inquired whether Trinity College, Dublin, would be empowered to grant leases under the Bill? There was nothing more objectionable than the college tenure in Ireland, and nothing more disgraceful than the way in which Trinity College had managed their estates during the last 100 years. When their land came out of lease, the authorities of the college took pains to secure and select from any part of the country some party willing to occupy the position of middleman. Cases had come within his personal knowledge where the college had rejected the proposals made to them by their occupying tenants and the persons actually cultivating the land, and had selected middlemen who offered rents much under those which the occupying tenants proposed to pay, the middlemen in these cases enjoying a profit after the payment of the rent.

said, the Bill would not apply either to Trinity College or any other corporation, but simply to occupiers. If, however, a clause were proposed calculated to improve the management of estates by colleges he would not object to it.

represented the inconvenience of seizing the present occasion to make a complaint against Trinity College respecting the management of their estates. If the hon. Member for Carlow would select some specific instance, at a suitable time, he would meet the hon. Member upon this charge.

had made no charge against Trinity College, the authorities of which probably felt compelled to adhere to their present system of estate management.

proposed a clause, empowering the incumbent of any benefice in Ireland, with the consent of his archbishop or bishop, to devise or lease any part of his glebe lands, not being less than ten acres, and not being immediately appertaining to and used in connexion with a glebe-house, for any term not exceeding twenty-one years, to take effect in possession, and not in reversion, and without fine.

stated, that it was not his intention to have legislated on this subject, but as the clause was proposed by the hon. Member for Dublin University, he would not oppose it.

said, that a provision should have been introduced against subletting.

said, the lease could be made only to a person in occupation; and in the form prescribed in the Act to which reference had been made in the clause, there was a provision against subletting; and if the Solicitor General introduced any general provision against subletting, it would, of course, apply to church lands. The clause was then brought up and agreed to.

said, he did not rise to offer any opposition to the course proposed to be taken by the hon. and learned Solicitor General, but rather to express his approbation of the candid manner in which he had explained his views, and the consideration he had shown towards the recommendations of the Committee. But as the subject was an extremely important one, as well as difficult to deal with, and bore much upon property in Ireland, he wished briefly to explain to the House the grounds upon which the Committee had come to the conclusions at which they had arrived, and which he believed if acted on with firmness and fairness, would attain all the objects which the Government proposed to accomplish. There could be no doubt that, inasmuch as recent events had forced the Legislature to contemplate a rearrangement of the present system of property in Ireland, they should take care to prevent, as much as legislation could do it, a recurrence of those evils which unhappily recent events in Ireland had shown them to be in existence; neither ought they to confirm any law which had mainly contributed to such a state of things. Considering the peculiar circumstances of the Irish people, and looking at the temptation which the assignability of judgments held out to an improvident raising of money, he had come to the conclusion that it would be a wise course to repeal the law which permitted such a practice, and thereby endeavour to put the state of things in Ireland on a more just and safe footing. The Bill of the learned Solicitor General was one for qualifying the rights of judgment creditors. It was right in framing such a measure as that to distinguish between two classes of creditors. There was one class to be considered in the light of the money lenders—and the other the creditors who had obtained judgments on a fair bonâ fide demand. Now, in legislating upon that matter, he maintained they ought not to go one step beyond what was necessary for the public exigency. Both classes of judgments were assignable, that of the bonâ fide creditor, and that of the money lender on a warrant of attorney, and it was necessary to bear in mind the distinction between them. For his own part, he considered that it was a matter contrary to all sound public policy to allow a security like a judgment to be made the means of raising money. Sir Edward Sugden, however, was of a different opinion, and did not consider it wrong to do so. The present Master of the Rolls in Ireland, however, had stated to the Committee, that, looking at the present state of society in Ireland, he thought it a matter of political and public importance to make judgments a very doubtful security for raising money, and considered that their assignability ought to be got rid of. Sir Edward Sugden, indeed, thought it would be an unwise thing to make so great a change at once, but recommended as a first step to limit the amount of judgments under which receivers could be appointed to 1,50l. The Committee, however, had been unanimous in the conclusion to which they had come on this one point—namely, that assignability of judgments ought not to be allowed. In any legislation of that description, they should always endeavour to enlist on their side the good sense and right feeling of the country with which they proposed to deal. In his opinion they were clearly bound to qualify the rights of judgment creditors, if those rights should be found to operate injuriously to the best interests of society. The hon. and learned Gentleman then quoted the evidence of the Master of the Rolls in Ireland, and other legal authorities, for the purpose of showing the evils which resulted from the pre- sent system of assigning judgments; and afterwards proceeded to say, that he believed that measure would operate very beneficially when taken in conjunction with an improvement in the system of receivers, and a simplification of the proceedings in the Court of Chancery itself. He thought, that after having accomplished such changes, and after having effected a consolidation and a simplification of the laws which regulated the relations between landlords and tenants, the Legislature would have done all that it could do to improve the social condition of Ireland; and the country might then, he believed, be left to itself. He readily admitted that they ought to legislate for the protection of the rights of bonâ fide judgment creditors, and that they ought to give those creditors the same rights against property in Ireland which were possessed by the same class in England. But he also thought that they ought not to legislate exclusively with a view to the interests of capitalists, who might be disposed to purchase lands in Ireland. Before he sat down, he felt bound to express his acknowledgments to the learned Solicitor General, for the kindness with which he had received every suggestion he (Mr. Napier) had made to him; and he should farther say, that he would at all times be ready to give every assistance in his power towards ensuring the success of any measure which he could think calculated to promote the improvement of that country. He confessed, that, if they were all cordially and frankly to unite for that purpose, he should not despair of seeing Ireland raised to a state of real and permanent prosperity. That great and remedial visitation—for such he should call it, in spite of all the calamities with which it had been accompanied—that visitation with which they had of late years had to contend, might then, he believed, be made an instrument for effecting the regeneration of Ireland, and elevating her to the rank to which he was sure it was the wish of every Member of that House—whether Englishman or Irishman—that she should attain; and thus might they see the strength of the united kingdom and the general prosperity of the empire largely increased.

said, he should only aim at making a few cursory remarks upon this Bill. He agreed in the general principles laid down by the Solicitor General, but regretted that those principles were not reflected in the Bill itself. He admitted that the Bill prepared by the Master of the Rolls in Ireland would diminish greatly the delay and expenditure incidental to the prosecution of creditor suits, and he felt that some such practical measure was loudly called for. With regard to the suggestions of his hon. and learned Friend, as to the simplification of the proceedings of the Court of Chancery, he thought that unless some speedy and proper alterations were made, it would be impossible to afford any permanent relief to the immense amount of business which now lay before the court. The Incumbered Estates Bill, now in progress, was, he must admit, a step in the right direction. As the Bill stood, it certainly did not go to realise the objects stated to-day by the Solicitor General. The power of assigning judgments had existed in Ireland for more than a century. The real evil of a judgment as a security for money was, not only that it attached as a lien to the particular property, but that it overrode all the real and personal property possessed by the borrower at the time he confessed the judgment. It also affected the property which the borrower might afterwards acquire. It was idle to talk of increasing the facilities for the sale of land in Ireland, unless at the same time they conferred upon the lender of money on landed security in that country the fullest possible remedy for recovering his money. This seemed to be a retrograde movement in the wrong direction. By the operation of this Bill, the owner of the land confessed his judgment was hemmed in between two evils, in the shape of the Incumbered Estates Bill, and the Judgment Security Bill. If he wanted to sell the estate, the Incumbered Estates Bill would operate to prevent him; and if, on the other hand, he wished to dispose of the judgment, the Judgment Security Bill would not permit of his doing so, though a capitalist were at hand ready to advance the money. He thought it most desirable that a judgment-creditor should not have power of appointing a Chancery receiver over an estate. With reference to that part of the Bill which went to revive the vicious system of elegits, he thought that system was quite as objectionable as the custodien system. Had the Solicitor General thought of the immense sea of litigation which would arise from the complex system of elegits which he sought to revive? He thought the Government should not submit to the House measures of this isolated and puny character, but others of a massive and general nature with respect to real property. For instance, it was impossible to do any thing in Ireland without a system of registration of births, deaths, and marriages, many of the evils in respect of real property arising out of this defect. The facilities that existed in Scotland for the transfer of real property was the secret of the success of that country in this respect.

had been anxious to offer some observations to the House on a measure which, in connexion with the Incumbered Estates Bill, appeared to be of vital importance to the circumstances of Ireland; but time now forbad; and as he believed there was no difference of opinion as to the second reading of the Bill, he suggested that that stage should now be taken without further delay, in order to allow the Solicitor General to pass the Bill through Committee pro formâ When the Bill was recommitted, there would be an opportunity of discussing all the details of the question, and hon. Members would then have an opportunity of reading the report of that Committee on which he had had the honour of serving—a report which was not voluminous but specific, and contained a well-reasoned argumentation; also the important evidence of Sir E. Sugden and the Master of the Rolls in Ireland. Before he sat down he would inquire whether the Solicitor General, in fixing the limit of 150l. as the lowest amount of debt justifying the appointment of a receiver, was prepared or not to adopt the recommendation of the Committee, that in all cases above that limit, where a creditor should petition the court for a receiver, the period of at least one year should be given from the date of the judgment before the appointment of a receiver? He agreed with the learned Solicitor General that the present Bill must be taken in conjunction with the important measure relating to incumbered estates, and he suggested that the House should have the opportunity of discussing an important alteration made by the Lords in the latter measure, and, if possible, coming to an agreement with the Lords upon that Amendment, before considering the present Bill in its amended state.

rose to move, pursuant to notice, for a Committee to inquire into the fiscal relations between Great Britain and Ireland. One good effect of the appointment of the Committee would be, that it would be proved that Ireland had been unduly taxed. It would be proved, also, that the fact of the Irish standard of taxation being lower than in England, was not the result of any merciful consideration for Ireland, but was owing to the experience of English statesmen, who found that increased taxation in Ireland would not increase the revenue, but would diminish the amount contributed to the imperial exchequer. The appointment of the Committee would further tend to show that this country had not been lavish in her grants to Ireland. If a Committee was appointed, it could only sit for a short time at that period of the Session; but it was not his fault that his Motion had been delayed for such a long period; but if it only met for one week, they would be enabled to see what documents should be called for, which could be considered during the recess, and another Committee be appointed at the commencement of next Session. If his Motion was agreed to, he should be able to show that if they took the gross revenue of the two countries at 56,000,000l., the excess of taxation paid by Great Britain was not more than 13,000,000l If from this amount they deducted the 5,000,000l. paid for income tax in this country, the excess would not be more than 8,000,000l. Taking this 13,000,000l. from the gross revenue, there remained 43,000,000l., to which both countries contributed in equal proportions—that was, that England paid 38,200,000l., and Ireland 4,810,000l., or in the proportion of one to eight. He could not bring forward a more striking-proof than this, that Ireland was subject to one-eighth of the general taxation of the empire. If, however, Ireland was placed on the same footing as England, as regarded the development of her natural resources, she would be entitled to 10,000,000l. or 12,000,000l. for her share. This showed what a strong interest England had to raise the condition of Ireland. He would here ask two questions—the first was, whether Ireland was rightfully or not exempted from the excepted taxes paid in this country to the amount of 13,000,000l.; and, secondly. whether she was so exempted from any merciful disposition on the part of this country, or because no more could be got from her I In answer to the first of these questions, he would say, that, after due consideration, Ireland was exempted from the payment of them by the Act of Union; and his answer to the second question was, that such exemption did not take place from any merciful feeling on the part of this country. He would not go into the question of local taxation in Ireland, as he believed other Members would do so. He might observe, however, that on this subject a very striking protest had recently been placed on the Journals of the House of Lords, to which the name of the Earl of Rosse was affixed. This document strongly pointed out the injustice of the present system. At the time of the Union, the public debt of England was so much larger than that of Ireland, that it was distinctly declared that it would be utterly monstrous to make Ireland responsible for the whole of the debt of England, so that some arrangement must be made. At the time of the Union with Scotland a sum of money had been voted to that nation for any loss that might arise from the junction of the exchequers of the two countries. The amount was 300,000l., which was a large sum in those days in a poor country like Scotland, although it might not be regarded so now. It was found, however, that compensation could not be given to Ireland at the time of the Union, as the difference in the amount of the debts of the two countries was so great. According to a Parliamentary paper which he held in his hand, the amount of the debt of Great Britain on the 5th of January, 1801, which was the period of the Union, was 450,505,000l., while the annual charge for the debt was 17,720,000l. At the same period the amount of the debt of Ireland was 28,550,000l., the interest on which was 1,244,500. The consequence was, that the separation of the debts continued for several years, A calculation was then made as to the charges which should be made in each country for the common expenses of the empire; and the basis then taken had since been admitted to have been unjust to Ireland. At the time of the Union it was considered proper that the expenditure of the country should be divided into seventeen parts, and of this amount Ireland was to contribute two parts, and England fifteen parts. It was provided by the seventh article of the Act of Union that the exchequers of the two countries should not be consolidated until either of two contingencies arose: the first was, that the two debts should be paid off, which condition he had hardly need state had never occurred; and the second was, when the proportionate difference between the taxation of the two countries should be at the rate of two to fifteen. There was also another condition, which was of an accumulative character, and which was as binding and as stringent as the others. It was, that the respective circumstances of the two countries became such that they would be able to contribute equally to the common taxes. The arrangement at the Union, instead of increasing the prosperity of Ireland, had tended much to the impoverishment of that country. It should not be forgotten that 3,000,000l. had been expended in bribery to promote the Union, and to induce the Irish Parliament to sell the country, and to give compensation to the proprietors of the rotten boroughs. This charge also was forced on Ireland, and thus again was her debt forced up. Again, in the report of the Finance Committee of 1815, he found the following-statement:—

"For several years Ireland has advanced in permanent taxation more rapidly than Great Britain itself, notwithstanding the immense exertions of the latter country, including the extraordinary and war taxes, the permanent revenue of Great Britain having increased from the year 1801 in the proportion of 16½ to 10; the whole revenue of Great Britain, including war taxes, as 21¼ to 10; and the revenue of Ireland in the proportion of 23 to 10. But in the twenty four years referred to your Committee, the increase of Irish revenue has been in the proportion of 46¾ to 10.

In the debate also on the consolidation of the Exchequers in 1816, Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, the then Irish Chancellor of the Exchequer, referred to this declaration, and said—

"You contracted with Ireland for an expenditure she could not meet, your own share of which you could not meet but by sacrifices unexampled—by exertions the tension of which only England could have borne. Ireland has been led to hope her expenditure would have been less than before she was united with you. In the fifteen years preceding the Union, it amounted to 41,000,000l.; but in the fifteen years of Union, it swelled to the enormous amount of 148,000,000l. The increase of her revenue would have more than discharged, without the aid of loans, an expenditure greater than that of the fifteen years which preceded 1801. Your own Committee have shown you what an advance in permanent taxation Ireland has made."

The Marquess of Lansdowne, also, in a speech on the state of Ireland in 1822, complained that the increase of the Irish taxation since the Union was so excessive as to destroy revenue. He said that—

"In 1807 the revenue amounted to 4,378,241l.; that between that year and 1815, new taxes were imposed from which an additional income of 3,370,000l. was anticipated, but that the result was an absolute diminution of income, the revenue in 1821 having been 533,000l. under its amount in 1807."

He would also quote an extract from a speech of Lord Sydenham, then Mr. Poulett Thompson, delivered on the 20th of March, 1830, when he moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the expediency of making a revision of the taxes, and then took occasion to refer to Ireland as furnishing the most remarkable instance in history of the effects upon revenue produced by excessive taxation. He said—

"A case is established in the instance of Ireland, which is written in characters too legible not to servo as a guide to future financiers—one which ought to bring shame upon the memory of its authors."

He then stated the facts as to the decrease of the revenue between 1817 and 1821, mentioned by the Marquess of Lansdowne:—

"Here is an example to prove that an increase of taxation does not tend to produce a corresponding increase of revenue; but, on the contrary, an actual diminution."

He believed also the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge, the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, stated in the course of a debate in 1822, that the proportion of two to fifteen as the contribution of the two countries to the public expenditure, was admitted on all hands to be unjust. The pretence for the consolidation of the two Exchequers, was to relieve Ireland from the burden of the debt. Now, how did the debts of the two countries stand on the 5th of January, 1817? The English debt had increased from 450,050,000l. in 1801, to 734,522,100l. at the commencement of 1817, the interest on which was 28,238,400l. The Irish debt had increased from 28,550,000l. in 1801, to 112,704,800l. in 1817, the interest on which was 4,104,500l. Thus the increase on the charge of the British debt between January, 1801, and January, 1817, was 60 per cent; while the increase on the charge of the Irish debt in the same sixteen years was not less than 230 per cent. What had been the effects of the consolidation which took place? He thought it was perfectly clear, if nothing of the kind had taken place, it would have been for the advantage of Ireland. At the time of the consolidation, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been obliged to take off the income and some other taxes, which together produced 17,000,000l, and then he determined to have Ireland at his mercy, to see whether he could not make up the deficiency by putting the screw on that country. By the proceedings then taken, Ireland had been made liable for every farthing of the English debt. The projectors of this Act stated that such an amount of debt had been thrown on Ireland that she could not continue to pay it; therefore they nominally took off the debt from that country. As it was, instead of having to pay only 2–17ths towards the charge for the expenditure of the country, Ireland had to contribute one-seventh, or 2–14ths. After quoting some further details in illustration of the disproportionate and unjust amount of the general taxation which he alleged was borne by Ireland, the hon. and learned Gentleman alleged that, speaking generally, the ability of Ireland to pay was as one to nine, but that, whenever it could be got, she was made to pay as one to seven. There was a vast amount of uncredited taxation paid by Ireland. For example, there was upwards of 60,000l. Crown rents, for which she got no credit whatever. Then there were the duties paid in Ireland on manufactured articles coming through England, but for Irish consumption: all these were credited to the English revenue, although it was the consumer who actually paid the duties. The customs thus paid had been estimated by Sir Henry Parnell at 350,000l. a year. If Members would look at the tables of the receipts of the revenue of the two countries from customs articles, they would observe the ridiculously small sums which were put down to the credit of Ireland upon articles which must obviously be of very large consumption, such as oils and silks. Some of these items were credited as low as 5l., 2l., and in one case 1l. 10s. What the meaning of this was, or why it was so put, he knew not; but the great bulk of the articles consumed in Ireland paid the duty in England on passing through; and, therefore, on a largo proportion of the customable and excisable articles thus paying duty in England, Ireland got no credit for this amount of taxation. Ireland paid more than her fiscal abilities warranted. The excess of the debt charge of England over that of Ire- land was more than fifteen millions; and in this respect the conditions of the Union had been violated; for by an unjust consolidation England was only paying thirteen millions, instead of between fifteen and sixteen millions. It was said that when there had boon a deficit in the accounts of the two countries, England had paid it. That might be true; but how had she paid it?—out of the surplus of proceeds common to both countries. This was the injustice of associating in partnership a rich man and a poor man, and making the latter liable for the expenditure of the former. The hon. and learned Gentleman than quoted further extracts from the Parliamentary returns and reports of Committees on finance and taxation to show that the burdens of Ireland had been un duly increased by her disproportionate liability to taxes, which should have been supplied by a separate taxation, and that since the Union she had been made unjustly liable to sixty-four millions of money which England ought to have defrayed by separate taxation. The hon. and learned Gentleman then urged that this injustice might be repaired by taking off the stamp duties, and the remission of other imposts which would not involve those commercial difficulties which would arise if the customable and excisable duties were different in the two countries. He then compared the remission of taxation which had taken place in England and Ireland, arguing that the result was anything but favourable to the latter country. From 1814: to 1846 inclusive, Great Britain had been relieved from 51,2,36,420l. of taxation, while, in the same period, the taxation remitted in Ireland was only 2,903,995l, The hon. and learned Gentleman then went through some further details of the kind, and then alluded to absenteeism as the bane of Ireland. Absenteeism was sapping the vitality of the country. Not alone did it cause the cattle and goods to go out from Ireland, but oven the money they brought was not returned to that country, or if it was it quickly went out again in the payment of absentee rent. He concluded by recommending the state of Ireland to that deep and anxious consideration winch every statesman must feel that the safety of the empire rendered it incumbent upon him to bestow upon so momentous a question. It would be well that the leading parties and leading men in the House should consider the subject during the recess, for the exigencies of Ireland could not be postponed much longer. There could be no greater mistake than to grind down with the screw of taxation an already impoverished country; but if they would allow the resources of Ireland to grow, she could better hear taxation. If they would grant the Committee for which he now moved, much useful and valuable information might even now be obtained for consideration during the recess.

said, he did not intend to follow the hon. and learned Gentleman through the long details of figures which he had gone through; but he assured the hon. and learned Gentleman that whatever returns upon this subject might be desired, he should have great pleasure in acceding to; and it was by returns that the points could be most advantageously laid before the House. But although he could not accede to the Committee which the hon. and learned Gentleman had moved for, he should yet make a few observations in reply to the statements which he had made. Whatever Ireland might contribute to the general revenue of the empire, so far as regarded the injustice of which the hon. and learned Gentleman had been complaining, his statements were not borne out by the facts of the case. Without any Committee on the subject, the various returns which already lay upon their table were sufficient to show that since the time of the Union downwards, the expenditure of Ireland had never been met by her income, not even with the additions which the hon. and learned Gentleman had taken credit for on account of the customs received on goods now landed in this country. The hon. and learned Gentleman had talked of the proportion of payments to be made by the two countries, and had quoted figures, which, if he had only looked at the last returns, might have been stated in round numbers at 48,000,000l. for England, and 4,000,000l for Ireland; the proportion for the first twenty years after the Union being fixed at 15 to 2. But speaking of the debt, the hon. and learned Gentleman himself had acknowledged that since the Union Ireland had never paid the interest of her own debt; and the returns on the table showed that between 1803 and 1817 her income, so far from equalling her expenditure, was necessarily augmented from the British Exchequer to the amount of 61,700,000l., to defray the charges upon the expenditure for Ireland. Even with such deductions as could be fairly made for the customs in this country—and the hon. and learned Gentleman fairly took credit for them—that was yet a large sum. But, again, the hon. and learned Gentleman in taking credit for the receipts which came into this country, did not look at certain charges not one sixpence to which did Ireland contribute either to the military or to the naval expenses incurred for the protection of our colonial trade, or to the general expenses of the country. As for the local charges upon Ireland, he found that during the last two years previous to the distress now prevailing in the country, a charge had been made upon the Consolidated Fund to the amount of 7,000,000l. to be laid out for local purposes alone. He would not say more on that occasion. He admitted that the returns were somewhat below the truth in regard to the receipts, and very far below the truth as to the true amount of the expenditure. He could not say that the hon. and learned Gentleman was at all justified in the statements he had made to show that the sister country was unfairly taxed in proportion to England.

conceived that the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was an argument for the Committee that had been moved for. That speech showed that a return when moved for was not sufficient, for how were the same returns read in an opposite sense by two hon. Gentlemen? The matter was an important one, and it ought to be set at rest. It was not right that taunts should be thrown out against Ireland on the subject of her taxation. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated what was true, Ireland was not fairly taxed. Then if she were not, let the matter be justly settled, and let her bear her fair proportions. Let them, he said, by a fair and full inquiry, put an end to this bandying of words that was constantly going on upon both sides of the House—the Irish insisting that they had paid too much, and the English declaring that they paid too little. The question could be settled by a Committee, and a Committee ought to be granted.

thought there were good grounds for granting this Committee. For supposing all the accounts were correct, and that the contribution of Ireland was 5,000,000l. a year, he yet believed it could be shown that she paid more than her fair amount of taxation. The principle of the financial union of England and Ireland was, that both countries should contribute to the expenses of the empire according to the ability of the two countries; and the proportion was stated in a speech made by Lord Castlereagh on the subject to be 2–17ths. Admitting that proportion to have been fair for Ireland in 1801, subsequently to that year circumstances occurred which made that amount vastly more than Ireland was able to pay. The question for the Committee would be whether that principle was fair and just. By the returns of the hon. Member for Glasgow, it appeared that the debt of Ireland, in 1817, was 130,561,000l.; that in 1801 it was only 27,792,705l.; so that she borrowed in the meantime 102,768,295l. But if her fair contribution was at the rate 2–17ths, the amount borrowed by her ought to have been not 102,000,000l., but 31,000,000l. only. The hon. Gentleman then quoted returns to show that Ireland's payments since 1801 had varied from 1–16th to 1–12th in 1840, and argued that he was justified in saying that was a sufficient contribution from that country. Supposing the exchequers of the two countries had not been consolidated, what would have been the consequence? Since 1817 the general expenditure of the country had been, say 54,000,000l.; from which, do-ducting the interest of the debt, there would remain 24,000,000l. to be contributed by both countries. Quo twelfth of that gave him 2,000,000l. as the proportion for Ireland in the general expenses of the Government; add to which the interest on the debt, another 2,000,000l., and the round sum became 4,000,000l. or 4,500,000l. to be contributed by Ireland. He concluded by expressing his hope that the right hon. Gentleman would accede to the Committee.

insisted that the Motion of the hon. Member ought to be acceded to. He was convinced that Ireland in proportion to her means was paying as largely as England. In fairness to England and to Ireland, the Committee ought to be agreed to.

did not see it was for the benefit of Ireland that England had colonies, or that she had such an interest in them as to be called on to pay for them, for the balance of trade with the colonies was against Ireland. If the hon. and learned Gentleman pressed his Motion to a division, he would vote for it; but he hoped the Motion would be now withdrawn, and a Committee moved for early next Session.

ultimately withdrew the Motion, saying he should bring it forward next Session.

rose to move the estimates for the British Museum. He said he should best consult the convenience of the House by at once placing in the hands of the Chairman the vote necessary for this establishment. Every matter connected with the British Museum had boon referred to a commission, which had made extensive inquiries, and whose labours were now drawing to a close. Any discussion would therefore take place with much greater advantage when their report was laid on the table, and the opinions of the very eminent persons who were upon that commission were before the House. For these reasons he was of opinion that any discussion with regard to the British Museum had better be postponed until next year. The vote of 42,915l. to defray the charges of the British Museum was then read by the Chairman.

thought it perfectly right to postpone any discussion, as the commission were still busy about their report. He was gratified to find that the number of visitors seemed to increase; and when greater facilities were afforded for the use of the reading-room by the public, the institution would effect a much greater amount of good. He entirely concurred in the vote, and he only wished to see the liberal sums now given by Parliament towards the Museum properly appropriated. He wished to make a remark respecting the National Gallery, and to express his anxiety that the recommendation of the Committee of last year should be carried out, with respect to providing accommodation for the munificent collection of Mr. Vernon. He thought that, as the Royal Academy were only accommodated in their present apartments in the National Gallery until the rooms should be wanted for the public, it was of considerable importance that space should be obtained for Mr. Vernon's collection in the rooms now occupied by the Royal Academy. It was notorious, and from accounts that he received from all parts of the country he was convinced, that if the space at the disposal of the trustees for the reception of pictures were increased, donations of valuable pictures and collections would soon be made, which would even more than fill the present building. It was, therefore, highly desirable that Mr. Vernon's collection should be placed in the situation to which it was entitled by its excellence. He did not think that the present situation of those pictures was open to all the complaint that had been made; but there were people who thought that a better sense of the value of Mr. Vernon's collection ought to have been shown by making bettor accommodation for its reception. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, as a trustee of the National Gallery, must be aware that the trustees were frequently compelled to decline the acceptance of valuable pictures, in consequence of the limited space at their disposal in the present building. The noble Lord at the head of the Government appeared to be of opinion that the Royal Academy had a right to their present rooms in the National Gallery; but he would find, upon inquiry, that the understanding was, that they were only to be admitted to the use of those apartments until the public accommodation required this further space. Three years ago, he wanted to know the means of the Royal Academy, but he lost his Motion by four or five votes only. He was now told that there was 100,000l. belonging to the Royal Academy; that would enable them to build an edifice suited to their purpose. [An. Hon. MEMBER: It is not their own.] But it was received from the charges made for admission to their annual exhibition, and that money might be devoted to building an edifice of their own. He protested against the House being called upon to vote money for finding accommodation for the Royal Academy, when that body had the means of obtaining a building for themselves. The Government ought to have paid more attention to the report of the Committee of last Session, which recommended that the Royal Academy should be removed from the National Gallery, and that additional provision should be made for the reception of pictures belonging to the public. He would suggest that the Royal Academy might go back to Somerset-house, on the west side of which they might find a very proper situation. He had no objection whatever to make to the present vote. of which, on the contrary, he highly approved.

said, the subjects to which the hon. Member for Montrose, had adverted connected with the Royal Academy, and the providing better accommodation for the pictures of the late Mr. Vernon, had not been lost sight of by the Government. He had himself proposed the appointment of the Committee last year, and, although he was not able to make any proposal for the present Session, he hoped next Session to be able to state an arrangement that might be satisfactory.

believed that, taking into account the increase of population, and the additional facilities of communication with the metropolis, the ratio of visitors to the British Museum had not increased. But, looking to the higher purposes of literature and art connected with the institution, the attendance at the reading-room, the print-room, and the sculpture-room, had been regularly decreasing for several years, until the decrease had become very considerable. He would not pretend to say from what cause this arose, but he thought the question should have been mooted, had the House not received an intimation that the commission had concluded its labours, and that their report would shortly be printed. He had heard several complaints that the commission had not been so accessible as it ought to have been, and that there were literary men deeply interested who would have been able to offer valuable suggestions respecting the institution, but who had had no opportunity of stating their views to the commission. The British Museum was a most useful institution, but he believed its utility was capable of very large extension.

said, the Committee now sitting on the subject of public libraries had agreed on two points. First, that the 52,000 duplicate volumes in the British Museum ought to go to form lending libraries; and, secondly, that the reading-rooms should be open in the evening for the admission of many studious persons who were at present excluded. He confirmed the hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose in the fact that when the Royal Academy removed from Somerset-house to Trafalgar-square, the Chancellor of the Exchequer distinctly stated, in answer to a question, that they were to occupy the building only until it was required by the public.

said, he was sorry to hear it stated by the hon. Member for Oldham, that the number of persons visiting the British Museum had declined, and that there was not a disposition on the part of the public to avail themselves of the advantages which the collections at the Museum afforded. He confessed that he had reached a different conclusion. He considered the hon. Member to be quite under a mistake when he supposed that there was not a growing disposition on the part of the public to avail themselves of all advantages of that class; and as to the aggregate number of visitors, there could be no doubt that they had of late very much increased. The number, for example, who went to inspect the works of art and relics of antiquity at the Museum had very much increased during the last five or six years. Thus, in the year 1843 the numbers wore 517,000, while in 1848 the numbers were 867,000, showing, as the House would see, a very manifest increase. Again, with respect to the print-room, the mumbers in 1846 were 4,390, while in 1847 they amounted to 4,572, and in 1848 there was a still greater increase, which raised the number to 5,819. In the face of these facts it still was said that the numbers had recently declined; and, assuming that they had, he might observe, that it never could be very easy in such cases to say why a few less should have examined those works of sculpture or of painting in one year than in another. There certainly had been no impediments thrown in the way of visitors, at the same time that precautions to no inconsiderable extent were found necessary, for very serious losses had been sustained in the medal department, in a case in which there existed every rational ground for placing full confidence in the person at whose hands the Museum had sustained that injury. His great learning, his very pleasing manners, disarmed all suspicion; and, unfortunately, as many as 300 or 400 coins had been abstracted. Still reasonable access was not denied, though it became necessary to provide means of security against depredation; and he wished to impress this upon the mind of the hon. Member opposite, that if there were any falling off in the number of visitors, the change was to be imputed to accident, and not to any impediments created by the officers of that institution, for there could be no doubt that they showed every inclination to minister to that growing disposition which everywhere showed itself in the people of this country to substitute rational enjoyments in the place of those which were of a more sensual and less improving nature—a disposition which had clearly been shown by the returns that were now before the Committee.

believed the decrease had been principally in the reading-rooms. Seven years ago the numbers there were 71,000, now only 65,000, which was very remarkable.

was sorry the evidence had not been published which was taken before the Committee last year; if it had, as he had wished it to be, he was sure it would have afforded very satisfactory information to many persons.

believed the accommodation in the library and reading-rooms was better than that in any similar institution in any other country. The grant was then assented to. A vote was then taken for 112,800l. for the Disembodied Militia in Ireland.

hoped, that by the rules recently laid down, they would have no more votes on account of any excess.

could not promise that there never should be any excess. There were no rules laid down according to which the estimates could be so constructed as to avoid occasional excess. He feared that many hon. Members were too ready to think that there was every disposition on the part of a Government to get all the votes they could, and to expend as freely as possible; but on the subject of excesses, he wished to call attention to one or two facts. In the year 1841 there was an unappropriated balance carried to the public credit amounting to 119,000l. In the year 1842 there was a similar sum similarly applied of 391,000l. In 1843 the amount was 173,000l., and. in 1847, 855,000l.

admitted that the public accounts were now more correctly kept than formerly, and he was bound also to admit that his right hon. Friend at the head of the Army Department had given a great deal of time and attention to the subject; and, on the whole, there was no great reason to complain.

stated, that 50,000l. had already been granted, and that this vote was only the balance of what was intended to be the vote for the whole year.

feared that there was very little chance of their being able to get into the New Houses of Parliament in the course of the next year, and when they got in he feared they would not find very good accommodation.

said, that no doubt they might very much sooner get into the new House of Commons if they chose to break through contracts, and pay forfeits; but there was no escaping from those contracts without paying the forfeits; and he thought, upon the whole, that it would be the best way to finish the works according to the contracts. No contracts were now entered into without their being submitted to the Treasury.

thought that they had much better make a large grant at once, and get into the Now Houses without further delay.

fully expected that the works would, in the course of next year, be sufficiently advanced to enable them to get into the New Houses.

said, that the proposed ventilation was, he feared, bad, and that many faults were to be found with the architecture. The original estimate was 770,000l., and that, at all events, ought to have been a correct estimate, for nine months had been spent in its preparation. Looking, then, at the immense outlay that had been incurred—vast beyond anything that had ever been anticipated—looking at that, he would say that they were bound as regarded Mr. Barry, and not Mr. Barry alone, but any individual so placed—they were hound to take care that he did not carry them too far, for if they wore to pay him commission for the great excess that had been committed, they would have to disburse a very large sum of money—it would form a very great difference in the sum that Mr. Barry would have to receive.

thought it was advisable to see if they could not increase this vote and finish the work at once. They had already voted no less than 192,766l. for temporary arrangements during the building of the New Houses of Parliament; and he had not the slightest hesitation in saying that if any Gentleman would enter into a close inquiry upon the subject, he would find that the postponement of these payments for the New Houses Vas made at an expense of from 12 to 15 per cent per annum. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer said the other night that trade was reviving, and that prosperity was staring them in the face; and the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth referred them to the quantity of gold in the Bank, and the cheapness of money. Now, if they trusted to that—if they trusted that their prosperity was built upon a sure foundation, that their difficulties were over, and that trade was reviving—why not go into the market at once and borrow enough money to finish the works, and put a stop to these outlays for temporary accommodation? No one could deny that they were carrying on this work in a most wasteful and expensive manner. They were doing it in a way too which inflicted great injustice upon the contractors, and put all the workmen to great and severe inconvenience. By-and-by another claim would come upon them, which, he confessed, he was at a loss to know how they would meet. The contractor would say, that he had entered into his contract, after making the same calculations as he should have made were he doing the work of a private individual; that he had, therefore, laid in a certain stock of materials, which came to 15,000l. or 20,000l.; that these materials should have been used two or three years ago; but that they still lay by him on account of his being stopped in carrying on the works in the best and most expeditious manner. True, they might answer him when he came to them, and said that he had all his money locked up, and had lost the interest thereon for so long a period: "Oh, yes; but you must carry out the conditions of your contract; "but he (Mr. Spooner) put it upon the broad ground of equity, whether, if the contractor showed that he had done nothing more than what a prudent man should do, any court of equity would refuse to allow him interest for his money. It seemed also that there were two conflicting powers in operation. They had the regular architect and the ventilating architect battling with each other. At all events they did not act cordially together. The contractor complained of the ventilator, and the ventilator of the contractor. But the question was, who would have to pay for this? and he thought it now became the Government to step forward and say, "Gentlemen, one of you must give way. We cannot have two kings reigning fit the same time, and we will not permit the continuance of these disputes any longer." On looking at the estimate they would perceive that the sum spent for ventilation was one that required the serious consideration of the House. He knew that it was incompetent for any private Member of the House to move an increased grant; but he trusted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his views of the returning prosperity of the country, would act upon those views, and increase the vote to a sum sufficient for the immediate completion of the works.

thought that the present question fully deserved the serious attention of the House. The two objects that they had in view were economy and accommodation; and he feared it would be found that the temporary provision made for the use of both Houses would prove as expensive as the estimates for the new buildings, which he at the outset brought under the notice of the House.

said, he must object altogether to borrowing money for an annual expense. They had resisted loans for building docks, and they certainly ought to resist them for such a purpose as was now proposed. It was to be hoped that in the course of next year they would be able to get into the New Houses, and get rid of all the temporary charges. He should not go into the question respecting prosperity, which the hon. Member for North Warwickshire had raised; but, even assuming that his statements were well founded, he did not think that they afforded any justification for the course which that hon. Gentleman had recommended.

complained of the Committee-rooms. It was extremely difficult to hear in them; they were badly ventilated, and there was no retiring room for the Committee to consult in. Whenever there was difficulty in the Committee, witnesses and strangers had to be turned out into the lobby, which they blocked up, and created confusion and inconvenience.

admitted that the Committee-rooms were defective in this respect, and also thought it was very difficult to hear in them. Flock paper had been put upon the walls with a view to facilitate the hearing, and he hoped that by means of a screen it would be greatly improved.

wished to know on what principle it was proposed to ventilate the House? From all he could learn it appeared to him that the House of Lords was to be ventilated upon the principle of a descending current of air; the House of Commons upon an ascending current, and the Committee-rooms not ventilated at all.

said, the ventilation of the House of Commons rested with Dr. Reid, that of the House of Lords with Mr. Barry, and that as to that of the Committee-rooms it had not been thought of yet. He hoped, however, all the arrangements respecting the ventilation would be completed before the commencement of the next Session of Parliament.

said, that last Session of Parliament he had moved for a return of what sums had been voted, and what had been expended, on the Houses of Parliament. They had now got another step as to what would be the probable cost of the Houses, and it appeared that the amount would be 2,043,000l. It was doubtful whether they were at the end of the expenses. He wished to get an answer to the simple question, who were the parties really responsible for this expenditure? It seemed that the hon. Member for Lancaster had no power to regulate the expenditure. If there was any real responsibility in the matter, the Treasury were the parties who should have previously inquired into these matters, and taken some security for the completion of the works within a given amount. He was firmly persuaded that 2,043,000l. would not cover the whole cost. There was 497,000l. for fittings and furniture. What security had the Chancellor of the Exchequer that more than that sum would not be expended? The question he wished to put to the Chancellor of the Exchequer was, whether he could not appoint some particular department of the Government to have an effective control over the expenses.

was quite ready to admit that the proceedings connected with the building of the New Houses had not been conducted in a very satisfactory manner. It was a matter with which it had been very difficult to deal in the first instance, because Committees of the two Houses, apart from the Government, had determined upon certain plans which they wished to have carried out, and they had from time to time approved of schemes which increased the expenditure. The original estimate was rather more than 700,000l.; but that sum did not include the purchase of ground, or the expense of the foundations; it referred only to the carcass of the building, and no one could suppose that that was an amount for which such an edifice could be completed. Other expenses were incurred at the wish of the Woods and Forests; and a Committee which had sat in 1844, to investigate the expenditure upon objects not included in the original estimate, had reported their opinion that such expenditure was proper and necessary, and that it was not extravagant. He did not think that a sufficient degree of control had been exercised at that time; but a commission had since been appointed to exercise a perpetual check upon the expenditure, and to take care that no new expense was incurred until it had been approved by the Treasury. Certain plans had been approved by the joint Committee of the two Houses, which were to be carried out, and he imagined the commissions would take care that there was no deviation from them; but if any alterations were necessary, involving an additional expenditure, the sanction of the Treasury must be obtained.

did not understand what had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Did he mean to say that the original plan was to be carried out, with the exception of some alterations? Nothing was more distinctly ascertained than the estimate was at first. When Mr. Barry's plan was brought before the Committee, an examination took place. It was found that the estimate was very defective, and the Committee postponed the matter for several months, in order to allow a complete estimate to be made, and it was after the new plan was brought before the Committee that the amount of the estimates was fixed. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth proposed a resolution that the architect was not to be paid by a per centage, but to be paid by a sum of money. It was left for the Woods and Forests to decides whether it should be 20,000l. or 25,000l., and they decided on 25,000l. He could not imagine there could be any doubt as to the contract, and that there was to be no claim for any additional sum.

replied, that considerable expense had been incurred for the purchase of ground, for the alteration of the approaches, and for furniture. The commissioners, however, stated in their report that they would endeavour to exercise the strictest economy, and that they would postpone the completion of such portions of the building as were not immediately required. The estimate laid on the table was the architect's estimate, and had not been sanctioned in a formal way.

considered that to be the great misfortune. He understood the fact to be that the commission whose duty it was to look over these matters was under the control of the Treasury, and that the Treasury were the really responsible parties. There was rather an ominous sentence in this estimate. It said, "exclusive of the cost of previous estimates proposed for warming and ventilating the House of Commons." Then there came this doubtful expression, "and all other incidental payments not under the cognisance or control of the architect." These words—"incidental payments"—left a loophole for everything.

wished to know whether the money they were then voting was to be applied to the completion of that portion of the building which was to be appropriated to the use of the Members of that House?

stated, that the present vote would be almost entirely expended upon the new House of Commons.

said, the Committee were anxious that the whole of the funds placed at their disposal should be applied to the completion of the buildings most urgently required, and they were desirous that no further progress should be made with the towers at present; but Mr. Barry had stated in one of his reports, that if they adopted that course they would incur an expenditure of about 50,000l. for violation of contracts. He believed that only 12 or 15 feet of the towers remained to be built before the completion of the present contracts, and when they had expired the building of the towers would be entirely suspended, and the whole of the money voted would be applied to complete the House and Committee-rooms.

observed, that if any set of Gentlemen who had seen a true drawing of all the details of the new palace imagined that it could be completed for 700,000l, he thought they must have been very incompetent judges of building and architecture. If the 25,000l. which it was said Mr. Barry was to receive was to be given to that gentleman upon his estimate for the carcass of the building, well and good; but, as it had been said that unpleasant remarks might be made about an architect who demanded what he considered his just due, he (Mr. Drummond) would ask the House whether they thought no remarks would be made about employers who defrauded that architect of his just due? If an individual employed an architect, he dared not refuse to pay that architect the sum to which he was justly entitled; but this was not the first time that the House had defrauded those whom they had employed. They had defrauded Mr. Brunei in the same manner, for they had contracted to give him half the amount of saving the Government would effect by using his block-machinery, and they had never fulfilled their contract. Was there ever a grosser case of oppression than that committed with regard to the Baron de Bode? The fact was that the House had the power and the purse in their hands; they would not pay; and there were no means of making them pay. He would say, that if they meant to put off Mr. Barry with 25,000l., it was as gross a fraud as was ever committed by any body of men.

begged to remind the hon. Gentleman that the architect had undertaken the work after the Committee had come to a resolution that he should not be paid by a per centage, but that he should receive a fixed sum.

hoped that this vote would be postponed; or if the Ministry were disposed to part with 12,000l. just now to Ireland, it would be much better to send it towards relieving the distress that was prevailing there, than for the use of the colleges. Nothing could be more proper than the desire to advance education among all classes of people; but these colleges were to spread a system of education which was most objectionable, on religious grounds, to the Catholic population of Ireland. He had great hopes that if this vote were postponed for the present, between this and next Session an amicable agreement might be come to between the two opposing parties; and therefore he hoped Her Majesty's Ministers would consent to that course. The head of the Roman Catholic Church had twice desired his subordinates in Ireland not to have anything to do with this system of education; and if the Government persisted in it, they would be thrusting it down the throats of the Catholics, which they would be certain to resist. The object only could be to increase the Government patronage in a poor country where that patronage was an unconstitutional attempt, and he objected to it on every ground.

said, that upon looking at the Act of Parliament he found 21,000l. was to be advanced for carrying out the objects of these colleges, but not more than 7,000l. a year, and he wished to know if any of that sum had been advanced?

wished to know when they would have a report of the progress that had been made in the erection of the colleges? He trusted that none of the professors would be appointed until the colleges were nearly ready.

said, it was true that 100,000l. had been appropriated by Act of Parliament for the building of these colleges, and a sum of 21,000l. for their maintenance for throe years. The 100,000l. had been expended in the building and furnishing of the colleges, which would be ready for opening in October next. The annual expenditure of the 21,090l. would not, of course, commence until the colleges were opened. The presidents and vice-presidents of the colleges had already been appointed, but the professors would not be appointed until within a reasonable time of the opening of the establishments. It had, however, been represented to the Government that the whole sum of 100,000l. had been expended upon the building and furnishing of the colleges, and that the lectures could not be commenced without a certain amount of books and instruments; and the Government had proposed the present vote in order to supply that want. The 21,000l. was applicable only to the annual expenditure, and no portion of it bad been issued, with the exception of the salaries of the presidents and vice-presidents of each college, since the time of their appointment. The Government could not apply any portion of the grant of 7,000l. a year to the purpose of providing books, as that sum was merely applicable to the annual expenses.

asked whether this 12,000l was in excess of the 100,000l mentioned in the original Act?

Yes, in excess of the sum originally specified.

asked if it were true that Government had received a protest signed by a large portion of the Roman Catholic hierarchy against these colleges; and if so, whether, seeing also that they were objected to by a large portion of the English people, he meant to persist in their establishment?

said, that there had been an opinion expressed by a majority of the Roman Catholic bishops, that in order to make these colleges what they considered safe places for the education of Roman Catholic youth, certain securities must be provided, and among the rest, that certain professors should not be appointed, except subject to the veto of the Roman Catholic bishops. That was a proposition to which the Government could not assent. At the same time he must add, that both the former and present Governments gave explanations that satisfied a great number of the bishops that education might go on in the colleges with perfect security to the religious opinions of the Roman Catholic youth. The plan of the colleges was a thing which did not immediately concern the present Government, having been sanctioned by an Act of Parliament previous to their accession to office. What might be the ultimate success of those colleges it was of course impossible for him to say; but he believed that they were now looked upon with favourable eyes by a large majority of the Roman Catholic clergy and laity. Sir R. Kane, a distinguished appointment of the last Government, had informed him that the number of pupils likely to be sent would be much greater than he had in the first instance anticipated. He (Sir R. Kane) had received a vast number of letters from persons anxious to send their sons to the colleges, and who eagerly inquired when they were likely to be opened.

said, it appeared to him that this sum was in addition to the amount paid already; and he considered it somewhat irregular to propose, as an ordinary estimate, a large sum, which was beyond the express terms of the original contract. The moment it was discovered that the 100,000l would not be sufficient for the buildings and furniture, a Bill should have been introduced to obtain the required addition, for, in his view, the House was not at liberty, under the circumstances, to vote it without notice as an ordinary estimate.

said, the Government had not felt themselves at liberty to apply any sum obtained under the Act to other purposes than those specified in the Act. They thought it best to come before Parliament and state the case as it stood, for, after all, the amount was only required to carry out bonâ fide the intentions of the House when the Act was passed. Parliament intended to establish the colleges: without apparatus and books they could not be opened. He, therefore, thought Parliament might be fairly called upon to carry out its intentions.

asked, who had decided that the sum now applied for would be sufficient for the purposes for which it was destined—the professors or the Government? Unless there was some security that it would be sufficient, Parliament might be called upon year after year for similar grants, and nobody would be able to tell when these applications would stop.

said, Sir Robert Kane had communicated to the Government his opinion that this sum was necessary, but the vote was not to be an annual vote.

added, that he had been informed, that when the colleges were once open, the matriculation fees would be sufficient to supply whatever might be further required.

wished to be informed what security there was against the House being called upon for an annual grant to continue the undertaking in case the colleges should not fill? The noble Lord said the Roman Catholic hierarchy had made certain demands with regard to certain professors and officers, which the late Government would not concede; but explanations had been given by the present Government which had satisfied a considerable portion of that body. It was desirable the House should be put in possession of these explanations, because Parliament had voted money upon the faith and understanding that the colleges were to be common to all parties, without advantages being given to any.

said, so far as he could recollect his words, he had not stated that explanations had been given. All the information he had upon the subject was derived from sources which were public, and known to every Member of the House. What he had said with regard to objections was, that the presidents of each college would frame and propose regulations which he thought would satisfy the parents of Roman Catholics, and parents belonging to any other religious community who had doubts or fears as to the education provided in the colleges. There were no particular advantages or special privileges given to Roman Catholics. He did not know whether the regulations had been completed or sanctioned by the Lord Lieutenant, but the general nature of them was that those who wished it might live in the houses of their parents if they resided in the place; if they did not live there, the persons keeping lodgings for students would have licenses, that they were proper persons to keep such private establishments. These establishments would be entirely private, and no portion of the public money would be given to them. Parents of Roman Catholics would send their sons to a Roman Catholic establishment; parents belonging to the Establishment to one attached to the Establishment. Thus there would be every Security for religious and moral education without danger of proselytism; and it appeared to him there could be no objection to regulations of this kind.

expressed his belief that the 100,000l. was intended to defray all the expenses of establishing the colleges, including books and apparatus.

referred to the words of the Act. They were "for the necessary buildings, purchase of land, tenements, and buildings, with the appurtenances, and the furnishing of the same." The question then arose whether books and apparatus were part of "furnishing" or not.

understood "furnishing" to mean everything suitable to establishing the colleges. He wished further to know, when the presidents and vice-presidents were appointed, at what salary, and from what fund, they were paid?

said, the Government had naturally inquired, when the proposal was made to them, in what way the Act had been understood. They were informed by the Board of Works, that the letters which they received directed them to expend the whole of the sum on the buildings, and that as to what was usually called "furnishing," there was no sum applicable to the purpose. Such being the case, it was absolutely necessary that this vote should be proposed in order that the colleges might be commenced. With regard to the next question, he was not quite certain when the presidents and the vice-presidents were appointed; but he knew they had been occupied in making arrangements for the colleges which had required their attention for a considerable time.

said, he understood that the colleges of Belfast and Cork gave the greatest possible promise of success. The only doubt he had was with reference to the college at Galway, if the Roman Catholic clergy should be found to persevere in their opposition to it.

said, that the success of the colleges depended entirely upon the appointment of the professors. If those appointments were judiciously made, he had no doubt of the success of the colleges; but if they were jobbed, and persons appointed merely through Parliamentary or any other interest, they would certainly fail. He could answer one of the questions of the hon. Member for Montrose. The presidents and vice-presidents had been under salary since 1846, and had received two and a half years' salary. He had always thought it very absurd that they should have been under salary so long; but he thought it fair to say, that this was not the fault of the present but of the former Government, by whom the appointments were made. He trusted the Government would listen with attention to the objections which had been urged against these colleges by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Tuam—if the Government would only see justice and fairness done to all sects, he was convinced that the colleges would be successful, and would be found to be a source of lasting improvement to Ireland.

mentioned the names of several other Prelates of the Catholic Church who were opposed to the colleges as well as the Archbishop of Tuam.

said, it was quite true, as had been stated by his hon. Friend the Member for Limerick, that very grave objections were entertained by some of the Roman Catholic bishops to the establishment of those colleges; but he thought that their objections were founded rather on the experience of the past than on any just grounds as regarded the present mea- sure. They saw, that up to a very late period every attempt that had been made to educate the people had been founded upon a sectarian and narrow principle; but, seeing the satisfactory results of the national schools, he thought that the rational inference was, that the Government that had been ancillary to the establishment of these beneficial institutions would conduct the colleges on the same liberal and enlightened principles. The Pope had expressed dissatisfaction at these colleges; but he thought that the Pope's condemnation of them was founded rather on the fears of certain parties in Ireland than on any knowledge he had of the actual state of things. The state of feeling in this country had undergone a very great change with respect to Ireland, and there was now a wide-spread feeling to conduct every thing connected with Ireland on broad and liberal principles, and the old principles of bigotry and Protestant ascendancy were crushed for ever.

thought it not right that the presidents and vice-presidents of these colleges should have been paid during three years for doing nothing.

objected to the amount originally fixed upon for the establishment and carrying on of these colleges, being exceeded. It appeared, that apart from the sum voted for establishing these colleges, 7,000l a year had been granted since 1845 for carrying them on, which sums, as they had not been brought into operation, had not been expended. Why not take the money for the purpose now stated from the surplus resulting from that grant? He should take the sense of the Committee against the vote.

admitted, that a portion of the 7,000l. a year granted in 1845 remained over in consequence of the professors not having been appointed; and if that fund could be drawn upon for the purchase of the necessary philosophical apparatus and books, there would be no occasion for this vote. Government, however, considered that grant made for a special purpose, and that they had no power to devote it to any other.

said, that though the sum now asked for might appear inconsiderable, the principle involved was worthy of a discussion, because if, after an Act of Parliament had been passed limiting the expense of a certain establishment, the Government of the present day might claim 12,000l. additional, what should prevent a future Government making a still greater demand? Those who agreed to the Act in 1845 might have done so because the particular expenditure under it was limited, and at that time money was abundant, and distress not rife. But now distress existed, and money was not abundant, and 12,000l. at present might perhaps be as important as 100,000l. in 1845, The rejection of the vote would teach those who brought in Money Bills to take care that what they demanded of the House was sufficient for the purpose; and whenever they applied for a further grant, they, whether in power or out of power, should be told that they had deceived the Parliament.

thought the Government had acted fairly, if there existed a doubt that this expenditure was not comprehended within the Act. That had been stated to be the case; and, as the money was required for starting the colleges, he should support the vote.

inquired whether the income intended for these colleges was accumulating; and whether there was any considerable amount of it in the hands of the Government?

replied, that 21,000l. were granted in 1845 for the payment of the salaries of professors and other officers, and for defraying the expense of prizes and exhibitions. A considerable portion of that sum had not been issued, because the professors were not yet appointed; and that money would only be applied by the Government to the purposes mentioned in the Act.

said, that as so many objections had been raised against the sixth clause, the object of which was to enable the Poor Law Board to unite several parishes to return one guardian, he should withdraw it at the proper time.

objected to this clause, by which temporary enactments which were passed last year were continued for one year longer. He considered this to be a very objectionable course to adopt. The defect of the present Act was, that it gave no guide or direction to the board of guardians to enable them to decide who were, and who were not, settled in the parish in which they were resident. He thought the position of boards of guardians was an extremely difficult one, because they had not the facts regarding the chargeability, &c., of the pauper before them, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would direct his attention to amend our legislation in this respect, otherwise the guardians could not administer the poor-law in the satisfactory and uniform manner which was desirable.

said, with respect to the clause under consideration, he wished to say that the Act of last Session, two provisions of which were of a temporary nature, made provision for casting on the common fund of the union the two classes of vagrants, and the irremovable class of paupers under the 9th and 10th Vic, cap. 66. It had been found unjust that the parish where the relieving officer lived should be charged for the relief of all that came to him; and so, also, that the mere accident of a parish having the workhouse within it could not justify the whole charge-ability being thrown upon it. Therefore, it was thought by Parliament, and justly, he thought, that the true, and reasonable, and just course with regard to this class of vagrants, was to charge their relief upon the common fund. That arrangement had been tried last year by Mr. Charles Buller; and he (Mr. Baines) thought it was still to be considered in the light of an experiment. Doubtless some hardship arose in particular cases, but he thought the experiment, on the whole, had succeeded. Therefore, on the present occasion, he could not propose the adoption of a clause to make that state of things permanent, although he considered the result of the experiment had, on the whole, been so satisfactory as to justify him in recommending Parliament to continue it for some time longer.

said, it had been alleged that the Act of last Session was only a continuance of what was called Mr. Bodkin's Act; but that was totally incorrect. There were three classes of paupers under the Act giving irremovability, as it was termed—first, those who had resided five years in a given place; then the class who were temporarily sick; and, lastly, the class of children, with widows in the first year of their widowhood. Now, the second class, the temporarily sick, were the largest class, and occasioned four-fifths of the expense; they were entirely omitted from Bodkin's Act, which only threw the first of the three classes on the common fund.

said, that it was quite correct that Bodkin's Act provided that the class of paupers who had resided five years, under certain circumstances, should be chargeable to the common fund; but Mr. Charles Boiler's Act went a step further, and included other classes.