The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-01 00:00:00

JURIES (IRELAND).

Mr. F. FRENCH wished to ask-the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the Home Department the ques-
tion of which he had given him notice. In the report
of the speech made by the Right Hon. Baronet respect-
ing the striking of juries in Dublin, he was reported to
have said that he did not mean to say anything don*
by the sheriff was not illegal ?
The SPEAKER called the Hon. Member to order,
he could not refer to a previous debate.
Sir G. GREY said that what he had stated was that
he was not prepared to say that anything done bTthe •
sheriff was illegal.
CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS BILL.
Colonel SIBTHORP wished to put a question to the
Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Hem
Department. He understood that it had been arranged
that the Farmers' Estate Society (Ireland) Bill should
stand for to-morrow at twelve o'clock. Now such
being the case, he wished to know whether the Corrupt
Practices Bill was to come on to-morrow at twelve
o'clock, as he must confess that was the only Bill before
the House that he cared a farthing for.

Sir G. GREY was not aware that it had been arranged
that the Farmers' Society (Ireland) Bill was to go onto-
morrow at twelve o'clock; if it did, it would probably
occupy the whole day.
DISTURBANCES IN IRELAND.

Lord CASTLEREAGH wished to know whether
her Majesty's Government had received any informa-
tion as to whether any collision had taken place in Ire-
land between the people and the police, or the military
forces?

Sir G. GREY said he had not received any letters in
reference to such a collision; but he had received by the
electric telegraph to-day a message from the Mayor of
Liverpool, which had been transmitted to him by the
Lord-Lieutenant, and stated that a collision had taken
place yesterday in the county of Tipperary be-
tween the insurgents and the constabulary,
but not with her Majesty's forces ; and else that
General Macdonald, with a large body of troops, was in
close pursuit of Mr. Smith O'Brien. It stated, further,
that " some few people had been killed," but no names
were mentioned.

CHURCHYARDS.

In reply to a question from Mr. HARCOURT,
Lord MORPETH stated that ho hoped to introduCe
Bill next session to prevent burials in metropolitan
churchyards.

SUGAR DUTIES.
Lord G. BENTINCK wished to ask the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, before the House resolved: itself
into a Committee of the whole House to consider the
sugar duties, whether he would make some state-
ment with respect to those changes which he understood
her Majesty's Government had resolved upon making?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was usual to make a statement with respect to revenue
and trade after the Speaker left the chair.
The House then resolved itself into Committee on the
Sugar Duties; Mr. BERNAL in the chair.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then
proceeded to state the alterations which the Government
intended to make in the sugar duties. The altera-
tion which the Government intended to make with
respect to double and refined sugar were fully set
forth ,in the paper. The Government had hoped
to have made some arrangement by which the
poorer classes at home aright obtain sugar at
reduced rate, but the result of interviews which he
and his Honourable Friend the Member for Westbury
had had with sugar refiners had led them to the opinion
that they could not at present clearly see their
way to the introduction of such a provision.
The House would believe him when he said that no
time nor pains were spared to come to a satisfactory
conclusion. The main difficulty with which they had to
contend was the necessity that the whole of the sugars
which came from the refiners must be subject to some
duty. If Government complied with the wishes of Hon.
Gentlemen opposite, and imposed restrictions upon the re-
fining of sugars for the protection of the honest manu-
facturer, it would only serve to revive the evils of excise
iuterference, and he must therefore decline to comply
with the demand of the Noble Lord and his followers.
Mr. CARDWELL protested on behalf of the Liver-
pool sugar refineres against the vacillation which cha-
racterised the proceedings of the Government with
_re-
gard to the sugar duties generally, and particularly with
respect to their withdrawal of the measure at the eleventh
hour, which had been promised to his constituents at en
early period.

gr..LABOUCHERE denied that any such expecta-
tion had been held out, though he admitted that such
an arrangement would be highly desirable; but so great
were the difficulties in the way of carrying it into effect.
that the Government were obliged to abandon the At'.
tempt for the present.
Sir W. CLAY said that the sugar-refiners of London
were not disappointed, inasmuch as they did not think
that this measure, if carried, would remedy their grin'''.
ances.
Mr. BARCLAY proposed an amendment with regard
to including cane juice for consumption, but withdrew It
after some discussion.
Lord G. BENTINCK said he would now come to the
61.4 port of his amendment, which was the exclusion.of
the words, and on all sugar and molasses not otherwise
charF,ed with duty," in the heading of schedule 3, re-
garding the duties on foreign sugar. Whilst be cook'
not approve of tho proceedings of her Majesty's
Govern-
ment on this matter, he could not help admiring the
debonnaire with which the Chancellor of the Exchequer
came down to the House and announced that he was
going to disappoint the planters of the West Indies 119 d
the Mauritius by withholding the great boon which he
had promised. In fact, the whole course of the Hon.
Gentleman was a plea of guilty to the three-and-twenty:
counts which he (Lord George Dentinck) preferred