The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-18 00:00:00

iROMISE (IRELAND) BILL.

This Bill was ordered to be committed after the
other orders of the day were disposed of.
TRANSFER OF LANDE 1) PROPERTY (IRE-

LAND) BILL.

This Bill was read a second time and ordered to be
committed to-morrow, at twelve o'clock.
DUBLIN POLICE BILL.

This Bill was ordered to be committed after the other
orders of the day were disposed of.
UNLAWFUL OATHS (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed to-morrow at twelve o'clock.
LABOURING POOR (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was ordered to be committed after the other
orders of the day were disposed of.
POOR REMOVAL (No. 2) BILL.
This Bill was ordered to be read a third time after the
other orders of the day were disposed of.
COMMONS INCLOSURE ACT AMENDMENT

BILL.
This Bill was ordered to be committed after the other
orders of the day were disposed of.
The House then adjourned till Five o'clock.

The House resumed at Five o'clock.
PETITIONS.
Mr. WYLD presented two petitions from Cornwall
against the Copper Ore Bill.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the Odd
Fellows of Rochdale against the Odd Fellows' Society Bill.
Mr. COBDEN presented a similar petition from a
place in Yorkshire.
NOTICE OF MOTION.
Sir J. WALSH gave noticc, that he would to-morrow
ask for an explanation of the reason why the 13riti,41
fleet was stationed off Nsplcs.
CONDUCT OF THE MILITARY IN TIPPERARY.

Mr. N.V. MAHERWishedt6asi the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the Home Department whether
he had received any communication relative to the con-
duct of General M'Donald and the military under his
command, or in reference to outrages which it was
alleged had been perpetrated on the inhabitants of Tip-
perary under his direction?
Sir G. GREY said, in answer to the question of the
Hon. Gentleman, he could assure him and the House
that her Majesty's Government had received no infor-
mation of way outrage committed by General M‘Donald
or any of the troops or officers under his coin-
mand.—(Hear, hear.) He held in his hand a
letter, which had been received from General M`Donald,
on the subject of the arrest of Mr. Smith O'Brien, and
in that letter it Was stated that the only foundation

which could exist for the statteu Pent that any of the
officers under his command had:.' been guilty of an out-
rage on the inhabitants of Tipper, try, was to be found in
the fact that Captain Mackenzie, after the arrest of Mr.
Smith O'Brien called upon th.s d river. of a locomotive
at the Thurles railway sta tics I to hold himself in
readiness to convey a trail 1 to Dublin, and
to see that no train delta' ted in the mean-
time. The engine-driver,' ,'however, refused to
obey any other orders but th os4 i of the superintendent,
who not being in the way, CaptB in Mackenzie felt it to
be his duty to present a pistol him to compel obe-
dience to his instructions. G'ei feral M'Donald added,
that he perfectly approved of th is proceeding,. for: bad
not Mr. Smith O'Brien been igoi `, off tci,Duhlin by:the
train thore might have been a g ood deal of bloodshed,
and he had therefore no he lit. stion iii adopting-,tbe
responsibility which attached; to the conduct Of
Captain Mackenzie.—(Cheers..) Such was the pur--
port of the letter which h id' been received from
General M'Donald, and ho Iva is happy to say that
the conduct of both the G-eneral and the officers
and troops under his command be met with the entire
approbation of the Commander -in-Chief.—(Cheers.)
Mr. MAHER expressed him self dissatisfied with the
explanation of the Right Hon. :Baronet, and intimated
that he should institute an inquiry into the matter when
he returned home.

Mr. FOX MAULE said, as ' isis name had been men-
tioned,
he felt it necessary to se If a few words, the more
especially as some corresponde see had passed between
hina and the Honourable Gen. 'lmam The Honour-
able Gentleman wrote him a. letter from Brussels,
dated the sth of August, .complaining of the
conduct of Colonel Taylor, e( +mmanding the sth
regiment, for erecting a cai np within 30 yards
of his house, within a mile of Tim; ries, which he stated
was " one of the most peaceable jol aces in the county of
Tipperary."—(Laughter.) The, letter of the lion.
Gentleman was referred to Get +oral M`Donald, who
requested an explanation from . Colonel Taylor. His
explanation stated that the esl ate of Mr. Maher
was pointed out to him by the
.police-inspector as an
eligible place for an encamp:mai t, as being within a
mile of Thurles, and as affordieg: an excellent sortie for
the troops. They encamped in a field separated from
the lawn, to which the agent mad .e no objection; in fact,
instead of doing so, he offered the (:-.;'( donel accommodation
in the house, it raining heavily at. the time. The troops
entered the field through a space opened in a wall, not
wishinc, to go through the perk k gate, which could
be rebuilt in an hour. He (Mr.. Fox Yank) did not
believe General M'llonald w ld stoop to carry
a pistol about him for his person.sl protection ; and if he
did carry one, he did not believe th at he would have used
it in the way mentioned.
Mr. MAHER said, with respe+t to the statement that
the encampment was not upon his .lawns, he begged to say

that it was totally false. The :ia..f3t was tha—i' Colonel
Taylor came to his house, in the absence of his agent,
and formed an encampment w}►ii3h was distant only

twenty or thirty yards from the house, and in view
of of his dining-rooms and drawitc-reom window. On
the arrival of hia agent, he ank ed Colonel Taylor
whether he had his (Mr. Maher's)' leave, and he replied
that he had not. He thought he had good reason
to complain of an encampme at being formed at
his very hall door, it bei'ag known that it
was sure to be accompanied by scenes of obscenity.
They took possession of his stables, and when he wrote
over to have them cleared, the officers said they should
not do so, except at the point of bayonet. He had
no right to have military billeted u/,on him, and he there-
fore considered he was perfectly jtu.tified in complaining
of the grievance to which he had been subjected.
SUGAR DUTINS.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Sugar Duties Bill
was fixed for a third reading on Dto nday. lie found that
it would be impossible to take the, third reading on that
day, and if it met with the approbation of the Noble
Lord opposite (Lord G. Bentinek),' be would take the
third reading on Tuesday, at,twelv6 o'clock.
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK, :after acceding to the
Noble Lord's request, wished to asA him whether it was
the intention of the Government to fill up the vacancy
that had occurred in the office of President of the Mixed
Court of Commission with respect to the slave trade in
the island of Sierra Leone. As he understood, the
office was a complete sinecure, although its emoluments
were 2,5001. a year.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was not aware of the vacancy
alluded to by the Noble Lord, but he would answer the
question of the Noble Lora on Monday.
POST-OFFICE.

Mr. GOULBURN complained of the inaccuracies of
certain returns with respect to the :Post-office, and called
upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer to explain them.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that it was entirely the result of accident, and that ac-
curate returns would be furnished to the House.
NEW WRIT.,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL trusted:the Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Warwickshire would not press his
motion for issuing a new writ fors Derby, seeing that
Government would have no objection to its issuing after
the Corrupt Practices at Elections •Bill had passed, which
was likely to take place in a few days.
Mr. NEWDEGATE was sorry that the Noble
Lord still felt it necessary to oppose the issuing
of this writ, but be really could not consent to
delay the matter any longer, and with the
permission of the House he . would proceed to
move that Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant to the Clerk
of the Crown to make out a new writ for the electing
of two burgesses to serve in this present Parliament
for the borough of Derby, in the room of the Right
Hon. Edward Strutt and the Hon. E. Frederick Leveson
Gower, whose election has been determined to be void.
Writs having been issued for Aylesbury, Carlisle, Hor-
sham, Harwich, Leicester, and Cheltenham, the
Members of which had been unseated for treat-
ing, ho could not see any just reason why
Derby should be excluded from having representatives.
No valid reasons had been urged why that town should
be excluded from the category; and he, therefore, urged
the Government to consent to the issuing of the writ.
Lord J. RUSSELL thought the best course would be
to move the adjournment of the debate to Thursday
next, and the adoption of that Bourse would
enable the House to dispose of the Corrupt Prac-
tices at Elections Bill. The Noble Lord concluded
by moving the adjournment of the debate to Thurs-
day next.
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.
Mr. NEWDEGATE was surprised at the course
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had
pursued, and was in the hands of the House, whether he
should divide upon the question or not.
Mr. BANKES did not think there was any
justice in withholding the writ from Derby. He
could see no principle in the proposition of the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government
for adjourning the debate on the question. There was
no certainty of the Bill to which he had alluded passing
in the present session. If it went through the House it
was more than probable that it would not go through
the Lords, unless there was an adjournment instead of a
prorogation of Parliament. If his Hon. Friend the
Member for Warwickshire divided the House on this
subject he should certainly divide with him.
Mr. BRIGHT felt disposed to vote for the motion of
the Hon. Member for Warwickshire; but, as the propo-
sition for an adjournment was only for a week, he
thought it would not make much matter, and he would,
therefore, advise him to agree to the proposition of the
Noble Lord. But, while he was prepared to do that, he
should certainly insist on the writ being issued during
the present session, and if that were not dune he should
support the motion.
Mr. HENLEY contended that in the case of Derby
there was no ground for its disfranchisement, and he
had always voted for the issuing of the writ. The
reason assigned for the postponement was to him a most
unsatisfactory one, and he should therefore support the
motion.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that his Noble
Friend, when he moved a postponement, did so to see
whether the Bill should pass through that House, and
not until it had passed in the House of Lords. When
that House came to a determination as to what it
should do, and the Bill passed, then the writ should
issue.
Sir R. H. INGLIS observed that, if the Bill passed
through that House, how could that effect the decision of
the House of Lords. In his opinion, the Bill was a
mere piece of waste pnper, for it would never pass the
House of Lords, at least in the present session; and,
therefore, it was unjust to deprive their fellow-subjects
of their constitutional right. There was no case shown
that Derby should be disfranchised, and tho writ
ought, therefore, to be issued withuut delay. It was,
then, more than three months since the Members for
Derby were unseated, during which the town was kept
in a continual state of excitement, and consequent de-
moralisation.
He, therefore, pressed the House to come
to a decision on the subject.
Mr. R. PALMER was most anxious to check bribery
in every instance, but he saw no connexion whatever be-
tween the passing of the Bill to prevent corruption at
elections, and the motion then before the House. There
were eight or nine boroughs included in that Bill, and
yet writs were issued for all, except Derby, which he
believed was the least criminal among them.
Mr. P. WOOD contended that the passing of the Bill
before the House with reference to elections had a great
deal to do with the present motion. Derby was placed
in the schedule, and if the Bill passed through the House,
the freemen of Derby would know, that if the practice of
head-money were continued, their conduct would be
rigidly investigated.
Lord G. BENTINCK reminded the House that in the
case of Great Yarmouth, a Bill was actually before the
House, and yet a writ was issued for that borough.
The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it 43
Majority in favour of postponing the writ —42
CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS BILL.
The order of the day having been read for bringing
up the report on this Bill,
Sir 11. HALFORD again brought forward the case of
a person, named Leehy, who was appointed postman
in the borough of Leicester, and complained that the
appointment had been placed in the hands of Mr. Gar-
diner, who had been unseated for the borough on the
ground of bribery. It was said that the appoint-
ment of Leehy had nothing to do with the late election
for Leicester, but it was a fact that Leehy's brother was
a freeman of Leicester, and voted for Mr. Gardiner.
Now, this appointment ought to belong to the Members
for the county, instead of which it had been placed in the
hands of a gentleman who had been unseated on the
ground of bribery. He thought it right to bring the
subject under the consideration of the House, in the
hope that such an occurrence might not take place in
future.

Lord J. RUSSELL said he knew nothing as to the
circumstances under which the recommendation of Mr.
Leehy to the Postmaster-General had taken place ;
but he had no hesitation in saying that, under the
circumstances of Mr. Gardiner's position at the time
he made the recommendation, it was one which ought

not to have been attended to. The person recom-
mended by the Hon. Gentleman referred to, was, he
understood, in every respect suited to the place ; but
it was a mistake to suppose that Lord Clanricarde had
given the patronage of the appointment to Mr. Gardi-
ner, he merely received that gentleman's recommenda-
tion. He could not agreo that the Postmaster-Gene-
ral was to pay greater attention to the recommendation
of his political enemies than to that of his political
friends.

Colonel SIBTHORP said he could not swallow the
,
explanation just given by the Noble totd, and as to the
Bill before the House he denounced it as a most ini-
quitous measure.

Sir G. BURRELL complained of the patronage of the
Post-office being conferred upon a new resident in the
borough of Shoreham, instead of its being given to a
person in whose behalf a strong recommendation had
been forwarded to the Postmaster General.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND could not understand why
Hon. Members on his side of the House should com-
plain that patronage was bestowed on the supporters of
the Government. He had been asked to recommend a
person for a situation in the Post-office. He told the
man he had no influence with Lord Clanricarde, whom
he had never, to his knowledge, teem He however did
write a recommendatory letter to the Noble Lord, and
he received exactly such an answer ai be expected,
namely, that the appointment had been already made.—
(A laugh.)
Mr. MULLINS wished to ask Lord John Russell
whether any person had been appointed by the Govern-
ment Sub-distributor of Stamps at Cirencester since
May last, and whether such appointment had not been
placed. at the disposal of the Hon. Charles Ponsonby, or
his solicitor or agent in that borough. He understood
that a Mr. Harris, who was clerk in the bank there, had
been appointed by Mr. Newmarch, solicitor fo the Hon.
Mr. Ponsonby, who would therefore know the number
of stamps which other solicitors in the town used.
He hoped some inquiry would be instituted into the
_ _ _

TUFNELL defended the general principle
upon which appointments were made by the Post-oEce,
as regarded local postmen. They were usually the re
suit of recommendations from persons acquainted with
the respectability and character of the party recom-
mended. With respect to the appointment of Mr.
Harris, h• really did not know till that moment what
position Mr. Harris occupied inCirencester.
After a few words from Mr. C. Burrell, Mr. Tufnell,
and Mr. Newdegate,

Sir H. HALFOIiD explained.
The 'notion was then agreed to, and the report was
brought up.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then moved the fol-
lowing clauses:—Clause B to be substituted for sections
17 and 18, " And be it enacted, that it shall be lawful
for the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury, out
of any moneys which may have been provided by Par-
liament, to make orders for the payment of the neces-
sary expenses of the inquiries under this Act ; and
every Commissioner acting under this Act shall be
paid at the rate of five guineas for every day
that he shall be actually employed in conducting
any inquiries under this Act, over and above his
travelling and other expenses; and each such Commis-
sioner shall from time to time after he shall have made s
report, or his final report to her Majesty, under this Act/
in relation to the city or borough for which he shall have
been appointed, lay before the ,Commissioners of her
Majesty's Treasury for the time being a statement of the
number of days he shall have been employed under this
Act, with respect to such city or borough, together with
an account of his travelling and other expenses ; and the
Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury may order the
payment to such Commissioner of thaiamount due to hint
in respect to the number of days he shall have been se
employed, and in respect of his travelling and other et'
penses. And be it enacted, that" the Speaker of the
House of Commons may appoint an agent or agents to
prosecute before the Committees appointed under this
Act, or any of them, or any Commissioners appointed
under this Act, any inquiries or inquiry to he
made under the provisions of this Act ; and ever/ •
such agent is hereby authorised from time to time
to certify under his hand to the Commissioners of her
Majesty's Treasury, what sum or sums of money is or
aro required to meet the necessary expenses for
effectually prosecuting such inquiries or inquiry as such
agents may be appointed to prosecute, including the
sums proper and necessary to be paid to and for the
witnesses who may be required to attend under this Ad;
and the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury may
advance to such agent, from time to time, such sums 0
shall be needed for the purpose aforesaid out of any
monies which may have been provided by Parliament ;
provided always, that in every case the amount required
for such expenses shall be examined and allowed by:
some person appointed by the Speaker for that purpose..
Mr. ANSTEY wished to know if the Speaker viola
Bare the same power over the allowance to be made to
the Commissioners, that he would have with respect t°
the agents ?
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said there was at pre'
sent a control sufficiently effective.
The clause was then added to the Bill.
The LORD ADVOCATE then proposed to insert
the following clause :—" And be it enacted, that where
it shall be necessary to institute in Scotland any further
inquiry or investigation regarding corrupt practiot
either under the report of any Committee appointeu
under this Act; or of any Election Committee as afore-
said, the Speaker shall certify such report to the senior
Lord of Justiciary who shall have gone the preceding
circuit in that district in which the county
'wherein
such inquiry or investigation is required to be made is
situated; and failing such senior Lord of Justiciary, or
if such inquiry or investigation is required to be made in
any county not included in any circuit, then the Speaker
shall certify such report to the Lord Justice General,_ or
President of the Court of Session, and such senior Lar!
of Justiciary, or Lord Justice General, shall appoinv
an advocate, of not less than seven years' standing►
and who shall not be a Member of Parliament, to be 7.
Commissioner, for the purposes of such inquiry or ie„
vestigation, who shall thereupon possess 'and exercises;
the powers, and shall discharge all the duties conferral
and imposed upon the Commissioner to be appoin,n
under this Act, as hereinbefore set forth. And it in
be lawful for such senior Lord of Justiciary or Le
Justice General, in case by reason of the death, ingest
or absence of any such Commissioner appointed in sco
land, such inquiry or investigation cannot be proceed"
with by him, to appoint an advocate qualified as stbr'
said, to be a Commissioner in place of the Commissioner
whose death, illness, or absence, renders such new ap-
pointment necessary. And every Commissioner to 11
appointed in Scotland, shall take the oath by this 4°,,
required to be taken by Commissioners, before
Judge of the Court of Session in Scotland." The motion was agreed to, and the clause added to
the Bill, which was ordered to be read a third time S°.
morrow (this day).
—DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE Coll—