The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-29 00:00:00

allowed 100,0001., there was a sum of 90,0001. of which
there was no account. The petitioner stated that when
his Noble Friend the Duke of Wellington was in office,
he had saved the country as raucu as 60,0001., by making
representations to his Grace.
REMOVAL OF

TILE IRISH POOR FROM
ENGLAND.

Lord BROUGHAM would take that opportunity of
correcting a misrepresentation of what he had said the
other night with respect to the removal of the Irish
paupers frcm Liverpool and Glasgow. He had been re-
presented as saying that the Irish paupers should be re-
moved at once from those towns. He found on con-
sultation with Mr. Rushton that there was great diffi-
culty in the law, for although there was a power of
transferring Irish and Scotch paupers beyond the water,
and beyond the border, yet the doing so was so beset
with difficulty that the law could hardly be acted upon.
He trusted, therefore, that some declaratory Act would
shortly be brought in to remedy the evil.
Lord DYSART said in reference to a statement
which the Noble and Learned Lord bad made the other
night, that the landholders of Ireland, or their agents,
had given money to the paupers on their estates, to
enable them to go to Liverpool and such places in
England ; he had written to persons residing in various
parts of Ireland upon the subject, and only in one
instance had he ascertained that teere was any founda-
tion for the statement of the Noble Lord.

Lord BROUGHAM said he made the statementupon
the authority of Mr. Rushton, of Liverpool, who had
transmitted to him the reports of three police inspectors,
in which it was stated that many of the Irish paupers of
Liverpool had admitted that they had received three
shillings to five shillings from their landlords or
their agents to enable them to get to Liverpool.
The people could not come over for nothing ; it might
be said that the pressure of the famine had sent them
over, but then the famine could not pay their passage.
Then it had been said that the steam-boat proprietors
paid them to come over, but it was absurd to suppose
that they would pay them 2s. 6d. to come over,
for the sake of getting 2s. 6d. to take them
back again. He had been informed that
numbers of the tenants had received 51. each
to tear or hum owe the it cabins for the sake of allow-
ing their landlords thus to get rid of them. He could
not help making a passing allusion to the praiseworthy
conduct of the Society of Friends, they had already
raised among themselves upwards of 30,0001. to-
wards the relief of the Irish poor, and, upon the
occasion of the Fast-day, they not thinking it right
to keep that day sacred, had given the half of
their earnings and profits to the same charitable
object. He quite agreed with the Society of Friends
that works of mercy were better than works of sacrifice.
A Noble Friend of his on the bench was travelling his
circuits upon the fast day, and upon arriving at one of
the towns in Wales, he found it quite impossible to ob-
tain a morsel of bread, or anything in the shape of viands,
so completely had the zeal of the Welsh people to keep
the fast rumaged the whole of the town.—(Laughter.)
A NOBLE LORD—His Lordship kept the fast.
BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY LAWS.

Lord ASHBURTON presented a petition from the
merchants and traders of the City of London, praying
their Lordships to alter or amend the laws relating to
Bankruptcy and Insolvency. The Noble Lord consi-
dered the petition so important that he would move
that it should be read.
The Clerk at the table, therefore, read the petition.

Lord BROUGHAM explained that the newspapers
which had stated that his opinion had changed on the
subject of imprisonment for debt, were in error. His
opinion upon that subject had undergone no change.
NATIONAL SCHEME OF EDUCATION.

Lord DESART presented several petitions against the
Government scheme of education.
NATIONAL POOR-RATE.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition, praying
for the enactment of a national poor rate. In doing so,
he said, that he was still of the opinion which he had
expressed last year, that it would be quite unadvisable
to enter into the question of the settlement of the poor
until the whole matter was under the consideration of
I'arliament, for if thky came to any ill advised altera-
tion of the Act of last year, he felt assured that it would
lead to great confuvit,n and difficulty for those who had
to administer the law.
SERVICE IN THE ARMY.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to ask the
questions of which he had given notice. He had,
therefore, to inquire whether the Bill now introduced
into the House of Commons by her Majesty's Govern-
ment for limiting the time of service in the army has
the sanction and approbation of the Commander-in chief,
and if it has originated on his recommendation to her
Majesty's Government, or if any opinions have been taken
by any board of general officers, or other military
authorities on the matter. Whether it is the intention of
her Majesty's Ministers to advise her Majesty to issue
her royal warrant, as in October, 1806, for fixing and
raising the pensions of non-commissioned officers and
soldiers whcebecome entitled to their discharge by rea-
son of expiration of certain periods of service, ♦iz., to
non-commissioned officers to Is. 10d., to privates Is.,
thus returning to the standard thought advisable at that
period, when limited service was first introduced, in-
stead of remaining at the diminished pensions now esta-
blished.

Earl GREY said that although no inconvenience
might arise to the public service by giving an explicit
reply to the question, yet it was plainly improper that
confidential communications between the Ministers and
the Horse Guards should be brought before the Hnuse'
and he could, therefore, return no answer at all. With
respect to the second question, he had to say that no
such warrant as that to which the Noble Marquis al-
luded hadlbeen issued, or was intonded to be issued.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY had then to move

for copies of all the communications between her
Majesty's 31inisters and the Horse Guards with
respect to the term of enlistment for service,
and also with respect to the increase of pen-
sions, according to the minute of October 18, 1846.
As the oldest general officer in the service, he felt bound
to perform this duty : it was a duty he did not shrink
from, because he felt confident that nine out of ten of the
general officers of the army were opposed to the Bill.
He thought they had a right to know what were the
opinions of the general officers of the army on the sub-
ject. There was not at present a single military officer
in the Cabinet. In matters of law, in the navy, or in
the church, the opinions of the dignataries, or the offi-
cers at the head of the department were studied ; but
with respect to the army a great and fundamental change
was now to be brought about under the recommendation
of the Secretary at War, who was, no doubt, a very
re-pectable sort of gentleman, but certainly knew no
more about the army than one of the clerks at the table.
He said that was not the first time that a limited service
had been proposed. A similar proposition was made in
1806, and before that in 1757. Had the present mea-
sure resembled that of Mr. Wyndham, who proposed
pensions for the soldiers after their service had expired,
there would have been some encouragement for the
army.

FLEFT SPEAKING.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
DUBLIN CORPORATION IMPROVEMENT BILL.
Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition from some
place (the name of w hich we did not hear) against the
Dublin Corporation Improvement Bill.

SECOND READINGS.
The following Bills were read a second time and
ordered to be committed:—
Sandwich Haven.
Bristol Building arid Improvement:
Liverpool Guardian Gas.
York Improvement, Lendal-bridge and approaches.
EDINBURGH AND PERTH RAILWAY.

Mr. 'l'. DUNCOXIBE presented a petition from a
Mr. J. Brown, a shareholder in the Old Edinburgh and
Perth Railway Company, praying that the st eond read-
ing of the Bill be pos►poned until the evidence taken
before the Committee on Standing Orders be printed
The petitioner alleged that the report of that Committee
was not borne out by the evidence.
WEYMOUTH AND MELCOMBE REGIS HAR-