The Sun.
London, England, 1824-05-25 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT,

HOUSE O,F LORDS, MAy 24.
SECRET SOCIETY ACT (IRELAND).
The Earl of KINGSTON presented several petitions from
certain Freemasons of Ireland, praying that they:may be ex-
empted from the speration of the Secret Society Act.—They
were all laid on the table.
MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.
Mr. S. Wortley, and others, from the Commons, brought up
several private Bills, which were read a first time.
EAST INDIA COMPANY'S ACCOUNTS.
Mr. Mason, from the India House, 'presented the Annual Ac-
count of the Revenue of the East India Company.
*ENDOWMENTS FOR EDUCATION IN IRELAND.
The Earl of KINGSTON moved for Copies of all Returns
relative to the Endowments for the Encouragement of Educa-
tion in Ireland—.-Ordered.
Lord CARBERRY made a few observations on this notice,
which were nearly inaudible below the bar: it was understood
the Noble Lord objected to the present mode of appointing dio-
cesan schoolmasters, and to suggest ,the propriety of suspend-
ing the powers of the Board of Education, during the inquiry of
the Committee appointed by their Lordships, relative to educa-
tion in Ireland.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL hoped that the Noble Lord
would not make a motion,in conformity with his suggestion,
without giving previous notice of his intention to do so., •

- -
RESTORATION OF FORFEITED PEERAGES.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL rose to lay on their Lordships'
table several Bills for the restoration of honours to families
which had been attainted. In doing this it would only be
necessary for him to say a few •words upon the subject.—
When his Majesty had been graciously pleased two years ago
to visit Scotland, the first visit paid to that country by any So-
vereign of his Illustrious House, or since the Revolution it was
natural that those individuals, whose 'ancestors- had been at.
tainted, who felt conscious that they had acted with unshaken
loyalty for sixty years, should humbly petition his Majesty to
restore those honours which their ancestors had lost. Neither
did it appear inconsistent with his Majesty's dignity that he
should have been disposed to lend a willing ear to those peti-
tions. Yet, befdre complying with their prayer, much consi-
deration was required, and it was only now that he was able
to lay these Bills before the House. They formed an excep-
tion to the general course of Parliamentary. Acts, for they ori-
ginated with the Crown, and came down signed by the King.
Tkey included four cases ; and it was not necessary that he
should show what circumstances had induced his Majesty to
consent to the restoration of forfeited honours. To read the
names would be sufficient to satisfy their Lordships that there
was no disposition to act under the influence of any narrow
principle. It was material, however, that he should say that
those four cases rested entirely on grace and faVotir on the part
of his Majesty ; for no consideration should ever induce him
to bring into question the propriety and justice of the original
proceedings against the attainted families. They were there-
fore acts of Royal grace and favour, springing from the kind
disposition of the Sovereign on the throne, and granted to in.
dividuals whose conduct and loyalty for many rears had at-
tracted his Majesty's notice, to the restoration of their family
honours. So much for that part of the subject. He should not
look at those acts of grace and favour with so much satisfac.
tion if they were not accompanied by what he called an act of
justice. He should therefore have to add to the Bills which he
had mentioned, a Bill also signed by his Majesty for reversing
the attainder of Lord Stafford—( Hear, hear !)--which all par-
ties mast look upon as a great blot upon our history. It was
gratifying to bins to be the instrument to perform that act of
justice, in combination with acts of grace and favour, to a most
respectable family, and to (10 away one of the greatest stigmas
that ever fell on the conduct of Parliament in one of the worst
periods of our history. The Noble Earl then concluded by
proposing the first reading of the following Bills :
For restoring John Francis Erskine, Esq. to the Earldom of
Mar.

For the restoration of John Gordon, Esq. to the Earldom of
Kenmore.

For the restoration of James Drummond, Eiq. to the Earl-
dom of Strathallan and Perth. • .
Earl RADNOR wished to know whit was the nature of that
Bill ?
The Earl of LIVERPOOL had no objection that it should
be read, if it would be any sataaction to the Noble Earl.
The Bill having been read by the Clerk of the Honse,
The Earl of LAUDERDALE objected to passing a Bill to
reverse an attainder without first solving all doubts as to the
question whether the person in whose' favour the attainder was
to be reversed, was the real Lord Strathallan. Before the Bill
proceeded through its stages, it would be necessary to have the
opinion of the Judges on the subject.
Earl RADNOR conceived it regular when a Bill to reverse
an attainder was introduced, that the documentS on which the
attainder was founded should be first produced.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that it was a point agreed
upon that such Bills could only orioinate with the Crown. And
when an Act of Grace of that kind came down with the signa-
ture of his Majesty, would their Lordships refuse to give it a
first reading, which was given by courtesy to all other Bills
ever submitted to the House ?
Earl ItADNOR wished to know whether there were pre-
cedents ? _ _ -

The LORD CHANCELLOR said that it was not neces-
sary to produce documents' when a Bill recited an old Act of
Parliament.

- -
Lord HOLLAND conceived that the course followed by the
Noble Earl (Liverpool) was the proper one, and that it was
usual to allow a Bill to be read a first time without coming
to the question. With respect to himself he was willing to
give such Bills as the present all due encouragement. He
supposed the Noble Earl had looked for precedent, and that
care would be taken to provide against questions of law which
might arise.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE did not oppose the first
reading of the Bill, he only stated the objectiops which he
entertained to it, and which he should bring forward another
time.
Viscount MELVILLE said, that if the Noble Earl (Radnor)
would look at the proceedings of the House on the case of the
Earl of Dorchester, he would find in them a precedent for the
course now proposed.
After a few words from Lord BELHAVEN, the Bills were
read a first time.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL then moved the first reading
of a Bill to restore William Nairn, Esq, to the title of Lord
Nairn.
Earl RADNOR moved that the Bill be printed.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said that the Noble Earl might
have the Bill read, printed, or whatever he pleased. But
whilst it was a matter of courtesy to give a first reading with-
out any opposition to the most trifling Bill, was 'he to be
blade an exception to that general rule on this most sacred oc-
casion, and when he had brought down a measure, signed by
his Majesty ?
The Bill having been also read a first time,
The Earl of LIVERPOOL then moved the first reading of
a Bill worded in a different manner, as the circumstances were
not the same—to reverse the attainder of William Lord Vis-
count Stafford.—Read a first time.

PETITIONS.

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a petition from
the Protestant Union in London and its vicinity, against the
English Catholics 'Bills.—Laid on the table. •
The Bishop of ST. DAVID'S presented similar petitions
from the Clergy of Brecknockshire, and from the Archdeacon-
ries of Cardigan, Carmarthen, and St. David's.—Laid on the
table.