were not present; House counted; and forty Members not being present; The House was adjourned at a quarter after Seven o'clock.