The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-01 00:00:00

-.-
executed and perfected by this Corporation until ---
to the Right Hon. John Earl of -- at the yearly rent of
9/. 15s. 6d. sterling." These resolutions were passed without
oppos •
ition To this the Commissioners added, no fine was to
have been paid for this fee-farm grant. which, according to the
rental produced by the Corporation, and the evidence of the
Hon. Robert--, was to convey for ever to Lord -- a pro-
perty producing 3201. a year, exclusive of Mr. 's rent,
and the rent of the barracks, and, according to the statement
of the inhabitants, upwards of 5001. a year for a rent of 12/.
per
.ennum. It might be said that the property belonged to
the patron. If so, was- he the proprietor by an absolute con-
veyance, and in that case, why was there any difficulty made
about showing the deed of conveyance ? If he was merely a
trustee, then he was liable for the rent ; and he hoped it was
not yet too late to produce a return. If that were done, he
believed it would be found that the patron had received some-
thing more than a mere rental. He would proceed to enume-
rate some other boroughs. The next he should mention was
Cashel, the patron of which was Mr: Peunefather. Otte pro
perty belonging to the borough consisted of 1,548 acres,
rented for 99 years, at a lease of 87/. Another consisted of 58
acres, at a yearly rent of 11/. 12s. on a 99 years' lease ; and a
third of 141 acres, fur the same period, at 13/. Gs. 11d. The
tao last properties were not of great extent, but they were
valuable, and he believed would let at about 100/. for every 50
acres. It must be clear, therefore, to every impartial per-
son, that if that property was corporate, and he had not
heard any one venture to deny the fact, it was not managed
with any regard to the benefit of the inhabitants, but in such
an extraordinary manner as to show an utter disregard of
public opinion. The first case which he had mentioned con-
Srmed him completely in the remark. The patron held a
i etsperty of 1,548 acres, which had been let on a 99'years'
lease, at the trifling sum of 871. The person who had the
last 'ease proposed to the patron to renew it when there were
three nears to run, and offered 10,000/. fur the renewal. That
sum wagerefused, and he offered 15,000 L ; that also was re-
fused, aril finding that he could not get a renewal of the lease,
he sold the remainder for the sum of 2.5001., and the property
was immedi seely let for 1,500/., making a rental of 4,5001. for
three years. Let the House look at the sequel. As soon as the
patron got the iNroperty, though he had refused 15,0001. for the
renewal, he lets it to one of his family on a lease for 99 years,
and takes rather less than had been paid by the former lessee.
That property was in the neighbourhood of Cashel, and, valuing
it at only 1/. the Irish acre, it would produce a rental of 1,500/.
a year. That property we s left for the benefit of the inha-
bitants ; and on looking at tare report of the Commissioners it
would be seen that the supply of water was not more than hall
what was required. The Conamssioners report from evidence
which they had taken, that 5001 a year would amply supply the
town with water, and about 500/. more would have been requi-
site to afford water for the bleachfields; yet 1,500/. of money,
destined for the inhabitants, was taken by tho patron. The Hon.
Member then referred to the evidence given cy the Secretary
Of the Board of Health, and Dr. Fitzgerald, from which it ap-
peared that the inhabitants suffered much from poverty and
want, and that a sum of 500/. expended annually for t:e supply
of water and other purposes would be of the greatest belle& in
enabling them to procure the means of subsistence. He could
give similar cases to a great amount, but he had said enough to
'prove that the Corporations were bad, and that they ought not
to be truated with the management of the borough funds, or be
intrusted with the administration of justice as Ma`gistrates—
(Hear, hear.) He would next come to another subject, which
affected the public even more than the mismanagement of the
funds, or the shines caused by the defective state of the Ma-
gistracy. The House was aware that the Grand Juries had the
most extensive power of taxing the inhabitants. They not only
bad that power, but tlley also had the power of making con-
tracts and auditing their own accounts. In Dublin that was
peculiarly the case. Nearly the whole of the Grand Jurors
were selected from the Corporation, and it was a well-known
fact that from 1829 to 1832 the number of persons who had
served on Grand Juries were 336, and of these only seven were
Roman Catholics, and only 35 were not members of the Corpo-
ration ; and the members of the Corporation having of course the
majority, took care not to place these 35 on Graeid Juries, when
any fiscal business was to be done. The same was the case
with Cork. In that town there was a population of 100,000
and the number of freemen 273. The affairs of the town are in
fact managed by a club called the " Friendly Brothers," mad
the consequence is, that a vast proportion of persons of wealth
and intelligence is completely excluded. The same system
prevails there as in Dublin, and all persons on Grand Juries,
who are not members of the Corporation, are excluded when
any fiscal business is transacted. Yet these persons assess the
inhabitants yearly to the amount of 4,000/. or 5,000/. for rates.
In Dublin they assess between 30,000/. and 34,000/., and in
Limerick about 6,0001. yearly. All Roman Catholics are ex-
cluded. Another great evil arises, and more particularly in
Dublin, from the mode in which Sheriffs are nominated.---J
( Hear.) In Dublin, Cork, and Limerick, the Sheriffs are
nominated by the Corporations. Dublin contains a population
of more than 260,000 inhabitants, the greater part of whom are
of the Roman Catholic persuasion. The Common Council
nominate eight persons possessing certain property, and of
these the Lord Mayor and Aldermen choose two to serve the
office ; but " care is generally taken to elect individuals pos-
sessing the political principles of the Corporation, which are
avowedly exclusive and anti-Catholic ; and as a test of his
opinions, unless otherwise sufficiently known, the candidate for
the office of Sheriff has been required to engage that he will
propose at his civic entertainments a political toast whieh,bas
long been considered a pledge of those principles. When the
functions and duties of the office of Sheriff, and the extensive
powers vested in those filling it, come to be considered, it will
be obvious how injurious to the administration of justice the
effect must be, of the suspicions which (however upright and
.impartial the conduct of individuals) must attach to their per-
formance of those public duties in the minds of the great body
of their Roman Catholic fellow-citizens, and of those of other
persuasions who are opposed to the political views of the Cor-
poration." Could anything be more unjust or more likely to
be injurious to the proper administration of justice ?—(Hear,)
iff saying so he did not impugn the conduct of any individual
Sheriff, for the practice was all the same. And, besides that,
the duty was neither done by the High Sheriff nor the Sub-
Sheriff, but by the Sheriff's officer or clerk, who pays a cer-
tain sum to the Sheriff. The following is the Report of the
Commissioners relative to the way in which the transaction is
managed in Dtfhlin :—" The power given by law to Sheriffs
to delegate the duties of that office to their Sub-Sheriffs has
been acted on in Dublin in a manner which is substantially a
farming of that oft7ae, and not always to the Sub- Sheriff him-
self, but to certain iniNviduals who act as clerks or in subor-
dinate stations in the Sheriff's office. These persons some-
times recommend a nominal Sub- Sheriff, for whom they pro-
vide the necessary security (20,000/. ); they engage to pay
to each High Sheriff a certain sum, varying from 1,200/. to i
1,5001., and to pay the expenses of the office, and a small
salary to the nominal Sub-Sheriff. The ordinary duties of
the office are performed by these clerks, the Sub-Sheriff being
merely nominal, while the High Sheriffs decline interference
with the details of business, lest it might prejudice the security
given for the conduct of the Sub-Sheriff. Thus absolute con-
troul over these very important public duties is placed in the
hands of individuals filling no ostensible station, and deeply
interested by the terms of their bargain in the rigid exaction of
the official fees." In some cases also the Sheriff has the
power of charging 5 per cent. over and above the psual fees.
With respect to the appointment of Special Jurors, the Com-
missioners report that the panel for Dublin amounts to about
700, and that it is the constant practice of the Corporation to
place at the head of the list 100 of their own body ; and
though some of them may be challenged, the result was. that
all trials which had reference to property or the liberty of the
subject were tried by Special Jurors, and these Jurors were
connected, some hew or other, with the Corporation. It was
worthy of remark, that the number of Roman Catholics this
year on the panel was only 70, or about one-tenth of the
whole. In Cork the case was the same. The Commissioners
report that in that town many respectable inhabitants are not
called on to serve as Special Jurymen, while peraons who had
been bankrupts or insolvents were allowed to serve. In
order to show how justice was administered under such a
system, he would give an instance front judicial proceed-
ings which had taken place at Limerick. The Corporation
of,- that town thought they had the exclusive right to the
fisheries in the Shannon, in the neighbourhood of the town.
The fishermen disputed the right, and while they were in the act
of fishing the officers of the Corporation tired at and wounded
one of the fishermen, who immediately landed and seized the
fire-arms. The fishermen were taken before a magistrate,
who refused to interfere; but at the assizes an indictment was
drawn up against the fishermen and a true bill found ; but on
being brought to trial they were instantly acquitted by the jury
with. the approbation of the .fudge. Having stated these de-
fects in,Corporations, as regarded property and the adminis-
tration of justice, he thought he was warranted in saying that
there was no person, whatever his political opinions might be,
who would contend that the system should continue.—( Hear.)
And the question then was, what was the remedy to be de-
vised which the House would sanction? In considering that
question the House would naturally consider the Acts passed
for reforming the Royal boroughs in Scotland and England,
and he would ask them to sanction a stem founded on similar
principles.—( Hear.) The House was aware that there were
no rates of qualification in Ireland, as in this country ; and it
would be therefore necessary to fix the qualification according
to the rent, varying according to the size of the towns. It was
proposed to make the qualincation in seven large towns—
namely, Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Kilkenny, Belfast, Galway,
and Waterford, a 10/. yearly rent, whether for a house with
land or without. Ic' the same rule was to be applied to the
small towns, it would be seen from the instances which he was
about to give, that the inhabitants would not have a full or fair
representative system for the management of the affairs of
towns. The town of Lisburn, containing about 800 house-
holders, has only 91 persons entitled to vote for Members of
- Parliament. In Dungannon the number of householders is
about 600, and the electors 176. In Drogheda the number
of householders is 3,000, and the electors 371. In Ennis,
Kinsale, and Portarlington, the numbers of householders are
respectively as follow :-1,100, 1,000, and 500, and the
e3ectors for the first not 100, for the second 90. and for the
last not more than 30. Dundalk had a population of 10,000,
but very few of the houses were rented at or above 10/. a year.
In the year 1828 an Act had passed for reforming some of the
abuses which had long prevailed in the smaller Irish towns.
By that Act, householders paying an annual rent of 5/. could
apply to the Lord Lieutenant (if two-thirds of them assented)
for leave to assess themselves for lighting, paving, &c., the
town. The Commissioners, in alluding to that, say "the ill
effects arising front/she appointment of irresponsible officers,
required a remedy VoLfe. . Parliament." That Act (9th Geo.
IV., cap ,- 2) gave to thCll4l4useholders the right of voting
its the gection of their'Muni& al officers (andit was pro-
p 'used to extend the princiile,; it to all the towns of Ire-
4.
lai. td, except the seven errant ated.—( Hear, hear.) ' He
}mai eyed that such a qualificalim would not create a too
num,. `rows body of electors. It was also proposed that in
the fit it schedule the qualification for a Councillor or Al-
derman thcnid be 1,000/., and in the rest 50/. By the Act to

-~ ____

The
tic hich he had referred the towns of Drogheda, Londond•
err ,
Sligo, and Clonmel, were already divi:led into wards.
evess
burgesses, it was proposed, should elect the Common
C ut our.
y
every year, and one half of the Aldermen chould
three years—the election of the Aldermen to be decizied b t
Ziebt
greatest number of votes. A commission of the peace -s
''rd
be granted to the Mayor in the smaller towns if the L
Lieutenant approved—in the 11 towns enumerated the Mayo,
to be a Justice of the Peace—making altogether about 140.
Corporate Magistrates. On the 30th of December, 1836, the
present municipal officers would go out, if not re-elected.
The Bill also proposed to give the Councillors off the first-
mentioned large towns, namely, Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Kil-
kenny, Waterford, Belfast, and Galway, the nomination of
their Sheriffe with the consent of their Lord Lieutenant. That
power was now vested in the Lord Lieutenant, but the same
parties might be elected repeatedly, though rejected by the
Lord Lieutenant. It was therefore proposed by this Bill to
make it imperative on the burgesses (when a person was re-
jected) to proceed to the election of some other persons.
These were the general provisions of the Bill, and it remained
for the House to say whether, having granted Municipal Re-
form Bills to England and Scotland, they would not do the
same justice to Ireland. He trusted a measure founded on the
same principles would be meted out to that country. The
Municipal Bill had worked well in Great Britain, and 14 did
not see why the raeult might not be the same in Ireland.—
( Hear, hear.) It had been said that such a Bill would only
take power from one party and give it to another.—(Hear,
hear.) Now if he thought it would have the effect of taking
away power from the present parties and transfer the power to
another body equally exclusive and iatolesantif siwh a body
could be found—(Laughter)-11 it Would have such au effect?
no one would oppose it more strongly titan himself. But he des
nied it would have such an effect. It would have the affect of
doing away with the selfselective system—it would make the
accounts of the borough Anaws public; and he believed the
offices would not be confined to onse party or Al/Other as was
the case now. No one could say that the present Pqrperaters
represented the feeling of the jehabitents, aed taking the
se hole number of 13,000 persons, not were than §,tanc) were
resideet iu the boroughs. The very circumstance that tie
system was so exclueive prevented many most respectable men,
and men of li:Sesal feelings. from becoming members of the
Corporation. For L'ef hart, he did nut tbiiik the Bill would
give the ascendency to ae:7 Paeticular party, Whets the
Reform Bill was passed the same :'suntents were used a het
the result proved that these arguments were Slot well l'uundP4.
He would refer to the debate upon the proposal fur e6L'lling a
second time the Bill for extending to Ireland the Reform Bill,
upon the same principles as those upon which it bad been
adopted in England ; and his reason for doing so was because he
felt it to be impossible for hies-to use arguments so strong and
so convincing as those which were used, upon that eceasion,
by
the Noble Lord, the Member for Lancashire (Lord Stan-
ley) :—" It was said, on .more than one occasion, that the
effect of this Bill would be to give a preponderating influence
to the Catholics of Ireland. Now, even if he admitted this
to be the case, it would still be no argument, or, at least,
not an argument for the year 1832 ; for, since the passing of
the Catholic Relief Bill in 1829, the distinction had ceased
between Protestant and Catholie.—( Cheers.) If, then, the
distinction between Protestant and Catholic had ceased to be
longer recognised by the law, aad if the Protestant and Ca-
tholic were alike eligible to all offices, and to seats in both
Houses of Parliament, upon what ground could any one turn
round and say to the Catholics, ' We cannot extend this fran-
chise to you, because you are, Catholics ?'—( Cheers.) This
would, indeed, be keeping up a religious distinction, after
political ones had been done away with.—( Cheers.) It was
also argued that the measure of Catholic emancipation was
only a compromise, and that when it was conceded security
was given in the disfranchisement of the 40s. freeholders.
It was not, however, a measure of compromise, and no seen.
rity was given ; for the 40s. freeholders were disfranchised,
not because they were Catholics, but because they were de-
pendent on their landlords, and too often on the priesthood.
He trusted that the House would listen to him, while he
pointed out to them how utterly groundless were the fears of
danger to the Constitution which some persons entertained ft om
this measure." The Noble Lord then proceeded to argue that
the boroughs founded by King James were not founded for
exclusively Protestant purposes, and said—" It was argued
that the Bill would contravene the intention of James 1., who
had chartered 40 boroughs for the express purpose of giving a
preponderating influence to the Protestants of Ireland. He
denied that such was the intention of James, and he was borne
out in this opinion by the speech of Sir John Davie on the
opening of the Irish Parliament in 1660, who said that the
Parliament was summoned to legislate for all classes of the
country, and that the 40 new boroughs were created in order
that one half of the community might not legislate for the
other half without their couseut.—( Hear, hear.) In order to
show that such could not be its object, the Members returned
of each religion were not very dissimilar, there being 125 Pro-
testants and 121 Catholics. Looking, therefore, at this Bill
even with the eye of one bigottedly opposed to the Cetholies,
he must come to the conclusion that it could not add more than
six or seven Members of the Catholic interest.— (Hear, hear.)
It was curious with respect to corporate and nomination bo-
roughs, that their very rottenness was made their merit ; for it
was said that if the inhabitants could agree with the Corpora-
tions there would be no danger in admitting them ; but as it was
improbable that they should, they would have no communica-
tions with their.—( Hear.) They were bound to a. 14 the present
Bill by every tie of justice to a country to which they were
united, he trusted, by inseparable ties, He called upon them
to look at the regard paid by the Irish Members towards the
English Reform Bill, and to say whether those members had
not taken a deep interest in its success—whether, in fact,
their advocacy of it had not been frank, and open, and gene-
rous ?—(Loud cheers from all parts of the House.) The
principle was the same for England as for Ireland. It was
just in this country ; it was equally so in that ; and, indepen-
dent of the danger of withholding a just measure, they should
remember, if they refused it to the iitt,er while granting it to
the former, they would furnish thereby the strongest argument
for a repeal of the Union between the two cottetries that-he
had yet beard uttered--( Hear, bear)—for it would he emit-
ting that they looked at English interests in one point of
view, and Irish interests in another—that in England they are
determined to legislate according to the voice of the people,
while they had made up their minds to legislate for Ireised by
stifling it."—(The reading of these extracts wag received
with loud cheers by the House.) Would it be said—could
it be said that it was either just or politic for the British
Parliament to refuse to Ireland a Municipal Corporation Re-
form Bill upon the same principles as those upon which
such a Bill had already been granted to England ?—( Hear,
hear.) He dared to say it might be so argued, but let
those who were abOut to do so, in the first instance, answer the
arguments of the Noble Lord.—( Cheers.) In Ireland there
were 39 boroughs returning Members to Parliament, exclusive
of counties. if after passing the Bill for Catholic Emancipa-
tion and the Reform Bill, they had in that House only 13 Ro.
man Catholics and 36 Protestants, surely it did not prove that
any species of reform would give a preponderance to any reli-
gious persuasion.--( Hear, hear.) In the present Parliament
the majority of Protestants was pretty nearly the same. Ia- I
deed he would defy My one to show him soy one instance in I
which the Catholics had preferred a Catholic to a Protestant
candidate at an election, merely because of his religion, No
such instance could he addeeed.—( flear, hear.) In the ha.
rough which he had the honour to represent four-fifths of the
population were Roman Catholics. There had been two con-
tested elections in that borough. On each occasion these was
a Protestant and a Catholic candidate, and on both occasions
the Protestant candidate was returned. fie would ask the
House to look to the result of the proceedings under the
9th of George IV., which created a 5/. constituency in /re-
land, which constituency had to elect in each borough 21
Commissioners. In Coleraine the whole of the 21 Com-
missioners elected were Protestants. In Newry, out of the
21 Commissioners, 13 were Protestants, and eight were
Catholics. In Youghal there were 19 Protestants elected,
and only two Roman Catholics ; and yet all these elec-
tions were made by a Catholic OL constituency.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) In fact, religion never entered into the consi-
s:eration of the electors; they were •only governed by the poli.
tical (minions of 'the candidates. The necessity of a municipal
reform being self-evident, he was desirous of knowing if any
other tneastes'e was to be proposed as a substitute for the one
he was then discussing? He imagined from the cheers from
the other side of the .House upon the presentation of the peti-
tion that evening by the pion. Member for Belfast, that some
Hon. Gentleman intended to stropose the total destruction of
those Corporations. He, howe'vee, was atesid to go so far as
to destroy, for he was only a reformer.—( hear.) H"
would reform and not destroy.—( Hear, hear, from Opposi-
tion side of the House.) And until he should find some
structive proposition put forth, he would not believe that it
could emanate from the other side of the House.—( Hear. )
No one, be presumed, could sanction the leas made by the
patron of Cashel to himself; neither could they sar.ction the
appropriation of 9,000/. a year in Drogheda, nor the defraud-
ing of the poor of Cashel of that property which belonged to
them. He almost thought some proposition mlght be made to
vest those corporate properties in the hands of COmmissioners.
Why, that was the very thing this Bill proposed to do—( Hear,
hear)—to vest those funds in the hands of Commissioners
elected by the people, and who were necessarily interested in
the property which was committed to their care.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") He claimed the votes of all those who
were in favour of reforming corporate abuses against any mea-
sure of general disfranchisement, should such be proposed,
and in favour of his Bill, which had no such destructive ten-
dency.—( Hear.) He claimed also the votes of those who de-
clared that there was nothing in the state of society in Ireland
which could warrant the injustice of denying to that country
what had been already given to England.—(Hear, hear.)
And he claimed also the votes of those who had on former
occasions so warmly and earnestly advocated the vested rights
of freemen ; for such persons he would boldly ask how they
could support a proposition the effect of which must be to de .
:troy all freemen,
by making them freemen of a body which no
longer existed?.—( Hear, hear.) He claimed, therefore, the
vote of the Noble Lord, who had said the refusal to Ireland of
the same justice which had been
serve as a handle for reviving
freemen, of those who had sofofttene
h accorded to England would
tngt the question of the repeal
of
ff the
Unioe, while he also claimed
heretoforevotes of
strenuouslyef r tends
oothoe.
tefided for the preservation
hear.) He felt he had trouhltehdosefreemen's righte.—( Hear,
the House at considerable
length, and he would therefore conclude by stating that the
present Bill was based upon the sameprineiples as those which
governed the English Bill, and he hoped the House would
agree that it should he read a second
time.
cheering.
The Hon. Member
then sat down amidst very general e
Sir R. PEEL then rose, and wcs receivedn loud
Continued cheering. The Right Hon. Baronet
with
dedand
:—Sir, the matter which we are now discussingpr°ee doesa
'not merely relate to local and personal interests.—(Hear,
bear)—it does not merely relate to the pecuniary interests of
certain communities in Ireland. It involves considerations of
the deepest importance with respect to the administration of