The Sun.
London, England, 1837-06-17 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS, ..k.vz 16.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the „
Noulsack at
Five o'clock,
the several pri-
vatOe On the
Bills
(m motion o
the
ta of Lord
le
wereS I-I
advanced
E T ESaB r:, Y
stage, and the Royal
Military Canal Bill was read a Nu', time.
Mr. BERNAL, a.nd other Mentl'.-crs of the House of Commons,
brought up the Charity Commis:,ioners Amendment Bill.
Viscount MELBOURNE -gave notice that he would pre-
sent the BriAol petition, referred to the other night, on Monday.
_ _

SMALL DEBTS (SCOTLAND)-BILL.
On the motion of Lard ROSEBER I' the report on this
Bill was brought up and received,
MUNICIPAL ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the Commons
11.,d made ceitain amendments on their Lordships' amendments
to this Bill, and, as he did not anticipate any opposition to it,
he moved that the amendments of the Commons be agreed to.
Lord WY NFOR D said that he dissented from the amend-
ment of the Commons which provided that the person rated to
the greatest amount of poor-rates should preside at elections
where the boroughs were divided into wards. He contended
that the election should be decided by the majority of the votes
of councillors.. He, therefore, moved that the clause should be
altered to that,

The LORD CHANCE LL OR said that the Commons had
conwicd a great deal in another clause, and no doubt, if they
altered the clause, now under discussion, they did so reluc-
tantly. He thought that the clause as altered by the Com-
mons would work better than if amended as proposed by the
Noble and Learned Lord, whose scheme was impracticable
He hoped that the Bill would not be lost this s"-
such an objection.—( Hear.)
Lord ABINGER supported ti—
same as had been adopted -,arnettument, which was the
the ':,ouse of Commons in ano-
ther case.

_.....0n upon

The T - IN •-•
440 t.; ti ANC ELL 0 R said that the clause would
proVide for the case in which the number of Councillors was
equal, which would nut be provided fur if the amendment
were agreed to ; for the original clause gave to the person
the highest rated the casting vote where there was an
equality of votes.
After some further conversation, in which Lord ABINGER
and Lord NV YN FOR I) took part, the House divided, when
there appeared--

For the amendment 63
Against it B4
Majority
The LORD CH A NCE LLOR then moved that the amend-
ment of the Commons to the 20th clause, in reference to the
costs in municipal actions, should be agreed to.
Lord ABINGER said he could not accede to the altera-
tion ; he thought that the costs should be taxed as between
attorney and client, and not as between party and party. He
thought, therefore, that the amendment of their Lordships
should stand.

The LORD CHANCELLOR defended the amendment
of the Ceramons.

The House then divided, when the numbers were—

Contents
Non-contents •

80

Oa clauses 144 atidla
jlo4rsi t,y
The amendment was consequently carried.
The LORD CHANCELLOR moved that the House do
agree to the amendments of the House of Commons. The
clauses related to the expenditure of the Corporations.
The Duke of \VELLINGTON said that it was provided
that the different Corporations should make a statement each
year of all moneys received and expended on account of the
borough, such statement to be prepared in such form and man-
ner as the Secretary of State should direct. These statements
were public documents, and it was his opinion that they should
be audited in the most formal manner. That was the opinion
of the House generally on the former occasion, but he would
not now press the point.
Lord BROUGHAM could not help regretting that the
Noble Duke did not intend to press his amendment; for he
believed that it was the universal opinion of the House that
the amendment of the Noble Duke was a great improvement.
He trusted, however, that his Majesty's Government would
introduce some measure to eff?ct the desirable object of a sa-
tisfactory audit of these accounts.
A Committee was then appointed, to draw up thcir Lord-
ships' reasons for adhering to their amendments.
Oa the motion for bringing up the report on the Grand
Juries (Ireland) Bill,
The Earl of WICKLOW moved an amendment in the Bth
clause, to the effect that if the Grand Jury should fail to pre-
sent the sum mentioned in the certificate, the Court (the
Judges of Assize) should have the power to make an order,
directing the sum mentioned to he raised and levied.
The Marquis of LANSDO\VNE would put it to the House
whether, to effect the purpose desired by the Noble Earl, their
Lordships would postpone the relief which this Bill was in-
tended to confer.

-29

Lord BROUGHAM really hoped the Noble Earl would
re-consider his amendment

The Earl of WICKLOW observed that it was his intention,
on a subsequent occasion, should his first amendment be car-
ried, to move the omission of certain words, so as to leave to
the Grand Jury no option in the matter.
Lord FITZG ERALD should feel bound, if the Noble
Earl pressed his amendment, to give his vote in its favour ;
but at the same time he should do so with regret, inasmuch as
he had himself withdrawn certain amendments, which he con-
sidered of greater importance than the present, from an ap-
prehension that they might have the effect of defeati,g alto-
gether the measure,' which was certainly necessary.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH trusted that his Noble
Friend would not persist in his amendment.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY expressed the same

After a few words from Lord Ellenborough, Lord Brougham,
and the Marquis of Lansdowne,
The Earl of WICKL 0 W had entered that House with a
determination to persist in his amendment, the expediency of
which he still maintained ; and now that he bad been induced
by the observations of his Noble Friends to withdraw that
amendment, he felt in some respect degraded in so doing—he
felt that he was rendering himself a party to the insult which
was offered by part of this Bill to the magistracy of Ireland.
He was not, however, willing to take upon himself the respon-
sibility of pressing his opinion against that which had been so
generally expressed.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the report was
received.

• ____
The Belfast Harbour Bill was read a third time, and passed.
Lord GLENELG moved the second reading of ti.e East
India Officers' Salaries 13il! ; and after a few observations
from Lord Ellenborough, in condemnation of the measure, the
motion u•as agreed to.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Ju.vic 16.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
Several returns were presented pursuant to order.
METROPOLITAN CEMETERY BILL.
Mr. 'l'. DUNCO MB E moved the third reading of this Bill.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented several petitions against the

Bill.
Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition signed by 6,000

of the inhabitants of Lo.-,don against the Bill.
Mr. DUNCOMBE, in Loving the third reading of the
Bill, wished to set the House right with respect to the
real object of the measure. In his (Mr. liuncombe's)
opinion, there never was in the annals of private Bills so
much misrepresentation as there had been with respect to this
measure. From those misrepresentations the public had
formed an opinion that the object of the Bill was to
deprive them of those places of public recreation, Primrose
Hill and Hampstead Heath, which they had enjoyed
from time immemorial.—( Hear, hear.) Primrose Hill,
which, no doubt, lion. Members and the public had an
affection for, was, it was said, to become a church•yard, and
the public to be excluded from it. There never was a more
unfounded statement—a statement made for the purpose of
sisle.ading the public, and to further the ends of other rival
Cemetery Companies. He trusted that the House would do
Lim the justice to believe that, if there were any provision in
the Bill which at all sought to deprive the public of the pri-
vileges which they at present possessed, that lie would be the
last to call upon that House to read such a measure a
third time, or give it any support whatever.—(llear, hear.)
The object of the Bill was to establish a Cemetery in the pariah
of St. John, Hampstead. At present it stood in the Bill the
parish of St. John, Hampstead and Marylcbone. That had
been inserted, because part of the Chalfont estate, which be-
longed to Eton College, was in that parish. The Bill, how-
ever, as he understood it, proposed to confine itself entirely
within the parish of Hampstead. Eton College had offered to
sell to the Company 93 acres of the Chalfont estate if they
thought proper to buy it, and that College had at the
present moment power to cover Primrose Hill and the whole
Of the Chalfont estate with buildings, upon leases of
ninety-nine years. So much for any sacrifices that might be
made of Primrose-hill. If they were committed, it must
be under the Act of Parliament passed in 1826, by which
the whole of Primrose-hill might, if Eton College thought
proper, be coveriid with houses. They were willing, after the
third reading, to insert those memorable words, "or any part
thereof,"if the House should think fit. It must be clear to
every one who had read the Bill that Primrose-hill
would be excepted from the operation of this Bill ; but
almost all the other Cemetery Bills that had passed the House
had at that moment the power to take Primrose-hill; there-
fore the present Bill was the only Bill that could not take
Primrose-hill. There never was representation so false, or
clamour so senseless, as that which had been raised against

this measure. The London Cemetery Company last year ob-
tained three Bills for Cemeteries, one in Kent, one in Surrey,
and one in Middlesex ; and by the Bill for establishing a
Cemetery in Middlesex, they had the power of establishing a
Cemetery in St. Pancras, or any of the parishes adjoining
thereto. There was another Bill that had passed the House,
called the West London Cemetery Bill ; and that Bill had
the power of establishing a Cemetery in any place within ten
miles of Hyde-park corner. The real secret of the opposi-
tion to this Bill was this. The whole of this unjustifiable,
unjust, and, he would almost say, dishonest, opposition to the
Bill, was entirely. got up by a few interested individuals who
were trying to defeat it, because they knew it would establish
a competition which they were extremely afraid of encountering.
-The promoters of the preseqt Bill proposed to build a church
or chapel within the neighbourhood, one-fourth of the sittings
in which were to be appropriated to the poor. The chapels
attached. to all the other Cemeteries were entirely confined to
the performance of the burial service ; but this was to be a
church in aid of the parish-church of I lampstead. He men-
tioned this, because a representation had been made
by the Church Commissioners, that many individuals
who were living in the parish of Hampsteact bad •-•
• about two miles before they could 0, ins:•", g°
a church, and