The Sun.
London, England, 1823-04-26 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COIVINIONS.

A number of petitions were presented from various places,
-proving for the repeal of the Coal Durk%
,miscoNcupTioN of LORD NORMANBY'S SPEECH.
Lord NORMANDY..-" Understanding that certain words,
which from me In the course of last night's•debate, are
liable to misconception, t bough I wonder how any such tuis.
conception can have taken place I still cannot have the
slightest hesitation to declare, that 1 did not mean to convey,
in what T then said, any imputation to the disadvantage of the
:Right non. Member for the City of Edinburgh. 'Multi did
mean to convey was this—that, however respectable the hull.
vidual may he, who is sent to Parliament as the representa.
tive of so large a population, and is ,yet chosen by so very
• small a number of electors as is to be found in the city of
Edinburgh, his ease affords one of the strongest instances that
can be adduced of what has been welt styled the mockery of
represeotarion:"—(Hear.)
Mr. W. DLINDAS was understood to say, that the
,crption under which he had laboured was not occasioned so
much by what 'the Noble Lord had himself said, as by the
representation of it which had .appeared in some of the public
journals

GAME LAWS.
Lord CRANBOTINE brought in a bill to legalize the sale
of gaine.—lt was read a first time.
Sir JOHN SLIELLEY expressed his intention of taking the
sense of the House on this bill on the second reading.
Lord CRANBOKNE then appointed Monday se nnight for
.he second reading of it.
Lord ALM OKI' presented a petition from MO respectable
•tratitlanen of Westminster, praying that some effectual legal
measure may he deVised fot the easier recovery of small debts.
The Noble Lord, in presenting it, stated that the evidence
had. been offered before the Cprumitte of which he

'hia"been Chairman, Thlly'proved the necessity of some such

measure.
After a few observations from Mr. HOBIIOII6E, who sup-
ported the prayer of the petition, it wolaid on the table, and
ordered to he printed,

pp...
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES' SILL.
Sir G. CLERK moved the Order of the Day for the third
reading of this bill.
Mr.-HUME renewed his former objections. There was no
penalty in the Bill,to prevent the old measures from being
made in future, or to compel the Excise and Customs to adopt
the new. _lnstead of beinkn Bill to promote an uniformity of
weights And measures, he looked upon it as a Itill,that Ins cal-
culated to ascertain their discrepancy, Besides, such a Bill
ought in its operation to be prospective.
Sir G. CLERK defended the Bill ; and stated, that if it
should be found defective at present, another Bill could be
subsequently introduced to amend it.—The Bill was then read
a third time.
Sir U. CLERK said, that he had been desired by the Hon.
Member for London to introduce a clause into the Bill, to save
the right of gauging to the City of London. He did not him-
self think it necessary, but he had no objection to introduce it
to satisfy the fears of the worthy Alderman opposite (Wood.)
The clause was agreed to, after a few remarks from Mr.
Alderman Woon.
The Bill was then passed, after a short conversation upon it
bet Ween Mr. Hume, Mr. D. Gilbert, Mr. T. Ellis, and Sir
J. Newport.
UNION DUTIES.

Sir H. PARNELlipresented a petition from certain inha-
bitants of Drogheda, relative to the Repeal of the Übion
"Duties. _ _ _ _

After a few words from Mr. Curwen, Mr. Wallace. Mr. C.
Hutchinson, Mr. G. Phillips, and Mr. Ellis, the petition was
laid upon the table.
Mr. BYNG presented a petition from old and new Brent-
ford, against the _Duty on Coals : also a similar petition from
Clerkenwell. . _ .

Mr. HUSRISSON presented a petition from the cotton:.
weavers of Manchester, complaining of distress, and attributing
it to the employment of machinery in the manufacture of cotton
goods. The lion. Member expressed his opinion that the re-
medies suggested by the petitioners would not be effectnaL,
He sympathized in their sufferings, but saw no method otgiv-
ing them relief ; but he trusted .that the House would take the
case into consideration.
Lord STANLEY adverted to the prayer of the petitioners
for a Committee to regulate the prices between master and
workman ; and observed, that if the wages were low, the price
of provisions was cheap. •
Mr. G. PHILIPS denied that the weavers were injured by
the use of machinery as it was applied in their trade. As re-
garded the rate of profit at present obtained, the men were in
general better off than their masters.
Mr. PEEL said, that he had received most satisfactory an.
swers to his inquiries generally into the condition of the manu-
fatturing classes.
Mr. J. MAXWELL was convinced, that since the intro.
duction of machinery, the wages of manufacturing weavers had
fallen front 30 to 40 per cent. Certainly, if the labourer was
to compete with machinery, lie ought to stand—as machinery
stood—free from taxation.
LEATHER-TAX.
Mr. HUTCHINSON presented a petition froM the Tan-
ners of Cork, praying for a further reduction of the Duties on
Leather.
Lord ALTHORP presented a similar petition from the
butchers of Northampton, complaining that the Leather-tax
prevented their getting a price for their hides.

DUTY ON COALS COASTWISE.
Mr. LUSHINGTON presented a petition against this tax
from die Mayor and Corporation of Canterbury.
BEEIt TRADE.
Lord ALTHORP presented a Petition from Sir James
Longhorn, of Northamptonshire, Bart., against certain provi-
sions contained in the new Beer Bill. The Noble Lord stated,
that Sir James Longhorn, for the benefit of the lower orders in
his vicinity, had set up a brewhouse some time since, under
permission of the Excise, in which he brewed a beer of seven
bushels of malt, to three barrels of 36 gallons each—the price
never to exceed sixpence a gallon, and no smaller quantity
than;lour gallons to be sold at once. As by the new Beer Bill
the quantity-of wall ,allowed to be employed was limited to
eight bushels in live barrels, of 36 gallons each, Sir James
Latigham_, under, that law, would no loner be permitted to
brew his beer of its accustomed strength. rite Petition there-
fore 'praytal, and Lord Althorp agreed in the suggestion, that
the brewer might be allowed to make his beer of what strength
he pleased, provided be did not exceed his price of ten pence
.per gallon. 'This course would be certainly advantageous to
the public, because beer brewed at the rate of eight bushels
to five. barrels, would be so bad that no one would drink it.—
The Petitioner, in case the House rejected his first proposition,
prayed that the provisions of the Act might not extend to abet
any brewer who was already engaged in the sale of beer under
ten pence a gallon.
The report of the Grand Jury Presentments (Ireland) Bill
was received.
The Masters' and Apprentices' Bill was read a second time.
Committed for Monday se nnight.

GAME LAWS.
Mr. GREY BENNET presented a Petition from an indi-
vidual of the name of Richard Miller, complaining of a con.
viction under the Game Laws. The petitioner complained that
the. Duke of Buckingham, with two clergymen who were Ma-
gistrates, had convicted him; the Duke sitting in judgment
upon a charge which was his own, and taking the evidence in
ar
the matteom two dills own servants. The petitioner, after
farther complaining of a trespass committed upon his lands by
one of the Duke of Buckingham's servants, concluded by pray-
ing that the (Jame Laws might be altered, and that in future
no clergymen should be allowed to act as Magistrates.
- - - -

....
Sir THOMAS BARING bore witness to the high character
of the two clericalsentlemen (their names we could not catch)
of whom the petitioner complained.
The Marquis of CHANDOS said, that the conviction had
been in all respects a fair one. The fact was, that the peti-
tioner was fond of coursing. No objection had ever been made
to his coursing. with those parties of qualified persons who went,
out in his neighbourhood ; but when he was found coursing',
with his own friends? persons not qualified, it became necessary
to proceed against hun.
Mr. 11. SUM NER said, that he thought the petition should
not be allowed to be brought up.—(Murniurs.)---lie repeated
1 his assertion, and his reason for saying so was, that the law had
provided -sufficient means of redress for the grievance com-
plained of through the jurisdiction of the Courts.
Mr. ELLICL said, that he could not-agree with the Hon.
Member; for the petition not only complained of a grievance
personal to the petitioner, but prayed for an alteration in the
laws under which he had suffered. It was couched, moreover,
in language the most unexceptionable, and the House would
-have no fair pretence for rejecting it.
Mr. C. WYNN said, that if the petition had been confined
..-to a complaint against the conduct of the Magistrates, for
which there was a remedy given to the petitioner by appeal,
under the statute, to the Quarter Sessions, undoubtedly time
practice of the House would warrant opposition to its being
brought up. As it also prayed for an alteration of the laws, it
was but right that it should be received.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS said, that the state of the game laws
was most grievous, and a gross violation of the laws of pro.
perty. He thought it essential that a complete revisal of those
laws should take place. ' ' .
Mr. HUME said, that the Noble Duke, acting as judge in
his own cause, had done that which scarcely another man in
the country would have done. He strongly objected to dietlp-
potnttnent of clergymen to the Magistracy. The duties of the
bench, the squabbles of the neighbourhood, And the liability..to
be influenced by their rich neighbours, were all incompatible
with the sacred duties of their calling. Ile highly #pproved of
these counties where the Lord Lieutenants had refused to ap-
point clergymen to the Magistracy.
After a few words from Mr. C. WYNN, Mr. S. WoRTLEY,
Mr. E. WonEtioutmE, and the Marquis of Citaxpos, the
petition was read, and laid upon the table.
Mr. G. BENNET moved for copies of the letter of Mr.
ilutchinson,to the Commissioners, respecting the Diet of the
Penitentiary, and the report on the death of Mary Brenton.—
He prefaced -the motion with various recitals respecting the
'treatment of the inmates of that establishment.
A long conversation then ensued, in the course of which,
Mr. Ilobronn vindicated the conduct of the Committee,
and stated the readiness with which they had applied to proper
' medical persons, as soon as any doubts had been entertained
respecting the nature of the disease with which the prisoners
were afflicted.
Sir JOSEPH YORKE complained of the dismissal of
Mr. Copland Hutchinson, the medical attendant of the este.
blisitnment.
Mr. W. CUURTENAY said, that gentleman's dismissal
had been occasiontal not by any opinion of his want of skill,
but by the want of temper which he had displayed in his coin-
counications with the Committee.
Mr. PEEL deprecated any imputation upon the conduct of
the Committee, to whose gratuitous exertions the public were
highly indebted. With respect to the dismissal of Mr. Hut-
&mon, it met with his decided approbation.
Alderman WOOD expressed his opinion that the swampy.
nature of' the ground on which the Penitentiary was built was
one great cause of the mortality that prevailed there; and he
contrasted the healthy state of other prisons during the last
winter, with the disease which raged in the Penitentiary, as a
proof that the cold was not the cause of the distemper.
Mr. PEEL read an extract from the report to thew that the

tnediela gentlemen ilia not attribute the production of the ass-.
ease to the situation on which the prison was built.
After a few words from Alderman WOOD and Mr. MONCY,
the motion was agreed to.
Mr. GOULBURN presented a petition from the Iligh She-
Irift'and Magistrates of the County of Carlow respecting the
employment of the poor.—Laid on the table.
The lion. Gentleman next presented a petition from the
.Clergy of the united Dioceses of Arden and Aghadoe in favour
of the Tithe-commutation Bill. lie should only say, that the
petition was most respectably signed by the Clergy of the
Diocess.—( Hear I)
Sir J. NEWPORT was extremely glad to find that the Pa-
rochial Clergy of Ireland began to feel it to be their duty, as
well with reference to their own interests as. to those of the peo-
ple at large, to state their opinion on the subject of tithes, in-
stead of leaving that subject entirely to the Episcopal Order.
The petition was read, laid on the table, and ordered to be
printed.
BEER DUTIES' BILL.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
Order of the Day for the further consideration of the report of
the Beer Duties Bill.
Lord A. HAMILTON said there were twObillsz relative to
Scotland amongst the orders of' the day, and as-he'did not see
the Learned Lord Advocate in hisplace, he wished to ask the
Right Hun. Gentleman whether it was the Learned Lord's in-
tention to bring them on to.night ? They stood much higher
on the list than the order which was now moved ; and he had
heard that the Learned Lord did not mean to take any pro-
ceeding on them to-night.
.The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated, that
it was not in his power to give any answer to the question of the
Noble Lord. The Right Hon. Gentleman then moved that
the Beer Duties' bill be recommitted.
In the Committee, the Right Hun. Gentleman stated that he
had to propose ope or two amendments of no great importance.
In page 2, the price per barrel, as inserted in the Bill, was 2111.
This was a mistake, it should have been 275. In page 4, he
meant to add a few words, relative to the consumption of beer
on the premises of those who brewed it: At present, as the
clause stood, it Might betonsumed in any out-house or garden
.adjoining the premises. If this were allowed, the whole police
part of the question would .easily be evaded. He would, there-
fore, extend the prohibitie!to gardens, outbuildings,
There was anotper clause, Which limited the distance at which
persons should be allow.ed to take buildings, for the purpose of
brewing the new inaltliquor, with reference to establishments in
which porter was brewed: It was provided by the clause, that
the malt liquor contemplated by this bill should not be brewed
within 200 direct yards of a porter brewery. But if this clause
remained, there was nothing to prevent a person taking a place
for a brew-house, though he did not mean to use it for
that purpose, nearer than within 200 yards of any building
erected or employed under the provisions of this act, which
would have the effect of' hindering the individuals who wished
to brew the new liquor from proceeding with their design. He
would therefore add to the provision, by enacting, that the new
beer should not be brewed within 200 yards of any place which,
not only at the present time, but for three months preceding,
had been entered or licensed as a porter brewery. He meant
also to add another clause, allowing the brewers to receive a
higher price than 275. per barrel, when malt and hops were so
high as to prevent the brewer from reaping any profit from the
article at that rate. The clause would give to the Lords of the
Treasury, when the price of malt and hops rose to -a certain
height, the power to authorize the brewer to demand more than
275. per barrel.
Colonel WOOD was of opinion, that it would be more use-
ful if the price were advanced a little, instead of being lowered.
He wished the Right Hon. Gentleman to raise the price, and
diminish the quantity of water. By the present plan, a quar-
ter of malt was to produce live barrels of beer, at the rate of
275. per barrel. It would be much better to raise the price to
305., and to diminish the quantity to four barrels of beer from
each quarter of malt. A good and substantial beverage would
thus be brewed at a reasonable rate. He meant, therefore, to
move that 30s. should be substituted fur 275.
Mr. MONCIC said, that by this plan there would be but
two sorts of beer—one so strong that it would not be drank by
any person, the other so weak, that it would likewise be reject.
cd. The poor man had a right to expect a good intermediate
beverage. At present the poor man paid 1M) per cent. more
for his beer than the rich man did. The latter could brew it at
home, and thus escape the duty, while the former paid 30s. per
barrel on his strong beer. The poor man, then, was at least
entitled to this advantage, that he should have an opportunity
of choosing what sort of beer he pleased. That kind of beer
which be did not want ought not to be forced upon him. lie
should have a beverage that would neither disagree with his
head nor with his stomach. The present Bill he looked up-
on as cruel to the public brewer, and nut advantageous to the
public.
After a few words front Mr. Alderman C. Sstrrit and Mr.
NEWMAN,
Mr. I3ENETT expressed his dissent from the principles of
a duty regulated solely for the higher quality of beer, the effect
of which would be to exclude the cheaper article.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he
was in 'the daily habit of receiving numerous letters on the sub-
ject of this Bill: some of them said the effect would be to de-
stroy the regular breweries, while others said it would destroy
the quality of the beverage itself. Ile strongly recommended a
trial of the Bill In its present shape : he had no doubt the ellbet
would be tO enable those who could not afibrd the higher priced
article, to have wholesome beer at a moderate rate.
Sir J. NEWPORT said that the effect upon the Irish
breweries, of a measure framed for Ireland, would throw a
light upon the present consideration.
After a few words front Mr. PYRITE PALMER, Sir ED.
WARD KNATCHBULL, and Colonel Woon,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was
fearful that some of the provisions proposed to be introduced
into the Bill, particularly those which left upon the mixed
beer the higher duty—namely, that which was payable on
strong beer—would prove, in operation, injurious to the re-
venue, as they were certainly lo principle unjust to the con-
sumer.
Mr. RENNET (of Wiltshire), Mr. MONCY, Mr. W.
SMITH, Mr. Alderman Wool), Sir JOHN SEBUICIIIT, Mr.
E. WODEHOUSE, and Mr. NEWMAN, severally delivered
their opinions on the probable effect, and on the details of the
Bill, and it was then agreed to be read a second time para.
graph by paragraph.
On the reading of the clause, which declares Omen° less a
'quantity than five barrels of beer shall be made from a quarter
of malt,
Colonel WOOD proposed as an amendment that the word
four should be inserted instead of the word five.
Upon a division the numbers were—
}or the amendment, 48 I Against it, 16 I Majority, 29.
.The clause was then agreed to, as were all the other clauses
of the Bill.
The House then resumed, anti the Report was ordered to be
received on Monday.
IRISH MILITIA REDUCTION BILL.
On the Motion that the House do resolve itself into a Com-
mittee on this Bill,
Mr. SKEFF IN GTON, after some fctv observations against
the Bill, moved as an amendment that the House do resolve it-
self into the Committee this day six months.
Mr. GOULBURN supported the Bill.
Colonel BARRY opposed die Bill as a breach of faith with
the Irish Militia.
Lord PALMERSTON contended that the provisions of the
Bill involved no breach of faith with the Militia of Ireland.
After a feW words from Sir N. COLTHURST, the amend-
ment was negatived without a division.
The House then resolved itself into the Committee.
In die Committee Mr. Skeffington proposed an additional
eiause, which was agreed-to,-the House then resumed, and the
report was ordered to he Teceived on Monday next. The Union
Duties Bill went through a Committee. In answer to a ques-
tion put by Mr. a RICE, Mr. FRANKLAND LEwis stated,
that it was In contemplation to continue the Protecting Duties
to Irish blanketting, if it should be found to come within the
description of drapery.
The House resumed.—Report on Monday.
Colonel BARRY'stated that he held in his hand a list of
witnesses that it would be necessary to summon on the approach-
ing investigation into the conduct of the Sheriff of Dublin;
but so
me of poor, that unless pecuniary assist.
ae were e
tend the House. it would not be in their power to at-
Mr. GOULBURN said he believed there was no example
of any advances being made in the first instance. The House
had the power to compel the attendance of persons, at whatever
inconvenience i he was not, therefore, prepared to say that in
this case a contrary precedent should be established.
After alew words from Sir J. NEWPORT and Mr. DALY
the motion was agreed to, and the witnesses ordered to attend
the House on Monday, the bth of May next.
The panel of the Dublin Grand Jury was also ordered to be
laid before the House on the same day.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and tire
House adjourned at OxE o'CLorx.

The planets, Venus and Jupiter,' are now
beautiful objects in the western sky, immediately after sunset;
the former setting this evening at 81 minuts after nine, the
latter at 8 minutes after ten. the planet Mercury, which on
account of its proximity to the Sun is so rarely seen, will also
he visible for nearly an hour after sunset, in the hat fortnight
of the ensiling month of May, its greatest elonoion being
on the 28th of that month, when it will set at DO minutes
after nine.