Vane, Lord H. Vansittart, G. H. Villiers, rt. hon. C. P. Walcott, Adm. Williams, M. Winnington, Sir T. E. TELLERS. Walpole, rt. hon. S. II. Hayter, W. G. Waterpark, Lord Words added. Jolliffe, Sir W. Tuesday, June 19, 1855. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1a Consolidated Fund (£10,000,000); Spirit of Wine. 2 Friendly Societies; Duchy of Lancaster Lands Reported-Insurance on Lives Abatement of CARNEGIE'S RESTITUTION BILL-EARL- THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, a Petition had some years ago been presented by Sir James Carnegie, claiming the Earldom of Southesk, which Petition had been referred to the Committee of Privileges, and the claim was dismissed on the ground Main Question, as amended proposed of attainder. Her Majesty, however, had "That this House recommends to the earliest attention of Her Majesty's Ministers the necessity of a careful revision of our various Official Establishments, with a view to simplify and facilitate the transaction of public business, and, by instituting judicious tests of merit, as well as by removing obstructions to its fair promotion and legitimate rewards, to secure to the service of the State the largest available proportion of the energy and intelligence for which the people of this Country are distinguished." MR. LINDSAY moved the adjournment of the debate, and said, that he was sure, after what had been stated by the hon. and gallant Member (Admiral Berkeley), that the House would afford him (Mr. Lindsay) an opportunity of stating the grounds upon which he had made the statements which had been referred to. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON thought, under all the circumstances, and considering the lateness of the hour, and also that the House was to meet at twelve o'clock, that it would be better to agree to the Motion of the hon. Member. MR. DISRAELI hoped that the noble Lord would consent to the Metropolitan Improvement Bill being taken before the Tenants' Compensation Bill. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON said, that there was nothing like standing to an arrangement, and, therefore, the Irish Bill would be first taken. MR. DISRAELI then gave notice that, if he were present, as he hoped to be, when the House met at twelve o'clock (this day), he should move that the Metropolitan Improvements Bill should take precedence of the Irish Bill. Debate adjourned till Thursday. now been pleased to signify Her assent to a reversal of the attainder, and he had now to move that a Bill to that effect be read a first time. Bill to relieve Sir James Carnegie of Southesk Kinnaird, and Pittaron, Baronet, from the effect of the Attainder of James Fifth Earl of Southesk, and Baron Carnegie of Kinnaird and Leuchars in Scotlaud, presented and read 1a. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL. LORD PORTMAN, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said that the societies to which it applied were 20,000 in number, and it affected nearly 3,000,000 of persons who were members of registered societies, and nearly a million and a half more who were members of unregistered societies, making in all 4,500,000 of the 9,000,000 which constituted the male population of this country. The capital embarked in friendly societies amounted to about 6,000,000. It was obvious, therefore, that the subject to which the Bill related was of very great importance, and he trusted that, before they went into Committee, their Lordships would direct their attention to the provisions of the Bill. It had been found that it was not desirable to tie the societies down to any fixed tables, because the circumstances that affected them were very various, and depended so much upon locality and other causes, that it would be most unwise for Parliament to give anything like a guarantee that this or that set of tables was the safer, thereby inducing them to rely on the authority of Parliament rather than their own care and The House adjourned at half-past Two vigilance. The House of Commons, after o'clock. three Special Committees of Inquiry, had agreed to the present Bill, which it was anticipated would work well and satisfactorily. In Committee he should draw their Lordships' attention to two or three of the clauses. He would now move the second reading of the Bill. LORD MONTEAGLE said, that those who were parties to the passing of the previous Act with which the present Bill proposed to deal would remember certain circumstances which at the time excited a painful impression among the public. He alluded to cases of the murder of children, calculated to create a criminal interest leading to the perpetration of that unnatural and atrocious act. After due deliberation, some clauses were framed and passed by Parliament for the purpose of preventing that horrible crime, and he believed that they had had the intended effect; but he noticed that those clauses were omitted in the present Bill, and he trusted that when the Bill went into Committee the noble Lord would explain the reason of their omission. sure by which all rateable property may be compelled to bear its fair share of the expense of providing for the relief of the poor. The noble Lord said he bad thought it right to give notice of this petition from a consideration of the great experience which the petitioners had on the subject to which it referred, and also from a regard to its very great importance. The petitioners were the representatives of thirty-six unions and parishes in London, and of no less than 9,780,0001, of property rated for the poor. He might remind their Lordships that these two questions were considered of such great social importance that they had been the subjects of inquiry by Select Committees of the House of Commons in 1844, 1845 and 1846, and that in their Lordships' House two Committees sat in the years 1846 and 1850, while the subject was referred to in Her Majesty's speech from the Throne last year. The returns before the House showed that the direct local taxation paid by the land amounted to 14,320,000l. while that paid by manufaeturers was, 4,432,000l. It had been repeatedly said that the incidence of local taxation could not be defended on any principle whatever; and the late Chan cellor of the Exchequer, who was a great authority on the other side of the House, had stated, that the principle of our lar was, that personal, just as much as real property, ought to be the subject of local LORD RAVENSWORTH observed, that the 39th clause, by which building societies found themselves subject to a new fiscal burden in the shape of stamps from which they had been previously exempt, had created great dissatisfaction. He was given to understand that it was not in the power of their Lordships to amend that clause, as it was one affecting the privileges of the House of Commons, and, if the clause was allowed to pass in its pre-taxation. In 1850 the Committee of that sent shape, he wished it to be understood that it was only on account of the reason he had just mentioned. House adopted Resolutions in which they declared that it was expedient to rate all property alike, and that the relief of the poor was the national object for which no description of property should be called to contribute more than another. Some time ago he laid a Bill upon their Lordships' table which embraced the subjects of rating and settlement, but he withdrew it upon a pledge being given on the part of Her Majesty's Government that they would forthwith bring forward a measure dealing with these questions. Early in Session 1854 such a measure was brought forward by the Government; but, although it was notorious that it was a matter of discussion whether such a measure should be applied to Ireland or not, the Bill was thrown over LORD BERNERS presented a petition at the end of April on the plea that it did from the Committee of Metropolitan Asso- not apply to Ireland. The petition he had ciation for the abolition of the Laws of to present to their Lordships stated in the Settlement and Poor Removals, and for strongest terms that the present law was the Equalisation of the Poor Rate, praying unjust, partial, cruel, and oppressive in its the repeal of the said laws and for a mea-operation, and threw a most heavy burden LORD CAMPBELL observed, that the clause in question being a money clause could not be altered by their Lordships without interfering with the privileges of the other House. The removal of the exemption was in the nature of a supply granted by the House of Commons to the Crown, and by interfering with it they would interfere with the undoubted privileges of that branch of the Legislature. Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Tuesday next. LAW OF SETTLEMENT AND REMOVAL. a notice from the chief constable of the county of Leicester, stating that it was desirable to increase the police force of the county one-fourth, owing to the withdrawal of Her Majesty's troops from the county. If this augmentation of the police force were made, the result would be that a considerable addition would be made to the county rates. EARL GRANVILLE, in reply to the noble Lord, said he hoped he might be excused from entering into any detail upon so complicated a question. Her Majesty's Government did not intend to introduce any measure upon the subject this Session, because last year a Bill was brought into the other House of Parliament, and was referred to a Select Committee, and that Committee, which sat last year and a portion of this year, had only reported last week. As Parliament at present had so much business before it, he could not hold out any hope that the Government would make any proposition upon the subject this year. Petition to lie upon the table. upon those parishes in which there were | and the consequent increase of the local many small houses. The petition further police. He, himself, had recently received stated that the existing law curtailed the means of the poor man's labour, rendered it difficult for him to obtain a home, robbed him of domestic comfort, and depraved the habits of the people; and that not only was the law cruel and oppressive to the poor, but that it was attended with great expense to the ratepayers. The petition went on to describe the injustice to which the rate payers were subjected, and stated that the poor were the common property of the country and ought to be supported and relieved by the country at large. If their Lordships referred to the Reports of the Poor Law inspectors, they would find that many of the most wealthy parishes which derive the greatest advantage from the labour of the poor, were nearly altogether exempted from any contribution to the poor-rates. The petitioners represented that the value of property rated to the poor was 67,320,000l., and the total sum expended for the relief and maintenance of the poor in the year ending March, 1854, was 5,282,000l., which was a considerable increase upon the expenditure of the preceding year. The average amount of the rates was 1s. 6 d., in the pound, the lowest rate being d. in the pound, and the highest 5s. 7d. The petitioners, therefore, prayed their Lordships to repeal the present law relating to the settlement and removal of the poor, and to equalise the poor-rates. thought one reason why it was imperative that the Government should devote their attention to the subject, with the view of establishing a more just and equal system of rating, was that the tendency of the existing law was to throw the burden upon the land rather than upon towns. There was also another reason-namely, that in consequence of the establishment of the militia, a large number of persons-the wives and families of militiamen-had been thrown upon the parish for support. An order had been issued to the Colonels of the various militia regiments, empowering them to discharge those men whose families had become burdens upon the parish, and the consequence had been that, in the Leicester regiment, 136 privates, being nearly one-seventh part of the regiment, had been sent home to their respective parishes. An additional pressure would also be thrown upon the land in consequence of the withdrawal of the regular troops from the various counties He HOUSE OF COMMONS, Tuesday, June 19, 1855, MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS. -1° Administration Order for Committee read. VISCOUNT GALWAY said, that in the absence of the right hon. Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli), he should move that the second Bill upon the paper (the Metropolis Local Management Bill) take precedence of the Bill now before the House. MR. SPEAKER said, that the proper form was for the noble Lord to move that the debate be adjourned. VISCOUNT GALWAY accordingly moved the adjournment of the debate. SIR JOHN V. SHELLEY said, he thought that the House ought to have some consideration for Mr. Speaker, who had occupied the Chair until past two o'clock on that morning. If the debate went on there would be no chance of getting the right hon. Gentleman out of the chair until four o'clock, and then at six o'clock he would have to take the chair for the evening sitting. He thought this was rather too hard upon the right hon. Gentleman, and that the morning sitting ought to be confined to Bills in which progress could be made in Committee. MR. MAGUIRE said, that the Bill now about to be brought forward had been before the House in one shape or another for the last twenty years. It was of a thousand times more importance than the Metropolitan Management Bill; and much as he sympathised with the Speaker, he should persevere in thinking the Bill ought to be proceeded with. day evening, when the fourteenth clause came to be discussed. MR. NAPIER said, he would beg to point out that it was of the greatest importance that this question should be settled as soon as possible, for it was doing great mischief in Ireland to leave it in its present state. COLONEL DUNNE said, he was not aware of any such arrangement between the Government and the Opposition side of the House as the Chief Secretary for Ireland had described. He objected on principle to this Bill, as it would give rise to prac tices of evasion and fraud. SIR JOHN WALSH said, that he was one of those who objected to the prospective, as well as to the retrospective operation of this Bill; and he thought the principle had not yet been sufficiently argued. He saw no reason why the relation of landlord and tenant should be so entirely altered in Ireland. It was now half-past one o'clock, and he would ask was there any chance of making any progress with the clauses! The Metropolitan Local Management Bill had already been in Committee, and some progress might be made with it. SIR GEORGE GREY said, he wished the House to decide at once whether the Bill should go into Committee then, or be postponed; if hon. Gentlemen persisted in debating the principle of the Bill at that moment, the whole morning would be wasted. Motion made and Question put "* That the debate be now adjourned." The House divided:-Ayes 65; Noes 117: Majority 52. MR. HORSMAN said, he must beg to explain that it was only proposed that the first thirteen clauses of the Bill should be taken at the morning sitting. Those clauses related only to prospective compensation, about which, he believed, there was no difference of opinion. With regard to the other principle involved in the Bill, that of retrospective compensation, an appeal had been made to him by the hon. and learned Member for Wexford (Mr. McMahon), and by the hon. and learned Member for Wallingford (Mr. Malins), who represented that the fourteenth clause, which involved that very important principle, ought to be debated at an evening sitting, as some gentlemen of the legal profession, who were anxious to take part in its discussion, could not be present in the morning. He (Mr. Horsman) communicated with the noble Lord at the head of the Government, who authorised him to assent to their suggestion; and the Government arranged to give Thursday MR. PEACOCKE said, he rose pursuant evening to the discussion of that 14th to notice, to move that the House resolve clause. He trusted, therefore, that the itself into Committee on the Bill upon that noble Lord opposite and his friends would day three months. Considering that prohardly take the unusual course of prevent-perty to the extent of 15,000,000l. had ing the Government from pursuing their own course with their own Bills. As for the Amendment, of which notice had been given by the hon. and learned Member opposite (Mr. Peacocke), it was in itself an irregularity, as it would be raising a discussion in Committee on the principle of the Bill, which had already been raised and disposed of, a majority of 160 to 50 being in its favour upon the occasion of the second reading. If it were the object of the hon. and learned Gentleman to raise the question of retrospective compensation, he might raise it more properly on Thurs Question again proposed "That the Speaker do now leave the chair." changed hands under the Encumbered Estates Court, and that these purchases had been made under the sanction of a Parliamentary title, and subject to no liabilities except what were set forth at the time, he could not consent to saddle these purchasers with encumbrances that to a very considerable extent would be imposed upon them by the Bill now under discussion. It seemed that about forty Irish Members were in favour of this Bill, and that to obtain their support the noble Lord at the head of the Government regarded the great interests involved in this Bill |