The Sun. — London, England, 1849-06-09 00:00:00

THIRD READINGS. The following Bills were read a third time and pass€d : The Birm;ngham Borough Exemption from County Rates (No. 2) B:II. Ho,pital lor - Consumption Bill. Truro Turnpike Roads, Penryn and Redworth Turn pike Road (Consolidation of Trusts, Alterations of Tolls, Formation of New Roads) Bill. CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS. The following reports were considered and agreed to:— Binbrooke Sc. Gabriel and Binbrooke St. Mary Inclo sure (Amendment and Extension of Acts, Alteration of Awards, settling Titles to Lands, &c., and defining Parish Boundaries) Bill. Cong.leton Inclosure Act Amendment Bill. Sheffield and Tinsley Road (Extension of the Tinsley and D measter Turnpike Road to Sheffield) Bill. STOCKTON AND DARLINGTON RAILWAY. On the motion for the third reading of the Stockton and Darlington (Consolidatien of Acts Increase of Ca pital and Purchase of the Middlesborough Dock) Bill, Mr. HASTIE moved the insertion of a clause relative to the toll to be taken on the Shelbon Tunnel. Lord HARRY VANE said the clause bad been unani mously rejcted by the Commitke. Mr:B. - DENIS - ON said under these circumstances it was a wsste of time to discuss the matter. Mr. STUART suppomd the clause. Captain HARRIS said the reason the Committee did not insert the clause was, because they felt they had not power to do so. After some further discussion the amendment was withdrawn. The MI was then read a third time and passed. LORDS' AMENDMENTS. The Lords' amPnc:ments to the Kirkaldy Harbour, Docks, Ferries, and Petty Customs Bill were considered and agreed to. PETITIONS. Mr. BASS presented a petition from Derby praying for the extension of county courts. Mr. WILLIAMS presented a petition from Aberys twith in favour of the Clergy Relief Bill, Mr. PLUMPTRE presented petitions complaining of agricultural distn; ss. Mr. 0. DUNCO ABE presented petitions from York shire to the nine effect. Mr. B. OSBORNE presented a petition from Surrey, praying the H use to acknowledge the de facto Govern num of 11, , )me. Mr. COWAN presented a petition from Edinburgh complaining of ;he present system of keeping roads and brides in Scotland. Mr. TRELASVNY presented a petition from Mr. Charles H. Green c.JmpLining that he had been nearly ruined by church-rates. Mr. W YLI) presented a petition from 2,000 persons employed in collieries, praying that some measure might be passed to obtain the better ventilation of mines. Mr. BA NKES presented a petition from the county of Dorset, agrerd to at a large punlic meeting, complaining of the present distress of the agricultural interest, and praying for the re-imposition of a protective duty upon the produce of foreign countries. SUCCESSION TO PitOPER CY IN INDIA. Mr. HUNIE gave notice that on the 16th he would call the attention of the Elocis to certain proceedings iu India, by which the law of succession to property there had be(n superseded. LUNNTIC ASYLUMS (SCOTLAND) BILL. Mr. CU NINIING BRUCE kayo notice, when this Bill came on, that he would move the exclusion of the county of E:gin from it. NATIONAL EDUCATION. Mr. MILES moved for a return of all correspondence which had tsken place between the Committee of Council of Education and the Committee of the Na tional Society upon the subject of the management clauses, subsequent to the last publication of the minutes: copies of the management clauses, as amended; and of all conditions which are imposed, either upon Roman Catholic schools, or schools of Dissenting bodies, previ ously to the advance of any sum of money towards the bui!ding of the aforesaid schools by the Committee of the Privy Council of Education.—Agreed to. PALACE COURT. _ _ _ Mr. H. HERBERT said that the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had affirmed that the question which was now before the House had never been fairly met.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He feared that if it bad not been fairly met the circumstance was more owing to the Honourable Gentleman's absence from the House than from any other cause.—(Hear, hear.) If the Hon. Gentleman had been in his place as often as others, both on his own bide of the House and on that which was opposed to it, he ( - alr. Herbert) believed that he would have found no rea sonable cause of complaint of inattention to Irish interests. Ile had observed, indeed, that when ever Irish subjects were before the House that the Hon. Member bad never been in his place—(Hear, hear) — and he was ashamed to say that whenever Irish ques tions were before the House Irish Members were among the last to take a practical interest in them. Mr. GRATTAN—The question simply was, how the evils in Ireland had been produced.—(Hear, hear.) It was not a matter of two, three, or four thousand years, but how the evils were to be remedied. The whole of the evils were the natural fruit of British legislation. He did not object to British connexion, but British legislation was an evil which appeared irremedi• able. He saw a wretched party of Irish people the other day in Ireland, starving and in rags, who had been sent b ac k t o Ireland from Birmingham and Manchester, whither they had wandered in search of food and employment. That was the charity of the Ilonourabie Member for Manchester, that was the bright hu manity of that Hon.`Member.—(A. laugh.) They took away the absentee rents, and that was the cause of much of the distress and want that abounded. It was aiwnllhaennid. Irish H on th s e ense e , t plthhoodorpt.heheow was House plecould not live on th e rate pohsysgetrn antdhatotvtewr,usigd beain the ruin of I re l and. Mr. O'Connell said if they passed that Bill they might hgOse in it t ou t n h d e Ireland, and write upon every house words " poor-house." That had actually been verified, It was Irish poverty that was support ing Irish population. The House passed that law, and then they followed it up by driving away all the honourable and high-spirited men from the country, and now they had nothing :left but famine and fever. He (Mr. Grattan) had fled from a host of beggars forty - eight hours a g o, and he said for God's sake let him get away, for the very air was infected with famine and fever. It was not on let Irish them landlords that the it by co c u b l a d rgin b g e r t e h m e edi e e vil d; root back h of th e evil,te absentees. and send T theirhey vs .40,000 ui dn lt m soldiers h to drive longer recruit their army and navy with Irishmen. He had seen little children, the rising generati of Ireland, perishing and fading away. He saw the other day men from Roscommon, Limerick, and Tipperary; he declared to God he never saw such images of misery. in his life, and when he sat down to his dinner he slid " take it away and give it to the poor." They were destroying the best portion of the human mind. Mr. O'Brien was wrong; he rebelled too soon; had he waited, it must have anti would have exploded, and a real insurrection must have deluged the country. In Ire land th,;re were land landlords who did not get 2 lbs. of meat a week. He implored them to do something to prevent the horrible Stale of destitution that now ex isted in Ireland. Mr. LAWLESS, while he considered that the discus sion which had taken place would do much good, as it would 'mike known the amount of misery which pre vailed in Ireland, did not think that the system of evic tions now so prevalent in Ireland had been caused by the introduction of the poor-law into that country, as had been stated, for they did not commence with the introduction of that measure, but were practised before it was heard of. He rose, however, more particularly to ask a question of the Hon. Baronet the Secretary for Ireland, io reference to the circulars which hid been Lord D. STUAR,P gave notice of his intention to ask for leave to introduce a Bill to bring the jurisdic tion of the Westminster Palace Court under the opera tion of the County Courts Act. ACCIDEN IS IN COAL MINES. Mr. FLUME said an explosion had taken place at a coal mine on the sth of this month, by which 24 persons had been killed; and as such accidents were constantly taking place, he wished to know whether the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir (x. Grey) bad taken any measures to ascer tain the cause of it ? S:r G. GREY referred the Hon. Gentleman to the report which had been laid on the table of the House. Mr. FIUME trusted that some day would be fixed by the Government for the consideration of this question; and he gave notice that he should, on Monday, bring this question before the House, and trusted that the Government would fix a day for the settlement of the question which had so long agitated the public mind. Sir G. GREY said that it was impossible at preset t for the Government to take su .h a subject into consideration, but IA opp , rtunity would be lost in bringing the matter before the House. AUSTRALIAN BILL. Mr. HAWES, in reply to a question from Mr. Disraeli, said that though the Government had been ' much interrupted, he hoped to be able on Monday to introduce the improved Rill.—(H•.ar, hear.) TOONIEVERA. UNION. Mr. H. DRUNIMOND said before the Pouse went into the orders of the day, he would throw himself on its indulgence and its justice while he troubled it with a re• futation of the personal attack which was made on the Rev. Massey Dawson, a friend of his, the other evening, by the Hon. Member for Limerick. In so doing be by no means admitted the justice or the pro priety of any Member of that House making a charge against an individual in reference to his private pro perty, without in the first instance giving him notice of his intention so to do. The Hon. Member then read a letter he had received from the Rev. Massey Dawson, to the effect that the persons ejected from his property happened to be two middle-men, named Murphy and Sawley, the former of whom owed him six years' rent at one time, and had only since paid a very small portion of his arrears, whilst Sawley owed him five and a half years' rent, and not content with owing him rent, he har boured all the bad characters in the vicinity, men who lived on roaming the country by day and plundering by night. .kr. JOHN O'CONNELL said the Hon. Member for Tipperary was not in the House at that moment, but he would venture to answer for him to the House.— (ilear.) The facts were not at all denied, of turning out 500 or 600 poor people to perish, and the levelling of their houses was nut denied; and he (Mr. John O'Connell) did think it an aggravation to the people to be called a nest of thieves and murderers, without the least attempt to prove it. A great number of par ties got unavamped receipts for rents which they had paid from the agent of that gent l eman, Mr. B. E. Wilso n ; and parties taking unstamped receipts could be tamed out in a moment. There was no doubt in the present distressed state of Ire land a greet number of poor peopl e had been about the country to su pport life.—(Cri es of "Order, order, " in the midst of ali;eh the Hon. Member resumed his seat) Sir W. SOMERVILLE said as his Hon. Friend the other evening ,had referred to the conduct of tho .board of,-Kuirdians of the Igenagh Union, hA (Sir Willi am Sotkervllt) had received a report from Captain Bowen, the iPepecter, Who stated that the necessary notices were s erved 0:s the relieving, officer', in accordance with th e Ad 'or Vintoriti4n the case of the parties who had been t;7letord• • Nire- S CROPF. , ..Conneeted with this Eubject ("VI); obst "Pictir,byder," gait, chair.") , 1 when originally framed proposed. Unless this clause 1 Mr. F. O'CONNOR said that as there was no question which he had introduce d stood, he would sa y non-con- I before the House. he would move that the House ad tent to the third reading . ! journ, which would make a question.—(Laughter.) Lord BROUGaIAM reminded their Lordships that 'ru KILRUSH UNION. this was the last stage of the Bill. As his Noble and Mr. P. SCROPE said ne wished toesk of the Govern- Learned Friend had proposed to introduce a very im- ment, whether they had read the report of Captain Kens portant clause, he hoped he would not press the third nedy, and whether they thought it incumbent on re ading on the present occasion, but would give them them to take any proceedings to put a stop to the time to consider it. evictions going on in that part of the country? Lord CAMPBELL was understood to consent to post- The report of the inspector stated that during the last pone the third reading of the Bill until Monday. twelve months fifteen thousand persons had been driven Lord STANLEY said he understood that the second from their homes by this system. of eviction, and the reading of the Incumbered Estates (Ireland) Bill was homes of twelve thousand more were in the process of fixed for Monday next. Now, that was a Bill which being razed to the ground.—(Her.) demanded their most serious consideration, both as re- Mr. J. O'CONNELL corroborated the facts stated by spects its principle and details. Although he thought the Hon. Member, but intimated that he had under that the third reading of this Bill should be postponed, stated them. A cowshed in which a woman afflicted inasmuch as it required much more consideration than it with fever had taken shelter had been destoyed, and a heed as yet received, he hoped it would not be fixed for " wigwam" which a poor man and his family bad erected a day when their attention would be occupied by other was set fire to and pulled down. It really, in such a important business. He was of opinion that this mea- state of things, behoved the House and the Government sure should be permissive, and not compulsory; and he to take some step to prevent the continuance of such a thought it excedingly desirable that the Government horrible state of things.—(Hear, hear ) should take further time to ascertain whether it was Sir G. GREY was not surprised that what had possible to adopt the permissive principle, and to amend occurred in the Kilrush Union had attracted the the Bill in the way suggested. He wished to know attention of the Honourable Gentleman and the House, whether it was intended to take the Leasehold Tenure since it was distinguished from what had taken Bill and the Incumbered Estates Bitl on Monday, be- place elsewhere. He must, however, remind him cause he should protest against both being discussed at that last session an Act was passed for preventing the same sitting, both of them being mersures which re- evictions, but that those who, taking their stand quired grave consideration and ample discussion, upon legal grounds, were about to evict, that Lord CAMPBELL said it was his intention to take in every case notice should be given to the the second reading of the Incumbered Estates Bill on guardians, and that means should be taken to provide Monday, and, if time permitted, he hoped, considering temporary shelter for those who were evicted. It ex the present circumstances of Ireland, the Noble Lord preesly declared that no houses should be pulled down would not object to their going on with the second Bill. whilst the parties were in them, which provision, even The Marquis of NORTHAMPTON presented a peti- in Kilrush, he did not gather had been violated. If it tion from some agricultural society, praying the Govern- had it was in contravention of the law, and the parties ment to extend its assistance to those societies, to enable were amenable to punishment. Indeed the only rernscly them to exhibit agricultural implements and improve- for such a lamentable state of things was in the hands of menu. those who were capable and wi lli ng t o a ff or d emp l oy - Lord STANHOPE proposed to psstpone the presen- ment to the poor, thus enabling them to maintain tation of the petitions of which he had given notice till themselves and to pay their rent. He was prepared Monday next. to say if the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Scrope) Lord CAMPBELL said the Bills to which he had thought proper to call for a detailed account of the referred, being measures of importance, would take pre- number of evictions, the names of the evictors, and the cede nee. extent of the families of those evicted, that no objection Lord STANHOPE then postponed his petitions till would be offered by the Government. He was not pre- Tharsday next. pared to say that the Government might not call for Their Lordships their adjourned. further powers if they found them necessary; but he ---swei---- reminded the House that the subject was surrounded HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 8, with difficulties. The SPEAHER , took the Chair at Four o'clock. NEW MEMBER, Sir R. PEEL said he was quite aware of th e difficulty that stood in the way of applying a remedy to the gnu- Mr. Deciesore took the oaths and his seat for Lime- ing evils complained of, but it was quite possible that rick, in the room of Mr. William Smith O'Brien, con- the indignation of the House of Commons might have victed of high treason. some effect in checking such outrages—(Hear)—for he LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY. must say that he never heard of any country, civilized Mr. BROTHERTON moved that the report from the or barbarous, presenting materials fbr such a statement Committee on the Lancashire and Yorkshire and London as that made by Mr. Kennedy. He asked, therefore, and North-Western Railway Companies (Transfer of if the statement made by that gKith man was cur- Interest in the Preston and VVyre Railway Harbour and re wssofficial an doc . ument,. presented bi the Dock, and regulating Management of the Undertaking) Executive ct.lt Government by the order of the Crown (re-committed) Bill, be considered upon Monday next, fur the consideration of Parliament, for the guidance provided amended prints be delivered to the doorkeepers of their proceedings ; and that gentleman, too, was three clear days previously, and the amended breviate an officer in her Majesty's service and a man, he be laid upon the table one clear day previously, believed, of unquestionable veracity.—(tiear, hear.) Agreed to. He stated this fact—that in one of the unions at a period of famine, during one year, 15,000 persona had been driven from their homes; and he says, after this had been dune in one year, it would be hardly credited that during the last month 12,000 additional persons had been driven from their homes. He then proceeds to detail incidental cases of the persons so evicted. The inspector stated three facts which appeared to be rather the creation of a heated imagination than a de tail of events occurring in the present sge. The inspector said he went to a ruined house and found it in possession of a father, a mother and two children, who were about to be evicted ; the father was a corpse ; the mother was dying of dysentery, and the two children were lying asleep upon the corpse of the father. In the second case he found a family located in a hut which had been surrounded by muck to drive them thence by the stench; while in the third case he saw a hut set fire to, though it was still occupied by miserable beings whose ailments prevented their escap ing. With these facts before them, he could not retrain from expressing his conviction that the time had arrived when some remedy ought to be applied to the evil. He knew not whether it was possible to stop the system by law, but he felt that a strong feeling of indignation on the part of the House might have some effect in mitigating the sufferings of these poor wretches.—(Cheers.) ' Mr. REYNOLDS remarked that by the returns it appeared that 160,000 kings had been evicted during the last three years. Colonel DUNNE admitted the atrocities that had been committed, but attributed them all to the working of the Irish poor-law. Mr. AUGUTUS STAFFORD said it was unjust to look only at one side of the question; there were landlords in the districts which had been referred to with whom it was not a question how they were to obtain the luxuries, comforts, or even decencies of life, but how they were to support their existence, for they were wholly deprived of animal food, and were reduced to two or three meals of Indian corn a day. The Government had compelled the Irish landlords, and he thought wisely, to pay the poor-rates for every tenant holding under 41., and, since the potato crops had failed, the tenants were utterly unable to pay any rent, and the consequence was that the landlords found themselves not merely without an estate, but actually in a worse condition, for they were liable to the heavy rates which the tenants could not pay. It that fact was not an excuse for the conduct of the Irish landlords, he thought it might be considered as some extenuation of it. Two yt ars ago he had warned the House not to place any temptation in the way of the landlords, which it was impossible eir human na ture to bear, but to make it the interest of the landlord to improve his estate rather than to eject his tenantry. r its advice, however, had been entirely disregarded, and the consequence was that 15,000 tenants had been evicted. He therefere thought that the House should not content itself with blaming the Irish landlords, but ought to share a portion of the blame and responsibility which had been cast upon them. The alt' ration of the area of taxation, which was at the root of the evil, the Govern ment would eventually be obliged to resort to, but if that measure was driven elf, it might psrhaps be unavailing. Mr. ROCHE declined giving any opinion upon the hobby of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stafford), but be regretted that Hon. Gentleman had come forward to express their sympathy with the people who had been evicted, because all the sympathy in the world weuitt not prevent landlords taking proceedings to protect themseves and their families from destitution. lie wished especially to call the attention of her M - jesty's Government to the system of coluniz ition re commended by the Emigration Commissioners.—(Hear.) It was not the retaining of the present poor-law that was likely to give any relief to the immediate necessity nor any permanent removal of the distress which now so extensively prevailed in Ireland.—(Herr, hear.) lie trusted, tnere!Cre, that her Majesty's Government would not neglect those recommendations in the statements of the Commissioners to which he had directed their ar tention. THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 9, 1849. issued under the Poor Relief Bill. In these circulars it was stated that no one could claim relief under the Act until they gave up their land, with the exception of a quarter ut at, acre; but that should the lstritil nrd refuse to accept ut the property- so given up, the families could in that case claim relief. lle wished to know whether these circulars hau been acted on? Sir W. SOMERVILLE was understood to say that, so far as he was aware, the circular had been issued under the authority of the Act, and acted on. Mr. SLANEY had supported the Government gene rally, but he had not great faith in their measur. s as regarded Ireland. He rose, however, to ask a single question. He thought that however much the English people had already subscribed for the relief of Ireland, he had no doubt but that were a subscription got up, many would still be willing to rubsciibe again, and he therefore wanted to know from the Secretary for Ireland, or any one else, whether any Committee bad been ap p Anted for receiving such subscriptions? He thought the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Meath, was wrong in blaming the English Parliament for the evils which had befallen Ireland, as these in a great measure had been caused by a dispensation of Providence. He trusted, however, that from the measure already passed, and these before the House, a better state of matters would be brought about. Mr. SCULLY said there was at present a Committee of the kind the Hon. Gentleman retered to in existence in Dublin, presidt d over by the Hon. Member for Kil dare, and which Committee would be glad to receive subscriptions from England or any where else. In re gard to the statement which the lion. Member for Sur rey had called attention to, as to the evictions at the in stance of the Rev. Massy Dawson, he was not in the House at the time such statement was read; but he un derstood the facts stated i❑ reference to the extent of those evictions vt ere not denied. Having lately come from Tipperary, he could state as to the extent the system was carried on there, and until the area of taxa tion was narrowed and the landlord made liable for the support of parties so evicted, such evictions would pro ceed and multiply. It was said that those ejected by the Rev. Gentleman were rogues and vagabonds; but so far from that being the case, he believed a great many of them were honest and industrious people. Mr. DRUAIMOND said what he complained of was, the bringing the private characters of gentlemen before that House in the manner that the Rev. Gentleman had been. The subject then dropped, and the motion that the House at its rising do adjourn to Monday, was then agreed to. POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the House go into Committee on the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill. Sir W. H. BARRON said previous to the House going into Committee on that Bill, he had to submit to the House the amendment of which he had given notice, which was, " That the property at present rated to sup port the poor in Ireland is totally inadequate for that purpose ; that in England there are sixty-seven millions of property rated to the poor, the population being about fi. teen millions; whilst in Ireland there are only thirteen millions of property rated to the poor, with a (much poorer) population of about eight millions; showing nearly three times more property in England per head to support the poor than in Ireland; that, therefore, it is necessary to provide further means for support of the pour of Ireland, in order to remove the extreme pressure which is now crushing down the rate-payers in that country, and checking the energies of all employers and capitalists." It was imp ,ssihle to apply the same law and expect that such law would be carried out in Ireland, on the same principles as it existed in England. They had nume rous complaints even here at the amount of po sr-rates, and in Ireland, suffering the distress which it now did, was it possible that such a law which created so much dissatisfaction in England, could be at all workable in Ireland? A great portion of the property in Ireland had been almost annihilated already by this futile pro. ject of an Irish poor-law. In 1a46 Mc. O'Connell, who knew Ireland better than any man who ever sat for it within that House, prophesied that such a law would reduce Ireland to misery and destitution. His prophecy had unfortunately proved but too true, as had been fully established by the evidence taken before the Committees of the House of Lords and Commons which had tat on the L ish poor-laws. It was there proved that lands had been abandoned, crime had been generated to an enormous extent, and the whole social framework of society had been almost stricken down by that law. He then quoted the evidence of Mr. Burke, Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Do Vere, and Twissilton, before the Poor-law Relief Committee, showing that the property of Ireland was not sufficient to maintain the poor of that country, and that if persevered is it would make the landlords bankrupts, and ruin the farmers, and that the result of it, as far as it operated since the passing of that measure, was extermination, emigration, and famine of the most awful character. He was provided with returns showing that pauperism in Ireland was rapidly in creasing, of which a striking example presented itself in the number of inmates of the Dungarvon Union Workhotise, in which di , tict he possessed some pro. perty, and also in that of Carrick-on-Suir. The poor-law of the country was literally breaking down, because there was no money in the country to support the pau perism of the country. In many instances the relieving officers had been received into the houses as paupers ; and frequently the military, when called out for the pur pose of enforcing the poor-law at the point of the bayonet, the officers had subscribed the amount necessary to dis charge the claims to the rate against the poor cottiers. lie could see no just reason fur refusing to Ireland what was conceded to England, the richer country, with its vast and various resources, the advantage of charging upon the Consolidated Fund the expense of the medical arid edu norial establishments existing under the poor-1 tw. Ire• land was a purely agriculture' country, and had suffsred much more than England had by the repeal of the corn laws, even to the extent of one-fourth of its beneficial value. They must look to other sources from whence to collect the means of administering the poor-law. Ile should recommend that for this purpose an immediate income- tax should be applied to all lands in Ireland nut at the present moment taxed to the relief of the poor. The operation of the present system of rating was to oppress the poorer classes, aid allow the richer ones to escape, contrary to every principle of equity, religion, and justice. But beyond its tendency to pauperise the country, and to deprive the solvent part of the popula tion of the means of assisting the pour, he would warn the House that it was positively dangerous, and that un less it was speedily checked, they might soon expect to find its mischievous consequences developed in the still m ,re aggravated and more general distress of the coun try. It Ireland, through the agency of this unjust sys tem of legislation, were dragged down into irretrievable revolution, they might rely upon it that she would not sink alone, but that she would draw England also into the gulf in wnich she was overwhelmed. The Hon. Member concluded by moving his resolution. Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that every Member of that House could not help feeling the deepest sympathy for the present unfortunate condition of Ireland, and therefore the length at which the last Hon. Gentleman had addressed them, needed no apology whatever. He had ailuded to the great distress of that country in a manner which its melancholy character no doubt de manded, and which showed the importance of a proper system of legislation.—(hear, hear.) H e th oug h t t h e question might have been more fairly and more correctly answered by his Honourable Friend (Sir H. Barron) after he had drawn so lamentable a picture of the social condition of Ireland, in particular at the present moment, when they were iu the third year of the must awful—the most calamitous famine that ever befel any country. His Honourable Friend had asked; what had the poor laws done for Ireland ? But was it not desirable that the Government should do something to mitigate the great social and severely-trying evils under which the people of Ireland were suffering? He thought that they ought to do something to mitigate those calamities— (Hear, hear)—and therefore it was that he was must anxious that the House should go now into Com mittee. He would not particularly allude to the evic tions which were taking place in Ireland, and which his Honourable Friend attributed, in the main, to the operation, of the poor laws. He would not allude to those evictions with any view of evoking angry feelings or discussion upon them; but this he might say, that evictions had taken place iu Ireland a long time back, and that they appeared to him to have been greatly increased, rot, he would say, so much by the operations of the poor laws as by the consequences of the famine that betel the country. His Hon. Friend had attributed the increase of crime also to the poor law. but he (Sir William Somerville) was of opinion that the in crease of crime was more owing to the famine. His Hon. Friend had advocated an income tax on that landed property in Ireland which was not rated to the poor, but he (Sir William Somerville) thought that the present was not the time best suited to the introduction of that measure.— (Hear.) He, therefore, hoped, look ing at all the circumstances, and taking the whole ques tion of the condition of Ireland into consideration, that the Hon. Baronet would .not press his motion to a divi sion, and that he would allow the Government to go on; and, if they could not effect all that was desirable to alleviate the distressed condition of the people of Ire land, to at least du all in their power towards so neces sary an object. Colonel DUNNE contended that the Right Hon. rinizilettotod decide d a e w w a away et h with er Baronet who spoke last had not put a correct interpre tation on the argument of the Hon . Baronet who had the contrary, his proposition was the th e property rv r o i e s pr h et previouslyeve addressed the House. His Hon. Friend had plainly this—that the poor - law. 1.1 rt e y i r t a h t e ed to the n Hou t s . e pour was sufficient to relieve the During the past year large sums had b y een collected country. ia Ireland by private subscriptions and by other modes,but, as every one knew, they proved insuffisient; enormous mortality ensued, and nothing could be more evident than that the property rated to the poor was quite in a !equate to the maintenance of the pour. Some good authorities on the subject said that a portion of the re lief ought to come from the national resources and from the resources of Ireland alone. But, if they made this demand upon Ireland, he hoped they would give baek to that country all that it ought to have. If they took a large proper.. tion of the Irish resources and applied them to the wants of England, the poverty of Irelandought if upon every sound principle to be relieved out super abundance of England. The pover t y of that Hou Ireland had been I caused by the erroneous legislation of was a fact well known that 6 4 per cent. of the popula tioniof Ireland was employed in agriculture. Everything unfavourable to the landed interest was dee p injury t o Ireland. The repeal of the corn laws might, perhaps, i have been advantageous to the empires at large, but that was the very re a s on w hy something should be done for Ireland, for th e I r i s h h a d lost their monopoly of the English provision market. He should not go back to the „ . change or the currency, but ho would say that every change which had taken place since the union had proved disadvantageous to the trade of Ireland. Again, the co lonial trade was a losing trade. Ho really thought that, under all the circumstances of the case, they ought to have a Committee up stairs. With unions in Clare and other pl aces Irving 18s. 4 , 1. in the pound, it was quite clear that the landed property of Ireland was not en ugh to supp ,, rt the poverty of Ireland. He thought Ire land would have b. en in a bettor state if the Poor-law hal not been introduced; for, although he did not mean to say that the Poor-law had entirely caused the evils under which that country was now suffering, he be lieved it had greatly aggravated them. He considered that the Government were bound to take care that relief was administered in the most economical way possible, but under the existing system the expenditure had been most wasteful. One of the burdens ny which Irish pro perty was oppressed was the repayment of advances for the works undertaken during the :amine. In 1846 no less than 4,800,000/. was appropriated to relief works; but, from a calculation he h •(1 made, he found that, sup posing every person employed received 10d. a day (which was much above the average, many of the per sons employed being women and children, who received a less amount), and allowing ten per cent. for the ex penses of administration, only about 3,730,0001. would have been expended, thus leaving more than 1,000,0001. unaccounted for. He said then that if proper care had been taken in the conduct of the relief works, and in the distribution of money under the poor-law, the property of Ireland would not have suffered from the burdens by which it was now oppressed. He considered that they , ought to make an entire chaeig,e in the present system, and to give up all thoughts of administering the poor-law in Ireland as it was administered in this country. Mr. OSBORNE said the Secretary for Ireland (Sir W. Somerville) had opposed the amendment because he thought it would have the effect of repealing the present Irish poor-law, but it be (Mr. Osborne) could believe that it would have that effect, he would support it with even greater good will than he was now prepared to do. —(Hear, hear.) He was not opposed to a poor-law for Ireland, but he regard-'d the existing law as a piece of ill-digested legislation, totally unsuited to the habits of the people, and most prejudicial to the country. He considered the present law inefficient for its avowed pur poses, inasmuch as it did nut support the peor, but " makes us poor indeed." The Right lion. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville) had stated that Ireland was suffering from a three years' famine, but would th a t Right lion. Gentleman say that, in the even: of the famine continu ing, as he (Mr, Osborne) feared it would do, the present poor-law, or, indeed, any poor-l aw , wou ld e ff ectually meet the destitution which existed? The Right Ho nourable Baronet had said that they were bound to do all in their power to assist Ireland in her pre sent situation; but he (Mr. Osborne) maintained that neither that house nor the Government had done all they could do to counterbalance the great evils rife is that country—not, he was ready to admit, from want of dis position, but from want of knowledge of the real circum stances of the country. The [lon. Member for Water ford bad endeavoured to show that the inerea , ,e of crime in Ireland had been dependent upon the non-working of the poor-law, and to connect the evictions in that country with the establishment of the poor-law; but he (Mr. Osborne) thought that if he could show that a system was at present existing in. Ireland under which crime had increased, the poor had been neglected, and agriculture had been debased, and that such a system was countenanced by that House, the House was bound to apply an immediate remedy. He believed he would be able to show them that there was a proportion of the rental of Ireland amounting to above 1,500,000/.—the rental of the whole province of Connaught—which was at present placed under a system that prevented money from being laid out in improvements; and if he showed them that land was worse tilled and that crime was most prevalent where that system existed, he thought they would have nu excuse for not endeavouring to remedy these evils. The Committee now sitting to inquire into the operation of the Irish poor-law had thought proper also to make an inquiry into the circumstances of the estates under the manage meut of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, and he be lieved be could prove that there WAS an intimate con nexion between these estates and the burden of poverty which had obliged Parliament to pass an amended poor- I law for Ireland. lie had no wish to undervalue the Bill which had been brought in this session by the able Soli citor-General, for he believed the principle of that Bill to be good, but he thought it was a delusion to expect that that Bill would have any immediate effect in reliev ing the property of Ireland or in setting the people to work. A very popular theme in that House was abuse of the Irish proprietors. All eves were open to the faults of that class, while few hearts felt for their misfortunes. Now, he thought it strange that persons who exhausted a copious vocabulary of abuse upon Irish landlords should' altogether except the largest proprietors in Ire land the Court of Chancery. Every gentleman who had been in Ireland, if he had passed through a district where unuoial poverty was apparent, and asked to whom the p ro p er ty b e l onge d, would, he had no doubt, state that he had been told it was " under the courts," the meaning being that it was under the dmaaynsagageom the et Right f g h t t h Cy. w o O r r L i h ly f ( s a r Hew. Peel) had used these remarkable words:—" All your measures for drainage, for local improvements, for in crease of fisheries, for emigration—all will be ineffectual unless you can cure those monstrous evils arising out of the condition of landed property in Chancery. If you can relieve these estates from the control of Chancery, you will do more for the advancement of Ireland than by any other measure you can adopt." He (Mr. Osborne) concurred in that opinion. They were all agreed that the social regeneration of Ireland did not depend upon a poor-law, but upon placing the people on the soil and giving them employment. This was clearly seen by Sir E. Sugden, one of the best Lord Chancellors this country ever sent to Ireland; but even ho was de:'eated is his attempts to rectify tte system of the Court of Chancery. What was the system pursued in that ' court? Property was thrown into Chancery, and the ownership was vested in the Court, ostensibly for the benefit of the creditor, but actually to the disadvantage of the owner and of the country. The Court appointed a receiver, who hal nothing to do but receive the rents. It was not expected that the receiver should have any knowledge of agriculture, or that he should even visit the estates. So long as he could screw the greatest amount of rent out of the tenants, he was qualified for his office. The tenants were served with notice to pay their rents to the receiver, who had a poundage of 5 per cent. upon all he collected, and who was not obliged to account to a Master in Chancery till fifteen months after the passing of his last accounts. Indeed, the motto of the receiver was, "Rem; quocunque mode rem." All references were made to the Master, and the ex penses were charged to the estate, to the great detri ment of the owner. When leases expired, or tenants were ejected, everything was referred to the Master, and a more fraudulent system than that under the courts it was almost impossible to conceive. The receivers, when appointed, were unable to lay out money on improve ments without referring to the Master, and then the the Master was unable to warrant such expenditure.— (Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member hero men tioned, in reference to t he management of estates "under the coutts," the particulars of a number of cases, with the view of showing the abuses w hi c h ex i sted under that system, observing that it was intima'ely con nect, d with the pour-law, for as long as the estates remained under the present system of receivership, ha bell( ved that no poor-law could work sarsfactorily to the landlord or to the tenant, I dh n eud h s i tt s hh o ee p e i as n tm i a o ti n ,eus m nrt o e than m r o e fai nt remained d unimproved e m one sixth of the rental of Ireland was " un d er the courts," and the cost of obtaining p erm i ss i on to lay out m the poor unemploy e d. T he poor-rates ,i ne d a p no r d out o v e — m (H en t e s a r e . ) were always high where the estates were un d er receivers, otiinnmeepyyros is v n eld improvements and in one district where the system prevailed (we be lieve the Hon. Member mentioned Skibbereen), he stated as a proof of the extreme peverty which had ex,sted, that 600 deceased persons had been interred without coffins in two holes. Consequently, under this vile and iniquitous system the landlords were ruined and the te nants were thrown, like dead dogs, coffin less into holes. The Hon. Member Also referred to a return which had been presented to the House, by which he found that among the receivers therein mentioned connected with tne Irish Court of Exchequer there was a certain num ber of farmers, shopkeepers, merchants, and 400 gen tlemen—the latter term meaning in Ireland men who had no available way of getting their livelihood (Laughter.) It way no wonder, then, that " under the courts" the estates and the tenantry were in their pre sent deteriorated condition. Many of the receivers were of the feminine gender, but they appeared to be better receivers than those of the male sex, for though living from the spot, they allowed less arrears.—(Laughter.) Many, also, were clergymen, and of those one lived in Devonshire; and this was the way in which Irish estates were managed.—(l - lear, hear.) The Hon. Member also, as a proof of the pernicious results of the receivership system, stated th a t so me o f t h e t enan t s o f M r . R oe , i u Tipperary, assembled together and entered into a plot to murder that unfortunate gentleman, upon the speculation that as his next heir was a minor, the es tate would fall under the management of the Court of Chancery, and they might thereby avoid the punctual payment of the rent. This, then, was a plague-epot which required to be removed. The present system of receivership had been denounced no later than last April by the presentable Master of the Rolls in Ireland as a dis grace to the country, observing that the country never would prosper until it was removed root and branch, and the management of the estates placed under some responsible department. He had hoped that the Go vernment would have granted a Cemcnittee upon this subject of the management of estates " under the Courts" in Ireland, and he pledged himself that, if Isuch a Committee were app o i nte d , a p l an should be submitted to it for the removal of the evils he had adverted to, and holding out a better prospect for the tenantry and pea santry, who were now placed under the horrible control connected with the present systern.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. NAPIER, hoped he might be allowed to trespass for a short time upon the attention of th. House—(Hear, hear)—with reference to a system which he felt was dragging down the country—(fiear, hear)—convinced as he was that the subject to which the Hun. Member (Mr. Osborne) had addressed himself, while one of paramount and pressing importance, was one which presented the oppertunity of doing very great practical good for Ire land by a simple and rapid process ; and be had to im plore the House not to let this session pass without adopting alter a short inquiry—only a short one would be irTe.isary—such a measure as would remedy the existing grievance.—(Elear.) Upwards of 2,000.000/. c .f the rental of t h a t country was now under receivers, and every week was aiding to the proportion of the pro perty es . f Ireland pl aced under their han d s. B y a law passed i n 1835, power was given to a judgment creditor to obtain the a p po i ntment of .a receiver. Judgments now affeeted • ttel property; and now, inch by inch over the country, wherever a receiver could be fastened, they were to be found, like flies upon a corrupt carcass, not merely breaking up the relation between landlord and tenant, but inflicting moral and social evils such as hardly could be estimated. Instead of this, without any ad vance of public money, and by the mere institution of a better control, that portion of Ireland might be an exempla to the rest.—(Hear, hear.) The usual course of things was t` is: —a year's interest, being iu arrear, a Lill was filed by the creditor; after the answer was in there would corne an applicetion for the appointment of a receiver . . The proprietor expecting, it not certein rein, never again to get into the property in any desire bie position, would etave off the appointment as well as he could, and, during that time, would be engaged in getting in all the rent he could; and the tenants often having a feeling of respect for him and his family, and perhaps pitting his difficulties, would combine with him so that he would get accruing rents and promissory notes, ! nd all sorts of arrangements made with him, and the rect leer would come to a property apparently pros pering, without retire in arrear; bur, in reality, he would tied an embarrassed tenantry—a tenamry more or le-s ifemeralized, end ripe for hostile litigation--(Hear.) Let the House mirk the natural result. Every one was interested in the due management of property in Ireland, and tl,e poor-law made a man more than ever interested in the management of his neighbour's property. — (Hear, hear.) The receiver's business was to collect as much money as he could. If " property had its duties" who was to discharge those duties in regard to all this property transterr d into Chancery? Under the osten sible pla of asserting the rights of creditors, in what a condition these estates were plecedl—(llear, hear.) When Lord Chancellor Sudden Care to Ireland he wee startled et this stet*, of things; DO man eie r del so much in the way of intrmluc'sig sour d reforms into the ad ministration of justrce—(Hear)—but the rules which he framed had been meee or less evaded.—(Hear.) To be appointed receiver, a pity must give security for two years' rental.and when the estate was at all large this might be made a matter of great difficulty; but the plaintiff had generally some one whom ho wished to serve, or there was some one ready to enter into an un derhaud agreement with the plaintiff's solicitor; and a clever solicitor and a passive receiver could easily contrive to expend the rents in the management of the estate, and without laying out anything in improvements. —(Hear, hear.) Tire receiver had fifteen months to ac count in, and altogether it was about three years before the creditor touched a farthing of his interest.—(Hear, hear.) Now, surely the rights of creditors ought not to supersede the primary duties of property—(Hear. hear) —but this system delayed the creditor, injured at once the .owner and the public, and did good only to those in terested in an expensive management of the estate. If a receiver did anything beyond the mere collection of the rents, it was liable to be overhauled; and there were al wayS - small creditors ready to go before the Master upon such biatters, with the estate liable for costs.—(Hear, hear:l If so large a portion of the property of the country was to be taken for the sake of enforcing the rights of creditors, surely the Court of Chancery ought to Naive the powers of an owner, and this property ought to be managed as under a system of good private agency.—(Hear, bear.) An act was passed to encourage leases by reducing the stamp to Is., but it only applied to leases for a certain term, and every lease under the Court . of Chancery was effectually excluded, nor could such, 'a lease be obtained at a less cost than 71. The receiver had to give the two years' security because of his being allowed to hold over the money for so long ; and 'ten important part of the profits of his (lace con sistsd in his turning the money to his private purposes. —(Hear, hear.) A very experienced officers of the Rolls' Court was opinion that property under the Court did rnot upon an average yield more than two-thirds, frequehtly not more than one-half, what it paid under the owner's hands; arid the Master of the Rolls slated that it appeared by returns that, from 1841 to 1843 (the amount would be larger if the return were carried later), an arrear of a quarter of a million of money had arisen front the bad management of estates by receivers.— (Hear, hear.) lie (Mr. Napier) trusted, now that the Heirse had - got into this suttject, they would not part with. it until they had done something which would encourage hope and confidence in Ireland.—(Hear, hear) The Honourable Member for Middlesex bad mentioned that there were two classes of receivers, male and female, and that the properties under the latter were letter manneed than the properties under the farmer. He (Mr. Napier) imagined that the latter cases would be found to be chiefly those either of minors or 11.friarics. Those properties were generally netter rn.apag , d than other properties, because the Court of' Chan cery, had much more ample powers in such cases than in others He thought that what was wanted to remedy the - existing grievances was to give the Court of Chan ceral larger powers, and to introduce a new machinery for the purpose of putting those powers into execution. --:(lietr, hear.) From art he had gathered from persons ticit - 4;:dtenversent with this subject he believed the correct course to follow would be to appoint a person as master receiver, whose exclusive attention should be devoted to thilarticular subje ct , an d to h ave un d er hi m a num ber 'district receivers, wholly independent of the par ties interested, who should reside in the localities where the properties were situated, and, keep a superintendence over and cheek upon the management of the particular estates. He thought it would be useful also to cause the district receivers to make a return every week of the money they had collected; that there should be an aide where the books should be kept open for the in spection of all the parties interested; an i that there should be half -yearly accounts rendered by the district receivers to the master receiver, who should also have power to make inquiries from time to time, so as by these means to bring the estates as neatly as possible into the same condition as they would probably be in if the inheritors were themselves invested with full power to manage the properties as beneficially as possible.— (Hear.) He (Mr. Napier) was very averse to encourage the people to look to the Legislature for everything; but still he held that, if they could, they were bound to remedy a great and practical evil like the one then under consideration; and, for that purpose, he con sidered that a short inquiry would be useful. He had no doubt, from all he had heard un the subject, and from the conferences he had had with various parties in Ire land, that if a short inquiry were now instituted they would be enabled, before Parliament separated, to pass a measure which, under God, would greatly ameliorate the condition of Ireland, and help them to grapple more successfully with those scenes of misery which, if they could not prevent, they ought at all events, to do their best to mitiaate.—(Flear.) Lord J. RUSSELL.—I rise for the purpose of saying only a few words upon this subject, because I have no objection to make to the proposal of the Hon. Member for an inquiry into this subject.—(Hear, hear.) I think it is a subject of the highest importance. I think that the evils which have been so ably pointed out by the Hon. Member for Middlesex (Mr. Osborne), as well as by the lion. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Napier) who followed him, are such as to make it most desirable to apply a remedy, so far as we can at least, to the evils which they have described.—(Hear, hear.) I should likewise say that the Lard Chancellor of Ire land has fur some time past paid great attention to this subject—(Hear, hear)—and that it is certainly no fault of his that we have not introduced ,a measure on the subject. He has traced a plan which, if a Com mittee be appointed, would, as detailed by him, be a fit subject for inquiry by them. It is a plan which, while on the one hand we thought it of great advantage, on the other seemed to us to be liable to grave objections. It has, there‘ore, been under our consideration, with the 'view of try ing te remedy these objections, and I think it would be a very desirable question to go before ,s Com mittee, because the reasons for and against the plan could then be properly sifted, and the objections to it, if possible, removed. The plan suggested by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland does not materially differ from that which has been sketched by the lion. and Learned Gen tleman (Mr. Napier) ; but I can hardly go along with him in expecting from the appointment of public and re sponsible receivers that we can obtain the benefit which is obtained by having proprietors residing on their own properties, and being able to attend to the improvement tierefere, th 4.t one object of the Committee should of those prop er ti es th emse l v es,--(H e ar, hear.) I rat h er think, t be to inquire whether this system of appointing re ceivers to facilitate the charging of properties witty debt has not been carried too far under the law as it at present exists.—(Hear.) I own I consider myself, that although it is a principle which appears perfectly just, and which no doubt is just, that if a person has incurred a debt his estate should be held liable for it, yet I think the princi ple is carried too far, and leads to the injury of all per sons living upon the estate, in consequence of that estate becoming the property of the creditor, and at the same time that creditor not getting the management of the estate. I think that no advantage that can arise from the eppointment of a public receiver can compensate for the disedventege of not having a proprietor with his hands free ehi afire to ma - rage bus own estate. However, that is a point which will properly come under the consider ation eir the Committe, if appointed. I think that al though this subject does not immediately belong to the question before the House, yet it is so intimately con nected with it, and the House has received such valuable information from the Hon. Member for Middlesex and the Hon. and Learned Member for the University of Dublin, that tthink there is nothing to regret in the discussion that has taken place—(Hear, hear)—and if the Hon. Gentleman will more at any time for the appointment of Cominittee I will certainly be ready to support the motion; and my Hon. and Learned Friend the Solicitor- Geneiel, - who has introduced some measures in respect to this subject, will be ready to give every assistance in his poWer in framing such measures as the H ouse will be likely'to approve on lam of opinio n th at we ought to aim not so much at one great meas ure , b ut at different measure, bearing fm the evils un d er wh i ch she is now suffering.—(Hear, hear.) on the sam e o bj ect, namely, to re scl I rc• 1 a all n d from Mr. F. FRENCH, after compl a i n i ng that the question before' - (he House had be en eva d e d i n this discussion, q scussion, and that no answer had been given to the allegations con. tained" in the motion of the Hon. Member for Water ford, proceeded to say that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth had laid great stress upon statement relative to certain evictions which were said to have lately cecurred in Ireland. For his own part, he (Mr. French) deubted whether those evictions had taken place • at nil, for it certainly was not the first time that reports had been spread of evictions by landlords which had turned out, u p on i nqu i ry, to have been a , sp cies of Lynch-law, executed by the people them selves, used which the landlords had had nothing to do with. Besides, even if th e reports . respecting evic tions were true, it was not fair to blame the landlords for what was more just attributable to legislation; and the Right llon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth ought to have been the last men to take notice of such things, knowing', as he must, that their legislation was responei ble for them. Sir R. PEEL-- I cannot silently acquiesce in the cen sure which has just been cast upon me by the Hon. Nlembei.' I have nothing to regret except it be that I believe I rather understated than overstated the csse.— (Fhar. hear) I cerainly cannot charge myself wi!h . o the parties to whom I referred, for on look ing agpin at , the papers I fi n d t h at I painted the ease in faint Ind fi-ehle c olours.—(Cheers.) When I have thought,the Irish landlords had had injustice done to them--ar.td I think thiy have had injustice done to them iti bomb - respects—l g ave not b eim slow to d o t h em jus tice—cgeiir, hear)—but I must lay that Irish gentlemen " While inspecting a stone- breaking depot a few day's since, I observed one of the men take off his remnant of a pair of shoes and start across the fields; I followed him with my eye, and at a distance saw the blaze of a fire in the bog. I sent a boy to inquire the cause of it, and the man running from his work, and was told that the house had been levelled the day before; that he had erected a temporary hut on the lands; and while his wife and children were gathering shell-fish on the strand, and he stone-breaking, the bailiff or 'driver' fired it." What Irish gentlemen ought to say is this—they ought to say—" This is an individual act—don't judge a whole class by the act of an individual." That would be a better, a wiser, a more becoming course to take than to say that individuals are not responsible.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. FRENCH—I did not say so. Sir R. PEEL—You said that I ought to be the last man to take notice of such things, knowing that our legislation was responsible.—(Hear, hear.) There is only one thing more to deepen the colour of this case. He concludes with this emphatic sentence:— " I need not enter upon the financial condition of the union, which the estimates forwarded will sufficiently. explain. I need only remark that I anticipate a respect able collection this week, and for some weeks to come, but certainly not sufficient to meet more than half the current expenses of the unioa for food alone." If ycu want anything else to awaken feelings of sym pathy with those who are thus suffering, it ought to be the assurance that they are submitting to it with a for bearance and patience which exceeds belief.—(Cheers.) I did not think, Sir, I had deserved blame, or acted con trary to the spirit of justice to Irish proprietors, to say. on the first day after those papers were laid on the table of the House, that we should give a proof to Ireland that such facts shall not be stated in public documents and be buried in oblivion.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. F. FRENCH denied that he had . ever stated in dividuals were not reels. nsible for such acts as those. His objection to the course pursued by the Right lion. Baronet was, that he endeavoured to attach to all Irish proprietors blame which was attachable solely to those by whom the acts were committed, but for which the Right Hon. Baronet's policy was really answerable. The gallery was then cleared for a division in the usual way. Immediately after the exclusion of strangers. Mr. J. O'CONNELL, we understood, addressed the House, after which the division took place:— For the motion ••• ••• ••• 144 Against it ... ... 30 Majority —ll4 On our return to the gallery we found the House in Committee on the Bill, and the CHAIRMAN in the act of putting the question that the preamble be postponed. EXCLUSION OF STRANGERS. Mr. J. O'CONNELL immediately rese and said:— After the specimen of the fairness which I experienced when I was going to express my opinions on the poor law, just before the last division, there is but one course= left to me—either to insist on the House enforcing jus tice to its Members, in the matter of their privileges, or that they do away with an absurd practice ; and, there fire, Sir, I see strangers present.—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh!" and groans toll aved from all parts of the House.) Mr. BERNAL (Chairman of the Committee) — Strangers must withdraw. The galleries were accordingly cleared shortly after eleven o'clock. When the reporters had been excluded about half an hour, a division took place on the question, as we under• stood, that the Chairman do report progress. The numbers were— Ayes Noes 31 ... 163 Majority The gallery door having been opened as usual after he announcement of the numbers, the reporters entered, when— Mr. J. O'CONNELL again noticed the presence of strangers; and they were ordered to withdraw amidst loud laughter. We are indebted to an lion. Member for the following report of what took place subsequently to the exclusion of strangers, the House being at the time in Committee on the Irish Poor-law Bill : Clause 1. Mr. MONSELL thought it would be ad visable. to take a discussion on the maximum rate on the first clause, and he thought the discussion would be long and should not go on at so late an hour. Mr. ADAIR agreed. Colonel DUNNE thought no progress could be made that evening. Mr. STAFFORD had meant yesterday to raise this question on the words, " it shall not be lawful." Lord JOHN RUSSELL hoped the Hon. Gentleman would go on with his objections to-night. Mr. HERBERT thought otherwise. Mr. V. SMITH make a remark. Mr. CLEMENTS said many Members were opposed to the maximum. Mr. ROCHE did not see why, if they were to pro ceed, they should not proceed at once.; When every one complained of the poor-law it was a waste of time not to go on. Sir A. BROOKE thought it would be better to recal the gallery.--(Laughter.) Mr. GRATTAN had long been a Member of that Hothe, and had never known a case when a Member whose speech for five minutes was not reported had g up and deprived the public of a report of what took place.—(Hear, hear.) He moved the adjournment, in order to decide this question. When Mr. Windham was not reported he did not act thus; he proceed« d with his speeches. Why punish him who meant to make a good speech on that question? He confessed he was a young man and vain and wanted his speech reported His lion. Friend might not care. Don't let us make ourselves ridiculous in the eyes of the country. Mr. O'CONNELL, in substance, said it was of ira portancs for the sake of others. If the House were satisfi,d, he could not help it. He complained of un fairness. He had seen messengers in the gallery speak ing with the reporters.—(Loud laughter.) It might be ridiculous, but he would stand up for the right of Members to be treated fairly. He must deprive his friend of the pleasure of_seeing his speech in print. Mr. BERNAL put the question in a loud voice in these word, " It shall not be lawtul."—(Laughter.) Mr. GRATTAN begged pardon; he bad moved to report prow., ss. M. BLACKALL proposed to go on without further waste of time. Ou matters of such vast importance they ought to go on without the reporters. Whether it would be advisable to support a maximum at all was a most important question. Lord JOHN - RUSSELL said, the principal reason for the maximum was, it would induce persons to oc cupy and cultivate land, giving greater reason for sup port of the poor. Nor was this theoretical. One gen tleman gave evidence that he had tried this. He had promised his tenants that when the rate came to ss. he would pay it. Mr. HORSMAN said, the same gentlemm said that this would not do without a diminished area of taxation. Lord JOHN hoped the House would go on. Lord C. HAMILTON was as anxious as any one to go on. He thought the Noble Lord should state when the subj ,, ct should be renewed, as it was impossible to finish it at that late hour. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he should take the Par liamentary Oaths Bill first on Monday, and this Bill second; it not, for Thursday. Mr. GRAT FAN said, as to dividing, he would do what the House liked. Ayes ••• 31 Noes ... ••• ••• 163 Mr. BERNAL.—" It shall not be lawful."—(Loud laughtes, and cries of " Gallery, gallery.") A long pause followed. Mr. STAFFORD thought it unfortunate that this Committee on Iriah Poor-laws should hogin at midnight, when it could not come on again till Monday week, owing to the arrangement of the Government. At this moment strang,rs returned, and, Mr. O'CoN NELL having called attention to the fact, the reporters withdrew. Mr. STAFFORD resumed.—The Noble Lord said himself that the evening had not been by any means lost, as they had had a gtod debate. He (lir. Stafford) had proposed to ta k e t h e o bj ect i on t o the maximum on the words "it sill' be lawful." If , heaten, then they meant to fight on th e w o rd s " fi v e shillings" in the four teenth line, and divide on a subsequent passage. It must. be a sui,j,ct of great importance t.t Englishmen to know whence' money was to come from, when the maximum was attained. The Noble Lord said Mr. Menu had tried this on his estate, promiA ug to my his tenants when Oh', maximum was reached. The Premier was here Mr. Martin, and the Consolidated Fund was his estate. So that when the maximum was attained, the Consolidated Fund must be attacked. What stimulus was given to employtet nt tenth r tht , plan? The assump tion would be that the maximum rats- would always he reached. So that., as the occupier was the only ft , .r• son who could give tanploy t n ent, no stimulus wouhi be afforded, The farmer would deal with his landlord on should be the first parties to disclaim any connexion with those by whom the acts referred to were com mitted.—(Cheers.) I a-surne that the paper from which I quoted is corn ct; I assume that Captain Kennedy, the author of that paper, would not make erroneous statements; and I presume that her Majesty's Govern ment would not lay papers upon the table of this House, for the guidance and conduct of our legislation, with out being convinced that they were not gross exag gerations.—(Hear, hear.) Did I make any attack upon Irish landlords in general ? Did I throw upon individuals the charges which may be justly thrown upon legislation? What I said was, that there were particular instances stated by Captain Kennedy which were such as the; one day ought not to elapse without Our attention being called to them.—(llear.) It is very easy to say that the House of Commons is re sponsible; but I ask whether the House of Commons, or any other public body, is responsible for the particn. lar transactions to which I referred? Is the House of Commons responsible for this?— " In a cowshed adjoining this wretched cabin I found Ellen Lynch, lying in an almost hopeless stage of dysen tery. She hail been carried thither by her son when thrown out' of her miserable lodging, and was this at ened with momentary expulsion from even this refuge by the philanthropic owner of it; her only safety rested in the tuars of all but her son to approach her." Is it the fault of our 1, gislatton or ot the House of Commons that a woman is ejected 'rem her home, anti, being attackkd with dysentery, takes refuge in a tempo rary hut in the neiJbourhood, and that the party who ejected her is about to evict her a second time from tin wretched hovel, and is only prevented from doing so by the fear of a contagious disease, and that the oily hu man being who approaches her is her own son, whose filial affection overcomes his fear of contagion? Is the House of Commons responsible for ihat?—(Cheers.) This House is responsible for bad legislation and its re sults; but do not make it responsible for acts of inhumanity.—(Hear, hear.) . Is the House of Commons responsible for this?— Lord J. RUSSELL said, those who had argued the question had proceeds d on the assumption that there was no call for money on the Consolidated Fund. Although the western uni ons were l i able for the whole 4Cs. in t"" pound incurred, y e t, as t h e rate was not collected, what good was such a li a bili ty ? Did it not cause a panic, an d prevent improvement? The farmer when told that the rate would only amount to 75., would calculate se" cordingly. Lori J. RUSSELL next said he could not conceßa that the farmer would assume that the rates would run up to 55., and even aid in making them run up, in order to get 2s. out of others. This would be an absurdly . Supposing, for example, the rates were naturally only . I s* or 2s. He would have the ordinary interest in keepin er g e we re down the rates. Th e H on . G entleman had asked they were to come for money after the maximum was obtained? Few of the divisions would reach the slily' There would not be 280 electoral divisions in which ills rate would be exce eded. Things could not be left in their present condition. Rents would fall; the poor could not be relieved at all. If bad, the maximum rata was better than doing nothing. Ile should object to ad ranee out of the Consolidated Fund if the 7s. was exceeded. Ireland's condition would then be only the same as Scot land's. Till of late, 1837, the poor law was only volun tary-ss. in every electoral division, 2s. on the union. would be a great burden to impose so soon. The evi" deuce before the Committee was in favour of the plan: Mr. De Vere had evidently thought much on the general question, and gave good evidence, but still his opinion was that Mr. De Vere was a little influenced by his w ish to find fault with everything connected with the poor law. He (Lord John) believed this Bill would be A use • ful auxiliary to the Bill for the sale of incumbered estates. If land was made valueless, what use in a Bill to facilitate sales. Mr. HERBERT would not speak long.—(cries of "Adjourn.") He thought the principle of a maximum rate would compensate for the vice of the Bill. Nothing remedial in the Bill. There would be future calls on the Imperial Exchequer. 4s. Id. was the largest stun ever collected in the distressed unions. Thus capitalists would never be sale. Some honest districts had PIT more than the maximum. Had they stuck to the max' . mum, the poor would have died. He only wished to notice Mr. Vernon Smith's remark. Ho thought he had adopted the spirit of English Members on this law' When there was a danger of an inroad on the consoli dated fund he exclaimed against any change leading thereto. Only one English Member had ag reed wit Irish Me m b ers t h at the law of Ireland s h ou ld, as Irish gentleman wished, be assimilated to the English la w ' Mr. ADAIR said more than 4s. id. had been collected in one union. In Clare 6s. 6i.1. had been collected. I n Miltown divisio n 8 3. h ad been collected. He supPorrd the maximum rate as an exceptional measure to giv e confidence to Ireland. Mr. HERBERT had quoted from a nubile paper. Mr. SIDNEY HERBE RT appre h ended that the Noble Lord would desire to get this Bill through as soon as p,s.ible. Why not fix Monday? Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought Bills should . 130 , passed at once w h en t h e House had arrived at the t h i rd rea ling. He had agreed with other Members, too, °I I the subject. B es id es , th ere were points in the poor -10 still requiring amendment. He would rather adhere to the old arrangement. The Committee then reported, and the Speaker re' sumed to sit again on Monday. Charitable Trusts on Monday. The House adjourned at One o'clock. RAJ LWA Y tlAttic. ARKETS. LIVERPOOL, JUNE 8. STOCK EXCHANGE. —TIIO share market was gloomy and depressed to-day, and few transactions going forward. Towards the close °.! business prices had a down war d teaaency. The sake ara —Lan t cashire and Yorkshire, Fif t h s , 4% dis.—Bolton, Chester, and Wes.. Yorkshire (No. 1), 7—Lond on an d North-Western, 127 c.-1)14.: New Quarters, 48s. 9d. p.-.-Ditte, Fifths, s,p.—Midland, 11 •70 d dis.—South-Eastern and D over (N o. 4), 6—York, Newcastle, Berwick (G. N. B. Purchase), 765. 3d. dis. MANCFIESTER, JUNE 8. STOCK EXCHANGE.— The transactions to-day were as follows.;_, Clithereo (No. 1), 70—Sheffield, Eighths, 45(,—Grimsby Docks, 9N , North Staff° dshire, Preference (Canal shares), 21— Dover ( 140 ; 6% r.—Leeds, Fifths, 4 11-16 d i s. — Caledonian, Prefer ence, 11 5-16 r. BIRMINGHAM, JUNE 8. .• STOCK EXCHANGE. —The tran sact i ons to-day have peen as follow.' —London and -North-Western, 1.26-- Midland, 6 per cents 12 " Shrewsbury and Birmingham (B), V. 3s 9d. dis, —Shropshire I.TI L I Qa. 565. 3d. dis. YORK, JUNE 7. STOCK EXCHANGE. —Th e transactions to-day have been A- fOl° „d lows :—Great Northern, 9%—.Northl 3 ritish, Third s , 3 % — y or k a" North Midland, 5%. A FACT FOR IVELSLIMEN.—At the Board o f Guardians, on Saturday, Mr. John, the relieving officer' stated in answer to a q ues ti on f rom Mr. Booker, that o f all the ca ses o f c h o l era that came under his notice, O il d were relived or buried at the public expense, there was not one Welsh. They were nearly all Irish.—The Pr ig* cipality. [ADVERTISEMENT.]-.A dreadful Abscess under the Chin Cured by H o ll oway ' s Ointment and Pills. —Robert Davidson, sh oemaker, of Anstruiher, had suffered for ni,°re than five y ears w i th a very dreadful abscess under his nh'n , ; during thi s t i me h e had been under the care of two surgeons It Anstruther and one in Edi n b urg h , w i thout the least pros Pee of a cu re . I n th i s miserable condition he began to use 0 way's Oint men t an d Pil ls, which, in the short space of months, soundly he a l e d th e woun d ; and he is now enjoying,`. he best of health. Th e se fi ne med i c i nes are admirable rem el for king's evil, woun d s o f a ll kinds , burns, scalds, piles , fistu la , and bearings dow n . S o ld b y all Druggists, and a t Professo r Holloway's Est a bli s h ment , 244 , S trand, London. BIRTHS. On the Ist inst., at the Priory, near Taunton, the lady 0f J. Winter, Esq., of a daughter. On the 4th inst., at Offenharn i yorce s t ers hi re , t h e w f (1 of the Rev. R. Lawson, of a daughter. On the 4th inst., at Kensington-park•road, the wife of G• G. Kirby, Esq., of a daughter. On the sth inst.. at Arbour-terrace, Commercial-road, th e wife of the Rev. Richard Parnell, of a daughter. On the sth inst , at the Willows, Upton, Essex, Igo. D• H. Fry, of a son. On the 6th inst., at Brook-green, Hammersmith, the wi fe of the Rev. E. Hautingfird, of a son. On the 6th in t., 'strs. Frederic Webb, Clapham-road-Plac* of a son. M On the 6th in s t., at hrist A churcßßlEh,D. Newgate-street, Thongas third son of J o h n B ar k er, Esq., of Broadwater, Susses. t o Frances, eldest surviving laughter of the late Samuel likr ward, Esq., of Clapton, Middiesev. On the 7th inst., at Sc. Geor ge ' s , Bl ooms b ury, the Res': John Philip Gell, M.A., late Ward en o f Ch r i st ' s Collet' Tasma , ia, to k- le a or Isabella, only child of Capfaitt it John Franklin, R.N. Dm On the 4th in s t., a t Frognal, i) Hampstead, aged 82, Eliza beth, relict of the late J. Harris, Esq. On the 4th inst., at Leigh-house, Lower-heath, TraWY stead, France s Eli za b et h , youngest daughter of the late • Holloway, Esq., of East Leigh, Havent, Hants, aged 32. On the sth at the Lodge, Wey mout h, age d 84, Jan a Young, relict of the late W. Young, Esq. At Edinburgh, on the sth inst., Amelia Marian, relict of the late Ge orge R o bi ns, Esq., of Kensington-gardens-to-IV . At Hanford, on the 6th inst., Helen, daughter of 11. &prier, Esq., M.P. 1 1 , 0mion: Printed and P u bli s h e d b y MURDO YOUNG of h t No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sea Office, Na "el &rand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the COLON - atiddleses, Saturday, Juno 9,1949. this assumption. We have had experience of this in England. Acts in England (36'h George 111., cap. 10) formed a preceekne He quu'ed the preamble.—(Cries of " Gallery, gallery.") A maximum was established in this English Act. But then those gentlemen who hope there is any p. , rmanence in such an arrangement would be disappointed. Another Act is passed to double the arrangement. Then comes the 52d George 111., which abolishes the elan altogether. Agricultural prices in Ireland would fall, and the analogy with England was thus stronger. The Noble Lord said the maximum was an inducement to invest. He asked how a capi talist, looking to English legislation on Irish Boor-law affairs, could think it safe to invest 1001. in Irish ro ta rty, unless their legislation contained the germs of a better system? Do you think that a capitalist who he seen such v.eissitudes, such fresh burdens on landed property, would trust that no further charge would h 0 Drops ed? What would prevent our doubling the max:- mum? When the maximum is attained, where woul d more money come from? You cannot diminish pau pertra; with Irish resources undeveloped, you cannot say to the tide of Irish pauperism, Thus far shall you eo and no further." The Bill had no guarantee that the maximum would not be exceeded. It would not tell well .or English representat:ves to let it he understood that the remainder should come from English resources- Every statement showed that poverty wail The expenditure exceeded by far 55. in the pound in the distressed districts. How were they to proceed ? There ought to be more openness and plain statement in the Rill. It would be recollected that the law of settlement depended on the statement of the pauper and the alloca tion of the guardians. The result of the maximum rate would be to tempt great injustice to electoral divisions. One electoral division would be overburdened and others comparatively escape. The question is, would you or not make the law a stimulus to employment? If farmers could thus shuffle off their burdens on others, how would the end — employment—be attained? The Noble Lord had refused to state whence the overplus of pauperi sm was to be relieved. There would be no security to the owners of property. The plan would mulct the indus trious for the sake of the indolent and wrongful. Be could not conceive how Parliament—believing in tb,e duty of the rich towards the poor--could pass the Bill. Yet, it would pass. The House had registered the will of the Noble Lord throughout. Thus he reluctantly warned the Noble Lord that the Bill contained a den' gerous and fatal principle. Mr. VERNON SMITH had asked on the second reading what would be the fund when the maximum was attained. The Noble Lord said first come on the parish—then on the union—but afterwards there was a blank. The country was to be as it was before the poor law. In other words, Irish poverty would have to come on English property. Against that the Noble Lord sets this, that capital would be encouraged to flow into Ireland. But what hopes of th.d.? What said sir. Aubrey de Vere—a very clear witness? The farmer would take no pains to keep down the maximum. TIIe rate would jump up to that point at once. Estates would be taken accordingly, and pauperism would be where it, was. He (Mr. V. Smith) protested against making b a d laws to tempt capital into Ireland. In England all pro perty is pledged to support the poor. Why not is Ire land? Another argum en t o f M r. De 'Vera was, thea t . the variety of valuatio ns i n I re l a n d would make still more uncertain what liabilities a farmer would incur. The measure would not introduce capital. It was merely an opinion —a theory --of the Noble Lord's, and would fail. Colonel DUNNE said, the expenditure in several electoral divisions had reached 205. in the pound. Be said the maximum rate was a good principle. No m an could take land till li a b ilities were ascertained. T h e English principle was bad, and ought not to be extended . In only two cases had the ss. been exceeded. The seve rity of other taxes in Ireland on the farmer was another reason. No county cess would be paid, unless there Was a maximum. 1