The Sun. — London, England, 1850-03-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDA? EVENING, MARCH 2, 1850 support the amendment of His Honourable Friend. I 'The Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) intimated last night that it was not desirable to introduce any legislative measure which might operate as a substitute for the Reform Bill; but that all legislation on the subject should be supplementary to that Bill. Now, he must frankly declare that the present measure proposed to annihilate every existing franchise and to re-construct an entirely new franchise which, with regard to counties, would introduce a constituency to whom it would be dangerous to entrust the election of representatives.—(Hear, hear.) That, in fact, was the position of the question, and let them see in what way they ought to proceed. Were they to act upon the caution of the Noble Lord in his speech of yesterday, and take the institutions as they existed under the Reform Act, and add such classes of electors as the existing state of society rendered imperatively necessary, or to sweep everything away in order to re construct our representative system entirely anew. It appeared to be of vital importance that they should understand what the question was ; and he trusted the history he had given of the attempts at legislation would ,not be considered unnessary.—(Cheers.) Nov, if the Government conceded the insertion of the words pro. posed by his Honourable Friend, the very first question which would arise was, whether the House would create 'a new class of county voters. The Government pro posed a constituency for Ireland, consisting of persons rated on the annual value of Si. What was the new county constituency which they would raise under the present Bill ? They were, he believed, all agreed that it was absolutely necessary that there should be some re vision of the county constituency in Ireland, with a view to supply its acknowledged deficiency—(Hear, hear) —and their next endeavour would be to ascer- tain what would be the best mode of creating a class to supply the deficiency in the constituency. He would therefore support the amendment of his Hon. Friend the Member for the University of Dublin, his (Sir F. Thesiger's) anxious desire only being to give such a consitnency to Ireland as was best adapted to the wants and wishes of the people of Ireland.—(Cheers.) Sir G. GREY said that there was no desire on the part of the Government to oppose the amendment. The proposition was extended over a very long historical period.—(Hear, hear.) The speech of the Hon. and - Learned Gentleman had not touched the question in the slightest degree.—(Hear, hear.) The amendment pro posed to make no alteration whatever in the principle - of the Bill, but simply to make it more perspicuous.- - (Hear, hear.) The Government, therefore, had no de sire to oppose it, and they might proceed at once to the consideration of the several clauses of the Bill.—(Hear, ' hear, and cheers.) The amendment was then agreed to. Mr. HENLEY moved an alteration, the effect of _ . which would be to throw the consideration for the ' qualification not _upon the rates due, but upon the average of those which berore a certain late period had been assessed and paid. He thought that the House were well agreed as t) the necessity of shutting the door upon all corrupt practices, and he thought that some parts of this Bill were well - calculated to do so. He thought that all par ties would agree that so far the boards of guardians had been free from all political bias; but he wished the House to consider how easy it was by this Bill for guardians to put on and strike off the register. He would therefore suggest that they should adopt the provision of the English He form Act, that the party had been rated to all the rates, and that would get rid of this facility for creating fag got votes. He had no objection to that point of the Bill which related to the period of rating, but with re gard to the other point he did feel strongly upon it, be cause if the Bill were agreed to as it now stood, it must inevitably lead to great confusion, if not litigation and and fraud.—(Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, as the Bill at present stood every occupier rated for relief of the poor before the Ist of July, and who had paid the preceding rate, wuuld be entitled to vote. It appeared to him, therefore, that the introduction of the words " tenant or owner" would lead to great uncertainty in the revi sin4 barristers' courts, for in the case of tenants under notice to quit, legal questions might be raised that would lead to continual litigation and uncertainty as to the parsoes entitled to vote. The other part of the amendment, for substituting two years instead of one, would of course greatly limit the operation of the Bill. —([fear.) It was also proposed by the Hon. Member that the parties during the currency of these two years should be continually on the rate-book, and that the omission of that condition should be the loss of the • franchise. That was, in his opinion, an indirect blow aimed at the principle of the Bill. If any person was on the registry without being qualified by a year's occupa tion, he might ealily be objected to; and if Lily person entitled to be on the registry was omitted, there would be no difficulty in the way of his obtaining his right. The amendment of the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire would greatly limit the constituency, and he trusted the Committee would reject it. Sir F. THESIGER thought they were indebted to his Right Hon. and Learned Friend for the interpretation which he had given of the Bill, for it was evident that the object of the Government was, that persons who were neither tenants nor owners, but merely acted as occu piers, should be entitled to vote. (The Attorney-General dissented.) His Right Hon. and Learned Friend had not acid so, but did he not mean it? If not, why should he object to the introduction of the words tenant or owner? —(Hear, hear.) With regard to the litigation which his Right Hon. Friend thought would follow from the introduction of the words, he apprehended there could be no question as to whether a person under notice to quit was a tenant or not, if the term of such notice re mained unexpired. But a person under notice to quit would have an interest in the case of an approaching election to prolong his occupation beyond the legal term; and yet, by the Bill, as it now stood, he would be en titled to vote.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the occupier should be a bone fide occupier, and legally entitled to vote. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that his Right Hon. Friend had not correctly apprehended what he had said. What he had said was that persons wishing to disentitle a farmer to vote might give him notice to quit, and that that would give rise to doubt and litigation. Sir F. THESIGER wished to know whether his right Hon. Friend meant that any person who should loop possession of his holding by strong hand, against the will of his landlord, who had given him notice to quit, would, from being de facto in occupation, be entitled to vote? In the English Reform Bill there was a clause explaining this very term" occupier." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was aware of the Chandos clause. Several Members—No, no; that is not the clause. . The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Hon. Members were alluding to the borough franchise, but the Com mittee were now discussing the county franchise. The meaning of the Bill was clearly that every person occu pying a farm for a year should, if he were rated, ho en titled to the franchise. in answer to his Right ion. Friend's question, he must say he thought the Parlia mentary franchise ought not to depend on the dispute between landlord and tenant. Mr. LAW said. as the object was to secure to Ireland $ safe and sound franchise, he should support the intro duction of the words " tenant or owner." He would, however, suggest to the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire to make that a distinct motion, apart from thelother portion of his amendment.--(Hear, hear.) The sense of the Committee might then be take❑ on the question whether an occupier, without the slightest claim or right, should have, by means of force or fraud, a right to the political franchise ?—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BRIGHT begged to call the attention of the Committee to the evidence given on the Devon Commis sion, wherein it was stated that certain land agents had served to many as 500 notices to quit at one time, and that it was a custom in certain parts to serve tenants with notices to quit every six months.—(Hear, hear.) If such was the fact it was greatly to b• deplored. The term occupier was simple, and it undoubtedly was the object of Parliament to give the franchise to occu piers. He hoped they would do nothing to fritter away the franchise of Ireland. _ _ Mr. SHEIL said he was once Member for Louth, and in that county there was a mountain ealled Carlingford. Some thirty fishermen had reclaimed part of the moun tain, and had held their possession fur upwards of 20 years. They said they were not tmants, the landowners said they were not owners. How, then, would the amend - ment affe them? Sir F. THESIGER—Twenty years' pos,eision would give them a title. Mr. SHEIL—But suppose their possession had only' been f 19 years? Mr. HENLEY denied that they wished to fritter away the franchise in Ireland. Ile had in his amendment adopted the words of the English Reform Act, about which there could b e no ambiguity, as the point had been settled by a judicial decision. With regard to the rating. it was necessary in the E ng li s h Act that a 10/. occupier should be ratei for a whole year. The word otvncr or tenant were in the English Burgh Act, and if they were not introduced into the present Bill, any " squatter" might claim the right of voting.—(hear.) Thctr SOLICITOR-GENERAL (for Ireland) said that the present constituency had been diminished in a great degree by the Irish landlords refusing to grant leases. The Bill, to remedy that evil, proposed to give the fran chise to a person occupying for twelve months and pay ing the rate. With regard to notices to quit, he thought disputes might arise if the proposed words were intro duced. A tenant whose holding did not expire till Afay might for election purposes be served in November with a notice to quit, and the result might be his disfranchise ment. Was that just?—(Hear.) Mr. GROGAN pointed out to the Learned Gentleman that according to the construction put by the Attorney- General on the Bill as it now stood a tenant holding wrongfully would be entitled to vote. Wai that just? After a - few words from Sir F. THESIGER, lir. SADLEIR said he would oppose the introduction of the words proposed by the Hon. Member for Oxford, because he was convinced they would lead to a great deal of litigation. Mr. ROEBUCK wished to know what mischief would arise if a person holdi ng wrongfully, as it was called, should vote?—(Laughter and cheers.) Their object was to increase the number of voters in Ireland, and to whom it was proposed to give the right of voting? He wished to know, as a statesman and not as a lawyer— (cheers) —what mischief would arise if the constituency was composed of voters possessing the qualifications laid down in this Bill. According to the Bill the voter must not be convicted of crime—he must occupy land or tenements of the annual value of 8/.—he must have paid his rates up to July, and he must be occupier for a year. —(Hear, hear.) In the present state of the Irish con stituency ought they, on account of disputes as to whe ther a man was legally or wrongfully in possession, di vest such a class of voters of the right of voting, and say that they were unworthy of the franchise? In fact, by retaining the clause as it stood, they would deprive landlords of the motive to quarrel.—(Hear.) Mr. HAMILTON said he remembered sitting on the Fictitious Voters Committee in 1836, when a great deal of evidence was givea of the fictitious votes i❑ Ireland. According to the Bill as it stood a tenant not legally in possession might re7,ister and vote. Would such a vote be fictitious or not? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL apprehended the:, a person in bona fide occupation, and paying the rate, would b 3 a legal and not a fictitious voter. After a few words from Sir D. NORREYS, Sir F. THESIGER remarked that the Attorney-Ge neral had introduced a new tam, and had spoken of a bowl fide occupation. Surely his Right Hon. Friend did not mean to say that there was no distinction between a wrongful and rightful occupier. The Bill merely said that an occupier should be entitled to vote. After a few words from Mr. MOORE, Lord C. HAILILTON thought that as the Attorney- General had stated that the introduction of the words - " tenant or owner" would lead to litigation, the Right Hon. Gentleman should introduce words which would pr.wont litigation, and he would therefore suggest that the Right Hon. Gentleman should at once say that any de facto occupier should bo entitled to vote, whether ho was in occupation de jure or not. Mr. BROWN—Not taking a lawyer's, but a com mon-sense view of Lhe point, he should say that proof of occupatio❑ was all that was required. After a few words from Mr. MM./YARD, Mr. HENLEY said he should separate the two parts of the amendment, and first take the sense of the Com mittee on the introduction of the words " tenant or owner." The Committee then divided : For the amendment ... ... 102 Against it ... ... 166 Majority against the amendment ---64 Mr. HENLEY then moved the omission of the words, " under the last rate for the time being," for the purpose of inserting in their place the following words, " for the same time all rates made during that period." The Bill required that a person should have paid the rates during the year; and surely it must have been the intention of its framers to require that he should also have been rated during the same period. But no such provision was contained in the clause as it then stood ; and it was for the purpose of supplying the omis sion that he moved the amendment. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that by the clause as it then stood a person who at the commence ment of the year had held a property worth less than the required amount, but who before the close of the year had by the outlay of capital raised its value beyond that amount, would be entitled to the franchise; and ho thought the House would act wisely and properly iu adopting such a provision. _ _ . BRIGHT said, he believed that the adoption pf the amendment would only throw unnecessary and vexa tious obstacles in the way of the claimant of the fran chise; and he should therefore oppose it. Mr. HENLEY said, that as the clause then stood, if a man occupied a tenement worth only 10s. a year, and if a few days before the registry friendly guardians should strike a rate iu which that tenement should be fixed at 8/., that man would be entitled to be registered. In order to prevent such a proceeding, he proposed that a party claiming the franchise should be rated to all the rates struck. Lord J. RUSSELL said, that under that messuro a person seeking to be placed on the registry should be an occupier—that he should be rated to the poor-rate in a sum of not less than 81., and that he should have paid his rate; and he (Lord J. Russell) did not think it ne cessary to add to those conditions by adopting the pro. posal of the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire. He believed that no serious abuso could arise from the adoption of the elause as it then stood. Mr. W. MILES said, that if they wishod to establish a property qualification, they ought surely t) take into account not merely the last rate, but all the rates to which the party was liable during the required period. Mr. LAW said, that under the clause as it now stood a person who had contributed to no rate except ot e, and who had been made liable to that rate solely for the pur pose of meeting the requirements of that Bill, would be entitled to be placed on the registry. It seemed to him that they ought to prevent the possibility of such an abuse. Sir F. THESIGER said it should be remembered that the valuation could only be changed once in seve❑ years. lie should further observe, that an occupier who might have improved the value of his holding to the requisite amount was a person fairly entitled to the privilege conferred by the Bill. Under those circumstances he hoped that; his Hon. Friend would not press hie amend ment. Mr. HENLEY intimated that he should not divide the House on the subject. The amendment was then negatived without a division. The question having then been put that the blank in the clause with respect to the rating qualification should be filled up with the words " eight pounds," Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said he was well aware that, in moving an amendment for the purpose of raising the rate of the qualification, he should be met by the argu ment—if argument it could be called—which was usually addressed to Members who opposed an enlarge ment of the franchise—namely, that he was actuated by a desire unnecessarily to curtail the rights of his fellow-countrymen. But for his part he had no hesita tion in stating that he subscribed to the constitutional doctrine advanced by the Noble Lord at the head of the Administration, that it was the right of every indivi dual in the community to have the best system of go vernment, and the best system of representation, which it was possible for Parliament to devise for him. He believed that no reasonable man could refuse his as sent to an opinion quoted on a former occasion by the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Ripon, from Mr. Fox, he believed, to the effect that the best quali fication as the basis of the representative system was that which would include the largest number of in dependent voters, and exclude the largest number of persons who were not independent.—(Hear, hear.) They had heard it fr, quently said that the fact that the number of electors in Ireland bore a corsider able disproportion to the amount of its population, as compared with the number of electors in England, af forded a good reason for their increasing the number in that country. But he could not admit that the franchise was to rest on any mere arithmetical calculation of that kind. The only question they had to consider was, what was the amount of franchise which was calculated to afford the beat system of government. That question had formed a subject of very anxious deliberation at the period of the passing of the Reform Bill; and it had at that time been considered as an established principle that a certain balance was to be observed between the amount of household franchise conferred on the inhabitants of boroughs, and the amount of franchise based on property extended to counties. Now it appeared to him that it would be very unwise to interfere unnecessarily with that balawe; and if he objected to the franchise which would be created by that Bill fur one reason more than for any other, it was, that he thought it was calculated to destroy the existing distinction between the house hold franchise for boroughs, and the franchise founded on property, which had been established for counties. If there was any ground of justification for the franchise which it was then proposed that they should create for counties, it was, that with that franchise property in the counties would be fairly represented. The Committee were aware that in all previous Acts of Parliament upon that subject there had been three essential conditions ap pended to the franchise for counties; the first of which was, that there should be occupation; the second that there should be tenure, and the third, that there should be a certain amount of beneficial interest. In the year 1841 Lord Morpeth had introduced a Bill in which he had proposed that the franchise in Ireland should be based on a 51. rating and a 14 years' tenure; but the House had thought proper to reject that proposal. Now, he (Mr. H.) believed it might fairly be calculated that with an Si. rating franchise the beneficial interest of the holder would not amount to much more than about 41. instead of the 101. required by the Reform Bill. But if, as he was about to propose, the amount of the quali fication was raised to 151., the property rated at that amount might, he thought, be fairly considered worth about 201., and the beneficial interest ' of the holder could not be much less than about 101., the amount required by the Reform Act. Ho could assure the Committee that in making that proposal he had no wish unnecessarily to curtail the franchise in Ireland. His only desire was to see it extended to those persons: in that country who were qualified properly to exercise it. He would press on the Committee the necessity of their using peculiar caution in dealing with that question at the present moment. Ireland was at present recovering from those internal dissensions to which she owed so many of her mis!brtunes; and they ought to beware how they crated in that country a new element of strife among her people. Too past struggles between her upper and inferior classes had merely placed them in antagonism as to the tenure under which land should to held; but the proposal then before the House would place them in antagonism as to the occupancy of the land. With these convictions he felt it his duty to move that the blank in the clause be filled up with the words "fifteen pounds," instead of the words " eight pounds." Mr. GRATTAN said that in his opinion the qualifi cation should be fixed at 61. instead of 8/. A voter rated at 61. was in fact rated at 91. As to the two Hon. Mem beerrsfeprs.mightDublin, be called "ingenui vultus peer inge nmque pud9ris."—(A laugh.) But there was another expression in Dean Swift's" Polite Conversation" which equally applied to them. Referring to a similar cha mraecltte in lh)iesannioSuwthi h s : aid w t o h u a ld t w " a t r h r o a u n g t h t h b a u t t t cheese h r e w e s o eu would n u l o d t not choke him."—(Laughter.) Mr. REYNOLDS said that though not learned in the legal sense of the word he thought he could nevertheless give the Hon. and Learned Members for Abingdon and the University of Dublin a little information on the sub ject of the Irish franchise. What were the qualifications for the franchise in Ireland? True, it was enjoyed by 50/. and 20/. freeholders, 201. rent-chargers, 10/., lease holders with a 10 /. beneficialinterest, householders in boroughs of 10/. annual value, and freemen who required no property qualification. given, N left the freemen ow,thtsßill, to which un chso_ had a character had been rent-chargers. un touched, n u t e . h e e h d a , r as gelt also the wa r s i c . a re eandly correct,2ti /. freeholders, e therefore,holders, ari t tol.ons. say the that the Bill would sweep away all existnig qualifications. The lion. Member for Montrose stated the othe r ni g ht that 81. in Ireland was equal to 30/. in England; and, therefore, 151. in Ireland WAS equal to 58/. in England; and ho apprehended the House would never sanction such a qualification as that. He protested against the slow progress which they were making in the Bill. Here they were at eight o'clock on the second night of the discussion only on the 12th line c,f the Ist clause, and if they proceeded at the same rate, they might, perhaps, get through the Bill by next August. Ile appealed to English Members. It had been said that if Ireland would only drop the ques tion a a domestic legislation, everything would be granted to her which she could ask. Without "dropping anything," ho demanded respectfully of them as Engli , h representatives, in the name of his fellow-countrymen and constituents, a liberal, fair, and honest Parliamentary Re/orrn Bill for Ireland. He asked only the same fran chise as that in England and Scotland. He asked re presentation on the principle of revenue and population, and he regretted the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland had not in his Bill thought fit to increase the number of Irish Members. He had taken the trouble to compile a statement from the returns laid on the table of the House, which showed that in the thirty-two counties of Ireland the population was 7,435,000; number of voters enrolled, 33,804; number who would be enrolled under this Bill, 370,000; or, with deductions, probably 274,000. He had made a similar calculation with respect to bo roughs. He found in Athlone 349 enrolled; voted, 196. Belfast, 4,234 enrolled; voted 2,000. Clonmel, 687 en rolled; voted, 321. Carlow, enrolled, 417; voted, 175. Cork, enr011ed,4,965 ; voted, 1,600. Coleraine, enrolled,36B ; voted, 176. Drogheda, enrolled, 734; voted, 307. Dub lin, enrolled, 19,562; voted, 7,000. Dundalk, enrolled, 538; voted, 245. Dungannon, enrolled, 434; voted, 286. Kinsale, enrolled, 216; voted, 189. Limerick, enrolled, 2,063; voted, 600. Mallow, enrolled, 336; voted, 130. New Ross, enrolled, 270; voted, 124. Waterford, en rolled, 1,696; voted, 800. Youghal, enrolled, 493; vetted, 176. Total, of 16 boroughs, in 1847, enrolled, 37,374; voted, 14,305. He had often referred to a Parliamentary paper, furnished on the motion of the Hon. Member for Marylebone, which showed that the Scotch and English boroughs, with a population of 7.700,000, had 417,587 electors, and returned 358 Mem bers, while Ireland, with a population of 8,175,000, re turned 105 Members, with votes not exceeding 30,000 in number. The Hon. Member for Middlesex, the Nestor of reform, almost cried as he pictured the state of things in England, where, the total of the whole population being 16,000,000, there were no more than 1,000,000 of Parliamentary voters. But whilst England and Wales returned about 500 members, with a popula tion of 16,000,000, Ireland, with 8,000.000, only re turned 105. He knew there were many Irish Members who would ask him, why trouble your head with an Irish Franchise Bill? There were Members who, when they had secured the honour of M.P. after their names, thought all their Parliamentary duties accomplished, and absented themselves from the I House. He would not be guilty of anything so invidious as to mention names, but his fellow-countrymen were in telligent enough to look at the printed list and see what had become of their representatives. Where, the ladies would ask, are the men who came here coaxing our husbands and kissing our children? He knew many would say, if he asked them where they were when the battle of the franchise was fought, that they had no con fidence in an English House of Commons. To this, his answer would be, then resign, and let other men fill your seats.—(Hear, hear.) He had confidence in an English 1101130 of Commons, and he believed that the battle of Ireland was to be fought on the floor of that House. He had made a list of six English and six Irish boroughs, all sending Members to that House. He would first take the English boroughs. He found that And over, with a population of 4,997, had 243 voters, and re turned two members; Knaresborough, a population of 5,382; voters 228; returning two members. Thetford, a population of 3,884; voters, 214; returning two mem bers. Harwich, a population of 3,730; voters, 268; re turning two members. Marlborough, a population of 4,130; voters, 255; returning two members. Rich mond, a population of 4,300; voters, 265; returning two members, giving an aggregate population of 26,383; voters 1,473; returning 12 members. He would now take the six Irish boroughs. He found that Cork had a popula tion of 80,720; voters, 3,244; membere, 2. Dublin, po pulation, 232,726; voters, 15,449; members, 2. Galway, population, 32,511; voters, 1,822; members, 2. Lime rick, population, 48,391; voters, 1,246; members, 2. Waterford, population, 23,316; voters, 1,273; members, 2. Belfast, population, 75,303; voters, 4,701; members, 2. Showing an aggregate population of 492,972; voters, 27,735; members, 12. He presumed the question on whioh the Committee were about to divide was whether the qualification was to be Si. or 151. He should record his vote against the 151., and gave notice that if that motion were lost, as he prophesied it would be, he would feel it his duty to move another amendment, to the effect that every person so qualified as aforesaid and rated to the relief of the poor in any county of Ireland should be entitled to be enrolled as a Parliamentary elector, and he would propose to leave out the words " eight pounds" as the minimum rating, for the purpose of substituting " four pounds." With regard to another part of the clause to which they had not yet come, namely, that part which provided that in order to be enrolled it should be a condition precedent that the rate should be paid, it was his intention to take the sense of the Committee, for he held that you had no more right to make such a con dition than you had to insist that a man should first pay his half-year's rent. Mr. STAFFORD reminded the Hon. Member that by swelling the Ministerial majority with his vote on this measure ho would defeat his own object, inasmuch as the question put would be, not whether the franchise should be 15/. but whether it should be Si. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, the question re solved itself into this—what should be the num ber of electors in Ireland? and in reference to this view be submitted to the Committee that an 81. franchise would not render that number excessive. Taking the counties and boroughs, he believed the whole number would be found to be under 300,000, and if they compared that with the number in England and Wales, it would be found, that while the proportion there was about one in five, it would be one in six and a half or seven. Such being the case he saw no reason for holding the number to be excessive. It had been said that 8/. u year represented a beneficial interest of half that amount —namely, 41. a year; but compare that with the free hold franchise in England, which was only 21.—(Hear.) There was certainly the difference of tenure—(ironical cheers)—but still it was admitted that the property re presented by these was quite as much as 40s. There fore, the proposal being that there should be rather a less number in proportion in Ireland than in England and Wales, there was no reason for saying the franchise was too low. But then came the question upon which there had been very little argument — namely, why they should give the franchise to persons who were mere occupiers, and why they should not join that occupation with tenure, as had hitherto been the case in England ? In order to arrive at the conclusion that they ought not any longer to insist on such a tenure in Ireland, it was sufficient to look back to what had been the course of proceeding in Parliament with re spect to the franchise by tenure in Ireland. In 1793 a 40s. franchise as enjoyed in England was given by the Irish Parliament. The consequence was that there were in some counties thousand of manufactured votes, and persons having no property whatever were driven up to the poll, as given in evidence on oath before Com mittees of the other House by the agents of landlords ; in fact, forming the greatest caricature and most sad abuse of the representative system that could very well be imagined. He remembered hearing a story of a per son driving through a wretched village in company of the proprietor. " How can you," said he, " keep such wretched hovels on your estate ?" To which he re plied, "It is well worth my while to have these wretched hovels on my estate, for it was mainly through them that I was enabled to make my brother a Member."— (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Such was the system under the 40s. franchise. In 1829 the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth, in proposing the Catholic Emancipation Bill, declared his plan, which was supported by large majorities, of disfranchising the 40s. freeholders, and they had a new franchise estab lished—namely. a 101. franchise; and that was subse quently amended and altered by the Irish Reform Act introduced by Lord Stanley. But so far from getting rid of the abuse, they had under that franchise cases of perjury, fictitious votes, and life interests given to men of 70 or 75 years of age, for the purpose of voting at the coming election, and abuses so grievous that everybody agreed that such a system should not continue. The party with whom he was connected attempted some mode of amendment, Lord Stanley proposed another, and Lord llowick, again, a third. But there were several Members of that House—amongst others, he believed, the Hon. Member for Cavan—who said they would never put an end to such scenes of perjury, and the creation of fictitious votes, until they placed the right of voting on occupation and rating, and not on tenure. When Lord Besborough went to Ireland he was particularly di rected to report on that subject, and to give his opinion to the Government. He gave his opinion very deci dedly, that as long as you kept up any right of voting by tenure so long would) you have scenes of fraud which it would be quite impossible to counteract, and he pro posed that whatever the amount might be, the franchise should be founded on rating and occupation, so as to make the register little more than a copy of the rate hook. Such was the plan that they had adopted upon Lord Besborough's recommendation. The different:Bills introduced were founded on that plan, and the question now was, whether, having adopted that plan, the pro per amount of qualification had been fixed. He did not think they would give satisfaction in Ireland if they were to fix in that country a much higher value of property as a qualification for the franchise than in England, or declare their opinion that such was the character of the Irish people that they were not to be trusted with the same privileges as the people of England. He should wish, therefore, that if they did not grant the 40s. fran• chise to Ireland—if they saw that the 40s. franchise led to fraud—in that case he should wish that there should be given some equivalent qualification, which would give that country a sufficient number of voters. He did not think that the number the Government proposed was at all excessive, and he trusted, therelme, the Committee would not agree to the amendment. Mr. GOULBURN was anxious to state why he ob jected to filling up the blank with the number proposed by the Government. lie was a party to the arrangement for the abolition of the 40s. freeholders, on the ground that they were not an independent class—that they were merely an instrument in the hands of one party or ano ther in Ireland, rather than exercising any opinion el their own. Having been a party to that arrangement, he felt that there was a great delicacy and difficulty in reducing the franchise now so low as to give rise to si milar practices in Ireland. He felt strongly the condi tion of those to whom they now proposed to give the franchise; at the same time he had no wish whatever to make any reduction in the number of electors. On the these amount must other hand, th ere were causes b eyond the mere numer i ca l b of the th e looked electors oin that the conditionhis rn in mind, andlre land. They had first to consider how they were to cre ate a constituency that had that degree of interest in the soil that would enable them to act independently of all parties. Above all, they must consider what would be the effect upon the social condition of the country in making so large an a l terat i on i n th e am ount of the franchise. Ile apprehended, in the first place, that by giving 81. as the proper amoun t o f th e franchise, they would necessarily give a pr e p on d era ti ng influence to the occupiers of those towns that did not send representatives to Parliament, and they would find that the majority of these 81. freeholders would be inha bitants of those towns who , althou g h they did not send representatives to Parliament, were possessed of a con siderable population and property. They must remember that with the increase of property and manufacturing industry there was a constant tendency in those towns to augment the numbers enjoying the fanchise, and that , influence would trot prevail to the sore extent in the agricultural districts. So little explanation had been given by the Government as to the bsis or grounds on which they placed the franchise at 81. that he was not in a situation to judge of their motive in making it so low in amount. He confessed that ie had great fear that a majority of those upon whom t' ,e franchise would be conferred would be subjectel to in ireet influence at elections, Land was money in Ireland, and that man who paid 171. or 8/. for his holding might be taken as working for the lowest rate of eagee, and, con secieently, could not he c meiiiered irlependent. The Noble Lord (Eliot) when he was a Member of the Irish Government introduced a measure vith the object of establishing in that country a franchise similar to the English franchise—he proposed that he occupying fran chise should he 301., and he made it in by proposing that the freehold qualification should be 5, But there was a greet difference between an occupaton of 30/. and an occupation of an 81. holding, and he (id not consider that the latter was a franchise which it was desirable to give to Ireland in order to obtain an independent constituency. If they increased the amount of the fas.nchise they might reduce the number of the constituescy, but the effect would be to provide a wholesome stimulus to the indus try of the country, SO that others misfit qualify them selves for obtaining it. As he was called upon, without any political or party feeling on the subject, to decide, he should say that in the present socal condition of Ire land it was not advisable that the tanchise should be fixed atso low an amount.—(Hear.) Sir W. SOMERVILLE gave tie Right Honour able Gentleman credit for the best intentions towards Ireland while opposing the proposition of the Government. Ho apprehended that there was but one opinion in that House as to the necessity of doing something. The state of tie franchise in Ire land was at present such that it wat a complete satire upon representation. The question wee how were they to apply themselves to the case, and whict.wa,s the best method of remedying the existing evil ? Ths House would re member that by the Reform Bill a 101 franchise was con ferred; that narrowed instead of wending the consti tuency, and they gradually dwindled [way until they were now reduced to little more than 30,0(0. How, then, were they to get a franchise for the people of Ireland? If they connected it with tenure, let them pre it as low as they pleased they would never be able to get a constituency; there would always be an indisposition on the part of the landlords to grant leases, and that would be in creased. The question was, whether the 81. franchise they now proposed was extra v a g a n tly low as compared with the 10/. which it was intended to confer by the Reform Bill. lie was of opinion that the proposed franchise was higher, rather than below, the former 10/. franchise. The next question was, whether the number to be enfranchised would be excessive? The proportion of electors at present, as compared with the male adult population, was little more than three per cent. If they meant to do what was right and fair, they would be obliged to add greatly ts the number. The number which it was calculated would be created by the Bill was about 267,000, being about fifteen per cent. of the male adult population; and if they stopped at any smaller number, there would be just ground of complaint on the part of the Irish people. It appeared to him that the Right Hen. Gentleman (slr. Goulburn) took rather an extravagant view of the number of voters in the towns not returning representatives to that House, and in proof of thst he would refer to the returns laid on the table of the House of the number of persons rated at 81. and upwards, He did not think that there was anything unfair, cr unreasonable, or dangerous, in the proposition of the Government. He trusted, therefore, the House would not accede to the amendment of the Hon. Member for the University cf Dublin. Mr. R. M. FOX said the Right lion. Gentleman had I set great store on the creation of an independent consti tuency in Ireland, and for that reason it was that he (Mr. Fox) was anxious to extend the franchise as much as possible. He oelieved that the existing 101. free holders were not more intelligent than the class whom it was proposed to create by the present Bill. Indeed he did not know anything more miserably dependent than the 101. freeholders, where the constituencies were small. The great body of the non-electors throughout the country exercised a wild right of control, and as sumed to themselves the name of the country. On the other hand, bodies of the electors were dragged by their landlords to vote as they pleased to dictate, and to such an extent had this gone that the freeholders in many cases looked upon the franchise as a burdensome privi lege, of which they did not wish to avail themselves. The real remedy was such an extension of the franchise as would enable them to disregard the influence of the land lord or the intimidation of the " county."—(hear.) Mr. A. STAFFORD complimented the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. the Secretary for Ireland upon the very temperate speeches they had made, but observed that they had spent a considerable time in laying down propositions which no one had attempted to deny, and in drawing false inferences which no one had disputed. The Noble Lord had urged that there was nothing in the numbers of the constituency proposed to be created that could alarm either side of the House. The auswer of his (Mr. Stafford's) side of the House was, that it was sot the number, but the quality of the electors they ob jected to. The real question before the House was, should the figure 8 be inserted in the clause, but neither the Noble Lord nor the Right Hon. Gentleman had grap pled with that question. They had not shown upon what principle that sum had been selected. Why, he found that in another Bill introduced by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland (the Landlord and Tenant Bill) he had separated the Irish peasantry into two distinct classes. Of these one kind should have the right of appeal, and the others should sue injortva pauperis, and he found that the limit so fixed was riot an 8/. but a 10/. —(Loud cries of Hear.") So that its the one Bill the Right Hon. Gentleman had drawn the line between the inferior and superior at 101., and in the other Bill at 81.—(heir, hear.) Now, was nut that a most marked piece of inconsistency? The two principles were wholly irreconcilable the one with the other. The in ference he drew from it was this, that no sooner did the Bill become law than the Right Hon. Gentleman, dis daining to be the representative of a rotten borough, would ask for the Chiltern Hundreds, and they would see the sublime spectacle of a dissolution for Ireland.— (Hear, hear.) He called upon the lion. Member for Manchester, who was about to vote for the 8/. franchise, to explain how he could reconcile that with the vote he had given the previous night. Last night ho was pre pared to vote for universal suffrage for England, and he would ask was he now prepared to vote for 81.? If so, the inference was, that the difference between 8/. and nothing was the difference between the Irish and English Gen tlemanti had one spark of cons i s t enc y, w h a t be should d Nth°a' no.) If th e Honourable t the bl an k b e not filled up with coons was,tu e tn:y vote a - ( ho should avoid swelling the Government majority, as that would preclude him from afterwards voting a smaller sum. If he and his party did not act thus nothing would prevent the public from seeing that they were taking a most illogical course. What he (Mr. Stafford) and his friends proposed was that, plau, they had come boldly forw a rd and stated what they balancing the advantages and the disadvantages of the meant to divide upon. Mr. SIIEIL said the House was very justly impatient for a division.—(A laugh.) It appeared to him that the Hon. Gentleman who had j us t sa t d own w as, in all p ro bability, engaged . in reflecting much more upon what he meant to say himself than in listening to the obser vations of his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary for Ireland. The Hon. Gentleman said he had not stated why the Government had selected 81. as the ground work of the franchise; but his Right Hon. Friend had distinctly stated that ho considered 81. as equivalent to the franchise conceded by the Reform Bill. his Right lion. Friend might be wrong, but that was the explana tion he had given. He should state only ono statisti cal fact, but that was one of no ordinary importance. There were 469 English Members in that House—there were 105 Irish Members, Of these English Members, 321 wore returned by boroughs ; and of the 105 Irish Members a large majority were re turned by counties. What inference did ho draw from that? The qualification of the English Members was a 10/. value; and the qualification of the Irish Members was not a 10/. value, but a beneficial 10/. interest. That was equivalent to a 201. value. Now, he wanted to con tend for the right of the Irish to British institutions. Let them not imagine that the question he was about to put was not germane to the matter in hand. He had no fanatical antipathy to the Irish Church, but the question he put to the House was, on what principle did they maintain the Irish Church?: Not because they were not insensible to the anomaly—not because they were not convinced of the inconsistency of maintaining it—but because they thought that in the two. countries the same ecclesiastical institutions should exist. Be it so. Ap ply the same principle to the present case. L e t th em apply to the state the principle they applied t o th e church, and grant them the constitutional affinity as they insisted upon ecclesiastical affinity. Ho nourable Gentlemen oppo.site ought to b ear i n m i n d the Conservative concomitants of the Bill. Ile be lieved that there would not be such an augmentation of democratic power as Honourable Gentlemen anti cipated. In the first place, the expense of the ele c ti ons would be doubled, and the legitimato ambition of many young aspirants would be put a stop to. In tho next place, there would be a large mass of rural occupiers of the soil who would go to the county towns, and in his progress of 20 or 30 miles he would get rid o f t h e popular epedimic of intimidation —he would b e encum bered and surrounded by excited and assisting tho usan d s , and he would vote under the eye of his landlord, and in his peculiar physiognomy he would find sin exceedingly intelligent glance that he would be at no loss to under stand. These were the Conservative concomitants of the Bill. It was, ho trusted, not difficult, from the text devised by her Majesty's Government , to give all classes in Ireland a just equipoise of power.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. ROEBUCK denied that he had been guilty of any inconsistency because he had vot ed f or the motion of Mr. Hume on the previous night. He was anxious to see the constituency of Ireland enlarged, and that was the obj e ct of his vote last night as regarded the English constituency. He would go as far as he could g e t an yb o dy to go with him. The question really before the House w as, in what way they wore to enlarge the cons tituency of Ireland? He heard con stantly from the other side expressions of great sym pathy for Ir e l an d, an d he wished then that they would show it by allo w i n g thorn the means o f managing their own affairs. Wh e n the Government were attempting . to extend the con s tit ue ncy they heard Hon : Members from the Opposition side of the House rising up one after another and sa yi ng that they wanted an independent constituency. They, however, think that independence i and a 151. franchise are co-existent. Why should 15/. create a more independent constituency than i 0 or 80 There was a g rea t re ason for making the franchise much lower iu Irel a nd th an England, for in the latter country there was much greater wealth than in the former. If they were in E ng l an d to give such a franchise which he should be glad to see conferred upon the people—for he had never opposed the Chandos clause—they would swell the constituency in this country far more than they etould do in Ireland. An 81. franchise in Ir:land would be a larger sum than 151., 201., or 301. paid in this country. He feared Lot the charge of inconsistency in going out in support of the Noble Lord's proposition. He would vote for it in the full expectation that the experience of such a measure would teach that House that they might hereafter go one step farther in the same direc tion. Ho was not in a hurry, for he believed that this reform must be done by degreeg. He trusted that the Noble Lord would soon bring in that Reform Bill which he shadowed forth last night.—(Hear, hear.) He did not think that the Noble Lord would, for any long period, delay such a measure, and he hoped that it would be accompanied with another Irish Reform Bill which would go one step lower than the present.— (Laughter.) He (Mr. Roebuck) promised him, if he were present on such an occa s ion, th e N o bl e L or d should have his hearty support. Lord C. HAMILTON said it was a most remarkable fact that out of the numerous petitions presented from Ireland only five of them prayed for an increase of the electors. This fact was of itself sufficient to show that the people were altogether indifferent to such a measure as the present. They certainly asked for more repo - sentatives, but the Government said they should not have additional Members, but they would give them more electors. He thought that the way of exhibiting their sympathy for the Irish people was to give them more Members. Tr they passed this measure he could not see how they could consistently stop short from voting them the increase of representatives asked for. —(Hear, hear.) It could be shown that the proposition of his Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for the Dublin University would come much nearer to the franchise indicated in the Reform Bill than the mea sure before the House. It was a proposition, too, which ho thought better adapted for the present situation in Ireland. They ought to be cautious how they disturbed that calm which the Noble Lord described last night as now existing in Ireland, by giving the people an ide that they were to obtain great advantages from the pro posed franchise.—(Hear.) If they made the franchise too easy of attainment, they would degrade it in the eyes of the people. The real friends of the country were those who placed themselves in opposition to the measure now submitted to their consideration.—(Hear.) Mr. T. M'CULLAGH said that the Noble Lord who had just sat down had, in common with other Hon. Gentlemen on the same side of the House, an odd way of showing his sympathy with the Irish people. The Noble Lord had asked why there had not been petitions ' presented in favour of this Bill. The answer he gave him was, that the people of Ireland, finding on two se veral occasions in 1848 and 1849 the Hon. Gentlemen opposite coming down and affirming the principle of this Bill, believed those Honourable Gentlemen were in ear nest, and naturally thought it unnecessary to petition in favour og it.—(Hear, hear.) In Ulster, out of a population of 3,200,000 inhabitants, the consti tuency was less than 9,000. They were asked to night why 81. was selected more than any other amount. He did not know why.—(Hear, hoar.) But such a franchise would nearly give them such a constituency as on an average they had in England. The English consti tuencies in the counties had on an average 6,700 electors. He calculated that the proposed franchise for Ireland would give 6,000 for each county. This Bill was, after all, but a performance of the promise made at the time of the R&orm Bill—that Ireland should not be placed upon the same footing as England. He might be asked what that promise was in precise terms. He would appeal to only one authority. On the second reading of that Bill, these words were used, " If it was just that the principle of the Bill carried for England should be applied to Eng land, it was no less just that the same principle should be applied t Ireland. If the Reform Bill only conferred on the people of England that which was their right, how could the same right be denied to the people of Ireland? Could these rights be denied without danger? —or, if long withheld, would it not constitute a fair reason why the people should demand a repeal of the union?" This was the language that was at that time used by Lord Stanley. He believed that the Noble Lord was sincere when ho used those words, and that he really meant to give that power substantially to the Irish people of choosing their own representatives. Was it, he (Mr. M'Cullagh) asked, fair, just, reasonable, or politic for them now to refuse to give to the people of Ireland, after a delay of so many years, the realisation of those promises which were at the period alluded to held forth ?—(llear, hear.) If they believed in the re ality of religious liberty, was it not an argument to ex tend the liberty of the Irish people when they saw how they had used that liberty for the last 20 years ? They had now in Ireland 500,000 children receiving instruc tion by a grant from that House—the major portion be longing to the Catholic religion. If the House believed in the efficacy of religious instruction, they must believe that the Irish people were better fitted now for that liberty which it was proposed to give them than before such a means of education existed. He only asked the House to give the counties in Ireland that franchise which they possessed in 1829. Was it consistent, wise, or just that they should now divide the House on the question of whether the qualification for the franchise should be Si. or 15/. ? If they placed any value upon the good feeling and the loyalty of the Irish people, he trusted that the Government would persist in the vindication of their rights by pressing on this nem sure.—(Hear, hear.) _ _ Lord'CAST LER'EAGH said ho considered the quali fication proposed in the amendment of his Hon. and Learned Friend a great deal too high. Neither did he approve of the proposition of the Noble Lord. If, how ever, ho was compelled to vote for either, he should cer tainly support the measure of the Noble Lord; for when they were called upon to give a new constitution to Ire land, he thought that they had better be found on the liberal side.—(Hear, hear.) He, however, confessed that he had much doubt as to the propriety of selecting the present time for this experiment. He should prefer a 101. franchise. He most sincerely wished by this measure that they could either feed the people or restore tranquillity and contentment in Ireland. As, however, it was impossible for them to do all that they wished, they ought to do all they could.—( Hear, hear.) He had no doubt that if they did their duty towards Ireland. they would have no reason to repent by tho conduct of the people themselves. Sir W. VERNER was understood to say, in reply to an observation made by the Hon. Member for Sheffield, that at the time that there were 40s. freeholders in Ire land, the unfortunate freeholders were driven in flocks, like sheep, to the hustings, by the priests; and then, too, the priest was to be seen with a doubleethonged whip in his hand forcing on the voters to the poll. An Hon. Member, too, had remarked that the landlords would not give leases. Mr. MONSELL explained that what he had stated was that the people did not register because they had not leases; and the reason they had not leases was because the landlords did not wish them to register. Sir W. VERNER continued by saying that ho had property in Armagh, Tyrone, and Monaghan, and he was most anxious to make freeholders iu all these coun ties—(Hear, and laughter)—but the respectable Roman Catholic farmers requested of him not to give them leases, because if he did they must vote as the priest di rected them.—(Hear, hear.) He asked on this occasion the same justice to be done to them which would be done to England and Scotland. A highly-respectable Mem ber, who he had no doubt was in the House—(Cries of " Name")—the Hon. Member for Berwickshire, had told the House that it was an unprecedented thing to bring forward and attempt to pass any measure through that House connected with Scotland in the same way that the Noble Lord had endeavoured to force on that Bill in the absence of the Irish Members. The Honourable Member had twice told the Noble Lord that he dared not do it. They had then this, an Irish Bill, before the House, at the same time that the assizes were going on in Ireland, and that many Members were absent in the performance of very important duties. The Noble Lord did not afford to the people of Ireland the opportunity of consulting their re presentatives with respect to this measure. It was be cause the Noble Lord could not do this that they felt compelled to take the part they had done in opposing its progress ; and the Irish felt grateful to the Scotch and English Members for the manner in which they had supported them on that occasion. He hoped then that their party, though small, would stick together, and teach the Government not to take those liberties with them. Lord J. MANNERS observed that the Hon. Member for Dundalk, apparently in want of an opponent, had sought to fix an accusation on his Hon. Friend the Mem ber for Northampton, which the Hon. Member (Mr. M'Cullagh) would, upon reflection, he hoped, be disposed to withdraw. He had fixed upon the expression of sham representatives of a rotten constituency ;" when these words were intended as an interpretation of the language which Hon. Gentlemen opposite gave to them selves.—(Hear, hear.) It was said that they ought to give to Ireland a constituency like to that of England. That, he said, was what they (the Opposition) wanted to do.—(Hear, hear.) The tone and temper of the Hon. Member for Sheffield, who had referred to the Hon. Member for Northampton, showed how deeply were felt the observations of his Hon. Friend.—(Hear.) Th e Hon. Member for Sheffield had contrasted the expres sions of sympathy and generosity, as compared with the conduct of the Opposition on this occasion. This was a charge which, he said, sat light upon him; for when English Radicalism could not coin, at a time of the most severe pressure of distress in Ireland, words harsh and bitter and severe enough to describe the Irish character, it never was alluded to by any one on that (the Opposi tion) side of the House but in terms of respect, and there was no act of theirs but one of liberality and kindness.— (Hear.) If it wore true that on the memory of Irish Members these facts made a light impression, it was not so with others; for they were more deeply and strongly impressed upon the memory of the Irish people.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that there was an advantage in discussing this Bill after the debate of last night. They derived, too, great benefit from having the philosophical principles laid down by a Noble Lord as to the manner of granting the franchise, and upon which they ought to proceed. He did not then, ho thought, travel out of the record if he tested this Bill by the principles which had been laid down.— (Hear.) lie understood the Noble Lord to have laid down this principle—that any reform they granted should be as a supplement to the Reform Bill, and not a reversal Grit. It would be easy to show that the amendment of the lion. Me.aber for the University of Dublin was in strict accordance with the speech of the Noble Lord on hundreds,lB37 the preceding ni g ht. H e b e li eve d th a t he might take it for granted th a t th e R e f orm Bill was intended to create a constituency approaching 150,000 voters, and in the year the butactual the proposalconstituency of w t a h s e 12 2, Nobleo 00 s o me odd Lord, which they were told was to give n constituency like that of England, would in point of fact give them a greater constituency than that given bylithe Reform Bill.—(Hear.) lie could not, ho must admit, blind him self to the argument of his Hon Friend (Mr. Stafford), that those who voted with the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume) last night, and this night intended to vote with the Noble Lord, were guilty of inconsistency.—(Flear, he.lr.) He wished tn.lso to obtain for his Honourable Friend the majority who had supported the Noble Lord, because if it wore otherwise the Noble Lord might have the reproach justly cast upon him that he placed greater confidence in the peasantry of Ireland than in the peasantry and the mechanics of England.— (Hear.) Now, he had a great admiration of the virtues of the Irish people; but still he could not think them more peculiarly qualified to exercise the franchise than the people of England.—(Hear.) Ho could not say that the peasantry of Lincolnshire and the artisans of Birmingham were less worthy of the right of voting than the owners of tenements in the bog of Allen.—(Laugh ter.) Here the desire was to restore the constituency of Ireland to the le. el on which the Reform Bill had placed them. He directly joined with the Noble Lord in that endeavour; but he would not create an ent rely new con stituency. If it were adopted, it would not confer the least benefit upon Ireland, and it would lessen in the minds of the people of England that respect and regard for the representation of Ireland which it was of imperial moment to retain intact.—(Hear.) The Committee divided, and the numbers were— For the amendment ... .., 144 Against it Majority against the amendment ... —69 On our return Co the gallery we found Mr. J. REYNOLDS addressing the Committee in support of creating a 4/. instead of an 8/. franchise; but having been informed by the Chairman that he could not then move it as an amendment, the Honourable Member gave notice that he would take the sense of the House upon it on the bringing up of the report. He then proceeded to say that he had no objection to re cognise the principle that a man ought not to be enrolled unless he was rated to the relief of the poor; but be thought it was decidedly wrong in principle to deprive him of the right of being enrolled unless he had paid the rates.—(A laugh.) That, he believed, aught not to be a condition, because at present the law provided efficient remedies for the rec•.overy of the rate as well a the rent.—(Hear, hear.) He would suggest, therefore, that the words bearing upon this point in the clause should be omitted. Sir W. SOMERVILLE declined to adopt the sug gestion o 4 the Hon. Gentleman, as being opposed to the principle of the Bill. Mr. REYNOLDS—Then I protest against the prin ciple of this Bill.—(Laughter.) Mr. WALPOLE was of opinion that the days upon which the rates were to be paid, in order to qualify for a county or borough franchie, should be assimilated; but as the Bill stood it provided that in the case of a county qualification the rates should be paid on or be fore the Ist July, whilst in the case of boroughs the date was the sth of July.—(hear.) Mr. BRIGHT concurred in opinion with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, and said it struck him that fixing different days for paying the rates might lead to much confusion.—(llvar.) Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that be should bo pre pared to consider this subject when the Committee came to the 6th clause. Mr. REYNOLDS said that in many unions in Ire land there had been an accumulation of arrears of rates so large that it would be impossible to pay them up. Mr. fIUME considered that the land had been sub jected to very extraordinary circumstances during the past year—(Laughter, arid cries of " Ilear")—and he contended, therefore, that the payment of such rates only as had been levied after the passing of this Act should be a condition to the possession of the franchise. Lord C. HAMILTON then rose to move the proviso to the first clause, of which he had given notice, to the effect that the voter should make a claim to be placed on the register to the high constable of the barony in which he should be rated. The Noble Lord said he did not wish in the slightest degree to gain any political advan tage or party object by moving this amendment. His sole object was that the measure should be of a gene ral and impartial character, and that the real free dom aed independence of all classes of the electors should be maintained. He felt that it was necessary to protect those who might hold the right of voting from undue influences as tar as possible; for he was sorry to say that it was notorious that in Ireland the consti tuencies were painfully open, and exposed to the most unfair and apparently tyrannical interferences in the exercise of their franchise. It was an unpleasant thing for an Irishman to confess that such was the case; but no one who had resided in that country, and had wit nessed contested elections there, could fail to have a strong impression on his mind that they were a perfect mockery.—(Hear, hear.) Now, the object he had in pro posing his amendment was to prevent any man being placed in the painful dilemma of voting for one party or the other without his own consent.—(Heer, hear.) He believed the Government had come forward, upon the present occasion, really with a sincere desire not only to enlarge the constituencies, bu(to . do so fairly towards all parties, without any political or party object; and it was from the strong objection he entertained to putting men in the unfortunate position of being subjected, on the one hand, to threats of temporal injury, aud, on the other, to threats of punishment in the future world, that he thought the Committee would act wisely and justly by giving those parties the right of saying whether they would or would not accept the franchise.—(Hear.) It could not be denied that at present there was very great interference with the electors, end that in conse quence considerable disinclination prevailed to accept the franchise that now existed. He believed that he was thoroughly within the mark when he said that those who were entitled to exercise the right, even under the present law, might be multiplied by three.—(Hear, hear.) Seeing, then, the existence of this disinclination, surely it would be highly advisable that this House, which was really► anxious to promote the welfare of Ire land, should deal with this as a fact, and that the people should have the option of exercising the franchise or not as they pleased. That was his proposition, and he main Lined that it was quite as liberal an act to give a man the right of refusal as to insist upon his using the fran chise. He might be told that he was endeavouring to place an impediment in the way of the franchise; but he unhesitatingly disclaimed being actuated by any such a desire. He wished to preserve those persons who were enfranchised from being exposed to the serious annoy ances which would be brought to bear upon them in Ireland. He only asked the Committee to affirm the principle without alopting the exact words of the amendment, which, perhaps, in their present form might be taken to apply - 0 persons already on the register, or to make the claim annual, which was not his intention. Sir G. GREY said the adoption of the amendment would de4troy the value of a qualification founded upon rating; the advantage of which was that it was self acting. The independence of the voter would be sacri ficed, instead of being maintained, if the amendment were adopted. The proviso was then put from the chair and negatived without a division. Mr. J. REYNOLDS proposed the addition of a pro viso, to the effect that no person otherwise qualified to be registered should be held to be disqualified by reason of any arrears cf rates which have occurred previous to the 16th of July, 1849. The AT I ORNEY-GENERAL said the House could not agree to the proviso, for the Chancellor of the Ex ceequer would object to it us a receipt in full for all arrears. Mr. BRIGHT said that the Bill was not a measure to effect the collection of rates, which would be done through the machinery of the poor-law, and he, there fore, could see no objection to the proviso. Mr. AGLIONBY hoped the Government would allow the proviso to be added to the Bill, unless they could assign some other reasons than those given by the At torney-General. Vi;count CASTLEREAGII opposed the proviso. Lord J. RUSSELL said the question had been already decided by the House that the rates should be paid up to a certain day as a qualification for a vote, and now that general decision having been been given, the ques tion was whether or not there should be any exceptions made to it, because there had been peculiar distress in the year 1849. lie did not think as a general rule, for the franchise had been laid down by the House. that it would be expediant to make exception on account of those cases of distress, and he could not for that reason support the proviso. "Mr. HUME regretted that the Government opposed the proviso, but advised the Hon. Gentleman to withdraw it for the present. After a few words from Mr. CONNOLI,Y, Mr. REYNOLDS said that in order to give the Go vernment time to consider the question he would not give the House the trouble of dividing on the proviso at pre sent. He would, therefore, withdraw the motion.—(" No, no," from the Opposition.) The CHAIRMAN then put the question from the chair, and the proviso was negatived without a division. Clause 1, as amended, was then put from the chair, and agreed to. On clause 2, Mr. HAMILTON suggested that, at that late hour, the Chairman should renort progress. Lord J. RUSSELL said, as there were many objec tions to bo stated relative to that clause, he concurred in the advisability of reporting progress. With respect to the clause itself he could only say he should he happy to hear the opinion s o f H o n. Members connected with Ire land upon it, especially of those who were favourable to the Bill. With respect to the statement which he had made at five o'clock relative to the conduct of business of the House, he had to observe that the First Lord of the Admiralty found it impossible to attend the House on Monday, and as in his absence it would not be ad visable to bring forward the navy estimates, he proposes to go on with the present Bill on Monday instead. Mr. STAFFORD observed that the Noble Lord had said he wished particularly to hear the opinions of gen tlemen connected with Ireland, especially those who supported him on the Bill. If opposing the proviso of the Hon. Member for Dublin (Mr. Reynolds) amounted to supporting the Bill, then he (Mr. Stafford) and his friends were supporters of the Bill, and the Noble Lord ought to be happy to hear their opinions.—(Hear.) The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and ob tained leave to sit again on Monday next, and,tho House resumed. The second reading of the Court of Chancery (Ire land) Bill was postponed to the 15th of March. Mr. CARDWELL said, in the early part of the even ing, he had stated that great interest was felt by the public as to the Mercantile Marine Bill. He wished now to ask whether it was likely that Bill would be brought on on Monday next? Mr. LABOUCHERE said he did not think there was any chance of bringing that Bill forward on that evening. He would therefore fix it for Friday next. REGISTRATION OF DEEDS (IRELAND) BILL. Read a second time. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. The nous° resolved its. 4 into a Committee of Supply. Resolved, that u sum of 17,758,700/. be granted to her Majesty to defray the charge of outstanding Exchequer bills.—Agreed to. fioue resumed. Committee on Monday next. The House at its rising to adjourn till Monday next. Mr. HEADLAM obtained leave to bring in a Bill to r:,nnci r..ni -x t e Act nic7 ---- ertain 0 f tb ------- --- e provh4ions of an it ia(10 in t ' l3; Bth and 9t,11 year a bet. present MajestY, p entitled, " An Act to facilitate the Conveyance of res t loperty." Tl3O Home adjourned at a Quarter -past Twelve o'cl,)ck. _ _______ ~ THE Ci PUN TRY MARKZ -"; tios t a WAKEFIELD, MARCH I.—The supplies are good 0. - - i lls . rtieles. There is very little passing in wheat, and W I n T t t r o ut insales a submission of is to 23 per quarter is made, ' °titles. _ inducing millers to purchase except in very limited quo litid In barley there is no change in value ! but common qua meta are still difficult to move. Oats, shelling, and beans o dull sale, and prices tend lower. Old' _ ._.. Neiv. . i• WHEAT, per qr. 601bs per bushel:— s• s• ". to Sullolk, Fs iex, and Kent, red Ditto, white ... ... Norfolk and Hunts., red ... ••• 36 — 39 -- ' 4 ' ... ....... , 3 13 8 to 4A -- . 0;0. Ditto, white ... ... ._ 40 -- 44 ..... ......- Lincolnshire and Cambridge, red ... 35 — 37 - '''' Ditto, white ... ... ... 38 — 42 ........." --- 37 Yorkshire, red .., ... ... 34 --,...„•-• Ditto, white ... ... 42 -- Dantaic and Konigsburg, white .. 40 _ 4'3 ..... Lower Baltic and Hamburgh, red... 3 6 --- !! ....' Mediterranean, red ... ... ... 30 —. °' BARLEY, per quarter of 8 bushels: —.....- .......... 0 . , Norfolk and Suffolk... ... .. 23 --- 26 ....' Lincolnshire and Yorkshire -- 24 .... .....-•"' Scotch ... "' ... 22 -- 25 ...........„ Grinding per 30 stone ... .19 20 ... 0.. Foreign ... ... ..•... 20 -- 22 BEANS, per quarter of 8 bushels 631 b : 28 30 Small, fine ... ... .26 27 .... ' ---"*. •,• •• Ticks ... -- ... 24 —26 .......... Foreign ... ... 23 — 25 OATS, per stone : ••• ••• O i l to t 3i i t Mealing . ... ... lid to Bid Feeding ... .. .- 7d to Bd 8,1 to to a a Foreign .. ~. ... 7d to 8d - ..•-•*" SHELLING, per load of 2611 b ... 90 -- 21 -%•''''' MALT, per load of 6 imperial bushels 33 .. 35 PEAS, per Imperial Quarter Blue and white boilers Grey and Feed - • ... 25 -28 -- """- ... 24 -26 --', QP• ARM Qrs. Wheat ... ... 13,307 Rapeseed ••• *** 465 1 Barley •-• ... 3,635 Shelling ••• 1,599 Linseed •• Beans... ... 1,468 Malt ... " Peas ... 45 Flour ••• ••• Tares ... atitY,, ••• ••• NEWBURY, FEB. 28.—At to-day's market the riot wheat in offer is extremely moderate, yet fullY e the r s t the demand, which is very slack, and with difOne 3 J ; tP" of last week are supported. Barley, moderate anPPeiratber finer descriptions were much sought after, an d obtall4 p rice° better rates; other descriptions in better request, at : re queo' Beans, Oats, and Peas, short supply, and in my , . at full prices. ' lll LIVERPOOL, MARCH I.—At this day's mo ket r -r te / again a very limited attendance of buyers, and little:9:ces, was made with sales of any article. Wheat, in soln, e 2 a• was decidedly easier to buy. Oats and oatmea l ". e ithe r neglected. Barley, Beans, and Peas without &Reran° oc i to in value or demand. Flour was very difficult tom tttied t° ; have made sales some reduction would have been I , u ,: e - asst India Corn was not so easy to buy as during bu d ; , days, but must be quoted 3d to 6d lower since Tiles . 1 1 err EXETER, MARCH I.—Cattle market—The sopPlijoier" to the demand, which was by no means brisk', ' a dd, t! Turkeys, 5s to 88 each ; ducks, 4s 6d to 5s 6o ; 9 ,1 tov t i widgeon, 3s 6d to 4s ; galenas 5s to 6s ; fow ls ' 25 9 ,1 t " :"' spring chickens, 3s 6d to 4s per couple; hare'' , , 2 :1 5 . 1 3° T 1 tr • each; butter, is to is Id per lb; eggs, 18 to 2 ` ° '„l n c t ly -, , 0 ' toes, 9d to 10d per score. Corn Exchange, one ac ted' ' to this hour but little actual business has been fact, transbasisel although the market nominally begins at ele ven ' s ea ° is not attended to for the first two hours, and theito boa sl !: disposition to protract the market to an unreasonabros which is much complained of. Wheat is about t o e c onsi tle :. last week, but there is less disposition to sell, and ° At , FP, able quantity could be bought without increasing n i b bsrAiSit; 5s to 5s 3d must be quoted for the best e ara t i ,, e s s bel; Pr' 2s 10d to 3s per bushel; oats, is lid to 2s 2d per "" re d flow, 2Ss to 29 per sack 281 b. WETHERBY, s FEB. 28. of —Whi o te s wheat 1556 d toll6i6erdgr'; ditto 13s 6d to 15s 6d per load ; barley 23s to § beans lOs to 13s per load ; oats 7ld to 9d per st°''e id ; bel l° KNARESBOROUG 11, FEB. 27.—Wheat 45 3 d to 59..10d 33 9d to 4s 6d per bushel; b a rley 24s to 265; oa ts 0J; 20s per qr. R A to ; NORTHALLERTON, FEB. 27.—Wheat w hite, 3 9- red 4s lid to 4s 9d ; oats Is 6d to 2s 3d ; 'beans 35 o'• l g ai"° barley 2s 9d to 3s Qd per bushel. to RtroN, FEB. 28.—White wheat 4s 9d to 5s iar' re d 4s 3d to 5s ; beans 3s 6d to 4s 3d per bushel ; d biti 265; oats 14s to 21s per qr. 5 01 ; b ite SCARBOROUGH, FEB. 28.—Red wheat 45 3d to 6 7d, ' g to r odle to ditto 4s 9d to 5s 6d per 5 stones ; black oats 60 ditto 7d to 8d per stone ; malting barley 19s to 2 / 16 '2,5 0° ditto 17s to 19s per qr. of 32 stones; superfine P °- 591 335, seconds ditto, 24s to 27s per sack of 20 stones' „ i iisee," r ; BANGOR, FEB. 25.—Wheat, best home grown' r` - a inrw to 40s ; barley, 19s to 20s • oats, 13s to 1 5 s Pe 7s Od oatmeal, 20s to 21s per 24011:s. h old' oh DENBIGH, FEB. 27.—Wheat, 12s to 120 6 d ; h "" t to 7s 6d ; oats, 4s 6d to 5s ; peas, 101 per - °Dbe butter, 100; salt ditto, 8d per lb. (W . a LLANICWST, FEB. 26.—The following are the ge a r 9 1 l A. Wheat, 115 to 13s Od ; barley, 6s to 7s 6d ; oaten RUTHIN, FEB. 25.—The average price " 1 n 01 031 from 12s 6d to 135 per hobbet ; a feW O a " - 6 1 reached 13s 6d. • barr Prices :VALE. Morn, FEB. 27.—Wheat, from 125 to 13 5 ; 1 3 ;shir - to 75; oats, 45 to bs ; but no buyers at the 3d s asked. to 1 pet Rif YL, FEB. 26. —Wheat averaged from 1 21 A , 3* lOs barley, 7s to 7s 6d ; oats, 55 ; beans, 103 ; /e t— z‘rbiolg hohbet. °' vien, o o,; INvaawass, Fzu. 26.—Wheat, per 9 11 , 1 2: 11 ;0 0 e t° 1 1 9s 62%b per bushel, 365 to 385; new dittOt "'bushr ?et old barley, per quarter, weighing 541 b pe ts , 42,,h,j, . to oos ; new ditto, ditt o , ON to 00s ; t vs! bushel, 15s to 16 5 Od. O a t mea l, per impel!' to olls;# Pi second, 13s; barleymeal, llsOd ; peasemeal , a cood'o§ 0 1 2 per stone, 6d ; first flour, per 280Ib, 34s to 36 5 ;," 4cl 0 , doe" 28s ; oatmeal, best, per stone of 141 b imperial, I ; or"rotr j second, Is 2d ; barleymeal, Is 2d ; peasemeal , T e jit. ea l,P 2s 4d cash, 2s 8d credit; second, ifs cash, 2s 3,u t o 64; tp ,, toes, per stone, 6d to Od ; beef, per pound, 441 r e gebt tl" to 5d ; mutton, 4d to 6d ; pork, 3d to 4d ; fe' wl* eseb , i° 14d ; chickens, per pair, 16d to 184 ; ducks , „ l ib, 0 4 00d ; eggs, pi- dozen, 4d to 5d ; butter, fresh , ii s tre9j; 8d; salt, 9d to Od; croudie (curds) Od to Of t ' loaf, cash, 5d to 6d, credit, sird to 610:1; coals. Ij e hay, per stone, 8d to 9d. qd —YxsTßstpst• ... ti; Haswell ................. 17, oj Jonassohns ......... Lambton ........... 10 64 Russell's Ilettes . 1, 9 sa Stewart's ............. al West Hetton ........ • 1 6 45 5 i d ..... 'al Whitworth ....... 'Adelaide Tees ........... I ', !Maclean's Tees ......... : 0 6 0 _, s D o e u n t i h so H n ....... .. e..p. 00 ... i . 036 j Seymour Tess ..... 'io South Durban .... Birchg• Graigolll,' „ gi • .. Hartley ..... Sidney's Sara/ ,;', 3 4 3w Ships at mar' RAILWAY SHARE p tOlf BRISTOL, MARCH 1 . do e a STOCK ExcHANG E .—A good business u as OOP D i li acted, but prices h ave aga i n declined, with the r yas. ow. Bristol and Exeter New, which have slip . O res 9 t eriP e following are th e c l os i ng prices of the prinela ti rei tt., ifdo. 6% in to-day :—Bristol and E xe t e r, New, 10k.,,, 7, Quarters, 1334 ex div.—Ditto, New 171. (10 °. div.—Midland, 39 c. ex div. LIVERPOOL, MARcil l • A bil 9 in e° Se STOCK EXCHANGE.—There has been a g °° ' intsbil in our Stock Exchange to-day, and prices are focatir The transactions were as follow :—Lancashire An d 1341 Halves, 24—Ditto Fifths, 8 1 4 dis.—Lond°ll„. Western, 102%—Ditto, New Quarters, N.„-colssiialoc Fifths, dis. —Manchester, Sheffield and 1 -,;tto, 6 , At . c.— Ditto, Preference, Oh Midland, 3 !,,T„ 4) , „et Is. 3d. dis.—South-Easter n an d Dover 6 rd, Newcastle, and Berwick (G. N. E purcilfryiablii till 1850, 6s. 3d. c . di s . —Y or k and Nor'" Jo l j Belfast and Ballymena, 17%. MANCEIESTEB, MAscu • It s l eri r'i lr s ° the STOCK EXCHAIiGE.—Our share mar-et sue - ed to-day. F ew of the London ptices, when aspect of IO the purchasers were found until ingr° shade. COAL MARKE' Carr's Hartley East Adairs Main l3s 8d 11 asting's Hartley lss Od New Tanfield .. 14s Od Ravensworth'sW.Hart 15s Od ranfield Moor Bates— 13s 6d Townley lss Od Wall's End, &c. Brown's Brown's Gas l3s 3d Bewicke and Co. Hilda lss 3d Original Gibson Bell Belmont l6s 6d, Braddyll ietton 0 0 BIRMINGHAM, MAacit I. one STOOK EXCHANGE.—Business on our sW od t ell ta g ' o v , vires was very dull to-day, and prices had a dovi n v - ortiv The only transactions were—London and '. 0 102—South Staffordshire, 31. 18s. 9d. dis. Wer e fel YORK, FEB. 28. dO sti So STOCK ExcseANoa.—The transactin s ro; : i a follow:—Great Northern, 51. 18s. `9d'' Midland, 1.71,4 a. 0 14 01' GLASGOW, Fun. ' 2B ' to- 0 .1, 0 ,00 f &roar ExCrIANGIC.—The transactiohg __GlPRTorto— ollow : Edinburgh and Bathgate, 51 %.!' 5. 6d• 8:. 7s. and Ayr, Halves (No. I), 121. 12 '• 10/. is. 6d.—Midland, 42—North British, - ... h . Of ~,,chOPB— MWS. ,...„, WP - ~ nt On the 23d ult., at Exeter, Mrs. Willuiß" A ri. e ' - ' ,fort a daughter. On the 24th ult., at Kenn" gton the wife of H. D. Carter, Esq., in of a soil. at_ job ri'r , fr, On the 24th ult., at Woodstock -cottager P - .ol Wl° .4 the wife of W. Klein, Esq., of a son. ~ t the On the 26th ult., st t Stone Castle, l' e " o re, 14j.‘ Cooper, Esq.. of a son. i .,,, t an' i3tl f : Y , -hall, near 'UP' 0A On the 26th ult., in Portman-street, . -r ill ~. W l ' W. 11. Brookfield, of a daughter. I, Y 'llast dle' se o a n ine th , e of 2 a 6t d h au u g l h t. t , er a . t Weatbourne - P ar " ..l , a io i ll° CAP - On the 26th ult., at Southsea, the wif° Of field, Royal Artillery, of a daughter. -- D. i adwick, of Moan 'fa l i, On .) the 26th ult., at St! AMRairthgepw.'s. Britt titer orit"heis't (A li Mr. W. Co 1) 0 of _ Cooper, of Newington, Surrey. ( fi 3 ii p h l a n u ge l ' se ll . `-street, to Ellen, dauglai,' On the 26th ult., at Beckenham Church, the e ldest /01 10 Travers, a ➢i.A., incumbent of Thorpe floslef, a. to Ili gShirteEraotfonL.THraovleirasn,d,E.Nsq., KofntL. sannadiegy• jell - ~ oft enham, Kent. Frs 00 Davies, arlde r f I° On the 26th ult., at Enfield Church, Ala ~,o r o Esq., of Spital• square, to Frances, second dog.' Esq., of Freezy-water, Enfield• b tet NED. t doaO,IP „Ile 11 , , At Cromarty, on the 22d ult., Frances, rhiiatit C., , op of the late Major-General Robertson, of str°,,erfellt 1 _ .Ort the 23d ult., at Mount-pleasant, Cle r " to O. Ai wife of J. How on E ar 1, 4 sq., aged 31. Nei a° ' Newark, ,-,..t Deptford, on the 25th ult., Mr. Robert 9 4 • aged 63. m. O D n ., tl a te ge 2 d st 6 h 3. ult., at Bath, Robert Tholna ii Cruceii°' ge r ' On the 25th ult., at Broomfield, near Che ltlisf°rd' tile v; ' Thomas Sayers, aged 59 nfrb o lt-r '-- , At Wimborne Minster, Dorsetshire, on tbe 27 ' 0 1 riette, daughter of the late W. Evans, Fgt . , 031 1, Pg.' Croydon,On te s 2G u t r i r i ey u , l ult., aged in BU. as d U " .. Or SO '' ../..rt'a. On the 27th ult., in London, Thom l''''' I 110 1 d CO Liverpool, aged 82. e ,' On the 27th 1 'd u-t 4. at Nevill-park, Tunbridge wt ow of the late Colonel Hinuber, aged 70. C 155 I *cl 1 t ''' ritpo fI Jundon : Printed and Published b 1“-- ale* 0 11 No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sus ,fft. 0 the 0 SevGir Strand, in the Precinct a the fr , iddlemx, Saturday, March 2, 1850.