The Express.
London, England, 1849-07-28 00:00:00

TRIAL BY JURY IN IRELAND.

Mr. SADlllll.wlsiteil following circum-
stance under the attention of the house. An action for
trespass had a short time ago been commenced by a person
named Callaghan against Major Cameron, for certain acts
done by him in July, 1848, in the town of Carrick-on-Suit.
That action was defended by Mr. Kemmis, the crown soli-
citor. A special jury was moved for and o►taind, and the
list, consisting of 49 gentlemen, contained the names of 8
Roman catholic gentlemen of high character and position.
Mr. Remits went up and down the list until he had en.
pawed the whole 8 Roman catholic,, and, having yet 4
mon to expunge, be was reported to have said that it was
a matter of indifference to him what other four were strack
out. He begged to inquire whether the course thus takes
by Mr. Kemmis had bees with the sanction of the Attorney.
General in Ireland

Sir W. SOMERVILLE said, as he had heard nothing
before of the circumstances of the ease, he could not at ones
say what course it might be his duty to pursue with regard
to it.

Mr. EIADLBIIt asked whether the government would ob.
jact to furnish to the house a list of the jury in the ease, die.
pushing which were Roman catholim end which were pro-
testant'. (Cries of " Oh, oh.") Would the government
also give any information as to why these eight gentle-
, men had been struck off the list ?

Lord J. RUSSELL—I should object to give any such In-
formation. (Hear.)
WORKHOUSE LOANS (IRELAND) BILL.
This bill was read a third Ulna and pared.
DRAINAGE OF LAND BILL.

This hill wet also read a third time and passed, having
fint had a dense appended to it on t►e motion of
Mr. C. LEWIS, providing for the application of money
paid into the bank where the works were not executed, or
there was a surplus not applicable to the works.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
In 1111111Wer to a question from Mr.NIWDIO ATI,

lord J. RUSSELL expressed a hops that they should be
enabled to get through the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill in the
eourse of the day. He did' not think it necessary that the
house should meet on Monday, but he pro( wed that they
should meet to-morrow (this day) at two o'clock.

Agreed to.
ADMIRALTY JIIRISDICII9N IN THE COLONIES

This bill was read a third time and passed.

SLAVE TRADE (PERSIAN GULF) BILL.
On the motion that this bill be road a third time,
Mr. ANSTEY expressed a hope that the noble lord at the
head of the foreign department would reconsider this sub-
ject. He had always entertained a serious and deeply.
grounded repugnance to all treaties of this description be-
tween this country and others, whether civilised or
barbarians, and he felt convinced that the adoption of the
pranat bill could not possibly be attended with any good,
bat that in all probability it would be productive of a great
deal of mischief. The country derived no benefit from these
agreements. For the reasons which peculiarly applied to the
bill, and for the reasons to which he had peeviously adverted
at the commencement of his observations, he objected to this
bill, and proposed that it be read a third time that day three
months.

Sir E. COLEBROOKB secoadod the motion. Alter the
long experienos of the bud 30 years of the failure of these
attempts, they were again about to enter upon the same
idle and foolish attempt. He exprismed strongly his regret to
And the government ergaged in such an attempt, end, sen-
sitising that the system had been condemned by the casting
vela ad the chairmen, and that the whole question mast
come ander the consideration of the House of Commas early
next essisa, ha deprecated now entering upon this new and
idle attempt.

CM. 1110XPSON beli.ved he oonld throw some light on
NM et Os points which seemed to be considered doubtful

by the hon. member opposite (Mr. Ansley). In the Ant place
these transaction in the Persian Gulf were no novelty
whatever, for they dated from the Bth Jen., 1820, when •
treaty was concluded whir all these very chiefs by t• pre-
sent general Sir W. H. Grant. It was his (Col.
lomp-
son's) fortune to be Use negotiator of that treaty • therefore
he could speak to the spirit in which it was carried oe, and
tithe feeling with which it had been received by the Arab
chiefs, whose names he knew as mentioned in the bill, for
be knew every man of them. The tuts which occurred
were thee. : He was ordered to collect the representatives of
these chiefs or the chiefs themselves in a tent, and he had a
large cireleof Arab diplomatists. He began with great reserva-
tion and cau'ion to state to them tint there was a point
which the English government bad very much at heart, that
it was a subject of popular feeling in this country, and they
knew that on the successful termination of the war we bad
not pressed hard on them, and ho hoped they would not con-
sider there was any intention to do so azpresent ; but there
was • point which he pressed with all dEflast7, would they
make the slave trade piracy ? A smile ran through the as-
sembly, and they cried, capital, capital. There was • chief
who had been an ally in the war, and this chief was no
stranger, and they thought it the highest joke that we at
the conclusion of the war should propose a i arti-
cle of a treaty which was to put down a treaty
of somebody else of whom they were exceedingly
jealors. That powerful opponent was his Highness the
1 tnaum of Muscat. Of that treaty he had • printed copy
in hie pocket at this moment, and that treaty had this pecu-
liar fact, that it was the eeriest public document in which
the slave trade had been written down piracy. He bad
that on the authority of Mr. Roes, the American minister,
whe said that the American treaty, which contained *epees-
'dons to • similar affect, wee dated in May, sad was
first known in England, from circumstances, although ours
was so much earlier. He had not the slightest
doubt that the agreements of that treaty had
been public law ever since in the Persian Galf.
He would answer for it that there was not to be any increase
Of squadrons, because the thing had been going on quietly
ever since the Bth January, 1820. _
Lord PALMERSTON was not going to discuss with the
toe. gentleman who made the motion, or with the hon.
gentleman who seconded it, the abstract results of slavery,
which he thought were so evident. He should not discuss
his opinion of the mild character of slavery in eastern coun-
tries ; but this might be borne in mind, that • great part of
those perasns who were the subject of the slave trade on the
eastern coasts of Africa were Christians ; they were people of
Abyssinia, and might claim greater sympathy on the part of
the &lash public than negroes. The bill gave the vessels
that were on the spot for the protection of trade
powers to carry into effect the agreement entered into
wish the Denim of Muscat. He mid that this act was este.
Wishing no new principle. It was simply carrying into
effect an agreement made spontaneoualy with the Arab chiefs ;
it would feud us into no conflict with those chiefs or any
other p ewer in the Persian Gulf, and he thought that no
argument had been used by the hon. and learned gentleman
to induce the house not to pass the bill.
Mr. M. GIBSONWTs6a—ti-Oilhe noble lord whether a
better understanding was likely to be arrived at with the Em-
perer of Brazil on the subject of our attempts to suppress
the slave trade. The hon. gentleman who seconded the
motion was as much opposed to the slave trade, and thought
it as abominable • traffic as the noble lord. All that he
questioned was the policy of attempting to put down the
slave trade without reference to the opinion of the countries
which were carrying nn the slave trade. We could not expect
other countries to arrive at our opinions at any moment we
might point out. Opinion was of slow growth. The anti-
slave trade party in Brazil bad net keen at work so long in
that country as they had been in this to abolish the
slave trade. They were longer in this country agi-
tating against the slave trade than they had been en
Brazil. Why should we expect the Brazilians to be faster
than we were ? Give these different nations every time for
the formation of an opinion, and carry on a conciliatory and
rational course of policy. He should support the !nun= of
the hon. gentleman.
After a few words from Capt. Pecnet.t. and Mr. J.
°Ton si ch,
Mr. E. DENISON said that a committee had been sit-
ting for two years receiving evidence concerning the slave
trade, and that committee had made a report to the effect
that all attempts to suppress that trade by means of a naval
force must be Ineffectual. (Hear, hear.) On account of
-he indisposition of the chairman and the late period of the
session the report had not been brought specially under the
notice of the house. He (Mr Denison) had been one of the
majority on that committee, and he had come to a conclu-
sion in perfect accordance with the report. (Hear, hear.)
Having come to that conclusion, he should, if driven to a
division, vote against the present bill. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that, as his bon. friend who had
just spoken had alluded to the general question of
the means taken for the suppression of the slave
trade, he would trouble this house with a few words
on the subject. He did not consider that the passing of the
present bill would at all commit the house as to what mea-
th.y might think it necessary ultimately to adopt, nor
would the mesons urged by the committee, against the mea-
sures ter the supprevion of the African slave trade, apply to
it. He certainly agreed with his hon. friend behind him
that the evidence taken before the committee, and its report,
mutt form the subject of serious consideration fur parliament
and the government during the ensuing session. But he must
also soy when his hon. friend referred to the report of the
committee, that there were two things which would greatly
add to the difficulties with which government woulil
have to deal. The one was that the report, instead
of being unanimous, or even the opinion of the
great majority of the committee, was agreed to
by a majority I.li only one, and that one was an hon. mem-
b2r who had taken a strong previous interest in the matter,
and whose pre-formed opinions could not be shaken by soy
evidence whatever. Therefore they had only the opinion
of a balanced committee to guide them. Another e".ifficulty
would be that while the committee had come to the conclu-
sion that the present means taken for the suppression of the
elate trade were inefficient, they had suggested no eubstitu•
Lion of any means of another description. (Hear, hear.)
And this, although the object for which they were nomi-
nated was, " To consider the best means that Great Britain
could adopt (or the final extinction of the slave trade." The
present means used might be inefficient, but before they
were given up parliament should see that an efficient substi-
tute was provided. As to the ape cific bill before the house
his noble friend had fully explained its objects.

Mr. HUME reminded the house that in the formation of
committees government generally tnok care to nominate a
considerable number of their friends, if the question to be
investigated was one in which they were interested. There-
fore, when divisions were nearly equal, it showed that a
strong principle was involved.
Mr. BERNAL said that the present bill legislated for the
Persian Oulf, and had no reference whatever to the general
question of the African slave trade.
Mr. ANSTEY explained; and the gallery was cleared for a
division, but none took place. On our return we found that
the hon. and learned member hrd withdrawn his amend-
ment. The bill wee then read a third time.
On the question that the bill do pass,

_ .
Mr. ANSTEY proposed several verbal amendments,
which were severally negatived without discussion. The
hon. and learned member then proposed to insert after
" admiralty," in line 8, page 6, " Provided always, that, in
applying so much of the said act or acts es relate to the
indicia or evidences of slave trading, regard shall be had by
all such courts respectively to the general habits and cue.
toms of the said tribes, and of their respective countries,
with reference to the build and equipment of ships."

Lord PALMERSTON opposed the amendment as un-
necessary. The questions indicated would always be taken
into consideration by the judges.
After • short discussion, this amendment was also ne-
gatived.
Th bill then passed.
POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
The order of the day for the consideration of the Lords'
amendments to this bill having been read,

Lord J. RUSSELL said—Sir, before asking the house to
take into consideration the proposals which I have to snake
with regard to this important measure, and of which I have
given notice in the paper, I am desirous that they should
have the benefit of your opinion in respect to these amend-
ments which have been introduced by the Howe of Lords,
which affect the privileges of this house, and I will reserve
what I have to say as to those amendments, more especially
the omission of the first and second clauses, until after
that opinion shall have been given.
The SPEAKER (who was not very distinctly heard)
knew not bow he Gould better answer the srpeal which had
been made to him by the noble lord than by stating whet
bad been the practice of the house in reference to amend-
ments made by the House of Lords in former bills of this
description. The undoubted rule was that it was competent
for the Lords to amend bills having for their object the relief of
the poor. prortled such amendments did not affect the
amount of rates proposed to be raised, the mode of levying,
the mode of collecting, and the parties who were to levy
and to manage them. Tole was undoubtedly the rule, both
with regard to public and local and in respect to pri-
vate bills it had invariably been adhered to. But there
were some instances where in respect to public bills this rule
had not been strictly insisted upon, as in the case of the
English Poor Law Bill of 1834, the Irish PllO7 Law
Bill of 1838 the Irish Municipal bill, and lastly in the
we of the Irish Poor Law Bill of 1847. (Hear, hear.)
There could be no doubt that the alterations which
the Lords had made in the present bill did affect
the privileges of the House of Commons. The two
first clauses of the bill as sent up from the Commons
flied a maximum rate to be made in certain unions,
and in addition to that maximum fixed a certain
additional rate to be levied on the country at large.
It would be for the house to say whether it would follow
the precedent of the years te which he had alluded, and
waive its privilege on the present occasion, or whether they
would maintain their ancient and undoubted privilege'.
If they adopted the latter alternative, they must moles
that the amendments be read that day six months. (Hear.)

Lord J. RUSSELL—Having now the benefit of your
opinion as to what are the privileges of this house, and
whet course the house has adopted on former amnions of a
similar nature, I will pr iced to state my view on the ques-
tion immediately before us, and of the mode in which I
think the home should enter upon the considerati en of these
amendments. (Hear.) I cannot, air, for a moment differ
from your statement, that the °minion of the douses 1
and 2—to say nothing of the other amendments which Dave
been introduced by the House of Lords—does interfere with
the privileges of this house in the way you have so accu.
rately laid down. (Hear.) At the same time, air, you have
stated, that both as to the English poor law, the Irish
' municipal law, and the Irish poor law, the house his
on former occasions so far waivrd its privileges as to consent
to the consideration of amendments which interbred with

them. With regard to the first Irish poor law of 1838, one
of the amendments made by the Lords into that bill intro-
ducod electoral division of taxation. The effect of that
change has bean that instead of having an equal rata over
the whole union, the rate levied in different parts of that
same union varies considerably, so much so that it happens
that while in ono part of a union the poor rate is 10s. in the
pound, it is only 6d. or 10d. in the pound in another ;
thereby charging particular places and particular persons
very lightly, and imposing a greater rate of taxation on
others than this house intended they should be subject to;
(hear) and with respect to the last measure you, air, have
referred to, the poor law bill of 1847, the house will remem-
ber that the bill, as it passed the house of commons,
imposed a rate of le. 33. in the pound for the half-year, or
2.. 6d. in the pound for the year, on the electoral
division, leaving any remaining charge beyond that
to be levied equally on the who.e union. The house
of Lords omitted that clause and introduced certain o her
provisions of a totally different character. Well, sir, both
in regard to the original Irish poor law and the amended
law—this house consented to discuss the amendments so made
by the House of Lords, and consented also after consideration
to the admission of the clauses the Lords had introduced, and
to the omission of the clause the Commons had previously
inserted. (Hear, hear.) In both these cases the privileges
of the House of Commons were as clearly and positively
affected
pos.ve.l y
affected by the alterations which had been made by the
Lords as they were on the present occasion. On the mere
ground of precedent, therefore, I do not think that we
should feel onnelves bound to assert the privileges of the
house by refusing to entertain these amendments. That,
however, will be • question for the house to consider—whe-
ther it is advisable on this occasion, and with regard to these
amendments, that we should insist upon our privileges or not.
(Hear, hear.) I own, sir, it appears to me that as long as
the Lords confine themselves to the principle of introducing
amendments in a poor law with a view to better legislation
on the subject of the relief of the poor, and do
not seek to introduce new rates, or to make such
alteration as would impose new burthens on the
ratepayers I do not think it is expedient that
we should insist upon the assertion of our privileges. The
subject of legislation for the relief of the poor is one of great
importance, upon which, as I think, both houses of parlia-
ment are entitled to give an opinion. (Hear, hear.) And
I think further that legislation is likely to proceed more hat.
moniously as between the two houses if we do not assert OUT
privileges on occasions like the present then if we do. For
if we were to insist on our privilege upon every such macs-
eion, I do not see well how any progress could be made In
amending the poor law either in regard to this country or
Ireland, as scarcely any amendment of importance could be
introduced which would net in some way or other affect the
rates or the mode of levying them. For these reasons, then,
I shall pvipose to the house to consider the bill as amended
by the Lords, without any mention of our privileges to the
other house or any assertion of those privileges so far as
the present amendments are concerned. (Hear, hear.)
I believe these amendments have been introduced by the
Lords with a view to amend the law relating to the relief of
the poor, and that is • subjecton which, in my view, they ma
fairly be entitled to give an opinion, and to propose such
amendments as they may consider will conduce to the im-
provement of the law for providing and administering relief
to the poor of Ireland. Therefore, sir, 1 shall now propose
that this house do agree to the Lords' amendment for oink-
ing clauses 1 and 2.
The question basing been put,
Sir J. GRAHAM could assure the house that in
• question affecting the ancient end undoubted privi-
lege of that representative onembly, he differed with
great regret and with great diffidence from the
noble lord who had just spoken, but entertaining
as he did great doubts on the matter, considering that
the noble lord and himself had long been members of
that home., and influenced by a desire that their
ancient privileges should b 3 maintained he felt that he
should not discharge his duty if he failed, before the house
came to a final decision, to express his impressions with se-
gard to these amendments. It appeared to him, that for
the sake of discussing them satisfactorily, it would he ad-
visable to consider the coca itutional principles involved in
the amendments altogether apart from the merits of the
alterations which had been made in the bill. (Hear, hear.)
To show, however, that he was not prejudiced in that respect, '
he might state that he was one of those who had voted
against the maximum clause, and therefore that in substance
he agreed with the most impriant of the amendments
which the Lords had introduced. (Hear, hear.) But to re-
turn to the more constitutional question now fairly raised,
he thought it right to state shortly to the house the impres-
sions which weighed on his mind. To begin with that
which was the most important—they had had the dee larotion
from the chair, that were it not for precedents of compara-
tively recent date these alterations did interfere with the
ancient and undoubted privileges of the House of Commons.
Without going back to antiquated cases, or the authority of
Rennet, with regard to the unwritten law of parliament,
they had had it now clearly stated by the Speaker that the
privilege claimed by the Hons.... of Commons was this—that
the lords should not in any bill of taxation, whether general
or local, interfere to alter such bill, either in reference to the
amount to be levied, the mode of collecting, or with respect
to the persons who should collect, the persons who should
pay, or the persons who should receive. (Hear.) He did
not believe (he spoke of course subject to the corrections of
the chair) that he was in any way overstating the privilege
of the house, as up to the time mentioned by the Speaker it
had always been insisted upon. (Hear, hear.) He now
came to the period of recent relaxations—of these just ad-
mitted and the relaxations to which the noble lord re-
barred, were both dory recent date, and connected with the
question, as to the levying of poor rates. The first
case, which was one of very great importance, woe that of
the Irish Poor Law of 11138, and than incidentally
certainly there was a considerable interference on '
the pert of the House of Lords with the privillits of the
Commons, in regard to the distribution of the burden of the
rate. The area of taxation, as the bill was sent up by the
Commons, was that the rate should be levied on unions ;
but the Lords thought proper to narrow that area, and sub-
stituted, for unions, electoral divisions, and by that altera-
tion increased pro tanto the burden ea the smaller districts.
(Hear, hear.) But if he mistook not, a speziel entry was
made in the journals at the time, or, at all events, the then
Speaker (Lord Dunfermline) left • strong record of his
opinion that that was a precedent not to be brought forward
thereafter, as showina that the privilege in question had
been abandoned. In the other case, a more direct interfe-
rence on the part of the Lords had been made; but never-
theless, giving the utmost effect to these precedents, he con-
tended that the interference went infinitely further than any
one past-precedent, or than the aggregate of former prece-
dents taken together. (Hear, hear.) If, then, it was ad-
mitted that this interference was as extensive as it was, end
as he ebouid point it out to be, he must toy that in his view
the better and more consistent course would be to aban-
don the privilege directly. and for ever. (Cheers.) For
if this precedent were admitted, he did not think
that the House of Commons could ever withstand
interference on the part of the House of Lords in respect to
its privi.ers. Now, what had been done in this case ? In
the two first c'auses of the bill the Commons had sent up a
maximum rate of ss. on the union, and an accumulative rate
beyond of 2s. to be charged generally ever the whole country,
so that in no ease as the bill was sent up could a person be
compelled to pay more than 7e. in the pouted in the year.
The Lords had struck out this limitation, and had left for
limited taxation an unlimited tax without reference to
amount. The Commons said the rate/tigers should in no
case pay more than 7s. in the pound, but as the Lords had
sent down the bill there was no limit whatever to the
charge. So much for the quantum of the interf,rence. But
was that all ? The House of Commons bad, in the bill as
sent up to the other house, enacted a fresh property charge
(and here also let him remark that he had dissented from the
proposition of the House of Commons), and those who
agreed to this fresh property charge did so with the view of
alleviating the burden on the present ratepayers. The
House sit Lords had, however, struck out that clause like-
wise, and left the unlimited charge on the present ratepayers,
rejecting the proposition altogether that fresh property
should be brought into account—there, again, indirectly add-
ing to the burden of the ratepayers. But there was
another clause which had been introduced by the Lords, in
which actually the enactment of a new penalty was involved.
The Lords had inserted • clause which enacted that a tenant
being in arrest more than one year to the poor rate, should
be subject to ejectment. This was a clause of a most penal
cbaracter—(hear, heir)—notwithstanding all contracts en-
tered into, notwithstanding any agreements for leases that
might exist, the Loris had enacted a clause inflicting the
penalty of ejectment as the punishment for the nonpayment
of the rata (Hear, hear.) He was aware that the noble
lord had given notice that, with regard to this amendment,
he proposed to reject it—(hear, hear)—but they were not to
let the merits of the amendments interfere with the principle
at issue. He thought he was fairly stating the extent of the
interference of the Lords with their privileges, and in
arguing the case on principle it was necessary that the whole
extent of that iaterterence should be brought under their
notice. He had stated the extent of the interference, but
was for the house to consider how were they—if they waived
their privilege as to the poor rate—how were they to take
their stand as to other local rates—what would they say as
to the highway rate—what would they say as to the county
rate—and there was another topic, what would they say as
to the church rate ? (Hear, hear.) Might not the Lords, if
they gave way in this ease, frame an enactment as to church
rates, and send it down to the Commons ? (Hear, hear.) As
the matter now stood, in times of excitement and on quee.
tions calculated to excite angry feeling in the country if such
a mason wore brought down, the Commons would take a
preliminary objection, and say we will not enter into the
merits of it, but reject your measure on the ground of its
being an infringement of our privileges, thus avoiding all
angry discussion and all chance of collision. (Hear, hear.)
But if they waived their privilege as to the poor rate, he for
one—reserving his judgment, however, to be corrected, if
wrong, by superior information and better lights did not
see how they would be able hereafter to make a stand
founded on reason and precedent in regard to any of those
local and other rates he had mentioned. (Hear, bear.) Was
this subject new to the house ? Had not the question been
referred—in what way they could maintain their prirreges
as to local taxation—to a committee in the last session of par-
liament—upon which committee he had the honour of 'try-
ing with several members of the government. That com-
mittee investigated the subject with great care, and delibe-
rated upon it with a desire to arrive at • satisfactory conclu-
sion. Some of the arguments he had now addressed to the
house were submitted to the committee. lie believed he
mi:tht say fora!! the members that they went into that coal-
mines predisposed to come to some arrangement, and with
the view of consulting the public convenience and facilitating
the progress of public business to make • large relaxation of
their privilege', and to enable the lords to issue measures
of this kind without waiting io every ease for
their corning up from the Commons. But after
the moat careful consideration they could give to the subject,
and after consulting the highest authorities and the opinions
of the most experienced members of parliament, the opinion

of the committee was unanimous that any .05th relaxation
would be highly dangerous. (Hear, hear.) A limited re-
taxation was afterwards recommended to the house, and
formed a standiog order at the commencement of the 'eosin.
On that occasion his hon. friend the member for Oxford Uni-
versity (Sir R. Inglis) moved an amendment to that
limited standing order, based on the recommendation of the
committee, which be would now read to the house. Si R.
lulls moved that, " in order to facilitate the passing of bills
through parliament, this house will not insist upon its psi.
'lieges in respect of any bill, clauses, or intendment. which
may be brought from the House of Lords, whereby
tolls, rates, or duties are authorised, imposed, or rep.
lats." provided the same shall be assessed and levied by
leesl authorities and for local purposes, end shall not
be applied to the public service." His hon. friend recorded
i that opinion, but it being evidently opposed to the sense of
the house, he did not go to a division upon it. and it now
stood on the journals as a record that this house delihsrately
adhered to the a pinions of the committee, and was opposed
to the recommendati, n of his right hen. friend. (Hoar,
hear.) Now, he must ask the house whether they thought
this was the {Weil.e moment when, with • view to ex-
peiiency, and to prevent the possibility of needless eellision
between the two branches of the legislature—whether this
was the exact moment when it was expedient that they
should convent to any enlargement of the pow. rs of the
other house, and to tiny abandonment of the powers of the
House of Commons i (Hear, hear) Looking at the ques-
tions which were now rending, end which were likely to be
discussed, be was warned by dangers he fon saw would re-
sult, and wee disposed to take his stand on the safe and
sure ground of the ancient and undoubted privileges of the
house. (Hear.) lie saw no reason whatever for abandoning
or departing from that ground. (Hear.) Then was there
anything in respect to the amendments which had been
made by the Lords in this bill of so much importance as that
if the considerations he bed submit'ed were not well
founded and of great weight, as he believed them to be, was
there anything sa attracive in the alterations made in this
bill to induce them in a case of difficulty to depart from the
exercise cf their undoubted and ancient privilege ? (War.)
He must allude here to tome other of those amendments.
The Commons bad sent up in the bill certain clauses which
they believed were of primary importance—giving a remedy
in case of accumulated arrears against the corpus of the
estate—giving facilities for recovering the rate, and,
failing payment, to sell the estate in small por-
tions in order to pay off the arrears. All those
clauses had been struck out by the Lords, and was
the noble lord and were the government so sure et their ma-
jority in the other house that if on this occasion the commons
should waive their privilege with all the disadvantages of
that waiver they wou:d be able to give effect to their views ?
Were they sure that after all the lords might not insist on
their amendments, and so place the commons, by eneveeeling
in insisting upon them, in what he should cons:der the most
disadvantageous position of having waived their privilege,
and then losing the bill in their desire to obtain whirb they
had departed tram the safe and swe mound of standing on
their nadonbted rights. (Hear.) H. had real y r,o feeling
personally in the matter. In many of the alterations made
by the lords t e agreed ; but as he had stated in a ease of
this kind he differed from the noble lord (J. Russell) with
hesitation and doubt, for he was qnite sure the object of
both the noble lord and himself was the same—to uphold in
a manner which should be safe and reesonab'e, and with a
view to their I uture mcur:ty, the rights and privileges of that
house. (Hear, hear.) He differed with the noble lord, he
said, with doubt and hesitation; still, on a matter of such
great importance, and considering the present juncture of
affairs, when they were cslled on to discuss and decide, he
should have failed in hie duty if, before the house decided,
he bad not shortly and as clearly as he could, stated the
reasons why he wes disposed, he would not say, to resist the
noble lord's motion—but to beg him and the house earetully
to consider the subject in all its bearings b.dere they come
to a final decision. (Cheers.)
Sir G. GREY thought there could be no doubt of the
correctness of the general principle laid down by the right
hon. baronet, but without entering into the merits of the
various alterations wh'ish had been made in the bill, he rose
merely to point out an important distinction which it ap-
peared to him had been lost sight of by the right hon.
gentleman between the decisions of the committee on public
business in respect to the waiver of the ptivilegee of the
house in rioeret to local acts, and the course propmei by his
noble friend. It was proposed to the committee that in the
case of bills relating to local taxation, the house should
waive its privilege and surrender them by a direct
resolution. Ile thought the decision of the com-
mittee and the decision to which the house after-
wards came when the subject was brought before it
by the hon. baronet the member for Oxford University (Sir
R. Ingli) was a sound and a wise decision, and that it would
have hecn most unw.se and impolitic to have surrendered by
• single resolution the right they now maintained to insist on
their privileges in any case in which they thought the public
interest ri iinired it to be asserted. (Hear, hear.) But the
proposition of his noble friend did not bind the house to the
future, except so far as that it added one more to a string of
precedents in which on the.questien of p tor rate they had
not thought it necessary to insist twee their ancient privi-
lege. Ile thought the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Graham)
was mistaken when he said that the first abiwelonusent of the
privilege woe in the case of the fresh poor law of 1831. He
Lad understood the Speaker to say that the fitst abandon-
ms nt had been in the CIS* of the English poor law in 1834,
whea the late Lord Canterbury fid.d the chair of that
house—(hear. hear)—and in the Irish municipal bill he
thought the right hoe gentleman said there had been a de-
parture from the strict right of insisting on the pelt litotes of
the house, and again in the Poor Law Act of 1847. (liear,
hear.) The question was whether the house would be justi-
fied now in rejecting these amendment, by strictly insisting
upon its privilege is a case in which that suleect of rates (the
distributio-o of rater, the collection of rates, and the arrange-
meat of the area of taxation) wee ro mixed up sr i'lt
the question of a poor law either for England er Ireland
that in a bill of this kind it was impossible to exclude them
from consideration ? The subject was one which the house
should undoub:edly look to with care and caution, but he
thought at the same time that the near entry connexion of
those parei of the bill with the general question of
the am ndment of a poor law should indsce them
on that ground alone not to refuse to entertain the amend-
ments. He would not enter into the merits of those amend-
ments, but it was necessary to say this, that with regard to
the MAXIMUM rate, whatever might be said as to the other
clauses, the amendment did not propose the imposition of
any new tax. It did not propose an unlimited for a limited
rate, but left the law in this respect as it now existed.
Under these circumstances—upholding the right+ and
privile vs of the house as to church rates, highway rates, and
poor rates also, if necessary—not waiving those rights and
privileges in any case in which it might be necesJary to
maintain them, he trusted they would be allowed now to
ewer into the consideration of these amendments.

Mr. F. FRENCH was anxious that the motion of the
noble lord should be adopted, and that they ghoul,' not take
the view of the subject suggested by the right hon.
baronet.

Mr. HENLEY observed that the objection of the right
hon. baronet (Sir J. Graham) had not been answtred, but
the right hon. baronet, tie home secretary, had now
narrowed the question to a single issue, viz., should they
or should they not surrender their privilege as to Vie poor
rate ? He could conceive that every privilege which rested like
this on unbroken usage, must be lost before long if they
went on giving way, as now proposed. At any future time,
when it might be thought necessary to upset the privilege'
they would have to eater into a controversy with the Lords
as to whether it existed or not. To bim it appeared that
the mare ripen and manly course would be to surrender the
privihge by a direct resolution, as the hon. member for
Oxford (Sir It. Inglis) had proposed, than to go on this
way asserting it when it was in no danger, and giving way
the moment it waa brought into question.

I Mr. HUME said he viewed with great jealousy any sur-
render of the privileges of the house. He foresaw nothing
but collision hereafter if the privileges were surrendered. It
was at all times unpleasant to cause the upper and lower
houss to come into collision, and there was no more certtia
course of avoiding such a result than by adhering to the pri-
vileges. (Hear.)

Mr. GRATTAN said the argument of the noble lord at
the head of the government was, that the bill was such a
panacea for all the ills of Ireland, that hon. members ought
to adopt it and surrender their privileges. He (Mr. Grattan)
was in favour of retaining the privileges, and he advised the
government to abandon the present measure, and introduce
another and a better one next session.

Mr. J. O'CONN ELL thought it would be unwise to create
an additional bad precedent by giving up the privileges of
the house. He win of opinion that the right hon. baronet
the member for Ripon had put the question on it+ right
footing, and that, at such a time as the present, it would be
impolitic to waive privileges.
Mr. E. DENISON said that, although the committee
had recommended that the house should adhere to its privi-
leges on questions of local taxation, they had not gone the
length of stating that any particular inconvenience had coo-
curred from the waiving of privileges on certain subjects.
He thought these were not days when the house nerd fear
any great encroachment on its privileges upon the part of
tho ilou,e of Lords.
Sir J. GRAHAM suggested the tho house should take
the same course with respect to this bill which it had pur
sued the day before with reference to the Boroughs Relief
Bill, when the Lords' amendments were ordered to be taken
into consideration that day three months.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that the bill just
referred to by the right hon. baronet lie reference to Bir-
mingham, and that upon its provisions There had been a
perfect concurrence of opinion on the part of the two houses
of parliament.

Mr. V. SMITH thought the same course adopted by the
house with respect vs a Birmingham bill ought a fortiori to
be adolteel with reference to a measure which affected the
whole of Ireland. He expressed his thanks to the right bon.
baronet (Sir J. Graham) for having called the attention of
the h:Ave to this question. (Hear.) The right bosh
baronet's arguments were unanswered and unanswerable;
for, although precedents had been alluded to, hoe. mem-
bers must be aware that a series of precedents were often
quoted with greater force than a resolution or a rule.

Mr. LABOUOMBRE said there was a maticed difference
between the Birmingham bill and the pri sent measure.
There was no dispute as to merits of the former, and there
had been no difficulty in throwing it out upon a point of
privilege and bringing in another bill. With reference to
the present bill, it was impossible to suppose it could be
altered, rediscussed here and in the other house, and
passed in the present session of parliament.
After a few words from Mr. Broowen and Mr. SADLEI3,
Col. DUNNE said that he approved of the amendments
made by the Lords; in fact, they were the only part of the
measure worth retaining, but that he woul.l prefer the with'
drawal of the bill altogether rather than surreuder the pri-
vileges of the house.

Sir D. NORREYB proposed that ths amesdateate be
IBMs isto coasidesaties that day three maths.

Mr. MONSRLL supported the view taken by the treble
Ind at the bead of the goverassest. He timed it ki-
k the House of Lark to make say meadows%
Ball without interlock, fa some degree with
ummitieges lithe lower loose.
Lied I. RUSSELL said the quake was use of Testy
resmideration as regarded the waiving or maintaining
imier' of tee reuse. Now, be could not see that they
meld take any other course except woof these two—either to
skit that the Lords should interfere with the privileges of
Ns Common with respect so case clauses in the asses&
"ism the po or-law, or that the Cesamme Would gim sap
my chattel there heingsey legislation as the "abject ark
lees for Ireland. (Um.) He had been asked in the comae(
• msate to constder this question further, and to introduce
s bill ant nation, bat if the home were to decide that thole
umgsses were to be strictly 'maintained without say kw-
ism from them—that was to say, that the coarse they Wok
WISE sad 11147 was rem again to be followed, that these
some bed penedeate which they would not hereafter adopt,
besbeeld confider it hopeless to introduce a bill fa the kW
erica of parliament, because, if be brought in any bill, he
meld sot introduce it without clauses open to anesthetists
by the Lards,nad rot could hardly hope that if the lords made
smendsents, they would be amendments which should
set Mork* with the privileges of the Commons, (Hoar,
ban) He believed it to be almost impankie
k the Lords to touch any poor law without interfering with
No privileges of the Commas. Toe question, as he said
lake, was one of very greet importance, sad it WM MOM
mmeially of importance to those who took an Wend taper
het, sad who thougkt that the poor law of Ireland am& be
be amended. He himself was quite satisfied with the meek
peer law in Ireland, and, though he thought it capable of
emeatimmt, he did not believe that any amnia emend-
ates in ita dames was so required as to reader it accessary
he
him to bring la any bill as the subject. (Hier.)
Er J. GRAHAM said that he would take the liberty for
in somata of again alluding to the cmotitutional question
ke great Importance of which bad been admitted by the
Basle lord. He granted meet distinctly that it was very
diktat is questions of this nature to preserve the har-
monious wending of two legislative assemblies. He agreed
Nat collision we. to be avoided. But how was it to be
avoided ? He believed that relianco on old constitutional
sodas sad a strict adherence to them, would in the long
tea be the beat way to avoid it. (Hear, hear.) He de-
fined to them that if it were held expedint with
lenses to the peer-rate to abandon these maxims,
to would infit.itely rather in the neat semi, a
cf inettensent, and at its commencement, coma to a resolution
mindyint the waiver than multiply precedents of abandon-
ment. (Chine.) If they multiplied the precedents the
How of Lords would avail itself of them, and would claim
Ns right of dealing, not with poor rates only, but with all
ihst local taxation which, &tending to the statement of the
hes. member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Dispels), the other
night, alsnanted to 10,000,0001. or 12,000,0001. e Ily.
The Lords would, in fact, claim a right of interference with
all the other bramehes of local taxation. (Hear.) He was
of opinion that it was fa safer to cme to a specific sur-
ruder of the poor rate than to multiply the
precedents ; but he waa far from saying that he was
to consent even to that surrender, (Hear, beer.)EZZiv, noble Ir d was sans& ti with the paint law,
and prooo.cd these ren'utions, not in conformity with his
Owl opinion but in deference to the House of Lords, them
mold be not go with the noble lord, nor hesitate to like his
nand upon the once ut sad undoubted privileges of that house.
(Cleo r) The Speaker had told them that he constantly
bon private bills relating to the poor rates and affecting them
wry privileges hrosght under his notice, in regard to which
be fit it tient that they. ghoul lexialate on the strictest role.
Awl if in matters of muter importance that rule was inside&
es, how much more necessity wes it in a cagewhers animal
interests were at stelae that they should be able to KONA the
same mass of conduct upon chair journals. All he had
band only confirmed him the more that he ought net to
bulks is giving his support to the amendment. (Hear.)
Kr. S. ADAIR did not understand the noble lord to have
woks' la the sense attributed to him by the right has.
hermit He (Mr. Adair) as a poor law guardian ia the
meaty of Autrim, could say that the present kw worked
well is its general administration; but that thew awe
dress Lances arising which male hash legislation
kneel., although not to an silent that required
Web ea excessive amount of modifieathe necessary
se wotild amount to a new law. Ile believed with the noble
lard th-t is such a ease they might waive a little of their
re-
eegaisid right without eniangeriog it is fature. He
*toast it tag to the Irish p- opt* to do so, as the alternative
weal I be as legislation at all.
Ur. H. GRATTAN said he kw new the danger of copes.
iag their =oaths in that hawse. (A laugh.) The noble
lord sold be wee perfectly satiatied with the present pose
kne. is "'Ow se, the noble lord cat all thole thread' is
well as lk own—;latught.r)— tor he had, be Ave
maths pest, been deseribing it as utterly inetßcient. If the
soffit Ind hod held his tongue, he (Mr. Grattan) might have
Med Mk him; but after such • deliberate declaration he
weld an amen to do au. lie much preferred the advice
dike right hoe. baronet (Sir J. Graham) to the Lillipatiaa
oil of his right bow friend user him (Mr. Shell). (Load
leaghter4 The bill befure them was a fraud. The only
way to do good to Ireland was by giving the people employ,-
ant.

Lord J. RUSSELL denied having said that he was 0111•
tinly satisfied with the prraint pole law. AU ha Bald was,
that he was so far satisfied with the present poor law
that ha not think there was such an absolute weaselly
Ls east visitants as to n quire that house to.issiat spas than
by staadlia; oat its privilege.

- - .
Yr.HCMS would not enter into the merits of **bill,
bat Riposting the coostitstional question his opinion was
this, thet m they were the representatives of the nation, sad
wen bound to protect the national intense, it wee es.it for
them to yield • right which, from time immemorial, was
onetitutiouslly weed in the House of Commas. say
the right of taxation. The Hoses of Lords might yield,
because they acted fcr themselves, but tin/ (the HOUND of
Commove) had no right to give up a priv&go whisk they
held from the people, and which had been handed down to
them by SUCC4SIIIII georratione He quite concurred with
the right hue. baronet (Sir J. Graham). that it would be
nisch &Ater to some to • resolution to give up their pri•
viltge to • certain point, bet in thdr present position be
did sot see that they were justified in parting with • coati-
tstiosal right which they held from the people at large.
tprn that ground, and without reference to the merits of
the bill itself, he should vote for the amendment.

Sir L. O'BRIEN looked upon the bill as consisting of
two parts. In one respect it was a money bill, but it also
ceetaingd a great ninny regulati.un for improving the
workirg of the bill. The bill was not therefore, strictly
rpcskiag. a mousy hill, and he thought the House of Lords
had a fair right to amend it. He must, in that 'kW of it,
vote against the amendment.

Sir 11. BARRON' said that if the principle of the hon.
member fur Montrose were to be carried out, that bona
&add not, upon any measure of local taxation, go through
tle mockery of rending it to the House of Leeds. Let that
be the understood principle of the constitution if they were
to act as that hon. member required. (Hsu, bar.) He
should cote against the amendment.

Sir J. WiLMSLEY thanked the right how. baronet,
the member for Ripon, for the opinions he had expressed
as this very important question. It had been stated that
the two houses could Lot work harmoniously sakes the
home of commons gave way amen this occasion. But they
had obesity been favoured with strong reasons for not
Riving way, and if they were obliged to do so he was satisfied
that the opinion of the people out of doors would be this,
that lithe two houses could not work kareacetiously, one of
them mutt be refernial, and that one was the House of
Lords. He trusted, however, that this house would never
yiild one iota of it. privilege of keeping a just and a strict
control over the taxation of the country.

Sir J. YOUNG said it wu neutearito proceed cautiously,
ea the Hume of Lords had, during the last half century, fre-
quently infringed upon the privilege of that house. He
thought the amendments made by the Lords wen good, bat
that was not the question—the question was, whether by
yielding on this occasion they would endanger their prin.
lege. Now, as the Howe of Lords were, in his opinion,
such bettor qualified to deal with this question by their posi•
!ion a large landed pr •prieton,aad as the line of dentate ition
between local and general taxation was well defined, be saw
no danger of the power that house exercised over the general
taxation of the country, being infringed upon by yielding on
this occasion to the upper house.

Mr. HOUSMAN said the question wee not whether they
ought now to give way, or ought always to give way to the
House of Lords. But the question wee whether on this
occasion the advantage to be Rained was wee* the price they
paid for it. ( Hear, hear.) The prepaid el the amble lord
and the speech with which be accompaMei it seemed to him
the only thine wanting to complete the tell measure of ab-
surdity in their legislation on the bleb peer law. Five
months ago they commenced their labours under the int-
prersion that the law was most defective, and required
amendment. A committee was appointed, frequent debate',
took place, and now when the measure was completed it
appeared that it was not a material question in the seam .
non of the government. His objection to what they were
asked to do was this, that the principle, the policy, and
the purpose of the bill had been taken from it by the Lords'
amendments, end ttiat it was no sore like the original bill
than the noble lord would be like a Prime Minister it he
went into that house without his head and feet. (A laugh.)
He concurred with the right hon. baronet that the present was
an Ir:elision an wilds they ought to stud upon their privileges.
Any man who looked to the questions which ware likely to
arise, and that Web* cause a difference between the two
homer, would at saes say that this was net a time when that
hoses ought to give up any of their rights or privileges.
(Rear, hear.)

The bases am divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
}'or the amendment
The Were then adjourned tin a quarter past six o'clock.
The Sraautu resumed the chair at a quarter past six
o'clock.

POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
L rd J. RUSSELL said that the bane having agreed to
to into the armadosents en this bill, he had now to propose
to them to ghee to the Laeds' amendatenu, omitting glasses
I ar.cl 2. He did not intend, having in the previous part of
the session h. quietly debated the question of a maximum,
to st ate the reasons on which the proposed maximum yea
tmode.l. file opinion was that a maximum proposed by
law wopl.l he favourable to Intirradit hat them was great al-
tni m. on the enbjoet in the boom, the majority teeing at 0611
time f,r, and at another against., the proposal of the
internment. When the hill went to the other house of per.
Lament, they struck out the tint sail snood clause ; ho would
not anti.t oc thou!, eauns, and therefore moved to ogres to
the amendavrots, omitting clams 1 sad 2 al Cm-
mune bill.

The OVORILAN MAHON said that he had sow to bring
forward a matter width bees iydadp ma the point now
before** boom. Thoiesmets tbe, poor and
the meant of peollej
_Wier whist his country
laboured. Hrlll/=agan the doedigment of the 111101M•11
of his estuary ea imilferemeldo is the Md. He was bold
=thto say Wit lie awammosmeat he woe about to make
be prodmaho_ ea/mosa set only to his country, bat
to Naglawl sad Neetkai elm, mad he had taken this oppor-
tunity of briening It forward, that through the meant of the
hoses the public at large might inoome sequainted with one
at the most important discoveries relative to the
development of the MAIMS of Ireland that had over
taken place, and it would require forbearance on the part of
nuay who were seeessarily inclined to look with an air of
incredulity on a matter so a•tounding. He had the letter of a
a most detiniaisbed chemist, residing in flotch-creacent,
B ed ford. aquae, .-
1 beg to acquaint you that a discovery has been made in Ireland
whthis will materially enhance the value of landed property in that
country. It asthma in the aptitude of its millions of prat acres to
produce at trilling menet 'little more than that of manual labour)
oil napths, napthaline, piratic, mutate of ammonia, viecomar, pit.
that, candles, pitch, tar, sad other principles, by a new process of
dithWatima. Thee 'meal materials were submitted to me some
mouths age by Mr. Owen, and from what I have seen an I testi d, I
have no hesitation In pronouncing it one of the greatest discoveries
of the age, tad cos which will become a source of unbounded wealth.
I eon easily let you have a list of the several products derivable from
the &vitiation ; and you nave my permission to give this 0.0 t in,.
portent matter whatever publicity a
liolirWpknee. Some of the products
have been mean by, I believe, the s et Lere-downe and others
here, and I know the Irish court are eady eegnissat of the dis-
eovery.—Joas Warms, Y.D.

It amazed by the testimony of Mr. Hodges, profaner of
chemistry In Belfast, and of an eminent chemist in Paris,
who was also consulted, that Irish peat was capable of pro-
ducing oil of a superior quality—ail equal to that of the sper-
m •cetl, which was now used in manufactures to such se
extent, and which. at present cost from 901. to 9.52. a ton.
The manufacturers throughout England would hail it as •
boon, that henceforth they could have oil of es great purity
as that of spermaceti for • sum of 40/. per ton, teemed o
Mi. He staked his honour that there was no foreign mate-
rial in the candle. We owed this to • man who was wholly
unknown to the nation ; and with regard to his character,
he knew be should have the seedy assurance of the noble
lord the member of Bath, who had been acquainted with him
for some time. Perhaps the noble lord would state what he
knew with regard to the extent of the invention.
Lrd ASHLEY bore his testimony to the character and
'Pretensions of the person alluded to. An appeal having been
made to him he was unwilling that the name of the gentle-
man should be mentioned in the homes without bearing his
testimony that a more discreet, ether, generous, and reli-
gious man, it had never been his good artune to meet. This
gentleman had property anti • great business; he had
foie/A his friendship for three years, and a pets in more
capable of carrying on en operation of this kind he had
never known. He had re quested Mr. Owen to call on him
this morning, that he might take down in writing what he
had frequently heard from his lips in the coarse of
conversation, and he would give the house the
result of this gentleman's statement. No doubt
it might appear almost incredible, but let him press upon the
house that it was not a matter of theory, it was the result of
experiment. These things had been in operation mere than
12 months Lthe gentleman had invested considerable capital
and received considerable returns; and the great value of
this was that he asked nothing of the country—ell that he
did was to show that there was a profitable 'nye. tment of
money, and to invite espital for the cultivasion of the soil
and the employment of the people. This gentleman said
that with 100 tons of peat the labour of converting it would
east about 81. These 100 tone of peat contained
Carbonate of Ammonia, 26021135, vale/ £32 10 0
Soda, 21181 be r,32 10 0
Vinegar, MO gallons. IP 7 10 0
Naphtha, 30 gallows,. " 7 10 0
Candles, 00010.
That was to say, they contained of tie substance which
was equal and superior to epermaceti for every 100 tone—
camphine oil, 700ge ; common oil, 800 gals. ; gas of the value
of 81. ; ashes, 11. 13e. 4d.—and th, more, upon even 100 tons
of rat, urn which 201. had been expeneed in labour, the
total reeeipts were 911 18s. Bd. That was what he held
forth as the result of his operations. When the peat was
cleared away, the mil beneath was exceedingly fertile,
beyond all description, become it was saturated with ammo-
nia. Therefore, net only would the country be benefited by
this process, but the soil Itself would be broneht into culti-
vation. If one half of what he stated was true, everybody
would allow that something very great was about to be un-
dertaken ; and, if the house bore in mind that this was the
result of experiment, they would see that 100.000 acres of
Irish peat were far better than the whole region of California.
Sir D. NORRETS thought thee the bill, as the noble lord
wished them to receive it, contained scarcely one principle
worth having.
Mr. P. SCROPE said that if the statement turned out to
be true, he should regret that the proposition for taking pos-
eerie& of the waste lands of Ireland was not carried Into
effort, for they might have discovered means at once to have
paid off the natio.tal debt. Ile must protest against the
session being allowed to close without the adoption of any
11110•111/01 of an ameliorative character for the west ef
Ireland.
Col. DUNNE was much disappointed that government
should have abandoned the maximum clause eta it had re-
ceived the support of nearly all the Irish members.
Mr. GRATTAN said thatthe poor I or was now generslly
admitted to have been a failure. Many remedies were pro-
posed for the state of Ireland. One man proposed improved
cultivation: but what encouragement was there for the culti-
vation of the land while the landlords were absentees, and
the tenants could get nothing hut ruinous prices for their
purchase 2 He believed, and English gentlemen would soon
tied out, that the only remedy for the evils of Ireland was a
domestic legislature. As to emigration much as it was ad-
mired, it was a preposterous proposition. Any statesman
worthy of the name would laugh at the idea that the best
way to reeve ace untry was to export its labouring popula-
tion. His opinion of the maximum clause was, that tiara
was no sincerity in it, and the noble lord had set
its proper value on it by permitting its rejection.
Mr. FRENCH felt bound to thank the Lords for the
amendments they had made in the bill. They had acted in
accordance with the wishes of the Irish members, and the
interest' of the people.
The Lords amendments up to clause 10 were trend to.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the Lords' amendment,
omitting Clause 10, be agreed to. The house having ac-
ceded to the omission of the maximum clause, the retention
• of this clause would, in his opinion, be inconsistent.
Sir H. W. BARRON opposed the omission of the clause.
Mr. SADLEIR hoped the hon. baronet would not divide
against the noble lords motion.
The notion was then agreed to.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved to agree to the Lords' amend-
ments, omitting clause 10, and to insert clause 10 of Lords'
bill, omitting the word " resident."
Mr. STAFFORD moved the ommision of the clans. al-
together.
Mr. SADLEIR said that the officer wanted in Ireland
was a man to supervise the workhouses.
Mr. AGLIONBY wished to know what the opinions of
the Irish members were t (A laugh.) He thought that
amidst the variety of opinions expressed by the Irish mem-
bers, the best plan to pursue was to reject the clause.
Some conversation ensued, and the home divided—
For the clams
Against it
The clause was therefore agreed to.
Sir G. GREY moved that clauses 18, 17, 18, and 19,
omitted by the Lords, be re-inserted in the bill,
After • dimension the house divided, when there ap-
, For the motion Bl
Against it 22-59
The Lords' amendment, inserting clause 18 of Lords' bill;
the Lords' amendment, inserting clause 19 of Lords' bill,
with an amenliment, omitting all the words after " Rate-
book" in line 29, page 13, were agreed to.
The Lords' amendments inserting clauses 20, 21,23 (with
an amendment substituting the word', " one thy" for " two
days"), 24, 25, of the Lords' bill were agreed to.
The Lends' amendment, inserting clause 22, was rejected.
Upon the motion to disagree to the Lords' amendment in-
serting Clause 27 of Lords' Bill, the effect of which was to
enable persons who had lent money for emigration purposes
to • union to set off their debt against the rate due from
these,
Mr. AOLIONRY and several other members supported the
Lords' amendment.

The amendment, however, was rejected.
The Lords' amendment inserting Clause 29 of Lord.' Bill
was agreed to.
Oa the motion to agree to so mach of the Lords' amend-
meet inserting Clause 30 of Lord•' Bill as is contained to the
proviso commencing line 10 of page 18, and ending line 31
of the same page, and to disagree to the rest of the clause,
The house divided.

For the motion
Against it
Motion agreed to.
On the motion to disagree to Lords' Amendment', 31
and 32,
The house divided.
For the widen lO3
Against it
Motion agreed to.
The Lords' Amendment, inserting clause 33, was then
agreed to, and the house adjourned at 11 o'clock.

DISASTROUS BALLOON ASCENT AT CARAT.—
Com:melee Inuonor.—Cardiff, Thunday.—By Mr. Uphill,
at Kewstoek, in Somerset, en Tuesda , on the body of a
man supposed to be that of Mr. IZi Green, the aeronaut,
who lost his life in attempting to croft the Bristol Channel,
in a balloon, from this town. The body war washed
sabot° on the previous Friday at Band Bay, about fotir
miles from Weston Bum Mare, and its appearance indicated
that it had been is the water nine or ten days ; decompo-
sition in -fact was so great, that identity by the features
was impossible. The body had on neither coat, necker-
chief, or shoes. Mr. Gill, the churchwarden, it appeared,
saw on the eunieg of the 9th instant a balloon coming
across the Channel, and after watching It some time,
raw It, as he supposed, making a rapid descent.
Imagining that it would fall on the declivity of the
other side of the sand-bill, about three-quarters of a
mile from his house, he called a couple of lads to run with
him in order to render any &mildews she aeronauts might
require. Before they leached the summit of the hill the
balloon again rose about a mile and a quarter seaward, end
soon obtained a considerable altitude, traveling in the dire*.
Lion of Clevedon. Mr. Gill further observed, that such is
the set of tide running down the Cleassel between where he
imagines the halloos dipped and Bud-hill, that the best
swimmer in the world mild not have reached the shore
along the beach. The jury returned a verdict of " Found
drowsed."

Vtt rt 00•