The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-04 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Artr S.
LABOURERS' WAGES BILL.
Their Lnrdships west into Committe. on the Labourers '
Wages Bill.
Lord WYNFORD wished the Committee to be further
)4stponed. So important a Bill should not he pressed
through the Hous..
The Duke of RICHMOND said it woull not be dea'-
ing fairly with the Bill to put it of further. It would I,e
mpossible to bring it on next Friday fruan the press of
important business.

The Duke of CUMBERLAND said it way only by ac.
cident he heard the Bill wit to be committed that (1,,‘„

The Duke of RICHMOND said it wa% impossible public
business could go on unless Noble Lord, came down to the
House and mride themselves dequiinted with such bmine ss
is stood for discussion.

Lord WYNFORD said his great objection was to the
first clause, but Lis amendment might stand with it in
tbe Bill.

The Duke of RICHMOND said the amendment of ti e
Noble and Learned Lord was considered iu a Committee,
if which eighteen were present. Fourteen were opposed
to the amendment, .nd only fur in favour cf it.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND wished the first c7ati,e
to be postponed till some important pipers were before
their Lordships connected with the subject.
Lord KENYON suggested that the first clause might
he allowed to pass. His Noble and Learr.ed Friend could
take another opportunity of proposing the amendment.
After a few words from the Bishop of LONDON, tl e
first clause was put from the Chair.

Lord SUFFIELD said if the poor laws were properly
administered he should consider this Bill a great evil.
But a labourers' rate was already in operation, and this
measure only went to remedy the abuse of absolute idle-
ness in parishes. Great injury was dome to shopkeepers
and others by calling upon them to contribute to the sup-
port of all agricultural labourers out of employment. By
this Bill thsy would be c4lbsl upon to contribute to the
support only of the unemployed surplus labourers.
The clause was agreed to.
Lord WYNFORD said he was anxious to protect
tithe-owners, shopkeepers, housekcepers, and th,. propri-
etors of warehouses, as well as f.thers. The consequence
of this Bill as it now stood would be to impose the sup-
port of great nurubers of unAnployed agricultural labour-
ers upon these classes. The Noble Lord concluded by
propos es, a clause which went to disable v.etries from
imposing a rate, under this Bill, upon these four classes,
providea they were ready to pay the amount of rate to
which they were last assessed.

Toe Earl of STRADBROKE said a few words, which
were suite inE„idibie,

The Luke of RICHAF)ND opposed the clause. lie
saw no reason why titheowners and the other classes mm-
tinned should be exempt any more than other parishion,rp.
This experiment was tried in 425 cases. in none of which
was there any complaint on the part of the clergy, with the
exception of one.
The Bishop of LONDON said the reason why there had
been only one case of complaint was, that all these 425
parishes were under the composition. If a rate therefore
was imposed on them it would be set aside. If this Bill
should pass, he bad no doubt that in the course of a year
there would be 420 cases of complaint on the part of the
clergy. He had received many notices to the effect that the
composition would cease if this Bill passed in its present
shape.

Lord \VYNFORD said if his clause should he r2ject(d
it would impose an insuperable obstacle in the way of com-
position. That the former measure bad not teen approved
of was clear from the fact that only 400 parishis out of
10,000 accepted of it.

Lord SUFFIELD saw no relson why the titheowner
should be exempt from poor rates more than others.
Lord WYNFORD said the person oho employed his
full quota of labourers would not be called upon to pay tl e
rate. Was it not hard, then, that shopkeepers and house-
keepers who employed no labourers :should be called upon
to support the surplus labourers?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said the object pro-
posed by the Bill was exactly that of which the Noble and
Learned Lord complained. The object was to induce ad
who wanted labourers to employ their full quota. Th•y
would, however, contribute as well as titheowners and
shopkeepers, to the support of the surplus labourers re-
maining. The tithe-owners, and house and shopkeeper.,
contributed already, and, therefore, had no reason to com-
plain.

After a few words from the Duke of RICHMOND and

Lord WYNFoRo,

The Bishop of LONDON said the only question in re-
ference to the clause of his Noble and Learne,l Friend was
whether it was one which would be likely to pars in ano-
ther place.
After a few words from Lora FALMOUTH and STEAD-
Baoxic, the House divided—
Contents
Not Contents 44
Majority against the clause —l2
The Bill was then reported with amendments.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from the inhabitants of Calcutta respecting the East India
Conipany'a Charter.
Lord SUFFIELD presented a petition praying for the
abolition of slivery.
The Earl of ROSEBERRY presented petitions in favour
of the Quakers' Affirmation Bill ; also a petition from
s,iine place in Stirliogshire in favour of the Church Tem-
poralities (Ireland) Bill. His Lordship begged to say he
totally disagreed with the petitioners, as be had no wish
to overthrow the Established Church in Ireland.

The Bishop of LONDON said that he was surprised
that these persons should be the brit to raise their voic,s in
favour of this measure. It could not be denied, whatever
obloquy might be thrown on the Estahlisbed Church in
Ireland, that it had been the bulwark of the Pto.rst int
religion in that country. He thought that this fact
alone ought to have shut the mouths of the petitioners.
The Duke of HAMILTON presented a petition from
Cork again.t the Apothec tries Act.
The Bishop of LONDON prevented a petition from
Repton, and several other places, praying for some legis-
lative enactments in respect to the observance of the Lord's
Day. _ .

The EArl of DIEATH presented a similar petition from
Dublin.

The House atijourned at half past six.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 3.

The SPEAKER took the Chair a few minute+ after five.

The Sheriffs of the City of London appeared at the
bar, and presented the petition of the Lord Mayor, Al-
dermen and COMMOISS in Council maeinbled, relative to
certain projected improvements in 13lackfriars.bridge.--
Referred to the Committee.

Mr. DIVETT moved for certain returns shJwinn the
imount of church rates levied in England and Wales since
1827.

ENGLISH TITHE COMMUTATION BILL.

oHboi Len:. ,trit,
nLbTe
havingO been
whose,
annm, answeraea ew bey
could
ot
ht.oel
dat
nothqeu
learn, stated
payers
tputiante
certain
aai
that,un
districts to the compulsory part of the Bi 1, he thou;ht
it would be improper to proceed with it. At the same
time, as that clause would uothaverome into operation until
one year after the passing of the Bill, it would not inter.
fere with the progress in the permissive department of it.
It was very desirable that th^•e who wished to commute
should have an opportunity to do so.
Mr. EWART, at the request of Lord Althorp, post-
onned the second reading of the Prisoners' Coun4el Bal
till Wednesday, the 17th inst.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL postponed, till the same
day, the Llw Amendment Bill.

Mr. KENNEDY considered that it would be quite
impossible to pass through during the present ces-
sion the Scotci. Entail Bills ; and, therefore, con-
sidering the pre-eminently important business now
before the House, and for the purpose of concentrating
the attention of Hon. Members on what must pass, he was
indus.cd, however reluctantly, to move that they be read a
second time this day six months.
On the order of the day being read for the second read•
ing of the Carrickfergus Disfranchisement Bill,
Lord BELFAST suggested the postponement of the se-
cond reading, until after his motion for the appointment
of a Select Committee, which stood for that evening, had
been disposed of.

Mr. O'CONNELL asked if be gave up the second
reading that evening, it would have priority on the next
day.

The SPEAKER—As the case then stood, the order of
the day for the second reading of the Carrickfergus Dis-
franchisement Bill would take precedence of the notice of
the Noble Lord. If the second- reading were postponed,
and the notice carried into effect, it might become a
question whether the second reading of the Bill should
not be further postponed.
Mr. SHAW—As the Hon. Member for Dublin had
swEhiLc: tie
epeared in this case in the die.
expressed a desire to have a fall inquiry into the case, he
would not, perhaps, object to die application for a Select
Committee,
met ? justice of the case might be fully
As Chairman of the
Corionittee—(Hear)—he might las said to represent
nobody but the public At large. The HOUR !Midi
\C)-
ch3;rigre. o°;Ca°pbNyublic duty.--(Hear.)
t,4 (=.!*;•--

itittTyJski.

-

therefore, determine the question,- although he could not
see occasion for furtherevideitce, after.the.conclusive faces
that had been given to the C •mmittee upon oath. It was
true the Corporation was not repreSented before the Oen-
mittee, and it might app4l• hard to-itisTiimaise 'them in
their absence.—(Hear.) As to the motio❑ of the Noble
Lord, he
.agreed to the'first part of it, but not to the
second, which did not-g 6 the necessary length of disfran-
chising the borough, as a consequence upon.its corruption.
The SPEAKER suggested the postponement of the
second reading until Friday, which was an order day.
Mi. O'CONNELL. then moved the postponement of
the second reading of the Bill until Friday. •
BANKRUPT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE moved the second reading of
this Bill to that day six months, in consequence, ae. he
said, of the advanced period of the session.
EDINBURGH ANNUITY BILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE postponed this Bill to this
day six months
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT BILL.
The SOLICITOR•GENERAL hoped the House would
allow this Bill to he read a second time, as he was anxious
to get it into Committee for the purpose of filling up the
blanks, and so amending the different clauses as to disarm
any reasonable objections which might be made to it.
The question having been put,
Mr. SHAW was not opposed to the whole of the Bill,
but he thought it involved a principle too important to
he passed without discussion, and they had as yet had
none, the first reading having been agreed to at two
o'clock in the morning.
Mr. O'CONNELL hoped the Solicitor-General would
press the second reading of this Bill, for it involved a
principle which it was most desirable to establish, viz. the
abolition of imprisonment for debt, that peine forte et (hire,
the relic of a barbarous code, only exceeded in barbarity by
that part of the law which allowed a man to defeat his credi-
tors' claims by retaining his property, although sent to
prison. Both these barbarous anomalies would be removed
by the Bill. He hoped, therefore, the House would read
it a second time, and discuss every section of it in Com-
mittee, with that attention which the importance of the
details of such a Bill deserved.
Mr. BARING only objected to the second reading be-
cause it would, according to the Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin, be establishing the principle of the
abolition of imptisonment for debt. He did not say that,
after argument, he might not be led to the conclusion th it
the change was desirable, but at present he could not come
to that conclusion.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL had no objection to
the Bill beine. read a second time on:he understanding that
its principle might be afterwards opposed ; but
be begged to state that it did not in all cases abolish im-
prisonment for debt. Imprisonment was retakea in ea- c
of fraud and, when a debtor wished to abscond, a more
more summary remedy was given than now existed.
Mr. HERRIES must oppose the second reading, as
involving the principle of the Bill.
Mr. POTTER was of opinion that this would be a
most beneficial measure to the country. He had heard
from every quarter that it would he productive of the
grt atest advantage to the commercial community, and he
earnestly lisped the Solicitor-General would be allowed to
press forward the Bill to night through a second reading,
that it might be passed into a law this session.
Sir F. VINCENT and Lord ALTHORP made a few ob-
servations, which were totally inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. HERRIES said that, upon the assurance of the
Noble Lord opposite that no unfair advantage would
be taken of the Bills being allowed to pass through a
second reading to-night, he would be one of the
last to offer any obstinate objection on any technical
grounds; at the same time, in permitting the second
reading to-night, it would be clearly understood th a that
should not import an acquiescence in the principle of the
rm•asure on the part of any one in the House.
Mr. FRYER trusted the House would not object to
the second reading to-night. It was a measure, the bring-
.ng forward of which did great credit to the Government,
and undoubtedly ought to become the law of the land before
Parliament broke up.
The SPEAKER put the question, and the Bill passed
through a second reading without a division.
ripen the motion of the SOLICITOR-GENERAL,
the Bill was ordered to be committed on this day week.
several Bills which stood for to-night were postponed.
On the Bill relating to the transmission of property
n Ireland having been called or,

Mr. LITTLETON said he wished, if the House would
permit, that that Bill should be read a second time pro
farina, to-night, and ordered to go into Committee,
of course with the understanding that no Member would
be pledged to its principle or details.
A desultory conversation took place between Mr.
O'Connell, Mr. Lefroy, Col. Perceval, and Mr. Littleton,
but in the end the Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed to a Committee of the whole
House to-morrow.