The Sun.
London, England, 1824-05-06 00:00:00

THURSDAY, MAY 6, 1824.

the House, which, if it deemed correct, ought to render it more
cautious in their legislation on such matters in future. The
petitioner understood that the Kensington Road Bill had al-
ready been read a second time, and was therefore anxious to
put the House in possession of some information regarding it
previously to its being read a third time. By a freneral Turn-
pike Act passed at an early part of the reign of is late Majes-
ty, it was enacted that the accounts of all turnpike-roads should
h
be made'up by the Commissioners in the October of each year
—that they should' be deposited in the office of the Clerk of the
peace, and that thefshould be exposed, upon payment of a
small fee; to the examination of any person who wished to in-
spect them. ' Mr. Uobbett, knowing that the tolls of this gate
amounted t0'14,0001. a year, and having doubts as to the cor-
rectness
gement, and-finding that the trea-
surer of
thoefmthweat their
anin
Justice
aa
of the Peace, applied at the Office
of the Clerk of the Peace in October last, for the accounts of the
Kensington-road. The answer which he received was, that
there were no such accounts there. He applied again in No-
vember and December last, but his applications were in vain.
indeed, it was not till thelast three days that the account which
the Act of Parliament required was deposited in the Clerk
of the Peace's Office. That account was in a most un-busi.
ness-like shape—it was actually unbalanced; but it still appear-
ed that there was a balance in the hands of the treasurer
sufficient to pay off all alit- bonded debt of the road. The Act
requireAthat his debt shoo 4 ho paid off as soon as the amount
of the tolls would permit it ; 'but though inch was the case, the
commissioners now came forward to demand an extension of
that Act, after they had acted directly in the teeth of its pre-
amble. What was the fact ? At the bottom of the account,
which was signed James Barker, Chairman, it appeared that
the whole bonded debt, in January list, was 2,5001. ; and the
justice of the peace, who filled the situation of treasurer, actu-
ally had more money in his hands at the time, than would have
liquidated it. A small 'part of the debt, about 8.501., had
been pa!d off; while by the account which had been
produced, it appeared that the treasurer had in hand 4,5001.
being double the
,amount of the debt. Under these circum
stanced, he hoped the House would not allow this Bill to pass
without investigating the manner in which this individual had
violated the trust reposed in him. A rpenalty of 601. might be
levied for pot having the account ready at the time prescribed
by the Act ; and he believed an action was brought to recover
that sum'from the negligent party. But what was the penalty
ofsol. to an individual who was allowed to keep a balance of
4,0001. or 5,000/. in his hands ? The petitioner prayed, as two
years were yet to expire under the present Act, that the House
would reject the Bill which was now in progress. He would
now bring up the,petition ; and at a future period he would
move for a copy of the account, in order to see how far it agreed
with the actual state of the case.

Lord LOWTHER said, the Bill to which the Honourable
Member alluded had already passed that House, and was now
before the House .Of Lords. The subject of those turnpike
trusts was well worthy the attention of the House. The trusts
about the metropolis produced 150,000/. a-year, besides a large
sum which was raised by statute duty ; and he believed it
Would be found extremely difficult to discover how that money
was expended
The petition was then. read, and laid on the table. .
Mr. HUME wished to know whether there was any precedent
to direct them in a case like the present ? or whether that House
could adopt any measure, on discovering that they had passed a
bill containing a positive falsehood, while that bill was pending
in the House of Lords ?

The SPEAKER said, the bill was now entirely beyond the
controul of that Douse.

Mr. HUME said, some means ought to be taken to guard
themselves ar cminst such an occurrence in future.
TITHE-COMPOSITION BILL.

Mr. HUME rose to present a petition from the parishioners -
of Blackrath, in the dioceie,of Ossory, and county of. Kilkenny,
against the Tithe .Compositioribill. The petition, he obierved,
was of cOnsiderable length, but he would venture to say that a
petition of greater importance had rarely been presented to that
House. The petitioners complained of a great number of seri-
.
ous grievances which they suffered from the present mede of
collecting tithes. fie ,stated, that, for-the purpose of securing
fair play, fire valuators ought ,nttt,to be appointed .entirely-by
the clergyman. One should be appointed_by the person claim-
ing the tithe. the othe,r by the person. who was to pay it. There
was, however, they''t4rved, nothing like fair play between the
public and the thurch.,..The- valuators appointed were, in ge-
neral, men of indiffereo character, and were -not conversant
with
jothneerbsti t einreefo
business hlchthey were called on to perform. The
hoped, that if any change were effected in
the existing measure, they would be allowed the privilege of'
noininating one valuator, leaving to the clergyman the right of •
appointing the other. The petitioners also complained, that if
they set out their, tithe, it was
almost sure to be damaged ; and
they were then called on to make that damage good, although
any imprOper conduct of theirs. If they
idtellyildonneottLartitsleeyfrovrm
eie
iTinetliately .cited in the Consistorial
Court, and rather than litigate the business, they were obliged
fforercleipterioitylyedtothpauttthuep
Housey/it
acts of great extortion. They there-
would repeal the act of last session,
and not subject diem to that increased rate of- tithe which, ac-
cording to. the average of the last seven years, and the fall in
the price of Corn during that period, they were liable to at pre.
sent. He (Mr. ,
really surprised at the patience of
the Irish under this system, during so many years. He was
satisfied that they had suffered more from it than the Greeks
Itad suffered from the Turks._
The petition was read, and or-
dered
presented a petition from the butchers of the
city
of York,
similar n favour of the. Hides and Skins Bill ;_ and a
dtioiu be
3 printed
inpt erdes.
en
3reir.
ileshers of Aberdeen.—Referred to the
Commitpteeetitoinon omthfresailie b
in.
.11EmE Orientti a petition; signed by many thousand
artificers .of Wakefield, against the Combination Laws.—Re-
ferred to the Committee on artisans.
TB E TB EA DAITH EEL.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE rose to present a petition from two
very respectable Magistrates, Sir J.C. Ilippisley, who (Hs-
-charged the duties of a Justice of the Peace in the County
had the honour to represent; and
ugestice of the Peace for the County of
Surrey ; against the punishment of the Tread-wheel. As the
11wIhri.c Briscoe,3 he
(
Sir
petition was of great length, and embraced every topic wTh. .ol was Lethbridge)
ori
Justice
con-
nected with the subject, it would be quite impossible for him
to put the House in possession of the whole of its contents. He
hoped, therefore the House would permit it to be printed. It
would then be placed in the hands of Members, who, in corn-
nu n with the public at large, would duly appreciate the state-
ments and reasoning,' which it contained. rho petition was
against the labour of the Tread,wheel,a machine which, he
believed, was in pretty general use throughout this country, as
a punishment for crimes. That punishment had been, in some
instances, resorted -to before the trial of prisoners; but he be-
lieved there was a clause in the bill now before the House, which
would prevent it in future. He had taken some pains to read
several pamplilets,which had.been written on this subject by
an liOn. Bart. (Sir J. C.' HippiSley) who took great interest in
the question. Ile had in his mode of handling it displayed kis
usual ability ; and he (Sir T. Lethbridge) confessed that the
facts and arguments adduced by that Hon. Bart. had, in some
degree, staggered those opinions which he formerly entertained
with respect to this mode of punishment. lie would press on
the attention of the Committee on Priiim Discipline, who 'had
not yet finished their labours, the Propriety of-taking into their
most serious consideration.the various allegations on this sub-
ject. It was well worthy 'their notice, it was well deserving
their attention, and lie had no doubt but a due investigation of
this disputed question must have a very considerable effect
with reference to the report which that Committee would
make. The Hon. Bart. then proceeded to read certain passages
in the petition (which is subjoined), and concluded by moving
" that the petition be brought up."
Mr. DEN ISON said, the labour of the tread-wheel had ben
received with approbation in four or five-and-twenty different
counties. If it were not unanimously approved of by the Ma-
gistrates, certain he was, that a great proportion of them were
favourable to it ; and, so far, s it had gone, he believed it was
the best mode of puniShment that could be adopted. It kept
the prisoner to hard labour, as the law authorised and directed,
without breaking his spirit or injuring his health. One of the
Petitioners (-Mr. Briscoe) came before the Magistrates at the
last Quarter Sessions for Surrey,. and certainly laid before them
certain charges.„ which, in his opinion, and that of the bench, he
could not substantiate. He made a Complaint respecting the
treatment of two soldiers, who not only insulted, but actually
attacked the gaolers. They were in consequence put in strict
confinement for two days. At the end of that time, finding
they gained nothing by being refractory, they returned to la-
bour. One of the Magistrates, at. the time this complaint was
made, gave notice, that he would, -at the n.ext.Quarter Sessions,
,bring the whole subject before them, and doubtless it would
then be fully discussed. There were no gaols in the kingdom
where greater attention was paid to the prisoners, collectively