The Sun.
London, England, 1831-02-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, FirnßuAnr 9.
Petitions were presented by the Earl of Rosslyn, from
the Procurators of Perth, complaining of losses they
buffered by an alteration of the law, and praying for the
repeal of the Stamp Duties on their indentures and other
documents; by Lord Boston from Carnarvon, complaining
of an unjust tax imposed on their slates : by Lord Wharn-
cliffe from the Ward of Bridge, for the repeal of the duty
on Sea-borne Coals ; and by Lord Farnham from the city
of Bristol, with a similar prayer ; also complaining of the
privileges granted to the port of Newport.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBRUARY 9.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES presented a petition, praying
the abolition of slavery, from an Episcopal Chapel in
London-street,-Fitzroy-square, and moved that itbe printed.
General GASCOYNE said, he believed it was now a
rule of the House that petitions of this nature, of which
the House had already received a great number, should not
be printed.
Mr. HUGHES observed, that he every evening heard
an order passed for the printing of the petitions presented
to the House, and he did not know why the petitions he
was entrusted with should not have the same privilege.
The SPEAKER thought it necessary to say that both
Hon, Members laboured under some misapprehension of
the course pursued with respect to petitions. There was
no rule of the House which forbade the printing of pe.
titions of this description ; but there was a general under-
standing that the Members were not to require the print-
ing of petitions which contained nothing in statement or in
prayer different from the many which had been already
presented, and a number of which, being printed, were
in the knowledge of the House.—(Hear.) The under-
standing was, that petitions on subjects of this kind were
not to be printed when there were so many others on ,
matters of great importance which it was necessary should
be printed.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES said as he had a great number
of these petitions to present. He had been asked that day
how many of 2,000 he could take charge of; and if they
were not to be printed, he must read them to the House.
The SPEAKER sail he was sure the Hon. Member
would not persist in that course, when he was told it would
be very irregular. The Hon. Member might read extracts
of the petitions if they contained new matter, but he could
not, without leave of the House, read the petition itself.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES thought the petition he had
now presented contained sentiments which should be made
known, and he. therefore, moved that it be printed.
General GA SCOYNE said he must oppose that motion.
The SPEAKER asked who seconded the motion for
printing the petition ?
No Member answered, and the motion of Mr. Hughes
wnis, therefore, not put.
REFORM.

Mr. STRUTT presented three petitions from parishes
in the county of Derby, praying for rteform and vote by
ballot.
Mr. PHILLPOTS presented a petition from the city
of Gloucester, signed by 800 householders, praying for a
Reform which would give them the privilege of voting for
the representatives of that city.
Mr. HUNT presented three petitions from Stockport,
praying a universal extension of the suffrage and vote by
ballot. After what he had heard that evening, be should
abstain from moving that these petitions he printed ; but
he now gave notice, that, before the Ist of March, he in-
tended to move for a return of all the petitions presented to
the }loose in favour of Reform, and distinguishing those
which prayed for vote by ballot. The Hon. Member then
presented a petition from Bullock Smithy, in Cheshire,
praying universal suffrage and vote by ballot.
Mr. HART DAVIES presented a petition from St. Ste-
phen's, BriAol, praying the repeal of the House and Win-
slow 'fax.

THE PENSION LIST.
Mr. PHILLPOTTS gave notice of his intention to
move, on the bringing up the Report of the Committee
sitting on the Civil List, that no pension be hereafter
granted out of the Civil List; but that his Majesty should
have an addition to his Privy Purse in lieu thereof, out of
which he may be at liberty to grant pensions to his depen-
dents and those who have claims on his bounty, without
any interference or controul of Parliament.
THE LATE DISTURBANCES.

Mr. HUNT gave notice of his intention to move, to-.
morrow, for a copy of the regulations of the gaol of Fisher-
ton, in Wiltshire, with a view of ascertaining whether it
is the mit= of that gaol for a prisoner to hold private
communication with his attorney ; and to discover whether
a paper, signed by a prisoner named Lush, was or was not
at any time in the hands of the gaoler.
ROTUNDA MEETINGS AND MR. O'CONNELL.
Mr. HUNT presented a petition from a person named
Hetherington, the Chairman of one of the Rotunda• Mee-
tings, who, in behalf of the persons assembled, expressed
the conviction that the persecution of Mr. O'Connell by
the Government would increase, rather than ally, the dis-
turbances of Ireland. The Honourable Member, in sup-
porting the petition, took occasion to disclaim all connec-
tion with the meetings held by Mr. Taylor, Mr. Carlile,
and Mr. Jones; and having condemned the cold-blooded
policy which the Noble Loul (Althorp) had expressed
himself willing to adopt towards Ireland, when he uttered
his threat that he was ready to support a civil war rather
than suffer the distneirthe!ment of the empire, he declared
he was satisfied that no Jury, except a Jury packed by
the Government, could ever pronounce a verdict of guilty
against the patriot Daniel O'Counell.
Mr. NORTH, although unwilling to raise discussion
on a petition of this kind, could not allow the observations
of the Hon. Member with respect to the Government
Juries in Ireland to pass without notice. He (Mr. N.)
had twice, in his professional life, had occasion to form a
judgment of the merits of those Juries. Once, when Dr.
Sheridan was tried and acquitted, and a second time, when
certain persons in 1822, were charged with a conspiracy,
and the Jury could not agree in their verdict ; on these
occasions, as well as on many others, the Juries of Ire-
land had proved themselves as honest, independent, and
-virtuous as any number of men who could be collected ;
and he trusted that such instances would satisfy the Hon.
Member, as well as those to whose attention such sugges-
tions were directed out of doors, that it was not so easy
to pack Juries in Ireland as some were led to imagine.
Mr. LEADER lamented the occurrences which had
given rise to the prosecutions, but expressed his pleasure
to hear that the question was not to be determined by a
tribunal which united Judge and Jury in itself.
Lord STANLEY, adverting to the language of the
Member for Preston with reference to the expressions
used by the Noble Lord (Althorp) heat night, said, that
in the absence of that Noble Lord, he, as one of those pre-
sent most closely connected with him and the Government,
felt bound to express his surprise that any one could inter-
pret the expression of the Noble Lord into a threat of
having recourse to civil war. On the contrary, he dis-
tinctly understood the Noble Lord to say, that, much as
he abhorred civil war, he preferred the dreadful chance of
civil war to the dismemberment of the Empire.—( Hear.)
Mr. BUNT said he had been called on to explain or to
apologise for an expression he had used with reference to
the Language of the Noble Lord (Althorp) last night. Now
he recollected these expressions well, and he knew, and had
said so at the time, that they as well as those used by the
other Noble Lord (Palmerston) bore the construction
which he had put on them It was true that the Member
for Clare had held it as a threat, that if this country re•
fused to suffer the question of a separation to be discussed,
the people of Irelatid would plunge into a civil war.—
(Cries of " No, no.")—Well, the Member for Clare had
asserted, that if they (lid not agree to a separation, they
would have civil war. The Noble Lord had probably put
forward his threat in reply to that ; but he repeated, that
lie regretted the use of such threats, and he regretted it
the more, as he said at the time, because the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir R. Peel), and the Hoo. Member for
13oroughbridge (Sir Charles Wetherell), had both hallooed
the Ministers on to let slip the dogs of war. He
cautioned the Ministers against being misled by these
cheers, and he repeated that caution now ; but he
begged to say, with all his desire to respect the House and
its forms, that he could not withdraw what he had
said. As to the petition before the House, although it
b.
bore the signature of but one person, it was as good as
If it had ten thousand, for, from what he had seen, all
the petitions go into that gentleman's bag (painting to
the clerk) under the table and are out of sight in au in-
stant.)—(A general laugl:.)
Lord STANLEY said he could not abstain from repeat-
ing his conviction that the Noble LordcLor( Althorp)
merely alluded to his being willing to prefer
chances of civil war in Ireland to the dismemberment
dreadfulbie
rment of
the Empire. This was his recollection of the Noble Lord's
expressions ; and although lie was present duringl tl
whole of the evening, lie did not recollect that thelNemb Member r
for Preston accused him of using a threat.
The petition was then laid on the table.
Mr. GUEST presented a petition from Swindon, in
favour of Reform.
Mr. PENDARVIS presented petitions from Endwin,
Launceston, Truro, and various parishes in the county ut
Cornwall, praying for Parliamentary Reform.
Sir W. GUISE presented l etitions from Stroud., against
the Hou-e and Window Tax ; and from Chipping Sud-
bury, in favour of Reform. The Hon. IRaronet also pre-