The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-09 00:00:00

Zkie -slut

LONDON:
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1841.

A message was brought down to the Lords
from her MAJESTY by Lord MELBOURNE, re-
questing their Lordships to enable her MAJESTY
to make some provision for Lord KEANE on ac-
count of his great services in India. The message
is to be taken into consideration to-day.
Lord REDESDA LE'S Copyhold Commutation
and Enfranchisement Bill was read a second
time.

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a peti-
Lon from the Earl of CARDIGAN to have Sir W.
FOLLETT, Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM, and Mr.
ADOLPHUS, as his Counsel.
The Noble Earl also presented another Report
from the Committee on Precedents, recommend-
ing that the Earl of CARDIGAN should' be allowed
to sit on a stool at the bar uncovered and without
professional fourTi
e ticketsEarl
a rl
his robes at the trial, . and that he be allowed
hisafu:iflrismelosu. friends, and admission for
case of Mr. M‘LEon
authorities of NN TICASHEL referred to the
New ir,v)rkio has been seized by the
insurrection.
said,aTl
American
m, and imprisoned on a
The i n
Nobleitheinee r(
1,,
chargericaoifi steam-boat Caroline,
d concerned,iau hlfaubreicnagustehelicealnvaa:
destruction cstitoantedoftitllaiet
hads
understood
rr
that Mr. M LEOD was not one
he
of the party concerned in capturing
destroy-
ing the Caroline. He
inquired and
MELBOURNE whether Government of
Viscount
had received
any information on the subject?
Viscdunt MELBOURNE relied
that the Go-
vernment had received information of .
M'Lron's arrest; and that Mr. Fox
7 our Mi-
nister at Washinkcton, had demanded his libera-
tion. The American Government ep i r 1*
ed that it
had no power to order his liberation, as he was
in the hands of the authorities of New York. The
Noble Viscount declined to state what steps her
Majesty's Government meant to take, but lie
assured their Lordships that everything should be
done to save the life of a British subject, and up-
hold the honour of the nation. Their Lordships
adjourned.

In the Commons Mr. SMYTHE for Canterbury,
,00k his seat. Our former announcement that he

had taken his seat at the same time as Mr. GLAD-
STONE was premature.
A new writ was issued
,for Richmond (York-
shire) in the room of Mr. SPEIRS, accepting the
Chiltern Hundreds.
Several petitions were presented, chiefly against
the New Poor-law.
Sir F. BURDETT gave notice that 11.• would in

a Committee of Sup-ply, move that a statue be
erected to Sir S. SMITH at the public expeuse.
Lord J. RUSSELL brought down to the House
a message similar to that brought down to the
Lords, relative to Lord KEANE. It is to be taken
into consideration to-day.
Lord STANLEY gave a neat and succinct his-
tory of the transaction concerning the Caroline,
in which he stated that the question was still the
subject of negotiations between the two countries,
that the Caroline had been destroyed by the
orders of our Government, and that Mr.M'LEOD,
a Sheriff of one of the counties of Canada, was
not actually present at the destruction of the
Caroline, though his life wasat this moment, per-
haps, in jeopardy. The Noble Lord asked Lord
PALMERSTON, as the negotiations on the subject
had commenced in June 1838, whether lie would
lay on the table the correspondence relative to
the destruction of the Caroline, on the night of
Dec. 20, 1837—whether the Noble Lord had
received the despatches from Mr. Fox r3ferred
to in recent accounts from the United States--
whether the Government had taken any, and
what steps, to protect Mr. M'LEOD, and whether
the Noble Lord would lay all the correspondence
on the table ?
Lord PALMERSTON admitted that Lord STAN-
LEY had handled the subject delicately and cor-
rectly, but stated that, pending the negotiations,
he thought it not expedient to lay the correspon-
dence on the table, but it should appear when-
ever the affair was closed. Her MAJESTY'S
Government, the Noble Lord said, had received
despatches from Mr. Fox ; and such of them as
had already been made public through the Ame-
rican papers he had no objection to produce,
though lie considered it contrary to all rule to
lay papers on the table concerning a negotiation
while it was in progress. The Noble Lord also
confirmed Lord STANLEY'S statement that Mr.
M'LEOD was not present at the capture of the
Caroline. He further stated that the American
Government had elected to treat this matter as
one concerning the two Governments, and
therefore was debarred from treating it as an
offence against its laws. The Noble Lord
further stated that instructions had been
sent to Mr. Fox, in anticipation of a simi-
lar case, eighteen months ago; that it would send
further instructions, conformably to its duty,
but lie was not prepared to state what they would
be. In reply to Mr. HumE, Lord PALMERSTON
added that the American Government had dis-
avowed the acts of the Americans who invaded
the Canadas, and left them, therefore, to be
dealt with by our authorities. He repeated that
the American Government had treated this as a
question between the Governments, and was not at
liberty, therefore, till the transaction was dis-
avowed by our Government, to change its
ground, and treat it on a different principle.
The American Minister had been ordered not to
press the matter.
In reply to Sir R. PEEL, Lord J. RUSSELL
said that he had understood that officers of her
MAJESTY'S navy and army were employed at the
destruction of the Caroline—that some of them
were wounded, but he had not heard, as the
Right Hon. Baronet implied, that some of them
had received pensions on account of their wounds.
Sir R. PEEL rose to put a question about Per-
sia, and in the midst of it was interrupted by
Mr. O'CoxNELL, who said, amidst great cheering,
that Mr. M'LEOD'S life was at stake, and that
whether he were right or wrong, the House
ought to declare that it would assist the Govern-
ment in preserving him.
Mr. O'BRIEN would have followed on the same
subject, .but the SPEAKER insisted on hearing
Sir R. PEEL, and the affair of Mr. IVI'LEon was
at an end.
In answer to the Right Hon. Baronet, Lord
PALMERSTON stated that on account of individuals
the satisfaction tendered by Persia had been ac-
cepted, but that there were still some points
about territory in dispute. He would lay the
communications before the House. The subject
was dropped.
Lord STANLEY'S Irish Registration Bill was
read a first time, and appointed to be read a se-
cond time on the 24th inst.
On the question that the Poor-law Commis-
sioners Continuance Bill be read a second time,
Mr. D'IsRA ELI opposed the motion. He described
the New Poor-law as a great social revolution.
There was nothing of any value in our social con-
dition for which we were indebted to Govern-
ment, but it had destroyed the parochial consti-
tution of England for a sordid consideration. In
two years he computed that the expense of the
poor would be as great as it was two years before
the present law came into operation. He ob-
jected to the Poor-law because it immured po-
verty in a prison, and compelled it to submit to
treatment fit only for criminals, and concluded
by moving to read the Bill a second time in six
months.
Mr. WAKLEY seconded the motion, and in a
long speech enforced very ably hi► objections to
the Poor-law. He contended that the new law
had made a very small saving ; that it had passed
on false statements; that the poor-rates had not
increased under the old law in proportion to the
increase in the population, and the wealth of the
country; and that the present law was harsh and
cruel, and was and would be attended with the
most frighful consequences. Mr. G. KNIGHT and
Mr. BUCK supported the second reading, and
stated that they should expect alterations in
Committee.
Mr. MUNTZ and Mr. LIDDELL supported the
amendment, the latter gentleman objecting
chiefly to the length of time it was proposed to
continue the Commission.
Sir R. PEEL spoke in favour of the second
reading. He reminded the House of the con-
dition of the labourers before the present Poor-
law was passed. He contended that the present
scale of wages proved nothing unless that was
brought home to the Poor-law. He reserved to
himself the right of opposing clauses of
the Bill. Ite objected to the long pe-
riod for which the Commission was to be
established, and lie disliked attaching burial
grounds to workhouses, for the poor preferred to
be buried in consecrated ground, on which point
the Right Hon. Baronet was. elaborately great
and lengthy. He wished the unions also not to
be enlarged. He professed himself an enemy to
abuses, and desirous to consult the feelings of the
poor.