The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-10 00:00:00

Lord G. SOMERSET agreed with the Right lion.
Gentleman that it was proper for the House to adhere to
the rules it hal laid down, but be thought there were spe-
cial circumstances in the present case. He consi ,ered
that the Bill ought to be referred to a Committee of a
more general character than that to which Private Bills
sere generally lefcred.
Mr. HOPE thought the Bi'l ought to be referred to a
Committee constituted of Members who hal no interest in
the districts through which the river runs.
The Hon. CRAVEN BERKELEY said it appeared
to him that the object of his Hon. Friend was solely to
obtain an impartial bearing, and he trusted that the mo-
tion would be concurred in by the House.
Mr. 0. GORE, in reply, said that the course proposed
by the Right Hon. Gentleman the President of the Bcard
of Trade was quite as much a departure from the rules of
the House as that which had been proposed by himself.
He bad selected that Committee because it must neces-
sarily be impartial.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared—

Far the motion 74
For the amendment 4O
Majority
The York and London Assurance C3mpany Bill was
real a th.rii time and passed.
Mr. H. T. HOPE presented a petition from Glouces-
ter, against the Severn Navigation Bill.
Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented a pctiion
from seventeen guardians of the Halifax union against the
Poor-law Continuance Bill.

Mr. WILLIAMS presented a petition from the So-
eialiits of Ashton-under-Lyne, praying fcr an inquiryinto
their doctrines.

Mr. T. PARKER presented a petition from Brighton,
praying that Roman Catholic Members of that House
might be prevented interfering with matters connected with
the Established Church.

Mr. S. BARRY presented fourteen petitions from
parishes in Cork in favour of Lord Morpeth's Registration
811.

CORN-LAWS.
Mr. VILLIERS presented a petition from Missenden,
in the county of Buckilgham, praying for a repeal of the
Corn-laws; and a similar petition, numerously signed, from
working men in Thames-street. The Hon. Member took
the opportunity of stating that he-should bring the question
of the Corn-laws again before the House soon after Easter.
—( Chew. )
Mr. MONTAGUE CHAPMAN presented petitions
from Westmeath in favour of Church Extension.

Mr. B. CLIVE prevented a petiti3n from the Boitrd
cf Guardians of a Union in Hereford, against the Poor-
law Continuance Bill.

Mr. HODGES presented petitions from Whitstable
and another parish in Kent, singed by 640 inhabitants,
and from 810 fe nate rate-payers and inhabitants of the
same parishes, sgAinst the Poor-!aw Continuance Bill ;
also a petition from Ipswich, signed by 2,451 inhabitants,
to the same effee.

Sir R. FERGUSON presented petitions from Drog-
heda and Londonderry praying for the abolition of Patron-
age in the Church of Scotland.
Mr. G RIM SDITC H presented a petition from Mac-
clesfield against the Poor Law Amendment Bill, and pray-
irg that it mi;ht not be passed into a law.
Lord C. HAMILTON presented petitions praying for
Church Extension; also a petition from the Medical Pro-
fessi us of Oxford, complaining of the mode at present in
existence of giving medical relief t) the poor by the sys-
tern of tender, it being injurious both to the profession
and to the poor; also a petition from the same parties,
praying the House to restrain the enormous powers at pre-
sent enjoyed by the Poor-law Commissioners.
NEWSPAPER STAMPS.
Mr. BA LDWIN presented a petition from the news-
paper proprietors of Exeter, complaining of the injury
done to their property by. the publication of the s:arnp re-
turns, and praying that it may be discontinued.
Mr. T. DUN COMBE presented a petition from a
club in London complaining of the t:ial of Mr. Hethering-
ton as being a violation of the rights of conscience, his incar-
ceration au exercise of tyranny, and praying for his release ;
also petitions from Kilbechan, and a place in the West Riding
~f Yorkshire, praying for the relcaw of all political prise.,
ncrs ; and one from Merthyr Tydvil, signed by 7,865 per-
sons, praying for the release of Frost, Wiiliagns, and Jones,
who had been convicted against the spirit of the law of
England.
W A RBUAT 0311-niavtA, 4pursuant to riotiee,-tisat-
the evidence taken before the Committer on Petiti ms on
P,ivate Bills relative to the Stafford and Rugby R-ilway
Bill, should be laid on the table and printed.
Mr. LABOUCHERE sail that the difficulty he felt
about the questim was title, whether the motion ought to be
granted w.thout special grounds were made for it.
As the Chairman of the Committee was not then in the
House, he would sug,ge.it to the Hon. Member for Brid-
port the propriety of pAtponing his motion till he was
present.
Mr. WARBURTON assented, and Cie motion was
postponed.
Lord M A HON gave notice that he would postpone the
motion of which he had given notice yesterday, to Tuesday
the 23d inst.

Mr. EMERSON TENNENT gave notice that he
would postpone all further proceedings on the Copyright
Designs Bill to Wednesday the 24th of March.
I iOn the motion of Mr. GREENE that leave of 'absence
be granted to Mr. Ingham to go the circuit, a discussion
arose as to tho propriety of granting leave in such eases.
Mr. G OUL BURN said he believed from time imme-
morial it had been found advisable and for the general in-
terest that lawyers should be excused from attendance.
Mr. W. B. WRIGHTSON said there had been a
clear understanding.in the House that lawyera should nut
be exempted front serving upon Committees.
Mr. G OUL BURN said that rule applied when they
were empannelled end not otherwise.
Mr. F. KELLY sa'd that when the Bill of the Right
Hon. Member for Tamworth was discussed the Attorpey-
General bad been strongly against the exemption, and et
he was one of the first to ask leave for himself.
Sir G. G RE Y said the Attorney-General had leave of
ahience under special cireumstances.—(Hear, hear.) He
stated to the House that he had to attend the Government
prosecutions at Monmouth, and was cxcusel only for a
limited period, in order that the public service might not
he interfered with.—( Hear, hear.) He (Sir G. Grey)
thought that leave of absence ought to be granted in the
present instance.
The leave of absence was then given.
Culenel PAGET then mcved for leave of absence to
M-. W. 0. Stanley until after Easter, on urgent private
business.
Mr. WARBURTON hoped that this granting of leave
of absence when the duties of Members on Election Com-
mittees were very light, would not be drawn into a pre-
es dent during a Session when it might be heavy. He
did not see why indulgence should be granted to lawyers
any more than to merchants or Magistrates.
Sir ROBERT PEEL observed that what be had
stated on a former occasion, with regard to the lawyers, was
that if 'hey thought the performance of the duties in that
House was onerous, and there being no legal obligation
to compel them to serve in Parliament; he thought they
ought not to be made an exception, as justice would net
be done to other Members, by infiic:ing on them duties
which the lawyers ought to take a fa'r share of.—
( Hear, heir.) The fact was, that in former times a lawyer
was never to be seen in the house when i n electi sn
Commit:cc was to be balloted for—they always avoided
beirg calved upon to serve, by taking care not to be in the
House whoa it was called over —( Hear, and laughter.)
It was difficult to lay down a..y precise rule on the subject.
He thought it would be bad, having given permission in some
ease?, to refuse to extend a similar privilege to others, espe-
cially when there we.e only three or four election peftions
befire the House. At the commencement of a tiew
Session, boa ever, when there might be a great number of
pe itions, he thought the House ought to be more strict.
Lcrd H 0 WICK observed that the case ham e the
House was not that of a lawyer, and it was not stated what
the nature of the duties teas which called the Hon. Mem-
ber away.
Mr. PRINGLE deprecated these continual applica-
tions for leave of absence, and unless suffic'ent cause of as
shown for the motion in the present instance, he should
not hesitate to divide the House upon it.
Lord STANLEY happened unfortunately to be in the
Panel, No. $, and he t: as going down to the Assizes
on tie 2d of March, but it was his intention to return to
perform his duties in that House. He thought they ought
to hate the assurance of the Gentleman who made the
motion,.that the private business was so urgent and in:-
portant that it could not be dispensed with, and that it did
not a !mit of being done at any other period. They all knew
that urgent and important, generally speaking, meant
nothing at all. He was unwilling to do any thing that
might appear uncouitlmus, but he thengit the House ought
to be satisfied that the motion was n,ade bona fide.
Mr. E. J. STANLEY trusted the Hon. and Garant
Member would withiraw the motion and renew it at an-
other opportunity.
Colonel PAGET did not feel himself justified in with-
'dra ving the motion.
Mr. PRINGLE would not hesitate to divide the House
if sufficient reason was not shown for the motion be:l,g
made.

mition was agreed to without a division.
Mr. FRESH FIELD said he wished to ask the Chan-
cello- of the Exchequer, mh,.,ther, since the commence-
ment of the present Session, any Government age at
been employed to make arrangements at Dartmouth,
with a vies to the conduct of the West India Alai! &r.
v"ce in that port ?—Whether it is intended that the ex-
pense consequent upon the adaptation of that port to the
service in question, or to be incurred in the conduct cif the
service, shall be boine by the Royal Mail Steam Com-
pany, or by the public?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
it did not strike him as a case of very great importance.ti
Ile had no objection to tell the Hon. Member that
Commissioners, who had been appointed to see
de.e
cisiores of the Treasury carried into effect, had rce3m.