The Sun.
London, England, 1824-05-04 00:00:00

cosuiderable, a !t wee probable there would be/ great increase
in the consumption of email coal for steetn-engines.
The /louse then resumed, and the report was ordered to be
received to-morrow.

The Sheriff of London attended, and being called in, pre-
sented three Petitions from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and
Common Council of London, for leave to present Petitions for
Bills (the time for presenting Petitions for Private Bills being
elapsed), to enable the Corporation to borrow money at.the re.
duced rate of 4 per cent-, in order to pay off bonds for money
borrowed under Act of the 7th and 43d of Geo. 111., for cork.
pleting Illackfriars-bridge, and for other purposes.
The Petitions on the motion of Air. Alderman Wool? were
read, and ordered to be referred to Committees.

Mr. BERRIES brought up the Report on the Rum Duties
Bill. The several amendments were real and agreed to, and
the Bill ordered to he engrossed.
HIDES AND SKINS.
Mr. LUSH INGTON moved the second reading of the Fides
and Skins Bill.

.;
Mr. DAVENPORT opposed it, as a measure pregnant
with ruin to those concerned in the trade. lie moved as an
amendment that it be read a second time this day se'nnight ;
on which the House divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading, 27 Againgt it, 10 Majority 17
The Bill W4l then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.

• On the motion of Mr. II tTerE, it was ordere,l that it be an
instruction to the Committee to insert a clause for repealing the
acts of 43 and 40 Geo. 111., relative to the flaying of hides and
skins in London, and within 15 miles thereof.

LAW M RCHA NT.
Mr. HUSKISSON brought in a bill to amend the laws for
the better protection of r•.ierchant.,, as to factors and agents ;
which was read the first time, and ordered to be read a second
time to-morrow.

The other order* of the day were then diereed of, and the
HOLM Adjourned at 11A1.7-PAST ELIYEX 0 CLOCK-

FRENCH PAPERq.

CIIAMBKR OF DEPUTIES.
SITTING or 30TH tiLT.
The order of the day wait the Report of the
Commission upon an amendmeut referred to them
in the preceding fitting. .
M. Masson, the reporter, stated that tile amendment went to
afford to Stockholders a choice between 3 per cents. at 7.'f., and
4 per cent. at par. with the condition of no new reimbursement
previous to 1830. The commission prormeed its adoption.
M. Clauzel de Coussergues said that the amendment, as mo-
llified by the Minister of the Finances, expressed quite a ditfe-
rent thing to that intended by the mover of the original amend-
ment. M. Leroy had proposed to employ only the Sinking
Fund, whereas M. de V Hide intended to make use of financial
companies. The orator then referred to the vehemence with
which the Opposition of the !louse of Commons attacked
France with regard to the Spanish war—(Murmurs),—the tran-
quilli.y which lilina and Quiroga enjoyed in England, and
the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.— (Redoubled mu:-
murs.)-1n conclusion, he voted for M. Leroy's amendment.
31. de St. Chanians, in supporting the amendment approved
by the Commission, recapitulated tie general arguments in fa-
vour of the project.
M. de la Bourdonnaye supported M. Lerov's original amend-
ment, because he considered it his duty to 'diminish the injus-
tice of the law project. The lion. Deputy afterwardirprapos.
ed a slight alteration in the amendment ; but the proposition
was rejected.

M. a. St. Charnans proposed that the interest should be re.
duced to 43 per cent., wi'h security :-tgainxt a new reimburse-
ment until January I, 11;3:5.—Itjected.
The President. —I am about to put M. Leroy's amendment.
M. de La Ilourdonnaye roposed that the amendment should
be divided, and the sense of the Chamber taken upon the sepa-
rate articles.

The Minister of Finance opposed this method of putting
the amendment. The amendments moved in precedi.7g Sit-
tings had not been thus divided. Any lion. Deputy would
afterwards be at liberty Zi propose additions' Articles.
Gen. Foy said that the measure was of too mach importance
to be carried by assault. The law projects originated with Mi.
ousters, but the power of deliberating and deciding upon amend-
ments still remained to the Chamber, which ought not to suf-
fer itself to' be fraudulently deprived of a prerogative, which
would render all discussion useless. If there was any embar-
rassment in the deliberation, it was occasioned by the Mini-
ster's not having presented the project in separate articles. The
law project was embodied in the amendment, but ought so be
separated from it.
The Minister of Finance said, that an effort was made to
divide the amendment because it accorded with the project pre-
sented by the Government. The vote upon the entire amend-
ment would not prevent l lon. Deputies discussing amendments
not opposed to that adopted.
M. Bonnet maintained that a vote upon M. Leroy's amend.
ment would not hinder Hon. Deputies voting upon the project.
He, however, would oppose every measure tending w com-
promise the interests of the Stockholders.
Upon putting the question, it was decided that the division
should be adopted.
M. de Villele (from his placeo—in case the Chamber should
adopt the former part of the amendment, and not the other, I
cotesider it my duty to declare that the Government does not
pledge itself to adopt it thus divided.
The amendment was then put as it had been divided, and
was rejected.
M. Fouquier proposed an amendment ; but the Deputies
gradually departing. the number in the Chamber became too
few to deliberate, and the Sitting was adjourned.