The Sun.
London, England, 1837-06-29 00:00:00

brickbats for household suffrage, Republicanism h cue
herself catttiottsly '; edict Reform gro*s mere and more
Viioderate every day. The impending prostration of
the Radicals is attributable, no doubt, in u great de-
(Tree, to the revived i 0...; Olt! Cot:nary, which
Lj_a
~glishmen to see in the crazy schemes of
the modern philosophers the frivolity and absur-
dity, the fraud and the ro'schief, of which they
arc full. Rot tt uch bft§ ftlso been clone by the
cotiduct of the Radieals theniselVts td bring ititd
teptite
.the I:rineiples which dity profess to advo-
CAW, The liadicals in the House of Commons have

been throughout the whole of this Session iinmeasure-
ably superior to the Whigg, am well ht intellectual ca-
pacity en irr numerical force. "'lcy have ornittel no
opportunity of asserting this superiority, whyther ill
the pages of a review cr itl the colu:nns of a newspa-

. .
per ; yet they have suffered the Session to pass away
without claiming that which they have the fairest right
to claim—an ostensible share in those Councils whose
deliberations they have, in fact, for a long time guided
and controuled. The Radicals opened the Session
with denunciations of almost rabid hostility against the
Ministers. They would have all Constitutional ques-
tions open questions, or woe betide the Cabinet.
They would have the Chancellor of the Exchequer
dismissed, or woe betide the Cabinet. They would
have our interference in the civil dissensions of
Spain abandoned, or woe betide the Cabinet. Days,
weeks, months passed' by, and produced nothing at
all .answerable to this preliminary flourish of trum-
pets. Lord Melbourne shook his head at cpcn ques-
tions, and the Radicals were satisfied. Mr. Spring
Rice continued his ciphering and summing, and the
Radicals were contented. Lord Palmerston prepared
to repeat his outrages alike on the liberties of Spain

and the interests Of England ; and the Radicals came,
in a body, to support that most unpopular Secretary of
State in his most unpopular course of policy. The
result has been that the country despises the Radicals
as cordially as it despises thc Ministers. It sees
them noisy and empty, inconsistent and
,insincere ;
powerful of profession, and powerless of performance
—boasting their entire adherence to fixed principles,
yet abandoning daily those principles for factious in-
ducements ; protesting their wide dissent from the
the policy of the Administration, yet ready daily to
obey the whip of the underlings of that Administra-
tion with slavish servility. The Radicals, we
hope and believe, could never have destroyed
the British Constitution ; but they might have vin-
dicated for themselves, by an independent conduct,
a respectable reputation and a formidable position.
What are now the Grotes and the Warburtons, the

Roebucks and the Molesworths, in the eyes of the
people ? Only the humble servants of 'Mr. Edward
Stanley and of Mr. Fox Maule. The Radicals have
begun too late to perceive their mistake. They are
proceeding to scold and whine at Midsummer as they
scolded and whined at Christmas. They must have,
forsooth, from Lord John Russell, something definite,
something distinct, or they will play strange pranks at
the elections. Let them be quiet. Nothing definite,
nothing distinct, will they obtain from that eloquent
individual. He does not fear the opposition of Mr.
Elphinstone, nor heed the wrath of 111 r.
_Buller. The

patriots will grumble, as they have often grumbled,
but will follow as they have always followed. There
is not one man of all who have dined at Sir William
Molesworth's table, or written in Sir William Moles-
worth's Review, who has persuaded anybody beyond
his individual self that he has the wit to devise mis-
chief or the boldness to perpetrate it.—bloating Post.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JrNig 28.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack
shortly after Five o'Clock.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
the Guardians of a Union in Somersetshire, praying that
their Lordships would not give their sanction to any measure
charging the owners instead of the occupiers of houses with
the poor-rate. In the prayer of the petition he entirely
concurred.

Earl STANHOPE presented a petition, not relative, as
he stated, to Poor-laws, but to a subject with which the
objects of these laws had but little connexion—it was in
favour of a measure to promote temperaneo.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented a petition
from Edinburgh against some of the clauses in the Small
Debts (Scotland) Bill.
Mr. TOOKE and other Members of the House of Com-
mons brought up the Sheriffs Courts Bill and several pri-
vate Bills.
POST-OFFICE CONSOLIDATION BILL.

The Earl of LICHFIELD moved the third reading of
this Bill.—Agreed to.
The Post-Office Offences Bill, the Franking Bill, and
the Post-Office Management Bill, were also read a third
time on the motion of the Noble Lord.
The Earl of LICHFIELD then moved the third
reading of the Postage Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND objected that the surve}or
appointed to measure the distance between towns should
be compelled to take an oath in reference to it. This was
contrary to the opinion expressed on the subject of oaths
by the llouse, and he was surprised the clause had not
been altered ; as, if any objections were made by any
parties, this could be arranged by their measuring the
distance. Besides this objection, he did not see any al-
teration in the rate of postage, to which the Noble Lord
had pledged himself the other night.
The Earl of LICHFIELD said that a Bill having that
effect would be shortly before their Lordships, which it
would be desirable to have passed that Session. It would
also apply to the objections of the Noble Baron opposite to
the present rate of post !ge, as injurious to overland com-
munication with India.
The Bill was then read a third time.
MESSAGE FROM THE QUEEN.

The Duke of ARGYLE then delivered the following
answer from her Majesty tothe Address of their Lordships
relative to public business :

" VICTORIA REGINA.

" I have received with satisfaction your loyal and
dutiful addre:s. It is gratifying to me to learn that the
House of Lords will apply itself without delay to forward
su:•h measures as cannot be postponed without injury to
the public service, ar.d that it will make ample and sufficient
pro,ision for the public service, and for the Welfare of the
united kingdom."
DUBLIN POLICE BILL.

Lord DUNCANNON moved the second reading of
this Bill.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH objected to the measure,
as being the same as that which had been before their
Lordships this Session. It would be burdensome to the
citizens of Dublin to be so overtaxed.
The Bill was read a second time.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

On the Order of the Day for the further consideration
of the Report on this Bill,

The Earl of SH RE WSBUR Y said he was sorry be had
not been in the House when the 33d clause was consi-
dered. Last year the words " separate buildings" were
introduced in the Bill, which excluded Roman Catholics
from the benefits of the Bill, as he scarcely knew any Ro-
man Catholic place of worship which was detached, and
which had not a school or other building attached to it.
The 33d clause had been introduced in this 13i11 to obviate
the inconvenience, but it had been withdrawn. He under-
stood the objection to it was, that it contained the words
" consecrated or blessed." Now, the Catholics would not
object to omit these terms ; and he hoped, therefore, the
clause would be reinstated.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,..frxE 28.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH was sorry the Noble Lord
had not been present yesterday, as those who objected to
the clauses were not now in their places ; but what the
Noble Lord desired was, to give benefits to the Roman
Catholics which no other class of Dissenters bad.
The Earl of SHREWSBURY said that other Dis-
senters' places of worship were generally detached, in which
case they would not suffer from being placed beyond the
provisions of the Bill.
Lord AIALMESBURY moved that the further dis-
cussion of the Bill be postponed till to-morrow, in order
to consider the subject, as he was inclined to give great
weight to the observations of the Noble Lord opposite, as
to the effects of the measure on the Roman Catholics.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was necessary
the Bill should be passed by the Ist of July, and this could
not be if they did not conclude the discussion that night,
as some ameadments had been made to it which should
be considered by the Commons.
Lord MALMESBURY said that if any evil resulted
from the hasty proceedings with respect to the
measure, it should be attributed to those who now hurried
it through the House.

The Bishop of HEREFORD had no objection that
the Roman Catholics should have the privilege of marrying
in their places of worship when attached to other houses ;
but if the clause were agreed to which had been omitted, a
room might be licensed in a public-house for the per-
formance of the marriage ceremony.
The Earl of FING AL thought it of importance that
the discussion should be concluded that night, and he would
therefore move a clause to the effect, that Roman Ca-

For the motion. - 64
For the amendment
Majority in favour of the Bill -

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, .111N14: 20, 183/

tiiehes might bti allowed to celebrate marriages in their
houses of worship *hen attached to others. This would pre-
vent ti- abusereSultitig froth an extension of the privilege ?
tokd ELLENtdROUCH did Mit think the mdtfet,
the least interest to the Roman Catholics ; but
why dim uss the measure in the absence of those who were
not present, and who were much interested in the Bid—
they not knowing that such a proposition was to be made.
The Bishop_ of GLOUCESTER would certainly veto
against the clattse; hecatise he thought it would be den.
het Otis to dpeti i4litle
,dearfur abuses and grieVanees.
The bishop of tilqiEVChll) thdtigtit the tiiiittd to ex=
ccptionable that he would divide the House upon it.

The Earl of SHREWSBURY said be for one bad been
taken by surprise in the matter, and it was the duty of the
&v.. Prelates to have been is their places.

The Virl of 1.1 ADDINGTON, even at the risk of
some inconvenience, would propose that the debate be ad-
journed till to-morrow —Agreed to.
Earl STAN HOPE gave notice that tomorrow he
would present some more petitions relative to the new
Poor-law Act, and he would on that occasion take the op-
portunity of delivering himself of a few observations relative
to the alleged saving under it.
The House then adjourned.

The SPEAKErt took the Chair at the usual hour. Lord
Leeson and another Hon. Member took the oaths.

A Messenger from the Trinity house appeared at the
Bar and presented an account of the funds of the Corpo-
ration.—Laid on the table.

On the motion of Captain ALSAGER the further con-
sideration of the Report of the Committee on the Grand
Collier Docks and Surrey Canal Bill was agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. TOOKE the Lords' amendments
to the Leicester and Swannington Railway Bill were
agreed to.
LONDON CAOUTCHOUC COMPANY.

Mr. WIG NEY presented a petition against the London
Caoutcliouc Company Bill, which the petitioners stated
would utterly ruin them.
Mr. HAWES presented a petition from Lambeth to the
same effect.
Mr. H. HUGHES moved that the London Caoutchouc
Company Bill do now pass.
Mr. WIG NEY thought it necessary to trouble the
House with the arguments he had used on two former oc-
casions against the Bill, the object of which was to esta-
blish a most injurious monopoly. He should, therefore,
content himself with moving a negative to the motion.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the arguments of
the Hon. Member would lead the House to suppose that
the Bill went to establish a monopoly, which he denied to
be the case.—(Hear, hear.) Every thing like monopoly
had been struck out of the Bill, and he hoped it would
meet with no more opposition.
Dr. BO WRING said the more he saw of the Bill the
more he was opposed to it. A case for the Bill had not
been made out, and he trusted it would not be agreed to.
Mr. W. TOOKE had made many enquiries in the City
and elsewhere upon the necessity for the Bill, and he
found that all his former votes on it had been approved of,
and therefore he would again vote in favour of it, thinking
if it were not passed the House would not do justice to the
parties.
Mr. H. HINDE opposed the Bill, on the ground that
the House had set a precedent against it in rejecting the
Plate-glass Companies Bill last Session.
Mr. P. THOMSON supported the Bill, for he did not
see the technical objection to it as he did to that just
mentioned. As the Bill was altered he saw no objection
to it, and would vote for its passing.
Mr. H. HUGHES replied, and the House was cleared
for a division.

The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion that the Bill do pass
Against it.....
Majority in favour of the passing of the Bill —3s
The Bill was consequently passed.
On the motion of Mr. DENNISTON the Blochairn
Canal Bill was read a third time and passed.
LONDON AND BLACKWALL RAILWAY.
Mr. ALSTON moved that the House should agree
to the amendments made in the Blackwell and London
Railway.
Mr. CRAWFORD felt it his duty to move the recom-
mittal of the Bill. The first objection that he had was to
the material alterations that had been made to the terminus
of the railway ; the second was the insufficiency of the sub-
scription-list ; and the third that the Bill contained a clause
altogether at variance with the Standing Orders of the House.
The second objection he should take was with reference
to the subscription list, and upon this head he begged to
call the attention of Honourable Members to the ex-
traordinary circumstances that had taken place. When
the two Companies united they did so upon the basis
that the subscription list of the two Companies,
each intending to raise a capital of 600,000/. should
be united to make this Railway, and instead of 12,000
shares at 50/. each, it was agreed there should be
24,000 at 25/. each. The parties applied to the Com-
mittee for a clause to enable them to give effect
to this agreement. This bargain was made between the
provisional Committees without reference to the subscribers
themselves, and they had the power, if they were so minded,
of calling the subscribers together, and of doing such acts as
were necessary. They availed themselves of that power—
they gave notice that the two Companies were united, that
their interests were amalgamated, and they called upon par-
ties to bring in the receipts of the former subscription
that they might have them exchanged for other receipts,
which would entitle them to be registered for the 251.
shares. One line consisted of about 11,000 shares, which
was the line of which the subscription list bad been pro-
duced. Four thousand shares of that very list, which was
now before the House as the subscription list of this year,
had been actually transferred, and registered as 25/. shares.
The parties had under that agreement fulfilled every obliga-
tion they had entered into, and it was as great a misrepre-
sentation as was ever made, to say that parties on that list
were liable to any subscription. What was the real state
of the case ? A change of opinion had arisen. Parties were
not willing now to become subscribers—the Directors found
they had no power to compel them—and in that situation
they came to the House to get a power over the subscri-
bers which no Court of Law or Equity would give them.
There were three individuals now acting as Direc-
tors of this commercial Company, who had no quali-
fication whatever but what was contained in the list
called the new list. Under these circumstances, he
thought it but just that the Bill should be re-com-
mitted, so as to enable the Committee to inquire
whether the capital which they were called on to raise, of
600,000/., had been subscribed or not. He had no
hesitation in saying, and he held himself answerable for the
statement, that the 600,000/. had not been raised ; but that
183,000/. only had been raised under the provisions of the
Act passed in the last session of Parliament. With respect
to the last objection which he took, and on which he
thought the Bill ought particularly to be re-committed,
the Report stated that the expense of the work was esti-
mated at 195,0001. They were all aware that the ex-
tent to which parties were allowed to borrow was one-
third of the estimated expense, but the Committee had
reported that they bad borrowed 100,000/. On these
grounds, he begged leave to move that the Report be re-
committed, with instructions to the Committee to receive
evidence as to the objection of the petitioners to
the terminus of the railway being in Fenchureh-street,
and that they be also instructed to define the extent and
boundaries of the depot, and to adopt measures to secure
the public against the obstruction to traffic through the
adjoining thoroughfares.
Mr. ALSTON hoped to be able to satisfy the House
that the parties were entitled to the extension prayed for.
They merely asked an extension of a line to which the
House had acceded last year, and that did not amount to
more than 1,150 feet. The original terminus was to have
been in Leadenhall-street, but_the parties now wished to
have it in Crutched-friars, and no objoction had been made
by the owners of property in that neighbourhood. The
next argument of the Honourable Member against
the Bill, was that the funds subscribed were insufficient, but the
fact was that the validity and sufficiency of the subscription list
had been abundantly established before the Standing Orders
Committee. It appeared there were 15,575 subscribers of 50/.
each, amounting to 778,950/. and 7,429 subscribers to half
shares of 25/. each, making a total of 964,675/. applicable
to the undertaking, exceeding by one or two hundred thou-
sand pounds the sum required to carry the undertaking into
effect. The Committee had sat last year 38 days, and
during the present Session 70 days, and no objection such
as had been urged by the Hon. Member had ever been
urged against the Bill. On these grounds, he contended
that the parties were entitled to the extension prayed for.
Mr. GROTE would not have troubled the House if the
measure had not created so strong a feeling of disapproba-
tion among his constituents. He should therefore feel it
his duty to support the motion of his Hon. Colleague. He
looked T:ith very great jealousy upon railways when they
traversed densely peopled districts, and the number of
houses that were to be swept away in consequence of
the extension of the line might be estimated from
the large sum set apart for that purpose.--(Hear, hear.)
The motion was merely for the re-commitment of
the Bill, and he trusted the House would accede to it.
He thought there were many points in the Bill that well
deserved the attention of a Committee, who were the pro-
per forum to decide whether the subscription list was com-
pleted or not. He trusted that the House would not, upon
the present occasion, refuse that claim, which Appeared to
him to be founded on truth and good sense,
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared—.