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

1 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, June 6.
Their Lord3hips met at Fivo o'clock.
ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

IMPROVEMENT BILL.

This Bill was reported.
FEES (COURT OF COMMON PLEAS) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
SUNDAY FAIRS PREVENTION BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
EXCHEQUER-BILLS BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
PETITIONS.
The Earl of RODEN presented several petitions
against Post-office labour on Sundays.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented several petitions
complaining of agricultural distress.
Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition from the
Hon. F. Scott, the agent for the colony of New South
Wales against the Australian Colonies Government
Bill, and praying to be heard by counsel against the
same. He gave notice that on Monday, whe❑ his Noble
and Learned Friend would present a similar petition
from Mr. Low, he should move that these parties be
heard by counsel against the Bill.

GREECE.
The Marquis of LA.NSDOWNE thought it right to
draw the attention of the House to the motion of which
the Noble Lord had given notice for to-morrow. Com-
munications had bee❑ going on with France on the sub-
ject, which as yet had not led to any result, but he had
hopes that they would lead to a satisfactory result; but
satisfactory or not, the result must he known in a few
days; but the discussion of that motion at present would
tend to interfere with these negotiations, and he there-
fore hoped the Noble Lard would, on consideration of
the subjeet, defer his motion for a few days. He would
enter into an arrangement for the accommodation of the
Noble Lord, but he suggested to him the propriety of
deferring his motion,

Lord —STANLEY thought the Government had tried
to the utmost extent the parliamentary courtesy which was
usually extended on such occasions. The Noble Mar-
quis had before asked for the postponement of the motion.
Since that time six or seven weeks had elapsed, and since
that all the papers having been laid on the table, the
ransom having been paid, and the fleet having been
withdraan, he hoped that the discussion of which he
had given notice would take place, and now, on the very
eve of the discussion, the Noble Marquis
asked for a further postponement on the ground
of the negotiations going on with France. He
might have to touch upon that subject, but the great
object of the motion was to ascertain the opinion
of that House with regard to the original demands
on Greece and the manner of their enforcement.
He therefore was loth to defer the discussion for
a single
day; but if the Noble Marquis was
prepared to say Wet an impartial settlement
of the affairs
of Europe was likely to be come to,
in the course of a few days, and that the discus-
sion would tend to interfere with that settlement—
if the Noble Marquis would undertake to say that
in a few days the question would be settled, he
would postpone his motion until Monday se'nnight, with
the understanding that on that day, settlement or no
settlement, the discussion should come on.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE admitted that on a
former occasion he had asked for the postponement of a
motion of which the Noble Lord had only given notice
on the preceding night. He had hoped up to this morn-
ing that the discussion might have taken place ; but
stated on his responsibility as a Minister that he be-
lieved that the discussion, if it came on to-morrow,
would be detrimental to the public service, but he could
not say he thought it would be dangerous to the
peace of Europe. He was convinced that the
French Government had entered into that nego-
tiation with perfect good faith, and it had
been our wish throughout to co-operate cordially with
them. Ile was not surprised at the Noble Lord's anxiety
to bring on the discussion, and he should not, under any
circumstances, renew his application to the Noble Lord.
Lord STANLEY—Under those circumstances, I shall
postpone the motion to Monday se'nnight. .
PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS (IRELAND) BILL.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE rose to move the
second reading of the Parliamentary Voters (Ireland)
Bill, and he did not anticipate any opposition to the mo-
tion, because it was admitted on all hands, and by men
of all parties, that the present state of the Parliamentary
franchise in Ireland was a mere mockery of the principle
of representation.—(The Noble Marquis's voice was here
completely drowned by the noisy conversation of certain
persons at the foot of the throne, the Noble Marquis
turned towards them, and reminded them that a debate
was going on. This remonstrance was received with
loud cheers from all parts of the House.) Silence having
been restored, the Noble Marquis proceeded to detail
the provisions of the Bill. He said the House was well
aware that the Irish franchise had always been con
nected with the principle of property, it having been ori-
ginally enacted by Act of Parliament to belong to free
holders possessed of 405., and in 1792 or 1793 it was
further limited by the Irish Parliament, which declared
that the right to vote should only be given to those
freeholders who claimed and registered their right. He
had always lamented—looking at the period when that
alteration was made, it being the time when the privi
lege of voting for Members of Parliament was extended
to the Roman Catholics, thereby creating at once an
enormous addition to the constituency—that the oppor-
tunity was not then taken, while increasing the amount
of the constituency, on the one hand, of limiting the ex-
tent of the franchise on the other. He considered many
of the evils which had since afflicted Ireland were attri-
butable to the retention of the 40s. freeholders. It
was the possession of the right of making freeholders,
the temptation to make them, the enormous increase
their number consequent on the admission of the
Roman Catholic voters, and the amount of perjury,
bribery, and contrivance entailed by these means on the
country, by the desire to make what was called a strong
and commanding Parliamentary influence, which led ti
those evils. When the English Reform Bill was passed
it was thought that the right of franchise in Ireland
ought be considerably raised. Whether the precise
amour t that was right was then selected, was not a
question now to be considered, as the amount of the-
constituency bad since been materially diminished by
subsequent changes. The Irish Reform Bill created a
new class of voters, the 101. leaseholders, but even with
that addition the number of voters in Ireland had fallen
away to an amount which did not fairly represent the
general population, especially as regarded the county
constituency, which was now inferior to the borough
constituency. The present county constituency of Ire-
land was less than 30,000, or scarcely two per cent. on
the whole population. Indeed, at the last general elec-
tion there were more voters in one or two counties of
England than in the whole constituency of all Ireland.
During the last two years, also, that number had been
further greatly diminished in consequence of the suffer-
ings of the country. I
absolutely necessary to apply some remedy to this evil.
He would now state, as shortly as he could, the mode
It must then be apparent that it was
in which it was proposed to apply a remedy by this
Bill. It proposed in the first place—and he considered
this one of the principal and main recommendations of
this Bill, to get rid of the system of registration, the
most fertile source of uncertainty, corruption, and ve-
nality, and of trick and intrigue on the part of every in-
dividual, to obtain that which was worth something to
him for the worst of purposes. That alone he considered
a sufficient justification for the Bill. There was, how-
ever, a substitution, which was the rating to the poor.
All persons would have votes who were rated to the poor
at 81. a year, the registry be made by the clerk of the
peace, from the books, without the voter having any-
thing to do with it. Persons would not be entitled to
vote unless they had paid up their rates. That was the
main principle of the Bill, which referred almost solely,
however, to the county constituencies, no alteration
being made with regard to the boroughs, with the ex-
ception that voters would be subject to the same test of
rating as the county voters, and therefore giving them
the same facility of acquiring a vote without the neces-
sity of registration. All the other clauses were merely
for the purpose of carrying out those provisions, and,
therefore, he did not think it necessary to give any ex-
planation of them. He ought, however, to state, with
regard to the second clause, that if any objections were
made to it, he should not defend it, as he thought they
ought rather to discourage than encouragejoint tenancy.
He then moved that the Bill be read a second time.

Lord STANLEY
thought me
deserving of the support of the House, especially as it
tended to assimilate the law in Ireland to that now ex-
isting in England. At the same time there were other
portions so
work so injuriously not only in their immediate effect on
dangerous in principle, and calculated to
the constituency of Ireland, but in their possible effect
on the constituency of the country at large, he meant as
regarded the principle and extent of the proposed fran-
chise, that unless considerable alterations were made in
the Bill in Committee, he should feel it his duty to do
all in his power to induce their Lordships to reject it on
the ithird reading. He contended that th© system of
registration carried on in Ireland was quite different
teri
from that in England and Scotland, and that bad as it
was heretofore it would be rendered much more dele-
ou by the proposed measure; and would prove this
assertion by showing that, instead of an annual regis-
tration, as
The Noble Lord then contrasted the number of electors
in England, the system in Ireland is octennial.
that existed in Ireland in the years 1832, 1840, and 1848,
and argued _that the number of county constituents in
1832 was only 59,000, whereas, in 1847, there was an aug-
mentation of 2,000, making the number of county elec-
tors 61,000. But, at the same time he would request
of their Lordships to look to the astounding diminution
owing to the distress in that country, produced partly
by famiae, and partly by free trade ; for from 61,000
Irish constituents in 1847, Ireland, in the following
year, could not boast of more than 34,000, and in 1849
the number was again reduced to 27,000. He admitted
that this falling off was attributable, in a great mea-
sure, to the popular excitement created by the famine,
which deterred thousands from entering their names on
the registry list; and should add, that he had it on the
best authority, that in some counties of that ill-fated
country there were not more than 900 electors out of
5,000 inhabitants; and he expressed his delight that the
peeplo of Ireland be
and important interest than agi-
tation. an to know that there were other 1
matters of more vital
He would next refer to the boroughs, and was
prepared
to show that though there was a diminution
in the constituencies of the counties, there was
a very great increase in the electors of the,
boroughs, amounting to 2,000. He should also say
that he totally disc greed with the two propositions in-
volved in the Bill, and so strongly alluded to by the
Noble Marquis (Marquis of Lansdowne), and hoped that
such principles would not be pressed, as they must ine-
vitably result in a serious injury to Ireland, and become
a precedent for many of the Chartists and others in
England to demand a vote by ballot. Though he did
not mean to oppose the second reading of the Bill, yet
he should remonstrate with the Government, and hoped
tint a measure fraught with so much danger to the
..... ~._.......: if,

framework of society in Ireland, would be reconsidered
and withdrawn. When the Noble Marquis exprersed
hs regret that the forty-shilling freeholders had not been
abolished at an earlier period, he (Lord Stanley) thould
::ay that he fully coincided with him; and he was there-
fore more astonished that the Government should now in-
troduce a measure which would be far worse to Ireland
than the law which created forty-shilling freeholders.
Whe❑ the Noble Marquis said that he wis'ned that an in•
terest of 5/. per annum was to c institute the grounds of
the franchise, did he not reflect that such a system would
be far more pernicious than the 40s. freehold system ?
He did flat consider it right that one-sixth of the electors
of the entire kingdom should be established by this Bill,
particularly as such a line of proceeding would negative
the influence of the respectable class of society, and
would also introduce into the House of Commons a set of
men that would be likely to mar the best objects of any
Government. He feared that Government, in their ad-
vocacy of this Bill, were putting the poisoned chalice to
their own lips, and that ere long they would heartily
regret their present ambition; far he would ask their
Lordships to look to the county of Mayo, where 1 000
paupers, at a rating of 8/. would swamp the respectable
portion of the community in that county. The Noble
Lord then contrasted the constituency of Scotland with
what this measure was likely to provide for Irel old, and
said that nothing could be more unfair or unjust than
that. He also argued that it would be the means of
creating division and altercation between the tenant and
the landlord on the one hand, and between the priest
tnd the landlord on the other. lie then &hided to Mr.
Griffiths' valuation, and said that at the time that that
valuation was made that the price of corn was up to 505.
per quarter, whereas at present it is not more than 30s.
He would not oppose the second reading, but should
coLtest every clause in Committee.

Earl GREY considered there was a political necessity
for increasing the elective franchise in Inland, which
was now, by a variety of circumstances, dwindled down
to a lamentable amount. The Noble Earl then entered
into a consideration of the circumstances which operated
to reduce the constituency of Ireland, and proceeded to
say that the nature of the property in that country was
such, that unless they came to the resolution of increas-
iug the franchise, the consequences would be prejudicial
to the best interests of the people. He thought that
there was an absolute necessity for making occupation
the test; and on the other hand by taking rating in con-
nexion with that test, he thought they could not have a
better security for the increase and proper exercise of
the elective franchise. He considered also, that an 81.
ratting was not too low, and that the best principle which
their Lordships could act upo❑ for the right ex'ension of
the franchise, would be not merely the principle of making
the rating of individuals a necessary qualification for the
right to vote, but also that principle which subjected them
to be rated for the relief of others. There was one part
f the system under the English Reform Bill which he
considered of the utmost value in the consideration of
this question, that of annual registration, which he
trusted their Lordships would not lose sight of in the
consideration of this Bill. The principle on which that
system worked was of the greatest value, acting as it
did, annually, to cause the rate-payer to renew his in-
terest in his right to vote; and whether the qualification
was to be fixed as low as 81. or not, he hoped their Lord-
,hips would give their assent to the second reading of the
Bill now before the House.—(ilear.)
Lord DES ART could not refrain from expressing his
protest against this Bill, believing, as be did, that no cir-
cumstance could tend more to defeat improvement in
Ireland than the adoption of the Bill now before their
Lordships' House. The Noble Lord then went into de-
tails of those circumstances and relations which exist
between landlord and tenant in Ireland, and expressed
his opinion that the adoption of the Bill would sever
those relations, setting the tenant against his landlord,
and forming a came which would lead to his making war
upon him. He bore testimony to the great assistance
which he had received from the Roman Catholic clergy-
men in his part of Ireland, in maintaining order; but
their exertions were, he said, defeated by those illegal
societies which were combined for the purpose of over-
throwing all landlord interest in Ireland, and should this
Bill be passed by their Lordships, it would be a weapon
placed in the hands of those most mischievous classes,
which would enable them to accomdlish that object. He
,herefore trusted that their Lordships would not give
their assent to the second reading of this Bill.
. _

The Earl of ST. GERMANS considered that the
opponents of the Bill, while they stated their objections
to the measure, had altogether failed to advert to the
evils which it was intended to remedy ; while on the
other hand, the supporters of the 1.311 l evaded allusion to
the objectionable clauses. Since the year 1835 there
'tad been an annual diminution in the number of elec-
tors, and it was become necessary that it should be en-
larged, hut he admitted, to such an extent that the
constituency should bear proportion to the population.
What was wanted in Ireland was a real and bona fide
constituency, and he did not believe that the granting of
the franchise to the Irish people on a low qualification
would induce the English people to claim a similar
franchise. He objected, however, to the 8/. qua-
lification, and thought that the class of men
whom it would constitute as electors were not
those, either from their position or intellect, who should
be armed with the franchise. The qualification was
too low, and it would be much better if it were made to
depend on houses of a certain amount of value. lie
thought a 121. qualification should be adopted,
it' they took house and land as the test of value. The
Noble Marquis had thrown overboard the joint occupy-
ing clause, and he need hardly say that this determina-
tion on the part of the Government gave him great sa-
tisfaction. He objected to the clause which gave a 5/.
tenant for life a vote, anti he should oppose it in Cow-
-1 mates, believing that if it were permitted to remain in
the Bill it would have the elf-et of creating fictitious
voters. In conclusion, the Noble Lord suggested that
as the present time was most suitable for the enactment
tf a registration Bill, there should be a compromise on
the part of the Commons as regarded the qualification
clauses, and in that event they might reasonably hope to
have a good Bill.
The Earl of WICKLOW rejoiced at the abandon-
ment of the joint tenantcy clause, and pledged himself 0
give all the amendments intended to be proposed, the
most serious consideration in Committee. In the prin-
ciple of the Bill he fully concurred, and he believed that
when the details were properly corrected, it would work
well, and be attended with good results.
The Earl of GLENGALL said that he considered
that there was a very great injustice in this measure, as
it placed the pauper, whose holding was rated at 5/. per
,annum, on a footing with the most respectable persons in
the counties; whereas, on the other hand, the boroughs
were justly and well protected from such an innovation.
Again, he should beseech their Lordships to oppose any
measure such as this, which tended to create turmoil
and dissatisfaction between the people, their priests, and
the landlords. And, again, ho should add, this measure
would tend to crowd the House of Commons with such
agitators as the late Mr. O'Connell, and other such Irish
demagogues, which would ultimately tend to the disrup•
tion of the constitution.

The Marquis of WESTMEATII said that he was
astonished that such a measure should be supported by
Government, for nothing could be more pernicious to
the landed interest of Ireland, and particularly when it
tended to place the irresponsible portion of Irish society
on a footing with the respectability of the country.
The Earl of \VICKLO W said that the Committee that
sat on the poor-law fbr Ireland considered that this mea-
sure was essentially requisite for Ireland.
The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on this day (Friday) week.
The Sunday Trading Prevention Bill was read a third
time, and passed.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 6.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Lords' amendments to the following Bills were
considered, and agreed to:—Exeter and Crediton Rail-
way, Nottingham Freemen's Allotments, Royal Col-
lege of Surgeons of Edinburgh.
The following Bills were read a third time, and
passed:—Croydon and Reigate Turnpike Road; Eastern
Union Railway; Newcastle-upon-Tyne Improvement,
Amendment of Acts, and New Streets; Snaith and
Cowick, Union of the Townships, &c.; Tewkesbury
Severn Bridge and Roads; Ulverstone, Millthorpe,
and Lancaster Turnpike Road; Wolverhampton Water-
works Act (Amendment and Extension of Works).
The Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton, Birming-
ham and Oxford Junction, and Great West,?rn Railway
Companies Bill, as amended, was considered and agreed to.

PETI LIONS.
Mr. DUNCAN presented a petition from a place in
Forfarshire against Sunday labour in the Post-office.
Admiral DUNDAS presented a petition from Green-
wich against certain clauses in the Savings' Bank Bill.
Mr. ELLIOT presented petitions from Ha wick,
Peebles, Selkirk, Galashields, and other places in Scot-
land, against the Ten Hours' Bill ' • also petitions pray-
ing for an alteration in the Scottish Poor-law.

Mr. HOPE presented a petition from Hull against the
Mercantile Marine Bill.

Mr. R. PALMER presented a petition from the trus-
tees of a savings bank in Dorset against certain clauses
in the Savings' Banks Bill.
Lord ROTHAM presented a petition from the East
Riding of Yorkshire also against certain clauses of the
same Bill.

Admiral GORDON presented a petition from Dun-
dee against Sunday labour in the Post office.
Mr. SLANGY presented a petition approving of the
Savings' Banks Bill, but objecting to certain clauses.
Mr. J. CLAY presented a petition from the Hull
Chamber of Commerce against the Mercantile Marine
Bill.

Mr. KERSHAW presented a petition from Stock-
port against the Ten Hours Bill.

. -
Sir B. HALL presented a petition in favour of the
enfranchisement of copyholds; also a petition from
Marylebone in favour of the Government Interments
Bill, but objecting to certain clauses.
Mr. B. OSBORNE presented a petition from Coventry
in favour of secular education.

Col. CHATTERTON presented a petition from Cork
against the Mercantile Marine Bill.

AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.

Mr. DISRAELI presented a petition from landowners,
manufacturers, tradesmen, labourers, and artisans, in
the county Palatine of Lancaster, with 15,130 signa-
tures attached to it, complaining of the injurious effects
of our experimental legislation on the labour
and productive power of the country, of the
unrestricted admission of the produce of foreign labour;
that the owners and occupiers of land with diminished
means had to suffer additional burdens; that the hasty
abandonment of protective duties had been injurious to
the agricultural interest without benefiting the country,
and praying the House to redress those grievances, and
to adopt such a system as should place them in
fair competiton with the foreigner, and give a renewed
stimulus to agriculture, encourage manufactures, and
promote the extension of commerce.—(Cheers from the
Protectionist benches.)

~ J

JUNE 7, 1850.

Mr. HUME presented a petition from Montrose
ngAinEt the Mercantile Marine Bill.
NOTICE OF MOTION. _

Mr. SCROPE gave notice that to-morrow he would
put a questi,m to the Right Hon. the Secretary for Ire-
land on the subject of Irish evictions.

THE OVERLAND ROUTE.

Mr. DIVETT moved for a statement showing the
total cost of transmitting the mails and dispatches be-
tween Bombay a ,d Suez by the East India Company,
and towards which the sum of 50,0001. per annum has
been granted out of the revenue of the Unitsd Kingdom,
during the years 1848 and 1849, or to the latest period that
the accounts can be made up, including wages, victualling,
and allowances of officers, crews, and engineers, coals and
engine stores, and sea stores, and an allowance of ten
per cent, for repairs, five per cent. for depreciation, six
per cent for sea risk in lieu of premium of insurance, and
four per cent, interest per annum on the total
first cost of the steam-vessels employed; the net
amount of passage money received by the
East India Company, deducting victualling and
allowance to the commanders or other persona for the
same periods; the same al to the cost of transmitting the
bi monthly mails b,tween Bombay and Aden : also the
names, tonnage, and horse power of the steam-vessels
employed; and the dates of their departures from and
arrival at Bombay and Suez, and Bombay and Aden
respectively, on each voyage during the same period (in
continuation of Parliamentary paper, No. 746, of ses-
sion 1848).—Agreed to.