The Sun. — London, England, 1847-03-27 00:00:00

:NT. 26. he YiVil n from, r aw s reo, la a Oil fron,,, r oole )rayivg, tenu o lemen t • oo from G ,d, t be ,frir 3 gretWia Dor ini° course:',mende"o , od anY er his 0 11 g the p o o l ion that , l i to pro - A inship )ersonatil was onll. e had 014 it the hart, t h a n c ed the el7f brothe r a ble to !chi v e the rig rd °Pr byt'nosii° right s 1 1 1 0 poso, 0 f case fO rW vote ,te, f vestor be re but g L b vve ao' ogh to N 1 0061 4 00 )tecl oil P et ' . e ve for a• -10' (Mr. Pot) had tie eender a course of much less pressing eie c o eieti oi, o. tau,: 1, • stances of Ireland, its the year 1795, there were no measures of extremity which he did not adept: But it was with reference to the ordinary state of Ireland that he was speaking, and the inquiry which be wished to institute. He begged, therefore, shortly to refer their Lordships to the Parliamentary History of Ireland. From the year 1800 to the year 1804, was a time of great difficulty, when the usual Act,: in operation, as the law of the land, was martial law, the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and such like. But in 1804, Sir John Newport moved for a Committee of Inquiry into the state of Ireland. The Committee was appointed, and the result a hich they came to was, that the adoption of a general system of relief for Ireland, by parish rating or any such manner, would be injurious to the county, and the people themselves, the subjects of it. From the year 1804 up to 1815, the t,tiblw affairs abroad occupied so much of the time of these statesmen, that they could not attend much to domestic affairs ; and it was not till 1817 that the question of poor re lief was fully brought before the consideration of Par liament. In 1807, however, the case of Ireland was such, from the prevalence of fever and distress, that an inquiry was deemed necessary. After some discussion, in 1809 a Select Committee was appointed, which, after a full inquiry, reported that it would be exceed ingly difficult to introduce any pior-law into Ireland that would not extend the evils and dangers of pau perism. In 1822 Ireland was again visited by a great calamity in the failure of the crops. At that time a relief committee, with which he was connected, raised the magnificent sum of 300.0001. Here, again, a Select Committee sat on the condition of Ireland, and reported that any system of permanent relief that would lead the peasantry of that country to depend on others instead of their own exertions, would be fraught with great danger, and ought not to be sanctioned by Parliament. Thus all the Committees which had sat on the question of Ireland, had reported against a system of out-door relief, and only went to the extent of recom mending a system of in-door relief. Such were the sen timents that prevailed in Parliament respecting relief to the Irish poor; and he would beg to observe that the law of Elizabeth, of which they had heard so much, did not in its original form prescribe out-door relief. He maintained, though it had often been asserted to the country, that the law in its original form did not sanc tion anything beyond the granting of relief within the workhouse. It was not till 1795 that the law was altered so as to empower the magistrates to order out-door relief in cases where they thought it necessary. Well, under the operations of the t.ut-door system, abuses had become so numerous, and the population had become so Pauperised, that a Committeee was appointed to inquire into the matter. That Committee sat in 1824, Lord John Russell in the chair, and it reported strongly against the system of out-door relief then in operation. still nothing was done till Earl Grey's Administration came into power. That Ministry had been instru mental in carrying two great measures, the Reform Act and the Poor-law Amendment Act ; but by far, were they entitled, to the greatest praise for carrying the lat ter measure in the face of great prejudice and opposi tion. No one could read the evidence of the Commis sion appointed to inquire into the operation of the old law, and on whose report the new law was founded, without being fully convinced of the vast abuses and demoralisation arising from the outdoor system of relief. The Noble Lord here read several extracts from the Commissioners' Report in support of this view respect ing outdoor relief, and against the imposition of a labour test as to the destitution of the applicants for relief. Nothing could be more fallacious than labour tests, or more impolitic than labour rates. Experience, not only in this country but in Ireland, completely showed this. But it might be said, why not apply the same law to Ire land as to England ? In doing so it was incumbent to consider the circumstances of the two countries. But on this head he would remark that, however much the circumstances of the two countries might differ, the law did not much if any, providing they took the English lawin its proper meaning. The real meaning of the English law was to give relief only in the workhouse, and if they had departed from this, and now grai ted cut door relief, he did not see how they should endeavour to introduce the principle into operation in Ireland. He had now brought them to the ) ear 1834, and whilst the principle of in-door relief, of hospital relief, and of relief for the destitute was recognised by the English poor-law, the principle of out-door relief was repu diated. But they did not stop there, for in 1836 a com mission was instituted, of which a most Rev. Prelate, then in the House, was a Member, and what did they do? They did not render all the previous experience abortive, but they adopted the same principle. He hue moved the printing of that report, and would read at extract from it, by which it appeared that the people could alone be dependent upon the land and the rent for food and employment, and if that ground of support were cut from under them, they would ultimately cause tot one portion of the country, but the whole of Ireland to be dependent not on England only, but on the Impe -1%l Legislature for support. Was not that the case 'ew ? Was not the whole country dependent now upon t he Legislature ? And it should be observed that this di d not occur when the country was in a state of famine, at all times ; and such infallibly would be the case. Th en there aas further the caution contained in the re rosthat the administration of out-door relict IrQ uid occasion the evil that the people would not rely upon themselves, and what was the result. There was one man with whom he had been acquainted ; he had raised himself above his native condition, by the exercise of diligence and a forecasting prudence. This man had set himself to oppose the principle of this relief even upon the public works ; and what was the consequence ? Why he (Lord Monteagle) had heard to-day only that this man, who had been the benefactor of 1111 around him, had been shot. The only advantage oh. 1::; by his example was, that he existed no longer. L. , Lordship then cited the opinion of Mr. Nichols, who h. ; been sent out by the Commission of which his Right Rev. Friend was a member. This gentleman had gone throughout the whole of the country, but especially to the nor'h, among the industrious population, and the result of his obser vations was a strong recommendation to stay all out door relief. But Mr. Nicholls was not content with Merely British experience, for he went also to Holland and to Belgium, and here again the result of his obser vations was still the same, and the whole of that gentle man's predictions had been verified to the letter. — (Hear, hear.) Then they came to the year 1837. In that year Lord Melbourne's Government, who were too cautious to do anything rashly, had come down with a recommendation from the Crown to inquire into this system of out door relief, and Lord John Russell in the speech with which he recommended the measure to the attention of the House, had opposed the granting of any out-doer relief, for he believed that the whole of the burden would fall ultimately on the land. At a subse quent discussion of this same question, when the subject of emigration was incidentally introduced, the proposi tion was met by a specific resolution, made by a gentle man who represented the county with which he was connected, Mr. S. O'Brien, the effect of which was, that the relief should be granted to the able-bodied poor. But to the proposition, a Member of the Government, and not a counnon Member, but one who was charged with the interests of Ireland, one whose name could never be mentioned in any society of British gentlemen without an emotion of respect—that was Lard Mor peth that Noble Lord had stated that the granting of out-door relief would destroy the whole character of the Irish people. The evil of the English poor-law had been only felt at the latter end of the last century, and the whole of these evils would be increased tenfold if the system were to be applied to Ireland. Lord Fitzgerald, who knew Ireland well, and his Noble Friend opposite (Lord Brougham) who knew everything laugh)—had expressed the same opinion during the same year ; and all the opinions which they had then expressed hail been fully confirmed by subsequent experience. Again, in 1839, they had the rcpert of the Poor-law Commis loners, and they einehateady stated their belief that the greeting of out-do- r reli f would be utterly destructive of every principle of grafting re lief to those by whom it was unsolutely needed.--(H ear , hear.) (His Lordship then proced: d to read extracts from the report of the C o mmissioners.) The guardians upon the receipt of tne determination 01 the commissioners made another appeal to them, and to this they received also an unlevourable reply, and the commissioners stated in their report that the result of their refusal to interfere had produced great benefits upon the condition of the people at large. He regi etted to be under the necessity of troubling the House at so great a length. but he felt himself bound to make out his case now that the Government had refused to grant him his request. A Committee of their Lordships was appointed last session to inquire into the subject of the operation of out-dour relief in Ireland. The witnesses examined bsfore that Committee were Mr. Lewis, Mr. senior, Twistleton, Mr. Gulston, and Mr. Chad wicke, all of whom were unanimous of opinion that the introduction of any general system of out-door relief Would be destructive to the interests of the people of that country, but more especially so to that class which it was the duty cif the Government to protect. I's-a asked their Lordships, therefore to peruse before they adopted the principle of the Bill. He did not ask any of their Lordships to pledge themselves either to Support or oppose the measure, all he wanted was their Lordships to afford sufficient time for having evidence cc the subject laid before them. Ireland was not, how ever, the only country which would afford evidence of the injurious nature of a system of out-door relief. The situation of Scotland, according to the evidence of Sir G. Sinclair, fully bore out his assertion, as to the in- Jurious tendency of out door relief. Mr. Dempster, also, deprecated the system, and believed that the con sequence of such a measure would be to impoverish the rich, and not afford, at the same time, adequate relief to the poor. The Noble Lord then went en to allude to the prayer of the numerous petitions which had been l aid upon their Lordships' table, praying that an efficient Poor-law should be introduced into Ireland, and Prevent thereb y the enormous influx of Irish paupers into this country. Now, he contended that by a system of out-door relief in Ireland the number of Irish emigrants l:s.ould be considerably increased. He felt supported in ' l !'s °pinion by the fact, that in the several counties of 4, seuthe:n parts of England, where a system of out door relief was most liberally and recklessly carried out, 9 1 e wages were the lowest. tic did not mean to say that it was a fair logical dedee that because a system of out-door relief existed it ar.v place where wages were 4(V 7 that ther,for, the ra:, o! wages was reduced 13y the $ 3 stem of ouadoor relief. Still he must look to the facts a_s they s t oo d. N the reason why Irish labourers England was, because wages were higher in this cen y titan in Ireland. He had no doubt but that wages would be reduced 'Ai Ireland if the principle Zsre carried out, and the result would be a - ~!rger influx of p a upers into this country. j4 faS really the meat. ili ioicel, the most absurd, and the loses fallacious thing which had ever been imposed on the creduhty MEL:k:II , I to suppose that a system of o ut-door relief to the Irish paupers would tend perina- nently to improve the condition of the people. When e,, , . , e.ene. r: „.e eperatlee of this measure to a dreary waste of pauperism, what would be the next thing ? Why, a distribution of the whole property, amidst all the terrors of an agrarian outrage, the effects of which would be severely and bit t-t ly felt by all the aristocracy and people 61' this country. Unless they improved the country, so lonitwould Ireland continue one mass of pauperism, deranging the condition of England. Tho next question with which he wished to deal was the question of rating. In hiss opinion, the two modes—electoral and union rating—were open to great objectims. Union rating especially, as persons who had no right to support the poor would be called upon to do so, even though they lived twenty or thirty miles trom the parish of the person claiming relief. The experiment they were about to make upon Ireland by introducing the proposed poor-law was one of the most monstrous and awful that had ever been even suggested or ought to be introduced. It certainly was one which ought to be investigated as he proposed, in order that their Lordships might have materials for thinking and judging on the matter during the Easter recess. He did not object to the imposition of a pro perty-tax of 15 or 20 per cent. ; but what he objected to was, the misapplication of the funds raised for the relief of the poor, as it would be if the proposed law were passed. General and aericeltural education ought to be promoted in Ireland, and, in his opinion, a greater scheme of emigration ought to be carried out in Ireland than the one the Government were inclined to favour. After thanking their Lordships for the patience with which they had heard him, he concluded by moving the appointment of the Committee. Earl GREY said he felt constrained to ask their Lordships not to accede to the motion. In whatever light he viewed it, it was equally objectionable. Indeed, he was at a loss to know the Noble Lord's object in bringing it forward—whether it was to give their Lordships information on the subject, or whether it had in view to abject to the out-door relief clause in the Bill now in the course of deliberation in the other House, and which had been acceded to ; a great number of those in favour of that clause being Irish Members. He was quite at a loss then, after his Noble Friend's :peeeh, to divine which of those two objects he had in view. But if such a Committee were appointed, it must sit several months before it could come to a decision, and therefore the object which he stated he had its view would not be obtained. No doubt the Bill would pass the other House on the first day after the recess, and unless the Committee of his Noble Friend was not allowed to impede its progress, it could be immediately taken into consideration by that House, and passed without delay, as it was urgently re quired. His Noble Friend stated that he wanted a digest of ail the reports of Commissioners and others who had dralt with the subject. But no Committee could accomplish this so well as the Noble Lord, who had devoted so much attention to the subject, and who had himself prepared a digest of all these reports. Such a function could not be delegated by Parliament to a Select Committee. It was certainly a most elaborate way of adding another pamphlet to the many valuable ones which had been published on the subject. In his (Earl Grey's) opinion no such aid as that proposed was required. The materials had been prepared, and every man could easily form his opinion from them. He considered he had utterly failed to show the necessity of such an inquiry. The other part of his argument was equally objectionable—namely, his objection to-out-door re lief to the indigent or ailing poor. Such a measure was demanded greatly at the present moment, because the people stood more than ever in need of such aid.—(Hear.)He doubted whether the measure was one on which the Government were unani mous. Now, he (maid assure him that the Government were quite unanimous as to the immediate necessity of such a mea sure as the one proposed. Throughout his whole speech he appeared to him to have been fighting a chimera of his own creation.—( Hear, hear.) The dispensation of out-door relief to the able-bodied was to be placed in theihands of boards of guardians, but it would only be given when the workhouses were full, and when the Poor-law Commissioners had taken cog nizance of the matter, and decided that it should be given, He . . (Earl Grey )admitted that evils had sprung up under the present Irish Poor-law; but that was no argument in favour of its abrogation and the enactment of a new one. The prosperity of the country had increased since the time when a poor-law was first enacted ; and when the poor were supported by a tax levied upon property, the owners of property would see that the funds so raised were properly expended. What was the great cruse of the misery in Ireland ? Every thinking man would ts 11 him that the reason was, that there was insecurity of property in Ireland. And whence had that insecuriry arisen. All authorities concurred in the opinion that it was the result of the feeling which prevailed in Ireland that the land must be clung to for support. The Irish people felt that if they could not stick to the lend they must die like dogs upon a dunghill. No doubt there were political causes which had helped to increase that insecurity; but really and truly the immediate cause was that which he had stated, and hence the want of improvement which was manifest in Ireland. both amongst the people and in the land it self. This state of things he thought was a sufficient justifica tion for their Lordships refustng the Committee and -pressing the Bill which would shortly come up to their Lordships' House. Who, let him ask, could refuse to give the poor relief when they were really destitute ? The affluent landholeers ought to be the last to refuse it ; but his Noble Friend who had brought this motion forward did not object to giving relief, but he complained of the system Government was going to establish, of giving out-door relief, declaring that it was not justified by the old law of Elizabeth. Now he begged to differ with his Noble Friend on that point. Lord MONTEAGLE—The relief could not be given out of doors without work. Earl GREY said his Noble Friend's observations showed the inconvenience of discussing this question before the Bill came before them in the usual form. Government did not in tend to give out-door relief without work, and his Noble Friend would find that to be so when the Bill came before him. When the workhouse was full, he could not see any reason against granting out-door relief to the really neces sitous poor. Much of the misery which had recently existed in Ireland was occasioned by the want of a power to give such relief on the part of the parochial autho rities, who, when they found their workhouses overflowing to an enormous extent, were compelled to restrict, their out-door relief; because they well knew that the money they might expend in that way, would never be collected from the rate payers. What a contrast this state of things presented to many parts of England. For instance, in Castlebar, he per ceived from the returns, that the poor-rate never exceeded 2s. 6d. in the pound, while in parts of England they were 13s. 3d. in the pound. He did not intend to say that out door relief to the able-bodied poor was justifiable upon all oc casions, but he did maintain that it was advisable and just, when the workhouses became inconveniently full during a time of pressure. In ordinary times there would always be ample room for relief in the workhouse, but in extra ordinary times, when the workhouses were full, out-door relief ought to be brought into operation.—(Hear, hear.) Upon that ground he justified the Bill which was in progress in the other House, and upon that ground only. It was the principle which prevailed in this country while it had worked well, and he could see no reason why it could not be applied to Ireland with equal advantage. The system was, therefore, precisely the same as that which pre vailed in England, and it afforded all the security that could be given. But he knew that it was said that the - population of Ireland was so great, and the pauperism so extensive that no Poor-law could overtake it. This was a most fallacious state ment. No doubt, in some districts, the number of labourers was so large as to make it difficult to command - beneficial and profitable employment, but in looking at Ireland as a whole, he believed there was no real deficiency in the field of labour. The resource of the country were more- than ample to em ploy all ;he people. The reason why Ireland 'had presented suck a spectacle of distress was on account of the misapplica tion of her industrial power. If they looked at the large extent of her uncleared lands, her undrained bogs, her neg lected fisheries, and mineral wealth, they would find the ample truth of this statement. Such was the state of Ireland, and to alter this, and to call into action the latent powers of Ireland, he knew of no measure better calculated for the purpose than the present measure. It would induce Irish proprietors to improve their estates, and to find employment for the people, instead of supporting them out of the parish rates. No doubt the change must be gradual, yet the beneficial results he had stated would be sure to come about. Let their Lordships hear in mind that this was only one of several measures. There were other measures in progress for drainage and im provement of lands, for the reclamation of wastes, and for the development of the fisheries, which would co-operate with the measure under consideration for the regeneration of Ii eland and the elevation of the people. Still, though he had these hopes of the future, he must say that he looked with great alarm at the present state of Ireland, and the difficulties they would yet have to encounter ere a better state of things was brought about. The Noble Lord had talked about this poor-law extending pauperism in Ireland, and reducing the wages and condition of the people. Now he would call the attention of the Noble Lord to the facts in the blue books on the table of the House. If he did so, he would find that the habitual condition of Ireland was of the most wretchedcharactei , the population without decent shelter or clothing with the most meagre and ineadent supply of food. And yet the Noble Lord asked them to abandon the present Bill, which he said would still further degrade and pauperize Ireland ; though to a similar measure in England had they been indebted for much of her present industry, wealth, moral ,elevation, and independence. The Noble Lord had also referred to the former policy which 13 ( Earl Grey) had supported ; but in reviewing that policy he t ound nothing in the present measure inconsistent with his support of the present Bill. Though, as he before observed. he could not void looking with alarm on the present state of Ireland, still, as ne believed she contained all the elements of wealth in abundance, if she were only true to herself—anti he thought the present measure would afford much assistance—if she only exerted herself to overcome the present difficulties, he saw no reason why she might not emerge out of her present darkness, and advance herself to a position of the greatest plenty, and the greatest happiness—that she might do so was his most earnest prayer.—(Cheers.) Lord BROUGHAM wished that some Noble Lord con nected with Ireland had got up in preference to himself in the present stage of otnhseidedreabtiaot.el,tosetehinegm.theThime importance of the measure under theHou v s e e r , y he peculiar need liar not presented was o neitselfpos sessing to them in an aspect of extraordinary charac- ' ter. Still he did not w ish at present to _enter ufeatu remi nd res, an them, into the subject of a Bill which was not before their Lord him - ships, nor indeed would it be conven ient for o do at a t that advanced period of the night, or to g o into debate But on e the general principles of a provision fur the p oor. u could not help remarking at the unhappy course gh he did which the • Government had been pursuing , and he hoped, though not see much ground for success, that he might yet in p revail diverting them from su c h a proceeding. From the beg innin g of the session he had been endeavouring to show them the total failure of the course they were pursuing. A great calamity had overtaken the empire—a crisis had arisen which he hoped would prOve but only temporary, and he had endeavoured to impress on their minds that they should care fully distinguish measures to meet this temporary crisis and those of a permanent character. He should freely give every encouragement to any exercise of benevolence and beneficence which was calculated to meet the destitution of the country ; but when the question was the alteration of the whole policy of the empire, he advised them to do nothing rashly. No thing should be done in the dark, or under the influence of passions or feeling, but they should wait till the calm after the storm, ere they devised measures of a permanent character. Now there were several points in this subject to which he would :call their attention. In the first place, if they passed a permanent law, they could not retrace t h e i r steps; whereas if they passed a temporary measure, a measure that went but a little way, they could from time to time bring experience to improve it, where improvement was required. They could not do this with a permanent measure. They would, in such a case, be able neither to recal nor retrace their steps. Once let them say, that Ireland shall be fed without labour, and that outdoor relief should be granted, and they would not be able to stop till they had ruined the landlords, and not only them but, what was far worse, the farmers and tenantry of the country.—( Bear, hear.) Both classes would be inevitably ruined before a remedy could be applied. This' was one great reason why they should not rashly legislate on the subj , ct. Now these two Noble Friends had differed, from him on the Act of 1838, to which he was opposed, and as he had been justly re minded that he had been opposed to this Act, for this Act went much further. His Noble Friend had stated, that that Bill might lead to a repeal of the union; and as his Noble Friend's bad to call pon them to put it off because the majority of all parties concurred in its principle.— (Hear, hear.) For him self, he had always called for a poor-law similar to the one now proposed, and unless their Lordships wished to continue the present state of things in Ireland, they, like the other House of Parliament, would be unanimous in passing this Bill. It was a monstrous exaggeration to contend that there was , always to- be kept up an extestsive system of out-door relief. 'Nothing thuld be further from: tie fact. Out-door relief would be the last resort, and it would only be brought into operation during extraordinary visitations like the present It would seem that the objection of the Noble Lords who opposed this Bill was, that it would not pre vent pauperism. Why, what nonsense that was. No Bill could prevent pauperism • but he would venture to say, that if it me t w i t h the co-operation of the people, it would tend considerably to diminish the existing suf fering, and make provision for future periods of scarcity. Of course, if the people of Ireland were so foolish as to abstain from uniting to ensure the good working of this Bill, it might be rendered a source of great evil, but he had too much confidence in his countrymen to believe that they would be dilatory in availing themselves of this opportunity of permanently bettering their condition. Under these circum stances he did hope that the Noble Lord would not press his motion to a division. Earl FITZWILLIAM had heard the speech of the Noble Lord (Lord Monteagle) with the greatest pleasure, and had it been simply, as alleged by the Most Reverend Prelate, a pre lude to a motion for further inquiry, he would have thought it was rather late to do so. But the/speech was not of this character, but was rather a condensation of all the solemn opinions recorded from time to time by those who had carefully studied the condition of Ireland. Some years ago they bad taken steps to alter the law as it existed in England, in order to do away with the abuses which had arisen from the out-door system of relief. Not long after the Government introduced a poor-law for Ire land, and at the time he thought it a strange proceeding to re trace their steps as far as England was concerned, while they enacted an entirely opposite principle in Ireland. But the law which had been passed was now, it would seem, but a prelude to a more extended system, in which out-door relief was to be a prominent feature. Oh, but it was said that no relief was to be given out till the workhouses were full. Now, from his knowledge of Ireland, he knew that this would be often the case. In fact., they would be obliged extensively to give out door relief if the Bill were passed, and the numerous guards and restrictions with which they hedged the Bill proved this. From all that he had seen and read of the proceedings on this measure, he felt assured that the Government and the other House of Parliament were proceeding too ex clusively on English feelings and conclusions without thoroughly understanding the real condition of the country for which they were legislating. When they found so many words in troduced for the purpose, it would seem as if they were nullifying the measure. He thought it would have been better for them bad they taken the advice of those friends who were opposed to the present measure. He differed from the Noble Lord (Bari Grey) as to the 43d of Elisabeth having contributed in any degree to the prosperity of England. In entertaining such an opinion, the Noble Lord would seem to have set at defiance all who had carefully considered the question, and especially that much despised class of men the political economists. He called on their Lordships to consider what would have been the state of Ireland if the present measure had new been in opera tion ? Would Ireland have been better than now ? Would fewer lives have been sacrificed, or would less destitution have prevailed ? He believed that there would not, and therefore it was that he thought such an extraordinary state of things ought to have been met by a temporary, instead of a permanent measure. He hoped their Lordships would re consider this subject before giving their final decision. Lord BROUGHAM explained, that the pressure which he referred to in his speech was the public opinion of England, excited by the present extraordinary circumstances of Ireland. Earl St. GERMANS said, as only one Member of the Government bad spoken in the course of the present debate, he wished to say a few words. A great deal had been stated about previous Committees and Coaamissions, but it should be recollected that the total failure of the potato crop required that they should direct the in dustry of the people to a new means of subsistence altogether. It was clear that the people of Ireland must henceforth give up the possession of their small plots of land, and depend on wages for subsistence ; and therefore it was that be supported the present measure to assist in effecting a transition to a new state of things. He would not occupy their time now in discussing a Bill by anticipation, but he rose to state his opinion on the subject raised by t he motion of the Noble Lord, and to state that he believed the measure neces sary to meet the condition of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) The Archbishop of D BLIN explained, that he supported the motion of the Noble Lord (Lord Monteagle) though he thought that an inquiry would be but fair before giving a final decision. I statement, which appeared to have been superfluous, now preve,l to he anything but supe,fluous. What was the case now when they were suffering, not from the pressure from without, but also, the pressure from within. The measure was carried, as it was expected to be carried, by but a small division. What was that division ? Why, some 36 members were found to vote against the adoption of that clause, of which 32 were Irish Members, and so it was that four Members were found to vote against some 180 or 19.) Members, including English, Scotch, and Welsh Members; and thus it was evident that if the poor-law was bad for England, it was tenfold worse for Ireland. If the merits of this Bill were what they were represented to be, they were tenfold worse with respect to Ireland. It was perfectly evident that a poor-law was abso lutely indispensable for Ireland, but he could not trust the functionari-s to whom this administration was to be intrusted. He spoke with all respect to the characters of his fellow citizens in Ireland, but this he would say, that he could not trust the execution to Irish agents. They must have a ma chinery to carry out the Act. They must have power. They must have a force, whether civil or military, to carry out the designs of the Government. But look at Castlebar. In Castlebar they had 1,1001. to collect ; but what did they get? Why, under 4501., when the union was in a state of debt. He perfectly saw the reason of all this, for he knew that Irish men had a decided distaste for the payment of direct taxes.— ( Laughter.) His Noble Friend opposite, like all other Chancellors of the Exchequer, had a religious horror to the imposition of such a tax as would come immediately at the pockets of the people.—(Laughter.) He had had a pamphlet put into his hands, which he believed, and was assured, presented a right state of the case. By this pamphlet it was stated that 600 workhouses were to be built, but would they serve the wants of the country ? Certainly not ; for if these were to be satisfied, upwards of 3,000 work houses might to be built.—(Cheers.) Then what was the case? Why it was evident that the workhouses could not pos sibly accommodate the number of the people who would apply for relief, and what would be the consequence of this ? Why that they would crowd to the houses for relief. Well, then the moment that one applied for relief more than the House could accommodate, the principle of out-door relief would immedi ately be adopted, and thus the evil would become inevitable. He could bear testimony to the excellent and admirable and generous character of the lower classes of the Irish peo• ple, in which they might well set an example to their betters and perhaps this had led to that great evil which had been found to result in practice, and which was found in the effect of Members of Par li amen t s placing their own tenants , and those who had voted for their election, on the Public Works. Still this character was evident, and in the large increase of emi grants into Liverpool and the other English ports, he was happy to find that there was not the least tendency to disorder or any disturbance. But yet there was one vice in the Irish character, which was the source of all evil, and that was the vice of improvidence; a vice tending to reduce the people in the tone of their morality—that quality which had been engrafted upon humanity, for the preservation of its dignity, and the se curity of its progress, The Noble Lord who had spoken last had depended upon the Act of Elisabeth, but it should be re membered that that Act was totally inoperative, and it was not till the 9th Geo. 1.-that the workhouse test was brought into play. The Acts of Charles 11. and of William 111. had partly pro vided for the temporary necessities of the case, but it was not until the Act of George I. that this test came into effective operation. Then came the Acts to which Mr. Pitt had so unhappily lent himself, and which were calculated in every way to reduce the character - of the Irish people, and to demoralise those who were already too prone to depend upon extraneous support. We must confess that he was apprehensive that this measure would be calculated to do more mischief than benefit, and he considered it too frightful an experiment for any one to attempt, without greater assurances of success, than any which the Ministry at present possessed. He must confess, then, that he believed that the better plan, by far the better plan, would be, to take this as a temporary measure rather than to make a permanent infliction upon the resources of the country. He found that if the presentmeasure was passed, the promoters of it would in a few years regret the course they had taken. The Government would find it no easy matter in the six dis tinguished counties of Ireland to lead back the 300,000 persons to habits of industry, who had been led lately to rely upon the efforts of the Government rather than their own. It were ab surd to suppose that these 3C0,000 should be disposed of by means of a system of out-door relief, proposed in the present measure. In his opinion, it was most unwise and impolitic, at the end of a Parliament, and in the present distressed and dis turbed state of the public mind, to bring forward a measure such as the present. It was not to be wondered at, that the people of England should cry out for an Irish poor-law, seeing the thousands of Irish poor which had left their own country to become chargeable to them. He did not think that the landlords of. Ireland were as a body chargeable for the present distressed state of the country, and that unmerited obloquy had been cast upon some of them. ( At the con clusion of the Noble Lord's speech several of their / Lordships rose at the same time to address the House, and considerable confusion prevailed in consequence. A Noble Lord at length proposed that the Archbishop of Dublin should be heard. This motion having been seconded, and put by the Lord Chancellor, was unanimously agreed to.) The Archbishop of DUBLIN then rose and said that he felt himself called upon not to give a silent vote upon the present occasion. He felt that this was a duty forced upon him by his peculiar connexion with the subject then under discussion. He was, as their Lordships were aware, one of the commission appointed to inquire into the condition of the Irish poor—not by his own desire or offer, but by the selection and at the request of the then Government. The Government of the day perhaps considered that the experience which he had bad in England as a governor of a parish union might in some degree have qualified him for an inquiry of that kind, but whatever qualifications they might have found in him they certainly would not do more than justice if they believed that he devoted himself to the inquiry most heartily. This he would beg leave to say, that a comparison could hardly be found less likely to agree in any erroneous views, or in any kind of prejudice, than the Commission then selected by her Majesty's Government. The Commission consisted of Pro testants and Roman Catholics, English and Irish, clergymen and laymen, and Protestants of various denominations. There were differences of opinion as to the propriety of establishing such a law as was afterwards established, and several of them were afraid of the experiment then tried, but he felt it his duty to declare, that all were agreed—those who approved of the poor-law as then existing, and as now exist ingE; all agreed that it was most essential that there should be no out-door relief; that, they said asould be a ruinous measure, and cause the confiscation of property. He shared in the general apprehensions entertained at that time of the injurious effects of the measure. What he dreaded had taken place, viz., that when the workhouses were full, a clamour would be raised for out-door relief ; this had occurred to a most alarm ing extent during the present distressed state of the country. He had endeavoured to the utmostof his abilities to provide em ployment for the people in his immediate neighbourhood in order that they might be prevented from going into the workhouses, arid had by such a course of conduct prevented numbers from going into the workhouse. He regretted to see the present measure introduced ; and it was one of the most chimerical of - b d o o u o r r . relief T h The peop l e could be f s n u o s t t i a o i n n s ed to by su a ppose England were not, he was convinced, aware of the real nature well-directed a system system of of out la of the Irish people, when they thought such a measure would be beneficial to Ireland, and profitable employment could not really be found for the two millions of Irish paupers. No power could ever be able to compel them to do a lair day's work; and woe betide the unfortunate overseer who should compel them to do a fair day's work ; and woe betide the un fortunate pauper who should do a fair day's work, if such should be against the regulations of his fellow-la bourers. He believed the effect of the measure would be to throw ultimately the whole charge of the Irish paupers upon the United Kingdom. The rates as they were successively called for would be successively in ar rears the whole country would become desolate and like another Cholesbury. It would be far better for the Govern ment at once to confiscate the whole of the property of Ireland and allow the landed proprietors a pension for the remainder of their lives. It was physically impossible for the property of Ireland to support its poor. The Irish people were most re markable for their improvidence, and their willingness to throw themselves on the resources of others. An instance of this had recently come to his knowledge. In the neighbourhood off the Cove of. Cork there were a number of persons who had till recently obtained their livelihood by fishing, and although large quantities of fish were to be taken at a short dis tance from the shore, still these people refused to leave their homes, and were content to live upon the mise rable 'pittance of soup provided for them by the hand of charity. Some benevolent persons thought if they provided them with tackle and provisions for the purpose of starting them on this voyage, that they would afterwards be enabled to support them selves and their families; but it was found, however, a hopeless undertaking, as when provisions were given to them for the voyage, they landed and used them for the support of their families. In fact they could not be trusted with a loaf of bread. If they proceeded in the way this Bill proposed that they should proceed, the whole rental of Ireland before the end of the year would be swallowed up. But this was the worst time of all to bring forward such a measure as this.--( Hear, hear.) Yet after all something must be done. He, therefore, recommended inquiry, in order that they might not take a leap in the dark. if the plan the Government proposed rested on good grounds, he saw no bttrpr hieee, Parliament.. scannewm:wuaweellhnnl i y i t y nww. t ohehl t t h dtiel e sytsutht y poseihpy; c ho o eegu u vami edydne, agrariannat measure b uthe r.p e ewnrcothwtcohaet outragesl see o edbwa iebhttf. wouldoooe lr.eeb makeAo rtd n ehi d naee rtdia t solt h a. ethoe,hrefnaei right hd h r t avohsneaersdn H ous e wte no reason in surrection had totally changed the face of Ireland, they would have to retrace their steps with deep regret and humiliation. At any rate, they ought to make the proposed investigation in order to show that they had good grounds for the course the Government proposed to adopt. The Earl of DEVON considered that no good would arise from the adoption of the motion, because the blue books, of which a condensation was sought by the Noble Lord, were in the hands of Noble Lords, and they were therefore in a condi tion to judge for themselves. He had the misfortune to differ with many of the la n dl or d s o f I re l an d , as to what was the besides permanent e n ens r o i gmdmwearasnent many eti neh bmfti ese benefit placed eusm nur eierduring g di t ws i uu u i hsr t ati erchesimilars Gb i te d poh e voel r seo e iropt d nikeom t eon h die: a l net upon poih h otf e ahnd Irish Erapen sfsgepplbea p aucnr e ttde o .d p too l nf i Aero o nob u t fdth g ae h ti best course to be ad opte d f or t h e b enef i t of the people s of freland.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had spoken of outdoor relief, as if the whole people were at once to become recipients of out-door relief; and as if nothing was to be left to the exertions of landlords. He was wholly incorrect in supposing that all would become recipients of that relief. Nevertheless, those who opposed the Bill had nut proposed 'any other and better plan for the purpose of improving social condition of Ireland. The landlords would be driven by this measure to find employment for the people; and therefore there was no doubt about the people obtaining remunerative employment. It would be well, he thought, to extend the workhouse accommodation in order to apply the test of con finement in the workhouse with relief or labour given out of it. He fully believed that this was one of a series of measures which, collectively, could not fail to produce considerable benefit in Ireland, and it was for that reason he should support the Bill when it came up from the other House. It might press heavily upon one class of the landed proprietors of Ireland, but eventually it would lead to their permanent good. As a body, he had no doubt the land lords of Ireland had done their duty, but he could not conceal from himself that there were a few exceptions, and he trusted this Bill would have the effect of refining them.—( Hear. ) The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said his Noble Friend who had just sat down had so fully stated his own views upon the subject under discussion, that he did not feel it necessary to trouble their Lordships at any great length. Still, there were one or two points upon which he must be allowed to touch, and in the first place, he must direct attention to what had fallen from his Noble and Learned Friend opposite. Now, his Noble and Learned Friend had told their Lordships that Government were bringing this measure forward in a moment of pressure and excitement. Lord BROUGHAM—No; I said that the Members who supported it voted for it under feelings of excitement. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE wss glad the Noble and Learned Lord had explained himself, because he could assure the Noble and Learned Lord that this Bill had been brought forward by her Majesty's Government after the most mature deliberation.—( Hear.) But the Noble anti Learned Lord argued in favour of delay because the House of Commons ap peared to be almost unanimous in its favour. Certainly that appeared to him to be a most extraordinary reason to urge in I favour of delay. Had the ~votes on either side been nicely balanced, there might have-been some ground upon-which to urge their Lordships to delay the Bill, but really it was too Earl ROSSE lose to support the notion. He could not agree with the last Noble Lord, that the . old reports and com missions, on the subject of the Irish Poor-law, should go for nothing. It ought to be kept in mind that those reports had been made in calm and dispassionate times—( Hear, hear)— and not as now, when the public mind was excited and alarmed. He was glad that her Majesty's Government had not consented to this inquiry, but he looked upon the production and the printing these documents as far Isere important than the con venience of their Lordships, for it would answer the purpose of making the public acquainted with their nature. There was a general feeling that the more property was taxed in Ireland the more pauperism would increase. Let them only look at the subscriptions which had been made for the poor of Ireland, and they would have a sufficient proof that this principle would hold. He was anxious that this should be known, for he be lieved that the effect of these measures would be to throw a large quantity of the land in Ireland out of cultivation. But there was a limit to the assistance which had thus been ren dered, and that limit would soon be reached. Now, they were not prepared to try the experiment in Scotland which they were about to put forward for Ireland. Now, it was evident that the landed proprietors in Ireland had not done their duty in the same way as it had been done in Scotland, and he thought that this was a great reason for refusing the motion. The Noble Nord at the head of the Irish Commission had ascertained that it was ut terly impossible to provide for the poor without out-door re lief. The Noble Lord who had opened the debate had put the objection that it was necessary when the workhouses were full they must provide some means to meet the deaciency. Take the ease of the southern and western counties. And boir was that expenditure to be met ? He thought - that'could only be done by some system of colonisation. He had the other day the pleasure of reading a letter from Mr. Murray, who was at the head of the Provincial Bank of Ireland, and he believed that that gentleman had the command of a staff which gave him opportunities of gaining information which few people pos sessed. The bank had branches in the several pro . vinces and districts of Ireland, and the only re medy which he could conceive as likely to lead to a remedy for the distress in Ireland, was by some extensive system of colonisation. Mr. Murray was allowed to be a very sensible man, and considering the opportunities of information which he possessed, he thought that his recommendation was worthy of the highest respect. He bad not the slightest inten tion of saying more than one word on this question, but he had been led into these details by his interest in the position of the country. Earl MOUNTCASHEL was quite astonished that the mo tion of the Noble Lord had met with so much opposition. It was well known that upwards of 2,400,000 acres were employed in the cultivation of the potato. The whole of that provision had been lost to the country, and as the rental of the land in Ireland was only, according to the report of the Poor-law Commissioners, about 13,400,000/. ; and how, then, was this to be sufficient, when the support of the people would cost twenty millions. He sincerely trusted that the Noble, who had shown so much information, and who had cited so many authorities, would press this motion to a division, for if he did, he should feel himself bound to give him his support. Lord MONTEAGLE said that after the long time during which he had trespassed on their Lordships he should not occupy more than five minutes. He would put it to the House whether, after what he had stated an d the wa y in which he had ' been answered, his arguments were not most triumphant. He might .not be successful in this division, but he felt satisfied that the arguments which had been adduced this night would have their full effect in hindering that wild course on which the Government bad so hastily entered. Under any circumstances he should certainly press his motion to a division. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion l2 Against it ... 39 Majority against the motion —27 Their Lordships then adjourned at Twenty Minutes to One o'clock. HOUSE OZ CUM:IIOIVS. March 26. The SPEAKER took the Cnair at Four o'clock. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY BILLS. Mr. GREENE moved that the following Classifica tionrecommenda- Committee of Railway Bills be considered, viz.:— ion contained in the Third Report from the " Your Committee recommend that the Caledonian Railway Bill, No. 205, be divided into two Bills ; the first to contain Edinburgh Station and branches to Granton and Edinburgh and Glasgow Rail way. The second to contain branches to Wilsontown, Fauldt , ouse, Biggar, and Broughton. The first Bill to remain in his Group; the second to be placed in Group 47." That the order made on the 15th day of Feb ruary last, for referring. the -raid Bill to the Com- Mittee of Selection be read, and ' - discharged: That the Bill be withdrawn. That leave be given to bring in a Bill to enable the Caledonian Railway Com• pans to extend their station iu Elinburgh, and to make branch railways to Granton and to the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway ; and that Mr. Hope Johnstone, Mr. Lockhart, and Mr. Hodgson Bin& do prepare and bring it in. That leave be given to bring in a Bill to enable the Caledonian Railway Company to make branch rail ways to Wilsontown, to Fauldhouse, and to Biggar and Broughton ; and that Mr. Hope Johnstone, Mr. Lock hart, and Mr. Hodgson Hindu do prepare and bring it in. —Agreed to. PETITIONS ON PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. GREENE moved " That it be an i nstruc ti on t o Iwshthichday o shall f be appointed to meet on April, to entertain any petitions which may be referred to them, provided the the Thursday,Committees the same are presented on or before Mond a y, th e 12th day of April."—Agreed to. THE BRIGHTON POLICE. Captain PECHELL presented a petition from several parties in Brighton, complaining of the conduct of the police and the borough magistrates, inasmuch as they had been placed in cells, and not allowed to communicate with any one except in the presence of the police ; and that subsequently they were dismissed without any in quiry being made into the truth of the charge made against them. The Hon. Member also presented a peti tion from Worcester agaDUCATION inst the Poor R emoval / Act. E. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented two peti tions from Rochdale against the proposed Government erant for education. EDINBURGH AND PERTH RAILWAY BILL. The second reading of this Bill was postponed till Monday next. IRISH POOR RELIEF BILL. Mr. GREGORY presented several petitions in favour of this Bill. SCOTCH REGISTRATION BILL. Mr. MATHESON presented a petition from the schoolmasters of Dingwall against the proposed Regis tration Bill for Scotland. CIARING-CROSS BRIDGE BILL. This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committ'd. Mr. GREENE presented a petition against it, which was referred to the Committee on the Bill. GOVERNMENT PLAN OF EDUCATION. Mr. BRIGHT preseutei several petitions against the minutes of Council recommending the increased grant for education, Mr. C. BERELEY presented two petitions to the same effect. THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, MARCH 27, 1847. candle Life Assurance Society; Staffordshire Potteries Waterworks; Stockport Manorial Tolls and Bridges ; Swansea Docks; Terringtun Marsh Division, Allotment, and Inclosure; Wakefield Market; Wisbech Port and Harbour. One part of the Irish case differed from the other part of the Irish case, and one part of the Scotch case dif fered from the remainder. If he were justified in ask ing for a Select Commits ,e—if he were justified when he gave notice o f the motion—he was so far from being dissuaded from it by the aunoucemi nt made by his Right Lion. Friend, that he was still further encouraged to persevere from the very reason that the mind of the Right Hon. Gentleinan was not made up upon this subj ec t. W hilst up to the present time he had thought that the dif ferential duty should be sixpence, he had now consented to give way; and, though he did not acknowledge that his mind was changed, still he had changed the measure of the Government. He could ussure the Right Hon. Gentleman that if he were put upon that Committee, so little was he prejudiced upon the subject, so little was his desire to give any advantage to the British distiller over the colonial producer of rum, that if it could be proved to him that there was a neces sity for 9d. instead of 6d., or that there should be no differential duty at all, he would be the first man to pro pose such a measure to the Committee. It was not very long ago since an Act was passed relating to the differential duties between the Channel Islands and Great Britain. That Act was the 65th sec. of the 8 and 9 Vict. In that Act it was stated that is. 2d. was the amount of the countervailing duty be tween the spirits from the Channel Islands and the agricultural produce of Great Britain. He had, therefore, a right to assume that the sum of ls., or at least was a just assessment as between rum and British spirits, because the Act of which he was speaking recited in its preamble that the object of the Bill was to determine what was the extent of the Ex cise restrictions, and the House by passing that Bill had decided that the extent of the Excise restrictions amounted to Is. 2d. The Excise laws were altered in 1823, not for the advantage of the distiller, but for the better collection of the Excise duties. The result was that every distiller was forbidden to distil and brew at the same time, and to brew and distil on the same pre mises. Every distiller was consequently obliged to double his plant, to increase the size of his premises, and to increase the number and size of his coppers. The effect of which was that a distiller, whose business, could be carried on for 40,0001, required a capital of 80,0004—(Hear.) - He was putting the Irish part of the case first. Now it was given in evidence before a Committee which sat in 1823, that an Irish distiller, who produced 60,000 gallons of whisky in his business, and who previously required but 5,0001. as his capital, was in consequence of these new re strictions obliged to increase his plant, and to lay out 5,000/ more in order to conduct his business. 101. per cent. would be the result, or 5001. a year, which would have to be charged against 60,000 gallons. 5001. divided over 60,000 gallons would give exactly this result. The next item was the loss of material arising out 'of these restrictions. These re strictions obliged the distiller to brew at a certain gravity—to give so many days' notice of his in tention to brew, and al many hours' notice of any removement he makes. Thus he was sometimes obliged to stop his works for twelve hours—to allow his furnaces to become extinguished, causing a waste which was estimated at - one-twelfth of the whole produce. The Irish distillers estimated the loss in this way at 2d. a gallon. Then there was the loss in wages, because it was necessary to pay the workmen during these temporary stoppages ; in fact it was necessary for the distiller to increase the num ber of persons in his employment, to expend double time, and to pay double wages.—(Hear.) Irish distillers put this at ls. 2d. per gallon (as we under stood). Then again with respect to yeast.—(Hear, hear.) In making spirits, owing to the restrictions, it was necessary to use fresh yeast at every brewing, which would not be necessary if the restrictions were removed. It was a fact that under the operation of the Excise laws the distillers were obliged to let their yeast run down the gutter, and to purchase the same from other parties. The distillers of •Galway, of - Belfast, and of Drogheda, were thus obliged to 'tome to . the London mar. ket in order to purchase yeast,, while they thern.: Selves were obliged Co waste it. The expense of yeast to the galloo was a yenny, There were. 26,000,000 of 011614 ot - spirits distilled in England and Ireland, which; at id., would give an amount of 110,000 7 . of wrs - e turned down the gutter, under the operation of the Excise law. That made sid. They then cause to the malt duty. He was now speaking of Ireland. In what was called the raw corn spirit, about two-thir teenths of the corn was malted ; therefore, if they charged an amount equalling two thirteenths on the whole quantity employed, the malt duty being ls. 4d. a gallon, it would give a duty of 2d. per gallon for malt duty alone. A high authority in these matters in former times—he meant the late Mr. Huskision— maintained that the whole malt duty was in itself a heavy charge, but that the restrictions on malt added one-half to the amount of duty, to the real cost of malt ; for the same restriction that applied to spirits applied also to the making of malt. In cold weather the barley required more than forty hours for its proper steeping, but in warm weather less. The Excise laws would not, however, change the hour, and in many instances in warm weather the barley sprouted and was spoiled. The loss in this way was 2s. 6d. per quarter. He then came to another subject, which was called, in the language of distillers, the decreases. In England the duty was charged upon British spirits as they left the worm bead, but it was charged upon rum, not as it left the East and West Indies, or arrived in this-country, but as it came out of bond. lie found :by a !return, ordered by that House on the 29th May last, that the allowance made to the rum pro. (lacers was-elin England, three six -tenths of a penny ; in Ireland, seven seven-hundredths of a penny ; and in Scotland, eight five-tenths of > a penny, upon . each gallon. In England, out of 2,411,001 gallons imported, 76,794 had been allowed, the money for which, as returned for deficiency and leakage, was 36,248/. In Ireland 737 gallon were allowed, at a sum of 3471. upon 30,770 gallons introduced, and in Scotland the sum of 1,5341. was allowed for 3,287 gallons, out of 43,135 gallons imported. He would now calculate what would be the amount of drawback (if such it might be called) to the rum producers of Eng land, Ireland, and Scotland. He found that the drawback to the rum producers of England would be three 4-10ths of a penny ; Ireland two 1-Bths; and Scotland, four 3-10ths of a penny.--(Hear, hear.)- The result of all theist!, disadvantages, as far as the dis tillers were concerned, was that it would take 11-td. and / I- of a penny to put them on a par with the colonial distillers, whereas it was only proposed to take off 9d. per gallon. In addition to this the distillers had to con tend with many other disadvantages. Another example of the same kind was the removal of the glass duties. For that measure the country was indebted to the Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth. Although his:(Sir R. Peel's) sanguine expectations bad not been realised, yet the result was perfectly surprising. By a return laid on the table of the House last year it appeared, that owing to the increase for sheet and plate glass, the manufacturers had increased their Works. New works had been erected in Dublin, Belfast, Hull, and other places. The want of skilful hands was much felt—in fact, so much was this scarcity felt, that the workmen who could be obtained had forced their employers to allow them higher wages, and they had been increased in consequence 301. per cent. —as they received from 41. to Si. a week. He thought in the case of glass he had shown a very strong example of what the removal of Excise duties would accomplish, for it must be borne in mind that as regarded the glass duties, the removal of the Excise duties upon it had not led to any, increased exportation of the article. The increase was created at home, as shortly after the repeal of the duties in this country the duties on foreign glass were re pealed, so that English and foreign glass came at once into competition, and they competed on equal terms. He was justified from the increase of the home con sumption in these articles to suppose,' that if the Excise duties were amended, and greater facilities given to to the distillers in their manufacture, an enormous increase would be the result. As regarded the case of Ireland, there was another conside ration which the House was bound to entertain Whisky was the great drink of Ireland, but a very small proportion of that whisky was made from malted corn. The advantage which arose from the malting of barley was . that it was deprived of its poisonous qualities. As only 100,000 gallons were distilled from barley so prepared. it followed of .course that the mass of the Irish popula tion drank a poisonous instead of a wholesome liquor. The exports of foreign spirits from this country were enormous, but no British spirits were enabled to be ex ported at all. That was the case with Irish spirits ; what was the case with regard to England. The Eng lish distilleries did not consume half the quantity of grain that was consumed by the Irish distillers, for they rectified the spirits they manufactured instead of malt • lug them. The English distiller also claimed id. per quarter on foreign barley employed in the manufacture of spirit. If, then, the house would consider the several items they would find the duty on barley amounted to id., on malt 21d., the charge on increase plant Id., the interest on money required for increased plant Id., the loss by allowing the yeast to run down the gutters Id., the loss on material 2d., the duty on the decreases 3d. 4•loths, the interest on the amount of duty paid in ad vance, id., and the loss by the prohibition to allow the distillers to rectify their own spirits 3d., they would find that upon the whole of the items a charge was made of 134 d. and 3-20ths of a penny on the home producer. He would now finish with the Scotch case. It differed from the English and the Irish case in this, that 00- thirds of the spirits made in Scotland was malt spirits. They had the same restriction with regard to the excise. As a set-off to the 34d. to which he had referred in the Irish case, and the 2id. in the English case, they had the entire malt duty to pay, with the exception of the Bd. of drawback. In the manufacture of Sccteb SPirits, a duty was paid on the malt of is. 4d. per gallon. The various items made altogether 190. and 3 20th of Id. in addition to another id. which ought to be chargH for interest ; or, taking Mr. Huskisson's estimate, at 4c1 3 less, 1514. and 3. 20ths of Id., to which Scotland would be entitled, to put her on equal terms with the produe of foreign countries.—(Hear, hear.) He thanked th 4 House for the patience with which they had listened td his statement.—(Hear, hear.) He thought he h&c} shown the House just reasons for referring the subject; to a Committee up-stairs,—(Hear, hear,)—where wit nesses might be examined, and where they might deli-' berately ascertain what was the exact justice of the case: He was no advocate for any wanton interference with! the EnOish, Irish, or Scotch distillers, or for giving theinl any undue advantage over the Colonial 'distillers.' He was no advocate for any monopoly whatsoever, but sought only exact justice between both parties ; and the case he sought could only be properly investigated in -a Select Committee up stairs, consisting of impartial per sons. The Noble Lord concluded by submitting 'his motion, and re:unied his seat amidst loud cheers. Tha CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who' was ‘ery imperfectly heard, said, that he thought that his Noble Friend, in his anxiety to make a good case, had somewhat exceeded the amount of grievances which SECOND READINGS. The following Bills were sew2rallyread a second thne:—Ayr Harbour; Ayrshire Roads; National Mer- BREWERIES AND DISTILLERIES. --Mr.-RAIKES CURRIE pregebted a petition from the Borough of Northampton, praying that a stop might be put to breweries and distilleries. MEDICAL OFFICERS IN IRISH UNIONS. An Hox. MEMBER presented a petition from the medi cal officers of Athlone, praying for increased remunera tion to medical officers employed in the Unions. CUSTOSISDUTIES. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN presented a petition from Kildare against the Customs Duties' Bill. GOVERNMENT:EDUCATION SCHEME. Lord MORPETH presented several petitions from Baptist and Independent congregations, and from the inhabitants of several places in Yorkshire against the Government education scheme. CORPORAL PUNISHMENT. Dr. BOWRING wished to read a paper from Hong- Kong, dated the 13th of January, which stated that the system of corporal punishment on board ship had, they were happy to state, been done away with, and that no punishment would now take place without a trial, in consequence of the discussion which had taken place in the House of Commons. He wished to know whether the Government had received any official assurance of what was thus stated? Mr. B. HAWES said that no official confirmation had been received by the Government ; but he could, at the same time, say that he had great reason to believe that there would shortly be a great amelioration of the system of punishment in the commercial marine. ARMY PENSIONS. Colonel REID wished to ask the Secretary-at-War, whether there was any intention to alter the system of army pensions? Mr. F. MAULE said that there was no such intention. IRISH CHURCH. Mr. S. O'BRIEN wished to ask the Noble Lord at the head of the Government whether there was any intention to bring in any measures during the present session to appropriate the property of the Irish Church to purposes its which both Protestants and Catholics were interested? Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that there was no such intention. GAME-LAWS. Mr. B. ESCOTT wished to remind the Hon. Member for Durham that a Committee on the game-laws had sat in 1845, before whom a considerable mass of evidence had been given. He wished to ask whether it was the Hon. Member's intention to act upon that evidence? Mr. BRIGHT said that it was his intention to draw the attention of the House to the evidence which had been given at an early period, and he hoped to be able to bring in a Bill to repeal the game-laws before the end of the session. ENLISTMENT OF THE ARMY. Sir H. DOUGLAS wished to ask the Noble Lord at the head of the Government whether the system of enlisment for a limited period had been adopted by the advice and with the consent of the Duke of Wellington, the Commander-in• Chief of the Army? Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that there had been several communications with the Horse• Guards, but there had been no direct contravention of the plans adopted by the Government. Further than this he declined to answer. To a further attempt by Sir Howard Douglas, the Noble Lord returned the same answer. GOVERNMENT SCHEME OF EDUCATION. Mr. MATHESON presented a petition from a con gregation of Independents, at Ashburton, against the Governor-nt plan of education. Mr. ALDAM presented a petition from Leeds to ,he same effect. LIMITATION OF ENLISTMENT BILL. Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS, assuming that the opinion of the. Duke of Wellington was not favourable to this measure, begged to give notice that it was his intention, when the question was put for going into Committee on the Bill, to move that it be committed that day six months. HARBOUR OF REFUGE OF HOLYHEAD. Viscount SANDON moved for a copy of a letter from the Secretary of the Admiralty, dated the 27th day of March, 1846, stating that the Lords of the Ad miralty approve of Mr. Rendel's plans fbr a refuge har bour and packet harbour at Holyhead; and of the con ditions upon which the contribution of 200,0001., by the Chester and Holyhead Railway Company, had been ten dered for the same, as referred to in the Treasury minute of the 3d day of April, 1846. Also, copies of any report from Captain Beechey, RN, or others, on the nature of the sea ground proposed by Mr. Rendel to be inclosed as a harbour of refuge at Holyhead, and made subse quently to Ju1y,1846, together with a plan, showing the msult of such examination; together with a copy of the plan of such harbour of refuge and packet harbour at Holyhead, as has been approved of and prepared under the direction of her Majesty's Government, or of the Admiralty, and the cost of such approved harbours. Agreed to. NAVAL COURT- MARTI AL. In answer to a question put by Mr. WILLIAMS, Mr. WARD (the Secretary to the Admiralty) stated that the sentence of death, recently passed by a court martial at Portsmouth on a private of the marines for insubordination, had been brought under the consi. deration of the Lords of the Admiralty, who, con sidering all,the circumstances connected with the cases, had felt themselves justified in recommending to her Majesty a commutation of the sentence already ordered to take effect. NAVAL ARTICLES OF WAR. Mr. WILLIAMS wished to know whether the Lords of the Admiralty had considered the existing naval ar ticles of war, with a view to an amelioration of their inhuman and unjust provisions? 4 Mr. WARD said that the subject had been considered. but he was not at liberty to state as yet the result of those deliberations; he hoped to be able to lay before the House the determination to which their Lordships had arrived. HARBOURS OF REFUGE AT HOLYHEAD. Lord SANDON wished to know whether commis sioners had been appointed to consider and take evi dence upon plans to be adopted for constructing har bours of refuge at Holyhead, and, if so, who they consist of, and what were their instructions? Mr. WARD said that a Commission had been ap pointed, consisting of Captains Berkeley, Collinson, and Shepherd. Their instructions were to take evidence, and hear the objections of opponents upon the subject, and report thereon to the Government. MEDITERRANEAN SQUADRON. Sir CHARLES NAPIER said that at the beginning of the session he had moved for certain returns con nected with the squadron in the Mediterranean. He wished to know when they would be laid on the table? Mr. WARD was understood to say that they would be furnished as soon as possible. LANGPORT UNION. Mr. ESCOTT wished to ask the Secretary for the Home Department whether he had any objection to pro duce certain documents respecting the management of this union? Sir G. GREY replied that he had not, as soon as the charges at present in course of investigation were brought to a termination. HOLYHEAD HARBOUR. Mr. 0. STANLEY wished to ask the Secretary of the Admiralty if it was the intention of the Government to reconsider the plan respecting Holyhead harbour, not withstanding the interested representation of the city of Dublin? Mr. WARD said many grave objections had been urged against the plan ; and it was thought ad visable to well consider the matter before they consented to spend a million of money upon the undertaking, so that the Government might be satisfied that the money would be satisfactorily and usefully expended. It was still under the attention of the Government. ARREST ()E FOUR PERSONS AT BRIGHTON. Captan PECHELL wished to call the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department to the arrest of four persons at Brighton (from whom he had presented a petition to- Aiy)..- They complained that they had been taken up on suspicion of having committed a robbery, that they were taken before a magistrate, from whom they ob tained their discharge, the charge not having been made. They complained that during the intervening period they were not allowed to instruct counsel except in the presence of a police-constable. Ile wished to know whether the Hon. Gentleman had had his attention called to the case, and whether he intended to take any steps to prevent a similar occurrence?_ Sir G. GREY said the case had been brought under his attention. He, however, would make an inquiry into the matter. CUSTOMS' DUTIES BILL. On the order of the day being read for going into Committee en this Bill, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and said he thought it necessary, in justice to his Noble Friend opposite (Lord G. Bentinck), to state the course which he intended to pursue with respect to this Bill. He believed his Noble Friend intended to state his case against the Bill, in bringing forward his motion that the subject be referred to a Select Committee, instead of arguing his case in Committee. On bringing forward his financial statement he stated that he proposed a duty upon colonial rum of 6d. higher than that imposed on British spirits. Since that time he had had the opinion of distillers and others, who urged that that duty would not be adequate as a protecting duty. Although his opinion was unchanged, he had been induced to reconsider his decision. He had said at the time that it was impossible to fix a precise amount, and, therefore, he had been anxious to adopt as moderate a duty as possible. It was, there fore, his intention in the Committee on this Bill to pro pose that colonial spirits should be charged a duty of ed. per gallon higher than the home spirit. He would not now go into the reasons one way or the other; but he would assign these in answer to the statement of his Noble Friend opposite. He had thought it fair thus to apprise his Noble Friend of the course he intended to adopt. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said that he would require the especial indulgence of the House on this cceasion, for of all the dry subjects—(Laughter)—that could possibly he devised, and which it had ever been his misfortune to bring forward, this was the most tedious, and he feared that neither wit, talent, or ingenuity would suffice to make it agreeable. He believed that the Right Hon. Baronet desired by his measure to do j u stice to all parties, but he (Lord G. Bentinek) believed also that the Right Hon. Geutleman was en tirely in error in the result at which he had arrived. He was compelled to say that this question was not one of pounds and shillings; hu:, one of pence, halfpence, aye, and one of the twentieth parts of farthingq, and it was for that very reason that it was of such universal appli cation, and it would be better entertained in a Select Com mittee up stairs than in a Committee of the whole House. the distillers themselves complained of. He should be as:glad as any Hon. Member in that House, if the re ductions sought for by the distillers of this coop try I could be conceded, but he feared that the sanguine ex pectations of the Noble Lord woulii not b. , jieti3.d I y i the result. The Noble Lord had represented in very lively colours the fears which were entertained by the home manufacturer fur the competi tion which might be given by the colonial producer, but these fears he considered were greatly exaggerated, and without foundation. He considered that these fears were exaggerated, yet, with a view to meet the opinions of persons who differed from him, he had increased the differeetial duty to a higher amount than he had previ lously intended, and one reason fur adopting this course was undoubtedly that he might meet less opposition in Committee. If he established that the producer in any part of the country had nothing to fear from foreign competition, then he held that he had established his case in all parts of the country, for the English, Irish, and Scotch distillers stood precisely on the same ground. He bad no great faith in the statements put forth from time to time by parties interested in the manu facture of British spirits, for he thought that they had exhibited great ignorance on the subject. In the year 1830, when the Earl of Ripon was Chancellor of the Exchequer, the differential duty was 18d. per gallon, and the distillers then alleged that they paid 9d. for the ex tra price of corn, thus showing that 9d. was the amount of protection afforded them, and they were satisfied at the time with that amount of protection.—(Hear, hear.) He had received several statements from the distillers of this country, in which they suggested that Is. per gallon would be an equitable amount of differential duty, and lie confessed that he was somewhat amazed to hear his Noble Friend come down and urge grievances of a greater magnitude than even they themselves did. His Noble Friend had stated the " decreases" in the home stock at 3d. 4-10ths per gallon. Now he held an excise return which showed that in the stock of six of the largest distillers the decrease did not equal id. per gal lon. He held similar returns from Scotland and Ire land. There was still more remarkable evidence on the subject. In 1842 the drawback of malt spirits in Ireland was altogether repealed, and the quantity manufactured increased very much. Scotland had still, however, a drawback of Bd. per gallon, and yet with that drawback they were enabled to compete with—and successfully compete with—the Irish distiller, who had no drawback. In 1840, the quantity of spirit exported from Scotland to Ireland was 427,000 gallons; in 1842 it was 432,000 gallons ; in 1845 it was 507,000 gallons ; and in 1846 it was 524,000 gallons. There were complaints made by England and Ireland as to the loss upon excise restriction. He admitted that there was some loss, but not the extent of 4d. per gallon, as stated by the English, or 6d. as stated by the Irish. The law being the same in both countries, the loss must naturally be the same. He could not, however admit that the loss was anything near the amount stated by the Noble Lord. With regard to the question of de creases, he had the statement of themselves, and it was proved that in England and Scotland, the amount alto gether was 3- 7 ,1 d. That being the case, he thought it would be properly met by allowing them a differential duty of 6d., but he thought that the distillers themselves would be satisfied with a duty of 9d., which was the maximum duty that would ever be placed upon rum as a differential duty. In the year 1845, the whole quantity of spirits consumed in the United Kingdom was 26,672,000 gals., and of that 2,400,000 gals. were rum, all the rest being British spirits. Could the duty ou so small an article of import materially affect the interests of the distillers of this country ? The fear of such an injury was one of the lamest that could be imagined, for the interests of all those c.ncerned were, as he had shown, to be pro perly protected. Those who would be mostly benefited by the measure were the West Indians, and he did not think that it would be by any means so great a boon to them as they anticipated. Ile should, therefore, oppose the within of the Noble Lord. • Mr. CALLAGHAN said that the House should receive with caution the statement made by the Right Hon. Gentleman with regard to Ireland. He - wished to re mark upon some points of that statement. The circum stances of England and Ireland were such, that if the English distillers were to consent to receive 6d., 9d., or Is. as a differential duty, that amingcmont would not do for the Irish, who claimed a duty of Is. 6d. The cost of rum in Calcutta was from ls. 7d. to Is. Bd. per imperial proof gallon, and the export was increasing in quantity. From the 31,it of October of 1842, to the same period in 1843, the quantity exported from Cal cutta was 560,000 gallons, and in the year 1845 to 1546. it was respectively 600,000 to 706,000 gallons. The Irish distillers had further to complain that this re duction came on them suddenly ; on which point the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not think at all. Mr, BERNAL did not think the colonial interests had been well or equitably treated on the present occa sion. He thought the case was one beset with difficul ties ; but after the most careful consideration of every thing connected with it, the greatest reduction which the Chancellor felt himself bound to make was sixpence per gallon. There were just eight proper distilleries in England ; in Scotland the trade was shared by 150 ; but in Ireland he could not say how many there were. The trade, however, in England was an anomaly. With reg•:rd to the colonies, he thought i that they had nothing to do with the pres s sure of the fiscal duties on the home dis tillers. If these duties pressed hard upon the home . distiller, let them be removed ; but they must look to the. justice of the question. And if they did not enter into the grievances of the colonies, he denied their right to look to the pressure of the fiscal duties on the home distillers. He protested against sending the matter again to a Select Committee. It had been investigated over and over again, and he did not see what they could gain by doing so. He did not wish that any injustice should be committed on any class of her Majesty's sub jects, but he did not think the proposition now made would tend to throw any additional light on the subject. He begged to ask them whether, last session, it was not argued over and over again, that if the free -trade principles were conceded on sugar, they would be ex tended to the rum producers of the West Indies? He contended now, that on every principle of justice such an extension ought to be made. What he would say to the sister countries would be, show me how much you suffer from the duty upon malt, and by so much, and no more, shall be the discriminating duty charged be tween the foreign and home producer; for as to the case of England, Scotland, and Ireland, he must say that the discriminating difference between the liquor there produced and that produced in the colonies, ought to be the amount of the duty charged upon malt, independent of the duty on the liquor produced from it. He stood there, not merely as an English, or an Irish, or a Scotch representative, as the case might be; he stood there as the representative of the colonial subjects also,. and he demanded for them equal rights and privileges. Mr. GROGAN said he would second the feeling expressed by the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, for he did not rise as an Irish Member to ask any preference for the Irish distillers over the colonial producers. But what he deprecated in that Hon. Gentleman's speech, was the peculiar burdens under which the Irish distillers laboured, and that was the view to which he ( Mr. Grogan) would confine himself. Now, if every other charge was assumed to be equal in the case of the Irish and the colonial producer, the raw mat er i a l s from which the liquor was produced differed most signally in price. That was an element deserving of attention in the calculation. But then, proceeding onwards from the raw ma terial, the mechanical means and the expense of production deserved next the attention of the House ; for whatever science, ingenuity, or wealth could add in assisting to produce the liquor, the colonial producer could make use of th em a l l. Bet was thatl the case with the Irish distiller ? Why, from the time the first stone of the establishment was laid down till the moment when the cask of liquor was sent out, the Excise interfered and trammelled him in every movement. Yet the Hon. Gentleman had said that 61, as it was formerly, and now 9d., was not sufficient protection. But he begged to re mind that Hon. Gentleman that the actual reduction in England would just be 9d., and no more ; whilst in Ireland, though the reduction proposed was also 9d., it actually turned out to be 55. 3d. But the Irish distillers conducted their processes at very great risk and very great loss, on account of the impediments opposed in their way by the excise. They could not brew and distil at the same time, and the loss occasioned by this impediment in the mate- Hats necessary, which were wasted by the delay, was admitted on all sides. Now, again, were they allowed to use those mix tures which they believed would be beneficial in working off their processes of distillation. Another great loss arose staotrtienng,ioonf of f ond th ed e l fro . r m its. the H w e aste wati o l c d eas j i u e s n t ed direct in th t e he House to a single instance. A friend of his in May of the year 1842, stored six puncheons of whiskey, containing 660 gallons 25 overproef in the Queen's stores, Dublin ; and in the month of May, 1846, when duty was paid upon them, time puncheons had to be tilled up anti the decrease was found to be just eight gallons upon three of them. That was a very considerable loss that fell upon the Irish distiller. Mr. BOUVERIE said that as the intention was se to apportion the duties that they should not press too severely on any class, the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet did not meet this object, for it appeared to him to press too severely on the Scottish distiller. There were two classes of spirits distilled in this country, namely, from raw grain and from malt. In Scotland, the great proportion of spirits manufactured was from malt, the consumption being four times the amount of grain liquor. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that the better price received for the malt liquor, as compared with the lesser price of grain, gave an equivalent for the increased duty. But was this the case with foreign rum ? If the raw grain distiller was entitled to the decreased duty on his one eleventh of malt used in the manu facture of his spirit, the distiller wh o use d ma l t entirely w entitled to the same decrease en hi s e l even - e l evenths of malt.alass. For these reasons he would oppose the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet. ES contended that extraordin t a h ry advant ages h a d FoR Ai r. been given to the coloni a l producers 1.))' e measure o f th e Right Hon. Baronet. Th e N o bl e Lord, the Member l for Ly nn , had asked for the app o i n t ment of a committee some six weeks ago, and if the Chancellor of the Exchequer had then granted that committee, the question would have been by this time set at rest. The H on . M em b er felt that an inquiry into the opera tion of the Excise law was necessary, and he should support the motion of the Noble Lord Air. MOFFATT said that. he had heard many complaints from the Irish Members of the want of protection to distillers in that country, but he really g thou ht that they did not know their o wn i nterest. He thought that an equalisation of the pro tection to Iri s h pro d uce and colonial spirits would be most for their benefit. They ought to be enabled to sell their spirits from bond in the same manner as the colonial rum—as the abser.ce of that permission enforced the consumption of a very unwholesome article, and, at the name time, did an injustice to the producer. . Mr. BARFLY said that he thought that the English and I Irish distillers would have better consulted their own interests had they consented to receive the protection of 6d. per gallon as heir annual produce of 24 , 000, C 00 gallons — give originally proposed u nder this Bill. That amount alone-- wou!d upon t considerable revenue after th e . long monopoly 60 t a h r y ( ;1 1 11..d e A nj v o e ye l d. The distillers of the three , 1 kingdoms had long been considered as the supports and strong. 1 holds of monopoly , and t hey ha d naturally tried to hinder any il co mpetition by their brother distillers in the colonies. The on ly question that remained for the House to ascertain was. what amount of direct taxation should he imposed upon the , distiller. In his opinion is. ld. per gallon in England would be ample protection for the distillers, for he thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had sufficiently shown, in re futing their exaggerations, that they did not require any more. 118 1 !at ; rsol bio efi sail sit e 3UICI tioll the