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

n oined ittese, eland? is lion. lys ex •ecoliect int they 41.,coent. t down tin g or ater op t which he Irish erties-- ere had even e I to the of mis lort the t of free ess was ercise o ?utenant made it of the e a rnia , 'er Hon. )uld find .d-Lieu the Ist :It guilty govern the Bill to him go as to uld have using to blesonie• mild no. He had hitherto inistered mercy, ,because e subjec; Lord or had not stion. 0 e iropos irpose of rievanco, e attend• he curse lueonstia ver, con on Eng- Red with hen they vs, would from the ,be ques , agitat ►t bone- llon. and Lis sin:len d ' ild be j e t ; ctory the More tr e than and e amen de to a gitati e a trcasee' Ls not, th eli its scop e ' nea red 1, 0 ) which , P a view t'" cious. fd He Will' tight 1101 , j ; rid, it vi - f utensut ' secreti' r ,!; esen t We' the 14011,14 ktary C °7 ' ul . t e 3 Wa S q pa its Loar l3- e a id Learoo, it the 1-1° ll t dw e Linen . c h lon3 , „ 10' iu a c IA motio-' .ti' o should go awl the 14 1 io Bero 3 ` ' ~, THE StIN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 13, 1849. The first amendment, for the insertion of the words "or treasonable practices," having been per, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL sa.d he could not ac cede to that amendment, for it was at variance with the principle of the Bill, which the House had already affirmed. His Hon. and Learned Friend sought to eon• tinue—not the Act of last session—but an entirely dif ferent Act. But the measure of last session was framed in strict conformity with former precedents; and it ap peared to him (the Attorney-General) that it was better they should adopt the exact words of former Bills auspendieg the Habeas Corpus Act, rather than that they should, by agreeing to a new measure, open the door to doubt an litigation without the control of pre ' 'ions practice. He felt bound to oppose the amendment because it wens at variance with the principle of the Bill, and necaue se it was contrary to the known practice of Parliament. The Committe then divided, when there appeared 'or the amendment ... ..• ..• 12 Against it ••• ••• ••• 79 , 7 Majority against the amendment ... 0 The remaining amendments of Mr. Anstey were then 'negatived 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 friends, or of preparing his defence. The motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was negatived without a division, and the clause was agreed to. The third and only remaining clause 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 be 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 taki ng part i n the proceed i ngs of such meetings. Sir Ur. GREY would not waste the time of the Com =Wee 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. 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 woetrio. A one question plainly, ho would withdraw the as it or was it not the intention of her Ma jesty'B Government to prevent the agitation for the re- Peal of the union? He did not speak of the Repeal As 'lodation in particular, or any agitation which he (Mr. I 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? G. GREY said, no doubt the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland would exercise the powers committed to him as he alight think best; but in adopting this course neither he nor any ot h er member of the Government wou ld ex tend any immunity to those who might bring them selves within the suspicion of being engaged in treason• able de signs•—(Cheers.) After a few words from Mr. BxRNAL and Mr. Hufix, Mr. B IA • OSBORNE said it was - in vain for the Hon. if ember for Kilkenny to attempt to improve the Bill, but he w" really anxious to know the practical effect of the measures on the Repeal Association let him go over 11 4 1 :d agitate for repeal, and be would then satisfy himself " c e•—(Hear and laughter.) u • tr. O'CONNELL said no definite answer had been given to his q uest i on , a nd he would, therefore, take the of the C omm i ttee . The Committee then divided— For the clause... ••• • Against it ... Ma j orit y ••• ***-94 1., The bill was then ordered to be reported; the House 41.11 ned, and the report was received. RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND) BILL. ... 11 ... 105 Tileiduse then went into Committee on this Bill. P. SCROPE said the turn which the debate zad taken l e d hi m t o b e lieve that the object which he ts 44 84 in view could not be brought fairly before the e — catraittee by taking the debate on the present oc flisi"----(Hear, hear.) He was not opposed to a vote .or th e relief of Irish distress, an d h e did not wish, there sore, to obstruct the vote, his object being to attach a condition to it, supposing the vote to be agreed to. He should be most unwilling to object to a vote which he be fleved to be absolutely necessary in order to prevent sr: i s"' and to refuse which, therefore, would entail on te l siature a responsibility of a very fearful inasmuchcharac ter, as Parliament had recognised the prin cipsesgat the nervation.people of Ireland should be preserved from 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 Peopl e to perish from want, they would incur a heavy res ponsibility. To proclaim that no funds should be pro vided for the relief of those who were reduced to the ex -uoy of destitution weal be to absolve them from their allegiance to society, and give them license to plun der and commit violence of every description without the P o ssibility of opposing any check to them. Hroherefore, 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 forced to 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 the same effect. If, then, under these circumstances, they refused relief they rendered themselves answerable he believed would be fatal for all the consequences, which not only to thousands of lives but to the safety of society itself. He 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 for 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 vice 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 et 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, they would do without assistance from England.—(Cries of" Hear, hear.") These were the premises he would "Y down, and it, would be for Hon. Members to say Whether he made out his case or not. Why, there was quite enough of money in Ireland to support the people if they would only leave it there. There were such u items ``iraai,d 2O to g s Queen Victoria, 10 gs. ; paid to Queen Victoi and so o n ; Paid to Queen Victoria, 50 gs.;" ; and that • money and these vouchers were 103uittig of the isatuuche's bank. Let that money not be taken their comingt heeountry, and there would be no necessity for to England to ask relief. The objection of Honourable Membess in that House was, that Eug :!sh moisey should be devoted to Irish purposes ; but re there as a case of Irish money lying there, which ! ss could be no objection to devote to Irish pur ) ,, es • When the drummers and fifers of Cromwell b a de over to Ireland, and the London companies, they aei s ; ss tar ge tracks of land divided amongst them, for "'", they paid merely a small sum of Id. or lid. per ab re, b -Y way of quit-rent; that money amdunted to ou t 7 0 0001. annually; and although it had been some that reduced of late, it still averaged 50,0001. per annum. flNow let t h em come to a proper understanding, and when °n • Members talk e d o f their coming to England to ask for money, let them first refund the money which be longed to Ireland. Let them only leave the money there instead of carrying off these crown-rents and quit. rents Thedecorate Carlton-terrace and St. James's Palace. usecanlreetcoould be neither justice, nor propriety, nor good in acting thus, and then saying that the Irish . the 11, that House as mendicants. lie did not think in t h,, t n • Membe r for Tavistock was justified in sneering If waY at the Irish Members and the Irish people. the Irish landlord.; only did their duty there would be no necessity f or their coming to that House to ask for assistance. T he absentee proprietors were the bane Of Ireland , and had left its people in a state of pauperism e star vation. Ile complained also of the attacks upon t_h..!rish Members and the Irish people by the press, a w u n c l h were filled with the most offensive personal abuse !iiegusting falsehoods. He gave the strongest con tradiction to those attacks that the forms of Parliament wo uld allow hi m. The Hon. Gentleman t h en p rocee d e d to t read over along list of peers and gentry of that coun try who possessed estates in Ireland, which they rarely u t r never v i s i ted, and who left the people to m i sery an d orvation, while th e y a b s t rac t e d th e rents and profits ..s ihe l an d and spent them elsewhere. Many of these "Weasels and gentlemen were, be was ready to admit, e xcellen t l andlords; but they were very bad Irish land rds- Resid ent landlords could do a great deal. They co uld keep t h e people quiet. If they wished to keep t h e P e ople out of the hands of bad leaders let them give them coed leaders. ---(Cries of "He a r, hear.") He suggested that the best thi ng t h ey could do would b e to i mpose a ' a t of 10 p er cent. upon the absentee Irish landlords; if th e did that the people of Ireland would willingly dis- Zroe with their 50,000L—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. embers sa id they would grant it because it would u ° l ? iti.. the t est• lie said " No; " —it was only the begin reg of a seri es . I f they were to b e thus treated as !ndicants it would be better for them a t once t o t a ke eft. t heir clothes, and come to that House in the old Faerments that had been sent to Ireland.—(Great Irel and Whatever concessions had been made to theru an , d the British Minister had invariably mulcted Red and made them pay for it in pounds, shillings, Is se e e nce. Look at the Petition of Rights, which had conceded by Charles I. only on condition that the Parr call e i s Z rael lt should vo t e him a sum of 130,0001. H e cat s " aPou the Hon. Members for Ireland not to be de. sp urn a nd duped an y l ong er—let them act like men, an d th e t he filthy lu cre . —(Great cheering.) Now, look a t by th ren ,e r g e k amount that was annually drawn out of Ireland take s[ u a sentee p rop 04 sterling It was stated that te Was 4,000,00 annually; but he would it at 3 , 0 00,000/., and, calculating that for fifty years, 4,' R to the present time there was a sum of 150,000,0001. aver Wo out of Ireland. Take the crown rents at an 4,2 :, 1 ;° of 70,0004 for fifty years, and that would make u 0 Z , e 00 : 1 )1 ., so that instead of coming as beggars to that eceolFtrravoef he Would take the liberty of telling the Chan e Exchequer that he would find it difficult to 6.ity ne the fact, that there was altogether a sum of 08,0 00,0001. years s , te a r e n d n g et t , a u ke a n th o e u m t at o i l cia l n re w la i n u d ld d b u e ri a n b g le tl t i o e lastshow that he had been mistaken in a single figure. lie tr uted Ulu the Lion. Member for Tavistock, now that he had heard these facts, would blush for shame for the at tack, he bad made upon the Irish people. H . e thought the Hon. Member was altogether unjustifiable in the charges he had brought against them; he should be glad to know whether the Hon. Gentleman really thought that the people of Ireland had swindled the country. He cared little for their 50,0001. that, was to be voted that night, because he could tell them 50,0001. would not do, nor five times 50,0001.—(Ironical 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 600,004, and that if the names of the subscribers were looked over, it would be found that the great bulk of them were persons who were connected by property or relationship with Ireland. He admitted, however, the kindness and the liberality of England in the season of Ireland's distress, but they had heard quite enough of it from the Hon. Memb er f or T av i stock, and he would say to him— fit " To To: J obu o i ta John John ni I hn niotawhnt hash tr s hlo o util m gar eethe lately moretl t i h g tl o ai i etu t hg o nah n anit iliotun t —(Cheers.) And he believed, if the accounts were fairly ablanced between the two countries Ireland would be found to o we E ng l and nothing. Let! the people of Eng land bear in mind who it was that really wished to sepa rate Ireland from England. It was one of their own countrymen—not one of the mere gentry, but one of the nobility, a high and titled Bishop—the Bishop of Dvrry —who rode in at the head of his followers, and said to the BAH of Charlemont, " Now is the time 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 it," 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, and 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 Irelami, 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 8,000/. 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 ace mpanying 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 t hey 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 purs 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 he 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 was 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 50,0001. 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 downy bed in London to sit upon a naked rock in Connemara? — (Great laughter.) He was not a leader nor exterminator —he liked the aristocracy—he 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, if 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, he should have the satisfaction of supporting that which he considered more conducive to the interests of both countries—for he would rather his right band to be cut away from his body than take any other course. He was fur 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 condect 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 halt a chzen 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 one as those upon the other. He 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 he 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 Isis 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 one. 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 ap peared that year after year the amount of pauperism in Ireland was increasing, and 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 ho 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 he 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; and 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 Government 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, be did not see how Irish proprietors, with only 00 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 merits as they would not themselves suggest any remedy, should allow those who understood the wants and condi. Lion of that country to introduce remedial measures for the benefit of that country. He also thought it neces sary that Government should give a detail of 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 e °slid 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 reference to many parts of Ireland the time for . deli beration has passed by, and that now only was the time for 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 be found several mistakes in their mode of proceeding. First, in the Union of Ballina 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 the affections of the Irish people was not to pander 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 10,000,000/. 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 far the temporary mitigation of such distress until it shall have received from her Majesty's advisers an estimate of the whole charge which will be 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. :MORE 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 Hoc. Member that he did not intend to oppose the grant of 50,0001. for the immediate relief of the 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. I am 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 Ilace, 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 Hon. 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 50,000/. for 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 100,0001., for the same purpose. Then again in 1846, the first vote of the House in the early part of the session was a sum of 50,0001. for the public works in Ireland, which was fol lowed by a vote of 50.000/. for piers and harbours in Ireland, and by 50,0001. for drainage in that country. Altogether 228,000/. were voted in loans, and 150,000/. in grants for 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 pur, 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 Belittle 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 popu lation as far as possible, by making an advance in aid of the union, and not compell 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 for 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.—(Hear, 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; 1 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 on 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 Ireland." Now, Sirs 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 ofnhis 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. he Hon. Gentleman speaks of the distress that has prevailed in Ireland, and which dues prevail at the present moment, as the usual sad ordinary distress of that country. Now, Sir, the case, as I apprehend, has 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, more 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 lation. 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. gethcr 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 dependent 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. Tho people of this counry, in 1847, 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 agency of the British Association and the Government, many more—more than a million —were kept alive. The Hon. Member asks what good has this done—what trace remains of it? And he says 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, and a future comfort which is likely to be far more than they originally enjoyed.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore, so far— whether the money was rightly spent or not—whether it was most prudently distributed or otherwise—all this I consider to be but a small part of the real question. The 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 be 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 for the support of the poverty. Now let us consider how much was implied in this rule. We have heard a great deal of the Irish landlords and a their conduct to their t enantry. There are goo d han o d n. lord a s ent a l n e d man bad landlords agree Ireland , withl believe there are as goo d l andlords i n Irelan d as as him 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 less than 1,700,0001. 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 300,0001. has been applied to the relief of out-deer 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 come to the assistance of the very destitute in that country. But not only this is the case, but the number of unions to which large contributions have been made, have been considerably less. Out of 131 unions, there are not above 21 who have had such support. If you are confining the evils of the principle to a narrow dis trict, as we propose, the result will be unmarked by 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 i m provement 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 ICanturk union there 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 46/. 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 661. 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 the " Papers relating to the Aid afforded to the 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 be 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 b. 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, I do admit 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 anti 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 ne 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 ' should have at once come forward in the month of No vember with measures upon this subject. Why, Sir, we thought last year that it was desirable, upon this import ant question, to obtain the benefit of experience; 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 conduct of affairs in this country, and who had not sufficient knowledge with respect to Ireland. If that is the case; if that 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 consult those who have local experience upon the subject, and tell them what your plans are, and ask their advice as to whether they would be practicable and beneficial ?" Sir, I think that one of the amendments to be proposed in the poor-law should contemplate an encouragement to these 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 :ast 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 that which I think has been a great misfortune in England, and which I should be sorry to introduce into Ireland—namely, im peding the free circulation of labour—(Cheers)—and depriving the labourer of that reward to which he is entitled. Besides which a law of settlement implies a law of removal. If you find a man in Kent, and remove him, upon his becoming chargeable, into Gloucestershire, he is pretty sure to be fed and maintained in Gloucester shire ; but what would be the consequence of men rush ing, in the spring of the year, from Connaught into England or Scotland, and your driving them back again to those districts in Connaught which are most distressed, and where they are utterly incapable of obtaining work ?--(Hear, hear.) Why, theie conld not be a gre a t e r crue lty inflicted upon I re l an d t h an t o enforce that strict law of settlement and remo va l. 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 very much depend what course we might think necessary hereafter to take. The Hon. Gentleman says that it is the duty of her 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 west sures are under consideration, and upon which I think it *ill be necessary to legislate in the course of the present session. I do myself consider that it may be possible to go throttgli this g reat transition—one of the most extraordinary transitiOtla that ever took place — (Hear, hear)—a transition which is not the act of any Parliament 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 fa rmers and labourers.—(Hear.) I tad look forward with hope that that transition may be brought abbift without any very great loss of life ; though no doubt with a very great lose 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 then acy one could have anticipated who had been told tiro years before that the loss of the food of the country for so many years would have taken place. Now, I leave It td the Hon. 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 nave 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 any 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 it 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 me asures for the purpose, that a great social change 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 the,ground 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 consi derably incresse. 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.— (Hear, 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 matters to a Committee, and when laws sanctioned by the wisdom of two centuries were to be laid low, the Government would not wait for 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 bccurrence. The vote was only to keep the Noble Lord and his party in their present seats. These last, onel a single h .-- - a ( last.—(Hear tlrd e b , and d lug h Lord vot e were the grounds which would urge him to vote a ga i ns t the motion. He would r e mind the G overnment th a t wt ujetlaena able l e a h t oe bring sr e i r hno . they might d raw t oo muc h ou t o f a we ll, an d t h us fi n d it did not hold out any h o p es th a t thi s grant wou ld b e t h e a laughter.) should, t eNoble h e r therefore, measures. Remembering the past, he wou ld no t t rust t h e N o bl e Lord o r a that 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 turned 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 age the glassmakers of Birmingham same 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, be 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." He 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 days ago, however, he had received a letter from one of them, stating that the import duty on flint glas! was about to expire, and the manufacturers; d to their inability to compete with the fo n r ti c o a n g ists, and the trade in this country would expire with . manu facturer.—(Loud cheers from the protectio nists, anxious for a con tinuancelaughter.) They were, therefore, very owing to the prove that protection was in dispe nsa b le, manufacture. Nor was the peculiar character of the .ham that was lass trade the only one in Binning of the duty, being persu ad ed g h elf d it,n o suffer ingg ,from a similar ca use art the gilt toy trade other trades equally- bad— dPe. In these circumstances, he t h that they a could dozen z e a protested o f the maintenance the Irish. It contribute to upon to had T ne h i r r e heard of distress in s r i e e n that country o was owing to was said that the distress ' ace of that calamity. Was and aie b l i ) . , a fo ss r the potato-rot, as t hey Ireland against the people of . this country being called the distrose of 1822 or of 1842 owing to the potato-rot? f o o icnogeeturura 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, he 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 50,000/. do for it ? It was a mere drop of water in the ocean. Out of doors there was a strong feelinr: 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 must 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 tice to all parties.—(Bear.) The House then divided, when there appeared : Against Mr. Stafford's amendment 245 For it Majurity against it — 120 On our return to the gallery, Mr.IIIJME was stating the reasons why he should ()ppm), the grant. The Government were bound to , come forwa ;:o with some other measure to meet the dis tresses of Irelano, and to render the money given by this country really userj to her. As he did not think the grant good in principle, t;:' likely to be of any ser vice, he would take the sense of th' House upon it. The House again divided ; the numi;ers were, — • For the original motion 220 Against it Majority The vote was then agreed to. The House resanied 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 and 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 Hon. 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 in 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 prov;lme of Ulster was not adequately represented in the Committt:e. 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 bo 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. Maule) had been the chairman of the Committee of Selection. If the Hon. 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 Hen. 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 Hon. 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 example 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 polleted 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 command of a Protestant priest, had butchered a Catholic peasant in the presenee 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, he could riot 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 develope 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, hear)—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 fur Manchester's appointment on the Commit tee on account 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—(Hear)—and he 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 having 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.—(Laughter.) 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 the 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. His 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 against him, but he stole my gray mare last Christmas."—(Great laughter.) The lion. Member for Manchester was innocent of the charge found against him, but he happened not to have put him Reynolds) out, and put Mr. Gregory in.—(A laugh.) It ' was for that reason he was unfit to be on this_C?m e n? l ,t” tee ; but he could assure the House t hat, of was n as not British Members composing that House, thereo one in Ireland so popular as the Hon. Member.an plileaedwiaags recognised as the friend of the p oor, 9.3 a man for popular liberty. After a few words from Lord BERNesArcitd_l3, ' The House divided , when there app l2, For the motion ............• 74 A g ainst it .......... : ...... . Majority The name of the Hon. Member for Manchester was then added to the Committee, and also the name of Mr. Grace. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the following gentlemen form the Select Committee on Army and Ordnance:—Lord Seymour, Mr. Fox Maule, Mr. Hume, the Marquis of Granby, M r . W a l ter, Sir W. Molesworth , L or d C. Wellesley, Sir J. Graham, Mr. W. Miles, Mr. Cobden, Mr. S. Herbert, Mr. J. Greene, Mr. E. Ellice, Mr. V. Smith, and Mr. Bankes. Mr. B. OSBORNE would move that three additional names be added—Sir De Lacy Evans, Colonel Lindsay, and Colonell Dunne. The SPEAKER intimated that the Honourable Member for Middlesex could not propose these addi tional names until to-morrow, alter 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 BoLDEno, who complained that no person connected with the Ordnance had been placed on the Committee, although that arm of the service lro.d been subjected to so much attack in the pt'es's and elsewhere, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he woula oonsulL with the Comiaittee, a 44 zee whether the name of some Honourable Member representing the Ordnance could not, be added to the Connatttee.—(Hear.) The House then Qtijourned at two o'ttlock. PARLIAMEN TARY BUSINESS. (From( the Votes and Proceedings of Vie Rouse of Commons.) MONDAY, FEB. 12. The following Railway petition was presented, and the 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 (Lease or Purchase of the Glasgow, Barrhead, and iNeilston 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 Junctioo). Caledonian and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Lease of Dundee and Perth and Abeideen Junction, and the Dundee and Arbroath, and the Dundee and Newtyle Railways). Forest of Dean and Soun Wales (Amendment of Acts as to Charges on Forest of Dean Nailway and Branches—No. 2.) North. Staffordshire (Amendment of Acts.) Stirling and Dunfermline (Deviation of Branch to Alloa Harbour; Diversion of certain `Yorks; Extension of Time for completing Line and taking Land; and Amendment of Acts.) PARLIAMENTARY DIV ISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) MONDAY, FEB. 12. HABEAS CORPUS SUSPENSION (IRELAND) BILL. Order for Committee read ; Motion made, and Question put, " That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair." The ,brie divided:— MAJORITY-AYES. 84. MINOKIT Y-NOES, 14. Anstey, T. C. O'Brien, J. Scully, Francis Fagan, William O'Brien, Timothy Sullivan, :Michael Grattan, Henry O'Connor, Feargns Williams, John Greene, John O'Flallerty, Anthony TELLERS. Meagher, Thomas Powero Nicholas O'Connell, John Mogan, H. K. G. Reynolds, John Roche, E. B. (IN THE COMMITTEE.) Clause 1 (Persons imprisoned in Ireland for high treason, &. e., may be detained) :—Amendn.tent proposed , p a g e 1, line 13, to leave out the words " is, are, or :"—Question put, " That the words proposed to be left out stand 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 TELLERA. Morgan, H. K. Roche, E. B. O'Connell, John O'Brien, Timothy Scully Franci4 Anstey, Thomas C. Clause offered, " That nothing in thy' Act contained shall be construed to warrant the arrest of any person, &c. ;" Motion made, and Question put, "That the said Clause be now brought up." The Committee dividmd:— MI \ ORITY—AYES, 11. Fagan, William:l O'Flaherty, Anthony WilllAras, John Grattan, Henry Reynolds, John Greene, John Roche, E. B. TELLER.S. Meagher, Thomas Scully,i'rancis O'Brien, John O'Brien, T. Sullivan, Michael O'Connor,„Feargus MAJORITY-NOES, 105. ,RELIEF OF DISTRESS IRELAND. (IN THE COMMITTEE.) Question again pro;.' osed, 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 Unitt,d Kingdom, of any sum, not exceeding 50,0001., for affording relief to cei - tain 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 fo.' the relief of such distress, ought to have been accompanied b? 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 reliet of such distress, is vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and im politic with respect to the suffering districts themselves, as tending to destroy all spirit of sell-reliance: " That it is the duty of her Majety's Government to in troduce, without delay, measures wilich 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. IL 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, Bowel Richards. Richard Blair, Stephen Hale, It. B. Rufford, Francis Blakemore, R. lialsey, T. P. Sanders George Boldero, Henry Henley, J. W. Scott, Francis Bourke, R. S. Berries, J. C. Seymer, LI. K. Bramston, T. W. Hervey, Lord A. Shatto, R. D. Brand, Thomas Ilildyard, It C. Shirley, E. ,J. Bremridge, Richard Hodgson, W. N. Smyth, John; G. Brooke, Lord Hood, Sir A. Smythe, George Brim), M. liornby John Somerset, Captilin Brown, 11. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Somerton, Viscount Burghley, Lord Ker, Richard Sotheron, T. H. 16. Eurroughes, H. N. Knightley, Sir C. Spooner, R. Cabbell, B. B. Knox, Colonel Stafford, A. Cholmeley, Sir M. Law, C. E. Stanley, Edward Christopher, R. Lennox, Lord II G. Stuart, JI. Cobbold, John C. Leslie, C. P. Stuart, J. Cochrane, A. Lowther, Henry Sutton, H. M. Cocks, lhomas S. Lushington, C. Taylor, T. E. Cole, 11. A. Mackenzie, W. F. Thompson, Colonel Coles, H. H. 3landeville, Viscount Thompson, Aldermen Cotton, W. H. Manners,sLord C. Thompson, George Cowan, Charles Manners, Lord G. Thornhill, G. Disraeli, B. 3feux, Sir Henry Trevor, G. Dod, J. W. , Miles, William Tron ' ope Sir J. Dodd, George Moffatt, George Turner, George Duff, George S. Moody, C. A. Tyrrell, Sir J. Duncult, John Stunts, G. F. Verner, Sir W. Hondas, G. Napier, Joseph Vyse, It. H. Du Pre, C G, Neeld, John Waddington, David East, Sir J. Neeld, Joseph Waddington, H. S. Estcourt, J. B. B. Newport, Visct. Walpole, S. H. Farnham, E. Newry, Viscount Willoughby, Sir U. Farrer, James Nugent, Lord Wodehouse, E. Floyer, John Osborne, Ralph Fox,,S. L. Ossulston, Lord TELLEI9. Fuller, A. E. Palmer, Robert Beresford, William Godson, Richard Palmer, Bounden liewdegate, N. MAJORITY—NOES, 245. Goulburn, Henry O'Connell, J. Grace, 0. D. O'Connor, Feargus Graham, Sir James O'Flaherty, Anthony Grattan, Henry Ogle, S. C. Greene, John Owen, Sir J. Greene Thomas Paget, Lord A; Grenfell, C. Pascoe Paget, Lord C. Grenfell, Charles W. Palmerston, Vis. Grey, Sir George Parker, John Grey, Ralph W. Patten, J. W. Grosvenor, Earl Peel, Sir Robert Hallyburton, Lord J. Peel, Colonel Hamilton,sl. H. Pennant, Colonel Hamilton, Lord C. Peto, Samuel Harcourt, G. Pigott, Francis Hardeastle, J. A. Pilkington, James nestle, Alexander Power, Nicholas Hastie, Archibald Pusey, P. Hawes, B. Raphael, Alexander Hay, Lord J. Rawdon, Colonel Hay ter, W. G. Reynolds, John Headlam, T. E. Ricardo, J. 1.. Ileneage, Edward Rice, E. R. Henry, Alexander Rich, Henry Herbert, Henry A. Roche, E.-B. Heyworth, Lawrence Romilly, Sir John Bobhouse, Sir John Itumbold, C. E. Hobhouse, T. B. Russell, Lord J. llodges, T. L. Russell, Edward S. Hodges, T. Twisden Russell, F. C. Hogg, Sir J. W. Sadleir, John Hollond, Robert St. George, Chris. Horsman, Edward Sandars, Joseph Howard, Lord E. hcholefleld, William Howard, C.W. G. Scrope,:G. P. Howard, E. G. Scully, Francis Howard, Sir It. Seaham, Viscount Hume, J. Seymour, Sir H. Inglis, Sir It. Seymour, Lord Jackson, William Shell, R. L. Jervis, Sir John Shelburne, Earl el Keppel, G. T. Sidney, Alderraaa Kershaw, James Simeon, John King, P. J. Slaney, R. A.: Labouchere, Henry Smith, R. V. Langston, J. H. Smith, M. Tucker Lascelles, W. S. Smith, J. Benjamin Lemon, Sir C. Somerville. Sir W. 1 Lewis, G. C. Spearman, H. J. Lincoln, Earl of Stansfleld, W. R. C. Lindsay, Colonel Stanton, W. H. Locke, Joseph Stuart, Lord D. Lockhart, A. E. Sullivan, Michael . Lockhart, W. Talfourd. ,ergeant 3 ." N I I a ' N e i t i t a tt a e r n a , , S it i r r a j E o . r TT T le a , en i n s c iseg re en d r,, , 1,3, H. W. S iri. IsPCullagli, W. T. Th i c k n ess°, R. A. 11`Gregor, John Thornely, John Mahon, O'Gorman Mahon, Viscount Maitland, Thomasiem I TT • o °° w ww i ri li el l Ye c Y L l' d t , j. Captain oGh.n Marshall, NI Vane, Lord H. Martin, C. W. Villiers, Charles ai ns terman. John Vivian, J. 11. Matheson, Aletel " N l V V it al l l ter C ;J ß oh . n Maule, Fox moon-, :ant Ward, 11. G. Watkins, Colonel Milton, Viscount Mitchell, A. T. MMMoialnit'sheoller:4ll:William l' l W N V V v ea e i l l w s l s t e . o h is' n ea i : jy ki j ' a , TL ,: n . o . e r s i d .. C . r Moore, G. H. Williams, John Morgan, 11. K. Williamson, Sir' H. N3 s i l u o og r y : e :i ai s it , tt: D : a i: v ia l i d :ecrisey Mostyn, E. M. Wilson, Matthew MulgTave, Earl Wood, Sir Charles Wood, W. P. Norreys, Lord Young, Sir John O'Brien, J. TELLIES. O'Brien, Sir Lucius Tufnell, R. O'Brien, T. Hill, Lord Marcus Abdy, T. N. Acland, Sir T. Adair, R. Shafto A I cock, Thomas Anson, Colonel Anson, Viscount Armstrong, Sir A. Armstrong, It. B. Arundel, Earl of Ashley, Lord Bagshaw, John Baines, M. T. Baring, henry Baring, Sir F. T. Baring, Thomas Barrington, Viscount Barron, Sir 11. Bass, Tomas Bellew, It. M. Berkeley, Captain Berkeley, C. L. G. Bernard, Viscount Birch, Sir Thomas "Haanll, S. W. Blandtbrd, Marquis Blewitt,:Reginald Bouverle,:E. P. Boyle, Colonel Bright, John Brockman, E. D. Brotherton, Joseph Brown, W. Bruce, Lord E. Bunbury, E. 11. Burke, Sir T. J. Butler. I'. S.: Buxton, sir E. Callaghan, D. Campbell, W. F. Cardwell, Edward Carter, John B. Caulfeild, J. M. Cavendish, C. C. Cavendish, W. G. Caylcy, Edward S. Clay, Sir W. Clements, Charles Clerk Sir G. Cobden, Richard Cockburn, Alex. Colebrooke, Sir T. Corbally, M. E. Cowper, W. F. Craig, W. G. Crawford, W. S. Crowder, B. B. Dalrymple, Captain Dawson, T. V. Devercux, J. T. Duncan, Viscount Duncan, George Dundas, Admiral Dunne, F. P. Ebrington, Lord Ellis, John Ellice, Edward Elliot, J. E. Eusten, Earl Evans, William Fagan, W. Fergus, John Ferguson, Sir R. Filmer, Sir E. F i tzpa trick, IE, Fitawnllam, G. Gibson, D. hew F 31. } }}. ex Forster,rdloyYtcjT'bA Richardlhmat Gladstone, W. E. Glyn, G. C. COURT CIRCULAR. The Queen and Prince Albert, accompanied by the Prince of Wales, Prince Alfred, the Princess Royal, the Prince Alice, the Princess 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's 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 Dowag er Lady Lytt e lto n , the Marquis of Bread albane, the Ike of Norfolk, Lord George Lennox, and Colonel Seymour. Her Majesty and Prince Albert honoured the perform ance of the French Plays with their prese nce yesterday evening. The Royal suite consisted of th e Viscountess Jocelyn, the Hon. Miss Macdonald, the Earl of Listowel, Lord Alfred Paget, and Colonel Seymour. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council sat yes tet day iu the Council Chamber, Whitehall. The Lords present were—The Master of the Rolls, Lord Brougham, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall, and the Judge of the Admiralty Court. The C ourt heard Hardy's Petition for an e xtension of Lett ers P atent , Lor d Brougham notified their I.lo . :dships' intention of advising - '1 = L