The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-20 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 19.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Five Minutes to
Four o'Clock.

Colonel CLEMENTS was again introduced by Sir R.
Inglis and Mr. Young, and took the oaths and his seat
for Cavan.

PRIVATE BILLS.

On the motion of Mr. LOWTHER the York and
North Midland Railway Bill was read a second time.
On the motion of Mr. PEASE, the Britannia Life
Assurance Company's Bill was read a second time.

On the motion of Mr. T. PARKER, the Preston
and Longridge Railway Bill was read a'second time.
On'the motion of Mr. REDDINGTON, the Birken-
head Church Bill was read a first time.

Mr. W. PATTEN moved the second reading of the
Winwick Rectory Bi►l.

Mr. HIND LEY said he should be sorry to oppose
the Bill, and had no intention of doing so, but he hoped
the Committee would be instructed to frame the clause
relating to Church-rates, in such a way as should be
least objectionable to the parishioners.

• After a few wordi from Sir R. H. INGLIS,
Mr. WILSON PATTEN said he would undertake
to direct the attention of the Committee to that point.

The Bill was then read a second time.
On the motion of Alderman THOMPSON, the
Durham and Sunderland Railway Company's Bill was
read a first time.

On the motion of Mr. G. KNIGHT, the Notting
ham Gas Bill was read a second time.

Mr. PEASE presented a petition from the Stockton
and Darlingon Railway Company, praying for a more
equitable tax on railway passengers.

POUR-LAWS.

Sir J. Y. BULLEIt presented a petition from the
county of Devon, praying for a Committee of Inquiry
into the operation of the Poor-laws in that county.
Also a petition from the Guardians of the Kingsbridge
Union, praying that the Guardians might be allowed
some discretion in giving relief to able-bodied men with
large families.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. TROTTER presented a petition from Guild-
ford, in Surrey, against the 9th and other clauses of
the Poor-kw Amendment Act.

Mr. BOLLING presented a petition against the
Poor.law Amendment Bill.

Sir R. FERGUSON presented petitions from Lon-
donderry praying for an extension of the elective fran-
chise, and in favour of Lord Morpeth's Registration Bill.
Colonel RAWDON presented a petition from the
county of Armagh against Lord Stanley's Irish Regis-
tration Bill.

Sir DE LACY EVANS presented a petiti.ln from
:he Westminster Reform Society against the Window-
:ax.

Mr. W. FATTEN preiiented a petition from a
p'a2e in Lanea3hire for the extension of tho Copyright

in Designs.
Sir R. INGLIS presented .*petitions from Sussex
and Norfolk praying for Church Extension.
Sir F. I'OLLOCK presented a petition from the
Royal College of Physicians, praying that a Bill might
be introduced, by which one test might be applied to
all medical practitioners.

Mr. BAINES presented a petition from the Cor-
poration of Leeds, complaining of tl:e Registration of
voters, and praying the House would adopt some means
for the amendment of the existing law.
Sir R. BATESON presented a petition from the
Presbytery of Antrim, praying that the system of Church
patronage in Scotland might be abolished. The Hon.
Member also presented a petition from Fermanagh in
favour of Lord Stanley's Registration Bill.
Sir R. JENKINS presented a petition from Mont-
gomery against the separation of the dioceses of Ban-
gor and St. Asaph.
Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from St.
Luke's, Middlesex, against the Bill for the Amend-
ment of the Poor-law Aet. The lion. Member pre-
sented a petition on the same subject from cer-
tain rate-payers of the parish of Shadwell, in Mid-
dlesex. The petitioners complained of the man-
ner in which paupers were removed in the work-
houses in their union. They stated that the system
had been changed in that respect, and that the
change had increased the rates by 50 per cent. The
Hcn. Member was proceeding to enter into other de-
tails when
The SPEAKER asked whether he was then read-
ing the petition

-Mr. WAKLEY said he was really at a loss what to
do. He was only stating the substance of the petition ;
and it would be well the people should know that it was
of no use for them to send petitions to that House.—
(Cries of " Order, order.")
The SPEAKER again called the Hon. Member to
order. The Hon. Member must surely see that the
observations he was making had no connection with the
petition. If the Hon. Member wished to have the pe-
tition read, it would be the duty of the Clerk to read
it from the table.

Mr. WAKLEY said that he was not reading the
petition, he was only submitting the substance of it to
the House. The petitioners prayed that the House would
not pass into a law the Bill then before them, as they con-
sidered it would prove in the highest degree detrimental
to the interests of the rate-payers and the poor. They
also prayed the House to introduce a clause into the
Bill, which would have the effect of protecting those
parishes which were under local acts from the operation
of the new Bill. The Hon. Member presented a petition
with a similar prayer, from St. Leonard's, Shoreditch ;
alio a petition from the industrious classes of West
borough-common, near Barnsbury, against the Bill,
which the petitioners regarded as a robbery of the
poor, for the benefit of the rich, an opinion in which
he (Mr. Wakley) entirely concurred. The petitioners
prayed that the House do abstain from all legislation on
the subject until the people were fairly represented in
Parliament.

Major MACNAMARA presented a petition from
a parish in the county of Clare, praying for an extension
of the elective franchise, and against Lord Stanley's Bill.
Mr: WILLIAM DUNCOMBE presented a peti-
tion from a plus. in Yorkshire in favour of Church
Extension.
Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE presented a peti-
tion from a body called the Board of Science of Bir-
mingham, consistinc, of about 800 persons, praying
that the House would inquire into the treatment of
Mr. Feargus O'Connor in York Castle. The peti-
tioners stated that if the death of Mr. O'Connor
were to ensue from the severity with which he
was treated, it would justly be held as a judi-
cial murder. The Hon. Member also presented
a petition from the Chartist Association of Bloomsbury,
praying for the liberation of Frost, Williams, and Jones ;
and a petition from an individual residing in Hatton-
garden to the same effect.

Sir GEO.. STAUNTON presented a petition-from
the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh against the
Bill on the subject of Medical Reform, which stood for
a second reading that evening. The petitioners stated
that the Bill, so far from amending, would only injure the
condition of the medical profession.
Mr. LITTON presented a petition from certain in-
habitants of Wicklow, proving that the 13.11 for the Re-
gistration of Voters may be rejected, and that that
brought in by Lord Stanley may be passed ; also peti-
tions from the King's County, one from the county of
Meath, from the county of Louth, from the county of
Cork, and from the county of Waterford, to the same
effect.
Lord STANLEY presented a petition from certain
rate-payers of Lancaster, stating that they were subject
to very great expense under the New Poor-law and Ru-
ral Police Acts, and praying for relief:
Mr. GROTE presented a petition from certain in-
habitants of Bury, praying for the release of Henry
Hetherington from gaol.
Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from Youghal,
complaining of abuses under the present system of re-
gistration,
IlnidNpLauyiyngptrheastenatered a petitionmedyna fn
y be applied.rol
Lthe
China Association at Liverpool, praying for the equali-
zation of all duties on East and West India produce.f
Mr. O'CONNELL presented ape petition
Regis-
nomthe
county of Down, praying that Lord Morp

--if, 4,:-7,4 ; V-' '-',,,,:
ton ill for Ireland might pass intoirkfiVirSfii ---`
.:
.i.• n from the inhabitants of the proviOiX,miii,siiii.." ~,:.,,,ti,
\ ,re
-tyKying' that Lord Stanley's Bill migh li':eri.;eted:; ',-:.: ' '
)other, numerously signed, from t 4 sstuf,`Pl,co,
pr ay in Vo r the repeal of the Legislative niou. 1- ! _
Mr. HUME presented a petition from t u i'xidri,i7,
duals praying for an extension of the suffra td ill per- "" '.
sons who paid taxes. In the prayer of the petition he
entirely concurred.
Sir W. W. FOLLETT presented a petition from
Heavitree, in the county of Devon, praying that the
House would agree to some general measure for the
establishment of Local Courts.

Mr. S. O'BRIEN presented a petition from the
Medical Practitioners of Limerick praying for the re-
peal of so much of the Vaccination Act as gave addi-
tional powers to the Poor-law Commissioners.
Sir R. H. INGLIS, sceing the Hon. Member for
Lambeth in his place, l begged to ask him to what
day he proposed to postpone the second reading of
a Bill for reforming the Medical profession, which was
indorsed with his name. As it stood he could assure
him it was impossiLle that it could be read a second
time that night.

Mr. HAWES said he had stated to the parties con-
cerned in the Bill that it was his intention to. postpone
the second reading of the Bill. He would take that
opportunity of stating that he had made up his mind to
strike out all those clauses of the Bill which related to
chemists and druggists.

Mr. WAKLEY—If the Hon. Member had already
brought his mind to strike out those clauses, he would
earnestly entreat him to give up the other portion also
laugh)—for he could assure him that it would not
in such a sh spe give satisfaction to any portion of the
medical profession.
The SPEAKER said the clauses relating to the
chemists and druggists related to trade, and, therefore,
the Bill ought to have originated in Committee.—( A
augh.) It would be more in order if the Hon. Mem-
ber were to withdraw the Bill, and reintroduce it in a
new shape.
Mr. HAWES would be most happy to follow the
course pointed out by the Speaker.
Mr. HUME, seeing the Under-Secretary for the
Colonies in his place, wished to put a question to him.
He held in his hand a letter from Quebec, in which it
was stated that Lieutenant-Colonel Lester had died
there as it were in the service, and the officers of the
Guards were anxious to raise a tablet to his memory,
but were refused permiision to do so by the BiShop,
on the ground that the Gallant Colonel had not been a
regular communicant there. If this was so, he thought
it was persecution.—(Cries of " Order.")
Mr. V. SMITH had not been made aware that the
question was to be put, or he would have made in-
quiries on the subject. All he could say was that he
believed there was no official information on the-subject.
• Mr. GISBORNE gave notice of his intention to
move sevaral clauses in the Registration of Voters
(England)
Mr. U RIM SDITCH gave not:ce that in Committee
on the Poor law Continuance Bill he would move
the omission of clause 8, and substitute the words re-
stricting the size of unions.
Mr. EW ART gave notice that on Thursday, 4th of
March, he would move for a Committee to inquire into
the necessity of a public prosecutor in all criminal cases.
Mr. V. SMITH moved for a return of the corres-
pondence which had taken place between her Majesty's
Government and the Commissioners for emigration.—
Ordered.

Mr. MILES moved for Returns of the Accounts of
Treasurers of Counties.—Agreed to.
•Mr. HUTTON moved for certain Returns from the
Commissioners of Wide Streets, Dublin.—Ordered.
Mr. HUME moved for a continuation of Returns re-
lative to the half•pay" received last year by officers,
both civil and military.—Ordered.

Mr. F. MAULE moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to amend certain local turnpike Acts.—Granted.

On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL it was ordered
that the House at its rising do adjourn till Monday.
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS (ENGLAND.)
The Order of the Day for the second reading of the
Registration of Voters (England) Bill having been
read,
Sir E. SUGDEN said, before he called the atten-
tion of the House to the various provisions of that im-
portant Bill, he would observe that the other side of the
House was not more anxious than those on his side to agree
to any provisions which would be necessary to correct
fictitious voting, and facilitate the registration of bonafidc
electors. There were many things requiring correction
in the present system, namely, the publication of the
lists, and the nature of the objections made to voters.
As regarded the first there was great difficulty as the
law stood, because if the overseer, or ether dicer whose
duty it was to attend to the due publication of the
lists, neglected his duty, or improperly exercised it, a
constituency might be deprived of their franchise
through his misconduct, and the :anie would take place
if there was any error or mistake on the part
of the Revising Barrister.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It
appeared to him that with regard to the
other point there was some difficulty to be encountered,
but it might be met by not allowing a party to object to
an othe.rwile good vote, merely because the claimant
could not attend ; and also by compelling him
to give security for the costs, in the event of
his not being able to support his objections. He
thought he might venture to say, that on that side
of the House not the slightest impediment would be
thrown in the way of any of the clauses which had for
their Gbj cc t the formation of a bona fide registration
within the intention of the Reform Act. In esta-
blishing a Court of Repeal, they were . establishing
a tribunal to correct those errors which it was stated
could not be corrected under the present system. The
leading provisions of the Bill were, Ist, to form a new
Court of Registration ; 2d, to establish a Court of Re-
peal, which of the two had not been established at all,
as regarded • registrations ; 3d, to alter the franchise,
both by diminishing the length of time during which
rates and taxes were to be paid, and by taking away
one great class of burdens, which at present by law
it was necessary for a man to pay to entitle him
to vote ; and, lastly, there was a provision, and a most
important provision : it was to draw, hereafter, a dis-
tinction between voters—to have one class of
voters who might be objected to, and to have
another who might be called established vo-
ters, and to whom, after certain ceremonies, no
objection could be made. Now before they spoke of the
advantage resulting from the formation of new
Judges they must consider the nature of the pre-
sent Courts, and the objections which had been
made to them. One great object of the Reform
Bill was to establish at an easy cost C3urts
which should travel round the country, and simul-
taneously, and at a convenient time of the year,
register all the voters of England. The great
advantage of the present system was, that they had
the Courts sitteng at a certain fixed period, an& at
a time of the year when other business of an agricul-
tural or commercial nature did act intervene. The Judges
now nominated the Barristers, and sent them at the same
time on the different circuits in England. The great
advantage of that system was, that all the claims were
considered at the same period, and that that period was
the most favourable which could be chosen. The
barristers chosen were not certainly men of great ex-
perience in their-profession ; and perhaps it would be
impossible to obtain men of greater experience,
as the remuneration offered to those gentlemen
was very limited ; and they could not obtain
men of long standing at the Bar to fulfil such
duties, unless, indeed, they made choice of parties
who had failed in their profession. believed, there-
fore, it would be difficult to improve the system in
that respect. Tnere was another great benefit in
the present plan, which they could not enjoy if they
established permanent Judges of Registration. The
duties of the Revising Barristers occupied but ,a small.
portion of their time, and these Banisters afterwards,
returned to the ordinary labours of the profession; they!
again retuned to Westminster Flail, where, to use a
common expression, if they had not fairly discharged
their duties at the Revising Courts they were sure to
get " well rowed." There were great difficulties, no
doubt, a-ising from the changes at present proposed,. as
it was hard to draw up a law in that g we)
.which
would nut be found to break down on its aplplication to
certain individual elves. There was no complaint
against the Revising,Barristars, except that some of
them were too young ; that was a matter which could
be easily remedied. Now it they appointed new Judges
and sent them round England to revise the claims pre-
ferred before them, be did not suppose that these new
Judges could settle all the difficulties, because the
Noble Lord proposed an Appeal Court from the new
tribunal. What was wanted with an Appeal Court, if
the new Judges were to be so perfect ? The Noble
Lord should take care to propose such Judges as would
not require an appellant court. The Noble Lord pro-
posed that fifteen Judgee be appointed, who were to
perambulate England, and register all the electors of
England. Now these fifteen Judges, taking the number
of days occupied by the Revising Banisters, would be
employed about 213 days each year in revising cla:ms.
The Right Lion. and Learned Gentleman then pro-
ceeded to show that the Judges proposed to be ap-
pointed by the Noble Lord, being thus occupied almost
the entire year, would be wholly withdrawn from West-
minster Hall, and could attend to no other concern but
that of revising claims, and would be therefore in qua-
lity of discharging their duties, infinitely below the pre-
sent Revising Barristers, who, frequenting
.Westminster
Hall, and thus having opportunities of rising.
their
profession, had every inducement to act with integrity,
and with a view to raising their professional character.
The Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman also con-
tended that if the objection urged against
the
to the Judges of the land certain jurisdictionin those
cases—namely, that they would become political
Judges—held good, sunder objections must exist
against the Judges proposed, who would be solely en-
gaged in those cases. If the Judges of the land, who
would decide only some 20 cases in a year—to whom
those cases would be merely incidental in the diseharge
of various other duties—were likely to be contamina-
ted, he did not understand how it was more safe to

~~~