The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-09 00:00:00

upon the sites of old houses, and Parliament forgot in
all these cases to make a stipulation with the applicants
for providing other suitable dwellings for the poor a con-
dition of its sanction. This, he thought, should be the
rule in all cases, and the speculator should be obliged to
provide a similar class of house to those destroyed—
whether it was the Dean and Chapter of Westminster,
or whether it was a private individual. The evil was
one every day growing greater instead of diminishing,
and it would continue so to do unless it was checked by
legislative interference.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said every one must
feel that the Bill needed no support; but he rose to
point out one circumstance in connexion—namely, that
all the efforts made to educate the children of the poor
were permanently neutralised by the effects of the
dwellings in which they were now obliged to live.
From all he could collect, there was a perpetual ten-
dency on the part of these children to relapse into the
condition from which they were redeemed by day
through the examples which they found placed before
them in their wretched homes at night. Therefore
the constant attempt at reformation on the one side
was met by a constant resisting process on the
other, in consequence of the immorality communicated
to them under the miserable roofs of their parents.
There could not be a more effective auxiliary to the edu-
cation of the people, consequently, than the promotion
of social comforts among them, especially the creation
of a decent home. The Noble Lord was wise, as an ex-
periment, in limiting the operation of his Bill ; and he
(the Marquis of Lansdowne) hoped the example set in
the large towns would have the effect of inducing a vo-
luntary adoption of its principles in smaller localities.
The House was indebted to the Noble Earl who had
just spoken for his valuable suggestions, and he agreed
with him that no public or private speculation should
be sanctioned by the Legislature without an inquiry
being first made and answered as to what had be-
come of the displaced population. It was a subject well
worthy of consideration to endeavour, in as far as pos-
sible, to effect a beneficial change in the condition of the
poor as regarded dwellings.
The Bill was then read a second time.
The Bills on the table were advanced a stage, and
the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. July 8.
CIVIL BILLS, &c. (IRELAND) BILL.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.,
Mr. J. O'CONNELL thought the policy of the Legis.
lature ought to be to compel the landlords to grant
leases, and thus secure the proper cultivation of the
land. It would be a lasting disgrace upon the House
that so many years had elapsed without any effective
measure being passed to secure the tenure of land in
Ireland. Fifteen years and upwards it had promised
Ireland happiness and prosperity, and yet after the lapse
of that long time the country was still in a state of
misery and prostration. Perhaps this would be the last
measure upon which he should ever address the House;
and as it was not too late to afford Ireland redress for
her wrongs, ho would make a last appeal to the House to
retrace its steps and do tardy justice to his suffering
country.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK wanted to know what they were
talking about.—(Laughter.) If a man were in arrear
of his rent, what possible objection could there be to
giving his landlord the means of either making him pay
or of getting rid of him? That appeared to him to be
the object of this clause, and he was at a loss to under-
stand what reasonable objection could be taken to it.
He did not dispute the right of the tenant to protection,
but that was a matter beside the question, since this
Bill sought not to take from the tenant or to add to
the power of the landlord, but to render the existing
law clear and intelligible, and he should certainly sup-
port it.

- Mr. E. 13. ROCHE was glad to hear the Hon. and
Learned Member admit that the farmers of Ireland had
a just claim of tenant right. He and others very pro-
perly urged the speedy settlement of this tenant-right
question, but that question could not be fairly discussed
without going into the whole state of Ireland, and per-
haps that fact would account for the discursive nature
of the debate.—(Hear, hear.) The recent cen-
sus disclosed a startling state of things in
Ireland. Her population had terribly fallen off, and the
diminution be and his friends attributed not so much to
the famine as to the forced emigration which the legisla-
tion of the House in favour of the landlords had driven
the people to. This Bill would still further increase the
difficulties of Ireland, and he hoped it would not be per-
severed in.

I Mr. M. O'FERRALL objected to the clause as well
as the 25 others which the Bill contained, and ho could,
therefore, neither support the amendment nor the Bill.
The law of landlord and tenant was so difficult of being
understood in Ireland, even by lawyers, let alone laymen,
that it was utterly impossible to remove the existing
evils by a puny Bill of this description. It would only
have the effect of disturbing the tenure of land in Ire-
land, and endangering the right of property, and he
hoped it would be withdrawn until the Government
had some plan which could satisfactorily deal with this
important question.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said many of the clauses
which his Right Hon. Friend objected to were already
in force as law, and they were only introduced into this
Bill for the purpose of consolidation. Now, what pos-
sible objection could there be to such a proceeding as
that? The only question, then, for the Committee
was, whether or no the amendment of the Honour-
able and Learned Member for Dundalk would im-
prove the existing law. His notion was that it
would not. The clause as it stood now was a tenant's
clause, and so far from the amendment reducing the
power of the landlord, it would directly increase it. At
present the six months' notice was a means of oppression
in the hands of the landlord, who was in the habit of
holding it in terrorein over the head of his tenant, and
instead of Irishmen objecting to this clause, they ought
to be rejoiced to support it.
Mr. ROEBUCK would be glad to know how the evil
of a landlord continually threatening his tenant with
a notice to quit by increasing the term of the notice
from six to twelve months could be remedied.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD accepted the speech of the
Right Hon. the Secretary for Ireland as a confirmation
of what he had often stated to the House, namely, that the
landlords of Ireland exercised a tyrannical influence
over their tenants, and he objected to this clause, be-
cause it would increase that unjust influence. He re•
gretted that Government had so long neglected to settle
the landlord and tenant question, and he gave notice
that at the earliest opportunity be should call the atten-
tion of the House to the subject.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment 24
Against it ... 55
Majority against it ... ... —3l
The amendment was accordingly lost. During our
absence from the gallery a motion was made that the
Chairman should report progress.
Mr. O'FLAHERTY urged the Committee to proceed
with the Bill at once until it had been finally dis-
posed of.
Mr. KEOGH also concurred in thinking that there
was yet time to dispose of the clause before adjourning,
and ultimately the motion for reporting progress was
withdrawn.
The Committee then divided on tho question that the
clause do stand part of the Bill, when there appeared—
For the clause ... ... 56

Against it ... ... ... ... 20
Majority ... ... ... —36
The clause was accordingly ordered to be added to the
Bill. _ _ _

The remaining clauses were then agreed to, and the
House resumed.

The Hous© adjourned at Half-past Three till a Quarter
past Five o'clock.

The House resumed at a Quarter-past Five o'clock.

PETITIONS.

Mr. JOHN ELLIS presented a petition from the
West Riding of Yorkshire in favour of the Bill for the
more speedy arrest of absconding debtors.
A considerable number of petitions wero presented
against the attorneys' certificate duty._

—Mr. Alderman SIDNEY presented a petition from
the West London Union, i❑ favour of union rating and
union settlement; also a petition in favour of the County
Courts Extension Bill.

Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from Ripon
against the Registration of Assurances Bill.
THE GLASS PALACE.

Mr. STAFFORD presented a petition from Mr. Paxton,
the architect of the Glass Palace, praying that the build-
ing in Hyde-park may be maintained. The Hon. Mem-
ber also gave notice that he should to-morrow move
that this petition be printed with the votes, for the pur-
pose of the subject being brought under the consideration
of the House.

PUBLIC-HOUSES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Mr. HUME presented a petition against the Public-
houses (Scotland) Bill.
TRANSATLANTIC PACKETS.
Mr. WHITESIDE asked the First Lord of the
Treasury, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's
Government to adopt measures towards the formation of
a Transatlantic packet station in Galway, or any other
Irish port?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not answer the ques-
tion at the present moment.
_ _ _ THE CHOLERA OF 1849.

Mr. JACOB BELL asked Lord Seymour, whether
the reports of the inspectors and medical inspectors re-
specting the cholera epidemic of 1848-9 are preserved;
if so, whether there would be any objectio❑ to handing
over those documents to the Epidemiological Society?
Lord SEYMOUR said the Board of Health would
have no objection to give any information in their power
to the Epidemiological Society.
THE SOUND DUES.
Mr. JAMES CLAY asked the Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs—this being the year during which
(under the agreement of 1841 with Denmark regulating
the dues levied by that country ou goods passing the
Sound), notice can be given of terminating such agree-
ment—whether it is the intention of her Majesty's
Government so to give notice; also, whether any and
what negotiations have been entered upon between this
country and Russia, or Prussia, having for their object
the commutation of these dues for an immediate money
payment to Denmark, or other compensation?
Lord PALMERSTON said that at present there was
no intention on the part of her Majesty's Govern-
ment to give notice to the Danish Govern-
ment to dissolve the existing agreement
with Denmark, nor had any negotiations passed
between the two Governments on the subject. He thought
the House would agree with him that whatever might
take place, this was not the exact moment to press
hardly on a country which like Denmark had just passed
through a season of great trial.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME begged to ask the Noble Lord whether
they ought not to consider our own shipping?
MESSAGE FROM HER MAJESTY.
Lord PALMERSTON, at the bar of the House,
communicated her hiajeety's reply to tin' addresses

which had been presented to her by the House of Com-
mons, one praying that two laymen be added to the
Chsrcery Commission, and the other, that steps might
be taken to relieve the spiritual destitution of the people.
Her Majesty was graciously pleased to signify her gra-
cious assent to the prayer of both addresses.
ATTORNEYS AND SOLICITORS' CERTIFICATE
DUTY.
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR, in asking leave to
re-introduce a Bill for the repeal of the attorneys and
solicitors' annual certificate duty, said the grounds on
which he did so was that this duty was partial, unjust, and
oppressive. On the last occasion when he brought this
subject under the attention of the House, no less than
259 Members voted in favour of the repeal to 224
against it, thus giving a majority in support of the prin-
ciple which he advocated. If the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would promise to agree to the repeal of the
tax next session, in the event of the income-tax
being renewed, and no!unforeseen circumstances arising
in the country, he would be content with simply laying
the Bill on the table• but ho should feel compelled to
press his motion if the Right Hon. Gentleman could not
give him such an undertaking.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said ho
would be most happy to accede to every proposition for
the repeal of taxes, provided he could consistently do so,
but if further reductions of taxation were made under
existing circumstances he knew not how the business
of the country could be carried on. Feeling it neces-
sary to stand by his Budget, ho must oppose the mo-
tion, which he hoped would not receive the support ut
the House.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared--
For the motion ... ... 162
Against it
Majority against Ministers ... —3O
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
THE BALLOT.
Mr. H. BERKELEY, in moving for leave to bring in
a Bill " for the protection of Parliamentary electors of
Great Britain and Ireland by taking their votes by
ballot," observed that they were on the eve of a goner.'
election, when the people would require against political
bullies the protection of the ballot; for the landocracy
and aristocratical bodies were about to be arrayed
against popular rights. No plan of Parliamentary re-
form could give satisfaction without the ballot, for with-
out it the popular desires always ran the risk of being
nullified. The Noble Lord, in refusing to admit the ballot
amongst his proposed reforms, would by extending the
franchise only extend the area of intimidation. In dis-
cussing this question he could not avoid remarking that
he and those who were in favour of the ballot had torn
the last rag of reason from the shoulders of its opponents,
and had placed them as indecent pictures of national
obstructions.—(Laughter.) The Noble Lord opposed
the ballot because he feared a change. Did then that
from which he feared a change work well? Did that
system work well which deterred one-third of the elec-
tors from recording their votes? Did that system work
well which gave to forty-eight peers and seventeen Mem-
bers of Parliament the means of returning ninety-eight
Members of that House by direct unconstitutional interfe-
rence? Did that system work well which converted their
agricultural voters into electoral flocks of sheep? The fact
was the entire system was a great lie, for it compli-
mented men upon their liberty when it rendered them
slaves.—(Hear.) But, even it he were to admit that the
system worked well, then it must be allowed that it was
a good end attained by bad means.--(Hear.) The Se-
cretary for the Home Department had ceased to support
the ballot on the ground that there had been a great im-
provement in political morality. Where were the illus-
trations of that improvement? Were they to be found
in the Aylesbury "man in the moon," in the St. Alban's
" bell metal," in the drenching the electors with
"whisky" in the Falkirk burghs?—(Hear, hear.) On
Christmas-eve, of all other periods iu the year, the St.
Alban's election commenced; and the Times' reporter
gave a graphic description of the proceedings. He said
that the scene which the town presented throughout the
entire day was anything but that which would lead per-
sons to suppose that Father Mathew's disciples were
numerous there; that the sights in the principal streets
were absolutely disgusting—drunken men and women
staggering about, or lying in such curious places as ine-
briety alone selected. It appeared by the same report
that after the election was over, both candidates ad-
dressed the people. Mr. Bell, in his speech, told the
drunken mob that they had greatly and gloriously
distinguished themselves.—(Laughter.) Mr. Carden,
on the other hand, asserted that in his defeat he bad
achieved a victory; that he was told if he had put the
bribery oath to every elector ho would have won his
seat; but that ho refused to do so, because he knew
that the man who had taken a bribe wou!d not hesitate
to swear that which was false. It further appeared
that when the bribery oath was read on one oc-
casion there it was received with shouts of laughter
and derision, and was looked upon by the immaculate
electors there as a very good joke. He knew that by the
ballot they could not prevent a man purchasing a vote,
but they could prevent him knowing whether the elector
had voted for the party that had bribed him. By the
operation of the ballot they cast into the shade four dis-
tinct events. Firstly. Whether the bribed elector voted
for the party who had paid him. Secondly. Whether
the elector that was bribed did not vote for the other
party. Thirdly. Whether the purchased elector did not
split his vote. Fourthly. Whether the elector had voted
at all. With such an uncertainty what party would bribe
at an election? He had taken the opinion of many
agents who had been accustomed to conduct elections,
and they had all concurred in saying that intimidation
would be completely done away with by the ballot, and
that they believed that the ballot would be, generally
speaking, a complete protection against the system of
bribery. Intimidation contained the principle of bribery
in its worst form. It was practised in the shape of ex-
clusive dealing, withdrawal of custom, ejectment of
tenants, and that inquisitorial search into the lives and
finances of individual voters. These were all used oc-
casionally to prevent the party from voting in the way
he wished. He had before him a return of the poll at
the last Bath election, and in connexion with this sub-
ject he would remind the House that the Hon. Member
for Birmingham had told them that in the last elec-
tion for that town at least 1,000 men had absented them-
selves from voting in consequence of intimidation. He
(Mr. Berkeley) wrote to a friend in Bath requesting him
to send him an analysis of the voting there. In the re-
ply which he received the writer said he could quote a
few instances of direct intimidation, but they were the
gxe.P,Plioneand not tho rule. On the registry there ap-
peared to be 3,130 electors, of whom only 2,150 went to
the poll-1,110 polled for Captain Scobell, and 1,041 for
Mr. Sutcliffe. There were 449 electors who had not
voted at the election, and the reason given by them for
not doing so was, that they wished to vote for Captain
Scobell, but they know that if they had done so their
ruin would inevitably follow, for they would be com-
pelled to shut up their shops. The greatest boon that
they could confer upon the tenant-farmers would be to
give them the protection of the ballot. It would be
better upon great estates to allow et paper to be signed
by the different voters at the time of an election, with
the name of the candidate for whom they were compelled
to vote, rather than oblige them to travel to the next
market town for the purpose of telling a lie.—(Laugh-
ter.) lie was deeply interested for the tenant-farmers,
and although he bad felt it to be his duty to object to
them as soldiers solely on the ground of their incompe-
tency—(Much laughter)—he would be only doing them
justice in declaring that there were not a better drilled
or a more obedient body of electors in Europe. The
farmer might refuse to go out to fight, but he dared not
refuse to vote upon pain of immediate condign punish-
ment. The evidence taken before the Committee of
1835 ought to form the foundation for a legislative
measure upon this subject. That state of tyranny and
slavery which was proved to exist in 1835 continued to
flourish in the country as generally as ever. The farmers
were now murmuring at high rents and low prices, and
they were beginning to think that they were not
thoroughly represented in that House. The last South
Nottinghamshire election afforded a strong example of
this fact. The statement to which he was about to refer
was sufficient to show the abject condition of the tenan-
try upon the estates in that part of the country. He
would select the Times' report of the proceedings at that
election, because in the first place their reports were
generally very correct and admirably well written, and
in the second place, because that paper had manifested a
bias against the cause which ho was then advocating.
The report stated that this was one of the most aristo-
cratic counties in England, and the landlords to a man
were banded together to support their own nominee,
who was a scion of one of the largest landed proprietors
in the kingdom. That this nobleman thus supported
should be defeated by a plain country gentle-
man—a retired solicitor with scarcely one acre
of land of his own—appeared most marvellous. It could
only be accounted for by the fact that the losses which
were endured by the occupiers of land during
the last
two years had rendered them indifferent as to whether
they would be expelled their homesteads or not. There
was an admission on the part of the Times.— (Hear,
hear.) The article further stated that many who "a'
voted for Lord Newark did so with extreme reluctance.
In some cases the farmers were dragged from their
hiding-places in some hay or straw ricks. They were
taken to the poll and there forced to vote against their
will. In many instances the answer given to the ques-
tion " for whom do you vote?" was, " for Lord Newark,
I suppose;" the unwilling voter looking at the same
time into the landlord's face fora nod of assent.—(Hear,
hear.) After hearing this tale of humiliation and de-
gradation of the tenant-farmers as described by the
Times, he hoped ho would be permitted to apostrophise
that great organ in these words, 0 tempera, 0 mores.—
(Laughter,) In the Bingham district (continued that
Paper) there was a clever trick played which had the
effect of securing some votes for Mr. Barrow. Bills
were posted in every
village in the neighbourhood, pur-
porting to come from a nobleman that was accused of
coercing his tenants in favour of Lord Newark. " Lord
his Chesterfield announces to tenantry that he takes no
part in this contest, and permits them to exercise their
franchise in whatever way they were inclined." He (Mr.
Berkeley) asked the House if this miserable forgery
could have the effect of carrying these votes, what effect
did they think that the ballot would have ?—(Hear.) The
sessional order against the interference of Peers at elec-
tions was a mere mockery. Far better would it be to
take the franchise altogether from the tenant-farmers,
than to subject them to such a state of things as then
existed. At one time were the landlords leading on
their tenants to the accompaniment of a band that played
"See the conquering Hero comes" At another, ferret-
ting them out of their hiding places behind some hay
or straw ricks for the purpose of compelling them to
vote against their conscience at an election. Oh! for
the pencil of Hogarth, or the stereotype of Punch to
sketch such scenes as these.—(Laughter.) Oh! for the
glorious yeomanry of England.—(Renewed laughter.)
Future ages will wonder at reading that such things had
re illy existed in the 19th century. In the county a
Gloucester there resides a gentleman with a difficult
11414 Q. For teR ho would be timed of giyiDg handle