The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-20 00:00:00

CORN LAWS.

Colonel POWELL presented a petition from Bolton
against the Corn Laws.

SLAVERY.

Mr. BLACKBURNE presented a great number of peti-
tions for the abolition of negro apprenticeship.
Lord E BRING TON presented similar petitions from Sid-
mouth, and other places in Devonshire.
IRISH POOR LAWS.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition, signed by eight
hundred of the principal mercantile men of all parties in Dub.
lie, against the Irish Poor Law Bill. The petition had been
agreed to at a meeting held at the Mansion House, the
Lord Mayor in the Chair, and it would have received a con-
siderable number more of signatures if there had been
time. The Honourable and Learned Member presented a
petition to the same effect from the parish of St. Nicholas
Within, Dublin; also petitions from the parishes of St.
John and St. Andrew, Dublin, for the abolition of the ap-
prenticeship system in the colonies ; also a petition from the
inhabitants of Dublin, complaining of the oppressive nature
of tolls exacted, under a private Bill, on the road between
Dublin and Limerick ; also a petition from a place in Scot-
land, against further endowment to the Established Church ;
also from the parish of St. Michael and St. John, against the
Rate-paying Clause in the Irish Poor-law Bill ; and also,
from the same parish, for the abolition of Tithes.
Also a petition from the county of Kerry, against the
Irish Poor-law Bill. Another from the county of Tyrone,
signed by several thousands, to the same effect. Also a peti-
tion from the parish of St. Andrew, Dublin, against the pre-
sent mode of trying Election Petitions. Also a petition from
the Dublin Trades' Union, praying that the " Spottiswoode
Gang" might be indicted.—(Laughter.) The Hon. Member
presented several other petitions against the Irish Poor-law
Bill, but we did not distinctly catch the names.
Lord SANDON presented several petitions, but owing to
the very indistinct tone in which the Noble Lord spoke, we
could not collect the purport of them, except that one or two
were against the Small Tenements Rating Bill.
LORD DURHAM'S MISSION.
Th Marquis of CHANDOS, seeing the Noble Lord the
Secretary of State for the Home Department in his place,
wished to know if he would have any objection to lay upon the
table papers connected with the appointment of Earl of Durham.
He wished also to know from the Noble Lord if he had any
objection to their being laid also on the table a return of the
expenses of Lord Gosford's mission ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that with respect to
the production of the papers connected with the Earl of
Durham's appointment, he had had some conversation with
the Noble Earl on the subject, in which he had stated to
him grounds which rendered it necessary for him to apply to
the Colonial Office for a report on the subject. He
hoped the Noble Lord would postpone his question until
that report was laid on the table, as he would then
be in a much better situation to answer him. With
respect to the returns of the expenses of Lord Gosford's
mission they were in the hands of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, and he could give no answer on the subject.
Sir G. SINCLAIR wished to know from the Noble Lord
whether the second reading of the Mutiny Bill was to come on
to. night?
Lord J. RUSSELL replied in the affirmative.
Sir G. SINCLAIR then gave notice that on going into
Committee on the Bill, he would move for certain returns
connected with the system of rewards and punishments in the
British army.
Sir H. HARDINGE said that it would be a great conve-
nience to the House, if the Noble Lord would fix the day they
wereto go into Committee on the Army Estimates.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the answer which he would
give depended very much on his knowing whether or not
there was to be any discussion on the subject. From the
question put to him by the Right Hon. Baronet, he appre-
hended that there would be some discussion, and he should
therefore fix Monday next.

In answer to a question from Sir E. KNATCHBULL,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he would proceed with the
Report on the Army Estimates, after the Mutiny Bill on
Monday next.
An Hos. MEMBER on the Opposition benches, begged to
ask whether the Noble and Learned Lord (Advocate) had
received any intelligence respecting a riot having occurred
upon the day the Fifeshire Yeomanry were disbanded ?
The LORD ADVOCATE said an apprehension existed
such would be the case, but no riot occurred ; and if it had
taken place, the Yeomanry Cavalry would have been the most
improper force that could be employed to put it down.—( Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.")
CHURCH LEASES.

Sir J. GRAHAM, seeing that the Committee on Church-
leases was about to be re-appointed, begged to remind the
Noble Lord that a Committee bad been appointed in June
last. On the 17th of July that Committee had reported to
the House, and the report was ordered to be printed. No
person connected with the House appeared to be cognizant of
that report, and he wished to ask the Noble Lord whether
it would not be important that the evidence of the last
Committee should be in the hands of Members before another
Committee was appointed.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not know that any evidence
had been taken before the Committee of last year. Their
report consisted of a very few lines only, and whether the
order of the House for printing the Report had been complied
with or not, he (Lord J. Russell) could not say.

SCOTCH LAW BILL.
Mr. PRINGLE begged to ask the Learned Lord
(Advocate) at what time it was likely that the
Scotch Law Bills would come up. The Scotch Members
were kept in attendance two or three times a week when
there was not the least chance of their coming on. The
Learned Lord must surely have sufficient influence with the
Government to be able to fix a night for their discussion. He
wished to know particularly, whether it was likely that the
Sheriff Courts' Bill would come on in the course of the week.
The LORD ADVOCATE said that the subject last ad-
verted to by the Hon. Member might be brought under the at-
tention of the House any evening, but he could not, in the
present state of the House, take upon himself to fix any day
for proceeding with the measure the Hon. Member had re-
ferred to.