The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-08 00:00:00

ADVANCES BILL

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. E WART thought that the fact had not been
sufficiently taken into consideration, that this was a
limited sum, and that they had to decide what was the
best use to be made of it. He thought that it ought to
be confined entirely to drainage, for if they went to the
building of farms, buildings, and such things they
would have nothing left for drainage. He thought that
it would be decidedly most advantageous for the public
interest to spend the whole sum in drainage.
Captain PELHAM thought that the objection might
be got over by limiting the sum to be applied to build-
ing purposes entirely to new buildings.
Mr. BUCK thought that it would be far better to
confine the sum entirely to the purposes of drainage.
Mr. SLANEY said that if the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer did not give some facility to the small proprie-
tors in making their applications, the Bill would not be
of the slightest us 6 to them. He also thought that these
advances should be extended to the purposes of new
buildings at least.
Mr. MOODY opposed the clause.
Mr. DEEDES on the whole would prefer that the
clause should stand in its present condition if they
could be assured that the money could be lent with
safety for the purposes of building.
Mr. BRUCE was in favour of the clause as far as
Scotland was concerned; he was sure great benefit would
arise from it to that country, and especially to the new
farms which were formed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
his purpose had been answered by the discussion
which had taken place; and as the present majority of
Members appeared in favour of the omission of the clause,
he would vote for its omission.
Colonel RAWDON hoped that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would not consent to omit the clause.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
that the House wished to omit the clause, and he was
perfectly willing to consent.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause ... ... 45
Against it ... 107
Majority ---62
The clause was consequently rejected.
Clauses 5,6, and 7 were then agreed to, with some
slight amendments.
On clause 8 being proposed,
Mr. ROCHE proposed to insert in line 30, after "farm
buildings," the words, " including buildings for the steep-
ing, drying, and cleaning of flax, and also such machi-
nery and apparatus for the above-mentioned purposes as
may come under the denomination of fixtures." To
show the advantage of promoting the growth of flax in
Ireland, he need only mention that more than six mil-
lions worth of that commodity was imported into this
country in a year, and that if it were brought into
greater cultivation employment and support would be
given to a very large number of families.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER op-
posed the amendment, thinking it would be most incon-
venient to advance money on the security of machinery,
for that was, in fact, the natare of the amendment. He
understood that, in many instances, machirery in the
preparation of flax had been abandoned, and that the
practice of preparing it by hand had been substituted.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause
agreed to.
The other clauses having been agreed to, the House
resumed, and the Chairman having reported progress,
The House adjourned till Five o'Clock.

The House resumed in the Old Chamber at Five
o'clock.