The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COIIIMONS, June 13.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
SUNDAY TRADING BILL.
Several petitions were presented against this Bill from
the metropolitan boroughs.
The adjourned debate on the motion for going into
Committee on this Bill was resumed.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS complained that the object of
Hon. Gentlemen opposed to this Bill was to defeat it by
procrastination.
Mr. ROEBUCK thought the whole was nothing better
than so much waste paper. He proceeded to canvass the
provisions of the Bill, with a view of showing that it
was impossible to carry such a Bill into execution.
Ho thought there was not the slightest necessity for a
Bill, and he appealed to the House whether, if there
were any necessity, this Bill was one which would supply
the deficiency.
Mr. SPOONER urged the Hon. Member for Lambeth
to withdraw the BilL He himself was favourable to the
principle, but there were many provisions in it which
were highly objectionable.
Sir W. CL AY supported the Bill; because he felt con-
fident that it was the expression of opinion of some of
the best persons in the metropolitan districts, and that
it would tend materially to rake the condition of the
working classes.

Mr. W. J. FOX said that his objection to the Bill
was that it had no principle whatever. It was not
formed on the Sabbatical principle, the object of which
would have been to prevent all manner of work and not
trade merely, and on the other hand it only aimed at se-
curing a day of rest for the shopkeeper and apple-stall
keepers.
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR supported the prin-
ciple of the Bill, but recommended that it should be
withdrawn for the present year.
Sir G. GREY did not see any prospect of attaining
the object which was sought, the restriction of Sunday
labour, by going into Committee on the Bill; and he
therefore hoped the Hon. Member would withdraw the
Bill, which, even if passed, would lead to many evils,
and would leave many items of Sunday trading un-
touched. He believed it might be left to the good
sense of the people to remedy the evils which were com-
plained of, and to make Sunday a real day of rest.
Sir BENJAMIN HALL supported the sugges-
tion for the withdrawal of the Bill. He objected
to the system of legislating merely for the
metropolitan districts, of which this was a sample. A
Bill of this sort ought either to be a general one, or else
framed so as to apply to the particular district from
which it had emanated. He should recommend the
withdrawal of the Bill for this session, in order for its
introduction next year in the shape of a private Bill, in
order to test the sincerity of the promoters of the Bill.
Mr. C. HINDLEY was opposed to the withdrawal of
the Bill.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that he had been opposed
to this kind of contemptible legislation from the days of
Sir Andrew Agnew up to the present time, and he denied
that the working classes were favourable to the Bill. He
was sorry to hear that Lambeth, that great archiepis-
copal district, was such a sinful place—(Laughter)—
but he advised the Hon. Member to confine his legisla-
tion to that borough. As to the withdrawing of the
Bill, it was a farce that had been acted every session
for some time, and so it would be again until Govern-
ment took up the question.
After a few words from Mr. TRELAWNY and Mr
&coca,
The House divided, when there appeared—
For going into Committee ...
Against it .•• ••• "• 77
Majority against going into Committee —35
LANDLORD AND TENANT BILL.

... 42

On the motion for going into Committee on this Bili,
Mr. MULLINGS explained the object of the Bill,
:which was to place farmers on the same footing as tenants
in trade, and to give them the power to remove any
buildings which interfered with the carrying on of their
business, unless they recioved compensation for allowing
them to remain .

Sir G. STRICKLAND strongly opposed the 4th
clause of the Bill, because he thought it was better to
send matters of this sort to be arranged between the land-
lord and tenant themselves.
After a short discussion the House went into Com-
mittee on the Bill, Mr. BERNAL in the chair.
Clause I was agreed to.
Clause 2 was negatived without a division.
Oa clause 3.
Mr. GRAINGER objected to the clauso as giving
landlords an advantage over other creditors.
After a short discussion the House divided, when
there appeared—
For the clause ...
Against it... ••• •••
Majority
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 4 being proposed, giving power to the tenan
to remove buildings which he had erected,
M. r. MULLINGS moved the insertion of the words
" with the consent, in writing, of the landlord."
After a short discussion the House divided, when
there appeared—
For the amendment 82
Against it
•.. ... 23
Majority ••• —59
The clause as amended was then agreedto.
Th>) remaining clauses and the preamble were then
agreed to, and the House resumed.

... 71
... 41
... -30