The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-29 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

THIS DAY, TUESDAY, APRIL 29.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the chair at a quarter past twelve.
The Kingsbridge Roads and Fishguard Market Bills
were read a second time. Petitions were presented by
Lord Chandos against the Itchen Bridge Bill; by Mr. Baines
against the Leeds Turnpike Bill ; by Mr. Fitzsimon from
the county of Dublin, against the present system of tithes
in Ireland ; two petitions to the same effect from Tippe-
rary and Cashel, by the same hon. member ; by Mr. Rus-
sell from Kingsnorton on the subject of agricultural distress;
by Sir H. Parnell, from Dundee, against the corn laws ;
from the same place, against the union of church and state,
and praying for some relief to the Polish exiles ; and like-
wise one to prevent the plying of steam-boats on the Sab-
bath day ; by the same hon. member, from the parishes
of Christ Church, Surrey, Bermondsy, and St. George the
Martyr, in favour of the Southwark Market ; also a peti-
tion from the hand-loom weavers ; by Mr. A. Johnstone,
relative to the Kirkintulloch Railway Bill.
Mr. N. FITZ SIMON presented petitions from parishes
in Westmeath and King's County, praying for a repeal of
the union, and an extinction of tythes.
STEAM CARRIAGES.

Sir W. MOLESWORTH presented a petition from
an individual named Gurney, complaining of the interfer-
ence of the agricultural interest with locomotive carriages
invented by him. The hon. baronet entered at some
length into the merits of the invention, which he contended
would be productive of the greatest public benefit. The
petitioner prayed that the house would be pleased to re-
peal the legislative enactment by which he had been de-
prived of the profits of his invention.
Mr. CRIPPS (as we understood) thought that Mr.
Gurney was a much injured man, and that he had been
unjustly deprived of the merits of his invention. He sup-
ported the petition.
Air. JEPHSON thought that Mr. Gurney had laid
the foundation of the science of locomotive carriages in
Great Britiin, and he regretted that he had been so hardly
dealt with.

Mr. WALLACE said that in Scotland the people had
given every encouragement to Mr. Gurney's invention.
He thought the house should take Mr. Gurney's case into
consideration. The hon. member then gave a very.ani-
mated description of Colonel Maceroni's steam-carriage,
in which he had frequently travelled, and in which he had
invited half a dozen members of that house to take a trip
with him on Saturday next.
Mr. CAYLEY thought it would be extremely advanta-
geous if Mr. Gurney could bring his steam to bear upon
the business of that house. (Hear.) He concurred in
the prayer of the petition.
Mr. CHARLES BULLER complained of the legisla-
tive enactment which had interfered with Mr. Gurney's
invention.
Mr. ROTCH hoped the hon. baronet who presented
the petition would bring in a bill for the purpose of carry-
ing into effect the prayer of that petition.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH presented a petition from
Bladston against Church patronage.
Sir R. VYVYAN presented a petition from Bristol in
favour of the better observance of the Sabbath. The hon.
baronet concurred in the prayer of the petition, but said he
could not support many of the extravagant propositions in
the bill before the house.
Mr. J. E. BAILLIE said he never could be-
lieve that his constituents could wish him to support
such a mass of absurdity as the bill before the house con-
tained, and therefore he should take a decisive course, and
reject it altogether.
Mr. ESTCOURT said, as the bill would come before
the house to-morrow, it would be better to present all the
petitions on the subject by that time.
Sir A. HOPE said he would support the second read-
ing of the bill, but vete for amendments in committee.
Sir R. VY V YAN presented two other petitions from the
city of Bristol in favour of the better observance of the
Sabbath, and also one from the same city against the use
of climbing boys.
Mr. J. E. BAILLIE and Mr. ROTCH supported the
prayer of the petition.—Laid on the table.
Sir R. BATESON presented several petitions from the
north of Ireland for the better observance of the Sabbath,
without reference to the particular business before the
house.—Laid on the table.

THE CASE OF LIEUT. H. DUNDAS PERROT.

Mr. T. ATTWOOD presented a petition from Henry
Dundas Perrot, late a lieutenant in the Royal Navy, pray-
ing the house to inquire into the merits of his case, with a
view to restore him to his rank and station in the navy.
The prisoner admitted that he was tried at the Maidstone
assizes, in 1812, for obtaining money under false pre-
tences by forging a protection, and convicted, but the
judgmdgment was afterwards reversed in the Court of King's
ent was afterwards reversed in the Court of King's
ench, and by affidavits, one the uncle of the party him-
self who actually forged the protection, his innocence was
entirely established. Though this occurred twenty-one
years ago he was still denied his rank in that service in
which he had so often bled. The hon. member also pre-
sented a petition, signed by 500 respectable householders
of the parish of Shoreditch, neighbours of the petitioner,
bearing testimony to his respectable demeanour and good
character in that parish, in which he has been living in
poverty, and endeavouring to support himself by keeping a
school, and praying the house to follow up the declaration
of the learned judge who reversed the judgment against
him, and who said that he ought to be restored to his rank
and all his rights. The hon. member proceeded to give an
analysis of the case, and stated that the petitioner was now
about 45 years of age, and lost his arm in the English
Channel while exercising with small arms in 1806. He
was promoted to the rank of lieutenant, which he enjoyed
three years. He distinguished himself by his valour,
fought twenty-five battles before he was twenty-five
years of age, lost his left arm, had his right arm
severely shattered by two bullets passing through it,
and to this day carried a bullet in his body. It was true
he committed an error, but it was on the right side—he
refused to obey a signal of retreat when he was endea-
vouring to cut, out a vessel from under the battery
at Calais, and succeeded in his object. For disobeying
the signal, however, he was dismissed the service, but the
Prince Regent instantly reinstated him, and his country-
men, admiring his valour, carried him on their shoulders
about the streets of Dover. Such a case as this deserved
some consideration ; and though some fault might have
been committed, it should likewise be remembered
that he was very young. But what was the mistake ?
The Admiralty sent to Mr. Perrot to know how he had
lost his arm. This was evidently an unworthy manoeuvre
to entrap him into a mis-statement of the case. The
little mistake was this, • Mr. Perrot, in his answer,
stated that he had lost his arm in exercising great
guns and small arms in the Channel. Now, in fact, he had
lost his arm by small arms in Portsmouth harbour. This
was said to be a misrepresentation ; now in his (Mr, A.'s)
opinion, " great guns and small arms" and " small arms"
were analogous, and it would be ridiculous to pretend that
Portsmouth harbour was not in the Channel. He hoped
the right hon. gentleman would not attempt to found
a charge upon such a miserable distinction. Mr. Perrot
was convicted, in 1812, of obtaining 20/. from a sailor for
giving him a protection against impressment, but to show
that there was no foundation in this charge, he need only
state, that the judgment was reversed by the twelve judges.
It would have been but just for the then Admiralty to restore
him to his military rank, when the judges had restored him
to his civil rank ; but such was not the case, and he con-
tinued to suffer for a crime of which he was entirely inno-
cent. Under these circumstances, he hoped that the
case would receive a favourable, though late, consideration.
The hon. member proceeded to read two affidavits made
subsequently to his conviction, which deposed that the
charge against him was groundless, and fully asserted his
innocence. The petitioner was anxious for an inquiry into
his case ; he wouldsubmittoany tribunal,however strict, to
investigate his conduct, and he would be content to abide
by its decision. He (Mr. A.) hoped that if the right
hon. baronet (Sir J. Graham) could not bring any im-
peachment against him, he would accede to the prayer of
the petition.
Sir J. GRAHAM would ivish to be concise, in respect
for the time of the house, but he would still endeavour to
follow the hon. member for Birmingham, who, he con-
ceived, was under some delusion on the matter he intro-
ducedbefore the house. He deprecated making that house
a court of appeals interfering with the discipline of the
army and navy. The petitioner was, in his mind, not un-
fortunate, for he was convicted of felony, and not transported :
he was dismissed from the navy for conduct not becoming
an officer, and was now enjoying a pension of 2s. 6d. a day.
That was much more than he deserved. If his friends per-
sisted in bringing his case before the house, it could only
tend to disgrace his character in society. The right hon.
baronet read some documents—one of a public nature—
in which the conduct of Mr. Perrot was reprobated highly,
and a letter from Sir T. Harvey, declaring him unfit
foe holding a commission in his Majestys's navy. (Hear. )
No doubt was entertained of Mr. Perrot's guilt;
and he would have been punished to the utmost
extent of the law, but a flaw in the indictment had
saved him from the penalty the law awarded to his crime.
The right hon. gentleman then entered, at some length,
into the' facts of the charge upon which Mr. Perrot had
been tried. Independently of the false protection, there
were two forged certificates in Mr. Perrot's hand-
writing, found upon his person. ( Hear, hear, hear. )
It appeared, also, that in answer to an application
from the Admiralty as to how he had lost his arm,
Mr. Perrot had stated that he had lost it " in the public
service," although it was satisfactorily ascertained that he
sgahoinottinrogubsleead-guuiltlhs.theHnase
eh,
wopedhientwheashasoutsrewnwpoeurlyd
had lost it, not in "the public service," but while amusing
nothim bseelfa
a one as had ever been brought forward, (Hear, hear. )
w
, Mr. ATTWOOD replied. He thought the Admiralty
t of the time when Mr. Perrot lost his arm was the best
judge of how he had lost it, and of the remuneration to be
awarded. ;de"ot H
ase .wouldentanleodt abandonto
nthe
arrtheearcs ofase as he
halfhetlioupgayht,
and to be restored to his naval rank.
Sir J. GRAHAM informed the house that the sur-
f geon's certificate stated that Mr. Perrot's hand was lace-
rated by the bursting of a fowling-piece on shore.

Mr. ATTWOOD said, that Mr. Perrot was dismissed
for conduct which was called unworthy of an officer, but
it was not unworthy of a man, namely, that of cutting a
ship out from under the batteries of Calais.

Admiral ADAM expressed a hope that Government
would not disgrace itself by inquiring into the case at all.
The petition was laid on the table.
Mr. ROTCH presented two petitions from Wesleyans
in York, in favour of the better observance of the Sabbath,
and one from several woollen mill owners of York, com-
plaining of the conduct of the Trades' Unions, in making
exorbitant demands, and attacking the men not
belonging to them, so that property and life were placed
in the greatest danger. The petition was signed by
persons employing 3,000 hands. The hon. member said
he had other petitions from persons who had been com-
pelled to join the unions, praying for protection, which he
would present at another opportunity.—Laid on the table.
The SPEAKER left the chair at three o'clock.

UNIONS.

MEETING OF MASTER TAILORS.

This morning a meeting of considerably more than 300
of the master tailors of the metropolis was held in Willis's
I Rooms, St. James's-street, Mr. LESLIE in the chair.
He said he had to acquaint the meeting that there had
been one similar held last night, at which, though it was
summoned very hastily, between 400 and 500 were present ;
they then determined to adjourn it till that day. He was
then called to the chair, and having been so, he would do
his duty as impartially as it was in his power. He had no
doubt but that every gentleman in the room had had
a letter such as he held in his hand sent to him. (He
then read the letter, a copy of which is given in our
3d page. It was in consequence of that most extraor-
dinary and most unjust letter that the meeting had been
called. Some resolutions had been agreed to by the
committee which would be proposed to the meeting—they
so fully bore upon the case, that he was saved the necessity
of detaining the meeting with any remarks of his own. He
therefore would make only one remark ; he would state
as a fact, that the demands contained in those printed papers
would give an advance of 25 per cent. upon the wages of the
workman, while, at the same time, the prices of the
necessaries of life, were much lower now than they were
in 1813, when the present prices were agreed upon. He
had made some calculations with respect to the relative
price of the quartern loaf at that period, and the present;
the result was, that he found the workman could now
procure 21,41b5. of bread for the same money, which he
then paid for 11b. (Cheers.) In conclusion, he trusted
the meeting would give every gentleman who might address
them a patient hearing.
Mr. Snazz proposed the first resolution, which was as
follows :

" Ist. That these regulations would, if acceded to by
the master-tailors of the metropolis, be, both in principle
and effect, injurious to the employers and employed,
because, firstly, an increased demand of nearly 25 per cent.
on the present rate of wages; 6s. per diem is neither
called for by the circumstances of the times nor the actual
condition of the trade—the present scale of wages
having been fixed in the year 1813 by the workmen
themselves ; and, secondly, the 41b. loaf then cost 17d.,
the same sum at this time will purchase 81, lbs. of
bread ; meat also is reduced about 30 per cent., and coals
are about half the price at the present time as compared
with the prices of 1813.
Mr. 11ANsLEY seconded it most cordially.
_ .

The CHAIRMAN then invited any gentle-man who might
have any remarks to offer upon the resolution then to do it.
A Gentleman in the body of the meeting then rose, and
said he had been sent for that morning by several noble-
men and gentlemen, who asked him what course the mas-
ters meant to pursue. His answer was that they were
firm as a rock, and were determined, with the assistance
of the public, to win. (Immense cheering. )
Mr. REID then addressed the meeting from the plat-
form. After apologizing for addressing them at so early a
stage of the proceedings, he said he thought the demands
now made upon the masters were the most unjust that
had ever been made, and he was of opinion (and that was
his only excuse for trespassing upon them) that the spirit
in which the resolution before the meeting was passed, would
stamp the character and determination of the meeting.

(Cheers.) The demands were most unjust, first, in the
way in which they were made. There was nothing in
the whole conduct of the journeymen had excited his
disgust and pity for them, more than the manner in which
they had spoken of their masters. They had designated them
most foully and unjustly as tyrants, and threw every other epi-
thet of scorn upon them most undeservingly. He would
undertake to say that, as a body, for in all classes there
were exceptions, there was not a more humane set, or
one who took more interest in the welfare of those
they employed. The demand was also most unjust
in the terms in which it was couched; on that head he was
aware he need say nothing, the case was obvious. They
were however also most unjust, from the consequences to
which a compliance with them would lead.beT(iCnhgehyeiedrwesn.t)
Let the masters give way on only one single
point, and who could foretel the consequences? (Cheers.)
Every concession made would most naturntalhleylperttoderucane
and
fresh demand, and then that system would go on till the
men were so intowxiitase
taothe
be
dew
out,
found
hctachtwasist
htethhyeaywt
were
caredfor any
bands
nb of3er
iden-
tified, society
but.w would
interestsuilnd b,e. broken.hoaft
thpear
master
a so(tfLe
rto
huaadvapplause.)ptahpee rm e(
ll
interests but their own? Was it in the latter part, where the
regulations)
miserable threatw as
driven from the trade ? (Cheers.) The masters had al-
ways shown a ready attention to the wishes of the men
when they were couched in proper language, but when
the men wished to take the conduct of a man's
business out of his own hands, it was certainly
then high time for a stop to be put to them. They
were told by them, that they had no wish to hurt
the masters—that they did not intend them to be the
losers, but that the money was to be taken out of the
pockets of the aristocracy and the rich, and they (the
masters) were only to be the means of carrying that into
effect. But how did that stand? Money would not be
taken from the rich, but the middle classes—the real sinews
and strength of the country, would be revived. He
would most strenuously advise the meeting to oppose to
that contemptible show of physical force, not a
force of the same kind, but a great moral force.
(Cheering.) The eyes..of England were upon them
at that moment ; almost the fate of the country
depended upon their conduct. ( Applause. ) Let them
carry their threat into execution ; let them all turn mas-
ters (laughter) ; let them take all the responsibility and
cares of the situation upon their shoulders, aad they would
soon have a very different opinion of the matter. He did
not think that anybody knew what they wanted—indeed
he did not believe that they did themselves—
(Laughter, and cheers) ; but if they did obtain their
demands, the consequences would be ruinous not only
to themselves and the master, but to society in gene-
ral. (Cheers.) The bonds of all society would be loosen-
ed, and such a chaos would be produced, as he should
be most sorry ever to witness. (Great applause. )
He trusted that the meeting would not merely
pass the resolutions, but would feel when they went
home as if the well-being of their cause and of the coun-
try depended upon their own firmness. ( Great applause. )
Mr. SHOOBRIDGE, of Cheapside, stated that he had
many men in his employ who had worked for him for eight
or ten years, and until last night, he never heard that any
one was dissatisfied; then, on returning from the country,
he was surprised to hear that they had all struck, in conse-
quence of the resolution adopted by the Trades' Unions. He
hoped, however, that a union would be found to exist among
the masters, for the purpose of suppressing a union founded
in wrong. (Cheers.) All unions, he was confident,
would be but productive of discord if fouuded
on wrong principles, for they were a departure
from that great principle which taught man to do as he
would be done by. (Loud cheers.) It was a union
of men, who, if industrious, could easily earn six shil-
lings a day, while, by their own resolutions, they
would place the idler, the drunkard, the sober and the
industrious, all on the some footing. (Cheers.) It was a
well-known fact that journeymen tailors were better paid
than the mechanics of any other trade in the metropolis,
and that while the master-manufacturers had been obliged,
from the pressure of circumstances, to grind down
their workmen to eight or ten shillings per week,
the master-tailors continued to give the same rate
of wages as they did twenty years ago. ( Hear.) The
masters acted on the principle of doing as they would be
done by, but it was ridiculous for the men to dictate to
them as to finding a place for them to work in—unmindful
of the expenses or the extent of the masters' premises. He
hoped the masters would show the most determined re-
sistance to all such unprincipled attempts. (Loud cheers. )
The resolution was then unanimously agreed to amidst
loud cheering.
Mr. NUGEE, of St. James's-street, then proposed the
following resolution :
" 2d. This meeting is of opinion that the regulations pro-
posed to the master tailors proceed on gross injustice to the
working man, inasmuch as they fix the maximum which
an industrious man may earn, and make no distinction be-
tween the industrious and talented and the incompetent
and idle."

Mr. WILLIS, of St. James's-street, seconded it.
Mr. STUART, of Jermyn-street, said there was one
subject to which he wished to advert as connected
with the trades' unions. He would ask, what would
the journeymen say, if the masters were to form a union,
one principle of which was to be, that if any journeyman
were to displease his master, the master should report
him, and thereby deprive him for ever of employment ?
(Loud cheers.) The masters would then be de-
nounced, and justly so, as the greatest tyrants.
Yet this was precisely what the journeymen
were themselves doing. (Hear.) The eyes of the metro,
polis were now on the trade, and looking to their firmness
in resisting the demands which had been made, so as
to ascertain whether the journeymen were to be their mas-
ters, or the masters to have a proper control over their
workmen. ( Cheering.) He could tell them plainly, that if
the masters now succumbed, it would not be long before
this mighty empire would be prostrated at the feet of the
trades' unions. (Loud cheering.)
Mr. PEMBER, of Little Bridge-street, had never found