The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-06-19 00:00:00

IRISH TITHES

Sir ROBERT BATESON presented
raa petition
a i fro
mfm the
lord liasure eu.
tenant and magistrates of Derry, pying th any
the house might adopt with reference to Irish tithes it would
take care to do justice to all classes. He regretted that he did
not see any of his majesty's, ministers in their places, as they
might be able to state what were the intentions of government
on this subject. Ile,regretted that the honourable and learned
member for Dublin was not 'present, as that learned person,
being the most influential one out of the cabinet, (a laugh,)
and the best informed, he (Sit It Bateson) should be likely to
obtain from him, or some of his followers, some information as
to the intended tithe bill.
Mr. O'DwYEa rose to order. The hon. member talked of
the "followers" of the hon. and learned member for Dublin.
Ile had no right to use such language. What would be said,
if be (Mr. O'Dwyer) talked of " Lord Roden and his squad?"
Sir R. BATESON said he had meant no personal offence to the
hon. member. The word "tail" had been often used with impu-
nity, and he thought therefore there was no harm in the word
" followers." ( Hear.) He must again express his regret that
none of the ministers were present. They did not seem to re-
gard Irish petitions, however important.
IPSWICH BOROUGH ELECTION.
The Sergeant-at-Arms informed the house that all the parties
against whom warrants had been issued were in custody.
Petitions were presented from John Bond, Arthur Bott Cooke,
Robert B. Champ, Peter-Frederick O'Malley, Esq., John
doves Sparrow, Sparrow, John .Bury Ilasent, and John Clipperton. A
long discussion on the merits-of the case of each of these parties
was entered into. Eventually they were all committed to New,
gate.

INVERNESSSHIEE ELECTION.
On the motion of Mr. BANNERMAN, this petition was ordered
to be taken into consideration on Thursday, the 2d of July.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the second reading of this bil
-Mr. PRAED gave notice that in a future stage of the bill he
should move a clause to the effect of preserviug the rights of
freemen in boroughs and cities, and those possessing inchoate
rights, in the same manner as they had been retained in the
parliamentary reform act.
In answer to a question from Lord SANDON,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that all recorders now holding
that office, who were barristers of not less than five years'
standing, might under the provisions of this bill be reappointed
by the several councils to be elected by the ratepayers in those
boroughs, but that where the office was not held by barristers, or
by barristers of less than five sears standing, these individuals
could not be reappointed. . When any vacancy in respect to the
office of recorder should ensue, on all future occasions the ap-
pointment to those offices would be vested in the crown.
Lord SANDON had not theleast wish to oppose the motion
DOW under discussion,, but hepust remind the house that great
tare and caution ought to be used in providing that in all places
which this measure went to affect, the administration of justice
and the proper distribution oft public charities vested in corpo-
rate bodies should not be too lightly interfered with. He doubted
whether some of the clauses of this bill might not effect this evil,
and he had considerable donhs, further, whether such funds as
were administered by the ._ orporation of Liverpool—funds
amounting to upwards of 00,000 per annum—employed in
large plans of improvementi and with a view to increase the
commercial intercourse an connexion between that town and
other parts of this and othqr empires, and dispersed in such a
manner as nut to call for afie remotest blame from the commis-
sioners of corporate inquiev, could be properly conducted by a
cotporation varying so to in its constitution as in this bill
was proposed by the nob lord the member for Stroud. Besides
the large amount of annual revenue which he had mentioned,
the corporation of Liverpool now held the administration of
funds arising from the_ docks trust, amounting to f:.00,000 per
annum. That trust was a most important one, and be much
questioned whether its administration could be safely intrusted
to hands holding office-under this bill only for three years. He
did not intend to enter into details at present, but he wished to
mention this much iyi order to show that many points of the
bill would require very minute and scrupulous consideration.
In acquiescing, on principle, in the great change contemplated
byethis measure, he-tegged to add that he by no means acceded
to any admission of the justice of any charges as against the
corporate body with which he was connected. That body, al-
though self-elected, published year by year an account of its
expenditure, &c., and he believed the investigation of 24 days'
duration by the corporation commissioners had not discovered
any error so bad as to call for any legislative cure. It was im-
possible seriously t 6 entertain a notion that even a self-elected
bogy could desert their duties when it was remembered that
an important change had taken place in the constitution of the
commons' house of parliament. In conclusion, he begged to
add, that he should avail himself of an opportunity of supporting
the motion foe the preservation of the rights of freemen and of
those possessing inchoate rights to the freedom of any borough,
of which the hon. member for Yarmouth (Mr. Praed) had this
evening given notice.
Lord STANLEY expressed his approbation of the bill gene-
rally, but thought that the re-election of a third of the common
councilmen annually would be attended with great disadvantage
on account of the party spirit likely to be created by annual
elections.' He should have preferred to have had town councils
elected for six years instead of three, and to 'appoint one-half
or one-third to go out triennially. By that means the people
would obtain as complete controul over the councils as they
ought.to have, and the towns would be relieved from the excite-
mentot incessant contests.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said that the-same motives which induced
him to assent to the introduction of the bill would also induce
him to assent to its second reading. When he heard of party
interests, he had only to say that the party he had the honour
to be connected witii had necessaiilv an Juiciest in seeing a
system of good government established in our large towns. He
could not see the state of our great towns at present—he could
not contemplate the necessity that occurred of calling in the
military to keep the peace, which in itself' was a great scandal—
without lamenting that the people should not be habituated to
look to the civil power for the maintenance of order and tran-
quillity. (i I ear, hear.) Any thing that tended to accomplish
that most desirable object would be listened to by him with the
greatest attention. ile believed that we could not maintain
good government, and ensure a proper management of affairs
in towns, and retain the existing curperatious ; and he confessed
he thought it better to devolve the administration of towns on
corporations properly modified and enforced than to permit a
system of self-election to prevail, and deprive them of the govern-
ing power. There were three great and important points in the
bill—first,t he qualification of the constituent body of municipal
electors; next, the frequency of elections; and lastly, the manner
of electing the governing body of places. There teas another im-
portant point not noticed in the bill, or clearly defined in the
speech of the noble lord 'when introducing it—namely, the quali-
fication of the governing body. • But here he wished to observe
with respect to the qualification of the constituent body, that
having given the subject a good deal of consideration since it
was introduced by the noble lord,-he thought it an advantage
in establishing a qualification for municipal electors that the
noble lord had taken'a diffesent qualrficat ion .from that afforded
in the case ofparliamentary voters by the reform act. An hon.
gentleman, in referring to the subject of the Scotch municipal
sygtem, omitted to stale that.t he,,qualification of votersin Scotch
boroughs is the same as Sur parliamentary electors, the right
being given in either case to the
.£lO householders. Now it
was a material consideration. Should we require the same qua-
lificatiou in tuunicipal voters as in electors of members of par-
liament? The advantage of rendering the qualification identi-
cal consisted in this, that we were thereby enabled to take the
existing registratiuo, and apply it in both cases. But he felt