Star.
London, England, 1823-07-15 00:00:00

Bill, their Lordships were creating a new Constitu-.1
lion for Limericks and if their Lordships did pro-
ceed to create .such a Corporate Constitution, not
under the Great Seal, but merely by Act of Parlia-
ment, what remedy then remained for such abuses as
might take place ander that Act, except by passing
an additional Act to redress them? .He was pleased
that the Noble and Learned Lord upon the Wool-
sack had aUuded to that portion of the Bill limiting
and specifying the salaries of the officers who might
happen to belong to the Corporation of Limerick ; it
was possible that the citizens might become more af-
fluent, so as to look down with disdain on the im-
portance of a Mayor, who was stinted to a salary of
£500; and, in this exigency or dilemma, what must
be done? Another Act of Parliament would be re-
quired in order to provide for an additional salary.
His sense of duty to their Lordships had prompted
him to address them upon this subject; and if they
should think proper to pass the Bill, he could only
say that it would certainly be no fault of his.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN, in reply, felt satis-
fied of the expediency, legality, and justice of the
Bill ; and, therefore, he trusted that their Lordships
would not refuse to sanction it.
Earl MANVERS spoke a few sentences in favour
of the Bill.
The question was then put from the Woolsack,
when the Noble and Learned Lord declared that the
Contents had it; upon. which the Bill was read a
third time, passed, and ordered to be sent to the
other House.

IRELAND TITHES COMPOSITION BILL.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL now moved the Order
of the Day upon which their Lordships had been
summoned, for consideting the Amendments made
in the Tithes (Ireland) Composition Bill.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN (the Order of the
Day being read) observed, that he wished to obtain
the omission of a certain clause in the Bill which ren-
dered the proprietors of agistment lands liable to
compulsory compositions for tithes.
The Earl of WESTMORLAND could perceive no
valid objection to this particular clause.
Lord LIVERPOOL said, that looking to the value
of agistment property, and the number of votes which
the holder had, he was not sure that a fair option was
given to the holder of agistment land. At the pre-
sent moment agistment land was only relieved from
tithe under certain conditions ; for if that land were
mown or broken up, it would immediately be sub-
ject to tithe. The composition, therefore, would, in
a great measure, relieve the owner of agistment land,
as it would enable him to mow or break up his land,
or use it in any manner that he pleased. He would
maintain, then, that this being optional, and the pro-
perty being of the nature which he had described,
there would be no injustice done by this measure to
the bolder of agistment land. .
The Marquis of LANSDOWN explained.
Lord MARYBOROUGH thought that the great
recommendation of the Bill was, that it brought for-
ward the agistment lands of Ireland in aid of those
poor persons who were paying tithe, without doing
any injustice to the owners of agistment land. He
thought that the measure would be imperfect, and
not likely to afford that relief which he expected it
would, if this clause should be emitted. lie admitted
that in one point of view this clause might appear a
compulsory clause tit on the owners of agistment
land, but he felt that this would afford great relief
to Ireland ; and their Lordships might form some idea
of the extent of agistment land, when lie informed
them that about ten years ago that land comprised
one-half of Ireland. This clause would give the
most general satisfaction in Ireland; and he there-
fore hoped that the Noble Marquis would withdraw
his opposition to it. •
The Earl of I3LESSINGTON opposed the clause.
The Earl of BELNIORE said, that however expe-
dient the clause might be, it certainly was not just.
If it were conceded that agistment land was liable to
tithe, it might next be contended that every descrip-
tion of property in Ireland was equally" liable: But
there were other parts of the Bill which, Vile did not
take an incorrect view of them, were very objec-
tionable. There was the oath of the Commissioners,
in which the words" adequate compensation" occurred.
What lie wanted to know was, what would be termed
an adequate compensation? The Noble Lord oppo-
site had said that the Clergy did not 'receive one-half
of their tithes, and a Reverend Bishop had stated
their receipts at oise.tsventieth. If this were so, what
ought to be the rule by which the COmmissioners
were to direct an adequate compensation? He con-
fessed that he could consider this Bill in no other view
-
than as a Bill intended to give to the Irish Clergy
rights which have never yet been insisted on. The
Noble Earl noticed some other objectionable parts
of the Bill.
1 " The Earl of LIVERPOOL observed that there was
nothirig imposed upon the Commissioners, except the
. duty of executing their charge without favour to any
party. The one-fifth which the Commissioners were
empowered to give over the average value of the last
seven years, was intended. only to apply to • those
cases in which the last seven years would furnish a
very unfair valuation, because, in some parts of Ire-
land, no tithes whatever had been paid during the
last seven years. -
The Earl of BLESSINGTONsaid, that if the inten-
tion of this Bill was, as his N Friend near him
had stated, to put the Clergy land into a better
oar
situation—(No! front Lord pool)—he could
assure their Lordships that the Clergy were in no
want of such a measure. At the period of the Union,
the Bock of the Irish Clergy amounted to one million;
and according to the last cittr, they did not
exceed 400,000. He did not etc see why, with
a charge'sci considerably reduced, they should receive
an increased stipend.
Lord MARTIOROUGH and the Earl of BILMORE
itaverally explained.
The Bishop of DOWN said, that though this Bill
might not at first work as happily as they could wish,
yet he believed that if there was a disposition on both
sides to conciliate, it would at last be a beneficial
measure for Ireland.
Lord DARNLEY concurred in the wishes of the
Rev. Prelate, although he confessed that be was not
very sanguine in his expectation. If the operation
of the Bill were to take the burthen from the poor,
and place it uponthe shoulders of the rich, be should
be most anxious, in common with- all other Irish
landed proprietors, to support the Bill ; but it was
in many respects imperfect, and if he suffered let,