The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-01 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 30.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
HIGHWAYS (SOUTH WALES) BILL.
Upon the motion for going into Committee on this

13111,
Mr. NICHOLLS objected to the principle of the Bill,
which he contended was nothing more than making
South Wales the scene of experiment. lie should op-
pose going into Committee on the Bill, and if that were
unsuect:asful, he should move to except the county of
Glamorgan from its operation.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS thought there was no more ne-
cessity for this Bill in South Wales than any other part
of the kingdom.
After a short discussion on the propriety of extending
the Bill to England,
Sir G. TYLER rose to move that the House should
go into Committee that day six months.
Viscount EMLYN said that as the Government Bill
was not likely to be introduced at any early period, and
as far as his experience went, it was evident that no
time could be fixed for any Bill of any kind, he
had therefore determined to introduce his own Bill.
—(Hear.) He had at first intended to bring forward
a general Bill, or some one which would lead to a general
Bill. His regard had been especially directed to the dis-
trict of South Wales, which was especially deficient in
the means by which a: freedom of highways could be
carried out. He should; therefore, persevere to a divi-
sion, and he hoped that the House would be with him.
Mr. C. LEWIS said ,that, although he objected to
many of the details, he did not object to the plan on
which it was to be carried out. The details were indon-
sistent with the principles, and consequently no perma-
nent good could be effected without a great alteration in
the mode by which the provisions of the Bill were to be
carried out; however, he did not oppose the principle of
the Bill, for he thought that it would be_ eminently bene-
ficial, but it might be still moreServicenble if its advan-
tages were made more general. He should, therefore,
reserve himself for the Committee.
Mr. VIVIAN said that in his opinion the whole of
the management had better be left to the county magis-
trates.
The motion was negatived without a division.
The House then resumed, when
Mr. WILLIAMS said that the whole of the business
ought to be borne in mind. It would greatly affect the
Bill to which the Government had already given its
sanction.
Sir BENJAMIN HALL said that whatever the Hon.
Member for Lambeth might say, there would at least be
a great grievance inflicted upon the agricultural, and he
might say upon every part of the community.
After a few observations from Mr. C. LEWIS,
Sir F. LEWIS expressed his opinion that this Bill,
although defective in several points, was calculated to be
of great public benefit.
Lord EMLYN said that it would be of benefit if the
whole of the matter were to be referred to the Govern-
ment.
Mr. HUME said that be had repeatedly drawn the
attention of the House to subjects of this nature, and
the whole of his exertions bad been met with a put off.
What he wanted was a comprehensive measure. The
fact was that the whole affair ought to be taken up by
the Government.
rwomhensetvheerarel other Members,
For the motion ... ..•
TAhfteerusenies
Against it
we
dwi voirddesdf,

... 59

Majority ••• ••• —5l
The House having resumed, Mr. HUME and Lord
Estee's. made several observations on the sth clause, after
which the clause was passed without a division.
The remaining clauses were then agreed to, and the
report was ordered to be brought up this day week.
LODGING-HOUSES BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed this day week.
FARM BUILDINGS BILL.
Mr. B. COCHRANE moved the second reading of
this Bill, the object of which was to enable proprietors
of land to borrow money for the erection of farm
buildings.
Mr. TRELAWNY considered that the Bill would
have an injurious tendency.
After a few observations from Mr. MULLINGS,
Mr. HUME said he objected to the proposal that
landed proprietors should be enabled to borrow money
under the provisions of the Bill without paying the
stamp duty; if they were to be relieved of this duty the
exception ought to extend to other classes. He thought
the measure would have the effect of doing a great in-
justice to successors to estates by placing additional
burdens upon them.
Mr. MILES opposed the Bill.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading ••• ... 66
Against it ... ... 25
Majority ... —4l
SUNDAY TRADING PREVENTION BILL.
Petitions against the Bill were presented by Mr.
WAKLEY and Mr. BARING WALL.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS moved that the House go into
Committee upon the Bill.
Mr. ANSTEY opposed the motion. He had been on
the Committee which had sat on the Bill, and he was
sorry to say that he could not congratulate the Com-
mittee on its handiwork. The Bill was, in fact, the
result of a mixture of Sabbatical fanaticism, and
a desire on the part of shopkeepers in certain dis-
tricts to crush the efforts of their poorer brethren.
There was an exception made in the Bill with regard to
milk and cream, which was allowed to be sold on Sun-
days before ten in the morning and after one in the after-
noon; and he should like to know why greater .regard
was to be shown to the soul of the fishmonger than the
soul of the milkman. Club-houses were exempted en-
tirely from the operation of the Bill, as were also pub-
Ames. These were only some of the inconsistencies of
the Bill. But the most tyrannical and objectionable
clause of the Bill was the 7th, which gave a judicial
power to policemen to decide, on their own discretion,
whether a party had committed an offence under the in-
tended Act, and to seize the whole property of some
miserable hawker or dealer, which might happen
to be of a very perishable nature. It was
true that a magistrate had the power after-
wards of restoring the property, but in the mean time
it might become worthless. The statement in the pre-
amble, that legislation on this subject was necessary,
was altogether unfounded. In all the principal districts
of the metropolis Sunday trading had considerably de-
creased, or remained stationary. There had been no in-
crease in the borough of Lambeth, Which was repre-
sented by the proposer of the Bill. Sunday trading,
however, was carried on somewhat largely by persons
of the Jewish persuasion, who had a Sabbath and
holidays of their own. Their Sabbath, fast, and other
wthiethin dr to
withdraw make
them, altogether,
eom fifty-two more holi-
days;days, which they most religiously 'observed and on
which they abstained from labour, amounted altogether
toout of the twelve. The
to sixty-six days in the year, and the effect of the Bill
ftso•ouurl d
calendar
et
no
d compelarmonths fact,
Honourable Member for Lambeth had said that
the Bill was as much his (Mr. Anstey's) as his
uon the hear
of
present i tagain(Laughter.)
occasion he should
own; he wished he would adhere to that statement, and
allow him (Mr. Anstey) to withdraw the Bill; in that
clase h teh
we
eflr
eo usewold
defeated n
oppose it in every stage of its future progress. The
Hon. Member concluded by moving that the Bill go into
Committee on this day six months.
Mr. BARING WALL hoped that the Hon. Member
for Lambeth did not seriously intend to go into Com-
mittee to-day. If the Bill went into Committee
he should move that it should be made a
general instead of a local measure. He depre-
bastard legislation which
rated that sort of
applied to particular distrcF and prevented the
people knowing under what law they lived.
The next amendment he should. propose would have re-
ference to the times mentioned
th in the Bamendments ill fol. the
hsal
he
of
articles. There were many mention
h
intended to make, in order to remove the anomalies in
the Bill. He concluded by seconding the amendment.
Mr. LEONARD moved that the debate be adjourned.
Mr. ANSTEY seconded fern
sthotio.
our return we found that it had been agreed to adjourn
• ht
The gallery was then cleareem d division, but on
the debate until this day forting
CORONERS' BILL.
On the motion that this Bill be read a second time,
Mr. FITZROY recommended that the Bill should be
postponed until the country viias made acquainted with
its provisions.
Mr. ESTCOURT agreed to postpone the Bill, and the
motion for the second reading was withdrawn.
The other orders of the day having been disposed of,
the House adjourned shortly before Six o'clock.

STATE OF TRADE.
(From the Manchester Guardian.)
MerroitEsTica.—The Baltic arrived in the Mersey
other
last night, with advice& showing a further decline of i to
iof a cent per lb. in the price of cotton at New York.
A telegraphic announcement from New Orleans shows
that a quarter of a cent had been lost there from the 6th
to the 9th of April, but was regained by the 12th,
through the influence of improved accounts received by
ucncduenrtgroyn. 0
aSosmimeiloafr the other
eafrwrk°eYmtosrthkhaildsist, dated April 16, we take the fel-
ti,t ohrtelotmhiie
trfunr
el c
New
lowing particulars of increase as compared with 1815:
Bales.
Total increase of receipts at ports ••• 171,926
Week's increase ... ... -. ••• ..• 8.530
Total increase of exports to Great Britain •
... 183,287
Week's increase ... ... —. ••• ..• 18,605
Increase of stock at the ports ..• ... 4,923
Increase of stock in interior towns ... ... 28 330
But, as only a portion of the week's receipts at New Or-
leans had been reported, the total excess was estimated
at 180,000 bales. This mai expected to reach 200,000
bale:, and then a gradual decrerve is looked for. As these
accounts are taken to be more decisively indicative than
the preceding ones of a progress to a lower level of prices,
we have experienced an increased depression in every de-
partment of our market to-day. Goods have not been
saleable, except at lower prices in general than those of
last week; the buyers have held decidedly aloof from busi-
ness, and very little has been done. The medium and
lower ;lumbers of yarn baTo giTell Will etb9lll I(if per lb.