moved the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of the whole House upon the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill.

On the question that the Speaker do leave the chair.

said, he would avail himself of that occasion to fulfil the promise which he had given some days ago, that he would take an opportunity, previous to the House going into Committee on the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill, to indicate his views and intentions with respect to those general measures of Irish policy which were now waiting for the consideration and determination of Parliament. His wish was not to enter into a minute examination of the details of those measures, but rather to give a clear and comprehensive view of the principle which he intended to apply to them when they were brought before the House. On the details, therefore, he would reserve himself, and would not then minutely examine them, lest he should encumber his argument, or fail to give a comprehensive view of the principle by which he would be guided in the consideration of those important measures which were before Parliament relating to Ireland. He would preface the statement which he intended to make by referring to a statement which had been made last session in the other House of Parliament by a noble Friend of his. When, on account of the death of his late Majesty, her present Majesty's Government signified their intention of postponing the Irish Municipal Bill till another session, the Duke of Wellington made the following declaration—a declaration which had been been previously quoted by the noble Lord (Russell) opposite, in a debate on another Irish measure, during the present session. On the 29th of June the Duke of Wellington said—

"In former discussions with respect to this bill (the Irish Municipal Bill) I stated my objections to it. I still retain the same objections. At the same time, I must say, that it is my anxious wish to put an end to the discussions with respect to this bill, the Irish Tithe Bill, and the Irish Poor-law Bill, by bringing them to an amicable termination. I earnestly wish to put an end to the tithe question, which was introduced seven years ago. I wish some provision should be made for the poor in Ireland. I am desirous to see the corporation question settled, when arrangements can be made for carrying out the other questions connected with it. I am most desirous that the Parliamentary discussion, that now occurs from year to year should be brought to a close."

In the course of the last session, and in the course of the present session, he had declared his entire concurrence in the sentiments which had been expressed by the Duke of Wellington. He stated, that it was his earnest desire, if possible, that some arrangement should be made tending to effect a satisfactory adjustment of all those important questions, and that the Members of the Legislature might be permitted to apply their minds to the consideration of the general interests of Ireland without being met by those feelings which disputes on those questions naturally engendered. In the course of last year he had made a declaration on the third reading of the Municipal Corporations Bill, which was a clear indication of the course which he would pursue in relation to all the Irish measures before the House. On the 11th of April, 1837, he stated, that—

"If on seeing those two measures with respect to the Irish Church and the establishment of poor-laws in Ireland I should be prepared to modify in any degree my opposition to the Municipal Corporation Bill—then I tell the noble Lord, that my chief anxiety would be, being in opposition, to declare distinctly what those modifications were. Knowing the principles on which it is proposed by the Government to settle the poor-law question and the tithe question, we on our part ought not to deal in vague generalities with respect to the Municipal Bill. If we oppose it altogether on permanent grounds, that should be distinctly avowed, and by that rule we ought to abide. If we are prepared to make concessions, the nature and extent of such concessions ought not to be withheld, but to be fully explained."

Now, it was not merely because those declarations, previously made, might be supposed still to be binding on the individual who made them, but because he continued to entertain fully and entirely the opinions then set forth, that he came forward to give the explanation he had promised. He did retain the same anxiety which he had last year professed to see those important questions brought to an amicable termination, and he held it incumbent on them, being in opposition, after the length of time, that had elapsed since these measures were first proposed, provided he and his friends had full satisfaction given them upon those questions on which they differed with their opponents—he referred more particularly to the interests of the Established Church in Ireland—he did think it incumbent upon them, if they received that satisfaction, not to deal in vague generalities with respect to the Irish Municipal Corporations Bill, but frankly to inform the Government what the modifications were which they were willing to accept. If they were prepared to offer a permanent and uncompromising opposition to any of the measures of the Government, that opposition ought frankly to be declared. If, on the other hand, they foresaw the necessity of settling all those questions which had reference to Ireland—if they foresaw the necessity, for instance, of granting corporations to Ireland—and if they saw the expediency of granting them, then they ought not to withhold those views and intentions from the Government; but, on the contrary, those views and intentions ought frankly to be stated, in order that the Government might be enabled to act with more celerity and effect. The noble Lord opposite, and others, seemed to think, that the course which the Opposition had pursued, on the proposal of his hon. Friend the Member for Devonshire, to rescind the resolutions of 1835, was inconsistent with those former declarations. The noble Lord opposite, and his friends, appeared to infer, that they had changed their minds with respect to the expediency of settling the question of the Irish corporations. Some thought that they were more satisfied with the present condition of the Irish Church than they formerly were, that they were disposed to rest on the existing law, with respect to the property of the Irish Church, and that being satisfied with the conditions of the Church, they were disposed to postpone the settlement of the question of Irish corporations. If such were the impression upon the mind of the noble Lord, it was most erroneous. If such had been the motives by which they were actuated in bringing forward the motion for rescinding the resolution of 1835, then why should they not be influenced by the same motives now? On the division which took place on that occasion, 312 or 314 Members recorded their opinions, in opposition to the principle of appropriation. If, therefore, that motion was brought forward, with a view to avoid the consideration of the question, or from a desire to postpone its settlement, there could be no reason why, after that demonstration of opinion and of strength, they should not still be governed by the same motives. But that motion was not brought forward from any such motives, nor with any such views; and although he was desirous not to revive the asperities of a former discussion, yet he wished distinctly to state what the grounds were on which that motion was proposed. They thought it essentially necessary to place upon record their continued adherence to their resolution, not to admit the alienation of church property. They thought that there was not, in the resolutions moved by the noble Lord, not in the short speech which the noble Lord delivered on proposing their adoption by the House, a distinct disclaimer of the appropriation principle, nor a distinct statement as to the extent to which that principle was involved in the resolutions which were moved. They found those resolutions sent to Ireland unattended with any explanation, and they found, that an opinion, perhaps an erroneous, but not an unnatural opinion, was formed in that country, that appropriation was involved in the resolutions proposed by the Government. Those persons in Ireland who were naturally sensitive in regard to the alienation of church property, found, in one of the, resolutions, the word "appropriation," the 'ward "surplus," and the word "education," and they came, in consequence, to the conclu- sion, that the principle of appropriation was involved. Nor was that conclusion an unnatural one, seeing that two Members of that House had stated, that, after the most mature consideration, they had been unable to discover what the real object of the resolution was. The hon. Member for Wiltshire stated, that after two days' discussion, to which he had given the greatest attention, he was unable to discover what the resolutions meant with regard to appropriation; while another hon. Member (the hon. Member for Sheffield), the author of the appropriation resolution, distinctly declared that, with all his experience in alienation principles, and although he had diligently applied his mind to the subject, his first impression was, that the resolutions were vague and ambiguous, and his second impression, that they did include the germ of appropriation. Now it was impossible for them to enter upon resolutions so vague and ambiguous, or which did actually contain the principle of appropriation; and they therefore felt it to be their duty manfully and openly to declare their views, and their determination on the subject of appropriation, and their continued adherence to those principles by which they had hitherto been actuated. The hon. Gentleman said, "Why bring forward a motion which you know her Majesty's Government will not accede to?" His answer was, "Because we thought you meant to invite us to a discussion of resolutions, containing a principle to which we never could consent. To ask them to discuss a resolution, as to the extent of the reduction to be made in the Church revenues, without making it clear what the intentions of the Government were, with respect to the appropriation of Church property, was manifestly unfair, because they must refuse to state their views until Members had told them fairly, whether the plan included either the principle or the germ of appropriation. It was therefore necessary, at some time or other, for our own satisfaction, as well as the satisfaction of the country, that the appropriation principle should be properly discussed. Whatever opinions he and those who concurred with him, might have entertained with regard to bringing forward a resolution on the abstract principle, or however recent experience might or might not have confirmed them in those opinions, instead of bringing forward the abstract principle negativing alienation, they thought it better to propose the rescinding of the resolution which involved that principle. But if they had any motives for postponing the consideration of that question, if they were satisfied with the condition of the Irish Church, if they preferred that the existing laws should remain as they were—if such were the motives which actuated them, then after t he manifestation of their strength, should they not actuate them now? He declared, that they did adhere to the declaration, that they had heretofore made, that provided they were satisfied with the principle to which they were to give their consent, they were disposed to consider in what way they could come to an amicable settlement of the whole matter. The three questions to which he particularly referred were, 1st, the provisions which had been made in that House with respect to the Irish poor; 2d, the arrangement which would shortly come under consideration, with respect to the collection of tithes in Ireland, and the position of the Irish church; and 3d, the question to be submitted that night, pro formâ at least, to the committee relating to the Irish Municipal Corporations Bill. With respect to the Irish Poor-law Bill, he considered that bill only touched the other two questions on a single point, but it was a point of great importance. That point was, that by establishing the principle of rating, they would give an equal and satisfactory test of the qualification of the constituency. That, he considered, was the only respect in which the Irish Poor-law Bill could be fairly considered as connected with this question. He thought, the test of rating a most important and an indispensable provision. But still he could not see, supposing that Irish Poor-law Bill should fail, which he should exceedingly regret, that that would be a valid reason for postponing the other measures, particularly the Irish Corporation Bill. He did not consider the two measures so closely connected, as to afford any valid ground of objection to proceeding with the Corporation bill, because they might not have an Irish poor-law bill. But he did think it absolutely necessary to introduce some corresponding test, some controlling check, which should show what was the qualification of the constituency, and determine the real basis of the municipal franchise. He had voted for the Irish Poor-law Bill, not that he meant to say, that it was not easy to discover a great many faults in it, and that a great many objections might have been made against many of its details, but he felt that it was impossible to introduce into a country unaccustomed to poor-laws, a bill of the kind for the first time, without giving a large discretionary power. No doubt, that principle was open to very great objection; but deeming it necessary, in the first instance, he was disposed to overlook many fair objections which would have applied to that extraordinary power. It was not because he thought the bill perfect, but because he believed, that if poor-laws were to be established in Ireland at all, they must first establish some system which would be imperfect. No system would be entirely free from objections, and they must wait for the lessons of time and experience before they could discover all the imperfections of the measure, or know all the difficulties of the case, so as to be able to devise a complete remedy. After having heard the demand on all hands for a poor-law bill for Ireland, he certainly did think, that when it approached in the shape of a pecuniary imposition, some of them would alter their minds; as in the old fable, when repeated appeals were made to Death, and Death at last came, the applicant changed his mind, and wished to postpone his visit. He did not consider, as he said before, the Poor-law Bill as any necessary or special adjunct to any other measure, except as establishing a principle for testing the qualification of the voter—a principle which he considered most important to be applied to the constituency. With respect to the Irish Church, he entertained a very different opinion. He wished to see the tithe question settled in a satisfactory manner; and a satisfactory adjustment on that head was most important, as a preliminary matter. Even for the purposes of good local government, he should earnestly advise, that that topic of agitation be removed. It was essential that Parliament should make up its mind as to the principle on which the tithe question should be adjusted, and that for the sake of the peace and tranquillity of Ireland, as well as for the satisfactory working of municipal corporations, where they were to exist. He must insist upon the satisfactory adjustment of the tithe question, as necessary for the peace and safety of the country, On another principle, he must claim the performance of a compact, and a strict adherence to the provisions of the Roman Catholic Relief Act. He must say, and he felt fortified in stating it, that if civil privileges were to be perverted, as he trusted they would not be, for the shaking the principles of those compacts, then, anxious as he was for the identity of corporations in England and Ireland, and equality of civil privileges, he should feel justified in withholding the privileges to be so applied. He conceived, that it would be perfectly competent to them to adhere to the existing laws on Irish tithes, and the present foundation of the Irish Church. There was less agitation and dissatisfaction; the law was more regularly enforced, more tithes were recovered than before, and upon the whole, trusting to their own strength to negative the appropriation principle, in which strength he should feel the greatest confidence, they were willing to permit the Irish Church to remain as it was at present constituted. It would be perfectly open to them to take that course; but he did not mean to acknowledge, that the non-settlement of the Irish Church, and tithe, was a bar to the settlement of the question with respect to the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill. If they professed to be satisfied with the present state of the Irish Church, if they preferred the existing law to any law that could be introduced, if they objected to the settlement of the Irish tithe question, then they ought not to urge the non-settlement of the Irish tithe question as an insuperable obstacle to the settlement of the corporation question. Was it for the interest of Ireland, was it for the interest of the Irish Church, that the Irish tithe question should remain in its present state? He admitted, that this was a subject surrounded with difficulties, and so would any man find if he would try to suggest any elements for a settlement of a question of this kind. He believed, that the feeling in Ireland, in many parts of Ireland, was in favour of the existing law; he believed, that there were many persons there who greatly preferred the existing law to any change that was likely to be made. They stated, that a large proportion of the tithe was now collected; they said, that his noble Friend's bill was coming into gradual operation, and giving to the clergyman the whole of his tithe composition, in cases where the landlords had not undertaken the charge; and they deprecated an alteration in the law, because at present it appeared equal almost, if not wholly so, to their wishes. He was bound to say, looking at the permanent interests of the Irish Church, that he, for one, could not at all acquiesce in those views. He did believe it to be for the interests of the Irish Church, that this Irish tithe question should be adjusted on reasonable and satisfactory grounds. He admitted, that there was at present, perhaps, less of disturbance of the public peace than formerly; that there was in force a more effectual process for the recovery of tithe; that a larger amount of tithe was actually realized in many parts of Ireland; and that there was less agitation on this subject than at former periods. All these were arguments in favour of not touching the existing law. But in reply to those arguments, he must say, that he could not but feel, that the existing calm might be nothing but a delusion; that it partly depended on the state in which the question had been placed, that it partly depended on this; and here he must observe, that he wished to avoid everything which had in it in the least degree anything like an offensive character about it; but, at the same time, he must say, that there might be reasons for inculcating obedience and submission to the laws which might not always continue. Depend upon it, the agitation of the tithe question could not go on without the danger of creating irritation and encouraging the worst habits amongst the lower orders of the people. The payment of tithes could not be resisted without endangering the loss of rents—nay, the very salmon which the hon. Gentleman, the Member for Waterford, wished to protect, would not repose in safety in the Shannon. In short, the security of all property must be endangered, every description of property would be exposed to violation, when the laws were resisted by physical force. It must also be evident, that if the Opposition now refused to accede to any proposition for the settlement of the tithe question, they would recede from the ground they had formerly taken, and that if by relying on the temporary tranquillity, by relying on a calm which might have arisen from the very circumstance that those offers had been made, and that the question had been kept in suspense, they now receded, they would incur, on the part of the Church, the whole of the responsibility of whatever might occur if they broke away from the original course. What would be the consequence if they left the question still unsettled? In a considerable part of Ireland, for some years to come, the clergy must remain dependent on the occupying tenantry, they being chiefly Roman Catholics. If they broke away from the principles and hopes that were entertained at former periods, they might endanger the Church; because, if unfortunately violence should be resorted to, as had been frequently the case, and blood should be shed in enforcing the laws, the current might change, and the Church might be held responsible for the consequences, and circumstances might arise which would press on the settlement of the tithe question at a time when there would be less hope and prospect of a satisfactory adjustment of it than could be effected if they approached it while there was a temporary and comparative calm. He, for one, strongly advised the Church, looking to its comprehensive and permanent interests not to neglect the opportunity which might be offered for a satisfactory adjustment of this kind. He could not, consistently with his former course, have entered into the consideration of the Municipal Corporation Bill for Ireland, if the noble Lord had not led him to hope that in respect to the tithe question there was a prospect of a conciliatory settlement. Even now he must fairly state, that he should reserve himself entirely for the third reading of the Irish Corporation Bill, but he made no objection now to the progress of the bill. He waved his objection in the spirit of peace. He did think it would be an unworthy course to pursue, when these great questions were under consideration, if they really were mutually inclined to effect a satisfactory adjustment, if they were to spend their time in party struggles. He might have said, as in former years. "We insist that the Tithe Bill shall come on before the Corporation Bill," and a division might have been taken thereon; but the moment he heard the noble Lord say—"Before you give your final consent to the Irish Corporation Bill you shall have an opportunity of discussing with me the provisions of the Irish Tithe Bill, and I only receive your consent to the Irish Corporation Bill as far as you commit yourself to it, on the understanding that the other shall be satisfactory to you"—when he heard that, retaining of course his own opinion, he thought it would not be proper to enter into unbecoming conflicts. The noble Lord had stated, that it was his intention in Committee on the Irish Tithe Bill to make a general proposition, that the Irish tithe compositions should be converted into a rent-charge, to be paid by the first estate of inheritance, and therefore, in a considerable part, by Protestant landlords. He should consent to that resolution. He should say nothing of the amount of reduction—that was not a matter of principle, but of detail, and therefore he should reserve his observations on that topic. But to the proposition that the Irish tithe should be converted into a rent-charge he should give his consent, because he thought it of great advantage to the clergyman that when he collected his tithe he should come into contact with the landholders, who were mostly Protestants, rather than with the tenantry, who were generally Roman Catholics. He was not prepared to perpetuate the present system; he would not take that responsibility on himself; therefore, he gave his consent to the other proposition. He doubted whether the best position in which the Church of Ireland could be placed would not be to make the tithe a rent-charge payable by the first estate. He had heard without regret the abandonment of the resolution relating to the redemption of tithe, because it would occasion immense difficulty that must encumber and perhaps postpone the satisfactory settlement of the rent-change so long, that he was afraid they would be deprived of a great many of the advantages which they expected to derive from it. But, whatever objections there might be to the redemption clause, the noble Lord was not more responsible for it than other Governments who had brought it forward on former occasions. Of course, having redeemed the tithe, the next thing would be to determine in what manner the funds could be applied with the greatest profit and security. To convert the Irish Church into a large landholder, and make it receive its income by that means, was a plan which he thought open to very great objection. He doubted whether the effect of coming into the market with a very large sum of money to be expended on account of the Church would not be to increase the price of land and to diminish the facilities for obtaining it. Where was it to be purchased? If in the north, he apprehended a considerable bonus would be necessary. If in the south, what would be the consequence? The Irish Church would have a large number of Roman Catholic tenantry, probably with very small tenements, while the payment to the State would be by a Protestant property. The Church would have to recover her rent-charge from a Roman Catholic tenantry, and after paying the expenses of boards of commissioners, land surveyors, and allowing for losses in bad years, and after paying all outlays, there would be, after all, a very small profit. All the objections which applied to the management of property by large corporations would apply with much more force to the plan, because the landed property of the Church of Ireland would be of very recent origin, as compared with that of the English Church, and he was afraid, that from various causes peculiar to Ireland the experiment would not succeed. He did not, however, mean that observation at all to apply to the purchase of glebes, for the purpose of giving a small estate to the incumbent under his own view, and subject to his own management; but his objection solely applied to investing large sums in estates to be managed by commissioners on the part of the Church. Well, then, if they did not invest the money in land, the next best security was the public funds; and though landed property might be supposed to be more secure than property in the funds, yet it was not so profitable. Supposing, for instance, that 100l. of tithe composition was sold for 1,600l., and then it remained to be determined what was the most profitable mode for applying the 1,600l.; he had no hesitation in saying, that the most profitable investment would be an investment in the funds. A lamented friend of his, well acquainted with the subject, once said to him, "Those who take their money from the funds for the purpose of buying landed property, after they have paid all the expenses of the conveyance, the alterations, the repairs, and the various other outlays, would find cause to regret, that they had not rested content with the beautiful simplicity of the Three per Cents." The most probable investment, he repeated, of 1,600l., received in lieu of 100l. of Irish tithe composition was an investment in the Three per Cents. Suppose such an investment to be made. The Three per Cents. were this day at the price of 94, and 100l. invested in the Three per. Cents. at that price would produce something less interest than 3l. 4s. per annum; he, however, would take it at 3l. 4s., and supposing the 1,000l. to be invested at 94l. in the Three per Cents., the produce would be 51l. 4s. per annum. Now, taking that 51l. 4s. from 100l. and then would be ascertained the reduction which would be made from the income of the Irish clergy of 48l. 16s. That would be their absolute loss, and therefore the effect of that part of the noble Lord's resolution relating to redemption—an effect for which he (Sir R. Peel) admitted the noble Lord was not more responsible than any other preceding Government—would be not a deduction from the Irish clergy of thirty per, cent, from the composition, but it would be on the termination of existing interests a deduction of 48l. 16s. from every 100l. of composition for tithes. On that account it was, that he (Sir R. Peel) had heard without the slightest regret the noble Lord's proposal to abandon that which would in practice have proved a most complicated scale of redemption. Thinking, however, that voluntary redemptions were of advantage, that in some cases absolute redemption might be desirable to be provided for, and that parochial conversions of rent-charge into land might be in numerous instances productive of beneficial results, he reserved himself on those points not now in the scheme for redemption, and should address himself simply to the real points of the proposal, with a view to realise the advantages held out. He should most cordially assent to the proposal made in a former year by his noble Friend near him (Lord Stanley), and now renewed, for the purpose of effectually curing any real defects or abuses in the Irish Church. Where there were livings in which the emoluments were totally disproportionate to the duties performed, he was willing to consent to a reduction of those emoluments. Where there were sinecures he would abolish them altogether. In parishes where there were non-residents, he would provide for the resident clergy under such conditions and stipulations as might be effectual for that purpose. To plans of that kind he had always expressed himself ready to assent. He was now ready to assent, and it did appear to him, that no adjustment of the Irish Church question could be satisfactory that did not preclude and prevent the possibility of complaint on that head. But as the noble Lord very fairly proposed a settlement of these points, and though he retained the opinion he had always held on other points, he could not suppose, that there would be any difference of opinion in the House with reference to the reduction of incomes which were manifestly disproportioned, and for effecting regulations in respect to the residence of the clergy; at the same time, if there was to be a redistribution of Church property—by that he meant an alienation of Church property to secular purposes—he should still oppose that alienation, and contend, that if there was a surplus revenue arising from the property of the Church, it should be bonâ fide applied to the purposes of increasing the efficiency of that Church. He was quite aware of the position in which those on his side of the House stood with respect to the Church; they felt confident in their own strength upon the subject of the appropriation clause; they had a right to feel so, not on mere party strength, but upon the deliberate voice of the people of England, which, after full experiment, was against the appropriation clause. Let it not be supposed, that he concealed from himself the fact, that in his judgment the voice of England was also in favour of an identity of institutions both in England and in Ireland, at least as far as the circumstances of the two countries would permit, and it was on that account he was prepared to admit, that the inclinatio temporum, as the noble Lord had on a former occasion said, had partly decided some of these questions, and upon that decision he founded some of his hopes of their satisfactory settlement. But, however, let the House and the country observe what was now the state of the Irish Church. There was now in existence and operation a law under which tithes might be converted into rent-charge; that conversion had and was still rapidly proceeding, and he believed that during the last year not less than 50,000l. tithe-composition had become rent-charge. Now, the law under which the change had been made provided, that so long as the whole amount of the rent-charge should be paid, the undertaking landlord should be entitled to fifteen per cent. He trusted that, without a law requiring it, the clergy had generally been ready to allow that deduction; but, at all events, this point appeared to him to afford strong grounds for the landed proprietors of Ireland lending themselves, in concert with the Church, to an amicable adjustment of this question. But he repeated, that he and those who acted with him did not feel dependent on this position for an opposition to the appropriation clause—on that point they had strength enough to depend upon, backed, as they were, by the deliberate voice of the whole country. Still, he also must repeat, he trusted there was a possibility of an amicable and satisfactory adjustment of the tithe question; and before he proceeded to enter upon the proper subject for to-night's discussion, the Municipal Corporation Bill, he felt it absolutely necessary to state, that in the event of the attempt to effect a reduction of composition into rent-charge failing in its object, he should not feel himself bound beyond the present time to that proposition, but should consider himself, notwithstanding the offer now made, to be perfectly free and unfettered. If the implied condition was not fulfilled, if the proposition was of no effect, he claimed a right to be freed from the engagement into which he was now prepared and ready to enter. On the assumption, however, that an arrangement of the tithe question would be satisfactorily made, he should now proceed to consider the Irish Municipal Corporations Bill, and to state generally the course which it was his intention to pursue when that bill came regularly under the consideration of the House. With respect to that bill, he was willing at once to state his impression that there could be no hope of an effectual settlement of the question to which it had reference, if the bill did not recognise, as it did, the establishment of corporations in Ireland on the basis of popular election. To extinguish existing corporations in Ireland, and to vest the management of the corporate funds and revenues in the hands of Commissioners to be appointed by the Crown, was perfectly nugatory; and in the establishment of new corporations in Ireland, he, of course, implied that they would be municipal corporations on the basis of English corporate bodies—namely, elected by the free choice of a legal constituency, to be determined by the Act. This bill, which had been react a second time, provided for the establishment of corporations in three classes of town enumerated in three schedules, A, B, C. He proposed, in the first instance, to deal with the two first schedules A and B. Those schedules included eleven towns—namely, Belfast, Cork, Dublin, Galway, Kilkenny, Limerick, Waterford, Clonmel, Drogheda, Londonderry, and Sligo. He believed, that those eleven towns or cities contained a population of more than 15,000 on the average. He knew not whether the selection of those eleven towns had been governed by the amount of their population; but, strange to say, the number of their population was, as he had stated. However, with respect to those towns which contained a population of more than 15,000, he should assent to the establishment within them of corporate bodies, and, therefore, to the whole of the towns named in the two first schedules of the bill. There might be incidental questions arise, but he should not in the abstract oppose the legislative establishment of corporations in those large towns enumerated, as he had stated, in the two first schedules. Neither did he quarrel with the designations given by the bill to those corporations so to be established; but there still remained these questions—first, the extent to which corporations should be granted absolutely; that he had in part disposed of; next, the nature of the franchise of the constituency; thirdly, the boundaries and limits of the wards and jurisdictions of those corporate towns; and lastly, the title and designation of the corporate bodies, and the powers they should execute. Then, it was true, there were, besides, matters of detail—such as the principle of rating, and other questions, into which he apprehended it would not be necessary for him to enter then. With respect to the franchise of the constituent body, he should positively insist, that, whatever that franchise might be fixed upon to be, it should be a bonâ fide franchise. He would not consent to incur the necessity of appointing committees to inquire how far the provisions of the bill had been defeated by fictitious votes. Let any man look through the evidence taken before the Select Committee on fictitious votes, and then let him deny, that there ever was a more imperative duty imposed upon Parliament than that it should strictly define what the franchise really was intended to be. That committee had distinctly shown, that the present tests of qualification to the Parliamentary franchise were wholly unsatisfac- tory, and it had shown, that the House ought not to be content with any test which was dependent upon the valuation by the voter. The principle of the present test had been proved to have introduced a temptation to take false oaths, and he did expect the general concurrence of the great body of the House in the feeling, that whatever the franchise and its test might be under this bill, that franchise ought to be bonâ fide. The franchise ought to be known, as it was absolutely necessary for the interests of the population, for every interest which could affect the morals and prosperity of the people, to cut off all temptation and encouragement to fraud. He conceived that by far the most satisfactory test of the franchise was one which itself contained—a controlling check such as was provided under the Poor-law Bill for Ireland, which had received the sanction of this House. By that bill there was a valuation for the purposes of the poor-rates, and that afforded a check as to valuation in respect of the franchise, and if that by any chance failed, he should unquestionably feel it his duty to insist upon a check founded upon a corresponding principle. He did not wish to argue the case hypothetically, because he presumed, even if the Poor-law Bill, now elsewhere, might be altered as to the mode of relief, the right to relief, and other contingent considerations, still the bill would continue the same test of qualification, and that test he now proposed to take. He did not conceal from himself the existence of considerable apprehension that the amount of the franchise as fixed at 10l. was too light, and that a 20l. franchise had been suggested as necessary. That was an opinion, he believed, very generally entertained, but at the same time he was bound to say, that, considering that franchise, 20l. to be double in amount of the Parliamentary franchise—believing that thus to raise the franchise for corporate purposes in these towns would be much less satisfactory than the adoption or an uniform practice, he was not disposed to increase upon the Parliamentary franchise, he, therefore, was ready to take the 10l. franchise, but always with the condition that it must be a bonâ fide franchise. He should wish the 10l. franchise to be universal throughout the country, and he had a most disinterested authority in favour of the application of that uniform practice; for he found that the Commis- sioners of inquiry into the state of the municipal corporations, commissioners appointed by the present Government, and giving an opinion not with a view to the present question but certainly upon a matter analogous to it, but without party feeling being intermixed, had recommended uniformity of franchise in all the burghs in Scotland. The commissioners say:—

"The same qualifications required in the election of representatives in Parliament are adopted and applied to the election of the councils of burghs—namely, that they shall either occupy, as proprietors or tenants, houses or tenements within the burghal limits of the value of 10l., or shall be the true owners of such premises, though not occupying or residing therein. (They must reside within seven miles of the burgh.) In the course of our inquiries we have found, that among the inhabitants of different classes of burghs there prevails a considerable diversity of opinion as to the justice and expediency of maintaining this uniform qualification. In towns of the first class, containing an extensive and opulent population, it appears to be generally thought that the standard is by no means too high, and that although it may perhaps exclude many respectable persons, yet that it secures an effectual representation of the whole community, and that this main object would not be promoted by any change. In some other towns of a lower class it seems to be thought that the relative value and rent of real property are considerably lower than in the former, and that the apparent uniformity of the elective franchise becomes thus productive of a real inequality in the rank and condition of the electors, which could only be corrected by the adoption in such cases of a reduced scale of value. And again, in the smaller burghs, of very inconsiderable population or wealth, the still greater extent of this inequality is thought to be aggravated by the difficulty of finding a sufficient number of qualified electors to form a respectable constituency, and that therefore, in this class of burghs another and still lower scale would be required. In these views there is no doubt a good deal of plausibility and a certain degree of truth. But that the evil has not operated to the extent that seems to be imagined appears to be proved by the unquestionable fact, that the relative proportion of qualified electors to that of the whole population is not greater in the large than in the smaller burghs, to an amount that seems to indicate the existence of any gross inequality of the kind now alluded to. If, therefore, upon any other grounds the present franchise should be deemed objectionable, then he should not be disposed to recommend the adoption of a diversity of rates in different burghs. Indeed it appears to us that the introduction of any diversity of this kind, which, in order to be perfect in theory, must be also variable and fluctuating, would prove more arbitrary and inconvenient in its operation, and more remote from any real equality than has been attained under the present arrangements. We are further of opinion that, in the event of any general alteration of the present franchise, it must be made on the same basis of property and occupancy on which the present system has been founded, there being no other criterion now existing in this part of the United Kingdom, such as the English poor laws, to which recourse could be readily had."

The commissioners, therefore, of inquiry into municipal corporations in Scotland entertained an opinion strongly in favour of an equality and uniformity in the franchise. He was aware that there had been in some degree a departure from that principle in a bill which had not been yet carried, but which had nevertheless been brought forward by her Majesty's Government. But even in that bill it was provided that there should be a 10l. franchise in all boroughs in which the number of 10l. electors exceeded 100. He had a list before him of the towns in which the number of 10l. electors exceeded that number; and he found, that in Lanark the number of 10l. electors was 156, and in Peterhead 173. As far then as he could collect the principle of the bill, it was this—to give a 10l. franchise where the number of 10l. electors overstepped 100. Now he must say, that where the number of 10l. electors fell short of 100, he very much doubted the necessity of incurring the expense of establishing and maintaining municipal institutions. Even the case of Scotland, therefore, might be cited in favour of an uniformity in the franchise. He proposed, then, that there should be a 10l. franchise in Ireland; and in making that proposition, of course he meant that there should be a real rateable qualification. He meant to propose as a qualification for the elector, that he should be rated to the relief of the poor either for a house or for a house and land within the limits of the borough, and that there should have been an occupation for a year, and residence for six months, and also that he should have paid all taxes, and cesses to which he might have been rated, within three months of the period at which he claimed to be considered a voter. That was his proposition, and he should insist upon the receipt of alms being a disqualification. Thus much for the qualification which he proposed; now for the subject of boundaries. He had reason to think that all obstacles on that head would be removed. There was a report issued by the Boundary Commissioners so late as 1836, with reference to the boundaries of municipal corporations. He had looked at their instructions, and also into their report, and he must say, that the instructions appeared to him to be good, and the division of boundaries seemed to have been fairly made, and he should not object, speaking generally, to adopt their boundaries. He could say, that he had no objection whatever to a division into wards, as he thought it but fair; but in speaking on this question of boundaries he only spoke on general principles, and did not adopt every detail. With respect to the title and constitution of the corporate body, he did not quarrel with the titles of councillor and alderman as given by the bill, and he did not think that there was any matter of serious objection contained in this part of the bill. He now came to the consideration of the powers to be conferred upon the corporate body. Of course, he meant to propose, that all the powers usually exercised by a corporate body should be devolved on the corporate bodies to be established by this bill. He proposed, however, this restriction, that provision should be made that the corporate property, where there was corporate property, should be applied to public purposes connected with the benefit of the town. With respect to one description of corporate property, namely, tolls, of course, where those tolls were a security for a corporate debt, it would be necessary to continue the tolls for the purpose of continuing a guarantee for the debt. His first impression had been, that it would be prudent to abandon tolls altogether, and, considering that they formed a fruitful source of discord and ill-feeling, he could have wished that the bill had contained some provision for their final extinction. But, at the same time, knowing that there were individual rights to be respected, he felt that they must deal with caution in this matter. If the Government could make any arrangement providing altogether for the extinction of tolls in Ireland, he would give his consent to it, but he would not now undertake to pronounce any positive opinion on the subject, and he could only say, that in his judgment any plan which could be devised for the complete extinction of tolls would contribute much to- wards effecting the peace of the country, as well as towards promoting internal communication, and increasing the facilities of commerce. Now, with respect to the other powers to be exercised by the corporate body, there was to be considered the power of carrying into effect local improvements. This was undoubtedly one of the great difficulties on this part of the subject. He conceived that a control over local improvements was one of the powers which a municipal body ought to possess, but there were certainly other difficulties in the way. He thought, however, that if they established corporations, they ought to give them something to do, lest, in the absence of municipal business, the corporation might occupy itself with political matters. He thought that they ought to take every precaution to prevent the perversion of popular privileges, and that the primary object of the municipal body ought to be the good local government of the town. As far, therefore, as he could, he would give them control over municipal objects, and among them, over the lighting and cleansing of the town, and he thought it ought to be made an indispensable condition in the bill that those powers should be intrusted to the corporate body. There might be difficulties in the way where there were commissioners appointed under a local act, but where those powers were exercised under the existing Act of the 9th George 4th, and there was no local Act, those powers ought to be intrusted to the municipal body constituted under the proposed new Act. Of course, he should propose to give to the corporate body the power of levying a borough-rate, but he could only consent to that rate being levied on the principles on which it was levied in England and Scotland—namely, that there should be an equal rate on all descriptions of property, and upon this he should insist. With respect to the control over the police by the corporate body, the bill made this regulation—the Government having placed the ordinary constabulary force in the town, if found insufficient, it was in that case to be competent to the corporation to apply to the Government to increase that force, the expense of the increase being half defrayed out of the borough fund. He did not object to that principle, so far as the employment of the constabulary went, but he must insist, that the whole control over the force, should be vested in the Government. There was no difference in a police acting by day, and a police acting by night. This principle had been found absolutely necessary in Westminster, and was about to be tried in London. It had also been successfully applied in Dublin. He had been obliged to act on that principle in Westminster, and the noble Lord opposite felt the necessity of applying the principle so forcibly, that he was going to try the experiment in the city of London. That same rule, then, which had been found good in Westminster and Dublin, he asked the noble Lord to apply to the small corporations of Ireland, and place the management of the constabulary force by night as well as by day under the control of the Government. With respect to the administration of justice, ha had always contended, and still did contend, that it required every guarantee. With respect to the appointment of sheriffs, the bill provided that the corporate body should select three persons for the approbation of the Lord-Lieutenant, and if he were dissatisfied with those, then that the corporation should select three more; but the bill then provided, that if the Lord-Lieutenant were still dissatisfied with the selections made, he should have the absolute nomination. Now, here again was a divided responsibility. He apprehended, that the Government had found it convenient in some cases to exercise the power of an absolute nomination, even where three names had been selected by the judges. If the Government had the appointment of sheriffs, uncontrolled by corporate nomination, it would tend to check local prejudices. He must say, that he had a perfect right to ask the noble Lord to apply the principle acted on by the Government in the case of sheriffs nominated by the judges. He (Sir R. Peel) did not indeed concur with the Government in the policy by which they had been guided in that respect, and he thought that if great care were not taken, the nomination of sheriff would become a party appointment. He had felt that evil when he was himself chief Secretary for Ireland, on account of the constant applications which were made to him to appoint nominee sheriffs, and he had thought it most expedient to assimilate the practice in Ireland to that which prevailed in England, and he must say that he considered a departure from that practice would again open the door to the danger of partisan sheriffs; but, however, if the Government thought proper to act upon this principle in one case, they ought to apply it in another. There were only one or two other points to which he wished to advert, and one of them was the necessity of providing for an effectual and uniform system of auditing accounts. There certainly never was a country on the face of the earth in which a regular and uniform system of auditing the public accounts was more wanted than in Ireland, and he said so without meaning any disrespect to that country. With respect also to charity trustees, it would be necessary to make some provision on that head, and what he should propose was this—that time should be taken for the consideration of measures for the due administration of charity trusts, and that, in the mean time, the charity trustees should continue to administer the charity trusts till Parliament should make some comprehensive provision on the subject. He should propose, that the Lord Chancellor should fill up the vacancies which might occur in the mean time, as he did not think, that it would be wise to throw the appointment of all the trustees at once upon the Lord Chancellor. There could, however, be no reason why the House should not apply itself to the consideration of this subject in the course of next session. He would add that where there were any charity trusts left for purposes exclusively connected with the establishment, it was proper that the charity trustees should be members of the Established Church. He was also of opinion that there might be a great advantage gained by making a separate legislative provision for the City of Dublin, but, at the same time, if there was a prospect of a general settlement of the question he should be very sorry to interpose any obstacle of this kind in the way of a satisfactory adjustment. He had no objection that the same principle should be applied to Dublin which was to be applied to other large towns, but the position of Dublin was exceedingly complicated. There was a vast variety of local boards, local taxation was extremely heavy, and he must say, that the municipal body would be left with hardly any municipal functions to perform. With regard to Dublin, it deserved consideration whether it would not be a satisfactory arrangement to deprive the corporation of all share in the administration of justice. So much with respect to the establishment of corporations in the principal towns of Ireland, or those which were enumerated in sche- dules A and B of the Bill. With regard to the remaining towns, he did feel, that means might be adopted which ought to be satisfactory to the country, and prevent the feelings of the inhabitants from being wounded by the appearance of withholding from that country institutions which we had already conceded to England and to Scotland. He could only hope, that his proposition would be received with a spirit corresponding to that which he entertained on the subject. Nothing could be further from his intention than to offer any opinion calculated to outrage the natural feelings of Irishmen, and he should deeply regret that they should look upon the mere fact of their withholding corporations from the smaller towns as a just ground of complaint. He would not at all oppose the concession of corporations to the towns included in schedule C, if he could perceive that they were calculated to be of the least advantage to the community. While, however, he did not propose to include those towns in the list of those to which corporations were to be necessarily conceded, he would, at the same time, extend to them the principle that the corporate property connected with those towns should be managed for purposes of local benefit, and submitted to the control of local authorities, to be selected by the people themselves. In this matter he proposed to adhere to the 10l. franchise. While, however, he did not propose in the first instance to establish corporations in those towns, if a majority of the inhabitants should apply for a charter, he proposed that the Lord-lieutenant should be empowered to grant it. The question of limiting the qualification to the 10l. householders might be matter of future consideration. In cases of this description the wishes of the people should be fairly consulted, and their opinions should be duly represented, before the establishment of a corporation should be decided on. Under all suppositions he should leave to the people the option of deciding whether or not a corporate body should be established. In these towns, therefore, he proposed to manage the corporate funds, by placing them under the control of Commissioners. If the constituent body wished for a corporation, they might have it by application to the Lord-lieutenant; but if not the 10l. householders should ele t a limited number of commissioners, to whom the corporate property should be instr sted, for application to public purposes. He was not aware of any point upon which he had omitted a sufficient explanation with reference to the general principle of the bill. [Lord John Russell. The Mayors.] The noble Lord must permit him to reserve to himself the right to make such propositions as he might hereafter please in the shape of amendments. He had, however, endeavoured to state as fully as possible the course which he should take in the future stages of this and the other bills. If there were other towns in Ireland of sufficient importance that desired corporations, he did not mean to say, that he would not grant them; on the contrary, he saw no objection to allow their establishment. He would not detain the House longer, having, he was aware, in a very imperfect manner, but still he hoped in the spirit of conciliation, stated his views on this question. His anxious aim, was to see these long-disputed questions brought to a satisfactory adjustment, and that one of these causes of difference between England and Ireland should be removed. He was aware that the course which he had that night pursued would render him open to misrepresentation. He might be told, on the one hand, that he had conciliated too much, and on the other, that what he proposed to yield was no conciliation at all. He, however, could safely declare, that he did not propose to conciliate from any unworthy motive, but, in consequence of the state of parties and of the public mind, that it was the course best calculated to promote the benefit of all classes in Ireland. He believed, that parties were so balanced at present that they could each continue to maintain their present positions with respect to these questions regarding Ireland; and while that (the Opposition) side would be able to continue to resist the settlement of the tithe question, the other (the Ministerial) side would prevent the settlement of the corporation question otherwise than by some such plan as was proposed in the bill on the table. Should they then continue to come down to that House with their pockets full of scraps of each other's speeches on these subjects made on former occasions? Was it not better that they should severally remove from the ground which they could not continue to occupy with advantage to the country? He believed that, for the peace of Ireland, it was better to pursue the course which he proposed. All that they required was, that the Established Church should be maintained in their privileges, which had been sanctioned by the Act of Union, and had been confirmed by the Act which removed the religious disabilities from the Catholics. They had declared, that they ought not to continue the corporations as Protestant corporations. Indeed it would, in his opinion, be impossible, that they could be practically useful after they had themselves manifested a desire to put an end to them. Under such circumstances he thought that it would be impossible to continue them as instruments of good. Some arrangement, he thought, ought ultimately to be made as to the application and control of corporation property. He had felt it incumbent upon him to state fairly the terms upon which he should attempt to make a settlement of these questions if he were intrusted with that responsibility which now rested upon Ministers. He was also confident that though there might be dissatisfaction expressed upon the one hand, possibly, as to the extent of the concession he was willing to make, so dissatisfaction might be felt and expressed upon the other as to the niggardly nature of those concessions; yet upon the whole he placed his confidence in the people of this country, in men of moderate views and of sound judgments, who were the impartial arbitrators between the disputing parties upon both sides, for he believed that there was a vast body of men who desired the adjustment of those questions—that there was a body who represented the moderation, the reason, and the good sense of this country—of the three countries, and who desired to see the adjustment of these questions, and who were prepared to approve of any attempt, by whomsoever it was made, to adjust those questions upon satisfactory principles. They, he was sure, would approve of the attempt upon the one hand to recognise the principles that in countries united together by the strong bond of the Act of Union, that there ought to be, unless there were valid objections against it, an identity of political institutions, so far as the management of their local interest was concerned, and that they would approve of any attempt to recognize an equality of civil rights and political privileges between the professors of different creeds; and so they would also, on the other hand, approve of an attempt to settle the tithe question on principles which should recognize the integrity of the established Church, and which should resist to the uttermost the alienation of any part of its property to secular purposes. They, while willing to admit of any such changes as would tend to remove impediments to the efficiency of the establishment, would, above all, insist upon the observance of that which had been stipulated for in acts which had been already referred to by him, namely, the Act of Union, and the Act for removing Roman Catholic Disabilities; as by the one it had been declared, that the establishment of the Protestant faith, was an essential article of the union, and that the Church of Ireland was inseparably connected, both in faith and in fortune, with the Church of England; while they held it, on the other, that the removal of Roman Catholic disabilities did imply a solemn engagement, that the removal of restraints to civil equality and the exercise of civil privileges by Roman Catholics, were perfectly consistent with the maintenance of the Protestant establishment, with the integrity of its possessions, and the security of its legal rights and privileges.

said, that before he made any observations upon the details which the right hon. Gentleman had put before the House, he must congratulate the House upon the spirit and manner in which the right hon. Gentleman had fulfilled that pledge which the other night he had given to the House, that nothing would fall from him on the present occasion which should be likely to obstruct the proposal for an adjustment of those questions. Nothing had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman calculated to have that effect, and though he might differ from the right hon. Gentleman in matters of opinion, yet they were not marked with such differences as to principles as could forbid them to hope, that there might be an adjustment determined on that could be carried into effect in the present Session. He felt, as the right hon. Gentleman felt—perhaps he had more right to feel—that he was more subject to reproach than the right hon. Gentleman, that they had receded from ground which they had formerly occupied. He had already stated to the House, that he considered, that the prolongation of these questions, and that their discussion from year to year, without any prospect of a settlement, must be injurious to the interests of the two countries. The injury was in fact very great—it extended far beyond those who were concerned in these debates; for as far as they themselves were concerned, they might go away from that place, after a spirited and animated discussion, contented each that he had supported that view of the question which he believed to be most conducive to the interests of the empire. But the failure of the settlement of the questions, affected, most deeply affected, the interests of those in Ireland who might, as with regard to the tithe question, feel themselves bound to offer on the one side resistance to the legal enforcement of tithes, while they thought upon the other side, that they were reduced to poverty, and that there had been abandonment of their interests and of their just rights. Thus great injury might continue to be done by the question being left unsettled. And then, with regard to corporations, while the question respecting them was undetermined, great odium and obloquy was incurred, and the perpetuation of the evil was likely to lead to conflicts in which the happiness of society might be destroyed. Such were the consequences that might follow from keeping questions in suspense by the divisions of parties in that House. For these reasons, then, and mainly that seeing, as the right hon. Gentleman had said, that though those on the Ministerial benches might retain the appropriation principle, they should not be likely to obtain a law affirming that principle; and though the opposite party might contend for the abolition of corporations, yet it was not probable that that abolition could be carried into effect by the vote of that House. Leaving, then, the hopeless nature of the contest in which they were engaged, and being most anxious, that the evils which followed from it should cease, he came prepared to this discussion with the deeply-rooted conviction on his mind, that they ought to use all their powers to have an amicable adjustment of those questions. He had already stated, that the continuance of these contentions were likely to be injurious to the constitution itself; because he could not think, that, looking to the proceedings of the two branches of the Legislature, and seeing, that they were unable for so many years to agree upon the principles for ruling a vital portion of the empire, was likely to be conducive to the maintenance of the opinion, that the legislative powers could be beneficially exercised by them. There could be no doubt, that, receding from the ground they had occupied, they might be reproached for a concession or an abandonment of principle. He did not think, be did not feel, that they were justly liable to that reproach; because he was satisfied he did not sacrifice the interests of his country for the sake of party, or for the sake of those connected with him. But feeling, on the contrary, that the interests of his country required it, he attempted the settlement of these questions—he had advocated the settlement of them in a manner which he believed to be true and just—and as to the adjustment of them, he was ready to consent to it, because he thought, that the interests of the country required, that that consent should be given, and that the attempt at adjustment should be made. With respect to the first question referred to by the right hon. Gentleman, namely, that the tithe resolutions which the Government had proposed, and the attempt to rescind the resolution of 1835, he should not then at all touch upon the reasons which had been given by the right hon. Baronet for taking the course which had then been pursued. With respect to the course which the Government had pursued, he did confess, that it did appear to him, that if he did not make the proposition which he had made in former years, it was that, though we might have carried it by a small majority, yet there was no prospect of its settlement in the present Session, nor, he might add, in a future Session. If, then, they did not make that proposition, they felt bound, looking to the affairs of the country and of the Church of Ireland, to make such a proposal as was likely to give security and satisfaction, they thought these resolutions were likely to produce conciliation; and while they removed, on the one hand, liabilities from those who are obliged to pay, yet they gave, on the other hand, security to the Church subject to a deduction. In former debates he observed, that great misunderstanding prevailed in some who had spoken with regard to the sixth proposition. He did not think, after the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for the University of Dublin, on a former night, and the speech which the right hon. Gentleman had made that night—he did not think it would be wise to propose a redemption of tithes. The right hon. Gentleman had laboured to show, that there ought not to be an investment on land. Now, the original proposition for such investment had come from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cam- bridge, in 1823. It had also been proposed by Lord Hatherton in the bill of 1834, and it had formed part of the bill of Sir H. Hardinge in 1835. The principle then, had been laid down; but when it was stated by them, who had the opinions of those most deeply interested in the matter, and who declared, that they did not consider such a plan advisable, then it was his opinion, that it would not be desirable to proceed with any plan for the redemption or investment. He considered the question difficult and complicated, and believed, that at present it would be best not to meddle with it. It had been stated by the right hon. Gentleman, that the present calm prevailing in Ireland upon the subject of tithes might be delusive, and that they could not calculate upon things remaining as they were. He entirely agreed in that proposition with the right hon. Gentleman and he thought, also, that some of them who had agitated upon the subject of tithes might have felt disinclined longer to oppose the law, because they wished to express their confidence in those who administered the law. The right hon. Gentleman has touched upon the distribution of Church property, and the abolition of what he called "sinecures in the church." He was not prepared to give at that moment a definite opinion upon that subject; but he believed, that very considerable difficulty would be felt in coming to an agreement upon clauses affecting that subject. In clauses which had been proposed by the noble Lord opposite, although it did not appear at first, that any great difficulties could be discovered, yet they found upon discussion, that it was not possible to come to a settlement. He wished likewise to throw out to the right hon. Gentleman, as well as the noble Lord near him, whether, for the sake of the permanency of the Church in Ireland, if there was not to be an investment in the funds, or in land, whether the rent-charges collected in the South of Ireland, should not be transferred to the North. With respect to the amount of the deduction, it was not necessary for him to enter into that subject at present. Coming then to the bill which was immediately before the House—the Municipal Corporations Bill—the right hon Gentleman had first laid it down as to the franchise that it should be founded on, or rather tested by, the poor-rate. He did not think, that as a principle any objection could be made to such a proposal. If they took a certain proposed value as the proposed qualification of municipal burgesses, then they were also to take care, that it was an ascertained real value, and not an assumed value for the occasion. He hoped, certainly, that a poor-law for Ireland would be one of the measures passed in the present Session; if it were not, then he was pretty sure, that it must be one of those measures which Parliament would very soon give its assent to. He did not believe, that the amount of destitution which existed in Ireland could be permitted to continue without some legislative measure assigning property for its relief, and he said for the relief of the destitute, because if there were to be merely hospitals for the sick, the blind, and the lame, it would not be a poor-law, but a bill for the establishing of hospitals in Ireland. Whether it might be the case, that a poor-law would be passed this Session he did not know; but this he felt, that a law providing for destitution in Ireland was one which Parliament, looking to the interest and internal tranquillity of Ireland must soon pass. With respect to the amount of the value of the franchise which the right hon. Gentleman had proposed to establish in corporations, he wished not to make any definite declaration at that moment. He confessed he was not prepared then to express an opinion upon it. They were now speaking of a question in which there was no difference as to principle; for they were not then discussing whether corporations should exist or not exist at all, but, supposing corporations to exist, what could be the best constituency to represent the interests of the towns as to their local concerns. The test was only the subject for their discussion, as to whether a higher or a lower amount of value should be taken, and regarded as the best suited to represent the opinions, the feelings, and interests of the towns in which corporations were established. He did not then propose to enter into the question as to the exact number of towns to which the corporation franchise ought to be extended. He did not expect, that in the Committee this part could be arranged without very considerable difference of opinion. Then, with regard to the principle whether there should be a certain number of towns in which municipal corporations should be enforced by the bill, and other towns in which the power of acting for corporations should be extended by petition, was a principle he was not then prepared to discuss. He agreed in thinking, that a certain number of towns so situated would be, perhaps, less than were to be found in the schedules of the bill. With regard to the rest it would be left to further consideration. He would say, with respect to the franchise, that after the quotation which the right hon. Gentleman had read, in regard to the municipal corporations of Scotland, and as to the proper amount of the value of the franchise, it was to be observed, that in that country there was no regular poor-rate, as in England; therefore the quotation of the right hon. Gentleman was not as applicable as he seemed to suppose. As to the boundaries of those towns, not only had a report been made by the special commissioners, but a bill had been prepared laying down the exact boundaries of the towns by the authority of Parliament. He did not feel it necessary to enter into the discussion of the question as to constables and sheriffs. He was very glad to hear from the right hon. Gentleman, that he had no objection to another point; it was, that the mayors of towns should be made justices of the peace. The commission of justice of the peace was usually attached to that of mayor, and depriving mayors in Ireland of that commission would be a very invidious distinction. There was, he must remark, in several of the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman considerable similarity between them and the second proposal made by the existing Government when their first bill on this subject had been rejected by the House of Lords in 1836. It would be remembered, that when their bill was sent back to them by the House of Lords in 1836, instead of insisting on all their original propositions, they submitted, that to a certain number of towns, a corporation franchise should be extended, and that to other towns, the provisions of the 9th Geo. 4th, should be applied, and also with regard to other towns, the corporation constitutions should cease to exist. That was the proposal which was then made to the House of Lords. He mentioned it now only for the sake of showing with regard to the principles contained in the right hon. Gentleman's proposal, that, if they failed in their attempt at adjustment, it could not be from a want of similarity in some of their propositions. The right hon. Gentleman had offered suggestions with regard to the question of tolls. He should not then enter into the question, which the right hon. Gentleman had stated so ably, and on which he had given them so many details. He had no objection to the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman, except this, that he thought it would be exceedingly difficult to carry it into effect, at the same time he thought that the principle which the right hon. Gentleman had laid down, was a sound and just one. With respect, then, to the whole of his proposals, he certainly was quite ready to enter into a discussion of them. He should enter into it with a wish, not only as the right hon. Gentleman said, to discuss each particular clause, but with a great desire, where it could be done, even to yield his own opinions with respect to particular clauses, rather than incur the risk of frequent divisions, where, without any good being effected, difficulties and impediments might be thrown in the way. As he stated at the commencement, if they were enabled in the present session to carry through a bill by which corporations founded on popular principles, might be given to Ireland, and if they could pass a tithe-bill, the effect of which would be to prevent frequent collisions, and thus, in the opinion of the most steadfast friends of the Church, give greater security to that Church, and if they could likewise have a provision, affording some relief, at least, to the misery and destitution that existed in Ireland, then he did think, that great good would be done, though he must confess, and he did confess, that he had pressed upon Lord Grey frequently, that any settlement of the Irish Church must be totally unsatisfactory unless a portion of the revenues of that Church were devoted to general education; and when he was assured by Lord Grey, that, though not differing from him in principle, it was not his opinion that it could be carried into effect, seeing what were the opinions that prevailed in this country, he was obliged to confess, that in stating his opinion to Lord Grey, and Lord Grey being perfectly right as to the result, that though he might incur the reproach of many who might say, that he had receded from a principle which he believed to be favourable to the general good of the country, yet still, if this great measure could be passed, whatever reproach he might undergo, it would be a great satisfaction to him to think, that he had, in establishing for Ireland a measure, not only of great practical benefit, but also one extending privileges to that country, thus proved that the Legislature of the United Kingdom was disposed to consider the Irish questions, with a view to such adjustment of them as would conduce to the benefit of the Irish people.

felt great pleasure from the tone and temper of the right hon. Gentleman. If words were things, and conciliatory language and gentle speeches acts, it would be impossible for them to desire more than what they had heard that night. If it were a mere delusion that great advantages were intended for his country, it was one so pleasing and so unusual in its nature, that he should wish to indulge in it, even if it were but for a few moments; but he was bound to say, that some things had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman which he deeply regretted to hear. Indeed the general scheme of delusion he witnessed reminded him of the discussions in which the parties were the Government upon the one hand, and the planters on the other, and in which the unfortunate negroes were left completely out of the question. Thus it appeared to him that the feelings of the people of Ireland, their wishes, and their demands for right being done to them, were overlooked, or, if consulted, not with a view of satisfying them. It seemed to him, that what he had heard was rather intended to reconcile parties in this country than to pacify Ireland. What had the poor-law to do with the question of tithes, or with corporations? The right hon. Baronet had told them of his intention of using the poor-rate as an instrument for ascertaining the franchise; and he had said, that some might prefer the non-payment of the rate to the enjoyment of the franchise. These words alarmed him. What was to be the test of the corporation franchise? The poor-law. Were they to wait for a poor-law to enjoy freedom? They could have no poor-law until they had workhouses. They could not build workhouses by magic: they had not an Aladdin's lamp, and could not create them in a night. They must go through the tedious process of using lime and brick and mortar. Until they had workhouses, they could not have a poor-rate. Did they want an ingredient to enchance the amount of the franchise? He knew that the noble Lord was prepared to enhance the franchise. He knew that the noble Lord had restricted the franchise in Ireland. Tithes had been connected by the right hon. Baronet with the municipal franchise; but no two subjects could be more distinct from each other. They might say, that they would make a satisfactory arrangement by calling tithes a rent-charge, and placing the burden on the landlords, which the landlords would afterwards place upon the tenants; but the people of Ireland could not thus be deluded. The essential difficulty in this question had been overlooked, or it had been placed by the right hon. Gentleman in the background. There were in Ireland 7,200,000 persons who did not belong to the Established Church, and in a nation of 8,000,000 they talked of coming to a satisfactory arrangement for an establishment of 800,000. The right hon. Gentleman made use of the Act of Union as an argument for the continuance of tithes, but did he not know how that act was passed? That it had been imposed by the hand of power upon the people as if they had been slaves? When, therefore, the right hon. Gentleman said, that by the Act of Union the establishment had been sanctioned, he asserted nothing satisfactory or conclusive. The next subject he would allude to was the Roman Catholic Relief Act. He admitted, that it was implied by that act that the Protestant religion should be secured from the encroachments of the Roman Catholic religion. Its discipline and its doctrines were all free from his impeachment; but when they came to considerations of pounds, shillings, and pence, to the payment of money, he denied that they had granted anything which either expressed or implied that they had not as good a right to interfere as the right hon. Gentleman himself. He utterly denied, that there was any contract by which the Catholics were bound to non-interference with respect to the Church temporalities. It had been imputed to him that he had raised the tithe agitation; but agitation in reference to tithes existed long before he was born. The right hon. Gentleman had said, that the public mind of Ireland was in a state of calm with regard to tithes. If it were, the calm was a factitious one; he assured the right hon. Gentleman it was by no means so complete as he appeared to suppose. Within the last ten days—seven or eight public meetings had been held in Ireland, each attended by from 80,000 to 150,000 persons, who assembled for the purpose of protesting against tithes, and expressing their determination never to pay them. Three persons out of every hundred had been selected to watch the proceedings for the recovery of tithes; so that a species of discipline had been adopted, which would, doubtless, turn out to be of a very formidable character, but the necessity for which he ardently hoped would cease to exist. The House was aware that heavy, arrears were due, and he would say let such an arrangement be made as would extinguish those arrears. If they wished a satisfactory settlement of the question let them extinguish the arrears, even though to enable them to do so they must resort to the vulgar expedient of putting their hands into the public treasury. The attempts made for the settlement of tithes ought to be of as conciliatory a nature as possible, the people of Ireland having arrived at the conviction that to a Church to which they did not belong they were not bound to contribute. When they talked of giving equal municipal corporate rights to Ireland with those enjoyed by England and Scotland, he would beg of them to recollect that the Irish people well knew that the people of Scotland did not contribute to the support of a Church to which they did not belong, that the people of England did not contribute to the support of a Church to which they did not belong, but that the people of Ireland were compelled to do so. Let them legislate, therefore, not in the spirit of a dominant Church, nor in a spirit of exultation that the faith which they believed to be orthodox had jurisdiction over those who differed from it; let them not legislate in that spirit, but rather on the principles on which the municipal corporation question had been already settled in England and Scotland. With regard to the regulations proposed, he had a strong objection to their attaching to the qualification for the franchise the payment of the poor-rate. The poor-rate was never levied according to the value of property, but only upon the half or the third of the value. He trusted that no difficulty would now arise in this respect, but could not help fearing that they would so proceed as to "keep the word of promise to the ear and break it to the hope." He was exceedingly glad that the right hon. Baronet who was the representative of a great party, no longer alleged that the people of Ireland were unfit to be intrusted with corporate institutions. He did not accuse the right hon. Baronet himself of having ever used words to that effect, but his acts were an indication of his having entertained that opinion. He rejoiced, however, that Ireland was no longer to be insulted by being legislated for in that spirit, and that the period of conciliation having at length arrived, their rights were conceded in courteous and friendly terms. Let them only take care, that, in the subsequent proceedings, all this exhibition of concession was not discovered to be a mere deception—a splendid humbug—a well-painted delusion. This evening, however, he trusted had commenced the conciliation which had been so long promised. He, perhaps, had met it with more suspicion than the event would justify, and he should, indeed, be glad if it turned out that his apprehensions were groundless; but those who had suffered by years of false promises—and they were aware that his country had suffered by false promises for centuries, by excited hopes which turned out to be mere delusions—people who had been thus deceived and disappointed might be excused if they were neither very sanguine nor credulous. All they asked for were equal advantages with this country: they desired no more. What had been suggested with reference to the tithe question might possibly meet the existing difficulties; he could not, however, promise, though he hoped, that tranquillity would follow. In conclusion, he implored them, with reference to both the tithe and the municipal corporation questions, to act generously towards the people of Ireland, and he was convinced, that if they did so the Irish people would not fail to meet them with equal generosity.

was glad to observe the tone of the present discussion. With reference to the tithe question, he begged to say, that the clergy and his own constituents considered it already settled by the act of the noble Lord (Stanley). He was of opinion, that the landlords of Ireland were entitled to some deductions of the tithe. The settlement of the question fairly between the land-owners and the Church was one of great delicacy and importance; but he, nevertheless, thought that a settlement might be effected. The question of appropriation he considered had been abandoned. ["No, no."] He did not say, that all the hon. Gentlemen opposite had abandoned it; but he was of opinion, that it had been abandoned by the Government. At any rate it was excluded from the settlement of the question at present. Of course hon. Gentlemen might retain their opinion; but unless he believed the principle of appropriation excluded from the settlement of the tithe question, he never would consent to this measure. He would again, then, express his gratification at the prospect of a final and satisfactory adjustment of these various important questions.

said, that he did not mean to go further after the appointment of the Committee than to move, it should report progress, and ask leave to sit again on an early day. The right hon. Gentleman had touched on the question of appropriation in a way which rendered it necessary for him (Lord John Russell) to say a few words in explanation of what he had already endeavoured to state to the House. It would be sufficient for him to state, that he fully adhered to the opinions he had repeatedly declared on this point. His reason for not having proposed such a clause in the present bill was simply that he had considered he could not carry such a principle into a law, and that he should under existing circumstances, fail in passing a measure of which such a principle formed part. Had he conceived he stood any chance of carrying that principle he should have proposed it and did he think he stood any chance of carrying it now he would propose it to-morrow; but he considered he should have acted most unjustifiably had he attempted to press it forward now.

, entertaining the opinions which it was well known he did on this question of appropriation, could he suppose for a moment that such a proposal as that which had been laid before the House that night could be the basis of a "final and satisfactory settlement?" The House was bound to guard itself against being held pledged to any compromise which should end in giving a new title to the Irish clergy, which should operate as a guarantee that their title should remain in future unquestioned by Parliament. He should, at some stage of this negotiation, take the sense of the House on this principle, even if he stood alone.

protested against the practice of clubing such questions together, and debating them all on one night. He, however, felt so strongly the necessity of some immediate settlement of the tithe question in Ireland that he was willing to vote almost with any one who should propose it to the House.

thought that, in the present balanced state of parties, it would be wise for both to accede to a compromise, which they could do without dishonour. The one wished to appropriate part of the Irish Church revenues to the purpose of education, the other to abolish corporations, but neither could carry their object exclusively. Therefore, to do anything they must coalesce; and he was happy to say, that he saw in the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman much that was satisfactory; and he trusted, that the operation of the measure would have the best effects in promoting the peace and improvement of the country.

expressed his satisfaction at the measure proposed by the right hon. Gentleman, which would be hailed by all sober-minded men in Ireland with similar delight. He could bear testimony to the disgust with which the debates on both sides of the House on Irish affairs in that House were viewed in England. He blamed both parties equally, for both were equally conspicuous for the bad taste and bad feeling which they brought to the consideration of Irish topics, making garbled extracts from opponent's speeches, to be rebutted with equal bitterness on the next opportunity. The right hon. Baronet deserved the best thanks of the House and the empire for the conciliatory manner in which he had introduced the subject.

The House went into Committee on the bill, pro formâ, and immediately resumed.

Committee to sit again.