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

THE AFFAIRS OF PORTUGAL.

Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE said he had to object to the
armed intervention of this country in the affairs of Portu •
gal, ashe thought such intervention would be dangerous
to liberty, and favourable to despotism, and he hoped
his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose would not
be induced, by honied words, to discontinue the prose-
cution of his views on this matter.
Mr. HUME said he had already stated his intention
of bringing on the question on Friday next. He should
feel, himself bound to avail himself of every opportunity
of bringing the question forward.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he could assure his llon.
Friend and the House, that there was no wish on the part
of her Majesty's Government to avoid this discussion, be-
cause the more the question was known the better the
Government would stand ; but he did not think that the
House should enter upon the question until certain docu-
ments, for which the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would move, were laid before them.
Mr. HUME said, documents or no documents, he
would move for a Committee on Friday.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said he would refuse all motions
to go into a Committee of Supply till the question was
brought forward.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK said the Noble Lord's answer
would produce a greater effect on Portugal than any
force he could send out. Ho hoped, however, the Noble
Lord would hasten the printing of the papers as much
as possible.
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK asked if the Noble
Lord would have any objection to lay the papers on the
table of the House in detached portions, for if they were
so voluminous as had been stated, it would be impos-
sible for Hon. Members to read them in sufficient time.
He thought, therefore, it would be a great convenience
if his suggestion were attended to.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said they would be brought
forward as expeditiously as possible.
POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that in moving the
order of the day for the consideration of the Lords'
amendments on the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill he wished
to draw the attention of the Speaker to the course
adopted by his predecessor, Lord Dunatermline, when he
was in the chair in 1838. He would therefore ask the
Speaker to state what his opinion was of those amend-
ments, and how they affected the privileges of the Hou-e.
The SPEAKER said he had no hesitation in saving
that the amendments made by the House of Lords to
the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill and the Landed Pro-
perty (Ireland) Bill were an infringement of the privi-
leges of this House. In 1838, when similar amendments
were passed by the Lords to those they had introduced
into the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill, the House agreed to
waive its privileges, and it was for the House to decide
whether they would adhere to that practice in the present
instance. With regard, however, to the Landed Property
(Ireland) Bill, there was no precedent for the guidance
of the House, and the case was the more difficult
to deal with, because the amendments re-
lated to funds to be drawn out of the Consolidated
Fund, while in the other case the amendments related
only to local rates.—(Hear, hear.) It was, nevertheless,
for the House to decide in both cases what course should
be taken.
The order of the day for the consideration of the
Lords' amendments to the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill was
then read.
Lord J. RUSSELL, in moving the consideration of
the amendments, said the House would perceive that
th e opi i o given from
ntheChairinwai
sB3Be.n—ti(rHelyeari).o
conformity
withtheone given
question was whether it was expedient that they
should
w a
waive their privileges. Those cases to which
reference had been made were of local taxation, in which
the object in view was not taxation for any object of the
State, but had merely in view local objects. With regard
to the last of these, one of the chief amendments made
by the Lords was the division of the taxation into what
was termed electoral divisions, and that was an amend
meat which had been agreed to by the House of Commons.
It did materially alter the burden of taxation ; but con-
sidering that the object of this amendment was the same
as that to which he referred, he was not disposed to
think that they ought to press the point of privilege. But
it was quite another question when they came to consider
it apart from privilege, and they should take intoconsidera-
tion in what state the House of Lords had returned to
them the Bill which they had sent up. That Bill was of
a very important nature—it extended relief to all the old
and infirm, whether in or out of the workhouse, and to
the able-bodied poor outside, if the workhouse was full.
With regard to those two great principles, he found that
the House of Lords had left them untouched. There
was the amendment proposed for the purpose of limiting
the operation of this Bill to three years. Such a
clause would have been most injurious, and he
was glad to see that no such provision ap-
peared in the Bill. He was glad to say that all
the main features of the Bill remained unchanged
on its return to that House. It was true that the Lords
had insisted that the out-door relief should be given by
clause, which
wdhivioishionse;embeudt theretocounteract
owas,te however,
ract the omission
of the clause which relieved the
o another
visions from the payment of these
these rates.,
The provision introduced by the Lords
counteracted the evil which would arise from the omis-
sion made by the Lords ; and, considering that as a
change which would not be injurious to the Bill,
and that the Lords had agreed to all the main
points of the measure
; and, considering also the
necessity of the measure receiving
he
was sanctiondthispeosed
to o I
both Houses this
re-
commend them to agree to the amendments. He did not
object to the alteration which enacted that the landlords
of the highest rating should sit upon the boards cf