The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-05-04 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY

Mr. Walter was introduced by Sir F. Burdett and Mr.
Fielden, and took the oaths and his seat for Nottingham. The
honourable member was loudly and enthusiastically cheered
as he approached the table.
Mr. R. II onosuN moved that the British Plate Glass
Company's bill, which had been referred to the Hampshire
list, be referred back to the committee of selection, with an
instruction to the committee that it be referred to the Surrey
list, instead of the Hampshire list.
Mr. ESTCOURT opposed the motion.
A discussion ensued, in which Mr. Hinde, Sir R. Inglis,
Mr. R. Palmer, and other members took part ; after which
the house divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority

.. .
The motion was consequently lost.
A number of petitions on various subjects were presented

At five o'clock the house was exceedingly crowded with
members on both sides.
PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORS (IRELAND) BILL.

Lord MORPETH moved the order of the day for going into
committee on the Parliamentary Voters (Ireland) bill.
In answer to a question from Mr. G. PALMER,

Lord J. RussELL,said he should postpone the further con-
sideration of the Poor-law bill from Monday until Monday
se'nnight. (Hear.)

THE BUDGET

In answer to questions by Col. SIBTHORP'
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to say that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would make his financial statement
to-morrow, and on Monday he should bring forward the
civil contingencies.
The house then went into committee on the Parliamen-
tary Voters (Ireland) bill, Mr. Bernal in the chair.
The CHAIRMAN said the question before the house was
that clause 2 stand part of the bill.
Lord MORPETH said, although the subject had been so
frequently discussed, yet he felt called upon to state his
views of the proposed mode of altering the registration, par-
ticularly as such a threatened and combined opposition was
offered to it. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord then proceeded
to describe, in a technical manner, his opinion of the bear-
ings of the measure. He wished to see the Irish franchise
fixed on some definite and solid basis. Since the passing of
the Irish Reform Act there had been 42 election petitions
against the return of members for places in that country ;
but he believed in no instance had there been any allegation
of personation of voters, of fraud, or of perjury ; but the
complaint, in almost every case, was, that individuals had
been improperly placed on the registry. The noble lord then
defended the course which the government had taken in
changing the franchise from £5 to £8 ; it was not a depar-
ture from the principle of the bill, and alterations in impor-
tant measures had frequently been made by former adminis-
trations, many instances of which, if necessary, he might
quote. They had at first thought that a£s franchise would
have been the best •, in deference to the wishes of many they
had increased it to £B, although he (Lord Morpeth) knew
that by so doing they should disfranchise a great number of
the present £lO voters. He (Lord Morpeth) certainly had
heard with some regret, that the right hon. baronet the mem-
ber for Tamworth had thrown himself into the impetuous
course marked out for him by his noble associates. (A
laugh.) If a triumph was, however, now obtained, it was
impossible to tell how long the victory might last. (Loud
and great cheering from the ministerial benches.)
Lord STANLEY said he took no part in the debate on, this
clause more than observing that he should oppose it. And
he should not have done so had it not been for the misrepre-
sentations and sneers of the noble lord. (Hear.) He dis-
regarded those sneers (great cheering), and he would say the
whole conduct of the government in conducting the bill had
been one entire system of recklessness. (Hear, hear, and
great cheering.) The noble lord had misrepresented both
the principle which the house had affirmed and the objections
taken on his (Lord Stanley's) side of the honse to the bill of
the noble lord. The noble lord stated that the house by the
second reading of the bill affirmed the principle of defining
the franchise according to the test of the poor-law valuation.
The house, in affirming the principle of the bill, affirmed
that they would permit the government to submit to them,
and discuss in detail a measure which it was supposed that
they had, as was the duty of the government before submit-
ting, maturely considered in its details, collected the facts
and were prepared to stand by the provisions they had re-
commended. (Loud cheers.) On his (Lord Stanley's) side
of the house they took no objection to the government find-
ing a better and more satisfactory basis for the franchise than
the oaths of the parties interested on either side. On the
contrary, in the discussion that had taken place they had de-
clared that it was more the duty of the honourable member
for Mallow than it was of the honourable member for
Monaghan, whose consistency had been so unfairly im-
pugned by the noble lord last night.—(Reiterated cheering.)
It seemed to them most desirable that a real stringent and
efficient test should be applied to the oath of the party
himself, value of property other than oath of the party him-
self, or evidence upon oath, and, moreover they affirmed that
the best and most efficient test, for the amount of the value
was founded on the principle of rating, which imposed a tax
at the same time that it affirmed a franchise. (Hear, hear.)
But the noble lord had found it convenient to omit that which
was the principle of the bill from the details. (Cheers.)
They were willing to take valuation for the purpose of rating as
the test of value in the property, but they were not willing to
take the value of the property apart from the charges and in-
cumbrances on it as the amount of the qualification—(loud
cheers)—and that was the principle of the noble lord's bill—
that value to a certain amount, tested by rating, should
be the standard, and they. were disposed to agree with him
in that principle. But, in addition, that it should be
a test not of the value of the property, but of the
qualification of voting. They contended that, although it
was the best test of the franchise, yet it must be estimated
over and above the amount of the charges and incumbrances
thereon. The noble lord assumed that that was the point of
difference between them. That was the point of difference
between them upon principle. That was the point which was
broadly and plainly stated to the House on Monday night,
and that was the point on which the House of Commons de-
cided in favour of a beneficial interest against the no behe-
ficial interest contended for by the Noble Lord, and that was
the point for which they again stood up in opposition to her
Majesty's Government. He stated, moreover, and he would
repeat it frankly, that in the Poor-law valuation he could
place no confidence. The very evidence the Noble Lord had
produced coming forward in succession as it did paper by
paper, week after week, and month after month, but before
the house subsequent to the Bill—(opposition cheers)—that
evidence had gone on no fixed, or stable, or uniform princi-
ple. In one thing only had it been uniform—in disregarding
the provisions of the Act of Parliament.—(Hear, hear.)
But how far the Act had been disregarded how much the
valuators were below the rate—whether it was 5 per cent., or
30, 40, or 50 per cent. beneath the real "value, could not be
learned. That was the account which their own Commission-
ers had given them of their own evidence ; and yet it was
on that evidence that the noble lord asked the House to
form, not a prima facie case, but a conclusive proof of the
real and actual value of the premises, while the Commis-
sioners told them that it formed no conclusive or proximate
evidence, but that it varied in the proportions of its defi-
ciency and errors in every union and in every different part
of Ireland. He would say again that in the present state he
should decline, on the evidence they had now to assume it,
as the basis, even as the first element to be laid down, viz.,
of the value of the property, exclusive of the amount of the
burden charged on that property. He did not mean to say
that rating might not be soicorrect that it might be made so
perfect, and ultimately approximate so nearly to the real
value, and become so uniform, that they would be fairly
entitled and enabled to assume it, not as a test of the
value of the property on which the party claimed his
vote. But in the present state of things he could not take
it as any test either of the franchise or the value.
The noble lord then spoke of the manner in which the
evidence on this measure had been furnished, and the effect
of it upon the constituency.
After some further discussion the house divided, when the
numbers were—
For the clause
Against the clause 3OO

Majority against Ministers

After the division, Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he com-
plained not that.the clause had been rejected, but that the
grounds of the rejection had not been made intelligible to
the government or to the country. With regard to the
future, he thought that parliament was bound to look at
least that Ireland should not be deprived of the benefits in-
tended to be secured to her by the act of 1829. The charge
of vacillation, adduced against the government, reminded
him of the scene in the " Rivals," where Falkland condemns
the inconsistency of Julia, for being about to change her
declared purpose ; and then, finding that she never has had
any such intention, rates her for her pride and obstinacy in
adhering to her resolve. When he remembered the sacri-
fices made by the whigs for the catholic question, he thought
that the Irish ought not to be told that there was no party
in the state which took an anxious interest in their welfare.
He was satisfied that no future bill would be useful which
should not be based on a definition of the franchise ; but he
thought it could answer no wise or conciliatory purpose to
keep up the discussion of the present measure. He moved
that the chairman do now quit the chair.
PEELcontocurred in the opinion that it would answer
no good Rood purpose
had
dd
tvaekreynlitatle groundstraightfgoofrnwor nacomplainingand thisbn ilelylf.
its
course.Tehp epegnoeTvnehtresn;,mwhehandet
stated throughout that they objected to the new leasehold
franchise proposed in this bill. And in answer to the ques-
tion, what they (the conservatives) desired to see done, they
had declared that it was not for them, but only for the mi-
Aisters themselves, to originate a measure on such a subject.

He paid no regard to intimations intended to raise dissension
among his own friends, in whose ranks the most perfect
union prevailed—(prodigious cheering)—and he would not
retort them on Lord Morpeth, so much did he feel for the
painful situation of that noble lord, deserted as he was by his
own partisans. But he must condemn the changes made by
government without reason, and merely in the hope of con-
ciliating two or three votes, though, in fact, they had gained
by all their sacrifices only one single votc—the vote of Mr.

Slaney, of Shrewsbury. If the conservatives had proposed
the change from £5 to £B, how loudly would they have been
abused as enemies of Ireland !
Lord Howicx repudiated the idea that he was indifferent
to the welfare of the people of Ireland, and intimated that
when he was a member of the cabinet he was prepared to go
further than even his noble friend (Lord J. Russell) thought
prudent at the time.
After a few words from Mr. SLANEY,

Mr. BERNAL put the question that he should leave the
chair which being agreed to, the bill was of course lost.

The other ordersofithe day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-

-FRIDAY

The report on the drainage bill was agreed to, and the bill
was ordered to be read a third time on Tuesday (this day).
The South Australian bill passed through a committee,
and their lordships adjourned.

SECOND EDITION.

Standardlifice, Ten o'clock

HOUSE OF LORDS-MONDAY
THE CORN-LAWS.

The Duke of BUCKINGHAM presented 100 petitions against
any alteration in the corn-laws. The petitions were chiefly
from places in the county of Buckingham, Suffolk, Derby,
and Southatnpton. The noble duke called attention to a
speech on the corn-laws delivered on a former occasion by
the noble viscount at the head of the government, in which
the noble viscount said that any agitation or discussion on
the corn-laws wouid inevitably lead to commotions danger-
ous to the peace of the community; he (the Duke of Buck-
ingham) sincerely trusted the noble viscount would remem-
ber the words he had used on former occasions, denouncing
all agitation on the subject of the corn-laws, and that he and
his colleagues would guard against any such agitation.
Viscount MELBOURNE said, having been so pointedly al-
luded to, he could not let the present opportunity pass with-
out observing, that the speech quoted and others made by
him were never intended to convey the idea that the corn-
laws were never to be interfered with. He had, however,
changed the opinion he had formerly held, that opinion being
entirely based and grounded upon particular and temporary
circumstances. (Hear, hear.)
. _

The Earl of RIPON said, he heard the oboervations of the
noble viscount with deep regret. (Hear.) He did not know
what the country would think of his noble friend (Melbourne)
this, however, he knew, that his noble friend would never
be able to carry on the government of the country. (Hear.)
He should like to know upon what ground the measure was
to be introduced ? Was it under a protecting duty, or by
taxation—taxing corn for revenue? (Hear, hear.) If so,
the noble viscount would do what no other country in the
world would do, and it would be the most disagreeable mea-
sure that ever was forced upon a reluctant parliament. (Hear.)
Viscount MELBOURNE rose and said, with emphasis, that
the principle of the measure would be one of protection.—
(Immense cheering.)
The Earl of WiNctuLszA denounced any interference
with the present system as imminently dangerous to the
peace of the country. He called upon the noble viscount,
in God's name, not to adopt any measure likely to lead to a
tax upon bread. (Hear, hear.) The people of this country
knew their interests—they knew that cheap bread meant low
wages. (Hear, hear.) To pursue such a course would be
the downfal of the noble viscount's government, which, in-
deed, would be a blessing to the country. (Cheering.)
The conversation then dropped.
[Left sitting.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS-MONDAY
Tfit MINISTRY.

Colonel SIBTHORP (as it was understood) asked the Colo-
nial Secretary if it was the intention of her Majesty's ministers
to resign their places ?—(" hear, hear," and laughter)—and
if not, whether it was the intention of the noble lord to pro-
ceed with the civil contingencies this evening? (Hear, bear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL.-With respect to the first question of
the gallant colonel, I shall decline to give any answer. (Loud
cries of " hear, hear," and laughter.) With respect to the
second, he wished to say that he did not intend to proceed
with the civil contingencies this evening. (Hear, hear.)

IRISH REGISTRATION BILL

In answer to a question by Mr. S._O'BRIEN,

Lord STANLEY Said, it was not his intention to proceed
with his Irish Registration Bill on Wednesday next ; he
should postpone it for a fortnight ; and he could assure the
house that every member should be apprized in due time of
the day on which it would again be brought forward. (Hear.)

THE CORN-LAWS

In answer to a question by Mr. Cartwright,

Lord J. RUSSELL said, on Friday next,The.should be pre-
pared to state the amount of fixed duty he intended to pro-
pose on the importation of foreign corn. (Hear, hear.)

SUGAR DUTIES

Lord SANDON gave notice that on Friday next on the mo-
tion for going into committee of supply, he should submit a
resolution on the proposition of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer relating to the sugar dutics—(hear, hear), and he
should certainly so frame it as to take the sense of the house
on the subject. (Hear.)

Sir R. INGLri trusted the noble lord would introduce
words into his resolution calling upon the house to declare
that it was not advisable to allow the importation into this
country of sugar the produce of slave labour. (Hear.)