The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-08-15 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY

Mr. HUME recurred to the frauds in the Customs,
which be believed bad been to the extent of millions per
annum. The fault lay in the improper selection of com-
missioners, who, instead of being chosen from a class of
persons acquainted with the business, and capable of duly
superintending it, were appointed merely from interest.
He moved an address to the Crown for the production of
the evidence appended to the report.
Mr. FORSTER seconded the motion, and Mr. Wit,-
LTAIts supported it.
Mr. GOULBOURN agreed that publication, when the
proper time for it should come, would do great good ; but
to publish now would be to defeat the prosecutions. The
attention of government was anxiously directed to the
circumstances stated in the report ; and every precaution
that human means could include, would be taken against
the recurrence of similar malversations.
Mr. HUME finally withdrew his motion.
Mr. DUNCOMBE afterwards moved for the public entry
of the orders in the minute-books to be kept in the Long
Room, and for the printing and publication, on theist day
in each month, of all new orders made in the month pre-
ceding.
Mr. Got LBORN assented to the first part of the motion,
but resisted the second, which, on a division, was re-
jected.
After some further business of no interest, it was ob-
served, a little after four, that there were not forty mem-
bers present.
The house was accordingly counted out.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-WEDNESDAY

The house met at twelve o'clock.
The British Iron Company Bill was read a second time.
The Coalwhippers Bill passed through committee, after
considerable discussion.
Sir R. PEEL said, it was not the intention of the go-
vernment to repeal the act preventing religious proces-
sions in Ireland during the present session. The act
would expire at the close of the next session of parliament,
and of course the government would consider whether it
was necessary to give it a more extended operation. For
his own part be would feel great pleasure when the time
should come rendering such an act wholly unnecessary.
Mr. GnoGAN said, that at one of the multitudinous
meetings which had recently taken place in Ireland, it
bad been stated, either at the meeting or the dinner which
took place subsequent to it, that there had been some
negotiations between Lord Eliot and the authorities of
Ma ynooth College, with reference to an increased grant
to Maynooth. HelfishM to know whether the noble
lord had any objection to lay the correspondence on the
subject before the house?
Lord ELIOT said, he had never made a statement to
induce any one to believe that the grant would be increased.
In saying this be wished to be understood as merely oa.
ting a fact, and tivt caprcning an opinion,

Mr. SMYTHE inquired, whether any application had
been made to the government to discharge the debts of
Maynooth College?

- Lord ELIOT said, that shortly after the present govern-
ment came into office, a memorial was presented to the
ministry by Roman Catholic prelates, praying for a grant
to discharge the debts of Maynooth ; and in the course
of last autumn he received a communication from the
secretary of the trustees of Maynooth College, which he
considered a private communication. Therefore, without
the authority of the party who sent it him, he could not
lay a copy of that communication on the table. He had
called the attention of his right hon. friend at the head
of the government to that communication, but had taken
no other step.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD moved the second reading of the

Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill, the object of which
was to compel the landlord to make allowances or com-
pensation to the tenant for the improvements on his land.
Sir R. PEEL said, he hoped that the hon. gentleman
would not ask the government to come to any decision
now upon the subject. Whatever course the government
might think it necessary to take respecting the subject of
landlord and tenant in Ireland, it was most important
that nothing should be left in a state of vagueness or un-
certainty, but ample time should be afforded for the con-
sideration of its details. The government had already
directed that a careful review should be made respecting
the law in England and Ireland as regarded landlord and
tenant. They, however, had no intention whatever to
interfere with the just and legitimate rights of property,
by introducing any measure which could recognise what
was called fixity of tenure. He felt that he was bound
to discourage all such delusive hopes; but, at the same
time, nothing should deter the government from giving
that consideration to the subject which its great impor-
tance demanded. He was not now prepared to give any
opinion upon the bill.

_ .
Mr. CRAWFORD thanked Sir R. Peel for his pledge to
take the question into his consideration, and should now
ask leave to withdraw the bill.
The bill was then withdrawn.

Sir C. NAPIER said, he thought it his duty to bring
under the consideration of the house the conduct of the
Governor of St. Kitt's, in throwing overboard a young
midshipman for refusing to land the Governor at Basterre.
The hon. and gallant officer then proceeded to enter at
some length upon the matter, attaching blame to the con-
duct of the Governor.
Lord STANLEY entered into a counter statement con-
demnatory of the conduct of the captain of the steam-
packet, who ought to have shown some share of civility
to the passengers, and more particularly to a dying lady,
who was conveyed on board by the Governor himself. It
was not very surprising that the want of respect to the
Governor on the part of the captain should be copied by
those under his command, and he therefore attached little
blame to the midshipman.
Lord ELIOT moved the third reading of the Arms (Ire-
land) Bill.
Lord CLEMENTS moved as an amendment that it should
be read a third time that day six months.
Captain BE&N AL seconded the amendment.

Mr. D'Isn.AELI said, that Sir R. Peel had left his party
without a guide as to his course of policy with respect to
Ireland. He had obtained power in consequence of Lord
Stanley's Registration Bill, and having obtained that
power, he then turned round and virtually allowed that
the former government was right in opposing the very
Registration Bill of Lord Stanley, which he had himself
supported. The consequence was, that having left his
party in the lurch, they were now in the position of sup-
porting leaders without knowing the principles upon which
they were acting. The present government was acting as
if Ireland were a theatre, and the repeal agitation a Giver-
lissement got up for the purpose of entertainment, and
which was to close at the termination of the session.
This do-nothing policy, this paralysis of statesmanship,
was, he understood, to be attributed to a dissension in
the cabinet, a state of affairs from which nothing could
be expected, for Ireland required some great man to take
decisive steps to bring forward immediately some great
remedial measures. The present measure he viewed as
contemptible, and the opposition to it equally so, and he
should therefore give no vote upon the question.
Mr. SHEIL called upon the house to contrast the pre-
sent state of Ireland with its condition under the influ-
ence of a whiz administration, and said, that even at the
period of Catholic emancipation the country was by no
means so excited as it was at the present moment. He
saw no reason to think that the agitation would subside,
supported as it was by the Catholic clergy, who were gra-
tuitously vilified as a low and degraded class in the other
house of parliament. He suggested the policy of appor-
tioning glebe-houses and glebe-lands to the Catholic cler-
gy, whicn would create a sentiment of reciprocal sustain-
rnent between the Catholic church and the state.

Sir R. PEEL wished to separate the consideration of the
Arms bill, from the consideration of the general question
of the state of Ireland, with which it had nothing to do,
for the Arms Bill was framed in the last session ofParlia.
ment before the agitation in Ireland assumed its present
aspect. The opponents of the bill had themselves sup-
ported a more stringent measure when brought forward
by the late administration, which was a proof that there
was something in the state of Ireland which called for a
different legislation from that which was applied to Eng-
land. Ile disclaimed all idea of offering any insult to Ire-
land ; he was only anxious to give greater security to life
acid property in that country. Neither did he propose un-
equal legislation for the two countries except so far as the
circumstances of each were in themselves unequal. He
viewed the state of affairs in Ireland with deep and anxious
solicitude. • He thought that the asperities arising from
religious differences in that country were fast melting
away, and that a better and more wholesome state of
things was fast arising; but the agitation which had arisen
threatened to defeat all his most ardent aspirations. In

reference to the suggestion of Mr. Sbeil, as to giving
glebe-houses and glebe-lands to the Catholic clergy, he
asked how far such a suggestion was consistent with Mr.
Sheil's intention of supporting the motion made a short
time since by Mr. Ward respecting the redistribution of
the property of the Irish Church. No such compromise
was then talked of; on the contrary, they were told that
nothing short of the re-distribution .proposed would sq-
tisfy the people of Ireland, and yet now it was suggested
that a much more modified measure would be accepted.
The right hon. baronet concluded by stating that nothing
should be left undone by the government which could
tend to preserve the integrity of the empire.
The house divided :
For the third reading 125
Against it 59

Majority
The bill was then read a third time, and passed.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the house adjourned.

.--_...0.--

HOUSE OF LORDS.-THIIRSDAY

Lord BROUGHAM surprised the House of Lords by
bringing forward, without, as he announced, any commu-
nication with government, a modified form of the Coer-
cion Bill, by which, as he boasted, he had succeeded in
preserving the public peace in Ireland in 1833. An
attempt to seduce the non-commissioned officers of the
army from their allegiance was the immediate reason for
this somewhat extraordinary step.
Lord WICKLOW expressed his extreme gratification at
the re-introduction of a measure which should from the
first have been made permanent ; but Lord CAMPBELL,
considering the bill as clearly one of coercion, opposed it
as unnecessary, and objected, moreover, that it should
have emanated from the responsible advisers of the crown.
_ _

... ..- .......... After a few words from the Marquis of LONDONDERRY,
the hill passed its first stage.

The Earl of LUCAN then, in moving for papers respect-
ing the circumstances under which he had been removed
from the commission of the peace for the county of Mayo,
entered into an explanation of his conduct, and com-
plained, apparently with much justice, of the treatment
he had experienced at the hands of the Lord Chancellor
for Ireland. _ _

Lord WHARNCLIFFE assented to the production of the
papers, but declined giving any immediate opinion.
Lord BBOUGHAM, however, did not hesitate to express
his sympathy with Lord Lucan, and several noble Lords
concurred in strong expressions of indignation at the
harshness with which he had been treated.
The house then adjourned.