The Sun.
London, England, 1838-07-11 00:00:00

S:r M. WOOD moved the second rending of this Bill.

Mr. P. THOMSON slid the object of the Bill was
uncl.-ulitedly laudable; but he objected to the mode by
wltieh it sass prepo--ed to he effected—the taisirg 900,0001.
by tontine. H, tint nnt Huu-e would sanetio ► sut:ll
a p,i„ciple, Ii 1,e,5.,,,s were de.irous to enter upon under-
t ikings eapital, let them rdse it among ae-nselvc,,
8111 not base re..-t.urse to a sehemc fee hocuspacnssiv people
a their money : and IL: hoped the [louse woul.l nut agree. to
the 5.:c0.,(1 readieg.
Sir M. WOOD said the respectable inhabitants; of West—
minster. and the Dean and Chtiptcr, were %cry anxioua that
the improvements contemplated by this Bill should tt.l:,
place. if the tot.tine plan ore ohjectionalilc, it might be
a:t-rcd in Commire.'. But the Government ought not at
once to eppase a Bill, the ohjet of hie) um so important
as the impeJvenient of a V're.i, city like Westminster.
Lt.rd G. SOMERSET said his ohj,ction to this P.tll had
r.r.t been temored. If the LegiiLlure tat determined on
;;;Aar with speculations such as lotteries, be thooght it
ought uut to reco_tise a speculation for expending 93t) 000/.
to ;Li.; master. Besides, there were eleven Members of this
House who core Directors of this Company.
S.r DE LAC EVANS said. tbvt althou.tli be sir ported
this measure, he wvs no Director—he bad h;:en requested to
he come one, but had declined d se.—( Hear. )
Lord G. SUM ERS ET explained.
Mr. M•KINNON thought it unfair to lay down the prin-
epic, that because a Meni.oer ia as an hone• ary Director, la-,wing
no interest or shares in the Company, i.e. should be pruhibitsd
a rating.
Mr. A. YATES sugg,estecl that the Bill should go into
Committee, in old -r to make such amendments in -it as might
be d,emed

Mr. C. LUSH I NGTON had been a member of the P.°-
visional Commit e, but he had declined to bec•onte a Director.
because he thought it wrong for 31e:Ebas of that House to
embarkin stv•hsi eculations.

Sir E. SUGDEN ia;l7lso eirected Lis name to Le u ith-
drawn front the list of Directors.
Mr. YATES explained that he also had directed his name
to be withdrawn.

S:r R. INC LIS would ack the Home what credit could
be g Yen to a spi cula:ion from which three oot of the Mem-
bers present whose names were attached it as Directors, hail
slated that their names had been published without their con-
currence ? Under all the circumstances of the case be could
not agree to the second reading of the Bill.
After a few words from Mr. P. THOMSO N,
Sir M. WOOD withdrew the Bill.
PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENTS BILL.
Mr. SHAW LE FE VRE, in moving the second reading
of this Bill, begged to state in a few words, the principle of
the Bill. His object in introducing this Bill was to place
the law relating to parochial assessments on a more sa-
tisfactory basis than that on which it at pr, sent rested.
and also to put an end to that dissatisfaction which prevailed,
owing to the introduction of a principle of rating lately, which
had never be;ore been heard of. In the year 1830. the Pa-
rochial Assessment Act passed. The object of that Act was
to procure an uniform rate throughout the whole county.
The Honourable Member proceeded to quote at some
length the case " Rex v. Joddiell." It had been laid
down, he said, by the Judges that personal property
was to escape rating. Doubts, however, existed whether
the case of the King v. Joddiell was to be maintained.
The Parochial Assessment Act did not conduce to equality cf
rating ; the only good derived from it was, thae it gave a
cheap mode of appeal to the special sessions, and plenty of
appeals there would I e if this rating question was not settled.
He was not consulted as to the introduction of that proviso,
but those who were consulted understood that it should be in-
serted without the smallest prejudice to the landowner, and
that it was open to bring the subject forward in the next
Session. It was said that the clerical tithe-owner ieceived
the amount which came to him as a rent. charge for the duties
perfotmed, and that us that was a salary, he was to be
exempt from rateage. He (Mr. L.) could not take that
view of the matter. He always considered this as one of the
most secure and valuable properties in the kingdom. It was
better to the holder than any landed property.--( Hear.) If
they introduced the new species of rate great dissatisfaction
would be created in all the parishes of England ; and in the
county which be had the honour to represent, the tithe-owners
were rated at one-half while the occupiers were rated
at the rack-rent. Such dissatisfaction had been caused
by that mode of proceeding that all the benefits de-
rived from the Tithe Commutation Act would be counter-
acted, unless this House immediately interfered to remedy
this difficulty.__( Hear.) He ventured, therefore, to ask the
House to come to a speedy decision on this question, for if they
did nothing in it, they would give the signal for litigation in
every parish in England.
Mr. GOULBURN was sensible how difficult it was to
oppose any proposition coming from such a quarter. He
would not have come forward to oppose the present measure,
if he had not considered it to be inconsistent with the law for
the commutation of tithes which had lately passed that House.
The Bill was the more dangerous because it in a great de-
gree concealed the object it professed to have in view.
lie had no wish on the part of the clergy to avoid any burden
that might be justly cast upon them—all lie asked was this,
that when the House called upon all classes to contri-
bute their proportion to the general burden, the clergy
might not bo called on to contribute more than a fair
proportion. Two years ago, the House had passed an
Act for the Commutation of tithe 3 in England and Wales,
and that Act was in the nature of a bargain which the
present measure tended materially to alter. Every principal
of good faith required them to anhcre to that arrange-
ment, and not impose an additional tax upon nhe clergy.
The Bill was entirely different from the notice put upon the
Books by. the Honourable Member, and from his speech it
appeared that his intentions were different from both, Had
he (Mr. G.) no other objection to the Bill he would cppose
it, because the title of it had no reference to the matter
it contained.---( Hear, hear, hear. ) It was called a
declaratory Bill, but it was no such thing.--it was an enact-
ing Bill, and made a total change in the law of rating.
The tithe-owner was the only one in a parish to whom no
advantege was given by the Act, while it was proposed to
exempt the landholder and the manufacturer from the tax.
The principle of the Act of Eliz,beth, and every succeedine
Act, was that ad parties should be equally ri,:ed. Th;
average of the profits on a number of years might be
made the foundation of rating. In the conducting parochial
affairs there had certainly of late been great irregularity. If
this Bill was passed, every clergyman would he taxed more than
was just. Whatever might be the fate of the motion which
he had to make, be thought when the Bill was sufficiently
discussed, there was that sense of justice and good feeling in
the ecuctry that would not ptrint it to rase The Learned
Gentler-nail concluded by moving that the Bill be real a sacontl
time this day three months.
Mr. E. BULLET: rose, and was

(LEFT SPEAKING.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

-~:►-

110 USE OF COMMONS, JULY 10.

Mr. lIUME hoped that he Wgtat be allowed to bring on the m.)lion of
which be had given t,E:tici,, and which would put an end to the morning
meeting.—Calear, hear.) did not know whether this was the paver

time or not.—(Move.) It must be evident that the House would never
meet in an evening after such a sitting as the present, and the business
of the country would be impeded instead of forwarded by the present
arrangement.—(" More!" and" Oh !") The Hon. Member was under-
stood to say, in conclusion, that he should bring on his motion at six
o'clock.

The Report on the Prisons (Scotland) Bill was brought up.
COUNTY OF CLARE ADVANCE BILL.

In Committee of the whole House, a resolution was moved em-
powering the Treasury to make certain advances to the county of Clare,
in consequence of the defalcation of the Treasurer.

Mr. GOULBURN thought the public ought not to bear the loss
arising from the defalcation of an officer aprointed by thecounty, and who
ought to have been compelled to furnish security for the amount that
might be in his possession.

Mr. O'BRIEN said the security was limited by Act of Parliament.

Sir R. PEEL considered it was most unwise to pass such a Bill without
enquiry. He objected to it, because the House was not acquainted with
the circumstances under which it was granted, or what the amount of
the security was, and for these reasons thought the principle very
objectionable.

Mr. LITTON instanced the case of the Treasurer of the county
Tyrone, who was a defaulter to a large amount, and it was sub-
sequently recovered from his sureties.—(Hear, hear.) Unless the
House was satisfied as to all circumstances of the case they should
not consent to such a vote. From the absence of all explanation, he
found there was something behind the curtain which required that
explanation.
Lord MORPETH, as it was was now past four o'clock, would post-
pone the vote. He had not anticipated any opposition, but he should
be able to give the fullest explanation when the question was again
brought under the consideration of the House.
Sergeant J CKSON believed no hon. gentleman would impute any
imprcyer motives to the noble lord; but the manner in which the
whole affair was conducted spoke very little in favour of the system
under which the business of the Government was carried on.

Lord MORPETH understood that these unfortunate persons in the
county Clare were absolutely in a state of starvation. He was satisfied
that the matter would bear the strictest scrutiny.

Mr. LYTTOIsT asked when this question had been first brought under
the consideration of the Noble Lord ?

Lord J. RUSSELL suggested the propriet3 of postponing any fur.
ther discussion until the matter had been investigated before a Select
Committee.

Mr. O'CONNELL said a Member of that House had been one of the
Treasurer's securities, and his estate had been sold to pay the amount of
his bond for 7,0001.

After a few worth from Mr. Sergeant JACKSON',
Me CHAIRMAN reported progress, and asked leave to sit again
and the House resumed.

On the motion of Mr. ESTCOURT, the Vagrants' Act Amendmen
Bill was read a third time and Passed.
'Re House th..n, at a Quarter-past Four, adjourned till Six o'Cloc:;..

RESUMED SITTING.

The SPEAKFR resumed the Chair at six o'clock.

Lord F. EGE RTON presented a petition, numerously
signed by Clergymen of all parties, and other persons, praying
for an alteration in the Beer Bill ; and one, to the same
effect, from the Licensed Victuallers of Manchester and Sal-
ford ; also from Oldham. and other places, to the same effect.

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1838.