Hide Articles List

12 articles on this Page

PO ETR Y. ..

[No title]

[No title]

IDREADFUL FI Ii C AT U'YlVAKD…

[No title]

1/1 YK THINGS IN FEW WORDS.…

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. .0.

News
Cite
Share

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. .0. HOUSE OF COMMONS,—THURSDAY, FKB. 18. Petitions were presented from the borough of t'restoti, aiati ttie coutity of Surrey against the New Poor Law fJj I, an,1 Mr PARKER gave notice, that on the motion for I committee on the bill, he should move that it be com- mitted that d-iy six months. Sir F. BLIRDETr withdrew his motion for the erection of a monument to Sir Sidney Smith, thinking that the matter had better b left iu the hands of the government. Mr HUME gave notice of a motion respecting the atfairs of Syiia, and for a return of the number ol postmasters of England. Mr PAKINGTON put a question respecting cer- rain ordinances of the Goyernnr of the Canada*, which Lord J. Russell had no objection to have printed oi moved fill. In answer to Sir R. Peel, Lord J. KUSSELLsaid that some delay bad taken place wilh respect to the proclan.atiun of the Union of ;lie Canadas. The members of the General Election Committee were sworn, and the petitions against the returns for Canterbury, St. Alban's, and Walsall, were ordered fn be referred to i lietio. L»rd ELIOT moved an address, praying thai her Maje»'y wnu'd direct information 10 be given whether any and what measures had been taken for eff'Tting a recoinrtiendatinn made by the Adiiiiralt 's Commissi m of 1939, in favour Mr Hail'ik's invention for the protection of shi,.s from lightning. Tlie nnb'e 101'11 Cllmj'lilillen Ihat Ihl' An'l1irally. ins'elfi of rewarding Mi H ri is, whose plan was so highly estimated by iii(,ir o",n %vei-t! iryiik,,r new experiments, suggested hy other projectors. The adoption of Mr Harris's plan would, indeed occasion some expense—about £300 to a line of ba'tle ship costing £ 10I,()OJ; but such a percentage on such a sum was not lobe set against the lives and feelings of her Majesty's sailors. Other public services had been liberally rewarded, and none were more deserving tlH1I1 those of Mr Harris. I. M. O'FERRALL said he would not oppose the motion, and gave some credit to Mr f-hrris;- but he thought that £ 7.000, the sum claiaied was too larp and held it to he the duty of the Admiralty to try whether the same bCIIPfjls could not b e, obtained at a cheaper ra'e. Another plan more effective had been tried, which would cost but X'6'2. The whole amount yearly allowed to the Adrnirallv for rewauU was only £ 2,000 "1111 Mr Harris's claim -0 tl(1 exceed the whole of that allowance. Lord I.N'GESTRIE suspected that theiemust he some po itical under <urrent against Mr Harris at the Admiralty, or the hoard would not suffer the continuance of so great a danger to the navy. Mr WARRl'RTOX advocated Mr Hari is's inven- tion on scientific grounds. The excuse that fresh plans were under iiiii might be urged agiiust any inven ion however meritorious. Let those fresh plans he referred back to the same commission. Sir R. PEEL said he had himself suggested the commission, and th it when subject had once been committed to them, the Admiralty, who had nomi- nated them, ought not to have taken the fresh experiments into their own hands. He w ould reserve himself as to the question of compensation, though some reward would he fairly due to the inventor, if the plan should be generally adopted and generally sncce«-fiil. Sir T. COCHRANE supported the motion, and Sir R. in the eneral concurrence. Sir C. LEMON comp'aiued of the backwardness here evinced by his friends, the ministers, who had come forward so liberally oil other occasions and Captain .(-'OUlt'l' took the ;trvv- sid". The viev- of the preceding speaker* were briefly opposed by Sir C. ADAM. Mr Harris's conductor, he sa d, ltit,l ii(it a! first discharged the electric fluid oil the outside of ihe vessel, but ill it- body. Other persons had effected i-npvovements, which were now under trial, lie would not say that .Mr Harris's invention devrved nothing, hut it did not think it deserved what Mr Harris asked. He repelled the imputation of a poli ical under current ind»cd he knew not, till file charge then made, what Mr Harris's poli-ics wpre. After a few words from Mr Collier, Lord Sandon, anti Mr More O'Ferrall, Lord ELIOT replied. He said that Mr Harris had not asked for t7,000, but had merely stated that to be the sum wlpch he had laid out on the invention. And the noble lord quoted the testimony of Professor Faraday, who expressed his su pise that gov,rnmeril should so have neglected a matter of this great im- portance to the safety III the navy. The motion wiq then carried without a division. Mr PAKINGTON ssked leave to bring in a bill for the regulation of election., and other inci- devits of the la-m connected with county coroners. He d«*ireil to limit the election to s single dav, and the franchise to the registered freeholders of the Reform Rill. Mr HUM E %vou',l not oppose the introduction of the bill, but would resist the attempt to narrow the franchise Mr Sergeant JACKSON wished the bill to be ex- tended to Ireland, where the expense and the fraud of the present system was severely felt. Mr W.-IRIIUR ION hoped that the proposal for narrowing the franchise would, on the second read- ing. meet a doirged resistance from the house. Air PAKINGTON was surpiised at therpsistanoe of the to a measure founded on the hais of the Heform Act. Leave was given to introduce the bill. Mr J. STUART asked leave to bring in a bill for removing ihe i eressity of leases for a year precedent to releases of freeholds. Mr EWAR'I' seconded the motion, and leave was granted accordingly. The Constabulary Bill having been read a second tiiiie w itiout ol)l)osijioit, Lord Ke;ttie'i ;%iinuiti. Bill was proposed for a second reaiiing upon which Mr HUME expressed his opinion that the reward was overprfipor,iocied to the service, and desired a statement of Lord Keaue's services. He would, however, re«erve any further observation or oppo- sition until the committee. The bill was then read a second time. Mr WALLACE moved for vaiious returns rela- :o the post office; after which the House adjourned. #"# } HOUSE OF LORDS,—FRIDAY, FEB. 19. Their lordships resumed business for the first time since the trial of Lord Cardigan, The Earl of SHAFTESBURY moved that the Lord Speaker do issue his order for file publication, with the ord rs of the house, of the proceedings connected villi the trial of the Ear of Cardigan. The Earl of r,.I.I)ON made a few reniatks upon what had fallen from the learned Attorney General on addressing the House, ?nd said that he thought that his regard for the fee'ings of the members of this house had carried h in a little too far in saying that there was no moral turpitude in the offence with which he was charged (liearj. He gave the karued a gentleman credit for his motives in saying what he had said, but lie could not help thinking that he had gone a little too far. The Bishop of LONDON agreed with the noble earl in thinking that the Attorney General had gone too far, in saying what he had said; and, for his (the Bishop of London's) part, he could not help regretting the prevalence of those remains of the age of chivalry, which countenanced the barbarous and unchristianliko practice of duelling, which he trusted would not much longer be tolerated by society. The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL also condemned the practice of duelling, and thought it was high time that it should be put an end to. Lord REDESDALE said, that it had been held that spiritua1 peers could not sit in judgment upon a temporal p er. Lùd SHAFTESBURY said, it was customary for the spiritual peers to retire, not upon any inter- locutory proceeding, but immediately before the return of the verdict. Lord MOUNTCASHEL said, that something more than a trial like that of the Earl of Cardigan was necessary to put down duelling, and without some alteration in the law, such a trial was a mere mockery (hi ar, hear). He had seen in the public papers yesterday that another duel had taken place, and if the Act of Victoria was to be of effect, those persons ought to be taken into custody at once Something must be done to put all end to the prac- tice (hear, hear). He was of opinion ihat it was the duty of her Majesty's Minis'ers to bring forward n measure to nivet the difficulties of the case and h,' would cOllclulJehy askingaquestiou of her Majesty's Ministers, whether it was their intention to intro- duce any bill for the prevention of duelling (hear, lirar). Lord MELBOURNE said he was quite awoIrl" 01 theevitsattendinythc practice of duel ing; but he could not say that Ministers intended to bring for- ward any measure on the subject, which lie was of opinion was d very difficult one to legislate upon. The Ead of (TLIGALL wished to know whe- ther it was the intention of hei Majesty's Govern- meut to introduce any alteration in the Irish Poor Law Act ? The Marquess of NORM AN BY said he coold uot say that it was the iutention to make any alter- ation in the laws; but an exl,erillielit was about to ue made in the election of the returtiiiig oiffcers, fiom which improvements were expected. HOUSE OF COMMONS,—FmuAY.Fra 19 The Speaker took the chair a few minutes before fOllr o'clock.-A IIlImller of roid and other priva'c bills were forwarded a sia,e. -Several petitions were presented. Notice of motion \.ere ¡rill'n bv:\tr Åill'ol'lla of a c titise io exempt the Bolton Union from the operation of the New Poor Law Kill; bv Mr Gi. borne, for the repeal of some cl mses in the Reform Ril', and also adding a proviso to clause 60; by Mr Grimsditch, to substitute certain clauses in the Reform Bill relate to the size of the unions; by Mr Hodges, exempting rated inhabitants from cer- tain o,e a ions of the same hill by Mr Ewarl, for a bill to estab'ish a public system (f prosecution of criminals in England and Wales. Some returns were then ordered, and an order of F,-h. 12 (hy Nit- M les), on the Medical Profession Bi'l, «as dis- charged oil the motion of that ho«. gentleman Tlie order of the day for ihr» second reading of the Registration of Voters (England) Hill having been read, and the motion for its second reading having been read, Sir E, SUGDEN declared that his side of the House was as anxious as the other could be, to amend those parts of the measure which required revision and correction. Mr GISBORNE, in support of the bill, referred io in-tanrcs of inconsistent decisions by revising barristers the judge on one side of a passage adriiitiiiiz ttie votes which his brother judge on the other side of th" passage was t eject inc. I Mr WARMURTON considered it to have been a point admitted so long since a 1938, that Ihe insli. tutioiiof revising barri«;er« was a bad one. lie would not enter into details, which would be dis- cussed in committee. Mr HUME -aid there was a simple way of ter- minating all difficulties, by giving iu this bill, as in the Irish bill, a definition of the franchise. He did not see why the two countries should lv ditf- reol'v dealt with in this parricllhlr.-(Th's hlHllf"y rl"m:I' k, coining from such a qu inter, was much cheered.) Mr It. ALSTON thought it vry Ilcsirahle to I preclude for the futuie the conflict of decisions among revising harristers. Colonel 8IHTIIORPE wished to know what salaries would be ? Lord J. RUSSELL answered, that this would be staled in the committee. At present he would say o,i'y, that th,,i c be a oil the %vh,e of JT15,000 or j^l(i,0'j0 a-year. He had omitted the taxes, which he thought it inconvenient to insist upon in the franchise, but he bad colt-inued to require the rates, which he 'bought a sufficient safe- guard. As to the definition of the franchise, that might be done by a separate bill. The case was not like that of the II ish registration, for there almost all the difficulties of registry arose Irolll the state of the county franchise. Gentlemen opposite had been very emphatic in cheering Mr Hume's proposal for uniformity between Fugland and ire- land did they wish to abolillh the franchise of the 40s freeholders in England, or to bestow that 40s franchise upon lieland The bill was then read a second time. On the order of the day for the Committee of Supply, Lord PALMHRSTON, in answer to a question from Sir R. Peel respecting the Boundary Quest on, stated that commissioners for obtaining local inform- ution had been sent out respectively by England and by the United States, but without concert. It was intended that a joint commission should be consti- tuted, but the details were stiil under discussion. Sir R, PEEL asked whether the Amei ican Gu- vernment had tiettiiiliy a,i-ee(i that :here should be a joint commission ? Lord PALMEKSTON said that both governments h-id agreed to the principle, with a proviso for an arbitration in case of ditfeieuce. lu answer to Mr Hawcj, Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was intended to introduce into the other House a measure for a reform of the Ecclesiastical Courts, and particularly as regarded Church Rates. Mr HUME's motion for a return "f the services of Lord Keaue was agreed to; and the House ad- journed to Monday. HOUSE OF LORDS,—MONDAY, FEB 22. Lord VVIIARNCLIFFE asked if any r-conl of the speech of the Lord Ilig-h Steward would appear in tijo proceedings, which their lordships had ordered to be published, of the trial of the Earl of Cardigan. The Earl of Sll A FTESUU ItY said ho would make the ne -ess irv inquiries on the subject. Lord WHARNCLIFFE then gave notice that immediately after the holidays he would bring ins bill to clear up all doubts as to a peer pleading his privi- lege in cam* of conviction for felony. Ho thought that, after what had been said on the mnttw^ such a measure was due to their lor,lsliilys' rel)utttioti. The Earl of RI PON concluded a very elaborate nnd able speech, by submitting his promised motion for a copy of the correspondence that had taken between her Majesty's government and the Court of Teheran, in reference to the suspension of our relations with Persia. Viscount MELBOURNE did not oppose the pro- duction of the papers. Ilis lordship made an expla- | nation similar to that recently given iu the Commons by Lord Palmerston, that, iiitior differences having been arranged,the cession by Persia of a fort rl's ill the Herat district was the only point on which the two governments were now at issue. The Bishop of EXE TER intimated that he would next day, on presenting a petition of which he hall given notice, ask of Lord Melbourne to account for the delay that had taken place in the I-riiitin; of cer- tain ordinances by the Governor of Canada, that ought, as the right rev. prelate tilleged, to have been laid on the table several days ago. Their lordships then adjourned. II. HOUSE OF COMMONS,—MONDAY, FEB 22 Mr FITZ WILLI AM took the oaths and his seat as member for Richmond. Many petitions were presented for and against the rival Irish Registration Bills. The most considerable in number of signatures were one from Belfast, pre- sented by Lord Stanley, signed by 86,000 persons, and one from Liverpool by Lord Sandon, signed by 27,000 persons, bolh prayillg the House to pass Lord Stanley's bill. In answer to a question by Mr Milnes, Lord PALMERSTON said that Colonel Stod.lart was still suffering imprisonment at Bokhara, hut that government was using every exertion to procure his release. Captain HAMILTON gave notice that on Wed- nesday lie would ask the noble Secretary for the Colonics a question respecting the course pursued by the Assistant Poor Law commissioners, in taking evidence of witnesses in private. Mr LAHOUCIIERE gave notice that oil the 8th of March he would move that the House resolve itself into committee upon the customs duties of the produce of the West Indies and our North American colonies. Ser E. KNATCHBULL moved for an account of a))sums of money paid to the Poor Law Commis- sioners in the years 1836, IS37, 183S, 1839, and 1810; and also an account of sill suits to which the Poor Law Commissioners were parties, the costs incurred, and the results of such suits. Viscount MAHON wished to know what progress had been made in the negociation with foreign coun- tries respecting the international copyright law? Lord PALMERSTON said that propositions had been madp. to the government of France, the United States, the Germanic Confederation, Saxony, and Prussia, but not one of these effor's had led to any satisfactory result. Lord ELIoT inquired of Lord Palmerston whe- ther he was aware of a document lately published in a newspaper, purporting to be a communication from tho Austrian Minister to the Diet of Switzerland respecting the suppression of certain convents in the latter country. Lord PALMERSTON would not undertake to pledgo himself to the accuracy of any documents which might appear in a newspaper, but lie had reason to be- lieve that a note had passed between the authorities named by the noble lord. The debate on the second reading of tho Govern- ment Registration Bill for Ireland Was begulI by Lord STANLEY. After a few observations upon the authority to give costs on appeal, and upon the claue making certificates conclusive evidence for certain purposes, Lord Stanley passed on from the registry provisions to the new feature, the new tack now added to the bill. This was a repetition of the trick of the appropriation clause,which these same ministers tacked to the Irish Tithe Hill for the purpose of displacing Sir R. Peel. They had hcen obliged at last to abandon that tack, alld had themselves, as ministers. carried the Tithe Bill without it; and lie trusted that the sanl" n'sult would attend their Registration Bill. He had brought in his own Registration Bill last year I on learning from the government that they (who in several preceding sessions had introduced registration bills of their own) did not contemplate the iiitrodue- tio" of ally sucli measure then. But, after his bill had been sanctioned by the house, the ministers, in order to defeat, it" had now come forward with a bid of their own, containing a delinal ion of the franchise. Was a definition of the franchise their present object ? Instead of defining the franchise, their bill went wholly to change it. He knew not how long Lord Morpeth had entertained this view. Oil a motion of Mr O'Connell, in I SSO, for an exteitsioi) of the frrlllchise, Lord Morpeth had opposed that member. A similar declaration bad been repeated by Lord Morpeth in 1810, and now, in ISJ-I, that declaration was vvholli repudiated Nlr I)ropos;tl had been ti lower the franchise both in Ireland and in England Ifgovernment now thought that enactment an unjust one, which at the time, of the Relief Bill excluded tin 40s freeholders, whv was not tii.it boldly avowed? BUI the leascholders now proposed to be let in were a class of people far lower and far more liable to influence than those excluded frceho'ders, a class verv much lower than the lowest voters for the English counties; and ho would be glad to know whether the English counties were to be treated in the same way There were disputable questions upon the requisite value, and the remedy- proposed was, to require no value at all. He could not understand the ground oi. whidl asmall millority of the Irish judges h id raised doubt about the construction of the beneficial interest; ,-iii(i in order to elucidate the argument in favour 01 the solvent tenant" test, he cited passages from the statutes in part materia for England and Scotland, and from speeches made by Mr O'Connell while the Reform Bill was in discussion; particularly some which exposed the absurdity of basing a man's fran chise, as was now proposed, uot on the profit which he received, but on the rent which he hid to pav. II the value of the property fell, the ratepayer would not lose his franchise; the candidate would take car., to keep him still on the register,and get the rate paid for him—thus buying votes by wholesale, at sixpence a year per vote. The landowners iu Ireland were nearly twice as numerous as in England, though hey occupied an area of land amounting toon y about two-fifths of the Kuglish area; and about live-sixths of ail the Irish holders cul'ii ated their land withou' the employment of labourers, simply bv the work ol tll"m,I\'(' alld their families. The number of en- franchised leaseholders was diminishing a'so, from the indisposition of the landlords to renew leases. In England it was otherwise; the legitimate influence of the. landlord was still prevalent. At the time of the Reform Bill, he had calculated the county constituency of Ireland at 52,000. Mr O'Connell at that tune had fixed his utmost wislies it f)0,1)00. Last year's return showed it to be 09,127- The borough constituencies exhibited a similar result His last objection would be, that even if ad other arguments were cleared away, the t5 proposed was too small all amount. In England and iu Scotland, and, for municipal purposes, in Ireland too, the household qualification was £ 10. Why was it to be made £ 5 for the Irish Parliamen- tary franchise? Every poor labourer, with a mud cottage and ail acre or t wo of land, would be rated at £ 5; and you wou'd have a class of voters greatly below the common race of day labour *rs ill Kngland. If this bill could be carried for Ireland, it would be impossible to abstain from applying its principle to England and Scotland also. The next cry would be. "justice to Government would be bound to tell lie House in this debate what their intention with respect to EIIlalld was. Lord Murrelll lIIight the redress of abuses a little loti,-er-ii(, iniglit again excite anil unsettle a part of the public--he might again throw the elements of discord, as Lord John Russell had said, into the political cauldron— but he trusted that the House would resist this measure,and he was assured that in that resistance they would be supported by the peoplt: of England. He mover) that the bill be read a second time on that day six months. Mr C. WOOD desired to record his approval of the bill, and of the course pursued by the govern- ment. There, was no very wide difference as to the registration remedies between Lord Stanley's Bill and Lord Morpeth's; but the latter was objected to, for that which was really its great itterit, that it removed the whole evil, that of the franchise, as well as that of the registration. Mr LIT I ON said, he opposed the bill, as being a repeal of the Reform Act. lie gave a succinct history of the former proceedings of aoveriiment respecting registration, into none of which had they thought it allowable to introduce a proposal like that of the. £ 5 rating. But they now avowed that they would not consent to part with fraud and perjury in tiie registrations, unless they got a quid pro quo for ves. Mr FlTZPATRICK was favourable to the second reading. Mr LUCAS explained the views by which ho had been actuated last year, in advancing the principle of rating a a test for franchise. His view had been that the party shou'd be rated for CS os over and above his rent. Lord MORPETH began by retorting on Lord Stanley the charge of excitement and disturbance. Lord Stanley had said tho rating clause was but a tack alld a postciipt; for himself, he regarded it a the preface, nay, as part of the text itself, a main part too, and one without which the rest would have no chance of being brought to a satisfactory issuo. Ministeis wire twitted with an excessive partiality for Ireland; tint it should be remembered that there the 40s freeholders could not vote. The 40, frae- hltldou were rlifranehi".r1 at the time of the Bill, to the amount of 191,000 voters. Ho insisted on the authority of Mr Lucas and Sir D. J. Norrrys, as favourab'e to the principle of the rating test: and as to the amount, that question was for the committee. He should rather have waited till the t'xpprilllpllt of the Poor Law had been further ripened but Lord Stanley's legislation had forced ministers forward. It had become quite necessary to take some step; for almost all the litigation, whether in the registration courts or before committees of this House, now turned upon this one question of value; and til. Irish bench themselves were divided in opinion. Lord Stitiley' iiiii, w)ji'e it would tli-ive away dis- honest claimants, would be still more likely to drive away quiet well meaning persons. The Poor Law rating, on the contrary, combined most of the advan- tages of a test though certainly it would not be an exact measure for each parlicularcasc The question of amouiit iiiort, properly to the committee than to the second reading; but he would not shrink from (letliiig with it flow. Ministers, on looking into the fncts, were satisfi('d that even It £'J \let ratinj{ would exclude many voters of the kind which the Reforan Bill meant to admit, and they considered that by fixing the amount at;t £ 5 gross rating they were adopting a liocral test, Ollt not an inordinate one The document which Lord Si anley had relied on, as showing a eontiuuetiey of 9 LOO J voters, had been made out before the registration of last autumn, at. which time all franchises registered in 183"i would have expired, unless previously renewed; hut, at all events, there would soon be a fresh return, giving the numbers now actually in existence. Towns as well as counties were included in this arrangement, for it was desirable to take the opportunity of set- tling the whole subject at the same time. lie vindi- cated the provision for quarterly registration, and the restriction upon appeals touching matter of fact. He trusted that the I lotise, if, choosing between the two bills before them, would act in the spirit of tie Re- form Bill-that they would shut out the many dilfi culties devised by Lord Stanley against the honest voter, and that they would rather adopt a measure conciliatory to the great body of our Irisii fellow sub- jects. lie alluded mysteriously to the state of our foreign relations, as an inducement for keeping 'lie Irish in good humour, and concluded with a perora- tion about the repeal o! the union. The debate was then tdjotiriied tiyitil iiext day.

¡LOSS OF OVE HUNDRED AND TWENTV…

[No title]

CORN I'RAUK. 1 o

ON SECURING SKED-CROPS, &c,…

[No title]