The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-01 00:00:00

Mr. S 1 UAR s
thy :,.!

13,101)
-httuld 1,a,)

th 2 ~1 lii?
a!tp.tk, that p, IfOR beir
speech, that stetre,l to

,II

*ion, and a.-I:":ressed, no; t Speaker or the House,
but to a public out of door:, was a grie,s abuse of the
privileges of the House. IL, even named a Noble Lard,
and taunted him upon r cciring a pension on the
ground of holding a pubic office inder the Crewn.
He named another Noble and Idyllic(' Lord who
had once occupied a seat in that House. and said he was
neither remarkable for 1.1, eloquence or his wiqium.
Well, that Noble Lord, no doubt, would be quite a match
in wisdom or in elcqw-nce for the Hon. Baronet., if he
could have had the opportunity of defending himself.
The Learned Gentleman then read a paper, on the
ground of which he called the accusation made b) the
Hon. Baronet against the Mayor of W, ;cord u. founded.
Mr. WATSON said the question was. whether they
were to enact a union rate or an electoral rate ; whether
they would throw the whole burden on the towns and
free the country. He spoke not to his e eqittients but
for them ; because the town which he had the honour
to represent was ovirwhelintd with destitution. He
trusted that they would ri.iestate the original clause, for
the present system was full, of tyranny.
The question was then put, amid cries of Divide"
and " You can't," when ,

Mr. MACARTHY rose and said he could not under-
stand why the House should secede from their opinion,
and therefore he should press the question to a division.
The House then divided, when there appeared--
For the motion BO
Against it
Majority for Government, and the Lords'
amendments
Mr. D. NORREYS contended that the cliswe would
be altogether inoperative., heoause. by its preseu:
struclion, it

tradirrEd

The CHANCELLOR. of ttic EXCItEQL LH &au?,
that with a view to reconcile the discrepatici.s which
existed between one part and another, he bad altered
some of the tenses in the clause.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said another difficulty would
arise from the difficulty of' knowing where the applicants
for relief had been residing.
Sir R. FERGUSON said that a third, and perhaps the
greatest evil would arise from the derangement to the
workhouse account, occasioned by the introduction of
this clause. He thought that some lithe time should be
given them for preparation.
Sir GEORGE GREY said that ample opportunity
would be given to arrange means to meet the change
which would be rendered necessary.
Clauses up to 17, were agreed to.
Clause 17 was negatived.
After a few words from Sir J. 1). Norreys, Sir G.
Clerk, and Lord Hamilton,
The ATTORNEY GENERAL objected to the
powers, given under the present English poor-law, of
moving such cases into the Queen's Bench, by writ of
certiorari ; and he would rather take from, than give
to, Ireland the same power.
The House then divided, when there appeared,
For the amendment
For the original motion 73
Majority ............ —54
The amendments were th..-It at to.
LANDED PROPERTY (IRELAND) BILL.
The CHANCELLOR el' the EXCHEQUER moved
that the Lord's amendments Qn this Bill be read.
Mr. FITZSTEPHEN FRENCH said that the Bill
as it at present stood, wuuld be inapplicable to three-
fourths of Ireland.

The amendments were then read.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the first amendment of the Loris be disagreed to.
Lord G. BENTINCK hoped the House would not
consent to the course proposed, but agree to the Lords'
amendments, as they had ne to the Loch' amend-
ments to the English Poor law on a former -evasion.
The CIIANCELI.OII of tit.' F.X';IIEQI.'EII said he
could hot t i the siegg-% a ion of Ike NAle Lcrd.
He recAtutuentied tie amendments to be du,agreed to
becauso they affected the l ecuniary qualifications of the
B:11, and were therefore an ii,trii.gernent of the
privileges of that Ihiust,.—(llear. he,r.) As a
question of urivilcge. he considered this as a matter
or great imp irtanee ; and, notwithstanding what ; ad
fallen troni the Noble Lord of posite, he trust. d the
House would not depart fr. an the usage of all former
Hou,es of Parliament in ea..es of this nature.
Mr. ITEWDEGATE su:d the Right lion. Gentleman
had based the privileges of the Alonso. up,n a very
narrow foundation. The Lords were allowed to inter-
fere in matters cAniect,:d with local rates, and
as he considered the funds to be fluted
uuder this Bill were to be applied to local and no; ne-
ral purposes, he could not see why any questions of
privilege should interlere to defeat the amendments of
the Lords.
Mr. GOULBURN must resist the ameucnen:s of the
Lords upon the grounds stated by the Right Honourable
Gentleman. The peculiar privilege of appropriating
the public money was vested in the house of Com-
mons, and the House ought to be cantious that it
was not infringed. Suppose they were to agree

to these amendments, what might it not ulti-
mately lead to ? i;Phy, it might happen that
when this House voted 5,0001. to the navy, and
4,0001. to the-army, the Lords might give this as an in-
stance for their reversing or altering that appropriation.
—(Hear, hear.) He must, thefore, decline to be a party
to allowing the House to agree to these amendments.
After a few words from Lord John Manners, Sir G.
Grey, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Laroy, and
Mr. M. J. O'Connell, the amendments of the Lords were
rejected.
Upon clause 29 being read,
Mr. FITZSTEPHEN FRENCH objected to the
amendment, on the ground of its interterence with the
privileges of the House, it being a money clause..
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that he would move that that clause should be agreed to
by the House.

The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 29, as amended, was then read,
The CHANCELLOR of thin EXCHEQUER moved
that the amendment be disagreed to.
The amendment was rej-cted accordingly.
The following two clauses, as amended, were agreed
to.

Clause 55, with amendments, was also agreed to.
Several other amendments were agreed to, and seve-
ral rejected.
The Bill, as amended, was agreed to, and the report
ordered to be brought up.
The House resumed.
DESTITUTE POOR (IRELAND BILL.)
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER, the House went into Committee upon
this Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
what he now proposed with reference to this Bill was,
that a further advance should be made on the security
of the rates. Since August last 4,700,000/. was ex-
pended, but he was happy to say the old system, under
which this money was distributed, had been nearly
entirely discontinued. The reduction which had been
made, was greatly complained of, but it was attended
with great success, for it was effected when it was de-
sirable that the cultivation of the soil should be attended
to. Great indisposition was shown to this proceeding.
They had every reason to believe that the resident pro-
prietarylimits, endeavoured
furthe
the
either employ the people upon their estates and farms,
to keep
or feed them in idleness upon the produce of them.
conviction home to their minds, that they_ should
_e
darvholaudnitteesrueedcepeadyemd
payments
The system which had been pursued ei!.s to encourage
with the
to pre
vent the levy upon the poorer classes,
'firtYr iprinciple
e;sal and
dys ohaf
exception of some twenty- eight or thirty electoral over-
seers, emvionlyundti
the new system had been introduced throfighout
Ireland, and it was progressing with the happiest result.
The Right lion. Baronet then read statements
reports of Mr. Fox and others toshow from the
h were
abuses when the food wLs given 'kind, that
andtere were
that a
considerable change for the better might '
might be anticipated
from the new plans of relief. He believed the course
adopted by the Government was the best that could have
been resorted to under the circumstances, and he hoped
the result would realise their expectations. The sum
he now applied for was 600,0001., and if it would be
necessary to have a larger suns before Parliament rose,
he would come down and ask it. The Hon. Baronet
concluded by proposing the resolution.
Sir J. GRAHAM said there were two points to
which he wished to call the attention of the Noble Ba-
ronet. Since August last it appeared that the sum of
4,700,0001. was expended in relief, one moiety of which
was to be repaid. Did he understand that the half of
this was to be repaid in ten years ? He.i
wished to
know, also, as the Relief Act was in operation n 1,900
electoral divisions, and that the public works were in
operation in 68, and that 2,200,000 rations were daily
distributed, what was the estimate of the cost of all
this? Whether in every one of the 1,900 divisions the
rate would be struck, and whether it would be met?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the estimate was 2i..-1. rer ration, and the total esti-
mated charges 2,651,000/. He had already stated that
4,700,000/. had been spent in the department of publics
works, and would be payable in twenty instalments, the
first by next summer assizes. He believed that the rate
was already struck in every union, but they had no in-
formation as to whether it was being met.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM asked whether Government