The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-22 00:00:00

CORN-LAWS.

The Duke of ARG YLL presented a petition from It.-
vertiess against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Lord R A DNOR presented several petitions from Dui -
ham, and other places, praying for a repeal of the Cori -
laws. The Noble Earl said he would take that opportu-
nitv, in the absence of a Noble Friend of his, (Earl Fitz-
william), who had given notice of it notion on the subject
of the Corn-laws for Tuesday next, to postpone the me-
tion till Thursday, the 11th of June.
The Earl of ABERDEEN presented several petitions
from several places in Scotland against non-intrusion.
• The Duke of ARGYLL presented petitions front va-
rious places in Scotland against the Clergy Reserves Ca-
nada Bill.
The &shop of NORWICH presented a petition from
Swaffham, complaining of the alarming destitution from
the want of religious instruction.
The Marquis of BRE ADALBANE presented peti-
tions against the law of patronage in Scotland.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from Troubridgc in NS iltshire praying that stock in trade
might not be rated.
Lord PORTMAN gave notice that to-morrow he
should put a question to the Noble Marquis the Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department, in consequence
of seeing a notice of the Bill which had been introduced
into the other House of Parliament on the subject.
The Duke of RICHMOND thought that the stock of
farmers ought to be rated at the same time, and in the
same Bill.

SPANISH CLAIMS.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a peti-
tion, signed J. Fox, tiho stated he was the heir-at-law of a
deceased officer, a Colonel in the 9th Regiment, and who

prayed thQ House to take some measures for obtaining the
settlement of the claims of British Officers on the Spanish
Government. The Noble Earl read the petition, which

was not heard in the Gallery, and said he was be-
sieged with those claims, and therefore felt bound to
ask the Noble Viscount to name a day on which he would
state whether the negotiations were brought to a
ch se, or whether he must resort to the only course he
could pursue, that of movity, an adddress to her Majesty
on the subject, that the claims of these unfortunate men
might be brought to a close. This petition was only one
of a great number he was daily receiving. He felt satisfied
the Commission was not satisfactory to the claimants, who
complained that while the claims on the Portuguese Go-
vernment, which the Secretary for Foreign Affairs ad-
mitted were not half so urgent as the Spanish, met their
attention, they were unable to obtain any redress.
The Duke of RICHMOND rose to call the attention of
the Noble Marquis to a part of the petition which, in his
opinion, rendered it e%pedient it should be withdrav;n, it
being the rule of that House not to receive petitions which
contained any statement of anything done by any Peer
in that House in detail. There would be great

difficulty if persons were allowed to make speeches
out of doors and introduce them in petitions.

He would suggest the withdrawal.of th<._! petition, that it
might be amended.
The Marqufs of LONDOND MCI' was willing to
withdraw the petition if it was preSSed, but the petition
only alluded to a report which he had heard, %‘hich he
(the Marquis of Londonderry) did not think was incorrect.
The Earl of CL A RENDON said the petition was
cloarly out of order, and it certainly was not the 11:st
time the Noble Marquis—and so far as he (the Earl of
Clarendon) wan concerned he was welcome to do it—had
read an;wers in the petitions to the speeches which he

had made in that House.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said the Noble
Earl was disposed to make assertions which he could nut
say was correct. He asked the Noble Earl to state when
when be bad done that of which he was accused.
The Earl of CL A R ENDO N—l do not remember the
day, but such was the fact.
Lord MELBOURNE said he had no objection to name
a day or to give the answer the Noble Marqu's required '
now. Negotiations were still proceeding, and it was
therefore fur the Noble Lord to consider what course he
would take on the subject.
The Marquis of LONDCP.':DERRY was obliged to
the Noble Viscount for his courtesy, which would relieve
him from a number of applications on the subject. He
therefore gave notice that on the 4th of June he should
move that an humble address be presented to her MAjety,
preying her Majesty to give immediate directions for the
settlement of the Spanish claims. If it should happen
that the negotiations were not at that time brought to a
close he would postpone the motion ; if they were, he
trusted the Noble Viscount would exert himself on the
subject.
The Duke of RICHMOND hoped that the Noble Mar-
quis would not have any objection to withdraw the petition
he had presented.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY withdrew the pe-
tition. _

The Earl of GALLOWAY presented a petition from
the Presbytery of Kircudbright against the intrusion of
Ministers in the Scottish Church.
FRENCH CLAIMS. _

Lord LYNDHURST rose. for the purpose of calling
the attention of the House and of the Noble Viscount
opposite to a petition connected with the due administra-
tion of justice. He believed that the Noble Viscount, in
considering the subject, would feel it his duty to accede
to the prayer of the petition. The circumstances which
gave rise to it were as follows : In the year 1818 or 1819
a convention was concluded with the French Government
by the Noble Duke oho Duke of Wellington), by which
a considerable sum of money was to be paid by that Go-
vernment for the discharge of the claims of British sub-
jects in respect to losses they had sustained by the
confiscation of their property during the revolutionary war
in France. According to the...,arxgigements made, Com-
missioners were appointed for investigating their claims,
and an Act of Parliament was passed, by which it was provided
that any claimants who were dissatisfied with the deci-
sions of the Commissioners might have the right of appeal.
ing to the Privy Council. The sum allowed by the Go-
vcrn►nent of France was larger than was neces-
sary for the payment of the first class of claims,
and accordingly it was ordered by the Treasury
that under these circumstances the second class of claim

ants were placed on the same footing with those of the first
class; and that the claims should be investigated, and
that they should receive compensation. The Act of
Parliament, however, which gave the right of appeal, ap-
plied only to claims of the first class. It was arranged
by the Treasury at a subsequent period, that the claims of
the second class should be attended to as those of the first,
and that they should equally have the power of appealing
to the Privy Council, provided they signed a document bind-
ing themselves to submit to the decision of the Council.
One of the claims of the second class was that of a Mr. Jo-
seph Warre, or -De Warre, the son of Patrick De Warre,
who claimed compensation for estates confiscated in Bur-
gundy and Champagne. In Burgundy he claimed, in con.
sequence of the estate having been purchased by his
father ; and in Champagne he claimed as the heir of, his
mother, whose property the estate was before hee'Mar-
riage. His claim was investigated by the Commissioners.
—the claim was rejected, end the party afterwards ap-
pealed, as he was entitled to do, to the Privr Council.
The case was investigated before the Privy Council, and,
after a full hearing, a Judicial Committee'rescinded the
decision of the Commissioners. Nothing could be more
precise than the decision ; and it wouletreem that, under
the circumstances, the Commissioners had nothing more
to do than to institute an inquiry as to the'amount of loss
the party bad sustained. While the matter was
under judgment, however, the Commission expired, and a
new one was appointed in its stead. The former
Commission had heard and decided the case in public, but
the new Commission adopted a different course. Parties
were called en to send in the ,particulars of their claims,
but those claims were infest gated in private, without the
hearing of Counsel. Under these circumstances an
award was made, but the parties thought that they were
entitled to more than the award granted them. No greunds
for the award were stated, and accordingly the parties ap-
plied to the COinerossioners of her Majesty's Tre..sury,
praying that the 'Commissioners might be called on to
state the motives for their judgment. The Commissioners
then stated the-grounds ef their decision, and it appeared
that they had emitted to give any compensation for a cen-
siderable portion of the estates in Burgundy, and for the
entire of the estates in Champagne. The Commissioners
afterwards rectified their award as to the estates in Bur-
gundy, but adhered to the other part of their opinion.
They did so on the grounds, that as the heir was a
native of France, the property belonged to the
mother, and the children had no claim to
it. In consequence of this decision, some of the
most eminent lawyers in France were consulted, and
they were of opinion that the mother had only a life-interest
in the pro perty, and that at her death it should descend
to the husband and his heirs. The parties wished to ap-
peal to the Privy Council against the decision of the Com-
missioners, but as the Treasury and Commissioners did not
send the matter to the Council by way of appeal the case
could not be heard. The petitioners now wished that the
case might be properly submitted to the Privy Council,
and that the matter might not be left .o the decision of the
Commissioners and the Treasury. All he was anxious for
was that the Noble Viscount opposite would take the
prayer of the petition into his consideration.
The LORD CHANCELLOR understood that the
petition prayed for a rehearing before the Judicial Com-
mittee of the Privy Council, to which he had not a right.
It appeared that the party ought to make his appeal within
three months after the adjudication, but in this case five
years had elapsed since the adjudication had passed.
The information which the Noble Lord had received
was not accurate, inasmuch as it differed very much
from that which had reached him (the Lord Chancellor),
and he had derived his information from official document,"
The Noble and Learned Lord then went into a detailed
statement of the circumstances of the case. They had the
opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown and of two emi-
nent French lawyers in their favour, and until these opi-
nions were impugned he did not think the petitioners
.1 tould take any steps in the case.