The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 19, 1849,

(Hear, hear.) These were momentous considerations,
and they were the more deserving of attention, since he
believed that the line of policy which gave rise to them
was not that which Ireland required, or which was suited
to her in her present condition. He thought that a ju-
dicious system of emigration, and a better management
of the Irish fisheries, something similar to that which
prevailed in the Scotch fisheries, would be far more
likely to bring about a better state of things in Ireland
than the system upon which they now based their mea-
sures. The Noble Earl concluded by moving as an
amendment, that the Bill be read a third time.that day
three months.
Lord CREMORNE supported the Bill, and said that
although the Noble Earl who had just addressed their
Lordships had disapproved very strongly of the measure
under discussion, he had not ventured to propose a sub-
stitute for it, as be thought he was bound to do, for there
were only two alternatives before them, ho apprehended,
either they must pass this Bill, or allow thousands of
their countrymen to perish before the harvest. The
rate in aid had this advantage, that it could be easily col-
lected and estimated, but how could they estimate either
the amount of an income-tax or the inconvenience of col-
lecting it? Besides, he thought it would be but a poor
satisfaction to a landowner to know that money paid by
him, and intended to be applied to the relief of the poor,
should go directly into the pockets of the tax-collector.
For those reasons, he could not thing of adopting the
view of the Noble Earl opposite, and considering the
urgency of the distress, he was quite disposed to hasten
the progress of the Bill.—(Hear.)
Earl DESART said he could not agree with the pro-
position broached by his Noble Friend opposite, who
had just addressed the House, that in case any one of
their Lordships thought the measure before him objec-
tionable, it was his duty to provide a substitute. He
confessed, for one, that this was a measure which was
by no means calculated to strike the mind as being fitted
to the present circumstances of Ireland. Their Lord-
ships, he thought, should be unanimous in rejecting it.
It was a temporary relief instead of a permanent remedy
for evils which went on continually increasing. After
three years of unexampled famine, and after all the
legislation they had been engaged in, whilst endeavour-
ing to provide a remedy for deeply-rooted mischief, they
were called upon to pass another inadequate temporary
measure, to meet a distress which was, if possible,
greater than at first.—(Hear, hear.) But that was not
all; the Bill they were to pass proceeded upon prin-
ciples acknowledged by many to be utterly fallacious—
it made the areas of taxation larger, and proclaimed to
the people that they must pay for poverty, over the
amount of which they had not the slightest control.
Feeling thus upon the question, he believed it to be his
duty to vote against the motion.
The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL said that, after hear-
ing the evidence of a large number of witnesses, all of
whom stated that in their opinion this measure would
not be productive of benefit--having had no evidence
offered on the other hand to support the contrary view
of the question, it was with utter astonishment that be
found the Government persisting in pushing forward a
measure diametrically opposed to experience so acquired.
The newspaper press of Ireland had been unanimous in
condemning this line of conduct, and he challenged them
to produce a precedent in this country or elsewhere,
which could afford them the slightest justification. He
had searched for them, and had found two instances of
a similar policy adopted abroad, which had occasioned a
complete failure of the object in view. The Paeha of
Egypt imposed a land tax on the whole country, with
the exception of a certain district, which he intended to
benefit. The consequence was, that not only did he fail
in relieving the poor district, but he actually impo-
verished the rest of his dominions.—(Cries of " Hear,
hear.") The other instance was the levy of a
heavy tax by the East India Company on a large tract of
their terrieory. It was soon found that the occupiers of
a certain district of this land _were unable to pay the
tax, and the company compelled the other psrt to make
good the deficiency. The same result followed, and this
was exactly what they wished to do in Ireland. Money
had become so scarce in Ireland that a " sovereign" was
scarcely now to be seen in that country—(Laughter)—
and even silver had disappeared to a great extent in it,
so that there was not enough of currsucy to meet the
wants of the people. How, then, was the rate in aid to
be paid? The money was not there, and the rate-
payers, therefore, had not the means wherewith to meet
the demands that would be made upon them. This want
of money had put a stop to all employment, to all la-
bour; the lands were lying waste, and credit was gone.
The progress of this state of things would leave but two
classes in the country—namely, a very few landlords, and
a great multitude of paupers. As to the rate in aid, it
was too childish to be spoken of, unless in the ridicule of
Punch, and he predicted that it would prove an utter—an
entire failure.
Lord STUART DE DECIES said, the question was,
were the poor to be allowed to starve or not? The op-
ponents of the measure now before their Lordships had
net shown that they had anything better to propose, and,
therefore, having nothing better to propose, he thought
the House were bound to support the measure proposed
by her Majesty's Ministers.—(Hear, hear.) Some per.
sons had spoken of the substitution of an income-tax;
but he thought they required a more convenient season
to consider such a measure as that, in relation to the
prevailing distress; and he contended that the measure
now under their Lordships' consideration was calculated
to impose a far lighter burden upon the resources of the
rate-payers in Ireland than an income-tax, which was
advocated by a Noble Earl of their Lordships' House
(the Earl, of Wicklow). It had been said, it this Bill
should be thrown out, that it would cause the mortality
of many thousaLds week after week. In that statement
he entirely agreed; and he, for one, would not be a party
to any such tearful responsibility.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of WICKLOW assured their Lordships
that be had never proposed to substitute an in-
come-tax for a rate in aid; but what he did propose, and
what he did say was, that this most dangerous experi-
ment—this rate in aid—if they were to have a rate in
aid at all, should be paid out of the combined revenues
of the Iluited Kingdom. They should not impose an
income-tax for the benefit of the Irish poor alone, but if
any persons in the United Kingdom should stand in
need of the relief, then should a rate in aid be levied for
their joint aid out of the revenues of the United King-
dom, and if such an impost were levied, it was quite
clear that the Minister by whom it might be proposed,
would not have the power to renew it, when the two
years for which it might be proposed would expire.
Suppose they had a Cobden for a Prime Minister, and a
" Lord Roebuck " for a Finance Minister or Home
Secretary—(Laughter)—suppose they had any such po-
pular Ministers in power—(Renewed laughter)—what
guarantee had:they that they would not, at the end of
the two years, propose that the rate in aid be renewed ?
He thought, then, that for her Majesty's present Minis-
ters to say that the rate in aid would not be renewed at
the end of two years was illusory, and he must, on all
considerations, oppose the measure.
Lord DE BOS opposed the Bill, and recommended
Ministers to be cautious how they excited the anger and
opposition of the inhabitants of the north of Ireland.
The Earl of CARLISLE said, that after the length-
,ned statement which through the indulgence of the
House he had very recently made upon the subject now
under the consideration of their Lordships—atter hav-
ing
within so short a time brought fully under their no-
tice the grounds upon which the Queen's Government
thought it their duty to urge the adoption of the present
measure, he felt it would not now be necessary for him
to occupy much of their time or attention. He felt that
the proposition to which he now asked their assent rested
upon a basis so simple that now, at its lest stage, very
few observations from him would suffice v.) recommend
this most indispensable measure to their Lordships' ac-
ceptance; and most especially he had no wish to detain
them with any observations as to the immediate and
pressing necessity for coming to a decision on the
merits of the Bill. With respect to some of
the objections urged against the Bill, founded
upon the absolute necessity of its being ac-
companied by other measures, he must be al-
lowed to say that his Noble Friend the President
of the Council distinctly stated his belief that the Bill
now before them was only preliminary to other mea-
sures of a more extensive and searching character; it
being the clear understanding that the duration and ope-
ration of the measure were to be strictly limited to the
period assigned in the Bill. It had been hinted at that
his Noble Friend the President of the Council was not
destined much longer to be a member of that Govern-
ment to which his presence now imparted both strength
and ornament; but he trusted their Lordships would
remember, in connexion with that hint to his Noble
Friend, that a similar announcement respecting the du-
ration of the measure had been made elsewhere by his
Noble Friend at the head of the Government, no longer
ago than last night. But then the terrible prospect had
been held out to them of a total change in the Adminis-
tration of the country; and there had been shadowed
out for their edification the sort of persons who might ,
become their successors in the event of that change tak-
ing place which the Noble Lord believed to be within the
range of possibility. He should not now stop to discuss
the probabilities of such events or the consequences
even of such an awful certainty—(Hear, hear)—but he
would rather remind the House that it might be all very
well for Members of that House and of the other to say
that her Majesty's Government ought to go on further,
as now, in issuing sums of money for the relief of pau-
perism in Ireland without the consent of Parliament.
It might be very well for people to say that the scruples
which he and his colleagues entertained upon the subject
of issuing money without the consent of Parliament
were mere constitutional twaddle. His colleagues in the
House of Commons had already said enough to render
it unnecessary for him to do more than to repeat his
former declaration of opinion. that it would be incon-
sistent with the duty which the responsible advisers of
the Crown owed to the country if they were to have ad-
vanced money under any other than a full understanding
that the Bill now before the House was, with the least
possible delay, to become the law of the land; and now,
until it should become law, he did not think that the Go-
vernment could safely proceed a single step in the ad-
vances necessary for the poor of Ireland. FOr himself, he
must be permitted to say, that although he should not
consciously abandon a large number of his fellow-coun-
trymen to all the horrors of starvation, he did not see
his way very clearly if the Bill now before their Lord-
ships were to be rejected. They all that evening
heard the proposition made by a Noble Lord near him
for the inipoiition of a property-tax—that proposition,
as they could not fail to remember, was not to be the
establishment of a rate on income for the relief of the
poor, but the creation of an impost for the purpose of
equalising the taxation of ttto two countries, and that
thenceforward the provision tor the 1ri.,11 poor was to be
derived from the Imperial Exchequer. Now, even ad-
mitting that all objections to the imposition of an in-
come-te.e in Ireland under present circumstances could
be got ciesr, he would put it to the House to say whe-
ther, while they were engaged with 50 many measures
deeply affecting the interests of Ireland—the pour- law
fur example, and the trans.er of larxed property—
whether, when the other House of Parliament were
coluiderin $llO igiportatit subject of rho tome

of land in that country, and found it scarcely possible
to arrive at a satisfactory solution of that, he would
ask them whether it would be wise to throw in such a
bone of contention as now to propose for the first time
the imposition of an income-tax in Ireland?—(Hear,
hear.) As to coming to a decision now on the question
whether or not the measure before the House would be
sufficient to meet and counteract the distress of the Irish
people, he had only to say that such a result must de-
pend upon a great variety of circumstances—upon the
potato harvest, for instance, and other means of supply-
ing food for the use of the people, and the efficacy of the
Bill in preventing disease and diminishing the rate of
mortality. The framers and promoters of the measure
did not expect that by means of it any miraculous agency
could be brought into operation, and he should feel no
sarprise even though all its probable results shoul fail
to be realised. They produced the best measure that,
under the circumstances, they could hope to carry, or
hope, when enacted, to bring into beneficial operation.
In that hope they proposed the Bill, and they pro•
ceeded with it, earnestly desiring not to shut the doer
against what appeared to them the only method of relief.
A Noble Lord had spoken to them that evening of famine
in Egypt more recent than the times of the Pharoahs,
when two districts of that country gave assistance to a
third; but if the doctrine had then been carried out
which the opponents of the Bill now demanded, the
whole of the Ottoman empire would have been taxed for
the relief of that single Egyptian province, because
Egypt was held to be an integral portion of the Turkish
dominions. In the midst of all the debates that they
had heard upon the subject of the poor-law generally,
and on the subject of out-door relief,—in the midst of the
imputations cast sometime upon landlords, sometimes
upon priests, and doubtless at different times they all fell
into many and great blunders; but in the present case, at
least, there could be no doubt that every effort of
legislation and Government seemed almost powerless—
that the events taking place in Ireland seemed to de-
pend upon a higher agency and a more powerful con-
trol than that of man. As in " the tale of Troy divine,"
where the delineation of events, supposed to be superna-
tural, and related under the irfluence of a false religion,
gave no imperfect picture of that which, under the in-
flnence of a true faith, men might impute even now to the
immediate interference of an overruling Providence, so
he might be permitted to say—
" Non tibi Tyndaridis tacies invisa Laceenx,
" Culpatusve Paris ;
he used the reading of Dr. Bentley, almost as much in-
spired as the original—
" Div um, inclementia
" Has overtit opus, steraitque a culmine Trojam."
It was not in the quality of the Irish soil, neither did it
arise merely from the measures of legislation applied to
that part of the United Kingdom, that the present dis-
tress and suffering arose. Doing full credit to the exer-
tions made by the landed proprietors of Ireland and by
the other inhabitants of that country not actually reduced
to pauperism, he at the same time could not avoid bring-
ing to remembrance the fact that 10,000,000/. had been
granted by Parliament for the relict of the Irish ; that
1,500,000/. had been contributed by private benevolence,
besides large sums obtained from British colonies and
other dependencies of the Crown of England, and even
from foreign countries beyond the pale of Christianity.
Under such circumstances, he could not help asking
whether it ought to be a source of ill-will and hostility
that the more favoured districts of Ireland should now
be called upon to pay ed. in the pound for the relief of
those parts of the country in which the suffering was
most intense, the more eepecially when such contribu-
tion would not amount to above half a million in the
course of two years; and when the purpose of it was to
rescue their fellow•countr) men from famine, surely it
was not too much to expect that the more favoured por-
tions would give their aid and sympathy to other and
less fortunate districtse—(Hear, hear.)
Earl Fl'l Z WILLIAM observed that his Noble Friend,
at least for the present, objected to the proposition of
an income-tax, but chose rather to impose a burden on
the paverty than the property of Ireland. If' the Noble
Lord did cot know the fact, others well knew, that
amongst the ratepayers were many exceedingly poor
men, so humble as to be on the very verge of requiring
relief themselves. From such persons it was expected,
by means of the Bill now before them, to exact a sum
of 320,0001. It was unhappily the case that at the pre-
sent moment hundreds and thousands of persons were
perishing in Ireland, notwithstanding the poor-law,
and he feared they would continue to perish, not-
withstanding the rate-in-aid. The effect of the Bill
would be to reduce all the unions of Ireland to one
common level. He would not say whether the rate
would be Is. or 203. in the pound, bat, whatever might be
the general rate necessary for maintaining the pauperism
of Ireland, the effect of this Bill would be to bring all the
unions to the same rate of payment. It was held out
that the effect of this measure must be to throw all the
unions of Ireland under the administration of vice-guar-
dians. Now he would admit that the substitution of vice-
guardians for ex officio and unpaid guardians had been in
some cases beneficial, but at the same time he was of
opinion that it would be a great misfortune to the ad•
ministration of the poor-law if every portion of that ad-
ministration were thrown into the hands of paid guar-
dians. In the first place, it was in principle a very
unconstitutional thing that two gentlemen not connected
with the country should be sent down from Dublin by
the Poor-law Commissioners to determine the amount of
rate, and distrain upon the persons who did not pay it.
That was as unconstitutional a thing upon a small scale
as to send over money without or contrary to the will of
Parliament. They had heard of taxation and represen.
tation going together; but what was the history of the
present Bill? Where was the representation? Out of
105 representatives of the Commons of Ireland in the
Imperial Parliament, no less than SO voted against this
Bill. The measure was, therefore, one of taxation with-
out representation. But their Lordships were told they
must either have this Bill or starvation in Ireland. There
would be, unhappily, starvation in Ireland it' this Bill
should pass, but he supposed it would be said there
would be more starvation if this Bill should be rejected.
In Committee on the Irish Poor-law he had moved a
resolution that it would be better to impose a property-
tax than a rate in aid, end a mnjority of the Committee
voted for that resolution. Where two modes were sug-
gested for the purpose of relieving the distress, the
odium of opposing the second alternative was much
greater than that of opposing the first. Now, he op-
posed this Bill because there was another alternative,
and some other alternative he should feel bound to sup-
port if the present Bill was thrown out. He had
always been favourable to the imposition of a property-
tax, but if the House had thrown out the proposal of a
property-tax then it would become a very different
question whether, under these circumstances, their Lord-
ships would be justified in opposing the rate in aid. But
now there was another alternative, and if the House re-
jected the present Bill, he and Noble Lords who thought
with him would be prepared to support that other alter-
native, to which he believed very little opposition would
be made. If the Government withdrew the present
Bill a substitute would easily be found in a week which
none of their Lordships would feel themselves justified
in opposing.
Ineir Lordships then divided, when there appeared;—
For the third reading 37
Against it
Majority for the third reading 8
Proxies were not called.
The Bill was then read a third time.
LEASEHOLD TENURE OF LANDS (IRELAND)
BILL.
On the motion to go into Committee on this Bill.
Lord BEAL-MONT objected to the Bill that it made
lossno p
or of vt ihs
e reversion.
i o wher to remunerate the owner for the
atev
Aster a few words from the Earl of MOUNT-
CASHELL,
Lord MON TEAGLE suggested that if a party had
forfeited his privilege of perpetual renewal by any
breach of covenant, he ought not to be placed in the
same position under this Bill as if he had retained this
privilege. The courts of equity bad in one or two cases
decided that parties claiming under a lease of perpetual
renewal had forfeited their right in consequence of com-
mitting waste, and such leases ought not to be placed in
the same position as if they had performed their cove-
nants and agreements with the lessor.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the point sug-
gested by the Noble Lord had been provided for by the
Bill, which declared that no owner should be required to
execute a grant where the right of renewal was lost both
at law and equity. This would provide for the event of
a party being a lessee who, having a right to perpetual
renewal under his covenant, had forfeited it, because such
persons would not be entitled to demand the benefits of
the Bill. The object of the Bill was to convert what
was a payment inconvenient to all parties into a per-
manent and regular rent-charge, which would be conve-
nient to all parties, while it inflicted injustice upon none.
The Bill then went through Committee.
And their Lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 18.
The Speaker took the Chair a few minutes before
Four o'clock.
LORDS' AMENDMENTS.
The Lords' amendments to the North-Western Rail-
way (Extension of Lancaster Branch, Abandonment of
Williain Lands Branch, New Road to Settle Station,
Extension of Time for Purchase of Lands and Construe•
tion of Works) Bill were considered and agreed to.

THIRD READINGS.
The following Bills were read a third time and

passed :
Black Sluice Drainage Acts Amendment (Amendment
of Acts, Extension of Time for Completion of Works,
Powers to levy Rates raise further
and Ratefor other
and
Pur-
onies,
to alter existing and
poses) Bill.
Charing-cross Bridge (Amendments of Acts, Powers
to alter authorised Approaches, c.) Bill.
Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, and Wilsontown,
Morningside, and Coltness Railway Amalgamation Mi.',"
York, Newcastle, and Berwick Railway (Barmoor and
Alnmoutla New Branches, t&c.) Bill.
PETITIONS.
Mr. BROTHERT instON presented w
several petitioeer bons
from York hire aga granting ne licences to
shops.
Air. MUNTZ presented a petition,
.agreed to at a
public meeting at Birminglwrn, praying tor univertal
suffi age, vote by ballot,. I:tayment ot Members, annual
Pa; lie ments, electoral divisions, and a boli Lien of property
qualifications.
Mr. ANDERSON presented a petition, signed by
10.000 inhabitants of Kirkwall against the Rcgistration
of Marriages, Scc. (Sc!)tland) Bill; also a petition com-
plaining of the operation ot the Scotch poor-law,
51r. PAGAN presented a petition from the Cork
Union
aßgp.ar
Hai
ny.ii
trigtis,h, fi?o rl),saiosr
.pet
nraeemsne
id-
Sir
GLYN presented a
tnses for beer shops. ri
e'
lantredyd,moeaßa ttphoestf ißtti the
ol
pi?l.
ru;
4171alid-
petition against granting ad-
ditional bet
sir J. ID )PE presented a petition against the Scotch
Marriage Bill.
11°D58°}1 presented a Petiao from railway '

proprietors residing in Carlisle, complaining of the pre-
sent mode of assessing railways for the poor and church
rates.
Mr. B. DENISON presented a petition from the
West Riding, complaining of the po.vers granted to
county courts; also one against the extension of beer-
shops.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER presented two petitions from
Lincolnshire; one against the alteration of Parliamentary
oaths, and the other in favour of international arbitration.
Captain BERKELEY presented a petition from
Gloucester, praying for the abolition of capital punish-
ment.
Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition from the copy-
holders of Edenborough, in Cumberland, praying that the
Bill for the compulsory enfranchisement of copyhuld
land might pass into a law.
GROUP XIX.

Mr. WRIGHTSON moved that Mr. Parker, Mr.
Osborne, Mr. Frewen, and Mr. Brisco be allow,‘ld to
vote in the Committee on Group 19 of Opposed Privateßills provided they deliver in the prescribed forms of de-
claration.
N 3 sO agreedlfll ROAD BILL.,
OAD BILL.
The motion, after a few observation from Mr. WIL-
SON PATTNEENW, Iv

Mr. J. B. SMITH moved that the petition of inhabi-
tants, householders, and owners of property in the New
North Road, Hoxton, and its vicinity, against the New
North Road (Continuation Act) Bill, (deposited in the
Private Bill-office on the 15th instant), be referred to the
Committee on the Bill; and that it be an instruction to
the Committee to entertain the same, notwithstanding it
was not deposited in the Private Bill-offiße within seven
clear days after the second reading of the Bill, by reason
of the illness of Mr. Hume, the Member to whom it
was intrusted.—Agreed to.
Mr. C. BRUCE begged to give notice that when the
House went into Committee on the Bill for the Regis-
tration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages for Scotland,
he would move an amendment to clause 37.

ALLEGED BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.-THREAT-
ENED EXCLUSION OF STRANGERS FROM
THE HOUSE. ,

Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL said he rose to call the
attention of the House to a breach of its privi-
leges, which was connected with the last discussion
in the House on the Parliamentary Oaths Bill. In
consequence of his having seen in the Times newspaper
an infringement of the rules of the House—(Oh, oh)—
in a report of the last discussion on the Bill which

he had mentioned, in which report not only
were the rules of the House violated, but the oaths taken
by Catholic Members were entirely omitted from that re-
port, whilst other oaths were given. He should when the
House went into Cornmitte on the Parliamentary Oaths
Bill to-night, notice whether strangers were present or
not, and if he should ascertain that fact, he should draw
the attention of the House to it.—(" Oh, ob," and
laughter.)
SENDING CONVICTS TO THE COLONIES.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH said he wished to know
whether it was the intention of the Government to send
any more convicts to Van Diemen's Land; secondly,
whether there was any dispatch from the Governor of
Van Diemen'a Land as to whether or no there was any
more room for convicts in that island?
Mr. HAWES said in answer to that question he
could give no pledge that the Government would ceio,e,
to send convicts to Van Diemeti's Land. With regard
to any dispatch from the Governor of that colony as to
whether there was any more room firconvicts in that
colony, he begged to state that no such dispatch had
been received on which any interpretation of the kind
could be put.
ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN TREATIES.

Sir R. PEEL rresen►ted a petition from the congrega-
tion of the Unitarian chapel at Tamwortn, praying for
the imertiou of au arbitration clause in international
treaties.

O'Brien, be entered as read, proceeded to move that
Mr. Smith O'Brien, who had been convicted of high
treason, should be expelled Cie House. The Noble
Lord, in making the motion, said that the course he in-
tended to pursue he believed to be without precedent,
but although it was so, the crime of which the individual
had been convicted was of such a nature as totally to in-
capacitate him from holding a s: at in that House.
The precedents he had been able to find upon the
subject had no reference whatever to the present ca,o.
Th se precedents were of two kinds. The first was
with respect to high treason. The first case on vie sub •
ject was on the 10th of May, 1715. In that case Mr. Foster,
a Member cf that House, having been taken on a wilt
of rebellion for high treason was expylied the House, and
in another case, on the 22d of June, 1716, the

Ilouse being informed that J. Carnegie, Esq., a
Member of the House, had been in open rebellion in
Scotland, wiqlesses were called to the bar who proved
the fact, and he was expelled the House, and
a new writ was issued. The other cases he had
discovered were cases with regard to which there
might be some doubt as to the nature of the otnnce,
but they were cases of perjury, conspiracy, and
various offences in the nature of nostlena anour, in
which there might be a doubt whether they were of the
nature to require that the House should proceed
to the severe penalty of expulsion. The present
case of Mr. Smith O'Brien was one, as regarded
the House, totally without precedent, and was not
similar to the caae of Members with respect to
whom a similar proceeding had ben taken to the
one he was now about to adopt. When it was said
that he was in arms against her Majesty, the House
did not take any notice of the fact, but waited
till the conclusion of the proceedings against him.
Mr. Smith O'Brien being convicted of high
treason in Ireland. brought a writ of error against that
conviction in the House of Lords, and that House having
sustained that conviction and affirmed the decision of the
courts in Ireland, it became necessary that he should
make the present motipn for Mr. O'Brien's ex-
pulsion from that House. It was unnecessary that
he should say one word on the nature of the
offence, because nothing could be more complete
than the conviction and the judgment. With re-
gard to the consequences following on such an
offence, he need only observe that it was
an offence totally unlike the misdemeanours he had re-
ferred to, it was high treason, and all writers declar©d
that it was the law of Parliament that all persons
guilty of it were unable to sit in that House.
The consequence was, therefore, that Mr. Smith O'Brien
having been convicted of high treason, he was civilly dead,
and could not be elected, nor hold a seat in that House;
but he believed it was not prudent to establish a prece
dent in modern time of expelling a Member. He had,
therefore, consulted with the Speaker and other
authorities as to the course to be taken in the case, and
he had come to the resolution of moving the two follow-
ing resolutions: —" Whereas it appears by the records of
this House that Mr. Smith O'Brien has been convicted of
high treason;" and when that resolution was agreed to,
he should proceed to move--" That a new writ be issued
for election of a knight of the shire for the county of
Limerick, in the room of Mr. William Smith O'Brien,
who had been convicted of high treason." The Noble
Lord then moved the first resolution.

Sir FREDERICK THESIGER suggested that the
word "convicted" had better be altered to " a•tainted,"
as attainder did not follow conviction, but judgment.
Mr. Smith O'Brien would not be civilly dead until
judgment had been passed upon him.
Thi, ATTORNEY GENERAL thought the proper
words would be " adjudged guilty of high treason," and,
The resolution having been so altered, it was put from
the chair, and agreed tu.

Lord J. RUSSELL then moved that the Speaker do
issue his warrant to the Cli•rk of the Crown to issue a
new writ for the ertunty of Limerick, in the room of
William Smith O'Brien.
Mr. F. O'CONNOIt said that, alter seeing the reso-
lution as it originAy stood, it was his intention to move
as an amendment that an huu.ble Ldiress be presented
to her Majesty, praying that she would be gracibu ly
pleased to extend a tree pardon to \%illiam Smi h
O'Brien.—(ol), oh.) He hail n,,t intended to introduce
that amendment by an inflammatory speech; but having
ascertained that the relatives of Air. Smith O'Brien
wished that his case should remain in the hands of her
Majesty's Ministers, he thought it would be exceedingly
improper for any individual Member of the lieu ie to
take up the subject, and he would, therefore, not move
his amendment.—(Hear, hear.)
The resolution was then agreed to.
PRIVILEGE—STRANGERS EXCLUDED.
PARLIAMENTARY OATHS BILL.

The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
On clause 1 being proposed,
Mr. J. O'CON N ELL rose, and pointing to the reporters'
gallery, said, " Sir, I observe strangers present."
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and they
did so accordingly, reporters of course amongst them.
During our exclusion (about half past seven) the mes-
senger connected with the gallery handed to us the fol-
lowing statement of a division which had taken place:—
Question put on clause 1, line 3, that the words " and
that I do not believe," stacd part of the clause.
The Committee divided—
Ayes
Noes

... 62
.. 164
Majority ...-102
At ten minutes past eight o'clock the gallery was re-
opened.
On our re-admission we found Mr. BERN AL putting
an amendment, on which
Mr. LAW observed that the greater portion of the
Bill having been discussed in the absence of the public,
the remainder might have been equally well considered
under similar circumstances. He should move on the
third reading to exclude the Jews from the operation of
the Bill.

Clause 5 was then agreed to, with amendments.
On clause 6, providing that the Act should not extend
to Roman Catholics, or affect the 10th George IV., c. 7
(the Roman Catholic Relict Act),
Mr. M'CULLAGH moved the omission of the clause.
Having reviewed the relaxations introduced from time to
time in the Roman Catholic disabilities, he urged the
House to put an end to the anomalous state of matters
under which the same oath was alleged to be taken in
different senses by different Roman Catholic Members.
It was not the Roman Catholic, but the Protestant
Members, who complained that Parliament imposed on
the Roman Catholic Members an ambiguous, abortive,
and obscure test.

Mr. FACiAN complained of the advantage which was
frequently taken of the oath to taunt and insult Catholic
Members. He himself was insult'-d by the imputation
that he was acting in violation of his oath when he re
cently brought forward a motion respecting ministers'
money in Ireland. Ile would not do anything tending
to subvert the Protestant Establishment, but there was
nothing in the oath which he had taken to prevent him
from endeavouring. to make that Establishment more
useful.

Mr. J. O'CONNELL said, that he had not had the
good fortune to be present when his Hon. Friend pro-
posed the amendment, but he approved of izs object. For
his own part, he telt not the sliAhtest uneasiness as to
the opinion which any one might limn with respect to
his construction of the oath. lie had examined the cath
attentively, and he was sati,fied that it did not restrict
him from voting upon measures aiketing the property of
the Church. It any taunts should be directed against
him from any cnurse he might teke in thit House he
would deal with them in a very summary manner. If
uny person accused him of being guilty of perjury, he
would accuse that person of not speaking the truth, and
he would do so in the most comp.ndious torm of words.
He swore not to disturb or weaken the Protestant reit
gion; but money was not religion. Those only who held
that money and religion were convertible t,rrus could
accuse him of disregarding the oath which he had
taken. Again he declared that he would act upon his
conscientious convictions, and was prepared to abide the
result.

Mr. NEWDEGATE
ggMemberesstotistrangers
arnTnagboa
leffme.for
shrwsc
peLoohemra,,
tmdephohle,
nbaer
been
tnem:ider:t de:
ordered
rov
Lit
ueertrrbet
,ehdiaedi etnibtcLyceoooaout
consequence
sdy course
gap light
ekgtni
withdrawtoehel ndeet
uponby° tththee.
theekvieosnn-ui
s
ollfown.hMichemthbeeradfm.
head of the Government, and other distinguished Mem-
bers of the House, had not been reported.—(Hear, hear.)
Now the Hon. Gentleman got up and gave a falsified and
one-sided resume of the arguments which had been em-
ployed in the unreported debate.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL indignantly repel:ed the im•
putation.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said that the Hon. Gentleman
had, at least, given a one-sided version of the argu-
ments. It would appear that the Hon. Member's object
in excluding the reporters was to have the advantage
of renewing the debate under circumstances favourable
to himself.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY expressed
the great regret he felt at the exclusion of reporters, a
circumstance which had never occurred but once before
in the course of the twelve years during which he had
sat in Parliament. The circumstance to which he had
referred was the more to be regretted, because the de-
bate had been most interesting and instructive.
Mr. V. SMITH approved of the amendment. The
painful position in which Roman Catholic Members felt
themselves placed at present would be aggravated if the
words which the Bill struck out of the Protestant oath
should be retained in the Catholic one. Would it not
appear to be something like au imputation of bad faith
to Catholics to call upon them exclusively to swear that
they took the oath required from thorn without any
equivocation or mental reservation ? During the ab-
sence of those gentlemen who did the public the valu-
able service of communicating to it what passed in that
House, the Hon. Member for Limerick complained that
a speech of a Catholic Member had been compressed
into five lines, whilst that of a Protestant Secretary of
State had been expanded into thirty. As regarded oaths,
however, the case was reversed, for the Catholic would
have to swear to thirty lines, whilst the Protestant
would be limited to five.—(A laugh) Whether the
lion. Member fur Limerick would deem that a com-
pensation for the grievance to which he bad adverted, it
was hard to ray, but he (Mr. V. Smith). being in favour
etunifoorvm d.ity, would support the amendment which had
been m
Mr. SPOONER deprecated the attempt to reperl the
Catholic oath, which was held to be ono of the sale
gu .rds of the constitution.
Lord J. RUSSELL was ;:.lad to find that we had a
constitution Jell. He hail always understood that the
constitution was utterly destrol:ed and gone when the
Act for the Emancipation of the Catholics passed in
182.9.—(" Hear," and laughter.) Now, however, it ap-
peared that the constitution vial still extant, and that the
Catholic oath was Fart of it. He rid not feel h:mnelt
called upon to support the amendment, because the oa•
jest of the Bill was to remove obstacles which prevent, d
the entrance of parties into Parliament. The Catholics
had alreirly seats in Parliament.
lan WOOD said that political and religious maker!,

ations would induce him to vote for the amendment. As
regarded the political view of the question, it was absurd
and improper to shackle a Member of Parliament in his
legislative capacity, and it was untvi se as regarded the in-
terests of Ireland to maintain distinctions between Catho-
lics and Protestants. As to retaining the oath upon religious
grounds, let no one suppose that our Church depended
upon such rubbish as this.—(Hear, hear.) The time
was past for these vain reliance.,; the Church was to
be protected by its purity, by the tlnion of its members,
by the real earnest devotion of thos e who believed it the
most pure and reformed part of Christ's Church.—(Hear,
hear.) Let any one compare the Church of England now
with what it was thirty years ago, and say whether it
was not tar more energetic and act ive than when there
were those barricades to protect it.- -(Hear, hear.)
Colonel SIR CHORP could hardly believe that he
heard aright when he listened to a Chancery barrister,
the representative of the city of tOxford—( A laugh)—
designating an oath, an appeal to the Almighty, as
“rubbish."—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. WOOD could hardly have tit ought he was under-
stood to mean anything more tht in that to rely upon
this particular form of oath was rei! ing upon rubbish.
Mr. P. HOWARD would wish ho see one oath adopted
for all, nut could not shut his eyes to the pr.bable eiVot
of this motion upon the success of' the Bill in wother
place, if not in that flous-.—(Hoar, hear.) Wishing.
now not to put forward the quesitlion involved in this
motion, but to remove the greater vievance of his neigh:-
bour, he should abstain from voting, fearing to endanger
I the Bill.

Mr. WYLD protested against the introduction upon
this occasion of the question inieolved in the motion.
This was a most inopportune moment for it.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause ... 103
Against it ...
Majority

-49

The Bill having been gone thr.ough, the Howe re-
sumed; the report to be received on Monday, and the
third reading then fixed for Monday, June 11th.
NOTICE OF MOTION.—EXCLUSION OF
STRANGERS.

Colonel THOMPSON gave notice that he should, on
an early day, move " That this House take into its
consideration the standing order by which strangers are
excluded on the motion of a single Member, with a view
to the alteration of the same."

The Defects in Leases Bill went through Committee
pro forma to receive amendments.
The House adjourned at a Qu sorter before Ten o'clock.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
SENTENCES.

The following is a list of the sentences passed during
the late sittings of this Court:—

TRANSPORTATION.

FOURTEEN YEARS.—James itcbertson.

TEN YEARS.—John Draddy, James Chitty, George
Jones, Edward Bishop, Jerry Sullivan, George Rivers,
William Gear, George Johnson, Stephen Kenfield, James
Johnson, alias Savage.
SEVEN YEARS.—Charles M'Clarens, William Middle •
ton, Thomas Haley, alias Healey, James Hayes, alias
Carty. William Edwin Bszley, George Douglas, Timo-
leon Vlasto, Hannah Barrett, John Clark.