The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-26 00:00:00

COUNTY RATE.

The Duke of RICHMOND, io moving for the appoint-
ment of a select committee to inquire into the charge•
of the county rates in England and Wales, observed that
for the last few years the county rates in England had
greatly increased, not only in consequence of the various
enactments that had taken place, but on account of other
circumstances which he did not consider it necessary
now to state to the house. His Majesty's government
had for some time past turned their attention to this local
taxation, and it appeared to them that a committee should
be appointed, in order to inquire into all the particulars
and details on which to found a report, which would have
the effect of limiting the evil complained of, if it did
no more. He would not now enter into the particulars
relating to any one county, nor would be make any at-
tack upon any, but be would merely call the attention of
the house to the fact, that in the county of Middlesex, in
the year 1822, the county-rate amounted to 39 8371. In
1832 it amounted to 77,8721. This, as the house would
perceive, was a great increase, but took place in consequence
of the erection of additional buildings in the county. He
did not wish for one moment to cast reflections upon the
officers of the county, in consequence of this increase, all
that he wanted was to convince the House that inquiry was
necessary.—(Hear.) The debt of the county of Mid-
dlesex was at this moment 244,9851. An increase
had also taken place in the county rates of Leicester and
Nottingham. He thought, therefore, their lordships
would at once accede to his motion for the appointment
of a select committee.

Lord WYNFORD thanked the noble duke for bringing
this question under the consideration of their lordships.
With respect to the county of Middlesex, he had no
doubt whatever that the cause of the increase in
the county rates was that to which the noble duke had
attributed them. In addition to which, the acts of par-
liament that had been passed had added burdens to the
county rate which ought never to have been placed upon
it. In his (Lord W.'s) opinion, there was no rate that
pressed with greater force upon the inhabitants than it
did. The motion was then agreed to, the committee
appointed, and ordered to meet on Thursday next.
Lord POLTIMORE presented a petition from the Dis-
sent. rs of the parish of St. Mary, in the county of
Devon, praying for relief.
On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND, the Turn-
pike Continuation Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented two peti-
tions from the Dissenters of Warminster, praying for
relief from the disabilities under which they 14boured.
The noble marquis concurred moat heartily with the
prayer of the petition, especially that part whirl) claimed
the removal of the disabilities under which they laboured
with respect to the marriage law, the noble marquis con-
sidering that they were justly entitled to the removal of
the disabilities in 0-at respect.
Lord DURHAM presented several petitions from Wick-
ham, Windham, Northallerton, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne,
praying for tEe removal of the disabilities under which the
dissenters laboured, and fur an entire separation of church
and state.

Mr. Tylpr, from the Imperial Gas Light Company,
presrnted an account of tbr Contingency Fund.
Tbeir Lordships then adjourned to Thursday next.

R 0 USE OF COMMONS, FEB. 25.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at ten minutes past
five o'clock.
Sir GEORGE STAUNTON brought up the report of
the committee on the Stoke Bridge petition, and obtained
lease to bring in a bill. •
Mr. C. WOOD moved for a new writ for the borough
of Malton for the election of a burgess in the room of C.
C. Pepys. Esq., who had accepted the office of his
Majesty's Solicitor-General.
The Marquis of CHANDOS begged to ask the Noble
Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the ap-
pointment of an hoe. member of that house to the bench
was likely to take place, or if it had been entirely su-
perseded.
Lord ALTHORP considered the question was entirely
improper, and declined answering it.
Sir W. HORNE said he would be quite willing to an-
swer any question, if it were consistent with his duty or
his honour. The question put by the noble marquis did
not fall within his limits, and therefore lie should decline
answering it.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
The Marquis of CHANDOS understood that two
judges were in future to go the northern district ; yet, in
the county which he represented, he was given to under-
stand only one was to preside. Such would cause very
great inconvenience and delay.
Lord ALTHORP, in reply, said that he imagined go-
vernment would take into consideration the best means
for preventing any inconvenience arising from what the
noble lord bad alluded to.

Lord ALTHORP said, that it was his intention to
move to bring in a bill to repeal that part of the Stamp
Act which prohibits the stamps to newspapers convicted of
libel under certain circumstances.—(Cheers.)

Mr. R. WASON moved for a return of t} e names of the
chairmen presiding at the different quarter sessions in
Eng:4nd and Wales, distinguishing those called to the bar,
and the professions of the remainder, if any.
Mr. O'DWYER begged to expre-s his gratification at
the notice of motion given by the noble lord (Althorp) for
the repeal of that very obnoxious portion of the Stamp Act.
Mr. R. WAGON moved for a return of the number of
coins sold by the trustees of the British museum fur the
year ending in December, 1833.
Mr. TOOKE moved for certain returns from the Court
of Requests at Westminster.
Mr. HUTT wished to know if it was the intention of
Government to bring forward a measure in the course of
this session, affecting Joint Stock Companies similar to
the one that was introduced last year.
Lord ALTHORP could not pledge himself to the
bringing forward of any measure similar to the one in-
troduced last year, if it should be thought necessary to
bring in one at all.
Colonel CONOLLY gave notice, that in the event of
Carrickfergus being disfranchised, he would move that the
franchise be given to Lipperton and Strabane.
Mr. P. THOMSON wished to know whether the
ban. member opposite, who had given notice of a motion
for to-night respecting the port of London, would have
any obj,ction to i.ostpone the making of that motion on
being informed that the subject h,d been under the con•
sideration of his Majesty's Government, and that a measure
was likely to be brought in, calculated to meet the object
of the motion ?
Mr. YOUNG could have no objection to place the
subject in tt.e hands of Government, on his being in•
formed that it was about to bring forward a measure to
a°Tord the relief to the port of London from that oppression
which' his motion was intended to do.
Mr. SHEIL, having learned that the motion he was
now about to make would not be opposed, moved,
without eOrninent, for copies of all communications which
had taken place between the commissioners of stamps for
Ireland and the k overnment.

CORPOhATION OF DUBLIN.
Mr. O'CONNELL thnught as he had introduced during
the last session a bill for the improvement of thecorporation
of the city of Dublin, something would have been done
since to render it unnecessary for him to trouble the house
on the present occasion, " sed D.ta shier visum." Since
last Reston be bad bad. be pleasure of laying before hia con-
stituents a draft. of a bill he had obtained leave to bring
in then, but in consequence of the lateness or
the period he postponed it to this. It was a great satis-
factioa to him that this bill Vid been highly approved by
his constituents, as he bad taken every °ppm tunity of laying
it before them at meetings, and through the inerburn of the
newspapers. Fortified by these two circumstances, the
leave io b.ing it in in the first place, and the project being
approved, he should not apprehend any opposition to it,
unless what might arise in the shape of prism:lßl objection,
for he found that on many occasions discussions depended
not so much on the merits of what was proposed, an
vo the 'demerits of him who proposed it. He was eon•

vinced that the project he was about to propose for ,
the reform of the corporation of Dublin was one which
ought to succeed, unless it was put aside by those flimsy
excuses and pretences occasionally resorted to to inter-
rupt the progress of good measures. Notwithstanding the
benefit the measure he had in view would confer, he felt
himself bound to say he did not hope for success
if opposed by his Majesty's ministers. In the King's
speech an allusion was made to corporate abuses. In a
reformed Parliament it was most reasonable to expect
the most necessary branches of reform, which those
charges required.—(Hear, hear, hear.) There were two
divisions of the empire which laboured under corporate
abuses--Ireland and Scotland; but in Scotland they were
free from the worst species of abuse which prevailed in
Ireland. If there was monopoly in Scotland, it was the
monopoly of residents. There might he a difference
in political sentiments, but there was none of that base
religious animosity which prevailed!in Ireland.—(Hear.) In
Ireland the abuses of the Scotch Corporation existed, inflamed
to the highest degree by being admixed with the worst of cala-
mities—religiousdiasension, the ascendancy of one persuasion
over another, and the unjust degradation of one reli-
gion.—(Hear.) Of all the corporations of Inland, this
evil existed to the fullest extent in Dublin. That city
was from its peculiar situation so circumstanced as to
make those evils most frightful. Being the metropolis, it
contained the courts of justice. The sheriffs were ap-
pointed by a monopolizing corporation ; they were of
an exclusively religious persuasion, and those men to
whom it fell to summon juries, were such as were
capable of mixing up the worst of passions with the duty
which should of all others be the most free from any
bias. Such was the situation of Ireland, and such em-
phatically was the situation of Dublin.—(Hear, hear.)
Scotland had obtained a corporate reform. They gave a com-
plete corporate reform to the Scotch Burghs; and Edin-
burgh, which was a close town, had been thrown open--
that Edinburgh, which had been hitherto' restricted,
was now identified with the population. Why had not
Ireland such justice done to her, and, above all, why
had not Dublin its justice ?—( Hear, hear.) The
claims of Dublin, beyond any comparison, required
a speedy reform. Such reform ought to have taken place
the moment the pres; nt administration came into office.
The corporation of Edinburgh did not depend on acts of
Parliament, but upon charters. Dublin had several
charters; but although the corporation of Dublin had
several charters as ingredients, it stood not upon charters
alone—it had been regulated by acts of parliament, and
by more than one. The corporation of Dublin was in all
respects the creature of the legislature. It had been
formed by acts of parliament; it had been altered
by acts of parliament ; and it was emphaticaly
a subject of legislation.—(Hear.) Whenever the House
might legislate for Dublin, it must legislate for
it alone. If the house meant to do justice to Dublin,
it would have to legislate for it, on his plan, namely, by
a specific act for Dublin alone. It must proceed by
parliamentary legislation for it solely, and not adopt any
general enactment. It could have nothing to create,
but much to alter. The Corporation of Dublin contained
within itselt all necessary ingredients, a Lord Mayor, an
upper house of 24 Aldermen, and a representative house
of 141 Common Council. It bad, therefore, all the forms
and features of an excellent corporation, and all that it was
necessary to do, therefore, was to restore to the inhabitants
at large their rights of electing the Common Councilmen;
their rights of representation in the election of Aldermen,
and when the house bad done those two things, they would
have done every thing necessary for the corporation of
Dublin. He was not coming before the house to ask furs
bill to subvert the present corporation and to make another ;
he asked not for improvements in the corporation on any
notions of his own, nor for any novel experiments, but
merely to realize to the people of Dublin the promi-es
which the corporation at present held out to them ; and
to make that in reality a benefit to the citiz-ns is hick
was in itself a mere form, mock-ry, and great op-
pression. If tl a house would favour him with a
hearing, he would feel gratified ; although he knew the
subject could not be of much interest to many present,
how often had be been told, when he brought forward
measures, that if be would bring forward some prac-
tical ones which would be useful, he would cer-
tainly carry the house with him.—(Hear.) He could
now easily feel from the manner in whict the house
listened to him, or rather did not listen to him at all, how
futile and insincere those declarations were. If other-
wise, why did not honourable members give a proof
of it? Here was a practical measure of the greatest im-
portance, and it would be idle to talk about what might
be done in future, if a second session of the reformed
parliament were to pass away without a bill on this subject
tieing brought in, printed, and in the bands of every mem-
ber.—(Hear, bear.) He brought forward the sub-
ject in despair ; but he felt it was his duty to bring
it forward, and he complied therewith. He had the
strongest case ever presented for a reform of the corpora
tion of Dublin. It was impossible to deny it. He would
go through some of the details. What would be the
value of doing so? The decision of the house would
show what the value was considered there. Hitherto
he had said the frame of the corporation of Dublin was
popular ; it was a skeleton, perfect in itself, requiring only
to be properly filled up, but rendered destructive by that
which surrounded it. It was quite plain that the Dutliu
citizens were originally considered synonymous with a cor-
peration—how were they situated now ? These facts
must be admitted, first, that no person could get admis-
sion into the corporation by any matter of right,
there being no such thing as right pervading it.—
The first feature to which he should call their attention
was the monopoly of the corporation.—[There was a
great deal of noise, at this period, in the body
of the house, and the Speaker called order repeatedly.]
Mr. O'Connell then resumed—lt would be presump-
tuous in him to expect attention from a certain party.
The first feature of the corporate monopoly existed in their
self election, for no man could become a meinb •r except
at the will of the corporation. If they thought proper w
refuse the freedom to any person, no tribunal on earth
could compel them, and if they wished to confer it,
there was no power to prevent them. The criminal
from the dock—the lowest wretch in the land was
equally eligible with the highest and most distin•
guished in the land. This was the first feature, and
in its own nature it was totally an exclusive
corporation, with the power of having as many Members
as it thought fit, or as few as it chose. Ought
such a state of things to exist? What was its result? Tbat
the entire number connected with the corporation in a po-
pulation of 300,000 did not exceed 1,900, and these 1,900
individuals had the rights of the entire city vested in them,
and they were the sole electors to all the corporate offices.
They elected the common council, the aldermen, the
sheriffs, the mayor—the sheriffs of the capital of Ireland,
where the courts of justice sat. What was its next fea-
ture? Its religious bigotry. In the year 1793, forty-one years
ago, the Legislature passed an act enabling Roman Catho-
lics to be members of the corporation of the city of Dublin ;
that was, to be freemen, and to have the rights of fran-
chise vested in them. From that year, to the year 1834,
would any Hon. Member wish to know how many
Roman Catholics had been admitted to the freedom ?
—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He would not talk
of their having been made masters or wardens of guilds ;
he would not talk of their having been made Com-
mon Councilmen, a Sheriff, or Mayor, but how
many did they think had obtained the gift of their
freedom ? Not one.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") For
41 years that Roman Catholics had been eligible, not one
had been admitted to the freedom of the city. The
house would plainly see what a feature of monopoly
that was. First of all, it was an exclusive
monopoly in the bands of the Protestants—it was a total
exclusion of the entire Roman Catholic body of the city
of Dublin from corporate offices. Was there not a man in
41 years professing the Roman Catholic religion, fit to be
a member of the corporation ? There was among the
Roman Catholic body as much industry, property, loyalty,
good conduct, and every thing that could elevate man among
his species, as in any other class of the community, ;
but every qualification had been superseded by that corn
poration, and morality and integrity bad been saer;ficed by
the sectarian feeling of that bady.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
The house should recollect that no man could com-
pel his admission into this body, and was he
(Mr. O'C.) to be told that he should not take the
first step to remedy that evil ? It was an exclusive mo-
nopoly among Protestants, it was a religious monopoly,
which conferred the appointment of sheriffs to the
three highest courts of justice in the kingdom.—(Hear.)
The appointment of sheriffs in the city of Dublin o as
vested in about 1,900 persons, who alone had the right
to the appointment, and the rest of the population,
amounting to 298,000, had no voice in their elec-
tion. That was the sort of justice practically
administered in Ireland. Those sheriffs nominated the
Jury, and he bad known instances in which a large
; amount of property had been decided by juries selected by
those sheriffs, not on the merits, but because the
party was :be favourite of the exclusives. Those
who were acquainted with Ireland well knew that in
every county there was an immense quantity of local
taxation without representation, for the sheriffs had
the appointment of grand jurors, and the grand jurors had
I the power of taxation. lie would show how that system
11 had worked. In the year 1791, the grand Jurors of the
.1 city of Dublin taxed to the amount of 2,8901. ; in lBg7,

to the amount of 25,4261. in 1829, to 27,3031.;
lin 11430, to 28,3061. ; in 1831, to 29,663/. ; and in
1832 (the last return) to 32,151/.—(Hear, bear.)
To that enormous extent did the lilal taxation extend,
inflicted by about 1,900 persons, many of whom were no,
even housekeepers, and who taxed the other 300,000
of the inhabitants. He asked, was this system to con-
tinue, and whether they were to go on for better or worse?
He wanted a practical proof that the Government
would do somethng for Ireland. Previous to the Eman-
cipation Bill, there was scarcely a Catholic among
the grand jurors, but from that time to the ap-
pointment of the committee of last year, instead of the
exclusive system having been abolished, there had been
316 grand jurors appointed. of whom only seven were
Roman Catholics. He asked whether it could be pre-
tended that was a fair proportion for Catholic property ?
The principal merchants and commercial men, of
whom many were of great wealth, were Catholics.
Since the period of 1829, out of the 316 grand jurors,
who were made up of aldermen, common councilmen,
and commoners, how many, he would ask, did the list
actually consist of? Why only of 115, and that was
managed by the same men serving upon the grand
juries constantly—a number of the aldermen having
served, some thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen times.—
The house would see what a system of taxation that was.
They had the taxing of 318,000 of a population, and that
without control. The same men were also upon the
city grand jury, and from the same ranks was the county
grand jury made up. Was such a system as that to
be contiuued ? It would be so, unless the house
gave him leave to bring in his bill. It might. and it
would be said, for it was the only pretence upon which
leave to bring in the bill could be refused, that the com-
missioner!' appointed to inquire into these corporations
hail not yet made their report.—(Hear.) But let the
house look to the time that was likely to be spent before
that report was laid upon the table. The hon. gentle-
man who was at the head of that commission (Mr. Ser-
geant Perrin) than whom there was not a better common
lawyer, bad written to him (Mr. O'Connell) a letter
which he had only received that morning, in which he
stated that he bad accepted retainers for a Circuit. That
of course meant that he should be engaged in every cause.
He could not possibly be in that house before April, and
it would take a considerable time to consider of and make
up the report; then where was there time to pass the Bill
through that house without considering the other? That
corporation also had the supply of the water to the whole
city of Dublin, which was secured to them by several acts
of Parliament. It was thought that the Legis'ature, in
giving them such a power, would at any rate have fixed a
maximum of rates—they had done so, certainly, to the
houses of the gentry ; but to the manufacturer,
the distiller, and the brewer, the corporation bad the
power to charge what they liked.—(Hear, hear.)
Government was called on to interfere;—they would not.
The Court of Chancery was applied to, to allow the re-
monstrance to lie;—it would not. The matter was laid
before the House of Lords, and it was ordered to lie. What
was the consequence ? Why, the corporation of Dublin
actually levied 45,000/. more than they were entitled to
do. The city of Dublin was under the operation of two
acts :—there was first the Act of Settlement, the 17th and
18th Charles 11., cap. 22. The Cromwellian adven-
turers wishing to contract the corporation, passed an
act for the purpose of putting it under their regulation,
and empower the Lord Lieutenant to regulate the corpo-
ration for twelve months. How were the gui.ds represented
The different trades required a separate representation, yet
the shoemakers bad three attorneys to represent them,
and all the attorneys were regulated, in like manner,
by attorneys, attorneys' clerks, and half-pay officers.
Would such abuses be allowed to exist one twelve-
months longer? Would another year pass over and
the citizens of Dublin be submittea to a body that bad
the exclusive power of taxing them as they chose?
Would that first article of life, water, be even exposed to
a tax, and the people prohibited from enjiiOng
even that luxury which nature supplies them ?—(Hear,
hear.) When he told them of the disaffection of
the people of Ireland, of the disfavour the govern-
ment of the country was in, and of the species
of antipathy that existed between both countries,
were they to prevent him from putting an end to this
most monstrous monopoly ? A more plundering corpora-
tion never existed, and he called upon them to say
whether they would not therefore adopt a measure to
prevent it. If it had been in this country as in Scotland,
the institute ns of tile country would never have permitted
mischiefs to such an extent to exist for so long a period.
—(Hear, bear.) In England the corporations, were
scatutable, but this corporation was entirely legislative,
and was a creature of the legislature. Now three words as
to his plan of amelioration. He would return the same
number of mayor, aliierraten, and common councilmen.
I here were 25 aldermen, one of them being mayor. He
should propose to divide the city of Dublin into eight
districts or burghs, as in Scotland, and for each of these
tai elect three aldermen. He should number the burghs
1 to 8, and each of them, beginning at No. 1, should in
rotation elect the tt ayor—the latter to be elected from
among the common council by the ten pound householders
of the d strict, and not by the other aldermen from among
themselves as heretofore. That the aldermen should be
elected for six years only, so as to prevet t their coot t for
the future from becoming the haughty oligarchy which it
bad hitherto been. This new made of election would
have the beneficial effect of identifying the people of Dub.
In with their corporation. The police, ton, be would
have put on an efficient and less expensive footing. At
present it was not only inefficient, but the expense of
keeping it up came upon the people as an altogether
separate item of taxation. The taxes he would have
consolidated, which t onsolidation be had calculated would
effect a saving to the people of Dublin of not less than
50,0001. a year.
Mr. LITTLETON—No; 25,000/.
Mr. O'CONNELL be.ieved 50,0001. would be nearer
the mark. However, the saving of 25,000/., which the
right hon. secretary admitted, was well worth effecting.
He trusted that the house would allow him to introduce
his bill, which was quite ready in all its details, and he
should therefore conclude by moving, " That leave be
given to bring in a bill for amending the corporation of
Dublin."
Mr. RUTHVEN seconded the motion.

Mr. LITTLETON thought that the motion had been
brought forward at an improper time, and he should feel
it his duty to oppose the introduction of the bill, and he
trusted that in so doing he should not be accused of any
wish to suffer abuse to go unpunished. Such was far
from his desires, and be confidently appealed to the house
whether any measures of the present government were
open to any such charge ?—(Hear, bear.) His only mo-
tive for opposing the motion was that he thought it un-
timely. Last session the hon. and learned gentleman had
made a similar motion, which had been so far acceded to
as that leave was given him to introduce a bill, the details
and information which it was naturally supposed the hon.
and learned member would bring forward on the occasion,
being likely, it was thought, materially to assist the com-
missioners of ibquiry on this subject, and, therefore, leave
was given him to introduce his bill, with the understand-
ing that he was to proceed no further with it on that
occasion. The hon. and learned gentleman, however, had
brought forward no bill at all. The reasons which had
weighed with the house last session for supporting the mo-
tion, were no longer in force, as the commissioners had now
almost prepared their report. He (Mr. Littleton) did not
think a separate bill necessary for the Dublin corporation,
and in this opinion he was supported by Mr. Sergeant
Perrin, who cot sidered that a single bill on this subject
would be sufficient. It was, however, most deirable, in-
deed almost indispensable, that the house should have the
benefit of the inquiry of the commissioners, before they
proceeded with any bill they might be desirous of intro•
ducing on this important subject. With reference to the
consolidation of taxation proposed by the hon. and learned
gentleman, there could be no doubt of the advantages of
such a plan, which would effect a saving of 25,000/. a
year to the city of Dublin.

Mr. O'CONNELL greatly regretted to find that any
delay was to take place in this very important reform.
With reference to Mr. Sergeant Perrin's opinion, on which
the right hon. secretary so relied, with all respect for that
learned and excellent sergeant, he (Mr. O'Connell) should
not alter his view of the case in consequence of that opi-
nion. He still thought, that as the corporation of Dub-
lin was in quite a different position from other Irish or
English corporations, it required a different remedy.
Mr. BARRON expressed his full conviction that the
report of the commissioners would be perfectly satisfactory
to the people of Ireland. With this feeling in his init,d,
he should prefer having one general plan fur Ireland. He
did nut see why Dublin should have i s particular bill any
more than Watez ford or any other town.

Mr. O'CONNELI, said a few words in explanation.
Mr. WALLACE hoped his hon. and learned friend
would not press the motion to a division.
Mr. HUME was of opinion that ministers should not
oppose the introduction of this bill. Mr. Perriti's report
would certainly be of the grea•est po,sible value, as, if
there was one man more fit than another to report on the
subject, be was that man.—( Hear, hear.) There seemed
to be a doubt whether government intended to originate
any similar mea,ure. If they did mean to do so, let the
right hon. secretary for Ireland state as much. It they
had not such an intention, it would be very hard to refuse

entertaining that brought forward by his friend the hon.
and learned member for Dublin.—(Hear, bear.) If, on
the other hand, government had some measure in con-
templation, he would advise his hon. and learned friend to
withdraw his motion, lest it might have the appearance of
a vexatious opposition.
Lord ALTHORP, as we could understand him (there
being some noise on his rising), ktimated that it was the
intention of government to originate such a measure,
otherwise they never would have approved of, or appointed
the commission of inquiry.—(Hear.) He did not deny
that the reform of corporations was necessary ; but it was
also necessary to have before them whatever informa-
tion could be collected. Would the house allow the in-
troduction of a bill before the report of the committee was
returned ? If they allowed a separate bill in one instance
the same might perhaps be asked for in all.
Dlr. O'CONNELL on hearing this, begged leave of
the house to withdraw his motion, at the same time ob-
serving that with regard to the corporation - -Dublin and
Waterford, one was by charter, and the other was by
statute.—Leave was gran ed to withdraw the motion.