Dante% anb 113rombings in 113arliament.

GOVERNMENT OF JAMAICA.

The second reading of the bill to provide for the temporary govern- ment of Jamaica, was moved in the House of Lords on Monday, by the Marquis of NORMANBY ; who commenced his speech in support of the motion, by avowing his consciousness, that in consequence of his em- ployment abroad and the few opportunities he had had of addressing their Lordships, he felt under peculiar disadvantage when it became his duty to speak on any important subject. With respect, however, to the question then before the House, he could not help feeling that he pos- sessed something like a countervailing advantage in the personal expe- rience he had acquired of the Negro character, and his local knowledge of Jamaica. His opinion of the extreme importance of the question was confirmed by intelligence only that morning received from Jamaica, that the bill which bad been relinquished by Ministers was viewed by the Negro population as the greatest possible boon that could be con- ferred upon them ; and he much feared if the present measure were re- jected or seriously mutilated, the emancipated people of colour would feel that Patliamentary protection was withdrawn from them. He earnestly wished that all classes in Jamaica would forget past difkrences and bygone tdistinctions ; but that desirable result would not be pro-

duced unless the House of Assembly completely changed its conduct. Lord Normanby then argued, that the conduct of the Jamaica Assembly

had been such as justified the stronger measure which Ministers had first proposed. The Assembly bad neglected its duty and refused to

return to it. It was absolutely necessary that bills should be passed

which they refused to enact. He had himself seen the condition of the prisons in Jamaica, and knew the cruelties to which the apprentices had been subjected. He mentioned many instances of flogging females with extreme barbarity, and of the refusal of Magistrates to execute laws -which were made to prevent such outrages on humanity. He

quoted passages from protests and resolutions of the Assembly, to show the temper of that body and their determination not to submit to the authority of the Imperial Parliament. Lord Normanby enforced the

necessity of improving the law of contracts ; and maintained that on this subject, as well as the reform of prisons and the regulation of prison discipline, no good measures were to be expected from the Colonial Legislature. lie ridiculed the idea of the Assembly being a popular body. It had passed laws to raise the elective franchise to 30/. a year ; and in fact, was chiefly composed of not the first class of attornies in the island—there were very few actual proprietors among them. Lord Normanby concluded by reminding the Peers, that they were treading on hallowed ground, and exhorting them to carry out the great mea- sures of Negro Emancipation.

The Earl of HA asm000 said, that too much stress was laid upon the reception of the Prisons Bill by the Assembly. By that measure the

dispute was only brought to a crisis. There had been much previous irritation—the result, as lie maintained, of misgovernment at home. Lord Harewood briefly defended the Jamaica Assembly ; and moved an amendment that the bill be read a second time that day three months.

Lord Bnountram had strong objections to the principle involved in the bill. He had also opposed the Prisons Bill, thinking it most im-

proper to interfere with the money acts of the Assembly. As, however, something must be done, he would support the motion for the second reading, and consider the bill in Committee.

The Duke of WELLINGTON declared that he had no recollection what- ever of the Prisons Bill. He supposed it must have been passed during his absence from the House ; for he should otherwise in all probability have opposed it. He confessed that his greatest objection to the pre- sent measure was the speech of the noble lord who had proposed it— Ile bad never heard a speech delivered by a Minister who had come down to speak the language of the Crown and of the Government in respect to one of the dependencies of the British empire, so little calculated to conciliate either the feelings of those opposed to the policy of that Government or the public in general, as the speech delivered by the noble marquis this afternoon ; and he declared most solemnly, that the greatest doubt he entertained respecting the propriety of agreeing to the second reading of this bill, arose from sonic of the topics introduced by the noble marquis in that speech. In his opinion, it was the duty of men in office to conciliate such bodies as the Jamaica Assembly : but Lord Normanby had done no such thing— On the contrary, the whole of his spec& was made up of violence and threat against the Douse of Assembly ; and this for no reason whatever, but because the House of Assembly had disapproved of an act passed by the Imperial Par- liament, which was well calculated to create their disapprobation ; an act usurp- ing their own authority, and communicated to them in a way in which lie did net think any gentleman would like to have any order whatever from a supe- rior communicated to him.

However, he was sorry that Lord Harewood had moved to put of the

second reading for three months; as lie hoped in Committee to make such alterations in the bill and to send it down to the other House in such a shape, as, if transmitted to Jamaica, it might be useful in that island, Lord GLENELO reminded the Duke of Wellington, that the state of the Jamaica prisons had undergone much discussion at various times before

the Prisons Bill of last session was passed. Lord Brougham especially,

in a memorable speech on slavery, had emphatically alluded to the cru- elties perpetrated in the workhouses and prisons. Lord Glenelg consi- dered the Prisons Bill a necessary, consequence of the Abolition Amend-

ment Act ; many of whose provisions it made permanent. He must deny that it was an ill-considered measure, or hurried through the

House ; though certainly it did pass without opposition from any quarter. Lord ST. VINCENT hoped the House would go into Committee, and expunge not only the first clause, but that part of the second which gave the Governor and Council the power of enacting tax-bills, provided the Assembly did not within a certain time resume its functions.

Lord HAnxwoon, in concurrence with the general feeling of the House, withdrew Isis motion.

Lord MELBOURNE said, he should 'reserve his observations on the bill till the next stage of its progress ; but in the meanwhile, he meant to

protest against the injustice with which Lord Normanby had been treated. by the Duke of Wellington. He denied that there was any thing in- temperate, or any display of eager hostility to the Assembly, in that lord's speech. The Duke's observations were far too .severe, and his censure unmerited.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH entirely concurred with the Duke of Welling- ton. At the same time, however, that he condemned Lord Normanby's intemperance, he regretted that a more conciliatory demeanour hind not been displayed on the other side.

The Marquis of NORMANDY admitted that he might not have suffi- ciently dwelt upon the conciliatory part of the bill—those provisions

which allowed the Assembly a fair opport of resuming its func- tions ; but as to intemperance, it certainl of his habit to use in-

temperate expressions. He confessed that h=: rmly on the subject—

Any one who, like himself, had witnessed the a evils of slavery, must be inclined, when lie recurred to them—and at the same time knowing the diffi-

culties, the impediments, which were thrown in the way of the adoption of such measures as were necessary for the removal of them—to express himself with warmth ; and perhaps lie had done so on the present occasion ; but he thought he had stopped short of intemperance.

Lord BROUGHAM asked Lord Normanby, if it were true that five slave- ships had been taken into Rio Janeiro, their human cargoes there re- leased under the Emancipation Act, and then sold again at the rate of 51. a head? also, that Negroes captured in slave-ships were frequently taken to Cuba and there compelled to enter into a sort of apprentice- ship, under the pretence that they could not be located properly In

islands where slavery was abolished ? He had been told by a Member of the Jamaica Legislature, that in 1837, 400 Negroes, taken from a slave-ship, had been set at liberty in Dominica, where they behaved with exemplary propriety. Lord NORMANDY had no information on the subject, but would make inquiries. Amendment withdrawn ; bill read a second time.

On Tuesday, the order of the day for going into Committee on the bill having been read,

Lord LYNDHURST rose, and said it was his intention to move that the first clause of the bill be expunged. He would state, though not at any great length, his views upon this question, and the grounds on which he proposed the amendment. From the bill introduced into the other House of Parliament and abandoned, from the tone of Lord Normanby's speech on the previous evening, and from Lord Mel- bourne's speech, he inferred a disposition on the part of Ministers to abolish the Legislative Assembly of Jamaica, and to substitute a new form of government for that which had existed in the island for two hundred years. A similar attempt had been made in the reign of Charles the Second, and defeated. lip to the present time, the attempt of the existing Government had also been frustrated; but if this bill were passed, that would be accomplished by a side-wind which -Iinis- ters had been unable to carry by a direct and open attack on the Jamaica Assembly. He did not deny the power or the right of the Imperial Parliament to pass laws for the government of Jamaica ; but he maintained, that the power should not be exercised, except in cases of extreme emergency. That doctrine was held by all statesmen. lie did not agree that the emergency had arisen which justified Parliament in interfering with the internal legislation of the colony. The Jamaica Assembly. had been most unjustly treated. Sufficient reasons for the bill were indeed stated in the preamble ; but the preamble declared what was false. It stated, without any qualification or limitation as to time, that the Assembly had refused to pass any hills except money- bills. But such was not the resolution of the Assembly ; for that de- clared their determination not to exercise their legislative functions ex- cept in respect of money-bills, until the free enjoyment of their rights as British subjects were restored. They had a subject of complaint ; they called for redress; and it was clear, that had they met with con- ciliatory treatment, what they had done would not have been made a precedent, but they would have resumed their legislative functions. Much had been made of the protest of the Assembly, and its insulting language, (which he considered highly reprehensible,) was coupled with the Prisons Bill; but it was adopted befbre the Prisons Bill had been sent out to them, and at the close of the session, when only twelve members remained. He understood that a majority of the Assembly disapproved of it. Under these circumstances, he thought a great deal too much had been made of the improper language used by the Assem- bly. Lord Lyndhurst entered into a long and minute explanation and defence of the conduct of the Assembly in their dispute with the Go- vernor of Jamaica and the Government at home ; whose conduct he condemned in unqualified terms. He then examined the bill before the 'louse, and maintained that it was not only a violation of the constitu- tional rights of the Jamaica Assembly, but a most. unnecessary violation. He denied that there was any occasion to pass bills for regulating con- tracts or preventing vagrancy, in a hurry. There was no vagrancy in Jamaica. Lord Glenelg sent to that island for a return of the number of vagrants up to the end of last year. The return came, and it was nil. Squatting ought to be prevented, but the evil would grow by de- grees. The regulation of contracts for hired labour might be post- poned till Parliament met next year, without any great mischief ; but on this, as on the other two subjects, the Jamaica Assembly, if let alone, might pass the necessary laws. It was better to wait, than force laws upon the Assembly. It was a temperate, and dignified, and wise course, to exercise forbearance towards the weak ; and lie was satisfied that such a course Parliament ought to adopt.

The Marquis of NORMANDY and Lord GLENELC rose together ; the former gave way, and

Lord GLENDLO addressed the House at sonic length in defence of his conduct towards the Jamaica Assembly in the matter of the Prisons Bill ; the necessity of which, he maintained, was clearly made out by indisputable accounts of cruelties practised in the gaols, and by the confirmed resolution of the Assembly to pass no measure to prevent their continued infliction on the unprotected apprentices.

The Marquis of NORMANDY said, he was not aware, when he gave way to Lord Glenelg, that that noble lord would have confined himself so strictly to transactions which occurred when he was himself in office ; but nevertheless he did not intend, after having so recently ad- dressed the House, to enter into a detailed reply to Lord. Lyndhurst's speech. On the Prisons Bill, indeed, he was absolved from the necessity of saying any thing after Lord Glenelg's explanation. Lord Lyndhurst had alluded to the tone of his speech. Now, he never had concealed his opinion that, during the progress of the emancipation experiment, the best course to be adopted was not a complete, absolute, perpetual change in the constitution of Jamaica, but a suspension of the legisla- tive functions of the House of Assembly. Three attempts had been made to induce the Assembly to pass laws fitted for the altered state of things, but they absolutely refused to take into consideration measures necessary to carry out the great work of emancipation. In expressing his opinion on their conduct, he had doubtless spoken as he felt—earn- estly. but he could not recollect one intemperate expression. But was not the language of the Assembly intemperate ? was not their protest against the interference of the British Parliament intemperate ? It was asked by the opponents of this bill, how Ministers knew that the Assembly would not pass the necessary measures ? IIe replied, because the Assembly had themselves said so. They declared that they would not resume their legislative functions until Parliament owned itself in the wrong in adopttng the measures proposed by Vord Glenelg. He contended that a good contract law, with measures for the prevention uCv Aerancy and squatting, were immediately required ; and that as there NVas 110 hope of obtaining them from the Colonial Legislature, Parlia- ment ought to pass them without delay. Lord BROUGHAM was sure that if any person had entered the House white Lord Glenelg was speaking, not having heard Lord Lyndhurst's

speech, he would have said that Lord Glenelg delivered a very eloquent

and impressive harangue upon a subject of great importance, but which was all over some time ago—a speech upon what passed in Jamaica in 1834 and in England in 1838 ; for it consisted of an attack upon the proceedings of the Jamaica Assembly in 18:31, and a defence of a bill passed by the British Parliament in 1638. But not one word had Lord Glenelg said on the question before the House, though he rose after a powerful attack upon the present bill upon almost every point of con- stitutional law and almost every fact which bore upon the subject. Neither had the Marquis of Normariby advanced one tangible reason in justification of the bill. The Muse was considering the first clause of this bill without any thing in the shape of a defence from its pro- pounders. The questirnt was, whether the first clause should stand ? To which question, dispesed as he always was to limit his assent to ex- treme measures of uncoestitational character and hateful aspect—mea- sures begun, continued, and ended in illegal violence—limiting, as he did, his assent, nay his tolerance o f such measures to the absolute ne- cessity of each ease—he must unhesitatingly answer No."

vc bon a measure came up to that 'branch of Ilk,. Legislature, adopted by a majority of' the other—when the Iteple-entative, of the People, %rho ought to have IS great a care of constitutional principles ak. the Peers of liw realm, had ;weed, kl to a measure—when he fk mud the elknr and decided opinion of the other [louse of Parliament expressed in fiivour 01 :toy particular measure, he would not say that he should feel his opinion butt by theirs, but at all events he shoidd approach the subject with deference. t. ith respect. with more than evcn if an unconstitutional propokkit: r,i : and with reluctance and hesitation should he ask their Lordships to record their dissent from the opinions of the Representatives of the People. so it ,N •1s when how majorities of the other House had sent up bills, as herenkfore ill the years 1S:533 and 1834; so it was eVell 101....11 the h1iit came imp recommee.h d by only a small majority of that House, as in 1,35; ,o it might 1w when other measures should come up, if under the prt sant dispensation their Lordships should ever see measures sent up fronil the other House with large or even respectable majorities— (Cheers ortll Ian Ott' r fra he Op pasi 0—with such majorities as would en- title him to say that tlw House of Commons had pronounced its opinion de- cidedly—as would induce him to believe tictt the measure had received the sanction and authority of the Commons of England—as would lead him to know that he had to grapple with a case which Iva, supported by the decided, the unequivocal, the Clear, the plain the intelligible opinion of the Commons of England, expressed by any thing like km fair, reakkanaltle, undeniable, essen- tial, clear, indisputable niajk mit: of Its Members, and out it were by at mere ehenee-inedley by an inctinsiderable—might. he :ay byacontemptible ma- jority; in suell a case—when he found the epoian. of the Commons so ex- pressed, he might not feel bound to give up his own ej,inion, but at all events lie should consider himself hound to speak upon the question with deference and respect, to examine it with delleacy, to alike], it with hesitation—if pos- sible to agree with it—not lightly or ineon,idcrately to differ from it. lie should not I'm justified in treating a question St) Inelsed by the authority of the House of Commons as if it Ivese a new queli,1,1pr.mulnded in their Lord- ships' House for time first time. But how was it wit). iticasare Which should have been agreed to by the narrowest possible majolities—by chance-medley- by eircumstanwes which seemed almost, if not entirely accidental—where the turn of the scale was obtained by the lightest dust flume, into the balance, wavering, quivering, shaking in the air, so that the eve (((mild hardly see which scale preponderated when neither kicked the hewn? Iluw was a measure so passed by the Commons to be regarded ? with what weight did it come be- fbre their Lordships? Take:for instance, the first clause of the present bill. How had the Commons dealt with it ? were they unanimous in its support? If out unanimous, was there a strong majority in its favour'? Far from it. The Commons' had carried time clause by a hare majority—by a majority so small as scarcely to deserve to he called a majority at all. The bill came up to their Lordships as it' the Commons had expressed no 11111111011111)011 it, had given no deeision,,Interposed no authority. It teene ht lime their Lordships as if the opinion of the other House upon it had been hardly doci,ivt:1,■ formed— hardly intelligibly expressed—hardly distinctly ummininicat ed. It came backed by a majority so slight as to lae almost imiH except to the strongest organs of vision, supported by argument, so vaguely, so unintelli- gibly, so feebly expressed, as to be inaudible, except to cars of rarest acuteness. It came to them in a shape and under eircumstakwes which left it in doubt whether the other branch of the Legislature had formed any opinion whatever upon it. ("1/i.a r, hero !" and hallhler.) Now if there were any thing ludicrous in legislation carried on in such a way, it was not his fault—he only stated the fact ; and it was melancholy, not laughable, to see the affairs of a great nation so con- ducted— It was next to a positive negation of the fuitetious of the Imperial Parlia- ment—it was next to an abdication of Parliamentary power and privilege—it amounted to an absence of all government which dtsserved to be called govern- ment, or at all events to the prostration of all government which ought to command, by deserving to receive, the respect of the people of the country. It was no light or laughing matter that they should be placed in such a situa- tion. Or, if it became laughable and ridiculous in statement, it was melan- choly, grievous, lamentable, and serious alum reflection and in contemplation. The practical inference which he deduced thence, as hearing upon the present functions of their Lordships' House, was of high importance. In proportion as he should he slow to urge their Lordships into a conflict with the other House ofParliament where there was a clearly-expressed opinion of a decided, commanding majority—in proportion as he should he slow to touch a work (the workmanship of lawgiving) supported by a firm and steady hand, and guided by it firm and steady purpose, by' the coordinate branch of the Legisla- ture, the Representatives of the People—in precisely the same proportion he had a right to call upon their Lordships not to regard a measure which came up to them backed by so small a majority as had supported the bill in the present instance—not to regard it any more than if the other I louse of Par- liament had never formed a determination, or pronounced a judgment, or in- terposed any Imthority upon the question at all. With all possible respect for the House of Commons, he considered that be had a right to approach the discussion of this first clause of the bill just precisely as he should'have done, RS freely, as untatered, as if it had now been proposed to that House for the first time by a Minister of the Crown ; and as if it were back, I solely by the authority of that Minister, instead of' the authority of the House of Corn-

7110118.

He denied that the conduct of the Jamaica Assembly had been such as to justify Parliament in passing the violent, illegal, unconstitutional measure now before them. And here again he must advert to the narrow majorities by which it had been carried through the House of Commons— If it were a case upon which 600 rational men had no doubt in their own minds—if it were a case upon which a great majority of 600 rational men had no doubt, the matter would come before their Lordships in a totally different shape. But if the necessity for adopting a measure like the present were SO extremely doubtful—if the opinions of 600 rational men were poised in such equal scales, necessity in. one scale, needlessness in the other, that the scale of needlessness was almost on a level with the scale of necessity—if he found of those 600 rational men only a majority of ten, of one-sixtieth part of the whole, who thought that a case had been made out against the colony, was he then to consider himself justified in violently and despotically suspending the constitution of that colony ? God forbid ! If these h00 men wen,. not only rational men but Representatives of the People of England, it male the neces- sity stroncr that the expression of their opinion should be clear, distinct, and unequivocal. But there was another circumstance which ought not to escape their Lordships' attention. Most of these 600 men, who said that there was no necessity for the adoption of so severe a measure towards Jamaica, were those very men who, upon a former occasion, had shown that they were disposed to listen most readily to a proposition for siefpending the constitu- tion of a colony, upon the ground that the Local Legislature, the. provincial House of Assembly, bad refused to perform its legislative functions. What if be found that 300 of those men, who, a year ago, at the bidding of the Go- vernment, were so ready to suspend the constitution of the Canadas—showed so little of intemperate zeal in support of Canadian and Colonial rights—so little of indisposition to listen to statements of misbehaviour on the part of Colonial Assemblies—whet if he found that 800 of those very men who, one short year ago, had so little hesitation upon the case presented to them in suspending the constitution of Canada, trote now without exception of opinion that no sufficient proof had been given. of misbehaviour on the part of the Assembly of Jamaica, and that there was no ground whatever for suspending the constitution of that colony ? Surely, whatever ilia own individual opinion might be, he must regard such a circumstance as affording sufficient ground to induce him to pause betbre lie assented to such is proposition as that involved in the measure the he-6)re the House. Surely their Lordships must regard it as affording the strongest conceivable argument against the extreme necessity which was alleged to exist in this instance. Surely it must convince them that the condition of the colony, and the conduct of the Assembly, were not such as to demand the adoption of so severe, so arbitrary, so despotic a measure.

Colonial Assemblies would every now and then be in conflict with their Governors—with the Home Government ; it must be expected, and their Lordships must lay their account with these things: but let them remember the wise lesson given to Parliament by the matured ex-

perience, the large and comprehensive sagacity, the genius for affairs, which distinguished the first Lord Chatham- " lie to their virtues ever kind, Ho to their Duals a little blind, Let all their acts be unceniined, And clap a padlock on their mind."

Such was the lesson read by Lord Chatham. He knew, however, that the re- putation, the genius, the sagacity of Lord Chatham, were a matter of ridicule amongst the greater statesmen by whom one was surrounded in the present day—(Laughter)—but he had an old-litshioned respect for Lord Chathatn, whom the country IBA to venerate, and to whom he believed it was still in- debted. He thought that Lord Chatham's advice was founded upon states• manlike wisdom, and was strictly applicable to the Colonies at the present day. He thought also that Lord Lyndhurst's recommendation ought to be attended to; he thought that the Imperial Parliament ought to adopt and pursue, as long as it possibly could, a temperate and conciliatory course towards Jamaica.

He very much regretted that Lord Lyndhurst bad reserved all his

horror of suspending constitutions for the present occasion, and had not assisted his endeavour to prevent the suspension of the constitution of Lower Canada. (Lord Lyndhurst said—" I don't think I was in the House at that time.") Than Lord Brougham greatly lamented his

absence, and that all the letters Lord Lyndhurst wrote to his friends, urging them to go clown to the House and support him on the Canadian

question, had no effect whatever—had not procured hint a single vote. (Laughter.) Lord Brougham, dismissing this part of the subject, then replied to Lord Normanby's observation that the Jamaica Assembly was entitled to little respect, because it did not represent the population of the island ; a doctrine which certainly did not savour much of " finality "- If population, as represented or not represented in a legislative assembly, Or a body calling itself a legislative assembly, were the main testwhether that body had a right to call itself by that name or not, then what became of the House of Commons of Great Britain and Ireland ? It represented property ; but as to population, 99 out of every 100 of the inhabitants of the country were,not represented ; vet nobody spoke of suspending the legislative functions of Great Britain and Ireland. Property, no doubt, was sufficiently repre- sented in the Imperial Legislature ; but population was trampled under foot.

Lord MELBOURNE utterly denied that he or his colleagues had any disposition to abrogate or abolish the Jamaica constitution, or to inter- fere with the rights of the people in this country or in any of the

Colonies- " I say that what we have done we have done with the utmost regret and concern. It was with the utmost regret and unwillingness we made the pro- position which we before made; it is with great concern and sorrow we make the present : but I say that this course, which we now call on your Lordships • to pursue, is forced upon us—is absolutely forced mien us by the conduct of the Jamaica ;assembly; and I declare before God, that if any other body, aristo- cratic or democratic, be it where it may, acted in the same manner, I would not hesitate to advise the same sort of measures in order to supply those func- tions which were left wanting by it—those duties which it had abandoned. (Ministerial cheers, and a laugh from time Opposition.) My Lords, I respect the rights of all parties—I respect the rights of all individuals—I respect the rights of all bodies, whether elective or hereditary. I respect these as I respect and reverence all constituted authorities in every country. But, my Lords, all constituted authorities—whatever dignity, whatever weight, whatever powers and privileges they enjoy—hold them by time tenure and. on the condition of performing the duties which they are bound to discharge ; and if they utterly desert and completely abandon those duties, they commit suicide on them- selves. (Cheers.) It is not we who put an end to an assembly in such a case ; it is not we who suspend their constitution—it is they who put an end to it themselves. It is they who have imposed on us the necessity of fulfilling duties which they have left unsatisfied—of providing for powers which they have neglected to exercise—of guarding against exigencies and necessities which they admit to exist ; and I say that this is a duty which we cannot shrink from—it is a ditty which is absolutely imposed on us—it is a duty which it is absolutely necessary for us to perform ; and for the measures which are taken under this necessity, it is not we who arc responsible, but those who by their acts have made this conduct absolutely necessary, and called forth the remain- ing powers of the State for carrying on the ditties of the Government. 11•hy, my Lords, this House of Assembly has stated distinctly, in its address to the • Governor, the absolute necessity Of legislating on those very points provided for this by bill under the present circumstances of that country ; and tilen they goon to say that they will not legislate on that or any other subject, v th cer- tain exceptions, until their privileges are respected, or until Parliament lied in point of fact withdrawn front the course which it was now bent epee. Now,

that that is an abdication of their duty, an entire disregard of their functions, a complete neglect of the whole interests of the state, it is impossible for any one to deny-. And if they will not perform the duties incumbent on them—if they will not take those steps which they admit to be absolutely necessary— I ask your Lordships how we can do otherwise than provide for the necessity thus occasioned, or at least supply the means of meetingthe deficiency ?"

It was said that the Assembly's refusal to perform their duties was limited in extent ; but what right had they to say that they would per- form one part of their duties and neglect another?- " The whole interest of the public, the whole care of the community, the entire respubliea is committed to their care, and they have no right to with- draw themselves from that duty or from any part of it. (Cheers.) By abro-

gating their functions in part, they abrogated them altogether. Then it is said that their resistance is conditional; that what they say is, 'If you give up your act of Parliament, if you withdraw your attack on our privileges, then we will persist no longer in the opposition to the measures which you deem necessary.' *What right have they to make the performance of their duties

conditional? Is that the course which your Lordships mean to sanction—is that the spirit which you desire to cherish ? Your Lordships scent almost pre- pared actually to submit to this Assembly, actually' to agree to the conditions proposed, and to condemn your own Act for the Regulation of BASORS, and that m a very strange manner.

Lord MANSFIELD and Lord ST. VINCENT opposed, and Lord SEAroms supported the bill.

- The Committee divided—

For retaining the first clause 80 For expunging it 149

Majority against Ministers 69

The first clause having been expunged, Lord BROUGHAM moved an amendment to the second clause, limiting the power of the Governor and Council in respect to the renewal of money-bills ; but, on the sug- gestion of Lord ELLENDOROUGH and Lord CANTERBURY, postponed it till Thursday ; on which day, the other clauses having been passed, it was agreed that the report should be brought up.

On Thursday, the order of the day for bringing up the "report" having been read, The Earl of lista:wools suggested that the best course Ministers could pursue would be to withdraw the bill altogether. He was per- suaded, that if the Governor of Jamaica would offer some explanation— he did not mean an apology—to the Assembly, all difficulty would be removed.

Lord BROUGHAM rose to move an amendment to the second clause. He contended that there was no occasion to invest the Governor and Council with the power of taxation. The Assembly had agreed to keep faith with the public creditor ; and he was authorized by the agent of Jamaica to state, that that promise was understood to include the obligation to pass necessary money-bills. The constitutional objection to interference with the especial department of the duties of a Repre- sentative assembly was not got over by the limitation of the power to the renewal of expiring taxes ; for to all intents and purposes, the re- newal of a tax was the passage of a money-bill. He moved a proviso, " That noticing herein contained shall enable the said Governor, with the assent of the said Council, to continue or renew any acts for the raising or appropriating of money."

The report was brought up, and Lord Brougham's motion put by Lord SHAFTESBURY.

Lord Mimi:c:mu said, he could not adopt Lord Harewood's sugges- tion. He could not consent to offer an apology to the Jameica Assem- bly, and confess that a bill they had passed had been enacted in a hurry and by mistake. Other noble lords might say so with truth, but he could not. He knew perfectly well what he was about ; he knew per- fectly well to what the Prisons Act would lead ; he knew perfectly well that it provided for internal legislation ; he knew perfectly well that it was necessary ; and some noble lords, he must observe, were rather more eager about it last year than they were now ; he knew that the Assembly would consider it an attack on their privileges. The bill was passed sub sileittie. No doubt ; everybody seemed to know all about its provisions and to agree with them. That was a fair inference from the manner in which it passed. It was impossible, therefore, consist- ently with the honour and dignity of the country, to take the course Lord Harewood recommended. Neither could he adopt Lord Brougham% amendment— He agreed with the general principles laid down by the noble and learned lord, that there should not be taxation without representation ; he agreed with time noble lord, that to renew a tax which hail expired, was the same thing as imposing a new tax, although the noble lord supposed that opposition would be given to his statement, and had evidently prepared an elaborate argument in case a different course was taken. Ile agreed with the noble lord that it was wise, that it was generous, that it was Just, not to use any oppression ; he agreed with the noble and learned lord that it was worse to oppress the weak, to oppress the ill-used, to oppress the feeble, than to attack the strong. He agreed in the sentiments, in the feelings, and in the policy of the noble lord. But the fallacy of all this argument was clear. Were they oppressing ? The Government contended that this bill was not an act of oppression, but that it was a measure called for by necessity. Unquestionably, to oppress the weak was base, was unmanly, was inexpedient ; but the Government contended that this act was rendered necessary by the misconduct and by the contumacy of the House of Assembly themselves. He considered that a power of legislation was absolutely necessary. Many ditties would expire if they were not renewed, and the appropriation was absolutely necessary to be renewed; and he contended that such a power was as necessary as the power given in any other part of the clause. Therefore he could not agree tothe suggestion of the noble and learned lord The Earl of WrcisLow supported the amendment. Lord CLONCURRY spoke on the other side, and expressed his great pleasure at hearing such constitutional doctrines from Lord Melbourne.

The Marquis of NORMANDY entered into some details to show that the Jamaica Assembly had not made sufficient provision for the exi-

gencies of the public service. There was a deficiency of 42,940/. sterling, and one of the demands on the Treasury not provided for was payment of the army and navy.

LorkSr. VEsenyrssaid, that the payment of 1113 army and navy was quite gratuitous on the part of the Assembly ; and it v-sis an objection to this bill, that it wthild make that lecyment compulsory.

Lord BaonnuAst observed, that Lord Melbourne, the other day, had made some singular remarks about men who voted from party motives.

" said the noble viscount, "am an independent man, and therefore I vote from party motives." (Laughter.) Those who voted disinterestedly were not, according to the notions of his noble friend, independent men. Now, it was quite clear to him that if their Lordships divided, noble lords on the Opposition side would vote with his noble friend, for they would vote from party motives. (Laughter.) And if it were his disposition to act from such motives, he would have abstained from proposing any amendment at all, and have left the bill as it now stood; for it was no longer the bill of the Marquis of Normanby, but the bill of Sir Robert Peel. It was precisely the measure which Sir Robert Peel proposed to substitute for the bill of the Government. This, indeed, might be a very good reason why some some noble lords should vote for it. Ile should not withdraw his motion, but would leave it iu the hands of his noble and learned friend opposite.

The amendment was negatived without a division, and the report was received.

REGULATION OF FACTORIES.

The House of Commons, moved by Mr. Fox MAULE, went into Committee on the Factories Bill, on Monday ; after some preliminary observations by Lord STANLEY and Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND, On the necessity of limiting the powers of Sub-Inspectors, or appointing a su- perior class of persons with higher salaries to the inspectorial office,— points which, Mr. MsarnE observed, were best reserved for discussion in Committee; and a complaint by Lord ASHLEY, that the Committee on the bill was put off till the lateness of the session, by thinning the House, had given Government an unfair advantage over Min, the ex- tent of which the divisions would manifest; to which observation Lord Jour RUSSELL said lie would make no reply whatever.

The Speaker having left the chair, The first clause was agreed to without amendment.

The second; or " interpretation " clause, provided that " young per- son" should be taken to mean a person between thirteen and eighteen years old. Mr. BitomEnTos moved, that twenty-one be substituted for eighteen ; so that no person under legal age should he employed in factories more than ten hours a day. Leill AsithEY and Mr. O'CoNNELL supported the amendment. Mr. Pountsrs: THOMSON and Mr. MARK Pmmaes opposed it. Mr. Phillips said it would cause this practical inconvenience, that no person under twenty-uric could attend in fite- tories during meal-times, as was the custom now, to clean the ma- chinery.

Amendment rejected, by 87 to ; clause passed.

Lord ASHLEY proposed to amend the third clause, by striking out the words " not being a silk-factory," so as to bring silk factories under the operation of the law ; which amendment was carried, by 55 to 49.

The next division was on the ninth clam;e, enacting that no " young person " should be employed in a factory more than a certain number of hours a week—a blank being left for the number of hours. Lord ASHLEY moved to fill the blank with " 58 ;" Mr. MAtnas pro- posed " 69." Lord ASHLEY referred to the number of hours per day during which persons employed in Continental fitetories worked, to show that between cheap corn and long hours there was no connexion what- ever. Mr. EWART observed, that Lord Ashley had said nothing to dis- prove the filet that where food was cheapest the hours of labour might he shortest. Mr. Fox MAtms: contended, that Lord Ashley's remarks showed the danger of shortening the hours of labour in this country, for he reminded the House that the competitors of English manufac- turers worked twelve or thirteen hours a day. Mr. VILLIERS, replying to Lord Ashley, said— The limitation of any exchangeable coixirrlity produced a redundancy of labour, and rendered it necessary that the labourer Amid work a greater number of hours to procure the necessary amount of food. The Corn-laws thus limited the field of labour in this country ; and he believed that if those laws were repealed, the condition of the manutheturing labourer would be very much improved.

Mr. CAYLEY said, the question had nothing to do with the Corn-laws: it was one of humanity, and humanity alone. Mr. RAINES assured those who talked of humanity, that an abatement of the hours of labour would cause an abatement in the wages of labour, which would be cruelly felt in every manufacturing town. Mr. MARK PHILLIPS ob- served, that the proposition to shorten the hours of labour came most inopportunely, when circumstances were now compelling manufbc- turers to work short time, without any interference of the Legislature. Lord ASHLEY remembered, that when in 1819 the hours of labour were shortened, no reduction of wages took place. Mr. PEASE said, he was a large manufbeturer, and if Lord Ashley carried his motion he must close his works, or submit to over-drive the children cruelly.

Lord Ashley's motion was negatived, by 94 to 6i1 ; and the blank filled with " 69."

Clause 14th was amended, so as to make the weekly deduction from the wages of children to provide for their " education " twopence instead of threepence.

The Committee proceeded as far as clause 17th, and then rose; to sit again this day.

SAintnrEs AND DUTIES OF SCOTCH JUDGES.

Mr. Fox MAULS, on Wednesday, moved the third reading of the Suppeme Courts of Scotland Bill.

Mr. GLUON said, the title of the measure ought to be—" A bill to give large salaries to certain public servants." He had given the bill his strenuous opposition from its first introduction, and would oppose it to the last. In 1786 the salary of Scotch Judges of the Supreme Court was 1,000/. a year ; in 1793 it was raised to 1,280/., and. in 1810 to 2,000/., expressly on the ground that the necessaries of life were much advanced in price. Prices lead since been reduced, but there had been no diminution of salary. There were very few persons at the Scotch bar making 3,0001. a year ; and of these few would not be willing to accept a Judgeship, on account of its dignity and comparative ease, with a salary of 2,0004 He moved that the bill be read a third time that day three months.

Mr. HUIuE seconded the amendment. Thirteen Judges were too many for a population not exceeding that of Yorkshire and Lancashire. The number ought to be reduced to nine. Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR passed a high enlogium on the learning, assi-

duity, and disinterestedness of the Scotch Judges. He maintained that their present remuneration was inadequate, and that it was a penny- wise policy which actuated that penurious triumvirate of Scotchmen who refused their assent to a bill for increasing the salaries of ill-paid and meritorious public servants.

Mr. WALLACE said he was one of the penurious triumvirate, and he agreed with Mr. Hume and Mr. Gillon that the bill was a gross and notorious job. The Scotch Judges sat only five months in the year, so that their 2,0007. was equal to the 4,0001. received by the English Judges who sat ten months. The measure ought to be called—" A bill for increasing the case and comfort of the Scotch Judges by adding to their salaries and diminishing the quantity of judicial duty."

Lord Advocate RUTHERFURD, and Sir John CAMPBELL, Attorney.. General, defended the bill, on the ground that their present salaries did not enable the Scotch Judges to maintain their station in society with credit ; and that the duty they actually performed was much greater than the public were aware of, as it consisted in a great measure in the perusal of voluminous documents out of court. The Lord Advocate said he knew of two cases, which did not ocmpy two minutes in court, but in which the written documents amounted to COO quarto sheets of paper:in one case and Loon in the other.

Mr. OSWALD knew that an increase of salary to the Judges would be a most unpopular measure in Scotland, where nobody took a cause to the Court of Session who could help it. There was entire want of confidence iu that Court—why, he could not tell.

The House divided—

For the third reading Against it

Majority :30 'lime bin was then read a third time. On the question that it do pass, 'Mr. WALL.tcy. moved a clause, by way of rider, providing that re- turns be made every session of Parliament of the time occupied by the Judges in the performanee of their duty.—Rejected, by 59 to 14.

Mr. W.tt.LArn MOVel another clatts, directing the Lord President to state whether any extol:A(1n of the sitting.: of the Court had taken place by command of the Crewn.—Negatived` without a division.

Mr. WALLACE moved two other clauses, the object of which was to procure statements from the Judges of any improvements made iu the conduct of the business of their Courts. The first was negatived with- out a division, the second by a majority of 46 to 22.

Sir Wir.i.rsisi 1l E moved the rejection of the clause which secured to retiring; Judges the full amount of their saktrie.t, instead of three-fourths of the amount, as under the present regulation.

Mr. WALLACE supported the nweion. It was opposed by Sir Josim CAMPBELL, Who thought it might sometimes be advantageous to bribe a Judge (to retire; and by Mr. AGLIONBY, who thought the principle of the clause good.

Sir WILLIAM PAU'S minion was carried without a division, and the clause was withdrawn.

Mr. WALLACE moved an amendment to prevent " acts of sederunt" from becoming yolkd until copies had been laid before Parliament.— Rejected, by 53 to 17.

The bill then passed.

GOVERNMENT OF CANADA.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL., on Thursday, moved the order of the day for the second reading of the Lower Canada Government Bill.

Sir GEORGE SINcLAIRt said, that when he heard flue Queen's recom- mendation on the tIth of February, that the affairs of Canada should be promptly considered, he little thought that the Great Western would have performed three or four trips across the ocean before any legis- lative enactment, in conformity with the Royal injunctions, had reached a second reading in the llouse of Commons. Ile wished to ask Minis- ters, if they really thought themselves capable of acting as a Govern- ment, and were entitled :0 conduct the of' this great country ?- When he considered the infanticidal recklessms2 with which they deserted and abandoned so many of their iiew-born schemes, their own offspring, he must say that their organs of pbiloprogenitireness must be extremely small; but when lie looked, on the oilier band, to the tenacious manner in which, iu the face of all obd.o.des and degradations, they still stuck fondly to place, he was satisfied the it bumps of adhesiveness must be super- naturally huge. (Lanylitc r.)

Nobody could tell what measures these Ministers supported to-day they would abandon to-morrow-

When Lord Melbourne ifiniffefl office, after haying resigned, from a con- fesssion that he no iOngcr 90S:41:S,,t of the II ouse of Commons, Ire ought to have instantly come forward with a statement of the geacral policy on which his Government we: to be conducted for the future. But no such explanation had been given. The only result had been, that some young people bad been pvrmitted to retain their places about the Court. But lie wished to know what had since been (bule by the Coyermnent of tic country, and how [Lei; posit bin had been alte.%al ? lie cool I net see any change since the noble lord in that House, and Lord Meliftuirne iii another place, confesEed that they no longer possessed the confide:1cl: of the country.

Mr. HustE very much regretted that Co-venni-fent had not resolved to adopt the recommendations of Lord Durham's Report. lie pressed upon Ministers the necessity of an early settlement, as every hour added to the evil which must be removed.

Mr. O'CoNNELI, differed with Mr. Hume. 1 le rejoiced that the question of union had been reserved for further consideration. With deep regret he saw it recommended in Lord Darham's otherwise ad- mirable Report. But union of the two provinces would amtihilate the polif 'lea' power of the French Canadians—would annihilate them as a separate race. The only charge alvanecd against them seas ignorance— a defect which education would cure. In other respects they did not suffer from comparison with the British race. For these reasons, he rejoiced that time for reflection was given, and that the union of Upper and Lower Canada was not inconsiderately pressed.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER said, it was of the highest importance that the Canadians should speedily know the definitive plans of the Govern- ment. No evil could be greater than suspense during another winter. A feeling was growing up in the Caaadas, that they were utterly

51 21

neglected by the Mother Country. Not only were the Canadians in doubt as to what Ministers would do, but whether they would do any thing at all. What injured Government with the Colonies, was their never persevering two years together in the same system. For ten yea* there had been constant vacillation. He denied that Lord Dur- ham's Report recommended the annihilation of the French party—it recommended fair and equal representation. It was most desirable that the French Canadians should be made in all respects British sub- jects, by the adoption of the British language, laws, and institutions—by putting them on an equality with British subjects. Such was the scope of Lord Durham's reconnnendations. He called upon Lord John MIS- sell to say distinctly whether there was to be an union of the Canadas, or not. Lord John cited the Report of the Committee of the House of Assembly against union, as expressing the opinion of the people of Upper Canada; but he had not told them that the Report was kept back till the last day of the session, when one-third of the Members had gone home. There was evidence that the mnhabitants of Upper Canada were in favour of union. For instance, two elections to the Assembly had taken place, and the successful candidates stood upon the principle of union as laid down in Lord Durham's Report. As for Sir George Arthur, he had made statements in his despatches decidedly untrue— With respect, for instance, to the execution of those two unfortunate men whose case ryas made a subject of comment, all that the Report of Lord Durham did was simply to mention the lie. Sir G. Arthur asserted that Lord Durham had overstated the number of signatures to the petition in their favour at 30,000, and affirmed that it was only 5,000; and in order to show how perfectly accurate he was, he gave alit of the signatures. But a gentleman had called on Mr. Buller and stated that he alone had presented a petition to Sir G. Arthur to which were attached more signatures than he bad acknowledged.

Mr. LEADER feared that Mr. Buller was Utopian in his views of the advantage likely to result from adopting Lord Durham's recommenda- tions. The vast majority of the people in both provinces were opposed to union, by which the French Canadians would be entirely crushed. It might be true that the French race must eventually give way before the more energetic Anglo-Saxon, but it would be a disgrace to Parlia- ment to aid the strong in crushing the weak. Ile rejoiced that Mr. O'Connell stood forth in defence of the French Canadians, and he hoped he should have the powerful aid of that gentlemen in maintaining their rights. Mr. Buller asked what the Government would do with respect to Canada? Why, of course, they would do nothing. They were glad to get rid of the question, and shuffle it off to the next session.

Sir Romer PEEL was glad to be spared the necessity of opposing the bill for the reunion of the Canticles ; for he was convinced that nothing would be more impolitic than the attempt to obtain from the House a decision on the question. Ile could not find, in all the information collected, satisfactory elements for the settlement of the Canadian • question; but he hoped that a week of next session would not be per- mitted to pass without determining what should be the position of the two Canadas. With respect to the bill before the House, he approved of some parts, and thought others required alteration; but he reserved himself till the bill was in Committee.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL saw it was the wish of the House not to enter into a discussion, and therefore he would wait for the Committee, to ex- plain any part of the measure which required explanation. In reply to Mr. Buller's question, he would say that his opinion was decidedly in favour of union ; but he thought, in the meanwhile, it was necessary to enlarge the powers of the Canadian Government, so as to give facilities, where the bill of last year raised obstacles, to internal improvements and emigration.

Mr. Ewes: described the state of the Canadas as most deplorable; and strongly advocated the policy of enlarging the powers of Govern- ment, so as to enable it to promote internal improvements and en- courage individual enterprise. With respect to union, he thought it must be brought about by gradual means. He considered it highly im- portant that the bill before the House should pass by general assent, and recommended that it should be sent to a Select Committee before dis- cussion in a Committee of the whole House.

Sir CHARLES GREY said, that great caution was necessary in entrust- ing powers of local taxation to the government in Canada. He hoped the House would be well instructed as to the nature and state of the property on which taxation might fitll before assenting to the bill.

Mr. LABorcuenn said, it was only after mature deliberation that Ministers had resolved to give the power of local taxation to the Go- vernment in Canada. He regretted that the Reunion Bill would not go out to Canada with the sanction of Parliament.

Sir ROBERT PEEL did not shrink from the responsibility of having prevented the House from coining to a decision on the principle of union by reading the Canada Reunion Bill a second time. Such a de- cision, as recent accounts from Canada proved, would have been pre- mature and unwise.

The bill was then read a second time.

Mteeso.i.ASE0118.

NATIONAL. EDUCATION. In the lifouse of Lords, on Monday, Lord Bnousatam gave notice, that he should postpone his motion relative to edisestion from Thursday till Friday next. The Archbishop of CAN- TERBURY moved for returns to show the amount expended out of the Parliamentary grants on education, copies of the Order in Council ap- pointing a Committee of Education, and of any report made by said Committee. He gave notice that he should make a motion on the sub- ject on Friday. Lord BROUC.IIAM in that case would postpone his mo- tion to the Monday following, as he did not wish to mix up two sub- jects; and his motion, which he hoped the Are:dsishop would support, was entirely different from any which could be founded on the Orders in Council. On Thursday, Lord lbtoutsuasr, at Lord Srnastoeotto's request, again put off his motion, to Thursday next week.

CRIME IN IRELAND. Replying to the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, on Thursday, Lord WHARNCLIPPE said that the Report of the Committee on Crime in Ireland was in the hands of the printer, and would be pre- sented towards the end of next week.

INSULT TO THE BRITISH FLAG. In the House of Commons, on Mon- day, Lord INGESTRIE asked Mr. Charles Wood, whether he had any in- formation of an outrage committed on the British flag in the Mexican seas, an account of which had appeared in the Hampshire Advertiser?

Mr. WOOD replied, that the material part of the statement alluded to was this—that before the capture of Vera Cruz by the French, after the

affair of the Express packet, and while her Majesty's ship Vestal was

lying off Vera Cruz, an English boat from the Vestal, commanded by a midshipman, left for shore ; that a Mexican subject took refuge in the

boat, but was forcibly taken thence by the French officer in command. Now the Admiralty had received no account of the occurrence, for the very good reason that no such occurrence had taken place. The Vestal did not arrive till the 28th of December, whereas the date of the "ins

suit " in the Hampshire Advertiser was the 5th of December. He had, however, received the following statement, on which he supposed the account referred to by Lord Ingestrie was founded ; but at the same time he must warn the House, that he had no official information on the subject, bat had received it at second-hand— This statement was, that two British officers went out in a Mexican fishing- boat to learn to catch turtles, when they chose to hoist the BritIdi ensign. This boat came among the Freud; squadron where the French guard-boat was, when her commander took the Alex:wan out of the boat. Upon this some repre- sentation was made in- Captain Carter to the French Admiral, who said ho would communicate with the Commodore. Whether that communication took place or not, the Mexicali who had been taken out of the boat was set at liberty within twenty-fbur hours. This lie presumed to be the foundation for the story which 11:41 appeared in the papers. Whether his statement was correct or not, he could not positively say. if it was, it was clear the English officers were in the wrong in hoisting the English flag in a Mexican fishing-boat ; and under such circumstances no Mexican could have claimed the protection of that Ile*. The Commodore did not think it worth while to report this affair to the Admiralty at home; and the noble lord, who had been so recently afloat, must be well aware that many irregularities might occur on foreign stations, which might he quite tit to be animadverted upon and reported upon, but which ought not to be brought before the house of Commons.

Lord Ixons'entt: was glad to hear that the Admiralty had received no intbrmation on the subject—that no further stain rested on the British flag.

Sir FRANCIS Bunneesr hoped inquiry would be made into the facts. The honourable Baronet wished to say more, but was assailed with cries of " Oh !" and " Question !" till lie sat down.

SHANNON NAVIGATION. On Monday, the House went into Committee on the Shannon Navigation Bill ; and, on the motion of Mr. SPRING RICE, passed the following resolution— "That a sum not exceeding 290,7171. by way of grant, and of 294,0901. by way of loan, to be repaid, may be advanced in Exchequer Bills, or out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; the same to be advanced under such regulations as may be directed by any act of the present session of Parliament."

TURNPIKES. Leave was given to Mr. Fox MAME to bring in a bill to continue for a limited time the Local Turnpike Acts for Great Bri- tain, which expire with this or the ensuing session of Parliament.

busts CORPORATION Birds The Commons, on Thursday, went into Committee on this bill. Mr. SHAW moved to amend clause C, section 20, by raising the franchise from 81. to 101. Lord MORPETH and Lord Enloe opposed the amendment. Sergeant JACKSON and Sir ROBERT PEEL supported it. The Committee divided ; and rejected the amend- ment, by 104 to 54. The next division was on a amendment proposed by Mr. SHAW to clause 71, with a view to assimilate the oath taken by municipal officers to that prescribed in the Catholic Relief Bill—motion rejected, by 157 to 112. The remaining clauses, two hundred and ,fifty in number, with the exception of three unimportant ones, struck out, were passed without alteration. The preamble was agreed to, and the report was ordered to be received on Monday.

THE ELECTION PETITIONS TRIAL BILL was "reported," and ordered to be read a third time on Monday.