The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-27 00:00:00

EV ENING EDITION

lc.__
Leid Still more, by imposing the necessity of a !ease.
Noble Friend was driven to the necessity e' geire
le2ta to a much lower grade in society than would other-
j;7: be necessary for extending the right of voting to a
Ve body of the peop!e. But that was not all. Woul 4
ei Noble Friend by these means attain his object of suffi-
ttlientlY extending that right ? He (Lard H.) doubted that
th.woele. Such might be the effect of the measure at
e su ~
adta• °merit, but it would not be so in future. It was
potAitted by his Noble Friend—it was a matter:of notoriety,
hviiuceied on either side of the HOUEC-that there was a
th /N. indisposition to grant icing. In the Rspert of
4 4 °or-law Inquiry Commission, it was expressly stated
awskete, that when leases expired they were not re-
x', artein that way whole districts were unrepresen-
thi Ile (Lord PA.) believed that the great motiv for
orthsadloNs'condieet in refusing leases was the improvement
en lands. He thought that in the present state of sharesge-
shii 14 Ireland., it was a very great advantage to that
htry thrit the landlords should keep the land in their
ti,,Power..—(Hear.) His Noble Friend ( Lord Mor-
kti', had great interest in a large property in Ireland-
-144e of his colleagues in the Cabinet, were large proprie-
tien°f lane( in that country, and were they not, or most of
acting on that policy of allowing leases to fall in as
let, expired?—( Hear, hear.) But the effect of his
51""e Friend's Bill would be to extend the franchise only
ate illentaanaged estates on which that policy was not
"la es tcouraging landlords to cut up their property
,Ittall hcidings, and giving the franchise to the class of
115er,as wilt. were the most dependent on their landlords.
hn'uoug ht it would be far more expedient to take a larg ir
eie-i'nt of value, and dispense with the lease. Whilst he li
li'led. on these grounds to the proposition of his Noble
lee:ld ; he thought there were reasons no less pressing
if granting a new franchise.—( Hear, hear.) It was
great importance to the tranquillity of Ireland that there
tele. be an ample representation of that country, not of
tilt, sa not of that class only which almost exe:us vely
A 'listed of the owners of the soil, but an ample rcpresenta-
le of the great bulk of the people. His Noble Friend, the
s'tsher for North Lancashire, admitted that, and said
se th .
a e constituency ought not to be reduced to too small
,Striount. But his Noble Friend also said " wait till the
ki'l arrives, before you attempt a remedy by altering the
(htlehise." He (Lord H.) thought the evil had arisen.—
j;'_ear, hear.) . Returns this day laid on the table showed
i,'demonstration tint the evil was in progress. It was
ltil that the actual diminution of the county franchise,
the the year 1835 to the present year, was only 7,563 ; but
%elute return clearly showed that it was progressive,
es4l!iat, in consequence of the non-renewal of leases, it
Ist lely in the course of time to affect the whole of the
the 1,4:4201. leaseholders, who constituted two-thirds of
...(ii"ele county constituency, tieing 41,711 out of 57,103.
the bear.) If, therefore, it was not intended to
l',-t the electors to dwindle away, and to restrict the
lre.,llitchi!e to the owners of the soil, the House should not
Wylie
to take without delay a c!ecisive step t a put an end
tlitli,,i;oeuviTlih by altering- the franchise. —( He .r, hear.) On
he proposed an occupation franchise simi-
?tier to that which was possessed in England. H's
.Noble
totlend (Lord Stanley) proposed to wait until the_ evil was
tit' but was it safe thus to deal with the discontent
hi' Whole people, and to wait until it arose to the
et at which it was no longer tolerable ?—( Hear, hear.)
thought that the future effects of their delaying a re-
st/ had been too much and too recently felt, in the case
catholic emancipation, for any gentleman now to ade
ti'k this Parliament to return to the principle.—( Hear,
til:;') Besides, his Noble Friend (Lord Stanley) must
t feel the importance of reforming the registration of
°d with the consent Of the Irish people themselves.
a
IWorking of either that measure or Lord Morpeth's
t Particularly depend on the spirit in which it might
•
NIS, eived by the people.—( Hear, hear.) In putting an
of to fraud, which was not denied on that (the Liberal)
ttet,of the House, their measure for its suppression should
litt.,`e°Mpanied by the admission to the franchise of those
hi were unjustly excluded from it.—( Hear, hear.) It
114, Possible for the Noble Lord to force his measure
1: ugh the House without such an accompaniment ; but
45'Hance of doing so was not more encouraging than
iettospect of its being afterwards attended with
ill ''.( Hear, bear.) In addressing such remarks to
itta Noble Friend, he would also urge upon that (the Li-
tt, side) of the House the necessity of not asking for
4,4ftrge concessions. He hoped that gentlemen on both
IN' of the House would ace the importance of coming to
ti 4, agreement on this subject. Gentlemen opposite
Ihtp° find it impossible to carry a measure for reforming
le ''Presentation unless they coupled with it a measure
115,I,arging the franchise, and gentlemen on his ( Lord
te;''c'es) side of the House would find it difficult to
the'rge the franchise, without at the same time reforming
le :latent of registration.—( Hear, hear.) Even if the
trili'nise could be enlarged without reforming the regis-
'lll°p, it could only be done at a loss in public opinion.
kir frauds which existed were such that, even though they
of to obtain an extension of the franchise, the people
lrovngland would not join in an attempt to resist an im-
tOutent in the registration. An agreement which
e:ld secure both objects would confer inestimable benefit
;I; 11 Ireland. Let him remind Honourable Gentlemen
ia. „tb,,st side of the I-louse of the necessity which
li:l4`eu for such an agreement.—( Hear, bear.) They
tith now no chance of enlarging the franchise except
110 t. the concurrence of their political opponents. They
rt Carry it through that House, but in the other House
17neasure which was resisted by so large and powerful
i t'ty must inevitably fail. They were not in the posi-
15,:ehich they occupied at the time of passing the Re-
ai` Act ; and a measure for greatly altering the fi an-
ill,?would not have that support out of doors t i which the
(le?
Act greatly owed its success. These were rea-
le4which should weigh powerfully with all parties, and
lle,, 4‘ to endeavour if possible to effect a settlement of
whi questioo. The mode of settling the Irish franchise
leit he (Lord Howick) proposed, would be found
k
ititiet and fair to all parties ; and even if the House should
till Cr from him as to the propriety of creating an occupa-
-1: franchise, that was a question which arose upon a
Clequent clause; the who:e scope and purport of the i
i!' amendment which he now proposed was that of re-
-s,"ing, subject to a better definition, that franchise which
w, existed by virtue of a beneficial ir.terest.
eLord MOR P ET H said it was qui'e needless for his
agle Friend to repudiate the notion that in bringing for-
54tfithe amendment of which he had given notice, he was
aowed by a desire to cmbarras and impede the move-
outsjj. of her Majesty's Government with regard to the
ti,s iwhich they had introduced on the subject of the fran-
tee'''. His Noble Friend had stated that he despaired of
0, tog that measure brought to an amicable settlement,
ati° any settlement at all, if e;ther of the parties into
Itt eh that House was chiefly divided should stand upon
tlt:elte opinions. They had certainly done their best to
e'enstrate that they were not disposed to stand upon ex-
Q°lo opinions.—(" Hear, hear," and laughter from the
14Pesition benches.) Ever since the expiration of the
1101'Iss though they were convinced that the original pro-
tsb!". was amply borne out by all the information on this
jqeet, they had net hesitated, within the limits of fair
14 ke to the Irish people, to conciliate their opponents
tiLl'aising the amount of qualification for the franchise.
1.; Noble Friend had told them that they could not look
Benny great support out of doors. He begged to assure his
atule Friend that they sought no such aid or reinforce-
Ittllt in what they proposed ; they were content to rest
,'l' Proposition upon its abstract justice. He perfectly
t.t'ed with his Noble Friend in wishing to see the frau-
Ne in. Ireland placed upon a simple test of rateage;
It he trusted that whatever alteration might be proposed
Committee tithe on this Bill, a test would be fixed upon,
Pees easy of access, and easy of proof. His Noble
1411 d had also expressed a wish that the constitueety of
it; Sod might not be indirectly diminished by any mea-
(Le which might be adopted by this Ilause. Whilst he
I,i.?rd elorpeth) entirely sympathised with him in that
t,, he found that the mum-tee:dent, taken by itself, was
htiNatedmost str:iting, and startling manner to
hia Lteract that reett'e, The amendments proposed by
tab Noble Froend were three in number two
teyi`an," red one chiefly verbal. The Noble Lord then
Num '''' 'arst amendment. It appeared to him that his
se e. Friend, equally with the Government, proposed a
(`Fatal change in the definition of beneficial in; crest.—
sr, hear.) The Noble Lord then read the second
s4erlment. By those words, though it was not openly
(Cted, a change was in reality made.—(Hear, hear.) He
n;°rd Morpeth) preferred the words in the Government
if.' as being the simplest and the most straightforward.
L2l Noble Friend proposed that a person, in order to
*',nualified to vote, should be rated at a net annual value
it 4h eh should exceed the rent and charges to which he was
Cble in respect thereof, by the suns of Si, per annum. If
,15 Noble Friend had brought this forward as an
~tkl:llition to what be (Lord Morpeth) proposed, nem:ly,
Rat a person should be put upon the register
q 4 was rated at the net annual value of '
the (Lord Morpeth) would not perhaps have ob-
ss„l to the proposal ; he would then have considered it
1,,,,""iy an enlargement end relaxation of the franchise ;
feei_ensidered as a substitution fur that, and as the staple
Prr the elective franchise in Ireland, he thought that the
1, °Position of his Noble Friend, when careful) y examined,
th°„ul,4 turn out to be a mere delusion. Ile proposition
tedl.l,l be very carefully scrutinized before it was adop-
bouY the House. His Noble Friend had concluded his
';eels by saying that the proposition upon which he then
beleol upon the House to ronounce judgment was that
tle adopting a franchise to be tested by the rent after the
4heinetion of all rates and charges. He had not yet fixed.
tru the amount of rating. It was a proposition which
1111 °Very account demanded great consideration before the
u°,,llse consented to its adoptinn. They bad been con-
-I'o'4l by his Noble Friend for introducing an entirely new
ht:ut and condition for the elective franchise in Ireland,
r°tlncing a change which was inconsistent with the Re-
-8:41 Bill. He begged to remind bine that in the Reform
t 'Hs for England, Ireland, and Scotland, as originally in-
sttklueed, the authors of those Bills actually sought to
tilofer the elective franchise upon a voter paying a certain
PrOuat of rent, whether there was or was not a profit.
i '
ei
ktith the printiples of the original Reform Bill as bad been
Prepositio
it;ted by the Noble Lord. Neither was the
Ottsistent with that Bill as it actually stood, for it con-ftrted the franchise upon tenants who paid a rent of 501.
h. was upon this ground that he ( Lord Morpeth) rested
of Preposition—that it would include as voters that class
A.,Persees upon whom it was the intention of the Reform
thill to bestow the franchise ; and he contended therefore
5 't they were acting in thorough conformity with the
411'4 and the principles of that Bill. His Noble I' riend
4 assumed that his proposition of a Si. rating above the
esxt,'" and charges could be liable to no objection ; in the
fott ' sentence he proceeded to tell them that it would be
sit,_,nd to operate with great practical severity, and ex-
hi:" Many who now enjoyed the franchise, and who under-
itcti_ rigorous test. He thought his Noble Friend had
ophtuis respect taken a leaf from the Noble Lord
Dielsite • and that to this extent he could have
Nnt)k''e,(l himself a useful pioneer.—(llear, hear.) The
la..'" Lord, the Member for North Lancashire,
(Posed the solvent tenant test; but his Noble Friend
aeh°,4l Howick) would give them not only the solvent te-
c, test, but would add to it all the stringency which
bil'id follow from an assessment under the real value of
ePtttY• They learned from the returns on the table, in
tht Plainest terms, that the valuators were of opinion that
/411tIation was in most cases 10 per cent. below the

rent paid, as both landlord and tenant were desirous of 1
lowering the v?luatioo. In Bandon there was a va'uation
for municipal purpo,e7=, which wa3 considvia'Ay ahcoe that
under the Poor-law rating. In Castledermott the valua-

ticn was, in sixty instances, below the rent paid, and in
ten only above it. In Clonmel the es:iatate was lower
than the re Jt, with ver‘ few instances to the contrary.
In Cashel the valunt ,r was of opipi ni that his valuation

was from 3 to 5 per cent. below the rent required, even
by the 'most indulgent landlords. In Cork it was from 4
to 5 per cent. under the rent. In Roserea it was from
10 to 15 per cent. blow the ret at which an
occupier would still 11, ve an interest in the
land ; and it was cn the average of cases
15 per cwt. below the rents usually pid. In Slip it

was about 15 per cent. benealt the tent, which a suivent
tenant, making a prudent a-rangement would give, and 25
per cent. bencat`► the actual rent I.i Tippet,ry the
valuation was 2A ye: cent. below the rent. ln Fermoy

r r r
the number of 101. electors on the registry, whose rent
was ascertained, was 174, and out of that number 118
would be disfranchised if they were required to have an
interest of a farthing above the rent ; by requiring an in-
terest of 31. 132 would be disfranehiied ; by requiting

51. 140 would ---b; disfranchised, and by requiring an ex-
cess of 10/. above the rent, the c mstitucney woull be re-
duced to fifteen persons only.—( Hear, hear.) Of tl.e:e
parties, however, two paid upwards of 200/. rent, fiurteen
paid between 100/. and 200/., thirty-seven paid OctlTen
50/. and 100/. and ten paid between 301. and 50/. These

facts he thought would show that these parties were not
men possesiag li tle or no means to qualify them for the
right of voting. In Ca,hel the number of 101. electors
ascertained was 142 ; but of these 11 2 would be

chisei by requiring of them an interest «boy., the rear,
116 by requiring an interest of 2/. 120 by requiring an
interest of 3/. 121 by requiring an interest of 41. 1-23 by
requiring an interest of Si. and 133 would be disfranchised
by requiring an interest of 10/. above the Poor-liw va'ua-
tion. In Listowe!, out cf 265 electors 125 would be disfran.

chi,hed by requiring any interest ahoy,: the rating ; 127
by requiring an interest of 1/ , 172 by requir:ng an inte-
rest of 21., 188 by requiring an interest cf 31., 202 by re -
quiring an interest of 41., 220 by requiring an interest of
.51., and 250 by reeiuiring an interest of 101. In Tippc-
rary out of 100 la occupiers 82 would be disfranchised
by requiring any excess above the rear, .96 by requiring 11.,
88 by requiring 21., 91 by requiring 3/., 92 by requiring
-IL, and 97 by requiring 10/. In Arrni)gli—Prote.,tant
Armagh—out of 96 electors 22 would be or_iranchisel by
any in:crest above the rati ig, 27 by an intcre‘t of 11., 36 by
an interest of 21., 45 by an interest of 31., 53 by an inte-
rest of 4/., 66 by an interest of 51., and 81 by an interest
of 10/. In Catehill, out of 255 ascertained electors, 86
would b 3 disfranchised by requiring of them any excess
above the rent, 151 by requiring Si. , and 213 by requir-
ing 10/. He thought that those would show that the
amendment of his Noble Friend (Lord Howick) was un-
tenable and inapplicable ; and that it would nut carry out
the principle of popular representation in Irelar.d.—
( Hear, heir.) Those were the grounds on which

he certainly felt himself bound, With whatever re-
luctance, to offer his strenuous opposition to the

first proposal which his Noble Friend Vad made. With
regard to the arguments which might be urged in favour
of establishing a franchise without a lraie, and with re-
gard to the amount of value which should be required, he
woul I he prepared to state his opinions when the questions
came immediately under the consideration of the House.

All he wished for'the present to show was that the first

proposition of his Noble Friend could not be carri Al if
they were determined on maintaining any constituency--
he did not merely say a sufficient constituency, but any
constituency whatever worthy of the nsme.—( Hear, hear.)
He would be prepared at the proper time to contend that
the proposition they (the Government) had brought for-
ward of ascertaining the franchise by the amount of rating,
was the safest, the simplest, and the plainest they
could devise, and, at least, until he had heard
some counter proposition brought forward, which he
could think more feasible and expedi?nt than any which
had as yet been submitted to them—by that measure he
should be content to abide.—(Cheers.)
Mr. C. WOOD said that the proposition of his No-
ble Friend had not been brought forward as a substitute
for the Government measure, but as an amendment on it.

He did not mean to say that he approved of the franchise
which his Noble Friend the Secretary fur Ireland bad pro-
posed, but whether the franchise were to be leasehold, as
proposed by the Noble Lord, or a franchise to be de.er-
mined by occupation, as suggested by his Noble Friend, the
amendment would clearly be an addition to the franchise,
whatever it might he. The object of his Noble Friend was to
enlarge the franchise which might hereafter be e:tablisbed.
The proposition of his Noble Friend viewed as an addition,
not as a substitute, would be a clear extension of the fran-
chise to one of the most independent classes in Ireland,
and as it was so he trusted after that explanation his Noble
Friend, the Secretary for Ireland, would withdraw that
opposition which he had threatened to the amendment of
his Noble Friend. The Bill introduced by his Noble
Friend (Lord Morpeth) proposed to rest the franchise in
Ireland upon occupation alone; in his opinion that would
be most objectionable, because it would destroy the oldest
and most independent qualification which had ever existed
in that or any other country—the qualification founded
upon property. It would be a great matter gained, if that
qualification were preserved. If, as he sincerely trusted
it would, the present prosperity of Ireland continued, there
would be a vast accumulation of small proprietors who, by
the Bill of the Government, would be excluded from the
franchise, but th :t class would be admitted if the amend-
ment of his Noble Friend were successful ; as the object
of both was to preserve the constituencies of Ireland, he
sincerely hoped that the threatened opposition would be
withdrawn. It was necessary to have different franchises
for the state of property, and holdings were entirely differ-
ent in the South to what they were in the Nortb. The
leasehold franchise alone could never maintain the present
numbers of the Irish constituencies, and that was one very
great objection to the measure. He was most anxious to
maintain the numbers of the independent electors in Ire-
land, and he was well assured that that was also the aim
and anxious desire of the Government ; then he fully
trusted that they would withdraw a!1 opposition to the
amendment of his Noble Friend, which would have the
effect they desired. He would take the state of the con-
stituencies in Ireland in 1835, and that he considered as a
year in which every thing was fair, it was before the sys-
tem of double entries was resorted to ; as for the imputed
perjury and fraud, he cared nothing—( Hear, hear)—he
considered it was very much exaggerated. Was it to be
wondered at, that when the Judges themselves could not
agree upon the question of value, two peasants should upon
the same question swear entirely contrary to each other,
and yet both swear perfectly acccrding to their consciences
and without the least tinge of fraud ? Suppose that Judges
Perrin and Crampton were to be brought into the Registra-
tion Courts, they upon the question of value would swear
directly against each other, yet who for one moment could
imputeperjury or fraud to either of the Learned Judges?—
why, then, not extend their charity to the people also?—
( Hear, hear.) Well, then, in 1835 the constituency un-
der the Reform Act amounted to 45,000—it was now
38,000 in round numbers—the decrease amounting to
7,500 during that period. Now on looking at the evi-
dence hid before the House, it was evident that much of
this decrease was owing to the non-renewal of leases by
the landlords in Ireland—that evidence proved that even
where political considerations did not enter into the ques-
tion, there eats a great reluctance to renew leases. Those
reports showed that the renewal of leases was g sing out in
Ireland, and it followed that if the franchise were based
on the leasehold, it was based on a foundation which
shortly would not exist—they were building upon sand,
which was gradually falling away, and whatever numbers
of voters might be now obtained, even if they went down
to a 51. rating, there was nothing more certain than that
in five years hence they would not have that
number or anything like it. Disfranchisement was going
on at a rate of 1,000 a yea-. In a few years a necessity
would arise to revise the whole question. He tyrtiei-
pated in the strongest degree in the objections which his
Noble Friend stated against 51. rating. He (Mr. C.
Wood) did not believe that the object which his Noble
Friend ( Lord Morpeth) had in view—namely, of securing
the independence of the voter—would be obtained by a
lease when the amount was so low as Si. or even 81.
With respect to what was asserted relative to landlord
and tenant in this country he believed that great misre-
present itions were made. He did not believe that it ex-
isted as a general rule that the tenant was driven against
his will to vote contrary to his opinion. He did not be-
lieve that coercion was exercised generally by the land-
lord. If such a general rule existed he did not think the
tenantry, as a class, would be coerced by it.—( Opposition
cheers.) He must say that one of his Chief reasons for
being of that opinion was, that, taking the occupying tenantry
generally, their opinions did not materi tlly differ front
those of the landlords. That was apparent, if they con-
sidered those questions which generally occurred at a
county election—such as the Corn-laws. The question
to be decided now was not whether leaseholders were a
class of independent voters, but whether leases would
make them so. His position was that a lease was net ne-
cessary to make the occupying tenant independent, espe-
cially at a low rating, because, so far as occupation at a
high amount was a test of property, and property was a
test of intellgence and education, the occupying tenant
had a bettor test as a qualification for a voter than the
leaseholder at a small amount. There could be no doubt
that the power of creating fictitious votes, as stated in the
extracts which he read front the Report, and as men-
tioned in the case of the Castlereagh Union, would be
extended to a very great extent in the case of
leaseholders at a small amount of rating. Indeed
at such an amount of rating as 5/., it was of no consequence
to the landlord whether the tenant had a lease or not.
The question, he thought, was not so much whether they
should have an independent constituency, but whether
they should have a. constituency at all. What he had
hitherto urged referred to the state of things likely to re-
sult from the rating of Si., which was first proposed, being
established. It seemed now, however, that the Government
had raised the rating from 51. to 81. Now, even by that
rating of 8/. he found on referring to the fourteen Unions
mentioned in the report from which he had just re ad ex •
tracts, that out of the existing number of 20/. voters
one-sixth would be disfranchised. That seemed to him
a most extraordinary mode of keeping up the constitu-
ency of Ireland—to commence by lessening it. Those
Unions were taken indiscriminately, and might be taken
as pretty
fairly representing all the Unions its the coun-
try, and if so, if the
object of the Noble Lord's Bill was to
keep up the constituency, it was certaiuly extraordinary
that the first thing which it effected was to disfranchise
6,000 of the existing voters. In the last six years the
number of voters diminished to the amount of 6,000, and
if upwards of 6,000 more would be disfranchised, those who
would remain would be left to the operation of the same
cause as that which had already eff.cted so great a dimi-
nution in their numbers ; and where then the constituency
would ultimately come from, he confessed he did not
know. The cause of the diminution, namely, the non-
renewal of leeses, would remain in forcible operation, and
would effect a continued reduction.—( Hear, hear, from
the Opposition beaches.) That there might be no ques-
tion about what ho stated he would read the names of
the Unions. The Hon. Gentleman here proceeded to
read the names of the fourteen Unions referred to, and
then proceeded to say that the Noble Lord's ( Lord
Morpeth's) Bill would undoubtedly have the effect of die-

franchisilig one-ixth of the ttn-pound vo•ers of Ireland.
The object of his Noble Friend',; clause was to prcrervc
undimini,h.:ll that pro-ion of tic Irish constituency chick
might be sail to repre,ent the Irish people. He ( Mr. C.
Wood) begged his Noble Friend (Lord Alorpeth), and
the Attorney-General for Ireland, to roncrnLer that he
,tested against their comilering the proposal of his
Noble Friend near him as one which was to be taken as
the whole of the proposal which he mode. He proposed
to retain the property qualification in Ireland, as the b,st
that could exist; he meant as nearly as the; could retain

it, by relaxing the intention of tie Legislature, some
ycirs rgo, and by prcwnting that state cf things
which tie Noble Lord, the Member for North Lanca-
shire-, said he would deal with when it shnul,l happen—
namely, the diminution of the constitty.'ncy of Ireland— if
that diminution siould be such as to throw power zg
into the hande of those from whom the Reform Bill re-

leased it. He (Mr. C. Wood) quite agre'd th, t the effect
of any surplus interest above the rent would be to produce
that state ef things, and he called upon all who thought
that at least the form of representation in Ireland ought. to
he preserve], to assist them in pine-sin„ either by the
way his Noble Friend proposed, or by an occupation fran-
chise of his he: amount. He coiled upon them to make
up the number that might be required in a idition to those
who might remain, in such a manner as might be con-
sidered to form a fAir constituency for Ireland. His
Noble Fii.?nd's proposal had this object, but it did not
fully put before the House what his Noble Friend intnnded
to do. It might be considered al, omission that his Noble
Friend ha I not given notice of the amount at which he pro-
posed the tenant to he rated. It was impossible to do that be-
I re t'ey had the returns in their hands, and those were only
delis eed this morning. But the cecupatien franchise
his Noble Friend might consider as a substitute for the
one which he proposed, and the question for the House.
to consider was whether they would add:the franchise, re-
taining as much as they could of the present freeholds in
Ireland, and making up the rest in some way or ether
thereafter to be determined. He hot el his Noble Friend's
proposal would be considered only In conjunction with
some other to be thereafter delivered to the House. He
was sure his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland
would acquit his Noble Friend ( Lord Howick) of coming
betel.e bins with this proposition. They had thought the
present interest with the test of rating ought to be pre-
served, and the deficiency made up by additional fran-
chises, and for that reason only these words came before
the amendment of his Noble Friend.—(Hear, hear.)

Thcir object was the extension of the franchise,
to the people of Ireland, which he hoped would be con-
sidered as one that entitled them to the support of that

side of the House.
Sir C. GREY wished to say a few words on this
amendment. He hoped it would not be considered any
impertinent intrusion if he rose fur the very natural pur-
pese, before the question was put, of understanding what
tie amendment war, and what were the words it proposed
to amcoi.—( Hear, heer.) Before the speech of Lis
Noble Friend he was almost disposed to vote with him—
(Laughter)—but as the amendment wasexplained he could
not do so. He begged the Noble Lord (Lord Morpeth)
not to consider this as a verbal amendment.—(Haar. )

Could his Hon. Friend have overlooked the importance
of the words "in his actual occupation ?" On what
ground, then, did he say that the 101. franchise was taken
away by the first clause of this Bill ? The Hen. Member was
in total error in supposing that this clause operated as a dis-
franchisement of the property qualification. The clause
did not affect those who were in actual occupation. Hav-
ing said thus much, he would state as shortly as he could
his reasons for voting against the amendment, notwith-
standieg the words " beneficial interest." He held the
omission of these words as one of the main merits of the
Noble Lord's Bill. The mode in which the Hon. Mem-
ber proposed to deal with the beneficial interest would of
itself prevent him (Sir C. Grey) from voting with him;
but the insuperable objection he had to it was this, that it
would operate to disfranchise a class of voters to whom it
was intended to give the franchise in 1832. The Hon.
Member had omitted to mention those qualifications in
which property and beneficial occupation are required to
exist. The amendment of the Noble Lord the Member
for Northumberland would operate most injuriously with
respect to those. Although such an opinion had been fre-
quently repudiated, his ( Sir C. Grey's) opinion was, that
by law a farmer occupying a farm for a term originally
created, having an interest of 10/. a year above all rents
and charges was entitled to vote.
Lord STANLEY said that differing as he did alto-
gether from the principles of the measure introduced by
the Government, it was of very little importance to him
whether the original clause was carried, or an amendment,
which was considered merely of a verbal nature. But it
was bcc ruse he did not consider it merely of a verbal na-
ture—itwas because he considered it identified with the
great principle to which he was attached, that when he
was called upon to decide whether the amendment of his
Noble Friend, or the clause of the Noble Lord, the Secre-
tary of Ireland should stand, that he resolved to give his
vote in favour of the amendment of his Noble Friend,
which appeared to him to affirm and uphold the prin-
ciples which he maintained, and which the measure cf
the Government sought to destroy.--(Cheers.) The
proposition which had been made at the very latest mo-
ment, two months after the introduction of the Bill, and
upon informasion which was not obtained for the purpose
of framing the Bill, but which was obtained for the pur-
pose of bolstering it up—( Loud cheers)—the last
proposition of the Noble Lord and the Government,
was the insertion of a franchise, one simple, sole franchise
for Ireland, that franchise being the being rated to the re-
lief of the poor to the amount of 81., without reference to
the amount of beneficial interest—without reference to the
fact of whether the person claiming had any beneficial in-
terest as a solvent tenant, or possessed of any property
whatever.—(Cheers.) That was tho principle tire Go-
vernment contended for in opposition to that of his Noble
Friend the Member for Northumberland, who asked them
to define the existing franchise, undoubtedly with some
modifications, with some limitations, and some alterations ;
but he proposed to take the rating as the test, and in addi-
tion to a certain amount of rating, not simply per se, but
over and above the rent, and that that sheu!d ho deemed
and taken to be not a new qualification, but the 1 gal and
correct interpretation of that for which he was contending
in common with the gentlemen on his ( Lord Stanley's)
si le of the House, namely the beneficial interest being an
excess of value over the burdens affecting the land, as was
required by the Reform Act, but which the Government
now sought to abolish.—( Hear, hear.) Therefore, how-
ever it might suit the views of Hon. Gentlemen opposite'
to represent that as a verbal amendment—and it was upon
those grounds that he should vote in favour of the amend-
ment proposed by his Noble Friend to the first
clause—he did not conceive that that would be the pro-
per time for entering into the discussion of the details,
either of his Noble Friend's amendment, or the proposition
of the Government, for that would naturally and neces-
sarily arise in discussing the second clause ; but they were
now called upon to choose, if compelled to adopt any
change—if they were to make any alteration—if they were
to legislate at all, they were called upon to say, would
they legislate upon the principle of a beneficial interest, or
of no interest at all ?—( Hear, hear.) He must say that it
would require some ingenuity to persuade him, and it
would require some ingenuity to persuade the country,
that the division on the present question was
a division on a merely verbal animsndmer.t. He was
bound to say, without discussing the details of his Noble
Friend's proposition, that he was disposed entirely and
cordially to concur in it. He should regret to see the fran-
chise of Ireland, and he was sure he spoke the sentiments
of that side of the House, unnaturally and unduly diminished.
—( Hear, heir ; Cries of "Oh I ' and Laughter.) He
should regret to see persons possessed of a proper qualifi-
cation, and of the same property and the same beneficial
interest either by the state of the law, or from any kale-
qusey in the law, or from the conduct of the
landlords of Ireland in refusing to grant leases—he
should regret to see those persons depr.ved of their fran-
chises, and the constituency of Ireland dwindled to a very
small amount ; and whets the ewe arose, he repeated
again, that he would be prepared to consider, and
with the most fsvourable attention, any proposition
that might emanate from the Executive, with whom ques-
tions of that momentous nature must emanate in order to
be brought to a successful issue. He would consider fa-
vourably any proposition to meet those evils when those
had been proved to exist.—( Hear, hear.) It had been
asked whether it was the intention of the framers of the
Reform Act to restrict the county constituency in Ireland,
and it had been urged that in point of fact the Reform
Act, so far as the counter were concerned, was a delusion
upon Parliament and the public, and it was assumed that
the county constituencies of Ireland were at the present
moment in a state of rapid decline and of progressive di.
miaution, Now he apprehended that there was no proof
whatever for the opinion. When he had the honour
of introducing the Irish Reform Act, he was
asked at what he calculated the then existing
constituency of the country, and he replied 52,000—that
was to say, he took the existing registry, and he found on
it 52 000 He had been very properly met by the Hon.
and Learned Member for Dublin, who told him, " True,
there are 52,000 on the registry—l am on it, and my sons
are on it ; but my father is also on it, and my uncles and
my grandfather are on it ; and from my knowledge of the
country," said the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, " so far
from 52,000 being on the registry, I will take upon my
self to say that at the outside there are not 30,000. That
year only 1,200 had been added to the constituency, and
it requires no exorbitant stretch of the imagination to
conceive that, under your Bill, the county constitu-
.cy can scarcely reach 30,000 " These were the ex-
pressions of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman,
arid of the Honourable Member for Kilkenny. He
( Lord Stanley) admitted to the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman with regard to the county constituencies the Re-
form Act introduce I a very great change. But he ldoked
to the borough constituencies and the canstituencies of
counties, of cities, and of towns, for the great increase of
the constituencies. His Right Hon. Friend the Member
for the University of Dublin and the Hon. and Learned
Recorder for Dublin, both of them in opposing the
Bill
said that they did not calculate upon much increase in
the county constituencies, but they did with regard to
cities and boroughs. Those were the anticipations of
both patties of those who supported and those who op-
posed the Reform Bill, and neither side anticipated any
great increase in the county constituencies of Ire-
land. The result was that in 1833 under the
excitement of the Reform Bill, when all parties
were rushing to the booths to assert axle claims, and
when their claims were admitted with very little considera-
tion and very little opposition, because there was little of
a political struggle on one side, the number of the county
constituency in Ireland was 57,000. From that period.
up to the present time it was impossible it should have
happened without any double registration—without any
person being registered over again—without any voter
being struck off over and over again—it was quite clear
that the nominal constituency must go on increasing till
the first octennial revision. It was 57,000 in 1833 ;it
was 64.,000 in 1835; it was 73,000 in 1837 ; and it was
99,000 in 1839. But from what did this arise? From
the constant succession of names put on during the course
of these years, while not a single name could be
struck off. Moreover, a great number of the 57,000
who were on the registry in 1833 reappeared in 1839,
and swelled the constituency to an enormous amount, In