The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-16 00:00:00

charge, and of which he had said in that letter, " I do not
believe one farthing to be due from them." He begged their
Lordships' attention to this, and wished to know how any
gentleman could have given a more positive denial to the
imputed facts than that which he had just read;
but yet the public prints, in alluding to, it had repre-
sented it as rather an escape than a positive and honest
contradiction of the charge. His Lordship then con-
cluded the remaining part of the letter, He then added that
he was not satisfied with having written that letter,
but he had desired the rate-collectors to furnish him
with the names of all the tenements of which
he was the lessor, and the statement whether he
was liable or not for rates on any of them. He
found that the total amount of rate on property in his hand
was but 60L, and there was about 451. on property leased by
other tenants, but that was not in his owe hand, and
he was not liable for it. There was some 101. or
141. more which he confessed he could not ac-
count for. There was property of his which at present
was in beneficial occupation by another, the rate on which
amounted to some 101. or 141., and he was quite certain that
not a half, not a third, of that amount remained unpaid. He
was sure their Lordships would recollect his situation as a
landlord, that he was himself a large occupier of land and of
farms to a great extent, but on all that property
which remained in his own occupation there
had not been any rates due for months
and months past. He begged distinctly to be understood, that
he took this opportunity of positively stating, that there was not
a farthing due on the property in his own occupation, as he
himself well knew, having personally inspected the
rate-books of the board of guardians. The next
charge which had been made against him, was
the shutting of the Castlebar union workhouse. He said the
circumsiances were these ; he went over to Ireland about the
close of last session and attended a Board of Guardians.
He was present at a meeting of his tenants, where
he was requested to come over to her Majesty's
Minister and to represent the state of the country.
On the Bth September he had returned to Ireland, and at-
tended a board of guardians, when he was told that all the
contracts for the house were expired ; that no tenders had been
mrde ; and that there was no chance of any tenders being made
as there was not a farthing with which to pay. A
conversation ensued, representing the difficulties of the position
in which they were, when something was said about shutting
up the house, and he said in reply that he would ease them of
their difficulties, and keep the house for them. That
occurred on the 20th of September. As to what
had been said about applicants for relief having been turned
away, or having received inadequate relief; he was certain
that no such occurrence had taken place, neither had any one
been turned away, nor had any one been sent away with in-
adequate relief, and that was said by those who had been
present at every meeting of the board of guardians since 1840.
Now the real facts of the case were, that although the House
was capable of accommodating 600 persons, until this famine
the outside number that had ever been received was 170.
And this was not the case at Castlebar only, but
at all the other houses the same rule had prevailed.
He remembered that by the return which had
been made of the several houses in Ireland, in which (he houses
in Dublin were conjoined, the actual number received was not
more than from seventy to a hundred. On the 28th September
the guardians at Castlebar had made contracts which were to
go until the 24th October. This went on till that day when it
was found that the amount that remained unpaid was up-
wards of 1,2001 The rates, it was true, ought to have been
collected, and if they were not so, it was the fault of the col-
lector and nobody else ; and had it not been that that he ( Lord
Lucan) kad kept the poor, could not have been sustained.
There was a debt due to the treasurer, and it was evident that
if 5001. or even 300/. was collected, it was necessary to pay
that amount te the treasurer. They had no opportunity
whatever of stopping the money in transitu. This matter went
on till the 24th of October, and the only chance they had was
to get in the money from 'the rates, to prevent the people
from throwing their children on the parish. On that day there
was a resolution come to, that unless the Government would
step in and grant relief, or the Commissioners would put them
in the way of obtaining the means, it would be utterly impos-
sible to grant admission to any more poor ; and had it not
been for him the house during the last four weeks would not
have been kept at all.

full ; whereby it has happened that very many of such desti-
tute poor persons have died of starvation, as the verdicts of nu-
merous coroners' inquests heldlwithin the said union attest?
If no effective legal responsibi ity or obligation to relieve the
destitute rests at present on Irish boards of guardians, to ark
whether her Majesty's Government do snot intend to introducce
some effectual obligation of this nature into the Poor Relief
(Ireland) Bill, whereby security shall be taken, against such de-
nial of relief to the destitute poor of Ireland of ail classes in future?
Sir GEORGE GREY said that the best answer he could
give to the Hon. Gentleman would be to read the provisions of
the Act under which they were appointed. ( The Hon. Baronet
then read the sections of the Act, the substance of which was,
that when once the Commissioners had declared a workhouse fit
for the reception of the destitute poor, the board of guardians
were at their discretion to admit such as they deemed proper
subjects to the approbation of the Commissioners. Their was
a legal point raised as to the compulsory power vested
in the Commissioners, over the guardians, and
he had only to observe that the Commissioners bad exercised
all their power over the Castlebar guardians, for the purpose of
compelling them to afford relief. Their efforts, however, were
unavailing, and they were then about to dissolve them as a
board by the powers vested in them under the Act.
Mr. F. FRENCH desired to know whether his Hon. Friend
was aware that in the month of September last it was found
impossible to collect the rates, and the chairman, the Earl of
Lucan, took upon himself the whole expenses of the house?
Was the Right Hon. Gentleman aware that the hoard of guar-
dians framed a resolution, which they announced to the Poor-
law Commissioners, stating that ri was impossible to collect
the rate, and calling on them to sanction the borrowing of
money They had stated in that resolution that they were
ready to admit the entire number the house was capable of
containing if they had the means. The Commissioners were a
fortnight before they replied to the application, and they then
gave a general answer.
Sir G. GREY said that the report from the Commissioners
should be laid on the table, but at the same time he was bound
to state that, jading by that report, he had no reason to doubt
that the rates of the Castlebar union might have been much
better collected if .the guardians had done their duty.
NOTICES OF MOTION.
Mr. ETWALL moved to bring under the consideration of
the House the evidence given before the Andover Union Com-
mittee of last session, together with the report of that Com-
mittee.
Mr. BRIGHT moved for the appointment of a Select
Committee to inquire into the progress of the cultivation of
cotton in India.
Lord JOHN MANNERS moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to alter and amend the laws relating to the disposition of
property for pious and charitable purposes.
Mr. GRATTAN moved for returns of the absentees from
Ireland ; the annual value of the property of all absentees
assessed to the poor-rate ; and the amount of all annuities
payable to any person not resident in Ireland.
Sir C. NAPIER moved for the production of a copy of the
report of officers appointed to make a trial of Capt. Warner's
long range, addressed to the Master-General of the Ordnance.
COMMITTEE ON THE NAVIGATION LAWS.
On the motion of Mr. RICARDO to nominate the gentle-
men to be appointed on the Select Committee on the naviga-
tion laws,
Mr. WAWN objected to the name of Mr. Bright, and
moved that it should be omitted. In looking over the list
he found the names of the representatives of the seaports
almost entirely left oat. He hoped, in order to give satisfac-
tien to all interests, that the name of the Hon. Member for
Manchester would be left out, and some other substituted.
Mr. FER RAND rose to protest against the constitution of
the Committee, as he found out of the list eleven Members
had voted in favour of free trade. He asked would the
country be satisfied with such a Committee to inquire into the
operation of the navigation laws. It was well known, there-
fore, that the Committee would report against the con-
tinuance of those laws as no longer necessary. On these
grounds he would decidedly support the motion of the Hon.
Member (Mc Wawn), and would divide the House with him,
even if he stood alone.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the Committee was a
fair one. It was thought right that the Vice-President
of the Board of Trade should be on the Cornmitce.
and if he understood the Hon. Member right, he did not object
to that. With regard to the name of the Hon. Mt tuber for
Durham being left out because he was a candidate for Man-
chester, he (Lard John Russell) never heard of such a thing
before.
Mr. FINCH was rot satisfied with the Committee.
It was well known that one of the principal petitions
which had led to the appointment of this Committee was from
the Manchester Chamber of Commerce. These petitioners
were in favour of free trade, and therefore the lion. Member
for Durham would act to secure their support. In fact they
were agreed that the navigation-laws should be repealed—
(Hear, hear.) Seeing the importance of every interest being
fully satisfied in the selection of the Committee, he hoped as
groat an approximation to impartiality as possible would be
made.
Mr. LIDDELL was sorry to hear from many of the Hon.
Members around him that there was no chance of the country
being satisfied with this Committee. Application had been
made to him in the first instance to serve upon the first
Committee that had been appointed, but that ap-
plication he had respectfully declined ; but having
seen the good temper and feeling with which the Right Hon.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had suggested the recon-
struction of it, and the fairness with which the mover had
acceeded to that suggestion, he (Mr. Liddell), en his being
again requested to allow his name to be placed on that
Committee, he at once consented. He did not doubt that the
country would be satisfied with the constitution of the Com-
mittee, and, as far as he was concerned, he could assure the
House that he only wished for a fair and impartial inquiry.
Mr. BROWNRIGG said, that he was one of the Hon.
Members who was, on the first instance, asked to form one of
this Committee, and as he had not tak .n part in the division,
he might, perhaps, for there reasons, be allowed to address one
or two observations to the House. He had, for more than
a quarter of a century been engaged in commercial pursuits,
and he was, therefore, in possession of some information that
might be considered useful in the consideration of this question.
He did not throw this out as a warning to the Members of the
Committee, whom the Noble Lord lad described as being
divided into two classes, one of them being persons who
would vote for the maintenance of the navigation laws; what-
ever evidence they might hear, and the other persons who
would vote against them, whatever evidence they might hear.
Sir HARRY VANE trusted the Honourable Member who
had made the motion would not persevere in dividing the
House.
Mr. WALLACE said he would persist in doing so, even if
he went out alone.
Mr. BERESFORD explained that in the list he made
out the name of the Honourable Member for Boston
appenred, but it was withdrawn at the request of the Hon.
Member for the city of London, who was anxious, as he had
previous been chairman of a similar Committee, to be placed
on the present one. He represented to the Hon. Member that
his health was not such as to admit of his going through the
fatigue of a committee man, but the Hon. Member differed
with him on that point.—(Hear and Laughter)—and of course
he had no alternative but to put his name on the list.
Mr. BROIV RIGG did not wish it to be understood that he
complained of not being put on the Committee.
Mr. V. SMITH objected to the practice of placing on
Committees an equal number of Members for or against the
the particular question referred to them. The reason why the
Committees of that House did not arrive at any satisfactory
conclusion arose out of the improper mode of nominating these
Committees of Hon. Members, who went into the Committee
ABiaLr.ionrAgdis AdmiralGl
.Del rr:RGEnr IdAiNbua
with opinions biassed either to one side or the other.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, no division, how.
ever, took place, the amendment having been withdrawn.
141 r. M'Carthy, Mr. Thomas
The following names were then nominated on the Select
M. Bright, Sir G. Clerk,
Committee:—Mr. Ricardo, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Mitchell,
(IRELAND) BILL.
Alderman Thompson,
rll.Liri.aidiVid,iiell,iers, Sir Howard Douglas,
enelL ilAArlKYSpresented petitions from a relief com-
mittee of the county of Wexford ; also from the counties cf
Down and Armagh, in favour of the proposed measure for fa-
cilitating the construction of railways in Ireland.
MODE OF PUNISHMENT ADOPTED BY THE
BOARD OF WORKS IN IRELAND.
MWnotssky.sste inRR lEN said he would beg to draw attention
°m
to a °I punishment enforced by the Board
of Ireland. When an outrage toak place
in a district, the whole population resident in it
were thrown out of employment. He did not know
whether it was the origival iatentton of the House to admit such
a principle, but this he would say, that it was a most
cruel and barbarous punishment. In consequence of an
ar d boys were thrown out of employment.
outrage committed by eight armed men upo.o an
overseer of public works in the neighbourhood of
inflicted upon the overseer, whose name
slight scratch on his ear, occasioned by a
the county he had the honour to represent, two hundred
s
bwaTlnaoh:we rBEefBri men,mwomas tse women,inja
buttu injury
end of a gun.—( A laugh.) The incident
occurred on the 22d day of last January, and was verified to
him by the letter of a most respected Catholic arch-deacon.
They were aware that by an order issued in October by the
Board of Works the overseers were authorized to dismiss the
men on any public work on which violence should have been
offered to any officer engaged. This was a most arbitrary
power to place in the hands of the overseers. 288 persons em-
ployed upon the Kilmaimham-road were dismissed upon the
instant, and a list was furnished to the relief committee with
the view of excluding them from any other public works. This
dismissal affected nearly 900 person, and a torture was in-
flicted upon them, with a view of extracting evidence to im-
plicate the authors of the attack upon the overseer. 850 of
those tortured did not know the offenders, and had perhaps
never seen them. Of this 288 dismissed, some were boys, and
some destitute widows, who had no other resourse but to sit
by the road aide, and break stenes under the sky of January.
In the parish of Ballingarry, the slave torture was inflicted on
aged men, women, and children, to discover that which
it was impossible one out of fifty could have known. One of
these persons was a blind piper. The victims expressed
no malice, but requested that they might be allowed to go to
the workhouse. It was desirable, as it was said, to inspire in
these wretches a sentiment of respect for the law for the time
to come; so starving fathers were, by their dismissal, obliged to
see their children wanting food without being able to assist them.
He had heard of one instance in which 500 families had been
reduced to absolute famine from the suspension of public
works. His object in rising was to know from the Right
Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary for Ireland, whether the Go-
vernment sanctioned the proceedings to which he had referred ?
Mr. LABOUCH ERE said it would have been but right for
the lion. Member to have. given notice of his intention of
bringing the subject forward, and then he would have been
prepared to meet the statement. But with regard to the
general policy of the Government, it was undoubtedly
true l
necessary, for the protection of their servants, and as a duty
required of them in order to protect the lives and persons of
that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland had found it was absolute y
their officers, to lay it down as a rule that whenever
the labourers, in any instance, injured their officers,
and where there was good reason to believe that the
offending parties were, known to any of the other labourers,
to suspend the works till such time as information
was given respecting the offenders.—(Hear, hear.) Ile
licon-
fessed be had been astonished at hearing the; Hon. Member ap-
prove of the sentiments contained in the letter which he bad
read. lie would not yield to the Hon. Member in real sym-
pathy for the Irish people, but at the same, time he must say it
was the duty of the Goveinment to see that in pro-
viding for the employment of the people of that
country, that their servants were protected.—( Hear, hear.)
The Lord Lieutenant believing that that was the only effectual
means of protecting the officers of the public work, was to lay
down that rule, and to act upon it, and the result had
fully proved the wisdom of that course.—( Hear.) Many
of these outrages had taken place,
and the perpetrators of
them had escaped unpunished; but he was happy to say, that on
a recent occasion, when an attack on a public officer bad taken
place, the labourers on the works did not only not sympathise
with and assist the perpetrators of the outrage, but actually
rose to defend the officer, and they pursued those persons and
took them into custody. lie was prepared to justify the conduct
of the Government in this matter, and he did not therefore be-
lieve that the House of Commons, to whom the lion. Member
bad appealed, would decide that the Government of Ireland
had not done its duty in affording that protection
to the officers of those public works to which they were
entitled, by giving the labourers on these works the deepest
interest in preventing outrages. He could not answer
the particular question asked him by the H 0110114140

WATER—WORKS.
Dividend Amount
Name of Company. per of I Paid. Price,
Annum. Share.
.£ s. d.
East London..• •••• • • • 81. 100 0 0 202 ad
Grand Junction ••• • • • 3/. 108. 41 13 4 90
Kent ................ 21. 108. 100 0 0
Vauxhall 5/. per cent. 100 0 0
West Middlesex . . . 51.105. pr en:. 63 12 9 130

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BEACH,Teb. 15.

FISHER V. ASIFWELL.
Only two special jurors answered to their names. The
Clerk of the Court inquired if a tales were prayed ?
Mr. litrowl.r:s, who led for the plaintiff, said he did not
wish to pray a tales. He apprehended that, as the eause
had been arranged, there was no need of completing the
ju'
Lord
DENMAN —lf you want a verdict, you can't have it
without a jury.
Mr. KNowLEs hinted at the desirability of saving expense.
Lord DENMAN—That is all very well in its proper place ;
but there is another consideration. Parties have been sum-
moned to attend here, and bare come day by day, probably
at great inconvenience. I don't like to deprive them of the
little advantage that they are entitled to.
A tales was then prayed, and the number of twelve having
ben completed by common jurors,
Mr. KNOWLES said that this was an action brought by
the plaintiff against one of the directors of the Staffordshire
Potteries and Liverpool and Manchester Direct Junction
Railway to recover a sum of money paid upon shares. Since
the commencement of the action the matter in dispute had
been arranged. The plaintiff was now satisfied by explana-
tions given that there was no cause of action against the
defendant, and it was agreed that a verdict should be taken
for the latter, the plaintiff making a public acknowledgment
in Court that there was no imputation.
A nominal verdict was taken for the defendant.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 15.
(Sittings at Guildhall, before Mr. Justic. COLTMAN).
CRIII. CON.—HAWKES V. MOORE.
ion
verdict
Mr. went
srtetoitacispieeer,c,p, wsoisah;
nem: dAN sdt
iaminotnmacgeodenscu:u
pi
oeadln.
dw ht
he ne
jouurry
raThirdtur
nle?,d a
d i -

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 15.
POOR-LAW AMENDMENT.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from Mount Mellick, in the Queen's county, praying for
union settlements.
IRISH DESTITUTE RELIEF BILL.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, in rising to move
the second reading of this Bill, he did not intend to detain
the House, but merely to state the general principles of the
Bill; and he would first state that the Bill was limited
in its character, and temporary in its duration, and it
was a Bill which, he considered, was only justified by
the present state of Ireland. The B;11 empowered the
Lord-Lieutenant to appoint a relief commission, sitting
in Dublin, who were empowered to relieve deslitution''.
The Noble Lord then read the main provisions of the Bill. I
Rio had the pleasure of stating that the Bill was solely