The Sun.
London, England, 1837-07-11 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his scat on the Woolsack
at Five o'clock.

Lord PORTMAN brought up the report on the Bath
Gas Bill.

MESSAGE FROM THE QUEEN DOWAGER.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that he and the
deputation appointed to wait on the Queen Dowager with
their Lordships' Address had waited on her Majesty, and
had received the following answer :
"My Lords,—l thank you most sincerely for your
Message of Condolence, and for the deep sympathy you
express on the afflicting loss I have sustained.

" It shall be my anxious study to merit the respect and
affection of the British nation, and I shall endeavour to
prove my gratitude for this touching mark of your affection
for the widow of your late excellent Sovereign."
The Noble Lord concluded by moving that the answer
be inserted on the journals.—Agreed to.
PUNISHMENT OF DEATH BILL.
Lord DENAIAN moved that the House go into Com-
mittee on this Bill. He said that lie did not think it would
have the effect of increasing crime, but rather of diminish-
ing its extent considerably.
Lord WYNFORD believed that this would be a most
dangerous alteration of the law, and it was one he has de-
cidedly opposed to. The Noble Lord concluded by moving,
as an amendment, that the Bill should be committed that
day three months.

The Earl of DEVON said that although the Bill had
been introduced at a late period of the Session, as the prin-
cipal legal legal authorities of the country, after considera-
tion, thought it a wise and judicious measure, he should
give it his support.
After a few further observations from Lord \VYN-
FORD the House resolved itself into a Committee on the
Bill.

Lord ELLENBOROUGII thought that setting fire to
any of her Majesty's men-of-war ought to be considered a
capital crime, and should be punished with death.
Lord COLCHESTER thought the seduction of any
person on board her Majesty'‘ ships to commit a crime was
a greater crime than the committal of the offence itself.
Lord DENMAN said that great difficulty existed in
proving the seduction. If any Noble Lord thought there
was any doubt as to the construction of the Act as it wss
now proposed, it was competent for him on the third read-
ing to introduce a clause to correct any errors that existed.
Lord BROUGHAM said the repeal of the Acts in
question would not alter the law as supposed, for they only
contemplated the act of seducing a soldier to commit mutiny
where the crime had not been completed.
Lord WYNFORD wished that the punishment of
death should be preserved ; alio in smuggling cases, where
the parties were guilty of firing on any of his Majesty's
ships, thereby endangering the lives of twenty or thirty
men ; or where they beat the officer, almost to the de-
privation of life.

Lord COLCHESTER rose, and was left speaking.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF Jul.r 10.
DUNDEE WkTERWORKS.
The Earl of RADNOR moved the third reading of the Dun-
dee Water-works Bill. The Noble Duke upon whose motion
the clause was struck out, which contained the vital principle,
he believed was not present when the Bill was iu Committee.
If their Lordships allowed the Bill to be read a third time,
he should move that the clause which had been struck out
should be ad led by way of rider.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH said that after the rote he
bad given upon this Bill three nights ago, it was impossible
he could accede to the motion of the Noble Earl. If large
manufactories in or near Dundee were in want of water, he
was rather surprised the proprietors of these manufactories did
not themselves come forward and provide the means of fur-
nishing a most ample supply of water. It was on principle,
and principle alone, that he objected to the clause.
Lord W HA RNCLIFFE also objected to the clause.
The Earl of RADNOR said that the number of peti-
tioners who were in favour of the Bill were six times the
number of those against it; and those who would be made
liable to pay did not object to the clause. He did not
pretend to say he knew of his own knowledge any reason why
there should be this compulsory clause demanding payment,
although perhaps the Noble Duke might be able to furnish a
very good reason ; but one reason which a witness gave before
the Committee for the necessity of the clause was that the
Scotch were very cautious.--( A laugh.)
The Earl of II ADDINGTON remained of the same opi-
nion as he had expressed the other evening, and therefore felt
bound to oppose the clause.
The Earl of CAMPERDOWN lamented the objections
that was now taken to the clause had not been taken in
Committee. If this clause were rejected, the Bill
would be altogether destroyed ; there would he no time to in-
troduce another Bill this session, and the inhabitants of Dundee
would be deprived of a great boon, and of a comfort which
they at present were greatly in need of.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the gallery
was cleared for a division, but none took place, the re-intro-
duction of the clause being negatived.
Lord DUNCANNON moved the second reading of the
Reform of Parliament (Ireland) Bill.
Lord It EDESDA LE thought this one of the most
monstrous Bills which had ever been presented to
either House of Parliament.__( Hear, hear, hear.) It was
ordered to be printed seven days after the Queenl4 mes-
sage was communicated to the Houses, that no important
business should be brought forward—that was, after it was
decided that a general election should take place immediately,
and it was a Bill for altering the manner of taking the
polls in Ireland. It bore the title of the Reform of
Parliament (Ireland) Bill : in place of that it should be de-
nominated the Dublin and Cork Elections Bill. It was a de-
cided
and disgraceful job, and therefore ho called upon
the House to stop its further progress upon the most
constitutional grounds. Its real object errs to disfranchise a
number of voters in Dublin and Cork, and was a mere
electioneering manoeuvre on the eve of a general election—
(Loud cries of " Hear, hear)—and most strange to say,
it was brought in by the lion. Member for Cork to disfran-
chise those very persons whose interest he was sent to Parlia-
ment to protect. He was assisted most strangely by the
Attorney-General for Ireland, so that they had the spectacle
the 1,
of 1 leis law officer of the Crown
haiscsistiigincisonu one of
hadfthemevoesrt
dhiesagrrda.ce f
He
lee ltercutsitoednee ring jobs of which thei i
the Bill had now gone as far as their
Lordships would permit it, and that it would meet with its
proper fate—rejection.—( Cheers.)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE did not think the Bill
justified the expressions used by the Noble Lord, or that the
course pursued by the other House with respect to it de-
served the name of a tyrant majority.
The Duke of WELLINGTON deprecated the introduc-
tion of a measure like the present after it had been stated by
her Majesty's Ministers that they did not intend to introduce any
new public measures. He thought his Noble Friend was perfectly
justified in characterising the Bill as he had done, and he (the

Duke of Wellington) would join with him in his opposition to
the further progress of the
Lord Si R A rroito defended the Bill:
The r,aH of WICKLOW the thotnt
for the introdiietient of. iVits inoptiottune,
and tended to fast §l3§pjc.T.;titib its proffiti.le'rs. . thoUght
;herb inl.tfty would he eft•etCd by the
,paSSing of the measure
than postponing it till nest Cession. lie would theiefuEe
port the motion for the. Heetkoii or the
The LORD 'C'i-iANV:;i3LL'iII tb fended the Bill, theonly
obj:,et or .:hich was to carry iwo effect the intentions of the
form,r Act.

Lord WITARNCLIFFE oppoed the second reading of
the Bill.

The Nfarooi! of LANBDOWNE trusted the House would
eithee idjoutu the deb ate oh the NIL or allow it to be mad
a second tithe, in order that it might eo tibilithittee)
where the oblettinhatAe if•inilses might be struck out.
Lord OA At!: supported the Rill.
On the motion c.f Lord DUNCANNON the debate was
adjourned during pleasure, and the two clauses were ordered
to be expunged, as desired by the Commons.
On the motion of Viscount DUNCANNON, the Ilouse
resumed.

Lord BROUGHAM said that the Bill appeal-P(1 to be as
much a matter a course as any Bill he ever heard of. It had
been introduced to afford facilities to the voters, and if tl-eir
Lordships per.tevei-ed in rejecting the Bill, the expression of
a " tyrannical majority " might be applied, perhaps, with
greater truth to that than to the other House.

Lord ELLEN BOROUGH said that if the inconvenience
h.id been experienced, the Bill certainly ought to have been
introduced before. lie objected, bon ever, to tha details of
the Bill, and that was an additional reason for his voting
against it.

-The Earl of GL ENG A LI, said that he knew persons who
had registered in at least a dozen places under the present
system. He, t'icrcfore, trusted that the lists would be revised
annually.
Viscount DUNCANNON said that he trusted to see an
alteration in the Reform Bill for Ireland, for under the pre-
sent system it was nearly impossible to have a fair election.—
( Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of L ANSDOWNE said that the House of
Commons ought to be the best judge of the number of polling
booths which might be required at an election. This Bill,
which was to effect that object, had been sent up the other
House, and would the House reject it merely because a disso-
lution was expected ?
The Earl of WICKLOW would ask whether 600 voters
could not be polled in five days?
Viscount DUNCANNON would undertake to say that
1,100 voters could not be polled in five days.
Tho Earl of WINCHILSEA said that, according to the
statements of the Noble Lords opposite, at least 200 voters
had been deprived of the opportunity of voting at former elec-
tions ; and why, he would ask, had this Bill been delayed by
the Attorney-General to the eve of an election? He thought
that the case could not have occurred before, and he therefore
could have no hesitation in voting for the motion of his Noble
Friend.

The Earl of R A DN OR said if those electors were entitled
to vote would it be just to deprive them of the means of doing
so in consequence of the neglect of the Attorney-General ?
Instead of Noble Lords on their side of the House tampering
with the franchise he should say it was Noble Lords on the op-
posite side.
The Duke of RICHMOND said, as the House would come
to a division on the Bill he would make a few observations
before he gave his vote. If there were not sufficient accom-
modation to take all the votes the result would be that the
electors would have to fight up to the poll, and the most
popular and numerous party would, of course, carry the day.
One of the greatest benefits conferred by the Reform Bill was
the increase of the polling places, and as he thought that this
Bill would only be carrying out the same object he trusted that
the Noble Lord would withdraw his motion.
The House then divided, when the numbers were--
For the Bill
Against it
Majority 3B
The Bill was consequently lost.
The Civil Courts ( Ireland) Bill passed through Committee.