moved the Order of the Day for the House going into Committee on the Freemen's Admission Bill.

proposed, that it be an instruction to the Committee to insert the following clause in the bill: "That, after the passing of this Act, no person whose name is or shall be upon the register for the time being as entitled to vote in the election of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament for any city, town, or borough in England, shall be required, in order to entitle him to have his name inserted in any list of such voters for that city, town, or borough, for the following year, to have paid any poor-rates or assessed taxes, except such as have or shall have become payable from him previously to the tenth day of October in the preceding year."

said, that the enactments in his bill were confined almost entirely to the subject of the stamps required on the admission of freemen; and the amendment of the hon. Member for Hull, if carried, would have the effect of introducing a provision of a nature totally distinct from the others contained in the measure, and which, besides, infringed on an important section of the Reform Act. He wished to take the opinion of the Speaker, therefore, whether a clause so inapplicable to the general purport of the bill could be incorporated in it.

The Speaker decided against Mr. Hutt, who withdrew his amendment.

Bill went through Committee.

objected to the principle of the bill, and submitted, that the withdrawal from the magistrates of the very proper jurisdiction which they at present possessed over public-houses in Scotland was a course which the House would not think proper to adopt. At present, a publican was compelled to produce a certificate every year from certain persons in order to procure a renewal of his licence, but it was proposed now, that a publican having once obtained a licence would be entitled, unless he should have been three times convicted of keeping a disorderly house, to a renewal of his licence. This was a principle which he thought the House would not consent to, for they would see, that even although he should be twice convicted, his right to his licence would not be taken away. He, therefore, moved, that the chairman should quit the chair, and report progress.

differed totally from the hon. Baronet as to the nature of this bill, and he conceived, that it would be an exceedingly useful measure, in saving much unnecessary delay and expense to a most respectable class of the community. Instances had occurred in which men had been deprived of the means of procuring their livelihood merely in consequence of the caprice of the magistrates; and it was to prevent the recurrence of such events that he had introduced the present bill. He hoped, therefore, that the House would not give its sanction to the amendment of the hon. Baronet.

The Committee divided on the motion to report progress:—Ayes 101; Noes 70:—Majority 31.

The House resumed.

said, as this was the last clause in the bill, he must state, that he objected to any distinct jurisdiction being given to try offences committed under its provisions. If the clause creating this jurisdiction was persevered in, he should feel called upon, at some future stage, to take the sense of the House on it.

was pleased with the bill, and complimented the worthy Alderman on the success that it had met with.

thought, that the penalties proposed in it were inadequate.

denied, that any new jurisdiction was created by this bill.

Clause agreed to.

House resumed.

moved the second reading of the Tenants for Life (Ireland) Bill.

felt called upon to oppose the second reading of the bill, as he thought that it was a most unjust measure to the landowners of Ireland. In point of fact, it deprived the landlords of any control over their property. The noble Lord concluded with moving, that the bill be read a second time this day six months.

said, the law as it at present stood was highly injurious to the interests of society. The object of the bill was, to enable tenants for life, upon notice given to the persons having an interest in the inheritance, and upon obtaining permission from the Board of Works in Ireland, or an order from a Master in Chancery, to inquire into the matter, to make improvements, the inheritance being chargeable only with three-fourths of the value.

thought it would be a very dangerous experiment for one man to be permitted to meddle with the property of another in this way. It was to be remarked, that the heirs of inheritance might not be connected with the tenant for life, and much jealousy might be excited among the different parties by interference of this sort. He altogether objected to the new judicial jurisdiction proposed to be given to the Board of Works. There was no dominion so sacred as that which a man had over his own property. It was the most absurd thing in the world to suppose, that the law was wiser than individuals were in their own case.

Bill read a second time.

moved, that the House go into Committee on the bill that day three months.

hoped the House would go into Committee then. It was as essential to have the whole truth elicited from witnesses in cases of bribery as in other cases, but the protection proposed to be extended to witnesses, only applied to the immediate transaction testified to, and to no other, so far as effecting the ends of justice required, and no further.

The House divided on the original motion: Ayes 55; Noes 2: Majority 53.

Bill committed.