The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-28 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING,

them that he considered the Irish Poor-law needed no
amendment. He should certain support the amendment
of the Member for Mallow.

Mr. SHAFTO ADAIR said that his impression
was that the Right Hon. Baronet had quite misunder-
stood the Noble Lord in his supposition as to that Noble
Lord's statement with regard to the poor-law of
Ireland. He stated his own impression that what
the Noble Lord intended to say was, that
although he was satisfied with the principle of the
Irish Poor-law, yet he believed that its machinery might
be very greatly improved, and that was the reason why
he asked them to agree to the amendments of the Lords.
And would they then interpose a vain plea of privilege
to intercept that advantage which the Bill was likely to
produce to the country ? Let them remember that while

' they were talking of privilege there were parties for
whose benefit these privileges were sustained, and
whilst they were talking those parties were suffering.
Mr. H. GRATTAN said that he never up to that
moment felt the benefit of holding his tongue.—
(Laughter.) Why the Noble Lord had cut all their
throats.—(Renewed laughter.) He had intended to
have given, if not his vote, at least a gentle
opposition to the Government, but here, after five months
of legislation, they were told that the Irish poor-law
required no amendment. It was evident that they had
all been bamboozled, and that the whole of this matter
was a mere pretence—(Hear)—and he should give to
the motion his most strenuous opposition.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL explained that he had intended
to speak in accordance with the view of Mr. Shafto Adair.
Mr. HUME said that they, the Members of the House
of Commons, were the representatives of the nation,
while the House of Lords only represented themselves,
and if either House gave way in a collision it ought to be
the House of Lord 6.

Sir J. WALMSLEY said that if there was any dif-
ficulty in the two Houses working harmoniously toge-
ther, it was evident that that House required a reform,
and a very great reform too; and he trusted that the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) would persevere
with his motion. He should certainly vote with him.
Sir H. W. BARRON said, that if the views of the
Honourable Member ibr Montrose were to be adopted,
it was a mockery altogether to send a Bill respecting
poor-rates up to the House of Lords at all, and by far
the better principle would be to adopt a resolution not to
send those Btils up at all.—(Hear.)
Sir J. YOUNG said, that, in his opinion, the idea of
the encroachments of the Lords was a perfect chimera.
The Members of the House of Lords were, in his opinion,
from their position both as legislators and as large land-
owners, more fitted to deal with this question than the
House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HORSM AN said that it appeared by the Noble
Lord's declaration that after five months' legislation they
were called upon, for a supposed advantage, to give up
a great and important privilege. If there were to be a
large advantage to be gained by this, he would be
one of the first to assent to it.—(Hear, hear.) Such,
however, according to the intimation of the Noble
Lord, was not the case. They had had a tub thrown
to them, and a tub had been thrown to the Committee
up-stairs, and they had been amused during the whole of
these months' discussion for nothing.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
Fur the consideration of the Lords' amendments 111
Against it... ... „, 62
Majority for the Government ... —49
The House then adjourned till Ilalf•past Six o'clock.

The House re• assembled at a Quarter-past Six.
On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, the Lords
amendments in the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill, omitting
clauses 1 and 2 of Commons Bill, were agreed to.
On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, that the
Lords' amendment, inserting clause 5 of Lards' Bill,
Mr. O'GORMAN MAHON said that he rose simply
to make an announcement, which he believed to be of the
utmost importance, and would fill with gladness the
hearts of thousands in this country and in Ireland. With-
out further preface he would read a communication he I
had received from a distinguished chemist, Mr. John
Walker, M.D., of South•place, on the subject:—" I beg
to acquaint you, that a discovery has been made in Ire-
land which will materially enhance the value of landed
property in that country. It consists in the aptitude of
its millions of peat acres to produce at trifling expense
(little more than of manual labour) oil naptha, naptha-
line, parafine, mnriate of ammonia, vicomar, pittical,
candles, pitch, tar, and other principles, by a new pro-
cess of distillation. These several materials were sub-
mitted to me some months ago by Mr. Owen, and from
what I have seen and tested, I have no hesitation in
pronouncing it one of the greatest discoveries of the
age, and one which will become a source of unbounded

Wealth. I can easily let you have a list of the several
products derivable from the distillation; and you have
my permission to give this most important matter
whatever publicity you please. Some of the products
have been seen by, I believe, the Marquis of Lans-
downe and others here, and I know the Irish Court
are already cognizant of the discovery." The most
unequivocal testimony, both to the accuracy of the
science involved in this invention and the facility of its
practical application, had been furnished by Mr. Pel-
louse, of Paris (in whose laboratory the patentee made
his preliminary experiments and perfected his discove-
ries), whose reputation combined the highest attributes
of science with eminent skill in application. Similar tes-
timony bad been afforded by Professor Leibig, Dr.
Hodges, Professor of Chemistry in the Belfast Institute,
and by many other eminent chemists who had been con-
sulted on the subject. Under the sanction of these au-
thorities the capitalists who preliminarily undertook the
investigation of Mr. Reece's invention, had within the
last three months erected experimental works in Ire-
land on a scale of sufficient magnitude to test its merits.
Their success had been complete in obtaining the pro-
ducts enumerated by the patentee, and in establishing
the practical value of the discovery.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Gentleman then produced what he termed a
spermaceti candle made from the oil extracted from the
peat, and handed it to Lord John Russell across the table
for examination. He appealed to a Noble Lord (Lord
Ashley) to state what he knew of Mr. Owen, the gentle-
man to whom they were mainly indebted for this inte-
resting information.

Lord ASHLEY said that he could bear testimony to
the high character of Mr. Owen, one of the gentlemen
upon whose authority the truth of these statements
rested, and who had practically carried out the experi-
nient. A more discreet, sober, and high-minded man,
or a person more capable of carrying out these experi-
ments, he did not know. To make sure that the infor-
mation conveyed to him (Lord Ashley) was correct, he
requested Mr. Owen to call upon him that morning, and
he repeated his experiments, so that this was not a mere
matter of theory, but of actual experiment.—(Hear,
hear.) He had invested considerable capital, and made
large profits, by his operations in these peat bogs.—
(Hear, hear.) All he desired was to do good to Ire-
land, and to show the people how they could make a
profit:of the soil. Oat of 100 tons of peat,which would cost
8/., with labour expended upon it, which would cost 8/.
more, making in the whole an expenditure of 20/., this
would be the issue of the operations. The produce of all the
processes would be as follows:—carbonate of ammonia
6301b5, soda 2,llBlbs.,naptha 30 gallons, candles 6001b5.,
that was of ingredients out of which candles could be
made superior to spermaceti oil, 600 gallons common
oil, and other chemical ingredients to a large extent;
and he showed him by calculation out of every 100
tons of peat a profit of 31/. 16s. Bd. He added, that
when the peat WAS cleared away, the soil was fertile

they had pursued yesterday in their two last votes. In
one case they had decided to take the Lords' amend-
ments into consideration that day three months —( Hear,
and a laugh)—in the other, that of the Borough Bill, it
had been read a first and second time, committed, read a
third time and passed.—(Great laughter.) That was
precisely the course which he would advise them to pursue.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained that the
Borough Bill was for the purpose of relieving
some boroughs from certain local burdens when they
were subject to peculiar county-rates.—(" Hear, hear,"
from Sir J. Graham.) By an arrangement between the
magistrates of Warwickshire and the authorities of
the borough of Birmingham, the Bill was intro-
duced as a public Bill atter it had been thrown out by
the House of Lords as a private Bill, and that was the
reason why it was passed so hastily, the object being to
facilitate its course early in the next session.
Mr. V. SMITH totally differed from the whole of the
observations which had been made in favour of waiving
the privileges of the House, and if the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet, the Member for Ripon (Sir J. Graham), divided
the House he should certainly vote along with him.
Mr. LABOUCHERE would not touch upon the con-
stitutional question; but the Right Hon. Baronet oppo-
site had suggested that the House should follow the
same course as it had done in the case of a Bill intro-
duced with regard to Birmingham. He must explain
that the cases were quite different. If the House per-
sisted in asserting their privileges, there was little doubt
but that the Bill would not pass this session.
Mr. SPOONER said that by waiving their privileges
he did not see that any delay would be saved.
The Lords would necessarily have to discuss whatever
amendments this House made, and there would be quite
as much time taken up.
Mr. SADLEIR should support the Right Hon. Baro-
net (Sir James Graham) if he persisted in a division.
Colonel DUNNE said that the question for Irish
Members was, whether for the sake of a few clauses,
they should be content to sacrifice their privileges.
Certainly the whole Bill itself was not worth it, though
the Lords amendments were certainly the best part of it.
Sir D. NORREYS thought that great thanks were due
to the Right Hon. Baronet for having raised this ques •
tion of privileges. He did not think that any great
harm would be done if this Bill were delayed until next
session. He should propose that these amendments be
discussed this day three months.
Mr. MONSELL would not touch upon the merits of
the Bill before the House or of the Lords'amendments,
but he thought that if the House was determined to as-
sert its privileges it would be impossible for the Lords
to legislate on poor-laws at all.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the House must now de-
termine whether the House of Lords should interfere
with the poor-law legislation or give it up altogether. If
the House determined to assert its privileges, he should
consider it hopeless to introduceany measure at all; for he
could not undertake to introduce any Bill which should not
be open to amendment in the House of Lords. As for
himself he thought that the Irish Poor-law did not re-
quire any alteration. He was quite satisfied with it.
Sir J. GRAHAM said it was very difficult to pre-
serve the unanimous working of two branches of Legis-
lature without some little concession being occasionally
made. He, for his part, would much rather come to
something definite as to the privileges of this House than
establish innumerable precedents, because in time the
other branch of the Legislature would assume as a right
the privilege of interfering with local taxation;
they would have to draw a line between
poor-law taxation and other local taxation, and
he would indeed be a clever man who could do it. And
they must consider that they were asked to surrender
their privileges after the head of the Executive had told