The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-28 00:00:00

IMPERIA

lIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS--(YESTERDAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

INSPECTION OF NUNNERIES.
The Earl of EGLINTON presented a petition from
Kilmarnock in favour of the inspection of nunneries.
RUSSIA AND TURKEY.

Lord LYNDHURST wished to know whether the
Government would have any objection to lay on the
table a copy of the dispatch, recently published, which
purported to be signed by Count Nesselrode, and related
to the conduct of Russia in reference to the affairs in the
East. If that document was correct, he would venture
to say—and he thought he might do so without causing
any embarrassment to the State—that it was one of the
most fallacious, illogical, offensive, and insulting docu-
ments he had ever had the misfortune to read.
The Earl of ABERDEEN was understood to say
that the document would be laid on the table in a few
days, but that it would be inconvenient to produce it at
the present moment.
CASE OF THE COUNTESS DE ROLLAT.
Lord ABINGER presented a petition from the
Countess De Rollat (from Conway), claiming indemnity
under treaty, for property of her mother, Countess
Conway, confiscated by the French Government in 1793.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said if their lordships
entertained this petition he did not see why every disap-
pointed suitor in every court throughout the kingdom
might not, 20 years after the termination of a suit, and
after it had been forgotten, come forward and ask to be
compensated out of the public funds. But this lady ad-
mitted that she was not a British subject, and, therefore,
she had not a particle of right from the beginning. She
was a French maiden, married to an Irishman, who had
taken service with the King of France. In 1793 the
National Convention confiscated the property, under the
impression that she was a British subject. When, after
the peace, a convention was made that the French Go-
vernment should compensate British subjects for the loss
of their property, this lady's claims were investigated
before the commissioners, and rejected. She appealed to
the Privy Council, and in 1834 they decided against her.
Under these circumstances he did not think this petition
could be entertained.
After a few words from Lord ABINGER in reply, the
subject dropped.
RUSSIA AND TURKEY.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE postponed his
motion on this subject, which stood for Thursday, until
Friday week.
THE IMPORTATION OF BRITISH SALT INTO
INDIA.
The Marquis of WESTMINSTER presented a peti-
tion from Northwich, praying that English salt may be
imported into all parts of British India upon the same
terms and conditions as other goods and manufactures.
He said there are five thousand able-bodied men con-
stantly employed in the salt works at Northwich, and
the average quantity of salt extracted was 600,000 tons;
and they conceived that they could dispose of a much
greater quantity if they had the means of sending the
article to greater distances, and that the trade of Lan-
cashire and Cheshire would be much improved by the
interchange of commodities thereby occasioned. At
present the import duty in India was nearly 71. a ton,
which was about twenty times the value of tho article.
If it would be of advantage to the people of Lancashire
and Cheshire that the duty should be reduced, it would
be still more so to the unfortunate Hindoos, who, he
believed, lived eight months a year on rice and the re-
mainder on vegetables, and to whom salt was requisite
to keep them from disease and death. The salt of
Cheshire only contained one part in a thousand that was
impure, whereas the salt made in India was impure to
the extent of 185 parts in 1,000. There was another
point worthy of consideration, and that was the immo-
rality occasioned by the extensive smuggling which now
prevailed. He was told that three-fourths of the salt
used in the western parts of Bengal were smuggled.
Earl GRANVILLE said it would be impossible to
remove this tax, without imposing some other tax on the
people of India, and it should be remembered that the
principle applied to all countries, and especially to orien-
tal countries, that the people would pay a tax they were
accustomed to, but would not pay a new tax. He
believed that the legislation which had taken place in
India had been to encourage the importation of salt, and
he believed the last returns showed that the salt imported
into India from Great Britain for the last six months was
equal in quantity to what had been imported in any
previous twelve months. And if the noble marquis read
the evidence given before the committee of the House of
Commons, he would see it was a question whether, if
the salt duties were entirely abolished, that would not
exclude British salt from India.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said it appeared to him there
was some truth in the proposition which was first enun-
ciated by a committee of the House of Commons, he
thought, in the year 1836, but, by judicious dealing with
the salt monopoly in India, and substituting a system of
import duties, and excise duties, where necessary, a con-
siderable increase of revenue might be obtained with a
much greater extension of trade. In order to confirm
that view of the question, it was only necessary to look
into the accounts which the East India Company had
themselves published. By these documents it appeared
there were no less than four or five different modes of
supplying salt in different parts of India. In Bengal
• there was a government manufacture. In the North
Western provinces there was no government manufac-
. ture, but there was a supply from the government manu-
facture in Bengal, and from certain manufactories in
native at-des which paid duty on importation. In Madras
there was no native manufacture at all, and in Bombay
there was no government manufacture, but there was a
system of import duties and, excise. In Bengal and
Madras, where the peopie were supplied from the
government manufactories, the revenue had been almost
stationary, but where there was no government manu-
facture, and where the supply had been left to private
enterprise, there had been a very large increase. In
Bengal, where there was a government monopoly, the
revenue in 1839-40 was 619,0001., and in 1849-50,
610,0001. ; while in Madras the revenue in 1839-40 was
338,000/., and in 1849.50, 383,0001. He hoped that
the subject would be dealt with at an early period in a
comprehensive spirit,
The conversation then dropped.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) ACT
CONTINUANCE BILL.

On the question of going into committee on this bill,
Lord ST. LEONARDS suggested that the Govern
ment should not press this bill in its present shape, and
should not propose any similar bill for a longer period
than six months. He was not one of those who found
fault with the original bill ; but he had always regarded
it as a strong measure to meet an exceptional case,
being in regard to property what the suspension of the
Habeas Corpus Act would be with regard to personal
liberty, and he did not think such a system ought to be
continued longer than the immediate necessity. Why
should Ireland be thus permanently subjected to a law
which no one thought of permanently applying to Eng-
land ? (Hear, hear.) The Encumbered Estates Court
worked on the condition of p
direct sacrifice of the
rights of individuals, and at th expense of a contraven-
tion of many wise laws affecting the relations of landed
property. There were social evils from the present act
which were not ordinarily observed. One great evil was
that the system of mortgages was interfered with, and
money could not, on legitimate occasions, easily be
raised in that manner. (The noble and learned lord
illustrated his arguments by detailing cases which he
said exhibited monstrous injustice.) At this time there
was a vast diversity of opinion in respect to the act.
This he knew, because he had just come from Ireland.
He called upon the Government to consider the objec-
tions he had made, and to postpone the committee, in
order to reframe the bill. If his suggestions were not
acceded to he should oppose the further progress of the
bill.
The LORD CHANCELLOR regretted that his noble
and learned friend had not been present at the previous
stages of the bill, when the objections which he now
offered might have been better considered,, and when the
noble and learned lord would have heard the views of
the Government on the general question. He agreed
that this legislation was exceptional ; and at variance
with established principles. Bnt what were the indica-
tions that the necessity for this act had ceased ? He
referred to the numerous petitions presented for the
renewal of the act—viz., from Feb. last, at the rate of
35 per month. (Hear, hear.) This showed that public
feeling in Ireland continued to demand this system.
(Hear, hear.) Under the circumstances the Govern-
ment could not bring the system to an abrupt termina-
tion ; and it was, therefore, merely a question to what
period could they limit the renewed act, and by what
means could they best bring the system to a conclusion.
It was generally admitted that a preliminary to the
discontinuance of the act must be the accomplishment
of a uniformity in the Irish and English Courts of
Chancery ; and that, it was understood, had been the
view of the late Government. The offices of Masters of
Chancery in Ireland were at present so full of business
that they could not possibly for some time do the work
•f the Incumbered Estates Court. His own opinion
was, admitting that the system should not last a day
longer than was indispensable, that a bill continuing the
act from session to session would not have been a judi-
cious course, and he had calculated that a period
of less than two years would not suffice. Looking
to the, consequences of the act, he thought Parlia-
ment had 'every reason to congratulate itself on its
legislation in this direction, and though it might be true
as the noble and learned lord had said, that these forced
sales had occasionally not produced good prices, yet in
general, the sales were satisfactory ; and at any event
their lordships were not to overlook this great advan-
tage—that the purchaser got with the property a clear
and indefeasible parliamentary title. A few figures
showed how vast were the social blessings conferred by
this act on Ireland, The property sold in the court up
to April last had realised 8,700,000/. ; and of that
6,100,0001. had been distributed ; and it should be un-
derstood that there was a necessary delay in distributing
the proceeds, for it was difficult to ascertain clearly to
whom the money really belonged, which was the reason
why, though two years would now only be taken for
receiving further petitions for sales, four years would be
taken in order to enable the court to distribute the new
properties it might sell. With regard to the details, all
he could say was, that r,no new powers whatever were
taken, and that in that respect his noble and learned
friend was in error. With respect to the second clause,
affecting tenancies for life, to which great objection was
taken in Ireland, the government would consent to
withdraw it. (Hear.)
After a few words from several noble lords the house
went into committee.
Clause 1 was agreed to, with verbal amendments.
Clause 2 was, after some discussion, on the suggestion
of Lord ST. LEONARD'S, struck out, the LOIID CHAN-
CELLOR undertaking to prepare and bring up a clause