The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-24 00:00:00

trust which had been confidel to him, for the sake of a foolish
joke. He would say that if he were in the position of the
Noble an 4 Learned Lord, and had made a statement with
respect to matters that had been confided to him,
which he thought fit to divulge, and that he would
in explanation make i: appear that authority had been given
to him to act in the manner he had, he thought he should not
g,tin much credit by allowing him to be subjected to any
wrong imputations. The reason why he had given up these
sills was, became it had been so suggested by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Cork. He (Mr. O'Connell) well knew
that he had never, by any base or servile adulation,
committed himself in any way. He was well ac-
quainted with the whole course of his political career since
he had entered Parliament, and that he would exercise
fuir and legitimate use of his own judgment upon all
questions connected with Ireland. He knew also that the
last act of his public life was not to give in his adhesion to the
principles which were promulgated from Conciliation-ball.
(11-ar, hear.) Under these circumstances, he might be at
liberty to ask whether he was to labour under the charge of
Laving committed a breach of confidence by way of a foolish
joke, or was he to look down in slavish obedience to the dictum
of the Hon. and Learned \lember for Cork?
SPANISH COLONIAL SUGAR.

Mr. LABOUCHERE willed to put a question to the
Right lion. Gentleman opposite with reference to the claims
advanced be Spain for the admission of her colonial sugar into
the ports of this country. He wished to know if any arrange-
ment had been come to with that country in reference to this
subject.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
not knowing that the Right Honour ible Gentleman would have
put the question, he was not prepared at that moment to
answer it.

Mr. LABOUCHERE then gave notice of his intention to
ask the quostim on a future day.
POOR-LAW SET fLEMENTS BILL.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD wished to know if it ware intended
to pass the Poor-law Settlements Bill through the House this
session?

Sir J. GRAHAM said, that as there was a great contrariety
of opinion on the subject of the law of settlement, it was not
his intention to press that part of the measure at that time,
but it might be expedient if the Housv would permit the Bill
to be rend a second time in the amended form. He did not
think there could he any objection to this course, for he was
not aware that any opposition would be shown to that portion
of the Bill which related to the law of removal.
RELIEF TO IRELAND.

Mr. E. B. ROCHE said it might be in the recollection of
the Right Hon. Baronet that he (Mr. Roche) had in the
b'ginning of the session asked him whether before its close he
should bring in two measures for Ireland, one for a reform in
the Municipal Reform Act, and another fir the extension of
the franchise. At this late period he did not think it out of
place to again inquire whether it was the Right Hon. Baronet's
intention to bring these measures forward ?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the state of Ireland had
received in a very considerable degree the attention of the Go-
vernment. One important measure had already passed that
House, and another was under the consideration of the other
House of Parliament—he meant the Landlords and Tenants
Bill.