The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-31 00:00:00

SELECT COMMITTEES.

Mr. AGLIONBY wished to call the attention of the
House to the circumstance of his having been, as
chairman of a Select Committee, Group No. 28, ap-
pointed to meet on the 19th of April, while at the
same time he was appointed to serve upon two
other Committees—the Standing Orders Committee and
the Committee of Private Business of the House. He
hoped, therefore, that the House would relieve him from
one or other of his duties.
PAUPER LUNATIC ASYLUMS.
Mr. NICHOLL wished to ask the Secretary of State
for the Home Department, whether her Majesty's Go-
vernment contemplated any alteration in the law respect-
ing pauper lunatic asylums, whereby counties or
boroughs, having no asylum for the pauper lunatics
thereof, will be relieved from the duty of erecting or
providing such an asylum, in conformity with the
_pro-
visions of the Act 8 and 9 Vic., c. 126, and 9 and 10 Vic.,
e. •4, or whether it is intended to enforce the perform-
ance of that duty?
Sir G. GREY said that it was not in the contempla-
tion of the Government to propose any alteration in the
law, and the Government would take care that asylums
should be erected in the counties and boroughs where
there were none at present.
THE POOR REMOVAL ACT.

Mr. REDHEAD YORKE asked the Secretary of
State for the Home Department whether it was the in-
tention of the Government to repeal the Poor Removal
Bill this session, if there should be no general revision of
the poor-law system?
Sir G. GREY said that the Committee on the subject
were pursuing their inquiries into the operation of the
law, and till they made a final report he could not say
what the Government would do with regard to it.
The Prisons (Ireland) Bill and the Troops during
Elections Bill were severally read a' second time, and
the first was ordered to be committed on Mouday, the
12th April.

IRISH LANDLORDS.
Mr• HAMILTON rose to make an exp7anation con-
cerningßarone, t thec l
ertain charges lately made by the Hon.
Member for Marylebone, with respect to
an Irish landl
M. mbcr defendeordd of the name of Longfieid. The Hon.
ing, that that gentleman
Longfield, and concluded by say -
hat committem h,: had subscribed 23 'l. t 3 the re-
Sir B. HALL a
~,r
aid hlProperty.
that he made his statements from
that
a return ordered by
~.,louse on the 4th of February,
and he had no wi,h to 1.“191*C
Irish landlords. present the conduct of any
Mr. LEFHOY entered at some -ength into a defence
of the Irish landlords, and reade
, expreVmacts from severd
letters he received from them
g their indigna-
tion at the unjustifiable treatment they received in that

House.
SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR THE RELIEF
POOR IN IRELAND. °F THE
Mr. YOUNG wished to call the attention of the
House to a return which had been moved for in the
anonth of February last, stating the amount of private
subscriptions made in Ireland for the relief of the poor,
aril giving a detail of names and amounts. He had re-
ceivers very many letters from Ireland of the report
which lutist be made, in answer to that motion.
—(ilor, hear.) It was a report which would do

great injustice to all parties ; it would gratify
the ambition of the rich and ostentatious, who wished
to have their charity appear before the public ; while
those less able to contribute, or more modest, would
be passed over entirely. He did not think it was a
return which ought to have been moved for, or i moved
for, that ought to have been allowed by the House,
considering the great personal injustice it would inflict
necessarily on individuals.
Lord BARRY VANE agreed with what had fallen
from the Hon. Gentleman opposite, and thought that
before the returns were furnished to the House steps
ought to be taken to prevent their ever being published.
If the Hon. Gentleman opposite would give notice that
immediately after the recess he would move that these
returns should not be presented to the House, he (Lard
Fl. 'Vane) would second him.
Sir G. GREY begged to correct the misimpression
that the returns would be made with a view to gratify
the ostentatious, but rather to show, by the example
of some exceptions in Ireland, how a good landlord ought
to discharge his duties. He might state at the same
time that as regarded the whole amount of private
charity, that might be found in the papers already be-
fore the House, and he did not think it would be neces-
sary to give it in a separate form. He believed, however,
that it was perfectly legitimate fur the House to order a
return of the amount of private charity in Ireland; but,
of course, if it were intended to specify the sums against
the names of the individuals as owners or occupiers, he
could not concede that it would be either proper or
prudent.
Mr. YOUNG said he objected to the document only
so far as it was intended to show the private charity of
i the Irish landlords. _ _

Mr. POULETT SCROPE said if there might be ex-
ceptions,
no one could yet doubt that the Irish landlords,
generally, had neglected the poor. He had a mass of
letters and documents which could immediately
prove the contrary—were it disputed. He could
not help referring to a report made by a Com-
mission of Inquiry, issued in 1834, about the
time when the cholera was raging in Skibbereen.
That decument stated that the subscriptions in aid of
the suffering poor had nearly all been from the towns-
people, and little or nothing had been subscribed by the
landlords. One of these proprietors, with a rental of
4,0001. a year, had given nothing ; another, with 1,5001.
a year, had withdrawn his subscription from the dispen-
sary. The subscriptions made amounted to 471.55., and
nearly all had been received from the town. They had
written to the non-resident landlords, none of whom had
given any answer whatever except four, and these
had given 111. ss. out of a combined rental of G,OOO/.
a year. These circumstances naturally made an impres-
sion on the public mind, under which they had thought
necessary to provide for the poor by a compulsory impo-
sition on the landlords, and ho trusted he might see that
fully settled before the end of the present session, which
would be the only means of ultimately setting these dis-
cussions and causes of discontent at rest.

.-
Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought the lion. Gentleman who
had just sat down had lost sight of a necessary distinc-
tion between his own remarks and those of the Mem-
ber for the Dublin University. The Hon. Member
for the University rose to vindicate universal character,
and, upon his resuming his seat, up got the lion.
Member for Stroud, and made a general charge against
the Irish proprietors, stating that he had a mass of
documents and correspondence to prove that they had
neglected their duties. Yet the Lion. Gentleman ended
with a hope that these discussions might be set at
rest. Why, there never would be an end of them if
lionourable Gentlemen, without any connexion with
that country, or local knowledge of it and the
people, continually busied themselves in its affairs.
It old stories and old charges were to be raked up in this
way, the landlords of Ireland would be discouraged, and
it would be one way to cause the great experiment
they were about to make to fail—the poor would
be embittered against the rich, and the poor-laws
would work most ineffectually. He sincerely thanked
the Noble Lord the Member for Durham (Lord H.
Vane) for the observations he had made. Ho hoped
his HOD. Friend would not interfere with the presen-
tation of the return, as the Right Hon. Baronet,
the Secretary of State, for the Home Department had
stated that there would be no objection to pro-
duce a list of the grants of public money side
by side with the local donations. The imperfect
n‘iture of the return ought to tell a lesson to
the Government not to grunt returns so easily, and
when they could not accurately give the intormation
required. Now they were about to separate he thought
it right to take that opportunity of thanking the Govern-
ment for the kindness and patience with which they had
listened to the suggestions which had been made,
and for the way in which they had passed
the measures through the House.—(hear, hear.)
Their desire for the amelioration of Ireland deserved

the gratitude even of those who had opposed the measure,
and he himself had proposed some amendments.—(Hear,
hear.) In his capacity as a magistrate, he should carry
out the measure in the temper with which it had been
passed.—(Cheers.)
Mr. V. SMITH hoped Hon. Members would not,
when they were about to separate, prolong a discus-
sion of this nature. As far as the return went it was

accurate, but it would not enable any one to judge of
all that had been done. Even the name of a
!fiend of his, who had greatly befriended the poor,
was not mentioned. Much more could be done for the
suffering people if landlords and others would personally
superintend the distribution of aid, instead of leaving it
in the hands of others. He would suggest that
the Honourable Gentleman should move, when the
return was brought up for presentation, that it
should not be printed. He thought the measure
ought to pass without obloquy being cast upon those
who would be intrusted with the carrying out of the
I measure.

Mr. GOULBURN suggested that the Government,
in the absence of the Hon. Baronet the Member fbr
Maryleboue (Sir B. Hall), should intimate that a com-
plete list of the subscriptions would be furnished, as it
was necessary that they should be informed what had
been raised in addition to the grants made by
the Government. The return in its present form
was most fallacious, and would lead to the inference that
many parties had neglected their duty who had, in fact,
done a vast deal to assuage the sufferings of the people
of Ireland. It was not right that they should stand be-
fore the country as criminals. With respect to the Bill,
he might state that he was strongly in favour of a ge-
neral rate for the support of the poor.
Mr. LABOUCHERE regretted that he was unavoid-
ably absent during the earlier part of the discussion.
His Right Hon. Friend had intimated that there would
be no objection to furnish ample lists of the Govern-
ment grants and the local subscriptions—(Bear, hear)
—and his Hon. Friend would not lay the return referred
to in the course of the discussion on the table until the
Honourable Gentleman the Member for Cavan had
had an opportunity of bringing forward any statements
which he had to make with respect to it. Ho could not,
however, help availing himself of that opportunity to
state that nothing could be more unfair than to measure
the amount of aid which had been afforded to the
people by the amount of the subscriptions raised
in the different localities, as many had expended
money on the improvement of their estates,
and in the establishment of soup kitchens
in their immediate localities.—(Elear.) He hoped it
would go forth to the public that subscriptions by
persons in Ireland was not the best way of relieving
the prevailing distress, as employment in cultivating or
reclaiminr, land, or in some other way, was far more va-
luable.—(Hear.)
Mr. TRELA WS Y said it had been urged that
that was not the proper time to frame a poor-
law for Ireland, as the public mind was un-
settled on the subject, and consequently that it
could not be properly carried out. Now, that appeared
to him the coolest and most extraordinary statement ever
made, as a ♦ast number of the people of Ireland were
absolutely dying of hunger, and consequently standing
in the immediate need of such a measure. Charity, he
thought, was a most unequal and indivious mode of taxa-
tion. A Noble Lord in the other House (Lord Mon teagle)
had stated, that out-door relief to the able-bodied would
prove most dangerous ; but he had not shown how the
introduction of the system would produce evil.
The report was then brought up.
Sir GEORGE GREY proposed the following amend-
ments :—Clause 1, after line IG, to insert the following
words—" And of such destitute persons as being disabled
from labour by reason of severe sickness or serious acci-
dent are thereby deprived of the means of earning a sub-
sistance for themselves and their families, whom they
are liable by law to maintain ; and of destitute poor
widows, having two or more legitimate children depen-
dent upon them." In Clause 2, line 7, after the word
"disabled," to insert "Or destitute poor persons dis
abled by sickness or accident as aforesaid, or such.desti-
tute poor widows as aforesaid."
The amendments were ordered to be made to the Bill,
and the report was agreed to.
CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL.

This Bill was read a third time and passed.
ARMY SERVICE BILL.

The House went into Committee on this Bill.
Sir DE LACY EVANS wished to say a few words in
reference to what had fallen from the Honourable and
Gallant Officer the Member for Liverpool (Sir Howard
Douglas) last night, and also in regard to some obser-
vations made by the late Secretary at War (Mr. S.
Herbert). He regretted he did not sec the latter Right
lion. Gentleman in his place, while he (Sir De Lacy
Evans) made the few remarks he had to offer. That
Right Hon. Gentleman had stated the fact, that with the
exception of the non-commissioned officers in the
army, the great bcdy of the soldiers were of 15 years'
standing in the service—that was, he said, the natural
period of the service in the army. He (Sir De Lacy
Evans) must say, after that expression of opinion, and
considering the well-merited respect which was due to
the Right Hun. Gentleman for kindness to, and great
care of, the army, he confessed he was astonished at the
deduction which he made in recommending that the
period of service should be reduced only one year. lle
trusted that the Hon. Gentleman would alter his
opinion of the question; and to induce hint to do so he
would recta to hie recollection the warrants which he
issued in 1845, giving the privilege of enlistment for
twelve or fourteen years. The proposition of the
reduction of one year would be perfectly nugatory
as a benefit to the soldiers. With regard to
what had fallen from the Hon. and Gallant Member, he
:souid remark that what he had stated about the money
c) 800,000 dollars must have arisen from tin error of
the press. He (Sir Do lotey Evans) had looked over
the dispatches, and was convinced that such must
have been the case. The dispatch of the Duke of
Wellington, which the Lion. and Gallant Officer had
quoted in reference to the Peninsular soldiers,
50 far from going against the present measure, he was
persuaded, was rather in its favour, as it showed that,
enstevenliin the midst of a most important war, a limited
meat had not been found prejudicial. The greater
proportion of
, tor
ct,ll
about
bloluotn .
asa randnGcahllarnetlaMtioeumbteor'sthae raddreQsas.,
however,

sure before the House, as Tenderden steeple bore
to Goodwin Sands. While referring to the Duke of
Wellington, he would take this opportunity of thanking
him for his recent elevation of so many officers from the
ranks. During the past year no less than 43 non-com-
missioned officers had been raised to ensigns and cornets.
—(Hear, hear.) This was but a tardy act of
justice, and following out what had been done for many
years in France, Russia, and other countries.
There were no less than four individuals who, in his
humble opinion, were far better qualified to come to a
right decision on this motion than any General in the
army.—(Hear, bear.) These were, the Noble Lord
now at the head of the Foreign Department (Lord
Palmerston), who had been for nineteen years Secre-
tary at War ; and the Secretary for the Colonies,
who had also for some time been Secretary
at War. The others were two gentlemen who had
been also Secretaries at War. The Hon. and Gallant
Member opposite had thought it right, because the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government had declined
giving the correspondence between the Ministry and the
Commander-in• Chief, to assert that the Noble Duke
at the head of the forces was quite opposed to the prin-
ciple which they had adopted ; and a morning paper had
thought proper to abuse him for having differed from
the lion. and Gallant Member opposite. But what was
the:case? Why, if the Hon. Member would read the
dispatches of the Noble Duke, who had not been lauded
more than his illustrious services and illustrious charac-
ter had deserved—if they would read these dispatches a
little more zealously, they would soon perceive that his
opinion was very different to what it had been re-
presented. In his communications with the Go-
vernment when in Spain he had frequently
told them that, although the troops sent
over were at first in a high state of
discipline, yet they soo❑ lost that discipline and the
efficiency with which they first arrived ; and in all
is"iese communications the Noble Duke had repeatedly
pressed the necessity for improving the morale of the
army, and had urged the wisdom of enlisting a better
set of men, and of increasing the pensions of the men
who were entitled to their discharge. This opinion,
then, came in well to support the decision of
civilians, and he was, therefore, justified in
asserting that civilians were fully competent
to judge of such a measure as this. The Noble
Duke had stated that it was of all things most important
to raise the character of the men in the army ; and in
this opinion he was supported by a man eminent for his
success in life—he meant Oliver Cromwell.—(A laugh.)
Well, he believed that at the time the opinion ho was
about to state was delivered that Cromwell was a civilian,
for he believed that he was nearly forty years of age
before he entered the army. It is well known that
in the first two campaigns of the civil war that the
Parliamentarian army was unsuccessful, and in one in-
stance a portion of their troops was driven into Brent-
ford, and it was recorded in the statement of a conversa-
tion that had taken place between Cromwell and
Hampden, that Cromwell, to whose ingenuity and care
the elevation of the character of the men was chiefly
owing, had expressed great doubts of the ultimate
success of the conflict. To remedy this defect, he said
that he would go down into Lincolnshire, where he was
well known, and enlist the sons of the yeomen there,
whose hearts, as well as their hands, woulu be in the
cause. He had done so, and it was, in his belief, owing
to that movement of Cromwell.

Mr. GOULBURN believed that, in the discussions on
this subject, there had been one thing altogether over-
looked, and that was the fact that in the great majority
of cases the service in the army was under five years'
duration. If, therefore, they limited the service to ten
years instead of fourteen, they would not be saving
any evil, but they would possibly be losing a great
benefit ; for it could not be denied that if
the term of service were extended to fourteen years, the
country would be deprived of the ablest assistance
which the soldier could render, and of all the expe-
rience which he had acquired daring that period.
He perfectly agreed with his Right Hon. Friend who ad-
dressed the House last night, that it would be wise and
judicious to limit the time to fourteen years, dividing the
period of service into seven years abroad and seven
years at home. He felt, too, that it would be most im-
proper to regulate the amount of pay or pensions of private
soldiers, and he hoped that subject would not be
touched upon by the other Bills, which it %%as under-
stood Government had in contemplation for improving
the efficiency and general condition of the army. Still,
however, he thought the present system ought to be
amended, it ought to be based upon more lib.,ral princi-
ples, and he would be quite willing to make legislative
provision to that extent if he could see clearly that it
would not cripple or interfere with the financial ma-
chinery of the State.
After a few words from Mr. FOX MAULE,
Clause 1 was agreed to.
Upon clause 2 being proposed, limiting the term of
years of enlistment, it was proposed to fill up the blank
with the word " ten."

Sir 11. DOUGLAS moved, as an amendment, that the
blank should be filled up with the word " fourteen."
Mr. HUME supported the original motion. He
thought that, if anything, ten years was too long; and
he woald be glad to see the term reduced even to seven
years. He believed that the passing of the present
measure would prove a glorious era in the history of the
British army.
Colonel LINDSAY supported the amendment. In
his opinion the adoption of the term of fourteen years
would tend to give a greater number of old soldiers to the
army than the period of seven years.
Mr. FOX MAULE could not agree to the amendment
for the reasons he stated on the last night the question
was before the House, and he still adhered to those
opinions.
Colonel T. WOOD said a limited service, in con-
lunction with a fourteen years' term, without the old
period of seven years being also in the option of the re-
cruit, was preposterous, and he must vote again!! t the
clause.

After a few words from Colonel SIBTIORP and Major
LAYARD, in explanation,
➢ir. J. COLLETT rose amid loud cries of " Divide,"
and said he must support the amendment, as the effect
of the clause would be to withdfftw all opportunity from
the private of rising in his profession.
Sir IL DOUGLAS very briefly replied.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment 27

Against it 62
Majority against the amendment —35
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 3 beirg proposed,

. „
Colonel T. WOOD proposed the following amend-
ment:--Ist line, after the word " soldier " to omit the
words "aftercompleting," and insert "during the last year
of." He said that the object of the amendment was, that
a soldier might be required to make up his mind in the
last year of his service whether he intended to re-enlist
in his own or some other regiment.
Mr. F. MALI LE considered that the soldier should
not be trammelled in the way the Hon. and Gallant
Officer recommended; and that he should be allowed, if
he thought proper, to leave his regiment, and to regain
it in six months after if he thought proper, provided he
could do so with the approbation of his commanding
officer.

On the suggestion of Colonel REID,
Mr. F. MAULE consented to alter the clause from
" for a further term not exceeding eleven years" to " for
a further period of eleven years."
Colonel WOOD was unwilling to divide the House.
He considered that his suggestion was one which would
prove advantageous to the soldier. Ile trusted the Hon.
Gentleman would adopt it. He, however, should not
divide upon it.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause
agreed to.
Clause 3, with a few verbal amendments, was then
passed.
On clause 4 being proposed,
Mr. GOULBURN suggested the necessity of retain-
ing the compulsion in the service of pensioners.
Mr. F. MAULE replied that he had reason to believe
that the prospect of the -deferred pension was quite
sufficient to secure the attendance of the pensioners ; and
after some conversation between Mr. Goulburn, Sir De
Lacy Evans and other Members, the clause was adopted,
as were also the remaining clauses of the Bill.
Major LAYARD said that as the whole of the clauses
had now been adopted by the House, ho would take that
opportunity of expressing his regret that the advantage
of the Bill was not to be extended to those who are now
in the service of her Majesty. When he had first taken
up this subject, he had taken pains to ascertain the
injury of the short period of enlistment, and he was quite
assured not only that the Bill would be beneficial, but
that it would be so beneficial that unless its influence
was extended, that great injustice would be done to the
men already in the army. They had not only in this
House, but also in the other House of Parliament,
apprehensions expressed that the setting men at liberty
would be dangerous. But to this supposition he could
attach but very little credit, and since the introduction
of steam navigation, our sea-girt isle has been placed
in a very different position to that which it had lately held
and he conceived that
.a great advantage would result
from the existence of a set of people who understood the
use of arms. As for the danger that was likely
to arise from the adherence of old soldiers to
carry out any factious or seditious design, he
thought that they were too well acquainted with the
utter futility of attempting to stand in a mob against re-
gular troops to do any such thing, For his own
part he should as soon think of attempting to
fly as to join a mob in the face of regular troops.
He hoped, therefore, that the House would not refuse to
give a ray of hope to those veterans who require the
light of hope to cheer them in their rugged away along
the chequered path of life.
:Sir DE LACY EVANS seconded the clause.
Mr. FOX MAULE opposed the introduction of the
clause. The Crown already possessed the power to
terminate at any time it thought proper, the en-
gagements of the soldiers ; and for this reason
he considered the insertion of the clause would be
wholly unnecessary. The Government propased to ex-
tend the beiefits of the measure to the present army, but
he did not think it would be politic now to state to what
extent the measure would be adopted. In every case the
soldier had ample opportunities to make a statement of
his grievances to the authorities, and he had no doubt that
if it was considered as a grievance that they were com-
pelled to continue in the army for a longer
period than ten years, while fresh soldiers
were limited to ten years, he had no doubt that the
statements of such grivances would be fully at-
teeded to.
Sir DE L. EVANS said that after the statement of
the Right Hon. Member the Secretary at War, he felt it
his duty to siate his opinion that it was desirable for the
Hon. and Gallant Member to withdraw his clause.
.

Colonel LINDSEY had the fullest couf d nce in the
Government with regard to this clause, and had nu ob-
jection to leave the matter entirely in their hands.
Major LAYARD then withdrew his clause.
The House then resumed, the Chairman reported pro-
gress, and the report was ordered to be brought up o
Monday, the 12th of April.

FEVER (IRELAND) BILL.
HARBOURS, DOCKS, AND PIERS CLAUSES
BILL.
PORTLAND HARBOUR OF REFUGE AND
BREAKWATER.

The reports on the above three Bills were ordered to
be read a third time on Monday, the 12th of April.
The other orders of the day having been disposed oF,
the House adjourned till Monday, the 12th of April.