objected to the clause, because it would tend to multiply the vast amount of small judgments in Ireland. Great difficulties would attend the working of such a clause; but the only alternative they could wisely adopt, would be to make a compromise of these difficulties by confining the liability of the land to the particular division in which the debt existed. He would throw it out as a suggestion for the Government, that the Civil Bill Decree ought to be handed over to the receiver, so that he might in the simplest manner proceed to see that the arrears of poor-rate, which was to be the first charge, were properly liquidated.

considered the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxfordshire a very valuable one, but supposed that it went on the assumption that it would be necessary to apply to the Court of Chancery for an order. But an application to that court would not be necessary, because the poor-rates were to be made the first charge.

said, that it was only on a judgment that the rates would be made the first charge, and consequently it would be necessary for the same troublesome process to be gone through every year.

objected to a power being given to sell the lands for rates due by the tenant. It was unfair that the lands of the landlord should be sold for a debt due by another part.

said, it was only proposed to sell the interest of the party by whom the debt was due.

contended, that except power was given to the landlord to dismiss the tenant when a certain amount of arrears was due, the tenant might go away and leave the landlord liable for a debt due by him.

begged to call attention to the effect of the 4 l . rating clause, for he felt convinced that unless it was altered the country would be reduced to a state of desolation. Reference had been made to the Kilrush evictions, and he felt that the 4 l . rating clause was the whole cause of these evictions. The case came home to himself. Last year, 500 l . was paid on his property, for tenants paying under 4 l . rent. In one village, 100 l . was charged to him for tenements valued under 4 l ., and none of those tenants had paid him rent. When he came to examine his rental in the next year, must he not take some steps to relieve himself from this charge? Could he go on paying the rates for their holdings, year after year, without getting any rent from them? So long, therefore, as they had this clause, they would have those evictions of tenants. He would mention another case to show the evil effects of the 4 l . rating clause. In one of his villages a very solvent man, in his station of life, desired to build a house, and applied to him for a plot of ground which was worth nothing in an agricultural point of view. Before giving him the plot of ground, he had to consider whether the house, when built, would be valued under 4 l . or not, and finding that he would probably have to pay more rates than any rent he could get, he was obliged to decline to make the lease, so that the village lost the benefit that would arise from the expenditure of the money that would be laid out in building that house.

considered it would be a most flagitious act to take advantage of a period of famine, to give the landlords of Ireland a more summary power of eviction than they at present possessed.

thought the objection of the hon. Member for Stroud had great force in it; but on the other hand, he must admit, that in the case of a landlord who finds that his tenants pay no rent and no taxes, while he finds that he is prevented by process of law for a considerable time from making the tenant liable, it was objectionable to make that landlord chargeable with the accumulation of rates. However desirable it might be to remedy this evil, his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary could not, in discussing this clause, make any pledge with respect to any future clause.

thought the question with regard to protecting the landlord from the arrears of the tenant, was wholly independent of this clause; but in supporting this clause, let it not he thought that he entertained an opinion hostile to that of his hon. Friend who called attention to the subject. On the contrary, he thought the matter should be taken into consideration on a future occasion. He thought, when a tenancy was deserted, the landlord should get possession of the land by paying the arrears of poor-rate due on the land. That could be done by proceeding by civil bill as against a deserted tenancy.

admitted that some clause, such as that suggested by the hon. and learned Gentleman, might be necessary.

said, the difficulty they were in was this—they were all agreed as to the principle of the clause, and they were put in an unfair position by being compelled to divide against it for the reason he had stated.

said, that if no clause to meet the objection were hereafter put in, the hon. Gentleman could move on the third reading the omission of this clause.

was willing to leave it to be understood that the objection would be removed.

Clause agreed to.

On Clause 13,

moved as an Amendment, at page 6, line 43, to leave out the word "union," and to insert the words "electoral division."

thought they were dealing with men's properties in a violent way by an ex post facto law, and begged the noble Lord at the head of the Government to consider what the just limits of the poor-rates should be, which, being recovered under the 12th clause, would take priority over all other charges on an estate. As the law now stood, the holders of mortgages and similar incumbrances on the land did not contribute to the poor-rate. It would, therefore, be a very violent proceeding to make arrears chargeable by an ex post facto law.

Question put, "That the word" union" stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 72; Noes 40: Majority 32.

said, that, with regard to the observations made by the hon. Member for Oxfordshire, he need hardly remind him that when a debt was converted into a judgment, the debt was merged, and the person who took the land would not pay the arrears of rates unless the judgment recovered for them had a priority.

Clause agreed to, as was also Clause 14.

then moved the addition of the following clause:—

"And be it enacted, that for the purpose of charging the expense of relief to any rating district, every person making application for relief shall, after the passing of this Act, be deemed to have been resident in such rating district in which, during the period of five years next immediately before his application for relief, he shall have been longest usually resident, whether by usually occupying any tenement situate, or by usually sleeping within such district; provided always, that where any such person shall not have occupied a tenement or slept within any such rating district for at least six months in the whole during the said period of five years, the expense of the relief of such person shall, in such case, be borne by and charged against the whole union in which he or she is relieved."

It was admitted that an electoral division rating, and not a union rating, was desirable; but the effect of the Bill as it at present stood would be to create, in a roundabout manner, a union rating. That was contrary to the principle of the poor-law in England; and the object of his clause was to check those evictions of which the House had heard so much, by placing responsibility on the party from whose property the pauper originally came. He had adopted the period of five years to meet the case of landlords who had evicted their tenants since the unfortunate panic. He admitted that the clause would not meet the exigencies of the case as between union and union; but it would do substantial justice between electoral division and electoral division.

believed that the proposition of the hon. Member for Kerry would, if adopted, act very injuriously upon large cities. The clause would certainly not meet the case of destitute persons coming from a distance, and they would be chargeable on the city electoral division, and not on the union at large.

was understood to consent to the principle of the clause proposed by the hon. Member for Kerry, but subject to the substitution of "three" for five years' residence, and "eighteen" months for the six months proposed.

A short conversation ensued, during which Mr. MONSELL and other hon. Members expressed the opinion that the term of eighteen months was too long. Ultimately

consented to fix the term at twelve months.

assented to the alterations as proposed by the Government.

Clause, as amended, to stand part of the Bill.

then moved the next clause, of which he had given notice; the object of it being to reduce the area of taxation.

, however, suggested that the simplest course would be to adopt the outline of the clause standing in the Bill to be introduced by the President of the Poor Law Commission in England, giving power to the commissioners, in the cases of small parishes, to bind several parishes to the election of a single guardian.

recommended the hon. Gentleman not to rely upon the clause being passed which he had just alluded to, as intended to be introduced by the President of the Poor Law Commission in England; for that clause would meet with the strongest opposition. He protested against the principle, and would meet it with unmitigated hostility. If the hon. Gentleman, therefore, were to rely upon the success of that clause as" foundation for the principle as regarded Ireland, he would be laying his foundation upon sand.

Clause withdrawn.

next proposed the following clause:—

"And be it enacted, that from and after the passing of this Act, every justice of the peace acting for any county in Ireland, and otherwise qualified, under the laws now in force, to be, or to be appointed, an ex-officio guardian of any union within such county, and who shall be seised, possessed, or entitled for his own use and beneflt of or to any lands, tenements, or hereditaments situate within such union, or in the rents and profits thereof, for any life or lives in being, or for any term of twenty-one years at the least, such estate being of the yearly value of 50 l . at the least, shall be eligible to be, or to be appointed, an ex-officio guardian of such union, notwithstanding that such justice shall not be resident within the same."

The hon. Member contended that those most highly rated were not the most eligible as guardians.

said, that this question had been discussed in the Poor Law Committee, and there had been some doubts as to the course which ought to be pursued. He had, however, come to the conclusion that it was his duty to oppose this proposition. When the Irish poor-law was introduced, the number of ex-officio guardians was limited to one-third; but there was afterwards a relaxation of that rule, permitting, under certain conditions, a noiety of the guardians to be ex officio , so that the board was composed of one-half elective and one-half ex officio. But the limit to that permission was, that they should be resident within the union, and the effect of the proposed clause would be to do away with the limitation. He could not consent to a further relaxation of the rule for limiting the number of ex-officio guardians.

said, that the great difficulty in many districts was to form boards of guardians at all, and great advantage would arise by the admission of gentlemen who were willing to perform the duties. He hoped the right hon. Baronet would withdraw his opposition to this clause, which would be a boon not only to the possessors but the occupiers of property in Ireland.

hoped that the principle of residence would not be given up.

opposed the clause, which, he said, would be greatly objected to in those parts of Ireland with which he was connected.

said, that if the numbers were equal, then persons residing beyond the union would be ineligible; but if the number of ex-officio guardians resident within the union fell short of the half, then he would have no objection to make up that half from magistrates residing beyond the union.

Clause postponed.

then proposed his next clause, as follows:—

"And be it enacted, that no distress for nonpayment of any rate, or part of any rate, shall hereafter be levied or taken upon any rateable property being of the descriptions following, that is to say, Implements of Husbandry, Gardening, or Farming Utensils, Horses, Carts, and Horse Furniture, provided that the same respectively shall he in the actual or habitual use or employment of the person or persons possessing the same."

said, that this kind of property was distrainable in England for poor-rate, and the Committee must decide whether they would draw a distinction in this matter between the law in England and Ireland. He hoped the House would consider well the nature of the clause before consenting to adopt it. He believed it would amount to an enactment for postponing the rates from harvest to harvest, and there would be nothing left to pay them with.

thought the argument of the Attorney General would be a good argument for the thumb-screw.

said, this was a more serious proposition than, in the first instance, it appeared to be. A maximum rate had been fixed, whilst a proposition had been rejected that the maximum should be absolutely levied. An hon. Gentleman had declared that he voted for the maximum because he felt satisfied, if it were not collected, that the Consolidated Fund would be liable to the charge. But if this clause were passed, not one farthing of rate would be collected. Of that he was persuaded. The Attorney General knew how the screw was to be applied; and, coinciding in the views of the hon. and learned Gentleman, he should have no hesitation in voting against the clause.

recommended the withdrawal of the clause, being satisfied that it would not pass. Besides, he for one had no wish to come upon the Consolidated Fund sooner than might be absolutely necessary.

Clause withdrawn.

then moved a clause, the object of which the hon. Gentleman stated to be, to enable the Poor Law Commissioners to make such arrangements that new unions formed out of present unions should have power to send their paupers to the existing workhouses.

contended that such a provision would be most injurious, because its operation would give rise to contentions between different boards of guardians. He could see no practical benefit that would follow from it; and he further objected to it because it placed a monstrous power in the hands of the commissioners.

observed, that the clause only gave a discretionary power to the commissioners. There were some cases in which the power must be exercised most advantageously for the poor, particularly where they had long distances to walk before they could get to the union workhouse. It was also desirable that workhouse accommodation should be provided, as far as possible, in each division, so as to withdraw the system of outdoor relief—an object which could only be accomplished by such means. He thought those Gentlemen who advocated smaller areas of taxation wished to legislate rather for property than for the poor.

warmly contended that the right hon. Gentleman had not met the objection of his hon. Friend the Member for the county of Limerick. He had, however, attributed unworthy motives to those Gentlemen who advocated smaller areas of taxation, of which they were not deserving; and he called upon the right hon. Gentleman, if he wished to act fairly, to substantiate his allegations against them. It would be better to leave the allocation of paupers as it was at present. Any change must depend upon the speed with which new workhouses could be built. Under present circumstances he saw no advantage in the clause, and he hoped it would be rejected.

explained. He had attributed no unworthy motives to the hon. Member who proposed the clause.

defended the advocates of a smaller area of taxation, upon the ground that such a principle would tend to promote the welfare and develop the industry of the people. He regretted that imputations should have fallen from the right hon. Gentleman which were certainly not deserved.

could not approve of the clause as it was proposed, though he admitted that the size of the unions ought to be reduced. What, however, would be the value of any reduction in their size, if the paupers had to go to the existing workhouses? Still, the proper time to discuss this question was, when the whole subject of workhouse accommodation was brought before the House.

said, one object of dividing unions was to make them more accessible to the poor, and that the present was only an enabling not a compulsory clause, upon the Poor Law Commissioners to provide for those cases where unions had no accommodation, but which were under the necessity of providing it.

expressed surprise to find the advocates for a reduced area of taxation opponents of a plan which, of all others, was essential to carry their views into execution. It would tend to take away the necessity for paid guardians, whilst, without it, it would be impossible to revise the size either of unions or electoral divisions. Besides, the circumstances of the west of Ireland were such as to make it necessary that some such arrangement should be carried out immediately.

thought that the clause should be limited to three years at farthest. As it at present stood, the building of the new workhouses might not take place these ten years.

said, he was decidedly of opinion that in the west and southwest there ought to be smaller sized unions than there were at present, and that each new union should be provided with a workhouse in a central and accessible part of it. To meet the temporary difficulty, some such clause as this was, he admitted, necessary; but he objected altogether to the arrangement forming a part of the permanent law of Ireland. He wished the Government would give an assurance that they meant this only as a temporary expedient, or, what would be much better, that they would consent to limit the operation of the clause. The limitation might be fixed on bringing up the report.

said, he had no difficulty in giving the assurance that the right hon. Baronet required. Nothing could be more preposterous than making the proposed arrangement permanent; but as some time must elapse before fifty additional workhouses could be built, and fifty new unions formed, he did not think it would be expedient to fix on any limited period within which the alterations must be completed.

repeated his opinion that a limited period ought to be fixed upon. As the proposed arrangement, though objectionable in every other respect, would be a cheap one, it was not likely that much haste would otherwise be used in building the new workhouses.

said, he could have no objection to limit the time for the building of the workhouse to a certain period after the formation of the union.

Clause agreed to, with the substitution of six calendar months instead of one calendar month in the last paragraph.

then moved the next clause, empowering the commissioners to ensure payment of the charges for the paupers so provided for.

Clause agreed to.

moved the adoption of clauses empowering the commissioners to authorise boards of guardians to borrow money in order to promote emigration, in the same manner as money was now borrowed for the building of workhouses.

complained of such important clauses being brought forward at so late an hour.

inquired whether the money so borrowed was to be in addition to the maximum rate?

replied in the affirmative, and said the Attorney General had kindly consented to frame a proviso to carry out that object.

did not see any good in encouraging emigration, if the rates were still to be left at the maximum amount.

Clauses agreed to.

moved a clause, providing that in future any rate for the able-bodied poor should be a separate rate from the rate for the support of the sick, aged, and impotent, and for union and establishment charges, but that both rates might be collected together.

said, the object which the hon. and gallant Member had in view was already attained by distinct accounts being kept in the books of the union. If two rates were struck, it would be necessary to have two sets of rate-books, which would be attended with great inconvenience and expense.

Clause withdrawn.

House resumed. Committee report progress; to sit again on Monday.

The House adjourned at Six o'clock.