The Sun.
London, England, 1831-06-30 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

At Four o'clock the SrEatcla took his seat, when
several new Members took the oaths and their seats.

Lord STANLEY, Mr. JOHN Woon, and Mr. HAY-
WARD presented several petitions from various places in
favour of the Manchester and Leeds Railway Bill.
Mr. HUNT presented a petition from James Hirley,
who stated that he was an Irishman and had relations in
Ireland, and the prayer of the petition was, that an im-
mediate enquiry might be made into the causes of the
Newtownbarry massacre, that the yeomanry force of Ire-
land might be abolished, and that, if necessary, the regular
military force of the country might be substituted.
Ordered to lie on the table.

The HON. MEMBER then presented a petition from the
labouring classes of Tothill-street and its neighbourhood,
in Manchester, complaining that they were not included
in the plan of Reform brought forward by Lord John
Russell, and praying for annual Parliaments, universal
suffrage, and vote by ballot. The Hon. Member did not
present this petition with any intention of defeating the
Reform Bill ; but when be on former occasions stated that
the people at Manchester and other places in the
North were not satisfied with the Bill, he was
met by contradictions from several Honourable Mem-
bers. He had, however, since received a great many
petitions on this subject, confirming what be then said.
He had presented one from Preston, another from Bolton,
signed by 5,000 persons (although the newspapers chose
to say the number was only 500), and he had a petition
from Manchester, signed by 20,000 persons, all upon this
subject, and iii confirmation of what he had stated. The
petition was read, and ordered to be printed.
The HON. MEMBER next presented a petition from the
operatives of Macclesfield, signed by almost every male
adult, who was excluded by this Reform Bill from voting
for representatives. They complained of not having a
share in the election of Members, and they prayed for
annual Parliaments, universal suffrage, and vote by ballot.
The Hon. Member then presented a petition from Alessrpi.
Cumming and Dykes, who were deputed by upwards of
20,000 persons (wile were to be excluded from voting by
the Reform Bill) to make known their feelings, and to state
that the Reform Bill was an insult to the understanding of
the people. They prayed to be heard at the bar of the
House iu support of the petition.—Ordered to lie on the
table.

Mr. CHAPMAN presented a petition from the Grand
Jurymen of Westmeath, and another county in Ireland,
praying the House to take into consideration the state of
the poor in that country; also a petition from the inhabi-
tants of Mullingar, in favour of the Reform Bill.
Mr. PAGET gave notice that he intended to move
that instructions be given to the Committee on the Re-
form Bill, to leave out so much of the Bill as related to the
division of counties.

Colonel LINDSAY presented a petition from the Pro-
vost, Town-Council, and Magistrates of the royal burgh
of Cupar, praying that an alteration might be made in the
proposed classification of votes in the Scotch Reform Bill
that was brought in last Session, and which was intended
to be brought in to-morrow. They stated that Cupar
and St. Andrew's were intended to be united to Perth ;
Perth would have five hundred and sixty-one voters,
while the other burghs j,dned to it: would only
have 363 voters, so that the power of returning the
Members would rest chiefly with Perth. The petitioners
prayed that the boroughs of St. Andrew's and Cupar
tni4lit be united to some of the boroughs in the county of
Fife, instead of to Perth, which was a town of sufficient
importance, as respects wealth and commerce, to have a
representative to itself. The Hon. Member thought it
not only injudicious but unjust that the eastern burghs
should be disfranchised, and that it was, as they con-
ceived, an infringement on the articles of Union be-
tween England and Scotland, which articles provided
that the representation for the burghs should remain en-
tire, notwithstanding the Union.---(Hear.) The popu-
lation of those boroughs proposed to be disfranchised was
upwards of 6,000 ; in England, by the proposed Bill, to
a population of 4,000 two Members were given ; was it
not unfair, therefore, that these eastern boroughs should
be unrepresented ? It was highly desirable that Cupar
and. St. Andrew's should be united to the eastern burghs,
and that Perth should have a representation of its own.

Mr. S. WORTLEY said if the learned Lord Advocate
would not take up the subject, he should, in the Com-
mittee on the Bill, enforce the claims of Perth.

The LORD ADVOCATE declined at present to enter
into any discussion ur on this subject, as it would receive
all proper consideration i❑ the Co►nmittee.

After a few words from Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS, the peti-
tion was read, and ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. HOBHOUSE presented a great number of peti-
tions relative to shortening the hours of labour; among
the places were Renfrew, Manchester, Dundee, Bradford,
and Arbroath.
Mr. PROTIIEROE begged to ask the Hon. Member
for Westminster as to the fate of a Bill in which his, Mr.
p.'s constituents, were very partkularly interested ; he
alluded to the Marylebone Select Vestry Bill.
Dlr. HOBHOUSE said that the Bill had undergon
last Sessions such alterations in its nursing, that he had
felt it his duty to abandon it. If he had any chance of
parrying it through the present Parliament, which was
differently constructed from the last: he would haye no
objection to bring it in again.
Mr. EWART presented a petition from the corn millers
of Liverpool, complaining of the importation of American
Flour.
Mr. LEFROY presented a petition from Trinity Col-
lege; Dublin, ageinst the Reform Bill.
Mr. S'ADLER'rose to present a petition (we could not
learn where from), most respectably signed, complaining
of the effects of the 'New Beer. Bill. He • considered it
r.ititled to great consideration, for the impression in the
country was that the alteration made regarding the sale of
beer had been most pernicious to the morals of the people.
The opinion'of the Magistrates was that the committals
for offences had more Mari doubled from the day on which
the alteration had been made; it haft been prUmised that
the quality of beer would be improved, but he appealed
to every one, ;f the itu,,,ity had not in fact been much de.
teriorated. If gentlemen, wno ca-4ina;ly supported the
Bill, now found that their expectitions had nit been an-
swered, the most manly course would be now to come for-
ward and avow it.
Lord ALTHORP said, it was undoubtedly true, that

many corapikants had been made of the effects produced Lv
the Beer Bill, but he begged Hon. Members to recollect,
that it was much more likely that any changes of this na-
ture should produce worse effects at its commencement
than it should afterwards. He had advocated the mea-
sure when it was brought forward by the late Government,
but although some disadvantages had arisen, be was not
prepared to abandon it altogether, and resort to the old
system, which had greater evils, and the getting rid of
which had been one great object.—(Hear.) The Noble
Lord was not desirous of placing under any party's controul
the choice of: what licenses should be licensed.—(Hear.)
The Noble Lord at the head of the Home Department had
it under consideraeion to effect some poliee regulations,
which would have the effect of preventing those disorders
which were the subject of complaint ; at present he thought
the trial had not been a fair ene, and be would be sorry to
abandon it.—(Hear.)
Mr. PROTHEROE could not see any reason to reject
the vote he had given in support of the Bill brought in
by the late Government. Fur his own part, he considered
that most of the complaints raised against the operation
of the Bill, proceeded from those who had been first op•
posed to the measure.
Mr. GOULBURN was sure the House would not
postpone any thing that was calculated to afford relief
to the poor, till the period arrived when the poorer
classes of society should be so well informed poli-
tically and otherwise, as to be able duly to appreciate
the effect of such or any other measure. The most zea-
lous promoters of the Bill could not have expected it to
pass into a law, without entailing certain evil
consequences ; and for his own part he had been
able to see the possibility of removing the re-
straints which existed in the sale of beer by a gradual
withdrawal of those restraints ; he should have pre-
ferred adopting that course of bringing forward the
Bill, the effect of which was now complained of.
The inconveniences which had arisen from the passing
of the Bill into a law had certainly gone far be-
yond the extent which he had anticipated, accord-
ing to the informatio❑ which he was in possession of,
furnished to him by the ablest and most impartial persons.
It was of the utmost importance, therefore, for his
Majesty's Government to institute at least some very
diligent enquiry into the operations of the Bill. He believed
the inconveniences prevailed to the greatest extent, and,
indeed, principally to the agricultural districts.—(No, no.)
This was according to the information which he received.
He understood Government had already made general
inquiries on the subject, and if that were so it would
be better for the House to be put in possession of
all the facts that had come to the knowledge
of Government, before Parliament proceeded to legis-
late again on the business. Viewing it in every light
he had heard nothing yet which made him entertain the
most remote idea that it would be necessary to re-
turn to the state of the law in which it was
before the passing of this Bill. Measures might be adopted
for correcting the abuses without depriving the poor
of the advantages arising from the Bill.
Lord STANLEY could not agree with the statement
that the evils arising from the Bill prevailed principally in
the agricultural districts. He believed the Secretary of State
received from the county of Lancaster one universal reply to
11 his enquiries throughout that part of the kingdom, and
which was that the effects of the Bill were most mis-
chievous. His Lordship hoped Government would be
able to bring forward some measure for correcting those
mischiefs.
Mr. WARBURTON deprecated the idea of proceeding
hastily to pass further measures on this subject. He believed
there was one chaise in the Bill which required that those
who took out a license to sell beer must leave a place
in which to consume it—this entitled them to have sol-
diers quartered upon them, and the idea of that prevented
respectable shopkeepers selling the beer which otherwise
they would do, and left it to persons of a very low class
to engage in the sale of the beer. If this clause were re-
moved, more orderly persons would begin to sell it, and
more orderly conduct be the consequence.
Mr. PAGET regretted to hear that it was the intention
of his Majesty's Government to interfere in bringing for-
ward any new measure for the purpose of increasing the
authority of either magistrates or police with those
who sold beer. Io his opinion, all the inconvenience
that had been complained of arose, not from the Bill going
too far, but not going far enough. He should propose the
removal of all restrictions whatever. . .

Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought that the proposition of
the Hon. Member who had just sat down were it to be
adopted, would produce incalculable evils. He (Sir
Matthew) had opposed the Bill from the first; but
on this occasion he certainly thought the wisest plan
would be to give a little more time for experiencing the
operation of the Bill. Any proposition of amendment to
the Bill might be well worthy of attention.
An Hort. MEMBER considered the Bill had effected this
benefits, it had enabled the poor to obtain an article at
a cheaper price than before, and also raised the price of
barley, thereby doing a service to the agricultural interest.
Sir CHARLES BURROWS said, in his opinion the
Bill had done incalculable damage to the country. One
great object in passing the Bill was an increase of revenue,
hut all increase of revenue that tended to the demoraliza-
tion of the public must be an abomination in the sight of
any Government.
Mr. PORTMAN regarded it as an expedient to attempt
to amend the Bill, after only one year's trial. It ought,
at any rate, to have another year's trial. He was, how-
ever, firmly persuaded that there was but one remedy
fur all the evils that had now been alluded to
complained of by the poor on one hand, and the Clergy on
the other—that remedy was the repeal of the malt tax.—
(Chem.) He hoped that in the course of next year
His Majesty's present Government would introduce the
measure for the purpose of repealing that obnoxious tax.
Mr. SADLER, in bringing up the petition, denied
that he had ever been opposed to the remission of any
tax which was in any way calculated to benefit the poor.
What was the operation of the Bill ? He spoke not on
conjecture, but from certain knowledge. Ihe operation
of the Bill was to make not meoely the father of a
family but the feinala sex, the wife, the children, tipplers.
He knew that every person wo was at all conversant
with the state of society would agree with him in that
opinion. His proposition for the relief of the poor, would
be, and was, very different. He proposed to remit the tax
on malt entirely. He had contemplated too, such a thing
that the lower and lowest classes should have the opportu-
nity of brewing their own drink, as free from tax as
from adulteration. It was a quection which involved the
well-being, the morals, the happiness of the people of this
country; and he would, impressed with that conviction,
take leave, upon an early opportunity, to press on the
consideration of the House no new ideas or new opi-
nions of his own, but those which he bad previously
advanced on the question. And be would take the sense
of the House on the remission of the tax, as it re-
garded the lower class, so as to put a stop most
effectually to that vicious practise of tippling, which,
under the present system, might be carried on in any num-
ber of houses, which, for a trifling consideration, chose
to license themselves.

Mr. HUNT gave the Hon. Member (Mr. Sad-
ler) credit for his good intentions. He would ask
him, however, how could the poor of the Metropolis,
with their scanty means, furnish the necessary implements
for brewing their own beer. The good intentions of the
Hon. Member were like some of his other Utopian notions,
and if his plans were carried into executfon, instead
of benefiting the poor, they would be driven back to the
gin .shop, to drink that intoxicating blue-ruin, instead of
good wholesome beer.
Sir CHARLES I3URRELL was sorry to pto7ong
the discussion, but as truth was the only object
in that House, he would state a fact of which
he had been assured by his own steward, that an old wo-
man of his acquaintanee—(a laugh)—had brewed excel-
lent beer from an old teakettle.—(Loud and general
laughter.) The petition was ordered to be printed.
The LORD ADVOCATE then rose and said he would
to-morrow move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the
state of the representation in Scotland.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. DAWSON presented a petition from Sir A.
King for compensation for loss of his office.
Lord ALTHORP said that as a very strong complaint
by the lion. Baronet had been submitted to hint, he had
sanctioned the bringing of his case before the Ilouse.
PUBLIC SALARIES!
Alderman WOOD anticipated the support, not only of
the present, but of the last Ministers, for ex-Ministers was
an expression not very agreeable.—(A loud laugh.)
(LEFT SITTING.)

as
English
proprietor,
OPPRESSION IN POLAND.---RUSSIAN Jus-
ofahY
rics.L.The Grand Duke CONSTANTINE, when be wished
to press Li conviction, has been known to change the Judges
four times before 'be could obtain it. If this tells much
Tnrar.elltzo'nrg,
could against the tyrant, it tells:something also for the Magistracy.
estate in Yorkshire
to one in Devonshire, without waiting months fOr a pass-
port from two Governments, and when received, to find
. —W h Travelling-What would
not
go h e f r
.t I,
from
e hisfeelings
his route specified, as if for a prisoner 9i. War—his time
limited—and a prols'hition to visit the capital? But so it
has been in Poland ; and disgusted with this treatment,
many have made themselves citizens of Qracow, which has
thus become a true focus of liberalism,