se

é

——— —-

. es | tainly must have racked his brains for them. He will go for |

Escheat, becaese he does not kaow the powers of the Commission. Why, Sir, he avast know the terme contained in the resolutions and memorial! of last Session. He con, if he has forgotten them, new reed them; bat sepport of them now does not suit the pur- poses of himself or hie patty.

flon. COL. GRAY.—I told my constituents, Mr, Chairman, hefere the commencement of the Jost Session, that 1 would vot allow that Session to pase without introdacing’ some measure calealated, ia my opinion, to setile the question. How, Sir, has that promise been kept? Compare my conduct in that respect with that of some other hon, members of the House. Although jt was Well hadwa that the lost Session would necessarily be a short une, in conseqaence of the lateness of the period at wiich it was coavened, yet I insisted with my colleagues in the Government, that the measore should be introduced. Did [ wait for the latter part of the third Session of an Assembly, and then bring forward a measare with a view to hiflaence the popular minds when the time for a Genera! election was approaching? Was it not, I ask, reported before the first election, after the dis- solution of the forrner House, that the Bil! guaranteeing the Loan had been passed? Deeply asf regret that the hon, member is @issatisfied, | hope, eré the Session shall have terminated, that the hon. member wil! give expression to a totally diferent feeling — when he shall be taformed that tle Commission has been ap- porated.

Hoc. Me. COLES.—The hon. member mistnderatands the purport of the amendment, which does not embody any reflection upon the paragraph of the Address before the Commitiee; ut only expresses disappointment at the delay which has occurred. Itt expresses satisfaction at the gracious reception of the Address of last yeat, wor does it intimate the slightest disapproval of the Commission. ‘The hon. member, Me. Longworth, says, that the yary ina Court of Escheat would bo ye to atficm tre titles of the proprietors, wader the directiva of the jadge. Well, Sir, the Commission would have the same evidence submitted to them as woald be laid befure the Court, and weuld, I presume, be goveta> ed by the same rales of evidence; thus thes report would be to the effect, that the titles were valid, and if an act of the Imperial Parliament were requited to coaliem it, would the Guverament ask that Parliament to compel the relinguishment of the back rents? The amendment recognizes the possilility of some good resulting from the Commission, and merely says that, if it should not settle the qaestion satisfactorily, escheat wottld be the only means left; and { doebt not that some of the majority will sap- port escheat under there tircamstances. If, as the hoa. member has stated, the titles of the proprietors be good, let them not ob - ject to the most effectual means of plac.ng them beyond cavil or question, The hoa. member for Charlottetown, Mr. Davies, said, lust year, that he had sv doabt that the British Government would advocate the request of the House; ond, Sir, the Lieut. Governor is the proper channel of communics tion between this House and proprietira. ‘The hon. member, Mr. Douse, has attacked me, on the ground that I have opposed escheat, which he admits that he onte supported, but, as he alleges, merely te humor the hon. member, Mr. Cooper. Now, Sir, | do not think sach a reason sufficient to justify » pabliec man in acting in opposition to the dic+ tates of his conscience. The hon. member, Mr. Beer, says, that he cannot undersiand how I can support escheat, after having admitted the titles by the Land Purchase and Loan Bills. 1 newer, Sir, considered the titles perfect; and | introduced, and tatried, those Bills, as being moderate measures, calculated to eeitle the quesi.on moderately, and provide Compensation for the pre; rietory at a reasonable rate.

Mr. DEER. —I referred to the Loas Bill, not the Land Purchase Ae.

flon. Mr. COLES,—Well, Mr. Chairman, the one is but an «atensign of the other. By the firet we were limited to £30,000, the cther would have enabled as to extend the operations of the Purchase Bill to the whole Island. As to the assertion that the amendment Cootiins a threat, EL deny «. It merely says, that escheat will be the only resoarce left, if the Commission should prove a failure. If the majority wish to excite bad feelings be= tween the proprietors and the tenani(s, it may suit their purpose to construe the language of the amendment as containing a threat.

Hon. Mr. WIGHTMAN.—Mr. Chairman, the subject of the patagtaph is really a most importan( one, and has for many years been discussed in the Legislature. I, for one, have always de- nowneed escheat. The late Government tried the Land Purchase Bul. The intervention of middlemen between tie Government and the proprietors of the Worrell Estate sompetled the Govern— Ment to pay a much higher price for the Worrell Estate than they would otherwise have had to pay; and the farther action of the Bill was suspended by the loss of the Loan Bill. When the hon, tember, Coli. Gray, last year, introduced his resolutions, | sup— ported them, as being the only available means left as. And, Sir, we all know that it is unpossle for us to force the British Government; we had better await the result of an application, which, | do not doubt, will be communicated ata convenient time. I firm'y believe, Sir, that the hon. member, Col. Gray, was perfectly sincere 1m his sction on this subject, and I trast that henefits will accrue to the people from the measure he introduced, As a proof of what the Loan Bill might have effected, I will take the case of Lot 11, which was purchased under the Land Purchase Bul. Ia the instance of that Lot, the people were decidedly ben fitted; and the accounts of the Land Office will shew that the results have been very satisfactory, and will, I have reason to believe, falsify the predictions we heard last year, that the public Jands would prove a losing concera. 1 think u will be found that the Purchase Bill has been productive of very great advantages, and that there will be no great loss after all. Had the Loan Bill paseed, I believe Lord Selkirk would have sold his property at a cheap rate. Ata meeting, at which my hon. colleague and my- self were present, | was asked, what benefit the people of other parte of the Island could receive from the purchase, by Govern - ment, of the Worrel Estate? My answer was, that they must bide their time; and, Sir, had the Loon Bill passed, they would, ere this, been settled as [reeholders. I am prepared, Sir, to sup- port the amendment, if the reference to escheat be struck out; and fam in favor of the Commission, as constituting a Court of Enquiry.

Mr. HOWAT.—I concer with what has fallen from the hon. mermber, that this [louse cannot coerce the British Government; if we had the power of doing so, we would be ander no necessity of asking any thing from it. [ wis!) to see the Address we passed inst year fairly tested. When the present opposition obtained Responsible Government, they asked their opponents not to con~ demo the system without giving it a fair trial. When some hon. mermbers ask, what are to be the powers of the Commission, I answer, that it is to be presumed that they will be ample for the attainment of the objects for which it will be appointed—that the Commission will be a fall and complete Coort of Enquiry. In the part of the coantry which I have the honor to represent, the people hate the very name of escheat. All they want is to know, to whom they are to pay their renis? They wish to be assured that they are not paying to the wrong person. If we had escheat, a decision that the titles of the proprietors were bad, would involve the loss of the property of the tenant, as well as that of bis landlord. In such a case, the whole Island woald be nt the mercy of the Government of the day, and which party, Tory or Snatcher, was to have all? The hon. member, Mr. Coles, says, we have a right to a Court of Escheat, without re- ference to the Home Government. Bat, Sir, to use a common saying, he is very free with his buttermilk, when his cow has gone dry. (Laughter) The Commission 1s now denounced by those who, last year, sapported it. ‘They blow hot and cold, and they fear, if good results from it, they will be blown overboard. 1, myself, believe that good will resalt from the Commision; and if my expectations are not realized, Lam prepared to support any scheme whieh may enable the people te ascertain the party who is to receive the rents. The mea bers of the opposition now ad- voeate escheat, which they formerly denounced, and decry the Commission which, last year, they sapported, and endeavour to frustrate it, when they see it likely to be productive of any benefit to the people.

Hon. Mr. WHELAN.—Mr. Chairman, during the long discussion which has taken plice on the garagraph under the consideration of the Committee, I have waited in vain to hear any reasons to induce me te withhold my support from the amendment. The ministers having failed hyn“ en my darkness, I was in hopes that the master would im-

t some solid reasons why I should support the paragraph; ut, Sir, he has but increased the density of the gloom. In reviewing the opinions expressed by the maj rity, | shall commence with those of the hon. member who has just sat dows. Le says that he hates Escheat, but that he is fuvor- able to a Coart of Enquiry, and that the Commission will be a Court of Enquiry. Now, Sir, what is the enguiry fur! Ifthe Commission should report that the titles are bad, what would be the resuli! Would it not be the same as the verdict of a jury in a Court of Escheat? Would it not re-invest the titles in the Governmeni! Yet the bon. mem- ber who asserts sv incompatible and inconsistent arguments, ames to taunt this side of the House with blowing hot andecold. When we, Sir, are charged with inconsistency, I hurl beck the imputation end accuse the Government of practising, | will not say deception, but delusion, towards this House. In the discussion which took place in the eerlier part of the day | made a few remarks, to which the bon. member (Col. Gray) assuming the ro/e of Leader of the Government, undertook to reply, which he did with an energy and earnestness marvellous to behold. Sir, I saw him arise, with his *‘ eye in a fine phrenzy rvlling,”’ and luoking as though he would annihilate all those who should presume to impugn the conduct of the Government. He supposed that a few brief moments would suffive for him to shut my mouth, and that in afl time to come, [ would sel- dom presume to raise my voice in his presence. However, i am not yet annihilated, nor have | been particularly ter- rified by the loud tones of the hom. member for the fourth Dsirict of Queen's County. When I asked a question of se Government, | was met by a charge of discourtesy and wisre presentation. dea aes

Hon. Gul. GRAY.—Mr. Chairman, 1 rise to explain. The bon. member must be la%oring under some hallucina- tion. I did not attribute to him @ want of courtesy; but I stated that in that hon. member's own journal, the EL2am- smer, [ was twice represented to have promised that the Land Question would be ecttled in eight weks, when | whowed that I had-mentioned probably eight montis.

fion. Mr. WHELAN.—I fee} much obliged to the hon member for the compliment lie has paid me in the assertion that I am luboriag under an hallucination. Well, Sir, ** Homer sometimes nods,"’ and so may the hon. member, fur we bad bis admission lost Session that he sometimes labored under hypochondriasis, and, therefore, he may not be aware of all he dues say. But I repeat thet he made a positive charge of discourtesy and falsehood. I admit toatT was ip error in statiog that he said thematter woyld be settled in eight woeks instead of eight month.

-

| ' i |

i

i

i

; | ’ j

; 3

!

| j

Bi SS ee

Hon. Col. GRAY.—I do not adwit the correctness of the hom member's present statement. On the oceasion relerred to, I said prodad/y eight months.

Iion. Mr. WHELAN.—Well, Mr. Chairman, the word probab/y implies the expectation that eight months would suffice fur the settlement of the question. The priteipal reasons assigned for the delay I shall answer, I trust satis- factorily, before | have done, The Italian War, which is eo prominently put forward as the principal cause of delay, was between Austria, on the one sidé, and Franee and Sar- dinia, on the other. England was not one of the belliger- ent powers, as she Was, in the war with Russia, when the Loan Bill was sent home. Even if it were otherwise, it would afford no sufficient reason for the pos'ponement of a measure of such vital importante to the Colony; but as to any participation in the Italian war, Great Britain had no more to do than this Island. The Colonial Minister's de- partment certainly had nothing to do with it, and yet we are now told that it could not be attended to. As to the election and consequent thange of ministry,lam ata loss ot see why the rights of the Colony should be aff’cted by either of those events. The opposition are told that, beeause the Loan Bill was postponed, we should not complain of the delay in the present case. But, Sir, | want to know if the asserters of that argument mean to say that two wrongs make one right! Besides, [have shown that the eases are not alike. The Loan Bill was passed by us in view of a guarantee to be obtained by an Act of the Iinperial Parliu- ment, Which was introduced, and afterwards a change of Ministry occurred which necessarily postponed the cousid- eration of it. But the memorial required no Imperial le gistation. It merely requested the Colonial Minister to recommend Her Majesty to appoint a Commission. Mueh stress has been laid upon the alleged necessity for consult- ing the principal proprietors, as one of the causes which have retarded the appointment of the Commission. That but confirms the truth of the opinion I expressed last Ses- sion, that the measure was merely the cffspring of the pro- prietary party.

Hon. COL GRAY.--The first duty of the Duke of New- castle, was necessarily to forward to each of the principal proprietors a copy of the memorial, and ask their couseut to the suggeStions it contained.

Se

Hon. Mr. WITELAN. —The hon. member's interruptions but shew me that oy observations are unpalatable.

Hon. COL GRAY.—I deny and repudiate the inference the hon, member has drawn from my interruption. | merely ruse to explain,

Hon. Mr. WHELAN.—I stated, last session, that this panacea for all the ills that tenant flesh is heir to,would prove to be a humbug, and the reasons | have heard adduced fur the delay, only confirm my opnion, The time necessary to com- munhicate with the proprietors, who might be absent from London, need not be very long, when we consider the facili- ties of communication afforded by the telegrapt, by steam boats, and by ratiways, which bring countriesonce distant —into close approximation. But. why consult the proprie- tors atali? Cannot the Imperial Government appoint a Com- mission to settle the question! If it is absolutely necessary to consult the proprietors, what kind of a Commission may weexpecit! One adverse to the interest of the proprietors? No, Hf it is considered weeessary to consult the propri tors, itis buta fair presumption that the Commissiouers will be gentlemen entertaining views in unison with those of the Proprietors, and thus the whole scheme will prove delusive. ‘The Government last year promised to settle the question, and the memorial was the first fruits of their labours. ‘This morning the Despatches on this subject were asked for—there was nothing voreasonable in that. ‘The Speech promised us on the Post Otfice and Light ffouses—matiers of trivial importance te this vital question—some Despatches with reference to which we have beea informed by a member of the Government, are in the desk of another member, to be laid before as when the proper time shall arrive. When, I ask, may we expect that time to arrive in the opinions of mem. bers of the Government? ‘lhe hon, member, Colonel Gray, said that he supposed | expected the Government to insert the Des- patches in the Examiner. lL expected no such thing; but I did expect more information would be submitted than Is at present before the House. The request contained in the amendment that {1is Excellency would use his i: fluence to induce a postponement in the collection of the back rents, has been characterised as an unwarrantable interference on our part; and we are told that the Government has no power to interpose in the manner the amend- ment suggests. Are the hon. members of the Government ignor- ant thata former Governor, in 1837, issued a circular recom- mending the Proprietors to remit the arrears of rents—to sell on easier terms, and to grant long leases? Bat, Sir, if there were no such precedent, surely when the Llouse had recommended a remission, it is not improper to ask the Executive to lend its in- fluence to induce a postpovuement of the collection until such time as the Commission shall have reported—to ask the Lieutenant Governor to do what the House had done last Session, and what a previoas Governor had done—so much for the alleged impio- priety of that part of the amendment. [have been charged by the hon. member, Mr. tflaviland, with inconsistency ow the sub- ject of Escheat—that [ have opposed it for years. ‘True, Sir, I never advocated Escheat er her on the hastings or in this House until about three years ago. ‘Ihat hon. member stated that it was only when the reins of power were about to slip from the hands of our party that the hon. the leader of the opposition and myself changed our views on the subject, Sir, two years before the late Govern- ment retired, I stated that, if other means failed, I would support Escheat as a dernier resori—as the only means left of settling the question. { believed the Land Purchase B.ll would be of advantage to the country, and it was necessary to supplement it by the Loan Bill. Had the latter been in operation, the country would, I am satisfied, have been contented with its action— ander this the people would have been to a great extent settled in free- hold. Lam not in the habit of jooking over the reports of my speeches; but T recollect having declared my intention io vote for Escheat, if other means should fail. When such is the fact, on what grounds am I charged with inconsistency? 1 have beard members on the opposite side of the House, denounce meusures which the force of public opinion sabseqaently compelled them to support; but did they find me charging them with inconsistency ? I remember when one member of this House, now no longer here, a geutieman whose eloquence will long be remembered, and whose powers in debate were universally felt and acl.nowledged, changed his opinions not on one particular subject, bet with re- ference to the fandamental principles of our system. J allude to the flon. Joseph Pope, to whom, if to any one, the charge of in- consistency might be applied. But he met the objection by the declaration that it was idle to actin opposition to pablic opinion loudly expressed. J could refer to another gentleman, who ac- cepted a seat in the Legislative Council, and took office under the late Government, and afierwards changed sides and was appointed to an important public ofkee ander the present Government. ‘The case of the late Sie R. Peel, to which reference has been made, does not warrant the argument drawn from: it by the Hon. Me. Haviland. As I have already stated, 1 declared tmy iatended action on Escheat two years before the late administration went oat of office. The hon. member for Charlottetown argues that because the Address has been graciously received, we are bound to believe thet the Home Government consents te the Commis- sion, and will support the remission of arrears. I cannot recog- nise the correctness of the reasoning which feads to such coucla- sion from such premises. I have already stated that any respect- fully worded Address would be graciously received ; bat there is no positive information that a Commission will issue, or that, if it should, a remission of arrears will be among the results. Such remission will be entirely discretionary with the Commissioners, and wheu it is considered that the Commissioners will be nomi- nated by proprietary influence, and that the Exeentive Council of the Island contains a majority of Proprietors and Agents, and that His Excellency is generally supposed to be the nominee of the Proprietors, or at least, that his appointment was made with their approval, what have we to expect but that the Commission will represent their feelings, and support their interests? It is absurd to think otherwise, If the proprietary influence were not paramount at the Colonial Office, and at the Council Board, we might’ hope thata Commission woald be appointed fairly repre- senting the views of both parties; bat at present it is useless to expect anything like justice from a body appointed by such influ- ence. Uulike the hon. member for Belfast, Mr. Douse, who, I believe, has acted in a very liberal spirit to the Tenants on the property with which he is connected, and has made generous remissions of back rents, these Commissioners, unable to appre- ciate the social condition of the people, and will, I fear, not he disposed to act asthe hon. member I refer to bas done. The paragraph in the Address states that we are gratified to learn that the Address has Leen graciously received, and that we anhieipate the best resuits from the Commission, Now, Sir, I for one do not experience any gratification at the reception of the Address, nor would the people care if it were at the- bottom of the Hills- borough, nor do | anticipate any geod from iis aciion, even if it were Ww operation, IT have vow, Sir, given my reasons for my opposition to the Address of last year, and also the paragraph under discassion. 1 shall support the amendment.

Hon. Mr. HAVILAND—I repeat my assertion, Mr. Chair- man, that it was only on the eve of his party going out of office tha: the hon. member became an advocate of Eseheat. He was not converted by the high priest of that faith until 1858—the last year of the late Government's rule. In 1855

he was among the most bitter opponents of Escheat, far more |

decidedly oppeges to it than the hon. member, Mr. Wieht- man, who bates Escheat but supports a Court of Heaniry, In 1856, on the motion that the petitions on the subject of the land tenures be referred to a Committee, the hon. member supported the motion of the lead. r of the Government of the day to go into Committee that day three months, and thus would not allow any discussion to take place on the subjeet. I was in favor of treating those petitions with the usual cour- tesy of allowing a discussion on the subject to which they re- ferred, but the hon. member and his party were then all supreme and would not alow the question to be debated. It was only in 1858, in the last session of the House. when it was necessary to put forth some new article of political stock in trade, that the hon. member's resolutions were laid on the me ae not eipated, ~~ the — of the leader of the en Government appeared, as I h

his Goveramen Seer me? ave already stated, when _ Mr. SINCLAIR—While I shall support the amendment sonal nape Poe ee ‘ commission, wil exceed the —

xpectations of its frieads. I thought, last session, that too much deference had been paid to Pease. this Llouse should got have gone to them, as suppliants. If

Che Graminer.

a eee ———> — -

their titles were valid, it did not become us to ask favors ; but ‘the British Government has admitted that the question was ‘unsettled; and L was willing to re‘er it to an linpartial tri- ‘bunal for settlement, We only asked for a commission to “enquire into the state of the relations between landlord and ‘tenant, and t» negotiate with a view to the gravual purchase hy the tenantry of the freeholds of their jands, by payments of the purehase mouey in metalments, and to recommend a ‘remission of arrears. The proprietors have still the right to ‘say what they will take, and 1 cannot think this is the b st way of settling the question, Were the proprietors bound to | abide by the decision of the commission, some goud might be ‘expected to result from its labors, but the [louse did not ask i that they should come under any obligation to that effect. 1 ‘supported the address last session, not expecting any great re- ‘sults from it, bet thinking that, if it did no good it could do us no harm; and I &m siill willing to await the result. This |does not subject me to the charge of inconsistency, for the | amenduyent only states that the people are disuppuinted at the delay which has taken p'ace. The speech mentions vo causes | for that delay, although it is time that some hon. members /have assigned reasons forit, which they appear to think jsuflicient. It also says that if the commission dues not make | a final settlement of the question, some other mode of dealing | with it will be eH | Hlon. Mr. PERRY—At this late hour. it is not necessary tu | go over all the grounds travelled over in this debate. Io my | opinion the paragraph in the address conta ns but little, and | the amendment less. The first part of the amendment is the {same as the address, but the second part I entirely disapprove jof. When the country has been led to expect benefits irom the commission, we ought to give ita fa r trial, and not assume that it will lead to no results. If Escheat is to be sought, let hon. members sey so plainly, and not intimate it as a con- tingency, which may occur under some particular state of affairs. I yoted fur the resolutions of last year, and ain in favor of the paragraph in the address, to which | propose as an addition, not 28 an amendment, the recommendation not toenforee the collection of back rents, during the sitting of the commission,

The Committee diyided on Mr. Coles’s amendment as follows :

Yeas.—Hons. Messrs, Coles, Whelan, Thornton, Wight- man and Kelly, and Messrs. Sutherland, Koight, Cooper, Doyle and Conroy—J0.

Nays.—lHlons. Speaker, Messrs. Yeo, Longworth, Uaviland, Gray, MeAulay and Perry, and Messrs. Ramsay, Douse, Montgomery, Beer, John Yeo, Hlowat, Helm, Davies and Owen—16.

ion. Mr. Perry’s amendment was then put and lost on the same division, with the exception that Mr. Perry voted in favor of it.

The original paragraph was then put and carried.

A‘ter a few unimportant observations on some of the re- maining paragraphs, as they were successively read by the | Chairman, the address passed unanimously.

| |

a

| SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS.

Satrurpay, Feb. 18.

| Mr. Ifowat presented a petition from W. Il. Laird, Teacher, Upper Tryon, praying for compensation, aud thereupon moved jihat a Committee be appointed to whom should be referred eve y petition reiating to Teachers and Scio ls,

| Ordered that Messrs. Howat, Sinclair, Kaight, Conroy, Hon | Mr. Yeo and Lon. Mr. Laird, do compose said committee. lion. Mr, Yeo presented a petition from A. C. Bickford, an unlicensed Teacher at Grand River, praving tor remuneration. | Reterred to the above Committee. Also a petition from in- ‘habitants of Crossman’s Point, preying for the opening of a new Ine of Read.—Laid on the table. Also, from inhabitants of Lots 13 ard 14 with a similar prayer.

Mr. Montgomery presented @ petition from Finluy Campbell, | Teacher, Graham’s Road, New London, praying for compen- saton.—Referred to Committee on Teacher's petitions,

Mr. Davies from the Cowmiitee appointed to prepare an Ad- dress in answer to his Excellency's speech, reported a drafi, | , “hich was read, and made the order of the day for Monday. | Mr. Beer presented a petition from Rachel A. Gibson, widow, Charlottetown, praying for naturalization.~ Read and laid on | tha table.

Ilon. Mr. Haviland int-oduced a Bill to amend the Wills ' Act, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Mouday next. Adjourned,

Mospar, Feb. 20.

Mr. Holm present) d a petition from Fmily Harrington Teacher, Mill Vale, praying fur remuueration.—Referred to ‘committee on Teacher’s petitions,

Mr. McNeill presented a petiion fron inhabitants of Lots

| 59 and 61, praying for the opening of a new line of roa!, which | was read and laid on the table. , On motion of Hon. Col. Gray, the second order of the day | wos taken up, viz.: the House in Comm:ttee on the Address in answer to the Governor's speech, which occupied the House ‘until a late hour, when the Speaker tovk the Chair and the Chairman of the Committee, repo. ted the Address agreed wo.

Tcesvar, Feb. 21. Tue following petitions were presented to the House :—~

By Hon. Mr. Coles. from the Trustees of Stanhope School, ‘praying for payment of Tescher’s salary. By Hon. Col. Gray, from inhabnanrs or UVigg Bock Se tle- | ment, and others, praying tor the opening of « new Road, | By Hon, Mr. Longworth, from Robert Ga!bratth, praying ‘that money paid for a Tavern License be refunded. Also a | petition frou mhabitants of Rear District, St. Peter’s, praying | tor a grant to repair a road, !

. By Mr. Douse, trom inhabitants of Fark Settlemen’, praying

| for a grant to repair a bridge.

PAUPERS,

| ton. Mr. Haviland moved that a Committee be appointed to 'whom shall te referred everv petition relating to Pauyers, to | examime the same and report thereon,

| Commuttee.~—Hons. Messrs. Perry, Kelly, Longworth, Gray. Thornton, McAulay, Messrs. Conroy, J Yeo, Howat, Sinclair, | Holm, Davies, Sutherland, Knight, and McNeill.

| Hon, Col. Gray wished to make an observation respecting | pauper grants. ‘lhe money was voted expressly to relieve the 'puor, and care should be wken that it was appropriated to no other purpose. ‘The method pursued by the House in dividing \the money was ohj ctiorable. It was unfair that a mewber | who perhaps had ten paupers on his list shou!d receive the same | amount as one who had only two or three.

| Mr. Hou entertained a simitar opinion. There were many /pauvers in his district—so many that last year several who 'were really needy «n'y received fif een etiilings.

Hon. Mr. Cotes concurred with the hon member for Bel- fast that the matter required invest:gauion, Several, be believ- ed, received allowance who were not really in destitute circum- stances. He knew cases of individuals calling for money two or three years after it had been voted ; and thouzht that money | was sometimes even granted to perso.s who had been dead fur | several years.

Hon. Mr. Loneworta thought there was much room fcr im- provement. It was a very improper method to iake the list of last ye r as a guide when voting the amounts, Some did no: cal! tor the money placed at his disposal Jast year.

Hlor, Mr. Yeo kuew that all in his district had received their money. He thought that the system was wel! enough.

Mr. Deer satd thai the objection to the present method ap- peared to be that ar equal su 4 was granted to each electorai district. In his opinion the money ought tu be apportioned among the several districts according to the number of paupers in each.

Hon. Mr. Perry thought that the Chairman of the committee sheuld write to well informed persons in differen: parts of the Island, to learn who were realiy destitute. By this means de- ception would be prev. uted,

Mr. Llowart remarked that there seemed to be an inclisation to change the system. He thought that it was fair thai each district should receive an equal amount, as it contributed its share to the general revenue.

Mr. Conroy said that in his part of the country those in want applied to the members for the district. He must have very few paupers indeed if he could not disiribute £25, the sum which he received last year.

Mr. Sincrata observed that in his cistret last year very liutle mouey was required—part of the money allowed for \t had been given toother districts more necessitous. He thought something ike this course ought to be pursued.

Some further discu-sion ensued, when the Louse adjourned Without Comiug to any decision on the subject.

AFTERNOON SITTING.

Mr. Davies from the Committee appornied to wait upon His Excellency to know his pleasure when he would be attended with the Address, reported that he would be prepared to receive it te-morrow at 12 0’clock, | Mr. Davies from the Committee appointed to enquire intothe delay in publishing the Journals of last session, presemed a report, which having being read, it was therefore resolved that said report be taken up in committee of the whole House to- | | morrow, é | lon. Mr. Cones rose to refer to a statement in the last No. of the Royal Gazette, respecting the proceedings of the House. here i was made tc sppear that Kev, Dr. Jenkins bad sppuinted Chaplain, on motion of Hon, Col. Gray, whereas he ouly moved that a Chaplain be appointed, and he ( Mr. Coles) made the motion in reference to Dr. Jenkins. tt was stated ‘hat the Address in anewer to the Governor's Speech finally passed on a div gion of 17 to 11, This was incorree, for though the Opposition had endeavored to carry amendments, they did hot Opprse the whole Address, As that paper was published by authority, it ought to give correct statements,

On motion of Mr. McNeill, the following Committee were appointed, to whom all matters relating to Pust Offices should be re‘erred, viz:~Meesrs. Mc Neill, J. Yeo, Sinclair, Mont- | gomery, and Hoa. Mr, ‘l hornton.

ge

ol

ee

Hon. Mr. Wavinane thought the {louse oaght to decide about the manner of printing the Debates. ‘Phe Committee to receive tenders had not yet reported, and he anderstood some hon. mers. bers had changed their opimiot since 1 Was appointed, now think- ing more information would be coumericated by publishing the reports merely in the newspapers,

Hon. Mr. Cores suid, it was mecessary something elroald be done. He thought the best method would be to publish the De- bates tn the leading paper of each party. ‘Though 20 evpies were distribated by e@dch member, that weeald pot cireulate them throaghoat the whole coantry. lle was in favor of giving the Comuittee instractions te qake arrangements with the publishers of the Islander and Examiner newspapers.

Hon, Mr. Latxp concurred in whiat had been stated on a former occasion, that, in pabliehing the Debates, the Islaad pa- pers might not be able to afford space to keep ap with the basiness of the Llowse. Ile would recommend, that ff the paolisters had more matter oo hand than they could print in their asaal issue, they be instructed to publish an extras

Ilon. Me. LonGworth was not present whon the question was formerly brought before the House, or re woald have opposed the method thea proposed. Publishing the speeches tu the lead- ing newspapers was a mach better system. Members, sometines; found much ditlicalty in distributing the copies, but when the Debates were printed tn the papers, they were widely cirealated without any trouble. As it was necessary, however, that a few co- pies should be printed ta a separate form, for the use of the Legis= lature, this part of the work shoald be let by tender. Last year, Mr Ings and Mr. Whelan both had furnished the House with copies of the Debates, for which they received £30 each, Pottung up the printing of a sutfitient number to competition, would pre- vent this doable expeuditare,

Mr. Sinciain was opposed to printing the Debates in a separ- ate form for circulation, as a sufficient suaber could not be pub- lished for all the electors on the Island. Though he had 20 copies, he would not send one—he would not show se much favoritism,

Mr. Hou was of opinion the Debates should be published in all the papers, Many who took a paper had weither the Islander nor Lxcaminer.

Mr. tlowad remarked, that hon. members seemed to be dis- posed to inake an alteration. lis object in making the motton to have them printed in a separate form was to economise public money. Ia his part of the country the people were generally in favor of that methed.

Hon. Mr. Yico said, what signified 600 copies throughoet the country? Appropriating money for such a purpose was only throwing itaway. dt was far better to have the speeches priuted in the newspapers.

Afier some further discussion a resolution was passed to the following effect, viz: that the Committee, formerly appointed, be instructed to receive tenders for printing 75 eapies of the Debates in pamphlet form, for the use of the Legislature; and that they make an arrangement with the proprie ors of the Islander and EBraniner, to publish the Debates iu these paper within sia weeks after the rising of the Hlouse. Adjourned.

ITon. Cou. Gray presented a petition frem Mary Lawrence, the wife of a private suldier, praying for aid. Referred to the Conunittee on Pauper petitions, The hon. member then stated, that the House spent considerable time yesterday in discussing the question of pauper grants, without coming tv any decision, Le was not disposed to allow the matier thas to drop, but would again move the resvlation which he then introdaced) ‘The reso- lotion, which was agreed to, recommended the Commitiee to exercise great caution in investigating the claima of paupers ap— plying for aid; and that no money be granted to any individual, whose claim could not be vouched for by some meaiber, or was not certified by sume clergyman or megisirate in the district.

LAW CLERK.

IIon. Mr. Wavitanp suid, as there was to be considerable basimess beture the House this Session, a Law Clerk would be required, He moved that oue be appointed.

Hoa. Mr. Cores was glad to observe that the Government, day after day, saw the necessity of adopting the course pursaed by the late Government. Last Session the majority were so desirous to economise, that they did not appoiut a Law Clerk. Ik was necessary the House should haye such an officer, asall hon. members were sot qualified to dreft bills; and those who were, could not be expected to perform: the work. ‘The motiva would have his support.

Ifon, Cor. Gray remarked, that one reason why the [louse did not call for the services of a Law Clerk last year, was the shortness of the Session. Another reason was, that the Culony, at that time, was in a state approaching to bankraptcy; but the increase in the revenue, now warranted the Ilouse in inca: ring the expense. ‘Tu prevent inaccuracy, if possible, in the drafting of bills, it was necessary to have such an officer, as they were coustautly called upou tu revise Laws which had been too hustily drawn up.

Hon. Mr. Lonewortu was of opinion that the salary of a Law Clerk would not be money thrown away. He was pleased to think that by the appointment he would be re- lieved from labor whien would otherwise in some measure deyolve upon him. He thonght Mr. Coles ought to haye congratulated the House with respect to the appointment they were about to make. The neeessity fur accuracy, alluded to by the bon. weinber for Belfast, was obvious. His own desire was thacev ry Bill, by whomsvever intro- duced, should be as perfect as possible

Hon. Mr. Tuoanron thought no objection need be raised on thissubject. [le always considered the Louse should employ a Law Clerk; it was a saving to the country be- cause it facilitated the business and shortened the session.

llon. Me Covces congratulated the Governm nt because they had seen the error of their ways, Col, Gray had stated that the appointment was not made last session beeause the Colony was ina state bordering on bankruptey. He would like to ask if they had paid off one penny of tve pub- lie debt. Surely the bon member could not beso ignorant as not to know that it was us great now as at this time last year.

ilon. Col Gray in explanation cf what he had stated respecting the baukraptey of the Colony, would say that last year Treasury Warrants had been parchased at 20 per cent discount, but now they could scarcely be obtained at par. He thought this was sufficient proof that Lis stute- ment was correct.