The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-12 00:00:00

MR. S. O'BRIEN IN THE TOWER !

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Hull, pray-
ing for the release of Mr. William Ssnith O'Brien from the
Tower.—(Great laughter.)
CHELSEA PENSIONERS.
Captain LAYA RD presented a petition from 660 Chelsea
pensioners, complaining that five per cent. had been deducted
from their pensions, and that the periods of settlement had been
reduced from three to one month in advance.
THE IRISH COERCION BILL.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition against this Bill.
RATING OF SMALL TENEMENTS.
Mr. J. BLACKBURN presented a petition from the guar-
dians of a poor-law union (the name of which we did not hear),
praying that the owners of small tenements should be rated
instead of the occupiers.
Mr. WALKER presented a numerously signed petition
praying the House to restrict the sale of spirituous liquors on
Sunday.
THE POLICE AND THEIR RELIGIOUS DUTIES.
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY begged to put a
question to the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the
Home Department, of which he had given him notice. He
wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet what were the regula-
tions with respect to the attendance of the Metropolitan Police
force on their religious duties?
Sir J. GRAH AM said the Noble Lord was probably aware
that in the admission of privates into the police force no
inquiry whatever was instituted with respect to their re.
ligious duties. The force was open to all denominations.
With the exception of those on actual duty on Sunday, the
members of the force were at liberty to attend any place of re.
ligious worship they thought fit. Those belonging to the Es-
tablished Church had seats provided for them in almost every
church in their respective districts ; and with regard to the
others, they were left at full liberty to go wherever they pleased.
BRIDPORT ELECTION.
Mr. G. RANKES said he had a petition to present of
rather a peculiar nature, and he trusted he should have the
indulgence of the House if he departed from the general
rule which had been laid down, that no Member should
address the House on presenting a petition. The
petition, however, which he had to present on this occasion
involved a matter of privilege, and a matter upon which the
House would have to decide. He believed he might at once
state that there was no precedent to be found similar to the case
he had now to lay before the House, and he had some doubt
whether it would be considered a question of privilege or not; at
all events, supposing this petition to be true, and he had no
reason to doubt that it was true, it deserved the serious at-
tention of the House. He would state the substance of it, in
order that the House might judge ler itself cf the degree of
importance to be attached to it. The petition was
signed by William Lockhart, an elector of the borough
of Bridport. The House was aware that the minutes
of the evidence of the Bridport Election Committee had been
printed. It would be seen from that report that the decision
of that Committee turned solely upon the question as to whe-
ther the vote of an elector—who was the Mr. Lockhart in
question—which gave the majority for the late sitting Member,
had been erroneously placed in the return. The Committee
found that it had, and the decision caused the sitting of the
Hon. Member who now sat in the House for Bridport.
The SPEAKER intimated to the Hon. Member that the
question involved no matter •f privilege, and it was
out of order to speak on the presentation of the petition.
Mr. BANKES—It would appear, then, by this petition that
there were grounds of objection to Mr. Baillie Cochrane's else-
tion, but it was also certain that there were equal objections to
the election of Mr. Romilly ; but during the last year
the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had
declared the determination of the Committees should ba
satisfactory.
The SPEAKER—The Hon. Member must give notice of
a breach of privilege before he can introduce the subject in this
manner.
Mr. BANKES—Then I must rest upon this position, that
the petitioner should be heard at the bar of the House.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
ORDERS OF THE DAY.
The Bill for the Northern and Southern Connecting Rail-
way was postponed.
NTS POLICE CASE.
Mr. COLLETT wished to ask whether there was any
foundation for the statement that police•constable Hale still
remained in the police force of that county, and whether Sir
Charles Haywood still remained in the magistracy?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
the question put by the Hon. Member, the House would see,
had been put upon an exparte statement.
Mr. COLLETT said that that statement was the founda-
tion of his question ; and he had every reason to believe it was
correct.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM hoped that some time longer than
four days would be given to make an inquiry such as that calle(1
for by the Hon. Member into the character and conduct of a
gentleman of high character, and well known to them all.
Mr. O'CON NELL—Let the Hon. Member hand the state—
ment to the Right Hon. Baronet.
Mr. COLLETT said he would persevere in his notice to.
ask the question, and begged to band the statement to the
Right Hon. Gentleman.

TE BILL.
Sir J. GRA HA 11 movedCORN the order of the day for the third
reading of the Corn Bill.
The Marquis of GRANBY said, that in rising to address the
House upon this question, he trusted he would receive the in-
dulgence of the House for a short time. lie would oppose this
Bill, because upon it depended the fate of the poor man and the
labourer, and because it was a question of whether the Eng-
lishman was to be superior to the foreigner. Before he entered
on the question before the House, he wished to make a few ob-
servations on the manufactures of this country. The Noble
Lord near him ( Lord G. Bentinck) the other night said, and
said truly, that they did not desire to see the manufactures of
this country decline.—( Hear, hear.) They did not wish to see
the stream of its prosperity conducted into worn-out and useless
channels. They wished to see it, like the noble river outside
those walls, flowing in a continued and full stream, and not
like a rushing torrent, that at one time inundated the
country, and at another dried up to an useless
and unprofitable pool. They did not wish to see
the manufacturing interests decline, although they
knew the evils of the present system; for when properly
conducted they were of benefit to the country. If any proof
of that fact. were wanted, the Right Hon. Baronet the First
Minister of the Crown, whom he did not then see in his place,
had given it to them the other night. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had said that those counties in the neighbourhood of the
manufacturing districts were more prosperous than those=
counties further removed. The inference that should be drawns
from that was, that they should endeavour to draw the two in-
terests closer together. They should endeavour to
create a better circulation of the blood in their
own veins, and should not assist other counties which
did not require it. These were the principles
which should be applied, and he believed that these were the
principles which had long been entertained by many of the
manufacturers. He did hope that they would show the world
that her Majesty's Government were not bound by the Anti-
Corn-law League, by not giving up their presentt
aplctn6lll/0.,
The object of the corn-laws was much misunderstood. They
(the anti-protectionists) said that they starved the people. He
denied it.—( Hear, hear.) He sa_idresatththrtnh
supply food to the people at a constant andi :Ines
involved its
efthoseenet dw tohu its
( flear, hear.) There were two g
bye i principles
the. object
this question. The first principle vitoe
m the
produce of their own soil. ET' I )
and would people
gentlemenbegiven
o who sat.
country—healthy manly e
of protection they would
which, if
mabaln)eyot
people of this country,. employment—an
to the
employment under .
heated and ill -ventilated till a late hour in this -ventilated apartment
would have recourse to, they would in a short time become
much more vigorous, and capable to discharge their duties
with roots etlicacy The second principle was, that if
any deficiency took place in tt e supply of
their
own produce*
they would be enabled to have from th • • ea. colonies as vouch as
would meet that deficiency, and by this means the colonies
would
were abbe benefiteford
e;
ign
but if scarcity arose, and the corn-lawe
olished, prod
lion with their colonial uce would then come into competi-
-( Hear.) The Nobleproduce, to the detriment of the latter.
Lord near him (Lord G. Bentinck)
proved that the capabilities
of this country were able to meet
the demands of its increasingpopulation ; for from the recent
return of the averages he
showed that there were 13,000
quarters of increase of corn as compared with 1842.--
(" Hear, hear," from Lord oint
which, thoughi
not George Bentanck). Another p
mmediately connected with the corn-lawss•
had yet an indirect reference to them, and was of very great
importance. As it was much be ter stated in a book which'
t
lie held in his hand he would take the liberty of read;
ing it from a work of Mr. Allison " On Population.
The Noble Lord then read a passage, showing how corn bad
been bought up by the speculators and bonded till a period of
scarcity. This he considered diminished the supply in our
markets, while it augmented that of the foreign market.
He would advise the House to pause and consider well
what effect such a system had upon the scarcity of corn, anuP'
therefore, whether it would not be better to reform such JO
abuse, than to pass such a sweeping measure as that before-
the House. The Right Hon. Baronet had informed the House
that those laws which he once considered politic, were nos'
unjust. Looking at the amount of taxation in this country, an.
at the amount of capital which had been spent on the faith
of those laws in improving land, he could only say tt,at they
were not unjust, but highly politic and neces;:ary to the
state of the country.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord (C.. Bentinck.)
But he went on to state that there was great iif;cress under the
present corn•law. lle feared that might bet true in particular_
cases, but he thought that the farmer who threw off his gooll
warm great coat oa a winter's day becaeLse it was cold w°r_
u
act just as wisely as the farmer who threw
off pro-
tection tection because some distress e7i Theysted.--(Cheers.)
were also told that protection was the bane of agri-
culture, and that it wanted competition to excite it.
denied that protection was snoh ; but if it was, must it net
also he the bane of manufactures ? It was not likely that
it should be bane of the one and not of the other.
Why, what a' great injust,.ce—the Hon. Baronet was fond of
the word—to protect the one and leave the other defenceless.
Of course, the answer wquld be that protection wag afforded W