The Sun. — London, England, 1844-04-02 00:00:00

SPIRIi' of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—lreland still continues the difficulty and the disgrace of Sir Robert Peel's administration. The former it might have been without' reproach. The latter is not merely its misfortune, but its fault. It is with Ministers, as with ordinary men-- they cannot " command success ;" but, by a strict adherence to principle, and an uncompromising course of impartial administration of sound po licy, they may " deserve" to , succeed; and will even tually, if not at once, succetd. in silencing com plaints and establishing confidence in their rule. From the day that Sir Robert Peel obtained the ob ject of his aim, and, as head of the Administration, selected his instruments of government in Ireland, down to the last appointment made by those who govern in that country, one " untoward event." has followed another in quick succession—all tending to exhibit the unfitness of the Administration to restore tranquillity, or to confer prosperity on that part of the empire. Ignorance of the most essential and easily ascertained facts and circumstances, of which a Go vernment should be well informed to be safely guided in its policy, have caused blunders as palpable as they have been mischievous. Infatuation seems to have rendered the executive blind to consequences. Hence, the Ministry has been damaged in charac ter ; the country disturbed by agitation—vibrat ing between alternate fears for the preservation of social order and hopes of restored peace. The prosecution of O'Connell and his co-agitators was to vindicate the majesty and assert the supremacy of the Taws ; yet that very prosecution was marked, from its commencement to its close, by violations of the Constitution, and by open disregard to that im partiality of administration which gives to the laws their efficiency, and preserves justice from de generating into tyranny. By this perversion of the forms of law to the purposes of oppression—this securing a pre-determined conviction by pre arranged violations of constitutional right, ,the Go vernment has rendered itself the criminal. Public opinion directs its severest 'censures against the ad inokistratora of the law; while those who were con- victed by stretching the law that itquight reach those who Ifid rendered themselves obnoxious to the party in office, are regarded as heroes. If punished in virtue of the conviction thus obtained, they will .be elevated into martyrs. The moral influence—from which the administration of justice derives its real power—has been thus neutralised, if not absolutely enlisted with the convicted parties. No salutary results could follow the' infliction upon them of any sentence. A nominal punishment would be at tributed to fear—a severe one to vindictiveness. In eithercasN the Government would be the sufferer. A virtual triumph will be , conferred on O'Connell. Whether .he escape, or be incarcerated, is, com paratively, of no moment. At liberty, he would be hailed as the victor in the conflict.: In liilenain ham or Carrickfergus, his prison would be the centre of attraction, within which the sympathies of his countrymen would be concehtrated. From his cell the " Liberator " would issue his periodical behests. These would inspire more reverence, and be invested, in popular estimation, with more 'solemn sanctions, than. the proclamations of Councils, or the enactments of Senates. At the ex piration of the sentence which removed him, for a time, from the presence of his `.adherents, he would come forth, wieldingan immensely increased influence ; exercising a power over the credulous and easily ex- cited population, more dangerous than. ever to the tran quillity of the country and the integrity of the em pire. Yet in this dangeronspredicament—the result of that want of foresight which seems to have actuated the Government in Its mode 'of dealing with O'Connell and the repeal agitation—another instance is afforded of the folly which actuates the Irish executive. The appointment of a stipendiary magistrate is to be made. The Government is about to give an instance of its desire to conciliate the popular feeling, by selecting for the important post a gentleman whose superior fitness for the office shall he manifest to all. And when the Government does endeavour to do the conciliatory, its success is wonderful. They look round them—weigh the qualifications, mental, moral, and professional, of the numerous aspirants to the honour and emoluments of the office—and they select Mr. O'Brien ! This gentleman's claims to the patronage of the Govern ment and to the confidence of- the people were set forth by the Marquis of Normanby on Friday evening, in the speech by which he called the attention of the House of Lords to the appointment in question. Not only did Mr. O'Brien refuse to give the health of Lord Ebrington, then Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, be cause of his avovVed determination towithhold the Go vernment patronage from members of the Repeal As sociation; but he wrote a letter on the subject to R. Dillon Browne, Esq., the Member for .the town in which the dinner took place. • In this epistle, which was published at the time, the most fulsome panegy rics were pronounced on O'Connell, and the most inflated protestations of his own devotion to Repeal, were expressed. STANDARD.—Our attention has been called to a passage, in the seventh edition 'of the "Encyclo paedia Britannica," recently completed. It is a rich storehouse of knowledge, reflecting honour upon the age and country that have produced it.. We know of nothing in any language approaching to it in fulness and accuracy &Matter, or in excellency of arrangemen t. This great work, however, is not faultless, but its error certainly does not lie on the side of hostility to the "new philosophy" in commerce and social eco nomy. On the other hand, we should say, that the new science is a great deal too much in favour with the writers of the Eneyelopmdia." From this charac teristic, which nobody who knows the magnificent repertory in question will dispute, the passage above quoted [relative to " Government inter ferenoe with the regulatiOn of factories] derives additional authority . , and this passage, it will be seen, " directly impugns the propositioe _ urged in the late debate, that the principle of in terference between employer and employed is "an unsound principle." No' objection, says the eneTeloptedist, bin 'be made to the principle of interference 'between eitipleyer and employed, where the latter are children and young persons. It was in this exact cave, however, that the prin ciple was condemned, us introduced forty years ago ; it was said " the Legislature committed itself to an unsound principle in limiting the' labour of children in factories, and it is proposed to incre ase the limitation, and to include women, in it"----women surely as helpless and as-well - entitled to the protec tion of the State upon principle as even infant children. If it was our purpose, andif we could command time and room to discuss the subject in this particular light, we might show, by reference to returns, that in the proportion in which the hours of children's labour in factories have been limited have the manufacturei of the country improved in quality and increased in amount ; - certain and obvious must it he to all men, that within precisely the forty years that have elapsed since the adop tion of the principle said to be unsound, Great Britain has made a progress not only in manu factures and arts, wealth end commerce, but in moral and intellectual improvement, greater than was ever made by any nation in the same period, or even in three times the same period. And if we are asked how to connect this vast and rapid advance with a cause so seemingly slight as a restraint: upon the labour of children, we point to the orderly and peaceful character of the people, . which has left enterprise and industry to do their work. " If you *wild be prosperous, make a hedge for the law," is, if we remember rightly, the firSt precept of the " Pirke Abboth ;" and every farmer will tell, that generally fencing is worth more than ploughing or manuring; at alt events, that without fencing, ploughing and mat:wing, and all the other efforts of the hushandtnan, are thrown away. There is, then, some.thing more than the mere consideration of humanity to combat the proposition that the principle of interference for the protection of children, and we will add of women also, is. unsound. Such protection fences the opera tions of enterprise and industry ; and these operations must thrive in a country thus fenced from internal danger, and otherwise sufficiently protected from ex ternal violence. In the case of Lord Ashley's pro position, little stress is laid upon the unsoundness of the principle that protection is due to infancy, though that hypothesis cannot be dispen;ed with by his Lordship': opponents • the main objection to the pro position is, that the effect of limiting the labour of 'women and children to ten hours, would, accordin.- t 6 the existing arrangements in factories, limit the labour of men also. This we submit is 'not a fair treatment of the question. If women and children are not entitled to protection, refuse protection upon that ground ; recur to the unsoniidness or the prin ciple which forbids to employ infants or sin and seven ears old! for eighteen hours ! ! i n a mill as formerl y . But if women and children are entitle I to protection, then do not withhold the right, because, according to the present arrangement of the mills, men ! may avail Leinselves of the same protection. - - Ir I ,P Ad' t . -.. ANILIIR ..A.TIOCINATION.-. IS „m e , • • , attished clergy man of the Universalist denomination was accused, while in Lowell, of "violently dragging his wife from a revival meet in ~ t, and corqpilling her to go home with him." He replied Firstly, I have never attemted to influence my wi f e in her views, nor her choi ce o f a meeting. ,Secondly„ wr Wife has not attended any of the revival meetinp;,:m:well. Thirdly, I have not attend e d even O ne o f tho l e. meetings Th for anv purpose whatever. ,Fourthly, neither kr wife nor my self :has any inclination to attend those meetingg- . 4 1 :0' fifttily,..l never had a wife !"—/V07. 0 Orleans Paper, ; 4. : ' ~,. Enuw YALU' AND SLRHOWY I RON . IVoalcs.—tin going to pres.s , last week, we stated the fact of the sale by pri vate contract of thaiabnve property,- which has been for some time advertised in this paper. The purchasers aye the 3fessrs. Darley, of the coalbrook Dale establishment; Shropshire, and the autnisubject to the mortgage, 216,0007. The works, long ttottanoidthe.l4lo44South IVales,.andat one time valued ,?atico,ooo4 will, .19r.lfb happy to, learn; be carried on with. ,(ear 4 indoi'the.ex_pexle.ticcd and able mana,gement of 'lir: 41 - „: 0: • nias Brown. ixt6leveift in the grak staple - trade of this ~,CepitliV- w ill much confkce t 7 the prosperity of Newport.-- tn. ;;:-;;;. ;.7.; ,... - -. ms , :: --- -- '--f".;.'"'.... L ''4--i,. - :' ~7' ......_ .1 rjv IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Aprill. Their Lordships met at Five o'Chick. The-Marine Mutiny Bill and the Annual I demnity Bill were read a third time and passed. NEW ZEALAND. The Earl of MALMESBURY presented a petition from the inhabitants of Wellington, in New Zealand, praying for "the. establishment of a further armed force in that district of the colony. This petition had been sent over to this country in consequence of a massacre which lately took place in Cook's Strait. Great apprehension existed in -the 'colony at present as to what steps the Government were likely to take with respect to forwarding additional military force for the protection of the town of Wellington and the colony in general, and also' as to' what steps they intended to take for the settlement of titles to land with the New Zealand CoMpany. The Earl of RIPON had to state that the com - manding officers of New South Wales and Van Diemen 's Land had been directed to forward forces from those - two . colonies to New Zealand, for the pur pose to which the petitioners alluded. He understood that this force was considered to be sufficient by the commanding officer of New. Zealand. He thought the apprehension of the settlers was greater than there was any warrant for, but he trusted that -the rein forcement which had been sent over would give them the security which they sought. At the same time he must say, that the removal of troops in this manner, from one colony to another, was likely to be attended with much inconvenience, espe cially if our colonial empire should extend it self. There was, at present a law in force in New Zealand by which the colonists themselves could provide in a- great measure for their own safety. By this law the Governor was authorise& to levy a militia and establish a constabulary force on the same principle as that in - Ireland. With respect to the titles to land, all he could say was that Captain Fitzroy had been furnished with instructions which were likely to lead to a satis factory settlement of that subject. The Earl 'of MALMESBURY said 'the colonists Particularly wished a small armed steamer to be es tablished at Wellington. They complained, in their petition that the Government instructions were not obeyed by the authorities in the colony. Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from a place in Northumberlind, praying for protection to the agricultural interest. SIR HENRY POTTINGER. _ _ The Earl of ABERDEEN, in bringing up cer tain papers, which had been moved for with respect to China, said he was happy to assure their Lordships that the connexion between Great Britain and China was now placed upon a most satisfactory basis, and that the best feelings prevailed on both sides. He could not make this communication without at the same time adverting to the merits of that great and dis tinguished' officer, Sir Henry Pottinger.—(Hear.) Sir Henry had to contend against the most discou raging difficulties in a country which was proverbial for being suspicious, but he had, by his energy and talents, gained their unlimited confidence. He felt sure that the fact of the health of such a man being in Such a delicate state as to render his return to this country essential, would cause•their Lordships much regret. • The Marquis of LANSDOWNE fully concurred in all that had fallen from the Noble Earl opposite. A NOBLE LORD on the Ministerial side of the House, ‘whose name we could not learn, presented a petition from Rutlandshire, signed by 250 tenant farmers, praying their Lordships not to sanction any tneasures. which tended to destroy the protection ne cessary for the support'of the agricultural interest. COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH TURKEY. Lord BEAUMONT rose, pursuant to notice, to call the , attention of the Government to the, state of the commercial relations existing between this coun try and the Sublime Porte, and to point out the dis advantages under which the British merchant laboured since this treaty. In doing so he did not mean to attach any charge of supineness to her Majesty's Government; -nor did he think any: blame could be attached , to the Ministers; of the. Ottoman Empire. On the contrary, he thought they, had been thwarted in their friendly intentions towards England by Russia, which in all eases had shown its hostility to this country. Before the Convention of 1838 all goods ...were subjected' to. certain duties be tween every different 'district. Although in some parts' of Asia 'Minor these duties. were only three per cent. upon imports, yet in some Others -they were as high as nine per cent. upon im ports- and tWo per cent. on exports, an& the same ditties were . imposed upon all the imports and 'ex 'ports, on the sea-coast and , frontiers: By the Con vention of 1838, all imports and exports , should pay three per cent. ad valorem duty.; and two per cent. ad valorem in lieu of all those , harrassing duties im posed in the interior; but through the intervention of _Russia these duties were now as high as twelve per cent., and thus a great hardship was imposed upon the British merchants. The Noble Lord then read several extracts to establish these facts, and stated that one British merchant lost upwards' of 30,000 pias tres by this alteration. He also proved that, by it, the Russian merchant gained an advantage of two percent. on all imports, andnine per cent. upon exports. He wished to ask whether any negotiations had been set on foot to remove those difficulties under which British merchants , trading to the Levant laboured, and, if such negotiations were at present being carried on, whether they would be conducted on the principle of former British treaties? • The Earl of 'ABERDEEN said that perhaps the most satisfactory answer he could give to the Noble Lord would be to state, that within a recent period instructions had been sent to the. Russian Consul to 'negotiate a treaty of commerce with the Sublime Porte, taking for its basis the British Treaty of Com merce. . He had every reason to hope that at no dis tant period this negotiation would be brought to a successful issue. THE 'ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS BILL. On the motion for the third reading of this Bill, Lord COTTENHAM said he had been charged with taunting the Government . with yielding to a ina jority in Parliament, whereas,. what he bad said was, that they had yielded to authority out of Parliament. The 'present Bill proposed to continue a state of things which had long been considered' as a public nuisance. Lord CAMPBELL complained that the Govern ment had abandoned the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill of last session,' although there was a majority in its favour of two to :one. , The LORD CHANCELLOR said the. Govern ment bad not abandoned the Bill of last. session. The only difference between the two Bills was, that the Bill of last• session proposed to abolish, the diocesan courts, and the . present Bill proposed to retain them. It was found that that part of the Bill of last year, which proposed to abolish the diocesan courts, would not pass in Committee, and therefore that part of the Bill was omitted this session. lie believed that the present Bill would be seen both by Parliament and the country to be a very useful and advantageous measure of legislation. • After a few words in explanation from Lord COT TENHIM and the Loan CHANCELLOR, Lord DENMAN took that opportunity of ex pressing his great regret. that the diocesan courts were not proposed to be abolished by this Bill. For fourteen years those courts had been considered to be, public nuisances, for in them great oppres sion and tyranny frequently occurred. In other re spects the Bill before their Lordships would confer great benefit on the country. 'The Bishop of LONDON said he had never heard the diocesan courts described as public nuisances. As to'acts of oppression frequently:occurring in theM, he could not but admit that many cases of hardship had arisen out of proceedings in ecclesiastical courts ; but, .had there never been . eases of oppression in the courts of law and equity ? He had heard of many cases occurring in' those courts of fax greater hard ship' than evor occurred in the ecclesiastical courts. 'Lord DENMA.N would willingly • submit to the rebuke of the Right Rev. Prelate if he had used ex pressions too . harsh ; , .hut he certainly - had always boon accustomed to consider these courts as nuisances —(Hear)--oral he had never hear d in an y other courts of cases.Of such extreme hardship as he had known of in these.—(llear, hear.) 'He owned be heard the Right Rev. Prelate's concluding observa tions with apprehension, intimating; as he, was afraid they abolish thethan that diocesan osi r e to thought, continue really,th the appointment, of . a Committee to 'inquire into the character of the opposition to the Measure for their abolition mip,aht not-he wholly inexpedient.-7—(xear.) ' • Lord CAMPBELL remarked, that the jurisdiction as to the,moSt fertile subject or rates, was not removed from theseb i"rc tl l e - • complaint, I present measure, which could rot bl courts staid tyo be substantially the same as that of courts, the latter having abolished all provincial the present perpetuated them ; and as to thes'av'ttll'liole rity. of Sir Samuel Romilly, it was inapplicable. H e believed thb hope of the Lord. Chief Justice, es to • the ultimate- , abolition of these courts,, would be bitterly disappointed, as the .constituted two, new ones. The LORD CIIA.NCELLOR said the Bill of last session abolished the 350 "peculiars" and the diocesan courts, retaining only the Prerogative Court. The present abolished all the " peculiars," and retained, the diocesan courts and the Prerogative Court. Were they. not substantially similar ?. ' Then, as: to 'they authority pf Sir' S. Romilly, it was precisely in p.oint,l seeing that it had been pronounced on a measure to all respeets . SUbstantially the same as the present. 1103111 was then read a third time, . Lord WHARNCLIFFE having previously signi -fia th . 6 RoYar.Msent thereto (as a matter of form; prerogative inVolved). rkspectinvome points of The LORD CHANCELLOR.then propo3ed_ggne alterations in one or two clauses, which having been assented to, Lord COTTENHAM moved the Omission of the clauses continuing the diocesan courts; and those motions having been negatived, he proceeded to pro pose a clause, giving to the Arches Court jurisdic tion in all cases now under the cognisance of those courts. This motion was negatived. The LORD CHANCELLOR then moved the addition of, a clause to consolidate the office of registrar lin _two of the diocesan courts, which was agreed to. The Bill then passed. On the motion of Lord DALHOUSIE, the House went into CoMmittee on the International Copyright Bill, ,which was reported without ,amendments, and ordered to be read a third time to-morrow (this day). Their Lcirdships then adjourned. „ , HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 1. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'clock. Captain HARRIS took the oaths and his seat for the borough of Christchurch. COUNTY COURTS' BILL. Col. WOOD presented a petition in favour of the County Courts' Bill,.from a place in Somersetshire (as we understood). Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from Joseph Hamilton, of Annadale Cottage, Dublin, against the practice of duelling, and recommending a remedy. Mr. COLLETT presented'a petition from a place in Ireland praying for a repeal of the legislative union. M r. PLMPTRE presented a petition from Kent in favour of proteetion to agriculture. Mr. CAYLEY presented petitions from Yorkshire against the corn- , laws. Sir H. INGLIS presented petitions against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. Mr. YORKE presented a similar petition from the Archdeaeonry of York. Colonel WOOD presented several petitions from Wales in favour of the County Courts' Bill. Mr. M. GIBSON presented a petition. from the mayor and. corporation of Manchester, complaining of neglect on the part of the Post-office authorities. The Hon. Member gave notice that he should; on the first Friday after Easter, call the attention of the House to the petition. Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from Stockport against the ten-hour -clause in the Factories Bill. Mr. GREGORY presented a petition from the South Dublin Union, praying for inquiry into the working of the poor-laws in Ireland. He gave notice that to-morrow he should move that the petition be printed. Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from Capt. Hamilton on the subject of harbours of refuge. Capt. PECHELL presented a petition from Lieut. Pringle, complaining that the Admiralty had not done him justice with respect to an invention in naval ar chitecture, and praying the House to take his case into consideration. Mr. HUME presented a petition from the inhabi tants of Kenmare, in Scotland, praying that the sup plies should not be granted to Ministers till the grievances of the people were redressed. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON. presented a petition from the cigar manufacturers of the metropolis, praying that no alteration should be made in the duty on tobacco. Mr. GLA_DSTONE brought up the Report of the Committee on Railways. NOTICES OF MOTION. Mr. B. WALL gave notice that, after Easter, he would move for the appointment of a Select Com mittee •to inquire into the building of the Houses of Parliament,' and to report thereon. Mr. COBDEN gave notice that he would, after Easter, move for a Select' Committee to inquire into the effect of protective duties upon the national re venues. Dr. BOWRING gave notice of his intention to call 'the attention of the House to the necessity cif giving effect to the recommendation of the Commis sioners respecting the public revenue. Mr. TRELAWNY wished to know from the Noble Lord; the Secretary for the Colonies, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to lay before the „House any papers explanatory of the recent transactions in Canada? Lord STANLEY had' no desire to conceal from the house the difficulties in which the Canadian Go vernment was placed. By the latest accounts which he, had received from Sir Charles Metcalfe, it ap peared that no Administration had been formed, and he would submit to the. House that it would be bet ter to delay the granting of the papers until some de finite result was known. JUSTICES' CLERKS. An HON. MEMBER said, that seeing the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the Home De partment in his place, he begged to put a question to him. It would be in his recollection that the Noble Lord, the Member for Lincolnshire, had made a mo tion respecting fees to magistrates' clerks, and that he was met by an assurance that the subject was under the consideration of the Government, and that a Bill would shortly be laid on the table of the House. His Noble Friend had communicated with him, and expressed his disappointment that the Bill had not been brought in. On the 14th of March a positive assurance was given that a Bill was in preparation s and would shortly be brought in. What he now wished to ask was—whether the Bill was now in such a state of preparation that 'it would be laid on the table before the Easter recess—and, if not, when it would be brought in? Mr. MANNERS SUTTON, in answering the question, begged to !state' the circumstances under which he gave the explanation, which his Noble Friend had evidently misapprehended. What he had said was, that the subject was under the con sideration of his Right Hon. Friend (Sir J. Graham), and that he hoped no long time would elapse before a Bill was introduced i, but he did not distinctly state that a Bill would be brought in. Of course it would be impossible for him to state now what definite course would be taken on a subject which was still under consideration. It must be clear from what he had already said, that there was no intention of bring- ing in a Bill before the recess. ' Mr. HAWES begged to ask the Right Hon.' Gen tleman,-whether a Bill would be brought in before the recess ? for the understanding was clear that the Bill, was . in. preparation. He understood, that the Noble 'Lord (Worsley) had withdrawn his • Bill in,the belief that the Government had taken up the subject. • • Mr: M. SUTTON repeated that the measure was under consideration;'aud he, could not undertake to say what course Would eventually be pursued; WELSH GRIEVANCES. Dr. BOWRING, pursuant to notice, put a ques tion' to her Majesty's. Ministers, whether it was the intention of. the Government to introduce any legis lative measure for the ternoVal of the Welsh griev ances, which had been reported on by the Commission lately appointed by the Crown Mr. M. SUTTON said that it was only on one subject—that of turnpikes—the Commissioners had re commended legislation. That applied'only, to South Wales, but it was under the, consideration of the Go vernment whether they would introduce a measure relating only to South Wales, or one including the whole principality. _ GOLD AND SILVER WARES BILL. . _ In answer to a question from Mr. lIASTIE, The, CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER said that he would postpone the Bill until after Easter, and on the first night after the recess he would state when' he would bring the Bill into t;ommittee. THE BUDGET. In answer tu.a.. question from Ur. DIVETT, • The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQTJER said that he intended to bring forward the Budget on this day fortnight. ' AMERICAN RICE. Mr. HITME hav;tig .understood that it would be inconvenient that he should bring forward the motion of.which he had given= notice, for a copy of, or extracts from the correspondence bet Ween the Am2rican. Am bassador and the British Government, respecting the admission of pAdY and rice, the produce o'f the United States, into Great Britain, at • the same rates of duty as paddy and rice were admitted into Great Britain from the west coast of. Africa, would postpone his motion until after Easter. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that time was a correspondence at present going on on the subject, and that the production of the papers alluded to would tend to embarrass the" negotiation. MAST 'RS AND SiRVANTS' BILL. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE • presented Several petitions against the Matters and Servants' QtJA - RANTINE. Lord SWINDON wished to ask the Hon. Member for Bolton , if it was his' intention to direct the atten tion of the House to thesubject of the quarantine laws. Dr. BOWRING intended, unless some satisfactory communication should be made on the subject by the Government to the House, to move for the appoint ment of a Select Committee to consider the subject immediately after Easter. Mr. GLAD STONE could hardly be expected to make any communication on the subject at present. The Government had taken-steps which might pro bably lead.to.some important results. Comtnunica tions had been made to the different powers engaged _in the Mediterranean trade, for the purpose of endea veuring to induce them to shorten the time of qua ranOne„ The obstacles which had hitherto stood in the.way Of 'coming to : a satisfactory conclulion on this subject had been removed and there was 'every pros-, pect that the Powers concerned in :the trade of the. Mediterranean would consent to a shortening of the* time o. oRi f i3 .qu w arantr u . would give notice of a Committee on ei he e n su th b r j e i c a t to aft e lE in a u st n e i r e . atio i n iv i r t d h , e i 7it t i h g •e ht m l e i a o n n - . Gentleman, and modify his motion - according to the information he might .obtain. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAN: EVENING, APRIL 2, 1844. MILL COOLIES. Lord SANDON asked if Government had re ceived any' communication on the subject of the emigration of labourers from the East to the West Indies. _ Lord STANLEY had sent a dispatch to the Governor-General of India on the subject—the re ceipt of the dispatch had been acknowledged, and the Government of India would devote their .anxions attention to the subject, but he could not fell when he should be in a condition to .afford any information to the House on the matter. BUSINESS OE THE, HOUSE. Lord J. RUSSELL said that, as the dlOourntnerit of the- w House for the Easter recess -etas to be moved to-morrow, lie hoped that theitight Hon. Gentlemitn would to-morrow state • what Bills the Government intended to take immediately after Easter. CONVOCATION. Mr. BORTHWICK postponed until after Easter the motion of which he had given notice, on the sub ject of the assembling the convocation of the clergy. BANK CHARTER. Mr. GISBORNE wished to ask whether the mea sure on the subject of the Bank Charter which the Right lion. Gentleman proposed to introduce after Easter, would affect the system of banking generally, or whether it would, in its essence, be confined to the renewal of the charter of the Bank of England; also, whether the measure was intended to extend to the whole bf the United Kingdom. Sir R. PEEL complained that . the Right Hon. Geritleman had not given notice of his question. He proposed,to bring the subject before the House im mediately after the recess, but he must decline at present entering into particulars, and in this course he was following the precedent set by Lord Althorp. IRISH TRIALS.. Mr. DUNCOMBE asked if there would be any objection to lay before the House the short-hand writers' notes of the Irish State trials ? Sir R. PEEL—None. • BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Sir R. PEEL said, that his Noble Friend had given notice of his intention to move the Irish Regis gation Bill before the Orders of the Day. That course had been pursued, because the Government had thought that it was the general wish of the House to have that measure explained at an early period; but, although it was a Government night, he had no wish to take precedence, and his Noble Friend would not proceed unless with the wish of the House.—(Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL wished to know if it was in tended to take the Orders of the Day after the Noble Lord's motion? • Sir R. PEEL—Yes.. IRISH REGISTRATION. Lord ELIOT rose for the purpose of moving that leave be given to bring in a Bill for .amending the law relating to the--registration of voters for Members of Parliament in Ireland. The subject to which he was about to call the attention of the House had often been discussed within those walls, and it would not be necessary for him to. preface the -explanation he - was, about to give of the main provisions of the Bill by any lengthened eipOsition of the defects in the existing law. These defects were—the power - of challenging the rights of. voter to remain on the list, the multiplicity of objections, the facility of Personation, and a variety of other defects which had been acknowledged by almost every other Mem ber of that,House who had taken a part in the dis cussion on this question. Various proposals had been made • by gent'emen on both sides of the House with a view of applying a remedy to those defects, and those proposals had given rise to discussions which had occasionally been of an acrimonious nature. On the present occasion, however, he wished this question to be discussed solely on its own merits; with-a - view Securing a satisfactory adjustment of its difficulties. .He should not, therefore, refer to those discussions, or, if he did, it would not be in a tone or manner calculated ;to excite angry feelings. A. proposal to amend the law'of registration in Ireland was made during the existence of the late. Gover nment ; but it was resisted by that Government on the ground that the existing system had prevailed for many years, and that it was unadvisable to alter it. But, at the same time, Lord Althorp distinctly de clared that if time and experience should prove that the system of registration which had been introduced into England was well adapted for its pnrpose, and was an efficient system, it would be ad visable to extend that system to Ireland. He (Lord Eliot) thought there could be no doubt that the sys tem of registration in England did give general and great satisfaction. The defects in it, which experience during the last ten years had.'pointed out, were re moved by the Act of, last session, and he believed the measure, as it stood, was not only adapted to its pur pose as a . eystem of registration for England, but that if it were transplanted to Ireland, mutatis mutandis, it would be a great improvement on the system that prevailed in that country. It was this system, therefore, which her Majesty's Government proposed to that House for introduction into Ireland.. The measure proposed to give to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in Council, the power of dividing counties into polling districts ; in each polling place of which district the revising barrister should hold an annual court of revision and registration. It was pro posed to reserve to the assistant barrister ap• pointed to preside in the Court of Quarter Ses sions, and who at present, also presided in the registration courts, the _duty of the revising bar rister. They were in general men perfectly competent to perform their duties in a manner satisfactory to the counties in - whiCh - they were statipried, and there, Were no grounds for creating any new officers to preside in the registration , courts. His next point referred to the right of appeal. An appeal was allowed in England as to the law,-though not upon-the facts of the case, ,and it was vested ip the Court of Common Pleas. They did not propose to give this appeal in Ireland to the Court of Comnion Pleas, but' to the Court of Exchequer Chamber. The duties of the several law courts in Ireland were very 'heavy and multifarious,' and for this reason, chiefly, they proposed to - vest the new power in the Ex 'chequer Chamber, because all the judges belonged 'to that court, and the questions that would be brought for decision - would always have the consideration of a ,majOrity of them, namely, seven. He did not wish then 'to go into the reasons why the Court of Com :mon Pleas should not be preferred in Ireland as it 'was in England, but he might say that in giving it to all the judges they pursued a course which they con sidered most likely to give general satisfaction: There were only one or two minor differences be tween the English and the Irish system, which he thought it necessary to allude to. The duty of com paring the li s t s was in England confided to the over seer—in Ireland they proposed. to confide it to the baronial collector. In England the town-clerks, ex ercising their duties as clerks of the peace, had the custody of the lists, and they proposed that the clerk of the peace should have the custody Of them in Ireland. With regard to the time of polling, there would not be any material difference, for they pro.: posed to limit its duration to one day for boroughs, and to two days for counties.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") He believed this portion of the measure would meet with a very gene ral assent, correcting, as it would do, many great abuses that now took place, and curtailing the very unnecessary expenses which now so frequently took place. He would now state what it was pro posed to do with the existing registers. Ile proposed that all persons now on the register should be replaced on the new register, and should not-be liable to chal lenge Thlifing the - remainder of the term for which the present register would have lasted, except where he had parted with any portion -of his, property. He was aware that there might be some objections made to that. It might be said, and with truth, that there were improper votes upon the register, and that the revising barristers ought to be enabled to purge the register of suc li votes as we re, he would not say fraudulently,, but improperly placed t h e re. Un. the contrary, he (Lord Eli o t) thought it was better that a -feW imp roper votes s h o uld remain on the register than that per sons having a bona fide claim 8 .4 0 11,1 d be exposed t o vexa tious process 'of Challenge ; and thus'ho now proposed' that these parties should hoV be liable to challenge for the remainder Of the term of eight years, which the law now allowed them they would have to-reenlin on th e re gi ster. At the end of that time a right to be entered in the register , liable :under the s ame rules as other claimants, and liable to any' g - round of objection w hi ch mi g ht be urged against them., - He also proposed by this Bill to give--double costs in cases of friveleus objections and unsupported claims. These were the principal provisions of the Bill with respect to registrfaion and polling, and if there were any provisions of this part of the Bill to which he had 'n ot adverted, h e ' was ready to give an answer to any gentleman who might seek further information upon it. He would. next proceed to the third; and most important, and mos t difficult branch of this subject—he meant the qualification of voters. .The House was well aware that the question of the-fran , chile was in a most unsatisfactory state. In the 'year. 1829,,when by the 10th of George IV. the right of :Voting from 40s. freeholds was abolished, there were in Ireland, if he were„, not - mistaken; 216,000' electors. ale certainly djd not propose at that moment to ent er into the merits of that--qttes tien, )int he believed th a t, with a few exceptions, the abuses of that system we re so generally recognised, that the :propriety of its abolition was very generally 'concurred in, and he th ou ght the effect of ,the measure ,I:44l4p'to,give a gooi example. In the year 1829, •ftgriile:. :bad. already sa id, there , were in Ireland `216,040 electors; but it was worthy of observation, that out: of those there. were 10 2 ,000 registered for AtiVOnnties. At th e present moment the actual eConatiiuencyof the county . Kildare Was' "larger the year 1829, and in the county of Wiekrow ' , .ht the constituency was rather - larger _than; Itflidresent time, whilst in some other counties the nu mbers were nearly the same at the:piesent tiEnt•tis; they were-in 1829. - He merely mentioned Ark because he thought the affect of the Act of 1829 had been a good deal exaggerated. In the following year the number of electors was 39,700, and the effect of the Reform Bill, in the following year, was to increase the number of 'the electors fiom 52,000 to 60,Q00. The number was 64,000 in 1835 ; 76,000 in 1837 ; 57,000 in 1841 ; and 63,000 in 1842. From the time of. the,Reforea Bill down to the present period 11,000 had' been added to the constituency of Ireland. The addition was made in this case by words: In the Reform Bill the words were "the clear value to him," that was to the occupant, this being supposed 'to define more clearly,. not the value of the , - estate itself, but the interest which the owner or occupier had: • Those words' Were expunged in the House of Lords, .and the then Go-_ vernment did not think.'it expedient to-insert them in the Irish Bill.- The Right Hon. Gentleman, the .pre .sent Chancellor of Ireland, objectedta the admission of theee words, and said- that considerable doubt' and uncertainty . would arise frOM their insertion. .He. believed that the Learned Gentleman, 'Mr. LefrOy, proposed as a means of - obviating the' difficulty, the • insertion . of the 7words • "- beneficial interest." Those words - were introduced, certainly with 'no intention • on . the part - of the .proposer • of -them, in any way to decrease the franchise ; and .he (Lord Eliot) had not beet' able to discover that her Ma jesty's then .Government entertained any such design. It was elearlyand explicitly stated. by a Noble Duke in the other House (the Duke of Richmond), that it was not the-intention. of the GovernMent to raise the qualification ; and- he believed that no such intention ever existed. It was perfectly true that the Act, the 10th of . George the Fourth, did impose an oath 'commonly called . " the solvent tenant .oath," by . which it was provided that the land should. be capable. of being. let for the specified amount to a solvent tenant.. That oath was omitted in the Reform In the 19th of, George 11. the same oath•was impoied - upon freeholders ; by the 13th of ,George. 111. that . oath was oinitted; but he be lieved ~ it, was, never contended, either in Ireland or England, that a clear, beneficial value — that is, a_ surplus after the payment 'of rent and ether expenses—was invariably necessary., It was clearly defined ..that clear. yearly 'value meant the"value for which the tenement. might be 'let to a solvent tenant. That was the interpretation recognised by the courts, but he knew doubts existed upon the point in the Englieh.cotirts ; but the insertion of the words "be neficial interest," and their omission from the, oath, gave rise different :interpretation Of the' law in Irelend,,and the assistant barristers. , and some Of the judges held that the proper interpretation to be put on the clause was what the estate might be worth to the occupier. The - question was argued in the, Court of Exchequer Chamber, -in 1837, on a case which was- tried . before Chief 'Justice Bushe, and in that ease was laid down, not only that the • : solvent tenant _test , was the properinter pretation, bat that , the solvent tenant oath. was the oath to be. administered to the jury. Two of the judges held that the solvent tenant test was no longer applicable, and three of them held it was applicable, but that no oath was to beadministered, and- the re mainder of the judges : decided. that the bath was pro perltadtninistered, and that the solvent tenant test should remain in force. The _minority. of the judges and !several of the assistant-barristers-declined to be bound by the-ophaien of Mejerity,. and this was one great cause of: uncertainty'. It vas therefore right that Paelianient should put an end to the doubt, and that the question of value should be' defined by legis latien.(Hear,' hear.) 'Looking, then, to the deci sions of the tnajority of the judges, and the inten tions of the Legislature, and to the practice in England and Scotland, and to the established Constitution, which required .a 'bona, fide property arising out of land be' determined to. render the Irish law conforma ble toihelaw. of Englandand.Seotland. and-to require that' there..should.bo a .clear yearly value over and above all' rents and charges. It might be said that this:' object.: could. .be attained in . a -More simple manner.', In 1841 - the Noble Lord,' the :Mat - Wier. for Sunderland-whom he and many of those who sat behind him felt bound' to . sup port, made,a.proposttion which distinctly recognised the principle:of - property arising-out-of land.. -The Noble Lord proposed to take the rating under the, poor-law valuation, but the reports which he had received on the subject convinced him that this proposition would be in a great measure illusory. He had.rebeived the rentals of several gentlemen's property, on which he placed . the 'greatest. confidence. Bitt if gentlemen were not satisfied' With his statement of the confidence which he reposed in these com munications, :they were not bound to express any opinion Upon them." All the communications which he had received from every part of Ireland—noith, son* eait,arid west—with-. Sew 'exceptions, satisfied him that if they-were to fixon any . rate ,below da, if 0n1y..51., they would thereby-expunge from the regis tration list a larger portion of the present constituency than they wouldxpunge by the introduction of the solvent tenant test. Besides, he did not think- it would be fit,, or even becoming, on the part of her Majesty's Government, to depart, from .the ancient principles of the franchise in Ireland and Scotland, unless,some large and practical good. was to follow. —(Hear; hear.) He now admitted, without the least hesitation or, reserve, that the :effect of the ap plication of the solvent tenant test so stringently as he proposed, would be to deprive of their votes a very considerable number, Una of the present constituency, certainly of the 101. occupants. It *Mild be impos sible for him to say, precisely what the effect would be, hut,'according to thedata whiCh..he had been able to. collect,. he .was to admit that it was very possible that tWo-thieds el the etisting occupants (101. leaSeholderS and freeholders)—he again observed - not constituency---would .be disfranchised. He . be= lieVOthitt cIaSS of oceupatitS amounted to about 40,000, and it was obvious that.oneethircl of the numberwhick would' remain on :the , registry -under the solvent tenant test were not . eedequate ,to express. the.. opinions and feelings of the portion of the people whOth they Were intended to 'represent. It Was, de, cl4red by the Noble Lord, at theheginning of the session, during the ,debateupexi the, state of Ireland, that it was .expedient to givee :if 'not an identiatal,'at least.a substantial equality in the. franchise to Ireland with the people ef , this . country.--(Hear, hear.) In Making, then; so- large ,a. reduction of the, consti tee,ney As the new test would effect, it was necessary to .seek for some compensation,, for it must 'be admitted that the restricted number would , be inade quate- to expresa the' wants rind wishes of the com munity, for whose behalf the franchise Was entrusted to theta. Her Majesty's Minister§ thought it desir able that there should be a community, of interests and feelings between the constituent body 'and those for whom the franchise .wae entrusted to them. her Majesty's Ministets, therefore, thought it expedient td seek . for .n, ee6stitueney amongst a class of persons_ who, byttheir independent position,:would be enabled to give unbiassed and unprejudiced votes, and who were not tee far removed from the body of. the inhabitants of the eleCtoral. district.' He conceived . that, if the franchise were made-to depend merely upon the money amount/a rent, it,would.be attended .amongst many inconveniences au4' uncertainties, with 'a pracUe of collusion- on the Part of . the 'landlord, and to, give him an indUceneent • to raise the ,nominal amount Of rente Be., thought, : therefore, they • should, seek a ' test less : -liable :' to misapprehension.. The Gcivernineut proposed . . that , all occupiers, . no mat ter .;what. their tenure—that all occupiers . who wererated. to. the : relief of the . poor in .a -certain amount—should have the benefit of the franchise. .Then the ,questioii.WiS, what should - be the amount of that rating—what, looking at the ainoilnt 'hoifi'of the population, the rental; and the property of the coun try, would be sufficient for the,parpOse, and yet high enough to secure the independence of .the voter. The inquiries of her Majesty's, Government had led to the belief that a man rated to the relief of the poor in the sunrof aol. ayear would probably ,be possessed of sufficient capital torender him an independent person.' It . appeared that :there were in 'lreland ..76,00 1 3 tenements rated to the poor which were rated in that arnottnt. , ,.. Certain deductions must be made for that number on-account of, tenements held by. widows and minors, ao. - Of Persons-holding under other qtrilifice tions. Deducting one-seventh for the first class, and another seventh'from the other, they might assume that 25,009 would be the addition to the constituency under the new qualification. Assuming that 25,000. should he placed on the register under the, new fran chise, there would be an addition of 30,000 to the county constituency of Ireland. But her Majesty's Go-, vernment feeling that one of the links ef. the social chain in Irelend-was wanting from the total absence of that class represented' by the yeomen or small in dependent proprietors of England, would encourage the ;creation: of, such, a class of voters by the addi tional inducement of giving them the franchise. He proposed,,therefore, thatall persons possessing a free hold'inheritanee • of Si. clear yearly value above all quit rents, or possessed of a lease on lives, renewable for ever, so as to be equal to .a freehold inheritance, should hereafter have a vote. This, he hoped, would have the effect of inducing persons to invest their capital in the purchase of small freeholds. That would .give a more independent class of 'votes, and it was but juet, that such a class .of -men should be invested with the elective - franchise. He was not prepared to say that the effect - at present to be pro duced would be considerable, but 'the ultimate . effect would - be very beneficial, and he believedthat in many. parts of Ireland.perpetual leases—that was, leases , renewable for ever—Were by no means uncom mon. 'He believed that the measure would have the effect Of : adding considerably to the number , of respectable voters in . the Irish counties. There was 1 one other alteration, which he proposed to make in the existing lew ' .and, that was, that it was not intended that either freeholders orieltetitalilP lease holderiehould be respired to be in actual occupation. This would be of great assistance to small capitalists in :! acquiring Vote. l n -'England' 101. - freeholders were I _:.!i not required to be in occupation of the property for which they voted, and it was intended to assimilate the law of Ireland to the law of England in that re spect. They intended to dispense with occupation in all cases of freeholds exceeding 10/. in value. Before the passing of the Reform Act occupation was not required. in England for 40s. freeholders. Since the passing of the Act, however, occupation had been re quired in all cases of freeholds under the value of 101. These were all -the alterations that laeproposed intro ducing in the nualification of county' voters. He would now call the attention Of the House to the al terations which he proposed to introduce in the guar.- ficatien of voters for towns under the Reform Act in England. All that was required of a voter was the payment of two assessments—namely, the assessed taxes and the poor-rates ; but it should be borne in mind that under the comprehensive term " poor.. rates," what was called in Ireland county cess was also paid, inasmuch as under, the denomination. " poor-rates" the borough voter in England paid not only the rate for the relief of the poor, but also a large portion of the county rate. ' In England, there fore, it was necessary that the voter before he Could exercise the franchise must pay a much larger sum as poor-rates than he, would be liable to in Ireland. For a ten-pound house in many of the larger boroughs in England, taking assessed taxes, and the various sums falling under the term of poor-rates, there would be about three shillings in the pound to pay before a title to -vote was made out. In Ireland, under the Reform Act, there were county rates, muni cipal rates, and cesses to pay.' The consequence was, that to make out your title to vote, it was necessary to pay a considerable number of taxes, some of great magnitude, and others annoying, rather from their number than their large individual amount. This it was desirable to simplify.' He proposed, then, as a substitute for the assessed taxes, to require,payment of the town rate for paving, lighting,' and watching ; of the poor-rate ;' of the-bo rough rate;- and of the police rate. His' object was to make the . right of franchise correspond as nearly as . possible to that' of the ' correspond ing elm's' of voters in England. Though all his statements were :founded on facts, Which could be verified by documents then before him, he had not read extracts from those docu ments, not wishing, in this stage of the measure, needlessly to trouble the House. Were the accu racy however of any of his 'statements doubted, he trusted such doubt would be expressed, that he might- at once give evidence Of their truth. One 'of the great objects the Government had in view was, to relieve the voter" from the multiplicity of -claims he was called upon to satisfy—the vexation attendadt upon which was greater than the aggre gate money amount of them. 'He was sure it was not his own intention, nor the intention of the House, to deprive any man of his vote, but rather to simplify the' proper •means for . thQacquisitiou of it. All that ought to be required was .a fair guarantee of the ',solvency ,of the party claiMing a vote, and his fulfilment, after a clear and 'simple form, of the con ditionS attached to the right. He was not aware, there were any other • points it was necessary for him then to touch upon. He believed that the proposition, if adopted, would place the electoral franchise of Ireland Upon a wider and more extended basis'; and' though that basis was not 'upon the same principle as'the franchise of Eng land, still he believed that it "would be found to 'be more extended than it was either in England or•Seot land. He earnestly hoped that the great body of the Irish nation Would see that the proposal of that measure by the Government was a redemption of the pledge given by his Right Hon. Friend at - the head of her Majesty's Government in the speech to which he (Lord Eliot) -had referred, and that they would see in the adoption of it by the Imperial Par liament an : earnest desire to impart to the people of Ireland the enjoyment of equal rights and equal:fran chises :with the people of this country. And he trusted that those to whom those powers were, now entrusted for the , first time, would bear in mind that they were vso intrusted, not for any advantage 'to themselves alone---not for the advantage merely of the district in which they resided, 'or even of their own country, but that they were given for the good, of the wholeof thig great and still united empire. Mr. HUMS - asked what would be the addition to the'nuthbelfof voters by this Bill? _ • • . _ Lord .LIOT said that the Bill. proposed to - relieve voters of certaiu taxes and burdens, but that it. would , be • impossible for any gentleman to hazard a • correct = :opinion • as to the 'in; crease of numbers, it.•• might cause. ~ It was his intention to lay the 13111 on the - table tog morrow, and it would be then printed, and thus Hon. Gentlemen- would have, ample time to'. consider. its pfeiiSions. It was suggested to him, now, that instead of rising again, he should. explain at once 'the nature of -the alterations - proposed to be made in the Militi a Opal Corporations Bill. The Hodse was aware that svhett that measure passed through that House, the tssimilation-Of the municipal franchise of Ireland with hat England was impossible. The municipal franchise of EnglaruU was based on the occupation of a house for a given time, and on the payment of. rates -for the same - -period 4 Now as . the poor-law.valuation had not been-a : sufficient time in force in Ireland when the Municipal Corporation Bill became the law, it was impossible to place the muni cipal franchise of Ireland upon thathasis. It was now , proposed to remove any cause' of complaint which might arise at the difference which existed-between the municipal franchise of Ireland and' that of England; 'by assimilating theM 'as, far as' pos isible; believed; that - in all the' great cities, towns, and boroughs - of Ireland, with 'the exception a Wexford, which: wanted'a few-months of the ne cessary time; that in all`,those large. towns the poor-law had been in.operation a sufficient time to act as a test ' sitnilar. to that,which it .reqUired. It was therefore propoSed to extend - to Ireland the provisions of the Municipal Registration . Bill of .England in'that respect, and to give to every . inhabi tant .householder who, should have occupied,'for the space of three years, and who, during that time, had heen rated 'for the relief of the poor, and who had Paid- his rates-and. taxes. up to that time—it, was proposed. to. give. to , him the right of. voting. He .did not • , wish . now to' revert . to the discusSion 'on , the, corporations Bill. . No man could regret more: than he did what he must describe, as a perversion` of the pavvers 'which Parliament had given. He regretted that the municipaLcorporations should haVebecorne'normal schools of agitation •'lie thought it would hive been much better if they had confined themselves to their own peculiar duties.. But, however he might regret this, he could not 'divest himself of thb conviction that every man in a town who contributed, by the payment of rates and taxes to the maintenance of that farm, was 'entitled to a vote in the adininistra lion of its,local affairs ; and he did hope and trust that after the tempararY. effervescence ,which „now existed in Ireland ',should: :have . subsided, all .parties 'con nected with , municipal corporations would turn their attention to their own local affairs, and reserve the expression.of their political opinions 'for a more fitting opportunity.—(Hear,'hear.) The House were aware that -the: ,grand jury, municipal, and poor's:rateswere at present payable as a. condition attached to -the municipal franchise. He believed that, .in Dublin; there were not 'less than one or two and. twenty of these local taxes.—(llear, hear.) He did:not Mean that,. every man was liable to the payment of these local taxes, but that these .taxes were payable_ in certain districts; and ,he believed that someindividuals in ,Dublin-were actually liable to the,payment of fourteen, fifteen,' or sixteen local taxes, the non-payment of any. one of which would deprive' them of the right ~of voting 'at a mu nicipal election. " It , ~vaS proposed to make the payment ' of taxes - = , in this respect cor respond with the payment which entitled a - person to exercise the Parliamentary franchise. Ile was not aware that there wag any other point to which it was neeessary, to call the 'attention of the house. That Was the only provision of any importance which this - Bill ,contained. 'Thanking the IJou,se for the attention.with which they had listened tO hi.S. state-, went, he begged fel:leave to bring in the Bill. The question S having been put, Lord ELIOT Said there was one point of some im portance which he had omitted, and perhaps the House would allow him to.supply the omission. It was pro posed to introduce into the Irish law a provision with regard to joint occupation, which would place it on the same. footing. there as in. this country. Mr. M. OTERRALL, said that the Noble * Lord, though he had conceded every principle against which his party; had oNce :contended, had•yet fallen far short in his propositions to carry them out The Noble Lordhad proved by hisl3ill that all the complaints, and all the agitatioo,which existed upon this subject were fully jnstified.--(Hear, hear.) But the •Noble Lord had• fallen into all those errors into which it might be expected lie would, considering the advice under which 'he acted.--(Hear.) Ile believed the Noble Lord himself pos.sesied the best and most honest intentions, but he believed the views of the Noble'Lord were not carried out in his own Bill. The principle of the Bill was the main thing ; but, after all, the way whieli the principle was to he carried one was a-great point. • The majority of tho judges.had. de cided . -that the solvent tenant test ;should be applied ; that was, that a solvent tenant' should be able to pay • over and above . what was paid by the occupier, and that he understood was the interpretation which the Noble Lord intended to give in his Bill.t - The Noble Lord admitted that, such an interpretation - would diminish the present niunher of 'voters 'on - the registry by one-fourth, and to allow for this, he proposed to give the fran chise .to .persons rated under the - poor -law. at 30t. ° year. This would, at the least, make 50/. a year rent ;• • and- he contended - that any man paying . such a rent would .he able 'to qualify at the quarter sessions under in terpretation of the ,IRW. the present If his __statement was correct the 25,000 metes .6- pro pose d t la 'I ~- ~ ••••=0 , 14.1 thy 301. rating would pr, - ;ye to be , nOthigg at all. Therewas an important part-o. the ' t'ch , wa civsel omitted by the Noble Lord, namely, .that did nor state whether this 301. was to be a. 4 ,-iei.'andf, -1. or not. - Lord ELIOT—It was an occupaticte of *) ' Mr. M. OTERRA.LL—Then to that .yeti enttehre. tamed a strong objection, for it. would 14.1., A '2 voter much more under the influence of tha•. , lord than he was under the present b. r The persons who, under the present law, had the 10&. qualification, were protected by their leases, and could not be turned out by the landlords for voting according to their own feelings; but the persons rated at 301. were, for the most part, so placed under the present law, that could be ejected on three months', notice.-(Hear, hear.) The result would be to place the best and most industrious part of the community entirely in the power of the landlords. He thought a franchise of this kind the greatest curse that could be inflicted on Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) It was better to say at once that those who held land in tenancy should not vote at all—(Hear, hear)—better to inquire how many tenants rated at 301. each landlord bad upon his estates, and to give him at once just as .many votes as he had such tenants. Nothing could be more unjust, impolitic, or dan gerous, than to give the landlords of Ireland any in creased power over the conse:entious exercise of the constitutional rights of his tenants.—(Hear, hear.) The danger to which property was at present exposed in Ireland, and which was on the increase, could not but be aggravated by giving the landlords this further. power of interference. When the Noble Lord, the Member for North Lancashire made his celebrated speech upon the bribery that prevailed at Irish elec tions he forgot to mention the bribery which was induced by the clause giving the franchise upon reni- charges of 201. and 501. In many instances persons, 7 without proving that they received that qualification came down to the election, and, upon swearing that they had such rent-charge, were allowed to vote. A similar abuse. existed in Scotland, but then in Scotland there was a balance of evils, for parties were nearly equal in that part of the kingdorti; 'and, if one side created fraudulent votes, the abuse was compensated by the other party creating an equal number • but in Ireland, the land, forthemost part, was in.the hands of one party, and there was no such molitis of compensating fraud on the one hand, by equal fraud on the other. He ad mitted that where hbuses existed they ought to be corrected, but if they gave the franchise to per- sons so qualified they ought to demand proof of the receipt of the 301. for six or twelve months preceding, It was necessary that persons claiming should :t put to the proof of the actual receipt. The Noble Lord had stated truly that the 40s. franchise which, bad been destroyed in 1829 had produced a great effect in some counties, and scarcely any effect in others. In the county which he represented it had produced scarcely any effect, but in many counties the ma jority of the freeholders had been swept away. • must admit that the 51. franchise was, of all others, the one most desirable to exist ; but, under the pre sent circumstances, he found that there was scarcely ; any chance of any great number of such voters being created. Then, with regard to the franchise - in towns. It appeared that where three persons had a beneficial interest in a holding of the value of 301. it was the in tention of the Government that . each of them should be upon the register.—(Hear, - hear.) But he wished to draiv the Noble Lord's attention; to one point, which was that in cases where a -ma* held different tenements of one landlord, the amount = of the whole rent of which was 101., he was entitled. ' to a vote ; but where he held' tenements of different landlords, the total value of which wasmore'than 10/., but of which 101. was not held under one landlord, the occupier was not entitled to a vote. Now this he considered ought to be_ altered. He did not wish to make any unnecessary objections to the Government measure, and he was sorry that, while the Government admitted the principle of the necessity of extending the franchise; they had not sufficiently carried it out," He must protest against giving the franchise to the., 301. tenants-at-will. After a few words from Mr. GROG-AN, Mr. F. SHAW said he did not think the measure would have • much immediate practical effect,. The , amount of the holding was a matter of coffiparatiYe • indifference ; while the present state of society is e Ireland, there was an indisposition on the part of the , tenant to be put upon the registry at all. The tenant's Who wished to attend more to their farms and their r families than to politics, generally declined to be-VP on the registry, as they wished to live in peace with • their landlords, and those who had influence over , them. Whether the holding was 301. or 50L' would make little practical difference. He would not enter into the merits of the Bill till they had seen it printed, and looked more particularly into its provi" sioris. He was unwilling to give his opinion . as to the measure, except as to one point. If by giving , the• franchise to 51. freeholders, they could encourage tte„, creation of such a class of proprietors, he should tnueP; wish to see it carried into effect. • hi • Lord JOHN RUSSELL said. this was a subje° 'which, in itself, was one of very considerable dif 6- culty, and he was prepared to .admit that the Noble Lord had introduced it with g'idat good temper. first proposition would, as' admitted by the Noble Lord himself, cause a .verr,great deficiency in the .number of voters in Ireland. Speaking generally* it ,might, it appeared, be taken at not less than twenty' , 'five Thousand. But how did the Noble Lord propos e to Supply' the deficiency ? By allowing tenants par ing a certain rent, and occupying from year to year; to have votes, and therefore, so far, it • wall', be a tenant-at-will clause ; as it was well. known that a tenant choosing to vote ad versely to his landlord would be obliged t.,° , quit his farm. This tenant-at-will franchise had' never been known in England until • the Passing of the Reform Bill, and let it be remembered it was not Then proposed by the authors of the Bill, but by 3 , Noble Duke, then the Marquis of Chandos and ge , Member of that House. 'Such was the ori,srin.of that tenant-at-will clause, which placed the counties entirely in the hands of the landlords. The effect of this oleos° had been described very accurately and very with respect to the counties of England, by the Noble Lord the Secretary_ for the Colonies (Lord StanleY) l who had on a former occasion told the House that it. was only for Six or seven of the large landed p!e prietors to meet, and then the future representatrofl was at once determined on. In England they fowl(' a very strong inclination, both among Whiglandlord', and • tenants,. and Tory landlords and tenants, to eF; together at elections ; and therefore the system 'dr not create so great an amount of evil as it was certall„ 3 to do in Ireland. In some cases in England no dou bli it 'produced gross oppression and great evil, but in the general run it did 'not perhaps do so. - The 0 5 ' iu Ireland was very different. There, generallyspeaking, the tenants were anxious to escape fre l l. 4 voting ; on the one hand, not wishing, to vote the landlord—on the other, trying to avoid poPul., influences, in order not to seriously offend the lan e, lord. It was imposssible to have the same clause in Ireland that now existed in England; 'without prr clueing very great discontent. If the effect 'of it 0 3 . Ireland should be the same as it was in England, t° make the counties the channels through which tllu landlords should send to Parliament whomsoever they liked, the representation would be the constant wire ° of irritation and annoyance. He (Lord: Joh n Russell) considered therefore • that the intfe -, duction of the thirty-pound tenant chill was one which was very objectionable indee d '. Introducing so high an amount as 30'. for occupatit i would, he feared, only lead the 'an 'lords to thie7 that the body. of electors would be sufficiently Halite'', for them to have some influence or power over them He _ was glad that the Noble Lord proposed 0 , 4 ) e freehold franchise Bill. He only regretted that thet t was not also a 40s. freehold franchise. The nureb e r of freehold franchises in fee of Si., as well as those o 40s. in fee, would be small, and he did no t s ee 1 1 'J • they should not give the same franchise in this l e i spect to Ireland as England enjoy e d. He would 1 1 , then enter into the merits o f th e w h o l e Bill, expee t ing that on a future occasion the Right Hon. Baren v e t would furnish the explanation desired. At prcse . ., he could not see h ow th e p resen t Bill wou ld subslel o • tinily effect equality in the Iri s h franchise. rh o t Noble Lord proposed cert a i n c h ang e s w ith respeeL, the right of voting, whi c h h e th oug ht wou ld be " be neficial. With regard t o th e C or p or ations, if pi understood rightly, the v oti ng f or mun i c ipal offic e i would be the same as in England. He did not 1 0° that there was any provision in the Bill for the pl c ment of rates. lie had no further objection to re 3 in this•stage of the proceedings. •ye Mr. BELLEW said he was not prepared to fo e . any opinion at present on the tenancy at will clads 11 but he did not think the reg i s t r y would he affected by it. The franchise in Ireland show as extensive as was contemplated by theßeforni P„le Lord HQWICK thought that it was well wortht`ci. consideration of her M a j es ty's Gov e rnment whe th they might not get rid of all the agitation of the r f p'j tration courts by taking the rating on the list I 'f of compelling th e party to appear for the purp(l)l e pfd o proving the amount.—(Hear, hear.) lie t toe gentleman on that side of the H ouse would 11 ° hastily,Wemn voting fou'nded on mere occul)rat'i°lef h but i f t ' e admitted the superiority of a lease; le e° s ' truateipentirely to a franchise depending 01 l. ther:eould : not obtain a sufficient number of ve_t,,e',,, le k • (rPfitf;he'ifraeou'l Wei'Vtiisterial benches.) tb recd deed a. lease , the± "paced it in the power.° f t he great' owners of the Soil virtually to disfranclus fool eleatcii•s.—(Hear.) A franchise arising only 0 . 5 0 rt a lease was liable to great : almses. Suppose tt. ll The" granting a lease to the amount of 101-. or 201. % ,_ 01 lease might be granted at a nominal rent, ‘ 'n_ vo tee much less sum was really paid, in order that the 0 might be retained in the power of the landlord' 0/ • had had' considerable experience in county e° l ' t l . e ,r t 't and all his eXperienceled,him to the same opv e ot would be practically iinprissiblie.,te geij -T1 La W. cc