providence into a species of gambling; by convivial meetings, which lead him to ulterior expense; or by the privilege of balloting for the few prizes, which draws him into all the waste of time and excitement of an electioneering contest." That 14th of December, 1861, on which the prince expired, was a melancholy time in the castle of Windsor to the widowed queen and the royal family. The illness of the prince was brief, brought on by a cold caught in his journey to Oxford, and though but of brief duration, was attended by much suffering. The prince had an abiding impression that his illness would prove fatal, and when one of his physicians said, "Your royal highness will be better in a few days," he replied, "I am sure this illness will be fatal; but I am not afraid." When the same gentleman said, "I most sincerely hope your royal highness will not fulfil your own prediction," he replied that he doubted the likelihood of his recovery, and that if he now only trusted in outward things, he should be miserable indeed. One who was present, and in attendance, stated that, when on his dying bed, he often repeated the well-known hymn: "Rock of Ages, cleft for me, From Thy riven side which flow'd, Be of sin the double cure, Cleanse me from its guilt and power." those political discussions which usually precede the opening of a session. The supremacy of mournfulness remained by general consent undisturbed. Her Majesty's presence at the opening of parliament was not even proposed or thought possible; and all parties seemed to have decided upon a course of quietness and conciliation, so that the sadness which overwhelmed the queen might not be disturbed by the requirements of a legislative erisis. On the 6th of February the proceedings of parliament were commenced by royal commissioners. At that time, some changes during the recess had left the ministry as follows: Secretary of State, Home Department Secretary of State for Colonies. Secretary of State for War President of the Board of Trade Rt. Hon. Viscount Palmerston, Rt. Hon. Earl Granville. Rt. Hon. Earl Russell. His Grace the Duke of New- Rt. Hon. Sir George Cornewall Rt. Hon. Sir Chas. Wood, Bt. Rt. Hon. Wm. E. Gladstone. (His Grace the Duke of Somer- Rt. Hon. Thos. Milner Gibson. As the mournful tidings of his decease spread rapidly through the kingdom on the sabbath morning, they were everywhere received with the utmost grief, and the whole land was filled with mourning. The day of the funeral would have told any visitor to our shores that the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Right Hon. Edward Cardwell. shadow of death had fallen on the nation, and covered it as with a funeral pall. The monuments to the memory of the prince, provided by the voluntary offerings of the people, are numerous. Some have been already inaugurated, and others are in course of construction. The principal is the elaborate and elegant work to which the people have contributed above £50,000, and which occupies an appropriate site in Hyde Park, on a spot formerly included in the area of the Great Exhibition, the finest monument ever constructed in England, and a more gratifying spectacle than that vast granite monolith, which, after much effort, it was found impossible to supply. A magnificent mausoleum was erected under the personal superintendence of her Majesty, who watched the progress of the work with the utmost care, feeling, as well she might, a melancholy satisfaction in lavishing wealth and taste on this memorial to her deeplylamented consort, by whose side she had resolved to find her own last resting-place. The public have but an imperfect apprehension of this rich royal tomb, which is ornamented with a great variety of most beautiful marbles, and is a lasting proof of the taste as well as the devotion of the royal lady by whom it is consecrated to the illustrious dead. CHAPTER V. Review of Parliamentary Session-International Exhibition-Tour of the the Country Home Events-Foreign Affairs-Decease of Eminent Persons. THE PARLIAMENTARY SESSION OF 1862. Chief Commissioner of the Poor Rt. Hon. Charles P. Villiers. The speech from the throne, which was read by the of her Majesty's consort. lord chancellor, commenced by referring to the death "It had been soothing to her Majesty, while suffering most acutely under this awful dispensation of Providence, to receive from all classes of her subjects the most cordial assurances of their symTHE HE sad event which at the close of pathy with her sorrows, as well as of their appreciation the year 1861 threw the whole nation of the noble character of him, the greatness of whose into mourning, exercised a more than loss to her Majesty and to the nation is so justly and so depressing effect upon the opening of the session of universally felt and lamented." The relations of this The death of the Prince Consort-so untimely country with the foreign powers were on the whole and unexpected-caused for the time a cessation of satisfactory. With regard to the United States. “A 1862. A.D. 1862. 66 satisfactory," and the state of the country could not be called "sound." He urged upon the attention of the government the question of the railways of Ireland, which he said ought to be helped in their then languishing condition. Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Scully joined in the debate which followed; but the address was voted the same evening and without dissent. The reply of her Majesty to the address is worthy of record. It was as follows: "I return you my most sincere thanks for your dutiful and affectionate address, especially for the manner in which you have assured me of your feelings on the irreparable loss sustained by myself and the country in the afflicting dispensation of Providence which bows me to the earth." question of great importance, and one which might | then prevailing in the west of Ireland was anything but have led to very serious consequences, arose between her Majesty and the government of the United States of North America, owing to the seizure and forcible removal of four passengers from on board a British mail-boat, by the commander of a ship of war of the United States; but that question has been satisfactorily settled by the restoration of the passengers to British protection, and by the disavowal by the United States government of the act of violence committed by their naval officer. The friendly relations between her Majesty and the President of the United States have, therefore, remained undisturbed." Referring to the Mexican question, "The wrongs committed by various parties and by successive governments in Mexico upon foreigners resident within the Mexican territory, and for which no satisfactory redress could be obtained, have led to the conclusion of a convention between his Majesty the Emperor of the French and the Queen of Spain, for the purpose of regulating a combined operation on the coast of Mexico, with a view to obtain that redress which has hitherto been withheld." As to China, "The improvement which has taken place in the relations between her Majesty's government and that of the Emperor of China, and the good faith with which the Chinese government has continued to fulfil the engagements of the treaty of Tien-tsin, have enabled her Majesty to withdraw her troops from the city of Canton, and to reduce the amount of her forces on the coast and in the seas of China." A treaty had been entered into with the Sultan of Morocco, by means of which he "has been enabled to raise the amount necessary for the fulfilment of certain treaty-engagements which he had contracted with Spain, so as to avoid the risk of a renewal of hostilities with that power." Home affairs were but cursorily referred to. Measures for the improvement of the laws were promised, and among them a bill for rendering the title to land more simple, and its transfer more easy. As usual on such occasions, it was stated that the estimates for the ensuing year would shortly appear, and that they had been framed with a due regard to prudent economy and to the efficiency of the public service. In conclusion, it was stated that "her Majesty regrets that in some parts of the United Kingdom and in certain branches of industry, temporary causes have produced considerable pressure and privation, but her Majesty has reason to believe that the general condition is sound and satisfactory." In the House of Lords Lord Dufferin moved, and the Earl of Shelburne seconded, the address. The Earl of Derby in commenting upon it, having referred in graceful terms to the melancholy subject with which it commenced, expressed his cordial approval of the policy of neutrality advocated by the government in respect to the civil war in the United States of North America. In general terms having adverted to the topics mentioned in the speech, his lordship announced that it was not his intention to oppose its adoption. After a few words from Earl Granville, expressive of his pleasure at the announcement of Earl Derby, and some remarks from Earl Russell and Lord Kingsdown, the address was voted nem. con. In the House of Commons a similar course was pursued. After speeches from Mr. Portman and Mr. Western Wood, the mover and seconder of the address, Mr. Disraeli, following Lord Derby's example, expressed his approval of the speech, and, in conclusion, was more than usually eloquent in referring to the death of the Prince Consort. Lord Palmerston having spoken in reply, the address would have been at once voted, but for a warm discussion which followed some remarks of Mr. Maguire on the subject of Irish distress. He objected to the words "sound and satisfactory," used by her Majesty in reference to the general condition of the country, being used in reference to the state of Ireland. The distress A motion of Mr. White's-interesting as an endeavour to tamper with the privileges of the house-came on for discussion shortly after the commencement of the session. It was in the following terms-"That one night in each week should be set apart for the consideration of the estimates, so as to prevent motions on going into committee of supply interfering with business.” The practice of making motions on that of going into committee of supply was an old one, but it was shown that, in the preceding session, no less than 157 motions were made on going into committee on the estimates. This, as is obvious, hindered and hampered the discussion of the financial acts of the government. However, the motion did not find very much favour. Private members looked upon it as an interference with their privileges. The chiefs of the opposition saw in its adoption the withdrawal of one of their most powerful means of obstruction, and the government having in view the fact that their party was sometimes in opposition, gave to the motion but a lukewarm support. After a long discussion, leave was given to Mr. White to introduce a resolution similar to his motion, but the influence brought to bear upon the right honourable gentleman had the effect of disposing of the matter, at least for that session. The question of national education had been the subject of much discussion during the recess, and particularly the new minute of the privy council, which had been promulgated towards the close of the preceding year. As it was felt by the government that a full explanation of their plan was necessary, and discussion desirable, the ministers of education in both houses made their statements on the 13th of February. The Earl Granville, in the House of Lords, first referred to the appointment of the royal commission on education, which was caused principally by the fact that whereas 2,200,000 children ought to be brought into the inspected schools, no more than 920,000 actually attended them, and only 230,000 received adequate instruction in the elements of reading, writing, and arithmetic. operation of the new minute would be to do away with all the numerous grants of the old system, and substitute one simple plan of assistance, by which a capitation grant of 1d. per head would be given for each attendance over 100, subject to a favourable report from the inspector. This favourable report could only be obtained by the competency of the children, grouped according to age, in the three subjects of reading, writing and arithmetic, and their failure in any of these branches would render the school liable to the loss of one-third of the allowance, and if they failed in all, the allowance would be withdrawn altogether. The cry of "Religion in danger' was not a fair one to be raised, for the new minute did not make any alteration in the system of religious instruction. Referring to Scotland, Lord Granville said, that in deference to the strong representations made from various quarters, that part of her Majesty's dominions would not be included in the new regulations. In order to prevent the necessity of their examination, children under six years of age would be required to attend school 200 times instead of 100 times as before; and it had been determined that no school should receive assistance unless the master was certificated and duly | by virtually accepting the resolutions-it would be unpaid in accordance with the new minute, that was, three generous to try and obtain larger concessions. In the times the amount of his present augmented grant. Earl course of the debate which followed, Mr. Walter moved Derby having expressed a wish for time to consider the a resolution to the following effect, "That to require the statement of the noble earl, the subject was postponed. employment of certificated masters and pupil teachers In the House of Commons that evening, Mr. Lowe by managers of schools, as an indispensable condition of made a long and elaborate statement to the same effect their participation in the parliamentary grant, is inexas already made in the upper house, but the matter pedient and inconsistent with the principle of payment was not discussed until the 11th of March, when Mr. for results which forms the basis of the revised code." Walpole laid on the table of the house eleven reso- This resolution, though ably supported, was lost on a lutions in reference to the revised code of education division by 163 votes to 156. A resolution of Mr. framed by the committee of the privy council. These Baines, "That it is expedient that the managers of a resolutions went far to condemn all the alterations in the school, before receiving capitation money from the comsystem which had been announced on the part of the mittee of the privy council, should satisfy the inspector government. First, they declared the individual exami- that the circumstances of the parents of the children nations of the pupils in reading, writing, and arith- are such as to require public assistance for their educametic to be inexpedient; then they condemned the prin- tion," and a motion of Mr. H. A. Bruce, "That as the ciple of paying exclusively by results. The system of great majority of children in Wales are, on their adgrouping by age was pronounced to be inadequate, and mission to schools, ignorant of, or unacquainted with, the specially disadvantageous for children whose early edu- English language, in which their examination is concation had been neglected. The new code would increase ducted, such examination shall not in any school in the the difficulty of providing education for poor districts, principality be commenced until the children have and its regulations with respect to pupil teachers were attained the age of seven years," were opposed by the condemned as impolitic and unjust. The arrangements government, and defeated upon divisions. The revised proposed for night schools were objected to; and, in his code, as remodelled by the government, was accordingly last resolution, Mr. Walpole asked the house to resolve agreed to. that no future change in the system should be adopted until it had been submitted to parliament for at least one month before the time of its operation. It was not until the 24th of March that the discussion upon these resolutions and the new code took place, when Mr. Walpole commenced the debate by moving that the house resolve itself into a committee to consider the best mode of distributing the parliamentary grants for education. He took objection to the government plan, primarily on the ground that it ought first to have been submitted to parliament for their approval, and not been issued without that approval; and, secondly, on the ground stated in his resolutions. The home secretary did not object to the motion for the committee, and expressed the determination of the government to consider all suggestions with fairness and impartiality. The discussion which followed was of great length, and was concluded by the motion for going into committee being agreed to; but the general opposition to the ministerial scheme led to statements being made by the ministers in both houses, shortly before the adjournment for the Easter recess. That of Earl Granville in the House of Lords was the most comprehensive. In consequence of the discussions which had taken place, he said, the government had determined to make the following modifications in the revised code:-The sum of 4s. a year was to be given on the average yearly attendance of each pupil; 8s. for reading, writing, and arithmetic, for every pupil who should attend 200 times, subject to a deduction of one-third in case of failure in attendance. The grouping of pupils for examination was to be made in such manner as the managers might think best. The education grant was to be made answerable for any deficiency in the stipends of the pupil teachers. The grant might be withdrawn if religious instruction should be neglected in Church of England schools, and any revision of the code was to be laid before parliament for one month before its coming into operation. The Bill for the Abolition of Church-rates, which, on the question that it be read a third time, last session, was defeated by the casting vote of the speaker, was again brought forward by Sir John Trelawny, whose determined opposition to church-rates had led him year after year to introduce bills for their abolition. The discussion which followed was short and the division close, singularly so indeed, for the numbers were, in favour of the bill 286-against it 287, showing a majority against the bill of one vote. This unsatisfactory result led Mr. Estcourt to introduce, on the 14th of June, a series of resolutions. He moved "That the laws relating to church-rates may be beneficially settled by combining in one measure provisions for each of the following objects:-first, to enable vestries specially summoned, and in which owners shall have a vote by proxy, to transfer from occupiers to owners so much of their liability as regards the repair of thei parish church and churchyard, and to make such special rate, if voted by a majority, recoverable by the same process as a rate for repairs of highways; secondly, to repeal the existing legal process for enforcing a compulsory church-rate; and thirdly, to give facilities for collecting a voluntary rate." These resolutions, based upon the grounds that the present law ought to be altered, and that parliament ought to make provision for the sustentation of the churches of the land if a voluntary rate were insufficient for the purpose, were but feebly debated. Sir George Grey, on the part of the government, said he could not conceive anything more calcu lated to breed ill-feeling between owners and occupiers than the first resolution. To the two other propositions by themselves he would have given his most cordial support, but he could not agree to the first. Mr. Estcourt not being prepared to assent to any separation or modification of his resolutions, obtained leave to withdraw them, and the debate was at an end. Another attempt to deal with this vexed question was made by Mr. Newdegate, who introduced a bill to authorise the commuta. tion of the rate for a rent-charge to be levied on the proprietors of land. This bill came on for a second reading on the 9th of July, when it was proposed to refer it to a select committee of the house; but the government, having in view the lateness of the session, declined to accede to the suggestion, and the bill was withdrawn. Mr. Lowe made a similar statement in the House of Commons, and adding that the concessions were made in deference to the generally expressed wish of the house, but that any further alterations would, in the opinion of the government, render the entire scheme worthless. Mr. Walpole was very pleased, he said, to accept the concessions of the honourable gentleman, but asked for time for their consideration. This was accordingly A measure which had a rather novel object, was in given, and on the 5th of May the debate on the modified troduced early in the session by Mr. Bouverie. It sought code was opened by Mr. Walpole. It was his opinion to give relief to persons in holy orders of the Church of that considering the manner in which the government England, who, by declaring their dissent from it, were had met the objection urged against the revised code-liable by law to various restrictions and penalties. In moving the second reading of the measure, Mr. Bouverie | of any but the lower classes, except under peculiar cirsaid that many persons, owing to scruples on theological cumstances. The establishment of these colleges was not points, were desirous of freeing themselves from the justified by such circumstances. Their avowed object obligations imposed upon them by their ordination and by the canons of the church. Yet the law held them to their obligations, and forbade them to engage in any lay pursuit though they might become Roman Catholic priests. As it was understood that the bill would be referred to a select committee, it was not vigorously opposed at this stage, but upon its re-appearance and on the motion for a third reading the hostility was very marked. Sir L. Palk led the opposition, and his speech contained the reasons for the dislike of his followers to the bill. The principle, he alleged, which would relieve persons from the most solemn vows and obligations, was too objectionable to be allowed to pass unchallenged. After considerable discussion, the bill was lost by 98 to 88 votes. Lord Ebury moved for leave to introduce, in the House of Lords, bills with objects of a similar nature; but the measures did not reach a second reading. The "Marriages of Affinity Bill," more commonly known as the Bill to legalise Marriages with a Deceased Wife's Sister, was again brought in, this time by Mr. Monckton Milnes. On the 10th February, the motion for its second reading was met with a determined opposition. Lord Robert Cecil led the opposition by a motion that the bill be read a second time that day six months. The noble lord took a singular objection to the bill. He did not oppose it upon theological grounds, but he could not satisfy himself, if the measure passed, what the house might not be asked to do next. If the marriage laws were once altered, there would be no logical ground upon which other prohibited degrees could stand, and marriages still more repulsive might be legalised. On the part of the government, Sir G. Grey supported the bill. He argued that the theological ground of opposition was doubtful, and he believed that the balance of advantages to society was on the side of the proposed relaxation of the laws. Mr. Walpole strongly opposed the bill, believing that on moral grounds the proposed disturbance of the marriage laws would be detrimental to society in this country. According to the bill, marriages should not be void by reason of affinity. Was it | to be confined to marriage with a sister-in-law, or if so, why should not a widow be allowed to marry her brotherin-law? Those who wished to alter the laws were bound to show sufficient reason for the alteration, and to say how far they meant to carry their policy of alteration. The debate, which was carried on with great vigour, resulted in a majority in favour of the measure of eleven votes, the numbers being 144 to 133. The opposition was renewed more eagerly upon the motion for going into committee, Mr. Hunt moving as an amendment that the committee be deferred for six months. After a short debate the bill was thrown out by 148 votes to 116. Mr. Whalley did not lose the opportunity which the annual motion for the grant to Maynooth College afforded, for a speech upon the subject of endowments to Catholic institutions. The honourable member was as usual received with attention, but attention of such a nature as he would gladly have dispensed with. Ridicule open and avowed, laughter and uproar, followed his motion that the grant be discontinued, regard, of course, heing had to existing vested interests. The discussion which followed what can hardly be called the speech of the honourable gentleman, for it was drowned in clamour, was short, and the opinion of the house decisive. On a division there were for the motion 111, and for the grant 193 votes. The state of public education in Ireland was brought under the notice of the house on the 22nd May by the O'Connor Don. In a very interesting speech, referring more particularly to the queen's colleges in that country, these institutions, he said, erred against the principle that the state was not bound to provide for the education VOL. IV. was to meet the wants of the Roman Catholics and dissenters in Ireland, who could not receive religious education in Trinity College. In a religious point of view, however, these colleges were not less objectionable to Roman Catholics than Trinity College, therefore the queen's colleges had failed to meet the object for which they were established, and he denied that the colleges had provided a university education commensurate with the outlay. The chief secretary for Ireland insisted that the queen's colleges had been pre-eminently successful, and had answered the purpose of their founders; entering into copious details to establish his statements. He was sorry that some of the Roman Catholic prelates should have condemned the system of mixed education, and condemned the queen's colleges, and he hoped that the attack made by the honourable member would, by the good sense of the house, be defeated. Very many speeches followed, from Mr. Maguire, Mr. Monsell, Major O'Reilly, Mr. More O'Ferrall, and others, denouncing in strong terms the system of mixed education; but beyond eliciting a discussion upon the subject, no further progress was made. The civil war in the United States of North America excited great attention in England at this time, and during the session there were frequent debates upon the subject. On the 11th of February, in the House of Lords, Lord Carnarvon called their lordships' attention to the detention of British subjects in United States prisons upon charges of political offences. It appeared that three British subjects were at that moment in prison in the Federal States, where they had been detained for four or five months without a single allegation of any sort being made against them, and without any hope of inquiry into their case unless they took the oath of allegiance to the United States. The prisons were of the rudest, and the accommodation of the worst kind possible. The noble earl having asked the secretary of state for foreign affairs whether these facts had come within the knowledge of the government, and, if so, had induced it to take any action in the matter, Earl Russell said the question was one of American constitutional law with which he had no concern. If, as had been maintained by lawyers, and had been recently asserted by a vote of congress, the president alone had the power to suspend the habeas corpus, he, of course, had the power of arresting persons on the mere suspicion of treason, and the English government could have no ground of complaint. In fact, so late as 1848, a procedent was furnished by the arrest and detention in Ireland, during the suspension of the habeas corpus, of two American citizens. Lord Lyons had represented the case to Mr. Seward, who had not refused to listen to the complaints, and had placed no hindrance in the way of the British consuls who might wish to see the prisoners. In the course of the debate which followed, the Earl of Malmesbury asked for some information relative to the nature of the blockade of the Southern ports, referring to a statement of Mr. Mason that so inefficiently was it maintained that no less than 600 or 700 ships had broken through since its institution. If this were so, such an illegal blockade could not, he thought, be much longer respected. Earl Russell in reply said that very little information on the subject was in their hands, and he had asked Mr. Mason what the aggregate tonnage of the 600 or 700 vessels was, but he was not able to give as it could only be looked upon as a commercial port. | a cotton famine, debates on the necessity of opening The American government in reply to representations new fields for the production of that commodity ensued. on the subject had stated that the ships had been sunk The risk of having to depend for our supply of cotton in aid of the blockade, and not with a view to the upon a single market from which war might at any time destruction of the harbour. preclude us, was admitted on all sides, and it was with the view of stimulating the government to lend all the aid in their power to further the production of cotton in the East Indies, that Mr. J. B. Smith, on the 19th of June, rose to call the attention of the house to these matters. The honourable gentleman showed that with English superintendence and capital good cotton could be grown in India, and that, by the opening of the navigation of the river Godavery, the cotton would not only be good but cheap. The secretary of state for India entered fully into the question. He said he thought Mr. Smith had forgotten that the Indian finances were not in a satisfactory state, and he reminded the house that large sums of money had recently been expended in that country for various purposes, and stated that the same means which had been employed in the cases of sugar, silk, and indigo had been employed in respect to cotton, and would, he had no doubt, be as successful. Whatever facilities the government could give would be afforded, both to the improvement of the cotton and its supply; and as to the opening of the navigation of the Godavery, they had always been of opinion that it was desirable, and everything had been done that could be done in that way. With this expression of policy, the debate practically concluded. A passage of arms between Mr. Bright and Lord Palmerston occurred at this time with reference to the affair of the Trent steamboat, the former taking a fitting opportunity of expressing his opinion upon the conduct of the government with reference to that affair, especially | as to the inconsistency between the despatches sent from this country to the United States. Mr. Bright was more than usually felicitous in his speech, one paragraph of which being specially noticeable. "It is not customary," he said, "in private life for a person to send a messenger with a polite message to a friend or neighbour or acquaintance, and at the same time to send a man of portentous strength, wielding a gigantic club, and making every kind of ferocious gesticulation, and still to profess that all this is done in the most friendly and courteous manner." This had been, however, the course of the government, and the result was that more than a million of money had been wasted by the government in their warlike preparations. Lord Palmerston's reply was in his usual happy style of evasion, and in it he—at least, to his own mind-clearly showed that the course of the government had not been inconsistent, nor its action the cause of unnecessary expenditure. It would seem that his party was satisfied, for the matter shortly after was allowed to drop. The question of the blockade of the Southern ports was again the subject of lively discussion in both houses of parliament. In neither house was there any definite decision arrived at, so that the matter for the time stood over. An important debate upon the law of nations, in its bearing upon the maritime rights of neutral powers, took place in the House of Commons on the 11th March, on the following resolution, moved by Mr. Horsfall: "That the present state of international maritime law, as affecting the rights of belligerents and neutrals, is ill-defined and unsatisfactory, and calls for the early attention of her Majesty's government." After prolonged debate Lord Palmerston said that nothing could be more inconvenient than for the house to adopt such a general and abstract resolution, which, if it were adopted, the government could only guess at the course they were to pursue from the arguments urged in support of it; but they were so discordant that he was at a loss to know which should be their standard, and this he thought was in itself a sufficient reason for the rejection of the motion. Satisfied with the discussion he had caused, Mr. Horsfall asked for and obtained leave to withdraw his motion, which was accordingly done. Later in the session Lord Carnarvon stated that he had every reason to believe that the proclamation of General Butler at New Orleans, that women who showed contempt of Federal officers and soldiers should be treated as prostitutes plying their vocation, was authentic, but that it would be disavowed by the Federal government. Lord Palmerston stated his opinion that that proclamation was of the most infamous character, and that Englishmen must blush to think it came from a man of the Anglo-Saxon race. Any interference in the American war would, he believed, only serve to aggravate the sufferings of those now enduring privations in consequence of its effect in this country. A long debate ensued on the question of interference or neutrality as regards the civil war in America; but although several motions and amendments were moved, the debate concluded without any of them being put to the vote. This arose probably from the fact that the majority thought it inexpedient to declare in favour of interference, and unnecessary formally to record their desire for strict neutrality. The war in America having caused what was termed The distress, noticeable particularly in Lancashire, led to the adoption by the government of extraordinary measures with a view to alleviate its pressure. On the 22nd of July, the president of the poorlaw board moved for leave to bring in a bill to enable the boards of guardians in certain counties in England to meet any extraordinary demand for relief. He showed from returns the amount of distress that existed in the principal towns of Lancashire, in consequence of the want of employment, and the expenditure for relief of the poor, remarking that the number of persons depending upon the rates was no criterion of the number destitute of employment. The deposits in the savings banks were nearly exhausted; the distress was increasing rapidly; and there seemed no probability of its decrease until the revival of trade. Having in view these circumstances, and the principle of the existing law which sanctioned a rate in aid, he proposed by the bill to give vitality to that principle, so that any parish or parishes overburdened by extraordinary distress might claim a contribution from the common fund of the union, or under certain circumstances one union might call for a contribution from the other unions in the country. The bill was only intended to be in force until the 1st of March, 1863. In committee the measure underwent considerable discussion, and some important modifications were made. Mr. Puller proposed, and Mr. Cobden seconded, the principal alteration, which was that distressed unions should have the power to raise money by loan as well as to levy a rate in aid. After considerable debate this proposition was agreed to, but the modus operandi was the subject of renewed debate, and ultimately it was decided that the liability to a rate in aid of the other parishes of a union should arise as soon as the expenditure of a parish exceeded 3s. in the pound, and that a power to borrow on security of the rates should be conferred on the guardians, subject to the sanction of the poor-law board, whenever the aggregate expenditure of the union exceeded 3s. in the pound on the whole ratcable property of the whole union. The measure, as it then stood, was quickly passed through both houses, and received the royal assent towards the close of the session. The annual statement of the chancellor of the exchequer was made in a very full house on the 3rd of April. Referring to the expenditure for last year, it was found to be £536,000 less than the estimated |
