Debates anb 113rotetbings in parliament.

RAILWAY LEGISLATION.

On Thursday, Sir ROBERT PEEL moved the adoption of the following resolutions, to constitute a sessional order for the guidance of the House in -disposing of the Railway Bills now before Parliament- " 1. That this House will not read a third time any bill to empower any company

(whether intended to be incorporated by such bill, or already incorporated by act of Parliament) to construct a railway, unless three clear days before the third reading, there shall have been deposited at the Private Bill-office, there to be open to the hispec- tlon of all parties, a certificate signed and authenticated in manner hereinafter men- tioned, and comprising the particulars hereinafter expressed, and stating the following Zeds, viz.—

" 1. That a copy of the bill was submitted to the consideration of a meeting of the scripholders of the company, or (In case of a company already incorporated) of the shareholders or stockholders of the company, specially called for that purpose.

" 2. That such meeting was called by advertisements, Inserted once in each of two consecutive weeks in the London Gazette, (If the railway be an English or Scotch rail- - way,) or in the London and Dublin Gazettes, (If the railway be an Irish railway,) and In each case in at least three London daily newspapers, and not less than three times in each such paper, in each of such two consecutive weeks.

" 3. In the case of the company being Intended to be incorporated by the bill—That such meeting was constituted of persons producing thereat scrip of the company repre- senting not less than one-third part of the whole capital proposed to be raised by the company under the bill, such scrip having been actually issued, or the deposits in re- spect thereof having been paid before the 31st of March in the present year.

"4. In the case of the company being already incorporated—That such meeting was held, except so far as is herein otherwise provided, according to the constitution of the company, and was constituted of shareholders or stockholders thereof competent to vote at the ordinary meetings of the company, and representing either personally or as proxies not leas than one-third part of the whole capital or stock of the company.

"5. That at such meeting the bill was approved of by persons producing thereat scrip equal to at least three-fifths of the total amount of scrip produced at the meeting ; or In the case of a company already Incorporated, by three-fifths at least of the meet- ing; the votes being given and computed according to the constitution of the company.

"II. That for the purposes of this order it shall be competent for the chairman of any meeting called in pursuance thereof, in the event of the above prescribed quorum of scrip shares or stock (as the case may be) not being represented at such meeting, to cause the votes of the persons constituting the said meeting, approving or not approving of the bill, to be taken and recorded, and then to adjourn the same to some day, hour, and place, to be declared by the chairman, such day not being less than three days, and not more than one week, from the original day of meeting ; and such day, hour, and place being, in the meantime, advertised twice in each of three London daily news- papers ; and at such adjourned meeting it shall also be competent to the chairman thereof to cause to be taken and recorded the votes of such of the persons constituting the same as have not voted at the original meeting ; and the total amount of votes given at the original and adjourned meeting shall be received as if given at one and the same meeting.

"III. That such certificate shall also comprise, in a tabular form, the following par- ticulars—

" I. The day, time, and place of the meeting, and of the adjourned meeting (if any). "2. The dates of the insertion of the advertisements for the meeting, and the names of the newspapers in which they were inserted.

..ziowv "3. The names and addresses of the persons producing scrip at the meeting ; or in the case of a company already incorporated, the names and addressee of the sharehol- ---. ders or stockholders present at the meeting.

"4. The denoting numbers, and the amount of the scrip respectively produced by the 'persons so producing the same at the meeting ; or in the case of a company already in- corporated, the respective amounts of shares or stock held or represented by the share- holders or stockholders attending the meeting.

"5. The fact of the approval or non-approval of the bill (as the ease may be) by the several persons producing scrip at the meeting, or by the several shareholders attend- ing the meeting. "6. The total amount of scrip produced at such meeting, and the amount thereof pro- timed by the persons approving of the bill ; or in the case of a company already incor- porated, the total amount of shares or stock represented, either in person or by proxy at the meeting, and the amount thereof so represented by persons approving of the bill. "7. The total amount of the capital proposed to be raised by the company under the bill; or in the case of a company already incorporated, the total amount of the capital or stook of such company.

"IV. That such certificate shall be signed by the chairman of the meeting and by one of the solicitors of the company; and the authenticity of such certificate shall be ✓ erified by the signature of the Parliamentary agent depositing the same."

The reasons adduced on previous occasions as justifying the interference of Parliament to place a check upon the passing of railway bills under existing cir- cumstances, and to enable shareholders and scripholders to dissolve, were again urged by Sir Robert. First, the locking up of an enormous amount of eapital,— in 1844, 87 bills passed, involving an outlay of 17,987,0001.; in 1845, 118 bills, outlay 60,484,0001.; in 1846, application is made for 519 bills, involving an outlay of 804,000,0001. Then came the embarrassment which the expenditure of so much capital in one direction had occasioned to the legitimate pursuits of the country; the great fall which had taken place in the value of the schemes; the great desire evinced by persons to relieve themselves from their engagements; and the state of the law, which prevented them from obtaining relief in every case where a single shareholder chose to object. In addition, he stated a number of facts illustrative of what is called in the Railway world "rigging the market"; showing the extraordinary methods by which managing committees and indivi- duals contrived to impose upon the unwary. It was not unlikely that Parliament might yet see cause to expose these transactions, for the benefit of the public. Sir Robert explained the leading provisions of the bill for enabling shareholders to dissolve their companies, and which would that evening be introduced into the House of Lords. As to the present resolutions, (which had been circulated with the Votes,) the House were sufficiently aware of their tenour. Many of the most objectionable schemes were entirely unopposed, and would necessarily pass into a law unless seine rule for the guidance of the House was laid down. As an illus- tration, he mentioned, that there existed within twenty-five miles of the House a valley through which no fewer than eleven different lines propose to run, and which eleven different companies propose to execute. Parliament could only give its consent to one of them; and as the law stands at present, the other ten compa- nies had no power to dissolve themselves. "Altogether, looking at the amount of capital concerned, the willingness of parties to be released from their engage- ments, and the want of public benefit to arise from these schemes, I think there is ample ground for the House to give its assent to these resolutions."

The resolutions met with unanimous concurrence; the only difference of opinion expressed having reference to the point of time when the check .sheald have been applied.

Mr. BERNAL thought the evil should have been guarded against at a much earlier period. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL justified the delay, on the ground that it would have been impossible at an earlier period to impose restrictions: Govern- ment could not have undertaken to select four or five bills out of five hundred. Mr. LABOUCHERE considered the course recommended by Sir Robert Peel as the best which could be adopted under the circumstances. Mr. HUDSON thought that the proposed measures would not have obtained the support they will now do had they been brought forward at an earlier period. Mr. M. PHILLIPS, Mr. NEWDEGATE, Mr. WARD, and Mr. F. BAELYG, expressed their awl:real. Mr. B. DENISON regretted that the spirit Of speculation had not been checked sooner. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER urged that interference could not have taken place sooner with success. Now that the public phrensy bad cooled, Parlia- ment could appeal from Philip drunk to Philip sober. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, in allusion to a remark made by Mr. Gisborne as to scrip, stated that it was legally saleable, and that if a man paid money for scrip he must adhere to his *gain. Lord GEORGE BENTINcK accused the Government of having encou- raged speculation; for they discouraged Lord Dalhousie's attempt to check it. Mr. CARDWELL defended the Government.

Mr. Ts:tomes DIINCOKBE enlarged the topics for discussion by stating, that after the resolutions proposed by Sir Robert Peel had been carried, he should move the following resolution. [We give it as subsequently amended.]

" That it be an instruction to the Committee on every private bill originated in this House relating to any railway, before proceeding with the merits of such bill, to require to be produced before them, and verified by the promoters- " I. A copy of the original return made for the purposes of provisional registration, with the names of the promoters as then registered.

" 2. The names, residences, and descriptions of the present and past:provisional di- rectors, treasurers, solicitors, secretary, and other officer, if any.

" 3. The present and proposed amount of the capital of the company.

" 4. The number of shares, and the amount of each share.

" 5. The number of shares actually allotted, with the names, residences, and descrip- tions of the original allottees, and the number of shares allotted to each.

" 6. The amount of subscriptions paid up by such original allottees.

" 7. The amount of shares retained by or for the provisional committee.

" 8. The amount of subscriptions actually paid up by such provisional committee upon the shares originally allotted to them.

" 9. The original subscribers' agreement, signed by the allottees.

" 10. A statement of the amount of money in hand, together with an abstract of all receipts and expenditure up to the presentation of the petition for the bill.

" 11. A statement of the source whence the Parliamentary deposit was paid, or whe- ther a declaration was made of a surplus revenue Instead of a deposit. " And that the Committee report specially on each of the foregoing particulars."

If this resolution were adopted, a very useful exposure would be the result No honourable committee would object to undergo the ordeal it prescribes; but

all the bubble schemes would dissolve under its pressure. He did not blame the Government for encouraging railway speculation: the blame was attributable to others. The provisional committees were the decoy ducks, and bad misled the public at large. Not her Majesty's Government, but these provisional committee- men, had induced the public to believe that they themselves incurred responsi- bilities proportionate to the scale of the undertakings. There was a list collated from different companies, and taken from a railway newspaper, showing 102 of the clergy on these provisional committees. What would be the consequences in their respective parishes ? Here were Deacons and Archdeacons andreverend and right reverend gentlemen, Vicars and Rectors, and others, to the number of 102, giving them spiritual sanction to these undertakings. (Great laughter.) How, then, were they to blame the farmers and the shopkeepers in their neigh- bourhoods? When they saw these reverend personages taking this active share —when they knew that their pastors were so occupied—knowing also that the Church always looked to its own interest and took care of itself—it was natural for the flock to write for a number of shares.

Mr. Duncombe's resolution was received with general favour.

Mr. DisiGtEm thought it deserved attention; and as to the Government reso- lutions they were not unworthy of approbation. But he blamed the Ministers for not having foreseen and guarded against the impending danger. And what was the reason that the remedy for the present state of things was proposed so late ? He could see no other reason than this—that the Administration was not equal to the emergency that had arisen. It was quite evident that it had no confidence in its own convictions; otherwise it would not have changed twice within two years as to the amount of the deposits for these railroads. On the Administration, therefore, he threw the responsibility of all the mischief, loss, and ruin, which these schemes had brought upon individuals. Sir Robert Peel himself, not only by his speech on turning up the first sod of the Trent Valley Railway, but also by a speech which he had made in his place in Parliament, bad given an unna- tural impulse to the railway mania, that was likely to terminate in private min and in public disgrace. Mr. Disraeli contrasted the policy of the Ministers on the Corn-laws with their policy on these railroad bills. On the Corn-laws, they said that we ought not to interfere with the investment of capital or with the employment of labour: in regard to railways, they declared for interference and protection. Mr. BRIGHT reminded Lord George Bentinek and Mr. Disraeli, that till lately they had been among the most thoroughgoing supporters of the Government. It was not till Ministers changed their policy on the Corn-laws that they had sub- jected themselves to these attacks. He reminded Lord George Bentinck, that, considering the application which Lord George had made some short time ago on behalf of the sporting world, he was not the best moral authority on any matter relating to speculation and gambling. The Government resolutions having been passed without dissent, Mr. DIINCOXBE formally moved his resolution. Sir GEORGE CLERK, Mr. Hunsox and some others, thought difficulty would be found in obtaining the information wished for: guilty parties would not assist in exposing their own acts. Mr. W. COLLETT said, that the examination proposed was inquisitorial, and would prove distressing to many persons who had already suffered enough from their folly. On the suggestion of Sir GEORGE CLERK, Mr. Duiecoalmt consented to omit from the tenth clause the words "liabilities of the proposed com- pany." As to the eleventh clause, Sir ROBERT PEEL recommended the omission of the words "whether out of the deposits or by loan." Mr. DIINCOMBE agreed; and the resolution passed in the shape in which we have printed it.

In the House of Lords, on the same evening, the Earl of Rumors= moved the first reading of the bill for enabling Railway Companies to be dissolved. He also brought under notice resolutions, the counterpart of those moved by Sir Robert Peel in the Commons, for checking the passage of railway bills through the House— By the bill, power is given to the provisional directors or governing body to calla meeting to dissolve the company; or any five shareholders may address a requisi- tion to the committee requesting a meeting to be held to consider the vestion of dissolution. Of this meeting due notice is to be given; the determination of the meeting is to be ascertained by scrutineers; those entitled to vote are the actual holders of the shares, whether as original allottees or purchasers of scrip; votes may be given in person or by proxy; if a clear majority of the stock vote in favour of dissolution it will be sufficient. The scale of voting is to be in con- formity with the regulations now applicable to joint stock companies, which are these—every share under five shall each confer a vote, every five shares above ten and below one hundred shall confer an additional vote, and any ten shares above one hundred a farther additional vote. As a clear demonstration of opinion, however, is not always attainable, it is proposed, that if one-third of the whole stock be represented at a meeting, such meeting might take the question of dissolution into consideration; and if three-fifths of the whole stock represented at the meeting should vote in favour of dissolution, that should be deemed sufficient, and the company must accordingly be dissolved. Precautions are taken to name certain trustees, with power to wind up the affairs of the undertaking in the way of an ordinary partnership. They would have the power to possess themselves of the funds of the company, and, after discharging the liabilities, to apply the surplus, if any, proportionally among the bond fide shareholders. In case the funds of the company should not be sufficient to cover all the liabilities then the persons who took possession of the funds should apply them to the redaction of the liabilities; and for the rest, it must be left to those who had trusted an in- solvent company to seek their redress at law.

Lord Dalhousie thought that these provisions would be sufficient to meet the cases of inchoate companies, provided there existed in such companies an unani- mous or a general desire to wind up their affairs; and as regarded those schemes which are now undergoing the consideration of the House or of the Committeee, the sessional order would operate as an effectual protection to shareholders who do not wish the projects with which they are connected to pass into a law.

Lord BROUGHAM said, that so far as he could judge at present, he could see no objection whatever to the outline of either plan—

Ile trusted, that at length we might hope to see an end put to the railway

mania which had been raging for the last two years, little to the credit of the character of this country, and which had been productive of great mischief to its beet and highest interests, in which he included the morals of the country. The mania had descended from the highest to the lowest. There were instances of poor clergymen in the coimtry, of maiden ladies living upon small annuities, of widows with small jointures' who, in the hope of making suddenly a gre,at increase in their incomes, had given themselves up to and become entrappee by this rail- way speculation. He would fain hope that the mere statement which had been made that night would have a benelicial effect before the bill should pass, if it ever did 'MSS into a law; for he perfectly agreed with one observation of the noble Earl, that it might be long before the bill passed, and he was afraid there would be a great delay elsewhere. There was a great railroad body, that would debate for twelve days, one after another, upon one subject, without intermission, making speeches by the score, but nevertheless making no progress in getting through business. He only attributed this to the bad constitution of that great -railroad body.

The Duke of Ricemome--Was not that the director's fault? (Laughter.) Lord BRomanam—No, it was the fault of the body at large: the House of

Railroads was so constituted, so bad in its construction, that it would debate for ever, and discuss without end, and argue without intermission; but as to coming to any conclusion, that was out of the question. He therefore agreed with the noble Earl, that it would be a long while before this bill passed. W ith.regard to the proposed sessional orders, they were without precedent: still his opinion was, that the bill itself, if it ever passed into a law would not do much good without the orders; and if he were put to his election he should prefer the orders to the bill, for he thought they would be found moseefficacions. Some of the other Peers made a few remarks, but not in opposition. Lord ASHBURTON thought the course now adopted was the very best which -could have been taken. Lord CastesEtz expressed a similar opinion. Lord -WHARNCLIFFE thought the proportion of shareholders requisite to decide on the withdrawal of a project was too small. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE ob- -tected to Irish Bills being included in the sessional order. Lord DeurousiE said, that every fair effort would be made to forward them.

The bill was then read a first time. The consideration of the sessional order was fixed for Monday. [On Tuesday, the Earl of DitmoustE had moved, and the Lords re- solved, that the proceedings on all railway bills should be suspended till the 27th April.]

LOCA/. TRIBUNALS FOR IRISH RAILWAYS.

Mr. SMITH O'BRiEN brought forward on Tuesday his long-announced motion,

"That, with a view to diminish the inconvenience and expense now incurred in carrying through Parliament bills for the construction of railways in Ireland, it is expedient that, in the case of Irish railway bills, all such inquiries as are now conducted in London by Committees of both Houses of Parliament should, after -the termination of the present session, take place in Ireland." In support of this proposal, Mr. O'Brien urged the very great expense involved in the passing of private bills under the existing system, and the almost uni- versal opinion which prevailed in Ireland in favour of a change. The subject had engaged the attention of the Repeal Association, and a plan like that suggested in his resolution had been warmly recommended. But, waiving the question of expense, the existing mode of managing private bills is unsatisfactory. In the present session, 750 railway bills had been introduced; but how was it possible that such a number could be properly inquired into. He denied the power of the House to compel the attendance of Members on private bills by a simple resolu- tion. As to the motion now submitted, he saw no objection to the appointment of a Commission by the Speaker, with the consent of the House at the close or at the commencement of every session, to consist of five individuals—one an emi- nent barrister, another a civil engineer, a third a military engineer, with a gen- tleman of the commercial interest, and a country gentleman. All that he wanted was competency and impartiality; and he was satisfied these qualities might be obtained in individuals not Members of the House. He was not disposed to think that other and better plans might not be proposed; but as to the general principle, he had the strongest confidence in in Mr. F. FRENCH seconded the motion; but admitted that he had not come prepared to discuss the question—

He thought that Irish Members had a fair claim to be exempted from serving upon Railroad Committees in England; seeing that, in their own country, they discharged. the duties of legislation in their respective grand juries, where they received no assistance from English Members.

• Sir ROBERT PEEL advised Mr. O'Brien to withdraw his motion—

Every one must admit that it might be a grave question whether or not cer- tain preliminary inquiries ought to be instituted by some authority other than the House of Commons; but that was a question equally interesting to all parts of the empire as to Ireland. If any measures could be adopted, which, with a due regard to the rights of property, would lead to a saving of expense in the pre- liminary inquiries, it would be the duty of the House to adopt them: but he hoped Mr. O'Brien would not press the House to an immediate decision. Sir Robert did not offer any opinion adverse to the principle of certain _persons being employed to make certain preliminary inquiries, such as those of engineering; but he felt the strongest objection to parting with the legislative powers of the House. Then after the Commission had made its report, legislation might be required by the House of Lords and the House of Commons; and the attendance, therefore, of the Irish Members would be necessary. Again, in case the report of the Commission should not be satisfactory—that this or that county was not fairly dealt with—it was quite clear there would be no saving of expense; for parties dissatisfied with that report would ask to be heard at the bar, and they would transfer the discussion from a Committee of the House to the floor of the House.

Mr. Siam O'BRIEN only asked that the House should affirm the prin- ciple of the resolution.

Sir ROBERT PEEL objected to the House affirming a principle when they had not been able to form an opinion upon the details. Mr. WA/UE*1r advised Mr. O'Brien to withdraw his motion, and bring it forward again better prepared with the details—

There was a generally-prevailing opinion in this country that Ireland was ill

used, persecuted, and neglected, and had been so for a long series of years; but it was also felt that from no Government had she received more attention than she had received from the present It could not, therefore, be suppw.ed that the pee. sent Government was unfriendly to Ireland. Indeed, it was acknowledged by the Irish Members in that House, that with reference to measures for the relief of the people, none had emanated from any Government more advantageous. It was a pity, then, that Irish Members should suppose the present Government was his- tile to Ireland.

The motion was supported by Mr. Maumee O'Cosatzia., Mr. B. Rom" Colonel RAWDON, and some others; and opposed by Lord CLAUDE HA- butzox, Colonel CoNcn,Lr, and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. The House divided—For the motion, 25; against it, 69; majority, 44. POST-OFP7CE MISMANAGEMENT.

On Tuesday, Mr. Trloatas Dearcorans moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the allegations contained in the petition of Mr. Jonathan Duncan respecting abuses in the General Post-office'- He said, no public department in the country furnished greater cause or juster grounds of dissatisfaction in its administration than the Post-office. Delay in the delivery of letters is complained of; and he would undertake to prove that they could be delivered in London an hour and a half earlier every morning, but for certain malepracticas. Within the walls, the letter-carriers are greatly dis- satisfied: if a subordinate make any complaint, it has no chance of reaching the Postmaster-General fairly, because of the channel through which it must pass. After this exordium, Mr. Duncombe proceeded to enumerate the allegations in

Mr. Duncan's petition; premising that he had taken a great deal of trouble in examining the-statements, and that he believed they could all be established by evidence.

Mr. Duncan, who is the proprietor of a newspaper called the Sentinel, stated that he had lately become acquainted with facts concerning the management of the General Post-office, which he was convinced had intentionally been withheld from the Committee which sat in 1837, and from successive Postmasters-General.

Going into details, the petitioner asserted that abuse and fraud, and delay in the delivery of letters, had arisen from the manner in which thePost-office Dtrectory

was got up and published by Mr. Frederick Kelly, Inspector of Letter-eamers. That Directory was the private property of Mr. Kelly, and of Messrs. Kelly and Company, printers. In the compilation and preparation of that publication, cur.. thin inspectors, sub-sorters, and letter-carriers, were compulsorily employed

throughout the year during official hours; in consequence of which, hundreds of letters and newspapers were frequently detained, to the loss of two or three hours.

For instance, in March, when the Supplemental and Court Directory was to be delivered, the Indian mail, which had been delayed on board the Great Liver • pool, came in; and there were letters and newspapers lying on the floor of the office for ten days undelivered, because the delivery of this Directory was thought of more consequence. It was also stated that letter-carriers and others had been threatened to be reported as for a breach of duty if they neglected to work for Mr. Kelly; and that in the preparation of the work, paper books, paper, pens, ink, au i other stores belonging to the Post-office, had been used. Mr. Kelly too, in fraud of the revenue, had up to the present year sent many thousands of printed circulars concerning the Directory to different persons by the hands of the

letter-carriers, while traversing their respective walks: they were thus sent, recommending the book to the parties' without any postage-stamp. It was added, that Mr. Kelly bad instructed the letter-carriers how to evade the Hawking Act; and that these practices were said to be countenanced by Mr. Bokenham, Mr. Kelly's superior. In several cases Mr. Kelly had stopped the wages of the letter- carriers for debts owing to himself; and had withheld resignations for several "

months till such debts were paid to him. It was also stated, that nearly 160 copies of the Directory for London were supplied to the sub-sorters, and paid for by the revenue; though the use of them in seeking the address of imperfectly- directed letters was forbidden by the Presidents, as occasioning a loss of time in sorting. In consequence of the monopoly enjoyed by Mr. Kelly, various individuals who formerly published Directories on their own resources had been driven out of the market and ruined. Mr. Robson an enterprising individual, had not only been ruined, but had been driven to Madness and a workhouse. But, with all Mr. Kelly's advantages, his work was far from being complete: in the edition for the present year there were 16,000 errors. For this slovenly publication the public paid 30s. a copy; whilst, on inquiry, it would be found that many respectable pub- lishers, if possessed of the same advantages that Mr. Kelly had, would undertake

to produce a better work for 128. 6c1. As to the profit, Mr. Kelly stated in a re- turn ordered by the House, that the profit for 1844 did not exceed 1,2761. 4s. 7d.: but the petitioner asserted that the work would clear more than 10,0001. a year' and Mr.-Duncombe offered to prove that it was worth from 12,0001. to 15,0001. a year. Dili% Duncan had exposed a number of these abuses in his newspaper; and Mt. Kelly had raised two actions against him for libel, but had abandoned them, paying the defendant's costs.

Mr. Dtmcombe mentioned some facts of his own to show the dissatisfaction existing among the subordinates of the Post-office on account of the manner in which they are treated. Deputations of from ten to twelve had waited upon him with a statement of grievances; and when he warned them of the consequenceS that might arise to themselves from doing so, they told him they did not care, and would come, if he liked, to the number of two or three hundred. As re- garded remedies he thought a good deal might be done by doing away with the whole system of fees, especially for early delivery. Mr. WILLIAMS seconded the motion in a short speech.

Mr. CARDWELL, Secretary to the Treasury, appeared as the advocate of the authorities— He wished at the outset to make two observations which applied to the whole question. The first was, that there was no disposition on the part of the Trea- sury or of the present or past Postmasters-General to screen from detection, from exposure' or from punishment, any malepractices like those which had been denounced to the House. The other observation was, that the noble Lord who presided over the Post-office was always open, and that the Treasury was always

open, to the reception of memorials or applications from any of the parties who were the victims of the alleged malepractices. Ile had never known of a respect- ful memorial presented by any Post-office subordinate that had not 'TIN with instant attention. As to the objection to the payment of fees for early delivery, the practice was an ancient one, and had been continued, not for the advantage of persons connected with the Post-office, but because it was believed that a large part of the mercantile community were not prepared for its immediate and sudden

withdrawal. With regard to the publication which had formed the gravamen of Mr. Dancombe's speech, it was got up from information which must have been

collected under any circumstances for the use of the Poet-office. No more time or trouble was oocupied in getting the particulars embodied in the Post office _Directory published by Mr. Kelly than would have been required for the Post- office itself. Since the close of the last century, permission had been given to

the several persons who held the office of Inspector of Letter-carriers to publish a Directory; and had not that been the case, it is possible that such an arrange-

ment would not now be sanctioned. As to Mr. Robson, Mr. Kelly had made hint

a payment for the copyright of his work. With regard to the profits, Mr. Card- well believed that Mr. Kelly's statement was perfectly correct: Mr. Bokenbant had gone over the accounts, and his report coincided with Mr. Kelly's statements As to the alleged delay which had occurred in the delivery of the letters stud

papers received by the Great Liverpool, the fact was that the letters came in so wet, or rather, such a mass of wet, that the servants of the Post-office were occu- pied some days, but he did not believe so long as ten days, in getting them separated and finding what were the names to which they were directed. As to the allegation that public stores were used by Mr. Kelly, a searching in- quiry had been made, and it was found to be altogether destitute of truth. As to the circulars, Mr. Kelly had merely adopted the practice common among pri- vate persons, of sending round circulars to their customers by hand; and Mr. Cardwell understood that the letter-carriers carried round the circulars out of office-hours. The allegation that wages have been retained in payment of debts could not be met unless specific instances were given. At the close of last session of Parliament, Mr. Kelly had expressed a wish that all persons connected with the Post-office should be relieved from the duty of collecting information for his work; but the then Postmaster-General withheld his consent, on the ground that the information was necessary for the public service, and the present Postmaster- General had not seen any reason to depart from the practice. The employment of the letter-carriers as regarded the Post-office Directory was not compulsory; but few objections were made,-a circumstance not to be wondered at, seeing that a commission of six shillings is received out of every thirty shillings. As to the charge about promotion being withheld by Mr Kelly from those who refused to serve him, it was untenable, bemuse Mr. Kelly had no power to give or withhold promotion. In conclusion, Mr. Cardwell said he should resist the motion, but was ready to grant any returns that might threw light on the administration of the Post-office.

Mr. MOFFATT Mr. PROTHEROE, Mr. BROTHERTON, Mr. CHRISTIE, and Mr. WLE AHY, spoke in favour of the inquiry. Mr. F. T. BARING, Mr. GOULEURN, and Mr. B. Escorr, deemed it unnecessary.

Mr. Moeesrr thought that if judicious measures were taken, letters could be delivered within a circuit of three miles from the Post-office before nine o'clock, although they were not now delivered till after ten in the morning.

Mr. PROTHEROE had been making calculations; and from them it appeared impossible that the letter-carriers could have time to deliver the circulars that had been spoken of, in addition to their other duties. Mr. BnoTHERTON complained of appointments recently made in the Manchester Post-office. A number of agricultural labourers had been sent from Buckinghamshire to that town to act as letter-carriers,--men who could hardly read or write, and who had great difficulty in making out the different streets. Mr. CHRISTIE condemned the employment of the letter-carriers for Mr. Kelly's private advantage. He alleged that the Post-office patronage was exercised ac- cording to a system of political jobbery. Mr. F. T. RARING thought that improvements might be made in the Post- office arrangements, which he shauld be very glad to see effected; and he believed that the Post-office authorities would not be hostile to such improvements; but he considered that they were bound to look to their revenue as well as to the ac- commodation of the public. He hoped the fee system would be gradually got rid of He entertained doubts as to the propriety of allowing a private individual to carry on the Post-office Directory; but were a change to take place, Mr. Kelly would be entitled to compensation. He condemned the principle of allowing the subordinates of any department to look to that House, instead of the officers of the Crown, as their head. Mr. WARLEY said, if the House refused the inquiry, it would be relinquishing its functions as the great inquest of the nation. He did not mean to imply any censure on the general management of the Post-office; and with respect to the Directory, he thought it an invaluable book; but when grave charges of fraud and dishonesty were made against a public servant, it was the duty of the House to grant an inquiry.

Mr. Contain= (Chancellor of the Exchequer) reiterated the more important statements of Mr. Cardwell. As to improvements, Government had been pro- ceeding gradually with them since 1842; and if greater delay in bringing about perfection had occurred than was expected, it should be recollected that an enor- mous increase of business had taken place, and that some confusion and irregula- rity were the inevitable result of the enlargement of the Post-office. That en- largement was now completed, and he thought all ground for complaint would be speedily removed. Mr. Escorr looked upon the question before the House as a mere squabble between a newspaper editor and the conductors of a "directory."

Mr. DUNCOMBE spoke shortly in reply; and the House divided-For the motion, 49; against it, 92.

INACCURATE STATISTICS.

On Tuesday, Lord GEORGE Bi.14TINCK asked for an explanation as to a "false return" which had been made to an order of the House- The return had been moved for by himself, and had reference to the prices of Memel and Canada timber in certain years; his object being to throw light upon the debate that was then ensuing upon the Timber-duties. Ile had moved for the return either in the last week of January or the first week of February; and that part of it which appeared to him to be false was dated from the Landing Sur- veyor's office on the 13th of February; consequently the return must have been before the Board of Trade on that day, and yet it was not presented to the House until the 1st of ApriL The prices given by the return for 1840, 1841, and 1842, averaged 81. le. 8d. a load; the duty being 558. In 1842, Sir Robert Peel intro- duced his change, and reduced the duty to 25s.; and in 1843 the duty was fur- ther reduced 58. By the return, the average price for 1844, 1845, and 1846, was lil. 12e. 6d. Now, the result of that return was to show that the consumers had gained by the remission of the duty, not only the whole amount of the duty, but 19s. 2d over and above it; that the consumers had, by the remission of the duty on Memel timber gained 49s. 2d. a load. But he believed, that so far from that being the case, if a true return had been made, it would have been found that the prices in 1840, 1841, and 1842, were as follows-In 1840, 51. 10e.; in 1841, 61. 5s.; in 1842, 51. 5s. a load; being an average price of 5L6*. fid., with a duty of 56s. And in the last three years, since the duty had been reduced to 26e., if a true return had been made, it would have shown that the prices were, in 1844, about 41. 5s.; in 1845, about 4L 5s.; and in 1846, 4L 12s. 6d.; being an average of 41. 7s. 6d. So that the consumer, on the average of the three years since the duty was reduced, as compared with the three years before, instead of gaining, as represented by the return' 49e. 2d. a load, being all the duty and 19s. 2d. over and above, had gained but 19e. 2d.; putting the same amount, and 10e. 10d. to it, on the average of the three years, into the pocket of the foreign grower; and comparing the last year with the year 1842, before the duty was reduced, Tenting, not 42e. 6d., as represented by the return of Govern- ment, into the pocket of the English consumer, but only 12s. 6d. So that out of the 30s. which the duty had been reduced to upon the article of Memel timber in the year 1845, the foreigner had enjoyed the benefit of 17e. 6d., whilst the Eng- lish consumer had but the benefit of 12e. 6d. It was an important matter that the House should be able to rely upon the truth and honesty of these statistical statements laid on the table by the Board of Trade, on which legislation depend- ed. This was a serious question; and his first intention was that the officer or subordinate officer who had made the false return should be call d to the bar of the House to explain how the error had arisen. Gentlemen connected with the commercial interests could see at once the inaccuracy of these returns; but they passed current with a great many persons, not only in this House, but he had seen leading articles, by learned editors of newspapers, proving the great advan- tages derived from the reduction of the duty. Ile called upon her Majesty'. Min- isters to explain how the return had been made. Sir ROBERT PEEL gave the explanation required- " I do not think I should be justified in entering into any argument on the subject; but I will confine myself to the facts of the case with reference to the error in the return. My attention was called to it yesterday, when I was told that an error existed in the return. Although this return was presented by her Majesty's Ministers to the House, yet, from the number of similar documents, it would be impossible for us to be responsible for the accuracy of these returns. That responsibility rests with the department by whom the return is made. No doubt, it is of great importance that returns made to this House should be accu- rate; and on understanding that an error existed, I made immediate inquiries. I directed that if it were found an error had been made, another document should be prepared and laid upon the table of the House as soon as possible. There is an error in the return. I desired that it should be Corrected, and an accurate return made; and I believe that accurate return will be laid upon the table tomorrow. The mistake originated with the Board of Customs, and I desired to know how it had occurred. I hold in my hand the letter of the officer by whom the return was certified; and perhaps the best course I can take is to read it- " ' Sir-In answer to the requisition, calling upon me to state in what branch of the Customs the mistake had occurred. I have found that It was in the Landing Surveyor's office the mistake occurred. It arose in this manner. The prices were taken from prices-current, (and not from official returns of the Customs,) in which some of the prices include the duties paid and others do not. The heading of the space, " Value In Bond," only applied to the top of one column, and not to the bottom of the same column; and the mistake arose from its havi: g been supposed that the heading applied to the whole, when it only applied to a part of the column. I greatly regret that the mistake has occurred."

Sir Robert also regretted the error; but he had done all he could to rectify it,

THE TEA-DUTY.

On Thursday, after the presentation of some petitions from Manchester and Liverpool praying for a reduction in the duty on tea, Lord SANDON raised a discussion, by moving for copies of all the memorials which had been addressed to the Government on the subject- Unless a reduction in the duty took place, it was impossible to expect from the open intercourse with China the advantages we hoped to derive from it He ad- mitted that an increase in the consumption had taken place, but not to the same extent as had been found in coffee: in the one case the duty had been reduced, in the other it had been raised from an ad valorem duty of 160 per cent to a ditty of 250 per cent. He found that the yearly consumption of tea during the past ten years gave an average for the first five years of 38,118,000 pounds, and for the second five years of 39,914,000 pounds; showing that the increase had not been proportioned to the increase of population. The effect of so high a duty not only operated against the comforts of the people, but it obstructed the progress of our trade with China. The trade to that country could not be one of cash, but of barter; and the existence of such a high duty upon tea could not fail to pro- duce an unfriendly feeling towards this country, more especially as the Chinese found that England was the only country in the world which imposed a heavy duty on their produce. If the duty were reduced, there would be a greater de- mand for sugar, and this would assist in making up the revenue. Mr. MOFFATT, MY. J. SMITH, Mr. EN1'WI8LE, and Mr. WYt3E, spoke in favour of reduction.

Mr. MOFFATT said, the Chinese trade was a losing one to the English manu- facturer. For a number of years England had been absorbing gradually all the silver of China. It would be in the recollection of the Chancellor of the Ex- chequer that the exportation of bullion had always been most strongly ob- jected to by the Chinese: this had long been regarded as a great grievance by them, and bad tended much to alienate the feelings of that people towards us. The imports into China of our produce had been extended; but the exports had not kept pace with this; which could be easily explained by the existence of the present high duty on tea. The Chinese admitted our goods at a duty of from 5 to 10 per cent, but the duty on tea was from 10Oto00percent. He was sure that the person who made the treaty on the 1art of this country could never have calculated on such a state of things being continued. Mr. J. A. SMITH gave another illustration of the working of the present system. A piece of grey calico shirting, manufactured at Manchester, when introduced into China paid a duty of 7d.; it was exchanged there for 12 pounds of tea; which 12 pounds of tea paid, on its introduction into this country, a duty of 26s. No- thing could be more injurious than this contrast. The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER had no objection to produoe the papers; but he did not think it was consistent with his public duty at present to say what where the intentions of Government-

It should be recollected that the revenue on tea was very little short of five millions. The state of the general revenue did not admit of a large reduction, and the benefit of a small redaction would not go to the consumer.

COUNTY ELECTIONS.

On Wednesday, Mr. ELMILN8TONE moved the second reading of his bill for limiting the voting at county elections to one day. Colonel THOMAS WOOD believed that any such restriction would be productive of very serious consequences-' and he moved as an amendment, that the bill be read that day six months. Lord WOR8LEY read a return of the number of votes recorded at certain county elections in 1841, with the view of showing that a very large pro- portion of the voters polled on the first day- At the last contested election for the West Riding of Yorkshire, 49,782 votes in all were recorded; of which 41,499 were given the first day, and only 8,283 the second; and so in othercases. The majority was so great on the first day at that election for the successful candidates, that there was no chance of altering the result on the second. Yet the chance of turning an election on the second day offered strong temptations to partisans; and not only would corrupt practices be checked, but the expense of elections would be considerably diminished by the adoption of the present measure. He was aware also of some instances in which voters, from their ignorance of the law, thought that after having recorded their votes on the first day of an election for one candidate, they were entitled to vote for the other candidate on the next. The bill would prevent such mistakes.

Mr. NEWDEGATB spoke in opposition to the bill; Mr. BRIGHT in its favour; Mr. B DENISON, Sir JAMES GRAHAM, and Sir ROBERT INGLIS, against; Mr. B. E8COTT in favour; Lord GEORGE BEicriticir against. Mr. NEWDEOATE thought the events or the returns of past county elections afforded no criterion of what might be the events at future ones; and he sug gested, that in the present condition of railway travelling, whilst a number of county voters might be assembled at a railway station, the persons in the employ- ment of the Anti-Corn-law League might occupy their places at the polling- Mr. BRIGHT believed that nine-tenths of the county voters are in favour of the change. Sir James GRAHAM would oppose the bill; believing that it was calculated to abridge the latitude which ought to be afforded to county voters to go to the polL Ile did not see any analogy between the cases of borough and county elections He had been quite surprised by the enumeration of counties given by Lord Worsley; not because it showed that so few, but that it proved that so many voters polled on the second day. Besides, many persons had votes in two, three, four, or more counties; and with these the exercise of their franchise under this bill ;would be impossible. This fact alone established the importance of continuing the election in counties for two days. He could not imagine how it happened

that those who were for increasing county constituencies by the addition of out- voters—for so it must be accomplished—supported this bill, since the effect of it must be to prevint them, in many instances, from going to the poll. At the same time, he was in favour of enlarging the constituencies in all cases where it was not done ty absolutely faggot-votes.

Mr. B. Esccrr wished to promote the purity of elections; and as most of the bad practices and bribery took place on the second day, he should vote for the second reading. This was not a very important measure, but it was a step in the right direction. The way to raise the character of the House was to raise the character of its members.

Colonel SIBTHORP had votes for five counties, and was anxious to exercise his right in every county. People talked of a paltry economy, and he regretted the departure of the time when there was a free circulation of money at elections. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK hoped, that when the honourable Member for Win- chester next divided on the Corn-laws, he would remember the promise he had once made to his constituents, and not vote one way and promise another. To do so, was to imitate some poor voters at elections, who, having promised one candidate, polled for another.

Mr. Escorr rejoined. Ignorance was generally accompanied by presumption: the noble Lord was ignorant of what had recently passed at Winchester. The House divided—For the bill, 32; against it 55. Thus the bill was lost.

DISMISSAL OF A FOOR-LAW ASSISTANT-COMMISSIONER. On Tuesday, Mr. CHRISTIE moved for "copies of the correspondence which had passed between Mr. William Day, late Assistant-Commissioner of Poor-laws, and the Poor-law Commissioners and the Secretary for the Home Department, relative to his in- voluntary resignation of his Assistant Poor-law Commissionership; and of all minutes relative to Mr. Day's resignation, and to the appointment of Colonel Wade as his successor: also, that it be an instruction to the Committee on the Andover Union to inquire into all the circumstances under which Mr. Day was called upon to resign." Mr. Day had for several years discharged the duties of Assistant-Commissioner: in 1844 he suffered the misfortune of a broken leg; but quickly recovered, and resumed his duties: in about five months after the accident be received a letter from one of the Commissioners, intimating that the state of Wales at that time required increased activity on the part of the Assist- ant-Commissioners; for which activity the Commissioners so far doubted his capability after the accident he had sustained, that, with many expressions of personal regard, they suggested his resignation. Mr. Day replied, that he had never been confined more than fourteen days in his own house on account of the accident; and that he had speedily so far recovered as to be able to resume his accustomed exertions; that he could actively conceive such an accident as the real reason for the suggestion he had received, and that if any other reason ex- isted, be hoped he should hear of it. Although Mr. Day had reiterated this re- monstrance repeatedly, he had received from the Commissioners no reply. Ulti- mately he resigned; but from that day to this he had been unable to obtain any satisfactory explanation as to the cause of his resignation being asked for. Sir James Graham, in reply to a letter addressed to him on the subject, attributed it to a determination on the part of the Commissioners to reduce the number of their Assistants. This, however, could not be the reason; for the vacancy occa- sioned by the resignation of Mr. Day had been filled up by the appointment of Colonel Wade.

Sir JAMES GRAHAME, though not approving, assented to Mr. Christie's mo- tion- because the House had overruled his objection to interference between the Commissioners and their subordinates, in the case of Mr. Parker. Until the events which took place in Wales in the latter part of 1843 were forced upon the attention of the Government, he had never heard the name of Mr. Day. It was not his intention to impute any blame to that gentleman; but it was one thing not to give blame, and another to appoint a man to a district in a very delicate and peculiar situation.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES Him.. This bill was canvassed a good deal on Wed- nesday, on Sir JAMES GRAHAM'S motion for further consideration of the report. Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE thought greater facilities ought to be given for the withdrawal and transfer of ,funds belonging to individuals than the bill provided. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that Mr. Dancombe was in error if he supposed that the object of the bill was to restrict and limit Friendly Societies. The object was quite the contrary: it was introduced for the purpose of enlarging and giving greater facilities to the law as it at present existed. All shares now transferable would remain so. But while he admitted the right of workmen to combine for higher wages, he did not think it right to give facilities which, under the sanction of law, would create small bodies with large funds applicable to the purpose of carrying on " strikes " for a long time. After a good deal of discussion in which Mr. RUTHERFORD and the SOLICI- TOR-GENERAL took part, several clauses were agreed to; Sir JAMES Gitaitast undertaking to embody in the report some suggestions !Lade by Mr. Rutherford for facilitating the withdrawal ot money. An amendment, moved by Mr. DUN- COMESE, the effect of which would have been to legalize all existing Friendly So- cieties whose rules have been sanctioned by Mr. 1 idd Pratt, was negatived by 93 to 7.

Fifteen clauses were agreed to; the Chairman reported progress; and the bill was ordered to be recommitted on Friday next.

NEW WRIT for the Falkirk district of Burghs, in the room of Mr. Baird, who has accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.