The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-30 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 30. 183-'.

ELECTION COMMITTEES.

YESTERDAY.

themselves the germ of appropriation.—(Hear, and laughter.) Now it
was because it was utteily impossible for us to enter upon a resolution
which was vague and ambiguous, and which did include within itself
the germ of appropriation, that we felt it incumbent on us, before enter-
ing into the details of that resolution, manfully and openly to de-
clare our adherence to the principles which we had put forward.
The Hight Hon. Gentleman said, why bring forward a motion which
you know her Majesty's Government could not accede to ? My answer
was, because we thought that you meant to invite us to the discussion of
resolutions whose principles you know we could never assent to. If they
asked us to discuss the first resolution, namely, the extent of reduction
of the present revenues of the Church, without making us acquainted as
to the mode of appropriation,that would be unfair, and we should therefore
refuse acceding to any probable reduction, until you told us fairly
whether your plan included within itself the principle and germ of ap-
propriation—it being necessary at some time or other for our own satis.
faction, and that of the country, that the question of appropriation
should be fairly considered and discussed.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
We, therefore, did, instead of bringing forward an abstract
principle to which great objections might be made, and which
the experience of the last few days has taught mc would be made—instead
of bringing forward any abstract principle negativing alienation—
we thought it better to propose the rescinding of the resolution
involving that principle. I can say as I said before, if we had any mo-
tive for postponing the consideration of this question, if we were per-
fectly satisfied with the condition of the Irish Church, and preferred the
existing law remaining in its present state. If these were the
motives that actuated us then, why should they not actuate us
now?—(Cheers.) No, Sir; I declare my adherence to the decla-
ration of last Session of a Noble Friend of mine, that provided
we were satisfied with respect to the principle to which he
gave his unqualified assent, then he was prepared to consider the means
to bring this question to an amicable termination. The two ques-
tions to which I more particularly refer are the provisions made
by this House with respect to the Irish poor, and the argument which
we shall have shortly under consideration with respect to the collection
of Irish tithes, and the position of the Irish Church on the ques_
tion which is this night to be submitted, at least pro
forma, in Committee, relative to Irish Municipal Corporations.
With respect to the Irish Poor Law Bill, I consider that measure only
touches those two questions in a single point of view; but that point is
one of very great moment. The point to which I refer is this—that by
establishing the principle of rating, it gives you a satisfactory test of
the qualification of the constituent body. That is the only
way in which the Poor Law Bill is connected with this ques.

(From our Seconi Edition of last night.)
lY ESTME A TI I.

Mr. WILVVGIIANI addressed the Committee at considerable length in
opposition to the application for a Commission.
The Committee decided shortly before four o'cloc.1; that the Commis-
sion should not be issued,
The Committee then adjourned.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 29.

The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual hour.
The Lords' amendments to several private Bills were read a third
time and agreed to.
REBUILDING OF THE ROYAL EXCHANGE.
Mr. CRAWFORD moved for leave for the Committee on the Royal
Exchange Rebuilding Bill to sit to.morrow, which was granted.
IRISH CORPORATIONS REFORM.
Mr. POWER presented several petitions from places Ia the county
of Westmeath in favour of Irish Corporation Reform.
IRISH POOR LAW BILL.

Mr. MUSKETT presented petitions from places in the county 6f
Mayo, against the Irish Poor-law Bill. -
CHURCH LEASES.

Mr. PARKER presented a petition from the county of Devon, praying
that any additional value which may be given to Church property may
be applied exc:ulively to ecclesiastical purposes.
MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS.

Mr. WARBURTON presented a petition from the Medical Practi-
tioners of Sheffield, complaining of the uneducated state of Medical
Practitioners, and preying for a remedy; a!so a petition from the Medi-
cal Practitioners of Ulster, complaining of the operation of the Irish
Apothecaries' Act.

NEGRO SLAVERY.
Mr. HOBHOUSE presented a petition from Aylesbury for the imme-
diate abolition of Negro slavery.
REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND MARRIAGES.
An Hov. MEMBER presented a petition from Bath against the Acts
for the Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages, and praying for
more effectual security against clandestine marriages.
Mr. Serjeant JACKSON presented petitions from the counties of
Ccrk and Donegal against the national system of education. Also a
petition from 40 clergymen in Dublin, praying-for an alteration in the
Ecclesiastical polity of Ireland and the restoration of the ten bishoprics
which were suppressed.
The Report of the Committee on the Lough Foyle and Lough Swilly
Drainage Bill was brought up.
Sir G. STRICKLAND brought up the Report of the Committee on
the Kirkstall, Ilkley, and Shipley Road Bill.
The Report of the Committee on the St. Philip's (Bristol) Bridge Bill
was further considered.
Mr. LEFROY presented a petition from the Warden and Masters of
Galway College, praying that their interests might be respected in the
Irish Corporation Bill.
Mr. BROCKLEHURST presented a petition from the inhabitants
of Macck sfield, praying that that town might he incorporated. Also a
petition from the same place in favour of a reduction of postage.
The Order of the Day for the second reading of the Eastern Counties
Railway bill (which stood for to-morrow) was, we understand, deferred
till Friday.
Mr. ACKLAND moved that the thanks of the House he given to the
Rev. Joh❑ Vane, the Chaplain, for the sermon preached by him this
day before the House, at St. Margaret's Church, Westminster, and that
the same be punned with the votes.—Agreed to.
Sir S. CANNING postponed his motion relative to the capture of the
Vixen till the lath of June.
Mr. WYSE gave notice, that on Tuesday fortnight, he would move
far a renewal of the Committee on arts and manufactures.
Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that on the same day lie would move
for certain Papers connected with West India affairs.
CHARITIES COMMISSION.
Sir T. ACLAND wished to ask the Noble Lord whether he had given
attention to a petition, sometime ago presented to the House and printed
with the votes, from the Trustees of a Charity, of which we could not
learn the name, complaining that sentence was passed up in their conduct
before the inquiry was concluded, and praying the House to direct that
inqt.iry to be renewed. The petitioners also complained that their ac-
counts had been taken from them by the Commissioner.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that his attention had only been recently
directed to the petition, and he had requested the Commissioner to give
him a statement of his reasons for the report complained of. Until he
(Lord .T. Russell) received the answer, he was unprepared to give any
further explanation.

I think the test of rating is most important and indispensable; but
I cannot say, supposing that the Irish Poor Law should by any circum-
stance fail, that that wou'd by a valid reason for postponing other mea-
sures—l hold them to be so important as to afford no ground for ob-
jection to Irish Corporations because you have not an Irish Poor Law.
I do, however, consider it absolutely necessary to substitute seine cor.
responding test, viz., sine controlling check by which you can deter-
_ _ _ . .

mine what shall be the true basis of the franchise. Sir, I voted for the

lrish Poor-law Bill, though I am bound to confess that nothing
would have been easier than to have found fault with many

of its details—but I felt that it was impossible for us
to introduce a system of relief for the poor into a country

in which they had never existed without giving a very large
discretionary power—(Hear, hear)—and therefore it was that I
looked over many of the faults contained in the Bill, thinking it was
impossible to frame the Bill free &cm some faults.—(Loud cheers.)
It was not because I thought the Bill was perfect, but think-
ing if Poor Laws were to be established at all, you must
establish a system, probably imperfect at first, but one which,
in the course of time would chew its imperfections, and call
for a remedy. Hear, hear.) After the great cry for poor-laws for
Ireland I was not astonished at the opposition to it when it came prac.
tically home to the pocket. I, remembered the frequent appeals which
were made for death, but when death actually arrived the applicant had
changed his mind.—(Laughter.) Except as a test for the future
franchise, I do not see that the Dish Poor-law Bill is connected with
the other measure. With respect to the Established Church I entertain
a very different sentiment. I wish to see the Tithe question settled in
a satisfactory manner; but it is essentially necessary that it should be
settled as a preliminary—it is necessary that Parliament should make
up its mind upon the principle upon which the Tithe question should be
settled, as a preliminary to the working of Corporations in places in which
they were to be established. I must, Sir, insist upon that question being satis-
factorily settled. I must insist upon, I must claim a strict adherence
to the compact of the Union, and to the principles contained in the
Bill for the relief of 'the Roman Catholics. If Corporations are to be
established for the purpose of shaking that compact and those
principles, then it will be my duty to resist them to the last.
Now, Sir, I conceive it would be perfectly competent to us to adhere to
the existing law with respect to Irish tithes. I conceive it would be
perfectly open to us to say, we are satisfied with the condition
of the Irish Church. We see less of agitation, less of dissatis-
faction prevailing. We see the law at least more regularly enforced
—more tithes recovered than before ; and upon the whole, trusting to
our own strength to negative the appropriation principle, in which
strength I should feel great confidence—(Hear, hear, from the Tories)—
we might say we are willing to permit the Irish Church to re.
main as it is at present.—(Hear.) It would be perfectly competent
to us to take that course ; but then we must not urge the non-settlement
of the Irish Tithe question as a bar to the settlement of the question

IRISH FISHERIES.
Mr. BARRON begged to ask the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ire-
land, whether any measures had been taken by the British Government
to protect the Fisheries on the Suir and Shannon, and to prevent the
destruction of weirs, and loss of life.
Lord MORPETH said that he did not think the Government
ought to take upon themselves what weirs were legal or iflegal, but

was certainly their duty to take measures to prevent riots.

TERRITORY OF OUDE.
hlr. PR AED begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Hob-
house) whether there was any objection to lay upon the table the ad-
vices received from the British resident at the Court of Oude, respect-
ing the recent alteration of the succession 7—and also whether the
Governor-General had received instructions to take possession of that

relating to Irish Corporations.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") If we
profess to be satisfied with the present state of the Irish Church
—if we prefer the existing law to any new law that can be introduced—
if we object to the settlement of the Irish Tit he question, we ought not

to urge the non settlement of that question as an insuperable obstacle
to the settlement of the Corporation question.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
The question is—is it for the interests of Ireland, is it for the in-
terests of the Irish Church, that the Irish Tithe question should remain
in its present state ? I believe the prevailing feeling in many parts of
Ireland is in favour of the existing law—l believe there are many who

territory ?
Sir J. HOBHOUSF. said that there was no objection to lay the papers
on the table. The remaining portion of the Right Hon. Gcntl2mares
anawc r was totally inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. PR AED then was understood to intimate that he should on a
future occasion move for all the papers connected with the subject.
HUSH NATIONAL EDUCATION.
Mr. WYSE postponed his motion respecting Irish National Education
for a fortnight, in order not to interfere with the intended exposition of
the Right Hon. Baronet's (Sir R. Peel's) sentiments on that subject,

would prefer the existing, law to any change Parliament is likely to intro-

duce. They state that a largeproportion ofthe tithe is now recovered—they
say my Noble Friend (Lord Stanley's) Bill is coming into gradual opera-
tion, giving to the Clergy the whole of the tithe commutation in case::
where the landlords have not undertaken the charge. Sir, lam

bound to say, looking to the permanent interests of the Irish
Church, that T, for one, cannot acquiesce in that proposition.
I do believe it to be for the interests of the Irish Church that the Irish
Tithe question should be adjusted, upon a reasonable and satisfactory
principle. I admit there is at present, perhaps, less of disturbance of
the public peace than there ha; been at former periods—that there is in
force a more effectual process for the recovery of Tithes—that
_ . .

which now, of all others, deeply iiterested the people of Ireland—
Municipal Corporations.
IRISH MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day for the House
resolving itself into a Committee on this Bill.
Sir . It. PEEL then rose and said,—Sir, I will now avail
myself of this opportunity of fulfilling the promise which I
made to the House some days since, that I would, previous to the
House resolving itself into a Committee on the Municipal Corporations
Bill for Ireland, indicate my general views and intentions with re-
spect to those measures regarding the internal policy of Ireland,
which are now awaiting the decision of the Legislature. Sir, my
wish is not to enter into a minute examination of the details of
the measures ; but rather to give a clear and comprehensive view
of the general principles which I propose to apply to their consi-
deration fearing lest the leading principles should be rendered
I,,ss intelligible by entering now into details.—(llear, hear, hear.)
Sir, I shall preface my explanation by referring to the statement which
was made by a Noble Friend of mine in the other House of Parliament,
in the course of the last Session, when, on account of the demise
of his late Majesty, her Majesty's Government signified their in_
tention of postponing the further consideration of the Irish measures
—my Noble Friend, the Duke of Wellington, made this declara-
tion with reference to the Irish Municipal Bill, and this declaration was
on a former occasion quoted by the Noble Lord opposite (J. Russell.)
My Noble Priced on the 29th June 1837 said : " On former occasions i
stated my objections to this Bill, and I still retain these objections. But
it is my anxious wish to put an end to the discussions with respect to
this Bill, anti the Irish Poor-law Bill, and the Irish Tithe Bill,
by bringing them to an amicable determination. It is my earnest wish
to put an end to the Irish Tithe question. I am desirous that some legal
provision should be made for the poor in Ireland. And I am also de-
sirous to see the Irish Corporation question settled; and that the
discussions on these subjec:s should thus be brought to a close."
In the course of the last Session, and in the course of the present Session,
I declared my concurrence in the opinions expressed by the Duke of
myeartleinesdti,d,gt.sirteo that,
satisfactory
if possible,
sao\n-e,lel nrtro:*l..
arrangement
setnatte ds thatld it
b was
made e
adjustment of those questions—(Hear)—and that we might be
permitted to apply our minds to the consideration of the general interests
of Ireland, without being led by those feelings which disputes on these
questions naturally engender. In the course of last year r
- made
another declaration on occasion of the third reading of the Muni..
cipal Bill. I stated on the 11th April, 1837, if on seeing these
measures with respect to the Irish Church and the establishment of
Poor-laws in Ireland, I should be prepared to modify in any degree my
opposition to the Municipal Corporations Bill, then I told the Noble
Lord my chief anxiety would be, being in opposition, dis.
tinctly to say what those modifications were. Knowing the prin.
c" les on which it is proposed by Government to settle the Poor-law ques-
tion, and the Tithe question, we ought not to deal in vague generalities
with respect to the Irish Municipal Bill. If we oppose it altogether
on permanent grounds, they should be distinctly avowed, and by that
rule we ought to abide. If we are prepared to make concessions, the na-
ture and extent of such concessions ought not to be withheld, but to be
fully explained. Now, it is not merely becausethese declarations previously
made may be supposed to be binding on the individual who made
them ; but because I now feel and entertain the opinion then set forth,
that I come forward to give the explanation which I now
give. I do retain the same anxiety which I professetilast year, to see these
several questions brought to an amicabletermination. I do hold it incum.
bent upon us, being in Opposition, after the length of time that has elapsed
since these measures were first proposed, provided we get full satisfaction
upon thus e aicstions on which we have dill. red...l refer particularly to the
interests of the Established Church—(Hear)—l do thi,,k it incumbent
upon us to deal not in vague generalities with respect to the Irish Mu-
nicipal Bill, but frankly to inform the Government what are the modifi-
cations to which we are disposed to consent. It would not be right,
after the full opportunity which has been given to us, to withhold our
views from the knowledge of Government. If we • are prepared to

. -
a larger amount of Tithe is realized in many parts of Ire'and—
that there is less of agitation upon this subject than there was
at former periods : those are the arguments in favour of not touching
the existing law. In reply to those arguments, I cannot but feel that
the settlement of that question broadly depends upon the basis on

which this question of Irish Corporations is placed—that it broadly de-
pends on this—that there may be (and I wish to avoid every thing
which has in the least anything like an offensive character about it);
but at the same time I must say there may be reasons for inculcating
tranquillity, and submission to the laws, which may not always exist.
Depend upon it, however, that you cannot agitate the tithe question
without engaging in other topics of irritation.—(Hear.) You cannot
encourage the violation of the law in respect to tithes, without giving rise
to the worst habits amongst the people. You cannot resist the payment
of tithes without endangering rent, and even the salmon the repo Gen-
tleman omosite proposes to protect by his Bill could not se in
safety in their own rivers.—(A laugh.) By the resistance of the law
on the. question of tithes all property is endangered. If we were now to
refuse toacccdeto theproposition for the settlement of the tithe question we
ourselves will recede from the ground which we have taken, by relying
upon a calm which may be but temporary, and may have arisen
from the fact that there was a prospect of the settlement, and that
we had taken up the question. If we recede now, we shall take
upon ourselves the responsibility of what may befal the Church.
What may the consequences, if wa leave the question still unsettled ?
In a great part of Ireland the clergy must, for several years to come,
remain dependent upon the resident tenantry, who are chiefly Roman
If we refuse, on the part of the Church of Ireland, to listen to
propositions for the satisfactory adjustment of the question—and if violence
be hereafter resorted to, and blood should necessarily be shed, the favour-
able feeling which now prevails might be changed, and the Church
adjustment
h thanear)
would be held responsible. The settlement of the tithe question would
theC when
ht—h there
is ecom-
parative satisfactory
calm.—(Hear,
a t ei
be forced on under circumstances affording less prospect of a
wel advise
have now
ts
comprehensive and permanent interests—not to neglect the time which is
favourable to adjustment. But, Sir, I could not consistently with my
former course, have entered upon the question of Corporation reform, if
the Noble Lord had not led me to hope that there was a chance of a
conciliatory settlement. In waiving my.
objections to this Bill for the
sake of peace, and applying myself to an amicable course, I am not
bound uncle' all circumstances to vote; it would be an unworthy waste of
time to occupy the House with the discussion, which measure should
c
come on first. The Noble Lord said "before you give a final
consent to this Bill you shall have an opportunity of din.
cussing with me the provisions of the Tithe Bill. I only
receive your consent to the Irish Corporation Bill so far as
you can commit yourself to it, on the understanding that it may be satis-
factory to you." I retain of course my own opinions, but I think,
with this declaration on the part of the Noble Lord, it would
be unbecoming in me to enter into any party contest.—(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord states it is his intention in Committee, to propose a ge-
neral resolution on the subject of Irish Tithe composition—that it
should be converted into a rent charge, payable by the first estate of
inheritance, .and therefore in considerable part by the Protestant land-
lords. Sir, I shall give my consent to that resolution. I say nothing
of the amount of deduction—that is not matter of principle but of detail
—(llear)—with respect to which I reserve myself for thq Committee on
the Irish Tithe Bill. But as to the preliminary proposal, that tithe
composition shall be converted into a rent-charge, I shall give my
assent to that, because I think it an immense advantage to Irish
Clergymen that they should recover their tithe principally from the
Protestant proprietors—the great proportion of the landed proprietors—
instead of the occupying tenantry, who are generally Roman Catholics.
If I refuse to assent to this 'general proposition of the No-
ble Lord, on tile part of the Church, I perpetuate the present sys-
tem in some parts of Ireland—(gear, hear)—until exis ing
leases terminate; and I repeat I shall therefore assent to this
proposition. I doubt whether the best position in which the
Irish Church could be paced would not be that of having
a rent charge payable by the first estate.--(Hear, hear, hear.)
Sir, I heard without the
slightest regret the proposal of the Noble
Lord to abandon for the present the resolutions with respect to redemp-

offer permanent and uncompromising opposition to the settlement
of any question, that ought to be frankly declared, and that ought to be
the rule by which we should abide. If, on the other hand, we

forsee the coming necessity of settling the question—if we foresee
the necessity of granting Corporations to Ireland—if we foresee the
expediency of granting them, we ought not to withhold our views
and intentions, but frankly to state them, and give the
Govern.
ment opportunity of acquiescing in them. The Noble Lord
and others seemed to think that the course we took on the proposal

• -
of my Honourable Friend, the Member for Devonshire, to rescind the
resolution of 1835, was inconsistent with those former declarations.
They appeared to have inferred that we had changed our minds with re-
spect to the expediency of resisting this measure of Municipal Reform.
Some would infer that we were more satisfied with the condition of the
Irish Church than at previous Periods—that we were disposed to rest on
the existing law with respe2tto the Irish Church—and
-that we brought
forward that motion with a view of impeding or postponing the
settlement of that question—that being satisfied with the condition of
the Irish Church,We might suffer the Irish Municipal Corporations to re-
main as they were. If that were the impression of the Noble Lord and
others it was erroneous. If these were the motives by which we were
in-
fluenced in bringing forward the motion, then why should we not be in-
fluenced by the same motives in bringing it forward now ? On that occa-
sion on the division that took place, 312 or 314 recorded their o2uno.ns
on the subject of the Appropriation principle. lf, therefore, that motion
was brought forward from a desire to avoid the consideration of the
question, or to postpone its settlement there could be no reason, after that
demonstration of strength on the appropriation' rinciple, why, we should
not now be governed by the same motives. But, Sir, the motion was not
brought forward on such grounds,and I wish not now,because it is inconsis-
tent with my present views to revive the asperities ofthe fornzer discussion
—I wish to state distinctly upon what grounds we brought forward that
motion. We thought it essentially necessary to pLice on record our con-
tinued adherence to the resolution, that we could not admit of the alien-
tion of Church property.—(Hear, hear.) We thought there was not in
the resolutions of the Noble Lord, or in the short speech which accom-
panied them, neither a distinct disclaimer of the appropriation clause,
nor a distinct intimation of the extent to which it might be involved in
that resolution. We found that resolution sent to Ireland unaccompanied
by any exp'amtion, and that possibly an erroneous but not an unnatural
construction might be placed on it by those who were peculiarly sensi-
tive on the alienation of such property, namely, that this resolution did
not involve it. They at a distance from the scene of acticn would con-
sider, finding in one of those resolutions the word " apdropriation," the
word " surplus," and the word "education," would universally believe
that such was its meaning; nor was that construction unnatural
or unmeaning, and when I remind the Hon. Member for Wiltshire
that after two days' discussion he could not determine what the resolu-
tion meant with respect to appropriation ; and, on the other hand,
when I remind the Hon. Member for Sheffield, himself the author
of the appropriation principle, that he had distinctly declared, with
all his experience in alienation principles, and after appl7.,ing his mind
to the subject of these resolutions, his first impression was that it was
vague and ambiguous, and VIIS second was that they included witluP

ear, hear.)
lion, on account of the immense difficulty inherent in this question.—
And, Sir, if we wait for the settlement of this ques-
tion, until we have made a satisfactory arrangement on the sub-
ject of redemption, I am afraid that we must relinquish for a
considerable time that settlement. At the same time, of course the
Noble Lord is not responsible for the objections to a scheme of redemp.
lion. Having, however, redeemed the tithe, on some principle of valua-
tion to be determined on hereafter; you must determine in what manner
to apply the money. The best security is generally supposed to be
the purchase of land ;
but I think there arc great and valid objee.
tions to such a course—(Hear,)—to snaking the Church of Ireland
an enormous landed proprietor, managing large estates by extensive
bounds, and receiving the revenues.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The effect
of coining into market for the purchase of such land would be to
raise the value of land in Ireland. And where was it to be ob-
tained ? In the north? Not under a very considerable sum.
If it is to be purchased in the South, what is the consequence ? That
the Irish Church is to have a large number of Roman Catholic pro-
prietors. But after defraying the expenses of Boards, Commissioners,
Surveyors, making abatements from the rents, which would be ex.
peeled from the Church in bad years, in my opinion the actual profits
would be exceedingly small; and after they would become possessed of the
landed estate, why should it not be pretty much in the same position in
which the property of the Church of England is—namely, a proposition
to put it into the hands of Government to realize it ? The same objec-
tions would apply—the neglect of property managed by large Corpora-
tions, and other matters of a similar nature—all these objections would.
of course apply, and with much more increased force, inasmuch as the
landed property of the Church of Ireland would be of recent origin com-
pared to that in England. I am afraid, too, it would be found that Van
actual sur ,ey weretrade of the land granted to the Church in lieu of
the payment of tithes, you would see it was not generally so well ma-
naged. When I state these defects, I don't mean that they should
apply to the purchase of occasional glebes in each parish. My objections
merely apply
of money to be managed on the part of the Church by Commissioners
to the general principle of investing a large sum
appointed for that purpose. Suppose we don't invest the money in the
purchase of land, the next best security will be the public funds, and
of this I have a strong impression. I am satisfied the most profitable
investment for the Church would be in the funds. Take the
case of the purchase of the original tithe composition 1001. for
1,800/., and then determine the most profitable mode of applying the
1,600/ I have not the least hesitation in saying that in two or three
years you will find the most profitable investment in the public funds.
Al WM said by a friend of mine,...tbose who take their money from

the funds to invest it in landed property after Iniviog paid all
the expenses, may find cause to regret the beautiful simplicity of the
0 per Cents.—(Laughter.) It would be far more profitable to invest the
1,6001. in lieu of the 100/. Irish Tithe composition in the 3 per Cents..
Now suppose the investment was made, what is the sum the Irish
Church would receive ? This day the 3 per cents. are at 94. Suppose
the 1,6001. were invested in the 3 per cents.— I OW. invested in the 3 per
cents. when they are et 94 will certainly produce less than 31. 4s. per an-
num. But I will take it at 31. 4s. and therefore the sum that 1,6001 would
produce would be 511. 4s. Take 511.45. ,from 100/., and you have the
sum which would be remaining for the income of the Irish • clergymen,
namely, 48/. 1 fis., and this is the most profitable investment which
would leave 48/. 16s, out of every 100/. of tithe composition.—
(Cries of " No, no.") Ti-erefore the effect of the Noble Lord's resolu-
tion would be, not a deduction from the Irish clergy of thirty per cent.
on the amount of their tithe composition, but it would have
been, at the termination of existing interests, a reduction to the
amount of 48/ lfis.—(Hear, hear.) On that account, therefore, I do
not hear with the slightest regret the Noble Lori's proposal to abandon
the complicated system of redemption. I think, Sir, that any system of
a redemption of the rent charge must be so complicated, that I think it
infinitely better to address ourselves to the simpler parts of the principle,
and realise the advantages it holds out. Sir, I shall most cordially assent
to the proposal made in former years by my Noble Friend for effectually
curing any defects or abuses that may exist in the Irish Church.
Where there are livings with emoluments totally disproportionate to
the duties to be performed, I am content to consent to the reduction of
these emoluments—where sinecures exist I would abolish them entirely.
Where there are non-residences I would provide for residence under
such conditions and stipulations as might effect the object proposed.
It appears to me that no adjustment can be satisfactory which does not
put an end to the complaints made on former occasions. But as the last
Bill approached nearly to the settlement of the question, I, retaining
my opinions, cannot anticipate, on that point, any material difF,!rence—
T mean as to the measures for altering the incomes where they were
disproportionate. Under any circumstances, a redistribution of Church
'property must be understood to imply the mainteliance of the principle of
no alienation of Church property to secular purposes ; if there he a surplus,
it shall be bona fide applied for the increase of the efficiency of the
Church. We are quite aware of the situation in which we stand with
respect to Irish Tithes—we feel strong and confident in our own strength
in the appropriation. We have a right to feel so, not upon our mere
party strength, but we have the voice, the defile rate voice of the people
of England against the appropriation.—(Cheers.) I do not con-
ceal from myself, arguing this question fairly, that the voice of
the people is for indentity of institutions ill England and Ireland.
Looking at the state of the Irish Church—considering that every
year a law passed for the purpose of converting tithe composition
into rent—conaidering that more than half the revenues have fallen
into a rent charge—that was a very strong ground for the landed
proprietors of Ireland lending themselves with' the Church to an
amicable adjustment. They, on that side of the House, did
not feel dependent upon the assent of the other side against
the appropriation principle. They thought that upon that point
they had strength enough to defend it, backed as they were by
the deliberate voice of the people. But this (continued the Right Hon.
Gentleman) in no degree abates my desire to see the question settled.
Trusting, therefore, that there is a possibility of a satisfactory adjust-
ment of the tithe question, I shall now, with the permission of the
House, proceed to consider the more proper subject of the night—
namely, the Irish Municipal Bill.--(Hear.) I wish, at the same time, to
be distinctly understood—supposing that in any attempt to effect the
reduction of tithe into rent-charge our efforts should fail—l think it ab-
solutely necessary to state, that I shall not feel myself bound beyond the
present time to any amount of reduction. If my offer be rejected I shall
not afterwards make concessions in detail, or be bound beyond the pre-
sent period, but shall assert my perfect right at a future period to ap.
proach the consideration of the Church quc;stien free froze any engage-
ment. I shall hold myself at liberty to consider the question perfectly
unfettered by the offer 'have now made. On the assumption, then, that
an arrant-ement of the tithe question will be effected, I proceed to con-
sider the Irish Municipal Bill, and to state the general course which
it is my intention to pursue when that measure shall come under
the consideration of the House. Sir, lam willing to begin that state-
ment by admitting at once that I believe any hope of a satisfactory
arrangement must be futile which does not recognise the estab-
blishment of Municipal bodies on the basis of popular influence.—
(Hear.) To talk of investing the functions of existing Corporations in
Commissioners I know would be perfectly useless ; and, therefore, I
am willing to establish Corporations in Ireland on a basis similar to
those of England--namely, popular election by constituencies to be re-
gulated by the Act.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, the Bill which has been read
a second time provides for the establishment of Corporations in three
classes of towns, which are numerated in three schedules, A, B, and C.
I propose, in the first instance, to deal with the two first schedules, A and
B, which include eleven towns, Belfast, Cork, Dublin, Galway, Lime-
rick, Clonmel, Newry, Drogheda, Londonderry, Sligo and Waterford,
each containing, I believe, above fifteen thousand inhabitants. I know
'not whether the selection was governed by this principle ; but it so hap-
pens that the number selected is coincident with numbers of towns
having a population of above 15,000. Now, with respect to these towns
which contain more than 15,000 inhabitants. I shall assent' to the esta-
blishment of Corporations in all. Let us assume, if you please, that
Municipal Corporations in large towns is in itself good—that it is de.
sirable that Ireland should not be without them ; and, assuming that, I
shall at once consent to their establishment ; whether when the point of
honour shall have been removed the towns will be desirous to have it,
is another matter. But, foreseeing considerable difficulty in
towns of that magnitude in managing corporate property by any other
arrangement, I shall not oppose further these demands for corporations.
I do not quarrel either with the designation given to corporations in the
Bill. Perhaps the best course would be, as I wish to give a clear state-
ment, to state, first, thy extent to which I would grant corporations;
secondly, the nature of the franchise I would have established; and,
thirdly, the boundaries which should define the limits of jurisdiction,
the wards into which the towns should be divided, and the total powers
to be exercised by those corporate bodies. Then thereare other matters
of detail, but I apprehend that, without entering into minute details, I
can state the general line I intend to take in a much more satisfactory
manner.—(Hear, hear.) First, with respect to the franchise, I shall
positively insist on a bona fide franchise.—(llear, hear.) I, for one,
will not consent to be a party in incurring evils in municipal bodies,
similar to those now arising from the present state of the elective fran-
chise.—(Hear, hear.) I will not consent to incur the necessity of ap-
pointing a Committee to inquire into fictitious votes. I have looked
through the evidence given before the (Fictitious Votes) Commit.
tee, and I must say that in establishing a new franchise, it ap-
pears to me that there never was a duty more imperative on this

House, than to establish a strict and welLunderstood definition of
the franchise.—(Hear, hear.) In looking into these proceedings, I
find that none of the tests of value now used have proved satisfac-
tory ; and therefore I will have no test that depends on the mere valua.
lion of the voter.—(Hear, hear.) You must not introduce a fresh temp.
tation to the taking of false oaths; and, however we differ in other
points, I expect the general concurrence of the House in this senti-
ment in a determination to adopt a bona fide franchise in Municipal
Corporations.—(Hear, hear, from all shies of the House.) In the first
place we ought to know what franchise you mean to give; in the se-
cond, your means of avoiding temptation to fraud. It is required by
the interests of morality, by every interest which can affect-the morals
or prosperity of the people, that we should avoid in any hCw legisla-
tion affording any inducement to fraud and corruption.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir, I conceive that by far the most satisfactory test is that which con-
tains within itself a controulling check. I think that under the Poor
Law we shall find the best test that can be devised, because by it we
set against the voter's desire to possess the franchise his reluctance to
be overtaxed—(Hear)—who posseses the franchise, if unduly taxed, will
remonstrate : thus the real value will be ascertained, and a controulling
check established. If circumstances should prevent you providing this
check I should feel myself wholly unreasonable in insisting
on it; but some check tantamount to it will be necessary for me to have.
Perhaps, in fixing on the Poor-rate as a test, I am dealing with a
hypothetical case ; but I may presume I may calculate on the speedy
adoption of some poor law for Ireland which will serve as a standard,
seeing the universal desire that exists for some measure of the kind. I
should, therefore, simply propose the adoption of the poor rate as a test
of qualification for the municipal franchise. Now, Sir, as to the amount
of qualification, I do not conceal from myself the fact that there is con-
siderable apprehension, for a ten pound qualification will be found far too
low, and twenty pounds has been suggested as the qualification which
should prevail in the larger towns. This is a very general opinion ; but,
at the same time, I am bound to say that, considering it is double the
amount of the elective franchise, believing that to rise the franchise in
those towns would be on the whole much less satisfactory than the
adoption of a uniform practice, I am content to take ten pounds as the
standard of qualification for all.—(Elear, hear.) lam willing to be satis-
fied with ten pounds in the larger towns; but, as I said before, always
frith the condition that it shall be a bona fide qualification—(Hear)—
that I shall distinctly understand what it is I am giving.—(Hear.) Now,
I only hope that Hon. Gentlemen will not undertake hastily to decide on
individual suggestions, but wait patiently until I have opened my whole
scheme. I address myself to both sides of the House.—(Hear.) I pro-
pose that the ten-pound franchise shall be universal, and I consider I have
great and disinterested authority for the application of that uniform
franchise. I find that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the
state of municipal corporations in Scotland—Commissioners appointed
by the present Government—have given an opinion, not with any view
to this particular question, but on a point exactly analogous, but one in
which no party feeling could be mixed up—l find them expressing
this opinion :--
".The same qualifications required in the election of representatives
in Parliament are adopted and applied to the election of the Councils
of the burghs—namely, that they shall either occupy, as proprietors or
tenants, houses or other tenements within the burgal limits, of the yearly
value of 10/., or shall be the true owners of such premises, though not
occupying or residing therein, (They must reside within seven miles
of the burgh.)
" In the course of our inquiries we have found that among the inha-
bitants of different classes of burghs there prevails a considerable diver-
sity of opinion as to the justice and expediency of maintaining this uni-
form qualification. In towns of the first class, containing an extensive
and opulent population, it appears to be generally thought that the stan-
dard is by no means too high„ and that although it may perhaps exclude
many respectable persons, yet that it secures an effectual representation
of the whole community, and that this main object would not be pro-
moted by any change.

" In seme other towns of a lower class it seems to be thought that the
relative value and rent of real property are considerably lower than in
the former; and that the apparent uniformity of the elective franchise
becomes thus productive of a real inequality in the rank and condition
of the electors, which could only be corrected by the adoption in such
cases of a reduced scale of value. And again in the smaller burghs of
very inconsiderable population or wealth, the still greater extent of this
inequality is thought to be aggravated by the difficulty of finding a suffi-
cient number of qualified electors to form a respectable constituency, and
that therefore in this class of burghs another and still lower scale would
be required.

~-~.:

Mr. O'CONNELL—And with success,
Sir IL PEEL—I was myself obliged to abolish the old watch in West-
minster, and the Noble Lord found the doing away with any distinc-
tions so necessary that 'its advantages were so obvious in Westminster, he
but very lately proposed to make the Metropolitan Police one body, and
to place them under one control and superintendence.—(Hear,
hear.) The necessity for such a course is most obvious, as it would be
otherwise impossible to do away with the conflict of eternal jealousies
which must arise. What is found to operate beneficially in Westmins.
ter, in London, and in Dublin, must be equally effective when the prin-
ciple is extended to all Ireland. lithe municipal bodies find it neces.
sary to increase the force, let them, as I before said, have the power to
do so, paying a certain proportion of the expense ; but of all things I
hold it most desirable that the night and day constabulary should be one
and the same. I now come to another part of the subject, namely, the
administration of justice, and I repeat, what I have always contended
for, that I have a right to require every possible guarantee for its due
administration. The Bill at present before the Hoots requires that the
Corporation should send up to the Lord Lieutenant the names of three
candidates for the office of Sheriff; and if the Lord Lieutenant should
disapprove of the three names then three others are to be put in nomi-
nation. Should the Lord Lieutenant, however, object to the whole six
then the whole nomination should rest entirely with himself. By the
present system in Ireland, Government claimed the right of nomi.
nation, and in some instances set aside the recommendation of the
Judges. Now I apprehend that it would highly desirable to clear
up all doubts on this point in any measure which may hereafter be
brought forward. It would be well to ascertain exactly what course
would be pursued, and have that distinctly understood. If Government
is to exercise an uncontrolled power in the selection of sheriffs let it be
distinctly understood that they are to do SO ; or if, on the other hand ,the
sheriffs are to be selected by the municipal bodies, let them make the
selection subject to their own responsibility, but clear the matter from
all possibility of doubt. For my own part, as a check upon local feel.
ings and prejudices, I would propose to retain the power of nominating
the sheriffs in the hands of the Government. You reverted to the
practice which I abolished when you passed by the recommendation of
the Judges. I introduced the English system into Ireland. I gave up the
power of the Government in the nomination, and required of the Judges
to recommend the persons whom they considered best qualified to fill the
office. If you thought it right to resume to the Government tne un-
controlled power cf appointment, even in cases where the recommendas
Lions were made on such respectable grounds as that of the judicial, I
ask of you to follow out your own principle, thus established, and re-
serve this power to Government in any Municipal Bill which • you
may bring before the House.—(Hear, hear, hear.) If you deprive
the Magistracy of the power of appointing the constabulary, and make
one superintendent authority to preside over the police, it would be well
to apply the principle in the same way to corporate towns, and submit the
nomination of the officers to one controlling power. There is another
point—l feel lam trespassing upon the patience of the House, but I
rather choose to run the risk of being considered tedious than leave the
House in any doubt with respect to the views which I entertain upon
this question—there is another point, which I consider a matter of no
sl'ght importance. I mean that there should be one regular and uni.
form system of auditing the corporate accounts in Ireland. There
never was a country in which a prompt, clear, and effective mode or
auditing the accounts was more requisite.—(Hear.) I do not mein
any thing disrespectful to the local authorities, but, from peculiar cir-
cumstances, a strict and immediate system of auditing is most impe-
ratively called for. I apprehend that there is no person who will deny
this.—(Hear, hear.) Instead of each Corporation settling its accounts at
its own time, and at its own will, there should be some responsible
Board established in Dublin to see that these matters should be effectu-
ally performed. There is another point to which, even at the hazard of
being considered tedious, I must ;All the attention of the House—l mean
the functions of the charity trustees. There is a provision in the Bill that
where any existing charities are vested in trustees the trust will continue

until Parliament can make other enactments, and empowering the Lord
Chancellor to fill up any vacancies which might occur in the interim.
It would not be desirable that all these trusts should be vacated in one
day, and therefore it would be well that Parliament should apply itself
early next session, in case a Municipal Corporation Bill should pass, to
place those trusts on some fixed and permanent footing. When these
charities are found to be exclusively Protestant, or intended exclusively
for Protestant purposes, then I hold that the trusts should be vested in
the hands of Members of the Established Church alone.—(Hear, hear,
from Mr. O'Connell.) It might be an advantage if Dublin had an Act
passed peculiarly for itself—that is, if a separate Bill, founded upon the

"In these views there is no doubt a good deal of plausibility and a cer- principle of the general measure, were framed peculiarly for Dublin.
taro degree of truth. But that the evil has not operated to the extent The peculiar position of that city, the complicated nature of the details
that seems to be imagined appears to be proved by the unquestionable with respect to its local taxation, the vast number of Boards established.
fact that the relative proportion of qualified electors to that of the whole for local purposes, should be subj; etcd to revision, for the purpose of
population is not greater in the large than in the smaller burghs, to an reducing the expenses. The local taxation of Dublin is exceedingly
amount that seems to indicate the existence of any gross inequality of expensive, and much more than would be requisite for all necessary
the kind now alluded to. purposes under a more effective system. This could be done, and yet
" If, therefore, upon any other grounds the present fran- the free exercise of all its civic functions might be left to the municipal
chise should be deemed objeCtionable, still we should not be body. What I contend for is a revision of the 'various Boards, which
disposed to recommend the adoption of a diversity of rates in would be done by a Commission at little expense, and yet a great saving
different burghs. Indeed it appears to us that the introduction of any be effected. Whether, however, it be proposed to effect this by
diversity of this kind, which, in order to be perfect in theory, must be a Commission or through means of the Corporation, I hope the whole
also variable and fluctuating, would prove more arbitrary and incon- will be considered with a view to a reduction of the expense, and plat_
venient in its operation, and more remote from any real equality than ing the whole upon an improved system I.kely to conduce to the general
has been attained under the present arrangements. We are further of welfare of the city. So much with respect to the towns contained in
opinion that, in the event of any general alteration in the present fran- schedules A and B. I expect that whilst every enactment will be so
chise, it must be made on the same basis of property and occupancy on framed as to guard against abuse, they shall also be such as will be calm-
which the present system has been founded, there being no other cri- lated to conduce to good Government. I endeavour to indicate, in the
terion now existing in this part of the United Kingdom, such as the view which I lay before the House, those principles which appear to me•
English poor-rates, to which recourse could be readily had." to be fair and just, and, at the same time, such as I think calculated to
The Commissioners, therefore, reported strongly :in favour of an soothe the wounded pride of a nation which appears to be excited by
equality of franchise. Sir, lam aware that it has been proposed having that withheld teem her which has been granted to England and
to make some departure from that uniformity Lin the Bill for the to Scotland.—(Hear.) In the proposition which we formerly made with
regulation of Scotch Corporations, now under consideration ; but respect to that, there was no offence intended to be offered to the na_
even that Bill proposed to retain the 10/. franchise in every town tional feeling, and l'should regret that, by withholding these institutions.,
in Scotland in which the number of 101. householders shall amount I should afford any ground of national con-plaint, provided we can have
to more than 100. I have now before me a list of the towns in Scotland support and satisfactory security in other respects. If sufficient security
in which the number of qualified electors exceeds 100, and in which the be given for the maintenance of the Established Church in Ire-
-10/. franchise is to be retained, and I find that the proportion, land, it would give me the greatest possible aatisfction to remove
with respect to the whole population, is by no means inconsiderable. any ground of complaint with respect to the Irish municipal ques-
In Lanark, for instance, the population is 4,300, and the number tien.—(Hear, and cheers from the Opposition.) There was a class
of 10/. householders is 156. In Peterhead, with a population of 1,512, of towns in schedule C upon which it would not be advisable hastily or
there are 173. In short, I believe the principle of the present Scotch unnecessarily to force the adoption of municipal bodies ; nor, at the
Bill, which is only under consideration, is, as far as I can collect, to same time, to withhold such
uelLianrs.t)ittifise townsi,ohieisiftltey w
were•ere dLetmicanlchd n
desirable.iei
have the 101. franchise in every town which contains above lot) rota- or advantageous.—(u
bitants possessing to that amount of qualification. Now, I must say the list of places in which Corporations were deemed necessary; but the
that in towns containing a less number there is very great doubt as to principle of the Bill could be extended to these two towns without
the necessity for incurring the expeche of nitiniciPal establishments,— burthening them with the institution. Any corporate property which

..Cvi**!r-r
474'1
ss
(Hear, lies -es
r.) Therefore, not only in the Report o nem,: see.
but in the. proposed Bill for Scotland, I find conftitri C y stegts "..
merit, that the franchise should be uniform and indist t
Sir, I should propose that the • franchise be 101., as the BilfWalpfesss;
do not conceal that I shall have the difference between nominal abet
value defined. I propose that the franchise shall be established by the
test before mentioned. Then, with regard to residence, I would have
six months as necessary for qualification. I would also have it necessary
that all taxes and cyst should be paid within three months of the enrol.
meat of the vote. That is my proposal, and I believe it is in conformity
with the proposition of the Bill. I propose, also, that the reception of
relief from the poor rate should be a disqualification. So far as to the
franchise, Now on the subject of the boundaries. We before objected to
including the rural districts, as we thought it unfair that the inhabitants
of the rural districts should be subject to borough rates which were to be
applied merely to town purposes, and I was afraid that this might cause
some considerable obstacle in detail, but I have now reason to believe
that all obstacles in that matter will be removed. I have read the re-
port of the Commissioners, and I believe it to be framed on a fair princi.
ple. I mean the report of 1530, as to the boundaries. I have read the
instructions on which the Commissioners acted, and they appear to me to
be good, and the report to have been fairly made; and, as far as I can
speak generally, I do not see any ()li, ction to adopting the suggestions
as to boundaries prescribed in the last report of the Commissioners of
municipal boundaries. I cannot say, either, that I see any objection
whatever to the proirsed division of the wards ; as far as I can speck it
appears fair in the general principle. Ido not bind myself in every town,
but I am ready to adopt, in those towns where corporate establishmetits
at present exist, the suggestion contained in the report of the boundary
Commissioners, and of course adopted in the Bill. With respect
to the titles and constitution of these corporate bodies, I do not quarrel
with the Constitution as given in the Bill. I think it is advantageous
to follow the principle with respect to the appointment of Town
Councillors and Aldermen as given in the Bill, so that here either
there will not be much difference of opinion. Now, Sir, I come
to the powers of the corporate body. Of course I propose that
the corporate property shall be given over to the new corpora-
tion—(Hear, hear)—but f propose this restriction, to which I appre-
hend no one will object, that some security be given that such property
shall be applied exclusively to the benefit of the town to which it be-
longs.—(Hear, hear.) In fact, lam seeking means for a satisfactory
settlement of this question, and I shall certainly throw no impediment
in the way. Sir, there is one question to which I allude, namely, with
respect to tolls. Wherever they are security for a debt, or collected as
a guarantee for debt, I think they must be retained. My first impression
was to propose the absolute abandonment of tolls ; and considering the
vexations always attendant on their collection I am greatly inclined to
think that their ultimate extinction would be extremely popular.—
(Hear, hear.) It is certainly hard that goods and food brought into
towns for the use of the inhabitants should be subject to imposts, more
vexatious often from the mode of collection than from the actual amount.
It is opposed to free trade and the general interests of commerce. At
the same time there are individual rights to tolls which I think will re-
quire a certain degree of caution, as we must take care that, when aban-
doning the rights of corporate bodies, we are not infringing on those of
individuals. I can only state that if Government can see its way to
some safe enactment which, without injuring the rights of indivi-
duals, will provide for the extinction of toll altogether—which must
be the most satisfactory arrangement for the country—it shall have
my cordial consent. Whether or no it will be safe to deal with
corporate tolls separate from the tolls held by individuals I
shall not pronounce; that is a matter on which Government can form
a more satisfactory opinion ; but I can say that if we could safely sweep
away all vexatious regu.lations we should not only be effecting much
good for the country, but promoting internal communication, and guy-
ing facilities to commerce. Now, Sir, with respect to the other powers
of the corporate bodies, such as the independent controul of property, I
think that this is one of the greatest difficulties in the regulation of mu-
nicipal corporations. I think the great point will be to entrust the
property to the local bodies—to give them such controul as will
enable them to effect those improvements which are absolutely neces-
sary. But there are great obstructions in the way, because, perhaps,
from want of confidence in ancient corporations, it has been found ncs.
cessary in some cases to establish new systems for the management of
the property; but still I for one think that. if you establish corpora-
tions it would be wise to give them something to do.—(Hear, hear.)
To establish corporations and deprive them of all connection with
local objects does appear to me to give a temptation to occupy
their time in political discussions, and, I would therefore, de_
volve on them the whole property and duty of corporations. Sir, I
think we should take every means to confine municipal corporations to
their proper objects. I think that the moment they take part in political
discussions they are perverting the intention of their establishment. Of
course we cannot altogether prevent political discussions; hut I say
our primary object ought to be good local government in the towns. I
would, in as far as it could be done, give to those bodies controul over
municipal objects. I would give to them controul over the lighting of
the towns and other local matters. There have been local Acts appoint-
ing Commissioners for these purposes—a circumstance which may create
some difficulty ; but I think it might be avoided by giving in this Act a
power to the Commissioners to hand over their functions to the con.
porate bodies. In cases where there are no local Acts, where the thing
is done under the provis:ons of the 9th of George the Fourth, I think
the corporate bodies ought to be compelled at once to take upon them
all municipal functions. I have, of course, no objection to give to the
new municipal Corporations in Ireland the power of levying borough
rates, but then I would have it done on the same principle as it it done
in Scotland and England, namely, that they should be levied in equal
proportions upon all parties. The municipal bodies ought in all in.
stances to undertake to perform the municipal functions. They ought to
undertake the application of the burgh rates to the purposes of local ins.
provements, and, if the corporate property was not found sufficient for
the purposes, they should be called upon to bling an additional as.
sessment, as in the cases of England and of Scotland. Now, with re-
spect to the corporations in relation to the police. It perhaps might be
desirable to give to the municipal corporations the controul of those
forces; and, where they were not sufficient to perform the duties of the
locality, it should be competent to the municipal body to apply to Go-
vernment for an increase of the general constabulary force, half the ex-
pense of which should be paid out of the borough rates. I trust that
the Noble Lord opposite will make some such proposition, but, if he
should not, I shall myself, when the subject is under consideration; pro-
pose that the whole of the constabulary shall be under the control of the
corporation. There is another point with regard to the police which I
should also wish to see established, namely, that there should be no dif.
ference between the night and day police. The adoption of this plan was
found necessary for the city of Westminster.—(" Hear," from Mr.
O'Connell.) It had also been applied to Dublin.