The Press. — London, England, 1856-05-31 00:00:00

recalling% in Vat -haunt 1811111 CHURCH Mr. ST►FFORD, on Tuesday, nade an appeal to Mr. Mia!l, with reference to his motion respecting the temporalities of the Irish Church, not to bring for ward a subject calculated to awaken bitter feelings in Ireland on the eve of a national rejoicing. He moved that the house do adjourn. Mr MULL complained of a want of courtesy on the part of Mr. Stafford, in not giving him notice of this intimation, and deelined to postpone his motion. Mr. STLTIPORD ultimately withdrew his motion for adjournment, when On the motion of Mr. G. A. HAmirrox, the bth article of the Union of Great Britain and Ireland, embodied in the Act of Union, having been read by the Clerk, Mr. Mum moved a resolution pledging the house to consider in committee the temporalities of the Irish Church, and other pecnniary provisions make by law for religious teaching and worship in Ireland. Hs maintained that endowment was utterly inappli cable to the present rendition and religious feelings of the country; it was a policy which must be re traced, and, as indiscriminate endowment was im practicable, an impartial system of disendowment should be adopted, combined with the religious equality of all sects in Ireland,—a remedy, he thought, not more violent than the disease. For any revenues which might be disengaged from their present afplication by his proposal, he suggested as an appropriate employment the completion of drain age works, the construction of roads and harbours, and other purposes of practical utility. Mr. ICias defended the Regium Donum t, the Irish Presbyterians, and opposed the motion, which he contended would leave the Irish Church depen dent upon the voluntary principle. Mr. LINDSAY supported the motion, and asserted that nntier the voluntary system ample provision had been mean for religious purposes in Scotland. Mr. Ntvroteste reprobated a proposition which, be said, must have one of two issues, either to disendow the Established Church in Ireland, or to admit at other meta to an equal share in the endow ment. Mr. POLLARD URQUHART declared tha► the resu't of the inconsistencies Which had characterised the ecclesiastical p they of successive Governments, and e.speoially Whig Governments, in Ireland had been to leave a mass of unreconciled anomalies and un reformed abuses, fa which there was no remedy but Some sweeping measure of equalisation. Mr. G. A. Haitwrox maintained the indefeasible claim of the Irish Church to all its present tempo. ralities, which, he argued, bad been secured to it by thn Act of Union. He insistecl that the motion was a violation of Art. 15 of the Act of Union. Mr. W. J. Fox argued that the State possessed the full right to deal with ecclesiastical endowments according to the dictates - of un enlarged expediency. Mr. Stravroan eomplained that the debate on a subject of such importance should have proceeded so long without any expression of opinion from the Tresses, bench. Mr. HADTIELD Supported the motion. Mr. NAPIER condemned it, as perpetrating an act of confiscation upon the Irish Church property, and reviving the religious feuds whieh had already proved so detrimental to the peace and prosperity of Iralana. Lord PALIERSTON deprecated the introduction of polemical controversy amidst questions which bore principally a political significance. As regarded the practical consequences of the motion before the house, he remarked that the Irish Church temporali ties were secured by a formal article of the Act of Union, and could not be diverted from their original purpose without violating the pledze then entered Lite by the Imperial Government. With this careful performance of the promise relative to the endow.• mints of the Established Church in Ireland, he admitted the perfect right of the Legislature to deal with the Church itself. The question raised by Mr. Miall, he observed, was not limited to the Irish Establishment. If his proposition were accepted it would affect the existence of an Established Church in every section of the United Kingdom, and render rnactically impossible the recognition of any State t Aigion. Believing that the maintenance of an ec clesiastical establishment was essential to the well being of the country, the noble lord could not con cur in the resolution proposed for adoption, and objected particularly to the secular purposes to which it was proposed to divert the funds withdrawn from the endowments of the Church. Mr. J. MAociezoort supported the motion. he house then divided— Por Mr..lstiell's resolution 63 Against lB.l-70 Tilt PREBB. TRILLEE AND ETLIARNEY SAVINGS NANtI4. Captain D. O'Cowitzu., on Tuesday, moved the following resolution : That this house will resolve itself into a committee to consider an address to her Majesty, preying that she will be graciously pleased to extend the same measure of relief to the depositors in the late Tralee and Killarney Savings banks as has been already extended to the depositors in the late Cuffe-street Savings-bank. It was universally believed in Ireland that the savings banks had Government security; and it was notorious that the Government used the money and interfered in the management. He should be pro bably told that the Government had no legal responsibility, and this might be so, but he thought it clear that a moral responsibility attached to them. Viscount CASTLEROSSE seconded the motion. He trusted the Government would introduce a measure for amending the laws relating to savings-banks, and that the disastrous consequences which ensued from these failures might never again occur. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the case here referred to took place in 1848. There was no ground whatever for maintaining that any legal re sponsibility devolved upon the Government for the default of the managers of savings banks ; and the only question vas whether any moral responsibility rested upon the Government. That moral responsi bility in this case had been already negatived by a competent committee composed of ten members, who were by no means opposed to the reasonable claims of the depositors. It seemed to him, there fore, impossible that they could at this day go back from that decision, and reinvestigate a case which °centred seven years ago; still less was it possible to hold out any hope on the part of the Government that any vote would be proposed in aid of these two banks. At the same time he fully admitted that the case of the depositors in those banks was a very painful one, and he could only regret that it was im possible for him to offer anything more than that sympathy which such a case always excited. Mr. VANCE moved the adjournment of the debate, which was negatived by a majority of 75, when the house divided on the main question, and rejected the motion by a majority of 15-54 to 39. Tit CASE UT UR. POLLOK. Sir M. STEWART, on Tuesday, called the attention of the house to the petition of Mr. Allan Pollok, against whom most serious accusations were abroad of cruelty and ill-treatment of his Irish tenants : The truth of the matter was that Mr. Pollok, in Decem ber, l8:53, had purchased two estates out of the Encum bered Estates Court in different parts of Gelway, and also an estate called the Qnornborough West estate. Upon the parohase of this latter estate he had proposed to the tenants to give up possession; and they all, with the ex ception of nine, agreed to do so upon payment of compen sation. Those nine who refused to give up possession remained upon the estate, and they were now all there, with the exception of two who had voluntarily removed. ( Hear, hear.) With respect to the estates in Galway, the advertisement issued by the court stated that there were no leases in existence; that the tenancies were from year to year; and that the purchasers would, therefore, be able to settle the property as they might think to be of the greatest advantage to themselves. Mr. Pollok, upon purchasing these estates, endeavoured to make the same arrangements with the tenants which he had done with those on the other estate. At first they consented to give up possession, but they afterwards, for some reason, refused to do se. He therefore adopted legal proceedings to obtain possession, hut. from some technical informality, those proceedings failed, and the tenants remained, and they still were in possession of the land. The hon. member for Wexford had slid that the tenants had been exterminated and the land turned into pasture ground. So far from this being the case, Sir Michael Stewart declared that his friend Mr. Polink had erected farm buildings, built cottages, and was in every way preparing to introduce au improved system of agriculture and farming throughout his estate. Mr. WMAIION reiterated his former statements against Mr. Pollok, and said that if a committee of the house were appointed, he believed it would be found that Mr. Poliok's proceedings ought not to be tolerated. There was little doubt of one point—viz., that he had evicted 2441 tenants from the Quorn borough West Estate, and clearly mama to evict 500 more from the Ballynakil Estate. The subject was sharply discussed for a short time by Mr. Liddell, Mr, Duncan, Mr. Moore, Mr. Napier, and Sir A. Campbell, but at length suffered to drop. JOINT-STOCK CORIUM/6 BILL. Mr. SPOONER, on Monday, on the order for going into committee upon this bill, inquired the nature of the alterations made in the bill' and the reasons for them. He objected to its principle, which was con trary, be said, to the commercial policy of this coun try, and moved to defer the tcommittee for six months. hlr. Lows said he had made ,no alteration affect ing the principle of the bill, whisk had been affirmed by the house; and it would be wasting time to discuss its details, which mast .he reocasidi,red in committee. SATURbAY The amendment was negatived, and the hou a went into committee upon the bill, the clauses which Rent one to thirty-six, after some distussior, were agreed to. To clause thirty•seven, after the word " seven " the words "for the period of six months after that number should have been so n. duced" wore added. Clauses up to fit'ty.seven in clusive were then agreed to. In clause fifty-eight the words "whose nominal capital does not exceed 5,0001." were objected to by Mr. EWART, anti the amendment for the omission of the words carried. The remaining clauses of the bill were then ulti mately agreed to. PARTNERSHIP AMENDMENT (N 0.2) lux. Mr. Loam, on Monday, moved the second reading of this bill Mr. .4.itcRIBALD Hasii said it was incumbent upon Mr. Lowe, in order to make out the necessity for this measure, to show that there was a want of capital in the country; but he had not done so, and could not do so, inasmuch as capital wairre. dundant beyond the wants of commerce. He ino. ed to defer the second reading for six months. Mr. GREG/MN seconded the amendment. Mr. CaanwELL said he hoped the bill would plus the second reading without a division, although the bill would require to be altered in the committee. The measure which had just passed that stage gave great powers of limited liability to bodies of nil less than seven persons, and this was a strong reason why analogous provisiomi should be made for smaller associations. Mr. 'l. BARING was opposed to the second readirg of the bill, which wanted the necessary safeguaita against fraud, and which could not, in his opinion, be so modified in committee as to cure its imperfec tions. The Joint-stock Companies Bill would give sufficient scope to the principle of limited habilty. This bill carried oat a peculiar theory not recognis d by the law of any other country. It required i o declaration that the money was to be lent for a cer tain period. There was to be no publicity as to the amount lent, and no prohibition that money should not be lent at one moment and taken back another. Mr. RAXTBR spoke in favour of the principle of Unlimited liability, he observed, compelled a retiring partner to withdraw his cic whereas limited liability would induce him to leave it, at least for a time. The bill, however, in his opinion, went too far, and was too theoretical ; but he agreed with Mr. Cardwell that it could be amended in committee. Mr. MkSTERSAN strongly opposed the bill. Mr. lima gloved that the debate be it,ijoureed. Upon %division, this notion was negatived by 110 to 76. Mr. LOWE shortly defended the bill, which did not, he said, alter the law of partnership properly so called ; its object was to get rid of a liability which a perverse ingenuity had unjustly attached to a con tract which was not a real partnership ; to restrict partnership within its proper limits; and to relieve persons not really partners from the liabilities attaching to partnership. Mr. lirsoLET, Mr. KIRK, and Mr.l-IonsFALL opposed the bill in its present form, when the house divided, and the second reading was carried by a majority a 97 to 68. The bill was accordingly read a second time. IHEITART ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE NORTH AMERICAN The Earl o' Eton, on Tuesday, moved for returns of despatches to the Governor and Lieu tenant-Governors of the British North American colonies on the military establishment to be min• tamed in them, and a copy of the report of the commissioners appointed in 1t154 to inquire into the best means of organising the militia of Canada, and providing an efficient and economical means of defence for the colony. He did not wish to embar rass the Government by the motion; but he thought the rumour that 10,000 troops were to be sent to Canada was likely to create an uneasy feeling in the United States, and induce Congress to adopt measures of precaution and defence that would still farther complicate the present relations of England and America. He deplored the opinion, now gaining too much ground among us, that there was a strong hos tile feeling against England on the part of the Ame ricans generally. That enmity to England was felt and expressed more by foreigners, the refugees and immigrants from Great Britain, and disgraced rather the land of their birth than that of their adoption. All the better class of Americans were animated by kindly feelings to this country; and there never was a time when the interests of the two nations were more closely sound up together. He therefore deeply deplored the continuance of the enlistment conm yersy between the two Governments. As to 0 • questions connected with Central America, it was tl • interest of this country to maintain the indepentlem • of those Suttee ; but the Government had put the most restrictive interpretation on the Clayton Bulwer treaty ; it insisted that the parties to it might con tinue to exercise a right or protection in Central