The Sun.
London, England, 1840-02-26 00:00:00

lutions proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite.
The Hon. Member, the Chairman of the East India Com-
pany, did not ask to pledge the House to the resolutions,
but only to go into a Committee upon them. The Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade had attempted to justify the
course pursued with respect to coffee. He could not agree
with him in that,for he could not see why thesame rule should
not be applied with respect to Indian as to African coffee.
Tobacco was now imported even at the high duty ; si for-
tiori, more would be imported if the duty were lowered,
and low duties were good because they prevented the de-
moralizing effects of smuggling. It would be useless for
them to equalize the duties upon sugar without, at the same
time, equalizing those upon rum. With respect to the
question of the tea duties, he would be most sorry to see
any difference made even in favour of our Indian posses-
sions ; it would be giving her a false protection, which
would rapidly desert her, and he must oppose it as it would
be retrograding from the pure principles of free trade. He
rejoiced to see the increasing importation of cotton from
India. India could produce almost any quantity of the
very finest cotton, and if permanency were given to the pos-
sessions of the Ryots, as in the case of the indigo planters,
that country would be enabled to supply the
increasing demand of this country. In considering
that question, it was most important also to consider the
question of transit. He understood that landing duties
were still exacted at Madras. It would be almost useless
to lower the duties unless they facilitated at the same time
the transit of goods, by remcving all landing duties, and
greatly improving the roads in India. Care ought also to
be taken for the permanent settlement of British subjects
in India, so that British skill and enterprise might assist
and regulate the natural productions of the country. They
would also have a rising English population ready at any
time to check aggression, come from what quarter it might.
In Van Diemen's Land we supplied the inhabitants to the
amount of 201. each per annum. In Sydney they took of
our manufactures to the amount of 121. each. None of
our Colonies took less than to the amount of 1/. 10s. per
head. But our supplies to India did not average 7d. per
head. Let them develope the resources of India, and she
would make a large outlet for our manufactures. He
could not withhold his consent to the House going into
Committee, not pledged to the resolutions of the Hon.
Gentleman, but with the intention of examining and pass-
ing those that were approved of.
Sir J. C. HO B HOUS E said the Hon. Chairman of
the East India Company, and the worthy Director who
seconded the motion, had done him no more than justice
in saying that he had, to the best of his abilities. endeavoured
to do what he could for the advancement of the mighty
empire of India. The Directors of the East India
Company had requested him to support the prayer of
the petition, and he thought be should be fulfilling not
his pledge, for he had given none, but he thought he
would be showing that his inclination now was such as it
had always been, by the proposition which he would
shortly submit to the House. It was very true, as stated
by the worthy Director, that he found himself in that
situation which every President of the Board of Control
must find themselves in—that was, that between two
attractions, that of his Hon. Friend's opposite, and his
colleaguee on the other. His connection with the Go-
vernment obliged him to consider other interests, while
he was only anxious to consider those of India,
but on the present occasion he would be enabled
to satisfy his Honourable Friends that the course
to be proposed by the Government was the best
that could be taken. The same petition which had been
presented by his Hon. Friend to that House had been pre-
sented by his Noble Friend the President of the Council
in another place, and there the Government had con-
sented to a Committee, which would be presided over by
the Noble Lord who was his predecessor at the Board of
Control, all of which was a proof that the Govern-
ment were fully alive to the claims of Mid. The pro-
posal of his Hon. Friend was that the House should
on Wednesday next be called upon to affirm or
deny the propositions he had made. He believed it
was the first time that it had ever been proposed
by a series of resolutions, to make a total change upon the
mode of levying the duties upon all articles of importation.
It would be impossible to come to a proper decision—it
would be, indeed, taking a leap in the dark ; he should
not like to give a positive negative to any one of the re-
solutions ; but he was quite certain, that if they were to
go into a Committee of the whole House, there would be
a great chance of some of those resolutions receiving a
negative which it did not deserve. With respect to the
question of coffee from Mysore, the English Government
certainly had the administration of the civil affairs, and, to
all intents and purposes, they were the masters of Mysore;
but they held it only as trustee for the Rajah, and he was
compelled, after having taken a legal opinion, to
come to the conclusion, that by no technicality
could that country bo called a British possession.
This subject ought not, with reference to many things, in-
deed could not, be decided in an open Committee. He
mentioned this, to show, in his opinion, to refer these re-
solutions to an open Committee, and come to a regula r
aye or no on general principles of taxation, would not only
not insure the object, but would be:a violation of the forms
of the House. Now he was quite prepared to propose, and
he hoped it would be satisfactory to his Hon. Friend, and
show him he was equally interested in the great interests
of our Indian possessions, to adopt the same course pur-
sued by the House of Lords, and was willing that a Select
Committee should be appointed of that House, the selec-
tion of which he was quite willing to leave to his Hon.
Friend the Chairman of the East India Company, and that
an investigation should be gone into of all the allegations
contained in the petitions and resolutions. He thought
this proposition was just and fair, and would meet all rea-
sonable wishes, and do all that could be done by a Parlia-
mentary inquiry. But if the Committee were assembled,
he must suggest that they would not attempt to embrace
several topics. He thought it right to say that the pe-
tition itself would be referred to the Committee, and that
no foreign proposition should come before it. But, however,
he would take the liberty of saying, as it had been alluded
to by his Hon. Friend behind him, that neither the Go-
vernment in India nor the home authorities had at all neg-
lected to pay attention to the several parties alluded to.
Take as an instance the great improvement that had taken
place since the appointment of Lord Auckland in the
transit duties, which in Bengal and Bombay had been
entirely abolished, and in Madras partially. Another thing
that would be inquired into, was cotton His Hon. Friend
was aware that Government had paid the greatest attention
to this important matter, not merely with respect to duties,
but as to cultivation. In consequence of information given by
several deputations, and in consequence of the enlightened
views of the Board of Directors, this object had been
greatly facilitated. They had also endeavoured to get the
best information from America, and when the time had
arrived he would lay before the House a valuable docu-
ment respecting the improvement of the cotton trade,
which, he believed, was in partial circulation, and which
alone would show that the Government had neglected no
means with respect to the improvement which the in.
creasing demands of the Indian and British public ren-
dered indispensable. His Hon. Friend had alluded to
another topic which would not come before the Com-
mittee, that of a permanent land-settlement. He objected
to a subject of this sort being referred to a Committee of
the House of Commons, but this went to show that the
Indian Government had not neglected its duty, and that
in the north-western Provinces, steps had been
taken for improving that settlement, and for
promoting the land assessment, which had been perfectly
successful, notwithstanding the difficulty of the circum-
stances (he alluded to the drought which had taken place
in 1837) under which the experiment had been made,
which also proved the Government had shown itself sensi-
ble of the great charge committed to their care. His lion.
Friend had alluded to other points, which he thought it
unnecessary to enlarge upon, but in talking of the care
which Lord Auckland and the Government had given to
these great subjects, he might speak of the attention they
had given to the collection and amount of the salt revenue,
and, if time allowed, should be able to show what had been
done by the Court of Directors and the whole government
of India with respect to that most important branch of pub-
lic improvement—he meant steam navigation, to which
Lord Auckland had devoted his most careful attention,
and which, in unison with the Home Government,
he thought would tend to the improvement and add
to the prosperity of the country beyond the most sanguine
expectations of the most ardent imagination. If his Hon.
Friends opposite were prepared to accept the proposi-
tion he had made, it would be unnecessary to enter upon
further topics. He wished it to be established in the most
formal way the forms of the House would allow. He
would not trouble the House further, having made this
suggestion to his Hon. Friends, than to say they had done
their duty to their constituents, the Court of Proprietors,
and also to that large and important body of men—he
meant the hundred millions whose happiness, he thought,
were happily entrusted to their care.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. C. BUL L E R. said he was anxious to follow the
Right lion. Gentleman, the President of the Board of
Control, for a few moments, to impress upon those Gen-
tlemen who represented the Court of Directors, the pro-
priety of following the course he proposed. He had wit-
nes.ed nothing in the House more pleasing in any means,
than that of the Court of Directors coining forward in
that House with an application for a full and free trade for
those they were called to rule over, but he must
confess he concurred with the Right Hon. Gentleman oppo-
site, in thinking that the form in which the Court of Direc-
tors proposed it, was one imposing on the House too preci-
pitate a discussion on a subject of such importance,
for till this petition was presented to the House, neither
the House nor the country had any notice of the course
the Court of Directors were prepared to take; they were
prepared to expect from them what could be expected from
an enlarged policy, but not for the particular step adopted.
What they called for was a Committee of the whole House
to inquire into what was rightly denominated an entire
change in the fiscal system of the country. He should
have great difficulty in bringing himself to vote
either way on the proposal before the House ;
Ho concurred, as he had before said, in the principle of
free trade, and that they should not distinguish between
East and West Indian produce. But ho had heard no
argument against the principle of the great demand made
by his Hon. Friend on his side of the House—nothing
against the equalization of the duties on sugar and cotton.
He must advert to the argument of the Hon. Member for
Kilkenny, and begged the House to recollect the impor-
tant consideration he had mentioned, that they were apply-
ing the principle of free trade to India, and had brought capital
and English manufactures into the market, and had driven
the native out of it, and had imported manufactured calicoes
into India and refused to apply the principle of free trade
to goods imported from India. This was a monstrous in-
justice, and when he thought of the hardships which every
measure of free trade must have inflicted upon those whom
it deprived of bread by the competition with British artist.,
he thought we should give the natives all the protection free
trade would confer. Then he had heard no valid objection to
an equalization of the duty on goods imported from British
India, but all these were matters of detail, and they did not
object to the principle of admitting rum from India on the
same principle as from the West Indies, but urged that
they should admit other spirits, which would have an im-
portant
thought the course proposed by the Right Honourable
Baronet was the right one, to appoint a Committee to
inquire into the ctrcumstances of the case. Then take
the resolution respecting tobacco, the
,taxation on tobacco

was not protection or restriction, but one for the sake of
revenue. He understood that tobacco from the West In-
dies, being little in quantity, we had been able to allow a
smaller duty on that than on foreign tobacco. Now the
Board of Directors required not that the duty should be
equalised on all tobacco, but on that of the East and West
Indies—the efect of which would be, that East India
tobacco would displace Virginian. This was a mere ques-
tion of finance, and he could not consent to give up a
twelfth of the duty. He thought the subject of the Las-
cars navigating British vessels should be referred to the
Committee ; and the❑ as to the British possessions—how
could we say in the fiscal system they were British posses-
sions, and in diplomacy that they were not ?—( Hear,
hear, hear.) All these were difficult matters of detail,
and if called upon to vote for such propositions as these,
he twist rote against them ; but if to go into a Committee,
he should certainly vote for that proposition, in the hope
of carrying into effect the laudable object of the Court of
Directors in bringing the question before the House.—
( Hear, hear. )
Mr. WARBURTON concurred in the advice given
by the Board of Directors, but he thought, on the present
debate, they were rather discussing principles than mat-
ters of detail, and he asked the House whether or not it
was not lamentable that they should be discussing ques-
tions whether or not they should carry on the greatest
trade possible with our greatest Colonies. The question
was not whether they should use the tobacco of Virginia
or the East Indies, but whether, having made a vast out-
lay to obtain Colonial empire, we should refuse to receive
a return for that capital. If we succeeded in establishing
a colony—there was a great boasting of the magnitude of
this event —of the great armament, and the
extensive amount of exports necessary for a first settlement
—but when we came to the question, whether or not the
mother country should receive a return for this great out-
lay, nothing but discouragements were heard of, and they
were advised not to admit the produce of this country, be-
cause it might interfere with the produce of some other
colony, as that at home. Was it not monstrous that they
should be discussing such matters of principle when they
had been so long glorifying themselves as being a great
commercial country ? It was a disgrace to the House of
Commons that they should be debating not matters of de-
tail but of principle. Whether Mysore could be consi-
dered a British possession or not, his Right Hon. Friend
acknowledged that he had complete civil and military pos-
session of the country, but did not acknowledge that we
could promote the growth of coffee there, and treat it as a
British possession, because we were only trustees of that
country. What, he asked, were the duties of trustees but to put
the estate entrusted to their care in the most flourishing
state they could ? Now, as to matters of interpretation ;
did they not hold that Madras was situated in the county
of Middlesex ; and if so, was not Madras a British pos-
session ? He remembered reading a conversation between
a British officer and Runjeet Sing, in which the officer
boasted we had 20,000 men who could march from one
end of India to the other. Then were we not bound to
give the greatest facility to the produce of that country?
What provinces in India were the worst governed ? The
tributary states; because they were deprived of the
power of rising against their Government. Were we
not bound, therefore, to relieve them by giving them an
opportunity of sending their produce to this country ?
If, therefore, we owed a debt to that part of India, which
was immediately subject to our rule, were we not bound in
a greater debt to those tributary states which bad suffered
more than other countries in consequence of our interfe-
rence? With regard to those parts of India which were
subject to our rule. A great part of their commerce con-
sisted in the remittances made by officers, residents there,
to this country. These remittances were the accumula-
tions of these officers out of the salaries which were paid
them by the natives of that country. It was the duty of
this country, therefore, to give the inhabitants of India every
facility of making these remittances by the means of
commerce. With regard to the question of allowing Lascars
to be considered as British seamen, he would beg leave
to refer his Honourable Friend, who seemed inclined to
dissent from that proposition, to the late Act, by which they
been deprived of the privilege which they before pos-
sessed. It was only as lately as July 1825, that the
Act was passed by which it was enacted that natives of
places within the limits of the East India Company's
Charter, should not be considered as British seamen—
therefore by granting the prayer of the petition, they would
be only reverting to the former practice—(No, no, from
Sir J. Hobhouse)—at all events they would be returning
to what had been formerly the law on that subject. He
was happy to find that his Hon. Friend, the Member
for Whitby, who was generally in favour of the strictest
measures for the protection of British navigation, did not
object to that proposal. Such a measure would be for
the encouragement of the interests of British navigation.
The number of ships trading to India would be increased.
and the British ship-owner would receive the benefit of
the provision. It might cause some diminution in the
wages of the seamen, but the shipowner would benefit by
it, the trading interest would benefit by it, and the
whole empire would benefit by it. He agreed with his
Hon. Friend in objecting to that part of the resolution
in which the Directors sought for the benefit of a differ-
ential duty between tea, the produce of Assam, and tea
the produce of China, and between tobacco the produce
of India, and that the produce of the United
States.—( Hear, hear.) He thought the petitioning
for such a protection was directly contrary to all
the principles by which it was sought to enforce the pre.
sent case, and he was sorry to see such questionable prin-
ciples mixed up with principles which were so worthy of
support. With regard to the duty on spirits he thought
it would be wise in the Directors to make common cause
with the West India interest, and claim a just reduction of
those duties as compared with the duties levied on British
spirits. This was not the first time that the subject of a
free trade with India had been made a subject of debate in
that House. Hardly a year had passed, of late, in which
many Hon. Members had not contended that the time had
arrived when these differential duties ought to be aban-
doned ; therefore the Right Hon. President of the Board
Control ought not to contend that the House had been
taken by surprise.
Sir J. C. H 0 BHOUS E had not done so.

Mr. WARBURTON had understood the Right lien.
Gentleman so to say; but if that were not the case one of
his arguments against the Court of Directors had been cut
from under his feet. He had understood him to say that
the House was taken by surprise by this proposition of the
Court of Directors. The case might be new as to some of
the details, but as far as the principle of the question went,
namely, that of putting the commerce with the East Indies
on the same footing with the commerce with the \Vest In-
dies, the matter had been debated again and again in that
House, and therefore it could not be said that they had been
taken by surprise. He hoped the Hon. Gentleman would
accede to the proposition of the Right Hon. President of
the Board of Control, and that the Committee would go
into the investigation as speedily as possible, and that they
would not be too long in bringing it to a conclusion, but
make a report, so that the House might, during the present
Session, be made acquainted with the result of their inqui-
ries, so as to lead to the adoption of some practical mea-
sure before the close of the Session.

Sir R. JENKINS, after the offer made by the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite, could not refuse to accede to
his proposition. He hoped with the Right Hon. Gentle-
man who had last spoken, that the Committee would come
to a quick decision, and he would say the only ground
why he had proposed to bring this question before a Com-
mittee of the whole Howe was, because he feared if he
had moved for a Select Committee it would have appeared
like a desire for deferring redress.
Tice original motion was then withdrawn, and on the
motion of Sir R. JENKINS, the petition was ordered
to be referred to a Select Committee, the Members of
which are to be named the day after to-morrow.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that the lateness of the pe-
riod at which Bills were sent up to the other House hav-
ing occasioned many Bills to be lost, he would, in order in
some measure to meet that objection, move, that after the
Ist day of June next Orders of the Day should take pre-
cedence of Notices of Motions on Thursdays.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said that as no special
circumstances had been stated on which to rest
the motion, he was fearful of its being drawn
into a precedent, and made the rule in all future Sessions.
He had no wish to throw difficulties in the way; but if
the Noble Lord would defer his motion until a short time
before Easter, he should most probably support him.
Mr. HUME said that, at a later period of the last Ses-
sion, the Noble Lord had brought forward a similar mo-
tion, by which he (Mr. Hume) was taken by surprise.
He thought that this might be considered as a notice of
motion to be brought forward hereafter, which would do
away with his objection. He was desirous of enabling
the Government to go on with their business if they would
go on with it, and therefore should not object to the
question.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL had brought forward the
motion thus early to meet the objection of the lion. Gen.
tleman, because he thought it improbable that any Member
contemplated a motion after the Ist of June. Parliament
had now been sitting six weeks, and only one and a half
evening of each week had been given to the Government.
Be did not agree with the reasons given for throwing the
Bills out in the other House of Parliament ; but still be
thought the objection a reasonable one, and ho brought
forward his motion in order to obviate it.

Sir ROBERT PEEL thought this was a question
materially affecting the House of Commons, and that they
ought not on light grounds to say that only one day in the
week should be afforded to Members for bringing forward
independent motions. He would advise the Noble Lord
not to bring forward his motion at so late a periud as to
intercept any motion, for when a Member had a motion
in gestation for a month or six weeks, he ought to be af-
forded an opportunity of bringing it forward. His only
wish was to avoid establishing a precedent. The motion
was then withdrawn, on the und.rstanding that it was to
be brought forward at a later period of the Session.
COMMERCE OF TURKEY.
Mr. HUME said that the House would recollect that
during the last Session there had been laid on the table a
copy of a treaty of commerce with the Sultan. No one
could be more anxious than he was for the increase
of our commercial connection—every new market that
was opened improved the prosperity of the country—but
this treaty, he understood, when applied to the provinces
which had formerly constituted part of the Ottoman em-
pire, was more likely to impede commerce than to forward
it. Before that treaty, British goods exported to, or im-
ported from, Turkey, were liable to a duty of 3 per cent.
In Turkey Proper there were various abuses and monc_
polies, and certain internal duties were, in consequence,
imposed, amounting, in some instances, to 30 per
cent. These were, by this treaty, done away
with, and a fixed duty of 9 per cent. imposed,
making 12 per cent., the outside charge ttlat could be
levied on British merchandise. This, which was a benefit
on Turkey Proper, was otherwise in Syria, Egypt, and
other parts where these abuses did not previously exist, in..
asmuch as England, by acceding to the treaty, was liable
to a duty of 12 per cent., while Russia, which had refused
to
object
His accedejct i
n bringing e t o it,s,as forward subject Duly
thist motion
o at l tw
of 3 per cent.
a to aster_
twin from the Noble Lord what was the actual state of the
case. France, Austria, and Sweden had agreed to this
Convention, but Russia had not ; and England could not
lae considered upon the same footing as the most favoured

nations, while Russian subjects paid a duty of 3 per
cent., and British subjects paid one of 12 per cent.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving for copies of any
correspondence with the Foreign Office, or the British
authority in the Levant, as to the continuance of mono-
polka agreed to be abolished by the Treaty of Commerce
with the Porte; and of any representations made as to the
increased duties levied by the said Treaty of Commerce in
the provinces of the Danube, or in Egypt and Syria. A
comparative statement or return of the rate of duties levied
in the Turkish empire, on articles exported and imported
by British and Russian subjects under the new Treaty, and
under the old one. Return of the rate of duties levied on
imports from, and of exports to, Great Britain in Turkey
Proper, and in the Turkish provinces of the Danube, and
in Syria and Egypt, previously to, and since the late
Treaty of Commerce with the Porte.
Lord PALMER.STON said that it was not his inten-
tion to object to the production of the papers that had
been called for. At the same time he begged to say in
explanation, that there might be some difficulty in fur-
nishing all the information that had been required. The
treaty had led to great changes in the commerce of
Turkey, and it might be difficult to furnish the amount of
the duties levied under it as compared with former times.
There had been different degrees of advantages produced
by it to the different provinces of Turkey, and some
' doubts might arise as to whether it would be for the bone-
fit of Turkey or of British commerce that the treaty should
apply to the provinces of the Danube. It was quite clear,
however, that if it should not be found advantageous to
either, there could be no difficulty on either side in not ap-
plying it in those parts. The treaty would effect a great
change in the trade of Turkey, and some time should
elapse before it could be brought fully into operation.
That time had not yet come, but as soon as it should ar-
rive he would give the House all the information he should
possess on the subject.
The motion was then agreed to.
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS IN IRELAND.
Lord STANLEY rose to bring in a Bill to amend the
laws relating to the registration of voters in Ireland. The
Noble Lord said, that though he had no reason to appre-
hend that any opposition would be made to the proposal
he was about to make, or that the permission hitherto con-
ceded to Members on both sides of the House of intro-
ducing Bills for the improvement of the laws relating to
Parliamentary registration of the electors, would be denied
him, yet the subject was one of so much importance that
he considered it proper to beg the indulgence of the
House while he stated, as shortly as he could, the princi-
ples on which he intended to proceed, and the main oh
jects he had in view, and within which alone his motion
was to be confined. In the first place he wished to assure
the House that it was his earnest desire that the question
should be discussed without any reference to party
feeling on either side of the House, and he
could say that there was no such feeling on that side
of the House from which the motion emanated. It had
been his fate to have been so much mixed up with'political
discussions, and particularly ins reference to the state of
Ireland, that if he had folloived the dictates of his own
judgment, he should have preferred that the motion should
have been brought forward by any other Member but him-
self, lest the circumstance of his introducing it might lead
to controversy or a feeling of excitement, which he must
sincerely wish to avoid. He was anxious, however, to
undertake the task, because he felt he would thereby be
fulfilling a pledge which he aright be supposed to have
formerly given, as the organ of Earl Grey's Administra-
tion. He had stated the grounds at that time on which
that Administration did riot contemplate any change in
the Irish registration. He was now aware that the mo-
tion should rest its wily chance of being ultimately
agreed to, and could onlj • be received by its being able to
bear the test of fear and even of unfavourable
criticism. Their English and Irish Reform Bills had
been on many account; necessarily different from one
another. The English Reform Bill had caused a total
abolition of the franchise in many towns in England, and
a partial abolition in no ally others. That part of the ques-
tion, however, as far as: it related to Ireland, had been al-
ready dealt with at the period of the Union. In the Irish
Reform Bill there hart been no disfranchising clauses—
there were no boroug' as deprived of the right of sending
Members to Parliament. The English Reform Bill had di-
minished the constituency of England by 13. The Irish
Reform Bill had, on the conteary, added five new consti-
tuencies to those already existing in Ireland. The English
Reform Bill had put certain res trictions on the tenure of
40s. freeholders. No alteration ve.;th regard to the 40s.
freeholders could have been made :n Ireland. The Irish
Reform Bill had given a qualificatkea for a shorter term
and for a smaller amount of interest the n the English Bill.
With regard to taking the polls at electie ns, a great change
had been effected by the English Bill, axed one which had
worked very beneficially—he meant the provision for
shortening the duration of polling at elections. It was not
on one side or the other of the House only that great
doubts prevailed at the time, and still p revelled, he be-
lieved, as to how far it might be expediont to introduce
the same provision into Ireland. Lastly, with regard to
the registration in England, there had not been before
the Reform Bill, any fixed system 'for the registration of
voters. It had constantly been in the power of the Le-
gislature to take what course they pleased upon that sub-
ject, unfettered by any precedent, and they had made
great, and he believed a successful, experiment for intro-
ducing a new system of registering in England. With
regard to Ireland, however, the ca le had been entirely dif-
ferent. The laws of registration • eith regard to freehold
tenures had subsisted for many years in Ireland, and
rested on one of the principal si atutes of the country,
and the system was one which had been gradually
amended at various periods.—( Bear, hear.) Under
these circumstances, it had be s,n thought advisable
to watch the progress of the gee at experiment which
had been made in this country, wiice .h had worked so sa-
tisfactorily, and not engage in a. : tens system till they
knew the results of the other expt riment. But it had
been intended by Lord Grey's Ges vernment, that after
having the advantage of a trial tb ay would take such
parts of it as could be adopted in, Ire land. He hoped he
would not be unnecessarily troub'.ing ti re House if he pro-
ceeded to allude to a point on v Jhich it were necessary to
enter into some details. He begged to submit to them
the many differences between the lawe of England and
Ireland, with regard to the s ystem of (registering voters,
He should say that the means res proposed .to be introduced
should be confined to regulati an of voters, and to that only.
He did not propose to deal, in any way with the elective
franchise in Ireland, and he e'dd not wish to urge the House
to express any opinion with regaird to those disputed points
of law; any attempts to sett he which could produce but one
result, namely, that of hr rpeding the passing of the Bill.
He would hear no question is of the franchise, and of poll-
ing, for the consideration ofthe House at a future moment.
He need hardly tell tb e House that in England
the registration of w oters took place annually
before a barrister selecte I by the Judges at Assize.
while making the circuits throughout the counties for
which they had been appri nted. They fixed the place
and time for holding the Se ssions, and any person claim-
ing to be entitled to the ET anchiso should appear before
them at a certain time and place. He need not remind
the House that in the case o f counties it was necessary for
claimants to send notices t o the officers of their respective
parishes. The provisions with regard to registration dif-
fered so little in Counties I ind Boroughs that he might deal
with both of them togethr e. The officers of the parish
and the Clerk of the Pea, re were required to publish the
list by the 31st day of J line. The list then remained
open for public observatio a till the 25th of August. The
person afterwards objectin g to the claimants, till after the
words " objected to " xi been put to his name, had
to come forward and pros ee the objection. The Sessions
could not commence befi n e the 15th of September. He
need not tell the House th at the registry laws were differ-
ent in Ireland. The Sessions there were quarterly, and
were no: held before a Le urristar appointed by the Judges,
but before the assist' tant-barrister of the county.
The claims should not 1 ie sent in there as in England,
six weeks, and sometime. twelve beforehand, but twenty
days previous to the per/ ed of registering. The Clerk of
the Peace was obliged toe make out a list of the claimants,
not for each parish, bu ; for the whole town, ten days pre•
vious to the sessions. Ten days only were thus given to
object to claims in Ire land, and the lists extended to en-
tire counties. This m fight be attended with many advan-
tages. He would sup pose the case of a rich person who,
without a qualification, :might be anxious to register, and
the House should obs et ve that under the present system
he could weary out 11',5 t ,bjectors by appearing to prosecute
his claim in different par is of the county. He might pro-
secute that claim at. -a di stance of fifty or sixty miles from
the place at which. 'he riisided.—(Here Mr. Pigot made
some observation 'across, the table which did not reach
us.) The Nobi.e I oird proceeded to say that the
rule did not apply to counties in which there was more
than one electoral divi• ion. If the voter in England were
registered, now ithstandine the objection made against
him, that objection might be renewed after twelve months,
whilst, if the o'hjection w ere declared invalid in Ireland,
the claim continued go od for seven years.—(Hear.)
Those certificates of the d ecision of the Assistant Barister
were correct as t:aos law stood, and which it was proved they
were, were not ally for eight years, but it might be made
perpetual ; because if ,se (Lord Stanley) had been eon.
rectly informed, it had been he. ld in Ireland that the pro-
duction of a certiSicate graneedin 1832, not by the party
himself, but another individual, was Prima facie evidence,
entitled to another sertifieate,
and -so on toties quoties as
that in 1840 the i)arty was
entitling him to vote till 18e'S,
So' that those certificates were
necessity might require.
almost in the tie tune of Exci iequer Bills; they were ac-
tually transferrable securities, for there was nothing on
earth to prevent him from hams ding ever his certificate to
any other person, or, in the es ent of his death, to prevent
any person who had come into th e possession of his certificate
from voting in consequence es` its possession, but the
making the atEdavit at the chess ion.—( Hear, and laugh-•
ter)—and how was the questie a of the validity of the
certificate to be tried, if at all ? Why, by the operose,
uncertain, and expensive procees ling of a Parliamentary
Election Conimittee. It was tru s tint the return might
be questioned, and the Committee i might decide not to
open the Registry ; the House of Commons might strike
the vote off the poll ; but it had t e en doubted whether the
House of Commons had the pow(r to alter the registry,
so that when the candidate had f. tone through the process
of striking off votes at one elect' on, at the very next the
whole of the names struck off by that Committee might
appear without the possibility of the returning officer object-
ing to them.—(Mrs, O'Connell hero made some remarks to
an Hon. Member next him in rale er a loud tone, which
caused the Noble Lord to observe) that the Hon. and
Learned Member opposite, who mart e his observations in
so loud a tone, was the last mare in that House whom he
should have expected to regret that 1: e (Lord Stanley) in-
tended to proceed with this measure, .and that from a cause
which he would advert to presently. Another instance of
the abuses to which the, present law gave facilities was this
—a person registered i.n 1832 c ame forward at the expira-
tion of five years to rat-register his vote—he did so, and
then he received a second certificate, but he did not can-
cel the first or the affidavit lie had made, which had been
placed on the records of Oro county. What was the re-
sult of that? Why, that Live -different persons might vote
for the same property, ated t'ae right of the parties could
only be settled and inveseig ated before a Committee of the
House of Commons as the law at present stood. He
thought he was not via ggerating the matter when he

stated that it was possible, under the present law, that
there might be some single property in Ireland not capable
of yielding more than one qualification, of which there
might be fifteen certificates, one being taken out every half
year.—( Cries of " Ob, oh.") He had no doubt such was
the state of abuse under the law in Ireland that there
were many properties in that country for which two or
three successive occupiers held certificates to vote. In
the Irish Bill there was no provision for expunging the
names of men that had been dead for years, so that the
county registers in that country were literally a growing
mass of confusion and absurdity.—(Hear, bear.) The
Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin a short
time since had moved far a return of the electors
in each city and county in Ireland, for the pur-
pose of showing, no doubt, the small number of
electors in comparison with the population. Now he
(Lord Stanley) would even admit that the number of per-
sons appearing on she registry was larger than the real
amount, and that was going further than the Hon. Member
could expect, bet that only showed the necessity, if it was
desired to rescue the county and borough registry from
confusion—it was expedient and desirable to alter the law.
—( Hear.) He had stated at the outset that he would not
introduce political topics, but would only state the
abuses which the law bad occasioned. Some of those
abuses he had already stated, and he would not now
even go into the result that those abuses had effected.
He did not impugn the decision of any of the Bar-
risters in Ireland. He would not say that there had
been a system of perjary carried on in Ireland, but
this he would say, that the law held out an induce-
ment to perjury when the registry of the counties
did not declare who were the bona fide electors. The
abuses and the defects to which he had adverted had been
recognized for some time by both sides of the. House; but
the first person who took notice of those discrepancies, and
proposed their amendment, was the Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin, who had expressed his surprise that he
(Lord Stanley) should have taken up this measure. That
Hon. and Learned Member, in the year 1835, gave notice
of his intention to move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend
the law of elections in Ireland. That notice stood in the
books far some time, but the motion never was made. At
the latter part of the year, however, a Bill was brought in
by Mr. O'Loghlen and Mr. Perrin. That Act actually
passed through the eomniittee and all its stages, and on
the 29th of August was sent up to the House of Lords.
Of that Bill the Hon. and Learned Member spoke in the
following terms :—" It was an Act not only beneficial and
necessary, as it provided for annual revision, and gave an
appeal both ways. The Hon. and Learned Member trusted,
therefore, the Bill would be allowed to go into Committee,
as it was a measure calculated to save the expense and in-
convenience of scrutinizing votes before an Election Com-
mittee." That Bill, however, from some circumstance or
other, never arrived at maturity. The measure being
beneficial and essential in 1835, in the opinion of
' the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin,
he (Lord Stanley) could not conceive upon what ground
the Han. and Learned Member in 1840 should regret
that he (Lord Stanley) bad taken it up. That Bill never
having come to ttstrity it 1836, another was introduced
by his Noble Friend opposites and Mr. O'Loghlen, very
similar in its nature. That Bill was read a second time
' without debate, and it was then postponed to the end of
the Session, and -nothing more was heard of it, In 1838
the Hon. Member for Limerick announced his intention
of bringing in a similar Bill, but he gave it up, Mr. Wolfe,
on the part of the Government, taking it out of his hands.
That Bill went to a second reading, and then it shared
the fate of its predeceaaor. Then his Hon. Friend the
Member for Bandon introduced a similar measure, which
was given up to the Attorney-General, and that also fell
to the ground. Last year the lion. Member for Limerick
introduced another Bill, but that was abandone,t
at a very early period of the Session. In many
of the principles those Bills were agreed, end there
was no objection takson to any of them as to their
practical effects. But with that universal consent as to
the necessity of some remedy, and the amount of the
evil, we remained still in the same state.—( hear, hear.)
Not a single sebuee had been removed, and that was cer-
tainly a circumstance not creditable to the House of Com-
mons. With permission of the House, he was bent on in-
troducing a measure which would satisfy both parties, and
would have neither delay nor unfairness.—(llear.) He
hoped the House would give the measure a full con'idera-
tion, and that, before the end of the Session, it would be-
come the law of the land. He first proposed to follow all the
Bills to which he had alluded, in making the registration
annual. In stating that, he hoped the House would excuse
him for touching upon one point, in which it was impos-
sible not to deal with the existing practice. According
to the English law, a twelvemonth's residence was neces-
sary before the claimant was entitled to be registered ; but
upon being registered he was entitled to the franchise. In
Ireland the registration took place after a six months' re-
sidence, but the claimant was not entitled to vote until six
months after the registration. Now, if, as in England,
the Irish claimant were to :have six months' occupancy
before he was entitled to register, there must be a restric-
tion upon the franchise, as it was at present exercised in
Ireland. Because at present, by means of the quarterly re-
gistration, the clgimant may be qualified to vote in fifteen
months, and need never be kept out of the franchise be-
yond twelve months, which was the period of occupancy
which the law contemplated ; whereas in England it might ,
happen, that in consequence of the occupation com-
mencing in November, and the registration taking place
in September, a man would not obtain the franchise until
after an occupation of twenty-two month,. If the prac-
tice of the two countries in this respect were to be assiwii-
lated, the Irish roger would lose the advantage which
he now possessed. tie hoped Gentlemen would take it
as an indication of the fairness with which he sought to
deal with the question, that he was not about to curtail
the privileges of the Irish voter.—(Hear.) But on the
other hand he would not consent to allow the six months'
occupancy to be sufficient for the registration, and the
lapse of six other months, with or without a continued
occupation, to be sufficient for a vote.—( Hear.) Ile pro- ,
posed that if the claimant had been in occupation less than
twelve months, and more than six months, at the time of
registration, the barrister should set down opposite to his
name the full term at which he would, by a twelve months'
occupation, be entitled to vote, so that he should not be
kept out of his vote ono single day beyond the time when
he became fully entitled to it. That would be provided
for by a single clause, and one column in the register
would be sufficient to carry it into effect. The question
then arose, before whom was the registration to take
place? In England it took place before barristers ap.
pointed by the Judges of Assize. In Ireland there were
objections to that in which he did not participate. But
he objected to the proposition of leaving it to barristers
appointed by th& Government, as that would be giving
to the Gseprernineret a patronage which might be
used for politiCal purposes._—( Hear.) But there
were in every county in Ireland assistant barristers, and be
(lid not see why they eaauld not be entrusted with the charge
of the annual, as they now were with that of the quarterly
registration. But he thought it would be the best security
for the proper dischavge of their duties, if each should
have an undivided responsibility, which would not be the
case if they were cireulested in rotation through all the ,
counties of Ireland, as had been proposed by Judge Wolfe.
He thought it better that each barrister should be perma-
nently fixed in one county. lie thought it was necessary
that there should lie an appeal, not from the barrister to
a co-ordinate tribunal, but to the Judges of Assize. With
regard to notices, lk meant in every respect to follow the
English law ; with this exception, that in Ireland it would
bo necessary for the claitnant, both in town and county,
to give notice to the Clerk of the Peace, the latter being
required to give the same publicity to the claim as in Eng-
land. It would be necessary, however, that the re-
gistration shod take place in Ireland, at an earlier
period of the year than in England. The barrister
should appoint a place in each district for taking
the registry, or he would propose that the Lord-
Lieutenant of the county should have the power of
fixing places in each district, at which the barristers
should regularly attend to make the registry. At present
every person was bound to appear in person, and substan-
tiate his claim. There was one exception made in favour
of 50/. freeholders, who could be registered on affidavit in
' any Superior Court. Now he (Lord Stanley) did not say
that this had been—he only asserted that it might be—
abused. There was nothing except the affidavit to pre-
vent a person who had not a shilling in the world from
registering and voting. He did not propose that the cx•
emption from personal appearance of the 501. freeholders
should be taken away. But this he proposed that the
affidavit should be revved with the Clerk of the Peace,
that notice of it should bo published in the list of claim-
ants, and that the maims should be equally liable to ob-
jection with those of the poorest leaseholder —(Hear,
hear.) He proposed to do away with the whole system
of certificates, thinking that they led to fraud, and afforded
a temptation to perjury. He wished to interpose another
and a better check. He proposed that the Assistant Bar-
risters should have the power of giving moderate costs,
limited in the bill, in the case of frivolous claims or objec-
tions, and that on appeal to the Judges, there should
be no hesitation as to the costs which in their discretion
might be just to be given. But in what manner should
he dealiwith those who had once established their claim to
be registered ? Should he deal with them as in England,
and say simply, that a person objecting year after year
might compel the same party to come forward again and
again to substantiate his claim before the Revising Bar.
rister ? If this were a hardship in England, it was a much
greater hardship in Ireland, where there would be a greater
strictness in the original examination. He proposed,
therefore, that in all such cases the onus of p-oof should
be laid not on the voter, but on the. objector ; that the
claimant should have the presumption in his favour, and
that the objector should come under the penalty of costs,
to be inflicted in case his objection were frivolous and
vexatious.—( Hear.) Of course, it would be in the
option of parties, as in England, to appear in person, or by
deputy, to support their claims. But tho onus being on
the objector in these cases, it would be just, and indeed ac-
cessary that he should be informed, by some registry of
leases, of their duration—the nature, the period at
which they would expire, and (if on lives)
the names of the partieS on whose I-ves they were held.
Now, the question had been raised whether there should
be any limitation as to the period to which objections
should extend. On that point, after great consideration,
he had come to eke conclusion that with the chocks he had
already proposed,* he we•c:e to restrict objections to pe-
riods subsequent to ekee last- registry, he should be perpe-
tuating fraud—he should be doing injustice to the fair
claimant—( Hear, hear)—for supposing a case as clear as
ilabarcltY enoouigighlte ansie'a'etrptroesehnatvtehbe?ea'w' srte(gmids-,
tdearyeldi g
—h
t, twhnant tdh
bee
this should be perpetuated for eight years—but it would be
monstrous when, as he proposed to make it, the registry
would be final and conclusive, till proved erroneous—and
that the vote should be registered for the life of the voter,
till it was shown to be bad.—(llear, hear, bear.)
Therefore he found it impossible to accede to
the proposition that the objections
Yr—as
—( Hear.)
tsnholNu,lidln-h nzeiri
taearttarinegedistgr
great step—
elsixeetregnNevdaans
Sergeant
beyondnoo:vL etga
ikditeal eng
eanl
he proposed that the
registry should be bcfere a Committee of the House of
Commons, final and conclusive. lie did not propose to
exctude the Committee from going into matters since the
registry, but he wiabcd to make the registry final as to

matters before it ; and this would be a great concession in
favour of the franchise, and would tend much to remove
the angry feeling, and the not very creditable litigation,
before the Committees of that House.—( Hear, hear.) He
had now gone in great, perhaps too much, detail, into the
provisions of the Bill. The only remaining point was, how
he proposed to deal with the existing registry. He un-
doubtedly assumed that it was full of fictitious votes ;
there could be no question that there were many persons on
the registry who had no title at all to be there. Should
the registry be swept away altogether ? He thought that
would impose considerable hardship on parties who had
once substantiated their claims, to be again obliged to
prove them. Again, it was suggested that the present re-
gistry should be good for the periods to which the parties'
certificates extended. That might be doing justice to
some extent to individuals, but it would be open to grave
objection, as keeping gross errors on the registry, and pre-
venting its purgation for eight years. He proposed,
therefore, that the registry should be on the same footing
as it would have been, had it been framed under this Act.
He hoped that he had stated the provisions of the Bill
now, without exciting any acrimonious feeling, or dis
playing any party spirit. He would be perfectly ready
to listen, either at the present, or at any future
time, to arguments on the one side or the other, from
those who went along with him in his object—that of
correcting abuses on the registry—and he could assure
the House that suggestions offered in this spirit, whe-
ther coming from the other side or from his own, should
receive an equal degree of attention, and as respectful a
consideration.—(Cheers.)
Lord MORPETH did not itatend to offer any opposi-
tion to the motion, neither had he fcund anything to object
to, either in the tone or temper of the speech of his Noble
Friend.—( Hear, hear.) It was true, as his Noble Friend
bad stated, that several measures for the purpose he had in
view had passed that House, but had been rejected by the
other House. In every single Parliament since the acces-
sion of the present Government to power, Bills had been
introduced for the purpose of amending the anomalies and
inconveniencies, and improving the system of the regis-
tration in Ireland, yet upon no one of those Bills, though
involving changes slighter and more inconsiderable than
those contemplated by the measure now proposed, had the
two Houses of Parliament been brought to anything like
an agreement. The Government had felt that it would be'
most desirable to bring the franchise of the three countries
under some uniform and united system, although they felt
there were great difficulties in doing so ; and they consi-
dered that, with respect to Ireland, they would be able to
come to a conclusion with much more certainty and faci-
lity when the franchise under the new Poor-law could be
ascertained. They had, therefore, felt it would
be more judicious to suspend any measure of
legislation on this subject with a view to the soundness,
success, and permanence of the measure itself. But the
Noble Lord for once had merged the character of an ob-
structor into that of a constructor--( Cheers and laughter)
—and had stepped forward upon this occasion to tender his
aid for the solving of the difficulties which had hitherto
been experienced upon a measure of this sort. He could
assure the Noble Lord that his interposition would be re-
ceived with perfect respect, but as to their confidence in its
entire exemption from leaning on one side, was another
question.—( Hear, hear.) Of the Noble Lord's acuteness
and ability to solve the difficulties upon this or any other
subject there could be no doubt-( Cheers from the Con-
servatives)—but whether the Noble Lord was unbiassed, or
whether he was anxious to pay off some old score with the
present constituency of Ireland—(Laughter)—would be
best ascertained when they had an opportunity, not only of
deliberately considering the provisions of his Bill, but of
ascertaining the manner in which he proposed to work up
the details, which they could only do when the printed Bill
came into their hands, and till that time arrived he reserved to
himself the fullest right of forming any judgment he might
think proper with respect to the provisions, the principle,
the scope, and the tendency of that measure, and of de-
ciding what course might be most advisable for him to
adopt respecting it. Till that time he should have been
content to reserve any further observations on the subject,
were it not for one circumstance to which he wished for
a',moment to advert. It might be in the remembrance of
the House that in the course of the last Session a motion
was brought forward by his Honourable and Learned
Friend the Member for the City of Dublin,
for the purpose of assimilating the elective franchise
in Ireland to that which now established in England. Be-
sides the general abstract question of assimilating and
identifying the rights of the people of the two countries—
to which as an abstract question the members of the pre-
sent Government had always professed themselves friendly
—the Hon. and Learned Member also adduced some very
plausible statements, and stated several very striking in-
stances of the disproportion between the relative number
of voters in the two countries. To the motion of the
Hon. and Learned Member for leave to bring in that Bill,
he (Lord Morpeth) gave a decided negative; and he
hoped he did so with courtesy. Indeed be believed it
was a charge against him that his mode of opposition
was too courteous and deferential.—(Laughter.) He felt
that he could not contravene the logic of the Hon. and
Learned Member, nor contradict his statements ; but he
did feel and stated that after a great settlement and adjust-
ment of the whole representative system, and of the electo-
ral law of the three countries had been effected, and that
question had given rise to so much excitement and ani-
mosity throughout the country, that it would be expedient
not to break in upon that settlement after so short a period,
or to introduce any more fundamental changes. But after
the remonstrances that had been made to them by the peo-
ple of Ireland, who honoured them with their generous
confidence—(Laughter on the Conservative benches, and
cheers fi ore the Ministerialists)—who were not disposed to
confide their destinies to the party opposite.—( Cheers. )
If notwithstanding the representations made to them by a
great proportion of the Irish Members who gave the Go-
vernment their support in that House—if notwithstanding
the force which he thought did reside in some of the argu-
ments, and in all the arithmetical and statistical statements
that had been laid before them, they did refuse to consent
to such an assimilation and extension of the franchise as
they required at the hands of the Government, because
they thought it inexpedient to alter the law which the
Reform Bill had established in Ireland ; so on the other
hand they were not prepared to alter the present law or
system, if they theugbt the scope and tendency of that
alteration would be to limit, contract, impede, or
" obstruct," to use the Noble Lord's favourite phrase—
( Hear, and cheers) beyond due bounds and just
limits, that confined franchise which the people of
Ireland had received at the hands of the Noble Lord.—
(Loud cheers.) Reserving to himself the right of ob-
jecting to the details of the measure hereafter, he had
thought it more candid to state at the same time, that with
whatever ingenuity the Bill was framed, and however
plausible the grounds on which it rested, however
well it was calculated to effect its own object, whatever
collateral objects it might involve, yet, if he was con-
vinced in his own mind that its tendency and scope was
to narrow and obstruct the legitimate franchise of the
people of Ireland and their electoral rights, he should give
every opposition in his power to the future progress of
the measure. He had, however, no objection to the Bill
being brought in.--( Hear, hear. )
Mr. Sergeant JACK SON was glad that the Noble Lord
did not mean to offer any opposition to the Bill being
brought in, because the importance of the measure had
been conceded on both sides. He believed the Hon. Member
for Dublin had made a complaint with regard to the la.
tolerable state of the law. The Hon. and Lea:. ned
Member then proceeded to state the course pursued by
him with respect to the Bill introduced by him in 1838,
the object of which was to secure for Ireland a whole-
some and sound constituency, which be believed to be
the scope and tendency of the Noble Lord's Bill.
The Noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, had not acted
fairly by the Noble Lord, in repeating the erroneous im-
pression he had taken up relative to the use the Noble
Lord had made of the word " obstruct." What he had said
was, that he and the Gentlemen on that side of the House
would suggest good and beneficial measures, and would
obstruct those which were bad. The Noble Lord was pe-
culiarly fitted to introduce the Bill, for he had introduced
the Reform Bill for Ireland, at the same time stating,
that, so far as the registration was concerned, it was a
mere experiment. As the Bill was not to be opposed, he
would not enter into its details, nor detain the House
longer upon that occasion.
Mr. O'CONNELL did not mean any offence to the
Noble Lord when he expressed his regret that be had.
persevered in bringing_ in the Bill. What ho wanted to•
express was, that tho Noble Lord was the last person who,
from his former conduct towards Ireland, ought to have
meddled with it.—(" Oh, oh," and cheering.) The prin-
ciple of the Noble Lord's conduct was to limit and restrict
as much as possible the franchise of the people of Ireland.
The Noble Lord had succeeded in giving a most stringent -
Reform Bill for Ireland—a Bill which was admitted to be
infinitely deficient as compared with that for England.—.
(" No, no.") Was 'the House aware of the fact that in
Ireland not 5 per cent. of its adult population enjoyed the
franchise, while in England it amounted to 19 per cent.
Was the House aware that of its agricultural population
not 2 per cent. enjoyed the franchise? The people of Ire-
land attributed that fact to the Noble Lord, and if he were
even to introduce a good Bill—one that would
Prove beneficial in the eyes of the people of,
Ireland, it would have its grace through being
transmitted to them through the Noble Lorcia&-(Chec.re
and cries of " Ob, oh.") There was a manliness in giving
it to the Noble Lord ; it was setting the people of Ireland
at defiance, and when the details of the Bill went to
Ireland they would not be disappointed in it, for they
would know that it came from the same source which be-
gan the Reform Parliament by a Coercion Bill. —( Cheers. )
The principle of the Bill was trouble, vexation, anti ex-
pense. Was the flaw aware that the Conservative,
party—he would no longer call them Orange
posed every motion in the Registration Court by
agent and cowslip', with an array of swearers
ready to beat down tire value of the franchise—
with landlords doing all in their power to prevent the re-
gistration of their senants ; yet with all this the Noble
Lord proposed to,ifierease the trouble, the vexation, the
expense attendant %pon registration. Even where the
landlords were Weal, their agents were Conservative
even the agent of bwd Monteagle was as anxious'to prevent
the registration of the tenantry as any other. The title of
the Bill eseillf to be, "A Bill for preventing the tenantry of
Ireland from remistering, except by the permission and at
the expense of the landlords." It would bear out such a titaas
lie thanked the Noble Lord for the word " obstrnet."
This was a Bill which ought to be obstructed. He wry ;
convinced its operation would be to annihilate the Fran -
chise. The Noble Lord might say be did a great favoy r
in not putting upon the voter a second year to prove h is
case. Did he not know he could be obliged to do sea?
The agent would compel him, and thus, in every case,
the vexation would be continued from year to year. Was
Ihe upholding the present system of registration? He was
trot. But he believed they had worked thems Ayes out of
it a certain degree of freedom. He would alter it if he
could see it improved, but he should resist the Bill of the
Noble Lord. Every other Bill on the subject had been
favourable to the franchise, but the Noble Lord's re-
jected it. The House was not prepared for a Bill to
I regulate the registration. He objected to its being made
a contrast to the course proposed to be pursued in Eng-
land. He wished to know whether the English system of
registration was satisfactory.—( Hear, hear.) We wished

EVENING EDITION.

' the Noble Lord to apply himself to the English registra-
tion ; but, instead of doing so, he went over the Channel.
to destroy the franchise there. He might have attempted-
it in England or in Scotland.—(Cries of " No, no.")
He was not surprised at the vehemence with which that_
was exclaimed. The policy on which it had been to
troduced was, that leaving out the facility the tenants
had to register, and the intervention of the land-
lord and agent, a Bill of this Lad should take
up the subject for the three countries. It should
begin with putting Ireland on an equality with
Englaod, by giving it the same franchise. This should be
the basis of the Bill, and if the Noble Lord would con-
sent to that, there would be no difficulty of adopting a
proper method of registration. He did not accuse the
Noble Lord further than his general principle of restricting
the franchise, and depriving the Irish of all ; he did not
succeed in depriving them at the time of the Reform Bill.
He had complained of the Irish law being defective—that
the Election Committee had no power to strike the Irish
voter off. Those Committees were universally repu-
diated, and though he had been reprimanded for speaking
of them as perjured, the Noble Lord bad substant'ally
condemned them by assisting in their abolition. He did
not hesitate to say that the present system of registration
required amendment. Many experiments had been made,
but were unsuccessful, because they were upon too narrow
a basis-"-that of the limitation of the franchise. Ho
would not divide the House, since the Noble Lord bad
conceded the first reading. In every other stage it should
have his most decided opposition. On the whole• he
thought it calculated, not for the purpose that appeared
on the face of it, but to introduce such detaih
would be inconsistent with the interests of the -
tenantry of Ireland, put them to a ruinous expense of money
and of time, and bring them twice every year under the
lash of their landlords, and thus annihilate that franchise,
which ought rather to excite the commiseration than the
resentment of the Noble Lord, and his attempts to destroy
the little of it they possessed.—(Cheers.)
Lord STANLEY said, after the lengthened speech he;
had made at the commencement of the discus&ion, he
should trouble the House very shortly in reply. He wal
somewhat disappointed by the manner in which the Bill
had been received on the other side, but the observations,
of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin should not lead*_
him to deviate for a single moment from that lino of argu-
ment and calm discussion which he had chalked out for
himself, in which he should continue so long as he was
a Member of that House.—( Cheers.) He was appre-
hensive that an objection would arise from the part he
had taken in opposition to Hon. Members on the ether
side on Irish questions, and he was sorry to say he was
confirmed in that anticipation, by finding that an As.
elation calling itself " The Liberal Registration Associ-
e►ation of Dublin," had taken the precise course of the Hon.
and Learned Member, of course without any concert, and
had sent instructions to all the Liberal Members of Ire-
land to oppose the Bill whenever it might be iutroduced,
whatever its principles might be —(Cheers.) This was
a society which called itself " deliberative." Anything
more unworthy than such a resolution could never have
been uttered ; but he trusted the Liberal Members of
that House had more liberality and feeling than to fol-
low such blind leaders, and would not follow the in
structions given, but fairly consider the merits of the Bill.
But there was one part of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman's statement which it was impossible to pass over.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had over and over
again asserted that the franchise, as given to Ireland by
the Reform Bill, was more restricted than the franchise
given to England, and that he ( Lord Stanley) was the
author of that restriction. Now, he could meet the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman on both those points with a direct
denial—(Cheers)--and would assert that all the franchises
conferred on Ireland by the Reform Bill were tnore ex-
tended than similar franchises were in England.—( Cheers.)
He did not refer to the case of the forty shilling free.
holders, as that case had been settled some years before
the introduction of the Reform Bill. The English Reform
Bill had restricted the forty shilling freeholders, but had hot
abolished them. The Irish Reform Bill hard not interfered
with the freehold franchise at all, but had left it as it had
found it. He now came to consider the leasehold fran-
chise, and while the English Bill conferred the franchise
on leaseholders whose leases were for sixty years at a rent
of 101., for twenty years at a rent of 50/., and a tenantry
at will whose annual rent amounted to 501., the Irish Re-
form Bill confined the franchise to leaseholders whose
leases were for sixty years at a rent of loi., for fourteen
years at a rent of 201., and for 20 years at a rent of 101. ;
so that on a comparison of the leasehold franchise, a more
extended franchise was given to Ireland than to England,
and he defied the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to prove
the contrary.—(Loud cheers ) The Hen. and Learned
Gentleman had said that the object of the Bill was to
inflict endless expense and vexation, and had talked about
land revenues, and had said, while speaking of the
appeal to the Judges, that there were not so
many Judges who possessed the confidence of the
country. He was sorry to hear that observation ; for his
part he had as much confidence in the decision of Mr.
Justice Perrin or any Judge of liberal principles, into that
of any other Judge who might agree in politics with him-
self—(Cheers)—and he thought it injurious to the charac-
ter of the Judges, and of those who were likely to become
so on both sides the House, that these allegations should be
continually indulged in by the Hon. and Learned Gentlensma
against those who differed with him in opinion.—( Cheers.)
He was astonished to hear this objection from the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, because, when a Bill of this nature
had been introduced by Mr. Perrin and Mr. O'Loughlin,
the Hon. Gentleman had supported that Bill, and had,
mentioned as a reason for so doing, that it granted an sp..
peal to the Judges. —( Loud cheers from the Conservative
benches.)

Mr. O'CONNELL explained that he had meant to say
that the Reform Bill forlcl and, by not having restored
the freehold franchise to its former state, had fallen in-
finitely short of the English Reform Bill.—( Cheers. )
Lord STANLEY had the admission of the Learned
Gentleman, that setting aside the freehold qualification,
the leasehold and household qualifications were at least as
extensive in Ireland as in England.—(Loud cheering from
the Opposition.)

Mr: b'CONisTELL was by no means prepared to make
any such admission.—(Crieaof Oh I from the Opposition,.
answered by cheers from the Ministerial Benches.) The
motion was then agreed to, and Lord Stanley, Lord Gran-
ville Somerset, and Mr. Emerson Tennant, were ordemd
to bring in the Bill.
REGISTRATION RETURNS.

Mr. HUME said that as much had been said re:lilting to
the Suffrage as regarded Ireland and England., be haped
there would be no opposition to the motion 1, 0 was about
to make, for returns showing the actual soothing of the re-
gistration in the two countries ; he shevi,d therefore move for
a return of the number of electors oil the register for each
county of England and Wales, fP_
.rr the year 1439-40 ; and
distinguishing, in classes, the number registered as free-
holders, copyholders, leas
501. a year rent and ur ...,.nolders, occupying tenants at
of a similar nature -',vards, or as holding qualifications
; together with an abstract of the
numbers of eacb
in number ur class, showing the increase or decrease
.eer each separate head, since the returns of
the re
gstr..:red voters at the general election in 1835 (as
given in Parliamentary Papers, No. 199 and 227, of
). Return of the number of electors on the register
for each city, town, or borough, in England and Wales,
for the year 1839-40 ; and distinguishing, in classes, the
numbers registered in each place as 101. occupiers, and
the numbers registered under the old qualifications re-
served by the Reform Act, specifying what such qualifica-
tions are in each ; and whether the party possesse,4
the old and the new franchise ; together with an
abstract of the numbers of each class, and-, of
the. whole, showing (as above) the increase and decrease
sirice 1835 ; Return of the number of Electors on the
register for each county in Scotland, for the year, from
July 1839 to July 1840, showing, in columns, those
tr.insferred from the old roll of freeholders to the new
roll, the 101. life-rent, and those enrolled on the dif-
ferent qualifications of property, or lease; distinguishing
In each class those enrolled as life renters, and those
enrolled as a joint qualification, showing a companion
of the increase or decrease since 1835 ; Return of the
number of Electors on the register in each city or burgh
' returning, or contributing to return, a member or MM.
bers to serve in Parliament, in classes of burghs. for the
year 1840, showing in columns, the number of owners and
occupiers, jcint owners and joint occupiers ; toge-
ther with an abstract of the number of each
class, and of the whole, showing also a comparison
of the increase or decrease since 1835 ; Return of the number
of Electors on the register for each county of Ireland,
qualified to vote at any election which may take place be-
fore the let day of January, 1841 • and distinguishing, in
c' asses, the numbers registered under the different qualifi-
cations, in each county ; together with an abstract of the
nennber of each class, and of the whole, showing also a
comparison of the increase or decrease since 1835. Re-
turn of the number of electors on the register for the year,
qualified to vote at any election which may take place be-
-tore the Ist day of January, 1841, in each city, town, and
lo;rough of Ireland, and distinguishing the numbers in each
plp,ce registered under the old qualifications, specifying
vhat such qualifications are in each, reserved by the Re-
f onn Act, and the numbers registered under the new qua-
-1 ac ations admitted by the Reform Act ; together with an
ahs•tract, of the number of each class, and of the whole,
showing also a comparison of the increase or decrease since
18 15.

Lord ELIOT said, though he had no objection
V:, it the House should obtain the information required, that
be believed that the returns would be attended with con
sid erable expense, which expenseiwould fall on the count)
r;,:tes ; and unless some other means could be dovisod cf
meeting the costs, he could not give his consent to the

rr .ction.
Mr. HUME said that there would bo no trouble or
I:xpense at',.ending the returns, as lists, such as he de-
' 'landed, had already been made out in every county and
borough in Ireland. The whole trouble would be con-
fined to cor.nting up the numbers on the list which already
existed, 'and to show how many held their rights by free-
hold, ar.d how many were tenants.
Lore 1 G. SOMERSET did not see how the required
inform ,ation could be obtained without great difficulty, and
he dr ,übted whether there were any state by which the
Mac 'straws at Sessions could remunerate the Clerk of the
Pot cc for the trouble he would have to undergo.
,vlr. SHAW also thought that parties should not be
c e lied on to make those returns without some remunera-
t 1 n , and he believed that the counties had not the power
(C i remunerating them.
Mr. O'CONNELL observed that in Ireland the
' C.:lerks of the Peace were already obliged to have printed
lists of every man who was entitled to vote, and the pro-
posed returns would consequently be attended with very
1 Little trouble.

After a few words from Mr. SHAW and Colonel PER.
:kVA!,

Mr. ESTCOURT observed that the House had at
nesent no means of enforcing the returns demanded by
he lion. Gentleman, lie wished, therefore, that the
Hon. Member would suspend his motion or introduce it
m some new form.
Mr. 11UNIE said that he did not want any ew list,
but an abstract of the lists alroady existing.
Capt. EGERTGN objected to the motion in its pre-
sent form.
Lord J. RUSSELL felt that there were strong objets-