that the courts of law were open, but, as it was formerly well observed, "so was the London tavern to those who could afford to pay." But the petitioner was not in a condition to go to law with a general who had made a fortune out of those very islands, the population of which he had most harshly treated. Count Cladan became poor through the very means by which general Campbell became rich. But was it meant to be stated that when an officer of the government behaved ill, the only remedy against him was in an appeal to a court of law? Such, indeed, appeared to be the doctrine of the hon. gentleman opposite; but this was, he believed, the first time, that, when an officer of the government was charged with murder, with pilloring and flogging, according to his own will, with breaking into private houses, with appropriating to his own use the property of the people whom he was appointed to govern and protect, and with a variety of false and fraudulent acts, an under secretary of state rose in that House to say that government would institute no inquiry into the conduct of such an officer, but refer the party aggrieved to a court of law. Mr. Goulburn did not mean to say, that persons who acted improperly abroad were not responsible for their conduct. But, he wished to ask, whether government were to punish general Campbell, after he had, for several years, given up the situation he held in the Ionian islands, on the mere statement of the petitioner? Mr. F. Douglas expressed his anxious hope that government would not exercise a greater degree of power in the Ionian islands, than was sanctioned by the treaty of Paris. The great object was, to establish an English influence in the Levant, and that end would best be attained by protecting, not by oppressing the people. The Petition was ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE-COMMITMENT OF THOMAS FERGUSON.] The report and resolution of the Committee of Privileges respecting the complaint of a letter written to a voter of the county of Lanark, to influence his vote in the election of a member to serve in parliament, by Thomas Ferguson, in breach of the privileges of this House being read, Mr. Wynn moved, "That Thomas Fer guson, in writing and sending the said letter, has been guilty of a corrupt attempt to subvert the freedom and independence of Election, and a high breach of the privileges of this House." The resolution being put and agreed to, Mr. Wynn then observed, that he should next move the commitment of Mr. Ferguson to Newgate. Undoubtedly, that was not the only punishment which precedent justified in cases similar to the present. Our ancestors had, in their jealous care of the rights and privileges of the House, placed other guards around them besides that of punishing their breach by imprisonment. It appeared that the person in custody was an officer of the revenue, and several acts had prescribed that any person engaged in the revenue, who should be found to have interfered in the election of a member of parliament should be fined 1007. deprived of his situation, and rendered incapable of ever serving his majesty again in any capacity. The committee had not, in their report, said any thing upon the subject. He should, however, as a member of that committee, take an opportunity, on a future occasion, when the committee had finished their labours, of making a motion upon the subject. If the person in custody was to receive but one punishment, it ought in his opinion to be dismissal from the situation which he held. The hon. member concluded by moving "That Thomas Ferguson, for his said offence be committed to his majesty's gaol of Newgate, and that the Speaker do issue his warrant accordingly." At the same time he gave notice, that on a fit occasion he should move, that an humble address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, praying he might be graciously pleased to order, that the said Thomas Ferguson be dismissed from any employment which he held under the crown.-The motion was then put and agreed to. EDUCATION OF THE POOR BILL.] Mr. Brougham, in moving for the committal of this bill, expressed his regret that it had not before excited discussion, because had that been the case, many misrepresentations that had gone abroad would have been corrected. There was something so exceedingly delicate in a matter relating to public charities, that he would say a word or two, to prove how void of foundation the reports on this par ticular point were. The present was stated | to be a bill which would interfere with the management of charitable funds. A more gross misrepresentation never was set afloat It was a bill, not to interfere with the management, but with the mismanagement of charities-and that by inquiry and report. It was next stated, that the bill went to trench on private property. This was as gross a misrepresentation as the former. The fact was, that persons receiving money for charitable purposes, were, as much as any officer of the government, entrusted with public property, and had a right to account for it. The powers of the bill were not greater than those granted to the commissioners of accounts in 1781, to the commissioners of naval inquiry in 1803, and of military inquiry in 1804. Mr. Canning did not mean to offer any opposition to the House going into the committee, but rose merely lest his silence on the present occasion should be construed into an approval of the bill, to many parts of which he had strong objections. He said thus much to guard against any advantage which might be taken at another time. To the committee he would not object then: but he should at another time state his opinion as to the constitution and duration of the commissioners. Lord Folkestone was glad the attention of the House was called to the bill in its present stage, as he wished to make some observations before it went into the committee. He must object to the exceptions in the bill in favour of Oxford, Cambridge, Westminster, and Winchester. In consequence of these exceptions, he understood that farther exceptions would be proposed. It seemed strange, that any persons should wish for exemption from inquiry in such matters. One would rather suppose they would think it a kind of insult to them if they were so exempted. He should have expected that the members for the universities would have stood up and desired inquiry, as leaving them out might seem to throw an imputation on their conduct. He happened to know a gentleman, in a county not far off, who had been able to discover, by his inquiries, extraordinary abuses of charitable funds in that county. It appeared that only one-fourth of the amount of the funds had been returned, and that the returns thirty years ago, were 2,000l. or 3,000l. a year more than lately. He (VOL. XXXVIII.) hoped gentlemen were sincere in their object; and he thought that if a commission were appointed, it would be proper to put the gentleman he had alluded to into it. Mr. Bathurst observed, that if the object of the bill was in reality what it appeared to be to the noble lord, it was deserving of the most minute attention. The bill had been stated to relate to the education of the poor, and to the cha ritable institutions that were connected with that object. But it would appear that the bill was to embrace all charities whatever, and in that point of view the universities would be included, if not particularly exempted. In the case of the Charter-house no objections had been made. From lapse of time no doubt, and from other causes, the funds of charitable institutions might be occasionally misapplied, but he saw no reason why the funds of the universities should be placed in the power of the commissioners. The original object of the bill had referred to funds only connected with the poor, and yet, though in many cases no abuses had been shown, the funds of other institutions were to be submitted to the control of the commissioners. No discussion had hitherto taken place upon the principle of the bill, the object and nature of which ought to be ascertained. Mr. Brougham suggested, that neither the right hon. gentleman nor the noble lord were, by permitting the bill to go through this stage, pledged to give their assent or support to it in any other stage of its progress; and the question might, with equal advantage and facility, be argued upon the principle of the bill, whenever the motion should be again put that the Speaker leave the chair, for the purpose of recommitting the bill. At first sight it might be imagined that the bill had not confined itself strictly to the purposes to which it was intended it should apply, namely, charitable foundations for the education of the poor; but it appeared, upon examination, that even these greater bodies, not excepting the universities, had part of their funds or endow ments derived from donations granted with a view to educate those whose means were too contracted to admit of the expenses entailed on students at those seminaries or colleges. He could most heartily have wished that those five excepted learned foundations had challenged inquiry into the administration of their (Z) them. Inquiry was often useful to the parties themselves. Thus in the case of the Charter-house school, it appeared upon inquiry, that scarce any abuses existed in the application of their funds, as had been previously suspected. Sir J. Newport observed, that similar objections had been made to the commission for inquiry into the fees of courts of justice in Ireland. Ministers, however, had not the appointment of the commissioners, and could not throw cold water upon the investigation. Though the law officers had stood embattled against the motion he had then made, he had succeeded by a majority of one, and many abuses though previously denied, had been found to exist. A great saving had in consequence accrued both to the suitors and to the public. affairs. He thought that those great bo- | have full power to call all persons before dies would more truly consult their own real dignity, by challenging inquiry, and wishing the provisions of the bill to extend to their institutions. That venerable man, earl St. Vincent, had afforded an example on such subjects, which when ever they were considered, it was impossible too often to press upon the attention of the House, and to hold up to imitation. He meant his noble example in putting at the very head and front of the inquiry into the abuses in public offices, the offices of the lords commissioners of the Admiralty, he being at that time himself the first lord. The noble earl said, "let the commissioners come into his office, and examine all papers, and all persons in the office, in all departments, from the top to the bottom." That was the practice of that venerable earl, and the inquiries into the other offices were not the less successful by the example which the noble earl had set. He readily allowed two post captains, two lawyers, and two laymen, to go into the Admiralty and search for information, and thus effected one of the most important reforms in the management of public offices that had taken place since the time of the revolution. He began, in fact, the system of closely inquiring into the uses made of the public money in the offices, which had never been well set about until he procured the appointment of his committee. That investigation he had taken for his model. The appointment of commissioners did not proceed from jealousy of his majesty's ministers, but in consequence of the precedents established in all former cases. He should have no objection that ministers should propose the commissioners, provided the patronage thus put into their hands should not be abused, and that inefficient men should not be appointed. For his own part, he would not consent to the appointment of a single cypher. The reason for the measure was the necessity of the case. Three-fourths of the charitable funds in Berkshire were unaccounted for, and out of the annual sum of 20,000l. only 5,000l. had been applied to the purposes for which it had been originally destined. A return of only 7,000l. had been made to parliament, and but for the gentleman formerly alluded to (Mr. Parry), there would not have been the means of investigating the application of a single pound. The commissioners must repair to the spot, and Mr. Peel admitted that the inquiry alluded to by the right hon. baronet had been productive of the best effects; but the course of proceeding on that occasion had been by an address to the throne; and in consequence of the address, the commissioners were appointed. The hon. and learned gentleman had said, there were surmises against the Charterhouse, and that by the inquiry every suspicion had been removed. But what analogy was there between that institution and the universities? Did any one say that there was any suspicion against those learned bodies? For his own part, he wished the exemption had been made more extensive, and had included Harrow, Rugby, and other well conducted charters, against which there was not the smallest suspicion. Mr. Brougham, in reply, adverted to the inquiry that had taken place two years ago, relative to the Charter-house and Christ's hospital. Respecting the former, the charge was, that the funds for the education of the poor had been employed in educating the rich. The Charter-house stood on the same footing as Christ's hos pital, where it was proved, among other abuses, that a clergyman of 7001. or 800l. a year had a son. They were called on at the Charter-house to produce their deed. They refused, and said, "we have nothing to do with the education of the lower orders." The committee answered, "Show us your charter, and we will tell you whether you have or not." They did, with some difficulty; when the first three lines proved it was for the education of the lower orders. It was the committee that had reason to complain, rather than the Charter-house. The persons who were examined said, "Do you know who are the governors of this institution? They are the archbishop of Canterbury, and such and such noblemen; in fact there, is only one single member, who is not in the House of Peers." The committee answered, "The reason you have given is exactly the reason why we call on you; because the governors you speak of would not answer our summons." The result was, that by this inquiry far less abuses were discovered than were expected. The Bill was then committed pro formâ. CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONS - PETITION FROM ABINGDON.] Sir C. Saston stated, that he had a petition to present from the magistrates and trustees of certain public charities of Abingdon, in Berkshire, complaining that they had been calumniated in the statements that had been made to the House on the subject of the charities belonging to that town, and that these charities were as well managed as any others of the same description. Mr. Brougham observed, that an imperfect statement had been made of what he had said upon the subject. He had stated that there were 25 benefactions in the town of Abingdon, of a large annual amount, and that no return had been made respecting them to the House. On the subject of the misapplication of the funds he had said nothing. Mr. Wrottesley said, that one thing was clear, that something must be done relative to these charitable institutions, of the nature and amount of which the public had not been put in possession. Only twenty-one counties had made a return to the crown-office in Chancery, on the subject of charitable donations. He thought, that a penalty should have been inflicted in the event of no return being made. On the motion, that the Petition do lie on the table, Mr. Brougham said, the House would see the impossibility of this petition lying on the table, for it stated that calumnious misrepresentations had been made in that House, because a false statement had been made in some newspaper. What they had founded their assertions upon was, a total misrepresentation of what had passed, and which the petitioners had no right to notice. Mr. Wynn said, that whether the statement were correct or not, the petitioners had no right to call in question any representation that had been made in that House. He thought the hon. baronet had better withdraw the petition. The Petition was then withdrawn. COTTON FACTORIES BILL.] The order of the day being read for going into a committee on this Bill, Sir R. Peel said, he was desirous, in consequence of what had occurred in former discussions upon the subject, to take the present opportunity of explaining the nature of this bill. Those who were interested in the measure, and desirous of opposing it, had, through some inadvertence, missed the opportunities of debating its principle in former stages of the bill. This he regretted, as it could then have been done with the least inconvenience, He, however, had acted towards those gentlemen with the utmost fairness, and the House had also departed from a point of form to enable these gentlemen to resume the discussion, and he would now, in a few words, explain to the House the part he had taken in the business. About 16 years back he had been induced (as he trusted) by motives of humanity to bring in a bill, called the Apprentices bill, the object of which was to provide some remedy for abuses of a very serious nature which then prevailed in the cotton business. It met, at that time, with the approbation both of the House and of the government, and was attended with beneficial consequences; but they were not of long duration. It was soon after however rendered almost a dead letter, from the great change which took place in the manner of conducting the business to which it referred. The cotton trade found its way from the country into large towns, where, the population being numerous, manufacturers were no longer under the same necessity of receiving children as apprentices. Although ten times the number of children were employed, compared with the period when the apprentices bill had passed, none of them were bound by articles, or any thing in the nature of a permanent contract. The result was, that the children now employed in the factories were totally unprotected, because the apprentices bill could not reach them. The children were not entitled to, nor could they rely on the protection hitherto afforded by masters to those in their em ployment. If they met with an accident, | by legislative acts. Could this fairly be or were ill, the masters were not bound denominated free labour? or, if it were to look to, or provide for them. He, even considered to be such (which he, therefore, took the liberty of introducing for one, could never concede) would not the present measure with reference to the House feel it a duty to yield to the such children, employed in the cotton pressing remonstrance of the medical, trade, as were not protected by any con- clerical, and all other respectable classes tract. The difference between this and of society, who had no interested object, the apprentices bill was very material. and who had stated the dreadful effects The latter was for the protection of to these little children, and even to adults apprentices by the then existing law en- resulting from this incessant application titled to protection from their masters, to laborious occupation in strongly heated this for the protection of those poor chil- apartments, and which had been found, dren who had no legal, and often no na- in the case of the younger children, to tural protector, but who, he trusted, would prevent their arriving at their full growth, find protection in that House. Their case or even assuming the appearance of matuwas truly distressing; the hours of labour rity when of full age? It was obvious to in those factories in which there were no every person who had taken the trouble apprentices being not less than 14 out of of reflecting upon the subject, that human the 24. To endure such fatigue and con- nature, at so early an age, was not capable finement was quite above their strength, of bearing such excessive fatigue as must and could not but tend, in a short time, arise from 13 or 14 hours uninterrupted to injure their constitution, and render labour. It could have no other effect them afterwards unfit for any thing that than to destroy the constitution of chilrequired health and strength of body. dren, and to prevent them from becoming The inconvenience of such long confine- healthy and useful subjects. For these ment and attention to business in persons reasons he would entreat the House to so young was felt and expressed by the take the subject into their serious consiworkmen themselves. Numerous petitions deration, and to go into the committee, had been presented to parliament praying for the purpose of seeing whether some that that time might be shortened, and means might not be devised for alleviating more especially one from Manchester, the hardships and sufferings of these little proceeding from persons wholly uninte- helpless and unprotected victims of our rested, except from motives of humanity; manufacturing prosperity. He therefore among which persons were 30 medical moved, "That the Speaker do now leave men, and 21 clergymen. Humanity was the chair." the only motive by which these individuals could be influenced, for they had no connexion of any kind with the cotton factories. There were petitions praying for the same object, from the spinners themselves; and even from some of the master manufacturers-the sole motive of most of whom, must be, a benevolent wish to alleviate their situation. Indeed he believed that the number of master marufacturers who supported the bill was greater than that of those who opposed it, and that many of them were even anxious that its provisions should be extended to adults. It was fit that the House should be made acquainted with the circumstances of the trade, and with the situation of the people employed in it. The only mode by which such information could be obtained was by the examination of witnesses upon the spot. There had been an allusion made by some hon. gentlemen to general principles, and it was said to be impolitic to interfere with free labour Lord Stanley rose to oppose the measure. The object of it was, he said, in opposition to the feelings of many with whom he was in the habit of acting both in and out of the House. In the county of Lancaster particularly, the bill had excited a strong sensation. No doubt many respectable inhabitants of Manchester had petitioned in favour of it, but the House ought to consider that the question involved considerations affecting not merely the interests of the children employed in the cotton factories, but the interests of the cotton manufacture, and the interests of the empire at large. The present bill was represented by the hon. baronet as only an intended amendment of the 42nd of the king. To this assertion, coming from the quarter it did, he was bound to give credit; but the two measures appeared to him substantially different. The Apprentice act took care of the interest of a large body of children, who, at the time it was passed, were placed |