The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-26 00:00:00

PROTECTION OF LIFE IN IRELAND BILL.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to remind the Right
Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government (Sir R.
Peel) that the Bill for the Protection of Life in Ireland,
stood for its second reading to-day. From the speech of the
Right Hon. Gentleman, he had expected that it would come
on to-day, but he regretted to find that it had been postponed
until after the holidays, in consideration of a number of mis-
cellaneous statements, and he should wish to know when the
second reading of the Bill would take place.
Sir R. PEEL regretted that this Bill had been postponed,
but he had given notice that it should be brought up on Fri-
day in the first instance, and that the Customs' Duties Bill
should be taken on Monday. He had done this in the expec-
tation that this measure would have been disposed of before
the recess, but this had been found impossible. He had wished
to bring forward the usual financial statement, but he hesitated
to bring forward any more Money Bills until the sanction of
the House had been obtained for the two great principles now
before the House. He hoped, however, to take the second
reading of this Bill en Friday next.
SPANISH DISCRIMINATING DUTIES.
Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to ask of the Government
whether the report was true that discriminating duties had
been imposed on British produce in the harbours of Cuba and
Porto Rico.
Sir R. PEEL said that his attention had not been drawn to
this subject until he had seen it noticed in the newspapers, but
that upon observing the statements, he had read the dispatches,
which contained, so far as he could see, no such intentior ; but
he would decline giving any more explicit answer until he had
reread the dispatches.
REDUCTION OF CRIME IN IRELAND.
Mr. O'CONNELL asked whether there was any proof in
the hands of the Government of the public report, that since
the administration of relief to the starving poor in Ireland
there had been a great reduction of crime in that country ?
Sir R. PEEL could not at present give the Hon. and
Learned Member any
.specific assurance of the fact, but he
believed that in the main the peblie reports were true.

RAILWAY CLASSIFICATION.
Mr. BER.NAL complained of the present system of classification
with regard to railways, and wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, if it was proposed
to make any alteration in the system by which the present evils
would be obviated.
Sir G. CLERK said that the classification of groups rested with the
Chairman of the Committee, and though Inconvenience might oc-
casionally result from the merits of railways belonging to the same
locality being considered by digerent Committees, he believed the
territorial division was carried out as iar as possible ; and he was not
prepared to say that any alteration would be made in the system.
On the motion that the order of the day be read for going into a
Committee of supply,
Mr. LAWSON said he was sorry that the statements he had felt it
to be his duty to make a few evenings ago, bad been made the subject
of a great deal of controversy in the public press, and he wished to
take that opportunity of explaining.
Sir RORER I` PEEL did not consider the Hon. Gentleman was
quite in order in making any explanations on the subject then, and,
at any rate, he should have given previous notice of his intention
to do so.
Mr. LAWSON had no objection to postpone doing so till to-morrow,
if the House would give him leave to bring it on then before any
other business was proceeded with.
Sir R. PEEL had no doubt that the House would give every at-
tention to the lion. Gentleman when he did refer to the subject, but
on the other hand, he must say that the explanation of the Hon.
Gentleman would be very imperfect in the absence of the Hon.
Alderman (Mr. Humphrey).
Mr. EWART did not wish to prevent the Hon. Gentleman from
making his explanation, but he was first on the list of notices to-
morrow evening, and he did not feel bound to waive his right of pre-
cedence.
Mr. LAWSON said, that under the circumstances, and after the
explanation of the Hon. Member opposite, he would defer his motion.