The Sun. — London, England, 1849-02-13 00:00:00

- 1 •• U t louse, !eland? cis Hen. 'ays ex recollect Int they liament. it down al agi eting or ater op t which he Irish re h ad even a to the of mis )ort the t of free 'ss was ereise of utenant made it of the 0 a 'pis- er Hon. , uld find d-Lieu the Ist ;t guilty govern the Bill to him ;e as to lld have ►sing to &some. uld not He had hitherto 3isterai mercy, because subject Lord or had not don. If impos •pose of ievanco, attend e curse nconsti- er, coli c Eng ed with en they would rum the e ques agitat- benq- ngland. agitate urch in )—were usion of rho ra- most as though ded by poorer. the ap bted it. let was its re- Ireland e Pro t to be co,OOOL irposes, t small at was Church ch they lot the applied ght for e altars !ia esta people n esta people Church , ere the d were graded nullity blished athetic ng the I. But not be iething to tenl - to )n. and ild, he lot di- great 7 were essure minds e raw rce of as en 1, and onths w the .esent broad eying it and they )efore t. and livide ;ed in shed . Elon. was t of ,ary, nea- ard )uld uite 4 fled r: [on. eDt iichiloJ ...A l b - ''': Y THE SUN, LONDON, The first amendment, for the insertion o' word , '• or ti ias nab'e practices," flaying been pu', The ATTORNEY-GENERAL sa d he mild not ce -1 ede in that amendment, for it was a', variance with the principle of the Bill, which the House had alrec.cly Lffirraed. His Hon. and Learned Fr:end sought t..) eon tiuue—not the Act of last session—but an entirely Oil. fcieut Act. But the measure of last session was framed in strict conformity with former precedents; and it ap -1 eared to him (the Attorney-General) that it was better they should adopt the exact words of former Bill; suspending the Habeas Corpus Act, rather than that they should, by agreeing to a new measure, open the door to doubt and litigation without the control of pre %tout; practice. He felt bound to oppose the amendment .. because it was Lit variance with the principle of the Bal,. and becau se it was con t r ary to the known practice of Parliament. The Committe then divided, when there appeared — For the amendment ... ..• -.• 12 Against it ... ••• ••• 79 Majority against the amendment —67 The re -ncltr , ts of Mr. Arista) , were then ...emaining amendments of fur. regatived without a division, and the clause was ordered to stand part of the Bill. The second clause having been put, Mr. ANSTEY moved the omission of the clause. He thought it would be unreasonable and unjust to confer on the Lord-Lieutenant the power of selecting any place . he might please as a goal for carrying out the object of the .Act, because a person might by that means be removed to a part of the country where he would have no oppor tunity of entering into communication with his friend, or of preparing his defence. The motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was negatived without a division, and the clause was a gree d to. The third and only remaining clauso was also adopted. Mr. J. O'CONNELL then moved the insertion of a Clause to the following effect: —" Provided always, and be it enacted, that nothing contained in this Act shall Le construed or taken to warrant the arrest, committal, or detainer of any person for procuring or seeking to procure, in a legal and constitutional manner, the hold ing of meetings to petition Parliament or address the Queen, in accordance with the law and constitution, or for attending or taking part in the proceedings of such meetings." Sir G. GREY would not waste the t i me o f the Com mittee by again entering into a question which had al ready been decided after a discussion which occupied two hours, when the House rejected the same motion in the shape of an instruction to the Committee. Mr. BERNAL said a question of form was also in volved in the motion, namely, whether the clause moved by the Honourable Member came within the scope of the Bill. Mr. J. O'CONNELL said, unless the Chairman should absolutely divide against him, he would divide the Com mittee. However, if the Right Honourable Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department would an swer one question plainly, he would withdraw the motion. Wasit or was it not the intention of her Ma jesty's Government to prevent the agitation for the re real of the union? He did not speak of the Repeal As sociation in particular, or any agitation which he (Mr. J• O'Connell) might originate, but did they mean to in terfere so as to prevent the people of Ireland from agi tating for a repeal of the union? Sir G. GREY said, no doubt the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland would exercise the powers committed to him as be might think best; but in adopting this course neither he nor any other member of the Government would ex tend any immunity to those who might bring them selves within the suspicion of being engaged in treason abledesigns.—(Cheers.) After a few words from Mr. BERNAL and Mr. HUME, Mr. B. OSBORNE said it was in vain for the Hon. Member for Kilkenny to attempt to improve the Bill, but if he was really anxious to know the practical effect of the measures on the Repeal Association let him go over a nd agitate for repeal, and he would then satisfy himself at once. —(Hear and laughter.) Mr. J. O'CONNELL said no definite answer had been given to his question, and he would, therefore, take the Sense of the Committee. The Committee then divided — For the clause... ••• ••• ••• 11 Against it ... ... 105 Majority ... ••• ••• ••• ---94 The Bill was then ordered to be reported ; the House resumed, and the report was received. RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND) BILL. The House then went into Committee on this Bill. Mr- P. SCROPE said the turn which the debate Lad taken led him to believe that the object which he had in view could not be brought fairly before the C ommittee by taking the debate on the present oc easioo.—(flear, hear.) He was not opposed to a vote for the relief of Irish distress, and he did not wish, there fore, to obstruct the vote, his object being to attach a Condition to it, supposing the vote to be agreed to. He . I ,hould b e most unwi lli ng t o object to a vote which he be ;'l'ved to b e a bsolutely necessary in order to prevent "mine, and to refuse which, therefore, would entail on the L eg i s l ature a respons ibili ty o f a ver y f e arful charac ' 4, ,r, inasmuch as Parliament had recognised the prin 41e that the people of Ireland should be preserved from s tarvation. He thought, therefore, that if any vote should be come to in that House which should appear on the face of it to recognise the withdrawal of that right to relief, and impose the necessity of leaving masses of People to perish from want, they would incur a heavy r esponsibility. To proclaim that no funds should be pro 'tided for the relief of those who were reduced to the ex tremity of destitution woul i be to absolve them from their allegiance to society, and give them license to plun der and commit violence of every description without the Possibility of opposing any check to them. He, therefore, for one would incur no such fearful responsibility. He had seen reports from Ballina and Westport, and other Places, stating that the paid guardians had already been tereedto refuse relief to large numbers when it was abso lutely necessary, while in other instances many had been Put on half allowance, and he had private information to th e same effect. If, then, under these circumstances, they refused relief they rendered themselves answerable for all the consequences, which he believed would be fatal nut only to thousands of lives but to the safety of society itself. lie would not, therefore, bring forward his pro- Position at that stage, but would move it on bringing up the report. Mr. GRATTAN then rose to move the amendment of which he had given notice, " On motion-fur relief of distress (Ireland), to insert after the word that' the words ' the collectors of excise in Ireland be henceforth directed, and do in future pay into the office of vices treasurer of Dublin the amount of all Crown and quit rents, and that the same be appropriated to the relief of distressed poor-law unions in that country.' " He complained of the attacks that had been made upon the people of Ireland, and assured the House that he for one did not come there to beg; and he believed, if the people of that country were but fairly treated, L eY would do without assistance from England.—(Cries " Hear, hear.") These were the premises he would 14 . Y down, and it would be for Hon. Members to say w hether he made out his case or not. Why, there was quiteenough of money in Ireland to support the people it they would only leave it there. There were such items as " Paid to Queen Victoria, 10 gs. ; paid to Queen Victoria, 20 gs.; Paid to Queen Victoria, 50 gs.;" l 'uct s on ; and tat money and these vouchers were ling o in Latouche' h s bank. Let t e L money not be taken 314 of the country, and there would be no necessity for their coming to England to ask relief. The objection r s Honourable Members in that House was, that Eng it money should be devoted to Irish purpsses ; but he ro was a case of Irish money lying there, which here could be no objection to devote to Irish pur P '' s es. When the drummers and fifers of Cromwell "le over to Ireland, and the London companies, they ba d l arge tracks of land divided amongst them, for ti n Uleh they paid merely a small sum of Id. or licl. per e c e r, by way of quit.rent; that money amounted to :'out 70,000/. annually; and although it had been some reduced of late, it still averaged 50,000/. per annum. toe let them come to a proper understanding, and when tn n n. Members talked of their coming to England to ask tneney, let them first refund the money which be , figed to Ireland. Let them only leave the money there th e teae of carrying oil' these crown-rents and quits rents p, dec could be neither justice, nor propriety, nor good Reuse in acting thus, and then saying that the Irish e len e to that House as mendicants. He did not think se e e • Ilon. Member for Tavistock was justified in sneering 7, 1 that way at the Irish Members and the Irish people. x f the Irish landlords only did their duty there would be 4 ) necessity for their coming to that House to ask for eJ e list anee. The absentee proprietors were the bane of land, and had left its people in a state of pauperism starvation. He complained also of the attacks upon no Irish Members and the Irish people by the press, h • ate teh w ere fill e d w i t h th e mos t offensive personal abuse disgusting falsehoods. He gave the strongest con r"iotion to those attacks that the forms of Parliament would allow him. The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded tr read over a long list of peers and gentry of that coun- Who possessed estates in Ireland, which they rarely sza Hover visited, and who left the people to misery and ation, while they abstracted the rents and profits c ' land and spent them elsewhere. Many of these l i ,',ernen and gentlemen %sere, he was ready d Iris to admit, ;;Vlent landlords; but they were very bah land coidl; Resident landlords could do a great deal. They , - 1 keep the people quiet. If they wished to keep the g c "P'e out of the hands of bad leaders let them give them ti ` l 'Lt l leaden. —(Cries of "He.r, hear.") He suggested t lit the best thing they could do would be to impose a the, o fl ° per cent. upon the absentee Irish landlords; if d idD that the pe o ple of Ireland would willingly dis nse t' pewith their 50,000L—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. L e e i t tbers said they would grant it because it would e last. He said " No;"—it was only the begin zneVf a series. If they were to be thus treated as , fr leant, it would be better for them at once to take 'heir clothes, and come to that House in the old h u 'ruts that had been sent to Ireland.—(Great Ir e f te r.) Whatever concessions had been made to theit and the British Minister had invariably mulcted tea e ,' and made them pay for it in pounds, shillings, pence. Look at the Petition of Rights, which had parnaconceded by Chanles I. only on condition that the cell o merit should vote him a sum of 130,0001. He cs • ‘4 upon the Hon. Members for Ireland not to be de lved and sp urn duped any longer—let them act like men, and th e l the amounticre.—(Great cheering.) Now, look at the that was annually drawn out of Ireland ( , n ine absentee proprietors. It was stated that the t e k e ietie 4,000,0004 sterling annually; but he would t , lt at 3 , 0 00,000/., and, calculating that for fifty years, drawnl:oth present time there was a sum of 150,000,000/. out of Ireland. Take the crown rents at an 4e00: of 70,000/. for fifty years, and that would make li eus l3o4 , so that instead of coming as beggars to that (.110 e , he would take the liberty of telling the Chan eon. r of the Exchequer that he would find it difficult to 1"-:T en° the fern', that there was altogether a sum of last ?,,.0,000/. sterling taken out of Ireland during the fifty years, and no mathematician would be able to 12 ..7 that he had been mistaken in a single figure. He gated that the Hon. Member for Tavistock, now that he had and these fites. would Hush for shoor., for the qt tack . 1e had made upon tit, irt,ii lie ple. lie tnoug,ht the Hon. Member was altogether unjustifiable in the charges he had brought against them; he should be gla lto know whether the Hon. Gentleman really thought that the people of Ireland bad swindled the country. Ho cared little for their 50,0001. that was to be voted that night, because he could tell them 50,0001. would not do, nor live times 50,000/.—(lronical cheers.) He thought it better to speak out and be honest at once. He had never been insensible to the kindness of England; but when he heard so much talk of the British Association, and the large sums subscribed by the people of England, he would remind them that the whole amount did not ex ceed soo,oooL, and that if the tames of the subscriber:, were lurked over, it would ba found that the greLt bulk or rf relationship them were p ewristohn Ireland. who liberality b uth e 'clumnietttee(d by l, v r( o lr' r e t r i t i ) e kiof d Engl heardan England ui i n t e t: c i t . - t il e o ti u e g a h s anon of oi it Ireland'sndne and t distress, he from the Hon. Member for Tavistock, and he would s • to him— " To John I owe some obligation, But John hath lately thought it fit To blazer it throughout the nation, So John and I are more than quit." —(Cheers.) And he believed, if the accounts were fairly ablanced between the two countries, Ireland would be found to owe England nothing. Let the people of Eng land bear in mind who it was that really wished to sepa rate Ireland from England. It was ono of their own countrymen —not one of the mere gentry, but one of the nobility, a high and titled Bishop —the Bishop of Derry —who rode in at the head of his followers, and said to the Barl of Charlemont, " Now is the tine for us to slip the connexion—let us have blood, and blood enough." " No," said Lord Charlemont. " there shall be no blood . shed if I can help jr," for his Lordship was attached to the connexion with England, and he, with other Irish men, united together in opposition to such a proceeding. What was the use of this grant? Why, this 50,0001. would not last the Irish any time.—(Hear, hear, arid laughter.) Twopence out of every shilling of it would go to feed the poor, and the tenpence was divided amongst the officers. There were 131 unions in Irelan I, and it appears that there were 50 more to be added. Did they really think that this would do any good? Why they built the most ridiculous teetotal poor-houses that could be conceived, which cost from 5,0001. to 8,0001. and 12,0001. They gave the paupers gardens too, and so very generous were they in their attentions to them, that they gave them for their odours plenty of sweet-pea and mignionette.—(Great laughter.) There was a ridi cule accompanying this extravagance that was quite dis gusting. In the union to which he belonged, one of the guardians, who had nothing else to do, pushed his stick completely through the wall of the workhouse, it was so very ill constructed.—(Laughter.) In the Colbridge union they had, at one time, the highest rate of any in Ireland. In consequence, however, of his having the advantage of a better resident gentry than other parts of the country possessed, they were able to get rid of the Government officers and to support the poor themselves. To be sure they owed the Government a small balance of 301., which he would be willing to pay them back, for he did not want their dirty money .—(Great laughter.) He held in his hand a book called " The Irish Crisis," which he was informed was published and circulated at the expense of Government. He found that it had got upon the cover the harp without the crown. Merely such a thing as this was made evidence against some of the unfortunate Irish who were charged with high treason. He had pure chased this book before the Act was passed for the sus pension of the Habeas Corpus, for if he had bought it now it is probable ho would be arrested under this Act and thrown into prison. This book, however, was written by an Englishman high in favour with the Go vernment. It commenced with a falsehood, and it ended with lies. It depicted the poverty of the Irish, and laughed at them for their poverty. He believed Lord Clarendon to be an honest man, but at the same time he thought he wa,s very ill advised. The Habeas Corpus Suspension Act was not wanted in Ireland, but it was necessary in order to keep their eyes and their ears closed until the revolution was completed. There was now a gradual change of property in progress. Their policy was, first to vilify the Irish people, to call them barbarians—their priesthood surpliced ruffians—their landlords tyrants, exterminators—and these same land lords they were now endeavouring to sweep down in one general mass of ruin. It happened that a friend of his, an individual in this town, had lent 50,000/. in Ireland against his (Mr. Grattan's) advice— (Laughter)—and he had never been able since to obtain any interest for his money.—(Hear, hear.) He did not wonder at the disrelish of the English to specu late in that country, for who would leave his soft dowry bed in London to sit upon a naked rock in Connemara?— (Great laughter.) He was not a leader nor exterminator —he liked the aristocracy—be admired the coach and six before the miserable one-horse jarvey.—(Continued laughter.) If they gave the Irish freedom, they would support them in war or peace; but if they gave them chains and slavery, they would curse them, they would hate them, and they would get rid of them when they could. Now, there was nothing like speaking the truth. The Irish would act as the English themselves would act under similar circumstances—as the Norman barons at Runnymede acted. They ought to tax the absentees, it they would not send them back to Ireland. The time would come when they would regret not having done so. Let them not pride themselves in their vain glory, upon their wooden walls and their military forces. They might depend upon it, if republicanism had succeeded upon the continent, the Irish people would not be left in their present low and miserable condition. The time might come when this country would deeply regret their policy towards the sister country. There might be a reflux of the tide when the Irish people would obtain what they wanted. Whatever might happen, ho should have the satisfaction of supporting that which he considered more conducive to the interests of both countries—for he would rather his right hand to be cut away from his body than take any other course. He was for freedom for England equally with Ireland. His countrymen were born in every way equal to the English, and he, for one, would never submit to be treated as a slave. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving his amendment. The CHAIRMAN said he apprehended that the pro position of the Hon. Member for Meath could not be entertained. It was a motion affecting the Crown rents. It was, therefore, not competent for the Hon. Gentleman to submit such a motion. Mr. H. GRATTAN—Her Majesty's name does not appear in this proposition. The CHAIRMAN—The Hon. Gentleman will per ceive by the terms of his proposition that he intends to deal with the revenue of the Crown. It is not compe tent for any Hon. Member to bring forward a motion professing to deal with the Crown revenues, unless with the consent of the Crown, signified in a proper manner. Mr. ORMSBY GORE rose for the purpose of making some explanations in regard to what had been said about the conduct of the Irish landlords. The charg s brought against these gentlemen were most unfounded. It was said they did not attend to the poor in the districts where they resided. The charge was without foundation. They could not, of course, be everywhere. A man could not be expected to reside in half a dozen counties at one and the same time. He himself, when in Ireland, resided in Westmeath, but he had also property in the county of Sligo; he could not, of course, reside upon both, but he felt himself as much bound to support those resident upon the oue as those upon the other. Ho had no hesitation in saying that Ireland had been in a great degree robbed of the benefit which must have accrued from a resident gentry, in consequence of the system of government which had been pursued towards that coun try. He contended that Ireland had been used by all the political parties of the country as a stalking horse, to suit and to forward their own views and interests; and what he wanted to see was a system of legislation pursued towards that country which would have the effect of benefiting its population, and promoting its interests. Ireland had been misused by all parties. She had been robbed of her manufactures, her resident gentry had been driven from her soil, and be believed that all the gold in California would not place her inde pendent. He, therefore, advised the Government to look not only to the poor-law as regarded that country, but to take into consideration those laws which it was con sidered was necessary for the benefit of the country. It was remedial measures that Ireland wanted, and did the Government bring in those in a proper spirit they should have his support. Mr. STAFFORD said that he was glad to be able to discover the grievances of Ireland independent of all sectarian spirit. He did not, however, see, that the system pursued by the Government for the raising of money for the support of Ireland was a right on-. The continual application of sums of money raised by the general taxation of the country to the relief in Ireland was vicious in principle, and unjust in practice. It had already been fraught with the worst consequences as re garded Ireland, and he would not, therefore, give his consent to a further extension of the principle. From the information before the House, it up peered that year after year the amount of pauperism in Ireland was increasing, an 1 as a proof of it he might state that while in the month of April last there was 20,781 receiving out-door relief, there was in the month of July, 414,400 ; that, then, showed the increase of the poor, notwithstanding the measures heretofore adopted by Government for the support of them, and what he aimed at was the intro duction of a measure which would have the effect of, in some degree, doing away with this amount of Irish pauperism and alleviating the distress which at the pre sent time prevailed in that country. A gentleman from Lancashire who had purchased a considerable pro perty in Ireland, had stated to him, that in consequence of the exorbitancy of the rates he was obliged to dis miss 120 labourers, whom ho employed daily, and to re turn to his native country, thus leaving the land uncul tivated and the labourers unemployed, and therefore de pending on the workhouse protection. Could the pre sent generation boast of being superior to those before them? or could posterity not say of them that there was such tracts of land lying waste in 1849, and through the negligence of Government no system for their reclama tion was adopted ? that the labourers, unemployed, and yet willing to work, died of starvation; end also that the landlords were ruined because they were obliged to support those labourers idle in a workhouse? He looked upon the excuse held forth by_Goverement as a mere mockery, because it could not be said on the pre sent occasion, at this season of the year, that there was any harvest, and he believed, from the feelings and fears of the people of Ireland, that there would be a very trifling harvest next autumn, because there is scarcely any corn sown, in consequence of the apprehension of the farmer lest his crop should be seized by his landlord. Again, he did not see how Irish proprietors, with only 17,000 acres in one parish, while English proprietors had 25,000 acres, could afford money for the employment of the labouring classes; and he considered that Govern ment, as they would not themselves suggest any remedy, should allow those who understood the wants and condo Lion of that country to introduce remedial measures for the l'ere-fit of that country. He • also thought it noces z.a..) th.st Government shierld give a detail ef the state of the twenty-one unions in Ireland, to which a cursory and very vague allusion had been made from the debates in that House, and in " another place." The people of that country would become acquainted with the Ministerial system, and through such knowledge public opinion would tell strongly against them. He, therefore, hoped that they would consider that this trifling grant would effect very little good, and that it would not be wise for them to persevere in this course of proceeding when some specific measure was requisite for the employment of the labouring classes. As there was no subject relative to Ireland that the Government understood better, he wished to know why the Ministers had not convened Parliament before the Ist of February as so many unions were in a state of bankruptcy. He considered that those who have Ireland at heart should speak out in condemnation of the Government, because in refeienee to many parts of Ireland the time for di Ir beeation has passed by, and that now only was the time fir action—(Hear, hear)—and not for deliberation. For how, he would ask, could the Committee debate and deliberate, when it was known that every day tended to check the cultivation of the land, and to sink the most wretched parts of that country in a still deeper and worse condition. He thought that it was the duty of her Majesty's Ministers to have considered that question long before, and to have come to some de cision for ameliorating the state of a starving people; but such, he regretted to say, was not the case, for he found several mistakes in their mode of proceeding. First, in the Union of Bailina he found a mistake of 10,000 paupers, which would have escaped the notice of the House had he not been conversant with that locality; and, secondly, he also found a mistake on their part of 100 holdings; and thus, with such mistakes, do Govern ment come forward at the eleventh hour and complain that those unions are doomed to death if this House do not grant them 50,0001. for 414,000 paupers, who could not be sustained more than six weeks by this grant. He was aware that the Irish Members could see that the tide of pauperism and misery was now rising, and that the present Connaught would be the future Munster. He would not allude to alienation, because he did not believe that any such feeling existed, and that the way to win tho affections of the Irish people was not to pandar to their faults, but to use every effort to im prove their condition by a salutary system of employ ment. He did not see that any good had been effected by the 10,000,0001. that had already been expended on unproductive works, and he also felt convinced that no good would arise from the present grant ; and he, there fore, thought that the system ought to be changed, for, if not, the Government would be held responsible. He considered it very unfair and unjust that Government should place them in such a position as to be thought not to commiserate the forlorn condition of the country ; and he, therefore, felt it to be his duty to rise and speak against any Hon. or Right Honourable Gentleman who would put them in the position of closing their eyes and ears to the misery and distress of Ireland. The Hon. Gentleman then proposed the following as an addition to the original motion :—" That the continual application of sums of money, raised by the general taxation of the country, to the relief of local distress in --- Ireland, is vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and impolitic with respect to the suffering districts them selves, as tending to destroy all spirit of self-reliance. That the Committee cannot assent to any vote of money for the temporary mitigation of such distress until it shall have received from her Majesty's advisers an estimate of the whole charge which will bo requisite for this purpose. That it is the duty of her Majesty's Government to introduce, without delay, measures which may obviate the future necessity of applying to Parliament for the relief of local distress in Ireland." Mr. I'LlooßE and Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose at the same time, and the former gentleman having, on repeated cries being raised for the Noble Lord, given way, Lord J. RUSSELL said—Sir, I certainly felt relieved by the statement of the Hon. Member that he did not intend to oppose the grant of 50,0001. for the immediate relief of Ihe distress of Ireland. I own I consider that the visiting upon the distressed unions of Ireland and their inhabitants, who are entirely without the means of support, the censure or indignation which Hon. Gentle • men may feel against the course taken by the Govern ment, would be in the first place extremely unjust, and in the next place would be visiting upon the unoffending, the starving, and the miserable, those faults which—if they are to be censured as faults—are those of the per sons who are in possession of the government of the country. lam glad, therefore, to find that the Hon. Gentleman, instead of refusing the grant, moves his three resolutions upon the conduct of the Go vernment. But, Sir, with regard to these re solutions, I cannot but think that the Honourable Gentleman has taken a course which can hardly be defended as consistent with past usage. The first reso lution says that in the opinion of this Committee the application to Parliament for any sum of money for the relief' of the distress ought to have been accompanied by an estimate of the probable amount that will be required for that purpose. Now I say, in the first place, this has never been done by a Government. I alluded the other night to the cases of 1822 and 1846. In the first instance, the Right lion. Gentleman the Member for the Univer sity of Cambridge, when Secretary for Ireland, had brought forward, in the month of April, a Bill with re spect to the employment of the people by grand juries, and a vote of 50,0001. fur the employment of the people by means of a grant was agreed to. At a subsequent part of the same session of Parliament, two months after wards, there was another proposal for a grant of 100,000/., for the same purpose. Then again in 1846, the first vote of th r House in the early part of the session was a sum of 50,000/. for the public works in Ireland, which was fol lowed by a vote of 50,0001. for piers and harbours inlreland, and by 50,000/. for drainage in that country. Altogether 228,0001. were voted in loans, and 150,0004 in grants tor Ireland, in the early part of the session. Such Sir, has been the course of the Government up to the present moment ; coming forward at the beginning of the session with a vote for distress as it existed, and then proceeding to vote further sums according to the neces sity of the case—(Hear)—and it appears to me an obvious and a necessary course. If the Government came forward and said, " Let us have 400,0001. or 500,000/. for the relief of the distressed unions in Ire land ;" why, Sir, you might to be sure send that sum, but you would have no security that there would not be a further sum of equal amount asked for the same pa.- pose. This course seems likewise necessary, because it is impossible to say how much may be required for cer tain districts where distress prevails until we know the urgency of the case. Now, Sir, with respect to the union of Ballina the poor-law guardians of that union state that it is certainly possible to collect the further rate due on that union, but they add, that in their opinion to do so would be to destroy the means of the farmers, to injure the prospects of the next harvest, to cause the tenants to emigrate, and involve the land lords ; and therefore they advise the Commissioners to allow the industry of the country to maintain the popus lation as far as possible, by making an advance in aid of the union, and not conapell ng them to strike another poor-rate. In May, they are of opinion, that there would be means of support derivable from the property of the union, when the rate might be struck, and they had no doubt would be paid. Would it, Sir, under such circum stances as these, be wise or prudent in us to say, there will be no such means in May; and that, therefore, this House shall vote a sum sufficient for the relief of that union fur the whole year?—(Hear.) I conceive, conse quently, that according to precedent, and according to the dictates of practical reason, we have taken in this in stance a course which is perfectly justified by the cir cumstances; and that we should, on the contrary, have been liable to censure if we had taken the course pointed out by the Hon. Gentleman. And yet, Sir, a vote of censure upon us forms the first part of the Hon. Gentleman's resolution.—(Hear.) The next part of the Hon. Gentleman's resolution is, that " the continual ap plication of sums of money raised by the general taxa tion of the country to the relief of local distress in Ire land, is vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and impolitic in respect to the suffering districts themselves, as tending to destroy all spirit of self-reliance." Why, Sir, I think that this is nothing more than a mere truism.—(flear, hear.) I agree with the spirit of the resolution, that there is nothing worse than continual grants of the public money to the relief of local distress in Ireland or anywhere else; I agree that it is calculated to make the people improvident, and to destroy their spirit of self-reliance; I agree that it is vicious in prin ciple and unjust in practice. But I must also confess that there are many cases in which a grant may be all this vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and impolitic as a general rule, but which, nevertheless, becomes jus tified ou the part of the Government and this House by the force of extraordinary circumstances. A mea sure which is wrong in principle may be forced on us for the purpose of saving a part of the population. This is one of that nature. But the Honourable Gentleman goes on to say that "it is the duty of her Majesty's Government to introduce without delay mea sures which shall obviate the future necessity of ap plying to Parliament for the relief of local distress in Ireleed." Now, Sir, on this subject I can refer the House to what has been done by her Majesty's Go vernment, and what it proposes to do. With regard to what has been done, let us not omit from our retrospect that which has been, and is, the extraordinary feature of this case—that extraordinary feature which, as far as the present crisis has gone, makes it unparalleled in the history of the world. That feature, however, has been entirely omitted by the Hon. Gentleman in his observa tions. The Hon. Gentleman speaks of the distress that has prevailed in Ireland, and which does prevail at the present moment, as the usual and ordinary distress of that country. Now, Sir, the case, as I apprehend, h as been—by whose fault, tenant or landlord, I shall not stop to say—that an immense population has grown up in certain parts of Ireland, snore especially in those districts which lie upon the sea coast, where sea-weed for manure is plentiful and cheap, which population having no employment upon the land or in any other manner, were fed out of the small patches of ground held by them with the potatoes which they cultivated.—(Hear.) This being the case, for the last few years a succession of calamities has come upon them, and swept away the food of this part of the popu lii ion. They have had no other employment, and there fore no other means of subsistence—consequently there have been in that period multitudes of persons alto• gether without food, or the means of procuring food. Now, Sir, we can imagine such a state of things on a less civilized state of the world—we can imagine in a distant country a failure of the food of a population, and two or three millions swept away, other people taking their place. But for us to allow the operation of famine to sweep away and devastate those parts of Ireland where the people are depeedent upon this condition of things for their food, would be a course inconsistent with the humanity of this House—would be inconsistent 'with the duty of the Government—would be contrary to the feelings of the country—and would be most shocking to civilized nations.—(hear, hear.) Well, Sir, in 1847 we made extraordinary exertions to keep the people of Ireland alive under the pressure of most extraor dinary difficulties. The people of this counry, in 1847, TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 13, 1849. raised an immense subscription for the purpose of re lieving the distress of the Irish people. It lasted through the entire year, and 200,000 persons were saved from starvation. By the a r ;eney- of the British Association has this done—what trace r ema i ns o f it? And he says and a k G e o p v t e a r : n i r n e i . e n many more—more than a million era The Ho n . M em b er as ks what good that the people are at present unbenefited and without means of employment. I deny the consequences. I think the efforts made by the House and the people of this country in 1847, and by the British Association in 1848, enabled many persons to emigrate—enabled them to get over the immediate season of difficulty in Ireland, and to find in other countries a reward for their toil, end afutureco e m n jy fo o rt ed whle c h Ha i e sl r k i , likely to be far more than they originally h far— whether the money was rightly spent Therefo re, pentorue was most prudently di str ib uted or otherw i se — a ll t hi s I consider to be b u t a sma l l part of the real quest i on. Th e twb s e o tbe r it real question is, whether or no it was advisable to keep as many people alive as possible ?—(Hear, hear.) That object has been accomplished; and being so, I think, as a nation, we have reason to be proud of what we have done in this matter. Well, Sir, I will admit, if after these exertions you find you have the same thing to re peat, and nothing to do but to spend millions a year to keep alive the destitute poor of Ireland, who are called idle, but should more properly be called unemployed—l admit, Sir, that this would be most unsatisfactory- But, in the first place, let it bo recollected that while this House consented to grants of immense sums of money, they laid it down as a distinct rule that in future legis lation on the subject the property of Ireland should be made responsible fur the support of the poverty. Now let us consider bow much was implied in this rule. We have heard a great deal of the Irish landlords and their conduct to their tenantry. There are good landlords and bad landlords in Ireland, as the Hon. Gentleman said: and I agree with him. I believe there are as good landlords in Ireland as there are in any other country—men whose conduct, under the present trying circumstances, has deserved the greatest approbation. But with regard to the bad landlords of that country, before the poor-law was passed they did absolutely nothing for their tenants, but receive the rents of their estates. They built no houses they erected no barns, they expended nothing whatever on the land. Not a tenant nor a beggar on their estates received any help. Such was the bad landlord of Ire land. But the bad landlord can be so indifferent to the welfare of the people on his estate no longer. Whether he lived in Ireland or not, a rate was levied for the sup port of the destitute poor upon his property, and appro priated to that purpose. Well, Sir, we fixed upon Ire land a large and extended poor-law. What has that poor law done in the last year? No leas than 1,700,000/. were collected and paid for the maintenance of the infirm and able-bodied poor of Ireland. And, I am happy to say, that by calculations which I have seen made by perfectly competent persons, the number of the able-bodied poor supported by the poor law has been by no means as great as might have been anticipated from the former accounts furnished by the Commissioners of Poor-law inquiry in their previous investigations. I am told that out of that sum of 1,700,0001. not 300,000/. has been applied to the relief of out-door able-bodied poor in Ireland. Well, then, you have advanced this step, that with regard to the support of the poor in Ireland a great proportion of the cost is collected out of the rates levied upon the property of that country. I take the advances made by the Bri tish Association and by the Government as I find them, and they only amount to one-fifth or one -sixth of the whole sum given for the support of the poor in Ireland —the remaining four-fifths or five-sixths having been contributed by the property of Ireland. We have seen, with respect to the relief of the poor of Ireland, that the poor-law has greatly contributed to their support; and I think it a reason why the House should be more ready than in 1822 and 1846 to the ut naostsiosntainycetbioafiathtbeevrearsye,dbesuttittubtee number n um t b h e a r t such l e u l p p unions,orr. Ify there ou countr y. o co fmeto B unions to which large contributions have been made, areha novebt are confining the evils of the principle to a narrow dis trict, as we propose, the result will be unmarked by eaebnov considerably 2 who less. Out of 3 e had those disadvantages which are anticipated. We pro pose to confine them at present to those places by the sea-shore where the people lived on potatoes, and used sea-weed as a manure. The Hon. Gentleman told us there was no hope of any improvement or of any remedy with regard to the distressed unions. I hold in my hand the report of the Poor law Commissioners, representing the very distressed state of many unions, and which is dated the 11th of December, 1848 . In that report it is said that " in several unions the out-door relief is far less in extent than it was at the corresponding period last year. For example, in the Kanturk union thre were, in the week ended 27th November, 1847, 18,460 persons relieved out of the workhouse, at a cost of 4721; in the week ended 25th November, 1848, the number was 2,323 only, at a cost of 461 In Killarney union, the number receiving out-door relief in the week ended 27th November, 1847, was 8,495, at a cost of 2891. In the week ended 25th November, 1848, the number was 2,129, at a cost of 66/. These instances show the degree in which an improved management, assisted by additional workhouse accommodation, has served to keep in check the out-door relief which suddenly arose in 1847 8 under the influence of the example of the Temporary Relief Act, and while the machinery of administration under the permanent poor-law was yet new and inexpe rienced." Therefore we do see that, with regard to some of the unions, there has been a very considerable diminu tion of the pressure upon the poor-rate. Mr. STAFFORD asked where the passage cited by the Noble Lord was to be found? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pointed to page 8 of tha " Papers relating to the Aid afforded to be Distressed Unions in the West of Ireland." Lord J. RUSSELL—I say, then, that you do find there is a prospect of improvement with regard to some of these unions. I come now to the consideration of what prospects can be held out for the future. And here I must notice a statement which has been made by the Hon. Gentleman opposite, that my Right Hon. friend said that the present grant was not the last which he in tended to propose. Now, my Right Hon. Friend has no recollection whatever of having made any such state ment. That he said, and that I said afterwards, that we would not pledge ourselves that this would be the only grant during this session of Parliament, is perfectly true; and I say again now that I would not consent—if the 50,0001. were granted at once, without any further remark or observation—l would not consent to bind my hands to any course, and not have regard to future con tingencies. I think I should not be doing my duty in the position in which I am placed, if I consented so to be fettered with respect to the conduct of the Govern ment.—(Hear, bear.) But having said this, admit that adrt that there is one point of view in which this question has been placed, in which I think the reasoning, not of those who have objected to the grant, but of those who have desired explanations and discussions upon this grant, is natural and reasonable—l mean when they say " Here are very considerable taxes imposed upon Great Britain, in which Ireland has no part;—here are many parts of :Ireland which seem not only not to be suffering extreme distress, but in reality appear as capable as many parts of England or of Scotland of bearing their share of the pressure; and therefore that subject ought to be considered by those who have to administer the laws." Sir, I stated the other night that I should think it to be my duty to propose to the Committee of the House of Commons those measures which I thought no cessary for the amendment of the poor-law, and to provide for the future amendment of that law in such a manner as I thought would be beneficial to Ireland and the least burdensome to this country. The Hon. Gentleman finds fault with the Government because they proposed to appoint a Committee—he says they ishould have at once come forward in the month of No vember with measures up on thi s su bject. Why, Sir, we thought last year that it was d es i ra ble, upon this import ant question, to obtain th e b ene fit of experi▪ ence; and amongst that experience I found, in almost all the reso lutions I have seen, and the representations I have re ceived, that one of the main charges with respect to the poor-law is, that it was proposed in this House by gen tlemen who had the cond uc t o f a ff a irs in thi▪ s country, and who had not sufficient knowledge with respect to Ireland. If that is the c ase; if t h a t is the accusation against us; if we had met Parliament and said, " Here is the measure ready prepared—we have not consulted Irish gentlemen on the subject, but it is ready prepared, and we do not mean to alter it on your representations;" it would have been immediately said, " Why not eonsu t those who have local e x p er i ence u pon the subject, and tell them what your pl ans are , a nd ask their advice as to whether they would be practicable and beneficial r Sir, I think that one of the a mendments to be proposed in the poor-law should contemplate an encouragement to those who would be prepared to lay out their capital, and to improve and cultivate the land in those parts where, partly from the entire failure of the crops of the :last three or four years,. or partly from the amount of the local burdens, there is now an unwilling ness to enter upon the occupation of land. But, in so doing, I confess I should not be prepared to rush at once into that division of the country which the Hon. Gentle man seems, in his recent speeches, to contemplate. I own I cannot imagine that there should be such a divi sion with regard to property in Ireland, and that each of the smaller properties in Ireland should be formed into an electoral division, without leading to the consequence of a law of settlement, and thereby doing th a t w hi c h I think has been a great misfortune in England, and which I should be sorry to introduce into Ireland—namely, im peding th e f ree c i rc ulation of labour—(Cheers)—and depriving th e l a b our er of that reward to w hi c h h e i s entitled. Besides which a law of settlement implies a him,la law of removal.upon nhs ib eolofrnyinog chargeable, into Gloucestershire,u find a man in Ke n t, an d remove he is pretty sure to be fed and maintained in Gloucester- Connaught into shire ; b u t w h a t w ould be the consequence o f men rush ing,Eng lainndtohre Scotland, and f anthdeyyoenarr, drivingfrom them back again to those di s t r i c t s in Connaught which are mos t distressed, a n d w here they are utterly i nca p a bl e of obtainin g wor k ?—(Hear, hear.) Why, there could not be a greater cruelty inflicted upon Ireland than to Enforce that strict law of settlement and removal. There fore, in proposing any plan of amendment to the Com mittee I shall endeavour, in the first place, to provide for the greater encouragement of capital and of industry; and, in the next place, I own I do consider it just, that, in some way or other, Ireland should be made fur ther to support the cases of exception in Ireland — (Cheers)—and that those cases should not come exclu sively as a charge upon the public expenditure—(Hear.) Whether what I should propose upon this subject is practicable or not, is of immense importance ; and on the solution of that question would v ery much d epen d what cou r s e we might think necessary her ea ft er t o t a k e . The Hon. Gentleman says that it is th e d u ty o f h er Majesty's Government to introduce, without delay, measures which _may obviate the future necessity of ap plying to Parliament for the relief of local distress in Ireland. I do contemplate measures which would have that tendency. There are other questions respecting local taxation in Ireland, with regard to which mea sures are under consideration, and upon which I think it will be mcessary to legislate in the course of the present session. I do myself consider that it may be possible to go through this great transition—one of the most extraordinary transitions that ever took place— (Hear, hear)—a transition which is not the act of any earliament or of any Government, but a transition which has been brought about by the calamity of the loss of the potato crop ; a transition from the state of a popu lation living upon their own plots of ground, to the state of a population consisting chiefly of farmers and labourers.—(Hear.) I do look forward with hope that that transition may be brought about without any very great loss of life ; though no doubt with a very great loss of property, for a very considerable loss of property has already taken place ; but, considering the vastness of the change—considering the sudden manner in which that change has come upon upon us—with less of suf fering and with less of loss than any one could have anticipated who had been told two years before that the loss of the food of the country for so many years would have taken place. Now, I leave it to the lion. Gentleman to pursue his own course, and if he thinks necessary to press his motion as a declaration against the policy of the Government to a division, I can only say that I think we have taken the course which is best adapted to the exigencies of the case ; that I do not think it would have been advisable to have brought forward a Bill for the amendment of the poor law without a Committee ; and that I do not think we should have been justified, not having measures pro posed, in refraining from asking this House for a small temporary grant for the relief of distress. I feel confident—and nothing will persuade me to the contrary—that this House will assent to the grant which we have proposed. I feel confident that they will not visit upon those wretched and desti tute persons in Connaught any faults that we may have committed—or any want of foresight in not pro posing measures in November last—or any want of adaptation in our present measures to the end we have in view. But, agreeing to that proposal, undoubtedly the House may think it proper to accompany the vote with the resolution which the Hon. Gentleman has proposed. With respect to that, however, it is entirely in the hands of the House to decide as they shall think proper. I have given what, I must say, I think is a fair account of theposition in which we stand.—(Hear, hear.) I have given some view to the House of the nature of the mea sures that we shall have to propose. My belief is, that you cannot by ally one measure remedy a state of society which has been, from the year 1760 at least, one of suffering, of crime, of division of landlord from tenant, of division of one class from another, of conspiracy frequently repeated, of laws of repression continually enacted, and the hope of permanent tranquillity con stantly frustrated.—(Hear, hear.) If it be true, as I be lieve it is, that that hope has been frustrated because the state of society in Ireland brought on these contentions for land, brought on those assassinations of proprietors, brought on that perpetual war of one class against an other—if that:be true, then it is only,by a total change in the state of society that those evils can be remedied.— (Hear, hear.) And if it is only by a total change in the state of society that these evils can be remedied, let me, with all deference to the Honourable Gentleman, tell him, if he were on these benches to-morrow, to propose measures for the purpose, that a great soci al can not be effected in one, two, or three years; that it must be the work of time; but that I do believe, with time, with perseverance, and with a judicious : adaptation of remedies, we may arrive at the result which we all de sire, that of seeing the state of Ireland improved and rendered happy.—(The Noble Lord resumed his seat amidst loud and prolonged cheers.) The Marquis of GRANBY objected to the proposed vote, on theground that it was unjust towards the people of this country, and that it would not confer any per manent benefit on those for whom it was intended. He thought, after reading the papers before the House, it was impossible not to admit that there was a vast and alarming extent of distress in Ireland. In certain dis tricts deaths and fever were increasing, and the guar dians of the unions were without money or credit. Not withstanding the statement of the Noble Lord of the progress made last year, he feared there was very little hope of the condition of these people being bettered under present circumstances. He did not think that the Poor-law Commissioners and the resident gentry of Ireland entertained the same idea as that adopted by the Noble Lord. The vice-guardians of a union in the west of Ireland, writing to the Poor-law Commissioners in Dublin, told them that they could form no idea of the privations and sufferings of the people, and added that such was the pitiable state of the whole labouring popu lation, that they (the vice•guardians) could not see any prospect of the cessation or diminution of their present distress, but, on the contrary, they were compelled to express their fears that the wants and sufferings of the population would cps'. derably increase. What then, he asked, was the blight ing influence which produced these effects, and drove capital from the country, but the Irish poor-law, under the operation of which a tenant never knew that his property would not be taken away from him for arrears of rate? The Noble Lord admitted that the present grant was vicious, and what his Hon. Friend (Mr. Stafford) and those who supported him wished to effect by the proposed amendment was, without objecting to the grant of 50,0001., to guard it with such conditions as should prevent the House being called on to make a similar vote. They wished not only to put the fire out, but to take precautions against it breaking out again.— (Flear, hear.) How long was this state of things to continue? How long were they to have the Irish people dependent on English liberality? Had the Go vernment no plans to bring before the House? They replied that they had appointed the Irish Poor-law Committee; but the present was the time not so much for deliberation as for vigorous action. The Govern ment were not always so ready to refer matter3to a Committee, and when laws sanctioned by the wisdom of two centuries were to be laid low, the Government would not wait fur the evidence tendered before the Lords' Committee on the navigation-laws last year. Colonel SIBTHORP commenced with "Sir, I will not vote for this grant on any consideration whatever."— (Hear, hear.) He had listened with great attention to the speech of the Hon. Member for Northampton, and if he understood him right, it was that this was a con ditional vote. Now, he yielded to no man in that House in humanity and in consideration for his fellow creatures, his whole course of life would bear him out in that, but he could not give his support to the motion. The Speech of the Ministers placed in the hands of their Sovereign was, in his opinion, equivocal and Jesuitical—there were no solid grounds in that Speech on which he could rely. He said he had no con fidence whatever in the Noble Lord when that Speech was introduced ; and he repeated now he had no confidence in the Noble Lord with regard to the present proposition. The Noble Lord had told them at the com mencement that this was to be the first vote; but at the same time he had told the House he was not in a situa tion to bring forward measures of amelioration. From this he inferred that the Noble Lord meant this vote to be of yearly occurrence. The vote was only to keep the Noble Lord and his party in their present seats. These were the grounds which would urge hi m t o vote aga i nst the motion. He would remind the Government that they might draw too much out of a well, and thus find it dry at last.—(Hear and lau g ht er .) Th e N o bl e L or d did not hold out any hopes that this grant would be the last, or that he would be able to bring in other measures. Remembering the past, he would not trust the Noble Lord one single tittle, and he should, therefore, vote against this Jesuitical, low, and dirty motion. Mr. HUME said he could not vote for the amendment, because it agreed to the grant while it said it ought not to be given. Now, as he (Mr. Hume) dissented from the grant entirely, he must vote against the proposed amendment and then take the sense of the House against the original motion. Mr. MUNTZ had voted against the Government the other night because he felt that he could not conscien tiously do otherwise He felt obliged to do the same on the present occasion. He did not see how he could call upon the people of this country, taxed as they were, to contribute repeatedly, incessantly, and endlessly to the support of the Irish.—(Cheers.) He differed from those who thought there were any signs of improvement in Ireland. For his own part, he thought they were getting infinitely and rapidly worse. He attributed that distress to misgovernment, cheap produce, and dear money. What was the situation of the people of this country, for that appeared to be left out of consideration? Were they fit to pay such calls? and ought they to bo asked to pay such calls?—(Hear, hear.) He had heard a good deal of late about trade being at present in a very prosperous and profitable state. For himself, he had found nothing of the kind, and having visited Birming ham on Saturday, he had found a similar ignorance of it prevailing there. Every one he saw there told him that trade was exceedingly flat and unprofitable, and that there was no probability of its improvement, in consequence of their having to com pete with the foreign manufacturer.—(Loud cheers from the Protectionist benches.) That very morning he had met a member of his own family, who had just re tamed from the north of Germany, and having asked him what was the state of trade there, he was informed that there was plenty of trade, but it was not trade with England—the people manufactured their own goods much cheaper than the English could manufacture them.— (Cheers from the Protectionists.) He would mention another curious circumstance. Some three or four years ago the glassmakers of Birmingham came to him and said they were anxious for free trade; if the glass duty were re moved they believed they should do very well. He cau tioned them to be careful what they were about, and asked them if they were quite sure they were able to compete with the foreign manufacturer. " 0 yes," they said, " there's nothing like free trade." Well, he ac companied a deputation of them to the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, when he was Mi nister, and to his horror they asked three years' pro tection.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Muntz) said to them, " I thought you were for free trade?" "So we are," said they, " but we want three years to prepare for it." Ile asked them, " Well, suppose you get three years' protection, what better will you be at the end of that period?" But they paid no attention to him. A few clays ago, however, he had received a letter from one of them, stating that the import duty on flint glass was about to expire, and the manufacturers, feared the trade in this country would expire with it, owing to their inability to compete with the foreign manu facturer.—(Loud cheers from the Protectionists, an laughter.) They were, therefore, very anxious for he a could con tinuance of the duty, being persuaded thatwt. peculiar character of the manufacture. that was suffer glass trade the only one in Birminghamwas half a dozen ing from a similar cause. There cularly the gilt toy trade prove that protection was indispensable,Noerinwgyesto the e e other trades equally bad — protested against the peoplethe maintenance of the Irish. It upon to contribute to in that country was owing to was said that the distress they had never heard of distress in r o t f ln th t i h s e c s o e u c n i t r r e y um be st i a n n g c c e a s h h ed o the potato-rot, as if occurrence of . that calamity. Was and the brassfoundingtra ea. the Ireland 1842 owing to the potato-rot? t l h B e 22or of distrbeessforoef He feared the distress was owing to a rot of some other sort that would not be easily cured. He was sorry the amendment had been moved; for, being opposed to the grant, ho could not support an amendment which was substantially the same, with the ex ception of saying that something should be done that would not be done. Suppose there was the dis tress in Ireland that was alleged—what would 50,0001. do for it ? It was a mere drop of water in the ocean. Out of doors there was a strong feeling against granting any more money to Ireland —not arising from any pe nurious feeling, but from a conscientious beliet that they could not afford to pay taxes to the extent they were doing, and that there roust be a reduction of ex penditure—(Hear, hear.) That reduction, so far as it could be effected with safety and honour to the country he was determined to support, and, in the meantime, he must oppose this grant, as being inconsistent with jus lice to all parties.—(Hear.) The House then divided, when there appeared : Against Mr. Stafford's amendment 245 For it Majunty against it - 120 Oa our return to the gallery, Mr. HOME was stating the reasons why he should oppose the grant. The Government were bound to come forward with some other measure to meet the dis tresses of Ireland, and to render the money given by this country really useful to her. As he did not think the grant good in principle, or likely to be of any ser vice, he would take the sense of the House upon it. The House again divided ; the numbers were, — For the original motion 220 Against it Majority —77 The vote was then agreed to. The House resumed : and the report was received The report on the Inland Revenue Bill was consi dered, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to morrow. The report of Supply was received. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL obtained leave to bring in a Bill to enable overseers of boroughs sur veyors of highways to recover costs on distraining for rates; also a Bill for the holding of petty sessions in boroughs, and for providing places for the holding of such petty sessions in counties and boroughs. POOR-LAW (IRELAND) COMMITTEE. Sir W. SOMERVILLE proposed that the names of the Earl of Lincoln, Sir Lucius O'Brien, Mr. Moore, Mr. Bright, and Mr. Grace, be added to the Select Com mittee on the Irish Poor-laws. On the question that Mr. Bright's name be added, Mr. TAYLOR objected to the nomination of a dele gate of the Manchester school. There was a prepon derance of borough Members on the Committee already. From the unhappy recollection of Mr. Bright's service on another Committee, he looked with jealousy on the addition to the present Committee of one who could not know the interests for which he (Mr. Taylor) felt an affection.—(A laugh.) The lion. Member concluded by proposing to substitute a Welsh Member, Sir John Walsh. Mr. M. GIBSON begged to remind the House of the enormous interest which Manchester and Lancashire generally had in the proper administration of the poor laws i❑ Ireland. The burden imposed by the poor-rates required to support the Irish poor in that district was very large. Sir •W. VERNER complained that the province of Ulster was not adequately represented in the Committee. Lord C. HAMILTON thought that there was an undue preponderance of borough Members amongst the English representatives on the Committee. As the Com mittee was originally proposed by the Government, six out of eight of the English Members placed upon it were borough representatives, and if the Hon. Member for Manchester should be added the number of borough re presentatives would amount to seven out of nine. It was desirable that at least one English Member representing a large agricultural constituency should be added to the Committee. Mr. F. MAULE believed, that when the Hon. Mem ber for the county of Dublin spoke disapprovingly of the Hon. Member for Manchester's conduct on a Committee he meant to refer to the Dublin Election Committee. This was the first occasion on which the conduct of a Member of an Election Committee had been called in question since he (Mr. F. Niaule) had been the chairman of the Committee of Selection. If the Lion. Member had misconducted himself upon the Dublin Committee, the question ought to have been raised at the proper time; but, for his part, he believed that the Hon. Member had conducted himself uprightly and with as due a regard to the affirmation which he had made as any other Member would have done under the obligation of an oath. Mr. BATESON professed himself unable to discover the peculiar qualifications which entitled the lion. Member for Manchester to be placed upon the Com mittee. If Ministers thought the Honourable Member ought to be one of the Committee, why did they not nominate him originally? They could not have over looked him because the Hon. Member was accustomed to hide his light under a bushel.—(A laugh.) He had heard it whispered that the Hon. Member and some of his friends had made arrangements for the purchase of a considerable amount of landed property in Ireland as soon as it should become :sufficiently depreciated.—(A laugh.) It was impossible to give the Hon. Member credit for an unprejudiced mind, for when he addressed the House upon Irish questions he usually exhibited a virulent and vindictive feeling towards the landed in .. terest of that country. One ex — ample of the Hon. Mem ber's eloquence would suffice to justify the character which he attributed to it.—(Hear the Hon. Member read an extract from a speech made by the Hon. Member for Manchester, in which the Hon. Member complained that everything was Protestant in Ireland—that Protestant judges polluted the seat of justice—that Protestant ma gistrates would not do justice to Catholic peasants—that Protestant landlords exterminated their tenants, and that Protestant soldiers, by the comma n d o f a Protestant priest, had butchered a Catholic peasant in the presence of his mother. The reading of this passage was received with cheers and counter-cheers.) It was not difficult to understand the motive in which the Hon. Member for Manchester's nomination for the Committee originated; it was a sop thrown to a party which the Government could not satisfy and dared not offend.—(Hear, hear.) Sir G. GREY hoped that the whisper which the Hon. Member who spoke last had heard relative to the Hon. Member for Manchester being about to invest capital largely in Ireland would prove to be correct.--(Hear, hear.) That, in itself was a good reason for placing the Hon. Gentleman on the Committee. It ought not to be forgotten that many members of the Society with which the Hon. Member for Manchester was connected had displayed their usual benevolence, ho could not say more, in relieving distress in Ireland; and, in addition to a great sacrifice of time, had made a generous appli cation of capital to developo the resources of that coun try. It appeared to him that the Hon. Member, instead of attempting to depreciate the labours of that Society, ought rather to speak of them with the gratitude and respect to which they were entitled.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BATESON protested against the uncalled-for lec ture which the Right Hon. Baronet had read him. He did not say a single word against the members of the Society to which the Hon. Member for Manchester belonged— (Hear, hoar)—and he entertained for them as deep a re spect as the Right Hon. Baronet himself could feel. Mr. HENRY said that he had suggested the Hon. Member for Manchester's appointment on the Commit tee on acccuat of some remarkable speeches which he had made. After a few words from Mr. SCULLY and Colonel DUNNE, Mr. HUME said that never before since he had had a seat in that House had he heard any personal motive attributed to any Hon. Member—(Bear)—and ho must say that the Hon. Member who made this charge had greatly neglected his duty if he had any complaint to make against an Hon. Member as to his conduct upon a Committee, in not havicg brought it forward at a previous period. Mr. REYNOLDS said it appeared to him that this was a military attack upon a member of the Society of Friends—the Hon. Member for Manchester had been attacked by three colonels and a captain.—(Laughter.) Mr. BATESON—I am not a captain. Mr. REYNOLDS—AIthough the Hon. Gentleman had parted with his military rank it still belonged to him. —(Laughtee.) Once a priest always a priest— once a lieutenant always a captain.---(Laughter.) It was clear that this attack was prepared—the volume of Hansard quoted by the Hon. Gentleman proved that the attack had not risen at the moment. The charge made against the Hon. Member for Manchester might be attributed to him (Mr. Reynolds). It was not be cause the Hon. Member was unfit to discharge the duty tho Government was about to impose upon him, but because he happened to sit on his (Mr. Reynold's) elec tion Committee, and the old story of the gray mare, which was familiar to every man's ears—or it should be —(A laugh)—applied. It was this—A countryman of his was indicted at the assizes at Tralee for felony. Ills innocence was proved, but, notwithstanding that, the jury found him guilty. The judge was shocked, and said—" Gentlemen, the prisoner's innocence was clearly proved." " Yes," said the foreman, "he is innocent of the crime now charged agai ns t him, but he stole my gray mare last Christmas."—(Great laughter.) The Hon. Member for Manchester was innocent of the charge found against him, but he happened not to have put him (Mr. Reynolds) out, and put Mr. Gregory in. —(A laugh.) It was for that reason he was unfit to be on this Commit tee ; but he could assure the House that, of the 553 British Members composing that House, there was nota s one in Ireland so popular as the Hon. Member. Ile recognised as the triend of the poor, for popular liberty. a s a man pleadinwg After a few words from Lord BERNARD, The House divided, when there appeared — For ...... 09 the motion ............................ 14 , Against it ............................. 55 ls j °ritY .........• .. ..r Manchester was _ Tho name of th H OD. Member o then added to the Committee, and also the name of Mr. Grace. Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved t hat the following g entlemen form the Select Committee on Army and Ordnance: —Lord Seymour, Mr. Fox Maule, Mr. Hume, the Marquis of Granby, Mr. Walter, Sir W. Molesworth, Lord C. Wellesley, Sir J. Graham, Mr. W. Miles, Mr. Cobden, Mr. S. Herbert, Mr. J. Greene, Mr. E. Ellice , Mr. . Smith, and Mr. Bankes. Mr. B. OSBORNE would move that three additional names be added—Sir De Lacy Evans, Colonel Lindsay, and Colonel! Dunne. Ttze SPEAKER, intimated that the Honourable Member for Middlesex could not propose these addi tional names until to-morrow, after notice had been duly given. Mr. B. OSBORNE (looking at the clock, which in dicated a quarter to two)—This is to morrow, Sir. In reply to Colonel PEEL and Captain BOLDERO, who complained that no person connected with the Ordnance had been placed on the Committee, although that arm of the service h a d b een su bj ected to so much attack in the press and elsewhere, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would consult with the Committee, and see whether tha • name of some Honourable Member representing the Ordnance could not be added t o t h e Committee.—(id,) The Hoase then adjourned at two o'clock. PARLIAMEN'T'ARY BUSINESS. (From the rotes and Proceedings of the House of Common.) MONDAY, FEB. 12. The following Railway petition was presented, wad th• Bill ordered to be brought in : Leeds and Thirsk (Power to guarantee Interest on certain Shares, &c.) . . The undernamed Railway Bills were read a first, and ordered to be read a second time :—._ _ Caledonian (Lease or Purchase of the Glasgow, Barrhe and Neilston Direct). York, Newcastle, and Berwick, and Maryport and Carlisle Lease and Amalgamation. Birmingham and Oxford Junction (Purchase of the Strat ford-upon-Avon Canal Navigation). Caledonian and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Lease of Scottish Midland Junction). Caledonian and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Lease of Dundee and Perth and Aberdeen Junction, and the Dundee and Arbroath, and the Dundee and Newtyle Railways). Forest of Dean and South Wales (Amendment of Acta as to Charges on Forest of Dean Railway and Branches—No. 2.) North Staffordshire (Amendment of Acts.) Stirling and D un f erm li ne (Deviation of Branch to Albs Harbour; Diversion of certain Works; Extension of Time for completing Line and taking Land; and Amendment of Acts.) , PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Coownoss.) lIONDAY, FEB. 12. HABEAS CORPUS SUSPENSION (IRELAND) BILL. Order for Committee read ; Motion made, and Question put, " That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair." Thio House divided:— MAJORITY-AYES, 84. MINORITY—NOES, 14. Ansley, T. C. O'Brien, J. Scully, Francis Fagan, William O'Brien, Timothy Sullivan, Michael Grattan, Henry O'Connor, Feargue Williams, John Greene, Joha O'Flaherty, Anthony TELLIZIP. Meagher, Thomas Power,' Nicholas O'Connell, John Morgan, H. K. G. Reynolds, John Roche, E. B. (IN THE COMMITTEE.) Clause 1 (Persons imprisoned in Ireland for high treason, &c., may be detained) :—Amendment proposed, cage 1, line 13, to leave out the words " is, are, or :"—Question put, " That the words proposed to be left out amid part of the Clause." The Committee divided : MAJORITY—AYES, 79. MINORITY-NOES, 12. Fagan, William O'Connor, Feargus Sullivan, Michael Greene, John O'Flaherty, Anthony Williams, John Meagher, Thomas Reynolds, Jonh Tru.r.zs. Morgan, H. K. Roche, E. B. O'Cennell, John O'Brien, Timothy Scully Francis Anstey, Thomas C. Clause offered, " That nothing in the Act contained shall be construed, to warrant the arrest of any person, he. ;" Motion made, and Question put, "Th a t t h e said Clause be now brought up." The Committee divided:— MI S ORITY—AYES, 11. Fagan, William: ' O'Flaherty, Anthony Williams, John Grattan, Henry Reynolds, John Greene, John Roche, E. B. TELLSU. Meagher, Thoma,s Scully,Francis O'Brien, John O'Brien, T. Sullivan, Michael O'Connor, Fears MAJORITY-NOES, 105. RELIEF OF DISTRESS IRELAND. (IN THE COMMITTEE.) Question again proposed, " That the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland be authorised to direct the issue out of the Con solidated Fund of the said United Kingdom, of any sum, not exceeding 50,0001., for affording relief to certain distressed Poor-law Unions in Ireland." Amendment proposed, at the end of the Question, 'to add the words, " That, in the opinion of this Committee, the application to Parliament for any sum of money for the relief of such distress, ought to have been accompan ie d by an esti mate of the probable amount which will be required for that purpose: " That the continual application of sums of money raised by the general taxation of the country, to the relief of such distress, is vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and im politic with respect to the suffering districts themselves, Of tending to destroy all spirit of self-reliance : " That it is the duty of her Majesty's Government to in troduce, without delay, measures which may obviate the future necessity of applying to Parliament for the relief of local distress in Ireland :"—Question put, " That those words be there added." The Committee divided:— MINORITY—AYES, 125. Anstey, Thomas Gooch, E. S. Perfect, Robert Archdall, Captain Gordon, Admiral Plowden, W. H. Arkwright, G. Goring, Charles Prime, Richard Bankes, George Granby, Marquis of Renton, J. C. Bennet, Philip Grogan, E. Repten, G. W. J. Blackstone, W. Gwyn, Howe' Richards. Richard Blair, Stephen Hale, R. B. Rufford, Francis Blakemore, R. Italsey, T. P. Sandars, George Bolder°, Henry Henley, J. W. Scott, Francis Rourke, It. S. Ilerries, J. C. Seymer, 11. K. Bramston, T. W. Hervey, Lord A. Shalt., R. D. Brand, Thomas Hildyard, R C. Shirley, E. J. Bremridge, Richard Hodgson, W. N. Smyth, John G. Brooke, Lord Hood, Sir A. Smythe, George Brthco, M. Hernby, John Somerset, Capidin Brown, H. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Somerton, Viscetutt Burghley, Lord Ker, Richard Sotheron, T. H. S. Burroughes, 11. N. Knightley, Sir C. S pooner , 1 Cabbell, B. B. Knox, Colonel Stafford, A. Cholmeley, Sir 31. Law, C. E. Stanley, Edward Christopher, R. Lennox, Lord HG. Stuart,,H. Cobbold, John C. Leslie, C. P. Stuart, J. Cochrane, A. Lowther,"Henry Sutton, H. M. Cocks, Thomas S. Lushington, C. Taylor, T. E. Cole, 11. A. Mackenzie, W. F. Thompson, Colonel Coles, 11. R. Mandeville, Viscount Thompson, Aldernall Cotton, W. 11. Manners,yLord C. Thompson, George Cowan, Charles Manners, Lord G. Thornhill, G. Disraeli, B. Mena, Sir Henry Trevor, G. Dod, J. W. Miles, William Trollops, Sir J. Dodd, George Moffatt, George Turner, George Duff, George S. Moody, C. A. Tyrrell,,Sir J. Duncutt, John !aunts, G. P. Verner, Sir W. Dundee, G. Napier,:Joseph Vyse, It. 11. Da Pre, C. Gi, Neeld, John Waddington, David East, Sir J. Neeld, Joseph Waddington, 11. S. Estcourt, J. B. B. Newport, Visct. Walpole, S. 11, Farnham, E. Newry, Viscount Willoughby, Sir I/, Ferrer, James Nugent, Lord Wodehouse, E. Floyer, John Osborne, Ralph Fox,:S. L. Ossulston, Lord TILLER/. Fuller, I. E. Palmer, Robert Beresford, William Godson, Richard Palmer, Roundel Ilewdegate,N. MAJORITY—NOES, 245. Abdy, T. N. Goulburn, Henry O'Connell, J. Acland, Sir T. Grace, 0. D. O'Connor, reargUS Adair, R. Shafto Graham, Sir James O'Flaherty, Anthony Alcock, Thomas Grattan, Henry Ogle, S. C. Anson, Colonel Greene, John Owen, Sir J. Anson, Viscount Greene Thomas Paget, Lord A. Armstrong, Sir A. Grenfell, C. Pascoe Paget, Lord C. Armstrong, R. B. Grenfell, Charles W. Palmerston, Vie. Arundel, Earl of Grey, Sir George Parker. John Ashley, Lord Grey, Ralph W. Fatten, J. W. Bagshaw, John Grosvenor, Earl Peel, Sir Robert Baines, M. T. Hallyburton, Lord J. Peel, Colonel Baring, Henry Hamilton, J. H. Pennant, Colonel Baring, Sir F. T. Hamilton, Lord C. Pete, Samuel Baring, Thomas Harcourt, G. Pigott, Francis Barrington, Viscount Ilardeastle, J. A. Pilkington. James Barron, Sir 11. llastie, Alexander Power, Nicholas Bass, Thomas nestle, Archibald Pusey, P. Bellew, It. M. llawes, B. Raphael, Alexander Berkeley, Captain Ilay, Lord J. Rawdon, Colonel Berkeley, C. L. G. llityter, W. G. Reynolds, John Bernard, Viscount Headlam, T. E. Ricardo, J. L. Birch, Sir Thomas Heneage, Edward Rice, E. R. Illackall, S. W. Henry, Alexander Rich, Henry Illandford, Marquis Herbert, Henry A. Roche, E.lB. Blewitt,nteginald Heyworth, Lawrence Romilly, Sir John Bouverie,:E. P. Hobhouse, Sir John Ruwbold, C. E. Boyle, Colonel Ilobhouse, T. B. Russell, Lord J. Bright, John Hodges, T. L. Russell, Edward S. Brockman, E. D. Bodges, T. Twisden Russell, F. C. Ilrotherton, Joseph Hogg, Sir J. W. Sadleir, John Brown, W. Hollond, Robert St. George, Chris. Bruce, Lord E. llorsman, Edward Sandars, Joseph Banbury, E. 11. Iloward, Lord E. Scholefleld, William Burke, Sir T. J. Howard, C.W. G. Scrope,,G. P. Butler, I'. S. Howard, E. G. Scully, Francis Buxton, Sir E. Howard, Sir R. Seaham, Viscount Callaghan, D. Hume, J. Seymour, Sir H. Campbell, W. F. Inglis, Sir It. Seymour, Lord Cardwell, Edward Jackson, William Shell, R. L. Carter, John B. Jervis, Sir John Shelburne, Earl of Caulfeild, J. M. Koppel, G. T. Sidney, Alderman Cavendish, C. C. Kershaw, James Simeon, John Cavendish, W. G. King, P. J. Blaney, R. A. Cayley, Edward S. Labouchere, Henry Smith, R. V. Clay, Sir W. Langston, J. H. Smith, M. Tucker Clements, Charles Lascelles, W. S. Smith, J. Benjamin Clerk Sir G. Lemon, Sir C. Somerville, Sir W. Cobden, Richard Lewis, G. C. Spearman, H. J. Cockburn, Alex. Lincoln, Earl of Stansfield, W. It. C. Colebrooke, Sir T. Lindsay, Colonel Stanton, W. H. Corbally, M. E. Locke, Joseph Stuart, LordjD• Cowper, W. F. Lockhart, A. E. Sullivan, Michael Craig, W. G. Lockhart, W. Talfourd, Sergeant Crawford, W. S. li`Naghten, Sir E. Tancred, 11. W. Crowder, R. B. Macnamara, Major Tenison, IL! g F. Dalrymple, Captain M'C u ll ag h , W . T. Thesiger, Sir . Dawson, T. V. M`G regor, John Thictnes". H. A . Devereux, J. T. Mahon, O'Gorman Thornely, T. neleY, John Duncan, Viscount M a h on , Vi scoun t Tow R 0 . • Duncan, George Maitl an d, Thomas Townley, ' Dundas, Admiral Marshall, Willia m vane, Lorownshend. Captain d_II. Dunne, F. P. Martin,,C. W. Ehriugton, Lord 31"t6rm"' jan vi J Ellis, John Ellice, Edward m 3 31 1 11 ea st a iu t t :i h t e e ; s s i do;,nno,.AViscountle. Colonel IwNvlvilvn/vVNVN,,,iejuilaarlealallilltiotiktd;:nsnrCnesu,eaa'sslyJ,Cir.Boo,c).harnhail.L...lsirrenplei.: Elliot, J. E. Eusten, Earl Evans, William Milner, W. M. ilton, Viscoun t Wawn, JT. Fagan, W. Mitchell, A. T. Fergus, John Ferguson, Sir R. Williams, John Filmer, Sir E. w 3 11 1 ° r °I g irs a cel' a l , a' i N I III : 111 / 1 1 , 1 • am Fitzpatrick, J. • Morris, Davi°. 'Wilson, James Fitawilliam. G. W. Mostyn, E. M. Wilson, Matthew Foley, John H. Charles Mulgrave, Earl NMowatt, Francis Wood, W. P. Norreys, Lord 0 ' u ß g r e i e n n t , S S i ir lP L e U r e c i Y us T IC Forster,o .., Fordyce.Richard MathewA . p lf .. Freestun, Colonel O'Brien, J. Gibson, T. M. O'Brien, T. Hill, Lord Marcus ............______ 0 (1 1 „Itilstoon.eLlY. H. u"ninegu.'llusiSair Joh: COURT CIRCULAR. The Queen and Prince Albert, accompanied by the Prince of Wales, Prince Alfred, the Princess Royal, the Prince Alice, th e P r i ncess Helena, and the Princess Louisa, and attended by the Viscountess Jocelyn, Hon. Miss Cavendish, Hon. Miss Macdonald, the Earl of Lis towel, Major-General Bowles, Lieutenant-Colonel the lion. C. B. Phipps, Sir Edward Bowater, Lord Alfred Paget, and Colonel Wylde. left Windsor Castle at ten minutes past three o'clock yesterday afternoon, escorted by a detachment of the Second Life Guards, and pro. ceeded to the Slough station, travelling to town by a special train on the Great Western Railway. From the Paddington terminus, the august party was escorted by a detachment of Light Dragoons to Buckingham Palace, where her Majesty and his Royal Highness arrived at five minutes before four o'clock. The Queen and the Prince were received at the Palace by the Dowager Lady Lyttelton, the Marquis of Bread albane, the Duke of Norfolk, Lord Georgo Lennox, and Colonel Seymour. Her Majesty and Prince Albert honoured the perform ance of the French Plays with their presence yesterday evening. The Royal suite consisted of the Viscpunteaa Jocelyn, the Hon. Miss Macdonald, the Earl of Ltstowel, Lord Alfred Paget, and Colonel Seymour. The Judicial Committee of the Privy C o u nc il sat yes. terday 'in the Council Chamber, Whitehall. The Lords present were—The Master of the Rolls, Lord Brougham ' the Chancell or o f the Duchy of Cornwall , and the Judge of the Admiralty Court. The Court heard Hardy's Petition for an extension of Letters P a t ent , Lord Brougham notified their Lordships' intention of advi sing and lend ) im vote 1 the any nded ation 'son then :lope. im h he the use tb• OM