Debates anb Vrotetbings in iparliament.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

Mouse OF LOADS. Monday, May 14. French Intervention at Rome : Lord Beau- Mont's Questions and Lord Lansdowne's Explanations—Rate-in-Aid Hill, considered in Committee—Adjourned at 711. 35 nt. Tuesday, May 15. Disturbances in Canada : Questions and Ministerial Statements—Agricultural Distress : Petitions presented and discussed—Adjourned at 7 h. 50 m. till Friday. [Thursday being Ascension Day.] Fri- day, May 18. Italian Intervention: Lord Lansdowne's Explanations of previous Statements—Navigation-laws: Lord Stanley's Statement Of Ills Amendments—Small Debts (Scotland) Rill, read a second time—Land Improvement and Drainage (Ireland) .Bill, read a first time—Rate-in-aid Bill, read a third time and passed—Adjourned at 911. 25m.

[Time occupied lathe three sittings, 911. 50m.

since the beginning of the Session, 112 h. 35 m.]

Roues Or Comatose. Monday, May 14. Irish Land Improvement and Drainage Bill, debated in Committee—Parliamentary Oaths Bill, debated In Committee—Adjourned at 12b. 45m. Tuesday, May 15. Disturbances in Canada : Questions and Ministerial Btatements—EmIgratIon from Ireland; Mr. Monsell's Motion for Papers, debated and agreed to—Prison Discipline : Mr. Charles Pearson's Motion—Adjourned at 1211. 30 tn. Wednesday. Slay 16; noon sitting. Papers on Canada presented, with a Conversation— Landlord and Tenant Bill, considered in Committee—Adjourned at 511. 50 in. Thursday. May 17. Eastern Counties Railway : Petition complaining of Mr. George Hudson and Other Members: Mr. Hudson's Defence—Canada: Question and Ministerial Statement— Irish Poor-relief BIB: second reading debated, and agreed to—Adjourned at 1111. 4510. Friday, Slay 18. Mr. Smith O'Brien: New Writ for Limerick County—Parliamentary Oaths Rill considered in Committee with closed doors from 511. 10 m. to 811. 10 m.; Mr. John O'Connell having enforced the Order excluding "strangers ": Bill passed Committee—Adjourned at 9h. 43m.

[Time occupied in the five sittings, 3611. 33m.

since the beginning of the Session, 51411. 9 m.] CANADIAN DISTURBANCES.

The attention of the Peers was called by Lord STANLEY, on Tuesday, to the formidable and alarming news from Canada. Though unwilling to provoke ;premature discussion, he felt it his duty not to lose a single moment in ascertaining whether her Majesty's Government were prepared to offer any explanation of the state of affairs in that colony; where it would appear that the discontent produced by a recent measure of the Govern- ment had at last broken into absolute disaffection and revolt. The two Ilouses of Parliament at Montreal have been burnt; and there is raging at this moment the most formidable of all wars, a war of races. Be would first repeat the question put at an early period of the session—. whether the noble Earl the Secretary for the Colonies has given to the Governor- General of Canada any specific instructions as to the policy to be pursued with regard to the measure which produced this outbreak. Secondly, he asked whether her Majesty's Government has any explanation to offer as to the present condi- tion in which Canada, one of the most valuable possessions of the British Crown, appears to be?

Earl GREY wished that Lord Stanley could, as he promised, have ab- stained from the expression of an opinion, or rather from making a state- ment which it was at the present moment difficult either to answer or to pass over in silence. On Friday he would lay upon the table a despatch 'from Lord Elgin, written on the 30th and sent through New Brunswick and Nova Scotia to New York, where it arrived just in time for the mail. It would show that Lord Elgin has acted throughout with his accustomed judgment, moderation and good sense. A riot, undoubtedly of an aggra- vated character, has taken place at Montreal; but from anything contained in the despatch, there appeared no reason to apprehend, as Lord Stanley apprehended, that a war of races has broken out. On the contrary, he had every reason to believe that tranquillity is now restored. Referring to an observation by Lord Stanley, that Ministers and not Lord Elgin are responsible for what has occurred, Earl Grey took the liberty to inform Lord Stanley, that the responsibility of these events rests as much with him as with many others-

" There is no doubt," said Lord Grey," that the accounts of the proceedings in This House and the expression of the opinions held by the noble Baron have con- tributed in no slight degree to aggravate the violence of party feeling which, 'unfortunately, prevails in that colony. I trust that the noble Baron will recol- lect in this House, that there is a responsibility resting on the members of Op- position as well as on the members of Administration. It is a fact which the noble Baron is too much in the habit of forgetting."

Lord STANLEY instantly replied, that there never was a Government in -existence which was indebted so much to the sense which the Opposition entertained of its responsibility, or had profited more by that feeling No intimidation, no insinuation, no taunt, no invective, should at any time pre- vent him from exercising that liberty ol meedhvwhich is one of the highest privileges of every Peer of Parliament. But the noble Earl had not answered either Of his questions: he thereforemepeated them.

'Earl GREY explainedmore folly-

" Until that despatch is :onthe table, it does natappear expedient to me to en- ter into any explanation ; far, •nntil yon'have 'read it, d cannot state upon what points I may or may not have given instruCtions to-Lord Elgin. As far as re- gards the assent given to the Indemnity Bill, I say that I deliberately and ad- visedly abstained from giving my noble friend any advice at all. I believe that the rule in Canada—and, indeed, in all our Colcnies—is, that the Governors have certain general instructions given them to guide them in giving their assent to or withholding their assent from the bills of the Colonial Legislatures. Whenever bills are tendered to them for approval, they exercise their judgment upon them, and, having exercised that judgment, transmit them to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, with such reports thereon as they think proper; and then her Ma.. jesty's Council is allowed to give or withhold assent, as the case may require. It has not been my practice, neither will it be my practice so long an I retain the office which I now fill, to depart from that wholesome rule; nor will I give my as- sent to bills which are not before me, and of which the circumstances are unknown to me."

Lord REDESDALE observed, that here WWI 9, Government bill, brought in and supported by the Government officers, and carried through the Legislative Council by the introduction of six new members into it—all of whom were introduced for the distinct purpose of carrying this bill—which at last was only carried by a majority of four. He was proceeding in his criticisms, when the Marquis of LANSDOWNE rose to order, and closed the irregular discussion. Earl GREY, however, rose to set Lord Redesdale right on facts: whatever addition had been recently made to the Legis- lative Council of Canada, had been made quite irrespective of this measure.

The subject also engaged attention in the House of Commons. Mr. HERMES called for official papers: at least extracts might be given; as they had been in regard to the Navigation Bill, although Lord John Russell had said that it was not usual to give extracts.

Mr. ROEBUCK observed, that the Indemnity Bill must be a money and be presumed that the assent of the Crown. must have been previously signified by the Imperial Government to Lord Elgin, and by Lord Elgin to his Ministers. Mr. Roebuck asked if such had been the case?—ap- pealing secondly to Mr. Hawes, who entered the House after he had first put the question. Lord Joint RUSSELL replied. He promised Lord Elgin's despatch, and the Votes and Proceedings of the Assembly when they they should be re- ceived. He declined to answer Mr. Roebuck's questions; thinking it far better to wait till Lord Elgin should have hail an opportunity of stating the case. Lord John stated, that on the 30th of April Montreal was tran- quil; and although there had been disturbances in the provinces, he believed that they also might now be considered tranquil.

On Wednesday, Mr. ROEBUCK recurred to the subject; reading a letter which he had received from Canada through Mr. Hume. It comprised an analysis of the divisions on the Rebellion Losses Bill in the Canadian As- sembly, [which we gave a few weeks back,] to show that the contest was not one of races, but that the bill was supported by a majority of the British Members in the Assembly. The letter also declared that two-thirds of the Montreal people supported the Government, "including all the wealth and respectability of the city "; the mob being led by "bankrupt merchants." To this information Mr. Roebuck appended a warning— No doubt, at the present moment, alarm was created in Canada and in Eng- land by a notion that annexation" was connected with these riots. At the pre- sent moment that was not the case; but he warned the House of Commons, lest they should by an injudicious interference with the conduct of the Government of Canada, and the opinions of the majority as expressed through their own repre- sentatives—he warned the House not to interfere with them, lest they should make the question of annexation one which should occupy the minds of the Cana- dian people. The money which this Legislature was about to appropriate was the money of Canada, and not the money of England. It was about to appropri- ate it at the suggestion of an Administration made the Administration by the majority of that Legislature; and it had the sanction of the Crown. In that Parliament, no bill for the appropriation of money could be discussed without there being a Committee, exactly as in the British House of Commons; and the Minister must have come down and, when he proposed the Committee, stated that he had the sanction of her Majesty in making that proposal for 100,0001., for purposes of which her Majesty was cognizant. He would entreat the House to beware how they interfered with the natural and proper constitutional expres- sion of the opinion of the Canadians themselves.

Mr. HAWES deprecated discussion, until Members should have had an opportunity of reading the papers on the subject, just issued.

Mr. GLADSTONE concurred in that caution; but could not allow Mr. Roebuck's remarks to pass without observation. On a review of the in- telligence respecting the Rebellion Losses Bill and the conduct of Lord Elgin—a nobleman whose friendship he had had the honour of enjoying from early youth—he was convinced that they were not yet in possession of materials for a judgment on the merits of the case; and if Mr. Roebuck had rested his warning on the ground of imperfect information, it deserved hearty concurrence. But when he heard the honourable and learned gentleman lay down as the ground of his warning a principle which would be as good when the House should be fully informed,—when he heard him say, "The people of Canada have been voting the money of Canada, and therefore I warn you not to interfere' "—he mast protect against a doctrine which interfered with the supremacy of Parliament over all Imperial concerns. Why, it might be that England might be at war with some foreign power, and that some Colonial Legislature might be found vo- ting a subsidy to that power ; and because it was the money of the colony and not of this country, would that be a reason against the interference of the Imperial Parliament? The House of Commons had a perfect right to interfere in all Im- perial concerns. It was a question of policy, and of wisdom, and of prudence, whether the House should interfere or not; but the fact that this money was the money of Canada would not of itself be a conclusive reason against their interference, if it should seem upon other grounds to be called for. The contest had not been described as a questiou of race within the Assembly: but that was not the point—was it so without,' That would be for consideration when they should have full information_ Mr. Roe- buck said truly, that as the matter was one involving money, it would have been absolutely impossible, according to constitutional forms, to Pro- ceed without the sanction of the Crown; which meant, of course, the sanction of the responsible Ministers of the Crown. But the very fact that tbe sanction of the Crown was required and given must bring the matter within the cognizance and jurisdiction of that House. Sir GEORG& GREY said, he had not understood Mr. Roebuck to deny the right of Parliament to interfere in matters of Colonial legislation.

Mr. GLADSTONE did not say so: he was simply discussing what Mr.

proceedings in Lower Canada—both of considerable importance, and both without O'Connell was quite unparliamentary.

no possibility have any knowledge. He knew nothing of private letters in re- cupations. Many had already emigrated, and many more are seeking to The Earl of WileCHILSEA. implored their Lordships, if they had gone wrong on free-trade—and men might do wrong unintentionally—to retrace their steps, and grant protection to the interests fairly entitled to it. Earl GREY replied, with encouraging observations about the sound state of agriculture in the North and in Scotland. He had no difficulty in re- letting his own farms at their old rents. The distress in the South, which pe he admitted, was due to had harvests; and such distress had often cm- curled and been complained of—nay, even been mentioned in speeches from the Throne—under Protection. He deplored the distress which ex- ists; but any measures to relieve that which arose from circumstances be- yond their control would do more harm than good .

that he feared somewhat empty organ where brains ought to lie. terized as "a gross calumny."

He gave an illustration. A reverend friend set to work with youthful energy Colonel DUNNE defended the Irish landlords, in language of such mild to plead, in pulpit and from house to house, for Irish distreas; and among rich forbearance as called forth the applause and sympathy of the House. Mr. Rol poor men, women, and scholars, he raised a sum not to be considered little, OSBORNE testified to the improvement in Irish cultivation, which he has which he sent to Ireland. What WAS the answer? It was in these terms— just observed on the spot, as a consequence of Lord Clarendon's practical "God bless you for your charitable donation; we are quite happy now; all the instruction by lectures. roots are paid." ("Hear, hear! ") His reverend friend, on reading this, was The bill passed through Committee. , ,almost in a swoon. "All the rents are paid I" And was it that for which he had gone about among the poor English labourers, who were earning their eight hum EMIGRATION. Or nine shillings a week, to raise subscriptions? Was it for that that he went into Mr. Monsau. called attention to the question of emigration for Ireland. the school and taught charity to the little child? Was it to pay the rents of the He recapitulated the reasons for emigration as a remedy to Irish distress— leaded proprietors that his reverend friend went from house to house asking alms? replying by anticipation to some objections; indicated the Colonies which It was to feed the starving poor, and not to pay the rents of grasping improvident

should be made the receptacle of the emigrant stream; and considered the Yoldlords. If the Government did not stand forth and say, "We command and

insist that the poor of Ireland shall reap the benefit of England's charity," the means of effecting the emigration. In reference to the first point, Is Springs of that charity would be altogether dried at their sources: and he would stated, that even before the famine' the proportion of the population of Ire- be the first to preach it. ("Hear!" from Sir Henry Barron.) He heard an land to its soil was excessive. In France, notwithstanding the great divi- Irish proprietor cry "Hear! "—he wished an Irish peasant were on the floor to eion of the soil, there are 36 cultivators to every 100-acree, in Ireland Ile Roebuck had said as to the propriety of Parliamentary interference in p meet the honourable Barnet. The Government must enforce a rigid rule or

matter affecting the money of the Colonies. private charity will cease. If order and system be introduced, and the land:mks After a little more conversation, which did not &drams the discussion, be no longer the almoners, the English people will not fail in the hour of need.

the matter was dropped. Mr. Joliet O'CONNELL observed, that the storm with which the news- On Thursday, Mr. GLADSTONE asked for explanations respecting the papers had long been threatening them had come down upon them at last— papers which had been presented to the House.

The thunderbolt had fallen with all the accumulated intensity which delay Among the papers were two—No. 18, an act amending and extending corn- mountebancould give, and enforced with—what should he say ?—with all the grimace of a. (Cries of" Order!")

pensation to .persons in Upper Canada, and No. 26, relating to certain legislative The SPEAKER obfierved that the expression which had just fallen from Mr

any covering letter or explanatory document. He asked Mr. Hawes whether it Mr. O'CONNELL felt it his duty at once to bow to the authority of the Chair, was in his power to lay any further information before the House illustrative of and was ready to withdraw the expression; but he begged to remind the House the former proceedings in Canada with respect to the Compensation Bill on ac- that Mr. Roebuck had spoken of ' persons who called themselves gentlemen." count of the rebellion losses anterior to the late bill passed by the Canadian Le- (Loud cries of" Hcar!") gislature? He repelled the charge of immorality lw retorting it. Had there been in Ire- Mr. Ilawas said, that there were no other papers in the Colonial Office relating land a system of poisoning infant children for the sake of the burial-fees? Had

Ire-

to the proceedinge in respect to the first Compensation Rebellion Losses Bill than they any abortion-homes in Ireland, as there had been proved to be in London? what had been laid before Parliament; and that the documents which had been You excluded Irishmen from the Guards, but were there any Irish regiments just presented to the House contained the whole of the papers that had any re- Terence to the subject. whose sentry-boxes you could not approach at night? Could it be said that it Mr. Annex asked whether the documents relating to the affairs of Canada was dangerous to walk on the public reads in Ireland after dusk ? Above all, had , they in Ireland professors of political economy, and writers in public newspapers and which were unaccompanied with any public despatches, were accompanied patronized by the Ministry, holding out the blasphemous doctrine that the people with any private letters? Mr. HAWKS aid, the honourable gentleman bad asked him a question in rela- of Ireland should be starved down to a level with the diminished capital ot that

s country, and that it would be interfering with the will of God were the Govern- lion to events which occurred some time past, and concerning which he could by ment to save them from death ? Govern-

ference to these transactions; but he begged to repeat that every public document The tone of bitterness thus far prevalent was somewhat allayed by Lord referred to by the right honourable gentleman had been laid before Parliament. JOHN RUSSELL'S mode of reply. Lord John remarked on the keener appe- AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. tite for an Irish debate possessed by Mr. Roebuck after his long absence The Duke of RICH.HOND, on Monday, presented petitions from many from the House; and compared his eloquence to that extraordinary French parts of the country, complaining of agricultural distress, and calling for horn which after having been frozen for some years, at length gave forth the restoration of protection and the continuance of the Navigation-laws; all the melodious notes so long congealed. Lord John declined to follow ; and, in pursuance of notice, he brought the subject of agricultuml distress him on what he had said of Irish landlords of whom there are a sufficient n under review. The result of his statements was, that if a remedy be not number, both in the House of Commons and in " another place," to defend applied soon, the great body of tenant-farmers will be swept from their no- themselves. Mr. KEOGH resented this abandonment of Irish landlords by Lord John, and his admiration for Mr. Roebuck's melodious notes; but as obtain the most they can for their stock, in order to follow. He complained the latter had not wound up his attack with any motion to the House, Mr. of the Malt-tax, as unjust in its principle and operation. As it had been Keogh consoled himself for that, " after all, the Sheffield blade is not so very the fashion upon this point to refer to the Reverend Bench, he asked the dangerous a weapon." Mr. Mooen characterized the " full cry " raised Bishops whether the Tithe-commutation Act was not a bargain to prevent after the Irish landlords—from the coarse virulence of Mr. Reynolds to the bickerings. , But did they expect that the tithe, which was valued on the epigrammatic satire of Mr. Shell—from the killing candour of Lord John supposition that wheat'was 56s. a quarter, would be paid when wheat. is Russell to the melodramatic malignity of Mr. Roebuck. N only 45s. a quarter? The Right Reverend Prelates may depend upon it, Mr. HORSMA here threw himself into the fray, with a charge against Ministers of increasing the mortality in Ireland by neglecting to answer that if the farmers are not justly 'treated they will combine to get rid of the demands of the Poor-law Commissioners for assistance. The spectacle tithes altogether. The Government says, it cannot retrace; then the farm- was disgraceful; the Commissioners saying that " the deliberately permit- ere reply, why cannot it resign. He wished that the Ministers' Could be ting " the poor " to suffer such privations " " involves a responsibility got rid of; but, unfortunately, whenever an important measure was under discussion, the question was not decided on its merits, but it certain number which the Commissioners think they ought not to incur." Sir GEORGE of gentlemen went about London and said, " You must not vote against GREY accused Mr. Horsman of speaking in utter ignorance of the facts of Government on this occasion, because if they are beaten they will resign." the caso; and Mr. Honshu's rejoined with more precise accusation. The Commissioners wrote on one occasion for 18,0001, and received but 5,0001.; He wished they would; and he could not fancy that there would be any very great difficulty in finding sixteen or eighteen men honest enough to on another for 10,0001., and received but 4,0001.; on the 20th April the form a Government. 50,000/. was exhausted; they wrote on the 23d, stating that 20,000 persons were starving, and that without relief thousands would perish; yet no no- tice was taken of their communication, so far as appears by the Perlis- mentary papers. Mr. Horsman would do his duty, undeterred by the ter- rors of Sir George Grey's language, or by his ill-humour: Sir George's irri- tability did not prove that he had done his duty, but the contrary: he knew Sir George's extreme sensitiveness, and his extraordinary power in debate contrasted with his deficient power in administration. Sir GEORGE GREY repeated his charge of misrepresentation. Government had applied the funds in the way they thought the objects of Parliament would be best attained; and they had done what Mr. Horsman said they had not done. Mr. Houssaw having thrown in a "last word," Mr. ROEBUCK again rose: The subject dropped without any motion, expressing his obligation to Lord John Russell for the good-humour of his personal allusions, acknowledging his perspicacity and generosity, he re- IRISH DISTRESS AND ITS CAUSES. peated, " without any of that asperity so often charged against him," that On the motion to go into Committee on the Land Improvement and Lord John had not met the difficulties of his position in the spirit of a Drainage (Ireland) Bill, Mr. ROEBUCK took the opportunity to express his statesman; he had exhausted the resources of this country, and not relieved Opinion on our general policy towards Ireland. He sketched the circum-

stances under which the present Ministry took office; glanced at the Irish entered the field of his general policy, and at considerable length justified landowners, their domineering spirit, and excessive expenditure: they the acts of his Government; giving prominence to the unexpected magnitude burdened their properties to maintain their vanity, and multiplied small of the famine calamity, and the impossibility to meet it effectually by any holdings for political objects. How much money, he asked, has been given, means. In allusion to the Encumbered Estates Bill, he introduced the fol- and yet what is the result? Amongst all, from highest to lowest, the de- lowing tribute to Sir Robert Peel— sire is to acquire without labour. "On this subject the House has received suggestions, and the development of The money of England was put into a vast heap, and there was a scramble views of the highest importance, from the right honourable Baronet the Member Of' Irishmen to get it not of the poor only, but of the whole mass. Some, as for Tamwortb, not now present. And if it be any degradation, or if it be any the honourable Member for Dublin, (Mr. Reynolds,) "wanted a pull at the humiliation to a Government to receive from an opposite quarter, or to receive Exchequer"; and when refused, said, "You are a set of bard ones—you are high- from a Member of the House with whom they are entirely unconnected, sugges- way robbers." The bill before the House was but a "pull at the Exchequer." tions and developments of plans of the highest importance, which we are ready to In the name of the hard-working men whom he had lately seen congregated in adopt, lam quite ready to submit to that degradation, and to suffer that humilia- thousands, he protested against the exaction. When telling those men his belief lion; and if I can receive from any person any addition to the plan the right that they were misled on the subject of taxation, he had done it well knowing, honourable Baronet suggested, I am quite willing to bear the taunts which may that the first time he should have to raise his voice in the House of Commons of be thrown on us—that in this great calamity—in this great peril and crisis of England, it would be against the rapacious desires of an idle, wasteful, extrava- Ireland, we have been forced to act upon the suggestions of others, and that not gent landed proprietary ; and that that wasteful and extravagant proprietary from our own wisdom but from the borrowed plans of others, we have devised a were the landed gentry of Ireland. But they were not in any sense of the term remedy. Sir, 1 think' it would be false pride if I were not to hold this language." the proprietors of Ireland. Let them at once get rid of the name. Let them go (Cheers.)

to every 100. In Lincolnshire, the proportion of labourers is 9 to the 100 acres; in Mayo, 78 to the 100. The 30,600,000 of English soil employ 3,000,000 of labourers; while in Ireland only 13,000,000 acres have to find employ for 5,500,000 labourers. He compared the dreadful condition of some unions in Ireland where the remedy of emigration has yet been untried, with others where it has been tried. In Bettina, the children have hardly a human aspect; people pray to be transported or worked in chains rather than left to starve in freedom. In Sligo, where

emigration has chains, place, there are fewer paupers, and generally a much more comfortable state of the people. Canada and Southern Africa are the colonies that would be benefited by immigration from Ireland. In Canada, immigrant labour could be employed, with immense benefit to- wards the consolidation of our American empire, in the construction of the Halifax and Quebec Railway. The culture of the cotton of Natal and of the district South of the Caffre country is most important to be encouraged. Immigration for that purpose would protect the frontier, enrich the colony, and supply an increase of raw material for the employment of the teeming population of Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire. As to the means, he would suggest—

First, that greater facilities should be given to the Boards: of Guardians for borrowing money for the purposes of emigration, by allowing them to raise loans upon the security of the rates, to be repaid by instalments in the course of five or seven years. The landed proprietors should also be allowed to borrow money for the same purpose on their settled property for a similar period of five or seven years. He believed if these two powers for raising money were given, they would be extensively acted upon, and that the measure would work exceedingly well. He admitted that the million or million and a half of money which it was desirable to raise should come entirely from Irish resources.

He moved an humble address to the Queen for any despatches relative to North American and Australian emigration, in continuation of despatches presented to the House in August 1848 and February 1849.

Mr. Joint O'CoNwErm opposed Mr. Monsell's motion with a speech ad- mitting the advantage of emigration, the fitness of the Irish to emigrate, and the fitness of the colonies mentioned to receive emigrants; but desi- derating more precise details on the point of cost; and expressing a firm belief that the money for a great and efficient project cannot be found. At the conclusion of his speech Mr. John O'Connell offered the House the ad- vantage of his own suggestions. Referring to the Solicitor-General's de- claration that his Encumbered Estates Bill would restore order and "cause the repeal of the Union to be heard of no more," he replied, "Well, let it go." His own suggestions were these—a combination which, however wild or revolutionary they might seem, were not more revolutionary than the

anti-revolutionist measures of Sir Robert Peel or his " opposite neighbour" Lord John Russell—

First, he would treble the rates of absentee proprietors; next, continue the

landed property, drainage, and reclamation measures, in a combined form—and then the scheme of Mr. Monsen would take its proper place as accessory; finally, he would Fiend a Committee of the leading and most influential Members of the House over to Ireland, to look into the condition of the people, to examine into the statements made by the Irish Members—to see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears, and then to come back, while the impression was fresh upon them, and give the House the information they bad acquired. If that were done, they would save much of their time- for they could then legislate with a full knowledge of the people and of their distress.

He moved an amendment, to the effect that emigration is at the best a partial, tardy, and most expensive remedy; and that urgent necessity exists for additional state contributions to prevent whole counties from depopula- tion.

Sir GEORGE GREY admitted that Mr. Monsell's suggestions were en-

titled to the greatest respect. He had, however, underrated the importance and the value of the natural emigration now proceeding from the districts of Ireland which suffered from congestion of the labouring population. If any means can be found to promote his views without interfering with that spontaneous flow, the Government has every disposition to assist. The principle of giving the Board of Guardians power to raise money on the security of the rates, is not new: it has not been practically used, how ever; and if in the progress of the amended Poor-law any proposal can be embodied in a clause, the Government will give him every accommodation. The proposal to give to landed proprietors who are already enabled to bor- row money for the improvement of their estates, powers also to assist in emigration, is liable to objection. The same permanent security offered by works cannot be given for the loan, while the effect would be to divert money now employed in drainage and reclamation, to the present benefit of upwards of 20,000 people. As Mr. Monsell had not submitted any formal motion, it would be time enough to express an opinion on his distinct pro positions when embodied in a bill or a clause of some bill.

The House divided on Ur. John O'Connell's amendment; which was negatived, by 45 to 10; and Mr. Monsell's motion was carried.

IRISH POOR-LAW.

When Lord Joint RUSSELL moved the second reading of the Poor Re-

lief (Ireland) Bill, on Thursday, the motion gave rise to a debate of a very discursive nature-' Members pouring forth shoals of objections to the parti- cular bill, and to the ineffective character of the Poor-law generally.. Al- though the debate was more than commonly animated and practical, a vast proportion of the arguments were of the sort so often repeated in previous debates; but mixed with this more familiar matter were some points of a telling nature.

. Mr. Potmerr SCROPE maintained that the relief is no relief. He particularly referred to the Workhouses of Ballinasloe, Kenmare, and Skibbereen, where the paupers were crowded together in such numbers that pestilence and death were the unavoidable consequences. In Skibbereeu Workhouse the beds were 3i feet wide and 6 feet long, and in those beds three persons were laid at the one end and three at the other. He had thus shown their system of in. door relief was utterly insufficient. But their out-door relief was as bad: a pound of yellow meal a head, of much of which they were defrauded by the relieving-officers and false weights, without feel to cook it or a roof to cover those who received it, was no relief at all

Mr. HENRY HERBERT made a statement, showing the condition of the work-

house in the union in which he lived. The numbers in the workhouse on the 8th of May were 3,232; and the details presented a singular picture of an Irish town in what was understood to be a prosperous district. Of those persons, 618 were described as being accommodated in the body of the workhouse, 606 in "the brewery," 116 in "the college," 54 in "Mr. Slattery's," and in different houses built for very different purposes. Others were distributed also in separate bodies, which consisted severally of 180, 450, 246, 116, 84, 327, and 51. Places built for the purposes of commerce, education, and for a great variety of objects, bad been turned into receptacles of pauperism. There remained but one house which had not.twen so appropriated, and that was the house of God. At the same time,

there were 9,700 persons in the union in the receipt of out-door relief. Up to about week ago, 1 per cent a week had been the amount of mortality; it had since in- creased, and the last return gave 52 deaths out of 3,700. It should be borne in mind that there was no cholera in this case. The union which he had descrihed was called a prosperous union; it had neither asked for nor received any money. In one division of the union 14s. in the pound had been collected within the last thirteen months, and the lowest sum collected in any division was 68. The total amount collected in thirteen months was 40,6801.; which was calculated to last about seventeen months. That large sum had been raised without the interven- tion of a single soldier or policeman. The Guardians of this union memorialized the Poor-law Commissioners in 1847 to exercise the power which they pos., sessed under the act to reduce the area of taxation, by which alone it was pm_ Bible to obtain the cooperation of landed proprietors and to stimulate the employ_ ment of labour; but the Commissioners took no notice of the memorial. Mr. NAPIER exposed the mismanagement of unions under the care of Vice- Guardians. In the union of Kenmare, since September 1847, there had been no audit of accounts. In an examination of affairs in the North Dublin union, it tamed out that nearly 400 persons were on the register of the workhouse who were not in the workhouse at all. The accounts were then examined ; and it ap- peared from the accounts ending March 1848, that there had been supplied 1,723 bottles of port, forty.five bottles of spirits, seven dozen of lemons, 45,937 pounds of sugar, and 18,479 bottles of Guinness's double X. For the year ending March 1848, he found the consumption had been 1,728 bottles of wine, during the next year it was reduced to 904. The spirits in the first year were forty-five quarts; but in the second half-year they made up for the diminution of the "entity of wine by an increase in the quantity of spirits to 102 quarts. Of whisky seven dozen bottles were consumed in the first half-year, and twenty-eight dozen in the second; and he found upon looking to the increase in sugar, lemons, and whisky, that it had increased in precisely the rateable proportion required for ma whisky punch. With regard to what were called the bankrupt unions, he two advertisements which would show to the House the manner in which the affairs there were conducted. The advertisement requested tenders to be sent in "for the best port wine, — per dozen; the best sherry wine, — per dozen; the best arrowroot, — per pound; the beat mustard, — per pound; the best tea, — per pound; the best lump sugar, — per hundredweight; the best XX porter, — per dozen; the best whisky, — per gallon ; the best sweet oil, — per gallon; the best mould candles, per dozen pounds; the best white bread, — per four- pound loaf." These were the cases of unions under the management of Vice. Guardians, and subject to the control of the Poor-law Commissioners. Was it fair or just that the inhabitants of unions, who bad to support their own poor, should, in addition to these charges, be compelled to pay for the support of such unions as those he had referred to?

Mr. HORSMAN, in a forcible speech on the deficiencies of the bill, contended that they would only arrive at improvement in Ireland by reducing the areas of taxation, making them manageable sizes, and applying the workhouse test; and, above all, exhausting all the resources of the district before giving a claim for extraneous aid. They were now passing a measure for the sale of encumbered estates, in which was contained that excellent provision for the appointment of a Commission: but to enable that Commission to work advantageously, they must begin by disencumbering those unions of every embarrassment. He thought they should do so in every case by compelling the sale ; and with a smaller area, and the workhouse test, they would give the advance of money a new character, and crown all with this important result, that by selling the land in small portions it would be bid for by small proprietors; and by assisting them with loans of money, judiciously advanced, they would establish a most useful, valuable, industrious, enterprising, peaceable, and orderly class of agriculturists. Mr. Oseoraex asked why this bill to amend the Irish Poor-law had been intro- duced by Ministers when a Committee was sitting up-stairs to inquire into the working of that law, and had not yet made its report. Colonel DUNNE did not expect that the House would receive a report from the Poor-law Committee, whim was doing nothing. He had no confidence in it, neither had the Irish Members. They were not allowed to have that influence in calling witnesses which they ought. He wished it to go forth to the people of Ireland, that, after the experience of some weeks, he had no confidence in that Committee. Sir WILLIAM SOMERVILLE observed, that if Ministers had waited for the report of the Committee, they would have been taunted with postponing the introduction of their measure until the close of the 'session when it would be impossible that its provisions could be deliberately considered. Mr. VERNON Sierra particularly fixed Lord John Russell's attention upon the question, from what source the money would be drawn if the destitution of Ireland should require larger assistance than the maximum rate now to be deter- mined by this bill? Would it be by a national rate?

In reply, Lord JOHN RUSSELL entered into a variety of figures to show, that in the most destitute unions the amount of rates collected, even when collected with severity, has not equalled that in comparatively prosperous unions. On the other hand, the alarm at the increase of rates in the poorest districts has occa- sioned occupants to withhold what they should have paid for labour, and has thus checked the employment of labour and the cultivation of the land. The general effect of Lord John Russe'l's representations is, that by fixing a mast mum, the alarm would be removed; that by a better administration, and a casti- gation of the relief-lists, the really destitute would have a better chance of relief; and that by the rate-in-aid the deficient collection of the poorest district would be redressed. But he could not adopt the rate-in-aid as a permanent system in Ireland; nor could he throw the additional relief on the Consolidated Fend. If more were wanted, it would be better that relief should be given from those re- sources from which relief bad been given before the introduction of the Poor-law in 1837. Lord John intimated, that Mr. Monsell would have the opportunity of introducing his proposition on emigration in the shape of a clause to be added to the bill in Committee.

Ultimately, the bill was read a second time; Lord John. Russell to state on Monday the day for going into Committee.

PARLIAMENTARY OATHS BILL.

On the motion for going into Committee upon the Parliamentary Oaths Bill, Sir ROBERT PEEL stated that he had hoped it was the intention of Government to place Jews on precisely the same footing, with respect to eligibility for Parliament and for office, as that on which other classes of her Majesty's subjects at present stand. As to other classes of her Majesty's subjects dissenting from the Church of England, he imagined the law to be this. When elecfrd to municipal officesi they became qualified to hold them upon making a declaration which had been substituted for the declaration against transubstantiation. A similar declaratton enabled them to sit in Parliament and to hold office; but in the latter declaration the words "on the true faith of a Christian" were introduced, which rendered it impossible for a Jew to adopt it. It was proposed by this bill to relieve the Jews as far as the declaration in Parliament was concerned; but if the bill passed in its present shape, Jews would still be disqualified for holding civil offices. (Loud cries of "Hear, he.arr) It might, to be sure, be a question whether Jews might not be able to hold civil offices by means of the Annual Indemnity an evasion Act: but he would re as to see her repudiate ion of. that nature, and wished

Majesty's Jewish subjects placed on the Same footing 25 all other classes of the. community. (Cheers.) It was not desirable that a Jew should holds wit office by the precarious tenure of the passing of an annual indemnity act. (Cheers

rePeatel)

Lord Jouar RussELL entirely concurred with Sir Robert Peel in think- ing that Jews should enjoy the same privileges as are possessed by their fellow subjects. He had proved that by the bill he introduced last session, which was rejected by the other House of Parliament. But it would be improper to introduce into this bill, which would admit Jews to Parlia- ment, a provision securing their admission to civil offices. He should propose a separate bill for that purpose. Sir ROBERT PEEL explained, that the observations he had made with respect to the position of the Jews had reference to all civil and military offices under the Crown in respect of which the declaration against tran- substantiation was formerly obliged to be made: they had no reference to municipal offices,.because in 1845 the Jews were relieved as to those offices, but those offices only, and placed on the same footing as the other subjects of her Majesty. In Committee, on the first clause, Mr. VERNON SMITH proposed as an amendment, to omit the declaration of belief "that the Pope of Rome, or any other foreign prince, prelate, person, state, or potentate, &c. has not any temporal or civil jurisdiction, authority, or power, within this realm"; and the pledge to defend "the settlement of property within this realm as established by the laws." The first is superfluous either to the Protestant or Jew; and the second is unintelligible. Lord JOHN RUSSELL admitted that it would be desirable to substitute one oath for all denominations, and instead of four oaths to have two; but he thought it could not be well accomplished. Many objections would be felt to the Roman Catholic oath by Dissenters; and to substitute the shorter form for the oath settled in 1829, would be taking away the foundation of that settlement. In the course of some discussion, discrepant interpretations of the "settlement of property" clause were given by different Mem- bers. Sir JOHN ROMILLY, Sir ROBERT PEEL, and Mr. DISRAELI, ad- mitted that the oath did not admit of a very certain interpretation. Ultimately, Lord JOHN RUSSELL declared himself ready to omit this clause. He also consented to omit the words relative to the Pope's having no civil jurisdiction in this realm. The supremacy of the Pope not being allowed by the common law of the kingdom, he imagined it would remain the same whether an oath were taken or not. This course met with the concurrence and praise of Sir Ronaer PEEL; who confessed for himself, that he would be content to limit the oath to the simple and distinct de- claration by a conscientious man that he would be faithful and bear true allegiance to her Majesty Queen Victoria, and would maintain the suc- cession of the Crown, &c.; words that appeared to him to include every- thing. Sir ROBERT INGLIS objected to the suddenness with which these changes were admitted by Lord John Russell. Several Members seemed unable to understand what was the question under consideration; or if they understood the formal question, not to see the bearing of the altera- tions. The SPEAKER explained; but was still questioned again and again. Mr. S000wea, provoked by general manifestations of impatience, moved that progress be reported: and he was supported by Mr. PLUMTRE, Mr. DISRAELI, and others on the ground of surprise. Mr. Spooner's motion was negatived; but, after two more motions for adjournment, Lord Joaw RUSSELL gave in, and the House resumed.

PRISON DISCIPLINE.

Mr. CHARLES PEARSON moved for a Select Committee to inquire and report on the practicability of establishing one uniform system of discipline, preventive, reformatory, and self-supporting, to be applied to all persons sentenced to "imprisonment" for crime; and he supported his motion by a speech of considerable length, going over the same ground and adducing the same arguments against the present system which he has before em- ployed at public discussions already reported in our columns. He quoted official reports, and statistics collected by himself, to prove that the present system is extravagant in cost and ineffective to suppress crime—indeed, effective to increase it; and he detailed the results of the self-supporting regulations in the American and Belgian prisons. He explained his own plans; vouching his statements of building cost by certificates of eminent builders, and of labour-produce by the opinion of above a hundred emi- nent farmers. The details are already known to our readers: they involve a stricter system of punishment; severer labour; less relaxation, food, and comfort, to the prisoners; and a system of fuller employment, with the ob- ject of rendering each institution self-supporting. The labour would be principally employed on land, and thus the prisoner would be fitted to be- come a valuable emigrant. Ile offered his aid to the Government in a kindly spirit—the aid of a man who has devoted a quarter of a century to the subject; and he called on them to accept his cooperation in solving the problem which they had declared themselves anxious to solve—the pro- blem of secondary punishment.

It was a subject which he professed to understand—one which a large consti- tuency had sent him there to discuss: he would not yield therefore till it has been thoroughly examined. At an earlier period of his life he might have been proud to take part in their party debates; but he was now desirous that the short rem- nant of his days should be devoted to the promotion of at least one useful object; and he knew of no object that could be more worthy of a man's best efforts than the attempt to establish a sound system of prison discipline.

Sir GEORGE GREY opposed the motion, as too large and general; though,

from an alteration made in its terms at the last moment, it now excludes from inquiry the prisons of Millbank, Pentonville, Portland, and the Hulks —these being places devoted to persons sentenced to "transportation," and not "imprisonment." He gave his testimony in favour of the system at Pentonville: no system is so good both for the repression of crime and the reformation of the criminal; the more it is inquired into the more worthy it is of admiration—though it must be watched with care and vigilance in Practice. With reference to the system of Captain Maconochie, of substi- tuting labour-sentences for time-sentences, Government was once anxious to introduce it; but consultation with persons whose opinions were of great weight disclosed obvious objections. That plan was founded on the sup- position that all ablebodied men were capable of performing the same amount of labour; whereas it was obvious that that must necessarily vary with the health, skill, age, and physical circumstances of each individual, which it was impossible for any judge to become familiar with at the time of passing the sentence, so as to enable him properly to apportion the Punishment upon each prisoner. Sir George was not prepared to say that another inquiry might not be added to those which have been made into the subject of prison discipline, or that one might not be made into the subject of separate imprisonment; but he objected to inquire into a speculative plan. He hoped Mr. Pearson would not press for a division on his motion in its present very large and general shape. If any inquiry took place, it ought to be an inquiry limited to specific objects, and one which would contrast the present system with the past.

Mr. ROBERT PALMER, as a Magistrate of Berkshire having no con- nexion with Reading Gaol, testified that the system there pursued was beneficial in preventing crime and reforming criminals. On the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, the debate was adjourned.

FRENCH INTERVENTION Iii THE ROMAN STATES.

Lord BEAUMONT prefaced some questions to Government on the subject of the French intervention in Rome by a review of the circumstances which have preceded and induced that intervention.

It has been known to students of recent Italian history, that the misgovern- ment of the Roman territory under the pontificate of successive Popes had brought about such a condition of the country, that nothing but the strong hand of a stronger power could prevent the people rising in insurrection. On the succession of Pins the Ninth the question arose, whether the policy of his predecessors should be continued or modified. To prevent outbreak, the latter course was re- solved on: but the difficulty of carrying out this course was, that any concession once made must lead to the final abolition of the Pope's temporal dominion. An attempt was made to separate the temporal and spiritual powers, by a mode of all modes the most impracticable—the appointment of lay Councillors and a sacer- dotal Government. The Pope adhered to his original resolution not to concede the slightest abridgment of his secular jurisdiction. Laymen were allowed to as- semble and debate, but not to initiate. On the granting of this phantom of a constitution, a general revolution broke out in Italy. The Roman people de- manded the same liberty which had been granted to the Neapolitans. The Cardinals opposed the demand ; but ultimately concessions were made, with the determination that whenever a fitting opportunity came every step taken in advance should be retraced—the supremacy of the clergy maintained in all its vigour, and the laity deprived of the privileges conceded to them. On the advice of foreign courts, Pope Pins then called to his councils a man not deserving his confidence [Count Rossi]—" a man who had been exiled from Rome, who had been branded as a rebel; who had been excommunicated as a churchman who had abandoned the Catholic religion and professed another; who had forsaken his own country and had become the inhabitant and citizen of another country [Fniucel; and who had been employed as the ambo,aidor of that country to that which it con- sidered a foreign state." The advice of this man turned out as unwelcome to the Pope as it was adverse to the views of the Cardinals. To relieve the finances of his country, he saw no means but a mortgage of Church property ; and with that view he was entering the Capitol when he fell by the hands of an assassin, and thus brought unmerited disgrace on those who opposed him solely as a Minister. This was an event completely isolated—a monstrous crime—an event deplored by those who afterwards succeeded him in power, both for the sake of M. Rossi him- self, with whom they were on habits of intimacy, and as an obstacle to the suc- cess of the cause in which they were embarked. Indeed, the first step taken by Mamiani when he gained power was to arrest the assassin; the Popes Govern- ment having never taken any step in that direction. The moment M. Rossi fell, the Cardinals endeavoured to retrace the steps taken. Their plans were discovered in time: the people went in indignation to the Vatican and implored the Pope to renew the oath to stand by the constitutional form of government then existing, but to disband his Swiss troops—pledging their lives that not a hair of his head should be injured. He declined to do this, and ac- cepted the advice to quit Rome. His retreat would have been opposed only by prayers; but he fled in disguise, and so betrayed a strange want of confidence in his subjects. A question by Lord BROUGHAM here led to a retort rather than a reply by Lord BEAUMONT, who used the word "falsehood." He afterwards disclaimed any personal application of the term; and the squabble led to nothing further. Lord Beaumont rapidly completed his historic explanation of his questions. Attempts were made to reconcile the Pontiff with his people—attempts rejected by the Pope in the harshest manner imaginable. A scheme was devised by Austria for the intervention of Spain and Naples only, Austria and France looking on. Whilst each power was looking to its own interest, the Roman Republic was pro- claimed by the universal suffrage of the people distinctly made known. Though the real Republicans at Rome may not be in very great numbers, there is no doubt that the number is very great of those who wish the secular power to be taken from the. clergy. The country was profoundly tranquil—peace and reform anxiously expected by the Roman provinces—when the French suddenly sent an expedition from Toulon to Clyne Vecchia ; where they published a pro- clamation that deceived the Roman people and procured a friendly reception: but as soon as it became known in Rome itself that they came to restore the Pope in full ecclesiastical ascendancy, all Rome was against them; and it is impossible for them now to attain this end without destroying liberty and establishing a pure desPotism in its stead. In making this statement, he was speaking the sen- timent of millions of Roman Catholics.

Being unable for his life to discover the objects and intentions of the French

Government, Lord Beaumont concluded by asking the President of the Council, whether any communication has been made to our Government by that of France of its objects and intentions in occupying the Roman States; whether Austria has yet violated the Roman territory ; whether any notification has been received by our Government from the King of Naples as to his object in joining in this expe- dition; whether our Government has taken any measure in concert with Foreign Governments on this subject, or whether it remains ignorant, or approves of what has taken place? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought this neither a fit time nor a suit- able occosion for entering into a retrospect of the recent events in Rome; he therefore confined himself to a short and distinct answer of the questions. An intimation from the French Government as to its intentions in occn pyiug the Roman territory was received on the 21st of April: the declared objects—and there appeared no reason to doubt the declaration at the time —were the promotion of the general peace of Italy and the reestablishment of a constitutional and regular government at Rome. No reason wan felt to disapprove of this communication, and no disapprobation was expressed. The expedition was limited to an occupation of Civita Vecchia: nothing was said about a march to Rome. Lord Lansdowne had reason to believe that the march to Rome was a suggestion of the commander of the force, which did not proceed from the Government at Paris. The Earl of ABERDEEN thought that more explicit declarations were due from Ministers, considering the importance of the subject. Notwithstanding the declarations of the French Ministry, he assumed that the expedition was undertaken with a view more or less friendly to the Papal Govern- ment ; and, supposing Austria also to respond to the desire of the Pope, then they would see the Austrians marching to Rome at the time when the French were advancing to that city from Civita Vecchia, and declaring that their object was to prevent foreign troops going to Rome. Such an occurrence would put one in mind of the declaration of the bastard Faulconbridge in King John, when Austria and France advanced to the siege of Angers-

0, prudent discipline ! from North to South Austria and France shoot in each other's month."

It really was ,a most extraordinary affair, that the end of all the mischievous interference on the part of her Majesty's Government—of all their negotiations and extraordinary missions—should be to bring 20,000 French troops (t'or to that number, he understood, they were augmented) into the centre of Italy. The Earl of Mreixo defended his Italian mission. The Marquis of LON- DONDERRY twitted Lord Brougham with his fraternizing expedition to Paris. Lord BROVORAM peremptorily contradicted the story that he went to France with a large body of Englishmen, or that he communicated with that absurd expedition for any purpose but to show he had nothing to do with it.

MR. HUDSON'S EXPLANATIONS.

Petitions inculpating Mr. Hudson were presented by Mr. DIVETT, from thirty-one shareholders of the Eastern Counties Railway Company residing in Devonshire; and by Mr. CILA.RTERIB, from sixty shareholders in the same company.

The petition presented by Mr. Divett stated, that Mr. Hudson, a Member of the House of Commons, was the Chairman of the Company, and that the peti- tioners were informed, and believed it to be true, that Mr. Hudson, acting in his capacity of Chairman, had from time to time caused to-be made out and pub- lished statements purporting to be true accounts of the receipts and disburse- ments of the Company, which he well knew-to be false and untrue, whereby the public had been grossly deceived and the petitioners grievously injured. The petition prayed that the House would be pleased to cause inquiries to be made tnto the truth of these charges; and that., if the same were true, Mr. Hudson might be expelled from being a Member of the House, and that the House would adopt such course as to it might seem meet to prevent a continuance of such false and scandalous practices, whereby thousands of her Majesty's subjects were ruined.

The other petition complained generally of mismanagement, commencing after Mr. Hudson and Mr. Waddington became Chairman and Deputy-Chairman of the Company, and while Mr. Bagshawe. M.P., was one of the Directors; and it prayed for inquiry respecting those three Members.

Mr. Hunsom rose, and bespoke the indulgence of the House while he offered his explanations, as he was labouring under a severe domestic afflic- tion. He assured the House, that if he had been guilty of error it had not been intentionally.

In October 1845, he accepted the office of Chairman in the Eastern Counties Railway Company, on the repeated and pressing request of the shareholders, seven-eighths of whom signed a requisition to that effect. His sole objects were to benefit the shareholders of that company and to effect an arrangement between that company and the London and York Company: he devoted himself assidu- ously to the duties of his office. The first accusation was, that he had raised the dividend from 3s. to 9s. in the first half-year; and that in the subsequent half-years the Directors had carried dividends respectively of 9s., 108, 10s., fig, and 8s., when it appears by the re- port of the Committee of Investigation, that the dividends ought only to have been respectively 3s. 8d, 2s. ld, 5s. 10d., 4s. 5d., and 2s. 4d. Another accusa- tion was, that the consequences of these false appearances of prosperity had been the indulgence of reckless extravagance; schemes of extension and amalgama- tion, and an increase of the capital of the company from 2,906,7801. to 10,8.31,5931, exclusively of the projected amalgamation with the Norfolk Company.

Mr. Hudson proceeded with his explanation. It so happened that the market- value of shares was higher at the time lie joined the company than it had been ever since. ("Hear, hear!") "In the half-year ending July 1845, the gross in- come was 114,0001.; in the half-year ending January 1846, it was 173,000/, an increase of nearly 60,0001. Surely the House will agree that there was a justi- fication for some increase of dividend. (" Hear, hear!') As to whether the divi- dend declared was the right one, I believe the accountant—the person set to ex- amine the books—states the dividend to be right, except some 11,0001. It is a question, I am sure, that no two persons would agree upon, what ought to be car- ried to capital and what was revenue; and therefore I feel that-there is an ample justification for an increase of dividend. Bat the petitioners state that the capital of the company has been raised from 2,900,000/. to 10,800,0001. That is not true either. The capital of the company when 1 joined it was 2,900,0001. There was 1,300,0001. and odd of the Northern and Eastern; which made the capital of the company 4,300,0001., instead of only 2,900,0001. Then there was added to it a bonus of 1,000,000e, which made it 5,300,0001. Therefore the money actually ex- pended since I had the honour of presiding over that board has been 5,500,000/. The income when I joined was 228,0001.; last year it was 800,0001. I think the petitioners' complaint, that money has been wastefully and extravagantly ex- pended, falls to the ground, when the increase of capital was only about doubled, and the increase of income is quadrupled." It was stated that he had altered the figures in the accounts. He denied that he had done so, in his individual capacity, at all. He complained that when he had called at the office of the company on the previous day, and had asked to see one of the documents so altered, the greatest difficulty was thrown in the way of his seeing it. What would the House say when he stated, on the testimony of two other gentlemen—he might say of hundreds—that not one figure, not one mark, was in his handwriting? He denied that he had authorized the carrying of 115,0001 from revenue to capital. The published accounts stated the average coat of working to be 1,2351. per mile; the Investigation Committee made it 1,5571., equivalent to 55 percent: so exorbitant a statement as to refute itself to every one acquainted with railway affairs. He was charged with having individually altered the sum of 10,000/. Alterations of that kind, however, were made by the Directors; and there might have been reasons for the particular alterations, from the stock of materials on hand and other circumstances. "I was seldom able to attend the meetings of the Fivance Com- mittee. I never signed a check for the company in my life. I merely presided over their affairs, and was anxious to do my duty to the beet of my power. I may have taken over-sanguine views of this undertaking; but I am a sufferer along with the rest in consequence of those sanguine views; and lam convinced that this undertak- ing will yet amply remunerate the shareholders, when the expenses of management are brought down, as it has ever been my anxious desire to do. I can only say that! throw myself upon the House, and that I am perfectly ready to bow to any decision the House may come to. I am ready and anxious to clear myself from any imputation cast upon me; and I distinctly deny that I have done anything either to enhance improperly the value of the shares, or to give an undue position to them. The House will recollect, that when I joined the company there was scarcely a day without several accidents on the line. It was completely out of order; a large expenditure of stock was necessary for the improvement of the line; and I do not think it was unfair or improper to charge a considerable amount of that to capital rather than to revenue. You will see from a report that has been published this morning, that another company bas placed 150,0001. to capi- tal that ought to go to revenue; and the chairman, instead of being blamed, is praised and extolled."

"I think that if the House were, by an express enactment, to determine what is capital and what is revenue, what ought to go to capital and what should go to revenue, directors would then have no difficulty, as they would be guided by strict law : but nothing can be more difficult or attended with greater anxiety than the state of matters at present. I recollect a case in which the Grand Junction charged for repairs 14,0001, which was taken from revenue and paced to capital. One charge against me relates to the payment of interest; but Parliament itself has sanctioned the payment of interest out of capital. I do not see why one law should apply to the Eastern Counties and another to other companies. My posi- tron has been a most difficult one; but I leave it to the House to deal with the petition as they may think proper. 1 have no other explanation to Mr. WADDINGTON referred to a charge against himself, that he had been a party to deceiving the shareholders. In reply, he stated that many of the assertions in the report of the Investigation Committee were incorrect: moreover, in the Committee it had been agreed to expunge a clause that afterwards appeared in the printed report, so that he had had no oppor- tunity of correcting the statemenrii made before the Committee. Mr. BAGSHAWE stated two facts in justification. Out of 14,000 share- holders, only 60 could be induced to sign the petition presented by Mr, Charteris. That morning, at a meeting of the Northern and Eastern Com- pany, which formerly elected him to the Eastern Counties board, the oarte against him had been fully gone into; and the result was, that he was unanimously reelected by the same persons to the same office: In Vindi- cation of Mr. Hudson, he stated, that once in 1848, upon an occasion of his going down to Norfolk to investigate the concerns of-the line Mr. Hud- son said to him in great agony of spirit, "Mr. Bagshawe, I have been grossly deceived in these matters."

The petitions were ordered to lie on the table.