The Sun.
London, England, 1839-07-02 00:00:00

EVENING; UDITION.

with the case, and aftere arils call on his' Counsel to
return the fees.—(" Hear, he ,r," a el leugi,ter.)
COUNTY COURTS.
Sir JOHN. SEALE presented a petition from
Dartmouth, in favour of the County Courts
Bill.—Re-
ferred to the Committee. Als, a petit oa in t..“ our of
a uniform penny postage.
CHURCH RATES.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from
John Thorogood, a prisoner in the Che:msford prison
for non-payment of Church-rates, who stated that
he bad been confined six month's for 5,;. 6d.—that he
'was treated as a felon and could not see his friends, and
prayed the House to adopt such measures as might lead
to his immediate discharge. The Honourable Member
wished to know whether it was with the knowledge
and sanction of her Majesty's Government, that this man
was incarcerated in the Chelm:ford gaol as a common felon.
Mr. FOX MAULE had never heard of the complaint
before. If the party felt himself aggrieved he had much
better have sent his petition to the Secretary of State
than to that House, which, even if the circumstances
were proved, could afford no means of redress.
Mr. BAINES said he himself had, on a former oc-
casion, brought this case distinctly under the considera-
tion of the House.
Sir GEORGE CLERK presented a petition from
Dalkeith, praying the House to prevent the running of
stage-coaches on the Lord's day.
OUTRAGE ON THE BRITISH FLAG.
Lord INGESTRE, seeing the Under Secretary for
the Admiralty in his place, wished to repeat a question
that he had put to the Hon. Member for Sandwich the
other night, relative to an outrage on the British
flag, supposed to have been committed in the Mexican
seas. He wished to know whether the Right Hon.
Gentleman had received any official knowledge of that
outrage, and whether the midshipman had received the
reprimand from Commodore Douglas, which had been
stated.
Mr. WOOD presumed that the Noble Lord alluded
to a letter which appeared in the Times newspaper in
the course of last week.
Lord INGESTRE—A letter in the Hampshire
Advertiser.
Mr. WOOD—The statement was, that an English
boat went on shore, that a Mexican subject took refuge
in her, and that he was taken from the British boat by
a French officer. No account of such transaction had
been received, and, he believed, for the best reason,
because, as he understood, no transaction of the sort
had taken place.—(Hear, hear.) If the statement and
dates as given in the ilimpshire Advertiser were correct,
that it should have taken place was impossible, because
the Vesta was not at Vera Cruz at the time. She arrived
with Commodore Douglas on the 28th December, and
as the taking of Vera Cruz was on• the sth, it was im-
possible that the transaction as detailed could have taken
place. He might have hoped that this would have heen
a satisfactory statement, but he was sorry to he com-
pelled to state more, because he would not lay under
the imputation of concealing from the House anything
which he knew. At the same time the statement he
was about to make, was one which having only re-
ceived it at second-hand from an officer who had
come from the spot, he could not voueh for its corn-
pletc accuracy, as the officer had gone out of town
and he had not seen him to verify the fact. The state-
ment was, that two British officers went in a Mexican.
fishing boat, in which boat they chose to hoist the BA-
tish ensign ; that this boat came amongst the French
squadron, when a Mexican subject was taken out of the
boat ; that some representation was made by Captain
Clark to the French Admiral who said tlaat he would
communicate with the Commodore. Whether that repre-
sentation took place or not, the Mexican who had been
taken out of the boat was set at liberty. This he
presumed to be the foundation for the story
which had appeared in the papers. Whether
that statement was correct or not. lie could not positively
say. If it was, it was clear the English officers were
in the wrong in hoisting- the English flag in a Mexican
fishing boat. He was sorry to have thought it neces-
sary to make that statement., in order to avoid the im-
putation of concealing anything when such concealment
might be misrepresented. If it were so, the Commo-
dore did not think it worth his while to report it to the
Admiralty at home,and every one must be well aware that • many irregurarities might occur on foreign stations which
it would be dangerous to the service to bring before the
House, and might be exceedingly painful to the officer
concerned.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord I NGESTRE said, as to the rebuke which the
Hon. Secretary had given him for bringing the subject
before the House, he had done so from having seen the
accounts in the public organs, and therefore invested
with some probability. In those accounts it appeared
that a subordinate officer, for doing what he deemed his
duty, had been reprimanded by his superior. Was that
a proper way of keeping up the discipline of the ser-
vice ? Hence it was he had asked the question—and
the more especially, since the present WAS the third
instance which had occurred in that part of the world
within six months.—(Hear, hear.) He, was glad how-
ever to find that the Admiralty had received no account
of such a transaction, and that the, stain did not rest
upon the character of our Navy.
Sir F. BURDETT rose tniid faint exclamations of
;00hihs,
Noble
He said
for iidt,he country should feel indebted
putting the question.—(Hear,
hear.) The account; referred to had appeared in
very authentic pu'elic organs.—(Cries of " Order.")
He trusted that no time would be lost by the Admiralty
in making toe inquiry into the facts.—(Order.) •
CLERGY RESERVES (CANADA).
Lord ASHLEY said he had, on the part of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Droitivich, to give notice that
on Tuesday, July 16, he would move for extracts or
copies of correspondence between the Colonial-office
and Governors Arthur and Colborne, respecting the
Clergy Reserves (Canada).
SHIPWRECKS.
Mr. G. PALMER said, considering the late period
of the Session, and the importance of the subject,
involving as it did, hundreds of valuable lives, he
truste might be allowed to put a question to the
President of the Board of Trade. In 1836 a Select
Corn nittee had been appoipted to consider the subject of shipwrecks, with
Reportvjew
r
thouitheir prevention, as far as
possible,
and ;
particularly alluded to
the dangerous custom of placing part of the cargoes on
deck. Of that Report no notice had been taken. The
Committee had again sat this Session, and made a
Report a week or so ago. He wished to know if ;Any
measure was to be introduced upon the subject during
the 'present Session ?
Mr. POULETT THOMSON said it was impossi-
ble for him to tell whether he could introduce any mea-
sure on the subject during the present Session. The'
Report of the Committee had not yet been printed, and
previous to any measure being introduced it would be
necessary to have it circulated among Members of the
House, and to have it go forth to the public. He could
not therefore give the lion. Member any pledge, but he
greatly doubted the possibility of introducing any mea-
sure during the present session.
Lord I NGESTRE begged to know when the pa- .
pers he had moved for during the last session would
be laid upon the table. He also wished to know whether
it was the intention of the Admiralty to build a line-of- •
battle ship on the plan of the late Admiral Gage ?
Admired ADAM said, the only answer he could give
was that the subject was under the consideration of the
Board of Admiralty.
Mr. MILES wished to ask the Noble Secretary for
the Home Department when it was his intention to
proceed with the Bill establishing summary jurisdiction ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he intended to
postpone the further proceedings on the Bill till the
week after next.

FACTORIES BILL.
Mr. F. MAULE moved the order of the day for
the House going into Committee on the Factories' Bill.
Mr. W. PATTEN did not rise for the purpose of
opposing the Bill, but rather in order to state the views
of those manufacturers residing within the district
which he had the honour to represent. He complained
of the great powers to be given by the Bill to per-
sons called sub-inspectors—powers much greater than
those exercised by Magistrates. The manufacturers
would much rather that more inspectors should be
appointed, and that no sub-inspectors should be allowed
to exist. He wished to ask the Hon. Gentleman what
salary was proposed to be given to sub-inspectors ?
Lord STANLEY said that before the Hon. Mem-
ber answered the question perhaps the House would
permit him to say, that in conformity with the views
entertained by his Honourable Friend and Colleague
who had just sat down, he was qujte satisfied the
Government would facilitate the passing of the Bill
and the carrying out of its provisions, if they gave
a greater character for weight and respectability to
the appointment of inspectors. The inspectors as at pre-
sent constituted had a most inquisitorial power, and it
was necessary therefore to have persons of respectability.
It was too much to expect that persons, with a salary
of 350/., would be placed beyond the risk of tempta-
tion of bribery. He believed that the manufacterers
themselves desired that the inspectors should be more
efficient. The only chance for the success of the mea-
sure w: s, to make the law effectual, but not vexatious.
Sir G. STRICKLAND said he had received some
communications upon the subject, but the expressions
of dissatisfaction which he had heard were of a different
character from that described by the Noble Lord. The
Noble Lord stated the dissatisfaction to be on account
of the inspectors being an inferior class of persons.
He (Sir G. Strickland) had heard no complaint against
them, but the complaint was that the manufacturers,
disliked to be subjected to what they called inspectors
law4.__(ilear, hear.) They were willing to obey the
lads sanctioned by Parliament. The House would
gratify the feelings of the manufacturers more by de-
priving
iog laws, and telling them that it was their duty to obey
the laws as well as the manufactures, and not make
them. The law to which he alluded was that which
gave three inspectors the power of making regula-
tions. He would take away this clause altogether, and
specify the duties of inspectors, and see that they per-
formed their duties.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. PHILLIPS said the observations of the