The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, August 6.
Lord SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the Wool
sack at a little before five o'clock.

VY
Petitions for the protection of the Established. Church
were presented by the Archbishop of CANTERBURY and
the Marquis of BRISTOL.
The Arms Importation (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.

THE POST-OFFICE.
The Earl of GOSFORD presented a petition from the
Chamber of Commerce of Greenock, for the establishment
of steam communication for the conveyance of mails along
the Clyde, in order to facilitate the delivery of letters along
the line of that river ; and a petition from merchant ship-
owners and others of the same place, for the abolition of the
impressment of seamen.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that this petition com-
plained that the mails were not sent by steam along the
Clyde, when they might be so sent. He had inquired
into the subject, because he knew that when he was in
office be neglected no opportunity of sending the mails by
steam, and he found that many steam-vessels were em-
ployed in the conveyance of the mails in that part of Scot-
land. The Noble Duke here read a list of the places to and
from which steam-vessels so employed were regularly dis-
patched with the mails. He then observed that he did not
find fault with the petitioners, who, he had no doubt, were
very respectable persons, and who probably had been in-
fluenced by the representations of others, and who had
taken up an opinion without sufficient information on the
subject. This petition was, in fact, got up by one 4tdi-
vidual. The petitioners themselves had been mistaken—
they had seen the speech of an Hon. Gentleman reported
in a work published by Mr. Barrow, and he had no hesitation
in saying that the speech, so reported, was not the speech
which was delivered, for it had been corrected by the Hon.
individual himself, and it was only a garbled statement of
what had been really uttered. The people of Glasgow
had before now expressed to him their satisfaction at his
mode of conducting the business of the Post-office, so far
as Glasgow was concerned ; and he might instance one
matter as a proof of the attention he had always paid to
the convenience of the Glasgow merchants. He had been
very strongly pressed by Hon. Members and others con-
nected with the county to send the Glasgow mail through
a different part of Nottinghamshire, but he found that, by
so doing, five minutes would be lost, and therefore he re-
fused to consent to the alteration, for he thought that,
if five minutes were lost at one place, five minutes might
be lost at another, and the convenience of the Glasgow
merchants would be seriously affected. He should not
now refer to the speech contained in The Mirror of Par-
liament, further than to say, that that speech con-
tained forty-one charges against the Post-office while it
was under his direction, and that he wished the individual
who made those charges could find some Noble Lord to
bring them forward, for he should then be able to con-
vince the House that they did not contain one single syl-
lable of truth. He should not condescend to reply to
attacks made in speeches at public meetings or elsewhere,
because he felt that that House alone was the proper place
in which to make him answerable for his conduct, while
in office. He must now say one word with respect to an
Hon. Baronet, who had also been made—and most un-
justly made—the subject of attack. He alluded to Sir
Francis Freeling, who had been most grossly libelled—he
who for so many years had filled the responsible and confi-
dential office of Secretary of the Post-office—who had so
often deserved, and not unfrequently received, the approba-
tion of the country at large. He must say, that it was too
bad that this gentleman, who was not in Parliament to an-
swer for himself, should be attacked in this manner. He
was bound to declare, that during the period he was in
office, whenever there had been a difference of opinion be-
tween them on any point of business, and he had decided
against the opinion of Sir Francis Freeling, that Hon. Ba-
ronet had always shown as much zeal to execute the mat-
ters thus decided on, as if they had come from himself.
It had been stated that he (the Duke of Richmond) had
refused to allow letters from France to be delivered on a
Sunday, because, forsooth, he had been persuaded to
the refusal by Sir Francis Freeling and other official per-
sons, who wanted to get to their country houses. Jn
the first place, Sir F. Freeling had not had a country
house for the last 21 years ; be much regretted that the
Hon. Baronet had never been able to afford time einouwghas
during that period to enjoy a country house, but
refusal
! were
the fact. In the next place, the grounds of his refu