The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-19 00:00:00

ACQUITTAL OF

PERSONS TRIED FOR

MURDER.

The NOBLE and LEARNED LORD then moved for
a return of the names of all persons who within
the last ten years had beer► tried for murder and
acquitted on the ground of insanity, and who had been
since liberated. His Lordship adverted to the case of
the Captain of a vessel who had murdered eight of
his crew, who had been tried, and acquitted on the ground of
insanity, and had since (we understood) been liberated. The
return was ordered.

CHURCH PROPERTY.
The Duko of NEWCASTLE presented a petition against
the appropriation of Church property to other than ecclesias-
tical purposes.
CORN LAWS.

Earl FITZ WILLIAM gave notice that he would to-morrow
present a petition on the subject of the Corn laws.
Lord LONDONDERRY observed that this would inter-
fere Irith his motion, which stood for to-morrow, on the
Spanish question.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM then fixed it for Friday.

BISHOPRIC OF SODOR AND MAN.
This Bill was brought up from the Commons.
GRAND JURY CESS (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was also brought up.
TRUSTEES OF CHARITIES' BILL.

This Bill having been read a second time,
Lord BROUGHAM said this was a Bill of great im-
portance—it enacted that when no application was made for
two cars to the Court of Chancery, charitable funds in Cor-
porations were to pass under the control of the Mai or and
Guardians.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said the Bill had been
moved before he entered-the House. He believed it would be
greatly amended in Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM would give the Bill his strenuous
opposition.
Lord PORTMAN (who had moved the Bill) said he had
understood there was no opposition to the Bill but as to de-
tails, which might be amended in Committee.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

110 USE OF COMMONS, JUNE 18.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
NEW MEMBER.
Mr. FECTOR, the new Member for the Borough of
Maidstone, took the oaths and his seat.
Mr. Grey, from the Bank of England, appeared at the Bar
with returns, which were laid on the table.
RAMSGATE IMPROVEMENT BILL.
Mr. BELL presented a petition from Newcastle-on-Tyne
against the Ramsgate harbour Bill.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition from a place
in Kent in favour of the same Bill.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL moved the third reading of the
.Ramsgate Improvement Bill.
Mr. W. ATT\VOOD, upon the question that the Bill do
pa-s, rose to move the clauses of which he bad given notice.
If the Bill passed in its present state, every vessel laden
with coal entering the harbour through stress of weather,
or other causes, would have to pay a duty of 2s. a ton.
Now if that were to be the case every town in the country
might, upon the same principle, impose duties upon all goods
carried through their streets. The inhabitants of Ramsgate
received sufficient benefit from the situation of their har-
bour without imposing such a tax as was proposed by the Bill.
On the same principle as that on which the Lill was justified,
Whitstable and Faversham would have a right to tax neigh-
bouring places. It was also defended because the duty
was imposed by two several local Acts of former
tirnes—( Hear, bear)—but that duty was imposed for
the purpose of improving the town, and it was impossible to
say that the Legislature did not mean that the coal duty should
cease, now that the purposes for which it had been given had
been performed. These duties had already produced 30,0001..
while they were imposed for paying only a sum of 5,0001•
The Commissioners had held out as a threat, that if this duty
were not imposed they would give up the Bill altogether, and
that that would be a grievous injury to the people of Rams
gate. Now he denied that the withdrawal of the Bill would
inflict the least injury on the inhabitants of Ramsgate,
for the Bill was considered at a public meeting in the
town of Ramsgate, and the inhabitants.at that meeting were
called upon to decide whether they approved of the Bill or not,
and it was only carried by a majority of seven, that majority
being opposed to the Commissioners appointed under the Bill.
The words of the Dover Act were similar to those of the
Ramsgate Act, and in the Dover case there had been an
appeal to, the Quarter Sessions, the consequence of which
bad been a decision in conformity with the opinion of
the then Attorney. General, that the duty should be reduced
to Is. 7d. per ton, and in the case of the port of London, the
Committee on the Coal Trade had determined that, upon coals
merely coining in transitu into that port, the duty should
be taken off.—( Hear.) On these grounds he moved that
these clauses he brought up.—( Hear.)

Sir E. KNATCHBULL said on behalf of the promoters
of the Bill he was compelled to oppose the clauses. On
the late discussion with respect to this Bill, the Hon. Member
(Mr. Attwood) had proposed clauses to the effect that the duty
should be reduced to one half; and, in the interim, it had been
resolved by the supporters of the Bill to adopt that condition.
He (Sir E. Knatchbull) was much surprised to see upon
the votes the clauses which had been now moved.—(llear.)
He did not see any great hardship in continuing, this charge,
as it was imposed for the benefit of the town, by making such
improvements as would hold out the greatest inducement to
strangers to visit the place. The clauses proposed were not
consistent with the interests of the inhabitants of the town,
and he felt it his duty to take the sense of the House upon them.
Mr. ATTWOOD said the Hon. Baronet appeared to
have been led into some miitake as to the course which he
( Mr. A.) had adopted. The House was aware that compro-
mise; frf quently took place,
suggested before the Bill came before the House on the last
orcasiou. That being rejected, all communication on the
subject wss considered at au ced, and due notice had been
given of the nature of the amendments which were-now pro-
posed.
Mr. A. WHITE said if the inhabitants of Ramsgate wished
to improve that town, it should be by a rate ',vied upon the
inhabitants.—( Hear.)
Ile should give the Bill his 'most de-
cided opposition.-
Mr. II UME supported the clatrcee on the ground that
Raer3gate was a harbour of refuge, and that the object of the
tax was more to improve the navigation of the river than the
town of Ramsgate
Mr. BRISCOE opposdd the Bill. Ilis objectiens had been
drawn to the Bill in consequence of the animadversions that
had been cast upon Hon. Members of that House for the course
they had adopted relative to Private Bills. The object of the
present Bill being to render a tax of 23. 6d. a ton on ma's'
perpetual, he shOuld give it his most decided opposition.
11*. D. \V. HARVEY would offer two arguments against
this tax—those arguments were net words, bat two petitions
from Ratriegete against the Bill.

Mr. PLUMP TRY, must object to the bringing up of
the clauses proposed by the lion. Member for Greenwich.
Ile considered that the party receiving a benefit ought to con-
tribute towards the benefit.—(Loud cries of " Divide.")
• Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided._ The numbers were—
. Ayes

Noes
Majority in favour of Mr. Attwood's clauses --118-
The clauses were then brought up:
On the motion that the Bill do pass,
Mr. BRISCOE opposed the motion, and the gallery was
cleared for a division; none, however, took place, and the
Bill was passed.
BOLTON AND PRESTON RAILWAY.
On the motion of Mr. BROTIIERTON, the Lords'
Amendments to the Bolton and Preston Railway Bill were
agreed to.
BARNSLEY SMALL DEBTS BILL.
On the motion of Sir G. STRICKL AND, the Barnsley
Small Debts Bill was recommitted. _ _