The Sun.
London, England, 1840-03-03 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, IVIARCHI3, 1840

• Lands Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read
a second time this day week.
On the motion of Sir EDWARD KNATCH-
BULL, the South Eastern Counties Railway Deviation
Bill was read a first time.
Colonel VERNER presented a petition from the
grocers and spirit-merchants of Armagh against certain
propesed changes in their trade.
Mr. BUCKE presented a petition from a place in
Berkshire against the Irish Municipal Reform Bill.
THE CHURCH.—JOHN THOROGOOD.
Mr. lIALFORD presented a petition from Lein-
ster, in favour of Church Extension.
Lord Stanley, Mr. Hurt, Mr. Pringle, and Mr.
Broad'ey presented several petitions to the same effect.
Mr. BANNERMAN presented a petition against
the existing system of Church Patronage in Scotland.
Mr. A'COURT HOLMES presented a petition
from Cowes, Isle of Wight, against the annual grant to i
Maynooth College.
Mr. R. ALSTON presented a petition from a place
in Essex, in favour of John Thorogood, and against the
continuance of Church-rates.
INLAND WAREHOUSING.

Mr. WILSON presented a petition from Runcorn
in favour of Inland Warehousing.
THE CANTERBURY PAVEMENT BILL.
Sir EDWARD KNA'J'CH BULL called the at-
tention of the House to a petition which he had some
days ago presented, respecting the Canterbury Pave-
ment Bill, and moved that the Bill be allowed to go
on, notwithstanding the unfavourable report of the
Standing Orders' Committee. Before the Bill ap-
pointing the present Commissioners, the rates amounted
only to 7001. c-year. But under the present Act they
would have to pay next year 2,1001., unless the House
allowed the Bill, to which his motion referred, to pass
for their relief.
Mr. GREENE felt compelled to oppose the motion,
as the Commissioners for Paving had not complied with a
single Standing Order. There could be no doubt that
the case was a hard one upon the petitioners ; but he
did not think any circumstances had been brought
forward which called upon the House to act.
Sir G. STRICKLAND thought the present case
was one in which the House ought to interfere, and he
should therefore vote for the motion of the Honourable
Baronet.

Mr. ESTCOURT opposed the motion. If the
petitioners would take the necessary steps, in the next
Session all difficulties might be removed.

Mr. BROTHERTON also opposed the motion,
considering it uncalled for.
Sir T. FREMANTLE thought this was one of
those cases in which no relaxation of the:Standing
Orders ought to take place. One grand object of the
Standing Orders was that no tax should be imposed on
any portion of the community, without those interested
having due notice of the intention of taxing them.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL replied, and the House
divided.

For the motion
Against it
Majority —49

Lord SANDON brought up the report of the Com-
mittee on the Liverpool Docks 8111. The Noble Lord
then presented a petition from Chester in favour of the
Grand Junction Railway Bill.

Alr. BROTHERTON presented a petition against
the Grand Junction Canal Bill.

Mr. LANGDALE present'd a petition from New-
town Stuart, complaining that in one of the National
Schools the Roman Catholic children were required to
read the Presbyterian prayer-book.