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

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS, March 26. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. NATIONAL RATING. Earl FORTESCUE presented a petition from Ax minster, praying for an alteration in the laws relating to the removal of the poor, and substituting a national rate ou all real and personal property._ POOR: REMOVA:L ACT. Lord BEAU MONT presented petitions from the board of guardians of the Harstmere and Goole Unions, in the counties of Suffolk and Yorkshire, praying that greater effect might be given to the Poor Removal Act of last session, by enlarging the area of settlement. The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from Goole, in favour of an efficient poor-law for Ireland, the peti tioners complaining that their rates had been greatly in creased by the recent inundation of Irish poor into tha district. FRAUD ON LORD COLVILLE. Lord COLVILLE, who spoke in a very indistinct tone of voice, complained of individual fraudulent and f a l se as sumption of his title by an calling himself Lord Colville, of Ochiltree. We underst oo d t h e N o bl e Lord to say, that this ihdividual, without any right to the privil ges of a Peer, mad e use o f t hi s pretence to obtain his liberty from imprisonment under the Sheriff of Middlesex in which he succeeded, and went down to Scotland and voted at the late election of a representative Peer for that country. The Noble Lord contended there was not a ves t age o f a c l a i m w hi c h t h at individual could suggest in palliation of his conduct. Lord ROSEBERY understood the general nature of this case from a private communication, and believed that his Noble Friend could not do that which he de sired to do. By the resolutions of which he was the au thor, and which had unanimouslypassed the House in 1822, no person except the son or other lineal descendant, or the brother of a Peer of Scotland, could vote for the election of a representative of the Peers of that country, without first coming before the House and proving his right to vote. The Noble Lord could not, therefore, summon the perscn to the bar of the House ; and the better plan would be to move for a copy of the proceed ings of the late election, and when it was laid upon the table a Committee could be instituted to investigate the whole of the circumstances. When the House had adopted the resolutions, they had taken no measures to purify the list of the Peers of Scotland ; and if, there fore, the party had voted in right of being a lineal de scendant of a former Lord Colville, it would be impos sible to arraign him for the fault with which he was charged. Lord BRO UGH Alleonceived that no other course could be adopted than that which had been recommended by his Noble Friend. As the law at present stood any man might walk into Holyrood House, and tender his vote, as a matter of course, without any one having the power to prevent its being taken. The only alteration that had been made by the resolutions of 1822 was to prevent persons beyond a certain degree of relationship frcm voting, but they did not and could not prevent personation, nor could the House amend the evil, for it was only in case of a contested election that the House had any right to scrutinise the votes. The LORD CHANCELLOR conceived that the better plan would be to consider the future rather than care about the past. As the law at present affected the case, it could not interfere with the personation of a brother of a Peer. It was true that before a Peer was able to vote he must come before the Chancellor and prove the right to his title before a writ could be issued. Lord CAMPBELL assured the Noble Lord opposite that a usurpation of a title gave no legal right what ever, and the Noble Lord was wrong in supposing that the Courts of Westminster entertained the case of an individual because he had been allowed to vote for the election of a Scotch Peer. The Courts at Westminster granted a rule to show cause on that ground, but there cause never was shown. In his opinion a law ought to be passed requiring that no individual should be allowed to vote until he had made good his title. Lord COLVILLE gave notice that on Monday he would move for a return of the Peers who voted at the recent election. The subject then dropped. IRISH POOR-LAW. The Marquis of SALISBURY presented several peti tions in favour of an extended system of poor-laws for Ireland. GOVERNMENT EDUCATIONAL GRANT. Earl FITZWILLIAM presented several petitions from places in Lancashire and Yorkshire, against the proposed grant of the Government for the purposes of education. Among them was one signed by 25,000 of the inhabitants of Leeds. The petitioners emphatically denied that it was the right or the duty of Government to interfere with the education of the people. To that he would answer, that if it was not the right or the duty of the Government to interfere, neither was it the right or the duty of private individuals. But if, on the other hand, it was right for individuals to interfere, he apprehended it was also right for the Govern ment. The petitioners act only stated this, but went further, and stated that voluntary efforts were quite sufficient for the education of the people. If this were correct, then ought every person in the country to he educated; but if they were not then it was clear voluntary efforts had not been sufficient. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from a con gregation of Protestant Dissenters in Suffolk, against the same grant. He found, on looking at the petition, that it contained the names of more ladies than men (Hear, bear.) The petitioners stated that they decidedly protested against the measure as unconstitutional, favouring the Established Church against the Dissent ing sects, and exercising a tyranny over the teachers who accepted the grant. The Noble Lord also nro iuru, against ine roar nemoval Act. IRISH POOR. Lord MONTEAGLE rose to move that a Select Committee should be appointed to consider and report on the recommendations of the several Parliamentary Committees and Commissions on the state of the Irish poor, as relating to the expediency of introducing per nsanently the system of out-door relief for the able bodied labourer ; and on the effect of such a measure on the well- being of Ireland, the interests of the poor themselves, and the immigration of Irish paupers into Great Britain ; and, also, to consider and to report on the effects of enlarging the present electoral divisions, for the purpose of raising and !eying the assessments und er th e P oor -l aw . The Noble Lord said lie felt the weight and the responsibility of the subject which he had undertaken to bring before their Lordships ; but, at the sam3 time, he felt himself free from many of the difficulties which surrounded the discussion of it. In the first place, he was free from one possible imputation of being swayed by any party views in dicsussing, the ques tion ; and, in the second place, he was free from the supposition, in introducing it to their Lordships, that he could be swayed by any deiire or acquiring popular favour on the one side of the Channel or the other. But per haps he might be charged with presumption in taking up so great a question. He begged to say that he hail twice been Chairman of a Committee of inquiry in the other House on the poor-law in Ireland, and he had more than once in his Par liamentary career had his attention directed to it. He had been told that there would be objections taken to the raising this question by reason of the late period at which Bills were sent up for consideration by their Lordships. They had never suffered more than during the last week of the last session, for some of the most material Acts of the whole Session had been sent up at a time when it was utterly imposs;ble to give them any necessary attention. This difficulty was increased by the technical regulations which existed between the two Houses of Parliament, when there was any amendment to be proposed. lie would not wish to use any parliamentary tactics —to meet a measure by a side-wind—to take advantage of a side-wind.—(Hear.) He desired on the contrary, to meet the matter directly. This measure had already been considered during the recess, and therefore it was no new subject which they were called upon to consider ; but 70, although they had all the necessary evidence oefore them, and still he believed that many were about to vote on this Irish Poor-law, without being able to make themselves acquainted with ono -tenth part of the information which was already on the table. Many had been so engaged, not upon more important but upon perhaps more pressing subjects, so that they were unable to command sufficient ti m e to make -them selves acquainted with the evidence which had been ad duced. In the candour and nobility of their natures he was sure that their Lordships would never suffer themselves to slight or deny this evidence, but he was quite sure that if they did cast this evidence away as antiquated and unnecessary, they would at least admit the information which he had to give, and if they did strike they would at least hear before they struck, and grant him that for which he was about to ask. He wished to guard him self against any misconception on two grounds—the first was, that he, as an Irish landed proprietor, desired in any way to save his own property, and secondly, that he was desirous of in any way increasing his own pro perty from the public revenue. There was no sacri fice the landlords of Ireland would not make, if they could by doing so raise their country to the level of England. Nor did he came there to ask for unusual grants from the revenue. Ile deprecated many of the gifts of this country, because, in some instances he could name, the money had been unwisely and too lavishly given. Smaller sum 3, if well directed, might have done more good than all the lavish expenditure they had re cently witnessed, and therefore be did not come there to ask f o r l arge grants f rom the British s2tellequer, or to call upon their Lordships to Protect Irish property from a just and natural a xatl a. His m o ti on was s i mp l y for a Committee quirY and lookin g a t th e i mportance of the measure,)f and the obi' v e ee ltis t !.t was intended to serve, he thought it could not refused. He did not ask their Lord ships to examinee because it might lay him self open to the charge wishing to produce delay ; but what he wanted theeiro Lordships to do was, to grant a Committee to examine the w ritten ritteu evidence which they already possessed upon donee could contravene that No oral evi gl e i i testimony;schteu d but still be quite could that evidence be found ready to consent that the Committee should was -whether- rstion go into it.—(Hear, hear.) . The gr eat qu center which was before their Lordships, year 1847, with the experience of the last half before them, with their knowledge of the state of land, with their knowledge of the character of the Irish people, they were disposed to sanction this experiment to be introduced into this country for the first time, a out-door relief for the able-bodied poor of Ireland. li e begged they would remember the destruction which he bad laid down. His motion had no reference to the pre- sent emergency in that country, for if they were it was measures for the remedy o f p resen t r e lief, why, i f was necessary, let them take their Statesman's pro- P OB 4 l . 'Whet' a great Alinister of this country (Mr. Pitt) had to consider a course of much less pressing emergency than the present circum stances of Ireland, in the year 1795, there were no measures of extremity which he did not adopt. But it was with reference to the ordinary state of Ireland that he was speaking, and the inquiry which he 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 Acts 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 which 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 public 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 poor-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 300,000/. 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 out-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 law in 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 granted out 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 year 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 had moved the printing of that report, and would read an 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 not one portion of the country, but the whole of Ireland to be dependent not on England only, but on the Impe rial Legislature for support. Was not that the case now ? Was not the whole country dependent now upon the Legislature ? And it should be observed that this did not occur when the country was in a state of famine, but at all times ; and such infallibly would be the case. Then there was further the caution contained in the re port, that the administration of out-door relief would 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 ennssetnesree 9 a, who had been the benefactor of all around him, had been shot. The only advantage obtained by his example was, that he existed no longer. His Lordship t hen cited the opinion of Mr. Nichols, who had 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 north, 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. rations was still the same, and the whole of that gentle man's predictions bad 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-docr 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 subj( ct 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 common 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 resi , ect—that was Lord 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 ---(A laugh)—had expressed the same opinion during the same year ; and all the opinions which they had then expressed had been fully confirmed by subsequent experience. Again, in 1839, they had the report of the Poor-law Commissioners, and they emphatically stated their belief that the granting of out-door relief would he utterly destructive of every principle of granting re lief to those by whom it was absolutely needed.—(Hear, bear.) (His Lordship then proceeded to read extracts from the report of the Commissioners.) The guardians upon the receipt of the determination of the commissioners made another appeal to them, and to this they received also an unfavourable 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 regretted to be under the necessity of troubling the House at so great a length, b u t h e f e lt hi mse lf b ound 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-door relief in Ireland. The witnesses examined before that Committee were Mr. Lewis, Mr. Senior, Mr. Twistleton, Mr. Gulston, and Mr. Chad wicks, 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 of the Government to protect. He 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 timesfor having evidence on 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 on to allude to the prayer of the numerous petitions which had been laid upon their Lordships' table, praying that an efficient Poor-law should be introduced into Ireland, and prevent thereby 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 would be considerably increased. He felt supported in his opinion by the fact, that in the several counties of the a eithern parts of England, where a system of out door relief was most liberally and recklessly carried out, the wages were the lowest. Lie did not mean to say that it was a fair logical deduction that because a system of out-door relief existed in any place where wages were low, that therefore the rate of wages was reduced by the system of out-door relief. Still he Inuit look to the facts as they stood. Now, the reason why Irish labourers came over to England was, because wages were higher in this country than in Ireland. Ho had no doubt but that wages would be reduced in Ireland if the principle a rc_airn,r.aiyeadx. out, and the result would be a warela rgertw s of paupers into this country. most fallacious thins most illogical, the most absurd, and the mthairniilinwdhich had ever been imposed on Irish suppose that a system of th© credulity of out-door relief to the I • paupers would tend perma statement, winch appeared to have been superfluous, now proved to be 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 190 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 functionaries 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 450/., 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• pie, 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 Parliaments 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 Elizabeth, but it should be re membered that that Act was totally inoperative, and it was not till the 9th Geo. I. that the workhouse test was brought into play. The Acts of Charles H. 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 rdeasure 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 present measure 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 300,0G0 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 300,000 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 had 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 ing!; all agreed that it was most essential that there should be no out-door relief ; that, they said would be a ruinous measure, and cause the confiscation of property. He shared in the g eneral v apprehensions entertained at at that time of the injurious he a. .axon place viz., that when the workhouses were full, a clamour would Its 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 utmost of 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, and 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 notions to suppose that a system of out-door relief could be sustained by a well-directed system of labour. The people of England were not, he was convinced, aware of the real nature 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. lie 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 of 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 werewere content tobe tatkn i v e taken at tdis tancemise- rable leave their homes, and 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 he 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 reason why they could object to it. And then he saw no reason why they should not proceed to make their investiga tion, even whilst the measure was before the other House of Parliament. If they gave the whole able-bodied a right to relief, they could not atop even when the whole rental of Ireland had been swallowed up ; agrarian outrages would arise, and when 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 landlords of Ireland, as to what was the best course to be adopted for the benefit of the people but he considered that the Irish people ought now to be placed iu a similar position, with respect to obtaining' relief during distress, as the p eop l e o f E ng l a nd. And besides this mea sure must be looked upon as but one of the many measures which the Government had prepared for the permanent benefit of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had spoken of out-door 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. Pie was wholly incorrect in supposing that all would become recipients of that relief. Nevertheless, those who opposed the Bill had not proposed any other and better plan for the purpose of improving the 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 pre ss h e avily upon one class of the landed propri e t ors of Ireland, but eventual l y i t wou ld l ead to their permanent good. Aa 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 was 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 and 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 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 nently to improve the condition of the people. When everything had been reduced in Ireland by the operation 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 terly felt by all the aristocracy and people of this country. Unless they improved the country, so long would Ireland continue one mass of pauperism, deranging the condition of England. The next question with which he wished to deal was the question of rating. In his opinion, the two modes—electoral and union rating—were open to great objections. 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 low were passed. General and agricultural 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 object 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 speeeh, 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 is 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 all the reports of Commissioners and others who had dealt 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 could 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 the bands 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 cause of the misery in Ireland ? Every thinking man would tell 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 land 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 refusing 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 landholders 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 or, that point. Lord MON TEAGLE—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 outdoor 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 thin_p_yreselltscpn ctivea 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 crd 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 Ir e l an d w ith equa l advantage. The system was, therefore, precisely the same as that which pre vailed its 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 resources of the country were more than ample to em ploy all she people. The reason why Ireland had presented such a spectacle of distress was on account of the misapplica z 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 propidetors 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 bear 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 Ireland 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 ha did so, he would find that the habitual condition of Ireland was of the most wretched character, the population without decent shelter or clothing with the most meagre and inefficient 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 whichis (Earl Grey) had supported ; but in reviewing that policy he bound 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 no believed she contained all the elements of wealth in abundance, if she were only true to herself—and 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 p os iti on of the great es t p l enty, 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 the debate, seeing the importance of the measure under consideration to them. The question before the House, he need not remind them, was one pos sessing very peculiar features, and presented itself to them in an aspect of extraordinary charac ter. Still he did not wish at present to enter into the subject of a Bill which was not before their Lord ships, nor indeed would it be convenient for him to do at that advanced period of the night, or to go into a debate on the general principles of a provision for the peer. But be could not help remarking at the unhappy course which the Government had been pursuing, and he hoped, though he did not see much ground for success, that he might yet prevail in diverting them from such a proceeding. From the beginning of the session he had been endeavouring to show them the ew t n o h ta diech v l a f o h failure hopedilrued retoo impress would course they w ere p ursu i ng . A great calamity had overta k en the empire—a crisis had arisen oprove their but mindsonly temporary,ths t they should aonticildhe care fuhadth 1 0 l s y e distinguishpermanent meas measures teeas r s t n o meetrHe should t his freely temporary give every crisis obw e f n uh t e ti ohowhue when w a ee ge nams p m t ehi raecelno,qtn question s o ee st e a taid n do y vn e stowe x dam e s r etc the h s te e ernt o ha f el tt o b ed e re da n s ott e ii v ot un o n l to e i too t h i nf c i e nt goh a fe n ( tlh e e o n o e ( fi n e t e r n y c e ; ole po y. licy . thing should b e d one i n the dark, or under trhaweshilinfluence 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 lcall their attention. In the first place, if they passed a permanent law, they could not retrace their 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 renal nor retrace their steps. Once let them say, that Ireland shall be fed without labour, and that outdoor relief should be and tenan t ry e d innae n nv o tir t tya obolnfyl the ruined u h granted, and they would not be able to stop till they had ruined the landlords , and B w , o it r h se, c t las he se fa s rm w ci e no m enda t b r u y t . , what was far before—( Fi n e arr, remedy could be applied. This was one great reason why they should not rashly legislate on the subject. Now these two Noble Friends had differed, from him on the Act of 1838, to which he was opposed, and as he bad 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 WO to a repeal of the union; 83 his Noble Friend's THE SUN, .LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 27, 1847 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 extensive system of out-door relief. Nothing could be further from the 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 met with 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, hut 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 FITZ WILLIAM 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, be would have thought it was rather late to do so. But theispeech 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 ,?tears ago they had 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 gua-ds 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 had they taken the advice of these friends who were opposed to the present measure. He differed from the Noble Lord (Earl Grey) as to the 43d of Elizabeth 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 hatil 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 had 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 Cosamissions, 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 smsll plots of land, and depend on wages for subsistence ; and therefore it was that he 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 the 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 DUBLIN 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. Earl ROSSE tote to support the motion. 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 more 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-dour re lief. The Noble Lord who had opened the debate had put the objection that it was necessary when the workhouses were full they mast provide some means to meet the deficiency. Take the case of the southern and western counties. • And how 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 me command of a staff which gave •L ~ 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 hail not the slightest inter - 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 iong time during which he had trespassed on their Lordships he should not occupy more than five minutes. He would put it to the House hether ' after what he had s t a t e d an d t h e way i n 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 had su hastily entered. Under any circumstances he should certainly press his motion to a division. The House then divided, when there appeared— Fur the motion l2 Against it Majority against the motion... ...... Their Lordships then adjourned at Twenty Minutes to One o'clock. HOUSE 01 COMMONS. March 26. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY BILLS. Mr. GREENE moved that the following recommenda tion contained in the Third Report from the Classifica tio❑ Committee of Railway Bills be considered, viz : " 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, Fauldhouse, Biggar, and Broughton. The first Bill to remain in this Group; the second to be placed in Group 47." That the order made on the 15th day of Feb ruary last, for referring the said 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 pany to extend their station in Edinburgh, and to make branch railways to Granton and to the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway ; and that Mr. Hope Johnstone, Mr. Lockhart, and Mr. Hodgson Hinde 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 Hinde do prepare and bring it in. —Agreed to. PETITIONS ON PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. GREENE moved-" That it be an instruction to the Committees which shall be appointed to meet on Thursday, the 15th day of April, to entertain any petitions which may be referred to them, provided the same are presented on or before Monday, the 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 ion from Worcester against the Peor RemovallAct. E i MC ATION. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented two peti tions from Rochdale against the proposed Government t, rant 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 schoolnvisters of 15ingwall against the proposed Regis tration Bill for Scotland. CHARING-CROSS BRIDGE BILL. This Bill was re;,dastTcolltiine and ordered to be cornrnitt!d. Mr. GREENE presented a petition against it, which was referred to the Committee on the Bill. GOVERNMENT PLAN OF EDUCATION. ➢ir. BRIG HT presented several petitions against the minutes of Council recommending the increased grant for education, Mr. C. BERKELEY presented two petitions to the same effect. SECOND READINGS. The following Bills were severally read a secon d time;—Ayr Harbour; Ayrshire Roads; National Mer- cantile Life Assurance Society; Staffordshire Potteries Waterworks; Stockport Manorial Tolls and Bridges; Swairea Docks; Terrington Marsh Division, Allotment, add Inclosure . ; Wakefield Market; Wisbech Port and Harbour. 110 BREWERIES AND DISTILLERIES. Mr. RAIXES CURRIE presented a petition from the borough of Northampton, praying that a stop might be put to the use of grain in breweries and distilleries. MEDICAL OFFICERS IN IRISH UNIONS. An HON. MEMBER presented a petition from the medi cal officers of Athlone, praying for increased remunera tion to medical officers employed in the Unions. CUSTOMS DUTIES. _ _ 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 in 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. Be 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 bad 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 Government plan of educaion. Mr. ALDAM presented a petition from Leeds to ' the 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 AT 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 for 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, R.N, or others, on the nature of the tea ground proposed by Mr. Bendel to be inclosed as a harbour of refuge at 'Holyhead, and made subse quently to Ju1y,1846, together with a plan, showing the result 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- MARTIAL. 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. it,. wiLLIAM3 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? 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 be:ore the Howie the determination to which their Lordships had arriveo. 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, Coliinson, 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 4sk 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 OF 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 lie had presented a petition to day). 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. He wished to know whether the Hon. Gentleman had had his attention called to . the ease, and whether ho 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 on 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 Committ ee on t hi s Btll to pro pose that colonial spirits should be charged a duty of 9d. 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 eccasion, for of all the dry subjects—(Laughter)—that could possibly be devised, and which it had ever been his misfortune to bring torward, this was the most tedious, and he feared that neither wit, talent, or ingenuity would suffice to maize it agreeable. He believed that the Right Hon. Baronet desired by his measure to do justice to all parties, but he (Lord G. Bentinck) believed also that the Right Hon. Gentleman was en , • tirely i❑ error in the result at which he had arrived. He was compelled to say that this question was not one of pounds and shillings; but ono of pence, halfpence, aye, and one of the twentieth parts of farthings, 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- Dinka - up atiara than in a Committee of the whole Ilease. One part of the Irish case differed from the other pftr,t of the Irish case , an d one part o f t h e S cotc h case do fered from the remainder. If he were justified in ask' ing for a Select Committee—if he were justified wiles he gave notice of the motion—he was so far from being dissuaded from it by the annouceras, ol made by hi s R ig h t Hon. Friend, that he was still further encouraged to persevere irom the very resist)°, that the mind of th e Ri g ht H on. G entleman was 11°' made up upon this subject. Whilst up to tb e e present time he h a d th oug h t t h at t h e • ferential duty should be sixpence, he had 110?1 , 4 consented to give wa y ; an d , t h oug h h e did not acknowledge that his mind was changed, still be had changed the measure of the Government. He could assure the Right Hon. Gentleman that if he were pul upon that Committee, so little was he prejudiced nen° the subject, so little was his desire to give any advantage to the British distiller over the colonial producer of nun , that if it could be proved to him that there was a neces' sity for 9d. instead of 60., or that there should be no differential duty at all, he would be the first man to pro' pose such a measure to th e C omm i ttee . I t wa s n°' - 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 Viet. In that Act it was stated tha t Is. 20. was the amount of the countervailing duty b r a tween the spirits from the Channel Islands a° the agricultural produce of Great Britain' He had, therefore, a right to assume that the sum of Is.' or at least 111 d., was a just assessment as between run and British spirits, because the Act of which he we speaking recited in its preamble that the object of w e Bill was to determine what was the extent of the 1 „ 1 • cise restricti ons , an d th e H ouse b y pass i ng that Bill had decided that the extent of the Excise restrictio ns amounted to ls. 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 wa s that every distill e r wa s f or bidd en t o di s til an d brew e` the same time, and to brew and distil on the same Pre' muses. Every distiller was consequently obliged t° double his plant, to increase the size of his premise s ' and to increase the number and size of his coppers. Ta° effect of which was that a distiller, whose businesi could be carried on for 40,0001., required capital of 80,0001.—(Hear.) He was ' putting th e Irish part of the case first. Now it was given in evident! before a Committee which sat in 1823, that an Iris? distiller, who produced 60,000 gallons of whisky in hi s business, and who previously required but 5,000 L as his capital, was in consequence of these new re' strictions obliged to increase his plant, and to out 5,000/. more in order to conduct his business . 101. per cent. would be the result, or 5004 a year, which would have to be charged against 60,000 gallons. 500/. divided over 60,000 gallons would give exactly this result. The next item was the loss of materist arising out of these restrictions. These re strictions obliged the distiller to brew at s certain gravity—to give so many days' notice of his in. tendon to brew, and ss 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 worknsei during these temporary stoppages ; in fact it W as necessary for the distiller to increase the W; ber of persons in his empl o y men t, t o exeen; double time, and to pay double wages.—(Hear.) distillers put this at ls, 2d. per gallon (as we under stood). Then again with respect to yeast.—(Bea r, hear.) In making spirit s , ow i ng t o t h e restr i ct i o ns, was necessary to use fresh yeast at every brewing, will e would not be necessary if th e res t r i c ti ons were re moved. 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 partie s ' The distillers of Galway, of Belfast, and of Dr o gheda' were thus obliged to com e t o th e L on d on mare ket in order to purchase yeast, while they then; selves were obliged t o was t e it. Th e expense o f yea to the gallon was a pe nn y. Th ere were 26,00 0,000 o f gallons of spirits distilled in England and Ireland, whit at Id., would give an a moun t o f 110,000/. o f waste tu rned down the gutter, under the operation of the Excise Ja i l', That made sd. They then came to the malt duty. ,„, was now speaking of I re l an d. I n what swr,. called the r aw corn sp i r i t, a b out two-tn" ; teenths of the corn was malted ; thereto s ; if they charged a n amoun t equa lli ng two - th i rtee nt' e on the whole quantity e m pl o y e d, t h e ma l t duty he„ill ls. 40. a gallon, it would g i ve a d uty o f 2 1 d. per ge"°- for malt duty alo ne . A hi g h aut h or i ty in these ma tters in former times—he meant the late Mr. Huskisson e "' maintained that th e w h o l e ma l t d uty was in its ell heavy charge, b u t t h at t h e restr i ct i ons on malt add 1 one-half to th e amoun t o f d uty, to the rel:4 cost of malt ; for the same restriction that opP li D . to spirits applied also to the making of lot s In cold weath er th e b ar l ey required more than ford hours for its proper st ee pi ng , b ut i n warm weat her les s ' The Excise laws would not, however, change the 1 10 , 114 and in many instances i n warm weat h er t h e barley sprouted and was sp o il e d. Th e l oss i n t hi s w ay W as 2s. 6d. per quarter. He then came to another subie e ; which was called, in the l anguage o f di s tillers, ! decreases. In England the duty was charged Upo n British spirits as th e y l e ft t h e worm h ea d, b u t it 110 , charged upon rum, notes it left the East and West Indl . nr arrived in thi s country , b ut as it came out o f boo He found ;by a return , ordered by that House o n t he 29th May last, that the allowance made to the ratu n P a r r ducers was—in England, three six-tenths of a P e '", - `; ‘ , l in Ireland, seven seven-hundredths of a penny ; seu '),- Sestland, eight five-tenths of a penny, upon each gallon. In England, out of 2,411,001 OW!! imported, 76,794 had b een a ll owe d , the money for which, as returned for deficiency and leakage' was 36.2481. In Ireland 737 gallon were allowe d ' at a suns of 347/. upon 30,770 gallons introduced, and in Scotland the sum of 1,534/. was allowed for 3, 287 gallons, out of 43,135 gallons imported. He would COW calculate chat would be the amount of drawback (if such it might be called) to the rum producers of Eng' land, Iroland, 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 these disadvantages, as far as the dis tillers were concerned, was that it would take 11id. and kof a penny to put them on a par with the colonial r d e is r ti g ll a e l r i s o , n ss . .he l r n ea a s dd i t o o ff co 9 n d. - tend with many other disadvantages. p d o i s s e t d i lle t r o s k ad e Another example i t ti w on as to o t n h ly is p th ro e 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 l as t y ear it appeared, that owing to the increase for sheet and piste glass, the manufacturers had increased thei r works. New works had been erected in Dublin+ Belfast, Hull, and oth e r pl aces . Th e wa nt 0 1, skilful hands was much felt—in fact, so much was this scarcity felt, that the workmen w h o cou ld b e o btained had forced their employers to allow them hit her wag es ' and they had been increased in consequence 301. per cent. —as they received from 4/. to 81. a week. He thoug9. in the case of gla s s h e had s h own a very strong exam ple° 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 duti es 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 u° 11 : sumption in these arti c l es t o suppose,7t h at i f the Excise duties were amended, tvid greater facilities given 1 ° 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 enterluill' - Whisky was the great drink of Ireland, but s' very small proportion of that whisky W ss , made from malted corn. The ad van t age w hich arose from the malting of barley was that it was deprived of its poisonous qualities. As °nit 100,000 gallons were distilled from barley so prepared , it followed of course that the mass of the Irish populate tion drank a poisonous instead of a wholesome liquor' The exports of foreign spirits from this country Wor e enormous, but no British spirits were enabled to be ex. ported at all. That was the case with Irish spirits ;. what was the ca s e w ith regar d t o E ng l an d . Th e Eng; lish distilleries did no t consume h a lf t h e quant i t y 01 grain that was consumed by the Irish distillers, for they rectified the spirits they manufactured instead of malt' iug 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 1 ° 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 1c 1 ;t the loss on material 2d., the duty on the decreases 3°*, 4-10ths, the inte r e s t on th e amoun t o f d uty pa id in acv vance, id., and the loss by the prohibition to allow the, distillers to rectify their own spirits 3d., they would fist! that upon the whole of the items a charge was made of Mid. and 3-20ths of a penny on the home producer,. He would now finish with the S co t c h case . I t differed from the English and the Irish case in this , that tAo' 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 aid. to which he had referred in the Irish case, and the 2id. in the English case, they bad the entire malt duty to pay, with the exception of the Bd. of drawback. In the manufacture of Scotch spirits, a duty was paid on the malt of Is. 4d. per The various items made altogether 19fd. and 3 20th. 0, 1 Id. in addition to another id. which ought to b e c h a rg ed for interest ; or, taking Mr. Huskisson's estimate, at 4d. less, 15/d. and 3 20ths of ld., to which Scotland would be entitled, to put her on equal terms with the produce of foreign countries.—(Hear, hear.) He thanked the House for the patience with which they had listened to, his statement.—(Hear, hear.) H e t h oug h t h e ha d shown the House just reasons f or re f err i ng the subje.o.,. 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 En'lish, Irish, or Scotch distillers, or for giving then 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 Select Committee up stairs, consisting of impartial per . sons. The Noble Lord concluded by submitting his motion, and resumed his seat amidst loud cheers. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who was very imp er f ect l y h eard, said, that he thought th at his Noble Friend, in his anxiety to make a good cart had somewhat exceeded the anactint of glievtinceg increa drawl they comps In lE Scotia it wa Placed