The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-25 00:00:00

4u-
dis
teir
)ne

ing to imply that Lord Fitzroy Somerset was dti-po vertul 1
at the Horse-guards. The case of the men he had alluded
to was one of very great hardship.
In answer to Mr. CHARTERIS,
Mr. F. MAULE said that non-commissioned officers
and their wives were not placed In the same rooms with
Private soldiers. With respect to married soldiers, an
arrangement was in progress by which they would be
enabled to provide themselves lodgings out of the bar-
racks.
Mr. OSBORNE complained of the use of shell-jackets
on march, and criticised other points of regimental cos-
tume. Nothing could be worse conducted than the whole
of the clothing department. The dress of the officers of
the line seemed adapted for no other purpose than to ren-
der them as frightful as possible.
Mr. F. MAULE said the object of all the late altera-
tions had been economy. In the Kafir war, the officers
ending that the distinction of a blue coat, while the sol-
diers wore red, rendered them a mark to the enemy,
laid the coats aside, and adopted red jackets the same as
those of the soldiers. This was als ) found to be a
matter of convenience, and now the blue. coats were laid
aside.
Mr. HUME asked who was the master tailor.—
tighter.) If it was not the duty of the Secretary at
War to attend to these matters, to whom dirl that duty
belong? If there was no one responsib'e for it, changes
might succeed each other without end.
Mr. F. MAULE said the changes were made after
being well considered by the Commander-in-Chief, and
submitted by him to a board of general officers.
Mr: OSBORNE said he had reason to believe that
these alterations generally emanated from some el,Abier,
who possessed the ear of some general officer. He had
no doubt,. so uncomfortable were the shell jackets, that
that before six months were over there would be another
general order on the subject.
Colonel DUNNE complained of the rank given to the
Captains of the Guards as Lieutenant-Colonels ; they
furnished about ene-half the whole number. An officer
of the line could rarely attain the rank of Lieutenant-
Colonel under twenty or thirty years, and after serving
in every part of the world, which the officers of the
Guards were not required to do. The system that was
Pursued in giving more speedy promotion to the Guards
than to the officers of the line was most unjust. He had
no feeling against the Guards, or to the distinction be-
tween the Guards and the line, but he thought the
fairest plan to pursue would be to promote the most
deserving officers of the line to the Guards.—(Hear.)
Mr. FOX MAULE said that the question to which
the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman referred would come
before the Committee of Inquiry. He was of opinion
that the Guards should be permanently fixed in London.
Colonel LINDSAY said that during 32 years there
were only three instances of officers of the Guards ex-
changing to regiments of the line. •
Mr. OSBORNE said that the commands of stations
were given to guardsmen. He had no. objection to the
Guards, and he believed if they were to have a monarchy,
that it would be necessary to have Guards. He denied
that they were peculiarly fit for London service. The
only reason why captains in the Guards were lieutenant-
colonels was, that it was considered advisable to have
those about the Court general officers. It was unjust to
the officers of the line that they should be promoted for
such a reason.
Colonel ANSON said that the average age of general
officers in the Guards was about 60, which was as high
as in the line. With regard to the fitness of the Guards
for London duty, he did not say that other troops were
not able to perform that duty, but he believed no one
would deny that the Guards performed their duty effi-
ciently, and that the line were but too happy when they
found themselves brigaded by the Guards.
Col. DUNNE did not assert any superiority for the
line, and he would not admit any inferiority. He be-
lieved that no Irishmen were admitted into the guards.
Col. LINDSAY said that he knew one regiment in
which there were some Irishmen. But there was cer-
tainly an indisposition to take Irishmen or Scotcbmen
into the guards, fiecause the corps of guards was dis-
tinctively national.
Mr. OSBORNE said that with respect to the nation-
ality of regiments, most of the 42d Highlanders, called
the " Black Watch," who fought at Waterloo, were
Irishmen.—(Laughter.)
Sir D. L. EVANS complained that no mark of recog-
nition had been given to General D'Aguilar and Colonel
Brereton for their distinguished services in the Canton
war. . .

Lord PALMERSTON bore testimony to the skill,
energy, and ability displayed by the officers in question,
which bad been followed by results so beneficial to , the
Commercial interests of this country.— (Hear.)
Mr. HUME, before the vote was passed, wished to
congratulate the House on the state of discipline which
existed in the army, notwithstanding the disuse of cor-
poral punishment.—(Hear.) That was extremely satis-
factory to those who• advocated its abolition.—(Hear.
hear.) With respect to the amount of the vote, he con-
sidered there was great room for reduction. They were
not now likely to be invaded, so that he thought the
nusabef of teed could be reduced. In the years 1834,
1835,•and 1836, the average number of men in the army
Was 86,500. It was now 113,000. In addition to this
number there were 150,000 invalids enrolled. There
were yeomanry and militia. and a police force of 23,000.
In London there were 5,338 policemen; in the boroughs
of England there were 4,400; in the counties, 2,509; and
in Ireland there were 10,639. He was greatly sur-
prised at the increase in the police force. The number
of men in the navy was now 43,000 instead of 27,000; in
the ordnance, 13,000 instead of 8,900. Without includ-
ine the artillery, he believed there were now no less
than 236,000 armed men in the country. That was
enough to exhaust any country. He should move that
the vote be reduced by 445,0001, though he did not mean
to divide the House upoh it.
Mr. F. MAULE said he wonldnot enter into the de-
tails which had been mentioned by the Hon. Member,
as the subject would coma' before the Committee of In-
quiry ; but be would ask whether there was anything in
the state of Europe or in the state of their own country
(Hear, hear)—which would justify them in reducing
the army now ?—(Hear, hear.) The army was not more
than they ought to have, and he only trusted in Provid-
ence it might be found sufficient.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. OSBORNE said that he had brought a plan be-
fore the House by which 2,000,0001. of money might be
saved without reducing the army by a single man, but
it had been disregarded. The great question which the
People of this country had now to decide was, how they
Were to pay all these forces. The increase of the police
force in the metropolis might be accounted for by the
number of new streets which aro added every year to
the metropolis.
Mr. Ilume's amendment was then negatived without
a division, and the vote agreed to.
On 168,2371., for the expenses of the general staff of-
ficers and the garrison officers of the Tower of London
being moved,
Mr. HUME thought that a great reduction might be
effected in this item.
Mr. OSBORNE objected to having two general offi-
cers, one commanding the army and the other the ord-
nance. One person was sufficient to perform the duties
of Commander of the Forces and Master-General of
the Ordnance. Then there was 900/. a year for
the Duke of Wellington as Governor of the Tower.
He would kneel; off 1.000/. a year from these salaries.
Then there was the Tower Major. No person could
say who he was. Then there was the chaplain, the
physician—although there were the army surgeons—
and the apothecary to the Tower, who had 101. a year.
--(Laughter.) Then there was the gentleman porter
With 801. a year—(Laughter)—and the gentleman gaoler
'with 60/.—(Laughter.) Then there were 40 yeomen
warders, as if there were no troops. He would try to
do away with the whole thing, and move that the vote
be reduced 3,911/. Is. Bd.
Mr. P. MAULE said the whole of the Tower estab-
lishment had been under a review of a Committee of that
Rouse, and they let it stand as it was. He should be
- the last man to vote under any circumstances to deprive
of a place pf honour that Noble and Gallant Officer who
did so much service for his country.—(Hear.)
Mr. OSBORNE said the Hon. Gentleman tried to ride
off upon the Duke of Wellington. He would say nothing
in disparagement of that illustrious individual; but as
the Right Hon. Gentleman made reference to his ser-
vices, he would say in reply that the country had amply
repaid thew.—(Hear, hear.) He had two regiments,
and Strathfieldsaye, and other things.
Colonel LINDSAY said that the gentleman gaoler
and the gentlbman warder were not appointed by the
Government. They were non-copmassioned officers,
and the situations were given them as something better
. than retiring pensions.
Mr. OSBORNE protested against debasing non-com-
missioned officers by calling men who had served their
country gentlemen porters and gentlemen gaolers. If
they served their country let them get suitable pensions.
The country would not object to that. But let them not
hie paid by being made gentlemen porters and gentle-
:men gaolers.—(Hear.) He would divide the House.
After a few words from Mr. -HumE and Major
BLACKALL, •
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
. For the amendment
Against it
Majority against it —4B
The Tote was accordingly passed.
On the next vote, 96,5901. for the charges and expenses
Of the public departments,
Mr. B. OSBORNE said this charge was lumped toge-
, ther in a most extraordinary way. He regretted to find
fault in a matter affecting an office so well filled as that
, of the Judge Advocate General was at the present time,
but for the life of him he could not understand what the
use of that office was. It was an office usually given to
• a barrister who could get no briefs, and he really thought
many a briefless barrister could be got to fill the post for
one-fourth the cost. -He hoped, therefore, that hit
friends would support him in a motion that the expense
of the Judge Advocate General department be reduced
3,000/. per annum.—(Oh.)
The JUDGE ADVOCATE-GENERAL thought it
really surprising that the Gallant Gentleman whb had
himself served, should not know better than to depre=
ciate the office which he had the honour to hold. The
duty of the Judge-Advocate was to examine and report
upon all the courts-martial which were held in the
may, and they amounted to nearly 60,000 per annum,
Besides this, constant and continual references were
made to the JUdge-Advocate by the Horse Guards on
Points of great delicacy and difficulty. He said nothing
Fa to the salary of the Judge-Advocate that was a
Point upon which he hoped he should not be asked to
give any opinion. This, however, he begged to remark,
that of late years not only had the duties of the office
been
much increased, but the occupant of the office had
bees deprived of a great amount of official assistance.
kno another,oecasion he should be happy to enter more
at detail into the duties devolving on the office, and he
• thought he should be able to show that the office was
net overpaid.
• ir_Mr.. HIJME, having been one of the Committee of
zugutry into the payment of this office some years ago,
Was bound to say that be thought there was no lavish
erPenditgre in this department.

It
Mr. F. O'CONNOR could say from exp,ri, ace th
the duties of the Judge Advocate General were ex-
tremely arduous. The present Judge-Advocate had sat
for several weeks upon an inquiry respecting him, and
he had really found a great deal to do.—(Latt4te er.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE said it was not hi, intetitio r to
divide, though he thought all the duties of the Ju Igo-
Advocate might be performed by his deputy.
Vote agreed to, as were the tollowing:-
1e,161/. for the expenses of the Royal Military
Asylum, &c.
80,309/. for the expenses of the volunteer corps.
15,5071. for allowances and rewards for military
services.
26,0001. further vote for the pay of general officers.
Mr. HUME remarked on this vote that ho thought
the number of general officers too large.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said the way general officers were
paid was perfectly disgraceful. They absolutely made
their money out of the savings of the regimental
clothing. Some of them, as, for instance, the Marquis
of Londonderry no doubt lost money by the system, but
the system itself was what he complained ot. It was
no use, however, to talk upon this subject to the House
of Commons. Few Members knew anything about the
army, and still fewer cared about it.
Mr. F. MAULE said this question had been discussed
twenty times, and it had never been found that any better
system than the present could be adopted. It was a sys-
tem that worked well for the army, and that was econo-
mical to the country.
Mr. HUME said a majority of the House had, after
inquiry, agreed to the continuance of the existing system,
and7ie, therefore, was not prepared to raise a discussion
upon the subject. At the same time he did not approve
the system.
Mr. F. MAULE said it was impossible for any gene-
ral officers to make money unfairly by the existing
system.
Sir W. CLAY thought the system very objectionable.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said if the army clothiers were
examined before a Committee, they would prove that
many general officers made from 800/. to 1,000/. a year
by regimental clothing. They were making their gene-
ral officers army clothiers, nothing else.
57,0001. for charge of full pay of retired officers.
6,000/. (in part), for charge of half-pay and allowances
of retired officers.
47,386/. for charge of half•pay and reduced allowances
of officers of disbanded foreign corps, &c.
29,530/. (in part) for charge of pensions of widows, &c.
38,000/. (in part) for charge of allowances on compas-
sionate list, &c.
26,7741. for charge of Chelsea and Kilmainham hos-
pitals.
223,810/. (in part) for charge of out pensioners of
Chelsea hospital, &c.
37,500/. for superannuation allowances, &c.
These resolutions were ordered to be reported to the
House to-morrow (this day), and
The House then resumed.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
A message from the Lords informed the House that
their Lordships 'had agreed to the followine. Bills:
Habeas Corpus Suspension (Ireland)—London and
Blackwell Railway (Connecting Branch)—Edinburgh
and Northern Railway (Roscobie, Keltyhead, and Glen-
craig, Branches, &c.), without amendment—Great
Northern Railway (Isle of Axholme Branch), with
amendments—Monkland and Kirkintilloch, Ballochney,
and Slamannan Railways Amalgamation or Sale or
Lease and Amendment or Repeal of Acts, with an
amendment.
INCUDIBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of this Bill,
Sir L. O'BRIEN observed that, as he had opposed
this Bill When first introduced, he wished to say that he
hoped the amendments made to it would be favourably
considered in another place. He should not press his
opposition further.
Colonel DUNNE expressed his entire dissent from the
Bill, which he still thought calculated to do great injury
to Ireland.

On the question that the Bill do pass,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL moved the insertion of
a clause providing that notice of sale should be given in
all cases to remainder men; a personal notice wherever
possible, or in other cases an equivalent notice.
The clause was inserted.
Mr. MONSELL (in the absence of Mr. Bouverie)
moved the insertion of the following clause:—" And be
it enacted, that no assurance under this Act shall be sub-
ject to the further or additional duty (of equal amount
with the duty on a lease, or bargain and sale for a year),
with which conveyances by a single deed are by any Act
either expressly or by reference made chargeable; and
that, in lieu of all other stamp duty whatsoever (except
the progressive duty), there shall be chargeable on all
assurances under this Act on which the purchase or
consideration money therein or thereupon expressed
shall not amount to 2,0001., an ad valorem duty of 6s.
for every 50/ of such purchase or consideration money,
and the like sum for any smaller or fractional part of 50/
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that from fiscal considerations he must on principle ob-
ject to the introduction of the provision.
Mr. MONSELL supported the clause as calculated to
encourage that which was generally admitted to be a
point of great importance, the sale of estates in small
portions.
Mr. B. OSBORNE also supported the provision. The
alleviation of the stamp duties in Ireland was most es-
sential to the material interests of that country.

The Earl of LINCOLN hoped the Hon. Gentleman
would not divide the House on this motion, because in so
doing he might imperil the success of the measure itself;
and, still more, prejudice the satisfactory revision, which
he hoped would be at an early period, of the whole
system of stamp duties on the transfer of landed property
in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) There was no question but
that this measure must be followed up by more, tending
in this and in other particulars to ameliorate the social
condition of the sister country.
Mr. HUME said it was quite clear that if the Govern-
ment wished the Bill to be of use in Ireland they
would listen to the suggestion of the lion. Member.
What was wanted in Ireland was the means of affording
employment to the labourers, and that could only be
done by facilitating the transfer of land.
Mr. GOULBURN expressed a hope that the Hon.
Member would not persist in his amendment, as if agreed
to it would tend to render incunibrances more numerous.
—(Oh, oh.) A revision of the stamp duties on the
transfer of land was much required, and he was sure
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would do right to take
that subject into serious consideration.
Mr. EWART was of opinion that the whole of the
stamp duties on the transfer of land both in England
and Ireland ought to be revised.
Mr. HENLEY thought that by making one comes-
lion the Government had drawn down upon themselves
the present one for a remission of the stamp duties in
Ireland. He must oppose the amendment.
After a few words from Mr. DRUMMOND and Sir A.
BROOKE,
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the clause
Against it
Majority
The clause was consequently lost.
Sir L. O'BRIEN moved two clauses as riders to the
Bill—the first to prevent selling more of an estate than
was necessary to clear off the in.zumbrances; the second
to prevent the family mansion from being sold until the
outlying parts of the estate had been found insufficient
to redeem the mortgage.
The SOLICITOR- GENERAL opposed the clauses
on the ground that they would operate injuriously on
the general effect of the Bill.
Sir W. WALSH supported the clauses, which he
contended would in some degree correct the injurious
operation of the Bill. He had no desire to prevent the
sale of heavily incumbered estates in Ireland, but he
was most desirous to prevent small incumbrancers or
tenants for life forcing property into the market unne-
cessarily at a time when it could only be sold at a
ruinous price.
Colonel DUNNE also supported the clauses, which,
After a few words from Mr. GROGAN, were nega-
tived.
The Bill was then passed.
The
PUBLICHouse
havingW OR l WORKS
go
n(el (IRELAND,
intoE N L
CommitteeA D, No
tBILL.hi
sßill,
Mr. GOULBURN, having remarked upon the prac•
Licee
te
d of
fund, making
saidadthvaantctehse
advanceto Irel ndm
made
et
in
nf
sh
4e cwo nesse lti -
(j
be paid in a certain number of instalments. The objecte
of the Bill was to repay out of the consolidated fund the
sum of 1,000,0001., which would otherwise be available
was
for the general resources of the empire.lf Ireland
to pay the money, it should go consolidated
meant be voted out of
fund, and the sum necessary for Ireland
f rt
oh
me
tthe Government
paymentthis to relieve
of
Ithrealtanfrdaltogßetehterif
ought to say so—they ought to declare at o
could not be levied without impoverishing nctheethat it
Irish
population, and then ask Parliament for theamount
distinctly stating what were the public works to which
it was to ba applied, instead of leaving the matter in
the hands of the Treasury, with poker to continue those
works which had already proved so useless and unpro-
ductive.
Mr. HUDSON protested altogether against the
prin-
ciple of the Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the object of the Bill was simply to enable the
Treasury, through the Board of Works, to lend money
to the grand juries on presentment for the purpose of
completing such works as the grand juries might think
proper—the works to be carried on under their own
superintendence. The Government did not intend
to introduce the machinery of the Board of Works, or
otherwise interfere with the mode of outlay, but leave
that altogether to the counties themselves. At present
he did not think it would be advisable for this country
to call on Ireland for repayment; but the Government
would do so the Moment they saw that Ireland was in a
sufficiently prosperous condition to respond to the call.
Mr. CARDWELL took the same view of the measure
as the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the Uni-
versity of Cambridge, hoping the House would not de-
part from the ordinary mode of expending money drawn
from the consolidated fund.
br. BO WRING 'regretted that Parliament had no
security against these loans to Ireland' being converted
into giftS, either by that country's inability or unwil-
lingnesi to repay. He complained, too, of the unsatis-
factory, nature of the accounts of the Board of Works.
Indeed, the whole state of Irish expenditure demanded
a searching investigation, for from the Treasury down-
wards there seemed to be an utter helplessness to pro-
tect the revenue. The evil was intolerable, and ought
to be put an end to.
Major BLACKALL said that it would be found that
the loans which were •
paid back. as an given given to Ireland were as fairly
Alemher for to this country. The Hdn.
objection to this Liverpool,loan, he
thought, would 'see that his
namely, that the object for
which the loan was intended
by the Bill which specifie was not stated, was met
the objects of the loan. The
House
pause
should
before
tion
to
itßill which
it refused to give its
wouldsanc-
prove a very great boon -to

Ireland, as it would give employment to a very great
number or the starving population.
Mr. STAFFORD said that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer bed mixed the question of the poor-law with
this question. The poor-law had no bearing on the
matter whatever. lie held in his hand a petition from
the county of Clare, protesting against this Bill, signed
by the most respectable gentlemen in that county. As
for his own constituents, he believed that, if he did not
make any allusion to the Bill, so easily was million after
million passed for Ireland, none of them would have
known anything about it. It was not by voting million
after million that they would do anything for the benefit
of the country, it was by teaching the people self-
reliance. He was glad that the lion. Gentleman the
Member for the University of Oxford afforded him an
opportunity of reiterating his objections to the principle
of the Bill.
Sir R. FERGUSON said he was very much pained
at the manner in which the petition was quoted. The
petition implored the House of Commons not to pass
this Bill, because it held out an idea that the money
would be paid back again. That idea they repudiated.
He did not think it fair under such circumstances to
quote the petition.
Mr. -URQUHART said that the criticism on the peti-
tion enhanced its value.
Sir 1). J. NORREYS objected that the payment of
advances were made general while the advantages would
inevitably be local. He thought that the benefit derived
by particular counties ought to be correctly ascertained.
Mr. STAFFORD made an explanation.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY concurred in the views of
the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Liverpool on the
ground that no money should be voted by Parliament
unless the mode in which it was to be expended was
specified in the estimates.
The CHAIRMAN then put the question as to whether
the blank for time should be filled up by the words
" three years," which was agreed to.
The House then divided on Mr. Goulburn's amend-
ment, when there appeared—
For the clause
Against it
Majority for the clause —66
On returning to the gallery we found,
Mr. HUDSON objecting to grants of money made
without any prospect of repayment.
Mr. GOULBURN reminded the Hon. Member that
the House had already affirmed the principle of the

grant.
Colonel SIBTHORP, as one of the guardians of the
public purse, objected to this mode of frittering away
public money. He looked upon the present Bill as the
smuggling act of a smuggling Government.
After a short discussion clauses 2 and 3 were agreed
to. The remaining clauses were agreed to, and the Bill
was ordered to be reported on Thursday next.
SPIRITS (DEALERS IN) BILL.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER, the Committee on this Bill was postponed
until Friday next.
BONDED CORN BILL.
On the motion of Mr. LABOUCHERE, the order for
the Committee on this Bill was discharged. The Right
Hon. Member stated that he had ascertained from the
Board of Customs that legislation would not be neces-
sary to enable parties to grind corn in bond during the
next three months, and therefore he begged leave to
withdraw the Bill, which he had proposed with a view
of legalizing that operation.
SAVINGS' BANKS IN IRELAND.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that a Select Committee should be appointed to inquire
into and report on the laws regulating savings' banks in
Ireland, and on the large deficiencies in several branches
of those banks, in consequence of frauds cemreitted by
the officers.
After a conversation the motion was agreed to.
SUGAR DUTIES.
Mr. CARDWELL moved for copies of any reports
made to the Government by the revenue departments,
with a view to the proposed .alteration in the propor-
tionate duties upon refined and raw sugars respectively.
He made this motion in consequence of the 'proposed al-
teration itt the Government plan, to be prepared for the
Committee on Thursday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said

th;rewers3tiOol6c-i-al returns suoh as were alluded to
which it was in his power to lay before the House. The
information on which Government had proceeded had
been chiefly obtained by communication with individuals
in the trade.

After a few words from Mr. GOULBURN, the mo-
ion was withdrawn.
THE NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Mr. EWART rose to submit a motion on the subject
of the accommodation in the new House; but a motion
being made that the House should be counted, and there
being only 33 Members present, the House stood ad-
journed, at a Quarter after One o'clock, until noon this
day.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

;From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Coninwns.)

MONDAY, JULY 24.
SUPPLY.-(IN THE COMMITTEE.)

Motion made, and Question proposed, " That a sum not
exceeding 168,2371. be granted to her Majesty, for defraying
the charge of General Staff Officers and Officers of the Hos-
pitals serving with her Majesty's Forces in the United
Kingdom :of Great Britain and Irelan 1, and on Foreign
Stations (excepting India), and of her 'Majesty's Garrison of
the Tower of London, which will come in course of payment
from the Ist day of April, 1848, to the 31st day of March,
1849, both days inclusive;"—Afterwards, Motion made, and
Question put, " That a sum not exceeding 1(4,3261. ba
granted to her Majesty, for defraying the said charge."
The Committee divided :

MINORITY—AYES, 21.
Illewitt, Reginald Elastic, Alexander Thompson, Colonel
)lowring, Dr. M'Gregor, John Thompson, George
grotherton, Joseph Mitchell, A. T. Wakley, Thomas
Clay, James Mowatt, Francis Wawa, J 'V.
Cobden, Richard O'Connor, Feargus Williams,John
Coiobrooke, Sir T. Pilkington, James
..... TELLERS.
. .

rawford. W. S.
Yagan, William

Reynolds, John Roma-Joseph
Smith, J. Benjamin Osborne, Ralph

MAJORITY-NOES, GO.
Abdy, Thomas N. Grace, 0. D. Reid, Colonel
Anson, Colonel Greene, Thomas Rice, E. R.
Armstrong, Sir A. Grenfel , Charles W. Roodlly, Sir John
Armstrong, R. B. Grey, Sir G. - Russell, F. C.
Bellew, R. M. Gwyn, liowel Rutherford, A.
Bentinck, Lord G. Hamilton, G. A. Sandal's, George
Blackall, S. W. Hay, Lord J. Shell, R. L.
Buller, Charles }Wrier, W. G. Simeon, John
Bunbury, E H. Henley, J. W. Somerville, Sir W.
Cardwell, Edward Herbert, Sidney Stafford, Augustus
Clay, Sir W. Hood, Sir .A. Stephenson, Robert
Craig, W. G. Jervis, Sir John Tancred, H. W.
Dawson, T. V. Langston, J. H. Thornely, T.
Drumlanrig, Vas. Leonard, T. B. Turner, Edmund
Drummond, Henry Lindsay, Colonel Vivian, J. E.
Dundas, Admiral Lockhart, A. E. Vyse, IL
Dunne, F. P. M'Cullagh, W. T. Ward, 11. G.
Egerton, W. T. Marshall, William Williamson, Sir IL
Ferguson, Sir R. Ma,heson, Colonel Wwiolosodn,,SJiramcehsarles
Fitzpatrick. J. W. Maule, Fox Wilson, Matthew
Floyer, John Monsell, William
rox, Richard M. Morison, Sir W. TELLERS,
Freestun, Colonel Palmer, Roundell Tufnell, Mary
E Goulburn, Henry Parker, John Rich, Henry

INCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL,
Read a third time; Clause added; another Clause (And
be it Enacted, That no assurance under this Act shall be
subject to the further or additional Duty (of equal amount
with the Duty on a lease, or bargain and sale for a year),
with which conveyances by a single deed are by any Act,
either expressly or by reference made chargeable; and that,
in lieu of all oilier Stamp Duty whatsoever (except the pro-
gressive Duty), there shall be chargeable on all assurances
under this Act, on which the purchase or consideration
money therein or thereupon expressed shall not amount to
two thousand pounds, an ad valorem Duty of six shillings
for every fifty pounds of such purchase or consideration
money, and the like sum for any smaller or fractional part of
fifty pounds," brought up and read a first time : —Motion
made,and Question put, " That the said Clause be now read
a second time." MlNORlTYhloused—ivAidTedErs—,
55.

Anderson, Arthur Gore, W. O. Perfect, It.
Anstey, T. C. Greene, John Reynolds, John
Arehdall, Captain Gwyn, Howol Robartes, T. J.
Bateson, T. Hall, Sir B. SelweY, Colonel
Bolling, William: Hamilton, G.'A. Scully, Francis
Bourke, IR. S. Henry, Alexander Simeon, John
UMW, Dr. Podgson, W. N. Spooner, Richard
Bright, John Hood, Sir A. Talbot, JI.
Drummond
Brooke, Sir A. B. Tioruby, John Tancred, H. W.
Banbury, E. H. Hume, Joseph Teunent, 1.. J.
Clay, James . Jackson, William Thompson, Colonel
Cobden, Richard Kershaw, James Thornely, T.
Courtenay, Lord Lennard, T. B. Tyrrell, Sir J. T.
Crawford, W. S. Lushington, C. Villiers, Charles
Dawson, T. V. 31`Cullagh, W. T. Williams, John
Duncan, George
Swart, William Norreys, Sir D.
* Henry Mowatt, Francis
TELLERS.
O'firien,Sir Lucius Monsen, William
Fagan, William
Fox, M, O'Connor, Feargus
Richard Osborne, Ralph
Pechell, Captain

MAJORITY—NOES, 114.
Adair, Hugh E. Grace, O. D. J. Palmerston, VIS.
Arkwrlght, G.
Armstrong, Sir A. Grey, Sir George
Armstrong, R. B. Grey, Ralph W. :
Baring, Sir F. T. Grogan, Edward PilkingtOn, James
Bellew, R. M. Grosvenor, Lord R. PlOwden, W. 11.
Parker,r
atten J. oh
W.
John
Pigott, Francis
Benbow, John Grenfell, Charles W.
i do, Osman
Bentladk, Lord G. llastie, Alexander it.car E. „
Bernal, Ralph
Rich, IlortrY
Blackall, S. W. Hay, Lord John
Romilly, Sir John
Hardcastle, J. A.
Brockman, E. D. llayter, W. G.
Russell, F. C. H.
Brotherton, J. Headlam, T. E.
Hawes, Benjamin Rico, -,•,•1%.
Rutherford, A.
Brown, W. Henley, J. W.
Campbell, W. F.
Sandars, George,
Cardwell, E. Hobhouse, T. B. Posey, P.
Carew, W. P. Hogg, Sir J. W.
Chaplin,',W. J. Howard, • J. K. Seymour, Lord
llobhouse, Sir John
Sanders,
Charteris, Francis Jones, Captain Smith, It. V.
Christopher, R. Ring, P. J. Smith, John A.
Christy, Samuel Labouchero, Henry Smith, J. B.
Clay, Sir W. .... Langston, J. H.
Clerk Sir G. Lascolles, W. S. Strickland, Sir G.
Cocks, Thomas S. Lewis, G. C. Thicknesse, R. A.
Craig, W. G. Lincoln, Earl of. Towneley, John
Cubittt,. William IWGregor, John Townshend, Captain
,jJoknoseph
Denison, J. E. Mangles, R. D. Somerville,TrerE. Sir
Duncan, Viscount Marshall, William Vane, Lord H.
Dungas, Admiral Martin, J. Walsh, Br .1.
Dunne, Francis P. Matheson, A. IVawn, J. T.
Ebrington, Viscount Matheson, Colonel Wellesley, Lord C.
Elliot, J. E. Mettle, Fox Willcox, Brodie
Estcourt, J. B. B. Weigand, Viscount Willonliby, sir 11.
Ferguson, Sir R. Morpeth, Viscount Wilson, James
Foley, John 11. Morris, David Wood, Sir Charles
Forster, Matthew Mostyn, E. Wood, W. P.
Fortescue, J. W. Norreys, Lord Wyviil, Marmadake
Freestun, Colonel Ogle, S. C. TELLERS.
Glyn, G. C. Owes, Sir J. 11111, Lord M.
Goalburn, Henry Palmer, Roundell Tuthell, henry

RESWEARING OF SPECIAL CONSTABLES ._ln COD.-
sequence of a communication received from Sir George
Grey, the Secretary of State for the Home Department,
the magistrates of the Kensington division of Middlesex
have been engaged since Wednesday last in re-swearing
the special constables appointed previous and subsequent
to the 10th of April last. The division comprises the
parishes of Chelsea, Kensington, Fulham, Hammersmith,
Chiswick, Ealing, Acton, and Willesden. All who
have presented themelves have been re•sworn for six
months. Many have, however, absented. themselves, and
the greater part have not undertaken the duty with the
willingness they did at first, most of them considering it
at present unnecessary.—Observer,
Sir John*Gorard had an interview with Sir George
Grey yesterday, at the Home•ottree.