POOR-LAW—(IRELAND).

HC Deb 19 March 1838 vol 41 cc989-1002

House in Committee on the Poor-law (Ireland) Bill.

On the 70th Clause,

Mr. S. O'Brien

moved an amendment, to the effect that the receivers of rent-charges, annuities, and jointures should be liable to the rates in the proportion of their several charges; and that the nominal landlord should be liable only in the proportion of his clear receipts.

Viscount Morpeth

said, it was the intention of Government, by the interpretation clause, to extend the operation of this clause to all rent-charges in the nature of fee-farm rents; but it would be a new principle in law to subject to a charge of this sort jointures, annuities, and marriage portions.

Mr. Shaw

supported the amendment, and stated a case in which an estate producing annually 1,100l. paid 950l. in the way of annuities and jointure, leaving only 150l., to the landlord: it would be most unjust to impose on him the entire burden of the rate.

Mr. O'Connell

believed the act would produce nothing but disgust if it excepted annuitants, who, for the most part, had abundant means, and were not otherwise taxed.

Colonel Conolly

contended, that the amendment, if adopted, would tend to depreciate Irish property, and render it more difficult to borrow money upon land.

The Committee divided on the amendment. Ayes 27; Noes 37:—Majority 10.

List of the AYES.
Archbold, R.	Macnamara, Major
Barron, H. W.	Maher, J.
Bateson, Sir R.	O'Conor D.
Bridgeman, H.	O'Connell, M.
Chester, H.	Palmer, G.
Curry, W.	Pechell, Captain
Evans, G.	Redington, T. N.
Finch, F.	Roche, W.
Fitzsimon, N.	Shaw, right hon. F.
French, F.	Sinclair, Sir G.
Hayes, Sir E.	Style, Sir C.
Jephson, C. D. O.	Westenra, hon. H. R.
Jones, T.	TELLERS.
Kirk, P.	O'Brien, S.
Litton, E.	Roche, D.

List of the NOES.
Adare, Viscount	Hodgson, R.
Barrington, Viscount	Hughes, W. B.
Briscoe, J. I.	Lucas, E.
Buller, Sir J. Y.	Lynch, A. H.
Busfield, W.	Miles, W.
Castlereagh, Visc.	Morpeth, Viscount
Childers, J. W.	Nicholl, J.
Clements, Visc.	O'Callaghan, hon. C.
Conolly, E.	Poulter, J. S.
Courtenay, P.	Power, J.
Damer, hon. D.	Rice, rt. hon. T. S.
Ebrington, Visc.	Richards, R.
Ellis, J.	Rundle, J.
Fergusson, rt. hon. C.	Russell, Lord J.
Gladstone, W. E.	Scrope, G. P.
Grey, Sir G.	Sheil, R. L.

Shirley, E. I.	Young, J.
Somerville, Sir W. M.	TELLERS.
Staunton, Sir G. T.	Campbell, Sir J.
Thornley, T.	Labouchere, T.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 71 having been proposed,

Mr. F. French

objected to the clause and wished it to be omitted. He contended that it would hold out a great temptation to landlords to raise the rent of Houses above 5l., and would expose the poorer classes to oppression.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

objected to the proposition of the hon. Member for Roscommon, on the ground, that as all the rate-payers were to vote in the election of guardians, the omission of this clause whould let in a set of voters directly interested in the mismanagement of the measure.

Mr. Shaw

thought, it would be better to have one uniform mode of rating throughout this bill, and that in all cases the occupier should pay the rate. This would give the tenant an interest, which it s fit he should have, in the appointment of guardians, and in the disposition of the funds of his parish.

Sir C. Style

moved, that 10l. be substituted for 5l. as the amount of rent in the clause.

Mr. Lefroy

thought, that the clause would operate prejudicially, in leading landlords to increase their rents on the poor man, or to add to the evils which arose from clearing estates of small holdings. He should therefore support the amendment of the hon. Member for Roscommon (Mr. F. French).

Lord J. Russell

said, he believed there was considerable difficulty about the clause, and he felt some doubt about the course which ought to be pursued in reference to it. The most that they could do in legislation of this sort was to lay down a general rule or principle. If exceptions were found to arise in particular districts and under particular circumstances, it could not be helped. The difficulty in the case was, that they must either adopt an arbitrary line, which should be universal and uniform in its application, or they should have no line at all. The question which he considered of the greatest importance was, whether the bill would be likely to work so well without some line as with it. They would in the former case have a small class of tenants paying rates and having the right to vote, the payments from whom would be irregular, and would give rise to constant disputes and vexation. Besides, they would not be so intelligent in working the bill and administering its provisions as the class pointed out in the clause, and from which these people would be excluded. In England it was true that many persons were from poverty exempted from the payment of rates, but in Ireland, if some were to pay readily, others after a contention, and some not at all, such a state of confusion would arise, and such impediments would be thrown in the way, that it would be impossible to work the bill. If a line, however, was drawn reasonably well, they would have a certainty of getting a class of persons who would pay regularly, and who would be sufficiently intelligent to work the bill well. Upon the whole, he was disposed to say that the clause as it stood was preferable either to the amendment of the hon. Member for Roscommon (Mr. F. French), or the proposition of the hon. Baronet, the Member for Scarborough.

Mr. Lucas

did not approve of the arbitrary line laid down by the noble Lord. He found, upon examination, that the average of all occupations in Ireland did not exceed 7l. a-year. The payment of a higher amount of rent by a small farmer was not by indication of wealth or prosperity, but was altogether the result of chance and a successful scramble for a larger quantity of land. The laying down of an arbitrary line would create a great deal of jealousy among the small farmers, and would operate ss a check upon industry and an encouragement to laziness and slovenliness. He would, therefore, support the amendment of the hon. Member for Roscommon, in preference to that of the hon. Baronet, the Member for Scarborough, which, as he had shown, would exempt nine-tenths of all the occupying tenants in Ireland from the payment of rates.

Mr. O'Connell

said, he would divide in favour of the substitution of the word, "ten" for that of "five." As the bill stood it was perfectly absurd to make the most wretched peasantry of Ireland the bankers of their landlords, by advancing money for them which they were afterward to deduct from the rent.

The Committee divided on the question that the blank in the clause be filled up with the words "five pounds," as originally proposed. Ayes 57; Noes 17: Majority 40.

List of the AYES.
Barrington, Viscount	Lynch, A. H.
Bateson, Sir R.	Macleod, R.
Beamish, F. B.	Marshall, W.
Blake, M. J.	Marsland, H.
Briscoe, J. I.	Martin, J.
Buller, Sir J. Y.	Morpeth, Lord Visct.
Busfield, W.	Morris, D.
Chester, H.	O'Brien, W. S.
Cole, hon. A. H.	Parnell, rt. hon. Sir H.
Coote, Sir C. H.	Plumptre, J. P.
Corry, hon. H.	Pringle, A.
Dalmeney, Lord	Rice, E. R.
Ellis, J.	Rice, rt. Hon. T. S.
Fergusson, rt. hon. R. C.	Roche, W.
	Roche, D.
Gladstone, W. E.	Round, C. G.
Grey, Sir G.	Rundle, J.
Hayes, Sir E.	Russell, Lord J.
Hodgson, R	Shaw, rt. Hon. F.
Howard, P. H.	Staunton, Sir G. T.
Howick, Viscount	Thomson, rt. hn. C. P.
Hughes, W. B.	Thornely, T.
Humphrey, J.	Williams, W.
Hurt, F.	Winnington, T. E.
Jephson, C. D. O.	Wood, Sir M.
Jones, T.	Woulfe, Mr. Sergeant
Kirk, P.	Young, J.
Lefroy, rt. hon. T.	Tellers.
Litton, E.	Brotherton, J.
Lucas, E.	Parker, J.

List of the NOES.
Archbold, R.	Reddington, T. N.
Bridgeman, H.	Roche, E. B.
Bryan, G.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
Butler, hon. Colonel	Stansfield, W. R. C.
Clements, Viscount	Wakley, T.
Curry, W.	Westenra, hon. H. R.
Fitzsimon, N.	Wood, G. W.
Maher, J.	Tellers.
O'Connell, D.	French, F.
O'Connell, J.	Style, Sir C.

The Committee again divided on the question, that the clause stand part of the bill. Ayes 49; Noes 27: Majority 22.

List of the AYES.
Archbold, R.	Hurt, F.
Beamish, F. B.	Litton, E.
Blake, M. J.	Macleod, R.
Bridgman, H.	Marshall, W.
Briscoe, J. I.	Marsland, H.
Brotherton, J.	Martin, J.
Buller, Sir J. Y.	Morpeth, Viscount
Busfield, W.	Morris, D.
Cole, hon. A. H.	O'Brien, W. S.
Coote, Sir C. H.	O'Connell, D.
Corry, hon. H.	O'Connell, J.
Fergusson, rt. hon. C.	Parnell, rt. hn. Sir H.
Grey, Sir G.	Plumptre, J. P.
Howard, P. H.	Rice, E. R.
Howick, Viscount	Rice, rt. hn. T. S.
Hughes, W. B,	Roche, E. B.
Humphrey, J.	Roche, W.

Roche, D.	Wakley T.
Rundle, J.	White, L.
Russell, Lord J.	White, S.
Shirley, E. J.	Winnington, T. E.
Stansfield, W. R. C.	Wood, Sir M.
Staunton, Sir G. T.	Woulfe, Mr. Sergeant
Style, Sir C.	TELLERS.
Thornley, T.	Dalmeney, Lord
Tollemache, F. J.	Parker, J.

List of the NOES.
Barrington, Viscount	Lucas, E.
Bateson, Sir R.	Lynch, A. H.
Brabazon, Sir W.	Maher, J.
Bryan, G.	Reddington, T.
Butler, Colonel	Round, C. G.
Chester, H.	Shaw, F.
Curry, W.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
Ellis, J.	Stuart, V.
Fitzsimon, N.	Tennent, J. E.
Hayes, Sir E.	Westenra, hon. H.
Hodgson, R.	Wood, G. W.
Jephson, C. D. O.	Young, J.
Jones, T.	TELLERS.
Kirk, P.	Clements, Viscount
Lefevre, C. S.	French, F.

On Clause 74, "receipts for rates to be taken in payment of rent," being read,

Mr. O'Connell

contended that this clause gave a power to the landlord over the tenant which was not sanctioned by the law as it now stood, and which, if attempted to be carried into operation, must work great injustice. This clause gave the landlord the power of ejecting his tenant for nonpayment of rent, though it might happen that he had paid in poor rate the sum to which he was really liable. This proof the tenant had no opportunity of giving, for the right of action was taken away from him. Now, how stood the law at present? No action for ejectment would lie unless it was proved, that the tenant got credit for any sum he might have advanced for the landlord, and that after so doing, a full year's rent remained due. But by this clause, the tenant was not allowed the same advantage with respect to payments made on account of the poor-rate which they were about to establish, as he now possessed with regard to all other advances made by him in favour of the landlord. He defied any hon. Member to produce any but one, apparently, just reason for conferring this exorbitant power on the landlord, and that was, that he might not know what sum was paid for rates by the tenant. But this difficulty might be easily removed by requiring the landlord to serve a notice on the tenant, demanding that he should state how much he had paid for rate, and, in case of his refusing to answer, that he should be declared not entitled to credit for any advance which he might have made. He had made up his mind that this bill could confer no benefit when it imposed the rate on the occupier in the manner in which it was determined to have it levied; and he should have taken no part in the discussion of its details, only for the impression which he had, that such clauses as the present would work gross injustice to the tenant. An ejectment could not be served on a single person in Ireland, for a less sum than from 5l. to 10l.; and a tenant might be put to expense and deprived of his holding, though he might have a good and honest defence, on the ground that he had paid as much in poor rate as would discharge the claim for rent.

Mr. Shaw

objected to this clause, because it would prejudice the tenant, and also if any part of the rent were paid in poor-rates the landlord would be deprived of any remedy for recovering the residue. The interests of landlords and tenants were identical, and this bill ought not to give either one an advantage over the other; at the same time this was a dangerous experiment to be tried on the landed interests of Ireland, for it was not so much a question between landlords and tenants as between the landed interests and destitution. If the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Sergeant Woulfe) said, that the object was only to protect the landlord from paying the poor-rates of the tenant, he should be satisfied.

Mr. Sergeant Woulfe

thought the hon. and learned Member for Dublin had explained the difficulty of the right hon. Member who had just spoken, in saying that the landlord's remedy by ejectment was the only one interfered with in this clause; but the tenant got credit from the landlord for the amount of the poor-rates, and yet the landlord's action for the remainder would be as vigorous as ever; he might bring an action for the gale rent minus the poor-rates. There was no case in law in which a partial payment on account of the landlord would deprive him of that remedy. The Tithe Act was framed so as to give the tenant the power to deduct the amount of tithes from the rent due to the landlord, and yet not deprive the landlord of his remedy for the residue. In his opinion, the clause did all that was fair to the landlord without being harsh upon the tenant. It would certainly be hard on the landlord to deprive him of ejectment or some means of recovering his It would certainly be hard on the landlord to deprive him of ejectment or some means of recovering his remaining rent. The hon. and learned Member for Dublin said this clause gave no action; nor did it for the tenant; but it gave him what was better, the right of deducting from the rent the amount he had paid for poor-rates. The deduction was not to the prejudice of the landlord, but only to protect the tenant.

Mr. O'Connell

said, that it was his solemn opinion that this bill would amount to an actual confiscation on the part of the landlords and tenants; by its present limits it could not go far enough to prevent this. It was only upon comparing its operation on landlords and tenants that he said it was a landlord's bill. He did not deny, that the landlord ought to have some remedy to recover the surplus of his rent after the poor-rates were paid; but he would suppose a case where 50l. rent was paid; the tenant paid 30l. for poor-rates, and there was no reason then why the landlord should not recover the remaining 20l.; he might distress, or he might bring an action for that sum, but by this monstrous and unjust clause he might bring an ejectment and recover the whole 50l.

Mr. Sergeant Woulfe

observed, that the ejectment would be brought for the residue, and not for the entire rent.

Mr. O'Connell

said, that unless there was an entire year's rent due, no ejectment could be brought. That was the law. An ejectment was to recover the land, and not the rent, and yet if a tenant had paid 30l. 40l., or even the whole of the 50l. rent for poor-rate, the landlord could recover the full amount by an ejectment. Was not this a monstrous injustice? And yet no action was given to the tenant against the landlord. That was really the law, and although he had left his profession, he was certain of it, and would stake his professional character on that point. He was not to be shaken from his position. There was only one inconvenience which he would admit, and that was, that the tenant by paying a small portion of the poor-rates might deprive the landlord of the remedy by ejectment, but the clause ought either to enable the landlord to pay the poor-rates, or prevent his tenant from doing so, by giving him due notice of it.

Mr. Sergeant Woulfe

observed, that the hon. and learned Member for Dublin said, a tenant might pay all the amount of rent in poor-rates, and yet be liable to his landlord; but under this clause all poor-rates paid were equivalent to rent paid to the landlord. He denied the possibility of a tenant being liable to an ejectment or action if he paid the whole amount of rent in poor-rates. If he produced the discharge which he had received from the collector, it would be as effectual as a receipt from his landlord. If he had not paid the whole, he admitted that he was then liable to the same remedy, and no other, as if he had paid none. It was not fair that landlords should be deprived of all remedies, and the law should give him a remedy for a part as well as the whole. This act compelled the tenant to pay the rates, and that would be equivalent to rent.

Mr. O'Connell

said, that he saw there was one word in the proviso which would bear the construction of the right hon. Member—viz., that where the rent was entirely paid in poor-rates, an ejectment would not lie; so far he conceded, but if 49l. were paid out of 50l., then it would, and if an action were brought, a verdict in judgment must be given.

Mr. Lefroy

supported the clause, for he thought the case put by the hon. and learned Member for Dublin a very extreme one, and not at all likely to occur in practice.

Mr. E. Litton

considered it to be extremely improbable, even supposing a tenant paid 49l. 15s. in poor-rates out of a rent of 50l., that any landlord would bring an action of ejectment for the remaining 5s., or that any tenant would refuse to pay the 5s. to save the action. But there was a case very likely to occur, if not prevented by the enactments of the present bill, which would have a most injurious effect on the interest of the landlord—viz., that of a tenant paying 2s. 6d. poor-rates for the purpose of defeating an action of ejectment brought for the non-payment of a rent of 50l. He, therefore, was in favour of the retention of the proviso to the clause, by which such a proceeding was rendered impossible.

Mr. O'Connell

moved the following amendment to the clause:—"That deduction on account of any payment of rate under this act shall be held to be a discharge of any portion of any gale, or quarterly or other payment of rent, due from the person entitled to make such deduction, so as to prejudice the right of any landlord to recover the possession of any hereditaments by ejectment for non-payment of the rent thereof, but that it shall and may be lawful in any case where the remaining portion of such gale shall be unpaid; for such landlord to proceed for the re- covery of such hereditaments by ejectment, as effectually as if the entire gale or quarterly or other payment of rent, out of which such deduction is hereby allowed, had remained wholly due and unpaid."

The Committee divided on the original motion: Ayes 69; Noes 8: Majority 61.

List of the AYES.
Adam, Admiral	Macleod, R.
Ainsworth, P.	Maher, J.
Archbold, R.	Marshall, W.
Barron, H. W.	Maxwell, H.
Barry, G. S.	Monypenny, T. G.
Bateson, Sir R.	Morpeth, Lord
Beamish, F. B.	Morris, D.
Blake, M. J.	O'Brien, W. S.
Briscoe, J. I.	O'Neil, hon. J. B. R.
Busfeild, W.	Palmer, C. F.
Castlereagh, Lord Vis.	Parnell, Sir H.
Cole, hon. A. H.	Plumptre, J. P.
Craig, W. G.	Price, Sir R.
Curry, W.	Redington, T. N.
Dalmeny, Lord	Roche, E. B.
Douglas, Sir C. E.	Roche, D.
Fergusson, rt. hon. C.	Russell, Lord J.
Finch, F.	Shaw, right hon. F.
Fitzalan, Lord	Sinclair, Sir G.
Fitzsimon, N.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
Forbes, W.	Stansfield, W. R. C.
French, F.	Staunton, Sir G.
Grimsditch, T.	Stuart, V.
Hayes, Sir E.	Style, Sir C.
Hodgson, R.	Thomson, C. P.
Howard, F. J.	Thornely, T.
Howick, Lord	Tollemache, F. J.
Hughes, W. B.	White, A.
Hurt, F.	Wood, C.
James, W.	Wood, G. W.
Jephson, C. D. O.	Woulfe, Serjeant
Jones, T.	Wyse, T.
Kirk, P.	Yates, J. A.
Lefroy, rt. hon. T.	TELLERS.
Litton, E.	Grey, Sir G.
Lynch, A. H.	Parker, J.

List of the NOES.
Brabazon, Sir W.	White, L.
Bridgeman, H.	White, S.
O'Brien, C.
O'Connell, J.	TELLERS.
Wakley, T.	Bryan, G.
Westenra, H. R.	O'Connell, D.

Clause agreed to.

On Clause 76, giving rate-payers votes in proportion to their property,

Mr. O'Connell

objected to the clause, as granting a plurality of votes for the election of guardians. The system of plural voting had, in all cases where it had been adopted, operated badly, and he would therefore move as an amendment, that the words "or votes" be left out.

Viscount Morpeth

said, the motives for, granting a plurality of votes were so obvious, that he would not take up the time of the Committee by detailing them. The system had been established in the English law, and he thought plural voting was necessary in the present case for the due protection of property. He could not, therefore, consent to the amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Dublin.

The Committee divided on the original question, that the words stand:—Ayes 58; Noes 18: Majority 40.

List of the AYES.
Acland, T. D.	Macleod, R.
Ainsworth, P.	Maxwell, H.
Baines, E.	Morpeth, Viscount
Barron, H. W.	Morris, D.
Barry, G. S.	Murray, J. A.
Bateson, Sir R.	O'Brien, W. S.
Blackburne, I.	O'Neil, hon. J. B.
Brabazon, Sir W.	Palmer, C. F.
Briscoe, J. I.	Palmer, G.
Busfield, W.	Parnell, Sir H.
Castlereagh, Viscount	Plumptre, Sir J. P.
Cole, Viscount	Price, Sir R.
Craig, W. G.	Redington, T. N.
Curry, W.	Russell, Lord J.
Dalmeny, Lord	Sinclair, Sir G.
Douglas, Sir C.	Stanley, E. J.
Fitzsimon, N.	Stansfield, W. R.
French, F.	Stuart, Lord J.
Hayes, Sir E.	Stuart, V.
Hodgson, R.	Tennent, J. E.
Howick, Viscount	Thomson, C. P.
Hughes, W. B.	Tollemache, F. J.
Hurt, F.	Westenra, hon. H.
James, W.	Wood, C.
Jephson, C. D. O.	Wood, G. W.
Jones, T.	Wyse, T.
Kirk, P.	Yates, J. A.
Lefroy, right hon. T.
Litton, E.	TELLERS.
Lucas, E.	Parker, J.
Lynch, A. H.	Grey, Sir G.

List of the NOES.
Archbold, R.	O'Brien, C.
Beamish, F. B.	O'Connell, J.
Blake, M, J.	Roche, E. B.
Bodkin, J. J.	Roche, D.
Bridgeman, H.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
Brotherton, J.	White, A.
Bryan, G.	White, L.
Clements, Viscount	White, S.
Finch, F.	TELLERS.
Howard, F. H.	O'Connell, D.
Maher, J.	Wakley, T.

Mr. S. O'Brien

had an amendment to propose in regard to the present clause. As the clause was framed, the scale of voting gave, in his opinion, an unfair influence to property, and he should therefore move an alteration in the scale, and also a limitation to the number of votes to be given by any one owner of property for the election of guardians. By the proposed scale, any sum above 5l., and not exceeding 50l., gave one vote; 50l., and not exceeding 100l., two votes; 100l., and not exceeding 150l., three votes; 150l., and not exceeding 200l., four votes; 200l., and any sum above that, giving five votes. Now, in the English Poor-law Bill the number of votes allowed was only three, and the scale of voting was as follows:—Any sum under 200l. entitled the party to only a single vote; 200l. or more, but under 400l., to two votes; 400l., or upwards, to three votes. That, in his opinion, was a much fairer scale, and he should therefore move (as we understood the hon. Member) that the number of votes in any one case be limited to three, and that a scale similar to that in the English Poor-law Bill should be adopted in the present case.

The Committee divided on the original question, that the blank be filled up with the words fifty pounds:—Ayes 54; Noes 20: Majority 34.

List of the AYES.
Acland, Sir T. D.	Lynch, A. H.
Acland, T. D.	Macleod, R.
Ainsworth, P.	Maher, J.
Baines, E.	Monypenny, T. G.
Barron, H. W.	Morpeth, Viscount
Barry, G. S.	Morris, D.
Bateson, Sir R.	Murray, hon. J. A.
Blackburne, I.	O'Neil, hon. J. B. R.
Brabazon, Sir W.	Palmer, C. F.
Briscoe, J. I.	Palmer, G.
Cole, Viscount	Parker, J.
Craig, W. G.	Parnell, Sir H.
Curry, W.	Plumptre, J. P.
Douglas, Sir C. E.	Price, Sir R.
Forbes, W.	Redington, T. N.
French, F.	Russell, Lord J.
Grey, Sir G.	Shaw, right. hon. F.
Hayes, Sir E.	Sinclair, Sir G.
Hobhouse, Sir J. C.	Stanley, E. J.
Hodgson, R.	Stuart, Lord J.
Howick, Viscount	Steuart, V.
Hughes, W. B.	Tennent, J. E.
James, W.	Thomson, C. P.
Jephson, C. D. O.	Woulfe, Sergeant
Jones, T.	Wyse, T.
Kirk, P.
Lefroy, right hon. T.	TELLERS.
Litton, E.	Wood, C.
Lucas, E.	Rolfe, Sir R. M.

List of the NOES.
Archbold, R.	Bryan, G.
Beamish, F. B.	Clements, Viscount
Blake, M. J.	Finch, F.
Bodkin, J. J.	Howard, F. J.
Bridgeman, H.	Marshall, W.

O'Brien, C.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
O'Connell, D.	Vigors, N. A.
O'Connell, J.	Wakley, T.
O'Connell, M. J.
Roche, E. B.	TELLERS.
Roche, W.	O'Brien, W. S.
Roche, D.	Brotherton, J.

Clause agreed to.

On Clause 78, "At elections for guardians votes to be taken in writing,"

Mr. O'Connell

moved, that the words "by ballot" be substituted for the words "in writing."

The Committee divided on the original motion:—Ayes 54; Noes 27: Majority 27.

List of the AYES
Acland, Sir T. D.	Litton, E.
Acland, T. D.	Lucas, E.
Baines, E.	Macleod, R.
Barrington, Viscount	Maher, J.
Barron, H. W.	Marshall, W.
Barry, G. S.	Maxwell, H.
Bateson, Sir R.	Monypenny, T. G.
Blackburne, I.	Morpeth, Viscount
Briscoe, J. I.	Morris, D.
Clements, Viscount	Murray, J. A.
Cole, Viscount	O'Brien, W. S.
Conolly, E.	O'Neil, hon. J. B. R.
Corry, hon. H.	Palmer, C. F.
Curry, W.	Palmer, G.
Douglas, Sir C. E.	Price, Sir R.
Ebrington, Viscount	Redington, T. N.
Fitzsimon, N.	Russell, Lord J.
Forbes, W.	Stuart, V.
French, F.	Tennent, J. E.
Grey, Sir G.	Thomson, C. P.
Hayes, Sir E.	Townley, R. G.
Hobhouse, Sir J.	Westenra, H. R.
Hodgson, R.	Wood, C.
Howick, Viscount	Woulfe, Sergeant
Hughes, W. B	Yates, J. A.
Jones, J.
Kirk, P.	TELLERS.
Knight, H. G.	Stanley, E. J.
Lefroy, right hon. T.	Parker, J.

List of the NOES.
Archbold, R.	O'Connell, J.
Beamish, F. B.	O'Connell, M. J.
Blake, M. J.	O'Connell, M.
Bodkin, J. J.	Roche, E. B.
Brabazon, Sir W.	Roche, W.
Bridgeman, H.	Roche, D.
Brotherton, J.	Sinclair, Sir G.
Bryan, G.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
Craig, W. G.	Style, Sir C.
Finch, F.	Vigors, N. A.
Howard, F. J.	Wallace, R.
James, W.	Wyse, T.
Jephson, C. D. O.	TELLERS.
Lynch, A. H.	O'Connell, D.
O'Brien, C.	Wakley, T.

Clause agreed to,

On Clause 79, "Votes may be given by proxy."

Mr. Wyse

objected to this clause, on the ground that it would encourage absenteeism, and moved that it be omitted.

Mr. S. O'Brien

supported the amendmen E

A division took place on the question, that the clause stand part of the bill:—Ayes 52; Noes 27: Majority 25.

List of the AYES.
Acland, Sir T. D.	Hughes, W. B.
Acland, T. D.	Jephson, C. D. O.
Ainsworth, P.	Jones, T.
Baines, E.	Litton, E.
Barrington, Viscount	Lucas, E.
Barron, H. W.	Macleod, R.
Barry, G. S.	Marshall, W.
Bateson, Sir R.	Morpeth, Viscount
Blackburne, I.	Morris, D.
Briscoe, J. I.	Nicholl, J.
Campbell, W. F.	O'Neil, hon. J. B. R.
Clements, Viscount	Palmer, C. F.
Cole, Viscount	Palmer, G.
Conolly, E.	Price, Sir R.
Corry, hon. H.	Russell, Lord J.
Craig, W. G,	Shaw, hon. F.
Curry, W.	Sinclair, Sir G.
Douglas, Sir C. E.	Stanley, E. J.
Ebrington, Viscount	Stuart, V.
Fleetwood, P. H.	Tennent, J. E.
Forbes, W.	Thomson, C. P.
French, F.	Townley, R. G.
Grey, Sir G.	Westenra, H. R.
Hayes, Sir E.	Woulfe, Mr. Sergeant
Hobhouse, Sir J.
Hodgson, R.	TELLERS.
Howard, F. J.	Lynch, A. H.
Howick, Viscount	Prker, J.

List of the NOES.
Archbold, R.	O'Connell, M. J.
Beamish, F. B.	O'Connell, M.
Blake, M. J.	Redington, T. N.
Bodkin, J. J.	Roche, E. B.
Brabazon, Sir W.	Roche, W.
Bridgeman, H.	Roche, D.
Brotherton, J.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
Bryan, G.	Style, Sir C.
Finch, F.	Vigors, N. A.
Fitzsimon, N.	Wakley, T.
James, W.	Wallace, R.
Maher, J.	Yates, J. A.
O'Brien, C.	TELLERS.
O'Connell, D.	Wyse, T.
O'Connell, J.	O'Brien, W. S.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses to the 100th were agreed to.

The House resumed, Committee to sit again.