The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-30 00:00:00

EAST RETFORD,

On the motion of the Marquis of Saussuar, the
Order of the Day for continuing the investigation into the
East Retford case was re•id. Counsel were then called in
and the forming witnesses examined :---Mr. Handley and
Mr. Thornton.

The next witness's name was Samuel Buxton, During
his examination by Lord Dunham,

Lord ELLENLIOROUGH rose to order. Till very
lately it had been the custom for Noble Lords, when ex-
amining witnesses, to stand ; by retaining their seats, a
conversational tone and limner arose, which prevented
those Peers who were further from the witness hearing the
examination.

Lord DURHAM said that the Noble Lord was welcome
to make what remarks he pleased upon his tone and man-
ner, but if he found occasion to alter it, at all events he
should take care not to adopt the tone and manner of the
Noble Lord. With respect to standing or sitting, all he
could say wag, that during the examinations last year he
had perceived it to be the custom for Peers to retain their
seats.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH explained.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the custom had
been, in set examinations, for Noble Lords to stand ; but
when only a few questions were asked, a Peel' u,ually re-
tained his Seat. On the whole, perhaps, it would be better
to leave such a matter to the discretion and good taste of
each Noble Lord.

Lerd DURHAM then continued to examine the witness
in his seat, as before.

The only other witness examined was William Hodson.
At the close of his examination, the further hearing was
adjourned till to-morrow (this day).

Their Lordship* then adjourned, at a Qwtrter pazt mine.

HOUSE OF COMMONS--(LAST NIGHT.)
LONDON-BRIDGE APPROACHES BILL.

On the Order of the Day for the Second Reading of
this Bill,
S r E. KNATCIIBULL moved the introduction of a
clause, empowering the levy of a duty on the parish of
Gravesend, amounting to one half of that paid by the City
01 London.

After a few words from Mr. Alderman WOOD, Mr.
TENNYSON, and Mr. Ifinnus,

The clause was agreed to without a division, and the
Bill read a second time,
Mr. M. A. TAYLOR presented a petition float the
City of Durham, praying that the punishment of death
for forgery might he abolished.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS.
Lord ALTHORY presented a petition for the amend-
ment of the law respecting Insolvent Debtors front a re-
spectable individual, who, having for some time held an
official situation in the Insolvent Debtor.: Cour', was
thereby rendered peculiarly competent to express an opinion
upon the subject. The prayer of the petitioner was, that
a debtor, instead of being arrested, should have power to
apply to the Insolvent Court for permission to divide his
property among his creditors and also, that creditors
should have power to compel an imprisoned debtor to divide
hi■ property among his creditors, and not to remain in
prison and defy them. In both those prayers he (Lord
Althorp) entirely concurred. He believed that impri-
sonment for debt was in many cases detrimental to the

debtor, without being in any way useful to the creditor.
In eases where the debtor was an honest man, and really
insolvent, imprisonment could do no good. He would now
move that the petition be brought up.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said the gross amount of
the debts for which insolvents have been discharged was
eleven millions sterling ; and upon those debts the creditor
hid received upon an average a dividend of fourpence
farthing is the pound. Surely that fact was in itself a
proof of the necessity of some alteration. The law, as it
:it present stood, operated with peculiar severity on the
retail trader. There ought to be a provision in the law,
empowering the creditor to compel the debtor to come
before the Commissioners at once, and assign over the
whole of his property to the payment of hie dellts, instead
of squandering it in prison. The demoralization which
the present system created was most extensive. Unless
additional protection were afforded to the retail traders es-
pecially, they must soon he entirely ruined. He had in
his possession a petition on the subject, most respectably
signed, which he should take an early opportunity of
presenting.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT declared that he was every day
more and more convinced of the necessity of some material
change in the law upon the subject. As the law at pre-
sent stood, one of its chief tendencies was to protect the
fraudulent debtor. In his opinion it required very exten-
sive amendment.

Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN declared it to be his opi-
nion, after a great deal of experience on the subject, that
there never was any thing so pernicious as the Insolvent
Debtors' Act. It operated as an encouragement to fraudu-
lent persons, who found themselves just as well off if they
paid only the smallest fraction of their da-bts as if they
had paid the whole. It operated as a legal oppression on
an honest man, who was unwilling to recur to the same
means of relieving himself from inevitable embarrassment,
which were resorted to by the individuals who incurred
large debts, well knowing that he had not sixpence to pay
them with. So strong was this feeling that he had known
some persons who had been rendered insolvent by unfore-
seen calamity, but who had declared they would suffer
death rather than take the benefit of the Act. It was
well known that all the dividends paid under the Insolvent
Debtors' Act, would not defray half the sa!aries of the
Commissioners of the Insolvent Court. Was that a system
to be endured ? During the last year 4000 persons took
the benefit of the Act; and probably as many more ob-
taMed a release from their creditors under the threat that
they would do so. It was very easy for Hon. Gentlemen
to say that tradesmen ought not to give such easy credit.
If those Hon. Gentlemen would lounge fur an hour or two
in a tradesman's shop, they would perhaps be surprised to
observe the caution and circumspection on the one hand,
and the dexterous attempts at fraud on the other. There
were many cases in which it was utterly impo.sible for a
tradesman to avoid giving credit. He had no doubt that
if a tradesman were to send goods to any Hon. Member,
and order his messenger not to leave them without the
money, that llon. Member would turn round and exclaim,
You rascal, what do you mean by such impertinence ?"
If a tailor were to send clothes to the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman opposite, with such an intimation, the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman would be very apt to say, " Am
I not his Majesty's Attorney-General ?"—(A laugh.) He
trusted that, before the Bill or the subject before the House
were proceeded with, a Committee would b, appointed to
investigate the matter, and see if nothing better could be
devised.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was unwilling to go
into any detailed statement of his opinions on the subject
at the present time, as it was not customary or convenient
to do so on such a qmstion as the present. At the same
time the Noble Lord knew that he had no prejudice in fa-
vour of arrest. Of the expediency of the proposition for
empowering the debtor without arrest to apply to the
Commissioners for power to divide his property among his
creditors, he had considerable doubts. As to that which
went to enable creditors to compel their debtors, living in
prison, to divide their property among them, if the Noble
Lord would prepare a clause fur the purpose of introducing
it in the Bill in progress, he should be happy to give it
every possible consideration. As to a Committee of In-
quiry, he should be happy to accede to any proposition
for the appointment of one. He would not pledge him-
self to any ulterior measure; but, if any gentlemen
would undertake the labour of the investigation, he could
have no possible objection to it.
Mr. BRIGHT was glad to find that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had no objection to an investigation
by a Committee.

Mr. W. HARVEY was very desirous that a Com-
mittee should be appointed to examine the state of the law
rcspectin debtor trul creditor, and concurred with the
Hon. Member for Bristol, that until the result of that in-
quiry should be ascertained, the beet course would be to
re-enact the present Bill for a short period. As to the
amount of the debts of insolvent. during the continuance
of the Act being eleven millions, it ought to he retnem-
bared that the amount of each debt was repeated in the
schedule two or three times. It was true that the divi-
dends were trivial; but that was hecause the debtors had
no temptation to make them greater. In what situation
would creditors be placed, if the law of arrest were
abolished, and nothing die substituted ? What was the
remedy proposed, but to have recourse to the property of
the insolvent ? This ought to be accompanied by other
provisions, and he trusted that the Solicitor-General
would let the Bill stand ever till next Session.
_ _

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL had no objection to a
Committee, but be thought creditors had a better chance
of having their cases attended to by the House than
debtors, although he hoped that the House would have
humanity enough to attend to the latter. It was a great
blot in the legislation of this country, that whilst it gave
every facility to the debtor to incur debts, it enabled him
to set his creditors at defiance, if he did not choose to give
up his property. It power were given to break up all
men who could not pay twenty shillings in the pound, it
would he most injurious to society. His principle was,
that when a man was in such a state that he could not go
on with his business, and even spent his days in prison,
he would compel him to Fettle and give up his property
to his creditors. This, however, was not a time to dis-
cuss the subject.

Mr. HUME had heard with satisfaction that Govern-
ment had no objection to a Committee upon the subject.
He thought the law of Scotland might be applied to
England with advantage.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL explained.

Mr. O'CONNELL said it was disgraceful to the
country that the question of debts should be postponed
by the Courts as they were—sometimes for six weeks or
even nine months—and upon the most frivolous pre-
tences. When a debtor was brought before a Judge, why
should fictitious delays and postponements be allowed?
It was a great evil that there should be one bankrupt law
in England and another in Ireland. If a man in trade
became insolvent, and gave up his property to his credi-
tors to obtain his release, why should the same law not
extend to persons not in trade ? At present, any man
might be arrested by any person who chose to go to a
certain office and make affidavit of a debt against him,
and he had known a gentleman to be arrested for a debt
of 60,000/. by a person to whom lie did not owe any
thing. He had not been long in that House, but from
what he had seen, he did not think that Committees of
Inquiry did much good.
Mr. O'DOIIERTY said, that when the Hon. Member
brought forward his subject of the Union, he should be
fully prepared to meet him upon every question relating
to Ireland.

Mr. BARING thought that a settlement between
debtor and creditor could never be attained without some
power of arrest for debt.
On the motion that the petition be brought up,
Mr. O'CONNELL said, he had spoken of the Union
only with reference to the Bankrupt Laws.
Mr. O'DOHERTY would wish to assimilate the laws
of the two countries as much as possible.
Lord ALTHORP thought that provision ought to be
made against any decided cases of carelessness or extrava-
gance.
The petition, which was from H. Dance, Esq., of Lin-
coln's-iim-ields, was then ordered to lie on the table, and
to be printed.
THE JEWS,

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL rose to present a peti-
tion from one Lewis Levi, a Jew, praying that the Jews
might he allowed to acquire and dispose of real property.
The petitioner had informed him that neither he nor those
Jews with whom he was acquainted, wished for the elec-
tive franchise. They merely wanted the rights of property.
After a few words from Mr. FERCUSSON, Mr. SPRING
RICE, Mr. HUME, and the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, the
petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Captain BRADSHAW presented a petition from the
innkeepers of Runcorn, against the free trade in beer.
The Hon. Member then said that he disagreed with the
petitioners in their views.
Mr. S. RICE said, he would take the liberty of inform-
ing the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer that
it was his intention to move for certain returns respecting.
the Press of Ireland. He wished the Right Hon. Gentle-
man to consider, before he proceeded farther in his pro-
P"sed measure of taxation ; and he hoped he wool I see
reason to abandon it altogether. In saying this, he begged
to be understood not as contending against, but in favour
of
an increase in the revenue. And he was anxious to
impress it upon the English Members, and on the Right

Non. Gentleman himself, that in proceeding with tkis
subject he would not only lose revenue, but extinguish re-
venue altogether, and also take away the means of exist-
ence from a large ciass of his Majesty's subjects. For the
fict was, the Press of Ireland could not survive the new
duties. The Hon. Member concluded by moving for a
Return of the Amount of Stamp Duties received fur
Newspapers in Ireland during each of the last twenty
years; and also for a similar Return of the Duties on
Advertisements.

Mr. O'CONNELL was satisfied that the Right Hon.
Gentleman was misinformed respecting the State of Ire •
land when he proposed the imposition of new duties. lie
was fortified in this opinion by tie statements respecting
the distress prevailing iu that part of the kingdom, which
had been made during the Session. The present mea-
sure was, in Lis opinion, decidedly cAculated, thou4li he
hoped not intended, to extinguish the expression of public
opinion in Ireland.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, it
was not quite fair when a notice was standing on the
books for a discussion on this subject to introduce it after
the present fashion. He would try to reserve what he
had to say upon the 'natter until it was brought before the
House in the regular course of business.
The 'Returns were then ordered.

Mr. DAVENPORT presented a petition from the
licensed victuallers of Chester, against the Sale of Beer Bill.
Mr. MONCK moved for a Return of the Pensions and
Allowances granted to the Widows of Officers in the
Civil and Military Departments of the Army, Navy, Ord-
nance, and Commissariat, from 1794 to 1829.---Ordered.

Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition from
the wholesale and retail ironmongers, respecting the Ltw
of Arrest ; he also presented a petition from Appleby,
praying that the punishment of death fur forgery might be
abolished.

Lord STANLEY presented petitions from the common
brewers of Wigan and St. Helens, in Lancaster, against
the Sale of Beer Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the ,EXCHEQUER stated
the principle of the llill was simply to enable any man to
open a public house on a licence from the Excise; but
this did not relieve him from the subsequent restrictions
embodied in the Act. He also wished to remark, that it
was not intended to touch the replations atfeting the
seine and spirit trade.
Mr. BYNG presented a petition from Uxbridge, in
Middlesex, praying that the punishment vf death in cases
of forgery might be abolished.

Lord STANLEY moved for a Return of the amount of
Stamp Duties received on Newspapers in England during
each of the last twenty years. Also for a similar, Return
of the Duties received on Advertisements.

Mr. O'CONNELL took that opportunity of giving no-
tice, that with his consent no Irish business should be
brought on after twelve o'clock at night.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the letter-
press printers of Dublin, against the plan for assimilating
the duties on Irish newspapers, and on advertisements in-
serted in them, with the duties payable on rewspapers and
advertisements in this country. The petitioners acknow-
ledged the friendly disposition shown by the Government
towards the encouragement of literature, especially among
the Irish people, but they added, that these new stamp
duties would most effectually counteract their benevolent
intentian.‘.—Ordered to lie on the table.

Mr.O'CONNELL presented a petition from the traders,
manufacturers, and artisans of the town of Galway, in
favour of the Galway Franchise Bill. The petitioners
stated that that Bill would have the aft et of restoring
them to those rights which their ancestors had exercised,
and they prayed that a petition which had been pre-
sentee, as from the Mayor and Corporation of the town
of Galway, might be distnis ed—the petition not deserv-
ing that character, for though the corporate seal had been
affixed to it, the petition had not been agreed to at a cor-
porate meet,ng.

Mr. HUME said the statement made in this petition,
if truly made and capable of being substmtiated, was
one that considerably affected the privileges of that [louse.
He trusted that the Hon. and Learned Member would
move for the appointment of a Select Committee, to see
whether that statement was capable of being proved.

After a few words from Mr. NOATII and Sir J. NEw-
PORT,

Mr. O'CONNELL stated thit he would, at an early
opportunity, make a motion on the subject.
Mr. O'CONNELL prosented a petition from the Ca-
tholic owners and occupiers of land in the county of Wex-
ford, against the tithe and vestry system ; and another
from a town in Carlow against the Vestry Bill.