that act he had given his constant oppo- hon. Baronet told them that he should ad- of List of the NOES. A'Court, Captain Duncombe, hon. O. Fuller, A. E. Gaskell, J. Milnes Gladstone,rt hn.W. E. Goring, C. Goulburn, rt. hon. H. Graham, rt. hn. Sir J. Hope, G. W. Sir E. Knatchbull, right hon. Larpent, Sir G. de H. Mackenzie, W. F. Planta, right hon. J. Polhill, F. Pollock, Sir F. Pringle, A. Rawdon, Colonel Reade, W. M. Smith, rt. hon. R. V. Stuart, H. Sutton, hon. H. M. Taylor, T. E. Tennent, J. E. Collins, W. Colville, C. R. Paget, Lord W. Dick, Q. Egerton, W. T. Rennie, G. Escott, B. Scarlett, hon. R. C. Greene, T. Fielden, J. Sibthorp, Colonel Grimston, Viscount Fitzroy, Captain Wakley, T. Grogan, E. Trench, Sir F. W. Fleetwood, Sir P, H. Watson, W. H. Guest, Sir J. Grimsditch, T. Wigney, I. N. Hamilton, W. J. Trotter, J. Hanmer, Sir J. Hardy, J. Harford, S. Hayes, Sir E. Heathcote, J. Hanley, J. W. Wortley, hon. J. S. TELLERS. Crawford, S. Hamilton, Lord C. Turnor, C. Harcourt, G. G. Vane, Lord H. Hardinge, rt. hn.Sir H. Verner, Colonel Herbert, hon. S. Vesey, hon. T. Hodgson, R. Vivian, hon. Captain Holdsworth, J. Ward, H. G. Trollope, Sir J. {SEPT. 28} Mr. Crawford moved the second instruction, of which he had given notice as follows: "That it be an instruction to the committee, that they have power to make provision in the bill, that it shall not be lawful for the commissioners to disallow, by any general or other order, any payments which shall be made by the authority of a board of guardians for the relief of any poor persons or their families out of the workhouse, notwithstandiag any powers given to them by the Act 4 and 5 Will. 4, c. 76, to the contrary." Commission. 998 cowardly flight? Who was the first to betray that sort of moral cowardice, of which he now took upon himself to be so severe a censor? But that was not all. If the case simply affected the hon. Member for Sheffield, it would be of very little cowardice in that House, there was cowimportance. ardice amongst the board of guardians, to But there was not only louse had heard the hon. Member detail which that hon. Member belonged. The a conversation which had taken place between himself and one of the members of the board of guardians to which he belonged. If any such conversation did would be at the trouble of stating who the take place, perhaps the hon. Member individual was with whom he had held it. If he recollected right, that hon. Member had stated that the guardian to whom reference had been made, expressed an anxious desire that he and his fellowguardians should be relieved from all responsibility. They cried out, "For God's sake don't alter our position, we don't want to take upon ourselves any responsibility; we want to have the Poor-law commissioners to fall back upon." What more to say, but this, that if the House a valiant group! He had now nothing discharged their duty, they would throw upon the guardians that responsibility from which no men in their situations ought to shrink. Mr. Wakley said, that he should support the amendment, and he thought, that the House was bound to support it. The House had been informed from several quarters, that distress prevailed in particular parts of the country, and he thought that the House ought to show some disposition to take measures for relieving that distress, by giving to guardians authority to exercise a discretionary power, according as circumstances might require. He should not have troubled the House with any further observations, were it not that the hon. Gentleman opposite, the Member for Sheffield, had addressed the House just now in a tone which did not indicate a kindly feeling on his part; and the hon. Member had, he thought, given him just cause of complaint, for he had imputed to him expressions which he had would, under the circumstances, allow him Mr. Ward hoped, that the House not used; and the hon. Member for to say a few words. Sheffield had thought proper to read him word" cowardly" in any unparliamentary If he had used the a lecture, in the course of which he im- manner-if he had used any language puted to him cowardice for not having that was too strong, he now begged to divided last night in conformity with the express his regret. He had not forgotten sentiments which he had expressed in the the course which he had himself pursued course of the debate. He supposed, that on the occasion of the amendment to the language of the hon. Member was the Address moved by the hon. Member Parliamentary-that such language was admitted in debate. He should be the occasion, nor desired to apologise for his for Rochdale. He neither forgot that last in the world to wish to curtail the conduct, or to retract anything that he freedom of debate; but he must take the had said, and he was now prepared to liberty to say, that the hon. Member say, that under similar circumstances he ought not to have taken upon himself to should again pursue a line of conduct preread such a lecture to any one. Member ought to have been the last man Member for Finsbury, what he endeaThe hon. cisely similar. With respect to the hon. in that House to have done anything of voured to do on the former occasion, was the sort. It would be recollected, that at the commencement of the present Session with the diffidence of his acts. He had to contrast the boldness of his language the hon. Member for Rochdale had moved told the House that he, above all men, an Amendment to the Address, and on that occasion who amongst the hon. Mem--that he had paid the closest attention was the best enabled to give them advice bers opposite was the first to resort to a to the working of the Poor-laws; yet this 2 K 2 The hon. Napier, Sir C. Yorke, H. R. List of the NOES. A'Court, Captain hon. Member, so well qualified to form a | Murphy, F. S. He say, Mr. Darby wished it to be understood, that the vote he then intended to give, was not to bind him on any future occasion. He was glad, that the Governinent intended to communicate with the commisioners, and he wished to give them the full benefit of that opportunity. The House again divided. Ayes 32; Noes 146:-Majority 114. List of the AYES. Boscawen, Lord Es court, T. G. B. Fleming, J. W. Follett, Sir W. W. Fleetwood, Sir P. H. Forbes, W. Fielden, J. Baldwin, C. B. Borthwick, P. Hardy, J. Forster, M. Hamilton, W. J. Grogan, E. Hamilton, Lord C. Hardinge, rt. hn.SirH. Jermyn, Earl Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Knatchbull, right hon. Sir E Mitchell, T. A. Planta, right hon. J. Pollock, Sir F. Goulburn, rt. hon. H. Pringle, A. {SEPT. 29} Mr. Warner's Invention. 1002 Tennent, J. E. Trench, Sir F. W. Trollope, Sir J. Trotter, J. Turnor, C. Vane, Lord H. Verner, Colonel Vesey, hon. T. Vivian, hon. Captain Ward, H. G. Wood, C. Wood, Colonel T. Wortley, hon. J. S. Wyndham, Colonel TELLERS. Fremantle, Sir T. Baring, H. he was most desirous that the Government should be fully satisfied as to the nature of his invention before they adopted Mr. Walseby said, that shortly after Mr. Warner's return from Portugal, the subject had been mentioned in the House of Commons, but had been stopped by the then First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir J. Graham), who suggested that a committee should be appointed to investigate it. A committee had been appointed accordingly, but Sir R. Stopford, the chairman, thought it was too numerous, and some alterations were suggested in it, but Sir Robert Stopford shortly afterwards left England for the Mediterranean. Sir Bill went through a committee, and re- Richard Keats, another member of the port brought up. Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Wednesday, September 29, 1841. committee, died, and his Majesty, who had taken a great interest in the subject, also died shortly afterwards, so that the subject had never been investigated. The gallant Captain, the Member for Gloucester, had stated that captains in the navy might object to admit the invention on board their ships, for fear of being blown up; but he understood that when the subject should be investigated, it would Wooton-Under-Edge, North Nibley, and Bristol, and by appear that such apprehensions were Mr. Beckett, from Leeds, for the Repeal of the Corn-groundless. When the subject was discussed MINUTES.] New Members. Sir George Cockburn, for Bills. Read a second time:-Exchequer Bills; Exchequer Bills Funding.-Read a third time;-Expiring Laws. Petitions Presented. By Mr. H Berkeley from Kingswood, laws. By an hon. Member from Northern Central British India Society, for Inquiry into the case of the Rajah of Sattara,-By Mr. Gibson, from George Beacon, for the admission of Provisions to Poor-law Unions duty free. MR. WARNER'S INVENTION.] On the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Exchequer Bills Bill being read, Mr. Wakley said, he wished to put a question to the gallant Secretary of the Board of Ordnance, relating to the invention of Mr. Warner. The subject had been brought before the House last Session, on which occasion many Members had borne evidence to the extraordinary nature of the invention; and in the debate on the estimates the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had admitted that he had seen one of the experiments, and that he had witnessed the most extraordinary effects. Statements had been made the other night by the hon. and gallant Member for the Tower Hamlets, and by some other hon. Members, that Mr. Warner had objected to the appointment of a Committee to investigate the nature of his invention. Mr. Warner and his friends complained of that statement. The fact was, that Mr. Warner was most anxious to have a committee appointed to investigate his invention, and | in June last, the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies had stated that some explanation ought to be given, and had promised that further negotiations with Mr. Warner should take place. He was anxious to know if any investigation had been instituted? Colonel Fox said, that he believed that the Master-General of the Ordnance, Lord (lately Sir Hussey) Vivian, had wished to refer Mr. Warner to the usual committee at Woolwich, for the investigation of inventions of the nature of that brought forward by Mr. Warner, and that Gentlemen had refused to submit his invention to that committee. With regard to what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member for Marylebone the other evening, in relation to the muskets supplied to the navy, he supposed that the observations of that gallant Officer applied only to the old arms formerly issued, and not to those which had recently been given out. His noble Friend's (Lord Vivian's) attention had been most closely directed to the subject for the last three or four years. He knew that upwards of 50,000 muskets, with the percussion lock, had been constructed-most of them had been distributed. They had received the approba tion of officers of every branch of the united service. Complaints had been made with regard to the Royal Marines, but he believed that 4,000 or 5,000 of those muskets had been given to that corps, which had received the unqualified approbation of the officers. His reason for making the statement was, that it might not go forward to the public that the late Master-General of the Ordnance had neglected his duty. Captain Boldero said, that the only answer he could give to the hon. Member's question was, that since the formation of the present Board of Ordnance, neither the Master-General nor the Board itself had received any communication whatever from Mr. Warner respecting the weapon of destruction which he had invented. Mr. Wakley would put another question, which he hoped would be answered more satisfactorily. The gallant general, at the head of the Board of Ordnance, had witnessed the operation of this weapon, and had expressed a favourable opinion of it, an opinion which all must admit was deserving of attention. He was anxious to know, therefore, whether there was any intention, founded upon the information which the Board of Ordnance already possessed, to investigate the matter any further? Captain Boldero had already stated that the Board of Ordnance was ignorant of the views and wishes of Mr. Warner. He had the authority of the Master-General for stating, that he did not feel himself authorised to take upon himself the responsibility of appointing a committee upon the subject, without the previous sanction of her Majesty's Ministers. House debating about locks and guns, and various other instruments used in war. What would the next generation think of the present when they read that the House of Commons of that day had debated for hours about implements of destruction? He believed, that until war and warriors were held in less estimation, there was no hope of good for this country. Certainly, on all occasions, he should enter his protest against reward being granted for inventions of the nature then under discussion, because he conceived that the more they discouraged war, the more would civilisation advance throughout the world. Mr. Wakley observed, that both humanity and economy might recommend the use of such weapons as that invented by Mr. Warner. Subject at an end. DR. MADDEN.-MISSION TO AFRICA.] Mr. Forster, seeing the noble Lord the Secretary of State in his place, wished to ask him a question. He observed in the estimates which the House voted the other night a sum of money charged as paid to a Dr. Madden towards the expenses of a mission to the west coast of Africa. He understood that gentleman had returned to this country, and, after a very short stay in Africa, had made a very long report to Government. The question he wished to ask the noble Lord was simply this, when we might expect to see that report laid on the Table of the House? Lord Stanley said, that Dr. Madden. having been sent out as a commissioner by the late Government to make various Mr. Brotherton said, in the debate inquiries of a confidential nature with rereferred to by the hon. Member for Fins- ference to the state of our settlements on bury, he had entered his protest against the western coast of Africa had furnished the Government giving their sanction in four reports, one relating to Sierra Leone, offering a reward to men who exercised another to the Gambia, and another to their talent and ingenuity in discovering the Gold Coast. The fourth was consome infernal machine for the destruction fined exclusively to medical subjects. To of human life. If a man used his talents the production of that he believed to promote the happiness of his race he there was no objection; but the other was entitled to reward, but not for using three treated of matters of the greatest them for an opposite purpose. He had importance and secrecy, of matters conheard, with great delight, the announce- nected with individuals, affecting our ment of the right hon. Baronet (Sir R. foreign policy, and our relations with the Peel) that he would use all his influence trade legally and illegally carried on on to diffuse those sentiments in society which the coast of Africa. In the present powould lead men to discourage war. He sition of the Government he should not feelmust say his heart had burned within him, himself warranted in laying on the Table when, on a previous evening, he heard the of the House, the whole of these matters, |