The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-30 00:00:00

SALMON FISHERIES.

Colonel CONOLLY presented a petition from the owners of
salmon fisheries in Ireland, stating that some of them had re-
cently lost 5,000/. in consequence of the recent enactment, for-
bidding the fishing of salmon during more than one season in
the year, and preying that this stringent enactment might be
removed, and the laws relating to salmon fisheries in Ireland,
assimilated to laws of England nn the same subject.
SELLIN,, SPIRITOUS LIQUORS ON THE
SABBATH.
Mr. LA WSON presented a petition against the selling of
spiritous liquors on the Sabbath.
THE DANISH CLAIMS.
Mr. G. HUDSON presented a petition in favour of the
Danish Claims.
ADIJURNED DEBATE ON THE COERCION BILL.
On the motion tf the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE
QUER. the motion of the day for resuming the adjourned de-
bate on the Irish Coercion Bill was read for the purpose of
being postponed till to-morrow.—Agreed to.
SIR JAMES GRAHAM.

Sir J. GRAHAM said he had a petition to pre-ent from
himself.
• The SPEAKER said the Hon. Baronet could not present a
petition from himseli.—( Laughter. )
Mr. S. HERBERT', under these circumstances, presented
the petition from the Right Hen. Baronet. It was concern-
ing the Caledonian Railway.
NOTICES OF MOTION.

Mr. SPOONER postp.med his motion relating to the peti-
tion of Mr. Toulmin Smith, from the 12th till the 14th May.
Dr. BOWRING moved for a copy of a petition of the in-
hentants of Malta, to the Queen in Council, on the subject of
their grievances, and especially complaining of the interference
of the police at the last Carnival.—Agreed to.
THE POST-OFFICE.

Captain VIVIAN wished to draw the attention of the House
to the great irregularity which took place in the transmission
of letters and newspapers from the General Post-office, and
upon this subject he would desire to ask a question of the
Right. Hon. Member the Secretary for the Treasury,
whether the Government were prepared to make any
arrangements on the subject. A friend of his 001)
living five miles from London, was accustomed to receive his
letters and papers eight-and-forty hours after the pi oper time.
He wrote to his news agent, a Mr. Smith, who, in reply, in-
formed him that 860 sacks of newspapers, posted in the morn-
ing, were detained till the evening. He (Captain Vivian)
believed that it arose from a deficiency in sorters.
Mr. CARDWELL was rather surprised to hear any com-
plaint against the delivery of letters. He was aware of
some irregularity in the transmission of newspapers.
There had been a very great increase in the circulation of
the London daily papers by the morning mails within the last
two months ; are, he thought that Hon. Gentlemen would be
surprised when he stated to them that he held in his
hand a return in which it was stated that in one
week within the present year the number of news-
papers earned by the Post-office was no less than 729,000,
Perhaps some Hon. Gentlemen were not aware of the bulk of
some of those newspapers. He held in his hand one of those
newspapers, and 729,000 of those had been forwarded in one
week alone I—( Hear, hear.) The irregularities complained of,
as he had already stated to the House, were by no means
general at the Post Office, or in any way connected with that
department. They arose from many other causes. Some
newspapers wore sent without corers, and some were misdirected
Some were sent at the very last moment. There were many
irregularities for which the Post-office authorities were not
accountable. With regard to the responsibility of ;the Post-
office, he had already stated the great increase which had taken
place in the dispatch of the morning mails within the last two
months, and there had also been a considerable increase in the
public business. There bad been new machinery, which had
only recently been put into operation. There had been an ad-
ditional number of persons appointed to discharge the increasing
duties, and be had every reason to believe that the irregulari-
ties complained of would soon be removed. He had also the
satisfaction of stating to Hon. Gentle that he was in constant
communication with the authorities at the Post-office,
and it appeared that there were circumstances at present
existing which prevented them from discharging their duties
in an efficient manner. They were, however, most anxious
to take every possible means for the due discharge of the im-
portant duties which devolved upon them.
CONVEYANCE OF TROOPS 10 THE COLONIES.
Mr. HUME wtshed to ask a question of which he had given
notice. namely, whether sufficient provision had been made for
having life-boats to accompany such ships as conveyed our
troops to the colonies. The public were much interested in
the answer that might be given by the Government to this
important question.

'ir G. COCKBURN made some answers to the Hon.
Member, which was perfectly inaudible in the gallery. At the
the couclusion of his remarks,
Mr. HUME stated that the Hon. Baronet had quite mistaken
his question, with reference to the number of life-boats,
with which each ship was to be provided. He
meant only that one life-boat should be carried in each
ship, for the purpose of conveying a rope to the shore in case
of shipments. He would ask the President of the Board of
Trade whether any provision had been made of this nature?
Sir G. CLERK stated that the subject bad been under the
consideration of the Board of Trade.
THE BEERSELLERS.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet
the Secretary for the Home Department a question with re-
spect to certain petitions which bad been presented from the
beersellers of the couotry. The beersellers were anxious to
know whether it was the intention of the Government to legis-
late at all with reference to their claim to be placed upon an
equality with the licensed victuallers of the country.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, he had received a great
number of memorials upon this subject. One of the privileges
of the licensed victuallers was, that they should keep their
houses epen during the night. Of course, if the be•erse-llers
were placed upon an equality, they would claim a similar right.
Were such a privilege extended, he had no doubt that it would
be abused, and therefore he could not hold out the least ex-
.

peetation that any legislation would take place upon this subject.
Mr. BILEW wished to ask the Right Hon. Secretary for
the Home Department whether it was the intention of Govern-

ment to act .on the recommendation of the Landlord and
Tenant commission, and consolidate the offices of clerks of the
crown in different counties in Ireland, or replace them as the
offices became vacant.

Sir Ji GRAHAM (who was very imperfectly heard) said
that the, office of a clerk of the Crown in Ireland was a very
important office in connexion with the Constitution. The
Hon. Member, as well as the House, must be aware that the
clerks of the Crown were appointed by the Crown on the re-
sponsibility of the advisers of the Crown. The variety of

offices entailed considerable expenses, and the Government was
preparing a Bill to consolidate those offices, under the recom-
mendation of the Commission the lion. Member had re-
ferred to.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
Messengers from the Lords brought up several Bills, which
were ordered to be laid on the table.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' ACT.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who was very indi.tinctly
heard in the gallery, was understood to ask the Hon. Member
for Lambeth to postpone the second reading of this Bi!l, be-
cause it would be quite inipoesible, on that evening, to give it
the consideration which it merits demanded.

Mr. HAWES said he was quite ready to accede to the Hon.
and Learned Member's proposition, by postponing the second
reading till that day fortnight.
PRIVILEGE-31R. W. S. O'BRIEN.

Mr. ESTCOURT moved that the adjourned debate on the
pro,eedingq connected with the Hon. Member for Limerick
be resumed.

Mr. E. B. ROCHE said ay t it would be in the recollection
of the House, that at the conclusion of the debate on the
preceding evening it has been his duty—his painful duty—to
come down to that House, instead of his Hon. Friend, in order
to make a certain statement to the House. The Right Hen.
Baronet opposite, acting, as he (Mr. Rocke) admitted he did,
in the fairest and most amicable spirit possible—(Cheers)—
thought well to give his Hon. Friend eight-and-forty hours
to consider his resolution. His Hon. Friend had considered
what course he should pursue, but he complained, and he (Mr.
Rocke) considered that in that complaint he was justified
he complained that he had had no opportunity of explaining to
the House the position in which he was placed, and the reasons
which had actuated him in adopting the course he had followed
under the circumstances. He did not know what course his
Hon. Friend would have pursued, but what he would suggest
was, that the House, either by a positive motion, or in some
other way, would allow his Honourable Friend to come to
the bar and explain the reason for his adoption of
the course he had pu.sued on• this occasion.—( Hear, hear. )
It must be true that he was asking the House to pursue an
unusual course, inasmuch as it must be at variance with the
rules and regulations of the House, but he was sure that when
he appealed to the House on behalf of the Honourable Gen-
tleman who stood in the painful position of not
being sustained by many individuals in that House. He stood
in a painful position,
.because he had taken a course of action
different from that adopted by those who usually aeted with
him. He was sure, however, that the House would see that,
whatever might be the nature of the rules and regulations of
the House, he considered that, in justice and fairness, and
with their usual desire to see fair play administered,
that they would in their indulgence and kindness, grant the
motion which he had risen to make. He had therefore simply
to move as an amendment, " That Mr. William Smith O'Brien
should be heard in his place."
Mr. O'CONNELL seconded the motion.
Mr. HUME apprehended that there could be co objection to
grant the amendment of the Hon. Member.—( Hear.) He was
anxioth as any one to maintain the privileges of the House, but
at the same time, when a request was made in the way in
which it had been made by the Hon. Member, he thought the
House should assent to it, provided, however, that the grant-
ing of it would not materially interfere with the rules of the
House. He hoped they would agree to the motion.
Mr. R. YORK said he had somewhat considered the question
and that if they wished to preserve the rules of the House in-
violate, that it would be absolutely impossible to grant the mo-
ti,in of the Hon. Member.—( Several Member's in the vicinity
or the Hon. Member called out, " Why," but he made no
response.)

lilr. O'CONNELL said his Honourable Friend (Mr. Smith
O'Brien) would no doubt be satisfied at the way in which
the subject had been brought before the House, but he (Mr.
O'Connell) did not think his case had been put in a proper
mariner before the House.

Sir ROBERT PEEL—Sir, it is my desire to relax the
strict rules of the House as far as possible.—( Hear,
hear). But at the same time I do not think
that, as far as my private inclinations are concerned,
1 wish to act on that principle, but in the position in which I
stand I owe a duty to the House—( Cheers)—and therefore it
'is of the utmost importance to cotisider whether it would be
advisable to establish a precedent, by granting the amend-
ment of the Honourable Member—we must con-
sider what will be the effect of the relaxation of
the House. 1 must remind the Honourable Member
( Mr O'Connell) that the Hon. Member for Limerick (Mr. S.
O'Brien) had every opportunity offered to him to beg the order
which the House made on the subject ; and I do distinctly re-
collect that, in speaking on the subject, he said that although
he had such an opportunity, he did not think he should
obey it, beeause his sentiments on the subject were
already on record in the correspondence which had
taken place on the subject, and to which he said he
mint refer as the grounds for refusing to attend.
I find being in his place, having been called upon by the
Speaker, stated that he had skeany stated two reasons, that
he had no further observation to ieffer upon the matter, and
that he still held his determination. He then withdrew. Now
I apprehend, having declined to obey the orders of the
House, he is in, what is technically called, contempt.
Whether or not there were precedents for acceding
to the motion which was made, I am not aware.
but I beg that you will have the goodness to state what are the
rules of his House. If they are in favour of the extension, I
will certainly be rejoiced, but if they are the reverse, I will
feel it my painful duty to support the rules of the House.
The SPEAKER-1 must state, with very great regret, I
remember no precedent which would justify this House in
acceding to the Amendment.—( Hear.) The Honourable
Gentleman had an opportunity of being heard in his place
and that was the time to make any explanation he thought
proper. The Hon. Member did net do that, and the House
of Commons then resolved that he had been guilty of a con-
tempt. I cannot call to his memory any precedent which
would justify the House in acceding to this motion.
Mr. ROcHE of course bowed to the decision of he House,
and he would now beg leave to ask whether there was any
reason why the Hon. Member should not be heard at the bar
of the House?

•
The SPEAKER said that there was no precedent for an
Hon. Member appearing at the bar of the House unless as a
criminal.
Mr. GRATTAN said he had been requested by his Hon.
Friend to state, that when he had the opportunity of being
heard in his place, he was not aware of the motion which the
Chairman of the Committee of Selection should propose.
Mr. ROCHE-01 course I bow to the decision of the
Speaker.

The SPEAK ER then put the question—that William Smih
O'Brien, Esq. having been guilty of a contempt, by neglect-
ing to attend a railway Committee, during the present ses-
sion, after having been summoned—resolved that a warrant dc
issue against him, and that the Sergeant-at-Arms do arrest
him accordingly.
Mr. M. MILNES, amidst great impatience, said he rose
humbly to submit to the attention of the House whether it
would not be possible to avoid the unpleasantness of agreeing
to the course proposed. He believed it was perfectly clear,
that if the Honourable Member should continue to remain
in a state of contempt he could not take his seat in the
House, nor of course take part in the proceedings. If this
debate were adjourned till that day six months, he appre-
hended that the Honourable Member for Limerick would
not be able t., take part in the deliberatiors of the House,
and he did think that the best way of avoiding
the unpleasantness that attended the course recommended by
the Hun. Members that had made the original motion would
be to agree to the adjournment of this debate ;ill that day six
months. —(Loud cries of " Divide, divide.")
An How. MEMBER. having seconded this amendment, the
Hon. Member said, that as it appeared not to meet the views of
the House be would withdraw it.—( Hear, hear.)
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. No division,
however, took place in consequence of the motion being
agreed to. It was then ordered that Mr. Smith O'Brien should
be committed to the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms, and
that Mr. Speaker be directed to issue his warrant accordingly.

COMMONS' SUMMARY.
DANISH CLAIMS.
Mr. HawEs then rose to bring forward the subject of the
Danish Claims. After a few introductory observations, in
the course of which the Hon. Gentleman reminded the
House that the rights of these claimants had been repeatedly
admitted by successive majorities of the House, he proceeded
togive the history of the expe lition to Copenhagen in 1807, an
expedition got up with the greatest secresy. The expedi,ion
went not for the purpose of hostile aggresions, but for the
purpose of enforcing negotiations. The fleet of Den-
mark was seized, and then Denmark made reprisals
by seizing British property. Great Britain made
represents and seized Danish property to nearly double the
amount of the property seized by the Danish Government.
Negotiations, however, still continued. On the 18th of
November the Danish Government declared war, and it was
not until the 24th of 'December that England declared war.
It had been contended on a former occasion that those de-
clarations had a retrospective operation, but looking at the
Convention which had been made at the time the seizure
of the Danish fleet toek place, he found that it
was agreed that private property should be respected—that
that convention must have been a farce until the
declaration of war, and therefore he had a right
to assume that all the sequents of property which
bade been made in the interval had been made
as reprisals and not as prizes; and he was borne out in this
assumption by what a declaration, which had been made
by Mr. CANNING at the time these transactions
took place. The claims had been of three kinds, Ist, those
for book debts, 2d: those for goods seized on chore, and 3d,
those for ships at sea and goods seized on board. In 1825 and
1836, the first and second classes of claimants had their
claims settled. In 1838 the third class of claimants urged
their claims, on the ground that the Government had funds
out of which to pay them, for the Government had seized
more than sufficient Danish property to liquidate all
these claims. In 1839 these claims were again brought for-
byJusliN GovernmentCaa s s
ofw L
tEL,e
wardand a
lt h
otuhgaitt at chceoymNpv
errseh ed
opposed lawyer,by Ihre.
day, it was determined that the claims should
would be inquired into, and adjudicated upon.
A commission was appointed, a judicial examination took
place, and claims, amounting to 225,000/., were admitted
This judicial report was again disregarded by the
Government, and in 1841, Mr. Cresswell again urged their
claims upon the attention of the HousO, and again the rights
of claimants were affirmed in opposition to the Government.
If these claims were to be resisted en technical greunds,
he had the authority of Mr. Justice Creswell,
for saying that they had a right in law, but
it was not on such: narrow grounds that such
a question should be argued. The expedition had
been organized secretly, for a great national object
which object had been accomplished, and he would
ask if it was right that the merchant should be sacrificed,
when it was proved that the Government had seized more
property than sufficient to liquidate their claims. The Govern-
ment could not have given these merchants and shipowners
proper notice and when on this occasion shipowners and mer-
applied to the Government authorities of the day they
chants were led to believe that they only ran the ordinary
sea risks in going to the Baltic. Under these
circumstances, he thought the merchants had a perfect right
to come to the Government and ask for a Committee of the
House to investigate and settle these claims. The Hon.
Member concluded by moving for a Committee.