The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-16 00:00:00

~ ~~ ~
77
(~ ~
-1 f
/"VV WV

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16,

1845.

The House of Lords met at Five o'clock.
The Mutiny Bill and the NI trine Mutiny Bill passed
ah'rongh
.Committee.
On the motion of the Earl of JERSEY, a return of 'the
number of bank notes in circulation in Scotland during
the ten years from 1834 to 1844, was ordered to be laid
on the table.
LOrd Buotramem then drew the attention of the Himse
to the necessity of a greater stringency in the standing
orders on the subject of railway Bills. He proposed to
narrow considerably the power at
present possessed by
railway
companies of deviating from the line. He
thought they ought to be restricted to twenty yards on
eah'side, and if in consequence of accident they were
oninpelled to trespass on the property of tbe adjoining
landowners, he would leave them to make their own bar_
ga•A with the person on whose property they had en-
tered, without the intervention of a jury.
The Marquis of BREA.DAL4NE complained
hostility manifestedeited by the Noble and Leerned of the
Lord' to
all• railway schemes ; and • -
C The Fkarl of DALHOUSIN refuSed to go into the question
at
present,- and would content himself with saying that
some of the statements of the Noble and Learned Lord
wits overcharged.

The Bills on the table were forwarded a stage, and
their Lordships adjourned.
The House of Commons met at Four.

Thesecond reading of the Hemel Hempstead Small
Tenements Bill, on a division, was carried, the num-
bers being :—For the second reading, 69 ; Against it,
39 ; Majority in favour of it, 30.
Various motions standing for this evening were post-

poned, in order that the adjourned debate on Maynooth
might be resumed.
In answer to a question by Mr. F. FRENCH,
Sir T. FREMANTLE said that it was not the intention
of the Government to propose any alteration in the 'nth
poor-law. It had worked well hitherto, and the Govern-
ment were determined to give it a fair trial.
Sir J. GRAHAM fixed the second reading of the Medi-
cal Bill for Monday, and

Mr. WALLET gave notice of his motion on the subject
of the College of Surgeons' Charter for Tuesday.
Mr. FERRAND moved that the petition of the Dublin
Operative Conservative Association, praying for the im-
peachment of Sir R. PEEL, be printed.
The motion was seconded by Mr. HINDLEY and op.
posed by Colonel RAWDON and Lord NORTHLAND.
The opposition was grounded on the fact that the peti-
tion was couched in language offensive to the Roman
Catholic subjects of her Majesty.
Mr. REDINGTON did not consider the expressions in
that petition as more offensive than those contained in
the coronation oath.

Sir R. INGLis supported the motion.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that if the petition was to be
made the foundation of a motion respecting the allega-
tions against the First Minister of the Crown, no mem-
ber of the Government could offer the slightest opposi-
tion to the printing of the petition.

Mr. FERRAND said that on the third reading of the
Maynooth Bill he should bring forward a motion to the
following effect :—" That the Catholic Bequests Act
was a violation of the Act of Settlement, and a contra-
vention of the oath of supremacy."
Lord J. Russia'. considered that the allegations in
the petition were frivolous, and should therefore oppose
the motion for printing it.
After a few words from Mr. S. CRAWFORD, Mr. LID-
DELL, Mr. REDINGTON, and Mr. DUNCOMBE,
Mr. FERRAND said he did not intend to make a dis-
tinct motion on the subject of the petition, and, amidst
the loud laughter of the House, withdrew his motion.
The adjourned debate on the subject of Maynooth
was then resumed by Major BERESFORD, who opposed
the Bill, on the ground that, as had been stated by the
Home Secretary on a former occasion, concession had
reached its limits.

Colonel VERNER opposed the grant, as mischievous
in tendency and unjust in practice. It would be ill re-
ceived by the Irish Catholics, and excite suspicion in the
minds of the Protestants.

Mr. HuslE considered that the course adopted by the
Government was the only one calculated to put down
that agitation in Ireland which had arisen from the
refusal of that justice to which the Irish had a right,
and that this measure would remove some of those
grievances of which the Irish had a right to complain.
Mr. NEWDEGATE opposed the proposition of the
Government.

Mr. PAKINGTON supported the measure, and denied
that the present Government had made the' No Popery"
cry a stepping-stone to office. They had only raised a
cry to defend the Protestant religion when they really
thought it was in danger ; and he for one was ready to
take the same course again.
Mr. P. M. STEWART protested against the Govern-
ment throwing away the weapon by which they had ob-
tained power, viz., the "No Popery" cry. He believed
that in consenting to this measure they were violating
the protest which this country had made against Popery.
Although he might be in a minority in the House he
was in a majority in the nation, and he should certainly
record his vote against the measure.
The House was subsequently addressed by the Earl of
LINCOLN, Lord WORSLEY, Mr. M. MILNES, Mr. Sergeant
MURPHY, Sir J. HANDIER, and Mr. Ross ; after which
the debate was adjourned, on the motion of Mr.
HAMILTON.

The debate on the Maynooth grant increases in in-
terest. Several admirable speeches were made on Monday
night, and it is gratifying to find that not a few Members,
who represent large bodies of electors, many of
whom are averse to the Catholic religion, have the
courage and the virtue to express their real senti-
ments, and prefer the peace of Ireland and the union
of the two countries to momentary applause.
Among these we may mention Mr. HAWES, Mr.
Mammal-, and Sir CHARLES NAPIER, and though
there are possibly no three men in the House more
anxious to benefit their constituents, or more desirous
of consulting their wishes, they still consider that
they have a higher duty to perform, and like
upright senators, they look not to individual in-
terests, or the predilections or prejudices of one portion
of the community as the guide of their conduct, but the
whole policy of the State, and the well-being of twenty-
six millions of inhabitants. This resolution has caused
these Members, we may well believe, no little
anxiety, but they have chosen the right path,
and that will afford them sufficient consolation whatever
may be the result. The words of Mr. MACAULAY must
meet the approbation even' of his keenest opponents.
" Therefore it is," said he, " making sacrifices not agree-
able to any man to make, curbing and confining many
feelings that are strong within me, I am determined to
give the Bill my most determined support, and to give my
support to every Bill emanating from the Government
that shall tend to make Great Britain and Ireland fully
and completely an United Kingdom. I give that sup-
port regardless of the obloquy that may be poured upon
me, and regardless of the risk I well know I run of my
seat in Parliament. Obloquy I will meet ; as to my seat
in Parliament, I will never hold it by an igno-
minious tenure ; and I am sure I could never lose

it in a more honourable cause." While making this
candid confession of his opinions, and express.
ing his high approbation of the scheme, he
did not forget to blame Sir ROBERT PEEL for his
former opposition, and for his reluctance in almost
every instance to treat Ireland as an inte-
gral portion of the British empire. By this
delay he had almost driven the Irish to despair,
and greatly diminished the value of any blessings which
he may have in store for that distracted and persecuted
country. The words of Sir C. NAPIER are equally
honourable to him. He would have preferred the motion
of Mr. WARD to that of Sir ROBERT PEEL, and in that
preference we cordially concur ; but he would rather
take something than nothing—he would take an instal-
ment, and trust to circumstances and the enlightenment
of truth for the rest. Sir CHARLES regretted that he
could not have proposed an amendment to the motion
of Mr. WARD, which would have been more in
accordance with what he regarded as just, not
only to Ireland, but to Great Britain. As it was,
however, supposing his Hon. Friend's motion should
fail, "he would give his support to the Government met"-
sure. He was aware that in so doing he should give
offence to many of his constituents who felt strongly on
this question, but though his interest should be com-
promised he should feel it to be his duty to support the
Government in what he felt to be a fair, a just, and an
honourable course."

Press of other matter, however, prevents us from
*urther remarks on this momentous subject.

In the " Notice Paper" of motions in the House of
Commons for the present week, we see announcements
of very different kinds, but on very important sub-

jects, upon one of which we have a few words
to offer. We find the Earl of LINCOLN is to bring in
a Bill to facilitate the inclosure of common and waste
lands in England and Wales. It would be much more
gratifying to us were Lord LINCOLN to apply to Parlia-
ment for powers to facilitate the practical carrying out
of the dictates of common sense and good taste in the
management of those public works which are the
more immediate and legitimate objects of the super
vision of a Board of Woods and Forests. Why
will not Lord LINCOLN and his brother Commis-
sioners cast their regards on such objects as these, and
the " cribbing" system, as it has been aptly called, which
is so insidiously appropriating patches of the green
sward from the public's old right-of-way to the demesne
of the aristocratic residences that are, in more senses
:than the Irish sense of the word, "convenient" to them?
But,on the other hand, could we exercise any influence in the
Matter, we could tolerate a hundred such annoyances in
the public places of the capital, provided the Commis-
sioners would give up all co-operation in this
hateful system of inclosing " waste and com-
mon lands." What manner of madness is it which
prompts this selfish war upon the comforts, the health,
the recreations of the labouring poor ? Has not the
spread of manufacturing and commercial industry, 'and
the concentration of capital or enormous works of
various descriptions, a sufficient tendency to appropriate
and inclose all the " waste and common" lands in the
country, where these operations are carried on, without
its being necessary for the Legislature, by mime general
and sweeping provisions, to "facilitate" that oc-
cupation of the soil which is everywhere too
facile of accomplishment already ? Are these in.
closure workers, yesterday with Lord Wonsuly, to-day
with Lord LINCOLN at their head, acting under the im-
pression that theirs is the best mode for conciliating the
respect and good-will of the patient, overworked, and
too often underpaid and underfed labourer, for that
abundant wealth and Widely-diffused luxury which
everywhere surrounds him, as associated with the pos.
session of noble parks and spacious manors, wide-
stretching forests and wood-clothed hills, green valleys
and laughing meadows ? Or, is it seriously considered
that, having in this country taxed the light of heaven
itaelf, and levied in this way "discriminating duties"