The Sun.
London, England, 1840-02-20 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

sicn.

Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition from For
far, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR presented numerous
petitions from Dumfriesshire against the intrusion of
ministers into parishes without the consent of the pa-
rishioners.
On the motion of Col. ANSON, the Birmingham
and Wyrley Canal Union Bill was read a second time
and ordered to be committed.
Lord ALBERT CONYNGHAM presented a
petition from Canterbury;complainine•b that the Standing
Orders had not been complied within respect to the
Canterbury Pavement Bill.
Mr. GROTE presented petitions from two congre-
gations of Dissenters in Northampton, praying for the
abolition of Church-rates, and for the release of John
Thorogood.
Lord Ingestrie, Mr. Duffield, Mr. Dimsdale, and
other Members, presented numerous petitions in favour
of Church Extension.
THE CASE OF PRIVILEGE.
Lord ALBERT CONYNGHAM presented a
, petition from Canterbury, praying the House to vin-
dicate its own privileges in the case of the Sheriffs of
London and Middlesex, and to extend the Municipal
Reform Bill to the City of Lonlon.
Mr. D'ISRAELI presented a petition from John
Joseph Stockdale, which, he said, had been put into his
hands, complainingof the treatment which the petitioner
had received, and praying that be might be permitted to
plead his own cause and that of the Sheriffs at the bar
of the Housa on Thursday next (this day).
The petition was ordered to be laid on the table.
CO RN-LAWS.Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented several
petitions from places in the West Riding of Yorkshire,
praying for the abolition of the Corn-laws.
CASE OF FROST.
Mr. DENISON presented a petition from Glasgow,
numerously signed, in favour of John Frost.
Lord HENNIKER presented petitions in favour of
Church Extension.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from
Clerkenwell, praying a free pardon to Frost, Williams,
and Jones. .
Mr. LITTON presented a petlion from some officers
of the Dublin corporation, praying for compensation, in
case the Municipal Bill passed.
On the motion of Mr. S. HERBERT, the Ames-
bury and Kennett Road Bill was read a second time.
Mr. CO LQUHO UN presented several petitions
for Dundee and other places, against the intrusion of
ministers into the Church of Scotland.
Mr. Alderman HUMPHERY presented a petition
from Aldgate, praying for the liberation of Mr. Sheriff
Evans.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a peti-
tion from Eilnburgb, signed by the Lord Provost, Dr.
Chalmers, and upwards of 13,000 of the inhabitants of
Edinburgh, against the intrusion of ministers, and pray-
ing that some legislative measure might be introduced
for the purpose of asserting the rights of the Church
of Scotland, and restoring that harmony which had
hitherto existed in it.
PRINCE ALBERT'S ANSWER TO THE
ADDRESS.
Lord SEYNIOUR brought up the Answer of Prince
Albert to the Message of Congratulation delivered to
his Royal Highness yesterday from the House of Com-
mons. The Answer was as follows :—" I return the
House of Commons my warmest thanks for the Mes-
sage which you have now delivered. I learn with
lively satisfaction their approbation of the choice her
Mijesty has made, and it will be the study of my life
to justify the favourable opinion which you have ex-
pressed."

- Sir E. SUGDEN presented petitions from the dio-
cese of Ripon, from North Staveley, Chergood, and
Boroughbridge, in favour of Church Extension.

-----------
COPYRIGHT BILL.
Mr. Sergeant TA LFOURD presented a petition
in favour of the Copyright Bill, signed by several
eminent authors, and also the principal publishers in the
metropolis, including Mr. Croley, Horne, Thomas
Moore, Milman, Sir Francis Palgrave, Lockhart, Sa-
muel Lover, Charles Dickens, and Rogers, and among
the publishers, it contained the names of Longman,
Moxon, Fraser, Colburn, Bentley, and others.
Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Charles Coote
until the Bth March, to Sir George Crewe and to Lord
George Cavendish for one month, and to Mr. Robert
Ingham to go the circuit.
Mr. E WART gave notice, that on Thursday, the
27th inst., he should move for a Select Committee on
the School of Designs Bill.
Mr. LIDDELL gave notice, that on the same day
he should move for certain returns relating to Sir John
Newport.
Mr. ORD moved that all Members contained in the
panels on Election Committees, do attend on Thurs-
day, the 19th of March, the day fixed for the Corn-
rnittees for the boroughs of Ludlow and Ipswich.
Lord G. SOMERSET was willing to agree to the
resolutions of the Hon. Member, in order that they
might see how they worked ; it would by no means
form a binding precedent. Suppose a Member were
absent was he liable to be taken into custody at once,
or would his absence be reported to the House ?
Mr. ORD said if a Member were absent for one
hour he would be liable to be taken into custody ; if
absent for three hours, then his absence must be re-
ported to the House.
Sir T. FREMANTLE thought it absolutely ne-
cessary to have all the Members of thel panel present
on the Wednesday ; the House would then know whe-
ther any Member wished to be excused, and might judge
of the reason.
Mr. SANFORD said the resolution was to be
printed with the Votes, but Hon. Gentlemen were not
to attend for about, three weeks. In the multiplicity
of business in the House, it might readily escape their
memory. He thought means ought to be taken far re-
freshing their memory, nearer the time they were to
attend.

Sir. E. KNATCHBULL thought a more conve-
nient day might be appointed, on which the attendance
of Members would be required.
Sir HENRY HARDINGE thought that one
mode of securing attendance on the Friday would
be, that on the Thursday the whole of the
panel should attend, and the names be called over, in
order that it might be clearly ascertained whether they
would be present or not.
Sir E. SUGDEN observed that if the House issued
an order for their attendance, it would be imperative,
and those Hon. Members would be compelled to at-
tend on the Friday. If any accident occurred before
the Friday by which they would be prevented attend-
ing, common sense would tell them to send to the House
before that day, begging to be excused attending.
Mr. ORDE said he intended to propose that notice
should be issued with the Votes on Monday 24th Febru-
ary, Monday 2d March, and Monday 9th March.
Mr. GOULBURN thought it would be advisable
that the Members should attend on Thursday. The
whole Committee might otherwise be obliged to put
off its proceedings. That would be a very great incon-
venience, while there would be very little in Members
coming up on Thursday. •
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE thought that
Thursday should be appointed as the latest day. He
should even have preferred Wednesday for the attend.
ante of Members, if the House were of ,that opinion.
Dr. LUS,HINGTON said that it appeared to him
that they could not make Friday the time for the at-
tendance of Members, while they should have to ex-
cuse themselves, if they found it necessary, by one o'clock
on that day.

Mr. BARNEBY said that he also thouttht it neces-
sary that Members should attend on Thursday.
Mr. MILES did not agree with the Hon. Member
who had just sat down.

Tic question was at last agreed to thus :—" That
ih; Members on each panel attend on the 12th and

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FBA. 19.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
The annual returns from the Court of Bankruptcy
were presented at the bar.
The Garboldisham (Norfolk) Inclosure Bill was
read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
Mr. MAUNSELL presented a petition from a
parish in Middlesex, in favour of the liberation of the
Sheriffs ; a!so a petition from 13rompton, and other
parishes in the same county, in favour of Church
Extension.
Colonel CONOLLY presented a petition from the
presbytery of Raphoe, complaining of the present'state
of Church patronage, and praying for its alteration.
Sir EDWARD PHILIMORE presented a peti-
tion from a parish in Kent, in favour of Church Eaten-

Mr. FITZPATRICK presented a petition from a
parish in the Queen's County, praying for Municipal
Reform, and an extension of the franchise in Ireland.
Lord COLE presented a petition from Middlewick,
praying for a withdrawal of the grant to Maynooth.
Mr. BRUGES presented a petition from a parish in
Somerset, in favour of Church Extension.
Mr. STRUTT presented a petition from a parish in
Derby, to the same effect.
Mr. PLUM PTRE presented a petition from Cran-
brooke, and two other parishes in Kent, to the same
effect.