The Sun. — London, England, 1837-12-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—DEc. 21. The SPIAREA took the Chair at the usual hour. The SPEAKER stated that the sureties for the petitioners against the returns for Sligo, Belfast, and the City of Water ford had not entered into their recognizances. The Orders of the Day for taking them into consideration were therefore discharged. BOROUGH OF EVESHAM. Mr. GODSON gave notice that he should on the 6th of February, move for a Select Committee to inquire into the =parliamentary and fraudulent manner in which the petition against the return for the Borough of Evesham had been concocted. Mr. WAKLEY begged to inquire of the Speaker whether be considered the notice which the Hon. and Learned Member for Kidderminster had just given was correct iu point of form. It appeared to him ( Mr. Wakley) that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman assumed as a fact that a petition which had been presented to that House had been concocted In a fraudulent manner. The SPEAKER—Whatever the merits of the petition are tl oy will no doubt be stated when the motion is brought ft rward. If there is a petition pending, it will be for the /louse to consider whether they will entertain the Hon. and Learned Member's motion during the Dendency of the petition. Mr. WAKLEY—There is a petition pending, Sir. The motice which the Honourable and Learned Member has iven will be entered on the votes, and what I wish to know is, whether that notice is in point of form correct, the Hon. and Learned Member assuming that a petition which Las been presented was concocted in a fraudulent manner. The SPEAKER—No doubt the feeling_ of the House es been not to entertain a proposition of the sort while the petition is pending.—( Hear, hear.) However, it will be for the House to decide whether they think it is a proper pro ceeding to put on the votes of the House a notice of motion which, as the Hon. Member states, assumes there were fraudulent circumstances attending the petition whlle that petition is r endin g .—( Hear. ) Mr. GODSON—When the 6th of February arrives, I shall state my reason for giving the notice of motion. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Gentleman had better give the notice generally after the recess. Mr. GODSON would adopt that course. _ Sir JOHN C. 1-108H01..T SE must say that whatever ex perience he had had in the House of .Commons, it went to confirm what had been stated by the Hon. Member for Fins bury. He (Sir John C. Hobhouse) thought the HOB. &An:i Learned Gentleman's purpose would be answered quite xe well if he altered the terms of his notice ; because he must know dill was an iscowatioa that would remain for six weeks against certain parties, which accusation he might or might not prove.—( Cheers.) Mr. GODSON said, that unless he had been perfectly satisfied his notice of motion was perfectly correct, he should not have dared to have brought it forward. He Lai a right to give a notice of motion in the terms in which he had put it. When he came to make his statement, if the House should thick he had ventured to put a notice of motion on the books that ought not to have been there, on Lin would be the responsibility.—( Cries of " Oh, oh.") But thought he had a right to put on the Order Book a notice cf motion, which he believed wes a correct and proper notice. If he had not put it in the terms which the forms and usage of Ihe House required, he was willing to take responsibility tui,on A short and very confused conversation then took place, iii hich The ATTORNEY-GENERA(, said that it would be d.isablx for the lion. Member for Kidderminster to withdraw words fraudulent and uoparliamentary." Mr. GODSON said that aft(.r the suggestion of the Attor tyy-Ger.erul, he would not insist upon retaining the word •‘ fr.wlident," but he had no cbjection to I etaio the word a. tfT.trli.on, . . . . . '11:e SPE ,IK.ER suglested that th- notice should bi ameodal according to the r. commendation of die Attorney li f.' ral. M. GODSON, after a few words from Mr. RUSUOUT, as. sentcd, and the motion was amended accordingly. THE BALLOT. Mr. TANCRED presente ! n petiti n frem certain inhabi tants of Banbury. complaining of acts of intimidation and bri be yat the late election. The petitioners stated, that nothing but an effectual protection t, the voters, such as the Ballot neuld afford could prevent the constant reetprence of I ribery itnd perjury at elections for Members uf the House of Com mons. TIIE SPIaIT DUTIES Lord D. HA LYBURTON presented a pet:Con from Dundee, Fraying fur nn equalizitiun of the Spirit Dufes. HANDLOOM WEAVERS. Mr. H. FLEETWOOD pr..sentA a petition from the ) , Analnoln we:,vers of Preston. signed by 2,500 of tl.e.n, many of whom were in the hab:t of not reetiviag more than oue j...nny a day for their suLsistence, praying the llouse to con sider their case, and the eaust.s of the distresses in which they were at present. Mr. PARKER supported the petition. POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. Sir H. STYLE gave no.ico that in case the second reading of the Irish Poor Law Bill WAS proposed before the recess, or at an early p:•ri-xl after, he should move that it be postponed till the 16th of December. POSTAGE Mr. VILLIERS presented a vetition from some place in Surrey in favour of Mr. R Hill's plan for cheaper.ing the rates of postage. Referred to the Committee on the Post-office EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE. Mr. LEADER presented a petition from Cirencester, stating that the petitioners though taxed, directly or indirectly, for the maintenance of the Government, they had no choice in the election of Members to act as their representatives in Parliament, and they, thererore, • prayed the house to grant them relief by extending the Suffrage.—( Hear, hear.) THE DORCHESTER. LABOURERS. The HON. MEMBER then presented a petition signed by 600 cr 700 of the inhabitants of Westminster, complaining that the Government had broken their promise of bringing home the Dorchester Labourers. He begged that some inquiry might be made into their case, which he thought a very hard one. —( Hear, hear. ) Mr. HUME, seeing the Under-Secretary for thc Colonies, wished to know what was the real state of the case, as to which several applications had bees made to him. He thought the Secretary for the Home Department had stated that orders to send these men home had been transmitted to the Colonies. Sir G. GREY said, orders had been sent to the Colonies to that effect, which he had no doubt would be attended to. He would, however, cause inquiry to be made into the case. Colonel EV ANS supported the petition. • POOR LAW. Mr. FIELDEN presented two petitions against the ope ration of the new Poor-law, which were referred to the Com mittee on that subject. THE BALLOT. Mr. WA KL Y presented a petition from the Borough of Finsbury, which the Honourable Member said was adopted at a public meeting, as numerous and enthu siastic as any meeting which had ever assembled in the metropolis. Tho petition was not signed by many names--in fact it was only signed by the Chairman, John Arthur Roebuck, Esq., a gentleman who until lately held a seat in that House ; but he was satisfied that the namo of the petitioner was in itself sufficient to attach importance to the document, as he was one of the ablest assertors of the demotratic principle that ever had a seat in that House. —(Hear, hear, hear.) The petitioner complained of the hos tility displayed by the Noble Lord, the Secretary of State for the Home Department against the extension of the Suffrage, the Ballot, and the shortening of Parliaments. The petitioner ex pressed his strong attachment to these measures, and stated that he could have no confidence in any Ministry that were pledged against admitting the people to that share in the Constitution which their numbers and their in telligence entitled them to. The Hon. Member said he cordially concurred in the prayer of the petition, and hoped that her Majesty's Ministers would see the propriety of aban doning the declaration which they had made, and advise such i n extension of the Suffrage as would meet the wishes of the people. PENSION LIST. The Hom. lifEmeEn also presented a petition from the pa rishes of St. Giles in the Fields and St. George, Blooms bury, praying the House to place upon the Pension List Com mittee the name of Daniel 'Whittle Harvey—(Loud cries of hear, hear, which the Speaker was obliged to suppress) —as beint , the fittest person to conduct such an inquiry. RECOVERY OF SMALL TENEMENTS. The HoN. MEMBER also presented a petition from Mr. Theobald, a distinguished Barrister, against a Bill now before the Howie, for the Recovery of Small Tenements, as being harsh and unjust in principle and defective in its details. The petitioner hoped that the House would take into con sideration the whole law of Ejectment. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from Bassetlaw, near Nottingham, praying for an Extension of the Suffrage. Colonel SIBT HOR P presented a petition from a respect able body of members of the Established Church, in Lin colnshire, praying for either a repeal or an amendment of the Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages Act. The Hon. Member said, that if the Ministry did not intro duce any measure for the amendment of that obnoxious and degrading Act, he (Col. Sibthorp) would do so, upon an early day after the recess. Mr. GROTE presented a petition from Debenham, in the county of Suffolk, in favour of the Ballot. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a petition from Edinburgh, most numerously signed, in favour of the Ballot. Whatever might have been, or were, his own opinions with respect to that measure, he was bound to state that the peti tion was agreed to, almost unanimously, at a meeting called by public advertisement, and most numerously and respectably attended, and they prayed for the Ballot in consequence of filo gross bribery and intimidation which had taken place at the _late election. He had also a petition to present from the Senatus Academicus of Edinburgh, complaining of the dis abilities which graduates of that University laboured under in practising in England. - Sir EA RDLEY WILMOT presented a petition from Coleshill, praying for an alteration in the mode of appointing Auditors to the Poor Law Commissioners. Referred to the Poor Law Committee. Mr. HAWES presented a petition, signed by 1,210 copy hoLders and leaseholders of the metropolitan boroughs, pray ing for an alteration in the law of landlord and tenart. The Hon. Member also presented a petition, very numerously signed, from the inhabitants of Marylebouc; complaining of the vexatious proceedings adopted by informer=, and praying that protection might be afforded to traders in consequence -..thereof. Sir SAMUEL WH LEY supported the prayer o thy• petition. Mr. CHALMERS presented a petition from Montrose praying for an inquiry into Mr. Rowland Hill's plan with respect to the improvement of the postage. Mr. HUME presented a petition from the Glasgow Po litical Union, praying for the adoption of a system of National Education. KING OF HANOVER. Mr. HUME gave notice that he should move, on the third Tuesday in February, for leave to bring in a Bill to suspend the payment of the annuity of 6,0001, granted by the 47th of George the Third, and the annuity of 15,0001., granted by tho first of George the Fourth to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland, so long as he shall remain King of Hanover. —( Hear, hear.) The SPEAKER said they could not receive the notice for the third Tuesday in February, not knowing to what day the House would be adjourned. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he intended to move that the House should adjourn till the Ist of February. Mr. HUME understood the rule of the House was that a Member could not give a notice beyond four notice days, and he believed he was strictly within the rule by fixing the third Tuesday in February. Lord MORPETH presented a petition from the Society for the prevention of Cruelty to Animals in Belfast, praying the House to enact some measure for the furtherance of the objects of their Institution. The Noble Lord also presented a petition from certain Presbyterians, praying for an alteration in the law relating to Church property. MALTA. Mr. HUNIE said that soon after the House met, he would put a question to the Secretary to the Colonial Department, respecting certain reports made to her Majesty's Government relating to Malta. He wished now, before the House sepa rated, to ask in what state those reports were, and when they might expect they would be laid on the table? Sir GEORGE GREY had hoped those reports would have been ready before the recess ; but in order to obviate the delay thereby occasioned, it was the intention of Government to present them in such a form that they would be ready to he put into the hands of Members the moment they would be ready. Lord J. RUSSELL brought to the bar and laid on the table certain returns from the Colonial-office, of which the par ticulars were not understood in the Gallery. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Colonel SIBTHORP said that he had a question to put to the Noble Lord opposite, respecting the business of the House.— ( A laugh.) Many Hon. Members, who, like himself, came down, at every personal inconvenience, to discharge their duty to their constituents, were last night greatly disappointed at finding that it was not the pleasure of her Majesty's Ministers that a Mouse should be made. The SPEAKER, asked the Hon. and Gallant Member whether he meant to conclude his observations with a ques tion or a motion; if with a question, he should confine himself to the subject matter of that question. Colonel SIBTHORP said that he and others had been ♦ery much disappointed last night by the conduct of Ministers in not making a House, and he now wished to ask the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to evade the motion of which he (Col. Sibthorp) had given notice for this night.—(A laugh.) His motion was respect ing the allowance to the Duchess of Kent—( Hoar)—and he wished to ask the Noble Lord whether it was the intention of the Government to evade that question, in order that he and others might be relieved from the supererogatory duty of attending in the House with a view to that question.—( Hear, and a laugh.) Lord .1011 N RUSSELL •said that it was by no means the wish of her Majesty's Government to evade the noz,ion of the Honourable Member, whom they were always glad to see in his place, and sedulous in his 'duties —(A laugh.) Whenever the Hon. and Gallant Member chose to bring for- ward his motion, her Majesty's Minist , Ts, Members of that House, were quite ready to meet it. Colonel SI BT 110 P —( A laugh.) Lord JOHN RUSSEL L—There is no desire on the pail of her MHjesty's Government to evade the motion. Speafdig for that portion of her Nlaje,ty's Government who have the honour of seats in this H. use, I was do.; n here yes:crday be fore four o'cock ; the Chancellor of the Exchequer was with me, and w:.‘. were disappointed to find that a House could not be made. Col. SIBTHORP—If you wished to make a House, you would have hcen down here at three o'clock.—( Laughter.) THE. CASE OF DR. HAMPDEN. Mr. LUSI I I NGTON begged to ask the Noble Lord the Secretary of the Home Department, whether he had read the protest of Dr. Hemp den, the Regius Profcssor in the Uni versity of Oxftrd. and whether her Majesty's Government had taken any official notice of that protest? The SPEAKER s,id the lion. Member ought not, in asking a question, to state any thing which sni;ht lead to discussion Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I can only say that no official application has been made to me by Dr. Hampden upon the subject, nor has any such application, I believe, been made to any other Memb rof the Government, and at presort there is certainly no intention on the part of the Government to institute proceedings on the subject. COMPENSATION TO LORD CANTERBURY. Mr. WARBURTON wished to make an explanAtion as to some state:cent ho had been supposed to make on the late debate on the question of granting compensation to Lord Canterbury. He had not said that as to the sum of 5001. which the late Speaker had received from the Treasury for certain articles of furniture, that lie had paid to the Lord Chamberlain an equivalent sum of 5001. In feed he (Mr. W.) could not have stated that, for he knew at the time that it was only a nomi nal consideration IN 1-h:eh had been paid by the late Speaker to the Lord Chamberlain. SODOR AND MANN. Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT presented a petition from the Dean and Chapter of Exeter, against the annexation of the bishopric of Sodor and iNI,Inn to the see of Carlisle. SHERIFFS' COURTS. Captain PECH ELL asked the Attorney-General, who had stated on a former occasion that the Lord Chancellor and the Judges had the subject of Sheriffs' Courts under their consi deration, whether it was the serious intention of the Law Of ficers of the Crown to bring forward a measure for the exten sion of Sheriffs' Courts. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the Lord Chancellor, with the assistance of the twelve Judges, was inquiring. His Lordship had not yetmado up his mind upon it, but before the meeting of Parliament, after the recess, be (the Attorney-General) would communicate to the Hon. and Gallant Member his Lordship's determination ; and if his Lordship did not intend to introduce a measure upon this subject to the other House of Parliament, he (the Attorney General) would offer no opposition to the Hon. and Gallant Member's bringing forward a Bill upon the sub ject.—(Hear, hear. ) LAW OF LANDLORD AND TENANT. Mr. AGLIONBY asked the Attorney-General, if after the recess he would be prepared to bring in a Bill on the subject of the Law of Landlord and Te nant, which required general revision, not only on the point to which he (Mr. A.) had applied himself upon a former oc casion, but upon a subject to which the attention of her Ma jesty's Home Secretary had lately been called, as to the pro cess of distress, and the occasional hardships which it worked on tke poor. The . ATTORNEY-GENER AL said he had no intention to take the subject out of the able hands of his Hon. Friend, who would doubtless deal with it in a most masterly manner, and to whom he would be most happy to offer any humble as sistance in his power. Mr. AGLIONBY thought it was the duty of the At torney-General to take up the subject. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman had before offered his assistance which, however, had only consisted in being absent whenever the question was brought forward.—(Laughter.) NEWSPAPER STAMP RETURNS. whether he was aware that the affidavit ought to have been sworn before the day on which the petition was lodged, Mr. FRESH FIELD objected to the question, and the wit ness was ordered to withdraw. After some discussion the witness was recalled, and stated that he thought in strict practice the affidavit ought to have been sworn on the same day that the petition was lodged ; was aware of the petition being open to the objection on the sth. The witness then withdrew. The journal entry of 1807 of the proceedings on the peti tion of George Kinderley, in the Penryn case, on the motion of Mr. Freshfield, was then read by the Clerk at the table. Mr. FRES H FIE LD said that that entry showed the relief given in that case was greater than he asked the House to give on this occasion. Not only was the affidavit sworn thirteen days before the petition was presented, but the recognizances were also entered into, thirteen days before the petition was presented. The Hon. Member concluded by moving " that the time for entering into the recognizances be enlarged to Wednesday, the 16th of January." A Message from the Lords acquainted the House that their Lordships had agreed to the Municipal Officers' Declaration Bill. Mr. WOULFE said the Penryn case proved clearly that a mere error might be corrected by the House ; but in the pre sent case the error was fatal. It was known to the agent on the sth of December, and he did not apply to the House to remedy the mistake until the 18th. On the motion of the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, Mr. Plumptre was recalled, and examined by the Honourable and Learned Gentleman, be stated that on the sth day of December, he had wrote to the agent in Ireland, suggesting that some objection might possibly be taken on the ground of the affidavit having been sworn before the petition was presented, but he had not yet received an an swer.—( Laughter.) Upon referring to the Act of Parlia ment he thought that the affidavit would be sufficient. His object in writing to Limerick was, if possible, to avoid all ob jection. That letter contained a request that another affidavit might be sent, if it were required, in order to put an end to all objection. By Mr. LEFROY.—When he presented the affidavit to the Examiner, he thought it was correct, and that it would be enough to prove to that officer that the sureties were sufficient. By Mr. G. F. YOUNG.—He was afraid that the letter had not reached its destination. By Mr. WOLFE—The reason he had waited till the 18th before he went to the Examiner was, because that offiur had applied that day. He applied to him on the 13th, and he then applied on the 18th for taking the subject into cortsi derhtion. He should not have gone before the Examiner on the old affidavit if the new one had been made out. The witness was then ordered to withdr...w. Mr. GODSON said, that all the House had to deal with was the sufficiency of the recognizances, because there was no objection to the form of the recognizances, and he trusted they would not be met by the statement that the affidavit was wrong, because it was merely a mistake, and not an intentional error for the purpose of deceptior —therefore time ought to be al lowed, and the correction made. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL agreed with what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. H. Maxwell) the other night, that the question was, whether there had been gross negligence on the part of the person applying for their favour. He (the Solicitor-General) had at first made up his mind that they ought to grant that indulgence, and he was still of that opinion, although he confessed that opinion had been shaken by finding the party was aware there was a pos. sible objection. They ought not to infer fraud unless clearly made out, and be thought this case came within the same principle as that acted on in the Sligo case and ono or two others, that it was an oversight which they had it in their power completely to cure. Mr. AGLIONBY thought there was nothing is this case in the stature of fraud; and that therefore the indulgence of the House might justly be granted.—( Hear, hear.) Sir W. FOLLETT was of opinion that it wo&d be much better for the character of that House that they should not interfere at all in these cases, for they were almost unavoidably decided in a party spirit.---( Hear, hear.) Still es the House had granted indulgence in other cases, and as in the present instance he very much doubted whether there had been after all a mistake committed, he should be willing to grant indulgence on this occasion. Mr. WO ULFE remarked that the witness had stated that, for the affidavits, to prepare which he had now asked time, till after the recess, lie had already written, but had to this hour received no answer. lie trusted that the House would consider this as a fatal objection, as in his opinion it must be taken that the latter had arrived. Mr. G. F. YOUNG thought that there was nothing in the evidence of the witness to show that the party was unwilling to enter into the recognizances. No case, in his opinion, was more entitled to indulgence than the present. Sir T. FREMANTLE trusted that though the House had lost its character for the manner in which it conducted the se cases, it would maintein its character for consistency. After a few words fro:n an Hors. MEMBER, Mr. FRESHFIELD replied. Mr. M AIME having formed the opinion that the party applying was not entitled to succeed in his application, he trusted he should ri•A be considered as hiving been in ikenced by party motives, and would, with the per mission of the House, state the grounds on which he hai formed his opinion. The Honourable and Learned Member for Exeter had stated that he wished there was a rule of the House for refusing every application of this sort, but as there was not he had recommended the House to grant it. On that ground, and no other, had the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter rested the tight of the petitioner to succeed in his ap plication. Ile (Mr. Manic) was dissatisfied with this portion of the Grenville Act, indeed he might say with the whole of it, but it was the law of the lard, and the House wasbound to act upon it. The Act imposed upon the House the duty--as in the trial of election petitions—of deciding on all these appilca tions for indulgence, upon the evidence adduced at the Bar.—. (Hear, hear.) It was not fair to impute to this side of the House exclusively, party-spirit in the decision of these cases.—( Hear, hear.) In the present instance the affidavit, it appeared, had been sworn before the petition was presented. The agent discovered the error on the sth, and he then wrote to the Irish agent ; but when he received no answer, why had he not written again on the 10th, the 11th, or even the 13th ? He should vote against the application. Mr. GODSON explained. Mr. PEMBERTON thought that if there was a case where a slip had been committed, and where the parties had acted bone fide, the present was that case. The error here was merely a formal and technicle one. The complaint here was the parties' a Aveney not being disputed they had not been permitted to cure a technical error. It was said that the decision of the House on the Sligo case had no application—he contended that it had. In the Dudley case indulgence had been granted, because the error had been bona fide. In the present case he would grant the indulgence. Mr. JERVIS felt bound to oppose the motion, for he thought that, admitting the error to have been bona fide, there had been a lathes and a negligence on the part of the petitioners.—( Hear, hear.) Why, the mistake had been dis covered so long ago as the sth December.—( Hear, hear.) After a few words from Mr. ELLIS, the House divided, when there appeared--- For the motion Against it .. Majority —9 .... 59 50 Mr. 0. GORE moved'' That the t;re• for delivering in the particulars of the qualification of the Hon. and Gallant Mem ber for Sligo be enlarged to the 7th of January." The Hon. Gent'eman did not call on the House to concur in his motion merely as a matter of favour, but as an act of common justice. After a few words from Mr. HUME and Mr. WOULFE, the motion was agreed to. On the motion that Mr. Potter, the agent in the Portarling ton election petition case, be called to the bar, Mr. MAULE would consent that the motion for calling Mr. Potter to the bar should be negatived. Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE could not help expressing the surprise which he felt at the course which the Hon. and Learned Member for Carlow had taken, after what occurred the other night with respect to the Sligo, Portarlington, and Carrickfergus petitions. Mr. MA UL E, in explanation, said, that, as the parties had not entered into the necessary recognizances in the Portar lington case, he took it for granted that the petition must fall to the ground. The motion was negatived without a division. Mr. HUME expressed a hope that her Majesty's Govern ment would adopt some measure for altering the law on this subject, in order that the time of the House might not be wasted, night after night, in this way. Mr. MACLEAN thought the best course that could be taken would be to leave questions relating to recognizances altogether in the hands of the examiners. The SPEAKER wished to know whether it was the plea :itre of the House to proceed to the Orders of the Day ? Mr. HUME suggested that the ought, in the first instance, to dispose of the dropped Orders. Mr. F. BARING was anxious to go on with the Duchess of Kent's Annuity Bill, and if they would allow him he would move that the House should resolve itself into Corn nltee on the subject. Mr. BORTHWICK could not conceive that there would be any objection to the extension of these returns. The Hon. Member for Kilkenny had moved for returns to the Ist of October. The Honourable Member for Marylebone had subsequently- moved for them up to the Ist of November, and he would now more that they be published up to the Ist of December. Mr. BARING said that he had no objection to the returns being furnished up to the date wished for by the Hon. Gentleman, further than that the returns were now ready to be printed, aid if any alteration were made in the form of them, as would necessarily be the case, if the date was changed, they could not be printed until after the recess. Mr. HUME objected to any motion which would interfere with the returns he had moved for ; the returns were already prepared, and if the motion of the Hon. Member was agreed to, time would be lost. Let the returns be laid on the table, and the Hon. Member could move for such returns as he wished for. Mr. BORTH WICK then gave notice that he would to. morrow move for returns from the date of the last returns. TITHE ON FISH. In reply to a question from Captain PE CHE LL, Lord J. RUSSELL stated that the Commissioners had made no further progress with respect to the Tithe on Fish, than to direct the Commissioners to direct how far voluntary commutations had been entered into. Lord JOHN RUSSELL postponed his motion for leave to bring in the Pluralities Bill till to-morrow, in order to bring on the Duchess of Kent's Annuity Bill. Mr. HUM E, before they went into the consideration of that Bill, wished to know whether it was intended that the Pension List Committee should meet before the recess ; if they did not, much time would be lost, as they must necessarily send out circulars. Colonel SIBTHORP rose for the purpose of bringing '.award the motion of which he h a d g i ven not i ce on go i ng nto Committee on this Bill. Mr. HUME must object to the Hon. and Gallant Officer being allowed to bring on a motion which, if he (Mr. Hume) understood rightly, was likely to lead to considerable debate. Mr. F. BARING would not press his motion, but he must at the same time say that the Government were anxious to bring this Bill on as early as possible. After a few words from Mr. Warburton, Lord Howick, the Speaker, and Colonel Sibthorp, Mr. FIELDEN rose to order. He had a motion on the aper which he was determined to press. He thought that the motions on the list ought to have precedence of the d. opped Orders. Lord HO WICK—If the Hon. Member Was determined to press his motion, he should not stand in the way. He would, therefore, concur in the postponement of the orders until the motions were disposed of ; and if it should not be at too late an hour when this Order of the Day came to be considered, the Hon and Gallant Member could bring forward his mo tion. He could assure the Hon. and Gallant Member that there was no desire whatever on the part of the Government to throw him overboard. Lord J. RUSSELL could not then give an answer. LIMERICK ELECTION. Mr. FRE S H FIE LD said he had a case to bring on which he believed should take precedence. He moved that Mr. Plumptre be called to the bar. Mr. W. H. Plumptre was then called in and exa mined. He was a solicitor, residing in the Temple. He was the agent aga i ns t the return for the county of Limerick. The petition was presented on the 4th of Decem ber. Previous to that time he received the names of the sureties. He gave notice to the proper officer of the names of those gentlemen ; the recognizances were enured into in Ireland, and transmitted to the Speaker. Those recognizances were regular both in form and date. He attended the Examiner on the 18th to complete the recognizances. No objection was then made to their sufficiency. A formal objection was taken to the recognizances, in consequence of the affidavit having been sworn before the day on which the petition was presented. The recognizances were not entered into until after the petition was lodged; it was only the affidavit of sufficiency that was objected to—the re cognizances were pe?fectly regular. Upon an HON. MEMBER putting the question to the witness, The Orders of the Day were then poitprned. DISTRESS OF THE HANDLOOM WEAVERS. Mr. FIELD EN rose to call the attention of the House to a petition presented on the 11th of December from the hand loom weavers of Manchester. In Manchester alone there were computed to be at least 6,000 weavers, some of whom had been visited by persons appointed for that purpose. The results of the inquiry made by the visitors were, that 876 fa milies whom they had visited, containing 3,274 persons, de pended for support on the income of 1,740 looms employed. THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 22, 1837 The average earnings of these looms did not exceed 332/. 6s. 3d. weekly, leaving an average of 2s. Id. a week to each per son, and deducting Is. 2d. a week for rent, fuel, soap, and candles, the average for the support and clothing of each per son per week would be only 104 d. or leel. per day. It was now five years since this subject had been brought under the notice of Parliament, and though the distress of these persons was admitted to be great, no redress what ever had been afforded them.---( Hear, hear.) It had been proved before Committees that these men worked from twelve to fifteen hours a-day, and they were unable to sup port themselves by their labour. The articles produced isy these operatives were of a description principally consumed by the rich and wealthy, who could afford to pay a remunerating puke for the labour that prOduced them, and a great quantity of these articles were exported to foreign countries, to be ex changed for commodities that contributed to the comfort and luxury of the wealthy classes. Notwithstanding the patient demeanour of these persons, their grievances remained unre dressed. If this indifference continued, he would, at the risk of being considered factious, take steps that would force the case of these persons on the attention of the Government. If some redress was not afforded he would feel bound to get up and oppose every vote of money that was proposed. That might be a course open to blame, but if redress was not af forded, or some attention bestowed on this subject, that course he was determined to take. There was not one of these weavers that did not contribute to the taxation of the coun try, and if the situation of these men did not receive at tention, he would take every opportunity that the privileges of the House afforded to force that attention. All the facts respecting the distress of the suffering classes had been clearly established before a Committee, of which the Right Hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. P. Thomson) was a Member, and he did think that that Hon. Member had not done his duty towards those people by not directing the at tention of the Government to the sufferings they endured. One of the reports of a Committee recommended a Bill to be brought in, which would have the effect of relieving those distressed weavers. That Bill was brought in by the Hon. Member for Lanark, and it was met on the part of the Go vernment by a direct negative, and was not allowed to pro ceed. In the course of the last Session the matter was not lost sight of. A motion was made in July last for an Address to the Crown for a Commission to inquire into the condition of the distressed operatiies in the manufacturing districts. That Address was voted six months ago, and yet not a single Commissioner had been sent forward, though the operatives were dying for want of food. It showed that the Government were indifferent to the condition of the working people ; but he could tell the House that no Government could carry on their busi ness who were indifferent to the distresses of the working people. He would like to know why this inquiry had not proceeded ? If a vote of that Hoes was good fur any thing it ought to be acted upon. The Government that would act in this way could not have his confidence, for he thought after the vote of the House - that that inquiry ought to have been pro ceeded with, and they should have ascertained what redress could be afforded. Something should be done. They must either raise the wages of these operatives to a scale that would afford them the means to live, or they must do what would had to the same effect, namely, reduce the taxation that. pressed on the necessaries of life. He thought that they ought to have a minimum of wages. The Hon. Member con cluded by moving the following resolution :—" That there is in this kingdom an immense body of. hand-loom weavers suf fering unparalleled distress, and that this distress arises from the unprecedented low rate of wages that the weavers are paid for their work, and from the heavy taxes imposed by this House on the food and other necessaries of life, a sufficiency of wh'ch their wages should enable them to purchase; that the work which a large proportion co: - these weavers execute, con sists of articles indispensably necessary to the personal comfort and convenience of the higher and middle classes of society, or of articles exported to fureign countries, and there ex changed for luxuries and necessaries, to increase the affluence and comfort of these classes ; and that it is therefore the in terest as well as the duty of the r:presentatives of the people in this House, immediately to desise and enact such laws as shall either raise the wages of these distressed weavers to a scale adequate t. maintain them comfortably, or that shall so reduce the taxes imposed on the necessaries of life, and to alter the mode of collecting such taxes, as that no part of the wages paid to these weavers shall be abstracted from them, by either direct or indirect taxation on those necessaries " The motion was seconded by Mr. H. FLEETWOOD, and put from the Chair. Mr, H. FLEETWOOD was in communication with a large body of his constituents on this subject, and he knew that those handloom weavers who were suffering great distress at present would receive as a great source of cum. fort any assurance •f sympathy on the part of the House. During all the troubles that had taken place throughout the country, these men were remarkable for their peaceable de meanour. Their cas., demanded atten'ion, and they ought to ace what could be done to reduce taxation upon the neces saries of life. There was one point in which he cliff:l.nd from the Hon. Me.aber for Oldham. He did not think that they could possibly raise the standard of wages, but they ought to reduce taxation. Mr. M. PHILIPS was not in the House when the com mission alluded to by the Honourable Member for Oldham had been agreed to. Knowing the objections to such a proceed ing, had he been in the House he would not have been amongst those who voted for it. There was no •ne more in . terested in the condition of these weavers, or more anxious to reLeve them, but he differed as to the means of doing so. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to refer to the details stated by the Hon. Member for Oldham, for the purpose cf showing that he had overstated the distress, and also that the distress was on the decline. He did not mean, however, to deny, that great distress prevailed throughout that class of the commu nity. The petition stated, that this distress was felt more dur ing the present than any preceding year, but this was in a great degree owing to the commercial embarrassments which deprived this branch of industry of the American market ; and this diminished consumption was of course immediately felt by the classes engaged in this manufacture. He did not see how they could establish a minimum of wage=. If any such standard of wages was legislated for, the operatives themselves would be the first to feel the inconvenience of it, and the first to wish to depart from it. Much of the periodical distress was owing to the variation of the monetary system, and the consequent fluctuations of commerce. The Honourable Member concluded by stating that there was no class which suffered so greatly and with so much equanimity, but he re gretted that he did not see any direct way of relieving their digress. Sir E. WILMOT bore testimony to the distress of the handloom weavers, and to the patience with which they en dured their sufferings. He contended that their distress arose principally from the system of free trade. Mr. 11 INDL E Y.—As a commission was appointed to in quire into the subject he would not go largely into the ques tion. The first cause of the distress of the handloom wearer was the present Corn Laws. It was a shame to expect that, with corn at double the price of what it was on the Conti nent,:the handloom weavers could compete with the same class in any of the Continental countries. Though the subject was a delicate one, be hoped the House would take it into consi deration apart from any prejudices with which the subject was beset. Another cause of the distress was the great improvement in machinery. Such improvements were in their nature calcu lated to benefit the human race, but it was the duty of a provident Government to take care that, instead of adding to, they should ameliorate the weight of the original curse, which ordained that man should earn his bread by the sweat of his brow. The immi gration of the Irish poor also added to the distress of the hand loom weavers. He did not argue against the right of those people to come and look for a sabsistence in the richer country, and the people here ought to make them welcome ; but the effect of their immigration must necessarily be to reduce those with whom they came to compete to a condition as low as their own. The immigration of the Irish was likely to be increased by the operation of the proposed Irish poor law, by the fourth and fifth clauses of which beggary was about to be made a crime in Ireland, punishable by imprisonment and the tread mill. This would increase immigration, and send over even a lower class than those who now came to this country. He would conclude by stating it as his opinion that Government was pinned to one of two alternatives. Either they must adopt some fixed rate of wages, or reduce the amount of taxes upon articles consumed by the poor. Mr. P. HO WARD recommended the Hon. Member for Oldham to withdraw his motion, as the subject could not be well discussed until the Commissioners had made their report. Mr. DARBY was of opinion that insuperable difficulties stood in the way of a reduction of the taxes. He thought the distress of the handloom weavers was owing to the want of protection, and he did not see why protection should be taken from the agriculturists because of the manufacturers suffering from the want of it. It would be better policy to extend it to the one than to take it from the other, and he was satisfied that the agriculturists so far from opposing such a proposition would be most willing to grant to the manufacturers an equal protection to that which they themselves enjoyed.—( Heir. ) Mr. P. THOMSON would, if the Hon. Member for Old ham persevered in his proposition, move the previous question. One of the propositions of the Hon. Member was a state ment of facts which the House, having no knowledge of them, could not agree to. The other proposition went to re commend a species of vague and loose legislature. The Hon. Gentleman would have it appear that Government was indif ferent to the distress which existed amongst the handloom weavers, and unwilling to endeavour to relieve them, and that he alone was the person ready to befriend them. He de nied, on the part of the House, as well as on the part of the Government, that any such indifference existed. They were most willing to attend to, and if possible to relieve, the distress of those sufferers. But why, if the Hon. Member was their only advocate, why; instead of vague resolutions, did ho nut come forward with some specific remedy, or propose some measure which would lead to a full discussion of the subject ? He would then find that there would be no indisposition to consider his proposition, and, if it was deemed satisfactory, to adopt it.—(Hear, hear.) Now, how could the Hon. Gentle man's plan of taxation be managed by any possibility ? It would upset all the arrangements of the c ountry , as t h e taxa tion was, in almost all instances indirect:—(Hear, hear, hear.) Even if the House agreed to the proposition, how could it be carried into effect ? The thing was a mere delusion. He (Mr. P. Thomson) would admit that it was his duty to look to the interests of these poor people, and he would not yield to the Honourable Member for Oldham in a desire to relieve their distresses, but he was not aware of any specific measure by which that relief could be effected. Indeed, he was opposed to the Commission which had been appointed, because he thought it calculated to raise delusive hopes. The evil which he anticipated had occurre d , b ut t h e respons ibili ty did not rest on him : it rested on the House. As, however, the Commission had been a p po i nte d h e wou ld do a ll i n his i power to render t as effective as possible, and he hoped the report, when received, would prove satisfactory. Assistant- Commissioners had been appointed, and they would make • their communications to the head office as soon as possible ; but he could not hold out a hope to the House that the report would be speedily made, as the objects of their inquiry were scattered through every part of the country. A great propor tion of the distress which existed amongst the hand-loom weavers, arose out of the peculiar nature of their business, as, from the easy access to it, more people engaged in the trade than the trade could support. This, and the superior produc tion of the power-loom, were the chief causes of the distress. He denied that the evil was owing to foreign cempetition, for the same cause was not followed by tho same effect in other branches of industry. There was also an advantage to the persons employed in the business of handloom weaving, that they were not, like other labourers, tied down to time, and they also had the advantage of taking apprentices. It was the policy that was pursued, ho considered, more than any question of price which had reduced the condition of the weavers. If a different policy hag been pursued trade would have been extended, and that which was of more importance than a question of price would have been prevented, namely, the foreign competitors who had been raised up would not have existed, and the manufacturers of other countries would not have been able to supplant those of England in the market. The effect of improvements in machinery generally he was convinced, was to increase the demand for manual labour, and that after a considerable improvement had been made, although it would be attended by temporary ill effects, the ultimate result would be a greater demand for hands and labour. On the whole, he was willing to wait the result of the Commission appointed, and when the report was made ie adopt a measure upon it. Mr. WA KLE Y, having listened with great attention to the Right Hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade, could not but express his astonishment at his arriving at so strange a conclusion as that of waiting for the report of the Commission. When would that Commission make its report ? It was appointed in June or July, but it might last for two or three years in that happy state of incubation, and the only information they might be able to obtain might be that they continued setting. He thought the proper plan would be to take taxes off the industrious portions of the com munity, and leave the rich to take care of themselves. Let them impose a property tax, the most just tax that ever was imposed—take the tax from the poor and place it upon pro perty. The weavers had been complimented for their for bearance under their distress. He could not join in such compliments, for he thought that justice could not be obtained by the people unless they teased that House by petitions, and that unless they did so they would never get their grievances remedied. After a few words from Mr. G. F. YOUNG and Mr. Hume, Colonel SIBT El OR P protested against the doctrine that the agricultural interest enjoyed the benefit of any unequal tax. They were as much taxed as any other part of the community. Mr. M. A TTW OOD said that the prices were now very different to what they formerly were; but without entering into the question of the C orn Laws, it must be remembered that 50,000,000/. now was equal to 80,000,000/. at the close of tho war. people of this be at once agreeable to the feelings of the her Majesty had been told by them that such a grant would country and available from its pecuniary resources. And it was not in any spirit of disrespect to her Majesty's com mands, or of irrevence towards her recommendation, that those observations which be should make on the subject matteer of that grant were conceived or his opposition to it offered Who did this measure in reality come from ? Ostensibly from her Majesty, but in reality from her responsible--he rather term them dangerous—advisers ; from those men w so loudly professed economy in their expenditure of the pab lie money, and put forward reduction as their principle, but who, he was free to say, practised neither the one nor t le other in the slightest degree during the period they— rot. tunately, he should add—had held the reins of Governmen No one was more willing to admit the excellent q ualities_ t]tl . the Duchess of Kent, and he had no doubt that she had fnl filled her maternal duties in the most exemplary manner, but .e would ho he thought that she had, after all, done no more than she ought as a mother and the country had a right to expect.; and if she had not fulfilled those duties as she had done, the country would have had every right to censure her. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had argued that they wer;DZ,. the proposed arrangement only giving the Duchess of 2,0001. per annum additional ; but he (Colonel Sibtborp) denied it, and asserted that, if they I looked to former g ran ? , they would find that it would be an addition of 20,0001. I° contended that the grants for the education and virtual sup-. port of the Princess Victoria had virtually ceased eV become lapsed by her accession to. the Throne , and thaw the Duchess of Kent might now (as far as any reason 11e of state existed to the contr a ry) retire into private life; and , had no doubt that her R o yal Hi g h ne ss herself entertainheadt the wish. As to precedents, it sh o uld be remembered t in the reign of G eorge th e Thi r d th e members of the Royal family, act u ally nearer t o the Throne than he Duchess of Kent, were allowed much smaller incomes. six sons were only given 60,000/. amongst them, and his five daughters 13,000/. Th e f ormer certa i n ly had much gr eater establishments to support than the Duchess of Kent . The Hon. Gentleman o n the Treasury bench had expatiated (?ti. the limited allowance hitherto enjoyed by her Royal High, ness; and he certainly must admit that if it was right to allow her 30,000/. per annum now on account of her proxini to the Throne, it was mean and niggardly in them to restric_ her to 22,000/. hitherto. It was rumoured that there e certain debts incurred in the education of her Majesty sti undischarged, to the payment of which this additional gram. was to be devoted. If this %sere the case he could saying that it would have been more straightforward to ba r : brougt forward that matter openly, and he would have been also as one of the first to have aided their payment. It was serted that there was a sort of private arrangement, that soil workings were going forward in foreign lands, as well as. a home, where he could plainly see that Hon. Gentlemen were acting upon a principle well understood in one part of h r Ma jesty's empire, viz., " scratch me and I'll scratch you . Laughter.) The grant was evidently concocted and sup' ported by those who were only anxious to secure power a n place, " and who (said the Gallant Colonel) I trust in b ee ‘ ,„ ve „ - will only hold them for a short time."—( Laughter.) It wag a measure obviously prepared to please those by whose will and pleasure they continued to sit on the Treasury Bench., A not help Sir J. C. HOB fl OUS E —We are going on Saturday.---k laugh.) Colonel SIBTHORP—I w i s h t o G o d , Si r, i t ma y be fo r ever !—( A laugh.) If th e y were go i ng to grant t hi s 30,01 a he wanted to know wh ere it wou ld go , an d to w h om it w°n go? He should now move, " That it shall be lawful for her Majesty to give and grant, by letters patent under the Great Seal of Great Britain, to her Royal Highness Maria Louisa Victoria Duchess of Kent, for the term of her natural life, for the adequate provision of h er sa id R oya l Hi g h ness , a certa- ;, annual payment or ann u ity o f 22,0 00 /. o f l aw f u l m oneys °t- Great Britain, in lieu of the proposed grant of 30,000/." Sir S. WHA LLEY said he felt some reluctance to the grant, and would most probably have supported the Gallant Colonel's proposition but for the line of argument by which b e supported A laugh.) He assured the Hon. Gentleman that he was no party to the scratching system of which he si‘oka, and was quite sur p r i se d t h at a man of his gallantry should insinuate such motives where a lady was in the case." (Laughter. ) Colonel SIBTHORP assured the Hon. Member that ho did not apply the axiom to the Royal Personage alluded l°' but to those persons who scratched her Majesty's Ministers, ca hopes of getting something in return.—(Laughter.) Mr. FINCH (who rose amidst cries of " Question") sorted that, instead of merely granting an increase of 8,0001., they were actually giving an increase of 14,000/. Looking at the entire arrangement, and the circumstances under which th , e , additional grant w as p ro p ose d, h e cou ld not reconc i le i t with his duty to his constituents to accede to it. He must, there' fore, give his vote to the Gallant Colonel--(Question.) A division then took pl ace , an d t h e num b ers were as fol lows : Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to recal the attention of the House to the question really before it. He thought it a mat ter of the greatest danger in a branch of the Legislature af firming resolutions that might give birth to expectations which might, from causes unconnected with the question to which they related, be altogether frustrated. Hopes might be raised mhich they could not realise under circumstances not at all connected with the immediate matter. Ha thought the terms of the resolutions pledged the House to such kind of proceed ings, as he was sure were of a nature that ninety-nine out of a hundred of the intelligent class he gave the weavers the credit of being, would scareely be able to weave with a serious coun tenance when they read them. Sir C. B. VE RE said that the manner in which the ques- Con had been put had given an opportunity to open all topics, however remotely connected with it, and he thought the Hon. Gentleman would better consult the interests of the people whom he was desirous of serving by withdrawing his motion. Mr. FIELD EN replied. He wished the motion to be put from the chair, and had no objection to its being negatived withou . a division. Mr. lIINDLE Y said it was one of too much importance to be dealt with in that manner, and lie should press it to a di. vision if the Hon. Member for Oldham did not. Mr. P. THOMSON said that in case he shoidd move the previous question as an amendment. The gallery was then cleared for a division. peered— For the original motion Aga;nst it Majority There ap- -62 BEER AND CIDER IN ENGLAND AND WALES Air. \VARBURTON moved for leave to bring in . a Bill to , mend the laws for regulating the sale of beer and cider in England and Wales. Mr. P. HOWARD seconded it. Leave was given. UNION WORKHOUSES. Mr. COURTENAY moved for a list of the unions fur which workhouses have been ordered by the Poor Law Com missioners to be built, purchased, altered or enlarged,from the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act to the present time, with the number of persons to be provided for, the amount authorised to be expended, and the names of the archi tects and eontracters.—Ordered. OCCUPATION OF ALGIERS. Sir S. WHALLEY postponed his motion relative to the occupation of Algiers by France. We could not hear to what period. NOMINATION OF SELECT COMMITTEES. Mr. HUME moved, pursuant to notice, " That every Mem ber intending to proposed a Select Committee shall, one day next before such nomination of Members, place on the Votes the names of the Members intended to be proposed by him to be Members of such Committee." He was not aware that any inconvenience could arise from the arrangement; but if it did, as it was only an experiment—the House could, upon trial, rescind it. Ay es Nees Majority Colonel SIBTHO RP then stated his intention to postpon e the second clause of his motion until the report of the Con!" mittee on the third readin g came b e f ore t h e H ouse. He gin' ,, begged leave to explain that, in his reference to the scratch ing System, he had not the slightest intention of alluding t! •her Royal Highness, but to the action and reaction of t he Radical Members and the jobbing Ministers.—(Laughter .) He then gave notice that, after the recess, he would mote for the repeal of so much of the Statute of George 111. as grant° 50,000/. to Leopold, Prince of Saxe Coburg, &c. Sir Matthew Wood's two Bills—oee for the improvemen t of the metropolis, and th e ot h er f or t h e b etter regu l at i o n of , hackney carriages and omn ib uses — were rea d , and advan ced a stage, and the following Gentlemen were appointed a Corn" mittee in the former :—Sir Matthew Wood, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Robert Peel, Lord Viscount Lowtil r ' Mr. Herries, Admiral Codrington, Sir Robert Harry Ing lis ' Mr. Shaw Lefevre, Mr. Wakley, Colonel Evans, Mr. OAP Mr. George Palmer, Mr. P en d arves , M r . Barnard, and M r ' Hall. Mr. P. THOMSON should not oppose the motion, espe cially in the form in which it had been put by the Hon. Mem ber; but he could not let it pass without expressing his own conviction that it would lead to great inconvenience, and that the House would ultimately be obliged to rescind it altogether. Sir T. FREMANTLE did not intend to oppose the mo tion either, but he thought it would be very inconvenient if strictly adhered to in all cases. He would suppose, for in stance, that a Select Committee was required to be appointed without delay. In that case the principle of the motion would interfere with the public business. If, however, it was to bo taken as the general rule, and if cases analogous to that which he had supposed should be understood as the exception, he thought no injury could accrue from at least giving a trial to the experiment. Mr. WAKL E Y suggested the introduction of words to the effect named by the Hon. Baronet. It was necessary, he as serted, to make the rules of the House as clear and as explicit as possible. Mr. WYSE supported the motion. After a few words from Sir M. WOOD, the motion was agreed to. MEMBERS ON PUBLIC COMMITTEES. Mr. HINDLE Y moved " That no Member shall be on more than two public Committees at the same time." The motion, however, had no seconder, and accordingly it fell to the ground. The other Orders of the Day were then gone through. i , Mr. HUME mov e d f or a return o f a ll t h e monun len t erected in Westmi nster Abb ey an d S t. P aul ' s Cathedral. at the public expense from 1756 to t h e present t i me, specifrlig the cost in each case, &c. The House then adjourned, at Twe!ve o'Clock. HOUSE OF L ORD S.—Dire. 21. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY, in the absence of the Lose CHANCELLOR, took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. Upon the motion of Lord DUNCANNON the whole Houser solved itself into a Committee on the Prisoners' in 101 0 " Conveyance Expenses Bill. The Bill passed through the Committee. The House red sumed, and the Bill was reported without amendments, an ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. POOR LAW MEDICAL ATTENDANCE. Lord WHARNCLIFFE presente d a pet i t i on from t,WI gentlemen calling th emse l ves th e S ecretar i es o f t h e M e dics and Surgical Associ a ti on a t ( as we understood) Chelrast w ar bs on behalf of the gentlemen forming that Association. f _ object of the petiti o n was t o state t h at t h ere was an ins uts ficient and greatly in a d equa t e supp l y o f me di cal atte ndant s afforded to the poor under the new Poor-law amendment sY 6 ts tem ; and that that attendance was now much more inadequ a te than it was under the form er s y stem. Wi t h referen c e its having been diminished by the new Poor-law system , tj e c i . the Noble Lord, h a d very cons i dera b le doubts iiidecei As to its having b een i na d equate formerly, and being iti a to quate now, that might be ; nor was it any answer w h a tever ter say, that the m e di ca l ass i stance afforded to the poor i s bet t ot now than it was under the old law. If that assistance is ° now sufficient, an alteration ought to be made. Lord BROUGHAM said that the comparison lYtte portant. Lord WHARNCLIFFE o b served that upon corall it rise e the attendan c e m i g h t now b e b etter, and so far it alif - 1 2 01- satisfactory, but st ill t h at was no answer to its being tlittate cient even now. Th e pet i t i oners went on to :Neal that, in consequence o f the extent. of the m edic it distance to which m e di ca l o ffi cers were ap point t e im was impossible f o r th em to ren d er prompt and dance mediate assistance in many cases where prompt attend se lf was required. That was what he, the Noble Lord him ssi , was entirely ignorant of. Ile had had, he mus t p o or no experience whatever of the working of the ne w _ a lso Law Amendment Act in that respect. The petitioneros,,,.o.o complained of the system of appointments of medical ta r : yer made by the Poor-law Commissioners; and the final P int of the petition was, that their Lordships would aPr b i e st. Committee for the purpose of inquiry into the Pu er J, in The Noble Lord differed in opinion with the petitio% so t reference to the prayer of the petition. He di o dieu t think under the present circumstances it would be e l l ) , ar to engage in that enquiry. There was a Committ! r ojori pointed by the other House to enquire into the 0/7 w ho of the New Poor Law Amendment Act, and tha' e bs fore complained ought to have an opportunity of going. tisti ers that Committee with their complaints. The Pe" as not observed that a s u ffi c i ent opportun i ty of that so rt * row s, afforded to them by th e C omm i ttee o f the H ouse o f C t i' tho se inasmuch as th e C omm i ttee was so composed as no t to gllbeard. opposed to the new system a chance of being imparth'ilie roost only did not know how that was, but if it were so, r oost only say that it was most impolitic. He was sure tha t e 4 t he persons who had given their attention to the operativi.); the new system, especially in those parts of the countrytistiteed that Poor-law was most particularly felt, must be sa n d that tie essential good had been done by the new system, a 6Eoll°' internal management of workhouses was infinitely suf,:ded bat to what it was under the old system. H e felt Perbseneficial the working of the new system had been most place—end that it t hat that great improvements had taken with the change had been most useful. would be considered universally throughout tne agree .5 Lord ELLENBOROUGH did not altogether d with °I be concurred na the statements of the pe:itioners. But rinciples a Noble Friend in believing that the more the known, the mor e real tendency of the I'oor Law Act became would its benefits be acknowledged. any petition. at m medical The Earl of R ADNOR said, that a gre s ectabla had been presented to the House froa l rewguld have a practitioners, complaining that the the system of comp etiXre'_ • dency to degrade the profession by men who had But there were a great many respectable country t.s . in eit" entered into that competition. Lord on the table. debtors planation, the petition was lai d a ctition from the the Lord BROUGHAM presente praying forPsome alteration Z n ers confined in Bath Gaol, ni for debt. The p e s T ate of After a few words from WHARNCLIFFE, laws elating to stated that themselves anti familiesmisery, ee a nseci wee_ t destitution and (lured. T he Y f the the greatest which they had en t ion 0 of the long confinement and cruel o pera d w ets of the harsh fe aa boned two instances who had a wt law. One was that of a person imprisonme were . n uerce GENERAL POST OFFICE. Mr. HUME, in the absence of the Hon. Member for Greenock, moved for the following returns, at his request : " That return No. 24, ordered in the votes of December 14, be discharged ; and to move for returns, in detail, of the number of cases which have occurred, from sth January, 1829, to sth January, 1837, in each year, of letters, franked or un franked, addressed to p er s o n s i n London, Dublin, or Edin burgh, or which have been applied for through the General Post Offices of those cities, containing money, bills, bank. notes, or other property, which have been secreted or purloined by any person in the employment of the Post Office depart ment, or been demanded therefrom by private parties as unde livered ; with the amount thereof in each case in each year respectively. Of the names and situations of all persons dis missed or removed from the Post Office department, as above, under the allegation of having purloined or secreted letters, franked or unfranked, or been concerned therein, containing money, bills, bank-notes, or other property, belonging to pri vate parties, with the amount in each instance ; also, a return, as above, of all persons who have actually defrauded the Re venue department of the Post Office, and been dismissed therefore; stating, in either case, if the first offence was vi sited with removal or dismissal, or if repeated previous thereto. Also, the nature of the security taken by the Post Office re garding the abstracting or purloining moneys or other property by those employed therein; stating if the parties becoming sureties are bound to make good and restore private property when abstracted or purloined by the servants of the public in that department, or only for their fraudulent acts against the revenue." QUALIFICATION OF MEMBERS OF PARLIA MENT. Mr. WARBURTON moved for leave to bring in " a Bill to amend the laws relating to the qualification of Members to serve in Parliament." The Hon. Member stated that the principle of his measure was to reduco the qualification for county Members to the same amount as that of borough Mem bers, and to admit various descriptions of property to qualify for either or both.—Leave given. DUCHESS OF KENT'S ANNUITY. On the motion of Mr. P. THOMSON, the dropped Order of the Day for the Committee on the Duchess of Kent's An nuity Bill was read. _ On the question that the, Speaker do leave the chair being put, - - • Colonel SIBTHORP complained of the conduct of the Hon. Secretary for the Treasury towards him as regarded the o amendment which he had g i ve n notice of on this Bill, and said that he b e li eve d it t o b e the intention of her Majesty' s Government to throw it altogether over. "smooth n device" t hat ground, f ie though he had been requested by the Hon. Secretary to postpone his amendment, for the conve nience of the Government, he should not do so, as they would not promise him a day for its discussion. They deserved not the slightest indulgence at his hands, and they should not have it.—(Laughter.) He would do his duty. If the public were satisfied so would he be. The Speaker then left the chair, and the House resolved itself into Committee. On clause I being put, Colonel SIBTHORP came forward to propose his amend ment. He said that when the Hause of Commons was called on to grant a sum of 30,0001. a year to " her Royal HighneFs Maria Louisa Victoria, Duchess of Kent"—( Laughter)—he, as one of the guardians of the public purse, felt it to be his duty to express his opinion on the subject, and to inquire wherefore was that sum granted. It came down to that House as a recommendation from her Majesty, on the advice of her Majesty's servants in the Goverement ; and no doubt