The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-05 00:00:00

The report wai then received and agreed to.
Mr. SCULLY wished to know whether at a future
stage he might be permitted to add a clause giving the
power of voting to a class of persons concerned in pro-
jected railways likely to be wound up, which were shut
out by the present Bill? Tho class of persons he re-
ferred to were those who had not paid the last call,
and who would be put in a worse situation by 'the pro-
posed measure than that in which they were now placed.
They ought to have a power, in case of need, to refer
the cases of these persons to the consideration of the
Railway Commissioners.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the subject had
already been carefully considered, and he could hold out
no hopes of extending that privilege to the class of per-
sons referred to, which the Hou. and Learned Member
wished to have embodied in the measure.
After some discussion, the third reading of the Bill
was understood to be fixed for Friday next.
ENGLISH AND IRISH UNIVERSITIES BILL.
The adjourned debate on the above Bill was post-
poned.
TENEMENTS RECOVERY (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. FREWEN moved the second re iding cf this
Bill. It only consisted of one clause, the object of
which was to extend an English Act of Parliament to
Ireland, which in_this country operated extremely well.
_ _

Mr. P. SCROPE considered that the Bill would have
the effect, and was, in fact, intended to facilitate and ren-
der more easy the process of evictions in Ireland. lie
thougeht these were going on fast enough, without any
additionql facilities being required for carrying them
out. He would therefore move that the Bill be read a
second time that day six months. They had heard the
other night of 600 ejoetments obtained at one quarter
sessions against tenants on one single estate, and cer-
tainly that was going fast enough.
Mr. O'FLAHEBTY said the obtainment of those
evictions was not the act of an Irieh proprietor, but clan
insurance company in Lcmdon.-.—(Llear, hear.) He did
not, however, think that the present was a time for pass-
ing such a measure, and he would support the
am* ndment.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for IRELAND also
supported the amendment. There was already a court
in Ireland—the Assistant-Barristers' Court—whereby
evictions from small tenements could be obtained at very
little expense. That he conceived was a tar better tri-
bunal than would be established under this Bill, and at
the present time it would. be very improper to give the
power to the magistrate at petty sessions to grant those
evictions as proposed by this Bill. He would, therefore;
suggest that the Hon. Member should not press the se-
cond reading of this Bill.
Mr. G. HA MILTON said there was a great difficulty

in ej,ciing tenants from the description of property the
Bill referred to. Bufore proceeding in the As6istant-Bar-
riswr' Court it was'necessary to give twelve months'
nod"; and cerzainly that was not giving much facility
to evicting that description of tenant, holding from year
b year. . . . .

Mr. MONSELL said that might be the case with very
small tenants, but it was not so in respect of the tenantry
in general. This Bill would, however, deal with a large
proportion of the tenantry of Ireland, and therefore he
did not think the powers it conferred on the magistrates
were such as ought to be conceded to them.
Col. DUNNE-supported the Bill. He would not bind
himself to all the details of it, but something of the kind
%visa' necessary, and therefore he would support the se-
cond .readin7.

Lord NAAS thought the amount of rent (201.) which
was to be place:Lender the jurisdiction of the magistrates,
in order to grant cjctment from such holdings, was too
high, and he would suggest that the Bill at all events
should not be proceeded with that evening.
Mr. ROCIIE said as the majority of Irish Members
had spoken a,'einst the Bill he hoped that it would not
be pressed. .But, at all events, if it was so, ho should
give it all the opposition in his power.
Mr. GROGAN supported the Bill, and
Mr. SADLIER opposed it, as there wai nothing in
it wiieh would hive the effect of improving the law of
landlord and tenant in Ireland, which was a disgrace
to the Legislature of ihis,country.
Mr. ST. GEORGE considered that the fact of one
year's n-nt being due by a tenant should be held sufficient
cause for eviction; and were that bold to be the case it
would save a great deal or expense.
Mr. NAPIER hoped the Bill would not be pressed,
as if so he must rote against it.

The Bill was then withdrawn.
THE PROCESS AND PRACTICE
_(IRELAND)

ACT AMENDMENT BILL:

This Bill went into Committee.
Mr. SADLIER considered that the Solicitor-Genc-
ral should look to the case of persons subjected to
severe losses by this Bill, and should therefore oppose it.
The Commioce then divided upon clause 2, when
there appeared—

For tie amendment
Against it ...
Majority
The clause was then carried.
Mr. NAPIER objected to the third Glance, on the
ground that much injury would be inflicted on the
people of Ireland, and that it was quite antagonistic to
the profession to which he belonged, and also to the
constitution, that such a clause should be allowed to
pass in an English louse of Parliament, and therefore
should say that it was the duty of the Government to re-
move the injustice under which the people of Ireland
laboured.
Aft,'r some further discussion clause 3 was agreed to.
Tho House then resumed, and the Bill was reported,
read a third time, ind passed.
The House adjiurne,t at Half-past One.

••• •• ... 39
••• -24

THE SUN,

LONDON,