Sitting of 24 February 1840

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Messrs. Ewart, O'Connell, and Captain Wemyss, from a number of places, for the Total and Immediate Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Messrs. Bannerman, Baines, T. Duncombe, Brotherton, and Ewart, sod Colonel Salwey, from a very great number of places, for the Release of John Thorogood, the Abolition of the Church Rates, and of the Jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts.—By Sir R. H. Inglis, from Dublin, against Corporate Reform In Ireland.—By Mr. Wallace, from certain Carriers, against the Chester Railway Bill—By Mr. Litton, from the Corporation of Dublin, for Redress if the Municipal Reform Bill for Ireland pass into a Law.—By Mr. Aklerman. Thompson, Alderman Copeland, and Mr. Liddell, from three places, for the Release of Mr. Sheriff Evans.—By Captain Wemyss, Mr. Bannerman, Mr. Fox Maule, Sir James Graham, and Mr. Colquhoun, from a number of places, against the Intrusion of Ministers into Fwiahes,—By Messrs, O'Connell,
524
Bannerman, and Homers, from a great number of places for Municipal Reform in Ireland.—By Mr. Bannerman from Printers in Whitefriars, against the Copyright Bill.—By Mr. Crawford, from a Chinese Association, for Altering the Laws affecting the Trade with China.—By Lord Sandon, Sir James Graham, and Mr. Liddell, from Liverpool, and another place, for Church Extension.—By Lord Sandon, from the East India Association of Liverpool, for Equalizing the Duties on East and West India Produce.—By Mr. Ewart, from three bodies of Men at Hull, against the Inland Warehousing Bill; from Hull, for a Free Pardon to Frost, Jones, and Williams.—By Mr. Labouchere, from some Railway Company, against the Unequal System of Taxation on Railways.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND).
Lord J. Russell Lord J. Russell moved the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee on the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill.
On the question that the Speaker leave the chair being put,
Colonel Vernerwished to say a few words in explanation of the vote he had given a few nights since, because he should be sorry to have it supposed that he obstinately preferred his own opinion to that of many hon. Members with whom he had always acted. He felt, however, he should not lower himself in the estimation of his friends by giving his vote in support of those principles which he conscientiously believed to be correct, notwithstanding their opposition. He would not now go into the arguments on the question, which had already been so frequently discussed, but he could not understand why they were now called upon to deviate from the course which had been pursued on former occasions. He could not see why they should deprive one class of men of those rights and privileges which they had possessed for a great number of years to give them to others, more especially when they recollected that those rights and privileges were originally given to them for the purpose of curbing those into whose hands it was now proposed to transfer them. He would state the reasons why he had voted against the second reading of this bill, and why he was now prepared to vote against going into committee. The House would recollect the time that had been taken up during the last two Sessions in discussing this bill. Every disposition had been manifested by that side of the House to give a bill to which they could conscientiously assent. Amendments had been proposed with a view of effecting this, and how had they been met by the noble Lord? With the most decided opposition. The hon. and learned Member for Bandon, upon the second reading of the bill, said that

525
the present bill was a much more mischievous bill than any former one, and he called upon the House narrowly to watch its progress. He for one would attend to that warning. It was some consolation to him, and those who thought with him, that when the bill passed through that House, it could not become the law of the land—it must go to another place, where the suggestions from that side of the House would meet with some respect, and where those suggestions would be embodied in the bill. That those alterations would be made he had no doubt, and he had as little doubt that they would be unacceptable to the hon. Gentlemen opposite, and that if they were made, it would, as before, be rejected. His firm conviction was, that the bill would greatly tend to the advancement of Popery, though he did not charge that intention upon all those who supported it. He would have been better pleased with the former proposition, which had emanated from this side of the House. He thought that the total abolition of corporations would have been greatly for the benefit of the country.
The House in Committee.
On the question that clause 6 stand part of the bill.
Mr. Shawrose to move the first amendment of which he had given notice. He observed that the subject then before the Committee had been so often discussed and the arguments which bore upon it had been so often repeated, that he should not then trouble the House at any length. As he had given notice of his amendments, every hon. Member must have had an opportunity of knowing their scope and effect. He proposed to take each amendment separately, shortly stating the grounds upon which he brought them forward, and reserving any further observations that he might wish to offer till he found himself called on to answer objections to the amendments that he intended to propose. The first clause to which he wished to offer an amendment was that which had been introduced into the bill for the purpose of reserving the Parliamentary franchise to freemen. He had understood that the promoters of the measure had no intention of disturbing the present state of the Parliamentary franchise, and therefore, it was presumed that they purposed to leave the law relating to franchise untouched by the
526
present bill. The noble Lord opposite he was sure, would agree with him when he said that the bill then in Committee related solely to municipal corporations, and that no part of it was framed with the view of altering the Irish Reform Act. Assuming that the fact was so, he took for granted that her Majesty's Government could have no intention of effecting a change of such a nature by a side wind when they disclaimed any intention of directly accomplishing such an object. The amendments which he proposed would leave the law as it now stood. He would permit the franchise to remain as it was according to law, and as it had been ever since the passing of the Irish Reform Act. He proposed to omit clauses 7 and 8 altogether, and to make a considerable change in clause 6. Three or four alterations in the law were contemplated by the two former clauses which he altogether deprecated, and which he should use his best endeavours to resist. It would be recollected that in the year 1838 the bill passed from one House to the other, and especially that the clause then under consideration had frequently been sent backwards and forwards. In substance his amendment had been agreed to by both Houses, and agreed to, he might say, in the form in which he had now brought it forward. The right hon. and learned Member concluded by moving the following amendment to clause 6:—"To omit from the word 'that' to the end of the clause and insert the following words:—
"All persons now entitled to vote at the election of a member or members to serve in Parliament for any city, town, or borough, shall continue to enjoy such right as fully as if this act had not been passed, and that every person who, if this act had not been passed, would have had a right to be admitted a freeman or burgess, or to be placed on the roll of freemen or burgesses of any such borough as aforesaid, in order to be registered and to vote in the election of a member or members to serve in Parliament or might hereafter have been entitled to acquire in respect of birth, or marriage, or servitude, or of any statute then in force, as a freeman or burgess the right of voting in the election of a member or members to serve in Parliament for such borough, shall be entitled, if such borough be one of the boroughs named in the said schedule (A), or one of the boroughs to which a charter of incorporation shall have been granted, as hereinafter is mentioned, to be admitted a freeman or burgess, and placed on the roll of freemen of such borough, and to

527
acquire and enjoy such right of voting as fully as if this Act had not been passed; and if such borough be one of the boroughs named in the said schedule (B), to which no such charter of incorporation as aforesaid shall have been granted, to acquire and enjoy, without having been admitted a freeman or burgess, such right of voting as fully as if this act had not been passed, and he had been admitted a freeman or burgess provided he shall be enrolled on the freeman's roll in any such city, town, or borough, according to the provisions hereinafter contained."
He also proposed to omit clauses 7 and 8, page 4, and clause 11, page 6.
Mr. Pigotwas prepared to show that the amendment proposed was wholly unnecessary, even for the purposes which the right hon. Mover and his Friends had in view; but more than this he would contend that clause 6, as it now stood in the bill, protected every Parliamentary right. He challenged hon. Members on the other side to point out any individual case where the Parliamentary right was intended to be preserved, and which was not provided for by clause 6. Clauses 7 and 8 stood upon perfectly distinct grounds; but he now affirmed—and it would be for hon. Members on the other side to rebut the assertion if he were in error—that no case could be imagined which had not been provided for by the clause. It appeared to him that the wise and proper course would be at once to provide for all possible cases, and avoid the loose and ambigious phraseology of the amendment. The clause as it now stood in the bill was framed with the purpose of making provision for two classes—these who were already in possession of the franchise, and those who were not; the former class might be subdivided into those who had registered and those who had been admitted to their freedom, but whose names had not been placed upon the Parliamentary register. Now, he begged to call the attention of the Committee to the words of the clause:—
"Be it enacted that nothing herein contained shall prejudice, confirm, effect, or alter, any right of voting of any such person now registered, or any right to be registered of any such person who shall have been admitted a freeman of any such borough at any time before this act shall come into operation in that borough."
Here the House would see that the rights of those not yet admitted were fully protected. First, it protected
528
those who had rights at that time in existence, and secondly, it protected those who, if the act had not passed, would have had rights, and although he held, that there was no material difference between admission and enrollment, yet, even acknowledging such a distinction, he had made provision for that case also. He now invited and challenged hon. Members on the other side to point out a single case which the words of the clause did not meet. It gave rights to
"Every person who shall then have, or who, if this act had not been passed thereafter, would have had a right by reason of birth, marriage, or service, or of any statute so in force, to be admitted a freeman of any such borough, or after his admission to the freedom of such borough, to be placed on the roll of freemen of such borough, and to acquire as such freeman the right of voting in the election of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament for such borough, shall be entitled to be admitted and enrolled, as a freeman of such borough, on the freemen's roll of such borough, according to the provisions hereinafter contained, and to acquire and enjoy, as such freeman of such borough, such right of voting as fully as if this act had not been passed."
He hoped that the House would see how much more expedient it was to adopt the clear plain language of the bill, than the ambiguous phraseology of the amendment. He was quite aware, that propositions of this kind were frequently prepared by parties not Members of that House, and it therefore did not surprise him to find that the amendment would bear a construction which its advocates probably never contemplated. The clause, as it stood, included every case of legal right, and what more could the right hon. and learned Recorder require? He trusted that, on consideration, the right hon. Gentleman would abandon his amendment, and adopt the clause which had been proposed, the construction of which he would challenge any man of plain understanding to mistake
Mr. Shawsaid, that the speech of the hon. and learned Gentleman had satisfied him that the hon. and learned Gentleman had, as he had suspected, a particular object in this clause. He was persuaded, that the hon. and learned Gentleman meant to introduce some more stringent construction of the words of the clause than would be ordinarily given to them. If, however, he would give up the 7th and

529
8th clauses, and he really thought, that the 6th clause better expressed the meaning than the amendment which he had proposed, he would not contend any longer against it, as there was very little difference in the words of the two latter.
Mr. Pigotcould assure the right hon. Gentleman, that he was at that moment perfectly unable to comprehend what connexion existed between the 7th and 8th and 6th clauses. With respect to the former two, they were most undoubtedly intended to produce a change, but there was not the slightest intention of framing the 6th clause with reference to them, or of giving to it any other construction than what the plain language of it would allow.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, that confusion always arose when persons jumbled up two or three considerations on a single topic. The committee were now on the 6th clause, and if there were any objection to the 7th and 8th clauses, let them be discussed when they came to them. His hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Cashel, had challenged the right hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin to point out any persons who would lose any rights by passing this 6th clause. He not only, however, had pointed out no such person, but had admitted, that the 6th clause did not materially differ from his amendment, and that by itself he would not object to it. He hoped the House would not enter into a discussion on the 7th and 8th clauses until they had decided on the 6th, at present they were not in the bill, they were not sanctioned by the House.
Clause agreed to.
On the 7th Clause,
Mr. Shaw Mr. Shaw moved, that it be omitted from the bill. It provided, that no person should have a right to acquire as a freeman a right of voting in respect of birth or marriage, unless his right were originally derived from or through some person who in the case of birth was a freeman previously to the 31st of March, 1831, or in the case of marriage was the daughter of a person who was a freeman previously to that day, or from or through some person who since that time shall have become, or shall hereafter become, a freeman in respect of servitude. Such a proviso would, in his opinion, be a monstrous injustice to a large class of persons, and he therefore could not sanction its introduction into this bill.
Mr. Pigotsaid, that this clause was not without precedent, for he found in a bill which was introduced into the House on the 23rd of May, 1838, by the hon. and learned Member for Bandon, a similar clause respecting electors, with the exception of its applying only to cases of birth, and not of marriage, and it was from that clause he had framed the one now under discussion. The bill to which he had just alluded, was stated to be brought in by Sir W. Follett, Mr. E. Tennent, and Mr. Sergeant Jackson, so that he had good authority for adopting its phraseology. The only difference he had made was in extending it to cases of marriage as well as birth. He was perfectly ready, however, having stated what was the object of the clause, to concur in its modification for the purpose of securing any rights now in existence, provided it did not extend to the acquisition of any rights in respect of birth or marriage, through honorary freemen, since the year 1831.
Mr. Sergeant Jacksonsaid, that the clause referred to by the hon. and learned Gentleman in the bill which he (Mr. Sergeant Jackson) had introduced, was for a very different object from that of the clause now before the House. His bill was for amending the law in respect of the registration of electors in Ireland—a most important subject—and he had inserted that clause because the Government for years had brought in bills professing the same object, but had not carried them out in a bonâ fide manner. He had seen clauses in bills which had been introduced by attorney-generals on the subject much more objectionable than his own, and those he had cut down, because he was anxious to do what was likely to conciliate all parties.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, what was sought for by this clause was to put the laws of the two countries on the same footing, and surely that was a most desirable object. Much had been said about the existence of rights, but he would put it to the right hon. and learned Recorder, whether there was anything in the English law like a right without a remedy? But was there any freeman of Dublin who had a legal remedy to enforce his right of franchise? What was now called a right amounted, in the city of Dublin, merely to a claim, which the aldermen and common council had an absolute power of rejecting at

531
pleasure, and without assigning any reason. It would be a right without a remedy, and such a right was unknown to the law.
Mr. Littoncould not assent to the proposition, that the present clause was merely a declaratory enactment. It would lake away existing rights of voting, and therefore ought to be brought before the House in a separate bill, with due notice, and not to be introduced for the first time in a committee upon a bill for the reform of municipal corporations.
Viscount Morpethsaid, it was not intended by the bill to affect existing rights, it was a distinct and definite abuse only which was meant to be dealt with. The franchise now in question was derived through the corporate body, and therefore formed a proper subject of legislation in a bill for the regulation of municipal corporations. A clause which existed in the Reform Bill for England was omitted in that which affected Ireland, and the present clause was introduced to place both countries in the same situation.
Sir R. Peelgave no opinion on the merits of the enactment proposed to be introduced by this clause, but he had much rather see it made the subject of a separate bill. If any improvement was more conspicuous than another in modern legislation, it was the practice of confining acts of Parliament to their proper objects, and of thus dispensing with the necessity of consolidating acts. It would be very inconvenient to have to look for the alterations in the system of representation not only in the Reform Act itself, and acts for the amendment of the Reform Act, but also in acts for totally distinct objects, such as the reform of municipal corporations. In his own acts for the consolidation of the criminal law, he had attended to these considerations, and he must say, that without reference to the merits of the present clause taken by itself, he was sorry to see an old and objectionable practice revived on this occasion.
The committee divided on the motion "That the Clause do stand part of the Bill;"—Ayes 100; Noes 53: Majority 47.

List of the AYES.

Adam, Admiral

Archbold, R.

Aglionby, H. A.

Baring, rt. hon. F. T.

Aglionby, Major

Barnard, E. G.

Alston, R.

Barry, G. S.

Anson, hon. Colons

Bellew, R, M.

532

Bewes, T.

O'Conor, Don

Blake, M. J.

O'Ferrall, R. M.

Bodkin, J. J.

Palmerston, Viscount

Bridgeman, H.

Parker, J.

Briscoe, J. I.

Parnell, rt. hn. Sir H.

Brotherton, J.

Pendarves, R. W. W.

Brown, R. D.

Philips, G. R.

Bailer, E.

Pigot, D. R.

Busfeild, W.

Redington, T. N.

Butler, hon. Colonel

Roche, E. B.

Callaghan, D.

Roche, W.

Clay, W.

Rundle, J.

Collier, J.

Russell, Lord J.

Corbally, M. E.

Russell, Lord C.

Cowper, hon. W. F.

Salwey, Colonel

Dalmeny, Lord

Seale, Sir J. H.

Divett, E.

Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.

Duke, Sir J.

Smith, B.

Dundas, Sir R.

Somerville, Sir W. M.

Evans, Sir De L.

Stanley, hon. E. J.

Fenton, J.

Stuart, Lord J.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

Stuart, W. V.

Finch, F.

Stock, Dr.

Fitzpatrick, J. W.

Tavistock, Marq. of

Grattan, J.

Thornely, T.

Greg, R. H.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

Greig, D.

Tufnell, H.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Turner, E.

Hastie, A.

Vigors, N. A.

Hawes, B.

Villiers, hon. C.

Hector, C. J.

Vivian, rt. hon. Sir R.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Wakley, T.

Howard, F. J.

Walker, R.

Humphery, J.

Wallace, R.

Hutton, R.

Warburton, H.

Langdale, hon. C

Wemyss, Captain

Lemon, Sir C.

Westenra, hon. H. R.

Maule, F.

Williams, W.

Melgund, Viscount

Williams, W. A.

Morpeth, Viscount

Wood, Sir M.

Muntz, G. F.

Wood, G. W.

Muskett, G. A.

Wood, B.

O'Brien, W. S.

Wyse, T.

O'Callaghan, hon. C.

O'Connell, D.

TELLERS.

O'Connell, M. J.

Lynch, A. H.

O'Connell, M.

Curry, Sergeant

List of the NOES.

Alsager, Captain

Halford, H.

Archdall, M.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Baring, H. B.

Harcourt, G. G.

Bentinck, Lord G.

Harcourt, G. S.

Blair, J.

Hinde, J.H.

Blennerhasset, A.

Hurt, F.

Cole, Viscount

Johnstone, H.

Colquhoun, J. C.

Jones, Captain

Conolly, E.

Kemble, H.

Corry, hon. H.

Knight, H. G.

Courtenay, P.

Knox, hon. T.

Dunbar, G.

Litton, E.

Eaton, R. J.

Mackenzie, T.

Ellis, J.

Maclean, D.

Gaskell, J. M.

Maxwell, hon. S. R.

Glynne, Sir S. R.

Meynell, Captain

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Miles, P.W.S.

Graham, rt. hn, Sir J.

Norreys, Lord

533

Ossulston, Lord

Sheppard, T.

Parker, R. T.

Somerset, Lord G.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Stanley, Lord

Perceval, Colonel

Thomas, Colonel H.

Plumptre, J. P.

Verner, Colonel

Polhill, F.

Wilbraham, hon. B.

Powerscourt, Visct.

Young, J.

Praed. W. T.

TELLERS.

Richards, R.

Shaw, right hon. F.

Sandon, Viscount

Jackson, Sergeant

On Clause 13 being proposed,
Mr. Sergeant Jacksonhad an amendment to propose on this clause, which was to strike it out altogether. His object was to render it optional with the different communities in Ireland to which the Bill had reference, to take or refuse corporations as they might think fit. The Bill now before the Committee divided the towns in Ireland into two classes. The first class, schedule A, consisted of eleven towns on which the acceptance of corporations was to be imperative, and the second, schedule B, of 37 with whom it was to be optional, and who were to slate them, through the medium of a petition signed by a majority of the rate-payers, to her Majesty. His proposition was to render the acceptance of corporations optional with all. He could not conceive what objection there could be to this alteration, as, in cases where corporations were wished for, the parties could get them without difficulty by petition. An hon. Gentleman opposite had lately presented a petition from the town of Gal-way, in which the inhabitants prayed that they might not be encumbered by corporations. It bad been alleged by those Members who did not approve of the petition, that the only reason why the inhabitants objected to a corporation was the objection to the boundaries proposed by the Bill—that they thought the intended municipal district too restricted in its extent. But that was not the case, as any one who read the petition would see. The inhabitants complained that they had no funds for municipal purposes, and that the law, as it stood at present, was quite sufficient for all their wants. Neither did the Galway people stand alone. The people of Clonmel had also petitioned, and their petition was signed by three-fourths of the rate-payers of the town. Belfast also, a town containing eighty thousand inhabitants, objected to the Bill, the petitioners stating that they were commercial people, and not at all anxious to be troubled with
534
municipal affairs. The committee should recollect that these were all towns in schedule A. Why, in fact, should towns, people now ask for corporations, seeing that those bodies were all stripped of their most desirable functions. The police, the care of the harbours, in fact, every thing had been taken from them. It was urged that, as England had got reformed corporations, Ireland should have them also; and he felt that it was this argument which had induced many English Members to vote for the total abolition of corporations in Ireland. He believed the fact to be that, in a great many cases, the English people would be glad to get rid of their corporations, and that they had proved a scourge, instead of a benefit, in too many instances. He would, therefore, entreat hon. Members to consent to that which was just and reasonable, by giving an option to the towns of Ireland, and to recollect that there had been four petitions from Ireland against these new corporations, and not one in their favour.
Colonel Percevalseconded the amendment. He had consented to consider a measure of this kind last year, upon an understanding that it should be accompanied by a measure for securing the church of Ireland, and by a bill for providing for the poor of Ireland upon the principle of the English poor law. But to this bill, as now placed upon the table by the noble Lord, he could not give his assent. It inflicted, in many cases, manifest injustice upon the parties in Ireland with whom he acted and felt, more particularly upon the people of Sligo, who were now satisfied with the manner in which their town was governed under a local bill. The whole corporate property of that town did not exceed 100 l. a-year. Such a trifling income would be totally inadequate to defray the expenses incident to a corporation. He should therefore suggest the propriety of exempting this town from the necessity of having a corporation, which would plunge the population into a train of expense, as well as of occasional excitement, which the inhabitants were most desirous to avoid.
Mr. Lynchsaid, if one or two towns in schedule A wished to decline having corporations, that was no reason why all the others in the same schedule should not have them conferred upon them by the act. The town of Galway, he assured the House, had only objected to having a

535
corporate form of government imposed upon it with circumscribed boundary. If that objection were removed, the people of Galway would, he was convinced, gratefully accept a corporate form of government.
Colonel Conollyknew that many of the towns included in the schedule A were not fitted to receive corporations, and many were not able to support the expenses incident to the possession of corporate forms of government. It would be much more in accordance with the feelings of the inhabitants of these smaller towns to be permitted to subscribe their corporate funds to the maintenance of the poor under the Poor Law (Ireland) Bill.
Mr. Pigotobserved, that the petition from Clonmel against the bill was got up through the means of a placard, which declared that a new corporation would entail on the town an expense first of 1,350 l., next of 750 l. for watching and lighting, 500 l. for county cess, 500 l. for the repairs of the town, and 4.000 l. for poor's rates! Notwithstanding this, there was a large meeting in favour of corporations, from which emanated a petition, signed by 1,450 persons, and which he had presented to that House. The hon. and learned Sergeant had called the attention of the House to a petition from Clonmel, which the hon. and learned Sergeant had characterised as a petition respectably and numerously signed. Now what were the facts? Out of a population of 19,000 souls, this numerously and respectably signed petition contained just 172 signatures. And out of these 172 persons who signed the petition several were non-resident and others were minors. One of them was the turnkey of the gaol, another was the assistant turnkey; another was a driver to a gentleman of some property near the town; another was porter at the hospital; and two others were minors, the sons of a highly respectable clergyman who kept a school. He thought the hon. and learned Sergeant had laid too much stress on this petition.
Mr. Sergeant Jacksonsaid that the statement he had made was brought to his notice by Gentlemen on whom he placed full reliance. It was true that many humble persons had signed the petition, but it had also been signed by many highly respectable persons.
Lord Stanleystill remained of opinion
536
that it would be more for the advantage of Ireland—that it would tend more to the preservation of peace and good government, and to the promotion of harmony, as well as to the carrying out of the objects which the towns sought to obtain, if corporations throughout Ireland were generally and universally abolished. That opinion, which he had expressed years ago, had been strengthened by what he believed to be the diminished feeling of the people of Ireland on this subject. The question, however, had been decided against him in successive Parliaments, and he and his friends, under those circumstances, had acquiesced in the introduction of municipal corporations into Ireland, as proposed by the present bill. He was anxious now, both for his own part and on the part of those with whom he acted, to be understood as not withdrawing from what he had acceded to in former years; and he was bound to say that one of the concessions made by the side of the House at which he sat was, that there should be in this bill a schedule A, consisting of the principal towns of Ireland to which the principle of option should not apply. That being the case, he did not now feel himself to be a free agent, otherwise he certainly should prefer to see the corporations abolished. He felt as much precluded from opposing schedule A as from opposing the introduction of corporations altogether; and, under these circumstances, he should oppose, however reluctantly, the motion of his hon. and learned Friend.
Mr. O'Connellwas glad to hear corporations undervalued by hon. Gentlemen opposite. At one time it was said that any change in the corporations would destroy the Protestant religion of Ireland. These pillars, he was afraid, were now rotten, at all events they were thrown aside as of no value whatever. If the old corporations were of no value, he hoped the new corporations would be of a very different description.
The committee divided on the question that the clause stand: Ayes 109; Noes 30—Majority 79.

List of the AYES.

Adam, Admiral

Barnard, E. G.

Aglionby, H. A.

Barry, G. S.

Aglionby, Major

Bellew, R. M.

Alston, R.

Bewes, T.

Archbold, R.

Blake, M. J.

Baring, rt. hon. F. T.

Bodkin, J. J.

537

Brabazon, Sir W.

O'Callaghan, hon. C.

Bridgeman, H.

O'Connell, D.

Briscoe, J. I.

O'Connell, J.

Brocklehurst, J.

O'Connell, M. J.

Brotherton, J.

O'Connell, M.

Browne, R. D.

O'Conor, Don

Busfeild, W.

O'Ferrall, R. M.

Butler, hon. Colonel

Parker, J.

Callaghan, D.

Parnell, right hon. Sir. H.

Clay, W.

Collier, J.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Craig, W. G.

Pendarves, E. W. W.

Curry, Sergeant

Philips, G. R.

Dashwood, G. H.

Pigot, D. R.

D'Eyncourt, rt. hn. C.

Praed, W. T.

Duke, Sir J.

Redington, T. N.

Dundas, Sir R.

Rickford, W.

Evans, G.

Roche, E. B.

Ewart, W.

Roche, W.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

Rundle, J.

Finch, F.

Russell, Lord J.

Fitzpatrick, J. W.

Russell, Lord C.

Godson, R.

Salwey, Colonel

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Seale, Sir J. H.

Grattan, J.

Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.

Greg, R. H.

Smith, R. V.

Greig, D.

Somers, J. P.

Harcourt, G. G.

Somerville, Sir W.M.

Hastie, A.

Stanley, Lord

Hawes, B.

Stuart, W. V.

Hawkins, J. H.

Stock, Dr.

Hector, C. J.

Strutt, E.

Hobhouse, right hn. Sir J. C.

Sutton, hn. J. H.T.M.

Thornley, T.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

Howard, F. J.

Turner, E.

Howard, Sir R.

Vigors, N. A.

Hume, J.

Villiers, hon. C. P.

Hutton, R.

Wakley, T.

Labouchere, rt. hn. H.

Walker, R.

Langdale, hon. C.

Warburton, H.

Lemon, Sir C.

Wemyss, Captain

Lynch, A. H.

Westenra, hon. H. R.

Macaulay, right hon. T. B.

Williams, W.

Williams, W. A.

Maule, hon. F.

Wood, C.

Melgund, Viscount

Wood, G. W.

Morpeth, Viscount

Wood, B.

Morris, D.

Wyse, T.

Muntz, G F.

TELLERS.

Muskett, G. A.

Stanley, hon. E. J.

O'Brien, W. S.

Tufnell, H.

List of the NOES.

Arbuthnot, hon. H.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Blair, J.

Jones, Captain

Blennerhassett, A.

Kemble, H.

Cole, Lord

Knight, H. G.

Conolly, E.

Knox, hon. T.

Dunbar, G.

Litton, E.

Ellis, J.

Maunsell, T. P.

Gaskell, J. M.

Maxwell, hon. S. R.

Glynne, Sir S. R.

Ossulston, Lord

Gore, O. J. R.

Plumptre, J. P.

Halford, H.

Polhill, F.

Hinde, J. H.

Round, J.

Holmes, W.

Shaw, rt. hon. F.

538

Thomas, Colonel H.

Verner, Colonel

TELLERS.

Wilbraham, hon. B.

Perceval, Colonel

Young, J.

Jackson, Sergeant

On Clause 23 being put,
Mr. Sergeant Jacksonproposed that it be omitted, and the following substituted:—
"And be it enacted, that for the purposes of this Act, all places locally situate or included within the boundaries of any borough, or of any ward thereof, as defined under this Act, shall be deemed and taken to be a part or parts of such borough, or ward thereof respectively: and in those boroughs which are counties of themselves, shall be part of such county and of none other; and in every case in which the metes and bounds of any borough or county, under the provisions of this Act, shall not include any place or precinct which before the passing of this Act was part of such borough or county, such a place or precinct shall thenceforward be taken to be part of the county wherein such place or precinct is situated, or with which it has the longest common boundary. Provided nevertheless, that if any such place or precinct shall have been liable, before the passing of this Act, to contribute to any rate made for the purpose of satisfying any lawful debt to which the ratepayers of such borough or county were liable to contribute before the passing of this Act, and in case any difference shall arise concerning the proportion of such debt, which ought therefore to be paid and contributed in respect of such place or precinct, it shall be lawful for the Chief Justice of her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench in Dublin, in the case of the county of Dublin, and the county of the city of Dublin, and in the case of any other county, for the senior justice of assize for the county of which such place or precinct shall thenceforward be taken to be part on his circuit, on the application of the council of such borough, or of the chairman of a public meeting of the ratepayers of such place or precinct, to appoint, by writing under his hand, a barrister, not having any interest in the question, to arbitrate between the parties, and by his award, under his hand and seal, to assess the proportion, if any, of such debt, which ought therefore to be paid and contributed in respect of such place or precinct, and such arbitrator shall also assess the costs of the arbitration, and shall direct by whom, and in what proportion, and out of what fund, the same shall be paid; and such rate as aforesaid shall continue to be levied by warrant of the council of such borough, and paid by such place or precinct as if this Act had not passed, until such proportion shall have been fully paid and satisfied, to the treasurer of the borough, and no longer; provided, nevertheless, that every county gaol, house of correction, or lunatic asylum, or court of justice, which at the time of the passing of this Act is taken to be for

539
any purpose within any county, shall still for all such purposes be taken to be within such county, anything herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding."
The hon. and learned Gentleman said, that by the bill of the noble Lord of last year, such parts as were cut off from the boroughs, the rural districts, counties in cities, and counties in towns referred to, would (unless this clause were passed) be altogether deprived of quarter sessions, and also excluded from the benefit of the aid of the magistracy. Such an arrangement would work great injury in the suburbs of many cities in Ireland, such as Cork, Limerick, and Waterford. The effect in the neighbourhood of Cork would deprive seventy square miles, with a great population, of the advantage of quarter sessions and justices of the peace.
Mr. Pigotsaid, that the observations of his learned Friend were very well worthy of attention, and if the clause were passed as it stood, he would take care to have the jurisdiction extended and settled in a subsequent clause.
Clause agreed to.
On Clause 32 being proposed, which provides for the amount of qualification,
Mr. Shawrose to move the amendments of which be had given notice. He said, that as to the amount of qualification for the towns now to be incorporated, and which was 10 l., to be regulated according to the suggestion made at his side of the House, he had no objection to offer. But in the corporations to be hereafter formed, it was proposed to make the qualification 8l. He was opposed to this dissimilarity, and should propose, that the amount in both cases should be the same. As it was intended to fix the qualification after three years, according to the English standard, he should object to any such prospective legislation, and move that the 10 l. qualification be, as far as this bill was concerned, permanent. The way in which he meant to carry these views into effect was, by moving the omission of part of clause 32, and striking out clauses 33 and 34.
Viscount Morpeth: This proposal would double the period of occupation, and diminish by one half the exemption from payment of rates which were proposed. Now, after the large concessions already made to the opposite side, he did not think that the Government could be called
540
on, in common fairness, to introduce this additional restriction and curtailment.
Mr. O'Connell: His objection to this amendment was, that it made the qualification higher than that of England. He thought it should be exactly the same. He stood on that position, and maintained that if it were not conceded, it was absurd to talk of dealing with this measure in a conciliatory spirit.
Mr. S. O'Brienobserved, that no man pretending to the character of a statesman could insist on treating the two countries differently with regard to municipal corporations.
Lord Stanleythought it exceedingly objectionable to lay down any rule for the practical working of a measure three years hence, when they could know nothing of the circumstances of the period. Though they fixed the qualification at 10 l., it was dealing with Ireland in the spirit of the English Municipal Bill, and fixing the amount of qualification at exactly the same standard as that of Scotland. He thought it would be better not to mix the two questions raised by the proposed amendment, but to take them separately on each of the clauses out of which they arose.
Mr. Sergeant Curriecontended, that the increase in the grand jury cess which by the enactment of the new poor-law was to be deducted from the valuation of houses, tended to lower that valuation, and that it would be unfair, therefore, to fix so high a standard of qualification as that proposed.
Mr. Shawmaintained, that the legal value was what the house would fetch between landlord and tenant.
Mr. O'Connell: Such were the questions of litigation to which they were about to expose the Irish, by depriving them of the English law! The noble Lord (Stanley) contended at one time, that the English Municipal Bill could not be extended to Ireland, because the same machinery of rating did not exist in the two countries. He admitted that was a fair objection. But the noble Lord would strike out the present clause, which conferred on the Irish the benefit of the English law, when they should have qualified according to his view, and thought it desirable that the question of municipal corporations should be again opened three years hence.
The House divided on the original

541
clause:—Ayes 130, Noes 85:—Majority 45.

List of the AYES.

Adam, Admiral

Lambton, H.

Aglionby, H. A.

Langdale, hon. C.

Aglionby, Major

Lemon, Sir C.

Alston, R.

Lynch, A. H.

Archbold, R.

Macaulay, rt. hn. T. B.

Bannerman, A.

Maule, hon. F.

Baring, rt. hon. F. T.

Morpeth, Viscount

Barnard, E. G.

Morris, D.

Barry, G. S.

Muntz, G. F.

Bellew, R. M.

Murray, A.

Berkeley, hon. H.

O'Brien, W. S.

Bewes, T.

O'Callaghan, hon. C.

Blake, M. J.

O'Connell, D.

Bodkin, J. J.

O'Connell, J.

Bowes, J.

O'Connell, M. J.

Bridgeman, H.

O'Connell, M.

Briscoe, J. I.

O'Conor, Don

Brocklehurst, J.

Ord, W.

Brotherton, J.

Paget, Lord A.

Busfeild, W.

Palmerston, Viscount

Callaghan, D.

Parker, J.

Clay, W.

Parnell, rt. hn. Sir H.

Clive, E. B.

Pendarves, E. W. W.

Collier, J.

Pigot, D. R.

Collins, W.

Price, Sir R.

Corbally, M. E.

Ramsbottom, J.

Curry, Sergeant

Redington, T. N.

Dash wood, G. H.

Roche, E. B.

D'Eyncourt, rt. hn. C.T.

Roche, W.

Divett, E.

Rumbold, C. E.

Duke, Sir J.

Rundle, J.

Dundas, hon. J. C.

Russell, Lord J.

Dundas, Sir R.

Russell, Lord C.

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Rutherfurd, rt. hn. A.

Evans, Sir De L.

Salwey, Colonel

Evans, G.

Seale, Sir J.H.

Evans, W.

Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

Smith, R. V.

Finch, F.

Somers, J. P.

Fitzpatrick, J.W.

Somerville, Sir W. M.

Fitzroy, Lord C.

Stanley, hon. E. J.

Fleetwood, Sir P. H.

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Gisborne, T.

Stewart, J.

Gordon, R.

Stuart, W. V.

Grattan, J.

Stock, Dr.

Greg, R. H.

Strangways, hon. J.

Guest, Sir J.

Style, Sir C.

Harland, W. C.

Surrey, Earl of

Hastie, A.

Thornely, T.

Hayter, W. G.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

Hector, C. J.

Tufnell, H.

Hill, Lord A. M. C.

Turner, E.

Hindley, C.

Turner, W.

Hobhouse, rt. hn. Sir J.

Vigors, N. A.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Vivian, rt. hon. Sir R.

Hollond, R.

Wakley, T.

Howard, F. J.

Wall, C. B.

Howard, Sir R.

Warburton, H.

Hume, J.

Wemyss, Captain

Hurst, R. H.

Westenra, hon. H. R.

Hutchins, E. J.

White, A.

Hutton, R.

Wilbraham, G.

Labouchere, rt. hon. H.

Williams, W.

542

Williams, W. A.

Winnington, H. J.

TELLERS.

Wood, Sir M.

O'Ferrall, R. M.

Wood, B.

Wyse, T.

List of the NOES.

Bailey, J.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Baillie, Colonel

James, Sir W. C.

Baring, H. B.

Jones, Captain

Bentinck, Lord G.

Kemble, H.

Blakemore, R.

Knox, hon. T.

Blennerhassett, A.

Law, hon. C. E.

Broadly, H.

Litton, E.

Broad wood, H.

Lockhart, A. M.

Bruges, W. H. L.

Lygon, hon. General

Buck, L. W.

Mackenzie, T.

Cholmondeley, hn. H.

Maclean, D.

Chute, W. L. W.

Maunsell, T. P.

Clerk, Sir G.

Maxwell, hon. S. R.

Clive, hon. R. H.

Meynell, Captain

Cochrane, Sir T. J.

Miles, P. W. S.

Cole, Lord

Norreys, Sir D. J.

Colquhoun, J. C.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Conolly, E.

Peel, J.

Corry, hon. H.

Perceval, Colonel

Courtenay, P.

Planta, rt. hon. J.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Plumptre, J. P.

Dunbar, G.

Polhill, F.

Du Pre, G.

Powerscourt, Visct.

Eaton, R. J.

Praed, W. T.

Ellis, J.

Pringle, A.

Estcourt, T.

Rickford, W.

Filmer, Sir E.

Somerset, Lord G.

Foley, E. T.

Sotheron, T. E.

Fremantle, Sir T.

Spry, Sir S. T.

Gaskell, J. M.

Stanley, Lord

Godson, R.

Sutton, hn. J. H.T.M.

Gore, O. J. R.

Teignmouth, Lord

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Thomas, Colonel H.

Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.

Thompson, Alderman

Grimsditch, T.

Tollemache, F. J.

Halford, H.

Vere, Sir C. B.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Verner, Colonel

Harcourt, G. G.

Waddington, H. S.

Harcourt, G. S.

Wilbraham, hon. B.

Hardinge, rt. hn. Sir H.

Young, J.

Hodgson, F.

Hodgson, R.

TELLERS.

Hope, hon. C.

Shaw, rt. hon. F.

Hotham, Lord

Jackson, Serjeant

On the 66th clause (burgesses to vote for the councillors of the ward in which their property is situate) being put,
Mr. Sergeant Jackson Mr. Sergeant Jackson moved, that the following proviso be added to this clause:—
"That every person entitled to vote in the election of aldermen and town councillors in any borough, shall vote only for one half the number of the aldermen and town councillors to be elected for the ward or borough in respect of which such person shall be entitled to vote."
Lord John Russellsaid, that he should be sorry to agree to any principle which

543
should have the effect of drawing a line between Roman Catholics and Protestants.
The committee divided on the question that the proviso be added:—Ayes 35; Noes 102:—Majority 67.

List of the AYES.

Archdall, M.

Maunsell, T. P.

Blackburne, I.

Maxwell, hon. S. R.

Blackstone, W. S.

Meynell, Captain

Blennerhassett, A.

Miles, P. W. S.

Broadwood, H.

Packe, C. W.

Chute, W. L. W.

Parker, R. T.

Cole, Viscount

Plumptre, J. P.

Corry, hon. H.

Pringle, A.

Du Pre, G.

Rushout, G.

Eaton, R. J.

Sandon, Viscount

Farnham, E. B:

Shaw, rt. hon. F.

Filmer, Sir E.

Sibthorp, Colonel

Greene, T.

Thomas, Colonel H.

Halford, H.

Tollemache, hon. F. J.

Hamilton, Lord C.

Verner, Colonel

Hodgson, F.

Waddington, H. S.

Hope, G. W.

TELLERS.

Jones, Captain

Jackson, Serjeant

Litton, E.

Perceval Colonel

List of the NOES.

Aglionby, H. A.

Hobhouse, T. B

Aglionby, Major

Howard, F. J.

Alston, R.

Hume, J

Archbold, R.

Hutton, R.

Baines, E.

Jervis, S.

Bannerman, A.

Labouchere, rt. hon. H.

Baring, rt. hon. E. T.

Langdale, hon. C.

Barry, G. S.

Lushington, C.

Bellew, R. M.

Lynch, A. H.

Bewes, T.

Maule, hon. F.

Blake, M. J.

Morpeth, Viscount

Bodkin, J. J.

Morris, D.

Bridgeman, H.

Muntz, G. F.

Brotherton, J.

Murray, A.

Bruges, W. H. L.

O'Brien, W. S.

Callaghan, D.

O'Callaghan, hon. C.

Clay, W.

O'Connell, D.

Corbally, M. E.

O'Connell, J.

Curry, Serjeant

O'Connell, M. J.

D'Eyncourt, rt. hn. C.

O'Connell, M.

Dundas, hon. J. C.

O'Conor Don

Dundas, Sir R.

Oswald, J.

Erie, W.

Parker, J.

Evans, W.

Philips, M.

Ewart, W.

Pigot, D. R.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

Ponsonby, hn. C.F.A.C

Fitzpatrick, J. W.

Price, Sir R.

Fleetwood, Sir P.

Pryme, G.

Gisborne, T.

Ramsbottom, J.

Gordon, R.

Redington, T. N.

Harland, W. C.

Roche, E. B.

Hastie, A.

Roche, W.

Hawkins, J. H.

Rundle, J.

Hayter, W. G.

Russell, Lord J.

Hector, C. J.

Russell, Lord C.

Hill, Lord A.M. C.

Rutherfurd, rt. hon. A.

Hobhouse, rt. hn. Sir J.C.

Salway, Colonel

544

Sanford, E. A.

Wallace, R.

Sheil rt. hn. R. L.

Warburton, H.

Somers, J. P.

Ward, H. G.

Somerville, Sir W. M.

Wemyss, Captain

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Westenra, hon. H. R.

Stock, Dr.

Westenra, hon. J. C.

Stuart, Lord J.

White, A.

Stuart, W. V.

Wilbraham, G.

Strutt, E.

Williams, W.

Style, Sir C.

Wood, G. W.

Thornely, T.

Wood, B.

Townley, R. G.

Wyse, T.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

Vigors, N. A.

TELLERS.

Wakley, T.

Stanley, hon. E. J.

Walker, R.

Tufnell, H.

Remaining clauses agreed to.
House resumed.
Committee to sit again.

MINUTES.
Bill. The Royal Assent was given by Commission to the Transfer of Aids Bill.
Petitions presented. By the Marquess of Westminster, from the Trustees of Charities in Shaftesbury, for Redress from Injuries done them by the Municipal Reform Act.—By the Marquess of Normanby, from Marylebone, for the Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Lord Abinger, from the Soldiers and Sailors Friends Society, against Socialism.—By the Marquess of Bute, from Ayr, and other places, for an Alteration in the Law of Church Patronage in Scotland.

CORPORATION. APPOINTMENTS OF TRUSTEES.
The Marquess of Westminsterpresented a petition from individuals connected with certain small charities, whose right to administer the same had ceased and determined by the Municipal Corporation Act, complaining that the expense of appointing trustees under the Act was more than the funds of the charities could bear, and praying for some measure of relief. The noble Marquess called the attention of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack particularly to this subject.
The Lord Chancelloradmitted that the grievance was one which deserved the serious consideration of the Legislature.

507
The subject was one which was attended with considerable difficulty with reference to the views which were entertained amongst the parties concerned themselves. Certain of them might desire some alteration, but before that could be effected, it was necessary to have the concurrence of all. If any mode presented itself to him by which the difficulty could be overcome and the grievance removed, it would be his duty to bring it under the consideration of their Lordships.

MINORCA. FRANCE.
The Marquess of Londonderry, seeing the noble Viscount in his place, was desirous to ask him a question respecting what was called the temporary occupation by the French of King's Islet, near Minorca, in Port Mahon. When on a former occasion an inquiry was made relative to this point, the noble Viscount said, he was quite assured that the papers which would be laid before their Lordships would be found to give a perfectly satisfactory explanation. Now, he must declare that those papers were not at all satisfactory to him, and to show why they were not, he begged leave to refer to the despatch (No. 4.) from Sir George Villiers to Viscount Palmerston, dated November 4, 1837. It was there slated:—
"A report of the Committee of state on the occupation of the King's Islet, in Port Mahon, by the French has been read, and was approved without discussion. The proposition on which the report was founded was to the effect, that the measure adopted by the Government with respect to this island should be suspended; and the committee declare, that they have observed with the greatest regret the steps that have been taken by the Government on the subject. It appears, the Committee state, that the French have for some time rented the island from the local authorities as a depôt for coal, and as it is now likely to be more necessary to them than ever, on account of their occupation of a portion of the coast of Africa, the French Ambassador at this court received instructions from his Government to apply to the government of her Catholic majesty for the use of the buildings on the island for a fixed period. The Government consulted the authorities of the island, and although their report was unanimously against acceding to the request, it was granted by the Government, on account of its being politically convenient not to deny this favour to an ally, when on the other hand, the inconveniences attending the refusal of it were taken into consideration. The French government were therefore permitted to hold the premises in question for the term of two years, renew-
508
able at pleasure, for the annual rent of 300 reals (3l.). After having heard the Minister of State, and although extremely desirous of manifesting a sincere wish to maintain the most friendly relations with France, the Committee nevertheless advised the Chamber to offer to the French government the best buildings on the island of Minorca itself, which may be adapted for the objects in view, instead of the spot called King's Islet, by which proceeding, they state, the wants of the French vessels of war will be consulted, and the national anxiety on the subject tranquilized."
Now there was in his opinion, a great deal of difference between occupying houses and barns situated on the island of Minorca, and occupying King's Islet, in the centre of Port Mahon. Looking to the last letter dated January 16, 1840, from Mr. Gaynor, the British Vice-Consul at Port Mahon, on this subject, he found that it merely stated, that—
"Since the departure of Consul Lieutenant Colonel C. L. Fitzgerald, nothing has occurred worthy of remark, except the renewal of the lease, by the Spanish to the French government, for two years of the King's, or Hospital Island, situate in the centre of this port, with its hospital and its appurtenances, at a monthly rent of 16 dollars, with the reserve, in case Spain should not have occasion for it."
It was to be observed that not a single reason had been given why the buildings and barns on the island of Minorca were not appropriated instead of this islet. He believed that any person who was acquainted with the position of the latter, would state, that if the French were to have possession of it for two years, unless they were absolutely prohibited from erecting fortifications, they would make it so formidable a post, that, if we ever returned (as was by no means impossible) to a war with France, (in which case, he had no doubt that the waters of the Mediterranean would be the scene of conflict), it would be found to operate injuriously to our interests in that quarter. He could not, therefore, avoid looking with jealousy at their occupation of an island in the centre of Port Mahon. He wished consequently, to know whether any communication had taken place explaining why buildings and outhouses on the island of Minorca were not given up to the French, instead of a separate island? The subject was very important, and on some future day he would propose a motion with reference to it.
The Earl of Clarendoncould not see

509
what right the British Government had to ask of the Spanish Government its reasons for not having adopted a resolution of a committee of the Cortes. That, amongst other matters, had been taken up by the opposition in the Cortes, and had been used to excite an ill-feeling against the Government. A Committee was appointed, and had made the report which had been alluded to. But the lease having been granted long before, the Government saw no reason to rescind it. The warehouse and hospital so leased were first in possession of the United States, and afterwards, in a strange manner, handed over to France, who wished to make use of it as a dépôt for coal, and there was no objection to granting it to them for that purpose, on the same terms as those on which it had been held by the American Government. There was, moreover, a clause in the first lease, which stipulated that the French should not exceed the authority exercised by the previous occupiers of the island; and in the lease now granted to them for two years there was a similar stipulation; besides which, they were only to hold the station in the event of the Spanish Government not wanting it for their own use. Inquiry had been made of the French Government as to what were their intentions respecting the place; and the answer was, that they merely wished to use it as a coal dépôt; and it appeared to him that there could be no objecton to their using it for that purpose.
The Earl of Aberdeensaid, that the matter was one of considerable importance. It was not the first time the French had endeavoured to establish a footing in the island. They had requested permission to place a dépôt there ten years ago, but the Spanish Government then refused its permission to allow the French to form any such establishment. The noble Earl had said, that the matter had excited a great deal of alarm and of interest in Spain. Those feelings, in his opinion, were very natural. The noble Earl had also stated, that the Opposition in the Cortes had taken up the question. Surely, it was very natural that they should, and he was afraid that the Opposition in their Lordships' House would also find it necessary to take it up, in order to show that it was a point which might lead to very serious consequences. The Cortes committee had recommended that if the
510
French formed an establishment of the kind, it should be on the main land, where they would be more under the control of the Spanish Government, which might prevent them from erecting such works as at a future period might become formidable. The noble Earl, however, said, that it was a temporary agreement, and he asked, what right had we to interfere with the distribution of any portion of the Spanish territories? He would answer, that we claimed that right fur the best of all possible reasons—for the security of our position in the Mediterranean. Our interest there rendered it imperative on us to interfere. He conceived that they had a right to complain, not that the French Government had placed themselves in this situation, but that the Spanish Government had given to France this facility for forming an establishment which might seriously affect the interests of this country. The noble Earl had not told them that by the terms of the lease the French were prohibited from strengthening themselves on the island, which was a very important matter. If it could be shown that the French meant only to have a dépôt for coal, or an hospital for the sick on the island (it being strictly provided that they should not convert it into a post of strength), the matter would then assume a different aspect. But, unless the noble Earl declared that they were positively prevented from erecting any buildings that partook of the character of barracks, or had a hostile appearance—unless he showed that it was impossible for them to construct any buildings on that island which might be available to them in military operations, in that case the objection to the continuance of the French there became exceedingly strong. Considering all that had taken place in that part of the world, no one could be surprised that there should be some degree of anxiety felt in this country on the subject.
Lord Ellenboroughwished to know if the French had erected any building in the island besides dépôts and hospitals? Whether any edifice had been raised there that was not strictly in accordance with the terms of the lease?
The Earl of Clarendonwas not aware that the French had erected any other. He believed that the Spanish Government would not allow the erection of any building whatsoever of a military cha-

511
racter. The noble Earl had stated that the Spanish Government had refused to lease the island to France. [The Earl of Aberdeen.—In 1830.] He believed, that about 1830 the American Government had handed the island over to France; and very shortly after the taking of Algiers the French turned it into a coal dépôt. They had now held it for several years, but only as a coal dépôt. He believed that there were none but invalids there: and there had never been more than one sloop of war at any time near the island, He had not the least apprehension of the French forming a military establishment on the island. He had made inquiries on these points; and he found, that since the French had occupied it no individuals appeared there, except a few to receive coals; and, as he had said before, there had been but one French sloop of war on the station.
Viscount Melbournesaid, he did not know they could prevent the French from establishing themselves on the island, with the concurrence of the Spanish Government. If the French had endeavoured to settle themselves in the island of Minorca, he thought the jealousy of the House and of the country might fairly have been roused. Their possession of this islet was, however, a very different matter. In his opinion they had no ulterior objects in view; and, certainly, if they entertained any such, they had acquired no very great facilities for carrying them into effect.
Conversation ended.

ANGLO-SPANISH LEGION.
The Marquess of Londonderryrose to address their Lordships on another question. Though it might be somewhat irregular, he should solicit the indulgence of their lordships whilst he said a few words on the claims which the British Auxiliary Legion had on the Spanish Government—claims which, up to this hour, were unsettled. He could assure their Lordships, that he was not about to make any attack upon her Majesty's Government. He thought they must have had enough of attacks—attacks sufficient to sicken, nay, to kill, half-a-dozen Governments. [Viscount Melbourne, "Oh, no!"] The noble Viscount might laugh; but he would tell the noble Viscount, that when the French Ministers were recently left in a minority of twenty-six, they, acting on a point of honour,
512
declined to carry on the Government; but the noble Viscount and his colleagues, notwithstanding they were beaten on one question by a majority of 104, and on another by a majority of ten, still continue in their ignoble position of stedfastly adhering to place and pay, although they must feel that the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, and his friends, ought to fill the situations now held by the noble Viscount and his colleagues. Having said this, which he was induced to do by the manner of the noble Viscount, he should now return to the subject to which he wished to call their Lordships' attention. He had recently received several letters from parties who had belonged to the Spanish Legion, and who were suffering greatly in consequence of the non-settlement of their claims by the Spanish Government.—He had received a letter on the subject which he would at once read:—
"As I perceive you are shortly to bring the affairs of Spain before the House of Lords, I trust your Lordship will not allow the opportunity to pass without inquiring of the Government whether there is any chance of the claims of the unfortunate men who served in the British Auxiliary Legion being liquidated. There is above 200 l. due to me on account of those claims, which would be a great relief to me, as I have been much distressed in consequence of the delay. Your Lordship's exertions towards effecting an arrangement, will ever oblige your Lordship's humble servant."
The date of this letter was the 14th of February, 1840, and the address 54, William-street, Dublin.
There were circumstances of a peculiar nature connected with those claims, to which he begged leave to call their Lordships' serious attention. An attempt was made at St. Sebastian to settle these claims. The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Clarendon) had stated in May, 1837, "that his intervention with respect to the payment of these demands was recognized by the Spanish Government," which he considered as a distinct guarantee for the liquidation of those claims by the noble Earl, who was then our ambassador at Madrid. The noble Earl now belonged to her Majesty's Cabinet (he knew not whether he had much influence there), but he asked him whether he would exert himself to fulfil the guarantee thus given. In the last Session he had charged the Government with being privy to the con-

513
yention which Colonel Wylde had entered into relative to the payment of these claims. At that time the noble Viscount denied that the gallant Colonel had any authority to act on behalf of the British Government. Colonel Wylde was now in this country, and, he would ask, whether he had any authority as a British officer, as well as a Spanish commissioner, to see that those payments were adjusted and effected? If he had no such authority, then he must say, that Colonel Wylde had acted in a very reprehensible manner; but if he had such authority, then he could not see how the British Government could get out of the difficulty of forcing Spain to liquidate those claims. Colonel Wylde arrived in St. Sebastian previous lo June 10, 1837, and signed warrants for the issue of pay, and on the 10th of June issued the following order:—
"The officers of the British Auxiliary Legion, whose term of service expires this day, will be entitled to billets, pay, and rations, until they are settled with, and vessels provided to convey them to England,
(Signed) "W. WYLDE, Colonel."
His conduct also at a public meeting was most extraordinary:—
"At a public meeting of officers in San Sebastian, Colonel Wylde said, that he stood before them in a twofold capacity, viz. as 'a commissioner from the Queen of England, and as a commissioner from the Queen of Spain,' and that he was authorized by her Britannic Majesty's Minister at Madrid, to pledge himself that a portion of pay should be issued before they left Spain, and that they should receive good bills for the remainder. Colonel Wylde and Brigadier-General Tena afterwards gave to each paymaster a warrant to estimate for and pay their officers to the day when their arrears should be settled in good bills or cash. A similar warrant was also given to Deputy Commissary-General Black, for the payment of officers of the staff, &c. In consequence of these assurances, a number of officers and men were induced to enter the new Legion, the conditions of service for which were also signed by Colonel Wylde."
The noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs was reported to have said, in another place, that though the British claims on the Portuguese Government were not so strong as those of the Legion officers on Spain, still if the Portuguese Government refused to satisfy the claims awarded by a British and Portuguese
514
commissioner, he certainly should enforce satisfaction. Now what was 280,000 l. or 300,000 l. to the Spanish Government? It was true their finances might be in a state of difficulty; but would any one say that this country might not, by some financial arrangement with Spain, render valuable those securities which had been given to the Legion, and which were at present worthless? Why could not those assignats or certificates be given in payment for duties? Why might they not be made available through some other commercial channel if the Government chose to insist on it. Why might not 200,000 l, be received by some plan of the nature for those unfortunate men, who were now suffering the deepest distress, and who could plead that they had the guarantee both of the noble Earl and of Colonel Wylde that their just claims should be fairly met and settled? What had they got? Nothing but bad notes or assignats, as they were called, of General Alava; and they were now at a discount of twenty-five per cent. The Jews had been busily engaged in buying them up; and though he would not say that members of the Spanish mission had been engaged in such a traffic, he could not, and would not, conceal from their Lordships, that a report to that effect was current. He called upon their Lordships to look at the mode in which the Foreign-office had disposed of the superior officers of the Legion, in order to get rid of their importunities. He had got a list of the officers who had served in the Legion, and had subsequently obtained promotion in the British army, and a very curious list it was. Their Lordships would hardly believe, that out of the officers who had served in the British Auxiliary Legion, fifty-six had either been promoted in the army by the Horse Guards over the heads of older officers in India and elsewhere, or had been provided for in the civil service of the country, no doubt upon the recommendation of the Foreign-office.
The following is a list of the officers rewarded by honours, promotions, and appointments, for their services in Spain: which was read by the noble Marquess:—
Sir De Lacy Evans, Lieut.-General, made a K.C.B.—Evans, Brigadier-General, appointed Military Secretary to the Governor of Madras.—M'Dougal, Sir Duncan, Brigadier-Ge-

515
neral, knighted.—Shaw, Sir Charles, Brigadier-General, knighted, and made Commissioner of Police for Manchester.—Le Marchant, Sir J. G. knighted, and appointed to command a British regiment.—Chichester, Brigadier-General, appointed to the command of a British regiment.—Fitzgerald, Brigadier-General, appointed consul at Carthagena.—O'Connell, Brigadier-General, Military Secretary, New South Wales.—Jochmus, Brigadier-General, employed on secret service in Turkey.—Reid, Brigadier-General, Governor of Bermuda.—Colquhoun, Lieut.-Colonel, from Second Captain of Artillery to a Lieutenant-Colonelcy.—Boyd, Lieut.-Colonel, Majority 38th Regiment.—Ibbetson, Assistant Commissary-General, made Assistant Commissary-General British Service.—Hicks, Colonel, made Barrack-master.—Wetherall, Colonel, appointed Commissioner of Police in Canada.—Wakefield, Colonel, appointed Lieut.-Governor of New Zealand.—Swan, Colonel, employed on a particular service in Canada.—Rottenberg, Baron de, ditto.—Johnson, Captain, made Queen's Messenger.—Browne, Captain, appointed clerk in the Foreign Office.—Hoseason, Mr. C.C., appointed clerk in the Colonial Office.—Considine, Lieut.-Colonel, appointed Military Secretary, West Indies,—Wylde, Colonel, C. B. made full Colonel, and appointed Equerry to his Royal Highness, Prince Albert; his son made clerk in the Foreign Office.
He had gone only through a part of the list, and there were fifty-six of them in all. How, he would ask, did it happen that all the officers had been provided for, while the men had been abandoned? Men could not help asking themselves whether Ministers had not given them promotion to get rid of their importunities. If they had not done so, they had contrived very badly in providing for all the officers, and in abandoning all the men. A commission, it was true, had been appointed to examine into their claims; but the very first measure it had taken was to close it by fixing a certain time, after which it would receive no claims. Yes, they issued a statement that all claims not sent in by a certain time (he believed it was the 9th of September,) would not be admitted. They had not however given any public notice of this their intention, either in Ireland or in Scotland, or in any other more distant parts of the British empire, where these unfortunate men or their relatives might happen to be residing. He was surprised that such public notice had not been given by some of the superior officers connected with the Legion. The commission, however, had sat for some time,
516
and he was given to understand that not less than 3,000 certificates were still wanting by the men. Here he would beg leave to call the attention of their Lordships to the conduct of the commission:—"Contracts had been agreed to or broken, as suited the purposes of the commission; medical certificates had been refused and granted without sufficient grounds; pensions had been refused to some officers who were entitled to them, under the British regulations, and allowed to others who had no right to them. The decision of the war-office had not been given on the claims until it had been extracted by dread of public exposure. Gratuities had been denied to several officers, who had done good service, while they had been given to others, who had either retired or had been dismissed from the Legion." Such were the representations which had been put into his hands; and he believed the real truth of the circumstances to be, that these unfortunate men were kept out of their money by the base manœuvring of the Spanish Government, through Spanish agents in this country. He hoped that the noble Viscount or the noble Earl opposite, would feel it to be his duly to bring this question to a direct issue; and if in a short time he did not see a prospect of immediate justice being done to these claimants, he would, soon after the recess, move an address to her Majesty, that she would take measures with the Spanish Government to have these claims adjusted. The noble Marquess then moved, that "there be laid on the table a return of all decisions of the War-office on the pensions and compensations granted to the wounded officers of the British Auxiliary Legion, and also a return of all the outstanding claims of the men of that Legion not presented before the 30th of September, 1839." He concluded by asking the noble Earl opposite whether any arrangement had been made on the subject to which his motion referred with the Spanish Government; and if not, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Ministers to propose to that Government any mode of arranging these claims?
The Earl of Clarendonsaid, it was very satisfactory to find that these unfortunate men, who had been so long and so unceasingly the objects of the keenest vituperations of the noble Earl, and on whose conduct he could not formerly bestow a single word of approbation, had now be-

517
come the objects of his warmest solicitude. Instead of entering into the wide field of observation into which the noble Earl had directed his discursive march, he should confine himself to the statement of a few facts, and more particularly to the refutation of the attack which the noble Earl had made upon himself and upon the guarantee which the noble Earl had said that he gave, when the men of the first Legion were on the point of embarcation for England. As the representative of the British Government at the Court of Spain, he had no official right to interfere to procure the payment of individuals who had voluntarily enlisted themselves in the service of the Queen of Spain; but as an Englishman having some influence at her court, it was impossible for him to remain passive to the necessities and wants of so many of his fellow-countrymen. He had, therefore, used his best exertions to obtain the fulfilment of those engagements into which the Spanish Government had entered with them, and he was happy to inform their Lordships that every claim which he had brought forward had been listened to, and as far as was possible at the time complied with; and that, under these circumstances, he had written to General Evans, stating, that as the Spanish Government had accepted his intervention, he had no doubt that all the engagements which it had made with the men of his force would be performed. What had been the consequence of that intervention on his part. That every soldier who went away was paid up to the time of his embarkation. All of them were paid except 250 Lancers, as fully as if they had belonged to the British army. There were 3,000 or 4,000 men thus paid up. The noble Earl laughed at that statement. Did the noble Earl mean to deny it? [The Marquess of Londonderry: Push it further—push it further.] "Push it further?" What does the noble Earl mean by that? With respect to the fifty-six officers who had been appointed to various situations, and whose promotion the noble Earl attributed to a desire on the part of Her Majesty's Government to get rid of their importunities, he had only to observe, that he could not believe the noble Earl to be serious in making the statement which he had done upon that point. A great part of the officers whose promotion the noble Earl had attacked were personally unknown to him; he knew them, however, by character as
518
some of the most distinguished officers in her Majesty's service; and he hardly thought their Lordships would sanction the idea, that because they had engaged in a service of which the noble Earl did not approve, they were therefore to have a bar set against their further employment. He believed that there was not one of those officers who had not distinguished himself greatly, and if they were taken individually, there was not one of them whose appointment was not defensible by the Government on its own special grounds. He should be glad to see the list which the noble Earl had read, and to give the noble Earl, in each particular case, an account of the reasons which had led to the individual's promotion. With respect to one of the officers of the name of Colquhoun, whom the noble Earl represented to have been appointed to a lieutenant-colonelcy in the British service, he happened to know that that officer only held that rank locally so long as he continued at Lisbon. With respect to the assertion that the claims of the soldiers had not been attended to, he must observe that they had received the whole of their pay, and that every farthing to which they were entitled as pay had been given to them just as if they had been serving in the British army. The noble Marquess shook his head; it was very easy to do that, but could the noble Marquess disprove his statement? It was true that the soldiers had not yet received their gratuities, and there were more reasons than the inability of the Spanish government to account for the non-settlement of those gratuities. It had taken a considerable time to examine and audit the accounts, which were of a very complicated character. He stated with confidence that the Spanish government had proceeded in the examination and audit of those accounts with the most complete good faith. He thought that when the noble Marquess calmly read over his remarks of that evening, he would regret deeply having said that the members of the Spanish mission had been concerned in discounting the certificates granted to the soldiers of the Legion, and would also regret having brought against the Spanish government a charge of insincerity and fraud. With respect to the commission, and the notice which it had given, he would now proceed to make a very short statement. He would inform the House of what that

519
commission had done. It was appointed in November, 1838, and had been engaged for nine or ten months in its labours, during which time the claims of 3,000 men had been examined into, and nearly as many certificates had been granted. At the end of that time it was thought that no more claims would be brought forward, and therefore the commissioners, in order to save the expense of keeping the commission open, expressed an opinion that the commission ought to be closed. They therefore published a notice in August, 1839, stating that, after a month from the date thereof, no fresh claims would be received. Was there any secrecy in that? The fact was, that the notice was published in all the newspapers at the time, and was publicly posted up in all the towns where the men of the Legion had been first enlisted. It was afterwards stated, in another place, by his noble Friend, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, that, as the notice up to the 15th of September was not considered sufficient, fifteen days more would be granted, and ultimately the notice was extended to the 30th of September, 1839. It was furthermore stated, that as there were some claims into which inquiry could not be made in Spain conveniently to the claimants, inquiry into them should be instituted in London. Now, to that arrangement, none of the superior officers of the Legion had offered, on behalf of their men, the slightest objection. Perhaps ii might be convenient, as this discussion would go abroad, to state how this commission was composed. It was composed of one individual, a gentleman of high character, selected by the Legion itself, and possessing its entire confidence, who had been substituted for another gentleman, of whose proceedings the Legion did not approve, and to whom, as a substitute for the former gentleman, the Spanish government, though it might have objected, had not made any opposition. It was composed of another individual appointed by the Spanish government, a Spaniard, a gentleman of great respectability, long resident in London, and thoroughly conversant with our language, and with our mode of transacting business. The referees were men of the most unsullied honour, and the most unblemished reputation, as he thought that their Lordships would admit when they heard that they were General Alava and Sir R. Dundas.
520
Every point on which they decided was submitted to the War-office, and was not made public until it met the sanction of his noble Friend, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He contended that such being the facts, no commission had ever been appointed that was more calculated to give satisfaction to all parties who had any concern with it. The noble Marquess had said that he had made inquiries into this subject. Would the noble Marquess permit him to ask who the parties were of whom he had made inquiry! Were they persons worthy of credit? If the noble Marquess had wished to obtain redress for the grievances of the claimants, would it not have been more natural for him to have gone in the first place to General Alava or to Sir R. Dundas? Such a course, however, would not have suited the purpose of the noble Earl; yet such a course would undoubtedly have been much better than that of stigmatizing men of character as parties guilty of fraud and insincerity. Had the noble Earl pursued the course he ought to have pursued, he would have found that since the commission had given notice that it would close its labours, a thousand certificates had been issued, and he would also have found that the commission was not even yet closed; but that the most ample provision had been made—he would not merely say in the most just and honourable manner, but in the most generous spirit by the Spanish Government—for the liquidation of future claims, as might be naturally expected by all who were acquainted with the high and chivalrous character of General Alava. It might be as well for him to state once for all, that there were certain individuals, with not much knowledge, but with a large infusion of the spirit of mischief, who for the sake of their own paltry emoluments were most anxious that the labours of this commission should not be cut short. Now, if the noble Earl's object were to obtain for these claimants a redress of grievances, and not to make a mere statement of their sufferings, he would in future obtain his information from General Alava rather than from the individuals to whom he had just alluded.
The Marquess of Londonderrydisclaimed all intention of asserting that the employment of these officers in the service of the Queen of Spain was to be a bar to their promotion in the service of the

521
Queen of England. He sympathized with the sufferings of the men of the Legion, because they had been the victims of the noble Earl and the noble Viscount opposite, who, as they seduced, ought to have protected them. He did not mean to deny that many of these officers had distinguished themselves in the ranks of the British army; but it was singular that no less than fifty-six officers should have been promoted for serving in the Legion—a number of promotions out of all proportion to its amount, when compared with the number of promotions granted to our officers in India, and in the other corps of the British army. The noble Earl had stated that the pay of the Legion had been granted; but he had been compelled to admit that the gratuities had not. He could not pretend to enter into all the details of this subject, but this he knew, that no less a sum than 280,000 l. was now due, and remained unpaid, to the men of the Legion. The noble Earl took credit to himself for having obtained the pay of the Legion by means of his guarantee, but he seemed to have forgotten that his guarantee went not only to the pay, but to everything that was due to them in the service. Did the noble Earl mean to assert that Colonel Wylde had no right to make the declaration that he would be responsible for the pay and gratuities of the officers? This was a question which the noble Earl ought to have answered, but which he had not answered. The noble Earl had also challenged his sources of information. The noble Earl had asked, "Why did you not go for information to General Alava or to Sir R. Dundas?" It might be very satisfactory to the noble Earl to have him going to General Alava, whom the noble Earl had got completely under his thumb, but what should he have got by going? General Alava, no doubt, would have received him very courteously and civilly; he would have been as kind and as pleasant to him in conversation as he had been to the Spanish bondholders who went to him the other day for information as to the period when their dividend would be paid; and, like those unfortunate bondholders, he should have returned from the General just as wise as he went.
Viscount Melbournein the few observations which he meant to address to their Lordships would confine himself to
522
the motion of the noble Earl, and to the questions which had been put. And first as to the arrangement of the time for receiving these claims. After sitting for a period of eight or nine months, the commissioners announced on the 6th of August that it was their intention, upon the expiration of a month, to receive no more claims. Now, it was impossible that the business of any commission could be carried on by any different sort of arrangement. Upon a reference being made to his noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, his noble Friend said that he conceived the time to be too short, and the period was accordingly enlarged to the 20th of September. He apprehended that this part of the motion would merely state these well-known facts, and throw no new light upon the matter. The noble Earl asked for the decision of the War-office. He did not know what that meant. But if he meant that his noble Friend had received from the Secretary-at-War statements of what would be the practice in the case of compensation for wounds, or other pensions in the British army, those statements had undoubtedly been forwarded for the information of the commissioners; but these were obviously papers which could not be produced. The statements in those papers could not be in anywise binding upon the commissioners, nor could they be at all regarded as decisions of the War-office. He did not, therefore, apprehend that it was at all likely that their Lordships would call for these papers. The noble Earl had asked whether any arrangement had been entered into with the Spanish Government for the liquidation of these claims. No final arrangement had as yet been entered into. The commissioners were engaged in ascertaining the nature and amount of these various claims. It would be for the Spanish Government, when the labours of the commission were terminated, to take their own view as to the most proper mode of liquidating these claims. If the noble Earl asked him what was the intention of the British Government, in the event of these claims not being liquidated, it was to use all fitting, proper, and discreet means of obtaining a settlement of these just claims from the Spanish Government. It was very possible, however, that considerable allowance was to be made for delay in the settlement of these claims, with a formidable civil war in the heart of

523
the country; but, however this might occasion delay, he begged to state, that he did not in the least doubt the determination of the Spanish Government ultimately to satisfy all its legitimate claimants. He had as little doubt that no one would have reasonable ground to complain of the British Government for declining to take any fitting step to obtain justice for those who were entitled to its assistance and protection. This was the answer which he had to give to the motion and questions of the noble Earl. He did not See why, upon a motion of this description, the noble Earl should have given the names of so many officers, both civil and military, who had received promotion at home since serving in the British Auxiliary Legion. The last, however, which the noble Earl gave, contained the names of some of the officers of artillery, who had been employed in that service by the British Government, and who were as distinguished, he believed, as any officers in the British service. Whether those officers had been in Spain or elsewhere, they would have received this promotion, to which they were well entitled. Having heard the list which had been read over by the noble Earl, he must say that, in his opinion, there never were appointments more creditable to the Government.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that ns the noble Viscount had thought fit to deny the production of those papers which had passed between the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and the War-office, he would not at present press the matter further.
Subject at an end.