Scarlett, hon. R. C. Vere, Sir C. B. Scott, hon. F. Sheppard, T. Somerset, Lord G. Somerton, Visct. Stanley, Lord Stewart, J. Stuart, Lord J. Stuart, W. V. Trollope, Sir J. Trotter, J. Sutton, hon. H. M. Turnor, C. Villiers, Visct. TELLERS. Fremantle, Sir T. branch of the National Anti-Corn-law League established at Manchester, and the circular was forwarded to the members of the League. The letter was as follows: ought to remember the forbearance which was shown, and abstain from proceedings like those with which he charged them. He was quite sure that, if natives of this country went abroad and interfered as these foreigners had done, they would speedily come under the operation of the laws of the countries where they resided, and be obliged to leave. He protested, in the name of the work people of the North of England, in the name of justice and decency, against these proceedings. The House, he was sure, would visit with conTHE TRUCK SYSTEM.] Mr. Ferrand dign punishment persons proved to be rose, in pursuance of a notice which he had guilty of the offences of which he comgiven. He begged to say a few words relative plained, and as he was a living man he to a declaration which an hon. Member, would use every effort to see such wellwhom he did not then see in his place, had merited punishment inflicted. He begged lately alluded to in that House. The decla- to read a circular, which was dated “ Manration had been stated by that hon. Mem-chester, March 5, 1842," and was signed ber to emanate from Manchester, and to be "J. Higgins, secretary." The person who signed by seventy-two manufacturers re-signed this letter was the secretary of the siding there, who were subscribers to the Anti-Corn-law League, who in that document denied that they had employed the truck system in the payment of the wages of their workpeople, or that they paid them through any other medium than the current coin of the realm. Now he begged distinctly to state, that the hon. Member had been most fully deceived in the representations which had been made with reference to this declaration. Instead of those seventy-two signatures being the signatures of seventy-two manufacturers residing at Manchester, they were the signatures not only not of persons residing at Manchester, but of persons who were many of them not manufacturers at all. The first name on the list was the name of a man who had been proved to have paid his workpeople in milk, and who had also been convicted of gross tyranny towards his work people. In that list, too, were the names of five foreigners. Now, what right had those foreigners to come over here and subscribe to a fund which was raised for the purpose of stirring up excitement, setting class against class, and giving support to a party which already was endeavouring to overawe the Government? These persons ought to be aware, that by coming over here and carrying on their business, they were depriving the British merchants of their market; and because our merchants did not wish to dispute the right of these foreigners to pursue their avocations here, therefore they "Dear Sir,-It has been suggested that a declaration by the workmen on each establishment would tend to complete the exposure of Mr. Ferrand's charges; and as a discussion is likely to take place during the early part of the week, it might be well to direct the foremen of works to obtain declarations signed by a few of the men, on behalf of the whole, and to forward them to us at the earliest oppor tunity." "Now where are those declarations?" exclaimed the hon. Member. "Have they appeared?-they have not; and what is the reason?-because the working men have at last shown a proper spirit. They have found that there has been a kind feeling expressed towards them in this House-they have, many of them, written to me, telling me so-they have rebelled against the attempt to make them sign what they knew to be false. This I can prove before any committee that may be appointed. They have had too much. respect for themselves, and the position they hold, even as poor working men; they would not sign the declarations, which have not, therefore, been presented. And if they had been presented, I should have been ready for you. You cannot move an inch without my being ready to meet you; and in a way, perhaps, you may not be aware of. I have received | complete exposure of these practices, a comanother letter; listen as I read it, and say mittee of inquiry may be appointed." if there ever was-in a country professing itself the land of liberty-such a system of fraud and tyranny towards the poor as that which I am exposing. This is from a oor working man :— I have, Sir, another letter from Chorley, where the hon. Member for Stockport's works are situated, and where he must have known, when the other night he so loudly denied the charges made, that the manufacturers were robbing their men most infamously. The writer says, "The magistrates have convicted some of the chief manufacturers here in penalties to the amount of 251. for robbing their workpeople by paying them in goods instead of money." The other night, the hon. Member for Stockport said, he had inquired whether in his mills or 66 printing works" the truck "A statement was put into my hands (which I enclose) from one who holds a station in a cotton-mill, which enables him to know that men are compelled to sign declarations known to be false. Your exposures, Sir, have driven the grinding Anti-Corn-law Leaguers frantic, as they know every charge you have brought against them to be true. Your exhibitions of their fraud and tyranny have delighted working men of all politics, for they know how well founded they are; and they have gone far to abolish the infamous truck system, which is so notorious that the only wonder is, how Mem-system prevailed, and that he had found bers can be hardy enough to deny it." it did not, whereas the fact was, that the forced his people to buy milk from him. hon. Member himself kept cows, and Sir, after the statements I have made, I am sure every one will see the propriety of facilitating the inquiry by furnishing the returns for which I beg to move I have a further letter to read, still further exposing this accursed system, which prevails to a frightful extent, and has been carried on by men holding a situation in society which ought to have made them ashamed of such disgraceful proceedings. And I take this opportunity of repeating, that it is my determination fearlessly, in spite of all opposition, to do my utmost to ferret out the whole of this cruel, abominable tyranny, which is practised upon the working classes. I care not by whom--I care not to what party the guilty may belong-I have but one course, a fair and open one, to pursue; that is, to search out with determined resolution, as an independent Member-to search out and expose this system; and when the day comes, after Easter, when I shall move for the committee of inquiry, backed by the enormous mass of evidence which I am daily receiving; and when before that committee there shall come out all HOUSE OF COMMONS, 2o. Designs Copyright; Copyright. 3o and passed:-Bristol Boundary; Stalybridge Gas. the robberies, and plunders, and oppres- PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Colonel Rawdon, Mr. Aglisions which have been and are perpetrated on the manufacturing workmen, the complaints of these unfortunate men will find a response, not only within these walls, but throughout the country. Sir, a magistrate of Lancashire writes to me thus : "A friend begs to state a few facts. A great many convictions have taken place in this district within a very short period for a use of the truck system. At one village, where flannels are made, such is the extent to which it is carried, that a man has been known to go to a barber with a piece of candle instead of a penny, not having even that small coin in his possession. It is hoped, that in order to a onby, Mr. Cobden, Dr. Bowring, Mr. Villiers, and Mr. T. Duncombe, from Belfast, Safford, Westbury, Greenock, Haddington, St. Clement's Danes, Lancashire, and other places, for a Repeal of the Corn-laws.-From G. Warr, for Compensation to Corn Inspectors.-By Mr. O'Connell, from Cork, shewing that Cork was the Best Packet Station between the South of England and Ireland; and from Farmers in the county of Meath, in favour of the Importation of Foreign Cattle.-By Mr. J. O'Brien, from Limerick, for Amendment of the Poor Relief (Ireland) Act.-By Colonel Rawdon, from Miltown, and Down, for the Marriages (Ireland) Bill.- By Mr. Brotherton, from Salford, against the Railway Bill.From the Manchester, Bury, and Bolton Canal and Railway Company, for Alteration of the mode of Charging Duty on Passengers on Railways.-By Mr. Beckett, from Leeds, for Exemption from the Operation of the Borough Improvement Bill.-By Mr. A. Smith, from the Anti-Slavery Society at Hitchin, against the Importation of Hill Coolies to the Mauritius. -By Mr. Shaw, from Rathcormac (County Cork), against of Ecclesiastical and Secular Property.-By Mr. C. Bald the National System of Education in Ireland.-By Mr. | doubt with reference to the answer which Colville, from the Clergy of Derby, for the Equal Rating he should give, but it was a most inconvenient course continually to draw the attention of Government to a question not Strictly before it. win, from several Millers, against the proposed Duty on Foreign Flour.-By Mr. Reade, from Kilkenny, in favour of the Importation of Grain instead of Meal and Flour. -By an hon. Member, from Cordwainer Ward, for Re demption of the Tolls on Waterloo Bridge.-From Wick, for Universel Suffrage.-From the Corporation of Southampton, in favour of County Courts.- From Stratfordupon-Avon, and Nottingham, for Alteration of the Poor laws.-From Clonolney, for Abolition of the Duty on Foreign Beef.-From Authors, Booksellers, and others, in favour of the Copyright Bill. Subject at an end. CALEDONIAN CANAL.] Mr. E. Ellice, said, that on a previous occasion the right hon. Baronet opposite had stated that it was his intention to submit the THE INCOME TAX-PENSIONS-HER report of Sir Edward Parry upon the CaMAJESTY.] Mr. Milner Gibson believed ledonial Canal to a committee. Upon that he had the permission of the right looking to the papers of the House, howhon. Baronet at the head of her Majes- ever, he found no notice of any such ty's Government to repeat a question committee being likely to be appointed. which he had already put. It was, whe- As the recess was drawing near, unless ther it were the intention of Government the committee in question should be soon to extend the Income-tax to persons re-appointed, he feared that the gallant officeiving annuities from the consolidated cer's labours would have but a very sorry fund, under the operation of particular acts of Parliament? Sir Robert Peel apprehended that the measure which he had proposed subjected to the Income tax all salaries and all annuities, received by any of the subjects of her Majesty; all incomes, however, paid out of the consolidated fund would be subject to a reduction of the duty of 3 per cent. He would take this opportunity of making a communication, which he was sure would be received with much satisfaction by the House. When, on the part of the Government, he had intimated to her Majesty, that her servants were of opinion that the financial difficulties of the country were such as to make it desirable to submit, although in time of peace, the incomes of her Majesty's subjects for a limited period to a tax of 3 per cent., her Majesty, prompted by those feelings of deep and affectionate interest in the welfare of her people which she had ever manifested, stated to him that if the financial condition of the country was such that, in a time of peace, Parliament should think it necessary to subject all incomes to a certain charge, it was her determination that her own income should be subjected to a similar burden. Mr. Ricardo asked whether incomes derived from terminable annuities would be subjected to the same rate of taxation as income derived from permanent annuities. Sir Robert Peel begged the question might be deferred until Friday, when the subject would come on for discussion regularly. It was not that he had any result. He was afraid that the right hon. Baronet opposite would think that on matters of minor importance such questions were not a little troublesome, but the great anxiety felt in the North of Scotland that the matter should be decided in one way or another warranted him in pressing the matter on the attention of Government. His question was, whether the right hon. Baronet intended to nominate a committee before Easter? Sir R. Peel could assure the hon. Gentleman that he considered the matter to which his question had reference as by no means one of minor importance. He had seen the names of the gentlemen proposed to form the committee upon paper, and he really thought that the notice had been given. He saw no reason why it should not be given for to-morrow. PRISON DISCIPLINE.] Mr. O'Connell wished to make a few remarks on something which had last night fallen from the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department, in vindicating the conduct of the rev. Mr. Bagshawe. A demand had been made by a Catholic prisoner for a priest, and the question as to what he wished to have his attendance for was discussed between the gaoler and the chaplain, who came to the resolution that the prisoner wished for the priest to assist him in conducting his defence; the request for his attendance was therefore rejected. On looking over the act of Parliament, he found no such discretionary power, as had been here exercised, entrusted to either chaplain or gaoler. The act stipulated that if a request should be made by a Catholic prisoner for the attendance of a priest, it should be granted. It would, however, appear that the right hon. Baronet had vindicated the conduct of the clergyman alluded to. Sir James Graham said, that, admitting the statute to run as the hon. Member had construed it, yet that the case alluded to did not come within the limits of those provisions which it was alleged had been violated. He understood that the prisoner had refused to comply with the general rules and regulations of the gaol. Subject at an end. CHARGES AGAINST MANUFACTURERS -THE TRUCK SYSTEM.] Mr. Villiers said, that not having precisely understood the rule the Speaker had laid down the other evening with respect to persons out of this House noticing what had been said by Members in the House, he wished to know whether in the present case he was in order. If he understood the Speaker, the right hon. Gentleman had said that persons out of the House were not entitled in any statement they might submit to the House to comment upon or answer any charges affecting them made by any Member of the House. The House would remember that the question arose upon certain manufacturers and others in Lancashire, charged with certain practices by the hon. Member for Knaresborough, denying the truth of his statements. Since that time, and late last evening, during his absence from the House, the same hon. Member, as he was informed, had repeated some of the same charges which the hon. Member had uttered before. Now he wished to know whether, as the hon. Member had been suffered to make such statements, he might read the notice of his speech by the woollen manufacturers residing in Yorkshire in the precise places where the hon. Member had brought his accusations, denying everything that the Hon. Member had said with regard to them? He had declarations to this effect now in his hand, and he wished to know if he were precluded by the rules of the House from reading them. whether, upon any future occasion, or upon any other motion, he should be allowed to submit them to the House? The Speaker said, that the only way in which such a denial could be made, was either in moving for a committee upon the subject, or in examinations before that committee. Mr. Ferrand said, that if the hon. Member for Wolverhampton would publish to the world the names of the whole of the members of the Anti-Corn-law League, it would soon be discovered who did, and who did not, pursue the truck system. Mr. Villiers said, that the hon. Member must see that he could not give the hon. Member a list of the Anti-Corn-law League. He was not aware who were members of it. He had only received the statements of many of that body denying the statements of the hon. Member, and he certainly had seen no reason to doubt the truth of what they said respecting themselves. Mr. Cobden wished to ask a question of the hon. Member for Knaresborough, with reference to what had fallen from him last night. The hon. Member was reported in the Times to have said, "The other night, the Member for Stockport said he had inquired whether, in his mills or printingworks,' the truck system prevailed, and that he had found that it did not-whereas, the fact was, that the hon. Member himself kept cows, and forced his people to buy milk from them." He wished to know whether the hon. Member for Knaresborough charged him with the truck system? Mr. Ferrand said, that what he had said was, that he did not know whether the hon. Member for Stockport was in his place, but if he was, would the hon. Member deny that he kept cows, and supplied the people with milk from them, deducting the amount from their wages? Mr Cobden: Does the hon. Member charge me with pursuing the trucksystem? Mr. Ferrand had said " Would the hon Member deny it?" If he did, it was his duty to take that denial; but he would give his reasons for having asked the quesThe Speaker said, that such a proceed-tion, and his authority for having done ing would be irregular. Mr. Villiers said, they certainly contained a reference to the hon. Member's speech, as the charges were contained in that speech. He wished now to know so. Mr. Cobden hoped that the House would give him credit for not wishing to introduce personal discussion into its debates. It seemed to him that the statement which had gone abroad in the " Times" as a charge against him was withdrawn. He was not, therefore, directly called upon to answer it, but he would treat it as a charge made against him last night which was not adhered to to-day. If, however, the House would allow him, he would state a few facts in reference to the business with which he was connected. That business could not be carried on without the consumption of large quantities of cow-dung He was now letting the hon. Member for Knaresborough into the arcana of the calico printing trade. As many hundred tons of dung were used in this trade, it was necessary for manufacturers to keep great numbers of cows. Now, it so happened that his printing work being situated close to a town, it was found more convenient to buy the requisite quantity of dung than to keep cows, and therefore the insinuations of the hon. Member for Knaresborough were not only untrue, but destitute of the shadow of a foundation. If the House would allow him, he would remind it that those charges were evidently got up for the purpose of distracting the attention of the public from a great and important question. He must confess that he did not understand how the alleged misconduct of mill-owners and manufacturers could properly form a part of discussions on the Corn-laws. If it was true, as the hon. Member for Knaresborough had stated, that the master manufacturers were tyrants to their workmen, that could be no reason why their sufferings should be added to by increasing the price of food. Mr. S. Wortley rose to order. The hon. Member for Stockport was not in order in entering into the Corn-law question. He should confine himself to the charge brought against him. The Speaker said, that the question before the house was that the order of the day be now read. Hon. Members ought not to wander from it. Mr. Cobden did not feel that he was intruding upon the House. He had tried to avoid personalities. He had borne much from the other side of the House. He had borne it because he knew that the annoyance was part of a system to lead attention away from a great question recently before the House. He was not afraid to meet the hon. Member for Knaresborough on questions of personal character. If this House was to be made an arena for the discussion of questions of social relations between fathers and sons, brothers and sisters, nephews and nieces, masters and servants, or between neighbour and neighbour, he would not be ashamed to enter into such discussion. Nay, he challenged the hon. Member to it. He had always studied to avoid person alities, but if charges were to be made against him he should meet the Gentleman who brought them forward on any ground which he wished. He repeated that such charges were only attempts to divert public attention from a great question. Hon. Members charged manufacturers with being tyrants to their workmen. He did not stand there as an advocate for their indiscriminate defence. There were good and bad mill-owners and manufacturers, as there were good and bad of all classes; but that was no reason for stigmatising them as a class; and even although they were all, without exception, bad, still that, again, was no reason for taxing the poor man's loaf. The great question from which attention was sought to be diverted was that attacking corn and provision monopoly-attacking the monopoly of the people's bread; and, when it was attempted to divert public attention from these grievances, by talking of "devil's dust," and the enormities of the manufacturers, such subjects of discussion were quite unworthy of the House. Mr. S. Wortley said, there was no man in the House more averse to the introduction of personal altercation than he was, but with respect to the charges of the hon. Member for Knaresborough, this must be borne in mind, that when that hon. Gentleman undertook to show that the gentlemen connected with the AntiCorn-law League were obnoxious to these imputations, he was only following an example set him by the hon. Gentleman opposite. Whatever might be the faults of the hon. Member for Knaresborough, he (Mr. S. Wortley) would at least sayand he thought that the majority of the House would agree with him in the assertion-that charges against his language did not come with very good grace from the hon. Gentleman opposite, who had taken so violent a part in the defence of the league. With respect to the hon. Member for Stockport, could the House forget the language which he had used last Session, while addressing the House upon the agricultural interest? The House would not forget the terms "monsters, and tyrants, and demons," which figured in that speech. [Mr. Cobden spoke |