The Sun.
London, England, 1822-02-26 00:00:00

SCOTCH COUNTIES.

Lord A. HAMILTON gave notice, that on Tuesday, the
2Gth of next month, he proposed to submit a motion to the
House on the subject of Scotch County Representation. He
proposed strictly to confine his motion to the Representation of
Counties of Scotland.
•
STATE OF IRELAND.

Mr. D. BROWN gave notice, that on Thutsday, the 16th
March, he would submit a motion to the House, which would
bring under their consideration the present state of Ireland.
WINDOW TAX IN IRELAND.

Mr. HUTCHINSON, in presenting a Petition from the
Householders and Inhabitants of the City of Cork, praying
for relief from the Window Tax, took upon himself to recom-
mend it to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give this subject
his most serious consideration. Ile hoped the Right Honour-
able Gentleman, having a clear surplus income over the expendi-
ture of more than 5,000,001.11. would be able to. attend to the
prayer of this petition. The abandonment of the impost in
question would very slightly affect the revenue of the country,
while the relief which its repeal would afford must be felt of
the highest importance; especially when viewed with reference
to its effect on the health of the inhabitants of populous places.
He set forth at some length the benefits to be derived from the
abandonment of the Window Tax, and the claims of Ireland
to such relief.

Mr. GRATTAN supported the prayer of the Petition, and
was decidedly of opinion that 'greater relief could be afforded
by diminishing the Window Tax than by the proposed relief
of the Malt Duty.
Sir W. DE CRESPIGNY spoke against the Window Tax,
as being very oppressive in England.—Ordered to lie on the
Table.

CHARGES FOR POSTAGE.
Sir R. WILSON thought it right to mention the inconveni-
ence to which certain parties had been exposed from their ne-
glecting to comply with the resolutions of the Post Office. A
petition had been presented to him closed at the ends, and in
consequence a demand of 11. les. had been made for postage.--
He had therefore returned the petition.. In mentioning the
circumstance he did not mean to throw any blame on the Post
Office, he was only anxious to state what had occurred, that
going forth to the world, those who had petitions to forward
might know in what way they were privileged to send them,
anti that it might not be thought that those to whom petitions
were sent in the way described had failed in their duty.
Mr. JAMES had had a Petition sent to him in the same way,
but no charge had been- made for postage on his sending back
the cover which inclosed it to the Post Office.
Lord A. HAMILTON said, a Petition had been sent to him
last year which was charged no less than 91., but on sendinidit
to the Post Office, the whole sum was remitted and the Peti-
tion was presented.
Sir JAS. GRAHAM understood the Post Office was bound
to charge,for postage when a document was. sent closed up as
these had been, but when it was proved that what had been so
forwarded was a Petition to be, presented to Parliament, the
money was always returned.
Mr. HUTCHINSON bore testimony . to the readiness mani-
fested at the Post Office to correct any inconvenience occasion.
ed by Petitions being sent in such a way as to make them liable
for postage.
Mr. HUME did the Postmaster the justice to say, that he
had experienced the same disposition on his part. Last week
he remind Petitions which were charged 3or 41. On his send-
ing to the Post Office the money was immediately returned,
with a clause which precluded the sending of Petitions in this
way which exceeded the weight,of six ounces. Were this regu-
lation generally known, it might save much future inconve-
nience and loss of time.

Sir M. W. RIDLEY said, the clause in question was attach-
ed to an Act for regulating the duties on Tea and Coffee. At