The Sun.
London, England, 1837-06-28 00:00:00

liament to impose the same amount or duty on it that v. as:*'
paid by sugar imported. They replied that they knew
nothing of such a declaration. that might be a fair obser-L.
vation enough ; and therefore, in order to prevent parties: ,
from committing their capital in such speculations, it was
necessary for Parliament to interfere, without loss of time,,
and pass a law to do away with such experiments. With,,,
regard to what had fallen from his Hon. Friend the Member 7
for south Durham, all he could say was that the reason,
why they proposed to impose a duty of 2•1-s. on beetroot
sugar was simply because that was the amount of duty on
West India Sugar. He did not believe the .I,Touse oval(1 .
4
bolster up an artificial manufacture of this kind at the ex- .
pense of the revenue.—(Hear, hear.) These were the
grounds on which he proposed the resolution, and because
~..,,
he had been informed that even with a duty of 10s. it o numl
be impossible for beetroot sugar to compete with We-ct ~;,,
India sugar. In fact, unless the duty on the latter article
were raised to cent. per cent. he understood the former could
not succeed, and, that being the case, he thought it better (~
at once to say, " unless you can compete on fair and equal
terms you shall not compete at all." He agreed in thinking
that, so far from serving agriculture by allowing the manu-
facture' of beetroot sugar duty free, it would injure it, and
this might be exemplified by what had occurred with regard
to tobacco. If they were to bolster up the manufacture of
beetroot sugar by means of a bounty they would be cocoa-_/1
raging the investment of capital on false grounds, and it was 4,
for this reason that he proposed placing it under the excise :'°-
laws. He, however, had no objection to the raw material -,
being cultivated, as that might be beneficial to agriculture. .1;
Mr. HUME said, as this was not a fit period for going •:.
into such considerations, he must object to the present g.
motion.
Mr. BERNAL (the Chairman) asked whether it was.
the intention of the Hon. Member for Middlesex to divide ? :.;1:
Mr. HUME replied in the affirmative. .4
The Committee then divided. The numbers were—
For the resolution
Against it l9
Majority for the resolution
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, when the House
resumed.
TITHE COMMUTATION ACT AMENDMENT
BILL.
The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
Sir J. GRAHAM. in reference to the first clause,
begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. P.
Thomson) whether a discretion was not given to the Com-
missioners which it was not intended by the Committee
they should possess when the compulsory part of the Dill
should come into operation.
Mr. P. THOMSON said the discretionary power was
~.
given to the Commissioners for the purpose of preventing 4
fraud, and they could have no object in refusing their sanc-
tion to valuation where no fraud existed. ~
Sir E. KNATCHBULL was of opinion that this dis- t
cretionary power exceeded the limit which the Committee '
contemplated. The discretionary power sanctioned by the
Committee related only to voluntary commutation.
Sir J. GRAHAM expressed himself satisfied with th' .
explanation of the Right Hon. Gentleman ; but if, from .'
experience, inconvenience was found to result from this '.
discretionary power, he thought it should be open to al- .'.
teration in a future Parliament. He thought, however,
the period for voluntary commutation ought to be enlarged
Lord EBRINGTON was decidedly opposed to the ex-
-,
tion of the term for voluntary commutation.
Mr. HEATHCOTE was understood to object to at
enlargement of the time. I
Mr. GOULBURN was of opinion that an extension of
the time would be found advantageous.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL had received letters from
Clergymen, expressing their apprehension that if the timt
was enlarged it would prevent parties from entering into a
voluntary commutation.
The clause was then agreed to.
The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed to,
the Chairman reported progress, and the House resumed.
COMMON LAW COURTS.
On the motion for the third reading of the Common La"
Courts Bill,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hat'
been formerly of opinion that the officers of the Court coup
be reduced, but, after a communication with Lord Den
man, Lord Abinger, and Sir Nicholas Tindal, he had beer
induced to alter his opinion, and should be averse to any
reduction, and would support the Bill if two clauses wets
added. First, that no vacancy should be filled up withou
a certificate from the Judges of the Court and the sanctiot
of Parliament. The order was that no compensation shout,
be given except in particular cases.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY opposed the Bill. Contrary t.,
the recommendation of a Committee which sat upon the
subject for 7 years, this Bill made three additional oflleo
with salaries of 1,2001. a year, and the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, on the recommendation of the Judges, agree'
to this increase. The thing was a judicial job.
Mr. Sergeant GOULBURN deprecated the attacl
made on the Judges, who were influenced by no intereste,
motive, and not made this suggestion without entering int(
the fullest inquiry.
Mr. HODGSON HINDE did not see that a case ha(
been made out for increasi.)g the number of officers.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hope,
the Bill might be read a third time, with the clauses whic
he had proposed, to be added as riders, if thought necessary
The Bill was then read a third time with the provist
which had been propOsed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER move'
that the clause be added that no compensation be allovre,
for the non-appointment of officers.
Mr. TOOKE saw no reason to thank the Chancellor o
the Exchequer for his proposed clause.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL defended the conduc'
of the Judges. Their conduct was above suspicion.
The House then divided, when there appeared—

39

For the Clause
For the Amendment
Majority 22
The clause was then agreed to and the Bill passed.
The Counties (Ireland) Bill was read a second time.
The Sheriffs Fees Bill was read a third time and passed
Lord PALMERSTON brought up a Bill to establis!
certain Courts in China.
MILITIA ESTIMATES.
On the motion of Lord Viscount HO WICK a Selee
Committee was appointed, " to prepare Estimates of th,
Charge of the disembodied Militia for a year, to the 31st 0
March, 1838," consisting of the following Members :—Lori
Viscount Howick, Sir Henry Hardinge, Mr. Fox Maul(
Mr. Hume, Mr. Gore Langton, Colonel Perceval, Mr
Sanford, Mr. Robert Gordon, Colonel Grey, Lord Viscous
Clive, Mr. Eaton, Mr. More O'Ferrall, Mr. Hawes, Lore
Arthur Lennox, Mr. Shaw Lefevre, and all Colonels o
Militia. > .
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, an<
the House adjourned at half-past two o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Jm 27.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsacl
at Five o'Clock.
Mr. ESTCOURT and other Members of the House oi;
Common's brought up the Dublin and Kilkenny RailwB
Bill, the Bolton and Preston Railway Bill, and the Bello
Harbour Bill, stating that the Lords' Amendments wer
agreed to.
Mr. BERNAL and other Members of the Commom
brought up the report of the Committee of the Commons 011
1836, as to the expediency of amending the law relating
to prison discipline ; also Martin's Naturalization Bill.
MUNICIPAL ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The following Noble Lords left the House, to attend
conference with the Managers of the House of Common!:
in reference to this Bill :—The Earl of Shaftesbury, Ea'
Stanhope, the Bish9p of Rochester, Lord Kenyon, Lnro
Bexley, Lord Redesdale, and Lord Faversham. On thci,
return,
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said that the Manager
of their Lordships' House had met the Managers of ti"
Commons, who communicated the reasons of the Common'
for adhering to their amendments.
Lord H AT H E RTON presented a petition from a Union
in Staffordshire, in favour of the New Poor Law Act.
OATHS AND DECLARATIONS.
s I The Duke of RICHMOND brought up the Report of
the Committee to inquire into the substitution of declaration-
for oaths. The Report stated that during the last yeil
500,000 oaths had been diminished, and declarations substi-
tuted for them, and there was no evidence of any inconv,-
nience suffered on this account ; and it hoped that the a;
tention of their Lordships would be turned to the subject
early next Session.
RIGHT OF PRESENTATION RECOVERIES

BILL.
On the motion of the Marquis of WESTMEATH, thlsi
Bill was read a second time.
The Earl of HADDINGTON gave notice, Generll
Thursday he would present a "petition from the
of
A,sembly of the Church of Scotland, for the extension
Church accommodation there.
JACKSON'S ESTATE BILL.
This Bill was read a third time, on the motion of Lord;
SHAFTESBURY. , •
MARRIAGES ACT AMENDMENT BILL'
On the motion that the Roport on this Bill bean eeein(veci:
The Bishop of GLOUCESTER moved, as an'ett„l
ment to the 26th clause, that a certificate might be scn
the Register of the Ceremonies through the P
Agreed to.
The Report was then received.
SHERIFFS' COURTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The Duke of RICHMOND moved the third reading
of this Bill.—Agreed to.
BANKRUPTCY COURT (IRELAND) BILL.,
Lord BROUGHAM moved the postponement ot
v
i
Bid till Thursday, on the ground that it wrts a
•