Star.
London, England, 1823-06-17 00:00:00

LONDON DRIDOD BILL.
Mr. Alderman WOOD nairrearthat the London
Bridge should be conatted,itbich was agreed to.
In the Col mittee Mr:Artlemists WOOD moved,.
that in the clause relatipg to the Plan. of the Bridge,
the word " specification" should. be omitted; upon
,which the Committee divided, when there appeared,
For the Amendment . . . 4
Apiost It • . • SO
Najority T —7l
On the clause for advancing the sum of i.:150,000
from the Consolidated Fund,
/44 HUME bbjectecl to thit grain. He saw no
reason why the people of England and Ireland should
build a bridge for the City of London, especially as
the present bridge was strong enough to last six or
seven years, at the expiration of which time there
would be sufficient funds accruing from the Bridge
Estate. He did not think this Bridge 'a work of ne-
cessity ; and if it were, lie would sooner adopt the plan
by which the cost incurred would be £250,000, rather
than that which would incur an expense of £400,000.
Mr. H. , SUMNER avowed himself the author of
the clause objected to. He contended, that the inte-
rests of the persons tiading on the River required this
clause, which *ould be the means .of saving many
lives on the River Thames. •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was
indeed at first unwilling, to consent to this advance,
but he did not think this Bridge ought to be consi-
dered a local benefit. When he considered how con-
nected the trade of London was with the interests and
commerce of the Empire at large, he was *finally led to
conclude that such an advance would not be a misap-
plication of the public money, especially when he
found that the City of London was anxious to make
great sacrifices by mot tgaging the Bridge Estates. •
Mr. MONCK did not think a public grant neces-
sary. He thought die money ought to be raised by
the imposition of a sixpenny toll upon four and two
wheeled carriages.
The LORD MAYOR thought the expenditure of
£lOO,OOO on the present Bridge would answer every
national, and useful purpose; and in this opinion lie
was supported by eminent architects. He should,
therefore, oppose the grant; and move, as an amend-
ment, that the Chairman do report progress.—On
the Amendment being put,
Sir G. COCKBURN opposed the Amendment, and
defended the propriety of the grant. •
Mr. G. BENNET objected to the general principle
that Government ought to give money for the build-
ing of Bridges ; but he thought the case of London
Bridge formed an exception, and he should therefore
suppoit the grant.
After a few observations from Sir H. PARNELL,
the Gallery was cleared for a division, when there ap-
peared for the Chairman's reporting progress—Ayes
12—Noes 81.—The clause was agreed to.
The LORD MAYOR brought in a clause for em-
powei ing the City to build and erect walls and dams
to protect land from the overflo+s ing °ldle tide when
unusually high.
The clause was, after a few observations from Sir
Geontie CocKnonN and Mr. CA LVERT, rejected.
The House resumed, and the Report was ordered
to be received to-morrdw.

recess, and if they did not themselves originate any
measure on the subject, they Would give notice in
sufficient time during the Session to allow any other
Member to make a proposal. Whatever then might
be the merits of the Bill, no chat ge of delusion could
be supported against Government. He thought that it
would ben strange and inconsistent sort of conduct on
the part of the House, if, after consenting to a second
reading, the Bill were got rid of by this Amendment.
Mr. ABERCROMBY considered the Bill as lost,
and therefore, though he had come down with a view
of watching the progress of the Bill, he was now dis-
heartened. The question of the compulsory clause
had been lost, and that brought them to the question
of whether they were prepared to add largely to the
large possessions of the Church ? The principle ap-
peared to hiM odious every way, but espeCially as ap-
plied to Ireland. Without, therefore, the compulsory
clause, be conceived that the Bill was rendered ut-
terly useless. With this feeling, therefore, and re-
gretting deeply the failure of the Bill, he did not see
Mat any good could arise fiom supporting it.
Mr. CANNING said, that the • Hon. Gentleman
had justly observed that no Bill would be worth any
thing tirat had for its object a considerable augme.n•.'
Cation of the Church revenues of Ireland. -1-Io ,was
perfectly of the same opinion ; but were we to con-
trast an accidental increase with the disadvantage of
introducing a compulsory spoliation without a pu in-
ciple of compleie indemnity ? he could not support
the latter alternative. The Right Hon. Gentleman,
after some general remarks on the Bill, called upon
the Hon. Mover of the Amendment to consider whe-
ther, if his Motion were carried, it would not render
entirely hopeless the chance of the subject ever being
brought forward again with effect? It did strike him
as strange that this, which had always been consi•
acted as the most important subject with regard to
Ireland, should be thus thrown away in despair. He was
sure that the rejection of the Bill in the manner now
proposed, would leave this impression on each party
—to the one it would hold out the idea that the con-
sideration •of the subject was hopeless, and to the
other that the subject was one on which it would not
be expedient to enter. On the,e grounds he hoped
that the Amendment of the Honourable Member
would be rejected.

Mr. V.. i'ITZGERALD, as he was understood,
spoke in favour of the Amendment.

Lord EBRINGTON thought, that by taking away
the compulsory clause, the measure could not possibly
be one of relief.—He would support the Amendment.
Gen. HA ItT spokein favour of postponing the Bill.
Mr. ItICARDO supported the Amendment.
Mr. W. WYNN believed that in all legislative in-
terference of this kind. this principle had never been
deviated from ; viz. that a fair value ought to be
given for the property of which any class might be
deprived. Ile thought that to introduce the principle
of compulsion without giving 4 reasonable valuation,
would be a most dangerous principle.
Sir J. STEWART thought that a valuation for the
last seven years would not be an unfair measure to-
wards the Clergy. It was better at once to put an
extinguisher on this Act, than to send it to Leland,
where in not one solitary parish could it be carried
into execution. •

A Message from the Lords announced that their'
Lordships had agreed to the Prison Laws Consolida-
tion Bill, and some private Bills.
IRISH TITV ES COMPOSITIOI4
GOULBURN moved the going into a Corm
mitteeon the Irish Tithes Composition Bill. • 1
Mr. AGAR ELLIS said, he felt that the rejection
of the compulsatory clause had put it out of his
power to give his assent to the Bill. Ile moved that
the further consideration of the Bill should be post-
poned to this day six months. .
Mr. GOULBURN said, •theconrse of proceeding
which was now adopted was anything but regular.
The House had been suffered to mature the Bill in its
details, and now, because the compulsatory clanse
was left out, and the arrangement substituted of a
voluntary adjustment of claims on the score of tithes,
the Hon. Gentleman, directly in the teeth of senti-
ments delivered by him on a former night, proceeded
to oppose their proceeding further in this Bill; already
the Bill in its principle had been sufficiently discussed,
and he only added, that he hoped the house would
for consistency sake support the proposition for the',
Speaker's leaving the Chair.
Mr. ‘VETHERELL felt there were very objec-
tionable clauses in the Bill still to be discussed, and'
he considered the Bill was rejected by anticipation.
Mr. CALCRA FT said, he believed the Right lion:
Gentleman opposite would be very glad to get out
of the measure of the Tithe Commutation for Ireland
by the House rejecting it in this manner. He wished
the House to remember this was not the' Tithe Bill
that Ireland called for or required. He should, how-
ever, support the motion for the Speaker's leaving
the Chair.
Colonel. BARRY thought this would be the fittest
periqd to put an extinguisher on the Bill at once, in a
lull. House, if the Right lion. Gentleman wished to
force the Bill into operation this year. But if the Bill
were only intended to be now committed for the pur-
pose of filling up the blanks in it, and the Right
Honourable Gentleman would consent to let it lie
over in that state until next year, he should support
the Speaker's leaving the chair.
Mr. G. BANK ES said that nothing would reconcile
him to the measure. He could nct help believing
that the Gentlemen who represented the interests of
Ireland in that House had taken a proper estimate of
the value of the Bill and its tendency, and they were
for the most nart opposed to its principle and details.
Mr. S. RICE thought that although he differed en-
tirely from the details of the Bill, yet some thanks
were due to Government for taking up the subject at
all. He wished to correct a misrepresentation which
had been given to the Public respecting his opinion
on this Bill. He had been understood to say that the-
income of the Clergy ought to be fixed at. the rate of
the receipts of the last three years. Now he had not
said so, nor could he have done so without speaking
against his own opinion.
Mr. HUME complained of the grounds an which
this Bill had been introduced. He thought that the
Bill would do no good to Ireland. It appears by a Return to an Order of the House
Mr. GMAT:IAN and Mr. PEEL severally gave some .of commons, that, from Ma 3, 1813, to May 3,1823, 370 Ap-
explanations as to the course which Government had peals were presented to the House of Lordi; of which 426 were
pursued, and denied that any pledges had been given Scotch, 56 E oath, 84 Irish, and four Wash. Of these Ap-
were heard, and :67 decided. The number of Writs
as to pursuing any particular lioe•of conduct. The I.l7p.rrWorrl need during the
,and period, were 242, of which
only pledge that had been &iven ha been this,, that two were &cock 235 Ffnglish, and 12 Irish. Of these 114 were
they would consider the subject of .tithes during the.4.tioa-pros'cl:, 76 beard, and 78 decided.

Mr. CALCRAFT gave notice, that if the Amend-
ment was negatived and the House went into a Com-
mittee, he should feel it his duty to move the re-in.
troductiou of a modified compulsory clause.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided. The numbers were—
For the Amendment
Against it

- 36
- 51

. -
Majority for going into a Committee —l5
-On the re-admission of strangers to the gallery
the House were in a Committee.

Colonel BARRY was desirous of knowing if it was
/intended that the Bill should be recommitted ?

Mr. GOIJLBURN replied that that .would be a
question for the House to determine when the Bill
was reprinted.
Mr. CALCR AFT said that be understood that a
principal clause, relative to the attendance of voters,
was postponed.
Mr. GOULBURN replied that the Hon. Member
was quite right in his supposition. It was the third
clause of the Bill, and it was understood at the time
of its postponement that it would not be discussed
until the reprinting of the Bill.
Mr. FITZGERALD said, if the Bill was recom-
mitted there would bean opportunity of reconsider-
ing the Bill ; its objectionable clauses might thus be
amended, and he should offer no further opposition.
Mr. GOULBURN replied, that though some slight
amendments, mostly of a verbal character, would be
introduced, there was no disposition again to discuss
the measure.

Mr. D. BROWNE said, he thought it was right to
proceed at once, since Irish Members were every day
leaving this country. He was disposed to support
the Government in every measure they introduced
into Ireland for its benefit ; but he was decidedly of
opinion that this measure would not answer its in-
tended object.
To the clause which made personal service neces•
sat y upon 'the impropriator,
Colonel BARMY objected, that the impropriator
might be absent, on the Continent for instance ; and
this clause must therefore prove extremely inconve-
nient, since, if the service
.were not properly executed,
the Churchwardens were liable to considerable pe-
nalties. He proposed that service upon the agent of
the impropriator should be considered a valid service.
Mr. WETHERELL said, that not merely would
a word, but a regiment of words be required in this
clause ; the trustees of property, for instance—the
guardians of infants—and a whole levy en masse
otrght to be introduced to give anything like a just'
efficiency to this measure.
After a few words from Mr. GOULBURN, the
clause underwent the change suggested by Col. Barry.
After several clauses, with some verbal Amendments, had
been agreed to, the CuLuiimix, on the motion of Mr. Secretary
reporfed progress, and •obtaloed leave to sit again on
Wednesday next.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
'House adjourned at Half-past One.

..., -,