The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-30 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION

the whole number of unions in Ireland—that is, 135.
Now, then, admitting that towns would give a.constitu-
ency of 450,805, whereas the constituency of 40s. free-
holders was no more than 196,000—( Loud cheering.)
He supposed that the Noble Lord would tell bun that there
was a restriction in the leading clause. There was a re-
striction. Would the Noble Lord tell bun when he made
a large increase, and when he made the deduction,
what vrcold be the effect of that increase and
deduction. The Noble Lord had given them ostensibly
an enormous increase in the number of qualifying tene-
ments; smalls told them that the present evils var.! mainly
attributable to the unwillingness of the landlords to grant
leases. The sine qua non of the proposal of the Noble
Lord was that unwillingness, and it was in no degree
touched, for the cause which tended to disfranchise would
still operate as extensively as ever. He would not now
enter into the question of the importance of leases as
effecting the independence or otherwise of the Liter. His
own opinion was that with regard to the
,small class of te-
nements the existence of a lease would augment the de-
pendence of the tenant. It would increase the absolute
power of the landlord if he chose to let the tenant tun into
arrears, and therefore he belioved that the small class cf lease-
holders would be more in the power of the landlord than
the tenant-at-will. The question, however, had been fully
discussed before, and the merits of it were before the
House and the country. He objected to this clause because
he objected to the principle of the beneficial interest being
abandoned. He objected to the clause because tbeir was
ho certain evidence of the rate being a test of a sufficient
amount to the value of property. lle objected to the clause
because her Majesty's Government could not give them the
least idea of what the practical effect of this measure would
be. Of that they gave the House proof by first proposing
a 51. rating and then increasing it to nearly double that
amount. He objected to the clause because her Majesty's
Ministers had introduced that Bill with a baste and rash-
ness and want of considcra,ion which he thought was most
censurable. He would therefore conclude by stating that
he would give the most direct negative to the clause.
Mr. C. WOOD said, as he had been refe: red to by the
Noble Lord, he trusted the House would permit hint to
trespass upon its attention for a few minutee. His Noble
Friend bad represented the measure which he (Mr. C.
Wood) had proposed, as a measure of entensive disfran-
chisement. He begged to remind the House of the state-
ment he had before made on this subject—viz., that, as far
as he could gather from six or seven unions, it would leave
about one-third cf the present constituency. One of the
last papers which had been laid before the House, con-
tained the population of thirty-one unions, not including
towns which sent Members to Parliament. It contained,
also, the number of tenements rated at 20/. and upwards.
The population of those tbirty-one unions was as near as
possible one-fifth of the population of Ireland—viz.,
I.6oo,ooo—the number of tenements rated at 201. and up-
wards was 36,000; multiplying that number by five, the
total number of tenements rated at 20/. and upwards was
180,000. This would give the number of those, who
were returned as having a beneficial interest, 135,000.
It must be satisfactory to the House to know
that, if these accounts were to be relied upon,
the number of county constituents in Ireland, would, tak-
ing the sum at 201., be considerably more than doubled.
Now, he would simply state his objections to the clause.
It contained the restriction rendering a lease necessary,
which, in his opinion, rendered it impossible to provide,
and still more impossible to retain, an adequate number of
independent voters in Ireland. He (Mr. C. Wood) had
stated that opinion long ago to the Noble Lord (Lord
Morpeth), and that opinion had been confirmed by every
subsequent Report that had been laid on the table of the
House. It was with a view of removing that restriction
that his Noble Friend's amendment was intended ; and,
holding that opinion, and being anxious to remove
those restrictions, it would be extremely inconsis-
tent in him (Mr. Charles Wood) not to resist
a clause by which the restriction was continued. He was
aware that it was possible the rejection of the clause
might lead to the abandoment of the Bill, but he could
not avoid thinking, that under existing circumstances,
such a result was not to be deprecated. It was a clause
which, without the consent of Hon. Gentlemen opposite,
could not he passed into a law, and he believed nothing
was so pernicious as the angry discussion of Irish ques-
tions, which led to no practical result.—(Hear, hear.)
For the same reason, ho hoped the Noble Lord (Stanley)
would withdraw his Bill.--(" Oh, ob.") It proposed to
deal only with registration, while the evil was not in that,
but in the state of the franchise, and consequently any
Bill affecting the one only, could not remove the evil com-
plained of in Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) He entertained a
sanguine hope that the Ministers, having time to consider
the matter, might, on a future opportunity, introduce a
measure retaining as much as possible the present fran-
chise, and introducing another based upon leasehold and
rating qualification, by which means opposition might be
conciliated, and by which they might give to Ireland an
adequate and independent body of electors.
Mr. HUME rose amidst loud cries of " Oh, oh," and
" Divide." Ile said an appeal had been made to him
by the Hon. Member, and ho felt bound to answer it.
He had hoped to see the Right Hon. Baronet the Mem-
ber fur Tasnworth, rise with indignation to repel the in-
sinuation that no good measure towards Ireland could
pass without his sanction and approbation.—( Cheers and
laughter.) He was glad that the Right Hon. Baronet
had acknowledged by his cheering that such was the fact,
for it was moat important that it should go forth to the
world that the Right Hon. Baronet and his friends were
the strong opponents and the great impediments to all
useful legislation. In what position did the Right Hon.
Baronet stand last night when he voted for the leasehold
and the 81. qualification, and then, without one word of
explanation, he, and all behind him, were about to vote
against both. Let it be understood by the country that
the Right Hon. Baronet and his friends stood in the way
of every improvement.—( Laughter and cries of " Divide,
divide.") Parliament had ne right to put the franchise of
ono man into the hands of another.—( Loud cries of " Di-
vide, divide.") He should vete for the clause, on the
grcund that it was at all events giving the people some-
thing, however small.—(Laughter.) He had lived long
enough in this world.—(Laughter.) He had yesterday
charged Ministers with altering the Bill, but he was now
satisfied with the Noble Lord's explanation, that they had
done so for the sake of carrying some portion of good, and
he entirely agreed with the Noble Lord.—(Great laughter
and cheer...) As he bad blamed the Noble Lord he
thought it was only right to say that he was satisfied._
(Renewed laughter and cheers.) This ought to teach
the Noble Lord that he should not yield to the opposition
which was banded together to deprive Ireland of justice._..
(Renewed laughter and cries of " Divide.") He thought
the Noble Lord ought not to be twitted any more on that
ground.—( Laughter.) He was told that the Noble Lord
was to be in a minority to night, but of what consequence
was that.—( Cheers and laughter.) He dared to say
the gentlemen were all cock-a-hoop.—(Laughter.) The
Hon. Member's conclusion was not heard amidst the cries
of " Divide, divide."

Mr. O'CONNELL begged the indulgence of the
House for five sentences only. The Hon. Member for
Halifax had said that irritation in Ireland was a great evil,
and that it would be increased by angry discussion in that
House. Now he (Mr. O'Connell) thought it would be
worse if the people of Ireland believed they had no party in
the House—(Chcers)—or that their interests were
frittered away by men who felt their own inportance
to do good, and stood out on crotchctty notions
of their own. —( Cheers.) It was quite clear, and ad.
milled on all hands, that this clause would be negatived,
but it would do Ministers much good in Ireland. They
bad made an attempt to enlarge the constituency of Ire-
lan,d. The tranquillity of that country had Leen preserved
by their administrative impartiality—(Cheers)—by their
keeping partizans from power, and partial bigots from the
indulg,sece of their spleen.—( Much cheering.) The
Noble Lord opposite was said to bare some talent in serving
his fete:: ;he had shown much more in serving his ene-
mies.— ( Much cimering.) He bad heard with pleasure the
Nobi Lord's statement of the increase which this clause
would wake in the constituency. He hoped the Ministers
would take a hint from the Noble Lord, and surely the
people of Ireland would ace that the Bill was much better
than they thought it, although the statement of the Noble
Lord was much exaggerated.—( Cheers.) He sat down
thanking the House for the attention with which ho kdd
been heard.
After a few words from Mr. H. GRATTAN mid Mr.
Fist nEN, amidst great interruption,
Strangers were ordered to withdre.,) and the House
divided, when the numbers were—

For the clause... .......
e claw e . •
Majority n
?'
- g.nst the clause ....••• j
Lord .I*RU then addres,sed the House as 10-
lows :—Sir, the House cannot be et a loss to im-
agine the courts t hich we mean to pursue after the vote
which "3.1,114 lice', come to by the House. We have al.
ways stre.eil that the clause which has now been rejected
by the House is the principal clause of the Bill, and the
fourAtation on which tue superstructure of the Bill rested.
but, Sir, before I put any motion in your hands I may,
perhaps, he permitted by the Committee to make
a very few observations on tha course that has been
pursued, and the grounds that have hecn taken for the re-
jection of this clause. And ht me say, in the fist place,
that I should nut be at all scrprised—that 1 shall feel no
cause of complaint that thi4 clause, containing a different
test of the franchise from that w'alch has been established
by the settlement of 1829, on. the subject of the privileges
of the Roman Catholics, Ana by the settlement of 1832,
with regard to parliar,ewary representation—that on the
first proposal of c:ach an alteration the House should be
unwilling to ;sive to it their sanction; but what does seem
to me cffer some ground of complaint is tt at
"hit I have stated just previously to the division,
t'.,at I do net think the grounds on which the clause has
been rejected by the Right Hon. Gentleman, by the
Noble Lord and the party which sits opposite, have been
Intl Iligible, either to the Government or the House. I
can understand saying—" We shall stand on the principle
of the beneficial interest—we shall stand on the interpreta-
tion of the Acts of 1829 and 1832, and we will admit no
deviation from them. " I can also understand those who
say —4* We do not approve of the leasehold tenure which
Is contained in your clause, and we prefer an occupation
franchise in any charge that is to be made." But so far
as I could understand Hon. Gentlemen opposite they at-
tempted:to do that which is inconsistent and incompatible—
that is to say, they took both of these lines--they say they
will not depart from the principles of the Acts now

. _
in force, and that they require a profit in the
land, and a beneficial interest, while in the same breath,
and in the same voice, they have said that they ere ready
to admit, if a change is to be made, a franchise wLich
would have no beneficial interest, no profit, and which did
lot contain the principles of the present Act. So far,
therefore, and so far only is it that I have reason to be
surprised, not at the decision which has been come to, but
at the grounds which had been stated for that decision.
Sir, in speaking further of those who oppose the Bi.l on
those grounds, let me say in addition, that if you are not
now prepared in any degree to modify the franchise, if you
thick that the mode in which the Government has pro-
pored to modify the franchise is objectionable, and if you
think that there is no other convenient mode which has yet
been proposed in the House, or that the state of circumstances
4n Ireland does not at present justify any new arrange-
ateat of that franchise, that if such be your principle,