The Sun.
London, England, 1831-10-17 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Ocrosna 15.
The House met to-day shortly after Two o'clock.
ROYAL COMMISSION.

The Royal Assent was given by Commission to the Commis-
sioners of Charities Bill, the Payment of Wages in Goods Repeal
Bill, the Payment of Wages in Money Bill, the Importation of
Lumber and Provisions Barbadoes Bill, Common Law Officers
Fee Bill,Churchßuilding Bill, Cotton Factories Apprentices Bill,
Officers of the Customs Fee Bill, Turnpike Road (Scotland) Bill,
Pluralities' Bill, Special Constables' Bill, Galway Franchise
Bill, City of London Fresh Water Bill, Poor Relief Bill,
Public Works (Ireland) Bill, Public Hospitals (Ireland) Bill,
White Boy Amendment Bill, Regulation of Arms (Ireland)
Bill, and several Private Bills.
The Commissioners were the LORD CHANCELLOR, the Duke
of RicissloND, and the Earl of SHAFTESBURY.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented petitions from the
counties of Peebles and Selkirk, praying that they might not
be joined under the Reform of Scotland Bill, in sending a
Member to Parliament; and one from the borough of Selkirk,
praying that they might be joined with the other boroughs there
in returning a Member
The Earl of ABINGDON brought up the report of the Select
Committee on the Vestry Bill. He moved the suspension of the
standing orders, in order that it might pass through its several
stages.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
One of the amendments proposed by the Select Committee was,
that the majority of the parish should be two-thirds in place of
three-fifths, and that the majority should consist of all the rate-
payers in the parish.
Lord HARROWBY opposed the amendment; after a long dis-
cussion itiwas agreed to.
BANKRUPTCY COURT BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said,that in consequence of cer-
tain misrepresentations circulated respecting himself and the
Bill which lie had introduced into that House for the Reform of
the administration of the bankruptcy laws, he was induced to
move for several returns connected with the subject, the produc-
tion of which would be the means of disabusing the public mind.
He was both astonished and mortified to find that an attack of a
most singular and extraordinary character had been made upon
bins in a publication, by a Learned Friend—the venerable father
of the bar—for whose virtues, talents, and professional acquire.
ments, he had always entertained the respect which they were so
justly calculated to excite. As the attack did not ostensibly bear
the name of his respected and venerable friend, he would abstain
from naming him in that House, although the author was suffi-
ciently indicated by the character and circumstances and style of
the attack, which he could account for only by attributing it to
certain prejudices and theories upon the subject which his
Learned Friend entertained. The charge was of a most extra-
ordinary nature, for it was nothing less than that he had brought
forward the Bill, and had pressed it through the House,
because the effect of it would be to put au increase into
i thanhis 2,6,
explanation /. a.yea r.
of
this
ss
viLearnedew
of
that in a political point patronage
less
(the Lord Chancellor) than money,
whthe andis pocket
~, Venerable
subject,egi
greater
ee
ar ta ebori lifevanl Friend,ou stet 2t ttlocsde'
and that the Bill would be to hiss an increase of patronage to
the extent of 26,1'00/. a year. Other persons had repeated the
charge, without this distinction between the patronage and the
money. This charge was utterly unfounded, but it was not
more so than another charge, that he had contrived by the Bill
to provide for his secretary a sinecure place, as secretary of bank-
ruptcies, of the value of 11,0001. per annum. This was a total
misrepresentation of the case its every particular; for so far from
the Bill giving any increase of income to his secretary, it would
actually decrease that person's salary by 1,9004 or even 1,3001.
a year. His secretary had at the present moment an income of
2,5001. a year, and all the Bill would do in relation to this officer
would be to deprive him of that income, and to substitute a place
under another name, the total salary of which would be only
1,9001. 'lO this strange perversion of the facts of the case was
added, from a different quarter, another statement equally with.
out foundation. It had been put forth that there was a strong
difference of opinion between him and his Noble Friend at the
head of his Majesty's Councils with respect to a very material
part of the Reform Bill, and this gross misrepresentation had
arisen from an inaccurate and garbled statement of what had
been said of the measure by him, when he had been address.a
second
,dotaltle,tdbehi
ibsFce:Bliinii:lo-il
jug the House upon the subject of the Bill. 'What he had said
upon that occasion was, that there was not the slightest differ-
ence of opinion upon the question of Reform between him and
his Noble Friend, and he (Lord Brougham) had distinctly
added that, not only was there not, but that there never had
been, any such difference between them. This statement had
been omitted, and the passage of his speech, from which this
sentence had been left out, had been commented upon so as
utterly to mislead the public mind on the subject. He would
postponed
stpoßrizoiute
ot until
again declare that there did not exist a shade of difference of
opinion betw
important measure. It was with a view to refute the serious
Gen him and his Noble Friend upon that great and
charges made against bins by his venerable and Learned Friend,
that he had risen to move for a return of the salary and emolu-
ments of the Secretary of the Lord Chancellor. 'When the facts
of the case had been so perverted, that a reduction of salary to
the extent of 1,3001. had been construed into the creation of a
place which would increase the salary by 1,•2001. a year, he al-
most feared that such erroneous impressions proceeded Irons a
source that would be impervious to any discipline which he
could apply. lie should now move for a return of all fees at
present received by the Secretary of the Lord Chancellor, top_
ther with his salary provided by the Act for the Secretary of
Bankruptcies, &c —The motion was put and carried.
Earl GREY moved the second reading of the Distillation (Ire-
land) Bill. The object of the Bill, the Noble Earl stated, was to
Earl of SHAFTESBURY the Valuation
render the law more efficient, particularly as regarded the re-
pression of illicit distillation in Ireland, and to diminish the ex-
pe,iiicheeaßttiellnd,,aatsittuhltonnreth3de collection of the revenue.
ISlotinorloaoyfnueixot.
upon it.
rnirthoenn
of
,} :
,11,-ah,
re?
Is dp(s4
Duke
t(kElorye
01
marno,,,t,v),
eEdititililei 1
thirdands u,r
ort
el isaed
isiNntlzgpi Ipiootfastrelyd, e
ctAccountshoenrseol,:
Bill, were severally read a third time and passed.
Bill, with the appropnation clause.
objection to the postponement of the third reading of
untill Mtohnirddayr,eadas
itii,eglosardthseomßeillobswaesrvaactcioornditnogmlyaki
Duties Bill went through Committee._
_Report Monday.
The

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

At Four o'clock the SPEAKER took his seat.

Mr. BLAMIRE presented a petition from certain land-
owners in Cumberland, against the General Registry Bill,
which the petitioners conceived would be attended with
much inconvenience and expence to persons living at a
distance from the metropolis. The Honourable Member
conceived that the only benefit that would arise from the
Bill would be to the advantage of the London attornies.
He did not believe that the Bill would operate injuriously
to the community generally, but that at a distance from
the metropolis, particularly in Cumberland, where the
division of property was very minute, it would create a
great expence. There was also a feeling in the
country that it would be necessary for owners of property
to go to the expence of having double deeds in many
cases. The Hon. Member hoped, as the Hon. and Learned
Member (Mr. Campbell) who introduced the Bill had
exempted Yorkshire from its operation, be would also exempt
Cumberland, solely on account of the minute division of
property.
Mr. CAMPBELL said this petition was another proof
of the misapprehension which had gone abroad respecting
this Bill. In the first place, he denied that it would
create any additional expense to persons living at a
distance from the metropolis, for no London attornies need
be employed, and although in instances it would be necessary
to have a duplicate of a deed, that duplicate by one of the
clauses would be exempt from paying duty. Yorkshire
would certainly be excluded from the operation of the Act,
but that wait because a registry had existed in that county
for 100 years. There was no registry in Cumberland,
and therefore he could not consent to exclude that county.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition from the Baptist con
gregation assembled in Brown-street, Salisbury, against
the multiplicity of oaths.
Mr. C. FERGUSSON addressed the House on the
inconvenience attending the taking of so many oaths,
particularly to the inconsistency of compelling the
Protestant Members of that House to swear that
they did not acknowledge the power of the Pope,
while the Roman Catholic Members, the only per-
sons in the House who admitted the power of the Pope,
were exempted from taking that oath.—(Hear.) The
multiplicity of oaths much weakened the effect that should
accrue from so solemn an act, and tended to encourage
perjury.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition from a dissenting
congregation at Reading against the imposition of a tax on
pilgrims to the Idol at Juggernaut, and also against the
Indian law of depriving converts to Christianity of their
inheritance.

Captain GORDON hoped some measures relating to
these subjects would be adopted next session by his Ma-
jesty's Government.
Mr. C. FERGUSSON said if such a law did exist to
deprive converts to Christianity of the right of inheriting
property, it was never enforced. One of the laws was,
that before a person could inherit property he should be
possessed of every virtue, and must also be perfect in his
body. These laws were, however, a mere dead letter, and
he (Mr. C. Fergusson) once recovered an estate of 30,000/.
a year for a person who was totally blind.
The petition was ordered to be printed.

Mr. HUNT moved for a return of the expences attend-
ing the Special Commissions to try the persons implicated
in the disturbances of last winter, distinguishing the sums
paid to Counsel and Agents, and those paid to witnesses.
—Ordered.

The Marquis of CHANDOS begged to ask his Ma-
jesty's Government, whether any reward had been offered,
or any steps taken, to apprehend the persons concerned in
the destruction of Nottingham Castle ?
Mr. STANLEY could not give the Noble Marquis the
required information.
Colonel EVANS moved for a return of the expense by
the public of the various royal military asylums, from their
formation to the 31st December, 1830, together with the
number of recruits furnished to the army by those esta-
blish ments. —Orde red.

Mr. D. BROWNE presented a petition from the Mer-
chants and Bankers of Galway, praying that tkeir rights
might be properly dealt with in the discussion of the Irish
Reform Bill.

The HON. MEMBER. also presented a petition from
Ballyrobe, in the county of Mayo, praying the House
to pass the Irish Reform Bill as speedily as possible. The
people of Ireland were unanimously in favour of the mea-
sure introduced by his Majesty's Ministers.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUNT observed, that if the people of Ireland were
unanimously in favour of the measure, great misrepre-
sentation had been made on that subject. He was quite
surprised to see the account of a public meeting in the
Times, and some other papers, in which it was slated that
he people cried out " No Peers, no Peers," whereas the
fact was, and he had it from the htst private infor-
mation, that the assembly called out " No new Peers,
no new Peers." It was also said that flags bearing tl.e
inscription " William the Fourth, and the Reform Bill for
ever," were carried about. Now, the truth was, that the
inscriptions on these flags were, " Universal Suffrage,
Annual Parliaments, and Vote by Ballot," and that a peti-
tion to that effect had been carried by a great majority.
Sir J. BURKE observed that Ireland was unanimous in
its approval of the Bill.
Mr. D. BROWNE felt happy that the speech of the

Hon. Member for Preston, had.iiven him an opportunity of
stating his sentiments more at large. lie did not mean
to deny that Ireland was not actually unanimous, but he
would assert that there had not been any meeting held in
any parts, which had not been unanimous in favour of tie
Ministerial Bill. For the county which he had the bonour
of representing, though they wished that a few Members
should have been added, yet he had no hesitation to say that
they were all unanimously in favour of the Bill, and trusted
Ministers would not relax in any constitutional measure to
support it.
Mr. SHEILL had no doubt that there were many per-
sons in Ireland opposed to the Reform Bill, more espe-
cially those connected with close boroughs. For instance
Dundalk, the present Hon. Member for that borough
had no connection whatever with it. One of its
representatives some years ago, was Mr. Barclay, who, it
was notorious, was a great brewer in London. The lion.
Member contended that Ireland was entitled to more re-
presentatives.
Sir R. VYVYAN was glad to see English Members
represent Irish boroughs, and Irish Members represent
English ones. Because he was in hopes of shortly seeing
no distinction between the two countries, and that they

would have one common interest at stake.
Mr. RUTHVEN considered that as Ireland contained
one-third of the population of the United Kingdom, it was
entitled to have that share in the representation.
Mr. LEADER considered that absenteeism must be put
an end to, before the peace of Ireland could Le established
on a firm hasis.—( Cheers.)
Sir F. BURDETT felt surprised at the course pursued
by the lion. Member for Preston with respect to the great
measure. All who wished for the adoption of Reform
wished the adoption of that system which was most likely
to be obtained. The Reform which they objected to was
that Reform which was not capable of being carried
into effect. He really felt surprised, and conceived it most
extraordinary, that any person reallywishing well toßeform,
could not concur in giving support to that species of Reform
which could be brought forward with success, and that
they would still persist in thatßeform which would not meet
with the general concurrence of the people. It was
impossible for any person who paid attention to what
was passing in the world, not to see that there never
was such universal concurrence in any measure as in the
present. He considered the present measure calculated to
effect all those beneficial results which would proceed from
a free representation of the people.
Mr. HUNT deprecated the insinuation that be had
voted one way and spoken another. He had from the first
introduction of the Reform Bill spoken of it in the same
way as he had done ever since. If it had not gone one-
tenth part as far as it did, he would vote for it ; but
he still believed, and so did the greatest part of the
country, that it did not go far enough. He was taunted
merely because he would not go across the House and
sit along with the Whigs.—(Laughter.) He had had a
dislike of the Whigs from the speeches of the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir F. Burdett.) How was it that that Hon. Ba-
ronet went across and sat by the side of Mr. Canning, when
that Right Hon. Gentleman declared himself an enemy to
all Reform.—(Hear, hear.) What sort of alliance did
the Hon. Baronet call that? He (Mr. Hunt) had
never been either Tory or Whig, but bad as the
Tories were, he believed they were far better than
the Whigs..—(Laughter.) The Press held him up as a
turncoat, because he sat on the side of the Tories.
Sir J. NEWPORT would not give the Hon. Member
the credit of being the representative of the people. With
regard to the charge of the Hon. Baronet opposite, that Ire-
land had not contributed her portion to the general ex-

pease of the war, be begged to refer that Ho' f"01
to the report of a Committee, of which Lord 13ey
chairman, which stated that Ireland had contritiv,
greater portion of the expenses, as compared with rlo'
He begged, however, to deprecate the drawing of eut,
tinetions between different communities and differe°'
of the United Kingdom.
Sir R. VYVYAN explained, that he did not 6t6
Ireland did not contribute her proportion of the e 1.,;
but that she did not contribute such a proportion
fled a large extension of the representation.
Colonel TRENCH submitted that the suffrAgeo
people were in favour of the Bill, be
li
Honourable Members to look at the opini°lol.,
bad been given respecting it. The WV,
for Northampton (Milton) had stated that th
founded on injustice, and other opinions bad hee
which were entitled to great weight. Teie,iti
Colonel stated he was desirous of declaring his o'
be fi
and gratitude for the vote given in the Lords. Tye
would now have time to reflect on the 11-o°),sV
he believed that in many places, where delusio
its sway, the people were now coining to their sePchi
had seen papers, that were published, containingobjr(
against the Bishops, and pointing them out to
„,1,1:
violence. On the first page of one was engraved
from which three Bishops were suspended' ,te
laughter.) Although he did not think that GovernrneotY,
interfere and prosecute these papers, yet he could seiiti
thinking that Govtrnment gave an indirect san"
their propagation.

(LEFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS•

The LORD CHANCELLOR. took his seat en the

at Five o'clock. 1, the
The Duke of CUMBERLAND inquired w-e 01
Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack in his,'ep
on Saturday respecting a pamphlet alluded to $
Learned Friend of his (Lord Eldon). On the Prtoec
Noble and Learned Lord he disclaimed any c°

_......... ....... _.........__
with such pamphlet. - ihilJ,l
The LORD CHANCELLOR meant no 1.,",",,g'
the Noble and Learned Lord alluded to by the I""tve
Duke. His (the Chancellor's) were—that the ai.o P
the Pamphlet was the venerable Father of Vied V,
lish Bar. Now, though the Noble and LeOtetst;,
was a very old and venerable man, still he was,,°°,l
ther of the bar. One other remark he had znauenli 01
be had not only called him the father of the Ee'f:efor!
but he had said he was also the originator of fable 00
Now no one could suppose (with these words in7yesP/
that he (the Chancellor) meant the Noble 0'
(Eldon), oif fd
The Duke of CUMBERLAND expressed h'-
fectly satisfied with the explanation. a fo°
The Hop Duties Bill was read a third titneitroitti';
The Irish Distilleries Bill went through a 'i.ol'
The House then went into Committee on the
t•
Bill. 14'11°
Lord WYNDFORD inquired whether the
t..:' 4
be applied to parishes in which were open Votlte°`
Lord MELBOURNE said that any parish ID'' r;
the Bill by complying with its provisions. ; P,,it'4
Lord WYNFORD thought the Bill, in. ,tsscroil
state, would not go far as the Noble Viscount 0-.oc ,01
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that f'1,01,,";,1
Bill was last before the House he had given it6:l:l,,Vil,
of his attention• It was certainly a que'ti°c-ietlw,l.,
importance, and was looked upon with great ari",,,1111"
inhabitants of parishes in large towns, but esPer'oe,t/
metropolis. He thought that in parish affairPrepterr,
in the affairs of the kingdom, the system °I 'try 1,,i
tion should be acted upon. The Select e''';‘, I`.
was one which ought not to have existed f, t` ,
He had an insuperable objection to the ameadao. Litii
adoption clause, which gave the tight of adte'°-oe.,°;,
twhl.,demhaj‘%o,ai majority of
be reaatleledpafyoerrst,he wphuorpaotsete,ndbetidt
tothittf:
of 'two-thirds of all the rate payer on ttd- iteljt
of ".the parish—nothing more absurb cc'ul biellso
conceived. He would suppose a parish, in vi 004;,i
300 rate-payers, 199 of those attended thead
called 0 consider the adoption of this Bill, vie
unanimous for its adoption, the 101 might also, 0
Your of it, but not being present, the churchwar"'
be bound to reject the adoption of the Bill. bt et!
The House being in Committee, be Inigrosp
few, words in respect of voting by P' 1110,
aid not think it was a proper mode, b
person might throw out a measure, which he se#
mheard
extendedon e w ord
theof argument
system
rr 0 butx.
vtobt;!),;:,1
farther than their Lordships, for they required
prexies should he tendered, but here if sooefij
was absent, they undertook to say that he 109 °fog ' ,
the measure of adopting this Bill, without koc°l; be
prevented that person from attending, or what
in the country rr not.

(LEFT SPEAKING.)