The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-29 00:00:00

—.—. .,
lors valid and legal. He begged the House to consider what
would be the effect of it. There were some individuals who
held offices in the old Corporations of trust and profit.
They were to be removed by these new Councillors acting
without any legal authority ; they had been deprived
of their offices and emoluments, although they were entitled
at the present moment to hold those offices and emoluments.
Now, if the House lay this Bill rendered the appointment of
these Councillors up to the 25th of September, they would in
effect deprive those individuals of those emoluments. He
thought the House would pause before they passed a
Bill having such an effect. —(Hear, bear.) Another
point wrs, if the House made ,the appointments legal by the
present Bill, the refusal of any parties to concur in what they
had done would be an illegal act in the eye of a court of law,
and in such a case the court had the power to fine and im-
prison. Another subject was the Quarter Session. They had
been illegally held, and notwithstanding they convic;ed prisoners
of felony, those covicted were illegal : but still if the present Bill
passed, the men who had been illegally convicted were to be
pronounced as having been convicted legally. He trusted on
the whole the Noble Viscount would take the principle of the
Bill into his serious consideration before he sanctioned it fur-
ther.----The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed.
APPOINTMENT OF MAGISTRATES. .

Lord WHARNCLIFFE 'moved for a return of the Magis-
trates appointed under the Municipal Corporations Act, since
the last returns had been furnished. The Noble Lord stated,
that he should be able to show there never had before been
such a system of magisterial appointments as under that Act.

ST-AFFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice that he
should, on the 15th of next month, move for the second read-
ing of the Stafford Disfranchisement Bill.
Lord LYNDHURST wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Noble Lord (the Marquis of Clanricarde)
to permit evidence to be given at the bar of the House relative
to the Bill, because otherwise he believed it would be the only
instance of such a 89.1 having been read a second time without
evidence being given.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition. )
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that when the
time came for him to move the second reading he should state
upon what grounds he did so.
The Earl of HARROWBY presented a petition from the
Freemen of Stafford, praying that they might be heard by
counsel at the Bar.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

The Duke of WELLINGTON wished to know from the
Noble Viscount when he intended to adjourn the House, and
to what time ?
Lord MELBOURNE said he should move an adjournment
of the House to-morrow until Tuesday the 12th of April.
SALE OF BREAD BILL.
The Duke of RICHMOND moved the second reading of
the Sale of Bread Bill ; and stated that after the recess, he
should move that it be referred to a Select Committee.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.

Lord CHARLES SOMERSET brought up the Report
of the Committee on the Great Western Railway Bill.
BIRMINGHAM, BRISTOL, AND THAMES JUNC-

TION RAILWAY.

Mr. WILKS laresented a petition from 318 Thames wa-
termen, in favour of the above Bill.
Petitions to the same effect were presented by Lord G.
LENNOX, from 600 inhabitants of Vauxhall ; Mr. BYNG, from
800 inhabitants of Chelsea ; and Mr. CLAY, from Westminster.
On the motion of the latter Hon. Members the Bill was
then read a second time.
MR. BUCKINGHAM'S CLAIMS.

Mr. WILKS presented a petition from Pollockshaws, in
Rcnfrewshire, in favour of the claims of the above gentleman.
MIDLAND COUNTIES RAILWAY.

Mr. GLADSTONE presented a petition from a place in
Leicestershire in favour of the above Bill.

Mr. CHALMERS moved the second reading of the
Writers to the Signet Widow's Fund Bill.
Mr. ROEBUCK presented a petition from Bath in favour
of the Eastern Counties Railway Bill, and one from Bury St.
Edmund's against the Assize Hall Bill for that town.
LAMBETH IMPROVEMENT BILL.

---
On the motion of Mr. HAWES the above Bill was read a
second time.
MERTHYR TIDVIL AND CARDIFF RAILWAY

BILL.

Mr. HALL presented a petition from certain proprietors of
the Glamorgan Canal, complaining that the standing orders
not been complied with by the promoters of this Bill, and
praying the Committee on the standing orders with respect to this
Bill might be revived. It was necessary, before a Bill of this na-
ture were introduced, that notice of it should be inserted two
successive weeks in the county papers. The promoters of this
Bill had inserted notice only once. On this ground, he moved
that the petition be referred to the Committee.—Agreed to.