wished to ask a question of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Solicitor-General for Ireland. About ten days ago the hon. and learned Gentleman had obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the registration system in Ireland, and he had also notified to the House that he intended to introduce a second bill, to deal with the subject of the new definition of "a beneficial interest," including the direction of an appellate tribunal for the assistant-barristers registering votes in Ireland. He had brought in the first of these bills, but it was not yet printed, though the order had been made. He had also obtained leave to bring in the second bill, but he had not introduced it as yet. He begged to remind the hon. and learned Gentleman of the promise which he had made to him upon that occasion. He (Sir J. Graham) had said that it was most desirable that these bills should both be in the hands of Members before the House was asked to take another step in the bill of his noble Friend the Member for North Lancashire. The hon. and learned Gentleman had given his assurance that both these bills would be in the hands of Members in a few days. Ten days had elapsed but they were not yet forthcoming. One of them might be printed and delivered before Thursday; but unless he presented the second bill either that night or the following day, it was impossible that it could be in the possession of Members on Thursday, when the debate would come on. He wished therefore, to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman, whether to night or to morrow he would present the second bill, for the definition of the beneficial interests.

, I can't introduce the second bill either to night or to morrow. The first will be ready by Thursday.

was then to understand that it was not possible upon Thursday next to have the second bill.

said that, without entering into the question of the policy of the differential duties, he was not able to see why any exception should be made in the case of timber. He could not understand why, if differential duties were continued, they should not equally apply to sugar, coffee, and oils. Purchases of timber had been made by parties under the impression that the duties would remain the same as they had formerly been, and a new scale of duties would lead to great inconvenience. He therefore objected to the plan of the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

said that the hon. Member for Sunderland had not appreciated the arguments of his right hon. Friend at their just value. His right hon. Friend had stated, that, to his former proposition, as to the duties on colonial and foreign timber, there was both a financial objection and a commercial objection; a financial objection, inasmuch as the augmentation of the rate of duty might, as it frequently happened, be attended with a less amount of duty received in the aggregate; a commercial objection, founded upon the consideration that the duties upon Baltic timber were already enormous. Its con- sequent high price was very prejudicial to the builder, and to the permanency of our structures and buildings here; and no one, therefore, would desire any augmentation in the duties upon the import of that finer description of timber. He had lately seen several intelligent persons interested in the timber trade, and from them he had learned that the proposition of his right hon. Friend would be acquiesced in by the dealers in that article. So far from there being anything intricate in the proposed increase of duties, the principle was quite simple, and was applicable to all timber, whether introduced from Canada or from the Baltic.

concurred in the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman, that already the amount of the differential duties upon Baltic timber, exceeding, as it did, 45s. per load above the duty on our own colonial timber, was excessive, and felt to be prejudicial in respect to the construction of our buildings. This was a great mistake in a commercial point of view, and did not now admit easily of a remedy. The proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be seen to continue the same preference given to our own colonial produce, and would place the trade in these sorts of timber exactly upon the same footing as it had stood for a long period of time.

believed that the remarks which had fallen from the hon. Member for Sunderland would not be coincided in by his constituents. The proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer met with his approbation.

would not let the Session pass without bringing the whole subject of the timber duties before the House. He considered the question was left perfectly open by the arrangement proposed—that the differential duties were as objectionable as they were before—and that the same arguments remained against them as before. The case of those who wished to have the duties altered was, that the present system was a waste of the resources of the country; and the hon. Alderman and his colleague might be assured that he would give them an opportunity of establishing their position, that the system they contended for was of advantage to the colonial and the shipping interests.

begged to inquire of the hon. Gentleman opposite, what course was intended to be adopted with regard to a vote of 800l. recommended by the committee of last year, to be placed in the hands of a university court, to be established for the purpose of its distribution? He did not find that there was any mention of it in the estimates.

said that if the right hon. Baronet would refer once again to the estimates, he would find that they contained a proposition for a grant of 800l., in lieu of the lease of rents of the archbishopric of Glasgow. All the objects of this vote were set out with the exception of one, which was the establishment of a chair for civil engineering and mechanics. He thought that the importance of this vote would be universally admitted at the present time, and that a sufficient ground of the grant being rather large would be found to exist in the circumstance that the persons who were to be benefited being generally of small means, they could not afford to pay expensive fees. With regard to the disposition of the vote alluded to by the right hon. Baronet, there was no university court yet established, and it was thought best to place the funds in the hands of the Government, with a view to its proper distribution.

did not mean to dispute the propriety of establishing the proposed professorship; but after the explanation of the hon. Under-secretary, it was clear that the appropriation of the fund was not in conformity with the recommendation of the commissioners, nor was it in conformity with former grants. What he wished to know from the hon. Under-secretary was, whether the appropriation of the sum mentioned in the vote was made in conformity with the recommendation of the commissioners? He thought it was not.

remarked that although there was every wish to conform to the recommendation of the commissioners, he did not consider that the Government were bound by the report of the commission, if they should think it necessary to make a different appropriation of this grant. The recommendation of the commissioners was, that the grant should be continued, and placed on the same footing as the surplus revenues of the university, to be distributed in the manner most conducive to the objects of the institution. It was true that the commissioners had further recommended that this grant should be left in the hands of the University Court for distribution, but that court was not in existence.

observed that the chief recommendation of the commissioners was the establishment of the University Court, in which the heads of the universities would have voices, and would dispose of the money in a manner most conducive to the interests of the university. That recommendation, however, the Government had not adopted, and in the absence of the University Court they took upon themselves the distribution of the grant. And the House was called upon to agree to the vote in the absence of all information upon the subject.

was sure the Government would exercise a strict supervision in the distribution of this fund. He thought it was most important that this professorship of engineering and mechanics, which would so essentially contribute to the improvement of those working classes who were not in a condition to pay high fees, should be established.

said he would not go any further into the items of supply at present, and would postpone further proceedings until the bringing up of the report on Thursday.

expressed his surprise that so much money should be voted in so short a time. He had just gone to take some refreshment, and on his return he found that above 300,000l. had been voted away in his absence, short as it was. He would certainly oppose these grants when the report was brought up on Thursday. He saw that the noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, had also only just come in like himself; in fact, nobody expected such a mass of business to be gone into except those who were in the secret of the juggling policy pursued by the Government.

complained that an undue advantage had been taken of the Irish Members on this occasion. He was only absent ten minutes, and found that a sum of 300,000l. had been voted away without opposition. This business had not been expected to be gone into on Friday at such an early hour, as the state of the benches on both sides proved. There were scarcely Members to form a House. When serious questions on Protestant education were brought forward, he had wished to have had an opportunity of expressing his opinions on the outlay of 50,000l. But he perceived the noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, had the same misfortune as himself—a misfortune in which, indeed, almost all the Irish Members shared, for there were only six or eight of them in the House—and even the seat of the hon. Member for Kilkenny was vacant, whom he expected on his return to find speaking. He was sure he was absent only ten minutes. He would certainly take the opportunity of expressing his opinions very fully on the subject of Irish education on the bringing up the report. It was his intention to bring under the notice of the Legislature, at an early period in the next Session of Parliament, the system of education pursued in the College of Maynooth.

also complained that the Irish estimates had been carried through in the absence of Irish Members.

expressed himself to a similar effect. Three hundred petitions had been presented during the Session against the grant to the College of Maynooth. That fact alone was sufficient to demonstrate that the vote was one that ought not to be passed as a matter of course. He should state his views upon the point when the report was brought up. It was also his intention to move for a select committee for the purpose of considering the existing system of education at Maynooth.

said, that the manner in which the estimates had been proceeded with was perfectly regular. Friday was the regular day, and the House resolved itself into a committee of supply at six or half-past six o'clock. Surely hon. Members opposite would not expect any set of Ministers to create and to maintain a debate upon the estimates which they themselves brought forward. With respect to the sitting of the House to-morrow, he wished to observe that it was merely intended to proceed with one bill (the Irish Grand Jury Cess Bill), for which the Lords were waiting.

said that he supposed that the noble Lord opposite, being at Almack's, or some other fashionable place, could not be present whilst the Irish estimates were brought on, though he thought it was the duty of the noble Lord to be present, holding the lucrative and overpaid office which he did; and he should certainly propose that the noble Lord's salary should be reduced from 5,500l. to 4,000l.

was sorry that he had not been in his place when the Irish estimates were brought on; but, as they had passed off so smoothly, his regret was diminished; and, knowing that the hon. and gallant Member had often expressed his intention of moving the reduction of his salary, it might be a matter of delicacy with him not to be present on the occasion, and so to avoid the necessity of voting on that subject.

said he must admit the perfect regularity of the proceedings. He had come down with the intention of making some objection to certain parts of the estimates; but, seeing the state of the House on his side, he could not do so.