The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 29.
The LOAD CHANCELLOR. took his seat on the Woolsack
shortly after Five o'clock.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Mr. W. CAVYNDISH and other Members brought up
several private Bills.
The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from
Bristol against shivery, also one from Manchester for alter.
ing the poor laws.
Petitions were also presented by Lord Got ford from
Hertford in favour of Reform ; by Lord King from
Canterbury and Melton in favour of Reform ; by the Mar-
quis of Bute from Greenock against the monopoly of the
Eaat India Company.
Lord KING presented A petition from a place near
Exeter complaining of the levying of exorbitant rates.
The Bishop of EXETER observed that the case was
one over which be had no jurisdiction.
Lord WYNVORD attributed such grievances as those
complained of by the petitioners to the present state of the
Ecclesiostical law,

The ARCHBISHOP of CANTERBURY considered
no such grievance could exist where it was in the power of
a Bishop to interfere, and he begged to inform their
Lordships that it was his intention, shortly afeet the
recess to bring in a Bill to remedy the grievances
which were complained of its the petition. The
Right Rev. Prelate also apologized for the delay which had
taken place in introducing his Bill for the composition of
tithes, observing that it arose out of a desire to make the
Bill as perfect as possible. It was moreover his intention,
immediately after the holidays, to bring in a Bill for the
re.triction, not the abolition of pluralities.
The subject then dropped.
_ _

The Marquis of BUTS presented a petition from
Greenock, praying for a compensation in case of the aboli-
tion of slavery.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
Queenhithe in favour of Reform.

Lord CARBERY presented a petition from Cork,
praying for protection in case of the abolition of slarery.
Lord GLENGALL presented a petition from Tippe-
rary against the introduction of the poor law%
After some observations from Lord Auckland, Lord El-
lenborough, the Duke of Buckingham, and Lord Gode,
rich, the Colonial Trade Bill went through a Committee,
and ordered to be reported to-morrow.
Oa the motion of Lord GODERICIT, an bumble ad-
dress was agreed to be presented to his Majesty for a copy
of the report of the Commissioners on the expenses of the
colonies.

In answer to a question from Lord KEtrvoli,
Earl GREY should propose to-motrow that the House
should .adjourn from that day till Tuesday the 12th of
April, then to re-assemble for public business. At the
suggestion of his Learned Friend on the Woolsack, he
would propose that the House should continue to sit for
private business until Monday next.
Lord KENYON wished to know what reason there
would be for the House sitting, even for private business,
on Easter-Eve and Easter Monday ?

The LORD CLIANCELLOR should most willingly
state the reason why it was proposed that the House
should not adjourn, except for public, business, until Mon-
day next. Undoubtedly the usual course had been to
commence the adjournment, both for private and public.
buNiness, before Good Friday; but he did not aee any
thing improper in the House continuing to sit for the dis-
charge of ita judicial functions until Easter Monday. The
tea-on why he proposed that the House should continue to
sit for that purpose was, in order, If possible, to get rid of
the urrear of appeals.—(Hear.)—His great object, ever
since he had come into his present office, had been to get
rid of that arrear, and he hoped to be able to boast at
the end of the session that he had disposed of not only all
the appeals lying over from the former session, but of all
the appeals which had been entered previous to Easter.
That was the reason why he intended to sit until Easter
Monday, and the mention of that arrangement would in
itself be calculated to prevent new appeals from coming
in. He had no objection to sacrifice his holidays, and in-
stead of going out of town, as he might do (for the Court
of Chancery had risen that day), to sit hearing appeals till
Easter Monday. He should hear only Scotch appeals in
that period. With regard to a precedent for Courts of
Justice sitting on Easter Eve and Easter Monday, the
thing was constantly done on circuit in the country, where
the Courts sat upon Easter-Eve and upon Easter Mon-
day, and on Good Friday also, with the exception of the
two hours spent in church. There was, therefore, no-
thing contrary to precedent, nor against decorum, in the
arrangement which he (the Lord Chancellor) proposed.—
Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mine."' 29.
'Vile SPEAKER took the Chair at Three o'clock.
LAMBETHs WATER-WORKS BILL.
_ _

On the motion of Mr. DENISON, the Lambeth Water.
Works Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com,
mitted.

Mr. H. DAVIS presented a petition from the merchants
and others of Bristol, praying for compensation in case the
House should carry the measure for the abolition of sla.
very. The petitioners stated that they had as just a right
t i compensation for the loss of their property as any holder
of a freehold estate, which was to be taken from him.
The Hon. Member supported the prayer of the petitioners,
which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. MUNDY presented several petitions from various
places for the abolition of negro slavery, and another pe-
tition from a place in Derbyshire in favour of the plan of
Reform.

Colonel LUSHINGTON presented three petitions from
Carlisle against the plan of Reform. The Hon. Member
hoped that when the Bill went into a Committee such al-
terations would be made as to secure the interests of all
classes.

The Marquis of CHANDOS should give his most de-
cided opposition to the Bill as it now stood; but he was
not opposed to all Reform, and hoped when the Bill came
into Committee it would be so altered as to make it a
constitutional measure of Reform.—( Hear.)
Mr. lIART DAVIS was not against all Reform, but
it ought to be one not calculated to injure the interests of
any class of the community. The Bill in its present shape
should have his decided opposition.
Sir A. J. DALRYMPLE said the parties about to
be disfranchised had as good a title to the elective fran-
chise, granted as it was to them by royal charter, they
had, he would contend, as good a right to retain it as
Noble Lords in another House had to retain their titles.
—(Hear.)—He supported the prayer of the petition.
The petitions were then brought up, and ordered to he

printed.
Several private Bills were read a third time, and others
forwarded a stage.
Lord C. TOWNSIIEND presented twenty-eight peti-
tions from various places against the slave trade.
Mr. MOORE presented a petition from the Sheriffs
and Corporation of Dublin against the Bill for Parliamen-
tary Reform. 'lle petitioners stated the measure would
destroy their chartered rights, and ultimately lead to a
repeal of the Union, as it would have the effect of return-
ing Members for Ireland who would be anxious to co-
operate with the Ilon. Member for Waterford. The pe •
titian, as well as several others he had to present, had his
cordial support.
Mr. SPRING RICE said no measure was so likely to
calm the public mind as the plan of Reform proposed by
Ministers. It would entirely do away with all apprehen-
sions respecting the repeal of the Union.
Mr. G. DAWSON—There was a difference of opi-

nien as to this measure being a revolutionary measure re-
garding England, but there was not the least difference
of opinion as to its being a revolutionary measure as re-
garded Ireland.—(Hear, hear.)—The elective fran-
chise would be taken from Protestants and given
to Roman Catholics. If it passed into a law, it
would do the most serious and grievous injury to
the Protestants of that country. It would have the
effect of returning so many Roman Catholics into the
House, that he should tremble for the safety of the Pro-
testant establishment.—(Hear.)
Sir JOHN NEWPORT said that passing this Bill into
a law would be the only means of preventing a separation
of the British Legislature. Having lived half a century
in Ireland be thought he knew as much of that country
" hi, Right Hon. Friend, and he did not hesitate in de-
claring that, in his opinion, if the measure was carried, it
would be the best means of securing the tranquillity
of that country..
Mr. O'CONN ELL said the petition coming from tLe
Common Council of Dublin against the Bill was the best
possible i
argument inits favour.—(Hear.)—About eighty
persons composed the Common Council of the fist city in
Ireland, and out of that number he bad a list of forty of
them who had either been insolvent or become bankrupts
—(Hear)—and yet these people arrogated to them-
selves the right of petitioning against the liberties
and just rights of their fellow-citizens.—(Hear.)—
Respecting the Protestant Church being in danger from
the measure, the idea was absurd. He begged to repeat
that this petition was the strongest possible argument in
favour of the measure.
Mr. NORTH should always contend that this lush
Reform Bill would have the effect of laying prostrate the

Protestant establishment of that country, and building
upon its ruins a Roman Catholicaseendancy=(Hear.)

. „
After a feW observations from Mr. Grattan, Mr. O'Connor
Don, Colonel Rochfort, and Mr. Shcil, the petition was
brought up, and after a few words from Mr. George
Moore, ordered tn. 13* prihied.
_ _

Mr. GEORGE MOORE presented a petition from
Dublin, praying that no step should be taken to do away
with colonial slivery, ufilees the principle was agreed to of
affording compensation. ahe Hon. Member also presented
a petition from the same quarter against the Reform Bill.
General GASCOYNE complained, that the debates
which were got up on every Irish petition greatly impeded
the progress of busineta, and the evil had become so great,
that if the Hcr. Member for Waterford would propose the
repeal of the Union, be would vote for it, in order to get
rid of the Irish Members.—(Much laughter.)—lf the
Noble Lord who had brought in the Reform Bill would
propose the removal of sixty-hvo Irish, instead of sixty-
two English Members, he would give the motion his most
cordial support.—(Laughter. )—Evening after evening he
was prevented from presenting petition.; because he found
the names of two or three Irish Members always before
his. The Noble Lord was, it appeared, about to add to
this calamity by increasing the number of Irish Members;
but he should oppose that proposition When it was brought
forward, because the number already in the House created
considerable inconvenience.—(Laughter.)—After the ho-
lidays he would move that the names on the Speaker's list
be taken de die in diem.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (for Ireland) said that
the two petitions were not at all out of keeping with each
other. Those who could petition against Reform in Par-

'lament were just the petsotts who were prepared to peti-
tion in favour of colonial slavery. These two—slavery
and the rotten boroughs—were the two great blots in the
Constitution of the country, and he trusted that before the
present Session passed over both of them would be en-
tirely wiped away.
Lord ALTIIORP rose to make an appeal to an Hon.
Member, (Mr. F. Buxton) in respect to a most important,
interesting, and delicate subject, concerning which he had
given notice of motion for that evening; he meant
colonial slavery. His Majesty's Ministers bad certainly
made up their minds respecting the principle they in-
tended to purNue; but as there were difficulties attend-
ing the subject which called for mature deliberation,
he hoped he did not ask for too much when
he requested the Hon. Member to postpone his motion
until after the holidays.
Lord Howtcx and Sir J. MACKINTOSH spoke in favour
of the postponement.
Mr. F. BUXTON wished to have the recorded opi.
nions of the present House on that subject, but on the
understanding that such an opportunity, as early as con-
venient, would be afforded to him, he should concur in the
suggestion of his Noble Friend.
Sir R. PEEL said it would be extremely inconvenient
that the proceedings in Committee upon the Reform Bill
should be at all interrupted. He should propose, there-
fore, that the discussion on the slavery question be brought
on on Thursday, the 14th of April, and that the House
should not go into Committee on the Reform question till
the 18th.

Shortly afterwards Mr. F. BUXTON changed the day,
and selected Friday, April 15, for his motion.
The Committee on the Money Payments Bill was post-
poned, on the motion of Mr. LITTLETON, to the 12th
of April.
Mr. WYSE postponed the motion of which he had
given notice, respecting the poor of Ireland. Me had not
expected to have an opportunity of bringing it forward to-
night, and he was not, therefore, prepared to proceed with it.
Mr. RICE moved for certain returns respecting the po-
pulation of Ireland.—Ordered.
LIVERPOOL ELECTION.

On the motion of Mr. BENETT, the special report of
the Committee appointed to take into consideration the
Allegations contained in the petitions presented to the
House against the return made at the last Liverpool elec-
tion was read. The report stated that gross bribery pre-
vailed at the last election.

Mr. BENETT rose, as Chairman of the Liverpool Elec.

tion Committee, to make the usual motion when a report
of the nature just read was made to the House. He said
that gross bribery had been traced by the Committee to a
great number of individuals ; but as he was not aware
that any opposition would be offered to the motion he was
about to make, he should not trouble the House by going
into the details of the evidence. He thought that the fact
of such a report having been made by the Committee was
sufficient reason to induce the House to grant the motion

for the suspension of the writ for a new election for L
verpool, until time was allowed for the Howe to take steps
to do justice in the case. The crime of bribery had at-
tache I only to the lowest class of freemen in Liverpool ;
and he thought, that as the proposed Reform measure, if
passed into law, would not disfranchise the present free-
men during their lives, some other steps ought to he taken
to deprive at once the guilty parti, s at Liverpool of the
enjoyment of the elective franchise. He intended to call
the attention of the House to the subject after the Easter
recess, and in the mean time he moved that the Speaker
he directed not to issue the writ for the election of a bur-
gess to represent Liverpool before Monday, April 18•
An 'loss. Mrsums, whose name we could not learn,
seconded the motion. He declared that a regular syste-
matic plan, of the most gross bribery had been established
at Liverpool, aisd he thought steps ought to be taken to
punish the guilty parties.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
the House would not be doing its duty, after having sus-
pended the writs for smaller places where bribery was de-
tected, not to apply the same rule to larger places. He felt
Inbound to rely on the statement of the Committee, that gross
bribery had been practised at Liverpool, and he should not
offer any opposition to the motion.
Mr. R. PALMER gave notice, that when the proposed
Reform measure came into Committee, he should propose
a clause, to compel Members of that House to take oath
that they had not employed improper means to procure
their return.—(Hear.) Whether he should propose that
Members should take that oath at the hustings, or at the
table of the House, he had not yet determined.
The motion was then agreed to.
The report of the Committee on Supply was brought
up. On the proposed item of 155,905/. for superannua-
tions for officers employed in the civil departments of the
Navy being read,
Mr. HUME wished to know whether the Right Hon.
Baronet had made inquiry into the correctness of his state-
ment, that one individual was in the enjoyment of two
duperannuations.
Sir J. GRAHAM admitted that the Hon. Member's
statement was correct ; but he had found in the records of
of the Admiralty, a letter from the late Chancellor of the
Exchequer, strongly reprobating such a practice ; but
pointing out the hardship of not continuing, in the case of
one individual, what was the general custom. Ile pro-
mised during the Easter recess to take the subject into
consideration ; and he hoped the Hon. Member would not
take any objection to the grant at present.
Mr. HUME said he should withdraw all opposition to
the grant in consideration of the promise just given by the
Right Hon. Baronet.
The report was then agreed to.
The Indemnity Bill was couunitted, and ordered to be
reported to-morrow.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, in
reference to the usual power give❑ to his Majesty to issue
Exchequer-bills for purposes of temporary relief in Ire-
land, that it was important to have the money available
in May. But as it would be a considerable time before
the Bill could be introduced to the House, he proposed to
take a vote on account ; and in the Committee of the
House to• morrow, he would take an opportunity of stating
the mode in which the money would be applied, and the
regulations which would direct its distribution ; leaving
the House to decide whether a vote of that kind ought to
be adopted. Ile therefore gave notice, that on the House
going into Committee to-morrow, he should move a reso-
lution to authorize his Majesty to issue Exchequer-bills,
for a limited amount, for purposes of local and temporary
relief in Ireland, on due security being given.
Lord NUGENT gave notice, that be should on Wed-
nesday, the 13th of April, move for leave to bring in a
Bill to abolish certain oaths now taken in the Customs de-
partments.
Mr. lIODGSON presented a petition from South
Shields, against the timber duties.
The same HON. MEMBER also presented a petition from
Newcastle-upon-Tyne (we believe), complaining that the
number of freemen in that town would be diminished, by
the proposed Reform Bill, to 2,000.
Sir C. WETHERELL said, that the very respectable
body from which this petition emanated were very natu-
rally anxious to preserve their rights, and as they, a very
numerous constituency, were desirous of preserving a
franchise which, as being more extensive, was less valu-
able than a right enjoyed by a small constituency, it was
to be inferred that they were hostile to the general and
sweeping disfranchisement contemplated by the Bill before
the House. He hoped that other boroughs, following the
example of this, would consider well the consequences of
the Bill, and give a hint to their Members to oppose it.
Indeed, he had reason to expect this, when the provisions
of the Bill became more generally known.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY said, that at the meeting at which
this petition was agreed to, there were 400 or 500 free
burgesses present, and not a word was said by any of

hetn against the principle of the Bill ; but they thought
the continuance of the rights which they enjoyed not in-

_
consistent with that principle:
The petition was then read. In moving that it be printed,
Mr. HODGSON said, though he fully concurred in the
principle of the Bill, and would do nothing to endanger
that principle, yet he thought it by no means inconsistent
with that principle that the franchises of large towns,
with a constituency so ektensive as to secure their inde-
pendence, should not be disturbed.
The petition was ordered to be printed.
Mr. HODGSON then gave notice, that when the Bill
went into Committee, he would move a clause to the effect

he had just mentioned.
STEAM NAVIGATION.
Mr. C. DOUGLAS presented petitions from persons'
interested in the navigation of the Clyde and the Frith of
Forth, praying that no tax might he laid on the steam na-
vigation. The Hon. Member pointed out the impott-
ance of the steam navigation established in the Clyde, and
the advantages it had produced to the whole of the western
coast of Scotland. There was a capital exceedinu.
400,0001. embarked in this navigation, which would
be
totally ruined if the proposed tax were imposed. He
hoped, therefore, to bear the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer state that it was not his intention to press a tax

so injurious.
Sir M. S. STEWART supported the prayer of these
petitions, and was desirous of taking that opportunity of
saying that although he had always been decidedly opposed
to a tax on steam boat passengers, yet he had at one time
felt disposed to concur in the imposition of a moderate
duty on steam navigation ; but from more detailed and ac-
curate information, he was now quite satisfied that such a
duty would at present be attended with severe and ruinous
effects. The great, and as yet unproductive, capitals ex-
pended in the outfit of steam vessels, from the incessant
progress of improvement in the machinery—the great im-
portance of this improvement in a national point of view
—the vast comfort and accommodation of cheap steam
conveyance to the labouring, and industrious, and poorer
classes of society—these and other striking and important
considerations, which he need not now enumerate, induced
him to implore his Noble Friend, the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, to abandon his intention of imposing any duty
whatever on steam navigation at present, which, if unfor-
tunately prr•isted in, he should feel bound strenuously to
oppose.—(Hear, bear.)
Mr. HUME said that a petition from Glasgow, signed
by 10,000 persons, and one from Greenock, also nume-
rously signed, had been intrusted to his care against this
tax. He did hope the Noble Lord would abandon the
proposition. The tax, though insignificant in point of
revenue, being calculated at only 75,0001., would be most
seriously injurious to steam navigation in every part of

the country.
Mr. WARBURTON, Mr..O'CoNNELL, and Mr. WILES,
severally objected to the tax as impolitic and unjust.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said, that the remission of the
coal-tax might be some compensation for the imposition of
the tax on steam-boats in England, though he by no
means admitted that it would be a fair ground for such
imposition. But in Scotland, which had been exempt
from the coal duty, and which would not benefit by its
repeal, the weight of the proposed tax would be se-
verely felt..
After a few words from Mr. H. HUGHES,
Sir R. PEEL suggested to the Noble Lord that before
he took off any tax he ought to be prepared with a tax to
supply its place.—The petition was ordered to be printed.
CIVIL LIST BILL.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER presented
a Message from his Majesty, expressing his approbation of
the measure which had been submitted to him for time re-
gulation of the Civil List, and giving his assent to (as we
understood the Noble Lord) the surrender of his heredi-

tary revenue to the country.
The NOBLE LOAD brought in the Bill, which was read a
first time, and ordered to be read a second time to-mor-
row, and to be printed.
Mr. DUNDAS presented a petition from the Chamber
of Commerce of Edinburgh, for the rvinoval of the re
strictions on the China trade.—Laid on the table.
THE RECORDER OF YOUGHALL.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from several
respectable inhabitants of the town of Youghall, com-
plaining of abuses in the corporation of that town. That
corporation had, amongst other officers, a recorder, and
the residence of such an officer was necessary, because, by
the Vestry Act, the appeals under that Act were to be
made to him ; but the petitioners stated solemnly to the
[louse that the present recorder of Youghall was an old
woman.—(Laughter.)—This was not meant figuratively,
but literally--an old lady residing at some distance from
the place.—(Laughter.)
The petition was laid on the table.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented three petitions, complain-
ing of the manner in which the Kildare•street Society ap-
plied the funds given to it, and praying against any farther

grant to that society.
The HON. MEMBER presented a similar petition from a
parish in Sligo, signed, amongst others, by two Roman
Catholic Biabops.
Mr. WYSE thought some general plan of education
ought to be adopted in Ireland, and intimated his intention
of introducing a measure to that effect after the holydays.
After a few words from Mr. LEFROY, the petition was
ordered to be printed.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented eight petitions from Gal-
way, Drogheda, New Ross, and other places, in favour of
Reform,-Ordered to lie on the table.
Petitions against taxes upon knowledge were presented
from a co-operative union of London, and certain inhabi-
tants of Westminster, by Mr. O'CONNELL.
Petitions against the tithe system were presented from a
parish in Devon, by Mr. O'CoststELL ; from two parishes
in Kilkenny, by Lord OSSORY ; and from a parish in Gla-
morganshire, by Mr. WILES.
Mr. Alderman THONIPSON presented a petition from
the representatives of the late Mr. Hutchinson, com-
plaining that the East India Company had prevented their
recovering a debt of considerable amount which that gen.
tleman claimed from the Rajah of Travancore, and pray-
ing that they might be heard by themselves, their Coun-
sel, and agents, before a select Committee, in support of
their allegations.
Sir C. FORBES bore testimony to the hardship and
oppres.ion of the case Mr. Hutchinson.
In reply to a question from Sir T. BARING,
Mr Alderman THOMPSON had already communi-
cated with the Chairman of the East India Company on
the subject. The Hon. Alderman then gave notice, that
he should move on an early day after the recess, that this
case be referred to a Select Committee.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON also presented a petition
from Coleman. street Ward, in favour of the Ministerial
plan of Parliamentary Reform.
Mr. SCOTT presented a petition of an opposite nature
from certain inhabitants of the county of Roxburgh.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition from Wareham,
against idolatrous practices in India.
Petitions in favour of Reform were presented from a
parish in Stafford by Sir J. WROTTESLEY, and from the
city of Waterfor,l by Sir J. NEWPORT. This last petition
was supported by Mr. WYSE.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from a parish in
Cumberland, in favour of the Reform Bill.
Mr. BRISCOE presented a similar petition from Rich-
mond, Surrey. The Hon. Member also presented a peti-
tion from Southwark, and sixteen petitions from other
places in the county of Surrey, praying for the extinction
of colonial slavery.
Mr. FOWELL BUXTON presented 499 petitions
from various parts of the country, praying for the aboli.•
tion of slavery. One of them was from the Society of
Friends. He said that he had great pleasure in presenting
the petition from this body, as they had been the very first
persons in the country who had promulgated the doctrine,
that the buying, or selling, or holding of slaves, was con-
trary to the doctrines of the Christian religion. Forty
years ago they had presented the first petition for the abo-
lition of the slave trade, and ten years ago they had pre-
sented the first petition for the abolition of slavery. He
also presented a similar petition from Glasgow, signed by
19,500 of its inhabitants; and to that petition he attached
considerable weight, as it came from a place more closely
connected with our settlements in the West Indies than
any other town in the kingdom. He then placed on the
table a pile of petitions, which completely covered it.
Mr. WILKS supported the prayer of the petitions.
An Host. MEMBER denied that the Quakers were the
first to petition for the abolition of the slave trade. The
first petition to that effect was from the Colonial Assembly
of Jamaica. It had been presented to the King in Council;
but its prayer had been rejected.
Mr. GOULBURN, in looking at the list of the names
of places from which these petitions came (a list which
occupies three closely printed folio pages), said that he ob-
served that two of the petitions came from persons who
styled themselves " The Ingliamites of Greyrigge," and
" The logliamites of Pear-tree Chapel." He should like
to know who these persons were, for he had never heard
of them before.—(A laugh.)
Mr. F. BUXTON confessed his inability to answer the
question, but bad no objection to have their petition read.
Sir C. WETHERELL—Are they a corporate body, or
what ?—(A laugh.)
Sir E. LLOYD presented a similar petition from
Overton.
Sir E. LLOYD presented petitions from the freeebolders

of the county of Flint, in county meeting assembled, from
the inhabitant Lomeholders of Mold, and from the inha-

bitant householders of Holywell, in favour of the Reform
Bill. He also presented a petition from the burgesses of
Flint in favour of the same Bill, expressive of their rea-
dihess to surrender their exclusive privileges for the public
good of the county. He likewise presented a petition from
the inhabitants of the city of St. Asaph, praying that they
might be gifted with the privilege of returning one Mem-
ber to the House of Commons for their ancient city.
Mr. WEBB presented a petition in favour of the Re-
form Bill from the inhabitants of Wootton-under-Edge, in
the county of Gloucester.
HAMPSHIRE PETITION FOR REFORM.
Sir T. BARING rose to present to the House a peti-
tion from the freeholders of the county of Southampton,

in of the plan of Reform introduced by his Ma-
jesty's Ministers. He had endeavoured to present it to the
House before the second reading of tie Bill, but had al-
ways been prevented by the number of names which had
been placed on the Speaker's list previously to his own.
The petition was signed by the High Sheriff on behalf of
one of the most numerous, the most respectable, and the

most intelligent meetings that he had ever seen in that or
any other county. There were upwards of 5,000 free-
holders present at the mewing, and the petition bad been
carried without any hands being held up against it, save
those of the two Hon. Members for the county.—(llear.)
lie had otated to those two Hon. Members his intention
of presenting this petition on an early day, and he should
be sorry if they were not at that moment in their places.
The Hon. Member then read the petition, which we pub-
lished in our journal along with the report of the pro-
ceedings of the meeting, and concluded by saying that in
every sentiment which the petition contained he most cor-

dially concurred.
Sir R. R. VYVYAN said, that if he had heard aright
the prayer of this petition, one of its statements was that
the petitioners were anxious for a Reform of Parliament,
because the House had regularly refused to institute an
inquiry into the causes of the distress of the people. He
therfore wished the petitioners to recollect that many of
the Ministers who now advocated the new plan of Reform,

.. . .
were the very men who had denied the existence of dis-
tress in the last Session of Parliament, and who had voted

against the motion for going into a Committee to inquire
into the causes of it. Those who now deprecated the

plan of Reform proposed by Ministers were the men who
had most strenuously insisted upon the propriety of in-
quiring into the causes of the distress of the country, in
order that they might be remedied as speedily and effica-
ciously as possible. Let the people, then, judge between
those who were their real, and those who were only their
professing, friends. --Let them judge between those who
had acted, and were still continuing to act, on their own
deliberate conviction of what was due to the public safety,
and those who were tamely, and he would even add,
basely yielding to the ill-advised clamour which was
now raised throughout the country. He was glad to
find from the statement of the Hon. Baronet, that
there were still men in that House, who had the cou-
rage to stand up in the face of thousands at county
meetings, and to tell them, even at the risk of losing
their seats at the next election, that they deemed this
new plan of Reform most injurious to the Constitu-
tion of the country, and that they were determined to op-
pose it. He was nearly in the carne predicament with his
two Honourable Friends, the Members for the county of

Southampton ; and as a person who would never have
thought of standing for the county of Cornwall under other
circumstances was now standing for it on account of the
vote which he had recently given—(Hear, hear)—he
would only say, that had he to give that vote over again
twenty times, he certainly would give it as he had already
given it,—for he never would submit to the degradation
of letting his opinions truckle to the base cry which was
now set up by the country. He wished that the country
would give itself time to ponder on this new plan of Re-
form. He wished that the country would give itself time
to consider whether this plan contained in itself such
moral and political excellence as to be the only one which
it ought to adopt. He was sorry that his Hon. Friends
the Members for the county of Southampton were not then
in the House. He knew that he had but small right to
interpose upon this occasion, as the petition did not come
from his county ; but it was impossible for him to keep
silent when he heard the petitioners alluding to the dis-
tress of the country as one of the reasons for calling fur a
Reform in Parliament, at the same time that they were
very likely to be abusing those very Members of Parlia-
ment who had voted for a Committee to inquire into the

causes of it.
Mr. RICE could not allow the observations of the
lion. Member for Cornwall to pass without a reply. The
Hon. Member had said, that the denial of the existence
of distress in the country, and the refusal of the House of
Commons to inquire into the sources of it, was the cause of
the clamour of the people for Reform ; and had then pro-
ceeded to assert that the Members of the present Govern-
ment were among those who had strenuously opposed
themselves to all inquiry. Now he thought that he could
show in a few words which of the parties into which the
House was now divided was most worthy of the confidence
of the people of England. They would find among the
members of the present Government, those who had voted
for inquiry,—among the members of the late Government,
those who had voted against it. Let the people look at
the list of Cabinet Ministers at that moment in the House
of Commons, and then, if they were to decide who most
deserved their confidence by the division on that question,
they would find that those who were the friends of Reform
had voted for inquiry, and that those who were the enemies
of Reform had voted against it. His Noble Friend the
present Chancellor of the Exchequer—
Sir R. VYVYAN—Had voted against the motion for
inquiry.
Mr. RICE—No such thing. His Noble Friend had
voted for it.
Sir R. VYVYAN.—No, no.
Mr. RICE contended that his Noble Friend had voted
for it. The Hon. Gentleman was not regular in the in.
terruption which he was giving him. He (Mr. Rice)
was speaking, he admitted, from recollection only : hut
within the next twenty-four hours he would either re-
assert this statement if correct, or retract it if incorrect.
He asserted, that on the amendment to the address moved
by the Hon. Member for Kent, his Noble Friend the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, had affirmed the existence of
distress, and had voted for inquiry ; and he recollected the
fact well, for he had gone out of the House along with his
Noble Friend.—(Hear.) An appeal since that time had
been made to the country, and the answer which the
country had made to it by the petitions which were already
laid upon their table, entitled him to say that the country
had given a verdict in favour of the present Administra-
tion, and not in favour of the Hon. Member for Cornwall
and his friends. On the occasion to which the lion.
Member alluded, those who supported the address had
affirmed the existence of partial distress, and those who
supported the amendment had affirmed the existence of ge-
neral distress. In the first party were the members of the
late Administration ; in the latter the members of the pre-
sent. He was quite certain, that if the Hou. Baronet
would only take the trouble of looking through the di-
vision, he would find that those who were friendly to Re-
form in Parliament had voted in favour of the amendment
proposed by the Hon. Member for Kent.
Sir R. VYVYAN did not mean to deny that on the
amendment to the address moved by the Hon. Member for
Kent, the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had af-
firmed the existence of general distress in the country, and
had voted for inquiry. But he contended, and he believed
that he was correct in contending, that on a subsequent
occasion, when a motion was brought forward by Mr. Da-
venport, for an inquiry into the causes of the distress of
the nation, the Noble Member for Northamptonshire, now
Chancellor of the Exchequer, had voted against the ap-
pointment of any committee of inquiry. The petition from
the county of Southampton stated, that one of their rea-
sons for calling for a Reform of Parliament was, that the
House of Commons would not look into the distress of
the country. He said that upon that score the present
Ministers were as culpable as any of their predecessors.
He thought that they had always been opposed to inquiry
into the causes of our distress, and into the operation of
those principles of free trade which had operated so inju-
riously on the country by making one class of society the
prey of another, and by luring the different interests of it
to attack each other.
Sir T. BARING was sorry to interrupt the Hon. Ba-
ronet's declamation, but there was no such statement as
the lion. Baronet imagined in the petition. The chief
grievance of which the petitioners complained was the
want of a full, fair, and sufficient representation of the
people in the Commons House of Parliament.
Mr. DUNCOMBE contended that his Hon. Friend was
perfectly correct in stating that the distress of the country
was one of the grievances which the petitioners thought
would he most effectually cured by a Reform in Parlia-
ment. He recollected perfectly well, that when a motion
was brought forward by Mr. Davenport, for appointment
of a Committee to inquire into the causes of the general
distress, the Noble Member for Northamptonshire opposed
it, on the ground that it would lead into a useless inquiry
into the state of the currency. Now this, he contended,
was a paltry and + (the Hon. Member added
some other epithets which were not heard in the gallery)
ground for opposing that motion. He denied that what-
ever might have been the views of some, there were many

gentlemen who supported Mr. Davenport's motion in
order to obtain an alteration of the currency.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM did not rise to prolong this
discussion, but he must protest against such language be-
ing used with regard to his Noble Friend (Lord Althorp)
in his Noble Friend's absence. He thought it would be

difficult for any Hon. Member—even for the Hon. Mem-
ber for York—to point out any of his Noble Friend's con.
duct to which the epithets paltry, pitiful, and insignificant,
could be justly applied.—(Hear, hear.) An Hon. Mem-
ber opposite had said that since he had voted for Mr.
Davenport's motion, he had had an opportunity of facing
his constituents ; but so also had his Noble Friend, who
had voted against the motion—(Hear, hear)—and if they
should all have a similar opportunity again at no distant
period, the respective constituents of the Hon. Member
for York and of his Noble Friend would have an oppor-
_

tunity of showing to the conduct of which of them—if
to the conduct of either—they considered the epithets
_ _

paltry, pitiful, and insignificant, as most applicable.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL was quite sure that
the epithets complained of by the Hon. Baronet must
have been intended to apply to the reasoning, and not to
the conduct of the Noble Lord. He was as sure of
this as he was of the fact that most of those who had

voted in favour of Reform had voted against Mr. D.:ven-

port's motion. Now no man, he contended, could read
this petition from Hampshire, without seeing that the pe-
thinners, in effect, asserted that the House had not at-
tended to the distress which prevailed among the agricul-
tural labourers last year : and, moreover, that the peti-
tioners imputed that as a fault to the House. And,
although he should be sorry to say any thing disrespectful
of the Noble Lord (Althorp),—although he never would
say any thing of the Noble Lord in his absence, which lie
would not say in his presence,—yet lie must beg leave to
say, now, since the subject had been broached, that in his
opinion the failure of Mr. Davenport's motion was mainly
attributable to the speech which the Noble Lord made
against that motion. An Hon. Member opposite had said
that the meeting in Hampshire ays a mist respectable
one, which was true,—and that only two hands were
held up against the petition,—which was equally true :
but whose hands were those ? Why, they were the hands
of two illustrious Members for the county, who had had
the manliness to come forward and act according to their
judgment, and to tell their constituents plainly. that
they would so act. God forbid that the time should
ever arrive in which county members would come
into that House as mere machines, acting merely as their
constituents directed them, and not as men exercising their
own judgment and their own intellect. This was the
true character of a county Member ; and whenever the
character of the representatives was inverted, he believed
that the representative would be ruined, and that with
them the people also would be ruined. He was sorry that
neither of the Members for Hampshire was present now,
for he highly applauded their conduct, and had read with
the greatest pleasure the speeches which they made at the
meeting. He wished that all county Members would
f,llow their example. His Hon. Friend near him, the
Member for Cornwall, had kept up the character of a
Metnber of that House by differing from his constituents.
(Hear, and laughter.) He would only add that he was
glad of having this opportunity of offering his testimony of
admiration of the conduct of the two independent Alum-
bent for Hampshire.
Mr. DUNCOMBE thought that the Hon. Baronet
opposite (Sir J. Graham) was the only Member in that
House who was of opinion that he had imputed unworthy
or paltry conduct to the Noble Lord the Chancellor of
the Exchequer. All lie had said was, that the excuse
which the Noble Lord had made for opposing Mr. Davvn-

port's motion was a paltry excuse—and so it was, in his

opinion.

Sir J. GRAHAM had understood the Hon. Member to
have said that his Noble Friend bad opposed Mr. Diven-

port's motion on the ground that it would lead to an in-
quiry into the currency, with the view of effecting an al-
teration in the currency; and that, in his opinion, such a
ground of opposition to the motion was paltry, pitiful, and
insignificant. He thought that he had distinctly heard
those words from the Hon. Member. However, he was
glad to hear that he was mistaken ; but if he had not been,
he felt assured that the Hon. Member for York would have
been the only Member of that House who would have
thought his Noble Friend's conduct on that occasion, or on
any other occasion, could be properly characterized by the
epithets paltry, pitiful, and insignificant.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. DUNCOMBE thought that the Hon. Baronet was
decidedly out of order, in imputing to him what he had
already declared that he had not said.

Mr. ATT WOOD had understood the Hon. Member for
York to have used the expressions as he had said he had
used them, and not as the Hon. Baronet had thought
proper to apply them. With this understanding, he begged
leave to say that he was ready to use the same expressions
to the same extent as the Hon. Member had used them.
He was confident that the people were only praying for
Reform as the means of relieving their distresses, whirh
they thought would disappear before a Reformed Parlia-
ment. Upon this delusion was founded the popularity of
the present Ministry ; and that popularity, therefore, was
as ill-deserved as he foretold it would be short-lived.—
(Hear, and a laugh.) The Hen. Member then went on to
argue, at some length, that the currency ought to be altered.
Mr. Alderman WOOD protested against the question of
the currency being debated upon the presentation of a pe-
tition for Reform.—(Hear, hear.) He must say that he
thought the attack which had been made upon the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, in his absence, and upon a peti-
tion with which he had nothing to do, was a very unfair

attack.
An Hos:. MEaruEn. thought that the Hon. Baronet op-
posite had correctly stated the expressions which had fallen
from the Hon. Member for York, but that he had not cor-
rectly stated the application of them.
Sir W. HEATHCOTE was sorry he had not been
aware that this petition was to be presented,—for, if he
had :wen, he certainly should have been in his place sooner.
He certainly was opposed to the prayer of the petition,
and in saying this he begged to declare his regret at find-
ing himself compelled to differ from so respectable a por-
tion of his constituents, as those undoubtedly were who
composed the meeting. But, after the best and most de-
liberate consideration which he had been able to give to
the measure of Reform, he must say that he became day
after (lay the more confirmed in the belief that it was a
measure founded upon the most impolitic grounds, and
that if it passed into a law, it would he productive of
the most injurious effects. It was true that the meeting
at which this measure was agreed to was of a very dif-
ferent opinion : but he had reason to know, from com-
munications which he had since received, that this
opinion of his was by no means universally opposed to
that of the wealth and respectability of the county.
He conscientiously believed, that the feeling in favour of
Reform among the people was founded, to the greatest
extent, upon distress, and upon the refusal of the House
in the last session to inquire into the causes of that distress.
Mr. H. HUGHES said, that if there was strong lan-
guage in the petition, it might be accounted for by cir-
cumstances peculiar to the county, and which, very natu-
rally, excited a strong feeling in the county. The Isle of
Wight—in which be resided—sent six Members to Par-
liament, and those Members were often not even seen by
their constituents. Now, with this fact before them, and
when two of these Members thought proper to insult their
constituents, the Ilouse, and the country, by saying that
no Reform was necessary, and that no Reform was asked
for by the people,—and this had been said by the two
Hon. Members for Newport,—it was not to be wondered
at that the inhabitants of the county of Southampton used
very strong language in their petitions.
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member had allowed
language to escape him,—unintentionally, no doubt,—
which he was sure the Hon. Member would be anxious to
explain. First the Hon. Member had said that the lan-
guage of the petition might be accounted for by what the
two Hon. Members for Newport had said. Now the Hon.
Member must be aware that what was said in that House
could not justify any thing in a petition. Next, the Hon.
Member had said that observations of two Hon. Members
of that House had been insulting to their constituents, to
the House, and to the country. He was quite sure that
the Hon. Member would himself see the propriety of ex-
plaining, and be himself anxious to explain this language,
which had, no doubt, fallen from the Hon. Member in the
heat of debate.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES really did not see what he
had to explain.—(Hear, hear.) It must have been quite
obvious, he thought, to everybody that he bad not meant
any thing personal to the two Hon. Members for New-
port—(Hear, hear)—that he had merely spoken of
them as public men acting in their public capacity, and
of the effect which it was natural that the language of
those Hon. Members should produce in the minds of men
circumstanced as the inhabitants of Hampshire were.—
( Hear, hear.) He said, too, that he thought that that lan-
guage might justify the petitioners in expressing them-
selves strongly, and he must say that lie still thought so;
for although it was irregular to allude in a petition to any
thing that was said in that House yet it was quite im-
poisib!e to prevent language used in that House having the
effect which the same language out of doors would have.
Sir. T. BARING, in moving that the petition be
audible
in
printed, made
gallery.esomeobservations which were altogether in-
After a few words from Sir W. Heathcote, Sir R. Vy-

vyan, Mr. .Atwood, and Mr. Milks, the petition *as
ordered to be printed.
Sir T. BARING presented a petition from the borough
of Chipping-\Vycomh in favour of the measure of Reform.
Lord NORREYS presented petitions from Woodstock,
and from several other places, against slavery.
Sir J. BURKE presented a petition from Ross, praying
for relief from distress, and a petition from Tuam for Par-
liamentary Reform.
Sir R. BATESON presented petitions from the inha-
bitants of Londonderry and from Newtown.Lirnavady, in
favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform. He was him-
self friendly to the principle of the measure, but objected
to some of its provisions, as he should state on a fitting

occasion.
Mr. DICKINSON presented a petition from the Arch-
deaconry of With against the Free Sale of Beer Act.
Mr. RICE presented a petition from Bakewell, in
Derbyshire, in favour of the Ministerial plan of Reform.
On the motion of the same Hog. MEMBER returns
were ordered of the number of gallons of spirits exported
from Scotland to this country within the last ten years,
with a specification of the amount of duties paid, and draw-
back allowances.
Sir C. WETHERELL presented a petition from Vis-
count Stirling against the grant of lands in Canada, with-
out a due consideration of individual interests.
Mr. BROWNLOW presented three petitions from dif-
ferent parts of the county of Armagh, in favour of the
Reform Bill.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN presented a similar peti-
tion from the inhabitants of Cordwainers' Ward. -
Mr. WHITMORE presented a petition of like nature
from Bridgenorth.
Mr. ATTWOOD presented a petition, from persons in
the neighbourhood of Bristol, praying for the repeal of the
assessed taxes.
The Howe then adjourned at Half-past Ten o'clock.

REFORM! REFORM! ! REFORM!!!

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Stk,—Our righteous cause has gained another triumph
—the result of our late county meeting, and the unequi-
vocal expression of public opinion there, and, indeed,
everywhere, has unseated an old Tory Member, Mr.
Wilbraham Egerton, whose intention not again to offer
himself as a candidate is advertised in the Courant, which
I send you. Thus, day after day, is our cause gaining
fresh accessions of strength, and we must succeed.
Our city Member, Sir P. Egerton, is also in the same
predicament as his namesake, though he has not yet taken
a similar step ; but it is said he will do so, and then he
will, with his compeer, gain the only weed of popularity
now in his power, namely—by retiring with a good grace.
The most active treasures are taking here to bring for-
ward a gennine Reformer at the next election, happen
when it may ; and an invitation has been sent to Cunliffc
Offley, Esq. (who married the only daughter of our late
truly- noble and high-minded patriot, the late Lord Cre we ).
This gentleman is not only talented, but a thorough-going
Reformer ; in short, we will not have any other : and our
friends are almost impatient for the conflict.
Excuse haste. Yours, &c.
Chester, March 28. A CONSTANT READER.