The Sun.
London, England, 1837-02-11 00:00:00

CORPORATION OF LUDLOW.

Mr. BLACKBURNE held in his hand a petition from'
the mayor, aldermen, and common council of Ludlow, which
required some degree of attention from the House. They
prayed that some means might be adopted to give an oppor-
tunity of remedying a great grievance that occurred in con-
sequence of the conduct of those persons who had filled the
office of councillors of the borough. On the 25th of Dec.
1835, the old council went out of office ; and, on the 26th
of the same month the new council was elected. It was
an entirely new body of persons ; there was not one of
them that belonged to the old corporation. There was a
clause in the Act which provided that as soon as the coun-
cil was elected all the deeds, papers, and documents of
every des:ription which belonged to the old council should
be immediately transferred into the hands of the new ; and
for the purpose of enabling the new council to put into effect
a clause in the Act of Parliament of great benefit to the
corporation, and one which was inserted for the specific
purpose of preventing any disposition of property on the
part of the old corpoation the 27th clause was inserted,
which enacted that no disposition of property on the part
of the old corporation should be valid, which took
place after the sth of June, 1835—unless it were
done under some previous valid covenant or agreement.
That was to prevent the old corporation from getting rid
of their property when they had no longer any autho-
rity to dispose of the funds. The Act passed on the 9th
of September, 1835, but the old corporation of Ludlow,
instead of giving up the papers and other documents to
the now one, thought fit on the 23d of December, two
days before they went out of office, to make an order
placing in the hands of certain Bankers all their
deeds, papers, documents, and books as a security
for a balance of an account, amounting to 3,0001., due by
them. It appeared, that at the time of the passing of the
Bill, or shortly afterwards, the old Town-council were
somewhat indebted to their bankers ; but between that
period and December, 18:35, they continued to increase
their balance 1,300/. The new corporation, on coming
into office, made repeated applications for the books, deeds,
&c., but in vain. By a clause in the Act, after the ex-
piration of six months no interference could be made with
any act of the old Town-council, and accordingly it was
the interest of that body to withhold all knowledge of
their proceedings until that time had elapsed. They,
therefore, took this method of keeping them in igno-
rance of what really had been done. It could he re-
collected that there were certain Charity funds in
existence, which the Hon. Member for Ludlow was
anxious should not be withdrawn from the control of
the old trustees. The Member for Ludlow, who was one
of the old Town-council, had a house in that town, called
the Charlton Arms, in which he had a life-interest of 32/. a
year. On the 28th of October, 18;35, they came to a re-
solution that 500/. be paid to Mr. Charlton to alter the
house according to a plan specified, and Mr. Charlton hav-
jog come before them said ho-would. have no objection pro-
vided he were allowed 501. for altering the road to it. The
old Corporation, not content with giving him the 500/. and
their thanks, which any reasonable person might consider
sufficient, gave him the 501. he then asked, and on the 23d
of December, 1835, they gave him 50/. more, making in all
6001., to repair a house in which he had a life interest of
SW. a-year. A suit was instituted in Chancery, and after
certain proceedings new trustees of the charity were ap-
pointed by the Chancellor.

Major I3EAUCLERK rose to order. He put it to
the Hon. Member whether it was fair in the absence of the
lion. Member for Ludlow, to go into a discussion of this
matter.

Mr. BLACKBURNE would only further say that he
wished the petition to he printed, and have it referred to
the Committee now sitting on Mr. Charlton's case. He
did not see why the inhabitants of Ludlow should be pre-
vented from stating their case to the House.
Sr G. CLERK said the Committee of Privileges were
not inquiring into the merits dale suit in Chancery. The
papers he understood were now placed in the hands of the
proper officer of that Court, and if the case were not pro-
perly adjudicated upon in would be time enough to bring it
before the House.
Mr. BLACKBURNE—If allowed to proceed, would
show the bearing of the facts stated in the petition upon the
matter now under investigation before the Committee.
The subject matter before the Chancellor was, who should be
appointed trustees. He had nothing to do with the property;
and if it was found the propetty of the borough had been
wasted on one of its Members, surely he had a right to pre-
sent to the House a petition, complaining of that, and ask-
ing the House to prevent that mischief being repeated.
He therefore proposed bringing up the petition ; and, inas-
much as the Committee of Privileges were inquiring
whether the Hon. Member for Ludlow bad been guilty of
a contempt, there could be no doubt that the facts stated
in the petition ought to be laid beforo that Committee.

Sir EDWARD KNATCIIBULL said, the contempt
,f Mr. Charlton had nothing to do with the deeds. If the
!barge against Mr. Charlton had arisen out of any con-
tempt from the nun-production of the deeds, there might
have been something in the argument of the Hon. Gentle-
man who had just sat down. Under all the circumstances,
be trusted the Hon. Member would take the advice of the
Hon. Member for Surrey.
Mr. CLIVE, on behalf of his Noble relative, would
Amtent himself by sa:ing that they courted inquiry to the ut-
most extent to which it would be carried.—( Hear.) They
did not shrink from it—on the contrary they courted it.
In justice to the lion. Member for Ludlow, to whom he
had stated the nature of the petition, he was bound to say
that that Honourable Gentleman had stated he
as perfectly ready at all times to meet any in-
quiry that might he instituted. With these observa-
tions he should sit down. It was for the House to determine
what it would do in a matter of this kind, and be should
make no observation as to the petition being introduced in
the Hon. Member's absence.
The SPEAKER inquired of the Hon. Member for
Huddersfield, what course he meant to pursue with regard
to the petition ?
Mr. BLACKBURNE would move that it be referred
to the Committee.
Sir G. CLERK objected to that. The Committee had
no right to go into the case of the Ludlow charity, and be
should therefore move that the petition be laid on the table.
Mr. C. WOOD made a few ob;ervations which we
could not hear.

The SPEAKER thought that as the petition (lid not
relate to a question of privileges, it ought not to be referred
to a Committee of Privileges.. It was not usual to refer
a petition to a Committee, unless the subject of the petition
came within the matters referred to the Committee.
Upon the pima facie statement of this petition, it was
clear it did not come within the matters referred to the Com-
mittee of Privileges, and therefore probably the Hon.
Member would move that it be laid upon the table.
On the motion of -Mr. BLACKBURNE, the petition was
then laid upon the table.
CHURCH-RATES.

Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from Sal
ford, praying for the abolition of Church-rates withou
commutation.

vV
..... -.....-...
Mr. POTTER presented petitions from Leicester, and
from the congregation of St. Bennett's Chapel, Lincoln, for
the abolition of Church-rates. The Hon. Member then
presented a similar petition from Wigan, signed by 4,014
persons, being the greatest number that ever signed a
petition from that place.—(Cries of " Ilear,hear.") It was
signed by Churchmen, Roman Catholics, and Dissenters.
The petitions expressed entire confidence that His Majes-
ty's Ministers would introduce a measure for the Abolition
of Church-rates, and that there would be no attempt to
make good that rate in any other way at the cost of
the public.—(Hear, bear.) He entirely concurred in the
prayer of the petition.
WINDOW TAX.

Sir SAMUEL WHALLEY presented a petition from
the inhabitants of Marylebone, praying for the Repeal
of the- Tax on Windows.—(Hear, hear.)
POOR LAWS.

The HoN. MEmnEn. also presented a petition from the
great Radical Association of Marylebone, praying for the
immediate introduction of Poor Laws into Ireland.

Major BEAUCLERK presented a petition, as we
understood, from Leicester, praying the House would take
into its consideration the present Poor Law Amendment
Act.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. Sergeant GOULBURN cordially supported the
petition. This was no party question, and he sincerely
trusted the House would amend the Act of last Session,
which he believed had been productive of the greatest in-
jury and injustice.—(Hear, hear.)
MACKEREL FISHERY.

Captain PE CHELL presented a petition, very nume-
rously signed by the owners and masters of vessels em-
ployed in the Mackerel Fishery, complaining of certain
grievances. They stated that their property, to the amount
of 10,0001., was embarked in this fishery, and that on the
nights of the 3d and 4th instant, in consequence of the
oppressions exercised by the French fishermen, they had
lost property to the amount of several hundred pounds.
This was a very ancient grievance. Remonstrances had
been made on the subject since 1829, but no redress had been
afforded. This was the petition, not of the crews, but
of the owners and masters of vessels ; and owing
to the circumstances be had stated, a very large body of
men were at this moment out of employment. In conse-
quence of the French vessels being so much better manned,
all attempts at retaliation were wholly out of the question.
As he meant to draw the attention of the House to the
circumstance within a very short time, be would not at
that moment occupy more of their time, and would only ex-
press a hope that his Majesty's Government will at once
take the subject into its consideration. He would only add,
that whilst the French fishermen prevented our fishing
vessels from approaching within less than nine miles of their
coast, their vessels came within a boat hook's length of our
shore.

Mr. LABOUCHERE said that it was necessary for
him to make a few observations, lest those gentlemen who
did not know more of the subject, should be induced to
believe that the Government had been guilty of great no-
gligence, in allowing such proceedings to take place, with-
out affording a speedy and effectual remedy. He would
engage to say, that if the facts stated by his Hon. and
Gallant Friend were embodied in the shape of a Memorial,
and sent to the Board of Trade, no time would be lost in
communicating with the Admiralty ; and as soon as inquiry
was made, and they had reason to believe that the facts
were as stated, no time should be lost by that department in
affording sufficient protection. He did not know whether
the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman complained of the terms
of the treaty with France.—( Hear, hear, from Captain
Pechell.) Of course that was a very different matter. If
that treaty had not been properly observed, or if any in-
fraction of it bad taken place, no time should be lost in
making the proper representations through the Foreign-
office. He would only say that the most speedy and effec-
tual way of remedying any injury that had occurred to the
Hon. and Gallant Member's constituents, would have been
in the first place to have memorialised that department of
the Government to which the matter more properly be-
longed, and if measures of redress were not speedily taken,
then it would have been the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman's
duty to have come to that House.
Captain PECHELL said that remonstrances had been
made on the subject over and over again. As to what was
his duty, he considered his duty to be to present to that
House the petitions that were sent him by his constituents.
When his constituents sent him a memorial he would be
most happy to lay it before that department to which it
referred. He had known many instances in which protec-
tion had been refused by Government. He would not say
that the present Government had not shown every disposi-
tion to afford redress, but he believed that it was not in
their power to compel the French Government to preserve
the law of equity or the principles of justice.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said, that when the Hon. and
Gallant Member complained of treaties, be should recollect
that the treaty in question was a very ancient one, and that
there must be two parties to every treaty.
tAfter a few words from Mr. ROBINSON,

Captain PECHELL said, that there had been remon-
strances made to the French Government, and he would
now wait to see what notice of the matter would be taken
by the Government here.
The petition was then ordered to lie on the table.
NEWSPAPER POSTAGE.

Dr. BOW RING said, that on Monday next he would
move for returns respecting communications between this
country and France in regard to the transmission of News-
papers ; he would do so in order to show the effect of the
late treaty.