The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, UNE 16, 1818.

misfortunes, and his ultimate connexion with the Bei:-
at-Law Society.
Mr. NORTON directed the officer to take the unforti-
nate person to Lambeth workhouse, with his family, aril
to request that they might be taken into that institutim
for the present, and further desired that the prisoner's
brother might be requested to attend before him ona
future day.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

• HOUSE OF LORDS, June 15.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
The Earl of SELKIRK presented several petitions
against the Scotch Registration Bills.
The Earl of ROSE BERY presented a petition from
Linlithgow with a similar prayer; also several petitions
praying for an alteration in the Scotch law of entail.
POOR-LAW UNIONS—TRAMPS.
Lord PORTMAN presented petitions from a Union
in Somersetshire, and also from a Union in Dorsetshire,
complaining of the burdens cast upon parishes by the
great increase of tramps, and praying that some measure
might be adopted to remedy the evil.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the subject
was under the consideration of the Government, and they
were much disposed to entertain a measure which should
make a new distribution of the charge incurred from re-
' lief given to tramps, and extending it over the whole
union, instead of confining it to the parish in which the
relieving officer resided, and in which, consequently, the
relief had been given.
Lord REDESDALE thought some alteration in the
law was necessary. As long as a tramp knew that by
applying to the relieving officer he could secure a good
supper and a bed, so long he would be without any in-
ducement to endeavour to gain an honest living.
After a few words from Earl Fitzwilliam, the Earl of
Chichester, and the Earl of Stradbroke,
Lord BEAUMONT said that he thought a much
severer test of destitution should be applied to tramps
than the test applied to the parochial poor.
CORN-LAWS.
Lord STANLEY Cg
ave notice that, to-morrow, he
should call the attention of their Lordships to the state
of the law regulating the importation of foreign corn.
It was not his intention to enter at all on that occasion
into .the discussion of the question of protection.
ODD FELLOWS.
Lord BEAUMONT presented a petition from a lodge
of Odd Fellows, in favour of the Bill fur legalising this
society.
RAILWAYS AND STEAM NAVIGATION.
Lord MONTEAGLE called the attention of the
House to the grasping monopoly of certain railroad pro-
prietors who, by certain private Bills, were now endea-
vouring to monopolise the steam navigation of certain
ports, and contended that the provisions of those Bills
to that effect were in opposition to the standing orders
of their Lordships' House, which standing orders would,
he trusted, be strictly enforced. He wished to know
whether the Government had not provided steamers of
the greatest power to carry on the mail service between
Holyhead and Dublin.
The Earl of AUCKLAND said that the Admiralty
had been prepared to carry on the Post-office service
between Holyhead and Dublin, and unless he could
feel assured that that service would be carried on
as effectually by the railway company he should be sorry
to see that service transferred to them. At the same
time, if that service could be conducted by the company
equally and efficiently, and more economically than it
was conducted at present, it would be to the advantage
of the country that it should be transferred to the
company.
The Earl of GRANVILLE explained the history of
the passing of the Bill through the House of Commons,
and said that the matter had been considered and re-
ported on by the Board of Trade.
The Earl of ROI)EN bore testimony to the admirable
manner in which the Admiralty provided for the per-
foimance of the Post-office service between Dublin and
Holyhead.
The subject then dropped.
POOR-LAW (IRELAND).
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table
numerous returns relating to the operation of the poor
law in Ireland.

Lord inquired what authority this board was supposed to
have? Undoubtedly the board had not any binding
authority either on the Government or the Parliament;
but it was impossible for any person anxious to avail
himself on railway matters of important information
placed within his reach not to be aware how great a
moral weight was attached to the opinions pronounced
by the Railway Board. At the same time he (the Mar-
quis of Lansdowne) was not prepared to say that the
Government or the Parliament ought to consider it-
self so bound by the opinions of the board as to re-
ject all further information, or refuse to hear
any other person. All that Government and Parlia-
ment could do was to attach due weight to the opi-
nion of the board. Such had been, and such would
continue to be the functions of the board, usefully
exercised for the public service. If the Noble Lord
asked him whether he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) was
prepared to say that it would at no time be found ex-
pedient to give to this board:or some other still greater
powers of control in respect to railways, he, of course,
was not prepared to say
.that the time would not come
when a still further extension of the powers of the board
might gradually take place. On this subject, however,
a great deal of jealousy was entertained by the railway
companies, and he did not think that matters had as yet
reached such a point as would justify the Government
in demanding further powers. The President and Vice-
Presidentj of the Board of Control would give their at-
tention to railway matters, receiving the assistance of
the most efficient officers, and ho had no doubt that the
application of the Railway Board would continue to be
as vigilant as it had been during the whole of the last
year. •
Lord REDESDALE said, in reference to the remark
of the Noble Marquis, that weight was attanbed to the
opinions of the Railway Board, he was almost afraid that
no weight was given to them at all.
Earl GRANVILLE conceived that the Noble Lord's
observations had more reference to the old board than
to the Railway Commission, for there was not one in-
stance in which the recommendations of the latter had
not been attended to. He thought that the board might
be made more useful, but even with its present powers
he could not for one moment admit that the board was
useless.

Lord REDESD ALE thought that those to whom the
gauge question had been referred ought not to havo left
Parliament without more advice on the subject.
THE SPANISH CORRESPONDENCE.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, in moving that the
House do then adjourn, regretted that he had not pre-
viously been able to lay before them copies of the Spanish
correspondence, but he hoped to-morrow to present the
whole of that correspondence.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 15.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four
Mr. LUSIIINGTON presented a petition from the
Anti-State Church Association, praying for the separa-
tion of Church and State. The lion. Member, in con-
nexion with this petition, gave notice that when the
Regium Donum vote was moved he should move that it
be discontinued.

FOREIGN THEATRICALS IN THE METRO

POLIS.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD presented a petition from
the performers of the Haymarket Theatre, complain-
ing of the extent to which foreign performers were en-
couraged in the metropolis, and praying the House to
take steps to limit the number of theatres intec ded to be
engaged for foreign theatrical entertainments. The
Learned Sergeant presented a petition from numerous
ladies and gentlemen connected with other metropolitan
theatres to the same effect.

Sir G. STRICKLAND presented 52 petitic.ns in fa-
vour of a reduction in the expenditure, and praying for
Parliamentary refi)rm._

Several thin. Meintwrs presented petitions praying;
that effective measures should be taken for the suppres-
sion of the slave-trade.
THIRD READINGS.
The following Bills were read a third time:— -
Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway (Re-
vision of maximum Tolls and Charges on the Glas-
gow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway) Bill.
London and South- Western Railway Company's Acts
Amendment, Extension, Deviation, and New Works
Bill.

North Staffordshire Railway (Ashbourne Bra nch and
Approach to Congleton Station) Bill.
North Staffordshire Railway (Deviation at Willington)
Bill.
Newry and Enniskillen Railway (Amendment of Acts,
and to authorise Arrangements with other Col %Julies)
Bill.

Mr. STAFFORD expected that such an appeal
would be made to him from some Member on the
opposite side of the House. He must confess
t'nat he could not accede to the request of the
Noble Lord. He considered that a most unfair and un-
constitutional course had been taken by some Members
on the other side of the House, the result of which was,
that the difficulties attending this question had become
greater and greater, and ultimately would become insur-
mountable unless seine stop was put to the course that
was being adopted. He could not allow a single clay
to intervene before moving the writ, and having done so
he would have discharged his duty, and made it
imperative upon the House to discharge theirs.
He moved this writ with more hope than he
had moved others, for he had invariably found
that a short recess gave Members a more vivid notion of
what was right and wrong than upon other occasions.
Let Hon. Members take the trouble to look over their
papers and see what they had done in the present
session. Since they had met in last November,
the number of Acts they had passed amounted to
eighteen. Of those eighteen, four were money Acts,
three amendments and explanations of existing
laws, two the famous coercion Bills, one the
Borough Superannuation Fund, another to facilitate the
progress of public works in Ireland, another to extend
the time for the construction of railways, another for
making arrangements in the Court of Chancery, and
lastly, the famous New Zealand Constitution Suspension
Bill. Such were the Bills they had passed this session,
and in the face of this experience what chance was there
of the Honourable Baronet's Bill passing this session?
But the course the House was pursuing, so far from
punishing bribery, was, in fact, encouraging it—
(Hear, hear)—inasmuch as the electors who had
hitherto been the exposers of bribery had been annoyed
at the delay which had taken place, and now they al-
together abstained from making complaints of bribery.
They had a proof of this in the proceedings of the
last Bawdley election, where it was openly avowed that
treating was freely resorted to, and yet they had now re-
ceived petitions complaining of the return, simply because
the parties who were the opponents of corrup-
tion in that borough naturally felt that their
petitioning might ultimately lead to the suspen-
sion of their motion altogether. Again, in the
case of Kinsale, parties who bad determined to
emigrate upon the proceeds of the previous election, upon
learning that another contest was to take place, quitted the
emigrant ship in the Cove of Cork, leaving their wives
and families on hoard, and returned to Kinsale to do a
last act of duty to their country in assisting to return
another Member to the Treasury benches.—(Hear, and
laughter.) Bearing these circumstances in mind, and
looking at the fact that the Hon. Baronet's Bill, repu-
diated as it was by the Government, and by the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth, had to fight its way
amongst 48 others, he really felt that it was impolitic
to delay the issuing of these writs any longer,
and he should therefore persevere in his motion.
Great distress was now existing in the borough of Lei-
cester, and the poor-rates were as high as 13s. in the
pound. Consequently great dissatisfaction was expressed
with respect to the institutions of the country, and there
was growing up a tendency towards violence among the
people, and he would ask was it right and was it expe-
dient in such a state of things to keep the bo-
rough without a representative in that II ouse ?
The Hon. Member concluded by moving that Mr.
Speaker do issue his warrant to the Clerk of the Crown
to make out a new writ for the electing of two burgesses
to serve in this present Parliament for the borough of
Leicester, in the room of Sir Joshua Walmsley and
Richard Gardner, Esq., whose election had been deter-
mined to be void.
The SPEAKER having put the question,
Mr. FREWEN rose to oppose the motion. He said
the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Stafford) had told
them that he had no connexion with Leicester.—(Hear.)
A letter which he had received from a solicitor of much
practice in the locality, stated that he had put his motion
on the paper without consulting any one in the town with
respect to it. Now the House had to consider two things
—the report of the Committee which was presented only
a feW days ago—(Loud cheers)—which set forth many
cases of bribery, and whether they would main-
tain that report or not. His (Mr. Frewen's)
family had been connected with Leicester for
many years, and he believed it was as notoriously
corrupt a place as any in the kingdom.—(Laughter.)
As an instance of this, he might state that in 1826,
66,0001. were spent by three candidates, which
showed that much of that money must have been
spent in bribery. In 1839, when he (Mr. Frewen)
most reluctantly offered himself as a candidate,
he told his committee that he would rather
lose his election than that there should be a single
case of bribery. The election went against him, because
his committee would not consent to spend 1501. in the
same way as a similar sum had been expended at the
previous :election—in bribery. A certain number of
freemen tendered their votes to the committee
for 11. a head, 17s. 6d. having been the price at the
former election.—(Hear, and laughter.) They should
either disfranchise the city or limit its boundary. Un-
less they took some decisive step the same system of
bribery of which he had spoken would continue. Ho
should therefore oppose the motion.
Mr. SEYMER, a member of the Committee,
recommended the House to read the report of
the Committee before they came to a decision.
If the Covernment proceeded with their Bill he would
vote for the suspension of the writ, but if they did
not he should feel compelled to support the motion of
the Hon. Member for North Northampton.
After a few observations from Captain MANGLES,
which were inaudible ip the gallery,
Sir J. PAKINGTON trusted that his lion. Friend
the Member for North Northamplon would not press
his motion for the issuing of the writ. Leicester was
one of the Committees that had made a special report,
and that report was entitled to the consideration of the
Rouse. Such being his opinion, he thought the writs
ought not to be issued.
Lord J. RUSSELL considered that if the Honourable
Member for North Northamptonshire had accepted
his proposition he would have done far better for the
interests of those he represented than by adopting the
course he had of persevering with his motion for the
issuing of the writ.—(Hear.) He denied that, the suspen-
sion of writs was an unconstitutional proceeding. Such a
course was warranted by the proceedings that had taken
place in earlier times, when writs had been suspended
for a year, in consequence of bribery and corruption.
In the case of Bishop's Castle, in the reign of queen
Anne, such a course of proceeding had taken place, and
numerous cases of a later date migt be brought forward.
He thought, if the House approved of the principle of the
Bill of the Hon. Member for Flintshire it should be
gone on with, but if the House did not approve
of the principle of that Bill ' • be would then go on with
the Bill with respect to the Horsham borough, and en-
large its provisions as the House thought fit.
Mr. BANKES said he was sure the Noble Lord
would readily admit that the times to which the Noble
Lord had referred were greatly disturbed by
party feeling„ which ran very high in the House
of Commons, so much so indeed, that it was
related in Lord Hardwicke's life that the
House, on ono occasion, voted that forty was a majority
in ninety. It was in that way the elections were con-
ducted then, and he was sure the Noble Lord was not
desirous that they should return to such a system as
that. With regard to the immediate question before the
House he thought these boroughs had been placed in a
very unjust position. They had no representative to
defend them in- that House, and the only way
in which they could •support their case was by
sending counsel to the bar of the House,
which was a very inconvenient course. On the
Whole, however, as this question would be resumed next
week, he would recommend his Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for North Northampton not to press his motion now,
but leave the matter to be decided with the other cases
next week.
Mr. HUME said the motion given for Tuesday by
the Hon. Baronet (Sir John Pakington) for the issue of
the suspended writs, would have the effect of delaying
his motion for Parliamentary reform, upon which, what-
ever might be the merits of the motion, great anxiety
existed in the country. He, therefore, trusted that the
Hon. Baronet would not persevere in his motion.
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON said he had given notice for
Tuesday next without the slightest reference to the
motion standing in the Hon. Member's name on the
paper, and considering that the issuing of the writs was
a question of very great importance, he could not con-
sent to withdraw his motion.
Colonel SIBTHORP trusted that the Hon. Baronet
would take the sense of the House on the subject.
After a few observations from Mr. ELLIO f,
Lord LINCOLN said he quite agreed with the Noble
Lord, that it was most desirable that the House should
agree to take at once a division upon the general prin-
ciple of the Bill brought in by his !lon. Friend (Sir John
Hamner), and if there was a majority in its favour, that
no further impediment should be thrown in the way of its
further progress. A private Member could not pass a Bill
so successfully through the House as it could be done by
the Noble Lord, who possessed so much influence
in that House. He hoped, therefore, the Noble Lord
would take the matter into his own hands.
. Lord J. RUSSELL said he had given notice of his in
tention to do so.

Lord LINCOLN said people out of doors entertained
much objection to indefinitely postponing the issuing of
the writ. No doubt the majority of the House would
vote against the issuing of the writ, but he hoped
the Noble Lord would give precedence to the Bill on
Tuesday.
Lord J. RUSSELL had given as much assistance to
the Bill of the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Flint
broughs, as if it had been brought forward by a mem-
ber of the Government. He should assist the
progress of the Bill to the best of his ability, but he
could not give up other Bills of public importance,
seeing that the Bill was threatened N% ith much undue

opposition.
Sir J. TROLLOPE, as a member of the Leicester
Committee, wished to remark that they had specially
reported that the parties at that election appeared to re-
quire the consideration of the House. Ile should like to
know how the consideration was to be given to it when
the evidence was not before them.
Mr. HUDSON thought that, whatever might be the
report of the Committee, it was hard upon the great
majority of the voters in. Leicester to be deprived of the
exercise of their privileges, because 4
r. os f the misconduct of
some very few of the electorate. egard-
ed his Hon.
Friend Sir Joshua Walrnsley, for whom he bad great
do
esteem, he knew he had been most anxious to avoid'
hardlythought treated.
Mr. AGLIONBY saidue these discussions were ex-
tremely inconvenient.had beard it said that small
constituencies were always corrupt. He denied the fact,
us far as Cockermouth was concerned.—(Laughter.) Ile
would not sit there and he,ad arhis constituency slandered
i
even by imputation.
sat for Cockermouth ever
since 1t332, and ho declared he had never paid a single