The Sun.
London, England, 1838-07-17 00:00:00

THE CORONATION.

Mr. HUME gave notice for to.morrow, or next day, of a
motion for a return of all promotions at the late Coronation,
and the expenses which accrued to the public therefrom.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

The HONOURABLE MEMBER then proceeded to intro-
duce his motion regarding the early sittings of the House.
It must be in the recollection of the House, that on five days
on which notices stood first, the House had been counted out,
or prevented from being made, in order that discussions might
not proceed. That showed an indisposition in the House to listen
to such matters. He was as anxious as any one to preserve the
right of introducing notices, but he submitted to the House
that at this period of the Session they ought to give all their
time to the disposal of such business a; it wits essentially ne-
cessary to cirry through. He proposed, theretoro, that 0.1
Tuesdays and Thur,days crd,rs have precedence of motions.
The motion was agreed to.
CANADA.

The Marquis of CHANDOS inquired if any official
account of the names, salaries, and dates of the appintments
made by Lord Durham had been received?

Sir GEORGE GREY was understood to reply that one
copy of the Gazelle ha•l been received, and that the informa-
tion would be furnished as soon as p,,s,ible.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that with respect to the
&Aries ha could only refer to the papers laid on the table of
the How? some time ago. Ile had icason to believe there
was no other person with a salary.
FACTORIES.

Lord ASHLEY gave notice that on the first motion
going into a Committee of Supply, he should move as an
amindment the motiou of which he had given notice on the
sulject of factories.
Mr. DARBY enquired if it were ifaended to go into Com-
mittee of Su7ply to-clay?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER r,,plied in
the negittiie.
DUI"! ON WOOL.

Sir G. lIEATHCOTE wished to ask a question with
re,-pcct to the exports of British Wool to France. This
country took their wool at a mere nominal duty, while they
ke,,t up an ad valorem duty of 22 per cent. Was tit re any
probability of that duty being taken off?
Mr. P. THOMSON said that some time ago it was inti-
mated to him that the French Covet-11,11cm intonded to reduce
the duty to a considerable extent. Since then no re.
ductionhad taken place, and he had reason to believe that no
farther reduction would he made. At the same time he would
observe that it was more their inttrest than that of the Lig-
ii.h Governmeot t, make a 1-Auction.
NEGRO EMANCIPATION.

Mr. O'CONNELL begged to ask the Right Urn. Bar,.
net the Secietary for the Colonies, whether any dispatches
hid be, n rests ived from the West Indies, relative to the im-
mediate ern nip .thin of the negroes ; and whether there was
reason to apprehend any diffi...urties in earning that measure
into r if et ?
Sir GEORGE GREY said dispatches had Lecn r«teived
this (13y alnouneing that proviion h,d been msde by the
Legislature of Jamaica fur the emanci, athtm of the negro
apprentices on the fir.t day of August. On the 9:11 of
Ju,e, the day on which the Bill had pass,d the House
of Assembly of Jamaica, it was sent up to the Council,
returned by them with some win:Omen's, and no farther pro.
eeedings had been taken at the time the packet s ailed. In
St. Lucia a majority of the Council w2re in favour of a
similar Aep. A triesige had also been address -d to the
Legislature and Council of Trinidad by the Governor,
calling their attention to the s ime subject, and suggest-
the expediency of following their example. A
similar message hid been addressed by Governor Colborne,
aas to be taken into c6nsidtrathin on the 6th of June.
UNIVERSITY Oh LONDON.

Mr. GIBSON rose to ask the Noble Lord, the Secretary
of State for the Home Department, a que,tion relative
to the cause of the present embarrassed state of the
Uniso rsity of Lo don. Statements of a very extraordinary
nature had a; peared in the public prit.ts, reflecting on the
conduct of some Members of the Senate and of M. tubers
of
her Majesty's Government; and he d to ask the Noble
Lord whether it was true that the Committee of the Faculty
of Medicine had for some time suspended its labours, and
whether various Members of the Senate had not announced
their intention not to resume their functions. He wished also
to know whether considerable dissatisfaction had r.ot been ex •
I pressed by a Right Rev. Prelate on account of the defective
nature of the charter ? Ile wished also to know whether the
Lord Bishop of Durham had not written to the Chancellor
of the University of London, stating that if the preset t
system were pursued the whole plan would prove abortive,
and was calculated to render the University of London an
object of ridicule and contempt rather than of praise. He
wished the Noble Lord to state to the H.)use whether Le
meant to issue a, new chatter to the University of Lon-
don ; and uhile on that subject, he would ask—(Much
laughter)—whether it was the intention of the Government
to persevere in withholding compensation from those meinhets
of the Senate who had devoted their tine to the organisation
of that University; and whether in the case of a new charter
( Renewed laughter)—ha should have done presently--
whether in that case the Noble Lord intended to entrust the
superintendence of the University to an unpaid management ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Honourable Mem-
ber had asked him so many questions, that rerhaps he
would not think him unreasonable if he only answered
one.___( A laugh.) That was wit 4 respect to the pre-
sent .tote of the University, with reference to the medical
Committee w:ticli the Honourable Member had stated he un-
derstood had for some time ceased to act effectively. He "ccr-
I tainly had been informed that for some time the Medical
Committee had not met in sufficient ntimbers to enable
them to eat, but he had every reason to believe that
the difficulties that had arisen would shortly be pat an end to,
Atnd the Committee would meet f,:r r;:gular business in Octn-
ben Of this he was sure, that discussions in that House vierp
pot likely to do R.ny good.

ORANGE FLAGS.
Mr. HUME wished to know, from the Noble Lord at the
head of the Home Department whether it was correct, as re-
ported in several papers, that from the Protestant Cliurc:ei in
the north of Ireland the Orange Flag was displayed on se‘eral
o7casions ? _ .

Lo d J. RUSSELL said he would advert to that circum-
stance in the statement he should presently make to the House
I answer to Mr. FRESHEIELD,
Mr. WARD said it was not his intention to p-oce-d with
the Metropolitan Scners Bill this session, further than to have
it printed and in the hands of the Members for consideration.
Mr. BAINES begged to inquire of the Hon. Baronet, the
tinder Secretary for the Colonies, whether it was the inten-
tion of the Government to make arty communication to Par-
Ii with respect to what they intended to do with the
question of slavery in the Crown colonies?
Sir G. GREY was not aware that it would be at all ncces•
s iry. The Government had sent out a circu'ar to all the
Co cities, and he hid already stated that the roc wrimr.mda-
tion ha I been acted on by the three Crown Colonies oi the
West Im:ies. The same circular and recommendation had
been cent to the Mauritius, and he trusted it would ulso be
acted upon there.
• TITHES (IRELAND).
Lnrd JOHN RUSSELL said the House would expect
some communication with respect to the result of the deli-
berations of the Government, upon the debate which took
place when the Tithe Bill was last before the House. Upon
that occasion the motion of the Honourable and Learned
Member for Dublin ( Mr. O'Connell), was supported by
the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire ( Lord
Stanley), but upon that occasion he ( Lord John Russell) stated
that he had three objections to the course then proposed The
proposal was to sacrifice the public money for the purpose of
passing that Bill. His first objection to it was that the
amount required to satisfy the claims had never been stated ;
his second objection was that the Honourable and Learned
Member for Dublin had stated that the arrangement even
then would not be satisfactory to a large body of the
Roman Catholic population, and therefore he thought
it inexpedient that such a large sacrifice of the public
money should be made.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He had
stated, in the third place, that he thought as to the
future working of this measure it would be a bad precedent
to begin with grants, which would be certainly to the
tithe owners, but by which all who had resisted the law
and refused the payment of tithes would obtain a remission,
and those who had paid their tithes would receive no adven-
t: ge—( Hear)—and that, in consequence, in the future col-
'cetion of the rent charges, landlords would be likely to
look to Parliament for any deficiency, and thus the good
working of the measure would be interfered with. But these
statements of his ( Lord J. Russell's) did not meet with the
acceptance of the House ; and with regard to one, the Right
Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel) had made a proposition by which the
first object of those statements would be no longer applicable.
Now the chief motive which induced the Government to modify
the course which they before bad considered just was, that there
appeared a very general opinion in the House that some sacrifice
on the part of the public of the nature propoeed would tend to the
general settlement of this question, and that it would promote
the cause of peace and harmony between adverse parties in Ire-
land, and he ( Lord J. Russell) thought that whatever might
be the opinion of the Government on a question of this nature,
a proposition of this kind, uniting the suffrages of Members,
differing on subjects connected with the Church, would be more
likely to promote peace and tranquillity in Ireland, and
that the Government ought not to stand in the way
of the prospect of a satisfactory settlement. He thought,
however, it would be necessary to provide that it should
not be optional with the tithe owners whether they would
accept the proposal, for if some accepted, and others
enforced the law, the object which they had in view
in this proposition would be entirely defeated.—( Hear.)
With these opinions, therefore, he would now proceed to state
msince
t hthe propositions which he intended to make to the House.
The first part of the subject would be the amount of 640,0001.
which had boom already advanced under the authority of the
do,former
hiAcptroptonstihtienntitwheitohwnthere arrearss. Co
passing should
of the Act, it did not appear to him to ho expedient
to make a proposition entirely for the payment of that sum by
instalments, but that the sum should be entirely remitted and
forgiven to the occupier, but that the landlord and persons who
would be liable to a rent charge under the present Bill, and
owed these instalments, should be still obliged to pay them, and
that the Treasury should be empowered to collect them. But
when he said that, with regard to the landlord, the sum should
be collected by the Treasury, he did not mean to propose that
the Treasury should collect those sums for the benefit of the
State, or for a repayment that was to remain finally with tire
Exchequer. He proposed the sum should go in part satisfaction
of the persons who claimed the arrears of tithes which accrued
since. He proposed to add to that the sum which had already
been received by the Treasury in repayment of the instal-
ments. The next part of the question was the question of the
remainder of the million as connected with the arrears of tithe
composition. Now the amount was rather different from that
which was stated the other day in the course of the debate.
There were, as he had alreedy said, 640,000/., which
were actually advanced to the owners of tithes out of
the million.—( He tr. hear.) There was a yet further sum,
which was applied by a subsequent Act of Parliament,
and in consequence of a loan which had been advanced by the
Exchequer out of the sum voted for public works for the use
of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners of Ireland. The Ecclesias-
tical Commissioners were not at first able to meet the demands
made upon them. They were allow( dto receive one hun-
dred thousand pounds from the Treasury, and by a subse-
quent Act thst sum which had not been paid by the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners war given to the public works
out of the remainder of the million which had been voted by
Parliament. Now, there was a sum of 640,000/ which had been
alresdy applied. The remaining stint was 261.000/. What he
proposed was diet tl.c 264,000/. tog( tlier with all that part of the
640,000/., which might be recovered from the landlord
shout I be applied to liquidate the arrears of the tithe
composition fur 1836 and 1837. That was together,
as he had already said, with any sum that might be already
paid. He believed that he had already mentioned that he
wished to state more explicitly, with regard to th a sum
260,000/., and the further sums that would" be paid,
it was proposed that they should only go in liqui-
dation of those arrears of Tithe Composition due from oc-
cupying tenants; that with regard to any landlords who had un-
dertaken the payment of Tit e Composition, and with regard
to any landlord to is hem the Act of the Noble Lord opposite
applied, that with respect to those persons there would be no
remission. The rent-charge would, by that meting, in future
be put upon the landlords, who were liable. The amount,
therefore, of his proposition was this, that towards the pay-
merit of arrears of t the comp tsition, from 1836 and 1837, due
by occupying tenants, there should I e employed the sum of
263 0001., and the whole of the 640,0001. due from landlords,
and also due from 1 rs impropi iaeors—the proprietors of the land
as well a> the tithe. It would be impossible t r make a statement
of the exact amount of the sums to be recovered and added to
the 260,000/ , but there could be no doubt that it
would exceed 300,000/. Where the lay impropriatnr
had not the lanh, then the division would take place in
the sam net .n-r as iti the Ca .0 of teller persons
It was rposcd in consideration of ti.eae sums that the
whole of the ar,esrs of t;the, which were nce,y existiae,
should b r at once abolishe I, and tl.a. di. re should be no
airears exe- pt such as iv, re reserved by the present Bill.
: ile le ic6t3 tslrci anttf itn
It appeared to him with regard to any arrears accruing
b
tass haring
rotb'elebille ttnia,de, but without succesa,
at any further proceed-
ings would be tel;o1 with respect to them after the paving of
to before
::
the pre=ent Act. With respect to any fetal e harmony and
peace wit.ch was to be exp Nee I in I, elai".d, Inc could not but
rat het t the question pat to him a short time pre. •esly by
tee floriom ab'e Member fur Kilkenny. r espeet:ng a hit had
t ikon pl ice only a few days beck iri that country. Ile ( Lord
Russell) r, reived a later from the Lord Lieutenant that
nhoei ng, iu which it was st tted that, not only wer Orange
11 .Its displayed upon the Churches iiii the floral of Ireland,
but firing of guas hal also taken place. Ile thought it was
not out of the power of the Clergy to preve.it those demon-
strations. If, under this Act, or any other, they sought for
peace and harmony, it could pot be b alleeing demonstri-
tiens which would excite hostile feelings bete:rest the Catholic
people and the Protestants. There could be no chance of
future pence unless some di-position of forbearance was dis•
pleyed on both sides. Only by such a spirit, and not by the
sacrifice of 300.000/., or tt n times that sum, could that desir-
able end be obtained. The Noble Lord cce,cluded by movirg
that the House resolve itself into a Committee for the purpose
of considering so much of the 6th and 7th Win. I V., clause
180, as authorises the issue of Exchequer Bills.
Mr. HUME submitted whether, as a matter of forme, 'the
Noble Lord ever knew of a propes:l to grant away a million of
I the public money made to that House without due notice.

Lord J. RUSSELL—If the Hon. Gentleman would insist
upon that objection he should not press his motion; what he
wished was to have his proposition fairly before the limas-,
print, d, and in the hands of Members to consider it.
Mr. Ii UM E thought it w is the duty of tie Chancellor of
tire Exchequer to look to this roVely of the public purse.
He felt convinced that this sacrifice of a million would be only
a truce for a few months; the loss of the money being not
half to bad as the violation of principle. The Noble Lord had
given up his own opinion against the proposal, as he asserted,
in deference to the opinion of the House ; but he (Mr. Hume)
di I not think that opinion of the House was at all ascertained.
He would, therefore, object to the motion, as when leading
Whigs and Tories joined in committing a great larceny on the
public the Representatlws of the people should have an oppor-
tunity of con,i(b-ring how it was done.
Sir R. E L was not disposed to throw any impediment in
pow • t upon form ,on the cour,7e of tie Noble Lord, in this ad-
vanced peri el of the Session, in a measure which would prove
of great advantage in bringing the Tithe question to a saris
f story termination.—( Hear, hear.) At the same time he
would not pledge himself irrevocably to the clauses to be then
proposed. It a,peated that the Noble Lord would nit be
able to incorporate this provision in his Bill, unless it went
throueh a preliminary Committee ; but that Would not bind
Hon. Members to it in its subsequent
Wages,
should it be
found advi. able to change it. Only upon this condition was
he (Sir R.
R Peel) disposed to acquiesce, reserving to himself
Bill, of it full consideration, and deciding upon its
the entire power, when the clauses were incorporated in the
gar. ) rye latter part of the Noble Lord's speeds
he (Sir R. 1)( e 1) had beard with some regret, when he intro-
duced the totally unconnected matter of the hoisting of Orange
flags upon the steeples of churches in the north of Irel Ind with
gbse— very well-
Hear)--
conciliatory question before the House.--(Hear,ehaera)r_.)
and the
for one,Neh Noble
Lden:dt
himselfb efore heard n oft
appear these
tfloa
Informed upon it ; besides, it was not stated that those exhibi-
tions were wade with the concurrence of the Protestant
clergy. He, fur one, did no hesitate frrikly to avow that the
plerp and the landlords should do all the? could te prevt.iat

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JULY 17, 183 S

such exhibit:ons ; Lut on-the pact of the clergy he fc't bound
to protest against the general impeachment thrown out againtt
them by the Noble Lord.,—( Hear, and cheers.) •
Mr. IRVINE had received a later from a most respectable
gentieman residing in the county of Antrim, assuring him that
no such manifest ttion as that to which the Noble Lord had
adverted had taken place in that county.
Mr. O'CO NNE LL wished to know from whence the letter
to 7a hich the Hon. Member alluded was dated?

-Mr. IRVINE r, plied, fnan Lisburne.
Mr. O'CONNELL %aid that it was not a little singular, ns
Lisburne was nvar Bolftvt. where the troops had actually been
called out to quell the rioters after they had broken the win-
dows of the house of the Roman Catholic Bishop, and com-
mitted othcr outrages.
After a few words from Mr. DUNBAR and Captain JONES,

Mr. WARD did not believe that the proposition of the
Noble Lord wouli lead to al adjustment of this question It
was true that the Government plan was less objectionable
Van the plan of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Tam worth, but still, when On was a million of money to I.e
tlea't with, he did not think th.y would be justified in de-
paving from the rules of t. e House. He hoped his Hon.
Fritn.l the Member for Kilkenny would persist in his motion,
and if he did he should have his support.
Mr. LUCAS would not concur in any plan the object of
which was to do justice to all p irties. With respect to the
Noble Lord's plan, all he (Mr Lucas) would say was that he
was not to be considered as pledged in any way to that plan,
and that, should he have objections to it, he should claim his
right of urging them hereeter.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
although the Government had considered the plan of his
Right Honourable Friend the Member for Tamworth, they
had not adopted it. What was the object which the Govern-
ment had in view ? Why, to give the House information,
and this could only be done by enabling them to bring for-
ward the clauses, with a view to their being printed and cir-
culated, by which they meant to carry their intention into'
effect. For this purpose it was indispensable that they
• •
should go into Committee on the resolution, and then, when
the clauses to be founded on it were brought in and printed,
Honourable Gentlemen would be able to seethe whole scheme
by which the Government intended to carry their proposition
out. At the earliest no discussion on the subject could take
place before Thursday ; and as that was the case, aid as with-
out knowing what the plan was they could not decide upon it,
he hoped his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny would not
]persist in his opaosition.
Mr. WARBURTON said that what his Hon. Friend the
Member for Kilkenny wished wag, that the resolution should
be proposed without pronouncing any opinion upon it at pre-
sent. This could be done if the Chairman were, as soon as it
had been proposed, to report progress and ask leave to sit
again to-morrow. So far from there being unanimity of
feeling on the part of the House with respect to this propo-
sition, he believed there were many Hon. Members on both
sides who strongly objected to it. Such bwing the state of
the case, he must express it as his opinion that the course pur-
sued by his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny was a
proper one.

Sir E. B. SUGD EN said that the original resolution, with
respect to compensation, was brought forward for the relief of
the clergy of Ireland exclusively, and as he had some diffi-
culty as to the extending this principle to the other tithe-
owners, he should like to see the point properly considered.
Mr. HARVEY said that his Hon. Friend the Member for
Kilkenny did not seem to understand what had fallen from
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
as it was clear, from what the Right Hon. Gentleman had
said, he had no wish that any opinion should be pronounced
at the present time on the Government proposition. Without
having before them the resolution and the machinery by which
it was to be carried into effect it was impossible that they
could take the matter into consideration ; but, as regarded the
proposition itself, all he could say was that this country would
be as much astonished at it as the Government themselves
were when they first heard of it on Friday night. The Right
Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth bad dexterously led
the Government into this plan, but now he as dexterously
avoided pledging himself to it. Ile (Mr. Harvey) predicted
that the only advantage which the Government would derive
from the course which they had taken would be an increase of
unpopularity.
Lord J. RUSSELL would not object to the course sug-
gested of going into Committee, proposing the resolution, and
taking the subject into consideration at a future period.
Lord STANLEY said that there was a point on which he
was desirous of information. If he understood the Noble Lord
rightly, he proposed to remit the 640,0001. advanced to the
clergy, where the clergy nad abstained from levying from the
landlord or occupying tenant any part of the arrears due to
them. Did the Noble Lord mean that the Government
might levy that amount only which was due to the clergy from
the landlord, and not from the occupying tenant? By the
Million Act under which the advance was made the party
liable was defined; but then that Act did not come into ope-
ration until 1834, and in 1833 the liability for the tithe rested,
not with the landlord, but with the occupying tenant. He
might be labouring under some mistake, but it was at all
events right that the House should know the amount of remis-
sion on which they could reckon.
Sir R. PEEL said that there was another subject of mis-
application on which the Noble Lord ought to obtain in-
forma,ion. He would not ask any question at present relative
to it, but merely say to the Noble Lord that he ought to ob
tai❑ some information as to the 100,0001. which had been
granted to the Ecelesisstical Commissioners —( Hear.)
Mr. HUNIE wished to know if it were intended to excuse
those landlords who were occupiers from the repayment of
the advances which bad been made to them ?—( Cries of
" No, no.")

,
Lord J. I USSELL said that they were not to be exempted.
With respect to what had fallen from the Nob!e Lord opposite,
all he could say was, that in many cases the landlord would be
liable to the repayment of the instalments, and that in many
others the advances, for instance, to lay impropriators were
not made recoverable. He would be very glad to find that Ecclesiastical Commissioners were in a condition to refund
the 100,000/. alluded to by the Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Tamworth.—( A laugh.)
Mr. LUCAS contended that the liability of the landlord
was the result of a post facto law.
The House then resolved itself into Committee, and
Lord J RUSSELL having proposed the resolution,
Mr. HUME said that it made no mention whatever of the
100 0001. which had Leon paid to the Ecclesiastical Commis-
sion( rs.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was not neccssarv, as the
resolution referred to the Act of Parliament under which that
payment Baas made.
Mr. HUME certainly had not been aware until now that
any such sum had been applied to ecclesiastical purposes, and
he thought the fact ought to be stated in the resolution. •
The resolution was then agreed to, and the Howe having
resumed,

Lord J. RUSSELL then moved that the House should go
into Committee again, for the purpose of considering the re-
maining clauses of the Bill, and when they had got through
them they could then proceed with the clauses rendered neces-
sary by the• resolution.
Mr. Fl UNIE hoped the Noble Lord would fix some day
after Thursday fur this purpose.
Sir G. SINCLAIR postponed the motion of v.hich he bad
given n tie., for c,lling the attention of the House to the state
of the Irish Protestants, and ;he policy of her Majesty's Mi-
nisters, to a future day.
Mr HARVEY said that, as the resolution had come on
them like a thunder storm,, they ought to have ample time
allowed them to consider it. For this purpose it would be
neeessa y to wade through the debates that had taken p'ace on
the suLject, arA he did not think they should be required to
go int ► that part of the question before Thursdiy.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the debates which had taken
place ct,uld afford little assistance, as there had been but one
opinion expres,ed on the subjoet on either side of the House.
Mr, AGLION BY denied this, and said that the Noble
Lord wdeld find to his regret that there were a great num -
he of Members opposed to his proposition on both sides of
the House.

The liouie then went into Committee; Mr. Bernal in
ti:e Chair.

Ott clause 3 being put,
Mr. L E FRO Y, in the absence of his Right lion. Friend
the Member for the University of Dublin, proposed as an
amendment a proviso to the effect tha• instead of 251. per cent.
the party liable to the payment of tithes should be allowed
301. per cent. as a bonus in the event of payment within
six months, and that in defau't of payment he should be liable
to the whole amount of the arrears due, without any allow-
ance whatever.

"Lord MO RPETH said that the Government could not pos.-
sibly accede to the proposition of the Han. and Learned Gen-
tleman after all that had passed. The only question the Com-
mittee had to consider was, whether the powers for enforcing
the payment of; the rent-charge were sufficient for the purpose
or not. He thought they were quite sufficient.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the only effect of the Hon.
and Ltarncd Gentleman's proposition would be to create vexa.
tion and litigation, by the uncertainty of the payment which
his proposition would establish if it were agreed to.
Mr. LEFRO Y said that the advantage of such a bonus
having been shown in the instance of the Barony cess, lie thought
it right to introduce the same principle into this Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
think the prop )sition was one which the Committee could en-
tertain, for, in point of fact, instead of a bonus it would estab-
lish a penalty.
After a few words from Mr. J. GRATTAN and Sir R.
FERGUSON,
Mr. LEFROY withdrew his amendment.
_ _ _

Captain
rn
tain JONES wished to call the attention of the Co-
n te e to a point of some importance, and that was the manner
in which this Bill would shift the liability of parties holding
leases for lives.
Lord STANLEY said the point adverted to by the Hon.
Gentleman was worthy of attention. It was a point that
ought to be considered on the bringing up of the report.
Viscount MO RPETH said it should have his attention.
Mr. L FRO Y then proposed a proviso, by way of amend-
ment, to the effect, that all certificates of composition should
be deemed and taken, unless specially varied, as the criterion
fur ascertaining by whom the rent charge was to be paid. The
object of this proviso, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said,
was merely to give validity and effect to those certificates.
Mr. CURRY said that as the object of the proviso seemed
to be to afford more certainty in ascertaining the rent charge,
and as it was cautiously worded, he saw no objection to it.
Mr. LEFRO had taken care to word the proviso most
cautiously.
The proviso was then added, and the clanse as amended VI as
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses down to 8, inclusive, were thep agreed la,
On elquse being propesed,
Mr. L. O'BRIEN cmplained that the period allowed for

:peals under this clause, namely, six week tat t)o small,
and ought to be enlarged.
Lord 11ORPETId said the object in fixing so snort a pe-
riod was to avoid encouraging vexatious app.'als, or any ap-
peals that were not alttgetlicr well founded, and t ) afford the
titheowners some feeling of security.
On the clause being put from C:e
Mr. L E FRO Y rose to propose the omission of clauses
from 9
to 19, and to substitute for them one c'ause which h.!
had prepared. These clauses proplsed to open all former
compositions. Novs it should be recollected that since those
compositions had b_4,n originally made several of the in-
cumbents had died and had been succeeded by others.
'Fbere was no record existing, in twiny just owes, of
the pinciple on Wiich these composiiins had taken
place. There was no calculaion by which to be guided,
and it was easy to conceive the difficulty to which open-
ing compositions bat had so long ago taker place would
now lead. But this Bill also proposed to open cue composi-
tion; that had taken plice wider the Stinky Act. lie had
oljec ion, in a limited manner, and under certain te-
vbictions, to allow the to,re recent conyotitions under the
Siaidey Act t) be renewed. lie would conclude by n)v-
ing the omission of the clauses front nine to nineteen,
and he would move, to substitute instead, one dame provid-
ing for the review of the composidons in the limited way .that
he had stated.

Lord MO RPETH would not deny that there was some force
i,n the arguments of the Right Hon. and Learard Gentleman
with respect to the inconvenience of opening compositions made
at a period far back. In his amendment the Right Han.
Gentleman proposed to leave the plwer of appeal in a cer-
tain class of cases under the Bill that went by the name of
the Noble Lord ( Lord S,anley.) An objection had been
made to allow appeals in caies where there had beet volun
tary composition, but he thought voluntary an erroneous
term to apply to compositions where parties merely gave their
consent that a composition should be made without any agree-
ment as to the amount of the composition. The difficulty of
going back to 1814 would not be so great as was imagined, as
the averages would ail be found in the Dublin Gazette. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had said that he was willing to give
an appeal in any case of fraud or concealment, but he said
al.o that he wished the appeal should be limited to the Lord
Lieutenant and Privy Council. Now he ( Lord Morpeth)
thought that it would be a great advantage and convenience
that the parties should go before a barrister, who would in-
quire upon the spot, with a facility of hearing evidence at both
sides, and a great saving of both time and expense to the
parties. _

Mr. G OULBURN urged upon the Committee the incon-
venience and danger of disturbing engagements which existed
under an act of the Legislature, and so far shaking the pub-
lic confidence in the faith of an Act of Parliament. Nothing
could be more dangetous than to introduce such a principle.
With respect to the compositions made under the Act that
went by his name, both parties chose a Commissioner, and the
composition was the result of their mutuil voluntary ag.ee-
ment. Now, in many instances since these compositions had
been made in 1821, the original incumbents had died, and had
been succeeded in some instances by two or more successors.
He repeated that it would not merely be doing injustice to
individual parties, but it would be introducing a most danger-
ous principle at this distance of time to re-open agreements
entered into with the voluntary consent of both parties, and
upon the faith of an Act of Parliament.—(Hear )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
that the apprehensions of the Right Hon. Gentleman were in
some degree exaggerated. If the alteration proposed inter-
fered with agreements made under the Right Hon. Gentle-
man's Act, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would
support them with very great reluctance ; but as they only
contemplated revision in cases where compositions had been
unfairly effected, he could not see that their adoption would
impose any hardship on the clergyman.
Mr. E. ROCHE did not object to the clauses as going too
far, but as not going far enough. That abuses had taken
place under Mr. Goulburn's Act he needed no further proof
than the petition he had had the honour of presenting a few
nights since. That was a petition from the parishioners of
Castle Island, stating that their Rector, the very Rev. Arch-
deacon Ryder, bad, by fraud and collusion, procured an unfair
composition under Goulburn's Act. It appeared by that
petition that the Archdeacon claimed 1,8561. as composition,
and that his own Bishop, on being referred to as arbitrator,
awarded him only 1,450/. This showed the necessity for re-
vision.--:( Hear. )

Mr. LUCAS thought that this case, if established, went
wholly to support the view of his Right Hon. Friend below
him (Mr. Lefroy). As, even in a case when the parishioners
had a right of appeal to the law, they waived that right, and
preferred arbitration.

Mr. SHEIL said that the facts contained in the petition
mentioned by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Roche) were, that the
Bishop of Cloyne, on having the matter referred to him,
awarded the Archdeacon 1,4501. instead of 1,8161., his claim.
From this the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite might con-
clude that the Archdeacon since that time had received only
1,4501., abiding by the arbitration ; but what were the facts ?
He took the 1,4501. until 1832, but when the million was
granted he claimed, and obtained, the proportion of his own
claim, 1,856/., and afterwards made his succe,:s in that matter
a ground for enforcing the same amount from his parishioners.
H.ar, hear.) Surely such a case as this afforded some
grounds for revision. He ( Mr. Sheil) could not vouch for
the statements in this petition as facts.—(Cheers.) When the
petition was presented, he advised his Hon. Friend to write
to Archdeacon Ryder on the subject of its allegations.—
[Mr. Roche here intimated that the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man had not given him such advice.) Well, he advised same
Honourable Gentleman to write—(A laugh)—but, however,
revision was absolutely necessary, if it were only from the
fact of the time allowed by the Right Honourable Gentleman's
let being so short as to have caused great injustice and hard
ship. With respect to the hardship of interfering with settled
agreements, he did not think it would be very great, as the
Clergyman could always rest on his composition, and the ep.
plicants would be obliged to produce facts before they could
shale it. In 1823 Ireland was completely infested with tithe
proctors, and be must do the Right Honourable Gentleman
opposite the justice to say that his Act went a great way to
extinguish them; but at the time the compensation was settled
those proctors were the acting parties for the Clergymen,
and they arranged the compensation, not according to the
standard of the net sum which the Clergyman had hitherto
received, but according to what they (the proctors) had been
able by every device to extort from the peasantry. He was
perhaps, not justified in mentioving what occurred in private
conversation, but he had heard 'through that medium that the
Act had been originally more effective ; but that the Right
Honourable Gentleman bad made such aterations in it during
its progress through the House as were considered by the
. hen Lord Lieutenaut (Marquis Wellesley) as being of an
impolitic nature.
Mr. GO ULBURN said the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man was mistaken, as every alteration which he (Mr. Goul-
burn) had made in the Act with the perfect concurrence of his
Excellency. Alterations, to be sure, were forced on him
during the passage of the Bill through the House ; but these,
in the opinion of Lord Wellesley, in no wise vitiated its prin-
ciple.
Mr. HUME was very much surprised at fie opposition
given to the proposal of the Noble Lou,, because as the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite must recollect, that on the intro-
duction of Mr. Goulhurn'a Bill the grounds advanced for its
adoption were--that there.snrist be a revision every fifteen
years.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir It. PE EL observed that the Hon. Gentleman ( Mr.
Hume) appeared to have awoke after a sleep of fifteen years,
and was wholly uneorveious of what had passed during that pe
riod.—( Hear, and laughter.) By Mr. Goulburn's Act com-
position was, no doubt, temporary ; but it hal been rendered
permanent under Lord Stanley's Act, with a right of appeal.
Why, then, hal the pa; ties who felt themselves aggrieved not
availed the.nselv, sof that right ? He thought the re-opening
of the composition would have a tendency to shake titles to
property ; arid sure he was, that with respect to no c luntry but
Ireland, and with respect to no subject but one affecting the
Isish Church, would such a proposition ever have been for one
moment entertained. If such a principle were once admitted
why might it not be contended for in England as regards
Tithe Composition 15 years hence ? tie gave his most cor-
dial support to the prop )sition of his Right lion. Friend (Mr.
Lefroy.)

Mr: O'CO NNE LL asked why Hon. Gentlemen oppasi'e
were now prepared to restrict their own p,.inciple ? Before an
appeal could be allowed under this Bill, there must be evidence
adduced on oath in a court of law that the amount of the com-
position exceeded by far more than one-fifth what ought to has c
been the bona fide payment under the agreement. Why, was
there ever a fairer proposition than this submitted to par-.
liameut? Would Hon. Gentlemen contend that if a Protestant
clergyman had got 5, 10, 15, or 20 per cent.more tan be %as
legally entitled to receive under the composition that he must
retain it—that before an appal could lie the amount must ex-
ceed 20 per cent. ? Why, what a principle of justice was this
And yet the proposition to afford relief unless the amount was
more than 20 per cent, was gravely opposed by Hon. Gentle-
men opposite I Why, the pound of flesh was nothing to this.
Where more than 20 per cent. had been given over the just
value, there must have been fraud, and a power of opening the
composition ought to be given. As the present was attempted
to be made a final settlement oF the tithe question, no cause of
complaint ought to be allowed to remain. It ought not to bti
forgotten that tithe was sprinkled with blood. The murder of
the widow Ryan's son, at Rathcormac, ought nut to be forgot-
ten in securing such an adjustm. nt as would be conciliatory to
the feelings of the people; fur that collision should be pro.
duced was not to be wondered at. lie hoped that the House,
by passing the clause as it stood, would give one evidence of
its desire to act justly by the Irish people.
Load STANLEY supported the amendment. The clause
which his Right Hon. Friend proposed to' substitute for those
from 9 to 19, were in his (Lord Stanley's) opinion quite ade-
quate to all purposes of justice ; and, therefore, he should
support the amendment.

Sir EDWARD SUG DEN said that the ihm. and Learned
Gentleman opposite had not scrupled to call the affray at Rath.
cormad a murder. He had, indeed, published an opinion,
signed by himself in his capacity as lawyer, declaring that the
affair amounted to a murder. Now he (Sir E. Sugden) as a
lawyer would take upon himself to deplare his conviction that
the opinion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was not
founded in law, and moreover, that it was caleteeted to pr.).-
duce, and had produced, great evil in Ireland.
Mr. O'CONNELL had not been so fortunate a lawyer in
England as the Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman ;
but he could undertake to say that ha had seen more than he
had of the practice of the criminal law. The Right Honour-
able Gentleman bad said that ( Mr. O'Connell) had pub-
lished his opinian as A lawyer that the affair at Rathcormae
was a murder. That statement was not consistent with the
fact.—(Hear.) The opinion in question was published un.
doubtedly, and with his (Mr. O'Connell'sl name to it; but it
was not rublished b/ him. That ovinion aa: given 11 himin

usual vay, upon a case • sent in,- and returned in the usual
way t) the client. The panic s thought prnpur to make it pub-
but he (Mr. O'Con,mll) did n3t publish it hims,lf. Lbw-
ever, he was ready to stand by that opinion now. Here were
tle real facts of the C:iSJ The LI, on which the incursion
of the military at Ritheormae was ma..'e was an cnclosei
Sir E. SUGDEN—No.

Mr. O'CONNELL—I say the field was an enclosed field.
I am glad I have now brought s a eminent a lawyer to the
P ant on this subject, and let it b! decide I now. The Right
G.eatkman is too good a lawyei not to kenw the value
of the fact which be deities. Upo) whether the field was an
enelos el field or nat rests the whole question, whetter or not
the aff air amounted to a murder ? I repeat it was a murder. The
stAternea :.n his (Mr O'Connell'e) brief was that the fields
were enclosed. The evidence at the inquest directly went to
show that the:- were enclosed. Eleven witnesses proved that
they wele, and there was no sufficient evidence to contradict
tl.cm. That being so, the troops who broke into the field
were tresp vsers, the resistance offered to then) was a legal re-
sit ince and ih killing that °wand was a murder. He repeated
that he was glad the Right Hon. Gentleman had come forward
to grapple with him on this sulsject. The case was very
clear ; Parson Ryder and his ttemy committed a trespass by
breaking into an inclosed field. It was due, however, to the
military to say that the officers exhibited, as, indeed, they
always did, the most gentlemanly conduct; and that neither
t'tey nor the men showed the slightest desire to exceed the
orders of the Ntagistrate. The people of Ireland, in fact,
always felt the greatest confidence in the good conduct of the
military, who never evinced any desire to go beyond their
orders.—(Hear.) The Right lion. Gentleman could not
resist admitting the murder had been committed. The evi-
dence went directly to prove that the fields were enclosed.
The fact was not denied, that the military broke into the en.
closed fields. That constituted a trespass. They were re.
listed. Shots were fired, and murder was committed. For
three shillings and four pence seven human beings lost their
lives, and four were rendered helpless for the remainder of
their days.—( Hear.)
Sir ED WA RD SUGD EN regretted that this discussion
had arisen.—( Cries of " Oh, oh !" on the Ministerial side.)
lion. Gentlemen cried " Oh l"—did they imagine that he
began it? Who first introduced, on a question relating to the
opening of compositions, the subject of the affray at Rath-
cormac?—(Opposition cheers.) The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman might cry " Oh I" but it was not his doing so
that would induce him (Sir Edward Sudden) to swerve from
the line of his duty, or to abstain from expressing his opi-
nion. He cared not for such expressions and the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman's feelings.—( Hear, hear.) He utterly
denied that the whole of the evidence on the inquest and
elsewhere went to show that the fields were enclosed. Ho
denied that there was no evidence to the contrary effect.
So far from it, he asserted, from the tenure of the evidence,
that there was no enclosure whatever. He asserted this as a
fact, and he would stand to it._ The Hon. and Learned Gen-

demon had stigmatised this affair, in regard to which Judge
Foster had charged the. Grand Jury, and the Grand Jury had
ignored the bill, as a murder. It was very easy for the Hon.
and Learned Member to rise in that House and malign a
learned Judge, but did the facts bear tho Hon. and Learned
Gentleman out? He again asserted that there was no en-
closure ; he insisted upon it as a fact, which he was prepared
to substantiate. So far from there being any enclosure, there
was fair and clear access for hundreds of persons, had they
been disposed to enter upon ordinary concerns. True it was
that in the mean time the parties who were determined to
oppose the law had drawn up carriages and other things so
as to block up the passage and erect an illegal barrier. But
such a barrier erected for such a purpose was clearly illegal.
No trespass therefore was committed by forcing it, and he
( Sir E. Sugden), as a lawyer, asserted that under those cir-
cumstances no murder was committed.
Mr. O'CONNE LL repeated that a murder, an unavenged
murder, was committed. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
adverted to Chief Baron Foster. Why, Judge Foster in his
charge to the Grand Jury, did not put to them the question of
the enclosure at all, but entered into a long rambling state-
ment of the political motive which had induced the parties to
oppose the entrance of the military. As to Judge Foster
being a " Learned" Judge—why, learned he certainly was, by
courtesy ; but he spent 25 years at the bar without getting a
brief, all his time being occupied in parliamentary avocations.
For these it was that by a hop, step, and jump he rose to the
bench.—( Hear ) He (Mr. O'Connell) was quite satisfied as
to the result of this conversation. He had elicited the opinion
of one of the first legal authorities of the day, that the fact of
the enclosure being once admitted, he could not deny that the
subsequent catastrophe amounted to a murder. Now the
whole weight of the evidence distinctly proved that the enclo-
sure dii exist, so that the opinion of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man was, in fact, as good as a declaration that murder was
committed.—( Hear.)
Mr. ROCHE (Cork county) knew the spot as well as he
knew his father's estate, and he would state from his own
knowledge that the haggard was enclosed before the affray
and after it.

The Committee then divided, when there appeared--
For the clause
Against it BB
Majority for the clause -15
Clauses from 10 to 21 inclusive were then agreed to.
The clause, as amended, was Agreed to, as were the clauses
to the 40th inclusive.

Upon the 41st clause,
Mr. SMITH O'BRI EN moved an amendment that mini-
sters' money, as it was termed, should be comprised in the de-
finition of house.
Lord AIORPBTH could not admit that definition at
present. He certainly admitted that it might properly enough
be made the subject of a Bill in a future Session ; but before
they could legislate on it several Acts on those two subjects
ought to be examined and dealt with.
The amendment was negatived without a division.
Mr. E. B. ROC El E proposed the clause of which he had
given notice :

Provided always, and be it enacted, that if any party or
parties entitled, or who would have been entitled in case this
Act had not been made, to any composition for tithes esta-
blished in any parish, shall offer to reduce or increase the
amount of any such composition, and shall signify such offer in
writing, stating the amount of the sum or several sums so pro-
posed to be substituted for the amount of such composition.
and if such offcrshall be assented to and accepted in writing by
a majority in value of the persons who, if this Act had not been
made, would have been liable to the payment of the compo-
sition established in such parish, or if any composition for
tithes in any parish has been by any agreement between the
parties interested, or any award in writing, or other written
document, reduced or increased, or agreed to be reduced or
increased, the sum or sums so agreed upon or awarded shall
be binding on the said Commissioners of land revenues, and
the said barristers, and shall be fixed as the amount of such
composition, and the certificate thereof amended accordingly.°
Lord MO R PETH was of opinion that the first part of the
clause might be admitted, but he thought differen ly as to the
latter part ; the cases the Hon. Member's amendment applied
to were already sufficiently provided for by the clauses as they
stood.

The clause wns finally withdrawn.
Tim. House resumed, and the report was ordered to be re•
ceived on Thursday. upon which day also Lord J. RUSSELL
informed the House be shraild brirg under their consideration
the resolutions submitted to the House for the first time to-night.
The House resolved itself then into Committee upon the
Prisans Bill.
The several c:auses of the Bill having been agreed to tio
/louse resumed ; the report was brought up, and the Bill or-
dered to be read a third time on Friday.
TRADING COMPANIES' BILL.
On the motion of Mr. THOMSON, this Bill went through
Committee.
The Hous.i resumed, and th'3 report was ordered to be real
to- morrow.
COUNTY OF CLARE ADVANCR BILL.
On the motion of Lcrd M RPE T 11, this Bill went throne
Committee.
The (louse resumed,and the report was ordered to be received
to-morrow.

TUNES AND LAND MERGER BILL.
°lithe motion of Mr. AGLIONBY, this Bill went through
Committee.
The HOuse resumed, and the report wag received.
REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS BILL.
The further consideration of the report on this Bill was
postponed until to morrow.

LAND TAX REDEMPTION BILL.
Thig Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be cal"
mitted to- morrow.

COAL TRADE (PORT OF LONDON) BILL.
On the motion of Mr. THOMSON, this 13ill was read 6
third time and passed.

WAY RATES B
On the motion of iiIGH
Lerd J. RUSSELLI, LL
this Bill was read
a third time ; after which
Mr. G IZIMSDITCH brought up a clause, proposing to ell"
act that the money raised in each parish or township should be
expended in the parish ov township where it was so raised. Mr. SHAW LE FE VRE had originally been in favour 0f
~.`
the principle contained in the pioposed clause ; but, inasmuch
as it had been rejected in the Committee, after much discug-
sion, he was not now prepared to adopt it.
The clause was brought up and read a first time. On the
question that it be read a second time the House divided, when
there appeared

Noes
Ayes ...
Majority against the clause —32
The Bill was then passed.
FISHEIZIES.(IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion of Mr. E. TENNENT, this Bill was read
a second time, and committed for Wednesday.

PUBLIC RECORDS.
The Hou e resolved itself into a Committee of the whole
House, when a resolution was agreed to for a
grant to.defr%
the expense of the record commission, and for
other porpose,
connected therevrith. The House tesumed, the resolution n 5
reported and agreed to, and leave was given, for the introduc'
tion cf a Bill founded thereon.
On Vie motion of M BONES.r. CH AL NI E R S, a return was ordere
of the qualtity of banes imported into the United Eingdnnl'
from foreign countries, in thS years 1835 and 1836, distiry
guisbing the quantity from each country.
ESTABLISHED CHURCH. • . Lord JOHN RUSSELL, obtained leave to brim?: 'ft,
Bill for further suspending the appointment to certain
ur;
nities and offices in cathedrals and collegiate churches,
01 sinecure rectories, and for preventing the immediate eff.ntsb one
ecclesiastical jurisdictions
cf the moasures in progress for
alteration of dioceses.
The Bill was afterwards brought up, read a first, and or'
dered to be read A sooond time on Thursday next.