The Sun.
London, England, 1831-09-27 00:00:00

1
bed attempted Reform in other places,
to carry it into effect there. t• a it :41';-4?:-.
The Duke of RICHMOND rose to • .:".,4,,,tf the Noble ,;."'=.'s- ^l
Marquis meant to give a notice, he • ,•: ; : sit that ' •
it would be much more decorous to .' :the Noble
and Learned Lord *ls in his place and preparstioaaawer. I ... •
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he was merely . tai‘j
proceeding to give reasons why the Noble Lord was bound
.mil
1 to attend.
oLur
of order.
contended that the
Noble
er
ItAhileas. rr information. r
guuii Marquis of
s
"
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY intended to call
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE inquired if the Noble
Marquis opposite meant to give notice of a motion or a
question?
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY--A question.
Lord PLUNKETT was sure that their Lordships could
w
not fail to be of opinion that his Noble Friend bad not
violated any of their standing orders; at the same time it
was net for him to set himself up as a Judge of the stand-
ing orders of their Lordships' House, for he rather wished
to leave that office to persons of more experience in that
House than himself; but he confessed it did appear to him
that there had been no violation of the standing order.—
He understood the standing order to mean that the Lord
Chancellor was not to be absent unless some other Noble
Lord were appointed by Royal Commission to preside.—
Now, the Noble Lord who at present so ably occupied the
Woolsack received his appointment by Royal Commission.
No doubt, however, his Noble Friend would he perfectly
able to afford their Lordships the fullest explanation oa •
the subject, and to answer any question which the Noble
Marquis might have to put ; but he thought it would be
unjust to the Noble Lord to have it go abroad that his
absences were so frequent as bad been represented; •r that
they arose from any other causes than that application to
the arduous duties of his office which had commanded the
unanimous approbation of the public.—(Cheers.) There
had been in his Court a great arrear of business ; he should
not stop to inquire in whose time that arrear had accumu-
lated ; hut the Noble and Learned Lord had succeeded in
getting rid of it.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, if his prede-
cessors thought themselves at liberty to he absent, they
might have gotten rid of any,arrear of business in the
Courts ; they conceived that it was their daty to attend
in that House ; and therefore if by hie absence from
one duty he was enabled to di,charge another, and supe-
rior duty, he could lay claim to no more merit than his
predecessors.
The Earl of ELDON always understood from what he
had read, and from his predecessors Lords Thurlow and
Loughborough, that the first duty of the. Lord Chancellor
was to attend upon that House ; and when circumstances
rendered it impossible for him to do so, he was bound to
signify the cause to the Noble Lord who might hold the
Royal Com:ninaion to preside in that House. It hasl been
said that the alisence of the Noble Lord hail enabled him
to discharge other duties ; but it should be borne in mind,
that that very evening questions affecting lay property in
advowsons bad been brought under the consideration of
their Lordships, of as great importance as any upon which
a Lord Chancellor could have to decide, and yet the House
were without the advantage of hearing the opinions of
that high functionary, from whom they ought, upon such
subject, to receive their doctrines. Unless their Lord.
ships intended to alter their usages, the Lord Chancellor
ought to attend in his place. There had been instances
recorded on the Journals, where the Lord Chancellor was
absent from the necessity of attending upon the King at
Windsor; hut that was not held by the Homo to be a suf-
ficient cause.
The Duke of RICHMOND said, that the King's Com-
mission had issued for the purpose of enobling the Noble
and Learned Lord who spoke last to be absent from ap-
peals ; the House knew no diff,rence between morning and
evening. As to the present absence of the Lord Chancel-
lor, it arose from the very circumstance just alluded to—.
namely, attendance upon the King.
The Eatl of ELDON said, that his absence from appeals
arose not front any act of his own, but under an order of
their Lordships.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE contended, that it was
no breach whatever of the orders, but recommended that
the discussion be dropped for the present.
After a rev: words from Lord MULORAYs and the Mar-
quis of Lormoienartav, .
The London and - Weitroinster Coal Bill was, on the
motion of Lord ELLZWBOROUGH,considered in Committee z
the amendments were adopted, and the report ordered to he
received to-morrow.
The Earl of ROSSLYN proposed the second reading of
the Scotch Turnpike Bill for Thursday, and gave notice
that he should move a clause, disabling toll-keepers from
having beer licenses.
The Special Constables' Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed to-morrow.
Lord PLUNKETT moved the second reading of the Ad-
ministration of Justice (Ireland) Bill. It was intended by
that Bill to extend most of the recent English Acts to Ire-
land. It was read a second time, and ordered to be com-
mitted to.morrow.—Adjourned.

HO USE OF COMMONS, SK.PrigarsErt 26.
Colonel EVANS gave notice that he should, on Thurs-
day, bring forward a inotinn relative to military prepara-
tions said to have taken place at the Tower and in the city
of London, on the 9th of last November.

Mr. STRICKLAND presented a petition from Halifax,
praying for the vote by ballot, and complaining that per-
sons had threatened them with ruining their trade, if they
did not vote according to their directiou at the election for
Halifax, which was to take place under the Reform Bill.
Mr. HUNT supported the prayer of the petition, and
thought that their having given the elective franchise to
101. voters would give rise to more corruption than bad
yet existed, if the vote by ballot was not introduced.
Mr. C. PELHAM contended that the prayer of this
petition served to chew already how badly it was probable
the new Refottu Rill would operate with respect to the
101. voters.

Mr. HODGSON presented a petition from Newcastle-
on-Tyne, against the tax on marine insurances.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from Drayton,
praying for an investigation into the case of Mr. and Mrs.
Deacle.

Mr. O'CONNELL also presented a petition from some
place in Ireland, in favour of poor laws in Ireland. He
was afraid that it would at last be found necessary to in-
troduce such a system into Ireland ; but at the same time
he felt that after the example of the English poor laws, it
behoved them to be exceedingly cautious what steps they
took with respect to the introduction of poor laws into
Ireland.

Mr. HUNT said it was not the poor laws of England,
hut the abuse of them, that was reprehensible. He Defied
any one to point out any clause in the English poor laws
that was not just, equitable, and humane.

Mr. WRIGHTSON thought the introduction of poor
laws into Ireland would only be alleviating one days of
persons at the expense of the ruin of another.
Mr. WEYLAND supported poor laws in Ireland, on
the ground that so much capital of that country was taken
away by absentees that the labourers of the country wore
left without employment, and had, therefore, a right to
look for support in some other way.

Mr. ROBINSON said, that it Was impossible to expect
that able-bodied men would remain quiet and tranquil
without employment; and be thought that poor hrwa
were the only remedy for Ireland.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY contended that poor laws had
their origin in the laws of nature, and that every man who
was willing to work and could not obtain work, had a na-
tural claim on the soil for support. He hoped that the
titne was nor far distant when church property would be
made available fur that moat charitable of all ~bjects--the
support of the poor,
Sir R. BATESON said, that the introducti( n of poor

laws into Ireland would render that country doubly
wretched and doubly miserable. He would rather take an
example as to poor laws from Sou',land than from England,
for in the former country they worked well, and in the
atter country confsedly ill. At the same time, he very
touch wished to see a legal support establi.hed for th..! aged
and ina,rn who were unable to support themselves.
Sir C. BURRELL said, that there wit.. no fault to be
oiund With the poor laws—it was from the inistpplicationt
of them that all the mischief arrow.
Mr. WILKS admitted, that if Enclish poor laws, with
all their abuses, were introduced into Ireland, they would
'to harm instead of good.
Lord INGESTRIE thought that the question of the in-
trAuction of poor laws into Ireland ought to receive im-
mediate attention from the Legislature.
Colonel TORRENS said, that %hone% gentlemen spoke
n favour of poor laws in Ireland, yet no tone had pointed
out how the land was to be mule to produce sufficient
food to support the poor.
Mr. HODGES was of opinion that some poor laws
were necessary for Ireland. Ue was aware of the great
;buses of the poor laws in England, and could not con-
.eive that system applicable to Ireland. It should be
.omething different trim; that, and something
bclaecr.upaions
Sir JOHN NEWBORT deprecated
.object. •
n
ne
ntnen tYd preparedt
vaguei ua l l practicalyP rat ln7deo dd
b7recuglrot:o undergoing t should
e 0 es
it. f;Pabl:r:' hara wicit
al lip jorotnwf b
et fd,
441 b
Englandl
But
ie
when
wereu
ny i d;
planted of;