said, he felt hound, in conformity with the wishes of a large majority of his constituents, to oppose the Motion. Certain facts had been put forward, and circulated in a printed form, among the Members of the House, in support of this Bill; but they were, as he was prepared to show, not facts at all, but the reverse of facts. One of the assertions in this paper was, that none of the local boards were opposed to the Bill, except the Dublin corporation; but so far from that being the case, he held in his hand three petitions against the Bill. One of those was from the Wide-street Commissioners; another was from the Chamber of Commerce; and the other was from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the city of Dublin. This Bill proposed to abolish four district boards, and to lodge their powers in a new board, to consist of the Lord Mayor, the High Sheriff, the chairman of the two boards of guardians for the city, the president of the Chamber of Commerce, the two representatives in Parliament of the city, and two commissioners to be named by the Lord Lieutenant. But he believed that not one of the gentlemen named would consent to serve, and that the Lord Lieutenant had not been consulted on the matter at all. The effect of the 60th clause would be to give Mr. Jackson, who was the author of this Bill, the costs, not only of the present Bill, but of three former similar Bills that had all been thrown out. The 33rd clause enacted that it should be lawful for the Treasury to advance a sum not exceeding 200,000l. to the commissioners; and he believed that this clause would have the effect of upsetting the entire Bill, as one of the standing orders of the House provided that the House would not proceed on any petition, Motion, or Bill, for granting any money owing to the Crown, but on a Committee of the whole House. He objected to the Bill, because it handed over the fiscal rights of the citizens of Dublin to an irresponsible body, and thus applied a rule to Ireland contrary to that under which the municipal corporations in this country existed. He begged to move that the Bill be postponed for a fortnight, in order that the Speaker might have an opportunity of deciding on the objection which he had raised on the 33rd clause.

seconded the Amendment.

said, it would be impossible for him to answer the question without having the Bill before him, as much necessarily depended upon the wording of the clause in question. He would look at it, however, and would be able to give an answer to-morrow.

said, on consulting with his hon. Friends near him, he begged to ask leave to withdraw his Amendment, in order to move that the second reading be postponed until that day six months.

said, he should not persevere in the second reading of this Bill, unless under the full conviction that it was absolutely necessary for the city of Dublin. The object of the Bill was to get rid of the many conflicting interests now existing in Dublin, and place the various powers held by them under one board. The corporation of Dublin had already failed in their attempt to pass a similar Bill in their own favour; and he believed it would be admitted that all the respectable classes in the city were unanimous in their opposition to any attempt to confer new powers on the corporation. The hon. Gentleman appeared to have got hold of a wrong document, as the words were "but one of the local boards," instead of "not one of the local boards opposed the Bill."

said, his hon. Friend (Mr. Grogan) had not at all overstated the case when he said that the fiscal and other municipal regulations of Dublin required adjustment and improval. Several attempts had been made to introduce a better state of things; but, owing to the strong party animosities which prevailed on the subject, they had been attended with no success. He had himself indulged in a hope last year that he had succeeded in reconciling the parties, but he was disappointed. His belief was, that if the House sanctioned the second reading of this Bill, and permitted it to go before a Committee, they would throw an obstacle in the way of the final settlement of the question. He had received a petition against the Bill from the Chamber of Commerce in Dublin, which, as was well known, represented the opinions of a highly respectable and numerous class of the citizens. The Grand Jury was against the Bill, and all those whom it was proposed to name as commissioners were against it, and the Government had never given any sanction to it, so that he did not think it was too much to say that the Bill had been presented to the House under most disadvantageous circumstances. He believed the only effect of going into Committee on the Bill would be, to subject the parties to unnecessary costs, and, consequently, to increase the ill-will which prevailed upon the subject.

said, that after the extraordinary admission of the right hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville), he thought the House had a right to call for an undertaking from the Government that a measure which they could force upon all parties should be introduced without delay to remedy those evils.

expressed his great regret at the course which the right hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville) had thought it to be his duty to take on this question, more especially in the absence of any such pledge as that which the hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) had called for. He (the Earl of Lincoln) had, since the period of his connexion with Ireland, taken a deep interest in the sanitary improvement of Dublin, as well as of the country generally, and from all the facts that had reached his knowledge, he doubted whether any large town in the empire was so much in want of a measure of this kind as Dublin. The right hon. Gentleman had alluded to the fact that on more than one occasion his predecessors in office, as well as himself, had endeavoured to bring those opposing parties to some understanding upon this subject; and the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade had, he believed, more particularly exerted himself with that view, but without success. The right hon. Gentleman (Sir W. Somerville) now, however, merely held out a hope that, if this Bill were rejected, Her Majesty's Government might be able to bring the parties to terms; but when was he likely to do so? Surely not in the course of the present Session; and were they to throw over all measures for the sanitary improvement of Dublin for another Session, merely in the hope that these boards, who were now represented to be in deadly hostility to each other, might become reconciled before next year—a hope that had been already repeatedly frustrated. The House had now before them the means of legislating for Dublin in a fair and impartial manner, totally irrespective of both parties; and, for his own part, he might be permitted here to observe, that he stood there totally unbiassed towards either. He had had no communication with any of the parties connected with this Bill, and had not had any conversation with his hon. Friend (Mr. Grogan) respecting it up to that moment. They had two Bills before them at present on this subject, the second having been introduced by the party who opposed the present Bill, and being nearly the same as that which had been rejected two years ago, and also by the Committee of last year. He wished to impress this matter on the attention of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department. He was strongly of opinion that it ought not to be considered as a mere private Bill, but as a question of national importance, and one to be taken up by Her Majesty's Government. Surely the Government, if they could not bring the parties to an understanding, could enforce a measure that would secure the general interest upon them. If this Bill passed the second reading, it would go before the same Committee upstairs to which the other Bill would be referred, and, by the rules of the House, they would then have a Committee of five Gentlemen, selected for their intelligence and impartiality, and having no local connexion with Dublin, to consider the whole question, assisted as they would be by the two Members for the city of Dublin, one of whom would be appointed on behalf of each Bill. That Committee would be enabled to reject both Bills, or else to incorporate the provisions of one Bill with those of the other; and even if this Committee passed the Bill now before the House in its present form, it would be still competent for the right hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville) to move its rejection at a future stage, if any better plan should occur to the Government as a substitute for it. By refusing to sanction the second reading now, they would, on the other hand, necessarily ensure the postponement of all legislation upon the subject for another year. All he asked was, that the Government should permit this Bill to be read a second time, and let it go before an impartial tribunal, when, if a satisfactory adjustment could not be made, he would be as ready to vote for its rejection as the right hon. Baronet himself.

said, there was a great deal in what the noble Earl had said. His only reason for suggesting the course he had done was, that the Lord Lieutenant had a few days ago received a deputation upon this subject, and he expressed to them the opinion that this Bill would impede rather than promote a satisfactory adjustment of the question. It was on that ground he had acted, and he would now suggest to the noble Earl and to the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Grogan), who had charge of the measure, whether it would not be possible to postpone this Bill till he could receive fresh instructions from Dublin. If there was another Bill before the House, it was certainly advisable that the Bills should be considered together.

said, this suggestion placed them in an awkward predicament, because it had been brought under the notice of the House, that this Bill was an infringement of their Standing Orders.

suggested, that instead of postponing the Bill, the debate should be adjourned till that day fortnight.

said, that all the respectable citizens of Dublin were opposed to the Bill. No greater injury could be inflicted on that city than its passing,

was opposed to the adjournment of the debate. If they consented to postpone this measure, they entailed very heavy expenses on the opponents of the Bill. As to the hon. Members for Montrose (Mr. Hume) and Salford (Mr. Brotherton), although he entertained great respect for their opinions, he dissented from their opinions as applied to any of the institutions in Dublin, with which they were not connected or acquainted.

appealed to the hon. Member to consent to the postponement, as it was evidently the general wish of the House.

wished to ask a question of the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies. In the course of last Session he had stated, in reply to a question, that Sir Henry Pottinger had sent home a report, after he left the Cape of Good Hope, concerning the expenses of the Kaffir war, and the expenses of the colony. He then stated that the report had been referred to the Audit Office; and he (Mr. Vernon Smith) wished to know whether any report had been received from the Audit Office since the report of Sir Henry Pottinger?

said, that the report had been received; but he was not yet in a condition to state when it would be in the hands of the Members. It was a very complicated report, and a very laborious inquiry.

wished to ask a question of the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control. There was a great anxiety at present pervading the public mind with regard to railways in India, especially after the explanations which he understood had taken place by the Indian Government. He wished to ask the right hon. Baronet what was the present state of that question, and what prospect there was of a portion, at least, of our Indian empire enjoying the advantage of railways?

said, that negotiations were at present going on between certain railway companies and the Indian Government. Whilst those negotiations were going on, the noble Viscount would perceive that no good end would be answered by his explanation of the terms which the one party was prepared to propose, and the other to accept. But the moment he became acquainted with the result, if the noble Viscount would ask him the question again, he would have no hesitation in answering.

wished to ask another question upon this subject. He wished to know whether the Indian Government had come to the determination not to make these railways itself, but to have them made by private companies?

said, the Indian Government had come to no such determination. The real state of the case was this—at present they proposed that these undertakings should be carried on by private companies; but the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bright) might rest assured that the Indian Government had come to no determination, if the work should not be done by private companies, not to undertake it themselves.

wished to ask the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control when he would be prepared to present to the House the papers relating to the state of affairs in the Punjaub, and to the recent outbreak in that country?

said, that, as at present advised, he had no papers to present connected with the war in the Punjaub.

asked the noble Viscount the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the documents connected with the recent transactions in Sicily, which have already been published in the newspapers, would be laid on the table of the House?

said, there was an inconvenience to the public service in introducing into the papers of that House what had already appeared in the newspapers.

rose to move—

"For a Select Committee to inquire into the present state of the Inland Fisheries and Navigation of Ireland, and the obstructions which hinder the enjoyment of the same, and the best means of removing such obstructions; and to report their opinion thereupon to the House."

He said, that when, late last Session, the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for Ireland brought in a Bill, which passed into a law, for the amendment of the Irish fisheries, he intimated his intention, at an early period of the present Session, to bring this question before the House. The Bill of the right hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville), he admitted, effected several amendments, especially one which allowed parties who lived above the tidal move of a river to take fish for a limited period after close time had taken place with regard to those who lived below. Still he thought there was much room for the present Motion. And here he would address himself to those English Gentlemen who might, perhaps, have adopted the opinion of Sir C. Trevelyan in these matters. That gentleman stated, when examined before the Committee on the Miscellaneous Estimates, that Government was obliged to take charge of many duties in Ireland which in England and Scotland were usually discharged by private gentlemen; he instanced this very case of the Irish fisheries. But he (Mr. C. Anstey) would show that the cases were totally different. Generally in England, he believed universally in Scotland, the fisheries were private property, and in legal phraseology they were termed "several fisheries," and were therefore very properly left to the management of their owners. But the state of the law in Ireland—and he had taken some pains to inform himself of the fact—was very different. There was scarcely a fishery in Ireland which was a private property, or a "several fishery." The fisheries in every navigable river, as far up as the smallest skiff could be navigated, were as free to the public as the waters of the ocean into which they ran, and he (Mr. C. Anstey) contended that so far did the public right of fishery extend; and further, that no right could be acquired by private individuals, except by Act of Parliament, or by prescriptive right dated as far back as Henry II.; and therefore the Government, as the trustees for the public, were bound to watch over and preserve this valuable public right. He believed there was not a case in which the law was otherwise; certainly not in the river Shannon, where the corporation of Limerick had lately let some fisheries on lease, to their own advantage he supposed, as well as of those who had taken them, but to the great detriment and prejudice of the public interest. Still it was not his intention, if the Committee were granted, to attempt to destroy the quasi rights of those particular claimants. He merely wished to make out a case which should entitle him to obtain the Committee, by means of which he hoped to simplify the law, and provide equitably for every interest. The monopolists of those obstructions had proceeded further and further in their usurpations of rights which should belong to the poor, until, in a country watered by rivers of the largest amount, both in number and extent, filled with the finest fish, in quantities sufficient not merely for home supply but for the markets of Great Britain, not a single fish was taken in many rivers, and not one would in a few years be taken in any river above the weirs themselves, except by the permission and connivance of those who claimed the special rights. And those obstructions were specially noticeable in those districts in Ireland where famine was most rife and rampant. He should trouble the House with a few details in illustration of his assertion. He had culled them from various papers upon the subject, which had from time to time been printed by order of the House. Beginning with the county of Meath, and proceeding to Louth—in which the fishery of the river Boyne was monopolised under a local patent granted to the corporation of Drogheda, but really monopolised by two or three private individuals, all the rivers were usurped. In Antrim nearly all the rivers and the coast were claimed under patent. Lough Beg and Neagh, the river Ban, from Coleraine to Lough Neagh, and the entire coast, from Innishowen Head to the Giants' Causeway, were similarly monopolised. In the county Donegal, several rivers and the coast were likewise claimed. The same was the case with the river Erne, from Lough Erne to the sea, and with the Glendore and seven other rivers. And here he should beg to observe, that all the patents under which these claims were made were no older than the date of Elizabeth. In Leitrim, Mayo, and Galway, in Clare and Limerick, nearly every river was monopolised. The Shannon was obstructed by a weir at a place where the river was three quarters of a mile wide, and the gap left for the salmon to ascend was only twenty-one feet broad, or one fifty-eighth part of the whole width. Yet, whether the commissioners of the Shannon navigation had exercised their powers, or rather fulfilled the duties imposed upon them by statute in every other instance, they had not attempted to touch that weir. In the county Kerry, all the rivers were monopolised. In Cork, only the Bandon and the Lee were claimed under patent; the remainder were monopolised without any such right being shown. In Waterford, the Blackwater, the Barrow, the Suir, and the Nore, were held without patent. In Wicklow, the Bray river and all the others were held under patent; and in Dublin the Liffey was held under a patent, which, however, related only to a portion of its course. By the direct operation of these obstructions the people of Ireland were defrauded of 600,000l. annually, the value of the fish; and to that mischief should be added another, and a consequential injury, arising from the damaged one through the want of police to guard the upper portions of the rivers. None of the gentlemen whose properties lay along the upper portions of rivers could possibly think it worth their while to prevent poaching, when the entire advantage of that interference and care would fall to the river owners in the lower parts. And the result was, that poaching was universal. In the river Black water alone it was computed that 1,000 female fish annually were destroyed when coming up to spawn, each of which fish was estimated to produce 15,000 ova, of which 800 would have come to maturity. So that the destruction thus effected (taking the low average of eight pounds weight for every one of those 800 fish, and the low price of sixpence a pound) was equal to a loss of three tons of fish and 160l. annually for every spawning salmon destroyed in that one river, or 160,000l. in all. Such was the case he had to present to the House, as his ground for asking for the Committee. If it were granted to him, and he had reason to believe the Government would not refuse, he would suggest his remedies. He was content to take the law as it stood. He would even clothe with the sanction of the law those encroachments which had equity in their favour, and were not of modern origin. But the law, as it at present stood, was altogether ineffective. The gentlemen of Cork, Clare, and other counties, who had requested him to take the matter in hand, had not done so until they had proved the utter inefficiency of the present law. Whenever they had attacked the monopolists, some man of straw had been put forward to bear the brunt of the proceedings, and the judge before whom the case was tried had generally inflicted the minimum fine; and in every case, he believed, the judge directed the sheriffs of the counties to see that the obnoxious weir was removed, and if it were taken away, the fine was not to be estreated into Her Majesty's Exchequer. As to the courts of quarter-session and petty session, there was no such thing as satisfaction to be had from them. The majority of the magistrates on the bench were generally weir-owners themselves, and they refused to convict. The mode of provision by the Legislature, which he (Mr. C. Anstey) would propose, would be, that immediately upon a conviction being obtained before any existing tribunal, or before any tribunal which might be hereafter established, the duty of prostration of the weir should become a matter of police. The weir should be thrown down by the police, and if another were erected, it should be also thrown down at once, without any further prosecution. And although that would be by no means sufficient to satisfy all the requirements of the case, it yet would go a great way. If the Committee were granted him, it was not his intention, in the present state of the public finances to ask for power to send for witnesses. If witnesses should volunteer, he would ask the Committee to examine them. But there was abundance of evidence already before the House. There were reports of evidence of witnesses taken before the Board of Works. Most of these had been examined by Mr. Mulvany, who was rather obnoxious to the very gentlemen on whose behalf he (Mr. Anstey) was then speaking; and yet with those reports and with that evidence he would be satisfied. The Minutes were admitted not to have been taken verbatim, but only by way of extracts from the evidence. Nevertheless, he would assume them to be true and correct, so far as they went, and he would be satisfied with them. He should also ask for the correspondence which had been carried on last year between Her Majesty's Government and those persons who were interested in the fisheries, which correspondence showed the great difficulty of obtaining convictions under the law as it stood. This would be quite sufficient for all the purposes of justice. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the present state of the inland fisheries and navigation of Ireland, &c.

seconded the Motion, and suggested the propriety of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Anstey) adding to his Motion words which would include the deep-sea fisheries of Ireland. The deep-sea fisheries formed a question of the utmost importance, and it was one which Parliament had neglected to a most culpable extent. It presented an inexhaustible fund of wealth and employment, and yet it had been impossible to induce Parliament to look to it. The Scotch fishermen had been carefully instructed in the best methods of catching and curing fish, under the auspices of a board that was established in Edinburgh in the year 1800. That board had done incalculable good in improving the Scotch fisheries. Since its appointment by the Government the Scotch fisheries had extended beyond any example ever known before. The Government had fostered and improved the Scotch fisheries; and it was a melancholy fact, that Scotch fishermen sent into the Irish markets annually 15,000l. worth of fish caught actually upon the Irish coast. That matter had been pressed upon the Government and upon Parliament year after year by the Irish Members; but it had, up to the present moment, been as constantly neglected. He (Sir H. W. Barron) had himself brought it forward in 1835, again in 1839, and again in 1847. Upon each occasion there had been fair promises given that something should be done; but these promises proved to be vox et preterea nihil. All sides of the House agreed as to the beneficial results that might be expected from encouraging and fostering the deep-sea fisheries of Ireland. Promises were given in plenty; but, up to the present hour, not one had been performed; and the poor Irish fishermen were still suffering and starving upon their coasts, with abundance of fish in sight of them, but without the requisite machinery for their take. No practical help had been given to these poor men to enable them to work that mine of wealth. It was not fair, nor true, nor just, to charge the Irish Members with having neglected so important a subject. They had long been vainly endeavouring to force it upon the attention of Parliament. He (Sir H. W. Barron) trusted it was not yet too late. The welfare of 350,000 or 400,000 individuals was dependent upon the fisheries; and had they been attended to in time, the poor people of Connemara, of Mayo, and of Galway, would not now be starving. Had they been fostered and attended to forty years ago, as the Scotch had been, the Government would not have now to come down and ask a grant from Parliament to keep the poor Irish fishermen from dying of starvation. He, therefore, implored of the House, as a matter of economy, if not of humanity and common sense, to place the Irish fisheries upon the same footing as the Scotch. He (Sir H. W. Barron) could bring before the Committee five or six witnesses to show the necessity of inquiry touching those fisheries, and the necessity of teaching the poor fishermen the art of taking and curing their fish. But, as a preliminary measure, there was nothing wanted so much as a superintending board, such as there was in Scotland.

said, he had intended to have seconded the Motion of his hon. Friend (Mr. Anstey), and he rejoiced that he had been anticipated in that intention by the hon. Baronet the Member for Waterford (Sir H. W. Barron). He begged to confirm all that had been said by his hon. Friends. In the parts with which he was connected, he could assure the House there were thousands of men in a state of destitution in consequence of the total absence of the means of obtaining subsistence for themselves and others. Had the Irish deep-sea fishery been attended to and encouraged, the Irish people would have been in comparative case, because the fishery would have given employment to the men on the coast. He believed, however, it would be better for his hon. Friend (Sir W. Barron) to allow the Committee to be named, and then the hon. Baronet might move an instruction to the Committee to include this branch of the question.

said, it was not his intention to object to the appointment of the Committee asked for by the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Anstey). But as to the suggestion of his hon. Friend behind him (Sir H. W. Barron), it referred to a totally and entirely different subject. Indeed he (Sir W. Somerville) did not see how anything in the Motion of the hon. Member for, Youghal (Mr. Anstey) could be made to apply to the subject of the deep-sea fisheries. The hon. Member for Youghal had correctly stated the present condition of the law. He believed the hon. Gentleman had directed his attention very carefully to the state of the law upon the subject in Ireland, and he had correctly stated both its condition and the objects which he (Sir W. Somerville) had in view in proposing the measure of last year. Several Acts of Parliament had been passed for the purpose of regulating the fisheries in Ireland. There were general complaints from all parts of the country as to the condition of those laws, and allegations that they were inoperative, because there was no police to carry them out. The Bill of last Session was therefore enacted, to give power to the parties interested to meet together and arrange methods by which they could be their own conservators, and to increase the anxiety of gentlemen whose properties lay up the rivers to protect the spawning fish. He (Sir W. Somerville) admitted it was an experiment which had not as yet been fairly tried; but the Bill placed in the hands of the parties interested the power of protecting their own rights. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Anstey) was also quite right in stating that the law was defective. He (Sir W. Somerville) recollected that in the course of the discussion last Session the hon. Gentleman had said that it would not do that for which it was intended—that it would not give power to remove illegal obstructions. He quite agreed with the hon. Gentleman that the salmon fisheries of Ireland had been greatly neglected, and that there was in them a mine of wealth which had not been as yet sufficiently explored. But he did not see what good the Committee upon such a subject could effect in the case of the deep-sea fisheries, as suggested by the hon. Baronet the Member for Waterford (Sir H. W. Barron). In the course of last year a good deal had been done under the superintendence of the Government Board of Works, by the establishing of fishing stations in some localities. Some of them had worked extremely well, whilst others had not turned out so well; but he hoped that a great deal had been done, and that some information had been imparted to the poor fishermen. The Government would, he thought, leave these matters, as respected the fishing-stations, in future to private enterprise. He perfectly understood what was the object of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Anstey), and he hoped the result of these inquiries would be to improve the stock of the fisheries.

said, that the Bill of last year had been rendered inoperative from the size of the districts into which the country was divided. They were so large as to render anything like co-operation impossible.

supported the Motion. He said that instead of 15,000l., 60,000l. was paid annually by Ireland for foreign fish. He was present during the discussion of last year, and was willing to take his share of the responsibility of the Act passed upon that occasion; but it was due to himself to state that he then concurred in the propriety of passing that Act, for the reason assigned by those interested in the fisheries of Ireland, namely, that the system of poaching was carried on to such an extent that if the Bill were not carried, all the fish would be destroyed. It was then stated that the fish destroyed in the Black water river alone in one year amounted to 160,000l., that the police would be a sufficient protection to the fisheries, and that the only mode by which the police guarding the fisheries could be remunerated was by means of an assessment. Now, Lord Stuart De Decies had stated at Waterford that it was impossible to obtain a sufficiency of police for the purpose; but it certainly was to obtain such a force of constabulary as would protect the fisheries efficiently, that the Bill of last year bad been obtained by the Government. One of the chief objections to that Bill, was the imposition on the poor fishermen of a tax which they were unable to pay. It appeared that from Cappoquin to Youghal, there were 200 fishermen who subsisted on the earnings they realised by the fish they caught; and so wretched were these men at present, that they could neither pay the 20s. tax, nor give their families a meal a day. In the Cork river the poor fishermen who supported themselves at one time by catching salmon, were now cut off from that means of support; and therefore, if there were no other inducements than these for supporting the Motion before the House, he would be glad to give it his cordial vote.

said, that he had no objection to the Motion, but he feared that the appointment of the Committee would only lead to the usual result—namely, that no legislative enactment could supply that defect in the Irish fisheries which could alone be adequately met by well-directed private enterprise. He believed that had capital and industry been applied by Irishmen to those fisheries in past times, they would be now in a most flourishing condition. He believed also that it had been already clearly proved that rights to several of the fisheries existed in Ireland to a much greater extent than many supposed, and that the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Anstey) who made the present Motion would find himself mistaken if he fancied that by the appointment of this Committee he could set those rights aside. He was aware that the owners had, in several instances, surrendered rights which they had claimed for half a century, and accepted a compromise; but still costly litigation would be produced, if there was any general interference attempted with private rights, many of which were supported by legal opinions of the highest eminence.

said, when he asked for leave to introduce a Bill for diminishing the labour and expense attendant upon the sale and transfer of real property, he thought he had stated sufficient to ensure the favourable reception of the measure by the House. There was no more reason why land should not be as perfectly free in the market as any other commodity. The hon. Gentleman, alluding to the then state of the House, observed that the subject did not seem to excite much interest, seeing that so great a proportion of the hon. Members had gone home to dinner. He might quote many authorities who had advocated this sentiment in times past; but it would be a work of supererogation. Were it not for the feudal tenures which were still preserved, the disposal of land would be quite unshackled. He would not now enter into the nature of these tenures, or show how all their general evil had been maintained, although the burdens upon owners of land had been long-since remitted; and as he did not intend to dilate upon these subjects, he felt himself in this difficulty, with respect to recommending his measure—that he did not know upon what grounds the opposition to it could go, and therefore he did not know what objection to answer. He could only reply at hazard to a few difficulties which he had heard started out of doors. First, he had been told that it was presumptuous in a person not called to the bar to introduce a Bill upon a subject of this kind. Now, being called to the bar, meant taking a certain number of dinners, and paying a certain amount of fees. And he had certainly not been able to discover any necessary connexion between these operations and the capability of drawing a Bill. The question was not one in which a lawyer need bestir himself. Sidney Smith said long ago that the Court of Chancery was like a boa constrictor, which swallowed the estate of an English gentleman whole, and digested it at its leisure. Then why should lawyers bestir themselves in law reform? They performed the office of masticators and digesters, and that was probably enough for them. No. This was a question in which the owners of land, and those who might become the owners of land, were the parties really interested. But then, it was said, that nobody but a lawyer could draw up a Bill. That remained to be proved. A great many Bills had been drawn up by many very eminent lawyers, which were found to be of very little use. Nay, no later than last Session, a Bill for facilitating the sale of land in Ireland had been most carefully prepared by the highest legal functionaries of the Government; and that Bill, he was informed by many Irish Members, was little better than a caput mortuum. In fact, it frequently proved that Bills which one set of lawyers drew up, puzzled another set of lawyers to interpret. Here, however, he would be perhaps told that there was a Crown Commission sitting on the subject; and he would be asked whether he would not wait to see what that Commission would do. Rusticus expectat—and he would be a very simple rustic indeed, were he to expect any practically advantageous results from a Crown Commission. Again, he was told that he would be opposed by the lawyers, because his Bill would interfere with their interests. He repudiated such an idea. The study of the law was the study of a liberal profession, elevating men above sordid and interested motives; and he would as soon believe that medical men would object to the reception of a remedy for malignant disease—or that military men would decry a general peace—as that lawyers would object to such a measure as he had to propose. He had once indeed heard of the members of a medical college congratulating themselves on an unsatisfactory state of the public health, and drinking to the progress of slow fever with three times three. But he rejected such scandals, and he could assure the House that all the lawyers whom he had spoken to were favourable to his measure, and that he counted upon their kindness to supply his legal deficiencies. After the fullest examination which he had been able to give to the subject, and with the fullest information which he had been able to collect, he had arrived at the firmest conviction that it was impossible to effect the object which he had in view in any other way than by the provisions of such a measure as he held in his hand. He proposed to establish a registry of deeds and lands, and he proposed that entries should be accompanied by full and ample maps of the estates referred to. In former times this was accompanied with some difficulty; but now that there existed a map of every parish in the kingdom, under the Tithe Commission, nothing more would be required than to copy out the necessary portions of that map. He also proposed that there should be a public registration of all incumbrances, of any species, upon land; but he did not propose that this should be compulsory. He left it to the discretion of individuals. Such were the main provisions of his Bill. He thought that the only objection which would be made to it was, that it did not go far enough; but in matters of this kind he preferred a measure which went the least possible distance. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for leave to introduce the Bill.

seconded the Motion.

said, he would offer no objection to the introduction of the Bill. The hon. Member (Mr. H. Drummond) had clearly informed the House of the object of the measure, and of the mode by which it was proposed to be carried into effect; but it was impossible to express any very decided opinion upon the subject until the Bill was printed and in the hands of the Members. Nobody could deny the desirability of the object the hon. Member sought to obtain; and he (the Solicitor General) thought that the hon. Member was in the right direction as to the mode of carrying that object into effect. He had no doubt that registration was the most efficacious mode of effecting it, and that no registration could be complete and effectual without a very perfect system of maps. But the subject was involved in very great difficulties—difficulties so great that he had paid great attention to see how they could be obviated; but there was no objection to allow the Motion to pass, and he would give the hon. Member every assistance in carrying his very laudable object into effect.

seconded the Motion.

said, he was glad the hon. Member (Sir J. Pakington) had introduced a measure having so desirable an object in view, and that when he saw a copy of the Bill, he would pay the utmost attention to its provisions.

said, that until he saw a copy of the Bill, he could not promise it his support; but that he was decidedly opposed to every species of bribery and corruption at elections. He believed that until the giving of wages and places to those who supported certain candidates was done away with, there could be no end to bribery and corruption; and that the greatest corruption was practised by those hon. Members on the other side of the House who would saddle it, if they could, upon their political opponents.

thanked the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lewis) for the lucid statement he had made. With reference to the debt, he begged to remind the House that it had been incurred in order to facilitate the traffic of the country. The subject was one of great difficulty, and no one could say that the scheme proposed by the hon. Gentleman was not comprehensive. The hon. Gentleman had told them, that in this country there were some 100,000 miles of highways, and about 2,000 turnpike trusts. The hon. Gentleman proposed to throw all these into the management of the 700 poor-law unions throughout the country. Whether the guardians could manage such an amount of additional business, was a point which ought to be considered. The great difficulty, however, in the plan proposed, was the debt. It was proposed by the hon. Gentleman to mortgage the county rates of England to the extent of 8,000,000l. According to the plan of the hon. Gentleman, the county board was to establish a sinking fund, to pay off the debt in twenty-one years. To do so, an annual sum of 400,000l. would be required, or in other words, half the amount of the county rate at present expended in the maintenance of the public roads, without including interest. That was a very heavy tax to lay on counties at a time when they were beginning to taste the pleasure of wheat at 5s. a bushel; and after they had cut down hills, and overcome engineering difficulties at a great expense, not for their own benefit, but for the benefit of those who wanted to travel at ten miles an hour. A few years ago a measure, cognate with this, was introduced into Parliament. The hon. Gentleman ought also to recollect that the debt had been incurred for commercial purposes and to facilitate traffic between different parts of the country. He lived in a county in which a great number of roads existed, which were a heavy taxation upon the ratepayers in the county, which he did not think was fair. There was always a great objection to dealing with bonded debts in Parliament. One thing had not been stated in the explanation of the hon. Gentleman, and that was, the present improved and improving condition of the turnpike roads, a condition which, for the last three or four years, had been much better than previously. Another matter connected with the subject was worthy of consideration; and that was, that for the same period there had been a small but progressive decrease in the aggregate debt of the turnpike roads. He believed, also, that the expenditure upon them had been lessened since the diminution of that great traffic which, in contradistinction from the mere local, was called the "through" traffic. He had no intention, however, of throwing any impediment in the way of the present measure, or of its full and fair discussion; for it was a great and comprehensive one, and likely to be productive of much general benefit.

had gathered from the clear statement of the hon. Member (Mr. Lewis), that the principle of his measure was to be the consolidation of turnpike trusts, and the payment of their debts by means of a sinking fund. That entirely met his idea as to the manner in which the difficulties connected with the question of turnpike trusts might be removed. In 1843, when Sir James Graham was Secretary for the Home Department, a Bill was introduced relative to turnpike trusts, and was referred to a Committee, of which he (Sir J. Pakington) was chairman. That Committee concurred with him in strongly recommending the adoption of the principle now proposed by the hon. Under Secretary for the Home Department. The hon. Member for Oxford (Mr. Henley) had omitted to take into consideration that the tolls derived from the turnpike roads would go in aid of the sinking fund to pay off the debt; but, at the same time, it could not be denied that the adoption of the measure would impose a great charge on the county rates; and, on that account, it could not fail to be viewed with jealousy.

approved of the measure suggested, and, believing it would be productive of general benefit, expressed a hope that it might eventually be adopted.

observed, that no doubt there were considerable difficulties in the way of settling the present question; but he believed the clear statement which had been made that night, would be met with approbation throughout the country, and it showed, at least, that the greatest possible attention had been paid to the subject. Instead of the carrying out of the proposition being an expensive improvement, he was of opinion that it would eventually be found the most economical arrangement for the landed interest that had ever been made in this country. Every one knew how much good means of communication throughout a district enhanced the value of land. He concluded by expressing his hope that the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lewis) who made the proposition would receive all the fair and honourable assistance which they could give him in its progress through the House.

thought there was a good deal of justice in what had fallen from his hon. Friend the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley). He did not think the tolls could come in aid of the sinking fund, as was contemplated, because they were at present inadequate to meet the charges on them; and, besides, he considered that it would not be fair to have well-managed trusts brought in to bear the burden of ill-managed ones. He was content, however, to give the measure every fair consideration. It was a matter of great importance also for them to consider, how they would bring upon the county rates the sum of 8,000,000l., which was now funded on the security of turnpike roads.

confessed he looked with some suspicion upon a proposition which would tend to put the roads of the country under a centralisation system instead of a local control—a system to which he was always opposed; and although he was not disposed to oppose the measure from what they had then heard of it, he would caution the hon. Member who introduced it against being too sanguine about its ultimate success.

said, one of the great difficulties with which they would have to contend, was the immense debt which now impended over the turnpike trusts. Those which were well managed, he agreed with the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Spooner), ought not to be saddled with the debts of others' mismanagement. There was another part of the subject upon which he felt some mistrust. For centuries there had been a certain mode adopted in this country for the management of highways with branches, which it might not be advisable to change. He thought the country roads at the present moment much better than they had been at former periods; and he would ask, why was it that these roads were now to be placed under this new management? He had a mistrust, he confessed, about leaving the highways in the hands of boards of guardians. He believed that they had enough to do at present, and more than they could do well, without imposing any such additional work as this upon them. He gave the hon. Member (Mr. Lewis) who brought forward the measure every credit for the best intentions, and he hoped all parties would concur in helping him to bring his labours to a useful result.

rose to move—

"That it be an Instruction to the Committee to extend their inquiry to the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster."

He (Mr. Trelawny) know that he should be met with the objection that the duchy of Cornwall was not Crown property, and that it was originally given to the eldest son of the Monarch. But to this he answered, that in case of the death of the Prince of Wales the property reverted to the Crown; and that during the whole period of 500 years, for which the duchy of Cornwall had been held, it had been longer in the possession of the Crown than of any Duke of Cornwall. Considering that Parliament would soon have to determine upon a provision for the Prince of Wales, it was of importance that an inquiry should be made into the present management of this property; and as the Committee of Woods and Forests were now sitting, he could not see what objection could be urged to the matter being referred to them. Perhaps he would be told that these revenues were private property. If they were so, then why were the accounts annually published, and submitted to the House? In 1846 the gross income of the duchy of Cornwall amounted to 50,395l., and the amount paid to the Crown and the trustees of the Crown was only 12,032l., so that the cost of collecting was 38,363l He therefore thought this subject highly demanding investigation, for no private estate would be allowed to remain in such a mismanaged condition; and for these reasons he had brought forward this Motion. He might be told that the management was recently much improved; but that did not argue that still greater improvements might not be effected.

said, the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Trelawny) who made this Motion, had shown in his speech that he brought it forward with the view of applying the revenues of these two duchies to the exigencies of the public service as part of the supplies. It was on this ground that he (Lord J. Russell) must oppose this Motion. This House, before which the whole question of the revenues of the Crown came, had declared that the Crown might receive the revenues of these duchies. The Parliament could, of course, if they thought fit, make a new settlement on the Crown; and it was, of course, perfectly competent—though he would not say it would be just or expedient to make such an arrangement—for them to make that new settlement contingent upon the surrender of these particular revenues. But, having made an arrangement with the Crown, and provided, by Act of Parliament, that the Crown should keep those revenues, he maintained that it would be totally unjust and unfair to seek now to depart from that contract, merely because of some wish for economy in the public service. Every one knew there were sources of revenue that belonged to former sovereigns that no longer belonged to Her present Majesty. There were, for instance, revenues of the King of Hanover that belonged to William IV., but which did not now belong to Her Majesty. But, as the hon. Gentleman stated, there had been mismanagement of the duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall; and with a view of putting some check upon this mismanagement, it was enacted that accounts should be periodically presented to Parliament of the general receipts and expenditure. The hon. Gentleman had alluded to the great proportion of the expenditure as compared with the receipts, and had said, very truly, that great improvement had been made in the management of these revenues. This was certainly the case; and he (Lord J. Russell) believed that at present persons were employed, with respect to both of these duchies, in carrying out such improvements as a private proprietor would introduce in managing his own estate; and the income, as compared with the expenditure, was in the way of becoming in a much more improved condition. On these grounds, then, and considering that the matter had been already settled, and that the credit of Parliament would be seriously impaired by a reference of these accounts to the Committee, and considering likewise that no further benefit could accrue from such a step than was already in the course of being secured, he must oppose this Motion.

said, he did not understand the hon. Mover (Mr. Trelawny) to propose that these lands should be sold and applied in aid of the public burdens; but merely to state that a great constitutional authority had advocated an inquiry into these revenues, which presented so strong a case of mismanagement. Without going into the pecuniary question, he would observe that there was something like public inconvenience in having these independent jurisdictions and principalities within the country, which created litigation and vexatious proceedings of various kinds. He doubted whether they were of advantage to the Crown, or any person employed under it, or to any class of Her Majesty's subjects. If anything could be done to obviate this, it would be a great public advantage. Burke had observed—

"Every one of these principalities has the apparatus of a kingdom for the jurisdiction over a few private estates, and the formality and charge of the Exchequer of Great Britain for collecting the rents of a country squire."

It was certain that a very much larger revenue would accrue to the Crown if this system of management was altered.

said, in the present state of the House, he should not press his Motion to a division.

said, he could not help remarking the strange coincidence of the same Government, which had only a few nights ago come down to the House with a Bill for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland, now coming forward to propound a scale of political franchise for the same people lower than that enjoyed by the people of England. Let not the right hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville) flatter himself that because, with the thin attendance of Members now in the House, and the seeming acquiescence in his present Motion, that his (Mr. Stafford's) side of the House, in the least degree, pledged its assent to any one of the details of this Bill, or that it was in any way hindered from resorting to every legitimate means for opposing its final passing. With regard to the amount of the franchise, and with regard to the same qualification being adopted for both town and county districts, he (Mr. Stafford) would reserve to himself the most free and entire right of fully discussing and criticising each of these points. He also attached great importance to the question as to who should have to bear the expense of all this registration; and why the necessity of being registered, whether he would or not, should be forced upon the tenant in Ireland, as appeared to be contemplated by this measure, he would not now stop to inquire.

thought the remark of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stafford) who had just spoken, as to the inopportuneness of the present measure, seeing it was only the other night they had been called upon to suspend the constitution in Ireland, was something very like mere child's play. For his part, he (Mr. Roche) did not think the measure was sufficiently extensive; instead of desiring to pare it down, he considered it did not go far enough. He had hoped, after the great examples given of late throughout Europe, of the extension of the rights of popular representation, that the Government of Great Britain and Ireland would not have lagged behind other nations, which formerly it was her glory and boast to excel, in the liberties and freedom enjoyed by her people—in the amount of concessions it would yield to the masses in this ago of advancement and popular enlightenment. With regard to the system of registration proposed, he hoped it would be at least the means of putting an end to the disgusting scenes that now occurred from time to time in the registration courts.

considered, in the present prostrate condition of Ireland, when they were called upon to make grants from the national treasury as subsidies to unions in Ireland overwhelmed with a rapidly increasing pauper population, that measures of a very different character from the present—which he could not but characterise as a party measure, intended by the Government as a bait to catch support from hon. Members in that House, and which could confer no conceivable practical good on the starving people or the desolate estates of Ireland—were imperiously called for, and demanded precedence from Her Majesty's Ministers. There were the medical charities of Ireland, affecting the interests of the poor, and also entailing heavy expense upon the most distressed districts; then there was a sanitary measure for the towns and cities of Ireland (the measure of last year having proved a complete failure); then there was the extension of railways in that country; next its fisheries, and a variety of other plans for developing the national resources of Ireland, which had all a prior claim upon the Government's attention. He strongly objected to the entire Irish policy of the present Administration, and considered it their duty, when they appointed the Committee on the Poor Laws, to have given the Committee some clue and guiding principles regarding the nature of the amendments required to be effected. With regard to the present measure, he must strenuously oppose it. He saw no ground whatever why the borough franchise should be interfered with.

said, that, considering the state of Ireland, a much more useful and necessary Bill might have been introduced by the Government. For to bring forward a measure like the present, was to give the Irish people a stone when they asked for bread. If, however, such a measure were necessary as a popular boon, let them, in common justice and common fairness, see that the existing valuation adopted in the different unions which this Bill proposed to take as its basis, should first he made of equal force and equal stringency, and be first remodelled upon an impartial and uniform scale. This would be an absolutely indispensable preliminary to the present measure, for the poor-law rating was not made upon the same basis in any two out of the total number of unions in Ireland.

thought no hon. Member need entertain any fear of an undue extension of votes in Ireland as likely to result from this Bill. The rapid breaking down of the small ratepayers, now unfortunately going on in that country, was quite enough to guard against any very largo accession to the lists of voters. Again, with respect to the towns, he was strongly of opinion that this franchise upon the eight pound rating, instead of increasing, would very much diminish the existing number of voters. It was the interest of the parties to keep the valuation down as much as possible; and certainly the advantage of the franchise would not prove a sufficient inducement to make them prefer rating, which they now strove by every possible shift to avoid. No one had more strongly censured the Government for not redeeming its past pledges to the Irish people; but he was glad to accept this measure as a step—though certainly a very small step—in the right direction. There was one excellent principle in this Bill—that was, it proposed to disconnect the franchise entirely from the tenure of the land, the unsatisfactory state of which had led to so many of the miseries of Ireland, and to so much bitterness between landlord and tenant in that country.