The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-29 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON,
.TUESDAY, MAY 29, 1838.

.-priAing how the people of Irehnd can so tranquilly behold
the pri,grrs3 of a measure Which, while professin2* to relieve
them, s a mere mockery of their misery, and while tempting.
them with the promise of a right of legislative provision, would
rob them of their independence, and plunge their country into
a state of even greater misery and dozradation than it has ever
yet experienced.—Morning Advertiser.

ELECTION COMMITTEES.

YESTERDAY.

(From our Second Edition of last
WESTMEATH.

The Committee met at Twelve o'clock.
Mr AUSTIN was heard from that time to half.past Two, in opposition
to the opening of the registry.
• •

The Committee ordered the room to be cleared, and remained in
consultation till half-past Three, when
The CIIAIIINIAN announced a resolution, to the effect that the Com-
mittee did not cansid,T that the Irish Reform Act precluded them
from entering into the registry.
Mr. THESIGErt, on behalf of the sitting Members, gave notice that he
should to morrow apply for a Commission to examine witness es in
Ireland.

This announcement appeared greatly to astonish both the Committee
and the Counsc.: for the petitioners.
The Committee then adjourned.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, il4? 28.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
Mr. HENEA GE took the oaths and his seat as Member far Devizes.
Mr. Crafer, from the TreAsury, appeared at the bar, and presented
certain returns, which were laid on the table.
On the motion of Sir GEORGE CLERK, a new writ was
ordered fur the county of Linlithgow, in the room of the Hon. James
Hope, who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
ST. PANCRAS PAVING BILL.
Captain A LSAGER presented a petition against the St. Pancras
Paving Bill. _ .

Mr. HALL presented a petition from Kentish-town in favour of the
St. Pancras Paving Bill.
•

Lord EASTNOR presented a petition from Somcrs town against it,

Similar petitions were presented by Sir R. INocis and Captain WOOD
from St. Pancras, and the trustees of Skinner's Estate.
Mr. HALL moved the second reading of the St. Pancras Paving Bin
Lord TEIGN3IOUTH opposed the second reading of the Pill which
had just been moved by his Honourable Colleague. Perhaps Honour-
able Members were not aware that this was the sixth time a Bill of
this description, almost identical in its provisions, hail been brought
before the House. Thrice it had been thrown out on the second
reading, and a Committee of the House had decided it was exceedingly
objectionable to entrust the paving of the whole parish of St. Pancras to
the vestry, and they proposed, as a modification, that four boards should
be erected in the parish. After several ineffectual attempts had been
made, his Hon. Friend'had now brought forward the present proposition.
He objected to the Bill on principle, as he thought it would be mischievous
in its operation. The object was to place the whole paving of the parish,
containing 120,000 inhabitants, and 20 .miles in circumference, tinder
the jurisdiction of the Vestry. Hon. Members would recollect that the
parish was partly paved and partly unpaved, and that it was under the
control of 19 different Trusts. Ile heard of no objection being made
to these Trusts. There was a part of the parish at Kentish.town
which was unpaved, but the 57th Geo. 111. enabled the Trusts to extend
their jurisdiction for paving these districts. What he would suggest to
his Hon. Friend was to withdraw the measure, and wait until the next
Session of Parliament by which time steps would be taken to provide for
paving these remote districts of the parish. He could not see
why these trusts should be suddenly and without just cause de-
prived of power, and one circumstance he should mention to show its
extreme unfairness. There were several of these trusts which had
incurred large debts, and which they were on the point of pay-
ing off.—(Hear, hear.) If this Bill were carried, they would be
suddenly deprived of the means. of doing so, and on these grounds he
should give the measure his most decided opposition. lithe Bill passed
the whole of the parish would be thrown into cunfusion, beeause if the
jurisdiction dropped in, they must be placed under one Board.
Mr. HU NIE thought the House did not clearly understand the nature
of the Bill from the statement of the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord
objected to the Bill, because so large a parish would by it be put tinder
the management of one Board. He (Mr. Hume) thought that was an ar
gument in favour of that Bill, for in St. Pancras there were no less than
18 Boards which led to the greatest confusion. In his opinion the Bill
ought to be allowed to go into Committee, where its details might
be considered. He would therefore appeal to the principles of fairness,
and lie trusted that if the principle was good foe one parish, it would be
good for the other.
Lord TEIGNMOUTH—Sir, I forgot to move that the Bill be read
a second time this day six months.
Sir H. INGLIS seconded the amendment, and trusted that the ques-
tion would not be made a party question. The cases of the parish of
St. Pancras and of Marylebone were not at all similar, for in the former
there was a large rural population in one part, and a town population in
another, which was not the case in the latter. He would resist that
which was the sixth attempt to tax the poor in order to put power into
the hands of the vestry.
Mr. HALL was sorry that this Bill should meet with the opposition
of the Noble Lord opposite. He had received a letter from one of his
constituents, stating in winter the children were unable to go to the na-
tional schools in consequence of the impassable state of the roads. Indeed
the state of the streets in the outskirts of the parish was most deplorable.
All he asked was that the Bill might be allowed to go into Commit-
tee. His noble colleague (Lord Teignmouth) was mistaken in sup.
posing that the Bill would place tha whole jurisdiction in the vestry,
because the whole jurisdiction and power were proposed to be taken out
of the hands of the vestry, and placed in the hands of the Rate.payers
and Commissioners to be appointed under the Act. Ile therefore hoped
that the Bill would be allowed to go into Committee, and the sense of
the House could be taken upon its third reading.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided ;
when the numbers were :
For the Bill .
Against it
Majority against the Bilk —26
IsTEINQUAY (CORNWALL) HARBOUR BILL.

This Bill was read a third time, as was also the Rocester-bwidge BM,

GLASGOW WATER-WORKS BILL.

Mr. HINDLEY brought up the report on this Bill.
Reports on the following Bills were received :—The Dudley Hill
Road Bill, the Dcanhcad Reservoir Bill, and Paddington Estates Bill.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition from the Clergy of Canter.
bury, in favour of certain amendments in the Registration and Mar.
riage Acta.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition front Newcastle-on.
Tyne, tbr the abolitio❑ of the system of Negro apprenticeship. Similar
petitions were presented by Mr. Hodges fri m Kent, and Mr. C. Lush.
ington from various places in the county of Suffolk.
Mr. BAINES presented a petition from the Deputies of the several
congregations within twelve miles of London appointed to protect their
civil liberties, in favour of the immediate abolition of Negro apprentice-
ship. Petitions to the same effect were presented by Sir J. I'. HULLER, Mr.
SHAW LEFF:r RE, and several other Hon. Members.
Captain CHET WYND presented a petition for a reduction of the
rates of postage.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON presented a petition from a place in Ayr.
shire, against any further endowment to the Church of Scotland.
Mr. G. KNIGHT presented a petition from the Dean and Chapter
of Carlisle, against any alienation of Church peoperty.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a petition from a place in Devonshire
to the same effect.
Mr. E. BuLLEn. presented a petition in favour of the immediate
abolition of Negro slavery.
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented four petitions for an alteration
in the Factory Laws. The Hon. Member also presented a petition from
a person of the name of Lester, complaining of the delays in the Cdurt
of Chancery, and praying that measures might be adopted for the pur.
pose of giving expedition to the proceedings of that Court.
THE CORONATION.

Sir F. BURDETT presented a petition from several of the tradesmen
of Westminster, praying that the ceremony of the Coronation might be
performed with all the usual solemnities. The petitioners stated that if
any part of the ceremony was dispensed with, trade would be consider_
ably injured. The Hon. Baronet concurred in the prayer of the petition.

NEW WRIT FOR LINLITHGOW.
Mr. GILLON said that he rose to address the House upon a sub.
ject which involved its privileges. He understood that a new writ had
been moved for the County of Linlithgow, on the ground that Mr.
Hope had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds. Ile was informed that
the date of the application fur the Chiltern Hundres was the 7th of the
present month. He understood also that the signature was not filled
in the hand writing of the Honourable Member himself. AS
the Honourable Member had left the country sometime
there were no means of ascertaining whether the signature was
that of the Honourable Member or not. lie had therefore to present a
petition praying that the issuing of the writ might be suspended,
in order that time might be given for a communicetion with Mr. Hope.
He would present the petition and move that it be printed with the
votes and taken into consideration to-morrow. He moved that in the
meantime the issuing of the writ be suspended.
The SPEAKER said it would have been much more regular if the
Hon. Member had got another Hon. Member to present the petition.
Mr. HUME suggested that as it was clearly irregular, the Hon.
Member should withdraw his petition.
The SPEAKER said there was ne rule upon the question, but it
would clearly be more convenient if the old usage were adhered.to.
Sir G. CLERK—As he. had moved the writ he trusted he might be
enabled to render such explanations to the Hon. Member as would ren-
der his motion unnecessary. At all events, as the appointment had re-
gularly taken place, so far as that House was concerned the matter was
at an end, and there was no reason for the delay in issuing the writ.
The day before Captain Hope lett the country, knowing his absence
was likely to be protracted, and not wishing to deprive his Constituents
of a Representative, he had asked him how lie should act. He (Sir G. C.)
told him either to authorise any friend or relation to apply for the Chil.
tern Hundreds, or to write a letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer
himself. Captain Hope wrote that letter, which was left wills his
brother ; it was afterwards put into his (Sir George
Clerke's) hand, with a request that he should go down
to the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; and he acted in compli
ance with that request.—(Cries of" the date.") If a Member of Parlia-
ment stated in his place—(Loud cries of" Hear, hear," from the Tories)
certain facts that had come under his own knowledge he did not know
why they should be doubted.—(Cheers from the Tories.) What he had
stated was on his own responsibility as a Member of Parliament.
Mr. PRYME considered that upon the Hon. Baronet's own .showine
there had been no acceptance of the office. There had been only a solici-
tude to get it; no acceptance. The office had been granted but Capt.
Hope might have changed his mind, and not accepted it.
Sir G. CLERK said that, if an lion. Member asked an individual
to apply for that office, and it was granted by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer the uniform practice was to consider that he had accepted it.
Mr. HUME said the motion that had been put from the Chair was
on the ground that the Chiltern Hundreds had been accepted. The
Speaker had therefore put a question without having any document to
be-
fore s the day
iad been warrant it.— (Cries of " Oh, oh," from the Conservatives.)
Mr.he G
sailed,.
had .HOPEtO saidmt hheelhi oaide
writtenigentlr suchfor a Linlithgow,tera
de-
scribed by his Hon Friend, and that it had been left with his brother,
the lion. Charles Hope. Captain Hope had also expressed to him his
desire to obtain and accept the Chiltern Hundreds.—(Flear, hear.)
Mr. FIUME— Will the Honourable Member state on what day that
was.—(Cries of " No, no," from the Tories.)
Mr. HOPE.—The date was the 6th of May, and he sailed on the 7th.
Mr. E. J. STANLEY said, as he understood, the case was this. An
application was written by Mr. Hope, and left in the hands
of his friend for the office at a time thus might be convenient. It was
left blank, without any date. That blank had been filled up since Cap-
tain Hope had left the country, and therefore they had no reason
to know whether the Honourable Member might not have changed
his wind since.—(Hear, and ironical cheers from the Conservatives.)
The House could not know whether other circumstances might not have
arisen since the letter was written, which might make it desirable to the
Hon. and Gallant Gentleman to retain his seat. It was for the House
to consider whether there was any informality in its own proceed-
ings which might require that a resolution should be altered. He sub.
mitted that the mere fact that a place had been applied for,:and that the
application had been acceded to, was sufficient to establish the accep-
tance, and to require the issue of the writ.
Sir T. FREMANTLE thought that when the place was granted upon
any gentleman's application, he ceased to be a Member of the House.
It was a mere quibble to raise an objection to the 155110 of the writ, be.
cause there had not been a formal acceptance of the place after the
appointment,—(Hear, hear.)