Hide Articles List

14 articles on this Page

[No title]

IM P E ii 1 A L P A R L IA…

News
Cite
Share

IM P E ii 1 A L P A R L IA il/ E .YT IIOL -L OF LORDS,—TUESDAY, FEB. 23. Lord A RINGER presented a petition Irom a poor law union in Norwich against the POllr 1 irivv Ai;ie;:d ment Bill. The Marquess of NORM VNRV said, t!ii, petition • could not be received, as it wa» azainst a bill which had not reached their lordships' House. Lord A Ii ING Eli observed that the petition was also directed against certain provisions of the exist- ing bill. After the c'erk hat! read an extract froltl the peti- tion, and Mil observation irotu the Marquess of Normanby und the Vlarqivss of Lansdowne, Lord A'MNGEli agreed to withdraw the petition Loril BROUlillAM brought, up the report of the select committee on (lie Copyhold Enfranchisement Rill- I he committee had made considerable changes in the bill originally introduced, and had incorporated with it a portion of the other hill. 'The proper form, he believed, would be to report the amendment bill, and to move that the report of the other be received this day six months. A conversation then took place between Lord fiedesdale, Lord Brougham Lord Ahitlger, and the Marquess of Salisbury, as to the time when the bill should be further proceeded with, but the result did not reach the gallery. Lord BROUGHAM laid on the table n bill to tixlenrl tlll law for the recovery of compensation for malicious damage, iu the case of fire or otherwise. is which operates lit every part of Ireland, except the city of Dublin, to that city. Thr bill was read a first time. he, Hishop of EXETER wished to receive some information as to the cause of tlw delay which had occurred in printing certain ordinances of the Governor and Special Council of Lower Canada, which had been laid on the table on the i'Jth of last month, and not printed till the 2dth of the present. Viscount DI NCANNON said, the delay was occasioned in consequence of an ordinance, No. 129, which it was deemed desirable to include with the other papers, having been sent, to the printer after the documents previously lai.1 on the table bad been ordered to be printed. The papers were returned to the Colonial Otiice for the purpose of having that particular document introduced. The omission had caused a delay of 11 days, and he was very willing to allow the ordinances to remain upon the table of the House for an equal number of days beyond the expiration of the 30 days reckoning from the 29tit of January. (Hear). The Bishop of EXETER said, the noble viscount's explanation was tantamount to saying that the ordi- nance,which was never presented to the House, had been presented, and it was made to appear as if it had been. It was a matter, then, which ought not to be treated lightly by the noble viscount. It was a very serious departure from that ingenuousness of conduct which the House had a right to expect from the government. 'The noble viscount said 11 days had been lost; he apprehended that 16 was nearer the truth; and he called upon the noble \iscount to say whether or not the an days allowed for considering the ordinances were to be reckoned from the 16th of the present month ? Viscount MELBOURNE said, lie thought tne right rev prelate had greatly exaggerated the case. The Duke of W ELLINGTON said the intention of the act was to atiowasuthdent opportunity to their lordships for considering the onliuanees. If that ohject waS secured, it was enough. I i' not, the right rev prelate might make his motion a few days sooner than he intended. Viscount DUNCANNON moved for copies of cer- tain dispatches to and from the General Governor of the Canadas upon the subject of the onlinances hfore their lordships; and nlso for a return of the expenses incurred in furnishing and filtill". 111) of the House of Lords for the trial ol the Earl of Cardigan -Oi-tiert-d. Lord DENMAN presented a petition, signed by certain citizens ol London, praying for the abolition of oaths in courts of law, and substituting affirma- tions. Lord lANDMURSr wished to call the attention of the noble Viscount to a h.l! before parliament for facilitating the administration of justice he believed that bill corresponded with one which went down to the House of Commons last session, but it did not pass through that house. It had been introduced by the law officers of the Crown, and, therefore, must be considered a government measure. He hoped the noble Viscount would take care, to have a clause introdllcul into the bill to give adequate compensation to persons possessing vested interests in their offices who might suffer by the operation of the measure. Viscount MELBOURNE could only sav that be would Iake care that compensation clauses should be introduced, having regard to ail lliose who had it cleitr right and claim to compensation (hear). Lord LVNDHL'KST reminded the noble Viscount that he was at the head of the 'Treasury, and that die necessity for some such provision was a sufficient ex- cuse for mentioning the subject (hear). Their lordships then adjourned till Thursday. HOUSE OF COMMONS—TUKSHAY, FEU 23. The SPEAKER informed the House that lie had teccived a communication from the examiners to whom election petitions were referred, slating that one of the proposed Sureties for prosecuting the petition against the return of Nir Smythe for the City of Can- terbury, had been objected to. Mr HANDLEY obtained leave to bring in a bill to facilitate the drainage of laud in England and Wales. Mr F. MAULE obtained leave to bring in a bill for removing doubts as to the, continuance of certain local turnpike acts,and for continuing until the 1st of June, 1842-ti,r, if parliament shall then be sitting until tlittend of the then session of parliament—ihe local turnpike acts for Great Britain, which expire with this or the ensuing session of parliament. Mr CRESSWELL postponed to Thursday week his motion for a committee on the Address to her Majesty respecting the Danish claims- '1 he adjourned debate on Lord Morpeth's Irish Franchise and Registry Bill was begun by Mr YOUNG. He adverted to the course of conciliation in which now for many vears the Legislature had p/oceeded towards Ireland, and declared that he was t not disposed to any restrictive policy; but he III list oppose a measure which placed the franchise lower than was consistent either with the agricultural or with the social interests of the country. Mr SMITH O'BRIEN cmiteuded, at length, for the bill, grounding himself in some measure upon -tat* Istl cat retiirps, Sir Ii. BA TESON wished the House to know that the majority of the people of Ulster were favourable. to Lord Stanley's bill. Mr CAREVV supported the hill, Lord IIOWICK said, the question was not whether the House would adopt the amount of or any ntlier particular detail, but whether it would adopt tia, assessment to the poor's rate as the test of fran- chise—whether it would attempt the deliuilion of the franchise conjointly with the amendment of the registry. The present state of the franchise—ihe Jilficuity of ascertaining vahte-begot extensive perjury, and arrayed the different classes of societ ugaiust each other. \Vhat remedy presented itself ? tnthepresentstateof parties neither (he beneficial interest test," nor the "solvent tenant test," coulil be tffirmed by a declaratory act. He saw no remedy so I clear and hopeful as the lest by rating. But he must <ay that the returns presented on Monday, which formed the basis of the present hill, were wholly unsa- ;isfactory, so little was there either of accuracy or of uniformity in these valuations. lie knew that his opinions would not satisfy those on his own side, nor iiis vote those on the other; but lie was resolved, Oil questions so deeply affeciing' the public welfare, to ict independently of party considerations. The 1m, Liortance of settling this question was enhanced by I lie doubtful slate of our foreign affairs. Mr LEFRO Y thought the house bound to take the irst opportunity of dismissing a bill which attempted he overthrow of the settlement made by the Reform \ct. If the object of this bill had been to fix by an tccurate test the real value of the tenant's interest leyo'nd his payment to his landlord, that might have tad its advantages; but the object here was merely to lestroy the principle of the Reform Act, and to set jp a principle of democracy in its loom. In the tosvns ins bill went to substitute a value of i'o lor a value ot 4 of' t 10. The chauge uow proposed would soon fill the Irish part of the representation with advocates of epeal; and then the FsistJIICe to that mischievous I' ueasure would become difficult indeed. t The ATTORNEY GENERAL for Ireland said, t hat the propllseJ definitinll of the franchise was the r -e,ki (lites!lon in this debate. All be litigation, all :\¡e perjury, arose upon the question of value fur t .vhile all other matters were matters of fact, this was ( >ne ni opinion only. The dispute about the value was r »ad enough, but there was also that still greater pest, 1 l disputed law. He gave a history ot the way in which he question had been deall with by the judges, who )it sotiie points were iltiiost c(itiit!ly divided, but who, le admitted, were at first ten against two, and after- wards eight against four. in favour of the solvent t :enant test—the main question. To leave a doubt ipon any matter of law, he continued, was discredit- ible to the legislature, but more especially so to leave a Joubt upon political law. The House had two lJills t :0 choose between. Lord Stanley's had not only the tefect of not defining the franchise, but also the iggravation of creating an appeal to the judges, which ( ivent to multiply conferences and doubts on the bench 1 k barrister makes a decision, the judge of assize reverses it; the next barrister, at the ensuing regi- itration, follows the reversal: an appeal is made to a i iiere iit .iii(igt, of assize, and the reversal i reversed. I IVIIS • u some way, then, the matter wist be settled. It was not for him to say what was the intention of the Reform Act; bnt it must not be forgotten that the House were dealing with great masses of men, not now first seeking the franchise, but possessing it already, and about to be disturbed in it-uoder a law of ambiguities, but a law construed by iheui as investing them with the franchise upon a liberal con struction. Sir \V FOLLF/IT expressed his surprise that thr- Attorney Genera! for Ireland should have been si n: on the subject of that which was really the main point — the sweeping change now directed agaiti.st the settlement of the Reform Bill—and should have argued as if the only question on this second reading were the test of ihe poor's rate. Now, h" him-elf and those around him approved that lest, provided ihe rating were upon a s.dl1(:i.-nt property possessed by the voter in the premises rated beyond his rent atal outgoings. But what he and his friends complained of wa, Ihat, under pretence of that salutary te-t, government hatl attacked the Reform Biil in a most material point It was a breach of the compact made at the time of the Relief Bill, when you agreed tn extinguish the 40s. freeholders. This bill did not restore that class of voters in so many words but it 1V0uld bring back that and other more objectionable classes. It was argued that at all events the rating was a very low one; but was a low rate a reason lor requiring no property at all ? The bill ot Sir !>1 Norreys, last year, proposed a test of rating, but a rating lor a net annual value of t'8 beyond the rent. Again, ns to towns; when ill England and Scotland the annual value must be ±10, why was the annual value in Ireland to be only X5 ? MrMACAULAY said ho could not consider the question about the amount of 1:5 as anything but a question of detail, lie thought the dangers greater of unduly narrowing than ot unduly exl'iidiug the tranchise but he woulllllot nOIVenlcr on the quesLion ofainouut, but proceed to whathe considered tiie prin- ciple of the bill. Each of the two measures bore the characteristic marks of its party parentage. Any who thought that a registration bill ought to be a lull of disfranchisement, might act on that opinion, but pmhahly would not avow it. lie thought the object should be to shut out had votes itii,l let in gool ones. (Cheers from Lord Stanley and the Conservatives). In both respects he thought Lord Morpeth's bill superior. He proceeded to compare the machinery of the two, and found no security in Lord Stanley's but the reiteration of trials. It was a childish measure, impeding all to keep out a few. lie dwelt oil the scandal arising from the discrepancy among the judges, and 'lieu addressed himself to the question of finality. Would the house, from a desire to preserve all things fixed, maintain a state of law which left all things unsettled ? Lord Stanley had felt great delicacy ahollt investing the Speaker with thepouertonooti nale the barristers who should hear cases of appeals on the subject ol registration had he no delicacy about committing the control of the registry to the judges? Lord Stanley had said the franchise clause was only a tack. He denied that; he held it to fie the main point of the government bill (Great cheering from the Opposition ) He besought the House to abstain from harshness towards the siste country, hut rather to cement the legislative union by the consolidation of 27,000,000 of men. The (Ichate was theu adjourned to the next day. HOUSE OF COMMONS — WEDNESDAY, FKB. 24. 'The second reading of Lord Sianley's Registration Bill was postponed pro forma till Friday, the noble lord intimating that he would on that day be ready to fix the day on which he would really bring it on. The adjourned debate on Lord Morpeth's Parlia- mentary Voters Bill was resumed by Mr BHOTH Ell- TON, who believed the effect of the bill would be to draw the two countries more closely together. Serjeant JACKSON said, every man attached to monarchial institutions ought to join in throwing out a measure, the rt'sult of which would be to over- whelm the country by the inroads of democracy. Mr THESIGFIl resisted the second reading. Sir J. GRAHAM defended Lord Stanley against the charge of being responsible for the delects of the Irish Reform Act, reminding the house that during the debates that preceded the passing of that act, the system of registration adopted for Ireland had been described as intended to be only temporary, until they should have had ex- perience of the new system of registration introduced by the English Reform Bill. He (Sir James Graham) was determined to stand by the Reform Act. Mr SI I El L described the biil as essentially in the, spirit of the Reform Bill. The debate was then again adjourned.

PAYMENT* INTO THE RXCUFQUKII.

-__-----------------L ÁJ T…

Advertising

[No title]

.-------_.---ON COPYRIGHT.…

Advertising

[No title]

nWELTY TO A PAIllSil APPRENTICE.…

[No title]

ICXTlt \O!iD1N A R Y KXi'iOiUM…

[No title]

INTERESTING STATISTICS OF…