The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-11 00:00:00

Mr. WAKLEY understood that it was intended to
make Richmond park a preserve for game, and exclude
the public. He did not know why such an arrangement
was contemplated, and he trusted it would not be carried
into effect.
Mr. EW ART gave notice that he Should renew his
question to-morrow,
MAIL PACKETS.

Lord G. SOMERSET begged to ask whether the I
Government had made up their minds as to where the
mail packets were to be despatched from ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
who was very indistinctly heard, was understood to
say that he had directed the Report to be laid on the
table, but not having yet read it over, he was unable to
decide. He certainly was bound to say that the Go-
vernment had selected gentlemen who, they thought,
were best calculated to investigate the merits of the
several ports, and so far as he was able to ascertain,
they had spoken in the highest terms of the port of
Dartmouth.

NEW WRIT. 1
On the motion of Mr. E. J. STANLEY a new writ
was ordered for the Borough of Clonmel, in the room of
David R. Pigot, Esq., who had accepted the office of
her Majesty's Attorney-General for Ireland.
LOAN SOCIETIES.
Mr. FOX MAULE moved the consideration of the
Lords' Amendments to the Loan Societies Bill.
Mr. WAKLEY said there was an amendment which
had been introduced, and which he could not agree to.
It was a clause prohibiting the meetings of these societies
in public-houses or beer-houses. Unless the clause was
rejected he should move that the amendments be taken
into consideration that day three months.
Mr. F. MAULE thought the Bill was so beneficial
a measure, that the .House would not be justified in re-
jecting the Bill
,merely bec'ause the !clause had been
re-inserted, although he admitted that clause was a very
unfair one, and would operate very prejudicially towards
the licensed victuallers.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE was of opinion that a gross
breach of faith had been committed by the introduction
of the clause, and hoped the House would expunge it.
Mr. WAKLEY considered that as the House of
Lords was going to inquire into the whole subject; it
would be better to allow the law to remain as it was,

than to pass a Bill with a clause that must work infinite
mischief.

Captain PEC ELL thought the clause ought to be
rejected. for it was exceedingly objectionable.
Mr. FOX MAULE understood that if the House
did not agree to the amendment, the next course would
be a conference with the Lords, and if the Lords still
persisted in the amendment the Commons would then
have the opportunity of considering whether they would
accept or reject the Bill. He should therefore vote
againit the clause.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that the effect of voting
against the clause would be to lose the Bill. He should
therefore support the clause.
Sir S. LUSHINGTON did not think that; upon
reconsideration, the Lords would persevere in support-
ing the clause which appeared to have been drawn up
with great haste and precipitation. He objected to
the clause upon every groUnd as most unjust and incon-

venient.
Mr. AGLIONBY explained.
Mr. MART thought the words of the clause ex-
tended much further than the framers of it intended.
He should certainly vote against the clause.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when there appeared—
For the clause
Against it 4O
Majority against the clause —26
A Committee was appointed to draw up reasons,
and desire.a conference with the Lords on the subject.
JOINT-STOCK BANKING COMPANIES
BILL. •
Tl.e CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
moved that 'the' Lords' Amendments to the Joint-
Stock Binkine• COrripanies-Bill should be read.
The amendments having been read,
The CtI4,I.NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said

that the Lorhad introduced an amendment without
giving any notice, which made a most material altera-
tion in the law relative to the liability of shareholders,
and as this Bill was merely a continuation of a former
one,, he thought that alone would be sufficient ground
Cur agreciug to the amendment ; but the amendment
was most .objectiolable in itself, and therefore he re-
a'retted to be under the necessity of proposing that the
House do disagree to the Lords' amendment.
The motion WAS agreed to without a division, and a
Committee appointed to draw up reasons and request a
conference with the Lords on the subject.