The Sun.
London, England, 1835-05-23 00:00:00

ENNIS ELECTION.

Mr. DYSON here brought up the reduced list for the En-
nis Borough Committee, the members of which came to the
table, and were sworn.
LIVERPOOL POLICE RESUMED.
_ _

Mr. PR YME said that with respect to the Liverpool Polk()
Bill, he thought the question was whether Corporation funds
should be appropriated to the benefit of the whole town, or
only for the benefit of a small portion of its inhabitants. In
his opinion such funds ought to be appropriated for the benefit
of the whole town, and as that was not the object of the pre..
sent Bill, he felt bound to vote against it.—( Loud cries of
Withdraw, withdraw.")
Mr. T. THORNLEY complained of the Bill having been
concocted between the Corporation of Liverpool and certain
inhabitants of that town. The Corporation was composed of
the Mayor, Bailiffs, and Burgesses, who amounted to between
er sd of
Boardthe ef foCorporationtyfi v
0
three and five thousand; but ti,Pealeff::a.it
were essentially managed by a self-
persons, who composed a complete family _concern of fathers,
sons, brothers, brothers-in-law, and sons-in.-law.—( Hear. )
He maintained that they by no means represent the inte-
rests or feelings of the people of Liverpool generally - The
Noble Lord had alluded to the approbation of this Mil ex.
pressed by a public vestry in Liverpool in October last,
but on that occasion there had been a great difference of
opinion, and a poll had been demanded, but out of 87,000 rate-
payers on the lists, only 63 persons had voted in favour of
the Bill, and 34, including himself (Mr. 'F.) against it. Ha
was sure a Reformed House of Commons would never sanc-
tion such a Bill.—( Hear.) The Noble Lord had stated, that
the Grand Jury were in favour of it, and that the Recorder
supported it ; but they were portions of the Corporation. The
funds of the Corporation were quite adequate to supply any
deficiency of the nature complained of. They had an income
of 100,0001., about 50,000/. of which was composed of town
dues, paid not by the merchants of Liverpool, who were
exempt, but by the people of England, Ireland, and Scot..
land.—( Hear, hear.) On these grounds he should vote with
his Hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool (Mr. Ewart), that
the Bill be read a second time this day six months, because
he thought the inhabitants of that town should receive the full
benefit of any Municipal Reform that might be introduced,
and also that it should receive the benefit of any Church-rata
Bill that might be adopted by that House.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord FRANCIS EGERTON said the Hon. Membce
opposite had opposed the Bill, because it was a diversion of
Corporate property to other than the purposes for which it was
intended. No doubt a considerable property was vested in the
Corporation for the express purpose of enabling them better 'e
provide for the rectors of the parish. So far the objection of
the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton was done away. with. TI• e
Hon. Member had mistaken one vestry for another in alluding
to the opinions of the people of Liverpool upon this Bill; the

:illusion of his Noble Friend (Lord Sandell) was to a vestry
which had lately taken place, in which no voice had been raised
against this Bill. It was hard that this Bill should be charac-
terised as a job, and as coming from a party, instead of as he
LLord F. Egerton) contended, a great body of the people of
iverpool. I. or these reasons he should give the Bill his support.
Mr. SHEIL would give a decided answer to one argu-
ment
suggested by the Noble Lord, viz., hold the property
for the benefit of the Church—let that be conceded, and what
right had the Corporation to demand an equivalent from the
people ? This Police Bill stated the inhabitants had been accus-
tomed to pay 3501. in addition to 4001. paid by the Corporation
towards the support of the clergy ; they had been accustomed
to pay, indeed, but it was a gratuitous payment, and this Bill
sought to make that permanent and compulsory, which was
now discretionary and temporary. In consideration of the
Corporation undertaking to pay 4001. a year, which,
indeed, they were certainly bound to pay, the people
assembled agreed to pay a proportion of two-thirds ;
but that was a voluntary payment, and the corporation of Li-
verpool was at this 'moment bound to pay the whole of the
police force. Would the House agree to the proposition for
empowering th'..lcorporation of Liverpool to add to the custo-
mary 4001. a. year the people's voluntary subscription of 3501.
a year?—('dear, hear.) There were two members for Liver-
pool in the House, one a member of the aristocracy and the
other a. representative of the largest body of the inhabitants,
and he assured the House, as well as the Hon. Gent. opposite,
that the majority of the people were adverse to this Bill, and
if they were adverse to it, ought the House prematurely to
legislate on a matter of such vast importance ?—( Hear, hear.)
There was a Corporation Bill at this moment in the hands of
Government, and it would become the House to be specially
guarded against the devices of Corporations at the present
tune.—(Hear.) He had just had put into his hands a docu-
ment, which the Hon. Member who gave it assured him was a
correct one. It related to the Corporation of Lincoln, and it
said the Corporation is now assembled in Common Hall—
(Laughter from the Opposition)—they were now assembled
to make a sudden disposal of all the property hitherto held
among themselves.—(Cheers from the other side.) Now
was that a matter for laughter 2 ( Hear, hear.) They had
decided to convert the whole of the Corporation property
into freehold property, in order to meet any exigencies that
might arise in consequence of the Corporate reforms which
were about to take place.—( Hear, hear.) Whether this was
a matter deserving the laughter of those gentlemen, who were
slightly ridiculous when they were extravagantly risible, he
would leave the House to judge.—( Cheers.) It was a mat-
ter touching the interests of the people at large, and of so
much importance that it ought not to be disposed of hastily.--
( Hear, hear. )
Lord STANLEY could not help thinking that the House
was more likely to fall into an error in coming to a pre-
cipitate conclusion, and depart so far from the customary
course as so reject the Bill at this stage of it, than it would
if it allowed the assertions on either side to be sifted before
the proper tribunal. He regretted the Hon. Member for Tip-
perary should mix up this question with general attacks upon
the nature of Corporation abuses, which he hoped
would very soon come under the consideration of the
House.—( Hear.) The Hon. Member for Liverpool said
that a vast number of the inhabitants were apposed to this
bill; and that was a fair matter for inquiry, and could not be
disposed of by rhetorical flourishes.—( Hear, and laughter.)
He had understood that 34 only of the whole of the
inhabitants had voted against the Bill in vestry, and that out
of eighteen who were parochial officers and supported this Bill,
16 were removed by the vote of public vestry—two only were
re-elected. These 34 voted against the Bill, and 16 holding
office voted against the Bill, and those very 16 were thrown
out of office.—( Hear, hear.) The Honourable and Learned
gentleman (Mr. Shiel) had told them that there was a great
preponderance of the people of Liverpool opposed to this
Bill, and that the House ought not therefore to inquire into
the Bill, but to throw it out upon the second reading. In the
case of Liverpool the Church rates were levied in a very pecu-
liar way. The administration of his Noble Friend Lord
Grey, upon the question of church-rates, thought it neces-
sary that some specific provision should be introduced into it
to meet the case of Liverpool. Under these circum-
stances it was desirable that some terms should be come
to.—( Hear.) The Honourable and Learned Member for
Tipperary called upon the House not to act precipitately,
and he therefore called upon them to throw out this Bill preci-
pitately.—(Loud cries of " Hear.") Could the House be-
lieve that the Hon. and Learned Member fairly and candidly
stated the grounds for this course?—( Hear, and cheers.) The
real facts were these—if this Bill were agreed upon, it
would afford a permanence to the provisions of the
clergymen of Liverpool, a large and increasing place.—
( Great cheering from the Tory section.) That was the
ground upon which they were called upon to act.—illenewed
cheering.) When the Hon. and Learned Member for Tippe-
rary said that the Corporation ought not to spend their funds for
the benefit of the Established Church, be ought to recollect that
the Corporation actually held a consilerable proportion of
their property upon a grant, to enable them to provide for
the Clergy of the Established Church—( Loud cheering)—
and for the purpose of giving an adequate maintenance to
the clergymen of that town which was daily risk; in impor-
tance.—( Hear, hear.) There had not been a single voice
either of Dissenter or others raised against this grant since the
year 1752. Under these circumstances he hoped the House
would not act with what he could not help calling injustice—
( Hear)--in postponing indefinitely the second reading of this
Bill, but would allow it to go through the ordinary course—r,--
ferrino- it to a Committee, where the details aught be examined.
He hoped the House would see the fairness and expediency
of takinc, this course, and of not pressing the third reading, until
the. Bill could be rendered as perfect as possible. This was
the fair course of proceeding—he wished that the second
reading should be taken, because as there was no substantial
objection to the principle, the details could be better arranged
in Committee.

Mr. SHEIL—Of courso I rise to explain. Ido not rise
for the purpose of adverting to the very unprovoked attack—
( Loud cheering from the Ministerial side of the House, and
cries of " Order" irons the Tories.) Perhaps I have no
right to advert to what I cannot but call a most wanton—
( Cries of " Spoke," Order-') 1 have riser, to explain—
I know I have no right to speak again, but upon other occa-
sions, other individuals upon whom such attacks 'were made
were permitted to speak.
Lord STANLEY—If I have said anything that can offend
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, I am sincerely sorry.
Mr. SHE IL—Oh ! the Noble Lord's words are like the
spear of Achilles, they wound with one end and cure with the
other. The Noble Lord said that I had made a statement r -
specting the feelings of the people cf Liverpool. Now he (Mr.
S.) bad made no assertion upon his own authority, but upon
the authority of one of the Members of Liverpool and the
Metrilx‘x for Wolverhampton. The Noble Lord had forgotten
those two gentlemen, and did him the honour of solely allud-
ing to him.—( While the Hon Gentleman spoke there were
lcul cries of " Order, order.")
The SPEAKER considered the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman out of order.

Mr. SHIEL said he would willingly bow to the
of the Chair, however hardly he felt himself dealt with.
Sir R. INGLIS remarked that in the course of his Parlia-
mentary lire he never recollected a gentleman, after receiving
an apology from an Hon. Member—( Hear, hear)—perse.
vere in making the attack which he (Mr. S.) had just now
repeated.—(Loud cries of " Question, question," from the
Ministerial Members.) He (Sir R.) certainly—
Mr. FINN rose to order.
Sir R. INGLIS—The Hon. Member is totally mistaken.
lie does not know me if he thinks he can put me down.
The Honourable and Learned Member for Tipperary
is the first person in my memory ; and he ( Sir R. I.) hoped
he would be the last, that after receiving an apology such as
his Noble Friend (Lord Stanley) had given, should be in-
duced again and again to repeat his attack.—( Question,
question, from the Ministerial side, and Hear, from the Oppo-
sition. He (Sir R. I.) stated this not because his Noble
Friend required any assistance from him, but in order to ex-
press what he conceived was the general feeling of the House.
The Right Hon. Baronet then stated his acquiescence in the
provisions of the Bill, and said he would vote for its second
reading.

Mr. WI L K S begged to express his hope that notwitstanding
the eloquent appeal of the Noble Lord, the House would not
allow this Bill to proceed further, opposed as it was to the
feelings of the majority of the most wealthy and respectable in-
habitants of the town of Liverpool. The House ought to recol-
lect that the majority of the people of that town were Dissenters
from the Established Church, and, therefore, they ought not
to be astonished that the Hon. Member for Tipperary was op-
posed to the Bill, when they knew that 14-16ths of the popu-
lation were of the persuasion to which he (Mr. S.) belonged.
--( Hear.) It was also to be recollected that the Dissenters
of Liverpool considered themselves as being in a state of pe-
culiar oppression, and complained greatly of the violation of
their rights. The Corporation of Liverpool has a Council
consisting of 64, and though the Test and Corporation Acts
have been repealed, not a Dissenter has as yet been admitted
into it. They have not allowed one member of that sect to
become one of their Corporation, though two-third of the bankers
and merchants of Liverpool are Dissenters. The truth was,
that this Bill, bearing the name of the Liverpool Day
Police Bill, was framed for the purpose of givinr,
a permanent appropriation of the public money for the
Clergymen of the Established Church--( Hear, hear)—
although the Corporation was bound by the conditions
on which they obtained their seats to provide for them. If that
were the trust that they received how can they reconcile it
in the history of the last century, during which the rectors and
curates had but a salary of 1601. a year, that that amount was
not paid by the Corporation, but out of Church-rates levied
upon Dissenters and Roman Catholics ? Under such circum-
stances, he hoped the House would not allow the further pro-
gress of this Bill. It was a mere attempt to prevent a re-
form in the Corporation, which they all had it in contem-
plation to carry through—(kaughter)All those on that side
of the House, at all events, and many on the other.—( Cheers. )
In the meantime the present Bill was brought in, and pressed
through in the presence of a vast number of Members who
had not heard one word of the merits of the Bill.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) Perhaps the promoters of the Bill expected
that they might be able to carry through the Bill by the aid of
63 who had before voted for it, who, he had no doubt, had
been most anxiously gathered together.—( Cheers.)
Mr. MARK PHILLIPS opposed the second reading.
Lord SANDON referred to the printed title of the Bill
" for the establishment of a day police, and to provide for
the payment of an annual sum due to the parochial clergy.
Colonel SIBTHORP asserted his conviction that what-
ever charges might be made against the Corporation of Lin-
coln, alluded to by the Hon. and Learned Member for Tip-
perary, that body would at all times stand perfectly pure and
unsullied in every transaction.
Dr. BOWRING felt himself bound to resist, with indigna-
tion, the attempt made, in the course of the debate upon that

question, to cast opprobrium upon the members of the Dis-
senting body.
Mr. O'CONNELL rose to protest against the Bill, on be-
half of a number of the contributors to the ffind which the
Bill proposed to dispose of. ' The city which he (Mr.
O'Connell) represented was a great contributor to the Corps
ration funds of the town of Liverpool. He protested against
the Bill, because there were 45,000—he was told 62,000
Roman Catholics resident in Liverpool, not one of whom
had ever yet been admitted into the Corporation ;
of that town.---( Hear.) There were also an immense num-
ber of Protestant Dissenters resident in the town, not one of
whom bad ever yet been admitted into the Corporation ;
and yet charges of bigotry were constantly beard against
those who were opposed to the oppressors and the exclu-
sionists.—( Cheers.) He was not, indeed, much surprised
that the Noble Lord should take a fancy to a Bill
which included at once provisions for police and parsons; but
he (Mr. O'Connell) submitted that the Bill was a fraud upon
the House. There was not one word about the clergy in the
recital. In the title it was true that there was a slight men-
tion of them ; but neither in the recital nor the preamble was
the slightest allusion made to them.--( Hear, hear.) Until
you came to the 13th page of the Bill, not one word was said
about the clergy. In the fourteenth page of the Bill the
clergy were introduced ; but under what head were they in-
troduced ? how was the attention of the House directed to
their introduction ? They were introduced under the head of
" Limitations of Actions."—(Laughter and cheers.) How
could a parson grow up under that clause 2—( Hear, hear.)
He had certainly heard of the precedent of a Turnpike Bill,
in which a Bristol magistrate obtained the introduction of a
clause to enable him to send his slaves from one island to an-
other in the West Indies, in spite of any local act to the con-
trary. The present Bill appeared to furnish an instance of a
similar exercise ofingenuity. Here the day police of the town
were mixed up with the parsons of the town ; and this was
done because it was said that the Corporation had funds in
trust for the clergy. They did not want an Act of Par-
liament to execute the trust, but they did want an Act
of Parliament to evade it, by throwing the burden upon
others. There was not one word about the trust in the
Bill—it was entirely omitted. There was something ora-
torical in stating that thirty-four only voted against the
Bill, and, on the other side, keeping back the equally
important fact .that only sixty-three voted for it ; and
when it was found that neither Catholic nor Protestant had ever
supported it, was not the House to be convinced by the asser-
tions of the Hon. Gentleman near him, that the majority of the
people of Liverpool were essentially opposed to it? "It is
an attempt," exclaimed the Hon. and Learned Gentleman—
"it is an attempt to prevent the reform of Corporations which
we have in contemplation.— (Great cheering.) Yes, all of
us on this side of the House, and many on the other side also,
are prepared for a measure of corporate reform ; but in the
mean time this Bill is brought, in the hope that it may go to
a Committee, and that by some accident—such things have
happened before—persons who have not heard one word of
the merits of the Bill may come down and vote in its favour.
The Bill is pressed forward now in the hope that 63 persons
may be got together again, as they were got together before,
to vote for the Bill whether they understood it or not." If a
police Bill be wanted, why not introduce a police bill ? but do
not, under the name of a police bill, introduce a parson bill—
( Hear, hear)—do not establish the unnatural conjunction of
thief-takers and parsons in the same bill.—( Cheers.) It was
a most ridiculous and preposterous conjunction. And who
made it ridiculous and preposterous ? Was it he who ex-
posed the ridiculousness and preposterousness of it, or was it
he who was guilty of the absurdity of proposing so absurd
and unnatural a conjunction ?—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He
knew that insinuations were thrown out by those who could
not speak openly. There was not a worse habit of persecu-
tion than that of insinuation.—( Cheers.) If any man had
been guilty of what had been foully and foolishly stated
elsewhere, let it be openly and manfully 'avowed. He
alluded not to any who sat within the House, but to those
who out of the House had stated things which no one in
the House would dare to assert.—( Hear, hear.) If there
were any truth in the insinuations to which he referred, let
it be spoken out manfully. He was not one of those who
would merely insinuate. If there were such an insinuation
to be made, let it be boldly put forth in words. Until it were
so put forth, he should treat it with sovereign contempt.—
( Hear, hear. )
Mr. GOULBURN observed that the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman complained greviously of those who insinuated
motives to the persons who conducted public measures, or
who took part in them in Parliament ; and yet the whole of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's speech on that occasion
had been an insinuation of motives against those who brought
forward the present Bill.—( Hear.) The Noble Lord the
Member for Liverpool had read the title of the Bill to the
House; but as it seemed so soon to have passed from the
recollection of several of the Hon. Gentlemen who were pre-
sent, he (Mr. Goulburn) should perhaps be excused if he
ventured to read it again. It was entitled " A Bill for the esta-
blishment of a day police force in the town of Liverpool, and to
provide for the payment of annual sums to the parochial clergy."
But then, said the Honourable and Learned Gentleman,
" the preamble contains not one word of the clergy." What
was the fact? Why, that instead of one there were two pre.
ambles—one relating to the police, the other to the clergy.
That which related to the payment of the clergy, not only
stated that it was expedient that the payment should be made
to the clergy, but entered into a detail of the whole of the
circumstances which rendered the payment necessary. And
that being the state of the Bill, the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman, with that fact before him, after imputing to those
who advocated the Bill an intention to act surreptitiously,
concluded by a laudable lecture upon the impropriety of in-
sinuating motises. The question before the House was
simply this :—An arrangement had been entered into by the
inhabitants of Liverpool for the establishment of a day po-
lice, and for the payment of the clergy. They desired the
House to consider, in Committee, whether the arrangement
into which they proposed to enter was fair and proper ; whe-
ther the funds in question could be fairly and properly applied
to the purposes mentioned in the Bill. In that shape did
the question come before them, and he (Mr. Goulburn) con-
tended that justice required that they should co into Com-
mittee, and inquire whether the arrangement proposed to.be
entered into by the inhabitants should be affirmed or refused
by the House.
Mr. O'CONNELL rose to explain—He made no insinu-
ation against the parties—he charged them directly. As to
what he had said about the preamble, if anybody would look to
the Bill itself, they would at once perceive what he had alluded
to. What he ( Mr. O'Connell) had said was, that up to page
12 of the Bill there was no mention of the Clergy—nor was
there. In the 13th page, in the middle of a section, entitled
" Limitations of Actions," for the first time, by a rhetorical
flourish, was a preamble relative to the Clergy introduced
That wss certainly a queer way of introducing a preamble.
Mr. GO UL BURN—What the Honourable and Learned
Gentleman said was, that there was an intention to take per-
sons by surprise, in introducing a question for the payment of
the clergy in a Bill which professed to be for the establish-
ment of a day police. In reply to that he (Mr. Goulburn)
stated, and he repeated, that the title of the Bill distinctly de-
noted the whole object of the Bill; and that although the
preamble to the first part related only to the police, yet that
there was a second preamble setting forth the whole of the ob-
jects of the Bill as regarded the Clergy.
After a few words from Sir C. BURRELL, Mr. POTTER, and
Lord SANDON—
The gallery was cleared, and the House divided. The
numbers were—

For the Second Reading
Against it
Majority l4
TAXATION.

In reply to a question from Mr. HUGHES HUGHES,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he would endeavour to
make some arrangement by which that Hon. Member would
be enabled to bring forward his motion for a revision and com-
mutation of taxation, by the 12th of June.
CONDUCT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS.
Mr. COBBETT rose to submit a resolution to the House,
which, in his opinion, was rendered necessary by the mode in
which the public business was conducted by the Government.
The Ministers of the Crown were expressly bound to give the
House every explanation they could reasonably require ; and
so to conduct the public business as to enable them to under-
stand its progress, and to transact it most conveniently. With
the present Ministry, however, there was no knowing what
was to be done.—( A laugh.) First they brought forward the
Navy Estimates, then the Civil Contingencies; then they left
the Civil Contingencies and took a dip at the Army Estimates.
Well; the House might reasonably have expected that they
would have proceeded with the Army Estimates until they
were completed—no such thing ; to-night they were to go on
with the Navy Estimates, and perhaps before they finished
them they would be called upon to proceed with something
else—he knew not what. He would, therefore, move the fol-
lowing resolution :—" That it is the opinion of this House, that
when an estimate of any description is presented to the House,
the moving of all the votes in that estimate should be con-
tinued until the estimate be concluded."
The motion having been seconded, the question was put.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was sorry he could not concur
in the motion of the Hon. Member ; but as he considered that
it would have the effect of placing an undue limit to the dis-
cretion of Ministers, he felt himself obliged to resist it.
SIR WILLIAM GOSSETT.
Mr. W. S. 0' BRI E N asked whether the report was correct
that Sir William Gossett had been removed, or was about to
be removed, from the situation which he held in Ireland? and
whether the Government had been unable to find among the
very large party which supported them in Ireland, a single no-
bleman who was qualified to hold even the comparatively
humble situation of Under-Secretary for Ireland ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not feel it consistent with
his duty to return any answer whatever to the question of the
Hon. Gentleman.