The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-10 00:00:00

Mr. C. BULLER Wished to impress on the Hon.
Gentleman the itnaol:cy of dividing the House at this
stage, because it gave an air of factious opposition to a
proceeding Which had hitherto bsen conducted on high
;sod constitutional grounds. The llou.e had decided in
favour of the principle of the Bill. He proposed, there-
fore, to take toe sense of the Eouse as to the pro.
priety of keeping the appointment in the hands of the
Council. He also wished to direct the attention
of the Noble Lord to the proposal of the Honourable
Member for Birmingham—that the Bill should not go MILITIA PAY BILL.
further than tire reasons assigned—and that, when any The Report of the Militia Pay Bill was brought up, and
Corpceaticm should be established in Birmingham, things 'he Bill ordered to be read a third time on Wednesday.
should be allowed tit return to the ordinary course, and the TITHE COMMUTATION ACTS AMENDMENT
town should be allowed to be governed by the fecal autho. BILL.
ricks. He would also take the opinion of the House as to On the motion of Lord JU ti N RUSEELL, the House
the propriety of taking the authority out of the bands of went into Committee on this Bill.
the Cos Clauses 1 to 8 were agreed to.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD said he was afraid ho should On clause 9 being pr,,poed,
disappoint the wishes of many of his constituents, whose Captain PECH ELL objected to the tithe on fish,
feelings acre vets, strongly against the
Bill. The Noble which ought long ago to have been abolished. He be.
Lord had satisfied sonic of his scruples; and if he would lieved that the tithe had been abolished in all places, with
adopt the suggestion of his Hon. Colleague, that would the exception of Norfolk and Cornwall.
remove au additional objection. He felt, iu common with Lord J. RUSSELL said he had endeavoured to make
many his friends, that it would be dangerous to press some general arrangement, but there were so many con-
this matter, without doing something to assuage the fee.ings flicting interests, that he had not been aisle to do so.
of the people. When a petition was proposed in the Town. Mr. HUME thought this clause would give the power
Council on this subj,et it was rejected, on the grounds that to one or two individuals to make a settlement with respect
theywould not in any shape recognise a measure so insulting; to Easter offerings, by which all the inhabitants of a town
they felt it was an infringement of the liberties of the might be saddled with this payment, which ought to be
pt
'o. Their opposition to it was national, although entirely voluntary. He wished to know whether the landed
they felt it as a local attack upon them that they should be proprietor had the power to make this arrangement.
the first Feinted for the introduction of this system, and The SOLICITOR•G ENER A L said the same pro-
that at the suggestion of persons who had always opposed portion of landowners as might under the first Act enter
the enfranchisement of Birmingham.
' into the general on , might, under
Mr. WARL EY said that the Noble Lord might feel a this clause, agree to mcommute theagreemen Easterts offerings —that
difficulty in acceding to tile suggestion at once ;he would, is, two-thirds of the landowners. True it was, that they
therefore, suggest that they should go into Committee pro would be taking on their lands a burden which would
forma, end the discussian might take place On Monday, exonerate the occupiers, but that was in fact the eff2et of
when the Noble Lord could state his intentions on the all commutations; and the ultimate result was the tame,
subject. for the property became thereby more valuable.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL had already stated that he Mr. HUME said he did not understand why an agree-
did not wish these powers to continue longer than the ne- ment of the landowners should bind a whole parish, seeing
cessity existed. With regard to the clause which the that the occupiers. and not the landowners, would have to
Hon. Member for Birmingham intended to propose, it pay the Easter offerings.
should be recollected that the trial in the Court of Queen's Lord J. RUSSELL said he was willing to have the
Bench might not settle the question; further questions words "personal tithes" left our, for he certainly eon,i.
might arise, and an appeal might be made from the first dered that personal tithes should be abolished.—( Hear. )
decision to the Exchequer Chamber, and it might be Captain PECHEL Is asked if the Noble Lord thought
carried from thence to the House of Loids. Therefore, ttiere was any probahility of the Tithe Commissioners re-
the Hon. Gentlern in must see that it by
on means followed porting favo)nrablv as to the abolition of fish tithe?
that the case would be decided as speedily as he had an- Lord .1, RUSSELL said there were great difficulties—
ticipated. but he did not &split-.
Mr. WILLIAMS hoped the Noble Lcrd would ac- The clause was agreed to, as were clauses 11 and 12, to
cede to the suggestion of his Hon. Friend. He would which last,
withdraw his aniendmen's - Mr. T. D UNCO MBE !flayed a proviso, excepting the
The House than resolved itself into Committee. Lammas land, used by the cattle of poor persons—which
On clause 1 being proposed,
was assented to.
Mr. C. BULLER said be should take the sense of the Clauses up to 30 were agreed to. Clause 31 was struck
House on the specific ground of the authority in whom out.
the appointment should be invested.
Many Hon. Mem- Mr. AG LIONBY said he wished. to introduce a-clause
hers had supported the Bill on the second reading, on the before the 321.
supposition that if they opposed. it they would present the The CH AIRMAN-At cannot be brought up now.
establishment of an efficient police in Birmingham. He Loral .1 RUSSTELL—You had better wait till the end
wished they should not take advantage of disturbances of the Bill.
! existing iu_a.nyslistriet to break through the- old constltes - Mrs./Ml=ll7
tional practices of the country.- His objection Wag foulidcd now._( La •-'

the-moon 4 -mention it.
,t is. d don't mention it now,—