The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-14 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF GOMMONS.—DEs. 13.

-- -- -
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'Clock.
Mr. S. LEFEVRE brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the Chester Inclosure Bill.—Leave was given to
bring in the Bill. The Hon. Member also brought up the
Report of the Committee on the Cambridge and Errington
Road Bill.—Leave was given to bring in the Bill. The
Hon. Member also brought up the Report of the Commit-
tee on Exmouth Market and Finsbury Small Debt Court
Bill.—Leave was given to bring in the Bill.

FIRST FRUITS.
Mr. BAINES gave notice that it was his intention,
after the recess, to bring in a Bill for the better Appropria-
tion of First Fruits.
LAW OF PATENTS.
Mr. MACKINNON stated he had given notice of his
intention to move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the
law relative to Patents. Since he had given that notice
he had found that it was necessary to divide the Bill into
two sections—one relative to the alteration of the law with
respect to patents, and the other with respect to different
scientific inventions. _

yv
The SPEAKER stated, that it was perfectly compe-
tent for the Hon. Kember, he having given notice to intro-
duce a Bill, to bring forward that measure, and then move
to divide it into two parts.
Mr. MACKINNON adopted the suggestion, and gave
notice that he should on Wednesday, the 20th instant,
move for leave to bring in two separate Bills.
REVISING BARRISTERS.
Captain PERCEVAL gave notice that he should, on
an early day after the recess, move for leave to bring in a
Bill to amend that part of the Reform Act which related
to the duties of Revising Barristers.
VOTE BY BALLOT.
Mr. GROTE presented a petition from the inhabi-
tants of Freshingfield, in the Eastern division of tit*
county of Suffolk, praying for the Vote by Ballot.
The petition was signed by 506 individuals, but there was a
circumstance connected with the signatures whicti it was his
duty to state to the House, and to ask whether it was
an objection to the reception of the petition. The peti-
tioners in this case were the inhabitants of Several rural
villages, and he was sorry to say a considerable number of
theM, though in a respectable station of life, were not able
to write. Accordingly the parties who took the petition
round signed their mark, hut the signature of those persons
was fixed in every individual instance at the request and in
the presence of the person whose name was signed, and
after the petition had been read over to them. H•
thought it his duty to state this, in order that he might
knoll whether he could lay the petition on the table of the

House.
The SPEAKER did not apprehend the signatures of
the petitioners by marks would be a ground for refusing
the peti'ion, although it might be a reasonable ground for
doubting the authenticity of the petition.
Mr. GROTE said many of the signatures were the sig-
natures of the petitioners themselves.
The petition was then brought up and laid on the table.
On the question that the petition be read,
Mr. HUME said that he wished the question to be
settled, whether or not petitions could be received which
were not signed by the petitioners themselves. In Courts
of Law signatures were admitted, although not written by
the parties whose names were signed, provided that a mark
was of by the person whose name was signed in the
presence of the signing %iitrwsses.
After a few words from Captail BARNARD (inau-
dible in the gallery), the petition was ordered to be laid en
the table.

LONDONDERRY BRIDGE.
Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE brought up the Report of
the Londonderry Rid4e Committee, informing the House
that the Standing Orders had not been complied with.
Referred to the Committee on Standing Orders.
EXPENSES OF WITNESSES BEFORE
COMMITTEES.
Mr. F. BARING (who was very imperfectly heard in
the gallery, having his hack to the reporters' gallery) was
understood to recommend to the Hon. Member for Rns-

bury (Mr. Wakley), that he should raise, upon the petition
which he had to present, a motion that would include gene-
rally the whole question of expenses to witnesses before
Committees.
Mr. WAKLEY said he would adopt the course which
was suggested to him, which indeed he was compelled to
adopt ; and he would give notice that he would bring the
subject forward on Friday.
The SPEAKER—If the Hon. Member chooses, he can
bring it forward when the Orders of the Day are disposed
of. But what Ido object to is, the bringing it on before
the Orders are disposed of.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. W AKLEY—But I have not the petition now with
me ; it has not yet come from the Treasury.
POST-OFFICE.

Mr. WALLACE said he had to present a petition from
the Printers, Beokselers, and Publishers of London, and
without attempting to make a speech, he begged leave to
state one or two important facts which the petition set
forth, and which he thought would be interesting to
the House and to the country.—( Hear, hear.) The
petitioners stated that if the rates of postage were not
lowered, communication by steam-boats would soon enable
them to forward letters for Dundee, Edinburgh, and many
other towns on the coat at the rate of Is. per thousand,
and with despatch equal to the mail-coaches ; and that
when the principal lines of railroad were completed, an
equally available road would be opened to the petitioners for
communication with Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham,
Leeds, Southampton, Bristol, Belfast, Waterford, and all
the principal towns of the United Kingdom at the same
low rate. They also stated that while pamphlets, maga-
zines, &c. were transmitted great distances at the small
cost of a penny or three halfpence each, and while news-
papers, which, on an average were each equal in weight to
six moderate sized letters, were conveyed to Edinburgh for
the charge of Id. each, the petitioners had to pay for six sin-
,gle letters to or from any part of Scotland no less than 6s. 9d.
They further stated that manyof them-would, in the ordinary
course of business circulate from '20,000 to 50,000 more
letters per annum if the rates of postage were lowered, and
many other traders would be glad to avail themselves of
such a reduction to increase their correspondence by post.
The petition was then brought up, and ordered to be re-
ferred to the Post Office Committee.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he perceived by
the Order-book, that the Hon. Baronet the Member for
Warwickshire had given nitice for the 13th of February,
of his intention to introduce certain Bills. Now it struck
him that this was going beyond the four notice days pre-
scribed by the House.
Sir EARDLEY WILMOT said, that before he placed
the notice on the books, he had asked the Speaker if ho
were strictly within the rules in putting it down for that
day, and had obtained an answer in the affirmative.
The SPEAKER (as we understood him), said that if
he had told the Hon. Member so, he was wrong.
Sir E. WILMOT.—Then the order of the 13th must
be discharged, and the new order made for putting back
the time.

Lord J. RUSSELL said be believed that the Hen.
Baronet had placed his notice on the books before the new
regulations were adopted.
Lord G. SOMERSET made some observation which
was inaudible in the Gallery.
Sir E. WILMOT said, that as respected his unfortu-
nate Bills, he was indebted to the Noble Lord, for being
obliged to withdraw them in the last Parliament. The
Hon. Baronet then withdrew his notice.