The Sun. — London, England, 1850-05-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, May 10. Their Lordship; met at Five o'clock. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE gave notice that ho should, on Monday, move the second realing of the Advauces to Ireland Bill. DISTRAINTS (IRELAND) BILL. The Earl of LITCAN introduced a Bill to alter the law as regarded diatrainta on growing crops. POOR-LAW (IRELAND). In answer to the Earl of lAJCAN, The Yarquis of LANSDOWNE was understood to s ay that it was not at present the intention of the Go vernment to renew the measure authorising the appoint ment of vice-guardians in Ireland. Lord MONTEAGLE would submit that in the mea sures now in progress for dividing unions, powers should be given to the guardians to employ a man of experience to assist them in the administration of the law. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE would wish to avoid the introduction of any measure which should tempt the guardians to transfer the execution of their duties to a paid officer. After a few words from Lord Stanley and explana tions from the Marquis of Lansdowne and Lord Mon teagle, Lord BEAUMONT said he thought the ratepayers should be consulted before the appointment of any paid officer. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said such would be the case. The Marquis of WESTMEATH said the duties of the boards of guardians were so heavy that they would never be performed unless paid officers were appointed. Several had already been appointed, under the expecta tion that the House of Commons would grant them re muneration. The subject then dropped. PETITIONS. The Earl of POWIS presented a petition from Salop against any alteration in the law of marriage. Lord STANLEY gave notice that on Thursday the Marquis of Salisbury woeld present a petition from Harts complaining of distress. The Earl of CARLISLE presented several petitions against the shift system in factories. CASE OF MR. RYLAND. The Duke of ARGYLL rase to move the following resolutions of which be had given notice:— " 1. That i% is the opinion cf this House that the case of George Herman Ryland, late clerk of the Executive qouucil of Canada, as set forth in a petition presented With House on the Bth of June, 1849, and as further set forth in addresses ♦oted to her Majesty by the Le gislative Assembly, and by the Legislative Council of Canada, in 1846 (on the report of a Committee specially appointed to inquire into the circumstances of. the said case) is one of great hardship and injustice. " 2. That it appears from the papers laid on the table of this House, that this hardship and injustice has been acknowledged both directly and indirectly, by successive Governor-Generals of Canada, by both branches of the Legislature in that province, as well as by the Imperial Government. "3. That it is the opinion of this House, that the guarantee given by Lord Sydenham to the said George Herman Ryland, bearing date the 23d of August, 1841, constituted an engagement, to which the faith of the Crown war pledged. " 4. That it is the opinion of this House that the funds derived from colonial sources, but placed at the disposal of the Crown, independent of the colonial Legislature, were those liable for the fulfilment of Lord Sydenho.m's guarantee, but that the voluntary abandonment of the said funds, or of any part of them, by the Imperial Go vernment, dues not absolve it from the obligation of re deeming the promise of the Crown:— " 5. That it is the opinion of the House that the claims of the said George Herman Ryland, which have heretofore been officially acknowledged, ought not to be avoided or overlooked, and that he has a right to ex pect that the agreement entered into between him and the Governor-General, of which he has performed his part, should be carried into effect according to its terms; or as they may now be impossible, that he shonld be compensated for the non-fulfilment thereof." The Noble Duke entered at great length into the cir cumstence of Mr. Ryland's case, which have already been very fully laid before the public, and concluded by expressing his opinion that the Government were bound to award compensation to Mr. Ryland tor the abolition of his office as clerk of the Executive Council of Canada, to which he had given his consent on the express gua rantee of Lord Sydenham that he should be appointed to a new office of equal value, and which guarantee had never been fulfilled. They might resi3t the claim on the ground that Lord Sydenham, who made the promise to Mr. Ryland, did not live to explain the reasons why he had made the promise. He trusted, however, they would urge no such reason, for there was nothing in it,. There was another ground on which this claim might be rested, and it was this—that Mr. Ryland might have conducted his office in such a manner as to realise all his'expectations in respect to it. This would be no answer to the promise made by Lord Sydenham, but he must deny that there was any truth in the statement that Mr. Ryland had not conducted his once with due economy. The Noble Duke concluded by saying that the Government were bound to see that the promises made by the representative of the Crown were fulfilled. Earl GREY entered into a brief history of this case. In 1838 the Earl of Durham, the governor of Canada, appointed Mr. Ryland to a higher office than he then held in Canada. In 1839 Lord Norman by, when Secre tary for the Colonies, in a letter to the Governor of Canada, stated that in the event of the Canadas being united, and Mr. Ryland losing his office, he was not to have compensation for the loss of his office. The. union took place, and accordingly Mr. Ryland would be only entitled to a compensation of so much per month for the time ho held the (Alice, that being the principle upon which the Board of Treasury compensated persons in Mr. Ryland's position. But Lerd Sydenham did give the promise referred to, and he (Earl Grey) thought the provincial Government ought to have carried it out. Lord Metcalf, although he felt that Mr. Ryland had no claim on the Government, yet gave him the office of registrar of Quebec, and gave him 1504 a year in addition, to make up the emoluments of the office; subsequently Mr. Ryland was appointed to another office and the pension was taken away from him by Lord Metcalf, who felt that the proceeds of the new office were equal to all that could fairly be required by Mr. Ryland. Lord Metcalf's conduct in this matter was approved of by Lord Stanley, when se cretary of the colonies. Lord Motcslf had written home, declaring Mr. Ryland had no claim for compensation. It appeared from the last minute of the Executive Coun cil that the claim of Mr. Ryland were still ander consi deration of the provincial Government, and for this rea son alone, were all others wanting. He conceived their Lordships would be of opinion that there was no evi dence to show that the colonial Government were indis posed to deal with Mr. Ryland in a proper spirit, and therefore that there, was no ground for the interference of the House. Under the circumstances of the case, however, he should mot meet the motion of his Noble Friend with a direst negative, but he should only ask their Lordships to refuse to allow the question to be put, by mot ink the previous question. If the Noble Duke, wha had brought the question forward, had had the ex perience which he (Earl Grey) had had in the other House of Parliament, and knew as he knew, in what temper such a question would there be entered upon, he thought that his views on the subject would at least be considerably modified. The Noble Earl concluded by moving the previous question. Lord STANLEY said he thought that all of their Lordships who had followed the clear and comprehen sive statement of the Noble Duke behind him, would agree with him in thinking that he had brought to their notice a case of gross and grievous hardship. It ap peared from the correspondence relative to it, which ex• tended as far back as the administration of Lord Goe ferd, that no fewer than six Governors-General of Ca nadat had t a k en a part in the several circumstances de tested in it, then:l3 , -4es of no inconsiderable complica tion, An application had been made to the Government that Mr. Ryland might be Clerk .t) the Council after the death of his p f r a e t h ir i , te w d ho had held the office before. Lord Gosford thea trrangement, hut Lord Durham went out, and with knowledge rar of the corres pondence and instruction to the e ap pointment, but without reporting y, mad© the deLnthrde Norman by being afterwards requested to frvv t. Mr. Ryland believing that he held t a t r i consented to forward it on condition of able officeil4 by patent, to hold the office, notwithstanding the union obfetinhge pro vinces. When the office had been held fora year, Lord Sydenham took upon himself the responsibility of entering in to an engagement with Mr Ry land land that he should have another o ffi ce of equal emolu went, or that his income should be made (rem som e other so urce, in case that which ho h e ld should fall off in its revenue. Lord Sydenham had no right to do that, but he (Lord Stanley) thought that Mr. Ryland was entitled, nevertheless, to a retiring allowance. Al though quite unable to enforce by law the fulfilment of the engagement made by Lord Sydenham, ho thought it due to the maintenance of good faith between the Crown and its deserving servants, that their promises r should be made good, and he instructed Lord odo so accordingly, as far as it was possib Earl opposite (Earl Grey) whether he had handed over to the local Govern ment the money which should have b een a pp lied to this purpose whether he had voluntarily sacrificed the rights of the Crown, and placed its faithful servants at the disposal of a legislature which, if it might be judged by the acts of its officers, were so far effected by demo cratic views, as to repudiate instead of confirm appoint ments previously made in good faith? His Noble Fri end did not ask e i t h er House this loss. Th at was the o f Parliament to make good Govern ment, and all th at th i s province of the local mo't!oecontemplated, was an ex pression of thei r Lordehity opinion of th e i n justice and hardship with which x his Noble Friend Rylandpressed his h a d b een trea ted. If i resolati ons t o a di v i s i on , he should certainly support himn o t i lle Ist, 2d, and sth. Earl GREY rose to answer question put to him by Lord Stanley. He said, e se not sacrificed the that matter L' e ' l l i t iealltr, that he had it ' l n, ; ll to the Crown, others relating but had noted in that matter, a 3 tie Canada in the way which he considered most condu cive vi to nces the perpetuation of h armony between the two and e on- pro. Lord BROUGHAM s u pp or t e d t h e motion tended that it wa s n ot on ly a h ar d s hi p, but an injustice, to Mr. Ryland, to refuse him the compensation which he was promised by Lord Sydenham. The Earl GRANVILLE said that moving the pre as the most respectabl e way of meeting . vious question w the case. Lord GLENELG said that, f:er all he had heard, the impression left on his mind was that a great injustice had been done to Mr. Ryland. The question was not a mere colonial one, it was an Imperial one.—(Hear.) The guarantee, therefore, or the Queen's representative ought not to bo overlooked. If the colonial funds were not available to west the premise made ha this case, means should be taken to meet the matter through the medium of Imperial funds. The Duke of ARGYLE replied, and said he would move only the first, second, and fifth resolutions. Their Lordships divided, and their numbers were— Contents for the resolutions ... 22 Non-contents ... •-• ••• 19 Majority for the resolutions... —3 The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COAGIONS, May 10. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' amendments to the following Bilis were considered and agreed to: — Architects, Civil Engineers, Builders, and General Fire and Life Insurance, Annuity, and Reversionary In terest Company (incorporation of the company under a different name). Clerical, Medical, and General Life Assurance Society. Wakefield Borough Market. The following Bill was read a third time and passed— Groat Northern Railway Deviations. Amendment of Acts, Alteration of Tolls, and of East Lincolashire Railway Tolls. The following Bills as amended were considered and agreed to— Liverpool Corporation Waterworks (Extension of Time for Purchase of Land, &c.) Waterford and Kilkenny RAilway. MANCHESTER RECTORY - DIVISION BILL. Mr. GOULBURN proposed an amendment to this Bill to the effect, that the salary of the canons of Man chester should be 7501. instead of 6001. a year. Mr. M. GIBSON opposed the amendment on the ground that after a full consideration of the Bill by the Committee they had come to the conclusion that 600/. was an ample remuneration for the canons. The object of the Bill was to apply the parochial revenues to the pa• rochial purposes generally of Manchester, and if the amendment of the Right lion. Gentleman were agreed to the result would be to trench further upon the surplus fund, out of which the poorer clergy were paid. The amendment was inconsistent with the whole principle of the Bill, and he was therefore decidedly opposed to its introduction. Lord JOHN MANNERS supported the amendment. Mr. PLUMPTRE thought the Bill would be far better without the amendment. Sir BENJAMIN HALL thought the salaries of the canons should be decreased to 5001. a year instead of augmented, because they did not properly discharge the duties of their office, and most of them left those duties to be performed by deputies. There were as many as fifty or sixty churches in Manchester, and the average endowment did not exceed 801. a year, and he thought it would not No just or fair to deprive the poorer clergy men, who really did their duty, of a portion of their re. muneration for the purpose of increasing the salary o the canons. Sir GEORGE GREY cansidered the Bill was a most valuable one, and should be sorry if it did not receive the sanction of Parliament. Tho Bill as it originally stood proposed to give the Canons 5001. each, but the Com mittee, atter due deliberation, raised it to 600/., and he, therefore, thought some strong grounds ought to be stated before they consented to depart from the decision of the Committee. Mr. DEEDES, having had the honour of sitting as Chairman of the Select Committe, was anxious to say a few words upon this subject.—(llear, hear.) The Committee were not unanimous in fixing the income at 6001., but three years ago Parliament passed a public Act, fixing the future income of the Dean at 2,0001., and that of the canons at half that sum, and the Com mittee did not feel altogether justified in changing that law.—(Hear, hear.) It was therefore proposed that as the income of the Dean was 1,500/., that of the canons ought to be 750/., but eventually the income was fixed by the Committee at 6001. He ass sorry that his Honourable Friend the Member fur Marylebone had thought proper to introduce personalities into this debate, because he knew that when the evi dence takes before • the Committee was printed, it would turn out that it did not justify the strictures which his Right Hon. Friend had passed upon setae of the gen tlemen interested in the 13i11.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. CHILDERS assured the House that the reason the sum was not fixed at 750/. was, the desire of the Committee to be as unanimous as possible upon the de cision they came to.—(Hear, hear.) Th©y ought to look to where that additional sum, amounting to 600/. a year, would go. It would go into the parish of Man chester, consisting of 400,000 inbabitants.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances be could not help thinking the House would do better to adhere to the opinion of the Committee. Mr. HORSMAN thought the House had every reason to be satisfied with the proceedings of the Committee on this Bill. This was not a question of payment, but it was one of apportionment and distribution; and be called on the House to remember that in every 120/. they gave to one of those canons they took a living from a clergy man, and a pastor from his congregation. Mr. W ADDINGTON bore his testimony to the effi cient manner in which the Dean and Canons of Man chester discharged their duties, and he did not think it fair under these circumstances 1,0 come forward and at tempt to throw opprobium upon these gentlemen. Mr. HUME wished to know what the parochial duties were which these gentlemen had to perform. On their own admission they never considered they had any duties to perform, and they never had any to perform. Sir 11. IL INGLIS aupport•.l the amendment. Mr. H. DRUMMOND said that th• question of pluralities Ras not an ecclesiastical question, but a question of common sense. It was an abuse which would not be suffered in any other service but the service of God. If these gentlemen were forced to do all their duty they would have to hold service in the cathedral every hour it: the day from six to six.—(Laughter.) Gentlemen might laugh, but that really was the origin of cathedrals. Mr. BRIGHT wished, as a representative of Man chester, to say a few words on the matter. It might be considered presumptuous for a Dissenter, as every one knew him to be, to express an opinion with regard to the funds of the Church; but, looking at the decision of the Committee as a Member of Parliament, and as a citizen of a community, he . thought the Com mittee only did what any body of six or a dozen sensible me❑ would have done with regard to the funds brought under their consideration.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The Bill, as it came from the Cotn mittee, would give great satisfaction to all persons who where in the habit of attending the services of the Church in Manchester. The way in which the funds of the Church had been appropriated there had always been pointed at as an argument, and a very strong argu ment, against the management of Church affairs gene rally. What the Committee proposed was simply that the canons should receive 6001. a year, and rectors 2501., besides certain fees, which could not be defined in the Bill ; and if they raised those sums, the result would be to defer the accumulatio❑ of the fund which it was expected would be derived frem a better management of the collegiate establishment. The Bill would give satisfaction not only to Churchmen but to Dissenters in Manchester, and he therefore trusted the House would pass the Bill in its present shape. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the amendment .... Against it Majority against The amendment was accordingly rejected. The other amendments were then considered and agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be engrossed. NOTICES 01? MOTION. Lord NAAS gave notice that on an early day after Whitsuntide he should call the attention of the House to the duties charged on home made spirits in Ireland; and also, that in consequence of not being able to obtain car t tin returns, he should not be able to bring on his motion which stood in the paper for Tuesday evening. IRISH ENCUMBERED ESTATES. Mr. FRENCH wished to ask a question of the Solicitor-General. It was in reference to a sale of an estate in Westmeath under the Encumbered Estates Act, in which the surveyor had included 44 acres of a neighbouring estate which had been sold and a Parlia mentary title given to them; he wished to know what steps the owner of these acres must take ii order to re cover them. The SOLICITOR•GENERAL said that ho had re ceived no notice of this question, and as he suspected that the lion. Gentleman must be mistaken in his in formation, he thought that it was desirable that he should have some days' notice of the question. He had had no information on the subject himself. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS. Mr. HORSMAN asked the First Lord of the Trea sury when the Ecclesiastical Commissioners were to pre sent another general report; and, also, whether any and what proceedings had b een t a k e n either by them or the Bisho p of hoe r Gloucester, since 1848, in the ease of the estate of Horfield? Lord J. RUSSE LL replied that he was una bl e to say when th e neat general report of th e Commissioners would b e l a id befor e the House, and as to the second question, that of olitrfithe arrangement with re eld w as st ill un d er th e c on- ROYAL sideration o f t h e le d'OLLEGr? of spect to th e estate the Crown. Mr. STAFFO RD asked E OF Dome S ecretary w h et h er SURGEONS. ttit was the i ntention of her i jeity's Ministers to sanc tion such an alteration in the charter of th e R oya l Col loge of Surg eons as should enable the council to elect fellows GwiGthßoEutyex,at naunderstoodtion: to state that the Go vernment had, at present, no intention to make such an alteration in the charter of the Royal Coll ege o f OF SAVINGS' GOVERNMENTBANK IN RE. Surc,reens. BANKS. o f RESPONSIBILITY T ITY O Mr. WILLIAM FAGAN as k e d the G the Exchequer whether it was intended that the Go vernment should be responsibl e for all moneys from depositors of savings banks by the treasurer v" or his clerk. Also, whether ho would h any objection to introduce a clause in the Bill, ev distinctly assuming this responsibility; if, on the other hand, it was not intended that Government should be responsible. whether it was proposed to make the trustees • liable for such default? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was intended that the Government should be responsible for all moneys received by the treasurer of a savings bank or his clerk. Tne treasurer and his clerk would, in fact, be the servants of the Government. He did not think it would be necessary to introduce a clause into the Bill with regard to the responsibility of the Go vernment. PAYMENT OF ASSISTANT GUARDIANS. Mr. TAYLOR asked the Home Secretary whether the Government meant to make any provision for the P a yment of assistant g uardians to unions in I reland? G. GREY re p lied that it was not the intention of the il. the Gov ernment to make the slightest pro vision for were P aYt:nelit of assi s t an t- guar di ans , but observed there certain cases in an which inspector might be ap pointed t o act in the he capacity of an aissistant-guardise , and that be might b e paid, THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 11, 1850. made to reduce the duty from 28. 6cl. to Is. Now it did so happen that a more inconvenient sum could not have not have been fixed upon. Whilst it sacrificed a considerable revenue, it would not agree with any exist ing stamp; new dies would be necessary, and thus con siderable expense and inconvenience would be occa sioned. After the decision in favour of Is. some delay took place, and during that time he received representa tions from all parts of the country expressing the utmost anxiety that the measure should be proceeded with. He would read a short extract from one of the representa tions on that subject, showing that even as the measure Was originally proposed, it would have been considered a great boon by a large portion of the country. The letter, which came from a committee of attorneys in Somersetshire, was signed by four gentlemen of the highest character. They said—" Perhaps few statutes which have ever passed; the Legislature have been more perplexing or more fruitful of litigation than the st am p Act, 55 Geo. 111., cap. 184, now in force; and while, therefore, the proposed measure of Government is just and equitable, it is one of which all who have had any experience in the existing stamp laws have felt the urgent need. We beg, sir, further to state that, in the course of the many years' experience which we have had of the present Stamp Act, no part of it has appeared to us to be more unequal in its pressure, or more unjust in its principl e , than that which imposes the duties now payable on bonds and mortgages. And we think (in common, we believe, with the members of our pre fession and the public generally) that a uniform ad valorem duty of ss. per 100 i, as proposed by her Ma jesty's Government, on all bonds and mortgages, in lieu of the present unequal, and, in some cases, oppressive scale, will be liberal and just, an d t h a t i t w ill b e suffi ciently low to meet all the requirements and all the reasonable expectations of those on wheat the payment of these duties will fall." That statement showed that in the opinion of these parties the propositions of the Government were fair and equitable. He would now proceed to state the course which he in tended to adopt. In the first place, he proposed to discharge the present order altogether, and intro duce a new Bill, containing the clauses of the old Bill, together with those which had been framed upon the suggestion of the Hon. Member for Ciren cester. Ile proposed to impose a uniform duty upon conveyances and transfers of property of 1 per cent. ad valorem. This would not give so much relief as he had been desirous of affording in the case of small convey ances; but, nevertheless, considerable benefit would be given in such cases. Upon mortgages and bonds he pro posed a uniform duty of per cent. This would slightly increase the sum voted by the House, but it would prevent the inconvenience to which he had referred with respect to the stamp. The sum proposed by the House was Is. His proposal was per cent, carried uniformly forward, which would considerably relieve all mortgages and bonds for sums up to 12,0001. With regard to leases he proposed that the Bill should stand as it did at pre sent, with the except i on o f l eases f or li ves i n Ire land. He proposed to place 55., or 4 per cent., upon set tlements or money, or money raised upon land. Some Hon. Gentlemen were labouring under a strange mis apprehension as to the imposition of a duty upon con tingent annuities. His object was to omit the words in the existing law, so that henceforward contingent an nuities would be free. He proposed to repeal shop the duty on leases for one year, and to reduce the duty on transfers of mortgage to an ad valorem duty. This Bill would relieve almost all transfers of mortgage. Ile proposed to reduce the duty on memorials, which at pre sent is 10s. to 2s. 6d. Then with respect to the convey ance skins which were subject to progressive duties, varying from 20s. to 255., he proposed to subject them to a uniform duty of 10s. He also proposed to allow the Commissioners of Staraps to settle the amount of duty on deeds on the payment of 10s. additional, such decision to be final, and to make the deed valid. Before cencluding he would read an extract from a letter which he had received from the council of the Law Society of London, in which they stated—" The council are glad to find that there is a disposition on the part of Govern ment to reduce the ad valorem duty on mortgages to t 2s. 6d. per c en t. Th e co uncil are decidedly of opinion with these alterations and amendments, and assum ing the ad valorem duty on conveyances to be fixed at 20s. per cent., and on settlement of personal property and of money, charged on land and immediately rais able, at ss. per cent., the Bill will operate most beneficially for the interests of the public in general, and will effect a very equitable and consider able reduction in the stamp duties payable on mort gages and conveyances of small amounts, to the great advantage and relief of the classes on whom these duties have hitherto fallen in a very disproportionate rate." The Right Hon. Gentleman then moved that the order for the Stamp Duties Bill be read, in order that it might be discharged, and as it was desirable that no time should be lost he proposed to move that the House go iuto Committee on Monday, in order to pass a resolution whereon to found the new Bill. Mr. T. EGERTON inquired whether the Right Hon. the new Bill, had paid any theatten tGioenntletoman, in framing suggestion made by the Incorporated Law Society of Manchester respecting leases in per petuity ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I pro pose to leave them exactly as they are. Mr. HEADLANI wished to know whether the Right Hon. Gentleman intended to include receipt stamps in his Bill? lic clergy of Ireland had always been the upholders of order and the rights of property; but they would not be satisfied unless the people were fairly repre sented in that House. lie was of that party who were disposed to recommend the people to turn their at tention to the physical improvement of the country rather than political agitation; but Hon. Gentlemen opposite were throwing bitter ingredients into the poli tical cauldron, and by their cen duct on the present oeca sion were the real agitators of Ireland. For his own part he felt bound to tender his heartfelt thanks to tho Government for having introduced that measure, and he trusted it would be carried, contrary4o that opposition, with such a majority as would bear it successfully through all its subsequent stages.—(Hear, hear, from the Government side.) Lord BERNARD contended that the present period for bringing f irward such a measure was most infelicitous, and that no wish had ever existed on behalf of the Irish people to have it pass into a law. That was clear from the fact that no petition was presented in its favour, and that the greatest indifference was manifesto I on the matter. He believed that the measure nas a direct vio lation of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, previous to the framing of which it was arranged that the franchise should be 101. in Ireland. The Noble Lord then ad verted to the Committee which set in 1825, and quoted the evidence of the late Mr. R. A. Blake, to show that even at that period the understanding was that the fran chise should be 101. If they once adopted the principle of making the borough and county franchise the same, where on earth were they tostop? lie believed they would be led to the adoption of the Chartist principle of dividing the country into electoral districts. The influence of the town voters—many of them altogether uncon nected with agriculture —upon the purely aericultural constituency, would be of the most prejudicial nature. From the greater activity and means of organization possessed by -residents in towns, they would, in fact, swamp the agricultural voters. Another objection to the Bill was that it gave no security for the bona fide character of the franchise. It would be in the power of a dishonest or partizan board of guardians to make a rate at such a time as would enable persons to vote with out paying their rates. Above all, the unfair and un equal valuations in different counties ought to be put an end to before this Bill was passed; that was a mea sure which the Government should introduce. It should not be left to boards of guardians. For instance, if he took his own position as the chairman of a board of guardians, his attention to the duties of the office neces sarily gave him considerable influence, and though he was anxious to act in all matters so as to escape sus picion, yet it would be impossible that he should en tirely escape the imputation of having an eye to his political interests in anything he might do as to the valuation.—(Hear, hear.) Ile looked on the measure with great apprehension, because, as had been ably and forcibly shown by Lord Clarendon, Ireland at this time wanted peace and opportunity to apply itself to social and industrial improvements. Political excitement and the strife of opposing parties were to be dreaded as the worst evils that could befall the country. What would be the effect of the mea sure in this country? He was afraid that it would be said the Ministry had adopted the policy of the Colonial Minister with respect to the Cape of Good Hope. England was quiet and peaceable, and the Government refused any extension of the suffrage to it. Ireland was turbulent, and succeeded in getting an extended suf frage. On another ground the measure was most ob • jectionable. Now that the two countries were so closely brought together there ought not to be any difference in the laws by which they were governed. He earnestly asked the House to pause before it passed a Bill so fraught with dang3r, and took a step from which they could not draw back—which would throw them into the arms of a party with whom all attempts at conciliation had been i❑ vain. Instead of such a measure, the Go vernment should endeavour to introduce measures that would improve the social condition of Ireland—that would fend the hungry and clothe the naked. Such measures, while beneficial to Ireland, would at the same time increase the glory and the prosperity of the united empire. —(Hear, hear.) Sir J. YOUNG did not consider it fair to institute a comparison between the 405. and Si. freeholder. With respect to the Bill itself, though there here portions of it which he did not approve, yet he did not think that his objections to those details would warrant him i❑ concurring in the very doubtful and desperate course of rejecting the measure altogether, seeing that it was one which was so much called for by the circumstances, and was so suited to the spirit and genius of Ireland. The portions of the Bill to which he objected were, the joint occupancy clauses and the adoption of the poor-law valuation. That ♦aluation was unequal throughout Ireland, and was much complained of in many districts; whereas if they adopted the town-land valuation, it would be found uniform and fixed? It would get rid of many of the difficulties which would be found to attend the operations of the poor-law valuation. He also ob jected to the 81. franchise as being too low. A respect able class of voters ought, ho thought, to be looked to, more than a merely numerous one, and he considered that a 12/. franchise would effect that object, and fully carry out the purposes of the Reform Bill. These were his opinions with respect to the Bill; but, seeing what the general opinion of the House appeared to be, ho would not, on account of those objections, refuse to vote for a measure which, on the whole, he considered well suited to the circumstances of Ireland. Looking at the probable effect of this measure upon the character and energy of the people cf Ireland in the I ul mess of time, he could nut see in the measure anything but a boon. It was not an attempt to force a franchise on the Irish people unsuited to their habits; and he knew it to bo i❑ accordance with the general wish. On the best consideration, therefore, that he could give the question, he thought he would act most in the interest of all classes in Ireland by supporting the Bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had found so much difficulty in dealing with one class of stamp duties that he trusted ho should not be pressed with respect to another. The motion was then agreed to, and the order wa3 discharged. PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS, S;e. (IRELAND) Mr. W. FAGAN met the objection raised by the Hon. Baronet on the ground that the poor-law valuation by the statement that the valuation was still ton high, being one•fourth less than the average rental of the country. It would have the effect of protecting the te nantry against the landlords; and unless some measure of the kind was adopted the franchise in Ireland would terminate. Ile denied the statement of the Honourable Baronet, that the people of Ireland were indifferent to the Bill; they were only disgust4d at the length of time it had lain dormant. He also defended the Catho lie clergy of Ireland from the stigma cast upon them by the Noble Lord. The influence of the Catholic priesthood was only powerful so long as they entertained the same political views as the people. He (Mr. Fagan) would not admit that the Irish Reform Act was a final measure; it was far more meagre than even the English or Scotch, and it was a stigma upoa the memory of Lord Grey, that ho did not enlarge the mea sure of reform he had granted to Ireland. The mea sure, in his view, would have the effect of checking the consolidation of farms in Ireland. The franchise given to Ireland by this Bill was a 201. at will franchise, and would not give more than 200,000 county voters to Ireland. In his opinion the Bill did not go far enough. Mr. NAPIER wished, he said, to state the reasons that induced him to vote for th e amen d men t o f t h e H on. Baronet. He quite agreed with the Hun. Gentleman who spoke last, that the people of Ireland were entitled to equal rights with the people of this country; but this was not a measure that was in harmony with the constitution of En g l an d. I t was a v i olation of the pi 'ample of the Reform Bill of England and of Ireland, and it was on that ground he opposed it. He placed this case on the second clause—the clause which affected joint occupiers.—(Hear, hear.) In the case of towns there had been a d e f ect i n t h e I r i sh Act, and it had been justly provided fir by the present mea sure. In . the counties, however, by this Bill there was a change made in the whole principle of representation ; and it was, moreover, not in harmony with the English constitution. In that clause they had struck out the words " tenants or owners." By it they might have three men voting out of the s ame pi ece of laud where only one man had a real interest in the property.—(Hear, hear.) He did not believe that this measure would do anything but promote the purposes of party. When the 40s, freehold was formed in Ireland, the landlords raised up a power which was turned against themselves. Then came the influence of priesthood, it was admitted, and now, by this Bill, they were about to give power to those who could move the mas ses , th oug h, w h en th e Right Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) introduced a franchise Bill, he placed the franchise so high that none could possess it but thos e w h o were super i or t o im proper influences. If the object of this Bill had been this—that there should be a substantial class of persons farming the land, he would have supported it; but this Bill would have no such purpose. He said, let them attend to agricultural improvements first, and when that was done, let them give whatever power they could that should attach to property. As to the Esta blished Church in Ireland, it was not, and would not, be affected by such a Bill as this. He had no fear for that Church as long as it did its duty, and its clergy entitled themselves to the respect and veneration of their coun trymen, as they were at this moment.—(Hear, hear.) As to this Bill, he considered that by passing it they were throwing the country into the mess which it bad got out of by a recent visitation. He had looked latety to the Franchise Bill of Lord Stanley, and he could not but admire it for the constitutional spirit to be found in it; and that Bill, it was to be observed, properly gave an appeal from the assistant barristers, as being persons who held office under the will and pleasure of the Lord- Lieutenant. This he said without any disparagement to the assistant bar r i s t ers , f or w h om h e entertained high respect. But now h o sa id to t h e G ov ernment, that if they wished to ma k e a c h ange i n the representation, Ireland was not th e p l ace t o b eg i n w ith, and, if it were, this was not the time to begin with. In many parts of Ireland the people did not care a farthing for the fran chise. It was employment they wanted. They asked for bread, and not for a stone of this kind. If the second clause were rejected, and the qualification were some what raised, he would not have felt it to be his duty to oppose the third reading. He said that, if the qualifi cation were based upon a rating between 12/. and 151., and the second clause struck out, ho would not oppose the measure. This was not an Irish but an Imperial measure. There ought, hi said, in conclusion, to be a uniform principle fur regulating the whole representation of the people. Mr. SfIEIL remarked that the Hon. and Learned, Gentleman had based the whole of his argument, and he thought, of his objection, to this m easure on one se n• Once ; for he had said that by this measure they would give power to those who moved the masses. He thought that there was a great misapprehension that that which was the just, the natural, and the legitimate influence of property would be injuriously affected by this Bill. Now, it had been well observed by the Hon. Baronet the Member for Cavan, that it would have the effect of ex tending the Chandos clause to Ireland, and that in a form much more comprehensive than it 95 applied to this country. The voters would be tenants at will, and this, he said, was a point which deserved their serious consideration—(Hear). The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, whose opinions he always heard with respect, even when he differed from hire, had remarked that the tenant at will rated at 81. would vote in presence of his I landlord. This, no doubt, would be a great change, a change that would give an undue preponderance to the landlord interest, unless there were independent house holders of towns not returning Members of Parliament, and whose votes might serve as a counterpoise to those of the subservient cultivators of the soil.— (Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Napier) had oscillated between 121. and 15/. as a uualification—that was as to the minimum qualification—one sufficiently high and yet low enough for his purposes.—(Flear, hear.) This great change was high enough to exclude the household constituency from counties, and at the same time to let in a large mass of quiescent vassalage under the operation of the clause. And what would be the consequence? The industrious occupier of land, rated at the pseudo-Conservative minimum, unprotected by a lease—whose tenure was but his vote, whose suffrage was unprotected by the ballot—(Hear)—he would be in vested, according to the Hon. Member's clime, with the franchise, for the proper exercise of which he would be deficient of some of the most important qualifications. On the other hand, the householder in towns containing 10 000 or 12,000 inhabitants—he spoke of Thurles and Carrick-on-Suir, which did not return Members—the respectable householder of large country towns was to be rated at 8/., which would be 181. to a tenant of the same class in this country. Well conditioned men in trade— industrious, intelligent men—and with supplemental capital, in their integrity, would be stripped by this scheme of their franchise, of a hich franchise they would have made a fearless, an independent, and an honourable use.—(Hear.) This was both impolitic and unjust—impolitic because unjust; and its impolicy and injustice were worse, because, in this country, the 40s. freeholds were preserved, and the great mass of English Members returned for boroughs at a 101. qualification; whereas the majority of the Members for Ireland, if the Hon. Member achieved his object, would only be returned on a qualification of double that amount. This was not consistent with the true spirit of the Legislative Union. They would no doubt tell him—or at least they would think it—that the case of Ireland was peculiar, and that they were afraid of agitation. This would be a mistake, and mistaken teas had ever been the bane of Ireland. Through mistaken fears the penal laws bad been enacted and their repeal delayed. Through mis taken fears, fatal procrastination of justice and devia tion from the path they ought to have pursued in legis lating for Ireland, occurred; and there was nothing so much that Englishmen ought to be ashamed of as this continuation of mistaken fears. They would ask, would he make such assertions after what had been witnessed in Ireland—landlord and tecant sundered, and continued paroxysms of dis turbed feeling. Were those things not to be feared? He replied no, look at the cmses of events—look at the events passing before them, and then mark the conse quences. The agitation to which he had referred might be ascribed to two causes, the operation of both ef which had now ceased. That cessation war to be ascribed to a great man—a man whom, considering his life and intel lectual character, they would be long ere they looked upon his like again. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman adverted to the franchise of 1797,when the 40s. franchise was granted to Catholic freeholders. Why, did he not know that the franchise was exercised for forty years in subserviency to the Protestant proprietor?—(Hear.) How was that subserviency broken? Ho had not the slightest doubt that the great electoral war which took place in Ireland would not have taken place but for the miraculous organization which Mr. O'Connell was enabled to effect through the wrongs done to Ireland in this country. But for the Catholic question there would have been no association of Catholic hierarchy, Catholic clergy, Catholic aristocracy, Catholic gentry, Catholic barristers, Catholic gra ziers., and all classes and conditions of Catholics, joined in that amazing confederacy, before which ascendancy fell down. And, on the other hand, this con federacy would never have been formed, unless had ap peared that celebrated man to whom had justly been ascribed the victory. Might not a second O'Connell arise? Nature might supply the faculties, but fortune would not give the same opportunities. The same ver satility, the same boundless resources, the same inde fatigable perseverance, the same indomitable energy and eloquence, which converted a populace into a people, might be found in another man; but then they could not furnish him with another penal code.—(Hear, hoar.) If Catholic emancipation had been carried out at the time of the union—if the great design of Pitt had not been left unfinished—you would never have seen the Clare election and the great moral insurrection against the pro prietors of the soil. Had these matters not occurred, Mr. O'Connell might have been a great barrister, a great senator, or a great chief justice, but ho would not have wielded the fierce democracy, because he would not have had a fierce democracy to wield. In any of those capacities, however, he would have been led to promote the interests of his country. Those were the reasons which had produced the conviction in his mind that there was nothing in the Bill which ought to be objected to; and he would call on them to see whether the views he took of the past were not confirmed by the present con dition of Ireland? They would probably tell him that Ireland was now enjoying profound tranquillity, that no political agitation existed, and popular passions had sub sided. Great meetings, it was true, were now held, at which political objects were net discussed. Catholic gentry and Catholic clergy were now engaged on a ques tion for which they were indebted to the Right !lon s Baronet the Member for Oxford. Even the most indus trious ecclesiastical advocates of the repeal of the union now believed that such object was bright, but impracti cable. Never was the landed interest—he would say the Protestant interest—more secure. To the Protestant interest, in the highest sense of the word, the Catholics were not opposed. Protestant ascenda cy—another name for Catholic disqualification —was, however, extinct, and in its place the existence of a greal moral, intel lectual, and territorial power, whose roots we r e as deeply struck as its ramifications were extended— had firmly established itself, and did not need the aid of the Legislature to assist its progress, Never was there a period more opportune than. the pr esen t f or con sidering a measure like the one before the House. Con cessions to Ireland had hitherto been the result of fears — they were dictated by the remembrance of that which Englishmen ought not to recollect but with shame. Now when Ireland was at rest, and well and wisely governed —when she was in repose, and not pursued by a spirit of minacious molestation—this large and comprehensive measure, to redeem the pledge given by the Ministers of the Crown when they took office, was brought for ward as the spontaneous emanation of British fairness and as dictated by the noblest sentiments of Englishmen. It was said that England's difficulty was Ireland's oppor tunity, but this would now cease to be a proverb, for he trusted the House would di vest t h at di ama l ap h or i sm of i the truth which t had borne for centuries, implant in its stead a feeling in the minds of Irishmen that justice to Ireland was the best security t o E ng l an d , an d ma k e th e incubus which had hitherto operated so disastrously give place to the lofty sentiment that the rights of the Irish people were equal to those of the English people, as their interests were beyond all doubt identical.—(Cheers.) Viscount JOCELYN acknowledged the ability of the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech; but it appeared to him to refer to matters long passed away, and to have no real connexion with the subject before the House. Holding the opinions he did, he must object to the Bill, and vote for the amendment. He had been willing to receive in a fair and liberal spirit, from the Noble Lord, any well conceived measure for the extension of the Irish fran chise, for it was impossible to doubt that the state of the franchise in Ireland required amendment; but though he agreed entirely in the principle of the Bill, he could not give it his support, because, in-its present form, it would operate fatally to the interests of Ireland. It was impossible to apply one system of legislation to Ireland and another to England without doing mischief. He ob jected to the Bill on several grounds; first, that the basis selected for the franchise would afford no criterion of the class of persons who would enjoy the franchise. In one poor-law union while the rate was 81., it would in another union be 101. Then the working of the Bill would be most objectionable, inasmuch as the registrars would be the poor-law gu Irdians—a circumstance that would be sure to throw the apple of discord in every place. Another objection was the sum settled by the Noble Lord-81. He had seen a calculation which clearly proved that the Si. and 12/. franchise would swamp the intelligence and respectability of the popula tion. Another objectionable point was the joint tenancy point—one of the many evils of Ireland, as re-introduc ing the mischief of the 40s. freeholders. The Noble Lord concluded by referring to the repeal of the union, with energy declaring, when the majority of the Irish Members voted for the repeal, of the union, then he con sidered that the first step towards the dismemberment of the British empire would be attained. Viscount CASTLEREAGH had come to a different conclusion to his noble reNtive on the subject of the present Bill. As the Bill had gone so far through the House, he thought it ought to be allowed to take its course. Had he, however, been asked what sum he would have voted for, he would have said 12/. fur towns, and 61. for counties. He would not, however, disturb the Bill now, as he could not reconcile himself to be come a party to further delay. The Noble Lord hero read some figures, which, he said, if adopted, would leave the constituency about 215,000—the same numbers as when the 403. freeholders existed. He thought that the great experiment which was about to be tried would open the doors to a new Reform Bill. The Honourable Member fir Cork, who appeared to be in the confidence of the Govern ment, said that the Noble Lord intended to bring forward a new Reform Bill fur England. He wished that such a measure had beets brought forward at the same time as the present Bill. Ho thought it was an unfortunate step to take to try the experiment in Ireland before they tried it in England. He trusted that this Bill would be properly considered in another place.— (Rear, hear.) But he felt bound not to impede the pro gress of the measure in its present st age . If ever t h ere was an inopportune time for trying this experiment in Ireland, the present was that time.—(lronical cheers and laughter.) If the Bill were framed with the amend ments which he had proposed, he thought that it would then indeed give to the people of Ireland a full and fair representation.—(Hear, he sr.) Colonel RA WDON would accept the vote of the Noble Lord, but not his arguments.—(A laugh.) He could not admit it to be a constitutional argument to say in this House that we could not decide upon a Bill of this kind without reference to another branch of the Legislature. The moment was now arrived for legislating in a ldose al spirit for the people of Ireland, and he thanked the Noble Lord at the head of the Government for fulfilling that pledge which he bad given upon this subject, This Bill was not forced upon the House by agitation, but it pro• ceded from a pure sense of justice, and what was felt to be due to the people of Ireland; and he was sure it would be received in a corresponding spirit by those whom it was intended to serve.—(Hear, bear.) • Sir J. GRAHAII—Having had some share in framing the Irish Reform Act, and having on various occasions expressed a strong opinion that that great settlement ought not lightly to be disturbed by any naw enactment, the Uvula perhaps W9tild TM think A unnatu►il if he NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. B. OSBORNE inquired of the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) whether it was intended that the New House of Commons was to be cccupied on Wednesday next by way of experiment ? Lord J. RUSSELL said, as he was not one of the Commissioners for the erection of the new Houses of Parliament, he could not answer the question of the Hon. Gentleman. AUSTRALIAN COLONIES BILL. Mr. AGLIONBY gave notice that he would move an amendment to this Bill to give New Zealand represen tative institutions. ADJOURNMENT FOR THE HOLIDAYS. In reply to Mr. AGLIONBY, Lord J. RUSSELL stated he intended to take the Australian Colonies Bill on Monday next; also, that he would propose the adjournment of the House for the Whitsuntide holidays on Friday next until the Thursday following. MR. BARON ALDERSON. Sir G. GREY entered into an explanation of an error which the reporters had fallen into last night in stating that he had communicated with Mr. Baron Alderson on the subject of the case of the Eastern Counties Railway Com pany. The report in the papers was substantially correct, but he altogether disclaim , d the right of any Secretary of State' or Government to call upon any Learned Judge for any explanation of what he may have said in trying a civil case. (Hear, hear.) There was a court of appeal to decide or adjust errors of judgment on the part of the learned judges, and no Government ever had a right to inter fere with its functions.—(Cheers.) What he did say was, that a communication had passed between the Under-Secretary of State and the Learned Judge on a matter of fact, and not on the subject of the charge the Learned Judge delivered on the case in question. ALLEGED BRIBERY OF A MEMBER. Mr. F. O'CONNOR, seeing the Hon. Member for Wicklow in his place, he wished to ask him whether or no it was true, as it had been reported in the newspapers, that the Hon. Member bad stated at a meeting held in the Rotunda, of Dublin, that be had been offered 5,0001. for his ♦ote in that House.—(oh, oh, and cries of " Order.") Mr. HENRY GRATTAN was understood to say that it was not so.—(Order, order.) THE LATE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, Lord HOTHAM, after relating the circumstances connected with the recent appointment of the present Archbishop's son to a sinecure of fice, observed, in explanation, that it had been erroneously insinuated that the reason the late Archbishop did not fill up the office was, that he had no son of his own to appoint to it, while it had been stated, equally without foundation in truth, that the Bill which had been passed for reforming these ecclesiastical offices was only passed just before the late Arch bishop's death, and that had he lived a little longer the office would have been filled up by him. He thought the statements he had made would show that the surmises which had been raised were totally without foundation. But the late Archbishop had acted upon higher grounds ; he bad acted upon the principle that it was not competent fur him to fill up offices in reversion, and he therefore declined to do so. In making the state ments he had done he had no further object in view than to rescue the late Archbishop from the stigmas that had been end( avoured to be thrown upon him. Lord JOHN RUSSELL bore testimony to the up right conduct of the late Arehbishop. He believed that both out of and in that House the highest respect was entertained towards the late Most Rev. Prelate. THE NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS. In answer to a question from Mr. OSBORNE, Mr. GREENE stated that he believed the New louse of Commons would be ready for the reception of Mem- bers, merely for the purpose of experiment, during the next week. ECCLESIASTICAL INCOME RETURNS. Sir B. lIALL put a variety of questions to Lord J. Russell in so indistinct a tone that it was impossible to collect the exact purport of them in the reporters' gallery. The Hon, Baronet was understood to say that the Eccle siastical Commissio❑ was appointed in 1838 for the pur pose of procuring information as to the revenues of the bishops and archbishop. It was notorious that several bishops had refused to make returns, and the Commissioners were unable ti fulfil their duties fully and satisfactorily. The return in 1 45 was most unsatis factory, as the incomes were given in gross and not sufficiently detailed. The Hon. Baronet was understood to instance the returns from the sees of Canterbury, Loudon, and Exeter. There were circumstances which had occurred likely to augment the value of those sees, and yet the returns did not show the fact. In the see of London great improvements had taken place in re spect to the erection of buildings and houses in various parts of the diocese, and yet he found the returns to be as follows:—In 1831 the income was stated to be 15,7471. In 1845 it was only 13,519/. What he wished to ask the Noble Lord was, whether the Commissioners received a full account of rents, tithes, leases, and other sources of revenue; whether they placed these sources of revenue under different heads; and whether they also distinguished in the same manner the several kinds of expenditure? If the Zeclesiastical Commissioners did dot adopt this system, then he wished to know what data they had for stating the several amounts as the revenues of the various sees from which they had re ceived returns? He wished further to a , ,k whether the Ecclesiastical Commissioners received a full account of all sources of revenue, and full particulars respecting church leases? Lord J. RUSSELL said the Ecclesiastical Commis sioners in 1844 sent a number of queries the bishops, asking them to place in a t.tble, forwarded to them, under the various heads, the sources of their incomes, and in another table, under different headi, the amount of their payments. On comparing the different tables, and deducting the amount paid from the amount re ceived, they were enabled to form an estimate of the yearly incomes received by the bishops. The state ments of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners were made out septenially, and in 1851 they would no doubt be prepared with another statement, and then the Hon. Baronet would be able to obtain more complete answers to his present inquiries. Tho Commissioners, he be lieved, had not published any accounts of the increase in the value of leases, tittles, and various other items comprising the episcopal revenues; but no doubt the forthcoming statement would be found to contain all the information that was necessary in that respect. With respect to the difficulty in obtaining returns alluded to by the Hon. Baronet, he had not heard of any serious difficulty the Commissioners had in obtaining infor mation. MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES. Colonel SIBTIIORP wished to know when the mis cellaneous estirestes would be brought forward. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would bring forward three heads of the estimates teat day week if the discussions on the earlier business permitted. In reply to a question from Sir IL WILLOUGHBY, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Savings Banks Bill was an important measure, and Go vernment, therefore, intended to give ample time for its consideration. It would not be brought forward until after Whitsuntide. LORD-LIEUTENANCY OF IRELAND. Lord J. RUSSELL mentioned that on Friday next, he should introduce a Bill for the abolition of the office of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. Colonel SIBTHORP gave notice of his intention to oppose any advances of money on account. STAMP DUTIES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, with respect to the stamp duties, he would, with the per mission of the House, state more fully what he intended by this measure. He hoped the House would first allow him to state what had happened, and the difficulty in which he was placed in his attempt to introduce the measure. He would then proceed to state what it was he now proposed to do. lie might here state that he never said on the Snit occasion that the measure was one which was intended to confer a great boon on the agricultural interest. The lion. Member for Bucking hamshire had misunderstood what he did say, from not being present at the time. The Lords' Committee had pointed out the injurious operation of the distinction be tween the charges on small and large conveyances, and this had induced him to propose a remedy. His object was, that the poorer tenant should not be exposed to more hardship than his richer neighbour. He proposed to put both on the same footing. So, therefore, the measure could not be considered a measure calculated exclusively for the benefit of a particular in terest. No doubt the agricultural interest would be benefited by his proposal, but that interest would not be exclusively benefited. He also stated what the amount of relief was which he proposed to afford, and how far he was disposed to go in remitting taxation. There was, in the first place, rather better than 450,000/. by the repeal of the duty on bricks, and rather less than 300,000/, by the stamp duties, making together 750,0001. That was the extent of relief from taxation to which he proposed to go this year. When he made his statement, he stated fully what his objects were. No opposition was then offered to what he pro posed, and no finding fault with his propositions was in dulged in. From the apparent general approval of his proposals, he was not prepared for the opposition which ultimately arose. He introduced a Bill on the subject of his proposed alteration of the stamp duties, to which several heads. were taken that ranged themselves under heads. Certain exemptions were proposed by the Bill. It was supposed that he had intended to , propose a duty on equitable mortgages. Now he had never entertained such an idea. What the lion. Gen tleman opposite had called the second Stamp Bill was nothing but the removal from the Bill of certain duties. At the time the di,:cussion on the Bill took place several objections were stated; but, so far as regarded the clauses, they were passed without a single amend ment. The Hon. Member for Cirencester proposed to move several amendments; and although he (the Chan cellor of the Exchequer) could not agree to the wording of those amendeeente, he acquiesced in the object which the Hon. Member had in view, and proposed to intro duce clauses for the purpose of carrying out his sugges tions, which certainly were most valuable. lie believed if the Committee had proceeded with the schedules, all the minor objections would have been removed in the same manner as the objections with respect to the clauses had been met. By those schedules, nearly the whole of was noonnsciodnevreeydamncoers; the loss to the revenue would have arisen from the reduc tionsell than to mortgage their pro not on aadnvdatitageoua for the landowners to per cent., but in consequence pert mortgages , (u e a h u e s a e r. i; luwpohnicthheh he o b w a e l s t amountwade waYs Of mortgage was duty Te (which,proposa made to him, he reduced ) w t a o s assured by parties connected duty with uee t 9 o ce re o d t u r c e e pr th e- e per cent. cs 2 ee per nt a au e nn a ds t . hll antyol-thhpeeenrr ways, who were more affected by the Bi class, that they would be satisfied with that du n t the proposition came on for discussion the HYOuse took a different view. His proportion was or ss. carried uniformly up, or 2s. 6d. for sums under 501. A n objection was taken that the scale would press heavily OR the JaQiCierd of large property, awl proposal was BILL. Mr. HATCHELL moved the third reading of this Bill. Sir J. WALSH moved that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. He contended that the re cent settlement of the Irish con s tit uenc y oug ht t o b e final, if anything could be considered to be final—that although the fixing of a prope r ty qua lifi cat i on was sup posei to increase the number of voters, that did not happen to be the case'vritia respect to Ireland, where con stituencies had melted away and disappeared. When the present measure was first laid on the table, it was quite apparent that it was not a Bill to remedy the evils which had arisen from the Reform Bill, but a measure calculated to introduce a more democratic system. One of the clauses was so objectionable that at one time the Noble Lord (J. Russell) had almost made up his mind to reject it. Ho would now point out to the House the present state of the constituency, and the probable effect of the new measure. It appeared that the total number of electors in Ireland in 1837 was 80,286; in 1849 they were reduced to 33,842; and by the proposed Bill they would be increased to 334,771.—(Hear.) He should have been quite ready to assent to such an increase in the number of voters as should have raised the number to what it was after the passing of the Reform Bill, but he had strong objections to so sweeping a measure as the present. The effect of the measure would be to make the constituency of Ireland propor tionately muoh more numerous than the constituency of either England or Scotland. By agreeing to a measure like this they would be beginning a new career of re volution and change, and would be endangering the principle of a property qualification. He principally ob jected to the 81. qualification —to the joint-rating clause —to compulsory registration ; and he thought it very doubtful policy to connect the franchise with a rating for the poor. In fact, the Bill would create a cottier constituency in Ireland, and would lead to what all who knew the state of Ireland condemned—a subdivision of the land. Not the landlords merely, but the priests, would acquire a powerful influence by the Bill. He believed the Noble Lord at the head of the Government once gave it as his opinion that if the Irish Protestant Church was destroyed the Established Church in Eng land would bo in peril. Was the Noble Lord not afraid that there would be danger to the Church in the crea tion of a constituency likely in a great degree to b e con trolled by the priests ? H e w i s hed to impress upon English members that the p resen t was not more an Irish question than it was an English one. Considering the stride made by democracy in neighbouring countries, it would have been prudent had 'Ministers paused before introducing a men-Jure which must greatly increase de mocratic power in this country. As far as the experi ment had been tried, democracy did not appear to be favourable either to the liberty, prosperity, or happiness of mankind.—(Hear.) His belief was that democracy was but the grossest f o rmof d e spotism, and aggravated all the evils that afflicted society. There was no popular feeling in favour of reform at present at all resembling that !which carried the R e form Bill. On the . contrary. reaction had long s i nce t a ken place , and stall existed. They had been told that if Slinisters were defeated they would resign, and that if they resigned nobody knew who would succeed them. They had even been menaced with the advent of an Administration formed of the Hon. Member for Manchester and the Hon. Member for the West Riding, and others of th at p art y . He believed such a rumour groundless, and felt certain that such an Administr at i on wou ld not h o ld together for six hours. If there w as any d anger o f such an Administration, it the present Bill,wouldaris arise not from rejecting, .but from passing Entertaining thes e views, he could n u t d o otherwise than move that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. The question having been put.. Mr. E. B. ROCHE was surprised at the opposition offered at the eleventh hour to what he must call a tardy measure of justice to Ireland. H was still more sur prised at the reasons offered by the Hon. Baronet, for better reasons could not be given in favour of the mea sure than those which the Hon. Baronet had used against it. Ireland was, he might almo st sa y , disfranchise d at the present moment. He wanted to know why Hon. Gentleme n on t h e oppos it e side of the House, who said they were th e f r i en d s o f the Irish people , now came for ward at the el even th h o ur to run amuck thus , as it were, against a pr o p os i t i on f or the enlargement of the fran chise of th at country ? He did not think the H on . Baronet was very discreet in proposing that motion, nor in the grou n d s upon w hi c h he rested his opposition to the Bill. The lion. Baronet said that by that measure they would enfranchise 300,000 persons, but he had never stated that the population of Ireland amounted to B,oBo.ooo.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Baronet had said that if they gave that franchise the people would turn round and upset the Irish Church. Now, be did not think the lion. Baronet could have used amore unhapp y argument in support of his motion. It might be a good argument against the franchise, but it was a very bad one in favour of the Church. If there was one thing more than another, which trade the Establish ment unsavoury in th e nostrils of the I r i s h people, it was the fact that the Church was always made the cita del from which rushed out the bands who attacked every liberty of and concession to the Irish people; and she was ever made the plea against any proposition for im proving the social, moral, or - political condition of the. people. It was said that that Bill would give power to tqe priests in Ireland. Ile would suggest a remedy for that. Let the Hon. Baronet join them in procuring the ballot, Pot be oontended for it that the EMU cmho.. found it difficult to give a silent vote upon measure.—(hear, bear.)' lie would then, lim its permission, compress into the narrowest possible " ke. e n the observations which he was anxious to In. In t ee answer to the ebserva'tions which had fallen Ire 001 Hoe. Member for the University of Dublin, be ., del wow? o _ . assure him, with the utmost sincerity, that he this claim all party subjects and party thisoirhporthtstoirt feeling Urn d we eli casion. He had looked with great attention an. defy auxiety at the course which it would be hi s Hs in reference to the present Bill to thought it imperative upon him, when the Hon joio , Member for the Queen's county moved the °M s e tbM of the second clause, to vote fur the rejection to so clause.—(Hear, hear.) He had not one wHo noura ble in answer to the arguments used by the „Id Member for the University of Dublin againstalicies pursueo.araos clause. He thought it unsound in principle, ti n teeee ) cidedly objectionable in every point of v iew.—(" cii be He believed that it was a clause which ivon eca of tamed to vicious uses, and would create a 5 ) 4 h e se) splitting votes and making faggot voters.—(ac ar w iseeet i t. With those impressions, he had voted against . so d hesitation, and he should b ) g l a d, before this Bill of the House, of Again bei n g a fforded the opportutni.oJoi reeording his vote against it. Then, again, he wa s lea to express his opinion that the 81. valuation w as t oo b a valuation,—Bear, hear.) He should have bellow,. better satisfied if the Bill had been f amed with tlaiuonly what higher rating. He f e lt, h o w e ver, tbet he 11 1 ' 1 010 s to choose between a proposition of 154 and an B • te s to 0 tine. When these two alter n atives were 1 0 ' 1) ow his choice, be did not hesitate to support the 8 4 T o o f tion. He, therefere, viewed this question as one sit mixed considerations of great difficulty. But it W oo ed' duty to look at the conditio n o f the county ethos, tuencies in Irelard at the present time. Re t e st/ Us ' be a great nation, consisting of 8,000,000 peolite , 4 ere eet found—what, indeed, was admitted by the Hon• e ons for the University of Dublin—th a t the county c° " o - e at ency of that great nation, with a form of govets Too based upon representation, consisted of an electo rs w as 07 about 50,000.—(Hear, hear.) That be thougT os . an anomalous state of things which was utterly 1 ;; ems ) sistent with our constitutional principles.—(l eer ' eee vil He had from time to time admitted that this wa s " 0 ite• which demanded an urgent rem e dy, and that it si me et dispensable to adopt some measure for the enlarg e t t ee of the county franchise.—(Hear, hear.) LoOlting, % O ral fact of the rapid diminution of the number of t hat tee voters, it appeared to him to be quite clear the; to nature of the franchise being based upon tenure , was be cause of this diminution; and that any remedy „nog effectual must be a substitution for a constituency r r- re eee on tenure of one based upon occupation in T e ' e w sieb to voting ,—( Hear, hear.) All the measures to . seset • he was a party with the Right Hon. Baronet the ui, os ber for Tamworth, in respe c t t o va l ua tion, had d • isu abe reference to this subject. H e was anxious thatiolo valuation in Ireland should be uniformly st ieg. on the sound principle of occu p an cy and r " e re He found in the Bill befor e th e H ous e all till s / l e en visions for which he had b een contending.-4 s ell hear," from Lord John Russell.) First, based ceopsa franchise was to be an occupati on f ranc hise, be of rating; next, an annual registrati on , w hich was to se or a self-acting character, and attended with no "'tole , difficulty. Again, there was a p recau ti on to be °" me lf, to which he attached the utmost importance, °e wer not only occupation for t we l ve mont h s b e fore reg . ' o so tion, but there must be ac t ua l p ayment o f a ll poor rde r due six months within th e d a t e o f reg i s t ra tion. 111 . ° o se to calculate the value of suc h a prov i s i on a s this , I 's et' necessary to consider th e c i rcumstances of Irela n s tes this moment. As he understood the Bill, all po ce sdi• must be paid, and these must include not only the ° n ot nary poor-rate necessary for the maintenance of th e h r w el l for the time being, but also the rate in aid, wh i , s : s for recently called into operation, and which was to wha le a feS three years to come.—(Cries of "No, no.") ; „ ff it might be the duration of this rate—even sunr s '; o 'be was only to last for one year—the rate in aid wa s its included. And, more than that, there was a we es "ossa progress which he believed had passed this Houseostse which would fix on the poor-rat e the re-payrnen t s t° baea Exchequer of this country a ll th e a d vances that ha d a ble made to Ireland, which would f orm a ver y consni e &eis permanent addition to the poor.rate. parisons have been made with the franchise in Brigi tt e Be it remembered that wou ld h ave b een t h e 40 3 . " d si hold.—(Hear, hear.) But the 40s. freehold wh ieh e s ea exist in Ireland was o p en to i nsupera bl e Obje c `i s el This franchise no lon ger ex i s t e d ; and i f they c° lll P - 3, it the franchise under thi s Bill w i t h t h at i n Scotian 0 could scarcely be thougt that the 8/. franchise Wcsslesy extravagant proposition. Quite the contrary w het leaseholder in Sc o tl an d was ent i t l e d to vote u nder s '' s was termed the feu t enure . I n I re l an d , h owe ver, tr ise tl valuation, including the payment of the p o or-retet je g, that was a valuati o n whi c h was gra d ua lly sncress t be was a much more limited franchise. What wer: i is): other difficulties which thi s Bill remove d? It tv- i s possible that they could forget th ose angr y debat e 'ftbei took place here in respect to the interpretation ° out franchise described as the b ene fi c i a l i n t eres t. Th e ,rlte opposite opinions were expressed upon this point. ; yea was no uniformity of decisi on i n respec t to it, anis ec e i ia the concurrence of the b enc h cou ld not b e obtain doe respect to the construction that was to be put ali en ;deck words. If they turned to the decision of the Consin; s sst of this House upon the subject, they would fin d - the Noble le rd the Member fer Bath, wbO A ° the, chairman of one of those Committees, had rep o rte d ea' opinion of the Committee over which he preside d ' 1O this was to the effect that no time ought to be lost bt legislating upon this subject, and in re g moviog 11 ,. -ti es which so eeeerally existed—that until such donu`i, removed in respeei to what was the meaning of Id be Leal interest," the county franchise in Ireland wn s u ssee te always placed i n a most uncerta i n old hear.) Wieh the present Bill all suph difficulty I° e ft cease.—(" Hear, h ear ," from Lord J. Russell.) . o tt spect to registr a tion, a ll the evils that attended 01° 00 of the subject were removed by this enactment; an ' t he the whole, he was bound to say, when balancing 0 0 considerations, that the g o o d h e thought this Bill w ° 10 effect was such as would not permit him to besit tste ete giving it his support. It was said that it greatil 00t larged the constituent body. He must say he ' ll lo' object to it on that ground.—(Hear, hear.) Cc : P e g - site' ing the increase of democratic elements in our i tt .s ," ee se tions, he saw the greatest danger in erecting an itr wee superstructure upon a narrow electoral basis. Pil e no s sure that such a superstructure could not stand 1 ! 1 " s io narrow basis.—(Hear.) He, for one, could not Alof. extend that basis.—(H e ar.) Some allusions ba d g eld made to what we had wit nesse d elsewhere. We s h ; fore not disregard the exampl es th a t are paten t, sni i sable our eyes. If he were to menti on w h at i n his ,11-- 00 10 judgment was the immedi a t e cause o f t h e f e ll 01 Philippe, he should say it was, that he maintain e s ies attempted to maintain, the a e m bl ance o f r epresen - ss eel government with a constituent body, which, cn ts P e ssli with the great bulk of th e p eo pl e , was ,danger s a te narrow, and utterly inconsi s t en t w ith a f ree Mist°. sett His government fell without a s t rugg l e . Hi s porie' see buried in its ruins, and the immediate consequel l bich, been, that for the last two y e ar s th e na ti on over ens ho ruled has been plunged in anarchy, confusion, osi bloodshed, and property as well as life has becont e r insecure. The result has been, instead of u niverss gre ge frage, a general desire has b een man if este d f o r a I tt s e, restriction, as compared with un i versa l sun s fr ree namely, household suffrage in connex i on with pots taxation. He was sure that th a t was the safe bas' s . ° s be , which the franchise might rest. H e h a d c orn° " t biro conclusion that it was his duty, to support th e be reading of this Bill, and he could only repeat 0.1 Of would rejoice at an oppo r t un i ty b e i ng a ff or d e d h ilit site voting against the second clause, and of sending °Pa s te. Bill to the other Ho use i n as perfect a state as note Mr. DISRAELI—Si r , I h ope the House—as : e es not as yet pres ume d to g i ve an op i n i on upon this -note sure—will n o t thi n k i t i ntrus i ve i f for a few 03°131-reet I express my opi n i on . I d o so, not on l y w ith g hesitation from a consciousness of the di t nie of the subject itself, but from having o . ., be t low the speech of the Ri g h t H o n . G entleman t h e Ale 7.058 for Ripon—a speech which is to me one of th e e s Fl o° ' perplexing character.—(Hear, hear.) The Rig--, Baronet has called the attention ofthe House to 10 , 0 0 cumstance that he disapproves o f th e mos t inlPf s : g regulations of the Bill in favour of w hi c h he is go oar vote.—(Hear, hear, and laughter). He recalls t° t hat recollection, with somewhat o f P ar li amen t a ry prid ° otos he recorded his vote against the second clause Of the s eat The Right Hon. Gentleman actually disapproves °: clause which has fixed the suffrag e a t an 8L rating" but, I believe that be voted in favour of it in Conito ss itie ttil: [Here Sir J. Graham mad e an o b servat i on to 02.r ;bet raeli which was not heard i n th e ga ll ery .] I find eon was correct, and that the Right Hon. G e ntlema n h be recorded his vote in favour of thi s rat i ng of wh i l e D ot ( diSapproved.—(Hear, hear.) Wh a t o pp or tunity o , e io ta longs after to express his opinion by his secon o rve to against the second clause I confess it is difficult for.isia ascertain, considering that the Bill is now only 11 1 00°, 1 for a third reading.—(Hear, and laughter.), Jai" hardly believe that any very successf u l occasio s n luts° offer itself now to any Honourable Gen tle tb ° in this House to express his opinion ir eo sn' manner sought for by the Right Honourable Gen t „user Nor has the Right Hon. Gentleman, although 11, 0 0 0 proves of the most important clauses of this Jai , he ie under these circumstances vindicated the rote of s he going to give by a frank avowal that he approvt, eon; principle of the measure.—(Hear, hear.) On tit fitte d trary, the Right Hon. Gentleman has candidly a s u el iegS that he is going to give that vote upon mixed ie as fer and with mixed considerations; yet it would Jeer s ' 00, 1 as I can draw an Ulf rence from the s p eec h of in, 0 0 Hon. Gentleman, that what he most a pproves oi to Bill is, that the suffrage is in future to be eser e ' he sP ) Ireland without any reference to tenure.—(Efe ar. d I understood the Hon. Baronet, between wholue re sees self there is much political sympathy, in 6 : 11)^ . - 0 , Ire part of the debate, to tell us that a franchise the tb; land, unconnectsd with tenure, way, with "u'lectri e great political desideratum. A franchise c° ll ;sas 0 ` with tenure, he told us, was not suited to Inc Be at i ° the Irish people. Now, Sir, I have more confiuu d - r obla the genius of the Irish people than the 11° , t1°- Ve/1 01 . Gentleman the Member for Cavan.—(Cheer te s ' es Ge n ' is most remarkable in this discussion is, that poin; tlemen should rise and tell us that there is 01t- d tbs' upon which all parties and all sides are a greed , : e l Ira n f is, the impo ss ibili ty t h at i n I re l an d t h e politic' u r, chine can b e connec t e d w i t h propr i etor ial ten / 0 10" A my mind that i s announc i ng th e d egr adation of s elat e —(Cheers)—that is, telling us that Ireland is i which is inferior to the countries with which U - 1 5 son Yr ' tally connected; and if you persist in that 1 3° , 3 0 i n d is announce that you believe the position of Ireis„sely dlv reclaimable.—(Hear.) Sir, it is because I ell! s il s ' s ,it politoSS e B e ; approve of that principle as a principle of because I entirely disbelieve the principle W as. a nating from the real state and social conditio. . s l a ngs land, that I cannot accept it as the basis of L e g s is i o Ire' What do you mean by saying that the franonifi ae ol 1411C1 cannot be exercised with tenure? P° low