The Sun.
London, England, 1833-06-12 00:00:00

which the proceedings, as regarded the other defend-
ants, could be removed in accordance with the rules
which had been just granted to Mr. Earle for two other
defendants. Captain Halstead did not complain of any
prejudice against him, and his being tried at the Sessions
was his undoubted right, as he had been committed to that
jurisdiction, and he would have the benefit of a trial six
weeks sooner than at the Assizes.

The COURT granted the rule.
Mr. GAMBIER asked that Captain Halstead be admitted
to bail.

The COURT said there was not the necessary informa-
tion before them. That application could be hereafter
made before a Judge at Chambers.

COURT OF REVIEW.-(THIS DAY.)

IN RE KNOWLES AND OTHERS, BANKRUPTS.

Mr. SWANSTON stated that a petition bad been pre-
sented to the Court a short time back, to supersede, with
the consent of creditors, a commission which had been
issued against the bankrupts, hut this objection had arisen
in drawing up the order, namely, that two of the bank-
rupts had not surrendered. The application to supersede
was with the consent of the persons who bad issued the
commission, and of all the parties interested in maintaining
it, and sending them to go through the form of the bank-
rupts' surrendering would only be inflicting delay and ex-
pense. Undoubtedly, the practice in bankruptcy uniformly
was, that the bankrupt must surrender to the commission
before it could be superseded. But, in the case of ex-parte
Glynn, the commission, with the consent of creditors,
was superseded by Lord Lyndhurst, although the bank-
rupt had not surrendered.
The Court said there were not any circumstances in
this case which warranted their taking it out of the ge-
neral rule, and so violating one of the great and funda-
mental principles of the English law. In the case of ex-
parte Glynn, there probably appeared to the Learned
Judge good reasons for the course he took, and for revers-
ing his former decision ; but in ex-parte Drake, a case
similar to the present, the commission was not superseded
till the bankrupt had done ali that was necessary to purge
him from his previous contempt of Court. The commis.
sion, however, might be superseded, as far as regarded the
bankrupts who had surrendered.

EX PARTE GIBBONS.

This was the petition of William Gibbons and others,
tipataves of the Courts of King's Bench, Common Pleas,
and Exchequer, stating that the duty of attending persons
confined in the different prisons, required to be taken be-
fore the Commissioners of Bankrupts, was performed by
them, and that they received no remuneration for the con-
siderable space of time taken up in so conducting and at.
tending them during their examination. They had for-
merly been paid 13s. 4d., which sum was afterwards
raised to 1/. ; but the Commissioners had determined that
it should be done away with altogether, although the mes-
senger was allowed 13s. 4d. for merely preparing and
bulging the warrant of the Commissioners with them, re-
quiring the party to be brought before them. The peti-
tioners received no regular salary, but were entirely de
pendent upon fees.
The COURT could not make any order upon the peti-
tion, but would take an early opportunity of communica-
ting with the Commissioners upon the subject.

1M PERIALPA R LIA MENT

THIS DAY, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The gallery was opened at a quarter past twelve o'clock,
when we found about thirty Members in the House.
Mr. GILLON presented a petition from Hamilton, in
Lancashire, praying that it might he added to the neigh-
bouring boroughs or the election of magistrates; and a
perition from Paisley against tithes ; on the presentati!,n of
which the Hon. Member said that he had already pre-
sented many petitions on this subject, and that he was
convinced a large majority of the inhabitants of this
country, and of Scotland, were decidedly opposed to the
further continuance of this oppressive impost. Indeed,
he should not be surprised if the people rose en masse, if
their just expectations were not complied with. if the
grievance was so much lit in this island, how much more
so must it be in Ireland ? He hoped that in that ill-treated
country it would be no longer attempted to propagate the
doctrines of a Christian church by blood and violence—
(Hear, hear)--for he was of opinion that if the Legisla-
ture did not very soon settle this important matter, the
people would at length take it into their own hands,
and annihilate a system that was so repugnant to every
notio❑ of justice.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. HENRY GRATTAN said that he would take
that opportunity of stating that he held in his hand ex-
tracts from official documents, by which it appeared that
religious education cost 20s. a head in Ireland, and only
2s. in Scotland.

Mr. LEE LEE presented a petition from the principal
yeomen of the neighbourhood of Ilminster, in Somerset,
praying for a more efficient alteration in the tithe system,
than is promised by the Ministerial Bill now before the
House. The petitioners stated that they had expected
that the Ministerial measure would have allowed the
cultivators of the soil to reap the benefit of their
capital and exertions ; hut, by this Bill, they
would have to pay a full tenth of the gross pro-
duce of the land. The petitioners stated, that their tithes,
as compared with their rentals,had been materially increased
during the last forty years, by means of indirect taxation ;
and prayed that, in the proposed alteration of the tithe sys-
tem, it might be made a leading feature that the tenth of the
annual value of the land, as ascertained by amount of
rental, should be paid, instead of a tithe of the gross pro-
duce. The Hon. Member supported the prayer of the
petition, and expressed his hostility to the proposed Bill,
as exceedingly unfair to the agricultural interest.
ENFORCEMENT OF TITHES IN IRELAND.

Colonel BUTLER sail, he had to present a pe-
tition of the utmost importance, although coming from a
private individual ; and he would take leave to call the
attention of the House to it by reading it. The petition
was from Patrick Tracey, in the county of Kilkenny ;
but before he read it he should express his regret that
neither the Noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
nor the Right Honourable Gentleman the late Sect etary
for Ireland were present. If the Noble Lord were
in the House, he (Col. Butler) had some hopes that a stop
would be put to such proceedings as those complained of.
The petitioner stated, that on Tuesday, the 16th of April
last, he was in bed, at his residence, and that in the same
house were his brother-in-law, Cabinn, and Cahinn's wife
and sister ; that they were alarmed by a knocking at she
door, and that they were asked by the policemen who
were knocking, if any list had been left at the house.
On being informed that there was none, the police de-
manded admission. After describing the particulars of
the entrance of the police, and the conversation that en-
sued, the petitioner stated that he was asked to pay im-
mediately the sum of sixteen shillings, which he owed
for tithes, to the Reverend Dr. Butler, under
pain of immediate imprisonment, and a threat,
that if lie was not quiet he would be handcuffed. The
money was paid, and he obtained, next morning,
a receipt signed by the chief constable. The petitien
complained that the police were riot accompanied by either
a magistrate or chief constable, and that the petitioner's
case was by no means a solitary one, but one of many
such daily occurring in the neighhourhood.—(Hear, he ir.)
The Ilwitiener &t:i.vd himself Ise v,o poor to sb-,,•tr r-dreg
through. a course of law, and prayed the Hon. House to
interfere, and prevent the perpetration of such illegal acts.
He bad also an affidavit in his hand, upon which the
petition was founded. but as it, was almost all embodied
in the petition, he would not trouble the House by read-
ing it. But he had in his hand the receipt which was
given for the tithes, and which was signed by the chief
constable, thereby clearly showing that he approved of the
sergeant's conduct, otherwise he would have brought hint to
condign punishment. Now, to trace the transaction to the
Government, it was only necessary to state that the Chief
Constable was obliged, by his duty, to make a daily re-
port to the Deputy Inspector-General of the district, who
imam was in daily correspondence with the Insp,ctor-
General at the Castle of Dublin. Ile was always
of opinion that the Coercive Bill was intended
to enforce the payment of tithes, lint it never
once entered his mind that it could be pl.t in
force without the presence of a Magistrate, or at
the very least a chief constable. If the powers which it
gave were to be intrusted to such men as those in ques-
tion, they would be used for the purposes of extortion,
for many most respectable persons might he taken up
when returning from a fair or a wake, who would rather
pay money than he confined all night in a police barrack.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR regretted very much that the
Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer, and sonic others of
the Ministry, were not present, as well as the Learned
Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Shaw) upon
such an. occasion, for it would have given them those
proofs of which he said the other night they stood in need.
Were the people of England aware, that for the purpose of
upholding what was called the ‘' Word of the Lord,"
Government kept up a force of 23,700 Soldiers and
10,000 police marauders to scour the country? This was
not a single instance ; he himself had seen eight different
divisions breaking into houses for tithes, where not a
penny was due. The fact was, these proceedings were
taken for the purpose of forcing the people to enter into an

arrangement with the proctor, that he :might extract
arrears of tithes which were not due. If the Noble Lord
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been present, he
would have told him that his government was one of the
moat imbecile, truckling, and infamous that ever
sat on those benches. With regard to the last
part of the petition, the repeal of the union,
when that great man, Mr. Pitt, brought it
forward, he said that when feuds and agitation prevailed,
it would be better that the consideration of it should be
taken at a distance, when it would be more calmly dis-
posed of. But he denied that. Would the people get no
redress if such proceedings as these were laid before a do-
mestic Legislature, when the wrongs were fresh in the
memories of the whole population ? He would tell
the Government, that they were taking the same
steps to prevent the repeal of the union, as a celebrated
individual did to obtain that measure. Then there was
that House passing their votes of confidence, only because
they had not gone very far wrong. He would tell the blun-
dering and truckling Government, in the words of the
great Lord Burleigh, " that they would ruin England
with a Parliament."

Mr. FINN said, as the petition came from his part of
the country, he must be allowed to say a few words upon
it. All agreed, even in Court, that Sergeant Shaw bad
acted very imprudently--that was the word—he was
disposed to use a much harder term. There was one part
of the petition which almost incited him to laughter;
the simple petitioner said that tie Coercive
Bill would never have passed through that House,
had it not been assured that it would not be used
for the purpose of enforcing tithes. Poor simple
man—he did not know that House. He (Mr. F.) had
never seen or heard of such a House of Commons—any
measure, whatever might be its nature, would receive
their support if it was only asked' by Ministers—it was
the most truckling House that had ever sat within those
walls. It was said that the people had no confidence in
the House of Lords, but the people were more widely
separated from that House, and in the event of a dissolu-
tion three fourths of the Members would never appear
there again. And yet that noble phalanx who strenuously
opposed that infamous Bill, and foretold its consequences,
were reviled, insulted, and called assassins and their coun-
try's enemies. That was a Reformed Parliament, whose
first act was the passing of such an infamous and bloody
Bill as that now complained of.—(Cries of " Hear.")
It was said that Ireland would want no repeal of the
Union, when all the beneficial measures that Ministers
would propose were brought forward. But he could tell
them, that the repeal of the Union was more rife than
ever it was; they had already put down the right of pe-
titioning, and had " established" (as the Hon. Member said)
the Habeas Corpus Act. Heasked, ought Englishmen to be
allowed more privileges than Irishmen ? Although they
might extinguish liberty in Ireland, the spirit of liberty
would yet live, and would ultimately triumph.—(Hear,
hear.) The cause of the oppressed was common to both
countries, and it was impossible that that House could be
permitted to trample on Ireland. As to the case of the
petitioner, his was by no means a solitary instance, but be
would not now go into them seeing what a mass of busi-
ness was now before the House.

Mr. MACLEOD intreated the House to suspend itsjudg-
naent until some Member of the Government was present,
who could either contradict the statements in the petition
on official information, or would consent to make inquiry
into them. He had invariably supported the Ministers.—
(Hear, hear, from the Opposition)—in passing what was
called the Coercive Bill—( Hear, hear)—believing that it
would restore tranquillity to the country, and although its
powers might have been, in a few instances, abused, he
believed that it had done considerable good.—(Hear,
hear.) He thought it would have been but fair to have
presented the petition when some Member of the Govern-
ment was present, and had a knowledge of its contents.

Cdonel BUTLER—I informed the Noble Chancellor of
the Exchequer that I would present it to-day.—(Hear.)
Mr. MACLEOD begged the Hon. and Gallant Member's
pardon. He, however, regretted that from the unexpected
occurrence of the delay in returning the writ, the Right
lion. Secretary for Ireland (Mr. Littleton) had not yet
taken his seat, because it was important that he should
have been present.
An Hon. MEMBItit, whose name was not known, said
the facts contained in the petition afforded one of many
instances in which the pledges that had been given by
Ministers had been violated. He pledged himself, when-
ever an inquiry was instituted, to prove many such eases.

Mr. ROTI-iVEN said a communication had been made
upon the subject of this petition to the Noble Lord (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer), but he was sorry to say that
anything respecting Ireland was treated in a disrespect-
ful manner. As to the repeal of the Union, the peop e
looked to that only as a dernier resort ; for thirty-
three years they had looked in vain to England for an
equality of rights and privileges, and they now sought the
means of obtaining the manag...noent of their own affairs.
There was an industrious circulation by the press of this
country of rumours injurious to the people of Ireland—
there was in a base portion of the press of England a mean
trading principle adopted towards Iretand. Taunts were held
out by some persons that those Members, favourable to the
repeal of the union, dared not bring it forward; but he
could tell those persons, and would tell his constituents,
that it would be brought forward, and that, too, at as
early a period as was possible. They (the repealers)
only desired a fair, a calm, and dispassionate discussion ;
that they had a right to de►rtand, and if they could not
obtain it, Ireland would he justified in demanding a sepa-
ration and a domestic legislature. It they could not ob-
tain justice from the British Pat liatuent, it could not be
believed that they would live under a rod of tyranny,
when they couA take the means of relieving thetnselves.
The repealers were a strong and powerful phalanx, not
only in that House but ought of it. He would support
the repeal of the Union whenever it was brought before
that House.

Mr. LAMBERT thought that the course that had been
adopted in Irel Ind in the collection of tithes, was a most
gross violation of good faith on the part of his Majesty's
Government, and be again a Member of that House,
would persevere in exposing to the House and the coun-
try what he considered a gross and scandalous violation of
a most sacs d promise.
Mr. H. GRATTAN said that House had become a com-
plete Government one ; no Member was able to bring for-
ward measures, it they had given notice of it, if his Majesty's
Ministry did not wish it. He had been a Member of that
House since 1806, and could truly say that he never was
so ashamed of the conduct of any Parliament as the present ;
and he felt convinced that the House, if it persevered in the
course it was now pursuing, would never give satisfaction
to the people.: Could it be said that that House had done
its duty by voting twenty millions for the relief of a
species of nondescripts, while they left eight millions of
people starving ? What was now the situation of Ireland ?
Why to relieve the peasantry of Ireland from the effects of
a detestable law they were obliged to appeal to the huma-
ni y of the military.
Mr. SHAW felt for the conduct that had been pursued
by souse of the Irish Metnbers in that Hi use. When
English Members came down with the intention of doing
business, they had counted the House out, and when
petitions on the suhj'ct of Ireland were brought
forward, they took that opportunity of occupying
the time of the House by humbug sort of discus-
sions about any thing.—(Hear, hear, hear.) As to
the accusations that had been made against Ministers of a
breach of public faith, he did not stand forward as their
apologist, but he could not ccc how the observations that
had been made use of could apply to them. He had
always said, and he would now repeat, that the Irish Co.
ercive Bill had been rendered necessary by the not putting
into effectual ex.cu•ion the laws as they existed in Ireland.
Hon. Members seemed to him to wish order and peace in
Ireland, bexcept as it regarded the Irish Church.
All he claimed for the clergy of Ireland was the benefit of
the law ; if they violated the law he would say, let them
be punished for it.—(Hear, hear.) He knew nothing
of the case before the House—(Hear)—but he wild
venture to say that when the facts of the case were in-
quired into, it would be found, as was generally the cAse,
that the circLunstanc;s were greatly exaggerated, if not
whol:y untrue..._

Mr: HENRY GRATTAN explained that what be had
said was, that the Right Hon. Secretary was wholly mis-
taken in stating the evidence as for 1830.
Mr. LAMBERT disclaimed the idea of devoting the
clergy to bloodshed. His wish was that they should be
protected, but that they should not go beyond the law or the
intention of the Legislature. It hod fallen from the Noble
Lord at the head of Woods and Forests, :and from the
Noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer, during the
debate on the Irish Disturbances 8.11, that tithes were
not the description of property sou2ht or intended to be
protected by the provisions of that Bill.—(llear.)
Mr. BARRON protested against the tone adopted
by the Hon. Member for the University of Dublin :
which was such as to lead to the supposition, that other
Members for Ireland did nut come into that House pos-
sessed of a 3 much ability and information as that lion.
Member.—(Hear.) Ile treated such dictatorial manners
with a great deal of contempt.—(Cries of " Order.")
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member was without
question out of order if he meant to apply his observations
personally to the Hon. Member who preceded him.
Mr. BARRON disclaimed any intention of giving per-
sonal offence to the Hon. Member, and contended that if
the Irish Members bad had their wishes conceded to, on