The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1819-05-01 00:00:00

the table.

ftlr. C. 11. IluTcittuscitr presented a Petition
from the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of a Parish
in the County of Londonderry, praying for the
repeal of the Penal Laws, by which they were up-
pressed. The Petitioners stated, that the pros-
perity of Ireland had increased, in proportion as
the severity of the Penal Code had been relaxed.
—Laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. M. FITZGERALD presented a Petition from
the Roman Catholic Inhabitant. of Killarney. &c.
praying for a repeal of the Penal Laws.—Laid on
the table.

A Petition of the same deseriptioa ws• presented
from the Towns of lislcool and Neweartle.—Lind
ou the table.

SCOTCH BURGHS.

Lord A. 11amir.voN presented a Petition from
Glasgow, praying for aii alteration in the system of
the Scotch Burghs.—Laid on the table.
Gen. FERGUSON had some Petitions to preseuton
the saute subject, and was glad to see the Learned
Lord Advocate in his plaice, while lie stitycl the few
observations he had to make on this subject. Two
of the Petitions *lnch he had to present originated
iii consequence of the rash declaration of the Learn-
ed Lord, that the Petitions on this subject did not
emanate from respectable bodies, competent to
take a full slew of the subject. The Minions
which he had now to present were the best answer
to that declaration ; they were conclusive against
the very bold and unfounded assertions of the
Learned Lord. One of the Petitions was from the.
Town mud Council of Burnt Island. L, tinned
Lord must admit lust this was a good Petition—the
others were from Kirksulden, and the Burgesses of
Dysart.
These Petitions were laid on the table, and
ordered to be printed.
PETITIONS AGAINST TOWNLAND FINES.
Sir Jesus STIEWART presented a Petition from
the lishabitinits in the vicinity of Strabane., in Ire-
land, aFainst the system of townland lines in Ire-
land. She effect of this law, the Don. Baronet
declared, was the iudiseriminate opprn aeon of
iu-
'toeent person., end the tiding the gaols in Ireland
with persons who could not, from their situation
in life, hod the enormous bail required of them.
Many of these iwrsons, after suffering long impri-
souments, were discharged. The Isw as affecting

townland fines was a barbarous one, and unworthy
of a civilized country.—(Hear. hear.)
Petition was laid oil the table.
General HART rose to present a Petition from
Mosel M'Coorollough, an inhabitant of Donegal,
c plsining of extreme cruelty on the part of an
Excitor officer, acting under the townland fine sys-
tem. The Petitioner's father was taken into cue.
Cody by an Excise officer, named Patrick Fiatlry,
for 3111 Hiked infraction of the Excuse laws. Ile
complained to the officer that he was very ill of a
dropsy, and incapable of going to a distant orlooli.
with the dispatch required of him. The Excise-
man offered, if he gave 101. to let him 7,0 upon his
own recognizance ; but the poor mail was witch
to raise that sum, and was forced to go on goaded
ht• a military force, awl thorough' a circuitous road, to
the gaol of Donegal. Ile co►nplaiord of having
been beaten, and otherwise ill-treated on the way.
tin his arrival at the prison, he became weak and
exhausted, and told his sou he could not s'►rvive what
he had suffered. The man's prediction was verified,
fur he died while his son was in the act of Inioging
to him a Priest, to ruleniouiter the last consolatory
office, of reliion. which a periinii of his persuasion
is motions to rt ceive from his own Minis.er. The
Grand Jure represented this circumstance to the
hoard of Excise, but uo auswer had been give', to
01.4 applicati tttt .
Lord MOUNTCHARLES said, that as Foreman of
the Growl Jury alluded tu, lie could verify the
tact that evidence n► support of the allegations in
the Petition, was tendered to that Leidy. It was
the commoto report that the poor man hod been
murdered by an Eloise officer, and it became the
duty of the Jury, as the Grand Inquest of the
county, to take cognizance of the matter. The
son of the deceased had depoo.eol to the same effect
I,efoirr the Grand Jury, as lie hail flo‘% set f►tth in
his Petition. The Jury the discharge of what
they felt to be their duty, transmitted the olepot,i-
bons to time Excise Hoard, front which. as was
stated, no answer had been received. The neglect
of *lowering a communication of such a kind,
could be looked upon in 110 other light than as a
delay of justice-01w, hear)—utiA where so
serious •u imputation was cast, he thought it be-
came the I ..ouse to take cutiozmice of it, and to
Zook with serious atteutioi► to the allegations its this
Petition.
The Petition was then laid on the table, ■nd or-
dered to he punted.
Mr. WILLIAM STEWART presented a Petition
from several freeholders in the county of Tyrone,
compliiiiiisig of the heavy grievances they endured
under the townland fine system.
The lion. Member presented • similar Petition
from William Sharpe, who complained of his tin.
prisonment and sufferings under a charge, fur
shed► lie was acquitted when brought before a
Jun•.
AGRICI`LTUR.4I, PETITION.

The Marquis of TAVISTUCK presented a Petition
signed by a number of landholders in the county of
Bedford, praying that the attention of the Legisla-
ture should be directed to the stated their produce.
The Noble. Lord observed, that he differed from
the Petitioners in their view of the subject, and ap-
proved of the policy which postponed u cousidera-
tion of this kind, which was so likely to create an
irritable feeling throughout the country.
The Petition was laid on the talde.
WOOLLEN TRADE.

Lord MILTON pr.e.esited a l'ettinit from the
woollen manufacturers of the county of York, re-
lating to thr ditty on the importation of foreign
rape seed. He begged to stare, that if it were not
the tutetition of 1 ;o‘erontrot in repeal this ditty, he
should take au early opportoulty of calling the at-
trition of the 1-loos to the subject.
Sir CHARLES BURRELL made a few remarks on
the diminution attempted in sonic ►nstauces to be
%brawn between the agriculturists and the inassufau-
torero.
Lord LASCIILLES said, that this duty, which he
was wiry to hear there was 110 imentiost of repeal-
ing, affected boil) the agriculturist and the Maim-
file/Orel'. foe the former could nut cultivate his
Lind with the rape dust, which he would otherwi►e
Use 11 the ditty were repealed.
CURWEN said. it was his intention to move
for the repeal of this duty. ilia woollen manufac-
turers never stood more 111 need of such a measure
than at present.
Lard MILTON said, when the subject was
brought before the House, he would endeavour to
get this tnut injoirinus duty repealed. By means
of it, they were imposing burdens ori one of the
most important ports of the raw us iterial of their
woollen maitufaeture. 'rlw duty was laid tin, oil-
gitially, to benefit the whale-fishery—but whale oil
was found inapplicable to the purpose; and the
oils imported 1 the southern parts of Europe
were tun dear to be employed in the manufacture.
Laid uu the table and ordered to be printed.
BOROUGH, OF CAM ELFOR D.
Lord Aftl.TON presented a Petition from Charles
Pitt, of Adam-street, Adelphi, complainitig of
guess partiality uis the part of the returning officer
for the Borough of Camelford, at the Itud general
election. Petitioner stated, that the returning
oilier had rejected a propetly qualifittl person,
regularly nominated by him, and duly seconded,
as a candidate to represent the ►aid Borough—mid
that when hr (she Petitioner) was about to nflrr
himself as a candidate to represent the said Bo-
roughs the returning officer refused to admit hia

The Spatial:a said, the House insist be aware,
that, under the Act of Parliament, the Petitioner
conitilaming of an llie return, must tither
declare hiropelf to be a voter, a ',tram claiming a
right to vote, or a candidate. The Petitioner, io
lbw instance, stated, that he was pre.riit at Ilse
election, and, when about to offer himself as a can-
didate, the returning officer refused to allow hint.
These words certainly brought the Petition within
the tutu ll ll g of an Election Petition"—since,
when he offered himself, the Petit 1111 l re became in
fact a candidate. But he observed that the words
which made the present in Election Petit 11111 l were
interlined, and written in a different hand, and with
different ink, from the rest of the Petition.
Mr. W. Dames observed, it did not appear
from the Petition, that the Petitioner had a right
to vote. Ile might have been a mere stranger.
The Sexiiitft repeated the stateturiii, which lie
had before wade, with ►espect to the lusty. The
question was, as this particular part, which rcu-

tiered the prescnt au F.lection Petition, was written
iu N (lifl;.rent haw', and in different ink, whether it
could, con•i•tently with the forms of the llionse,
he received ? There was sufficient titne to present
another netition, if it were sec
Mr. Tlvamer said, it would he acting ton
strictly to reject is petition. Itec,ni.e an individual
added something to it, which, nd the Ent instance,
Ile. hail forgotten.

Slr J, GRAHAM said a few words against leceiving
the Petition, as we understood.
Lord MILTON a.lld, he was nt first at a loss to
decide whether the Petition was or was nor on
Election Petition. Cut, when he found it stated
that the Petitioner hail offered himself as a
candi-
date, and was prevented from coming forward by
the conduct of the retioroing officer, his doubts
were removed. Ile conceived it would he narrow-
ing extremely the grounds on which Election Pe-
titions were to be received, if, on u technical point
of this sort, it was deemed proper to reject them.
Mr. CANNING apprehended, when a trifling
omission occurred in the first draft of a Petition,
which the Petitioner afterwards thought it better to
supply, that no ohretion woold be made to the in-
terlineidion. Hilt this Petition was peculiarly cir-
cuttistaticeil—for the interhiteation was the whole
matter which made it what it was. if they took
away the matter interlined, it was not an Election Pe-
tition--if they admitted that matter, it was till Elec-
tion Petition. Nose it was too much to suppose
that the whole gilt anti stiboance of the:Application
which the Petitioner inteiriled to make to the ll,nnie
should have escaped his notice until after the Peti-
tion was fairly drawn out—and that then it occurred
to him that this little circumstance might as well
he inserted. There being time to present a cortect
Primo If, on comitkiation, the individual might
think pi oprr to do so, lie conceived it would be
more wise to uphold the general orders of the
House, and to decline receiving it in Its present
state.

Mr. TIERMEY this Petition belrietted to a
sep irate class of Petitions—and was widtly distin-
guishable from others. It emne under a specific
Act of Parliament. All Petitions complaining of
an undue election and return were lan! on the
table, a ithout the formality of putting the question.
Now, a certain tune, fourteen days, was allowed for
that purpose—and it would be extremely hard, if
a Petition, cent from the country or, the 13th day.
was rejected on account of an interlineation. and
the individual presenting it was deprived of an op-
portunity of procuring redress.
The SPEAKER said, the law certainly provided
that Election Petitions should be received without
putting the question—but the law did not restrain
their presentation to the period of fourteen days
after the return—that was done by an order of
the House ; and it was in the power of the !loose—
n power they frequently exercised—to extend The
time tinder particular circumstances. If. to guard
the purity of the Petition itself, it was rejected on
account of interlineation. the House was always
ready to afford au opportunity of redress. by en-
larging the time within which Petitions were usually
presented.
. _ _

After a few words from Mr. TIERNEY—from
Lord —MILTON, who stated that he did know the
Petitioner, whom he hint causally met in the
lobby—and (row Mr. CRC/NEU—the Petition was
withdrawn.
POOR'S SETTLEMENT BILL.

Lord DEF.nnuttst nre.ented lotion from the
Mayor ntitl Aldermen of Worcester, optint the
above 8111.

Sir 1.. PA LK presented a Petition of the same
nature, from Ashbortioi.
Mr. 131 ROI presented it Petition from certain
Churchwardens and Overseers of the Poor in dif-
ferent Parishes of Nottingham, to the same effect.

Mr. KINN ERSLEY pteseuted a similar Petition
from Neweastle-under-Lyre.
Lord SEFTON piesenteil a Petition of a similar
nature, from the mighbourhood of Liverpool.