The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-15 00:00:00

IMPERTALPARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
THIS DAY, WEDNESDAY, MAY 15.

The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual time, a few
minutes after twelve o'clock ; there being about fifty
Metnbera present.
Mr. DUNDAS moved the second reading of the Lards'
Amendments on the Greenwich Railway Bill.
The amendments on the Highgate, Ross, Tadcaster, and
other Road Bills were read a second time.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS presented petitions in favour of
the Lord's Day Bill, from Beaurnaris, and from other
places. Also from the clergy of Matlock. The Hon.
Member then presented two petitions relating to the Beer
Laws, which were referred to the Committee. He also
presented petitions from Belmont and other places for the
abolition of slavery ; and from the dean and chapter of
Ely, and from the clergy and archaeaconry of Totness
against the Irish Temporalities Bill.
Mr. TODD presented a petition in favour of the im-
mediate abolition of slavery ; and one in favour of a re-
peal of the house and window duties.
Mr. HORNBY presented petitions from the borough
of Warrington, for the abolition of slavery; for the re-
peal of the house and•window duties ; for the putting of
beer-shops on the same footing as public-houses ; and one
•r•om the same place praying that the Assizes for the
South Division ofLancashire might beheld in that borough.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented twenty-two petitions in
favour of the immediate abolition of slavery from Man-
chester, Salford, Bullock-smithey, Staley-bridge, and other
places in the counties of Lancaster, Chester, and Derby.
Sir JOHN ASTLEY presented petitions from Spalding
and Heaton for the abolition of slavery, and from Bristorff
for the total repeal of the malt tax.
Mr. WHITMORE presented petitions from Bridgnorth
and Bewdlev for the abolition of slavery.
Lord MORPET/I presented a petition from the cloth
manufacturer,' of Leeds, praying for the repe it of the
corn laws. The Noble Lord also presented petitions from
Barnsley, Goole, Long Preston, the graaiera attending the
fairs of Skepton and Settle, anti from several other parts
of Yorkshire, for the better observance of the Sabbath.
From Rawinark, Besborough, Grayafield, and Goole,
against the Beer Bill, and from the Dissenters of York-
shire and Devon for the abolition of slavery.
Sir R. V YVYAN said he would take that opportunity
to make a few remarks upo❑ two or three statements of
matter of fact that fell from the Right Hon. Secretary for
the Colonies last night. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
stated that the Colonial Legislatures did not attend to the
recommendations of Government, and that observation
was intended particularly to apply to Jamaica. Now this
was not the case, for that Legislature, under the recom.
mendation of his Majesty's Government, had passed an
Act whereby the evidence of the slave was not only ad-
mitted against the master but the overseer. Another
allegation had been made by the Right Hon. Gent., that
the evidence of the slave could only be received upon
the recommendation of the master. That observation
only applied to one island, namely, that of Antigua.
The Right Honourable Secretary had declared untruly
that a slave might be liable to receive thirty-nine
stripes for merely looking his master in the face.
He was anxious that the House should not allow
charges against a body of persons to go forth to
the public, and create a prejudice, without there being an
opportunity to answer them. The Right Hon. Gent. had
said that the evidence of a slave was not admissible without
the recommendation of his master ; that was untrue,
for in Jamaica, at least it was admissible without such
recommendation. The statement of the Right Hon. Gent.
would, if uncontradicted, have a great influence in the
minds of all who, like him (Sir R. Vyvyan) were anxious
for the emancipation of slaves.
Lord MORPETH had not the means of information to
enable him to meet the statement of the Hon. Baronet;
hut lie was convinced that his Right Hon. Friend (Mr.
Stanley) would, if he were present, be able to substantiate
all he said last night. The statement that a master might
inflict 39 stripes on the slave merely for looking him in
the face was made on the authority of a West India pro
prietor.

- Mr. O'CONNELL said his information was derived from
the evidence before the House. The question was, could
any slave owner inflict 39 lashes on the slave, without
assigning any reason for it ? It was unquestionably
proved that he could; and that fact was of so horrifying a
nature, that the House would not be imbued with a par-
ticle of humanity if it did not pass a law to make it irrf-
possible for one human being to strike another with im-
punity.--(Hear, hear.)
Colonel LEITH HAY said he believed the statement of
the Right Hon. Secretary to bane been over exaggerated ;
it was an exparte statement, and given in such a manner
as likely to create great prejudice, and he thought the
Hon. Baronet perfectly justified in making the reply to it
that he had.
An Hoff. MEMBER said he believed it was untrue that
an overseer could punish a slave without assigning a reason
for it. Many exaggerated statements had been made to
create a prejudice against the West India proprietors, but
the House should proceed to the discus-ion of the question
dispassionately and without prejudice.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. D. W. HARVEY protested against the principle
of preventing Hots. Members from availing themselves of
the presenting of petitions, as an organ for the expression
of their opinions. He regretted much to see that there
was no responsible metnber of the Administration pre-
sent.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It was disgraceful that
thus, day after d ty, petitions were, be might say, ludi-
crously consigned to a bag, without the notice of any
responsible Minister.—(ll.ar.) After the luminous
speech of last night, the House would naturally expect
many other in the ensaing ds.bate, and would then be im-
mediately called upon to decide without time to come to
a rational conclusion. He would ask if the scheme of
emancipation was to go haul in hand with that for com-
pensation ; or if emancipation was to be carried without
compensation ? And if not, where the compensation
was to come from ?—(Hear.) From the speech of the
Noble Lord, who had until within a very short period
. . . . .

teen Colonial Secretary, the House had learnt that that
Noble Lord had been occupied for nearly two years in
preparing a scheme for the emancipation of the slaves,
which plan differed from that produced in so short a time
by the Right Hon. Secretary. He would ask, why not
have the plan of the Noble Lord before the House,
as well as the resolutions of the Honourable Secretary ?
—(Hear.) He would contend that such conversational
inquiries elucidate the facts of a case better than a lu-
speecli, and again expres,,ed his vexation at thtrc
being no Member of the Government present at the pre•
sensation of petitions, as had been part of the original
compact between the House and the Ministers.—(Hear.)
An Hox. ME:m:3Eu stated some instances of cruelty to
slaves, to prove that the statements before the public were
not exaggerated, and the petition was then laid on
the table.

Mr. MARTIN presented three petitions from Sligo
against nerd slavery; one from the same place pray-
ing that Diisenters may be released from the taking of
oaths; and another praying (or inquiry into the stiunicpal
abuses in the borough of Sligo.

Mr. ROEBUCK presented petitions from a person
named John Webh.r of Tiverton, Devon'hire, for the
abolition of titFes ; from the Leamington Political Union
against the Lord's Diy Observance Bill; and from a per-
son named Robert Clarke, relative to the Glasgow Lot-
tery. The latter petition stated, that he, like many
others, had purchased a share in the lottery, and, like
many others', his share was a blank—(A laugh)—that
from the open manner in which it was advertised, he be-
lieved it to be a fair lottery, and under the control of
Commissioners appointed by Government, but that since
the drawing he had reason to beli,-ve it was an illegal and
improper proceeding. The Hon. Meniber said it appeared
to him that the Bill under which the lottery took place
was smuggled through the House, and that Government,
whose business it was to watch it, had allowed it to go
forth—thus deteriorating the morals of the country. A
Learned Friend of his, who had read the Bill, was of
opinion that it did not sanction a lottery—if so, the Go-
vernment was still more chargeable in not having pre-
% ented its taking place The Hon. Member next presented
a petition from the freemen of Bath, complaining of
abuses in the corporation.

Sir R. INGLIS said be believed that it was generally
imagined that all the shares of the Glasgow Lottery were
to have been drawn on the 17th April, but from what he
had just heard it appeared that another scheme was pre-
paring. As to the blame attached to Government, he
believed that the Bill, being a private one, did not come
under their consideration more than any other private Bill.
l'he Lottery certainly did not take place under the sanc-
tion of Government, but all the ordinary means of pub-
licity were adopted, without any attempt to prevent it.—
There was no mode of raising money so objectionable in
principle as that by lottery, for by experience it was proved
to be demoralizing in its effects. He hoped the attention
of the Government would be immediately directed to this
subject.

General PALMER vindicated the corporation of Bath
from the charges named in the petition presented by his
Hon. Colleague.

Sir H. PARNELL presented petitions from the Incor-
porated Trades of Dundee, praying that freemen and
burgesses might be allowed to vote for their magistrates ;
rom St. Andrew's, praying that the right of voting for