The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-24 00:00:00

should have been paid to him on the 29th September last,
had not been paid, but had been stopped by the order of Go-
vernn'ent. He had sent in the necessary certificate, pursuant
to the instructions issued for effecting that object; but still,
when an explanation was demanded, it was alleged that the
non-issue of the bounty to the minister of Clonmel was attri-
butable to the fact that the certificate did not specify the
number of families belonging to the congregation. Now, in
the instructions issued to the Presbyterian clergymen the
form of certificate was given ; and on reference to this clergy-
man's certificate, it would be found that he had complied
with the instructions. Tt was manifest that if the con-
tinuance of the Regium Doman was made contingent upon
complying with the orders from the Castle, there was an end
to the independence of the Presbyterian ministers. In con-
clusion, be repeated that in this instance all the rules had
been observed, and, wider these circumstances, he wished to
know upon what principle the bounty had been withheld?
Mr. OSBORNE said he had the pleasure of knowing Mr.
Dill, to whose respectability and the respectability of the
congregation over which he presided, he could testify. He
knew further, that the congregation felt the non-payment to
Mr. Dill as a slur upon themselves.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE was sorry the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman had thought it his duty to bring the case
under the notice of the House, because it had been fully dis-
cussed at the late meeting of the General Assembly at
Belfast, by whom a committee was appointed to communi-
cate with her Majesty's Government upon the subject. The
case might very well have been left there, because any
communication from the General Assembly would meet
with that respect and consideration which had always
characterised the intercourse between the Presbyterian body
and the Irish Government. He admitted that the return re-
ferred to by the Hen. and Learned Member had not been
called for by Parliament. The rule requiring the particulars
alluded to from the Clonmel congregation, was made in con-
sequence of a request by Dr. Morgan to his Right Hon.
Friend (Mr. Labouchere) that the usual amount necessary
to be subscribed by the congregations should not be insisted
upon. The call for the number of families was always re-
quired; and Mr. Dill was only called upon to furnish the
same particulars that were required from every other con-
gregation. At the same time when the particulars for 1847
were furnished, as they had been for P 348, the bounty would
be paid.
Mr. HERBERT did not consider the answer of the Right
Hon. Baronet satisfactory, because the complaint was not
so much at the return being required as the mode of re-
quiring it.
After a few words in explanation from Sir W. SOMERVILLE
and Mr. KEOGIt,
Sir R. FERGUSON regretted the case had been brought
forward. Unfortunately there had been some differences of
long standing between Mr. Dill and Mr. Matthews upon
other subjects. As to the vote in general, he denied that it
had any political character.
Mr. KERSHAW repeated his objections to State support
being extende4 to any particular religious denomination, and
urged that the voluntary principle ought to be adopted.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment l3
Against it 45
Majority

The vote was then -agreed to.
The next vote was 4,1771. for the Concordatum Fund, and
other charitable allowances in Ireland, which, after a short
conversation, was agreed to.
The next vote was 3,4001. for the expense of the Commis-
sion for digesting the criminal law.
Colonel SIBTHORP objected to the enormous cost of this
Commission.
Sir G. GREY said that this was the last time that this
vote would appear in the estimate.
Colonel SIBTHORP hoped that it would be the case, but
did not believe it. —(A laugh.)
Sir G. GREY said that the only remaining portion of work
for the Commission was the inquiry into criminal judicial
procedure, which was rapidly advancing to a conclusion.
The vote was then agreed to.
The next vote was 2,500/. to defray the expense of the
metropolitan sanitary commission.
Mr. OSBORNE alluded to a petition presented the other
night, complaining of the state of the Serpentine river,
which was now nothing more than a stagnant pond. Ile
had recently walked beside that same river, some parts of
which, near the bridge, were in a most noisome and pesti-
ferous state. _ _ _

Lord MORPETH said that no one could go by or near
that river without perceiving the offensive state in which it
was. The matter had been referred to Sir John Rennie, and
he (Lord Morpeth) hoped soon to receive a report from that
eminent engineer. The vote was then agreed to.
The following votes were also agreed to :-
32,000 i. for a moiety of the charge for public works con-
nected with navigation and drainage in Ireland.
1,1841. for the expense of works and repairs of the Ambas-
sador's house at Paris. _ . _ .

3,0001. for works and repairs at the Ambassador's house at
Madrid.
37,0001., the remaining portion of 50,0001., towards de-
fraying the charge of steam navigation to India by way of
the Red Sea.
16,0001. for the militia and volunteers in Canada.
2,000/. to defray the expense of erecting a lighthouse at
Barbadoes.
On the motion that 22,5001. be granted to defray the ex-
pense of the medals to record the services of the British
army and navy from the commencement of the war in 1793
down to the peace of 1814,
Mr. OSBORNE expressed a wish to call attention to the
circumstances under which Lord Hardinge was sent to Ire-
land. He thought that it was but justice to the gallant
officer commanaing the forces in Ireland (Sir E. Blakeney)
to express his strong conviction that all the steps taken by
the military authorities for the suppression of the outbreak
had been taken before Lord Hardinge went to Ireland. The
gallant officer he alluded to was the senior officer to Lord
Hardinge, for he was captain of the company of the Guards
of which the Noble Lord was a lieutenant. That gallant
officer also, during his long service, had succeeded in winning
the respect and affection of the men under his command, as
well as the Irish people.—( Hear.) He had stated thus much
as he had heard that it was the impression of some persons
that Lord Hardinge was there to carry out the necessary
military arrangements.
Sir G. GREY quite agreed in the observations of the Hon.
Gentleman as to the high character of Sir E. Blakeney, and
no one could be more fitted for the command which he held
in Ireland than that gallant officer. It was quite incorrect
to suppose that Lord Hardinge was sent to Ireland to super-
sede him, but Sir E. Blakeney having said that in the then
state of Ireland it was desirable to have another general
officer in the south to command there, Lord Hardinge, in the
most handsome manner, and with the most patriotic notions,
offered to serve under Sir E. Blakeney.— (Hear, hear.)
Colonel DUNNE said that as he had had the honour of
serving under Sir E. Blakeney he wished to bear his testi-
mony to that officer's distinguished services.
The vote was then agreed to.
A sum of 10,000/. was voted for the further expenses that
would probably be incurred for the maintenance, in the year
ending April 5, 1849, of convicts in Ireland.
A sum cf 1,500/. was voted for remuneration to Lieutenant
Waghorn, R.N., for his services in ascertaining the practica-
bility of the route via Alexandria for the conveyance of the
Indian Mail.
To the vote of 12,0001. for the further expense incurred in
rebuilding the British Ambassador's house at Constantinople,
Mr. URQUHART moved that the sum be reduced one-
half. The original estimate was only 30,0001., which was
subsequently raised to 45,0001., and he should object to a
further addition of 12,0001.
A brief conversation, in which Lord Morpeth, Mr. Osborne,
Lord Palmerston, and Colonel Dunne took part, ensued.
The gallery was cleared for a division, but none took place,
and the vote was agreed to.
The next vote asked was 20,000/. to complete the sum
necessary for civil contingencies.
Mr. OSBORNE objected to the item for gratuities for
extra services to the commissariat department, performed in
relieving distress in Ireland and Scotland. His motion
would, in fact, renew the Trevelyan debate, but he could
not avoid objecting to the giving rewards to the commis-
sariat whilst the services of the coast guard were not only
not requited with gratuity, but were not even acknowledged
with thanks. Yet Sir Randolph Routh had said that he
could not have done without the valuable assistance of the
coast guard; and three or four of the men had lost their
lives by fever, contracted whilst doing their duty in carrying
food to the poor. The unequal distribution of rewards was
most pernicious. To one man, who had risked his life,
a gift of 751. was given, whilst to another no less
than 2,500/. was handed over, and he was made besides
a K.C.B. It was so improper, unfair, and injudicious,
that he should take a division on it. The Government had
acted doubly wrong—first, in giving the money to Sir
Charles Trevelyan without the cousent of Parliament—and
next, in committing an assault upon the Order ot the Bath.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would not re-
new the debate upon the reward to Sir Charles Trevelyan. It
had been given in the usual way.
Dr. BOWRING admitted that it was not an unprece-
dented act; but it was one of those ancient customs that
would be more honeyed in the breach than in the observ-
ance. He hoped twat for the future, it would not be again
imitated.
Mr. J. ABU SMITH thought the gratuity to Sir Charles
Trevelyan
a bare act of justice. He did not know that gen-
tleman personally, but, judging from the reports he had
seen,
r,..,r
'lle should be very sorry to see such services as Sir C.
sirelzna l
had rendered to the country undervalued or un-
(serrated.
thought that
those who hadtGh gSr
deservedaa ins
totandfeaemrf ea. nxdt er
ad
services
v c.e
aT
mr e
ivgehl yt abne ;mbaudtebt
ee
'W
Colonel DUNN supported ported Mr. Osborne's view of the
question, and said that
merits by the test of opinionroef ine Ireland,they
wouldwhere
find h
they were to try Sir C. Trevelyan's
praised services had been
opinion there entertainedisthinatucthhe-
from that put forth so stronglyninwvery different indeed
Sir C. Trevelyan had published and
theavowed
House of Commons.
of several productions, in which he hadvowleatlihe authorship
of Ireland, especially the landlords, and yet
manyed the people
deserved rewards better than he were allowed men who
unre-
quited. Why, he would ask, for instance, had that eminent
member of the Reform Club, whom they had sent eminent
over to
Ireland—he meant M. Soyer, the cook—(Laughtet not
been made a K.C.B. for his great services?—(Laughter.)
Mr. H. DRUMMOND had read every single word of the
reports upon the relief works in Ireland, and he thought,
judging from them, that it would be impossible to overrate
the services of Sir Charles Trevelyan, and the manner in
which he bore down the opposition he received, and con-
veyed relief to the poor, to whom it would otherwise never
have come.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. URQUHART supported Mr. Osborne.
Mr. MUNTZ knew nothing about Sir Charles Trevelyan,
except what he had heard in that House. But he held it to
be impossible that any man, by his extra services, could
fairly earn a sum of ",5001. in one year, in addition to his
salary of 2,000/. or 2,500/. a year. What he chiefly ob-
jected to, however, was the manner in which the gratuity
was wrapped up in another vote, so that it might never have
been found out but for the accidental discovery made by an
Hon. Member.
Mr. WOOD thought that as the Noble Lord had promised
the other night to avoid in future a similar mode of classing
the votes together, there ought to be no further debate upon
the merely personal matter.
Colonel DUN NE explained. He had no personal motive
whatever. He had never seen Sir Charles Trevelyan in his
life.

Mr. POULETT SCROPE said, that in agreeing to the
vote, the House was not to be considered as bound to any
approval of the system of relief given under the direction of
Sir C. Trevelyan.
Mr. GOULBURN said that the Honourable Gentleman
who had just sat down appeared to him to take an erroneous
view of the question in supposing that Sir Charles Trevelyan
was rewarded for laying down a principle. Whether the
principles on which that gentleman had acted were right or
wrong, it was not he but the Government that was account-
able for it.— ( Hear.) He felt anxious to express his ap-
proval of Sir Charles Trovelyan's conduct, but at the same
time he could not but disapprove of the mode in which the
grant was made to him.—( Hear, hear.) There had been a
studied concealment about the matter that raised a doubt as
to its propriety, which, if the vote had been openly brought
before the How'', would never have existed. Therefore,
while he entertained a full sense of the value of Sir Charles
Trevelyan's labours, he felt obliged to mark by his vote
in favour of the Honourable Gentleman's amendment his

disapproval of the principle on which the grant had been
made.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said he hoped that his Hou.
and Gallant Friend would divide the Committee on this ques-
tion. They had been told that Sir Charles Trevelvan de-
served none of the demerit of the plan that he had acted
upon, and therefore it was to be presumed that he should
have none of the merit, if any existed.—(Hear, hear.) He
(Lord G. Bentinck) had read all the correspondence that had
been published, and he really could not discover that any
such great ability had been displayed in that correspondence.
—(hear, hear.) He could not see the great merit of the sys-
tem of management that had been pursued, and he could
not forget that the country had been put to great and un-
necessary charges on account of the mode in which the re-
lief had been provided. For instance, at a time that oatmeal
was to be purchased for 141. a ton in Cork, it was sent to
Ireland from Deptford when it cost 18 guineas a ton.—
( Hear, hear.) He thought that 2,5001. a year, an amount of
salary equal to that of the highest officials in the United
States under the President, was quite enough for any la-
bours that Sir Charles Trevelyan had performed ; and he
was also of opinion that no officer of the Treasury should con-
nive at a grant given in this clandestine manner.—(Hear.)
Mr. MONSELL begged to remind the Noble Lord that if
the Government had gone into the market of Cork to pur-
chase oatmeal they would at once raise the price, whereas
by purchasing at Deptford they were enabled to keep down
the price in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He believed there was
no individual in this country who had devoted more time and
energy and ability to the difficulties which had to be con-
tended against than Sir Charles Trevelyan.
Mr. GOULBURN begged to remind the Hon. Member
that the vote did not in the least degree affect the character
of Sir Charles Trevelvan.
Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said, in reply to what had
fallen from the Hon. Member for the county of Limerick, that
at the very time the Government were sending oatmeal from
Deptford to Ireland at eighteen guineas a ton, while it was
selling at 141. a ton at Limerick and Cork, there were for
every one ton sent from Deptford to Ireland, no less than
three tons coming from Ireland into the Thames ; so that in
all probability the Government were merely sending back,
at a large additional cost, the very oatmeal that had just ar-
rived from Ireland at Deptford.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. REYNOLDS said that as he approved of the motion
of his Hon. Friend the Member for Middlesex, while he in-
tended to vote against it—(Laughter)—he wished to explain
that his motive in so voting was, that he believed the money
had been already paid, and that no vote of this House could
induce the parties to make restitution. He believed that all
the good they could do to the public was to condemn the
principle of paying money without the consentof Parliament.
After a few words from Mr. BROTHERTON,
The CHAIRMAN put the question, that the vote be re-
duced from 20,0001. to 15,955/.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment l4
Against it 73
Majority
Mr. OSBORNE said that there were other items in this
vote that he thought required explanation. He found a
charge of 1,1491. for robes, collars, and badges for knights
of the several orders ; 1811. for chains and badges for the
master of the ceremonies and marshal of the ceremonies, and
also a charge of 5231. for defraying the travelling expenses
of the King of the Belgians, the Grand Duke Constantine of
Russia, the Prince of Leiningen, and other distinguished
personages, during their visits to this country. He thought
it disgraceful that the King of the Belgians and those other
distinguished personages should not pay their own travelling
expenses.—( Hear.)
Mr. PARKER explained that these items belonged to a
class of charges that were formerly in the Civil List, but had
been, of late years, transferred to the civil contingencies.
The vote was then agreed to.
The following votes were also agreed to :-428,3451. to com-
plete the sum necessary to defray the charge of the com-
missariat department; 32,9641. to complete the sum necessary
to defray the charge of pensions and allowances in the same
department.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then proposed
a vote of 132,0001. to wind up the expenditure for the relief
of distress in Ireland up to the present half-year. The Right
Hon. Gentleman said that this sum had been expended
within the last few weeks. To show that the poor-rate had
been levied to a considerable amount for the same purpose,
he might observe that the whole sum collected in Ireland in
January, 1846, was 36,000/. •, in January, 1847, 52,0001. ; while
in January, 1848, it reached 194,0001. The entire sum levied
in the first six months of 1846 was 217,000/. ; in the first
six months of 1847, 339,000/. ; and in the corresponding
period of 1848, 867,000/. There were, however, many parts
of Ireland in which the poor-rate, however well collected, had
been found quite inadequate to relieve the prevailing distress.
Twenty-two unions were in that position. The object of the
Government was that relief should only be given in districts
respecting which it had been shown that no possible exertion
in collecting the poor-rate would make it adequate for the ob-
ject. Relief had been given of late almost entirely in food.
As regarded the British Association, he would state, that the
whole amount expended by it was, 236,0004 of which sum
143,000/. went for rations for grown-up persons, 80,000/. in
the same way for children, and about 120,000/. for clothes.
The vote which he proposed was for relief given in continu-
ation of the proceedings of the British Association in the
three months immediately preceding the harvest, when the
distress was the greatest. There were many unions in Ire-
land in which it was impossible they could defray the cost
of their poor. The union in Ireland in which the greatest
distress prevailed was that of Clifden, in which the rate was
19s. 2d. in the pound. The valuation of the union was
22,400/. The expense of maintaining the poor in that
district, from September, 1847, to September, 1848,
was 18,310/. They had a small debt of 9001.
The advances made by the British Association were
9,000/. for general relief, 3,0001. for the relief of destitute
children, and the whole amount due from the union would
he upon a rated value of 22,400/., amounting to a rating in
the pound of 19s. 9d. In another union in the county
of Clare, the amount of rating was 16s. 10d. in the pound;
in another, 15s. 11d. ; in another, 14s. 9d. ; in Ballyra,
12s. 41d.; in Castlebar, 1 ls. 9d, The rate in Ireland would
be 2s. 91d. In Down it was lighter than in most counties
in England; it would there amount to ls. 2d. Taking the
electoral divisions in Donegal, there were electoral divisions
in which the charge for the maintenance of the poor this
year would be 445. 2d. in the pound. In Castlebar there
was an electoral division in which the charge was 295. in the
pound. In Galway it would amount to 235. Bd. This was
the charge in the pound upon the valuation; but as it was
notorious that in many of the most distressed districts a large
proportion of the ratepayers could pay nothing at all, it was
hopeless to expect that any amount of rate could defray the
sum which was advanced. This statement applied to the
western coast; on the eastern and north-eastern part the
burden was lighter, which showed that the distress was local.
It was, therefore, to sanction the expenditure of 132,000/.,
which was required from July to the end of the harvest, to
continue the relief which, up to that time, had been afforded
in voluntary contributions, through the means of the British
Association, that he asked the House to agree to the vote.
There could not be any necessity for further assistance in the
way of depots. He believed that the events of the last two
years had introduced into Ireland dealers in meal and corn,
so that the guardians would be enabled to procure an ade-
quate supply of food. These were the circumstances which
induced the Government to take on themselves the responsi-
bility of demanding this sum of money. Without the assist-
ance thus rendered, it would have been utterly impossible
for the people to have been preserved from utter starvation,
except by the means which had been so beneficially applied
by the British Association. He trusted that the House
would ratify the responsibility which Government had taken
upon themselves.
The CHAIRMAN put the question that 262,545/. be
granted to make good the advances of the sum provided for
the relief of distress in Ireland and Scotland, through the
Commissariat Department.
Mr. P. SCROPE said that he had given notice of resolu-
tions on this vote, but as he could not move those resolutions,
he wished to state the absolute necessity of refusing to make
grants of public money, in addition to the poor-rates, and
should take the opinion of the Committee in opposition to this
grant of 132,000/. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had ap-
pealed to the generosity of the House, by stating the extra-
ordinary distress of some of the Irish unions. He (Mr. P.
Scrope) had endeavoured to ascertain the condition of those
unions, and his sources of information did not correspond with
the figures of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. His opinion
was, that Ireland was perfectly capable of maintaining her
poor, as well as the whole of her population. But he had
another and a stronger objection to this vote—that it was
given for the relief of such landlords as had not paid their
rents.—(Hear, hear.) By granting money, without an ade-
quate security upon the property of the country for its repay-
ment, they would be obstructing the objects of the poor-law.
They would be running counter to the professed intentions of
that statute, and they would be encouraging inertness upon
the part of proprietors. A premium would be held out to
those who were improvident. All the landlords had to do
was to make out a case of inability to support the poor, and
they would then receive assistance. He moved the vote be
disallowed.
Sir J. TYRELL considered that strong measures with
regard to Ireland should now be adopted by Government.
There was a greater consumption of strong measures in that
House and in Europe at large than there was some months
pers d istion,. uasi but i
nction be-
t
ago.—(A laugh.) He did not mean to be offensive to any
gentleman lgetm,
taon clear differingto fromhim
thathis
there w
opinionas a or
great
tween Roman Catholics and Protestants. In the Protestant
districts of Ireland the poor rate only averaged Is. in the
pound; while in the Roman Catholic districts it varied from
19s. to Ils. in the pound. He solemnly believed that the
Roman Catholic religion, carried out in all its parts, was in-
compatible with the true cultivation of the soil.—(Laughter.)
In Switzerland, the common remark of every traveller
was the great difference between the agricultural prospects
of the Roman Catholic cantons and those of the Protestants.
The latter were far superior to the former. He trusted that
the Learned Doctor (Dr. Bowring), who had a European
reputation, would come to his assistance, and bear out the
truth of his statement. It was well known that in the Pro-
testant cantons individuals have stopped up all night, and
have got up early in the morning—(Roars of laughter)—of
course he meant other individuals and not those who were
stopping up all night—in order that they might go to mar-
ket with their corn—(Hear, hear)—whereas in Roman
Catholic districts, whenever there is a burial, a wake, a wed-
ding, or a saint's day, the operations of agriculture are sus-
pended. And if this be not true, Honourable Gentlemen
who smiled at his statement could get up and contradict
him.—(Bear, hear.) He believed unless the Government
country umn tisr:
miscellaneous
neous subscribed ebtaot
e. Ireland. The
took some strong measures in reference to Ireland, in which
they would be followed by the universal feeling of the coun-
try, there would be repeated calls upon the coffers of this
dragged into the discussion the religion Mr.. OSBORNE considered that this might well be termed
Honourable. Baronet had
which were Catholic countries, were the
"gte?rnasof the Irish people,
Tuscany Belgium,
any in the world. In China the cultivation
but he seemed totally to forget that
'of cultivatedtiea of
carried on to the highest point of scientific refinement.ielis
Would, then, the Honourable Baronet wished to transfer the
religion of Confucius to Ireland, and uncbristianize the
people for the sake of the cultivation of the soil? He could
assure him that he could get a great deal more work
done upon Sundays, when it was necessary for the pre-
servation of the harvest or for any other proper purpose, in
Roman Catholic than in Protestant districts. The Hon.
Member for Stroud assumed that the rental for Ireland was
15,000,000/., but he (Mr. Osborne) considered that the Go-
vernment ought to confer some honourable distinction upon
the Count Strilinskv for his exertions in the cause of huma-
nity in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He desired to take that op-
portunity of drawing attention to the meritorious services of
the coast guard in Ireland, who had undertaken time whole
burden of the commissariat arrangements for the behalf of
the poor.
Air. CLEM ENTS corrected certain statistical statements
of the Hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. P. Scrope) relative to
the proportion of the poor-rates paid in Ireland.
Sir. H. WILLOUGHBY asked whether there was any ba-
lance left unexpended out of the seven millions loan to Ire-
land. The House knew nothing of the expenditure of that
large sum.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Stamford
(Mr. Herries) had moved for full information respecting
the whole amount expended for the relief of Ireland, and
papers in accordance with that motion would be duly laid
on the table.