The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-10 00:00:00

POOR REMOVAL ACT.

Colonel WOOD presented a petition from the county of
Middlesex against the Fool. Removal Act.
LAW OF MARRIAGE.

Sir GEORGE GREY presented petitions from Devenport
against the law of marriage within the prohibited degrees.
THE REFORM BILL.
Mr. C. HOWARD presented a petition from Dover against
the rate-paying clauses of the Reform Act.
IRISH POOR-LAW.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition in favour of a
more efficient poor-law for Ireland.
COTTON AND WOOLLEN TRADE.

Mr. FINCH moved for certain returns connected with the
woollen and cotton manufactures for several past years.
Agreed to.
ARREST FOR DEBT (IRELAND) BILL.
Sir W. BARRON moved the second reading of this Bill.
In doing so, he said, he did not think there would be any ob-
jection to its 'principle, which was to assimilate the law of
Ireland, with regard to debts under 201., to the English law,
as recently amended. If it were necessary to change the
law in this country, it was still mote necessary to do so in
Ireland, which was much the poorer country. Espe-
cially was the measure now required, considering the
deplorable state of the country. There were a great number
of poor people in Ireland who could not pay their small
debts, such as those who were ander the conacre system,
owing from 40s. to 151. or 20!. ; yet these parties could at
any tune-be arrested and imprisoned for the non-payment of
these sums. It was to furnish a remedy that this Bill was
prepared. At present all Le wanted the House to do was to
affirm the principle, to commit the Bill pro fornici, and then
to leave it to the consideration of a Committee up stairs, so
that its details might be fully matured. He c.aimed no pater-
nity to the Bill, as the Lord-Lieutenant, and many of the most
influential parties in Ireland were favourable to the principle.
He believed also that the highest law authorities in Ireland
looked upon the measure favourably. He trusted, therefore,
that the House would, with this explanation, agree to the
second reading of the Bill.
Mr. MONALIAN (Solicitor-General for Ireland), said that
perhaps the House would pardon him if he shortly stated
the reasons why he could not assent to the second leading of
the Bill brought in by the' lion. Member for Watertord.
The object of the Bill was this—by one short clause at once
to abolish arrestment for debts where the amount did not
exceed 20/. Hon. Members unacquainted with the social
condition of Ireland could not conceive the number of per-
sons who were indebted in sums not exceeding
20/. It would be at once seen, then, that a Bill
of this kind would, interfere in no ordinary degree
with the rights of property in the country. He did
not mean to say that measures should not be introduced into
Parliament to ameliorate the evils under which the petty
debtors in Ireland laboured ; but it' would be utterly impos-
sible that the House could concede a Bill of this description,
unless facilities were given to enable the bond fide creditor to
recover the amount of his debt from such property of any
description as the debtor might be possessed of. :Co one
could entertain a greater sympathy for those bond fide debtors
who had contracted debts, and were, from adverse circum-
stances, unable to pay; but he had no sympathy with those
men who, possessed of property, fraudulently endeavoured
to defraud the honest creditor. The House would excuse
him, if, so lately introduced into that House, he did not so
cleverly express himself as he could desire—(dear, hear)—
but he had not had time to give the subject that con-
sideration which he should have wished, and his obser=
vations must be necessarily brief upon it. A similar
Act to that now brought forward by the Honourable
Bart. was passed in England in the 7th and Bth of the reign
of Victoria, and the country evidently felt that the pro-
vieions of that Act were in some degree imprudent, because
in the very next session of Parliament considers
able safeguards were granted, to creditors, which
safeguards could not be, under existing circumstances,
at present extended to Ireland. England had a
vast number of smaller courts and district judges, who could
take cognisance of these matters—he meant the Commis-
sioners of Bankruptcy throughout the country, the local
judges, &c.; and provisions were introduced in the Small
Debts Act for England empowering the bringing of
debtors before these inferior courts, in order that
the property of such persons might be made avail-
able for the payment of their debts. But they had
no such judges in Ireland, and although he was most
anxious to lessen the costs of process in the recovery of small
debts, he at the same time felt that any further enact-
ments of the kind proposed by the Honourable Member
for Waterford would be only multiplying confusion,
of which there was too much already. The ques-
tion was one not to be lightly considered. There were
many difficulties in the way of a proper arrangement—
there were difficulties in ascertaining the most fitting
tribunal for the giving the necessary protection.
which creditors would require if a Bill of this
kind were passed. The subject, he might inform
the House, was at that time under his consideration, and he
hoped to be able soon to recommend to her Majesty's Go-
vernment a measure for their adoption. .He trusted that.,
under these cireunistances, the House would leave the matter
with him, and he telt himself, in the mean time, compelled.
to oppose the second reading of the Bill.
Mr. SHAW said that after the very clear and admirable
statement of the Hon. Member, he would not tresspass on
the patience of the House. However desirable it might be
to assimilate the law of arrest in Ireland to the law as it
existed in England, he was of opinion that there were faults
in. the latter which were of great magnitude. True, there
were circumstapces which counteracted those evils in Eng-
land, and which„they would not possess in Ireland. He was
satisfied to leave the matter in the hands of the Learned So-
licitor-General.