The Sun.
London, England, 1824-06-19 00:00:00

MARINE INSURANCE.

Lord BEXLEY moved that the Alarine Insurance Bill be
committed.

The LORD CHANCELLOR did not mean to oppose the
motion, but wished to call the attention of the house to the
necessity that in bills of that kind some restrictions should be
laid on those Societies which consisted of more than a certain
number of persons. In cases of Corporations chartered by the.
Crown, if those Corporations were not found useful to the
public, their charters might be revoked through the means of
a writ of Virg fades. But it was otherwise with respect tci
partnerships and joint stock companies created by Act of
Parliament. If they became mischievous there was ncs re-
medy, they could not be dissolved. Ile should make no mo-
tion on the subject that night, as he did not consider thatit
would be fair to do it, the parties connected with the measure
not having had any notice, would be taken by surprise. But
on the third reading, next Monday, he should propose several
additional clauses, to give greater security to the public. Let
their I.ordships suppose a company consisting, of six ty, mem-
hers, it would be impossible for any person to sue them, be-
cause it could not be known who they were, and because if
they were known, all their names could not be introduced into
a law process, without giving, them the advantage of putting a
plea in abatement, and creating interminable delay by contend-
ing that such end such an individual was not a partner. The
only way to remove the difficulty was to require that the world
should know who those partners were ; and for that purpose
he should propose that memorials should be enrolled in one of
his Majesty's Courts of Justice, to give the means to the King's
subjects of knowing who were the persons who formed those
companies. He also trusted that their Lordships would think
it reasonable that when those companies consisted of more than,
a certain number of individuals, say six for illustration's sake,
any two should be allowed to be sued as sufficient representa-
tives of the whole, and that if judgment were obtained aainst
them, execution might be taken out as if all the partners has' been
involved in the trial. It would also be necessary to introduce
a clause to provide that all persons should remain liable till it
had been demonstrated to the world by the enrolment of a new
memorial that they had ceased to be members of the partner.
ship. And in case the new partners 'should'not be responsible
persons, it would also be necessary that the old members should
remain liable for the contracts which they had made till a re-
gular transfer of shares had been made, and that such transfer
should be considered null and void. till a record and memo-
rial of it should have been enrolled: He had said so much,
not as an enemy to the Bill, but because he wished that its prin-
ciple be carried into effect with as little mischief and with as •
much good as possible. If their Lordships should determine.
to pass it without adopting those clauses, lie must say, in
fairness to those Companies, that the first thing which he
should do next Session, if he lived till then, should be to bring
in a general Act in those views to affect all Companies of that
kind.

The Earl of LIVERPOOL perfectly concurred in all that
had fallen from the Noble and Learned Earl. He thought;
however, that the regulation proposed, had better be the
subject of a general Act, though he should not oppose their
introduction into the present Bill. Be also saw no reason why-
the same process, by which chartered companies might be de-
prived of their charters in cases of abuse, should not be ex-,
tended to Companies incorporated by Parliament, and why
they should not be made dissoluble like the former.
Lord BEXLEY said, that as no amendment was now to be
Proposed, he should only move that the Bine committed.
Lord REDESDA LE thought that this would be the last
time for removing the additional clauses.
The LORD CHANCELLOR repeated that he did not
think it fair to move them at present,
.as the individuals inte.
rested in the Bill would be taken by surprise ; whereas they
now would have time to consider and to weigh the propositions
which it was his intention to make on Monday.
The Bill then went through a Committee, was reported, anti;
ordered to be read a third time on Monday:
,Mr. WALtER, from the Office of Woods and Forests, pre
sen thethe first
Roads Reportfrooinf thteoCondomnmtiossllioonieyrbsefaodr_ Laid on the
the
table.—Adjourned.
improve-
mentted
of

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
RECORDS OF IRELAND.
Dfr. DAWSON presented a petition respectably signed from
the Merchants of Dublin, praying that the Records of Ireland
might be placed in a state of greater security than they were in
at present.—Ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. CHOKER presented certain Papers from the Admiralty
bymorrdeHr
uof3tihEe
presented House.- a Orpdeetrietdiontofbroem hprtinteedß.ev.
Tnylor,
of Dublin, complaining that he had been punished by certain
Ecclesiastical censures, which affected his worldly interest as ap

:preacher, merely because he, had preached certain doctrines
which he thought to be conscientious, but which were offensive
w the ecclesiastical authority established by law.
Mr. WYNN said that the petition might have been pre.
sented when the/Secretary of State and the J.,aw Officers were
present.
Mr. MONCK said, that the sooner these prosecutions were
put au end to the better it would be for all parties of all opinions.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table and (after a few
words from Mr. HUME) to be printed.
CAPE BRITON. _ .

Mr. HUME presented a Petition from several Inhabitants
of Cape Breton, involving no less a question, than whether
his Majesty should have a power to deprive British subjects of
their rights. They complained of many alleged grievances,
particularly of the annexing Cape Breton to Nova Scotia,
thereby depriving the former of its independent Government.
They_ complained also that the official information. laid before
the House, as to the state of the Colony, contained many un-
tbunded facts. He (Mr. H.) in this respect did not blame the
Governor of Nova Scotia, of whom he had the highest opinion,
and he believed, therefore, that any difference of opinion between
the Governor and the Colonists arose from the circumstance of
the former not being fully acquainted with the situation of the
Colony. The Act complained of was, in his opinion, as wanton
an act of Colonial oppression as lie had ever heard of. The
same reason which had been pretended for annexing Cape Bre-
ton _to Nova Scotia, might, if necessary, be urged for annexing
Dominica to Grenada. He really believed there was a serious
intention on the part of the inhabitants of Cape Breton to apply
-to the United States for protection, as they had been robbed of
their birthright, and deprived of any redress ; and he must say
that he did not blame them ; for if he were one of them, he, for
one, would assent to such a course.

Sir I. COFFIN said that, from what the Hon. Member said,
.one would think Cape Breton belonged to the Dey of Algiers.
,The people of Cape Breton now enjoyed the benefit of the Eng-
lish Law, which they did not before.
Mr. W. HORTON said the Hon. Member had last Session
presented to the House a Petition, of which this was only a
duplicate. If the wrongs complained of were so great as to
_justify separation and rebellion, it was the duty of the Hon.
Member long since to have brought the subject forward on a
specific motion, and not to have waited until the last clay of
the Session to bring it forward as a Petition. He (Mr. H.) de-
nied that any Constitutional Law had -been violated; and he
called. upon the Hon. Member to bring the charge forward in
.a formal shape. He denied, too, that the people in general
were at all averse from the alterations which he had taken place.
(The Honourable Secretary here read a letter from the Go-
lernor, in support .of his last observation.) There was no
doubt that the inhabitants of the colony were much better un-
der the old than under the new system of Government. And
whenever the subject was properly brought forward, he would
be prepared to go into the subject in detail.
Mr. BERNAL denied that the present Petition was a coun-
terpart of the last; and he denied too that the inhabitants of
Cape Breton enjoyed the benefit of the English Law. He
would observe that primogeniture, for instance, did not prevail
under the new system, but had been abrogated. They were ex-
posed also to many commercial disadvantages by the alteration
they complained of.
.Sir,ISAAC COFFIN said he hoped the inhabitants of Cape
-Breton would not be encouraged to rebellion; for in one hour,
with one ship of the line, they could be all knocked to pieces.
—:(A laugh.)
Mr-. HUME said he understood the remarks of the Hon.
Secretary to be equivalent to a pledge that next Session he
would not refuse an inquiry into the subject. He had for three
Sears been giving some attention to the subject, but a man
could not do every thing at once.—(A laugh.)
The petition was ordered to be printed.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.

Mr. HUME presented a petition from several Catholics of
Ireland, praying.for Emancipation, and Relief from the Tithe
Laws.—Ordered to lie on the table and be printed.
CONFERENCE WITI-T-THE LORDS.

On the motion of Mr. ESTCOURT; a •Conferenee was or-
tiered with the Lords, on their Lordships' Amendments to the
-Vagrant Bill; and several Members were appointed to manage
the Conference.
• Mr. C. 11. HUTCHINSON presented a petition from Mr.
Thomas Flanagan, praying for a redress of grievances..—Or-
•dered to lie on the table.

Mr. C..HUTCHINSON presented a petition from Dundalk,
praying for Emancipation, and complaining of the Tithe system
of Ireland.—Ordered to lie on the table.
.51r. BROUGII A 111 presented a petition from Morpeth, in
favour of Mr,;.Smith's case.,--Ordered to lie on the table.