The Sun. — London, England, 1834-03-27 00:00:00

good government of the metropolis, nothing which more 'immediately bear on the it:erests 01 :be King's peace and the food administration 01 the law ad over the cc:tinny, than some such change as that now proposed ; prciOtt?iing on some such princiFle, and pointing to those grand objects of paramount impor tance—the ttniftmity, the concentration, the regularity tof the jurisdiction to be established—its extension, so as to bring within its scope all the parts of this great metro ; and the greater frequency of its trdministra'ion, so as to effect the greatest possible despatch in that most es sential branch of our judicature, by making the trial and punisho.ent of offences follow as speedily as possible after their commission. —(Hear, hear.) Soot were the ob jects which he had in view, and thich he thought were provided ler by the bill ' , MA he should have the honour of submitting to theit lordships. When setting forth the 'districts to which the proposed jurisdiction was to be ex tended, be freight to have mentioned the amount of popu lation which would be comprised; and he was sure, that by stating the great increase which of late years bad taken place in that respect, he should show still more clearly the necessity which existed for the change. The population of London, Middlesex, Southwark, Lambeth, and the Xen- 1 tish towns proposed to he included in t'lle extended jurisdiction, without taking into consideration those parts of Essex which would also be tomprised in the change s amounted at present to between 1,600,000 and 1,700,000, while ten years ago it amounted to no more than 1,300,000, showing an increase of from 300,000 to 400,000. the judicature thus enlarged would extend over a population of from 1,600,000 to 1,700,000, which was equal to many great and even powerful kingdoms, and concentrating in a narrow spate one of the densest popu -14 ions in Europe. He should now move that the bid he read a first time, cod although he had already communi cated with many !earned individuals immediately concerned on the subject, in order that time might be given for addi firma! , c ostmunication, he sold then move that it be priesttsi, and stand over for further consideration. The bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be printed. Lord BERESFORD presented a petition, agreed to at a meeting of the trades' union of Charlotte_street, Fitzroy. 'square, praying for the extension of mercy to the six indi viduals who had been tried and convicted at Dorchester of administering unlawful oaths. Ordered to lie on the table. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Oa the Earl of SHAFTESBURY proceeding to move the Atijituintrent of the horse until Saturday next, The Duke of CUMBERLAND said it had been gene rally understood, in consequence of the statement or the 'noble earl at the head of the government on a previous revening, that the house was to adjourn until the 14th of April, anl lie therefore desired some explanation of the reasons which now induced the noble earl to move an adjournment to Saturday next ? The LORD CHANCELLOR replied that the public business of the house would stand adjourned until th? 14th of April, but that he intended, as he had stared a few evenings ago, to sit from ten o'clock till four each day during the recess for the hearing of Scotch appeals. For the satisfaction of tie illustrious duke, he would undertake that the house should not, on any day, sit beyond four o'clock, and that nothing but Scotch appeals should be proceeded with until the 14th of April. Tte Duke of CUMBERLAND was quite satisfied with the explanation, and would not have alluded to the circum stances had he been aware that any arrangement, such as tin noble and leaned lord stated, had been come to. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought the illustrious duke was quite entitled to call for an explanation, and was not quite certain that it was not his duty to have given it even thouch it had been uncalled for. The house 'ben adjourned until Saturday next at ten o'clock, HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 26. The Sr&Aces took the chair at ten minutes past five o'clock, Mr. Preston brought up certain papers from the East ludio House. Mr. HUGHES HUGHES presented a petition, under `the common seal of the company of proprietors of the Lambeth water works, complaining of the South London water works, praying that the bill might not pass_ during the present session, and that they might be heard against certain clauses in it. The house was summoned to attend the Lords, to hear the royal assent given to various - bills. Mr. J. SMITH presented petitions from Dissenters of Aylesbury, Stony Stratford, North Crawley, Buckingham. and various other parts in Buckingloamshire,complaining;of grievances, and praying for redress. They were oppressed in four or five different ways. They complained that they had not a mode of Registry of births, deaths, and mar riages; that they were not permitted to send their children to the Universities, and of what they c died the alliance of the church and state. He had no difficulty in saying in his place in that house that the church had been injured by its alliance with the state; but he could not support any measure that would have for its effect a dis• severance of that alliance in existing circumstances. Public opinion, all powerful, would, doubtless, before many years passed away, remedy the grievance. The Hoy. Mamma presented another petition from another parish in the county of Buckingham, relative to the poor laws, and praying that they might be revised, as they effected that part of the country. He fully • con • curred in the prayer. Allusion was made in the petition to certain magistrates, of the facts of which he knew nothing, but he believed the magistrate principally hinted at was one of the most honourable and able magis trates of the county of Buckingham. Mr. TANCRED presented a petition from the members of the Royal College of Surgeons in Banbury, c }mplaining of the state of the medical law, and praying for an altera tion to he made in it. The hon. member presented a petition from the dissenters of Banbury, praying that they might be relieved from their grievances. Mr. WILKS gave notice, that on an early day he should move for leave to bring in a bill relative to friendly societies. The HON. Maxima gave notice that he would take an early opportunity of presenting 12 petitions from dis senters in Wales, explanatory of the grievances under which they laboured, and praying for relief, upon which he would take an opportunity of discussing the question. The Hos. MEMIER, presented two petitions from the dissenters of Boston, and one from the independent dis senters and primitive methodists of the same place, I , r the redress of their grievances. He had also a petition from tie dissenters of the inhabitants of Burnham, in the county of Backs, of Chipping Norton, in the county of Oxford, of Zion chapel, Dartford, in the county of Kent, of Swanige, in the county of Dorset, of Waltham Abbey, Essex, of Wilton, Wilts, and of Hythe, in the county of Kent, to the same effect. Mr. V. SMITH presented two petitions front congre gations of Protestant Dissenters at Northallerton, praying for relief. Mr. LABOUCHERE presented a petition from the inhabitants of Taunton against the practice of employing children to sweep chimneys. Mr. CRAWLEY presented a petition from certain Dissenters of the town of Bedford, praying for redress of grievances. Mr. G. W. WOOD presented three similar pe titions : one of them from a Dissenting congregation at Bury (Lancashire), and the other two from Warring ton in the same county. He also presented a petition from the hand loom-weavers of Chowbent, in that county, for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the practicability of having a board of trade to regulate the price of wages. Sir. 0. MOSLEY presented a petition from the bailiffs and other inhabitants of Burton-on-Trent in the coon y of Stafford, praying for ecclesiastical reform. The petitioners stated they were sensible of the necessity of supporting the church of England, and they deprecated the diversion of the property of that church to any other object, than for the support of the church and its mini sters, for which purpose they were of opinion that property was not more than sufficient. The lion. member also presented a petition from Totness (as tsar understood), signed by 600 farmers, praying that the tolls payable on lime used for the cultivation of the land might be taken off. THE SOUTHAMPTON AND LONDON RAILWAY. Mr. Alderman WOOD moved for a return of all sums received by the customs at Southampton for the last five years, specifying the amount of each, the names of the officers employed there, hc. Mr. S. RICE, in alluding to the time and expense of producing such returns, unless it was intended to in troduce some measure upon them, wished to know from thehon.rnernber what aim. his objection making the motion Mr. Alderman WOOD said the house was aware that a committee was sitting upon the Southampton Rsilway Bill, and it was solely in order to obtain information as to the quantity of business done at that port that be wished to have the returns.—(Hear, hear.) Hilltettghtlffatltison was a very strong one.—(Hear.) ,' <lSar.- - B., , lTlCErtniia that was precisely what h e wante d , - , (.1 . . / tEkeiw t .) He did itot„:eppose the motion. / -:. The returns werelbo ordered. . . ..:1 11.4. TOLLEMACHpresented a petition f min the dis r. Ve 3U i eentere of Grimetone, praying to be relieved fron* th rievances under which they laboured. _ _ POOR LAWS. Sir J. GRAHAM, on the part of Lord Althorp, save notice, that on Thursday, the 17th of April, he (Lord Althorp) would introthace a bill to alter and amend the poor laws. . . Mr. STANLEY presented a petition from Bolton in Cheshire, praying that some measiire might be introduced for the betterlobservaiice of the S.dibath. Thehon. member presented a petition from the dissenters of the same place, praying to be relieved from their grievances. Lord G. BENTINCK presented a petition from the dissenters of King's Lynn, praying to be relieved from their grievances. The petitioners stated that they had not the slightest desire to partfaipate in church property. Mr. O'CONNELL presented two petitions —one from the butcher', and another from the operative hatters; of Dublin, praying for a repeal of the Legislative Union, The HoN. and LEARNED MEAGER presented petitions from the pari,hes of Boher, Kilraore, Kenturk, and Caste Islani, praying for the total abolition of tithes. TEA DUTIES. Mr. O'CONNELL also presented a petition from the Vice-President of the Chamber of Commerce in Dublin, complaining of the tea duties, and praying that the clause relating to the valuation of tens should be referred to a committee. KINGSTOWN RAILWAY. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the corporation of joiners, of Dublin, praying that the house would take measures for the construction of a rail way from Dublin to Kingstown. RUSSIA AND TURKEY. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from Newcas tle-upon-Tyne, complaining of the designs of Russia, and praying that the house would take measures to prevent the subjugation of the Turkish provinces by Russia. The LORD ADVOCATE moved for certain returns connected with the Court of Session in Scotland, which were ordered. Mr. HALCO%IB said he had some information to convey to the house, which he thought would be important. It would be recollected he asked the hon. and gallant member who was chairman of the Warwickshire election com. mines., who drew up the report of that committee, and that the honourable and gallant member, in the course of his reply, had told him that he was as ignorant upon that as be was upon all other subjects.— (Laughter.) Certainly after such an observation he was not disposed to earry on his inquiries in that way, and therefore he went up stairs and searched the records, among which be found a draft of the report, drawn up partly in the hand- writing of a law stationer.— (Hear, hear.) He then proceeded to a law-stationer's shop ) and asked him if he knew any thing of the report of the Warwickshire Election Committee.—(Cries of Oh, oh, oh.") The law-stationer replied, "Do you mean the report of Mr. Joseph Parkes, the solicitor ?" He answered in the affirmative, although be did not know who Mr. Joseph Parkes was, and on further inquiry he found that four copies were charged to Mr. P.rkes, and paid for by him. He should say nothing upon it, but merely content himself with stating the fact ; it did, however, show the animus with which the report was drawn up, and, therefore, the great impropriety of trusting any person but a member of the committee to draw up the report, especially an agent of the borough, because there was a clause in that report reflecting upon the Earl of Warwick, which had been negatived by the committee. Mr. ROBINSON rose to order, and wished to know if there was any motion before the house.—( Hear.) The SPEAKER said certainly there was no motion before the house, although it might indeed be proper for an hon. member to inquire how a report was drawn up ; at the same time the house always felt its security in the responsibility of the committee. Mr HALCOMB should be sorry if he had given the house any unnecessary trouble ; but as he felt it his duty to introduce the matter before it, he should not flinch from that duty. The committee was not like any other election committee, at which members were com pelled to attend day after day._(Hear, bear.) It was necessary that a report which was drawn up, containing a mass of evidence, should be found worthy of the con fidence of the house. He (Mr. H.) was made the in strument of an attack upon Mr. Joseph Parkes. Me was anxious to hear whatever explanation the gallant officer as chairman could give. The hon. member then proceeded to read a motion " That an inquiry should be made by a committee or otherwise—(Loud laughter)— to ascertain who was the agent of the petitioner." (Con siderable confusion prevailed during the last sentence. We cannot vouch for its accuracy.) The SPEAKER put the question whether there was any hon. member to second the motion, but no one was found to do so; upon which loud and continued laughter ensued fur some moments. Colonel WOOD moved for certain returns, showing the calculations that had been made for the commutation of tithes in the different parishes in England and Wales. Lord HOWICK brought up various returns from the Home Secretary's Office. Mr. SPRING RICE moved for a copy of Mr. Tel ford's report rel rtiee to the supply of pure water to the metropolis ; also returns relative to the amount of moneys lodged in the Exchequer ; and a return of the amount of the different kinds of grain entered for home consumption, with the average price in each quarter. HIGHWAYS BILL. The order of the day for the second reading of the Highways Bill having been read, Mr. LEWIS rose and said that he did not intend to oppose the second reading of the bill, but he wished to know whether it was the intention of the right honourable secretary to press that bill during the present session, becau-e, if so, he hoped that some means would be adopted of drawing the attention of the house to the provisions of that bill, which were in many respects objectionable, and would make a total change in tie laws relating to highways. Mr. S. LEFEVRE said that the principle had been tried in many parishes in England, and found efficient. He believed the bill would he a great relief to the agricul tural interest. The bill was then read a second time. FELONS' PROPERTY BILL. Mr. ROTCH said, in moving the second reading of the Felons' Property Bill, it would not be necessary for him to enter into :soy lengthened discussion on that occasion, but as observations had been made on the other side which were of considerable weight, he felt it his duty to make some answer to those observations. It was observed, and very truly, that by returns presented to that house, the property of felons was as well disposed of by the present system as was necessary.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The returns already before the house showed that the money was paid over, resulting from the properties of felons, into time hands of the sheriffs of the counties. The whole sum paid to them for the last ten years was 3,1921. ; out of that 2,5331. came from one individual ; so that, in the course of eight years, the whole sum accounted for by the she riffs only amounted to about 6001., whereas it must be evident to all who knew anything about the proceedings at the criminal sessions, that scarcely a day passed, on which there was not some property passed into some hands or other, which had belonged to felons, and who, therefore, either did not know what to do with it, or who misapplied it. In the great city of Lin coln for the space of ten years the sheriffs had actually only accounted for 7s. 3d. In nine years not a farthing had been accounted for in the city of York. In Wilts and Worcestershire in 10 years only five shillings had been accounted for. Were not these facts sufficient to show the necessity of such a bill as this ? and yet the hon. member on the other side of the house relied on those very returns as a proof of the non necessity for the bill. He did not mean to say that property of this kind was improperly dealt with by Government, but the object of his Bill was to prevent officets and constables from having any control over it. The bill had another important object. When it was so much the fashion to preach against county rates he thought that a person found guilty of felony, who had 1,000/. in his pocket, ought to be obliged to pay the expenses of the prosecution, and in that way relieve the county in which he was convicted to that amount. There was a great anomaly in the law upon this subject. The owner of a landed estate con victed of felony could leave his estate to his child, whereas the man whose wealth consisted of a different species of property, take Mr. Rothschild, for instance, if convicted of felony, would lose all his money, and his child be left a pauper. He should be willing to adopt any suggestion which was likely to improve his bill. He would leave the bill in the hands of the house, trusting that they would allow it to be read a second time. Mr. ROEBUCK was adverse to the bill going into committee. It was a piece.tneal measure ; and he thought when there was a commission sitting on the criminal law, it would be better to suspend further proceedings in it till they had carefully perused the report of the gentlemen who were such competent judges on this important subject. But he objected to this bill chiefly because it inflicted an unequal punishment—falling lightly on some, and heavily on others. Mr. O'CONNELL hoped his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Roebuck) would allow the bill to go into committee, on the ground that the present law caused a great differ ence in the apportionment of punishment. In every othe country, a felon's property went to pay the expenses of his ?wn prosecution ; but under our system, the innocent inhabitanTs of the county, in having to pay the costs of conviction, and of the. keep of the criminal, were punished to a great degree—indeed, generally speaking, in.re than the person robbed.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HARDY wished the bill to go into committee for the reasons stated by the last speaker. Mr. CHARLES WYNN was of opinion that the bill required great consideration. In the case of felons, when property was found on them which bad been acquired by robbery, be considered it should form a fund, out of which those who had been plundered ought to lie reimbursed in ratio to the amount of the property abstracted. Sir SAMUEL WHALLEY would place the property of felons in the same condition as the assets of bankrupts, and entirely abolish the pretence and principle of forfeiture. Mr. AGLIONBY fully agreed with hon. members that the bill should be allowed to go before a committee, but he was decidedly opposed to the proposition of the hon. member for Maryl,bone, fur placing felons' and . bankrupts' property up on th e same footing, inasmuch as it woull be an inducement for prosecutors to pros evi dence in order to secure a conviction. Mr. HUGHES HUGHES considered the bill should be referred to a select committee up stairs. Mr. HALCOMB spoke to the general question, and was for considerin g th e case o f p r isoners after their period of punishment had expired. He felt they were better entitled to what property was left than their next of kin. Mr. EWART hoped the Government would not de. lay in themselves giving the fullest consideration to the subject. The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on the 16th of April. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL. The house then went into a committee on the Bribery at Elections Bill, and the report was ordered to be brought up on Monday the 14th April. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. Sir J. GRAHAM said, that before going into the orders of the day, he would beg leave to move that the house, on its rising, do stand adjourned to Monday the 14th of April.—Carried. HERTFORD BOROUGH BILL. Mr. BERNAL moved that the amendments of the Hertford Borough Bill be then read, with the view of further considering the bill on Wednesday, the 16th of April. Mr. TENNYSON feared the landed interest in the vicinity would influence and absorb constituencies similar to those in Hertford. Mr. BERNAL would reserve any observations he had to make till the next discussion of the questian. The amendments were then agreed to, and the bill or dered to be engrossed and read a third time on the 16th of April. The Hemp and Flax Bounties Bill was read a second time, and ordered to he committed on the 14th of April. EXCHEQUER OF RECEIPT BILL. Mr. GROTE regretted that in this bill a clause was not introduced prohibitory of the practice of discontinu• ing the banking business of the Exchequer two hours before the ordinary period when the banks closed. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, the reason why such a clause was not introduced, was in consequence of the very onerous duties to be performed, which demanded the hours which the hon. member wculd desire to have dif ferently appropriated. Nothing could exceed the diligence of the clerks, and be trusted the bill would be allowed to pass in its present form. The bill was then read a third time and passed. Mr. EWART moved for returns relating to the official document entitled the Customs' Bill of Entry.—Carried. ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN CASES OF LETTER STEALING, &c. Mr. EWART, in rising to make bis promised motion for abolishing capital punishment in cases of letter stealing, &c., went into details respecting the number of convic tions and executions within the last few years, and con• tended that by official returns, it was clearly manifest that a diminution of capital punishment had nut been followed by an increase of crime. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill fur abolishing capital punishment in cases of letter stealing and returning from transporta tion ; and in certain cases of burglary. Mr. AGLIONBY seconded the motion. Lord HOWICK felt unwilling to oppose a motion like the present, but hoped that the hon. member for Liver pool, when he considered the circumstances under which his motion was brought forward, would consent to with. draw it for the present. The hon. member had himself adverted to the fact, that the state of our criminal laws was at present under the consideration of commissioners appointed for that purpose, and he (Lord Howick) could add, that those commissioners would, within a very short space, be prepared to submit their report to the house. He admitted that the crime of returning from transporta tion, and stealing letters, and some kinds of burglary, ought not to be punishable with death; but the hon. member and the country knew, that though these crimes were, by the terms of the statutes, capital, yet, in point of fact, criminals were never now executed for these offences. He (Lord Howick) observe I that another hon. member had a motion on the order book for the abolition of the puni,hment of death for another offence, and a third hon. member had another motion for the abolition of the pu. nishment of death in cases of crimes different from either, Was that the manner in which they ought to legislate on the _subject ? Ought they thus to take the different offences, and legislate separately for them, or ought they to act under a regular system, and upon principle ? (Hear, hear.) He did not ask the hon. member to abandon his bill altogether, or even to delay it indefinitely, hut he asked him to delay it for a abort time, in expecta tion—and he (Lord Howick) thought the well-grounded expectation—that the report of the commissioners would soon appear. Mr: LENNARD was surpri,ed to bear the statement of the noble lord, that none had been executed for these offences fur years. He (Mr. L.) believed that a person had been executed for letter stealing within the last year. —(Hear, hear.) It was very difficult for gentlemen bringing forward motions on the subject of the criminal law to know how to proceed. In former times, when Sir J. Mackintosh and others brought down long bills on the subject, they were told that that was wholesale legisla tion, that it was dangerous, and that they ought to pause before they ventured to up se t t h e w h o l e sys tem of criminal law in the country : and now that hon. members came with measures which liaJ reference to particular crimes, they were told that it was improper to legislate without reference to the whole system of the criminal code. He hoped that the hon. member for Liverpool would perse. vere with his bill. Mr. RUTH YEN hoped that the noble lord would re consider his opposition to this bill ; for, if he did not, he could not expect a reformed bonse to go along with him in his opposition. Mr. SPRING RICE denied the assertion made by the hon. member behind him (Mr. Leonard), that the go v.rnment had neglected the state of the criminal law. The question of punishment of death in cases of forgery, - _ was one of those most fought for by Sir James Mackin tosh and all those who sought the amelioration of our criminal code, and it was the present government who had abolished that punishment in such cases. The hon. mem ber had also forgotten that the bill, abolishing the punish ment of death in all offences against the coin, was intro duced by the present Lord Chief Justice. He thought . . the government ought to get the credit of introducing these measures. Lord HOWICK explained. He did not mean the hon. member to abandon his measure, but merely to post pone it. Mr. PEASE thought the question, as met by the go vernment, was merely one of time. He himself thought that the t unishinent of death should be abolished altogether. Mr. PHILIP HOWARD thought the house ought to be careful, in repealing the act which awarded the punish ment of death for the crime of stealing letters. Mr. ROBINSON hoped the noble lord would not op pose the bringing in of the bill. - Mr. HUGHES HUGHES was happy, for the sake of humanity, to observe that the corporation of London, which had formerly found it necessary to maintain two salaried hangmen, had been able of lite to dispense with one of them. Mr. HARDY thought it was a disgrace to a Christian legislature, to visit burglary, especially constructive bur glary, with the punishment of death. Entertaining this conviction, he would vote for the bringing in of the bill of his ban, friend. Sir S. WHALLEY complained of the undue severity of our criminal code. His impression was, that the most advisable course for the house to pursue would be to pro• ceed with case atter case unit' they gained greater experi ence in such matters. Mr. EWART said a few words in reply. Leave was then given to bring in the bill. Mr. S. RICE, in the absence of Dr. LuNhington,moved for a return of the number of fines assessed by the Leet Jury, or respective Leet Juries acting in and for the ma nor of S ebenheath, otherwise Stepney, in the county of Middlesex; the amount at which such fines were affixed, and the amount of such fines received, and how disposed of; and the amount in value of weights, measures, and balances seized and taken away by such Jury, or respec tive Juries, and how disposed of, from 1827 to 1833, both inclusive, distinguishing the fines, assessments, an d amounts received and disposed oC for each year. Agreed to. Mr. wAttßewros moved for (as we understood) certain returns from the overseers of the diferent perishes in England and Wales relative to the medical treatment provided for such parishes. Mr. RU'I HVEN moved that Ireland be added to Eng land and Wales. After a short desultory conversation, the motion was agreed to in its original state. GLASGOW LOTTERY. Mr. Alderman WOOD moved that the petition of Mr. Swift on the subject of the Glasgow lottery, be referred to the select committee.—Agreed to. The IIoN. IVlEstlian. then moved that Mr O'CONN ELL and Mr. H. B. CURTEIM, be added to the GI isgow Lot tery Committee. Sir R. INGLIS opposed the motion. Mr. BISH said that the right hon. baronet the member for Oxford, claimed to himself the merit of great libera• lity in the line of conduct he had pursued on the occasion of the Glasgow Lottery. He (Mr. Bish) denied that his conduct was characterised by liberality. On the contrary, it had been most harsh to the parties more immediately concerned. The committee appointed to investigate the matter was a packed committee. He would have no ob jections to the gentlemen constituting that committee if they could come to the consideration of the subject with their minds divested of all prejudice, and with a proper knowledge of its details ; but the fact was, that they knew nothing at all of the matter.—(Laughter.) He trusted, however, they would, notwithstanding, teach the right hon. baronet a lesson very different from what be expected. He had, in the discussion the other evening on the sub ject, thrown some atrocious aspersions on his (Mr. Bish's) character.—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh," and "No, no.") The SPEAKER hoped the hon. member would not, in the warmth of debate, forget what was due to the right hon. baronet referred to as an individual and to the house of which he was a member. Mr. SINCLAIR would vote with his right lion. friend (Sir R. Inglis) against the motion. Sir T. FREMANTLE defended the character of the committee already appointed. Sir SAMUEL WHALLEY would vote for the motion. Mr. SPRING RICE, though he might be said to be, in one sense, personally interested in the matter—inas• much as, if the third drawing of the Glasgow Lottery did not take place, the revenue would be deprived of some 20,0001. or 30,0001.—would vote against the motion. His objection was to the principle involved in the motion. Mr. Alderman WOOD would feel it his duty to divide the house on the question. He knew, from experience, that the formation of committees of the house was a mere humbug —a gross delusion of the public. Sir J. GRAHAM had had somewhat longer experience in the house than the hon. member, and he knew that committees were not nominated by Ministers, but by the house. He would oppose the motion, as he thought it went to establish a bad precedent. Sir R. INGLIS also opposed the motion. The gallery was cleared for a division, but none took place, the motion being withdrawn. Colonel EVANS postponed his motion with reference to the working of the Reform Bill till after Eater. ' Mr. GRO'I'E presented several petitions in favour of the Dissenters ; one against the Islington market, and one against hanging criminals in chains. Sir H. VERNEY presented a petition from Bucking ham, complaining that a large landed proprietor of that borough, who held not less than 5,000 acres of the 18,000 which composed the borough, bad built a number of small houses of 101. yearly value, for the purpose of conferring votes upon his tenants, and by the undue influence thus obtained, swamping the borough, and making it a mere nomination borough. The petitioners prayed that the defect in the Reform Bill, which enabled the individual in question to effect this, might be remedied. Sir T. FREMANTLE was sorry that the Reform Bill turned out so little to the tastes of those who had so loudly raved for it. There certainly had been a few such votes created, but the tenantcies were not new tenantcies, being situate in one or two of the parishes which had been added to Buckingham by the Reform Bill. Mr. TENNYSON had always protested against that part of the Reform Bill which added considerab e districts to smaller towns. It was evident that the effect of such an arrangement must be to overwhelm the towns with the constituency of the neighbouring districts. Ira his opinion in every case in which there c. , uld not be found in the borough a sufficient number to form a town constituency, the boroughs so deficient ought to have been put into Schedule A. In the else now before the house, it ap peared that there were 18,000 acres in the immediate neighbourhood of Buckingham that belonged to a noble duke, against whom it was alleged that he had caused certain buildings to be erected on this his property, for the purpose of creating votes. That such advantages would be taken might have been expected. He bad no doubt it would be discovered that this was a practice which had been resorted to to a very great extent through out the country. He might even say that the Reform Bill, by adding the large districts to the towns, intenqed such an increase of the constituency. What other effect could it be said to contemplate, when, according to i s provisions, the erection of any cow-house or other ignob building on ptoperty of a certain value, would give the occupi:r the tualificatioo necessary to constitute him an elector? The effect of the bill was an increase of the con stituency precisely in the way described by the hon. bart. (Sir T. Fremantle); if one individual made votes on the one side, some other individual would make them on the other, The Reform Bill was to his mind far from effecting all that it ought ; and many who were its supporters com promised their opinions, anxious to secure a measure from which, at all events, a great deal of good was natu rally expected. He, with such a view, bad, be must de clare, compromised his opinions with regard to the voters' qualification, that of scot and lot appearing to him to be the simplest, and the freest from objection. He was for merly opposed to the ballot; but more recent exFerience had made a convert of him to the principle of ballot; and be 114 d reason to believe that he was but one of many others who had been similarly converted...—( Hear, hear.) Mr. EL BULWER really did nut see bow the house could possibly inter fere, by way of enactment, to prevent persons from erecting buildings upon their land.—(Hear, hear.) The only way in which the house could coun'eract the evil of a creation of dependent constituencies was, by Passing a measure to establish the vote by ballot. This was the sure method of getting rid of all the improperly preponderating influences.—(Hear.) Colonel EVANS admitted that the mere fact of build ing houses on property was what could nut be objected to; but the building of houses for the express purpose of creating votes was as certainly a deviation from the object and spirit of the Reform Bill, and a revival, to that ex t-nt, of a species of the ancient corruption.—(Hear, hear.) This petition he held to be a very important one. It was the first, he dered to say, of several that would be brought before the house on similar grounds. In many cases, the addition of a large district, in which one or two indivi duals hid considerable possessions, to the town constitu encies, bad been attended with the most injurious conse quences. The borough for which he had formerly been returned (Rye) used to be an open borough ; had it not been, he woul,l never have been its member, for he pos . sessed no influence there derived from property; but six or seven parishes having been added to the town by the Reform Act, it ceased to be free, as it was previous'y, and he had, consequently, been sent to the right about. He repeated, that the only effectual mode of counteracting such improper influences was to apply the ballot. The petition was then ordered to lie on the table. TRADES' UNIONS. Mr. HUGHES presented a petition from the city of Oxford, praying the house to address the crown to induce it to review the very rigorous and horrible sentence of seven years' transportation passed recently on some agri cultural labourers, at the Dorchester Assizes, for having administered illegal oaths. In presenting this petition, be thought it was due to his constituents to state that they bad not any political unions or trade unions in their town, and that they had not ever held even a politic il meeting on the subject of parliamentary reform.—(Hear, hear.) This petition was not thought of till yesterday morning and then the inhabitants of Oxford were informed by a handbill of its existence, and where it was lying for sig nature. The signatures were received from nine o'clock in the morning until eight o'clock in the evening; and i n th e c ourse of those eleven hours, so strong was the feeling on the subject, 1,563 mines were appended. He must say, that he thought he had perceived of late a great tendency ,•n the part of the judges, in sentencing pri soners f or t h eir offences, instead of judging of the na t ure o f t h e crime, and apportioning the punishment to that, to be guided rather by the extent to which the particular crime existed. Now, h e must say, that this appeared to him unfair. Mr. H. BULWER said, if he had seen any member of the government present, to whose peculiar department such business belonged, he would have asked a question on the subject which he did not know that he should be jus tified in putting to the right hon. baronet opposite, the First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir J. Graham). What he desired to know was whether it was the intention of his Majesty's government that the sentence of the agricultural labourers, convicted at Dorchester of administering un lawful oaths, should be mitigated ? They ought to bear in mind that the act tinder which the prisoners were con victed was not passed with a view to such offences as had on this occasion been [trough': under it. He (Mr. Bal. wer) gave notice of a motion for leave to bring in a bill to amend the act, it being evident that some alteration was essentially necessary. Sir JAMES GRAHAM did not believe it was the intention of his Majesty's government to recomtnend the crown to mitigate the sentence. Mr. HARDY hoped it was not the intention of his Majesty's government to mitigate the sentence in this in stance. He was not in the least surprised at this petition emanating from Oxford, if that were true which the hon. member who presented the petition had asserted, viz., that they knew nothing of trades' unions in their town.— (Hear, hear.) If they had unfortunately possessed any such knowledge, he felt convinced that they would not have forwarded any such petition ; for of all the curses in any town or district, that of trades' unions was the worst--(Hear, hear)—and in so saying, he did not speak as to their effect on masters in particular, but included the poor unfortunate creatures who were compelled—he had himself been witness of the fact—a ho were compelled by the most foul tyranny that could be exercised, to join unions that they were most averse to, and who were called on to subscribe towards them sums of money, pre. viously to themselves spending a shilling, amounting to one•fifth part of their whole earnings. To these unions were they obliged to pay an amount, which, if they had been required to piy to the government, they would have considered to be the grossest possible extortion.—(Hear, hear.) He knew instances in which the men out of 255. per week, pail se. per week under the compulsion of These trades' unions, to whose put poses the money was appl'ed. They were governed, too, by a comparatively small num ber—by a body of delegates, who, for the purpose of shrouding their operations in secrecy swore the parti- s, administering horrid oaths to them to alarm their con sciences,and thus prevent them from divulging the acts by which the destructive influence was obtained. He had lately received an application from some individuals in the county of Durham, with whom he had not the least connection. They inquired of him whether such and such things could be dune consistently with the law, their object being obviously the same as was that of the persons who had been convicted at Dorchester, viz , to compel those who had not joined their union willingly, to join under compulsion. He told them that they were certainly at liberty to Cell their labour at the highest price that they could obtain for it, and even to associate to con sult as to the best means of inducing their masters to give higher prices to themselves ; but it was obviously their intention to act against others, and not to confine their efforts to their own trade, but to force men connected with other trades to act with them. The house was perhaps not aware that these unions exis'ed not in one place alone, but in every part of the kingdom, spreading from town to town and from place to place, and exercising a univer sal influence. There was a case of the masons having contributed to enable the carpenters to strike, and when the latter had effected their object, they, in their turn, contributed to enable the masons to strike and effect theirs.—(Hear.) It was not as it used to be, branches of trade confining themselves to their particular locality. They had now one trade striking at one time, and another at another, and throughout the kingdom, to force a certain amount of wages—without any foundation for their so doing—without any reason for it—•they so acted at a time when, in fact, they were receiving a greater amount of wages, on a fair comparison of the wages with the prices of provisions formerly, than they ever received b-fore._-(Hear, hear.) As regarded the learned baron (Williams) who had passed the sentence, every man who knew his liberal principle—(Hear, hear)—every man who knew his character, must feel convinced that he would do all he could do to protect these misguided men from the effects of their• own conduct. No individual would be more disposed than he would be to act with all possible lenity ; yet when he saw the state in which the country was as regarded these unions, and when, after due deliberation, he found that he was compelled to put a certain construction on the provisions of the law (not having time doubt on the subject that was suggested by the hon. member for Lincoln), he would have failed in his duty, if, instead of looking forward, he had been diverted from giving effect to the law, the great object of which was to pt obibit the administering of illegal oaths.—(Hear.) After a few words from Mr. BULWER, Mr. BOTCH thought it evident, from all the circum stances, the petition had been got up in a moment of p •- collar feeling—he would even say of popular frenzy. He would put it to the house whether it was not apparent the learned judge had been actuated by the soundest feelings, and he brought his best judgment to bear on the subject, when they bore in mind that the sentence was not passed, until after two days' deliberation ?—(Hear, hear.) The petitioners, he believed, would have thought there was little occasion for the petition which had been presented to the house, if they had been aware of the wretchedness occasioned by these unions—disunions be would call them. He could not sit down without giving notice that, after the recess, he would move for leave to bring in a bill to pre vent the combinations of trades' unions, as they affected the bee trade of the country. Mr. WARBURTON could not concur in the suggestio❑ that, in looking at the punishment, they were not to con sider the t fleet of example; that, in his opinion, ought to be the great aim of punishing. But if there was not a law applicable to a particular offence, and it was desirable there should be, he would say make one—do not, on any consideration, let particular parties be the means of puttin g a forced construction on the statutes. He contended that the existing law was not sufficiently clear, and whatever other expedient they might have recourse to for putting down oaths, which were directly prejudicial to the free intercourse of trading, let them not resort to a forced interpretation. It would be much better to get a statute for the express purpose desired. Sir J. GRAHAM thought what had fallen from the hon. member for Bridport required one word from him in explanation. He had said the learned baron took two days to determine whether the law applied. The hon. gentleman was the last person, he (Sir J. Graham) believed, who would wish to misrepresent a fact, yet, unintentionally, he had done so. The facts were these :—The learned baron, after hearing the case summed up to the jury, de clared, without the least hesitation, the statute did apply to the case in question. He (Sir J. Graham) was given to understand, there was not the slightest hesitation in this case; but the learned baron did that which, as a mu nicipal judge, lie was bound to do ; after he had laid down the law as applicable to the facts, the jury, having heard the facts, and heard the law, give their verdict of guilty. The learned baron then did not hesitate as to the applica tion of the law, but did hesitate in mercy—(Hear, hear) — as respected the sentence to be passed for the commission of an offence at this moment of considerable importance. —(Hear, hear.) He was sorry any question had been asked in the house which he was not better prepared to answer ; but he felt bound to say, that as at present ad• vised, looking at the existing circumstances of the country, with respect to this question, agreeing with the lion. member for Bridport, and not with the hon. member for Oxford, as regarded punishment, which he (Sir J. Gra ham) thought ought not to be for vengeance, but for ex ample—(Hear, hear)—for example, that it might deter, that being the object of all punishment, and the only jus tification of punishment that was severe—as at present advised, then, and under these circumstances, he did not de e any ground on which to tender advice to his Ilidje,ty to mitigate this sentence.—(Hear, hear.) Colonel EVANS thought they ought to admit the right of trade unions to associate for the purposes of trade, but they might mark out the limits, and whenever they re sorted to any intimidation, they might be subjected to punishment. As to the alarm about unions, expressed by many hon. members, he thought it in a grerit degree visionary. Mr. SHAW said the house ought not to encourage pe titions cal ling on the house to reverse sentences passed by the Judges. If parties had objections to the law, it was quite free to them to deprecate that; but it must be most inconvenient for the judicial acts of Judges to be brought before this house as a sort of court of appeal. No less objectionable would it be for the prerogative of mercy possessed by the crown to be interfered with by the house. On the other hand, he should be sorry if people suffered undeservedly, because the injudiciousness of certain incon siderate petitioners might make it necessary to discourage petitions on such subjects by a direct negative. He thought the better course for the right bon. baronet (Sir J. Gra ham) to have pursued would have been, to have declined giving any answer to the qu-scion put. Sir J GRAHAM—I on'y said, "As at present ad vised." Mr. HUGHES explained. His constituency did not justify the conduct of the men who had been convicted. AU they submitted was, the punishment was ilispropm tionate to the offence. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. Mr. HOOD presented a petition from some licentiate of the College of Physicians in London, praying for an investigation iuto certain matters connected with that Co'. lege.—Referred to the committee. Mr.. HOOD also presented a petition from some dissen ters of Willow, in the Isle of Wight, praying for relit I from church rates and all other ecclesiastical charges. Mr. FLEETWOOD presented a petition from the church and congregation of Enawick, and another from Churchtown, Lancashire, in favour of the dissenters. He also presented a petition from the friends of the reformed Episcopal Church, Vauxhall road, Preston, to the ea ni° .. p ff ro c p t e . „ t y , L i c k , , ,,i,i,i w i se t i n o i n n e g of from d a is t b r o t. d ss y , of an % I v p - arvieyrins g o 7 , his ev i :r u n n of the corn laws. placeo f , C Rme l is o nns n t, l e Ds l , ei E gi 1 nan V enesad A , , prayingNbp y S r A )2,i presented ,gof:r t he peti t ionap c abolitiono fi f a r ti o : m ei :g theousfe rata:tie: pvera of Sr. Mtt tin's-in-the-Fields, co m plaining of the extreme cl expense of the police force ; and another from St; window taxes. Mr. WATKINS preented a pet iti on from the count/ division of tle county. p ersons , P Mr. H. I3ULWER presented a p etition from the Dia house adjourned, aka f'4. centers of the county of Wat wick, ra int: for reli ef ' Mr. E. RUTHVEN presented a P rYetition from son! q t i l l i a e rt a e b r o . repeal of the Union. Toe to Mond iy, the 14th of April. pliatisotoeleovfentithoe,scloacnk: ----- BRUSSELS AND GERMAN PAPERS. g il thr a . k ug ha h te ß ry tu o se f , a , i s rt o le in ry, c t o e rn ry o _-....__ BRu,issErp.sr,o3.lrleassßicvetily24g.e—ttiTnghebleiuttleler, no more tinoftllis mernieg of the h ea l t h o f t h e P r i nce R o y a l, announces that, as th e Prince bulletin , will bs iss ue d. h as e it will be fodoweel by troops from H ainault, and from the province M. Weston, amur jun., hanker of this city , returned seater, day fr om L on d on, w hi t h er h e wen t to arrest the p re:end( d Viscount de Alartigny, who swindled hi m out of 10,000 francs. Thi s individual W 43 seen in London at the begin' Waterlo o it, i. thoughtpas si a ;sing of thi s month, but having doubtless learn ed that persons were i n p ursu i t o f bins, he has left it , and it is not known in wh a t di rec ti on . The French A m b assa d or a t Brussels has just purchased . in '. g d s fr Antwerp; several shares in one of the principal coal mines of Hainsult, BRUSSELS, MARCH 25.—1 n the Chamber of Represen tatives yesterday, the President said that M. Frison ba d proposed the day before that the Ministers should be re• quested to come to the Chamber, and wished to kno t ' whether the Chamber would wait till the Minister of Wa r ' should arrive. This was resolved on, and all the ministere soon after arriving, M. Frison asked the Minister of W ar for some explanation relative to the movements of th e ' Dutch army, and the measures which he intended to O r ! 1 to repel any act of violence that the enemy may co mmit u i on the terri ory, and to oppose an invasion if it :haul take place. M. de Renesse pointed out to the Minister of War Wha t passes about Maestricht, and asked what reeasures be , would take to prevent any further violation of our te rritory. The Minister of War—The recent information I have received from North Brabant enables me w occupiedfb e ed grantedllast nt o on te t ha h er e s iy, that the cantonments of the Dutch army a re the same as at the time of the breaking u p of the corps at Ryen and Oidschot. Yet it is certain that the army is increased by the return of the men who were absent on furlough, and that the furloughs; which were to On our side, relying on the treaty of 21st May, we ha ve not, however, ceased to hold ourselves in readin-ss to meet events. ,r Thus we have ordered the camps which were have bees taken are not such as can be divulged t ls tob spring.ef p March resTerhve h e a dc r , ehaanbaledebntehrge ryemawill i r , e e b s ea t r e i sa c ug t ma d do . that the Government is on its guard ; the measures t hel you may be certain that we are prepared against everyt event. As to the second question put to me, it i' i true that General Dibbets has thought fit to make excursions to n pretty considerable distance from the fortress of Maestricht. General Hurd has written to him to signify that these ot; it he Mu t cursions were opposed to the status quo, and th ' not continue them. General Dinbets, On his side, sr peals to the status quo, preteneing that previously to t‘ e e s treaty of 21st May he made the same military promenadvi that be does now. This has obliged us to think of Im sures to put an end to this state of things. I shall shard y . measures attics) be able, gentlemen, to inform you what these M. de 11, , ,baulx thought the reply of the minister ~ vague. He wished that it might be stated whether !: Dutch army was on the war establishment, and whe t ' 7 field • it had received every thing requisite to take the ken He would wish to know what measures have been la the here, but against an - invasion, which is very possible? Befo re s . disasters of the month of August, he said the same . (1 0 . e ..re tions had been put to the ministers, and the same an were tions had been put to the ministers, and the sa War de given ; besides M. Du Failly, then Minister of Wa r were founded or not an invasion was (dared that we hail 60,000 men under arms, and We bad enly 28,000. idea° M. Devaux said that whether the reports in circ . __. such pu.sihility the govenummt ought to be on Its g u b . M. de Broukete said that one ti ' whic h gave Pia ' f bility to the reports in circul tiu ung s that the king 0 Holland had lately made nuMernousWaproinotion's in the army , in which the Belgian officers in the enemy's service . had had a large share. H e would have the minister' prepared not only to repel invasion, but to hinder t 7 enemy from passing a single foot beyond the frontier. 1 faint in spite of the armistice, Holland should break the 0 twice given, we ought to take the offensive, and %op. 4•--(Very well, vell off the insults that have been put on u • well.) i be ' The Minister for Foreign Afflirs said it wne h ne ridiculou s to alarm the country little aPr arj- 6 ry ; there was of war when we see the public funds at par. ow After some further observations the Alinister of to fieing tn b BELGIANpe proposed proceeded ose d a nt. .1 u t t s ' Ne d eD i o s sn c . seconded, discuss a the ut shseay declared that he would engage to do all in his pow er . repel any invasion, in ease one should take place. d the lawc ,i Se relativey r l members be t se railroad declared ; t hebtuntselsvePevs°e'sr"aai Bible, satisfied, eailn: diirit'n'tgoat:rbongcll7 Jroe l3 " • referred to the central section, for a further rep r, Actual Debt, 2% per Cent. .................... ~,, Rothschild's Loan, 5 per Cent ................... v's Loan of the City, 1832, 4 per Cent. ...••••• 941 —Brussets Papers, March G. of 1 t 60 0 MUNICH, MARCH 17.—Yesterday th e depo. 3 " 0 t he the two Chambers, with the addresses in ana sver r as li- speech from the Throne, bad the honour of a sole m! -- re ly , r ep 1 Y erce, at which they delivered their a ddresses. .l u wa s to that of the Chamber of Deputies, his ilfar,., s ber pleased to express his satisfaction with what the sf e _ tes t had said, and the manna in which it was said, and re i p : lit. is his expectation that this Diet would be honnur air l Y iit 10 i tingu.shed. The Chamber, said his Majesty, h"beiCOUle continue as it has begun, and the Constitution will beco me upper i i still further consolidated. The address of the that ot th' Chamber, which Was equally satisfactory with F t ranhfsti Deputies, was also most graciously received. Papers, March 20. - sw, articles er e :lo c t rho( the :51eiler:e 's ' he that a part of t ROME, MARCH $.--We bear a P e ' Catholic Priesthood in Ss itzerland have presented L., . • an Arc. titian to the Pope relative to the notninatwn o f i. , .. bishop or Metropolitian not to be in future insinetb!teLlie .- di s s a e d eva o , r r ne f s o t r ly Spaindeman demanded it can take place. dependant upon the court of Rome. The seat 0.10;. Bishopric is left entirely to the decision of his 1 01 ; w ill of the chief The request has been made known to the Council, 30 ' t he probably be granted. Switzerland will then be f n „ 9: (EXTRACT OS' A PRIVATE LETTER.) same footing as France. The rece t• of the -' 3 " -b ; d • with many obstacles which must be remove d "t - i r l e s The recognition Que en o l f e re. of • I e without restriction the diplomatist who, for her - well , '• supporters t z h e d Ce C o i Cut r tea, at:pt briau i ( f:licsraeni still ntehme alteliosf°(.;: asp red to the office of Secretary to that assembly 1a r io and 1808 ? General Buckner is appointed successor of -, General Hrabowski, in Bologna. The Queen Dower _,,, Naples arrived here to day with her suite ; it is sat. , ' 1 . 4 will remain till Easter. Should this be the case,re he las t ' charge of fire.works has not been displayed for t ~ a" Full three years. The diligence between &visa and ,_„ e d :.:.. stopped lately near Cosinsa by eight brigands, who reu' A , people hop e to see again their tamed Garandola, which di , the passengers of all their effects, and 3,000 dollars. .. 4 , ~ Faces i there has been a s kirmish between the volunre`,o osaue ' ti and the revolutionists. One o f the latter, consp•e-o le ies 1, former disturbances, was mortally wounded.--Allge I. Zeitung, March 21. (EXTRACT OF A LETTER.) oEfgCyspOy Egyptian fleets A flo N es T e s N a O nw P e L ri E e:a e F i hn E a B sight.w 2 a 6 s . o — sf u eachsWp e t i c e t Lie other thboee; T ho u :y r k i,a i i 6 4 b ,coo 3i r, t fully suffered to escape him several opportuthel.eved bringing to action the enem)'s ship, which w' r he - g l ft" ciao be unable to resist with effect an attack frotti t h e equi u squadron. Ibrahim pasha, irritat d aad' vocal conduct, wrote severa! times to his fathers " e ' the ins the head tif the 'Grand Admiral, or, at le teni he would inflict on him some exemplary pant bu t, M,hemet did not comply !vith these doll i gbl after the conclusion of peace, when Osman Pilau' wr a -i i - ottl back hi s squadron to Alexandria, the Viceroy receive; re, ye, y c o ldly, a nd expressed his dissatisfa ction in t b s tf sense of witnesses. He remained i n disgrace to r 06 months, after which he reappeared at the Pat3' else festival of the Beiram, but Ibraliam t houg n 10 what harmonised by his sojourn in Greece, conginu.:oo slimy his hatred against the Admiral, and to 1 03 " - • i i with insults. However, Osman Pact's, upon wbotiool,, some degre; the fate of Egypt depended, c rut nuei copy himself at one tim e with military operations, at Lt r iso with the administration o f affairs, and at ot her tin.°