NEWS OF THE WEEK.
MACKINNON had a bill to abate the nuisance of smoke. Little of all this was done. The Ecclesiastical Courts Bill was duly read a second time ; Mr. BORTHWICK would have moved his clerical resolution, only be was stopped by the " counting-out " of the House; and most of the measures set down were not even mentioned.
The Factory Bill was expected to pass the second reading in silence : it created the greatest pother of all, for in the debate on that formal stage of the bill began the personal talk, which con- sumed the first three evenings of the week and occupied the House last night. The scene originated in one of Mr. ROEBUCK'S dramatic surprises, and was scarcely less interesting while the action pro- ceeded than the old drama of the election-compromises, in which be suddenly made the House bear so conspicuous a part. The Factory Bill, we say, was to have passed the second reading with- out dispute—so had Ministers and Lord ASHLEY agreed ; but Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE interposed with some censure of Lord ASHLEY'S concession. In the desultory debate on this and other points, Mr. FERRAND showed himself. " Heu infelix !"—Roenucx was lying in wait with a fatal weapon called a question, which he launched at the youth; asking whether he had not accused a Minister of the Crown of procuring a false report from an Assistant Poor-law Com- missioner for the purpose of crushing a Member of that House ? After some indirect answering, Mr. FERRAND admitted that he had ; Sir JAMES GRAHAM being the Minister, Mr. MOTT the As- sistant Commissioner. The story is one of Mr. FERRAND.S Poor- law delusions; but, thus repeated in the House, matter-of-fact Sir JAMES GRAHAM thought that he could not let it pass, and he called upon Mr. FERRAND to explain, justify, or retract. But that was not all : Mr. HUME asked, whether Mr. FERRAND had not accused Mr. Hoea of having, as Chairman of the Nottingham Election Committee, corruptly to oblige Sir JAMES GRAHAM, unseated Mr. WALTER? and Mr. WARD asked, whether he had not reported Sir ROBERT PEEL to have said, that in one of Lord ASHLEY'S success- ful divisions on the Factory Bill, Government bad been defeated by "the Christian feeling" of the House ? It appeared that the last report was circulated by Mr. OASTLER ; and Mr. FERRAND asked, like Cain, whether he was Mr. OASTLER'S keeper ? He acknow- ledged the accuracy of the report in the Times which contained the other remarks, and he abided by them ; but promised next night to bring a copy of the paper, and go over it line for line. Next night came : Mr. FERRAND rose ; the House listened for his vindi- cation; when he said, that he had read the report in the Times— that it was correct—that he neither explained nor retracted: he was saying something about "wounding the personal honour" of others, which was stopped short with a burst of derision ; and, leaving his speech a fragment, he took his hat and went out—fairly bolted. The House roared with laughter. Sir Jamas GRAHAM rose and gazed after his Parthian adversary, amazed alike at his effrontery and his fugacity ; Sir JAMES himself not belonging to that light corps that has much alacrity in flight. Mr. ROEBUCK
inquired if the matter was to pass off thus ? Mr. Hoao
demanded justice. The hubbub of conversation was renewed, some proposing one thing and some another. Sir ROBERT PEEL was now in his favourite element—a Parliamentary im- broglio—a kind of storm in which lie shows his nerve, his expe- rience, and his skill. With admirable coolness he turned to the chart, proposing that they should look for precedents ; and the de- bate was adjourned, no one staying to listen to Mr. BORTHWICK'S Convocation-proposal. On the third night, the discussion assumed a more solemn aspect : Sir JAMES GRAHAM and Mr. Hone formally lodged a complaint each ; the Speaker asked if Mr. FERRAND was present ? silence replied ; and then the House deliberated what to do. Sir ROBERT PEEL proposed to wait till Friday, when perhaps Mr. FERRAND might qualify, retract, or prove his aspersions: Mr. Hoec wanted the House to bring Mr. Feaeaxn to proof, or them- selves to declare the accusation false and calumnious; Lord Joule MANNERS wished to let the matter drop, moving "the previous quntion." "Young England" shone in that discussion ; several of her denizens assuming a dignified superiority to Mr. FERRAND and his aspersions, to the Members for Dorchester and Beverley and their sensitiveness, as well as to the forward zeal of Mr. ROE- BUCK in giving Parliamentary éclat to an intemperate ebullition of the popular hustings, which had already died away. Mr. DISRAELI especially ridiculed the cumbrous proceedings against the loose- tongued Member, in a felicitous strain of pungent pleasantry : he reminded Sir ROBERT PEEL of his own far graver aspersion on Mr. COBDEN, in the face of the House itself; a retort too fair not to cut deeply. Young England, however, got itself into a little scrape—hinting that the aggrieved Mr. HOGG might have sent "a friend" to Mr. FERRAND; at which Sir ROBERT INGLIS and-Mi. ROEBUCK were duly shocked. Eventually, the matter was left fer Friday ; and our Postscript will contain the fourth act of the tra- gedy or farce as it may turn out. This seems, on the surface, terrible loss of time ; but perhaps it is not so : the bracing influence of the sport may tell on the legis- lation of next week, so that after all more work may be done within the fortnight than if Members had plodded on with their ordinary "discussion "—assuredly the slowest and most debilitating mental exercise in the world. The effect of the expose, however, must incidentally damage the cause of which Mr. FERRAND is such a conspicuous ally—the Ashleian Ten-hours cause. And what does it say for the electors of Knaresborough? First Ricnaans, then FERRAND! Never let Knaresborough be disfranchised. The rotten boroughs were defended on the score that they were useful in returning brilliant wits—no rotten boroughs it used to be said, no wits; and the state of the debates in the Reformed Parliament often gives much corroboration of the warning. Surely the enter- tainment of the House makes it necessary to retain the franchise to the single borough of Knaresborough, for an opposite reason. It will be curious to see what Knaresborough can do after FER- RAND.
