The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-19 00:00:00

STEAM NAVY.

Earl TALBOT rose to bring for►vard the motion o:
which he had given notice, on the subject of the effi
ciency of our steam navy.
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair abortly after Twelve
o'clock.

THIRD READINGS.

The following Bills were read a third time and
passed :
Commercial-road (comprising the Cannon-street-roads,
the Commercial-read, the Her seterry Branch of Road,
the Eat India Duck-read, and the Barking-read).
Great Indian Pecinrular Railway Company.
Mr. MAS rERMAN presented a petition from the
master bakers of the city of London, against the Sale of
Bread Bill.
Mr. HENLEY presented a petition frum Oxford,
praying for au alteration of the Betz. Aet.
SUPPLY.

Mr. BERNAL brought up the r. port on the Com-
mittee of Supply, which u as 3gr.ed to.
ESTATES LEASING (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read u third Mine and passed.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL.

On the question that this Bill be teed a third time.
Mr. REYNOLDS again expressed his regret that the
Government had not deemed it necessary to assimilate
the municipal privileges of Ireland to those of England.
He gave notice that early next session he would move
for leave to introduce a MI on the subject.
Mr. SADLEIR wished to know whether it was the
intention of Government to introduce a Bel next session
to extend municipal privileges in Ireland.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said the matter was under
consideration, but he could not pledge the Government
to introduce a Bill on toe subj,cr.
After a few woi-ds from Mr. A GLIO.NB Y and Mr, W.
PATTEN,
Mr. J. O'CONNELL also expressed a desire that the
municipal privileges of Inland should be placed on the
same footing as those of England.
Mr. HAMILTON hyped the passing of the Bill would
prove setisfactury to the parties who had so long been
agitating the question of municipal reform in Ireland.
The Bill was read a third time and passed.
SMALL DEBTS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
This Bill was read a third time. On the question
that it do pave
Mr. THORN ELY asked if the power of granting com-
pensation under this Bill rested with the Treasury, that
was, had the Treasury the power of fixing the sum to
be paid?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
in the affirmative.
The Bill was then passed.
STOCK-IN-TRADE BILL.
On the motion that this Bill be read a third time.
Sir H. W. BARRON said it was unjust to make one
single species of property support all local taxation, and
therefore thought it his duty to enter his protest against it.
As, however, at that late period of the S•Ssiiin, every one was
desirous that no division should take place unless it was
likely to be profitsble and useful, he would not divide
the House upon the Bill.
After a short discussion, with reference to such a
privilege being extended to Ireland, in which Mr. Law,
Mr. F. French, Col. Dunne, and Mr. Anstey took part,
the motion was agreed to, and the Bill was read a third
time.
REGIMENTAL BENEFIT SOCIETIES BILL.
On the motion that this dill be read a third time,
M. HENLEY said the Bill bad passed through its
various stages with great rapidity without one word of
explanation being given with respect to the object e hich
it was contemplated to effect. He was desirous, there-
fore, that the Government should postpone it far a day
or two, in order that Members might make some
inquiry with respect to it; otherwise,li should consideroe
it his duty to take the sense of the House
cause it proposed to deal with private upon. it, be'
property in a way
which was encir ly ueusual.
Mr. F. MAULS said, he could hardly consent, at this
late period of the s-ssion ~ to po,tpone the measure. It
had received the entire appruva of the Commander iu.
Chief, and it was considered necessary on three grounds;
first, because these regiic,ntal benefit acciettes were
thought, to a certain extent, subversive of military dis-
cipline in the army; secondly, because they hitei fared
to a certain extent with the establishment of savings'
banks; and, thirdly, because all parries connected with
them were (li•sirous that they should be brought under
,those which were contained in this
such provisiups as
.4111•,,4 , 1 . \ i IN,
"-- Xr—IIRNL-EY said that this Bill would be an invasion
ii of the rjghti end, pri ilege of persons interested in other
/-'-- aw'etlea of Siy,iff ady established. It was not the
1. , caste 13F ,,, ' eft deel to ith the property of private
te Indite al's W 1440 - -,fb r previous consent.
ruir
lt..
', .. ' hfr. DX- iefivi3 expiained that the Bill only dealt
` with benefit aticie' and not with charitable scAtieties.
• 811-14 LAY VANS said that he Was much
.11 S.

pleased with the attention paid to this Bili by the Hon.
Gentlemen, but he thought it better to leave the matter
in the hands of the Secretary of War.
After a few words from Col. DUNNE the Bill was
read a third time and passed.
The Enlistment (Artillery and Ordnance) Bill was
read a third time and passeS.
INCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the consideration of the Lords' amendment to this
Bill,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL proposed some verbal
alterations.
Sir H. W. BARRON called the attention of the Soli
citor-General to a grievance under this Bill, which he
was sure bad escaped the attention of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman. The commissioners under this Act
had power to sell an estate which, perhaps, might bring in
an income of 2,0001. a year if it hada debt of 200/. upon it.
Mr. SADLEIR had to express his regret that the
twenty-second clause had been added to the Bill. He
should be sorry if these projected commissioners were
given the power to proceed to a peremptory sale of an
estate, so long as the owner managed to keep up the
payment of the interest on the incumbrances on the
estate. lie thought cases would occur in which the
commissioners would proceed to such peremptory
sale of an incumbered estate under circumstances
which would be peculiarly hard to the owner of the
land. Besides, the most disturbed district in Ireland
was practically excluded from the operation of the in•
tended Commission. It was too late now to remedy the
omission, hut in the next session of Parliament he would
call the attention of the House to the desirability of
bringing that district within the operation of the Bill.
the Solicitor General had more than once confessed
that his want of local knowledge of the coun-
try and the circumstances of Ireland had to a certain
extent incapacitated him from legislating for that
counts y. That confession did the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman's candour great credit; and he (Mr. Sadleir)
hoped that, in filling up the proposed Commission, he
would select gentlemen resident in Ireland, irrespective
of their politics, whose best qualification for carrying
out the objects of the Bill would be their intimate and
extensive knowledge of the unwritten law of the country.
Colonel DUNNE complained that a Bill of this im-
portance, which proposed to deal with the whole of the
lauded property, was brought forward during a morning
sitting, when so many of the Irish. Members were absen►.
Surely this was a mean use of the subservient majority
of the Government. The amendment proposed
by the Lords was at least calculated to pre-
serve some of the property of Ireland; but
the amendment proposed at the table to-day was of a
different spirit. He should oppose the Bill, and support
the amendment of the Lords.
Sir LUCIUS O'BRIEN spoke in opposition to the
amendment.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the object of the
Bill was to enable estates to pay off incumbrances, which
could not be done under the present law.
Mr. REYNOLDS was opposed to the Lords' amend-
ment, on the ground that it would not only embarrass
the administration of this excellent Bill, but render it
nugatory altogether.
Sir L. O'BRIEN held that the amendment would
open the door to fraud.
The House then divided on the amendment, when
there appeared—
For the Solicitor-General's amendment 84
Against it
Majority for the amendment ... —64
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then moved the in-
sertion of the word nett, instead of the word gross, in
the same clause amended by the Lords.
After some observations from Mr. HENLEY,
Mr. SADLEIR said he was at a loss to know in what
manner the nett income was to be ascertained. He was
in hopes the Government would have rejected the
clause.

Major BLACKBALL supported the clause as it
stood.
Mr. BRIGHT thought it would have been better for
the Government to reject the clause introduced by the
Lords inte the Bill, but certainly the clause would be
improved by the suggestion of the Solicitor-General.
Mr. GROGAN supported the clause as it stood.
Mr. F. FRENCH also supported the clause.
Mr. REYNOLDS thought the introduction of this
clause had rendered the Bill less valuable than when it
was sent up to the Lords, but the word " nett," in his
opinion, was a far better word than " gross." Although
he entertained great respect for the other branch of the
Legislature, he should have esteemed them more had
they abstained from introducing this clause.
Colonel DUNNE, on the other hand, approved of the
clause, and should vote for its continuance.
The amendment was then agreed to.
After several other verbal amendments, the clause was
agreed to.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL proposed that they
should disagree to the amendment made by the Lords
in clause 25, to the effect that the Usher of the Court
of Chancery should not be entitled to poundage upon
estates sold under this Bill.
The motion was agreed to.
JUDGMENTS (IRELAND) BILL.

The House then went into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. Bernal in the chair.
On en amendment proposed in clause 2, in answer to
a question from Sir D. NORREYS,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that it would
not apply to leases where warrants of attorney had been
granted.
Mr. MONSELL objected most strongly to the altera-
tions introduced into tee Bill. It would have done much
more good if it bad been kept intact.
Mr. SADLEIR objected to this clause. It was mani-
festly against first principles. This clause would revive
all the evils, both of the custodism system and the elegit
system. If the Solicitor-General would reter to the re-
ports of the Committee, he would find that the evidence
given went to show this. At present they had two
systems of elegits, by one of which they could take pos-
session of the whole of an estate; by the L.tLer it was
possible to take possession of half the estate. Every
practical man who had given his evidence on the
subject of custodian and elegit process, had stated that
the same evils arose out of the elegit as out of the Cita-
toliam process. He had felt it his duty to opi,ose a
clause which went to revive a most pernicious legal
process is Ireland—he meant the system of degas.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL did admit that some
svili attached to the elegit system; still he hoped the Bill
would pass through Committee for the sake of its general
merits.

On clause 9 being moved,
The SOLICITOR GENERAL proposed certain alter-
ations to the effect that a receiver was not to be ap-
peidted or extended until after the expiration of a year,
and that the Court might direct subatitutcd service under
scite facias.

These alterations were agreed to, the House resumed,
and the Chairman was ordered to report the Bill to-
IfiUfrow.

STAMPS, &c., ALLOWANCES BILL.
The House then went into Committw•e on this Bill.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ex.
plain,d that the object of the Bill waste enable the Trea-
sury to reduce the allowances made on stamps.
The Bill then went through Committee.
The Turnpike Act Continuance Bill and the Juvenile
Offenders and Small Larcenies Bill were both postpuned.
YOUR-LAW UNION CHARGES ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL.

The House went into Committee on this Bill.

Captain PECIIELL inquired if the wives and children
of soldiers and marines possessed the privilege of irre-
moi ability during the absence of their husbands.

Mr. BAINESdid not like to take upon himself the
responsibility- of answering the question. The subject
was under the consideration of the Court of Queen's
Bench.

Captain PECTIELL said they had terrible experience
of the delay of the. Court of queen's Bench in cases not
very dissimilar. He hoped the Board would urge the
Court to come to a decision, and not defer doing so for
two years, a. they had done in one case.
Mr. BRINES begged his Gallant Friend to bear in
mind that the Poor-law Board had no influence with the
Court of Queen's Bench.
Captain PEVHELL said the Attorney-General and
Solicitor-General might accelerate the decisions of the
Court.

The clause was agreed to.
Clauses 6 and 7 were agreed to.
On clause 8 being proposed,
Captain PECIIELL opposed it, and proposed its
omission, on the ground that the appointment of tem-
porary auditors would endow the Commissioners with
additional power.
Mr. HAINES explained that the clause meant the
temporary appointment of auditors in the event of the
death of the auditor of a union, in order to obviate the
inconvenience of unfinished accounts.

Oa the suggestion of Sir H. WILLOUGHBY the
clause was altered to convey the moaning st4ted by the
President of the Poor-law Board; and it was agreed to.
Clauses 9 to 10 were agreed to—the latter with a ver-
bal amenilment.

Clauses 11, 12, 13, and 14 were also agreed to.
On clause 1f being pmposed,
Mr. HENLEY asked for some explanation of its
necessity?
Mr. BAINES replied, that as the law at present stood,
before the guardians could allow the emigration of a
pauper, they were compelled to call a vestry
meeting to sanction each case. This clause
was to get rid of that inconvenient machinery,
and empower the Pour-law Board to sanction all
proposals to emigrate approved of by the guardians.
The clause restricted the annual expenditure of each
union for purposes of emigration to a half of the average
rates of the previous three years.
Mr. MILES objected to the clause in sego. It was
tendencye coun counties
bad iu principle, us it would have the effect of removing
a parochial responsibility on to thebteha unions.
the
t
reduceo T
tche
er cir ertainly
legislationa in lliatte ytoecaormpss hlaad complain
to the
unions.
chinl responsibility, and transfer it bit by bit puro-
Mr. RICE thought it was very desirable to do away
with the consent of the vestry to any sum of money
e
which the guardians might think proper tovarprpy
apply
theor
migration. It would be impracticable to
elau,e into effect if such a consent was rt quired.
Alter a brief discussion,
Mr. BAINES proposed that the clause should be
withdrawn, and gave notice that he should bring in
another in its stead.
The clause was accordingly withdrawn.
Mr. BAINES moved the following addition to clause
16:—" Provided, that the abiding ut any such pour per-
son in such workhouse sh,il in all other respects be
attended with the same legal consequences as if such
workhouse had been situated within the union or parish
from which such prior person shall have been sent.'
Mr. MILES said that the powers given by this clause
to unions and to the Poor law Connuissionera were k.
o
great, that unless he heard some better reason given for
its iasertion, he should cousida it his duty
H to divide the
Hound upon it.