The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-01 00:00:00

WESTMINSTER SMALL DEBTS.

On the motion of Mr. WARD, the Westminster Small
Debts' Bill was read a third time and passed—a clause
having been previously added by way of rider.
Lord ACHESON presented several petitions from

. .
places in Armagh, in favour of the Irish
it had Originally palsed that 49,45. e ; and One .itned by'SOO
persens of all relrgiiini tiiftying for the
toval ahiitiOn of V,thelil
teb'rtlSH LAW REFORM. _

Mr. WALLACE had several petitions to present from
Scotland upon a subject which had very much agitated the
public mind there, namely, an improvement in the law, and
the way
,in which it was administered in the Courts. The
first petition-4as from the town of Greenock, which be had
the honour to represent, signed by the Provost and Town
Council. The Lord Advocate, with the most praiseworthy
perseverance, was attempting, to carry through Bills for the
purpose ofiniproving these laws. It was a matter of the deepest
concern 'to the people of Scotland that the feudal system in
all its absurdity should be retained in the passing of pro-
perty from one proprietor to another. He thought there was
now good reason to expect that the present Lord Advocate
would not let the matter sleep ; and he trusted Government
would not throw obstacles in the way of passing the Bills, but
would take care they were sent up to the other House in time
for their being passed this session. The other petitions
were from the feuars of Ayr and Wallacetown, and an-
other place, also. in Ayrshire. The Hon. Member also
presented a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of
Greenock, praying that no greater power might be granted
to the Steam- Navigation Company of London. Also a
petition from the county-town of Argyle, praying that the
Acts of Parliament might be placed in such hands, and in
such a manner, as that the public might have better ac-
cess to them. The Hon. Member thought, that persons
who were bound to obey Acts of Parliament ought to
have the means of knowing what the laws were. Also a
petition from the Office-bearer and Council of the Glasgow
Political Society praying for Vote by Ballot. The Hon. Mem-
ber thought the time was come, if justice was to be done to
the people, that they ought to have Vote by Ballot. If it
was adopted there would be no such thing heard of as
head-money. Also a petition from the same place praying for
an alteration in the Municipal Reform Bill. Also a petition
from Hamilton, praying that the attorney tax might be abo-
lished ; also a similar petition from the Dean of Faculty and
Writers .of Greenock. The petitioners had prayed for
law reform for three Sessions, as they were convinced that
it would be for the good of the community at large to
have a sweeping reform. The Hon. Member also pre-
sented a petition from Greenock against the Lords' amend-
ments to the Irish Municipal Reform Bill. He would
not now enter into a discussion on the subject, as he should
have another opportunity in the course of the evening of

doing so.
Sir E. CODRINGTON presented a petition from a
gentleman, a surgeon in the navy, who had been removed
and deprived of his half-pay without trial or examination
that he was aware of. At the end of the war the peti-
tioner bad been put upon the half-pay list, and went into
private practice. He had a right to do this—it was his
duty towards his family to do so, and it was in,all respect
becoming. In 1827 he became bankrupt, being indebted to
his agent 521. He was brought before the Commissioners,
and opposed by his agent, when this debt was treated as a
private debt, and the petitioner was discharged. The pri-
soner ought not to have undergone any further punishment.
The agent, however, made false representations to the Admi-
ralty, and the consequence was, that the petitioner was re-
moved from the list and deprived of his half-pay. This was
one of those transactions which he had endeavoured to bring
before the House, but always found himself opposed when
he endeavoured to lay the facts of the case before the
public. He had several other petitions of a similar nature,
but all they sought was the reasons for which they were
removed. The present petitioner having undergone all
punishment for his debts was discharged as other men,
and he ought not to be subjected to further punish-
ment. What was the case ? He was removed from
his station by an arbitrary, unseen power, which was
nothing more nor less than a star chamber. This power
deprived him of the means of procuring subsistence
for his family. This man had served his country. He says
that two gentlemen had been lately put on the Pension
List for certain services—which were no services in com-
parion with the services of those persons whose cause he
advocated. He asked the Government whether these gen-
tlemen were subject to be scratched off the List by an un-
seen power ? And if not, why were others to be subject to
this arbitrary, unjust, and merciless power?
The LORD ADVOCATE presented petitions' from
Glasgow, Leith, and other places, in favour of the Scotch
Municipal Bill. Also a petition from the shipowners of
the town of Leith, in favour of an improvement of the
Leith Harbour.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS.

Mr. Serjeant GOULBURN presented a petition from
certain gentlemen in the town of Leicester, who were en-
trusted with very large Charities under the will of the late
Alderman Newton. The petitioners stated that that gen-
tleman had declared himself a zealous member of the
Church of England, and .had given certain sums
of money for the purpose of clothing and bring-
ing up children in the doctrines of the Established
Religion. They further stated that the Bill for the
regulation of Charitable Funds might have the effect of
giving those funds to persons who utterly dissented from
the doctrines of the Church of England, and prayed that
care would be taken by the Legislature that the trusts should
not be handed over to Dissenters and others, who were op-
posed to the Established Church.
DIOCESE OF DURHAM.

Mr. A. TREVOR presented a petition from the paro-
chial clergy of the diocese of Durham, praying that the
House would take into its special consideration the ecclesi-
astical condition ofthat diocese. He trusted he would be ex-
cused for trespassing upon the attention of the House ; but
he thought the petition one of very great importance, and he
trusted his Majesty's Government would allow full time to
inquire into the statements made by the clergymen of the
diocese. The Hon. Member concluded by moving, that
the petition be printed.
Captain PEC HELL opposed the motion. He had no
objections to the sentiments contained in the petition ; but,
when he (Capt. Pechell), brought the case of a poor wo-
man, named Jane Campion, before the House--(A laugh)
they had refused to allow the petition to be printed, and
he submitted that the present petition' came within the rule
laid down on that occasion.

The SPEAKER was of opinion that the petition did
come within the rule, as it was not intended to found any
ulterior proceeding upon it.
The, motion was then withdrawn.

Sir . GEARY presented petitions from the Trustees
of turnpike roads against the Turnprike Trusts' Consolida-
tion Bill. Also a petition from the Tithe-owners of the
county of Kent, praying that compensation might be
awarded them in case of any legislative interference with
their property. The Hon. Member then presented a peti-
tion from Blackheath, Greenwich, &c., in favour of the
Lords' Amendments to the Irish Corporation Bill.
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented a petition from the
Delegates from the factories of Leeds, Dewsbury, and other
places, praying for a concise ten hours' Factory Bill, the
one now in the statute book being a nonentity. It could
not be carried into effect.

Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition to the same
effect from a factory in Dewsbury.
Mr. J. A. SMITH presented a petition from (as we un-
derstood) Mr. C. E. Drummond on behalf of himself and
complaining of his being excluded from pursuing
his claims upon the sum awarded by France, for the re-
payment of losses by British subjects during the war.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition, praying for the abo-
lition of Church-rates.

Lord W. BENTINCK presented a petition from Glas-
gow, against the Scotch Municipal Reform Amendment
Bill.

SALE OF SPIRITUOUS LIQUORS.

Sir J. BECKETT presented a petition from the Mayor
and Town Council of the borough of Leeds, complaining
of the number of places in that town that had lately been
erected for the sale of Spirituous Liquors, and praying the
House to adopt some measure for their suppression. The Hon.
Baronet thought the subjects of the petition were well de-
serving of the attention of his Majesty's Government ; and
he hoped they would take the subject into their own hands.
The Hon. Baronet also presented a petition from the Di-
rectors of the Leeds Joint Stock Banking Company, com-
plaining of the course adopted by the Select Committee to
enquire into Joint Stock Banks, in having called upon those
establishments to forward returns as to the mode in which
their business was transacted. The petitioner; thought
the course adopted by the Select Committee was most
inquisitorial.
Mr. BAtNES supported the petition.
CASE OF LIEUT. PERROTT, R.N.
Mr. T. ATTWOOD presented a petition from Lieu-
tenant Perrott of the Royal Navy, complaining that he
had been dismissed the service without any sufficient reason.
The Hon. Member then went at some length into the facts
of the petition, but they have been so often laid before the
House, and the public, that it is unnecessary to repeat
them. He hoped the House would stretch out to this
unhappy man the arm of its protection, and shelter him
from wrong and oppression.
Mr. PESE rose to order. He had attended there for
a whole week to present petitions. If it was the under-
standing of the House that speeches should be made on the
presentation of every petition, he would submit to it
readily ; but if they were to have a certain time in which to
present petitions, he thought that time should be occupied
by the presentation of petitions alone.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. ATTWOOD was in the possession of the House.
The SPEAKER said, that if the Hon. Member would
state the circumstances and facts mentioned in the petition
and the prayer, in all probabitity the Hon. Member's pur-
pose would be answered.
Mr. ATTWOOD would follow the advice that had been
given from the Chair The Hon. Member then stated
that the petitioner had been struck off the list by all arbi-

trary order th Admirdity;, withclut any trial that he
had hcen tried by a &WA-Martial, and striiCk id three years
before, and that in one month afterwards he was restoredby
the sign manual on account of his bravery ; hut his solicitor
had made an affidavit, in which he stated he would not have
been convicted if be could have procured a copy of the in-
dictment which the Admiralty had refused him.
The petition having been brought up,
Mr. C. WOOD was sorry 'to be obliged to trouble
the House upon a subject with which he believed
every Hon.—Member was already fully acquainted. The
only circumstance which had occurred since the case
of Mr. Perrott had been last before the House,
was the trial and conviction that had taken place.
He (Mr. C. Wood), although the trial had been relied upon
by the Hon. • Member for Birmingham, was glad that it
had taken place, as every one of the allegations made against
the petitioner had been proved. He had been convicted
of a gross and base fraud ; and it had also been shown that
he had obtained his pension by gross fraud, he having stated
he had lost his arni while exercising7eat guns in the Channel.
It was true the fraud had not been found out for some
time, but, so far from acting harshly, the Admiralty had
acted most humanely, as they allowed him to retain a pen-
sion, to which it was clear he had' no right. The peti-
tioner had charged Sir John Hardy with first giving him a
good character, and then refusing the prayer of the
petition. Now the fact was, that the character was given by
Captain Hardy previous to 1808. Between 1808 and 1809,
Mr. Perrott's conduct was so bad that the Captain had de-
termined to bring him to a Court-martial, but he obtained
his discharge in consequence of losing his arm—so that that
loss had first saved him from a Court-martial, and then had
got him a pension, to which he was not entitled. The
petition mentioned many wounds received, and battles at
which he said he had been at ; he only mentioned one date,
and then the Records of Admiralty proved that he could
not be at sea at all. He, therefore, doubted all the state-
ments of the petition.
Sir E. CODRINGTON said that here was assertion
against assertion. He did not understand why the Admi-
ralty reiords should be trusted without investigation. The
quest: here was, had there been an examination face to
face ?—(Hear, hear.) He did not know the case.
The SPEAKER called the Hon. Member 'to order.
A motion would be made by the Hon. Member for Bir-
mingham on the subject, and then the Hon. and Gallant
Member would have an opportunity of expressing his
sentiments.
Sir E. CODRINGTON would postpone any observa.
tions he had to make until the motion was made ; but he
knew the difficulty there was in bringing forward a mo-
tion.--(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
Admiral ADAM said that when the motion was made
he would be ready to meet it.
Mr. HUME said he would be able to disprove every
allegation that had been made against the petitioner, as they
had been disproved before a jury of his countrymen. The
Hon. Gentleman bad made the same assertions last year ;
they had been printed in a public newspaper; Mr. Perrott
brought the printers of the paper before a Jury, who
stated that they did not believe a single word of the
charges, and gave damages to Mr. Perrott, and found the
Admiralty guilty.—(Great laughter.)
Mr. C. WOOD—When the Hon. Member stated that
the Admiralty had been found guilty---(Renewed laughter)
—he must say that the Admiralty had in no way whatever
offended.
Mr. HUME—I beg pardon ; no, no.—(A laugh.) He
understood, however, that the attorney for the Admiralty
laid before the Jury every document they held, in justifica-
tion of the Admiralty ; and the Jury, after the most pa-
tient inquiry, gave a verdict against them. It was hard,
after all this, that the individual in question should be so
persecuted.
Admiral ADAM begged to be allowed to say one word
in explanation. The Attorney for the petitioner had been
to Sir John Barrow, and apologised for giving him so much
trouble for so unworthy a purpose.—(Cheers.)
After a few words from Mr. Goulburn, Mr. Hume, and
Mr. Attwood, the petition was ordered to lie on the table,
to be printed ; and Mr. Attwood gave notice that, on this
day se'nnight, he should bring forward a motion on the
subject.