The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-02 00:00:00

PETITIONS.

Mr. 'WILCOX presented a petition from Southampton
in favour of tha abolition of punishment of death.
Mr. BLACKSTONE presented a petition, praying
the House to take steps to relieve the existing agri-
cultural distress.
Mr. PALMER presented a number of petitions against
the Marriage Bill.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented petitions to the same
effect.
Sir JOHN DUCKWORTII presented petitions against
the Oaths Bill.
Several HON. MEMBERS presented petitions in favour
of international arbitration.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented eleven petitions from
individuals residing in the metropolis, in favour of uni-
versal sufferage, and petitions against State endowments
for religious purposes.
Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from Saddleworth,
in the West Riding, praying the House to pass a Bill to
regulate the county rate expenditure.
Sir JOSHUA WALIISLEY presented a petition
from Leicester in favour of the Parliamentary Oaths
Bill.

Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition to the same effect,
and several petitions in favour of the Clergy Relief Bill,
and also petitions praying for the abolition of punish-
ment of death.
Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition praying for
the revival of the suppressed Irish bishoprics.
Several petitions were presented in favour of the
Clergy Relief Bill, and praying for the liberation of Mr.
Shore.

Mr. CHRISTOPHER presented a petition from a
place in Lincolnshire against the Parliamentary Oaths
Bill.

Mr. SMITH presented a petition from Birmingham
praying the House to take steps to insure efficient rail-
way travelling on Sundays.
Mr. S. WORTLEY presented several petitions in
favour of his Bill for legalizing marriage with a deceased
wife's sister.
Mr. T. EGERTON presented a petition from a place
in the county of Chester against the Parliamentary
Oaths Bill.
General LYG ON presented a petition from a place in
Worcestershire against the Copyhold Enfranchisement
Bill.

Mr. DEEDES presented petitions from Kent com
plsining of agricultural distress.
MARRIAGE BILL.

Mr. EWART brought in the Marriage by License
Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read
a second time to-morrow.
VOTE BY BALLOT.

Mr. H. BERKELEY postponed his motion with re-
spect to taking votes fur Members of Parliament by way
of ballot until the 17th inst.
PARLIAMENTARY REFORM'.

Mr. T. D'E YNCOURT gave notice of his intention to
ask for leave to bring in a Bill to shorten the duration
of Parliaments.
Mr. S. CRAWFORp gave notice that, on the motion
of the Hon. Member for Montrose, to amend the national
representation, he should move an amendment to extend
the suffrage to all adult males, not disqualified by law,
which had been registered and resident for a certain
time within the electoral districts.
CLERGY RELIEF BILL.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON gave notice that in the Com-
mittee on the Clergy Relief Bill, he should move that the
following words be added as a proviso to the 6th clause:—
" Provided always, that nothing in this Act now con-
tained shall authorise the refusal of the right of burial
in the accustomed manner to any dissenting person."
FETHARD FEVER HOSPITAL.
Mr. SCULLY moved for copies of all the corre-
spondence between the Board of Health, the Poor-law
Board, and the Board of Guardians of the Cashel Union,
or the vice-guardi.ins and any other persons, with re-
spect to the Fethard Temporary Fever Hospital.
Agreed to.
MR. CREWE AND THE WORCESTERSHIRE
SESSIONS.
Sir J. PAKINGTON asked the Secretary of State
fur the Home Department, whether the amount of the
recognizances of the Rev. Mr. Crewe, which were es-
treated by order of the Court for non-attendance to give
evidence on a trial at the Michaelmas Quarter Sessions
for Worcestershire, had been returned to Mr. Crewe by
order of the Treasury; and if so, upon what grounds,
and whether the forms and practiee usual at the Trea-
sury and the Home-office on such occasions were ob-
served in this instance.
Sir G. GREY stated that after an inquiry had been
made into the facts of the case the recognizanees had
been returned by the Treasury to Mr. Crewe. It ap-
peared that he attended the sessions on a day in October,
but as the justices were not all present he returned home
in the evening, a distance of 13 miles, and afterwards
became so unwell that he was not able to return to
Worcester on the following day. The Right Hon.
Baronet, after detailing the universal course adopted in
cases of this kind, stated that in consequence of an acci-
dental omission it had not been followed in the present
instance.
REPORTING THE DEBATES—BREACH OF
PRIVILEGE.

Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL begged to call the attention
of the House to what he conceived was a breach of pri-
vilege. The sessional orders of the House laid down that
strangers were not to be admitted into the House during
its debates, and that its debates should not be reported
without the permission of the House. He was not
going to argue at all upon the good sense of retaining
such a rule; at the same time, when strangers were per-
mitted to report their proceedings i 1 was but reasonable
that the House should expect them to be fairly and
impartially reported. In a newspaper called
the Times—(Laughter)--a great violation of that
rule took place in the debate which occurred
on the third reading of the Rate in Aid Bill for Ireland.
He believed the proper course would be to call the
printer of that paper to the bar to answer for his conduct,
and he (Mr. J. O'Connell) would conclude with a mo-
tion to that effect. He found the proceedings of
last night were regularly set out and reported,
but he found that not only a great part of what.
Hon. Members said was reported, that much of
what they did say was omitted, and that a deal
of what they did not say was given.—(Laughter.)
Me found a great deal of what he himself
,said
was omitted. Now, it might be a matter of no
great importance to the editor of the Times
what he (Mr. John O'Connell) said in that House, but
to himself it was of some importance that he should be
tolerably correctly reported, for he had a constituency to
whom he was responsible for his conduct. He bad
observed that the speeches of the Irish Members
were not done the same justice to as those of English
Members. He complained that that was unfair. He did
not know whether the other Irish Members in the House
would longer submit to that practice; but he (Mr. J.
O'Connell) fur one would not do so. The Hon. Gentleman
concluded by charging the proprietors, printers, and
editors of the Timm, and all concerned, with a violation
of the order of the House, and by moving that the
printer of that paper be called to the bar of the House
to answer for his conduct.
Mr. SCULLY seconded the motion.
The SPEAKER said he could not put the motion, in-
asmuch as the Hon. Member had not given the name of
the printer.—(Laughter.)
Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL here hurried out of the
House, and returning in a few moments with a news-
paper in his hand, said the name of the printer was John
Joseph Lawson.—(Laughter.)
The SPEAKER put the motion that John Joseph
Lawson be called to the bar of the House to-morrow.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR did hope the honourable Gen-
tleman weeld spare the time of the House.
If any Member had a right to complain of his
speeches nut being impartially reported, he himself had
that right, but he did not think it worth his while to
complain to the House on a matter of that kind.
Sir GEORGE GREY said, considering the 'cir-
cumstances under which their debates were reported,
that the gentlemen who were engaged in that business
had a mere permissive right to report the proceedings,
which was clogged with some disadvantages, he hopedla
the Hon. Gentleman would not do any thing to cast censure
on the rep')rts of the debates in the public journals. He
(Sir G. Grey) himself was not in the habit of reading the
debates; he generally contented himself with reading
those admirable summ,ries of the proceedings of the
House which of late years had been given in the public
journals, and which contained a most fair and impartia
resuW of the debate.

Mr. BROTHERTON said, with regard to the real
question before the House, he really thought the Times
was a most accurate paper indeed ; he was sometimes
quite surprised to see the accuracy with which it
gave the debates. There was another paper, how-
ever, which he could not say so much for, and
that other paper was the Daily News, which
had represented him to have stated in the
House that his last
The
Tact
wasionc hostei hadm h
wholly untrue. 4 ib°l4w
electedhieh was
wholly firea
s
times for Salford, and on no one of those occasions had
his election cost him a penny piece.—(Hear, hear.) He
made a practice of never
paying anything for his elec-
tions, and he knew most of his friends disbelieved the
report, and he did not care much about it.—(Laughter.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said what he complained of was
that the speeches of Irish Members were not given fully.
The Right Hon. Baronet being an English Member bad
nothing to complain of in that respect, but be com-
plained that much of what ho did say was entirely
omitted, while a great deal of what he did not say
had been put in.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
If the House wished to get rid of the rule to which he
had directed attention, let them abrogate it at once ;
but so long as it existed, let the House see that fair play
was done to Irish as well as English Members. For the
present, however, he should withdraw his motion; but
if the offence were repeated, he should not deal wth it
so lightly.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. BERKELEY suggested that the Hon. and
Learned Member had better send his speeches to the
papers, instead of making them in the House.—(Hear.)
The motion was then withdrawn.
MR. LAYARD'S DISCOVERIES.
Sir J. PAKINGTON wished to ask the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, whether it was the intention of her
Majesty's Government to assist Mr. Layard in his dis-