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

LAW OF LANDLORD AND TENANT.

In reply to a question from Mr. CLEMENTS, it was
stated that a Bill was in preparation for the amendment
of the laws regulating the property between landlord
and tenant.

COST OF EMIGRANTS TO NEW SOUTH
WALES.

Mr. SCOTT wished to know whether the Right Hon.
Baronet the Secretary at the head of the Home Depart-
ment had received any returns respecting the coat of
an emigrant ship, amounting to 3501., which it was de-
sired to draw from the funds of New South Wales, and
to the expenditure of which the colony objected.
Sir G. GREY said that no such returns had been re-
ceived, but that he expected them in a few days. The
colonial fonds would not be applied to the emigration of
any person convicted of 'crime.
CORONERS' INQUESTS IN IRELAND.

Mr. P. SCROPE rose to put a question to the Secre-
tary for Ireland, respecting the 590 coroners' inquests
held last year in Ireland, according to the report of the
Poor-law Commissioners, in which verdicts of death from
want were recorded. He had to ask whether the Poor-
law Commissioners had made inquiry into those 590
cases, and whether they had in any one of those cases of
death from want found that one single death had been
occasioned by such an amount of neglect on the part of
the relieving officers as to warrant them (the Poor-law
Commissioners) in instituting criminal prosecutions
against those parties.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that certainly it was
without doubt that many persons had died in Ireland on
whom the verdict cf died of want had been passed. He
believed it was not the practice generally to hold in-
quests over persons who died in workhouses.
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE (BANKRUPTCY) BILL.
Mr. HENLEY wished to ask the Attorney-General a
question with regard to the Bill which he had asked the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman to postpone in the early
part of this week. The Bill would necessarily take
some time in discussing, and he wished to ask the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman if he would undertake not to
go on with the Bill to-night if it did not come on until
late?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that be certainly
would not go on with the Bill if it did nut come on be-
fore twelve o'clock.
DANISH WAR.—RENEWAL OF BLOCKADE.
Mr. SANDARS said that, as the Noble Lord the
Secretary for Foreign Affairs was not in his place, he
should put the question to the Noble Lord on Monday
night; or, if he were not then present, to any Minister
who might happen to be there.
Mr. DISRAELI said the question of which Mr. San-
, dars had given notice was as follows:—" To a,,k the
Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affiirs, if it be
true that the Danish Government has refused to renew
the armistice of the 10th of July last; and, if so, whether
the Noble Lord considers as a natural consequence the
renewal of the blockade cf the Prussian ports of the Baltic,
and the Elbe." Now he (Mr. Disraeli) would az,k the
Noble Lord the First Minister whether it was the Danish
Government that had refused to renew the armistice?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Danish Go-
vernment had not refused.
ECCLESIASTIC AL COMMISSION.

Mr. HOESMAN said that, instead of the motion of
which he had given notice, he should move for the pro-
duction of tho proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Commis-
sion relative to the matLir of the secretaries.

DISTIIESSED UNIONS (I REL INM-ADVANCES

AND REPAYMENT OF ADVANCES.

The House then went into Committee, and

Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose to propose certain
resolutions respecting advances and the repayment
of advances to distressed unions in Ireland,
and in doing so said he would endeavour to
spare the Committee the necessity of going into any
de'ails on the subject, and confine himself to a state-
meat of general views concerraing the state of Ireland,
and the grounds on which the Government thought
is right to propose the resolutions he was about
to submit. For many years the condition of Ire-
land had been lamentable in many respects, but no
remedy of the Legislature could be made applicable
to the evils which existed. A great number of the la-
bouring classes in that cuuetry were in the receipt of no
wages, and depending ler their livelihood upon the
cultivation of smell plots of ground ; some
seasons of the year they suffered great distress.
which had produced much crane. Whilst entericg into
the policy which of late years heal teen adopted, he
would state that the failure of the potato crop and the
consequent famine which had taken place, had produced
evils with which the Legislature had as yet been unable to
deal. An immense alteration had taken place in the state of
the country, and on one hand it was no doubt gratifying
to find that we no longer have, to any considerable ex-
tent, those outrages and murders which were formerly
so prevalent, while, on the other hand there had been
the greatest disposition upon the part of all persons of
property, whether landlords or tenants, to preserve the
lives of the great mass of the people under the pressure
of an avvfa,l calamity. This change had taken place
through no influence of the Legislature, but the interpo-
sition of the Legislature may assist the country
in its present transition state. But in doing so
the Legislature must always le guarded against two
great dangers—one was not to impose too great burdens
upon the property of Ireland, or the people might be
discouraged from cultivating the soil, and the other not
to assist with too much liberality Ile poor labourers who
had been deprived cf their labour by the failure of the
potato. Having said thus much, be would now proceed to
state what he thought was a fair encouragement to hope
for the future. He ha I before him the reports of a number
of officers engaged under the Beard of Works in the
different counties in Ireland, some including
the distressed counties, and, with the exception
of the county of Clare, they generally bear
testimony to an increased desire on the part cf.the
people to cultivate the land. With respect to two of
these counties which they had heard of as being most
distressed, the reports state that although there was
much land untenanted, yet there would not be any great
difficulty in procuring tenants at a redaction of 25
per cent. on the previous rents. He had likewise reports
with regard to the fisheries, and they all gave very
satisfactory accounts of the visible improvements in the
country. Now, he held in his hand a return of the ex-
penses incurred during the four last months of last year
including the months of October, November, December,
and January. During October the decrease of 48,0004
during November 40,0001., during December 40,0001.,
and in January 7,0001; making a total of about 188,00 W.
The return with respect to the relief given
to persons out of doors was much the same, the
whole numbers showing that the reduction of these
persona was in the whole as many as 405,341 during the
same period of four months.—(Hear, hear.) This was
owing to various causes, for it appeared from the several
reports of the secretaries of the different poor-law unions
that this decrease had arisen partly from a better under-
standing of the principle of the poor-law, partly from a
desire to decrease expenses, partly from a desire to carry
the law into effect, and an acquired discrimina-
tion in the discovery of imposture.—(Hear, hear.)
The indoor relief had been rather increased. In De-
cember, 1848, it amounted to 14,902/., and in 1849 it
was 18,2061., being an increase of 3,294/.; but there was
a decrease in the outdoor relief, in the month of De-
cember, amounting to 2,867/. The total indoor and out-
door relief had been respectively 297,918/. and
147,3971. That, certainly, so far was satisfactory,
as it showed there was an improvement even
in those districts which were considered the first. Now,
in proceeding to consider this question, he should
state that of the opinions which had been given by various
persons in Ireland from whom they had received reports,
there was none that was more prevalent than the state-
ment, that the burdens arising from the expenditure
on the lean of former years now imposed
such heavy cost on many unions in Ireland,
' that although they might be able to bear
the burden that arose from the relief of the poor, they
were not able* to sustain at the same time the repay-
ment of the loan. He would now state what had been
the loans which had been made of late years to the unions
in Ireland. Beginning with 1839, the SUM of 1,225,0001.
was raised for building workhouses in Ireland, 47,000/.
being allowed to be deducted from it for mismanagement
in construction of the workhouses. The next public debt
was for labour in the spring of 1846. The sum of
476,000/. had been advanced, of which 238,0001. was re-
mitted, and the other half spread over 20 half-yearly
instalments. Shortly after 4,850,0001. was advanced,
of which one-half was afterwards spread over 20 half-
yearly instalments iu a similar manner. A sum was
oad-
vanced for temporary
relieff, which only 953,000/. was
the remainder had been
required to be paid;
remitted. In the August of fait year an
additional sum was authorised to be advanced
of 60,000/. The sums which were at the present time
due from Ireland were—first, 1,131,000/e—cm ad-
ditional sum of 100,0001.—a sent advanced for work-
houses 158,0001,—a sum advanced the 9th of Victoria
2,305,000/.—the sum advanced for temporary re-
lief upwards of 700,000/., amounting in all to 4,453,000/.
Thera was a proposal made, which -had been sanctioned
by an Act of Parliament, to enable the Irish counties to
extend the time of payment over 20 years, upon applica-
tion, and there Ras also a provision to shorten the
time. Six counties had applied to have the time ex-
tended, and two to have it shortened. The state
of the counties in Ireland was very varied.
White some loans bora interest, there were others on
which no interest was required, and he proposed that
the same arrangement mould be continued—that the
loans which were liable to interest should continue
to pay it, alul that those which were not Should be

exempted from the payment of any. There were other
heavy charges upon some unions, which prevented them
making exertions to provide the necessary workhouse
accommodetioa for the poor, and to give relief to the
destitute. He alluded to the contracts which bad
been made during the period of famine for the
Supply of goods and clothing to the work-
houses. The unions had refused to pay the
contractors owing to their impoverished condition, and
the consequence was that in several workhouses
the effects had been seized upon, and the guardians
were obliged to pay 6/. per cent. upon the sum
due, in order to prevent the effects being disposed of.
Now it appeared that these difficulties were mainly owing
to the famine, and if they could be relieved from them
they would be able to begin afresh, and thereby carry
into effect the due administration of the poor-laws.
Such is the opinion of the Poor-law Commis-
sioners, more especially of Mr. Power, who
is now in this country, who had repeated his
opinion that a little assistance would enable several
unions to build temporary workhouses, and by the ap-
plication of the workhouse test greatly to diminish the
expenditere. Such being the case, Government thought
it advisable to propose that there should be added
to the sum already advanced an amount which
would make the total advances amount to the
sum of 4,483,000/, for the purpose of assisting
the unions and enabling them to discharge their liabili-
ties, and which should be repayable by instalments in
forty years. According to the accounts they had re-
ceived the general debts of the poor-law unions in
Ireland were diminished between September and De-
cember by no less a sum than 100,0001., but the distressed
unions, which were about thirty, had been unable to
effect any reduction in their liabilities. At the end of
December last the debts, besides those due to the elec-
toral divisions, amounted to 270,0001. ; and the Poor-
law Commissioners were of opinion that, if these debts
could be discharged, not only would they be able to carry
on the due administration of the unions, but in some cases
it would enable the Poor-later Commissioners to make
the divisions in accordance with the report of the
Boundary Commissioners, which otherwise they might
not be able to do.—(Year, hear.) Now, it was
deemed advisable that the unions should be
divided into electoral districts. Some of these
districts bad been already arranged. Eight were in
course of formation, and nine had already been formed.
In these districts it had been ascertained that the law
had been fully and wisely carried into effect. He would
now state to the House what had been the result of the
formation of these electoral districts upon the popula-
tion. [Sir George Grey here reminded his Lordship of
the reduction of the debt of the unions.] Yes; the
debt of the several unions he had to state was about
270,000/., which had by subsequent outlay been in-
creased to 370,000/. The whole amount cf the debt
of the several unions was 4,783,000/. The =mint
actually required to be liquidated was about 250,000/.,
of which sum about 150,0001. had been de-
frayed, and beyond which about 50,000/. more was
already prepared for payment, being, he believed, now
in the hands of the several guardians. Much of the
business which had been transacted in these unions had
been concluded under the authority of several of the Acts
of Parliament by which the affairs of the Irish unions
had been of late conducted.—(Hear.) But be must now
state what was their opinion of the workhouse
test upon the population at large.—(Hear, bear.)
On the Ist of January last it appeared that in England
and Wales there was about 1 in 15 receiving relief from
the poor-rates, whereas in Ireland, in the month of
December, there was only 1 in 27 receiving poor relief.
He therefore thought they should not be acting im-
prudently, but wisely, if they enabled the poor-
law unions in Ireland to provide themselves still
further with workhouses. Now, therefore, the proposal
he had to make was, in the first place, that the general
sums which had been advanced to Ireland, beginning
with the workhouse le ans in 1839, and going on to the
advances made in 1846 and 1847 and subsequent years,
should, when it was desired, and where the pressure on
the poor lass unions appeared to be mani-
festly great, be converted into consolidated an-
nuities, and be payable with interest where interest
was due. The next proposal was, that the sum of
300,00 u/. should be advanced for the purpose
of enabling beards of guardians, under the
the direction of the Poor-law Commissioners, to
pay off the debts incurred for fiod and clothing,
during the periods of distress. (Hear, hear.)
There was now a prospect of Ireland being able to
recover from that very great depression in der which she
had long laboured, and to enter upon a new
social career. It was evident, if they were
to look to that state of society which
exLted in Ireland from 176 S to 1815, they would
be only looking to the recurrence of misery and blood-
shed, the people being utterly destitute of those means
of comfort to which the civilized nations of Europe were
accustomed. There had not been those sums expended in
farm buildings andin improvements which the landed gen-
try in England and Scotland are accustomed to make by
agreement with their tenants; there had not been that
regularity in the payment of the farm labourers which
ought to be the source of maintenance to them.
Everything there had been dirorder and disorga-
nization. Hence arose those crimes and disorganiza-
tion which seemed beyond the power of legislation.
to amend. Those things were not for them to dispose
of, but he (the Noble Lord) hoped that Ireland was ap-
proaching to that time when society might be constituted
in a better manner, In which landlords, farmers, and
peasantry, wculd unite to. make her a happy and con-
tented country.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord concluded
by moving a resolution embodying the proposition eaun-
ciat ,d in his speech.
Mr. F. FRENCH said he could not a.-;ree with the
Noble Lord in the discredit whirih he had tbrox a upon
the landlords and tenants in Ireland, t) whose disunion
ho had alleged many of the evils in the country were to
he attributed. He l6oked upon the propsition of the
Noble Lord with great su.ipiciou, considering it fraught
With ills fir Irelaug, but pregnant with benefits for
England.
Mr. MONSELL represented one of the most dis-
tressed counties in Ireland, and he felt bound to tender
to her Majesty's Government his best thanks for the
course they had adopted. lie differed from the
Honourable Member for Bosscommon, in thinking
that this measure was not a liberal one; he thought it
was greatly so, and that the best thanks cf the people of
Ireland were due to the Government far bringing it
forward.

The E trl of ARUNDEL and SURREY adverted to
the conduct of the Kilruela Union, and expressed an
opinion favourable to the proposition of the Noble Lord
at the headf the Government.
Colonel SfBTHORP could not support the resolutions,
and would take every opportunity to oppose them.
Mr. P. SCROPE said that he highly approved of those
resolutions, as they as much concerned the interest of
the people of England as the Irish; he therefore thought
that the people of this country should see that these re-
solutions were fairly carried out by the boards of guar-
dians. He should, ;hoVrever, say that he differed from
the Noble Lord when he asserted that there was a con-
siderable reduction in the poor-rates. If such were the
case, he believed that it was effected by the denial of
relief to the poor in those unions to which the Noble
Lord adverted. Yes, the unions of Kilrush, Scarry,
Eanistymon, and Westport were witnesses of those re-
ductions, effected through the unwarrantable means of
denying relief to the poor applicants. He had been in-
formed that, at the time that out-door relief was denied,
the diet given in those workhouses was not such as was
prescribed by the regulations of the Poor-law Commis-
sioners; and that the result was that the poor, who
would otherwise necessarily have made application, were
deterred by the numerous deaths in those workhouses,
occasioned by bad diet, and therefore took as a choice to
risk their lives in their huts and hovels, and by the ditch
side, rather than go into such charnelhouses.
Mr. CLEMENTS said that he considered that every
Irishman owed a deep debt of gratitude to the Noble
Lord for those most beneficial measures that ho had in-
troduced. He certainly objected to the amount of money
granted to the unions in the west, because he felt assured
that it would be very difficult to carry out the law in
those unions. He thought that it would be much more
beneficial if the waste lands would be reclaimed by a
grant, and that they be made exempt from the poor-
rate for some years. This project would give employ-
ment to the poor, and would be productive of general
utility.
Lord CLAUD HAMILTON said that he fully con-
curred in the system of giving employment to the poor,
and hoped that the Noble Lord would take it into con-
sideration.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY wished to know whether this
grant of 300,0001., with the debt of 4,783,0001., is to be
converted into consolidated annuities, and, if so, he
looked upon it as a most dangerous system of finance,
particularly when it extended over 40 years. He per-
fectly concurred with the resolutions, with the exception
of the system of consolidation.
Mr. GRATTAN said, that from the climate, soil,
harbours, and geographical position, Ireland was not in-
tended by Providence to become a beggar, and he would
join with the Hon. and Gallant Colonel (Col. Sibthorp)
in opposing these resolutions. England should make a
bold resolve, and nothing else could save her. Ireland
would most assuredly otherwise pull her down.—(Hear.)
How, he would ask, could England bear the drain
which Irish miseries were entailing on it? A paper had
that day been laid upon the table of the House on the
subject of emigration. Well, how was that question
operating in the case of Ireland. He fond, by a return
now in his hand, that 195,000 individuals had actually
arrived at Liverpool from Ireland, whence they were
drivea by starvation. The land was being deserted, and
did the House think that the masses who were thus
forced from Ireland could be friendly to the interests of
England in other countries? He hoped they would; but
he should much rather, in a time of danger, see those
masses happily located on their own soil. The difficul-
ties of this country in relation to the condition of Ire-
land were very great, and the question was, how were
they to getout of them ? He would tell them—by not
getting into them.—(Loud laughter.) The country was
ruined, and it became a question, were they to keep it in
this state? Such was the discontent in Ireland,
that it required the Government of this country to
keep an army of 50,000 men in that country. With re-
spect to the Irish " Protectionists," ho might say of
them, that they were Protectionists now that they had
nothing to lose, and that he despised men who were pro-
tectionists of a miserable shilling a bushel on corn. '].'he
Irish Members were really of no use to their country.
The bad landlords were a marked class—the bad land-
lords were " men to be shot at " from behind the hedge
—(Laughter)—while the good ones were free to walk
abroad. He had found that. The misgovernment of
the country was mainly the cause of the wretched state
in which the country now was. Were there no states-
men in England to stop the evil, and save the United
Kingdom from total ruin ? Was English statesmanship
Was there no
ytrybaPd dTeshteroy.edsChatham—nokGo-
vernmenti n and t Pitt—loeng
legislation a t no
nsrescue
tschyaitnseh
,ceec oec?uvoneuntnr
the
financial
the peace, the happinen,

happiness of Ireland. He found by returns, that
the revenue of Ireland had sunk down to 398,000/, while
the money sent out of the country to " absentee " land-
lords amounted to 4,000,000/. By returns which he also
held in his hand, he found that 200,0001. had been paid
in the last year for fever and famine in Ireland. The
Encumbered Estates Bill was now in operation in Ire-
land, and with respect to that he would say to the
Government, if they sell up men, let them sell up the
men who were the cause of such a state of things as he
bad been deploring in that country—let them do that,
and not sell up innocent men. He did not think, with
respect to the " infusion of new blood" into Ireland,
spoken of by Sir Robert Peel, that the Right Honour-
able Baronet would live to see it. The Right Honour-
able Baronet imagined that an array of new menwould
spring up in that country, like men armed cap-a-pie, and
springing forth from the head of Minerva, but the Hon.
Baronet would be disappointed. He (bar. Grattan)
would again say to the House in the same language
which had before given so much offence to some Ho-
nourable Members, " Take back your money;" it
is not your money the Irish require, but justice ;
you make them beggars when you should make
them men.

Lord BERNARD could not but thank the Govern-
ment for the advance which it proposed in aid of the
distressed unions in Ireland on the present occasion;
and to the Noble Lord at the head of the Government
he thought especial thanks were duo for having pro-
posed it thus early in the session. The distress in many
of the unions was deep, and ho had no doubt the ad-
vance would prove a most seasonable relief.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to make one or two observa-
tions to the House on the subject now under considera-
tion. In most parts of Ireland, he was glad to be
enabled to state, there were some improvements in
the sadly distressed and disastrous condition of the peo-
ple over the last four years. He could comprehend the
claims which some Hon. Members in that House had put
forward for the 300,0001. which the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government proposed to advance to pay oil
the debts of some of the distressed unions. He did not,
however, think that the Noble Lord had sufficiently ex-
plained to the House how it was that there were such an
enormous amount of arrears in some of those unions.
While he was in Ireland, a few months ago, his atten-
tion had been fixed on the condition of one or two of
the unions, and he found that the greater portion of the
money due was owing, not by the occupiers, but the
" owners" of the land in those unions. He was aware
that there was not any great partiality by the owners of
property in that country to the poor-rates, and he found
that the occupiers were generally distrained for the
arrears, while the owners managed to escape payment,
and came off " scot free." He would read an extract
to the House, which would show that ; and he felt
that when the Government showed that an in-
crease was necessary. it was bound to show
also that everything had been done to collect
the arrears due. He would nut mention the names of
the unions, for certain reasons, but if any Honourable
Gentlemen wished to know he would tell hire in private.
In one union more than half the magistrates were de-
faulters in respect to the rates due of them—(Cries of
" Name, name.") He took it that those magistrates
were owners of land. He found, also, that both the
Members for the countywero defaulters—("Name, name !"
from sevcral Irish county Members.) He found that
one of the magistrates had made over to his mother his
goods and chattels, so that the poor-law officers could
not take them for the rate—(Name). lie found that
another magistrate transferred his stock to his son, and
that his son's name was now branded on them, in order
to defeat the poor-rate collector, and that case had been
reported to the Castle, but the Castle took no notice of
the matter, the party reported being in favour in that
quarter. He found that another magistrate sat on the j
Bench in his own case, and decided in that case. He
found that another magistrate west from his own to
another union, and helped his friend there. to baffle the
law, and that in turn his friend came to his union, and
helped him to baffle the poor-law guardians of the
rates clue—(Name, name). Now, there was another
case which came under his notice the case cf
W. Bourke, who was occupier of 19 acres of land,
and to his name he found this note of
the collector—
" This man is really poor, with his family in fever, but
I have no doubt he will pay." He (Mr. Bright) found
that there was property in Ireland which was assessed
to the rates, and teat when application was made to a
superior court upon the subject the result of success was
very doubtful, because of 300:10
set up. He found that in the unions of Balinrobe,
Clifden, and Castlebar, the greet bulk of the rates was
owning by owners, and not by occupiers of land. Those
cases had been reported to the Castle of Dublin, and
the poor-law guardians found that after those detalca-
had been reported at the Castle,
the Castle took notice of them. He was net there to
object to the advance of this grant of 300,000/., but he
tonbtui
hnetioneA:n;t:itsilednr
alrrris.o.
hoped it would be the last.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—An " advance," not a grant.
rated
was
at theo
eekry
knew
Ip:dr. narhowsd. ettc
:013ytNe. ri
MBEs—Whol'
tuga'dol blrhadlt
land,
Noble Lordirdieri::aoeshtt
and
oop
re sedar:i
orh:
owal neobtu,
their
dda
er
comelxs at
landsen
re on
s.
in the pound, the year before at3s., and the year before
at Is. Thus, then, it would be seen that the union of
Clifden never paid more than 7s. in the pound for poor
rate. This year it was proposed to rate it at ss. in the
pound. He might mention to the House an instance of
a gentleman who rented a farm in Ireland, and who was
rated at 17/. 10s. for his holding, a rate which some
would call excessive. What did that gentleman remark
to him?—" They sly," said Le, " poor-rates will
prove ht? ruin of Ireland." All I know is, that a mann-
fa3turing concern with which I am connected is rated
at 309/.
motieofßh:ntst.
oealhcwi
hhGiGpuraii
Aocdtelliahcoi gistrates

Mr. MONSELL—On what valuation 2—(i:car, 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
alopt some measure to give the poor-law officers
power to seize on some acres of land, he would
bring the refractory and defaulting owners to a
sense of their duty, and would, by such an aet 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
over, Sear thee Ir taxesaftr of
year,th this
in 3', and handed the money
o of the distressed unions in
lic oauindtr
Ireland, be ought to give the poor.law authorities suffi-
cient power t) 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 lion. Gentleman in the words of the poet, that
he hal

44 neturn'd from his finish'd tour,
Grown ten times wiser than before."—(Laughter.)
The Hon. 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 Hon. Member attacking Members anonymously—
attaching men, too, in their absence, and not daring to
give their names; and attacking the Government at the
Castle for neglect of duty. The Honourable Member
also made an attack on Irish gentlemen for not letting
their lauds to persons who were not dispos,A to give
them what they required for them. Now he (Mr. Her-
bert) hal heard much frcfromthe 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
House,
don't pay their rates, therefore that they arc not entitled
to the s
Mr.
not
.justified in the attacks which he had
sympathy of
_tbrisho 11
llusourable Gentleman was
made on the
Irish landlords. He called upon the House to t him
HERBERT—The
in insisting that the names of the two gentlemsueptipaolrluded
to by the Honourable Member for Manchester should be
given up, and if they were not, he had no hesitation in
stigmatising it as the worst of calumnies, an anonymous
calumny.
After a few words from Colonel DUNNE,
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said the Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Manchester had fallen into a not very
uncommon error. He appeared to consider rate un-
collected as rate in arrear; but that was not the 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 power of dis-
traint as against the occupier. He would just call the
attention 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 amouute.l to
something more than 7,000,0001., and of that amount no
less than 96 per cent. had been collected; and he believed
that in England there was no rate collected is 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 ono which required a good
deal of care and consideration; but he did not think any
blame attached to the Commissioners. He was glad to
find that the proposition had been 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.) Ho 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. bIONSELL 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 defect 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 tho 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 tho entire
body of owners might not suffer through the omission of
a few.

Sir 11. W. BARRON said ho felt pleased the lion.
Membsr for Manchester had made his attack on the Irish
landed proprietor!, and on two county Members
especially, because it afforded the Right Hon. the Secre-
tary for Ireland an opportunity of eating that Ireland,
at hut, had pi.' a ohale of the pour•law tax larger
than England had done of a similar impost. lle denied
that, as was assumed, the poverty of the country had

been decreasing during the 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 left 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 he
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 ho 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-law Act
for 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
cent. of the rates so leviable had been lodged, and of the
remaining six per cent. four per cent. had been carried to
the arrest's of the last rate, and only two per cent. ac-
tually remained due.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT said the statement of the Right Hon.
Gentleman had nothing to do with the statement he
made. If they were to speak of Ireland as a whole in
regard to the rates 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 average 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, Batinrobe, 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 of rates on the owners of land.
The description he had already given of the law in that
respect was a correct one. If a landowner west in arrears
they had to apply to a magistrate for an order, end
then they had to go to ono 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 land; but the process was so tedious that
in many cases he was told that it was found impracti-
cable. The case might be, that neither the landlord
nor the guardians wore to blame for the accumulation of
those arrears. In regard to what he stated about a
certain union, and which statement the Hon. Member
for Kerry had called a calumny, and- not only that, but
a cowardly calumny, he was not prepared to giso 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 union book, and
therefore he was confident that what he had stated was
correct. He should not 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 bo called to them.
Lord NAAS said, after the assertion the Hon. Member
had made, he could not ree 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. He would therefore ask the Hon. Member it
he would state the names Ee bad referred to, that a re-
turn might be procured, in order to show the truth of
his assertions. In regard to what the Hon. Gentleman
had said about the poor-rates being lower in Ireland
than in England—

Mr. BRIGHT—I said, if you take the whole of Ire-
land it might bo 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 de;ree
than England—(Hear, hear)—which was an astenion
which could triumphantly be refuted by a protest laid
upon the table of the House of Lords last session by
Lord Ross, in which it was stated that the rateable
property in Ireland was 4,214,3151., which was just Fs.
4d. in the pound, and about four times the rate of the
local taxation in England.—(Bear, hear.)
Mr. TRELAWNY said he could not think the state-
ment of the Noble Lord was correct, fn. during the
famine in Ireland England was not only plying the ex-
pense of its own poor•law, but also half the expense of
the Irish poor-law.—(" Bear, bear," end laughter.)
Sir H. W. BARRON—It siai 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 mueh as 94 per cent. of the poor-rates had bon
collected, he could not understand upon what grounds
Government sought this additional grant. He was some-
:, hat surprised at hearing the Hon. Member for Man-
chester talk of parties refasing to let their land at a rea-
sonable rate. He did not understand how a Free-trader
could use such language.—(A. laugh.)
Mr. M'CULLAGII, knowing the state of Ireland,
would net be doing his duty if he did not express him-
self grateful to the Ministers for their proposal. He did
not deny that some portion of the landed proprietors in
Ireland might deserve the reprehension of the ion.
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 arison from the properties not being in the hands
of the parties whose names stood on the rats-book. In

the Cliiiden union the largest property was in theposser.-
sion of an English assurance company. It was unfortu-
nate that Hon. Gentlemen opposite should seem to make
common cause with the delimiters. %yids respect to the
question of local taxation, ho believed the whole rate-
able property of Irelaid was, somewhm.c about
13,000,0001., and that the amount of rates collected far
the two years ending September, 1848, and September,
1849. was 1,600,000/., making the total charge on the
rateable property of Ireland about 2s. 6d. in the pound.
That was higher than the average charge in England.
Mr. TRELAWNY—No. _ _

Mr. M'CULLAGH—If it was, and he believed it
was, the Hun. Member for Tavistock was scarcely just-
fied in misleading the House as to the charge fur the
poor of Ireland.
Mr. H. HERBERT denied that either he or the
Hon. Member for Kildare had identified themselves
with the defau:ters alluded to by the Hon. Member for
Manchester.

Mr. SADLEIR said, that as one anxious to preserve
human life, he thanked the Government for the consi-
derate proposal they had brought forward. He thought
the Hon. Member for 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 respecting the collection of rates. They provided
that in the first ,instance a civil bill or decree might be
issued against a defaulter by the assistant barrister,
and that it might be removed without writ or certiorari
to a superior court at Dublin, where, after certain
forms, it would obtain the force of a judgment, and take
prierity as a charge for 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, and his questions re-
ferred more to the 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 to 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.) He had re-
sisted the vote of last year, and bad told them that there
would be another vote this year.—(Hear, hear.) And
now he told them there would be another vote next year.
—(Hear, hear.) He 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 for propos-
ing the advance. Ho had stated that Ireland was not
suffering from famine. The Hon. Member said that the
proposed advance would be a grant because there was
no chance of its being repaid. They had heard aimiler
language last year, but the House consented, neverthe-
less, that the advance of 250,0001. then proposed should
be made. Out of the 250,0001. which had been so votled
last session, 150,0001. had been repaid within six months;
and that surely did not show that there was any extreme
difficulty in obtaining the repayment of the Irish ad-
vances. He hoped that Hon. Members would then
allow the resolution to be reported. It would afterwards
be necessary to introduce a Bill founded on the resolu-
tions; and to that Bill the Hon. Member for Birming-
ham, and every other Hon. Member, could offer yan
op-
position he might think desirable. He had no 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 SIBTHORP said that be would, on a future
occasion, take the sense of the House on the subject.
Mr. . O'CONNELL said be 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 the system of government pursued iu
that country.
The resolutions were den agreed to, and 'were ordered
to be reported t) the House on Monday nev.

PARTY PROCESSIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
The House having resumed, this Bill was rem.' a
second time, and was ordered to be committed-on Mon-
day rear.
AUSTRALIA N COLONIES GOVERNMENT LILL.

To second reading of this Bill was postponed (as wo
understood) until Monday next..,

THE COURT OF CHANCERY (IRELAND) BILL. •
Tho order of the day having been read for the second
reading of this Bill,
Mr R. PALMER said he did not rise to oppose this
measure, which he believed to be necessary for the bene-
fit of Ireland, but to 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
one 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-
Bement.
After a few words from Mr. HEADLAM, who said
that he would reserve his observations 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 ef Ireland ought to do himself. Why should they
do so? Would any Hon. Member get up and ray that the
Lord Chancellor of Ireland had not the power to do all
that was suggested by this Bill ? His Hon. Friend (Mr
11. Palmer) had spoken of a Bill for the improvement of
the Court of Chancery in England. If that Bill was to
give additional powers to 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 Chancery in England, simply because the Lord Chan-
cellor—whose conduct as judge of that Court had given
great satisflction to the public and profession—had the
power of making all necessary 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? Tho Lord Chancellor cf 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
Hon. and Learned Gentleman then referred to Sir Samuel
liomilly's Act of 1812, and contended that while it
altered the practice of the Court of Chancery in reference
to charity cases, in respect to which the practice was
altered so as to oblige the parties to proceed by way of
petition, 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 Lords, the party complaining was obliged to begin
again and file a new bill. In this way a tremend-
ous injustice might be inflicted, and a better means
could not not be invented of increasing litigation without

the intervention of any direct cause for it. It did not
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 piactitioners
should be tolerated. His idea of a useful system of law
that might be beneficial to the landlords of Ireland,
was, that it should ho expeditious, and next that
it should be cheap. The Commissioners f nr the sale of
Enctunhered Estates had net yet told a single acre, and
were that his only reason, he should have been justified
in considering the Act under which they zero 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 wire
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 Encuui-
bored Estates, those proceedings had been stopped.
Granting that to be the case, he should like to know 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 be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. HE tkDLAM said that as it now appeared to be
the wish of the House that the discussion of this Bill
should be taitea at this stage, he begged to make a few
observations upon it. He differed entirely from the ar-
gument made by the Hon. Member who bad just sat
down, first, that the Lord Chancellor had powers which
this Bill proposed to give; and, secondly, that suppos-
ing he had such powers, 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 pro-
posed a most salutary improvement, by giving power to
the master to carry into effect the matters entrusted to
him. These were matters the re form 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. Every one acquainted with tho nature of the
proceedings in the Court of Chancery must know how
voluminous the proceedings were. Firrt, there was the
original bill, then the supplemental bill; then, if 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 last 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 tho cause. He found the original bill, the
extent of which was twenty-three skins of parchment,
and he found a supplemental bill extendirg to seventy.
two. There were sixty or seventy defendents in the
suit, and one counsel had signed the answers of twenty-
five of there. No one who know 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 stopped. Why the Commissioners under
the Act were only appointed in October last, and, short
as had been the opportunity of judging 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 heard an attack that evening made on
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 of the party, sup-
ported by affidavit, and the other.party was immediately
t I answer. Then there was this very satisfactory course
of proceeding, that viva voce evidence might be taken,
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 reason he should support
the Bill, and was glad that it had beenaindtrboiendeuntchemed
binaM;r.hCe OademliitHteUdßtbNatsabiedw a
an allusion
n eprofoundt
obnut t
hhee
man,th proposedougb t he was cornlpsetbeandt
tlboeedeggniev
:ea fiadne
opinionhqyui
nt yn la
eminentwn ,p
that measure.
sutireenmaingdhttbbee
introduced which would shake the Constitution,
lawyers would remain in their cabinets,u but if you
were to touch a cobweb in Westminster yen 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 far distant when it
would be extended to this country.—(Cheers.) 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.—(Flear, hear.) The Chancellor had jurisdiction in
the minor prcceedings 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.) lie ems
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 farther 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 he
but slender, and that an effectual- remedy could not be
obtained without the. sanction of the Legislature. -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 legislative 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 p.urpotee of costs,
injurious to the public. It was perfectly competent for
the Court to adjudicate upon tte 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. lie was asked whether he had the
sanction of th© Lord Chancellor of Ireland. Ile had
only to say, that he would not introduce such a measure
without consulting that eminent judge. lie hadesub-
mated 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 he a 'greet im-
provement, and hoped the House would affirm the second
reading.
Mr. WALPOLE wished to &Attie Hon. and Learned
Geutleman one question. He believed there was a ge-
neral concurrence as to the necessity of some extensive
referm cf the proceedings in the Court of Chancery in
Ireland, and also of the Court of Chancery in England.
—(hear, hear.) But, seeing tl at the present was 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 the present b-ing discussed in- a House the
nreater tilti%her o f a bee; Moninrs were unacquainted
with the details of the question. He should suggest,
therefore,-that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee
—(Cries ohl")..—by
whom it would be put into each

a shape as would qualify it for carrying out the objects'
they had in view.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL could 'dot accede tO
the proposition of the Hon. and Learned Gentlemeth
He knew well what would be the effect of sending it to a
Select Committee. He would endeavour to adopt and
embody in it any practicable suggestions that might be
offered to him, and for that purpose would commuarcate
with the Hon. and Learned Member for Newark and
others, but ho could not consent to referring the Bill to a
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. He Icas
convinced that the Bill could not be carried out in its,
present shape. He would not vote on either side.
the same time he was most willing to give his assistance
in the framing of a measure that would really rem edi
the evils of which they complained. Ile thought em &t
this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee, and
that it would be more advantageous that many perseeS
unconnected with the law should form a portion ofttist
Committee than that it should be composed altogether °I
lawyers.
Mr. STUART said that it was not his intention to
ipress his amendment. He would, however, in a fete?
stage, move to expunge every clause except the 2St"f
which gave the Lord Chancellor power to make ursnY °
the desired alterations. end-
Colonel RAWDON having cbjected to the sol
meat being withdrawn,
The question was put, when the second reading 055
carried by the almost unanimous assent of the House.i,
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE (BANKRUPTCY) 1314,
On the motion for goine. into Committee upon this 0
Mr. HENLEY said that this was a measure to unit
the office of Chief Registrar of the Court of BankraPtl
with the office of the Lord Chancellor's S
Bankrupts. lie complained of the amount of salaries
attached to these offices, both of which were since re
This Bill would make one of these sinecures pernasol.;
He though that it would be much better to refer t4lO
Bill to a Select Committee, where it could be felt
seriously considered and put into a better form to ,Tin,,eo.
the evils of the case. It was rather too bad forathe 11.10
and Learned Gentleman opposite to comedown with "the
Secretary os
Bill for a first and second reading without favouring
House with one word of explanation. lie would, therdeer
fore, move" that a Committee be appointed to eoesir
the best mode of dealing with the office of Regietra' of
BankruATTORNEY-GENERAL
now vaeant.
The observed that it d
rather inconsistent for an Hon. Member who exPres4o..
a wish for reduction to meet the.proposition of tbeeee-
vernment by an amendment to refer the Bill to a v-sit-
mitten up-stairs. Ho would ask the Hon. Gentlr: 6
what mode could be more acceptable of dealing welt Bill
sinecure office than to abolish it altogether, as t'-',e`',o of
proposed? The main reason for abolishing thene-ore.
registrar of bankruptcy wau because it was a stn
The secretary of bankrupts had not certainly at presto
as many duties to perform as heretofore; but stilLisite.
an officer was necessary and could not be dispenee";eod-
The secretary had sometimes very extensive correap sed.
once with various parts of the country to dischsre'ffiee
he occupied a responsible position, and filled the 3300
during pleasure. He apprehended that no jest
could be assigned for rejecting the proposition rioWe—ie te
Mr. BOUVERIE thought it was most desir,e—raple
do away with the office of registrar, fir they bad
evidence given before the Committee of which be 7,00.
Member, that such an office was a complete siriff:elet
He, however, thought it would be much more des"-both
instead of uniting these two offices, which were re so
nearly sinecures, to place the trifling duties that wf-oiot
be performed updh the shoulders of one of the J° bee
registrars, with an addition of 1001. or 50/. a year to
salMr.ar „pair
y.
M.ULLINGS said the Act provided for
trews, and also in case cf the death of the chief regleie
that one of the other registrars might fill the oinee• the
he could be convinced that the suggestion made be
Hon. and Learned Gentleman would lead to a esvirit''
(Mr. Mullings) would vote for his Bill. eteeeeneo
After a few words from the ATTORNEY.u..--
and Mr. HENLEY, • bpi-it the
Mr. P. WOOD said it was true that the effect a
Bill might be a saving at the. present monsen.ito thol,
would perputaate the office of chief registrar, and '-
by attaching a useless office to another one, would Per,.
phut° one of them.
The House then divided, when there appeared--
For the original motion ....... 57
For the amendment
kith
The announcement of the numbers was received
cheering. Bilk
Mr. LABOUCHERE then brought up the three f tee
of which he had given notice, for the regelati°ll Toe.
Merchant Service, Seamen's Fund, and Mercbellt` be
nage, which were read a first time, and ordered te
read a second time that day fortnight.l
The House then adjourned at Twelve o'clock'

't

a

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISI°I4S.
0,0°)
(From the Votes and Proceedings of the House „r C°

FRIDAY, FEB. 15. Tao
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, BANKRUPTCY Question
Order for Committee read; Motion made, anurbair:
proposed, " That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Thst'
Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word yards
to the end of the Question, in order to add the mode °
Select Committee be appointed, to consider the be t no
dealing with the office et Registrar of 13°°kruge volidg
That.
n.,,
vacant," instead thereon—Question put,
proposed to be left out stand part of the Questio
House divided:—

MINORITY—AYES, 57. b UenrY
bh
Abdy, T. N. Hayter, W. G Etc , ,• John
milly, blr
Anson, Colonel Hoouss, Sir. vn
John "•"-- .
~ Lord Jona
Baring, H. B. Hobhouse, T. B. Busse., „ c. .
Bellew, R. XL Howard, Lord E. Russell, ri
Berkeley, C. L. G. Howard, Sir H. Shell, IL •"*.,,.ari 01
Boyle, Colonel Jervis, Sir John Shelburne, ..,
Brockman, E. D. Keppel, G. T. Simeon, John if,
Campbell, W. F.
Caulfeild, J. M. Henry Spearman, 11%,"„dlei
Cockburn, Alex. Lascelles, W. S. Stuart, Lord -I,*
Craig, W. G. • Lewis, G. C. Tennent, . .1.• t.
-Cap
Dundas, Admiral Lindsay, Colonel Townshend,, 4
Marquis of Someryille,,Syr.
tailbodaruelfrear,
Watkins, Colo°'
Ebrington, Viscount Martin, C. W.
Elliot, John Manic, Fox • 'Willcox, Brodia
Ferguson, Sir R. Mulgrave, Earl Wilson, Jnale°
Freestun, Colonel Ogle, S. C. Wyld, Jame 046
Grey, Sir G. Paget, Lord A. Wyvill, Mar....°l
Grey, R. W. Palmerston, Vii. TELL'
Hatchet!, John Parker, John Tufhell, Il• ertS
Hawes, Benj. Pelham, D. A. Hill, Lord 31"'

MAJORITY—NOES, 61. ..1
Aglionby, H. A. Grattan, Henry
Best, John Greene, John
Blair, Stephen Gwyn, Howel Scully,sS
eah l wo I ii,FeCre iin alO
Brotherton, Joseph Hardeastle, J. A. Shaft°, B• D' fd
CEBarrtiontwherurn:yjW,. B. ..H. '
BHllueeadiadlsdo,ann IJ, Thomas James Stanford,
.._.• ha.
Spooner, ...1..,,,,._
Stanford, J. f,.
Cocks,Clay,C o b 1) o Jamesl
dT, . Johns
S.
Tancred,
King, P. ,J.
Thicknesse, Ita h.
Carrie, Henry MRaghten, W.V.
Thomas
Dodd, George Mangles, 8., D.
Thornely,
'C. . KKeeorsghha,wWillijaamines
Sullivan,
el
Douglas, Sir C. Manners, Lord J.
Duff; G. S. . Matheson, Colonel
Willonqhby, sir P
Or
Duke, Sir. J. Morris, David
Wilson, Matth
Duncan, George - - Muilings, j. IL
Wood, W. F.
Diincuft, John Palmer, Boundell
TThaornnte7Goe,
.
10/5.
Evelyn,,W. J. Patten, W. Tr ,sr.
Fagan, W. Pilkington, JaineS Henieq, nley ,j. ,r.
e , T..„
P timer, Sir E. Plowden, W. H. oCrgoelon:
Graham, Forster,
Sir. j .
RR
la:a
ry ddoon;
oCsoml oanue l
~1
Bouve,rie,

0 f
bl,is
ha,.
AUSTRALIANBIB' rr lf 'i
COLONIES GRANT "'"'-'" hie OA'
has just been printed. Its leading provisions der the'
Port Phillip be formed into a separate colohY•1111,1 ova
title of the colony of Victoria—that the GoveilLorat
Council of New South Wales are to establish e""; bed
districts—that Legislative Councils may be e,stw'lbell:te.rll
in Van Diemen's Land, South Australia, an u Coos,
Australia—that the Governors and Legislativ® ejterilix.
Victoria,t
e rVan constitutionpiealen's
Australia, are authorised to make laws-013/ Govern
ii 3
etdaoiniisodet,srLtiaacnetgdsislattive Councils may regulate t_olle,_8,11„;"0; POI!:
toms duties may Land, South sh, ortior
and duties a v 0,..,, t cue
number and boundaries of districts--t° 04'
General Assembl •
separate colonies imposed on . _......„0,
y, which the colonies are el% coon'
ci), and to prescri e 0/
vary its constitution—that the lows
._a bi,
General may alter rulesl dby order' , the
sAssembly shall suersede those enact!. ore
be any goodsthsterdi
constitution of th
Plleasdfor troops, nor any duties inconsistent with Coon'
Cs[reAfDorVFEeßmTall
oilsnthat power be possessed by Governors an°
lter 111°
with assent of her Majesty in Council, to 6
Se
ECMOEr :T a.
—"e
Ltheagtidsinattii: shall
cou uncoil: levied o. t.tio
Tn, falllblef
jinTs.H—owlloomweanf:t
life are s • übject to complaints which • wilier nr
it
p require a p ,ere 10 , .„6
to remove, and it • is now an established fact, that then. 0,,,,v,,
so suitab' e as thilloway's Pills, and their purifkiPg, and."
render them invaluable the
to maiden, the suotac;!orstaig,
middlethey i OP
-aged; a •
irregularity
Sold.
by
all in th e
researching, cleanGing,andyetiefeeri oeaa by
so that females of all ages may take them with Pfrdel'i'. of
and it is tr 1 dike il ls
esont —p- -. r
od di
ci,e;
Establishment,
to tind the benefit that is srecies ~.
takin a doses, which speedily remove* every flitli 1119,,,,
Vendors
ostfeiTieadni
Medicine
neest,aabnlidsh.athelt,tll,eosisters 00ilovis.7
, 244, Strand, London. .P 1..........•••••••••_.------
----- ,

On the Bth i nionsfst
inst.,
, atat
uSB:
-------r----Estl.
' tolfleallt•
52d lleguu. enht,
0
.son„
On
Vil ster-
gaOte:t Sthuess
lexu,holnsatdanutghter.
of the „0..,
Oa the llth inst., the lad 'A. II Nall, fsel'' °
y oi . ,
Napier, of a daughl'er. Rugby,
the
wife
TT n Cbsrles
Busk, Esq., of a daughter. f X'
ahnl:tthieftilheHe,BtlhaedyNsoiffeconf:Gt:iti.E.:o7l33lll:
the Ith ,at Little Berkbarnpeteadf
On '2 • inst the tlif° °
.a.
I,.OHnotlhlsendl3, .wife
Of s'.
tEh9lll:to.f. ian
son
pper liarley-strot, the
______W•
......___

Barton, Esq
f R.
MA WED•
On the 12th inst., at Eccles, Richard, eldest son
Eliza,
Cheshire, to Elizabe'll, eldest daughter of '6'ir 13euilu'
of Springwood, Lancashire and Cal(l2:4l2ljey-
wood, Bart., of Claremont, Lancashire.
On the llth inst., at Kilgerran Church olcobire'
Perobr
s. !..e, to
Edward Bearcroft, Ecq of Mere-hall, 'Worester 1i5"(.1., of
F 3 none, Pembrokeshire.
youngest daughter-.
of the late John. Colby*
c;r

_
DIED- ~ ,
On the 1 ith lust— at Tunbrid e-weit3,
Gordon Bremer, K.C.B. K.O 1-1.8. the
or ..qusre,
-street, ros% en ,
On the 136 inqt , in' Green G '
Rev '
. Dr. Spranger,.aged 74. J.)ear-A.dintr.-
Ori the 9th inst.. at Clift,n-bous9, near Rotherhain, —T4ll°s.
bethothe wife of •Ilettry Walker, Es' q a 63t
On the 9th inr.t., at-Port Madoe Carson-oils/lire, 048 0.
Elizabeth, the wife of J. Spooner,'Esq., of the above P4Ac.e,
EsOn the 11th inst., at Wadhuret, Sussex, Thomas
On
aged 75. Stroud
LjOn the 12th inst., in Alexander-square, Brompton,
ncoln, Esq. . qi,st, for-
Suddenly, at Brentford-bridge, Captain Sialca . i
merlyoftlLL.Loyal Horse Guards aged 71. .—_-- of
-- ..1
lloecion: Printed and Publiied by .11.111E.I.:() l'1;L;-, ii 2,
+ti,t,'ar in - 112. Strand, Printer. et The Sus (Vice, ty Of , I
Strand,the Precinct of the Savoy- in tile GQIIII
Bliddleiez. Saturday, Februaryil6, 1850.

:~ ~,