The Sun.
London, England, 1838-07-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JULY 25, 183 R

ALARMING DISTRESS IN THE

SHETLAND ISLANDS.

Extract from a Minute of the Shetland Destitution Com-
mittee, Lerwick, 9th July, 1838.
" This Committee grieve to find that the majority of the
London Committee should have departed from the proposal
to which they had unanimously assented, of sending one of
their members to inquire into the truth of the reports from
Zetland, and that they should persist in discrediting, or in af-
fecting to discredit, the authenticated evidence laid before
them, directly, by Mr. Barclay, when lately in London; and
also the report of the Aberdeen Commitee, establishing the
fact that deep and extensive destitution pervades the Zetland
Islands, in consequence of the almost total failure of the
crops, and the partial failure of the fishings last year. This
Committee are also bour,d to record their conviction that if
the London Committee refuse to send further supplies to Zet-
land, the consequence to tte many thousands of destitute per-
sons in these islands must be deplorable, and may prove fatal,
while the London Committee will not only be guilty of a trio-
teflon of the pledge given to Mr. Dundas and Mr. Barclay,
but will also involve themselves in the guilt of violating the
trust reposed in them by the subscribers, and the provincial
Committees, who furnished them with the funds, for the express
and sole purpose of supplying the destitute with the necessa-
ries of life. The reports from every parish in Zetland shew
that the destitution is so extensive that the five hundred and
sixteen bolls of meal, expected from Aberdeen, cannot carry the
starving part of the population through more than one
fortnight, and if some mf ans of obtaining extraneous aid for
them be not obtained till the rising crops are available, there
appears no human probability that the lives of those will be
preserved; who cannot subsist exclusively on gray-fish and
shell-fish, while the supply even of these must depend on the
state of the weather and other circumstances over which man
has no controul."
Extract of a Letter from the Rev. T. Barclay, Chairman
of the Shetland Committee, to Frederick Derides; Esq.,M. P.:
" I am deeply grieved at the information contained in your
favour of the 3d instant. You are a witness that Dr.
Brown's proposal to send a memberef the Committee to Shet-
land was unanimously acceded to before you left the room ;
and as Dr. Crombie had declined going, it was intimated to
me at the close of the meeting that the Committee had agreed
to meet again on the following Tuesday to fix on the individual
to be sent. You are also a witness that it was unanimously
admitted thal. to the extent proposed in the Report of the
Aberdeen Committee (3,000/.) they were bound to grant
relief. Yet it now appears from Mr. Nisbet's communication
to you that they have resolved to make no inquiry them-
selves, and not to credit the reports either of the Aberdeen
Committee, or of the Local Committees in Shetland, and con-
sequently to grant no further supplies. They are well satis-
fied in their own minds that if they do enquire they will find
the destitution so deep and extensive, as to require a large
portion of the funds which they have probably destined to a
different object from that fm• which they were intrusted to
their charge by the subscribers.
" Our Committee earnestly beg that you will continue your
benevolent exertions on behalf of the starving people ,• and
they think it would be advisable to bring the London Com-
mittee to a point at once' by requiring them to state de-
cisively whether they intend to grant any further aid. If they
refuse,
fortnight; so
to temporise, you are earnestly intreated to
apply to the Treasury for a grant to save the people's lives.
remitrrdoemeaesmn:u wehxpoerectethdefrnotinealAberdeen,
divided,
sustain
longer
so that allowing a week to elapse before
this supply reaches the suffering districts, by the end
of the month, there will be nothing to mitigate the famine.
Isys,
ociooaono
Committeeelb.r etoopf prevailed
enao lsrAee
own
wdeurnpnd oneaneepnept ofociti
onho
tmtemei
Committee
trt
te,eeieobtrhe
and era yso
ntshvhoeo rrui
eitherztldoo
sacabeelTes
Commissioner
t buotiel s
amonghourl y
a s
Extracti inquiry."
i ry.
inspect the islands. There is nothing we court so earnestly
"Of a letter from the Rev. Thomas Barclay to a
f
t
friend in London, dated July 16 :—" The cod-fishing has
tstaltThehl
neheatodoehnAde
utterly failed. Some vessels have not caught more than seven
in a week, and many under fifty. The statement of one
smack's fishing for a week, which has been published, is a
deception. The nurnter delivered by the vessel in question
was a fortnight's fishing of several vessels, whose catch was
carried to the curing station by one. I sincerely hope the
London Committee will yet relent, for from all the accounts I
receive from the suffering districts, I am persuaded that if sup
plies do not soon come from some quarter, the grave will fur.
wish evidence of the famine."

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

We know nothing, for a length of time, which has given
us so much unalloyed pleasure as the passing of " the Na-
tional Loan Fund Bill," last night, in the House of Lords.
It is not surprising that this should be the case. Upon
public grounds we defended, nay, strenuously advocated the
measure—we continued to do so, opposed by a portion of
the Press, which was inimical to it, either through igno-
rance of its provisions, or from some worse motive. We
must confess that, owing to such ungenerous attacks we
should not have been disappointed bad the passing of the
Loan Fund Bill been delayed ; how great, then, must be
our delight at the circumstance of its having passed both
Houses of Parliament triumphantly. Now that the Bill
may be said to be the law of the land, we have only to repeat
what we have, so often before deliberately stated, that it will
be one of the greatest blessings ever conferred upon that class
whose interest has hitherto been completely neglected in
institutions bearing some resemblance to this—we mean the
class whose daily labour is its only capital. Never before
Las any institution attempted so fully to embrace the
working class in its arrangements, or offer anything like the
same advantages to those who, more than all others, re-
quire the attention of the, philanthropist and patriot. One
step has been gained, but much remains to be done
throughout the empire. Every well-wisher to his fellow-
men must investigate the scheme, and, having proved its
value, must lend it his support.--Morniny Advertiser.
The numerous attendance at the fete given for the
Poles at the Beulah Spa on the 13th instant, has led to
very exaggerated ideas respecting the benefits accruing to
the Refugees from that entertainment. We learn, how-
ever, from an authentic source, that after allowing for all
deductions, the proceeds will ,only afford to those Poles
who are not relieved by Government, in number about 200,
the pittance of a few shillings weekly for the next two
months. We applaud the spirit of those who, under these
circumstances, have set on foot a second fete for the same
purpose, which we see announced for the 30th inst. The
most distinguished English singers, following the example
of the Italian artists, have generously volunteered their ser-
vices on the occasion, and a long list of patronage, of per-
sons of the first fashion, and of all opinions, shows' the
runi-
versal desire to stretch out the hand of friendship to these
psuffering exiles. We cordially wish success to the under-
taking.
iltariseaewng
a oargkeodin it, and which, if properly sup-
ported,philanthrophy which does honour
to
ee
alltd w,
willi effect certain amount of real practical good.
But it is not by such means that the two hundred Poles
can be effectually assisted ; our Government ought to step
in, like that of France, and render such repeated, and, after
all, inadequate, exertions on the part of individuals unne-
cessary. We are not without hope that it may be so when
the estimates come to be voted on Friday next. —Times.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 24.
SCARISBRICK V. ECCLESTON.

i n
late April,
pArliri ~
Lordth e
willLy n Lyndhurst u
therst
This was an appeal from the decree of Si; J. Leach, when
1835. The
each
of whow hadhic hthhreeelefltarqtoe
heisstattheiseeinsoLmanrceasspheicrtei—vetlyhe.
e.Essetc:ctricies:btrinnk estate, the Wrightington estate, and the Eceleston
affirmed
arose
yo
f
to him was to go to the next son, and in case of his death to
and on the death of any of them without issue, the estate given'
Master ofthecießeosltliso,n
go to the next brother, &c. All the sons of the testator died
without issue, except one, Charles (still living), who had the
Eccleston estate, but, on the death of of his two elder brothers,
,succeeded to their estates. His sisters, in the events which
happened, filed their bills claiming, by virtue of the shifting
of
Sira .%
clause, to be entitled to the Wrightingtou and Eccleston es-
t ::oLweamehovd was
stion reversetheir favour.
vt
he decree
our.
of the Master of the Roils. The consequence is that Charles
te s.
The
Loin
p decree
ciiA NcE L t
Scarishrick is entitled to three estates.
Ordered accordingly.

COU.

-RT OF CHANCERY JULY 24.
STOCKEN V. STOCKEN.
This was an appeal from a decree of the Vice-Chancellor.
It was argued before Lord Brougham in 1833, but his Lord-
ship retired from office without giving any definite opinion on
the question, arid it was again argued before the present Lord
Chancellor in November last. His Lordship now gave judg-
ment. The bill had three objects in view. The plaintiff's
bad a claim under the settlement made on the marriage of
their Parents ; they had also a claim for payment of rents and
profits received by their father, and they moreover sought to
establish their title to take under their father's will. His
Lordship observed that there could be no doubt that a power
was retained 'of disposing of property,by will, and the will
must be held to be established. His Lordship added, he was
quite confident that the Vice.:Chancellor, in his judgment,
made the same declaration with respect to the maintenance of
the children, although in the decree it appeared otherwise.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Juzr 24.
THOMAS ROGERS'S BANKRIIPTCY.
The adjourned examination of this bankrupt, who, it will
be recollected, on a former occasion stated that he had been
robbed of 12,000 sovereigns, came on to-day: Alderman T.
Wood appeared on behalf of a bankrupt named John Jones, to
prove against the estate of the bankrupt Rogers, under an
order from Sir C. Fletcher, for 7781. 17s. 10d., being the
amount of moneys
a
moneys, bills, &c., received by Rogers as trade
to the bankrupt estate of Jones.
The bankrupt then stated that his friends were willing to
pay his debts and obtain his release ' • when it was agreed that
the claim should be admitted for the present, and the money
be paid into Court, to abide the ultimate decision.
The bankrupt exhibited much anxiety to obtain a speedy
release from his confinement, and it is expected that he will
be liberated in the course of to-morrow. After some further
preliminaries the examination terminated.
The debts due by the bankrupt amount to between 4,000 i.
and 5,0001,

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 24.
The SPEAKER-took the Chair at the usual hour.
Mr. BALL (the Attorney-General for Ireland) and Dr.
STOCK were introduced by Lord MORPETII and Mr. Fox
Alarm:, and took the oaths and their scats for Clonmel and
Cashel.
DEBTS OF OFFICERS—ARMY AND NAVY.
Sir E. CODRINGTON rose "to bring before the House
the petition of Wm. Boyce, late of the Royal Navy, of which
he had given notice, in consequence of a statement made by
the Hon. Member for Liskeard, that in no case whatever were
the pecuniary private transactions of officers interfered with.
Lord G. SOMERSET submitted to the House that it-was
not right to snake any statement of this kind.
The SPEAKER said that no person out of the House had
a right to reply to that which was stated within the walls.
Capt. PECHELL apprehended that it was not the petition
but the observations of the Gallant Admiral which were now
ebjected to.
Sir E. CODRINGTON wished that the case should be
fully understood by the House. If an officer borrowed money to
fit him out fOr the service, the authorities thought it right to
secure the repayment through the means of that officer's pay.
The petitioner stated that he set out as a surgeon; that at the
peace he fell into difficulties, and in the course of time his
debts became such that he was put into prison, went before the
Commissioners, became bankrupt, and delivered up the whole
of his property. The Commissioners on looking over the
accounts, seeing that he had given up the whole of his pro-
perty, meant to release him. The petitioner then stated
that upon the representation of the agent, which- the
petitioner considered to be a gross misrepresentation,
the Admiralty had struck hint off his half-pay. He had
applied several times to be reinstated, but" without the
least effect ; and he had therefore nothing further to do
than to lay his case before the House. He thought the offi-
cers of the navy bad been most improperly dealt with, and
he trusted, therefore, the House would take the subject into
its most serious consideration.
Mr. C. WOOD could not allow the statements of the Gal-
lant Admiral to pass without observation because he had mixed
up two matters that were totally distinct. He had mixed
up the punishment inflicted by the Admiralty, and the inter-
ference with private concerns. The reason why Mr. Boyce
was struck off the list of the navy was, that in the opinion of
the Admiralty, he had been guilty of swindling. The Ad-
miralty thought if such were the case he was a disgrace to the
Navy, and therefore they adopted the course they did.
Captain PE C HEL L deprecated the course adopted.
The SPEAKER said the question was a very grave one,
and ought to be discussed in a regular and proper manner.
In justice to other gentlemen whose names were down for
the presentation of petitions, the subject could not then be
gone into.

- Sir E. CODRINGTON then gave notice that he would
call the attention of the House to the subject on the first Sup-
ply night.

'Mr: RICH presented a petition from a Wesleyan Congre-
gation in Knaresborough, complaining that the servants of the
East India Company were obliged to attend upon idolatrous
worship.

Mr. A GLIONBY presented a petition, signed by 300
owners of small cottages in Birmingham, in favour of the
Recovery of Tenements Bill.
Mr. HINDLEY presented petitions from Stockport, in
favour of the Ballot, and in favour of Rowland Hill's plan of
Post-office reform.

Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the
spirit dealers of Tralee, praying for protection.
Mr. M. PHILIPS presented a petition from Manchester
(we believe), praying for a discontinuance of the sanction
given by the British Government in India to Hindoo idolatry.
Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from the Dean and
Chapter of Canterbury against the Ecclesiastical Appointments
Suspension Bill.
On the motion of Mr. FOX MA UL E, the report of the
Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill was received, and the Bill
ordered to be engrossed.
The Report of the Turnpike Acts Continuance (Ireland)
Bill was received.

Upon the motion for receiving the Report on the Arms and
Gunpowder (Ireland) Bill,
Mr. H LIME said that there must be some mistake with re-
spect to this Bill, as he had received two letters that day ex-
pressing a hope that he would move that the Bill should be
withdrawn, as it was feared it might be attended with evil con-
sequences. If he understood rightly, the present Bill was
only a continuance of the one of last year.
The Bill was then ordered to be engrossed.
Sir G. GREY moved the committal of the Bill for the ad-
ministration of justice in New South Wales.
Mr. H UAI E said he had not seen the Bill, and he therefore
wished to know what its object was.
Sir G. GREY said it was the same as the Bill of last
Session.

After a few observations from Mr. HUME, the Bill passed
through Committee.
The Report of the Committee on the Constables on Public
Works Bill was brought up.
LIGHTHOUSES (GIBRALTAR) BILL.

The House went into Committee on this Bill.
Clauses 1,2, and 3, were agreed to.
On Clause 4 being proposed,
Mr. HUME objected to the tax of one shilling upon all
vessels passing Gibraltar being imposed. This country
allowed 250,000/. for the support of Lighthouses, but the
expence of the Lighthouses did not exceed 60,000/. or
70,000/. The remainder went into private hands.-4 Hear,
hear, hear.) It was said it %%Ai applied in pensions to
captains and seamen by the Trinity
.Huu,:e. if it were neces-
sary to apply such a sum in pensions, it ought to go under the
proper head.—(Cries of " Heir, hear, hear.") The com-
merce of the country was.already very much taxed. This
clause was just adding to the evil of giving to an irrespon-
sible body like the Trinity House additional power.—
(Cries of " Hear, bear.") He would ask the Honourable
Gentleman at the Head of the Board of Trade on what prin-
ciple it was that they proposed to extend the power of the
Trinity-house to Gibraltar. No Government but a Whig
Government would seek to,give such pt.v.ets to a ,el -elected
body like the Trinity House. He should move the exclusion
of the clause altogether.
Mr. WA RBURTON said the Trinity House Lad come
worst out of the inquiry on the subject of lighthouses. Why,
then, was it to be selected for the purpose of superintend.
ing the Gibraltar liglithou,e ? The Ballast Hoard in
Ireland and the Northern Lighthouse Commissioners went
upon the regular and proper principle of apportioning their
revenue to the actual cost of the lighthouses. Let one of
these Boards sthen be chosen. He should support the mo-
tion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny.

Mr. O'CONNE L L put in a claim on behalf of the Irish
Ballast Board, (of which he was a member,) for that Board
bad conducted itself best of any. It had diminished the taxa-
tion on the public, and its members asked no remuneration
for their services, thus standing in proud contrast to the
Trinity House.
Mr. P. T OMP S ON—This was not the time to discuss the
rival merits of their Lighthouse Boards. The Trinity House
had been proved before the Lighthouse Committee to have
conducted itself with great propriety ; and a Bill had been
passed last Session, giving it additional powers. He did not
think the Board deserved the censure which had been heaped
upon it. Now with respect to the clause in question, his
Hon. Friend had asked why put this lighthouse under the
Trinity House ? The reason for doing so was because Par-
liament decided two years ago that lighthouses should be put
under that Body, and the proposal now made was merely fol.
lowing out the precedent laid down in the case of Heligo-
land. His Hon. Friend then objected to the toll, and said
there was a surplus revenue at Gibraltar. If so, it was car.
ried to the account of the public, and therefore paying this
charge out of the surplus revenue, would be nothing more
than making, a charge on the public of the sum necessary
to keep up this light.--( Hear, hear.) His Honourable
Friend in this was contending for die principle of all lights
being paid by the country, on which principle the House did
not agree with him. The Hon. Member said this was a mere
trifle. He (Mr. Thompson) was perfectly aware of that.
The country had erected the lighthouse, and all that was re-
quired was a small sum for the annual expense of maintaining
it. The shipping interest was willing to pay these dues, and
he had introduced the Bill at their request and with their sanc-
tion. He hoped the House would agree to the charge in
the manner he had suggested.
Mr. WALLACE, as a member of the Committee two
years ago, begged to remind the Hon. Gentleman that it was
then understood that in case any new lighthouse wee
built they were not to follow the track of the Trinity 'House.
He wished to know what was to become of the surplus in-
come of Gibraltar—was it to go into the coffers of
the Trinity House? It was monstrous to collect a revenue
in the shape of lighthouse duty, under the name of charita-
ble purposes.
Mr. HUM E said that Gibraltar, since its capture, had been
a free port, and the effect of the Bill would be to destroy its
being so. He would put it to the House whether, for the
sake of a paltry shilling, it would adopt such a clause.
He wished to see the lighthouse erected, but he thought its
erection should take place at the expense of the surplus re-
venue
se.of Gibraltar or the surplus revenue of the Trinity
Hou
Mr. P. THOMSON denied that the toll proposed by the
Bill would have the effect of injuring commerce.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw.
The House divided, when there appeared_..
For the clause
For the amendment
Majority
—7O
The clause was then agreed to.
The remainder of the clauses were agreed to, and the House
resumed.

Lord J IRISH POOR-LAW BILL.
OHN RUSSELL then moved the Order for the
House taking into consideration the Lords' amenclintnts to
the Irish Poor-law Bill.

PEUSTAN EXPEDITION.
Sir STRATFORD CANNING wished to ask a question
on a subject of great importance to the commercial inte-
rests of the country. He understood that an expedition,
composed of several armed vessels, with 500 or 6CO
men had sailed from Bombay to the Persian Gulf. The only
two places to which the expedition could proceed belonged to
the Schah of Persia, and an expedition against them might
place us in a state of hostility with Persia, He was desirous
of knowing, for the interests of the trade of the country, whe-
ther the expedition was likely to bo attended with that conse-
quence?

Sir J. H OB HOU S E said it was undoubtedly true that a
small expedition had sailed, in consequence of ti despatch re-
ceived from the Governor-General of India by the Governor
of Bombay, stating reasons which made the Governor-General
Of India think it advisable to send such expedition. It was

sent for the protection of British interests in central• Asia, iw •
consequence of the state of that part of the world.
Sir S. CANNING inquired if the expedition was, merely
for general purposes, or had a specific object? •
Sir J. HOBHO USE could give no other answer than he
had already given.

LABRERS.
Sir R. PEEL wished INDIAN
to ask thO U B
ee President of the Board of
Control whether the Governor in Council in India had corn-
plete authority to prevent the conveyance of the natives
of India fur the purpose of being employed in the West
India settlements ; and if not, whether it was the intention
of Government to pass an Order in Council forbidding
such conveyance for the period of two years, or any other defi-
nite period.
Sir J. C. HOB HO USE said, 'in answer to the two ques-
tions put by the Right Hon.. Baronet, he had no hesitation iu
saying—it was his opinion at• least--that there could be
no doubt whatever that the Governor-General had_ the
power adverted to by the Right Honourable Gentleman.
He and the Council had the power of making laws for India.
and nothing could upset those laws but their abrogation by
the Home Government. With respect to the other question he
bad to say that in consequence of the view taken by her -
Majesty's Government it was the intention of the Court of
Directors to lose no time, but forthwith to issue an order for
the purposes mentioned by the Right Hon. Gentleman. .
Mr. G. PALMER then rose to make the motion of which
he had given notice.
Mr. P. THOMSON apprehended that the Hon. Member
was violating the orders and understanding of the House its
persevering- in his motion.
The SPEAKER said the motion could only ha brought
forward on Supply days.
After a short discussion, Mr. Palmer gave way.
IRISH POOR LAWS.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL having moved the Order of tbe
Day, for the consideration of the Lords' Amendments to the
Irish Poor-law Bill,
The SPEAKER said. it was his duty to state to the -
House what -had taken place relative to these amendments.
It was usual when amendments were proposed to be made
tendiog to touch the
'privileges of the House to con-
sult the Speaker on the sabject. The amendments
which had been made had - been laid before him,
and his opinion asked—his answer was that he did
consider them as contrary to the rules of the House. The
Bill was introducing a great novelty in the laws of
Ireland, and it was, therefore, in his opiniOn,' neces-
sary that they should not press the strict rule, otherwise
they would take from the House of Lords any power
of considering laws of such importance. There were two .
precedents for considering these amendments ; they were the
cases of the English Poor-law Bill and the English
Municipal Bill, and very probably the House would think
the reasons now pressing as valid as upon those
occasions. As a general rule he thought the roles and privi-
leges of the House were best secured when not too far
stretched. He had done his duty, and it remained with. the House to take what step it pleased in the matter.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that no doubt the rule which the
Right Hon. Gentlenian had stated did materially affect the
consideration of this question. There certainly were amend-
ments introduced which went fully into the question of rating
and the disposal of money ; but he hoped the House would
consider them as amendments intended rather to further the,
object of the House of Commons in the Bill which it sent up.
That Bill had been adopted after very great consideration, .
and its provisions had been agreed to by a great majority of
that House. On the third reading of the Bill 234 voted for,
and 95 against, the third reading. He wished to bring
before the attention of the House the chief of those amend-
ments, and to ask Honourable Members to give their con-
sideration to them. On the whole he thought. considering
the very great importance of the Bill, the number of provi-
sions necessary to carry its object into effect, and considering
the great diversity of opinion as to the plan to be adopted
(even supposing the principle of the Poor-law to be adopted),
the amendments made by the Lords were fewer in number and
less extensive in principle than might have been expected.
There were, however, two or three of sonic importance,
and one of which made some approximation to a law of set-
tlement in Ireland, dividing it into electoral divisions, -the
persons coining from each • of • which should he relieved at the
charge of his particular division, and not at the charge of the
whole Union. He doubted much the effect of this provision, • and feared it would either be inoperative or impracticable. At
the same time he could not deny that there was the great-
est advantage in saying' that certain districts should be liable -
to the suppert of the poor of- that district; it would giee rea-
son for greater vigilance, and supposing that the Union were
very extensive, would ensure a better attendance to the wants
of the poor than the coneernrof the whole Union. He there-
fore proposed that the Hon% should agree to this amend_
made by the Lords in this part of the Bill. There were also
amendments in a clause relating to medical charities, and also
one something in the nature of a Vagrant Act, respect- •
ing the desertion of, a wife and child, or of a husband*
and father. Another amendment was that which had
been mentioned by the Right Honourable Gentleman in
the Chair, as one which might probably be considered as •
affecting the privilege of that House. This amendment was,
the omission of the clause, regarding the 5/.. occupying
tenants, and the • substitution of another. - Meording ,to
diel, Bill, as) sent up from that House, the occupying ten-
ants under 3/. were, in the first instance,-to pay the rates, but
had the power afterwards to charge it to the landlords. The
House of Lords by striking out that clause had made it neces-
sary that those persons should pay a rate, at the. same time
that they proposed another clause, by which an arrangement
might subsequently take place between the landlord and the
tenant. The Member for Leitrim (his Noble Friend Lord
Clements) was steadily of opinion that the owners of even the
smallest property in Ireland should not be positively ex-
empted from taxation. The House of Lords had taken a simi-
lar view to his Noble Friend. With regard to this amendment
he ( Lord J. Russell) did not think it was one which should,
give rise to a difference of opinion between the two HOUSCF,
and therefore he proposed that it should be agreed to. Con-
sequent upon this was a clause regarding the scale of.voting,
which he should afterwards call attention to ; as likewise to
the schedule which he would propose to simplify; reducing it
from twelve to six columns. Having stated his views regarding
the general alterations made by their Lordships in the Bill, he
should only say that he did not think that they went to imputo
the principles established by that House, and that he saw toss. thing to induce them to refuse to consider and items the r,reater
portion of those amendments. - There was another, 'alteration
respecting the officers in Dublin. He should thr,refore move
that these amendments be read.
Upon the 11th clause being read,
Lord J. RUSSELL said he should propose to add to the
words conferring power upon one of the Commissioners in case of the absence of the other, the words " with the appro-
bation of her Majesty's principal Secretary of State," and
strike out, in a subsequent part of that amendment, the words
" acting in Ireland."
Mr. G. PALMER objected to the powers given to tl-,,y.
Commissioners by this clause. The Commissioners here, 'act-
ing under the Secretary of State, might receive all thr:Ar in-
formation from Commissioners sitting in Ireland, and, acting
under the controul of the Lord Lieutenant of that country:
They would not see with their own eyes, but 'through the
eyes of others. The Noble Lord might rest 'Assured that the
public would not be satisfiea that the ComAissioners should
be invested with the* exclusive powers coeferred on them '
by this Bill. N.e should oppose the amendment of the:-
Noble Lord.
After a few words from Mr. O'CONNELL, the amend-
ment was agreed to.
It was then proposed to leave out the words "acting in
Ireland."
Sir J. GRAHAM objected to this amendment. As the
clause stood, it was proposed that those Commiseioners, to
whom such large powers were given, were to be resident in
Ireland. If these words were left out, that. presumption)
would be taken away. The Commissioners might, if tire
change were made, delegate their powers to a Commissioraer
who had never been in Ireland, or to some assistant Coni- "
inissioner.
Mr. O'CONNELL concurred in t:de sotw taken by the
Right Hon. Baronet, and did not r
,pp
rove of the alteration •
proposed by the Noble Lord. '
After a short conversation, , •
Lord STANLEY sugg,Aed the insertion of the words
" provided such Assistant
-Commissioner shall be at the time
actitig in Ireland," inseead of the words proposed by the . .
Noble Lord.
Lord J. RUSSELL -
posal of the Noble• Lord.
The amendmpt'was then agreed to. . .
The other amendments were then gone through, seriatim,
and, with some slight verbal amendments, the several clauses
were agreed to in the shape in which they came down from the
other House of Parliament.
REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS BILL.
On the motion that this Bill be read a third time,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had a clause to intro;
duce, respecting which he had consulted the Hon. Member
for Aylesbury, who concurred as to its expediency. In bring-
ing forward the Bill, he wished to move a clause by way, of
rider, which would
,obviate all the difficulties that bad been
started as to the measurement of distance. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman then moved a clause to the effect that the
seven miles should be computed by the nearest public way ;-
either by land or water.
Colonel SIBTHORP objected to the proposed clause, as. ,
being calculated to injure the rights of freemen.
Mr. ROUND concurred in the opinion of the Hon: and
Gallant, Gentleman, and would press the House to 7 division.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the clause 5O
.18 Against it

Majority
The clause was consequently added to the Bill.
Colonel SIBTHORI' moved for leave to bring up an
amended'elause with regard to the mode by which the admea-
surement of the seven statute miles shall be computed or taken
ir. conformity to the thirty-second section of an Act passed in
the second year of the reign of his late Majesty King William
the Fourth.

The clause was negatived without a division, and the BM
was read a third time.
ECCLESIASTICAL
lON APPOINTMENTS SUSPEN-
S BILL.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the House went
into Committee on this Bill.
On clause I being prodosed,
Mr. GOULBURN objected altogether to the Bill.
Colonel ;SIBTHO P thought the rights of those parties
should be respected.
Lord J. RUSSELL would give the matter his fullest con-
sideration.
• After a few words from Mr. ikglionby, Mr. Goulburn, and
Lord .1. Rutsell, the clause way, agreed to.

.~~.-'
. ~~::~~ .