The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-28 00:00:00

PERI

AMEN T.

Lord ASHBURTON wished to his Noble Friend
(Lord Clanricarde) whether it was his intention to
-proceed with the Stafford to-morrow.
also take the opportunit- • He would
y of asking him whether in
his opinion the evid",:nce already taken was such as
would induce hira to press on the Bill in its
present shape for 'the total d:sfranchiscment of the borough r
would it not br, better to adjourn all further proceedings an
the Bill till, next session, not for the purpose of defeating
the Bill, because in his opinion, it was necessary for that
House to do something to put an end to stieh scenes as was
it evidence before them ? The ensuing registration might
afford them materials for an improved Bill, and nothing
would be lost if the matter was taken up quite early in the
next session.

The Marquis of CL A.NRICARDE had observed that
there was mi.PAI important business before the House to-
morvow. There were two of the most important Bills of
the Session, the Irish Church Bill and the Marriages Bill
vomio on then. He would therefore, with the leave of the
Hov.se, defer the further proceedings from to-morrow #.;11
Fr:alay. On that occasion, when the House was better
attended, he would have no objection to discuss or consider
-whether the Bill ought to be put off or not for another
year. His own wish was to proceed with the Bill, for the
question had been so long open that it was almost necessary
that it should be settled. He thought the evidence quite
sufficient for pas-sing- the Bill in its present shape ; but if
it was adjourned, he hoped that there would be some evi-
dence of the participation by the House in the feelings ex-
pressed by the Noble Lord, that something ought to be
done inr respect of Stafford elections. With such an un-
derstanding he would not much object to the postpone-
meat of the Bill.
The Land Tax Commissioners' Names Bill, and the
Newspaper Postage Bill, were read a second time.
Mr. HARVEY and others hrought up the London Ceme-
tery Bill.—Adjourned.

HOUSE 1)F COMMONS, JULY 27.
The SPEAKER kook the Chair at four o'clock.
EDINBURZIH, LEITH, AND NEWHAVEN
RAILWAY.
The LORD ADVOCATE brought in the Edinburgh,
Leith, and Newhaven Railway Bill, which Was read a first
time.

CHADWICK'S
_ESTATE.
Mr. BROTHERTON brrught up the Report of the
Committee on Chadwick's Estate Bill, which was read a
third time and passed.
BISHOPUIC OF DUBLIN BILL.
Mr. A. TREVOR presented two petitions from pa-
rishes in Durham, against the appropriation of the reve-
nues of the see of Durham. The Hon. Member stated
that tLese petitions were signed by the laity only, and that
he considered they justified him in the opposition he had
given to the Bishopric of Durham Bill.
Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from literary and
scientific gentlemen, members of a Natural History Society in
"Worcester, praying that in any sale or appropriation of the
surplus or duplicate coins and other curiosities of the British
Museum, they might be allowed to purchase them. A sum
of .5,000/. had been expended by the gentlemen of Worces-
ter in the formation of this institution, and from the evi-
dence of the Librarian of the British Museum before the
Committee of the House, it appeared that these coins and
other works of art, were entirely useless to the public.
Sir JOHN BECKETT presented petitions from agri-
cultural parishes in favour of the Bill for Enclosing Com-
mons and Improving Waste Lands. As the Agricultural
Committee had not favoured the House with any report, he
(Sir J. Beckett) hoped this Bill, which the petitioners con-
sidered a very valuable one, would be allowed to pass.
Mr. WILK'S supported the prayer of the petitioners.
Mr. GRATTAN moved for some returns relative to the
Poor Law Commission (Ireland), the exact purport of
which we did not catch.

SCOTTISH COURTS.
Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from Henry
Jones, Esq., of Upper Canada, late a purser in the navy,
praying that the House would take steps to facilitate the
proceedings in the Scotch Courts of Law. He stated that
he had had a case in litigation in the Supreme Court in
Scotland for two years, and that it had now only arrived at
that stage in which it could be submitted to a jury. Had
it been in any of the Courts of Westminster Hall it would
have been brought to the same stage in less than two
months. He stated that formerly he had the misfortune
to be concerned in a Chancery suit, which was bad enough,
but the Scotch Courts were much more dilatory—in fact
he could not compare it with anything in this world, but
seemed to realize that which would trle place in the next.
A sum of 5,0001. was impounded, and he was kept from his
family for two years, and he saw nothing but ruin for them
unless the House interfered in o'rder to quicken the proceed-
ings of these Courts. The petitioner further complained
of the conduct of the Hon. Member for Chichester, who
was the other litigating party, in having taken a copy of
the petition, and sent it down to his agent in Scotland, he
having been furnished with it merely out of courtesy. In
that charge he (Mr. Wallace) did not concur, as the docu-
ment was now public property, and the delay of a
few days could not be material. He perfectly
joined in the prayer of the petition. The
petitioner trusted that the House would take this
subject into its serious consideration, for although it might
be law, he would take upon himself to say it was not jus-
tice. He agreed very much in all the assertions of the
petition, though he must confess that he brought the sub-
ject forward with some degree of diffidence, considering
that the Lord Advocate of Scotland had brought forward
so many measures for the amelioration of the legal condi-
tion of Scotland ; but among those he must be allowed to
say the subject of the petition had escaped him.
Mr. A. SMITH could not conceive why the peti-
tiouer should have marked him out by name as the
object of attack.—(Hear.) In reference to the particular
:accusation against himself—that of making an improper
use of the petition he had presented, he would say a few
words. The Hon. Member for Derbyshire had told him
of his intention of presenting a petition on the subject ;
and at that time he had told him fairly that he was una-
ware of the statements of the petition. He had taken a
copy of it, and sent it to Edinburgh ; and the answer he
had received he had given to the Hon. Member for Der-
bythire, and the result was, that that Honourable
Member had refused to present the petition. Since
then several Members had been applied to, and they
had also refused to present the petition. In the course he
had pursued he had done nothing but what he had been
sanctioned in by the Hon. Member for Derbyshire. He
had nothing further to say, than to express his surprise that
the petitioner had taken the present means of making at-
tacks upon Hon. Members.
Mr. HUME would take this opportunity of asking the
Lord Advocate what had been become of the suit instituted
by the Crown against Lord Dundas ? That House had
checked the law officers of the Crown to institute proceedings
against Lord Dundas, but instead of stopping the 3001. of
which he was in the receipt, they had allowed him to re-
ef Ave it up to the present time, and he wanted to know,
after three years, what was the issue, or what was likely to
be the issue of this suit?
The LORD AD VOCA.T.E hoped, in reply to the alle-
gations contained in the petition presented by the Hon,
Member for Greenock, to be allowed to make one obser-
vation. It usually happened that in every case one party
was right, aid the other was wrong, ; and the party who
found hit,
in the wrong, was likely to come to that
(HHouse and to say that justice was not done him.—
ear, hear.) The complaint of delay against the Court
of Session, was unjust. This silk had continued for two
yenrs, but the fact was that in the Court of Chancery there
Isere amicable suits of thirteen years standing. If such
charges as these were rashly made in that House, without
sufficient grounds, they would deprive the Courts of that
. weight to which they were justly entitled from the charac-
ter of the Judges, and they would be inflicting a serious
injury oe. the distribution of justice. With regard to the
particr;lar case me:Atoned by the Hon. Member for Mid-
dlesc.:x, there was in it a question of very great difficulty.
Tl-,0 Hon. Member thought that the Crown ought at once
v., withhold these revenues. Now, it was not in the
'power of the Crotvn to take possession of these revenues.
And, under all the circumstances of the case, it was one
that was attended with great delay.
Sir G. CLERK said, that his Hon. and Learned Friend,
the Lord-....,A (I:vocate, was -mistaken in supposing that Lord
Dundas ~ad interposed any delay. Whatever delay had
arisen 'was created solely by the parties prosecuting the suit.
The LORD-ADVOCATE said, that his Hon. Friend
(Sir G. Clerk) was not sufficiently informed of the facts,
or he would have been aware that that was not tie case.
Mr. HUME was glad he had asked the question, as it
had enabled him to make this statement, that the answer
of the Lord-Advocate confirmed the statement of the pe-
titioner.
POORI.
Mr. WALTER rose to present petition from the ma-
gistrates, clergymen, and guardians of,the poor and rate-
payers in the parish of Petworth, and,the neighbouring
parishes, in the county of Sussex. ...,Tfie \Hon. Member
statet.tha . ievance the petitioners complained of was
thaVinfiraer: ha' d been recently issued by the Commis-
siontyl,farbiddinganYput-door relief whatever to the families
101 A-bodied labourers.
§a** lie SPEAKEK.said that he must request the Hon.
:- ituber to limit himseif to the statements in the Petition.
. ' r. WALTE,Oid not wish to transgress the rules of

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did
not think the Bill would be proceeded with this Session.
Of course, Hon. Members would have full notice of any
changes that were contemplated.
The SPEAKER then put the question that the Orders
of the Day should be read, when
Mr. HUME rose, for the purpose of putting a question
to the Members of his Majesty's Government. In the
course of the last Session returns had been laid before the
House relative to the income of the Colonies ; those re-
turns were imperfect, and, as they were now approaching
the end of the Session, he considered it most important
that perfect returns should be laid on the table of the House.
Mr. BARING would take care that returns, such as
could be procured, should be laid on the table of the
House before the end of the present Session.
PRISONERS' COUNSEL BILL.
On the motion for proceeding with the Order of the
Day for the House taking into consideration the Lords'
amendments to this Bill,
Mr. EWA RT rose—He conceived that the most im-
portant part of the Bill had been cut out of it by the amend-
ments made by the Lords ; he alluded to that portion which
established the principle that persons charged with treason,
suspicion of treason, and felony, should have the last word.
That he considered the very basis of the Bill, and without it the
ends of justice and the dictates of reason were put an end to.
The Noble personage who seemed to have had the conduct
of this Bill in the other House of Parliament shut out the
principle laid down by the Commissioners ; viz., that the
accused party should have the last word. The words in
the Commissioners' Report were, "it appears to us, as a

i.,' °gal

--- --.....—..---....___.---......._
the House, but probably ti'o tilifillt be allowed to allude to a
decision which had beer; come ;0.
riOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 27. The SPEA•EIL'it if,,,.ain interrupted the Hon. T Member,
Earl. SHAFESBUR W
Y took the Woolsack as Deputy reT,estin-dibe would confine himself to the prayer of the
Spcalscr at five o'clock.
Pet....,:ton.
T,,lr. BROTHERTON and others from the Commons brouvb.'. i
up Chadwick's Estate Bill, which had been agreed to with-
out amendment.

Mr. WALTER observed that the petition was one of
very great importance. The petitioners had applied for
some relaxation of the order of the Boards of Guardians,
but without obtaining any relief, and to whom then were
they to apply lint to that House
• Mr. PARKER rose to order,
Major REAtICLERK really hoped thii.t, rule
'would he 4.ltiopted•. Sometimes an CIPt!. Member was
allowed to s'peak for an hour or. the presentation of a pe-
tition., .and at other time!! lie was immediately put down.
The SPEAKER, observed, that in cases of individual
grievance having no relation to matters before the Heuto
it was the pleasure of the House to hear the staWlttaltt
of Hon. Members. No one was more itrikioes than hid4!s'4
to consult the convenience of All sorties.,-t4l-ie.M,.)
Mr. WALTER would ttot occoiiiv thO time of the
Home more than five minutels‘,...olear, hear, hear.)
This petition was signed k- tale most respectable gentle-
men, and was one of kik‘ach importance. It was signed by
two magistrates, a.,:,ven clergymen, ten guardians of the poor,
and three ll'andred rate-payers. No petition had ever been
presented more worthy of the attention of Parliament, both
From the hardships it denounced, and the respectability of
the parties who denounced them.
Major BEAUCLERCK supported the prayer of the
petition. The case was one of extreme hardship, and wits
well worthy of the best attention of the House. He had
himself sent up a similar petition from Leicester to Lord
Melbourne—the parties there would not petition that
House, because the petitions of the poor were not attended
to. There was great need of reform in thq orders relative
to the medical attendance.
Lord G. LENNOX, tho'lin representative of that part
of the county, knew nothing of the case. The Hon.
Member ought to 'cave shown him, or given him notice of
the petition; so that he might have been prepared either to
confirm or deny its statements.
Mr. WAKLEY felt bound to condemn in the strongest
terms the manifestations of impatience which was shown in
the House when the poor came before them as petitioners.
That was called a Reformed Parliament and a Liberal
Ministry, but it that conduct were to be continued he
would wish to get rid of both as soon as possible.
When a petition had been presented from several officers
of the East India Company an hour and forty minutes had
been occupied in its discussion, but yet, when the petition of
the poor man came before the House the greatest impa-
tience had been manifested. He had been informed that at
Stowmarket a case had occurred in which there were only
two persons in the Workhouse, a husband and wife ; the
husband was blind, and the wife decrepid, and yet it was
considered necessary that an order should be procured
from the Poor Law Commissioners, before the wife could
attend upon her husband. Another instance he could men-
tion was that of a female afflicted with a most excruciating
bodily disease ; she expressed a wish that the medical man
who had been in the habit of attending her should attend
her still, but that was refused.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME wished to know whether his friend knew the
facts he had stated of his own knowledge. He was
as anxious as any man to alleviate the distresses of the
poorer classes ; but he would appeal to the House whether
they were not liable to be led away by party statements,
which, when enquired into, turned out to be without foun-
dation.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG trusted that the Hon. Member
for Berkshire would adopt the advice that had been given
to him, and gave notice upon the subject.
Mr. WAKLEY would not have stated facts that he
had not heard from the best authority ; and he was per-
fectly ready to furnish the Secretary of State for the Home
Department with the name of the practitioner who had
furnished him with the information.
The Marquis of CHANDOS wished to ask the Noble
Lord, the Secretary of State for the Home Department,
whether, in the orders that had been given by the Poor
Law Commissioners, with regard to the windows in work-
houses, they were directed to be so constructed that the
inmates should not be enabled to see out of them ?
Lord J. RUSSELL was not aware of any such order.
If there had been a general rule to any such effect, it
would have been brought specially under his notice.
Mr. BONHAM hoped that the Hon. Member for
Berkshire (Mr. Walter) would fix an early day for the dis-
cussion of his petition ; and he hoped also that the Go-
vernment would give that Hon. Member the power to
bring on the discussion. As his Majesty's Ministers had in
their hands the means of preventing any discussion, he
hoped they would see the necessity of allowing a discussion
on this petition.
After a few words from Mr. A. TREVOR,
Mr. WILKS expressed a hope that the Hon. Member
for Berkshire would not allow this subject to drop. The
petition presented by that Hon. Member was well worthy
the attention of the House.
Mr. WALTER would not fail to adopt the advice
given him by Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House,
and would take the earliest opportunity of bringing forward
the subject in another shape. The Hon. Gentleman then
moved that the petition be printed, and gave notice that
on Monday next he would present another petition upon
the same subject.
Mr. WAKLEY was afraid there would be very little
chance of any conclusion being come to upon the subject
this Session.
The SPEAKER called the Hon. Member to order.
There was no question before the House.
Mr. WAKLEY was going to put a question. He wished
to know from the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home
Department, whether he would object to the appointment
of a Committee to enquire into the operations of the Poor
Law Bill early next Session ? If the Noble Lord would
give an affirmative, answer to that question, he was sure it
would give the greatest satisfaction thoughout the country.
—( Hear, hear.)
The SPEAKER did not think the course pursued by
the Hon. Member for Finsbury was a correct mode of pro-
ceeding. There was a vast difference between speaking to
a proposition before the House, and putting a question to a
Minister of the Crown.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think the question could be
satisfactorily discussed on Monday.
SOUTH LONDON CEMETERY.
On the motion of Mr. D. W. HARVEY, the South
Metropolitan Cemetery Bill was read a third time, and
passed.

THE EUPHRATES EXPEDITION.
In answer to a question from an Hon. MEMBER,
Sir J. C. HO OUSE said it was perfectly true that
he had received information of the loss of the Tigris frigate,
which was upset in a hurricane. He regretted to add that
twenty lives had been thereby lost, but neither Colonel
Chesney, Lieut. Lynch, nor any of the officers in command
of the expedition had been lost. He should also state that
Colonel Chesney was, on the 28th of May, going down the
river in the larger steamer, with every hope of being able
to accomplish the objects of the expedition.
REMOVAL OF THE BISHOPS FROM THE
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Mr. LUSHINGTON gave notice that early next Ses-
sion he should move resolutions to the effect that it is the
opinion of the House that the sitting of the Bishops in the
House of Lords is unfavourable to the general interests of
the Christian religion in this country, and tends to alienate
the affections of the people from the Established Church.
Sir J. Y. BULLER gave notice that early next Session
he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the
laws relating to controverted elections.
Mr. A. TREVOR begged to know whether two im-
portant bills, the Registration of Votes Bill, and the Plu-
ralities Bill, would be proceeded with.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL hoped the Registration of
Voters Bill would be proceeded with to-morrow evening ;
and, if possible, the Pluralities Bill would be proceeded
with on Friday evening.
STAMP DUTIES.
Mr. ROBINSON begged to know whether the Stamp
Duties Bill would be proceeded with this Session, and
whether it was intended to make any alteration in the duties
on marine insurances ?