The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-02 00:00:00

eginst Church-rates, Church Extension, the further im- i
prisonnaent of JohnThorogood, Ecclesiastical Courts, and
see employment of climbing boys in sweeping chimneys. i
Mr. SMITH presented several petitions from Nor- I
wich, and other places in Norfolk, of which some were
against Church Extension.
Mr. SHEPHERD presented petitions from Frome
against the employment of climbing boys in sweeping
chimneys, and against the opium trade with China.
Mr. W. DUNCOMBE presented petitions frcm
York against alteration of the Core-laws. in favour of
" Church Extension and against the application of the
Csuada Clergy Reserves Fund to any purposes but those
of the Established Church of England and Ireland.
-Mr. DENNISTO UN presented four petitions from
places in Lanarkshire, against grants of public money
for extension of the Established Church.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented petitions from Sid-
mouth, in favour of Church Extension : and from Tor
quay, again-t the grant to the College of Maynooth.
Mr. THORN ELY presented two petitions from
Dissenting Congregations in Wolverhampton, in favour
o' the abolition of Church-rates, an] against any grant
of public money for Church Extension. The Hon.
Member also presented a petition, praying that stock
in trade might not be rated to the poor.
Mt. CLAY presented a petition from St. Ann's,
Linseshouse, atsaiast the rating of stock in trade.
Mr. MI LNE presented petitions from different
parts of Yorkshire, in favour of Church Extension.
The Hon. Member also presented a petition in favour
of the Chimney Sweepers Bill.
Mr. GROTE presented a petition from the Lord
Mayor arsd Aldermen of the City of London in favour
of the Chimney Sweepers Bill. The Hon. Member
also presented a petition from a person named Sweet-
ing against the Copyright Bill. The Hon. Member
also presented three petitions against any grant for
-Church Extension, and a petition from Bermondsey in
favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. TOWNLEY PARKER presented a petition
,Prom the Mayor and Corporation of Preston against the
tountv Comeobulary Bill.
Sir E. WILMOT presented a petition from Kenil-
worth in favour of the Chimney Sweepers Bill.
Mr. PRYME presented similar petitions from places
in Cambridge and Essex.
Petitiotts of a similar nature were also presented by
Sir G. Grey from Devonport, by Mr. A. White from
places in Sunderland, by Mr. Mackinnon from Lyrning-
ton, and by Sir R. Inglis from the clergy of London and
Westminster. The Hon. Baronet also presented several
petitions, praying for increase in Church accommodation.
Mr. E WART presented petitions from various Dis-
senting congregations, against any Parliamentary grant
to the Church of England.
Mr. HUME presented similar petitions, also a pe-
• tteiou signed by 1,790 inhabitants of the City of Kil-
kenny, against the Irish Registration Bill. The Hon.
Member also presented petitions from the working-men
of Dumbarton, Glasgow, and other places, in favour of
Universal Suffrage, and stating that taxation without
representatioo was unjust, oppressive, and tyrannical.
The HoN. MEMBER also presented a petition from the
medical professors in Kilkenny, praying the House to
adopt measures for placing that profession in a respect-
ahle position—(A laugh)—and from Clerkenwell,
Globe Road, and Newington, praying for the total and
immediate repeal of the Corn-laws, which the petitioners
said were the fruitful source of poverty, disease, and
misery.
Colonel J. WOOD presented widows from parishes
in Middlesex praying for Church Extension, against the
rating of workhouses, and the rating of stock in trade.
Mr. J. PARKER presented a petition from Shef-
geld
in favour of the Bill for preventing boys being
employed in the sweeping of chimneys.
Petitions to a similar effect were presented by Mr.
Mildmay, Lord R. Grosvenor, from Chester ; Mr. P.
Scrape, from Stroud ; and Mr. Hutt, from Hull.
Mr. P. SCROPE presented a petition from the Pro-
testant Dissenters of Stroud, praying that no public
money might be granted for the further extension of
the Church.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented three petitions
with a similar prayer.
Mr.PATTISON presented petitions from the Wards
of Cripplegate, Bishopsgate, Vintry, Cordwainers, and
Bridge, praying for the total
Sand immediate repeal of
tag Corn-laws.
Mr. BOLLING presented a petition from Bolton,
preying for Church Extension.
1 Mr. DARBY presented similar petitions from Suf-
folk ; also petitions against any further grant to the
College of Maynooth.
Mr. BRAMSTON presented three petitions from
Essex in favour of Church Extension, and one praying
for the exclusion of Roman Catholics from Parliament.
Mr. J. MARTIN presented a petition from the
members of Highbury Chapel, Cheltenham, against any
grant of public money in support of the Church Eats-
blitmr. ent.
LUSHINGTON presented similar petitions front
the counties of Sussex, Essex, Bucks,and Berkshire.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE presented a petition from
Nottingham in favour of the Chimney Sweepers' Bill.
Alderman HUMPHERY presented a similar peti-
tion from the borough of Southwark.
Mr. ALSTON presented a similar petition from
Waterford, and one from the chimney-sweepers of
London against the Bill.
Lord MAHON presented a petition from Scar-
borough, in favout of the Chimney-sweepers' Bill, and
a petition against the County Constabulary Bill.
Mr. WARD presented a petition from the Dissenters
elf Sheffield, praying for the abolition of Church-rates,
the release of. John Thorogood, and against any grant
for Church Extension ; also a petition from the
!Armagh of Stroud for the abolition of Ecclesiastical
tribunals, and against the establishment of a dominant
Church in the Colonies.
Mr. HAVES presented seven petitions from dif-
ferent plAces against any grant of publie money for the
purposes of Church Extension.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN presented petitions from various
parishes in the county of Limerick against the Bill for
permitting the importation of foreign flour into Ireland.
1- Mr. BENJAMIN WOOD presented a petition from
1 the Baptist eongregation at Bridlington praying the
I.
House nos to consent to any grant of public money
for the purposes of Church Extension.
Mr. HOPE presented a petition from the Bishop,
1 Deer), and Clergy of Gloucester, against children being
employed in sweeping chimneys.
Lard SANDON presented a petition from the Mi-
t nisters and Elders of the Scottish Church in Lancaster,
1 praying the House to take into consideration
1 -the present state of the Church of Scotland, and
to pass some measure giving effect to the prin-
teiples of Non-intrusion, due regard being at the same
time hadto the rights of the patrons ; also a petition from
Yonhall, Staffordshire, in favour of Church Extension ;
also a petition from several tobacco manufactures of
Liverpool, in favour of the Bill for regulating the menu-
-1 fectaring of tobacco ; also a petition front Mr. Percival,
a tobacco manufacturer, stating various objections to
the proposed alterations in the tobacco-laws.
NOTICES OF MOTIONS.—CORN-LAWS.
1 Mr. VILLIERS, in consequence of a notice of the
Hon. Member for Essex, of a motion relative to the
1 e.ffeirs of China, on the 12th of May, would postpone
the motion of which be had given notice with respect to
tho Core-laws front the I.2th to the 14th of May.
EMIGRATION.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN gave notice that he should brinr,
i forward his emigration resolutions on the 12th of May.°
—(A laugh.)
Mr'. HEAVE gave notice that on Tuesday next he
wowd move for a Select Committee to inquire into the
several, duties levied on imports,into the United Kingdom,
am.; the nature of such duties ; also that he would move
at an early period that an address should be presented to
her MAjesty, praying her Majesty to order that there
sllouM be laid before the House a copy of the Repor
of the. commercial affairs of Egypt and Syria by Dr.
Bowrmz; also that he would on Monday put a question
tathe Secretary forForeignAffaire, if he could get him in
the House—(A laugh)—with regard to the interference
of the British Government with the affairs of Mehemet
Ale and whether any orders had been issued by her
Majesty's Ministers for reprisalsagainst Mehemet Ali,
or the detention of two vesselsasrerrted in the papers,
ae'd whether Ministers, or Lord
insEogn,pyt,.had given
arremdri.revetioiiebrelagtaivste tonotthiceeaffairs oe
that when the House re-
soleed itself intro Committee on the 1: eellancous Esti_
1
sautes he woull aka a motion relative the proceed-
-44.0 of the Emigration Board.
ilr. BARNEBY gave notice that he
Commissioners
that the returns of the Poor-law would'nave
tliade on the 37th of February last should be
Laid before the Hsouse forthwith.
Colonel WOOD begged leave to ask her Majesty's
Ministers if they had any information to offer with re-
spect to the mode of rating stock-in-trade, and the
course which parish officers were ordered to pursue
in rating such property ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that Govern-
ment, as far as he was aware, did not propose
to adopt any measure on the subject. As to the course
which parish officers were to pursue he had only to say
that no new law had been introduced by the
Poor-law 'Commissioners, who merely ordered the
enforcement of the 431 of Elizabeth. It was
quite a mistake to suppose that there had her-n
any new law framed. Ever since the 46th of Elizabeth
personal property had been liable to be rated, thought
for general convenience it had been held better to rate
only real property. The amount of the rate was not
increased, only the mode of apportionment would be
al' ered.

Colonel T. WOOD was anxious to know from the
Learned Gentleman whether it was trurt that rates
would be held invalid which did not include
personal
property.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, said the Court of
Queen's Bench had held that rates would be invalid
which did not include Stoek-in-Tra,le, but that
was no
new law. The law had always been to that effect.
WEST INDIA MAILS.
Mr. FRESHFIELD wished to ask the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer whether a new port of departure

for the West India Mails had been agreed upon, and,
as a mere negation to that question would not satisfy
his constituents, he begged further to ask whether the
deputation of Cornish Members who had waited upon
the Right Hon. Gentleman, had correctly understood
him to state that the Government would not decide
on the question until information had been
obtained from disinterested parties ; that oppor-
tunity would be given to the different ports to
support their own case, and that instructions to the
Commissioners would be laid on the table of the
House.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
his communication was, that it was the intention of the
Government, connected with the Navy and the Post-
office, and utterly uninfluenced by the interests of the
different ports, to inquire and to report to the Govern-
ment, and as soon as instructions had been
issued they would be laid on the table. One of the
Commissioners appointed was Sir James Gordon ;
another was the Assistant-Secretary to the Post-office ;
and the third was a gentleman connected with the
mercantile marine ; and their instructions would be
framed by the Admiralty, and referred to the Treasury.
Mr. FRESHFIELD asked if the different ports
would be able to state their own case before the Com-
missioners ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said the Hon. Gentleman might rely upon it that every
port would have full opportunity of representing its
own case, but the instructions were not framed ; when
they were, he would have no objection to lay them be-
fore the House. The ports to which the inquiry woud
apply were Falmouth , Devonport, Plymouth, South-
ampton, and Portsmouth.
Mr. G. W. HOPE inquired whether the question
relative to Jersey would also be referred.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER re-
plied that when those gentlemen were appointed he
should call for their opinion on that particular point.
MENAI BRIDGE.
An HONOURABLE MEMBER OR the Opposition side
of the House asked whether the Under Secre-
tary for the Home Department had seen a letter
in the Morning Herald, addressed by Lord Western to
Lord Melbourne, relative to the perilous state of Menai
Bridge, and whether it was the intention of the Go-
vernment to take any steps with respect to it.
Mr. F. MAULE could give no information on the
subject. He did not read the Morning Herald, but
be would make inquiry into the matter.
NAPLES.
Lord MA HON seeing the Noble Lord the Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs in his place, wished to ask him
whether any official intelligence had been received of
those measures of reprisal which, as the House was in-
formed on a previous occasion, had been directed to be
taken against the Government of Naples.
Lord PALMERSTON had received, yesterday, a
despatch, dated the 17th of April, stating that reprisals
had commenced, and that the Hydra was then in the
Bay of Naples.

MAINE BOUNDARY.
Mr. HUME begged to ask whether her Majesty's
Government were now able to state in what condition
the negociations respecting the Maine Boundary were ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I have some doubt how
far it is consistent with my duty to answer the question
which the Hon. Gentleman has just put to me ; but as,
no doubt, there is considerable anxiety upon the sub-
ject, and as papers upon the subject have been pub-
blished in the United States, I think it would be desir-
able to give a general outline of the state in which the
question at present stands between the United Stet s
and this country relative to the Maine boundary. The
House will recollect I stated there were two very dis-
tinct questions, the one was the general question of the
boundary, arising out of the treaty of 1783, and the
treaty of Ghent ; and the other was with respect to the
interpretation of our agreement for the sake of pre-
serving jurisdiction and possession undisturbed by the two
parties made in the course of the spring of 1839.
With respect to the former part of the subject, a pro-
position was made by my Noble Friend the Secretary
fo'r Foreign Affairs, in the name of the Government, last
year, and the reply to that was a counter proposition of
a totally different nature being made by the Govern-
ment of the United States. At the same time Com-
missioners were appointed by the Government of Great
Britain, who had surveyed the disputed country, and
had arrived in this country in January last. Their Report
was received only a few days ago, it contains
matter of very considerable importance, and is now un-
der the consideration of the Government, and an answer
will immediately be returned to the last proposition
made by the Government of the United States, inform-
ing them how far we can fall in with the proposition
they last made. That is the only answer I can give at
present upon that branch of the subject. With respect
to the question relating to the provisional agreement
of last year, it is unfortunate that it is upon
it—almost entirely upon it—that recent difficulties have
arisen. It is certainly most unfortunate that there
should have been this disagreement not only upon the
general question, but also upon the agreement entered
into between Sir J. Harvey and General Scott—it is
most unfortunate that that agreement should also be
the object of difference and disagreement between the
two countries. I beg to state, as I think it
necessary to inform the House, one or two
points upon which both the Governor of New
Brunswick and the Governor-General of North
America, as also the Commander of the Forces, thought
the spirit of that agreement was not fulfilled on
the part of the American Government. The agree-
ment proposed by General Scott, and agreed to
by Sir J. Harvey and the Governor of Maine,
was, that Great Britain should hold the valley
of Upper St. John, and Maine that of the Aroos-
took, without it being conceded that the right was
in either. Unfortunately the agreement did not state
the exact position in which the jurisdiction of either
party was to remain, That agreement was offered by
General Scott on the 21st March, it was agreed to by
Sir J. Harvey on the 23d March, and by the Gover-
nor of Maine on the 25th. Sir J. Harvey in his de-
spatch to Lord Glenelg, stated these facts—that was
the statement made to the Government of Great Bri-
tain, and it was borne out by the following
words of the Governor of the state of Maine :
" Under such circumstances the Governor certainly did
not intend to send any parties beyond the waters of the
Aroostook river, but to employ them merely in guard-
ing the timber on the river, and so as to give the least
possible ground of complaint." Sir John Harvey ob-
served " that his understanding of the agreement, and
he would unhesitatingly venture to state that of General
Scott, was, that things should remain in the state they then
were, Great Britain remaining in possession of the Valley
of Upper St. John, while the Governor of Maine denied
its right to hold it." Such having been the under-
standing of Sir John Harvey, and such being the re-
presentations he made to Lord Glenelg, and in conse-
quence of which the Government of this country ex-
pressed its approbation of the agreement he had made.
It afterwards appeared late in the autumn that the per-
sons belonging to this civil posse of Maine, had ad-
vanced into the Valley of Upper St. John, and bad es-
tablished themselves in a position where the Fish River
falls into the St. John, called the Mouth or Confluence of
the St." John and the Fish River. But with regard to what
was done by the people of Maine, there was no better
authority than the Governor of the State of Maine,
" there has been a good deal of additional labour and
expense in building additional fortifications on the Aroos-
took, two block-houses on the Fish River, and making
100 miles of road through the heart of the forest."
Now with regard to the party which had ad-
vanced into the Valley of Upper St. John, it con-
sisted of only twenty or thirty individuals, armed
with guns and a field-piece, which they fired off
in token of taking possession. In consequence of these
proceedings there were remonstrances made by Mr.
Fox to the Government of the United States, and it not
appearing that there was likely to be any effectual check
put to these proceedings, the Governor of the British
North American Provinces in concert with the Com-
mander of the Forces, has-advanced two Companies of
Infantry to a place certainly within the disputed
boundary. In the reppesentations made on the part of
the United States, there certainly must have been
some oversight on the part of the Governor of
Maine in his communications to the Secretary of State
for the United States, in not adverting to that point,
but merely referring to another part of the agreement
in which it was stated that they had done nothing to
disturb the Madawaska settlement. They confined
the limits of the Madawaska settlement within a very
restricted boundary, while we contend that it
extends to the Fish river.--( Hear, hear, hear.)
This is another part of the agreement. The ambiguity
of the term " Madawaska settlement" had occasioned a
disagreement as to the construction of the original
words made use of in the agreement between the Go-
vernor
starnorotfe New Brunswick and the Governor of
of
the last accountlslairnee;ivedHoe.f•crovnelr,
thaeactordcionugntrtyo,
it does not appear that Maine entertains any intention
of g
been oig b
e
givenn
ih
ahas
suchliit hies ritiol
the opinion
I
nhtaevre.
tained on this subject by those on the spot, and I believe
that it is also the opinion of the Governor of New Bruns-
wick that the two parties will remain in their
present posi-
tion, and that there is, I will not saynopotsasikhiinlity,
lbut
certainly no probability of any
collision
between the adverse parties.—(Hear, hear.) Lacche
ray
duty to write to the Governor of British America, and
to the Commander of the Forces in that country, to
state my opinion that it would be exceedingly desirable,
if any ambiguity existed in the instrument agreed upon
between the Governor of New Bruswick and the Go-
vernor of Maine, in order to avoid any chance of collision
between the adverse parties, that the exact geographical
position at present occupied by each party should be
distinctly ascertained and made the foundation of a
fresh agreement. Gove:nor Thomson coincided with
me in opinion on this paint, and in obedience to my
wishes he sent to the American Government to make
Such a proposal, adding, which is a matter of great im-
portance, and of which I entirely approve, a proposition
that Commissioners should be appointed on each side