15 MAY 1830, Page 1

I. SUPPLY.—The House, (after some opposition from Lord EBRING- TON

and Mr. HUME, who contended that the petitions of the people should be discussed before their money was voted away) having re- solved itself into a Committee of Supply, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that 60001. be granted for the erection of Churches in the West Indies.

Mr. R. GORDON wished to know where members might learn how the wious sums that had been voted for similar purposes had been disc red of. -

arching for this information, some time ago, and asking for directions in

quarter, he had been told by 1) look into the Arley Extraordinaries. (Laughter.) Wi.11, he did :cr,.h :nto tire army ex- traordinaries, and there he found a sum charged for the Bishop's-house; at Barbadoes. (Hear, and laughter.) Sir J. GRAHAM said, that he found a sum of 5081. charged or the very same purpose in the civil contingencies. (Laughter.) The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said; that one was for the house of the Bishop of Barbadoes, and the other for the house of the Bishop of the Leeward Islands.

Mr. HUME said that the time was come when there ought to be an end of erecting palaces for bishops in the West Indies.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM objected to the mode in which the Colonial accounts were kept.

Sir G. MURRAY agreed that an estimate for the Colonies ought to be submitted to the House annually. Steps had been taken for that purpose ; but the House must see that the distance of the Colonies rendered it impossible that delay in procuring the necessary informa- tion should not take place.

Mr. BROUGHAM was not satisfied in letting 6,0001., or 6001., or 61. be granted without some information-of its use and intended distribu- tion.

After some further discussion, the resolution was agreed to.

A sum of 87,3681. to make good the deficiences of the fee fund, having been moved, Sir J. GRAHAM observed, that the motion which he intended tc make to-morrow had for its object the production of returns thal would put the House in possession- of the precise amount of all tht salaries now received by the principal servants of the Crown.

It was not worthy of the member for Dorset or himself to stoop at corn paratively ignoble quarry, while the great birds of prey were permitted tc soar in the higher regions of the political atmosphere unmolested. (Cheers. Since the existence of the distress which the people had daily to struggl with, the only public _officer who had the consideration to come forwar spontaneously and relinquish a portion of his salary, was the Duke Northumberland, the Irish Viceroy. At an antecedent period Lord Carndel also, and Mr. Moore, a gentleman who pre-eminently merited the gratitud of the country, had, much to their honour, made similar sacrifices; but sue conduct was not likely-to become popular .with placemen ; and it therefor became necessary.that GoVernment should communicate to the guardians c„, the public purse the exact amount of the money which had thus been a propriated.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER having objected to the eit, pressions made use of, Sir JAMES GRAHAM admitted that the form of the expression ws objectionable, but begged to adhere to its spirit. It was ungenerot to cut downthe salaries of clerks, and to allow the perquisites of nie. high in office to'remain untouched,

The salary of the Under-Secretary of the Treasury, amounting to 2,500/. then came under discussion.

Mr. C. WOOD moved that it be reduced by 5004

For the reduction, 106 ; against it, 173.

The Supplies were again before the House last night ; and when they were disposed of,

Sir JAMES GRAHAM moved for " a return of all salaries, pay, pro- fits, fees and emoluments, civil andmilitary, received between the 5th of January 1829, and the 5th of January 1830, by the members of the Privy Council ; the amount paid to each,individual, the cause for which paid, and the source from whence derived." Sir James stated, that he deemed it necessary to call for returns of the emoluments of

Privy Councillors, because none such had ever been furnished, and because the public had a gad right to know on what grounds that class of persons received public money. He excluded from his motion the members of the Royal Family. Their allowances had often been discussed. There were, besides them, 169 Privy Councillors ; of Whom 113 receive pay, pensions, &c., to the amount of 65 0,164 /. or, on an average, 5,7501. each : 86,1031. of the gross sum is paid for si- necures. Of the 113 Privy Councillors who receive pay, thirty are pluralists, who receive on an average 7,371/. each ; forty-seven are Peeers, who receive on an average 8,0691. each ; twenty-two are members of the Lower House, who receive on an average 4,1301. These statements Sir James believed to be perfectly accurate. At all events, it rested with Ministers to prove their inaccuracy, by granting the returns he called for. The country now, when wheat sold at 568., paid public officers as large an amount of money as they did in 1810, when wheat sold at 105s. Country gentlemen now received half prices, and paid double annuities, while public officers received double annuities and paid half prices. His first great 'object, Sir James staled to be, to ascertain whether the services rendered by Privy Councillors were equivalent to the money paid for them ; his second, to have it decided, whether the rule that half-pay should abate on accepting office, should not apply to full pay ; his third, to asceri tin whether pensions or allowances to retired Ministers should not cease on their return to office. Was it consistent with justice—with decency—that poor clerks should be cashiered, while

public officers, possessiw, power, property, and influence, should re-

tain all their emoluments ? that Lord Cathcart, for instance, should retain an English pension of 2,0001., a Scotch pension of 2,0134. be- sides military pay and allowances ? that the Gallant Admiral opposite (Sir G. Cockburn) should enjoy 1,000/. a year as a Lord of the Ad- miralty, and fall pay as a Major-General of marines ? or that Lord Melville and Lord Rosslyn, and others of that class, should be per- mitted to enjoy the enormous salaries and pensions which had been heaped upon them ?—Sir James concluded a most able and eloquent speech amidst loud cheers.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no wish to obstruct the propoSed inquiry. He, however, looked upon the form of the required

returns as caleulated to hold up Privy Councillors as a class to ob- loquy ; and concluded by moving, as an amendment, for "returns of salaries received by public officers," instead of "by members of the Privy Council."

Lord AlwroN- declared that the Chancellor of the Exchequer only wished by his amendment to defeat the object of the motion. He called upon Sir George Cockburn to answer to the statements which had been made on the subject of his emoluments.

Sir GEORGE COCKBURN, with great modesty and good feeling, en- tered upon his defence ; and satisfied even Sir James Graham that his allowances were not unreasonable. Sir George concluded by declaring himself perfectly ready to retire from public service.

Mr. Hum: exposed the object of the amendment. Many Privy Councillors received the public money without being public officers : the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to furnish returns of the emoluments of public officers only.

Sir JOSEPH YORKE, Mr. E. DAVENPORT, Lord ALTHORP, and Lord HOWICK supported the motion. So did Mr. Husicissox ; who

declared that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer wished to save Privy Councillors from " obloquy," it might be well to grant the required returns.

Mr. PoarmA.N, Mr. W. SMITH, and General GROSVENOR opposed the motion.

The House divided. For the motion, 147; for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's amendment, 231.

2. LORD LIEUTENANCY OF IRELAND. Mr. HUME moved " that an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that he will be graciously pleased to consider whether the office of. Viceroy was any onger necessary in Ireland ; or whether it could be dispensed with onsistently with the advantage of that country and the general in- erests of the United Kingdom." Mr. Hume observed that the ques- on was less complicated than it had been before the settlement of he Catholic claims. The saving of expense which the abolition of he office involved, was only of minor importance, yet had the aboli- ion taken place twenty-five years ago, the country would have saved 0,000,000/. If this money had really been spent for the good of Ireland, he should not egret it; but as he knew that a great part of it had gone towards keeping up arty spirit, and setting a few over the mass of the people, he could not help amenting that the money of England had been so misspent. The local in,. uence of the Government of Ireland had occasioned the greatest mischiefs. nstead of being made an integral part of England, Ireland had been con- erted into a province, and subjected to all the vices of a colonial govern- ent. It differed in no respect from a colony; it had been spared none of hose evils which were inherent in delegated power. They had passed sepa- ate hills for Ireland ; the establishments of that country were on a different Doting from the establishments of England. If there had been no Lord Lieu-

tenant in Ireland, this could not have happened. AaLord Lieutenant, when appointed, put his relations and friends, all strangers to Ireland, in lucrative and confidential situations about him. The retainers of the Lord Lieutenant were different from the people of Ireland. This could not fail of displeasing the mass of the Irish, and there could be no union till the system was altered. Of the Irish, too, the Orange party had the preference. On them, the small minority, were lavished honours and emoluments to the exclusion of the ma- jority. In a word, we had treated Ireland exactly as we had treated the rest of our colonies. Canada and Ireland presented the same picture of mis- government. The only way to get rid of the evils of this system was to retrace our steps—to place Ireland on the same footing with respect to its internal government as Scotland and England.

The presence of a court was no doubt a benefit to a certain number of haberdashers, and tailors, and court dress makers; but was their advantage to he purchased at such a price to the country and to their fellow-subjects in other parts of that kingdom? The fears of those who thought that Dublin would be injured by the removal of the Court were, he thought, quite vain and idle. From the situation of Dublin—of its being the centre of commu- nication between this country and the whole of Ireland—the seat of the law- courts—possessing a fine harbour—it must always he the metropolis, and an increasing metropolis too, in that country. When he last brought this sub- j ect before the House, he was met by a statement of the evils which the re- moval of the Legislature had brought upon Dublin—that grass was growing in the streets, and that a great portion of her houses were gone to ruin. He had since made inquiries into the fact, and he would state the result. So far, then, from its being true that Dublin had decreased since the Union, it had increased in the number of houses and inhabitants. From the year 1800 to 1822 (the year before that in which he first introduced this subject), the increase of the number of houses was 3,463, being nearly a fifth of the whole number of 19,864. The copulation was then 223,000, having increased between 40,000 and 50,000. The increase in the shipping was also great: in 1800, the number of ships was 2,575; in 1822, it was 3,4U0; and at present, 4,000 : the toiolage had also increased 113,000 tons. It was suggested that this increase of shipping might have been occasioned at the expense of the outports ; but this was not the case, for the outports had increased in the same time. In 1800, the number of vessels was 4,800 ; in 1822, 7,900 ; and last year, 11,700. The tonnage in 1800 was 664,000 ; in 1822, it was 953,000; and in the last year, 1,470,0Q0;, being an increase of upwards of 500,000 tons in the last seven years. It was. impossible, then, to assert with any justice that Ireland had deteriorated since the Union.

Lord F. L. GOWER contended that the Lord Lieutenancy was emi- nently beneficial to Ireland.

The general advance of the prosperity of Dublin since the Union had been demonstrated; but was it not rather illogical to conclude, that the system under which that prosperity was created ought to be changed ? In fact, no case had been made out which could induce the House to adopt the proposed resolution, and the discussion of the subject at present was both impolitic and inconvenient.

Mr. S. RICE had now little doubt that the time was not very dis- tant when Government would come forward with a proposal of the kind contemplated by the member for Aberdeen. This being his im- pression, it appeared to him that it only remained for the House to quicken the motions of Ministers, and anticipate their intention. If members looked back to the frequent changes of the Chief Secretary of Ireland since the Union, they would see what must be the effect of the system of shifting and changing. The average continuance of each was nineteen months. Just at the time when they knew something of business, they were led to abandon the country, and deliver over a most difficult political task to a new practitioner. * * 4' As to the prosperity of Dublin, it must neces- sarily increase with the improvement of the Government. Had it been found necessary to establish a court at Edinburgh for the moral improvement of the people ? And, without undervaluing the society of Dublin, he would ask if the society of Edinburgh was to be despised in comparison? The fact was, that the tendency of Dublin was every day more and more commercial. It was an outwork of Liverpool, to which it was united by that flying bridge, a steam-boat. So highly did he think of the value to Ireland of steam-boats, that much as he valued the Lord Lieutenant of that country, he valued a single steam-boat more than a whole wilderness of Lord Lieutenants.

Mr. MOORS and Lord OXMANTOWN opposed the motion.

Sir H. PARNELL gave it his support. Lord ALTHORP said, the office of Lord Lieutenant appeared to him to destroy that unity of government which was so desirable in Ireland. If, upon the abolition of the office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, there were appointed in each county clthat kingdom a lord lieutenant, enjoy- ing similar powers and privileges with the lords lieutenant of counties in England, all the difficulties which some gentlemen apprehended from the abolition would he entirely obviated. Sir GEORGE HILL was inclined to think that the office of Lord Lieutenant had been of great service to Ireland.

Ile admitted that a saving to the public would accrue from the removal of the Viceregal Court from Dublin ; but he thought that that saving would be a minor consideration, unless it could be distinctly made out that Ireland would receive no detriment in any other respect from flaying such a measure carried immediately into effect.

Mr. 0.CONNELL opposed the abolition of the Lord Lieutenancy, because it would increase the number of absentees.

Sir JOSEPH YORKE supported the motion. Lord CASTLEREAGIS, Mr. JEPHSON, and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, opposed it. Mr. HUME replied ; and the House divided. For the motion, 115 ; against it, 229.

3. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND. Mr. O'CONNELL having moved for a copy of the Coroner's Inquest upon the body of Daniel Naylan, for whose alleged murder in Miltown Malboy, county of Clare, on the 29th of June 1829, a policeman, named William Ferguson, was tried and acquitted, Mr. DOHERTY rose, and at great length opposed the motion ; which appeared to him, he said, the most extraordinary motion that had ever been made in that House. It would tend to convert the House into a court of appeal, in all criminal

i cases, from the decision of juries in Ireland; and, consequently, if this is to be tolerated, there are no cases which might not, upon the simple motion of a member, be brought up to this court, as if it were to a court of review.

Mr. DOHERTY then proceeded to attack Mr. O'Connell for having boasted that he would drag him (Mr. Doherty) before the bar of the House, while he at the same time declined bringing forward. the Case in a manly way. Nay, he accused the member for Clare of a design to sneak out of the business altogether, by moving " for documents so contrary to all the principles and practice of conducting the busi- ness of this House, that, however anxious, we cannot grant them without a violation of all those rules which should guide us as lawyers and members of Parliament." Mr. Doherty then proceeded to contrast Mr. O'Connell's want of alacrity in the House with his manner elsewhere.

" He has unsparingly brought charges against me in-taverns—in the street, —before the rabble—before those amongst whom I go, not as a volunteers but as the delegate of the Lord Lieutenant, with important and sacred duties to perform, which, I trust, I de> perform faithfully, fearlessly, and, notwith- standing the assertion of 'the learned gentleman, mercifully. (Cheers.) I trust, that, whenever the learned gentleman shall find courage to bring for- ward his motion, I shall be able to prove the utter falsehood of his daily and ordinary slanders." (Loud cheers.)

Mr. O'CONNELL, in reply, talked ore rotundo about the necessity of discharging what he deemed his duty.

" I will not be deterred from doing my duty fearlessly by any man, how- ever he may be supported. In saying fearlessly, I allude not to that species of courage which is recognized in a court of honour, and of which I know nothing. There is blood upon this hand—I regret it deeply—and he knows it. He knows that I have a vow in heaven, else he would not have ventured to address me in such language, or to presume that insolence should go un- punished. [Loud cries of " Oh !" " Order !" and law later.] He knows it ; and there is not one man in the circle of our acquaintance but knows it also, and knows, at the same time, that but for that vow he dare not address me as he has done. [Very loud cries of " Order," from alt parts of the House.] I retract.

Finally, the Member for Clare withdrew his motion ; but on the following evening, brought on his long-threatened motion about the Doneraile conspiracies, uy calling for

Copies of the several depositions and informations sworn by Patrick and Owen Daly ; a copy of the Judge's notes, and other documents connected with the trials for conspiracy to commit murder, before the Special Commis- sion at Cork.

Mr. O'CONNELL stated, . . . that his object was, in the first place, to bring before the House a complaint against the mode of preparing cases for trial in Ireland by the Magistracy—against the system of taking depositions without the knowledge of the person charged. This was his first specific object—that so the prac- tice might, if irregular, be censured, and, if sanctioned by precedent, that it might be altered. His second specific object was to bring forward a com- plaint against the mode in which the prosecutions in Cork were in one re- spect conducted by the leading counsel, with the view that if this complaint were well founded, and the practice irregular, the House might express that opinion in consequence of which the practice would cease ; but that if, on the contrary, the practice was sanctioned by usage, he might obtain leave to bring in a bill to amend it. These were his objects ; and notwithstanding what had passed, he would enter upon the subject without irritation or any angry feeling, but as fully as he ever did any where to his knowledge—he Was well aware that the reports were stronger than the speeches he delivered, for they had not the qualification which accompanied the delivery.

Mr. O'Connell then went at great length into the case or the Doneraile conspirators and contended, that Mr. Doherty was not warranted in putting the lives of the King's subjects in danger on the testimony of a witness, whom, from the gross inconsistencies in his original deposition (which was carefully kept from the prisoners' coun- sel), the Crown officers must have known to be perjured and un- worthy of credit.

Mr. DOHERTY defended his conduct ; denied that any part of the evidence had been concealed ; and accused Mr. O'Connell of indulg- ing in inflammatory after-dinner harangues, full of accusations which he could not substantiate.

Mr. JEPHSON contended that all that was no answer to Mr. O'Con- nell's specific charge. Lord ALTHORP thought that Mr. O'Connell had made out a strong case, and that the defence of the Irish Solicitor-General was any thing but satisfactory. Mr. NORTH inveighed with great bitterness against the Member for Clare. •

After being compelled to bring forward his charge, he had done so in a man- ner very different from that in which he had brought it forward elsewhere. In Ireland he had been all fury and violence ; in that House he was all submis- sion and gentleness. In Ireiand he had spoken with the Stentorian voice of a full-grown Irish giant ; but in that House he had been like the little babe which he had himself described as lisping the praise of the Juryman who per- sisted in a verdict of acquittal. In Ireland he uttered his accusations like the lofty monarch of the woods ; in that House he " aggravated his voice so that he roared you as gently as any sucking dove." In both countries, however, the honourable and learned gentleman could not refrain from being the un- wearied disturber and agitator of the community.

Mr. HUME praised the temper and moderation of Mr. O'CoNNELL'S speech ; which he thought favourably contrasted with the pomposity and insolence of that of Mr. North. He looked upon it as unfair in the extreme to sit in judgment upon expressions that might have been used incautiously at convivial meetings.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL defended Mr. Doherty. Mr. D. W. HARVEY remarked, that although the Honourable the Solicitor-General for Ireland said he courted inquiry, he was, never- theless, withholding evidence, for the principal evidence was the notes of the Judge who tried the case. This was not a cause between two individual members, but the House was called upon to vindicate the public justice.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL and Lord F. L. GOWER opposed the motion.

Mr. O'CONNELL, in reply, asked why he had been tauntingly chal- lenged to bring forward the motion, if he was to be met with the an- swer that the papers could not be granted ? He required no more now than was necessary to prove what he asserted ; and he asked for the Judge's notes—a document never in this country refused. The House then. divided. For the. motion, l 2; against it. 75. 4. FLUCTUATIONS IN TRADE. Mr. SLANEY moved, " That a Select Committee be appointed for considering means to lessen the evils arising from the fluctuation of employment in manufacturing dis- tricts, and to improve the health and comfort of the working classes dwelling in large towns." Mr. Slaney called the attention of the House to the increase of the manufacturing population, and to the circumstances which affected its condition. The monopoly of trade which this country at one time enjoyed, was now broken up ; and that circtunstance, thought it did not warrant us in fostering jealousy of our neighbours, called upon us to examine our situation.

The fluctuation of the employment of our manufacturers arose from two or three Causes. One of the causes was the vast improvement in machinery ; not that he intended to say that this would not finally benefit the manufac- turers, but, at all events, at present it was acting to their injury. But besides this, an extraordinary change had taken place in the locality of many of our manufactures. Since steam-engines had been so much used, it had become the interest of the proprietors to fix their works where there were coal-pits. The wool-manufacturers, that had formerly abounded in the southern par t of the country, had now found their way to the north. In addition to these reasons, fashion often made it great alteration. Cottons, for instance, had to a great extent displaced woollens ; and linens and silks had changed places in the like manner ; all which, of course, had been felt in certain quarters.

He then proceeded to point out other sources of fluctuation arising from chano-,es in fashion, and consequently in demand, both at home and from abroad.

He only mentioned these things to show that the trade of this country was more vulnerable now than it hail been formerly ; and his argument was, that against this attack upon the trade of the country the Government ought to contend, by affording the manufacturer every fair facility that was practi- cable with the general interests of the country. In touching upon this part of the subject, he would take the practical example of Benevolent Societies. The principle of those societies was to insure their members against illness, old age, or any other natural contingency ; and it was his intention to propose to the House the appointment of a contingency Committee for the purpose of inquir- ing whether it was not practicable to extend the same privileges to the hum- bler classes of society as a provision against other sorts of contingencies which were no less continually occurring. Mr. Slaney entered at considerable length upon the state of trade in Manchester and the surrounding districts—m Birmingham, Shef- field, and Wolverhampton; specifying the general rates of wages, and the general habits of the working classes, in these places.

He knew that objections would be made to the course which he was pro- posing ; and perhaps it would be said that such facilities (an extension of the principle of benefit societies to cases of want of employment) would be used by the manufacturing classes for the purpose of combination, and of raising their wages. He should not have ventured to propose the appointment of this Committee to the House, if he had not turned his particular attention to that point ; and it seemed to him that such an objection might be greatly removed by certain rules and regulations to be recommended by the Com- mittee. The case, too, was very different since the combination-laws had been removed, except in cases of violence or intimidation. It had been given in evidence, in the Committee of which Mr. Hume was the Chairman, that the combination-laws had always tended to increase combination ; and it certainly was clear, that in proportion as funds were provided by which the manufacturing classes might hn saved from distress, they would become more tractable. Two of the great causes which had forariatecirl, ic,anusNevcilatcluhctiumart- tion in wages were now removed—the one was the

formerly taken place in the currency, and the other the sudden changes in the price of food.

By some of the trades of London the insurance system was carried to a state of great perfection. This was the case with the tailors in particular ; and it was so managed, that when they were out of work, they were put on an allowance by which they were kept from distress. A somewhat similar system existed among the carpet-weavers and paper-makers of Kidderminster ; but it was not nearly so perfect as the one to which he had already alluded. When these persons were out of work, they had travelling tickets given them, which entitled them to receive a small sum in every town they passed through, on the condition that they did not appear there again for three months ; and on coming to London they got 5s. with a bed for two nights, and two pots of porter. But all the rest of the manufacturing classes had no such provision, and in the event of being. out of work they were left entirely destitute. In addition to this, the way in which things were managed, when the trade was bad, was highly disadvantageous to them. The price of their labour was lessened, and the quantity of work was increased in proportion ; the effect of which was, that the manufacturer increased his labour from twelve to sixteen hours a- day, in the hopes of increasing his pittance, from which circumstance the market soon became overstocked, and the low prices were confirmed for a much longer period of time.

Mr. MARSHALL seconded the motion.

Mr. CRIPPS doubted very much whether the plan would prove ad- "Tnhteagheotisu.rable member had alluded. to the Southern counties ; but he could not be blind to the difference between them and the Northern counties. He could not suppose, looking at their situation since 1825, that it would at any time have been possible for the people to club 6d. a week for the support of the workmen out of employ. All that the workmen in employ could con- tribute, would be only a drop in the bucket to support the workmen out of employ. If 10,000 or 12,000 men were out of employ in one district, what could the Club do ? If indeed the workmen were capable of supporting themselves, they might make themselves independent of their employers. This, according to the information laid before the House, already happened with the tailors. They earned more money than any other class of work- men. No people had such high wages. They could afford to subsist each other when out of work ; and what was the consequence ? Why, they did subscribe, not, however, to keep tailors from the parish, but to get what they called sufficient wages for themselves. In guarding against one evil, it was necessary not to run foul against another. Suppose that wages were so high as to enable the workmen to support each other in idleness if they did not choose to work for a season, or if they would not work unless they re- ceived 4s. or 5s. a day, could that be considered an advantage ? They might employ their funds to keep up wages, not to prevent fluctuations. Mr. ROBINSON disputed some of Mr. Slaney's statements about the state of trade in Worcester.

The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER would not oppose the ap- pointment of a Committee, because a Committee might supply some valuable information on the condition of the labouring classes ; but he was disposed to question the utility of the plan. which Mr. Slaney had in view.

In admitting the advantages of benefit societies, he had some doubts whe- ther their advantages could be so extended as to meet all the fluctuations in trade. That was an object he was afraid it was not possible to obtain. As far as these societies were now constituted, they were intended to assure in- dividuals, by small subscriptions, when they had any superfluous money, against periods of difficulty and distress, which might be a matter of accurate calculation. It was possible to calculate the average quantity of sickness and distress among a number of persons within a given time, and such cal- culations were accurately made ; and then it was possible to calculate the average payments which would provide against these casualties and preserve the funds of the society. To apply these principles to the fluctuations of trade, and call on the labourers to contribute small sums when they were fully employed, so that they might be maintained when they were not em- ployed, was, he feared, not possible, because the fluctuations were not sus- ceptible of calculation. The calculations of probabilities could be applied to friendly societies ; the principles on which these calculations were founded were invariable ; but that could not he said of trade. Another difficulty was, that friendly societies being intended to provide against sickness, the assist- ance they supplied was limited to parties actually needing it; but that prin- ciple could not be applied to the fluctuations of trade.

Sir GEORGE PHILIPS would not oppose the motion, but he thought the plan little likely to be of public advantage. Sir George bore tes- timony to the improvement of late of the condition of the labouring classes in Lancashire.

The Committee was then appointed.

5. Poon-LAWS. Lord TEYNHAM called the attention of the House to the rapid increase of pauperism, particularly in Kent, the county with which he was connected ; where, he declared, the pressure of the poor-rates. was no longer tolerable. He then read a series of Re- solutions, recommending the consolidation of the laws on the subject of the provision for and settlement of the poor, proposing that the repair of roitds and bridges be taken into the hands of the Govern- ment, who were to manage the county-rates, and advising, for the prevention of crime, the appointment of a rural guard. The Duke of WELLINGTON admitted that these subjects were well worthy of the attention of the House ; but, in their present form, it would be impossible to discuss them. Resolutions withdrawn.