The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
TRANSFER OF LAND (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. V. SCULLY moved the second reading of this
bill. The bill was confined entirely to Ireland ; and, after
many years' study of the subject, it was his sincere
opinion that a measure of this kind was the fittest to re-
medy the evils of Ireland. The act of 1848 was too
overburdened with technicalities. It was a mistake to
suppose that the incumbrance of property was entirely
owing to the reckless conduct of proprietors ; but defi-
ciencies of the system of transfer and register of land in
that country had had quite as much to do with it. Of
course, local distress and the poverty of the country had
had a considerable effect in hastening that con-
clusion. A bill had been introduced in 1850
for the security of repayment of advances which went
to some extent in the direction of this bill, but not so
far as was desirable. When that bill was introduced a
meeting of Irish landlords was held in Dublin, which
passed resolutions approving of the principle of the bill,
bet recommending that its previsions should be greatly
extended. His bill was founded entirely on the string
of resolutions agreed to afthis meeting, and he believed
that if the house would pass the bill it would do much
towards increasing the property of Ireland. He pro-
posed free trade in land, that every man should have
the power of disposing of his land as he liked during
life or after his death. He trusted that the Govern-
ment would take up the bill, but if they did not he
should be satisfied with the bill receiving a second read-
ing this session, and next year, should he be in Parlia-
ment, he would pledge himself that he would lose no
opportunity of pressing it forward.
Sir J. YOUNG said there was no objection to the
second reading of this bill, on the contrary, he thought
the house ought to be mtreh indebted to the hon. and
leaned gentleman for having brought it forward. It
was tight, however, that he should mention that the
Government intended to appoint a commission to inquire
into the whole subject of the see and tenure of land, and
no doubt that commission would turn its attention to
this and other similar bills. There was a strong desire
in this country to simplify the mode of tranfenring and
securing titles to land ; and the house ought to be much
indebted to the hon. and learned gentleman for the
ability and clearness with which he had dealt with the
eibjeet so far as Ireland was concerned.

4fter a few words from Mr. NA.H.ER and Mr. HEAD-
LAU, the bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
referred to the select committee on the registration of
assurances.

COURT OF COMMON LAW (IRELAND) BILL.
The committee on this bill was then resumed, and the
remaining clauses were agreed to.

ELECTIONS BILL.
This bill was passed through committee.
SEAMAN'S SAVINGS' BANKS BILL.

This bill was read a second time and ordered to be
tommitted this day fortnight.
PUBLIC LIBRARIES (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE moved the second reading of
this bill, the object of which was to extend the Public
Libraries Act of 1850, to Ireland.
The bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
Committed this day week.

PUBLIC HOUSES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This bill was passed through committee.
SHERIFFS' COURTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.

This bill was considered as amended, and ordered to
be read a third time on Friday next..

LIVERPOOL,. ELECTION.

Mr. FRESHFIELD moved that Mr. Speaker do
issue his warrant to the clerk of the crown to make out
a new writ for the eleeting of two burgesses to serve in
this present Parliament for the borough of Liverpool, in
the room of Charles Turner and William Forbes Macken-
zie, Esqs., whose elections have been determined to be
void. Nothing came out in the committee which could jus-
tify the suspension of the writ. The treating established
agrainlst the late members was of the most moderate
kind, and the committee were unanimously of opinion
that the evidence was not of that nature to sanction any
further inquiry on the suspension of the writ for a single
day. There ought, therefore, to be no objection to this
motion.

Lord D. STUART said it had been his intention to
move that the vote at the next election for Liverpool
should be taken by way of ballot ; but he was in-
formed' by the Speaker that he could not do it as an amend-
ment to this motion,' and he had no alternative but to
move that the writ be suspended until the 20th of July
next, in order that he might have time to move
for leave to bring in a bill to carry out his
first intention. His object in making this motion was
not to punish the electors, but to afford an opportunity
of testing the efficacy of the ballot in preventing corrupt
practices at elections for large towns. The noble lord
was proceeding to combat the arguments which had
been used on former occasions against the ballot, but
Lord J. MANNERS rose to order, as it was mani-
festly irrerrular to refer to a speech which had been
made in a °former debate, and upon a totally different
question.

- The SPEAKER decided that the noble lord was out
of order ; and

Lord D. STUART said he would abstain from quoting
these speeches again, though it was a very common
practice to do what he had done. This was not the first
time that Liverpool had been convicted of bribery and
treating, for Messrs. Ewart and Denison were unseated
on the same ground in 1831, when the writ was sus-
pended in the same manner that he now proposed,
to give the Marquis of Chandos time to bring in a bill
to prevent corruption at the next election. It was not,
however, on the ground of the corruptibility of Liver-
pool that he made this motion, but as he had already
stated, to test the ballot in a large town.
The noble lord spoke up to six o'clock, when the
SPEAKER adjourned the house until to-morrow at four.