The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-17 00:00:00

BRITISH-AMERICAN BOUNDARIES.

Sir ROBERT PEEL, not seeing the Noble Lord the Secretary for
the Home Department in his place, begged to remind the Right Hon.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer that certain papers had been moved
for respecting the disputed boundaries of the province of Maine and
Sew Brunswick. He only wished that the matter should be kept in
mind, and that the papers moved for should be produced at an early
period.

IRISH POOR-LAW BILL.

On the Order of the Day for going into Committee on this Bill,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER expressed a hope that
the Hon. Member (Mr. Lucas), who lytd given notice of a motion, by
way of an instruction to the Committee, relative to the law of settle-
ment, would not bring it forward at this stage—the rule of the House
be:og, that no mot.ion should be brought forward by way of instruction,
which could be made in Committee.

Mr. LUCAS said he did not wish to take a course either opposed
to the rules or the convenience of the House; but he had given the
notice because, when the Poor Law Bill fur Ireland went into Commit-
tee last Session, the Committee were entangled at every step by this
question of sett'ement.
SPANISH AFFAIRS—COLONEL EVANS.

Lord MA lION asked when the Gallant Colonel the Member for West.
niinster, would bring forward the motion on Spanish affairs which he
had intimated his intention of making at an early period of the Sessi'
Colonel EVANS replied that he had been induced to postpone it
from the press of Canadian business; but the Noble Lord would he
hoped soon see a notice of motion en this subject upon the books.

Mr. BORTH WICK remarked that the Gallant Colonel had deferred
his motion, in consequence of the thinness of the House.
Mr. F. FRENCH said that it was absolutely necessary that the
notice placed on the books by the Hon. Gentleman opposite, the Mem-
ber for Monaghan, should be disp ,sed of cne way or other. This wee
the second time that he had given notice on the subject, and he hoped
that he would no•.: fix some day for the discussion of it, say Monday next.
A short discussion then took place, in which Mr. O'Connell, Mr.
Smith O'Brien, Sir Edward Sugden, Mr. Shaw, the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, Sir Robert Peel, Mr.,Goulburn, Lord Clements and Mr.
Grattan took part.

Mr. LUCAS said he would more that certain wcrds should be added
to the 16th Clause, which would raise the question of settlement, and
that would meet the object of all parties.
Mr. T. ATTWOOD said he bad voted against this Bill because he
thrught it was inefficient f,r the objects for which It way intended. Crt el
towards the pauper, unjust towards the tenants, and a de'usion
on the people of Ireland. No man was a greater friend
to pcor.laws than he was, but he did not consider this
Bill would provide efficient laws for the purpose of supplying the wants
of the poor of Ireland. Some gentlemen had objected to poor.laws for
Ireland, on account of the great poverty in that country, but he
maintained that the poorer Ireland was the greater the
necessity exlstrel for Poor-laws, and he thought if a Just and ef-
ficient Poor-law was established in Ireland, it would not be found so
great a burden as some Honourable Members imagined. He opposed the
Bill as unjust and misehieveus. It was an attempt to delude
the Irish people; and he would take the liberty of suggest-
ing two or three measures, which would supersede the necessity of
any such Bill. He would fiat say that the standard of value
must be abolished. His friend behind him (Mr. Warhurton) laughed,
but he was overwise in his ignorance, and he was always behind the
time.—(A laugh.) His first object would be to establish a just and
honest system in Ireland, instead of that which was now attempted.
He would recommend the introduction cf the system which prevailed in
the Islands of Jersey and Guernsey, by which the nominal rent
was always commutable into produce according to the average of years.
Let the uncultivated land of Ireland be appropriated ; let the bogs of
Ireland be drained ; let the land tie sold upon seven years' credit
to Irish labourers, and they would in time repay the debt. When
this had been done—when a sound system of currency had been
established, and the waste land made available and divided into small
tenures, and halt a million families located upon them ; a just and
efficient Poor-law wot•ld not be felt as- a burden. But this could
not be done it the base prejudices of the Irish nobility and gentry tx e,e
attended to ; act boldy—pay the nobility and gentry of Ireland the Cull
value, three times the value of the waste lards. Let these preparatory
measures be edoted in the first place, and he could assure them that
they would establish a roor-law in Ireland three times more generous
than the present Poor-law is England, anal twice more generous than
the old Poor-law—a Poor-law which would weigh as lightly on the country
as a feather on the bank of *a
giant.—(Great laughter.) A few
years ago he had given his vote in favor of a grant of 20,000,000/. for
the emancipation of the negroes. Now he did not regret that vote, but
' he thought that it would be much better applied to the relief of the
white negroes. He would not call them negroes,—(Laughter)—but of
the white slaves of Ireland, who were infinitely more wretched, infi-
nitely more oppressed than the blacks.—(Hear, hear.) Now let them
give a grant of 20,000,C00/. to the Irish. It would be but a small addi.
tion to their debt, aed if they would slot give it, let them lend it to the
Irish labourers, and he would lay his .ife they would not lose by it. If
the currency was rectified it would relieve a great portion of the distress
—if the bogs were reclaimed, it would relieve a further portion—if Poor.
laws were established, it would relieve a still further portion—and if
20,000,000/. were lent to the people, it would relieve a further portion,
and thus establish happiness and prosperity in that country.—
(Hear.)
The Hou ;e then went into Committee, Mr. ern M Bernal In the chair.
_ _ .

On clause 16 being r,a,l,
Mr. O'CONNELL proposed an amendment, " with the assent of the
major part of the gu,rdiatis for the time being."
After a few words from Mr. P. SCROPE,
Lord HOWICK opposed the amendment. The adoption of the
amendment might lead to great inconvenience, inasmuch as it might
happen that the consent of the Board of Guardians of a pari,h could
not be obtained even to a Proposal of the greatest public utility, in
conse•luence of local motives and the influence of surrounding cir-
cumstances.

Mr. JEN-130N supported the amendment.
Lorl CLEMENTS on the whole anorovrd of the power conferred
cn
the Co:amissioners, but he thought it should be exercised cautiously
and discreetly.

Mr. FRENCH supported the amendment.
Sir R. Ferguson, Mr. W. S. O'Brien, Sir W. Somervil!e, and Mr. W.
Roche respectively supported the amendment.
11r. J. G RATTAN u,,posed it. •

Mr. SHAW conceived th;t as the Commissioners
spo.bility cast on them, they should also have power corn •
riensurate
with it, had great re_
ns

Sir E. SUGDEN suggested that, if the Hon. Member for Dublin
framed his amendment so as to give the majority of the of
Guardians a powe- of nesativing a resolution of the Commissioners by
Fecuniary means, it might meet the difficulty.
Mr. LYTI: ON was in favour of the clause as it stood.
Lord MORPETH than said that, as a strong opinion had been ex-
pressed in favour of the amendment, he was willing to adopt it, with mo.
difications. Boards

Mr. O'CONNELL then withdrew hil amendment. The am:
u
the Noble Lord was agreed to, and the clause ordered to 6
t
the Bill. inl dmpeanrt of

Clausa 17.—" Election of Guardians."
After a few words from Mr. W. S. O'Beinza and Lord Moan srri the
clause was agreed to.
Clathe 19 was then carried.
On clause 19 being read,
Mr. GOULBLTRN proposed that the electoral districts should be
taken as they existed already in the legal divisions of the country into
counties, baronies, and parishes, otherwise the guardians would base
considerable additional trouble.

sio'nfehres Cw He rAe Nc
oCmEpLe
iLI
cOd
takeittoof t the
thee E X.CldHeElegctUorEar
bosuainddairfi h e Commis.
frequently subject the guardians and rate-payers to great inconvenience.
He had experienced similar difficulties in introducing the new sessional
es h ewrno would
arrangements into the county of Limerick, where the Commissioners
had found it absolutely necessary for the publiz convenience to adopt
new geographical boundaries.
Mr. O'CONNELL moved an amendment, that after the words " the
commissioners may alter such division from time to time" the follow-
ing should be added, "with the assent of the majority of the guardians."
Sir R. FERGUSON objected to this amendment.
Lord MORPETH thought the amendment was attained in effect by
that adopted in clause 16, giving the majority of the guardians power
respecting the size of the unions.
Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN supported the amendment.
A division then took place, when there appeared—,
For the amendment
4.7
For the original motion
84
Majority •• • ................... —37
On clause 20 being read,
Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN moved the insertion of the sum of 30/. as a
qualification, instead of 401.
. . _ .

Mr. O'CONNELL further suggested the striking out of the proviso
" That no person being in holy orders, or being a regular Minister of any
relig ous denomination, shall be eligible as a guardian." vr
..e argued that
this proviso was founded in total ignorance of the state of Ireland in the
present day ; for Clergymen of every persuasion were to be seen united in
charitable institutions without jealousy, rivalry, or contention, however
they might differ in political feeling.
Mr. LUCAS objected to this amendment.
Colonel CONOLLY objected to throwing any more secular duties on
the Clergy.
Mr. C. OTWAY thought the Clergy could not be better employed
than as guardians of the poor.
Mr. SHAW thought that the Clergy of all persuasions would act
more gracefully, consistently, and • effectively as voluntary agems_not
er_ofJicio authorities. It would also be much better to keep them free
from the sy.tematic electioneering and indulgence of party feeling neoed_
sarily connected with the Bill.
After a few words from Lord CLEMENTS and Mr. deeesow in support
of the amendment, and from Mr. Getwaue:v in support of the original
clause,
Lord MOIIPETH said that, for the sake of the Clergy themselves, he
thought their advice would no doubt be most valuable to the Board of
Guardians; yet it would be bater that they should not be mixed up in
the duties of guardians.

HUrfON supported the original clause, and thought it Would
be better to exclude Clergymen.

Mr. SHA W did not object to the Catholic Clergymen on any religious
grounds more than he did to Protestant Clergymen. He did not think
that Roman Catholics would injure the property of Protestants because
they wc. re Protestants.

O'CONNELL believed the Bill would act as an additional in-
citement to agrarian disturbances at all events, but with this proviso it
would prove to be an insult also, He should therefore take the suite
of the Committee upon it.

Sir R. FERGUSON said that lie should support the amendment
of the Hon, and Learned Member for Dublin, because the proviso went
to exclude large landed proprietors if they happened to be clergymen.
Mr. P. THOMSON thought that in the present state of Ireland it
was most desirable to avoid mixing up clergymen of both persuasions in
political and religious feuds, and therefore he should support the
original clause.
Mr. WISE thought the provision ought to be modified, but, If the
amendment was pressed to a division, he should feel it his duty to vote
against it.

Sir F. TRENCH supported the original clause.
Mr. ROCHE supported the amendment.
Sir E. SUGDEN did not believe that' any denomination of clergy-
men would feel dissatisfied at being excluded from the duties which the
appointment of guardians would entail upon them.
After a few words from Mr. J. O'BRIEN and Mr. BARRON. the
Committee divided, when the numbers were :--
For the originalclause lO7
For the amendment 3O
Majority
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 20, 21, and 22 were agreed to, without any discussion.
On clause 23 being put, which pro►ides for the appointment of
to officio guardians,
Mr, 5. O'BRIEN moved the insertion of words to the effeot that
" no man should be appointed a guardian ex qfficio who was not rated to
the poor rates at the annual net amount of 501. a-year."
After a few words from Mr. SHAW and Mr. WALKER (Wexford),
Colonel CONOLLY said the Introduction of this amendment would
have the effect of excluding a most useful and respectable class of men
from th I Board of Guardians.
Mr. P. THOMSON considered that the clause, as it stood, went as far
as it ought reasonably to go.—(Hear.)
Mr. S. O'BRIEN, as the feeling of the House was against him, ex.
pressed hie willingness to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. O'CONNELL objected to the principle of this clause, and would
take the sense of the House upon it.—(Hear, hear.) In some counties,
in Ireland there were magistrates who enjoyed but little public con-
fidence, and some Who did not deserve to have any.—(Hear.) He ob.
jested to their being made as officio guardians. At the same time there
could be no doubt that magistrates who were popular and had property
in the district in which any union was situated, would be pretty sure of
being elected guardians by the rate.payers. The Hou. and Learned
Gentleman concluded by moving the omission of the clause.
Colonel COXOLLY thought the exclusion of agents, who also acted
in the capacity of magistrates, would be a very great injustice.
Mr. HINDLEY said that if agents who were also magistrates were
so popular, there would be the less objection to leave their election to
the rate payers,

Mr. JEPIISON supported the clause,
After a few words from Mr. O'CONNELL,
Lord MORPETH trusted that the House would adopt the clause as
it stood, as he thought the Bill would be inoperative without it.
Mr. SHAW agreed that it was necessary to the success of the mea-
sure that a certain number of magistrates should form a permanent por-
ticn of the Board of Guardians.

Mr. J. JERVIS supported the amendment of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin.

Lord HO WICK believed that the system had worked well in Eng.
land, and that the best results had arisen from the intercourse of the
farmers with the magistrates.
Mr. HUME supported the amendment.
After a few words from Mr. Jervis, an Hon. Member, Mr. J. Grattan,
Mr. Wyie, Sir E. Sugden, Mr. Lytton, and Mr. Maher, the Committee
then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause

For the amendment
Majority 44
—BO
TohnecicLasues
t2e
Gwasbeitnhg enagreed
proposed,
Mr. SHAW objected to the powers given by this clause to the COM.
mlssioners. The Right Honourable Gentleman moved the omission of
these words—" In case a sufficient number of Guardians to form a Board
shall not act with due diligence in obedience to the orders of the Com-
missioners, &e., they (the Commissioners) shall have power to appoint
other Guardians in their place."
Lord MORPEI'H could have no objection to leave out the word
"obedience," and so to frame the proviso as to meet the objections of the
Right Honourable Gentleman. He should propose that it should stand
thus :—" In case, lie., any of the Guatdians shall not act with due dili-
gence," omitting altogether the word " obedience."
Mr. O'CONNELL said that it was absurd to include the machinery
of election in this clause. It was impossible that any amendment could
improve the clause. He should object to it altogether.
Mr. LEFROV objected to the clause, and to that part of the subse-
quent clause which referred to those words which his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Shaw)fthr a adfeowl4:' wcoted-
Ae rds from Mr. S. O'BuaN and Mr. Wise in opposition
to the clause,

Lord CLEMENTS said that those two Clauses were highly objec-
tionable. if any thing could cause the Bill to fail it would be the ex-
traordinary powers given to the Commissioners.
Sir E. SUGDEN concurred in the objection urged by his Honourable
Friend the Member for the University of Dublin, but thought the Clause
might be amended, and that it ought not to he altogether omitted.
The amendment', that the words proposed to be omitted should be
omitted accordingly, woo then put from the Chair.
Mr, P. THOMSON said it is as necessary that some power should be
given to the Commissioners. In England Boards of Guardians hat;
been appointed, who merely met, and then adjourned for six months,
without having per;ormed any part of their duty.
Mr. PACKINGTON suggested thetas it was quite clear the office
should be compulsory, it would, perhaps, be better if Government post-
poned the further consideration of this Clause, and in the meantime de-
vise some penalty fur the refusal to act. This, in his opinion, would
be a better regulation than giving the power to the Commissioners.

Mr. REDINGTON disapproved of a penalty.
After a few words from Sir E. Sudden, Mr. Shaw, Mr. Kemble, and
Lord Howick,
Mr. O'CONNELL said that men should be given a motive to act;
there would be no motive if this ',Aver were given to the Commis-
sioners. It would be much better to adopt the coercion of the penalty.
In Ireland, the Judges had in many cases brought back absentees cg
twenty years' standing, by appointing them Sheriffs; and if they had n
penalty in addition to the shrievalty, as a hook to catch absentees, he
thought it would be very desirable.—(Hear.)
After some further tliecue.sion, Mr. Shaw's tr

was agreed to.

The Clause as amended was then agreed to.
Clause 26, after a few words from Mr. O'Connell, Mr. 3. O'Brien.
and Lord Morpeth, was postponed.
Claus:s up to 30 were then agreed to.

The Chairman reported progreas, and obtained leave to sit again of
Monday next.

The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House
adjourned at Twelve o'Clock.

DIVISION ON THE BALLOT.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
SlR—Have the goodness to insert my name in the minority in favour
of Mr. Grote's motion in favour of the Ballot, as I perceive it has been
omitted in the list printed by the House of Commons.
I am, Sir, your most obedient servant,
Feb. 16, 1838. W. GIBSON CRAIG.

TO THE EDITOR OF 111.2 SUN.
Sig—l beg to inform you that I was prevented attending the House
last night, and voting in favour of the Ballot, by a severe indisp-sition,
which has confined me for some weeks to the house.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
19, James-street, Feb. 16,1839. RICIID. POTTER.

In th.: pr;nted List of the Division on the Ballot, Mr. Edward Buller
wasinserted in the Minority, and Mr. C. Blackett in the Majority,
neither of whom voted.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUIV.

Sta,—Will you do me the favour to correct an error which aprars in
your Parliamentary report of yesterday, relating to the Shipping Gazette.
Lord Ileniker presented a petition from the shipowners and others of
Sou praying not " that the Shipping Gazette might be tram,-
rn itted free of postage," but that it might " be placed on the same foot-
ing as Lloyd's Shipping List, by receiving its maritime intelligence free
of postage." Your obliged,
THE EDITOR OF THE " SHIPPING GAZETTE."
Friday, 4, Bolt court, Fleet-street, Feb. 16.