Sir C. Napier ["loud cries of "divide" and "adjourn,] would only detain the House for one minute. He did not know whether he had rightly understood the right hon. Baronet, that a merchant in Liverpool had written a letter from that city to America, for a cargo of corn, and that in six weeks the cargo had arrived. Now, he should like to ask the right hon. Baronet whether, if a merchant at Liverpool wrote, by means of steam communication, for a cargo of corn, although ship might with a fair wind, arrive back to Liverpool in six weeks, if the ship had a foul wind, he stood any chance of getting an answer in that time? The right hon. Baronet had spoken of corn being brought from America; if a vessel was sent to Alexandria to bring corn, it would take two months to go and return; if to Odessa, three months; and he professed his belief that no vessel could go to and return from any port in the Mediterranean in less than two months. ["cries of" divide" and "adjourn."] Sir R. Peel said, that if hon. Members had not spoken, and wished to do so, he had no objection to the debate being continued ["cries of" go on," and divide."] Mr. Johnstone thought that there were hon. Members of that House who would wish to express their feelings upon this all-important question, and he should, therefore, persist in his motion, for an adjournment of the debate. Debate adjourned. The House resumed. EXCHEQUER BILLS-PUBLIC BUSINESS.] Mr. Hawes ventured to express a hope that the protracted debate upon the Corn-laws would not prevent the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer bringing on the motion of which he had given notice for this evening (Thursday), upon the subject of the Exchequer bill fraud. The interest excited upon this really very important question was intense, and he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman, even if the discussion could not be taken this evening, would have no objection to make the statement which he proposed to address to the House upon the subject if possible, to allay the apprehensions which almost universally prevailed upon the subject. The Chancellor of the Exchequer regretted that he did not feel at liberty to interfere with the course of the debate upon the question of the Corn-laws, the importance of which he felt to be paramount. If each Member would interfere and bring forward the particular motion of which notice had been given, there would be nothing but delay. The question, however, was one regarded by the country as of particular importance, aud he trusted that every facility would be afforded him to bring it forward. As far as he was concerned it should be brought forward with the least possible delay. He trusted that at any rate he should be able to bring it forward on or before Tuesday. Mr. Hawes wished to know whether this would be the first business the Government would bring forward on the House coming to a determination on the corn resolutions. He sincerely hoped that the subject would be brought forward with the slightest possible delay. Sir Robert Peel observed, that all he asked was, that the House should agree or come to some determination on the resolutions which he had proposed respecting the corn duties, and to allow him to bring in a bill founded on them. When this was done, other business would be proceeded with immediately. Mr. Labouchere said, that he apprehended that it was desirable before the House came to a resolution relative to the duties to be paid on the importation of corn from the colonies, it should know what was the determination of the Government as to the proposed duty to be paid on the importation of corn from the United States into Canada. He did not ask for an answer now, but he trusted that the determination of the Government would be communicated to the House with the least possible delay. Sir R. Peel agreed with the right hon. Gentleman, that it was desirable that the course proposed to be adopted should be communicated to the House within as short a period as possible. He would take care that this should be done. House adjourned. 122 HOUSE OF LORDS, Thursday, February 24, 1842. MINUTES.] Bill. 1. Witt's Estate. Petitions presented. By the Earl of Radnor, from Banff, and various other places, Lord Brougham, from Perth, Whitechapel, and other places, and the Earl of Carlisle, from Carlisle, for the Repeal of the Corn laws.By Lord Brougham, from Congregations of An lizing Marriages by Dissenters.-By Lord Feversham, from Confectioners of York, and Dunstable, against the Importation of Confectionery from the Channel Islands. From Bathgate, for Revision of System of Taxation.From Carlisle, complaining of Distress.- From George trim, Dromore, Downpatrick, and other places, for Lega-pressed his fears that the tale of woe describing the distresses of the people Would be met by insult; and this was evident from what he had read of what occurred in another place. [" Order."] He was not reading a petition, but an extract of a letter which had been forwarded to him, and of which he could produce hundreds, all to the same effect. Tanner, for Inquiry into Deaths of two Paupers at Cre diton. EXCHEQUER BILL - FRAUD.] Lord Wharncliffe, seeing the noble Lord the Controller of the Exchequer in his place, wished to know whether he had any objection to postpone to Thursday the motion of his relating to the late Exchequer-bill fraud, which now stood for Monday next? As his noble Friend the noble Duke could not attend in his place on Monday, it would be a convenience to have the noble Lord's motion postponed to another day. Lord Monteagle had already postponed this motion several times in deference to the suggestion of the noble Duke, and would again consent to another postponement from the same motive; but let it be borne in mind that these postponements did not come from him, but were made to suit the convenience of noble Lords opposite. Lord Wharncliffe admitted that fact, but added that the absence of the noble Duke arose from the discharge of what he considered part of his public duties elsewhere. Motion postponed. CORN-LAWS. PETITIONS] Lord Kinnaird had to present several petitions for the repeal of the Corn-laws, which had been transmitted to him from various parts of Scotland. Amongst these were thirtyfour petitions from the workmen of several factories in Dundee. Some of the petitions were signed by those engaged in the linen trade in the east of Scotland, and they prayed that, along with the tax on the import of corn, might also be removed any protecting duties on their own particular trade. They wished to have trade wholly free. Some of those petitions had been agreed to before the Government plan of a change in the Corn-laws had been agreed to, but from several of the parties he had received letters, which showed the general feeling in those parts of Scotland to which they belonged to be decidedly hostile to the Government plan. One letter, from which he would read an extract, expressed the deep regret of the writer at the plan proposed by Government, and stated that a similar feeling was prevalent throughout that part of the country. The writer ex The Duke of Richmond said, that he could produce thousands of letters all the other way. Lord Kinnaird went on to read the extract, which said, that unless some means were adopted to relieve the distresses of the people, they would be driven to proceedings which would not be so easily quieted, and that if they did not oppose such measures as the Corn-laws by every means in their power, they would be untrue to themselves and to their country. To show the effect of the Corn-laws on the industry of a large class of the poor fishermen in Scotland, he would read an extract from another letter which he had received from a gentleman who had taken pains to encourage the fisheries in the Shetland Isles. The noble Lord the President of the Board of Trade had, upon the occasion of the dinner after the laying of the first stone of the Royal Exchange, taken occasion to make use of these words : and gratification to me to feel that we are as"I must say, that it is a circumstance of pride seinbled here in celebration of such an event, in the face of this distinguished company-the concentrated representative of the wealth, the honour, the honesty, and therefore the power of the commercial interests of this great empire. "O weel may the boatie row, And better may she speed; O weel may the boatie row That gains the bairns' bread.' In the face of that expression of feeling, the noble Eail was a member of a Government at that time about to bring forward a measure, the effect of which would be to prevent the "boatie" from earning one half bread enough for the "bairns." But he would refer to the instance to which he had alluded. His correspondent had written to inform him that he had some time ago determined to establish a fishery in one of the small islands of the Shetland district, that he had done so, and with the best result, the fishery being carried on with the highest degree of success. Au offer had then been made by a Spanish merchant to take fish, to the amount of 15,000l., in exchange for which for was to have been given, but owing to the heavy amount of duty payable on the importation of foreign corn into this country, it was found impossible to accept the offer. The fishermen were thus, the writer added, robbed of one-half of their daily bread. He did hope that some of his noble Friends near him would move for an inquiry into the distress which revailed, with the view to see how far it might be remedied. The Earl of Ripon said, that the noble Lord was perfectly welcome to take any advantage that he could of a supposed inconsistency in quoting the verse of the song on the occasion alluded to. And he begged to say that he had no idea when he quoted it that it had any reference whatever to the Corn-laws, otherwise he certainly should not have made use of it. As regarded another point of the noble Lord's remarks, namely, that which related to the exchange of salt fish for Spanish flour, he wished the noble Lord would inform him whether the Spanish Government had a Corn-law or not? and what duty the Spanish Government imposed upon our salt fish imported there? There was no article, he begged to say, so heavily taxed in Spain as salt fish imported there. It was quite clear, therefore, that if the Spanish Government would not accept of our salt fish but with a high duty, almost indeed amounting to a prohibition, there was not much chance of the correspondent of the noble Lord receiving Spanish flour in exchange, particularly as there was a Corn-law in Spain. Lord Kinnaird thought there was a connexion between the Corn-laws, at all events, and those lines of the song which said, "O weel the boatie rows, Which gives the bairns bread." Surely between bread and the Cornlaws there must be an affinity. Petitions laid upon the Table. DISSENTERS' MARRIAGES (IRELAND. Lord Brougham had also to present several petitions from Presbyterian congregations in the counties of Antrim, Down, and Tyrone, and in several other places in Ireland, praying for some legislative enactment for legalizing the marriages of Dissenters with members of the Established Church. The whole of these petitioners expressed the greatest anxiety at the recent decision of the learned judges in Ireland against the legality of those marriages, and it was very natural that such anxiety should be felt on the subject. He had scen what he believed to be a correct note of the grounds of the decision to which the judges had unfortunately come on this question, and though he feared to express any opinion which might be held adverse to the decision, yet it was no departure from that courtesy which he sincerely desired to observe towards those learned persons, he said, that those reasons had failed to satisfy him. The feeling which he entertained on the question was not confined to himself alone. It was shared by others who had duly considered the subject. The desision, he must say, was the more to be lamented, as the question was raised in a shape which made a revision of it by any other tribunal impos sible. The Marquess of Clanricarde said, that the late decision of the Irish judges was directly opposed to the opinions given on the same question in 1816. On that occasion the late Sir S. Romilly referred to the case of a gentleman who was convicted of bigamy about that time, one of the marriages having been celebrated by a Presbyterian clergyman, and between a Presbyterian and a member of the Church of England. The case was then submitted for the opinion of the law officers of the Crown, Sir William Garrow and Sir Samuel Shepherd, and they were decidedly of opinion that the marriage was perfectly valid. In that opinion Lord Eldon was known to have fully concurred, and the sentence of the court, of transportation, was carried into execution on the convicted party. Lord Campbell was desirous of again calling the attention of his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack to the subject to which the petitions which had just been presented to the House referred. His noble and learned Friend was aware of the intense anxiety which was felt by a large class of persons upon the subject. He had lately received several communications relative to the painful situation of parties affected by the decision of the Irish judges. No doubt had existed for many years but that marriages contracted under the circumstances in question were perfectly valid. He would express a hope not only that the Government might at the earliest opportunity introduce a bill to remedy the evil, but that his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack would introduce the bill into that House in the first Bishop of Exeter rose to present the petition of which he had given notice on a former evening. It was of such length that he would not take up their Lordships' time by having it read at the Table; but he would, as he proceeded, give a correct ab instance. It appeared that the House of Commons was engaged, night after night, with subjects of great public importance, which prevented them from turning their attention to the subject; and he was of opinion that it would be found much more convenient to introduce the bill imme-stract of its contents. It contained very diately into that House, and he earnestly hoped that his noble and learned Friend would adopt that course. grave charges against the Poor-law commissioners of England and Wales, and, as it did, he had taken care that before laying it on their Lordships' Table, copies of it should be placed in the hands of the parties to whose conduct it related. Those parties were now in full possession of all the facts which were charged against them, and he had the satisfaction of know Lord Brougham said, he most strongly concurred in recommending to his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack to bring the measure forward in that House rather than in the House of Commons. He would beg to remind his noble and learned Friend that he had on a formering that the case of the commissioners occasion concurred with him in complaining that their Lordships were left in the early part of the Session for many weeks with scarcely anything to occupy their attention, and that towards its close a heap of business was thrown upon them, a great part of which was thrown over to the next Session for want of time in which to give it that due consideration to which it was entitled. In the state in which business was now before the House, their Lordships could give full attention to the measure, if his noble and learned Friend should introduce it there. would be stated to their Lordships by a noble Lord high in office, whose zeal and ability would leave nothing untold which in his opinion made for their justification. at-To this he had no objection whatever. On the contrary, he thought it but fair and just that the Government should protect its public officers where they acted fairly in the however say, that unless a great part of the discharge of their public duty. He would, facts alleged in the petition were fully contradicted, much of grave charge would remain, for which they would remain responsible. He would now proceed, and though he would endeavour to make his narrative as brief as the case would admit, still he feared his trespass on the time of their Lordships would not be very short. In the month of January, 1840, two paupers died in the workhouse of Crediton, cited a very strong and general feeling in that town and its vicinity. Rumours went abroad as to the case, and the names of the guardians were mentioned. In consequence of those rumours, a highly respectable individual, an attorney at Crediton, felt it his duty to make some inquiries on the subject. He at first disbelieved the rumours which had reached him, but as he went on with his inquiry the proofs came so thick upon The Lord Chancellor said, it was not his intention at that moment to say a single word as to the law of this question. He would only observe that the Irish judicial bench was never filled by lawyers possessed of more legal knowledge than at the pre-in Devon, under circumstances which exsent moment. The question as to those mixed marriages had been ably argued before it, and full time had been given for its due consideration before its decision was pronounced. With respect to the question put to him by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Campbell), he would say, that a bill on the subject referred to had been prepared, and was at present before the law officers of the Crown, as it related to a very delicate subject. Whe-him that he could no longer doubt that the ther the measure to be introduced should be brought in first in that House or in the House of Commons was a matter not yet decided; but if it should be decided to have it brought in the first instance before their Lordships, as little delay should be allowed to intervene as possible. rumours were well founded. In this feeling he addressed a letter to James Wentworth Buller, Esq., the chairman of the board of guardians. In mentioning the name of this gentleman he must say, that a more respectable or honourable man did not exist. As he took a great interest in the condition of the poor, it was natural that Mr. Tanner, the attorney to whom he had alluded, should address him on such a THE POOR-LAW COMMISSIONERS]. The subject, and the more particularly as he was Petitions laid on the Table. then chairman of the board of guardians. | partially sifted. In this instance common On the 30th of April, 1840, Mr. Tanner justice to all persons and parties, as well as addressed the following letter to Mr. Bul-humanity, imperatively demand it, and I feel assured you will not forget the maxim 'Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur.' ler: "Crediton, April 30, 1840. "Sir-a very serious report having for some time past been in circulation, relative to the death of a late pauper of Sandford, called William Lock, who, it is alleged, perished or expired in the month of January last in a cold dark shed or outhouse belonging to the Crediton Union Workhouse, where he had been improperly, and for several days before, placed, whilst labouring under a most severe and dangerous illness, I have, in conjunction with a friend of mine, taken some pains to investigate the matter, and it grieves me to say, that I fear there is too much reason to believe that such a report is true, and that its accuracy can be substantiated by incontrovertible evidence." (It then proceeded to request an open and impartial inquiry.) "I have, &c., "G. TANNER. "To James W. Buller, Esq., Chairman of the Crediton Poor-law Union. This letter was read at the board of guardians at their next meeting, but the board took no notice of it. At least no acknowledgment was sent of its receipt, and so far from complying with the request for investigation, the guardians did not accord to the writer even the civility of an answer. In consequence of this Mr. Tanner felt it his duty to address the Poor-law commissioners in London, and, accordingly on the 6th of May, in the same year, he sent them the following letter : "Crediton, Devon, May 6, 1840. "Gentlemen-I take the liberty of transmitting for your immediate and serious consideration, a letter, which I felt it my duty to address to the Crediton board of guardians at their last board-day, and as no reply has been given to it, nor any steps, which I have heard of, taken in the matter, I am thus compelled, respectfully but earnestly, to beg that you will require a prompt and public investigation of the subject of it. As the public press has alluded to this deplorable case, and as the report of it, with the usual exaggerations and embellishments, no doubt, has been circulated far and wide, I do submit, that the most open inquiry should be instituted, at which, if permitted, I think I shall be prepared to substantiate, by indisputable testimony, more than the lamentable facts stated, and more than one such case. In addressing you as public functionaries, in whom the Legislature of this country has thought fit to repose such unlimited and awful powers, I am convinced I need not point out the duty which you owe that Legislature and your country, to cause every well-founded charge to be thoroughly and im "I have, &c. "G. TANNER. "To the Poor-law Commissioners for England and Wales." This was on the 6th of May, and on the 9th of May Mr. Tanner received a letter from the Poor-law commissioners, stating that the matter should receive their immediate attention. Mr. Tanner naturally relied upon this assurance, and three days afterwards he wrote a letter to them, to an extract from which letter he the (Bishop of Exeter) should have occasion presently to call the attention of their Lordships. But, to his utter astonishment, he had found, that though on the 12th of May he had ceed, and that having heard from a private written to say he was then ready to prosource that the investigation was to take place on the following Saturday, the 16th, he requested permission to call before the assistant commissioner the persons with whom the rumour had originated, and from whom he had received his information, the inquiry had closed. This course followed by Mr. Tanner was that which every fair man, cager to bring his witnesses before the tribunal appointed for the inquiry, would have adopted. On the 14th, however, he received an answer from the Poor-law commissioners, which he (the Bishop of Exeter) would now read. It was as follows: "That they (the commissioners) had received from Mr. Gilbert, the assistant-commissioner, depositions so conclusive, negativing the purport of his general statement, that they were of opinion they should not be justified in causing further investigation into those cases; but that if he would communicate any further specific facts, they would take into consideration the propriety of further inquiry." Now, he (the Bishop of Exeter) thought the extracts he had read contained specific facts-they included the death of the pauper, William Lock, in a cold dark shed or outhouse, to which he had been confined for some days while labouring under severe and dangerous illness. It was a little hard to require anything more specific as to the terms of the complaint on its very outset. Undoubtedly, the commissioners were right in calling upon Mr. Tanner to produce his witnesses to prove the grounds of his charge. It appeared, however, that on the 9th of May-the very day on which Mr. |