The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-05-04 00:00:00

r ~.

PARLIAMENT/Kr INTELLIGI:

HOUSE OF LORDS, TUIADAT, MAT 3.
Mr. Brogden and other Members from the House of Commons
brought up the Scotch Juries Bill. the Scotch Sheriffs' Court Re-
gulation Bill, and several private Bills.
Mr. Bevan, from the Commercial Dock Company, presented at
their Lordships' bar accounts of the number of ships of the average
of 300 tons, which the Commercial Docksthave been able to contain
at one time; also an account of the greatest number of ships dis-
charged in those Docks during the present year ; and also an ac.
count of the number Of vessels loading in those Dockson the hilt
April 1845.
Similar accounts

....—.tersccounts were presented from the Grand Surrey Canal
Docks, from the LiverpooVDocks, and from the London Docks.
ATTAINDER BILL.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE, in the absence of Lord Holland,
moved that their Lvidships be summoned for Monday next on t tie
Attainder Da—Oftlei-ed.
EqUITABLE LOAN BILL.
Earl GROSVENOR presented a petition in favour of the Equit.
able Loan Bill, from .the parish of St. lilies, signed by 800 per.
sees.—Laid on the table.
Lord SUFFIELD said he would take advantage of the oppor•
bawl of troubling their Lordships with a few observations, in con-
sespeoce of a statement he had made on the preceding night. He
Lad received a communication from a worthy Magistrate, Sir
Richard Kirnie, which authorised him to state that he was not now
a Director of the Equitable Loan Bank Company. It appeared
by the statement of this gentleman, that he had been appointed a
Director of this Company, but that be bad been so appointed with-
out his knowledge and consent. He ir..d attended a meeting when
the plan for the formation of this Company was discussed, and be
had expressed his approbation of its nature and object, in conse-
quence of which his name had been put down on the list of
Directors. He was well aware that it would be highly improper
for a person in his situation to act as a Director to such an Institu-
tiou, and with this feeling he withdrew his name. He ;tad twice
been appointed Vice_President to the Society, but had no share in
the management of the Company, add in permitting his name to
be thus made use of, he merely expressed his approbation olds
plan and proceedings.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE said, that this statemenewas
worthy the attention of their Lordships. since it appeared that a
eientleman had been appointed Director to this Company without
knowing who appointed him, or even how he was appointed. With
al: respect for the worthy Magistrate (and he was certainly entitled
to respect). he conceived it nothing his baying withdrawn his name
(tom the list of Directors, as he still continued a Vice-President of
the Company ; and it he were rendered incapable of acting use Ma-
gistrate in consequence of being a Director. he was equally so be-
cause lie was a Vice-President of the Institution.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a petition in favour
pf the Equitable Loan Bill, from the inhabitants of To:hill-street,
Westmuister.—Laid on the table.
CAtfIOLIC CLAIMS.
The Duke of MONTROSE presented a petition against the
Claims of die Catholics, from the Corporation of Cordwainers of
time city of Glasgow. •
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition to the same
effect from the parish of Bishops Waldron in the county of South-
ampton, and another from the Dian and Chapter of the city of
U luucester.
The Bishop of BRISTOL presented a petition to the same
effect from the Vicar, Churchwardens, and inhabitants of the parish
of All Saints, in the city of Bristol.
Lord ROLLE presented a petition against the Claims of the
Catholics, from an individual named Hart, residing at Honiton, in
toe county of Devon.
Earl GREY said he had also to present a petition from an indi.
but its nature was very different front that just presented by
the Noble Lord (Rolle). This petition was from a Clergyman of
the name of Miles Popham, and the petitioner stated his belief that
the Clenlymen of the Church of England were not generally hos-
tile to the Emancipation of the Catholics, but that for certain rea-
sans they did not come forward to express such opinions. The
petition, the Noble Ead observed, was respectfully worded,- and
emanated from an individual of high and honourable character.
- The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a petition from the
Dissenters of Redeross-street Chapel, Cripplegate, against the
Claims of the Catholic&
Earl BROWNLOW presented a petition to the same effect from
the Dimmers of a parish in Lincoln.
The Bishop of BAT/I and WELLS presented a similar peti-
tion fram the Clergy of Tewkesbury, In the County of Gloucester,
and another front Kingmere, in the County of Oxford.—The peti-
tions acre laid on the table.

CORN LAWS.
The Earl of ROSEBERRY presented a petition from Ross-shire
against any alteration in the Corn Laws.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE presented petitions to the same
effect from several Hundreds in the Cnunty of Norfolk.
Lord HOLLAND said, that as a Noble Lord (Lauderdale) had
given notice of the second reading of the Attainder Bill, on Mon-
day next, he did not wish to disturb the arrangement; but u he
found that the second rewlingof the (lame Laws Bill was appointed
for that day, he wished it to be under trod. that it the debate on
the Game Laws should occupy any length of time, he should move
that their Lordships be summoned on the Attainder Bill for the
Tuesday following.
The House then Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COlll3lO-S, MESDAY, MAY 3.

LIVERPOOL AND 31ANOIIESTER RAILROAD.
lir. W. PEEL presented a petition from Bolton-le-Moor, in
favour of the Liverpool and 313nel:eater Railroad
to be printed.

HULL DOCKS.

Mr. J. P. GRANT presented inopctitions against the Hull
Docks RiU.—Referred to the Committee on the Bill.