The Sun.
London, England, 1840-03-31 00:00:00

LONDON:
TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 1540.

There was a considerable number of petitions for and
against the Corn-laws, presented in the House of
Lords last night, and those petitions excited a little
sparring and some exhibitions. Their Lordships are
touched. It is not in human nature to submit, un-
moved, to the contumely now heaped on the landown-
ers. They cannot help wincing under it. The Earl
of CLARENDON supported a petition for the Repeal. The
Duke of RICHMOND comp!ained of those who set the
agricultural interest against the manufacturing. Why,
then, does he make a Corn-law ? He relies on the
Scotch farmers, but they know that the Corn-laws are
not for their advantage, and will not petition for them.
Lord ASHBURTON was testy. The Earl of RADNOR
corrected him. The conversation shows that the Lords
begin to feel that every petition for the Repeal of the
Corn-laws contains a sting.
Lord FITZGERALD in presenting a petition against
the Irish Municipal Bill, avowed his intention to support
• 'which
made
the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, who
we presume means to oppoie it, reproach the Noble
, Lord with inconsistency.

A. little conversation took place on the Scotch
Church, which will interest our readers in Scotland.
The Earl of ABERDEEN reproached the Ministers with
not undertaking to settle the quarrel betwixt. the Scotch
Church and the Scotch Courts, which Lord MEL-
BOURNE. though his declaration was not so explicit as
that of Lord JOHN RUSSELL in the other House, de-
clines. The Noble Viscount sneered a little at the
obstinacy with which the Kirk and the Courts have car-
ried on the fray, and seems inclined to allow them to
settle it as they best can.
In answer to Lord WYNFORD, the Marquis of NOR-
M &Nair stated that he would confine the number of
Police Magistrates to twenty-seven, but he declined to
insert a clause to that effect in the Police Courts Bill,
which was reported.
The Bishop of ExETER postponed his motion about
the Clergy Reserves till this day.
Their Lordships adjourned at a Quarter past Seven.
In the Commons, in consequence of Mr. VILLIERS'
option being expected to come on to-day, the House
devoted an extra quarter of an hour to receiving peti-
tions concerning the Corn-laws, which were accordingly
presented in groat numbers.
In answer both to Mr. HUME and Mr. HUTT, Sir
JAMES GRAHAM doggedly refused to state the nature of
his motion concerning China, which the Right Hon.
Baronet is to bring forward on the 6th of April.
On Thursday week, Lord JOHN RUSSELL is to move
for leave to bring in two Bills to amend and continue
the Poor-law.
In answer to Sir R. PEEL, Lord JOHN RUSSELL
stated explicitly that the Government did not mean to
bring forward any measure to settle the dispute between
the Scotch Kirk and the Courts, but to wait and see
what might be done by the General Assembly.
In answer to Mr. GOULBURN, the CHANCELLOR of
the EICUEQUER said it was his intention to continue
the Assessed Taxes Composition.
In answer to Sir JonN WALSH, Lord JOHN RUSSELL
said he meant not to call Mr. Sheriff EvANS again to
the bar till after Easter.
Mr. AGLIONBY called the attention of the House to
the Ludlow Electien, and moved for leave to bring in a
Bill to legalize the proceedings, but the House was
satisfied that the proceedings
were regular, and the
motion was negatived.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the consideration of
her Majesty's message, and also moved that the Com-
mons would enable her Majesty to grant Lord SEATON
2,0001. a-year. The Noble Lord complimented Lord
SEATON very highly for his services.

Sir R. PEEL seconded the motion, and bore testi-
mony to the great civil, as well as military, merits of
Lord SEATON.