The Sun. — London, England, 1846-05-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL - PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, May 1. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock. CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL. Lord DENMAN presented a petition from the London Missionary Society, praying to be exempted from the of era tiens of the Charitable Trusts Bill. DIF,DANDS BILL. Lord CAMPBELL moved the order of the day for going into Committee on this Bill. Lord DENMAN expressed his approbation of the Bill in its present state. Lord BROUGHAM also expressed his concurrence with the object of the Bill. He thought that if an officer like the Procurator Fiscal in Scotland was instituted in England, it would be a great means of forwarding criminal justice. Lord LYTTELTON supported the Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR was in favour of the Bill, which had been unanimously agreed to in Committee up stairs as a measure very desirable. Their Lordships then went into Committee on the Bill, and the several clauses were agreed to. IRISH GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY. Lord REDESDALE presented a petition against the Irish Crest Western Railway, viz., the line from Portarlington to Galway. Ile said it was signed by a large number of share holders, at least the parties signing it purported to be such, and to represent 121,0004 He would recommend the peti tion to the attention of the House. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said he had heard of a great many shareholders in the Irish project who were just as anxious that the line should be forwarded. This petition had been got up by a person who styled himself a secretary to a rival company. The haed up. shares s WIC row selling a t 21. discount ; if any person purchased these shares they would be entitled toreceive 21. per sh are when the affairs of the company were wound Their L or d s hi ps wou ld see t h a t this would" gHeegpresented a . reat encou ragement to ga m blin g s peculation in ailway petition from the chairman and directors, pra s. ying their Lord ships to pass the Bill. Lord BROUGHAM wished to lay on th somee subjectinforma oftio be foren rail way speculation. He had the House which he had re received ceived a letter from a sharebroker, which stated that his business made him acquainted with the opinions of other brokers on the state of that speculation, and they coincided in his own sentiments, which were thu s s t ate d i n the letter: I beg to call your Lordships' attenti on t o th e f act t h at within the last few days the mania of railway speculation has been revived with all its former fury. Established are at from 201. to 301. per cent. premium, and the scrip of lines which are of a doubtful character have gone from a discount to a pre mium. The consequences will be more serious than is gene rally imagined. First, it will enable new companies to get a majority of three-fifths in favour of carrying them on, and se curely cloak interested parties and the frauds of others ; and last not least, we shall have another panic." This showed the necessity of adopting some effectual measures to meet the im pending evil of undue speculation, during the continuance of which the gambler made his harvest.—( Hear. ) Affer a few words from the Marquis of SALISBURY, which were inaudible in the gallery, Lord MONTEAGLE was of opinion that all the Bills on the table of the House should be suspended until the opinions of the shareholders could be obtained respecting them. He, saw considerable injustice in suspending the test respecting some Bills and applying it with great severity to others. There never was a year, in his opinion, in which a more ex traordinary and extravagant proposition had been made to either House of Parliament. He agreed with the Noble Mar quis behind him, that they ought to make one rule govern all. On these grounds he had taken the liberty of stating so much, because, having originally opposed this Bill, he felt himself now precluded, and he should consider himself acting not in a very unjust manner in refusing the passing of this Bill. He did not know whether his Noble Friend had moved the third reading of that Bill, and he would now move that the Bill be read a third time. Lord REDESDALE explained the grounds which he had taken with respect to this Bill on a former occasion. There was no doubt that the petition which he formerly pre sented, embodying, as it did, so large a body of wealthy andowners was deserving of considerable attention. That pe tition represented the wishes of the owners of 5,000 shares, or 211,0001. out of 800,0001., which was two-thirds of the esti mated cost. He thought that, after all that had been stated, it would be better to let this Bill go on. At all events, after what he bad stated to their Lordships, he should decline to offer any opposition to the third reading. The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the motion, that the Bill be read a third time, which was unanimously agreed to. MULLINGAR AND GALWAY RAILWAY BILL. On the motion of Lord MONTEAGLE, this Bill was read a first time. RAILWAY DEPOSITS BILL. Lord MONTEAGLE then said that he rose for the pur pose of moving that the Railway Companies' Dissolution Bill be read a second time.—(oh, oh, and laughter.) He begged their Lordships pardon, he meant the Railway Deposits Bill, to which motion he hoped there would be no opposition. In the early part of this session their Lordships' attention was called to the fact of the very great inconveniencewhieh might be produced, and which he believed ought to be produced, upon the money market with respect to the law on railway deposits. He was glad to find that this Bill passed in the other House of Parliament without opposition. He believed that Bill was one which would serve the public interest, though it was thought at the time that it would give railway companies very great influence ; that, however, was not the case, and he trusted it would now be read a second time. The Duke of BEAUFORT said, that as several Noble Lords who took a great interest in the measure were absent, he thought it a d v i sa bl e to postpone the second reading till his Noble Friends had an opportunity of expressing their opinions. The second reading of the Bill was then postponed. The BISHOP of EXETER wished to know from his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack, when the House would go into Committee on the Bill (the Religious Opinions Relief Bill), which was read a second time on the pre vious evening ? The LORD CHANCELLOR feared that the Right Rev. Prelate judged his powers of expediting matters according to his own character fur facilitating things. lie might depend on it there would be no unnecessary delay, but the precise time he could not say. The Bishop of EXETER said, there had been no hurry it appeared in puothing forward the Bill. It had been intro duced in the beginning of February, and for three months it had been before the House ere the second reading was taken. And then but little intimation had been given of the intention of taking the second reading. He hoped, therefore, they should have accurate infcrmation of the day of the Committee on the Bill, as there were many nice points to be considered. There were two points which he intended more especially to oppose, unless they were altered. The one was, that pro posing to repeal the prohibition against the extolling of Papal supremacy ; aad the other, the restriction on the circulation of Papal bulls. Except those were amended, he should certainly divide the house. RAILWAYS DISSOLUTION BILL. The Earl of DALHOUSIE moved that the House resolve itself on this Bill. Earl RADNOR rose to offer a few observations before going into Committee. He could not consent to the Bill passing without considerable modifications. If it were agreed to in its present shape, many good schemes would be put a stop to by very unfair means.—(Hear, hear.) This was confirmed by a letter he had received that morning, from a gentleman, from which he would read an extract. ( The Noble Lord then read the extract, which was to the effect that he had taken up shares in some of the best railway pro jects—in the South Wales, the Waterford and Kilkenny, and other lines.) He had t a k en up t h e s h ares as a boncifide in vestment, with the intention of paying up the instalments; but in the present Bill a power was given to parties to break up those companies by improper means. This gentleman's position, as he stated, was a very hard one ; because it was well known that a deal of gambling had taken place in shares, for the purpose of putting an end to schemes, for the purpose of realising a profit out of the sharing of the deposits Tins was a great hardship upon those who had embarked in good schemes, and very general injustice would result from the pro posed measure. There would be many cases of hardship under the operation of the proposed measure. He thought that by a little management such hard , hips might be ayes ted. It ap peared to him that there would be no great deal of difficulty in carrying out an arrangement by which, when a majority of the shareholders were in favour of a dissolution of the com pany, the minority should have the power of putting in a claim to continue the company. The Earl of DALHOUssIE—They would then get off their liabilities. Earl RADNOR—Their deposits would be returned out of the money in the hands of the company, or which was de posited with the Accountant-General. He did think that some clauses should be introduced to meet this state of things, and that it should be postponed for a day or two for that purpose. If the Ifouse (lid not do this, the result would be great injustice to the parties, and great injury to the public. Earl DALHOUSIE sail, that as some clauses were to be proposed be the Noble Lord opposite to the effect suggested by the Noble Lord who had just sat dosn, perhaps it would be as well that he (Earl Dalhousie) should reserve what he had to say upon the subject until those amendments should be pro posed, as by that means the House would be saved Coe nect's airs of having the same ground gone over a s e c on d time , . Earl GRE Y said he should object to the measure being postponed on account of any amendments which he might have to propose, beeau4 e the nature of those amendments might de pend upon what the nature of the measure should be. He ap prehended that great e•'l mischiefs would arise from this Hill as it now stood, if some and should not be intro duced. He considered trlaet subject ought to be postponed for a few days in order that the overnment might give the matter more mature consitleratio They had a right, hr.w ever, to call on the Government to state their views on the subject. u The Earl of DALIIOUS IE said if the Noble sub mitted his amendment to the House lie should feelit his Lord dy t H to do all in his power to i n d uce t h eir Lordships If the Noble Earl had been i n hi s P l ace l e the earlierto reject it. s the Bill, he would have known that h e (L ord Dadhousielgb'o'‘.l in introduoing it and in the second reading, discussed the points advised by the Noble Earl. '1 hese points had also been considered by her Majesty's Government, wh o had constantly endeavoured to avert the evil of undue speculation, but they thought it impossible to provide a remedy for the evils of which he complained. The Noble Eafl complained that gambling had been going on in shares for a double purpose—namely, gambling for the pur pose of making a profit on shares, and gambling for the pur pose of influencing, the proceedings of companies by purchasing a quantity of their stock, and so obtaining a majority of votes. Now, he had thrice admitted, and he now admitted, that gambling had been going on in the stock market, but that could not be urged as an objection to this measure, neither would their rejection of it. But if they did reject it, they would render many companies fifty times worse than they were at the present moment, because they would leave them without the means of dissolution, thus leaving them to speculate from month to month whenever there was the least semblance of a chance of making any money by their shares. Scrip passed so constantly from hand to hand that it was almost impos sible to trace those who originally held it—in fact, they were like a bank-note. The object of the present I3ill was to enable any company which had not come before Parliament, or which were not before the House, in consequence of having failed to enmPly with the standing orders, to wind up their affairs. T f here were 1,200 registered companies at the commencement of the ses s i on . Th ere are now in actual progress b efore the loithzea not more th an 430 , an d t h e w h o l e o f t h e fro m „ se a : r e ta . ,i. a condition utterly incapacitated each p,,„„ taming fully what was the liability of have Lord o n the opposite hit hand. N N , , '''''' te that was the object of the Bill he held in minority should power of co t• ' e side suggested that a existence; and tteb'property t- nin uing the company in them. He objected a ofutlian should be vested in Those who wereretciht•t"leh titled to the property of the from th , eo °n4 r as b 'ing unjust. Plans and w t were the only property h course be lost. whie c.:zpan y , f ,,, " tha n should be .en getting up the plans was of cour uld be saved se to profes s to sitisslti that five, ten, or fifteen persons, I h v e a x s P . 4 s l e oz ol the company to go on, should be entitled let them pm.ra'aesrty should la - e when the company was wound up? All thetopa" the property sold, and if the minority desired, and theta for 5/. they ei,uld put themselves in the conditio n Plan f s ' newly-registered company. By such means they 9 , o ' a creating a nucleus of a new company, with a capital coonusilsdcbe of the stock of an abandoned concern of a worthless company, with a nominal capital to trade upon. They would be creating a nest egg upon which the lowest kind of speculators would in: ettbate ; next year they would have a brood of these miserable speculations let loose upon society. It might be very q well if there was no remedy for the evil. But they have nothing to do but to purchase the plans and go down to Ser jeant's:lnn, pay 51., and they would be again a regisf ered company These were the grounds on which he should object to the mo tion of the Noble Earl. Lord MONTEAGLE thought that his No' le Friend, who had just sat down, had made a very strong case in one part of the subject, but he must contend that th' ugh the parties wele highly to blame, the Legislature were most in fault. The Government might be exonerated from one portion of the blame to which they were liable, but still he should contend that they were deeply responsible for not having taken measures for the avoidance of the evil and now, when it had accrued they dealt with it in a small and pitiful manner, instead of grap pling with t hi s i mmense speculation in a large and masterly way. On the 31 s t M arc h t h ey h a d g i ven not i ce t o the parties s e e n i g v a e g s e( f l or in t r h a e ilw a a l 3; e s, red in sotradteerofthatittekem r might they prepare principleareth that ought to have been nwhich allowing w a s individuals a dopted theby t to vote and untilt h e theyth Easth had d Indiah been en some Directors,timoef markets. inthe posse ss i on o f s t oc k, was the one d should be allowed to vo d te he u e n ome a bona fide possessor, bef ore adoped. He (Lord MonteaT e e ss ) h h e a ha p d ro h p e o e s n ed in th th a e t no one sion of the stock, and had the 31st March. Now, would any one deny that a new, an in. creased, and mischievous is t c h l e tiesvtrek. He was sspeculatio qunhiat d esure that u been raisesdsh would e i la declaration ofi be the case. The 13th clause of to thehleldel natlilotiwededtoav(Lni.tersnounts in the possession of shares_ were this was highly detrimental, for under it any two persons might go into a meeting to vote, transfer their shares, and then again re-transfer them, voting all the while, and this might be done ten thousand times over.—(Hear, hear.) Let those parties who refuse to acquiesce in the dissolution of the company, purchase the plans, and then re-register, while those who seceded from the company would be reimbursed for their out lay. He thought that the original proprietors ought to be in titled to a pre-emption. He had no desire to throw difficulties in the way, but he was desirous of seeing it made as useful as possible. Lord BROUGHAM quite agreed with his Noble Friend who had just sat down, but it appeared that though he was friendly to the measure he had spoken against it. When they were favourable to a measure it was usual on this side of the British Chanr.el to support it by a speech or a vote, but it seemed such was not the rule everywhere, for his Learned Friend went on the principle of looking one way and rowing another. He quite regretted that a fuller measure had not been introduced, but he hoped that such would be the case with respect to all private Bills, although he was aware that great difficulty laid in the way of any great change being made at once. That it was necessary was evident from the almost convulsion in the money market which we had just escaped, and which was nearly as mischievous as the panic of 1807, 1812, and in a much larger wayi n 1825-6. _ Thank God, under the firmnes of those at the head of affairs, and through the admirable management of the directors of the B an k, th e c l ou d h a d passe d without bursting. But the danger in the future remained, and he should like to have time to consider any alteration, as any one false step might be productive of a great deal of mishief. As to the voting, there appeared to have been a slip in the draft which was to be amended. Ho approved of the Bill, but it must be understood that he said this as not at once condemn ing the alterations of his Noble Frierd (the Earl of Radnor) without the opportunity of considering them before going into Committee. But he still hoped for a more enlarged Bill, for it ought not to be forgotten that all the courts in England, Scotland, and Ireland, could not dis pose in ten years of the pecuniary and other interests of the private Bill legislation—a legislation which was conducted as badly as possble, and which gave what the Master of the Rolls called a transcendental power to take men's property at will—not in compliance with their wish, but against it, and contrary to all law. And he should return from his political life, whenever that tints came, he should feel it a consolation to reflect that he had always been the strenuous advocate of what he could not but feel a most un constitutional and mischievous power. Lord MONTEAGLE and the Earl of DALHOUSIE ex plained. Lord ASHBURTON wished to rectify the impression that this Bill was the only thing that was going to be done to do away with the mischief and the confusion into which the country had been thrown by this railway speculation ; for he was quite true that they would entail upon the country the greatest possible injury, if they went no further. Wherever there were the materials of gambling there would be gam bling; and whilst these materials remained it would be quite useless to stop the evil by legislation. He thought the bette plan would be to prevent the issue of scrip at all until the seve ral Bills reached a certain stage before the Houses of Parliament. To save the evil, also, they might give to the shareholders wh• remained the power of buying out those who wished to secede. One thing he wished particularly to impress upon their Lord ships —one thing which he had particularly alluded to on all the Committees of that House—and that was, that it would be highly improper to suffer these Bills to leave the House in the shape of laws, without a sufficient assurance that their object, would be carried into effect. Earl FITZ WILLIAM approved of the Bill, but he feared that it might have the effect of destroying many good schemes and supporting many bad ones, for the goodness or the badness of the schemes were in no way to be judged of by the positions and characters of the promoters. With respect to the plan, be wished that the best mode to be adopted would be for the Go vernment to take possession of them on behalf of the public; and that he conceived would be a very good quid pro quo for the right to wind up the affairs of the several companies. He was anxious for this, for he hoped some day that the whole of these railway projects would be in the hands of the Govern ment. He was especially opposed to the sale of the plans, be cause he conceived that they would be bought up by the great companies, and be hereafter made use of most mischievously. Lord REDESDALE explained that the books of the sur ♦eyors were only intelligible to themselves, and as to the plans they were all lithographed, and, therefore, easily attainable anywhere. With respect to the winding up, he believed that those companies which might be dissolved would be very honestly wound up. Aud with regard to the state of railway legisla tion, he intended next week to ask their Lordships to accede to a resolution that they would not take any opposed railway Bill into Committee after sore late day, say the •20th July. Their doing this would have the effect of saving a great many Bills from coming up from the other House of Parliament, and render the business much more controlable than it apparently was at present. - The Marquis of CL ANRICARDE supported the Bill, but thought that the Earl of Dalhousie had not met the objections of his Noble Friend (the Earl of Radnor) and his proposition that persons should make a declaration of the time at which they came into possession of the shares before they were allowed to vote. He thought that was a proposition well worthy of consideration, and which ought to be thought of before the report was brought up. The House then went into Committee on the Bill, when The Earl of DALHOUSIE said he was quite ready to con sider the objections of any Noble Lord. Earl GREY suggested that the practice of the other House be adopted which was to commit the Bill pro forma, have it printed, and then fully consider it in Committee or have it re-committed afterwards. This was necessary, as it appeared there was almost as much writing as print on the Bill. The Earl of DALEIOUSIE objected to the Noble Earl drawing any inference from his bird's eye view of the paper he held in his hand. There was no alteration whatever in the principle of the Bill, and he then went through the alterations to show that such was not the case. After a few words from Lord NIONTEAGLE, Earl GREY proposed to impose a penalty of 51. for each vote given not according to the provisions of the Act, both on the scripholder and the proxy who might vote for him. A conversation ensued on this point, in which Earl Grey, Lord Monteagle, the Earl of Dalhousie, and Lord Redesdale participated, the last nobleman objecting to the date of the lst of March being fixed as a day posterior to which the sale of scrip should invalidate the right of voting. A provision was also inserted for obtaining a fair decision at the meeting for dissolving the company, the rule being, that the minutes should be signed by the chairman, aid countersigned by two of the scrutineers, and any attempt to falsify them should render the party guilty of a misdemeanour. The authority to dissolve was to be obtained by a majority of the whole of the scrip, or of at least three-fifths of that which was actually issued. The Bill passed through Committee, several Bills were ad vanced a stage, and the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 1. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. NORTH STAFFORDSHIRE RAILWAY. Sir C. LEMON moved that it be an instruction to the Com mittee ( Group 27), to which the North Staffordshire Railway (Ilarecastle to Sandbach), North Staffordshire Railway (Chur net Valley Line), North Staffordshire Railway (Potteries Line), are referred, that they have leave to consolidate the three Bills into one Bill. The motion was agreed to. EDINBURGH, LEITH, AND GRANTON RAILWAY. Mr. RICA RDO moved that the Committee on Group (No. 8) of Railway Bills have leave to sit and proceed on Mondaay next on the Edinburgh, Leith, and Grantors (exten sion and branches) Bill, notwithstanding that seven clear days' notice of the sitting of the Committee on that Bill had not been given at the Private Bill-office, After a few words horn Mr. GREENE, the motion vs as withdrawn. CAMBRIDGE IMPROVEMENT BILL. Mr. WARD moved that the Cambridge Improvement Bill, notice of the second reading of which was given for Monday, the 0 7th of April last, be read a second time, notwithstanding the period limited by the resolutions of the House had expired. The motion was agreed to. GOLLON IN That the order referring the pe tition of Major-General Sir James Fullerton Dundas, Baronet, alig,V,risatndtheee,,Gnsoellloonrdelrnecdl7lu,ererelaldi.ll,Tthoatththee C sa f: d m i m ,e i t t i t t e ion o , n beingtha against the whole Bill, and not against the preamble hea or douses, and not tirapng focratnhneotp,etaictieounredrintotte theyreferred at,Prtakicetreel °re f , this the said order be discharged." The motion was agree-3 to. LOUGH SWILLY AND LOUGH FOYLE DRAINING This Bill was reaAdNap see E onlt 3 i ' m kN e, K a l n N d G orde re d to be com mitted. REPORTS. The following reports were brought up, the amendments and ?iteration s agreed to, and the Bills ordered to be en- Harbour,(ss :—lfelnsbgh Extension and Police, lielensbuigh ' Gliisgow Union Arcade, Boston, Stamford, and Birmingham Railway (Stamford to Wisbech), Stommarket Navigation. GLASGOW WATERWORKS RILL. The Lords' Amendments on this Bill were read and agreed to. LAW OF SETTLEMENT. Sir JOHN TYRELL presented petitions from the parish of Kennington and other places, praying for a revision of the law of settlement, more especially with respect to paaper lunatics. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented a petition from the Roman Catholics of Rochdale in favour of the Roman Ca tholic Relief Bill. The petition was ordered to be laid on the table. PASSENGER-DUTY PAID BY RAILWAY COMPANIES. Mr. BROTHERTON moved for a return of the amount of moneys levied and paid annually by each railway company in England and Wales, unier the head of duty on passengers, made up to the sth day of January in each year from 1841 to IS-16. Also, a similar return for Scotland. Also, a similar return for Ireland.—Agreed to. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH. Mr. WARD presented a petition from a public meeting recently held in Exeter Hall, against the punishment of death. Mr. AINSWORTH presented a petition in favour of the Lancaster and North Yorkshire Railway. THE LAW OF SETTLEMENT. Mr, BANKES presented a petition from the poor of Bridport Union against certain amendments in the law of Settlement. The CEIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the House at its rising should adjourn to Monday next.— Agreed to. WILLIAM SMITH O'BRIEN. tprieir,rd• Rti;elloleCmHbeEr fo s r aid ura th e a r t ik t a c p . i n )e s a id r e e r d ec t i ha t t ha h t is h H e o h n a o d ur b a e b e l: strepresented in what he (Nlr. limehe) stated to the House ' night. Re therefore hoped that the House would per— mit him to read a letter from the Hon. Member without any comment:— __ _ " House of Commons Prison, " May I, 1846. "My dear Roche,—l shall feel much obliged if you will explain to the House, this evening, that you were under a misconception when you stated yesterday that I complained that no opportunity had been afforded to me of speaking in my own defence. 440 n the contrary, I cheerfully aeknowledge that such an opportunity was offered, and that I declined to avail myself of it. " I was very anxious to have spoken yesterday, because I do not think my case was fairly stated to the House by the Chair man of the Committee of Selection. I referred to my let ters to the Committee, as stating the grounds upon which I had refused to serve upon Committees on Scotch and English railway Bills. If those letters had been read in ertenso I should have been contented to abide the opinion of the House upon them, but the Charman of the Committee of Selection read only such portions of them as tended to produce an im pression on the House unfavourable to my conduct. " I wish it also to be known, that until the closing sentence of Mr. Estcourt's speech reached me, I did not knew what was the nature of the motion which he intended to submit ; so that I was unprepared to form an opinion as to the course which it would be most advisable for me to adopt. I did not know whether I was to be imprisoned or reprimanded, or whether a Committee might not be appointed to take the case into consideration before any final motion should be proposed to the House. As mine is a new ease arising out of resolu tions adopted without notice, without discussion, Lot founded on long-established practice, not supported by any authority derived from statute or from prescr:p tion, it seemed to me that the appointment of a Committee to deliberate upon the subject, was not only the wisest and most natural mode of dealing with the case, but also that which would have been most conformable to former precedents. I need not say that my de cision with respect to the propriety of addressing the Howe on my own behalf, or of remaining silent, might have been affected by a knowledge of the motion which was to be proposed to the House. Undoubtedly, if I had foreseen that my views would have been so much misrepresented in debate as they have been, I should not have declined to state them fully to the House. " In all proceedings in Parliament it is customary to give due notice to the parties affected by such proceedings—such notice, therefore, may be considered as a ' right' rather than as a ' courtesy.' With reference to the preliminary motion made on Monday night, I was left in such entire ignorance of the terms of that motion, that I absolutely mistook the question when put from the chair, and imagined that it was an order to attend the House on Tuesday, whereas I afterwards learned that it was an order to attend the Committee. "On last Friday I stated to Air. Estcourt, in private, that I should feel much obliged to him if he would intimate to me the terms of the motion which he intended to make in reference to my case, as soon a 3 his own determination was formed. I sub sequently received no communication from him. " I do not wish yeu to reveal to the House what an Irish man thinks of such a mode of proceeding. Suffering from the injustice of the British House of Commons, I expect nothing from its generosity. " I shall make no further appeal to the House. Yesterday I was extremely anxious to have been allowed to speak on my own behalf before my committal to prison as a culprit. I shall not again condescend to solicit even this trifling favour. " In concluding, I beg most anxiously and earnestly to re quest you to inform the House that I am no party to any motion for my discharge. " I remain, my dear Roche, very sincerely yours, " WILLIAM S. O'BRIEN, " E. B. Roche, Esq., M.P." SOUTH NOTTINGHAMSHIRE ELECTION. Mr. GISBORNE wished to ask the Hon. Member for South Nottinghamshire, whether a correspondence, which had appeared in the local and London newspapers between T. B. Hildyard, Esq., M.P., and T. Herbert, Esq., mayor of Not tingham, relating to the late election in South Nottingham shire, was authentic ? and, in case the answer should be in the affirmative, whether the Honourable Mem ber was now prepared to prove that the free trade committee at 'Nottingham, for promoting Lord Lincoln's election, offered 231. to two voters, who had promised their votes to the Honourable Member, in case they would vote for Lord Lincoln. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN rose to a point of order, He wished to know whether it was incumbent upon his Honour able Friend to answer such questions?—( Hear. ) The SPEAKER replied that the Hon. Member for Not tinghamshire must exercise his own discretion, but according to the practice of the House it was customary for Hon. Mem bers to answer questions that were continually put to them, whether those questions related to the business of the House or not. Mr. GISBORNE made some observations which were scarcely audible in the gallery. He was understood, how ever, to say that it was a fit subject for that House to in quire into, and as the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hildyard) had made the statement in question, he thought that the House should give him an opportunity of affirming or denying it. If the Hen. Member would affirm it, he would move for a Select Committee to give him an opportunity of proving the state ment. He thought that the Hon. Member had no reason to complain about his being asked such a question, as he had given two days' notice of his intention to ask it. The subject then dropped. MR. SMITH O'BRIEN. Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that he would postpone his motion relative to the discharge of Mr. Smith O'Brien from the custody of the Sergeant -at-Arm s till Monday next. CONSUMPTION OF SMOKE. Sir. J. GRAHAM, in reply to a question from Mr. Peter Borthwick, said that it was not the intention of the Government to introduce any measure this session with regard to the con sumption of smoke. lie had entertained great apprehensions last session as to the working of the plans which had been adopted far that purpose, and far from these apprehensions being now removed, they were more and more confirmed. ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the motion that the order of the day, the Protection to Life (Ireland) Hill, be read, Mr. P. SOMERS rose and proceeded to address the House, but in consequence of the law tone in which he spoke, and the confusion that prevailed at the bar of the House, he was for some time utterly inaudible. It must be evident to the Right Honourable Baronet that it was not by such a Bill as the present the state of Ireland was to be altered. Let the Government, instead of persisting in this odious measure, introduce some measure for the purpose of giving greater security to the tenant, the improvement of waste lands, and such other remedial measures, and they would produce more peace in Ireland than a constabulary force ten times greater than the present could de. The distress in Ireland had been denied. The existence of the potato fail ure h a d b een considered an exaggeration. Gentle mensel f-i nothingndul g realenc e , y substantialpursue wasspe c u t: y ualini,dwtihtehorainse lation c s o , e ; ar b .v ut result. Ireland was still left to drag out a miserable existence, through misrule. Neither he nor the Irish Members could approve of the spirit of the measure. Mr. M. O'CONNELL did not intend to follow the example which had just been set of introducing matter which was quite irrelevant to the purpose. He thought sufficient had al ready been said on that topic, and he believed that suffi cient matter already remained for another debate of equal length with that which had already transpired. He had certainly been much struck at the moment by the statement of the [light Hoe. Baronet at the head of the Government, respecting the state of Ireland now and what it had been in former years. The Right lion. Baronet. compared the state of Ireland in 1843 with its present condition, and had asked whether there were any measures taken at all for the repression of crime during that period. Now, any one would suppose from such an inquiry as that, that during the last two year s the Government had done absolutely nothing. But what had been the case with regard to Ireland since 1843? Isr his part, he might ask whether the Government had been by any means idle during that period ? Why, they had dismissed as many as twenty-two magistrates, and on application from the country, the replies from Dublin had confirmed the replies of the authorities. This was their first step. What had been the course of the Government during the last few years ? Their first step was to pass that most ridiculous n: all measures—the Arms Act, while there still existed an effective Bill of the same kind. Their next step was to issue a prod mation against the Clontarf meeting, then to prosecute the leaders of the Repeal Association; next to imprison them most unjustly, and now they were going to pass this most obnoxious and unnecessary measure.—(Hear, hear.) They had carried all these measures into effect, as far as they were able to carry them, and what was the result ? By their dismissal of the magistrates they had added numbers to the ranks of repeal, and had taken away from the bench those pe , - 30119 in whom the people had confidence, and to whom they would have come, and were in the habit of coming with infor mation, and left those persons who seemed to be opposed to the interests of the people. By the Arms Act—as he had said-- they established the fact that there were in the hands of the peasantry of Ireland, on the very first registry, 90,000 stand o: arms. These arms were in part taken away, and if the number of robberies of arms in Ireland were increased, they might thank themselves for the increase. Having passed all these measures, were they to be surprised that the people against whom those measures were levelled should have some contempt for a Government who had brought forward measures of such inutility? Could they for a moment imagine that repeated and reiterated failure in all these measures had not inspired the peopl e with the belief that the Government must continue to tail in still more important measures? Had it not been the same all through? They had beaten themselves on every measure they had proposed, and, they now came for ward, asking far powers beyond the law.—(Hear, hear.) What did they think would he the feeling of th e p eo pl e of Ireland to war d s t h e I rish Members, if they were to agree to en trust with such p owers a Government which hadso entirely bungled in every measure with regard to Ireland? It was not merely in their efforts in the cause of oppression or coercion that they had failed, but it was in every effort which they had been making at reconciliation. They had brought in their Charitable Bequests Bill, to regulate the charity of Catholics in Ireland, at the very moment when all the Courts of law and equity had declared that the Catholics were free to exercise their power in that respect, just as they pleased. When all the old sytem of restriction was gone, they brought forward this measure, restricting and confining them again. The promises which were given in 1835, for the purpose of inducing them to give up the repeal agitation, had never been fulfilled. From the moment the present Government had came into office, till the present time, nothing had been one to remove a single grievance uric] ih h w id c the Irish p eop l e la boured ; an d as far intentions, nothing aswo bee°ad be judged by thei r p resen t one. at was e state of Ireland s i nce the present GovernmentWh came into office, and Y since the M arqu i s of Normanb who was j us tl y cons i dered one of the best Englishmen thatievergoverned i n I re l and, had Outrages ceased to rule i n th at country' h a d b een on the in crease, and the s oc i a l condition of the more disorganised. What was the remedy eount ry was becoming propsed for this . state of things now ? They proposed the Coercion arsio n Bill, which had been tried - over and over a gain,but which had never yet in any one instance succeeded in suppressing those against which it was directed. That was the outrage s panacea which was proposed for the hicke v il 3 w were partly created by them se lves. —(Hear, hear.) The county of Clare was more disturbed than any county in Ireland. He remembered the county of Clare when every gentleman's house was a garrison. Whenever you went up to a door you were challenged, the same as a military station. They had shells and balls prestared, and t piled upon th e And stonesh this window-sills, to repel an assailant.was the case in that county for three or four years. The cause of the insur rection was the same as that of theinsurrection now —namely the want of the potato crop. Several attempts had beenmade to put do wn this disturbance, but without ms. He mentioned effect, until it ,s' a propo se d th a t th e y s h ou ld give up their a r this, because it included the case of Bry an Seery. 111auy gen. lemon had interested themselves in this case, and an endea vour was made to induce the people to give up their arms. The Lord-Lieutenant—the Marquis of Anglesey—had been applied to, to give permission for the reception of the arms, but he declined. The insurrectionists then stated that they would deliver their arms if the party who had not been ex pressly engaged in the offence were allowed to go free. 'This was agreed to, and what was the consequence? Why, not le,s than 500 stand of arms was delivered up in one night to the Hon. Member for Cork, who went down to receive them. And how meny people did they think these arms were taken from ? Not more than forty-five individuals, after whom, during those three years, not less than between 5,000 and 6,000 military, and between 2,000 and 3,000 police had been in constant pursuit. Some of these men stated, that if the gentry had resisted them, the disturbances would never be at an end, and he be lieved in the present instance that had the gentry of the dis turbed districts shown front against those who were organ ising the disturbances, instead of calling for Coercion Bills, their counties would have been resorted to peace. Thanking the House for the indulgence they had shewn him, he conclinled by declaring his intention of continuing his moat decided op position to this measure. Mr. COLQUHOUN wished to state in a few words the grounds for his vote on the present occasion. He thought the description given by the Hon. Member for Meath, of the state of Ireland was, if there were no other, a sufficient justification f their passing this measure. The Hon. Member described the state of the country in a remarkably emphatic word. lie de scribed certain counties as being, in a state of insurrection. Mr. MORRIS O'CONNELL—Agrarian insurrection. Mr. COLQUHOUN—WeII, in estate of agrarian insurrec tion ; and how had the Hon. Member described a particular county while on a former occasion it was in this condition ? Why, he told them that houses had to be barricaded, and pass words given before a gentleman's house could be approached, and then he went on to tell them, that in certain districts there existed this agrarian insurrection. Now, could the Govern ment urge a stronger reason than this for the House passing the Bill ?—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.) lion. Gentlemen might say that threatening letters were nothing; but when those letters were followed by actual deeds, some notice should be taken of them. Let them look to a recent case, in which, immediately on the arrival of Lord Orkney at his estate, his steward, a man of estimable character, was shot at in open day. This case was not solitary. A landlord could not attempt to remove a tenant, even from one farm to another, without fear of attack. The case of Lord Orkney's steward was a most flagrant one. The murderous act was committed in front of the steward's house in the broad da)light. They took out the unfortunate man and placed him upon his knees in the presence of twenty persons, and they tell him he must say his prayers as his days were numbered ; and when the nonresident landlord, after visiting his Irish estates, returned from his morning excursions among his tenantry, whom he wished to serve, he found the front of the house stained with the blood of the murdered man. He found not a single individual would give evidence of the ferocious crime, and yet Hon. Members had told him (Mr. Colquhoun) that that was the state of the country which the people of England and the Legislature ought to tolerate.— ( Cries of " Oh, oh.") Well, then, he was glad to here that admission, that that state of the country was intolerable, and which they ought to redress.—( Opposition cheers.) Yes, the first step which they ought to take was to introduce powerful measures, but he did not mean to say that they should be coer cive as these.—( Opposition cheers.) At all events Hon. Members opposite admitted that the ordinary law was power less.—( Cries of " No, no.") At all events it was a con dition of things intolerable, and which they ought not to overlook, and he earnestly asked for their support to some effective measures which would put down this state of things. Well, new, had there been any exaggeration with regard to the statements made in support of the Bill. They had the cases of Westmeath and Clare. He had read the papers, and the statement to which he would refer had been credited by the name of a most respectable individual; and the gentle man to whom it related, he believed it would be admitted was a most worthy individual ; indeed his worth was proved by the address he had recently received from his tenants, thank ing him for the exertion he,had made on their behalf ; and yet this resident landlord, in the county of Westmeath, had been de nounced, whilst in the discharge of his duty to his tenants, and his life was threatened, and it was in answer to that de nunciation that his tenantry had addressed him. He had stated one case in Westmeath, the case of Sir Francis Hop kins. But wculd the House allow him to dispense with these individual illustrations, becaus it might be said that they were calculated to mislead the House. He would take the case of the county of Westmeath, as a friend of his had sent a return of the police inspectors of that county, for the last six weeks. These returns made a full statement of the various outrages for that period ; their total number amounted to 197 cases. It was stated that many of these outrages were owing to the severity of the landlord upon the tenant, but he had consulted these returns, and found that only 13 of these outrages were on gentlemen ; 38 of them were connected with the rights of property ; 38 were connected with land, but were directed against farmers, and the gentlemen and stewards who usually exercised the more severe rights of property did not interfere at all ; and 38 of those outrages were on labourers without any reference at all to land. He would not enter into all these cases, but he would only state, that an attack was made en one man, because he was generally disliked, on another be cause the aggressor wished to drive him from the country ; a third was because the man told stories to his employer ; and the remainder were various prosecutions for debt, theft, &c. A considerable cause of these grave acts was the wish of the farmers to tyrannise in their own districts, and to have their ' will executed implicitly—the law of wrong being placed in defiance of the law of right.—( Hear.) What they wished to do was to punish others who contravene and oppose their law. If the law of the land was not sufficient to s P t u r t eng d th w e n ned th s o o se IVhat could p reven t th e coneocters o f th ese cr i mes f r om m e eting as cr t i o ns o es v , erp t o h w e er las a v nd of pre tl , Le nt la t n h d ose m e u r s i t me b s e . during the day, and committing those crimes they had con cocted during the day ? In this Bill increased rewards were offered for evidence, but those rewards were a perfect delusion. —(Hear, hear.) Why, the police stations were covered with rewards, from 10/. to 108/., for any person who would come forward and give evidence. The only provision that could be made to ensure the attendance of witnesses was to provide for their safety. The remedy proposed by the Bill would, to some extent, do good ; but he doubted whether it would be attended with those results which were anticipated. Here was a con flict, delaying their discussions and retarding the progress of the Corn Bill.—( Hear.) Now that conflict might be well worthy of being carried on if the remedy were equal to the evil. The measure had been limited to three years ; now was there a man of sane mind in that House who would tell him that in three years the peace of Ireland would be re stored. He thought the measure defective, because it was not sufficiently stringent. It did not interfere with those men who in a district were known by the police and others as dis turbers of the districts. Nothing was so bad as giving a blow which provoked those desperate characters, and yet making that blow so feebly it only gave an advantage to the criminal. It would be proved in this ease, as in the Arms Bill, that the remedy was slot equal to the evil. Mr. HAWES explained that all his statistical statements were exclusively derived from the documents which had been laid on the table. Mr. J. O'BRIEN objected to the measure, because he was convinced that it would fail in the object fur which it was in tended. He felt sure the result of the measure would cause life to be much more precarious than it was at present. ( Hear, hear.) He asked what impunity could he expected when whole families were turned out of their holdings on to the high road, and were left to seek shelter in the bogs or churchyards, and to die in ditches. Can peace or tranquillity be expected while that state of things was allowed to exist. Coercion Bills were of no use, and would only tend to increase crime in the country. He would tell the House an anecdote that would tend to illustrate the effects of a measure similar to the present. He recollected the time which was when the country was under what was called Algerine law. A farmer held a large quantity of land, and was careful to avoid the least opportunity of giving offence to the law. A neighbouring clergyman, however, had a great antipathy to the man, because he was a Roman Catholic, and sought every means to ruin him. What did he do P Why, he brought a sergeant's guard down to his house, under the pretence of searching it for arms, and while there, he concealed some powder and balls. The sergeant was then ordered to take the farmer into custody for the supposed Whiteboy act. On the trial, the sergeant, who was a Scotchman, in reply to the question whether he found any ammunition in the house, re plied that he did not know, but his Honour who was on the Bench knew all about it, as he saw him put the powder there. The magistrate, when asked, admitted the charge, and said that the man was a desperate character, and he knew no other means of causing him to be removed from the neighbourhood. That man was a reverend, an honourable, and a magistrate ; he was a priest of the Established Church, and a Lord's brother. He would not, however, mention his name, as two to wt y , e i a a ss r years ) ya ss a st ee f h t dmae had occurred, of thefe<iofclearanceoc rceuh ret o c e. e ed u i ,vr believeder wem he et twelvemonths, was e t the that instead e( compelled.ll r hh . ooe f J e . O'Brien) l e a v e men tionedthen ill l tttai S hhni ye u eeisas c ne h ci gbnorl ta:ah wasreasons that ott.i ao t n l mit: i wayeeHeholaeelfmeasure, ul"dl oaets was disturbance, any having e asvon o oitnce elgocae,engrtb.oaht been yinslnetr Member. that theoebha ut n eai Irnttfild. first tou a ßnrtv d ei uieati ieei fifteen.—( :mdoe eeo t onpfr r f.serc e_ tioi a ti bsh) t (ni e eevi d ef,Kßeiii If wasc u havingri t else dead. i y w e o u co l n b . e hear. t g ) It was a dangerous and most impolitic measure. For 11. Mr. BELLEW said he was as anxious about th'e progress of t in view that the Irish Members had not been to blame in de -1 in aying to it. No doubt the Corn Bill was an Irish as well as English measure. He was satisfied that after this night the Hon. Mernieer for Stockport would have no reason to complain of the progress on that question. Still, he must c'aim for ilae Irish Members the right under the circumstances of inter fering with its progress to the extent they had done. Ile, con sidering the character of the Coercion Bill, opposed the Bill on two grounds. First, because it would not be effective in putting down agrarian outrage ; and, second, because it was not accompanied with remedial measures. In opposing the Bill, ho attached little importance to the comparison of the amount of crime in Ireland and England, as the great poin was not the amount or crime, but the sympathy with which i was regarded, and the efficiency of the present Bill to repress that sympathy and put an end to that crime. —( Hear, hear. ) That the Bill would not effect this object, he must refer them to the fact that the other day a gentleman in the town of Kil rush had been shot at in the middle of the day, and no one in terfered with the assassin. No curfew law could affect such of P y crimes as t h ese.—( Hear, hear.) Neither would the Bill be effecti ve i n protecting witnesses and securing proper evidence in court s o f j ustice, of which so much had been said. In fact, no measur e o f t hi s ki nd could be effective in the present state the Poliulation o f I re l an d . Th e m u st consider that, unlike —owand, seven-ei g ht s o f th e inhabitants of Ireland dtehrgeym agricultural lived on t he soil. In England those on the land were but one half. I n I reland, also, the proprietors were much smaller, and the t enants occupied much less portions of land. One. half of all th e f arms were under five acres each, and it had be n sh own t h at the great body of these tenants were without skill or capit a l , and lived in miserable cabins. (The Hon. Alem uslhtuorwailngth ber h ere read an extract from the evidence of a Roman Ca bthooylie of clergyman, miserable a state) Suchoft the (ogoren.a t e population with regard to their condition. Now, with respect to the evictions that had taken place. Not less than 150,000 notices of evictions hail been served during the last five years. The Hon. Member here read an extract from the report of Lord Devon's Commission on this head, showing the extensive s ystem of eviction that had been carried out. This was the condition of Ireland—a disgrace to England for allowing it to continue as it was. The power and influence of England was known throughout the world, and co-existent with it was the knowledge of the degradation of Ireland. It might be said there were great difficulties in meeting the case, but he would tell the Right Hon. Baronet, no great achievement was ever yet accomplished without encountering difficulty. Let him set manfully and energetically to work, and success would be certain.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet was bound to do something to meet the state of Ireland. In appoint ing the Devon Commission, and in what had been done in the Landlord ard Tenant Commission, he had given a pledge that som e steps would be taken to relieve the distress of Ireland. In this respect the present Government differed with their pre decessors, for th ey h a d sa i d they could do nothing.—( Hear, hear.) The Ri g h t H on. Baronet, then, was the last man who should get up and say that the landlords of Ireland ought to meet the case themselves. He (Mr. Buller) admitted the landlords of Ireland had not done their duty ; still, after the issuing of the Landlords and Tenants Commiasiots, the Right Hon. Baronet was bound to bring forward some of the measures which the members of that Commission had recommended. lie maintained that it was perfectly consistent to oppose this measure, because no beneficial measure was connected with it, The Irish Member endeavoured to benefit Ireland in many ways, but they had been prevented in many ways. He would support their Bill as cordially as any Member in that House, if he thought it would effect the object it had in view, or was accompanied by any other measure, but as it was, he felt it to be his painful duty to oppose it. The A cTORNEY-GENERAL said, that although the present subject must be nearly worn out, yet. in the position in which he stood, he was expected to make a few observations on it. He had to regret the very unusual course which had been adopted in opposing the first reading of the Bill ; but, as the Members who opposed it, were interested for their country, he did not blame them for their opposition, but hoped that the future stages of the Bill, if the House should by a majority declare itself in its favour, would be less marked by opposition. He deeply regretted the language that had been adopted by one Hon. Member, and hoped that the feeling which that lan guage conveyed was not general among his countrymen in that House. The HOU. Member for Limerick had stated that he felt it to be the duty of the Members for Ireland to oppose the first reading of the Bill with all their power, and by all means which Parliamentary usages afforded. He trusted that such an expression was inadvertent, and if it were not, he hoped that the Hon. Members to whom it was addressed would not listen to or act on it, and give any unusual opposition to the present measure at the commencement of the debate on this question, which seemed so remote, that he could hardly believe that it belonged to the present discussion. The Hon. Member for the city of London had found fault with his (the Attorney-General's) Right Hon. Friend Sir J. Graham, for having, in the very temperate speech in which he opened this case to the House, omitted one very important point in the measure. He complained that in a former measure, which had been passed, it was accompanied by remedial measures, but in the present measure no such remedial measures were adOpted, and that formed a grand point of objection to the present measure. Was not the House aware that in Ireland, where a sympathy existed in favour of the criminals, that they were emboldened and encouraged by that sympathy, and was it not for the Government at once to adopt such measures as would remove such a state of things? His Hon. Friend, the Member for Newcastle-under-Line, gave the House a long list of outrages committed in the open day, and stated that not one single person would come forward to give evidence against them. Under those circum stances he (the Attorney-General) would like to know how his Hon. Friend would carry into execution his plan of seizing these men and imprisoning them, when he admitted the existence of an evil which would prevent such a course. The Hon. Member had also asked whether the present measure would drive people from combination by night and combi nation by day—he hoped that by an extended police, and an increased amount of vigilance, this evil would be prevented. He was rather surprised to hear the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, complain of the indiscriminate nature of this law, and still more surprised to hear him recommend the Act called the Black Act, which was framed to punish a series of outrages committed in Waltham Forest by persons in disguise. The Noble Lord did not remember that the Black Act was a measure of punishment and not of prevention, and that in the majority of these outrages in Ire land, the disguise which was necessary for a con viction under that Act was totally wanting. In Ireland at the present moment there were families who were living in every sense of security, and were not con scious of having offended any one, exposed to the sentence of death, which was only conveyed to them by a written message. It was natural that endeavours should be made to prevent this state of things, and that a restraint upon liberty should be the consequence of measures taken for that purpose. In the dis tricts in which these outrages prevailed there was hardly any thing like liberty, for all security and all freedom of action were gone. Although the measure might have the effect of producing some inconvenience in the proclaimed district, yet he could not believe that the orderly, peaceable, and well dis posed could; have any real objection to it.—(Hear, hear.) He could, without unnecessarily carrying back the House to dis tant periods, show the House that the principle of this Bill was by no means novel, but was acknowledged by the early statute law of the country. In the reign of Edward the Third, the inhabitants of particular parts of the country were made liable for lawless acts and robberies com mitted in their districts; and in the subsequent reign of Eliza beth the same principle was carried out in the Hue and Cry Act. This was, he thought, sufficient to refute the statement of the Hon. and Learned Member for Cork, that they were ap plying a new law to Ireland which had never been tried in this country. It was objected by some Hon. Members that the Bill was intended as a stigma upon certain classes in Ireland, but he need only refer them, in answer to this objection, to the statement of his Right Hon. Friend, that it was in no way directed against any class or party, but really and truly intended to suppress that dreadful thirst for murder and bloodshed which unfortunately prevailed to so alarming an extent in the sister kingdom. This being the object, then, of the measure, those who urged this objection against it ought rather to join with the Government in attempting to put down this terrible spirit. —(Hear, hear.) It would have heen impossible for them to sit quietly looking on with their arms folded without taking some steps to put down this thirst for murder, but nevertheless this measure was not introduced till atter it had undergone the most careful and attentive con sideration.—( Hear, hear.) With every good and kindly feel ing for Ireland, then, he did hope most sincerely that it would have the effect of restoring tranquillity and peace, without which it was impossible the country could prosper, and at the same, time prepare the people and soil for those seeds of im provement which Government were prepared to scatter amongst them with a free and bountiful hand.— (Cheers.) Mr. H. GRATTAN admitted that all outrages of a law less and murderous character ought to be put down, not only in Ireland but wherever they happened to be perpetrated, but he questioned whether the Government were taking the proper steps for effecting this propose. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman who had just sat down was wrong when he said Government could not sit looking quietly on with their arms folded during six months, while these outrages were being perpetrated. They did not stir a step to suppress them. And what he complained of was, not so much of their endeavouring to restore peace and tranquillity in Ireland, as of the delay they had allowed to take place before making the effort to effect that object.— ( Hear, hear.) Many of the evils complained of he could trace to the landlords themselves, and the landlord and tenant system, which had so long disgraced'and convulsed Ireland ; and Government might depend upon it, an improvement di rected that way would produce more peace and tranquillity than a thousand Coercion Bills,— (Hear, hear.) He denied that the Irish party had formed a compact with the protec tionists ; and trusted, after this denial, they would not lose a single vote of any Hon. MeMber on their own side of the House, in resisting what they considered an unjust and tyran nical measure.—(Hear, hear.) Would the House believe it that in one of the parts of the country, that was, in not more than three baronies, there were, he believed, 174 magistrates, 32 deputy-lieutenants, and 4 of the heads of the Government, making an army of upwards of 220 men, and, with the assist ance of the police, that army was increased to 600 men. A Noble Lord, whom Le did not then see in his place, had gone back to the history of Ireland, to show the state of that country in the year 1737. Now he would not go so far back as that, he would refer to the year 1807, in which year two coercive Acts were passed against that country. Those Acts he remembered well. He believed that Lord Monteagle had said in his speech in the House of Lords that those Acts were more stringent than the Eresent measure, b u t h e d i d not agree with his Lordship. Cases occurred in the county of Tip perary in the year 1808, when those Acts were passed, which were very similar to those that were now e nacte d i n 1846. Shepherds were abruptly discharged from their employ, and the labourine classes combined together for the purpose of pre venting the intrusion of labourens from distant places ; and to destroy the effect of that and similar combinations those coer cive measures were passed. He would ask, had the Ministers followed the advice that had been given by the witnesses at Lord Devon's Commission for the removal of the evils with which Ireland was at present afflicted ?—( Hear, hear.) Their system only tended to produce police spies and informers, and the lowest characters. Instead of attending to the wants of the people, they had created an army of 10,090 police. The Noble Lord Donoughmore was not afraid of doing his duty to his Irish tenants, and he had not asked for any such Bill as the present, because he knew it would not effect its aim. That Noble Lord was a popular character, and he believed that he had not a shutter to his house. Himself and his family went about the country without the slightest fear, and they were never molested by the tenantry. And why was that so ? Because he did not let his land at eight guineas per acre. Because he gave so me thi ng more to the poor fellow that toiled on his estates.---( Hear, hear.) Let other landlords pursue a similar conduct. He flung back in the teeth of the utterers the libel that Ireland was nothing but a land of assassination.— ( Hear, hear.) If he read but a portion of the calendar of crime that had been committed in this country within the last few years he should completely astound them. But he would do no such thing. He would grapple with the Bill and with the Right Honourable Baronet opposite until the House decided whose case was the strongest. He would ask the Right Hon. B aronet t hi s—how many countries were at present in the deplorable state described by him in introducing this Bill? It would appear that there weve only five out of thirty two. And did the Right Hon. Baronet mention the number of baronies in those five counties that were in a disturbed state? Why, there were twelve baronies in Limerick, and yet it would appear from the reports that only three out of those were in a state of disturbanee. In the county of Clare, there were nine baronies and only two disturbed; in the county of Westmeath there were but three of the baronies is that condition ; in the county of Cavan one; and in Meath three, which made a total of fifteen. And would they feel themselves justified in depriving the people of Ireland of their liberties because fifteen baronies out of five counties happened to be in a disturbed state ? If they did, what inducement would they give to the honest and industrious to observe the laws of their country? Let them adopt just measures, and hang these that talked of fear that the peasantry would not obey the laws. He would ask the Right Hon. Baronet how many of the gentlemen who had been referred to in Ireland for ther opinion as to this measure, had recommended its adoption ? A few of those gentlemen —namely, Gen. Johnson, Gen. Egerton, Col. Burke, Major Warburton, Major Wilcox, and others, he was well acquainted with. These gentlemen, including Mr. Blackburn, Serg. How ley, the Clerks of the Peace and others had unanimously state,: that they were not in favour of this Bill. On the contrary they had expressed themselves as decidedly opposed to it. And first of all he would quote the opinion of Mr. Sergeant Howley, an individual who was beyond all cavil.---( Hear, hear. ) Ser geant Howley said, whilst he was in the very county of Tip perary, " I do believe that a large amount of the present violence and outrage is traceable to the low physical condition of the people."—(Hear, hear.) That was the opinion of Sergeant Howley, when h e was try i ng a number of unfortu nate individuals for the commission of offences brought about by the harsh conduct of their landlords— (hear, hear.) He also said that they were deprived of the necessary amount of employment—that they lived on a food that was the lowest in the scale of human con sumption, even of which they had not sufficient—that they were ill-clad—they lived in houses that scarcely deserved the name.—( Hear, hear.) Such being the condition of the large amount of the population of Ireland, he asked how could it be expected that that people could be either orderl or tranquil ? Sergeant Howley had further delivered himself of words, the seditious character of which had never yet been equalled by the greatest agitators that had yet appeared on behalf of Ire land, not excepting even the Hon. and Learned Member f or Cork, and the Hon. Member for Limerick, whose " pale and ineffectual fire " had been far outshone by the language of that learned individual. And it was yet the language that had been uttered by one of her Majesty's judges, who had said that the lowest animals would not endure to be starved, and much less could it be expected that man could suffer to be starved to death. Major Wilcox, in his reply to the Right Hon. Baro net's inqUiries, had said that. " he was of opinion that the pea santry of Ireland could never be peaceable whilst they were in a state of starvation and oppression." He had stated too that " the present measure would sever all connexion between land lord and tenant." Mr. Blackwell had said that recently, in his own neighbourhood, one landlord had ejected 40 families, another 50, another 20, another 20, another 3, another 60, another 19, another 55, and anothes 31. Tipperary also 86, 96, 95, 76, 26, and 97 several families had been severally ejected. No less than 230 families, including 1,200 individuals, had been turned out, and those poor creatures were wandering about the country; and to put the climax to all this, he was sorry to see that two indi duals who lived in his own county, Mr. and Mrs. Gerard, had recently ejected 270 individuals from the lands, to fatten bul.. locks upon it. Would such a state of things be tolerated in any other country than Ireland ? When the Hight Hon. Barn.. net brought forward this Bill, which had been called for by moderate men, nobody could doubt that the Noble Lord had committed a grievous mistake, because, when the Noble Lord had stated that crime had increased, he must have been ignorant of the contents of the Blue Book, that had been placed upon the table of the House immediately afterwards ; that within the last ten years there had been a de crease of no less than 10.000 in the amount of crimes. In the year 1835 there were 36,300, and in the last year there had been but 16,000. Now, when the Right Hon. Baronet oppo site attempted, on the introduction of this measure, to paint an Irish picture, unfortunately, all the colours that he used were dark ; and he thought that the Right Hon. Baronet might hereafter be called the Salvator Rosa of the Treasury bench ; nay, he even made use of all the dark horrors of that artist, without introducing any of his light colours.—( Hear, and lazghter.) He would now draw attention to another important point. He saw by the return made to Government, that in one year no less than 3,538 Bills had been ignored by the grand juries of Ireland, and 2,089 prosecutions had been withdrawn. Would such a state of things be permitted in England ? Would they permit 5,638 to be unjustly charged, arrested, and imprisoned, and then let out without trial ? And yet lion. Gentlemen stood up, and boast.. fully said that crime in Ireland had increased to such an alarm_ kg extent, as to call for the suspension of the constitution. Government were misinformed by the police—they maligned the people of the country, and the result was that such Bills as these were passed by that House for Ireland. Government ought not to leave the people of Ireland in the hands of such persons as these. The lion. Member proceeded to refer to a number of cases of misconduct of the police-officers and spies of Ireland. In one instance the police had concealed some arms in a poor woman's house; they then went to the in former, brought him to the spot, and they took away the arms, and concealed them a second time, and then had the audacity to claim the rewards of the Government for the discovery of arms they had twice concealed:; documents of the Ribb,.n Society had been put in the pockets of persons, and they were then prosecuted by these spies and perambulatory police, for the purpose of obtaining the reward of their diabolical treachery. He hoped Government did not allow the money, wrung so hardly from the people of this country, to be expended in this manner. If the laws were not properly administered let them live in a state of primeval originalty. Leave them to themselves, and they would soon send those assassins to the right about.— ( Hear, hear.) Never was a more unjust charge made against any people than had been made in the course of the debate, that the Irish people shielded the assassin from justice. The Hon. Member for Pomfret, who had belonged to the New England school, had called this measure a mere police regulation. He did not agree with his Hion. Friend's New England doctrines—he preferred the Old England constitution, and he hoped that the Honourable Member would soon have to leave Pomfret, in dire disgrace, with his New England theories. Mr. W. COLLETT considered that the infusion of capital in Ireland would not remove the disposition to commit outrage, and prevent crime. He would state a few facts to the House, and in doing so he would not be accused of egos ism. In 1838, after having visited the four quarters of the globe, he pro ceeded to Ireland, which he found in a very bad state. lie thought that capital being introduced there might effect some good, and he therefore chose that part of Ireland as the very best adapted to prove the experiment—the wilds of Tipperary. He employed eight hundred men in some mines there, and in vested 50,0001. In carrying out his projects, he had no consi deration for religion or polities, he employed all equally, and he chose six gentlemen to superintend the works, three Catholics and three Protestants ; two of whom had been murdered, and not on any pretence of harsh usage or difference as connected with land. The first of them was murdered in a very barbarous manner, by having a stone thrown on his back, of which he lingered for some time before he died. There was another, a Roman Catholic steward, a very bold man, who said that if they chose to attack him, let them do it in the day, This steward was shot at and missed. He was shot at again and struck in the side. The assassin was afterwards appre hended, tried, and punished for the offence, but the un fortunate steward has since been obliged to be under the pro tection of the police. These outrages proved the necessity for such a Bill at the present. If they could only exterminate these armed assassins—and the number of them was not very great —peace and tranquillity would be restored. He believed that he himself would be shot at for so small a consideration as a bottle of whiskey.—(Cries of "Ohl oh 1") While this sys tem of outrage was going on he thought it high time that life should be protected, and they were not asking too much power in trying to pass the Bill. If this Bill were passed he would guarantee that the system of outrage would receive a check, and the country would be restored to a state of tranquillity. The police in Ireland were a fine, efficient body of men, well organised, and well adapted, from their local knowledge, for the state of things which existed there. For his own part, be could say that, as far as he was concerned, he would have the satisfaction of having done his duty to his tenants, though he might fail in producing the results which he desired. fie wished the Bill to be brought into operation at once, and if it was, a new state of things would shortly arise, and Tipperary would become —what it was not at present—a habitable country. The con duct of the Government throughout the State trials was such as to excite his warmest respect, and he sincerely hoped that the same efficiency would characterise their present and future measures for the peace and amelioration of that unhappy country, and that they might be able to say of it, as of the Thames— " Though deep yet clear; though gentle, yet not dull; Strong without rage—without o'eriewing, full." Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said, that in speaking on the question before the House, he would confine himself, as nearly as possible, to the amendments proposed by the Hon. and Learned Member for Cork. He agreed with the Hon. Member, that instead of outrage being put down by the Go vernment measure, it would but promote crime. He felt that instead of Ireland receiving anything like justice from this country, there was not a measure brought forward but such as operated to the interest of the wealthier classes and to the injury of the poor. They gave a poor-law to Ireland, hut what was the relief afforded ? It was matter of complaint that the relief given by the Irish poor-law was not as liberal as in this country.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.) He would now conclude by again repeating his assertion that he had always opposed those Coercion Bills, even when pro posed by the Whigs while in office; and, therefore, he could not be supposed t o b e i n fl uenced by any interested or party motives in opposing this Bill. If the House should go into Committee upon it, he would there also oppose it, and he trusted he would never see it the law of the land. Mr. FITZ MAURICE said that, as an Irish Member, he should say that, in his opinion, many of the crimes committed in Ireland were owing to the wholesale system of eviction of tenants, which he should say was a system that was a disgrace to any civilised country. The lion. Gentleman then entered into a detail of various outrages that had occurred within his own knowledge in Ireland. His own brother had been sub jected to them. His brother never visited his estate without receiving threatening letters of the most violent character. On one occasion ha went down to his property; and on arriving there he found that one of his tenants was over head and ears in debt, and had paid no rent. He forgave the man his rent, and offered him 301. to go into another and a smaller farm, when the man declared he was very ill used, and that on the first time he met his landlord he would settle ac counts with him, and every body knew what that meant. If Ireland wished to be glorious let her be glorious in her in dustry, and not notorious in her crime. He very much re gretted the statement of the Hon. Gentleman opposite, that English Members were careless about the state of eland. He did not think it fair or generous fur the Irish Members to taunt the English people with indifference. He felt bound to say that one man with a thousand a sear living in Ireland did more good than another possessing ten thousand a year who re sided out of the country. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by thanking the I - louse for their kind attention to his statements. Mr. ROCHE had no doubt whatever that what the Hon. Gentleman opposite had stated was quite true. He had no doubt that he was well inclined towards Ireland. In the course of the present discussion they had not to confine themselves to the paltry and miserable Coercion Bill—the whole state of the Irish question was to be canvassed. The condition of the Irish people was an undoubted stain upon the British pride and honour.—( Hear.) It laid upon that House to do something for the Irish nation—that was a result which had been arrived at after a discussion of six weeks. He believed that no man now thought that the present condition of Ireland ought to continue. Every one admitted that Ireland required some remedy. He must say that he had never listened with so great a feeling of despondency as he had done to the speech of the Right lion. Baronet opposite on a previous occasion. He did not think that the Right Hon. Baronet had made out a case for the Bill. He thought, however, that he had made out a strong case for the national party in Ireland. The year of all others in which agrarian crime was least, and the people more peaceful and quiet, was in 1843. That was the year in which the Govern ment had military possession of the country, and they (the repealers) had the hearts of the people. It was the repeal year, and the effects of their government was manifest in the increased content which was spread among the people. 'I he Right Hon. Baronet, in dealing with the question, had not been candid with the House. He went into the statistics of crime in 1843, 1844, and 1845, but he had not gone into 1846, and had failed in showing that there had been any ma terial progressive increase of crime in those years. The Right Hon. Baronet had referred to the case of Hogan, who was shot notwithstanding the vigilance of the police; but he had not shown how this crime would have been avoided had the Coercion Bill been in existence. He had referred to other eases that were equally inopportune to support the case. In fact he had been endeavouring to delude the people of England, in regard to this measure. A great deal had been said about combination and ribandism, but these he (Mr. Roche) maintained had been introduced from England, and could easily be met by the existing law. He said, there fore, there had been no cas e ma d e out for coercion, or for this illegal and unconstitutional measure. He would tell them the Bill, as it at present stood, never should pass that House. I they took it into Committee, on them would be the responsi bility of bringing over the Irish Members to oppose its pro gress ; and he was sure it never would be carried unless was preceded by remedial measures. The sense of the people of England, out of doors, was against it, and all Ireland, as well as its represe n t a ti ves , h a d d ec l are d aga i ns t it. 'They talked of the work would o ask,fthe agitatorswho made oflr theelan Ireland, butgriev ances in answer to that he andthe h s i e m had an ? England had made these made the agitators.—( Hear, hear.) grievances, heyliad made those grievances He w rievanees existed.ud ask , l he would who cwoenrte ; i n l o e an agitator,agita to a r e . d2v ( i H il e e h a t r, ea govern Ireland, and howeweeerreeietn. T they to govern leader overnit? ef Tthhee v„ I jt iti n h g t Hon. Baronet says, by same thing; and this was also ech oe d b y t h e Wry saysotle h Lord t on e the other side (Lord George Bentinck). But the division list would show who supported coercion, and who did not; and he would take care that tho people of Ireland should see it. It was said that a kind of coalition existed be tween the Noble Lord opposite (Lord George Bentinck) and his Hon. Friend who was in confinement—(A laugh) —but he would tell them there could be no coalition with any one that would vote for the coercion of Ireland. He (Mr. Roche) complimented that Noble Lord for sentiments that were anythino. but coercive on the evening the alleged coalition was suggested'. Having settled that matter, he would again revert to the ques tion of coercion. Now, he asked the Right Hon. Baronet why he did not introduce with this Bill some measure for re lieving the sufferings of Ireland ? Did he listen to the heart rending disclosures of the Hon. M em b er f or Cashel? He thought he did, for he observed that the statements of the Lion. Member fur Cashel made a great impression upon the Right Hon. Baronet, and he wished to know if the Right Hon. Baronet had nothing else but paltry advice to Irish landlords to remove this dismal, this sad and lamentable state of things ? nut, he was asked, what could be done for removing the mise ries and for producing peace and tranquillity for Ireland ? Well, he would tell them. They must make Irelar.d happy in the same way that other countries were made happy, by letting them be governed by their own people and their own countrymen. That was the only means which could restore peace and happiness to his unfortunate and misgoverned country ; and until these means were resorted to, there would be moral victories achieved in Ireland.—( Cheers. ) Let them, however, do justice to that unfortunate country, and their vic tory would be more brilliant than any that had been achieved on the banks of the Sutlej. Copt. LA YARD said, representing an Irish town, he could not give a silent vote on the present occasion. He could pre dict most confidently that this Bill, to which he intended to give his decided opposition, would prove a failue. This was the eighteenth time a coercive Bill bad been resorted to for Ireland. It had always failed, and this instance, the House might rely upon it, would prove no exception to the rule. If Government wished to remove agitation and the cry for repeal in Ireland, let them do justice to the people and the coun try. They had now an excellent opportunity of doing this, sod improving the condition of the people, by giving them employment. They had some admirab railway schemes before them, and if three. and-a-half per cent. were guaranteed to the proprietors they would certainly be carried out, and afford ample employment for the people. Now, it was quite clear these railways would ultimately become immense good remunerative unde r t a ki ngs , an d, see i ng t h e good they would do to the country, he thought Government could not do better than guarantee three-and.a-half per cent. There was an opportunity now of granting a poor-law to Ire land, and he trusted that it would not be allowed to pass by. Now was the time for the Government vigorously to act. it poor-law was one of the modes of pacifying Ireland. Let the Government not let slip the present opportunity of doing good for Ireland. Look at the protectionists now. Five year° ago they were offered an e i g ht s hilli ng d uty on corn, an d they refused it. Would they not now be glad to get that eight shilling duty. Let the Government take advantage of that example. It was absolutely necessary that some steps should be taken with respect t o th e t enant r i g h ts i n Irelan d . Let the Government turn its attention to the cultivation of the waste lands in Ireland. There were millions of acres in that country that were not in a state of cultivation. How could they talk of over population in Ireland while so much land was out of cultivation ? The Hon. and Gallant Officer had given a very strong argil' merit for supporting the Bill, for he said that as the people of Iceland had even at present very little liberty, this Bill, whick would deprive them of that liberty, should have his support He hoped that the Government would, instead of pressing this measure, bring in some conciliatory measures fur the miserabl people of Ireland, and withdraw this measure at once. Major BERESFORD felt it his duty to support the Bill connected as he was with Ireland and her people, aPhough be considered it as an inefficient and useless Bill. —(Gres laughter and cheers from the Opposition benches.) He askee if the Bill met the present evils of Ireland. The great and crying crimes of Ireland were not committed in the darkness of night, but in the open day, in the presence of numerate people, who laughed at the assassination of Irish landlords , whom they felt to be obnoxious.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") The murderer who walked at noon-day, and having committed the bloody deed, would not be detected by this Hear, hoar.) The Bill was one which would bring great irritation to the minds of the Irish people, because it was not accom panied with a remedial measure. He hoped, however, that alter it had passed, the Government would immediately set about the passing of the necessary remedial measures to which the peasants of Ireland were fairly entitled.—( Hear, hear.) He had no hesitation in saying that this Bill confounded the innocent with the guilty. The Honourable Member for Cashel had said that a clergyman of the Church of England had privately put some gunpowder in a peasant's cottage in Ireland, and afterwards sent a policeman to search that House. Now, he happened to be particularly acquainted with the cases and he could say that the statement was not based on truth.-- that ( those Hon hear.) The Honourable M who sat on the same side of the House with him (the Ministerial side), would join with him in voting for the first reading of the Bill.--( Cries of " Hear, hear," and " Divide.") Colonel RAWDON opposed the Bill, and proceeded to do' fend the course of ccnduct pursued by the Irish Members, in opposing the first reading of the Bill, and hoped that they would succeed upon a second reading. ( The Hon. Member proceeded in his remarks, and was interrupted by the cries of " Divide, divide," from all parts of the House.) Now much of the Irish character has been misrepresented. The people were kind and warm. You cannot judge of their misery. How can you judge of it when you are not able to es timate it ? He thought that this Bill was at variance with the present temper of Ireland. There has been a certain sti' mulent administered to the people by a newspaper against the spirit of the Bill. That newspaper had found its way to the fireside of every cottager in Ireland. He had said that the framer of the Bill was ignorant of the temper of Ireland—its provisions proved it, and it would not be acceptable to any aloe' Would the law irradicate the excited feelings of the Irish...* would it even soothe them ? He was confident then that it would not. There was but one opinion of it in Ireland, and that was not in its favour. He implored them then to record their votes in favour of the amendment of the Member for Cork. If they travelled through Ireland—if they went into the huts and cottages of the peasantry—and if they were aware of the misery whi c h ex i ste d there —many of their dens au misery, if he might be a ll owe d to use the expression, most 0, them only ten feet s quare — t h e a b ode of animals—they wool hesitate to shut them up from sun-set to sun-rise.—( Hear.) „ Colonel SIBTHORI'E said, he would no t oppose t h e Di". but at the same time he could not support it. The present Government had shown itself so weak, so vaccinated with P o ' laical cowardice, that he could not repose any trust in them, fo r he did believe that they were men who would truckle to all' thing, provided they by so doing were able to maintain their own seats. —(Loud laughter.) Lord INGESTRE rose, amid cries of "Divide, divide. He denied there was ever anything like coalition between Lord Bentinck and Mr. S. O'Brien.--(Loud cries of " Divide , divide." A state of crime and destitution unparalleled in any s country prevailed i n I re l and. The murderer walked abroa " , in noon day, and no one attempted to arrest him. He escape " in fact with impunity. It was incumbent, therefore, that the Government should interfere to put an end to such a disgracefu l state of things. He would conc l u d e b y again denying t h a t there was any thing like coalition referred to between the Hon' Member for Limerick and the Hon. Member for Lynn.- - " (Loud cries of " Divide, divide.") Lord GEORGE BEN TINCK moved for the adjournmen t of the debate to enable him to have an opportunity of denying the statement made by— The SPEAKER interrupted the Noble Lord, and said that it was not competent for any Member of the House, after he had spoken on any question, either to propose the adjournme7 of the debate afterwards, or t o ma k e any o b servat i ons a s econd time.—(Loud cries of " Divide, divide.") Mr. P. BORTHWICK, amid loud cries of divide, then proposed the adjournment of the debate. Lord G. BENTINCK seconded the motion, and embrace': the opportunity which his doing so afforded him to deny %I d charge which had been m a d e , an d h e h oped the House wetn' ,„ though at that late period o f th e even i ng, permit him „t; occupy its attention for a f ew m i nutes w hil e he d id so . enable him the more effectually t o meet t h e case, h e h a d sen t home for the letters which had passed relative to that state' ment—(Laughter)—and he hoped they would arrive to enabl e him to refute the c h arge t h e more effectually.—(Cries , "Divide, divide. ") If that correspondence were tea. to the House, it wou ld at once be shown that th e statemen t Wl' unfounded in fact—that there were not the slightest grounds for it whatever. It had been stated by a Cabinet Minister, the Secretary for Ireland, that the coalition was a fact. He (Lord G. Bentinck) had not had time to consult his 11 ". 13 * Friends upon the matter, for Hon. Members would bear hit° a out that it wanted but twenty minutes to five o'clock when his attention was drawn to the subject. Where the n o was the coalition which was tried t o b e ma d e suc h a handle of—which was made a point of a t a pu bli c h ust i ngs , by Cabinet Minister of the Crown ?—(Cries of " Divide.") Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House the divided, when there appeared— For the first reading .... 274 Against it 125 ~, Majority in favour of fi rs t rea di ng On our return to the gallery, we found Sir R. PEEL stating that he would take the second readi n g of this Bill on Monday, the 25th of May. Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that, on that occasion, . 1 1 should move for a Select C omm itt ee to i nqu i re i nto a grarif t : offences in Ireland, with a v i ew to prov i de some means fo r their prevention—(as we und ers t oo d t h e H on. and L e arnt . Member, but he spoke in so 1 ow a t one o f vo i ce, as to scarcely audible in the gallery.) POLLING PLACES (IRELAND) BILL. 0 The adjourned debate upo n th e fi rs t rea di ng o f t hi s Bill wa s resumed by Mr. M'CARTHY, who contended that its provisions 1 4 1 very neces sary . H e s h ould not press the matter further, but leave the Bill in the hands of the House. Mr. GROGAN opposed the Bill, and declared that no in' convenience was experienced from the present polling s ysteal in Ireland. It worked well, and he for one could see no reaso n why it should be altered. It was true, in Ireland, ther e was only one polling booth, but it must be remembered that the poll was riot like it was in this country. It was kept open for five days. This measure was a partial partisan Bill, and be hoped the House would throw it out. Sir W. SOMERVILLE said the opposition of the Hon. Member to this Bill was most extraordinary. It was quite ins' possible under the present system that all bona ,fide voters could record their votes fo r th e wan t o f su ffi c i ent acconun d a tiono and he for one cordially a pp rove d o f t hi s Bill . Mr. ROSS said that h e k new an i nstance w hi c h occurr ed in Belfast, in which 305 of th e b es t men o f t h at town were e%_': eluded from the polling-bo o th a t an e l ect i on b ecause th7 l happened to be a few minut es l a t e . H e wou ld g i ve h is v ote' support of the Bill.—( Ch eers . ) Mr. ROEBUCK replied t o s o me o b servat i ons w hi c h ha fallen from thel Hon. M em b er f or D u bli n (Mr. G rog an ' He thought the Bill a necessary on e , an d h e would ther e fore upport it. Mr. PIGOT said that in the year 1841 he had introduce d: measure similar to the present. Th e present l aw re l at i n g to policy in Ireland was in a most defective state. The 11°& : Member entered into some p ar ti cu l ars f or t h e purpose of abort ing the deficiency in the existing law. The p ro p os ition a° st before the House would n o t, h owever, e ff ect much more that 0 the present law. There were many scandalous practical elections in Ireland against which the measure would not Of; vide.— ( Hear , hear.) If v o t ers presente d t h emselves at the booths, who it was known would vote in favour of that cod; date who was the favourite o f th e po ll c l er k s, the oat h administered to them very rapidly, and every facility W u ; given to th? reception of th e i r votes ; if, on t h e contrar y, tn voters were on the opposite s id e , th e oat h was a d m inistere! very lazily; and the effect, in oue instance with which he off acquainted, was that one hundred votes were left unpolled ti , c , o D ns i e vqid u e e , n d ce ivi o d f e. t,h, ; conduct of the poll clerks.--(Cries ° The SOLICITOR-GENERAL considered that the 0/ of the Government was to afford facilities, and to allow P er ' sons to exercise their elective franchise. Mr. O'CONNELL thought that some alterations prop(l4a by the Solicitor-Gen e r a l wou ld meet all objections to the 13 : " Lord MORPETH thought that th e const i tuency o f Duhl t e s and other Irish towns should have the opportunity afford them of returning the representative of their el- oice. After a few words from Mr. M'CA/tTIIY, Mr. GREGORY withdrew his amendment, and the de bate on the Bill was adjourned till Monday the next. After a few wor d s from Messrs. SPOONER and HAS its, the Friendly Societies Bill was read a third time. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter past Two o'clock. The General Steam Navigation Company's favtfo• mail pa c k ( t C aledonia, Captain H. W. Gibbs, arrived at P"; of burgh on "Monday morning last, after a beautiful passage 47 hours. with LETTERS OF OF THE ICI NGS OF E NGLAND. — Ed,— , Notes, by J. 0. lIALmwELL. &c.—lt is a eir e ;lo stance not a little remarkable, that while so many ice containing l e tt ers o f em i nent personages have been g Deo to the w or ld, no attempt has hitherto been made to 10 ; of fore the public, in a collected form, those of the X ill ' o ad E; gland, revealing as they do, the thoughts, feeli n g s t 'oreSP habits, and recor di ng t h e adventures and misadvenf the the trials and vicissitudes, related by th ems elves, ° , l , 03 0 Sovereigns w h o h ave re i gne d over this countr y, u tbro rl history of w hi c h th ese roya l reliques also serve only a very co ns id era bl e li g h t. S uch precious documentsisity, be deemed records of extraordinary interest and c l ! r Aislr not only by the lover of historic lore, but by every ieto man, and the present work will doubtless find its V / 3). as i& the library of the gentleman, and the scholar, forml i ' o d. does, an essential comp an i on t o every Hi story o f Eng , B/RT/IY - ' ' _-- r g4t.' On the 30th ult., at Hornscy, the lady of Henry Tr" re " th ° of a son. den g ' On the Ist inst., at Westbourne-terrace, Hyde-park - go r I'A tli wife of Charles Mare, 11 , _q., of a son. the On the Ist inst., in Ch ar l es - street, ..--' Dahneny, of a daughter. _________,— Berkeley-square, MARRIED.ore' On the 30th ult., at St. Pancras Charcb, Sir George Duck e t t, Clialle: to Mrs. Saxe, of Gloucester Lodge, Regent's Park. IfiriMan? t 0 f 0 On the 30th nit., at Trinity Church, Weymouth , Metcalfe, Esq., Commander, R.N., to Helen E. 1), 11058, re" _....., late William Ross, Esq., of Skeldon, Berbiee. DIED. of On the 30th ult., at Eshor, Surrey, 111!! France! Bu rdett, the late Sir Francis Burdett, That London: 1 I 9 ..,............. ...........e. . 50. Printed and Published by 3,11111D0 YOUNG. ~ -f ',rot- Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, strand , in the jge, of the savoy, in the cgtnity of Nidale§ox, Saterdt o 2, 1846.