The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-27 00:00:00

Soon after twelve o'clock, the SPEAKER 400 k the Chair;
at which time there were upwards of a hundred Members
in the House. The unusual hour of assembling appeared
to have some effect on the deliberations of the House, as
the SPEAKER had occasion, during the first half hour, to
call the Members to order very frequently.
The Norwich and Wootton Road Bill, Saltash Road
Bill, the Ipswich and Otley Road Bill, and other private
Bills were read a second time.
Committee named for the Sutton Bridge and Bury
Road Bills.
Mr. HALL presented a petition from the borough of
Newport, in Monmouthshire, for the repeal of the win-
dow tax ; and petitions from the same place for the repeal
of the Septennial Act, and in favour of vote by ballot.
Colonel FOX presented a petition from Tavistock, for
the abolition of slavery.
Mr. GODSON presented petitions from Letterworth,
and other places in Leicestershire, for the abolition of
slavery; and expressed his entire concurrence in the
prayer of the petitions.
SLAVE EMMANCIPATION.
Mr. GODSON also presented a petition from James
Window, of Westminster, containing a plan for the gra-
dual abolition of slavery. The Hon. Member, however,
believed it to be a plan that would not please either side.
As connected with the West Indies, he felt called upon to
declare, that the West India interest was most desirous of
having the question settled, and that whilst the present
Ministry was at the helm.
Mr. COBBETT bad no doubt but there would be
many schemes brought before the House, containing, like
this, a proposition for taking money from one party to
satisfy the claims of another. It the five millions
which this plan would take nut of the pockets of the
veople were once to be disbursed, he would be glad to
know when or how it could be got hack again. When-
ever compensation was talked of, it was always contem-
plated to take it out of the taxes wiung from an overtaxed
people. He should on some future occasion have to bring
before the House a case of compensation, upon which
was committed the most flagrant robbery that ever dis-
graced the annals of any country.
Mr. GODSON,althongb he did not believe the plan would
be adopted, could not admit that it was so objectionable
as the Hon. Member for Oldham appeared to think. The
money was proposed to be raised by debentures, and the
labour of the slaves would repay the interest, at least, and
in time reduce the principal. This was a petition from a
gentleman connected with the West Indies, and if not
considered to be feasible, would no doubt he followed by
many ethers, from which the House might be enabled to
make selection ; and between extreme plans steer a mid-
dle course.
Mr. HARVEY thought that every scheme which was
brought before the House, having for its object the eman-
cipation of slaves, was entitled to serious consideration ;
but it seemed that in the consideration of the subject, com-
pensation and emancipation were confounded, whereas
they were wholly distinct; and, indeed, emancipation
should precede compensation. But there was an objection to
the scheme proposed by the petitioner, even greater than that
raised by the Hon. Member (Mr. Cobbett), for Oldham,
for it proposed that the debentures that were to be granted
were to be liquidated by the slaves themselves, and then
they were to he left to purchase their own freedom--
(Hear.) The owners of the slaves, as they religiously
called themselves, would no doubt submit some simil Sr
proposition to the House; but in his (Mr. Harvey's)
opinion, if any persons were entitled to compensation it
was the slaves themselves.--(Hear.)
Dr. BAI.DWIN said the proposed scheme was, that
compensation should be paid by the slaves out of their
earnings after paying for their own support, hut as a
great portion of the labouring classes of England and
Ireland were unable to support themselves by their labour,
he did not know how the slaves were to maintain them-
selves and save sufficient to enable them to liquidate the
debentures.—(Hear.) The gentleman who proposed such
a scheme should insure the lives of the slaves, and then
how would the effect be if the cholera got among them ?
(Laughter.) It was an insult to humanity and to the
rights of mankind to suppose that slaves ought to be hound
to purchase their freedom from those who ought never to
have exercised any control over their liberty.—.(Hear.)
Mr. BERN AL regretted that such a discussion should
have taken place upon this subject on the mere presentation
of a petition.—(Hear.) With the proposed scheme of
Mr. Window he had nothing to do, nor would he now
discuss its merits ; and he regretted that the good, plain,
working sense of the Hon. Member for Colchester (Mr,
Harvey) should have induced him to depart from his
usual course; and when a question of such moment
was not regularly before the House, have led hint
to join in the war cry that had been unjustly
raised against what he would still call thetn—a
most respectable body of men, v:z., the West India pro-
prietors.—(Hear.) If the property in slaves were a pro-
perty which had been iniquitously held and unjustly
enjoyed by that class, he would ask, had it been their own
fault? Had it not been recognised and encouraged by
legislative enactments ?—( Hear, hear.) And was it just,
when the question was shortly to be brought forward in
a regular way, to increase the aspersions which had been
so improperly raised against the West India proprietors
(Hear, hear.) He wished not to appeal to the passions of
the House, but when the subject was brought forward in
a proper shape, to bring arguments founded upon calm
and dispassionate reasoning into discussion.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. GODSON then presented a petition signed by
1,520 of his constituents (Kiditerminster). Their first
prayer was the repeal of the Septennial Act—(Hear)—
which questi ,n he would at present refrain from discuss-
ing. They next prayed the House to repeal or &ter the
27th clause of the Reform Bill. That was a clause which
gave powers to overseers to an extent which the House
was probably not aware of. He would not refer to ans
particular place, as the elections were now over, but he
would suppose a possible effect of an operation of the clause.
Overseers assumed a number of characters by the Reform
Bill. In the first place they might be on a Committee;
then they might collect the rates from persons whose
opinions were one way, and not from those on the other
side until after July; then they could leave out a list of
doubtful voters on one side, and lost rt those on the other
side, and after all, they could be witnesses before the re-
vising barrister. The petitioners, therefore, prayed for a
repeal, or an alteration of that clause. They next prayed
for the vote by ballot; that topic he would not at present
enter upon, but would merely state th it 1,520 of his con-
salteents agreed in the necessity of that measure.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr 11. GRAT FAN presented a petition from the
King's County Political Union, praying for the abolition
of vestry eess. Also from St. Michael's and St. John's,
Dublin arid Cavan, against the coercive measures intro-
duced by Earl Grey for the tranquilhz ng of Leland. In
presenting the latter petition, the Han. Member observed
that before such a measure was introduced, the greatest
inquiry our;ht to have taken place ; instead of that no in•
quay whatever had taken p ace. He (Mr. G.) felt con-
vinced that the tranquillity of Ire' end could not be brought
about by the introduction et bayonets, the taking away of
the Trial by Jury, and the introduction of martial law.
Mr. RUTIIVEN had t ten requested to support the
pryer of the petition. He felt dettst itionand abhorrence
tbr the measure introduced by Lord Grey; it was mo e
calculated foa Algiers than any Christian country I- was

a danind,le atid detestable measure. Ireland was blessed

with an ansentee Government, and an absent Dish Secre-
tary, who was extravagantly paid for what he did by an
oppressed and heavy taxed people. His Majesty's Minis.
tern, by bringing forward the measure, had increased the
Repealers in Ireland.

Mr. MORGAN O'CONNELL also supported the
prayer of the petition.

Mr. WILLIAM FIELD presented a petition from the
inhabitant, of Blackburn, praying fur an immediate and
total abolition of negro slavery.
Mr. TURNER supported the prayer of the petition.
Mr. HAWKINS presented a petition from Mackworth
Praed, Esq., of the Inner Temple, comphining of gross
Interference with the freedom of election in the borough
of St. Ives, and praying that the parties who had so
acted might be prosecuted. The petition stated, that in
the mines in the neighbourhood of the borough, notices
had been put up, evidently for electioneering purposes, by
which any person working in the mine, if he did not act

as the owners wished him, was instantly turned adrift.
11 pe-tions workipe i❑ the mine were compelled to have

their goods at certain houses, and such was the system
of intimidation that was carried on, that the petitioner
found that all the persons who voted for him, if labourers,
would be deprived of employment, and, if tradesmen, of all
their custom. The Hon. Member had no hesitation
whatever in saying that the conduct pursued by Lord
Lauderdale was highly improper, and against all the rules
of the House. As one of the Hen. Members fo:othuaste
borough was in the House, he (Mr. H.) trusted he would
explain the conduct that had been pursued, .and if that
explanation was not satisfactory, he hoped the i
would institute an inquiry into the subject.
Mr. HALSE would answer the appeal made to him by
the Hon. Member on the presentation of this petition from
Mr. Mackworth Praed. The resolution alluded to in the
petition, with respect to the purchase of goods for the mine,
was one that had been agreed to by the proprietors, in
the year 1830 ; and although printed then, or in 1831,
bad never been acted upon in any single instance. At
a public meeting on the occasion of the recent election,
this resolution was alluded to; and it was only then that
he (Mr. Halse) recollected its existence. The Hon.
Member then recounted some circumstances that occurred
at the election, and among them part of a speech made by
Mr. Praed, in which that Gentleman spoke of his pro-
perty and income, including in the latter an average of
50/. per annum for poetry, and 5001. per annum for law,
which excited a little laughter in the House, but from
the lowness of the Hon. Member's tone, we could not
apprehend the application. The Hon. Member denied
that the Noble Lord (Lauderdale) had used any influence
at the election, and read a letter he had received from the
Noble Lord, which lie (Mr. Hake) stated to be the only
communication that had passed between them_.in which
letter his Lordship stated that he had been applied to by
a number of persons to exert his interest at the election,
in favour of Mr. Praed, but bed in every case declared it
to be absurd to expect he could entertain any idea
of doing so. This, he would repeat, was the only commu-
nication he bad had with the Nohle Lord. He would
wid, that the printed resolution upon which the principal
weight of the charge appeared to hinge, was without date
or signature ; and that it was customary, when any-
thing of consequence was ordered for mines, to have
some resolution passed by the managers, authorising the
purchase.
Mr. HAWKINS said that he was instructed by the
petitioner to say that he did not request Lord Lauderdale's
assistance. All he had done was to ask Lord Lauderdale
to disclaim all knowledge of the notice which was read to
the men in the mine, and promise not to persecute any
workman, or shopkeeper, in any way for the vote
he might think fit to give; but Lord Lauderdale
refused to make any such declaration. The peti-
tion, however, was chiefly against the Honourable
Member (Mr. Halse) who denied all knowledge of
the notice referred to. Now be (Mr. Hawkins) had
the affidavits of several persons employed in the mine, dis-
tinct y swearing that the notice was read by order of the
Hon. Member several times, and on one occasion, in his
presence. Of course, as the Hon. Member and Lord Lauder-
dale had the majority of the shares in the mine and the
complete control of it, the circumstance could not fail
to have considerable influence with the workmen. Mr.
Praed besides drew up a declaration in the most stringent
language binding himself not to persecute any man for his
vote, and promising, if his opponent would produce and
substantiate a single instance of intimidation by himself or
friends, to resign his pretensions. He signed this deela.
ration, and called upon the Hon Member (Sir. Halse) to
do the like, but he refused, and the reason he gave was
in these words—" I will not sign this declaration, because
it is not fair that a man who, like my opponent,
possesses no property in the town, should call upon
me, who do possess property in it, to sign a de-
claration which would effectually prevent my exercising
any influence which that property might enable me to exer-
cise." This was the reason the Hon. Gentleman gave
for not putting his name to the declaration drawn up by
Mr. Praed, who, nevertheless, himself subscribed it, and
took every opportunity of addressing those inhabitants of
St. Ives whom the Hon. Member opposite had rather
uncourteously designated as the mob---(Hear, hear)
—to impress upon them his determination of abid-
ing by that declaration. He (Mr. Hawkins) knew
not what construction the House might put upon these
facts, but he had no doubt of the light in which the public
would view them. He thought the explanation given by
the Hon. Member most unsatisfactory, for he contented
himself with impugning the motives of the petitioner
without attempting to give any answer to tbegrave charges
brought against him. With a view probably to ulterior
proceedings, be should move not only that the petition be
laid upon the table, but that it be printed.
Mr. HALSE—I must state most positively that the
petitioner said upon the hustings that he had applied fur
the interest of Lord Lauderdale, and added, " I con-
fess I have failed."—(Hear.) For my own part, I
most solemnly declare, in answer to the statement
of the Honourable Gentleman that I was never present
at the reading of the notice to which he alludes, except
when it was read upon the hustings, nor was it, that I am
aware of, ever read in the mine, except once in the year
1830. I protest, in a manner equally solemn, that I
used no undue influence to procure my return. Indeed it
was not necessary for me to canvass the borough after
July or August, and at the close of the election I had up-
wards of a hundred majority over Mr. Praed.
The petition having been read,
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that he apprehended, accord-
ing to the new rules of the House, the Hon. Member
could not move the printing of the petition. He would
beg to suggest, that it should be at once referred to the
Committee, and without saying any thing upon the
merits of the petition, he was ready to promise the Hon.
Member all the assistance in his power in bringing the
subject forward.
Mr. HARVEY said that it was not right in any Hon.
Gentleman to state that he had affidavits swearing to cir-
cumstances which an Hon. Member solemnly contradicted,
without producing those affidavits.
Mr. HAWKINS—In answer to the observation of the
Hen. Member for Colchester, 1 beg to state that I have
the affidavit in my pocket.
CORPORATION OF LIVERPOOL.

Mr. EWART presented a petition signed by a great
nunibtr of merchants of Liverpool, upon the subject of
the Corporation of that Borough. It was signed at one
of the most numerous and respectable meetings of mer-
chants, sh;powners, a❑d rate-payers that was ever held
there, and its object was to obtain a Reform of the Cor-
poration. The revenues of the Corporation, derived
from various sources, amounted to little less
than 300,000/. a-year, of which 100,000/. was re-

ctived by that body directly, and 180,0001. as having
control ever the Dock Estates. By borrowing money on
the Dock Esta,es they had raised a million and a half,r,hich
they had expended in various buildings in the town. He
asked the House, was it proper that such an enormous
revenue should be under the almost itT,sponsible control
of any certain number of indivicivals ?—(Hear, hear.)
The Common Council of Liverpool, who controded that

enormous revenue, wirs a self elected body, amounting
to forty-one individuals, who elected themselves for
life. The Dock Estates were managed by a Committee
of twenty-one, the majority of whom were nominated
by the Common Gained. The consequence was, there-
fore, that the corporation had the conuol of those funds
—they possessed great influence in the h trough—they had
the nomination of all the dere:, in the town and of all
officers to the dock estates. They sold lintl as owners of
tand in the town, to members oft eir own body, and pur-
chased hind according to the opinions of the majority of a
c inimittee. The patronage and influence thus vested in
them they had abused—theyhad even abused their ecclesiasti-
cal patronage, tty refusing to nominate persons to churches
unless they were connected with members of their own body.
He appealed to the House whether such abuses were to be
allowed, and whether sutffi powers ought to be left in the
hands of a self-elected Corporation ? He hoped that the
att,nti in of the Committee, now sitting to inquire into
the esisting corpor itions, would be peculiarly directed to
that of Liverpool.

The petition was read, and, on the motion of the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman, was orklaed to he referred to the
Committee on corporations.
Tt e HoN. GENTLEMAN then presented a petition,
signed by 1,200 members of the Guardian Society for the
Protection of Trade in Liverpool, praying for the abolition
of the small receipt stamp duties. He said those duties
operated very partially—for instance, be had known a large
library transferred without being subjected to tiny duty,
while the small tradesman could not transact the smallest
piece of business without coming under their operations.
The MN.
„GEI•MENAN also preseute.,l a petition from