The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-01 00:00:00

EVEN iNG EDITION.

party on account of excess in the execution of the e arrant
of the House. Now, should the House agree well him,
he should propose to call in the officers and hear from
them what had been their proceedings and if their ac-
count was not considered correct by Mr. Howard (who
doubtless corresponded with certain gentlemen actuated
ey the purest motives in the advocacy of his case) he could
present a petition to the House, and" it would be compe-
tent for the House to give him redress.—( Hear.)
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that he had received a let-
ter that day from Mr. Howard, and he believed other
Members had done so also, and it would appear from that
letter that what Mr. Howard complained of, was not the
warrant of the Speaker, but the excessive use which had
been made of it. It had been said that Mr. Howard might
have petitioned the House on the subject, but he ( Mr.
Duncombe) thought that Mr. Howard had already had
enough of that House.—( The Hoe Member here read the
note of Mr. Howard, in which he stated the grounds of his
complaint.)
Sir W. FOLLETT said that he entirely approved of
the course adopted by the Attorney-General. The war-
rant of the Speaker was a sufficient protection for parties
acting under it, but at the same time it did not justify the
excesses of those parties.
After a few words from the ATTORNEY-GENERAL,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that he bad al-
ready so often laid before the House his opinion on the
question, that he should merely say that lie could not agree
in the course pursued by his Hon. and Learned Friend,
the Attorney-General.
The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the Motion
Against the Motion
Majority
CHARITIES.
Mr- C. BULL ER said he thought it stood to reason
that the House should grant the Returns which he now
loved for, and which contained information of the highest
importance:—I. An Analytical Digest of the whole body
of Reports made by the Commissioners for inquiring into
Übarities upon the plan adopted in a Digest relating to
certain Counties, in pursuance of an Order of this House
made on the 27ch day of March, 1835.—1 I. A more par-
ticular Digest of ell Schools and Charities for Education
?ported on by the said Commissioners, setting forth, as
ar s appears from the said Reports : 1. The date and
mod
of foundation. 2. To what persons the govern-
Tent is intrusted. 3. To whom the patronage be-
,eanegs• 4. Whether there is any special visitor. 5.
qualification required in the masters. 6. The
!instruction prescribed. 7. -Who arc entitled to the free-
oal of the school. 8. Whether any exhibitions are
aetached to it, and whether they ate made available.
1)„', The amount of the income, distinguishing whether it
'reProveable or not. 10. The state of the school at the
time of the inquiry, with the date thereof, as regards the
instruction afforded therein, and the number of free and
other scholars, with a note of such observations es the
Commissioners may have made on the case, and that such
di
gest
• may distinguish and classify such schools and chari-
tiesin the following manner : —First, all schools in which
Greek or Latin required to be, or is, in fact, taught ;
secoudly, all other schools; thirdly, all Cbarities for the
Purposes of Education not limited to any particular local
'esteblishrnent.—lll. Return of all Charities for the Poor
tielluY parish or district, the income whereof is or may
distributed in money, fuel, or other articles, with a
nc'te of such observations as the Commissiouers may have
ilciakde, on the case, distinguishing and classifying such
the"aritles as follows :—First, those given for the Poor, or
use or benefit of the poor, without any directions, or
reputed directions, by the donor as to the description of
or persons, or the mode of distribution. Secondly,
thoselimited as to which the donor has, or is reputed to have,
the application only by describing the objects as
07,114.00 r not receiving parish relief." Thirdly, those in
other
le the donor has, or is reputed to have, given some
Charity,
directions as to the selection of the objects of the
or as to the mode of distribution.
Sir R. PEEL said there should be a measure for a
summary remedy for some cases, to supply occasional
errors through neglect—( Hear, hear)—as, for instance,
Where Vacancies among trustees had not been filled up
regularly, and where their powers were consequently
cost
or nullified. An appointment to Chancery would
;sit Some 701. or 1001. for such a simple purpose alone.
ay, in some cases, this would engross two years' in-
Comeßill of the endowment.—( Hear, hear.) Could not a
be framed prudently, so as without danger to supply
the required remedy 2---(Hear, hear.)
, ,The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said this was cer-
%llly an object of great national importance.—( Hear.)
been yond all doubt the endowments for education had not
and were not of half the public benefit they might be
heHear)—and it would give him real satisfaction to meet
object suggested by the Right Hon. Baronet, though
considerable difficulty prevailed on the question.
Mr. HOPE said he had a Bill before the House de-
signed for a similar object.
Mr. BROTHERTON said the abject was of the
greatest importance.
Mr. ESTCOURT said he knew of two cases in which
!light difficulties of the formal nature which had been al-
luded to had, through the heavy expense attendant on alt
aPPeal to Chancery—its only present course—been fatal
to the progress of the charity.—(Hear, hear.)
R Mr. SLANE Y considered the motion of the Right
on Baronet-- of the utmost value. He ventured also to
suggest the great importance of establishing a good system
of inspection, especially on Educational Charities. He
knew in many of such charities the trustees were very ig-
norant—in one case he had heard that they had deprecated
gelling, thinking that the children who could not read
made the best servants.—(A laugh.)
Mr. J. STEWART thought in such cases as had been
mentioned a simple reference to the Chancery Master
might be at one° allowed.
Sir R. PEEL—What isthe expence ?
Mr. .1. STEWART—Very trifling. Some pounds cer-
tainly, but the main expense of bill, answer, counsel,
&c., in open court, would be saved.
Mr. HOPE said that was the principle of the Bill he
had brought in.
The Returns were agreed to, with the addition, en the
suggestion of Mr. SLANEy, of an index.
CLERUY RESERVES (CANADA.)
Mr. PAKINGTON moved for a return of " the re-
ligious bodies or denominations of Christians," who would
be entitled, in the event of the Royal assent beim.- given
to the Clergy Reserve Bill, passed by the Legislature of
Upper Canada, to receive a portion of the proceeds of the
reserved lands. The Hon. Member said that in an inci-
dental matter of this kind, he would not enter into a dis-
cussion of the entire subject, to which the returns he
moved for referred. He should say, however, that the
question was one of so important a nature, that the Govern-
ment should not refuse the House the information which
the returns he moved for, might afford.
Sir R. H. INGLIS seconded.the motion.
Mr. VERNON SMITH said that be should not
oppose the motion of the Hon. Member, though he
differed with him on the subject of the Bill, as he believed
it would be attended with beneficial results.
After a few words from Sir R. H. INGLIS and Mr.
HUME, the motion was agreed to.
Mr. HUME then moved for a return of the amount
Paid for pensions, superannuations, and retired allowances
trom the Colonial revenues of Malta, Ceylon, Trinidad,
and Guina, the Cape of Good Hope, New South Wales,
and Van Diemen's Land, in the years 1837, 183 e, and
1839, stating the name of each person, the amount, and
the date of his pension or allowance, his age, length of
service, and offices held ; also the reasons for granting
the said pension or allowance, and under what authority
granted.
The motion was agreed to.

LORD SEATON.
Mr. PARKER brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on Lord Seaton's Pension Bill.
Sir R. H. INGLIS thought that Sir Francis Head
waa also entitled to the gratitude of the country for his
services in saving Upper Canada.
Sir C. BROOKE VERB gave his testimony to the
great merits of Lord Seaton.
Mr. HUME thought that the cases of Lord Seaton and
Sir Francis Head were entirely distinct, and that the Hon.
Baronet was not in any way entitled to the praises be-
stowed on him by the Hon. Member for Oxford.
The resolutions were then agreed to, and the Bill was
ordered to be brought in by Mr. Vernon Smith and Lord
J. Russell.
Mr. HUME said, that he would take that opportunity
of objecting to the amount of the grant.

ADMIRALTY COURT BILL.
Mr. VERNON brought up the Report on the Adm
raltv Court Bill, Judges' Salaries, &c. &c.
The Report was received.
EXCHEQUER BILLS(PUBLIC WORKS) BILL
The Report on the Exchequer Bills (Public Works,
Bill was brought up and agreed to.
TOBACCO AND GLASS DUTIES.
The Report on the Tobacco and Glass Duties Bill was
brought up and vgreed to.
THE BEER BILL.
Mr. WARBURTON presented several petitions from
Bristol and Middlesex, against the proposed alteration of
the Beer Lasts.
Mr. ALSTON presented petitions from various places
in Hertfordshire, is favour of the opening of the beer
trade. They said that the partial opening that had taken
Place, had been productive of great advantage to the agri-
culturist, and to the public in general.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pre-
sented a number of petitions from the Metropolis and other
places against Mr. Pakington's Bill.
Mr. PAKINGTON then moved the second reading
of the Saleof Beer Bill (No. 2.)
Mr. ALSTON opposed the motion. He objected to
the third clause, which limited the right of obtaining
licenses in some districts, to hhuses rated at 15/. and in
others to houses rated at ill. In many districts there
were no houses rated even so highly as 11/. so that in
them, if this Act passed no beer could be sold. He also
stated that it was an insuperable objection to the fourteenth
clause, that by means of it, in many districts, all the sellers
of beer, no matter how licensed, would be obliged to give
uP their business. The existing Beer-laws had been pro-
ductive of great advantage. There had been an enormous
increase in the growth of barley and in the consumption
of malt. The Hon. Member quoted the returns of the con-
sumption Of malt in the several years from 1810 to 1839,
and he showed that the increase had been very great in the
'lino years since the passing of the Beer Bill. A Bill so
obnoxious and full of injustice he, as one, could not allow
to roceive the sanction of the House by a second reading,
and he sheuld therefore move as an amendment, that it be
read a second time this daj six months.
Mr. JAMES, in seconding the amendment, said that
w.hilst he admitted that there were great evils in the beer-
Ps, and in the licensed victuallers' system also, the Bill
would not have any effect in remedying the evils. He
ot?deer no distinction between the licensed victuallers and the
Qi.°_,
08. The proper cure for the disorderly management
.l_natu se houses was to be found in an improved police sr-
Line t_, and the education of the people. If the Bill went
Coma° Committee he would propose that the c-unt • of
eriand should he exemptcd from its operation. 1 _ Mr. R. PALMER said he had always been and still
should
tootn be consumed on the premises. He thought beer
ought be sold with as little restriction as any other arti-
.....—__