* * 



s 4 -I* "*^ 



A 



/ 



fee.*]* 



THE NEWSPAPER. 



— -fc 



- parliament. 



. —HOUSE OF LORDS. 



.. . .„-,,, Jr disposing of the Irish Party Processions Bill, the 



Aliens Bill, on the motion of Lord Brougham, was read a third 



tiAiQj&qct ias»#— The Marquess of Normanby, in a speech of 

 gfts g* tewg ttljgtfd detail, then drew attention to the subject of the 

 heailn oi'Towns, and moved an address to the Crown, praying that 



the sanatory condition of the people, as exhibited in the results of 

 the inquiries of the commission whose report has been recently 

 issued, may receive the deliberate attention of Government, with 

 the view of framing some general remedial measure, to be intro- 

 duced at an early period of the next session of Parliament.-— The 

 Duke of Ui/cclkuch went over the subject, as developed by the 

 evidence, dwelling on the magnitude of the evil, but pointing out 

 the difficulties in the way. As an instance of this, he stated that 

 a Bill passed for the improvement of Liverpool was inoperative, 

 because motives of humanity prevented the exercise of the power 

 by which twenty or thirty thousand individuals might be turned 

 out of cellars, without any other place of refuge. The commission 

 was diligently considering its report, which in due time would be 

 produced, though he did not think that it would recommend the 

 immediate adoption of any legislative measure, mature delibera- 

 tion being requisite. He therefore opposed the motion, which 

 was negatived without a division. 



Monday.— The Royal assent was given by commission to the 

 Assessed Taxes, Detached Part of Counties, District Courts and 

 Prisons, Parish Clerks, Butter and Cheese, Colonial Postage, Soap 

 Allowance, Sudbury Disfranchisement, Loan Societies, Actions for 

 Gaming Discontinuance, Western Australia, and several Railway, 

 Road, and Estate Bills. A great many Bills were forwarded a 

 stage.— The Duke of Bucclbucii moved the second reading of the 

 Metropolitan Buildings Bill.— Lord Campbell moved its 6econd 

 reading that day three months. He objected to such a Bill being 

 brought forward at the end of the session. It was a Bill that af- 

 fected a vast amount of property in the metropolis; and all the 

 provisions for ventilation and drainage in it were calculated rather 

 to defeat than promote these important ends. He disapproved of 

 its principle, because its machinery was its principle ; and he was 

 opposed to the payment of referees out of the county rate. There 

 was also a wanton interference in it with private property— wholly 

 unnecessary on the public. It gave the referees a power hitherto 

 only held by the Sovereign, namely, a dispensing power.— The 

 Earl of Cadooav, Lord Kin.vaird, and the Marquess of Salis- 

 bury, likewise objected to the passing of such an important Bill 

 through Parliament at this period of the session.— Lord Cottev- 

 ham said so difficult and important, and so contradictory in some 

 respects were the provisions or this Bill, that it would be quite 

 impossible at so late a period of the session to give it that con- 

 sideration which was indispensable; and it was somewhat too 

 much to call upon their lordships to sanction it by a second read- 

 ing. By one clause, agreements were to be enforced between 

 landlords and tenants, which by another part were made impos- 

 sible.— The Duke of Bi/cclbugh having persisted In pressing for- 

 ward the measure, their lordships divided— For the second read- 

 ing, 31 ; against it, 8 ; majority, 23. The Bill was read a second 

 time. 



Tuesday.— The Loud Chancellor explained the course he 

 had pursued with respect to Lord Beaumont's Bill for repealing all 

 the obsolete penal acts against Roman Catholics which still remain 

 on the statute-book. He had consulted all those who were espe- 

 cially competent to advise with him upon the subject, and having 

 struck out every clause against the propriety of which any reason- 

 able doubt could be entertained, he now confidently recommended 

 that their lordships should pass the Bill, in spite of the objections 

 which the late period of the session had suggested. He then went 

 on to describe the enactments which the Bill proposed to repeal, 

 explaining their enormity and absurdity, and the hardship to which 

 Roman Catholics would be exposed if any informer, from motives 

 either or reward or malignity, should proceed upon them; and 

 concluded by expressing his regret that the Bill did not go further. 

 — The Bishop of London anxiously guarded himself from the 

 possible imputation that he was desirous of continuing these ob- 

 noxious laws for their own sake, but opposed the further progress 

 of the Bill, on the ground which the Lord Chancellor had himself 

 suggested— that it was not a comprehensive measure. He com- 

 plained that it was pressed forward at so late a period of the session, 

 and in the necessary absence of most of the Bishops ; and, remind- 

 ing their lordships that the constitution of the English Church was 

 not only Protestant but anti- Popish, cautioned them against thus 

 u- ?t hurriedly breaking through the links of the great chain, 

 which had been designed to maintain the Church in its supremacy. 

 There was already a talk of "going further;" let there be no 

 piecemeal legislation, but let a subject of such grave importance 

 be considered at leisure, and as a whole.— Lord Bbouoh am agreed 

 with the Lord Chancellor, but thought that the acts prohibiting 

 communication with the see of Rome should be first repealed.— 

 Lord Wicklow, too, preferred that the present Bill should be 

 passed, and the work of revision resumed next session.— Lord 

 Campbell thought that great inconvenience would result if the 

 Bill were delayed, as, from the publicity which had been given to 

 xne obsolete penal acts, qui tarn actions would be brought against 

 tne Roman Catholics.— Lord Beaumont declared his intention of 

 persisting and the question that the report be received was put 

 and carried— the Bishop of London saying «• Non-content."— The 

 Lord Chancellor then asked the right rev. prelate if he had 

 any amendment to propose, as, if so, the Bill should be re-com- 

 mitted.— The Bishop of London answered that he would not 

 25! re further in the matter.— The report was then received.— 

 The Metropolitan Buildings Bill passed through committee, and 

 the Railways Bill was read a second time. 



Thursday .—The Earl of Aberdeen, In answer to the Marquess 

 of Clanricarde, intimated that the occurrences at Tahiti, espe- 

 cially the outrage against the person of the British Consul, were so 

 gross and flagrant as to be all but incredible. The event would, 

 doubtless, prove a Godsend to the enemies of peace between 

 France and England; but he had no reason to doubt that the 

 French Government would promptly disavow the unauthorised 

 conduct of their officers at Tahiti, and not a moment had 

 been lost in making proper representations. After some con- 

 versation, the subject dropped.— The Railways Bill was com- 

 mitted, after a statement from the Earl of Dalhousie as to 

 its objects and nature. The Metropolitan Buildings Bill, the 

 roor-iaw Amendment Bill, and other measures were advanced: 

 fJSni , L rd readin g of the Law Courts (Ireland) Bill, a dif 

 clip** "^V^ween the Lord Chancellor and Lord Wharv- 

 the Bin V -«L° rmer stron gly objecting to a particular provision of 

 in the kwS. 1 - the \ ori ^eutenant the inferior appointments 

 iL cLeTn th TrmInt ead °* COnTeT ™S them on the judges, as was 

 a diffSen? footing fro^F H i C ™^ why Ireland was to be P ut on 

 the same jn. S Tthe^ ^ called on thera t0 administer 



^maie- = 



Friday. — The Horse Slauehterinp- um w «« 

 time, and the Metropolitan^ *«». n J 



time and passed—The Earl of AbiYokv in «L * d ? l hir 2 



?hl> IT' ."" ,hat the - Brt «*""Sw«"TSnto were 

 obliged to give up a certain Maltese who recently half ™™ 



roitted a double murder in Tunis , the Maltese hid w? . f r 

 trial ,, the criminal had been recited H*X1^ 

 Dication on the subject should take place with the B?S?h 

 Government at home ; but he (the Earl of Aberdeen) could not 

 recommend the criminal to mercy, and the man was executed 

 The Consul at Tunis did no more than his duty, and we had a 

 right to try the criminal according to the usual custom for 

 <uimg a Maltese.— The discussion was here interrupted by the 

 ^ornmons appearing at the bar, in order to a conference on the 

 Process of Law (Ireland; Bill.- [Left sitting.] 



HOUSE OF COMMONS. 



Friday. — The discussion on the Poor Law Amendment Bill 

 was accompanied by a general expression of belief that though 

 the Bill in its details did not please all parties, it was never- 

 theless a great improvement and amelioration of the old law. — 

 Sir J. Graham woundup the discussion with a short speech, 

 in which he admitted the fair, temperate, and assiduous manner 

 in which the opponents of the Poor-law had acted towards the 

 Bill, which was then read a third time and passed.— The South 

 Wales Turnpike Trusts Bill, the Joint Stock Banks Regulation 

 Bill, and other measures waiting for the third reading were 

 passed. The Consolidated Fund Bill was read a second time, 

 ordered to be committed on Monday, with notice given by Sir 

 G. Clerk, that it be an instruction to the committee to move 

 the usual appropriation clause. This signal of the close of the 

 session was marked by a cheer.— The Merchant Seamen Bill, 

 which stood for consideration in committee, was opposed, se- 

 veral Members expressing a wish that it should be postponed 

 till next session. Mr. S. Herbert, however, expressed his de- 

 termination to carry the measure forward; but consented to 

 postpone the committee on the Bill till Monday.— About 20 

 other Bills were advanced through different stages. 



Monday. — The Merchant Seamen's Bill passed through com- 

 mittee. The Criminal Justice (Middlesex) Bill was read a third 

 time and passed. The Lords' Amendments to the Farm Build- 

 ings Bill and to the Trafalgar-square Bill were agreed to, and 

 the Art Unions Bill was read a second time.— Sir J. Graham, 

 in moving the second reading of the Charitable Donations and 

 Bequests (Ireland) Bill, stated its nature, which is to remedy 

 the defects of the 40 Geo. III., under which bequests and en- 

 dowments for religious uses in Ireland is regulated. The first 

 objection was the constitution of the Board of Charitable Be- 

 quest?, which is still exclusively Protestant (the main portion 

 being dignitaries of the Church), unless, since Catholic eman- 

 cipation, any of the judges who are members should happen to 

 be Roman Catholic. This is to be remedied by a re-casting of 

 the board, by which (in addition to the ex officio members), out 

 of ten commissioners to be appointed by the Crown, five are to 

 be Roman Catholics j and all doctrinal questions arising out of 

 Roman Catholic Bequests are to be referred to their exclusive 

 adjudication. This removes another objection to the board, as 

 it is at present constituted, that though exclusively Protestant, 

 it has the discretionary power of deciding upon the expediency 

 of a bequest for religious uses, though three-fourths of all that 

 pass under its review are Roman Catholic. The Bill, otherwise, 

 remedies defects in the law applicable to voluntary religious en- 

 dowments; renders testamentary provision for Roman Catholic 

 priests and chapels valid ; and places Roman Catholics more on 

 that equal ground which the act of Catholic relief contemplated. 

 He assured the House that the measure was proposedin the spirit 

 of peace, and as a part of that conciliatory policy which it was 

 hoped would so compose Ireland as to enable the Queen to visit 

 her Irish subjects, whom he eulogised as a brave and still loyal 

 people. — Mr. M. O'Ferrall complained that the Roman 

 Catholic bishops had not been consulted in the construction of 

 this measure, and pointed out various objections to its details 

 which he considered to be unsatisfactory, especially the subor- 

 dination of ecclesiastics to laymen.— Lord Eliot assured the 

 House that the Crown, in the appointment of the five Roman 

 Catholic commissioners, would select individuals having the 

 confidence of the Roman Catholic body.— Mr. Be i-lew com- 

 plained of the solicitude manifested throughout the Bill to avoid 

 giving the titles of the dignitaries of the Roman Catholic Church 

 in Ireland, any of whom, if they conformed to the Protestant 

 faith, would be eligible to elevation on the episcopal bench 

 without fresh consecration. Not a single Roman Catholic was 

 officially connected with the Government; and every measure 

 of relief bore evidence that the ascendant spirit still prevailed. 

 — The Earl of AauNDKLand Surrey returned thanks to Govern- 

 ment for the conciliatory spiritjevinced in this Bill. He wished, 

 however, that the bishops had been recognised in their epis- 

 copal character. — Sir R. Peel expressed his satisfaction at the 

 manly tone taken by Lord Arundel, and his proportionate 

 regret at the carping spirit of other speeches ; and declared 

 the entire sincerity of the Government in their intention to 

 benefit the Roman Catholic population by this measure. He 

 read extracts from a; work of Mr. Scully, showing the disadvan- 

 tages under which Roman Catholic charities laboured in the 

 existing state of the law ; and after explaining how these dis- 

 advantages are removed by the Bill now in progress, appealed 

 to the House whether it must not be disheartening to a Govern- 

 ment thus earnestly exerting themselves for improvement, to 

 be met with these ungracious comments upon their motives. 

 He referred to the draught of a Bill relating to this subject, 

 which was prepared under Lord Wellesley's Administration, 

 with the concurrence of the Roman Catholic hierarchy— con- 

 trasted the present Bill favourably with that draught — and 

 exposed the unreasonableness of the commonplace charges of 

 "insult and injustice." He said it was objected that Roman 

 Catholic spiritualities were not properly cognizable by any lay 

 tribunal. But, first, the matters to be dealt with under this 

 Bill were not spiritual at all ; secondly, it did not follow that 

 the tribunal to be constituted under this Bill would be a lay 

 body; and, thirdly, a lay body was to have had this Jurisdiction 

 by the very draught which he had before mentioned as having 

 been approved by the Roman Catholic hierarchy themselves. 

 He deprecated an unfair agitation of this question during the 

 approaching recess.— Mr. Sheil intimated his discontent that 

 the Roman Catholic clergy had not been consulted on this 

 occasion. The property which was the subject of the Bill 

 was confessedly Roman Catholic; and why then was the 

 board by whom this Bill proposed that such property should be 

 regulated, to be a body containing a majority of Protestants ? 

 Protestants would never take sufficiently into account the feel- 

 ings, prejudices, and jealousies of the Roman Catholic popu- 

 lation. He recommended that a Roman Catholic majority of 

 the board should be at once appointed, and that some of them 

 should be prelates of the Roman Catholic church. It was not 

 fit that Protestants should regulate the colleges by which 

 Roman Catholic professors and pastors were to be appointed.— 

 Lord Staxlev said, that Government, in introducing this mea- 

 sure, had had in view no religious controversy, but solely the 

 best mode of amending an imperfect law; since this indeed 

 was a question of law and of property, and not of religion. He 

 objected to fetter the discretion of the Crown by any exactly 

 fixed proportions. The composition of the board under the 

 existing law was much less favourable than under the proposed 

 Bill. He referred largely to Mr. O'Conneii's evidence in 1829, 

 as justifying the principle of this measure. He denounced the 

 injustice of throwing out against eminent Judges, Protestant 

 or Catholic, an imputation that their creed would warp their 

 decrees; and he deprecated the discussion of the measure in a 

 sectarian spirit.— Mr. Wyse objected to the proposed constitu- 

 tion of the board, and complained that the Roman Catholic 

 clergy had not been consulted by the Government.-Mr. Hume 

 thought the proposed tribunal a fair and proper one, such as 

 no man ought to object to. The Bill seemed to him to be 

 framed in a spirit of peace; and he wished all the Irish griev- 

 ances were met in the same feeling. To oppose the second 

 reading of such a Bill was not the way to get those grievances 

 redressed. He should be glad to see as good a tribunal for the 

 administration of English charities : there ought to be " justice 

 to England."— Colonel Rawdon supported the Bill, and Mr. D. 

 Browne pressed for its postponement.— A division was called 

 for, when the second reading of the Bill was carried by 71 to 5. 

 —On the motion that the Bill be committed, Mr. M. J. O'Con- 

 nell renewed the complaint about the non-recognition of the 

 bishops, which he could ascribe only to a truckling of the Go- 

 vernment before the remnant of a contemptible and bigoted 

 party. He considered the Bill in several of its details, and gave 

 notice that he should move amendments in committee. 



[1844. 



Tuesday. -About 20 Bills were forwarded a stage^Uho^uTT 

 word of discussion.— Mr. Hums moved a resolution for takin? 

 into early consideration, in the next session, the situation & 

 the coopering trade. His object was to obtain a reduction nf 

 the import duty on the wood from which staves are man« 

 factored.— Mr. Gladstone opposed the motions and Mr 

 Hums was understood to withdraw it, though not without 

 animadversion upon the injury done to our manufactures br 

 charging raw materials with heavy import duties.— Lord 

 Lincoln asked leave to bring in a Bill for forming an embank 

 ment on the Middlesex side of the Thames, between Westmin- 

 ster and Blackfriars. He did not mean to press it further in 

 this session j but he wished to print it, in order that it might be 

 understood before the re-assembling of Parliament by those 

 whose interests it might affect.— Sir C. Bvrrbli., Mr. Hott 

 and Mr. Hums, declared their intention to oppose it. They' 

 objected to a measure of which it was understood that the 

 Government intended to defray the expense by a tax upon 

 coal. — Mr. Hume went still further, and declared that even if 

 there were 3,000,000/. surplus in the Treasury, he would 

 oppose an embankment of this kind, as likely to injure the 

 bed of the river.— S'.r F. Tbench detailed the advantages of his 

 plan for the embankment of the Thames, which, in addition to 

 other projects of architectural display, has the merit of contem- 

 plating a railroad, the profits of which he calculates will defray 

 all expenses of erection and maintenance, and thus obviate any 

 tax, whether on coals or anything else. He invited Mr. Hume, 

 whose powers of calculation commanded his respect, rigidly to 

 test the figures on which the plan was based. Leave was 

 ultimately given to bring in the Bill.— Mr. Mackin.vo.v drew 

 attention to the practice of interment within large towns, and 

 in churches and chapels.— Sir J. Graham saw great difficulties 

 in the way of any general legislative enactment on the subject, 

 and could not pledge himself to bring in a Bill next session.— 

 Mr. Borthwick, in a short speech, moved for copies of the 

 correspondence which has passed between Don Carlos and the 

 Government, relative to certain propositions made with a view 

 to the tranquillisation of Spain; and also copies of the corres- 

 pondence between the British, French, and Spanish Govern- 

 ments on the same subject. — The Chancellor of the 

 Exchequer said that the House had already received all the 

 information required, and objected to the production of the 

 documents.— Mr. Borthwick complained of the injustice done 

 to Don Carlos by the refusal to produce the correspondence.— 

 On a division there were two for the motion, 33 against it, 

 which with the tellers and the Speaker made exactly "a 

 House."— Mr. Wyse drew attention to the petitions from 

 artists and friends of art in London and Dublin, praying for the 

 establishment of a gallery for the reception of the best works in 

 sculpture, or of casts from them, from the earliest period of art 

 to the present. He moved an address to the Crown on the 

 subject.— Colonel Rawdon and Dr. Bowrino supported the 

 motion.— Mr. Wyse, in answer to a question from Mr. Escorr, 

 stated that the commission of which he is a member had not 

 irrevocably bound itself to accept the designs of the artists 

 selected for the decoration of the new Houses of Parliament.— 

 SirT. Fremantle objected to the motion of Mr. Wyse, on 

 account of the lateness of the session, and the then state of the 

 House, which wa3 not prepared for the consideration of such a 

 subject.— Mr. Wyse, on the recommendation of Lord Eliot 

 and Mr. Hume, withdrew his amendment, promising to bring 

 it forward next session, in conjunction with a gallery for the 

 preservation of national monuments. — On the next motion, 

 which was for a return of Slave-trade papers, the House was 

 " counted out." 



Wednesday.— The House met at 12 o'clock, and sat for about 

 half-an-hour, forwarding various Bills.— At the five o'clock 

 sitting, Sir C. Napier said he wished to put a question to the 

 right Hon. Baronet opposite, ; of great importance to the 

 character and reputation of this country. He had not givea 

 notice of his intention to put the question, but it referred to a 

 matter of such public notoriety that he hoped the right hon. 

 Baronet would be able to give him an answer. The question 

 he had to put was, Whether it was true that the British Consul 

 at Otaheite had been arrested under the name of " the man 

 Pritchard," by the French authorities; whether the Rights ot 

 the English residents were obliged to be put out at eight in the 

 evening by the orders of the French ; whether the French had 

 established strong fortifications there j and whether, in conse- 

 quence of these operations, Queen Pomare had been obliged to 

 take refuge on board a British ship? He also wished to ask 

 whether, at the time these operations were going on, there was 

 a British force at the island, and if so, to what extent? (Load 

 cries of " Hear, hear," from both sides of the House.) -Sir K. 

 Pebl said—" Sir, although the hon. and gallant Officer has no* 

 given me notice of the question, yet two other hon. Members, tne 

 noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire, and the hon. Member 

 for Evesham, have notified to me that it was their intention to 

 put a question of a similar nature to that of the gallant Officer. 

 They will perhaps excuse me if I take the opportunity « 

 answering mv noble Friend and the hon. Member in toerepiJ 

 I give to the 'gallant Officer. In doing so I must 1™**!*™ 

 to the statement of those facts which are of i most . mpori tancej 

 Among these is the removal of the British Consul. v> e i 

 received accounts from Otaheite, and presuming on me ace 

 racy of these accounts, which I have no reason to ca " ™ *J ied 

 tion, I do not hesitate to say that a gross outrage, accompan iea 

 by a gross indignity, has been committed, ^o , u , u 

 Hear, hear). Her Majesty's Government wj« v f* ^S^ 

 to this effect on Monday last," and we have t^ en J h p e n ^ S G ove?n- 

 tunity of making those communications to tne " e "J" _ case 

 ment, which we considered the circumstances oi . i 

 required . (Cheers from both sides of the House.) The ou ^ b 

 was committed by a person in temporary authority +i d 



and from what we know of the facts it was i not com«mttedi^ 

 consequence of any authority given him by tne r rc« 

 ment. Presuming that the accounts are accurate, >W™° 

 that the French Government will at o^e make sucn» f. 



tion as we think this country has a r »g ht . t0 /^H„n on the 

 I shall not be pressed for any further ^^f^tioa 

 subject.-Sir C. Napikr said there ^as one part « » f J« * u hetber 

 which the right hon. Baronet had not answered Wje 

 a proper force was stationed at Otaheite at the time, an 

 ther the French had established fortifications on ^J^nla- 

 Sir R. Peel said he had given the gallant officer all tne ^ ^ 

 nation he could conveniently give at P^nt.-Lord in o 

 called attention to Capt. Warner's Brighton experiment, w 

 was either a gross imposition or else deraonstrativeonnp.^ 

 session of some formidable destructive Power, the ■ «^ 

 possession of which would be of vast importance » to tt« con ^ 

 The latter was his belief, which ridicule would not retrain 



i 



from avowing. All great ^^}°^S^^J^^stet9 

 so forth-were matters for incredulity before the r P°* e ' ion9> 

 developed. He gave a sketch of the negotiations, in vest g ^ 

 and experiments which have been undertaken, in reiau 

 Capt. Warner's invention, under the Go^^.^^Xsecure 

 boSrne, and that of the present, the great : object being to s ^ 

 the inviolability of the secret. The Board of Admi»^ ^ 

 boards, treated the matter w.th indifference, neglect, ^ 



tempt; Lord Melbourne was dilatory, Sir R.PeeiP t t0 

 friends of Capt. Warner were referred from i one ^^ ir >. 

 anotherj and the commission to which the m«w ^ 



trusted required experiments which involved too niu^n^.^ 

 and disclosure, as well as leaving the question , of '«? „ad 



without a sufficient guarantee. At first capt. he ha ^ 



asked 400,000/. as the value of his two 'nvfnUons, o satisfied 

 subsequently offered to refer it ^.arbitration, being y&m 

 that Sir R. Peel would not act unjustly on . proo o te 



and importance of his discoveries. By £%^^ents f ending 

 individuals he had been enabled to make e^ en ^ ^ ve the 

 in the decisive one off Brighton j and, however <« 



