The Sun.
London, England, 1862-05-02 00:00:00

LAND) BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. HENNESSY suggested the propriety of passing at
that stage of the bill a resolution which should have the
effect of preventing the employment of the police in the re-
gistration of births and deaths in Ireland. The police were,
as a rule, of too limited attainments to be entrusted with
the collection of statistics on a matter of such vital import-
ance, and the result of imposing upontlfem that duty would
be to make the force unpopular. He moved—" That this
house is of opinion that it is not expedient to employ the
police as the registrars of births and deaths in Ireland."
Mr. DAWSON regretted that the registration of mar.
riages was not proposed to be dealt with by this bill. He
acknowledged the difficulty of dealing with that part of the
question, owing to the prevalence of religious differences in
Ireland, but he regarded the system at present in operation
as so unsatisfactory that he should view with gratification
any measure, from whatever source it came, which should
deal with the question of registration in all its branches. He
objected to the proposal of this measure to meet the expanse
by local taxation, considering that the cost should be de-
frayed out of the Consolidated Fund. He should have pre-
ferred to the present bill the arrangements proposed last
year- by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, believing as he
did that the medical officers of dispensary districts would be
more trustworthy agents in the collection of statistics with
regard to births and deaths than the constabulary force.
Dr. BRADY agreed both that a registration was abso-
lutely necessary for Ireland and that it was disgraceful to
that country not to have had ene established long ag A)
the same time he denied that the police was the proper body
to which to entrust the duty. He considered that thud
men to perform the task would be the medical men ; if
the house was not in a position to remunerate those gentle-
men properly for the work, let it wait till it wa.s.
Sir F. HEyGATE considered that the police were not
the right body for this employment. He did not wish to say
a word against the force, but he did not wish the peasantry

ZZ

"I"lidre d to find the police set to do everything. If the con-
~tajl not enough to do, let their number be reduced.
Sir R. PEEL said the amendment struck at one of the
main features of the bill. After giving his best attention
to the subject, he was of opinion that there was no class so
well calculated to undertake the labour as the police. The
medical officers admitted that they could not do the work
for the remuneration offered, the postmasters were unable
to do it, and the ecclesiastical officers of all denominations
would not. To impose the task upon persons nominated by
the Lord Lieutenant would be to confer too great an amount
of patronage on the executive Government, and persons ap-
pointed by boards of guardians would not be suitable.
Under these circumstances he thought that the police would
be tae best officers for the purpose. They were a very
popular body, and he believed that they would discharge
the duty exceedingly well. He hoped therefore the house
would read the bill, and allow its details to be considered in
committee.

Mr. MAGITIRE did not see why in their anxiety to re-
move what had so long been the reproach of Ireland they
should adopt the very worst plan that human ingenuity
could'devise. He wondered how the right her; gentleman
could tolerate the odious machinery now propsed, for it
would vitiate the whole bill, and raise up every mal of the
humbler classes in Ireland against it, lie warned the hurls°
against adopting a seliPme which could only becomes source
of suspicion and amloyance to the people of Ireland.
Col. DUNNE did not think the police the most competent
parties to make these returns. Why not adopt the system
prevailing in this couniri and appint persons specially
for the purpose.
Lord PALMERSTON said that the course adopted'. by
those who moved the present resolution was not very con-
sistent with the opinions they had exercised with regard to
the bill. They were exceedingly anxious to have a system
of registration, and the house was now called upon to affirm
that principle, but instead of agreeing tnthe second reading,
they interposed a motion which did not belong to the pre-
sent stage of the discussion, and which was perfectly fit to
be proposed in committee. •
Mr. MONSELL thought the proper mode of proceeding
would be to adopt the plan already existing in England.
Mr. IiENNE S SY consented to withdraw his amendment,
The bill was then read a second time.

SUMMARY JURISDICTION (IRELAND) BILL.
The clauses in this bill were agreed to.
Capt STACPOOLE_moved the addition of the following
clause :—" Any person who shall keep or suffer to be at
large, within 50 yards of any public road, any dog, without
having the said dog properly muzzled, shall be liable to a
Lino not eaceeding 10s. ; and it shall also be lawful for a
justice or justices of the petty sessions district, upon infor-
mation that any =muzzled dog is kept or suffered to be at
large within such distance as aforesaid, and that the owner
thereof connot he discovered, to issue his or their warrant
to any sub-inspector, head or other constable, to seize and
destroy any such dog, or to dispose of said dog in such man-
ner as to said justice or justices may seem fit; and further,
it shall be lawful for said justice or justices, upon informa-
tion, to issue his or their warrant to any head or other con-
stable to seize and destroy any dangerous dog so kept or suf-
fered to be at large within said before-mentioned distance."
Sir R. PEEL opposed the clause, which he said was in-
consistent with the provisions of the measure, and said
that if the hon. and gallant member attached any import-
ance to the subject the better way would be for him to bring
in a dog bill. (Laughter.)

Sir E. GROGAN supported the clause.
After some discussion the committee divided—
For the clause
Against it -7
•

The clause was therefore thrown out.
Lord E. HILL moved the following clause :—" And
whereas, by the act of the 24th and 25th of Victoria, chap.
100, sec. 38, certain assaults on peace officers and others aro
made misdemeanours, and punishable with imprisonment
for a term not exceeding two years, with or without hard
labour; be it enacted, that two justices of the peace shall
have a concurrent jurisdiction to punish such assaults un-
der the 42d section of the said act, if they shall consider
the offence so trivial as not.to require being dealt with by a
superior tribunal."—Agreed to.

The bill was then reported.
The house then adjourned.