r\ 



July !3j 



THE NEWSPAPER 





iaj ce-ia-rtilj^>y proprietors, was calculated to be eminently 



beneficial to Ihftfcg reat portion oi the community who have not 



PjfifigJJfbcW- benefits.— Mr. F. Bamno did think that at 



£$f the session m Important a measure should he 



Iwy were not justified, except on actual necessity, 

 ^Jth private speculations; but when the neces- 

 ould justify interference with existing: as well 

 l*7ys. But the Bill would not prevent the evils it 

 to be intended tocure.--lt being: past twelve o'clock 

 an adjournment of the debate was moved, which, being 

 opposed, a division took place, when it was rejected by 1/5 to 

 53.— Mr. Hindi, kv then addressed the House against the Bill, 

 when the adjournment was again moved.— Sir R. Pslkl regret- 

 ted that the minority did not defer to so large a majority, and 

 come to a decision on the second reading of the Bill. How- 

 ever, after some conversation, the adjournment was agreed to. 

 Tuesday.— The House met at 12 o'clock, and the Solicitor- 

 General moved the second reading of the Sudbury Disfran- 

 chisement bill. A petition was presented from the Mayor, 

 Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough, praying to be heard 

 by counsel against the Bill, which, on the motion of Mr. Black- 

 stoxk, was conceded.— Mr. Hill, Q.C., having then addressed 

 the House, the SoLiciTOR-Cit-VKnAL contended, despite what 

 had been advanced by Counsel, that the majority of the electors 

 of Sudbury had been proved to be tainted with bribery, and 

 that no grounds had been shown to warrant the House in 

 arresting the progress of the Bill.- Mr. Blackstovk said, 

 although he would not oppose the second reading, that when 

 the House went into committee on the Bill, it was his intention 

 to move thaf, instead of disfranchising Sudbury, the right of 

 roting should be extended to the adjacent hundred. This had 

 been the course pursued with respect to East Retford, to which 

 the hundred of Bas^ellaw had been added. If he should be 

 unsuccessful in this, \t was his intention to take the sense of 

 the House on the principle of the Bill, upon the third reading. 

 — Mr. I). Brownk thought that there were other borough 

 besides Sudbury, which ought to be disfranchised; and that, 

 when the franchise was taken from a corrupt place, it ought to 

 be given t > sonic populous town, in order to maintain the 

 balance of representation. — Mr. W. Wvnv recollected no 

 borough which had exhibited more systematic bribery and 

 corruption than Sudbury. The Bill was then read a second time, 

 and the House at three o'clock adjourned till five.— At the five 

 o'clock meeting Mr. CflRItTfl brought on the subject of the 

 Danish claims and was supported by Mr. Hl-.uk, Colonel Sib- 

 thorp, Mr. Hawks, Sir C Napikr, and Mr. Mi/ntz. — The 

 CiiAN( KLi.ost of the Exchkqubr and Sir It. Pebl both con- 

 tended against the validity of the claims, and expressed the 

 determination of the Government, backed as they were by 

 legal opinion, to resist them.— On a division Mr. Christie's 

 motion was rejected by 7*2 to 68.— Mr. Liddkll moved for a 

 select committee to inquire into the practice of dog-stealing, 

 and into the best means of checking the evil. He stated that 

 in the last and i resent years the money paid in this metropolis 

 for the restoration of stolen dogs under a compromise amounted 

 to 970'-i collected by an organised gang of dog-stealers. — Sir J. 

 Graham adm.tted that the crime of dog-stealing was very pre- 

 valent, ar.d ought to be checked, and he should not therefore 

 resist the motion, especially considering that we were in the 

 month of July. — The appointment of the committee was agreed 

 to. — Mr. Hi me moved for an address to the Crown, praying 

 that the Royal Academy may be rendered more conducive to 

 the advance Blent of the Fine Arts, better suited to the spirit and 

 circun.stanccs of the present age, and more consonant with 

 the original intention of its royal founder, George III. — While 

 he was speaking the House was counted out. 



Wednesday. — The House met at twelve o'clock, and, in 

 addition to tne routine business, devoted till five o'clock to the 

 consideration in committee of the two Joint-Stock Companies 

 Bills.— Some desultory conversation took place on thecounting 

 out of the House on the previous night, and on the arrange- 

 ments for securing judgment in the House of Lords, in the 

 IVCoimell Writ of trior, dur'.ng the present session. The 

 Chakcsllor of the Excbjeqi/CR said, that Government would 

 offer no impediment to the immediate delivery cf judgment. — 

 Mr. Cow per moved the second reading of the Field Gardens 

 Bill, the object of which was to afford employment and amuse- 

 ment to the working classes; to give them the means of inno- 

 cent recreation, of which, in some sort, all men stood in need. 

 He was in hopes, too, that such allotments as he proposed 

 would be the means of identifying the owner of the soil in 

 interest with the occupier. The hon. gentleman read portions 

 of the evidence taken before the allotment committee, to show 

 the change of sentiment woiked in the minds of the operatives 

 by becoming possessed of land, and their consequent content- 

 ment; that the Chartist no longer speculated on the visionary 

 scheme of having the whole land cut up into small parcels, 

 when under this system he enjoyed the very advantages held 

 out in prospectu, and that with a moderate rent the owner was 

 often able to clear &L a year on a quarter of an acre. This 

 evidence lully proved that great advantages must accrue from 

 the adoption of this system, and that there were no counter- 

 vailing disadvantages. This Bill enacted that all the powers 

 heretofore conferred on churchwardens and overseers should 

 be transferred to a new board cal.ed the Garden Board, and 

 their power of purchasing land was alone excepted. There 

 was a limit placed to the amount of land to be appropriated 

 —the average would be about a quarter of an acre for each 

 individual. The adoption of this body by any locality was 

 quite discretionary. It was intended that the benefits of 

 the system should be conferred on those only who were rated 

 below 10/. a year. The board was to consist of five persons : 

 two elected by those rated above 10/., two by those rated 

 below 10/., and the officiating clergymen. Those who were to 

 be benefited by the Bill had thus a direct control over the act- 

 ing body, and it was to be hoped they would elect such persons 



d 

 to 



as would take a strong interest in its proceedings. The perio 

 of their election was for three years. They were authorised t_ 

 take from the poor-rate the necessary amount for rating land, 

 there being inserted in the Bill a compulsory clause for repay, 

 ment. They were entitled also to get leases from the commis- 

 sioners, who had the controlling power over commons. He 

 should not care how much his Bill was changed, provided it 

 reached its object— the giving of a piece of land to those able 

 and desirous of cultivating it. His only object was the benefit 

 of the poorer classes, wnose interests, in proportion as they 

 wer represented in that House, should be the more carefully 

 looked alter. The legislation ot the present session held out no 

 prospect of any measure being passed for their benefit, when it 



*««?" the , y were su *fc«n* from great poverty. The in- 

 oflabn«r P° pt J u J ,on » an<1 the competition in every department 



tin. ^ ****** aml to lower wages ' but ir 



Fecamp ? proportion as the wealth of the country 



fires in the eastern counties, and by the opinions broached by 

 the poorer classes through many parts of the count rv He 

 hoped he should be allowed to read his Bill a sec fnl 1 'time 

 --Mr. S. Crawford seconded the motion, and ur 1h 

 is cordial appioval of the BUI, in which he recopnhed the 

 means of carrying out the recommendations of a committee 

 on the allotment system, whose report, although made in 

 1839, had uniil now been a dead letter. There were two essen- 

 tials to the proper working of the proposed system— one 

 hat the rents should be moderate, and the other, that the 

 labour applied should be as skilful as possible, The unhappy 



condition of the small holders in Ireland illustrated this. 

 Schools should be established for teaching proper modes of cul- 

 tivation, such as that established by a benevolent lady at East- 

 bourne, in the county of Sussex. The land of England was not 

 half cultivated; if it were, it would give food and employment 

 to the whole population. He highly approved of the general 

 object of the Bill. He did not understand, however, why there 

 should be a limitation of 1 -20th as to the newly-inclosed lands 

 for the purposes of this Bill. His view was, that not a particle of 

 common rights should be given up, except for the purpose of 

 providing the poor with land. He did not think it desirable 

 that the land allotted should be limited to a quarter of an acre. 

 He did not think that less than an acre was desirable. He was 

 still, however, willing to accept a smaller portion, provided the 

 employment was ample. If the Corn-laws were repealed to- 

 morrow, continuous employment in manufactures was impos- 

 sible. It was absolutely necessary, therefore, that both the 

 agricultural and manufacturing poor should be allotted some 

 small portion of land, to save them from destitution.— Mr. Fer- 

 rano thanked Mr. Cowper for his Bill. The system was car- 

 ried into effect to some extent in the north, and to render it 

 more efficient, it was only requisite to appoint some such 

 responsible body as that proposed. He hoped Government 

 would allow the Bill to become the law of the land.— 

 Mr. Escott was of opinion that the present allotment 

 system, which was voluntary in its nature, had worked 

 well, and to this conclusion the evidence taken before the 

 committee on allotments led. He was alarmed at the con- 

 sequences which might follow from giving a compulsory 

 power of taking land, and would prefer an extension of the 

 present system under proper regulations.— Mr. Hume doubted 

 that the provisions of the present Bill would have a very 

 salutary or beneficial operation, though it was a very great evil 

 that the labourer should have so scanty an interest in the soil. 

 — Sir J. Graham said it was not his intention to oppose the 

 second reading of the Bill, as there appeared to be no wish in 

 any quarter to obstruct it, and he thought the House and the 

 country were indebted to the honourable member for the at- 

 tention he had bestowed on this subject. With respect to the 

 preamble of the Bill, which was to the effect that small allot- 

 ments of land are conducive to the comfort and well-being of 

 the labouring classes In the rural districts, he was not disposed 

 to suggest any doubt, but he agreed with the two honourable 

 members who had last addressed the House, that the prosperity 

 of the system mainly depended on the voluntary countenance 

 and support given by the landed proprietors, and that it was a 

 question whether legislative interference might not be preju- 

 dicial to it. With all deference to Mr. Crawford, who seconded 

 the motion, whose philanthropy was beyond suspicion, he must 

 say he was surprised, looking to the experience which the hon. 

 gentleman must have had of the effects of a somewhat similar 

 system in his own country, that the hon. gentlemen should have 

 expressed himself so decidedly in its favour. He understood him 

 to say, that the occupation of a small portion of land, cultivated 

 by spade husbandry, was a certain security for the independence, 

 comfort, and happiness of the peasantry. He (Sir J. Graham) 

 thought no small portion of the distress prevalent in Ireland 

 was to be traced to the minute portions into which the land 

 was divided. The way in which he thought the system of 

 giving small allotments of land might be made most valu- 

 able, was not by making them sufficiently large to afford 

 full employment to the labourer, but by giving him enough 

 to occupy his leisure hours. That was the real use of the 

 allotment system, and he must say he thought an acre of 

 land appeared to be too large a quantity. He did not wish to 

 enter into the details of the measure, relative to which he 

 should have some observations to offer hereafter. The hon. 

 gentleman said that there was great unwillingness on the part 

 of the landlords to let land in this way. The present Bill, 

 however, would afford ample protection and security to the 

 landlords, inasmuch as the poor-rates would be made charge- 

 able, under its provisions, with the payment of the rent. He 

 apprehended, however, that in several points the machinery of 

 the Bill would be found to require material alteration. He en- 

 tertained great doubt as to the construction of the trusts for 

 management, and he thought the provision, as to charging the 

 rent of the laud on the poor-rates, liable to the dangers of 

 abuse, as well as to the creation of jealousy and ill-will in the 

 parishes. He was not disposed, however, to enter into a cri- 

 tical examination of the details of the measure. He was afraid 

 that the compulsory clauses would not be found conducive to 

 its success ; but, regarding the subject as one of great import- 

 ance, and seeing that it had been recommended by a commit- 

 tee of the House, he did not think he should be acting consist- 

 ently with the principles which guided the course taken by 

 Government with reference to the working-classes, if he op- 

 posed the second reading. — Mr. Childkrs concurred generally 

 in the object of the Bill. It was true there was too much apathy 

 on the subject, but still it was to be hoped thrtre were in every 

 parish some philanthropic individuals who would interest them- 

 selves in carrying the measure into operation.— Lord Worsley 

 thought field-gardens might be very useful, but care must be 

 taken not to discourage cottage gardens. The cottager ought 

 to look to them not for subsistence, but for assistance.— The 

 Bill was then lead a second time.— The second reading of the 

 Court of Arches Bill was opposed, and on a division rejected by 

 30 to 17.— The Bill introduced by Lord Palmerstok, as chair- 

 man of the committee on gaming, and the object of which is to 

 extend the previous Qui Tam Act, so as to stay actions until the 

 report of the committee has been embodied into a general legis- 

 lative measure, stood for consideration in committee; and on 

 the order of the day being read, Mr. Christie moved that Mr. 

 Russell, in whose name the actions were brought, should be 

 heard by counsel at the bar. Upon a division, the motion was 

 negatived by 30 to 14, and Mr. Christie then moved that the 

 Bill be committed that day three months, and complained in 

 strong terms that he had not been fairly treated, having been 

 led to believe that his previous motion would not have been re- 

 sisted, relying upon which belief, Mr. Russell had gone to the 

 txpenseof employing counsel.— The Chancellor of the Ex- 

 chequer and Lord Palmerstox respectively exonerated them- 

 selves from this charge, as did Lord Stanley from the imputa- 

 tion thrown out by Mr. M. Gibson, that the Government had 

 treated the question timidly and with vacillation.- Mr. V. 

 Smith, however, repeated it, and drew from Sir J. Graham a 

 further explanation of the course they had adopted. The ori- 

 ginal Bill lor suspending the actions had not been introduced 

 by them, and they had therefore declined to bring in a fresh one 

 to continue its operation.-Capt. Berkeley had originally 

 opposed the Bill as a means of relieving persons from 

 penalties they had incurred by transactions which had brought 



t *J e .K tUr ^" U ^ race » bu t having heard, as a member 

 or the Gaming Committee, the reasons which had induced 

 the parties to bring the actions, he was reluctant that such 

 characters should reap such immense profits. For himself, he 

 would preter that a sou of his should go to the common hazard- 

 table, lather than enter into the chicanery of " book-making," 

 and the dirty work that was now inevitable in those who med- 

 dled in horse- racing. The excessive gambling on the turf had 

 brought it into disrepute ; and as long as it continued, he would 

 assist in relieving no one from the liabilities he incurred —Sir 

 G. Clerk and Mr. Christie exchanged some explanations; 

 and Col. Peel then endeavoured to relieve himself from the 

 imputation cast upon members of the turf generally by Mr. 

 Baron Alderson during the recent trial of the " Running Rein" 

 case, that they «• associated with blackguards." He had never 

 seen any one of the parties to that case until he met them in 

 court} and it was because he and Lord G. Bentinck refused to 

 associate with them, that they had been most unfairly attacked. 

 He complained especially of Mr. M. Gibson's conduct in holding 

 frequent communication with Russell, with the view of eliciting 



evidence in support of the Qui Tam action. —Mr "F,„ - 



plained. Hit only object had been to elicit the in. A' *, ex " 

 G. Bentinck repeated the accusation, and mention*? TI Ur * 

 particulars in support of his charge. ' H e denied ?ha fthY? 1 



SKaUftLl* StWMS-J * *** * waa, in any t\t 



those in whose favour the former act had been passed tk ** 

 were numberless precedents for such Bill*. nnH ;►_.. J :"*** 



indebted for the support it had met with to the hi^L ??****' 



m 



did not prevent Mr. Gibson from associating with^therrT**!* 

 Hume supported Mr. Christie.— Mr. Escott and Mr »m 



such Bills ; and it was hard «. 

 class- legislation was attributed to those who endeavoring 1 , 

 to frustrate the schemes of persons whose infamous chariet 



who had been members of the Gaming Committee vindwS 

 Mr. Gibson's conduct.— A short discussion upon some Z 

 expressions used by Lord G. Bentinck ensued ; and the Hon * 

 then divided, negativing Mr. Christie's amendment by 45 trw? 

 —The Bill then passed through Committee.— Upon the order nf 

 the clay for the committee upon the Sudbury Disfranchisem.ni 

 Bill being read, Mr. Blackstone complained of the late Deririd 

 of the session at which the Bill was brought forward and men 

 tioned the cases of Harwich, Nottingham, &c , in 'which hi 

 maintained, bribery as flagitious as that at Sudbury had been 

 committed. He moved, that instead of disfranchising the 

 borough, the right of voting should be extended to the adjacent 

 hundreds.— Capt. Bkrbspord seconded the amendment and 

 was supported by Mr. Cochrane. In Nottingham no less' than 

 12,000/. had been expended at one election, and yet upon proof 

 that 250/. had been spent among 8000 electors in Mr. Walter's 

 behalf, that gentleman had been unseated. This was a mo»t 

 monstrous case j and upon the grounds on which Mr. Walter 

 had been deprived of his seat, every Member of the House 

 might, he believed, be declared unduly elected.— The Solicitor. 

 General defended the Bill; and the amendment having been 

 negatived by 37 to 1, it went through committee, and the 

 House was then counted out. 



Thursday.— After some routine Bills were advanced, and e 

 few unimportant questions put, the adjourned debate on the 

 second reading of the Railways Bill was resumed by Mr. 

 Bright, who supported the amendment for reading it a second 

 time that day six months.— Lord Seymour could not sec the 

 slightest objection to the principle of the Bill, and believed that 

 whatever was objectionable in its machinery might be amended 

 in committee. — Mr. Bkrnal and Mr. Colquhoun opposed the 

 Bill. The latter said that, with respect to the power of the 

 Government to purchase railways, it was quite clear that, un- 

 der this Bill, the Government would have the power to purchase 

 railways. Supposing that the Government came down to that 

 House to ask for an estimate for the purchase of a particular 

 railway, was it to be doubted that they would obtain that vote 

 from the House, particularly if they stated that it was a ques- 

 tion on which they were ready to stake their existence.— Mr. 

 Wallace and Mr. J. S. Wortley supported the Bill, and Mr. 

 Gisborne opposed it.— Mr. C Bullbr ridiculed the idea of 

 making the Government the controller of speculations depend- 

 ent for their vitality on individual enterprise, and urged that, 

 at least delay was due to those who had embarked their 

 capital in speculations so materially promotive of the public 

 welfare. —Sir R. Peel admitted that the greatest credit 

 was due to those whose capital and enterprise had deve- 

 loped our admirable railway system. The time, how- 

 ever, had arrived, when it was requisite that our legislation 

 should be based on specific principles ; and the public interest 

 required that a conclusion should be adopted in favour of the 

 Bill, which gave to Parliament a right of interference uuder 

 specific circumstances. The Bill was brought forward as a 

 notice to the numerous railway projectors seeking the sanction 

 of Parliament for their projects, that, after the lapse of a 

 certain period, Parliament shall have the power to deal with 

 their charters, and to determine whether any alterations will 

 then be necessary for the public convenience. " We are about 

 to deal with railways," he said, "in the same way as we 

 deal with the Bank Charter. You have given them a charter 

 by which they enjoy a monopoly, but you have & l /en wiie- 

 ment the power to deal with them, if they think fit, after the 

 lapse of twenty years-so with the East Imlia Company, you 

 give a limited duration to their charter, and you give Paraa- 

 mentthe power of reconsidering the compact you have made 

 with them. It is the same thing with railways. , We dc .not 

 say that purchase is desirable, but we do not i" tend *f n em f ™ 

 have a permanent monopoly against the public, but in after 

 years they shall be brought uuder certain limits, 11 w 

 liament should think fit to interfere." To .make the : B.U 

 conformable to the recommendations o the tbir report 

 of the commission was his object and lie wu ready w 

 agree to such amendments in committee on the B 11 as w o 

 conduce to that end.-Mr. Ward regarded the Bill Mjwn 

 step in establishing a gigantic system of ^ZTait^Go^- 

 -Mr.G ladstone disclaimed all wish on the part of the £oje 

 ment, to dogmatise.-Mr. Hawks attacked jtae ^"servient 

 supporters of the Railway Bill, which he considered subse 



to the interests of monopoly.-Mr. *™l*^£$Xw«*' 

 Bill would operate unfavourably against existing "^ * £ BilIf 



lations.— Mr. S. Crawford expressed his aPP r ° Ddl £ n J divis ion, 

 and thanked the Government for bringing itJ 0. v Somo 



the second reading was carried by i«6 toQ8 3 < ™ a J°™' sT0KK dis- 

 further discussion ensued, during which Mr. "J L . b€ . 



claimed all wish, on the part of the Government, c 6 ommittee 

 yond the recommendations of the third repor o* time> _ T he 



on railways. The Bill was then read / Q \ e e c c °' U(l time. -The 

 South Wales Turnpike Trusts Bill was read a .ecu &nd ^ 



reports of the Actions for Gaming Dlscontl " U -;'ed -The com- 

 the Sudbury Disfranchisement Bill, were reccl uns uccessfol 

 mittee on Dog- stealing was nominated, after 

 division on a motion for adjournment. f the further 



Friday .-On the order of the day °cingread » m , 



nsideration of the Great S mthern and *\es i ern ^ m 



con 



Billon its third reading, Col. Rawdon rnov 



rooN ww*- - , tbe mo- 

 clause be omitted from the Bill.-Lord Eliot?^^ . q whicQ 

 ion, and defended the clause.- A discussion en su j^^^t 

 he Solicitor-General, Mr. Aglionby, w jcht 



—In answer to a question oy ««. 7:. "*V in the I/very^ 

 Brazilian tariff, which had been published in publica Uon to 

 newspapers, Sir R. Peel said he had 1 seen I *eP tt the 



which the hon. member referred, and ^ before able 

 Foreign Office on the subject, and he was 1 to 



to state that her Majesty's G 0T «"S e ? nte i5gence on Jf 

 the present time received any official intehge ^ „,. 

 subject.-The Sudbury Disf ranch is eraen t B. I a ^ paSS ed. 

 tached Parts of Counties Bill were read a third •txm <.<,£ 



On the motion of Sir J. Graham, the House g lD u* 



mittee on the Poor Law Amendment Bill, Mr. £ n e0ia ed 

 chair. Clauses 20 and 21 were agreed to. A ^ ing amenu 

 on the 22d clause.-Capt. Bernal moved t he iouo ^ , t 

 ment on this clause:-" That mayors ; and justice Ia . 



acting under the authority of an Act t PJ 1(le J ale5l .be" J* 

 tion of municipal corporations in England end WJ ^r/'-SnT 

 ex officio members of the board of ff^rdians of J » v sn ort dis- 

 J. Graham opposed the amendment, which aK n0 ther 



cussion, was withdrawn.-Mr. Bo RTaw'CK m lhe co£ 

 amendment, to the effect that every clergy n^na n ^ 

 „?souls within the parish should be an e '^'J florne^: 

 J. Graham objected to the amendment, and a'ter ^gj 

 sion it was withdrawn, and the clause agreed to. 1 





CITY. accohhw 



Money Market, Friday. - Consols for ^ 



closed at 90. Red. Three per Cents. P» 



