The Sun.
London, England, 1850-08-07 00:00:00

THE SEWERS.

Mr: MACKINNON postponed till to-morrow, in con-
sequence of the absence of the Noble Lord, asking the
f Atowiegqueetions of the-Chief Commissioner of Sewers,
of which he had given notice for today:—Whether it is
not the fact, that five or more officers and attendants on
tbis• House have of late been seriously indisposed by
colaptuints such es usually arise from exhalations from
drains or graveyards? Whether there is any objection
to allow. no dram or cesspool to be tapped or cut through
daring the present operations in Westminster unless
ventilated in the manner introduced .by Dr. Reid ?
Whether the Chief Commissioner has any objection to
direct, that in all operations conducted in Westminster
during the remainder of the session, an opportunity
shbuld. be given to Dr. Reid to take such measures
deemed requisite, to prevent such complaints as arose
last night, from the impure atmosphere in the vicinity of
this House.'

liCYNCE OF MOTION-CRIME AND OUTRAGE
(IRELAND) BILL.

Mr. S. CRAW-FORD give notice that on the motion
fur the second reading of the Crime and Outrage (Ire-
land) Continuance Bill, he should move EL3 an amend-
ment that the Bill be real a :tecoad time that day three
months.—(Hpar, he :r.)
COMPOUND HOUSEHOLDERS BILL.

Sir W. CLAY stared that it wa4 not his int-ntion to
pfneeed further with this Bill in the present session, but
that be should at an early period in the next introduce a
similar measure'.—(Hear, bran)
SAVINGS BANKS (DUBLIN).
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER., in
answer to a 'question cf the Lord May, r of Dublin,
said that it was hot intention t> talze measures as soon
as possible tor insti:utp g an inquiry relative to the
depositors in the St. Peter's Parish Sivings' Birk,
Caffe•street, Dublin. He could nut, however, state what
course he shout i adopt on the subject next session.
Mr. REYNOLDS then gave notice that he should
bring the subject before the consideration .of the House
at an ra-ly period next se,sinn.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this Bill;

-Mr. HAMILTON, who bad charge of the Bill, an-
nounced his intentkn to accede to any amendments that
might be proposed in Committee, though he had no
hope of carrying the 13id through at this period of the
session.
The AT FORNEY GENERAL considered Bill
objecti,nable beta ins pnociple and detail, and he should
tberefoie move that it he n-ad a second time this day
six months. It was con,tantly assumed that the sales
under the Encumbered Estato s C..nareission had talcou
place at an under value. Hid deliberate opinion was
that no sales had taken place at an under value; and
he stated that upon examination of every case in which
it had been stated such under value had occurred. When
so many years' purchase was talked of as the price, it was
icapossible for Hon. Members to know what it was they
were talking of, whether it was the nominal rental, or
the sum of money which was actually received.—(Ucar,
hear.) This was a state of things which had
arisen in
Ireland, and which this Bill would tend to increase
Nothing could be more injurious to the social con.
dition of Ireland than that there should be a
reroie;
of tenants of the land promising to pay a great deal
more rent than the property was worth, the effect
of which was simply to pauperise the tenants.
That had existed to a very considerable extent,
and with great advantage to the landlords. If the pro-
perty were let lor double its nominal value, the landlord
came to borrow money on double the rent. Now the
House would bear in mind that from the peculiar state
of Ireland, and the smad nature of the tenures, it was
by no means 'difficult to get a tenant to promise any
amount of refit, providei he could be put in posses-
. sion of the land, The tenants were willing to live
on the smallest possible amount of subsistence, end
would, pay all the rest t i the lsnrllord. If a man took
ln estate of, say, a thous )nd a year value, and if it was
et fora thousands year, it would sell for a larger amount
than it it was let for two thousand a year: He would
give an instance, in the case of a property in the county
of Galway; it was sold at 2901. a year; it was lot on
4001. a year; and this was the consequence,—there
were SO tenants on the land, and 400 in-
habitants, all of toem in a state of pau-
perism or insolvency. The arre Irs of rent
die by that tenantry exceeded 3,0001.. which was
more than tea years' value of the land. The net receipts
for a series of several years did not amount to 1504 per
annum. It was sold on a rent of 2904 a year; it had
been let on 4001. a year. and for a great number of years
the total receipts had bean 1501. It sold for 4,6504, or
little more than ten years' purchase. But in point of
fact it sold for 40 years' purchase on the net receipts.—
(Elear.) Such cases as that occurred over and over again.
He regretted to see a Bill of such a one-sided descrip-
tion as this.—(Hear, hear.) The landlords were alone
considered in it, and the poor disregarded.—(Hear, hoar.)
Look at the operation of the law of distress. Was there
any clause in the Bill wh eh aid hat 'lhv bed of a cot-
tager should not be taken in distress for rent? None.
He (the Attorney-General) submitted that that was a
monstrous thing. He regretted that. this Bill k hould
hate come down from the House of Lords, and
above all, he regretted that it should have
ecranated. from Irish landlords.—(Hear, and cheers.)
shhinitted, therefere,, that the )3ill was altogether as
c-i.jectintiable a one Ws - possibly be introduced.—

(Hear, hear.) The principle of it was the encourage-
merit of landlords, who were to be enabled to make ex-
travagant claims, and thereby to pauperise the tenants
located on their estates. (Hear, hear.) It eau
been said that the most prejudicial result which
could be arrived at was to leave the sale of
property entirely in the hands of the Encumbered Estates
Commissioners, but he thought they had wisely and pru-
dently carried out the powers entrusted to them.—
(Hear.) He did not believe that any sales bad taken
place without the instrumentality of the Court, and when
Hon. Members talked about the enormous amount
arising from them they should bear in mind
the great extent of the country, and that
seven or eight millions was the total amount of all the
sales collected together under one head. If in this
country all sales of property were accumulated and
brought before one tribunal, they would be struck with
their enormous magnitude. He did not believe that
any estates had hitherto been sold under value, but, even if
there had, it was his deliberate opinion that Parliament
ought not to interfere, but should, on the contrary,
allow the law to be carried into full effect, and such a
course would ultimately prove beneficial not only to the
landlords themselves, but to the whole inhabitants of the
couutry.—(Hear,' hear.) The sth clause afforded an-
other proof of the real character of the Bill, for it pro-
♦ided that in case any gentleman should
have any land which was brought under the
control of the Court, the Court should have
power to give him protection from arrest in every suit
which might be instituted against him. Now, a more
monstrous principle than that was never suegested.—
(Hear, hear.) A person might, for instance, have a
hundred thousand pounds in the funds, and be guilty of
the greatest possible degree of extravagance, but that
clause rendered his arrest by creditors perfectly im-
possible. (Hear, hear.) He did not wish to
detain the House any longer. He admitted he
felt warmly on the subject, and earnestly trusted the
House would not proceed to the second stage of the
Bill. The Learned Gentleman concluded by moving
that it be read a second time this .day three months.
Mr. F. FRENCH confessed he had heard the speech
of the Learned Attorney-General with very great sur-
prise. He had chosen to speak of the landlords of Ireland
io an almost vituperative manner, but the statements
which he had made were wholly and totally unfounded.
The Learned Gentleman had stated that this was a
species of one-aided legislation, brought forward for the
purpose of advancing the interests of landlords, but a more
unfounded or more incorrect statement was never made
within or without the walls of Parliament. A de-
putation of Irish solicitors had stated that es-
Wes had been prepared for sale under the En-
cumbered Estates Bill, the rental of which
amounted to 625,000/., and the encumbrances upon
them to 10,900,000 t, and he would ask how, under these
circumstances, the landlords of those estates could in
any way be interested in the result, except in a desire
that their creditors should be fairly and honestly paid?
It was on the part of the creditors, not the landlords,
that he ventured to raise his voice against the Bill
which had been introduced by the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman, the Attorney-General.
Mr. SCULLY opposed the Bill. It enacted that an
estate should be sold under the Encumbered Estates Act
at less than 15 years' purchase, which would virtually
nullify the Act, and enable the Irish landholder to set
his creditors at defiance. The people of Ireland believed
that the Encumbered Estates Act was a necessary law,
and he warned the minority of the Irish Members in that
House not to be too eager in seeking its abrogation.
Mr. A. STAFFORD had come to the conclusion, after
due deliberation, that the best policy Parliament could
adopt was to allow the Encumbered Estates Act to pur-
sue its own course, and not shackle its operation by
passing a Bill of this nature, which, in his opinion, con-
tained most dangerous clauses without the redeeming
feature of one sa►utary provision.
Colonel DUN NE looked upon the En-
cumbered Estates Act as a measure of con-
fiscation; and, therefore, he thought its opera-
tion should be as much as possible restricted.
The Honourable and Learned Gentleman (the
Attorney-General) proceeded on a fallacy is think-
ing that all the land in Ireland was over-rented.
He (Colonel Dunne) did not object to the support of the
poor, but be objected to that support being charged on
only one class of the population. This was not at this
moment so much a landlord's question as a creditor's
question.—(Hear, hear.) He (Colonel Dunne) con-
tended that the fixing the value of an estate at so many
years' purchase was infinitely preferable to leaving
it to the caprice of any three Commissioners
He did not think 'he House could have any better proof
of the utter failure of the Encumbered Estates
Commissio❑ than was furnished by the speech of the
Hon. Gentleman (the Attorney-General) himself. Crime
and outrage were not diminished and the destruction of
property was apparent. Under these circumstances he
(Colonel Dunne) would vote for the second reading of
this Bill.
Mr. BRIGHT said there ware four Bills which had
come down from the House of Lords, of which
this was one, the whole tendency of which was to
have all that could be got by any means for the landlord,
and to pay nothing on the part of the landlord that could
be avoided. Those Bills were the Distress for Rent Bill,
the Landlord and Tenant Bill, the Small Tenements Re-
covery Bill, and the Encumbered Estates Bill. In the
whole of the three first of those Bills the object was to
get rid of the occupier, or to seize that which the
occupier bad to pay the rent of the landlord.—(Flear,
hear.) With respect to the Encumbered Estates Bill,
the promoters of that Bill assumed a value-
den of land made some years ago, which was
very much higher than it ought to be at this day. He
(Mr. Bright) contended that all the recent legislation
of the House of Lords was most unjust itself, most in-
sulting to Ireland, and marked with all the animus
which a large party in that House had constantly shown
to Ireland. It was a spirit which tended to create dis-
cord between Ireland and England, and therefore the
most unpatriotic and the most anti-national that could
possibly be pursued.—( [Tear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. SOTHERON,
Mr. NAPIER complained that there was no notice
on the paper of to-day of the rejection of this Bill, and
that rejection had taken him consequently by surprise.
The question before the House simply was, was the
principle of the Bill so vicious that the House
ought to reject it on the second reading.
He thought there was no justification whatever for the
observations of the Attorney-General with reference to
the object of the Bill and the nature of its provisions,
and he should, therefore, give it his support.
Mr. HATCHELL said he wished before the debate
closed to advert to the observations which bad been
made with reference to the Encumbered Estates Court.
He believed that a better selection of Commissioners to
carry out the objects and intentions, of the Act could not
have been made. They were perfectly qualified, both pro-
fessionally and otherwise, for the duties of their office, and
he had no doubt their ministrations would be such
as to secure to them the confidence of every person
coming in contact with them.

Mr3PCULLAGH tendered his thanks to the Learned
Attorney-General for having rescued the people of Ire-
land from the additional wrong just attempted to be in-
flicted upon them He agreed entirely with what had
been said by the Hon. Member for Manchester, and he
hoped the Learned Attorney-General would be as sin•
core and pitriutic on other occasions as he was on this,
and endeavour to prevent any fnud }iing committed by
' one particular class against another in that country.
The amendment wag then agreed to without a division.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL.
Mr. BERNAL said, before the Haase went into Corn-
mitt..e on this Bill he wished to ask the Chancellor
of the Exchequer whether it was his intention to per-
severe with that part of the Bill which proceeded on the
ex post 'ado principle, and prevented mutual assurance
oc te(ies coming within the scope of the Bill taking
life and fire as,urancea to a greater extent than they did
at present; and also whether h- sought to deprive them
of those other advantages which resulted in the non-
.bikty of shareholders beyond the amount of their re-
f pective shares? He saw no reason why the Hon. Gen-
tleman -ho b.. so imperative on those points.
The CHANCELLOiI, of the EXCHEQUER did not
consida what be proposed, to be ex post
,facto legisla-
lation, because all he had done up to the present time
was, to leave the law in respect to such socie;ies precisely
as he found it; but he did prop use to take away from
certain societies privileges which they hitherto enjoyed,
but which he thought it was never the intention of the
Legislature to confer upon them, and which he did not
think they ought t,) retain.
Tne House thea went into Committee on the Bill;
Mr. BERNAL in the Chair. _

LONDON-3RIDGE APPROACHES FUND BILL
The London- bridge Approaches Fund Bill was read a
second time and ordered to be committed.
LAW FUND DUTIES (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed. _ _ _