The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-27 00:00:00

should be given to the other prod'Llee of the soil on
which human labour was expended.
The petition`was laid upon the table.
Mr. MOORE presented a petition from The Rev.
Sir H. Lees, who prayed the House to provide for
the security of Ireland, and recommended them to
recollect the example of the House in 'the reign. af-
Geo. 1., when the Habeas Corpus Act was sus-
pended, with a view to public security.
Mr. JAMES GRATTAN said, that he did not
think the Rev. Baronet was much affected by the
dangers to Ireland, for last Thursday he saw the
Rev. Baronet, who was then quite well.—(A laugh.)
Mr. C. CALVERT presented a petition from
St. Saviour's, Southwark, against the Scotch and
Irish Pauper Removal Bill.
Colonel GRANT presented a petition from the
Magistrates, &c., of Elgin, in Scotland, against the
increase of duty or} corn and spirits?
The same 1-1111,41. MEmnEn presented a peti-
tion from the same place against the increase of
stamp duties.
Mr. DENISON presented a petition from New-
ington, Surrey, against the Scotch and Irish Pauper
Bill.

Colonel BARNARD presented a petition from
the freeholders of the King's County, against a com-
pulsory assessment for the poor in Ireland.
Sir W. GUISE presented a petition from Mr.
Balls against a clause in the Friendly Societies! Act.
Colonel BRUEN presented a petition from the
inhabitants of the town and county of Carlow,
against the increase of the stamp duties.
Mr. BYNP presented a petition from the parish
of Paddington, in the eounty of MiadleseAt, against
the Select Vestry Bill.
The Hos. MEMBER presented a petition from
S. Leonard's Shoreditch against the Scotch and
- •
Irish Pauper Removal 1301.
Mr. E. DAVENPORT presented two petitions
from Cheshire against the Bill for taking away the
Lopid Jirisdiction of that county.
Ordered to be laid on the table,
Mr. E. DAVENPORT then expressed a hope
that the Bill, miscalled the Amendment of the Ad-
ministration of Justice in England and Wales, might
not be brought on to-morrow, but would be post-
poned. His object in making that recommendation
was, that tooporrow had generally been considered
a holiday, as it was the day on which the Derby
was
run for.—(Hear, and a laugh )
Mr. C. WYNN presented petitions from Mr,
Dixon, of Dumbarton, complaining of the votes of
the Committee on the Clyde Navigation Bill, and
praying that the matter might be referred to a Se-
lect Committee of seven Members of the. Hopes
under the authority of certain Standing Orders.
These petitions were ordered to be taken into
further consideration on Friday next. The consi-
deration of the Report was fixed for the same day.
Mr. PROWNLOW moved for Returns of the
Duties on Glass in Ireland during the last ten years.
—Ordered.
In answer to a question from Mr. R. GORDON,
The LORD ADVOCATE stated that he in-

tended to go on with the Scotch Judicature Bill,
and added that he should aoon name a day for pro.-
ceeding.

Mr.-E. LLOYD presented a petition from per-
sons interested in Lead Mines in Flintshire, praying
for protection to British Lead Mines.—To lie on
the table.
Mr. LAWLEY presented a petition from Rugby,
in Warwickshire, against the Punishment of Death
in the case of Forgery.To lie on the table.
Mr. A. BARING presented a petition from Ga-
briel Davy, of Gloucester, praying for protection to
British Mines,

Sir T. D. ACLAND moved for leave to bring
in a Bill to protect stage coach proprietors from
their present liabilities in respect of parcels sent by
their coaches, where undue concealment was prac-
tised by the parties sending them. He was willing
that they should be made generally liable in all cases
to the amount of 201., without special notice.
Wherever the value was above 201., the burden of
giving notice should rest upon the parties sending
the parcel,
After a few words from Sir T. FREEMANITE and
Mr. N. CALVERT, the motion was agreed to,
Mr. G. DAWSON moved the Order of the Day
for the third reading of the Four per Cents. Dis-
sents' Bill.

Mr. E. DAVENPORT rose to move, as an
amendment, that the House, at its rising, do adjourn
to Friday next.

Mr. R. GORDON seconded the motion, but at
the suggestion of some Hon. Members near him,
Mr. E. DAVENPORT postponed the consideration of
the question of adjournment till the Orders of the
Day should have been disposed of.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
The report on the Beer and Bigg Duties' Act was
brought up and agreed to.

Lord STANLEY moved the second reading of
the Scotch and Irish Paupers' Removal Bill. He
merely wished that it should be read a second time,

and submitted to a Committee.

Mr. STURGES BOURNE was not opposed
to the principle of the Bill, but he had an objection
to one of the clauses. He confessed he felt some
surprise that such a Bill should have been brought
forward in the absence of the Secretary for the Home
Departmenr.
Mr. HOBHOUSE said it was quite certain that
the Bill could not pas in its present form.
Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that when those poor
persons came to the parishes they must be relieved.
Now the effect of this Bill would be to give them no
relief, and, therefore, against such a Bill he con-
ceived that every sort of opposition was perfectly
fair. He was resolved to divide the House.

Mr. DENISON hoped the Worthy Alderman
would take the sense of the House.

Mr. N. CALVERT said, that in the parishes
with which he was more immediately connected,
they were often put to an expence of several hun-
dreds a year for the removal of these paupers.
Mr. LITTLETON saw no reason why the more
distant counties should not have the bensfit of the
Act—the Bill ought to place all upon a footing of
equality. Perhaps it might be found advantageous
to try the experiment of leaving those paupers
without any parish relief; if due notice of such a
system were given, it would be found that their
numbers would materially diminish.

Mr. JAMES GRATTAN thought, that if a
sufficient provision were made for the Irish poor,
such a Bill as the present would be unnecessary—it
was in effect a Bill to deprive England of the bene-
fits of Irish labour.

Mr. RICE understood the object of the Noble
Lord to be, to have the Bill read a second time, and

submit it to a Committee for the purpose of seeing
if any measure of relief could be devised.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL anticipated, that in the
course of the next Session some provision would be
made for the Irish poor, but he thought that the
present Bill would have the effect of imposing a
heavy burden upon one part of the country at the
expence of another; it might be as well to wait a
little, and see what measure the necessities of Ire-
land might make necessary.
Sir T. FREEMANTLE—Even if they did wait
they still might be left without relief.
Mr. BYNG said that he looked upon the Bill as
so injurious to the metropolis that he should vote
against it.
Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY said that he
thought it a very fair proposal of his Noble Friend
that the Bill should be sent to a Select Committee.
Colonel WOOD was convinced that the large
populous
p parishes of Middlesex had very unneces-
--
sarily taken alarm at the Bill; and if it was sent to
a Committee it might be shown that no such evil
would accrue.

Sir R. INGLIS said a few words, which were
naudible in the gallery.
Mr. MAXWELL said that though he would not
refuse to give his consent to the second reeding, yet
he was desirous that it should have reference to the

kingdom at large rather than to any particular parts.
Dlr. A. DAWSON said that they ought to in-