The Sun.
London, England, 1838-08-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. Aucusr 6.
The SPEAKER took the Chair nt the usual hour.
On the motion of Captain ALSAGER, the St. Saviour's
Grammar School Bill was read a second time.
Mr. PRA ED moved the third reading of Lethbridge's
Divorce Bill.

Read a third time, and passed.
Mr. MARTIN presented a petition from Team, against
the monopoly of the Bank of Ireland. Also one from the
same place, praying for the total abolition of tithes.
Mr. DOTTIN presented a petition from Southampton,
against the sale of Beer Act.
Mr. FIE LD EN presented several petitions, of which the
followinc, are the greater number :—from Hyde, Chowbent,
Huddersfield, Leigh, Paisley, Padiham, signed by many inha-
Uitants of those places, and praying that Mr. Robert Owen
may be heard at the bar of the House, in explanation of his
principles of Social Reform ; from certain merchants and
manufacturers of Oldham, praying that warehouses fur bonded
corn may be instituted in the great mariufaetwing towns, a
measure vs hich the petitioners felt satisfied would be advanta-
geous to the country ; a petition from Compton to the
same effect ; petitions for Universal Suffrage, Annual
Parliaments, and Vote by Ballot from Halifax, signed
by 1,488 inhabitants ; Elland, Laytonstall, Almondbury,
Wordsworth, Hyde, Medgeley, signed by 900 ; Thorn-
ton, signed by 1,000; Stainland, by 400 ; Queenshead, 440;
Mixenden, 310 ; North Thomren, 420 ; Amber Thornley,
552 ; Colderis Haytonstale, 540 ; and from Mr. James Wil-
kinson, as Chairman of the Cobbett Club, to the same effect ;
from Mr. James Brooker, of Elphinstone, Sussex, Chairman
of a meeting of that and the several surrounding parishes,
praying for a repeal of the New Poor. law Bill ;
from Joseph Peham, of Boxgrove parish, Sussex, com_
plaining of having been committed to gaol for three weeks
for having refused to maintain his daughter's bastard child, he
being unable to do so, and praying the House to protect him
from the repetition cf such punishment, with which he was
threatened by the Clerk of the West Hampnet Union. From
375 male and 121 female inhabitants of Maldon, Essex, bur-
gesse;, and their wives and daughters, complaining of the un-
Christian character of the r?w Poor-I,w, and pray ing for amend-
ments. From tie hand• loom weavers of Norvtich, setting
forth their miserable conlition, and praying for an Act to re-
gulate the rate of wages.
Mr. M. PHILIPS presented a petition from Manchester
against the Beer Act.
Str E. WILMOT pcesented a petition from Coventry
against the Parochial Assessments Bill.
Mr. BROTIIERTON presented a petition from South-
ampton against encouragement to idolatry in India.
On the motion of Mr BERNAL the Lords' Amendments
to the Fisheries ( Ireland) Bill were agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. LABOUCHERE the Lords'
Amendments to the Coal Trade (Port of LOndon) Bill were
agret-d to.
On the motion of Mr. A GLIONBY the Lords' Amend-
merits to the Recovery of Tenunents Bill were agreed to.
Lord STANLEY presented a petition from Lanark against
idolatrous worship in Indi t.
Lord STANLEY seeing the Right Honourable Gentleman
the Secretary for the Treasury, in his place, begged to put a
question to him with reference to a Bill that stood for a second
leading to day. He had received communications upon the
subject of that Bill, to-day, begging for its postponement. He
wished, therefore, to know whether the Right Hon. Gentleman
would postpone the second reading for a few day's,
Mr. F. MAULE believed that the Bill alluded to, the Dis-
tricts Courts in Boroughs Bill, ougkt to be well known and
considered in the country, and that proper time had not been
allowed for that purpose. He would therefore have no objec-
tion that it be postponed. He moved that it be further con.
sidered that day three months.
The Stamps Die Bill, the Valuation of Land (Ireland)
Bill, the Bank of Ireland Repayment Bill, and the Militia
Pay Bill were severally read a third time and passed.
PENSIONS BILL.

On the Order of the Day being read for the third read.
ingof
theCPenNsNionEsLßL ill'
Mr. O'osaid he should move the postponement
of the third reading till to-morrow, because he wished to have a
clause inserted in the Bill for suspending the payment of a
pension to a lady during the life of her husband. Nothing
could be said against the lady, because she toad had to go
through an ordeal, and she came out of that ordeal perfectly
pure. Her husband had been convicted by Sir John Nichol
of having conducted himself with great cruelty to her, and he
conceived the pension ought to be suspended. The pension
was in fact not paid 'to her at all, but to the husband.
Sir John Nichol having declared the proofs of cruelty
.fully maintained against the Marquis of Westmeath, decreed
the Marchioness alimony to the amount of 7001. a year, and
allowed her the pension of 385/. a year. That decree was
appealed from by the Marquis of Westmeath, and the decision
of the Court of Appeal was pronounced by the Vice-Chancel-
lor. The case was reported in 3.1 Knapp, 45. The
superior Court concurred in tke judgment of Sir
John Nichol against Lord Westmeath for cruelty to
the lady, but the judgment was reformed to this ex-
tent—that it being established Lady Westmeath had
a pension of 3851 a year, the Court of Appeal struck out the
pension, and thus reduced the payment of Lord Westmeath's
estate from ioo/. a year to 315/. ; that was, they gave Lord
westmeath credit for the pension. Nobody, he was sure,
would think Load Westmetth ought to be aaalded a pension.
for cruelty to his lady. The and Learned Gentleman
submitted the House ought t i allow him to bring up the clause
for suspending the payment of the pension daring the Marquis of
Westnieat h's actinic. The income of the lady would then he 7001.
a-year. The patent, though granted for life, was repealable by
law. But he (Mr. O'Connell) did not wish that step
to le tak, n—he the House to act in analogy
to it ; and st eing that the p..1:5;00 was no longer pay-
able to the Marchioness, but to the Marquis of Westmeath,
he hoped the House would agree to the clause, to introduce
whhh lie now asked that the third reading of the Bill might be
postpone I till morrow.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said since the Learn,d
Member had admitted this tension to be lawful, the Marchio-
ness had a vested inte: est in it during her life ; and no legal pro-
ceeding could‘take it away from her—only an Act Parliament.
Would it then be just to deprive an individual of a vested
right by Add Parliament?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. must re-
sist the introduction of the clause, as it would be es_
tablishing a bad preced: nt to assent to it. The opinion
of the House might as well taken now, as he was
bound, on the recAumendation of the Committee, to re-
sist the introduction of this clause.
Mr. O'CONNELL believed the Committee did not take
this int a eonslderatioa at all.
The KITORNEY-GENERAL said this pension was
vested iu thr lady, but it was not vested in her for the benefit
of her husband.

After a fe:,stlemarks from the Coancellor of the Exchequer,
S E. Wilma, and O'C ,nnell, the amendlnent vvai ne-
gatived. and the 13d1 r ,ad a third time, and pigoed
DUCHIES OF CORNWALL AND LANCASTER
The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER moved
the second rtadilg of the Duchi_qi of Co:nsalla,d Lancaitcr
Bill.

Att HoN. MEmr.F.R, whose name wa could not learn, oppo,ed
the Bill, which he considered would 11_, productive of great
injury. All he wanted was that the p -inciple of granting
le ises for ninety-nine years should be introduced, which would
gr,atly improve the property of the country.

The 8.11 : was then read sconJ time.
BRIGHTON FISHERIES.
Gptain PECHELL was anxious to put a que:tion to fie
Noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. In
consequence of some aggressions upon the Brighton fishermen
by the French blot:, -negocialions were entered into, and
upon the sth of April papers were moved for and promised.
In consequence of another aggression a memorial upon
oath was sent to the Forei4n Office, and upon the 21st
of May the Noble Lord said he would have no objection
to inclule that memorial with the other papers. Oa the 231
July the vipers were on the table of the House, but the
parties interested were much surprised to find that the most
important paper was excluded—that, according to the phraseo-
logy of the day, the returns had been emasculated.—(A
laugh.) He wished to know the reason why the memorial
had not been included in the return.
Lord PA LMERSTON said it was originally intended
that the papers referred to should be laid before the House;
but they were received after the motion was made ; they would,
however, forthwith. be upon the tab!e
BENEFICES PLURALITIES BILL.

The Order of the Dty for considering the Lords' amend-
ments on the Benefices Pluralities Bill was then read.
Lord J. RUSSELL stated that generally he intended to
move the House to agree to these amendments ; from some,
however, he dissented.

Mr. HALVES regretted that an alteration should be made,
extending the power of holding pluralities.
Mr. A G LION B Y moved the re-insertion of the third clause.
The Hon. Gentleman sail if the clause were not restored the
Bill would nut give satisfaction to the House or the country.
After a few words from Lord John Russ.:ll, Mr. Hawes, and
Sir Robert Inglis, '

Strangers Were ordered to withdraw, and the House divided,
when the numbers were :
For the clause 2B
Against it
MajJrity
—26
On the amendment to clause six,

AGLIONBY said, the 12;rds had struck out the H-
mits •f pluralities, which originally stood at 1501. ; they had
altered it to 300/. He moved that the clause be restored to
its original state.
Sir R. INGLIS considered that as the law at present
existed, the these would be better with the Lord,' Amend-
men' than without it.
After a few words from Mr. PR YME,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, with respect to the present
amendment he was of opinion that the sum of 1501 was better
than 3001. in the clause, and he should therefore propose to
disagree with that amendment.—(Hear, hear.)
The Lords' amendment was then negatived.
The next clause was agreed to, after the introduction of a
few words by Mr. HAWES, in order to produce uniformity
in the different dioceses.
A vast number of v :rbal amendments were, after considerable
discussion, agreed to.
On clause f3O being proposed,
Mr. HAVES moved as an amendment, that in any case
where a Bish-ip was found, through age. or other infirmity,
inrap ible of fulfilling the duties of his office, the Archbishop
should be efripconered to convene a Council of six Bishops, to
inquire into tie circumstances of the case. Such a propo,i-
tion as that he made was in conformity with the past usages
of the Church.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think the provision of the