105,000l. to defray the expenses of the works of the new Houses of Parliament. Mr. Hume said, he wished to know when, at the rate at which they were going on, it was likely that the works would be completed; and he also hoped that in another year the Government would state the whole amount that had been expended.

The Earl of Lincoln said, that he had asked the architect when he thought the works would be completed; but he answered that it was impossible to say until he knew what sum the Chancellor of the Exchequer could afford towards carrying on the works. At the present rate at which the works were carried on, he thought there was every probability that the Session of 1845 would be held in the new Houses. The whole of the buildings would not be completed at that period, and he believed that it would be seven or eight years before the Victoria tower and other portions of the works were completed.

Mr. Hume said, he had always objected to the site of the new Houses. It had been the cause of their burying 150,000l., and a more extravagant waste of the public money had never, in his opinion, taken place. He thought, and he was supported in his opinion by one of the commissioners, that the building would never do for the House of Commons.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that he had made inquiry as to the sum required to carry on the works for this year, and the amount proposed was that which was considered necessary.

Vote agreed to.

19,3267. for the completion and fittings of the model prison.

Mr. W. Williams said, that this item would make up the sum of 69,000l. for the building of the model prison. He thought the system proposed would not answer in this country, and he thought that a reference to one of the items in the present estimates would convince the House of this. He found an item of 6,300l. for maintaining 250 convicts for three quarters of a year. This was at the rate of 13s. a week each, and this, too, in a country where the wages of a man who worked fourteen hours a day were as low as 3s. a week. Why had not these convicts been transported? He had been in. formed that the persons confined in the prison of Sing Sing, in the United States,

were not only capable of defraying their own expenses by their labour, but also the expenses of the prison. The prison was built by the convicts themselves; and he saw no reason why the same plan should not be adopted in the present case. He trusted that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department would take this point into his consideration.

Sir James Graham said, that the works were too far advanced when the Government came into office for them to be arrested. The experiment which they were to try was an important one, but at the same time he would not wish it to be tried upon a larger scale than that at present proposed. With reference to the probable expense, the hon. Member would observe that, as accommodation in the present case was to be provided for 520 persons, the expense would be proportionally reduced by applying it to a more extended system. He thought that the discontinuance of transportation would not be politic. It was, he believed, an advantageous form of punishment for the community here, and, under proper regulations, beneficial to the penal settlements themselves. The model prison was intended to be subsidiary to the punishment of transportation. It frequently happened, that to carry out the sentence of transportation immediately after it was pronounced was cruel towards the prisoner; but the aid of the model prison might be called in in such cases, and by confining the offender there for some time-say eighteen months or two years-he might be instructed in some species of useful and skilful employment, so as when he should be sent to the penal colony, he would have an opportunity of gaining an honest and comfortable livelihood.

Mr. Hume concurred in the observations of the right hon. Baronet upon the subject of transportation, but he thought that if they spent more money in building schools they would have to spend less in building prisons. He thought, too, that some provision should be made for offenders, particularly juvenile offenders, after their liberation from prison, to prevent them, if possible, from relapsing into vice. He had made inquiry of the governors of no less than seven prisons, and they had stated that great numbers of the persons under their care soon returned after liberation, as they were obliged to

have recourse again to thieving, from being without the means of earning an honest livelihood.

Vote agreed to.

On the motion that 8,6541. be appropriated for the use of the Parkhurst Prison in the Isle of Wight.

Sir James Graham stated, that the system of discipline pursued at Parkhurst had been found in general to be satisfactory in its results. The Government had thought it right in some cases, where the system had been found to produce extremely beneficial effects, to graut free pardons in the cases of these individuals and to send them out free to New Zealand, where they might gain an honest subsistence. In other cases, offenders had been sent to Van Diemen's Land with a contingent pardon depending upon their future behaviour. An additional amount was this year required for this prison, in order to make arrangements for the accommodation of juvenile female delinquents. Since he had been called upon to superintend the working of the criminal law, he had experienced great difficulty in making arrangements with respect to female convicts of tender years under sentence of transportation. It was not possible to send such persons to a penal colony, and it had therefore been deemed right to form an establishment at Parkhurst for their reception.

Mr. Hume remarked upon the hardship of sending out free, and with a pardon, to New Zealand, convicted prisoners, while numerous honest people were unable to emigrate there and to other colonies for want of means. He begged to call the serious attention of Government to this subject.

Mr. Vernon Smith asked in what capacities these persons were sent abroad?

Sir James Graham replied they were sent pardoned.

of their former crimes. He deprecated any continuance of discussion upon this subject.

Mr. Aglionby wished to know upon what fund the expense of these persons being sent was to fall.

Lord Stanley: Upon that part of the public money applicable to criminals.

Sir James Graham had no doubt as to the policy of immediately granting the vote. Young female convicts could not well be transported to a penal settlement, and therefore it was of great importance that something should be done for their reformation at home.

Mr. Roebuck was in favour of transportation with respect to all classes of convicts. The cry against transportation was unwise and unfounded.

Mr. V. Smith thought the system of juvenile offenders being sent to New Zealand, with a free pardon, was a premium upon crime, and an act of hardship to poor but honest men. He repeated the question as to the fund from which they

were sent,

Lord Stanley replied, that they were not sent out from any colonial fund. The expenses formed a moderate charge upon the money appropriated to criminal jurisprudence. He thought it advisable that prisoners, after having been detained a certain time, and to a greater or less extent reformed, should be sent from the country pardoned, upon the condition of their not returning to it. The funds which were applied to defray the expenses would have otherwise been applied to the cost either of transportation, or of fulfilling their originally destined period of imprisonment; and the result was an actual saving to the public.

Mr. Hawes protested against the doctrines of the hon. Member for Bath with respect to transportation. There was, he thought, with respect to criminal law, a tendency to fall back to old practices which had been proved ineffectual. He thought the difference between transpor

Lord Stanley stated, that no persons were sent out except those committed for comparatively trifling offences. The cases were few in number, and the persons were so far reformed that there was every hope of their being again fitted to enter into society, and the great object was to remove them to a distance from the scene

country was one between an expensive punishment three thousand miles away and a cheap one at home.

On the question that 112,4701. to defray the expenses of consul-generals, consuls, vice-consuls, and superintendents of trade in China, be granted to her Majesty.

Mr. D'Israeli asked what the services of consuls were?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said their duties were to superintend trade; and, at the same time, they had some diplomatic duties to attend to.

Mr. D'Israeli said, it was evident that consuls by law had nothing to do. Almost every instruction which they received from the Foreign Office was contrary to law. They were called on to make returns respecting the trade of the country where they resided; but they had no authority to demand those papers without which it was not in their power to give any accurate information. It was also their duty to see that every British ship was navigated according to law, but they had no power to call on the captain for the production of the ship's papers. Before Mr. Canning's act for the regulation of consuls, they had the power to make the captain produce his papers; but in his act Mr. Canning purposely omitted this power, with a view of remodelling the system altogether, which he had afterward, not done, and the administration and the legislation of the country, on this subject, were in direct contradiction with each other. The British consuls were the only consuls who could not arbitrate between a master and his crew.

Sir Charles Napier said, he did not know what the consular law was, but he had had a good deal of experience of the practice, which was perfectly different to what had been described by the hon. Gentleman, and he believed, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman must be mistaken. It was impossible for a captain to receive consular protection without producing his papers. But he did not think that sufficient attention was paid to the appointment of consuls. They ought to collect at the places where they resided information that might be of use to the country in time of war.

Viscount Palmerston said, that the chief duties devolving on consuls were those of protecting the interests of British commerce and shipping. The real question was whether those duties were of sufficient importance to warrant the expenses of a consular establishment. He believed that they were. He himself had increased the VOL. LXV. {s}

Third

number of consuls, and in every case he had been induced to do so in consequence of applications from persons interested in the trade of the places at which they wished for consuls to be appointed. As to what the hon. Member for Shrewsbury had stated with reference to the intentions of Mr. Canning to make a change in the consular establishment, he believed that the only change which was made was abolishing the system of paying consuls by means of fees proportionate to the tounage of vessels for which they had transacted business, and remunerating them by means of fixed salaries. This was the only change, he believed, which was contemplated by Mr. Canning. It was true, as the hon. Gentleman opposite had stated, that consuls had no legal power of adjudication, but they had a power of arbitration, inasmuch as such a power might be created by the contending parties themselves by mutual consent, and the most important duties of a consul frequently consisted in arbitrating between captains of ships and their crews. It was also true that the consul had no legal claim for the production of ships' papers; but the question of the propriety of investing them with that power had not escaped the consideration of the late Government. On consulting the Board of Trade, however, it was represented that the investiture of consuls with such powers would not be advantageous to commerce. In fact, when merchants and captains of ships require the aid of the consul to bring them through any difficulty into which they might have fallen with the local authorities, they were required to furnish him with their papers before the end in view could be attained. On the whole, he believed that the duties of consuls were officially discharged.

Mr. Hume wished to know on what grounds an addition had been made to the estimates by the appointment of a consulgeneral of Syria.

Viscount Palmerston replied, that that appointment was not by any means a new one, for there had formerly been a consulgeneral at Damascus. In the present state of Syria, it was considered important that there should be an officer invested with that power over the local consuls which belonged to the office of consuigeneral; the appointment had been attended by advantageous results.

Mr. Hume thought that as there was
E