The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-12 00:00:00

and Mr. Callaghan. I have voted for the Liberal Members
ever since I can recollect almost."
I only quote those passages to show what the House might
not have taken for granted, that in quoting Mr. Lane's testi-
mony lam not adducing that of a partisan. It may be ne-
cessary also to state that there is in Cork a valuation of pro-
perty for local purposes of rating, and that every house of less
than Si. value is exempted therefrom. The Parliamentary
voters who were householders in the City of Cork must have
a qualification of 101., and must also be registered in its local
assessments according to their holdings. Now Mr. Lane said
that he was curious to know how many there were
in that City who had voted as 10/. householders, and yet
were rated at an inferior value. He produced three lists
to the Committee, one containing the total number of persons
registered on the poll books as 10/. householders in the city of
Cork, who are valued in the city books under that sum. Of
these there appeared 368 persons.—( Hear.) Another, con-
taining the names of persons registered to vote as 101. voters
of th© city of Cork who do not appear as valued in the city
books at any time, and were in fact not worth 5/. ; these
amount to 112 persons. A third list contained the number of
Persons also registered to vote as 10/. householders who
wished to be excused appearing in the city books as not pos-
sessing 51., and were on appeal struck off, and not charged
any city rates; these amounted to fifty-five persons. Here
are 535 persons who took the oath in reference to the city
assessments, that they were not competent, as not possessing
101. houses, vet still exercising the Parliamentary franchise
as 10/. householders.—(Cheers.) Now I appeal to the
Public judgment, ought such a state of things to be tolerated?
--or ought we, when legislating for Ireland, and with such
sad experience before our eyes, rush into arrangements that
ould perpetuate temptations and practices so unwise and so
injurious ?—( Cheers.) We read in Mr. Lane's evidence the
qUestion—
" You state that you in your judgment consider the ten-
Pound qualification a good one, provided it be bona fide pos-
sessed?—Most decidedly.
"Were persons registered as having a value of 10/., who
afterwards swore that they had not out of the same premises a
value of 51. ?—Yes.
" And yet they remained upon the register after having so
Morn ?—They did.
" And do now remain on the register after an oath made by
them respectively that they have not the value of U.—Yes."
I say to the public read that evidence, and then uphold, defend,
or advocate such disgraceful proceedings if you will.-
--(Cheers.) Another witness, Mr. John Young, delivers
testimony to a similar effect. He made extensive researches
to satisfy himself on this point, and communicated the result
to the Committee in his examination of Feb. 19, 1838 :
" Did you visit a person of the name of John Oakshott, in
Phillips.lane?—l
" Did you see his shop ?-1 was in it.
" You examined it ?—I did.
" What is the highest value you would put upon that shop ?
--2/• a year.
" What description of shop is it ?—lt is a workshop ; he is
a carpenter.
" Does such a person as John Oakshott, in Phillips'-lane,
appear to have been valued ?—No.

‘• Do you find John Oakshott upon the register do ;
John Oakshott, carpenter, Phillip's-lane, city of Cork ; shop
at Phillips's-lane; 101. householder; registered the 2d of No-
vember, 1832. Voted 1832 and in 1835.,
You will find many persons, I fear, in other cities not coming
under any local rate, even for Si., yet voting, like John Oak-
-Bhott, for Members of Parliament, on oath that they were
Worth 101. Am I, then, insulting the people of Ireland if I
Wish, at the opening of a new era, to provide for more credit-
able proceedings ? The other question is, whether lam doing
injustice to the Roman Catholic population, by the establish-
Thent of a bona fide 101. franchise? The Hon. Member for
Dublin refers to his city, as one that would be particularly in-
4ured thereby ; but, if ymy information be correct—and I give
It with considerable hesitation—he cannot have much to com-
plain of. My informant tells me that there were 1,654 10/.
householders who vo'cd in 1835. Amongst this number,
tint a 201. householder is counted. lam informed that of
this number 353 gave Conservative votes, and 1,311 Libe-
-1;4- Again, in 1837, we find 719 101. householders voted
or West and Hamilton, while 1,799 voted for O'Connell.
Thislinformation (which I have only received to-day) is
totally inconsistent with the alarm of the Honourable Gen-
tleman. And I would seriously ask, is it possible that
!here should be such a preponderance of Protestant 101.
householders in the remaining- towns—such as Cork, Galway,
and Limerick, as to exclude the Roman Catholics of that class
in those towns from a fair share of the representation ? You
sly' you fear that the 101. franchise fairly taken would exclude
the Roman Catholics. Supposing for a moment that your
fears were well founded, I might have equal cause to be
alarmed at the establishment of a 5/. franchise. I trust, how-

ever, that neither party will have cause to fear, but that the
101. franchise will give to both parties a just and sufficient
share of influence in the representation without operating in-
juriously to the exclusion of either in any town. As to the
danger to the Roman Catholic interest, let me recal to the
recollection of the Hon. Member for Dublin the line of argu-
tnent pursued by him before the concession of Roman Catho-
lic emancipation. We were not then told that the Protestant
population preponderated. On the contrary, we were assured
that the Roman Catholics preponderated in wealth, numbers,
tecpectability, and industry, and as such their claims to relief
acre put forth. One of the ablest books that appeared at that
l'ariod was written by Mr. Scully, who dwelt especially on the
,eal:h and respectability of the Roman Catholics of Ireland.
Scully says that the Roman Catholics fully constitute
five-sixths of tile entire population, and are as nine to one
compared to the Protestants ; but this appears rather an ex-
travagant estimate. The Hon. Member for Dublin does not
take into account in his objections that many who now register
as freemen may then register as 101. householders. It appears
that there are 14,500 houses in Dublin, and I cannot doubt
that a 101. franchise would give you at the most a very re-
spectable constituency. The measure, snch as it is, is one of
Mutual concession and compromise, for I was called on to
1/lake sacrifices as well as you, and feel in so doing I have
Vle my duty. If you accept it—( Cries of " Never," from
O'Connell's benches)—it may pass into a law that may
lay the foundation of peace and good will in Ireland, and en-
sure for its towns that good local government which is so much
to be desired for the welfare of all parties, and which it now
!egg with you to attain.—(Cheers, cries of " Never," from
Messrs. O'Connell, Sheil, &c.)
.i.Lord J. RUSSELL very much regretted that the Right
Tln. Baronet had, after the consideration he had bestowed on
thisy subject, thought proper to persevere in his proposition.
410larever he did not find fault with the grounds of his perseve-
ianes; on the contrary, he rejoiced that the Right Hon. Ba-
°net had placed it on the grounds of his desire to adopt a si-
milar franchise to that preferred for England and Scotland.
sut it was on the dissimilarity of those grounds that he (Lord
'. Russell) contested it, believing that, in the state of the
t
in Ireland, it would be more calculated to keep alive
b in-
14▪ I'neue distinctions than to establish a lasting peace and bar-
ti "Y. As to the Tithe question and that of the Appropria-
-01.1 clause, he wished to reserve their discussion for a fitter op-
cPa_rtunity ; but he wished then to say that as to the Municipal
orporations Bill, he never intended that it should be taken
4mitigation, or bargain, or set-off to any other Bill.—
Hear“, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet was correct in
Stating that those on the Ministerial side of the House did
itt agree to his former proposition to adopt the 10/. rate for
, but the objection was not that the rate was va-
t. °gland
8191/s in different parishes. He (Lord John Russell) had
aid that if it were adopted, great numbers of persons
;You'd be disfranchised to whom the Government honestly in-
h'Tided to bestow the franchise, a statement which the Right
h.". I3aronet had treated as one to get up a cheer for Mi-
ters. Lord Althorp had also objected to his proposition of
a the
rating as a basis on a different ground, arguing that
simplest plan would be to take the value of the house itself.
4eb, then, was the declaration of Lord Althorp.—( Hear.)
And
;;t surely after this it could not be said that a house rented
/11e yearly value of 10/, should be taken into the Irish Mu-
ntejpal Bill as a test of qualification on the strength of recom-
dmendations made on former occasions. With respect to the
glish Bill, ncillino• that took place at the time it was under
eeussion ought to 17e taken as any sanction for what was now
Proposed with regard to the Irish Municipal Bill. As to the
Peoteb Bill, whether the franchise adopted under it was the
best that could have been chosen or not he was not then pre-
pared,,, to argue; but if the question were put to him vs he-
Iter this Bill should, with regard to the franchise, be made
eke the Scotch Bill, or whether even the Scotch franchise
anOuld be extended, he must candidly confess that he should
;,,s/hes. be inclined to agree to the latter proposition.—( Cheers. )
'ith retard to the Eglish Municipal Act, they might look
vain for any 10/., franchise, accompanied with a rate; and
e Must be allowed to say that as far as any precedent or for.
Incasanction was concerned, the present proposition of the
Hon. Gentleman involved a qualification higher than
English
of the vote for an English Member of Parliament, or for
Right
or Scotch municipal councillors.—( Hear.) The
lion. Gentleman said there were three sorts of qualifi-
afti°ns which he proposed. With respect to the uniformity
o
"e of them, with respect to the English and Scotch Bills,
and the argument that, therefore, a similar uniformity should
be extended to Ireland, he (Lord John Russell) must say that
agreod with te principle of having such uniformity of qua-
tirmion in Ireland--( Hear)—but at the same time the gues-
s:l was what sort of a qualification that was. To argue from
aa-tittal°ga there might be a uniformity of diet in England, Scot-
t; ue and Ireland, but there was a very great difference be-
een an uniformity of diet of wheaten breed and a diet
0,,,•
.Ineal or potatoes.—( A laugh.) He maintained, more-
ove•
r, that merely the ten pounds a year was not the
la of the House, and lie appealed to the Act for regu-
, t'ng parochial assessments which passed a few years ago
eaether such was or was not the case. The Noble Lord then
trrred to the provisions of the Act n question, and said that
QxPenses to which it related were these expenses which
were usually paid by the landlord. When the question was to
t Iv) a franchise, and they had a man paying rates, was it fair
~Olt4llsist that, after all the deductions for the payment of such
l.'s. and for repairs and other matters, the house in right of
lahich
of a vote was claimed should be subject to a further test
~,_PlYment of ten pounds a year more ? The result of this
'gild be that a person having a ten pound house would be dis-
hli6ed.—( Hear, hear.) And this had not been applied to
English or Scotch Bills, but was reserved in an especial
nnner for Ireland, and impose cl at the very moment that they
professedoou_ to be acting in a spirit of grace and kindness to that
as titltlY, and wishing to place her towns on tile same footing
aaen e,se of England and Scotland.—( Cheers.) It was not,
irt Dist to endeavour to enforce this double sort of restriction
thi:ne case of the Irish franchise. He was ready to admit
she franchise
,"ting should be taken as a test of the qualification for
ptt Iranehise under this Bill—( Hear, hear)—but not a ten
" rating. The Noble Lord then read a short summary of
i11e,11./nreber of ten nound householders in some of the towns
1 eland, from which it appeared that in many of them the
umber WAS already but small? considering the amount of the