The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-13 00:00:00

TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 13, 1849.

raised an immense subscription for the purpose of re-
lieving the distress of the Irish people. It lasted through
the entire year, and 200,000 persons were saved from
starvation. By the ar;eney- of the British Association
has this done—what trace remains of it? And he says
anda
kGe op vt ear: ni
rnei
.e n many more—more than a million
era The Hon. Member asks what good
that the people are at present unbenefited and without
means of employment. I deny the consequences. I
think the efforts made by the House and the people of
this country in 1847, and by the British Association in
1848, enabled many persons to emigrate—enabled them
to get over the immediate season of difficulty in Ireland,
and to find in other countries a reward for their toil, end
afuturecoemn
jyfoortedwhlechHaieslrk i, likely to be far more than they
originally
h
far—
whether the money was rightly spent
Therefore,pentorue
was most prudently distributed or otherwise—all this I
consider to be but a small part of the real question. The
twbse o
tbe rit
real question is, whether or no it was advisable to keep
as many people alive as possible ?—(Hear, hear.) That
object has been accomplished; and being so, I think, as
a nation, we have reason to be proud of what we have
done in this matter. Well, Sir, I will admit, if after
these exertions you find you have the same thing to re-
peat, and nothing to do but to spend millions a year to
keep alive the destitute poor of Ireland, who are called
idle, but should more properly be called unemployed—l
admit, Sir, that this would be most unsatisfactory- But,
in the first place, let it bo recollected that while this
House consented to grants of immense sums of money,
they laid it down as a distinct rule that in future legis-
lation on the subject the property of Ireland should be
made responsible fur the support of the poverty. Now
let us consider bow much was implied in this rule. We
have heard a great deal of the Irish landlords and
their conduct to their tenantry. There are good
landlords and bad landlords in Ireland, as the
Hon. Gentleman said: and I agree with him.
I believe there are as good landlords in Ireland as
there are in any other country—men whose conduct,
under the present trying circumstances, has deserved
the greatest approbation. But with regard to the bad
landlords of that country, before the poor-law was
passed they did absolutely nothing for their tenants, but
receive the rents of their estates. They built no houses
they erected no barns, they expended nothing whatever
on the land. Not a tenant nor a beggar on their estates
received any help. Such was the bad landlord of Ire-
land. But the bad landlord can be so indifferent to the
welfare of the people on his estate no longer. Whether
he lived in Ireland or not, a rate was levied for the sup-
port of the destitute poor upon his property, and appro-
priated to that purpose. Well, Sir, we fixed upon Ire-
land a large and extended poor-law. What has that
poor law done in the last year? No leas than 1,700,000/.
were collected and paid for the maintenance
of the infirm and able-bodied poor of Ireland. And,
I am happy to say, that by calculations which I
have seen made by perfectly competent persons, the
number of the able-bodied poor supported by the poor-
law has been by no means as great as might have been
anticipated from the former accounts furnished by the
Commissioners of Poor-law inquiry in their previous
investigations. I am told that out of that sum of
1,700,0001. not 300,000/. has been applied to the relief
of out-door able-bodied poor in Ireland. Well, then,
you have advanced this step, that with regard to the
support of the poor in Ireland a great proportion of the
cost is collected out of the rates levied upon the property
of that country. I take the advances made by the Bri-
tish Association and by the Government as I find them,
and they only amount to one-fifth or one-sixth of the
whole sum given for the support of the poor in Ireland
—the remaining four-fifths or five-sixths having been
contributed by the property of Ireland. We have
seen, with respect to the relief of the poor of
Ireland, that the poor-law has greatly contributed to
their support; and I think it a reason why the
House should be more ready than in 1822 and 1846 to
theut
naostsiosntainycetbioafiathtbeevrearsye,dbesuttittubtee
number
numtbheart
such le ulp
p unions,orr. Ify
there
ou
country.ocofmeto
B unions to which large contributions have been made,
areha novebt
are confining the evils of the principle to a narrow dis-
trict, as we propose, the result will be unmarked by
eaebnov considerably 2
who
less. Out
of 3
e had
those disadvantages which are anticipated. We pro-
pose to confine them at present to those places by the
sea-shore where the people lived on potatoes, and used
sea-weed as a manure. The Hon. Gentleman told us
there was no hope of any improvement or of any remedy
with regard to the distressed unions. I hold in my hand
the report of the Poor law Commissioners, representing
the very distressed state of many unions, and which is
dated the 11th of December, 1848. In that report it is
said that " in several unions the out-door relief is far
less in extent than it was at the corresponding period last
year. For example, in the Kanturk union thre were, in
the week ended 27th November, 1847, 18,460 persons
relieved out of the workhouse, at a cost of 4721; in the
week ended 25th November, 1848, the number was
2,323 only, at a cost of 461 In Killarney union, the
number receiving out-door relief in the week ended 27th
November, 1847, was 8,495, at a cost of 2891. In the
week ended 25th November, 1848, the number was 2,129,
at a cost of 66/. These instances show the degree in
which an improved management, assisted by additional
workhouse accommodation, has served to keep in check
the out-door relief which suddenly arose in 1847 8
under the influence of the example of the Temporary
Relief Act, and while the machinery of administration
under the permanent poor-law was yet new and inexpe-
rienced." Therefore we do see that, with regard to some
of the unions, there has been a very considerable diminu-
tion of the pressure upon the poor-rate.
Mr. STAFFORD asked where the passage cited by
the Noble Lord was to be found?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pointed
to page 8 of tha " Papers relating to the Aid afforded to
be Distressed Unions in the West of Ireland."

Lord J. RUSSELL—I say, then, that you do find
there is a prospect of improvement with regard to some
of these unions. I come now to the consideration of
what prospects can be held out for the future. And here
I must notice a statement which has been made by the

Hon. Gentleman opposite, that my Right Hon. friend
said that the present grant was not the last which he in-
tended to propose. Now, my Right Hon. Friend has no
recollection whatever of having made any such state-
ment. That he said, and that I said afterwards, that we
would not pledge ourselves that this would be the only
grant during this session of Parliament, is perfectly
true; and I say again now that I would not consent—if
the 50,0001. were granted at once, without any further
remark or observation—l would not consent to bind my
hands to any course, and not have regard to future con-
tingencies. I think I should not be doing my duty in
the position in which I am placed, if I consented so to
be fettered with respect to the conduct of the Govern-
ment.—(Hear, bear.) But having said this, admit
that adrt
that there is one point of view in which this question
has been placed, in which I think the reasoning, not of
those who have objected to the grant, but of those who
have desired explanations and discussions upon this
grant, is natural and reasonable—l mean when they say
" Here are very considerable taxes imposed upon Great
Britain, in which Ireland has no part;—here are many
parts of :Ireland which seem not only not to be suffering
extreme distress, but in reality appear as capable as
many parts of England or of Scotland of bearing their
share of the pressure; and therefore that subject ought
to be considered by those who have to administer the
laws." Sir, I stated the other night that I should think
it to be my duty to propose to the Committee of the
House of Commons those measures which I thought no-
cessary for the amendment of the poor-law, and to provide
for the future amendment of that law in such a manner
as I thought would be beneficial to Ireland and the least
burdensome to this country. The Hon. Gentleman
finds fault with the Government because they proposed
to appoint a Committee—he says they ishould
have at once come forward in the month of No-
vember with measures upon this subject. Why, Sir, we
thought last year that it was desirable, upon this import-
ant question, to obtain the benefit of experi▪
ence; and
amongst that experience I found, in almost all the reso-
lutions I have seen, and the representations I have re-
ceived, that one of the main charges with respect to the
poor-law is, that it was proposed in this House by gen-
tlemen who had the conduct of affairs in thi▪ s country,
and who had not sufficient knowledge with respect to
Ireland. If that is the case;
if that is the accusation
against us; if we had met Parliament and said, " Here
is the measure ready prepared—we have not consulted
Irish gentlemen on the subject, but it is ready prepared,
and we do not mean to alter it on your representations;"
it would have been immediately said, " Why not eonsu t
those who have local experience upon the subject, and
tell them what your plans are, and ask their advice as
to whether they would be practicable and beneficial r
Sir, I think that one of the amendments to be proposed
in the poor-law should contemplate an encouragement
to those who would be prepared to lay out their
capital, and to improve and cultivate the land in those
parts where, partly from the entire failure of the crops
of the :last three or four years,. or partly from the
amount of the local burdens, there is now an unwilling-
ness to enter upon the occupation of land. But, in so
doing, I confess I should not be prepared to rush at once
into that division of the country which the Hon. Gentle-
man seems, in his recent speeches, to contemplate. I
own I cannot imagine that there should be such a divi-
sion with regard to property in Ireland, and that each of
the smaller properties in Ireland should be formed into
an electoral division, without leading to the consequence
of a law of settlement, and thereby doing that which I
think has been a great misfortune in England, and which
I should be sorry to introduce into Ireland—namely, im-
peding the free circulation of labour—(Cheers)—and
depriving the labourer of that reward to which he is
entitled. Besides which a law of settlement implies a
him,la law of removal.upon
nhs
ib eolofrnyinog chargeable, into Gloucestershire,u find a man in Kent, and remove
he is pretty sure to be fed and maintained in Gloucester-
Connaught into
shire ; but what would be the consequence of men rush-
ing,Eng lainndtohre
Scotland, and f
anthdeyyoenarr,
drivingfrom them back again
to those districts in Connaught which are most
distressed, and where they are utterly incapable
of obtaining work ?—(Hear, hear.) Why, there could
not be a greater cruelty inflicted upon Ireland than to
Enforce that strict law of settlement and removal. There-
fore, in proposing any plan of amendment to the Com-
mittee I shall endeavour, in the first place, to provide
for the greater encouragement of capital and of industry;
and, in the next place, I own I do consider it just,
that, in some way or other, Ireland should be made fur-
ther to support the cases of exception in Ireland—
(Cheers)—and that those cases should not come exclu-
sively as a charge upon the public expenditure—(Hear.)
Whether what I should propose upon this subject is
practicable or not, is of immense importance; and on
the solution of that question would very much depend
what course we might think necessary hereafter to take.
The Hon. Gentleman says that it is the duty of her
Majesty's Government to introduce, without delay,
measures which
_may obviate the future necessity of ap-
plying to Parliament for the relief of local distress in
Ireland. I do contemplate measures which would have
that tendency. There are other questions respecting
local taxation in Ireland, with regard to which mea-

sures are under consideration, and upon which I think
it will be mcessary to legislate in the course of the
present session. I do myself consider that it may be
possible to go through this great transition—one of the
most extraordinary transitions that ever took place—
(Hear, hear)—a transition which is not the act of any
earliament or of any Government, but a transition which
has been brought about by the calamity of the loss of
the potato crop ; a transition from the state of a popu-
lation living upon their own plots of ground, to the state
of a population consisting chiefly of farmers and
labourers.—(Hear.) I do look forward with hope that
that transition may be brought about without any very
great loss of life ; though no doubt with a very great
loss of property, for a very considerable loss of property
has already taken place ; but, considering the vastness
of the change—considering the sudden manner in which
that change has come upon upon us—with less of suf-
fering and with less of loss than any one could have
anticipated who had been told two years before that
the loss of the food of the country for so many years
would have taken place. Now, I leave it to the
lion. Gentleman to pursue his own course, and if he
thinks necessary to press his motion as a declaration
against the policy of the Government to a division, I
can only say that I think we have taken the course
which is best adapted to the exigencies of the case ;
that I do not think it would have been advisable to have
brought forward a Bill for the amendment of the poor-
law without a Committee ; and that I do not think we
should have been justified, not having measures pro-
posed, in refraining from asking this House for
a small temporary grant for the relief of distress. I
feel confident—and nothing will persuade me to
the contrary—that this House will assent to the grant
which we have proposed. I feel confident that they
will not visit upon those wretched and desti-
tute persons in Connaught any faults that we may
have committed—or any want of foresight in not pro-
posing measures in November last—or any want of
adaptation in our present measures to the end we have in
view. But, agreeing to that proposal, undoubtedly the
House may think it proper to accompany the vote with
the resolution which the Hon. Gentleman has proposed.
With respect to that, however, it is entirely in the hands
of the House to decide as they shall think proper. I
have given what, I must say, I think is a fair account
of theposition in which we stand.—(Hear, hear.) I have
given some view to the House of the nature of the mea-
sures that we shall have to propose. My belief is, that
you cannot by ally one measure remedy a state of society
which has been, from the year 1760 at least, one of
suffering, of crime, of division of landlord from tenant,

of division of one class from another, of conspiracy
frequently repeated, of laws of repression continually
enacted, and the hope of permanent tranquillity con-
stantly frustrated.—(Hear, hear.) If it be true, as I be-
lieve it is, that that hope has been frustrated because the
state of society in Ireland brought on these contentions
for land, brought on those assassinations of proprietors,
brought on that perpetual war of one class against an-
other—if that:be true, then it is only,by a total change in
the state of society that those evils can be remedied.—
(Hear, hear.) And if it is only by a total change in the
state of society that these evils can be remedied, let me,
with all deference to the Honourable Gentleman, tell
him, if he were on these benches to-morrow, to propose
measures for the purpose, that a great social can-
not be effected in one, two, or three years; that it must
be the work of time; but that I do believe, with time,
with perseverance, and with a judicious : adaptation of
remedies, we may arrive at the result which we all de-
sire, that of seeing the state of Ireland improved and
rendered happy.—(The Noble Lord resumed his seat
amidst loud and prolonged cheers.)
The Marquis of GRANBY objected to the proposed
vote, on theground that it was unjust towards the people
of this country, and that it would not confer any per-
manent benefit on those for whom it was intended. He

thought, after reading the papers before the House, it
was impossible not to admit that there was a vast and
alarming extent of distress in Ireland. In certain dis-
tricts deaths and fever were increasing, and the guar-
dians of the unions were without money or credit. Not-
withstanding the statement of the Noble Lord of the
progress made last year, he feared there was very little
hope of the condition of these people being bettered
under present circumstances. He did not think that
the Poor-law Commissioners and the resident gentry of
Ireland entertained the same idea as that adopted by the
Noble Lord. The vice-guardians of a union in the west
of Ireland, writing to the Poor-law Commissioners in
Dublin, told them that they could form no idea of the
privations and sufferings of the people, and added that
such was the pitiable state of the whole labouring popu-
lation, that they (the vice•guardians) could not see
any prospect of the cessation or diminution of their
present distress, but, on the contrary, they were
compelled to express their fears that the wants
and sufferings of the population would cps'.
derably increase. What then, he asked, was the blight-
ing influence which produced these effects, and drove
capital from the country, but the Irish poor-law, under
the operation of which a tenant never knew that his
property would not be taken away from him for arrears
of rate? The Noble Lord admitted that the present
grant was vicious, and what his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Stafford) and those who supported him wished to effect
by the proposed amendment was, without objecting to
the grant of 50,0001., to guard it with such conditions
as should prevent the House being called on to make a
similar vote. They wished not only to put the fire out,
but to take precautions against it breaking out again.—
(Flear, hear.) How long was this state of things to
continue? How long were they to have the Irish
people dependent on English liberality? Had the Go-
vernment no plans to bring before the House? They
replied that they had appointed the Irish Poor-law
Committee; but the present was the time not so much
for deliberation as for vigorous action. The Govern-
ment were not always so ready to refer matter3to a
Committee, and when laws sanctioned by the wisdom of
two centuries were to be laid low, the Government
would not wait fur the evidence tendered before the
Lords' Committee on the navigation-laws last year.
Colonel SIBTHORP commenced with "Sir, I will
not vote for this grant on any consideration whatever."—
(Hear, hear.) He had listened with great attention to
the speech of the Hon. Member for Northampton, and if
he understood him right, it was that this was a con-
ditional vote. Now, he yielded to no man in that
House in humanity and in consideration for his fellow-
creatures, his whole course of life would bear him out
in that, but he could not give his support to the motion.
The Speech of the Ministers placed in the hands of
their Sovereign was, in his opinion, equivocal and
Jesuitical—there were no solid grounds in that Speech
on which he could rely. He said he had no con-
fidence whatever in the Noble Lord when that Speech
was introduced ; and he repeated now he had no
confidence in the Noble Lord with regard to the present
proposition. The Noble Lord had told them at the com-
mencement that this was to be the first vote; but at the
same time he had told the House he was not in a situa-
tion to bring forward measures of amelioration. From
this he inferred that the Noble Lord meant this vote to
be of yearly occurrence. The vote was only to keep the
Noble Lord and his party in their present seats. These
were the grounds which would urge him to vote against
the motion. He would remind the Government that
they might draw too much out of a well, and thus find
it dry at last.—(Hear and laughter.) The Noble Lord
did not hold out any hopes that this grant would be the
last, or that he would be able to bring in other measures.
Remembering the past, he would not trust the Noble
Lord one single tittle, and he should, therefore, vote
against this Jesuitical, low, and dirty motion.
Mr. HUME said he could not vote for the amendment,
because it agreed to the grant while it said it ought not
to be given. Now, as he (Mr. Hume) dissented from
the grant entirely, he must vote against the proposed
amendment and then take the sense of the House against
the original motion.

Mr. MUNTZ had voted against the Government the
other night because he felt that he could not conscien-
tiously do otherwise He felt obliged to do the same on
the present occasion. He did not see how he could call
upon the people of this country, taxed as they were, to
contribute repeatedly, incessantly, and endlessly to the
support of the Irish.—(Cheers.) He differed from those
who thought there were any signs of improvement in
Ireland. For his own part, he thought they were getting
infinitely and rapidly worse. He attributed that distress
to misgovernment, cheap produce, and dear money. What
was the situation of the people of this country, for that
appeared to be left out of consideration? Were they
fit to pay such calls? and ought they to bo asked to
pay such calls?—(Hear, hear.) He had heard
a good deal of late about trade being at present in a very
prosperous and profitable state. For himself, he had
found nothing of the kind, and having visited Birming-
ham on Saturday, he had found a similar ignorance of it
prevailing there. Every one he saw there told him
that trade was exceedingly flat and unprofitable,
and that there was no probability of its
improvement, in consequence of their having to com-
pete with the foreign manufacturer.—(Loud cheers
from the Protectionist benches.) That very morning he
had met a member of his own family, who had just re-
tamed from the north of Germany, and having asked
him what was the state of trade there, he was informed
that there was plenty of trade, but it was not trade with
England—the people manufactured their own goods much
cheaper than the English could manufacture them.—
(Cheers from the Protectionists.) He would mention
another curious circumstance. Some three or four years
ago the glassmakers of Birmingham came to him and said
they were anxious for free trade; if the glass duty were re-
moved they believed they should do very well. He cau-
tioned them to be careful what they were about, and
asked them if they were quite sure they were able to
compete with the foreign manufacturer. " 0 yes," they
said, " there's nothing like free trade." Well, he ac-
companied a deputation of them to the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth, when he was Mi-
nister, and to his horror they asked three years' pro-
tection.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Muntz) said to them,
" I thought you were for free trade?" "So we are,"
said they, " but we want three years to prepare for it."
Ile asked them, " Well, suppose you get three years'
protection, what better will you be at the end of that
period?" But they paid no attention to him. A few
clays ago, however, he had received a letter from one
of them, stating that the import duty on flint glass
was about to expire, and the manufacturers, feared
the trade in this country would expire with it, owing
to their inability to compete with the foreign manu-
facturer.—(Loud cheers from the Protectionists, anlaughter.) They were, therefore, very anxious forhe a
could
con-
tinuance of the duty, being persuaded thatwt.
peculiar character of the manufacture.
that was suffer-
glass trade the only one in Birminghamwas
half a dozen
ing from a similar cause.
Therecularly the gilt toy trade
prove that protection was indispensable,Noerinwgyesto
the
ee
other trades equally bad—
protested against the peoplethe maintenance of the Irish. It
upon to contribute to
in that country was owing to
was said that the distress
they had never heard of distress in
rotflnthtihsecsoeucnitrreyumbestianngcceashhedo
the potato-rot, as if
occurrence of
.that calamity. Was
and the brassfoundingtraea.
the Ireland 1842 owing to the potato-rot?
tlhBe22or of
distrbeessforoef

He feared the distress was owing to a rot of some other
sort that would not be easily cured. He was sorry the
amendment had been moved; for, being opposed to the
grant, ho could not support an amendment
which was substantially the same, with the ex-
ception of saying that something should be done
that would not be done. Suppose there was the dis-
tress in Ireland that was alleged—what would 50,0001.
do for it ? It was a mere drop of water in the ocean.
Out of doors there was a strong feeling against granting
any more money to Ireland—not arising from any pe-
nurious feeling, but from a conscientious beliet that
they could not afford to pay taxes to the extent they
were doing, and that there roust be a reduction of ex
penditure—(Hear, hear.) That reduction, so far as it
could be effected with safety and honour to the country
he was determined to support, and, in the meantime, he
must oppose this grant, as being inconsistent with jus
lice to all parties.—(Hear.)
The House then divided, when there appeared :
Against Mr. Stafford's amendment 245
For it

Majunty against it - 120
Oa our return to the gallery,
Mr. HOME was stating the reasons why he should
oppose the grant. The Government were bound to
come forward with some other measure to meet the dis-
tresses of Ireland, and to render the money given by
this country really useful to her. As he did not think
the grant good in principle, or likely to be of any ser-
vice, he would take the sense of the House upon it.
The House again divided ; the numbers were,—
For the original motion 220
Against it
Majority —77
The vote was then agreed to. The House resumed :
and the report was received
The report on the Inland Revenue Bill was consi-
dered, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to-
morrow.
The report of Supply was received.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL obtained leave to

bring in a Bill to enable overseers of boroughs
sur-
veyors of highways to recover costs on distraining for
rates; also a Bill for the holding of petty sessions in
boroughs, and for providing places for the holding of
such petty sessions in counties and boroughs.
POOR-LAW (IRELAND) COMMITTEE.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE proposed that the names of
the Earl of Lincoln, Sir Lucius O'Brien, Mr. Moore,
Mr. Bright, and Mr. Grace, be added to the Select Com-
mittee on the Irish Poor-laws.

On the question that Mr. Bright's name be added,
Mr. TAYLOR objected to the nomination of a dele-
gate of the Manchester school. There was a prepon-
derance of borough Members on the Committee already.
From the unhappy recollection of Mr. Bright's service
on another Committee, he looked with jealousy on the
addition to the present Committee of one who could not
know the interests for which he (Mr. Taylor) felt an
affection.—(A laugh.) The lion. Member concluded
by proposing to substitute a Welsh Member, Sir John
Walsh.

Mr. M. GIBSON begged to remind the House of the
enormous interest which Manchester and Lancashire
generally had in the proper administration of the poor-
laws i❑ Ireland. The burden imposed by the poor-rates
required to support the Irish poor in that district was
very large.
Sir •W. VERNER complained that the province of
Ulster was not adequately represented in the Committee.
Lord C. HAMILTON thought that there was an
undue preponderance of borough Members amongst the
English representatives on the Committee. As the Com-
mittee was originally proposed by the Government, six
out of eight of the English Members placed upon it were
borough representatives, and if the Hon. Member for
Manchester should be added the number of borough re-
presentatives would amount to seven out of nine. It was
desirable that at least one English Member representing
a large agricultural constituency should be added to the
Committee.

Mr. F. MAULE believed, that when the Hon. Mem-
ber for the county of Dublin spoke disapprovingly of the
Hon. Member for Manchester's conduct on a Committee
he meant to refer to the Dublin Election Committee.
This was the first occasion on which the conduct of a
Member of an Election Committee had been called in
question since he (Mr. F. Niaule) had been the chairman
of the Committee of Selection. If the Lion. Member had
misconducted himself upon the Dublin Committee, the
question ought to have been raised at the proper time;
but, for his part, he believed that the Hon. Member had
conducted himself uprightly and with as due a regard to
the affirmation which he had made as any other Member
would have done under the obligation of an oath.
Mr. BATESON professed himself unable to discover
the peculiar qualifications which entitled the lion.
Member for Manchester to be placed upon the Com-
mittee. If Ministers thought the Honourable Member
ought to be one of the Committee, why did they not
nominate him originally? They could not have over-
looked him because the Hon. Member was accustomed to
hide his light under a bushel.—(A laugh.) He had heard
it whispered that the Hon. Member and some of his
friends had made arrangements for the purchase of a
considerable amount of landed property in Ireland as
soon as it should become :sufficiently depreciated.—(A
laugh.) It was impossible to give the Hon. Member
credit for an unprejudiced mind, for when he addressed
the House upon Irish questions he usually exhibited a
virulent and vindictive feeling towards the landed in-
..

terest of that country. One ex—ample of the Hon. Mem-
ber's eloquence would suffice to justify the character
which he attributed to it.—(Hear the Hon. Member read
an extract from a speech made by the Hon. Member for
Manchester, in which the Hon. Member complained that
everything was Protestant in Ireland—that Protestant
judges polluted the seat of justice—that Protestant ma-
gistrates would not do justice to Catholic peasants—that
Protestant landlords exterminated their tenants, and that
Protestant soldiers, by the command of a Protestant
priest, had butchered a Catholic peasant in the presence
of his mother. The reading of this passage was received
with cheers and counter-cheers.) It was not difficult to
understand the motive in which the Hon. Member for
Manchester's nomination for the Committee originated;
it was a sop thrown to a party which the Government
could not satisfy and dared not offend.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY hoped that the whisper which the Hon.
Member who spoke last had heard relative to the Hon.
Member for Manchester being about to invest capital
largely in Ireland would prove to be correct.--(Hear,
hear.) That, in itself was a good reason for placing
the Hon. Gentleman on the Committee. It ought not
to be forgotten that many members of the Society with
which the Hon. Member for Manchester was connected
had displayed their usual benevolence, ho could not say
more, in relieving distress in Ireland; and, in addition
to a great sacrifice of time, had made a generous appli-
cation of capital to developo the resources of that coun-
try. It appeared to him that the Hon. Member, instead
of attempting to depreciate the labours of that Society,
ought rather to speak of them with the gratitude and
respect to which they were entitled.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BATESON protested against the uncalled-for lec-
ture which the Right Hon. Baronet had read him. He did
not say a single word against the members of the Society
to which the Hon. Member for Manchester belonged—
(Hear, hoar)—and he entertained for them as deep a re-
spect as the Right Hon. Baronet himself could feel.

Mr. HENRY said that he had suggested the Hon.
Member for Manchester's appointment on the Commit-
tee on acccuat of some remarkable speeches which he
had made.
After a few words from Mr. SCULLY and Colonel
DUNNE,
Mr. HUME said that never before since he had had a
seat in that House had he heard any personal motive
attributed to any Hon. Member—(Bear)—and ho must
say that the Hon. Member who made this charge had
greatly neglected his duty if he had any complaint to
make against an Hon. Member as to his conduct upon a
Committee, in not havicg brought it forward at a previous
period.
Mr. REYNOLDS said it appeared to him that this
was a military attack upon a member of the Society of
Friends—the Hon. Member for Manchester had been
attacked by three colonels and a captain.—(Laughter.)
Mr. BATESON—I am not a captain.
Mr. REYNOLDS—AIthough the Hon. Gentleman
had parted with his military rank it still belonged to
him. —(Laughtee.) Once a priest always a priest—
once a lieutenant always a captain.---(Laughter.) It was
clear that this attack was prepared—the volume of
Hansard quoted by the Hon. Gentleman proved that
the attack had not risen at the moment. The charge
made against the Hon. Member for Manchester might
be attributed to him (Mr. Reynolds). It was not be-
cause the Hon. Member was unfit to discharge the duty
tho Government was about to impose upon him, but
because he happened to sit on his (Mr. Reynold's) elec-
tion Committee, and the old story of the gray mare,
which was familiar to every man's ears—or it should be
—(A laugh)—applied. It was this—A countryman of his
was indicted at the assizes at Tralee for felony. Ills
innocence was proved, but, notwithstanding that, the
jury found him guilty. The judge was shocked, and
said—" Gentlemen, the prisoner's innocence was clearly
proved." " Yes," said the foreman, "he is innocent of
the crime now charged against him, but he stole my gray
mare last Christmas."—(Great laughter.) The Hon.
Member for Manchester was innocent of the charge found
against him, but he happened not to have put him (Mr.
Reynolds) out, and put Mr. Gregory in.—(A laugh.) It
was for that reason he was unfit to be on this Commit-
tee ; but he could assure the House that, of the 553
British Members composing that House, there was nota
s
one in Ireland so popular as the Hon. Member. Ile
recognised as the triend of the poor,
for popular liberty. as a man pleadinwg
After a few words from Lord BERNARD,
The House divided, when there appeared—
For
......
09
the motion ............................
14
,
Against it .............................
55
lsj°ritY .........•
.. ..r
Manchester was
_
Tho name of th HOD. Member o
then added to the Committee, and also the name of Mr.
Grace.
Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the following gentlemen form the Select Committee
on Army and Ordnance:—Lord Seymour, Mr. Fox
Maule, Mr. Hume, the Marquis of Granby, Mr. Walter,
Sir W. Molesworth, Lord C. Wellesley, Sir J. Graham,
Mr. W. Miles, Mr. Cobden, Mr. S. Herbert, Mr. J.
Greene, Mr. E. Ellice, Mr. . Smith, and Mr. Bankes.
Mr. B. OSBORNE would move that three additional
names be added—Sir De Lacy Evans, Colonel Lindsay,
and Colonel! Dunne.

Ttze SPEAKER, intimated that the Honourable
Member for Middlesex could not propose these addi-
tional names until to-morrow, after notice had been duly
given.
Mr. B. OSBORNE (looking at the clock, which in-
dicated a quarter to two)—This is to morrow, Sir.
In reply to Colonel PEEL and Captain BOLDERO, who
complained that no person connected with the Ordnance
had been placed on the Committee, although that arm of
the service had been subjected to so much attack in the
press and elsewhere,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
would consult with the Committee, and see whether tha

•
name of some Honourable Member representing the
Ordnance could not be added to the Committee.—(id,)
The Hoase then adjourned at two o'clock.

PARLIAMEN'T'ARY BUSINESS.
(From the rotes and Proceedings of the House of Common.)
MONDAY, FEB. 12.
The following Railway petition was presented, wad th•
Bill ordered to be brought in :

Leeds and Thirsk (Power to guarantee Interest on certain
Shares, &c.)

. .
The undernamed Railway Bills were read a first, and
ordered to be read a second time :—._ _

Caledonian (Lease or Purchase of the Glasgow, Barrhe
and Neilston Direct).
York, Newcastle, and Berwick, and Maryport and Carlisle
Lease and Amalgamation.
Birmingham and Oxford Junction (Purchase of the Strat-
ford-upon-Avon Canal Navigation).
Caledonian and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Lease of Scottish
Midland Junction).
Caledonian and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Lease of Dundee
and Perth and Aberdeen Junction, and the Dundee and
Arbroath, and the Dundee and Newtyle Railways).
Forest of Dean and South Wales (Amendment of Acta as
to Charges on Forest of Dean Railway and Branches—No. 2.)
North Staffordshire (Amendment of Acts.)
Stirling and Dunfermline (Deviation of Branch to Albs
Harbour; Diversion of certain Works; Extension of Time
for completing Line and taking Land; and Amendment of
Acts.) ,