of the Government was to evade its just responsibility. Such were the appointment of the Select Committee, the manner in which a decision in favour of the rate in aid had been extorted from that Committee, the mode in which the Ratein-Aid Bill had been dealt with, and the assemblage of Irish Members which had recently occurred in Downing Street. That assemblage was, in his opinion, highly unconstitutional. No Minister could constitutionally call together a large section of the House of Commons, not for the purpose of asking their support, but of taking advice from them. Not only was such a course unconstitutional, but it was also inefficient and absurd. The Repealers wanted an Irish Parliament, but at all events it appeared that they had an Irish Cabinet. The whole matter was in character with the Irish policy of the Government since the commencement of the session. "Infirm of purpose was stamped upon their every act. Their policy had been a series of bits-a policy of inuendoes, and had ended in an invitation for suggestions from their opponents.

Lord John Russell commenced by defending the precedents relied upon by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He then criticized the review of the Irish policy of the Government with which Mr. Disraeli had favoured the House. It was quite competent to the honourable Gentleman to give, in works of fiction, such an account of political occurrences as he might think would be most amusing to his readers, but it was hardly becoming in a Member of the House of Commons to depart from the strict line of fact, when he favoured the House with any such account. The noble

Lord then proceeded to show the different instances in which the honourable Gentleman had drawn largely upon his imagination in his brief historic review of the events of the session, so far as they related to the Irish policy of the Government. Many of his statements would have been far more in place in a chapter of a novel than in a speech delivered in the House of Commons. He (Lord J. Russell) had summoned the Irish Members to meet him in order to consult them. His sole object was to ascertain whether or not it was their intention to support Mr. Herbert's proposition in preference to the rate in aid. The Government were willing to consult the opinion of Irish Members in reference to that proposition, and the result showed that they were not wrong in their original supposition, that, even in the judgment of the Irish Members themselves, the rate in aid was preferable, in the present exigency, to an Income Tax. The noble Lord concluded by imploring the Committee not to decide hastily in this matter, but, by adopting the proposition submitted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to enable the Government to relieve the distress which now weighed upon Ireland.

Colonel Dunne then moved the adjournment of the debate, which, after a good deal of discussion, was acceded to. On the succeeding day it was resumed, but the speeches delivered were marked by no features of novelty. Among those who supported the amendment were Lord Claud Hamilton, Mr. Monsell, Mr. Clements, and Mr. Stafford; while Sir Lucius O'Brien, Mr. McCullagh, Mr. S. Martin, Mr. Sadleir, and Mr. Rice, supported the proposition

of Government. On a division upon the amendment of Mr H. Herbert it was rejected by 194 to 146, and the original motion was subsequently carried; the Ayes being 201, and the Noes 106.

Another measure of the highest importance as regards the internal condition of Ireland was the Bill for facilitating the transfer of Encumbered Estates which was this session passed into a law. A measure designed for the same object had indeed been enacted in a former session, but the machinery provided for the purpose proved not sufficiently stringent, and the Act consequently became inoperative. The extreme difficulties to which the pressure of the times and the burdens of the Poor Law had reduced the owners of encumbered property was now felt both to require and justify the introduction of measures of a very decisive and even arbitrary character, which might afford a relief more prompt and summary than the ordinary powers of the law were competent to furnish. It was creditable to the legal advisers of the Government that in such an emergency they did not hesitate to discard professional prejudices, and to apply a remedy commensurate with the difficulties of the occasion. The task of bringing in a Bill further to facilitate the sale of Encumbered Estates in Ireland devolved upon Sir John Romilly, the Solicitor-General. In moving for leave to introduce this measure, on the 26th of April, he recapitulated the provisions of the Act of 1848, and the difficulties which had arisen in carrying it out. That Bill had proposed the sale of estates by two separate plans, both of which he now admitted to have proved themselves ineffectual for the pur

pose. For this, the present condition of Ireland was as much answerable as were the defects of the Bill itself. Many of the difficulties which had arisen were attributable to the constitution and forms of procedure of the Court of Chancery. To obviate this, the Government, after mature deliberation, had thought it best to create a Commission which would be empowered to perform the functions and duties now performed by the Court of Chancery, but unfettered by the rules of procedure which prevailed in that Court, and also without the expense arising from the heavy fees and the antiquated system which encumbered the existing tribunals, but of which they could not immediately be relieved. He proposed that the Commission should consist of three paid commissioners and a secretary. This proposal was not without a precedent. which was to be found in the West India Commission, the creation and objects of which most honourable Members would recollect. It was his intention that the proposed Commission should follow the course of the West India Commission, viz., that it should proceed and frame a set of rules for its own guidance, which rules should be submitted to the Privy Council in Ireland, and which, on having received such sanction, and having been laid upon the table of the House, should have the same force and effect as if they had been enacted by the House. The Commission would also have power to alter its rules from time to time, as circumstances might require. In framing these rules, he wished, in one particular, to fetter the Commissioners. They would not be empowered by the Bill to frame any rules imposing

fees upon, or levying them from, suitors. He did not now propose that the Commission should be permanent in its duration. It would be as well first to test its usefulness, and then, should it have proved itself equal to its task, to render it permanent, or to prolong its duration as circumstances might dictate. By the Bill, the Commissioners would be required to deal with the matters brought under their consideration, in all cases in which application was made to them within three years. The Commission would, of course, have much to do after that period, which would require its prolongation for some time longer, say for two years. He then proposed to invest the Commission with all the powers now possessed by the Court of Chancery as to the evidence of title, &c. He did not contemplate that the Commission should have any functions or duties to perform, except in cases in which application might be made to them. But when any application was made to them by the owners or encumbrancers of an estate, the Commission would proceed and sell the property respecting which the owners or encumbrancers had made the application. When they thus proceeded to sell the property, they would have the power to sell it in such manner, and in such quantities, as to them might seem best. He then proposed that the conveyance to the purchaser should be according to a form to be specified in the schedule to the Bill-a form which would be both simple and short, and a form which, when executed and delivered to the purchaser, should vest in him an indefeasible title to the property which would be good against all parties, and which he need not go

beyond in vindicating his right to the land. It would be further provided that the Commissioners should have the same power of putting the purchaser in possession of the property, as the sheriff had in executing a writ of possession. This would obviate the necessity for actions of ejectment to get possession. The measure which he thus proposed would put the purchaser into possession at the earliest moment, with as simple a title as possible, and make it impossible for any one afterwards to evict him on the ground of any flaw in his title. The money to be received from the purchaser would be paid, in the name of the Commissioners, into the Bank of Ireland, to be then disposed of without delay, by being divided amongst the various persons entitled to it. It would be for the Commission to determine as to the persons to whom the money was thus to be paid. In disputed cases, the Commission would have the power to procure a legal opinion, and to direct an issue to be joined and tried when necessary. It was obvious that there must be, to some extent, a concurrent jurisdiction between the Commission and the Court of Chancery. But to obviate the difficulty to which this might give rise, the paramount jurisdiction would be given to the Commission in all cases in which it was competent for it to act. It had also been thought necessary that an appeal should be given from the decision of the Commission to a judicial committee of the Irish Privy Council, such committee to be selected by the Lord Lieutenant. To prevent appeals in frivolous cases, it would be necessary to arm the Commission with a power to decide

in what cases there should be an appeal. Such being the general scope of the duties and functions of the proposed Commission, there were other points which it was necessary to secure in order to render its labours permanently advantageous to the country. It was desirable, for instance, that titles in Ireland should be hereafter prevented from falling into the same complicated state as now. But provisions for this purpose would form no part of the present measure, A Special Bill would be introduced for the purpose-a Bill which, inter alia, would reduce judgments to a better system, so that they should no longer be, as now, a permanent charge upon land in the hands of any assignee. In addition to this, the Government had under consideration a measure the object of which was to establish a better system of registration of conveyances in Ireland. The result of the measure, the provisions of which he had just explained, would, he hoped, be to induce capitalists to invest their money in Ireland. It might also, should the Commission succeed, lead to an ultimate reform of the proceedings in the Court of Chancery itself. It would be necessary to vest a large discretion in the Commissioners. It would not, for instance, be compulsory on them to sell in all cases. They would be empowered, when they saw fit, to institute a preliminary inquiry before they determined to sell. He was aware that various objections might be offered to the measure, but he besought the House to remember that it was introduced to meet the unparalleled difficulties of an unparalleled crisis.

The honourable and learned Gentleman, on resuming his seat, was greeted with cheers from all sides.

Mr. John Stuart avowed that he did not exactly understand the measure, but nevertheless severely criticized it.

Mr. Keogh regarded it as a step at least in the right direction, and was certain that it would be acceptable to Ireland.

Mr. P. Wood exposed the groundlessness of Mr. J. Stuart's objections.

Sir R. Peel, reserving to himself the right to judge more fully of the measure when it was printed and distributed, could not then avoid expressing his cordial satisfaction at the course taken by the Government, and at the principle and general purport of the Bill. The ordinary courts of law were well adapted for ordinary circumstances; but when extraordinary emergencies arose, it was necessary to resort to a special tribunal. The great object in this instance to be gained was a clear, simple, parliamentary title. The right honourable Baronet, in concluding, paid a high tribute to the temper and ability with which the honourable and learned Solicitor-General had explained the provisions of his measure.

Mr. Bright readily accepted the measure as an omen of better legislation for Ireland.

After some observations from Sir John Walsh, Mr. J. O'Connell, Mr. Horsman, Mr. Henley, Mr. Monsell, and Mr. Bankes, leave was given to bring in the Bill. On the motion for a second reading no division took place, the measure appearing to be generally acceptable to the House, and no material objection being raised against it. It subsequently passed through the Committee unaltered, except in some very trifling respects. On the third reading some oppo

nents, though not numerous, appeared, of whom Mr. Napier, Mr. G. Turner, and Mr. Henley were the most prominent. But a motion having been made by Sir Lucius O'Brien, that the Bill be read a third time that day six months, the amendment was negatived by 117 to 12, and the Bill was passed.

In the House of Lords the Encumbered Estates Bill was introduced by Lord Campbell on the 11th of June. The noble and learned Lord entered into an explanation of the principles of the Bill and its intended mode of operation, and at the same time answered some objections which had been made to it. He frankly avowed that the character of the Bill was extremely arbitrary; it was such as could only be justified by the lamentable situation of Ireland. Its principal provision was the appointment of Commissioners, in whom great confidence was to be reposed.

These Commissioners were to be three in number; and it was not proposed to name any qualification, such as that they should be of a certain standing at the bar, but to leave with Government the responsibility of making the best appointments they could. The Commissioners so appointed by the Government were to act in Ireland with all the powers of the Court of Chancery, but without its delays, without its expense, without its formalities, and without appeal, unless with their own consent, which he believed would never be withheld where there was any good ground for it. The Commissioners were to have power to make general rules for the regulation of their proceedings; and those rules must be approved by the Privy Council of Ireland before they could be enrolled. There

was to be an appeal to the Privy Council against the orders of the Commissioners; the Lord-Lieutenant appointing a Judicial Committee of the Council to hear and report on the appeal; and the order of the Privy Council on the appeal was to be final.

Among the objections he replied to was one, that the establishing of this Commission would supersede the Court of Chancery. It would do so; but only for particular purposes, and in a particular department, in which the Court of Chancery had been found wholly inefficient. He had authority to say that this measure was highly approved of by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who most earnestly desired that it should become the law of the land. Lord Campbell stated that the Bill gave no new power. Every Irish mortgage was at present accompanied with a power of sale; and on application to the Court a sale would be decreed. This Bill only facilitated the exercise of that power in a manner most advantageous to the owner. The Bill would not by itself effect all the reformation that was to be desired ; but he hoped before long that a measure would be proposed by the Government to remedy the evils arising from judgment debts in Ireland and from those judgments being assigned, and that a reformation would also be made in the registration law of that country. Without such an amendment in the registry of deeds, the whole operation of the proposed Bill would be neutralized; for, though the purchasers of the present encumbered estates were to start afresh, free and unencumbered, they would soon become, unless precautionary measures were adopted, as deeply involved as the old estates had been.

Lord Brougham observed that