The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-09 00:00:00

COUNTY COURTS.

Mr. FOX MAU LE move] that the further pro-
ceedings on eli Bills for the recovery of smAil debts be
stayed till after the 25th of April, in order to afford
time for bringing in a general measure on the subject.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND said the House bad
had patience for several years in expectation of a
general measure, which had not yet been brought in.
As the Bill which he (Mr. Alderman Copeland) was
conducting through the House had already made consi-
derable progress, he hoped the Right llon. Gentleman
would make an exception in favour of the Stoke-upon-
Trent Small Debts B 11.

Mr. FOX MAULE said his object was to save the
Farties further expense, and he could not make an ex-
ception in favour of any locality.
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. HURST presented a pe:ition from Salop against
the Poor-law Amendment 13:11.

Mr. EASTHOPE presented a petition from 2,640
inhabitants of Leicester in favour of Lord Morpah's
Irish Registration Bill vlio a petition from the
Mayor and Corporation of Leicester in favour of the
Bill for the relief of persons professing the Je vish reli-
gion : also a petition from the same borough in favour
of the Bill for extending the Jurisdiction of County
Courts ; also a petition from the Roman Catholics of
Barkhana against the Jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical
Courts, and for the liberating of Mr. Baines : also a pe-
tition from Lincoln, egainst the imprisonment of Mr.
Baines, and praying for the extinction of the jurisdiction
of Ecclesiastical Courts.

Mr. Allerman COPELAND presented a petition
from Stoke-upon-Trent, aga'nst the Poor-law• Amend-
ment Bill.

Sir C. STYLES presented a petition from 1,032
illlabitants of Donegal, against Lord Morpeth's Irish
Registration 13;11.
Mr. PARKER presented five petitions from places
in Buckinghamshire in favour of Church Extension.
Captain PECHELL presented several petitions

from places in the county of Sussex against the eighth
section of the Poor-law Amendment Bill, which would
abolish the Gilbert unions.

Mr. W. EVANS presented a petition from a p'ace
in aayshire, praying that s.ome alterations be made in I
n
the Poor-law Amendment Biil.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented a petition from
Birmingham, with a similar prayer.
Mr. 11. 'l'. HOPE presented two petitions from
Gloucestershire in favour of Chinch Extension. Also
a petition from the Birmingham and Gloucester Rall-
tay Company against certain clauses in the Railway
Amendment Act. Also a petition, which was read at
the table, against certain clause; in the Poor law Amend-
ment Bi 1.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE presented petitions from
N tut, in the county of Meath, and from other places in
Leland, in favour of Lord Morrth's Registration of
Voters Bill ( Irel ind) and against Lord Stanley's.
Sir G. GREY presented a petition to limit the powers
of the Poor-law Commissioners.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a petition from the
county of Devon, praying for an alteration in the Poor-
laws. Also a petition, praying for Church Extension.
Mr. GREENE presented a petition from the Lan-
caster Railway Company, against certain clauses in the
Railway Amendment Act.
Mr. HINDLEY presented a similar petition from
the Bristol and Gloucester Railway Company.
Mr. W. DUNCOMBE presented a similar peti-
' fon front Cambridge in the North Riding of York-
shire. Also petitions from Halifax and another place
in Yorkshire, signed by 5,000 persons against the Poor-
laws and Poor-law Amendment
S;r CHARLES BROKE VERE presented a
petition from an individual against the Southwark Im-
provement Bi!l, No. 2.
Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND brought in the
North Midland Railway Bill, which was re ul a first
and ordered to be re ul a second lime to-morrow.
WEST INDIA MAILS.

Mr. FRESHFIELD gave notice that he should
to-morrow, ask the Chancellor of the Exchequl.,
whether, since the commencement of the Session, any
Government abed bad been employed at Dartmouth
for the purpose of ascertaining the propriety of making
that place the port for the departure of the West India
Mails.
Mr. GROTE gave notice that on Tuesday, the 231,
he would submit a motion to the House upon the sub-
ject of the land fund and finances of the colony of New
South Wales.
Mr. C. BULLER begged to ask the Honourable
Member for Pcnryn and Falmouth whether it was his
iLtatrion to bring forward any motion with respect to
the removal of the Falmouth packets.
Mr. FRES lIFIELD said it had been his intention
unt,l that day to bring forward a motion upon
the subject on Thursday next. Finding it quite
impossible, however, that the papers would be
delivered by that day, and thinking it would be unfair
to bring forward his motion unless they were de-
livered, he had determined to
_bring it forward as
soon after that period as possible.
RAILWAYS.

Sir R. PEEL wished to ask the Right Hon. Gm-
tleman, the President of the Board of Trade, whether
he had made uphis mind to apv
inquire int a Select Com-
mittee to into the operation of the 11th clause
of the Railway Act, conferring a general discretionary
pone, on the Board of Trade over Railways.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that since he last ad-
dressed the House on the subject he had been in com-
munication with parties connected with railways, and
as he found those gentkmen intended to confine the
evirence within limits which gave him hopes that the
inquiry would not be so protracted as to defeat his
object, that some definite measure should he passcd
this Session, he was quite willing to accede to the
suggestion that had been made for the appointment of
a Committee. He would therefore give notice that
i
he would move t!'e appointment of a Committee, 00c
he intended to propose the same Committee as sat
last Session upon this subject.
PO 0 R-L A WS.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL (who spoke in so low
a tone of voice as to render it very difficult to hear

what Le said) stated that berme moving. the House I
should go into Cemmittee pro forma on the Poor-
law Amendment Bill, as ha intended to propose
certain alterations, it might be convenient fer him ti
sta'e some of the amendments that were of the ,greatest
import agcy. With respect t r the duration of the Cam.
mission, he propose' that, the blanit should be filled up
by - inserting five years instead of ten.—(Hear, hear.)
With respect to another part of the Bill, there had been
a great deal of apprehe-ision expressed, which he
thought was not occasioned by the terms of the Bill—
it was with respect to the operation of local acts. Ile
wished to amend the Bill, and to state (a; we under-
stood) that tee Poor-law Commissioners should have
the same power with respect to local acts as they had
by the original Poor law Amendment Bilh There teas
another clause of the Bill which gas- power to jinn
different unions together for the purpose of t'ii•
management of insane and infant pane. T. c
Poor-law Commissioners' proposition
.was, that
persons who were perfectly destitute from mental
incapacity shoull t ken into the union. Now
he proposed. to confine that almission to insane poor
beloaring to the different unions,who were chiefly idiots, or
who might be dangerous from the want of confinement.
He further proposed that in any union where one-fifth
of the board of guardians should refuse such an expense,
it should not be acted upon ; it would, therefore, be in
the power of one-fifth of any board to prevent the clause
from being acted upon. With respect to another point
adverted to by the Right Hon. Baronet, viz,, the
propriety of having burial grounds for the special pur-
pose of the workhouses, he did not intend to propose
that such burial grounds should be institute", but et tlie
same time he found that complaints had been made
both by clergymen and those persons in the management
of burial grounds, not against the burying of their own
poor, but against the burying in their crowded grounds
of the casual poor who died in the workhouses. To re-
medy that he proposed that a power should be given
to unions to contribute towards the enlargement of
churchyards. He would therefore move that the Bill
b‘ committed pro Anna, with the view of taking it into
consideration on Friday se'nnight.
Sir It. PEEL hal heard the Noble Lord with great
satisfaction. He was glad that he intended to propose
to limit the duration of the powers of the Commission
to tine years. It gave him great satisfaction also that
the proposal for attaching burying-grounds to %yolk-
houses had been abandoned. There was one point of the
Noble Lord's explanation that might appear obscure—
with respect to those institutions for the education
of the infant poor. The Noble Lord said, that if
one-fifth of the guardians objected to tie expense then
it would not be incurred. Suppose there were three
millions proposed to establish such an institution, would
the dissent of one-fifth of the board of geardians of
any one of the unions prevent the clauses from being
acted upon ?
Lord J. RUSSELL—Ye: ; it would prevent the
extension of the clauses to such union.

\VAKLEY felt sure that the proposed amend-
ments would give much pleasure out of doors. He
trustA thi.t. as the Bill was now to be so modi-
fied us to make it more agreeable to the
people, the Noble Lord would not hesitate to
make two Bills of it—one to continue the Commission
for five years, and another to perfect a law to come
into operation when the Commission should cease.
He feared that at the expiration of the five years there
would be a propositon to renew the power of the Com-
missioners for flue y, ars more. What he desired was
that the law should be so constructed that it should woi k
without any Poor-law Commissioners, because peal le
out of doors generaLy felt that they were an excuse
for eery kind of abuse. He would remind the Nobl
Lord also that he had received several depu:ations from
influential bolt: s of medical practitioners rt spectio,g ti e
medical department of the Poor-law Bill. The Noble
Lord had not intirnat••d that it sv,s his intention to in-
troduce any change with respect to that department.
Several proposals had been submitted to the NoVe
Lord for the introduefon of elluses of great
im-
portaace, and as it was the Noble Lord'; intention
to remodil the Bill, he did trust that the int2.rest, of the
poor, as regarded medical relief; would not be forgotten.
There was a very influential body in that House,
who were disposed to support the proposition, which he
hoped would have the sanction of the Nol:1 Lord's
authority.
In answer to Mr. W. Duneornho, Lord JOHN
RUSSELL said that it was his intention to include
the Gilbert unions.

In answer to Mr. ORMSBY GORE,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL sail that as regarded local
Acts he meant to reserve the power, which was never
given by the Poor-law Amendment. Act. With respect
to the observations of the Hon. Member for Finsbury,
on the subject of medical attendance it appeared
that a very great alteration had been made by the
boards of guardians in that department, and he wor hi
rather have further improvements on that head than
make it the subject of special enactment.
In answer to Mr. GRIMSDITCH,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said there was no inten•
tion to reduce the size of the unions.
Sir DE LACY EVANS said there was another
point to which ho wished to call the attention of the
Noble Lord. He wished to know if it was the inten-
tion of the Noble Lord to restrict st'll more the power
of proxy and plural voting?
Mr. O'CONNELL wished to suggest to the Noble
Lord the propriety of arrangements being made to
enable paupers to attend their own place; of worship.
Lan: J. RUSSELL made some observation in reply,
which we could not catch. The Noble Lord scented to
require the Hon. and Learned Member to explain his
meaning more fully.

Mr. O'CONNELL said that what he meant. was,
the propriety of furnishing facilities to the paupers for
attending their own places of worship.
LORD KEANE'S ANNUITY.

On the Order of the Day for the third reading of
Lord Keane's Annuity Bill being road,
Mr. HUME said that he would negative the third
reading of the Bill. He could assure Hon. Members
that when such a 13111 as the present—one that was so
objectionable—was introduced, it ought to be marked
in every way that was Possible by the disapprobation of
the House. He felt that he had a dety to perform, and
whether it was pleasing or displeasing to Hon. Members,
he would perform it. He should say that the reward
was disproportionate to the service. Cie icing a Peir,
and rendering it necessary to support the rank of a Peer
by a pecuniary grant, was a measure highly improper,
Particularly i❑ the present stiAe of our finances. The
amount voted i❑ the present instance would
maintain one hundred poor families fbr fifty years to
come.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, he
►oust say that the present Bill ought not to meet with
the support of the Huusc. He hoped that the num-
ber of Members--seventy-seven—would teach Minis-
ters not to bring in a similar measure in future to that
House. He would negative the third reading of
the Bill.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divide ], when there appeared—
For the third reading
Against it

Mrjority f)r the third reading —63
The B;11 was then read a third titre, and on the
luei.tion that it do pass,
Sir R. INGLIS wished to call the attention of
the house to the claims of another galla,t officer, who
in another part of the world had obtained victories
equally as glorious and beneficial to the country as the
splendid achievements of Lord Keane, but to whom
no reward or promotion had been given. Ile alluded
to Sir F. B. llead, to whose valour and exertions
Eugl Ind owed Canada.
The Bill then passed.