The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-05 00:00:00

• Mr. ERLE presented a petition from Oxford, praying-for
an alteration of the taxes on corn, sugar, tea, and coffee ; also
a petition from London, against the toll levied at the Waterloo
and Souther ark Bridges. •
Lord DUNGANNON presented petitions from
.places in
the Counties of Down, Armagh; and Antrim, signed by
2,350 persons, the owners of 75,000 acres of land, against the
proposed alteration of the Corn-laws. Alas a petition from
Wilford in the County of Kent, in favour of Church Extension.
General LYGON presented four petitions from Oxfordshire
against any alteration of the Corn-laws.
Sir JOHN TYRRELL presented various petitions from the
county of Essex against any alteration of the Ccrn-laws.
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition from 188 wood
sawyers of Wolverhampton, praying for a reduction of the
high duty on foreign timber, and for a total- abolition of the
Corn-laws.
EMMERSON TENNENT presented a petition from
certain ship-owners of Belfast, against any alteration in the
duties on foreign timber.
Lord NVORSLE Y presented* petition from Lincoln against
any fixed duty on corn ; also a petition against any alteration
in the Corn-laws.
Captain GORDON presented petitions from Dundee and
Aberdeen, against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Mr. W. DUNCOMBE presented 104 .petitions from I laces
in the West Riding of York against any alteration in the Corn-
laws.
Mr. HOGG presented similar petitions from the East
Riding of York ; also petitions in favour of Church Extension.
'Mr. SCHOLEFIELD gave notice that he should, on the
15th of the present month, bring forward the motion of which
he had given notice, that the House ought not to separate
until it had legislated for the distresses of the people.
On the motioa of Sir E. KNATCHI3ULL, a Return,
showing the method pursued by the Legacy Duty Department
in making application to executors I rid administrators to ren-
der an account of their testator's or intestate's personal estate,
and for the payment of the Legacy Duty, and in collecting the
same ; al-o, giving a copy of each printed circular used by the
Legacy Deputy Department in making such applications;
also, snowing the practice of the Solicitor of Stamps and Taxes
in enforcing payment of the Legacy Duty, by application and
by legal process ; also, giving a copy of each printed circular
used by the Solicitor of Stamps and Taxes in making such
applications ; also showing the expense of the Legacy Duty
department in England ; and an estimate of all other expenses,
if any, in colecting the Legacy Duty ; was ordered.
Mr. C. WOOD presented a Report from the Committee on
Banking, and gave notice, that on Monday next he would
move for leave to bring in a Bili for better regulating the Banks
of Issue.
Mr. V. SMITH brought in the New South Wales Bill and
the Western Australia bill, which were read a first tine, and
ordered to be read a second time on Monday.
NOTTINGHAM ELECTION.
Mr. DUNCOMBE moved that the petition of Samuel
Doubleday, presented on the 2d of June, be printed with the
votes. He had another petition which he had received this
morning on the same subject. It was from Mr. Kilby, of
Mansfield, near Nottingham, who state d that he had heard
with surpriss that a petition had been presented two
days ago from a person named Coxe, stating that
certain parties had offered him a large sum of
money to bribe the Chartists to vote for the Whigs. The
petitioner believed that the whole of that statement was untrue,
and he prayed the House to institute an immediate and search-
ing inquiry. He &so stated that he was ready to prove that
the said Coxe, who accused the Whigs of bribery for the next
election, was emplo3ed by the present Member or his agent, for
the express purpose of bribing voters at the last election—( A
laugh)—and which he did to a large extent; and also that he
himself was offered Si. to vote for the present Member—that he
reused to accept the bribe, but gave his vote in favour of Mr.
Walter. The petitioner wished to be called before the bar of
the House to prove these facts. The Honourable Member
then gave notice that on Thursday next, when the peti-
tion of Edward Coxe was bi ought under the considera-
tion of the House he should move that the petitions of Samuel
Doubleday and William Kilby be also taken into consideration.
CORN-LAWS.

Sir E. KNATCHBULL observed that the Noble Lord, the
Secretary for the Colonies, had a motion on the papers for that
night relating to the importation of foreign corn ; but as the
motion would not probably come on that evening,
he begged that some Member of her Majesty's Government,
in the absence of the Noble Lord, would state on what day he
intended to bring the question under the consideration of the
House. It would be a very great convenience that they should
be informed upon the subject.—( Hear. )
Lord PALMERSTON said that his Noble Friend would in-
form the House, before it separated, of the day on which he
would bring forward his motion. He (Lord Palmerston) be-
lieved it would be Tuesday next ; but he was not quite sure.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL said that if the Noble Lord could
not furnish him with more accurate information on the subject,
he must be content. He had not asked the question from any
uncourteous m otive,but it was a subject on the discussion of which
a great deal of anxiety naturally prevailed, and he feared that
if he had to wait until the Noble Lord the Secretary for the
Colonies came into the House it might be too late.
POOR-LAW RETURN.

Captain POLHILL wished to ask the Hon. Gentleman op-
posite, the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment, when it was likely that certain returns for which he
(Captain Polhill) moved, the number of Deaths of Paupers
in Union Workhouses, would be laid on the table.
Mr. F. MAULE stated that he had given orders to the
Poor-law Commissioners to prepare the returns without delay,
that he had not yet received them, but as soon as he did so
they should be laid on the table.
CANDIA.

Lord TEIGNMOUTH, seeing the Noble Lord the Se-
cretary for Foreign Affairs in his place, wished to ask him
whether he had taken any measures in conformity with the
declaration of the Allied Powers to prevent the perpetration by
the Turks of cruelties on the Christian inhabitants of Candia.
Lord PALMERSTON did not know to what declaration
the Noble Lord alluded, but he would state that as soon as her
Majesty's Government had received information of the trou-
bles in Candia they had despatched instructions to our Am-
bassador at Constantinople, directing him to use his utmost
endeavours to prevail on the Turkish Government to enter into
some arrangement with the Greek population of Candia
which while on the one hand it should be satisfactory to the
Turkish Government, should on the other give the Greek po-
pulation of Candia full security for their persons and properties,
and he had also been directed to urge the Turkish Government
not to have recourse to measures more severe than should be
absolutely necessary.
Lord TEIGNMOUTH had alluded to the declaration of the
Allied Powers in 1830. The answer of the Noble Lord had
been perfectly satisfactory.
,PORTUGUESE CLAIMS.
In answer to a question from Lord SANDON,
Lord PALMERSTON stated that the Commissioners for
settling the Portuguese Claims had been busily employed in
laying down a code of rules and principles which might be ap-
plicable to the different specific cases, and that these claims
would very soon be laid before the Portuguese Government.
Mr. WALTER presented a petition from the town of
Dundee, stating that after nine years' experience the petitioners
were firmly convinced that her Majesty's Ministers were inca-
pable of governing the country to the satisfaction of the people,
and praying the House to address her Majesty for their imme-
diate dismissal.

Mr. F. MAULE begged to ask by how many persons the
petition was signed.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," from the Liberal
aenches, and " Order, order," from the Tory. )
Mr. FOX MAULE proposed that the petition should be read.
The Clerk then read the petition, which was signed " Wm.
Taylor, on behalf of the meeting."
ADJOURNED DEBATE.

On the Order of the Day for the adjourned debate on the
No-Confidence Resolution being read,
Mr. SHEIL rose and said that the resolution proposed
by the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth,
might be, he ventured to say, the resolution which the Right
Hon. Gentleman had been persuaded to propose—(Laughter)
—by some of those addresses in which he thouc'ht the expe-
rience of the Right Hon. Baronet might teach him that no
very implicit confidence could be reposed ; that resolution did
not contain any condemnation of measures; there was nothing to
preclude the Right Hon. Baronet, whenever the interests of the
country or of his party might require it, from reducing the duties
upon sleve-groen sugar, or from bringinghis views on the Corn-
lave question into conformity with these of Sir George
Murray or the Right Hon. George Dawson, who, in
better times, was, he believed, Financial Secretary under him.
The Right Hon. Baronet, in bringing forward his reso-
lution, took care, with the caution which was characteristic of
hint, not to involve himself in any engagements which here-
after might be found embarrassing by him. They were
not now called upon to decide on the policy of the
Government with respi:ct to the Corn-laws, or the
sugar duties, but on the general policy of that Govern-
ment, in whose wisdom and just feeling towards Ireland their
confidence had been universally placed. The Right Hon.
Baronet Fad no doubt calculated on the defection of some of
the English Members, but he (Mr. Shell) thought that the
Right Honourable Gentleman would find his calculations
were erroneous. This resolution of necessity involved a com-
parison between the relative merits of the two great parties,
and whoever voted for it would give expression to the opinion
that not only the Right Honourable Baronet, the Mem-
ber for Tamworth, but also the Honourable Member for
Kent, who had to his (Mr. Sheil's) surprise put some ques-
tions to him at the opening of this debate ; as also the Noble
Lord the Member for North Lancashire, and the Right Hon.
Baronet tee Member for Pembroke (Sir J. Graham), were more
de-erving of the confidence of the reformed House of Commons
than the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, and the
rest of those by whom Reform was never abandoned. The
Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had said that
the defeats of the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies
were rendered more signal by the field in which they were
sustained. This, said the Right Honourable Baronet, was
their own Reformed House of .C.oramotwe It was a House of
Commons constructed on the principles of that celebrated
Bid, the introduction of which was first entrusted to
the Noble Lord in the year 1831. The remark was a
jto remind them of the wsaservidceosubloef-edtghed.
the
ust one, end the satire
Nobltle served Lord
who added fresh lustre to the name of Russell. They
at-
tempted to pronounce the sentence of condemnation upon
the man to whom, accordingto
their
own admission, the
reform of the House of Commons
owed its existence.
It was on that party which had governed this country for ten
years, with the exception of ten months, to which
he should
presently allude, that the House was invited
verdict of distrust, at the same time that the pronounce_ its
renet invited the Mouse" Cemmons to place Right Bad
-
that of the Whigs in the balance. Look back trom 1 policy
an
to the Ist March, 1831, the year the Reform Bill 841
was intro-
duced into that House, amidst those manifestations
of ri-
dicule to which they were, perhaps, too prone, and
in that interval what a vast series of events ?—(The, P and
in that interval what a vast seties fevents?....(The l-!on
ourable Gentleman then made some allusions to 'othe
Noble Lord the Member fir North Lance hire and the Right
Hon. Member for Pembroke, but in consequence of
his
dropping his voice at the end of his sentences, they
were not understood in the gallery.) The Right Honour '
able Baronet ( Sir J. Graham) was more than mistaken in
attributing to the Government experiments in Parliament for
the irritation of the public mind, and of resorting to measures
which the most distinguished of the members of the Govern-
ment had distinctly repudiated. He held in his hand
a letter from the Noble Lord the Secretary for
the Colonies. dated July 31, 1831, addressed to James
Watts, Esq., a gentleman resident at Stroud, in which the
Noble Lord set 'orth opinions on the Corn-laws exactly similar
to those which he now entertaired. The Noble Lord in that
letter (alluding to the Corn-laws) said that he gave his support
to the Bil! of 1829, considering it an improvement on the pro-
hibitory system; but at the same time in his ( Lord J. Russell's)
opinion, a moderate fixedduty woultibemore advantageous to the
agriculturist, and also to the manufacturer; that it was desirable
not to alter too frequently the law by which capital and
great interests were affected; but it was also desirable not to
maintain a system of duties which experience had shown, had
a tendency to raise the prise of food ; that he gave this as his
individual opinion, but that it was one which he was ready to
support by his vote in the House cf Commons.—
(Loud cheers.) He (Mr. Sheil) thought this letter
established the fact that these opinions were not hastily taken
up by the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies,
and that the imputation of the Honourable Member for
Pembroke ( Sir James Graham) had no foundation.—(Cheers.)
The Right Honourable Member for Pembroke said that

every measure brought forward by the Government of
which he was a Member, was well and long consi-
dered. He (Mr. Sheil) observed that when the name
of Lord Grey was mentioned, an intimation was given by
the Noble Lord and the Right Honourable Baronet