The Sun.
London, England, 1825-06-03 00:00:00

lIOUSE OF COMMONS.

• ROBERT GOURLAY.
Captain WE3IVSS presented a petition from certain indi-
viduals in the county of Fife, praying that the 'case of Ho-
bert Gourlay might be inquired into.--Ordered to lie on the
table.
Mr. T. WILSON presented a petition from the Cordwainers
of the City of London, against a renewal of the Combination
Laws.—Referred to the Committee.
CO:II3ITrrEEs ON PRIVATE BILLS.
Mr. S. WHITBREAD rose to present a petition from the
Inhabitants of London and \Vestmipster, complaining of the
• manner in which the Bill for incorporating tile . Westminster
wa,, a
question of much import_
of
t o evidence
teoliit andliat such
c(.11:olui
had
Gas Company had been thrown out. lie made several
observations on the manner in which the business of commit_
tees
Members, the
tees was managed up stairs, and upon the non-attendance of
members. Ile had himself been the only person who for seve-
rals might he said to have formed that Comemviittiteenece;,focraihnee,
ht.e contclau.icktiohfiCnoititiintliiit,tieneisonin,
great
tstiellceee,l Chairmananll,..teniaoc:iiativst .oncea.it;
leattelengi 'glee) It'nitlt:iiisa,
attnoettntli
tnintwjtnraitnydodteue-ilLytbneevgetrleshteioairld.
lailevhorAdd
boefenth
been the . practice frr•hundreds of years, but he trusted that
the Company
tht3ttlii:e.
words
Lployment to 3,000 persons. 'T►te system
spect called loudly fo! amendment..
7NonntiSwiirehC). 1011FseRr,R.e,11..,LtIi.,,nt...
w would have Irtala-v.te'eSw2, ii:l:'lnr.
u
He would
four most complete reform. It
the Committee in question- was right•or wrong; but one thing
ante, and wotptlrcil7htee hoped,Bills werebe decisivelynla fgd
taken
the man;er of it was 111014 re.
he would say, which was,
notitelrie'htiackhe upon hint tothtalettermine whether t

prehensible. So mach did he disapprove of such practiCes, that
he declared the prevalence of them had driven him from all pri-
vate Committees. Every body knew that Members came in
droves down to such Committees, in the most entire ignorance
of the testimony, indeed without even affecting to know any
' thing about it, and took their side on the division without hav-
ing paid the slightest attention to what might have been said by
Counsel or witnesses.
Mr. TREMA VNE concurred with the Honourable Mem-
, hers who went before him in thinking that reform was very
much needed, and he earnestly hoped that early in the next
Session the subject would be taken up by some Member of
weight and influence.
Mr. CALCRA FT thought it extremely objectionable that
persons interested should take upon themselves to sit as judges
in such matters. Though fully impressed with the necessity
for alteration which on all hands was allowed to exist, he could
not but admit that the subject was one of considerable difficulty.
He therefore would not undertake to say that he had matured
any schethe ; yet, with a view to do something, he would
suggest that they should borrow from the Grenville Act, and
adopt proceedings somewhat similar to those resorted to under
that Statute. He thought Special Committees ought to be ap-
pointed, of limited numbers, with power to none others to vote:
There int& likewise be certain nominees, consisting of Hon.
Gentlemen who might be 'considered better acquainted with the
subject to be brought under their consideration than ordinary
Members. Such Committees, lie considered, .ought to be
elected by ballot. He could, from his own knowledge, bear
testimony to the truth of the statement, that, many Members
came into those Committees, and decided the question, without
having heard one word of the evidence or the arguments of
Counsel.
Mr. SYKES agreed in the importance of the subject, and
that many Bills of much public utility were rejected in conse-
(pence of the votes of persons who had private interests to ad-
vance. Speaking from his own experience, lie would declare,
that never in his life did he see more injustice perpetrated than
in those Committees. lie entirely concurred with the Hon.
Member for Wareham (Mr. Calcraft) in the view which lie
took of the subject.
Mr. LITTLETON could not help expressing his surprise
that men of common honesty could be guilty of such scandalous
practices. After an expence of perhaps fifteen or twenty thou-
sand pounds had been incurred, they detersnined such questions
in perfect ignorance of the facts or reasonings brought forward
by the parties. The House, he thought, had nothing to do
with deciding the details of such measures ; they had merely
to come to a vote on principles, or at least the report of the
Committee would supply them sufficientinfigmation on matters
of detail. Whatever course they might adopt, whether by ap-
pointing Select Committees or otherwise, they should save
themselves from public odium by there being found at least a
few Members in that House who would, when opportunity '
offered, rise up in their places, and express their decided re-
probation of such conduct.
Mr. TB.'. NT then made a few observations, after which
Mr. J. P. GRANT stated to the House that he had been
asked from the beginning to attend that Committee, and even
had he had time to read the evidence, he would have been re-
luctant to do so; but as the matter stood, he felt it his duty to
abstain altogether from giving a vote. It must have struck
every one in that House with surprise, that no one present ven-
tured to contradict a single tittle of the statement made by the
Hon. Member who presented the petition. There was no
grievance greater, or one that called more urgently for a re-
medy. In cases of that nature, where large sums of money
had been invested, and great public benefits likely to result,
Members should be restrained from bringing upon themselves
individually and upon the House generally, the discredit which
such conduct necessarily entailed.
After a few words from Mr. RICKFORD,
Mr. BRIGHT expressed his regret that the Member for
Hull had not brought forward in the present Session some
measure on the subject. It might still be highly beneficial to
do,so.—The petition was then brought up, and ordered to lie
on the table.

Mr. WHITBREAD said that the individuals who had sign-
ed that petition had not done so in the expectation of its pro-
ducing any object which interested themselves individually,
hut merely in the hope of doing a public good, by calling the
attention of Parliament to the abuses which prevailed in Pri-
vate Committees, the more especially as the Hon. Member
for Winchelsea had nett redeemed his pledge on that important
subject.
COTTON MILLS.
Sir A. CHICHESTER presented a petition from the town
and neighbourhood of Belfast against the Bill for regulating the
hours of Children's Labour in Cotton Factories.—Ordered to lie
on the table.

The same Iron. Member presented a petition from the same
dace, in favour of the Bill for establishing Manufactories in
[reland.

COMBINATION LAWS.
Mr. CURTEIS presented a petition from the Journeymen
Sawyers of Brighthampstead, against the renewal of the Com-
bination Laws.—Referred to the Committee.
FISHMONGERS.
Mr. CALCRAFT presented a petition from the Journey-
men Fismongers of London, praying that Fishmongers' Shops
be shut up after ten o'clock on Sunday mornings.
After a few words from Sir R. 1.1 ILSON, Mr. W. Saurrn
(Norwich), Sir M. W. RIDLEY, &c.,
Mr. CALCRAFT, jun., gave notice that he would bring in
a Bill to effect the end sought by the prayer of the petition.
The petition was then read and ordered to be printed.
COMBINATION LA 11'S.
Mr. Alderman BEVGATE presented a petition from the
operative Sawyers of Sudbury (as we understood), against the
re-enactment of the Combinatiou,Laws.
' HOUSE AND WINDOW TAX.

Mr. IIYNG presented a petition from the Churchwardens
and Overseers of the Hamlet of Radcliffe, for the repeal of the
llouse anti Window Tax.
LAW OF MERCHANT AND FACTOR.
_ _ _

Mr. J. SMITH had to present a petition on a subject of
considerable importance; and which was signed by the prin-
pal merchants of London, and indeed by the great body of
them, with the exception of three or four, who never signed
their names to any petition whatsoever. The object of the pe-
tition was to obtain relief from the operation of certain com-
mercial regulations between merchant and factor, which were
found to be extremely prejudicial to the mercantile interests of
the country. It had been intended to . bring in a Bill on the
subject, but circumstances which took place in another place
had operated to prevent it. He repeated, the present petition
was signed by the bulk of the commercial interests of the City,
among others by ten Bank Directors. The regulations in
question had originated in 1742, and went to prevent the pos-
sibility of raising money upon goods consigned from abroad to
this country. lie understood objections to the proposed alter-
ation were entertained by the Judges, but, however he was
disposed to attend to the opinions of those learned and vene-
rable individuals upon subjects connected with the law, he did
not conceive them the best authorities upon commercial affairs.
Mr. Serjent ONSLOW thought the country and the com-
mercial community indebted to his Honourable Friend (Mr. J.
Smith) for the exertions he had made and the view he took of
the case.
Mr. T. WILSON said the petition did not merely speak the
sentiments of the Merchants of London, but of the commercial
interests generally of every town ih the kingdom.
After an observation from Mr. Inviwn,
31r. HUSK ISSON intimated his intention of supporting a
measure much as that contemplated by the lion. Gentleman (Mr.
J. Smith.)
Mr. SCARI,ETT hoped when the measure alluded to came
before the House, it would be couched in intelligible language,
had no objection
lltl'rnieenvedr
and not like some of the measures of his Righ,theßwoonu.
which he must profess himself' utterly unable to understand. If.
di
situation and daily
the proposed Bill were intended to enable one of two parties to
sagresteooift.gooi s
Withw i without
respectth et consentoe
juodtg* tehse, ohtlerer,
y:onaintiethr:
that they should receive a lesson in political econoonif
same time he was not disposed, with his. Hon. Friend (Mr. J.
rd
Tipperary, he.
ecSixtatpti ietirh,irejo,npect oer
couldund under-rate
k-nrnoaott
\efvalt
eihldetgiore
aoofrpto. opinion upon subjects.r s
The petition was then read, and ordered to be printed.
TITHING SYSTEM.
Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition from certain inha-
bitants
the alteration that had . been adopted in
the Tithing Sy.stem.
lbaintadTcsomofptlhaeindiniogcese of Killaloe, in the county
Mr. BROUGHAM presented a petition from the inhabi-
tants of the parish of Castle Lyons, county Cork, praying for
an inquiry into the Tithing System in Ireland.
Referred to the Committee on the state of Ireland.
GRAND JURY. PRESENTMENTS (IRISH.)
Mr. BROUGHAM presented a petition from an individual

named Robert Bell, of the parish of Tan i yally, n the county
Tyrone, praying for an inquiry into the state of the. Grand Jury
Presentments in Ireland.—Referred to the gommitttee on the
State of Ireland.

COMBINATION LAWS, AND RATE OF WAGES.
Mr. BROUGHAM rose to present a petition front:the work-
ing colliers of Mid and East Lothian, against the re-enactment
'of the Combination Laws, and praying an equitable adjustment
of the rate of wages. The Learned and Honourable Gentleman
observed, that those individuals, though hard-working men, de-
served to have some attention paid to the prayer of their peti•
tion.- They were better educated titan many other. individuals
of greater pretension and higher rank, and although those per••
sans could not lay claim to be considered as political economists,
the House should have a fellow-feeling with them in that re-
spect, for it was but lately that they were in the same situation
themselves..—(A laugh.)—lndeed there were some HonouraNe
Members in that state at this moment; others had been but
lately rescued from their ignorance; the bulk of the House
were in the very same situation not 20 years ago, and these pe-
titioners were quite as well informed as some of" his Majesty's
Ministers at the present moment.—(Hear, and laughter.)—
Under such circumstances he trusted the House would. not dis-
regard the prayer of the petitioners.—Laid on the table..
• CATHOLIC RELIEF.
Mr. BROUGHAM presented a petition' from certain Mem--
berg of the.EStabliShed Church, in Stroud, Gloucestershire, in
favour of the Catholic Claims.—Laid on the table. .
COUNTY MAGISTRATES.
Mr. BROUGHAM presented a petition from an individual
named George Henry Bays, of Cambridge, an attorney of the
Court of King's Bench, complaining of the deplorable igno-
rance manifested upon legal subjects by the• Magistrates at
Quarter Sessions. Petitioner stated that these individuals af-
forded the strongest possible contrast to the information • pos-
sessed by the Magistrates of London and Westminster ; for-
that the majority of them were fox-hunters, and arbitrary (a
laugh), and, in short, everything but lawyers. It was . the de-
sireof the petitioner, that,, previous to the admission of. these in-
dividuals into the commission. they should be subjected to an
examination before competent Barristers. and theta suitable
degree of knowledge should be instilled into them if found
deficient in the necessary information.—(A, laugh.)---.Laid on
the table.