The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-18 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 17.
SHEEP STEALING.
Mr. HAWES, in answer to a question from Mr.
Bright, said that sheep stealing was still capitally pu-
nished in Van Diemen's Land.
LAND IMPROVEMENT AND DRAINAGE
(IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this Bill,
Mr. GROGAN said if five-shilling and two-shilling
rates were struck in the distressed unions of Ireland that
the effiacy of the measure would be materially
interiered with. What they wanted in Ireland were
zealous, energetic, and intelligent guardians of the poor.
Mr. P. SCROPE approved of the provisions of the
Bill generally, but what he complained of was that it
contained provisions of a most serious character, and did
not appear what its nem° proposed it should be, "An
Act for the Effectual Relief of the Poor in Ireland." In
many of the workhouses of that country relief was not
given as it ought to be, and the consequence was that
destruction of human life was frightful. In one union
alone, that of Ballinasloe, out of 5,000 persons, upwards
of 400 died in the course of a week. In Kenmare, they
had heard from the respectable chaplain of that estab-
lishment, that the unhappy inmates were compelled to
wear their clothes night and day; a state of things
which produced the most frightful consequences, while
in Skibbereen, six and eight were found to lie in the
same bed, the width of which was three and a half
feet, and the length six feet. Was it not no-
torious, that the poor preferred dying outside
rather than go into the workhouses? He did not
mean to say that that was the general character of work-
houses in Ireland, but there ought to be no such in-
stances. But was the outdoor relief of a better descrip-
tion? Many frauds were used, and in spite of the ut-
most vigilance, these frauds could not be put a stop to.—.
(Hear, hear.) Even numbers of those who received this
relief had no house, and nothing for clothing, nothing for
fuel. It was the universal testimony that these unfortu-
nate creatures were reduced to a condition frightful and
shocking to all beholders. Some steps should be taken
to secure a more adequate relief than was at present
afforded. But there was an excuse on account of the
deficiency of funds. He thought if a demand was pro-
perly inaLle. Pa.;iarnent would net withheld, fur the next
'.oar relief to these starving people, at the rate
of three farthings a day; that would be sufficient to pre-
vent any loss of life, and they need not lose the money.
Put the prOdllooo4oos 91 the Nil NY91.114 alone repay

them. The reclamation of the waste lands might afford
employment to the paupers; they might, at least, pro•
duce sufficient for their own subsistence. The Society
of Friends had succeeded in that plan in someiu-
sV:nces. Common sense told them that if they had idle
men, and idle land, to put the idle men on the land.
They had roads unfinished, and drainage incomplete. If
they set to work in a siraightfonsard way, nothing'
would be easier than to make these people self-support-
irg, and so diminish the poor-rate. The Noble Lord has
often stated that it was the first duty of a Government
to preserve the live's of the people. To secure that ob-
ject responsibility should be placed somewhere. The
people of Ireland 'were starving in numbers, and steps
should be taken to preserve them from the extremity of
destitution. There should be some rower of compelling
relief where it was properly required. It was true that
the Noble Lord would tell them the relieving-otTicer was
liable to be dismissed in case of refusing relief, but what
was the loss of Ss. a week to him, and that was all the
penalty that could be inflicted for a neglect of duty or
refusal of redo, wliich might result in the loss of hu-
man life.

Mr. OSBORNE: said that a Committee was sitting uP
stairs to inquire into the working of the law, and whY
did the Government bring in a Bill to amend this poor
law hetere that Committee had made its report? ID
objected to this peddling system of amending the law.--
(Hear, hear.) Until they come to something like
national rate the, present system would be, as it now
was, utterly iticacient. The lion. Member (Mr. Scropo)
had asked what was eight shillings a week; but he could
tell him that eight shillings a week was a fortune in Ire-
land. Four shillit-gs a week was the average wages.
He objected to app lying the principle of the English poor
law in Ireland. It. Cashel there was an army of 10,000
paupers receiving relief every week, and these poor
people were actually selling their pounds of yellow meat
to obtain clothing. The existing law was inefficient.
As to employing the people on waste lands, he feared it
was not a scheme that would pay, and he objected to
this peddling syste ei of amending what was originally t%
defective scheme of legislation. lie would not divide upon
this Bill, and word d wash his hands of all responsibility
under the circurast ances.

Lord C. liANII2TON, who was imperfectly hard,
was understocd to complain of the absence in the Bill of
all allusion to the important question of settlement. no
hoped the Governs neat would take some steps to remedi
thatgravo de!ect.

Mi:. CALLAGHAN said he thought this was a some*
xshat hurried au,d imperfect way of amending the 1'
He thought that the tenancy Crown lands should be in"
eluded in the r,ste. These lands had been heretofore
exempt.

Colonel DU.N.INE said that ho had no confidence in
that Committee on the poor-law up stairs. The Com-
mittee were completely under the influence of the Hon•
31ember for Me.:-ichester. He would support some
clauzcs in the B ,11 and oppose others, although be
agreed with the Honourable Member for Middlesex
that the Bill woult I be perfectly intik, as it would not
go to the root ,of the e.ii. He approved of fixing
a maximum rate, Why should not that income•tax
which was paid by absentees from Irish property
be taxed for the firl pport of the poverty of that country?
Irish income, wherever it was expended, should be
taxed for the support of the pauperism of that country.
He thought that th a money laid out should be laid out in
reproductive weriu He should not then discuss the
details of the Bill, which could be most properly done
in Committee. u s rose principaily to warn the House
against that Committee on the poor-laws sitting up stairs,
with whose conduct he was quite dimatisficd.

Mr. LI. HERBKRT would defer to the general wish,
and avoid the disce ssion of any of the details of this Bill
on that occasion.,. At the same time he could not look
at the state of Irel and, and the utter break down of the
poor law, without entsring his protest against the priti-
ciple of the mess are, and it any lion. Member had felt dis-
posed to move an. amendment ho would have divided
against the secoc d reading, because he considered east,
uaion rating, whieli was its main principle, was one Of
the most danger( nis that could be introduced into anY
country. He be] ieved that if they carried this mischiev-
ous Bill it would utterly break down and fail in its pro-
fessed objcca Th. only efT(ct would be to drag down
the comparatively well conditioned districts to the level
of the ‘sorst, and next session they would find they
would have again :to ask for grants from the Impala/
Excht,quer or suffe r the people to die from starvation as
they were now.— (Hear, hear.) He complained that
they never had th is question of union rating fairly
placed before the B uuse. In the present instance, it was
mixed up with other matters, the object being evidtntlY
to obtain its enactu tent indirectly. ale would ask, why
the average area of taxation in Ireland should he
nearly 10,000 mile. s, whilst it was so much smaller 10
England? He put that question to the Right Hon.
Secretary for Irela ad. lie had asked him on previous
occasions, why ours area of taxation should exist 10
'England and another in Ireland, and he trusted that he
would not receive a reply. The lion. Gentleman pro-
ceeded to read sore .e statistics of the state of pauperism
in the union with which he was connected. On the Bth
of May there were 3,232 paupers in the house: to make,
arrangements for 7ihis large number, they were forced
to distribute them in various buildings. There were
over 13,000 receiving relief altogether. The mortality
was increasing in the house, though there was no deo'
lera, and it was as well ventilated and managed as all
one in Ireland. When he left, the mortality was 1 per
cent. in the week. It had now risen to 11 per cent.--•
fifty-three had died in one week. This was in whit;
was called a prosperous union, because it had asked
them for no money, and he had a right to be proud,
when he stated, that within the last thirteen months
there had been collected in that union, without the aid
of a policeman or soldier, 40,6801. out of an annual
rental cf 80,0001. In sonic places the rates had been
1-ts. in the pound. The lowest was Gs. In 1547,
the board of guardians memorialised the Poor-law Cone'
missioners to reduce the area 'of taxation, and desired
to be allowed to carry out the law in a practical way,
but the Commission turned a deaf ear to all their repre-
sentations, though they neither asked them for money
nor relief, but to carry out a clause within our Act of
Parliament. The adherence of the Government to the
theories against interfering with a labour market which
dial not exist, had ruined that union. Many a landlord
who would now have been employing labour was now la
despair, and thousands of those who might have usefully
and profitably occupied, were forced into the workhouse.
They were accused of using harsh language occasionally,
but he thought, under these circumstances, they were
justified in it. It was the Government who had changed
the language of manly self-dependence into that of de-
spair and beggary, and when he thought of the state,
not only of the uni on to which he had referred, but of
every other union in the county, he felt that he had a
sufficient justification for any strong language he might
have used either ou that or former occasions.
Sir W. SOMEP.VILLE said he would confine his
observations to a reply to the objections that had bees
made by the Hon. Members who had spoken, leaving
the details of the 'measure to be discussed at a future
stage. It was not to be expected that an important
measure like this should pass without some opposition,
but he confessed he was surprised at some of the objet'
Lions that had been made. The Hon. and Gallant
Member for Portarlington had blamed the Government'
for not waiting for the report of the Committee. lie
thought there was some inconsistency in that charge,
seeing the Hon. and Gallant Member was one of those
who, when the Government proposed the appointment
of that Committee, urged that it should have been pre-
pared with its own measures without waiting for a
Committee at all.—(Hear, hear.) Looking, however,
at what had passed last year, he thought the Govern-
ment would have been chargeable with a breach
of faith, if it had not proposed the appoint-
ment of that Committee. Tho Committee bad
now sat for a long time, and the Government
felt that, in the present state of Ireland, they were
bound to come forward with such measures as seemed
most urgent, without waiting for the report of the Coin'
mitt,e, which might come so late in the session as to
leave no time for its consideration; but though the Com-
mittee had made no report, it had collected a great deal
of evidence, which had been laid on the table of the
House, and thus assisted in showing the way to prac-
tical amendments in the law. He, therefore, thought
the Government had exercised a sound discretion in
laying this Bill before the House, in order to give Mem-
bers time to consider its details, and also for its circula-
tion in Ireland. The Hon. Member for Stroud had made
a great many objections which appeared to him to have
very little connexion with the poor laws. One important
point he bad mooted, the insufficiency of the means
provided for the administration of relief.—(Hear, hear.)
But that was a matter which could be considered
when they went into Committee. The Honourable
Member who spoke last had alluded to his conduct,
and said that he had on several occasions refused to
answer to questions put to him as to the area of taxa-
tion. He did not remember of the question, as now put
by the Hon. Member, ever having been put to him be-
fore. The question had been discussed in the House,
and on that occasion he opposed the smaller area of tax-
ation. That was a matter of opinion, however, on which
the Hon. Member might fairly differ from him. The
Hon. Member seemed to think that the Poor-law Com-
missioners were bound to agree to the recommendations
of any union that might choose to memorialize them to
make alterations in the area of taxation. That was not
the case. Parliament had' vested a discretionary power
in the Commissioners, and he was of opinion that they
had acted wisely in refusing to accede to the request in
the memorial from the union of Killarney. In one
case when lie was on that Commission, they bad
agreed to reduce the area of taxation in the barony
of Drone, in the county of Carlow. They did so at
the earnest request of the parties resident in that
barony, who were unite as unanimous as they were in
the Union of Killarney; but, nevertheless, when they
agreed to the alteration general dissatisfaction was
created, and imputations of partiality and improper
motives were made against the Commission.—(liear,
hear.) He hoped he had answered all the questions
of the Hon. 'Alembeia as ho was desirous of showing
the utmost attention to what the Hon. Gentleman bad
said, feeling as he did that there was no Hon. Member
whose suggestions deserved more consideration.—(Clear,
hear.) Every attention would be paid by the Govern-
ment to any suggestions that might be made, and he
trusted they would receive every aid in Committee to
make the Bill satisfactory.
Mr. VERNON SMITH said it was rather singular
that all the discussion which had taken place was in re-
ference to the omissions in the Bill—what he had to
offer would be with reference to the provisions
contained in the Bill. He thought they were much
indebted to the Government for the introduction of
the poorlaw into Ireland, as it had been the means of
showing the rottenness that existed in too many parts
of the social system in Ireland. He should look forward
with great anxiety to the report of the Committee that
had begin appointed. He was surprised he had heard
nothing from Hon. Members on the subject of a maxis"
mum rate in one of the provisions of the Bill.—(Hear.)
A maxivaura rate had certainly never been popular in

England— (Hear, heir)—and he wanted to know, if the
maximum rate shall fail, what party would be called upon
to contribute?—(H, ar.) The Hoc. Member for Kerry
(Mr. Herbert) bed sta;ed that the union rate was very
unpopular is Eligland, but he (Mr. V. Smith) differed
in opinion on that zulket, and should have no objec-
tion to see the union rate introduced :into Ireland. His
object new was to wain the pecrele of England of
the measures con!emplatcd in due present Bid.
The Right lion. Member tl-en allutiied to what had
e.been propesed a few nights ago Ina the Honourable
atarnber for Limerick county (Mr. IV,.onsell), as to giv-
ing increased powers to the hoards of guardians
in Ire-
-1 on the ruhiect of emigration, and, in conciusion,
831 d he hoped some provision would be introduced into
the present Bill on the subject.—(Heft:.)
Lerd J. RUSSELL said his Right 1-.Lonourable Friend
(Hr. Vernon Smith) had asked him a question relative
to the maximum rate, and he was therefore desirous
of addressing the Holm on two or three points. His
Right Honourable Friend had at,ked him, as it
''''s proposed to impose a alexia...um rate in Ire-
land, us there had been no sach rate imposed
to England hew the poor w.:re to be pro-
le.d for in the event of that rate being ex-
haustcd ? They were aware that the condition
cf. a number of unions was such, although the amount
of the rate was far from bein g excessive, that
canney was required from this country to supply
- want. That being the case, he did not see much
value, in an abstract declaration that tt.se property of the
"lan was liable for the support of the poor. If thoa-
t!atne to irT quire relative to the expenditure of the 50,000/.
In Ireland they would find tint 8,245/. bad been given to
the Biillina Unnion, and it appeared that the amount
raised in Ballina on the second rate was 3s. lid. in the
Pound, and that the date of that mte was on September
21, 1813, while he found that in some unions eleven or
twelve shillings in the pound had beieu called for, yet in
there unions which had required relief rates of three
three shillings and sixpence, and four shil-
lings only had been made. If, then, such was the
case, it was a proof they had no security against being
called upon by means of an abstract; declaration, such
-as had be:oa alluded to. It might be asked why rates
of a larger amount had not bean called for, but
tno collectors said there bed been great diffi-
etilty in collecting the rates that had been levied.
What he inferred then from these things was this—that
with a small amount of rate they might have great
amount of distress.—(Hear, hear.) It seemed to him,
therefire, that there was no way of providing for the
destitute poor in Ireland, but by placing some limit be-
yond which those who cultivated the land in that coun-
try shou!d not be called on to pay lor others.—(Hear,
hear.) The view which he took of the proposed maxi-
mum rate was this, that by allotting a certain portion
nimn property for the relief of the poor, they provided
for the poor with greater certainty, and secured at the
same time the cultivation of the land in Ireland.—
(tlear, hear.) Still there might bo an amount of dis-
tress greater than that which would be provided for, and
bis Right Hon. Friend (Mr. V. Smith) had asked
Whether to meet such distress there could be a general
rate in aid, or whether the relief would be contributed
out of the Consolidated Fund. His (Lord John
Russell's) opinion was that the rate in aid
;should
not be continued in Ireland, and he would not there-
fore propose a further continuance of the Bill for
that purpose.—([Tear, hear.) As to having recourse to
the Consolidated Fund, he thought it would be much
better to leave those who required relief to the resources
of the same kind they had before the measure of the
Poor-law was passed, than to make such a charge upon
the Consolidated Fund.—(Hear, laiar.) If they retained
the maximum rate, he had no doubt that the amount that
Would be raised would be used with due economy. He,
therefore, thought, upon the whole, the passing of the
Bill with a maximum rate would not give any reason for
a rate in aid, or for coming upon the Consolidated Fund,
and he considered that the measure, taken altogether,
Would prove to be advantageous, and would bo for the
benefit of all classes of the community.—(Hear, hear.)
Right Hon. Friend (Mr. V. Smith) had also alluded
to the necessity of intro toeing some provision relative to
emigration. The lion. Member for the county of Lime-
rick (Mr. Monsell) had paid attention to that subject,
and as he should be desirous in Committee to have a
Clause introduced, ho should be glad to have the as-
sistance of the Honourable Gentleman, as his wish
Would be to make it effective. The Noble Lord then

referred to another subject which had been intro-
duced, namely, as to the arse of taxation. Government,
be said, had been asked whether it was intended to in-
troduce a small area, without any explanation having
been given as to what a large area or what a small area
was. In all those questions there were two sides, and it
was, be confessed, a very important subject. He would
take for instance an electoral division of 8,000 acres.
Suppose it was proposed to cut it in four, and make divi-
sions of 2,000 each, it requires more care and calculation
than merely to use a pencil and compasses. A gentleman
of ability and experience (Captain Larkin) was at pre-
sent engaged in making enquiries on this difficult
subject, and he would, no doubt, soon be able to furnish
important information, and would be able to point out
What was essential to he done, and what new unions
would be absolutely necessary. He (Lord J. Russell)
was ready to admit, that if the unions had been better
regulated at the time of the passing of the Poor Law, it
would have been better for the working of that measure.
—(Hear, hear) He could only, in conclusion, further
state, that whatever appeared to be necessary for the
efficiency of the present measure should be introduced
into the Bill in Committee.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HORSIIAN adopted the opinion which had been
expressed, that the Government had brought for-
ward the measure with the very best intentions;
and he agreed also that in considering the present mea-
snre they should be influenced by one feeling only—
'lamely, a feeling of making the measure the best they
possibly could for relieving the distresses of the country.
--(Hear, hear.) It was confessed that, after all that had
been done, the condition of Ireland was worse than ever.
lie felt assured, and was, therefore, bound to say, that
the general distress of Ireland required that this measure
should not be passed, particularly when not only the
people, but the priest and the proprietor, were subject to
the evil influence of misery and distress in that country,
which that measure would not relieve, but would
rather increase. He also considered that there was a
requisition for the combination of good measures, to
counteract the combination of the evils of that country;
and, as that measure showed that the poor-laws were
broken down, it was the duty of the Government to re-
vive that measure of the poor-laws as much as possible.
The combination to which he alluded for the benefit of
Ireland was the facility for the disposing of incumbered
estates, a limited liability for poor•rates, and an encou-
Neement for small proprietors; and as this Bill was a
solitary one, he did not think that it would effect any
good for that country. He would ask could it be ex-
pected that any one could venture, under this measure, to
Purchase property in Ireland, when the maximum rate
according to the Bill might be made much more should
the Government think fit, for the Government is now-a-
,,a3's the only means of carrying any measure. He be-
lieved that a limited liability for poor-rates would be
the best means of securing and encouraging the industry
of the people, and hoped therefore that the area of tax-
ation would be judiciously reduced. He would next ask
what_ was the use of imposing on the rate-payers a new
.!4:, when the old one was not paid, and from
4tlt not being paid he thought that measure
°t'allY useless. He considered that the first task
of the Douse should be either to remit or obtain the
hot be effectsd. Then let the House look to the condition
ocrime. In 1844 there were only 400 persons trans-
Ported, whereas in 1848 no less than 1,300 were
.I,s,insported, and the number of convictions in Ireland in
47 was 170 persons, and in 1848 the number was 2,800.
sT
herefore he considered he was bound, not only from
ltnes e circumstances, but from the evils that this measure
"was likely to entail on Ireland, to oppose it. He knew
110 better system that could be adopted for the payment
,goor-rates than the lessening of electoral divisions.
s in consequence of the great extent of those electoral
(divisions, many poor persons were known to have
perished through famine on the roadside before they
eould reach the workhouse. In the next place, ho would
call the attention of the House' to the evidence given be-
fore the Committee of the House, and in that evidence it
was clear that in consequence of the great extent of
(electoral area, that most of the mischief and evil pre-
vailed, and as such was not the ease in England, he
thought that a great injustice was done to Ireland, for
England, considering its valuation and population, was
much less in electoraliarea than Ireland. He consierded
that a Committee should be appointed for a just and fair
'division. He knew from all that he had heard and ex-
perienced that crime prevailed most in the largo unions,
and that, in addition to other circumstances, induced
biroto oppose the measure, particularly when he had the
opinions of Captain Hamilton and other men of distin-
gaiehed humanity, who well understood the state of
vteland- With regard to the multiplication of work-
4"uses. he believed it was the strongest argument in
4kvour of a limited area. In a paucity of them there
'could be no economy, and it had already occasioned a
great but useless expenditure. The evils of that system
L. 9 not terminate with the waste of money, nor even
7 eteth the waste of human life; but it had given rise to a
ilug of discontent and dissatisfaction. The founda-
s sign of
all systems of improvement in Ireland sbuuld, in
em-
ployment n, have especial reference to a sufficiency of
forem-
the
of the poor, together with a rigid enforcement
workhouse test. Those main points being ob-
served, they
would have laid the groundwork for useful
schemes in all
Proprietary directions—the substitution of a solvent
encou-
ragement of —theac npdromotion of emigration—the encou-
ipg of a
new
chairaeutstrious population, and the impart-
ing
contained all the
er to the advances of capital.
elementslre-
ill.assorteca nd ofw twith national
these advantagesprosperity,
bill they were
b re thene it w
merit if it did cot ould be a merited reproach to Perim-
believed that iraissist early in their development.
change, and thate and
n Was now undergoing He
induce the Englisgerotism and common a great
thies for her, in order :element to cherish
new
would
national crisis. Histoor'assist her throughewth"Pa" greater events than thei" could not recorlds great
itself, and the eorrespon Jeconstruction of so jacnty
laws. And all this was nowing alteration of e thYe
witnessed the dissolution of solelcurring;
for they now
setting free of old elements /on organisation, and the
new combinations would sprign combined, from whence
drew hope from the confidence peer'hgeTa( hear.) He
charging its duty, and from his cony'''. Parliament dis-
elevation of the Irish character; and tileeti°n of the moral
to the day when the two nations, u • looked forward
name, should be united, too, in'heartunit hitherto only in
(Cheers.) That the and characte
this lrish people were
improvement susceptible of
fur he
by proper means ho n
he saw that it only required ever doubted ;
to remove the Irishman
from his native soil toaud render him a
useful member ofthe q...et, industrious,
said that the brightest commuuity. Some one ha
be set in gems of Irish aes of English history were to
zany e product, and Jrsland bad wove
" num AnglAu '
d wow waeut
Ong leaf of

the chaplet being given to herself." He hoped that a
bqter iiiy would beam upon her, and that, fully cc-
knowhalg;ng her claims upon their sympathies, she
would be le.;islated for in a spirit of true sincerity and
wisitau.—(l-.Lar, hear)
Mr. NAPIER said he felt it unnecessary at that
moment to address the House at any great length on
this subject; but he wi,:s d,eply impressed with its im-
portance—the more so becanse it excited a consid,Table
degree of a, tention before the commencement of the ses-
sion. He thought also that it was only justice to the
Government that this question should be fully debated, in
order that they might be the better prepared, when in
Committee, to arrive at a conclu,ien conformable torach
other's views. In his own opinion this was an unjust
measure, and he objected to it mainly on the ground of
extending the area for all purposes of taxation to the
union at large, contrary to the spirit of tie law of 1838.
The electoral divisiens were tax«l in the first in-
stance, and when the rate amounted to the maximum
in the division, it was to be thrown upon the union at
large. The consequence was that a man, however indus-
trious and frugal he might be, would be compelled to
sink or swim according a; the fortunes of his ncighbJur
fi uctuatcd, though he himself had no check upon his ex-
penditure or conduct. There were two things which
ought, to b kept carefully distinct—the law and the ad-
mini-.tration of the law. In his opinion the latter was
the more important, but under such a law as that now
prop•)scd there could le no distinction between the in-
dustrious and the idl. , the extravagant and the econo-
mical. In idustrAtion of this point, he might quote the

accounts of the Dublin union, where a great expense was
gone to for wire. porter; whisky, sugar, and lemons, in
all which items deb's had been contracted beyond the
power of control of the industrious and thriving popula-
tion of Ulster and Leinster. He would put it to them
therefore, whether it was just to subject to a general
taxation, under such circumstances, a laborious and de-
serving tenantry, and the proprietary discharging their
duties? The complaint against the injustice of
taxing a meritorious class of men bearing up
against difficulties of all kinds, would not be
regarded as a captious or unfounded one. A very
important case, which frequently- arose, seemed to
omitted, viz., where the tenants deserted the land, and

the Ind bcelme unoccupied. The House was aware
that the landlord would not enter, because if there were
arrears of poor-rates he would immediately become re-
sponsible for the amount. That case might be provided
tor. In the case of jointures and rent carges an un-
just liability was impos2d by the Bill, which a little con-
sideration, it might be supposed, would not have per-
nthted.

➢lr. CLEMENTS regretted that no ion. Member
connected with Ireland had opposed the second reading
of this Bill. Ho was opposed to that feature of it which
imposed a union rating of 2e. in the pound. When they
went into Committee he would endeavour to reduce the
charges upn unions, and place them upon electoral

Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL reminded Hon. Mem-
bers that the peopla of Irelsud were dying while they
were differing about the mode of feeding them. It was a❑
admitted fact that the old poor-law in Ireland was a
tai:ure, and the proposed law was an improvement upon
it. That was his reason for supporting the present pro-
pocition. He had opposed the introduction of a poor-
law in Ireland, and he believed that ultimately it would
be the ruin of the country.
Sir IL W. BARRON was opposed to the 2s. rate in
aid; to be found in the second clause of the Bill. He
admitted there were some amendments in the Bill, and
on that ground he should support it, although he should
object to some of the clauses in the Committee. Until
they limited the area of taxation, they could never ex-
pect to establish a good poor-law in Ireland.

Mr. MONS[LL said he would call the attention of

the House to some points in the Bill. He regretted that
no change was made in the principle of chargeability.
He thought limiting the law of chargeability and the
area of taxati,n wc,uld tf,rid very materially to prevent
evictions. He suggested that the county cess and the
poor rate should be collected at the same time and by
the same collector. He also suggested that half the
county cess should be deducted by the tenant from
his rent.

Mr. SHAP.MAN CRAWFORD said the best means
to adopt would be to rdduce the area of taxation, and
throw the resvntibilitv upon the individual landlords.
Sir D. NORREYS objected to a limitation of the area
of taxation, as tending to on increase of evictions.
Mr. STAFFORD said ho was in favour of a limita-

tion of the area of taxation. In fact, the evictions arose
out of the fear of the area being limited, as then the
landlords would have to bear the entire support of the
paupers; while under the large area they only bore one-
third of the expense, and consequently a limitation of
the area would check evictions. While he did not op-
pose the second reading of the Bill, and while he did not
object to a certain maximum rate, yet he confessed, if it
were not extended to unions it would be a failure. Let
the boards of guardians have the power of making new
unions, if they pleased, but Jet them at the same time be
at liherty to raise money in any way they thought pro-
per. He would earnestly request the Noble Lord to say
whether any more changes were to be made during the
present session, for it was highly desirable that 211 such
should be discu3sed together.
The Bill was then read a second time.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he would state on
Monday what day hs proposed going into Committee
on the Bill.

ACCOUNTS OF TURNPIKE TRUSTS (SCOT-
LAN I)) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
POLICE OF TOWNS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on the 31st inst.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL.
The ArfORNEY-GENERAL nominated the fol-
lowing Hon. Members to form a Select Committee on
the Bill:—Mr. Attorney-General, Sir Frederick The-
siger, Mr. Forster, Mr. Henley, Mr. Bouverie, Mr.
Drummond, and Sir W. Molesworth.
W. SMITH O'BRIEN.

Lord JOHN
.RUSSELL—I have to state to the
House that I propose to-morrow, instead of the motion
of n hich I have already given notice in regard to
William Smith O'Brien, that I shall move that the re-
cord be read, and shall then move two resolutions; after
which I shall move that a new writ for Limerick be
issued in place of William Smith O'Brien.
The House then adjourned at Half-past Eleven.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

TATTERSALL'S.-YESTERDAY.

The run yesterday was all in favour of the recent ar-
rival at Danebury—Chatterer—and so strong was it that
in less than a coupe of hours 7to 1 was taken freely.
The outlay was heavy. The Flying Dutchman remains
precisely as on Wednesday, viz.—at 2 to 1; 9 to 4, or
even less, would have been taken. His companion, El-
thiron, as the odds will show, was not out of favour.
Nunnykirk was backed for several hundreds at 4 to 1,
but Tadmor did not maintain the position he occupied
on Wednesday. Scarcely any business was done ex-
cept on the four leading favourites. Very little was
done on the Oaks; but Glauca and Sister to Arkwright
may be selected as having been most conspicuously in
favour. The latest prices were:—