The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-17 00:00:00

ELECTION COMMITTEES.
(YESTERDAY.)

(From our Second Edition of last night.)
BEDFORD.
When the Committee rose, at four o'clock, the sitting Member was in
a minority of one.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mar 16.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock.
On the motion of Mr. It. STEUART, it was ordered that the House
at its rising adjourn until Friday.
Mr. FAZAKERLY brought up a report from the Poor_law Committee.
On the motion of Mr. CRAWFORD the Middlesex County Court
Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed.
On the motion of Mr. G. BERKELEY the Dean Forest Roads Bill
was read a third time and passed.
Mr. PEND A RVES brought up the report on the Newquay (Corn
wall) Harbour Bill.
Mr. HAWES presented a petition praying for leave to bring in a Bill
for forming a Company for ;the Galvanization of Meta's. Referred to
the Committee on Private Petitions.
Mr. HOI)GES presented several petitions from parishes in Southamp.
ton, in favour of the New Pour Law Bill, and praying that no
material alteration be made in it; also one from Rochester, praying that
no clause be inserted in the Copyright Bill which might tend to fetter
the diffusion of useful knowledge.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented a petition from Birmingham, praying
for the immediate abolition of Slavery.
Mr. WALLACE presented a petition to the same effect. Also peti-
tions from places in Ayr and Perth, praying for a reduction of the rates
of postage. The Hon. Hon. Member then presented petitions from the
pressmen of Leicester-square, Old Bailey, and Frith•etreet, Soho, against
the Copyright Bill. The Hon. Member stated, that as the rules of the
House curtailed the observations of Members on the presentation of pe-
titions, the petitioners had curtailed the size of the paper on which the
petition Nis written, in order to skew the absurdity of the manner in
which the petitions of the people were treated in that House.—(A laugh.)
Mr. ROUND presented a petition from the Guardians and other parish
officers of the parish of Yelverton, complaining of the operatic n of the
Poor Law Act.
Mr. BARNARD presented a petition from the inhabitants of St. Paul,
Deptford, complaining that neither the victualling-offices nor the dock.
yards at Deptford paid poor-rates or land-tax.
Sir C. E. GREY presented petitions from Tynemouth, praying that
the system of negro apprenticeship might terminate on the Ist of August
next. Also a petition against the establishment of the British Pledge
Company.
Sir G. STRICILAND presented petitions from places in Yorkshire,
against the negro apprenticeship system..
Mr. HUME presented a petition from the parish of Blackrock, Kil-
kenny, praying for the entire abolition of tithes. If any more scenes
like—(Cries of " Order, order.")
Mr. LITTON considered it the rule of the House, that no Hon.
Member had a right to make comments upon a petition which were
likely to lead to a debate. He would like to hear the opinion of the
Speaker on the subject.
The SPEAKER said there was no rule on the subject ; but the House
had generally acknowledged that it was for the convenience of all that

the substance of the petition should be stated.—(Hear.)
Mr. lIUME--Then the petitioners complain that the Church in Ire.
land was the bane of that country—an opinion to which he had given ut-
terance more than twenty years ago, and in which he still cordially con-
curred.

Mr. HAWES gave notice that, when the report of the Benefices
Pluralities Bill should be brought up, he should move the insertion of a
clause for the total abolition of all pluralities in future.
Mr. W. WYNN gave notice that on the 31st of May he would move
an Address to her Majesty, praying that some ecclesiastical promotion be
given to the late three Chaplains'of that House who had not been pro-
vided for according to the established rules.

Mr. P. THOMPSON hoped the Hon. Member for Dudley would with-
draw the Bill he had on the Orders for committal with respect to the
protection of British manufactures. He (Mr. P. Thomson) had paid
great attention to it, and had prepared clauses which would meet
the concurrence of that Hon. Member and those who were interested
in the Bill.

Mr. HAWES, on the pledge of that Right Hon. Gentleman that he
would himself introduce the substituted Bill with the clauses alluded to,
withdrew the Bill.

In answer to a question from an Hon. MEMBER,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Malta Commissioners had concluded
their labours, and were on their way home.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the
Glass Duties Bill went through Committee pro forma, in order to be
re-printed. SMALL DEBTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.)
On the Order of the Day being moved for the Committee on the
Small Debts (Scotland) Bill,
Mr. WALLACE begged to ask the following questions :
I. I wish to ask the Secretary for the Home Department, and also
the Lord Advocate, if they have received any Report from the Officer
of the Crown appointed to inquire into the conduct of the Sheriffs of
'ten frevi-shi re.

2. If the Report had been communicated to the Vice-Lieutenant,
or to the other Justices of Peace of Renfrewshirc, when assembled at
Quarter Sessions in that county on the 10th current.
3. If they have seen the official Reports published in the county
of Renfrew and Glasgow Newspapers, of the proceedings of the Jus.
tires of Itenfrewshice, assembled at Quarter Sessions, respecting the in-
vestigation into the conduct of the Sheriffs by the officer appointed by
the Crown.

The LORD ADVOCATE said no report had been received as yet,
owing to some unavoidable delay. Consequently the meeting of Jus,.
tices of Peace, alluded to by his Hon. Friend the Member for Greenock,
must have been held while in ignorance of the report.
Mr. 'WALLACE then moved that the return ordered on the 3d of
April, to amend a defective or false Return made to this House by the
Sheriffs of Renfrewshire, be made forthwith.
.__. _

•
The House then went into Committee on the Small Debts (Scot-
land) Bill.
Clause 1, with some amendments, was agreed to.
On clause 2 being moved, which raises the jurisdiction of the justices
of the peace to debts of the amount of 61. Gs. Bd.,

. , .
The LORD ADVOCATE objected to so high an amount, lie
moved as an amendment that 51. be the limit of their jurisdiction.
Sir W. RAE supported the clause.
Mr. Fox. Maule, Mr. Wallace, and Mr. Gillon, concurred in the
amendment. The Committee then divided—
For the clause
Against it 4O
Majority
The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
On the thirst clause having been put,

. ,
Mr. IN ALLACE objected to it, and moved that it should be taken
into consideration that day six months.

The Committee divided, when there appeared—.

For the original motion
Against it 2-1
Majority
The Clause, as amended, was then agreed to, as were the succeeding
Clauses, down to the 1 7th, after some verbal alterations had been math)
in them.

On the 18th Clause being put,
Mr. WALLACE objected to it, on the ground that it would place
too extensive powers in the hands of the Magistrates.
Mr. CHALMERS said that he concurred with his Hon. Friend,
and, therefore, he should move the omission of the Clause.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the Clause 55
Against it . 10
Majority
The clause was then, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The other clauses were then :greed to, and the Bill and amendments
were reported to the House, and ordered to be taken into further con-
sideration this day week.
The Order of the Day for the second reading of the County Rates
Bill having been read,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL suggested to the Hon. Me nber for
Kilkenny the propriety of postponing the Bill to a future day.
Mr. HUME acquiesced, and had no objection to postpone the second
reading of the Bill for three weeks.

The other Orders of the Dap were then disposed cf, and the House
adjourned at Seven o'Clock to Friday.

NEW YORK.

APRIL 20, 1834.—1 expected before this to have been able to have
informed you of the reestablishment of peace in the Canadas, but I have
been sorely disappointed. The reign of oppression continues in Lower
Canada and in Upper Canada. The new Lieutenant-Governor has
commenced his administration by shedding blood—by executions and
quarterings—contrary to all that we were led to expect from the declare-
lions of both parties, Whigs and Tories, Ministers and Oppositionists, in
the British Parliament. For the particulars of this horrid butchery I
must refer you to the papers which I send. You have already heard,
I presume, that Mr. Lount and Captain Matthews were
arrested, and put upon their trial for high treason, at Toronto.
Thedebates in Parliament, and the general tone of the London Press, in.
&iced us to believe and to hope that a merciful policy would be pursued
towards them and others. Indeed, if Ido not mistake, Ministers them_
selves declared that they had forwarded instructions to Canada to pre.
vent the shedding of blood. It turns nut now that they have, as usual,
deceived you and the people of Canada. On Sir George Arthur's ar.
rival at Toronto, addresses were presented to him from divers public
bodies and private persons. In reply to one presented to him by the
Mayor and Corporation of Toronto, he held forth at length upon the
blessed qualities of mercy, quoting an extract from Shakspeare. Every
person was led to believe that a merciful and forgiving policy would be
followed. Lount and Matthews had been ordered for execution upon
the 12th, and this answer led people to imagine that they would be re.
prieved. Much anxiety was felt at their threatened fate. Petitions,
with several thousand names, were presented on their behalf. To the
great disappointment, horror, and indignation of the Province, they
were executed upon the 12th, and their bodies given over for muti.
lation, notwithstanding the tears and entreaties of their wives and
families. Several others are ordered for execution today, and others
for the 24th. You cannot conceive the shock this bloodshed has given
to the public feeling here. Every person speaks with horror of it ; and
the Government is regarded as barbarous which could have permitted it,
now that the danger is at an end. It will seriously damage the influence
of England in the Canadas, and hasten that separation which must
eventually happen. How wi❑ sour Ministers in Parliament look, or
reply, when they are questioned about these cruelties? By a refe.
rence to the debates it will appear that they disclaimed all idea
of, or wish for, bloodshed. Contrary to their declarations, they
have since authorised Sir Geo. Arthur to commit the severities they
disclaimed, for offences which Sir Francis Head boasts in his dispatches
that he encouraged and held out every inducement for their commission.
It was impossible that Sir George Arthur could have gone this length
unless he was authorized by Lord Glenelg. The men who have been sa-
crificed were of unexceptionable private character. Lount was a native
of Pensylvania, to which state his father emigrated with the celebrated
Dr. Joseph Priestley. His brother is registrar of the county of
Simcoe, for which county he was formerly returning officer. Lount
had a large farm and a numerous family of sons and daughters. Ile
was about forty years of age, and I believe, of the Methodist persua-
sion. Captain Matthews was an American of about forty years of age.
He has been tong established in Pickering, county of York, where he
had a large farm.

I mentioned in my last letter that some of the New York papers are
forbidden to be circulated in Canada. This was a high-handed measure,
sufficient to excite surprise. The extinction of the Liberal press within
the province had left the Tories no materials at home upon which to
foment their rancour, and they have therefore waged war against the
liberal papers of New York. But, Sir, this is not all; they have not
stopped here. They have commenced war upon the press Of London
They have begun by ostracising the London and IVestminster Review. In
the January Number of that work appeared an article, entitled " Lord
Durham and the Canadians." Some Canadian Gentlemen at Montreal
having read the article thought that ii, circulation might do good, and
pave the way for a favourable reception of Lord Durham. It was,
therefore, determined to re.print it as a pamphlet, and Dr. Francis
Antoine Larocque, of Montreal, accordingly, ordered the work
to be done at the office of Mr. Louis Perault, proprietor of
the late Montreal Vindicator a paper which cuts no small
figure in the dispatches of Lord Gosford, and which he sup-
pressed before he left the province. The work was accordingly executed,
and delivered to' 111 r. Larocque. The Montreal magistrates, however,
and Sir John Colborne, thought the article to be too liberal, and they
have positively seized the types and the presses of the Vindicator office,
where the work was executed, and they have thrown Mr. Larocque into
gaol, where he now remain,. i forward to you a copy of the pamphlet,