The Sun. — London, England, 1822-07-13 00:00:00

St. Paul's, Rev. s.noore 16 1 '7l Abbotts Riptob, ditto, St. Mary's, Rev. W. per Rev. T. Hooper... 7 7 6 Cumming St. John's, Rev. J • per Rev. J. S. Banks _ Warner St. Peter's, Rev. Dr. Hunt 4 7 0 11. Mawdsley . l4 2 6 Goldingtons, ditto, ditto 4 9 I I Sawtry, ditto, per Rev. Cardington, Rev. F. James Saunders .... 210 6 Cumming . • . • • 11 17 6 St. Michael, C,ornhill, by Veple, Rev. G. M'Lear 4 7 0 Rev. 'l'. Wrench .... 40 0 0 lloughtonConquest,Rev. ' Rusden, Hertford, per Mr. Barber 3 S 0 Rev.. Skinner,Vicar 5 0 9 Maulden, Rev. E. Wil- Rev. G. Whitehead, by limns St. Helen's Amsaland, Haltat o u, Leicester, per by Rev. den. Ward Monkwearmouth, by the Collected from the Pa- Rev. B. Kenuicot 4O 10 4 rishioners, do Great Chart; by the Rev. Rev. F. Lodington T. M. Sutton 9O 4 0 St. Michael, Queenhithe, Mersham, by the Rev. J by Rev. H. C. 0. Dom- , Button • ll 1 0 noghue 5: 2 6 Aldington, by the - Rev.J. Hon. Saville 11, Lumley 1 0 0 Hof banns 7 4 8 Wareham, Sussex, per Smeath, ditto As the Collection for Contributions, under the King's Letter, f'or .the Rc lief of the Distressed Irish, is to be made from house to house, it is earnestly submitted to Gentle m e n i n the res pe c tive p a ri s hes, that they may render the most essential 'service, if they will assist 'in the , Collection in the several Districts of their Parish. Gentlemen who may ••,e so benevolently disposed, are requested :to semi to the Vestry their Names, and the District in which they purpose to assist in the Collection. G 3 13 3 3 0 $ 17 0 b 0 0 The Committee meet at the City• of London Tavern, daily, at eleven for twelve. -Subscriptions are received at the Committee Room, between the hours of twelve and four ' • by Smith, Payne, and Smith ; and by all the Bankers in London and Westminster. By order of the Committee, MICHAEL W. TROY, Hon. Sec. PARLIAJIE\TAIIY PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF COMMONS. •Feneris, 12° die Julii, 1822. Du KE OF MARLBOROUGH'S ESTATE BlLL—Read a second time, and committed ; leave given to Committee to sit, and report on Monday. next. .ROADS BlLL—Kirkintullock Reported, to be LONDON BRIDGE WATERWOR KS BILL I ingrossed. NEW SOUTH WALES DUTIES BlLL—Presented, and read a first time ; to be read a second time on Monday next. 'ORPHANS' FUND BlLL—Petition of Corporation of London, against ; referred to the Committee on the Bill. CANADA GOVERNMENT AND TRADE BlLL—Further con- --- sideration of Report on Monday next. __ ....... -- ,‘SCOTTISII SPIRITS 'DRAWBACK BlLL—read a third time, and passed. STAGE COACH DuTLEs BlLL—Third Reading on Tuesday. •G RE INLAND FISHERY 4CTS [26 Geo. 31 Committees there c. 41, 46 Geo. 3, c. 9, and 1 G eo . 4, c . 33 EAST INDIA SUGAR—Act [1 & 2 Geo. 4j 1 upon onMonday AluniATic ACID—Act [55 &56 Geo. 3 next. . CQURT OF EXCHEQUER SITTINGS BlLL—Read t 2d time. _AI EssAG E Fnom THE Loup s—That they have agreed to, Register Office (Scotland) Bill, Westmorland County Rates Bill, and Axminster Roads Bill ; without amendment ; and Middlesex County Rate Bill, with an Amendment. That they have passed,—a Bill, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing William Gordon Coesvelt." EAST INDIA SUGAR—Petition of Persons interested in ke mittances from India, against any restrictions on the impor tation thereof ; to be printed. -RETAIL OF BEE a BlLL—Petition of Licensed Victuallers of Croydon,. against ; to lie nn the table. MARRIAGE ACT AMENEMENT BlLL—Petitions from Ar thur Chichester, Esq. of Lea Place ; and from 'William Pritchard and James Robert Burchett, of Doctors Commons, in favour; to be printed. • ORDERS of the DAY, for MONDAY. 1. Duchy of Cornwall Bill-Further Consideration of Report. .2. Exchequer Bills (Public Works) Bill-Further considera tion of Report. 3. Stamp Duties Bill-Committee. 4. Superannuation Act Aniendment Bill ;-Further Consider ation of Report. 5. New South Wales Duties Bill-Second Reading. 6. Customs Duties Act [59 Geo. 3, c. 52]-Committee there upon. .7. Stamps (Ireland) Act [56 Geo. 3, c. 56]-Committee there upon. .8. Deeds Registry (Ireland) Bill ;-Committee. -9. Canada Government and. Trade Bill ;-Further Consider , ation of Report. 10. Supply, (Barracks, Public Works, and Law Charges),- urther consideration of Report. 11. Coroners (Ireland) Bill-Committee. ,12. Supply [sth July]-Report. 13. Royal Burghs Accounts Bill-Third Reading. ;T : t: Burgh Magistrates Residence Bill-Third Reading 15. Leather Duties Reduction Bill-Report. 16. Temporary Advances (Ireland) Bill-Report. 17. Salt Duties Repeal Bill-Report. 18. Salt Duties (Ireland) Bill-Report. Lotteries Bill-Report. 20. Receivers-General Bill-Further consideration of Report. 21. Punishment by. Hard Labour Bill-Committee. -22. Bankruptcy Law's Amendment Bill-Report. 23. Greenland Fishery, Acts [26 Geo. 3, e:-41, 46 Geo. 3, c. 9, and 1 Geo. 4, c. 331 -Committee thereupon. 24. Court of Exchequer Sittings Bill-Committee. 25. East India Sugar Act [1 and 2 Geo. 4]Committee there upon. -25. Muriatic Acid Act [55 and 56 Geo. 3]-Committee there upon. -27. Tithes Leasing (Ireland) Bill-Committee. 33. Constables (Ireland) Bill-Further consideration of Report. 23. Endowed Schools (Ireland) Bill-Report. , 50. Spirits Exportation (Scotland) Bill-Committee. 31. King's Bench Business Bill-Committee. :3JI. Public Works (Ireland) Bill-Further consideration of Report. 33. Supply-Committee.' 34. Ways and Means-Committee. 25. Insurrection (Ifeland) Bill-Third Reading. 36: General. Turnpike Bill-Committee. 37. Charge of Loan Bill-:-Second Reading. 33. East India Company's Loan Bill-Second Reading. NOTICES of MOTIONS for MONDAY. i. Mr. Goulhurn,-Irish Miscellaneous SerVices. (In Corn fnittee of'Supply). • 2. Lord Viscount Paltnerston -Vote, Disembodied Militi a ;-. Ophthalmic 'Hospital. (In Committee of Supply.) .3. Mr. Arbu thnot,-CivilCon tingencies ; -Pensioners of Green ' wich 'Hospital-Slave Trade Commissions. (In Com =tee of Supply.) NOTICE GIVEN -LAST NIGHT. Tuesday, July 23. Mr. Lennard,-Copy of any Communication or Correspon dence between his Majesty's Government or the Ambas sador at Paris with the Agent or Minister of the Republic of Columbia [deferred from 17th July). PUBI 4 IC COMMITTEES, for MONDAY NEXT. 1. Calcutta Bankers Petition, 3. Linen Trade (Ireland), at at twelve. one 2. Printing and Stationery, at 4. Limerick Taxation, at one. one' PRICE 0: THIS DAY AT flank Stock .245 "3 per Cent. Red.... 89- 704 8 •a per Cent. Cons. 7'j 34 per Cent per Cent. { thd 9784 New ... 98k 97 g t )er Cent15..1737 11;i.n1,-Long Ann. 20 .11-16ths 9-16ths F STOCKS ONE O'CLOCR. India Stock. India Bonds South Sea Stock, ex div.... Old Annuities $ per Cent. 1751 shut Ex. Billi 1 5 pr. Bank for Gins. Act. India for Con. Acct. Comm. for Acct. ". —.—. Bl 80i TRICE of FOREIGN STOCKS IN LONDON, JULY 12, French Five per-Cents.- 9150. Prussian _f Five per, Cent. Bonds, 89 87S M. .1 Ditto New, 86f 6 i i 4 g. (Old Bonds, 102. Colombian Six per Cent. Bonds, 84. ' ' • Ditto Scrip, 84. 1 j" Five per Cent. Bonds, 633 621 f. ~1 New Ditto, 621 R. Five per Cent. Bonds, 87. - ' Five per Cent. Bonds, 7O i. f Six per Cents. 00. 4 FiveperCents. (Metallic) 78. 79f i 2. 82g i. i Spanish Danish Neapolitan Russian Chili Russian AMERICAN FUNDS, Bar& Shares 3 per cents 5 per cents. 1826 LONDON. I July 13. nothing done. 'lB2l 6 per Cents. 1812 . 1813 . - 1814 . 1815 69 asked. nothing done 97 asked. r7,.p• cents nothing done. Divd. from July, 1822. -Exchange B_pr. NEW YORK. June , 1822. 1061 nothing done. 103/ 104 i 1041 107,i . 105 Divd. from April, 1822. PARLIAMENT. 110 USE ,OF LORDS, FRIDAY JULY 12. The Scotch Mgister-oflice Bill was read a third time, and passed. The followin g f , Bills were committed, viz. : —The S a le of Bread Regulition Bill ; the • Churches' Act Amendment Bill ; the Excise Licences Bill ; the Five per Cents. Repay ment Bill ; Loan Bill ; and theArish Prisons' Laws Bill. —Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The Sheriff's of London appeared at the Bar, and presented the petition of the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Coun cilmen of the City, stating that the Bill before the House rela tive to the Orphans' Fund had been introduced without their knowledge or sanction, and praying that it might not pass into a law. Upon the motion of Mr. Alderman WOOD, the petition was ordered to be referred to the Committee on the Bill. . . The Leather Duties Reduction Bill, the temporary advances to Ireland Bill, and the English and'lrish Salt Duties' Repeal Bill, passed through Committees, and the reports were ordered to be received on Monday. The Scotch Spirits Drawback Bill was read a third time, and passed. THE LATE QUEEN'S SERVANTS: Mr. BROGDEN brought up the Report of the Committee upon the Resolution proposed by the Chancellor'of the Exche quer, for granting pensions to certain of her late Majesty's ser vants. • Mr. HUME gave notice, that when the Bill should be brought in, he would propose a clause, providing that the pen sions should not be paid out of the Consolidated Fund, but should be placed upon the Pension List, as vacancies might occur. A few words passed across the table between Mr. Grenfell, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Ur. Calcraft, which were inaudible. Dr. LUSHINGTON felt it to be his painful duty to express his deep regret that the 'pecuniary consideration which it was proposed to grant to the late Queen's servants, was not also ex tended to those persons who had served her Majesty in high and confidential offices. He found that all those ivdividuals who had filled high offices, and had received testimonials of her Majesty's regard for the manner in which they had discharged their duties, were wholly passed by by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He did not know upon what principle the Right Hon. Member 'proceeded. He (Dr. Lushington) knew that many of the individuals who had been deprived of their salaries had been reduced to a state of great privation. Such, too, had been the unfortunate state of the Queen's circumstances, that it was found to be impossible topay many of the salaries which had accrued during the life-time of her Majesty. It certainly appeared very hard that persons who had served their royal mistress faithfully during a period of six or eight years, now that no proipect of preferment was destroyed, should be left to fight their way through the world. It was not agreeable to British justice, nor advantageous to royalty itself, upon a gene ral view of all the circumstances of the , case, to make such a marked distinction as was now proposed between the treatment of the confidential servants of an unfortunate Queen, and the venal attendants of one who lived all her life in prosperity. Mr. LOCKHART objected to the pension of 4001. to Mr. Sicard as being too large. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that by granting that pension to Mr. Sicard, Government would only carry into effect the intentions of her late Majesty, who during her life had bestowed it upon that attendant. Mr. LOCKHART said he would not object to the pension if it were paid out of her Majesty's personal property, and not out of the public money. Dr. LUSIIINGToN defended the propriety of the proposed pension to Mr. Sicard, and again expressed his regret that Lady Anne Hamilton and other persons who had held confidential situations near her late Majesty, should receive no compensation for their services. Mr. S. WORTLEY said, he believed it to have been the usual practice upon the demise of a Queen, to pension not merely her menial servants, but also all those persons who had held high situations near her person. He could •see no reason for departing upon the present occasion from what had always been the customary course of proceeding.—(Here the Chancel lor of the ExcheqUer made an observation.)—He understood the Right lion. Gentleman now to say, that those persons who had held high, offices from the late Queen, were not constant in their attendance upon her Majesty. But if they were absent from their duties it must have been by the permission of the Queen, and did Dot form a ground for depriving them of com pensation. He would recommend the persons who were ex cluded from the proposed grant to lay their claims before 'Go vernment. • Mr. BROUGHAM expressed his concurrence in the senti ments which had been expressed by the Hon. Member for Yorkshire (Mr. Wortley). He (Mr. Brougham) was not with out some information upon the subject; for he remembered that he had formed .one of a Committee, of which the Hon. • Member for Yorkshire was also a Member, for inquiring into the proper amount of pensions to be granted to the servants of Queen Charlotte. After a most minute examination, that Committee maxis a report which was not more liberal than just, both with regard to the interests of the parties and the country. The resolutions which were founded upon that report were more liberal than those before the House, since they included, in addition to the menial servants, all other persons who had been in attendance upon the Queen, with the exception of those who held, the very highest offices. All persons of the middle class, such as ladies of the Bedchamber, maids of honour, and the Chamberlain, were certainly included. Mr. Sicard, who had been alluded to by an Hon. Member; had been long in at tendance upon the late Queen, having been placed in her ser vice by the 'King when her Majesty lived in Canton-house. Some of her Majesty's attendants had been - in her service nearly 50 years. ' The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved for leave to bring in a Bill pursuant to the Resolutions. Mr. S. WORTLE Y said, that when the Bill should be in troduced, he should feel it his duty to move an amendment for extending remuneration to all the servants of her late Majesty. Mr. lILTME thought that some inquiry should take place upon the subject. He could not agree that it would be proper to grant pensions to all her late Majesty's servants. He thought 1 it was necessary to make a distinction between those who had and those who had not been cqnstant in attendance upon their late mistress. He would oppose any general measure. Mr. BROUGHAM thought a Committee ought to be ap pointed to inquire upon the subject. Dr. LUSHINGTON said, that being acquainted, as he must with the circumstances of her Majesty's household, he could de clare that there were not above six individuals, in addition to those included in the resolutions, whom he would think it ne cessary to recommend to the House as requiring compensation. These were principally ladies, who had, to their inconvenience and detriment, continued faithful to her Majesty during all her persecutions, standing by her through good report and evil report. Mr. WYNN,said, there was no precedent for the course proposed by the Hon ; Member for Yorkshire. • _ Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. THE LOTTERY BILL. Mr. BROGDEN brought up the ,Report on the Lottery Bill. Mr. H. G. BENNET and Mr. MONX reprobated the Bill. Mr. HUME wished the Chancellor of the Exchequer to state why he did not opeii a Government office for the sale of lottery tickets. The , Government, it appeared, originally sold the tickets for 101. each, whi c h were afterwards retailed by the con tractors at 191. each. If the Right Honourable Gentleman cl;i not choose to sell the tickets himself, he might establish an office for that purpose, and place it under the superintendence of the Society for the Suppression of Vice. He was sure that nothing could more properly come under the observation of that body. The Report was read, the Resolutions agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time on Monday. The Court of Exchequer's Sitting Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday next. LONDON BRIDGE. Mr. DAVIES GILBERT brought. up the Report of the Committee on the London Water-works. He said that the Report related to the removal of the London Water-works, which was preliminary to the speedy taking down of London-bridge, which was so long disgraceful and dangerous to the Citizens of London, and erecting in its place one which he hoped would be worthy of this great city. MR. A BERCROMBY'S ATTENDANCE. Mr. COURTENAY said he understood' that the Hon. and Learned Member for Calne would that evening attend in his place, in obedience to the order of the House. - He understood also that the papers Which the House had already declared to be Breaches of Privilege, had led . to some consequence likely to be of a personal nature, .unless the House interfered. The privileges of that House belonged to the House collectively, and not to any individual Member; and he trusted the House would intimate to the Hon. and Learned Member, that whatever might be his yiews or his feelings on the subject, he must not take any step interfering with the proceedings of the House. He (Mr. C.) found there were many precedents of cases wherein the House had solemnly enjoined individual Members not to make any breach of privilege a personal matter. This had been done in plain language, for it expressly forbad the Member to prase. cute any quarrel on the subject in question, by Sending or ac cepting a challenge. He should now move, that the Resolu tions of Tuesday last be first read. They wcre accordingly read by the Clerk. Mr. COURTENAY then moved, " That this House hav ing resolved the said papers to be breaches of privilege, dear strictly enjoin and command the Hon. James Abercromby not to prosecute any quarrel in respect thereof, by sending or ac cepting any challenge." 'The Resolution being put, and unanimously agreed to, The SPEAKER said, the usual course was to follow up such a Resblution by directing the -Speaker to communicate the Resolution to the Member in question in his place. Mr. FORBES. could not but lament the circumstances in Which originated the discussion and . the orders just agreed to, by which the important business of the Empire was interrupted and impeded. He trusted it would operate as a caution to Hon. Members not to say any thing in their places in that House which they would not or could not say out of it.—(Hear, hear !) On the other hand it was to be lamented that persons should not seek other means of defending themselves than through the medium of the public press. If Hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House were to be a little more cautious, he thought it would be more becoming their stations, and more likely to en sure temperate discussion and calm investigation.--(Hear, hear !)—The Hon. M em b er t h en moved c°that the Speaker should communicate the Resolutions to the Hon. Member (Mr. Abercromby) in his place." Mr. BROUGHAM said he hoped the Hon. Member had no intention to frustrate the effect of all that had been done by the House, om.to set up his individual opinion against the Resolu tion which the House had just adopted.—(Hear, hear !)—lle (Mr. B.) would take leave to say, that his Hon. and Learned Friend had not, on the occasion alluded to, . dealt in any ran dom charges. He was in the discharge of an irksome public duty, that of a public accuser, and he (Mr. B.) was in the judgment of the House whether any thing could exceed the distinguished ability with which he had discharged that duty, in the temperate and gentlemanly tone he had observed in the course of it.—(Cheers:) After a few words from Mr. 11. SUMNER, deprecating any further discussion on the subject, Mr. FORBES, in explanation, assured the House that his observations were intended to be of a general nature, and that he had not the remotest intention of alluding to the particular case of the Hon. Member for Calne. Ile should be sorry to rise in defence of that which the House had declared a breach of privilege ; but it was impossible for him to hear the name of Mr. Menzies uttered without declaring the estimation in which he held that Gentleman. Mr. BROUGHAM said, he had then only to express his ,satisfaction that he had given the Honourable Member' an opportunity to offer the candid •xpl ana ti on h e h a d j ust g i ven. —(Hear, hear !) Lord BINNING said, he had no wish to prolong the dis eussion, or to answer the remarks of the Honourable and Learn ed Member, lie only rose to prote§t against those remarks, having the effect of . prejudging the cases of other indivi duals, who had yet to appear on their trial at the Ba r of th e House.—The motio n was then put and agreed to. The SPEAKER then called on Mr. ABERCROMBI', who appeared in his place, and stood uncovered. The SPEAKER then informed'him that he was commanded by the House to acquaint him with certain Resolutions passed by the. House. The Speaker, then read the different Resolu tions ; and in conclusion, informed Mr. Abercromby, that he was enjoined and commanded by the House not to prosecute any quarrel in respect of either of the said Breaches of Privi lege, by sending or accepting ariy challenge. Mr. ABERCOMBY bowed, and resumed his seat. Lord ALTHORP then rose, and requested the indulgence of the House, while he stated the circumstances which had pre vented the earlier attendance of his Hon. and Learned Friend, and which caused his attendance now.—(hear, hear'!)—On Tuesday last, before the papers in question had been submit ted to the House, and while his Hon. and Learned Friend was in perfect ignorance that they would be so submitted, he had set off for Northamptonshire, to communicate with him (Lord Althorp)'on the subject. In consequence of that communica tion they had both set off for the Northi with a purpose in view which it was unnecessary to state to the: House. On their ar rival at Penrith they found that the Messengers from that House had previously passed through the town, and were then several miles in advance—and then they became acquainted with what had taken place in the House on the subject. They therefore found it was impossible to accomplish their object, as the order of the House would reach Mr. Menzies before them, and . would place that Gentleman in a difficulty. He (Lord A.) therefore under all circumstances, and recollecting too the order which the liouse had made for the attendance of his Hon. and Learned Friend, and with which they both had, virtually, though not officially, been made acquainted, took upon himself to advise, indeed to direct his Hon. a nd L earne d F r i en d to re turn, and attend in his place.—(Loud Cheers.)—[Here the sub ject dropped.] EXCHANGE WITH INDIA. Mr. FORBES presented a Petition from certain persons interested in the state of exchange betwixt India and this country, complaining that what hitherto had been worth 25.6 d. was now worth only 2s. in consequence of certain loans which used formerly to be paid in this country, ' being now paid in Bengal, and praying also that the restrictions on East India produce may be mitigated. The Hon. Member represented the state of East, India property being in a state of great de preciation in consequence of the monopoly now possessed by the West Indies of The English market for sugar. This pro perty would fall into a worse state if something were not done to relieve it. The Petitioners particularly prayed for the re moval of the duty of 10s. per cent. on East India sugar. Mr. BERNAL thought the lion. Gentleman dealt in falla cies, and raised apprehensions that had no foundation in reality. The West India Proprietors stood in much greater need of as sistance than those or the East. Mr. MONEY assured the Hon. Member who spoke last, that it was sad reality and not fallacy that his Hon. Friend had represented to the House. This country was forcing its own manufactures on India, and refused to allow her to ex port her raw produce in return. • Mr. BRIGHT said it was idle clamour to talk about mono poly towards India. Let India look at her own monopoly, and the encouragement her policy was affording to the American shipping which now traded in tonnage, that she ref Used to per mit. When they talked of freemen, they talked of what did not exist in the East. It was a system of slavery and depreda tion that prevailed in that part of the world. Mr. HUME declined at that time detaining the House, but rose•to give a pledge that he would at a future period prove to be unfounded every one of the statements of the 'Hon. Mem ber for Bristol (Mr. Bright.) The Petition was then ordered to be printed. Mr. BENNET presented a Petition from the Inhabitants of the parish of Tindal in Somersetshire, complaining that a pub lican in the parish had had his license taken away. Mr. Secretary PEEL stated the circumstances under which the license had been refused in this case. The Magistrates, who were two of the most respectable in the county, had been obliged to do so, upon the man's being convicted of having permitted a pauper of the workhouse to be in his house drink ing from Monday morning to Tuesday night, a period of 36 hours constant drinking; and also 'keeping a disorderly house upon Sunday mornings. It was not, however, till after fre quent admonitions, that the course complained of was taken, and even the milder of the two modes had been chosen. The , Petition was then read, and ordered to be laid on the table. LICENSING BILL. Mr. DENISON presented a Petition from the Licensed Victuallers of Croydon against the Licensing Bill, and pray ing to be heard by Counsel. He (Mr. Denison) thought, that where so much was said About guarding the vested interests of the middle and upper classes of society, some care ought to be taken of the vested interests of the lower classes. Mr. BROUGHAM entirely concurring in the last statement uttered by the lion. Member, begged to inform him that it was with that precise view that the Bill in question was brought in, It was to enable the lower classes to obtain provisions at the lowest rates that victuallers could sell them at ; and he be lieved it would not be disputed, that to break up any mono poly to maintain provisions at high prices must be consonant with the vested and the best interests of the lower classes.— (Hear !)—He believed also that to oblige persons to sell good beer would be productive of no harm to them or their cus tomers. Mr. DENISON observed, that the Petitioners must under stand their own interests better ttan the Hon. and Learned Gentlem'an. The Petition was laid on the table. • Mr. LENNARD postponed a motion of which he had given notice, for the production of Papers relative to the Independ ence of South America, from the 17th to the 23d Inst.—The Hon. Member then presented a Petition from Ipswich against ' the Alien Bill.—Laid on the table. PRISON DISCIPLINE. Mr. HLTME presented a Petition froin a person of., the name of West and his Wife, complaining of cruelties practised to.. wards their son, in Shepton Mallet gaol. The Petitioners stated that their son was committed to prison for having set a wier to catch a hare. Upon his commit ta l h e h a d his hair cut off; and subjected to very severe discipline, and, amongst other things, was washed with cold water. He, in consequence of this, caught a severe cough and cold, f rom w hi c h h e was un able for thirty days out of thirty-three to get admission to the surgeon. Ile was finally discharged, and died in a few days after he was liberated. A Coroner's Inquest was demanded, but refused because the Coroner was a friend of the gaoler. He hoped the 'Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department would be able to make some satisfactory stateinent on this subject. _ _ _ Air. Secretary PEEL said he had made some inquiries into this case which had been satisfactory He had a c2rtificate from the surgeon who attended this man after his dismissal, from which it clearly appeared that the im me di ate cause of his death was immoderate drinking on the day of his leaving gaol, but his death did not ocour till a fortnight afterwards. He be lieved there was another charge in the Petition of his having received 3s. as hush-money prior to his quitting the gaol. Upon inquiry into this, he found that this was a sum given him in consideration of service regularly performed in the kit chen, and in corroboration he found That an entry had been made of it in the books. With regard to his being washed with cold water, he learned that it was the custom to wash all the prisoners upon their coming into the gaol, and that the water used was warm.- After a few words from Mr. DAMSON and Mr. BENNET, the Petition was ordered to be laid pn the table. TIIE DONEGAL ESTATES. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL presented a Petition from an individual of the name of Arthur Chichester, settinc , forth, that by the will of his grandf a th er h e was ent i t l e d to inherit the estates of the Donegal family, in consequence of Anna May, styled the Marchioness of Donegal, not having been legiti mately married to the Marquis, by which it happened that there could be no lawful heir male from that union ; and that in consequence of a clause introduced into the , Marriage Act Amendment:Bill he should be deprived of his just right, as the marriage between Anna May and the Marquis of Donegal, Which would - otherwise have been null and void, would be ren dered valid. , lie complained of having been involved in expen sitive litigation to Maintain his jsistrights, and stated that theease was at present in course of judicial investigation, and it 'would therefore be doing what was unprecedented ip the annals of Bri tish Legislation to . pass this Bill, which w as an cx postfirctolaw to deprive him of his vested rights, and strip him of property to which by the bequest of his grandfather he was entitled by law. For these reasons, therefore, he prayed to be heard by Counsel against the particular clause •at the Bar of the House. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman observed, that if the allegation:: were true, and he believed they were matter of notoriety, this Gentleman had the same right to the'estates in question as that by which every Member of that House enjoyed his property. viz.—the right given him by the laws of the land. This Bill went to strip him of valuable estates, which he had the fullest title at the present moment to convey by Will, or fee, and under such circumstances he apprehended the House Would not refuse to allow him to be heard by Counsel at the Bar.' He would refer to a precedent which had been much,talked of. He alluded to the case of Mr. 'Wright; who had brought three or four hundred actions against clergymen for non-residence, at a time that a bill was pending to change that part of the law. It was con ceived at that time that he had a vested right in the penalties which the law ordained should be levied for non-residence, and surely this petitioner's right was much stronger. He was heard with great patience by the House of Lords upon that occasion, in support of Mr. Wright's claim, and although it was decid ed against him; it was considered unjust to do that: which would go .to deprive an individual of his vested rights v(ithout hearing him. Mr. Chichester thought, that if the House re solved upon depriving him of valuable property, they ought to devise some means o compensation, and lie hoped the House would allow him to he heard by Counsel. Mr. SCARLETT thought it impossible to grant the prayer of the petition at this late stage of the measure. It was not now. their business to alter the form of the Bill, but to consider the Amendments sent down to them from the Lords ; he must say that it was ratheiremarkable this petition was not preferred be fore.—(Hear !)--Ile could not but consider that the only ob ject of it was to procure delay, ht the same time that lie thought they could not now entertain such a prayer. Dr. LU.SHINGTON observed, that the first Amendment which he had to consider was one which went to affect pro perty in the way complained of by this petitioner. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH hopeu the House would not suffer its course to be impeded by the late application, when there had been ample time to present' it before both to that House and to the House of Lords, and certainly this was not a more fitting time than before, since all the Amendments of the Lords went to narrow the retrospective operation of the Bill. There had been a Petition presented to the. Lords, but it did not pray to be heard by counsel at - theliar. 'What then could be the meaning of this application but to delay the Bill, that it might eventually be lost, for this Session at least, against the deliberate determination of both Houses of Parliament ? Above all things this was a Bill which, out of regard for the peace of families, and their dearest interests, ought not to be delayed. It was therefore from th e same sense of duty that had caused him to vote for the Bill, that he opposed Coun sel being heard upon it, being convinced that it was only an expedient to defeat the intention of the Legislature by delay.— (Hear, hear!) Mr. B. - BATHURST agreed with the Hon. Members on the other side, that it was too late now to be heard by Petition against the Bill in its present state. He believed also that the Petition was directed against some of the amendments which had been sent down to them from the House of Lords, and in that case he believed the Chair would inform then] that such a course could not be taken as that prayed, for by the Petitioner. He rather thought too th a t it was t oo late for a Petition to be received now. The SPEAKER said it was inconsistent with the practice of the House to receive Petitions against measures which had ever been passed. With regard to the prayer of this Petition, he apprehended that the House could not hear Counsel against measures of which they were not masters. That House had passed the Bill. If the Petitioner, therefore, directed his complaints against the amendmenti of the Lords, he believed it was without precedent for the House to hear Counsel for such a purpose.—(Hear, hear !) Mr. BERNAL presented a Petition from William Prit chard, Esq. Proctor, on behalf of Samuel Blithe, at present in Paris, praying that the Marriage Act Amendment Bill might not be passed into a law in its present state.—Laid on the table. Dr. PHILLIMORE presented a similar Petition on behalf of Sarah Blithe. Her Proctor stated that she was married on the false oath of her husband, by license, that she was pregnant by him at the time, and was now pregnant, and out of her senses, from the conduct of her husband's father. Dr. 'LUSHINGTON having been Counsel in this case, felt himself called upon to put the House in possession of the real facts. This Sarah Blithe was maid servant in the. family of the father she complained of, when she married the young man. They were married at Myer upon his false oath, he being 18, and she 28. -The father had caused the marriage to be set aside, but an appeal had been made, and he was very much inclined to think, that as this had suspended the judg ment declaring the marriage null and void, it was one of those cases which the clause complained of would make a valid mar riage. The Petition was then read and laid on the table. CHANCERY SUITORS. Mr. BROUGHAM presented a Petition from Thomas Fla nagan, Gent. of Foley-pine. The situation of this Gentle man of which he came to complain to the House was not a pe culiar.one ; for it was a case of ruin' froth being involved in a Chancery suit.—(Laught er .)—H e had been ruined by the de cision in his case, and he was told that he might appeal; but he was alreAdy wholly ruined and could not avail himself of this means Of bettering himself, which had he only been half ruined by the decision would have served to complete his ruin. lie fsared there was nothing in this-GentlemaLi's case in which the House could assist him; but they might do some good if they complied with 'one part of his prayer. This was, that they would revive the practice of the Court of Chancery,and shorten the duration of suits. 'lf , Hon: Members would apply them selves to this, instead of getting up one after another, those who. were and those who were not connected . with that Court—to pass laboured eulogiums upon the Judge who happened to pre side over it at the time, some gooi might be done. The petition was then read and orthred to be printed. ' MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. On the Order of the Day for the consideration of the LOids' Amendments to the Marriage Act Amendment Bill being read„. Dr. PHILLIMORE congratulated the House upon the suc cessful result of their perseverance in this cause, which the present , stage of this Bill presented. This was the fourth Bill that' had been sent up to the other House.. It had at length received considerable attention, adequate to the im liortancc of the subject, and he must say, that the Lords, with the usual zeal of converts; had carried their concurrence with them much farther -than lie expected. That House had pre viously.distinctly declared, that there never should be a- nul lity of niarriage. But in the present Bill, they had passed over, unnoticed the clause to that effect ; and, in point of fact, had only expunged one clause, substituting in its place eight others, and those were th e A men d ments t h ey h a d to consider. They thad also given more extended operation to the retrospec tive clause, carrying it back to apply to marriages of a more ancient date. But in all that the Lords had •done in this re spect, notwithstanding what they had heard that night, he was prepared to contend that' they had most scrupulously respected the sacred rights of property. The Hon. Gentleman entered into an examination of the different amendments. He replied to the objections made to the retrospective operation of the Bill, and showed that former Acts on the subject of marriage had in the same way been made retrospective: He moved that the amendments should be read a second time. Dr. LUSHINGTON thought it would be almost unex ampled conduct, if the House should at once agree with what were called the Lords'. amendments, which left scarcely twenty lines of the former Bill, and supplied ten pages of their own. He believed no man who had read the Bill could say that he understood the whole of it. His Learned Friend had admitted that there was some obscurity in one of the clauses, and of the Most important clauses too, as he (Dr. Lushington) would contend. Was it then fitting that a Bill should pass, of which every syllable ought to be well understood, which was thus de fective ? He thought it objectionable, as it went to establish different marriage systems in England and Ireland. No man could be more willing than he was to bind down with iron fet ters the man who would effect a marriage by means of a false oath, and afterwards take advantage of his own, perjury to break it. But he cont e nd e d th a t gir l s an d boys, who might be drawn into marriages, under great disparity of eircum? IVeh stances, and who were i ncapa bl e o f j udging for Owing., 0 1 were entitled to p rotect i on f rom the law. He stated 5'7;1, cases in which the operation of the Bill would be initi r ' h - i d and could have b een prov id e d with many more cases ha of he thought his Learned Friend required to b e inforrue them. It was n ecessary to consider how this measure would affect contin gen t r i g h ts. He was.at this moment a trustee, five or six oth er individuals, to a property amounting to or seven hundred thousand pounds, which had been acs foil in the followi ng manner. M oney had been lent twen ty- ity years ago on a rev ers i on t h en encumbered with two lives' fit this bill, a null an d vo id marr i age, if it had taken place, nzir have been made th e means o f d epr i ving- the claimants o f r b u aye property, and o f g i v i ng i t to those who could never nal been considered en titl e d to i t. In com th enting on t h e Pe , ties incurred by th e S urrogate if al l the forms prescribeut.e, this bill were no t exact l y complied with, he having the ' t i lls nour to be Surrogate to the Lord Bishop of London, g ave f lora .friends notice th a t th ey wou ld a ll be likely to rema i n bach a for him, for he, un d er suc h enactments, should be disP e , se h a ci grant no licence. —(A laugh.)—A certain Noble Lady,, it ge been rumoured, had had a great hand in framing'this Bill. ss protested he believed the report, for it.seemed to him to Po ir 7, e much greater indications of having emanated from a fe,r a for rather than a masculine understanding. The prov tso r n„ io making marriages valid that Iti,d been celebrated u ncle !f ont names (by which parents and 'guardians were precludedililek, interference), he thought highly objectionable. Far front, ',a0.1 ing that this Bill ought to pass because it remedied one ev h , t _ 1-at a variety of evil 4 to- be attended to at a future pert° - 'tst would call on the House to abide by the ancient law, an" ~ to all innovations. He would say, that no Bill ought to Pa' t o alter the law of the land with respect to marriages which tit House could not declare on its honour and its conscience th!„ o , fully understood, an d h a d cons id ered with a view to a ll the c;' id , sequences to whi c h it must ten d . He moved as an at° 0 3 meat, " That th e amen d ments s h ou l d be read a th i r d time that day six months." Mr. PLIJNKET thought if they were not to pass anY„ t i s without first being sure of their understanding every sY", t ibe or sentence that it contained, the number of statutes ato lu itt d passed would be diminished. Not profes s in g to unders y g every sentence, syllable, and iota of this measure, he 00. nevertheless fully convinced that it would do great and tual good. It would do away with much injustice and cruelty' and if its operation were to be complained of in someaioe, stances, the benefits it would confer were beyond all e ie of lation, while the evils growing out of it were cap t he t he being easily cured. The Learned Gentleman had Pu t „ to question to an unfair issue. He had called on the 1-10 1 0 n; abide by the ancient l a w o f th e l an d; an d res i st innovarn to but he (Mr.. Plunket) wou ld ca ll on , the What House to reto hid; the ancient l aw o f th e land and cure the innovations "L i ge had already taken place. was good in the iga'" be Act would not be touched, but its object would no lon ger it defeated by the oath of the party against whose offendil e g was meant to guar d, an d w h o, carried away by head sls Tbe passion, might be dispo se d t o swear to what was not true: consent of parents or guardians was not to be reouire a, sa that verified by the of of a third person. The eZ,: of nullity w as got rid of, which had heretofore injured e t e " t ad it was meant t o p ro t ect . Its effect was such, that it star make the da ug ht er o f a no bl e family a concubine, ba s dize -her issue, an d put i t out o f the power of all h er frig to remove the incurable stain. This monstrous and to t ere ch tch enactment was 'now dispo se d o f, and.eoroparing the evi l i icin might grow out of the present measure with the misery &- it would cure, he thought the House would not hesitate ir l . . t i eo daring for its adopti on . I t was sa id to be against t h e pra`' Ile of legislation to give this Bill a retrospective operatiou-_etre, denied that such was th e fa ct ; f or to give a' Measure a 'o i ls spective action was a regular and an established course- c o he instanced in the Acts respecting l'oaper If other precet; _ n a were asked for, he would refer to die Bills of Lord nertfora;ca Bishop Horsley, which had been mentioned by his ' lea fin g/ Friend, who had en ti t l e d hi mse l f to the gratitude of his ,e ( ' - vdt by the introduction of this bill. He also mentioned tn e hick of Charles the Second, which had legalized all marriages.,Thea had been celebrat e d b etween the years 1642 and 1660- an d the unfortunate circumstances arose between the gtnboat the Parliament, which led to a revolution, many the the riages were m a d e b etween t h e years he had named eb parties merely going before a Justice of the Peace per„ ur' Lain his sanctio n t o t h e i r un i on. Those marriages retro doubtedly null an d void ; but the Legislature, by a o ther spective law, h a d decided on making them good. Prnists; case in point was the law respecting the marriages ot t olf These by the co mmon l aw h a d b een nul l and void, their spring illegitim a t e , an d property w hi c h otherwise weult devolved to them they were incapable of enjoying' 5 01.15 e- however, passed to m a k e these marriages valid, a rid go. quently another to re move a ll reproach from the 041 , 1 1 01 such marriages, and to enable them to inherit property- ~e cases the Honour a bl e an d Learned Gentleman opposi` Act' were different from those affected by the Marriage was When he called for precedents, the Learned GentleloV t 'was; not content with similarity, but looked for identity- I f e rre° however, the principle of the laws to which he had r% i tif! that they were to look to, and that .was sufficient to. t l i r o an the present Bill, so far as precedent went. The I . , 3 _ 4 '3far' before the House got rid of the perpetual-nullity of ul e o fotit riage Act, which was at variance with all the analogies _ 4 0 , law, which precludes even time from giving security to tie c t perty, and inflicted evils which might go on from gener 3 ex tion . generation, continually increasing in geometrical Or e l' tiag e ; It had been proposed to the House of Lords to render inaF ght 0 valid and their issue legitimate, but to take away the ri ; - u'if e such parties to inherit property. The woman was wbe d her in all other rights, but she was not to claim a dowry ; 5 , 0 " h oe ell'.ldren, who were to be legitimatized by birth, were to e first no claim upon die- property of their parents. This was ti t i e ver time that a distinction between right and property had been recognized in English law. Yet this. had been! r A ra' good enough 'to be proposed to the common sense of their i ,T e te ships. By passin g th e Bill as i t now stood,' the Peers o f ea' land raised th e hi g h character which they had alr ea t ctorl joyed in the opini on o f t h e peop l e, as t h e constan t pro p re d of the public good. The Right Honourable and Li fer the Genticman concluded by declaring his anxious hope t wee' success of the Bill, am id t h e . l ou d est an d long C O" cheering. Mr. HUDSON GURNEY objected to the retrosße c tie d It clause, but thought the general op era ti on o f th e Bill co t ' to the suport of the House. Mr. M p 'ETHERELL opposed the Bill. He did not bel -, i c e r:: that the retrospectiv e c l ause would 'have an extensive .olstice tion, but it could p ro d uce not hi ng b ut m i sc hi e f an d inif e polt . —They had heard of th e p rac ti ce o f canvass i ng f o r vote' re seat private bills, and th a t was b a d e no ug h ; V ut unt il the „X f ete! measure was proposed, h e never h ear d o f canvass ing t . u' e f the upon a question a ff ec ti ng t h e most i mportant interestseet to public. It was notorious, too, that this case had an a'ilibatj a particular Case now under litigation.—(Hear, hear I Yrtena e f he.would ask, was the old law, which this Bill was ' n o ne to replace? Was it not framed by Lord Hardwiel' e l n d R aj the greatest men that ever this country produced ? o f t.", not the present Bill opposed by the Lord Chancellorbigh year 1822, whose legal learning, and knowledge, 0 ( . 1 r to N: quirements, rendered him at least equal, if not suer e t i, i e great predecessor in that office ? lie admitted that o „ er at . tof , ings of parents were exposed to deep injury by the . manising influence, to make him regret it as deeply „ide one ; but such regret would not induce him to throw s ;: tti tiorl& of the . exis . ting law, and his mind required no morabaolgs: A t ig principles of established law, and to disregard the con'" o f tr s I t of property. He could also meet the su Bill upon the score of feelings ; for although sou? 5 Partly would be relieved from the occuirence of miseries such operation, yet it would impose on others a degre e . sac ship- not less intolerable. He also objected 'to Plaeldeelariag a power. in the hands of the Crown, as that of the Olsor ter f whether property should or should not descend, t o ed rt . children' of parties, WhoSe marriage 'bad been wo olen" ) , and contrary to law. 'What a monstrous power it ro t thilj to entrust in the hands of any Ministers. Ile did i; liable " re l l as that at' present it would be abused but how no - e , it be to abuse under particular circumstances. wa s e f roa ot a . power than( that of declaring whether the ofl'sprirg there no t riage should be legitimate or spurfous. And might., be, cases of an exactly similar character in which Policy equalli;),, dictate 'different courses, while justice demanded an mig ht as of treatment? Thus, with the same rights, one rartY other w admitted to the enjoyment of property,. while ,the , arg ue excluded from it. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman.o no. t o powerfully against the Bill; and conjured the House .„„ a ~, it with the indecent haste which was now proposed. di 7 en ts examination of the clauses, and the necessary ame.nte g rin ht it them beingonade, he might become reconciled to U of the measure. But without ample disCussion be ts tl e i n g ie v .. impossible that the House could, agree to a Bill.corl held " many new enactments upon which they had neve r liberation. dea wen t be t to P''' l l Dr. PHILLIMORE denied that the Bill was i n to re apply to a particular case. A Bill was introduc_-ei 0 n ate :o House in the year 1817, of a much more retrosPee l . ,' et t hen than the present; and the case alluded to Iv" " to the existence. Bill. He H A e T c T on o fe ß ss N ed EY th - a G t EitNaEppßeAarLeasptookieliminions/iLteitialitillie:. ti C destroyed the Act introduced by Lord Hardwiett e °int out, by nothing to supply its place. He proceeded to _fi e oteet i ,, hardships which the Bill would entail upon partle a si rg. at ti i ii " g as i d ts isp o o p s eLat o i f on t , h e an c d ro p w a n rti t c h u e la e r x l t y ra d o e r p di r n e cite dpotilvi:r p_ o k: tc l hong c: r.i property for the commission of an i egal act wa s PO; marriage. The question for the House to cons e art_ coo rt o et vil l ptheerseulaodqeutehnecme them, whether IllitshlterigahntuHmotyn:ofFmriienndia had end ue c 1\ .