The Sun.
London, England, 1840-07-31 00:00:00

BIRMINGHAM.

Sir E. WILMOT begged to know whether, in the
Bill about to be introduced by the Government to pro-
vide for the administration of justice in Birmingham,
any provision would be introduced to repay the county
for the sums advanced by the county for the main-
tenance of the prisoners of the borough ?
Lord J. RUSSELL thought a clause to that effect
might be proposed by the Hon. Baronet.
Sir E. WILMOT said it would be useless for him
to propose the clause unless he received the support of
the Government.

Mr. F. MAULE said the Hon. Baronet's proposi-
tion appeared to him a reasonable one, and if a clause
to that eff!ct was proposed, it would receive the assent
of the Government.
SLAVERY IN INDIA.

Sir S. LUSHINGTON begged to ask whether the
investigation into slavery in India had not been taken
out of the hands of Lord Auckland, and placed in the
hands of other parties, and when they were likely to
have a Report on the subject ?
Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE said the subject of In-
dian slavery had been referred to the Law Commission ;
they had made a very voluminous Report of 1,857 folio
pages. When the Report was printed, it would be sent
to England, and he expected to receive it by the next
Indian mail.

Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from J. B.
Ryder, 159, Sloane street, Chelsea, a Poor-law Guar-
dian, complaining of the present Poor-law system ;of
the union of the parishes of Chelsea and Kensington,
whereby the former had lost upwards of 2,0001., ard
imploring the serious attention of the House to the
subject, and the removal of the present Commissioners.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, the third reading of the Joint Stock
Banking Company Bill was postponed until to-morrow.
Colonel SIBTHORP presented a petition from
Dundee, signed by the chairman of the Democratic
Society, praying the House to address her Majesty to
dismiss her present Ministers, and call to her councils
those who would make the Charter a Cabinet
measure. The Gallant Colonel said he heartily con-
curred in the first prayer of the petition, but be could
not concur in the other.

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the administra-
tion of justice having undergone the investigation of a
Committee in the other House of Parliament before
being sent down to that House, he had hoped that it
would have met with almost unanimous concur-
rence, which could alone authorize the pressing
it at the present advanced period of the Session ; he
had hoped that no material objection would have been
taken to it. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite,
however, bad given notice of a motion on the subject of
the administration of justice by the House of Lords,
and before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
in connection with this subject, and had also objected
to the Bill on account of the late period of the Session.
He thought that this notice of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman took away from the Bill that general and unani-
mous support which was necessary to authorise the
passing it during the present Session, and that it would
not be advisable to discuss a Bill of so much import-
ance when so many Members competent to give an
opinion on the subject were unavoidably absent. Such
being the case it was not his intention to go on with the
Bill during the present Session ; but he should reintro-
duce it early in the next Session. He would therefore
move that the Order of the Day for the second reading
of the Bill be now read and discharged.
Sir E. SUGDEN had not stated that it was his in-
tention absolutely to oppose the Bill. He had long
since' given notice of his intention, whenever this Bill
.should come, of moving a resolution that it was the first
duty of Parliament to provide for a better administra-
tion of justice before the House of Lords, and the Judi-
cial Committee of the Privy Council, and also to make
a motion, founded on the resolutions, which by the
courtesy of the Noble Lord, and for which courtesy he
felt much obliged to him, he had been enabled to lay on
the table of the House. He was not prepared to deny
the necessity of further aids to the Court of Equity. His
objection to the Bill was to its standing as a measure

by itself, without being brought forward- in connection
with further improvements in the administration of
justice. He could assure the Noble Lord that he would
not, in the next Session, object to his introducing such
a Bill as the present as a foundation for a measure for
the better administration of justice ; and if the Noble
Lord and his colleagues, during the recess, would turn
their attention to the subject of an improvement of the
judicial committee of the Privy Council of the Appeals,
to the House of Lords, and of the Bankruptcy Court,
they would find him most anxious to support them in
carrying into execution any general measure on that sub-
ject. Had it not been so late in the session he should have
proposed the appointment of a Committee to in-
vestigate the subject, as he thought that
with the advantages of the investigation which had
already been instituted on the subject in the other
House, a Committee, formed of Members for both
sides of the House, might devise such measures as would
lead to a satisfactory reform in the administration of
justiee in the Courts of Equity. He did not object
to the present Bill, but he thought it ought to be
made the foundation of a more extended measure.

The Order of the Day was then read and discharged,
After which
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a peti•
tion in favour of the Bill.—(A laugh.)
SULPHUR MONOPOLY.

On Lord JOHN RUSSELL moving the Order of
the Day for the Committee on the Regency Bill,
Lord SANDON said he would take that oppor-
tunity of putting to the Noble Lord, the Secretary
for Foreign Affairs, the questions of which he had given
notice relative to the arrangement which had been en-
tered into with Naples with regard to the Sulphur
Monopoly. He wished to know at what period that
monopoly would cease, and what was the nature of the
indemnity agreed to be given by the Neapolitan Go-
vernment for the losses sustained in consequence of it.
Lord PALMERSTON said that her Majesty's
Representative had met at Paris the Neapolitan Pleni-
potentiary, who had been sent there with full powers to
agree to the award of the mediatorial power. that
award had been made. They had not heard
from Naples on the subject, but he had no
doubt whatever of the agreement of the Neapolitan
Government to that award, the nature of the arrangement
was that the monopoly should cease as soon as the
award should be known at Naples. Therefore, it
might be assumed that the monopoly would cease in the
shortest possible period after the conclusion of the arrange-
ment. He took it for granted that such would be the case.
The principles which were to regulate the negotiations
on the subject were to be laid down by five Commis-
sioners, two of whom ware to be Neapolitan, two Bri-
tish, and one French. The French Commissioner was
to act as arbitrator, in case of any difference between
the others ; and the selection of that Commissioner was
to be such as would have the previous consent of the
Neapolitan and British Governments.
In answer to a further question from Lord SANDON,
Lord PALMERSTON said that as regarded the
Portuguese clams two proposals were under considera-
tion for their arrangement, and the Government would
adopt that which might be found the more satisfactory.