The Sun.
London, England, 1833-03-06 00:00:00

BEER BILL.

The NOBLE. LORD also presented petitions from
Stone, Houghton, and Sandon, complaining of tl:e
great evils that had arisen from the Beer Act, and
praying the House to introduce such measures as would
protect the morals of the people.

The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from Mr.
Georg• Forwood, one of the Churchwardens of Liverpool,
complaining of the system adopted by masters in paying
the wages of their journeymen in public houses on Satur-
day nights.—(Hear, hear.) And a petition, signed by
4,000 of the gentry, clergy, merchants, and other inhabi-
tants of the same town, praying for a better observance
of the Lord's Day, and expressing their satisfaction at the
expressed intention of the House taking the subject into its
early consideration. The latter petition was agreed to at a
public meeting.
Mr. COBBETT could not let that petition pass with-
out expressing his opinion of the motives by which all
the petitions respecting the Lord's Day were got up. A
petition was presented, the day before yesterday, from
Staines, and two other parishes in the county of Middlesex,
expressing the desire of the petitioners to have a law to
protect them against the injury to which they were ex-
posed in consequence of impious traders trading on the
Sunday. It was very much like the reason give❑ by
Hudibras why the pious should have all the good things
of this world, but the real truth was—and this was the
foundation of all those petitions—the rich tradesman living
in country towns especially went out in his gig on a
Sunday, with his lady and children, " on a :visit
to their friends at Vickitam"—(Laughter)—and
he could tell them that their friends in many
instances, as he knew, would be glad if a law were
passed to make them stay at home.—(Laughter.) The
rich tradesman could go out on a Sunday to see his chil-
dren at boarding school, and therefore he wished to prevent
the poor tradesman from selling on a Sunday those articles
which he, the rich one, would then be able to sell on the
Monday. That was the foundation of all those petitions.
In that from Staines the petitioners avowed their motive.
Lord SANDON rose to order—lt was the understand-
ing in the House last night, that there should be no
debate on the presentation of petitions ; and he thought
,hat the Hon. Member for Oldham was very disorderly in
imputing motives to the petitioners, whose petition was
presented on a former night, and was not now before the
House.
The SPEAKER did not think the Hon. Member for
Oldham was entirely out of order, and with respect to
the length of speeches, much must depend on an Hon.
Member's sense of propriety.—(Hear, hear.) With
respect to the reference to a petition presented on
a former day, if it were on the same subject
as the present petition, he could not say that

Lord SANDON admitted that it contained a prayer for
inquiry ; but to countenance such a measure, after so long
a lapse of time, would be to put every constituency in the
country under the influence of dominant factions.
Mr EWART, as his election was alluded to in the
proposed measure of the Member for Wiltshire, should
consider it most consistent with propriety not to take any
pact in the discussion. He should leave it in the hands
of lion. Members, and to the opinion of the House.
Mr. WASON read to the House some statements, by
which it would appear that several boys belonging to
charity schools had signed the petition presented by the
Noble Lord, and had placed the occupations of their
fathers against them. Petitions should be valued accord-
ing to the weight that could be attached to their signatures.
The Hon. 111,mbcr then went into some observations
relative to alleged corruption in the municipal elections of
Liverpool, and read part of a presentment of the Grand
Jury on that subject, and on the corruption existing during
elections for Members of Parliament.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY called the Hon. Member to
order for not confining his observations to the petition
before the House, and we understood that the Speaker
concurred.

Mr. SPEAKER observed, that the petition could not
be liable to the observations the Hon. Member was mak-
ing upon it, as it was not the petition of an individual.

WASON still did not understand the House to
rule that he was out of order, in stating the circumstances
of corruption attending the Mayor of Liverpool's conduct.
Mr. SPEAKER certainly considered the Hon. Mem-
ber out of order, unless the petition contained some ex-
press charge in that respect.

Mr. WASON was not sure whether it did or not, as be
had not read the petition.
Mr. SPEAKER was not surprised, and it was not un-
likely, that the Hon. Member should be out of order when
he confessed to the House he had not read the petition on
which he was commenting.
Mr. GLADSTONE stated, that from the letter he bad
received be believed the petition to be signed by many
respectable individuals, and that it should have his
support. _

Colonel WILLIAMS said it was impossible to know
what to say upon the petition unless it was read.
If it contained an application for an inquiry
then he would have no more to say on the subject. This
he knew, that it contained the names of many individuals
who had been for3o years and upwards, known for corrup-
tion and bribery in their conduct.—(Hear.) The Noble
Lord who ;presented the petition had known Liverpool
for twenty-eight years, he (Colonel W.) had known
it for thirty years, and lie had been s good
deal concerned there in election business—(Hear, hear,
and laughter)—and he could assure the House that for
the last thirty years there had been a greater system of
bribery and corruption carried on in Liverpool than had
ever disgraced any rotten borough. It was very proper
that this system of corruption should be taken
notice of before the general Committee now appointed
to inquire into the state of Corporations ; and when the
Corporation of Liverpool came before the Committee, he
was confident it would meet with full ju'tice.
LABOURING CHILDREN'S FACTORY BILL.
Lord ASHLEY was unwilling to occupy the time of
the House, but in consequen,:e of petitions having ac-
cumulated very much, he felt bound now to lay some
of them before the House. The first he had to pre.ent
was a petition from Huddersfield, signed by 1,500 indivi-
duals, in the short space of a day and a half, in favour of
the Ten Hour Lal.ouring Children's Factory Bill.
Lord MORPETH took this opportunity of consulting the
convenience of the House respecting a notice which stood
under his name this evening. The House was aware that the
Noble Lord, the Member for Dorsetabire, had obtained

Mr. DUNCOMBE then presented a petition from
Pickering, for the better observance of the Sabbath ; in
doing which he begged to inform the Honourable Mem-
ber opposite (Mr. Shell), that the petitioners in
that petition, suggested as a mode for insuring the better
observance of the Sabbath, the better regulation of public-
houses, and eating-houses, and also that the election of Cor-
porations should not take place on Saturday.
Mr. MORGAN O'CONNELL presented a petition
from Ballyrobe, in the county of Mayo, praying the House
not to pass the Coercive Bill for Ireland.
Mr. COBBETT said that he had several petitions from
Mayo to the same effect, in which the petitioners stated
that they were afraid a great part of the information on
which his Majesty's Ministers had relied, had been
given by a person who was an inhabitant of Newgate at
the same time as himself. That individual had been, how-
ever, sent there for telling a falsehood, while he (Mr. Cob-
bett) bad been imprisoned for telling the truth...-.(A laugh.)
Mr. MORGAN O'CONNELL then presented a petition
from a parish in the county of Meath, to the same effect.
Also a petition from a parish in the county of Meath for
the repeal of the legislative Union. Likewise petitions
from various parishes in the same county against the
Irish Disturbance Bill. A petition from a parish in the
county of Armagh to the same effect ; and a petition from
a parish in the county of Mayo, praying for a repeal of the
Union, for the repeal of the Septennial Act, and for vote
by ballot.

An How. MEmnEa took this opportunity of stating
that ke had numerous petitions from the city of Dublin
against the Irish Disturbance Bill.
C lonel DAVIES presented a petition from the Po-
litical Union of Worcester against the Irish Coercive Bill,
and praying that it, might not pass into a law.
Mr. ROBINSON had been requested by the petitioners
to support the prayer of this petition. He felt bound to
say that the petition came from a very inconsiderable
number of his constituents, and as there had been no ge-
neral meeting of the other part of his constituents, he could
not say what their opinions were ; but as he had voted
for the first reading of this Bill early this morning,
he hoped the House would allow him to explain
in a few words what he had not had the opportunity of
doing when he gave his vote—his feelings during the very
extraordinary discussion the House had been so long em-
ployed in hearing.—(Cries of " No, no," and " Hear,
:tear.") He had given his vote in favour of the first
reading, as a mark of his confidence in his Majesty's
Ministers, and out of respect to that branch of the Le-
gislature from whence the Bill had been sent into that
House, but he did not think a sufficient case,
after all that had been said, had been made
out to warrant the Government to call upon the Legisla-
ture to pass such a Bill as the present, inflicting such a
wrong on the whole people of Ireland, as this measure
was calculated to inflict.—(Hear, hear, and cries of
Order.")

Mr. SPEAKER was quite confident that no Member
of that House would he more ready to consider such state-
ments as this out of order than the Hon. Member who
had now been addressing the House, if those statements
had proceeded from any other Hon. Member._—(Cheers•)
However satisfactory it might be to the Hon. Gentleman's

Mr. BLAKENEY supported the prayer of the petition
with all his heart. He had the honour of representing
the county of Carlow, and was in possession of some pe.
time from that county of a similar nature to the one now
before the House ; which he feared he would have no op.
portunity of presenting before the measures of Ministers
were completed,—(Hear.) Nothing during the debate
on those important measures had given him so much pain
as the speech of the N ,ble Member for Nottingham, the Lord
Lieutenant of Carlow (Lord Duncannon). That Noble
Lord had stated that he had not yet received from the po-
lice officer the report for the last month. Now be (Mr.
B.) would take leave to say that at this time the county
of Carlow was in a perfectly tranquil state. This he said
with the utmost confidence, and without fear of contra-
diction, for there was no Member of that House who could
be so intimately acquainted with the state of Carlow as
himself. He had, during the recess, made every inquiry
throughout that county. He had been, and was still
eceiving daily communications from every part of that
county, and he could not describe to the House how much
he had been shocked by the representations made by the
Hon. Member for Nottingham, to whose statemen a every
person knowing the worth of his public and private
character, would give great weight. Last evening he
(Mr. B.) felt himself called upon to remark upon the
statements of that Noble Lord, but this his courtesy to-
wards the Noble Lord, aed his feelings as a gentleman,
had prevented him doing in the absence of the Noble
Lord. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin
had risen last evening before the Noble Member for
No`tingham came in, and thus circumstanced, he
(Mr. B.) could only have a private communica-
tion with the Noble Lord, in which he learnt from
him that this day the report for the last month would he
received. But from whom would it be received ?—From
a police officer ! And he was able to prove to the House,
that all the other reports upon which the measures of Mi-
nisters ware founded, cams also from police oflicere.—
(Hear, hear.) He would take upon him to say,
that the number of outrages mentioned by the
Noble Lord could not possibly have taken place
in the county of Carlow without his (Mr. B.'s) cog-
nizance, and this he said as a magistrate, who gave more
attenti..n to what was going on in that county than any
other magistrate. It was with these feelings that he took
the liberty to address the House at more length than
perhaps he ought to have done. He would only
further say, that be had five or six petitions to
present to the House from every part of the county
which he had the honour to reoresent against
this measure. There were few in that House who knew
Ireland better than he did, and he would venture to affirm
that among the whole 32 counties of Ireland there was
not a more peaceable one than the county of Carlow. In
looking over the list of outragee that had been instanced
by the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland, he found that
that list had been made up to the end of March, and it had
been most grossly exaggerated. He knew the county well,
and could positively state that in the month of January
there had been only one outrage that deserved the name ;
the others that were pressed into the service were mere
trivial affairs. If he had an opportunity before this ques.
tion was settled, he would show that the state of Ireland
was not at all in the state in which it had been repre-
sented. He would show that the contents of the " Red
Box" had been most grossly exaggerated. It was too
much for the patience of an Irishman to believe that
that House would legislate upon such flimsy materials.
His election, and that of his Noble Colleague, was con-
ducted without a single outrage. Indeed there was no
outrage either before or after the election, nor had there
been a single case of murder in the coun y which he re-
presented for several years. If there had been any outrage
at all, it was committed by the Whitefeet of
King's County, Queen's County, and Kilkenny,
who had been permitted to creep into the county, with-
out at all being checked by the authorities. If the proper
authorities had exercised the powers with which they
were invested, Whitefootissu would have been suppressed
the instant it appeared.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. VIGERS presented a similar petition from the
landowners and other inhabitants of the parish of Raphoe,
in the county of Carlow.
Mr. lOLAKENEY supported the prayer of it.

Mr. VIGORS next presented tour petitions of the
same nature, from various parishes in the county of Wex-
ford, and one that was signed by a number of the inhabi-
tants of the town of Wexford. The latter stated that the pe-
titioners viewed with alarm and indignation the measure of
coercion which had been introduced into the House,
and which, if it were allowed to pass into a law, would
greatly harass and paralyse the trade of that town. They
deprecated the intention of vesting such powers in the
hands of any individual whatever, without previously in-
stituting a Parliamentary inquiry to show its necessity. They
felt confident, if such an inquiry were granted, it would
appear that there were no grounds for requiring extraor-
dinary powers; but that the present law, if vigorously
acted upon, would be found quite adequate to preserve the
public 'peace without resorting to any unconstitutional
measures.

Mr. WALKER, in supporting the prayer of the peti-
tion, would refrain from making any observations on the
Bill ; and would merely state that the petitioners were
both numerous and respectable.
Mr. VIGORS next presented a similar petition from
New Ross, in the county of Wexford, and begged to say,
that he fully concurred in its prayer, as well as in that
of all the other petitions he had presented upon that subject.
Mr. J. H. TALBOT said, that as Member for New
Roes, he had taken advantage of the Honourable
Gentleman opposite having petitions to present on
the same subject, to place the petition in
his bands, in order that it might be laid at
the earliest period before the House. He felt it his
duty to say that the coercive measure, as far as regarded
the county of Wexford, was quite unnecessary.
Mr. SHEIL said that he had been requested to sup-
port the petition, and in doing so begged to call the at-
tention of the House to the fact that the Lord Lieutenant
for the county of Wexford, had declared it to be his
opinion that such a measure was not necessary to preserve
the.tranquillity of that county. As his name was low down
in the list he would also mention; though, perhaps, rather
irregularly, that he had received a petition from South
Shields, signed by 1,000 persons against the Bill.
The petition was laid upon the table.
Mr. VIGORS presented a petition praying for the