brought up the Report on the Tithe Compositions (Ireland) Bill.

, after complaining of the unequal operation which a certain clause in the Bill would have upon those who had paid up their instalments under the Million Act, proposed, as a remedy, the insertion of these words in the clause—"in respect of any such instalments which said party may have received."

said, that he had been exposed to two very different attacks on account of this Bill. The hon. Member for Bridport said last evening that it was intended by this Bill to abandon all claims to the instalments granted under the Million Act, and now the gallant Officer opposite declared that the measure would lead to oppressive and vexatious proceedings. The gallant Member apprehended that this Bill would render it necessary for the clergy in Ireland to proceed for the recovery of their tithes by writs of rebellion where they were not obliged to do so at present—namely, in the north of Ireland. Now nothing could be further from his intentions than to produce such a result by this measure; in fact, his intention was quite the reverse. One of the objects which he had in view, certainly was the recovery of the instalments from the landlords. It surely would not be said that the Protestant landlords of Ireland were so indifferent to the support of their Church there, that they would not pay these instalments without having writs of rebellion issued against them? Such at all events, could not be the case in the imstance of the Protestant landlords of the north of Ireland The hon. and gallant officer represented one of the northern counties, he was aware that in those counties tithes were, generally speaking, cheerfully paid and he must know that there would exist no difficulty there either as respected the recovery of the tithe or of the instalments. He meant to say, that there would be no difficulty as far as the gentry of the country were concerned. He thought the gentry should be made to pay them. The introduction of this amendment would be fatal to the Bill, and if so it was the opinion of the law officers of the Crown that the Crown would be under the necessity of directing proceedings to be taken in all cases without exception. The hon. Gentleman must have seen, from the experience of the former Bill, that there was no desire on the part of the Government to press on parties severely. He believed there had not been a single distraint under that Bill. He would therefore not allow the introduction of an amendment into this Act which would deprive the Government of all discretion, and render it compulsory upon it to take proceedings in all cases to compel these payments from the Protestant landlords of Ireland. The amount to be recovered was 250,000l. tithes, 100,000l. of which had been paid by the landlords of Ireland in a given number of parishes. He had a right to recover all, undoubtedly subject to whatever arrangement should be made as to the whole question of tithes in Ireland, if they should ever be able to effect such a settlement. The hon. Gentleman would find that the Tithe Bill which had passed that House in the present Session had actually provided for the abandonment of these claims, subject to the repayment of the instalments. This Bill was in favour of the Church, and the loss of it would have the effect, as he had already stated, of withdrawing from the Government all discretion as to the taking of proceedings. He trusted therefore that the hon. Gentleman would not press it.

brought up the report on the Municipal Elections Bill.

proposed to omit clause 5. It was not that he disapproved of the clause—quite the reverse, but the introduction of it into the Bill would, he feared, have the effect of inducing the Lords to throw out the Bill altogether.

said, he did not see the utility of leaving out the clause because the Lords were not likely to assent to it this Session. They would not be more likely to agree to it next session. After what had passed elsewhere last night on the subject of the Registration of Voters Bill, he took for granted that that Bill would not pass this session. He found that opinion confirmed by the hon. Member who had been the father of the Bill in that House. Now, if this clause should be struck out, and if no Registration of Voters Bill should be passed this session, half a dozen places in England would have no returning officer at all. As there could be no possible objection to the clause, it appeared to him that the proper course would be to send it up to the House of Lords, and let it take its chance there.

said, that all this would be very well, and he would have no objection to such a course, if the Lords would merely throw out the clause, and pass the Bill. But his apprehension was, that if they sent up the Bill with a new clause in it, the Lords would not allow it to be read a second time and sent to Committee, but would throw it out; altogether. What would become of Ipswich, Sunderland, and other places, if that should be done? They should send it up like the Newspaper Stamps' Bill, without any alteration, and then the Lords could not fail to pass it. He would suggest to the hon. Member for Newport, that when the Bill was in the Lords, it would be in the power of any noble Lord to move that this clause be added, and if it should then be added, and the Bill came down again in that shape to the Commons, he need not say that they would most joyfully accept it. If they sent up the Bill, however, with new matter in it, he was under the greatest apprehension that the Bill would be entirely lost. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. Member for Newport would not persevere in his opposition to the omission of the clause.

said, that of course he would not, but he was sorry to find, from the statement of the learned Gentleman, that the introduction of such a clause could possibly endanger the Bill elsewhere.

expressed his regret that Government had not consented to advance 500,000l. for the purpose of forwarding public works in Ireland. An advance for that purpose had been made in 1831, and produced much good, and there was no danger that any part of the sum would be lost. The advance was not asked or intended as a gift. It was a loan, which would be repaid.

said that 100,000l. out of the "million," intended for the relief of the Irish clergy was applied for the purpose of promoting public works in Ireland, and he had no doubt would be productive of much good. It was a mistake to say, that this should not be considered as a loan; it might be considered as a loan, with respect to any particular work, but when repaid by that it was immediately applied to some other public purpose in Ireland.

said, that in consequence of the rejection of the above Bill, it had become necessary for him to introduce certain measures intended to be only of a temporary nature, for the purpose of carrying into effect certain provisions of the Bill to which no objection had been made in either House, and which, if neglected, would be productive of great inconvenience. The first Bill for which he should move, would be a Bill for the better administration of justice in certain boroughs. Without this, some of the towns would not be able to hold Quarter Sessions. He should next move a Bill to make temporary provision for the boundaries of certain boroughs. The third Bill for which he should move was for the better administration of the borough fund in certain boroughs. It was to allow certain corporations—for instance, Liverpool—to lease certain property. By this Bill, Liverpool would save 10,000l., which otherwise it must lose.