The Sun.
London, England, 1839-05-03 00:00:00

TUE SUN, LONDON. FRIDAY, MAY 3, 1_9:39.

made to the New Police, that every suggestion from him I i
to the Convention was entitled to the utmost respect. If 1
the Members of the Convention chose to put themselves in
comparison with Mr. Fielden as having a claim on the
public confidence, a very short time would decide that a
larger portion of public confidence was bestowed on Mr.
F:elden than on the Convention.—(No, no.) He: never
knew a public man in whom more confidence was reposed ;
and it was his firm conviction that a declaration of want of
confidence in Mr. Fielden, on the part of the Convention,
would be a publication to the world that the Convention
was not entitled to the confidence which it had enjoyed in
the country.—(No, no.) He should certainly vote for the
motion of Mr. Cleave because he considered that it gave
a proper answer to Mr. Attwood and Mr. Fielden.
Mr. NEESOM supported the amendment. If the National
Petition was presented by Mr. Attwood, and its prayer
was supported by Mr. Fielden, it must be done condition-
ally, that this Convention should sign certain documents.
—( No, no, no.) Allusion had been made to violent lan-
guage, particularly that used by Mr. Vincent, but it
should be remembered that he was the representative of
the working classes.
Mr. WHITTLE said the moment it was alluded to every
member of the Committee expressed his belief that no
such language had been used.
Mr. NEESOM said, that if violent language had been
used, Mr. Vincent was responsible only to the people by
whom Ise bad been elected. He had no confidence in
either Mr. Attwood or Mr. Fielden, and therefore sup-
ported the amendment.
Mr. VINCENT would vote for the amendment. He was
of opinion that the Convention was now in a position to
place the petition in the hands of any Member without
any condition ; and although Mr. Whittle said the Con-
vention would not have to make any condition, the letters
sta'ed that the answer given to the questions put would
guide them as to the course they should adopt when they
presented the petition. It mattered not to the Conven-
tion what line of conduct they adopted in presenting the
petition. If they could not get a .:11ember to present the
petition, they would go to the country with a stronger
case than ever.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. V.) never had
made use of the language attributed to him.--( Hear,
hear.) He belonged to the moral force party. He cer-
had spoken warmly, and would not be bound in his lan-
guage, nor was the Convention answerable for any expres-
sions which he might use. During the time he had been
out he bad been strictly guarded in his expressions. He
contended they ought not to submit to the slightest at-
tempt at intimidation on the part of any Member. It was
all right when Mr. Attwood was at the head of the move-
ment, and no fauit would then have been found. He
would now place the petition in the hands of Mr. Att-
wood and let him do what he liked with it. If he did
not choose to present it he might:let it alone, but let not
the members of the Convention make fools of themselves.
Mr. LOWRY said they had one of two things to consi-
der, either to submit to the request of Mr. Attwood or
Mr. Fielders, or not. If the Convention passed the reso-
lution required, they would be tying up their hands.
They had already come to a resolution not to discuss
ulterior measures till the petition was decided on, and
the Convention reserved the right to decide on the mea-
sures necessary to he adopted if the Legislature refused
their request. He supported the amendment of Mr. Dun-
can for this reason. If Mr. Attwood and Mr. Fielden
would present the petition, the matter would be at rest.
If not, the sooner some other Member was requested to ds
so the better.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARTWELL supported the amendment.
Mr. SKEVINGT ON would object to the petition being pre-
sented by persons who made objections against the conduct
which the Convention had hitherto pursued, without mak-
ing inquiry whether these imputations were or were not
well founded. It would be contrary to their duties if they
did so, as by it they would at once admit that they v,ere
guilty of the calumnies so heaped on them.--( Hear.)
Mr. Recneensoe, after disagreeing with Mr. Attwood
for the line of conduct which he was now pursuing and
condemning the Convention for conduct which, if even
true, was not half so violent as some of the singular
resolutions which he had formerly proposed at public de-
monstrations of the people—(Hear' hear)—still thought
the petition ought to be left in the hands of Messrs. Fiel-
den and Attwood. He thought the responsibility of the
Convention was shared in by those gentlemen as well as
any other member—as they identified themselves with its
acts by contributing to its establishment, as much as any
of the members present.—( Hear, hear.) Would it not
he preposterous that they should be held responsible
for language which might be used by any of their
body when their instructions to these persons were
that they should abstain from using such language.—
( Hear, hear). He thought they ought to get the Peti-
tion, and then let them have the option of refusing to
present it.—(Hear, hear). They did their duty when
they had doneso, and the country would consider that their
duty so far was performed—( Hear, hear).
Messrs. ROGERS, BURN, and MILLS supported Mr.
Cleave's motion.
Mr. MARSDEN and Mr. LOVETT supported Mr. Duncan's
amendment.
Dr. FLETCHER thought they were not competent to take
the petition from the hands of Messrs. Fielden and At-
wood. He had the fullest conviction of the honesty of Mr.
Fielden, and of what he thought are the privileges of peti
tioners—a right which he invariably desires us not to give
up. —( [leer, hear.) If our Society is a treasonable or illegal
Society, Mr. Attwood is as much implicated ;as any other
of the members : and if there is any shade in the degree
of guilt, he is more guilty than many others ; for he it was
who constituted the Convention.—(Hear, hear.) He
would not refer to any language which might have
been used, as it was not proved, except in their
lying newspaper paragraphs that gave the statements
for the purpose of pandering to poll er ; and he
himself was on some occasions in the habit of using
language which those persons had also formerly made
use cf, but which now seemed to be them to be violent—
( Hear, hear.) He would say that this was not a clamorous
disposition on the part of the people, and it was their firm
determination to obtain their pulp ?se, a determina-
tion which they would carry out.---( Hear.) He thought
Mr. Cleave's motion would do all that was necessary for
them to do at present.
Mr. COLLINS defended the conduct of Mr. Attwood.
All that gentleman required was to be put in a position to
repel the charges of the enemies of the people.—
(Cries of " Hear, hear.") This was all he asked, and was
it unreasdnable that he should do so when they knew
how many calumnies had been put out against them ?
Let them deliberate with due consideration—they ought
not to be taken by surprise in such a time—they were now
coming to the crisis, and it would be their duty to uphold
the cause for which they had assembled by strict and
deliberate attention to their present duties. Mr. Collins
continued to impress on the Convention the necessity of
abstaining from making allusion to the gentlemen who
were to present the petition, as to their former expressions,
with regard to the movement, and which exoressions were
not proved to be true. And concluded by stating,
that he agreed that the instructions given to the
missionaries should be sent to the Members who were to
present the petition, in order that they might have an op-
portunity derived from those instructions of what was the
real sentiments of the Convention.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. DONALDSON spoke in favour of Mr. Attwood, but
said he was lately unfortunately misled by persons evily
disposed to the people's interest. He was of opinion that
the petition should be sent agreeably to Mr. Cleave's
motion.—( Hear.)
Dr. M'DowEen said more consequence had been paid
to this discussion than it was really worth. If he was
mak:ng use of violent language here he might be called to
order; if ho made use of such language away from the
Convention, what right had Mr. Attwood to call him to
order for using it. —( Hear, hear.) It was extraordinary
that those two Members (who formerly expressed such love
fur the people) should now be about to pass censure on
them for the supposed use of language which the Conven-
tion was not responsible for.—( Hear, hear.) He thought
the popular course should be to leave the petition in the
hands of the Members without the instructions.—( Hear.)
Mr. PITKEITIILEY supported Mr. Cleave's motion.
Mr. O'CONNOR would move an amendment to be added

to what appeared the most successful amendment. They
had a double duty to perfurm. They ought to be obliged
to Mr. Duncan for pressing the question. Their object was
to get the petition presented by the two best men in the
House of Commons, and he conceived these were Messrs.
Fielding and Attwood. They had as much right to make them
confess for using violent language, which they had formerly
use:', as they had to make us confess what was not proved
Yesterday Mr. Attwood asked him what were the ulterior
measures ; he told him that these ulterior measures were

lose which he, Mr. Attwood, recommended, namely,
strike.—( Hear, hear.) His object in moving the
amendment was, to unite all the Convention in one opi-
nion, which he thought it would do. He did not know
what were the present opinions of Mr. Wakley, but he
would say if they were of the very highest description,
still he thought Messrs. Fielding and Attwood were the
best men to whom the petition should be entrusted.
Mr. CLEAVE-The object of his motion was to free the
Convent ion from the aspersions which were cast upon it ;
and the best mode of doing this was to forwaralk the instruc-
tions which had been drawn up for the government of the
missionaries. These instructions, it would be remembered,
were not drawn up for the occasion, but were agreed upon
long before the charges were made.--( Hear, hear.) This
lie thought was due to the Members of the House,
in which they had but few friends. It was with the
best intentions those Members threw out suggestions
which in their opinion would advance the cause in which
the Convention was engaged, and place its Members' in a
fairer light in the eyes of the world.—( Hear, hear.)
After some explanation the amendment of Mr. DUNCAN
was put, and lost by a majority of eighteen.
Mr. O'CoNNoa's amendment was then proposed, and
was seconded by Mr. HETHERINGTON. It was as follows
" That this Convention believing that the right of peti-
tion has been hitherto considered the constitutional privi-
lege of British subjects, in order to obtain a redress of
grievances, and that the National Petition being the just
exercise of that right, for a perfectly constitutional object,
we cannot consent to any conditions dictated by Members
of Parliament to induce them to present that petition.
That the Committee be therefore empowered to call upon
Messrs. Fielder, and Attwood, for the purpose of insuring
the immediate presentation of the National Petition, and
that the Committee be directed to hand to Messrs. Att-
wood and Fielden the instructions of this Convention to its
missionaries, as a respectful answer to their letters and
resolutions; and that in the event of any condition being
annexed, that in such case the Committee be directed to
appeal to other Member or Members of Parliament to
present the national petition without any conditions; and
that if such Member cannot be found, this Convention will
declare the right of petition a farce."
Mr. O'BRIEN—If they were to accept conditions from
Members of Parliament on the presentation of petitions,
they would eternally disgrace themselves in the eyes of the
country.—( Hear, hear.) These Members had no right to
say of them that they contemplated violent measures. Much
as he respected Messrs. Fielden and Attwood he could not
allow them to say this of the Convention without saying it
was anything but behaving well to the Convention.
—( Hear, hear, hear.) They (the Convention never gave
room for the imputation which those Members had laid on
them, on the contrary, he thought the other party opposed

to them, would be the party that would commence the
ulterior measures here.—( Hear.)
Mr. Bussey rose to order.
Mr. O'BRIEN was not discussing ulterior measures.
The CHAIRMAN agreed with Mr. Bussey.
Mr. O'BRIEN bowed to the decision of the Chairman.
The House of Commons did not interfere with this right
cf petition, which those Members, by thus endeavour
ing to impose conditions on the Convention were
trying to interfere with. (Order, order.) Mr.
O'Brien continued to say that they honoured the
Members by intrusting to them the Petition, and be
would consider it derogatory of its dignity if they should
submit to any condition being imposed on them. He at
once would resign if this were the case.—(Hear, her. )
On a question whichwas raised, whether there could not
be a resumed discussion on the subject, in consequence of
Mr. O'Connor's amendment, a short discussion ensued.
The CHAIRMAN decided that there should not be a dis-
cussion on the amendment. Notwithstanding which the
debate was renewed for some time longer.
The CHAIRMAN then put the amendment, when it was
carried by a majority of six.
Here a most confused and unintelligible discussion
ensued as to whether a new amendment could be put after
the previous amendment had been carried against the
original resolution. After being taken through the laby-
rinth of some dozens of opinions and standing rules of the
Convention, it was in the end discovered that the amend-
ment proposed might be decided on. It was " That the
previous question be put."
It was accordingly put from the Chair, and was lost
by a majority of 21.
Mr. O'Connor's amendment was put as a resolution, and
carried by a large majority.

regularly under discussion, he should be prepared to meet
the Noble Lord, and the House would then see whether
the Noble and Learned Lord would differ from those with
whom he had hitherto acted.

Lord BROUGHAM said the Bill was brought forward
because it was said to be favourable to the negroes ; on
the other hand, if he found that it was intended as a Bill
of Pains and Penalties—and it was not denied that it had
that tendency—he should certainly oppose the measure.
The Marquis of NORMANBY would be perfectly
ready to meet the Noble and Learned Lord on that
point. It was stated that the Bill would have
the effect of postponing the enjoyment of the
elective franchise, but when the Bill came before the House
he would be in a condition to proved; that it would not
defer these rights one moment longer than the time they
were able to enjoy them.
Lord BROUGHAM said, if the Bill was so good a
thing for the negroes, why not extend it to Barbadoes
and the other Colonies?

The Marquis of NORMANBY said the necessity was
obvious. The other Colonies had not refused to legis-
late.

Lord BROUGHAM—Then the Bill is a matter of
punishment, and not of bounty and favour—( Cheers and
laughter)—and be would oppose it, as he had done the
Canada Bill, because it was a penal Act. It was sent,
from the Noble Marquis's confession, for the mischief of
the whites, and not for the advantage of the negroes.
The Marquis of NOR MANBY had admitted that it
had that tendency, and that he would be ready to meet
the Noble and Learned Lord on that ground also.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition in
favour of the Caledonian Canal.
The Earl of ROSE BERRY and the Earl of ZET-
L AND presented petitions in favour of a penny postage.
The Marquis of BUTE presented a petition in favour
of Church Endowments in Scotland.

Lord DUNCANNON brought up the Report of the
Committee on Irish Education.

The Designs Copyright Bill and the Designs Copyrigh
Extension Bill went through Committee.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mar 2.

The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four
o' Clock.

Mr. MACKE NZIE presented a petition from Aber-
deen, complaining of the Aberdeen Harbour Bill, and
praying to be heard by Counsel against certain parts of
that Bill.

Oa the motion of Mr. ESTCOURT, the British Mu-
seum Building Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. ESTCOURT moved that the Standing Order
No. 12 should be repealed, and that the following should
be substituted in place :—That no postponement of the first
meeting of any Committee on a Private Bill, or a petition
for a Private Bill, shall take place unit as notice be given
in the Private Bill Office and in the Committee Clerk's

Office one clear day before the time fixed for such meeting.
Sir E. WILMOT thought it would be for the convenience
of all parties if the Committee, when a selected Member
did not attend, had the power to nominate another in his
room. The Committee in which he was to have sat to-day
was obliged to adjourn, in consequence of the non-attend.
ance of a selected Member, which might have been avoided
if another Member might have been chosen.
Sir T. D. A CLAND said that a similar occurrence had
taken place that day, in the Collumpton Roads Bill.
Mr. SHAW LE FE VRE hoped the Committee of Se-
lection would not be blamed, as no neglect had been com-
mitted on their part. They had sent notes to Members
selected, requesting to know whether they could attend
or not.

- Sir J. Y. BULLER thought a little more time ought
to be given in sending out the notice.
The motion was then agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. Alderman THOMPSON, the
Wearmouth and Tyne Bridge Road Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition from dif-
ferent parishes in Kent, in favour of the South-Eastern
Railway Bill.
Sir EDWARD FILMER presented petitions in favour
of an alteration of the line of the South-Eastern Railway
Bill.
The Perth Harbour and Navigation Bill was road a third
time and passed.
SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY BILL.

Mr. DARBY presented a petition from a parish in Kent
in favour of the South-Eastern Railway Bill.
Captain PEC HE LL presented several petitions in
favour of the Bill.

Sir E. KNATCHBULL then rose for the purpose
of calling the attention of the House to the Petition in
the case of the South Eastern Railway Company. The
House would recollect that it was a petition in behalf of
the South Eastern Railway Company. He would trouble the
House very shortly. A Bill had been introduced, and the
Standing Orders were not complied with, and he now
applied to have the Standing Orders dispensed with.
The execution of the plan had progressed to a considerable
extent, and if this application should be refused, the Bill
would be delayed until next year, and great inconvenience
would arise. All parties were agreed, and there was no
dissentient e oice. He therefore moved that the Bill be al-

loe cd to proceed.
Mr. 110DGES felt grateful to the Hon. Baronet for
having brought forward this proposition in his (Mr. H's.)
absence. The circumstances und( r which the question
otiAinally presented itself to the Standing Orders Com-
mittee were now quite different front what they were at
that time, for now there was no opposition whatever to the
measure.

Mr. BARNEBY said.the proceedings in this case were
unprecedented. There was a Bill, No 1, which passed
the Standing Orders Committee, and No. 2 did not, the
COmmittee reporting that in their opinion the Standing
Orders ought not to suspended. He thought this was a new
Bill, and the Speaker ought to give his opinion, in order
to guide the House to a sate decision. The Bill proposed
a deviation from the original line of upwards of three miles,
and the parties would not have fair play if the Bill
were allowed to pass, for they had been deprived of the
notice required by the Orders.
Mr. HODG ES rose to answer, but he was inter-
rupted by
Mr. BARNEBY, who spoke to order. The Hon.
Member had aiready made one speech upon the Bill, and it
was against the rules of the House that he should make
another,

Sir C. BURRELL said the objection of the Standing
Orders Committee was merely technical, and ought not to
prevail when all the parties interested were consenting to
the alteration.

Captain PECHE LL —The great opposition to this
Bill was from the London and Brighton Railway Com-
pany. They had now withdrawn all opposition, and were
now in favour of the line, as were all the parties whose
land was to be affected. He therefore hoped the House
would not agree to defeat the Bill upon a mere technical
point. .

Mr. DARBY said the parties who opposed the first line
were petitioners for the second. He thought that no
partici could be taken by surprise.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL said the Bill now before the
House was the one in which all the Standing Orders bad
been complied with.

The SPEAKER said it was a very strong proposition
to transfer the substance of a Bill, as to which
the Standing Orders had not been complied with, to a
Bill in which they had been complied wi, h. He
considered the least objectionable course would be to ask
the House to allow the latter Bill to be proceeded with.
O❑ the motion of Sir E. KNATCHBULL the debate
was then adjourned till Monday.
The Rochdale Water-works Bill was received.

Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition, in which he
said he could not concur, from Bristol, praying that
Robert Owen be heard before that House as to his new
philosophy.—(Laughter.)
Mr. BLACKSTONE presented a petition from Wal-
lingford against the power given to Magistrates to support
Popish chaplains for gaols.
Lord A. LENNOX presented a petition from Chi-
chester praying for an extension of religious instruction on
the principles of the Church of England.
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition in favour of a
penny postage. _

Mi.LO(iKHART presented a petition from a parish
in the County of Lanark, prayiug:for au Extension of the
Church of Scotland.

Mr. COLQUHOUN presented three petitions to the
same effect.

Lord G. SOMERSET presented a petition agreed to
at a county meeting in Monmouth, praying that no system of
national education might be established, unless it were
placed under the superintendence of the Clergy of the Es-
tablished Church.

NORTH OF ENGLAND RAILWAY.
Mr. PEASE moved the further consideration of the
Report on the Great North of England Railway Bill.
Mr. BOWES moved a clause compelling (so far as
we could r.mderstand), the Company to complete the
work within a given period.
Mr. PEASE said he was glad that it was not pre.
tended that the Company had conducted themselvesunfairly.
But a similar clause had bean proposed in the Committee,
and disapproved of. The Company had laboured with
great perseverance to effect an important public work ' • and
he hoped the House would not fetter them by this Clausa.
Mr. LAMBTON said he thought the clause would
tend to cast discredit upon the Company, and he hoped
the House would :not agree to it ; for if it was a proper
Clan,e it should have been .ntredueed before. —(Hear. )
Mr. HUME thought there ought to be some general
rule applicable to all railroads.