Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

of the hon. Member for shire.

[ocr errors]

Buckingham- | The hon. Member said he knew of no abatement. I beg to say they have been made in cases I am acquainted with in the county of Monaghan, to the extent of 19 per cent, in Cavan to 20, in Wicklow to 20, in Longford to 25 per cent, and yet the best of the people abandon their land, leaving behind the poor, the aged and the infirm. Hence it is that I cannot support any law, or any system, or any Ministry, under which Ireland thus suffers. Hence it is, that I will vote for the Amendment of the Member for Buckinghamshire, as it favours the agricultural interest, and thereby the people of Ireland, for I cannot agree in a system by which the farmers are ruined, the lands are deserted, the gentry are beggared, and the people are banished.

MR. HENRY GRATTAN said, he did not rise at that late hour to lecture his fellow-countrymen-he left that to others. He might advise-he certainly would not reprove for such an invidious task he had not sufficient presumption. But what had fallen from the Member for Kerry was perfectly harmless, and would pass by the Irish Members as the idle wind that they regard not. As to what fell from the Member for Limerick, he must observe that Ireland had not been relieved as was represented, nor had the lives of the people been saved, as was imagined. The repeal of the corn law, and the fanciful term Free trade, had done no such thing. At the time of the distress there was plenty of provisions in Ireland, if they had been properly distributed. To say that the lives of the people had been saved by the course adopted by Government, was absurd. Upwards of 237,000 Irish had died in the poorhouses within these four years, as the returns showed, and nearly 300,000 had emigrated. The effect of the corn law was not to feed the Irish on bread, but to disable them from getting labour whereby to procure it-in fact, the Irish poor were not fed on wheaten bread, but on Indian meal. He (Mr. Grattan), had gone with the father of the Member for Limerick to the Lord Lieutenant (Lord Heytesbury), with a view to procure his aid to relieve the distress-not by sending for foreign corn abroad, but by keeping and using the corn we had at home, for we had then twice as much grain as would have fed the enOne of the Government tire population. returns stated that sixteen millions of quarters of grain were in Ireland. We wished to secure the corn, and stopped the breweries and distilleries; but the fact was, that other interests prevailed, and accordingly Ireland was sold to the London and Liverpool merchants. I cannot, then, praise any Government, or any law under which, in a country so circumstanced, the people were suffered to perish. With regard to the

Member for Manchester, he shows that he is unacquainted with Irish affairs, and mistakes, if he thinks they are prosperous. The country is not only in a state of misery, but many say in a state of ruin. The farmers are broken, the gentry are beggared, and the people are flying; abatements made by the landlords are of no avail; they cannot induce the tenants to till their land, or adhere to their country.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question.'

[ocr errors]

The House divided:-Ayes 263; Noes 250: Majority 13.

List of the AYES.

Abdy, Sir T. N.
Adair, R. A. S.
Aglionby, H. A.
Alcock, T.
Anderson, A.
Anson, hon. Col.
Anstey, T. C.
Armstrong, Sir A.
Ashley, Lord
Bagshaw, J.

Baines, rt. hon. M. T.
Baring, rt. hon. Sir F.T.
Barnard, E. G.
Bass, M. T.
Beckett, W.
Bellew, R. M.
Bell, J.
Berkeley, Adm.
Berkeley, hon. H. F.
Berkeley, C. L. G.

Bernal, R.
Birch, Sir T. B.

Blackstone, W. S.
Blewitt, R. J.
Bouverie, hon. E. P.
Bowles, Adm.
Boyle, hon. Col.

[blocks in formation]

Bright, J.
Brocklehurst, J.
Brockman, E. D.
Brotherton, J.
Bulkeley, Sir R. B. W. Dundas, Adm.
Brown, W.
Bunbury, E. II.
Burke, Sir T. J.
Busfeild, W.
Campbell, hon. W. F.
Carter, J. B.
Caulfield, J. M.
Cavendish, hon. C. C.

Cardwell, E.

Dundas, rt. hon. Sir D.
Ebrington, Visct.

Ellice, rt. hon. E.
Ellice, E.
Ellis, J.

Elliot, hon. J. E.
Enfield, Visct.
Estcourt, J. B. B.

[blocks in formation]

Barrington, Visct.

Barron, Sir H. W.

Barrow, W. H.

Grey, R. W.

Grosvenor, Lord R.

Paget, Lord C.

Hall, Sir B.

Palmer, R.

Hanmer, Sir J.

Parker, J.

Baldwin, C.B

Harris, R.

Pechell, Sir G. B.

Bankes, G.

Hastie, A.

Peel, F.

Hastie, A.

Baring, T.

Perfect, R.

Hatchell, rt. hon. J.

Peto, S. M.

Hawes, B.

Pigott, F.

Headlam, T. E.

Pilkington, J.

Heald, J.

Pinney, W.

Bateson, T.

Benbow, J.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Davies, D. A. S.

Deedes, W.

Devereux, J. T.

Dick, Q.

Disraeli, B.

Dod, J. W.

Drax, J. S. W. S. E.

Duckworth, Sir J. T. B.

Duncombe, hon. A.
Duncombe, hon. O.
Dundas, G.
Dunne, Col.
Du Pre, C. G.
East, Sir J. B.
Edwards, H.
Egerton, Sir P.
Egerton, W. T.
Emlyn, Visct.
Evelyn, W. J.
Fagan, J.

Farnham, E. B.

Fellowes, E.
Filmer, Sir E.
Floyer, J.
Forbes, W.

Forester, hon. G. C. W.
Fox, S. W. L.
Frewen, C. H.
Fuller, A. E.

Gallwey, Sir W. P.

Galwey, Visct.

Gaskell, J. M.

Gilpin, Col.

Goddard, A. L.

Gooch, E. S.
Goold, W.
Gordon, Adm.

Gore, W. O.

Grace, O. D. J.

Cochrane, A. D. R. W.B. Granby, Marq. of

121 The County Courts-The {APRIL 14, 1851} Criminal Law Commission. 122

[blocks in formation]

Hotham, Lord

Hudson, G.

Hughes, W. B.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Jocelyn, Visct.

Jolliffe, Sir W. G. II.

Jones, Capt.

Keating, R.

Keogh, W.

[blocks in formation]

Kerrison, Sir E.

Knox, Col.
Knox, hon. W. S.

Langton, W. H. P. G.
Lawless, hon. C.
Lennard, T. B.
Lennox, Lord A. G.
Lennox, Lord H. G.
Lewisham, Visct.
Lindsay, hon. Col.

Lockhart, W.

Long, W.

Lopes, Sir R.

Lowther, hon. Col.

Lygon, hon. Gen.

[blocks in formation]

Repton, G. W. J.
Reynolds, J.
Richards, R.
Rushout, Capt.
Sadleir, J.
Sandars, G.
Scott, hon. F.
Scully, F.
Seymer, H. K.
Sheridan, R. B.
Sibthorp, Col.
Sidney, Ald.
Smyth, J. G.
Somerset, Capt.
Sotheron, T. H. S.
Spooner, R.
Stafford, A.
Stanford, J. F.
Stanley, E.
Stanley, hon. E. H.
Stuart, H.
Stuart, J.

Sturt, H. G.
Sullivan, M.
Talbot, C. R. M.
Taylor, T. E.
Thesiger, Sir F.
Thompson, Ald.
Tollemache, J.
Townley, R. G.
Trevor, hon. G. R.
Trollope, Sir J.
Tyler, Sir G.
Tyrell, Sir J. T.
Verner, Sir W.
Vesey, hon. T.
Villiers, Visct.
Villiers, hon. F. W. C.
Vyse, R. H. R. II.
Waddington, D.
Waddington, H. S.
Walpole, S. H.
Welby, G. E.
West, F. R.
Whitmore, T. C.
Wigram, L. T.
Williams, T. P.
Willoughby, Sir H.

TELLERS.

Beresford, W.

Main Question put and agreed to; Act considered in Committee.

House resumed.

Committee report progres; to sit again on Monday next.

The House adjourned at a quarter after Two o'clock, till Monday next.

[blocks in formation]

THE COUNTY COURTS-THE CRIMINAL
LAW COMMISSION.

LORD BROUGHAM moved for returns connected with the County Courts (Minutes of Proceedings, 36, 37, 38, 39). He regretted to hear the complaints that had been made with respect to any increase of the salaries of the County Court Judges, for the working of those courts proved how highly beneficial they had been to the public. His noble and learned Friend on the woolsack had said that ninety-nine cases out of one hundred decided in those courts were for sums under 20s. He had looked at the returns, and he found that about one-third of the cases were for such sums, but it appeared also that out of 130,000 disposed of by those Courts last year, no less than 32,000 were for sums above 10%., while he found that in the Courts of Queen's Bench and Common Pleas in the year 1827 -the last year for which there was any return-the number was only 31,600. There was another subject that appeared to him to require attention, and that was with respect to the state of the criminal law digest. Nine months since he had had a correspondence with his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack. in which his noble and learned Friand expressed himself fully sensible of the labours of the Criminal Law Commission, and he (Lord Brougham) was in hope that something would be done with respect to it; but the Government had allowed that Commission to expire. Every one was aware that the labours of that Commission had been very great, and, even without its being renewed, he thought advantage might be taken of

the admitted good the learned Members of

it had done.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, his attention had not been called to the subject of his learned Friend's last observations; but as to the renewal of the Commission in question, the Government were of opinion that it was not required. With respect to the cases that had been disposed of in the County Courts, he had merely said that a large proportion of them were of the description he had referred to on a former occasion, and when his noble Friend spoke of the increase of the salaries of the Judges, he (the Lord Chancellor) had mentioned that a considerable number of the cases disposed of by them required no labour.

LORD BROUGHAM said, that one reason why those cases were disposed of with so little labour was, that the Judges had the means of examining the parties themselves.

Returns ordered.

CHURCH BUILDING ACTS AMENDMENT

BILL.

The EARL of CARLISLE moved the Second Reading of this Bill. The Commissioners for subdividing Parishes had presented two reports, and it was with a view of carrying into effect the greater part of the recommendations in their first report that the 'prosent law had been framed. The object of the Bill was to impart as parochial a character as possible to all divisions and subdivisions of parishes; and its details were chiefly directed to provide a, sufficient amount of income for those clergymen who have the charge of such divisions of parishes. The Commissioners had recommended that some arrangement should be made to do away with Church Rates in their present objectionable form; but it had not been thought right to introduce any clause for that purpose in the present Bill. He thought the measure before their Lordships would have the effect of promoting Church extension throughout the country in a manner most unobjectionable to all parties.

tants of Killarney and the county of Kerry,
praying for the adoption of measures se-
curing by local guarantee the payment of
interest to parties willing to undertake the
completion of the works for the construc-
tiion of railways (Minutes of Proceedings,
53). The petition involved a most impor-
tant principle, and he wished to call parti-
cular attention to it.
Some years ago,
when this subject first came before their
Lordships-that of affording public assist-
ance to railway companies in Ireland-
although it was late in the Session, the
measure appeared so likely to improve the
condition of the country that their Lord-
ships readily sanctioned the Bill. The line
of railway from Dublin to Cork had now
been completed. Mr. Drummond, however,
in his report, recommended its being car-
ried further west to Mallow, and from
thence to Killarney. This railway had
been partly constructed, but the resources
were inadequate for its completion, in con-
sequence of which the grand juries of the
counties of Cork and Kerry had assented
to the principle of assisting by the county
rates the completion of this railway; and
the question was whether, under the cir-
cumstances of the case, Parliament would
be disposed to sanction that proposition.
The railway would give employment to
from three to four thousand ablebodied
men, and be of the greatest advantage to
the district. A Bill was now before the
other House of Parliament on the subject,
and he hoped when it came up to their
Lordships they would give it their assent.

LORD REDESDALE said, the Bill was first introduced in 1845 or 1846, and the capital of the company then was 375,000l.; that estimate had now been reduced to 210,0007. This, therefore, was clear, that it was proposed, in the first instance, that the capital should be raised on 150,000 shares of 251. each, and it was now proposed to reduce the amount to 147. per share, so that the original proprietors would get rid of 117. per share. The calls which had been made amounted to 6l. per share, and if all were paid up the sum raised would be 90,000l., and the rule was that a railway company should not be allowed to borrow until half the capital was paid up. The power of borrowing, which they now wanted to take, went to the extent of 125,000l., which would be 5,000l. RAILWAYS IN THE SOUTH OF IRELAND. more than the estimated cost of the whole LORD MONTEAGLE presented a peti- line. There was also an extension of this tion from Landowners, Clergy, and inhabi- line from Killarney to Valentia, for which

The EARL of POWIS hoped that some provision would be inserted in the Bill with reference to outlying parts of parishes.

Bill read 2a.

The EARL of HARROWBY said, there was such great distress in that county that he was sorry any technical rules of the House should stand in the way of its relief.

no such privilege was asked; and, unless | be obtained without infringing on the rules something was stated much stronger than of their Lordships' House. anything he had yet heard as reason for dispensing with the Orders of their Lordships' House, he thought they ought not to sanction such a principle as that sought to be obtained by the Bill. The Galway case was not in point. In that case great distress existed, and that was the only ground upon which the public money was advanced, whilst in the present instance it appeared to him that private parties came forward and sought to raise money for their own private advantage upon the security of others.

EARL GRANVILLE deprecated the practice of discussing a general principle upon the presentation of a petition, and referring to a measure not before the House. There was some excuse, however, for this matter being then brought before their Lordships, and he found himself in the somewhat incongruous position of agreeing, to a certain extent, with both of the noble Lords who had addressed the House. The Railway Commissioners, in pursuance of their duty of reporting to both Houses of Parliament, had never given an opinion on the merits of Bills; but it was their duty to point out any unusual provisions in a Bill, or any clauses which might clash with the general law on the subject. Now, the provisions in this Bill were of an unusual character, and were not in accordance with the general law of railways; at the same time it was perfectly true that a precedent existed in the Galway case, where the Government had advanced 500,000l., but the cases were by no means the same. He, however, thought that a great public benefit would arise from the proposed extension of this railway. He believed that it was matter of notoriety that great distress existed in that part of Ireland through which the line would pass, and the railway itself would not only be a public advantage, but it would give great employment to the poor; and, therefore, he thought the rules of the House ought not to be too closely applied with a view to prevent such an object from being carried out. It was necessary that great care should be taken in preparing such a measure; and it was impossible that this Bill could pass both Houses in its present shape; at the same time it would be the duty of the Government to consider whether a fair and unobjectionable mode might not be adopted by which the public advantages contemplated by the Bill in question might

EARL GREY said, there two ways in which railways were advantageous: in the first place, from profits directly made from passengers and goods; and, in the second place, indirectly by the additional value given to land and particular parts of a country, by opening up communication. In the United States of America, and especially in the remoter parts of that country, railways which would be utterly ruinous speculations if they were merely to look at the receipt from passengers and goods, became very advantageous when they took into account the increased value given to the land through which they passed. He thought it would be very wrong for their Lordships hastily to assume that something of the same kind might not take place in Ireland. He thought it possible that there were parts of Ireland which suffered so much from the want of communication with other parts of the empire, from want of a good market for their produce, that it might be worth the while of owners of property in those particular parts of the country to consent to become subject to some liability in order to encourage the formation of railroads in those districts, even if these parties had no share in the returns on account of passengers and goods. He quite agreed with the noble Lord opposite, that it was quite right to call the attention of the House to a Bill of so unusual a character, and he quite agreed with his noble Friend near him that any measure founded on this principle ought to be looked at with the utmost care. thought that, especially when they were legislating for Ireland, they ought to be careful there was not some job intended.

He

LORD BEAUMONT said, there was something peculiar in this case. The petitioners who asked for this power were not merely the company promoting the Bill. On the contrary, it was the party who was to give the guarantee. It was the ratepayers themselves who petitioned to be allowed to give a guarantee on the raising of this sum of money. It seemed a hardship to refuse such a request.

LORD STANLEY said, it seemed to be generally admitted that this was a principle of an exceptional character, and one which

« ZurückWeiter »