The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-01 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON,

ment of the Hon. Member for Montrose, because it was
too general in its character. The allegation of bribery I
might be made only with regard to one or two electors,
and might not affect the general character of the
borough. If the allegation affected the general cha-
racter of the borough, it was desirable that further in-
quiry should be made.
Mr. BANKES said the Committee were unanimous is
the opinion to which they had come. Nothing appeared
before them to induce a suspicion that there had been a
compromise. He was prepared to support the view of
the Noble Lord if he thought there should be a further
inquiry.
Sir H. PEEL said that the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose proposed by his amendment that the House should
abandon its discretion respecting the issuing of writs,
where Members were charged with bribery or treating,
till there was a previous inquiry by a Select Committee.
He thought it was desirable to institute an inquiry where
particular charges of bribery were made against the
sitting Member, but he doubted the policy of depriving
themselves of all discretion in every case where a Mem-
ber might be unseated on a charge of treating. Ile
thought it better that they should decide on each parti-
cular case, and not deprive themselves of all discretion
by the adoption of an inflexible rule.—(Hear, hear.) He
understood the Noble Lord to propose the suspension of
the writ, not for an indefinite period, but till a further
inquiry was instituted, and in that case he was prepared
to support him.
Atter a few words from Sir H. WILLOUGHBY,
The Earl of i,IARCH withdrew his motion.

Mr. HUME said that having obtained the object he
had in view, he would also withdraw his amendment.
The issuing of the writ for Horsham is therefore sus-
pended in order that further inquiry may take place.
TIIE NAVIG ATION-LAWS.

In answer to Mr. J. B. SMITH,
Mr. LABOUCIIERE said that the Hon. Gentleman
had asked two questions: the first was whether a cargo
of cotton arriving at Havre from the United States
could be admitted into this country, no part of the
cargo having been discharged? If a cargo so imported
entered under the American or British flag, it might
come to this country as if the vessel had come direct
from the United States, although it might have first
entered the port of Havre. The second question was
whether a cargo of cotton arriving under the French
flag would be allowed to come into this country under
the French flag; and whether the Government would
make a special exception in this case in consequence of
the cotton being unsaleable in Havre? Ho could only
say that the admission of cotton under the French flag
would be a distinct violation of the navigation-laws,
which they could not take upon themselves.
In answer to Mr. BRIGHT,
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that, in the present state of
it. was impn..;l.l. ...y ciure fur
bringing forward the subject of the navigation laws; but
full notice would be given when the Government were
prepared to bring the question before the Louse.
POOR LAWS.

In answer to Lord G. BENTINCK,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
what he had stated in the debate on the income-tax was,
that upwards of 600,0001. poor-rates had been paid for
the relief of the poor in Ireland for four months, and at
that rate that upwards of 2,000,000/, would have been
expended in the year for the relief of the poor. The
sum expended for the relief of the poor in England and
Wales up to Lady-day, 1847, was 5,280,0001; and the
estimate of the probable expenditure up to Lady-day in
the present year would be between 200,0001. or 300,0001.
more. He was not able to say what was the amount
expended in Scotland.
Mr. NEWDEGATE wished to know whether the sum
of 600,000/. 'paid in Ireland included any sums for the
repayment of money expended in relief works, or for the
advances to certain districts in Ireland under the recent
Act.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the whole amount was expended for the relief of the
poor.
Mr. P. SCROPE said the rates for the next four
months were not likely to be so productive as those of the
preceding four months.
Mr. DISRAELI wished to know whether the 600,00(M
included any arrears?
The CHANCELLOR of the EX ..'HEQUER said
that he could only say that 600,0001. was the amount
paid.
Sir 11. W. BARRON said the House would not come to
a just conclusion unless they knew the amount of pro-
perty rated to the poor in England and Ireland.
BALTIC TRADE.

Mr. J. CLAY wished to know from the Noble Lord
(Palmerston) whether the Government had taken any
steps to protect British trade in the ports of the Baltic,
in consequence of the events which were passing there?
Lord PALMEBSTON said that no measures had
been taken, the Government having no reason to suppose
that any would be necessary.—(Hear, hear.)
CROWN COLONIES.

Mr. FORSTER wished to ask the Under-Secretary
of the Colonial-office when the promised measure for giv-
ing self•government to the Crown colonies, and other
British possessions not having legislative and repre-
sentative assemblies, would be brought under the consi-
deration of the House.

Mr. HAWES said that he was only waiting for an
opportunity to introduce such a Bill with respect to
Australia.

Mr. HUME wished to know whether the Bill would
extend to Van Diemen's Land.
Mr. HAWES said it was under consideration whe-
ther Van Diemen's Land would be included in the Bill
or not. With regard to the other colonies, it was not
in contemplation to introduce any Bill (as lvtai under-
stood).

ThE CASE OF MR. FOLLETT.-COUNTY
COURTS.

Mr. B. COCHRANE said that having brought under
the notice of the House on a former occasion the case of
PoNett, who had been sent to prison for contempt of
court, because he was not able to pay a debt he owed, he
begged to mention another case which was equally hard,
and of which he hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would
also take cognizance. The present was the case of a
man who owed 2/. 65., and because he was not able to
pay he was sent to prison, had to mix with felons, to
pick oakum, and to lie on an iron bedstead. It the law
permitted such great hardships, the sooner it was changed
the better.

Sir G. GREY said he apprehended the court had the
power of committing a fraudulent debtor who contracted
debts without a possibility of being able to pay. With
regard to the case of Pollett, he had written to the
visiting justices and received their report. He addressed
a letter to them since then, calling their attention to the
regulations which ought to be enforced in prisons, and
which if enforced would prevent Pollett from being
treated as a felon. Ile had not seen any account of the
other case to which the Hon. Gentleman referred.
After a few words from Mr. COCHRANE and Mr.
BAILLIE,
Mr. BERNAL said he thought the rules and regula-
tions for the internal management of prisons in tho me-
tropolis should be exhibited to the proper authorities of
the department over which his Right Hon. Friend pre-
sided. The cases stated by the Hon. Gentleman oppo-
site were of a most intolerable nature.—(Hear.)

SICILY.
Mr. HUME wished to know whether Lord Minto was
interfering between Naples and Sicily as an authorised
agent of the Government ? As it was important that
they should keep aloof from the suspicion of intermed-
dling with other states, he hoped he should receive a
satisfactory answer.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that Lord Minto had cre-
dentials to the Court of Naples, and, la•sving been re-
quested by the King of Naples and his Ministers to
interpose the good offices of this country for the pur-
pose of making terms with Sicily, Lord Minto, as the
representative of an ally of the King of Naples, thought
he could do no less than interpose in that measure, and
he proceeded in a ship of war with such terms as he
thought would be satisfactory to Sicily. But though he
proceeded in a ship of war it was not his intention to
use any force, and he went there merely with a view
of rendering a friendly service.
Mr. HUME hoped that as the King of Naples had
now abdicated, his interference would cease.
EVICTIONS IN GALWAY.

Mr. SCItOP2, said that the subject of which he had
given notice was of sufficient Importance to be brought
forward in going into Committee of Supply, but as the
subject was under the consideration of Government, and
as they intended to introduce a measure for the purpose
of putting an end to those frightful and shocking evic-
tions which were taking place in Ireland, he would be
content to leave the matter in their hands. It was ne-
cessary, however, that the measure should be speedy and
thorough, because ejectments to an enormous extent
were about to take place. There were 6,000 ejectments
served in ono union alone. The Bill should not be con-
fined to illegal ejectments, because cases of a more
frightful and terrific character took place under the form
of law, as in the case of Balling, where 140 families were
turned out of their homes in mid winter by Mr. Walsh,
who was an attorney, and therefore well knew what ho
was about. He would, however, leave the matter in the
hands of the Government.

Mr. OSBORNE thought the course which the Govern-
ment and the Hon. Gentleman had taken reflected credit
on both parties.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. FRENCH said the conduct of the Hon. Member
for Stroud was deserving of censure for bringing for-
ward charges against the Irish landlords night after
night, which he did not proceed with, so as to give
others an opportunity of answering them. He could
show that his charges had no foundation in truth.
Mr. REYNOLDS thought the Hon. Member for
Stroud was deserving of praise, instead of censure, for
the manner in which he took up this question.—(Hear,
hear.) The last charge he brought against the Irish
landlords was founded on official authority, that of
Major MiKie.—(llear, hear.) It appeared in the report
of the Central General Relief Committee of Ireland, over
which the Marquis of Kildare presided, that 580 pa-
rishes, including one-fourth of the country, had sent
returns, which were substantiated by the parochial
clergy, and from these returns it appeared that up to
December, 1847, no less than 35,166 individuals died of
actual starvation; 94,007 had died from diseases caused
by bad and insufficient food; 68,140 were at that date
labouring under disease, and 62,756 had emigrated.
But 90,000 had emigrated to Canada, and of these the
lion. Member for Kinsale (Mr. Hawes) admitted that
15,000 died. If he took the entire of Ireland it would
appear from this statement that not less than 1,000,000
human beings had been swept off the face of the earth
for want of food. Could the parallel of this melancholy
fact be found in the history of any civilised, or even
uncivilised nation? The people of Ireland felt that
nothing could make them worse than they were, and
they began to despair of justice from that House.
Mr. STAFFORD (lid not think the conduct of the
lion. Member for Stroud was open to the criticism of
the Hon. Member for Roscommon. He observed that
there were some omissions of correspondence in the blue
book relating to the evictions in Galway, which might

in some degree modify facts ; but, allowing for all de-
ductions on that ground, there was enough left to shock
and horrify any human being.—(llear, hear.) It should
be recollected that the legislation of that Hlo►ase was not
wholly blameless. It was, in fact, particeps criminis, for
it held out the strongest inducements and temptations
to the landlords of Ireland to make those evictions.

Sir G. GREY really did hope the House would not
now enter into a general discussion on the state of Ire-
land and the Irish poor-law. He believed the poor-law,
whatever might be the difficulties of its operation, had
greatly mitigated the distress existing in Ireland. With
regard to the particular question before the House, he
would only say that the Government had no reason to
disbelieve the statement of Major M•Kie. The Govern.
men felt that sufficient powers ware not given under the
law for the protection of evicted parties, and a measure
was under their consideration with reference to the
(WHear, hear.)
W. BARRON said Ireland would be quite
ssuatbSijsierfteetndTif they had a bond fide poor-law such as they
had in England. Members ran away with the idea that
the laws were the same, but in reality they were mate-
rially different. The Irish law was a palpable failure,
and was pauperising a large proportion of the farmers of
the country. With respect to the evictions complained
of, he staked his veracity and experience that in nine•
teen cases out of twenty, if the facts were really sifted,
the evidence against the landlords would break down.
Half the charges were pure falsehoods or gross exagge-
rations.

Sir G. GREY said if the lion. Member would inform
him of a single case in which the statements of the blue
book were untrue or exaggerated, he would strictly
sift it.
___

Sir 11. W. BARRON said it would be impossible for
him to point to cases. Many of the people charged
really did not know that they were accuccd.
Mr. FAGAN highly eulogised the general conduct of
Mr. P. Scrape. He thought the gratitude of Ireland
was due to the Hon. Member for bringing forward the
case of Mr. Blake. He should like to ask tho Govern-
ment whether it was intended to publish the correspond-
ence relative to that transaction ? He also wished to
direct the attention of the Government to the evictions
now going on upon an estate in the 'fralee union under
the authority of the Court of Chancery. Upwards of
500 miserable persons had been evicted.

Mr. MONSELL said that hating read the blue book
with considerable attention, he felt bound to say that
the statement therein contained appeared to him to be
draw❑ up with great care and attention.
Mr. R. M. FOX asked whether the returns relating
to the Chancery estates in Ireland were prepared?
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said ho believed the papers
were on the treble of the House.
Mr. OSBORNE said that was a mistake. The return
iu manuscript, but it was not printed, and was likely
to occupy some time in going through the press in con-
sequence of its voluminous character.
Mr. HUME appealed to the Go►ernment to bring the
whole subject of Ireland under the consideration of the
Howe.

The order of the day was then read, and the House
went into a Committee of

SUPPLY-ARMY ESTIMATES.

Mr. F. MAULE then rose. He said it was now his
duty to propose to the House the amount of force which
her Majesty's Government had thought necessary to
propose for the ensuing year for the defence of this
country and its dependencies. The question as to the
amount of force to be maintained in this country was
one which depended upon the Executive Government,
and any refusal to grant this force, which any Govern
ment thought proper to propose, would be in a great
degree expressive of a want of confidence in that House.
If the Government, therefore, had committed the fault
of sending this vote to a Coaamittee up•stairs, they
would of course materially have neglected the perform-
ance of their duty. Accordingly, he had to propose
that a force of 113,847 men be voted for the year en-
suing, exclusive of the force in the East India Com-
pany's service. He could assure the House that that
estimate had been drawn up with every regard to eco-
nomy. Now, there were two objections taken to this
Tote. The first was, that a court of inquiry had ex-
isted ; and the second was, that the force was unne-
cessarily large. With respect to the first point he
begged the House to compare the estimates of the
present year with those for 1828, which would show
that whilst our force had been increased, its propor-
tionate cost had been considerably reduced. Jo 1835,
again, the number of officers for whom a charge was
made, was 4,405, whilst this year we had 4,800 officers,
and tke rank and file were in proportion; but the charges
were by no means so high in proportion as they were
in 1335. As compared, therefore, with 1835 there had
been no want of economy whatever on the part of the
present Government. The Right Hon. Gentleman then
stated the details of the various economical arrange-
ments that had been effected during past years. But
the next question to consider was, whether the force
proposed was too large a force for the country to main-
tain in the present state of affairs in Europe and the
civilised world. He did not found his demand for an
increased number of men upon the state of things beyond
the Channel, for the estimates were framed before that
state of things arose. lie relied upon the general expe-
diency which called for a thoroughly effective military
force. The condition of Ireland, more especially at
present, rendered it necessary that the military establish-
ment there should certainly not be diminished, and our
wide spread colonies, our military stations in the Mediter-
ranean, and in every part of the world, required the main-
tensnce of an adequate force, not merely in the respective
localities, but as a reserve at home for the relief,
from time to time, of those foreign settlements. In
Canada, where our frontier, needing constant watching,
had been gradually extending itself, an increase of
military force had been matter of absolute necessity. A
similar increase had become essential in Bermuda, in
New Zealand, and at Hong Kong, a new settlement pe
culiarly requiring effective protection. The new system
of rotation of foreign service was effecting the highly
desirable object of limiting the lowest period of foreign
service fur our infantry regiments to twelve years, a
resulttmost beneficial to the physical condition of the
troops, and which, by rendering the service more attrac-
tive, would lessen the military expenditure in limiting
the necessity for recruiting. As to any reduction in the
number of our troops, whether at home or abroad, he
regarded it as wholly impossible. No man, he believed,
would say that in the present state of Ireland any troops
could be withdrawn from that country.—(Hear, hear.)
There were at this moment in Ireland 26,000 troops,
scattered over 150 stations. In no part of her Majesty's
dominions had soldiers more harrassing duties to per-
form, and he would add nothing could be more exem-
plary than the conduct of the troops had been during
the past year.—(Hear, hear ); England, too, required the
full amount of the troops now maintained, and of the
addition he proposed. In England and Scotland, on the
Bth of March, there were 26,474 infantry, and 3,553
cavalry, :30,000 in all, being one soldier to 1,000 of the
population. He could not suppose that aay Hon. Gen-
tleman would, on reflection, consider that this was too
large a military force for the protection of this wealthy
country at once from domestic violence, and from the
chance of foreign aggression. He hoped the House,
therefore, would consent to no reduction in these
estimates. The present was peculiarly a moment
when this country should not wear even the aspect of
weakness.--([Tear, hear.)
The vote was then put from the chair (113,847 men,
exclusive of the troops in the East Indies).
Mr. HUME expressed his approbation at the manner
in which the present Government managed the army,
and the active steps they had adopted for improving its
moral tone. As to the extent of the army, that was
another thing. It was extremely natural in the Right
Honourable Gentleman to desire to give his parti-
a sbpuetc tt
the
ef
question
t utmoston
for t
h e complete
House -
enueslaz
ndfepeisvretnmednistplaany
of Commons was, whether the number of troops de
mended exceeded the actual necessity of the case,
and whether adequate efficiency could not be attained
at less outlay, more especially in the existing condition
of our finances. The Right Hon. Gentleman might
very well say that these were not times in which an ade-
quate military force should be kept up, but 'these were
also times in which no money should be laid out, for
this or any other purpose, than the actual wants of the state
necessitated. Now, in his clear conviction, the number
of troops demanded did exceed tho actual wants of the
State, for he regarded the apprehensions under which
the Government purported to proceed us mere delu-
sions. The Right Hon. Gentleman had adverted to
the circumstance that the estimates were framed before
the new state of things on the continent. Now, in his
(Mr. Hume's) opinion, we were in a much better posi-
tion since the manifestation of this new state of things
than we were before it ; infinitely less liable to the risk
of war, and Jess called upon, therefore, to increase our
military forces, He was convinced that if we did not
meddle with other nations, there was no other nation at
all disposed to meddle with us. The various powers of
the continent had quite enough to do to mind their own
business, and we ourselves, for that matter, were likely
to have quite enough occupation in the same way.—
(Hear, hear.) In 1833 we had only 80,000
troops—why were we now to be saddled with the
maintenance of 113,000 troops ? There was even less
necessity for sw,ooo
men than there was ten or fifteen
years ago,
for since that time an effectual police force
had been created both in Ireland and in England, who
answered many
of the purposes of protection to life and
property
which the military had previously fulfilled.
H 11
is Right
--en. Friend had asserted that the docks,
warehouses, and depots were public property which
demanded protection, and the home army was useful in
that respot t
of domestic police? He did not desire
but was there not the civil force available
for the purposes
to discharge a single man from tho army by his motion.
The proposed
reduction could be effected by stopping
the recruiting service, which gave 12,000 men every
year to the se.esiee, The number of troops would then
be reduced within
spect to the colonies, he thought that they ought to be
taught to
the year to 100,000 men. With re-
taught
at their own expense for self-defence.
required there would be unnecessary. If the colonies
govern themselves, and then the troops now
were equitably treated they would at the present me-
tnent have h
The motion he was about to make was only the first
step towards the final reduction which he urged. Ile
contemplated en
a further reduction of 30,000 men within
the next few
Years. What he bad to more was, that the
number of troops be reduced to 100,000 men, hich was
the amount of
The motion
wen voted three years ago, and 20,000
more than were voted in 1835.
chair,
Mr. V. SMITH did not agree with the Hon. Member
and amendment having been put from the
for
also
internal that
Montrose, that the aspect of Europe presented no-
thing to induce
the House to assent to the demand of
the Government for the number of men proposed in the
estimate before them. It might happen that some of
the European nations would have enough to do at home;
buttu turn
gettingn their
it
t we
i s a
ofd o
possible
e i t
o foreign attention one
d prawourcuelmorertise,
with a view.
mr s
lie them( m
lr
i gh
oft.
Smith) did see the possibility of a reduction in the army