The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-02 00:00:00

perfect and entire. When a less rent than ten pounds was paid, then
they would have power to ascertain, first, whether a fine had been
paid, and if so allow the customary addition of ten per cent. to the
rent; also whether there had been any improvements. These were the
tests he would propose. They should also recollect that even suppose
the Poor-law should pass the machinery for fixing the rate had not
been as yet determined on.
Sir E. SUGDEN thought there would not be much difficulty in the
matter if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman meant what he said, as the
rent paid should be the criterion for levying the Poor.rate as well as for
ascertaining the franchise.
Lord G. SOMERSET, having listened to a great many discussions
on this part of the subject, could not now refrain from expressing an
opinion very much at variance with that of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman. He understood the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to have stated
that he wished the criterion of value to be the same as that for the elec-
tive franchise. Now, he could only say, that having attended the exa-
mination of a great many witnesses, his conclusion was, that nothing
could be more unsatisfactory than the present mode of determining the
value by the Revising Barristers, as there was always a strong bias
amongst those persons with regard to election matters. Before the
Fictitious Vote Committee the Treasurer for the City of Cork stated
that many houses in that city were rated much under the real value,
some so much so as from five pounds to seven pounds. He mentioned
the evidence of this Gentleman as one whose prejudices, if he had any,
leant towards the other side of the House, and as proving how uncertain
was the present criterion of value.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the evidence quoted went against the
argument of the Noble Lord, as proving that the houses were rated be.
low, and not above, the value.
After a short conversation between Lord J. RUSSELL and Mr. Stun*,
Clauses 1 to 5 were postponed.
Clause 6, giving to the occupiers of houses in boroughs, of the yearly
value of 101. the municipal franchise,
Mr. SHAW, thought that there was no use in proceeding with this
clause until the Poor-law was passed.
Mr. O'CONNELL asked if the Right Honourable Gentleman pro-
posed to defer Municipal Reform until then ?
Mr. SHA W—Certainly.
Lord MORPETH understood quite the contrary from what fell from
the Right Honourable Baronet. He understood the Right Honourable
Baronet to say that Municipal Cm porations for Ireland were demanded
by public opinion, and should be conceded.
Sir R. PEEL said he should be satisfied with any other mode of
rating equally satisfactory. Of course his amendment was framed in the
supposition that the Puor-law would pass, as he did not attempt to
legislate for a hypothetical case.
Mr. O'CONNELL suggested that the Parliamentary mode of rating
should be adopted until the Poor-law Bill should have passed.
Mr. SHAW thought that until some satisfactory criterion of value
was obtained there was no use proceeding with this Bill.
Mr. O'CONNELL said it was easy to see through all the delusion.
It was a mere struggle to increase the franchise. The mode of rating
for the poor relief had not as yet been ascertained, and was not of course
available. He asked of the Right Hoe. Baronet opposite whether it,
was his intention to rate the franchise for the burgess roll higher that
the Parliamentary franchise?
Sir R. PEEL said, I shall read the amendment which it is my intend
tion to propose, and then the Hon. and Learned Gentleman will bed
better able to understand what arc my intentions with respect to the
j.franchise. If I had postponed the consideration of this measure until
the Poor-law should have passed, it would be alleged that I waited until
,the Coronation, and the approaching termination of the Session, rem;
;tiered the passing of the measure now before us impossible. I was aware
.of the difficulty arising from the fact of the Poor.law not having yet
passed, and was prepared to look out for some test equally satisfactory.
The amendment I intend to propose would come in in lieu of clause 6,
and is as follows :—The clause runs, " Shall be truly and really of the
value of 101. and upwards." My words are, " Separately and jointly
with any land occupied by the tenant under the same landlord, and shall
in respect of the said premises be assessed under any Act passed ins this
present Session for the relief of the destitute poor in Ireland, at the
yearly rate of 10/., in the manner to be directed by said Act."
Mr. O'CONNELL asked, would the Right Hon. Baronet do him the
faveur to say whether he intended the franchise to be higher or lower
than the Parliamentary franchise?
Sir R. PEEL—If any one enjoys his franchise on a nominal value
it is my intention that it should be higher. I intend that there shall
be no necessity for Committees to decide on fictitious votes.---(Hear,
hoar.) My intention is to have a satisfactory mode 'of ascertaining the
franchise, to give to the ratepayers a mode of redress if over-charged,
and to the mass of the constituency a power of prevention, should
there be an attempt to obtain the franchise without a legitimate title.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the Right Hon. Baronet would have
answered his question directly if it had answered his purpose. He
(Mr. O'Connell) had the testimony of the Right Hon. Member for
Ripon that the payment of rent was a fair test. He could show to the
House that the mode proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet was not, as
it would afford every facility to the guardians Magistrates to accommo-
date the rate to their own purposes.
Sir W. FOLLETT said that all were agreed as to the necessity of
some test for the value, and he was not aware of any test so good as that
proposed by his Right Hon- Friend. The Hon. and Learned Member
for Dublin had accused them of wishing to introduce a franchise diffe-
rent to the Parliamentary franchise. Now, although the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman stated in his place in that House that the payment
of rent was the criterion for the franchise he must have very well
known that that was not the criterion in Ireland. He (Sir W. Follett)
had himself had some personal experience in these matters, and he knew
that what was contended for in -Ireland was not renepaid. but what time
tenant could swear the premises were worth to him.—(Hear, hear.) He
could tell the Hon. and Learned Gentleman of a case which had oc-
curred within his own experience. An instance in point occurred in
Clonmel, as he would show by an extract from what was givens in evi.
deuce before a Committee of the House. It appeared that in the borough
of Clonmel about eighty persons claimed to be put upon the registry
on the ground of occupying houses worth 10/. a year. Now what were
the tenements from which these persons claimed I Not houses, but
underground cellars, being only parts of houses ; yet out of these claims
their names were registered. Same time after a rate was to be levied
for the purpose of some borciugh improvement, and the valuers
appointed to make the rate went round for the purpose. He
took the improved rent as the test of value, and they levied
upon no house, which, according to that test, was under 5/. Of the
houses to which these cellars belonged, and of which they formed a
part, all but one was under the value of 5/., and that one was only rated
at 6/.—(Hear, hear.) Those occupiers of cellars, when asked if they
were houses of 101. value, invariably answered " They are so to me.''
They included in the estimate their own and their wives' earnings from
the sale of eggs and other articles which they disposed of in those eel_
lars.—(Hear, hear.) Yet the Barristers took these names. He allowed
no question to be put as to the amount of rent paid, alleging that no
person could be so good a judge of the value as the person who occu-
pied. Now- what the Hon. and Learned Gentleman contended for
would have just the same effect. The result would be to encourage
perjury. He asked the House to consent to some test that would prevent
perjury. The franchise was different in England and Scotland, and it
was proposed to. introduce the amount of Scotch franchise in Ireland.
He only asked that what was proposed should be carried fairly into effect.
The mode of estimating the value had been declared by the Judges in
Ireland not to be the proper mode. It is quite essential that there should
be a bona fide test of property; and if that were not done; his Right
Honourable Friend was perfectly right to oppose the passing of this
Bill. It was not saying that the proper mode was the rent value
which a solvent tenant would give for the premises. He asked could
they consent to pass a Bill of this nature, giving a mere fictitious value?
The clauses of the Bill went expressly to disfranchise the freemen of
Ireland. Was this done with the consent of the Government ? The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that the object of this clause was to
raise the franchise, but he denied that this was the case. The object
which he had in view was to ascertain the real value. What was the
usual mode of ascertaining the value of a house ? Why by ascertaining
first the rent it would let for, and then valuing the amount for a certain
number of years. That was the mode in this country. The test of the
poor-rate was the surest and the safest test of value, and this very test
was the test used on a former occasion by her Majesty's Government in
ascertaining the qualification of a mayor and alderman. The question
then was were they to legislate on this measure, and grant a ten pound
franchise without ascertaining that that amount was real and not ficti-
tious. He did not think that it would benefit Ireland to extend the
franchise, as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said; and for this
reasons and the other reasons he had stated he should oppose this Bill,
unless the test of the ten pound franchise were such as to establish a real
property qualification.—(Cheers.)

Mr. O'CONNELL said that the opinion of the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman would be thought little of in Ireland, except inasmuch as it
showed his hostility to the extension of the franchise in that country,
/ and his declaration that the people of Ireland were unfit for self-govern-
ment. He contended that the object of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite
was to raise the qualification in Ireland, for their proposition could
have no other effect. The Hon. Gentleman said there were no Parlia-
mentary taxes in Ireland ; but what did he call the Grand Jury Ccss ?
As to the quotations which the non. and Learned Gentleman had
given from his (Mr, O'Connell's) evidence, it was not fairly given. His
first answer seas, that the 40s. franchise in fee ought to be preserved, but
not the nominal freeholds of that amount. The solvent tenant's test
was only applicable to counties, and not at all to towns, so that the ar.
guments on that subject totally failed. As to the freemen of the Corpo-
ration of Dublin, was there any test of property qualification with them
—were they not purchaseable at every election ? The honest consti_
tuency of Dublin were defrauded of their rights by the wholesale ad-
mission of freemen by birth, servitude, and marriage. The only way
of producing tranquillity in Ireland was to give equal rights to Ireland,
and England ; and while he lived not a year should pass without agita-
tion unless the equality were established. The Hon. and Learned Gen-
tier-inn should not apply his talents to oppose the rights of the people of
Ireland.
Lord J. RUSSELL could see no reason why they should not discuss
now what ought to be the proper qualification for corporations in Ire-
land. In Scotland the House had made a 101. value as the franchise.
With regard to England, a certain period of residence was necessary, and
to be rated to the poor. The proposal to unite the Scottish and English
tests, would have the effect of placing a higher qualification upon the
occupants of towns in Ireland, who were not so wealthy as a similar
class in England. It would be injurious to adopt any measure which
would tend to deprive of a vote for corporate purposes the body of a re.
spectable class, who had quite as great an interest in the welfare of the
towns they inhabited as those who stood higher or more wealthy. The
great objection, however, to the speech of the Right Hon. and Learned
Gentleman was, that it imperatively demanded a test of qualification,
and this test was to be obtained under an Act Which was not yet in ope-
ration. This would postpone the Municipal Corporation Bill and all its
benefits until the passing of the Poor-law Bill, or, in fact, until a later
period—namely, until the establishment of Poor-law Unions. Surely
this would be an unnecessary delay it would have the effect
—of d • epriv-
ing for a time the Irish people of the advantages that arise from munici.
pal corporations, without sufficient cause. He did not wish, at that
period, to enter largely into the question, but his opinion was that the
franchise, as it at present stood in the Bill, was quite sufficiently secured.
At all events, it would be only fair towards the people of Ireland to grant
the 101. franchise as it at present stood in the Bill, and not to postpone
it indefinitely. If the Committee adopted the 5/. franchise, it would
be even better than the mode which was proposed, and which would
have the effect of actually raising the qualification in Ireland. The test
was not necessary, and would be found to press so heavily upon the
occupiers of 10/. houses in Ireland, that it would be preferable to.have
a 5/. franchise.

Mr. SHAW considered the object of the Noble Lord to be a lowering
of the qualification. The criterion proposed was one to which he
scarcely could anticipate an objection, for it was an unfailing mode of
ascertaining the real value of the interest from which a person sought
the franchise.— (Hear.) The Noble Lord, in his objections to the cri.
terion of poor-rates, did not suggest any mode of ascertaining the qua-
lification. His (the Noble Lord's) view was, that the system of dis-
pensing with the test should go on until the passing of a Poor law, and
then it might be remedied. He did not deny the evil, but he offered
no means of prevention in lieu of that proposed. The reason for adopt-
ing the poor rate as a test was because it was the most simple, and that
which could be obtained with the least trouble on the part of those in-
terested, besides its having the advantage of saving them from mistake
or misrepresentation. But the Noble Lord's objection to the poor rate
was brought forward as the proposition depended upon the Poor Law Bill,
and that alone. He objected to the test, and yet he did not offer any
test in lieu of it. They merely said give them the poor rate test, or
something else. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had said
that the qtialification was different in counties from that which was in
operation in towns. There was some error in that, for the only diffe-
rence was, that in counties the qualification should be over and above
the rent, and in towns the real value was the standard. The
Noble Lord did not deny that some test was requisite ; he omitted,
however to say what criterion of value they, should adopt if they re-
linquished this most reasonable, just, and impartial mode of ascertain-
ing the value. The Noble Lord suggested that this Bill might be
allowed to progress as it was, and if the test he applied after was
foutleci upon a bad p4rieiple, were they to permit all the evil* result.