Lords Sitting of 16 March 1841

MINUTES.
Bill. Read a third time:—Lord Keane's Annuity.
Petitions presented. By the Archbishop of Canterbury, from the Deanery of Osfringe, against Idolatrous Worship (India).—By the Duke of Wellington, from the Guardians of the Alton Union, for the Continuance of the Poor-law Commissioners—By the Marquess of Downshire, from places in Londonderry, against Church Patronage (Scotland).

TITHE COMPOSITION (IRELAND).
Viscount Duncannon Viscount Duncannon moved the third reading of the Tithe Composition (Ireland) Bill.
Bill read a third time.
Viscount Duncannon Viscount Duncannon moved to add a clause by way of rider. He was afraid, that the alteration which it proposed would not effect the object contemplated by the noble Earl (Wicklow), nor did he know by what alteration that object could be effected.
The Earl of Wicklowwas sorry to hear, that the noble Lord was not prepared to remove his objection, as he was most unwilling to throw any impediment in the way of a measure which was generally so important. He regretted, that none of the legal Lords were in the House, for he was sure he should have their support in saying, that his objection was insurmountable. It was this, that under the bill, as it now stood, any number of persons could be forced into a court of justice without notice, and judgment could be given against them without their being heard, or having any knowledge of the proceedings; and further, that under such circumstances they would be liable to the costs. He had hoped, that in the time which had elapsed since the measure was introduced, his noble Friend would have been able to have so framed the bill as to remove this defect. He did not mean to oppose the bill, but
290
should content himself with stating this objection.
Viscount Duncannonsaid, that the object of the bill was to prevent the necessity of serving 350 or 360 separate notices, and to enable the Attorney-general for Ireland to proceed, not by separate notice, but by one general notice, on all persons resident in the same diocese. There was no possible way of effecting this object without incurring the difficulty which his noble Friend had stated.
The Earl of Glengallsaid, there was another serious point which had not been mentioned. When those parties came in to object to the order made for the payment of the money, they must first pay the costs incurred in the previous proceedings. He thought this was a hard case.
Viscount Duncannonthought it would be the same with separate notices. He regretted these objections had not been mentioned in the discussion that took place a week ago. He had, however, no objection to postpone the bill to this day week.
Debate adjourned.

POOR LAW (IRELAND)—CLONMEL UNION.
The Marquess of Normanby, seeing his noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Glengall) in his place, begged to state, that Mr. Stanley, the assistant-secretary to the Poor-law Commission in Ireland, was in attendance, and that he was ready to give any explanation, and to answer any questions which might be put to him.
The Earl of Glengall The Earl of Glengall moved that Mr. Stanley be called in.
Mr. Stanley, secretary to the Poor-law Commissioners for Ireland, appeared at the bar, and having been sworn, was examined at great length. Their Lordships having in the end ordered the evidence to be printed, and no debate of any consequence having arisen in the progress of the examination, we decline to insert it. Nothing short of the whole evidence, which is voluminous, would satisfy the justice of the case. An abridgement, or imperfect report, would not be acceptable to all parties, therefore we refer to the authorised report printed by their Lordships' orders.
At the close of Mr. Stanley's examination for the day, the House adjourned to Thursday.