moved the omission of a sub-section under which the advances to the different counties would be restricted to certain proportions. If the industries of one county did not stand in need of assistance, the money in hand ought, he contended, to be available for the purposes of a neighbouring county.

said, that these restrictions were proposed to meet the equitable rights of certain counties in Ireland, and submitted that as the clause had been carefully considered it should not be disturbed.

complained of the narrowness of the measure, and expressed a hope that the restrictions which now existed would be abolished.

, who had intended to move on the Motion for going into Committee on the Bill, that the House resolve itself into the said Committee that day three months, regretted that he had found it impossible to arrive in the House soon enough to propose his Motion. He complained of the manner in which, upon successive stages, he had been prevented from stating his objections to the Bill. It was one of the most extraordinary which had ever been brought before the House of Commons. A Resolution had been passed that Session on the Motion of his hon. Friend the Member for Limerick (Mr. Synan) stating that the sea fisheries of Ireland were in a decaying state and ought to be aided by the State. Now, the Government, in order to carry out that Resolution, had seized a fund which had been appropriated by Act of Parliament to other purposes. In the year 1822, when there was a famine in Ireland, the good citizens of London collected, under the King's letter, £350,000 for that famine. Of that sum £300,000 was spent and £50,000 remained. The donors of the gift said that that sum of £50,000 should be divided between the 10 counties in Ireland which they thought merited it most. County trustees were appointed, and in 1827 a committee from the county of Cork was named, presided over jointly by the Roman Catholic and Protestant Bishops. The sum of £5,000 was devoted to the building of agricultural schools and to instruct the people in agricultural science. That money was never given to the county of Cork. The committee in London, finding the scheme did not work well, called in the several sums which were then in the hands of trustees, and under the provisions of 11 & 12 Vict., that money was voluntarily placed in the hands of the Ministry of the day, and vested in the Crown for the purposes specified in the Act. He contended that the money had been diverted from its proper channel, by the Government permitting loans from this fund to be made in aid of the Irish Fisheries. The Prime Minister had complained once this Session of not being able to understand one of his own Bills. If he had read this Bill he must have come to a similar conclusion. The draftsman was so ignorant of Ireland that in one of the sections he described Limerick as a maritime county. Why, there never had been a fisherman there. Another section referred to a second Schedule, yet there was no second Schedule in the Bill at all. He could point out other gross errors in the Bill, and he asked the Government whether they were really serious in asking the House to pass a measure so loosely drawn, and to seize a fund which had been appropriated years ago to other and different purposes. If the Government were indicted before an honest jury they would be convicted of obtaining money by false pretences. The Bill was a miserable evasion of getting out of the obligation imposed upon the Government by the Resolution of the House to which he had referred. The Government were bound to carry out that Resolution, and he did not believe that they would lose a single shilling by any advance that might be made. He regretted that his late arrival hindered him from attempting to postpone the second reading of the Bill.

said, the Irish people had nothing to thank the Government for in this matter. They were simply giving them money which already belonged to them.

complained of the arrangement. Last night the Bill was fixed for to-day, and many hon. Members who were interested in it had remained in town in order to take part in the discussion. Now they were told that the Bill was to be deferred. He thought hon. Members had been hardly used, and he complained that a Bill of such importance had been brought forward at so late a period. He knew the Government had a majority which would enable them to do anything—they might put the Speaker into the stocks if they thought it necessary. He spoke to the Home Secretary about it, and that right hon. Gentleman knew nothing of the Bill. He then went to the Attorney General, who had never heard of it. He had, therefore, a suspicion that it came from a Scotch draper, assisted by some over busy clerk at the Treasury. He had been told that Lord Cairns was the author of the Bill; but he did not believe that so distinguished a lawyer could have had anything to do with it. He moved an Amendment that the Order be discharged.

, in seconding the Motion, said, he was somewhat pleased when he found that the Bill was to be discussed to-day, because the state of his health would not permit him to remain late at night. Under the proposed arrangement, however, the Bill would not come on until midnight. He wanted to know from the Attorney General why the Bill was to be postponed. They had assembled for the purpose of discussing the Bill, and now suddenly they were told it was to be deferred. He wanted to know the reason why.

would explain the reason. The Solicitor General had charge of the Bill, and within the last few minutes he had received a communication from him stating that he must unavoidably be absent. Another reason was that before the meeting of the House the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) took the opportunity of saying a few words to him upon the matter, and had made suggestions which he considered to be very valuable, and such as might lead to the removal of any further opposition to the Bill. These suggestions, if adopted, might be dealt with in Committee, and as it was probable that by Monday the Government would be able to consider and adopt them, it was not unlikely that a saving of time would be effected.

said, he was glad the Bill was put off till Monday, and he should be still better pleased if it was put off till next Session. There were a largo number of persons interested in the question, and it was not quite fair to bring the Bill forward at a time when a large number of hon. and learned Members were absent, who really were the best qualified to discuss the subject. He asked the Government to consider this point before the Bill came on Monday.

said, that this was a most important Bill; and it was by no moans understood, either by the House or the country, how immense an effect it would have on the poorer classes. If, however, it had not involved matters of imprisonment, he should have said less about it; but, as it greatly added to the powers of County Court Judges to inflict imprisonment, he pressed the Government to postpone the Bill to next Session.

suggested that the Bill should be taken early on Thursday, and remarked that it had already been six or seven times on the Orders.

said, that as there had been a Notice of Amendment to the Bill, it could not be taken after half-past 12, which was the reason it had been so often on the Orders.

said, he hoped the hon. Member (Mr. Bass) would go to a division, and considered that the Government ought not to attempt to smuggle a Bill of this kind through the House when a large number of the Members had left.

moved for a Return of the number, names, and present residences or livings of Clergymen and Ecclesiastics of whatever grade in the Irish Church who up to the end of July, 1874, have, under the Irish Church Act, commuted and compounded; stating the annual value of their livings, the amount of commutation agreed on, and the amount of composition paid in each case. The hon. Member said, that as he understood the Motion was to be opposed by Her Majesty's Government, he was anxious to say a few words as to his reasons for moving for these Returns. He understood that the right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (the Attorney General for Ireland), who was a member of the Irish Church Representative Body, objected to grant these Returns on the ground that the House was not entitled to ask for them. He (Mr. Jenkins) was, however, of opinion that not only had the House a right to call for their production, but that it was perfectly legitimate on his part to move for them. The reason why he had placed the Motion on the Paper was that efforts had been made from time to time in the Synod of the Irish Church to got these Returns from the Irish Church Representative Body—a body which consisted of 60 members, who met only once a month, and not even so frequently in the summer months, and which had paid out in compositions and advances to the clergy of the Irish Church the large sum of nearly £2,000,000. He thought the House of Commons had a right to know where that money had gone to, and he had received several communications from men of the highest position in the Church, who spoke in the highest terms of the transactions of the Irish Church Representative Body with reference to these compositions. Remonstrances had been of no avail, and in a pamphlet which he held in his hand, it was stated that Major General Young had moved for a Return, and was supported by Mr. Ellison, a Catholic, who stated that it was difficult even for a member of the Representative Body to obtain information as to the computations and compositions, but particularly with regard to the compositions. He (Mr. Jenkins) was of opinion that the country was entitled to know how the scheme of Disestablishment and Disendowment was being carried out. He should certainly press for the production of the Returns on the ground that there could be no object in keeping back an account of the transactions which had actually taken place.

seconded the Motion.

was understood to say that he had no objection to produce the Returns moved for so far as it was in the power of the Government to do so. It would be impossible, however, to comply with that part of the Motion which required the production of Returns in reference to the compositions made by the Irish Church Representative Body with the clergy who had commuted. The position of matters was this—In making a composition the sum paid was the actual market value of each life, and if there was the slightest error in calculating the duration of these lives there would be a failure of the fund provided for paying the annuities. The market value was regulated by the tables which were founded upon an average of the whole lives of the English community; but as they did not represent the real duration of these particular lives, the consequence was that it was absolutely essential for the safety of this gigantic scheme of annuities that there should be a largo margin in hand. The Church Body had the power of relieving themselves from those annuities by a process of composition, and he contended that this had been done in the interest of the Church itself. The Representative Body were bound to account to the Synod by the Queen's Charter for the sums expended. There being a regular Parliament of the Church in this Synod, which was held at Dublin, the information now asked for should be obtained through the Synod; but the Government could not embark in the inquiry. The late Church of Ireland was in no respect different from a Dissenting body. It occupied the same position as the Roman Catholic or the Presbyterian, or numerous other Dissenting sects, and was in no way connected with the State, or under its control.

said, his right hon. and learned Friend had passed by the real question involved in the Motion before the House. It did not deal with the clergy, or with the Synod, or with the relations between the clergy and the Synod, but it dealt with that for which the Government were responsible—namely, the proceedings of the Church Commissioners.

said, he had already stated that he would give every information as to the Church Commissioners. It was only that part of the Returns which related to the Representative Body which he was unable to give.

said, he did not clearly understand what part of the Returns it was that the Government refused to grant.

I object to the word "compounded." That is a transaction between the Church and the clergy, and is not a transaction of the Commissioners. I am quite willing to give the names of all the clergymen who have commuted, and the total amount paid, but I can give nothing beyond that.

You have the individual amounts of the computations and the bulk sum.

I agree to give that.

It would be impossible strictly to comply with the terms of the Motion. The right hon. Baronet the Chief Secretary for Ireland could not tell what were the present addresses of the clergymen who had compounded.

said, he would move to leave out the words "and compounded."

regretted that he must press for the entire Return. The answer of the right hon. and learned Gentleman simply evaded the real question—the main point being that part of the Return which the right hon. and learned Gentleman refused to give. It must be remembered that the Irish Church Representative Body formed a large part of the Synod, and that when they voted together they could prevent the laity from obtaining these Returns. In point of fact, the laity were unable to ascertain how far their rights were being bartered away. He considered it his duty to press the Motion.