The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-13 00:00:00

ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND.

Captain BERNAL begged to put a question to the
Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the
Home Department, of which he would have given notice
had he thought that there would be any difficulty' in
answering it. It would be in the recollection of the
House, that the Noble Lord the Secretary fur the
Colonies had made a quotation on a previous
night from a letter of the Irish Attorney-Gene-
ral, in which he charged the counsel for the
traversers with having made a systematic attempt
to excite him to commit a breach of the peace. He
wished to know whether the Right Hon. Baronet had
any objection to lay on the table a copy of the letter in
question ?
Sir J. GRAHAM—Most certainly. The letter was
not within his control. It was'a private letter, addressed
to his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland. But he
felt great pleasure, however, in informing the Hon. and
Gallant Officer that he hoped, in eight-and-thirty hours,
to sew the Attorney-General for Ireland in his place.
Capt. BERNAL gave notice that he would shortly
draw the attention of the House to the subject.
Mr. E. ELLICE, jun., inquired whether it was the
intention of the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham)
to introduce, in this present session, a Bill for the better
division of parishes in Scotland ?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said his Learned Friend
the Lord Advocate would certainly introduce a measure
on that subject.
In repty to a question from an Hort. Mummt, whose
name we could not learn,

The CHANCELLOR' of the EXCHEQUER stated
that, in consequence of some communication which had
passed between himself and the authorities of Man
chester, a Bill would shortly be introduced for the bond-
ing of goods for home consumption, and to that Bill he
should give his support, on the condition that Man-
chester should bear the expense.

THE FISHERIES.
Captain PECHELL wished to put a qtkstion to the
Right Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury,
with respect to the fisheries. In the year 1839, a con-
vention was entered into between this country and
France, which ended in the preparation of certain regu-
lations, which were to be submitted to the Governments
of both countries. An Act of Parliament had passed
the Legislature of this country confirming those regu-
lations, and he wished to know what course had been
taken on the part of France, in order that our fishermen
in the English Channel might know in what position they
were now placed.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he should be very glad to
give to the Gallant Officer every information in his
power. The Hon. and Gallant Officer would recollect
that the Governments of France and England were
in a different position at the time when the Convention
between the two countries was agreed upon. At
that time the Paliament of this country was sitting,
whilst the legislative bodies of France had closed their
proceedings. Therefore, it was impossible for the
French Government at that time to propose a
law for giving effect to the provisions contained
in the convention. The French Government had
certainly another power, which was not recognised in
this country—the power of issuing ordinances during
the period when the Chambers were not sitting • but
even this power was not sufficient to give a full and en-
tire effect to the stipulations agreed upon. He was happy,
however, to say that he had been advised, on authority,
that a projet de lei had been prepared by a Committee
to be submitted to the French Chambers, and that there
was every reason to hope that no unnecessary delay
would occur in obtaining the requisite legislative sanc-
tion in France to the provisions of the Convention.
Captain PECHELL would be glad to know, supposing
it was found that the provisions of the Convention were
not sanctioned by the French Chambers, whether the
Right Honourable Baronet (Sir R. Peel) would lay the
entire matter before the House in such state as it might
then happen to be ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL was. certainly of opinion that
the subjects of this country, in such an event, would
have a right to every information connected with the
subject.
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) COM-
MISSION.
Mr. ROSS said the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel)
would recollect the question put to him the other night
by the lion. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) to know
whether he had any objection to place some tenant-
farmers on the Landlo.o avid Tenant Commission, in order
to dissipate the suspicions which undoubtedly in some
quiwieDs attached to it. When the Right Hon, Baronet
expressed his doubts whether such tenant-flirrners could
be found to undertake the duty, he (Mr. Ross) had been
of opinion that plenty could be found. The next morn-
ing he (igr, Ilo,ss) had received information which satisfied
litrn that in the west and south of Ireland Iblenty of
tenant-farmers, with rents varying Acorn 2,000 L to 4001,
or 3001., could l iWnd v filling to undertake the duty.
'INW "Wit lion. Baronet expressed an inclination rather
iA yield to the wishes so expressed by the Hon. Member
for Finsbury. The question he wished to put was,

whether, as there was no difficulty ie. find'
ing respectable tenant-farmers to act upon the
Commission, without salary, the Right Hon. Baronet
- would consent to nominate some ; and, „lpposing his
answer to be in the negative, whether lie v. ,orisent
to associate some of the humbler class of v,ith
those already named in the Commission, paying them for
their 'time and trouble ?
Sir R. PEEL said the Hon. Gentlemen must have
misunderstood the answer which he (Sir Robert flee!)
gave the other evening to the questi,,n of tie. llp 7'
Member for Finsbury (Mr. it.Voliley.
and 11:?, thoug7it he did '..fty on th t oe
not pr.:pared a) agree to a:ly al_terat:oa :11
tion of the Commission. The Commission had made con-
siderable progress in their labours, indeed he had reason
to suppose some portion of their Report would soon be
ready, and he was, therefore, not prepared to sanction
any interference with it. •
Mr. ROSS said he thought the Right Hon. Baronet
had not answered in a satisfactory manner the second
part of the question put to him—namely, whether the
humblest class of the farmer-tenantry were to be e%a"
mined before the Commission ?
Sir R. PEEL said that he was most anxious to Con'
suit the opinions of all classes ; but still he thought
that the object of the Commission would not at all be
served by the indiscriminate admission of such evidence
as that alluded to by the Hun. Member.

THE GAME-LAWS.
Mr. BRIGHT moved for a return of the number efa
persons who had offended against the game-laws, au,
had been convicted at the several sessions throughoa"
England and Wales during the year 184 a, sped
the punishment and penalties inflicted. and in w°3
county and upon whose property the alleged offence W 5
committed.
Lord J. RUSSELL wished to know whether the
Commission upon the land tenure in Ireland was in-
structed to report generally upon the subject, or to re'
port upon only one branch of it, and if so, was that Per'
ticular branch left to their own discretion?
Sir J. GRAHAM, who spoke in an extremely 101
tone of voice, was understood to say that the nature o
the Report was left wholly to the discretion of the CO'
mission.

FRAME-WORK KNITTERS.
Mr. FERRAND said that during the last session he
had presented petitions from upwards of 25,000 franc!:
work knitters, complaining of the injustice done w
them by their employers, and stating that the last Corn•
mission had been productive of no good results to Oleo'
They now prayed for another Commission.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that at the last Commission
gentleman named Mugeridge presided, and the fillies
inquiry had been entered upon.
Mr. FERRAND said, that those people complainhet
t
of the appointment of this gentleman, as
Commission gave great dissatisfaction to them. :t
Sir J. GRAHAM defended this gentleman's age'''.
ment.