The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-25 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

There was a ballot this afternoon for the Carlow Elec-
tion, which took place at three o'clock, as usual ; but the
House was not opened up to the hour of our going to Press.

The reason of the closed doors before the ballot was
gone into, we understand was, that a claim that made
by the Sheriff of Carlow as to his right (his conduct being
impugned) to a strike in the ballot. The discussion was
very animated, and at seven o'clock was still going on.

BRIGHTON RAILWAYS.—Mr. Stephenson's Bill
was this day thrown out, in Committee, by a majority of 10.

SPIRIT OF T 1-1 E PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We understand that at the Meeting yesterday at
Apsley House, after a stormy discussion, it was finally
resolved that the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill
should be read a second time ; and that upon a ques-
tion being put to the Duke of Wellington as to what
he intended to do in the Committee, his Grace an-
swered drily, it would be soon enough to consider that
when the time arrived. Last year the more moderate
part of the Tories gave way to the Ultras. It remains
to be seen whether the more violent or the more mode-
rate men are this year to be in the ascendant. Certain
it is that the Ultras in both Houses are quite furious.
They make no secret of their dissatisfaction with the
others.—Morning Chronicle.,

The Conservative Peers, it is understood, will allow
the Irish Municipal Bill to pass a second reading, and
will postpone their final decision upon it until they
shall see in what complexion the Irish Tithe question
shall be brought before them. A pretty broad intima-
tion is said to have b€en given, that if their Lordships
will consent to the passing of the Irish Municipal Bill
little more will be said by his Majesty's Ministers
about the appropriation clause. The determination of
the Conservative Nobles has been formed, we doubt
not, upon the soundest consideration, and from the
purest motive. Nevertheless, for ourselves, we regret
its adoption. 'We are of opinion to-day, as yester-
day, that the Irish Municipal Bill, in its present form,
is inapplicable to Ireland in her present state ; and
although we trust that a fair measure for the com-

mu!at;on of tithe, stripped of the iniquitous appro-
priation clause, would produce a great and rapid
change in the condition of our Irish fellow-subjects, we
are not so sanguine as to hope that the change could
be instantaneous. Many evils, amongst which the un-
fortunate state of the tithe question undoubtedly holds
a prominent place, have contributed to make Ireland
what she is. Many remedies, among which a legis-
lative enactment on the Tithe question will, of course,
be most effectual, must co-operate in rendering Ireland
what we desire to see her. But to imagine that all
the reasons which prevented the House of Lords from
passing the Corporation Bill last year are to be ob-
viated by the enactment of a Tithe Commutation Act—
to suppose that the little words, " Le Roi le vent," are
in a moment to transmtue sedition into loyalty, fraud
into honesty, falsehood into truth--this would, indeed,
be to dream again our dreams of fairy land, and
to invest the tardy powers of legislation with the
marvellous prerogatives of the lamp or the ring.
However, it is premature to express a doubt as to
th• policy of the Lords, until we shall be ►nore fully in-
structed of the course their policy will take. We do
not yet know under what circumstances, and with
what modifications they may be disposed to accept Mr.
O'Connell's Bill ; and we can only say that we can
conceive no circumstances which should recommend it
to our eyes, and no modifications which should recon-
cile it to our judgment. With respect to the other
parties to the compact which is believed to have been
made, we are better able at once to pronounce our
opinion. If Lord John Russell, having induced the
House of Commons to vote that no Tithe Bill can be
satisfactory to Ireland except with an appropriation
clause, shall induce the same House of Commons to
pass a Tithe Bill without an appropriation clause,
and if, having accomplished his leap into office by
affirming the abstract resolution, he shall avert his
tumble out of office by abandoning the abstract reso-
lution, in what dictionary shall we seek words to ex-
. press the utter scorn and pity with which England,
from one sea to the other, will regard his avowed reck-
lessness of principle, and his detected greediness of
office ?—Morning Post.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF C03111101V3, APRIL 24.
CANADA.

The CHAIRMAN having put the question,
Mr. HUME said that he would be glad to hear an
answer to the statement of his Honourable Friend the
Member for Bath, who had observed that he did not think
the motion before House was understood by any Hon.Mem-
her. For himself he would say that he did not understand it.
He felt himself bound therefore to complain that such im-
portant questions as the Church-rates and other matters had
been put off, in order to afford an opportunity of bringing
forward resolutions which he world venture to say that not
one man of twenty in that House understood.—( Hear.)
He considered the discussion on these resolutions
was wasting the time of the House.—(Hear, hear.)
He (Mr. Hume) had given much time and attention to the
subject, and professed not to understand these resolutions
fully. It required much more time and research than the
House had devoted to the subject, and he feared to very
little purpose, as the present was the, fifth day that had
been wasted upon the subject. It was admitted by the Noble
Lord himself that this w.ls a matter which the
local legislature should itself take up, and he would there-
fore suggest to them the propriety of withdrawing it for the
present. He complained of the manner in which the busi•
ness was conducted in the Colonial-office. There could
not be a worse conducted office, and their policy was equally
bad.—( Hear, hear.) He was only surprised to see so many
liberal men dragged through the dirt in supporting these re-
solutions. The support of the Hon. Members opposite did
not surprise him, as it was their principle to advocate
every illiberal measure. The Colonial Minister was, in his
opinion, incapable of discharging the duties of his office, and
was merely following the dictates of Tory advisers. He
was satiseed these resolutions would he the Commence-
ment of hostilities between that country and Caneda
and the Noble Lord might find himself mistaken
if he was impressed with the ides that the people of
Canada would not fight. He believed the Colonial
Goverement knew nothing of the real sentiments of
the people ot. Canada, and he deplored exceedingly
that the Noble Lord slnaild have been so ill-advised
as to come down to the House with the proposal of such a
system of coercion.—( Hear, hear )
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not pretend to possess
more knowledge upon the subject of tenures than he did
upon fines and recoveries ; but still upon the information he
had received from learned persons, he believed he had good
grounds for the vote he gave on the Fines and Recoveries Bill,
as he also had for the vote he should give on the question
bjere the House. He only wanted the great principle
established—the details he was quite willing to leave to
the wisdom of the Provincial Parliament.

Mr. ROEBUCK said the Noble Lord was quite right
in what he had stated with respect to the Fines and
Recoveries Bill. There had been an inquiry entered int o
there by gentlemen learned in the law. But what in-
quiry had been institnted in this case ? Who were
the Commissioners ? Were any of them learned in
the law ? One of them was a country gentleman (Lord
Gosford)—wes he likely to be learned in the law of
tenure in Canada ? Another was an officer of Engineere,
and the other one an ludisn Jude—not one of whom could
he expected to know mere of the laws of Canada than the
Noble Lord himself. All he (Mr. It ) asked of the Noble
Lord was, that he should put the law into the same
state as he found Hear, bear, hear.) Such was
the wish of the Canadian people, and if they did not find
it to work well, then they would themselves appoint
Commissioners learned in their law ; but the Noble Lora
said no, and called upon the House of Commons to put its
faith upo❑ the report of a country Gentleman, an officer of
Engineers, and en Indian Judge.
Mr. HU ME said that notwithstanding the statements
of the Noble Lord, he should vote to please the people of
Canada, and not the Colonial Office.
Mr. G. KNIGHT defended the resolution.

Mr. ROBINSON thought the Hon. Member for Bath
wished to have it understood that nobody but himself was
acquainted with the Canadian law.--(Cheers.) The Hon.
and Learned Member could not be considered an uninte-
rested advocate of this question, as he was avowedly the
paid agent of the people of Canada.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member had said that it was impossible to know
any thing about these resolutions without being acquainted
with the French law of tenure. He (Mr. Robinson)
would take leave to deny that proposition. \Vhen
Canada became annexed to the British Crown it was
arranged that the French tenure should not be disturbed
i❑ the cases of property previously acquired ; but that the
English settlers should, in all property acquired either
by purchase or any other means, have the protection of
the British laws. He could see no objection to such an
arrangement, and he should, therefore, give his support to
the present resolution.

Mr. GROTE did not think the Hon. Member for Wor-
cester had read the resolution, or he would not have so
entirely mis-stated it. The resolution did not provide
whether the commutation of tenure should be compulsory
or voluntary, and there was a vast difference between the
two modes. All the inhabitants, British as well as French,
concurred in their dislike of primogeniture and alienations.
After a few words from Sir G. Grey, Mr. Buller, and
Mr. Robinson, in explanation, the House divided

, .
For the original resolution
For the amendment
Majority against the amendment 59
_ _ _

Tice eighth resolution having been put from the Chair,
Mr. WASON rose, and proposed the following resolu-
tion ;—" That the House of Assembly in Lower Canada,
by withholding the supplies necessary for carrying on the
Government, have adopted the only constitutional means
of obtaining a remedy for their complaints, the reasonable-
ness of which this House has recognized, by affirming the
4th and sth resolutions; and it is therefore expedient to
await the result of the plan about to be proposed by his
Majesty's Government for redressing the grievances com-
plained of by the Canadian Parliament."—There were two
reasons which induced him to propose this amendment.
The first was, that he had hitherto voted with Ministers
in all the divisions which took place upon the Canadian
question ; and the second, because this resolution, as it ap-
peared to him, contained so many elements of viciousness the
House could not, in consistency, vote for it ; and at the same
time, maintain constitutional principles. The other resolu-
tions had been so altered, that in their present shape, they
had become conciliatory, for they agreed that the griev-
ances complained of by the Canadians were just. He could
not, therefore, approve of the language of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman the Member for Bath, who said the
whole proceedings upon this subject were calculated only
to produce excitement. He reminded him of the boy in
the fable, who was in the habit of crying out wolf when
there was no real danger. It was in this eighth resolution
the real danger lay. If the resolution were sent to the
Canadas, with the exception of the one under considera-
tion, he (Mr. Wason) was of opinion that it would take
the case of the suffering officials into consideration, and
thus the contention which existed between the colony and
the mother country would be amicably terminated. He
hoped, however, that, under any circumstances, the House
would not agree to pass such an unjustifiable resolution.
If the Government, however, persisted in endeavouring to
pass it he (Mr. Wason) should consider it his duty to take
every step which ingenuity suggested to impede its course

through Parliament. There was no excuse for it, except
that a score of official- persons were in distress.
Mr. ROEBUCK interrupted the Hon. Member to move
that the House be counted.

• 'Fho Gallery was accordingly cleared for that purpose.
On our re-admission, -
Mr. WASON trusted Englend, which voted 20 millions
for the sake of humanity, would not now grudge the 120th
part of that sum for the sake of preserving entire the li-
berty and constitutional rights of their fellow-subjects.
Sir G. GREY concurred with the Hon. Gentleman as to
the desirableness of an amicable settlement of the subject
at issue betweon Canada and the mother country ; but then
he considered the Government having done all that was
desirable to effect it, as the instructions to the Commissioners
would show, they had now no alternative but the course
they had taken. The official persons had been now three
years without receiving a shilling of their salaries ; but it
was four years since they had received anything through
the House of Assembly. The refusal of that body was
not because these officers were not entitled to their salaries,
nor because their functions were unnecessary—no such
cause was alleged ; but it was simply because the House of
Assembly deemed it the best means they could employ to
extort compliance with their demands from the British Le-
gislature that it was adopted. The course proposed by
the Hon. Gentleman was highly objectionable. That
adopted by the Government was now open. It was, be-
sides, the fair and manly way to deal with the subject.
Under these circumstances he felt it to be his duty to op-
pose the amendment.
Major BEAUCLERK was understood to support the
amendment.

Mr. G. KNIGHT thought that after the House had
affirmed the first resolution they could not do otherwise
than give their assent to this.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that for this eighth resolution
he could not consent to vote. He thought it unjust—he
thought it a robbery ; he felt that it would be a tyranny.
It was admitted not to be founded on principle, for it was
put on the plea of necessity—ever the tyrant's plea—the
plea that had been used to deprive the people of Ireland of
their equality of rights. What was the position in which
the Government placed themselves with respect to this ques-
tion ? Why, they complained that there was a contest be-
tween the two countries, yet they refused the Canadians an
elective Legislative Council, which, it was declared, would
restore the colony to harmony. It was said that there was
no English party there. Why, it was surely an English
party that prevented the Canadas from joining the United
States. The conduct of the British Legislature to Canada
would, if these resolutions passed, be a mockery and an in-
sult. It was absurd to talk of the popular party in Ca-
nada being a faction. They were the representatives of
the Canadian people, British born as well as French born,
and they were an overwhelming majority of the whole
people. They ought first to have tried the experiment of
an elective Legislative Council. The question was now
narrowed to this issue—would they try that experiment ?
No, they preferred to set the Canadians at defiance. The
power to do so they at present had ; how long they would
retain it he (Mr. O'Connell) did not know. But of this
he was sure, that no man born in that country could have
a due regard for it, if he did not continue to struggle until
it should be impossible for any other country to plunder it.
Mr. ROEBUCK denied that there was a dispute be-
tweon this country and Lower Canada. There certainly
was, and there had long been, a dispute between Lower
Canada and the Colonial Office.—(Hear.) They now came
down to that House to obtain an authority to pay the
Government officers in spite of the Legislative Assembly.
There was a contradiction between the hopes of the Noble
Lord and the assertions of the Hon. Secretary. He (Mr.
Roebuck) complained that the present conduct of the Im-
perial Legislature was a breach of faith—a violation of one
of their own acts.—(Hear.) To have been consistent, the
Government ought to have preceded these resolutions with
a declaration that they had reaped no knowledge or wisdom
from their past experience of the result of the former op-
pression of this country towards the North American colo-
nies—that they had feared no consequences from a repeti-
tion of such acts towards other colonies—and that they
were now prepared to risk the Canadas also, as their prede-
cessors had risked the North American provinces.—
(Cheers.) The Noble Lord was now taking the first step
taken by his predecessor, Lord North, when he lost the
North American provinces. The House of Commons were
about to commit a breach of faith, and on his head would
be all the consequences of such an act.
Mr. ROBINSON did not see how, after affirming the
former resolut:ons, the House could now hesitate to pass
this. It could not be said that this was a dispute be-
tween. his Majesty's Government and the House of As-
sembly. The House of Commons had, by a large majority,
sanctioned the resolutions of his Majesty's Ministers. This,
therefore, was nosy a dispute between the House of Com-
mons and the House of Assemblv.—(Hear, hear.) The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had talked of an appeal to
arms. How deeply should hA (Mr. Robinson) regret to
see one class of his Majesty's subjects pitted against ano-
ther, but he would tell him that the people of Upper
Canada would not t;;ke part against their English brethren
in such a contest.—( Hear, hear.)
MesFrs. Roebuck, Wason, and Robinssn explained.

Mr. G. BULLER thought it was the duty of the Go-
vernment to have sent those resolutions to the colony, in
order to ascertain the opinion of the colonists with respect
to them before they called on the. House to assent to them.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took
place, and on our return
Mr. HUME was understood to oppose the passing of
the resolution, and to defend the conduct of the Canadians.
For his own part, he said that if he were an inhabitant of
Lower Canada he shouhi watch the opportunity for rebel-
ling- aglinst the mother country, contending that allegiance
ought not to be expected where there was not good go-
vernment. _

.....
Mr. EW ART strongly deprecated the present proceed-
ings, being convieeed they were unjust and impolitic.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the subject had been fully dis-
cussed on the introduction of the resolutions, and as no-
thing new had been advanced he thought it useleA to
argue it.
The gallery was again cleared, when there appeared—
Ayes
Noes
Majority for the Resolution B4
On the ninth Resolution being put,
Mr. ROEBUCK moved an amendment, which was ne-
gatived without a division.
Lord STANLEY wished particularly to have it stated
whether the Crown still maintained its whole control over
the waste lands, and still possessed the power of managing
and administering its revenues, and whether the lands were
to be granted for any period in a way different to the grant-
ing of the Civil List ?
Sir G. GREY said that the net proceeds only would he
surrendered to the House of Assembly, and the adminis-
tration of the waste lands was reserved to the Crown. A
full account of all expenditures would be laid before the
House of Assembly ; but the net proceeds only would be
placed at its disposal.
After a few words from Mr. HUME and Mr. ROE-
BUCK, the Resolution was agreed to.
Resolution 10 was then put from the Chair.
In reply to a question from Mr. HUME,
Sir G. GREY was not aware what was the nature of
the answer given by the United States to a petition from
the people of Upper Canada for facilities to a more effec-
tive commercial communication through the Northern
States of the Union—the State of New York particularly.
Sir R. PEEL wished to know what position we were in
at present in regard to the United States, respecting the
north-east frontier ; and whether any progress had been
made in the negotiations pending on the subject ?

Lord PALMERSTON said that there were repeated
communications between the Governments of both coun-
tries, each of which he believed was animated with the de-
sire to do justice; but the United States, he was bound to
say, had great difficulties to contend with, because the
general Government was limited in its operation on that
point by the independent action of the Local Government
of the State of Maine. There had been an extensive cor-
respondence between the Ministers of both countries on
the subject, which was published by order of Congress, but
he (Lord Palmerston) was sorry to say that it had not as
yet led to any prospect of. an immediate arrangement.
Sir R. PEEL wished to know whether the State of
Maine was in the occupation of any part of the disputed
territory ?
Lord PALMERSTON said the whole of the disputed
territory was in the occupation of Great Britain at pre-
sent, but with the distinct understanding that no right of
sovereignty was to be exercised by any party until the ques-
tion was finally settled.
Sir•R. PEEL—The land must be occupied by one party
or the other. Is it by British subjects or American citizens.?
Lord PALMERSTON—The greater portion of it is
occupied with forests, which it is agreed that no party shall
cut until the question of boundary is settled. He had no
objection whatever to lay on the table any papers which
related to the subject, though it was not usual to do so
while negotiations were pending.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that the Noble Lord appeared to
be .utterly ignorant of what every one else besides himself
knew. There were a large number of people, principally
citizens of the United States, cutting clown timber and set-
tling on the disputed territory. It was a refuge liar all
rogues and vagabonds on both sides of the line, and the
sooner it was placed under one Government or the other
the better.
In reply to a question from Lord STANLEY,
Sir G. GREY said that the Joint Committee were to
have the power of proposing laws to the Legislature for
the erection of a Court to try impeachments and appeals,
for the revision of the monetary system, for the regulation

of the internal communication by railroads, canals, &C-s'
and for several other matters repeated in the resolution.
Lord STANLEY would not oppose the Resolution ;
but he wished it to be distinctly understood that he did not
plede himself to the details of the Bill to be founded on
the series. be
The Resolution was then agreed to, and ordered to
reported to-morrow.
Mr. HUME hoped the House would permit the jteso4
lutions to be printed in the votes.
The SPEAKER said a few words, which were inaudible
in the gallery, and the matter then dropped.

FORGERY.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved the second reading of fil'e
Forgery Bill.
Mr. ROEBUCK objected to the separation of the
trte..
form of the criminal law into so many Bills. He tb°u'hl'
it would be more workmanlike of the Noble to consolidate
them Lord all
J intoRUS one Bill.
. SELL was understood to say that the'
present measures were to be but temporary, until the Con!:
missioners had concluded their Report on the whole eri
minol code.
Mr. HAWES trusted that, contemporaneously vgi,tho
the Bills before the House, the Government would a%
produce one haring reference to an improved state of pris°
discipline.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said his intention was, at Pre
sent, particularly directed to the improvement of prisno
discipline ; and that he expected soon to have .R 00,1.4
from, at least, two of the inspectors appointed for tlote
purpose, by which he should he enabled to proceed in t
matter.
Mr. EWART said the present system of prisoa
line was most monstrous. It was his intention to onve
further extension of the mitigation of capital punishrnen.t
and he would do so on the Bill under discussion when
went into Committee.
After a few words from Lord J. RUSSELL and Sr.
WILKS—
Sir R. PEEL was not aware that the Bills which the
Noble Lord had charge of would have been brought on
e
that night, and he believed the greater part of the 11°,133,
was equally unprepared for the discussion of them. In
present state of the criminal legislation of this country I
was necessary to deal vita it effectir ely,to hare a cot:Weill
sive view of the nature and effects of secondary Pw.-ib,
meets. The speech of the Noble Lord in introducing -of
Bills in question, was condemnatory of the punishment of
death as an effective preventive of crime ; but it was no,
more satisfactory in respect to the secondary punistint.
For instance, he said that transportation was not an e'"

tive punishment.
Lord J. RUSSELL—At present— for
Sir R. PEEL—He also said that imprisonment
any period,was equally so. The Noble Lord's spec' 01 i
to the inevitable conclusion that although the ptinishe':t
of death was unsatisfactory for the purpose for vrblclib•
was intended, the punishments of transportation end %e?
prisonment were equally so. What, then, was to be 6°':,o.
It was most important, in awarding secondary 114111.00
ments, to be well informed as to those likely to provesfy
most satisfactory. The Noble Lord was bound to e4„Ptoe
the House on that subject before it adopted his t.'305,"
bet
There was a Committee moved for by the Hon. ..101,;cli
'
the Member for Cornwall, respecting transportation, ifralt
might lead to some result like that desired in one bre'oot
of the subject at least. He (Sir R. Peel) should ble
object to the second reading of the Bill on the price'
of mitigating the punishment of death, but he reser%'eubia
himself the right of deciding on the limits of the rilieet,
Lord's extension of that mitigation, and on the substitlea
which he proposed to employ for it. If it were declo
that transportation were not effective he (Sir R. Peel)rbo
very much afraid that too much eonfidence could
placed in an extensive period of imprisonment as a 0"," of
tute for that punishment. With regard to the subirblo
the Bill more immediately before the House, the P°,
Lord had read a paper on the first night of its introe?toi
tion showing the effect of the mitigation of the !API to
punishment for forgery in the metropolis. He wieb'of
know whether the Noble Lord was in possession ofie-bo
papers by which the proportion in the provinces COul°ole
shown also ? If the Noble Lord had any such doenine-
lef
he (Sir R. Peel) hoped he would have no objection t°
them on the table of the House.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL had not intended to bed.
brought in the Bills that night, but the debate on Cat'Ahe
terminating sooner than he had anticipated, he thonedia
would not be doing justice to the public interest if he
jt
not take the opportunity of bringing them "forwarcl.o4
would be a great misfortune, now that public attention a '.et
so much attracted to them, if they were to be passe' -04
for another year. With respect to the observatioestie
secondary punishments made by the Right Hon. GSOO,
man opposite, he was bound to say that that Right, JODe
Gentleman was quite right in representing him (Ler"
C
Russell) as saying that the present system was muckf the
satisfactory than he could wish. The chief object 0I to
Bills was to give greater certainty to punishments, an to
define cases of greater or lesser aggravation. In WI bo
the Right lion. Baronet's question, whether he (Lord)°l
Russell) had any other documents respecting the eficeti,sre
ablesent forgery law, he begged to say that he had nqne et rblo
sent ; but he quite agreed with the Right Hoo°lo
Baronet that all documents which could be obtaiee°ol
subject should be laid on the table of the House. 00
general result of the papers he had consulted west it
that the crime of forgery had diminished, but t"00?
had not materially increased, while there wase'tte'
dcrable increase in the proportion of convietiose t°, of
quittals.—(Hear.) That in itself was a preventiv;;oo
crime. Since the last Assizes he had letters from vtioar,
persons in regard to the other branches of the crimineldli,
in which it was stated, that though offences were einit,
proved, juries uniformly acquitted the prisoner of the °olio
Charge, for fear of subjecting him to the punishreedifr
death. That circumstance was a strong case for a fil,„al)1
cation of the criminal law. The Noble Lord conebi'jieg
stating, that though he should propose the second re °o4i.,
of the Bill then, it was more to advance it than teee,,
other reason. He should take care, before it P19;0
another stage, to give due notice to the House $°-
would come on.
Sir R. PEEL could not see what reason the too
Lord had for introducing so many Bills, or what obJ4-cciel
he could have to unite them all into one. It was ret-no,
the steps which had already been made towards the ")3illo
dation of the Criminal Law, to introduce five or atsd
when a single one would have equally well serle
purpose.
After a few words from Messrs. Wallace, l'e.:resa
Hume, Ewart, Goulburn, and O'Connell, the Bill '!a-c
a second time, and ordered to be committed on Fri
19th of May. Bill`/v
The Robbery and Stealing fromthe Person jot'
also read a second time, and ordered to be commit°
same day. ;lieu
Oa the Burglary and Stealing from a Dwella''"'
Bill being proposed,
tend ir
Mr. PEASE expressed his opinion, that ins 01 P
diminishing, it would tend to the increase of e 4).
14
nishment.
Lord J. RUSSELL was not apprehensive of th•ek,
and for his own part, as Home Secretary, he ell°° to 61'
when called on to exercise the Royal prerogative 4
the law in his favour. theate'
te
Sir R. PEEL thought that whatever might be 00 0,
of the law, the Secretary, if he thought it his dut.,‘,/g06(,,
do, should advise the exercise of the Royal Prej;tratie;
The Jude, of course, would never think of reme'lset.l6
After a ftw words from Mr. LENNARD and the 4
TOR-GENERAL, vibo
Mr. A. TREVOR was of opinion that those of
to commit a burglary were prepared to add murder„.bieet6bo
Mr. WAKLEY thought that, as one of the ,-001(1,des
these Bills was to make punishment certain, it pee
desirable to vest as little discretionary power ill the
as possible.
Mr. EWART concurred in this opinion. rob .1° ible
Mr. RICHARDS contended that the Eng lt pc°
used the discretion invested in them in the beo 5O
Way. iehel:3s,
After a few words from Mr. Ewart, Mr. it
Sir R. Peel, the Bill was ordered to be Op'
Dacha
May 19. t tl, -
The Court of Exchequer (Scotland) Bill Weil of
Committee.
The Small Debts (Scotland) Bill went thro4ll
mittee.

In answer to laßlgSueH POOR
question
nfrom
sLirAßW.Skvapaia
ve_ tb°
ri.,o
f
Lord J. RUSSELL said the second re, no
Irish Poor-law Relief Bill would be move(' -
next, and take precedence on that doy• '
On the motion of Mr. P. STEWART' vacriSsPlertdsr°ll
were ordered connected with the affairs 0. Up p°
f ail
Lower Canada. ea 0 f
The other Orders of the Day were then clisP°6
the House adjourned at Twelve o'clock-
Lord It y--re.------h• e 4. el'. i/'
s HOUSE
HA
FTEiBu OF LORDS, Arita OW
folk in favour of
the absence of 1 took is sea
•t on the WO sfe
L leciLluorredh.Craltiaens.cellor. • § Ire°
Lord BANDON Presented several petition ,es
tiP°
'lO Pe
t d silDl b'li. di.
The Bishop of St. ASAPH presen e •,-,en..1 to .
from several places in Montgomeryshire and J"0.,8 fro „ir
CleTrgh;,l3Cislehrokps,ofanitiOSNeDxtoOnNs opfresseevnetreadl Poe,teltitra°l ;P%iillii_llll°-itilt
rishes against the West London CellieterY P jo r-
tions in favour of Church-rates from Place° fro°
Staffordshire, and Sussex.
The Earl of H ADDINGTON preserit'Ais f.-nei.nt. itif:::illift Vwd
the elders and clergy of a parish i.n .134111`'11 'reit Pi"'
Church-rates ; and praying that hetter mel°

adopted for the observance 'of the Sabbath ; also a petition
from the same body against the system of National Educa-
tion in Ireland
i ; and several petitions from places in Stafford
n favour of Church-rates.
_The Earl of ROSEBERY presented a petition agairst
Church-rates from the Lord Provost and Citizens of
Ediliourgh.
Lord TEYNHAM postponed his motion for returns re-
-1116 ve to the Poor Law till the 2d of May.
MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.
Mr. BROTHERTON and other Members of the Com-
:mons brought up the Dublin Police Bill.
Lord CLONCURRY presented petitions from places
an the County Cork, the County Meath,
and the Queen's
County, in favour of Irish Corporate Reform and the abo-
lition of tithes.
Lord FITZGERALD presented a petition from the
Queen's County ago'inst the Irish I,,lunicipal Bill.
CHURCH-RATES.
Church-
Lord It EDF_,SDALE presented petitions in favour of
rates 'from places in Stafford and Northampton.
The A rckibishop of YORK presented a number of peti-
tions frrAr, p
to. laces in his diocese to the same effect.
ThoJ bishop of GLOUCESTER presented similar peti-
..nr, from places in Gloucester, Worcester, and Kent.
foul
At Bishop of CHESTER presented similar petitions
fro 2,000 operatives in Manchester, from Bolton, and
pi other places.
6 The
Bishop of HEREFORD presented similar peti-
°fis from parishes in Herefordshire.
, The Bishop of CARLISLE presented similar petitions
",,nl, Pa riches in Cumberland.
the the Duke of WELLINGTON presented petitions to
same effect.
Ti,.e Bishop of LLA NDAFF said he had a number of
petifions to the same effect, which were signed by persons
o 1 of whom the nature of the petition had been explained ;
44Tpringst them were one from Liandaff, one from Merthyr
1)"dvill, and from a large number from parishes in Gla-
nWrganshire.
Viscount DUNCANNON presented a petition in fa-
th'.. of Church-rates, and laid on the table the Bth Report of
rPost-officeCommissioners,theßeport of the Commissioners
°4)pointed to inquire into the state of the Corporations
England and Wales in reference to London, and the
Report of the Commissioners on the boundaries of cor-
porate towns.

LAND-TAX.
Lord BROUGHAM said that a petition had been
intrusted to him to present from the Lord Mayor,
-Aldermen, and Council of the city of London, against
the unjust distribution of the land tax, which he felt
great pleasure in presenting, as the Corporation did not
to that Howse possess the right which they had in
the other 'House of appearing by their Sheriffs and
Ofßeers a'e the bar, and presenting their petitions. The
Noble Lew d then presented a petition from Lambeth against
Church-rates ; also petitions to the same effect from Maid-
stone, we'd from parishes in Northampton, Durham, Somer-
set, Derby, Buckingham, and York ; from Brandon in Suf-
folk, &I'm a parish in Denbigh, from Plymouth, from a
parish im 'Leeds, from parishes in Kent, from the Mayor and
inhabit:wets of Chesterbury, and from places in Denbigh
and Carmarthen ; from Kettering, in Northampton ; from
Paris•ries in Suffolk and Westmoreland ; from Newmarket ;
fr,°c,l: the Guild and Corporation of Perth. The Noble Lord
ais'o presented a petition from Bradford, and another place
lorkshire, signed by, ho might say, thousands of persons,
favour of the Irish Corporation Bill.
Lord HOLLAND presented petitions against Church-
tates from a parish in Leeds, in Yorkshire ; from a congre-
gation of Dissenters in Bristol ; from Honiton, in Devon-
shire ; from the Wesleyans in Huddersfield, in Yorkshire ;
from Hull ; from the Eastern Division of Devon ; and
zone Cbetwynd, in Stafford.
Lord RADNOR presented similar petitions from
Highgate, Bradford, Brixton, and other places.
Lord HARE WOOD presented a petition from a place
to Yorkshire against the Poor-law Bill.
viscount MELBOURNE presented petitions against
C•r,urch-rates from Ramsey, and other places in Suffolk,
&ten Stockport, Knaresborough, and several other places in
4.-.3arrnarthen and Glamorganshires.
The Earl of RODEN presented petitions from Dublin
aghinst the Irish Municipal Bill ; also from parishes in the
County Tyrone, to the same effect.
IMPROVEMENT OF LANDS IN IRELAND
BILL.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE, in moving the
second reading of this Bill, said that it would 'be only
necessary for him to make a few remarks on the subject.
All the Reports of Commissioners were in favour of such
a measure as the present—several Bills having the same
object in view had been proposed, but they had fallen to the
ground, in consequence of the provisions leaving too much to
the landowners--the provisions of this Bill were to the effect
that Commissioners should be appointed by the Lord-
Lieutenant in Council to examine and report how far, and
where, works could be undertaken, and how far the lands
should be chargeable on account of thorn. Some objections
would, and indeed had, been niade to this Bill, on
the ground that too much power was given by it to the
Commissioners ; but he was not of this opinion, and
lie had no dcust that many valuable works would be
'undertaken if the Bill became a law.--( Hear, hear.) The
present measure was one relating to Ireland, which he
thought might be discussed without reference to party
feelings..._( Hear, hear.) The Bill might, in some degree,
be said to be connected with another measure lately
introduced into the other House. However, it appeared
to him that Government and Parliament were determined
that some decisive steps should be taken for the ame-
lioration of the poor of Ireland, and he thought that
ofe appointment of Commissioners to inquire into the state
the poor was a wise step ; and when he considered the
names of the Hon. and Right Hon. Gentlemen of which
that Commission was composed he must say that the selec-
tion had been admirably made. That Commission had
made three reports to Parliament, and those Reports were
"w before the House. They were all refnarkahle docu-
nlents, more particularly the third Report ; and they were
•all supported by a body of evidence, given at great length,
anti which had been characterised by one who differed from
thee conclution of the Commissioners as fair a body of evi-
,, nee as; was ever presented to Parliament. The third Re-
" Pile 'which was distinguished by a great deal of ability, was
ll:D'ed by a friend of his, a man to whom Ireland was
l"Ply indebted, because he had taken the most statesman-
!ke view of her affairs, and had suggested the most efficient,
,"°Ligh not the most ostentatious, measures for the good of
Vat country.. He alluded to his Hon. Friend the Chief
'enlembrancer, Mr. Blake. In the first place, he would
observe that the recommendations of the Commissioners
Zeire too. widely departed from in the present Bill. He
° objected to the introduction of the workhouse
system, and he would ask why was that system
-,suepsed ?
His Noble Friend the Secretary of State
taid, and Mr. Nicholls said also, " when they decided, the
questquestion was, how to apply the workhouse system and the
ion
of that system to Ireland ?" The nets,Commis-
lo in the third report, after reciting a great quantity
jof
ce, and going into a minute calculation, concluded
stating that they could not recommend the adoption of
4'e workhouse system. Now, in this respect, which was a
utter ttel. of it` detail, he (the Marquis of Clanricarde) thought
s regard ought to have been had to the local circum-
"es of the country. Mr. Nicholls, who had also male
larste,Port on the subject, went to Ireland in the autumn of
01,,,,Lear, when the least number of people were unem-
visilin"- :This gentleman travelled eight hundred miles,
inquirfCe sixteen towns, and making all along personal
then,
c," into the state of the country and the people. He
niter
In the 15th of November, not quite three months
able he Set out, produced his report—certainly a very
Bible wPrk, but a report giving his opinion upon very pos-
. circumstance relating to Ireland, but withont an exa-
enination
Ghent h into all those circumstances. In that docu-
e treated upon the geology,
the the ethics, the physics,
Pneumatics the religion • in short, on every subject,
r°lll th f •!.• . efertility of the soil to the chastity of the
women
that he of " Hear, hear.") This
gentleman said
The would assume 1 per cent. to he the amount of
e
rem_Pa,upers—that was 80,000 in all. But it would be
enfien?bcred that the claim for relief was not to be age or
eicar:nAitY, but destitution. This he (the Marquis of Clan-
de) say was a gratuitous assumption on the part
of
_:1 • Nicholls, and one which he knew to be erroneous.
Wrl 71 the returns; on the subject it would be found that in
40 and in-door relief was administered to 21,000 paupers,
of one
relief to 169,000 ; that was, in the proportion
Z°:1:fl to eight. Mr. Nicholls said that the Report of the
eressloners uon exaggerated calculations, be-
ets,
,11! knew. the silencee on which it was founded. He
"e Mar ui
tested u sof Clanricarde) knew that the evidence
eeete, 1?on a census taken for purposes not at all con-
-I)._ la With the Commission. Mr. Nicholls, if he thought
,7:l):era!,..o___ea.a.lee such a statement, ought to have given
and the'uns , nut he merely said, " take off ten per cent.,
Would Perhaps, you will find the real amount. That
I°o °eve 200,000 or 300,000 souls, and you might have
, oin
Ns.; Your workhouses in Ireland." Now the Com-
and on
,the other hand, took as a basis the census,
rep ten'eY_fooun.d
.that the number of labourers out of employ
persoes months in the year was 585,000, and that these
caleAl .Possessed no land whatever. From an actual
utation it appeared that the proportion of Irish la-
- alliliorueer! to English was as five to two, and, taking the
times as of capital, to say nothing of skill, it showed fifteen
es ,
two as innltuhetl•
personal property or capital expended in the
e five. He (the Marquis of Clanricardc) would
,:32d-thba.t. would be impossible to relieve the distress of Ire-
intend "„unY system of workhouses. But it was not even
_ en to build the hundred workhouses proposed at once.
eleFt °nIY were to be built at first. It was then said by the
rnalent that they intended to follow this up by the emi-
tr4tinn and employment of the labourers. He (the Mar-

quis of -Clanricarde) was glad to hear this ; but still he
thought that few cases ever occurred in which it could he
applied with benefit, yet he did think if ever such a case had
or would occur it was in the present state of Ireland. But
the Government had taken the wrong step first ; for the)
held out by statute that the poor should be relieved ; and
how could it be expected that, under such circumstances.
they would be willing to go abroad ? He (the Marquis of
Clanricarde) thought that the Government ought first to
bring the country into that state of things in which the)
could give relief before they established workhouses. The
first step should be to relieve the impotent, the infirm, and
the helpless. This, he thought, might be done by extend-
ing the dispensary system, and by establishing almshouses
and houses of refuge. Mention had been made of the
workhouse test. He (the Marquis of Clanricarde) held
that phrase to imply—and it had now become fashionable
—the putting the destitute poor upon that system of living
by which it wasjust possible to keep body and soul together.
He therefore hoped that the Government would be induced
to attend to these suggestions, and make considerable al-
terations in the measure before the other House of Parlia-
ment.—( Hear, hear.)
The Earl of LIMERICK trusted the latter part of the
Noble Marquis's speech would have weight with the Noble
Viscount opposite, to prevent this dangerous and mischiev-
ous mcaaure from 'passing into a law. He had been so
long a Member of that House, that he could recollect the
time when the project of a poor-law for Ireland was first
mooted in Parliament. It was first suggested by a res-
pectable gentleman, but one of those visionaries who, not
having much property of his own, employed himself in find-
ing out different projects. When it was first proposed it
became the subject of much discussion. It was then said,
were not the people of England groaning under Poor-laws,
and had not Parliament been driven by their pressure to
pass laws of great severity to mitigate the evils which had
arisen from them ? In the present case the Commissioners
had reported, but their reports not being satisfactory,
what course was adopted. A gentleman from England, no
doubt a gentleman of great ability, was sent out ; but that
gentleman, he would take upon himself to say, was per-
fectly ignorant of the true state of society in that country ;
and he would maintain, however distinguished men might
be in all other respects, on that of Ireland the ignorance
which generally prevailed in this country was excessive. In-
stead of a Poor-law benefitting Ireland, he thought it would
have a contrary effect, and would produce the most mis-
chievous results. Besides, the people. of Ireland did not
call for such a measure.
The Earl of DEVON did not expect much good from
the measure introduced by the Noble Marquis (Clanri-
carde), but he viewed it as one of a series of measures,
from which great ultimate advantage might be expected.
His Noble Friend objected to Poor-laws. The Govern-
ment had introduced a measure on this subject, which was
one of great difficulty ; but that difficulty ought not, he
thought, to prevent them from giving it their most serious
consideration. The Report of the Commissioners, he would
venture to say, bore upon its face marks of considerable
talent and ability ; but he would beg to observe that, in his
opinion, the state of Ireland was not known to those gen-
tlemen. With regard to the workhouse system, he bad
been a zealous supporter of the alteration made in the
Poor-laws for England ; and he thought that the applica-
tion of some such measure to Ireland would operate bene-
ficially ; but before the Bill passed into a law it would, of
necessity, be much discussed, and then any necessary alte-
rations could be introduced ; but, upon the present occa-
sion, he had only risen to express his anxiety that some
measure on the subject should be proceeded with.
The Earl of WICKLOW was of opinion that opportu-
nities like the present should be taken of conveying to the
country, and to the other House, the general opinion of
their Lordships upon measures during their progress through
that House.—(Hear, shear.) There had not ben, he must
say, within his recollection, any measure of such vast im-
portance as the present, for on it depended the fate, whether
for good or evil, of the country to which it related ; and it
was highly important, therefore, that it should undergo the
fullest and most attentive deliberation ; and it was the
duty of his Majesty's Government, who had undertaken the
responsibility of the measure, to render it as effectual as
possible. He believed there had been no oppOsition to it
in the other House ; and this had arisen from the preva-
lence of the conviction that the time had come when some
legal provision must be made for the poor in Ireland ; that
the circumstances of that country were such that some
system must be adopted to check the progress of misery and
desolation which there abounded. Now, he perfectly
agreed that his Majesty's Government, having determined
to introduce some measure of the Kidd, had acted wisely
and prudently in appointing a Commission to inquire into
the state of the country in reference to the subject ; and
lie would say further that they had appointed most proper
persons to carry their wishes into effect. Those Commis-
sioners had given to this matter their most attentive and
constant deliberation for two years, and they had forwarded
to Parliament a report, in which they expressed the opinions
at which they had arrived. He also admitted that his
Majesty's Government were not called upon imme-
diately after receiving this Report to introduce a Bill
founded upon its recommendations ; he thought further,
that they had acted judiciously in sendiug another
individual to collect additional and more minute in-
formation, in order to guide them as to the details of
their measure ; but when they came to see the great dis-
crepancy that existed between the opinions which had been
founded on the experience of the former Commission and
those which were founded on the experience of that indi-
vidual, he could not agree in thinking that they should
at once have framed their Bill on the Report of this last
Commission ; it was a very hasty and injudicious step. He
would mention to their Lordships one of the discrepancies
between the two Reports. The Commissioners stated that
a poorhouse system
.in Ireland would require an outlay of
four millions for building, and of six millions for supporting,
them ; but Mr. Nicholls had stated that 700,0001. would
be necessary for the building, and 300,000/. for their main-
tenance. Now, when there appeared so total a variance
as that, it was the duty of his Majesty's Government to
have instituted still further investigation and inquiry before
introducing such a Bill, which was not only at variance with
the opinion of the first Commissioners, but also with those
of many persons connected with the Mendicity Society of
Dublin, who had considerable practical experience, and
of many other persons whose opinions were entitled to
some weight. The Bill at least ought to be well consi-
dered before it was passed into a law. If destitution were
to be the only test for relief it would be impossible to
see the extent of relief which would be required. If the
system which was proposed were adopted what would be
the consequence ? He had no hesitation in expressing his
confident belief that in less than a week every one of the
poor-houses would he completey filled. So convinced was
he that a system of poor laws must be adopted—so con.-
vinced was he of the clamour which would arise from any
opposition being offered to such a system from the belief that
an Irish Poor-law system would tend to give relief to this
country, a most mistaken opinion, he believed, for lie had
no doubt that, on the contrary, it would increase the num-
ber of able-bodied labourers that would come to this country
—hut so convinced was he of the odium which would at-
tach to anyone that opposed the introduction of sonic system
of the kind, that he was fully determined to give his sup-

port to some measure on the subject. He should be un-
willing to take on himself the responsibility of opposing a
measure of this kind, introduced on the authority and re-
sponsibility of the Governmnt. With regard to the Bill
now more immediately before their Lordships, as far as he
understood it, he thought it a beneficial measure, as it
seemed to him to be fOunded on the principle of those
remedial measures recommended by the Poor Law Com-
missioners. The only thing he lamented was that the Bill
came forward on the responsibility of an individual and not
of his Majesty's Ministers--( Hear)—especially as it gave a
large power of taxation. When it went into Committee he

would give his best consideration to its details—to its prin-
ciple he had no objection. Notwithstanding the difference
of opinion which existed there were two points on which all
were perfectly agreed, viz., that in the present state of Ire-
land a poorhouse system was not practicable, and, whatever
relief was given, it should in the first instance be given only
to the impotent, the infirm, the aged, and the helpless.
The Earl of RODEN begged also to express his obliga-
tions to the Noble Earl for having called the attention of
the House to this subject. The question of a system of
poor laws for Ireland was always interesting, and it was a
question in reference to which he, as a constant resident in
that country, might be allowed to have some grounds for
the opinions he might entertain, and he would say that only
those who did reside there could enter into a complete and
satisfactory investigation of the applicability of any system
to the state and circumstances of that country. The Noble
Earl had stated, with great ability, the difficulties which

surrounded the question. As to the existence of those dif-
ficulties he agreed with the Noble Earl, but he could not
but differ as to the conclusion at which he had arrived.
He (Earl Roden) had witnessed frequently such wretched-
ness, without seeing any means of relief, that he anxiously
wished to see some mode of relief established by the law of
the land.

Lord BROUGHAM thought that this subject might be
considered to resolve itself into two questions—first, whe-
ther any system of Poor-laws ought to be introduced into
Ireland ; and secondly, what that system should be. But
those questions were dependent upon each other ; and it
was useless to answer the first until some answer had been
decided upon for the second. Now it appeared to him that
they were in some sort committed in reference to the ques-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) The preliminary inquiry had been
made, and it was now, he thought, too late to ask the ques-
tion whether there should or should not be Poor-laws for
Ireland. He did not mean to say that he should have any
hesitation in answering it in the affirmative, at least to a
certain extent ; but he knew that there were others whose