The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-18 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock.
PUBLIC ROADS BILL.

Petitions against this Bill were presented by Mr.
Fuller, Sir H. Halford, and an Hon. Member from
places in Gloucestershire and Whiltshire; Lord Henry
Bentinck, Mr. Brotherton, and Lord Brooke, from a
number of places in Warwickshire; Mr. W. Patten and an
Hon. Member from places in Chester and Carmarthen-
shire; Captain Egerton, from places in Wiltshire and
Cheshire; and Mr. Muntz, from the Birmingham Canal
Company.
MARRIAGE BILL.

Colonel BERESFORD presented a petition from
Essex against this Bill.
ARBITRATION.

Mr. EVANS presented a petition from a place in
Pembrokeshire in favour of arbitration instead of war.

PETITIONS.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from Ross-
shire against Sunday travelling.
Colonel SALWEY presented a petition from Stoney
Stratford praying that all international disputes might
be settled by arbitration.
Captain GORDON presented a petition from Aber-
deen against the Registration Bill.
Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition from Bris-
tol against the Public Roads Bill,
Mr. WADDINGTON presented several petitions
from various places to the same effect.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented four petitions from Man-
chester, and one from Bury, praying for a general sys-
tem of secular education.
Mr. W. EVANS presented petitions from Derby and
several other places in favour of the Public Roads Bill.
Mr. PACKE presented petitions from Ashby-de-la-
Zouch, and other places in Leicestershire, against the
Public Roads Bill.
Mr. DUNCAN presented a petition from Dundee
against the Lunatics (Scotland) Bill.
Mr. CARDWELL presented a petition from Liver-
pool, praying for an alteration in the Passengers Bill.
Mr. HEADLAM presented petitions from Newcastle-
upon-Tyne, praying that international disputes might
be settled by arbitration; also a petition from the same
place for the abolition of slavery.
Mr. E. ELLICE presented petitions from Warwick
against the Public Roads Bill•
Mr. SOTHERON presented petitions from Devizes
to the same effect.

Mr. B. DENISON presented similar petitions from
various places in the West Riding.
General LYGON presented a petition to the same
effect.

Sir J. PAYINGTON presented similar petitions
from Worcestershire.
Mr. SPOONER presented seventeen petitions from
places in Warwickshire, and ten from places in Worces-
tershire, all against the Roads Bill, and praying that it
might not pass into a law.
Mr. HOPE presented petitions to the same effect.
Mr. CHAPLIN presented a petition to the same effect
from Salisbury.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a large number of si-
milar petitions from places in Devonshire.
Mr. HUME presented several petitions from places in
Scotland against the Marriage Bill.
Mr. GODSON presented twelve petitions from places
in Worcestershire against the Roads Bill.
Colonel THOMPSON presented a petition from Brad-
ford against the Roads Bill.
Mr. NEWDEGATE presented a petition, signed by
the Mayor of Bristol, to the same effect, and several
like_petitions from Warwickshire. _ _ _ _

Mr. AGLIONBY preeenteda petition from the El-
ders of Staple's Inn against the attorney's certificate
duty.

Mr. COBDEN presented a number of petitions from
places in the West Riding against the Roads Bill.
DROPPED NOTICES OF MOTION AND
ORDERS.
The Dropped Notices of Motion and Orders of the
Day were reappointed.
ROAD BILL.
On the question that the order of the day for the se-
cond reading of this Bill be now read,
Mr. PUSEY objected to the motion, and moved that
another order be read. Government had Mondays and
Fridays, and this week Thursday was granted to them;
and if they were allowed to place their Bills first on the
orders for Wednesday, independent Members had no
chance whatever of bringing forward their measures at
all, unless it were at two o'clock in the morning, after a
Government night, when their attempting to do so was
invariably objected to. New he had an important
Bill on the orders for to-day, but it was was quite
hopeless fur him to expect to bring it on if this Roads
Bill were proceeded with, and he therefore felt that he
had a right to make the motion he had done, however
troublesome or inconvenient it might be to Govern-
ment.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON perfectly agreed with what had
fallen from the Bon. Gentleman, and had great pleasure
in seconding his motion.—(Hear.) Now that the Go-
vernment has deferred the Bill, there can be no doubt
shortly there will be an attempt made to take every
Thursday for the Government, and he did think that
independent Members of the House ought not to be de-
prived of the few privileges which they now possessed.
After a few words from Mr. B. DENISON, who la-
boured under some misapprehension respecting the na-
ture of the Bill, in which he was corrected by several
Him. Members around

Sir G. GREY said that he certainly thought that it
was not right that even if Government measures were
placed upon the paper at all for Wednesday that they
should not take precedence of the other orders of the
day in which independent Members of the House were
Imerested.—(Hear, hear.) It was certainly true that
there might be measures of importance in the hands of
private 'Members which should take precedence of others
of less consequence, but as a rule that which had been
made a genera! order should not be departed from. In
Bills to which there had b on no opposition no difficulty
could possibly arise, but i . a a case like this, where there
had been considerable dissent expressed, he thought the
better course would be to come to some decision one
way it the other, if not to-day, at least at a very early
period.
Mr. WILSON PATTEN was very anxious to enforce
upon the Government the necessity of leaving Wednes-
day inviolate for pi-Iva:6, business, and as there was evi-
dently some difficulty in the way, he recommended his
Hon. Friend to withdraw the Bill now before the House.
After some words of explanation from Mr. FUMY and
Sir G. GREY,

SOTIIERON recommended that the Bill should
be referred to a Select Committee.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. HERBERT thought, that as this Bill was a
matter which largely interested the public, a fair dis-
eat- sion of the matter ought to be held.
Mr. HUAIE most sincerely trusted that the order of
the day for leaving Wednesday entirely open to the
business transacted by private Members would not be in-
fringed. With respect to the Bill now before the House,
he thought that it was imperatively necessary that they
should come to some decision.
Mr. DISRAELI protested most earnestly against the
doctr:ne which had been thrown out the other night with
respect to this Bill. The Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary of State for the Home Department had pro-
pounded that the Government were not responsible for
the principle and details of any Bills which bad been in-
troduced by independent Members, but afterwards
adopted by themselves.—(Hear, hear.) Against this
he must most earnestly protest. —(seer, hear.) The
Bill now before the House came precisely under that
category.
Sir G. GREY and Mr. LABOUCHRRE both declared
against any, disclamation of liability.
Mr. DISRAELI—But that was the principle broadly
laid out, and which ought not in any way to be en-
tertained.
The SPEAKER then put the motion that the order of
the day for the second leading of the but was in-
terrupted by
i
Mr. PUSEY,
who said that the object of his motion
was to set aside the second reading altogether.
The SPEAKER explained that it had been perfectly
competent for the Hon. Member to move an amendment
on the motion for passing to the orders of the day, but
he had not done so, and he (the Sepaker) had con-
sequentlyput the second reading of the Bill.
Mr. BUSBY, on the suggestion of several Hon. Mem-
bers, then moved that the second reading of the Bill
should be taken after the other orders of the day.
After a few words from Sir C. DOUGLAS,
Mr. PUSEY withdrew his amendment, and
Mr. BECKET DENISON rose to move another
amendment, to the effect that the Bill be read this day
six months,