The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-14 00:00:00

IN RE STURT.

This bankrupt was described as late of St. Alban's,
banker, and to-day was appointed for his last examina-
tion. The choice of assignees had not taken place
in consequence of every debt except one being
disputed on technical grour.ds. One of the
proofs was tendered by Mr. Matthew sturt,
for a sum of 6001.; but it was urged that the claim was
barred by the statute of limitations.
The claimant said that he had received letters from
his brother, offering to assure his life for 1,0001. as a
security.
His HoNoun (Mr. Commissioner Shepherd) said that
a very slight admission would, i❑ his opinion, support
the claim, and that the offer of security was tantamount
to a promise to pay.
In consequence of there being no assignees, and
scarcely sufficient assets to defray the expenses, the fiat
was superseded. The banking accounts are not affected
by these proceedings.

NEWMARKET RACES.
(THIS DAY.)
(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)

Sweepstakes of 100 sovs. each. D.M.

Loadstone ... ... ... ... walked over
Sweepstakes of 50 30V3. each. R.M.

Tisiphone 1
Match, 200. T.Y.C.—Sable beat Lovelace.
Handicap of 15 sovs. each. D.M.
Marquis of Conyngham 1
Sagacity
Duplicity

Match, 200. A.F.—Tisiphone beat Wilmot.
Handicap Sweepstakes of 15 sous. each. T.Y.C.
St. Anne ... ... .. ... ... ... 1
Taffrail
Mantilla, Carissima, Clerk of the Council, and Mill-
wood, also ran.
The Port Stakes of 100 sous. each. T.M.M.
Conyngh am ... ... ... •0 • ... ... 1
Red Hart . . ... ... ... ... ... 2

Won easy.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock.

Mr. G. THOMPSON presented three petitions from
the iuhabitants of Bethnal-green, Whttechapel,and Fins
bury against the Crown and Government Security Bill.
Mr. HINDLEY presented a similar petition from
Ashton-under-Lyne.
THIRD READINGS.

The following Private Bills were read a third time
and passed:—
Dov,r Landing Pier Bill.
Morley Gas Light Company Bill.
Southampton Gas Light and Coke Company Bill.
REPORTS.

The following reports were considered and agreed to:—
Leeds Improvement Act Amendment Bill.

Price's Patent Candle Company Bill.
SECOND READING.

The Walsall Improvement and Cemetery Act Amend-
ment Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.

THE NATIONAL PETITION.
Sir W. CLAY presented a petition from certain inha
bitants and town-councillors of Hull, complaining that
their names had been affixed to the Charter petition
without their knowledge or consent.
LANCASTER ELECTION.

The SPEAKER informed the House that he had re-
ceived a communication from the Clerk of Elections
stating that the recognizances entered inio for prose-
cuting the Lancaster election were unobjuctionabte.
CROWN AND GOVERNMENT SECURITY BILL.

On the motion being put that the Speaker leave the
chair for going into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said he regretted that her Ma-
jesty's Government had felt it to be their duty to intro-
duce such a Bill as this. While every other country in
Europe was preserving an onward course England was
taking a retrograde step, and he was convinced that if
this Bill, became the law of the land it would be made
the means of inflicting more cruelty and more misery
on the unfortunate people of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.)
Already had the wretched and detestable spy system
been resorted to by the Government of that unhappy
country, and he very much feared this Bill would enable
the Government still further to extend the political
sufferings of the people. It was too bad that they
should be visited with such a Bill as this at a time when
Ireland had a right to expect that some legislative mea-
sures would be passed to remove some of the
misery and discontent that prevailed amongst her people,
and he hoped the inhabitants of the three kingdoms
would ere long be aroused to the danger of this retro-
grade policy.—(Hear, hear.) The genuineness of the
Chartist petition had been impugned, but he was not
aware that any gentleman in that House was prepared
to deny that it bore the signatures of upwards of a
million of persons. That million at least were opposed
to this Bill, and surely the prayer of so large a number
of persons ought not to be treated with contempt.
Some Hon. Members in that House, while speaking
of this unconstitutional measure had said do what you
like with Ireland, but do not interfere with the right:
and privileges of the people of England. Now, in hi:
opinion that was a most ungenerous argument, and he
was rejoiced to feel and know that it was an argument
not sympathised with by the masses of the people
of England.—(Hear, hear.) He had done all in
his power to allay the feverish symptoms of
discontent which had begun to manifest themselves
amongst the Irish people, but how was it likely that his
counsels or those of his supporters could succeed if that
Hou-e persisted in lending a deaf ear to the complaints
of Ireland?—(Hear, hear.) It was already clear that
the repeal representatives would not suecoed in their
motion for a repeal of the union, and when they went
back to Ireland it would be for them to consider
what course they should now pursue.—(Hear, hear.)
Already some of them had been subjected to abuse and
insult at meetirgs in Ireland for continuing the cry of
"Peace, peace," and he called upon the House at once
to come forward and save Ireland from being plunged
into bloodshed and anarchy.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. MILNES said, after the concession the
Government had already made in reference to the third
clause of this Bill, he thought it was due to them that they
should not delay going into Committee, and certainly
anything he might have to say upon the Bill should be
reserved till they had got into Committee.—(Hear, hear.)
His principal object in rising, however, was to recal to
the recollection of the House the admirable lesson which
the Speaker read to them yesterday upon the importance
of being strictly accurate in the statements Honourable
Members made to the House,
and he hoped that whole-
some advice would not be lost sight of.
long that
er.
In his il
—(flear, hear.)
Mr. EVANS said he had voted for this Bill under
tmhiesatpimpreenhaedilsniorrni,ved and a
whens a
opinion, this was a most unco-
h es i lceonutl could Dumberremain
so
he
no felt
stitutional Bill, and he regretted to observe the House
abandoning the position it had always taken up
in preventing the Crown from encroaching upon the
rights of the people.—(Hear, hear.) This Bill gave the
Crown very dangerous powers, and the House, if it
wished to retain the respect of the people, ought to
pause before it gave its sanction to the measure.—(Hear,
hear.) Had the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment come forward and told them that information had
reached him which rendered this Bill absolutely
necessary for the safety of the State, he
might have agreed to the Bill, but looking
at the state of the country he could not '
consent to brand that man as a felon who had the
courage to speak his thoughts openly and without re-
serve. Why if this were felony he was surrounded with
felons.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) In other European
states changes were brought about by the force of arms,
but in England they did things in a different way and
without bloodshed.—(Hear, hear.) If abuses prevailed
here, meetings wero called to denounce them in
the strongest possible language, and it was
the safety-valve that protected them from the
calamities that now desolated other parts of Europe.

—(hear, hear.) Catholic Emancipation, the Reform
Bill, and the repeal of the corn- laws, were all brought
about by agitation at public meetings and open and 7
vised speaking, and so long as the words " open andadvised speaking" remained in the Bill he would not
give his support to it.—(Hear. hear.)
Sir G. GREY appealed to the House to adopt the
advice of the Hon. Member for Pontefract, and leave the
discussion of the details till they got into Committee.--
(Hear, hear.) He rnwrt, to remind the House that
his Hon. and Learned Friend who had just sat down bad
given an erroneous construction to this Bill. It would
not have the effect of puttinedown public meetings, but
of preventing "open and advised speaking" for the pur-
pose of dethroning the Queen, or depriving her of any of
her rights.—(Hear.) This Bill would not prevent people
from meeting to discuss the policy pursued by the
authorities, but it would prevent individuals from advis-
ing the people to resort to traitorous acts or compass or
imagine traitorous designs. The Hon. and Learned
Member stated that during the agitation on the corn-
laws an Hon. Member of that House was openly accused
of exciting the people to murder the Right Honourable
Baronet the Member for Tamworth, and yet no law
existed then to prevent the use of such language. The
lion. and Learned Member, however, was mistaken.
By the 10th of George IV., any person inciting others to
the commission of murder rendered himself liable to be
hung, without benefit of clergy. He asked the BO'
Gentleman the Member for Limerick if the Bill was too
strong to punish such language as that which had re-
cetitly been spoken in Ireland?—(Hear.)
Sir R. PEEL rose merely to put a question to the
Learned Gentleman (the Attorney-General). By the
36th of Geo. 111., which was made perpetual by an Act
passed in the 57th of the same reign, if any person
compassed or intended the death, the wounding, or re-
striction of the Sovereign, and should express such Au
intention in writing, which he published, that the offence
would amount to high treason. That law, as he
had said, was made perpetual, and by this
Bill the law would be extended to Ireland.
Under it any person compassing, or intending to
deprive the Sovereign of any part of her MajestY'S,
dominions, would be guilty of treason.—(Hear, beer./
And if a person should express it to be his intention.
by printing and publishing, or by " open and advised"
speaking, that the offence under this Bill, would
be felony. Suppose a person should compese
or intend the death, wounding, or restraint of
the person of the Sovereign, by " open and
advised" speaking, what would in the eye of the law be
that offence, and what the penalty ? What would be the
offence of endeavouring to depose the Crown either by
publishing or writing, or by open and advised speaking?
The offence of endeavouring to compass the death of the
Sovereign had occurred two or three times in the present
reign, and it was necessary that the law oa the subject
should be clearly defined.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the offence
of compassing or imagining the wounding or death of
the Sovereign would remain to be dealt with under the
old law, with this exception, that the statute of George
lll.,which was made perpetual by the 57th of George
would be extended to Ireland, some doubt being enter'
tained whether that Bill as it stood extended to the sister
country. A proposition, spoken or written, to levy wet
would become a felony by this Bill; but the question
put by the Right Hon. Baronet was this—assuming
that there was a clear compassing or imagining the
death, or maiming and wounding the Sovereign,
uttered and expressed by " open and advised
speaking, what would that offence be ? With
great respect to his Learned Friends the Members
for Haverfordwest and Pontefract, he stated ed:
visedly, after consulting the highest authorities, till'',
such an offence, or each of them, would continue to
be treason as under the present law.—(Hear, hear.)
He thought there could not be a doubt about this'
Words spoken would not be treason, unless spoken ea'
visedly, and with the intention to inciting others to cote'
pass the death of the Sovereign.
Sir ROBERT PEEL was understood to express hie
assent.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD referred to the case °I
Colonel Despard. That unfortunate officer was convicts
of treason, which consisted in words he had uttered, so
not upon any treasonable document found upon hin3l
though an oath of an abominable nature was founo,
upon the person!of some of his associates. He referrel
to the charge of Lord Ellenborough, who, he said, lei;
great stress upon the greatdifficulty and danger attendelp
upon relying in so grave a matter upon words spoke*
Mr. MARTIN did not agree with the Attorney
General, and cited a passage from Burn's treatise 111°
criminal law, which stated that words spoken could only
render the utterers liable to punishment for a Wilde
meanour.
Mr. C. ANSTEY was understood to support lb.
opinion of the Attorney... General.
Mr. CAVENDISH (who was very inaudable in the
gallery) was understood to support the Bill.
(LEFT SITTING.)