The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

tioVsT Lortml, Ailien
I'6 bib) ditANCELhon took hl§ teat WI the IVoblsack at
tht ittual • • • •
MUNICIPAL RI Fon.,Nl oat LAND) BILL.
Mrr, O uac ertial; attbia by Mr. 01Connell, Lord Morpeth,
and several other Members of the Commons,
,nought in this Bill, which was laid on the table.
IRISH BANKRUPTCY COURT BILL.
Lord PLUNKETT brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on this Bill.
THIRD READINGS.
nit Abolition of Slavery (Spain) Bill, the Annual Indem-
nity Bill, and the School Sites Conveyance Bill, were seve-
rally read a third time.
OBSERVANCE OF THE LORD'S DAY.
The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from St.
Mary, Nlaldon, in Essex, praying for the better observance of
the Lord's Day.

SUNDAY SCHOOLS.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented a petition
'rom the superintendents of the Sunday Schools of Brad-
'ord, praying for some alteration in the law relating to them.
STAMP DUTIES.
A NOBLE LORD presented a petition from Deptford, praying
for the total repeal of the Stamp Duties upon Newspapers.
MUNICIPAL REFORM (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord MELBOURNE, in proposing that this Bill be read
a first time, gave notice that on Monday, the 18th of April,
he would move that the Bill be read a second time.—The Bill
was then read a first time.
Lord L Y N DHU R ST presented a petition from certain per-
sons who had instituted writs of quo warranto, to set aside the
appointments of certain Magistrates under the Municipal Re-
form Act, begging that House not to proceed to the second
reading of the Municipal Reform Acts Amendment Bill.
MUNICIPAL REFORM ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving the second
reading of this Bill did not think it necessary to occupy much
of their Lordships' time, but the inconveniences which arose
from certain discussions in the Bill of last year rendered it neces-
sary as must be evident to every Noble Lord that some amend-
ment should be made to facilitate the operation of the
provisions of that Act. He would not go into details
of the provisions of the present Bill for the amendment
of the Act of last Session, but he begged to call their
Lordships' attention to some of the most important of them.
The first inconvenience had arisen from the wording
of the provisions of the Bill of last Session, and on the
38th section of it, which provided for the election of the
mayor. In consequence of the time of the election being dif-
ferent in some places from the period, at which they entered
on their official duties, some inconvenience had arisen, and
the first clause of the present Bill was to set that question at
rest. The Noble and Learned Lord, after referring to the
elections being taken in the presence of the mayor and asses-
sors, and also to the burgess roll, proceeded to state that it
was provided by the Act of last session, that upon
each election the poll should always be kept open
from nine o'clock till four, in the event of there being an op-
position, but it made no provision in the event of there being
no opposition, and the consequence was a great deal of unne-
cessary labour. Under these circumstances the present bill
proposed, that in consequence of there being no contest
the poll should be kept open only one hour.—( Hear, hear.)
Another of the difficulties arising from the Act of last session,
was in the 31st section, which providedthat those councillors
who had the smallest number of votes, should first go out of
office ; when the votes were equal, the council decided which
should go out ; but where no contests had taken place that
criterion could not exist, and the present Bill was intended to
remedy that. In the 38th section, the most important of all
difficulties had arisen. That clause extinguished certain
offices, and provided at the same time that the sessions should
still go on as if that Act had not been passed. Now, by the
charter of some of these towns, the mayor and other officers
abolished,were constituted part of the quorum to preside at these
sessions—without them the sessions could not be held. This Bill
would remedy that difficulty. There was another inconvenience
arising from the separation of the charity funds from the other
funds of the corporation, as the Bank of England, and some
other public bodies, had in consequence refused to pay dividends,
not knowing whether they belonged to the charity or the funds
of the Corporation. After pointing out some other inconve-
niences and defects to be remedied, the Noble and Learned
Lord moved that the Bill be now read a second time.
The Duke of WELLINGTON did not mean to Oppose
the proposition of the Noble and Learned Lord, but complained
that after the Bill had been under consideration so long a time
in the other House, it should be brought forward and forced
through that House at a moment when it was impossible that
it could receive that consideration and deliberation from their
Lordships which it required. Many Noble Lords who had
taken an active part in the measure of lest Session were not
then present;' and it was that consideration which induced
him (the Duke of Wellington) to request of the Noble Vis-
count opposite to postpone the measure until those Noble
Lords were in their places. The Nohle and Learned Lord
had left unexplained many points in what he considered a very
important measure, and he had omitted to point out that one
important alteration had been made on the last day on which
the Bill had left the other House, without having been pro.
perly explained either there or to their Lordships. There was
another part of the Bill enabling the burgesses to elect Aldermen
after a certain period, in case the Town Council had not done so.
This principle of the Aldermen being elected by the Council
was departed from in the Bill. Under these circumstances he
thought the House had a right to have a fair opportunity of
I discussing the subject upon its principles. He did not by any
means wish to impede the course of the Government ; but he
thought the House had a right to expect to be treated fairly
upon a question of this description; and ought to have
not only an opportunity of discussing its principles on
going into Committee, but also upon the second reading. He
would not further oppose the motion, but he. must enter his
protest against the course taken upon the Bill.
Viscount MELBOURNE had every wish to give every
Noble Lord an opportunity of considering all the Bilts
which came before the House.--( Hear, hear.) His Par-
liamentary experience told bim that it was impossible
to press forward any Bill against the wish of even a small
minority in that House, letting alone the wish of the Noble
Duke, filling the position which he did. He went entirely
upon the notion that there could be no serious objection
to the Bill, and he had most distinctly stated that if
in the mind of any Noble Lord there was the slightest objec-
tion to it, he would have been most willing to give way and
not proceed with the Bill until after the recess. The
Noble Duke had complained most loudly that this bill
was brought up at a time when Noble Lords were not present to
take part in its disclission. It must be remembered that for-
merly the complaints were that Bills were never brought up to
that House in proper time. That Bill bad been brought up at
a much earlier period than Bills formerly used to be, and it
ought to be borne in mind that if Noble Lords did not attend in
their places,it would be useless to bring upßills at an early period.
The House had no right to be called upon to wait for the con-
venience of Noble Lords; it was their duty to attend in their
places when business of such importance was brought on at any
period of the Session, but more especially at this early period.
The Bill was filled with matters of regulations and detail,
which could be considered only in Committee. If Noble Lords
intended that the Bill should go into Committee, the proper
time for the second reading was now, in order that the Com-
mittee might be had as soon after the recess as possible.
Lord L YND HUR ST said that as the Bill had occupied
three months in the other House, it would be but fair that
that House should have some time allowed for the considera-
tion of its details and principles. He would not oppose the
second reading of the Bill—still he was obliged to inform their
Lordships that there were some clauses of an ex post
facto nature, which it would be his duty to oppose.
No person could entertain any doubt that the appointment of
many of the Councillors was invalid. One of the provisions
of the Bill was to render the appointment of those Council-
lors valid and legal. He begged the House to consider what
would be the effect of it. There were some individuals who
held offices in the old Corporations of trust and profit.
They were to be removed by these new Councillors acting
without any legal authority ; they had been deprived
of their offices and emoluments, although they were entitled
at the present moment to hold those offices and emolpments.
Now, if the House lay this Bill rendered the appointment of
these Councillors up to the 25th of September, they would in
effect deprive those individuals of those emoluments. He
thought the House would pause before they passed a
Bill having such an effect.—(Hear, -hear.) Another
point was, if the House made the appointments legal by the
hp r presentids oin
n. A
done
o such
ewould
a Another
b rthe
Bill,
n thethe caserefusalesubject
an icourtl legaachdt in h
oflv al anys
te
theQ
partiestuaer t t
eyeeor
power concur o
Session.
on fct u
a r
courti n
e Twhathof
of
and law,
ey theyaimhdi
anda
been illegally held, and notwithstanding they convicted prisoners
of felony, those convictions were illegal : still if the present Bill
passed, the men who had been illegally convicted were to be
pronounced as having been convicted legally. He trusted on
the whole the Noble Viscount would take the principleo fine
Bill into his serious consideration before he sanctioned it fur-
ther.—The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed.
APPOINTMENT OF MAGISTRATES.
Lord WHA RNCLIFFE moved for a return of the Magis-
trates appointed under the Municipal Corporations Act, since
the last returns had been furnished. The Noble Lord stated,
that he should be able to show there never had before been
such a system of political appointments of Magistrates as under
that Act.
STAFFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice that he
should, on the 15th of next month, move for the second read-
ing of the Stafford Disfranchisement Bill.
Lord LYNDHURST wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Noble Lord (the Marquis of Clanricarde)
to permit evidence to be given at the bar of the House relative
to the Bill, because otherwise he believed it would be the only
instance of such a Bill having been read a second time without
evidence being given.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition. )
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that when the
time came for him to move the second reading he should state
upon what grounds he did so.
The Earl of HARROVVBY presented a petition from the
Freemen of Stafford, praying that they might be heard by
counsel at the Bar.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
The Duke of WELLINGTON wished to know from the
Noble Viscount when he intended to adjourn the House, and
to what time ?
Lord MELBOURNE said he should move an adjournment
of the House to-morrow until Tuesday the 12th of April.
SALE OF BREAD BILL.
The Duke of RICHMOND moved the second reading of
the Sale of Bread Bill ; and stated that after the recess, he
should move that it be referred to a Select Committee.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

BILL.
Mr. HALL presented a petition from certain proprietors of
the Glamorgan Canal, complaining that the standing orders
had not been complied with by the promoters of this Bill, and
praying the Committee on the standing orders with respect to this
Bill might be revived. It was necessary, before a Bill of this na-
ture were introduced, that notice of it should be inserted two
successive weeks in the county papers. The promoters of this
Bill had inserted notice only once. On this ground, be moved
that the petition be referred to the Committee.—Agreed to.
NORTH OF ENGLAND RAILWAY.
Mr. RIDLEY COLBORNE presented a petition from the
mayor, aldermen, and common-councilmen of Newcastle-on-
Tyne,in favour of the North of England Railway Bill.
DURHAM RAILWAY.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM presented a petition from South
Durham, against certain clauses in the Durham Railway Bill.
ULSTER CANAL.
Mr. EMMERSON TENNENT moved the revival of the
Committee on the Ulster Canal Bill.
MIDLAND COUNTIES RAILWAY.
Mr. PARKER presented a petition in favour of the Mid-
land Counties Railway Bill.
BRIGHTON RAILWAY.
Mr. CRAWFORD presented a petition from Surrey,
against Stephenson's line of Railway.
SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY.
Sir T. TROUBRIDGE presented a petition against the
South Eastern Railway.
An HON. MEMBER presented a petition from Andover, pray-
ing for an extension of time for building poor-houses.
ARTS OF DESIGN.
Mr. BARLOW HOY presented a petition, we understood
from Southampton, praying for the establishment of a Na-_
tional Institution for the promotion of Arts of Design.
PRESTON AND LONGRIDGE RAILWAY BILL.
Mr. H. FLEETWOOD moved the second reading of this

WINDOW TAX.
Lord E A STNOR presented a petition from Worthing
praying for a remission of the Window Tax in houses not oc-
cupied. Also a petition from Steyning praying for an ex-
tension of the time for building poor houses.
MEDICAL ATTENDANCE ON THE POOR.
The NOBLE Loan then presented a petition from 64 most
respectable medical men of Surrey to which he was most
anxious to call the attention of the House. They complained
of the great hardship and inconvenience of the system adopted
by the guardians of the poor in emplo3 ing medical men to at-
tend the poor, by contracting with them for attending
extensive districts.—( Hear, hear.) They complained that the
poor were obliged to apply to the parish officers before
they could obtain medical a►d, and they were consequently
obliged to remain sometimes several days without assistance.
The petitioners prayed that a Committee would be appointed
to investigate the subject, but it was not his (Lord Eastnor's)
intention at present to do so. Before he sat down, he would
say another word. He had read with attention that part of the
Report of the Poor Law Commissioners, but he must say that
he felt convinced that the observations made by the gentlemen
on that circuit were not satisfactory ; and it was most desirable
that the subject should be taken into their most serious consi-
deration.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. MAUL E would not enter into the subject further
at present, than simply to say that he was sure the subject
would receive the most serious consideration from the Poor
Law Commissioners.
Sir C. BURRELL must say that it was necessary that
they should take into consideration the remuneration given to
surgeons. That remuneration was so trifling, and the dis-
tance they had to go was sometimes so great, that it was im-
possible that any man could do justice to himself and justice
to the poor.—( Hear, hear.)
RAILROADS IN SCOTLAND.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition from the Provost, Ma-
gistrates, and Town-Council of Glasgow, under the common
seal, praying that in order to protect the capital employed in
the improvement of turnpike roads in Scotland, a Committee
might be appointed to take into consideration the subject of
railroads, with a view to their being taken up on enlarged
and sound principles. The Hon. Member also presented a
petition from a parish in Buckingham, praying for the aboli-
tion of Church Rates.
Lord E. SOMERSET presented a petition from the
guardians of the poor of a place in Cheshire, praying' for an
extension of time for payment of the building of workhouses.
Sir C. B. VE RE presented a petition from the Licensed
Victuallers of a place in East Suffolk, praying for a repeal of
the additional Duties on Spirit Licences ; also one complain-
ing of Agricultural Distress.
Mr. LENNARD presented a petition from the Guardians
of the Poor of Maldon, praying for an extension of the time
for building Workhouses; from Brighton, praying for the
repeal of the Soap Duties ; and one from the Licenced Vic-
tuallers, complaining of the additional duty for Spirit Licences.
Sir W. BR ABA% ON presented a petition from the inha-
bitants of Ballysatecoy, county Mayo, praying for the total

extinction of tiihcs.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD supported the prayer of this peti-
tion, and stated that it was particularly deserving the attention
of the House, as being the united voice of the Protestants,
Presbyterians, and Catholics of the parish.—( Hear.) It was
signed by the Churchwardens, the Presbyterian Minister, the
Parish Priest, and also by the Magistrates of the Parish,
thus affording the strongest testimony to the anxious desire, of
the nation to be relieved from this odious impost.
Lord C. MANNERS presented a petition from Ashby
De-la-'Louth, complaining of agricultural distress, and tray-
in.-° for protection.
Referred to the Agricultural Committee.
CORONERS' INQUESTS.
Mr. WARBURTON presented two petitions from medical
practitioners, one residing in the neighbourhood of Bath, the
other in the neighbourhood of London, praying for compensa-
tion when attending Coroners' Inquests, especially in cases
where they made an anatomical examination of the body.
LEGACY DUTY.
Mr. WARBURTON presented a petition from an indivi-
dual, named Robinson, praying that charitable bequests should
be exempt from legacy duty.
STAMP DUTIES (ATTORNEYS).
Mr. ROEBUCK presented a petition from certain inhabi-
tants of Bath for the reduction of the Stamp duties on the
admission of Attorneys. Also one from the inhabitants of a
place in Somersetshire, praying for the repeal of the News
paper duties.

MUNICIPAL REFORM.
Mr. WIGNEY presented petitions from Brighton against
he 27th clause in the Municipal Reform Act, commonly called
.he rate-paying clauses: also another in favour of vote by ballot.
He thought it right to state that when these petitions were sent
to him from the post-office, they were charged five guineas
postage • and when a person went to the post-office on the
subject ;he money was returned, and he was informed that it
was merely a matter of form, and a polite letter was sent to him
explaining the cause. It was desirable that Members should
know what sort of petitions they might receive—how sent, and
what weight they should be to come free of charge.
NAVIGATION LAWS.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG presented a petition from certain
master seamen of merchant vessels, praying that some regula-
tions might be adopted to prevent the waste of human life oc-
casioned by the unseaworthiness of vessels; also that measures
should be adopted whereby the qualification of persons under-
taking the management of ships might be ascertained, as many
shipwrecks had been occasioned in consequence of the unfit-
ness of persons appointed to the command of vessels.—
The• Honourable Member also presented a petition from the
Master Mariners of Teignmouth, praying that in any
alteration which might be made respecting light-houses, the
pensions now granted by the Corporation of Trinity-house
should not be interfered with.
AN INFERNAL MACHINE.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES presented a petition from a
native of Switzerland, complaining of a breach of contract on
the part of our Government, in respect to a new machine,
invented by the petitioner, to be used in war. The ma-
chine was capable of discharging thirty-six bullets in a mi-
nute, and the petitioner had agreed for the sum of 10,000/. to
increase its power to 96 bullets a minute. The sum agreed upon,
between petitioner and the representative of our Govern-
ment was 10,0001., but on the day appointed for the trial
of the machine he, by the advice of a mutual friend,
caused it to explode, in order to prevent it from
falling into the hands of the Russian Government.
It appeared further that Mr. Blighti , th
onereßritish Minister, en-
tered into a contract with the pßr
and sum
of 3,300/. (as we understood the Hon. Member), and he now
prayed that the British Government would ratify the contract
made by its Minister. There were various other allegations
in the petition which he did not think it necessary to refer to ;
but he further stated that the Russian Government, finding that
the petitioner did not perfect his contract, had caused him to
be thrown into gaol, where he remained twelve months. On
his arrival in England, he had gone to the Foreign Office,
where he bad received 50/.
Mr. GISBORNE—That is not in the petition.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES admitted it was not, but he
wished the case should be fully stated.
Mr. GISBORNE would not detain the House many mo-
ments, while making a few observations on the very unintelli-
gible petition that had just been presented. The petitioner
' stated that the British Minister, Mr. Bligh, had entered into
a contract with him for the sale of what a Morning Paper
called " An Infernal Machine." That was not the fact.
No expectations whatever were held out that the British Go-