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

age. Now, according to the usual allowance of the Sa nitary Commissioners of two gallons for each person, that would make 24,000,000 gallons as requisite for the 'supply of those persons.—(Hear, hear.) But what would the House think when he told them that instead of 24,000,000 Slais company supplied 60,060,000 of gallons per day—(Hear, hear, and cheers)— . -that was not only twice but nearly three times as much as was required by the Sanitary Commis sioners. There were three companies which had Particularly excited the attention of the public, all of which drew their supplies from the Thames. The first drew its water from above Kew -bridge, the second from Hammersmith, and the third from a place lower down the river. Mr. /HUM* said what was the House asked to do? It was asked to reject an offer that was made to supply an abundant quantity of water to the metropolis— (Hear)—for which they were not asked to lay out a shilling. The promoters said they would undertake to supply with water . every house rated at 501 . a year at 30s. per annum . If tkp Bill went before a Committee, those matters would be inquired into ; and he thought that in quiry should take place under the circumst ances . Af te r the 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 fore vote for the second reading. Lord DLDLEY 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 the metropolis having a larger, and better, and cheaper supply of water. They said no, they would not examine the Bill ; they would not hemr 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 Against it ... 137 Majority ... -80 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 PALMEitSTON intimated that he would answer the Hon. Member's que,tion on Monday next. SQUADRON ON THE COAST OF AFRICA. Mi. HUME wialied 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 Govarnment were not quite prepared, at present, to lay the results of the arrangement before the House. PETER'S SAVINGS BANK IN DUBLIN. Mr. REYNUDS 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 had been lot 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. SNIITH, Sir J. PAKINGTON said he would postpone the ap. .poiutment of the Committee on this Bill till Monday. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. On the motion of Mr. PARKER, it was resolved that the nouse 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, twat a portion of the Russian army hid invaded the Austrian territory in Transylvania. He wished to know whether Government had received any intimation of such an in• vasion Viscount 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 She . results they apprehended from the presence of th Hungaria:.s. In consequence of that application two bodies of Russian troops crossed the frontier—one to Heamanstadt, the other to Cronstadt—and occupied thes-a two town s . During the time thy occupied those towns an engagcre nt took place between the Hun garians and. Austrians, but the Russian troops, he be keyed, tor.k no tart in the hostilities. EX PLAN AT lON.—MR. NAPIER. Lord J. RUGS LL said, that understanding the Hon. Member for. the University of Dublin wished to make some statement with rospeet to what he said last night, he hoped he would now do so before proceeding with the order of the. day. Mr. NAPIER Attiel that in ti:e course of the debate of last nigh; the. Noble Lott] 1 -ad adoaed to his observations as being uncaudid. lie had urviersw the Noble Lord to say that he had o;. , jec'ed to the measr,- of ;he Noble Lord -because it was preniature, and un , .ecomparifed with ieation 'of the poor-la'r. The Noble Lord then said that h.e (dr. Napier), b , ing a member of the Committee,. must have been aware that there were other measures cw.teniplated, 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 otter measures—those other portions of the plan —had been postponed till the inquiry was completed, and wore to abide the issue of that inquiry. These other port:Sims, therefore, if not connected with the pro posal, could have no bearing on the question; but if con nected, and if premature, then a fortiori, the proposal itself was premature.—(Hear, hear.) Ho 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. SOME! IRO, ORDER'S 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 Hog. Gentlemen who had amendments would therefore post pone 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 lion it now did. Colonel SIBTLIORY thought that before asking for the mon6y some general financial statement ought to have been made by the Government. If he could con sistently support the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose he should certainly cio so. SUPPLY. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply. Sir F. T. BARING proposed that a sum not exceed ing 200,0001. 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 for mo ne y ex • pended without the sanction of Parliament, he could not allow it to pass without observing that no Hon. Member, by agreeing to it, was to be considered as having com promised himself.—(Hear, hear.) The vote was then agreed to.—Report to be received en Monday. The House then resumed. POOR -LAW (IRELAND). On the question of going into Committee on the Poor law (Ireland), petitions were presented Nom the grand j ury e( Meath, from Limerick, and from various boards o f guardians, strongly deprecating, the proposed rate Inadld• The Hove went into Committee. Resolutions having been read by Mr. BERNAL, Lord J. RIJSSELL said—l rise now for the purpose of explaining to the Committee the course which her Majesty's Government wish to pursue with respect to this most difficult question, the poor law in Ireland. Earlier this session I proposed to appoint a Committee, stating dt 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 order to aid by their knowledge, by their ex perience, and by their acquaintance with the feelings and - opinions of the people of Ireland, as well as of this country, 'Ai the discussion of so arduous a matter. I brought befor e that Committee, at its first meeting, several propositions. I stated as I shall state, what I conceive to be the general working of the poor-law in Ireland. It appears to me that so far m.B this House was desirous in 1847 of placing on the pry party of Ireland 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 r(gards the relief of destitution by rates collected in Ireland for the relief of the poor, that object has, in a great 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 House. Gene rally speaking, I think it is to be admitted that in many parts of Ireland the poor-law imposes a very considerable burden, inereastng in the course of a very short time, and accompanied, as the imposition of that burden is, by cir cumstances of no ordinary nature. The occupiers of inlreland, land Ireland, instead of considering the burden of givin g e pauperism a reason for e mp t loyment, have, on the x co ntrary, taken alarm at the ex t e nt of the burden to which they might be subjected an d , have ti3ia rather dimi nished than increased th e number of ourersin their . employ. Al thou g h it is contrar y to the general more especi a ll y the poor-la w En land, witch - pies of the poor law, contemplates_at the ee destitutereliet of distress poor shall 21t wherever it may exist, either ba relieved in tlair 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 this coun try, may be able to bear—it appears to the Government notwithstanding the divergence from such principles, that it would be expedient for Irish purposes that there should be a maximum rate beyond which the poor -rate should not go. In proposing a maximusa rate it was necessary to consider whether it should be an union rate or an electoral division rate, and also whether any extraneous aid should be given to raise it. I proposed to the Committee that there 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 general 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 resolatioas 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 to 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 discussions 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 Wall 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 eh rk of the Limerick Union mention, amongst several rentals of large amount, ono of only 301. per annum. How would it be possible to say " We protect estates worth 2,000/. or 3,000/, 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 30/. 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 tlat 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 ineumbrances (Hear, hear.) The consequence would be, that people would he driven in large numbers Irons the agricultural .istriets (as we have seen in the course of the last thirty ears) into the suburbs of large towns, there to live as mendicants for a short time, until they perish by disease and want.—(El hear.) Again, if you should determine that each property should be subject only to its ow n rate for the stipport of its own po you would find that you h.td established a much more stringent law of :eAt,enent thau exists in this country.—(Hear, hear.) You would find that, although labourers might fied employment from the owners and 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 indeFendsnt 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 subdivision 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 a 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 suggestion 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 unnecessary 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 as 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 ansount, 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 be would continue to receive his rental without deduction, it is but reasonable that they should, as far as practicable, b e su bj ec t e d to d e d uct i ons on alaencdo.untThiosf appliestlae poor-rateto settlements arte n the riorto ma u made the introduction of the poor-law, for all settle ments entered into since that time must be taken to have been arranged with due regard to the must, ne somes h p e e r c t matteru st therefore , , proceeding. upon wha el n uh o d t el b t be o thinkpl a r n o d s prospecti ve. which evehes has naa There state . of things. The relief t o b e a ff or d ed to the lan do wners a i t s d h o i a s p n t o r e t been unoccupied, and on which considerable arrears of rate have accumulated. I think that in order to induce tenants to occupy such land and to bring it into cultiva- tion, the arrears should for once be remitted. I would not wish to mske:this a general rule; but I think that for once it may be done. I now come to that which more peculiarly 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 un ions, 131, there are, per haps, 20 which require to be con sidered 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 1,800/. 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." 1 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. I t i s i mposs ibl e to l oo k upon t h ese districts as existing in the state in which they were in 1836 and 1837, w h en t h e P oor -l aw C omm i ss i oners o f 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 THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY people has been 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 ertions 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, 100,0001.; grants and loans for the improvement of the Shannon, 123,0004; ordinary Board of Works loan fund, 180,0004; grants and loans for the erection of piers and harbours, 100,0001.; advances for railways, 620,0001. So that no less a sum than 2,193,0004 had been advanced in those three years for what are called works of a repro ductive nature; and be it remembered, that though 500,0001. had been advanced under the Land Improvement Act, there still remains 1,000,000 L which has been applied for, and which will be drawn for from time to time, 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 have 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 L 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 been done, that already very large grants had been made, and that it 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 ls. 2d., Is. 10id., and Is. rid. In two unions in Armagh it has been ls. 4d., 3s. 4d., and 2s. 10d. In Down the average has been about Is. 3d. or Is. 4d; in Fermanagh, 2s. qd., 3s. lid., and 2s. Bd.; in Londonderry, is. 3d., ls. 4d., Is. 9d., and Is. 6d. 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., 7id., Is. 6icl. In Meath, ls. 2id., 25., 2s. lid., 4s. lid, and ls. 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.) Oa 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 contribtred to the same degree in proportion to her wealth to all the taxes to which the people of Great Britain are subjec r.—(Loud cries of "Hear, bear.") But it was put forward, and with great emphasis, by tlie Hon. Gentleman the Member for Northamptonshire, :Olen 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 11,000,0001. I have here a statement which makes it even more. It appears that are pay in Great Britain, for income-tax, 5,300,0001. ; for land-tax, 1,150,0004 ; for assessed taxes, 3,400,0001.; making, in direct taxation alone, 9,850,0004 ; and for duty on bricks, hops, post-horses, and soap, 2,300,0001; making, altogether, 12,150,0001. 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 anything 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 1,000,0001. of taxation—if instead of 6d., something like is. 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 thelpresent 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 r 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 sum from his landlord when he afterwards paid his rent. You would have to collect 7d. in the pound from all persons who were tenants of those who had more than 150/. a year—(Hear, hear)—and those persons 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 income-tax, we should find, in another shape, objections to charging Ireland for the relief 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, hear.) I can well understand if it were a question of right, like that which Hampden resisted, that 6d. or 3d. or ls. might be as objectionable to them as if it were the largest sum, and that they would be ready to stake their ex istenee 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 a u t s I o situ ati on am l toldnobody 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, not being a matter of right, I most 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 hung e r.—(Hear, hear.) I believe their loyalty is founded on atta c hment to the throne, to the institutions of this country ; on the sym pathy with th e re li g i on o f t hi s coun t r y, an d t h e memor y of the m an y d angers an d o f t h e many v i ctor i es i n w hi c h they have b een assoc i ate d. I cannot t hi n k t h at a feel ing of this nat ure can b e i mpa i re d b ecause a rate o f t hi s kind is imposed, an d b ecause t h ey are as k e d to b ear some part of the bu r d en w hi c h f or years toget h er G reat o riiatera that:na hutaid thispeaor Britain has b orne w i t h out complaint.—(Hear, hear.) B n.will) t he L country. measure beietus n ethe vohmleieoseohofka consequence v lreland, w likely 2 oh to lead iosandthe n sofntto ac tual that iwas a. r n( of e that i permanent c h arge g pr,perpetual is either in or likely to be in a state of very great distress. There is no reason that I know why the distress should bo one of continuance for many years more. My ex pectation 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 went 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 manner, or else you wi ll find that the people, seeing that they have no prospect of the restoration of that food up on which the y deptnded, will emigrate to ot her districts, to other t parts of Ireland, to Scotland , to England — ( A lau g h)—to North American and Australian colon ies, and to the United States of America. That is what you find they have done to a great degree in the last th ree seasons. It is not without example that great calam i t ies have be fallen a people in consequence of the failure of either their occupation or their means of liveliho o d . Man y ears ago a great population was maintained in some of the Western Isles of Scotland by the manufacture of kelp. That manufacture was displaced by the discovery of certain chemical preparations, and that population could, in consequence, find no subsistence. Their means EVENING, MARCH 3, 1849. of subsistence have not been restored, great miseries were endured, but there could not be any longer that popnle 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 reasons 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 tf.is 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 ray 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 was leas understood than it was at present. The predictions in which he had indulged in former years bad been fully realised, and if written in the present instead of the past tense, might now be read as history. Ho 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 then 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 endesvour to analyse that cry with great deference, but with great earnestness. NOSY 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 Bible. The Noble Lord, in instancing several cases of local distress, said that unless this state of destitution were stopped, the people would leave the country, and the land would fall out of cultivation; but the Noble Lord did not say how they were 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 uniAis in a state of bankruptcy. which would require 593 0001. to pay off their debts and to meet their expenditure ; 300,0001. was the maximum sum which the advocates of the rato in aid calculated that it would produce, and there would then remain a sum of 290,0001. to be provided for, even sup posing that no further destitution existed. This was an important and essential part of the question. The objection he 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 auy longer to that House as a beggar. Ho 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 lay 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 %hole of Ireland, it would hare been fair to Ireland, and more consistent with the feelings of the House, if they had offered to the Irish people the alternative of an equal taxation. It would have been better in dealing with this question if they had kept those two classes of taxation distinct from one another. At the same time, also, that they withheld this alternative, they 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; but before he quite dismissed the preceding topic of discussion, he would express his opinion, that no income-tax would be refused, the proceeds of 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 he attached the greatest importance, for there could be no check to profuse expenditure, and, even to use a common phrase, to jobbing, 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 cf 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. Ile 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 coterrninus 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 sach 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 disadvantages, 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 knew 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 taxation in Ireland. They said, and said justly, that the English poor-law, 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 tho smallness of the area of taxation in E ng land, 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-law that they had given to Ire land, give them along with it the English area o taxation. In England, that was about two thou sand acres, and did the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, make it in Ireland in no case exceeding 3,000, nor under 1,000 acres; he gave him to understand that such an arrang ement would meet with the support of a large p ar ty in Ireland. Th e 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. He 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, lot them do so; but he would a'lvise If they slid Governmenttt to lend them no funds for that. pur pose. 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. fie would not dilate upon it, as it would soon be in the hands of the Members; but he would say that nothing could more effecturilly show the impolicy, and even impracticability of that rate, then did the evidence of that gentleman. He had therefore suggested to the Government some improvements which might be made, such as the equalisation of taxation, and a diminution of the area of taxation, together with some other matters of detail; but he was not disposed to bring forward any general plan bim.elf. He nansf however, say, thet is ever u ti,ver.inient had a plea to for a plan on such a subject as the present, it :vas the present Government. He d:d not chard them as being equated by a bad or good principle, but he charged them eiiih being actuated by no principle at ail. lie did nut beli.ve that in re ference to this important subject of the Irish poor-law they had a single arrangement made or a single remedy concocted previous to the meeting of Parliament, fur 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 pluns to the Government, if there ever was e case where a viola tion of that rule could be justified it was the p:eient, for they had a Government wholly d ivoid of res,urces in itself, and totally unfit to meet and combat the diffi culties which surrounded it. Mr. JOEIN 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 for 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 poor 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 speech. There was no hope given that those compre hensive measures which Government had in contempla tion would be carried out. On the contrary, the Noble Lord had given a most melancholy prospect of the future, 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 prosperity. But let them do away with the causes which bad led to the present state of thiugs, and Ireland would again revive. The extermination system would 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 carne with a bad grace from the other side of the House to find fault with Government in regard to their Irish pulley, 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. He could not forget how unwillingly the paltry grant of 50,000/. had been coaceded; and he thought it was not creditable to the House that such a course of conduct should have been exhibited as they bad all witnessed with reference to the grant he 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 afhirs, 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 iu Ireland up to the level of the English; but the pre v i ous a tt em pt had been a failure, an d 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 taken into aecounr, arid by breaking down the poor-rate payer they would bo inm easirig the ranks of the paupers. He thought they woule hear something about the income-tax from observations that had been wade by some Hon. Members. Now, lie 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 wes 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 lor 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 be absurd, therefore, to impose an income-tax, for it could not be made a source of revenue. lie 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 tsnant right for instance—and therefore such a rate would fall with far greeter severity upon the poor farmer in Leinster. 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 300,0001., and that sum, with the 200,0001. he had referred to, would make up the 500,000/. which were now required. Let them not, therefore, he would say, put Ireland under the operation of a new and ruinous tax. Ile had studied the working of the poor-law in England, and he 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 manlier 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 'or 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 he considered to be the principle of the Irish Members. He considered that if the arguments brought forward for an income- tex were just and equitable, let the Government act un 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, arid he should add that one of the principal reasons fur net bringing on an income tax in Ireland was that most of the inconee of that coun try was subject to that tax in this country, where it was spent by landed proprietors residing in England. ll' 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. lie (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 world be either driven from their houses to the uninn workhouse, or to a foreign country, for they were incapable arid 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 1,000,0001. of that sum was given by the Right. Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), in compensation for the losses sustained by the corn-laws. Oa 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 tho 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 England 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 Bor nerd) 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 an d oppos i t i on 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 but for her poor-law ? And he would apply the same argument to England against the Hon. 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 dernier resort of clemency and humanity—the poor-laws. He 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 Cork thin Dublin was. Taking that view of the case, he would say further, that Ireland was rather 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 natioeul debt of Great Britain had increased so rapidly between the time of the Union fled that of the union of the two exchequers. When he saw so many manifestations of the env% iffirigness of the English people to contribute any further sums to the maintenance of destitution in Ireland, it was impossible for him :o turn his back on his perishing countrymen, and he would im press it upon the earnest consideration of the Heels° 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 till( on account of its inquisitoria'_ neture—but otherwise he should prefer it to the Govtrn►nent 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 t;sk, 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 , ystem, 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 have proved a considerable impediment in the way of his ob taining his Committee. The Noble Lord's invitatien tacitly was to " make common cause with them, and they would put things right;" in fact, " pillage was the way to banish pauperism." He understood that the advance of 60,0004 was to be applied to the emergency or this particular time when they were discussing the ques• lion; if that sum were not large enough, why had they not asked fur more? Above all, why had 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 troll 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 pit:teeny-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 be 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 the 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 Irolance—(Hear, hear.) He thought it better, therefore, in these circumstances, to meet the case faitly as it existed, without going into theoretical arguments, or making calculations as to how the baleece stood between England and Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He trusted, however, that Hon. Gentlemen would pause before they consented to the proposition which hid been submitted to them by the Gov« mimeo! ; for ho thought he 6i,ould be able to show that it was most unjust. In the first place ho believed, irorn the papers which had been laid before the House, that the sum proposed by Government for the aid of the dis tressed unions 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 not 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 poseis, rect4 ; si non, quocumque modo rem." Much stress hed been laid on this point of unequal taxation. If the as sessed taxes were imposed on Ireland, the cost of coll,c don 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 had 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 these poor creatures were now doing well, and whence they were tending home money to their friends.—(Hear, hear.) Another of the Noble Lord's colleagues (Lord Carlisle) had acted in a si - nilar 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 tempos erit, magno cum optaverit *rapt= Intactum Pallanta." 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 whe asked him to withdraw a proposition which had 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 he (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 held 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 follow 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 bet little necessary t o g i ve an y grea t st i mu l us t o emigration from Ireland. He would repeat that, connected though he was with the Government, he for one would not pro poee a national rate if 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, he 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 revert pro gress, anda,k leave to sit again. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he should not object to the motion of the Hon. Membur. The debate would, therefore, stand adjourned till M on d ay. H e hoped on that day to be 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 pros as, tni oh tsined leave to tit again on Monday next. The Out-door Pauperi Bill was read a third time and ra:sed. The second reading of the Qualification and Registra tion of Voters (Ireland) Bill, and the Election and Poll- ing Plaer s (Treland) Bill, was postponed until Friday', Li(. IGO) i_t:t. PETTY SESSIONS BILL. The House then went into Committee on the Petty Sessions Bill. Sir J. DUCKWORTH took occasion to allude to a clause of which the Hon. and Gallant Member fur Brighton had given notice, the object of which was to prevent petty sessions being held at public-houses. He holed the lion. and Gallant Memb-r would not perse vtre 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 be thought the county rate ought not to be made chargeable for holding these petty sssions 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 session; tieing 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 thia 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. Atter a few words from Mr. PACKE, Capt. PEC HELL then brought up the clause of which he had given notice, 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 i❑ England to hold any petty or special sessions of the peace in arw house licensed for the sale of exciseable liquors, or, after a sHs•iout-house shall have been provided under the powers hereinbelisre 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 Ireland 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 of the magistracy. Sir 'William Jolliffe, the Attorney - -General, Mr. Deedes, Mr. Hodges, cud Mr. Macke, 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 through Committee. The Distraining for Rates Bill also passed through Committee. The House then adjourned at a Quarter to One o'clock LAW IN TEL LIGE.N CE. 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 exsmination under the commission. The Learned Counsel said that the party in question was not a relative, but he had an int, rest in a will which had been made .ay Mr. Yaldon, and he was desirous, therefore, of the fact being esta- , blistied that Mr. Ya!doii was of unsound mind at the time of making the will. His LORDSHIP said such an application could not be granted, 88 no party could have an interest in a will till after the death of the testator. IN RE DYCE SOMBRE. The further hearing of the argument in this case was then proceeded with. Mi. Shad well having followed on the same side with Mr. Ruh and Mr. R. Palmer, Mr. BETHEL proc, , eded to argue against the prayer of the petition for supers( ding the commission ; and not hoeing concluded at the rising of the Court, the further hearing was adjourned till to- mcrrow (this day). CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COUR 7: POSTPONEMENT OF TIIE TRIAL OF MR. DROUET.---* Mr. BALLANTINE applied to the Court to postpone the trial of Bartholniew Peter Drouet to the next session. He said 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 ialarnmation of the heart and lungs, and although be was partially recovering, be was still in a most precarious state of health, and quite untit to take his trial. Upon this ground he applied for: the postponement. Mr. CLARKSON 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 t h e attendance o f the dfendant for that purpose. An application had been made, he believed, to the Court of Queens Bench, to remove the record to that Court, and the ap plication would probably be decided upon next Monday- The defendant, in the meantime, he believed, 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 slid he supposed there was no doubt that the condition of the detendint was truly re pr(-ser.tod Mr. CLARKSON said there was not the least doubt that Mr. Drouet was in such a state as to render him quite unfit to t ike his trial, either there or in any other Courts at this time. The CHIEF BARON said that this Leing the case, the only thing to be done was to grant the application, and he did not think lie ought to make any alteration in the amount of the recognizances: Mr. CLARKSON said he was perfectly satisfied withthe decision of his Lordship. His clients were only anaiGUill thut it i.hould not be thought elsewhere that they bat' m.gloctkd their duty. The CHIEF BARON said there was no suggestion of that kind. It was quite clear that under the circum stances the trial must he rostponnd. RAILWAY :!_4l-IARE MARKETS. • BRISTOL, Maxim/. 2. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The stock mark e t rema i ns in a dull and ~..• a ctive state, as is generally the case during the periods of holding tha halt-yearly meetings.—Bristol and Exeter Original Shares per: done at 25 dis.— t , nat - Western, Quarters, at 1% dig.—Ditto, IC(''' 171. Shares, dis. LIVERPOOL, MAitcn 2. Szocx Exciatior. —The transactions to-day were very DMIN d ' and thetnarket has been dull, closing rather heavily.—The sales are"' Aberdeen, Preference, 6 per cent. in perpet., Bs. 9d. p.—Caledoni Bo : Preference, 7 per cent., 11% ex i n.— East Anglian, 3% Shl guaranteed 6 per cent., 2 % — Lancashire and York s hi re (late , and B.), Fifths, 12% dis.—London and North-Western, 138% ex dll —Ditto,Quarters. New, 6 p. ex in. — Manchester, Sheffield and 1 1 ~ coin, Quarters, (No. 1), 7% p er cen t . 1853, 7 dis.— Ditto, 101. PreLe' ence, 10%—Midland Stock, 84% ex div.—Ditto, New Halves, 6 ,8 North Union (B), 1 51—Reading, Guildford, and Reigate, P. Scottish Central, 25 —Yo r k, N ewcastle, and Berwick (Exrensio— .2. Nos. 1 and 2), % ex div.—Ditto (G. N. E. Purchase), 6 per cents guaranteed, p.—Orleans, Tours, and Bordeaux, 3 dls.—Rouen 13% . MANCHESTER, Maxon 2. STOCK ExcnstioE.—The sales are —North Staffordshire, 3-- Shrews ury and Birmingham, Preference, 93,—Grhnsby Deeii.Sr l 4 Eigths, 51A—Caledonian, Preference, 14 --- Leeds, Fifths, 23 dis.—Shettleld and Lincoln, 14 n. dis.—LeedSo Preference, 1 7%—Shropshire Union, 2! dis.— Clitheroe (No. 1 ). dis. PIRMINGRAM, lanai 2. STocx Excherrok.—The sales are—Birmingham, WolverhamPt°°' and Stour Valley, 10%—North Staffordshire, 234dis.—Shrewsbal?., and 131rmingliain (A), Btis. 3d. dis.—Ditto, (B), 3 dis.--London au"" North-Western, Fifths, 7 ] / f p. ex diy.—Cliester and Holyhead, 22. YORK, MARCH 1. P STOCK Excuswal.—The basin e-s transacted to-day was as fO „ lows :—Great Northern, 11%— York, Newcastle, and BerndsZ• (Newcastle Extension), 49% ex (HT.—Ditto (G. N. E. FurCbas" 1/. Bs. 3d. GLASGOW, MARca 1. STOCK ExcnANoz.— Th, following are to-day's transactions Aberdeen, Preference, 325. 9d. —Dundee and Arbroath, New (Ns. 60s.—Edinburgh and Glasgow, 87%—Glasgow, Kilmantoc)s, and AY' , 56—Ditto, lialvtp4, No. I, 7 —4 , lasgow Genet al Terwjnus, 12. Glasgow Harbour Mineral, 20—Great Northern, 11 or th 16%. We are glad to find that that intelligent and ab lB . officer, Mr. F. M. Fanlkener, who so efficiently dis charged the duties of Vice- Consul of France at F o lkele tone, has been appointed to a similar responsible office a representative of the United States at the s am ,, port , in which position we are persuaded that his many v t. r lu:tble qualiti es w ill secure to him a continuance of toe public confidence and respect which he has hitherto 50 well merited and enjoyed. [ADVERTISEMENT.j—An Abscess in the Breast Cured by Holloway's Ointment and Pills. About three years since Mrs. O'Flaherty of Mill-street, Cork, accidantall bruised her breast, for months afterwards the pain incresle4:, and the part beca me f ear f u ll y swollen ; various application . were tried without giving the least relief. Ul'ciniately an ab; scess formed, discharging a grea t quantity of humour, whici, debilitated her constitution t o an a l arming extent • at th , stage a lady strongly recom men d e d her to try dollowaY , Ointment and Pills, having witnessed their good effects 03 ; former occasions, which a d v i ce s h e followed, and tlesis 913 medicines answered most sa ti s f actor il y, for the wound was 500 0. healed, and her health is now completely renovated.—Sold bZ all Druggists and at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 04 Strand, London. DREADFUL OCCURRENCE AT PonTsMourn.---C?ro'vll".. poral Leonard, of the 91 st F oot, was killed by throwi himself out of the third floor window of Cambridge 1311 r.. racks in Portsmouth Garrison, about two o'clock Y es : terday morning. It is believed the dreadful act was committed whilst the deceased was in a state of so® -. tli nabulism. An i nquest was held last night by Tr; William John C ooper, the coroner of the borough, w ".., a verdict in ac cor d ance with the above supposition fr"" returned. 11 On the 2:3d ult., at Brighton, the lady p f R. 11. Russ" Esq , Bengal Civil Service, of a son. - On the 211th ult., a t Trehinshun, Bree.on, South Wales, 06 wife of C a pt a i n G . Y onge, of a son, On the 2.9t.1i ult., at Berners-street, the wife of J. B. Carlin,' Esq., of a daughter. MARRIED. On the Ist inst., at Trinity Church, Marylebone, Colonel Windham, Coldstream Guards, son of the late Admiral Windham,o: Felbrigg, Norfolk, to Marianne CathY rine Emily, youngest daughter of the late Admiral Sir Johla I3eresford, Bart. DIED. •On the 25th ult., in 13 asing a -street, Frances, relict of the late Mr. R. Hoffman, of the Strand, aged 79. On the 26th ult., at Torquay, William Clark, Esq., late of her Majesty's 26th Regiment. On the 2sth alt., at Sidbury, Devonshire, Robert Hunt, Esq.. aged 85. London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOU.N o f No. 112, Strand, P r i nter, at The Sint Office, No. 112 Strand, in the P rec i nct of the Savoy, in the countY o f Middlesex, Saturday, March 3, 1849. The 'roPrie kode Tiro. Annv Ralf Etter Itede N.B. Per tent 44.' 4 ' e rE ' ---- __ so A ~1 11.0 8pe any ol rt Ude,' POLli t N( Medics Polk The wt ( ,_ n otice k ve ‘s rs Nam the 4 17 N i tti ci b a r tt :0 1 :: Zenon t, b 4; the 14: 1511 " 8 1 61 tht be 41/E coa t prwly i n v i iesat e kip th e 0 ktie direct t the 11e( trEfl du 114 t e en " ,to k pshea, ik te pstr um and eons and 4ses 4 c. T h c 44 -i tantan t bY ushu DoLoa is Dl6;ng cured er tth S You M 14 , Rat, 141 t ; 3 17 wi e Itil t e4re e s, r e p v for ,kr,l Wife / t Wool 10 ofa ' 14 be g ' - 40 11114 1 t ?ur s] 4 44 ' olive: • o 1,44 Interne 111thd loo' 11 11eltre do I tio,,,_hn g , 4 7 " 4 4 e Qo m 1 11. g ." 11 4. 0 8 p tt re ,, To i d ttor. s t r:24 1)3 kittl o ftes i ; t t tn r o o °r • ; r lell ( Tic:estyli Th e Eni, W ere tu eri ne wteitofi teren o jaarr Were He 8 Queen but utd k at h ui oa ts thw /1 " 11 cl