The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN T.

METROPOLIS POLICE BILL.
Upon the motion of the Earl of Shaftesbury, the Re-
port of the Metropolis Police Bill was brought up.
Upon the motion that the Bill be read a third time,
i conversation took place, upon a proposition from Lord
Ellenborough, that the clause which prohibits the use
rf dogs in carts should be modified, on which
Lord BROUGHAM condemned in strong terms
,he employment of dogs to a use for which nature had
not trained them. The manner in which dogs were used
o draw carts, both with merchandize and with men in
them, was perfectly shocking and disgusting. Moreover
ire had been informed by medical_ men that that mest
lamentable of all diseases, hydrophobia, had greatly
ncreased of late years ; and that they had no hesitation
arhatever in ascribing that to the mode of exhausting the
strength and tormenting the physical powers of dogs by
their employment as animals of draught.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH had received a letter
t'rom a poor man which represented that he should be
under the necessity of having an ass if he were
not to be permitted to use his dog to draw
his little cart or truck, which would put him
to an expense that he could ill bear. The Noble Lord
oelieved that this would be the case with many others.
He wished to know if there would be any objection to
titer the clause, so as to allow dogs to be used to draw
carts or trucks in which goods only should be conveyed.
Lord DUNCAN NON should have no objection to
that.

The Earl of WICKLOW said it was altogether a
new system of thus employing dogs, and it was most of-
`ensive and most objectionable in every respect. He de-
nied that keeping an ass would cost a poor man more than
keeping two large Newfoundland dogs, and lie sincerely
trusted that the clause would be allowed to stand in
such terms as would put an end altogether to such a use
of dogs.
Lord HADDINGTON objected to this use of dogs.
Lord ELLENBOROUGII withdrew his proposi-
tion, and the clause Was allowed to stand as originally
proposed.
The Bishop of LONDON drew the attention of the
House to the fact that there were certain parts in this
metropolis in which he believed that fever always pre-
vailed, from their very crowded and filthy state, and
hich well merited the attention of the local authorities,
with a view, if possible, to remedy that evil. He be-
lieved the remedy could only be effectually applied by
pulling down many of the houses by degrees.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE entirely agreed in the
propriety of the observations that had been made by the
Right Rev. Prelate.
Lord HADDINGTON wished to know if there
was any clause in this Bill which really put it into the
power of the Magistrates to put an end to the trifling
amusements of children in the streets, and especially to
put an end to the exhibitions of the never-to-be-for-
gotten Purich7—(Hear and laughter.) He could
not help thinking that if there were to be any
dangerotis exhibitions in the streets, the law, as it now
stood, would enable the Magistrates to remove them.
If there was any such clause as he had alluded to in
this Bill he begged it to be understood that it had n 6
his consent.

Lord DUNCANNON was afraid it might by this
Bill be in the power of the Magistrates to put an end
even to the exhibition of Punch, but he could not con-
ceive that any Magistrate would think of exercising
such a power.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.")
Lord WHARNCLIFFE was understood to offer
his objection also to any such clause.

Lord DUNCANNON would look again at the
clauses, with the view of ascertaining the precise fact.
The Earl of WICKLOW did not think that the
power given to the Magistrates authorized any such
thing, because there was a clause which excepted
amusing exhibitions of this sort before houses where
the proprietors of houses desired to have them.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE called the Noble Lord's
attention to another point. He wished to know if
-`l-

there was any clause in the Bill to prevent the large
advertisement carriages from passing along the streets?
Lord DUNCANNON said there was a clause
relating to the placards that were carried along the
pavements, but he believed that there was none that
directly applied to the large machines to which the
Noble Lord had referred. It was found difficult to
frame a clause affecting them without having extended
it also to inscriptions, &c. on waggons. Report received.
Upon the motion of Lord DUNCAN NON, the
Bill was ordered to be read a third time.
Upon the motion of the Marquis of L ANSD 0 NV NE,
the Sheriff's Exemption Bill was read a third time and
passed.

SLAVE TREIES BILL
Lord MINTO moved the second reading. of the Slave
Treaties Bill. Those who opposed the Bill supposed, if
it passed, that it would set this nation in arms against the
whole world; no such thing, for the whole of its provisions
were founded upon treaties that bad been made with other
States. It was a necessary preliminary to a greater un-
dertaking. The Bill would make African Chiefs give
up their traffic in the slave trade, which was a source of
great profit to them. The Bill empowered the capture of
Portuguese and other ships if they had not their proper
papers on board. The Bill was most essentially necessary
and had been introduced in consequence of a pledge on the
part of the Government, and he trusted therefore their
Lordships would permit the Bill to be read a second time.
The Duke of WELLINGTON concurred in the state-
ments of the Noble Earl who had just spoken as to the
necessity of putting an end to the slave trade in Portugal,
but he could not think the present measure would
have that effect.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") There
could be no doubt that the evils of slavery, still
existed in that country ; but he thought that those evils
had been greatly aggravated by the course that had been
adopted by the country. It must be admitted that this
country had an undoubted right to call upon Portugal to
carry out the treaties into which it had entered with this
country ; but he was afraid that more enlightened nations
than Portugal—nations which had not been subjected to
the horrors of revolutions for so long a period as that un-
happy country, had encouraged the slave trade, and felt
reluctance to put an end to it. He could not see why
the Queen's Executive Government should not call upon
Portugal to perform its treaties, instead of calling in the
aid of Parliament for the purpose of enforcing it. —( Hear,
hear.) Such a proceeding, in his opinion, would tend
much more to pacification than the adoption of the present
Bill. If her Majesty's Government had proceeded to de-
cide on this subject itself a project of arrangement would
have been drawn up, and answers to that project, in a
diplomatic form, would have been given up, and upon the
reasonableness or unreasonableness of those answers her
Majesty's Government might fairly and justly have de-
cided whether extremities should have been resorted to or
not. From such a course the best results he believed, would
have emanated but he thought the experiment of the pre-
sent Bill to coerce would be attended with the worst effects.
Portugal might then concede—she mieht admit that she
was bound by the treaties of 1810, and 1817—and then
both countries would have acted with mutual honour. He
was most desirous that a friendly understanding should
continue between those ancient allies. The recital of the
preamble related to Portugal ; but that recital was merely
making out a one-sided case. It did not however state
all. It omitted an article in the treaty of 1817. It also
omitted to state the negotiation that had lately taken place
between the two Governments. There bad been he un-
derstood a certain degree of support promised to the Por-
tuguese Government if they would abolish the slave trade—
why was not that stated now ? Was it just between man and
ma tto pass this Bill without laying that information before
the House ? If her Majesty decided upon going to war
with Portugal those facts would be first stated. He had
heard of the irregular proceeding's of another sort of
blockade to secure commercial objects. It made partial
war for that purpose. But he was sorry that we, by our

HOUSE OF LORDS, Avausr 1.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the
Woolsack at Five o'Cloci.
A message from the House of Commons brought up
the Highways and Turnpike Roads Bill, with their
Lordships' amendments agreed to, and some other Bills.
The Duke of Argyle, Lord Ashburton, and Lord
Roden presented petitions in favour of a penny postage.
The Earl of RIPON wished to know from the
Noble Marquis opposite if it was likely he would be in
a situation soon to lay on the table the papers respecting
Malta, which he (the Noble Earl) asked him for about
five weeks ago.
The Marquis of NOR MA NBY said he should inquire.
Lord REDESDALE presented a petition praying
for an alteration in the Bartardy clause in the Poor-law
Amendment Act.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented a
petition, most highly and respectably signed, from the
city of Edinburgh in favour of the Bible being made
the basis of any system of national education that
might receive the sanction of Parliament.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH wished to ask a ques-
tion of the Noble Viscount. As he should have to
make a few observations, probably it would be the
most regular way for him to conclude by moving
a motion. He desired to draw the Noble Viscount's
most serious attention to the information which had
just been received from China with respect to opium.
He understood that the Government of China had de-
termined to put an entire end to the illicit trade in
opium, and that a Commissioner had been dispatched
to Canton to communicate that, and to take steps for
carrying out that intention. He was informed also that
no less than 20,000 chests of opium, amounting in value
he should suppose at least to two millions of pounds
sterling, had been delivered to Captain Elliott, the Su-
perintendent there, upon an indemnity being given to
the British subjects. He begged to know if the Noble
Viscount could at once lay on the table the despatches
which had been received on this subject from the Su-
perintendent at Canton.

Lord MELBOURNE said no such despatch had been
received. He believed the facts to be pretty much as
the Noble Lord had stated them, but he had no official
information respecting it.
Lord BROUGHAM moved that a request be
sent to the House of Commons that it would
he pleased to furnish this House with a state-
ment of the Bills brought into that House on or
after the Ist of July, distinguishing those that had been
brought in since the 15th of last month. He believed
[hat a Bill had been brought in only last night by the
Lord Advocate for Scotland for the collection of Rogue
money.