The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-09 00:00:00

Mr. BUCK presented petitions from parishes in
Devon, against a fixed duty on corn.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT presented petitions from
parishes in Wiltshire, against the proposed alteration of
the Corn-laws.

Loral STANLEY presented a petition from Lanca-
shire in favour of Church Extension ; also several peti-
tions from the same county against any alteration of
the Corn-laws.

Mr. MACAULAY presented a petition from congre-
gations of Seceders in Edinburgh, against Church. rates ;
also, a petition against the present Corn-laws.
Mr. HAWES presented petitions from Wandsworth,
Brixton, Richmond, and 25 parishes in the metropolis,
against the present Corn-laws.

7-Mr. GICEG presented several petitions, signed by
2,065 persons, praying for the total repeal of the Corn-
laws ' • also, from two Dissenting-Congregations in Meri-
onethshire, praying for - the -abol4ion of Church-rates,
and. the Ecclesiastical COurtS.

:Mr. GEORGE PALMER presented two. ,petitions
from Essex, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. E. BULLER presented petitions, from the opera-
tiVes employed in 15 firms in the Potteries, praying for
an alteration in the Corn-laws ; and petitions from New-
castle, Burton-on-Trent, aid several other' places, to the
same effect ; also a petition against Church-rates.
Mr. WAI)I)INUTON ;presented five petitions from
Suffolk, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. GALLEY RIGHT presented petitidna from the
occupiers of land in Nottinghanishire, against any alte-
ration in the Corn-laws.

Mr. SA-INFORD presented' a petition from Somer-
setshire in favour of ,the present system of Corn-laws
from Wilston, in. Somersetshire, in favour of the fixed
duty and from sail . manufacturers of East Chinnock,
for artotal repeal of the Corn-law's,
Sir C. BURRELL presented two. petitions from Sus-
sex against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. HANDLEY presented a petition from Lincoln-
shire, very numerously signed, against any alteration in
the Corn-laws. • ' •
Sir T. ,TROU.BRIDGt presented a petition from the
inhabitants of Deal,. very numerously signed, in favour
of the Government propositions. .
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET presented peti-
tions from Monmouth and Gloucester, against any alte-
yation in the Corn-laws.
. Mr. AINSWORTH presented several petitions from
Bolton, and other places in Lancashire, praying fur the
repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Man-
chester, complaining of outrages 'perpetrated upon cer-
tain persons, assembled at • that place to discuss the
Corn-laws, and praying the House to make inquiry into
the circumstances. Also several petitions against the
Corn-laws. Also. u petition, praying for the removal of
clergymen fromthe Commission of the Peace.

Mr. 11ASTII presented twenty petitions from Paisley
praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws.
" Sir B. HALL presented similar petitions from Mary 7
lebone. • -

Mr. WARBURTON presented a petition from 300
females at Bridport against the Corn-laws. Also a peti-
tion from Dorchester against the taxes on corn and pro-
visions. Also similar petitions from places in the same
county.

Sir R. CLIVE presented a petition from Shropshire
against any alteration in the Corn-laws. •
Mr. PRINGLE presented several petitions • from
Hampshire against the Corn-laws.
Lord CASTLEREAGH presented petitions from Ire-
land against Church Patronage in Scotland, and against
any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Sir 1)E LACY EVAN'S presented petitions from the
.
parish of St. James's, Westmtnster, in favour of the re-
peal of the Corn-laws.
The Earl of LINCOLN presented a petition from
Lincoln, against any alteration in the .Corn-laws.
Sir G. CLERK presented a petition from Renfrew,
against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented a similar petition from a
parish in York.
Mr. CRAWFORP presented a petition from the ward
of Portsoken praying for the abOlition of the Corn-laws,
Mr. HUME presented 67 petitions to the same effect,
some of them in favour of the three propositions of the
Government, and one praying
.that if the Corn-laws
should not be repealed, they might be suspended for three
years.--(Cheers.)
_ _

Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY presented three peti-
tions from Cheltenham and its neighbourhood praying
for a repeal of the Corn-laws. • •
Mr. SHEIL presented a petition to the same effect
from the town of Tipperary. • •
The ATTORNEI-GENERAL presented 'eight peti-
tions from Edinburgh and its neighbourhood with a
similar prayer.
. Mr. BRISCOE presented petitions to the same effect
from Chippenham, from a place in Surrey, and from two
places in Wiltshire. .
Lord HOWICK presented a petition to the same effect
from a place in Northumberland. •
Mr. WILLIAMS presented petitions from places in
Warwickshire to the same effect.

Mr. VERNON SMITH presented two petitions from
the town of Northampton in favour of the commercial
measures of the Government ; also a petition from a
place in Northamptonshire praying for an alteration in
the Corn-laws.

Mr. W. FATTEN presented a petition from a place
in Lancashire against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
An HON. MEMBER on the Opposition benches pre-
sented ten petitions from places in Berkshire, praying
for a fixed duty on corn.—(Hear, hear.) Also a peti-
tion from a place in Cheshire in favour of the present
Corn-laws.

On the motion of Mr. EASTHOPE, the Church-rate
Abolition Bill was read, a first time, and ordered to be
printed.

TURNPIKE TRUSTS.

• 11 r. MACKINNON begged •to ask the Hon. the
Under Secretary of State for the Home Department a
question relative to the subject of a Commission issued
to inquire into the Consolidation of Turnpike Trusts.
lie wished to know whether the Government intended
to take any steps in consequence of that Commission.
Mr. FUN 31A'ULE said that early in the Session, in
consequence of the Report of that Commission, the Go-
vernment had determined to fram€ a Bill founded upon
the Report of that Commission, but they did not mean,
during the. present Session, to press it further than the
second reading, in order that the country might have an
opportunity of considering the question before the meet-
ing of the new Parliament. • •
FACTORY. CHILDREN.

Mr. HUME wished' to know whether there was any
objection to lay on the table the ReportS of the Committee
appointed to inquire into the state of the children em-
ployed in factoriesla the north.
Mr. F. MAULE said a good many of these reports
had been presented, but he was not aware that they were
at present_ in a fit state to lay before the House. He
would inquire into the matter, and if there was no ob-
jection he would deal with them as with the Reports of
former Commissions on the same subject. .
Captain PECHELL wished' to' know what was the in-
tention of the Noble Lord, the Secretaiy for the Colo-
nies, with respect to the Bills for the improvement and
drainage of towns.
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to make some re-
ply, which was inaudible in the galltry.
Mr. BAINES wished to call the attention of the Go-
vernment to the introduction of a Bill for the regulation
of the registration. in Municipal Corporations. In Leeds
and Liverpool recourse was obliged to be had last year to
the registration of the-preceding year.
The A'T'TORNEY-GENERAL said that the circum-
stances which occurred in the places alluded to by the
Hon. Gentleman was purely accidental, and not likely to
occur again. It was not his (the Attorney-General's)
intention to propose any measure on the subject to the
House.

PETITIONS AGAINST THE CORN-LAWS.
The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER said
that the 'Hon. Gentleman (Mr. G. Palmer) had , on
the preceeding day put to him some questions relative to
a petition against the Corn-laws lying for signature at
the Excise-office. He (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer) had assured the Honourable Member
that he would make an inquiry into the matter.
He had done so, and the result appeared to be this. On
the destruction of the Royal 'Exchange the merchants of
London had applied to the Commissioners of the Trea-
sury for permission to use one of the great Courts
of the Excise as a temporary place of business ; per-
mission was of course given, and they dealt with
the court in all cases as they had been accustomed
to deal with the Royal Exchange. It appeared, un-
doubtedly, that without any knowledge whatever of
the: Commissioners, or any application to the Com-
missioners, there had been a petition lying at the
court now employed as the Royal Exchange. He
was bound to state that when the Commissioners were
applied to some time ago by the LOrd Mayor of London,
to know whether there was any objection on their part to
let a petition relative to the Post-office lie
for signature at the court already alluded to,
was the, answer that they had no objection—that the
merchants of London should be allowed to use the place
in the same manner as they had been 'accustomed to use
the Royal -Eichange. On the present occasion, he. ap-
prehended that the same course had been pursuel as on
the former one. He trusted that this explanatiOn was
satisfactory.
'Mr. GEORGE PALMER said that he was One
of the members of the . Gresham Committee, and
he thought it possible that the proceedings might
have been sanctioned by one of the officers of that
Committee, and he therefore felt it his duty to ask
the man whom he saw, not in the court appropriated
to the merchants, but on the stairs at the top of the
court,'by whose permission he stood there with the peti-
tion, and the answer was, by permission of the Com-
missioners,of Excise.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
he had not entered into particular details, and it was
quite true that the petition was placed on a desk at the
side of the stairs, but then it. was a desk at which the
merchants were in the habit of doing business. That was
the explanation which had been given him by the parties
to whom he applied. If,.however, the Hon. Gentleman
.should make inquiries and acquire further information,
perhaps he would be good enough to communicate it
to the House.
COUNTIICORONERS' BILL.

Mr. EARDIGTON said that in the present circum-
stances of .the House, he did not intend to proceed fur-
ther with the County Coroners' Bill. He should there-
fore move: that the order of the day respecting the bill
be read, for 'the purpose of being discharged.—Agreed to.
lItI CHANCERY BILL.

In answer to a question from Mr. LITTON,
Lord-MOBPETII:said that it was not the intention
of the Attorney-Generat fur Ireland to proceed with the
Irish Chancery Bill if there was any likelihood of i.dis

cussion .upon It.
Mr. . LITTON .assured the Noble Lord that there
uld be a good deal of discussion On the Bill.
MEDICAL REFORM BILL
Mr. tITTON
.Said he also wished to ask the Hon.
Member for Larnbeth whether he intended to proceed