The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-14 00:00:00

which they had long resided. The fourth clause
provided as to the adjustment of accounts of unions and
electoral divisions. There was none of the other
clauses which he conceived would give rise to
any discussion. There were two clauses added not by
the Government, but several independent Members of
the other House connected with Ireland, which gave
pootelaw guardians the power to tax the unions with
which they were connected for the purposes of emigra-
tion. Such tax was, however, to be voluntary, and he
did not apprehend any objections would be made to
those clauses. Upon the whole, while the measure might
not remedy to the full extent the evils now prevalent in
Ireland, he felt convinced it would do so in a very consi-
derable degree, and he, therefore, with the greatest con-
fidence, proposed the second reading of the Bill.
Lord MONTEAGLE said he regretted that the
Noble Marquis could not have stated to the House that
the measure came before it under the sanction, and in
accordance with the views of the Committee of their
Lordships' House, which sat and reported on the subject.
Such nut being the case be conceived placed Committees
of that or the other House of Parliament in the character
of mere toys, with whom Government could do as they
plea-ed. The Noble Marquis had said that the measure
had been introduced fur the benefit of Ireland, but he
had failed to show in what respect it would do so. while
he was prepared to prove that no benefit to Ireland
would flow from it.—(Hear, heir.) He should say that
the maximum in Ireland was quite different from what
it was established in England, and he therefore thought
that it should be considered by their Lordships, tied that
they should make allowance for this state of things, as
there were different maximums in various unions. He
also hoped that their Lordships would look on the
matter in point of justice, and would not allow such
a Bill to be carried, as it would materially injure
the tenant, and he looked upon the maximum as
a cheat and a deceit, and thereeir hoped that
their Lordships would look to the subject in its true
light, for he believed such a measure to be dangerous
to the interest of Ireland, generally and principally to
the Irish, as the farmers considered that the rate in aid
contained in this Bill would be of a must dangerous cha-
racter, as it would very much affect the interest nut only
of themselves as tenants, but that the landlords of Ire-
land would suffer materially by it. He therefore hoped
that such a measure would nut be carried, principally be-
cause he knew that such was unprecedented ever since
the days of Queen leliz ibeth, when the poor-law was
established, and therefore on those grounds he should
vote against such an iniquitte s measure, as it was no-
thing less than a rate iu aid. When the landed propri-
etor exerted himself to remove the difficulties under
which the tenants laboured, he did not see why they
should be subject to support the poor of other districts.
who did not use the same exertie ns as he had used; and
he therefore hoped that those two clauses would be
omitted, that is, the maximum rate and the rate in aid;
for if those t w points were not agagreedt
the Bill,ohes a
should
bringldpro
pose that they should be struck out of
unconstitutional. He opposed these on the ground
thet there was nothing like this in the state
of Rome or Tuscany when labouring under si-
milar famine, and for that reason he asktd that the
aie.istence granted to the richer part of Ireland should
be granted to the suffering pour of that country.
When he saw that the landlord or the occupying tenant
would be subject to the rates of the tenant who ab-
sconded, he hoped that their Lordships would look to the
matter, and not allow them to be responsible fur the
debt of another. The expediency of obtaining every as-
sistance fur the promotion of emigration was readily in-
ferred, not only from the declaration of his Noble Friend,
in moving the second reading of this Bill, but also from
the act of the First Lord of the Treasury himself, who,
on the first meeting of the Committee, proposed clauses
giving power to the unions to appropriate 2s. 6d. in the
pound, or one-eighth of the whole rental of the country,
to assist in this very project. He, therefore, called upon
the Government to realize, or else to show cause why
they did not realize, the recommendations contained iu
their own report on this subject, and also on that re-
lating to the system of out4luer relief. He rejoiced to
find that in another place a considerate Statesman (he
meant Sir Robert Peel) had had the courage to
declare emphatically that until they reverted to the
principle of in-dour relief exclusively, there could
be no safety for property in Ireland. There were
several other points involved in the subject, all of
them more or less good, but on no particular one of
which did he lay mach store. Amonget these were the
smaller area of taxation and the sale of' estates. Tne
smaller area of taxation ought not to be connected with
the principle of the rate in aid, which was wholly anta-
gonistic to it. He challenged this Bill and all the pro-
ceedings upon it, as being wholly inadequate to meet the
nece.sities of the case, and if he had nit the evidence of
the Bill before him, he should rally have doubted whe-
ther it was possible that a measure could emanate from
men professing to he in any degree acquainted with the
state of Ireland, so wholly unfiited to improve it. The
result of their present operation was to contract for meal
and other provisions at greatly increased prices, and in
many unions the stewards and other officers had beer'
placed upon the relief list, in consequence of there being
no fund, in hand to pay them. To reduce to figures
the deeperare state of affeirs in Ireland, and the toter
incompetency of. the relief measures now about
to be brought into operation, a report presented
to the Committee by Mr. Twistleton, stated the

n thirty-two unions out of 130, the amount o

debts and expen-liture was 695,000/. to meet which
he estima-ed that in the prebelit halt year a sum of
198.00 it.. would be collected. But h. ,w w,.s this mad,

out ? Any gentleman who knew the c ,entry would
know it to be inno.sible for mine of the bankrupt
unions of Ireland' to contribute 10,0001. each, et which
sum, or thereabouts, they had been calculate-d upon in
this esiiroa e. In ..hurt, it their L..r !ships blinded their
e) es to the tact that immense d•siress existed which de-
.

inanded the most prompt redd,e e, they would go tar to
realise the prophecy of the lite Lord Grey, that under
such circumstances they would themselves destroy the
re,pvet to which their House was entitfed. It thee
were the meliures shadowed out in 4 remarkable letter.

addressed to the Lord Mayor of London by the Lord
Lieutenant or Ireland—a nobleman who, he might justly
sq, had endelred himself to all elAssea of men in th-

coantry where he had authority, he would venture to
s.y that they were such a 4 no nv.sn possessing the
slightest knowledge of Ireland, or the e4ruest wishes or
Lord Clarendon for its wel:are, would have ventured to

predict. lie believed they could appeal to the genero•
city of England ; but an appeal to her interest would
not be E. and without its advantages.

The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed on Monday.
Their Lordships tht.n adjourned.

HOUSE OF GO I/MONS, July 13.
JUDG VIENT3 (IRELAND) BILL.
,Continued from our Afternoon alition of yesterday.)
Mr. NAPIER did not rise to oppose the second
reading of the Bill, but to express his great satisfaction
at the candid manner in which his Learned Friend the
Solicitor General proposed to deal with this subject. The
matter was one of great importance to the people of Ire-
land, and he could not allow the present opportunity to
go by without makieg a few observations on the measure.
In legislating on such a matter for Ireland, it was ne-
cessary to make a distinction between two classes of
debtors—those who partook of the nature of money-
lenders, and tho,,e who had obtained judgments on bona
fide debts. It was the opinion of a very high legal
authority in Ireland, that it would be a very beneficial
law which tended to make judgments an unpopular se-
curity on property in Ireland. He thought, also, that
:great respect ought to be shown to the long preju-
dices of the people of Ireland, and care taken to
conciliate the r long-formed opinions in these matters.
The Act of 1841 had greatly augmented the diffietilties
which surrounded the question, and indeed he very much
doubted whether, in despite of the enlightenment of the
present day, and the increased privileges which were now
enjoyed, modern legislation did not sometimes suffer
by comparison with that of our forefathers. Toe sug,•
r,estions made by the Committee to the House were sup-
ported by the evidence of Sir Edward Sugden, to whose
opiniens in these matters too great &terrace could
,carcely be shown. The evidence too of the Master of
Rolls in Ireland also justified the views of the Commit-
see. He thought that if the Solicitor General adopted
the principle of not limiting the medium of 1501, which
was proposed, attended ako with a purification of the
Aptem of receivers, together with another matter which
h.d been introduced into the report of the Committee.
lamely, the simplification of the proceeding in Chancery,
oe Biil would be one w ich would deserve the supp Jr
if all parties, and would be likely to meet with cordia'
-0 operation from the people of Ireland.
Mr. SA.DLEIR said he should only aim at makiew
few cursory remarks up ,n this Bill. Wi.h regard to
the suggestions of his lion. and Learned Friend, as to
hA sitnplitication of the proceedings of the Court of
-',ltancery, he thought that unless some speedy and pro-
:r alterations were made, it would be impossible to
any perman, nt r.-lief to tne immense amount
.e bu,iness which now iay before that Court.
I. admitted that the 13111 lately framed by the Master
the R olla would go far to remove such causes of com-
laint, some measure of this nature was loudl;
tiled for by the history of suits in Chancery.
('he Imeutubered Estates Bill new in progres,
eas, he must admit, a step in this directiot;
As the 8.11 stood, it certainly did ty.t go to realise th•-•
stated to-day by S elicitor-(general. The
.vr,r of assigning judgments had exited in Ireland for
: a.
,pieeenruartit:rh .tahnf(e)ar, cmpean,rntt ya.wa
ra hrnoe,
treeroatnlyl:y• v itblhuo4tft
taiht jauet;gattenhoeevneit r
raaoss d
l the real and personal property possessed by th: eerrower at the time he cenfessed the judgment. It also
ffected the property which the borrower tnightafterwa.rd.,
acquire. It was idle to talk of increasing the facilities
rir the sale of land in Ireland, unless at the same time
they conferred upon the lender of money on landed
security in that country the fullest possible remedy for
recovering his money. This seemed to be a retroe,radt
movement in the wrong direction. By the ope-
ration of this 13.11, the owner of the land
lonfessed his judgment was hemmed in be-
iveen two evils, in the shape of the Incumbered
Estates Bill and the Judgment Securi'y Bill ; if he
wasted to sell the estate, the Incumbered Estates Bill
would operate to prevent him; and if, on the other hand,
he wished to dispose of the judgment, the Judgment
Security Bill would not permit of his doing so,
though a capitalist were at hand ready to advance
the money. He thought it mostdesirable that a judgment
creditor should not have the power of appointing
Chancery receiver over an estate. With reference to
that pert of the Bill which went to revive the viciou-
system of elegits, he thought that system Was quite
objectionable as the custodien system: Had the
Solicitor-General. thought of the immense sea
of litigation which would arise from the complex
system of elegils which he sought to revive ?
lie sutmitted that the Government should not submit
t the House measures of this isolated and puny cha •
racier, but others of a massive and general nature with
rapec/ to rs 1 irDparty. -For instance,- itt Was impot.

sible to do anything in Ireland without a system
of registration of births, deaths, ant marriages,
many of the evils in respect of real property
arising out of this defect. The facility that
existed in Scotland for the transfer of real property was
the secret of the success of that country in this respect.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, if time had allowed he
should have been glad to have offered some observations.
There was but one opinion in the House, 11,, believed,
that the Bill should be read a second time. As the Bill
would be again discussed in Committee after they had
had an opportunity of reading the report, he pressed
upon the House the necessity of reading it a second time,
reserving further discussion until the Committee. The
Bill must be
_taken in connexion with the Incum-
bered Estates Bill, the Lords' amendments
to which he hoped would be discussed before this Bill
again came on.
The Bill was then read a second time, and committed
pro forma. to be re committed on Thursday next.
The House resumed, and immediately adjourned till
five o'clock.

The House resumed at Five o'clock.
Mr. J. HEALD presented a petition praying the
House to extend the powers of County Courts.
ROYAL ASSENT.

The Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod appeared at
the table and sum:roiled the House to attend at the bar
of the House of Lords to hear the Royal assent given to
several public and private Bills (for which see Lords'
report).
The SPEAKER, on his return, enumerated the Bills
which had receive(' the Royal assent.
Mr. B. OSBORNE presented several petitions—one
from a place um Scotland, deprecating the interference of
Itus.ia in the affairs of Hungary, arid praying her Ma-
jesty's Government to acknowledge the independence of
that country; another from St. Giles-in-the-Fields.
against the Beer Bill ; one from the Rev.
T. Harrison, of Monmouth, complaining of tyranny on
tae part of his Bishop; and one from a solicitor at
Warwick, going through the Leigh case, and praying to
be heard (11 the case at the bar of the House.

Mr. E. I)ENISON presented a petition from certain
persons at Nottmeham in favour of a scientific institution.
Mr. S. WORTLEY presented petitions from several
places in favour of the Mirriage
Lord DUDLEY S TUART presented a petition from
Marylebone and St. Pancras againt the Sale of Bread
Bill.