The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-12 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 11.

ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Sir JOHN WALSII opposed the Bill, believing that
the House or a Committee of it was not the proper
tribunal for settling the question. He admitted it was
desirable to facilitate the sale of encumbered estates—
(Hear, hear)—but as this Bill would constitute a very
serious invasion of the rights of individuals, and
open a door for the admission of fraud, he
felt it his duty to oppose it. After the
stringent measures they had passed of late, with
respect to land in Ireland, it was most unjust now
to bring forward a measure which would have the effect
of wresting property from the hands of many of the land-
lords of Ireland. It would have the effect of destroying
the stability of investments in Ireland, and prevent the
increase of that trade which they were so desirous to

awaken.
Mr. B.' OSBORNE said, the speech of the Ho-
nourable 'Gentleman was an able and excellent one
if the interests of the mortgaged proprietors of
Ireland were merely to be considered ; but if the
vast interests of the commonwealth were to be weighed,
his speech was one-sided in the highest degree. The
Government had, he thought, acted most fairly and with
the best motives in bringing in this measure. To
show the necessity of such a measure, he might
state that the Honourable Gentleman (Yr. Sadlier)
was the real owner of several estates in his (Mr.
Osborne's) neighbourhood, though he had not the credit
of being so. He complained that so much of the time
of the House was occupied in the discussion of
Irish measures, which ended, after all in nothing.—
(Hear, hear.) For instance, this very Bill had been
mentioned in three Queen's speeches, and yet it had
been put off from time to time, and its principles had
been materially altered from hose in which it was in-
troduced: it was like a new Bill tacked upon the end of
the old one, and he feared if it were passed in this House
it would not receive the sanction of the House of Lords;
yet he was glad to accept it as far as it went. He ob-
jected to the references named-by the Bill to the Court
of Chancery in Ireland. All who knew the chicanery
and delay of that office, the vast amount of business
that it had to discharge, must be dissatisfied with this
principle.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore, however much
they might object to the appointment of Commis-
sioners, he considered that the institution of such
a body would tend much to facilitate the sale of en-
cumbered estates.—(Cries of " Hear.") Their great
object should be to make land cheap. Now he had ob-
tained the opinion of two eminent lawyers on the Bill,
and they agreed in stating that this Bill would not tend
in that direction.—(llear.) Unless they lessened the
stamp duties necessary on the transfer of es-
tates, great reluctance would continue to exist
on the part of many to try property. Great good would
accrue if landlords were allowed to sell their estates in
small portions. The landlords of Ireland were not worse
than those of England, but their position prevented
them from doing all they wished. The number of
persons interested in property in that country
cabmwepeaorpia creeaimcnrtoeoomidsrdtpetonilhianwsanhth eel .1
were so numerous that no valuable improvements could
;y(l3,
and the
thheeaoro.n)ditTiohne
ostfattehoolfanldrelhanadd
t
idtthfhoort himme
opeorvooiyvl
eptmah
eiadnntos
nawtnayos tfohtnihni
yog
ss.Co else.u4rd t.
po
efWhyrcchean
Chan-
cery
fromrfrom
their
their
knowledge
the residue was deveted to the support of minors,
lunatics, and others, who devoted no attention to the land
from
werel
manage
nehlaeigcceht e
dtahne
noty
e derived
sstoatme uca
shit.
t.m And hen
ability the
to ofdhowr receiversdrain
to
the pockets of the tenants. He cited the case of " O'Sul-
livan
estate and been buried in a hill, in consequence
of not being afforded the necessary releif out of the
Court of Chancery. The estate in consequence fell into
on v. O ' Sullivan," to show that 600 tenants had died
an
an unlucrative state. The proximate cause of the
murder of Major Mahon'and others arose out of estates
then lying in the hands of the Court of
Chancery. There should be a registration

office in Ireland as in Belgium. Unless they placed the ►
possession of the land in Ireland upon a better footing
than at present, anarchy would be the result, and the
property they possessed would be destroyed. He quoted
the cases of Spain, Norway, and France to show that
great advantage would accrue from the subdivision of the
land into small farms, and the creation in consequence
of a small class of farmers, no matter of what religion.
The value of land in Ireland would be thus increased—
(Hear)—and the crop also. Irish landlords owed a great
debt of gratitude to the Solicitor• General for bringing in
this Bill, which would receive his warm support.—(Hear.)
Mr. HERBERT should support the Bill, as he be.
lieved the fair and reasonable rights of the landlords
of Ireland would be protected by it. If they did not
take advantage of this Bill, he believed the time would
come when they would have no rights to protect.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR tendered his thanks to the Solici-
tor-General for the alterations he had introduced into
the Bill since it had been brought down from the House
of Lords. It would be a happy thing for Ireland if
there were not a solicitor in any part of that country.— '
(A. laugh.) He condemned the Irish landowners for
coming to that Douse for stringent measures, when those
measures might have been rendered quite unnecessary
by the proper discharge of their duties.—(Hear, hear.)
He was glad, however, that during the present session
one measure, at least, had been introduced which was
calculated to ameliorate the condition of that country.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD supported the motion for
going into Committee. He approved of the principles
of the Bill,'lout he objected to some of the details.
Sir GEORGE GREY said if the discussion came to
a conclusion at the present sitting, he should propose
that the House should go into Committee on the Bill on
Thursday next at twelve o'clock.
Mr. CALL A.GIIAN opposed the Bill, which he said
had created a great deal of surprise and dissatisfaction
I in Ireland.

Colonel DUNNE opposed the Bill. It was per-
fectly void in principle, and had not the approval
of the highest legal authorities either in this country
or in Ireland. It was a curious and singular circum-
stance that the Attorney-General had been absent
during the whole of the discussion upon this Bill. That
discussion had been of the Utmost importance, for in the
first place it had shown the imperfect state of the exist-
ing law, and in the next it had shown that the Bill, in-
stead of amending the law, was calculated to increase the
difficulties which at present attended its operation. There
was no country in Europe to which the Bill was less ap-
plicable than Ireland. If it were passed it would have to
be administered and carried out by lawyers, and would
therefore neither facilitate the transfer of property nor
cheapen the process by which that transfer could be
effected.

The amendment proposed by Sir Lucius O'Brien was
then withdrawn, aid the House went into Committee
pro forma upon the'Bill, Mr. BERNAL in the chair.
The preamble as postponed, the Chairman reported
progress, and tlen obtained leave to sit again on
Thursday.
CORN MIRKETS (IRELAND) BILL.
The Corn Marlets (Ireland) Bill then went through
Committee.
The House then adjourned till Half-past Five o'clock.

The SPEAKER rmumed the Chair at Half-past Five.
Lord D. STUART presented a petition in favour
of Parliamentary Worm.
Mr.; DUNCAN presented a petition from Aberdeen
to the same effect, sod also praying for a reduction in the
national expenditure.
Mr. O'BRIEN )resented a petition from Middlesex in
favour of vote by isnot.
•
THE RAJA OF SATTARA.
_ _

Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON then rose to bring
forward the moton of which he had given notice
with respect to the case of the late Raja of Sat-
tara, and to movE for a Select Committee to inquire
into the conduct of Lieutenant-Colonel Charles
Ovens (Of the Bonbay. Army), while British Political
Resident at the Court of Sattara; and into the pro-
ceedings of the Bimbay Government, and the Court
of Directors of the East India Company, in re-
lation to certain charges preferred against that
officer. The Honourable Member observed,
that he was tnxious to merit the indulgence
which he ventured earnestly and respectfully to solicit at
the hands of the House, by proceeding at once, as briefly
as possible, to state the reasons which induced him to
bring forward the motion of which he had given notice.
He (Mr. Thompson) wished, at the outset, to disclaim
any personal ill-feeling towards the Gallant Officer whose
conduct was the subject of the proposed inquiry. His
private character was, as far as he (Mr. Thompson)
knew, unreproac'aed and free from suspicion. He
had received no injury at his hands, nor did he
(Mr. Thompson) believe that that gentleman had
ever meditated any towards him. He had no one
cause for individual resentment against that officer,
nor was he conscious of cherishing any sentiment ap-
proaching to personal animosity. It was as -a
public man, and a servant of the State, that he had
then to do with Colonel Ovans. It was on public
grounds, and on public grounds solely, that he referred
to him in the Parliament of Great Britain, and deemed
it his duty to impeach certain of the acts done by
that officer in his official and responsible cha-
racter. But it was not simply the conduct of
Colonel Ovans that he (Mr. Thompson) was there to
arraign; still less was it upon Colonel Ovens exclusively,
or even as the principal offender, that he thought the
censure of that House and of the country ought to fall,
and would fall if the inquiry sought was granted.
Through Colonel Ovans a higher and more important
duty was then endeavoured to be discharged,
namely, that of arraigning the conduct of those
to whom that officer was, and still is, immediately
amenable—whose commission he had long held, by
whose orders he was placed at Sattara, and by whom
his conduct had been repeatedly sanctioned, approved,
and rewarded. Nor was it merely to obtain an inquiry
into the acts of those under whom Colonel Ovens had
served, that the present motion was brought
forward, although the conduct of the East
India Company, and her Majesty's Government, in
the administration of the affAirs of a vast empire like
that of India, was, of necessity, a subject of the highest
importance ; but it was because that conduct was inse-
parably linked in the present case with the melancholy
fate of a distinguished Indian sovereign, with the observ-
ance or breach of a solemn treaty, and with the disposal
at the present time of a throne without an occupant, a
principality without a ruler, and a numerous people with-
out a prince; and, further, because that conduct was con-
nected with whatever Is valuable to the British name
and character in India, with the principles of national
honour and good faith, and with the mainte
nance of that opinion in the minds of the

people and princes of the state, which could
alone
constitute a lasting foundation for British
dominion in that distant part of the world. It was due,
however, to his (Mr. Thompson's) own feelings that he
should state that he had long cherished the hope of being
relieved from the necessity of undertaking so painful a
duty as that which he was then endeavouring to dis-
charge. That necessity he fondly trusted would have been
removed, by a reconsideration, on the part of the Indian
Government in this country, of the decision now fully
admitted to have been prematurely arrived at, in the
case of the late deposed Raja of Sattara. In common
with many gentlemen, whose judgments were far more
entitled to respect than his own, he had always I
felt convinced that a reconsideration of the case of '
the Raja of Sattara—due weight being given to all the
facts which had been disclosed subsequently to that
Prince's deposal—would not fail to issue in the reversal
of the heavy sentence carried into execution azainst
the accused. The hand of death having recently re-
moved both the Prince deposed in 1839 and the one
subsequently exalted in his place, the hope to
which he (Mr. Thompson) had referred, obtained fresh
vigour, from the belief that as the Raja had left an
adopted son who, besides the circumstance of his adop i
tion, stood next n succession to the vacant throne,
as the nearest in lineal descent, and as no politi-
cal or other impediment existed to render it diffi
cult or inexpedient to declare that person the Raja
of Sattara, that therefore justice would be
done, as far as the present state of the case admitted,
by the acknowledgment of the rightful heir, the re-
storation of the deposed Raja's family to their native
country, and the preservation of the territory of Sattara
to the family of Sevajee, in accordance with the
express terms of the treaty of 1819. That hope
had, however, been considerably weakened by the in-
ability of the friends of the Raja's cause to obtain,
either from the Court of Directors, during two meetings
at the India House, or from her Majesty's Minister at
the head of the Board of Control, any assurance
of an intention to recognise the claim of the
individual who, according to Hindoo law, stood towards
the deposed Raja in a relationship as near and as sacred
as that of a child born of his own body ; and they had
even failed to obtain so much as an intimation
of the intention of those authorities to consider
favourably the claims to which reference had been
made. The treatment, too, which that Prince had
received from the agent of the Governor-General at
Benares, had, so far from furnishing any grou9ds of en-
couragement, been of a nature to induce his friends to
believe that the supreme authority in India was not
favourable to the recognition of the rights of the
adopted son. And there it would be necessary that
he (Mr. Thompson) should distinctly connect the
inquiry which was sought by the present motion with
the future fate of the surviving members of the de-
ceased's Raja's family, and the disposal of the titles and
territory which that Prince for so many years pos-
sessed. Within the last few days. it had been
asserted, that the Raja being still held to be
guilty of the acts charged against him, was, there-
tore, incompetent to bequeath any political right to his
heir, and that consequently the adoption he had made was
null and void, so far as constituting any ground
for recognizing his heir. It became, therefore,
necessary to revive the question of the guilt or info-
"rice of Fertile) Sheen, so that by placing that
Prince in the position, as respects his ctiaracter, which
he occupied prior to the charges brought against
him they might give validity to the act by which
he nominated as his successor on the throne the youth
whom they were anxious to see taken into
alliance with the British Government. The inquiry
which he (Mr. Thompson) asked for would, he believed,
fully answer that end, and by resulting in the entire vin-
dication of the late Raja's character, remove every doubt
respecting the right and title of his living son to succeed
to the state and dominion of which his father was, as he
(Mr. Thompson) firmly believed, unjustly deprived.
Even at that, the eleventh hour, he (Mr. Thomp-
son) was willing to forego the right which he
possessed of making certain statements to the House,
and of reading various extracts from the blue books
then upon the table, if
her Majesty's Government,
whose own conduct and motives were necessarily in-
volved in the case, would consent that the whole matter
should be referred, either to a Committee of that House,
or if such a tribunal should be unable to pursue its inves-
tigation at sufficient length during the residue of the