Debates anti tiroteeDings in iglatifament.

RAILWAYS IN IRELAND.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, the order of the day was Moved for the second reading of the Railways (Ireland, No. 2.) Bill.

Sir WILLIAM MOLESWORTH opposed it; contending that there WRS no essential difference between Lord George Bentinck's measure and the pre- sent; and having opposed that, be could not consistently support this.

The object of both measures was, to lend money at less than the market rate of interest to certain railway companies in Ireland —in other words, to give those companies a pension out of the public purse. do doubt, railways would be as good for Ireland as for England; but why are they to be made at the expense of the public in one country more than in the other? That is the question. The English, though not without their own distresses, have given half their loaf to their Irish fellow citizens without grudging, though they received small thanks in return; but their representatives are bound to see whether these loans would really and effectually relieve the destitute and suffering. Now the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord John Russell opposed Lord George Bentinck's scheme by the arguments, that less than one third of the loans to railway companies would be expended in the wages of labour; that a large portion would be Skilled labourers; that even of the unskilled labourers the most able-bodied, those gene- rally most able to obtain employment, would be preferred; and that in fact, in- stead of relieving the destitute, the proposal was but a plan for the relief of destitute shareholders and mortgagees. Lord George manfully proposed his plan; it was rejected by a majority of three to one, and every argument on principle by which it was resisted still exists in undiminished force. To carry out the pro- posed measure, would be not only to strengthen the bad habit in Ireland of relying on England for assistance whenever an emergency occurs, but it would encourage applications from every occupation throughout the United Kingdom. If money is to be lent to any branch of industry, why not to all? The only reason which he could discover was, that in the Ministerial plans for Ireland there remained a sur- plus of 600,0001. unappropriated, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had resolved to expend the whole of it in some way, good, bad, or indifferent. Sir William Molesworth concluded by moving that the bill be read a second time that day three months.

This amendment was seconded by Mr. Wir.ir aura Lord Joim RUSSELL defended the bill.

Sir William Molesworth bad taken a popular but a superficial objection to the measure, based on the resistance to Lord George Bentinck's plan. In resisting that plan, Ministers relied mainly on two grounds,—the prospect that it would entail an Immense expenditure in an uncertain state of the money market; and the insufficiency of the scheme for the immediate purpose in view—the affording of food to the destitute millions of Ireland who had lost their usual means of sub- sistence. But in the debate on that motion, Lord John expressly stated his opinion that the object for which Lord George proposed to apply the public money was a legitimate one; and therefore there was nothing in the decision of the House to preclude the House for ever from giving money in aid of public works for Ireland. It is the yearly custom to give advances out of the public money in promotion of useful public works: 400,0001. or 600,0001. has been given for works of drainage; and generally the public money has been usefully advanced for objects which individuals were not likely to undertake. In the bill therefore, there was nothing that was not in perfect accordance with the general principles sanctioned by the House, and found to work beneficially for the public.

The only question at issue now was, whether they should adopt a plan which required a larger advance than the Exchequer Loan Commissioners would be able to make. Lord John admitted, that to justify that it would be necessary to make out an exception to ordinary rules: but there would be no difficulty in making out such an exception. Sir William Molesworth had talked of employments in Ireland and in England; as if the state of the two countries were at all similar. You must look at the condition of Ireland, as it has been made by a long course of legislation and government. Turning back to history, it is evident that the legislation and government of a country exercise an influence on the condition of the people, not for ten or twenty years but for centuries. "If I look at the happy condition of the people of Tuscany, I see there the remains and fruits of the vi- gorous republic that once ruled in Florence. If I look to the condition of-Flan- ders at the present day, I see there traces still existing of the good and mild go- vernment of the house of Burgundy. And if I turn to the state of the territory of Valencia, I can still see there traces of the industry and superior cultivation of the Moorish government of that province. In short, in every part of Europe, I can see the condition of the people influenced, not by the policy of the govern- ment existing at the present moment, but by governments long since passed away. And Ireland is no exception to this rule. If you will go back for a cen- tury, and look to what was the nature of the legislation for Ireland a century past,—if you find the great majority of the people debarred from holding office in the state, and from all those distinctions of the bar and other professions to which talent should aspire,—if you see that they were debarred even from the possible enjoyment of a landed estate, if some relation, who should turn out a villain, chose to take it from them,—if you find that the whole course of that legislation was to degrade and distress the majority of the people,—when you find all this, can you wonder that we have now millions of that people living in the lowest condition of life and unable to raise for themselves the means of comfort?" It would be a narrow and unjust view of the duty to Ireland to look merely at what has been done for the last ten or twenty years, and then lay down the general principles laid down by Sir William Molesworth with so much complacency, that the Irish ought to do as the English; that we ought to leave them to their own resources, and give them no help whatever by our legislation, just as we do in England. " Why, if you had governed Ireland as you govern England, I do not doubt that the Irish would be able to do without such aid. But you have not done so; and it is not your late legislation—it is not the act of 1829, that act of tardy justice —which can in a few years place the Irish in a position to work out their own prosperity, and to attain anything like the state of comfort and wellbeing in which we have the happiness to see the English people generally placed." Glan- cing at the insecurity of capital in Ireland, and the prevalence of crime, which turns even against particular benefactors, Lord John contended that this state of that country is a reason why you should do something more than trust to the mere general principlea of freedom and the ordinary rule of government: "It is

aosason why you should not be satisfied with doing that which I admit this House has freely done—that is, give millions acquired from the industry of the other portions of the empire for the relief of the distress of Ireland."

Looking to the future, Lord John would not admit that the aspect is very pro- pitious. There is at least a reasonable fear that a great portion ot. the potato crop may perish. The people have exerted themselves with greater industry to sow corn and green crops; but with respect to nourishment, it requires three acres of wheat to replace an acre of potatoes: and on the whole, looking to the condition of Ireland, not only for the next six months, but for the next five or six years, con- siderable apprehensions must be felt that the eufferings of the people may be ex- treme. Great burdens have been imposed, and justly, on the proprietors in Ire- land—the expense of maintaining the labourers and their families; and Parliament was bound therefore to assist in rescuing the people of Ireland from their present state, by enabling them to work out that prosperity which they must ultimately be the most efficient instruments in working out for themselves.

There was nothing chimerical or empirical in the present measure. The Rail- way Commission strenuously recommended the formation of a railroad from Dub- lin to Cork- They advised that every effort should be made to combine into one interest the whole of the Southern district between Dublin and Cork, Limerick and Kilkenny; and also a Northern line. They gave various reasons for that recommendation, but mainly relied on the great advantage of perfecting the com- munication with the great naval and mercantile station of Cork. In the present measure, therefore, Lord John thought that they were taking a step in the right direction towards the permanent improvement of Ireland. They had not advanced money towards railways the benefits of which were yet problematical. The pro- moters of the railways themselves had advanced 50 per cent of the whole SIM. It was a perversion to say that Government spent the money merely because 600,0001. remained on hand. In pointing to that balance, Sir Charles Wood was only answering one objection—any difficulty that might have been suggested in finding the money. Lord John hoped the House would adopt the measure; for he thought it part of a general policy which ought to be followed towards Ireland—a measure which could not refused consistently with justice to Ireland.

Mr. ROEBUCK took alarm at thet last observation, that the measure be- fore the House was part of a general system of policy which Lord John Russell was about to adopt with regard to the future government of Ire- land; and on that ground he called upon the House to give the more de- termined opposition to the bill before it.

He reviewed the arguments used by Lord John Russell and his colleagues against Lord George Bentinck's plan; showing that they still bold good. The first objection urged by Ministers against Lord George's plan ESA to the largeness of the sum: Mr. Roebuck denied that the sum was larger than that demanded by Lord John's scheme. Lord G .arge's 16,000,0001 was to be extended over four years: Lord John had already called for 10,000,0001., but it only extended over 1847. Lord John talked of centuries of oppression and misrule: but those cen- turies of oppression and misrule used not have prevented the English people from applying their wealth to the making of roads or other works in Ireland. The master wrong inflicted upon Ireland has been the Irish Church; it has been that which has made the Catholic the serf, the Protestant the oppressor: yet, after going tack to "centuries of misrule," Lord John comes forward with a pitiful proposition for a vote of 620,0001 When Lord George Bentinck proposed his plan, Lord John showed that it would not relieve the aged and the impotent—he cut off Lord George from the argument derived from the "calamity" in Ireland: yet now he turns round and says "you must consider the calamity in Ireland "1 Mr. Roebuck, like Lord John, took no very hopeful view as to the prospect of the supplies of food. He anticipated that the potato crop would be an unhappy failure; that all the spring crops would be anything but plentiful; that the wheat crop would not prove more than an average in England and Ireland; and that America would have nothing to offer which would afford anything like hope or expectation of relief to this country. At such a time, therefore, he contended, it would be most impolitic to expend the substance of the country in railway schemes. Lord John has admitted the principle that the people of this country are the best judges as to the mode of employing their capital; but he said, these railroads are in such a flourishing condition, and already half finished. If so, why do not the parties borrow money in the market? In that case, capital would flow to them readily enough. But would Members really like to apply their own capital? The Member for Lincoln [Mr. William Collett] was always urging an advance of money for Irish railroads—to encourage, in fact, wild spe- culations: but why should the people of England be compelled to make good losses arising from the unwise application of money in these dangerous and wild speculations by another portion of her Majesty's subjects? Mr. Roebuck declared that if an attempt should be made to work upon the feelings of the people of England in favour of these advances, because of the calamity which, simultaneously with the failure of those speculations, had befallen that country, then it would become his duty to unmask the pretence, and to show that the sympathy felt by those who called upon the Government to lend money to Irish railways was not a sym- pathy for the sufferings of Ireland, but with their own unhappy situation. He sincerely hoped that the House would reconsider this matter. This was the time, when it was first proposed to Parliament, to reconsider the principle of the mea- sure they were called upon to sanction. Lord John Russell had himself stated that this was but the first step in his plan. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK entirely concurred with his "noble friend," Lord John Russell, that this measure was a step in the right direction; Mid he revived many arguments in favour of the general proposition that it would be advantageous to encourage railways in Ireland. It had been said that this measure would tend to make Irish railways pensioners upon this country: but, he maintained, so advantageous would the measure be, that the English Government would really be pensioners upon the Irish railways —the Minister, using his superior credit, would realize a profit by the measure. The proposed measure, however, was only too small. Lord George maintained that there are other railways which ought to share in the loan, particularly the Midland Great Western Railway and the Waterford and Limerick Railway. The farmer would immensely facilitate the transport of fish from Galway to Dublin, and even to Manchester and London; and it would bring into play the Arigna mines—those mines which for many centuries supplied the only iron used in England. He did therefore trust that justice would be done to those two lines of railway.

[From this point Lord George diverged into an ingenious argument, illustrated very copiously with figures, to show the immense gains of this country from the railway system in general. We have about 96,000,0001. expended in railways; the gross returns are about 8,000,0001. a year, but so much cheaper is the present mode of transit for goods and passengers, that the same amount of traffic would have cost the public 21,000,0001. a year: the saving to the public is thirteen millions a year,—which is equivalent, at five per cent interest, to a capital of 260,000,0001. That sum, therefore, represents the amount absolutely gained by the public through the railway system. Mr. LABOUCHERE followed up rd John Russell's defence, especially in showing why the three particular railways mentioned in the bill had been selected. The Exchequer Loan Commissioners had recommended that assistance should in preference be given to those railways which had paid up 50 per cent of their capital; and the three railways mentioned in the bill had been returned by the Commissioners as having complied with those oonditious. The motion was supported by Mr. Lsewor, Mr. &MIL, ME %LISA. COLLETT, Mr. MORGAN JOHN O'CONNELL, and Mr. MONTAGU GOE74 IS was opposed by Mr. TRELAWNEY.

Mr. SHE/L, at the close of his speech, paid a tribute to the memory of Mr. O'Connell. Be introduced the subject by observing that the fiscal view was not the only view of the question- " I shall be glad if, when the Parliament is approaching to its close, it shall make a testamentary manifestation of good-will to the people of Irelend, indica tive of the policy by which the government of the noble individual should be sustained who has had the courage to undertake the administration of Ireland. That able and sagacious statesman will have great difficulties to encounter— difficulties which have been enhanced by the death of the celebrated man to whom the noble Lord opposite alluded in the course of these discussions, the man to whom his country owes incalculable obligations, and to whom hereafter, when the prejudices and the passions, the antipathies and the predilections of the hour shall have passed away, in the impartial adjudication of those who shall come after us, the attributes of greatness, political and intellectual, will be beyond doubt as- signed. (Loud cheers.) I trust that the time will never arrive when English statesmen will have cause to lament that the voice by which millions of men were at once excited and controlled is heard no more, and that the accents CC which a nation hung in rapture and a senate in admiration are hushed in the grave for ever. Would that he had been spired to his country I would that he had lived to reach the seat of that ancient and perpetual faith of which he was a firm and honourable believer, and of which he was the proud and chivalrous champion; that he had knelt down at the altar of the greatest temple which was ever raised by the hands of man, worthy of the purposes, the high and holy ones, to which it was devoted; and that through the marble halls of the Vatican, the venerable man, although with feeble and tottering steps, had found his way through the array of sacerdotal pomp, to receive the sanctifying salutation of the great pontifical reformer who has ascended the chair of St. Peter amidst the acclamations of the world I and would that, after the performance of his pilgrim- age, the illustrious Irishman could have returned to his country, in order that he might renew his aspirations here to imprize the principles on which he acted all his life, and of the violation of which he was never rightfully accused. You will, I am sure, forgive me, if I, who have so seldom any justification for taking any part in the discussions of this House, have departed from the question, in order that I might offer the tribute of my mournful but unavailite commemora- tion to the man, whose departure from the scene in which he performed a part so conspicuous as to attract the attention of mankind, is a disaster which it will require wisdom and fortitude, and that conciliating policy upon which this measure is founded, to countervail."

Sir JAMES GRAHAM, who opposed the measure, began by acknowledging the propriety of a passing tribute from a Roman Catholic Member to Mr. O'Connell; but denied that it had been necessary to stimulate the sympa- thy and liberality of Parliament for the misfortunes and sorrows of Ireland.

Sir James was somewhat at a loss to discover upon what principles the mea- sure was proposed to the House at that moment. He could understand Lord George Bentinck, who proposed Irish railroads as a means to relieve the distress of Ireland: but, if he mistook not, Lord John Russell repudiated that ground; and the present question, therefore, was to be treated on the abstract question of general policy, without reference to the particular circumstances of Ireland. Sir James was not one who would deny that, under any circumstances and at any time, assistance might be given to railroad companies; but what were the cir- cumstances, what were to be the limitations? In 1846, Ministers ref used the advance of 360,000/. to an Irish railroad company, as too great. The financial prospects are now better than they were some time ago; but nevertheless, even now, they require peculiar caution in the management. The exchanges are not so unfavourable, and bullion, which was flowing out, is flowing into the Bank. But, on the other hand, the importation of corn within the last month has been Kreider than at any former period in the commercial history of this country. That large importation must be met by payments either in specie or by exports of manufactures. But coincidently with that large importation, there m a high price of raw material in the staple manufacture of cotton. Therefore it is to be anticipated that we shall have great difficulty in paying for our food by extending our manufactures. The rate of discount is still considerably higher than the rate of interest that Government propose to take for this advance to Irish railways; the balances in the Exchequer are less than they were in 1846 by 1,000,0001.; and when Sir Charles Wood recently proposed his great loan, he relied on the argument that it is necessary to avoid recurring to the Bank of England for a large amount of Deficiency Bills. Mr. Thomas Baring had imputed the commer- cial crisis to the unhappy circumstances which made an application to the Bank of England necessary in April last for payment of the dividends; and if a similar measure be not resorted to for the dividend due on the approaching 5th of July— and he believed that it would not be necessary—still It will only have been averted by the premium on the prompt payment of the loan. Those were cir- cumstances which the House was bound to bear in mind before assenting to the proposition. Should the potato crop again fail, a far larger sum than 620,0001. would be required to meet the necessities, not only of Ireland but of this country. In such case, however, every shilling would be necessary, and should be advanced with the direct view of increasing the amount of food. Be could not help observ- ing here, that Ministers had withdrawn, without even discussing it, the question of applying some stimulus to the cultivation of waste lands in Ireland. Then the inquiry had very naturally been raised, whether it would not be possible, by aid from the public, to diminish the number of those who press on the subsistence of the country, in colonization. If money were to be disposed on public account be- yond what is already advanced, Sir James thought that it might be beneficially disposed of incidentally in the attempt to improve the waste lands of Ireland, or to test the advantages derivable from colonization. He agreed with Mr. Roebuck, that the arguments against Lord George Ben tinck's plan were applicable to the measure now under discussion. Ministers, for instance objected to the former, that it was a measure in favour of speculators in Irish railways: but why, then' are the speculators in these three particular rail- ways to be specially favoured? Lord George Bentinck had declared that he would use this measure to "wedge" in his own plan: Sir James objected ex- tremely to this mode of wedging the Government, against their convictions, in measures which they deemed to be dangerous, as they had been in the case of the Ten Hours Bill.

Sir CHARLES WOOD spoke at some length, in a very low tone of voice. In the first part of his speech he endeavoured to show that the success of the Government measures for Ireland must be judged, not in the shape of pecuniary interest, but in the shape of the salvation 'of the lives of their fellow subjects; and in that sense he was satisfied with the return. He then endeavoured to show, that in withdrawing direct relief it was desira- ble to stimulate employment; which, he insisted, would very properly be done by the present plan among others. The railroad connecting Cork

and Limerick was particularly recommended by its facilitating the com- munication with America; and he bad before stated particular circum- stances in its favour: the whole of the rails and the whole of the locomo tive power had been bought; so that the money to the advanced would really be expended in earth-works.

Mr. DISRAELI supported the measure; but agreed with some of its op- ponents in allowing that the question really before the House was, whether

it would abjure or adopt certain principles as standard principles in guiding the Imperial policy of the country. The question was, whether capital should or should not be invested in Ireland for the employment of the people.

"Every argument which my noble friend brought forward in support of his motion has been brought forward in support of the measure of her Majesty's Government. There is just this difference,—the Government is like a man with a glass, who by a flourish of his hand turns it round, so that the glass, when looked into instead of reflecting back objects greatly magnified, as those of my noble friend, represents everything in a diminished asp( et, according to the view taken by her Majesty's Government. If the principles of political economy were violated by the noble Lord, they are violated by her Majesty's Government. Ire-. land is suffering. Here is a statesmanlike scheme proposed for the employment of the people, which you, the Parliament of England, }ousted in the month of February; and when you are about to be dissolved and appear before your con- stituents, you cling to the fag-end of that scheme, and hold it out as the only panacea for the care and regeneration of Ireland. We are willing that the question should be placed in that light. (Ironical cheers.) The noble Lord [George Bentinck] brought that measure forward; and all you united form a junction of every party in the House except those who immediately follow the noble Lord—you obtain a great triumph—I remember your countenances, your smiles and your congratulations, when you came out of the division-lobby—the glory of the Government—the chuckling conviction that they had saved their country, as well as the patriotic inspiration which fired the honourable Member for Southwark and his friends: ' You have done a great deed; you have kicked out the great and comprehensive measure, founded on principles of which you entirely disapprove, not only in reference to Ireland, but which are antagonistic to your general policy. You are in a consistent, honourable, and respectable position.' ("Hear, hear! "and laughter.) Now enjoy your triumph, but explain your conduct to your constituents." (Cheers.)

Mr. Hintz supported the amendment.

Mr. CA.RDWELL followed on the same side; backing many of Sir James Graham's arguments. He happily ridiculed the notion sf patron- izing a railway company who so managed its business as to have paid for all its rails, engines, and carriages, wanting only one thing to complete the line, which could not be accomplished without the assistance of Govern ment—its earth-works? Lord John Russell had said that this was the com- mencement of a system applicable to the condition of Ireland, omitting England and Scotland: if this was to be a new system of government for that country, it was no doubt fit that the fact should be proclaimed on the eve of a general election.

The House divided--For the second reading, 175; against it, 62; Minis- terial, Protectionist, and Railway majority, 113.

The bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. OFFICIAL CHARGES AGAINST RELIEF COMMITTEES IN IRELAND.

On Wednesday, Sir DENHAM NORREYS drew attention to the Third Report of the Relief Commissioners in Ireland, recently delivered; and to the allegations which it contains, which, he said, deeply affect the national honour. [This report we notice under the head of "Ireland."] Sir Den- ham went over the principal statements,—the wholesale way in which the Committees gave out a redundant amount of rations in excess of the ap- plicants; the giving relief to the servants and tenants belonging to men of property who are members of the Committees—even Magistrates sharing in this abuse; intimidation encouraged by members of the Committees, &c. It was true that some of these were described as exceptional cases; but, obviously, the inference to be drawn was, that the Irish as a people are the most corrupt and degraded on the face of the earth. He called upon Go- vernment, as an act of justice to lay on the table of the House full ex- tracts from the proceedings of the Commissioners, in order that it might be seen how far the Relief Act had been carried out in every electoral dis- trict of Ireland.

Several Members, while accepting the names of Sir John Burgoyne and the other Commissioners as a full guarantee for the honourable and truth- ful intent of the report, concurred in the opinion that particular instances ought to be brought forward in the shape of extracts from the local reports. Some also thought that the evidence ought to be produced by way of pe- nalty, holding out the recreants to general odium. The Members who pressed for the evidence were Mr. Ross, Mr. BERNAL, Mr. AGLIONBY, Mr. HAMILTON, Sir ROBERT FERGUSON, and Mr. BORTHWICK.

Mr. OSBORN& and Lord CLEMENTS angrily treated the report as a libel on the Irish gentry; and pointed to the fact that among the signatures was the name of only one Irishman. Mr. Osborne regretted that an Irish- man could be found to put his name to a document reflecting such dis- grace upon his country ; and Lord Clements said that the chief blame for the neglects lay with Government, in not having properly defined what is "destitution."

Mr. LABOUCIIERE and Lord JOHN RUSSELL objected to the production of the detailed reports. The Commissioners expressly stated that the cases which they mentioned were exceptional; and to enter upon such an in- quiry as that proposed, would occasion ill blood, recriminations, and such evil effects as would be worse even than the abuse. It was proper that the House should have information of the abuses which have placed ob- stacles in the way of rendering the act more universally beneficial. But a general inquiry would occasion general confusion.

Sir Mamma NORREYS did not wish a general inquiry, but only extracts from the local reports already received.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL explained, that if those reports were produced, of course there would be defensive counter-statements; which would demand investigation into the respective cases. Mr. Aglionby was aware that thirty-two days had already been consumed in investigating one single case. Lord John could not agree to any proposition for a general investi- gation; but he was quite content that the conduct of those who are in the service of her Majesty [the Magistrates] should be made matter of refer- ence on the part of the Government, and if necessary of further proceeding.

SANATORY REFORM.

On Thursday i Lord MORPETH moved the order of the day for going into Committee on the Health of Towns Bill.

Mr. GEORGE PaLsosa objected to the bill, as unconstitutional: it do- paves many corporate bodies of powers which they have hitherto enjoyed, and reposes all responsibility for the acts of four Commissioners in one, wile is to have a seat in Parliament. Mr. Palmer moved that the bill be otinunitted that day three months.

These objections were followed up by several Members; who opposed the bill on the score of its centralization' its expensiveness, its extensive patronage, and its large powers of rating. Colonel SIBTHORP objected be- cause the bill excluded London and included Lincoln; though he main-

tained that his constituents were as clean as the Lord Mayor and the Com- mon CounciL Mr. Iltrasog vindicated the cleanliness of York. The other opponents of the bill were Mr. SrooNErt and Mr. NEwomara.

The bill was supported, as necessary at all times, but particularly so now tmcheck the lamentable spread of infectious disease, by Mr. WILLIAM BROWN, Mr. MACKINNON, Mr. BARNARD, Mr. THOMAS DI:INCOME); Mr. HENRY BERKELEY, and (in its amended form) by Captain PECHELL.

Mr. BORTHWICK remarked that the bill was supported by all Members whose constituents were excluded from it, opposed by the representatives of those who were included. It was full of crude and imperfect legisla- tion; and he advised that it be abandoned, to be replaced next session with a well-digested and comprehensive measure. On a division, the numbers were—For going into Committee, 117; against it, 21; majority, 91. The House then went into Committee: whereupon Lord MORPETH rose, and, referring to animadversions on the patronage which,the bill conferred, he said, that as the alterations which had been made in the measure would diminish the duties to be performed, the Government had agreed to reduce the Commissioners from five to four, and that one of them only should be paid. Clause 1, constituting the Commission, was read; and then the debate was had all over again, on the principle of the measure, its centralization, &c. Ultimately the clause was carried, by 100 to 28. In the discussion on clause 4, Lord MORPETH stated, that Government intended in the first instance to appoint six Inspectors, but that when the machinery should be brought into proper working order probably the number would be reduced. He did not expect that the salaries would exceed, if they equalled that of the paid Commissioner [which is to be not more than 1,0001. a year.] With some opposition to the progress of the measure, the Committee got as far as the 7th clause; and then the Chairman reported progress.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE POOR-LAW.

In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, the Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the second reading of the Poor-law Administration Bill; very briefly ex- plaining the mode in which it was to continue the powers of the Poor-law Commission, with a different organization of the department.

Lord BROUGHAM hoped that nothing would go forth which could in the slightest degree indicate doubt or hesitation on the part of their Lordships in regard to that great and salutary amendment of the law. He took occa- sion to express his opinions on the conduct of the Commissioners— It would be unjust if he did not say that he entirely approved of the conduct of Mr. Nicholls and his coadjutors; and particularly grateful was he to Mr. Edwin Chadwick, the Secretary of the Board. He should consider that that most re- spectable and most able officer of the Board had been worse used than any public servant in his time, if he found the slightest disposition in any quarter to sacrifice him to clamour, raised against him for the faithful discharge of his duties. Those to whom the administration of the Poor-law was committed were peculiarly ob- noxious to abuse, and slander, and vituperation; and therefore it was the bounden duty of Parliament and of Government to see that they were not abandoned as vic- tims to public clamour. Some had not shown the firmness in the discharge of their important duties that Mr. Chadwick and Mr. Nicholls had done. He had before him a statement, not of Mr. Chadwick, but of another and most respectable person, connected with many friends of their Lordships, and nearly connected with many important members of the present Government; and the account which the writer gave of the want of nerve and firmness in some of the Commissioners showed clearly how it happened that the act had not been thoroughly carried into effect. "It was perfectly clear to me," said the writer, "that what was always uppermost in their minds was, not how they should best perform their duty, but how they should appease the newspapers, and mollify, by concession, all the ob- jections of the Anti-Poor-law agitators. They have encountered the natural re- sult of such conduct, in losing their friends and not gaining their enemies.. . . . Both, too, were distinguished by another quality, which, in my opinion, absolutely disqualified them from wisely managing the difficult duties of a Poor-law Com- missioner: theylwere literally without any moral courage. A depretiatory para- graph in the newspapers seemed to fill them with the direst alarm; and they were ready to sacrifice any subordinate officer, or any principle of the law it was their duty to enforce, to appease a newspaper clamour' or the demands of an Anti-Poor- law agitator. . . . . Hence the conduct of the Commissioners was especially annoying to me, and further rendered my tenure of office very precarious, as I knew perfectly well that they would not hesitate a moment in ejecting me ig- nominiously, if, in the discharge of my duty, I should ever be made a mark for newspaper attacks. Right or wrong, I should be sacrificed without scruple: and the business of an Assistant-Commissioner is so extremely difficult, and exposed to such obloquy, that the utmost caution cannot preserve him from public attacks and misrepresentations." Lord Brougham sarcastically condemned those who in the discharge of public duties succumbed to attacks made only for the sake of gaininga fleeting, a base, and an ignoble popularity. They who could best put this principle into meat Lion were the truest friends of the poor. These persons ought to have disdained popularity and praise obtained only by yielding to clamour; and they ought equally to have despised any abuse, any vituperation, which the firm and faithful discharge of their duties might draw upon them.

"Falsus honor juvat, et mendax Wanda terret Quern, nisi mendosum et mendacem ? "

Or, in an English dress,

"False honour charms and lying slanders scare

Whom but the false and faulty ? "

Lord Brougham must enter his protest against the bad conduct of this mea- sure, the flinching from the performance of duty imposed by it, the yielding to clamour in the performance of that duty, and in doing justice to some of the most useful public servants ever employed by this country, and charged with great and difficult and invidious and delicate public duties. Lord REDESDALE protested against that part of the bill which brings the President and Secretary into Parliament, to mix in party conflict. The bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. PRIVATE BUSINESS. .

In the same House, on Monday, Lord BROUGHAM moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the mode of dealing with private bills and pri- vate interests in that House, and the receiving of messages from the other House of Parliament. He began by tracing the history of the private business front its small beginnings. In the course of his speech fiord Brougham disclaimed any merit in the movement; emphatically declaring othfaitt. it was only by accidental circumstances that he was the originator

"Anciently, private bills were presented in the form of petitions clai • g jus-

tice from Parliament, before Parliament was separated into two c rs; and ha? subsequently to that, it was the practice of Parliament to receive an deal with such petitions. They were referred to persons appointed at the begin ing.of each Parliament, called receivers and triers of petitions. The recevou s originally were not of necessity members of either House of Parliament; the grime's origt ,

nay consisted partly of Prelates, partly of Temporal Peers, and partly (but in a small proportion) of members of the legal profession; after a time the triours were selected wholly from members of that House, but were desired to take to

themselves the assistance of the King's Sergeants. Matters of at amount, and of importance, and of great example '—so it was expressed on the Parliamen- tary roll—were referred to Parliament for its decision; matters which appeared to be purely of a judicial nature were referred to the courts of justice, and to an increasing extent as the jurisdiction of the Chancery and the Equity Exchequer grew up into definite form; but still a third class was dealt with by these re- ceivers and triers of petitions. Up to the present day such persons are ap- pointed at the opening of every Parliament, and even for petitions from Gas- cony.' The reason given in the roll of Parliament for their having the assistance of the Judges and Sergeants was—' that so the King and the Lords may have the more time for the urgent business of the state.' What would our ancestors who thus spoke have said, if they had lived now, to have seven hundred bills pre- sented to them in one year, and between four and five hundred actually passed, containing nearly fourteen thousand sections, all binding every subject of the Queen? Not however, that these bills were of minor and secondary importance; the amount of this private business was not more enormous than its intrinsic im- portance." When a common case is brought into a Court of Law or Equity, the court is guided by statute, the text of writers, or the reports of decided cases: the court Dim has a chart and compass; the chances of error are diminished, also the chances of corruption. In the great bulk of these cases, the average amount of value at stake is small. In the course of the Assizes at Lancaster, he had learned from the Prothonotary once that the average of 220 cases was but 131. 151. True, a question of right of way, or easement over property, or title to land, or a question between creditors, or a question of trust, or of mortgage, might be of more importance than the amount of the verdict indicated; but to talk of their bearing the very remotest comparison with those matters which were every year, by the score or by the hundred' disposed of by the private legislation of the two Houses of Parliament, was utterly and entirely preposterous. Whether a whole neighbourhood should be disturbed in its possessions—whether all the rights which the law gave to us should be set at nought by a particular law—the most sacred sights of property violated, and a man's property taken violently from him—taken forcibly against the title which the law of his country gave him,— this was the sort of question disposed of by these acts, which Parliament passed year by year. In those more trifling cases, decided according to known principles and the settled rules of the law of the land, see how the rights of the parties were fenced about, and how scrupulously a watch was kept over every gate, or door, or cranny, or chink, through which wrong, or error, or oppression, or injus- tice might find its way. There must be the Judges of the land to administer justice: very reluctant had Parliament been to delegate to others jurisdiction over the more unimportant cases decided by local courts; and, after all, the local courts were not allowed to deal with questions of right to land, or where the matter in dispute exceeded 201., or to have any jurisdiction in equity. Whence arose this reluctance? Only because they thought that in the superior judges of the land they had the best security for great learning, great professional skill, and incorruptible integrity. those learned individuals being removed from the strifes of common life, and integrity; the contention of politics and of party. What course has been taken in a far more important matter, the power of alter- ing or suspending the law, or giving it a particular application? Hadthey fenced or encompassed them about with any of those brazen walls, as one of the Judges once expressed it, through which no corruption and no injury could penetrate? On the contrary, he would venture to assert that the wit of man could not have devised a More rude, ill-fashioned, inartificial, he would almost say absurd, if not ridiculous, mode than the present of performing that transcendental branch of the duty of Parliament which was connected with the private legislation. The Mem- bers of the House of Commons were unfitted to transact the business connected with private bills, including road bills, canal bills, enclosure bills, railway bills, &c., because as Members they were unaccustomed to the exercise of judicial func- tions and because the construction of the other House rendered the members ill- adapted in another sense for that purpose. Each Member had his constituents, whose representations he must hear. He was naturally not indisposed to oblige them, particularly in reference to matters of local interest; and from hearing one party, and not hearing the other, he became even conscientiously biassed. But it might be said that against this influence of the constituency the Standing Orders recently agreed to against the appointment of interested parties on Committees for Private Bills afforded a valuable safeguard. Alas, it was not so; for a "shift" took place; the meaning of which was, that an arrangement was made by which a Yorkshire Member sat on a Cornwall bill, and a Cornish Member sat on a York- shire bill, by which means the constituencies of both were gratified just as com- pletely as if the Standing Orders had never passed. But let not their Lordships wrap themselves up in their dignity, and bless God, like the Pharisee, that they were not like other men—that they were not like those publicans and makers of taxes; for it was just possible that some such "shift" at times might take place within their Lordships more judicial and therefore more pure walls. It is most important to have skilful, experienced, and learned persons, to decide on matters of such transcendent importance. The members of Committees consti- tute, in fact, both judge and jury. Yet what experience had these individuals to give them capacity to perform their high and transcendental functions? Why, a man might be two or three times a member of a Committee in the course of the year. That did not give him sufficient experience; and when two lawyers disa- greed before a Committee, the members to settle the matter might take the opinion of another lawyer out of doors, to whom they stated the case, (and very likely imperfectly stated it,) and who gave his opinion without having ever heard the other aide. Thus It frequently happened that contrary decisions on the same points were pronounced. Of the private bills brought before Parliament of late years a great proportion had been railway bills; but their Lordships mast not suppose that because more than four hundred railway bills were passed last year, and nearly the same number this year, they had done with legislation on the sub- ject. He calculated that, with branch railways, the amount of business to be brought before Parliament next session and for sonic succeeding sessions would be as large as that of last session. And it must be remembered that, with regard to nearly every railway bill passed by Parliament, it was necessary to introduce a bill to alter, sinew), or extend the original act.

Lord Brougham proceeded topoint out that there was no responsibility in Parlia- mentary Railway Committees, or in Committees on Private Business. The mem- bers of those Committees were singled out once or twice in a session; but the in- stant they fell back into the body of the House to which they belonged, they had no individual responsibility.

Lord Brougham defended the practice of counsel in taking large sums of money although they may not be always able to attend. Counsel cannot refuse briefs; and they are ole.n retained to prevent their being; engaged on the opposite side. He expressed most indignant disapproval, however, of such as take an extra fee for attendance and Men neglect to keep that special engagement.

From every point of view in which he regarded this subject, he saw the im- portance of appointing a responsible tribunal to transact the private business brought before Parliament. He now saw in the columns of newspapers contain- ing election advertisements the names of chairmen and deputy chairmen of rail- way companies, and of large proprietors of shares in such undertakings, as can- didates for seats in the other House of Parliament; and in many cases, these parties, who had the gift of numerous situations, ranging from 401. to 701. or 801. a year, might probably be able to influence constituencies and to obtain seats in Parlia- ment. Their Lordships had heard of some Parliaments which were distinguished by particular names: they had heard of the Habeas Corpus Parliament; they had heard of the Long Parliament; and he believed that next session they would see a Railway Parliament (A laugh.) There would no doubt be first-class, se- cond-class, and third-class Ministers; and persons would change their stations instead of their places. (Laughter.) They might even hear of some Railway Member commencing his speech by saying, "Had my steam been up, Mr. Speaker." (Laughter.) He had no doubt these Railway Members would be found most temperate, most obedient, most submissive—not to the Treasury Bench, but to their own signal, to their own flag, to their own boatswain's whistle, which summoned them to the charge against any reform, any improvement, any amendment of the existing railway system which might be proposed ; and it was not improbable that many jobs might be perpetrated, that much mischief might be done, and that much good might be prevented, in consequence of the perfect discipline and close subserviency of these persons to their leaders. Lord REDESDALE admitted that it would be desirable to emend the pre- sent system, though he thought that Lord Brougham had exaggerated the evils; but it would be impossible for a Committee to take so important a matter into consideration at so late a period of the session. As Chairman of the Committee of Selection, Lord Itedesdale stated that no bargains are made by members of that House with regard to their appointment or con- duct on particular Committees.

The Duke of RICHMOND concurred as to the lateness; and also the Marquis of LANSDOWNE ; who thought, however, that Parliament would do well to give its attention to the matter at some future time.

In deference to the general feeling, Lord Bnoraimar withdrew the mo- tion.

GLASGOW ELEarrox. On Monday, Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE asked whether it would be legal for the permanent Secretary to the Board of Trade [Mr. Mac- gregor] to sit in that House, and continue to hold his office, if he should be re- turned Member for Glasgow? Lord Joure Russsia.replied, that it must depend on the construction of particular acts of Parliament regulating the particular office. It was needless, however, to enter into the question of legality, as Mr. Macgregor had informed him, that should he be elected it was not his intention to retain the office. Lord John quite agreed that the Board of Trade was suffi- ciently represented in Parliament by the President and Vice-President, and that the Secretary ought not to have a seat while he held his office.

PUBLIC CHARITIES. In reply. to Mr. HUME, on Monday, Sir GEORGE GREY stated that the bill prepared by the Lord Chancellor respecting the management of charities would be proceeded with.

PROTECTION OF LIFE IN MINES. On Wednesday, Sir GEORGE GREY urged Mr. I iuncombe to withdraw his Mines and Collieries Bill, which stood for the second reading. Sir George admitted the importance of regulations to pre- vent accidents in mines, but pleaded the late period of the session, and the an- possibility it getting the bill through the Committee before the prorogation. Mr. DUNCOMBE left the matter in Sir George's hands, and withdrew the bill.

PROGRESS OF RAILWAY BILLS IN PARLIAMENT.

COMMONS.

PREAMBLES PROVED IN Cosnurrom. July 1st. —areat-Northern ([ale of A:holm* Extension), July 2d.--Exeter-Yeovil-and-Dorchester (except thebmnehes to Sidunouth, limInster, Channouth, and Brldport). Salisbury-and-Yeovil (except the branch to Wincanton)- Bristol-and-Exeter (Taunton-and-Castle-Carey branch). Bristol-and-Exeter (Bleadon to Wells and Glastonbury).

LORDS.

PREAmBLEs PlovED TN Commirres. June 260L—Manehester-and-Lincoln Union deviation. Leeds-and-Thirsk (deviation of main line In Crimple Valley, &c.) Birken- head.Lancashire-and-Cheshire Junction (deviation of main line, &c.) Midland (Spam to Peterborough). Glasgow-Par,ley-and-Greenock (branch to the Caledonian Railway and diversion of Canal). Boston-Stamford-and-Birmingham (Wisbech to Sutton Bridge, &c.) Midland (Erowash Valley, &a.) Manchester-and-Leeds (branch from the Hud- dersfield Railway). Manchester-and-Leeds (alteration of levels of BrighOuee branch). South-eastern (North-Kent and Bricklayers' Arms Junction). Manchester-Sheftield- and-Lincolnahlre (branch at Bugsworth). Eastern-Counties Extension (Cambridge to Bedford.) June 2815.—Boston-Stamford-and-Birmingham (branch from Wisbech). Manches- ter-and-Leeds (branches, extensions, deviations, alterations of levels, and other works). London.and-North-western (lease and purchase of the Huddersfield-and-Manchester Railway and Canal, and the Leeds-Dewebury-and-Manchester Railway). York-and- Newcastle (Wearmouth Dock enlargement). Manchester-Shelfield-and-Lincolnahlre (branch to Chapeltown, &c.) Huddersfield-and-Manchester (deviations and alterations In Oldham branch). London-and-North-western (Birmingham-and-Lichfield line). Glasgow-Paieley-Kihnarnock-and-Ayr, and Ayrshire-and-Bridge-of-Weir (No. 3).

June 29t1L—Blackburn-Darwen-and-Bolton (amendment and diversions). Mold. St. Helen's Canal and Railway. Eastern-Counties (enlargement of London and Stratford stations).

June 30th.—Fortadown-and-Dungannon. York-and-Newcastle and Newcastle-and- Berwick Amalgamation. York-and-Newcastle (Pelaw, Tyne Dock, &c. branches). Mid- land (extension from near Leicester, via Bedford). North-British (No. I). Ipswich- and-Hury-St.Edinund's (branch from Ipswich to Woodbridge). York-and•North- Midland (Harrogate branch extension and terminus). Edinburgh-Leith-and-Granton (Leith extension). Manchester-SheMeld-and-Lincolnshire (Louth and Horncastle). Birmingham-Wolverhampton-and-Dudley (Stourbridge and West Bromwich). Coventry- Nuneaton-Binningham-and-Leicester. Great-Northern (Hertford-Hattield-and-BL-Al- ban's branch). Caledonlan-and-Gisagow-Paisley-and-Greenock Amalgamation. Oias- gow-Airdrie-and.Monklands Junction (CowlaIrs branch). July lst.—East-Lancashire (deviations, and Rawtenstall Coal branch). Midland (Maaborough and Nornranton stations' enlargement). York-and-North-Midland (Knottingley branch). East-of-Fife, (Markinch deviation). Shrewsbury-and•Chester (branches, &c.) London-and-North-western (Liverpool stations). Aberdeen (Brechin branch deviation). Eastern-Counties (purchase of the North Woolwich, &c.) Guildford Extension and Portsmouth-and-Fareham. Edinburgh-Leith-and- Granton (Leith and Granton Junction). Great-Northern (deviations between Gains- borough and Doncaster).

July 2d.—Coventry-Nuneaton-Birmingham-and-Leicester. Manchester-Buxton-Mat- lock-and-Midland Junction (deviations). Manchester-and-Southport and branches. London Bridge Termini general enlargement.

ROYAL ASSENT.

July 2d.—Cornwall. London-and-North-western (purchase of Earl Ellesmere's Inter- est). Vale-of-Neath. General Terminus and Glasgow Harbour Branch. Gloucester-and Dean-Forest (construction of dock). East-Lincolnshire (deviation at Boston, and branch to Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Railway at Grimsby). Ambergate-Nottlng- ham-and-Boston, and Eastern-Junction (alteration of line and branches into or near the town of Nottingham). Llynvi-Valley Extension. Shrewsbury-and-Birmingham Act Amendment and Branches. Bristol-and-South-Wales Junction and Aust Ferry. Cale- donian (Glasgow-Garnkirk-and-Coatbridge branch to Glasgow, and station). Caledo- nian and Dumbartonshire Junction (deviation between Duntocher Lime Works and Bowling). Midland-Great-Western-of-lreland. Newry-and-Enniskillen Act Amend- menL Newport-Abergavenny-and-Hereford (deviations). Herne-Bay-and-Canterbury Junction. London-and-South-western (widening, &c.) Dundee-and-Perth (alterations and extension). Glasgow-Barrhead-and-Nellston Direct. Great-Western (branch to oin the West-London). Eastern-Counties (Malden-Witham-and-Brabitree purchase.). Great-Southern-and-Western Extension (Portal-Wigton to Tollamore). Nolf0-6 (branch from Wymondham to the Norwich extension of the Ipswich-and-Bury-St.-Ed- mund's and the proposed Thetford-and-Reedham Railway, near Dias). Glasgow-Barrbead-and-Nellston Direct, and Glaagow-Southem-Termlnus Amalgamation. Southamp- ton-and-Dorchester (New-Forest deviation and branches). Lowestoft Railway and Harbour (alteration Bear Reedham). Norfolk (Yarmouth extensions). Dubir•and- Drogheda (branch from NAV= to Mello). Southamplon-And-Doteheeter (Wer.iouth branch). Swansea-Valley Manchester-and-Lincoln Union (deviation). Manchester- and-Leeds (branch from the Huddersfield). South-eastern (North-Kentiutdatticklay-

ertf-Arms Junction). Liven)001-Crosby-and-Southport. Dundee and Newtyle. London- and-North-western (Newport-Pagnell-Olney-and-Wellingborough branch). North- Staffordshire (alterations and branches). South-Wales. Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and Worcestershire Junction. Dublin-and-Belfast Junction and Navan branch. Boston- Stamford-and-Birmingham (Peterborough-and-Thorney line). East-Lincohishire (Louth Navigation purchase). Loudon-and-North-western (Coventry-and-Nuneaton branch). Londou-and-South-westem (Andover to the Bishopstoke-and-Salisbury branch). Man- chester-Sheffield-and-Lincolnshire (branch to Bugsworth). York and-Newcastle, (Wearmouth Dock enlargement). Midland (Leicester-and-Swar.nington). London- and-North-western (Atherstone-and-Whitaker branch). Glasgow-Kilmarnock-and- Ardrossan (amendment, deviations, and branches). Birmingham-Wolverhampton-and- Stour-Valley (No. 1). Shropshire-Union and Canal (lease to the London-and-North- western Company). Midland (Leicester-and-Swannington widening, &v.)