The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-16 00:00:00

Mr. MONSELL—On what valuatio❑ ?—(bear, hear,

Mr. BRIGHT did not quite understand the Honour-
able Gentleman's meaning. This he would say, that if
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government would
adopt some measure t) give the poor-law officers
power t) seize on some acres of land, ho would
bring the refractory and defaulting owners to a
sense of their duty, and would, by such an at of
justice put them, at least, in the possession of those poor
occupiers whose property was seized and sold for the ar-
rears, while the owner of the large park went unscathed.
—(Hear, hear.) He repeated, if the Noble, Lord took
from the taxes of this country, and handed the money
over, 3 ear aft'r year, in aid of the distressed unions in
Ire!and, he ought to give the poor.law authorities suffi-
cient power to seize on the lands of defaulters, and re-
tain them until the arrears were paid.
Mr. H. HERBERT, Member for Kerry, was not
much disappointed at the result of the Hon. Member for
Manchester's tour, and was sorry he could not compli•
ment the Hon. Gentleman in the words of the poet, the
he Lai
t 6

Return'd from his finish'd tour,
Grown ten times wiser than before."—(Laughter.)
The lion. Member did nothing by his travels but gather
up what had been known and written long before his
time. But what he (Mr. Herbert) complained of was
the lion. Member attacking Members anonymously—
attlekiog men, too, in their absence, and not daring to
give their names; and attacking the Government at the
Castle fur -ntg!cct of .duty. The Honourable Member
also made an attack on gentle Men for not letting
their lands to persons who were not disposed to give
them what they required for them. Now he (Mr. Her-
bert) had heard much from the lips of some Honourable
Members of free-trade opinions, and he certainly thought
that this interference with gentlemen as to the letting of
their lands was not consistent,

Mr. BRIGHT—I mean to say that those gentlemen
don't pay their rates, therefore that they are not entitled
to the House.
loourable Gentleman was
Irishnot justified l
a usympathydliEoßr landlord..
B 1
in
.Et
•Rhi I re
of
called.
atTis thtaehee were
w
uponl House to support him
in insisting that the names cf the two gentlemen alluded
to by the Honourable Member for Manchester should bo
sgtiivgemnautips'ing it aldifasththeey w
worst of calumnies, an anonymous
not, he he had made on the
had no hesitation in
calumny.
After a few words from Colonel DUNNE,
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said the Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Manchester had fallen into a rot very
uncommon error. Ho appeared to consider rate un-
collected as rate in arrear; but that was not tho case,
and all the returns went to show that the collection in
Ireland was exceedingly close.—(Hear.) If both the par-
ties to whom the Hon. Member had alluded were to be
placed on the same footing, he did not see how that
could be done, except by taking away the powerofditso-
traint as against the occupier. He would just call the
attention of the House to the state of facts with regard
to the collection of the rate. The whole rate imposed
since the establishment of the poor-law amounted
something more than 7,000,000/., and of that amount no
less than 96 per cent. had been collected; and he believed
that in England there was no rate collected in so close a
way. The whole arrear was only 207,0001. That fact
was sufficient to show that no reasonable effort had been
neglected to collect the rate, and that the collection had
been successful.—(Cheers.) With respect to the contract
entered into in the Newcastle Union, the Commissioners
had not the power to interfere with the contract when
once made; but, under any circumstances, it was very
doubtful whether they could properly have done so. He
admitted the question was one which required a good
deal of care and consideration; but he did not think any
blame attached to the Commissioners. Ho was glad to
find that the proposition had 1:0311 received so favourably
by the House. He was happy to say that the aspect of
affairs was improving, and that there had been a marked
diminution of expenditure in the unions since September
last; until, in January, the diminution, as compared with
the same month last year, amounted to 70,000/.—(Hear,
hear.) He trusted that the time was not far distant when
the unions would become self-supporting, and that re-
turning prosperity and a better state of things would
render any further assistance by Parliament unnecessary.
Mr. MONSELL explained that he had made the
statement relative to the Newcastle Union for the pur-
pose of calling the attention of the Government to what
he considered a dofect in the low.
Mr. GROGAN denied that a two or three months'
tour through Ireland gave the Hon. Member for Man-
chester any right to become a philosophical lecturer on
presumed delinquencies of the Irish landlords, and
challenged that Gentleman to move for the production of
papers connected with the collection of the rate, that
the country might know who the landlords were that
had proved neglectful of their duty, and that the entire,
body of owners might not suffer through the omission of
a few.

Sir H. W. BARRON said he felt pleased the llon.
Member for Manchester had made his attack on the Irish
landed propritttortr, and on two county Members
especially, because it afforded the Right Hon. the Secre-
tary for Ireland an opportunity of stating that Ireland,
at least, hal paid a share of the poor-law tax larger
than England had done of a similar impost. He denied
that, as was assumed, the poverty of the country had

been decreasing during tho last six months, and he
maintained, that the cheapness of provisions by free-
trade measures was not of the slightest use while the
people were loft without employment or the means of
obtaining even the common necessaries of life. Free-
trade measures might do well enough for Manchester,
but they had produced absolute ruin in Ireland, and ho
would tell the free-trade party that, having produced
that ruin, the people of this country would feel the
effects of it in the increase in the taxes which must
ensue.

Sir WILLIAM SOMERVILLE rose to correct a
statement which he made when be previously addressed
the House. He then said that 96 per cent. of the rate
leviable under the poor-law, since the last Poor-!aw Act
fir Ireland came into operation, had been paid. In one
sense the amount was under-stated, and in another
sense it was over-stated. The case stood thus ; 90 per
cant. of the rates so leviable had been lodged, and of the
remaining six per cent. four per cent. had been carried to
the arrears of the last rate, and only two per cent. ac-
tually remained due.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT said the statement of the Right lion.
Gentleman had nothing to do with the statement he
made. if they were to speak of Ireland as a whole in
regard to the rat s levied, then it was a different thing
from taking the amount levied in particular portions of
it. If they took the whole of Ireland they would find
that the averege rates were very low, less in fact than
the average of rates in England. But what he said was
that there were certain unions in Ireland in which the
largest portion of the arrears for poor-rates now due
were by the owners of the land.—(dear, hear, and cries
of "Name, name.") Well, he (Mr. Bright) would name
three—Cliffden, Baiinrobr, and Castlebar, where there
were a considerable portion of such arrears due, and the
reason given by the poor-law guardians for
that state of things was the state of the law which
provided for the recovery ef rates on the owners of land.
The description he had already given of the law in that
respect was a correct ore. If a landowner was in arrears
they had to apply to a magistrate for an order, and
then they had to go to one of the superior courts, where
they obtained a judgment. That became a judgment on
the land, and a debt which gave the union power to re-
cover from the laud; but the process was so tedious that
in many cases he was told toat it was found impracti-
cable. The case might be, that neither the landlord
nor the guardians were to blame for the accumulation ( f
those arrears. In regard to what he stated about a
certain union, and which statement the lion. Member
for Kerry had called a calumny, and not only that, but
a cowardly calumny, he was not prepared to gi,e up
the names of the gentlemen he alluded to, and the
reason of not mentioning them was, that they were
gentlemen whose rates were in arrears, to whom it could
not be imputed that they were so; and therefore it would
be unfair to them; but that there were such cases in
that union he was prepared to show, for he took down
the particulars on the spot, from the anion book, and
therefore ho was confident that what he had stated was
correct. Ho should rot give the names of those gen-
tlemen to the House, because he was only pointing out
facts to the Government, in order that their attention
might be called to them.
Lord NAAS said, after the assertion the Hon. Member
had made, he could not see with what justice he could
refuse to give the names of the parties. He had stated
landed proprietors in Ireland were doing all they could
to avoid paying their rates; that they had their pre-
mises guarded by their gamekeepers to keep out the
bailiffs; and he asked the Hon. Member whether it was
fair to make those charges without giving the class
against whom they were made an opportunity of refuting
them. Ise would there fire a:le the Hon. Member it
he would state the r ames he had referred to, that a re-
turn might be procured, in order to show the truth of
his aseertionr. In regard to what the Hon. Gentleman
had said about the poor-rates being lower in Ireland
than in England—

Mr. said, if you take the whole of Ire-
land it might be that the average rate was lower than in
England.
Lord NAAS—The Hon. Gentleman gave the House
to understand that Ireland was taxed in a less elegem
than England—(Hear, hear)—which was an assertion
which could triumphantly be re fated by a protest laid
upon the table of the House of Lords last session by
Lord ROSF, in which it was stated that the rateable
property in Ireland was 4,214,3151., which was just Bs.
4d. in the pound, and about four times the rate of the
local taxation in England.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. TRELAWNY said he could not think the state-
ment of the Noble Lord was correct, fur during the
famine in Ireland England was not only paying the ex-
pense of its own poor-law, but also half the expense of
the Irish poor-law.—(" Hear, hear," and laughter.)
Sir H. W. BARRON—It vva, a loan of four millions
Ireland got from the Imperial Treasury, and not given
by England.
Mr. TRELAWNY—A loan to Ireland!—(Laughter.)
When so much as 94 per cent. cf the poet -rates had hem
collected, he could not understand upon what grounds
Government sought this additional grant. He was some-
,, hat surprised at hearing the Hon. Member fur Man-
chester talk of parties refusing to let their land at a rea-
sonable rate. He did not understand how a Free-trader
could tme such lauguage.—(A laugh.)
Mr. M'CULLAGII, knowing the state of I. eland,
would net be duing his duty if he did not express him.
self grateful to the Ministers for their proposal. He did
nut deny that some portion of the landed proprietors in
Ireland might deserve the reprehension of the Hon.
Member for Manchester, but he knew something of the
unions referred to by the Hon. Member, and he had no
hesitation in saying that the difficulties would be found
to have arisen from the properties not being in the hands
cf the parties whoze names stood on the rate-book. In
the Clitlden union the largest property was in theposseE-
Lion of an English assurance company. It was unfortu-
nate that Hon. Gentlemen opposite should seem to make
common cause with the defaulters. With respect to the
question of local taxation, he believed the whole rate-
able property of Irelald was somewhere about
13,000,0001., and that the amount of rates collected fur
the two years ending September, 1848, arid September,
1849, was 1,600,0 M., making the total charge on the
rateable property of Ireland about 2s. 0. in the pound.
That was higher than the average charge in Eogtand.
Mr. TRELAWNY—No.
Mr. M'CULLAGII—If it was, and he believed it
war, the Hon. Member for Tavistock was scarcely jmti-
fied in misleading the House as to the charge for the
poor of Ireland.
Mr. H. HERBERT denied that either he or the
Hon. Member for Kildare had identified themselves
with the defaulters alluded to by the Hon. Member for
Manchester.
Mr. SADLEIR said, that as one anxious to preserve

human life, be thanked the Government for the consi

derate proposal they had brought forward. He thought
the Hon. Member far Manchester had overlooked the
Act of last session to remedy the defect in the law of
which he complained. That Act gave very summary
powers against, landlords owing arrears of rates. And
if any fault could be found with, the powers conferred by
that Act, it would be that they were excessive. If the
Hon. Member for Manchester confounded individual in-
stances with the general practice, he would do great in-
justice to the landlords of Ireland.
Mr. BRIGHT read the clauses of the Act of last ses-
sion respecticg the collect;on of rates. They provided
that in the first instance a civil bill or decree might be
issued against a defaulter by the assistant barriste7,
and that it might be removed without writ or certiorari
t a superior caurt at Dublin, where, aftsr certain
forms, it would obtain the force of a judgment, and t Ike
priority as a charge far the property. The Hon. Mem-
ber proceeded to say that the process was exactly such
as he had described it. He had not spoken of the price
of land let on reasonable tenure, sad his questions re-
ferred more to tho tenure than to the price. It was
quite allowable for him to characterise as folly the con-
duct of a man who allowed his land to lie waste when
there was a surrounding population without work.
Mr. MUNTZ was not surprised that Irish Members
should hail with thankfulness a proposal like the pre-
sent. But there was another party ta be consulted, who
were not so well satisfied ; he alluded to the hard-
working people of England. He wished to know
how long Ministers intended coming to that House for
money for Ireland, without ever telling them what they
thought was the matter with it ?—(Hear.) The
famine was the excuse formerly, but the famine was
not to last for ever.—(Hear.) Were Ministers always to
hang their coats on that peg?—(A laugh.) Ho had re-
sisted the vote of last year, and had told them that there
would be another vote this year.—(Hear, bear.) And
now he told them there would be another vote next year.
—(Hear, hear.) Ile was as desirous as any one of see-
ing Ireland prosperous, but his impression was, that Ire-
land would not be much improved next year. Were
they to have another grant because of the famine? He
wished Ministers to fix some limits to its effects. There
was surely no famine now, when every one was complain-
ing of the lowness of the price of food.—(Hear, hear.)
It was the duty of Ministers to declare the real cause of
distress in Ireland. With regard to the present propo-
sal he should not vote for it whether intended as a loan
or as a grant.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Member did not seem
to suffer much from delicacy in speaking of Ireland. The
Hon. Member must not have been present when he stated
at any early period of the evening his reasons far propos-
ing the advance. He had stated that Ireland was not
suffering from famine. The lion. Member said that the
proposed advance would be a grant because there was
no chance of its being repaid. They had heard similar
language last year, but the House consented, neverthe-
ohu
al
fddo r afterwards
noßirming-
ham,
_o op-
position neverthe-
less, that the advance of 250,000/. then proposed should
be made. Out of the 250,0001. which had been so voted
last session, 150,0001. had been repaid within six months;
and that surely did not show that there was any extreme
.d Member
itew
difficulty in obtaining the repayment of the Irish
rotnead-
vances. He hoped that Hon. Members would then
pa ollsoiwtiotnahnehder etsmooilgtuhhtaitotntuhtiionl
lkbtehree desirable.pH
be necessary to introduce a Bill funded on the resolu-
tions;
and every other Hon. Member, could offer any
objec-
tion to see the proposal of her Majesty's Ministers fairly
canvassed, because he believed it would be found that
the circumstances in which that proposal had originated
fully justified the favour with which it had been received
by the House.

- Colonel SIBTHOBP said that he would, on a future
occasion, take the sense of the House on the subject.
Mr. AL O'CONNELL said he wished to inform the
Hon. Member for Birmingham that the evils under which
Ireland suffered were mainly owing to the legislation of
that House, and tie system of government pursued in
that country.
The resolutions were then agreed to, and were ordered
to be reported to the House on Monday nev.
PARTY PROCESSIONS (IRELAND) BILL.

The House having resumed, this Bill ;vas read a
second time, and was ordered to be committed on Mon-,
day next.
The second reading of this Bill was postponed (as we
understood) until Monday next.,

THE COUR P OF CHANCERY (IRELAND) BILL.
The order of the day having been read for the second
reading of this Bill,

Mr. 'll. PALMER, said he did not rise to oppose this
measure, which he believed to be necessary for the bene-
fis Ireland, but t) offer a word or two in reference to
what had been said a few evenings since on this subject
by his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Coven-
try. It was a mistake to suppose that his Hon. and
Learned Friend was not favourable to an improvement
in the practice of the Chancery in this country. No
ore was more satisfied that this improvement ought to
take place than his Learned Friend, but the question
was, how was this to take place? He trusted that the
Court of Chancery in England would be reformed, and
that a Bill for that purpose would be brought into Par-
liament.

After a few words fcom Mr. HEADLAM, who said
that he wuuld reserve his obso:vations on the Bill until
it was going into Committee.

Mr. STUART said that the object of this Bill was to
alter the whole practice of the Court of Chancery in Ire-
land. If there were abuses in the Court of Chancery in
Ireland, the Lord Chancellor had power to rectify them.
They were going to do in that House what the Lord Chan-
cellor of Ireland ought to do himself. Why should they
do so? Would any Hon. Member get up and way that the
Lord Chancellor of Ireland had not the power to do all
that was hU zgcsted by this Bill ? His Hon. Friend (Mr
R. Palwerrliad spoken of a Bill for the improvement of
the Ceurt of Chancery in England. If that Bill was to
give additional powers t the Lord Chancellor of Eng-
land he should support it. But he should object to any
Bill that was intend, d to alter the practice of the Court
of Cnancery in England, simply because the Lord Chan-
cellor—whose conduct as judge of that Court had given
great satisfaction to the public and profession—had the
power of 'raking all recessary alterations in the practice
of his Court. The Hon. and Learned Member then re-
ferred to the Irish Encumbered Estates Bill, and con-
tended that the Commissioners under the Bill wore per-
forming the duties of the Irish Lord Chancellor. Why
should this be? The Lord Chancellor of England dis-
posed of matters connected with the encumbered estates

in this country.—(Hear, hear.) Upon these grounds
alone he would oppose the measure before the House
and divide the House upon it. But look at the object
of the Bill before them. It was to change the practice
from proceeding by way of bill to that of petition. The
Hoe. and Learneti Gentleman then referred to Sir Samuel

ltomilly's Act of 1812, and contended that while it
altered the practice of the Court of Chancery in reference
to charity cases, in respect ti which the practice was
altered so as to oblige the parties to proceed by way of
prAition, it failed when the principle was made to apply
to questions of title. After years of litigation and ex-
pense, the result was, that by the decision of the House
of Lards, the party complaining was obliged to begin
again and file a new bill. In this way a tremend-
ous injustice might be inflietel, and a better means
could not not be invented of increasing litigation without

the intervention of any direct cause for it. It did no.;
conform to his notion of the dignity of the profession to
which he belonged, and to the dignity of the Court of
Chancery, that a discreditable class of practitioners
should be tolerated. llis idea of a useful system of law
that might be beneficial to the landlords of Ireland,
was, that it should be expeditious, and next that
it should be cheap. The Commissioners f.)r the sale of
Encurnt ered Estates had not yet sold a single acre, aril
Hero that his only re:..5,,n, he should have been justified
in considering the Act under which they were appointed
as a mischievous enactment.— (Hear, hear.) That Act

was eating up the property of Ireland, and but few could
stand the drain of a double set of costs which most set re
exposed to. He had seen it stated somewhere, that in
16 instances in which there were suits pending in the
Court of Chancery in reference to estates under the
operations of the Commissioners for the sale of Encum-
bered Estate-, those proceedings had been stopped.
Granting that to be the caw, he should like to knew in
how many more instances those proceedings had not
not been stopped. Upon the whole, he considered that
they were trenching upon the duties of the Lord Chan-
cellor; and, secondly, that they were not doing so in the
proper way. For those reasons he should move that
this Bill he read a second time that day six months.
Mr. HEADLAM. said that as it now appeared to be
the wish of the House that the discussion of this Bill
should be taken at this stage, he begged to make a few
observations upon it. He differed entirely from the ar-
gument made by the lion. Member who had just sat
down, first, that the Lord Chancellor had powers which
this Bill proposed to give; and, secondly, that suppos-
ing he had such poe ors, it was an improper usurpation.
This Bill provided distinct and new remedies for the
evils which existed under the present system. In the
first place, it prevented the expense and delay incidental
to the mass of the pleadings in Chancery, by instituting
a proceeding by petition; secondly, it directly affected
the system of evidence upon paper; and thirdly, it pre-
posed a most salutary improvement, by giving power to
the master to carry into effect the matters entrusted to
him. These were matters the reform of which had long
been felt to be a matter of necessity, and in his opinion
this Bill was entitled to the support of the House, as
providing the direct remedy which every Chancery
practitioner had desired.
Mr. KEOGH said that the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman the Member for Newark must have a wonderful
regard for Chancery proceedings, if he thought they were
of so expeditious or inexpensive a nature that the Bill
before the House could not effect a change for the
better. Et ery one acquainted with the nature of the
proceedings in the Court of Chancery must know how
voluminous the proceedings were. Firat, there was the
original bill, then the supplemental bill; then, ie any
party in the suit died, there must be a bill oF reviver,
then there was a supplemental bill, and bill of reviver,
and a bill in the nature of a bill of review.—(Laughter.)
To exemplify the operation of the Act of list session he
might state, that on one occasion he had to attend
before the Commissioners, and it was necessary to
produce the certificate of the Chancellor to show the
state of the cause. Ile found the original bill, the
extent of which was twenty-three skins of parchment,
and he found a supplemental bill extending to eeventy-
two. There were sixty or seventy defendants in the
suit, and one counsel had signed the answers of twenty-
five of them. No one who knew these evils practically
would think himself justified in opposing the Bill under
consideration; and yet the Hon. Member for Newark
complained of having heard that only sixteen Chancery
suits had been stepped. Why the Commissioners under
the Act were only appointed in October last, and. short
as had been the opportunity of jugging of the effect of
the measure, he would ask how many Chancery suits,
if left to the ordinary course of practice, would have
been stopped in the interval?—(Cheers and laughter.)
The House had beard an attack that evening made o❑
the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and perhaps the Hon.
Gentleman from whom it proceeded did not even know
his name. They who came from Ireland not only knew
the Irish Chancellor, but the English ones too—those who
had been, those who were, and those who were to be.
But with regard to the merits of the Bill itself, it pro-
posed, in the first place, that a simple petition should
be filed, stating the rights sf the party, sup-
ported by affidavit, and the other party was immediately
to answer. Then there was this very satisfactory course
of proceeding, that viva voce evidence might be taker!,
instead of the absurd practice pursued in the Court of
Chancery. It also prevented a fraudulent defendant
from frustrating justice; by increasing costs which he
never could pay; and for that rcason he should support
the Bill, and was glad that it had been introduced.
Mr. COCKBURN said an allusion had been made to
him; he admitted that hew as not profound in the know-
ledge of equity law, but he thought he was competent
to give an opinion upon the proposed measure. It had
been said by an eminent mar, that a measure might he
introduced which would shake the Constitution, and the
lawyers would remain in their cabinets, but if you
were to touch a cobweb in Westminster Hall yuu would
have the hungry spiders disturbed from their hiding
places to oppose it. He had not the slighte t doubt
that this measure would act advantageously for Ire-
land, and hoped the time was not tar distant when it
would be extended to this country.—(Cbeors.) The
Honourable Member for Newark thought that it was
an encroachment upon the privileges of the Lord Chan-
cellor of Ireland, and thought that the reforms might
be effected by the Court itself; but if they were to wait
until that reform was accomplished they might wait for
ever.—(Hear, bear.) The Chancellor had jurisdiction in
the minor proceedings of his court, but a reform of this
character rested with the Legislature. It was said that
all suitors might be driven to resort to the original form
of pleading; but it should be recollected that the judge
was left a discretion by this Bill to decide whether that
was necessary or not. He believed the reform now pro-
posed would be equally acceptable to the public and the
majority of the profession.—(hear, hear.) He was
happy that it had been introduced by his Hon. and
Learned Friend, who was walking in the footsteps of his
great and honoured father.--(Cheers.)
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the objections
to this Bill had been so fully answered by the Honour.
able Members for Athlone and Southampton, that he
did not consider it necessary to enter further into refu-
tation of them. It was said that the Lord Chancellor
of Ireland could effect these reforms ; but he thought
if it was left to be done there the reform would be
but slender, and that an effectual remedy could not be
obtained without the sanction of the Legisiature. His
Learned Friend the Member for Newark knew
that the House of Lords would not entertain a suit
which had not gone through the regular processes, with-
out the sanction of a legislaiive enactment. The objec-
tion made by the Hon. and Learned Member was to the
form by petition in place of by bill, but this was only
a difference in name. The only real difference was that
the surplus pleadings would be omitted. In fact it was
only a technical system created for the purposes of costs,
injurious to the public. It was perfectly competent for '
the Court to adjudicate upon tee merits by petition as
by bill and answer. He took upon himself the entire re-
sponsibility of the Bill, and of every other to which his
name was attached. He was asked whether he had the

sanction of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

Be had

only to say, that he would not introduce such a measure
without consulting that eminent judge. Ho had sub-
mitted it to the Lord Chancellor and the Master of
the Rolls, and had their sanction to the principle and
object of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The present state of
the practice was calculated to throw a slur upon the
Court. He considered this Bill would be a great im-
provement, and hoped the Howe would affirm the second
reading.
Mr. WALPOLE wislv.d to ash the llon. and Iparred
Gentleman one question. Ile believed there was a ge-
neral concurrence as to the necessity of some extensive
ref Tin of the prece r.dings in the Court of Chancery iu
Ireland, and &so of the Court of Chancery in England.
—(Hear, hear.) But, seeing that. the present na3 not the
end nor the means by which these reforms could be pro-
perly carried out, he owned that he greatly disapproved
of a Bill like this present it, irp,i c'iscius9el in a
r •
with ,i.e tieiat;s a the quesi.ion. Ile should suggea,
therefore, that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee
—(Cries of " Oh !")—by whom it would be put into ouch

----
a shape as would qualify it for carrying out the object
they had in view.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL could not accede to
the proposition of the Hon. and Learned G01100:00.
He knew well what would be the effect of sending it to te
Select Committee. He would endeavour to adopt and'
be
embody in it any practicable suggestions that might
Offered to him, and for that purpose would communicate
with the Hon. and Learned Member for Newark and
ethers, but he could not consent to referring the Bill to
Select Committee.
Mr. TURNER regretted that the Solicitor-General
would not adopt the suggestion of his Hon. and Learned
Friend to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. Wes
convinced that the Bill could not be carried out in its
pre:cnt shape. He would not vote on either side. At
the same time he is es most willing to give his assistance
in the framing of a measure that would really rerned9
the evils of which they complained. Ho thought that
this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee, and
that it would he more advantageous that many persons
unconnected with the law should form a portion of that
Committee than that it should be composed altogether 01'
lawyers. t:
Mr. STUART said that it was not his intention
eau
press his amendment. He would, however, in a :.
stage, move to expunge every clause except the 28 of
which gave the Lord Chancellor power to make mall
the desired alterations.
Colonel RAWDON having cbjected to the Olen
ment being withdrawn,
The question was put, when the second reading Ws
carried ey the almost unanimous assent of the Houire•L,
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE (BANKRUPTCY) 13 itto
On the motion for going into Committee upon th': s •te'
Mr. HENLEY said that this was a measure to 01-
the office of Chief Registrar of the Court of BankruPtuff
pith the office rt. the Lord Chancellor's S,.cretary, 0
salaries
Bankrupts. He complained of the amount of
binecureu es
t.
sttached to these offices, both of which were
This Bill would make one of these sinecures pert:mili.
ers,
He though that it would be much bettor to refer 010
Bill to a Select Committee,formwhere it could be je
seriously considered and put into a better lto wee
the evils of the case. It was rather too bad for the Ilet!'s
and Learned Gentleman opposite to comedown with till:0
Bill for a first and second reading without favouring te
House with one word of explanation. He would, tin.)rde;
f ire, move that a Committee boappointed to Ong, of
the best mode of dealing with the office of Registrar
Bankrupts, now vacant. 3 Wad The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that 1 a
rather inconsistent for an Hon. Member who expreteo.
a wish for reduction to meet the proposition of theofini-
yernment by an amendment to refer the Bill to a
mittee up-stairs. He would ask the Hon. Gentleinao
what mode could be more acceptable of dealing Bill
sinecure office than to abolisii it altogether, as tlee, of
proposed? The main reason for abolishing the.
registrar of bankruptcy was because it was a s7e enure.
The secretary of bankrupts had not certainly at Pfelett
at many duties to perform as heretofore; but stilt 50.
an officer was necessary and could not be dispensed riatcl-
The secretary had sometimes very extensive correar
once with various parts of the country to discharge';es
he occupied a responsible position, and filled the essea
during pleesure. lie apprehended that no just re,e-feler
could be assigned for rejecting the proposition now";- to
111 r. BOUVERIE thought it was most desiralreeis
do away with the office of registr ate for they had s
evidence given before the Commfe.tee of which he —are.
Member, that such an office was a complete sie;ecabler
He, however, thought it would be much more des•c-both
instead of uniting these two offices, which were to
nearly sinecures, to place the trifling duties that aerator
be be performed upon the shoulders of one of the jte, hid.
registrars, with an addition of 100/. or 501. a year
saiMrar. eeir,
y.
MULLINGS said the Act provided for sir"`fer,
trews, and also in case a the death of the chief rug's" if
that one of the other registrars might fill the office' the
he could be convinced that the suggestion Wade Iji, bo
lion. and Learned Gentleman would lead to a aav'eb'
(Mr. Mulliugs) would vote for his Bill. (lee OAS
After a few words Lam the ATToateett-er—
and Mr. HENLEY, f th°
Mr. I'. WOOD said it was true that the ate. °het it
Bill might be a saving at the present moment' thug
would peree taate the office of chief registrar, and per'
by attaching a useless office to another one, vrculd
petuate one of them.
The House then divided, when there appeared 7
--
For the original motion
For the amendment
The announcement
received with
of the numbers was
cheering. .......
61
Bills
Mr. LABOUCHERE then brought up the three fll
of which he had given notice, for the regulation Ova.
Merchant Service, Seamen's Fund, and Merehanl be
nage, which were read a first time, and ordered t"
read a second time that day fortnight.
The House then adjourned at Twelve o'clecltr

A

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION
nod
(From the Votes and Proceedings of the House rf ans
FYIIDAI, FEL 15. -R LL• .0
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, BANKRUPTCY ,-1 Liest,l-_,ll
Order for Committee read ; Motion made, attqAir:" —7,
proposed, ~ That Mr. Speaker do now leave the route
to proposed, to leave out from the vordworde “1
to the end of the Question, in order to add the : rode
be t , W
Select Committee be appointed, to consider the '
dealing with the office of Registrar of Bankrupeow -'l'
vacant," instead thereof: Question putti,e"QTabeasttiot" 11;
proposed to be left out stand part of t
louse divided :

MINORITY—AYES, 51171cii, gerir lobn
Abdy, T. N. Hayter, W. G.
Anson, Colonel inillhf
ord John
Bobbouse, Sir John 11° Baring, 11. B. Ilobhouse, T. B. Russell, ,C.
Bellew, It. M. Howard, Lord E. RusSell, 1.;
Berkeley, C. L. G. Howard, Sir It. Shell, R. -,-",,,,ri of
Boyle, Colonel Jervis, Sir John Shelburne, .-
Brockman, E. D. Koppel, G. T. Simeon, John fir,
Campbell, W. F. Kildare, Marquis of Somerville,Sitl, i
Caulfeild, J. M. Labouchere, Henry Spearman,n'inidle,
Cockburn, Alex. Lascelles, W. S. Stuart, Lord ~'
..T.
Craig, W. G. Lewis, G. C. Tennent, . _cat.
Dinulas, Admiral Lindsay, Colonel Townshend,.. el
Ebrington, Viscount Martin, C. W. Watkins, Col
Elliot, John Maule, Fox Willcox, Or°l%
Ferguson, Sir R. Mulgrave, Earl Wilson, JAMeS
,
Freestun, Colonel Ogle, S. C.
Wyld, Jara' adagio
Grey, Sir G. Paget, Lord A. wyvili
, marl°
Grey, R. W. Palmerston, Vis. TELL'
Ilatehell, John Parker, John Tufhell. 1k.,00/
Hawes, Benj. Pelham, D. A. Hill, Lord 0.

MAJORITY—NOES, 61. , net
Aglionby, H. A. Grattan, Henry SaIWOY' 1,01,7000
Best, John Greene, John Scholetleld,
ci,
Blair, Stephen Gwyn, Bowel Scully, Fl
Brotherton, Joseph Ilardcastle, J. A. Shaft°, It* tie•'ara
Brown, W. Headlatn, Thomas Spooner, ~,.• 1.1. •
Bunbury, E H. Heald, James Stanford,..r. s.
Carter, J. B. Hudson, George Stanton, IT
Clay, James Keogh, William Stuart, W'
el
Cobbold, John C. Kershaw, James Sullivan,
„... iv.
Cocks, T. S. King, P. J. T red' 11
Ralph anc __,
el
Currie, Henry INl‘Naghten, Sir,E. Thicknessn: colon
Dodd, George Mangles, It. D. TrioinOe 000
W.
Douglas, Sir C. Manners, Lord J. Thorne 'George 0.
Duff, G. S. Matheson, Colonel Turilcr;bny. ~,ir.,,,
Duke, Sir J. Morris, David Willo" tat.
tho
Duncan, George Mullings, J. It. 11
Duncuft, John Palmer, lioundell 11:ii0:°d1:'13V. *V
Evelyn, W. J. Patten, W. 10°I.
Fagan, W. Pilkington, James . TX if,
I 'liner, Sir E.
Iforster, M. ll.:laowlvdciocnn,,
Cllo'l. 0 I.
lIIIOc
un,l.eeyr.i.
0J; $ , r•
Graham, Sir J. Ricardo, Osman ...-.:1

th
AUSTRALIAN COLONIES GRANT BILL.-- are ',1,0.
fort
just been printed. Its leading provisierl9der
Phillip be formed into a separate colon'', ar.gar t
ad
title of the colony cf Victoria—that the Gove-eleatar4
Council a New South Wales are to establish ,-„blishett
districts—that Legislative Councils may be Tivest°;rl;
in Van Diemen's Land, South Australia, itr::Coline',..o
Australia—that the Governors and LegislativA' We6te'r
of Victoria, Van Diemen's Land, South amilovera°4:
Australia, are authorised to make laws—that `-(1 rstes
and Legislative Councils may regulate tolls oh. t Coo°.
istrict4, alter constitution and duties of Distrelet 1,;
ells, and number and boundaries of districts's"' that t'd
toms duties may be imposed on any goods'yioviere
General Assembly, which the colonies arn Coll?:
to establish, may alter rules prescribed thedewrw tbii;
ell, and to vary its constitution—that ll"..,acled
General Assembly shall supersede those e,":3 oa sEire;
separate colonies—that duties shall not be lell,`"b treo""„
plies for troops, nor any duties inconsistent Wit Co°ll-;
—and that power be possessed by Governors alter t-
ells, with assent of her Majesty in Council, t°
f
constitution of the Legislative Councils.
[ADVERTISEMENIT.:I—HoIIoway's pills ant "-prieri°?fa
Ire°6
Cure for Female Complaints.—Women at differeni; operhcnoe
life are subject to complaints which require a Pecu"3 e
to remove, and it is now an established fact, that there
40iittihr
so suitab'.e as Holloway's Pills, and their purifC. talci•pg,
render them invaluable to the maiden, the °ICI rn-y it ral;fri t
middle-aged; they are searching, cleansing, and Ye'cfee l'Y
so that females of all ages may take them with P!," dei/%, of
and it is truly astonishing to find the benefit that z, opechl alio.
taking a few doses, which speedily remove ever' oro v's
irregularity in the system and establish health oar sop"
Sold by all Vendors of Medicine, and at ProfeO
Establishment, 244, Strand, London.

BIRTHS G• F, 1°1113016
On the Bth inst., at Saudgate, the wife of G. . • g
no
Esq., of a son. 4 lia Ca°
On the llth inst., at Bath, the lady of C313'4"
52d Regiment, of a daughter. ~,, fo W6ter‘
On the 11th inst., the lady of A. H. Hall, •sq'' 0
cbto
gate, Sussex of a daughter.
On the 11th inst., at Rugby, the wife of the li°3' (I.
th Nap'er, of a daughter. e vife 0,
On the 12th inst , at Little Berkhampstead,
vii
O.
Bus
On k,
the 1 Esq., of a dau3th inst., in gh
Upper Harley-street,
ter.the
wife of t
L. Holland, Esq., of a son. ilr.
MARRIED.
On the 12th inst., at Eccles, Richard,
Barton, Esq ,of Springwood, Lancashire, In _4mill
Cheshire, to Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Sir Devi
bite'
wow?, Bart., of Claremont, Lancashire. rnbrok° to
eldest
d c10g...,3011. neojer.!
recetersbiret of
On the 11th inst., at Kilgerran Church
Edward Bearcrott, Esq., of Mere-hall, INSclbf, P(l.'
Eliza, youngest daughter of the late John
Fynone, Pembrokeshire.

,:3...............„<ir0niPt°1:1:
..,
--------
On the 11th inst., at Tuffo. e.w.im, Admiral
Gordon Bremer, K.C.B K C H•g ore,
41 the
On the 13th inst., in ' . ' •
Green-street, Grosvenor.Sl
Rev. Dr. S
Springer, aged 74. fli°4.
On the 9th inst . at Clift,,n• house, near Mother
beth, 65,
the wife of Henry Henry Walker, Esq•
Elizabeth, the oge
On the 9th inst., Rear- A-_
On the 11.thwi nifset .a
oft
atJ.
Port\ssp,:ociroahndueorrc4,l:Csscia
lir, nsosaferstvi,oi
enTsabb4olve
c, a
sp 1
vita le e ,
Esq., aged 75. '
On the 12th inst ,11:11exanderisq Alexander-square, svollci
Lincoln, Esq. •
maSntitydiolefntlyhe,
RatoßarleHntlred-Gburiadrgdes:
aCgaepdta7inl.Sinl°3 oirstf f°r‘
...---
.n...,',n,,,,i; ; -J,::;--,:,„I „,,, ~ i - _ ~,ii-ra::."0
Jo 11,
..t .. ~ 1 0 ,‘:(S ',,,1 .?: .... -- --ofilco, ple., 01
-., , rand, Printer, a'. The Szgt apt
Str2nd '
middi ' in the Piecinei et the 592•70 - in the
0110.11SAturday, February-Al6. 1850.

CONTRACTS for MEAT, BREAD VEGE-
-04 chT4BalLraE. S; EGo fer the Royal Marine Infirmaries at Woolwich

COOfil of the Director-General of the Medical Department of
he ce the Navy, Somerset-place, February ii, 1859.
lup'e 'United
Irv. ramissioners for executing the office of Lord High Admiral
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland do hereby give
they"co that on THURSDAY, the 7th larch next, at One o'clock,
Contract • be on
te treat with such persons as may be willing to
lownitirlact f
for supplying all such quantities of all or any of the fol-
ein,_ g
particles as shall from time to time be •regdred for the use of
6-4a7 both of the Royal Marine Infirmaries at Woolwich and
4851'14ra, from the let day of April next, to the 31st day of March,
'',l4. :—.

FRESH BEEF AND 3fUTTON;
BREAD,
MILK,
SOAP,
CANDLES,
day or , .er the supply of VEGETABLES at Woolwich from the Ist
Pril next to the 31st day of March, 1853.
.trat7:lll es of the Soap and Candles, and the Conditions of the Con-
_l'! a 7 be seen at the saud Offiee, or on application to the Pur-
, 11. s the respective Infirmaries.
tder will be received after One o'clock on the day of treaty,
StlLo..ay•
_ • °raced, unless the party attends, or an agent ter him duly
le4 in writinc:.
stiff I' Tender must be addressed to the Secretary of the Adml-
Ind bear in the left-hand corner the words "Tender for
tatenrd must also bo delivered at Somerset-place, acc°mParliel
signed by a responsible person, engaging to become
ki.L..4 with the person tendering in the sum of 1001. for the duo
11r,u*nee of each of the Contracts for the Beef and. Mutton, for
14471 kl)d for Vegetables, and in the stun of 501. for each of the

ENERAL ACCOUNT of the RECEIPTS
tAirt;!Od PAYMENTS of the CORPORATION for RELIEF of
411,1)/{lin the 4N 3IERC for the Yearll ANTS' SERVICE( their WIDOWS and
1849.

eX Fs. d. £ 13,
'from 1848 in Cash .. ..... ....LOU 5 5
but Cash
Accounts ••• • • • .... 691 13 2

RECEIVED.

1,715 18 7
bllty
10 454 11 7
bittfrre in London 'Vessels • • **** "• " • ••• • • • ••• • • •
ta2trin Out-port 'Vessels of Ports under the manage-
6773 7 8
beitie the Corporation (1848)•
4)2'2 Wages, forfeited, London, ••• • • .................620 . 6201
137
,1
'kerea-i"t° ditto Out-poKts •••• • • •
.....
• • 1,4104 0 0
zn„., ittlen received from the City of /u„,„`O'n and the Mercers' Company for sustained from not being rein-
444eist la Offices at the Royal Exchange. • £60085 0
tra c05t5....., •
..
Old soli • ; •
etat 111
Sea Annuities for 3,0001., sold at 87% per
2,632 10 0
Ceit Sea Annuities for 3,0001., sold at 93% per
• •
.....

2,812 10 0

£26,93910 7