The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-24 00:00:00

THE SUN,

BIBLE MONOPOLY.
Mr. HUME having presented several petitions against
the Bible monopoly, moved for the returns of the number
of Bibles which had been printed; and also for returns
of the amount of duty which had been remitted for the
purpose of printing those Bibles.
COLLISIONS OF STEAM-VESSELS.
Mr. HUME also moved for returns of the number
and consequence of the collisions which had taken place
between steam•vessels at sea.

SPANISH TARIFF.
Mr. G. BANKES gave notice that on Thursday he
should move for returns of the duty levied on British
vessels and goods in Spanish ports, and Spanish vessels
and goods in British ports.
EXPENSES OF PROSECUTIONS BILL.
At the request of Mr. DEEDES,
Sir G. GLEY agreed to postpone the report of this
Bill from Wednesday to Wednesday week, as he thought
it advisable that the several alterations proposed in the
clauses should be in the hands of Members some days
before they were considered in the House, and he should
therefore move that the report be brought up on Wed-
nesday week.
THE EASTER ADJOURNMENT.

In reply to a question from _,
Lord ROBERT GROS-
VENOR,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that on the Thursday
befbre Easter Sunday he should move that the Howe
should adjourn till the following Monday so'nnight.
MERCANTILE MARINE BILL.

In reply to Mr. HUME,
Mr. LABOUCHERE stated that he had never at any
time denied that he thought the details of this Bill were
susceptible of improvement; but at the same time he
must say that he intended to adhere firmly to the prin-
ciple of the Bill. Ho should, however, bring in the
amended Bill in such time as would enable Members to
duly consider its provisions with a view to its becoming
law before the House rose for the prorogation.
MISS TALBOT.

Mr. REYNOLDS said that there was a subject to
which he was exceedingly desirous of drawing the
attention of the House for a few moments, and this
request ho made as a personal favour to himself.
It was to every man of honourable feeling an object
well worthy of regard to retain his standing in that
House by stating there that which he knew to be true.
—(Hear.) There, as well as elsewhere, he was always
particularly careful to say nothing of which he was not
perfectly cognizant. Feeling this responsibility, he was
partieularly struck with the bold assertion of the lion.
Member for the city of London, and with the still more
bold contradiction of the Hon. Member for Marylebone

(Sir B. Hall), when he asserted that Miss Talbot was
not and never had been a postulant.—(Flear, hear.)
He now deliberately repeated that assertion—(Hear,
hear, cheers, and laughter)—that Miss Talbot was not,
and never had been, a postulant. He had it from the
bishop who superintended the convent in which it was
said Miss Talbot was immured, that she was not at the
present moment a postulant.—(Hear, hear.) He did not
mean to impugn the assertions of Mr. Craven Berkeley
or any of his friends in that House. He believed that
which they said they believed to be true.—(Loud cries
of " Hear, hear," and ironical cheers.) Nevertheless he
was wrong.—(Renewed laughter, and ironical cheers.)
He was bound to say that the Hon. Member for Oxford
had treated him with all courtesy, but he had never re-
ceived the letter which had been addressed to him, and
he should therefore content himself with again asserting.
that Miss Talbot was not, and never had been, a postu-
lant.—(Hear, hear, and ironical cheers.)
Sir B. HALL said that it appeared from the speech of
the Hon. Member for Dublin that one man had
said onethihg and another that which was totally
opposite to the assertion of the first, and yet
that both might be perfectly right.—(Lond laughter and
cheers.) All he had to say was that what he (Sir B.
Hall) had asserted respecting Miss Talbot he bad from
one of the Hon. Member's own bishops.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) He had believed the bishop in preference
to Mr. Reynolds, and he was sorry for it.—(Laughter.)
THE ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL.

heads of which are removed. Sixthly, a heavy charge
upon the country, for the removal of convicts to Austi a-
lia. And seventhly, the evil of wives and children being.
separated from their husbands and fathers,—some, in all
probability, for ever.
This sort of train of disasters is all clearly traceable
to the inhumanity and impolicy of the game-laws. The
modus operandi is thus. Poaching is not in itself gene-
rally regarded as a crime. The poor man, who perchance
is starving, does not view it as wrong in the eye of
Nature, whatever it may be in that of the law, to ap•
propriate to his own aliment the wild creatures
denominated "game," and meeting with resistance, and
knowing the extreme severity of the law, he employs
force in return, and loss of life is not unfrequently the
result. We do not say the cffender is justified in this:
on the contrary, we think his conduct utterly indefen-
sible. We merely adduce it to show how the system
works.
In alluding to this painful topic, we cannot forbear
making an observation on the extreme severity of the
sentences passed upon some of the prisoners in the above
case. The prosecutor might and ought to have con-
tented himself with proceeding against the chief offender,
Chapman, for felony, and against the rest simply for
nig,ht-poaching. Such would have been a just as well as
merciful course, for the punishment even of night-poach-
ing is more than sufficiently severe. This, however,
would not suffice. The whole pcund of flesh was de-
manded. In olden days, 'twas said,—
" And felons hang, that jurymen may dine."
In modern days, men are transported that gentlemen
may shoot.
The ratepayers of Derbyshire have now a peculiarly
fitting opportunity to petition the Legislature to remove
this stigma from our national escutcheon. The Scarcliff
case will furnish them with a good ground-work for an
effective petition to Parliament.—Nottingham Review.