The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-28 00:00:00

THE StTN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JULY 28; 1835.

those officers whose exertions had been the means of filling the
coffers of the Company, should be refused compensation
because they had quitted the service of the Hon. Company
previous to 1828, although they had been always anxious to
return to it. He begged to apologize for having trespassed so
long on the House, and he hoped he bad said enough to convince
the House that these petitioners had strong claims upon the
Company for compensation for the services performed by them.
The petition having been brought up,
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE objected to the petition being re-
ceived, on the ground that it prayed for a grant of money, and
was therefore informal.
The SPEAKER said if such was the case it could not be
received.

Mr. ROBINSON—The petitioners merely prayed the
House would assist them in obtaining compensation from the
East India Company.
After a few observations from Sir J. C. HOBIIOUSE,
Mr. ROBINSON withdrew the petition.
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON presented several petitions from
parishes in Kilkenny and Cork against the Bill now in progress
through that House, relative to the Irish Church ; also, a
petition from Sir William Harty formerly representative of the
City of Dublin, to the same effect. Also a petition from a
Protestant clergyman of the island of Achil, on the coast of
Mayo, complaining of the persecution practised by the Roman
Catholic clergymen against the children attending petitioners'
schools.
Lord COLE presented a petition from the High Sheriff
and Grand Jury of Fermanagh, against the Irish Church Bill.
Sir M. S. STEWART presented a petition from Renfrew,
against the Ten Hours' Factory Bill.
Mr. CAMPBELL presented a petition from a Society
resident in London for the propagation of Christian Knowledge,
in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, relative to the con-
templated arrangement of the Scottish Colleges.
Mr. M'KINNON supported the prayer of the petition.
Mr. SINCLAIR also supported the petition.
ECCLESIASTICAL REGISTRATION.

Mr. W. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from a parish
in Yorkshire against the Ecclesiastical Registration Bill, and
asked the Attorney-General whether it was his intention to
proceed with it at this advanced period of the session.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he was sure that
this Bill would be supported by both sides of the House, and
therefore it was not likely to extend the duration of the
session. He should bring it forward at the very first oppor-
tunity.—( Hear. )
Mr. HEATHCOTE supported the petition.
Colonel SIBTHORP did not conceive the Bill would
meet with that general support which the Attorney-General
seemed to anticipate, and in support of his opinion he reminded
the House that there had been 166 petitions, to which there
were 10,257 signatures appended, presented against the Bill.
Mr. C. FE RGUS SON advocated the measure, observing
that he thought it was shown to be necessary by the gross abuses
that had been proved to exist in the Ecclesiastical Court.
Mr. WILK S trusted that the Attorney-General would not
attempt to press the Bill forward during the present Session.
He hoped however that it would be printed, in order that the
country might have an opportunity of deliberately considering
the subject. He wished that more important corrections had
been attempted by the House.
Mr. PEASE observed that the measure had been received,
in some parts of the country, with great alarm. He did not
like the principle that nothing could be well done that was
not done in London.--( Cheers. )
Mr. LOWTHER trusted the Attorney-General would
withdraw the measure for the present Session, in order to
give the country time to consider the subject.
Mr. SCA RLETT thought the Bill should be withdrawn
for the present Session.
The Petitions were then ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. HODGES presented a petition from the owners and
occupiers of land in Kent, complaining of distress and
praying the House for an alteration in the law with respect to
Tithes. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from
Lewisham praying for the repeal of the Malt Tax.
IRISH CHURCH.

Mr. LE FRO Y presented petitions from Dublin and other
places in Ireland in favour of the Irish Church. He
would take that opportunity of correcting a statement
which had been made in the course of the debate
on the question of the Irish Church, by the Noble Lord
the Secretary for Ireland. That Noble Lord had said that in
the parish of Kilgarrick there were two clergymen, and that
those two had dwindled into one man, whose only duty con-
sisted in the collection of tithe. Now the Rev. G. Townsend
was certainly a prebendary, and was also rector of this
parish, but he was a most excellent clergyman, was always re-
sident, and provided for two curates, so that the spiritual duties
were performed by three clergyman instead of one.
Dr. BOWRING presented a petition from a Mr. William
Bruce, complaining of the injuries he had suffered from
the incursions of the Caffres in Africa. He also gave
notice, on the part of the Honourable Member for Middlesex,
that on Tuesday, the 28th instant, he would move that the
House carry into effect the resolution of the Committee for
distributing Parliamentary papers.
IPSWICH ELECTION.

Mr. FRESHFIELD said, that as the evidence in the Ips-
wich case had not yet been delivered, and as he supposed,
from the two adjournments that had taken place, that the
House would not discharge the prisoners until they had heard
the evidence, he thought it useless to bring forward the case
this evening.
After a few words from Mr. GOULBURN and Mr. WYNN,
the case as we understood, was postponed.
WOLVERHAMPTON AFFRAY.

Mr. THORNLE Y complained of the great delay that had
taken place in the printing and distributing of this evidence.
IPSWICH ELECTION.

Mr. NICHOL asked whether the Hon. Member for
Ipswich intended to present the petition which he under-
stood had been placed in his care complaining of the con-
duct of the Committee in passing certain resolutions.
Mr. RIGBY WA SON replied, that he thought it
would have been nothing but fair for the Hon. Gentleman
to have given him notice of this question. The petition re-
lated, he understood, to certain resolutions which were brought
down to the Committee ready cut and dried, and which were
of a nature to stifle all inqUiry.--( Cries of " Order," during
which the Hon. Member sat down.)
Mr. GOULBURN spoke to order.
Mr. R. WA SON said it appeared to him that the Hon. and
Learned Gentlemen on the other side seemed disposed to listen
to but one side of the question. It would be impossible for
him give his answer without his reasons.
Mr. WYNN said the question was—Whether the intention
of the Hon. Member was to present a petition, accusing the
Committee of some improper course ?
Mr. NICHOL would put it to the -House whether a body
appointed to carry on an investigation should have this threat
held over it. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had re-
ceived a petition to present which he had not yet done, and
was it to be held over the heads of the Committee in terrorent ?
--(Hear.)
Mr. R. WA SON said it was impossible to give his answer,
if the Hon. Member would not hear his reasons.
The conversation then dropped.
DISTRESS IN IRELAND.

Lord MORPETH moved the Order of the Day for the
House to resolve itself into a Committee on the Irish Church
Bill.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD rose to move an Address to his
Majesty, praying him to take the distress in the county
of Mayo into his gracious consideration.—( Hear, hear.)
Ho had also a letter signed by the Secretary of the Lord
Lieutenant, in which he stated that the Government were
disposed to do all they could, but that they did not
possess sufficient funds to provide for the distress of so
large a population. He would now refer to the proceedings
that had been adopted in former cases of distress. In 1822,
when Sir Robert Peel was Secretary of State for the Home
Department, he came to Parliament, and it placed at the dis-
posal of the Crown 250,0001. to be applied for the relief of
distressed persons. In 1831, 50,000/. was raised for a similar pur-
pose. The distress was of such a nature that it would in-
crease progressively. The present condition of the
people did not result from any imprudence—it was
chiefly attributable to the absentee system.—( Hear.)
Another cause of the distresses of Ireland was, that the land-
lords dispossessed the unfortunate tenants, because they did
not send their children to the schools that the landlords
wished. And this had taken place in the North, as well
as the South.—( Hear.) Another cause was, that the rent
was too high. It might be asked why did the people take
land at a rent which they were not able to pay ? He would
tell them. The tenant was not a free agent; he had
nothing whatever between him and starvation but the
bit of land.—(Hear, hear.) He made an appeal to their
justice—he only demanded that they should restore to the
people what was properly their own. Every man who drew a
revenue from the country was bound to contribute to the
employment and relief of the people. ( Hear, hear,
hear.) They wanted practical measures of relief.
Would it be said that the House had not time to legislate for
Ireland? He trusted that such an imputation upon its justice
would not go forth to the public. The Hon. -Member con-
cluded by moving, that an humble address be presented to his
Majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to take
the distress existing in the county of Mayo, into his gra-
cious consideration.

On the motion being put—
Lord MORPETH said it was undoubtedly true that the
distress which the Hon. Gentleman had so faithfully pour-
frayed did still continue, and would, he feared, continue till
the new potato crops came round. But it was not a general
distress, but was confined to certain places. Under these cir-
cumstances, Government had taken such steps as to them ap-
peared most proper. They sent down to Mayo in the first
instance an inspector-general of police to superintend the
arrangements necessary to be made. They had since sent at
various times a great number of vessels, with cargoes of meal
and potatoes, wherever they heard distress to be most pre-
vailing, to be sold at low prices where the people were able to
pay, and where not able, to be distributed gratuitously.
They had employed an officer of the Coast Guard to super-
intend the landing of the provisions. They might not in all
instances be able to overtake the distress, and he feared that

he must corroborate the statement of the Hon. Member, that
the local subscriptions were not at all equal to the extent of
that distress; but it ought to be taken into consideration that
the people by whom those subscriptions would be made were
themselves in a state far from being able to contribute much
to the relief of others. When the Honourtble Member
talked of poor-laws being able to afford an adequate remedy,
he must be aware that even if a measure of that kind had
been carried this session it could not possibly have come into
effect to have afforded any relief of the existing distress pre-
viously to the month of August, when the incoming crops of
potatoes would considerably mitigate the condition of the
people. He did not, however, wish to say a word against the
introduction of poor-laws. He wished that question to be ar-

gued upon its own merits. In the meantime he assured the
Hon. Gentleman that the Government would not fail to apply
such means as were most proper to remedy the distress he had
so feelingly described. He (Lord Morpeth) hoped that he
had not been found backward in doing anything which his
situation called upon him to do ; if, however, the House itself
chose to interpose and make a grant to meet the existing dis-
tress, he should be the last man to complain at being relieved
from the responsibility which he felt pressed very heavily upon
him.

Sir R. MUSGRAVE thought the Noble Lord had made
out a good case for the introduction of poor-laws into Ireland,
by having shown that this country was again at considerable
expense to supply provisions to the people of Mayo. On a
late occasion, when he proposed a measure to effect the intro-
duction of poor. laws into that country, his Majesty's Govern-
ment thought proper to oppose him ; having done so, it was
their imperative duty to apply a remedy on this occasion.
Mr. D. BROWNE did not complain of the course taken
by the Hon. Gentleman who had moved the amendment.
Three or four years ago it was his painful duty to interfere
with the Order of the Day, for the purpose of calling the at-
tention of his Majesty's Government to the distress then ex-
isting in the western part of Ireland. That distress existed
to a great extent along the shore of Mayo and Galway, he
readily admitted ; but when he came to give his testimony be-
fore the House, whatever imputation it might expose him to
from any quarter, he must say that he believed the extent of
that distress had been exaggerated. He was sorry to say that
the landlords on that coast had not come forward as they ought
to have done, to relieve the existing distress. He could state
but one reason in extenuation of their conduct, and that was
that they were in very bad circumstances indeed themselves.
As to the introduction of Poor Laws, it was his belief that in
that part of the country they would be altogether inadequate
to afford the relief required.
Mr. J. GRATTAN would suggest that the Irish Govern-
ment should make such advances as were required, and subse-
quently apply to Parliament to have those advances repaid out
of the Grand Airy assessment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Government had attended to this subject from the time it
was first alleged that distress existed. He could, however,
assure the Hon. Gentleman, that in these matters the less that
was spoken about them the better.—( Hear, hear.) Notwith-
standing the kind feelings which dictated the amendment, he
could assure the Hon. Gentleman that nothing was more cal-
culated to interfere with the good object he had in view, than
a discussion of this description. He would give an example.
Among the first instances of distress laid before the present
Government, was the distress in a part of the county of Kerry.
If Government had openly interfered, the supply of food in
that distsict never would have adjusted itself. But the Go-
vernment, through the instrumentality of others, offered small
bounties for the introduction of food into that part of Kerry.
No sooner was this known, and that there was a deficiency of
supply in that place, than the excess from other places was
withdrawn, and the market adjusted itself; so that within a
fortnight after he had received the application for assistance, a
communication was sent to him that the people of the district
hoped the Government would not meddle in the matter, as
things were already set right. With respect to Mayo, there
was every disposition to meet the case which required the in-
terposition of Government ; but if the House were to inter-
pose, they would be burdened with a responsibility, the end
or consequences of which never could be calculated. The
Ikon. Gentleman might be assured the Government would not
relax in their efforts to remedy the distress, but he would re-
peat, that this was a subject of all others on which the greatest
possible caution was required to prevent the benevolent inten-
tions of Hon. Gentlemen themselves being defeated.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought that it would be better to em-
ploy the people on public works, than to grant them gratuitous
relief. That would be doing a permanent good, as well as
affording present assistance.
Major BE AUCLERK hoped the Irish Members would,
early next session, give Ireland that only remedy for her dis-
tresses—a system of poor-laws. He was particularly interested
in this question, having large estates in different parts of Ire-
land ; but he was ready to bear his portion of the burden, for
the sake of the general good.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL believed the distress complained
of was merely local ; at the same time he admitted that it
was quite right that the Government should afford that kind
of relief of which his Noble Friend (Lord Morpeth) had
spoken. But he did not conceive that the House should be
required on every occasion of temporary, partial, or local dis-
tress, to interfere. The people of this country were always
ready to come forward to render assistance when appealed to,
and he was sure that no efforts on the part of Government
would be wanting to remedy the distress that might so partially
prevail. With respect to what the Hon. and Gallant Mem-
ber had said in regard to the introduction of poor laws into
Ireland, without in any way pledging either himself or the Go-
vernment on the subject, this he would say, that, after the
close of the inquiry that was now going on, he thought Parlia-
ment would be in a situation to investigate and discuss that
question with a view to some permanent measure being adopt-
ed ; and he was of opinion, from the progress that had been
made by the Commissioners, it would be practicable to enter
upon that discussion in the course of next session.
After a few words from Lord CLEMENTS and Dr. BALD-
WIN, Mr. S. CEAWFURD consented to withdraw his motion.
CHURCH OF IRELAND BILL.

The Order cf the Day was then read, and on the question
that the House do now resolve itself into the said Committee,
Mr. GOULBURN said that after the decision to which
the House came on the preceding night—a decision which re-
fused to the minority an opportunity for fully considering the
question in the only manner in which he conceived it could
be fairly discussed; he did not think he should be justified in
wasting either his own time or the time and patience of the
House, by offering a variety of objections to the Bill in its pro-
gress through the Committee. He felt that no amendment
whatever could remove the objection lie entertained to the
greater portion of the measure. On the score of appropriation
it could give him no satisfaction ; nothing could reconcile him to
the latter part of the measure which appropriated the pro-
perty of the church to purposes foreign to ecclesiastical pur-
poses; nor could anything reconcile him to re-opening com-
position in any other cases than those of fraud. For these
reasons he should forbear giving the House any trouble in
Committee, and would' reserve his opinions until the period at
which they could be most satisfactorily recorded—he meant
the bringine: up of the Report.—( Hear, hear. )
The question was then put and carried, and the House re-
solved itself into the Committee. The preamble and title of
the Bill were postponed.
Lord MORPETH then stated that there was one alteration
which had been deemed advisable in one of the preparatory
clauses, which it would, perhaps, be better for him
to explain
to the Committee at once. An objection had existed in some
quarters, to which he wished to pay the utmost deference, to
that provision of the Bill which directly assigned the excess
of the reserved fund over and above the purposes set forth in
the body of the Act, to the uses of the Board of Commis-
sioners of National Education in Ireland, as calculated to give
an invidious appearance in the eyes of some, at least, to the
proceedings of that Board ; and though it might. be hoped
that the liberality of Parliament would sufficiently guard
against the fund for the purposes of education falling short
during the necessarily scanty beginning of the reserved fund,
yet it had been inferred that there might arise considerable
impatience in the districts liable to come under the provisions
of the Bill, which might end in producing among the Pro-
testant population very disastrous consequences. He freely
owned that the objection seemed to him more apparent than
real ; yet being of such a nature, and proceeding, as he had
already said, from such a quarter, his Majesty's Government
were desirous to meet it to the best of their ability. They
therefore proposed to alter that destination of the reserved
fund, so far as to provide for the funds payable to the reserved
fund, and applicable to the purposes of national education,
being paid by the Commissioners of Land Revenue to the
Consolidated Fund. They therefore proposed a charge of
50,0001. from the Ist of April, 1836, to be payable out of the
Consolidated Fund by warrant of attorney, for the purposes
of general education among all classes of his Majesty's sub-
jects in Ireland, without religious distinction.—( Hear, hear.)
On the question, " That clause 1 stand part of the Bill,"
Mr. FINCH begged to ask the Noble Lord what he in-
tended by " national education ? "
Lord MORPETH by the term "national education" un-
derstood a plan of education carried on upon the system of the
Board established by Parliament.---( Hear.)
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 2. After a desultory conversation on this clause,
Lord STANLEY rose to make a suggestion to his Noble
Friend relative to the course he proposed to take ; and he was
bound to state that the course proposed to be adopted by his
Noble Friend's predecessor in office, the Hon. and Gallant
Gentleman near him ( Sir H. Hardinge) had been liable to
equal objection. He could assure his Noble Friend that on
that and on all other occasions during the progress of the Com-
mittee, his wish would be to do no more than offer such sug-
gestions relative to the first part of the Bill, as he thought de-
sirable, avoiding all discussion on the second, which he did not
think could be reconciled to his feelings by any amendment
whatever. His first suggestion would apply to that part of
the Bill, commonly known as the ascending and descending
scale. He wished to point out to his Noble Friend a proviso
which he wished him to consider before they came to the
fifth clause, by which he would see that a gross injustice
would be inflicted on a class of men to whom no compen-
sation whatever was awarded. He apprehended that they
had one end in view which was common to all parties ;
namely, that the person having a permanent interest in the
soil, and not the occupying tenant, should be the person
chargeable with the payment of tithe, or tithe composition, or .
the rent charge lieu of tithe. This had been the common
object of all their legislation from 1823 down to the present
period. The Committee would allow him to remind them of
the course of proceeding in 1823, when the composition for
tithe was first introduced. The Noble Lord, after stating the
previous state of the law, said that in the Bill which he had
the honour to introduce, it was provided that in all future
leases, the persons granting the leases should guarantee the
tithe to the clergyman, and be liable to the clergyman for the
amount. That was likewise the object of his Right Hon.
Friend in the present Bill ; but the difficulty was in regard to
current engagements and leases. For it was a hardship that a
middleman should be made liable for the amount of the tithes,
which he was obliged to draw in small payments, without any
adequate remuneration. The only question was, how this
could be remedied. Suppose the case of a landlord, having
his whole estate in the hands of three middlemen, who have
fifty subtenants each under them. In that case, if the middle-
men are solvent, the landlord runs no risk, and still he has the
deduction allowed by the Bill, But what was the case with the
middlemen ? They were called upon by this Act to recover
from the tenants the tithe, which they never covenanted to do,
and they had no compensation for the risk and trouble. With
regard to the landlord, he had a permanent interest in the
lands, and the advantages held out to him by the Bill amply