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

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, May 10. :'heir Lard,hipi met at Five o'clock. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE gave notice that ho t..hluld, on Monday, move the second reading of the c,,..-.vances to Ireland Bill. DISTRAINTS (IRELAND) BILL. The Eirl of LUCAN introduced a Bill to alter the law as regarded distrainta on growing crops. POOR-LAW (IRELAND). In answer to the Earl of LUCAN, The Nlarquis of LANSDOWNE was understood to say that it was not at present tho intention of the Go vernment to renew the measure authorising the appoint ment of vice-guardian.; in Ireland. Lord MONTEAGLE would submit that in the mea sures now in progress fir 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 olEcer, _ _ After a few word 3 from Lord Stanley and explana tioni from the Marquis of LansdJwne and Lord Mon teagle, Lord BEAUATONT said he thought the ratepayers should be consulted before the appointment of any paid offic.3r. 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 would present a petition from Hefts complaining of distress. The Earl of CARLISLE presented several petitions against the shift system in factories. CASE OF MR. RYLAND. The Duke of ARGYLL rese to move the following resolutions of which he had given notice:— " 1. That it is the opinion of this House that the case of George Herman Ryland, late clerk of the Executive Council of Canada, as set forth in a petition presented to this House on the Bth of June, 1849, and as further set forth in addresses voted 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 wall as by the Imperial Government. 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, :,econd, 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 COMMONS, May 10. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' amendments to the following Bills 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— Great Northern Railway Deviations, Amendment of Acts, Alteration of Tolls, and of East Lincolnshire Railway Tolls. The following Bills as amended were considered and agreed to--. Liverpool Corporation Waterworks (Extension of Time for Parehase of Land, Sic.) Waterford and Kilkenny Rtilway. 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 tb• Bill by the Committee they had come to the conclusion that 6001. 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 th• Right Hon. 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 be just or fair to deprive the poorer clergy men, who really did their duty, of a portion of their re muneration fur the purpose of increasing the salary of the canons. Sir GEORGE GREY considered the Bill was a most valuable one, and should be sorry if it did not receive the sanction of Parliament. The Bill as it originally stood proposed togive the Canons 5001. each, but the Com mittee, after due deliberation, raised it to 6001., and he, therefore, thought some strong grounds ought to be stated before they consented to depart from the decision of the Committee. "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 Sydenham's guarantee, but that the voluntary abandonment of the said funds, or of any part of them, by the Imperial Go vernment, does 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 Georsse Herman Ryland, which have heretofore been officially acknowledged, ought not to be avoided or overlooked, and :hat 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 ho shonld be compensated for the non-fulfilment thereof." The Noble Duke entered at great length into the cir cumstance 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 for the abolition of his office as clerk of the Executive Council of Canada, to which ho 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 resist 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, ho wever, 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—tha: 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 Mice 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 Normanby, 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 fur the loss of his office. The union took place, and accordingly Mr. Ryland would be only . _ Mr. DEEDES, having had the honour of sitting as Chairman of the Select Committe, was anxious to say a few words upon this subject.—(clear, 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 1,5001., that of the canons ought to be 7501., but eventually the income was fixed by the Committee at COOL He was sorry that his Honourable Friend the Member for Marylebone had thought proper to introduce personalities into this debate, because he knew that when the evi dence taken before the Committee was printed, it would turn out that it did not justify the strictures which his Right Hon. Friend had passed upon some of the gen tlemen interested in the Bill.—(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.) They ought to look to where that additional sum, amounting to 6001. a year, would go. It would go into the parish of Man chester, consisting of 400,000 inhabitants.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances he 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 he called on the House to remember that in every 1201. 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 to come forward and at tempt to throw opprobium upon these gentlemen. Mr. lIUME 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 R. U. INGLIS supported the amendment. Mr. H. DRUMMOND said that th• question of pluralities was 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 firced to do all their duty they would have to hold service in the cathedral every hour in the day from six to six.—(Laughter.) Gentlemen might laugh, but that really was the origin of cathedrals. entitled to a compensation of so much per month for the time he held the office, that being the principle upon which the Board of Treasury compensated persons in )lair. Ryland's position. But Lord Sydenhane 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 150/. a year its addition, to make up the emoluments of the office; subsequently Mr. Ryland was appointed to another office and the pension was taken away frein 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 Metcalf 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 under consi deration of the provincial Government, and for this rea son alone, were all others wanting. He conceived their Lordships would be of opinion Oat 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 moving the previous question. If the Noble Duke, who 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 itigree 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 Gos ford, that no fewer than six Governors-General of Ca nada had taken a part in the several circumstances de tailed in it, themselves of no inconsiderable complica tion' An appli ca ti on h a d b een ma d e to t h e G overnmen t that me. Ryland might bo Clerk to the Council after 3 the d ea th of his father, office er, who h a d h e ld t h e before. lewd Gosford Durham went oi l e ) t rhh a prohibited the arrangement. but Lord with a knowledge of the corres pondence and inst ' ruc h tion to the contrary, made the ap pointment, but without reporting it. Lord Norman by being afterwards re to held the mandamus, Mr. Ryland believi g n u g " th te a d ili eld the office by patent, consented to forward it on econditiondin of his being able itlllunion of the 0 hold the office, notwithstanding pro vinces. When the office had been held t y Sydenham took upon himself theorer:e ,ye n s d Of entering into an engagement w land that he should have anoth©r officeoitfh equal emolu ment, y or that his income should be mad e u: in case that whi c h he 1 1 :et r cl orn should ot h e r source, fall off in its revenue. Lord Sydenham h a d no rightitolantod do that, but he (L ord Stanle y ) th ought that Mr. was entitled, nevert heless, to a retirin g allowance! Al though quite unable to enforce by law the fulfilment of the engagement made by Lord Sydenham, h e t h ought it due to the maintenance of goo d faith between th e C rown and its deservi n g servants, that their promises should be made good, and he lns w tr a u s cted Lord Metcalf P He (Lor t d o g o tan s° accordingly, as far as it ley) now wished to ask the Noble Earl opposite (Earl Grey) w hether he bad banded over ment the money which to the local Govern should have been applied to this - purpose—whether he had voluntarily sacrificed the rights of the Crown, and placed its faithful servants at the disposal of a legislature wh ich, 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 Friend did not ask either House of Parliament to make good this loss. That was the province of the local Govern ment, and all that this motion contemplated , w ex pression of t h e i r Lordships' ()Pinion of the injustice aniceanc hardship with which Mr. Ryland had been treated. If his Noble Friend pressed e should certainly his resol u tions to a division, he support Lord Stanle Pohim in the I s t, 2d, and sth. b to answer the ques ti o n put to him rose 1-1 ° Said ehatically, t hat he Crown, he had not sacrificed the y. power which p elonged to t but had acted in that matter, :e coneid ere d most condu cive in a ll ot h ers re l a ting b to Canads, in the way which ha to the perpetuation o f h leaweea the two _provinces. 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 men would have done with regard to the funds brought under their consideration.—(Loud cries cf " Mar, hear.") The Bill, as it came from the Com mittee, would give great satisfaction to all persons who where in the habit of attending the services of the Church in Mancha:ter. 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 Comm :tee 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 accumulation of the fund which it was expected would be derived frem a better management of the collegiate establishment. The Bill would give satis!action not only to Churchmen but to Dissenters in Manchester, and he therefore trusted the llcuse 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 b- engrossed. NOTICES OF 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 cer t .in returns, ho should not be able to bring on his motion which stood in the paper for Tuesday evening. IRISII ENCUMBERED ESTATES. Mr. FRENCH wished to ask a question of the Solicitor-Gene; al. 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 is order to re cover them. . . ~....._. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that he had re ceived no notice of this question, and as he suspected that the Hon. 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 an d what p rocee d ings h a d b een taken either by them or the Bishop of Gloucester, since 1848, in the case of the estate of Horfield? Lord J. RUSSELL rep li e d th a t he was unable to say when the next g enera l report o f the Commissioners would b e laid before the House, and as to the second qu est i on, that th e arrangement with re spect t o t h e estate of the con- Mr. STAFFORD ask ed the H ome S ecretar y w h e ther it was th e i ntent i on lege of Sur geons as should enable fellows with out examination. e of e t n h u e nc ß il oy t a o l e C I e o c l - t Sir G. GREY was understood to state that the Go vernment had, at present , no intentio n to make such an alteration in t h e charter of the Royal College of RESPONSIBILITY OF GOVERNMENT IN RE GARDAGSAVINGS'AN asked BANKS. h Surgeons. Mr. WILLIAM TEO Chancello r of the Exchequer wheth e r i t was intendedt th at t h e e Go vernment should be resp ons ibl e f or all from depositors of savings b an k s by the t reasurer money s rece i ves his clerk. Also, whether he would any objection to introduce a clause inthe have distinctly assuming this responsibility ; if, on th e Bill,t her hind, it was not intended that Government should o responsible , whether it was proposed to make be 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. The treasurer and his clerk would, in tact, 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 Payment of assistant guardians to unions in Ireland? Sir G. GREY replied that it was not the intention of the Government to make the slightest provision for the Payment of assistant guardians, but observed there were certai n cases in which an inspector might be ap pointed to act in the capacity of an assistant -guardian, and that he might be peal Lord BROUGHAM supported the motion ' and con tended that it was not only a hardship, b ut an injustice, to Mr. Ryland, to refuse hi m th e compensation which he was promised by Lord Sydenhare. The Earl GRANVILLE said that moving the pre vious question was the most respectable way of meeting the case. Lord GLENELG said that, after all ho had heard, the impression left on hie 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, of the Queen's representative ought not to be overlooked. If the colonial funds were not available to meet the promise made in this ease, THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, made to reduce the duty from 23. a to Is. Now it did so happta. that e. more inconvenient sum could not have not have been fixed upon. Whilst it sacrificed considerable revenue, it would not agree with any exist ing stamp; new dies would be necessary, and thus cell siderable expense and inconvenience would be occa sioned. After the decision in favour of 1:. some delay took piece, 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 bigbest character. They said—" Perhaps few statutes which have ever passed: the Legislature have been more perplexing or more fruitful of litigation than the Stamp Act, 55 Gee. 111., ga p. 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 principle, than that which imposes the duties now payable on bonds and mortgages. And we think (in common, we believe, with the members of our pruf-ssion and the public generally) that a uniform ad valorem duty of ss. per 1001., as proposed by her Ma jesty's Government, on all bonds and mortgages, in lieu of the present unequal , and, i n some ease! , oppressive scale, will be liberal and just, and that it will be suffi cieutly low to meet all the r equ i rements an d a ll the re asonable expectations of those on whom 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 suite 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. He proposed to i mpose a un if orm d u ty upon conve7ances 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 wish respect to the stamp. The sum proposed by the House was Is. Ilts proposal was per cant. 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 exception of leases for lives in Ire land. He proposed to place 55., or 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 th a t henceforward contingent an nut ties would be free. He proposed to repeal altoge 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. lie proposed to reduce the duty on memorials, which at pre sent is 10s. to 2s. 6d. Then with respect to the convey ance skins whi c h were su bject 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 Stamps 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 ho 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 2s. 6d. per c en t. Th e council are decidedly of opinion that 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 rats• able, at ss. per cent., the Bill will operate most beneficially for the interests of the public in general, and will e ffect 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 whomthese duties have hitherto falleu in a very disproportionate rate." The Right Hon. Gentleman then moved that the order for the Stamp Duties Bill be read, order that it might be discharged, and as it was desirable that no time go on i s u h t o o u c l d o m b e m lot tt s c,e h o e n proposed y t i p n m orderove that a t s h s e a r l e l o s o u l s u e t whereon to found the new Bill. Mr. T. EGERTON inquired whether the Right Hon. Gentleman, in framing the new Bill, had paid any atten tion to the 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? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had found so much difficulty in dealing with one class of stamp duties that he trusted he should not be pressed with respect to another. The motion was then agreed to, and the order % discharged. PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS, &c. (IRELAND BILL. Mr. HATCHELL moved the third reading of this Bill. Si r settlement J he t . , tt W i edm A a ey L n st S i x f 1 ofmonths,tmovedhe that Irish u t eco e cnos B nt i contended e l u l ne dn b ec e e dy that a ought tth tetoh toi r bed final, if anything could be considered to be final—that although the fixing of a property qualification was sup pose.' to increase the number of voters, that did not happen to be the case with 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. He would now point out to the House the present state of the constituency, arid the probable effect of the new measure. It appeared that the total numbe'r 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 au increase in the number of voters its 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 much 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 8/. 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 lrelaud, and would lead to what all who knew the state of Ireland condemned—a sabdivision of the land. Not the landlords merely, but the priestil p would acquire a powerful influence by the Bill. lie believed the Noble Lord at the bead of the Government once gave it as his opinion that if the Irish Protestant Church was destroyed the Established Church in Eng land would be 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 be con trolled by the priests ? He wished to impress upon English members that the present was not more an Irish question than it was au English onO. Considering the stride made by democracy in neighbouring countries, it would have been prudent had Ministers paused before introducing a measure which must greatly increase de mocratic power in this count-y. 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.—(Boar.) His belief wasthaatgdraevmaotcedraacyll was but the grossest formof despotism, and g the evils that afflicted society. There was no popular feeling reactionin pao nw ders, it 0 that which carried the Reform Bill. On the contrary, h fa a v d ou l r ong of srienfooormtaakteopresent at all resembling place, and still existed. They had been told that if Ministers were defeated they would resign, and that if they resigned nobody knew who would succeed them. They bad even been menaced with the advent of an Administration formed of the Hon. Member for Manchester and the lion. Member for the West Riding, and others of that party. Ho believed such a rumour groundless, and felt certain that such an Administration would not hold together for six hours. If there was any danger of auch an Administration, it would arise not from rejecting, but from passing the present Bill. Entertaining these views, he could nut do 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 t trdy measure of justice to Ireland. II was still more sur prised at the regions offered by the lion. Baronet, for better reasons could not be given in favour of the mea sure than those which the lion. Baronet had used against it. Ireland was, he might almost say, disfranchised at the present moment. Ile wanted to know why lion. Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House, who said they were the friends of the Irish people, now came f ,r -ward at the eleventh hour to run amuck thus, as it were, against a proposition for the enlargement of the fran chise of that country ? Ile did not think the Hon. Baronet was very discreet in proposing that motion, nor in the grounds upon which he rested his opposition to the Bill. The Hon. Baronet said that by that measure they would enfranchise 300,000 persons, but he had never stated that the population of Ireland eenounted to B,oBo,o oo. —(Hear, he tr.) The lion. Baronet had said that if they gave that franchise the people would turn round and upset the Irish Church. Now, he did not think the lion. Baronet could have used a more unhappy argument in support of his motion. It might be a good made g t i l v ie e argument against the franchise, but it was a very one thing more than another, which bad one in favour of the Church. If there was Establish ment unsavoury in the nostrils of the Irish 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 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 tqe priests in Ireland. lie would suggest a remedy for that. Let the ion. Baronet join them in .. procuring th e ballot. But ho contended AI it that the ItQUltin Catlio- MA Y 11, 1850: 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. He 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 castldron, and by their conduct on the present occa sion were the real agitators of Ireland. For his own part he felt bound to tender his heartfelt thanks to the Government for having introduced that measure, and he trusted it would be carried, contrary to 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 forward 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 manifested on the matter. He believed that the measure was 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 sat 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 10/. If they once adopted the principle of making the borough and county franchise the same, where on earth were they to stop? He 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 agricultural 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.) He 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 net 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 danger, 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 in vain. Instead of such a measure, the Go vernment should endeavour to introduce measures that would improve the social condition of Ireland—that would feed 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 40s. and 8/. freeholder. With respect to the Bill itself, though there were portions of it which he did not approve, yet he did not think that his objections to those details would warrant him in 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 suite] 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 valuation 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 tenant at will rated at Si. would vote in presence of his landlord. This, no doubt, would be a great change, a change that would give an undue preponderance to the landlord ieterest, 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 qualification—that was as to the minimum qualification—one sufficiently high and yet low enough for his purposes.—(Hear, 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 Lion. Member's clause, 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 81., 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 hick 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 haspolicy and injustice were worse, because, in this country, the 40s. freeholds were preserved, and the great mass of English Members returned fur 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 f tars had ever been the bane of Ireland. Through mistaken fears the penal laws had been enacted and their repeal delay ed. 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 tenant sundered, and continued paroxysms of dis turbed feeling. Were those things not to be feared? He replied no, look at the causes 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 of 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 cgain. 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? He 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 aneeloquence, 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 bad been carried out at the time of the union—if the great design of Pitt bad 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 he 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 not discussed. Catholic gentry and Catholic clergy were now engaged on a ques tion far which they were indebted to the Right tlon. 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 lauded 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 ascendaecy—another mane for Catholic disqualification —was, however, extinct, and in its place the existence of a greal moral, intel lectual, and territorial power, whose roots wets) 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 present for 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 rencdollweceltl and wiselybutwithshagmoev.eNrntel when Ireland was at rest, a —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 divest that dismal aphorism of the truth which it had borne for centuries, implant in its stead a feeling in the minds of Irishmen that justice to Ireland was the best security to England, and make the 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 Hou. 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 wis 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 affor 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 guardians—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 8/. and 121. 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 4 f the British empire would be st.aiued. Viscount CASTLEREAGH had come to a differept conclusion to his noble relative 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/. for towns, and 61. fur 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 here read some figures, which, he said, if adopted, would leave the constituency about 215,000—the same numbers as when the 40a. freeholders existed. He thought that the great experiment whieti was about to be tried would open the doors to a new Reform Bill. The Honourable Member for Cork, who appeared to be in the confidence of the Govern ment, said that the Noble Lord intended to briug forward a new Reform Bill for England. He wished that such a measure had been brought forward at the same time as the present Bill. He 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.— (Hear, hear.) But he felt bound not to impede the pro gress of the measure in its present stage. If ever there was an inopportune time for trying this experiment in Ireland. the present was that tine.—(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, heir.) 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 legislatir ' s in a liberal spirit for the people of Ireland, and he thanked the Noble Lord at the he sci of the Government for fulfilling that pledge which he had given upon this subject. This Bill was not force 1 upon the Hone by agitation, but is pro ceeded from is pure sense of justice, and what was felt to be due to the people of Ireland; and he was sate it would he received in a corresponding spirit by those whom it was intended to serve.—(Hear, hear.) Sir J. GR ALIA al—Having had some share in framing the Irish Reform Act, and having on various occasloes expressed a strong opinion that that great settlement ought not lightly to be disturbed by any new enactment, the House perhaps would not think it unnatural if he many of the difficulties which would be found to attend the operations of the poor-law valuation. He also ob• jetted to the 81. franchise as being too low. A respect able class of voters ought, he thought, to be looked to, more than a merely numerous one, and he considered that a 12/. franchise would effect that object, and folly 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, be 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 of Ireland in the ful ness of time, he could not see in the measure anythink 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 be in 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. 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 too 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. He denied the statement of the Honourable Baronet, that the people of Ireland were indifferent to the Bill; they were only disgusted at the length of time it had lain dormant. He also defended the Catho lic 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 upon the memory of Lord Grey, that be 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 20/. 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 the amendment of the Hon. Baronet. He quite agreed with the Hon. 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 England. It was a violation of the principle 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 defect in the Irish Act, and it had been justly provided for by the present mea sure. In, the counties, however, by this Bill there was it change made in the whole principle of repreientation 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 same piece of land 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 purposea 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 masses, though, when the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) introduced a franchise Bill, he placed the franchise so high that none could possess it but those who were superior to 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.—(Elear, 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 lateey co the Franchise Bill of Lord Stanley, and he could not but admire it for the constitutional spirit to be found iu tt; 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 barristers, for whom he entertained high respect. But now he said to the Government, that if they wished to make a change in the representation, Ireland was not the place to begin with, 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 wore rejected, and the qualification were some what raise I, he woul l 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 15/., and the second clause struck out, he would not oppose the measure. This was not an Irish but an Imperial measure. There ought, he said, in conclusion, to be a uniform principle for regulating the whole representation of the people. Mr. SHELL remarked that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had based the whole of his argument, and he thought, of his objection, to this measure on one sen• tence ; for he had said that by this measure they would give power t ) those who moved the masses. He thought that there was a great misapprehension that that which wns the just, the natural, and the legitimate influence of property would be injuriously affected by this Bill. Now, it hid 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 was 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 him, had remarked that the rtgri t found it difficult to give a silent vote upon this impooleic measure.—(llear, hear.) He wuu!d then, w ible limit s perr.,;sion, compress into the narro-i-est poss ,_ e. to the observations which he was anxious to a fl n o s e w . er i2 t i o nbo th r e fo c r , w e v u tio n i i is ve w r which h t. f.• ) 1 u f b e i l i l n e , n rn vh f‘lr_ e ° a °3 . od u t i b l s d e : assure him, with the utmost sincerity, that he s °",. 9 o e. claim all party subjects and party feeling tiP cn s t .f l a niell casion. He had looked with great attention F!" .. dut y anxiety at the course which it would be Os in reference to the present Bill to Pu rsue our able thought it imperative upon him, when the Flonni,,liou Member for the Queen's county moved the °f i b s ; of the second clause, to vote for the reibececwiliojern;inoutroirts.sbiles i c n la a u n se sl . v — er (ll t e o ar t , he hea a r r . g ) una H en e ts ha u l e n d o b t y on t Member for the University of Dublin agag lB .. ' d de. clause. He thought it unsound in principle, 5,140 a,) cidedly objectionable in every point of view. k id bo He believed that it was a clause which wn u t turned to vicious uses, and would create s sr %ear.) splitting votes and making faggot voters.—(fie l , r ' sc i t eout With those impressions, he had voted again st i t. , gas sed hesitation, and he should b 3 glad, before thi s But P„, o f the House, of again being afforded the opporttletioloa recording his vote against it. Then, again, be wag oo I°W t to express his opinion that the 81. valuation was tosb a valuation.— hear, hear.) He should have beee o . better satisfied if the Bill had been f arced with s o nly what higher rating. He felt, however, th..t he /7 0 - 10 • to choose between a proposition of 151 . and so 81 ote d 10 tion. When these two alternatives were p rese ,. his choice, he did not hesitate to support the 81 ~n e 01 tion. He, therefere, viewed this question s 8 bit mixed considerations of great difficulty. B a t it 70. duty to look at the condition of the county ;me tuencies in Ireland at the present time. He sawed be a great nation, consisting of 8,000,000 peoatee fem bef found—what, indeed, was admitted by the HOD. Otstitir for the University of Dublin—that the county ccu noe st ency of that great nation, with a form of goo', bo dy based upon representation, consisted of an electors of of about 50,000.—(Hear, hear.) That be thougT oa . an anomalous state of things which was utterly Too sistent with our constitutional principles.—(Be er ' s , e rtl He had from time to time admitted that this W ei a• fir which demanded an urgent remedy, and that it e eer a dispensable to adopt some measure for the e nlarg_ i t t he of the county franchise.—(Hear, hear.) Lookiniestorsl fact of the rapid diminution of the number of 11 , at t he voters, it appeared to him to be quite clear teas the nature of the franchise being based upon tenure , e / t o be cause of this diminution; and that any reniedY „ea effectual must be a substitution f u r a constitueneY ic re ese on tenure of one based up o n o ccu p a tion in re f w h ich to voting.—(Hear, hear.) All th e me asures to 90, he was a party with the Right H on . B a ronet the Aid iest ber for Tamworth, in respec t to valuation, heat"; she a reference to this subject. He was anxious t ha jos valuation in Ireland should be uniformly •eg , on the sound principle of occupancy and Tilt P ro' He found in the Bill before the House all thiffieet visions for which ho had been contending. -- ( a d hear," from Lord John Russell.) First, the c" u u po n franchise was to be an occupation franchise, hsese' be of rating; next, an annual registration, which was . t 0 ye or a self-acting character, and attended with no exPt' eff ea difficulty. Again, there was a precaution to be ou s nie al to which ho attached the utmost importance, 06 . 01 0 , not only occupation for twelve months before reg i o/ tion, but there must be actual payment of all poorado due six months within the date of registration. l II . t wee to calculate the value of such a provision as this. d gt necessary to consider the circumstances of Irelaersta this moment. As he understood the Bill, all Pon r- or ei• must be paid, and these must include not oelY t , b ,, e „, - eoer nary poor-rate necessary for the maintenance ea th e wee for the time being, but also the rate in aid, whi, c . t for recently called into operation, and which was to is' tel et three years to come.—(Cries of "No, no.") W il l a glt might be the duration of this rate—even supPc s ' to be was only to last for one year—the rate in aid wa s re if) included. And, more than that, there was a iness li aol progress which he believed had passed this Holise'g t eo which would fix on the poor-rate the re-paymen t c t i beell Exchequer of this country all the advances that ' 4 , 9 , lata ble made to Ireland, which would form a very consi""c o to' permanent addition to the poor-rate. D ad , parisons have been made with the franchise in Og fr er Be it remembered that would have been the 4 0 % did hold.—(Hear, hear.) But the 40s. freehold Wh' e t i a tie. exist in Ireland was open to insup e rable obje c ; sf ee This franchise no longer existed and if they en ni ,,ra, the franchise under this Bill with that in Scotle's se ii could scarcely be thougt that the 81. franchise eis V it a extravagant proposition. Quite the contrail. t or leaseholder in Scotland was entitled to vote under 4 was termed the feu tenur e . I n I re l an d, h ow ever, 01 valuation, including the payment of the poor-rstiek that was a valuation which wa s gra d ua lly iner e ',„ the was a much more limited franchise. What vi er ; other difficulties which this Bill removed? It ' vs ' thlo possible that they could forget those angry d e bates, t o took place here in respect to the int e rpretation ' 3 ' oo o franchise described as the beneficial interest. l i nreste opposite opinions were expressed upon this point., s ees was no uniformity of decision in r es p ec t to it, an d le the concurrence of the bench could n o t be obtainn e t hete respect to the construction that was to be put uP° 11 ; 000 words. If they turned to the decision of the Cetel li j t alit of this House upon the subject, they would 6 11 " Ag e the Noble Li.rd the Member for Bath, weal tlle, chairman of one of those Committees, had report; ace opinion of the Committee over whi c h h e `etpresideu 0 this was to the effect that no ti me oug h t t o be 00 legislating uponera i this)e x . ist e subject, d— t and h at u i n n til r s e u m e o e vin e g ou ak ei e l f which generally e• removed in respeci to what Was th e mean i ng of id es final interest," tae county franchise in Ireland w e i ii i i ti esf; .always placed in a m os t une , rta i n cond ition.--(; hear.) Wish the p resent Bill a ll such difficulty s-are' cease.—(" Hear, h ear ," f rom L or d J . Russe ll.) r set spect to registration, all the evils that attended tb it/ d es of the subject were removed by this enactment; 80„ ' tee the whole, he was bound to say, when balaneioboelfi considerations, that the good he thought this Bill w to effect was such as would not permit him to hesitate es' giving it his support. It was said that it greell e s( larged the constituent body. He must say di der' object to it on that ground.—(Hear, 'hear.) ti o reitle ing the increase of democratic elements in our 0 ., 0 9 0 tions, he saw the greatest danger in erecting an lin e superstructure upon a narrow electoral basis. 1- `,., 0 0 sure that such a superstructur e cou ld no t stand l !' t ; e t narrow basis.—(Hear.) He, for one, could not e l l beet extend that basis.—(Hear.) Some allusions bs u beSlG made to what we had witnessed el sew h ere . V", i b e for e not disregard the examples that are p a t en t, 50",,,,0br , , our eyes. If be were to me n ti on w h at i n his naftP, ju-tgment was the immediate cause of the fall of de 0+ Philippe, he should say it was, th a t h e m aintai° 9 oll attempted to maintain, the aemblance of r epreee li o rss government with a constituent body, which, °tea with the great bulk of the pe o pl e , was ,dant d ies: narrow, and utterly inconsistent with a f re e t orot h 0 His government f-11 without a struggle. His pewee be e buried in its ruins, and the immediate conseque li 4o ll , been, that for the last two , years the nation over " e tie he ruled has been plunged in anarchy, confusi° l:l 'ooe bloodshed, and property as well as life has becom e i floc insecure. The result has been, instead of =Avert s /fie frage, a general desire has been manifested for er„,ge j restriction, as compared with universal 0 0 . 1 ;:10 0 ": namely, household suffrage in connexion wi t ; er, taxation. He was sure that that was the safe hes",o the which the franchise might rest. He bad come •or conclusion that it was his, l duty to support tb o o l S o l reading of this Bill, and be gi be afforded-'7,00 Would rejoice at an oOrtunity ing voting against the second clause, and of sending °POO r E H u o_u s s e i i r n , I a s h peeope hope f th c e t H a o s toast:L..B as 9 P .1 8 Mr. Bill to t D he lS o l t t h A e not as yet presumed to give an opinion upon 0 16 0 0 sure—will not think it intrusive if for a few tri O t r eel I express my opinion. I do so, not only wit h „Lold hesitation from a consc i ousness o f t h e d i " . - 101' of the subject itself, but from having . i . o oof low the speech of th e Ri g ht H on . G ent l eman the x e 0 0 0/ e Baronet for r ar os i nt sei b p nt haaa ca l ledpa he t e e e ec t rh the e_ disapproveswattltiiecenhat character. — (Hea r attention of eo t oa o ffr t. me )thheee HouseTomhn oe e s B o f got li t bb. ace' perplexingepi uae c ce t 1' regulations of the Bill in f avour o f w hi c h h e is g°7 n vote.—(Hear, hear, and laughter ). He recalls to gbd.ol recollection, with somewhat o f P ar li amen t ar y Priuk:Bll he recorded his vote against the s econ d c l a use of ti th e The Right Hon. Gentleman actually dis a pproves "" t ielC, clause which nas fixed the suffrage at an Si. ra tee, but, I believe that he voted in favour of it in Coino;,. Pit [dere Sir J. Graham made an observation to iir t io l : / raeli which was not heard in the gallery.] I fin " 0 was correct, and that the Right Hon. GeDtleOtch recorded his vote in favo ur o f t hi s rat i ng O ,ai b i e disapproved.—(Hear, hear.) What opportunity d reL lungs after to express hi s o pi n i on by his see° f ee,' against the second clause I coafess it is difficult feirroo% ascertain, considering that the Bill is now only J for a third reading.—(Hear, and laughter.), it I hardly believe that any very successful offer itself now to any Honourable Gen 0 r„, in this House to express his opinion I tief ee", manlier sought for by the Right Honourable Gen ( 01' 0 Nor has the Right Hon. Gentleman, although bill, efji proves of the most important clauses of this e; 10, 0 under these circumstances vindicated the ' o ' o f going to give by a frank avowal that he apprelli, cr e i principle of the measure.—(Hear, hear.) On t dol it • irary, the Right Hun. Gentleman has candidl_titifeelit that he is going to give that vote upon raixeu to as '0 and with mixed considerations; yet it would se e m , Sit., as I can draw an inf rence from the speech of g 0 f fa roe Hon. Gentleman, that what he most approves , 0 i 5 e0:1 Bill is, that the suffrage is in future to be al e ; aele e ,". Ireland without any reference to tenure.-oL eil ;efte n f i f I understood the Hun. Baronet, between wh.aeef f ,.l' i d self there is much political sympathy, in , 11 ,-.7 ;a ;la part of the debate, to tell us that a fletnel l io land, unconnect d with tenure, was, wit h „,:e..- o f great political desideratum. A franchise ° a le. it; with tenure, he told us, was no t su it e d to tbs,g de ace the Irish people. Now, Si r , I h ave m ore coo p 00 0' the genius of the Irish people than the 11 2,1 1 - 11 ,, a b a ll, Gentleman the Member for C avan .—(Chee",4 o ,.."yrl f ," g iit*most remarkable in this discussion is, that ":„4,• its tleinen should rise and tell us that there is,- - 0 ,4<, upon which all parties and all sides are agreve • I fro" is, the impossibility that in Ireland the fo liii ree. chise can be connected with proprietorial te f Reis my mind that is announcing the degradation c ia e L ! i a, —(Cheers)—that is, telling us that Ireland is pc ,, 1 1 00 Vo 'ltch is inferior to the countries with whic h 05 1 idea/i f s tally connected; and if you persist in that P eitio dal!,, s , announce that you believe the position of Ir2 tire ff ; ° . 'i f reclaimable.—(Hear.) Sir, it is because I t r itio ,---P approve of that principle as a principle 19 f, P„ s ortel j se' because I entirely distelieve the prineiP' e i ; L i o a 0 1 . 0 0, nating from the real state and social cono, le eelaP te a land, that I cannot accept it as the basis°' 1 01 l t Q What do you mean by saying ow; t4-frtt o eili land cannot be exercised with tenure? ° NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. B. OS BOR,NE inquired of_tiae Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) whether it was intended that the New House of Commons was to be occupied on Wednesday next by way of experiment ? Lord J. RUSSELL said, as he W 3,3 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 intu last night in stating that he had communicated with Mr. Baron Alderson on the subject of the case uf 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 had stated at a meeting held in the Rotunda, of Dublin, that be had been offered 5,0001. for his vote 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 ho 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 wero tot illy without foundation. But the late Archbishop had acted upon higher grounds ; he had acted upon the principle that it was not competent for 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 endeavoured to be thrown upon him. Lord JOHN RUSSELL bore testimony to the up right conduct of the late Archbishop. 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. OS BORNE, Mr. GREENE stated that he believed the New House 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 lIIALL - Puta 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 Commission was appointed in 1838 for the pur pose of procuring information as to this revenues of the bishops and archbishops. It was notorious that several bishops had refused to make returns, and the Commissioners were unable to fulfil their duties fully and satisfactorily. The return in 1345 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, London, 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 13,5191. 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; end whether they also distinguished in the same manner the several kinds of expenditure? If the Ecclesiastical 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 ask 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 table, forwarded to them, under the various heads, the sources of their incomes, and in another table, under different heads, the amount of their payments. On comparing the different tables, and deducting the amount paid from the amount re ceived, they were enable] 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 lion. Baronet would be able to obtain more complete answers to his present inquiries. The Commissioners, he be lieved, had not published any accounts of the increase in the value of leases, tithes, 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 assy serious difficulty the Commissioners had in obtaining infor mation. MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES. Colonel SIBTHORI? wished to know when the mis cellaneous estimates would be brought forward. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would bring forward three heads of the estimates mat day week if the discussions on the earlier business permitted. In reply to a question from Sir H. 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 atter 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 t 3 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 iu 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. He might here state that he never said on the first occasion that the measure was one which was intended to confer a great boon on the agricultural interest. The Hon. 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. Ho 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 bo exclusively benefited. Ho 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 300,0004 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 ptions were propos e d by soebvjeecratilonhseadwse.rec t e a r k ta e i n n t e h x a e t m ranged themselves u n d er the Bill. It was suppos e d t h at he had intended to s. the N n ow no h . ehad proposenever yon suc e h qu a i n tab i l d e ea m . or w tga b g a e t nothing but the removal from the Bill of certain duties. the Bill t k place oo Gen tleman opposite had call ed the second Stam p Bill w as At the time the discussion on er entertained a du t a single the clauses, they were passed without proposed to amend ment. The Hon. Member for Cirencester several objections were states; but, so far as regarded agree to the wording of thos e amen d ments . h e acqu iesced in the object which move several amendments; and although he (the Chan cellor of the Exchequer) could not the Ho n . M em b er h a d i n v i ew , a nd proposed to intro• duce clause s f or t h e purpose o f ca rrying out his sugges. tions, which certainly were most valuable. He 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 schedule, nearly the whole of the loss to the revenue would have arisen from the reduc tion on conveyances, and not on mortgages, because it was considered more advantageous for the landowners to sell than to mortgage their property.—(ilesr, hear.) The proposal which he hal made was, to reduce the duty (which, u p on t h e lowest amount of mortgage was 2 per cent.) t o per cent., but in consequence of repre sentations made to him, he reduced the duty to i per cent., and was assured by parties connected with rail ways, who were more affected by the Bill than any other class, that they would be satisfied with that duty. When would Anily the proposition came on for discussion the House y. took a different view. His p roportion was lor 53. per cent. objectionca rriedunwifasormtalkyeunpt,hoart 2 th s. e 6d a . c f a o le r sums undereuldpress 5 on the holders of large property, and a proposal was