The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-14 00:00:00

IMPERIALPARLIAMENT

THIS DAY, WEDNESDAY, AUG. 14.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took his seat at 25 minutes past twelve
o'clock.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from Mr. Peter
Clark Mottram, or Mortram) of Manchester, formerly an
ensign in the Royal Cheshire militia, complaining of having
been unjustly dismissed from the service in 1821. The
petitioner stated that in June of that year, the regiment
assembled at Chester to do parade duty, and that having
urgent occasion to proceed to Manchest-r to transact some
business relative to a suit in Chancery in which he was
concerned, he wrote a note to Major CoVer by his servant,
for leave of absence for two or three days, and that a verbal
answer was returned. giving him that permission; on his
return to Chester at the expiration of the time, he was
placed under arrest, and kept so during the period that
the regiment remained in the town of Chester, (eight or
nine d .ys) on the charge of absenting himself from
parade. A court of inquiry was held, before which he
Was not allowed to enter on his defence, nor were his
witnesses allowed to he examined, on the ground that they
could only give hearsay evidence. A courtmartial was
promi ed hie-, but it was never held, and he was in the
November following dismissed, and all his pay and allow-
,nees in the interim stopped from him. He prayed, there-
fore, for a full investigetion, and pledged liirnself that he
could substantiate his innocence. He ale,. complained that two
members of the Court of Inquiry were hi. personal enemies.
He had made frequent applications to the Secretary of State
since that period, and he had never been able to obtain
redress. The Hon. M-mbar, in supparting the prayer
of the petition, said it was a very hard case—the peti-
tioner had been must unjustly treated, and therefore it was
the duty oft is House to institute an inquiry, with the
view, if the petitioner could make out his case, of rein-
stating him in his former rank.
Mr. HUME said all the papers relative to this case had
been laid before him, and, on due consideration, he had
come to the conclusion that he could riot make out such a
Case as would induce the present Parliament to institute
ny inquiry. There was no doubt the petitioner had
euffered considerable hardship from the conduct of the
officers commanding the regiment at that time ;
and he would be very glad if immediate jus-
tice had been done ; but, from the length of time
that had elapsed he could see no prospect o' benetitting
the petitioner by iny inquiry, although it might have the
effect of altering the system upon which the officers
commanding those corps acted. He thought it was pro•
battle that there had been rashness on both sides.
Sir. LAMB felt greatly relieved trout the difficulties in
which he thought he was pl ced, by the speech of his
Ilan. Friend who had just sat dawn; for if his Hun.
Friend, with all his readiness to afford redress to indivi
duals, could make out no claim on the House, there could
not have been any very great injustice committed. He
(Mr. Lamb) was not aware that the length of time that
had elapsed was any very good ground for refusing to
render justice—(Hear)—but since 1821 there had been
three sets of Ministers and three Secretaries of State, none
of whom had the petitioner allowed to have any rest,
and he had himself been frequently applied to by the peti-
tioner. Many Members of Parliament had also
been applied to, and yet not one had been
willing to bring the subject forward until twelve
years had elapsed. Th it was some proof that no
great injustice had been done. The petitioner, however,
had not stated all the facts relating to his case, and al-
though it was with regret, he (Mr. Lamb) felt it his duty
to advert more particularly to them. It was titian the
report of the Court of Inquiry that the petition was dies
missed. It was then denied that he had permission to
absent himself, but that was not the only cause of his dis-
missal, for it was proved that he drew for his allowances
before they were due, and paid the note to Mr. Lee, a
tradesman, of Chester. He afterwards drew another note
for the same stoney, and stated that be had paid Mr.
Lee's note, which turned out to t e untrue. Under these
circumstances, he (Mr. Lamb) should feel it his duty to re-
sist any inquit y.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS referred to documents he held in
his betide, expatining the bill transactions alluded to by
the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Col ,nel EVANS wished to he informed whether the
gentleman from whom the petition came, had objected to
a court of inqi,iry• and demanded a courtmartial ?
Mr. M. PHILLIPS said the petitioner had objected
to the manner in which the court of inquiry was coneti-
toted, and protested ag dust its decision ; he had also
demanded a courtmarrial, but he (Mr. Phillips) could not
say that it was at the time the court of inquiry was sitting.
The petition Was then laid on the table.
Lord GEORGE I3ENTINCK presented a petition
from the merchants, mites, and merchant-seamen of the
port of King's Lynn, against the payment of the mer-
chant-seamen's sixpences to Greenwich Hospital, and
supported the prayer of it.
Loud IV. LENNOX, in supporting the prayer of the
petition, said, that nothing could b, more unjust than that
a tax should he imposed upon the merchant seamen to
support a public national institution ; he was far from
wishing to advocate any invasion which would have the
effect of injuring the establishment of Greenwich Hos-
pital in any way whatever, or of depriving any seeman,
suffering from the infirmities of old age, or from wounds
gained in his Majesty's service, of a home in his old age,
and a comfortable establishment in his infirmity ; but he
thought the country ought to support its own national in-
stitu ions, and nut throw a burden of 20,0001. a-year
upon the shipping interests of the couniry—tor such it
really w is. The tax was a partial one, and being raised
from a few individuals for a national objecr, became an un-
just one. Jim conclusion, he tiusted that his Majesty's
Gavernment would early next session remove this ini
quitous tax.

Mr. HUAIE expressed his conviction that there was no
CI its more dese ving of coin,t,iseration than toat to which
the petitioners belonged. The merchant seamen came
home frequently destitute, and actually wanting the six-
pences which ..ere taken from tb-se poor wretched men
to support Greenwich Hospital. The Hon. Baronet
opposite (Sir James Graham) hail hitherto opp ised any
alteration of the system, bur he hoped that tie Hon.
Baron t wool t see a new light on the su..ject nex.. session.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM took a duff rent view of the
subj ct, because he should think himself criminal if he
were to admit of Greenwich Hospital being deprived of
that fund for its support; n could he consider that the
tax w.is so onerous as it had b en described ; b•cau•e,
hen first put on, in the feign of William the First, it
was at the same amount per month as at pre•ent, al
though the value of ni,tn,y was Si much ereater then than
it was now. He also feared that if the tax was removed,
the seamen themselves would not be benefited by it, bu
that the advantage would vo into the pockets of their eat
ployers. He should nut he justified in giving up that income
for Greenwich Ilispiral next sessi in, unless re were sal.-
fied that the House would be inclined to make good the
funds by other means, and und,r any circumstances he
wou d assert to the. House, that every eff,rt should be
continued to reduce as muck as possible the cost of the
estaillimhment.

Mr. LYALL said he had a petition to present on the
same :subject, and would take the opportunity 01 imme-
diately stating to the House his opinions upon it. He
would inf .rm the House that when Greenwich Hospital
was in iginally founded, it was intrude + for the reception
of m rcl.ant seamen as well as naval ; but that in the reign
of Quern Anne, it was found but barely comJrtent to
the accornmod ttion of the naval seamen, and was
then cohtined to them —(Heal ) In colisequence
of this, in the year 1747, the sh pawners and merchants
applied to Parliament for an ik,t to estahlisn sepir ito
merchant seamen's hespitals, and, as a proof that the im-
plied charge against the merchants and shipowners, of
taking advantage of the seamen, was unjust, be would
state, that the amounts from time to time levied under
that Act, up to Deceinher, 1831, was 231,0001. and that
the expenditure h rd exceeded that income by 13,1581. the
ficieucy belie made up by the merchants and ehipowneue
He had made inquiry at all the outpost-, as well as a•
the port of London, and (excepting Swansea, Bristol,
and Whitehaven, from whence no returns had been
ieerived), he found that the receipts last year, from the
6 I. p• r month levied exclusively for the Merchant Sea-
men's Hospital, amounted to 8,5041., and the disbursements
to 10 3501. From this deficiency, pensions, in particular
ctses, which used to be Si. per annum, were reduced to
41 , and the widows, orphans, and other claimants, weft-
ttot assisted as they would be if all the money raised from
merchant seamen were appropriated to the distressed and
disabled of titeir class, and to their unprovided widows and
orphans.
Mr. BUCKINGHAM said he bad heard with much
pleasure the admission of the Right Hon. and Gallint
Admit tl, that if the House would provide the means of
supporting the Hospital, the merchant seamen might be ne
longer charged, and he was sure the House would be found
to be most ready to assist in relieving so deserving a por•
tion of the community.
Sir. HUTT also supported the prayer of the petition.
Lord G. BENTINCK read extracts from the t riginal
Act, in support of the statement of the Hon. Member
ior London. He saw no reason why 24 00U/. a year
should not come out of the general revenue of the country.
on the same principle that his Majesty's Government

applied to this House to pay ane fourth the expense of the
' metropolitan police out of the revenue of the country,
It was clear the merchant seamen of England would de.
rive the whole benefit of the remission of sixpence per
month. They all felt the great advantage of the sixpence
uer month being contributed to the other fund, which
was an excellent society, and they all prayed that
that sixpence per month might be transferred
from Greenwich Hospital to the M..rchant Seaman's
Fund.—(Hear.) He for one, and he believed there
were a great many other Honourable Members in the
House who would do the same, would stand by his Ma
j-sty's Ministers, and support them in the next session of
Parliament, if they would come down and charge that
24,000/. a year which was now contributed towards
Greenwich Hospital by the merchant se imen, on
the general resources of the country.
Mr. O'REILLY concurred in the proposition of the
Nohle Lord who had Just spoken, and hoped that course
would be adopted.
The peti r-n was then laid upon the table.
Mr. E. RUTHVEN presented a petition from Thil-

Inead, in the county of Kildare, complaining of the con
duct of the Rev. Arthur Preston, in collec,ing the tithes,
and stating that he had sworn in a number of boys under
age as special constahles.

Mr. SHAW sincerely beli-ved that if the Hon. Mein.
her hail made inquiries, he would have found that not one
of the allegations contained in the petition was true. He
believed that Mr. Preston had no knowle4ge that such a
petition would be presented, otherwise he would have
most satisfactorily explained all the allegations contained
in it.

Mr. RUTHVEN could state from his own knowledge
that all the allegations contained in the petition were
true. The Honourable Mem,.er then presented a
Petition from William Furnival, late of Mahon.
in the county of Cheshire, complaining of cruel and
oppressive treatment when under confinement as a debtor
in Horsemonger-lane Goal. The Hon. Member then
read the petition at length.
Mr. S. RUTHVEN, in seconding the prayer of the
petition, stated that complaints of a more serious
assure never came before the public notice than those con-
tained in the petition which had just been presented. The
individual in question had expended a great deal of money
in the manufacture of salt in this country. He subsequently
went to ether countries and estabished similar works in
those places. Wnile in France he had been arrested for a
debt and was imprisoned. He had made his escape, and
was subsequently confined in Horsemonger-lane Goal.
where he had been treated in a manner totally at vari-
ance with all feelings of humanity and justice.
Mr. LAMB stated that he hail not had a copy of either
the former petition which had been presented by the Hon.
Member for Kildare, nor of the present. He did not corn.
plain of the want of courtesy, hut it would have been
inure convenient to the House if he had known of these
petitions earlier. It was to be recollected, however, that
this person was in the custody of the sheriffs and not of
the Magistrates. For some reason or other the sheriff
entertained great apprehension that this person meditated
escape. Whether those apprehensions were right or wrong,
he (Mr. L ) did not know, but at the same time the
House would see it was not for the magistrates to interfere
with the sheriffs; becaus•, if the prisoner had made his
escape, the sheriff would have been fixed with the con-
sequences.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He only wished the
House to suspend its judgment until inquiry coul
h, made, as he had n• hesitation in saying, that if
the allegations were true, the conduct that had been
adopted was most improper, and ought to be looked into.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said the prisoner had a consti-
tutional remedy, and ought to have applied for that before
he came to the House.

Mr. HUAIE said that this was one of those unfortunate
cases which showed the necessity of introducing some law
relative to imprisonment for debt.—( hear.)
The Hon. Member then went into a statement showing
the Dumber of persons committed at different periods at
the various prisons in the metropolis, and showing that a
v ist proportion of them were for very small di bts
Sir F. I3URDETT considered that the magistrates had
no right to interfere in the manner described.
Mr. O'DWYER wished the H in. Gentleman would
say whether he had heard of private whippings in the
prison.

111 r. LAMB supposed the Hon. Member to allude to the
whippings under the gaolers ; he would not immediately
give an opinion on the propriety of their abolition.
Mr. LYALL presented a petition from the President and
Governors of the Mei chant Seamens' Corporation, praying
the repeal of so much of the Act of 7 and 8 of Will. M.,
c. 21, as prescribes the deduct on of 6d. per month from
the merchant seaman towarth Greenwich H •spital.
Atter a few observations from Sir J. GRAHAM, the
petition was laid on the tuble.
Mr. LYALL then presented a petition from the ship.
owners of the port of London, relative to the dist, ess of
the shipping interest. Referred to the Committee
now sitting. The Hon. Member also presented a petition
from the seamen and others connected with the London
cgs, against the impressment of merchant seamen. He
thought it highly necessary to have some change is this
syst. rn.

Mr BUCKINGHAM supported the petition.
Lord HENNIKER pre.ented several petitions against
s•atute labour, and in favour of the Highways Bill.
A'so petitions against the malt and other taxes, and in
hvour of local courts.
After souse remarks by Mr. COBBETT and an Hon.
Member, the petitions were laid on the tible.

Mr POUILTER pros-nted a petition from the parish of
Kin,:ts on Magnus, c implaiiiing that the present rector had
advance I their tithes from 4001. to upwards of 1,0001
per aonum, had charged even the poor labourers 3d. per
vetch on their potatoe grounds, and in other cases ren-
dered him.elt obnoxious to his parishioners.
1 'After a few observations from Sir R Inglis, Sir H.
Verney, Mr. Benett, and Mr. Stiavv, the petition we,

d ..d lie nn the table.
The Speaker then I.ft, the Chair.

THE CAUSE of the DRA ►IA.—(THIS DAY.)

A numerous and respectable meeting of the friends of the
drama took place to-day at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, for
the put, ose of expressing their determination in the next ses-
sion to do all in their power to give reform to dramatic repre-
sentation.

Among the company present we noticed the Marquis
of Clanricarde, Edward Lytton Bulwer, Esq. M. P., Henry
Lytton Bulwer, Esq., M.P., Mr. Hawes, M. P., Mr. Davidge,
Mr. Serle, and several other gentlemen connected with the
drama.

On the motion of Mr. DAYIDGE E. L. Bulwer, Esq.
took the chair. He stated that they had met in consequence
of the rejection of the Bill by the House of Lords, to express
their determination, as before, to put their shoulders to the
wheel, and carry through, as expeditiously as possible, that
great measure which would give Reform to dramatic represen-
tation.—(Loud cheering.) When he considered that the
Bill had passed the House of Commons, and that
it's object was so clearly stated in the House of Lords
by the distinguished Nobleman then present, he had not the
s;ightest expectation that it would have been overthrown—
neither did he expect that so enlightened a man as
the Bishop of London should have put himself for-
ward as the greatest enemy of the Bill, which, though it
increased the number of the theatres, imposed ever check
upon immorality and licentiousness. He thought it beneath
tne dignity of the Right Rev. Prelate to get up in the House
of Lords, and make a co:k and bull story about a lady who
had performed at the Garrick Theatre, making that as the
chief ground of objection to the Bill. The only possible ground
of objection, except that, was as to the prerogative of the
Crown. Now as to that, he thought that the time was come
when the King of England could not exercise a more
beneficent act than that which gave enjoyment and delight to
his subjects. It had been stated that the Bill attacked the
prerogative. He denied that proposition, his firm conviction
being that it strengthened and confirmed it. He trusted,
therefore, that the mee ing would be unanimous in the ex.
pression of their opinions to introduce a Bill in the next
session of Parliament, similar to the one that had been lost.
The Hon. Gentleman concluded amidst loud cheers.
Mr. HAWES, ALP. for Lambeth, then came forward to pro-
pose the first resolution. In doing so, the Hon. Gentleman
stated that the monopoly which at present existed was so inju.
rious to the public that it could not long be allowed to exist.
file following was the resolution :—" That this meeting
while they regret the failure of a measure to enfranchise
the British drama, confidently trust that the justice of
the case will at length be made perceptible to its present op.
ponents, and that the alteration of the law which all acknow-
ledge should take place, may prove a just, liberal, and
sufficient measure. That fully acknowledging the im.
portance of respecting all vested rights, this meeting
is aware of no vested right more sacred and indefeasible than
that which every man possesses to gain his livelihood by the
honest exercise of those abilities which he has inherited from
nature and improved by study. That after suffering theaths
professedly built for the encouragement of the British drama
to be devoted to the most unworthy purposes, the Proprietors
have committed the last breach of the trust on which they
claim to hold their monopoly by placing both the so called na.
ional theatres in the hands of one individual, whose
management on behalf of another less e has been the
principal means of alienating those stages from their proper
use, and who has, by the act of the proprietors, become the sole
Legitimate arbiter of every thing connected with the histrionic
art. That this is a state of slavery for the professors of an art
unparalleled in age or country, and disgracefully inconsis-
tent with the spirit of the lath century, and the freedom of
the subjects of the United Kingdom."
The Marquis of CLAN/Ile/H/1i rose araidstgreat cheering to
second the resolution, and was lett speaking.

OLD BAILEY.-(THIS DAY.)

OLF) COURT.

The special commission which was issued in consequence of
the " mistake "of the Middlesex Magistrates was opened this
morning, before the Recorder, Aldermen Atkins, Fairbrother,
&c. The prisoners were then brought up, and called upon to
plead to the indictments.

Pitton was asked, " Are you Guilty, or Not
Guilty ?" to an indictment, charging him with a burglary in
the house of a Mr. Norbury. He answered, " I have already
pleaded to the charge ; I have been tried and convicted, there-
fore I do not think myself justified in pleading any more."
The RECORDER explained the informality of the former
trial, and said, "The Court had power to order a plea of "Not
Guilty " to be entered if he refused to plead to the present in-
dictment ; if, however, you rely upon the legality of your
former conviction, the Court must proceed to pass sentence
upon you. You will, however, take your own course."
Prisoner still refused to plead.
Mr. BODKIN applied to have a plea of " Not Guilty" entered.

The RECORDER, however, adjourned the Court till the Judges
should arrive, so as to have the benefit of their opinion.
At 10 o'clock, Mr. Justice LtrrLEDALE and Mr. Baron
VAUGHAN, accompanied by the LORD MAYOR, took their seats
on the Bench.

The prisoner was again placed at the Bar, and still refused
to plead.

Mr. Justice Ltrrt.EnALE then explained to him that all the
former proceedings in his case were now null ; but he per_
sisted in his refusal, and the Judge ordered a plea of Not
Guilty to be entered.
Several other prisoners acted in the same manner, and much
time was lost in consultation on thit Bench. Many of the
answers gave cause for laughter. Some when asked to plead
said, "I have pleaded before; I was tried, and I have had
enough of it." Another—" I was tried for that offence once,
and lam quite satisfied." Henry Chamberlain and Sarah
James were indicted for coining. Chamberlain handed in a
protest against being called upon to plead again.

Mr Justice LITTLEDALE asked whether he meant to say that
he was legally convicted before ?
Prisoner—l am not going to answer any questions. I shan't
commit myself.

The female was then called upon, but, by the advice of
Chamberlain, also refused to say nothing.
All the prisoners answered in the same manner, and it was
near twelve o'clock before the Court proceeded with the trials.
None of any interest had taken place when our reporter left.

NEW COURT.
(Before the COMMON SCRGEANT.)

Several of the prisoners who had been previously convicted,
on being arranged at the bar, pleaded Guilty, among whom was
Shaw, the late butler io the Earl of Ripon, who was indicted
for embezzling various sums of money, the property of that
Noble Lord.

The Earl of Ripon attended, and recommended the prisoner
to mercy. After the Noble Earl had left the Court,
Mr. CLARKSON, who appeared as Counsel for his Lordship
on this and the former occasion, submitted whether, in conse.
quence of the peculiar circumstances of the case rendering it
necessary to employ Counsel on both occasions, the expenses of
that employment ought not to be allowed by the Court.
The Common SERGEAN r thought it was but fair that those
expenses should be allowed. But as he was young in the prac.
tice of the Court, he should not like to decide the point with-
out consulting the Judges. The Learned Gentleman then
left the Court, and, after consulting with Mr. Justice Little.
dale, stated that it was that Leaned Judge's opinion, in cases
where Counsel had been properly employed on a former occa-
sion, the expenses .f the brief of Counsel should be allowed
on the second occasion.

Samuel Attwood was indicted with receiving, on the 10th
of May last, from an evil disposed person, a vast quantity
of plate and jewellery, to the value of 2001. or 300/. the
property of Mr. Bonifield, the Jeweller, of 36, Cheap_
side. From the evidence it appeared, that on the day in
question, the prisoner at the bar went to the shop of Messrs.
Attenbury, the pawnbrokers, of Finsbury-square, and offered
for sale half a dozen of silver table-spoons for 21. The shop.
man, thinking the price asked very inadequate, had a suspicion
that the prisoner had not come honestly by the property, and
sent for an officer, who searched the prisoner, and found a great
quantity of plate and jewellery about him. On being asked,
the prisoner said he had the property from Edward Foster, the
shopman of Mr. Bamfield, that lie resided with Foster's mother,
to whose house the officer immediately went,and there discovered
a further quantity of plate. The connexion between Foster
and the prisoner was proved by the shop-boy of Mr. Bamfield,
who stated that he was in the habit of coming to the shop re.
peatedly when Mr. Bamfield was out of town

Mr. CLARKSON, on behalf of the prisoner, submitted that
the case was one of stealing, and not of receiving.
The COMMON-SERGEANT said he would leave that question to
the Jury.
No person appearing to speak to the prisoner's character, the
Learned Judge summed up the case, and the Jury found the
prisoner Guilty of receiving the property, knowing it to be
stolen

A true Bill was found against Mrs. Foster last session for
participating in the receipt of the stolen property, which was
thrown out by the Grand Jury in this.

THE FUNDS.—(THis DAY.)

CITY. TWELVE O'CLOCK.

The only arrival this morning at the North and South Ame.
rican Coffee-house are Charleston papers to the Ist July,
which have been anticipated by the late arrivals from New
York of the 10th July.
From the Charleston papers.

. .
Extract of a letter from a medical gentleman in New Or-
leans :

" The cholera has completely subsided. No new cases have
been reported during the last 2.4 hours. Many dreadful and
piercing scenes have I witnessed ; I have seen the industrious
mechanic expire in the arms of his heart-broken spouse, and
his innocent offspring, and have witnessed his wife and several
of his infants struck down by the terrific destroyer."