The Sun. — London, England, 1849-03-03 00:00:00

age. Now, accordin gto the usual allowance of the Sa nitary Commissio rl.: of two gallons for each person, that would make t 14,000,000 gallons as requisite for the apply of thos r peraous.—(Hear, hear.) But what would the H raise think when he told them that instead of 24,0 00,000 this company supplied 60,0G0,000 of gallons per day—(Hear, hear, and cheers)--that was not only twice but nearly three times as much as w as required by the Sanitary Commis sioners. T here were three companies which had particularly excited the attention of the public, all of which drew' their supplies from the Thames. Tho first drew its 'water from above Kew-bridge, the second from Hammerstnith, and the third from a place lower down the river.. Mr. ILUNIE said what was the House asked to do? It was asked to rejeCi an offer that was made to supply an aAn.dant quantity of water to the metropolis— (Hear)--for which they were not asked to lay our a shilliwg. The promoters said they would undertake to supply. with water every house rated at 501. a year at 30s. per annum. If this Bill went before a Committee, those matters would bo inquired into ; and he thought that in quiry should take place under the circumstances. Af ter Abe recommendation of the Board of Health, it did appear to him to act greatly against their interest to refuse in quiry, and that was all they wanted. He should there lore vote for the second reuiing. Lord DUDLEY STUART said water was as ne cessary to life as the consumption of air. Now, what was the House asked to do by the Honourable Gentleman who came forward to oppose this Bill? Why, to prevent tilr metropolis having a larger, and better, and cheaper supply of water. They said no, the; would not examine the Bill ; they would not hear the promoters. It interfered with some interests of some persons through whose property it was to pass ; it interfered with their rights, and therefore they would not allow it to go before a Committee. Now, was that a mode of acting which would be satisfactory to that House, and which it was prepared to adopt? He felt satisfied that the objections to the Bill were such as the House would not entertain, for they were one and all objections which might be very properly urged in Committee, and only there. He hoped, therefore, upon those grounds that the House would assent to the second reading of the Bill. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the second reading ... 57 „ 0 „.. Against it ... 137 Majority The Bill was consequently thrown out. SICILY. Mr. URQUHART wished to know whether the Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) was prepared to lay any further papers on the table of the House with re spect to the negotiations of Admiral Parker's squadron in the Bay of Naples? Lord PALMEASTON intimated that he would anawer the Hon. Member's que4thirt off 'Monday next. SQUADRON ON THE COAST OF AFRICA. Mr. HUME.wished to know whether the Governments of England and France had come to any arrangements with respect to maintaining a squadron on the west coast of Africa; and whether the Government were in a con dition to lay the results before the House ? Lord PALMERSTON replied that the Go72rnment were not quite prepared, at present, to lay the results of the arrangement before the House. PETER'S SAVINGS BANK IN DUBLIN. Mr. REYNtiLDS wished to know whether the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had given any instructions to the Lord- Lieutenant, for the purpose of recovering the deposits which hisd been lost by the depositors in it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the managers of the bank had refused to produce their books, and as legal proceedings had been instituted to compel them to do so, he did not think it advisable to consent to the appointment of a Committee. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL. In reply to Mr. V. SMITH, Sir J. PAKINGTON said he would postpone the ap pointment of the Committee on this Bill till Monday. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Olt the motion of Mr. PARSER, it was resolved that the House at its rising adjourn to Monday. AUSTRIA AND "RUSSIA. Lord D. STUART said that a statement had appeared in many of the journals, and was entitled to credit, taat a portion of the Russia❑ army had invaded the Austrian territory in Transylvania. lie wished to know whether Government had received any intimation of such an in vasion ? Viecount PALMERSTON said that the Government had received information that on the approach of the Hungarian forces to the frontier towns of Transylvania, the people of those towns had applied to the Russian commanding officers to send forces to protect them against the results they apprehended from the presence of the Hungarians. In consequence of that application two bodies of Russian troops crossed the frontier—one to Heamanatadt, the other to Cronatadt—and occupied tbese two towns. During the time they occupied these towns an engagement took place between the Hun garians and Austrians, but the Russian troops, he be lieved, took no part in the hostilities. EXPLANATION.—MR. NAPIER. Lord J. RUSSELL said, that understanding the Hon. Member for the University of Dublin wished to make some statement with respect to what he said last night, he hoped he would now do so before proceeding with the order of the day. Mr. NAPIER said that in the course of the debate of last night the Noble Lord had alluded to his observations as being uncandid. He had understood the Noble Lord to say that ho had objected to the measure of the Noble Lord because it was premature, and unaccompanied with some 'modification of the poor-law. The Noble Lord then said that he (Mr. Napier), being a member of the Committee, must have been aware that there were other measures contemplated, and that, taking them in con nexion with the proposal of the Noble Lord, it could not be considered premature. Now the fact was, that those otiver measures—those other portions of the plan —had been postponed till the inquiry was completed, and were to abide the issue of that inquiry. These other portions, therefore, if not connected with the pro posal, could have no bearing on the question; but if con nected, and if premature, then d fortiori, the proposal itself was premature.—(Hear, hear.) He felt obliged to the Noble Lord for giving him the opportunity to ex plain; because he would regret if any imputation had rested on him of having been guilty of a want of candour. ORDERS OF THE DAY. Sir F. T. BARING said, according to the understand. ing which had been come to last night, he should now move the order of the day for the House going into a Committee of Supply, as it was necessary for the public service to take a vote on account. He hoped, those !Son. Gentlemen who had amendments would thereforepost ponc them. Mr. HUME, desirous that the House should proceed to the debate on the question of the Irish poor-law, would postpone his amendment; but stipulated that this notice should stand on Friday's paper in the same situa tion it now did. Colonel SIBTHORP thought that before asking for the money some general financial statement ought to have been made by the Government. It' he could con sistently support the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose he should certainly do so. SUPPLY. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply. Sir F. T. BARING proposed that a sum not exceed ing 200.000?. should be granted towards defraying the excess of . naval expenditure. Mr. HUME said as this was not simply a vote of money for public expenditure, but a vote fur money ex • pended without the sanction of Parliament, he could not allow it to pass withoht observing that no Hon. Member, by agreeing to it, was to be considered as having coin promised himself.—(Hear, hear.) The vote was then agreed to.—Report to be received on Monday. The House then resumed. POOR-LAW (IRELAND). On the question of going Into Committee on the Poor law (Ireland), petition s were presented rroan the grand i lry of Meath, froch Limerick, and from various boards o f guardians, strongly deprecating the proposed rate in a ftl• The House went into Committee. Resolutions having been read by Mr. BERNAL, Lord J. RUSSELL said—l rise noie for the purpose of explaining to the Committee the eourse wn i c h her n a j e „ t y' s G o vernment wish to pursue with respect to this most di ffi cult question, the poor law in Ir e l an d. Earlier this session I prop osed to appoint a Committee, stai.ng at the same time that my feeling was that, al though there were certain amendments which the Go. vernment had in view, it would be desirable that some gentlemen who were representatives from Ireland, as well as other Members of the House, should be ap pointed in ord e r to a id by their knowle dge, by their ex perience, and by th e i r acquaintance wit the feelings and opinions of the people of Ireland, as well as of this country, in the discussion of so arduous a matter. I brought before that Committee, at its first meeting, severed propositions. I stated as I shall s t a t e , what I conceiv e to be the general working of the poor-law in Ireland. It appears to me that so far as this House was desirous in 1847 of placing on the property of Isteland the charge of that destitution which it was foreseen must be very appalling for a con siderable time; and would at all times be of very large amount—so for as rtgarcls the relief of destitution by rates collected in Ireland for the relief of the poor, that object has, in a gnat degree, been attained. It is not to be denied, however, that in accomplishing that object various evils have arisen, some from peculiar circum stances of a local nature, but others of a more general nature, and which do require the serious attention, first of the Committee and afterwards of this Ilduse. Genie, rally speaking, I think it is to be admitted that in many parts of Ireland the p oor -law imposeg a very considerable burden, increasthg4n the course of a very short tia3e, and accompanied, ris the imposition of that burden is, by cir cumstances of no Ordinary nature. The occupiers of land in Ireland, instead of considering the burden of pauperism a reaion tor giving empl o y ment , h ave , on t h e con trary, taken alarm at the extent of the burden to which they might be subjected, and have rather dimi nished t h an increased the num b er of labourers in their employ. Althoughit is cont rary to the general princi ples of the poor-law, more espeCi a ll y the poor-law of Iltipland, which contemplates the . relief of distress wherever it may exist, and that the destitute poor shall either be relieved in the* own houses, or if able-bodi e d, shall be sent to work at the expense of the local com munity—an expense that may rise to any amount which in the first instance the parish, and afterwards due' coun try, may be abli‘to' bear—it appears to th e Government , notwithstanding-the divergence from such principles, . that it would be expedient for Ir i s h purposes that there shot:lid be a maximum rate beyond which the poor -rate should not go. In proposing a maximum rath wag necessary to consider whether it should be an union rate' et an electoral division rate, and also whether any extraneous aid should be given to raise it. 4;9010 lo the Committee that there J'e ; 1. 1 Lis biU -14 m) tlatatier3l2 siti4 io 1.*T1144 THE SUN, LONDON, SATtTRDAT EVENING, MARCH 3, 1849. should be, first, a rate of ss. in the pound ; that is to say, that the poor-rate should not exceed ss. in the electoral divisions, and that when the necessities of the case ren dered a further rate necessary, one not exceeding 2s. in the pound should be collected from the unions, making a total of 7s. in the pound. The Committee appeared to be generally favourable to a maximum rate, but required to receive some evidence on the subject, more especially with regard to the amount at which it might be expe dient to fix the maximum. Finding the gener i! opinion of the Committee to be as I have stated with respect to that part of the plan which I had proposed, I consented to withdraw the resolutions which I had submitted to the Committee, in order that they might proceed to take evidence. But before I went into the Committee I stated in this House that if, at any time, I should come to the decision that it was desirable particular mea sures should be adopted, I should feel myself jus tified in coming down to this House and proposing them, even although the Committee might not approve:of them. Ido not, however, at present, purpose submitting any proposition to the House on the subject of a maximum rate. lam willing to wait until the Commit tee shall receive further evidence on the subject, but it certainly is the decided opinion of the Government that whether ss. and 25., in the way I have referred to, be the proper limit or not, in the present circumstances of Ire land a maximum is desirable, and that by its means we could combine the relief of destitution (which has, to a great extent, been achieved) with the encouragement of industry and the improved cultivation of the soil. I will proceed ta state some other measures which the Govern ment have in contemplation with regard to the poor-law, but with respect to which I have not asked for the opi nion of the Committee, although I expect to submit them to its consideration at some future time as modifi cations of the existing poor-law system. One of the pro posed alterations is to this effect, that when improve ments are made upon land—agricultural improvements— no increased valuation should take place in respect of them for a certain number of years.—(Hear, hear) Whether the period of exemption should be seven years or ten years is a point respecting which con siderable difference of opinion prevails. I think that the time should be limited to ten years, although, perhaps, seven would be sufficient. Another altera tion refers to a question upon which a great deal of attention has been fixed during the discissions which have taken place from the very commencement of the amended poor-law in 1817, and upon which lam de sirous of stating some general views to this House—l allude to the question of the area of taxation. Many per sons, including I believe the majority of the Irish Mem bers both in the Committee up stairs and in this House, are of opinion that it is desirable to have a maximum of distance beyond which the poor-rate should not extend. They are of opinion that persons would be far more likely to occupy land and expend capital in its cultivation, if they knew that they would not be subjected to a ruinous rate. They allege that land would more readily find purchasers if it were known that the whole rental of the estate would not be swallowed up by poor-rates. It has been urged in support of a more limited area of taxation, that landowners and occupiers having a certain num ber of labourers residing in their particular districts, to whom they are able to give employment, will not be likely to expend their capital in that manner, if they are to be called upon to bear the burden of supporting the unemployed labourers upon the estates of their im mediate neighbours. Whilst I admit that this is a plausible argument, I must at the same time say, that I think it is impossible to consider the question in all its bearings without seeing, that if the principle were adopted of saying that each property shall form a separate area of taxation, liable only to the support of the poor found upon it, serious evils would result.— (Hear, hear.) In the first place, if this principle were to be adopted, it seems to me that you could not refuse to extend to small proprietors the benefit given to large ones.—(Hear, hear.) The returns drawn up by the clerk of the Limerick Union mention, amongst several rentals of large amount, one of only 30/. per annum. How would it be possible to say " We protect estates worth 2,0001.1 or 3,0001. a year from being swamped by the negligence of the owners of neighbouring property, but we will not concede the same advantage to the owner of land of the value of only 301. per annum?"—(Hear.) There would be manifest injustice in such a course of proceeding; yet, if you concede to the owners of small properties the ad vantage of separate taxation, it is obvious that great confusion must ensue, and that it would hardly be pos sible to carry the poor-law into effect at all. I see how the regulation would work in both directions. The owner of an estate having land susceptible of improvement would employ his capital in setting every able-bodied labourer upon the estate to work; and he would ultimately reap his reward, not only in the happiness and comfort which he would be the means of diffusing around him, but also in the augmented value of his property. But we have the testimony of all be longing to Ireland to the fact, that there is in that coun try another class of landlords who would take a course directly opposite to that which I have described ; and the first impulse of these men, looking only to the returns which they can get from their land, when they found that they were to be taxed for the support of all the in firm and unemployed persons residing upon it, would be to rid the land of what they deemed incumbrances.— (Hear, hear.) The consequence would be, that people would be driven in large numbers from the agricultural districts (as we have seen in the course of the last thirty years) into the suburbs of large towns, there to live as mendicants for a short time, until they perish by disease and want.—(Hear, hear.) ' Again, if you should determine that each property should be subject only to its own rate for the support of its own poor, you would find that you had established a much more stringent law of settlement than exists in this country.—(Hear, hear.) You would find that, although labourers might find employment from the owners sad occupiers of land within the district where they resided, if they should travel out of that circle but for a few miles, or even a shorter distance, in search of better wages, they would be driven back into their own locality, and thus, instead of maintaining the character of free and independent labourers, they would be reduced to the condition of serfs to their landlords—(Hear, hear.) Whilst these are the objections—and they seem to me insuperable —to the sub-division of the area of taxation proposed by some poor-law reformers in Ireland, there is, at the same time, no doubt, considerable inconvenience resulting in many instances from the size of the unions being co-extensive with the electoral divisions. The Commissioners to whom I alluded last night have taken the subject into their consideration. They have compared the unions and electoral divisions of the south with those of the north, and although there doubtless are many physical circumstances in the face of the country at the two points which must exercise an influence, they are nevertheless of opinion that the more minute subdivision of the area of taxation in the north has been fa vourable to the development of industry, and they therefore suggest that the size of some of the large unions in the south should be contracted. The ex tent to which that recommendation ought to be carried is s question which may fairly be. left to the consideration of the Committee up stairs, which will have the opportu nity of examining persons who have been engaged in forming new unions and new electoral divisions. should the Committee adopt the suggestio❑ of the Commis sioners they would not be sanctioning the principle to which I have before adverted, namely, that of making each property rateable for the support of its own poor exclusively. Such an amendment of the electoral divi sions as the Commissioners propose (bearing in mind more particularly that those divisions were formed for a, different poor-law) would be just and reasonable, whilst the limitation of taxation to individual estates would be a serious and permanent evil. There are other amend ments of the poor-law to which it is annecessary for me to allude; but one has been suggested to which the Government has given fair consideration, and with respect to which I am ready to state my views. It has been suggested, that whereas the land in Ireland is burdened with certain charges which were fixed upon it before the poor-law was introduced into that country, it is only fair that those charges should be made to contribute to the poor-rate as well us the rent of the landlord. I think it would be impossible to subject mortgages to a tax like the poor-rate, which is of variable amount, not fixed like a tax levied for the public Exchequer; and, besides, to make a deduction from the mortgagee's income would induce him to withdraw the money he has lent, thereby increasing the distress already prevailing in Ireland. With respect to charges arising out of family settlements, I think the case is different. I think that those charges having been fixed on the land when a poor-law could not have been con templated, and when the landowner believed that he would continue to receive his rental without deduction, it is but reasona bl e that they should, as fa ; land. 'this a s s neo p u r n a t cticable, t imposed mada u an po te n rior th to e of aptphl?iebse subjected to d e d uc ti ons on t in h e e nts in e tr u o te d r u e c d tto i n nto of sine th , poor -rate e tha r t time ioolawM for all settle ments be taken to have been arranged with due regard to the new s t a t e o f things. The relief t o be afforded to the landowners in prospective i r ab to adopt some tr this respect must, th ere f ore, not be is another matter upon whi c h I thinl it des le proceeding. I a ll u d e to land which has long been unoccupied, upied, and on whi c h cons iderable to arrears id of rate have accumulated. I think that i n order t en ants to occupy such land and to brin g i t into nuce cultiva tion, the arrears s hould for once be remitted. I would not wish to make:th is a g eneral r ule; but I think that m fo o r r o e nc once peculiarly be done. I now come to th a t w hi c h forms the subject of the resolution which I have placed in the hands of the chairman of this Committee of the whole House, and in so doing I must refer to the letter which the Poor-law Commissioners addressed to Lord Clarendon, dated December 11, 1848. In page 7of that document I find the following passage:— " Of the entire number of unions, 131, there are, per. haps, 20 which require to be considered separately from the remainder, as presenting peculiar difficulties. There is a second class, consisting of 10 or 11 unions, in which the present amount of out-door relief is considerable, but in which, by dint of exertion, serious financial 'embar rassments may be avoided, and the destitution at the same time be effectually relieved, without external aid. Of the remaining unions, say 100, there are 37 in which no relief is at present given out of the workhouse; in the other 63 the extent of out-door relief is for the most part inconsiderable, the aggregate total cost little ex ceeding 1,8001. weekly; while the additional workhouse accommodation provided in those unions is calculated to meet a considerable pressure, before the necessity of re sorting to extensive out-door relief will be again ac knowledged." In considering this subject, as I stated on a former oc casion, we must never lose sight of the effect of the re cent great failure of that root which has been the staple food of the country. It is impossible to look upon these districts as existing in the state in which they were in 1836 and 1837, when the Poor-law Commissioners of Inquiry made their report. However pitiable it may have appeared at that time that there should be so many of the inhabitants of Ireland living in mud cabins with only one room, if room it can be called, the condition of those o,olje people has Wen grievously altered for the worse by the deprivation of food with which they have subsequently been visited. Be it always remembered those wretched -persons never can expect, and never did expect, to re receive such wages in the course of the year as would enable them to live, however hardly and scantily ; no, they depended for subsistence upon the produce of the patches of ground adjoining their wretched cabins. Well, in the last two years we have seen a repetition in an aggravated form of some of those calamities which at various times have afflicted Ireland —one occurring in the middle of the last century, and another in 1822, when great relief was afforded by the Parliament and people of this country. It now, there fore, becomes a question whether relief of a similar kind shall be continued, or whether Parliament will think it a wise course to leave the inhabitants of the destitute unions to take their miserable chance of sur viving until the next harvest without making any effort to save them. In considering this subject the House has felt—and very naturally—that the exertions which have been made in the last two years by the people of this country and the Imperial Parliament, in the shape of advances out of the national exchequer, have been of an extraordinary nature. Ido not wish to speak as to the mode in which relief was given, or to discuss again the method in which the people were relieved. But then gentlemen say that nothing was done except feeding the people. Although I consider that feeding the people was absolutely necessary—(Hear, hear)—yet I must also remind them that there have been very great ex anions made by Parliament in order to stimulate the in dustry of Ireland and to place her in a better position to withstand future calamities. I hold in my hand a gene ral estimate of grants and loans for works of a repro ductive nature which have been made in the years 1846, 1847, and 1848. The sums advanced under the Land Improvement Act were 500,0001.; for land improvement and drainage, under Mr. Labouchere's letter, 200,0001.; extraordinary advances for arterial drainage, 370,0001.; granted for navigations connected with drainage, 100,000 L; grants and loans for the improvement of the Shannon, 123,0001.; ordinary Board of Works loan fund, 180,0001.; grants and loans for the erection of piers and harbours, 100,0001.; advances for railways, 620,000/. So that no less a sum than 2,193,0001. had been advanced in those three years for what are called works of a repro ductive nature; and be it remembered, that though 500,000/. had been advanced under the Land Improvement Act, there still remains 1,000,000/. which has been applied for, and which will be drawn for from timo to Limo,, for works of im provement and drainage authorized by the Act, making in the whole 3,193,0001. I think, with that statement, it cannot be said that Government or Parliament have entirely neglected all works of a reproductive nature, and that the whole of the money given has been entirely consumed in works of charity to those who would other wise hare starved. Be it remembered, also, that to main tain the people in a season of such great and overwhelm ing calamity, when they were unable to obtain work of a productive nature, to keep them alive was really the main purpose in view. —(Hear, hear.) Although we had made those efforts, we proposed, at the ,commencement of the present session, in continuance of the grant made last year, a sum of 50,000/. for the support of those unions in which great distress existed. It was stated in this House, and with great force, that already much had bees done, that already very large grants had been made, and that if it was right to continue this system in any way it was right that Ireland should contribute her portion generally to that fund. Now, in looking at the burden of the poor-law, I certainly find that with regard to many parts of Ireland there is no greater burden, if so great a burden, imposed as is imposed on many parts of England. I find, for instance, looking at the county of Antrim, at the beginning of the return with respect to the charges for last year, that the average amount of expense in three unions has been Is. 2d., Is. lOid., and Is. 72d. In two unions in Armagh it has been Is. 4d., 3s. 4d., and 2s. 10d. In Down the average has been about Is. 3d. or Is. 4d; in Fermanagh, 2s. sid., 3s. lid., and 2s. Bd.; in Londonderry, Is. 3d., Is. 4d., Is. 9id., and Is. 61d. I find with regard to several counties in Leinster there is a similar amount of charge. That in three unions in Kildare It has been - 25., 71d., Is. 6d. I .ln Meath, Is. 21d., 25., 2 s . lid., 4 s . lid., an d Is. lOid. • Those are the sums which have been paid under the poor-law in several parts of Ireland, so that it cannot be said with regard to those parts of Ireland that they have been entirely sunk, and dis tressed, and ruined by the poor-law.—(Hear, hear.) 'Oil the contrary, it does appear, comparing them with many parts of England and Wales, that they are less burdened than a good many parishes in Wiltshire and Sussex, and other parts of this country. It does not seem, there fore, impossible they should bear some additional burden for the sake of those distressed unions to which I have alluded. When I propose, however, that there should be a rate in aid collected in Ireland generally, for the sake of the support of those distressed unions, I am met by the answer, that this being a local burden, there are no more obligations on the county of Down than on the county of Middlesex to support the poor in the county of Mayo or Sligo. I am met by the argument that it would be quite as just to impose an additional poor-rate on Lancashire for the pauperism of Norfolk as to im pose it on Kildare for the pauperism of the west of Ire land. Now, Sir, there would be much justice in this ar gument if it could be said that Ireland altogether was taxed to the same amount with England—that she paid and contributed to the same degree in proportion to her wealth to all the taxes to which the people of Great Britain are subject.—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear.") But it was put forward, and with great emphasis, by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Northamptonshire, when we proposed a temporary grant, that 'there were taxes to a very large amount payable in this country which were not paid in Ireland at all ; the Hon. Gentle man said to the amount of 11,000,000/. I have here a statement which makes it even more. It appears that we pay in Great Britain, for income-tax, 5,300,000/. ; for land-tax, 1,150,000 2 ; for assessed taxes, 3,400,0001. ; making, in direct taxation alone, 9,850,0001. ; and for duty on bricks, hops, post-horses, and soap, 2,300,0001.; making, altogether, 12,150,000/. I think it is but just to say, that if there is additional taxation in this coun try of upwards of 12,000,000/ it entirely answers the case with regard to the local taxation which we propose to levy for the benefit of the western districts of Ireland. I find Hon. Gentlemen say, and very readily, at this mo ment, " Impose on us the same taxation that you have in this country —impose upon Ireland exactly the same taxes, and then take from the Imperial Treasury aaything that may be required for the distressed parts of that country." That is readily said; but I think if we were to propose not only an income-tax but assessed taxes in Ireland—(Hear, hear)—if we said, instead of 300,0001. we would charge Ireland with 1,000,000/. of taxation—if instead of 6d., something like ls. or ls. 6d. were asked, we should then find that gentlemen would very much change their opi nions on this subject—(Hear) —and that, having made that profession in order to get rid of theipresent proposal, to which they have a great objection, they would then object with twice as much fierceness and twice as much obstinacy to the proposal I should then make.—(Hear.) Even now, with regard to the income-tax alone, there is 7d. in the pound paid in this country; and let me ob serve with regard to this 6d. in the pound which I pro pose, the tenant occupier would be asked for 6d. addi tional poor -rate. He would take half of that from the rent he paid to his landlord, but if he had income-tax to pay, then we should demand from him 7d. in the pound, and he would take the whole of that SAM from his ,landlord when he afterwarda l ',paici his rent. You would have to collect 7d: in the pound from- all persons who were tenants of those who ha d more than 150/. a year—(H ear , h ear )— and those per sons at least would be subject to a reduction of 7d. in the pound from their income, instead of 3d. as I now propose. With regard to the measure itself, I certainly have no pecu liar fondness for this mode of rating Ireland rather than any other, but I do believe if we were to withdraw this proposition and substitute an ineome-tax, we should find, in another shape, objections to charging Ireland for the reliet of Ireland, and the same argument, that the Im perial Exchequer ought to be answerable, that we have now to encounter. But the objection goes further than this. It is said, and we were told last night that it was a matter of feeling affecting even the loyalty of the loyal province of Ulster.—(Hear, hear.) Ido not think that those who represent that province can represent her fairly when they assert that her loyalty would be im paired by such a proposition.—(Hear, bear.) I can well understand if it were a ouestion of right, like that which Hampden resi!ted, that 6d. or 3d. or Is. might be as objectionable to them as if it were the largest sum, and that they would be ready to stake their ex istenco against that sum . ; but it is no question of right. Everybody acknowledges the right of the Im perial Parliament to tax Ireland as well as England. All that the Imperial Parliament has done has been to tax Great Britain when she has not taxed Ireland, but nobody has denied that it is competent for Parliament to impose an income-tax or assessed taxes on Ireland at any time when it should be thought necessary. Then, nut being a matter of right, I must say I cannot believe that the loyalty of Ulster is of such a nature that it would be impaired by the imposition of a tax of this kind for the relief of persons who were destitute and suffering the extremity of hunger.—(Hear, hear.) I believe their loyalty is founded on attachment to the throne, to the institutions of this country; on the sym pathy with the religion of this country, and the memory of the many dangers and of the many victories in which they have been associated. I cannot think that a feel ing of this nature can be impaired because a rate of this kind is imposed, and because they are asked to bear some part of the burden which for years together Great Britain has borne without complaint.—(Hear, hear.) But I am told that this measure is likely to lead tc a permanent charge upon the income of Ireland, and that a perpetual rate in aid will be the cotiaequence of this proposal.—(Hear, hear.) Let us look 'at what is the ac- tual situation of that country. We hail) 20 unions now either in or likely to be in a state of very great distress. There is no reason that I know why the distress should be one of continuance for many years more. My ex -13, station is that one of two things must infallibly happen —either you will find that by the return of, good and plentiful harvests there will be sufficient food and em ploy ment for the people in those distressed districts, and that there will be such a change of culture, and such an employment of capital in those districts, that the people may be placed in a state of comparative comfort, and then you are relieved from the burden in that manlier, or else you will find that the people, seeing that they have no prospect of the restoration emigrate restorati o t f o th o a t t h f e o r od di u s p tr o i n ctz hi t c o h o t t h h e e y r depended, will parts N cf Ireland, o ) rthAmeri t c o Scotland, anandAu tsotrEnaliagnlacnod— lon(jeA laugh)— oth to the United States of America. That is what you find they have done to a great degree in the last three seasons. It is not without example that great calamities have be fallen a people in consequence of the failure of either tion was maintained in some of their o a c g c o u a pa g t r i e o a n t p o o r p t u h la eir means of livelihood. Many kelp the e T s h t eartu manufacture e u s r a c o t f ur S e c of certain chemical preparations, and that population w ot a la s n d d isp b l y ac te b m y manufacture c l i ct c u o r v e er o; could, in consequence, ,find no,,subsislence.,Their means ' I • ' of subsistence have not been restored, great miseries were endured, but there could not be any longer that popula tion continuing in the Western Isles without employ ment, by which they obtained subsistence. So you find in several towns in this country and on the conti nent, that various branches of manufacture have subsisted and flourished for a time, that they have en tirely deserted the places in which they were established, that great miseries have been endured for a while; but, afterwards, you find those people migrating to other dis tricts, where other or the same employment was found for them; and, finally, the calamities left no traces be hind them.—(Hear, hear.) So I believe with respect to this calamity affecting some of the southern and western districts of Ireland, that their livelihood having been entirely estimated on the culture of the potato, and that food having failed, unless that food comes back to them —unless they find there is the same mode of sub sistence they have hitherto had, you will find afterwards that other districts will have, not the burden of their subsistence, but the benefit of their employment.—(Hear.) hear.) I have now stated the reasans upon which I ground the proposition I have to make, I believe, that it you agree to that proposition, we shall then be entitled, after the consent of the house has been obtained, if we find it necessary, from accounts of the increasing desti tution, to ask some advance from tlis House before the rate be immediately collected, by which we could supply the more pressing wants of these people. At all events, I think it is the duty of the Government to lay the case before the House of Commons—(Hear, hear)—to ask the House of Commons whether they are ready to con sent to the means by which we propose to meet this case of misery and wretchedness—whether, if they do not take our means they will consider what other means ought to be adopted in preference —or whether, lastly, it be the deliberate will and sentence of this House that no attempt should be made to relieve the exigencies of the distressed districts, of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) As I understood an Hon. Gentleman who spoke last night, that last seemed to be the view he took of this question.—(Hear, hear.) For my part, I own that although you should limit your aid, and take care it should be spent as frugally and as economically as pos sible, yet, considering that the whole social state of Ireland is undergoing a great transition, and that you may save some of the miseries and many of the deaths, which are the consequence of that transition, by inter posing with relief of this kind, I confidently ask for your assent to the resolution which I have proposed. Mr. STAFFORD rose under great difficulty on that occasion, but he had experienced still greater difficulty on former occasions, when the policy he advocated eras less understood than it was at present. The predictions in which he had indulged in former years had been fully realised, and if written in the present instead of the past tense, might now be read as history. He was, there fore, prepared to advocate these views with the confi dence which past experience had given him. Feeling thoroughly satisfied that an inculcation of the great principle of self-dependance was the main requirement for the people of Ireland, he had opposed the grants of money to that country in various forms, - and among others the proposal of his lamented friend, Lord George Bentinck, for the encouragement of railway enterprise. This circumstance entitled him to claim the attention of the House while he showed that, in obedience to the dictates of his own conscience, he was obliged to vote against the motion for the Speaker leaving the chair, and he would again feel it to be his duty to give earnest opposition to the Bill of the Noble Lord in all its stages whenever divisions took place. He tben proceeded to detail the proceedings before the Se lect Committee of the House of Commons appointed to inquire into the operation of the Irish poor-law, and entered his protest against the course adopted by the Noble Lord, in compelling the Committee to decide on the rate in aid proposition which had been submitted to them without any previous inquiry or deliberation. Some gentlemen took up the cry that the property of Ireland should support the poverty of Ireland without understanding the meaning of the phrase ; he should endeavour to analyse that cry with great deference, but with great earnestness. Now he admitted that the pro perty of Ireland should support the poverty of Ireland, but, then, it was the entire rateable property, and not the landed property alone, that should be held respon • sible. The Noble Lord, in instancing several cases of local distress, said that unless this state of destitution t were stopped, the people would leave the country, and he land would fall out of cultivation; but the Noble Lord did not say how they we re to emigrate. He did not mention who was to provide the funds, nor did he state that any portion of the rate in aid was to be applied to that purpose. It should be stated dis tinctly by some Minister of the Crown what amount of money they expected this rate to realise, what amount of destitution they expected to be called on to relieve, and what amount of destitution they believed to exist in those localities. According to the return of the Poor.. law Commissioners, there were 21 unions in a state of bankruptcy, which would require 593,000/. to pay off their debts and to meet their expenditure ; 300,0001. was the maximum sum which the advocates of the rate in aid calculated that it would produce, and there would then remain a sum of 220,000/. to be provided for, even sup posing that no further destitution existed. This was an important and essential part of the question. The objection be took to the plan of the Government was, first of all, that it was unjust ; next, that it would be difficult of execution ; and, thirdly, that if it were not unjust or difficult of execution, still it would fail of its proposed object. It was most desirable that Ireland should not come any longer to that House as a beggar. He was one of those who thought that sufficient means could be raised in Ireland to support the poverty of the country, and this might be rendered prac ticable if all the property were assessed for the relief of the destitute. Let them not say that Ireland resisted an income-tax. Ireland had not had an opportunity of expressing herself upon that important question. As Ministers of the Crown, and guardians of the general interests of the kingdom, the Government should have given them an alternative. But when they had deter mined that a rate in aid should be extended over the whole of Ireland, it would have been fair to Ireland, and more consistent with the feelings of the House, if they had offered to the Irish people the alteraative of an equal taxation. It would have been better in dealing with this question if they had kept those two classes ot taxation distinct from one another. At the same time, also, that they withheld this altern a ti ve ,' t h ey did not follow the bold and statesmanlike course of bringing the subject forward as a Government measure, for the fair and deliberate consideration of the Irish representa tives. The observation of the Hon. Gentleman be low the gangway, who said of the loyalty of Ulster that it was a "sixpenny loyalty," had been regretted by many Hon. Gentlemen, and the more so because it was accompanied by an outburst of mirth which very ill suited the gravity of the question; for he need not re • mind the House that the question they were discussing was of the very highest importance, not only to Ireland, but to England. Having now spoken of the principle upon which they intended to raise the funds for the relief of the country, he approached the subject of their application; bat before he quite dismissed the preceding topic of discussion, he would express his opinion, that no income-tax would be refused, the proc ee d s o f which were to be applied to the relief of the poor population of the country.—(Hear.) It was now proposed to impose a general tax, to be raised by local machinery, and to be devoted for local purposes. Now, to that distinction be attached the greatest importance, for there could be no check to profuse expenditure,. and, even to use • a • 4;oninsott - ,tihrase, to itbbing, which the system would give rise to unless the strictest scrutiny was made as to the manner in which the money was expended. To en sure the proper expenditure of the money, it ought to be raised from the Imperial Treasury, for then every Member of that House would have an interest in looking after the mode in which it was expended, and in seeing that no misapplication was made of it. he did not, however, want one farthing to come from the Imperial Treasury for the relief of Ireland, unless the taxation in all parts of the kingdom was assimilated. The Noble Lord had said that the reducing the area of taxation would be the means of increasing the evils of Ireland ; but while he did not wish to argue whether a diminution in the area of taxation would be right or wrong, he did say, and experience convinced him of the truth of the assertion, that where the electoral divisions were ren dered coterminus with property, the Irish poor-law worked well ; while, where the electoral divisions had been enlarged, it had proved a complete failure. Com munication was now so rapid, and such publicity was given to everything by means of the , public press, that he would venture to say, that at this moment there was not a district of Ireland, nor a landlord of that country, but both as to the state of the one, and the character of the other, Lord Clarendon was in possession of the most ample details. That no doubt had its advantages, and it had its disadvantagei, but he would put it to the Secretary for Ireland, what it was that last autumn was most universally asked for by those who he know to be most deserving of consideration? Was it not that each of those men, from their respective localities, pressed upon the Government the necessity of reconsidering the system of the poor-law, and particularly of diminishing the area of taxatio n i n R e l ive d. They said, and said justly, that the Engli s h p oor -l a w, as applied to Ireland, was a mere chimera. As applied to Ireland, two great assistants which accompanied it in England had been withheld in Ireland. Had it not been for the smallness of the area of taxation in England, the poor-law would not have worked there, and how could it do so in Ireland, where that requisite was wanting? Then again in Eng land, the whole of the rate levied under the poor-law fell on the occupier, but in Ireland for the most part two-thirds, and in many cases all •the burden fell on the landlords. If, therefore, they _meant to call it the English poor-l ast t h at t h e y had given to Ire land, give them a l ong w i t h it the English area o taxation. In England, that was about two thou sand acres, and did t h e N o bl e Lord at the head of the Government, m a k e i t i n I re l an d in no case exceeding 3.000, nor under 1,000 acres; h © gave him to understand that such an arrangement would meet with the support of a large party in Ireland. The question of unions was, however, different from that of the electoral divisions, although the boundary Commissioners had in a great degree mixed up the two. Ile trusted that Government would instruct the Poor-law Commissioners in no case to separate unions, or erect new ones without the consent of the poor-law guardians. Every new union was of course attended with an additional staff of officers, and if the poor-law guardians chose to raise the money to defray the cost of them, let them do so; but he would advise Government to lend them no funds for thai. pur pose. If they did so, instead of a sixpenny rate in aid they would soon have a shilling one. In regard to the valuation on which that rate in aid was to be taken, he would advise Hon. Members to consider the evidence given that day before the Poor-law Committee by Mr. Griffin. He would not dilate upon it, as it would soon be in the hands of the Members; but be would say that nothing could m ore effectually s how the impolicy, and even impracticabilit y of that rate, than did the evidence of that gentleman. H e h a d there f ore sug gested t o th e Government some imp rovements w hi c h mig ht be made, such as the equalis at i on of taxation, and a diminut ion of the area of taxation, together wi th some other matters A , axeb tmei T 4A of detail; but he was not disposed to bring forward any general plan himself. He must, however, say, that if ever a Government had a plea to call for a plan on such a subject as the present, it was the present Government. He did not charge them as being actuated by a bad or good principle, but he charged them with being actuated by no principle at all. He did not believe that in re ference to this importaut subject of the Irish poor-law they had a single arrangement made or a single remedy concocted previous to the meeting of Parliament, for there was disagreement in the Cabinet on the subject, and therefore, no arrangement could be made, and no plan or remedy fixed upon; and while, therefore, it was not the duty of Hon. Members to suggest plans to the Government, if there ever was a case where a viola tion of that rule could be justified it was the present, for they had a Government wholly devoid of resources in itself; and totally unfit to meet and combat the diffi culties which surrounded it. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL said he was glad that the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down was not autho rised to speak for Ireland, as it would look somewhat strange, that after coming to Parliament for grants in aid for some time past, they should now come forward and find fault with the Government far not placing theca on an equality, so far as taxation was concerned, with other parts of the kingdom. The Hon. Member had in no respect met the argument of the Noble Lord, as to the impropriety of reducing the size of the electoral divisions. The Noble Lord had said, were such done, landlords would in a few years free themselves from the pay ment of rates altogether, by banishing the pier from their properties ; and there was no doubt but that such would be the result. On the whole, however, there was little of encouragement in the Noble Lord's apes ch. There was no hope given that those compre hensive measures which Government had in contempla- L tio o n rd w h o s a d ld gi b r e en ca a rr m ie o d st o m ut. eian O cb n o t i h y e pr c o o s n p t e r c a t ry o , f t t h h e e f N ut o u b re le , for he had said, that unless by some chance the potatoe should be restored, or the peasant obtain a substitute for it, in the shape of better food, or that the population of Ireland should be swept away by emigration, there was but a faint prospect of the country being restored to would again revive. The extermination system would led ßu to t the iet pr t h e s e e m n t s d t o a te a of w a t y h i n w g i s t h , and the l e r e a l h a s n e r a l p w r h o i s e p h e r h i a t y d . never restore it—it had been tried over and over again, and failed. As to the expedient proposed, he did not approve of it, but he did not wish to commit himself in decided opposition to it, until he heard from the other side of the House what proposition they had to make on the subject. As yet, he had not heard of any such proposition, and he could not help thinking that it came with a bad grace from the other side of the House to find fault with Government in regard to their Irish policy, for those on that side had always been the bitterest foes of that country. He did not think it was creditable to that House, that when one portion of the empire was in a state of starvation any difficulty should be thrown in the way of affording them necessary relief, even if the money should never be repaid. He thought that when England had exhausted the resources of Ireland she was called upon by every sense of justice to provide all that was required out of English resources, lie could not forget how unwillingly the paltry grant of 50,000/ had been conceded; and he thought it was not creditable to the House that such a course of conduct should have bean exhibited as they bad all witnessed with reference to the grant ihe had alluded to. The Honourable and Learned Member contended, that under the Act of of Union, Ireland was fairly entitled to an exemption from taxation to a larger amount than she at present enjoyed. The popular party had again and again said, give back that Parliament which was taken away from Ireland by the most foul, nefarious, and iniquitous means—give Ireland the management of her own affairs, and she would ask for no grants of money from England, and would no longer be appearing as a mendicant in that House. The experiment was by no means new of endeavouring to raise taxation in Ireland up to the level of the English; but the previous attempt had been a failure, and the experiment was therefore given up. He thought that rates in aid would destroy the poor. rate payer, but the condition of these people had not been' aken into account, and by breaking down the poor-rate payer they would be increasing the ranks of the paupers. He thought they would hear something about the income-tax from observations that had been made by some Hon. Members. Now, he altogether ob jected to the laying on of an income-tax in Ireland. He believed it would be most disastrous to the country should it be attempted, for they had no such thing as a middle class in Ireland, and the distress was so preva lent, that the laying on of an income-tax would com plete the ruin of the country. To increase the taxation of Ireland would be a violation of the Act of Union, and he was ready to prove it by chapter and verse. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel); when he was proposing the income-tax for England, in 1842, said that the fiscal ability of Ireland, as compared to Ireland, was as one to nine. If that was the case, her taxation should be in that proportion; but on the contrary, she was taxed in the proportion of one to four. It would bo absurd, therefore, to impose an income-tax, for it could not be made a source of revenue. He was ready to admit that the people of Ulster were deserving of great credit for their industry, and that im posing a rate in aid upon the population would be a great hardship; yet it must be admitted that the people of Ulster had enjoyed exclusive advantages—the tenant right for instance—and therefore such a rate would fall with far greater severity upon the poor farmer in Leinater. The lion. and Learned Member then referred to the state of the Irish Church Establishment, and expressed it as his opinion that Government, without in the slight est degree trenching upon vested rights, might obtain from that source not less than 200,0001. for the relief of the suffering poor. He next passed in review the evils of absenteeism, and said that a tax might be levied upon absentees, which would produce about 300,0004, and that sum, with the 200,000/. he had referred to, would make up the 500,0001. which were now required. Let them not, therefore, he would say, put Ireland under the operation of a new and ruinous tax. lie had studied the working of the poor-law in England, and ho was bound to say that in his opinion it was most unjust in principle, and did not work well. Poor laws would crush Ireland, and were crushing her, and they were now suffering for the hasty manner in which they had imposed poor-laws in Ireland. The Hon. and Learned Member then called the attention of the House to the address of the Catholic suffragan bishops at Tuam, in January last, in which the evils of the Irish poor law were pointed out, and the great and extensive distress that prevailed under their operation. He considered that the only measure tor the benefit of Ireland would be a good lanlord and tenant Bill, and he felt assured that the House would agree with him in that opinion if they would only refer to the province of Ulster, where that system obtains to a considerable de gree; but to poor-laws he was strongly opposed, as being vicious in principle and ruinous in effect; and such was the general policy of the British Ministers, for most of their measures were nothing more than patchwork. Lord BERNARD said that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. J. O'Connell) had asserted that there was no proposi tion offered by any Hon. Member on his (Lord Bernard's) side of the House, but such was not the case. A cele brated orator some 300 years ago, answered, when asked what was to be done, " Do anything, but do not support the present question." Such ho considered to be the principle of the Irish Members. He considered that if the arguments brought,forwird far an income-tax were just and equitable, let the 6overnment act on those ar guments, but let not such a measure as the rate in aid now proposed be allowed by the House, as such must certainly ruin that country, and he should add that one of the principal reasons fur not bringing on an income tax in Ireland was that most of the income of that coun try was subject to that tax in this country, where it was spent by landed proprietors residing in England. If the House would look to the condition of Ireland, they would find that there was at present the sum of 3,700,000/. chargeable on the rental of that country, amounting to only 13,000,000/. annually. He (Lord Bernard) would ask how could that rate in aid be collected?—(Hear.) Was it by valuation? No, for in every union. of Ireland there is a different ratio of valuation. He would refer to the Union of Middleton, in the county of Cork, which required the commissioners to allow the collection of the tax to be suspended until after the harvest, as the people of that union would be either driven from their houses to the union workhouse, or to a foreign country, for they were incapable and un able to pay the demand of the tax-gatherer. When the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) alluded to the number of grants given to Ireland, which he with gratitude ac knowledged, he (Lord J. Russell) should recollect that 1,000,000/. of that sum was given by the Right. Hone Baronet (Sir R. Peel), in compensation for the losses sustained by the corn-laws. On the whole, he believed, that this present measure would be the very instrument of arousing the indignation of the most loyal people of the country, the inhabitants of Ulster, and hoped that the Noble Lord would turn his attention to developing the resources of that country by railways, and other such remedial measures. He hoped, that as Ireland had shared with Englind her naval and military glory, so she would also be allowed to share her commercial glory, and enjoy happiness and tranquillity, unalloyed by sec tarian or party feuds. Mr. FAGAN said that the distinction he (Lord Ber nard) had drawn between the loyal men of Ulster, as he designated them, and the rest of Ireland, as a different class, would tend more to injury and opposition among those classes than any measure brought on by Govern ment, even the present, bad as it was. He would next refer to the Hon. Member for Limerick (Mr. J. O'Con nell). I ask him how would Ireland have survived for the last two years bat for her poor-law ? And he would apply the same argument to England against the lion. Gentleman, because to those poor -laws was to be attri buted the support of the weavers, and other operatives, whose trade was for some time suffering, who would have literally starved but for that Bernier resort of clemency and humanity —the poor-laws. lie concurred fully with the Hon. Member for Rochdale in this, that as they were bound politically with England, it was the duty of the people of England to aid the people of Ireland until the calamity which oppressed them should have passed away. England was, in fact, more interested in the prosperity of Ireland than Ireland was herself— manufacturing Manchester was more interested in the prosperity of work than Dublin was. Taking that view of the case, he would say further, that Ireland wasrather the creditor than the debtor of England. Ireland had been compelled to contribute towards the united exche quers of the two kingdoms more than her quota, be cause the national debt of Great Britain bad increased so rapidly between the time of the Union and that of the union of the two exchequers. When he saw so many . manifestations of the unwillingness of the English people to contribute any further sums to the maintenance of destitution in Ireland, it was impossible for him to turn his back on his perishing countrymen, and he would im press it upon the earnest consideration of the House that they should provide some ready means of alleviating it. Ho was in favour of this na tional rate in aid, but he thought that it was Wanting in some material details before it could be rendered a perfect measure. He objected to the income. : tax on account of its inquisitorial nature—but otherwise he should prefer it to the Government plan. To meet the difficulty he would recommend that the poorer holders might be exempted from the tax, and that it might be imposed exclusively on the richer ones. The Government would find it absolutely necessary, sooner or later, to render the operation of the Irish poor-law as perfect as possible, and the sooner they applied them selves to that task, whether in this way or in some other, the better it would be for the interests of the community at large. It was impossible to carry out the system of the Hon. Member for Northamptonshire, and his Hon. Friends who agreed in his opinions, without establish ing the settlement system, which would infallibly prove the destruction of the Irish poor-law. Though he was opposed to the area-of-taxation scheme, he very much approved of an alteration of the poor-law that would develop the industrial resources of the country. Some system of that kind must be devised, to afford the Irish landlords the encouragement which they stood in need of. For those reasons, and under the peculiar difficulties of the case, he would support the proposition for a na tional rate in aid. Mr. BANKES said that the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had placed the House in a situation of considerable embarrassment. The Irish representa tives said the whole scheme was an illusion, some of them saying that they could not pay it, others that they would not. In this perplexity they found themselves pledged by the Noble Lord to an advance of money, for the security of which they were to stand their chance, and which, if the Noble Lord had explained it to the House in the first instance, would certainly hav proved a considerable impediment in the way of his ob taining his Committee. The Noble Lord's invitation tacitly was to " make common cause with them, and they would put things right;" in fact, " pillage was the way to banish paup er i sm ." He understood that the advance of 10,000/. was to be applied to the emergency of this particular time when they were discussing the ques tion; if that sum were not large enough, why had they not asked for more? Above all, why bad they not called Parliament together at a much earlier period, when they had warning of the impending distress?— (Hear, hear.) Last year he thought it his duty to pro pose a measure of relief for Ireland. Had it been carried Ireland would now be bound in fiscal as well as in poll tical union with England. He knew the difficulty of the Noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown. The Noble Lord had carried a coercion Bill, and he had carried the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act; but it remained to him to carry a pue,lerty-tax Bill to Ireland before he fulfilled the measure of his destiny. He should oppose the proposition for a rate in aid for these rea sons, his opinion at present leaning in favour of a pro perty. tax; but he should reserve himself until he could ascertain whether the Opposition had not a better measure to propose than that of the Government. He felt that the people of England ought not to be called upon to come forward in this manner, unless upon better guarantees of security than were yet given to them, and without which he believed the scheme of her Majesty's Government would become altogether a failure.—(Hear.) Mr. MONSELL said that the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had, by means of very opposite rea sons to those which he (Mr. Monsell) would take the liberty of addressing to toe House, arrived at a conclu sion not altogether different from his. It was possible that, on the part of many Hon. Gentlemen who would address the House on this question, there would be strong objections expressed to the imposition of addi tional taxation on Ireland ; but there was not the least doubt, that with respect to a large portion of Ireland, money must be found to support the people.—(Hear, hear.) He believed that there was as little doubt that that House would not consent to any grant out of the Imperial resources for the relief of that country unless there was some additional contribution made to the Imperial Treasury by Irelana.—(Hear, hear.) He thought it better, therefore, in these circumstances, to moot the case fairly as it existed, without going into theoretical arguments, or making calculations as to how the balance stood between England and Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He trusted, however, that Hon. Gentlemen would pause before they consented to the proposition which had been submitted to them by the Government; for he thought he should be able to show that it was most unjust. In the first place he believed, from the papers which had been laid before the House, that the sum proposed by Government for the aid of the dis tressed anions would be found utterly insufficient. It was hopeless to think of relieving those unions by mere grants of money. In the evidence taken before the Committee, Mr. Power, as assistant Commissioner, distinctly stated that it was idle to imagine that the destitution of the western counties could be supported without extraneous resources. But it had been argued that Ireland was sot entitled to relief from the Imperial Treasury be cause she did not pay an income-tax, which was an admission that, if she had the tax, Down should no more pay the rate in aid than Middlesex. Who paid the income-tax in England ? Certainly not the small farmers. The whole of the argument resolved itself into this, that the Irish small farmer should pay a tax which was not levied off the small farmer in England. The next argument for the rate was the necessity of the case. It was, however, scarcely to be supposed that the House would sanction the principle " Rem, si possis, recto ; si non, quocumque modo rem." Much stress had been laid on this point of unequal taxation. If the as sessed taxes were imposed on Ireland, the cost of collec tion would be more than they were worth, and any rise in the spirit duties would be impolitic, as such a course had been invariably found to produce illicit distillation. Similar objections existed with respect to the soap duties. What source of revenue remained ? As an Irishman representing an Irish constituency, he wished at once to state that he would be content to accept an income-tax.—(Hear, hear.) If he consented to the tax, therefore, he should not be considered unjust if he demanded that the proceeds should be applied exclu sively to Irish purposes.—(Hear, hear.) The proposition would have the great advantage of enabling Govern ment to adopt some other means besides those which had been hitherto attended with such bad success. They could not say that they had been left without advice or without example of what might be done by energy in a right course. One of the Noble Lord's colleagues (Viscount Palmerston) had a property in a western county, which was worse off at the commencement of the famine even than Clifden ; but the Noble Lord bad applied all his energy and ability to raise the condition of the people by the natural and judicious course of enabling them to go to another country, where those poor creatures were now doing well, and whence they were sending home money to their friends.—(Hear, hear.) Another of the Noble Lord's colleagues (Lord Carlisle) had acted in a similar way with a like success. There was a portion of Crown property in Ireland which had not paid rent for eleven years, which was a nest of robbers and marauders, and the plague of the county; but the Noble Lord, by assisting the people to emigrate, had altogether renovated and restored it.—(Hear, hear.) If the Government had but listened to the advice of the Irish Members on this subject, they would not have been placed in their present position. Even yet he hoped the Noble Lord would pause before he forced that measure upon them. He little knew the feelings it would excite —the alienation and discontent it would create, and, ad dressing the Noble Lord in words with which he was not unfamiliar, he (Mr. Monsell) might say, Turno tempers, erit e magno cum optaverit emptum t 'lntactum Pitillantasr • When every union in Ireland was administered by vice-guardians, and when every bench was filled by sti pendiary magistrates, the Noble Lord would be sorry he had not listened to the recommendations of those who asked him to withdraw a proposition which hal received so little favour in the country to which it was to be ap plied.—(Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the question which was put by some Hon. Gentleman on the proposed plan was, how was this money to be raised in Ireland? That the necessity for aid was great the Hon. Gentleman admitted. It was but a sixpenny rate, he would answer, taken upon the poor-law valuation of the land, and without it, he believed starvation in the suffer ing districts must be the consequence.---(Hear, hear.) Some Hon. Gentlemen who were opposed to the propo sition now before the House, seemed to forget that the food of the people in the suffering districts had almost totally failed. One thing was certain, that if relief was not given, the consequences would be most deplorable. The Hon. Member for Dorchester (Mr. Bankes) had complained that Government had not at the meeting of Parliament made some statement to the House of the necessities of the people of Ireland; but the House would recollect that ho (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had, within four days after the meeting of Parliament, made a statement to the House on the subject For the last three or four months a na tional rate was suggested as the best that could be pro posed, and Hon. Gentlemen advocated a national rate in aid of emigration. Now, if that was so, how could they rationally object to the proposed rate in aid ? With respect to the encouragement of emigration, he could as • sure the House that it formed a part of the plan of her Majesty's Government; and on this subject he would say that that sort of emigration, which was carried on with foreign assistance, was the most healthy system of emigration, and from no country did it meet with more encouragement than from Ireland. He hold in hand a statement of the number of emigrants who had pro ceeded from the United Kingdom in the months of January for the last three years, which would show the House how emigration was going on, namely, in January, 1847, 4,700 ; in January, 1848, 4,560 ; and in January of the present year, 10,140. This emigration, let him say, took place with foreign assistance, those who went before assisting those who remained to fello a them to America, or elsewhere, when they were prepared to receive and further assist them on their arrival.—(Hear.) He might state that in aid of this description of emigration a sum of 46,0001. had been received in the course of last year, from those who had previously emigrated, and that being so, it was but little necessary to give any great stimulus to emigration from Ireland. He would repeat that, connected though he was with the Government, he for one would not pro pose a national rate it he believed it would be of a perma nent nature. The whole machinery for the collection was in operation, and it was but a 6d. rate. It would, ho assured the House, be collected without the appoint ment of one additional person, or without adding one farthing's expense to the present system of collection. Mr. OSBORNE moved that the Chairman report pro gress, and ask leave to sit again. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he should net object to the motion of the Hon. Member. The debate would, therefore, stand adjourned till Monday. He hoped on that day to he able to make such an arrangement as would enable the House to proceed with the second read ing of the navigation-laws on Tuesday. The CHAIRMAN then reported progp,ss, mai ob tained leave to sit again on Monday next. The Out-door Paupers Bill was read a third time and passed. The second reading of the Qualification and Registra tion of Voters (Ireland) Bill, and the Election and Poll- ing Plac(l_,(lrean3 the 16th in. t. - Bill_ was pos_t_poned until Friday, PETTY SESSIONS BILL. e t" The House then went iutu Committee on the Petty Session 3 Bill. Sir J. DUCKWORTH took occasion to allude to a clause of which the Hon. and Gallant Member for Brighton had given notice, the object of which was to prevent petty sessions being held at public-houses. He hoped the Hon. and Gallant Member would not perse vere in his motion, as it might be desirable, under parti cular circumstances, to hold a petty session in a public• house. At the same time he thought the county rate ought nut to be made chargeable for holding these petty sessions in public houses. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that by the Bill he left it entirely in the discretion of the magistrates to hold the petty sessions where they pleased. Mr. HENLEY thought the Bill was better as it was, and hoped the proposed clause would not be added to it. The quarter sessions would take care to prevent petty sessiuni being held in public-houses. Captain PECHELL said he was glad he had been enabled to elicit the feeling of the House against the practice of holding petty sessions at public-houses. Out of thirty-two petty sessions, twenty-three had been held in public-houses. He concluded that this ought not to be the case, and that a remedy ought to be applied. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL declined to engraft the lion. and Gallant Member's clause on the Bill. After a few words from Mr. PACKE, Capt. PECHELL then brought up the clause of which he had given nwice, which was as follows :—And be it en cted, that after the passing of this Act, it shall not be lawful for any justices of the peace in England to hold any petty or special sessions of the peace in any house licensed for the sale of exciseable liquors, or, after a session-house shall have been provided under the powers hereinbefore contained, elsewhere than in such session house, except in cases of urgent necessity, the cause of which shall be noted in the minutes of proceedings. In Ire'and it was illegal to hold a petty sessions in a public house, and why should it not be prevented in this country ? Sir ROBERT PRICE hoped the clause would be withdrawn. The matter might safely be left in the hands ot the magistracy. Sir William Jolliffe, the Attorney-General, Mr. Deedes, Mr. Hodges, and Mr. Packe, also urged the Hon. and Gallant Member not to press the clause. Captain PECHELL said, that under the circumstances he would not persevere, and consented to withdraw his clause. It was withdrawn accordingly, and the Bill passed threui.,h Committee. The Distruining for Rates Bill also passed through 'EY Committee. The House then adjourned at a Quarter to One o'clock Flu LAW IN TELLIG'ENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, March 2. - • IN RE YALDON. The LORD CHANCELLOR having granted the prayer of a petition in case this for the issuing of a commission of lunacy, Mr. J. PARKER made an application that permission should be given to a gentleman to attend the examination under the commission. The Learned Counsel said that the party in question was not a relative, but he had an - interest in a will which had been made by Mr. Yaldon, and he was desirous, therefore, of the fact being esta blished that Mr. Yaldon was of unsound mind at the time of making the will. His LORDSIrIP said such an application could not be granted, as no party could have an interest in a will till after the death of the testator. IN RE DYCE 111011BRE. The further hearing of the argument in this came was the❑ proceeded with. Mr. Shadwell haring followed on the same side with Mr. Rolt and Mr. R. Palmer, Mr. BETHEL proceeded to argue against the prayer of the petition for superseding the commission ; and not having concluded at the rising of the Court, the further hearing was adjourned till to- nacrrow (this day). CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT: POSTPONEMENT OP THE TRIAL Or MR. DEOLJET.--• Mr. BALLANTINE applied to the Court to postpone the trial of Birtholmew Peter Drouet to the next session. He c.id that the defendant was charged upon the Coroner's inquisition with the offence of manslaughter, and he believed that the Grand Jury had also returned true bills against him for the same offence. He held in his hand the affidavit of a professional gentleman, a member of the College of Surgeons, which stated that Mr. Drouet was suffering from inflammation of the heart and lungs, and although be was partially recovering, he was still in a most precarious state of health, and quite unfit to take his trial. Upon this ground he applied for the postponement. Mr. CLARICsoN said he appeared for the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn, to prosecute in one case only. There was no desire to put the defendant to any un necessary inconvenience, and the only object of the prosecutors was that the case should be properly investigated, and to secure the attendance of the defendant for that purpose. An application had been made, he believed, to the Court of Queen's Bench, to remove the record to that Court, and the ap plication would probably be decided upon next Monday. The defendant, in the meanti me , h e b e li eve d, was only under a recognizance to the amount of 2001., and the only question was whether the Court would consider that the amount of recognizance ought not to be in creased The CHIEF BARON said he supposed there was no doubt that the condition of the defendant was truly re presented. Mr. CLARKSON said there was not the least doubt that Mr. Drouet was in such a state as to render him quite unfit to take his trial, either there or in any other Court, at this time. The CHIEF BARON said that this being the case, the only thing to be done was to grant the application, and he did not think he ought to make any alterat,c)a in the amount of the recognizances. Mr. CLARKSON said he was perfectly satisfied with the decision of his Lordship. His clients were only anxioUS that it should not be thought elsewhere that they had neglected their duty. The CHIEF BARON said there was no suggestion of that kind. It was quite clear that under the circum stances the trial mint be postponed. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. BRISTOL, Ilascit. E. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The stock market remains in a dull and in active state, as is generally the case during the periods of holding the half-yearly meetings.—Bristol and Exeter Original Shares were done at 25 dis.— ureat Western, Quarters, at I dis.—Dltto, Nov 171. Shares, 11,', dis. LIVERPOOL, lifiatctt 2. Srocx EXCIIANGIK.—The transactions to-day were very limited. and themarket has been dull, closing rather heaylly.—The sales are — Aberdeen, Preference, 6 per cent. in perpet., Bs. 9d. p.—Caledonian. Preference, 7 per cent., 1134 ex in.— East Anglian ' 334 Shares, guaranteed 6 per cent., 234--Lancashire and Yorkshire (late IL and B.), Fifths, 1234 dis.—London and North-Western, 13834 ex dlr. —Dltto,Quarters, New, 6 p. ex in. —Manchester, Sheffield and Lin coln, Quarters, (No. 1), 734 per cont. 1853, 7 dis.—Ditto, 101. Prefer ence, 10%—Midland Stock, 8434 ex div.—Ditto, New Halves, 6 North Union (B), 151—Reading, Guildford, and Reigate, 14 p. Sottish Central, 2534—York, Newcastle, and Berwick (Extension , Kos. 1 and 2), % ex div.--Ditto (G. N. E. Purchase), 6 per cent, guaranteed, 34 p.—Orleans; Tours, and Bordeaux, 3 dis.—Rouen 1334. MANCHESTER, Marten 2. STOCK Exctunoz.—The sales are—North Staffordshire, 2 Shrews ury and Birmingham, Preference, 974 —Griinsby Decks, 1434 dis.—Sheftield, Eigths, 534—Caledonian, Preference, 1% Leeds, Fifths, 2% dis.—Shetneld and Lincoln, 14 n. dis.—Leeds, Preference, 1 7%)—..Shropshire Union, 2 die.— Clitheroe (N o. 1), ;4 dis. BIRMINGHAM, 141 . aacn 2. STOCK EXCITANGS.—The sales are—Bin/atlllharn, Wolverhampton, and ntour Valley, I OA, —North litarford;hiro, 2N dis.—Shrewsbury and Birmingham (A), it6s. 3d. die.—Ditto, (B), 34 dis.—London and North-Western, Fifths, 74 p. ax dir.—Chestpr and Holyhead, 22. • YORK, mAzati I. • • STOCK Exctrallon..:--The basine-s transacted. to-day was as fol lows :—Great _Northern, 11 1 4— York, Ne.vcaatle, and Berwick (Newcastle Extension), 49j ex div.—Ditfo (G. N. E. Purchase), 11. is. 3d. GLASGOW, Maacit 1. STOCK Excriasroc— The following are to-day's transactions : Aberdeen, Preference, 52k. 9d.—Dundee and Arbroath, Now, (No. 3). 603.—Edinhurgh and Glasgow, 87%—Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr. 56—Ditto, Halves, No. 1. 7U, —blasgow Gene/ al Terminus, 12. Glasgow Harbour Mineral, 20—Great Northern, 11 !,i—North British, 16%. _ We are glad to find that that intelligent and able officer, Mr. F. M. Faulkener, who so efficiently dis charged the duties of Vice-Consul of France at Folkes tone, has been appointed to a similar responsible office as a representative of the United States at the same port, in which position we are persuaded that his many va luable qualities will secure to him a continuance of the public confidence and respect which he has hitherto NO well merited and enjoyed. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—An Abscess in the Breast! Cured by Holloway's Ointment and Pills. - About three years. since Mrs. O'Flaherty of Mill-street, Cork, accidentally bruised her breast, for months afterwards the pain increased and the part became fearfully swollen ; various applications.. were tried without giving the least relief. Ultimately an ab scess formed, discharging a great quantity of humour, whic► . debilitated her constitution to an alarming extent • at Ole stage a lady strongly recommend e d h er to try dolloway's Ointment and Pills, having witnessed their good effects on former occasions, which advice she followed, and these Ins medicines answered most satisfactorily, for the wound was soon healed, and her health is now completely renovated.— Sold by all Druggists and at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 244, Strand, London. DREADFUL OCCURRENCE AT PORTsp[OUTII._Cor• poral Leonard, of the 91st Foot, WAS killed by throwing himself out of the third floor window of Cambridge Bar racks in Portsmouth Garrison, about two o'clock yes terday morning. It is believed the dreadful act was committed whilst the deceased was in a state of som nambulism. An inquest was held last night by Mr. William John Cooper, the coroner of the borough, when a verdict in accordance with the above supposition was returned. i•—• 7 • fiRTH3. I On the 23d ult., at Brighton, the lady of R. H. Russell, ' Esq., Bengal Civil Service, of a son. On the 26th ult., a t Trebinshun, Brecon, South Wales, the r . tt wife of Captain G. Yonge, of a son. On the 28th ult., at Berners-street, the wife of J. B. Carlill, Esq., of a daughter. MARRIED. On the Ist inst., at Trinity Church, Marylebone, Lieut.- A ) Colonel 'Windham, Coldstream Guards, eon of the late T . Admiral 'Windham of Felbrigg, Norfolk, to Marianne Cathe- - "' rine Emily. youngest daughter of the late Admiral Sir John , Berestord, Bart. DIED. -- On the 25th ult., in Basinghall-street,Frances, relict of the late Mr. IL Hoffman, of the Strand, aged 79. On the 26th ult., at Torquay, William Clark, Esq., late of her Majesty's k6th itegiment. On the 28th ult., at Sidbury, Devonshire, Robert Hunt, Esq.. aged 85. ___ London: Printed and Published by kIURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of Middlesex, Saturday, March 8, 1848. r az or AGR n 01: than Th e r are ft, th e c Ur bt seen. PA LET With sui th e na only ti forspert 3 ,Ilya 'el Prim lortitnel A tkled r 144.841;,i; P r ' 1 17ec to/ 1 ,, LYeni break tioff n4 Prida by In( liforni tr•p e . direct Op e Satan. -• Ad T F L O 6lO e , Wool le are all , itUat e tirul lutrodu twe e , :ee 4ore s . Bey 4„,, 11 " Nam, 'Lati n 11; 11 , Ti - ~ Atltur l'tgt