The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-15 00:00:00

SUFFRAGE

Mr. HUME presented a petition from the Political
Union of 13rentford, stating- that they had witnessed with
in4zn4tion the bribery, uorruption, and ititirnidaCnn
which had been practised dui ing the late Election—(Hear,
bear)—and they besought the House to grant them that pro-
t@otlun which they conceived could only be afforded by the
Vote by I3allot,—( Hear, hear,) They also pray ed the House
to effect those changes in the representative system by which
the political franchise might be made co-extensive with taxa-
tion, —( Hear, hear.) They added that their demand was
founded upon the unavailable bases of Christianity and the
rights of man, and that he was to be colsidered a slave who,
while subject to taxation, liable to be balloted for the Militia,
and to be impressed for' the. Navy, was to be deb:lrred from
the exorcists of his political rights.
EAST INDIA PRIZE MONEY.

Mr. WAK LE Y seeing the Right lion, Gentleman the Pre-
sident of the Board of Control in his place, was anxious to put
to bin) a question in which a great many individuals were
interested. It was a repetition of the question which he put last
year, namely, as to when it might be expected those persons who
served in the last war in India would receive their prize
money ? He hoped he would receive a satisfactory answ-r to
his question, as he had every week three or four applications on
the subject from pensioners who were advanced in years, and
to whom this money was a great object.
Sir J. HOBHOUSE said, that in answer te the question
put to him by the lion. Member, the Prize Committee had a
year since issued a notification that the distribution of the
money would begin in India. Notice had been just given
that the names of the European officers and men, who had
served in the war, would be sent out with a view to as speedy a
settlement of their claims as possible. His Hon. Friend must
perceive that some time must elapse before the names could
be sent out. He could assure his Hon. Friend that he was
most anxious the distribution should take place as soon as
possible. In August last the Court had sent out an intima-
tion of their d.,sire that the claims should he settled as speedily
is possible, and he had to express his regret that any unne-
cessary delay should have taken place. He hoped that this
answer would be satisfactory to the Hon. Member.
Mr. NV AK L E Y—lt is not satisfactory to the parties who
expect the money.
Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE—It certainly will not make
them live longer. —( Laughter.)
Sir E. COD RINGTON seeing the Secretary to the Ad-
miralty, begged to ask him a question which his Hon. Friend
' the Member for Devizes had left him as a legacy, he having
been obliged to go to Scotland, He begged to ask what was the
result of the motion made by him in the latter part of the last
Session ? The navy was very anxious upon the sulject, and
he would be glad to know if any steps would be taken by the
Admiralty consequent upon the motion ?
Mr. C. WOOD thought the question was rather prema-
ture, but as the qtystion was the legacy of a departed friend,
he did not object to a serer it. The Ad niralty had called for
information to enable them to decide whether the claims of the
parties were of such a nature as to justify them in going to
Parliament, and asking for such a considerable increase of the
public expenditure. He had not yet ascertained what the re-
sult of their enquiries was.
Mr. C AYLEY presented a petition from a parish in the
North Riding of Yorkshire, in favour of the Ballot.
NEGRO APPRENTICESHIP.
Mr. BAINE S, seeing the Right Honourable Gentle-
' man the Vice-President of the Board of Trade in his
place, wished to ask him, as be had been Chairman of
a Select Committee, which sat lsst year as a Committee
'of inquiry upon the system of Negro apprenticeship,
how it was, that the evidence taken before that Committee,
had been communicated in the West Indies, while it had been
thought advisable to withhold h from that House?
Mr. L ABOUC HE RE could assure the Hon. Gentleman
that he was in no way implicated in the matter. That Com-
mittee had decided that the evidence should not be rep srted to the
House, and he had not communicated it to any other party.
Certainly some complaints had reached him of that evidence
having transpired in the West Indies, while it was the fact that
it had not been communicated to the House. Now he would
bring something to the Hon. Member's recollection, which might
account for the matter. The Lim. Member would recollect
it was proposed and carried in Committee, with no other dissen.
tient than himself ( Mr. L ). that those parts of the evidence
which bore on the conduct of particular planters should be sent
out to them. That resolution was supported by Mr. F.
Buxton, by the Host. Member for Leeds himself. and all
those Members who thourlit with him. He (Mr. L.)
had been no party to communicate that evidence, except
in so far as he had been directed to do so by the Com-
mittee. He hoped that the answer would be satisfactory to
the Hon. Member, and that lie would acquit him (Mr. L.)
of any underhand conduct in the matter.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY defended the course adopted by her Ma-
jesty's Government. He denied in the most unequivocal
manner the charge that had bun made against him, at a
public meeting in London; that lie had surreptitiously trans-
mitted this evidence through Mr. Bqrge, the agent for Ja-
maica. He denied the accusations that had been made
against him ; but he was sorry to say that It was only one
among the many to which he had been hitherto subject.
Sir G. SINCL AIR felt convinced that it was quite unne-
cessary, as far as the House was concerned, for the Honour-
able Member to make the denial he had.
Mr. pAINEs was quite aware of the answer that 1.'40414
be returned when he piit the questiOti, but fir.ding that these
bad been circulated through the country a report very much
to the disadvantage of the Colonial Office, he was determined

that an oppo;-tunity should be given for the e3rreetioa of that
report.

FISHGUARD HARBOUR BILL.
Mr. DENNISTOUN presunt. d a petition from the
Chamber of Commerce of Glasgow, praying for an alteration

in the Fishguerd Harbour 13i1'. - -
LIVERPOOL AND IRISH MAILS.
Mr. WALLACE, seeing th, Right lion. Gentleman the
Secretary fur the Ad.uiralty in his place, wished to a:.l
whether anything had been dune with regard to entering into
contracts for curing the mails from Liverpool to Ireland.
Mr. CHARLES WOOD said, that it been decided that
contracts should be entered into for tat • pur, ose, and that
the advertisements relative to those contracts would appear
in the papers in a few days.
PARENTS AND CHILDREN.

Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD said, that as the Bill which
he was about to ask leave of the House to introduce
was read a second time in the last session of Parliament,
he might without much d:fficulty, anticipate that
there w.add he no ohjecti,n rsised to its int,edu,f on now, and
might content himself with s'mply making his motion. Hut
inasmuch as there was no developemcnt of the subject on his
part in the last session, and no discussion on that subject on the
part of others, and inasmuch as the state of the law he proposed to
alter might not be familiar to the minds of those whose circum •
stances had exempted them from coming under its provisions,
he would ask the indulgence of the House fur a short time
while he drew the attention of the House to the subject. It
had reference to the right of parents to communicate
with thei- children, when the right of joint superinten-
d 'nee had been put an end to by differences in which
there had b^en no criminality on the part of the mo-
ther. There were many persons who passed life together
in happiness and love, and who in their casual differences
never anticipated the horrible solitude to which they were
condemned, who either knew nothing of the law, or regarded
the law as a dead letter, and something which the present
state of civilised humanity had rejected. There was a law in
England, not obsolete but often enforced, that the guardian-
ship of the children belonged to the father. When put,ing that
law into force no consideration of the bereaved mother was
admitted in our Courts ; whatever cruelties had driven her
from her home, whatever moral torture she had suffered, from
her, however innocent, however kind, however faithful in her
duties of wife and mother—from her to the perhaps
guilty and cruel father the custody of the children is trans-
ferred. She would be deprived—not merely of the oppor-
tunity of watching over the sick-bed of her children—of com-
forting them in their sorrows—but even shut out altogether
from their sight.—( Hear, hear.) If she should by some
gentle fraud obtain the guardianship of their persona, a writ of
Habeas Corpus might he issued at the instance of the bus.
band, and the unhappy mother be deprived of the right with
which nature had endowed her. That was the state of the law,
as it had been declared in our Courts by the highest authorities.
The mode of enforcing that authority on the part of the husband
was by a writ of contempt, under which the mother, at the in-
stance of perhaps a cruel and tyrant husband, might be
torn from her children and cast into prison. —( Hear, hear. )
Nor must the House console itself by the belief that a law so
harsh but was rarely enforced. Although the instances might
be comparatively few—for it was in the nature of women to suffer
in silence, and to conceal from the world the wrongs endured
from those they love, and much was kept in the back ground
of domestic tyranny—yet there were not wanting a sufficient
number of cases that had come before our Courts, in which parties
had gone through all the painful ordeal of a public exposure.
To those instances he would confine himself in bringing be-
fore the House the operations of this law. In the case of De
Mandeville, to which he would first refer, a child, deriving
nurture from the breast of its mother, and being but 8 months
old,was taken from her under an order (as we understood),
of an English Court.—(Hear, hear.) She was a foreigner,
married to an Englishman, from whom she had suffered great
violence. She was separated from him, and took with her
her child. The husband, armed with the authority of the
law, obtained access to the house in which she was har-

boured, and in the dead of the night in an inclement sea-
son he carried off her child in an open carriage.---( Hear.)
Under those circumstances the mother applied for a writ of
Habeas Corpus. The Court held that as it did not appear
that the child had suffered physically from the want of nurture

. . .
it had no power to interfere, and the child was delivered back
to the father. The next case to which he would refer was

that of ex parte Skinner in 9th More; in which case the wife
had been separated from the husband under circumstances of
grievous and just complaint on her part, and the husband
applied for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to remove a fe-
male child of six years old from the custody of the
mother. It was suggested however, that some Gentleman
at the bar might determine in whose custody the child should
be placed, and the present Lord Wvnford, then Mr. Best,
being appointed by the Court for that purpose, appointed a
third person to have the custody of the child. But the bus.
band having by force or fraud recovered possession of
her, the mother applied for a writ of Habeas Corpus
to restore the child to the custody from which she had been
removed ; yet though it was proved that the husband had com-
mitted the child to the custody of a woman with whom he co-
habited, and that he himself being a prisoner in the King's
Bench, the woman was in the habit of taking the child with her

when she visited him there, the Court said it had no
power to interfere, and delivered the child again to the cus-
tody of the father, to be exposed to the moral contamination and
physical evil which must result from such a connexion. There
was another case—(the name of which we could not exactly
catch, we believe it was ex parte M'Clellend)-eeln which a female
child of tender years was played by the mother at a boarding
Schaal, and being attaelsed by a disease which had before
paeled off an elder child, the mother removed her from the
school, that she might receive the benefit of that skill in the
treatment of the disease which painful experience had given her.
She applied to the Court to enable her to do so, but Mr.
Justice Pattoson, before whom the case was heard, said,
as the child is in a delicate state of health, perhaps it would
be better that she should be with her mother; but I
have no power to make any order to that offeet,
and she must be delivered into the custody of her father.
The next case was to be found in all the authorities. It cause
before the King's Bench, and he himself was Counsel in it. It
was a case, however, in which he did not like to mention names ;
for, although the case was to be found in the Law Reports, the
circumstances were so recent that he did not wilt' to add to
the severe misery which the parties had suffered, by again
bringing their names before the public. lie would,
therefore, merely refer to the outlines of the case. It
was the case of three infant children under seven years
of age. It was a case in which it could net be denied
that the mother was justified in leaving her husband's
house. The husband, however, made an application to the
Court of King's Bench, to compel his wife to deliver up
the children to him ; and although she offered to obey
any qualified order which the Court might in its discretion
make, the rule of law would admit of no qualification,
and the rule was made absolute to compel her to give
up the children. She evaded the order, however, by
quitting the country with her children ; and thus the
enforcement of the rule was attended with misery to both,
fer the father was really attached to his children, and was thus
totally deprived of the opportunity of seeing them, In coaling
to these conclusions, he was sure the judges were in-
fluenced by none but the pur st intentions ; hut he
must say that they arrived at them by what appeared to
him to be artificial reasoning. One would hope that
the rigour of the law would in cases be relaxed by a Court of
Equity, but unfortunately that was not the case, except where
the children had property. The Honourable and Learned
Member then referred to the case of Paul v. Paul,
which came before the Vice- Chancellor, Sir Anthony Hart.
It was a petition from the mother, who stated that she had
been driven from her husband'a house, and children's society.
She stated further, that she could not desert her daughter—
that she had funds sufficient to provide for her, and imploring
an order, in the alternative, either that her daughter
might be delivered up to her, or, if not,. that
she might be allowed access, at all reasonable times, to that
child, if' left in custody of her father. The Vice-Chancellor at
once decided against the first part of the order ; the second was
pressed upcn him by counsel at great length. Tho question
he argued was, whether a child was to be deprived, by the brutal
conduct of the father, of the company, advice and protection of
the mother, against whom no imputation rested. In answer to that
the Vice-Chancellor said that some conduct must be shown
on the part of the father with regard to the management or
education of the child to warrant any interference, and in the
present case ho was bound to say, that there was not suffi-
cient to warrant his depriving the father of his common
law right of the care and custody of his child, He had
no authority to make an order such as was pray. d
for—it was directly at variance with the statute, and if
any authority could be found, he would most gladly make
it. —( Hear, hear.) The Vice-Chancellor went on to say that
he knew nothing so improper as depriving a mother of the
care and custody of her child. He stated further that
he was himself Counsel in the case of " Smith v. Smith,"
in which the facts were precisely similar, except that the
father was endeavouring to compel the mother to surrender
some property—that in that case his argument was, that as
the mother of a bastard was allowed to retain the custody of her
child until the age of seven years, a fortiori the mother of a
legitimate chill should be allowed the eu3tody of her child till
that period. What the Vice- Chancellor suggested on that occa-
sion, he ( Sergeant Talfourd) was now seeking. He did not want
to vary the Common Law right from the father who held it.
What he asked was that a power should be given to !carried
persons in the highest station, to hear the complaints of
those who had none to help them.—( Hear, hear.) There
would be no difficulty in applying the principles of the law to
such a case. In the case of Mr. Lytton, which came before
Lord Mansfield in granting the writ of habeas Corpus, the
Learned Judge suggested that the permissien to see the
child might be engrafted on the order, and he (Mr. Sergeant
Talfourd) would suggest that the or der for obtaining access
might be made in a similar way, power bring given to the Judge
to grant such access as might seem insoluble and just.
In many cases of that unfortunate kind, the Judges had at-
tempted- to induce the parties to waive their strict legal right,
and to permit themselves, or some other equnlly independent
party, to point out a way in which both parties might be
butni in too
matters they. applied in vain. In cases
in which interest were concerned, they might
cre ni
}reasonably hope for success, but in those cases where the
passions were roused—in cases where the animosity had arisen
out of the death of affection—in those cases where hatred had
arisen in place of love—how desirable then that there should
be a power lodged somewhere, which might be exercised to
the benefit of both parties. It was as much for the benefit
of the husband as for that of the wife, liveauee he could not
for a moment that a husband who was seeking
to deprive the methee of her children, and who was pursuing
her ei-en into a dungeon, was as much entitled to compassion as
! the poor mother against whose character the breath of slander
I had not dared to speak. It was on that account that
he left the right of application in one parent. He proposed

~..

g he did
the superior tribunal. In seeking these ads antaceeii ,
to leave the husband to his greater remedy
d should
not even ask that the mother of a legitimate
e to the
enjoy the same privileges which the law nor _ ges'.e
aive
mother of a bastard, but he did ask of the bl
')uasked them
some c.sinfort to those who were now forsaken ; he
.
to mitigate that g-oss tyranny which ha ben to longeaal)
I°svel to be exercised by one sex over the (Alter,—(Ch
a better OS.
Wilt these observati.ns he beed leave to rece,e
bring in a Bill, for the purpose of-providing
children of tender age, whose parents had separated.
mo.
Mr. LEADER felt great pleasure in seconding the
r Rea.
tion of his Hon,
and
Learned Friend the Member .or
0,
ing. After his admirable speech, shOwing the hars_hane e for'
the law upon this subject, he would not detain the 1 I 8
feeling
any length of time; hut he wished to express the strong s
which entertained upon this subject. The iaw,a it a'
Coo'
leave tuo(
present stood, was harsh and oppressive, and neededtse
or
siderable alteration, if re g ,rd was had to common,
hse sense
be
hurnaLity. H.• thought that every advantage oughts
togive i
A sthtebewi(aa,k to°f tt
ee
at
tr sperxe,sew:lltosltioaotldn,oivtu%sic,aesiunnirlaiev,r,nuarTiteg.
husband, u.d: oppressive to the e Fe. A man who mignhteb!
drunken, immoral, and brutalised, might place his wife I
he
dilemma—he might say, vou shall either live in. irg
sseoi.
with me, or you shall be deprived of the elgniv..,,e
your child. It might be admitted that the ",
was the more fit party to have the custody
the children. She might love them, and her husband might
disregard them, and they might dislike him ; yet for a we.
.re
placei in these circumstances there was no redress, and
law refused to listen t) the pleadings of natural symP'"4
and affection. This was not an overstrained case. 1'
could call to mind several such, and he had no doub
there was not a single Member of that House who had not,
such a case in his recollection. Under all the eircenne,ances,
surely some protection should be given to the weaker sex:
Doubtless there were hundreds of women at this very
pining for the children •that had been talL.e:
from them by this inexorable Issw. Those fenlaid
look( d to that House for protection, and he hoped they w°tid
not look in vain. He trust that the Noble Lord at the bea
,Ao.fotobitie HcooamleescOetlie
upon this important s
c'andtbeilightl
ion Bone o Hon
The t 0
to
subject.
Member concluded by giving h's most hearty concurrec;
the Bill.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN did not rise for the pur-
pose, at the present stage, of opposing the motileunlsss, however, a suggestion which he intended to 11'
was acceded to, he might be disposed to oppolo it
not
future stage. No one was more anxious than he wass,
ee
Baronet
Tt
hs,
sanction any law, the effect of which would be to separatebis
mother from her children. But the House had to look at it it
ques ion as a subject of great public policy; and looking at
in that view, the question would be, whether by this rocas"
the House would not remove the great preventive to the $e Pa
ration of man and wife ?—fer if any thing would induce at1..34.
and his wife to live in affection it would the birth of a olbe
The result of this Bill would be, that both parents would
endeavouring to maintain an authority in oosition to esc..,
other, which would lead to evils far greater thappn any that O,
exis'ed. Without offering any opposition to the introductioni)e!
the Bill, he would only state, that if at a future stage his °he
jectiotis were not removed, he would take the sense of t
House upon them.
Mr. Sergeant TA LFOURD explained. The object of the
Bill was not to change the custody of the children, but morel/a
to enable the parent in whose custody the child was not piaci.%
to have access to it, and that only at the discretion of w
Lord Chancellor, the Vice Chancellor, or one of the toll°
Judges. —( Hear, hear.) Leave was then given to bring in the
Bill.

LAW OF COPYRIGHT.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD in moving for leave to int/
duce a Bill to amend the law of Copyright, said, as the B's
was, in substance, similar to that which had been read
second time last session, he would only advert to two polflto
of difference. In the first place this Bill did not,
that of last session, extend to the fine arts
painting, music, and sculpture—the laws respect'e
which, especially the latter, were in a most disgrac'
fully difficult and complicated state—but was confined
to literary copyright; and with respect to the fine arts, "7
would introduce a separate Bill at some future period.;
(Hear, hear.) And next, the present Bill did not touch t•t
question of international copyright which he thought
.1,,
would be better perhaps to leave to the negotiation of Goverl4
meet. The Bill last session provided that foreign authors shenh'e
receive the benefit of its protection in this country. 111, tse
present Bill, however, he would merely propose that
should be inserted, providing that the Queen in Conte"
should have power, when it shall be ascertained that the GO'
o
vernment of any Foreign country has afforded protection
the copyright of British authors, to make an Order eaten
to the works of authors of that country published in t
United Kingdoms the benefit of this Bill.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. E. L. BULWER said that his Hon. and Learned
Friend could not be aware of the extent to which foreign
piracies piracies were carried,
..or he would most unquestioriall
not have left that subject altogether untouched by his 1311
The law in other countries was superior to ours in this re'
spect, and he was surprised, particularly as he understoo
there existed a desire amongst foreign Governments that tiler;
should be a reciprocity of protection, that some measure Ile
not been introduced in order to meet their wishes, and at to
same time confer a very great benefit upon English authors. r
Mr. P. THOMSON said that the subject was now undo
the consideration of Government, and he hoped that, earve
after the recess, they would be enabled to introduce a measure
which he hoped would meet the views of the Hon. Mernher'd
Sir ROBERT PEEL thought the Honourable a„itt
Learned Gentleman had acted wisely in separating
part of his Bill which related to the fine arts from that wl"co
applied to authors. He was of opinion that it vint.l„a
have been more convenient to enter into the discossl:
upon these two subjects as two separate measures ; but he w 0
sure that the same principle applied to the fine arts which apt
plied to others. The it
sculptor and painter were entitled it
similar protection, for the present state of the 11;4
and the practice was exceedingly complicated with resPet:ts
to the light of these parties to protection. At present the Oros
of the painter and engraver appeared to stand on very differe a
grounds from those of the author. He believed the subject, e
not been thoroughly inquired into before a Committee, an" se
doubted very much if Ins Hon. and Learned Friend's perP°o
would not be materially aided if he moved for the appointnle e
of a Select Committee to consider the question of Sculpt
and Painting. The subject might have been inquired into
some former Committee ; but if not, it was so difficult that 1-,, ,/
could not approach it without great disadvantage, unless a°oo
hitery was previously made.
es to
Me, B. D'ISRA ELI gave his most cordial supP°_,''ioa
the measuie. He was most happy to see the proteu'io
of the Legislature extended to the owners of that sPecos
of property. —( Hear, hear, hear.) The House 0,
probably aware that the owners of that description of tot
perty were compelled to have recourse to one of the hig the
and costliest tribunals in the kingdom, and to invokehieb
powers of the Lord Chancellor in all cases in v'
their rights were infringed. He would be extren
happy if an expeditious and inexpensive Inadetest
redress could be established against the system of piraeferisl
was carried on.—(Cries of Hear, hear, from the to
tbbeenebni,lsl. )by Hseomheadofppoeters.
mostrequeesmteidnentot
lgitievrearhyis su
beenthchar t% tie
It would give him great pleasure if the subject was ta'eelsa
by her Majesty's present Government, and he would be
if the law was perfected even under their auspices. , eed
Lord MAHON said the laws of copyright were 01 Itatch
complicated nature, and he thought the better way in fil-re
the subject could be treated was to send the Bill be-
Select Committee.
Mr, Sergeant TALFOURD was most happy Bill
of
that the course which he had taken in dividing the ''-issfith
last year had met with the approbation of the House•Ooyesos
respect to the suggestion which had fallen from the 301
went, he would have much pleasure in agreeing with that
leaving the Bill in their hands, as he was quite FOP
would be brought to much greater perfection than it eon'
sibly be in his hands.
Leave was then given, and the Bill was orderesii3t°,o
brought in by Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, Sir R. 11. Ing
the Cherie:ller of the Exchequer. 101
FINES AND RECOVERIES.
Mr. R. MAHON Y moved for leave to bang in theeg a
t) abolish Fines a:-.d Recoveries in Ireland. He
it very desirabla that the laws of Ireland should be asa',. teu.c,!
to those of England. It would surely be an objectfhhe the
importance that the laws relating to property shott„lue
same in both countries ; and he was happy to assure
cli,l_ad yrcr
that the great body of the landed proprietors in Ir
„,„ eloos
in favour of the Bill. 1,0 the
• ye'
Sir E. SUGD EN wculd be very sorry to reel he st
Gentleman to explain the whole of the Bills
whichdintroslneeot
duccd into that Heusi., for he believed that be had Bet, a
more than could be Cot through in one Session•
yds he h‘aci,
the leave of the Chair, he must ask upon what grn" wetted lee
introduced that Bill? He (Sir E S.) had carefully
_ono ise
them, but he could find no grounds upon which it
rable
founded.
and Learned Member for Kinsale had very aptu_und, tir_a
Me. Sergeant WOULFE contended that the. HsVeud tb:
nature of his all. He could see no substantial g.ito, in irelati"a
which the principles of the law relating to Pr°Pcis)the go°
should be different to those in England, which wa
Woe°
upon which that gentleman rested,
gr.
aed Forests had sanctioned the Bill.
inaudible front
After a few words, which were quiteled to
Lord MORPETH was understood to sae, that the
M'.
Herries and Mr. Woulfe,
MAHONY rep •
f Hrd ton; - di?
thanks instead of taunts, for bringing 0
lie c rot
( hear.) Whatever o
PPusi"nosition. Ile was nor
would be ready to justify his prttip
of a Bill, t bear. 9
one of those who got up at everyfs(i2ligta,s of a`
e
and talk away the public time.t
to Ireland in
~,calr7)
lied He thought himse! esnuthiitecebes;
The object of the Bill was to extend eEnt
England in 183-I.7.(ienws he
benefits that were extended
item
nts of the Hon. and
would have been met with the tau
sboiert
Member wad rgeths
Member, the on.
Sir E. SUGDEN said that t
deal of unnecessary Laon,
It some hat
ghat he conceived to be a g
read
treated him wt. hello t
He certainly did net expect t 4ore that with such cooed
d
lle seemed to think that he ha
ure
t.
Hoc. Genet
Was
1,000
is intentions. H
see feet °I A
from b
putting
1 irg could be further
not with alarm.,
use, ptl
the regardedthat 11° neok•-""
to say, however, that
ducion to e Order tlesa
ness. Now he b
his first moo
Hon. Member, on
number of Bills nP°"th had d°ub
tbee
notices for such a sesntiernee
ct
of
of
The Hon. see subJe task
(Hear, hear.) „aged to ass h
wit
the
not
cat ability thc.__
rco.arde,
Bills, and brought great
as as one "." could oibla
but he must say . erepertY, floneu
framing tle
-s affecting p the
interest the progress of laws affecting
the Ire
but look with jealousy at
given a great deal of attention to t