noble duke was descended from one of the licencers of the thieves. Had the noble duke been in his place, he (lord St. Vincent) would have called upon him to support him in his title to that estate which the ancestor of the one had bought under a system not only sanctioned but encouraged by the ancestor of the other. He begged leave to recommend that act of William and Mary to the consideration and attention of that noble duke and the other members of that House, and hoped that it would not be lost sight of by a learned member of the other House, who was said to be writing a history of that period. Without troubling their lordships with a recital of further acts, he would just remind them of the period of 1774, when, upon an application from the colonies to abolish the slave trade, the answer was, by the mouth of lord Dartmouth, one of the ministers, "We cannot allow the colonies to check in any degree a traffic so beneficial to the nation." - It was too much, then, that those who had so largely contributed to produce the system which is now complained of, should turn round on those who had built up the superstructure, of which they had laid the foundation-that the "artifices necis" should dare to "charge the participes criminis" with the consequences of their own act. If the ear was distressed by sounds, or the eye offended by sights, which are not in unison with the present sensations of those acute organs, the West-Indian, when reproached with these, may reply, "Scelus exitiale Lacænæ, illa hæc monumenta reliquit." If the offspring nursed by such a parent has not in some rare instances yet acted as she ought, let England recollect that she is that parent, and that it is her own offspring of whom she complains. But, did he therefore mean to contend that England, as the parent, should not endeavour to wipe off the stain that attaches to herself and offspring-that she should not endeavour to correct the deformities of the system of her own creation? No; but let her not do it at the expense of the blood and treasure of that offspring, and add the injury of reproaches. -He regretted exceedingly that, in justice to themselves, in confirmation of the claim which the colonies have long since set up, and fairly set up, to a kind and humane system of management of their slaves, they did not yield to the wishes of the mother country, as expressed in the orders of council; that they did not ratify by law, what their own generous feelings had long since sanctioned in practice. He chiefly referred it to the irritation produced by the uncandid and unjust attacks of their enemies at home. But he sincerely hoped they would not confound friends and foes: let them not mix up in the same feeling those who hold out the hand of a friendly assistance, and those who may be suspected of very different motives.-He had, for the last twenty years, done every thing in his power to act up to the spirit of the resolutions, of all of which he approved. Nearly as far back as that time, he applied to bishop Porteus, to assist him in procuring a clergyman for his estate. Another West-India proprietor joined him in the same application. The bishop, however, distinctly stated, that there were not sufficient funds at command for that purpose, and that, owing to the heavy burthens of a most expensive war, it was impossible to look for assistance from government. It had been said by a respectable gentleman (Mr. Wilberforce) that the cup (meaning the cup of liberty) had been dashed from the eager and thirsting lips of the negro as he was about to drink. But the cup offered to the negro was in fact the cup of Circe, which would have intoxicated and disordered his head, and have only introduced confusion and bloodshed in the colonies. The cup of which he could drink, the cup containing the living water, was not dashed from his lips, but presented to him willingly by his master's hand, on a branch from the stock of our inestimable church establishment. In conclusion he stated, that he approved of the resolutions, and had every hope that the colonies would carry them into effect. Lord Suffield expressed a hope, that the noble earl would give some more definite answer with respect to the expected early meeting of the different colonial Assemblies. It was of the utmost importance that parliament should be put in possession, at the earliest possible period, of the proceedings taken by the local legislatures, upon these resolutions, otherwise two years might elapse before further measures were adopted in this country. Earl Bathurst said, he could only repeat that instructions had been sent out to the different islands to convene the Assemblies at the earliest possible period; and those instructions, no doubt, would be complied with. The Bishop of Ferns said, that he | extraordinary fact, that while taxes were should not have risen at that late hour, if it were not to obviate the impression which might prevail, from the circumstance that no petitions had been presented on the subject from Ireland, and that therefore his country did not participate in the feelings of the people of England. But, in fact, the feelings of the people of Ireland had been evinced on the subject long ago. When the restrictions on the trade of that country were first relaxed, an attempt was made to form companies for the purpose of carrying on the African slave trade; but that attempt had been put down by a single sentence from one individual. A meeting was called at Cork, and the persons who called it stated the great advantages of the trade; but an old man rose in the midst of those assembled, and in terms too coarse to be repeated, he uttered a malediction on the head of the first man who should contribute the least assistance in promoting so infamous an object. The imprecation (he hoped it was heard in mercy, and forgiven) had the desired effect. The project was abandoned, and from that time, which was forty years ago, to the present no man had been found to revive the subject. Thus the opinion of the people of Ireland upon this question might be said to have been long since practically declared. He annually imposed on the people to erect new seminaries of education in Ireland, the existing seminaries were suffered to fall into complete decay. He particularly instanced the case of the school at Middleton, in the county of Cork. In 1812, the commission appointed in 1806 made a report upon the schools supported by private endowment. In that report it was stated that the school at Middleton was founded in 1696 by the countess of Orkney, and that it was endowed by her with an estate of 2,000 acres, which, within twenty years after, was leased out for 200l. a-year by the trustees, on a lease of lives renewable for ever. It was further stated, that the estate was then worth 2,000l. a-year, and that the power of the trustees to make such leases, appeared to the commissioners very questionable. The school, to which was attached a house for the master, had formerly been attended by a large number of scholars, but at present it was without a roof, and in total decay; the master had retired to Dublin, where he received his salary, and the House which he ought to have occupied, was occupied by a sergeant of police. He wished to know how this had come to pass, considering that the endowed schools were placed under the care of the commissioners of education, who were author thought it necessary to state these parti-ized to ask for an advance of money out culars, in order to obviate any imputation that might arise, in consequence of no petition having been presented from Ireland against the slave trade at this particular juncture. For himself, he had only to say, that the resolutions before their lordships had his most cordial concurrence, embodying, as they did, the solemn advice of both Houses of parliament to the colonial governments. He thought that they were, in their present shape, as well calculated as possible to produce a good effect; and that if they were accompanied by any threat, they would only tend to create intemperance and ill-will, instead of amicable acquiescence. The Resolutions were agreed to. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Tuesday, March 7. EDUCATION IN IRELAND.] Sir John Newport rose, to move for the production of an account of the application of all sunis granted in the last session for the furtherance of education in Ireland. He called the attention of the House to the of the consolidated fund for the repair of such schools as wanted it, upon the security of their surplus rents? He was greatly surprised at the decay into which this school had fallen, as Middleton was a healthy village, at a considerable distance from any large town, and admirably well adapted for all the purposes of scholastic education. He trusted that, when the House was again called upon for grants of money for the furtherance of education in Ireland, it would take care that those grants were made after some settled plan, and would not defeat with one hand the bounty which it doled out with the other. He would now move, for "an account of the application of all sums granted during the last session for the furtherance of Education in Ireland." Mr. Goulburn said, he was not able to state at that moment the ultimate determination of government on the subject of education in Ireland. It must necessarily be influenced by the reports which the commissioners might make, and the plans they might recommend. As far as the Irish government had yet had the plans of the commissioners before it, it had not been backward in carrying them into effect. Orders had been given to suspend all admissions into the chartered schools which had fallen under the reprehension of the commissioners. On this head there was a considerable reduction in the estimates of this year, and he trusted that that reduction would gradually take place in each succeeding year. With regard to the school at Middleton, he could only say, that as it was never under his cognizance, he could not give the House any precise information. At the time the commissioners of education made their report, that school did not receive their approbation; but as it was found to be under the direction of private trustees and special governors, they considered it not to fall within the scope of their jurisdiction. With regard to the decay into which the school had fallen, the sum necessary to repair it was 2,000l. Now the surplus of the revenue of the school was 10l. a year; and how was it possible that an advance of 2,000l. out of the consolidated fund could be made upon the security of such a sum? A legal opinion had been taken as to the right of the trustees to grant the lease which they had granted; but it had not been such as to justify any interference on the part of the governors to upset it. The school was a private foundation; the master was appointed by the governors; the power of visiting it was in the governors; and they alone were responsible for any dereliction of duty committed by the officers whom they appointed. Mr. Spring Rice supported the motion. Mr. F. Lewis assured the House that the reports of the commissioners of education would all be presented by the time appointed, with the exception of the report on the college of Maynooth, which would be postponed for a year. Great, but, he trusted, not insuperable, difficulties opposed themselves to the plans which the commissioners had hitherto recommended. They had not yet abandoned those plans, and he, for one, still entertained hopes that they would be ultimately successful. Mr. Plunkett said, that the school at Middleton was one on a private foundation merely, and did not come within the jurisdiction of the commission. At one time the school alluded to had been under the immediate inspection of a gen tleman who had been a distinguished member of the university of Dublin, and then the scholars were numerous, and the funds flourishing; but since that time it certainly had gone to ruin. Mr. Secretary Peel said, that if these schools on a private foundation, from the terms of their charter, or from any other cause, did not fall within the operation of the act of 1813, he was prepared to say that means should be immediately devised for subjecting them to an inquiry as rigid as that which might be extended to any school of public foundation, or under the immediate superintendence of the government. It never could have been intended by the legislature, at the time it authorized a commission to inquire into the state of schools of public foundation, that they should totally pass by schools erected by the grants of individuals, when those grants were manifestly intended for the public benefit. Still less could they have intended to pass by private foundations, where the income was stated at 200l. a year, and leave the whole of that sum to the maintenance of a master, without any attention to the school-house and the scholars, if it was true, that the lands from which such incomes were derived, amounted to 2,000 acres, which, if properly let, might bring 2,000l., but, from long leases upon lives, produced only 2001. a year. He thought there was an additional reason why the power of inquiry should be immediately extended to schools of every description, when it was proved that sums had been left for the education of children, and when, from such abuses, no scholars at present could be found. And he saw no objection why the present commissioners should not be empowered to pursue that inquiry in the same manner into private schools, as they were already authorized to do in the case of those of what were called public foundation. Sir John Newport observed, that the person through whose influence these leases had been granted, which cut down properties of 2,000l. a year to less than 2001., was a Mr. Broderick, a member of the Irish house of parliament, and a brother of lord chancellor Middleton. The state of all the schools ought, in his opinion, to be made a matter of report. The motion was agreed to. COMMITMENTS FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT.] Mr. Hume rose to move for a return of the number of persons confined | beneficially introduced than some altera in the Fleet and other prisons, for con- tion of the proceedings in the court of Chancery. He (Mr. Hume) had taken the trouble to send a person to the Fleet prison, with the list in his hand, to inquire of the warden what had become of the persons whose names had been returned in it. The warden, for some reason which he could not understand, had refused to satisfy that inquiry; perhaps he was alarmed at the long array of names, and thought that some use was to be made of the information which he might afford. As he was, therefore, unable to state any more than what the return contained, he should confine himself to that. It seemed that Hannah Barber had been committed on the 30th of January 1789, under a writ of rebellion. He did not know exactly the nature of that proceeding, but he understood that if a man owed him 10l. it was necessary to state that he had attacked him with swords, staves, and knives, and in rebellion against his majesty. In a suit by the creditors of one Thomas Green against Hannah Barber and others, the defendant was committed for contempt in not obeying an order of the court, for payment of 406l. into the Bank of England. She remained in the Fleet until her death, which happened since the return, and after an imprisonment of between 30 and 40 years. He understood that by a clause in the Insolvent Debtors' act, a person might be discharged from custody for contempt, when the cause of imprisonment was only the non-payment of money, but that the court had no power to release from the costs. Was it not too much to say, that in a country like this, the criminal law was more mild in its effects than the civil? If a man were sentenced under the former to transportation or imprisonment, he knew the limit of his punishment; but having once fallen under the sentence of the court of Chancery, there was no knowing how long his imprisonment might continue. Such a system was better adapted to the arbitrary jurisprudence of Constantinople or Algiers than to this free and enlightened country. Another instance in the return was that of George Pigot, who had been sent to prison under a rule of court, ordering an attachment for want of answer to an amended bill. This man had been in prison for more than twenty years, during which time he had no means of obtaining a copy of the amended bill, nor of procuring a person [1182 to draw an answer to it. Anne Bretner | chequer, since the 11th July 1820, with was committed under a writ of habeas copies of their respective commitments corpus from the Exchequer, for not appearing to a bill, and she was also dead. He now put it to the right hon. gentleman, whether this was right or not, whether some inquiry ought not to take place before persons were doomed to such imprisonments, as to the nature of their alleged contempts? and whether an end ought not to be put to so persecuting and oppressive a system? He understood that there were two instances in which the present lord chancellor, learning that the parties were unable, through poverty, to put in answers, had sent for them, and paid out of his own pocket the necessary expenses which their detention had occasioned. If his lordship saw the hardship of such cases, it was extraordinary that, being as he was at the head of the law, he had not brought forward some regulation to prevent such monstrous abuses for the future. He would only state one more case. It was that of Samuel Monson, who had been committed in 1813 for want of an answer, and who, although he had put in that answer ten years ago, was still detained for costs. Two other persons were in custody; one for speaking to a young lady, a ward of the court, after being ordered not to do so, and the other for cutting crops on an estate, in disobedience to an injunction of the court. He wished not only that the imprisonment which was the subject of his present complaint were done away, but that imprisonment for debt altogether was put a stop to; for he was convinced, that for one creditor who obtained payment of his debt, there were ten debtors who were made much worse members of society by it. The facility with which credit was given was injurious to society, and he could see no injustice in taking from those who were so ready to give it the power of imprisoning their debtors. Another, and the greatest hardship which attended this system of imprisonment by the court of Chancery was, that even if a man was ready to put in his answer, it would not be received until he was purged of his contempt; that was to say, until he had paid all the costs which had been incurred. The hon. member then moved for "A return of the several persons who have been committed to the Fleet prison and other gaols in England and Wales for contempts under process issuing out of his majesty's courts of Chancery and Ex with respect to such contempts; stating what persons have died, or have been discharged, and at what time, and how many now remain in custody; also, a return of the number of persons that were confined for contempt on the 11th July 1820, and how many of them have died, been discharged, and at what time, or now remain in custody." The Attorney-General said, that as he understood the return now moved for was a continuation of that formerly made, he could, of course, have no objection to it. Every body was aware of the importance of this subject; but put, as it was, in this general way, he should not feel himself justified if he took up the time of the House by any statement at present. His right hon. friend would soon present to the House the report of the commission appointed to inquire into the practice of the court of Chancery, and it would probably then become his duty to propose certain bills to carry into effect the alterations in the present practice which that report ort might suggest. He could assure the House that every attention would be paid to the subject. With respect to the contempt incurred for non-payment of costs, if it were as stated by the hon. gentleman, he was ready to admit that the provision of the Insolvent Debtors' act, which already went to release persons confined for non-payment of money ordered by the court, ought to be extended, so as to relieve them from imprisonment for costs. The other cases were of a very different nature. Some remedy ought to be applied, if any thing like oppression or unfairness could be shown to exist under the present system; but it was impossible to meet all the views of the hon. gentleman on this subject, without going the length of abolishing the court of Chancery altogether. In a bill, for example, filed for the purpose of obtaining discoveries of the utmost importance to the justice of a case; if the defendant obstinately refused to make the discovery sought of him, what was to be done? There was no mode consistent with the law of England by which he could be compelled to do what justice required, except by imprisonment. But, the moment he put in his answer, he was released from confinement. Where was the hardship in this? If there were a hardship, and if it was thought that such a power ought no |