The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-07 00:00:00

EVE!.TING EDITION

si..“,stion. What, then, bal the Scotch law said respect-
it ? It was said the present claims of tha Church
would be found embodied in the law. He was surprised
Near such a statement. In what Act could it be found ?
, was true there had been great excitement, but be be-
fed it had much subsided, and that the people were be-
coming tired of the subject. Whal he complained of was
that this Bill gave the Church and the people a power they
e•.lght not to possess, and which they would probably abuse.
I-ie thought it was only an old friend with a new face. It
was nothing more than the old Veto Law, and was not, he
thought, at all calculated to adjust the differences which
existed on the question.
The Earl of RODEN hoped that whatevar measure
might be adopted it would be such as would allay the exist-
ing differences.

The Marquis of NORMANBY said he regretted the
or.linary course should have been departed frem with re-
ap to this Bill, by taking the discussion on the first read-
+a4. He was desirous that it should not be supposed that
ad approved of the measure who did not state their ob-
jections to it on the present occasion.
The Bill was then read a first time.
LEASE AND RELEASE BILL.

On th 3 motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR this
Bill was read a second time.
PRIVILEGE OF PEERAGE.

On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR the
Bill for abolishing the Privilege of Peerage in cases of Fe-
lony was read a second time. The Noble and Learned
Lord said that in the time of Edward the Sixth an Act
had passed to give the Members of their Lordships' House
the same privilege in cases of felony which was then pos.
seascd by the clergy. In 1833 an Act was passed by which
the privilege of clergy in such cases was abolished, but no
proviEi.in ..as male with respect to the Peerage. The ob-
ject of the present Bill, therefore, was to abolish a privilege
which he was sure their Lordships would not desire to re.
tain, and to put them on the same footing in this respect
with all classes of her Majesty subjects.—( Hear, hear.)
Messengers from the House of Commons brought up a
number of Bills, of which the titles were not heard in the
gallery. _
......

The Marquis of HUNTLY presented a petition on
the subject of Church Patronage in Scotland, but the de-
signation of the petitioners was not heard.
Lord KENYON presented a petition from Sir Harcourt
Lecs, against the grant to Maynooth College ; also a pe-
tition from Derby, for the exclusion of Roman Catholics
from Parliament.

Lord POLTIMORE presented a number of petitions
fur the abolition of Courch-rates.

Lord WII ARNCLIFFE presented a petition from
the attorneys and solicitors of Taunton, for a revision of
the lAws of marriage; also a petition to the same
effect from the inhabitants generally of that town. The
Noble Lord said that on Thursday next he should present
•ome petitions to the same effect.

Loid R EDESD ALE presented several petitions
rgainst alteration of the Corn-laws., from Oxfordshire ;
also a petition from Fitzroy-square, for the removal of the
tolls on the metropolitan bridges.
The Earl t f WESTMEATH presented a petition from
the county of Antrim against Church patronage in Scot-
land.

Lord II ATII E RTON presented a petition from Char-
otte-street Chapel for the removal of the toll on metro-
politan bridges.

A number of petitions to the same effect were presented
by other Noble Lords.

The Earl of CIIARLEVILLE presented a petition
nom Enniskillen against Church patronage in Scotland.

CORN-LAWS.

The Earl of WINCHIL SE A presented petitions from
Ashford and other places in the county of Kent against
any alteration in the present Corn-laws. ,~
The Earl of FITZ W ILLIA M presented petitions for
the repeal of the Corn-laws from Arbroath and Barnstaple,
and from Bingley and Saddleworth, in the West Riding of
Yorkshire. The Noble Lord gave notice that he would,
tc-morrow, present a petition to the same effect from Leeds.
In answer to Lord ASHBURTON,

The Earl of FITZ WILLIAM said he did not mean to
go into a discussion of the general question until after
proceedings in another House, of which notice had
been given.—(Hear, hear.) But he thought it due to
the great town from which the petition same to give notice
of its presentation.
Lord ASHBURTON thought that if they were to
wait until the Bill upon the subject of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer's new project for obtain-
ing money without taxes, came before their Lordships,
the three measures, corn, sugar, and timber duties,
they would never have an opportunity of discussing
them at all ; for he was sure the good sense of the country
would prevent those measures from ever coming before
them.—(Hear, hear.) There never was a greater delu-
sion, nor a greater bubble than the project in question.
The Earl of FITZ WILLIAM wished to remind his
Noble Friend that these were new laws.—(Hear, from
Lord Melbourne.) He (Lord Fitzwilliam) was ashamed
be say that when he was a young man he voted for them,
bat his Noble Friend opposite (Lord Ashburton) could
Ibok back with pride to the firm, wise, and powerful oppo-
Alien which he gave to them, night after night, when he
mood alone against 500 united Members of the House of
Commons.—( Cheers ) His Noble Friend then rightly
called the scheme a monstrous project—( Hear, hear)._
and monstrous it would still be called by every man who
bad a drop of commercial blood in his veins.—(Cheers
and laughter.) But he was afraid that every drop of com-
mercial blood had oozed from his Noble Friend since he
had changed his character from that of a merchant and a
liberal politician to that of a great landowner and an
aristocrat.—( Cheers and laughter.) The majorities against
a relaxation and revision of the Corn-laws had boen gra-
dually diminishing even in that Hourse. Last year be
(Lord Fitzwilliam) had 42 votes in his favour, whereas
the year before he was supported only by 23 votes.—
( Hear, hear.) He was sorry that the discussion had been
so inconveniently introduced, but it had not been by him.
Lord A SIIBURTON explained. The proposition
which he opposed in ISIS was to raise the duty on corn,
in time of peace, from 603. to 80s.—( Hoar, hear.) In-
deed, a gentleman, who was now an advocate for free
trade, said at that time that 80s. would never do—( Hear,
bear)--that nothing less than 120 e. would do.—( Cheers. )
For his own part, he was satisfied that some protection
was necessary to the landed intereqr.
The Marquis of L ANSDO WNE presented petitions
from the county of Dawn for the better observance of the
Sabbath; and from other places in the north of Ireland
against Church patronage in Scotland. Also petitions
from the county of Down, praying for the better observ-
ance of the Sabbath. Also several petitions from Scot-
land- and Ireland against Church patronage in Scotland.

The M.lrquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from Portsea in favour of the Bill for removing Jewish
Di;abilitte%.

The Home then Adjourned at a Quarter to Nine.

110 USE OF COMMONS, MAr 6.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
The Coventry and Warwick Road Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Sir WM. CLAYTON presented three petitions from
plaeet in Surrey against a repeal of the Corn-laws, and
petitions from places in York, Norfolk, Buckingham, and
Glamorgan to the same effect.
Mr. G ILLON presented a petition from Aberdeen,
praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. BLENNERHASSETT presented petitions from
places in the county of Antrim, against lay patronage in
tLe Church of Scotland.
Sir G. STAUNTON presented a petition from Ports-
mouth, against the employment of dogs in drawi.ig carts
and trucks.
Measermers from the Lords brought down the Drainage
of Towns'l3tll, and the Borough Improvements Bill, to
which their Lordships bad agreed with certain amendments.
Mr. WA BUR TON presented petitions from Cum-
berland, for the revision of the Import Duties; from Nor-
folk, for repeal of the Corn-laws ; and from the Medical
Association, in favour of Mr. Hawes's Medical Re-
form Bill.
Mr. BOIS FIE L D presented a petition from the mem-
bers of a certain Dissenting College, praying for the re.
lease of Mr. William Baines, and the abolition of Church-
rates.

Mr. WODEHOUSE presented a petition from the
Guardians of a Poor-law Union in Norfolk, against the
proposed alteration in the appointment of officers of unions.
Sir li. I3ATESON presented a petition from some
place in the county of Down against railroad travelling on
the Lord's Day, and praying for a better observance of the
fr.d ; also petitions from two Psesbyterian congre.
gations in the North of Ireland, praying for the abolition
d Church patrinage in Scotland.
Mr. ROUND presented petitions from thirteen parishes
in. Essex, praying for Church Extension ' • also a petition
farina the Board of Guardians of the Saffron Walden
Union, praying for a more effectual remedy against the
fathers of illegitimate children.
Mr. M UNTZ presented a petition from a Dissenting
Congregation of Birmingham, praying for the abolition of
Church-rates.
Mr. E. BULLE r
aying that
a petition from some
place in Staffordshire, praying that no grant of public
money might be voted for purposes of Church Exlen'ion.
Mr. A. MILES presented a petition from the West
India Mere!sants of Bristol, against any alteration in the
Sugar Ditties.
Mr. BROTH E RTON presented a petition from a Dis-
senting Congregation at Leamington Priors. praying that
Vley might be permiqed to make an affirmation instead of
taking an oath. Also 13 petitions praying for a repeal of
tha Corn-laws.
Mr. DIVETT presented petitions from the various
waudrsc hot: rates.th
the city
of
Exeter, praying for the abolition of
Mr. LITTON presented et itions from various officers
of the courts of Ireland, praying
y• for compensation ire
the event of any interference taking place with their
; also, from several of the clergy of Ireland, praying
for the restoration of the supp-r.s
a i am Sir Harcourt Lees, Irishßishnpries; also,
address her Majesty beseeching :r praying
t the House to
graciously
picued to kstie her Rial Prociamation,(3)rd be
ordering the ex-
pulsion of the Jesuits from all parts of her Nhi.qity's
dominions.

Mr. ALSTON [resented a petition from A Dissenting
eougregation in Hertfordshire, praying for the abolition of
Clurch-rate, _ _

Mr. R. CURRIE presented five petitions from places
in the county of Northampton, praying for the abolition
of Church-rates and Ecclesiastical Courts, and the re-
lease of Mr. William Baines.
Sir GE O RGE GREY presented a petition praying
that greater facilities might be given for the admission of
Dissenting Clergymen into workhouses for the religious
consolation of those belonging to their congregation.
Mi. F. MAULE presented numerous petitions praying
for the abolition of lav patronage in the Church of Scotland.
Lord GEORGE LENNOX gave notice that on the
20th inst. he would move that the House should resolve
ittelf into a Committee in order to take into consideration
so much of the Report of the Naval and Military Commis-
sion as related to Marines.

Mr. LITTON gave notice that in Committee on the
Court of Chancery (Ireland) Bill he would move clauses
treating compensation to certain officers.
GILLON gave notice that to-morrow he would

mcve that the return of all sums of money paid to the
Church of Scotland, ordered on the 411 of March last,
be made forthwith.
Mr. WALLACE po;tponeri his motion f;:r taking into
consideration the petili,ni of William Leckie f:n• three or
four weeks, at the Teri:lost of several influential persons
both in awl out of the liause.
Mr. li. LUNDE gave notice of his intentio to move
for a return of the manner in which the mail, between
London and the North were earried.
CORN-LAWS.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL give notice that on to-
morrow evening on the motion that the House go into
Committee of Ways and Means being rut, he would move
the following resolution : " That it is the ()Onion
of this House that it is practicable to supply the
present inadequacy of the r,venue., by judicious
alterations of the protective and diffiqcntial duties,
without any material increase of the public
burdens; and that such course will at the same time promote
the inteicil of trade, and afford relief to the industrious
clases ; and that this House considers that such course is
test calculated to provide for the maintenance of the public
safety and the general welfare of the country."
Lord HO WICK wished to know in what manner the
amendment was to be moved ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the amendment
would be moved as he stated yesterday.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said that he supposed the
Chancellor of the Exchequer would move that the Speaker
do leave the chair, and upon that question his Noble Friend
(Lord Sandon) would move his amendment. The ques-
tion would then be, that the words proposed to be left out
stand part of the question ; in case that proposition were af-
firmed, the House would then go into Committee ; in case
it wore negatived, the Noble Lord would then move his

amendment.
Lord HO WICK said it scented to him that that
was an extremely inconvenient course, as it would
lead to two debates and two divisions. If it was
meant to take the sense of the House upon
which of the two resolutions should be adopted, it appeared
to him that instead of his Noble Friend moving the Ways
and Means, the Hon. Member for Liverpool should be
allowed precedence, and upon that motion his Noble
Friend could move his resolution, upon which the sense
of the House could be taken.
Sir R. PEEL said that of course the Noble Lord
would first bring forward the general question, which
would enable his (Sir R. Peel's) Noble Friend to take
the sense of the House on the Sugar Duties. If the Noble
Lord were to withdraw his motion, his Noble Friend would
not have an opportunity of submitting his resolutions, as
many might object to vote for his Noble Friend, if his
proposition were merely volunteered and not introduced,
in consequence of the course adopted by the Government.
He was sure the Noble Lord ( Lord J. Russell) would
adhere to the announcement which he had already made,
as to his plan of financial policy.—( Hear, hear.)
SOUTH AUSTRALIAN BILL.

On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL the Lords'
Amendmeats to the South Australian Bill were agreed to.
POOR-LAWS.

Mr. WALTER (who spoke from the front Opposition
benches) wished to ask the Noble Lord if it was his in-
tention to persevere with the Bill for the amendment of
the Poor-laws.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was his intention to
persevere with the Bill, and that he should bring it on on
the 17th of May.
Mr. WALTER would give notice that on that day he
should submit a motion to the House, the object of which
would be to arrest the further progress of that measure.
CHINA—RECAL OF CAI'T. ELLIOT.
Sir R. PEEL wished to know whether there had been
any recent arrivals from China which would enable the
Noble Lord to give the House any information as to the
present state of our relations with that country.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not say whether there
had been any arrivals to-day, but the previous arrivals
had not enabled him to furnish any additional information.
Mr. G 0 ULBURN said that information brought by
recent arrivals had appeared in the Papers of that day.
Sir R. PEEL referred to the Gazette accounts, and
wished to know if the Government had ratified the
treaty which bad been said to have been entered into be-
tween the Plenipotentiaries of the two countries.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Government had re-
ceived information of certain preliminary arrangements
which had been entered into by the Plenipotentiaries of
the two Powers. Those preliminary arrangements, how-
ever, did not appear to have been ratified by the Emperor
of China—indeed it did not appear that they had been
finally settled between Capt. Elliot and the Plenipotentiary
appointed by the Chinese Government. That arrangement
was generally divappreved of by her Majesty's Govern-
ment, but no further steps could be taken until they re-
ceived further accounts stating more particularly what that
Treaty contained.
Sir R. PEEL was desirous of knowing, considering
the distance of the scene of operations, whether hostilities
had already been disconsinued ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said a truce had been entered

into, and by the last accounts that truce had not been P;
an end to, but he could not say that hostile operations
might not be recommenced.—( Cheers. )
Mr. HUME said he wished to know whether a report
that had beat circulated was correct, namely, that the
Government had recalled Captain Elliot and appointed
Sir Henry Pottinger in his stead. The public were anxious
to know whether such was the case.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that it was true that Sir

Henry Pottinger had received the appointment of Pleni-
potentiary of China, and was about to depart immediately
for that country, Captain Elliot having been recalled.
EGYPT.

Mr. HUME wished to know if there were any de-
spatches from Egypt to the effect that matters were ad-
justed between the Pacha and Porte, as pledged by us to
be done.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was understood to say,
that he could not enter iato any account of what had
peen done recently.
CONVICTS AT WOOLWICH.

Lord MA HON said he had seen an account in the
public papers of the continued and increased mortality
among the convicts in the hulks at Woolwich, and that it
was stated that the Governer attributed this to the ac-
cumulwion together of the convicts under the di-
rectioos of the Noble Lord._( Hear.) He wished to
know if the Government had receivNl any oETcial informa-
tion of this. He also wishei to know what had occasioned
the delay in the returns on this subject two months ago.
Mr. PDX NI A ULE said that it was true that the mor-

tality had increased among the convicts at Woolwich; but
he was given to understand that this was not the case
with them only, but also with the military stationed there.
He could assure the Noble Lord that no attention would
be spared on the subject. With respect to the returns,
the Noble Lord was perhaps aware that a Judge could
not be compelled to disclose his private notes. neither
could a Coroner; but he had no doubt if the House ex.
pressed a wish to that effect, the Coroner would furnish
them with such parts of it as he should think necessary.
In reply to a question from Mr. G. PALMIER, with re-
respect to the mode of ascertaining the value of export;
and imports,

Mr. L ABOUCHERE said that with regard to the
official value, he beliived there had not been any difference
for the last fifteen yearn in the mode of calculating it.
With regard to the declared value, it was always taken
upon the declaration of the exporting merchant upon oath.