The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-05 00:00:00

IRISH FREEMEN.

Colonel CIIATTERTON wished to ask the Right
Hon. Baronet the Secretary for Ireland if he had any
objection to introduce a clauke into the Irish Registration
Bill, giving unresident voters residing within the bounds
of the county the right of voting.
Sir WILLIAM sOSIERVILLE was not prepared
to give such au undertaking, but it was open to the
Hon. and Gallant Member to move such en amendment,
and take the sense of be House upon it.
IRISH REGISTRATION BILL.

The House then into Committee on this Bill.
On the question being put that clause stcond, as
amended, should stand part of the Bill,
Sir R. FERGUSON believed there was a very general
feeling among the Irish Members that the introduction
of a franchise for joint rating, in counties, would be a
most mischievous and perilous institution. It would give
rise to the most fearful subdivision of the land, and he
hoped the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) would not press
the clause.

Lord J. RUSSELL was anxious to hear what:the
opinions of the Irish Members were.
Mr. REYNOLDS said the Hon. Baronet (Sir R.
Ferguson) had stated that a system of franchise from
joint rating would be attended with great subdivision of
the land. He (Mr. Reynolds) believed it wohld have a
very different effect, and that effect would be, that where a
farmer was rated at any sum that would give a double
vote, his son would vote as well as himself in the same
way that mercantile partnerships did in boroughs
fir the property which they held as partners.
He trusted that the omission of this clause would still
be made, and he was OA to hear that the Noble Lord
had declared that he was ready to abide in all, or at
least most matters of detail, by the opinion of the Irish
Members.

Colonel DUNNE would have been inclined to support
the clause, but that he saw that it would inevitably t‘md
to reduce instead of extending the franchise in Ireland,
and he felt compelled therefore to support the amend-
ment.

After a few words from Mr. FITZPATRICK in ar.
proval of the systm proposed,
Mr. FAGAN said that in his county there were a
great number of joint occupancies, and unless the privi-
lege of the franchise were extended to those joint occu-
pancies the whole project of the Bill would be defeated.
Mr. GROGAN said the effect of this clause would be
the sub-division of properties in Ireland.
Dr. POWER supported the clause. He could not in
the least see that what was anticipated by the Hon.
Member opposite would be brought about by this Bill.
Mr. GRATTAN hoped that the Noble Lord would
not be de:erred by all this talk from carrying out the
clause.

Mr. FOX thought that this clause would give oppor-
tunity in many instances for farmers to subdivide their
property in order to give a voto to their sone or
brothers.

Mr. CLEMENT'S supported the amendment.
Under all circumstances it was very desirable that this
clause should be expunged.
Mr. SADLEIR said the Noble Lord at the head of
the Government must at once determine upon
withdrawing or retaining this most important
clause, as it was totally impossible to obtain
anything like unanimity upon a subject of this nature
amongst Irish Members. It was purely a politi-
cal question, and unanimity could, therefore,
not be expected ; but he thought it WRS highly
desirable that the chose should be continued. The
Irish Reform Bill had failed to carry out the inten-
tions of the Legislature, and as, after all, this Bill
would only give Ireland a stunted and meagre con-
stituency, they could not afford to sacrifice this clause.
The 5/. franchise in fee, irrespective of occupancy, and
the occupation franchise were both objectionable. How
could the House check corruption by enlarging the
number of voters out of the land in connexion with
actual occupation and residence? Under the operation
of this Bill, even with the retention of clause 2, there
would be a very scanty constituency afforded to the
people of Ireland. The joint tenancy bad been
long enjoyed by the people of England, and
who had heard of its being abused in England?
He was aware how much these clauses were likely to
operate to the disadvantage of the seseral tenants in Ire-
land, and how likely they were to work to the disad-
vantage of the joint occupants of land in that country.
Clause 102 appeared to him useless and pernicious, and
calculated only to do injury to the Irish tenantry, with-
out
being of the slightest service to the English '
contributor.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that there were few subjects
connected with Ireland with regard to whieh any
sufficient information was possessed by English Mem-
bers, and he, for one, felt himseT in considerable
difficulty as to what he should do. All, then, that he
could do was to appeal to the Noble Lord at the heed of
the Government to state what the effect of this clause
wai intended to be.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that be had received

V.?,

bast
veral sugasstiors from Irish Members that t ,te
claims would be very injurious in Ireland, but sine° .1'
le
Bill had come uneer discussion be had 5°
aereement arrona Irish Members that he bad resolved- r:
abide by his original determination.
Mr. STAFFORD congratulated the Noble Lord on
the determination he had expressed cf not taping tulY
adThe vice AT in that side of the House. that the
TORNEY-GENERAL considered
evils pointed out by the lion. Gentleman vrould
r( merited by the omission of the clause, but, ea the ccu
trary, would he rather increased. es, the
Mr. HERBERT observed that the case Put -lamed
Learned Attorney-Genered was where the 'lulu's
-1;e
took no interest in his tenant, whereas the Cti° petl'h‘t
his lion. Friend the Member for Nuttingbans
is ot,
tieo landlord who did take an interest in his
clause if
and was anxious for political influence. The e`e—ise in
carried would open the door to jobbing, and rest! uhi
danger to the social condition of Ireland, and he sue
certainly ()rpose it.
Mr. lIUME said they were not discussing the Pr.e:
1
priety of giving landlords votes, but of extending 07.
franchise to the tenant, end es the smell farmer Ivl the
titlid to it as a matter ef right, he should suPPerthey
clause. Let the electors have vote by ballot and
might set at nought the influence of landlords On ro
ore hand and the priest: on tho other. He hoped
Government would persevere with the clause. 00s
Mr. SCULLY thought this was a national, ane
unio,
a mite borough, question. Ile contended th
during its progress, had been opposed factiously. ie.
Viscount CASTLEREAGH opposed
They were, by this Bill, altering the whole constituea Y
if Ireland, no data to go upon.
After some observations from Mr. ROEBTJCIC., the
Sir F. THESIGER congratulated the House on re.
consideration the Government had given to the me
—(Cheers and laughter.) Ile thought the .Noble
at the head of the Government had givensl
this clause, but, finding that some of the er'sa
Members would support him, be bad Stooped
down and picked up the clause that be
but shortly befsre thrown away.--ealang"te ot
the ells%
lie would serious') ask the Noble Lord whether or
great mischief would result from the adoption of
W.'
clause?—(Hear, hear.) aid
Colonel RAW DON believed that the clause age
greatly increase the constituency of Ireland, aDia
greatly
therefore support it. Ha felt that the .ent
would be good for nothing without it, and he had sufdel,e"at.
confidence in the people of Ireland to feel assured
they would not abuse the benefit it gave them• t the
Mr. ANSTEY said it should be remembered theacy
qualification given by that Bill was one of ()WTI re-
and not one of tenancy. He thought that the fact Id be
quiring that the party claiming the franchise shou•
ree'
rated to the amount of 81. would ho a sufficient P
tion against abuse. rest
Mr. SHEIL said that at present there existed A g.OO
evil in Ireland connected with the systems of de
votes. That evil way, that a landed propietor could
grant nominal annuities to five or six stms or ne,Penegh
who were entitled to be placed on the registry, 3:tco-vgil
they derived no real benefit from the land, and all-great
they occupied no portion of it. That was a ver
evil for which there existed no remedy. Now, 'lu;
ta-hose
it was possible that abuses might arise under that ewes
—and he knew no system which was not liable to their
—there would et all events be two checks against f to.
occurrence; one of these checks was that each o.eb of
parties should be rated; and the other was that ff- the/
them should occupy. But, on the other bane, ereat
were to deny e right of voting to joint occupiers ';',o in
injustice would be done to many of the tradesmsehss
towns.— [An HoN. Mamma on the opposite heolisted
here observed that that portion of the Bill r; that
to to county franchise only.] He was °carsore
it related to the county franchise only. Bat therowo„
mbearnsy,
aliaaeigye,htooswenisllhinablitraenlathed
bwandichverryeturned no
votes
Pr°Pe
for the county representatives. The townsienfrbisifhlit tirteaaelets;
and of Carrick, for instance, had each 12,000
and returned no Members. Now, in these townstreral
in all callers similarly circumstanced, there were 5e were
Joint occupiers care) ing on trade together ; and
of the
those men, he would ask, to be wholly deprived
close
franchise? He did not deny that under that tidos
some abuse might arise fie m the creation of gewauld
votes, but he believed that preponderance of evil the,
to found to lie in its rejection. He would rew"-4.40ra
Noble Lord the Member for the county,.DOwn.,aosts
Castlereagh) that the mere the number or constt'v ea
electione a s extended thea3 snore (
c) rfe
fictitious difficult wvooutieds it
Candid
tSdciiatl'eis.-s
ice .
seats in that House would then t eve to fish.with net
stead of fishing with lines.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL supported the clause. Or
Mr. SADLEIR said he believed the Noble Loirtaisea
Member for the county of Down was much rn`e„seiell
as to the increase in the number ( f Irish voters_ Noble
Lord that in attempting to arrive that Pill would produce.
at a car be
elusion upon that :point no reliance cote!
ptolaetehde House. In the
he had the honour to represent,
sti!uents
had a short time e,
tutrhnes
borougha,hich hoafd been Pregobich
Carlow; the:aons
alphabetical list furnished to the House they ot the
rcriovueld assure theot
cor
calculated at 445; but he had ascertained irdtbbteoart three's4(s'°;;33la;edinb Etebli:
persons named in that list were put down, tee°, .oted,
eavnedntthoautr
thetimes
c,
toutahlernsuhmadbedri eodf, and others had migrate
e
stbeoonratos
shape,
arbtpaoei
entitled to vita was only 235. PHerr hessdintaktchne tb rtihn:
amonittt.o
n
f
ibepi.nion of the Noble Lohred in the
i,Eane:sia.Eydhrial3Alotioewwso•at.eiindufu.itudhdabttehßtahtiel
tl
hnweuyemr ev,h,eotruo
ledpf aasvi lobe reillsiloop roes;
clause— ‘lorefi(viei t cheeka rconcur otter
)i.ra favouriea
sof
onetheef ot
hrt6ei °hwileb
ewd eotiri
in favour of an extensive franchise; and if e tag,
l'(aLsorddisiersteudssteoll) at a utir that
opportunity cf giving his vote the other o
01 i'ne tor
should have voted for an 81. franchise instead tt des
chine of 15/. But at the same time he we° ib°o°uld be/
sirous in eivi that extensive franchise that its hilt
a bona fide one—(Hear, hear). He belielei "of the
should by that means be fulfilling the intention fir as
legislature; but, above all ho should attempt crest'e
ing
iossfiibelteittoudsisvcootteirs_ag(lla
etheatr. hear),abomir thole system °levee .
th
which system, under the 40s. freeholds,bee
only much of the laxity and corruption of
in sttr of the:
in respect to elections in Ireland, but also re"-Ygo a--
social evils of that country.—(Hear, bear.) toot'
jjthea
wt
willing to admit that if there were bonafidePint ;titance'
—that was to sty, that if three persons, tor
em esaS
ot tookat rentfa willing
( gustily responsible to the landlord for the PaYinsesch
,rmhean:ips
li.sidilleiOn/g. of rent, and if each of th
ot of
those tenants should be etentaidtlmedittothvaotteil!
55 ins
also to admit, that if a number of partners Were a if sitel
on a manufacturing establishment together, a n capita'
of them contributed bona fide a certain ansount rho fra°'
to the concern, they were all fairly entitled 1001
chise. But he should confess that Lo aPPrneccuViett
great deal of abuse from giving to each joiti.lll' jottrahr
Gentlemen mht bar rated a right to vote. When `...° ;Witted4
gued that question, they coneled ..
talking of each tenant.-(Hear, hear.) resPebea
that each bona fide joint-tenant, who was equalifosed in
shale wifh others for the rent, ought tee e allowed
law
place his name on the registry. That as „oisg
England and in Scotland. But they were rietea_se; the/
impose the restriction of tenancy or of joint-ten etet'oncY'
used the word occupancy as distinguished win%
although in their speeches they could not he gf
tenancy. It was said that the PaYment-0 °tit
would be a sufficient security against ahtl'omount
matter. But that ho greatly doubted. Theo very' elli,
rates payable on an 8/. rating would not b. 0 tostiorto
siderable. It might be for the interest of 13, so take
h
particularly on the approach of an elects° whic
upon himself the payment of the tenant's ratetill iseel
would amount perhas to Ss. or 10s. TheeYeaot teas
how common it was fora candidate under th o rate, v 4,
lot system of voting to pay up, not only en'teatints
the whole of the arrears of rating due bY a there
°eV'
order to qualify him to vote. He had no , siring eo
fore, that in many cases in Ireland landlordsinueneertl%
multiply their electioneering interest scotilethe pal o°4
tthoepnasytotohde
araltae.ndlloired
rateilgiehatedee:ythat under ,4 011:1
toa tenansua so Ptet
accept your sons as tenants; I Shall becomes`uncloaP o ito
your rates; but I shall require that Ye° f vote ice
occupiers, in order to increase the number „let
•f that, r sea
my favour." All he said was, that a a to
loctrelpBtes
could be established they would introdiuoetted
abuse, and would give encouragement to to to
resort to practices similar to those wt hick freeb7he
veiled under the 40s. freeholds in Iredanunt faolnto
good in the eyes of the law, but as lelifferf,hte for„ to
403. freeholds of England as it was P°s''freeebPrito
franchises to be. lie was ready to giv° he ewutd use sto
jcoeiunitdtneneatnetsp,pbruotveasof"
tohcecueplaanuceye." was the aloe liejeuld
At the s hies W°
should be ready to listen to any proposal „titied,4oo
extend the franchise to all parties fairlY soact°' of
But as then advised, he should come to thous ea
at which the Noble Lord had arrived revision the
before, and oppose the adoption of that prowent of; of
Mr. REYNOLDS thought that the 11, coati° e
rates gave a sufficient protection against of
fictitious votes. tout°greed'
.be
Mr. HENLEY said he wished to eels " 3 then mit'
the Committee to the effect of the clause as of g`ea•
on the power of rating possessed by the "4' joint °yea r'
diens. Let him suppose that there Were isebilejse Wird
pants whose property was rated at SOL? '003e5 rellice•
sons would all be entitled to have theirch of as
uoas
upon the registry; but if, at the aPPrrt e the ae° dise
Lion, the board of guardians should realicuid ue,..
of their rating by a single pound, they iv°„ the Ili not
franchised. Why that was throvting.3 blood e°tlasottld
guardians a temptation which flesh and is
ithstand—(Hear, hear, and laughter)
out of rl„reed•
always be easy to state that the Souse wha:rotae re that
or that the value of the property was ot,,,oo3itteehouto
Then, again, ho would remind thes-es'eoa,
under that Bill a person occupying a lb's" bisot7o ef
might claim to be rated, and reightfi,,titiuus 60600
placed on the regi ryst. Why, the
realbleljea
ent-charges were in no way cons Para e
votes which that system would creatce-tea e ' _now
The Committee then divided when then 144
••• 104
•"
For the clause •P• .e. ,40
Against it ••• ..• "• the P
Majority for the clause a. , eat of.
eotios!
The clause was then ordered to steno V eosin idea
to estates in fee, or in tail, or fa• life, &too'
tthpeerson° 513;010
of IthleethCiredmcmlaitutseee, twhhenichPrpereoeveiddeel tt°hao,
.he rate
of
s 5
ir Is h. oTulidn,h;
sa have
Ev
ms foovre;dc otuhin
aetwisedstd.:, Tiillelbiontue
ing words at the commencement of
rtenfisrer se of,
addition to those qualified by
at any election of a knight of the shire, 09
eajo
„Tecate).
heoer
qualification not requiring
ject in moving that amenatnent vvs.ts'6'itatjar addition
guage of the Bill more complete.
bad been made to the fizet apse.

Si a,
ta;r • SOMERViLLE heti olojeation to the ad-
tun of those we
he4l,(ll,lnlellt was then agreed to.
alto-
Rati,;:th tie
° from
eesits;d2r:
38:-
S i t.‘
f;,111.°, of a leace at a rent, or for to any estate
.1
r-. 01,1 for lives renewable for ev,.r, or estate qillsi in
or
fettug veceb.hd:freehold y 1.:)ould observe that :1 this wag ernitt:7; att)'-rLe:-;.l*ull''
rya of the value of 5/, but a freehold rating as or
berl,l" of 5/. The Right lion. Baronet the, Mem.h-
-e. °I• Tanaworth had shown the CornnaLter;, r,
of't,r9ec to the former clati,e, how obj!;•ctionablo a c‘au.ioer
tittbliiu_lB description was with regard to the power of
ug Which it g the gave t the guarcliaus of the poor, e-
to
create fiztitious votes; because a party
ht held; freehold which might not be o' the value of
Areaa ureT.IY of 40s• or under that suns, if he coull only
feel mats name to be placed t rate as haldingr.,a
ad,iTt.,-,i(f the value of 51., would to en,itliedintosviottet.h7;
tt4,,e4rrc,dtthha: the charge would be _ - -
right on fro eoollers of iraheritanre, if
PclreflT?Wod it to extend to fr• elplltrs. fur lifa it
,d
him that they would be opentog the door by_
et terl all tae 40s, frecholdors f life could bo revivedp its
inlsnaueh es they would enable them by co ,tiu-
lajan oe put upon the rate as holding freeholds of the
ikCh°ls/. suhmit.ed, there ore, to the Noble Lord,
as "n ' 11.* • -Con to the 40s. freeholder
• rressf ,
de'u! as 1"11i1,g to great at abusrs, whoLlier it w,i.auld,.lr.sot‘
to u• slr'ltili? to ornit these words, and limit the Entre.'
u• sir
to freeholds of inhiritanc,..
Sailni• "RATTAN said the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
Loaralal still something to learn as to the power of. the
had r, el
guardials. The fact was that the guardians
Put :i°•l3"•er ti make' fictitious votes; they could not
ales man upon the re; inter.
clause IlivrcuELL said, the true construction. of the
s
that ia and that intended by those who framed it, aiS_.
friin'esh",e Party entitled to have a vote in respect of a 1
tarred should be a tenant fur his own life of an estate
tr or °,llt of the inheritance. if there were any other4e la4-dweiell would convey the meaning more distinctly,
Sir v.llll objection to sub-titute ta=w.
With , TaESIGER ssid, on looking at the words,
kiettl;a explanation given by the Hon. and Learned
therefer, he found his objection removed, and he would
The°re withdraw his amendment.
Sit.;4,l6'nfluaent was then withdrawn.
l'Ora ' IHESIGER then proposed to leave out all the
111,2 after " hereditanaents," in the 331 line, down to
• nrord if
47r 831 a eta. Instead of providing " that every male
say aea, lull age, and not subieit t s any legal incapa-
to4:uo should be seised of, or entitled for his own use
1144 ntate, legal or equitable (such tenant for life not
to - `es'cai or assignee of a lessee, at a rent), or of
4 anY estate. of freehold for.lives renewable for ever,
teeetestlte quasi in tail, of such freehold in any lands,.
the meats, or hereditaments which should be rated in
the att rate for the time b ing, under the mid Acts for
48 leilf°l•4l afectual relief of the destitute poor in Ireland,.
dtll7‘ the net value of Si. or upwards, should,
Ira
sleetiontegistered, be ititled to vote
,tairteevethye
clause of a knight or knights cf. the b
seised W041(1 run, in the later part, '• that a party-
Itthe or entitled, &c. (as stated in the cleuse), in any
slut Percents, or hereditaments, of the net annual
tie ft-h°a` or upwards, should be entitled to vote," &c.
*ara;;l'd then propose to insert after the word " up-
haat)", the words over and above all rents and charge
sane `e out of or in respect to the same." They. nor?
import 1° a very important point. They all agreed in the
ariS;,,,ae° of making up for the fliciency which had
Prose- tile county constiturney, and the question now
orea‘sutther, in creating a new freehold constituency
etintioe, they would take rating as the test, or have
hith°:a fills freehold qualification of a certain value.
ttresa-tti° distinction had always. .been maintained be-
ak, f Tie franchise in ccunties, in ewes, nod in boroughs,
to th?irruer having always been based on property, rand
vein Principle the Noble Lord at the Lead of the Go-
Itcere-,:11„t gal invariably adtte .od. Now, however, they
orm t-atlued on to declare that property should no longer
'l'ora:'° basis of the qualification, though the Nobled
tQttitt,„"en $o long ago as the Chandos clause, had
111141,-Ted the principle. How would the matter standho
soot
getstut clause ? Clearly, that every person w
61, his name inserted upon the rate to the value
'tia aa°,lllal be entitled to vote, although he might not
sr 1, Puld one farthing, because six months' possession,
4111yeeweiPt of the rents or profits Mire the 16th of
entitle A-43 to be the ground on which a arty was to be
theaaa'4,to registered, and he would be so entitled al-
-118.4,11" Be had Lid no rate whatever between the sth of
beforr/' and the 16th of July, and none might be due
tihr d that period, because he might never till the for.-
• e„a,e have been liable to a payment at all. Take
4 r. again, ors party with a lease for life renewable
ac 1:19 might be rack-rented, and possess, in fact,
Pesti" shilling's worth of beneficial interest in the pro-
-42(1 Yet would be entitled to vote if he ware rated
`tre ah's", gain, suppose a person burrowed money to buy
eta-acluli and n mortgaged it to its full amountasuc oht
Noe sigh hathe put on the register, and yet would n
tlthusss °rlc farthing of beneficial interest in the land,
hand
~.%11111:1‘' Paupers would acquire the franchise. T
'"uttearrobattly find landlords and mortgagees too ready
alli to !Ay the rates at the time of a general election
;yti 3,u entire principle on which the county franchise
reli/sfl would be destroyed. He feared the Noble
pat fr-a‘4 Changed his views on this subject. It was said
late .°lll a waste and renewal of our bodily
tites;' et the end of seven years not a particle of cur bo-
4ttie utlaai"ed; but the mental changes which men some-
-41163t witnessed were infinitely more extraordinary. One
Go•
rehtheY saw the Noble Lord at the head of the
I,%te fl.-411;teat throwing the Conservative shield before
‘ilsaii-;,!,oente Act waeo assailed by the ll?nourahble,
ellte a‘‘'` ter Montrose, and the very next night t
43111 Noble L atcl craning forward to support. .a
'of the •ofinitaly more de tructive of the
dprbincigee
aliorajtsform Act than anything propose_
▪ra Zinter,—(Hear.) He could assure the Noble
oble
awhie4""Ot he viewed with great apprehension the course
"thia,le waa pursuing; for if he went on loosening
tlce&-•"111R the reins according to iho exigencies of the
eY01:1-1' he would find himself at last dragged headlong
Zliteta!e who favoured a downward tendency in our in-
'`uvore-a", and were desirous of infusing into them a
mealocratie leaven.—(Hear.) He called on tbe
`the C tlrd to resist such influences; and he called upon
altitaa"lalittee, if they created a new 5/. freehold con-
/40'11,1°Y: to make it a bone fide one.
*ititlitr'i'• RUSSELL said, the proposal was to give the
•rv), v°"ing to persons who had property valued at
:Itata" 'far' 'lnd were owners either in fee or who had an
se• hi- for life to that amount. He owned that appeared
a4t,stetila4Troposal not open to the objection urged by the
;Lilt tai-1)41 Learned Gentleman; and except in the case
atneare might be mortgages on property, he thought
fakand Learned Gentleman hat entirely failed to
tha:Lcut a case.--(Hear, hear.) He owned that he
Iltop!'t occupier of an Si. rating, and persons holding
lieal.:3' of the yearly value of 5,/., might bo and were
'auttieft.,' 11'110 might fairly be entrusted with the elective
a`qtte di in in Ireland. The Hon. and Learned Gentle
'ill 6'4' not insist on maintaining the Irish Reform
atitra",. all his integrity, but gal concurred in making
en -I°llB in that law. No ono denied that alters-
wa
aa4oves„ t necesaary, and upon consideration the
ct'aettle amen,
had conic to the determination to
"kraue Principle embodied in this Bill, which ap-
Ikekti:i to them to furnish a sufficient, but by no means
:stlalele number of electors, whosa electoral rights
e`teasa", founded on property.—(Cheers and counter
'l„st ,-„%) He did not mean to say cases of abuse would
14seti;Ts but did not they happen in England and
4t11.413' 4130? by no means agreed with the lion.
billerattattiled Member in thinking that these persons on
ttsea;` was proposed to confer the franchise would be
aavea wlthout property. On the contrary, he be-
rty'-"eY would be found to possess sufficient pro-
-laq dad that degree of intelligence and respensibility
wa,°ll,ld enable them worthily to exercise the fran-
iriskpesat`ue Hon. and Learned Member said that the
Ott °f the Government was more dangerous than
oatr‘ue a few nights ago by the Hon. Member for
:Pt this He would not now enter into a comparison,
aetatkrta he would say, he did not think the best way of
a/ttre inlng our institusions was to refute reforms which
f-t 414- themselves useful, and which were founded on
"ta Ailrhiciples. He was tild at the time of the Re-
.ehtlit-'1.3 that the Conservative line of conduct was to
hev 411rtiorna He had, however, lived to see the time
thlt the
14 t moat Conservative statesmen
the 'eB had been swept away by the Reform Act in
ideas th„-volutionary times. Therefore ho had come to
ilttistrion with respect to this Bill and many other
0146'445-that those who conceived themselves to be
e 0 leers conservative were often the most revolutionary.
"'ria 1.4114 Counter cheers.) The best way to preserve
tortszitltations was to do away with abuses.—(Hear.)
Ria ea' MANNERS said the object of this clause was
egeeholders with a 5/. a year holding the right to
*las f• 414 IlOn and Learned Friend (Sir F. Thesiger)
41'1 rtii‘.`l4icl that iheelause, as it now stood, not only gave
istetPlt to that class, but also would bring on the
lei Petal
tit th r e who were not in that position. To this
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Noble Lord did trot address two words.
amend`ITTORNEY-GENERAL said the effect cf the
3tekti: pt. would be to perpetuate the beneficial interest
"'Ale (!r Which this Bill sought to substitute the more
Vatis criterion cf rating
,
ate, ILTON thought the property test ought to
t 1.111%
NoLDs thought the clause would encourage
flirt O 4 of fictitious votes. There was no provision
is't4 ae,P4rtY rated should pay the rate. If he were to
rh4ittkile iilr;!ei to this clause, ho should call it a clause to
tt'illttifactu landlords of Ireland, without any limit, to
se. tire 118 many faggot voters as suited their
etio!.. Skbr,
~Latalß objected to the clause altogether, as
4eae knee increaae the manufacture of fictitious votes.
I°ll thaliclttlent proposed, however, appeared to him to
meant door to the most inconceivable frauds, and the
.„Li„tB adoption would be to substitute the test of
for the test of rating.—(Rear, hear.)
I,orusinittee divided, when there appeared—
,the amendment ... . 30
Against it •
~ 106
••• ••• •••
Orir rrir Majority —76
re Nair j'dESIGER asked whether it was reasonable
taltlfria e that a party should merely be rated without
4,414 itg that he should pay his rates? Ho did not
vyiti.o4wtta, and should therefore propose the following
Iltst a 0
Bat the end of the clause: —" Provided always,
4;11'140,1kb Person shall be registered according to the
N' Of JulB hereinafter contained unless on or before the
lae4Ott, et laY in each year he shall have paid all rates in
eira tnch lands, tenements, or hereditaments due
thlltha„ Pireviouely to the Ist of January preceding."
ej,litit.lt that addition was required in order to make
thalie ~.-,(gltisent with a previous clause.
q 1 a.e vii.‘,(3,,RNEY-G.ENER Al, grid the provision of
na entitle -1,, •
that it p.rty nit :vas
444 the to vote. Now the owner, nut being in all
itUteLectipier, could not be rated, and could be
" Pay the ranee due.

Mr. REYNOLDS tLo'ight the amendment fair and
roasonable, arid if the Right lion. and Learned Gentle-
man divided he should vote Iviih `,in., as it woubi
be
some protection a.;anst the manufacture of fictitious

votes.
Mr. SCULLY would support the clue as it stocd,
as the object was to increase the franchise. He sug-
gested that the amendment should be altn-ed to the•Ac
word; :—`• Provi(qed that all rates due upon the premi-
ses ,hall bo iy-jd."
Mr. HAMILTON said tt e objection to that w(uld be
that if the te::ant in possession did not choose to pay he
might disfranchise the owner. Might it not be provided
that payment should be made from all occupiers who
wore orei.ers ?
Mr. SADLEIR thought that would be a reasonable
provisor.
Mr. F. FRENCII oljceted to the vote being made
conditional upon the layment of rates, when there were
legal means of enforcing their psyment.
Sir F. THESIGER sugtlested the postponement of
the matter tritil the Government had bed an opportunity
of considering his suggestion.
Sir \V. SO AEII,VILLE said the law officers of the
Crown would take the matter into their consde:ation.
The clause was then agreed to, as was also clause 4.
On clause 5 being read.

In answer to Sir R. FERGUSON,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the clause writ
further than tie former Act of Parliament, and [rovith.d
that parties residing and having property within the
limits of the borough should also have a vote for the
county.
After some desultory discussion as to the interpreta-
tion ( f the clause,
Mr. lIILDYARD thought no person should he en-
titled to interfere in the county election if his property
was situated within the borough.
Sir G. GREY objected to narrowing the provision's of
the Bill to that extent, as it would be a very important
alteration. The effect would be to disfranchise parties
residing within the limits of the borough, and would be
introducing a new principle altogether.
Sir D. NORREYS having declined to press his
amendment,

The clause was agreed to.
On clause 6, relating to occupiers of lands or premises
rated for the poor rate, being proposed,
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON moved the insertion of cer-
tain words to secure the rights of existing voters.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE was opposed to the amend-
ment, as it would have the effect of conferring the
franchise upon many who might not be subject to the
poor rate:.
Mr. F. FRENCH supported the amendment.
Lord J. MANNERS wished to understand distinctly
what were the intentions of the Government on this
point. If the Bill was to be framed in such a way as to
disfianchiso the existing voters, the authors of it ought
to say so at once, in order that the Committee might
know how to proceed in the matter.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. REYNOLDS asked whether it was the intention
of the Government to throw the freemen overboard?
The Right Hon. Baronet said it was not. It should be
observed that by the first clause, which had already
parsed, the hill had deprived a large and respectable
class of householders of the franchise—namely, those
who were registere I under the 101. beneficial interest.
Mr. O'FLAHERTY supported the amendment.
Sir F. THESIGER said that it was his object to pre-
serve the existing franchise. He did not think this Bill
ought to he views d es a substantive Reform Bill, but
rather as a supplemental 11111.—(Hear, hear.) He was
desirous that the principle involved in the amendment
should have been recognised in the first clause.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that the same principle
which had been recognised in respect to counCes he pro-
posed should be adoi_ted in reference to boroughs.
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said that all he desired was
a declaration that they did not intend to disturb the
existiez franchise.
In answer to a question from Mr. SADLEIR,
Sir G. GREY said he apprehended that the existing
right) of the were occupiers of 101. homes were to be
sisept away, and the franchise to be henceforward de-
clared upon the basis of poor-rate liability.
The amendment, as we understood, was then agreed to.
Mr. GROGAN proposed in line 25 to omit the words
any laud, tenerneuts, or hereditanaerits." He thought
that these words, if allowed to pas, would had to
much doubt, uncertainty, and litigation. A claim might
be said to arise out of mere waste laud by the clause as
it stood.
S.r F. THESIGER asked whether it was proposed,
under this clause, to confer a title to vote from two or
more houses, warehouses, or shops ? He presumed
it was not. He thought it better to omit these words,
or to explain these general words by specific words to
fsilow them. _ _

Sir D. NORREYS deprecated the idea of having out
these words.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said that the English Act
differed from the proposed Bill by the addition in the
former of the very remarkable words " or buildings."
If he could get the amount of rate reduced low enough
for the franchise, he should no be disposed to object to
the addition of these words in the proposed Bill.
Colonel DUNNE thought that this Bill as it stood
would restrict the franchise considerably. He hoped
that the Government would alter the union of different
tenements to make up the franchise. There might be,
for instance, a little land in one place, and a house or
other tenement in some other p"a?.e. He should b 3
inclined to propose that the words " same land" be
stiuck out.
After a few words from Mr. ANSTEY,

Mr. GROGAN withdrew his amendment.

Sir NORREYS moved to omit in elatue 6, all
the words from "or any," line 25, down to " owners" in
line 29 inclusive, and in the same clause to introduce a
provision, that, where an occupier shall bo separately
rated fur several premises of the value of 8/. and up-
wards, the payment of poor-rotes fir any one of such
premises (b, in of the required value) shall be sufficient
payment of rates f rt. registry.
Colonel RAWDON said that instead of striking out
words he wished to add some to the clause.—(Laughter.)
He was desirous to have added these words, " office or
other building."
Mr. REYNOLDS thought that if they adopted the
amendment of the lion. Member for Mallow: they would
be creating a scene of doubt and litigation. He protested
against such a provision being introduced into the Bill,
as it would prove most injurious to the rights of larger
Constituencies.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL hoped the Committee
would refuse its assent to this amendment, as it would
have the effect of making the question they were con-
sidering one of great uncertainty. The clause was drawn
so as to comprehend the two kinds of franchise proposed
to be given. If the Committee would be kind enough to
pass this clause now, so as to enable them to get on with
the Bill, it could be reconsidered on bringing up the
report.
Sir D. NORREYS asked whether it was the intention

to allow the occupiers in a borough, of two houses of the
value, he would suppose, of 41. 105. each, and ri.ted there-
upon at 91., to register a vote?
Sir G. GREY said that it certainly was not the Jaw in
Etig;aud, and he apprehended that the Bill did not pic.,
post, to do anything of the kind in Ireland.
Mr. ROEBUCK wished to know if a prson who held
a shop worth 41. under one landlord, and a stable worth
51. under another landlord, would he in the same situa-
tion with a person having a holding of 81. alone?
The ATTORNEY.GENERAL replied that if no
words were added to the words " lands, houses, or her( -
ditarnents," then the parson would have a right of voting
though he held under a hundred (Efferent landlords. It
was net so under the English Reform Bill.
Mr. ROEBUCK understood that this would be the
effect of the clause as it now stood ?

Tho ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied it would be

so, it the clause stood a 3 it then wa.,; but what would
be the effect (,f the clause he could not say if other words
followed. The revising barrister alone, who decided
everything his own way, could tell that.
Mr. ANSTEY said then he would propose they
should get rid of all words that were admitted to be sm.

plusage.
Sir G. GREY said that what was wished for was time
for consideration; that they should not come hastily to

a vo!e.

Mr. lIILDYARD could not see why property of one
description should have a vote end other property be de-
prived of it. He was opposed to words that were ad-
mitted to be surplusage.
Mr. ROEBUCK was disposed to give the Attorney-
.

Gene al full time to consider, if they agreed upon the

principle—viz., that if the 8/. was to be made up, no
matter how, he was willing the man should have the
franchise. In such case be would give the Attorney-
General full discretion.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said if it were the
general inclination for the House to adopt that principle,
the Government had no objection.
Lord C. HAMILTON thought the Hon. and Learned
Attorney-General should state what he meant by t'ee
words which he now proposed to omit from the clause;
and if by omiting them any ambiguity would be
avoided.—(Hear.)
Mr. GROGAN—If the words, "lands, tenements, or
hereditaments," were to include " house, warehouse,
counting-house, or shop," and it would simplify the Bill
and avoid ambiguity, ho had no objection to the omis-
sion of the latter words. His wish was that they
eheuld adhere to the Reform Bill as far as they could,
making the present measure a supplemental, not a new
Reform Bill.
Sir F. TIIESIGER hoped the Committe) would be
spared at least one division; and with that view sug-
gested that it would be better, as the Government pro-
posed to omit the words, " any house, warehouse, count-
ing-house, or shop," to agree to that proposition in the
first place, and to raise the question before the Com-
mittee upon the other words.
An Hoer. MENDER (who spoke from the Ministerial
benches) said that to strike out the words would make
the clause absolute nonsense.
The words were then ordered to be struck out.
Mr. GROGAN again rose, and moved that, after the
words " lands, tenements, or hereditaments," the words
"occupied by him as tenant or owner" should be inserte J.
Mr. ANSTEY appealed to the Chairman whether it
was competent fir the Hon. Member f Dublin ( Mr.
Grogan) to move the insertion of words which hal el-
ready bnn struck out by the Committee; for the words
" tenant or owner" were among those which had just
been struck out?
The CHAIRMAN—I don't see these words.
Mr. ANSTEY—Yes, the word " tenant" was in the
28th, and " owner" in the 29th, line.
The CHAIRMAN—It was perfectly competent for
the Hon. Gentleman to move the amendment.
The Committee divided, and the numbers were—
For Mr. Grogan's motion . . ... 83
Against it 170
ageiest it ... ... —B7

0.: ~,,,zl,)li tor th-.. 3 Litt the words
" eight. youn(l36" as ithe amount at which the occupier
should be raied to entitle him to the franchise,
Mr. AgXkl.ol4l§ morel an gilea4ment that the

blaelt be filled with the words " five pounds." Referring
to the discussion upon the second reading of the Bill,
the Her. Member then said that on that occasion the
Hon. Meager for Dublin University (Mr. Hamilton)
admitted that there ought to he a distinction drawn
between the qualificetion in counties and fit t in
horottehs. The Hen. Gentleman expressed his opinion
—and that opinion was echoed by meey lien. and
Learned Gentlemen around him—that the ret:ng in the
boroughs ouelit, net to he as high as in the counties.
But they went further, and sail it was too high in the
boroughs; and he hoped the Committee would not deem
him guilty of any impropriety in taking them at their
words, and asking their co operation in inducing the
Government to reduc- the, qualification from Si. to 51.—
(Hear.) If the Si. qua'ifie ition was retained it would
have the elf ct of disepralifying the censtituencies of
several boroughs—such as Poetarliegton, Athlone, Car-
low —a result the very reve:se of what the Government
profresod to effect by the I le.ent Bill. It would also
sweep en ay a large number from the possession of the
franchise in Dublin. The burgess roll in that city had
15,000 voters neon it, of which 4,000 were freemen who
were not required to be householders, and were not
liable to any taxes or local rates. Wes it fair t osards
the property qualification voters to insist upon so high a
rating as 8/,, which involved also the necessity of the
payment of taxes, whilst they maintained so doubtful a
class of voters as the freemen? The Noble Lord the
Member for Down (Viscount Castlereagh) seemed to '
think that under the Bill 20,000 voters would be added
to the constituency of that county. He called upon his
countrymen on the other side of the House net to op-
pose the rneesure rut ther, but to give that support to the
extension of the franchise which it was expected in Ire-
land that they would. In the a hole of the boroughs in
Ireland the conttituctrey would not exceed 48,000 voters
under an Si franchise. Ile, therefore, begged leave to
move that 5/. be inserte I in the clause.
Viscount CASTLEREAGH said that the Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Reynolde) hal completely misunder-
stood what he had stated. He had said that if the Bill
created any increased constituency in Ireland it would
be necessary for the House to interfere so as to increase
the number of Irish representatives.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE hal already stated on a former
occasion that the Government 113CADt to adhere to the
principle of the Bill which they had euhmitted to the
House, and in accordance with that statement he found
it necessary to oppose the motion of his Right Hon. Friend
the Lord Mayor of Dublin. The Right lion. Gentle-
man asked the Government, when they proposed a libe-
ral measure for the franchise in Ireland, why they
stopped short in the case of the boroughs? His answer
was, that the case of the boroughs was by no means as
strong as that of the counties, where the proportion of
electors to the adult male population was but two per
cent., whereas in the boroughs it was 22 per cent. By a
return on the table of the House it appeared that there
were upwards of 48,400 borough-tenements rated above
8/. in Ireland, and deducting one-fifth from that number
for double holdings, it left 38,750 as the number of
tenements. They could not legislate with reference to
any particular boroughs, but should rather have regard
to the whole country; and it should be remembered that
the boroughs also contained other electors, such as free-
men, 401. freeholders, which would be retained by the
Bill, and would be in addition to the 38,000, besides the
double occupants.
Mr. F. FRENCH supported the amendment.
Mr. T. O'I3RIEN also supported the amendment of
the Right Hon. Gentlexan (Mr. Reynolds).
Colonel RA WDON said the Government did not seem
to be aware of the great depreciation of property which
had taken place in Ireland. He was satisfied that a 51.
rating woul I be as fair a franchise for Ireland as a 10/.
eating for England.
Mr. ROEBUCK asked the Noble Lord whether,
taking 101. as the sum on which to found the franchise
in the boroughs in England, 81. bore the proper propor-
tion for Ireland, tilting into consideration the different
circumstances of the two countries? The great mischief
f the English representation was the small boroughs.
Schedule B was the gre at blot of the Reform Bill—the
great source of corruption—and if that were the case,
was the Noble Lord going to evtahlish a similar system
of corruption in Ireland? By placing the rating at 51.
instead of 81., the constituency would be so enlarged as
to render bribery and corruption more difficult. But
beyond that, it would give something like a fair repre-
sentation to Ireland. Where would be the mischief of
adopting the 5/. rating—would it make the constituency
dreadfully democratic? Not at all. The really honest
middle classes of Ireland would hardly be included in
the franchise, or certainly not more than included. If
the 10/. franchise operated unequally in England, it
would be most unjust with regard to Ireland. Ho
therefore trusted that the Irish Members would, by their
rotes, impress this fact on the attention of the Noble
Lord.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said the statue-like silence
observed by the Hon. Members opposite was as well
worthy the attection of the Noble Lord as the remarks
of the Right lion. Geetletnan (Mr. Reynolds), or those
of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Roebuck).
If the Bill bad consisted merely of this one clause, the
Noble Lord would not have seen eight divisions the
other night.—(Hear, hear.) There was not a single
principle on which thef 8/. franchise Lad been justified,
which did not apply with more force to the 51. franchise
for boroughs. It had been said that a higher franchise
than 81. would remove many persons from the register;
but he could assure the House that if they wont beyond
51. for boroughs, the voters would be struck off by keu-
. dreds.—(liear, hear,) The counties of Ira land, with a
constituency of 250,000 persons, would return 64 Mem-
bers, whilst the 39 Members for boroughs would not re-
present a constituency of more than 43,441. Of that
number 19,000 would be found in Dublin, 4,500 in Cork,
and 4,000 in Belfast. The remaining boroughs would
present a wretched minority, ani the only power that
could work on such a body would be the power cf car-
ruption.—(Hear, hear.) It had been said that the re-
duction in towns was not so great as in counties; but he
contended that they were reduced to the lowest ebb.
In Drogheda, with a population of 15,000, the total
number of voters polled in 1847 was 307. In Culls,
with a populatior, including the rural districts, of
106 000, the number polled at the last election was only
1,377. The clause in its present shape would probably
do little harm in the large towns, but in the small
ones it would effect the complete destruction of the

franchise.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir D. NORREYS said the number of tenements
rated at 8/. and upwards on the valuation three or four
years ago was 48,000, and he would put it to any
one whether, since that time, the value had not fallen
from 25 to 30 per cent. He cordially supported the
proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member
for Dublin.
Mr. SADLEIR was of opinion that a 5/. franchise in
boroughs would be equivalent to one of 8/. in counties.
The only protection against a wide-spread system cf
corruption would be to enlarge the numbers of the
borough constituencies, and he believed that it would be
impossible to preserve the purity of constituencies under
300. He lias astonished at the silence of Honourable
Gentleman opposite. They ought to rise above the
paltry considerations of party, and on broad, national
grounds, ought to unite with their countrymen in de-
manding of the Government a broad and generous
fa aechise, compatible with the exigencies of the
country, :cousistcnt with the wants of the boroughs,
and proportionate to the amount of intelligence for
ehich the inhabitants of these boroughs have ever been
remarh able.
Lord C. HAMILTON said that many towns in Ire-
land had risen in imp:twice whilst others had fallen
into comparative insignificance ; end he regretted that
nothing had been done to revise the borough registra-
tions.—(Hear.)
Mr. M. O'CONNELL said that a rating cf 8/. in
Ireland was clue' to a rental of 12/. So that, instead ( f
extending the franchise in boroughs, this Bill would
render the franchise difficult of attainment. He believed
that the franchise proposed by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man (Mr. Reynolds) would be as nearly equivalent to an
SI. franchise as possible.
Mr. SCULLY said that one of the arguments of the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland was,
that the franchise in boroughs in Ireland was equal to,
if nut greater, than that of England. Now, the borough
voters in England amounted to 314,000, in Ireland to
48,000. In England the number of vuters was as one
in five, in Ireland as one in twenty-one. He considered
the 8/, rating equal to a rental, not of 12/., but of 15/,
If a 5/. rating should be carried, the entire number of
voters would amount to 50,464; and as the population of
these boroughs amounted to 800,000, the population
would be only as one in sixteen.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRO MERTON did net think that the pro-
posed reduction of the franchise would lead to any
great extension. He had made a calculation with re-
sE e3t to the English boroughs, and found that, so long
as the payment of rates was made the condition of the
franchise, very little extension would take place.
Lord CASTLEREAGH hoped that some member of
the Government would stet: their views on the subject
of the amendment Wore the Committee went to a divi-
sion.
Colonel DUNNE said the Hon. Member for Dublin
(Mr. Reynolds) had stated that the constituency of
I'ortarlington would be reduced by the present clause to
170. If the Hon. Member in his calculation had left
out the 100 and taken the 70, he would have been
nearer the mark.
Mr. MONSELL hoped the Noble Lord at the head
of the Government, after what had bean stated by seve-
ral of the Irish Members, would allow the Chairman to
report progress. Unless the amendment was adopted, a
considerable diminution of the borough constituency
must be expected.
Mr. S. ADAIR thought any decision as to the pre-
cise terms of the franchise would be premature. A
communication which he had received from a highly
respectable party warranted him in saying that in the
town of Armegh the 81. franchise now proposed would
be equal to one of la value. According to the Poor-
law Investigation last yea-, property in Ireland had
been represented to the extent of between 20 and '25 per
cent. Property which, under the old Act, was rated at
10/, was not now valued at snore than 8/. lie wished to
see a full and fair franchise extended to the people of
Ireland, but doubted very much whether an 8/. rating
would extend the Franchise in boroughs.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the
beheßnetiilfing practically l had
prbaeeetnflrly the
peopamed
with
reiflando, bssibyler' o
eme lying the deficiency in the
lae view,
of i
constituency and plaeing the franchise on a satisfaetory
footing. If hey failed in eff..cting that object the fault
would not rest *WI the Government. With respect to
the county franchise, the number of voters had dimi-
nished to an extent that rendered a consideration of the
whole subject necessary. The Government had consi-
dered the whole matter, including the various proposi-
tions made more than ten years ago, and they had come
to the decision that it was necessary to change the basis
of the f,aechise to a tenure of occupation. There had
toiL appi,„/,(A the same reaon for aping any consider-
able alt ration in the borough franchise. It had been
placed, like the English franchise, at a value of 10/., but
bating taken 81, ratios to; the county had bop

thought advisable to take the same amount for the bo-
roughs. If they had proposed to take it below Si., the
argument used with respestt to having a similarity of
franchise in the two countries would not have had the
same force. With regard to the amendm-rit proposed,
if they took 5/. as the amount of the borough franchise
in Ireland he saw
.no reason why the same sum should
not be taken for England.—(flear.) But that would
be going far beyond the proposition before them.
Various parties in Ireland had given their opinion that
that proposal would be foe the interest of the people,
and it had struck him that their opinion was well
founded. He believed that the proposal they had made
wool I enlarge the franchise, hut that if they had pro-
posed 5/. there would have been little chance of such a
proposal being agreed to. Oa the present occasion the
Committee must deal with the proposal as it thought fit,
but the Government had not made their proposal with-
out great consideration.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER was surprised that Hon. Mem-
bers on the other side connected with Ireland should
state boldly that an Si. rating in Ireland was equivalent
to one of 161. or IS/. in England. He had often heard
the Irish Members complain, when the poor-law ques-
tion was before the House, that Ireland was glievuusly
oppressed by overrating:. How did they reconcile the
two statemeuts?—(Hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK said they were net now discussing
the poor-law. He cluld not avoid feeling astonished at
the statement of the Noble Lord the First Minister.
The Nob'e Lord lett the Committee to deal with the
proposed measure as it thought fit, saying that the Go-
vernment had made inquiries of certain parties in Ire-
land hefire making up their minds on the subject. But
why did not the Noble Lord take the. opinion of the
Irish M,mbers, every one of whom who had spoken had
told them that the Bill would greatly reduce the borough
constituency. ale hoped the Noble Lord would post-
pone further consideration of the question. He would
appeal to the Secretary for Ireland, as the Noble Lord
seemed unprepared to deal with the question.
Mr. M'CULLAGH, in reference to the remark of the

Hon. Member for North Lincolnshire, said the Hon.
Member seemed to forget that the lower the reduction
the greater was the amount of rates levied. If the
Noble Lord would refer to the report on the reduction of
the franchise commission, he would see it stated that—
even before the period of depreciation—not only would
an 8/. franchise strike off a great many 101. occupiers,
but that even a 5/. rating would have the same effect.
Mr. ICERSHAW hoped the Committee would not at
present divide, and that the Government would not con-
sider the question.
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY thought that
if the Government would give any hope that they would
re-consider the question the debate should be adjourned,
but if they gave no such hope the sooner they divided
the better.—(Cries of " Divide.")
Mr. GROGAN said it would be impossible to increase
the constituency much below an 8/. rating without going
to the poor-house.—(Divide.)
Mr. REYNOLDS thought the Chairman ought to re-
port progress.—(Divide.) He would suggest the atten-
tion of the Government to one fact. The aggregate
number of Irish boroughs was 33, the population in
round numbers being about 700,000, while the whole
number of voters was not more than 40,000, of which
number Dublin, Cork, and Belfast claimed 30,000, leav-
ing about 10,000 voters to the thirty boroughs.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared--
Fur the amendment ..• ••• ... 90
Against it ... ••• ••• ... 142
Majority against the amendment... --52
Mr. GROGAN then moved in the same clause to in-
sert after the words " poor rates, the words " grand
jury cess and police rates.
Mr. FORBES thought it was unadvisable to proceed
further with the discussion at that Me hour (then near
one o'clock).
Lord J. RUSSELL said he did not thick the propo-
sition of the Hon. Member would be an improvement to
the Bill.
The amendment was then negatived without a division.
After a few words from Sir R. FERGUSON, the 6th
c'auee, as amended, was then agreed to.
It was then moved that the Chairman should report
progress.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, in reply to an Honourable
Member, that he proposed going on with the Bill again
on Moneay next.
The House having resumed, the CHAIRMAN re-
ported progress, the report was received, and kayo was
obtained to sit again on Monday.
Mr. %YAWN moved for returns respecting the
management of the port of Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
Mr. lIEADLAM opposed the motion, as the produc-
tion of such a return would serve no public purpose.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ... ... 6
Against it
Majority
There not having been 40 Members present, the
House adjourned at a Quarter past One o'clock.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
TA rTERSALL'S.—YESTERDAY.
THE NORTHAMPTONSHIRE STAKES.
6 to 1 agst Mr. Hilford's Harriott, 3 yrs, sst 101 b—t
7 to 1 agst Mr. H. Hill's Osterley, 4 yrs, 7st
12 to 1 agst Sir J. Hawley's Fernhill, 5 yra, Bst 41b
—taken
15 to 1 agst Lord Eglinton's Belus, 4 yrs, 7st 51b
20 to 1 agst Duke cf Bedford's Mahratta, 4 yrs, sst
nib
Harriott was backed for a la-go stake at 6to 1, and
jointly with Osterley at 5 to 2, for two or three hundred
pounds; 700 to 200 was also laid agst them, the layers,
however, refusing to go on.
METROPOLITAN STARES.
5 to 1 agst Mr. Gratwicke's Cheerful, 4 yrs, Est—t
25 to 1 agst Mr. Carew's Eva, 4 yrs, 6st 121 b—taken
We have quoted the only horses backed; the outlay
on each amounted to about 3001.
NEWMARKET HANDICAP.
20 to 1 agst Mr. Frankum's Dolly Varden, 4 yrs,
Est 71b—taken to 201.
TWO THOUSAND GUINEAS STAKES.
9 to 4 agst Lord H. Lennox's Beehunter—taken
11 to 2 agst Mr. Bowes's Mickleton—taken
CHESTER CUP.
The only bets on this event were 1,000 to 50 agst El.
lerdale, 2,000 to 30 agst Horn of Chase, and 1,000 to 15
amt Sir Richard.

DERBY.
7 to 1 agst Duke of Richmond's Ghillie Callum—t
15 to 2 agst Mr. W. Edwards na Bolingbroke
12 to 1 agst Mr. Gratwieke's The Nigger—taken
15 to 1 agst Lord Zetland's Voltigeur —taken
20 to 1 agst Lord Airlie's Clincher-22 to 1 taken
freely
25 to 1 agst Lord Eglinton's Mayors—taken to 1001.
25 to 1 agst Mr. Jaques's Mildew—taken
33 to 1 agst Mr. Bowes's Mickleton—taken
50 to 1 agst Mr. Dixon's Blarney—taken
Ghillie Callum was in general favour this afternoon,
and on a considerable outlay again became first favourite;
7 to 1 was scarcely obtainable at the close. Clincher was
backed freely at 22 to 1, and tho horses returned, for
small sums, at the priers quoted.

AN AMERICAN on the ENGLISH
ARISTOCRACY.
" Your opinion of the upper classes, I am afraid," ob-
served Richard, "is not very
favourable."
" I think they beat us hollow in the sof.-:;awder hne,"
replied Mr. Trumbull; " can't come up to them, no
how, there. When you squat down in a grand house
here, you live at your Case, as if the whole concern
belonged to you; but it requires a windlass to draw a
natural mAn up to the top of their ceremonials. I've
been taking notes cf their modes and habits, and there's
uo end to 'ens. It strikes me, Mr. Rawlings, that though
they have their feet in the clay, like other people, they
carry their heads out of sight up in the clouds. I calcu •
Inv, your aristocracy will take a long time a-drowning."
" But upon the aristocracy afier all," Richard ventured
to interpose, "depends the solidity of our institutions."
" That's a remarkable observation, rejoined Mr.
Trumbull; "it's just like building a house upside down.
That's not the way we
go to work in America. We
make our foundaions in the earth; we base everything
in the people; anti it will be an immortal tempest that
will shako the eternal institutions of the Union. The
thing's impossible, by no means whatever; and when
your monarchies and nobilitie; are scattered like wrecks
upon the great ocean of time, the banner of the Stripes
and Stars will float sublimely over them, and the Re-
public will be heard through all eternity, singing out,
Hail. Colombia, happy land!'
" You really think so?"
" I'm clear convinced of it. What can come of a
country where the principle of representation—the first
law of the universe—is a mere sham?"
" Will you be good enough to explain yourself, Mr.
Trumbull?" said Richard.
" Square yourself then, Mr. Rawlings, for I'm coming
to the clock-works. His Lordship tells me you're going
to have a general election, and being curious to get all
the information I can on the machinery of your com-
plicated society, he lets me see how the wheels aro
greased beforehand. Now it's quite transparent to me
that the elc.t srs have no more to do with it than so
many spades and shovels. They're clawed up and bowled
out long before you come to the poll. That's my specu-
lation on the case. While men like you, Mr. Rawlings,
are waiting to get in at the reg'lar time, when the doors
of the Constitution are to be opened to the public at
large, the aristocracy are letting themselves in at the
private entrance with a latch.key."— The " Ladder of
Gold," in Bentley's Miscellany for March.

THE ROCHDALE SAVINGS' BANK.--The number of
depositors who have fetched their pass-books is 2,697,
39 of whom refused to sign the proposition of the trus-
tees, but several of them have since called at the bank
and signed it. The trustees at present intend to pay the
first dividend about the 11th inst. The petition to Par-
liament, praying "that the deficiency in the funds of the
bank be paid by Parliament, and that a grant be made
for that purpose," has been sighed by 2,470 depositors,
and has ken sent to London for presentation. There is
little doubt that the rest of the depositors will very
shortly sign the proposition of the trustees, and in that
case, the affairs of the bank will be settled without the
intervention of Mr. Tidd Pratt. The amount of the
subscription is 17,0001., and the trustees are yet using
every exertion to increase the amount.—Munchester
Courier.
[ADVERTISE/SIENTI—An Abscess in the Breast
Cured by Holloway's Ointment and Pills.— About three years
since Mrs. O'Flaherty of Mill-street, Cork, accidentally
bruised her breast, for months afterwards the pain increased
; various applications
andwer thee tr
tried
part
without
tgei v
ifearfully l
eastswollen
relief.
Ultimately an ab-
scess formed, discharging a groat quantity of humour, which
debilitated her constitution to an alarming extent ; at this
stage a lady strongly recommended her to try Holloway's
Ointment and Pills, having witnessed their good effects on
former occasions, which advice she followed, and these fine
medicines answered most satisfactorily, for the wound was soon
healed, and her health is now completely renovated.— Sold by
all Druggists and at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 244,
Strand, London.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
HOUSE OF LORDS, March 4.

JIOTLE AND OTHERS V. SIR J. INGLIS COCHRANE.

At the close of the arguments,
Toe LORD CutuicELLon intimated that their L-ird-
ships Nv.ul(-1 take time to consider the case, and
deliver judgment on Monday next.
Thehouse then adjourned.

ROLLS' COURT, March 4.
TIM, LONDONDERRY AND ENNISKILLEN RAILWAY

COMPANY V. LEISHMAN.
Ilk was a demurrer by James Leishman, the de-
fendant, to a bill filed against him by the plaintiff,
praying for a declaration of the Court that the award
arid final certificate of completion of the railway and
other certificates had been procured by fraud; that
the defendant be decreed to deliver them up to the
company, and that the accounts of all the works done
rind materials supplied under the contract between
the parties might be opened; for account of all the
works done and materials msed, with the prices which
ought to have beryl allowed for them in accordance
with the terms of the contract ; and fir an ac-
count of all moneys paid to the defendant on ac-
count of the contract, &c. The bill stated an
Act of Parliament of the 9h of the Queen, for
making a railway from Londonderry to Enniskiben,
and that the plaintiffs appointed under that Act Alex-
ander 111‘lienzie Ross to be the principal engineer;
and the bib then charged that the difference of the
prices of the works executed by the defendant and the
prices charged by him was so large that it would be
found not only that the defendant had received the
full amount of all the works he had done for the com-
pany, but that he had been considerably overpaid, and
that a large debt was due from him to the company.
The bill also charged that the accounts were extremely
intricate and complex, and that the correctness of the
items of the account depended upon circumstances
which could be ascertained only by way of discovery
from the defendant, Leishman ; and it prayed for an
injunction to restrain the defendant from issuing any
attachment, or enfarcing the award, or taking pro-
ceeding under a rule of a court of law which had
been obtained by the defendant.
Mr. Roundell Palmer, Mr. Selwyn, and Mr. Mel-

lish were for the defendant, in support of the de-
murrer ; and Mr. Hetherington, contra, was for the
plaintiffs.., the company.
Lord LINGDALE said he must allow the demurrer,

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
William Bradley, a young man of respectable ap-
pearance, surrendered to take his trial upon a charge
of stealing three yards of velvet, and 171 yards of
silk, the property of George Stagg and another.
Mr. Ballantine and Mr. Huddleston were fur the
prosecution; the prisoner was defended by Mr. Clark-
son and Mr. Parry.
This case occupied the Court several hours, and
the circumstances under which the charge was pre-
ferred appeared to be of rather an unusual character.
The prosecutors of the indictment are Messrs. Stagg
and Mantle, who carry on an extensive business as
drapers and silk mercers in Leicester-square; and it
appeared that on the 24th of Deecember, the day on
which the alleged felony was said to have been com-
mitted, the prisoner had been in their service as shop-
man for a period of four years. Upon the thy in
question, according to the evidence fur the prosecu-
tion, in consequence of some suspicion that was en-
tertained of the manner in which the prisoner con-
ducted himself, a watch was set upon his proceedings,
aed be was observed to cut off a portion of a piece of
velvet, and also to take a silk dress, and he then placed
both the articles between some boxes under the coun-
ter. It seemed that among the customers of the prose-
cutor was a French milliner and dress-maker named
Madame Routens, who carried on her business
in Charles *street, Soho-square, and this lady,
it appeared, had a credit account with the
firm, and on the morning of the 24th of
December a little girl was sent by her to the shop for
some trifling articles, which were furnished to her by
the prisoner, and duly entered. Later in the day a
hoy, also in the service of Madame Routens, went to
the prosecutor's shop to fetch two pairs of gloves and
some muslin lining, and the prisoner served him, and
when he had packed up these articles he was observed
to place the velvet and the silk in the parcel, and the
boy hfc the shop. It appeared to be the custom of
the prosecutor's business that the shopman selling any
article on credit to a customer should immediately
cause an entry to he made by a clerk employed for
that purpose, and it appeared that the prisoner had
cause the gloves and the lining to be entered, but
made no mention at the time of the other articles. Im-
mediately upon the boy leaving the shop he was fol-
lowed and brought back, and the silk and velvet were
found in his possession, and it appeared that almost
at the same moment the prisoner went a second time
to the, entering clerk, and required him to make
an entry of the silk and velvet being sent to
Madame Routens on approval; and it was al-
leged on the part of the prosecution that the
prisoner did not do this until he saw that the boy had
been brought back with the property. Upon the
prisoner being questioned, he asserted that he had
caused the entry cf the goods to be properly made,
and also said that Madame Routens had given him
the order for the velvet and the satin on the previous
day at her own house ; but the prosecutors not being
satisfied with the explanation given to them, gave the
prisoner in charge, and he was examined at Marl-
borough-street police-court, when the magistrate, upon
hearing the defence set up by the prisoner, directed
that Madame Routens should be sent for, and upon
hearing her evidence he dismissed the charge against
the prisoner. It appeared that after this Mr. Hum-
phreys, the solicitor for the prisoner, wrote to the
prosecutors, and applied on his behalf for some wages
that were due to him, and at the same time required
that they should make a written acknowledgment that
there was no foundation for the charge they had pre-
ferred against him, and stating that unless they did so
the only alternative the prisoner would have to clear his
character would be to bring all the facts before a jury.
The only notice taken of this letter by the prosecutors
was to refer Mr. Humphreys to their solicitor; and
it appeared that shortly afterwards the present in-
dictment was preferred before the grand jury; but
on reference to this part of the case, Mr. Stagg
stated that before Mr. Humphreys' letter had been
received, directions had been given to his solicitor
to proceed with the case by preferring a bill before
the grand jury notwithstanding the charge having
been dismissed by the magistrate. The counsel for
the prisoner cross-examined the several witnesses
for the prosecution at considerable length, and en-
deavoured to show that the prisoner had given the
prosecutors warning shortly before the transaction,
and that he was about to set up in business on his
own account in the neighbourhood of the prosecutors'
shop, but the evidence did not show either of the
allegations to be founded on fact.
Mr. CLARKSON, in addressing the jury for the de.
fence, complained of the manner in which the prose-
cution had been got up, and urged the unfairness of
Madame Routens not being called as a witness, when
it was well known that the prisoner had all along
asserted his innocence, and that his lady had actually
engaged him to supply her with the articles in quei•
tion. The Learned Counsel then commented at con-
siderable length upon the facts of the case, and said,
that,it appeared perfectly clear, that this prosecution
was only instituted by the prosecutors in order to
shield themselves from the consequences of the legal
proceedings with which they were threatened on be-
half of the prisoner.
Madame Routens, the lady referred to, was then
called as a witness or the prisoner. She stated that
she had been a customer at Messrs. Stagg and Man-
tle's for nearly five years, and as the prisoner spoke
French he generally served her with the articles she
required, and Mr. Mantle had himself requested him
to pay particular attention to her, and during the last
year
s i
ti
nher and her
and ahalfht eprisoner
husband,ha
abeennd i
theyn th e
werehabi t
on
v
friendly terms. The witness then said that on the
Friday before the 24th of December the prisoner was
at her house, and she requested him to send her the
velvet and silk, the former being required for the
approved
of. She also said that the prisoner came again to her
tnog be returned
aentdarbnaohendencomplained of his not
purposeh having
v house thng e silk
on
supplied
tfph
pemlwi
Sunday,eaadks ieft bonnets
t thatwas
notwere ordered,
but
Mr. BALLANTINE having replied upon this evidence,
the articles in question.
This testimony was confirmed by two other wit-
nesses. The RECORDER summed up, and the jury almost
immediately returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
The prisoner was ordered to be immediately dis-
charged.
Owen Swift surrendered to take his trial for com-
mon assault.
It was intimated to the Court that some arrange-
ment had been effected between the parties, and tbal
the prosecutor did not intend to appear to support the
charge.
Under these circumstances the RECORDER directed'
that a verdict of Not 13cuilty should be entered, upon
an affidavit being made of the service of notice upon
the prosecutor to appear and prosecute.
Joseph Leney and Henry Lenry were indicted fur
wounding Ephraim Jacobs with intent to do him
grievous bodily harm.
Mc. Meller prosecuted ; Mr. W. Cooper was fir
the defence.
The prosecutor, who is the landlord of the White
Horse public-house, Spitalfields, proved the assault-,
but at the same time said he believed the prisoners were
a little excited by liquor at the time, and that they
did not intend to do him any serious mischief. He
added that he had known them a great many years,
and they had always been on friendly terms up to the
time of this transaction, and he had no desire to press
for a severe punishment upon them.
The jury found the prisoners Guilty of a common
assault, and they were sentenced to be imprisoned in
Newgate for 14 days, and at the expiration of their

term of imprisonment they were ordered to enter into
their own recognizances in 40/. each to keep the peace
for one year.

NEW COURT.
(Thfure Mr. BULLOCK.)
John iulucarthy, aged 40, clerk, was convicted cf
stealing the sum of 40/, the property of his masters,
Henry Dolan and others. Mr. Woo:lett prosecuted.
The facts of the ca3e were these :—The prisoner
had been for twelve months in the employment of the
prosecutors, who are the army agents of St. MArtia's-
lane, and was sent on the 4 h of February with a
cheque for the amount in question to the CJrnmtrc:al
Bank, where he got it cashed and aisconded.
Nothing was heard of him until the 15. h, when he
went to the p slice-station in an intoxicated state and
gave himlelf up, alleging that he had lost the money.
The prisoner made the Same d:f.•nce this day.
The G)UItT sentenced him to eighteen month; ira •
prisonment and hlrd labour.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.

William Stephenson, a clorliinihe C4meral Post-
office, was clurged, before Mr.ll, with stealing
three letters, supposed to contain
Mr. Peacock, the Solicitor to the Post-office, pro-
secuted.

John Ford, a messenger in the e3tablishmenf',
proved that he was set to watch the prisoner in the
discharge of his duty, as A clerk in the inl3nd
dr-
partment, shortly before nine in the morning.
While so engaged he saw the prisoner take up a letter,
examine it, tear off a corner of the envelope, and
shake it ; aftet which he put it on a little shelf and
ledge apart from the other letters. Presently he took
up a second letter in the same way, and placed that
aside also ; after which he dropped a silk handkerchief
over the two letters, and then put both handkerchief
and letters into his pocket. Witness saw hitn take a
third letter, and then gave information to the autho-
ritie3.

Mr. E. Hol)b, a president in the Inland-office, de-
posed that he was on duty at the same time with the
prisoner, who after the above discoveries, was taken
to the Superintending President's room to be ex-
amined. He was accused of having letters in his pos-
session which did not belong to him, and asked if he
had any objection to be searched. He made no ob-
jection, and denied the charge ; but before being
searched he took out his pocket handkerchief and
held it in his hand. Peak, the Post-office constable,
found two letters in the same pocket, one of them
being addressed to " Miss A. Watkins, 171, North-
street, Brighton," and the other to " Mr. J. Austen,
Rolvendon, Kent." They had both arrived by the
morning mail, and were broken open. On taking the
handkerchief from the prisoner's hand, and shaking
it, another letter fell from it, the seal of which re-
mained still unbroken. It was addressed to " Mr.
C. Kinsett, Betchworth 'Vicarage, near Reigate,
Surrey." (Witness opened the letter in court, and
found it to contain IF. wrapt in paper).
The prisoner who is a young man, reserved his de-
fence, and on the application of Mr. Peacock, his
Worship remanded hiin for further examination.