The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-19 00:00:00

MUTINY BILLS.

On the motion of the Earl of LIVERPOOL,. the A tiny
Mutiny Bill and-the Marine Mutiny Bill were•read a seem,
time, and ordered to be committed on Monday.
Lord CARBERRY moved that an bumble Address be pre,
tented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty-would be
pleased to order certain Returns relative to the poor in Ireland,-
to be laid before their Lordships.
Lord CLIFDEN thought that some assistance or other
should be given to the poor of Ireland, and that it was a sacred
duty on their Lordships to do so. If something were not done
numbers must materially perish.
Earl DARNLEY said he was aware of the horror with which
the Poor Laws-were regarded by the Irish Landed Proprietors
generally. He for one thought that any thing like the Englial,
Poor Lsws would never answer the purpose of Ireland. But
he,thought that some provision should be made for. the Irish
poor, and that they-should not be suffered to die from want.- lie
was aware, that among all classes in that country there was a
strong disposition to relieve those who were in•- distress, and
that many did not die from want;. but lie also knew .that
such deaths did sometimes occur, and that they-should be Pre-
vented.

• •
SPRING-GUNS 81LL...
On the-motion of Lord SUFFIELD the Report en the Spring
Guns Bill Was received.
The Earl of LIVEIIPOQL asked the Noble Lord (suffiehl )
when he intended to move the second reading of the liill to make
stealing in gardens larceny ?. . •• • . .
Lord SUFFIELD said, on Monday next, with his Lordship's
concurrence. • • •

•
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said that he 'thought the Bill
was too large, and might be compressed. into half a page. • •
• Lord
•SUFFIELD observed, that he had intended; on tlie
second reading of the Bill, to state how it became so voluminous.
It happened to be drawn up by a gentleman who was forming
a general scheme of law; and he . wished this Bill to be • con-
sidered as a 'specimen.' if 'the Noble Lord, however; wished
it to be done" he (Lord Suffield) .would-. destroy the-greater .part
of it, and only reserve the three last pages.
Lord CLI FDEN said that 'the Noble -Lord merited ,much
praise for the zeal with which be had introduced this Bilk and
carried it thrrrukh the House. He •believed:that its eirecti?.on
the country-at large Would be most beneficial. • • ,;,*4
SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.
The Report of tho•Scoteli Jtidicatureßill Was received and
agreed to; and -was•.ordefed to. be engrossed and read tilhird
time on -

. .
.. - •
ASSESSED TAXES' 13ILL. • •••.:
The Assessed Taxes' Bill went through, a Committee, and
was reported.—Adjourned till Monday. • • , ....

HOUSE OF- COMMONS:

BERKELEY, PEERAGE.
Sir..W. GUlSE.pres'ented. a_pgtition from. W,. Eitzhartlitige
Berkeley, of Berkeley Castle, in the County
•of Gloucester,'
praying, that he may berheard by. Counsel against the now
in progress through the House for .settling the Berkeley pAer-
age,Referred to the Committee. • .'
EQUITABLE L0,A3.1. °BANE.. • ,
Mr. C. CALVERT presented a petition from certalOndivi-
duals in Southwark, in favour '.of the- -EqUitable lioafOlank
Company. The Hon. Member said he felt it to. be hii.clitty to
present this, petition, although he could not support it.prityer.
--Laid upon the table. • • • •-11
Petitions were presented from St. Giles's by Lord Ai,-
oRP ; from the• Watermen of the River Thames, gnfirtlie
• Watchmen of the Metropolis, by Mr. bqp .A§ .; ,an4orne tie
Tailors of the Metropolis by Mr. If YNG, in favour of the Equi-
table Loan Bank Company. •
• • ST. LUKE, CHELSEA.
On the motion of Mr. S. Will Tint E. 113, the,Bal-forect_
ing a new Church in the Parish of St. Luke, Chelsea, was read
a first time.

,:~;.

NEW BRIDGE.. CHESTER..
On the motion of Gen. GROSVENOR, the Bill fox Erecting
a new Bridge over the River Dee, in Chester, ard foi Hiking
approaches and other improvements connectedwith,,the•Asanie,
was read a first time.

. BERMONDSEY DOCK. ,
On the motion of Mr.. H. SUMNER„ the Bermondsey Dock
Bill was read a first time. . .

. .
INUNDATION IN PORTSEA..
Mr. JARVIS presented a petition froM the inliabitiatii of
Portsea, praying the House to grant them such relief as itk their
judgment might seem fitting to their, present distress.--,444 on
the table. . - •
ARUNDEL CANAL.
Mr. JAnvis presented another petitionfromPortsea,•in fa-
vour of the Arundel Canal. . • •
Mr. LociorwitT moved the second reading of. the. Sti.,fin-
drew's, Holborn, Rates Bill. • •- •
Lord FOLKSTONE opposed it, and moved that** bettriail a
second time that day six months.
Mr. T. WILSON said the whole rates of this p2rishant
ed to '15,000/, a year, and out •of that there had been a IcoAt; of
1,500/. arisin,, from. the.2o/..a,year houses_ As.tlie! law' t pre-
sent stood, the owners of these small houses were ,hoiind. tie'pay
the rates. The rich had therefore. been the defaUlters,";B, the
:aw was intended the occupiers were to pay, and ,the prior to
suffer for any inability- to. comply with the parish cleinfirid,.
The rich supported thrsl3ill-,,-the poor opposed it, and be thiilight
it better to atop any, further expence on either side,tiy voting for
the amendment. •
•Mr. LOCKHART said that the losses mentioned .by. the
Member for the City of London, Mr. Ti Wilson, had not.pro-
eeeded from any default npon the part of the rich, hut fit* the
manner of collecting the-rates. In that parish they werethotind
to collect them quarterly; .not immediately, yi4s.the:Esotin
other parishes; so that it frequently happened the 'ocetiprer of
one of the small houses, removed before .the ,colleet • went
round to. receive his dues. The: on. Member'prgiied strpngly
in favour of the Bill.

.
Mr. HopHousE opposed it.. .
After a few words from Mr. Byng, Aldernaar9.,lV94 Mr.
Hume, and• Mr. Sykes, the House divided-. 2
For the Bill.. .- . . - . -.. . 39 ''..
.Agaiust it -
. - Majority .- -. .- ~,--.119 "
The Bill was then read,a.st time. .
.
MR. I)UBOIS. •tt
Mr. HOBBOUSE said he claimed .the usual indulgence 0.,
the House while he took leave to brink to its re4lect op ;tome
circumstances which had been mentioned iri.the debate vfln the
Pasco P.cruvi,anCoMpany. The Hon. Member toily'cniouth
had in that debate charged a Mr. Dubois
.'svA bair.ll entered
•ainto base .conspiracy •Ag 4 . inst the Conn.pank, ,illid gsfeYday
evening.relterated.bis uwrtions -by Aeclarinr\tlq.t4ey .id not
ailude to Mt.,,VV.m. but Dn
. Mr. James,b.nil,,4g,OtiFSOM he
declared. thern, Nitg, to apply in the serongyttAPAct..lo".4piwer
to this he (Mr. HaNiiiad received . a .._lotter., ftnnl.iliiii.4t44.ptues
Dubois, which he'wourd take. leave" to rOl,. do ib•c iloite.:„ He
ii id not pledge hihp9itiOr its accuracy, r, was tie iilsweirable
. . . -. . , ... .

...•~...,.~ c~ . .

_

ict igat statenatrAtil, but he thought it right that the individual
aspersed should be heard in his defence. The letter stated,
•• that he (Mr. J. Dubois) was sorry to trouble him, being un-
known to him, but that he hoped he would pardon the liberty
he bad taken from a consideration of his earnest desire to free
,nkroself from unfounded imputation. He denied that he had
ryer published any thing in a newspaper, and declared that he
hi been offered one thousand new shares in Mr. Fry's Pasco
I,?ruvian project if he would give up his opposition to it." He
t Mfr. Hobhouse) did not pledge himself, he repeated, for the
accuracy of this statement, but he thought it fair that the indi-
ydual should be permitted to reply to what had been advanced

arainst him.
Mr. F. BUXTON said that Mr. Dubois had asserted he did
not publish any thing in the newspapers, but he had not an-
swered the accusation that he had used his efforts against the
Company in other ways. He had charged him with offering
kit twenty shares to withdraw his opposition to the project, and
by publishing all the truth to ensure the rise of the shares.
"ilhat charge he begged to repeat, upon the authority of two of
the most eminent merchants of the city, and Major Hinde, a
well known officer, who was present at the interview. If it
should turn out that this should he a base conspiracy by these
two individuals and this officer of rank against the character
sfltir. Dubois, he should be one of the first to reprobate it in
We strongest terms the English language could dictate; but if
it should turn out, as he believed it would, that all he had as-
serted with respect to Alt. Dubois was true, then he would say
eat this letter warranted him H 4 applying even stronger terms
*llan he had before used in expressing his contempt and disgust
wen he spoke of the conduct of that Gentleman.
LIVERPOOL RAILWAY.
Mr. B. WILBRAHA M presented a Petition from certain per-
sons in Lancashire against the Liverpool and Manchester
Railway.
METROPOLITAN WATER COMPANY.
Mr. 13-YHO, presented a Petition from the West Middlesex
Water Company against the 31etropolitan Water-works.
Mr. J. SMITH presented a Petition from the West India
• Dock Company against the Coal Dock Company, praying to
be heard by their Counsel.—Ordered to be laid on the table.
Sir R. WiLsom presented a Petition from \V. Perring
against the London Docks..—Ordered to be laid on the table.
Lord A. HAMILTON presented a Petition from the Weavers
cf Leith against the Leith Docks.