The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIANIENT.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, June 1.
The SrEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
REPORTS.

The following reports were considered and agreed to:—
Midland Great Western; Railway of Ireland (Devia-
tion Line from Mullingar to Athlone) Bill.
North and South-Western Railway
-(Harrow to Brent-
ford) Bill.
Scottish Midland Junction Railway (Amendment and
Branches to Bimini:), &c.) Bill.
York, Newcastle, and Berwick Railway (Deviation and
Abandonment of part of the Thirsk and Mahon
Branch) Bill.
THIRD READINGS.
The following Bills were read a third time, and
passed:—
Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway (No. I—Amendment
of Acts and Branches, &e.)
Forth and Clyde Navigation and Airdrie and Coatbridge
Water Bill.
Great Western Railway (Extension of the Berks arid
Hants Railway from llungerferd to Westbury, with a
Branch to Devizes).
Norfolk Railway (Amendment of Acts and Extension of

Time for commencing Reedham and Diss Branches
North-Western hallway (Diversions at Skipton, Caster
ton, and Sedbergh).
REPEAL OF THE -UNION—AN IRISH PAR-
LIAMENT.
The Lord Mayor of Dublin, accompanied by several
of the Corporation of the city, wearing their robes,
appeared at the bar and presented a petition against the
repeal of the Union, and praying for the restoration of
the Irish l'arliament. The petition, which was very
voluminous, was read by the Clerk at the table. It was
ordered to lie on the tattle.
NAVIGATION-LAWS.

Mr. FREWEN presented a petition against the Bi,
proposed by her Majesty's Government for altering these
laws.
Mr. FAGAN presented a similar petition from Cork.
Mr. COBBOLD presented a petition to the same
effect.
SPIRITUOUS LIQUORS.
Mr. FOX presented a petition teem Oldham, praying
the house to restrict the sale of intoxicating liquors on
the Sabbath.
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE.
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented fifty petitions from
Preston praying tor a reduction of the public expenditure.
THE FRANCHISE.

Mr. lIL IE said he had a petition to present. from
Mr. Robinson (as we understood), a clerk in the Signet-
office iu Scotland, stating, up to the recent revolution in
France, he was a strong Conservative—(Laughter)—
but that he was now a Radical Reformer, and that there
would be no peace in the country until there was an
extension of the suffrage, annual Parliaments, and a
more equitable distribution of the electoral districts.
LEICESTER ELECTION.

Mr. KER, SEYMEII reported that the Com-
mittee, had arrived at the opinion that Sir Joshua
%Valaisley and Mr. Richard Gardner were nut duly
elected to represent the borough in Parliament at the
last election, and that both had by their agents been
guilty of bribery; that several of the electors had heen
bribed by small sums of money, oue with 11. 2s. 6d., the
" gilt of a new hat"—(Laughter)—and that the system
of bribers• was such as to require the serious attention
of the House.—(Cheers.)
The report was ordered to be printed.
Mr. W. MILES presented petitions from Somerset-
shire, complaining of the increase of vagrancy, and
pra) ing for an alteration of the law
NAVIGATION-LAWS.

Mr. LABOUCHERE pregented a petition from the
merchants and banlwrs of Liverpool praying for a re-
peal of the navigation-laws.
BAKERS.

Lord R. GROSVENOR gave notice of his intention,
at some early day, to bring in a Bill to prohibit the
working of bake-houses at certain hours of the night.
DEFALCATIONS IN CALCUTTA.

Viscount JOCELYN, seeing the Right Hon. Baronet
the President of the Board of Control in his place,
wished to know whether it was true as reported, that
there was a deficiency to the extent of 100,0001. in the
accounts of Sir Thomas Tarton, the Ecclesiastical Regis-
trar of the Supreme Court of Calcutta; and, if so, how it
was intended to make up the deficiency ; and whether
the Indian Government were engaged in concerting mea-
sures by which such delinquencies would in future be
prevented?
Sir J. HOBHOUSE said it was with extreme sorrow
he had to slate that the report of the defalcation of the
Ecclesiastical Registrar of the Supreme Court of Calcutta
was too true. From the information he had received
he could not say that the sum was so largo as that men-
tioned by the Noble Lard, but still it was a very large
sum indeed. The sureties accepted on Sir Thomas
Turton taking the office were only for 10,0001.; and
even supposing that this sum were recovered, it would
ge but a very little way indeed towards making good the
deficiency. With respect to the second question, as to
who would bear the loss, he was sorry he could not give
the Noble Lord any satisfactory answer. The East India
Company insist that the loss eught to be charged upon
the revenue, but no doubt his Right Hon. Friend would
protest against that course being pursued. With respect to
the third question, as to whether some scheme was being
concocted to prevent such delinquencies in future, he
had to inform the Noble Lord that, on the first receipt
of the intelligence from India, ke thought it his duty
to consult the law Akers of the Crown with respect
to the punishment of this individual party—as to
whether it would be advisable to indict Sir
Thomas Turton but the opinion given by the
law officers was not favourable to that course, and he
had thought it right to inform the Governor-General of
India of that opinion. The Government in India, how-
ever,were now preparing an Act by which it would be
their endeavour to prevent, by all possible moans, a re-
currence of such delinquencies.
THE VEST INDIES.
Mr. BERKELEY wished to ask the Hon. Member for
Montrose a question respecting his resolutions on the
state of the West Indies. He observed that the Hon.
Member had postponed the discussion upon the resolu-
tions till the 22d of June, and he wished to ask him under
what circumstances it was that Government would not
consent to an earlier day? He wished to ask, also,
whether, supposing the House affirmed the resolutions,
they would be productive of good, when, on the sth of
June, the ls. 6d. preferential duty would tall in?
Mr. HUME said he had only two days to choose
from, and ho had fixed upon the 22d of June as being
the best adapted to the discussion. At the time, how-
ever, that he named that day, he was not aware of the
preferential duty expiring so shortly afterwards, and if
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government would
agreo to it, he should have no objection to bring on the
discussion this day week.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he would reply to the lion.
Member's question to-morrow.
Mr. GOULBURN wished to ask the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government whether he was prepared to
bring forward any measure upon this subject?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that immediately
after the recess he or one of his Right lion. Friends
would state the course Government were prepared to
take on the subject.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
In answer to a question from Mr. KEOGH,
The SOLICITOI4- GENERAL stated that the Bill
YI as ready for committal, and it would be brought on on
the first opportunity.
LAW OF MARRIAGE.

him in his place, when the report
o
on the Law of Marriage would be
Mr. SLANEY wished to ask the Hon. Member for
Rafiedtnhfe rne c
Mr. S. WORTLEY said, as most of the Members on
lov:sohhmeiratresib,sisej seeingo? n
that Commission had important avocations independent
of the Commission, there had been some difficulty in
getting meetings as frequently as was desirable, but he
was happy to say that the Commissioners had come to
the determination to report separately on the questions
of marriage and the degrees of affinity, and that the
reports on these subjects had been prepared and were
only waiting to bo engrossed. As soon as they were
ready they would be presented to her Majesty, and it
would rest with the Government to lay them upon the
table of the House.
IMPORTANT NOTICE OF MOTION.

---- -
OATHS OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT, AND
PAYMENT OF ASSESSED TAXES.

---
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I beg to give notice that,
on Monday next, I shall ask leave of the House to bring
in a Bill to alter the form of oaths taken by Members
of Parliament on taking their seats in Parliament; and
makes duce a
tB necessaryi ll to
also, that on Friday next I shall move for leave to intro-
peal so much of the existing law as
to pay the assessed taxes before elec-
tors can be registered in cities and boroughs.--(Loud
cries of " Hear, hear," and cheers.)
BOROUGH OF DERBY.
Mr. COLVILE rose to move 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 Derby, in
the room of the Right Hon. Edward Strutt and the Hon.
Edward Frederick Leveson Gower, whose election has
been determined to be void.
Mr. STAFFORD seconded the motion. He said he
should like to know how many of the Hon. Members
who were prepared to vote against the petition had read
the petition from Derby signed by some 2,000, out of
the 45,000 inhabitants of the town. Writs had issued
to other places with the same amount of population as
Derby, the same constituency, and a similar charge
brought against them. Bribery was thus effected:—
A offered B a bill for his vote which ho ac-
cepted, and petitioned against the return. and
it was not unlikely that the whole would be dis-
franchised in consequence of the act of one in-
dividual, and that ho thought was not a sufficient
reason for the disfranchisement of the innocent.
If the House withheld this writ he would take cars that
it should not bo the last time the question of its issuing
should be brought forward, for be would time after time
and day by day test by divisions who were the Members
he whoartieuwnsould withhold from their fellow-men the right of
representation.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME denied that those who refused the issuing
ot this writ were acting unjustly. The very reverse was
the case. His only object was to ascertain, for
the benefit of the community at large, who were the
pdtehrlttoohd the
adbeeitrulgeltilltaVfduonjnustbypratheteiceHs.ouAses,
it was, that the writs should not bo issued
to any of the boroughs which had been re-
ported as guilty of corrupt practices, in order that it
should be proved whether they had been guilty or not.
He should certainly take the sense of the House against
the issuing of the writ.
Sir G. GREY said that the question before the House
was, whether the circumstances that appeared upon the