The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-02 00:00:00

Mr. LYALL supported the motion, but in so low a
tone that it was impossible distinctly to hear any complete
sentence.

Air. PEASE also supported the motion. He had all
along been friendly to the emancipation of the slaves,
but he had not supported that measure under the im-
presoion that there wool I be no diminution in the pro-
duction of sugar in the West India colonies. On the con-
trary, he believed such an effect must unavoidably
iesult from the operation of the contemplated plan, but
this be considered, in place of being an objection to she
present motion, one of its best recommendations. It be-
hoved the House to prepare for the defalcation in the
West Indian produce, by giving timely notice and
encouragement to those who cultivated sugar in the
eastern possessions of the country.
Mr. AIURRAY declared himself to be favourable to a
free importation of sugar and coffee from the Eist Indies.
He was sure that if this were permitted, the public would
hear less of gin and beer shops than they were in the habit
of hearing at present.
Mr. KENNEDY would have all restrictions removed.
Unless some such resolution as had now been proposed
was speedily come to, the East Indies would become de-
pressed, and very soon be like what the West Indies
were now, a curse upon this country.

After soma observations from 'Mr. TODD and Mr.
TANCRED,
Mr. P. THONISON said Hon. Members had in most
of their speeches lost sight of the motion before the House,
which related not to West India sugar, but solely to East
India produce. He entirely concurred in the motion of
his Hon. Friend, because lie considered it just and expe-
dient that East India sugar should be admitted at the
same rate as the sugars of the West Indies, but the only
point on which be differed was as to the time. The ses-
sion was now too tar advanced to pass a Bill, and as it
would he inconvenient to agree to resolutions without
bringing in a Bill, be hoped the motion would be with-
drawn, and the Government be left to take up the sub-
ject next session.

- Mr. EWART, on that understanding, withdrew his
motion.

CORPORATIONS.

Mr. J. KENNEDY said that the object of his motion
was for leave to bring in a Bill whereby all persons en-
titled to vote for Members of Parliament should be allowed
to vote in the election of municipal officers. At present
these officers were appointed by nomination, and not duly
elected, as they ought to he, by the voice of the burgesses.
Great abuses prevailed, and he trusted Government would
see the propriety as well as necessity of lending its assist-
ance in putting down these ahuses. The period of the
session was too late to carry through a Bill on the sub-
ject, but he trusted that Ministers would not object to
allow the resolution to be put on the Journals.
After the motion had been seconded by an MN.
MEMBER, whose name we could not learn,
Mr. V. SMITH asked whether it would be worth
while for the Hon. Member to press his motion this ses-
sion. He agreed with many of the objects the Hon.
Member had in view, but there were others to which he
decidedly objected. He objected to see a Bill of the kind
confined to boroughs that returned Members to Parlia-
ment, and he also objected to it on the ground that Ireland
was not included in it. He also thought that the House
should hear the result of the inquiry before they proceeded
to legislate. The Bill of the Hon. Member was so defec-
tive, and left out so many corporations which were no-
toriously ill-managed, that he could not give it his consent.
He would instance only the corporation of Berwick-upon-
Tweed. That corporation was republican enough, but it
was defective in some qualities, for which ancient republics
were famous. As a proof of this he might state that the
members of the corporation paid all the taxes of the cor
poration with borrowed money, and divided the revenues
of the town among thernselves.—(A laugh.)
Mr. PARROTT hoped between this and the next
session that Ministers would propose a measure which
would prove an effectual remedy for the evils of Corpo-
rations.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that his object in moving for a Committee at the com-
mencement of the session was to lay a foundation for such
a measure as bad been referred to.—(Hear, hear.) At
the recommendation of that Committee, a royal commis-
sion was now issued, and he had no doubt that before
next session those inquiries would be completed, which
would enable the Government to bring forward a measure
of reform. He should only add, that no man was more
convinced of the necessity of a reform in the Corporations,
or more anxious that a measure fur that purpose should be
brought forward.—(Hear.)
The SOLICITOR GENERAL represented one of
those boroughs which it was exceedingly desirable should
have a new constitution. He said nothing of the Magis-
trates, as they were not present to defend themselves, but
a new constitution was wanted.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER inti-
mated his intention to bring in a Bill for the reform of
Corporations before the conclusion of the session. It was
desirab'e that the country should be aware of the contents
of the Bill, and he should, therefore, content himself with
moving that the Bill should be printed this session, and
by the next session the House would be prepared to enter
into the discansion of it.

After a few words from Sir S. WHALLEY, which
did not reach the gallery,

. .
Mr. KENNEDY consented to withdraw his motion.
DUBLIN CORPORATION.

Mr. O'CONNELL was exceedingly anxious to obtain

eave to bring in a Bill to alter and reform the corporation
of Dublin. No general measure of corporation reform
would be beneficial for Ireland. Thu greatest misfortune
which Ireland had was the total absence of a knowledge of
its local institutions in that House. The corporation of
Dublin was a corporation by prescription, by statute, and
by usage, and be thought it had in it all the materials of
good government. The Hon. and Learned Member then
entered into a detailed statement as to the constitution of

the corporation, which he said, consisted of a Lord Meyer,
Aldermen, and Common Council, with several other
officers. He repeated, that he did not deem it desirable
to alter any of the leading features of the corporation. His
objection to it was that it was not the corporation of
Dublin, hut of a small part of Dublin ; and that the
monopoly was confined to persons of one persuasion. His
corrective was to render the corporation that of the
people of Dublin, and to allow it to be no longer sectarian.
The population of Dublin was about 300,000, and
the number of freemen was only 1,000 so that it
was a close corporation based upon 1,900 freemen.
There were disc corporations of a very different descrip-
tion in Ireland. There were 44 corporations, consisting
of 12 burgesses and a sovereign, which had been created
by James the Second in one day; and in allusion to which,
that monarch, when the number was remarked, is reported
to have said—" The more the merrier."—(A laugh.)
The Corporation of Dublin, however, was of a different
description, and was created for a very different purpose.
It had become a close Corporation, as already stated, biw•
ever, and as Dublin was the seat of the courts of law,
Juries were summoned by Sheriffs appointed by
the Corporation, and the Jurors were summoned
from that body. All the commercial property of
the country, therefore, was liable to come under
the control of tribunals tinged with the suspicion of

being actuated by exclusive and peculiar prejudices. In
1792 Catholics became admissible to the Corporation of
Du'din, but from that period to the present, not one
Catholic had been admitted. What he proposed was that
the city of Dublin should be divided into eight wards, and
that the basis of the Corporation should rest on the 10/.
householder. By this arrangement about 5,000 inhabitants
would be admitted to tile Corporation, and probably the
number would be doubled, if the temptation was held out
that persons registering as 101. householders, would become
members of the Corporation. He did not desire to press
his measure this session beyond the first reading, but
should merely move to introduce it, and have it printed.
Mr. LITTLETON under ordinary circumstances should
certainly have kit it his duty to oppose a Bill for altering
tl:e constitution of any Corporation, whilst a Cniiimisaion

6(7
was proceeding in its tries on the subject, with a view
to a general measure. He admitted, however, that it would
difficult to deal with the Corporation of Dublin other-
oise than by specific enactments ; and upon the distinct
understanding that the Hon. and Learned Member merely
desired to submit his Bill to the House, and not to press
it further this session, be (Mr. L.) should not oppose its
introduction.
Mr. SHAW said with all the Secretary for Ireland's
(Mr. Littleton) desire to conciliate the Hon. Member for
Dublin, he (Mr. Shaw) thought it was going too far to
permit the Hon. and Learned Member to bring in a Bill
merely for the purpose of making his opinions on this sub-
ject known, and as an instruction to the Commissioners
now proceeding in their inquiries. The Commission was
a mere delusion, and a shifting off of the shoulders of the
Government what they ought to do on their own responsi-
bility. He had made the same observation on the Perlis.
mentary Committee, but it applied far more strongly to
the Commission. The question for the House now was,
whether inquiry and legislation should go forward toge-
ther ? If the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin ob-
tained leave to introduce a Bill, he saw no reason why
the Hon. Member for Tiverton's (Mr. Kennedy) motion
should have been negatived. As to the proposal that the
101. householders should appoint the Corporate officers,
that would be to give the appointment in effect to the
Hon. and Learned Member himself.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Government had long wanted grounds and materials
on which to found sortie general measure of corporation
reform, and it was with the view of obtaining such that
the Commission had been appointed. The Commissioners
were highly re,pectable, and if they acted up to the notions
which he bad conceived of them, they would not he dic-
tated to by any sing!e man, but would be guided by the
matter of fact which came before them in drawing up
their report.
Mr.S rgeant LEFROY said it was preposterous to bring
in aBB at the end of the session which it would be int-
possible to carry through.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL argued that great good
often resulted from introducing Bills in the present way,
because the discussion on them frequently produced very
good eff•cts, by introducing improvements, and he wished
the plan was, therefore, followed in other cases besides the
present.
After a few words from Mr. VERNON SMITH and Mr.
O'Cooteeeo, leave was granted to bring in the Bill.
Mr. O'CONNELL postponed his motion for leave to
bring in a Bill to amend the Act 2 and 3 Will. IV., to
89, entitled " An Act for amending the representation of
the people of Ireland."
On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the other collets
of the day were next proceeded with.
Mr. HUME begged to know whether further consi-
deretion of the Bank Charter would be taken up.
Lord ALTHORP said that after the Slavery Abolition
Bill was disposed of, the Home would lie called on to re-
sume the consideration of the Bank Charter.
Mr. POTTER said the House had been sitting un -
interruptedly for six months ; that many Members bad
had no time to see their families, or to attend to their
private business, and he should be glad to know from the
Noble Lord some opinion as to the duration of the session.
Lord ♦LTHORP agreed that the sessioa had been long
and arduous, but said that it was important the Bank
Charter should be passed this year, and as it would not
take a very long time after the Slavery BM was dispose I
of, he hoped to get it through both Houses this session.
BANKRUPT JUDGES BILL.
On the motion of the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, the
House was about to resolve itself into a Committee of the
whole House on this Bill, when
Mr. COLQUHOUN asked the Noble Lord (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) a question relative to a motion
of which he had given notice. His Hen. Friend the
Member for Caithness, in bringing forward a motion for
the repeal of the Act JO Anne, c. 12, had been met by
this obstacle—that such a motion could not be entertained
at all without the concurrence of the Crown. He had
been induced to give notice of this motion in order that
this obstacle might be removed from the way of his lion.
Friend when he brought this question again before the
notice of Parliament next session, and he begged to learn
from the Noble Lord whether he was prepared to signify
the concurrence of the Crown to the consideration of this
statute ?
Lord ALTHORP said that at the time the Member
for Caithness brought forward his motion he W
not prepared to signify that concurrence; but now,
in answer to the question of his Honourable Friend, he
begged to say, without pledging himself or his Ma-
jesty's Government as to the course they should see fit
to pursue, when the question should be brought forward ;
he was, however, quite ready to say that the rights of the
Crown should form no obstacle to a full discussion of the
question.
The House then went into Committee on the Bankrupt
Judges Bill, and a resolution was agreed to, authorizing
the Commissioners of the Treasury to pay a sum of money
for the purpose of defraying the expenses on the travelling
circuit of the Bankrupt Judges, when they striuld proceed
to the provinces to relieve insolvent debtors.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL said that a certain sum ought
to be named for the purposes referred to.
The SOLICITOR•GENERAL agreed that such a
course would have been better, but the precise amount
required was not known. He begged, however, to re-
mark, that in ail probability the duties of the Bankrupt
Judges would be materially altered next session, and that
those functionaries would no longer have their present
offices to discharge.
Mr. HUME was glad to find some business was faun I
for the Bankrupt Judges, who Lad little or nothing tit In
to fill up their time.
After some further observations, the resolution wee
agreed to.

THE FACTORIES BILL.

Lord ALTHORP moved the recommitta►, pro for»ur,
of the Factories Bill, in order, by moving hl4 amen 1-
ments, to put the Bill in the shape in which he intended
to submit it to the House.

Toe House resolved itself pro forma into the Com
mittee, the amendments were read, and the report was
ordered to be printed and taken into further consideration
on Friday week.
Mr. HUME moved for a return of copies of the tni-
mites of the Council of the Presidency of Madras, relative
to the extension of trial by jury to the natives of that coun-
try. The Hon. Member also moved for a return of the
number of Africans liberated and landed on the coast of
Sierra Leone each year since the abolition of the slave trade.
The returns were agreed to.

Mr. HUME then presented a petition from Mr. Tilt-
mas Brown, of Fenchurch-street, in the City of I.onnilon,
stating that he had been employed in passing private Bile
through that House, upon one of which (the East London
Railway) the expenses of House fees and printing came to
614/., upon which measures were taking to arrest him.
For House fees alone the Speaker had testified to the
amount of upwards of 4001. The petitioner prayed that
Ids case might be referred to the Committee sitting upon
the House fees.
The petition was accordingly referred to the Committee
up stairs.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from the landlords of
small tenements in the Tower Hamlets, praying that a more
summary and cheap mode of ejectment might be devised.
Also a petition from a number of farmers and able-bodied
labourers respecting the poor laws; and two against the
tithe system, from places in the county of Norfolk, and
one, from a place in Ireland, in favour of parochial edu-
cation,

Mr. HUME then presented a petition from the Glas-
gow political union, against allowing the Bishops to sit in
the House of Lords. Also one from the political union
of the Carse of Gowrie, praying for a revision of the sys.
tern of taxation and the adoption of a graduated property
tax ; and another from James Fisher, a prisoner io Lan•
caster Castle, praying for an alteration of the law of libel.
Mr. AGLIONBY gave notice that on the 6th August
tie would move for leave to bring in a Bill to facilitate and
reader cheap the recovery of lands and tenements after
notice to quit.
The House then adjourned (quarter to ten o'clock).