The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-22 00:00:00

TREMOUTHA HARBOUR AND-RAILWAY.

The Tremoutha Harbour and Railway Bill was read a third
time and passed. . . _

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a petition from
the parish of St. Cuthbert, Edinburgh, and one from the
Southern district of the same city. They were signed by
8 000 persons, and prayed that some clauses might be struck
out of the Scotch Borough Reform Bill, as they would impose
extra burdens on the rate payers without giving them arty
corresponding benefits.
Sir F. TRENCH presented a petition from Scarborough,
in favour of the Durham Railway Bill. He would only say,
that if the petitioners bad read the evidence he had, they would
net have signed the petition.
The Usher of the Black Rod appeared at the table, and
summoned the House to the House of Lords, to hear the Royal
Assent given to certain Bills (for which see Lords' report).
TURNPIKE TRUSTS CONSOLIDATION BILL.

Sir JOHN BECKETT wished to ask the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite ( Mr. F. Maule), whether it was his in-
tention to proceed further in the present Session with
the Turnpike Trust Consolidation Bill. He did so be-
cause the strongest • feeling out of doors existed with
respect to the measure ; indeed there was hardly a single coach
arrived that did not bring abundance of petitions and remon-
strances against the Bill.
Mr. F. MAUL E begged in answer to the question of
the Right Honourable Baronet, to state that in consideration
of the great anxiety which was represented to prevail
on the subject, he had thought it his duty to consider whether
he should go on with the Bill during the present Session or
not, and he now thought, for the convenience of all parties,
that it would be better for him to state at once that he did not
intend to proceed further with the Bill in the course of
the present session.—(Cheers.) Deeply impressed as be was
with the great benefit that the passing of the measure would
effect, he greatly regretted postponing the Bill; but he did so,
giving notice that he should again introduce it early in the
next session.—( Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet had alluded
to the opposition that had lately appeared to the Bill: he
bogged the House to understand that it was on no account of
that opposition that lie had withhrawn the measure for the pre-
sent Session, for he believed that opposition emanated from self-
interested motives, and preceeded from individuals who had
long been jobbing on a bad system of management; they were,
However, only enjoying that jobbing for a short season longer,
by the postponement of the Bill, for he was quite sure the
moment the House came to a solemn consideration of the mea-
sure, they would unanimously adopt it, and pass it into a law.
Sir J.. BECKETT was sure that many of the opponents
of the Bill wera men of too high character to have anything
to do with jobbing.
Mr. F. MA ULE said that lie had letters in his possession
which stated that a vast number of the persons who had
signed the petition did not know what they were doing, and
that the petitions had been got up by the treasurers of cer-
tain parties', for their own private purposes.
Lord F. EG ERTON felt bound to enter his pro-
test against the most uncalled for attack that had been
'made by the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite.
He had told several of these petitioners that he believed that
the Bill would receive a most careful consideration on the part
of the Government, and that it might come out of the Commit-
tee in a shape that would satisfy the public; but ho
certainly rEd not expect to have to tell these parties that they
had been subjected to the sweeping and unreserved condem-
nation of the Hon. Gentleman.,-(Hear.)
Mr. HE ATHCOAT said that there were some Gentlemen
on that (the Ministerial) side of the House, as well as on the
other, who regretted the sweeping censure of the Hon.
Gentleman. A great number of the persons who had
signed these petitions which bad been sent to that House
were totally unworthy of the accusation that had fallen
from the lion. Member for Perthshire. He did not believe
that these petitions had been got up in the way in which it had
been represented. lie was sure that many of them had been
signed by the most respectable county gentlemen and yeomen
in parts of the country where the utmost independence pre-
vai!ed. He also protested against the charges of the Hon.
Gentleman.

and who had heard his reply on a former occasion to the ques-
tions put to him on the subject, would, he hoped, antici-
pate the reply which he was about to give. However dis-
tressing it might be to some parties, and however
much he might regret it, he thought that to depart from the
provisions of an Act of Parliament passed upon due delibera-
tion, and in the first instance at the suggestion of the
parties themselves, would be a precedent full of inconve-
nience to the commercial interests of the country. Parties
would not know upon what they would have to depend, if the
law made at one time should be altered to another, merely
because individuals had a much larger stock of a commodity
on hand than they could easily within a certain time dis-
pose of. This was an application of a very peculiar
kind. The parties wanted to have the full benefit
of the Act as far as related to the remission of duty, but they

wanted to be freed from their obligations where the duty was
to be levied. It so happened that the alteration in the law was
fixed with the cognizance and sanction of these parties. An
arrangement had been made which would afford considerable
advantages and facilities, and that was by postponing the
payment for a short period.—( Hear, hear.) A treasury,
minute had been issued a few days ago authorising all per-
sons who had entered tea for home consumption prior to the
first of July, to take a time, not exceeding thirty-one days,
for the payment of the home duties. Although there were
many precedents for such a proceeding, it had been ordered
that.a copy of the minute should be laid before that House for
its consideration. By fixing the interval of one month, the ad-
vantages which a shorter period would have held out to the city
of London would be extended, and justly, to all parts of the
kingdom, because, if these advantages had been given exclu-
sively to London, there would have been just cause of complaint;
but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) saw no reason why
the same indulgence should not be extended to Edinburgh, to
Dublin, to Liverpool, and to Glasgow. He trusted he had
explained himself sufficiently to the House.—( Hear.)
Mr. ROBINSON thought the Government had acted
wisely and judiciously in extending the time in that instance ;
and in refusing an extension for the payment of the lower rate
of duty, they had merely done their duty.—( Hear). Ample time
had been allowed the parties already, and he therefore felt it
his duty to say that, in the present case, the Government had
only done its duty to the public.
Mr. MA RJOIIIB ANES did not thank the Hon. Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer for what he called a boon—it would
not be at all satisfactory to the trade.
A Message from the Lords' brought up certain Bills.
Lord SANDON was very anxious to put a question to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer on the same subject. His con-
stituents were very much afraid that there might be some other
alteration in the duty on Bohea, by which they might be made to
suffer as much as they had now done. There was conside-
rable agitation existing on the subject, and they were afraid
that hereafter they might be put to severe loss by the duty
being lowered to Is. He wished to know whether the
Chancellor of the Exchequer was determined to abide by the
system which was now laid down.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said his
Noble Friend must be well aware that it was not in his power
to stop agitation upon any subject.—( Hear, hear, hear.) If
he asked him what his intentions were, he would tell him
that his question was the first intimation of the agitation.
He would further say that he had no intention of altering the
law.

Sir R. PEEL wished to know when the Treasury minute
would be laid on the table; for the fact of its bong so laid on
the table seemed to recognize that there existed a peculiarity
in this case. He did
.not think the question had been fairly
or fully stated on the other side. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man had said that the parties had had full notice that the in-
creased duty would come into operation; but he (Sir R. Peel)
apprehended that the orders for the tea had been given before
the law was passed. The Bill was not passed until August
last year, so that there could not have been the means of
ordering tea from China since that time, and the orders were
in fact given upon the supposition that the old scale of duty
would continue. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the
parties had consented to the measure; but as regarded some
of them (those fur instance who were abroad) this could not
have been the case. He was not prepared on the whole to say
that the Right Hun. Gentleman was not right, but he thought
there were some peculiar circumstances which called for his
attention.
The •CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Treasury minute would be on the table in the course of
the evening, and then he would be ready to give any expla-
nation required. He should be able to show that, however
desirable it might be to afford relief to the parties suffering
under the alleged grievance, yet that their just demands could
not be complied with, consistently with the commercial laws
and regulations of the country.
Mr. A. TREVOR wished to know what were the inten-
tions of tin? Noble Lord on the suljeet of the Durham Cou .ty
Palatine Act? He feared that it might -be intended not to
bring it forward this session, and, if so, considerable difficulty
would arise, porticularly with reference to the writs of the
Common Pleas, because there was now no person to whom
they could be directed. The Bill would take only a very
slinrt time in Committee, and he hoped it would be presse(l