The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-15 00:00:00

REFORM.

General GASCOYNE presented a ptition in favour
of Parliamentary Reform from Liverpool. The Gallant
General said the petition was signed by more than eleven
thousand of the inhabitants of that town, and although
it did not express their entire concurrence in the
measure proposed by Ministers, yet they hailed with de-
light the plan of transferring the elective franchise from
close boroughs to large and populous towns. He
knew from experience that it was no easy task for one or
two representatives to discharge the duties of a consti-
tuency like Liverpool. He thought, therefore, it was
well deserving of the House to cansider whether it would
❑ot be advisable to give more Alembers to the large
towns.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—Liverpool alone paid more
taxes than the whole kingdom of Ireland put together,
and it contained more houses entitled to the elective fran-
chise than either the counties of Bedford, Buckingham,
Cambridge, or Hertford.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He
disagreed with some parts of the Bill, and to the details of
the measure should give his decided opposition.—(llear,
hear.) If it was necessary to transfer the franchise
to large towns, he did nut see why sixty boroughs
should be selected and thrown indiscriminately overboard.
There was not a single petition that prayed for any such
step. He agreed however that some Reform was neces-
sary—(Hear)—and he had no hesitation in saying that
in his opinion, if the present measure was not carried,
it would lead to some other plan of Reform that would be
adopted by the House before the expiration of another year.
Mr. EWART said there never was a petition more re-
spectably signed. He fully and warmly supported the
prayer of the petitioners in favour of the measure brought
forward by his Majesty's Ministers. He considered it a
measure calculated to confer one of the greatest boons on the
country. Notwithstanding what had fallen from the Gallant
General, he could assure she House that the inhabitants of
Liverpool were decidedly in favour of the proposed plan
of Reform.
Sir E. B. SUGDEN hoped that some Hon. Members
in supporting Reform would not forget the excessive bribery
that took place at some elections.—(Cries of " hear.")
Mr. J. WOOD said the Bill did not lose sight of that.
Mr. C. CALVERT presented a petition from South-
walk, in favour of Parliamentary Reform. The Ho.
Insurable Member then said that the petition had been
agreed to at the largest meeting ever held in that borough
fcr the last twenty-five years, and that without a dissen-

tient voice.—(llear.) The petitioners were decidedly in
favour of the plan proposed by the Noble Lord, and
he thought he might add that nine-tenths of them were
also favourable to the vote by ballot. He (Mr. Calvert)
considered that a more perfect system of Reform could not
have been proposed, and it should have his most cordial
support.

Sir R. WILSON supported the petition, and bore Vs-
tiniony to the unaninsity that prevailed in its favour, and
to an address that was to be presented to his Majesty,
but he denied that the majority of the borough were fa-
vourable to the ballot.

Mr. CALVERT presented another petition from the
parish of St. George the Martyr, expressing the delight
of the petitioners at the plan of Ministers to transfer the
elective franchise from rotten boroughs to large towns.
Mr. BARLOW HOY presented a petition from South-
' ampton, against the proposed tax on steam.
Sir J. MACDONALD presented a petition in favour of
the plan of Reform.
After a few words from Mr. C. PELHAM and Mr. Y.
PEEL,
Mr. HUNT considered many of the electors of Caine
as rotten electors as any in any borough in the kingdom, at
least such was their reputation a few years since. He had
made the same observation a few evenings ago, which he
understood was 'Afterwards alluded to by the Hon. Member
for Yarmouth (Mr. Yates Peel). In the course of that
Hon. Member's observations he noticed his (Mr. Hunt's)
trade. had he been present he should no doubt have
answered those observations ; but all he would say now
was, that his (Mr. Hunt's) father was the first
of the family who was a retired tradesman, whilst the
Hon. Member's father was the first of the family that ever
obtained the rank of a tradesman.—(Great laughter.)
Mr. BAYLEY presented a petition front Bristol, pray-
ing for a repeal of the corn laws.
Mr. CURTEIS said, the plan of Reform introduced

by Ministers had been so carefully framed as to protect all
interests of the State. lie should therefore give it his
most cordial support.
An HoN. MExiiiEn, whose name we could not learn,
said, in his opinion the Bill would give such a preponde-
rating influence to the agricultural interests, that no re-
peal of the corn laws need ever be expected by the
country. He should therefore oppose it.
Mr. I3INGLEY presented a p,itition front the Cham-
ber of Commerce at Bristol, praying for a repeal of the
duty on sugar.

Colonel LYG ON presented a petition from Dudley,
iu favour of the plan of Reform, and another from Eveshamn
against the Disfranaiselmnt Bill.

Lord ALTI10111) moved the order of the day for
callin; over Barnes of the defaulters on Friday last.

DUTY ON COTTON WOOL.

Lord ALTHOHP, in answer to a question put by Lord
G. Somerset, stated that he did not mean to oppose Sir
John Newport taking precedence with his motion of
what stood before him in the paper. Afterw•atds he
should, as he had given notice on a former night,
move in the first place the Customs Bill for introducing
the duty en cotton wool.
COAL DUTY.
Lord ALTHORP also stated that the orders had been
given from the Custom-house respecting the coal dnty,
and that there was no further difficulty repecting it.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON sta:ed that he had no ob-
jection to la the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir John New-
port) proceed with his motion, of which he had given
notice, but he thought it right to state to the
House that he (Mr. Alderman Thompson) had given
notice three or lour times of his intention to bring forward
a petition of the ship-owners on the North America❑
station. For the purpose of doing so, he had at-
tended four or five time 3, end occasionally as early
as half-past nine o'clock in the morning, but
still he had not had an opportunity of bringing it forward.
It was his intention to have laid the petition before the
House o❑ the Speaker's leaving the Chair to-night,
for the House to go into a Committee of Supply, should
he not have an opportunity of previously presenting it,
but he should not do so, nor further interrupt the Right
lion. Bar. net, if the Ctianct nor of the Exchequer would
allow him to present the petition to-morrow before publie
business began, even should it be past five o'clock.
Lord ALTHORP would raise no objection to the Ifin.
Member presenting the petition to-morrow, after titre
o'clock.

FIRST-FRUITS' FUND IN IRELAND.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT then proceeded with his mo-
tion of first fruits. He said, that at the time of the Re-
formation the first fruits belonged to the Crown, but were
made over to the clergy by Queen Anne, for the purpose
of enabling them to build and repair the churches ; to this
purpose, however, they were not found adequate, so that

ul
the burtlien which ought to be provided for out o' el SP6
first fruits really fell upon the people, which was the
objectionable in Ireland, as so large a portion of the PW:s
lotion consisted of Roman Calmlics and Dissenters 4 P.l",
the Established Church. The real cause of this herds :,
oppressively felt by the people was, because the valu:h:
time
of the first fruits still remained the same that it VW r", ;(
first made ; so that now what was called the fist
was scarcely more than nominal. The Right 10°3-e
to
')0
Baronet referred to a variety of documents to s''// lily
the benefices were improperly rated, and showed tb3, orei tl4t°
patentee of the office of first fruits had been cell (0( ISt„tic
for doing his duty. Other people were hl-"°. lot,:
neglect—he WAS blamed for his cal. It WAS tilneo
bt wo.ei
the wealth properly belonging to the State shone', o,otot
devoted to that purpose for which it had been int°oo e
rg
and neither the Consolidated Fund, nor Parlill°olst. (if
Sar
grants, nor local taxation ought to had reerol
to for ecclesiastical purposes till the whole of 111,ethef
first fruits were appropriated as it was inteadeo at et-~c
an
should be. Ile believed that in the motion he teasblgb' Par
to make, lie consulted the interests of the church esl'l4of
ment. If the clergy were acquainted with the sig'it-pi
the times in which we live, they would be careful °lig
insist too pertinacionsly on claims that were in 01,1'1,51d0 Fri he
to the claims of the State and the poor. He had"l't,i
up his proposition in such a form, lie believed, a Ireo ;CI!
be liable to objections. He proposed to move an •A;"'h'
to the Crown, detailing at length all the facts wlii
had brought before the House, and which were conef,-,i!
with this subject, and praying his Majesty, in 01"."1,)!IC1'
render these first fruits efficient for the purposes for 'l')
they were granted, that he would direct a reference tlio t 110.4.
made to the law officers of the Crown to ascertaln,'ol
Pa
were legal to make a new and complete valuation (I,llkontru
first fruits, exempting from the payment all h 1
one hundred pounds and under, in order out of the°oll I,7't
make good deficiencies in the revenue for ecclesil° 11,,,!.
purposes, so that they might no longer be defraYe'.o
grants from Parliament, or by local taxation. The 11' q-41.11
Hon. Baronet concluded by moving such an address' C4Zllati,
Mr. STANLEY seconded the motion. S'
illr.ofGthOeUßLißoUitliNlloinl.id
Bniartonpereescismeloytiounndaenrsdts
object :?1,
to know what he meant by exempting benefices
than one hundred pounds ?
Sir JOHN NEWPORT was understood to say 01:1011}lkj- °
wished the first fruits of all benefices above 1001.1 'C 41
to be accurately valued. y cal Wal
Mr. GOULBURN, with that explanation, rno1„,c1• ik'fit4ll
nounce the views of the Right Bon. Baronet to be
stitutional. lie did not know why, as he presurneutiosl,„. I'4
his Majesty's present Ministers approved of this Lio„,
they could not direct the Law Officers to make 14!volSeir.,qiiie%
cessary inquiries. He thought the motion was conll;iiiillifth
neither with public advantage nor justice ; he should

the motion. The Right Hon. Baronet was in ert01;01
supposing that the first fruits formerly were the °er
annual income of benefices. It was also an error to Per
pose that the Acts of Parliament which empowered 'iv
missioners to appropriate the first fruits gave any I°ol
to the Commissioners to ascertain the value of the tilj
fruits. if he followed the strict letter of the lelool
should oppose the motion ; but if the Government et))
to ask further legal advice on the subject, to that he r°
make no objection.
1 it er
Sir Joss NEWPORT and Mr. GOULBORNRai
plained.
Mr. LEADER was one of those who wished the clel,o
at all times to possess a competent provision, and I'Bl,o
not, therefore, very likely to consent to anything tiro
might tend to despoil them of their right; but be
cep
tainly thought that the church of Ireland and the es,)
would be benefitted by some better regulation and Pile
of the produce of the first ft uits. At the present
merit, and for the last eighteen years, the greatest ab a
and neglect were visible with respect to its collection.
the diocese of Armagh, which contained parishes CO
300,000 acres, the whole produce of the fund for thebro,l
eighteen years was only 4,0001. In the dioceses of IN fj,t'
Cashel, and Tuam, the amount was equally small,
if
although the whole of these dioceses contained 2,0001
rishes, and there had been 1,300 promotions, the pr
of the first fruits' fund was only 9,0001. in eighteen Yeltel
1,200 parishes, containing 600,000 acres, had been allaip
to compound the payments to the fund for a mere °Aril
He was satisfied that the regular payment of the
fruits, and the application of their produce to its legit'
objects, would tend to relieve the church from in° 51
the odium which at present attached to the workingtlers
the vestry system, and that the removal of the vet"
which it produced would be hailed with joy in Irell°
the harbinger of peace and tranquillity.—(Hear.) tg
Mr. LEFROY did not see why the clergy shot)
too
subjected to the payment of a tax of this description! of
one which was not levied from any other profes34;al
office. If the clergy were in all cases to pay the of
year's income to the First Fruits' Fund, he did not seer)
his Majesty's Ministers should not also pay to sonaele,,ro
their first year's income on accepting office, or the elPtd
of the army sacrifice their first year's pay. lie pro te
against taking from men who stood so much in 0'04!
their income—men without property, and in manY
having large families to provide fur, the whole of_arse
first year's earnings. It was cruel, vexatious, and Toil
sive. If the clergy were to pay this tax on their
why not collect it from year to year, instead of te/I,ljis
at once.—(Hear, hear.)—That would be just!
pia a
would he in accordance with the principles of COkeeel
an income tax on other kinds of property. Whoever b/
indeed indeed of a whole year's income being taken as an Jnitelsi
tax ?—(Hear, bear.) He did not see either, why t'tettal
impropriator and the remainder man, who has an i°
in the lay tithes, should not be compelled to pay n tss,el
the repairs and erecting of churches, as well as the 0
man. Ot
Mr. STANLEY denied that there was anything.!
ovat
motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman which laid l'oaa
to the clause of illegality brought against it by theoo the
Member for the University of Dublin (Lefroy). '
contrary, the sole object of the motion was for an 34,,.11,`
to the Crown to take the opinion of its law officers! ',lle
purpose of ascertaining whether it was or was not Jenioo
collect the first fruits ; and, on the result of that 01%.101
it would then be open to the House to determinev ort
coulme was to be pursued. As to the charge of t
pressiveness of the tax, surely the Hon. Member n"l' .
d(ssl.
have heard the declaration of his Right Hon. Frier Fe'
J. Newport) that it was not intended to demand the
ment from the incumbent of any living under 100 b 3., ),
of!
What was the tax, too ? A tax on the acceptant'f
living ; and was it not natural that the Parliament ° Pro'
country should be called on to devise means for aPtluO
priating this fund to its origin.l purposes? The 4° rlo'
Wes, how far the first composition was final and ("ot
sive. That was a point of law, on which he did °that
competent to pronounce ; but it appeared to
.hini tal
to
would be very strange if a clergyman were walT3,') ale
bind his successors for ever. It would surely 'sea ths,
reasonable to suppose that the clergyman who Wet bee
composition bound only himself. It was clear the
had been repeatedly new valuations in Ireland in the
4of El z :both, James I. &c.
to
ip,o9) to
'0
Sir R. PEEL contended that it was wholly '` r!!
to agree to the resolutions without having titre
P°' lei
con•ider them. It would be infinitely better to P,lrels
all discussion upon the policy of time subject until
officers had given their opinion.
Mr. STANLEY observed, in explanation, that
solutions were only grounds for a future Bill. at lei
Mr. O'CONNELL maintained that it was of grer-tiPv
portance to the people of Ireland to have it deteid
whether there was not a legal fund, out of W'u
00 lef
churches should Ise repaired, instead of imposingttide
t,
people at large the burden of taking care of the 0°
buildings, the inside of which they never saw• corms
pressed his surprise at hearing the Hon. and 0°,1,1
Member fur the University of Daslin ask if it At!, Deiles
common-law burden on the parishes in Ireland vro,ol
and repair the churches? It was not a common-di,
either in Ireland or in England. It was a burden 00,4,
by pat ticular Statutes. The common-law division
third of the repairs of the church, a third fur Is1,01;etro
and a third for the poor; but now the clergYt"'"'avea
Yethe
It was certainly true that within the last twenty-'i
more churches had been built in Ireland than („,i'000;
preceding three hundred years. No less than 63`''..; ee)
the public money had been granted for that inifii eocv
emal
the Established Church in Ireland were not richgifts re
without. A portion of this bad been expended badpro
donations; among. ethers, Lord Oriel, poor Inant'elmere s'
ceived 2,000/. This doubling of the Prwestati /rob fog,ta
accounted for a great deal of the poverty of tile
the
santry. Parishes, stimulated by the architect! aof the
the painter, the glazier, &e. applied to the 1300
Fruits for a lo in, which, when the church wnslit:ri 1,0000
p inhabitant. had to repay. T o
The II9n• , the Ccto‘'
Gentleman proceeded to aigue that the title who,
ed,
to the property in question was perfectlY e s
proof of the manner in which the rates "'ere siterrity
instanced the parish of Ivragh, in which tic
acrd
%tor
thousand inhabitants, of whom only tn'er'Y 11,e 1% • tlls
ot
testauts. Of those twenty, tif;een were 01 c rate t
Guard ; so that five persons actually levied ts"_iiitin:righ
wholesi r Ipta.riisNh
(!a,l stronglylm
e thatsu i wrestle° (! the a '
would be submitted to the Law Officers 0 000..0
of the ogalos
without any incutnbrance of the opinion
Mr. SPRING RICE said that if the La"' stag
the Crown did their duty properly, as he was
ipthuerted the re uf jegacirofa

f)
I._'.tL

?I hill
lyiti
gain
rt,),

5, the
t

''''.
It(
Ivi,
lA*. Ick

gi
1141
►Lo