The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-27 00:00:00

pelled in duty to harrow their Lordship's feelings.—(" Hear," After a few words from Mr. PLUNIPTRII and Mr. Alder man
from Lord Lyndhurst.) ! Coreeeen. which were totally inaudible in the gallery,
Lord MELBOURNE contended that if the object of in- I Mr. HUME said that although this was a private Bill, it
troducing this subject had not been to excite further clamour, affected the public more than any other private Bill. The
notice would have been given, as was usual in all such cares. community there were divided as to the proper exercise
If the Noble Duke ( Wellington) were present, he would not of the power which was given by the Acts, and it was
have taken such a course, because lie was a man of honour and to remove these doubts that this Bill was brought for-
a gentleman. I ward, and he thought the best way was to allow it to
Lord LYNDHURST asked in what way he was to I go to the Committee between which the complaints of the
interpret the expression of the Noble Viscount, that the parties might be inquired into, and the Bill be brought out
Duke of Wellington, being a man of honour and a gentle- satisfactory to both parties. He should therefore vote for the
man would not have acted as be (Lord Lyndhurst) had acted. second reading.
Lord MELBOURNE rose and bowed. Mr. HODGES explained.
Lord LYNDHURST was then leaving the House, when The gallery was then cleared for a division. On our re-
Lord BROUGHAM appealed to his Noble and Learned admission, the numbers were declared to be—
Friend to stay for a moment. Lord Brougham then said that no For the second reading
man durst—no man durst—in a Parliamentary sense—say that Against it e 44
another acted unlike a man of honour, in not giving notice Majority —l5l
of his intention to bring any subject before the House. Such The Bill was then read a second time.
notice was a matter of courtesy, and not of right. After some discussion the Committee on the Bill was
Lord LYNDHURST then asked if the Noble Viscount ordered to the Kent List.
had intended to impute to him conduct unworthy of a man of Mr. WALL ACE presented a petition from Greenock,
honour and a gentleman ? praying that no grant of money might be made for the pur-
Lord MELBOURNE replied, that in referring to the pose of inereasine endowments in Scotland.
Noble Duke who was absent, he had only intended to say, The Deputy Usher of the Black Rod hero entered the
that from his sense of propriety, and the scrupulous care House, and summoned the Speaker to the Lords, for the pur-
which he always took to inform those opposed to him of any pose of hearing the Royal assent given to certain Bills, but not
subject which he intended to bring forward respecting them, one Hon. Member followed the Right Hon. Gentleman,
he (Lord M.) was convinced he would. not adopt the which occasioned some merriment in the House, each Member
course adopted by the Noble and Learned Lord. But, appearing exceedingly anxious to retain the scat he was already
although he did not recollect in what words he had expressed in possession of.
himself, he was sure he did not mean to cast any im- On the SPEAKER'S return, he informed the House
putatien on the Noble and Learned Lord (Lyndhurst.) that the Royal Assent had been given by Commission to cer-
POOR-LAW. tain Bills, for which see Lord's report.
Lord R EDESDALE presented a petition from Kidder- PENITENTIARY.
minster, complaining of the operation of the Poor-laws. Mr. GLADSTONE seeing the Noble Lord the Secretary
NEWSPAPER MISSTATEMENTS. for the Home Department in his place, wished to ask him
Lord BROUGHAM said that he would take the oppor- a question respecting the statement which was going the round
tunity which presenting some petitions afforded him of contra- of the public Papers, purporting to have been made by the
dieting some statements respecting himself which had ap- Magistrates of Middlesex with respect to the above
peared in a goveimment paper yesterday (Sunday), inti- establishment. He wished to know whether that
mating that he had no doubt altered his opinion on the statement had been brought under the consideration
Poor-laws, and that he had set on the Honourable Member of the Noble Lord, as it was one which, if allowed to go
for Southwark (an individual not very likely to be set on or unrefuted, would prove very prejudicial to the Government,
set off by the opinions of any other person) to carry into exe- and detrimental to the establishment. He wished further to
cution some plan, the nature of which he (Lord Brougham) ask whether the Noble Lord had instituted any inquiry
was really not at all asyare of, for the purpose of not com. respecting the statements, and if so, whether he would have
misting himself with respect to the Poor-law Bill. The any objection to lay the result on the table of the House before
same paper also asserted, as a matter which was not at all they were called upon to vote the estimates for that establish-
doubted, that he (Lord Brougnam) had also set on another ment.
Honourable Gentleman (one in all probability as little subject Lord JOHN RUSSELL had seen the statement re-
to influence as the Honourable Member for Southwark), the ferred to, but he could not for a moment believe
Honourable Baronet the Member for Leeds, to give notice of that it had emanated from any person holding her Majesty's
a motion respecting the administration of the Colonial De- Commission in Middlesex.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.)
partment. With that Honourable Baronet he had never been It was to be supposed that the Middlesex Magistrates knew
in a room but once ; and although he had great respect for the something of the Penitentiary. If so, they must have known
talents and integrity of the Hon. Baronet, and agreed with him that the silent system never had beet introduced into that
in many of his political opinions, he by no means agreed with establishment. Cettein cells had been prepared, in or-
him in them all. But the fact was, that he had never had any der to carry the system into effect, but no person had
political communication with either of the individuals alluded yet been confined in them. The statement then went on
to; and had never had any communication whatever with any to say that certain persons confined in that manner in the
human being on the subject on the Hon. Baronet's notice. Penitentiary had been reduced to a state of idiotcy thereby.
Nay, there was one, and that an important part of the Honour- He had had several reports respecting these persons, but
able Baronet's notice, on which he differed from him. those reports rather showed to him that they were
As he had already stated in that House, he did not think the persons of disorderly behaviour, and who would not conform
Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial Department should to the rules of the establishment.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
be exposed to bear the whole of the blame respecting the Ca- One in particular referred to Julia Newman. That convict
nadian question; and if the notice were his, he mould strike was recommended, through the Secretary of State's Office,
out the Noble Lord's name, and extend the charge to the by the Recorder of London. Her conduct was very violent,
whole Government, every member of which was, in his opinion, and the reports to him were that she was feigning madness,
equally liable to the accusation. He wished all public secre- and that it was not real. He desired that her case
taries, and private secretaries, and under secretaries and over should be watched, and eventually she was sent to that place
secretaries would employ themselves in earning their respective where lunatics under her circumstances were usually confined.
salaries, rather than in telling such stupid tales to the editors of Persons were sent to the Penitentiary, either from strong re-
newseaners ; for he was sure that no man in that capacity commendations of the Chairman of Quarter Sessions, or from
would invent anything se bsurd. the request of the parties themselves, not wishing to be sent
SLAVERY. abroad. He (Lord John Russell) did not think it necessary
Lord BROUGHAM presented also a number of Petition!, to lay the paper before the House regarding a statement so
in favour of the Abolition of Negro Apprenticeship; Peti- extravagant and so false. He might add, it been asser-
tions for the mitigation of the punishment of the Glasgow tained that the convict referred to had feigned insanity.
Cotton Spinners. With respect to one of those petitions from JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
Oldham he must say, although he might be sneered at by her In answer to Mr. Clay, the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
Majesty's Ministers—he would say that he considered one CHEQUER said he had already given notice respecting
allegation in the petition to be a gross, although not wilful Joint Stock Banks.
misrepresentation. That allegation was, that the men were HIGH SHERIFF OF SLIGO.
transported for uniting to maintain the wages of their labour. Colonel PE RCE VA L asked whether the High Sheriff of
No such thing. They were tried for a grave offence—the the County of Sligo had been decided upon.
threatening others to intimidate them from taking a lower Lord MORPETH said he had riot received an answer
rate of wages. to the enquiries which he had sent to Ireland upon the sub-
PRESBYTERIAN OATHS. ject, owing, he believed, to the severity of the weather.—
Lord DENMAN obtained leave to bring in a Bill, in lieu (Laughter from the Opposition.)
of the Presbyterian Oaths Bill. The object of his Bill was Colonel PERCEVAL--I have received my letter.--(op-
not only to permit Presbyterians to take oaths in the form position cheers.)
according to their conscience, but to admit the testimony of Lord MORPETH—The mail of Saturday has not arrived,
persons who from conscientious scruples would take no form and it was by that I expected my answer. What date is the
of oath. Hon. Gentleman's letter ?—(Hear.)
POSTAGE. Colonel PERCE VAL—The 22nd of this month.—(Loud
cheers from the Ministerial benches.)
BISHOPS' LEASES.
Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice that the week after next
(lie could not fix the day according to the rules of the House)
he would move for the appointment of a Select Committee to
inquire into the mode of granting leases, by Bishops, Deans,
and Chapters, with the probable amount of the increased
value of property held under such leases.

Lord BROUGHAM presented two petitions from Liver-
pool, and one from Haddington, praying for a diminution of
the rate of postage.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 96.

The Sre4xEatook the Chair at the usual hour.

Sir Charles Grey (for Tynemouth), Mr. Lynch (for Gal-
way), Mr. Fitzpatrick (for the Queen's County). and Sir
James Graham (for Pembroke), took the oaths and their seats.
The Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Pembroke, w•as
received with loud cheers from the Opposition benches, which
were re-echoed, with ironical cheers, from the Ministerial
side of the House.
IPSWICH ELECTION.

MR. O'CONNELL.
Lord MAIDSTONE assured the House that he rose upon
the present occasion with the greatest diffidence, being a young
Member, and unacquainted with the forms and formalities of
the House. He begged, however, distinctly to state, that he
brought forward the motion which he was about to sub-
mit, not as the result of the suggestions of others, but
solely from the dictates and feelings of his own heart. He
hoped that the animus which influenced the course which
he had adopted on the present occasion would carry him
through, notwithstanding his inexperience, and ignorance of
the forms of the House. He could twure the House, that having
sat on a Committee (the Salford)eread being unconscious of any
thing like the perjury or the feelings attributed to Members of
Committee, in the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member
for Dublin, he was resolved, at the earliest opportunity, to re-
pel the imputation.—(Loud cheers from the Opposition
Benches.) la doing that, he felt quite convinced that
he was only adopting a course which other Honourable
Members would have done, who like himself had been in-
eluded in the imputations of the Hon. and Learned Member
for Dublin. He felt that this was not a reflection on any
individual Member, but on the character of the House—
and if they were to be vilified and defamed in this manner,
who was to defend them if they did not themselves stand
forward ?—( Hear, hear.) He did not look upon this as a
party question. He would ask whether Hon. Gentlemen at
the other side were not equally involved in an imputation
affecting the general character of the House ? What
situation would this House occupy in the eyes of the
country, if such an imputation as this was suffered to remain
uncontradicted? They were sent by their constituents to take
care of their honours, and if they could not take care of their own
honours, what were they to expect ? He (Lord M.) expected
when he went back to his constituents, that they would one
and all consecutively spit in his face, if he passed over such
an aspersion as this.—(Cheers from the Opposition, and
laughter from the Ministerial side.) lip to the present
period this House had vindicated its honour, and he hoped it
would not fail to do so on the present occasion, because to
sanction the use of such language would be to prejudge the
decision of all election Committees. Such a feeling as this
he should be sorry to see go abroad to the country ; and
wherever this poison might be circulated throughout the coua-
try, he trusted the antidote would be circulated along with it.
He hoped no man would charge them with having heard such
an imputation, without knowing also ;that they threw away
imputation with the scorn and contempt that it deserved.—
( Cheers.) He begged pardon of the House if hie feeling led
him away,and he said anything contrary to the forms of the
House ; but he hoped Hon. Members themselves would
bear with him, because the character of the House was in ques-
tion, and whether they were to look upon themselves as anxious
to get rid of the commodity of a good name, and whether
they were to keep it if they could, and whether anything
which they could do would prevent others from aspersing it,
as the Learned Member for Dublin, in his speech de-
livered at the Crown and Anchor, had done a few days ago.
He must say that he spoke more in sorrow than in anger. He
wished the subject had never been alluded to, and that no
notice had been taken of it, for any thing that might be done
by that House would not counterbalance the weight of the
charge that had been brought against them.—( Hear.) He
would again repeat that it was more in sorrow than in anger
that he moved a vote of censure upon the Hon. and Learned
Member. He would now deliver the speech at the table of
the House, and would move that the extracts be read by the
Clerk.—( Hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL submitted that the entire speech should
be read.—(oll ! and great laughter.) No one ever heard of
the meaning vof a document being construed from extracts—its
meaning waste be gathered from the whole document.--( Hear. )
The Clerk then proceeded to read the speech from the
Morning Chronicle of Thursday, 22nd February, as follows:
" Mr. O'Connell mounted on the table—( Roars of laughter)
—and addressed the gentlemen assembled."
When the Clerk came to that part where the Hon Member
for Dublin charged Members of that House with downright
perjury, the cheering from both sides of the House was vehe-
ment in the extreme. After the speech in the Morning Chro-
nicle had been read,
Mr. O'CONNELL said he would be content with the
passage complained of in the Morning Post being read only.
When Mr. LEY, the Clerk, had finished reading this
paragraph, an Hon. Member rising, there were loud cries of
‘‘ Move,_ move," from the Ministerial Benches, and " Chair,
chair," from the Conservative benches.
The SPEAKER apprehended the course of proceeding to
be adopted in cases like the present had been established
in the case specially of Sir Francis Burdett. Lord Colchester
then considered the mode of proceeding to be this—that in a
case where the charge or complaint made against a Member
was clear and definite, as in the case of a written charge, as the
present might be considered to be,inasmuch as the passages com-
plained of had been published and were on the table, having been

Mr. JENKlNibiought up the report of the Ipswich Com-
mittee, stating that H. Tuffnell, Esq., was not duly elected to
serve in the present Parliament fur the borough of Ipswich—
that Fitzroy Kelly, Esq., was duly elected to serve for the said
borough—that the petitions against the return were not frivolous
and vexatious, nor was the opposition thereto.
Sir G. GREY moved for a new writ for the county of Rut-
land, in the place of Sir Gerard Noel, deceased.
Sir M. WOOD presented a petition from three hundred
inhabitants of Gravesend in favour of the Gravesend Pier Bill.
On the motion of Mr. PHIL POTTS the Necropolis
Cemetery Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.
presented three petitions against the
Mr. HODGES
Gravesend Pier Bill.
TENBY IMPROVEMENT AND PIER.
An
Improvementß moved the second reading of the Tenby
and Pier Bill.
Mr. STR UTT opposed the Bill. In the breviate laid
upon the table of the House it appeared that heavy penalties
were imposed by it upon a great number of parties.
Mr. FRESH FIELD congratulated the Chair and the
House upon the excellent effect of the new Regulations with
respect to private Bills.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.
.wished to correct a statement which
Lord G. LENNOX
was attributed to him, with respect to a gentleman who was a
petitioner to that House. He had been reported to
have said that there was not one word. of truth in the pe-
tition of Mr. Mills, from the first line to the last ono.
What he had said, or at least what he had intended
to havets of
said, was that taken in conjunction with the state-
the Honourable Member for Bridport ( Mr.
mWeaarburton), and the letters of Mr. Charles Pearson, it was
impossible that that petition could be true. He had no
reason otherwise to doubt the veracity of Mr. Mills ; it was a
mere matter of opinion which could only be settled in a
Committee.
Lord WILLIAM BENTINCK brought up the report of
the Committee on the Glasgow Water Works Bill.
GRAVESEND PIER BILL.
Sir. M. WOOD moved the second reading of the Graves.
end Pier Bill.
Mr. HODGES said he hoped the House would agree to
the motion which he intended to make, that this Bill be read a
second time this day six months. The common course he
knew was to refer private Bills to a Committee, but he thought
in this case there were strong reasons why the House should
depart from its ordinary course, and throw the Bill out at
once. There had been two Acts passed, one in 1828, to
enable the Corporation of Gravesend to raise a certain sum
for the erection of a quay, and to impose a toll of one penny on
all persons landing there; and another Act was passed
in 1833, for the erection of a pier. When Parlia-
ment gave the Cprporation this Bill, they imposed
a condition that the tolls granted by that Act should
be applied to certain purposes therein stated, that is,
the payment of the interest of the debt, and also for the re-
pairs.
About two years ago certain parties attempted to erect
a new pier, and to reduce the tolls below the amount granted
by former Acts ; that was the object of this Bill ; and it was
also endeavoured to prejudge the question, which was now
pending in the Court of Queen's Bench, whether the
ground on which the new pier was erected was extra
parochial or not. It thus appeared that the parties had
great reason to fear that the decision of that Court would not
be favourable to them. He (Mr. II.) trusted that the House
would consider that he had stated sufficient grounds, without
entering further into the subject, for the motion which he now
made—that this Bill be read a second time this day six months.
Sir C. BURRELL seconded the amendment.
On the SPEAKER putting the question,
Sir MATTHEW WOOD said that the fairest way
would be to send the matter to a Committee. With re-
spect to what had fallen from his Hon. Friend, as to the
taking away the toll from the old pier, he had only to say that
the Bill did not go to that extent, as all that was intended
was to apportion it fairly. His Hon. Friend knew that he
could have no interest in the matter, as he did everything in
his power to carry the former Bill.
Mr. H. GRATTAN said that having been on the former
Committee, he felt bound to add his testimony to what had
fallen from the Hon. Member oppo'site, and he should certainly
support the amendment.
Sir C. BURRELL said that if his Hon. Friend pressed
his amendment to a division he should support it.