The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-06 00:00:00

BILL.

The House having resolved itself into a Committee
011 this Bill,
The Nlsrquis of lANSDOWNE moved an amend•
ment, that the measure should commence to take effect
on the 9th of August next.
Lord S CANLEY opposed the amer.dment, and pro-
posed that the Bill should not come into operation until
the Ist of June, 1851. In his opinion it was quite pos-
sible, considering the various stages through which the
Bill would yet have to pass, that it might not receive
the Royal assent becore the period fixed by the Noble
Marquis for its bei❑g carries into effect. But even
though it should be passed by the 2d or the 3d of
August, it would in that case be impossible for the
clerks of the peace in Ireland to make out those lists,
and to effect those other arrangements which they
would be required to effect before:the 9th of that month,
if the proposal of the Noble Marquis was adopted.
The Noble Marquis further proposed that the re-
gistration under the Bill should take place this
year between the 29th of November and the end
of December. But that would be a most inconvenient
period to adopt fir the purpose, as the days would then
be nearly the shortest, and the weather nearly the se-
verest in the year. He had further to observe that after
the passing of the measure some technical objection
might be successfully urge i against carrying it into
operation ; and in that ease it would be found extremely
advantageous that they should nut have caused it to
come into effect until after Parliament should have again
assembled, and should be enabled to remove any such
technical objection. He had another reason to advance
against the proposal of the Noble Msrquh,. According
to that proposal the registration under the Bill would
not be completed until the month of January, and the
pariiea registered wouli he entitled to vote in the month
of February following. But the re-registry would com-
mence on the first of Jule; s that t'lere would be only
four months between the completion of the o❑e and the
commencement of the other. He did not think the de-
lay in p assing that Bill would be a consideration of suffi-
cient importsnen, nor was it nece.sery that it should
come i❑to operation on the Ist of June, 1851. He ob-
jected to the insertion of the words " 20th of July," and
proposed that other words should be substituted.

- The Nlsreisis of LANSDOWNE thought any altera-
tion like that propose I by the Noble Lord ought to be
proposed at the last stage cf the Bill. Parliament had
already during two sessions determined on enlarging the
constituency of Ireland, and the effect of the Noble
Lord's proposition would be to postpone the passing of a
measure on that subject for another year.
Lord MONTEAGLE and the Earl of WICKLOW
were understood to support Lord Stanley's proposition.
Earl GREY said the proposition of the Noble Lord
opposite, it adopted, would have the effect of preventing
the new franchise and the new registration from coming
into operation until the end of the next session of Par-
liament. The Crown was armed with a certain power—
namely, that of dissolving Parliament. The Noble
Lord's proposition would even interfere with that, be-
cause in case of a dissolution between the periods re-
ferred to, the new Parliament was to be elected by a
body of electors which had been already condemned.
Lord STANLEY briefly explained, and asked the
Noble Marquis to postpone that question. As for his
alteration he could net postpone it until the last stage,
for all the dates depended upon it. lie had a strong ob-
jection to the inconvenient time at which it was pro-
posed the registraions should take place. He said he
should be obliged to cake the sense of the House upon
the question as to whether the Noble Illtrquis's words
should be inserted or not.

The &Aria S P. Li EH AI ANS thought there was a good
deal of force in the observations which had fallen from
the Noble Lord.

Eid GREY thought the Bill might be made to com-
mence on the lit of June, 1851; but the second regis-
tration need not take place until June, 1852, and thus
they would have a registration on a proper basis.
Lord 510NrEAGLE did not see much in the objec-
tion as to the present period of registration; but cmsi-
dered the last suggestion a fair compromise.
After a long and desultory conversation, in which
many Noble Lords took part, it was understood that
the question was to be postponed for the present for
reconsideration, but without detriment to the progress
of the Bill.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE then proceeded to
propose soave verbal amendments in line 35 of the 3d
clause.

Thy Earl of Sr. GERNIANS said he had introduced
a Bill into the other House of Parliament, in which
there was a short clause giving a 5L franchise where a

freehold existed. lie suggested that example to the
Noble Marquis.
The Earl of ST. GE/MANS brought up the clause re-
ferred to and handed it to the Marquis of Lansdowne.
Lord REDESDALE was understood to support the
principle of a franchise where there was a freehold and
occupation.

Tile Marquis of LANSDOWNE was then understood
to agree to insert the words " shall be of the net annual
♦alue of 51. over and above all charges thereon."
After a conversation in which Earl Fitzwilliam, Lord
Stanley, and other Noble Lords took part,
Lord MONTEAGLE said it was of essential import-
ance to Ireland to increase the number of small proprie
tors; but then they should be in the occupation of the
land.

Lord BE ALIMONT suggested a means by which the
manufacture of improper voters could be prevented, by a
slight change in the working of the Bill.
The Eart of WICKLOW had no apprehension that
fictitious votes would be c►eated, because before that
could be done a person would have to make a convey-

ante of his property.
Earl GREY said the object of the Noble Baron would
be obtained by leaving out of the clause the words "at a
rent," and substituting the words " or under lessee.'
The clause, as so amended, was then agreed to.
On clause 6,
Lord STANLEY said, though *he had no amend-
ment to this clause, he, nevertheless, wished to direct
the attention of the Government to a difficulty with
respect to it, which would equally have arisen if the
81. qualification had been retained. The present clause
did not relate to the borough franchise alone, but to the
mixed franchise of counties and cities, and provided
that any person rated with respect to any lands, tene-
ments, or hereditaments, to the value of 8/., should be en-
titled to a vote. By excluding house occupation, a
county franchise would thus be created on a rating of
84 only. He did not wish to raise the borough franchise
to a 151. rating; but, at the same time, he aid not wish
to lower the county franchise to the same amount as
that for boroughs. Another point required attention.
It was provided in the clause that in boroughs persons
should be entitled to vote on an 81. rating, if such per-
sons had paid the poor-rates due by them. Now, under
the poor• law, as it at present stood, persons who occupied
a house of the value of 81. only, were exempted from the
payment:of poor-rates, these being paid by the lessors.
—(flear.) The result would be a class of voters who
might vote without having paid any rates at all.
The Earl of CARLISLE said there was another
clause which providel that all these 81. occupiers should
pay their own rates.
The clause was then agreed to,
On clause 7,
Lord STANLEY said this clause would enable per
Oult to rota for boroughth a 3 Occupiers. lie did trot,