Current:

Northern Star (1837-1852), 15th March 1845, Edition 2 of 3, Page 8, j_ ^ THE NORTHERN STAR, Marchj^ t^.

Page 8
Page 8
8 of 8

On this page

  • Departments (2)
    • tapmal Sarltamtnt
    • _ ouwji Printed by DOTOAL M'GOWAIT of 17 _ . _ , KJ'SSti^WSSWS
  • Text (6)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      J_ ^ The Northern Star, Marchj^ T^.

      j _ ^ THE NORTHERN STAR , Marchj ^ t ^ .

      Tapmal Sarltamtnt

      tapmal Sarltamtnt

      House Of Lords, Mo.Vdat, Mabcb 10. The S...

      HOUSE OF LORDS , Mo . vdat , Mabcb 10 . The second reading of the Jewish Disabilities Bill was moved bv . The Low * Chakcxlloe , who said that the object of the measure was to relieve the Jews from their municipal and corporate disabilities . The noble and learned lord annded to the election of Mr . Salomons as an alderman of the City of London , and argued upon the impolicy of » law which eouldexclude agentlemanof such respectability from the highest municipal honours which conld he bestowed upon him bv ills feUow citizens , thus diminishing the incentives to good conduct . He proposed to effect his object by omittiug from the declaration requisite to be made by a Jew on taking office , the words " on the true filth of a Christian . " On every account it was desirable that those words should be omitted , for if it was thought rig ht to exclude ihe Jews from such offices , they should de so br directmeans , and not by a side wind , which could be made to apply , or hot to apply , according to the wishes

      of the corporation for introduction to which the Jew was a candidate . There were Jews amongst the aldermen Of Birmingham , of Portsmouth , and of Southampton , and there might be amongst the aldermen of London also , if the corporation chose it , for by varying the time at which the declaration was tobemade , Uiey mlg btallow the party to come under the operation of the Annual Indemnity Act , and thus j-vm-ieall y admit those whom the law refused to recoils - ^ in such a capacity . It was to get rid of such an anomaly il-at he introduced the bill npon the table , which would place all the corporations in tbe kingdom in this respect upon the same level . T ^ hese words had been omitted in the cases of the Quakers , the Moravians , the Independents , and the Separatists ; and upon the same principle , he proposed their omission in favour of the Jews . He did not bring it forward as a great measure of public policy , which would admit of difficulty and doubt : bnt he was content to rest it on the limited ground of putting an end to a useless and absurd anomaly .

      The Bishop of London said he should not oppose the hill , bnt lie wished to be understood that he did not therefore pledge hhnsdf not to oppose a more extended measure for adinsuing the Jews into Parliament The -Mnrquis of Laxsdowxe expressed his gratification at the introduction of this measure , which he hoped would ere long be carried still further . Lord . JinouGHAK was rejoiced to find that this bill was to be passed without a dissentient voice , and hoped he should live to see the day when a more extended measure would be introduced . Lord Caiipeem . was also delighted that this measure was recrfved with unanimity by their Lordships—a measure whicli he hailed as a large instalment of what the Jews had a right , as British subjects , to expect . The Bishop of Loxnojc objected to the word unanimity . It was not to be supposed that he was in favour of the bill because he declined to oppose it .

      alter some observations from Lord Colchester and Lord Bedtsdalc , the hill was read a second time ; after which their Lordships adjourned . Tuesday , Makch 11 . " The House sat for a short time , but the business was entirely oi a . routine character . At the rising it adi Ounicri niitil Thursdav .

      House Of Commons, Monday, March 10. On T...

      HOUSE OF COMMONS , Monday , March 10 . On the motion that the report of the Property Tax Bill be read , Mr . C . BcuLEB moved as an amendment , "That the circumstances under which the renewal of the income tax is at pre ? ' -:: i proposed are such as to render it exccedingly anprobaWc tuatFarluunentuillhavetiiepower of olspens ing withlts continuance atthe end of threeyears ; and ( that itis therefore the duty of this House to take care that the tax be imposed in a form in which its operation shall be less unequal and inquisitorial than it now is . ' " * Eg commenced by stating his objections to the present financial scheme of Sir It . Peel , and observed , that though it had been caUcd the poor man ' s budget , he did not know how any DUUjret leSS beneficial to the-poor man could be

      de-Vised . The poor man conld get no benefit from the reduction of the sugar duties , or from that of the auction duties , nor yet could be obtain any relief from the reduction of the export duties , as they were usually paid by foreigners . In the 420 articles which were to he struck out of ihe tariff there was not one which entered into the consuiaption of the poor . Corn and butter were left in the tariff as before ; but the poor man was now allowed as a great boon to get dutyfree alum to adulterate his bread , and lard to adulterate his butter . The reduction of the duties on glass might indeed obtain for him a Cheaper and better window ; but that was not , he thought , an article of prime necessity . The duty on cotton was reduced , it was said , -to give him ' cheap clothin ?; but , supposing the poor man to wear one fustian suit himself * , and his wife to wear two cotton gowns , in the year , the whole amount of the reduction of the duty

      on cotton on such garments would not amount to more than 3 d . in the year , and it was open todOubt whether Ihe poor man would get even that much benefit . He then showed that by the scheme of sugar duties now proposed by Sir B ,. Peel , the poor man would have to pay more than 3 d . a month in the shape of protection to the "W est . India proprietor . He complained that Sir R . Peel had excepted from reduction every article which entered largely into general consumption , and said that if he nad dealt frankly with the articles of tea , coffee , tobacco , malt , soap , spirits , and wines , he mignt have so benefitted flie revenue , hy diminishing the price of those articles , as to make up the amount of the loss at the end of threeyears by the increase of consumption . He then proeeededto show , that the budget was a monopoly budget , and not a free trade bud get ; for it interfered with no protected interest , except the West Indian interest , and that

      it elevated . In voting , therefore , for the income lax at present flie House was voting in favour of a system which would not only holster up discriminating duties , but " would also weaken its resources for assailing other protected interests . Be showed that three or four bad harvests had caused tte deficiency in the revenue whilst the Whigs were in power , and that three or four good harvests had restored the revenue to prosperity . But was the Minister provided with any measure to meet a similar disaster in future ? If there were in the course of the next three years a bad harvest , or a fall in trade , what would be tbe budget of ISIS » There would be a deficit in it , in spite of the income tax , and the Minister would then be compelled to come forward and to ask for a larger per centage . It

      was a downright fraud then to say that your revenue I would be so ftir recovered at the end of three years as to enable you to get rid of the income tax . If that were the case , then it behoved them , as plain honest men , to make the tax perfect when they made it permanent . He did not propofeauy specific amendments in the bill ; he would lay before them a clear , inteDigible , practicable principle , and would not weaken it by entering at present into any disputable details . On a former occasion he had exposed the unequal , innuidtoriaL , and odious nature of the property tax , and , though it had oeen carried into operation in London and the vicinity with greater mildness than bad been expected , yet he had received many complaints from the north of England as to the way in which it had been administered there by local commissioners against offensive politicians and rivals in trade .

      The Chanceewb of the Exchequer observed , that Mi ' . Buller had indulged in a variety of details which , if not sound in principle , were at any rate lively in detail . The income tax had been previously debated in that House , and had been carried by an overwhelming majority . That was sone proof that it was not very unpopular ; bnt , if it were so . why had the Hon . Member withheld his disapprobation till that moment , when the amendment of the bill was scarcely within his reach ? and why had he come down to the House at last , not with any specific amendments , but with a general resolution , which denounced the bin without attempting to improve it ? If he were so convinced that the income tax would be permanent , his motion should not be for its repeal , but for the repeal of other taxes besides those proposed to be repealed in the budget . Mr . Buller had said that the Government ought to have dealt with tea , coffee , tobacco , malt , soap , spirits , and wine , instead of with sugar , glass , and cotton ; but seemed to have forgotten that the articles which he mentioned produced a revenue of £ 16 , 000 , 000 or £ 17 , 000 , 000 .

      ilr . C . BuxtEB said , that he had mentioned five or six articles , and had argued that the Government would have done better in reducing the duties on any of those articles , than in reducing the duties enumerated in the budget . The Chaxceiaob of the Excheqceh observed , that if the Government had proposed to sacrifice a revenue of £ 3 , 000 , 000 , derived from the duties on tobacco and spirits , Hr . Buller would have been one of the first to raise an outcry against . Ministers for pandering to the vices , and for neglecting the morals and comforts , of the people . He then proceeded to show that by imposing an income tax , which did not operate npon the poor at all , and which produced a revenue of £ 5 , 000 , 000 a-year from those classes of society which were in more comfortable circumstances , Ministers were enabled to relieve the poor from many

      taxes which they now paid . But it was not by the withdrawal of taxation alone that they benefited tbe poor ; you did them as much good when you afforded them in-Creased means of employment , and such means would be afforded to them by the piv-sciit budget . For instance , in consequence of the remission of the glass duties new capital was already embarked in that trade , and new labourers were therefore wanted in the market . He had never limited the benefit which the repeal of the cotton duties would confer upon the poor man to the increased Cheapness of his clothing—he had considered the repeal of those duties to he most valuable in this respect , that it would enable tbe British to meet the foreign manufacturer in every part of the world , and would therefore eaB into the labour-market an increased number of men to meet the increased demand of the foreign market . He

      then went on to show that if Government had proceeded to reduce the tea duties , which produced about £ 4 , 000 , 000 , it must have reduced them to the amount of £ 3 , 000 , 000 , as anything short of that reduction would be a dead loss to tbe revenue , and no benefit to the consumer . Afterdwe S ing on the impossibility of making any such reduction at present , he proceeded to implore the House not to be deterred from pursuing the course which it had hitherto taken on tliis subject He denied that there had been any harshness in the levying of this tax in the north of England , and maintained that the cheerfulness and readiness with wtucb . it had been paid was aproof of it . If Hon . « mbers should support the amendments which wereuow Proposed for exempting from the operation of this bill ehwses which ought not to be exempted from it , the neeeesar effec would be either to impose on the other

      House Of Commons, Monday, March 10. On T...

      ' classes of society a higher burden than that whicli they bore at present , or to render it impossible far the Government to remit the taxes which is now proposed to' repeal . For these reasons he should give to Mr . Boiler ' s amendment every resistance in his power . Lord HowicK called the attention of the House to the feet that the ChanceUor of the Exchequer had avoided all mention of the manner In which the revenue was to be restored to its present amount , after these reductions should have been made and the income tax should have ceased . He foUowed Mr . C . Buller through his financial propositions , and Observed that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not given a satisfactory answer to any one of them . He declined , however , to vote for the amendment , not that he liked the income tax better than his Noble friend , for it was a most injurious mode of collecting revenue , but because the finances of the country were in

      Such a State that if we took off the iicome tax , we must put on new taxes to the same amount . Now , he was not prepared to propose new taxes , and therefore he could not vote for the repeal of one which produced a certain amount of income . He considered that a better mode of levying taxation would g ive relief to the consumer , aud more especially to the Industrious classes , far more considerable than that which Sir B . Peel had proposed , and would leave the finances in a condition which would justify the belief that all the loss of revenue incurred in making this great espferiment would eventually be recovered . He trusted that in the interval between the present time and the next general election the electors would consider whether it was worth while to continue this odious income tax for the purpose of bolstering up for a few years longer a system of protection , which even Ministers themselves had denounced as contrary to the principles of common sense .

      SirR . Inclis expressed his intention to vote with Mr . Buller , although he could scarcely understand his reasoning , that he wished to make the income tax tolerable because he found that it was to be perpetual . He recemmended the Government to make some modifications in their bill , to distinguish between annuities and perpetuities , to capitalise the incomes of individuals , and to impose the tas'bn this capitalised income . He also recommended that the tax should not be imposed on the first £ 150 of any man ' s income , but only on that part of it which exceeded that sum . Mr . W _ bbitoton declared that he could not vote for the amendment , because his Hon . Friend denounced the income tax as unequal , and he could uot see wherein Us inequalities existed .

      Mr . Milnes suggested to Mr . C . Buller the propriety of not dividing the House on his amendment , as many of those who agreed with him in denouncing the income tax differed from him as to the propriety of the course he was then proposing . Though he was himself not friendly to the imposition of the income tax as a permanent tax in time of peace , he could not agree with Mr . C . Buller in considering it as very unpopular at the present time . If it had been , the table would have been covered with petitions against it , as it was in the year 1816 ; but now not more than three or four had been presented .

      Mr . Hawes reminded the last speaker that the income tax in 1816 was 10 per pent ., and that it was now only 2 } per cent ., and intimated that the difference hi the amount of the burden might be the cause Why the people bestirred themselves more in 1816 to get rid of this tax than they did at present . He then entered into an examination of Sir R . Peel ' s financial scheme , and contended , that at present there was nothing to justify the imposition of the income tax . If it were imposed , it must be imposed with great inequalities , and that was a

      sufficient reason for him to vote against it . He had voted against it when it was proposed three years ago . He then thought that it was not justified by the deficit which existed in the revenue , and which he always looked npon as temporary and traceable to natural causes . He should vote against it now , unless Sir JR . Peel could show that the income tax was necessary to the maintenance of public credit , and that no other tax could be imposed in its stead . So mischiGvous and inquisitorial was the tax that nothing but a sense of its insurmountable necessity should ever induce him to support it .

      Mr . Spoonee dilated upon the injustice of applying the same scale ot taxat i on to a man with an annuity and to a man with an estate in perpetuity . He explained the amendments which he intended to more in the course of the evening , and insisted that he asked nothing unjust in calling upon the House to agree to them . He could not , however , vote for the amendment of Mr . C . Buller , hecause he could not deal with his motion unconnected with his argument , and to much of his argument ho entertained strong objections . Mr . Hume observed , that Mr . C . Buller and Mr . Hawes had brought before the House twe questions , which ought

      to be kept quite distinct , namely , the income tax and the financial account for the year . Another opportunity would arise for discussing the latter question ; at present , he would confine himself to stating that he supported the property tax , because he conceived it to be , not an increase , but a change of taxation . He also defended it as an approach to a system of direct taxation , which he conceived to be much more beneficial to the poorer classes than a system of indirect taxation . He supported the proposition of Sir B . Peel as a whole , though he objected to some of Ms details . But , as the Right Hon . Baronet had declared that he would not modify them , what use was there in bothering any longer about the matter I

      Sir R . Peel complained that Mr . Hawes had completely misunderstood the object and tendency of the financial statement which he had made at the commencement of the session . After correcting the errors into which Mr . Hawes had unintentionally fallen , he replied to the different statements of Mr . C . Buller , contending that he ought to have concluded with a motion condemnatory of the income tax , and not with a motion declaratory of nothing more than the propriety of making some modifications in the hill for its continuance . He then adverted to the proposition of Sir Robert Inglis , who wished to exempt the first £ 150 a year in every man ' s income from the operation of this tax . Had his Hon . Friend considered that his proposition amounted to nothing less than this , that every man who now contributed to the income tax should reduce

      his contribution by the sum of £ 4 10 s . ? He believed that there were 200 , 000 persons atleast entitled to demand that exemption ; and if that exemption were granted there would be a loss of nearly £ 1 , 000 , 000 to the revenue . He next proceeded to point out the benefits which the community would derive from the reductions which he had proposed in his budget , and went through them item by item , showing that , though the poor would be benefitted by them , they were proposed , not for the benefit of one class , but for the benefit of the whole community . Mr . Hawes took so favourable a view of the financial position of the country , that he evidently must expect a surplus at the end of threeyears . He would ^ hnwever , confine

      himself to the present prospect , andutggmd only say , that he proposed to continue the inconreyfijiic for three years , in order that he might fry a great experiment on the industry , sMU , and capital of the country . He admitted that the tax was open to objection , and that the inquisition to which parties were subjected under it was painful ; but , seeing that no petitions had been presented against this bill , he hoped that the House would receive it with the same favour" as it had three years ago . He hoped also that they would not admit any modifications in the hillfor modifications must open the door to fraud—but would affirm it in its present shape , as a tax both on income and on property .

      Mr . Sheil contended , that in schedules , which affects professions and trades , there was an injustice , which might be easily removed by the imposition of anew tax , he meant a tax on the hereditary and testamentary devolution of land . It would be a species of legacy duty , and might be collected in the same manner . He knew that Mr . Pitt had failed in gaining the consent of the House tosuch a proposition ; but then Sir R . Peel was in abetter situation than ever Mr . Pitt enjoyed , and if any remonstrance were made against' his bringing it forward , be had only to mention the cabalistic name of Russell to get rid of all opposition . Sir R . Peel had said there was no clamour against the income tax . In that respect , too , he had an advantage over the late Lord Castlereagh , who , if he mistook not , accused the people of "ignorant

      impatience of taxation , " on a bill of this very same character . But there were many reasons why there was no clamour at present . First , there had been a succession of good harvests ; and secondly , Government had raised up a privileged class in favour of the bill , namely , those who had not , and those who chose to swear they had not , £ 150 a-year . He then proceeded to condemn the injustice of the tax . Nothing could be more unjust than to impose the same tax on the barrister struggling for existence on his first circuit , and the Lord Chancellor reclining on the woolsack ; on the gentleman who was listening to and reporting the debate , and the First Lord of the Treasury , with £ 30 , 000 a-year , who was forming tho subject of it . After passing a "high encomium on the reporters , out of whose ranks some of the first men in the country

      had risen , he dwelt upon the hardship of compelling them to pay out of the salaries which they earned under great wear and tear both of body and mind , and of which they might be deprived at any moment by the occurrence of illhealth , a contribution equal in proportion to that paid by the highest functionaries of the State , who , when disabled by the labours of office , had largo private fortunes to fall back upon . He showed that this tax had been denounced as immoral , unjust , and oppressive by Baring , the prince of commerce ; by Wilberforce , the moral and the good ; and by the father of the present Minister , the late Sir R . PeeL He quoted the opinion of that shrewd and excellent man on the subject , and expressed a hope that posterity would not have to add , "Polris dictum sajyiens temriutsfluco )\ dei * na tti . "

      Mr . Cobden thought that Sir R . Peel was congratulating himself too soon upon the absence of all clamour a"ainst his measures , When the country understood that the sugar duties were as bitter a pill to them as the income tax , which they were now called on to swallow , there would be a great outcry against botli . At the end of the year men would know what they had to pay for the West Indian monopoly of sugar . Then they would combine their dislike of it with the quiet but honest detestation which even now prevailed against schedule B . As a free trader , he denounced both measures . He was surprised that Sir R . Peel , after proposing them , should call himself any longer an advocate for free trade .

      Lord Jons Russell said , that the ground alleged for the impesition of the income tax was that it was nothing more than a commutation of taxes . Such being the case , the House was bound to consider whether the tax was as just , as equal , and as little yexatdous as the House could makeit . After the statement made that evening by Mr . C . Buller , the House was bsund to examine into aU the conditions aud inequalities of the tar , aud to endeavour , as far as it could , to remedy its defects . He hoped that i the country would not forget that it was obliged to submit

      House Of Commons, Monday, March 10. On T...

      to the income tax , because Sir R . Peel showed so much favour to monopoly and protection . By reducing' the duties on corn , sugar , and timber , ho might get a batter revenue , and make all the modifications whicli were required in the income tax . He should give his vote for the continuance of that tax for the next three years ; but on the understanding that he was at liberty , to mate any modifications in the bill he might think necessary . If those modifications should diminish by a million tho revenue hitherto derived from the tax , Ministers might find a sufficient compensation for it in carrying into execution more fully the principles of which they professed to be the advocates . Mr . VittiEBs made one of his usual speeches in favour of free trade , and contended that those who supported the Corn Laws ought to be held by tho country responsible for the imposition of the income tax .

      Mr . Mhntz admitted that the income-tax was not popular in Birmingham . He was for putting an end to it , and for imposing a bona fide property tax upon all classes . The House then divided , when there appeared—For Mr . C . Buller ' s amendment 112 Againstit ' •* ** ' Majority against the amendment . ... 128 Mr . IV . Mitrs then proposed a clause for the purpose of providing an easier mode of appeal for tho agricultural tenantry . He stated that the measures of tho Government had taken from that tenantry the means of paying the income tax . He therefore thought that the condition in which they were placed in the last Act ought to be altered in the present . They were now rated at one-half of their rent , and he thought that they ought not to bo rated at more than the sum of 3 | d . in England and 2 M . in Scotland for every 20 s . of the property they occupied .

      The Cbancemok of the BxcHEauEK said , that it was not in his power , nor was it consistent with justice , to accede to this amendment . The House then divided , when there appeared—For the amendment 02 Againstit 196 Majority against it —104 The report was then brought up , and the bill was ordered to be read a third time on Wednesday next , when the amendments of Mr . Spooner , Mr . Wakley , and others , are to be taken into consideration . The report of the Committee of Ways and Means was brought up ; tho resolutions on the sugar duties were agreed to , and a bill founded upon them was ordered to be brought in . The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means , and agreed , without almost any discussion , to the resolution taking off the export duty on coals . On the House resuming ,

      Mr . Bbight rose to nominate tho select committee on the Game Laws . Mr . C Bebkelet complained of the unfair mode in which this committee was going to be formed , and moved in the first place that the name of Mr . Bouverie he expunged from the list , and that the name of Mr . Gregory be inserted in its stead . He accused Sir James Graham of having acted with great partiality in nominating so many gentlemen on tbe committee who were known to be hostile to the present system of Game Laws . Six of them , moreover , were members of the Anti-Corn Law League .

      Sir J . Gbahah was sorry that Mr . C . Berkeley should think that he had reason to complain of his conduct in the nomination of this committee ; but he was glad to know that he had given no foundation for that complaint ; He then stated how the committee had been nominated by him ^ lfand Mr . Bright , who had bshaved throughout iu the most conciliatory spirit . If Mr . Bright was not inclined to accede to the wishes of the Hon . Member for Cheltenham , he should feel himself bound ill good faith te resist them also . Mr . Bright could not assent to the proposition of Mr . C . Berkeley . The Hon . Gentleman was mistaken in supposing that six gentlemen nominated on the committee belonged to the Anti-Corn Law League . There were only four of them members of the Anti-Corn Law League , and only three who had ever taken any active part in its proceedings !

      The House then . divided , when there appeared for the erasure of Mr . Bouverie ' s name—Ayes , 13 ; Noes , 100 ; Majority , 87 . Mr . 0 . Bebkelet then moved the erasure of the name of Mr . George Cavendish from the list of the committee , and the insertion of that of Lord Palmerston in its place . Another division was then taken , but Mr . Berkeley ' s amendment was negatived by a majority of 65 over 20 . The House then adjourned .

      Tuespay , March 11 . Sir R . Peel gave notice that he would move , on a future day , that the House should adjourn for the Easter recess on Thursday , the 22 d , and meet again on Monday , the 31 st inst .

      NEW ZBALANO AFFAIRS . Mr . Somes moved for copies of correspondence respecting the issue of debentures as a legal tender in New Zealand ; of all correspondence respecting taxes proposed in the Legislative Council ; of all correspondence relating to the measures taken by the Governor of that colony to fulfil Lord Stanley ' s agreement of the 12 th of May , 1843 , respecting the grant of a conditional title to the lands of the New Zealand Company ; and also of correspondence relating to the affairs of that company , their purchases of lands , & c . Mr . AeutoNBY complained of the course pursued by tho Colonial Office towards the New Zealand Company , and pressed for the production of the documents . The colony , he contended , was brought to tho verge of ruin by homo and local mismanagement , instead of being , as it ought to be , under proper management , one of the most flourishing colonies under the British Crown .

      Mr . G . W . Hope said that the Secretary for the Colonies and the Governor of New Zealand were exposed to attacks by insinuations rather than by any direct charges , while , on the other hand , the documents before the House were altogether overlooked by those who made those insinuations . With respect to the debentures , they had been disallowed-by the Government at home , and had therefore been withdrawn . No information had been received on the subject of local taxation , nor of the recent occurrences arising from the conduct of tho natives . With respect to the sale of lands , the necessity for altering the instructions sprung from the increasing knowledge of the natives , which prevented the possibility of dealing with them under the same circumstances as

      heretofore . , Mr . C . Buller took a review of the history of the colony , condemning in severe terms the whole policy of Captain Fitzroy , who had , he said , taken advantage of the death of Captain Wakefield in order to traduce his memory . As governor of the colony he had given all his sympathy to the natives , and had contrived to lose the confidence of all the European inhabitants of the islands in the short period of six months . He wished to pass no severer censure on Captain Fitzroy , than that he was a most foolish and incompetent governor , unfit to be intrusted with the management of the most ordinary affairs , and whose recall was absolutely requisite for the interests and safety of tho colony .

      Colonel It . Tbevor deprecated the language that had been used towards Capt . Fitzroy , who could not even hear of the charges now made against hun until after the lapse of five months , and could not defend himself from them at an earlier period than the next session of Parliament . Sir R . Peel regretted that Mr . Aglionby , knowing that the motion was not to be opposed , had not fob lowed the example of Mr . Somes , and refrained from discussing a matter in which charges must necessarily be promulgated against Captain Fitzroy , without tho requisite information to enable his conduct to appear in a proper and just light to the House . The Hon . Gentleman , upon the mere authority of a newspaper

      report , had made serious charges against an absent individual whose Mends had no means to defend him . The Right Hon . Baronet then observed , that the New Zealand Company were at first quite satisfied with the appointment of Captain Fitzroy , and contended that in common justice they should hear from that gallant officer an account of those transactions before they attempted precipitately to condemn him , or the Colonial Secretary by whom he had been appointed . Lord Howick . rose to defend Mr . C . Buller . Ho imputed no blame to the motives of Captain Fitzroy , but he had a right , and so had Mr . Buller , to condemn the judgment of that officer . After some further conversation , the motion , slightly altered , was agreed to .

      RESISTANCE TO THE POOR LAW AT ROCHDALE . Mr . S . Crawford ^ in bringing before the House the allegations contained in the petition of the ratepayers and inhabitants of Rochdale , observed that the subject which he was then about to introduce to its consideration was not merely local , but one of general and national policy . It involved this question—whether the authority of tbe Poor Law Commissioners should be forced into that remnant of England which still refused to submit to it ? It also raised the question , whether the Now Poor Law should continue in its present state , or whether it should be changed so as to make it more consistent with sound policy and the ancient constitution of England ? The affairs of the poor in the parish of Rochdale had been'managed for the last twenty-five years under the Select Vestry Act , and no'fault had ever been found with the mode of their management . In the year 1837 a union was formed ot Rochdale

      and nine other parishes , for the purposes of registration ; but the guardians elected were instructed to refrain from interfering with the relief of the poor . Rochdale remained in this position till the 25 th of October , 1844 , when an order was issued to the guardians by the Poor Law Commissioners , directing them to take upon themselves the administration of the relief of the poor in that union . Now , this order , in point of fact , commanded them , though they had long administered the relief of the poor in their own way , to administer it in that , way no longer . Notwithstanding this order , it was found impossible to obtain £ . meeting either of the elected or the ex-offioio guardians to carry it into effect ; for they had determined that they would not do that which in their opinion would prove injurious to tho poor in their district . In November , 1844 , the Poor Law Coiumisaionera moved for a mandamus sgamsfc the board of guardians , and , as he was informed , not in the usual form , for the

      House Of Commons, Monday, March 10. On T...

      common practice was to move for a rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue ; but in this case tho rule was made absolute at once , on th n allegation that the poor at Rochdale were actuall y starving . Now , it was strange that such an allegation snoum have been made , as the poor were . ^ Y ^^ rns " lief m ' . tlie usual way to which tiieyM been accustomed . He charged the Commissioners with somethin" approaching to a deception when they gamed a inZdZls on such grounds , as they thereby deprived the parish of Rochdale of the opportunity ot disputing the truth of the harsh imputation cast upon its character for humanity . On the legality of the mandamus he would not say a word , as that would be decided at the next assizes for Lancaster . Tho

      ratepayers of Rochdale wished to avoid this litigation , and they addressed in consequence a memorial to Sir James Graham , as did also the board of guardians , requesting that the New Poor Law should not be inflicted upon them . Those memorials were signed by 11 , 415 rate-payers , which was within fifty-three of the whole number ; and on their presentation to Sir James Graham he declared that ho had no authority to interfere with the operation of an Act of Parliament . Under such circumstances , he asked whether it was right to allow ; the Poor Law Commissioners to force their authority on tho rate-payera of Rochdale ? He tliought it was not ; for his constituents had never been guilty of any misconduct in their mode of administering relief to the poor ; on the contrary , their management of the poor

      had been highly eulogized by several of the Assistant-Commissioners . They , therefore , appealed to the House against the power of the Poor Law Commissioners , and prayed to be heard at the bar of the House in support of the allegations contained in their petition . He then proceeded to state and to enforce the allegations of the petitioners , that the Poor Law was unconstitutional , destructive of the principle of self-government , inhuman in theory , cruel in practice , injurious to . tho morals , and detrimental to the industry and comforts of the poor . After pointing out various other defects in the Poor Law , he said that he asked for inquiry into these allegations at their bar ; but he would not insist on that part of his motion , if Sir James Graham would give him

      inquiry in any other ^ way—for instance , if he would SCnd down a Commissioner to Rochdale and institute a public examination into the complaints of the petitioners . He warned the House that if the prayer of the petitioners were not granted , the guardians of Rochdale would suffer all the penalties ol an attachment rather than yield that which in their conscience they believed would be injurious to the poor and to the ratepayers conjointly—he meant obedience to the mandates of the Poor Law Conunissioners . He concluded by malting a motion in conformity with the terms of his speech . Mr . Ferrand . —I rejoice , sir , that I have caught your eye , for I am anxious to bear my testimony to the unanimity of that vast meeting at which this petition was agreed to , and the determined spirit

      which the inhabitants of Rochdale then exhibited to Standby the principles which they wer <> met to assert . I also rejoice to ha % -c the opportunity of calling the attention of the House to the solemn pledges given by those who introduced this law , and the manner in whieh those pledges have been broken , as well as the fearful results which have accrued to the country . I will prove that" the inhabitants of Rochdale are justified in resisting the extension of the system into their neighbourhood ; and that obedience , on their part , would be a crime , while resistance is a virtue . ( Hear . ) There were the most solemn pledges given when this law was introduced ; this House was deceived by those pledges , and so was the country ; and what can Piirliament say now , when I prove that

      those pledges have been most unblushingly broken ? Will it assert that the pcopjo of Rochdale are not justified in resisting a law which was carried by unjust and unconstitutional means ? ( Hear , " hear . ) Sir , when this measure was first introduced by Lord Althorp , he distinctly said , on the Vfth of April , 1834 ;—"As to the observaticn of tho Hon . Member for Marylebone , who hoped that the commissioners -would not interfere with parishes that were well regulated , he had to say , that he hoped they would not ; the only mode in which he trusted they would deal with such parishes would be by following their example . When a parish was really well regulated , it need not entertain the slightest apprehension of interference upon the part of the commissioners . " Upon

      this pledge , given by the mouthpiece of the Government of this House , this House gave its consent to the bill , and the country did not offer that opposition to it , which it would otherwise have done . Afterwards , on the same day , Lord Althorp said , "he need not say that an immense advantage would be obtained by a uniformity of system throughout the country" and on the 27 th of June , he observed , " The proposed amendment would destroy one of the principal advantages of the measure , namely , uuit ' oi ' . mity of practice . " The Right Hon . Baronet ( Sir J , Graham ) said , on a latter occasion , on the 20 th of July , 1839 , ^ that " the law contemplated that , on a given day , the refusal of out-door relief throughout England and Wales should be general . " Lord Althorp

      said , on the 1 st of July , 1834 , "the object of the bill was to put a stop to the allowance system . " On the 12 th of June , 1834 , the same Noble Lord stated "that it was not intended as a general rule , that a man should be separated from his wife , or children from their mother , or that paupers should have their hair shaved , or be compelled to wear badges . " On the 9 th of June , 1834 , Lord Althorp said , "it would prove of the greatest possible benefit to the labourer ;" and on the 27 th of that month , " the farmer and his labourer would both be benefited ; the latter being made independent by increased wages , and the former , in consequence of that increase , would have his work much more effectually and zealously done and performed . " Ho asserted that the average rate of

      wages in the north of Nottinghamshire was 13 s . a week ; in Northamptonshire , 0 s . But there was a statement made by a Noble Lord , who has been quoted to-night . I allude to Lord Brougham . In moving the second reading , his Lordshi p said , " Such a system ( that is the old Poor Law ) deadens all sense ot shame , all sense of real dignity ; erases from the mind every feeling of honouraDle independence , and fits its victims only for acts of outrage or of fraud . Look at that volume ( the Poor Law Commissioners' Report ) , the record of idleness and her sister guilt which now stalk over the land . Look at the calendar which they have filled to overflowing , notwithstanding the improvement of our jurisprudence , and the progress ot education . " He

      then called the attention of the House of Lords to the state of the country , and spoke of it as " that which I could not bear to think of . did I not know that the same hand which lays it bare to your eyes , and makes its naked deformity horrible in your sight , will be enabled by jour assistance to apply to the foul diseases safe and effectual remedy ; restoring to industryits due reward , and visiting idleness with its appropriate punishment ; reinstating * property in security , and lilting up once more—Cod be praised ! —the character of that noble English peasantry to the proud eminence , where , but for the Poor Laws , it would still have shown untarnished , the admiration of mankind and the glory of the country which boasts it as its brightest ornament ! " Now , I ask the House

      of Commons—I ask England—have these pledges been redeemed ? ( Cheers , ) What has been the conduct of the Poor Law Commissioners in defiance of those solemn pledges ? Have thev refused to enforce this law in " well regulated parishes ?" Have they taken well-regulated parishes as ' * their example" in enforcing the law elsewhere ? No ; but they have trampled under foot the rights , the liberties , and the privileges of the people of England . ( Hear , hear . ) How has your " uniformity of practice" been * earned out ? Has that been enforced throughout the country ? Why , I want no other evidence than that or the Hon . Baronet himself ( Sir J . Graham ) , who , in this House , after this law had been five years in existence , was obliged to bear

      testimony to its utter failure , and to the breaking down of all " uniformity of practice" in the granting of out-door relief , and in the allowance system , whatsaid Sir R . Peel on the 8 th of February , 1841 ? He said . "It was in the hope and in the belief that a new test would improve the condition of the labourer himself , and that it would teach him the happiness and pride of an independent position , that be had consented to the alteration in the law . " The "independent position" of the labourer of tho present day ( Cheers . ) I see in the House the Noble Lord , the Member for London ( Lord J . Russell ) , and I wish to bear to his face tho testimony which I have borne behind his back , that it was a manly way in which he adhered to the New Poor Law , previous to the last

      general election .- No doubt the Right Hon . Baronet at the head of the Government sits on that bench , placed there by the New-Poor-Law cry throughout the country . ( Hear , hear . ) Ay , it was-fanned into a blaze by the Conservative party at the last general election ( cheers ) , and fanned by the : Right Hon . Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department . ( Hear , hear . ) I have not forgotten reading the speech of that Right Hon . Baronet , and the First Lord of the Treasury when they abused the Poor Law Commissioners for their disgraceful -language , when they had declared ttiat the New Poor Law was to put a stop to alms-giving in this countiy , ( Cheers . ) The First Lord of the Treasury raised his hands , and appealed to Heaven if such language ought to have been used , ( Renewed cheers . ) But what said the Noble Lord the Member for London , when he saw

      these Right Hon . Gentlemen breaking the pledges which they had privately given , to' stand by the New Poor Law , which ever party was in power . On the motion of the Hon . Member for Sussex ( Mr . Darby ) to allow out-door relief to persons who had married before the passing of the Act , and had families , the Noble Lord ( Lord J . Russell ) said , 'he considered it to be at variance with every other clause in the New Poor Law Act . It was a renewal of the worst part of the old system—the allowance system . It would expose tho new law to universal relaxation , and would in that respect alone be productive of the most pernicious consequences . -It would create great dissatisfaction among the labourers , as it would divide them into two distinct classes , one of which would be entitled to relief out of the workhouse , and the other not , and that too witbonfc the slighlest reference either tft % m goodness or the worthlejsness of their

      House Of Commons, Monday, March 10. On T...

      character . By the cogency of such arguments , a bv the want of uniformity thus created in the systc oi * Poor Laws , the House would be compelled to bre down by degrees ail the efficiency of the present law Sir , the House has" by degrees broken down all t efficiency" of that law . The New Poor Law is dead letter ; there is not such a thing in existem ( Hear , hear . ) There is one law in the north , anoti law in the south , another in the east , and another the west . - There is one law earned out in one uni by Lord This , and another in the next ' uni by the Duke of That ; and the practice varies wi the extent to which the Commissioners have grou the guardians into submission . The whole law is 1 ' arce . ( Cheers . ) The Noble Lord ! the Chancellor

      the Duchy of Lancaster ( Lord G . Somerset ) , bean that speech of the Noble Member for London , jump up and " expressed his intention to support t clause . So far was he from being willing to cxtci the authority of the Commissioners , that he h ; every desire to abridge it ; for he would tell ti Noble Lord that he had no confidence whatever the Poor Law Commissioners . '' Cabinet Ministe within these walls have expressed themselv to be adverse to this law ; and I rememb being in this House , when there were eith eight or nine gentlemen sitting on tho . Treasu bench , who had either obtained 'their seats by violent abusing this law upon the hustings , or had spok < violently against it in this House . ( Hear , heai

      I ask the Right Hon . Baronet ( Sir J . Graham ) who ther Lord Althorp ' s solemn pledge has been kept that as a general rule a man was not to be separate * from his wife , or a child from its mother , nor pau pers to have their heads shaved , or be compelled t < wear badges ? And I Know that these indignitie and insults have done more to arouse the spirit o disloyalty and disaffection among the masses in thi country , than all other evils put together . ( Hear . Have you not continued the allowance system ? - You have ; in the north of England you have beei compelled to do it . You are enforcing the rule a . Bradford ; but the day will come when you will bit tcrly repent it ; and you are not enforcing it at Leeds a few miles off . ( Hear , hear . ) Well did the Nobh

      Lord ( Lord J . Russell ) say , that it would " crea great dissatisfaction among the labourers , " Is not disgusting , that « i law is now in force in Englan * which on one side of a brook treats the labourer wit apparent consideration , and on the other with inhi manity ? ( Hear , hear . ) But Lord Althorp assure the countiy , when he introduced the measure , tin wages would rise . What are the wages in the com try now ? Why , your labouring man in the agricu tural districts is well off if he obtain 7 s . a woefc Has the Poor Law raised wages , and redeemed tin p ledge ? ( Hear . ) But I come to more startlin facts . We were told that the New Poor Law was t eradicate poverty , and reduce tiie poor-rates ! I fin by a return I hold in my hand ( the Poor Law Con

      missioners' tenth report ) that the population of England and Wales in 1841 was 15 , 900 , 829 . And nowlet the House listen to the following returns , rcmemhcAng that 1 S 45 and 1843 hare been good years in tho manufacturing districts . The numbers relieved were—In 1 S 42 , in-door , 222 , 042 ; out-door , 1 , 204 , 5-io Total , 1 , 427 , 187 . The cost—Of the in-door , £ 934 , 158 j of the out-door , £ 3 , 090 , 884 . Tota , l , £ 4 , 025 , 042 In 1843—In-door , 238 , 560 ; out-door , 1 , 300 , 930 . Total , 1 , 539 , 490 . Cost—In-door , £ 958 , 057 ; out-door , £ 3 , 321 , 508 ^ Total , £ 4 , 279 , 505 . The increase of 1843 over 1844 being , in-door , 15 , 918 in number , and £ 23 , 899 in cost ; out-door , 90 , 385 in number , and £ 230 , 624 in cost . Total , 112 , 303 in number , and £ 254 , 523 in cost . Again , tho parochial rates levied were—In

      1834 , £ 3 , 338 , 079 ; in 1837 , £ 5 , 094 , 566 ; in 1843 , 7 , 086 , 595 ; showing an increase in 1843 over 1837 , ol £ 1 , 891 , 029 , and a decrease of 1843 as compared with 1834 , Ol £ 1 , 252 , 484 . There was expended in reliefin 1834 , £ 6 , 317 , 255 ; in 1837 , £ 4 , 044 , 741 ; in 1843 , £ 5 , 203 , 027 ; showing an increase in 1843 over 1837 of £ 1 , 163 , 286 , and a decrease of 1813 , as compared with 1834 , of £ 1 , 109 , 228 . I now wish to call the attention of the House to the expenditure of parochial rates otherwise than lor the relief of the poor . In 1834 the expenditure otherwise than for the relief of the poor was £ 2 , 020 , 714 : -, iu 1837 , it was £ 1 , 249 , 852 ; in 1843 , it was £ 1 , 877 , 568 , giving an increase of such expenditure in 1843 over 1837 of £ 627 , 716 . That is the result of yourattompt to save

      the poor-rates of this country ! Sir , I call the attention of the House to the price at which you have obtained this result . Lord Brougham , in moving the second reading of the Poor Law Amendment Bill in the House of Lords , gave a picture of the blessings which were to flow from this law . It would eradicate crime , it would put down poverty and pauperism , and prevent the Noble Lord himself from becoming a Cumberland pauper . What is now the state of crime in England and Wales ? I will read to the House an extract from tbe statistics compiled by Mr . Redgrave , from the records © f the llomc-oifice , where the Right Hon . Baronet may see them to-morrow if he pleases . I have extracted them from the British Almanack for 1845 ,

      of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge , Lord Brougham chairman of the committee . The amount of crime as evidenced by the commitments in 1 S 36 was 20 , 984 ; in 1837 it wa ' s 23 , 612 , * in 1 S 38 , 23 , 094 ; in 1839 , 24 , 443 ; in 1840 , 27 , 187 ; in 1841 , 27 , 760 ; in 1842 , 31 , 309 ; in 1843 , 29 , 591 . The result is , that the increase of crime in 1842 over 1836 is 10 , 835 , being years after the New Poor Law came into operation . The increase in 1343 over 1836 is 8 , 607 . 1 ask , has the New Poor Law diminished crime ? This is a startling result , and must enforce conviction . But is that all that has occurred under the operation of the law ? Why , instead of a decrease , there is a frightful increase of crime , so much so , that you arc obliged to have an

      extra winter assize to sweep oft from the face of the public the monstrous mass . At the last York winter assizes , last year , hear what Judge Coleridge said in his charge to the grand jury : — " Another cause for a winter assize , he lamented to say , must be considered to be the steadv increase of crime throughout the country , and in their own county , that increase , too , being not so much observable in crimes of a petty nature as in those of a more serious character . Within the last eight years the number of prisoners had nearly doubled in their own county ; and , though it was true that the population had increased , that the police were more efficient than formerly , and that capital punishment had in a great measure been removed , yet he did not think

      that it was possible , by the application of those facts , satisfactorily to explain away the great incubus which seemed to hang over them . " Here , then , we have tliis fact , that crime in the county of York has doubled during the last eight years . That is tho period at which the New Poor Law came into operation in Yorkshire , That is the result which the law which was to put a stop to crime has produced in my native county . Good God ! what can , the Right Hon . Baronet say in justification of that ? Have you one word to say ? _ You have rebellion in the north , you have incendiarism in the south , and rebellion again iu Wales staring you in the face ; and how are you to justify this to the people of Rochdale ? They will say that if in spite of all this you will persist in fAHAIMf , AM 41 . A . M f l , " o Ift . n . .. A .. ... Mt 1 A . _ .--. L , l ciu vino inn

      __ uremg i > " < " » , ruu will I 1 H , Y « 3 IQ laSO lUC same course as you adopted in Bradford ; you will have to draw the bayonet and cut down the populace ; but the feeling of the people of England , depend upon it , will be rai « ed against any attempt to force this law upon the people of Rochdale in the face of eveiy high principle , and in defiance of j ustice . The Right Hon . Baronet declared the other night that there are 1 , 500 , 000 paupers in England and \ Yales existing on the poor rates . The Right Hon . Baronet also declared the other night , that the agricultural labourers are in a state of poverty which we can no longer neglect , Sir , Lord Brougham said , in the speech to which I have alluded , that the time was when the English peasant dreaded the word '' pauper " next to the word "felon . " Sir ,-now the tune is come when the British peasant dies , exclaiming "No workhouse ^—

      "A gaol , a gaol for me . '" ( Hear , hear . ) I told you a short time ago that you had wrapped the south in Raines ; that you had produced a rebellion in the north ; that you had produced a rebellion in Wales ; but this is not all ; there is scarcely a week passes but the Hon . Gentleman opposite , as Coroner for Middlesex , has to hold an inquest on some poor victim of the system who has died of famine . That crime is steadil y on the increase you have the evidence of a judge on the bench ; and the extra winter assize which you have established shows that you admit that to be the case . I would quote the language of Lords Brougham and Grey in defence of the people of Rochdale , but that I am unwilling to detain tho House ; but if the House

      will permit me I will read to them from a speech of the . First Lord of the Treasury what he said on the attempts to introduce this law into well-regulated parishes . This was just'before a general election , when the Right Hon . Baronet was courting popular favour . On the 26 th of March , 1841 , the Right Hon ; Baronet said he had always thought that where there were immense masses of population well governed under local Acts , it would not be found expedient to place them under the control of the commissioners . That was just before the general election ; but now that he is firmly seated on the Treasury bench , with his majority at his back , what must he say te justify his present course ? Sir , he must eat his words . It will not be the first time he has done so . I will also read to tho House the opinion

      entertained of this law by Lord Chief Baron Pollocl who was an ornament to thia House whilst he wi in it , and now graces the bench on which he sits , hope , therefore , the House will allow me to repeat i them what Lord Chief Baron Pollock has said on th subject ; and I must say that he was a man whom a the inducements of the Government could not dr c up to the table to say a word in favour of this la-He said at the same time as the speech of the Risl Hon . Baronet , " Great complaints had been mac of tho Poor Law generally . " " A bill which raid be good for the north , might be injurious to thesont ! The evil which he and others complained of wag tl attempt made by the commissioners to introduce tl same law into every parish in the kingdom witho reference to local circumstances , which nyicht act modifying the operation of that law . " That was tl

      House Of Commons, Monday, March 10. On T...

      opinion of Sir F . Pollock .- You mmt ™ T 7 ~" have said to be incorrect ; if you ZfJT * what ' dorota introduce thu- kwinfo ChdS ; 5 ° v V " sown the wind and more than onwmSS I ^ ° " haTe the whirlwind . A foreigni fi » 2 » i ° ^ ^ P * appeal to the people of Engird Will T 0 " 11 you you ? At the Sidding of tl ^ l ^^ -gg lore rose in one mighty phalanx CI T bayonets ready to be t ° urned ^ ft , J ? g \^ h again to ti-jcm , and you will find them diaffn */ j disioyal .. ( "No no" ) You havomaft £ ^ 1 repeat , —appeal to them in your nerils , niu » -., find them disaffected and disloyal ! ^ t'fc jf tural labourers distressed ? What mdZ °$ iml ' but your tyranny ? Treat them m vour ° ll . fe ° did , and so raise them to what thev we e bo £ ^ introduction of the New Poor Law and a •' . ? return to their ancient nature ; thev will 0 B Jul and forgive , and be again a loyal peol Wll ) ^

      bir J . toUHAMSaid , that he had listened u-, * f i , « . , respect to the elaborate speech of Sf ^ gg but had not heard one novel argument in ti i ? had said that this question was a gciiei'll a ! 1 tionalquestion ; but he ( Sir J . Grahainlmih / ,- ^ that it was a purely local one ; that it ^'" ^ " ^ before the tribunals ; and that he must in conscn „ 7 n / meet the motion With the most decided nmS ; Mr . Crawford had asked him whether fiffj * an inquiry into the operation of the New i < J ° \ ' !"; at Rochdale . To that question he would reply tl T the Poor Law Commissioners had determined to troduce the New Poor Law into Rochdale . Thevh ' d power by law to carry that determination into effwr He did not enjoy any power to dispense with flm i . „ .

      and as a mandamus had been issued in conseouoiw of the opposition made by the guardians of \\ aZu to the orders of the Commissioners , as the "iiardiin had made a return to that mandamus , as the ' omwn had traversed that return , and as an issue had _ W joined which would be tried at Liverpool on ttu > 2 * rY * > of this month , he thought that it would be indecorous in him to order that inquiry which the Hon . Mnmlim called for At that late hour of . the night , SpeJ that the House would not expect him to follow L S . Crawford through , his elaborate argument , which he had met and refuted on several previous occasions Mr . Bright approved the attachment of the neouto of Rochdale to their local institutions , and their hos tility to the law administered hy the Poor Law Com " missioners . He thought it right to say this , althou-k he was one of those at Rochdale who had refusedlo sign the memorial to Sir J . Graham .

      Captain Pecheli , Colonel Sibthorp , General Johnson , Air . Borthwick , and Mr . Entwisle , briefly e * pressed their dislike of the New Poor Law , ' and their determination to support Mr . S . Crawford ' s motion . The House then divided , when there appeared—For the motion ... jg Againstit 5 . J ' Majority against it __^ The House then adjourned .

      Wkdxesdat , March 12 , Reports from Committees on Petitions for Private Bills were brought up , from which it appeared that in the cases of the petitions for the London and South-Western Railway ; the Lambeth ami flungeribrd Suspension Bridge ,- the Midland Railway ; the Man-Chester , Bury , and Rochdale Railway ; the Newcastle-upon-Tync and North-Shields Railway ; the Manchester , Leeds , and Hull Associated Railway ; and the London , Bedford , and Birmingham llailwav ' the standing orders had been complied with . — -Leave was then given to the petitioners to bring in the bills prayed for .

      The Blackburn and Preston Railway Bill , the Newark and Sheffield Railway Bill , the London and Greenwich Railway Bill , aud the York and North-Midland Railway Bill , were brought in and severally read a first time , and ordered to be read a second time . VEJfTiLATIO . Y Or COLLIERIES . Mr . _ T . Do . vcombe would beg to put a question to the Right Hon . Baronet the Home Secretary , bavin" ' reference to a petition which he had presented uot long ago , signed by 3 , 000 persons engaged in mines and collieries in the county of Durham , complaining of the want of ventilation in collieries , by whicli the security of human life was greatly endangered .

      Petitions to the same eftect had been presented from miners in other districts . It was weU known that , owing to want of sufficient ventilation , a dreadful explosion , accompanied by great loss of life , had not long ago taken place in Uaswell Colliery , with respect to which an inquiry was instituted by Government . What he now wanted to know was , whether it was the intention of Government to introduce any legislative measure with the view to a bettor system of ventilation of mines and to a greater security of the lives of those employed iu them ? and , failing any such intention , ho would ask whether Government would object to the appointment of a committee to take the subject into consideration ?

      Sir J . GiunAMsaid , that the case of tho Uaswell Colliery did appear to her Majesty ' s Government to require special investigation ; anilI two scientific gentlemen , Mr . FaradayandMr . Lycll , had been sent down to inquire into the cause of that accident . The Hon . Member was probably aware that they had made a report upon the subject , entering into great detail with reference to the cause , and also suggesting certain remedies to prevent the recurrence of such accidents . That report he ( Sir J . Graham ) had forwarded to the lord-lieutenant of each county in which any coal mines existed , requesting that it might be sent to the coalowncrs , with an intimation that anr

      information or suggestion from them would be gladly received by the Government . A report bad since been sent in from the coalowncrs of the Tyne , and Wear , stating several objections to the remedies suggested , and pointing out reasons why the plan would not be either practical or elficicnt . He ( Sir J . Graham ) had forwarded , that report to Messrs . Faraday and Lycll , requesting them to direct their attention to these points , and transmit their rcjoiuder to him . The attention of Government would bo directed to the subject ; and if the Hon . Member would repeat his question later in the session , ho ( Sir J . Graham ) should be happy to answer it . In the meantime the inquiry could not be iu better hands than those of the two gentlemen he had just

      named . Mr . Duncombe hoped that these documents would be laid on the table . Sir J . Graham intimated that there would be no objection to that course . Mr . Mackinnox moved the second reading of the Smoke Prohibition Bill . Several gentlemen , however , expressed their dissent from its proposed enactment , and at the suggestion of Lord Lincoln the motion was deferred until Wednesday , the 2 nd of April next . The Chancellor of the Exchequer thou moved the third reading of the Property Tax Bill .

      Mr . Wakley . referred to the caae of Mr . FioWcn , which had been mentioned on a former night by Mr . Hawes . He had since received a letter from Mr . Fielden , stating that , though in a former year , when he had made no profits , the Commissioners had assessed his income at £ 12 , 000 , and had compelled him , by distress , to pay the per centage upon that sum , they had assessed him this vear at double the former sum , viz ., at £ 2 i , 000 , Mr . Fielden appealed against that assessment in November last , and sent in to the Commissioners a written statement , showing that his firm had sustained a loss on an average of the laat three years . The Convmiss ' vonevs then desired Mr . Fielden to let the case stand over till Easter , but they had since demanded from Mr . Fielden payment of half the tax on the £ 24 , 000 . He hoped that the Government would take measures to prevent the recurrence of such a proceeding in future .

      Ihe Chancellor of the Exchequer could not explain how this case had arisen , but suggested that if Mr . bidden had brought his appeal before the Commissioners at Somerset-house , he might nave corrected the error of the local Commissioners , if error had been committed . The bill was then read a third time . The Sugar Duties Bill and the Customs Export Dunes Bill were both read a second time , and tho first was ordered to bo committed on Friday next . Sir J , Graham then moved tlie second reading . of the Justices' Clerks and Clerks of the Peace Bill . He said the objections which had been made to the bill were rather to its details than to its nrin .

      cipies ; but the two were so blended that they could scarcely be separated . Now , this was the occasion for discussing the principles of the bill , and the chief one was , that justice was better adminis . tered by public sen-ants receiving salaries than br public sen-ants receiving fees . He then proceeded to show that the ends of justice would be better answered , and the interests of the rate-payera would be better advanced , by the details oftbibfflTan they were ^ by the law at present . Astotho S 3 which it had been suggested , would arise fromthJ magistrates having no longer any power to remit thn iulu uui

      Ca wu uarueg were liable who came before them , because those fees were to be carried in fiS to the county stock , he had only- faServe * fe had no objection to consider in committee < i ™ Z £ t on for giving the magistrates Cpower 0 frS " tug such fees . The bifi would not oecLfon anv ad ditional expense to the counties : but even if it did it would be better . that such were the ca \ e tbS that the monstrous injustice should con « _ S && ing fees frorn . innocent persons unjusUy ^ ffif Sg « L their dl 8 Charge from itoiTSS : i p Ate a few word , from Mr . Turner and Captain ( Continued in our first page . )

      _ Ouwji Printed By Dotoal M'Gowait Of 17 _ . _ , Kj'ssti^Wssws

      _ ouwji Printed by DOTOAL M'GOWAIT of 17 _ . _ , KJ'SSti ^ WSSWS

      T „_„ „„„ D Anm Rarigk . For Tk» P™. Pne...

      T „_„ „„„ anm rarigk . for tk » p ™ . pnetor , FEARGUS O'CONNOB , Es « * L * Zvvl ^ - street , WaWh , in the Parish of St . MarV £ S _ £ J ??» ° T . ? r * " * S 2 K ! Kw ^!^ -fc , ta ^ -- ^ Saturday , March 15 . isa

  • Citation
    • Northern Star (1837-1852), March 15, 1845, page 8, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns2_15031845/page/8/