The Sun.
London, England, 1834-06-21 00:00:00

The Marquis of BRISTOL presented similar pe-
titions from parishes in Somersetshire.
Lord ROLLE presented similar petitions from
parishes in Devon and Cornwall. The noble lord
stated that the petitions from Devon were signed by a
great number of the Dissenters of that county.
The Earl of WINC HIL SE A presented petitions
in support of the Established Church from parishes in
the counties of Essex, Hants, Surrey, and Huntingdon.
The Duke of WELLINGTON presented similar
petitions from parishes in Norfolk.
The Bishop of ST. ASA PH presented petitions
from parishes in Carnarvon, in favour of the Established
Church ; and from parishes in Montgomery, against the
claims of the Dissenters.

The Duke of GLOUCESTER presented similar
petitions from parishes in Northumberland.
The Marquis of BUTE presented similar petitions
from parishes in Durham.
BEER BILL.

The ,1; a r 1 of HARROWBY presented petitions
frorp wishes in York, against the Beer Bill.
CRIMINAL CODE.

Viscount MELVILLE presented petitions from
Dalkeith, for a revision of the Criminal Code.
COMMON FIELDS ENCLOSURE BILL.
On the motion of Lord ELLENBOROUGH, the
Common Fields Enclosure Bill passed through com-
mittee, and the report was ordered to be received on
Monday.
COUNTY CORONERS BILL.

On the motion of Lord WHARNCLIFFE, the
County Coroners Bill was read a second time, and or-
dered to be committed on Monday.
The Earl of WINCHIL SEA gave notice that
on Monday next he would present a most nume-
rously signed petition, praying that Protestants in
the army abroad might be relieved from attend-
ing or assisting in Roman Catholic processions
or ceremonies. He also wished to know whether
the noble earl (Grey) would have any objec-
tion to lay a copy of the proceedings of a court-
martial, held upon an officer whose name escaped us,
for a remonstrance to his superior officer when or-
dered on duty for such a purpose.
Earl GREY said the courtmartial had been held
upon the officer alluded to in consequence of a breach
of orders. He believed it would be inconvenient to lay
the proceedings before the house—such a thing was
unusual.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said a few words,
but in so low a tone of voice as to be almost
inaudible. We understood him to say that he had
looked over the proceedings of the courtmartial, and
found them to be quite correct, as the officer alluded
to had most clearly committed a breach of orders. He
did not think it would be proper that the proceedings
should be produced.
Numerous petitions for support to the Established
Church were presented by Earl HOWE from places in
the county of Leicester, and by the Bishop of EXETER
from parishes in the county of Devon.
The Earl of ROSEBERRY presented a petition
from Brecon, against church patronage.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that on
a former evening in the absence of the noble earl
(Grey), he had asked the noble marquis ( Lans-
downe) a question relative to the time the house
might expect to receive a copy of the ratified treaty,
with regard to the Peninsula. On that occasion, he
was very jocular, and, though he gave him no inform-
ation in regard to his question, he told him that
his friend Don Miguel was coming to this coun-
try, and was then safe on board an English ship
of war. In that it now turned out he was misinformed,
and was not so well aware of what was going on
as from his position he ought to be. However,
letting that pass, he now wished to ask what the
Government intended to do with the Illustrious Prince
who had been detained at Portsmouth for above a week ?
The person and the case of that Prince were of
very deep interest to the whole of Europe. How
long he had been detained there unnecessarily he did
not know, but he saw it rumoured very widely, that
there had been a sort of mission sent down to Ports-
mouth, in fact, that an Under-Secretary of State had
been there trying by intimidation, or some other means,
to induce that illustrious prince to give up that which
was his birthright. ( Hear.) Those reports were so
general that he thought he was doing the noble earl
a great service in giving him an opportunity of nega-
tiving them. He would contend that that prince was
as much entitled to the protection and the hospitality
of this country as Charles the Tenth, or any other
unfortunate prince who had been driven into it. He
trusted the time had not arrived when a British go-
vernment would force a prince to abandon his birth-
right by any means whatever. He hoped the house
would be favoured with some satisfactory answer, in
order that these rumours and statements might be put
to rest.
Earl GREY said he was much afraid that in what
he had then to say, he should give the noble marquis
as little satisfaction- as it had been his misfor<
tune to do on other occasions. In the- outset
he must disclaim that it was the duty of govern-
ment to make statements in that house, merely
because other statements had been made or
appeared in other places. There had been a
mission to Portsmouth, but with respect to the
object of it, or to what passed there, if the noble mar-
quis (Londonderry) would bring forward a motion
upon the subject, he (Earl Grey) would be prepared to
meet him ; at present he would say no more than
that Don Carlos, whether he was or was not
the proper and legitimate heir to the Crown,
whatever might be his situation, or whatever might be
the consequences of that situation, had been re-
ceived here as a Prince of the Blood Royal
of Spain, and would be treated with all the respect
belonging to him in that character.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that
so far as regarded the respect shown to Don
Carlos, by some of the reports he had seen, it ap-
peared that he had been obliged to take a hackney
coach. ( Laughter. ) The house had never yet been made
aware of what had made the Government depart from
that neutrality to which they stood pledged,
both to the parliament and the country. He
would most distinctly ask whether the mission
was not for the purpose of getting Don Carlos,
either by intimidation or by promises, to give up
that right which he most undoubtedly had to
the throne,of Spain ?
Earl GREY said? in a sharp manner—Whenever
the ratifications are received in a proper state, they will
be laid before the house, and if the noble earl will
then bring forward a motion, I will most undoubtedly
be prepared to meet him.
The Earl of ELDON rose to call their lord-
ships' attention to a very unusual circumstance that
had taken place in their House that day, and
which he believed had occurred once before, namely,
that judgment had been given in cases in the absence
of the noble lord on the woolsack, or any one who
was appointed by commission to be the Deputy
Speaker. He would take the liberty of saying there
was nothing that he had more at heart than to see the
business of the House of Lords conducted in the course
and in the manner it had been so long conducted, be,
cause he would venture to say that the esteem
and respect of the subjects of this country, for the
House of Lords, as a Court of Judicature, was greater
than for any other tribunal in the country. It was ne-
cessary and proper that the interests of the suitors
should be properly adjudicated upon,- and he should
give notice of a motion to the effect that no
appeal should be heard without a certain number of
law lords being present. ( Hear, hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR was quite sure that
his noble and learned friend was aware that no one
felt more strongly than he did that the greatest
possible cue should be taken to keep in due and
regular form, and according to the ordinary Iscrra

of proceeding, the judicial business of that house
but it was perfectly well known that he was not to its
there that day, for he had made an appointment
to sit at ten o'clock in the morning at Lincoln's
Inn Hall, to hear an appeal, in which the suitors
and the parties from the country were kept wait-
ing in town. It was well known that, in con-
sequence of the necessary absence of the Chancel-
lor, who was the principal Speaker of the house,
the Crown had always, by commission, given the
power generally to a Deputy Speaker to sit and perform
the office of Speaker. He was quite sure his noble and
learned friend did not mean to.say there had never
been before a Deputy Speaker, because, while
the noble and learned lord held the great
seals, he (the Lord Chancellor) had argued
times without number cases before his deputies
who consisted of the Lord Chief Baron of the Ex-
chequer, the Lord Chief Justice of the King's
Bench, and his Honour the Master of the Rolls.
There had been a commission given to more than
one on the present occasion. Among the com-
missioners were two noble lords, who had belonged
to the profession of the law, the noble earl who
was chairman of the committee of that house, and
who did not belong to the profession of the law.
He believed there had been some misunderstanding,
because his noble friend the Lord Chief Justice
of the King's Bench, had been unexpectedly
detained in another place. There certainly was
no law lord present when the learned judges gave
judgment ; the consequence of which was, that
they would either have to give their opinions
to a lay lord, which seemed to strike his learned
and noble friend as something too horrible to be borne
( Hear and laughter), or they would have to go away
and come back on another occasion. Ho begged leave
to observe, he was not answerable for their having given
their opinions to a lay lord. He was not there at
the time, but the moment he heard of it, his answer
was, that if the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench
were still detained, let him know, and he would break up
the Court of Chancery, and go down to the House of
Lords instantly. He hoped his noble and learned
friend would reflect a little before he made his
motion, for he (the Lord Chancellor), could
not possibly help thinking, upon constitutional
grounds, regard being had to the nature of the
functions of that house, it would be very awkward,
not to say impossible, for them, to put upon
their shoulders a resolution which amounted to this,
that the whole of the peers were not competent
to discharge the judicial business of that house.
If the house adopted the resolution of which his noble
friend had given notice, it would deprive itself of the
exercise of one of the highest functions it could
possibly exercise, without the presence of the
nominee of the Crown. He would put it upon consti-
tutional grounds, whether the house would for the
first time admit that the Crown had a right to interfere
in the performance of the judicial functions of the
house. It was true that the house issued the commis-
sion for the appointment of a Deputy Speaker, but it
was equally as true that the house could at any time
name a Deputy Speaker for a day or an hour. If
it was meant to be said that the Speaker or Deputy
Speaker should be present before the house put its
question to 'the judges, that was nearly as much as
saying, " Don't put a question to the judges, don't
take upon you judicial business, without the presence
of a law lord." Now that he (the Lord Chancellor)
objected to. The constitution of the country might be
badly contrived, but by the constitution lay lords as
Well as law lords had a right to judge of all legal
matters in that house ; that was the legal and constitu-
tional view of the subject. For these reasons he hoped
that his noble and learned friend would re-consider
the subject before he brought forward his mo-
tion, pointing out such distinctions as he had ad-
verted to. Having made these observations he felt
himself bound to put their lordships in possession of
some of the facts of the case. A case came before the
house, in which the Judges came to a unanimous
decision ; no judgment of the house was then given,
but that of the judges was taken. The decision of the
house on the subject was given yesterday when he was
present, in which he took no small part, and in which
exemplary justice was done, by the appeal being
dismissed with costs. ( Hear, hear.) In the other
case the parties bringing the appeal abandoned their
case, and the Judges dismissed the appeal with costs.
Such was the state in which matters stood, he agreed
with the noble lord, that it would be much better if
some of the deputy speakers were present, but if they
were engaged elsewhere no other course could be
adopted.
The Earl of ELDON could assure the house that
nothing personal to his noble friend on the woolsack
had induced him to bring the subject forward ; his
only anxiety was that the forms of the house should be
observed. He was satisfied that it was his duty to make
the motion of which he had given notice. When he filled
the office of Lord Chancellor, he never left the woolsack
without making arrangements to fill the seat in hit absence.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had nothing to
do with what happened two days ago. The judges might
have been impatient in not waiting half an hour for him.
If he, as Lord Chancellor, was detained half an hour in
the Court of Chancery, it was the duty of the judges to
wait for him.

Earl GREY reminded the house that they had irregu-
larly entered upon the discussson of a question on the
notice of a motion. He thought they had better wait for
the proper opportunity.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND observed that the con-
versation would be of great advantage with regard to the
judicial proceedings of the house.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said a few words, ac-
counting for his absence.

Lord DENMAN, as Deputy Speaker under the com-
mission, informed the house that he was unable to leave
the Court of King's Bench at the moment the presence of
a Deputy Speaker was required in that house. He was
sent for, but at the moment a criminal cause was before
him, and it was impossible to leave the court. (Hear,
hear.) If the judgment had not been regularly given, it
might be set right. He would only add, that he was sure
that no impatience on the part of the learned judges had
led to the transaction.

After a few words from the Earl of ELDON in reply,
the subject was dropped.

PRISON DISCIPLINE.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE rose for the purpose of moving
an address to the Crown, to appoint a commission of in-
quiry into the state of the prisons. The noble lord con-
tended that the system of prison discipline was wrong, and
that offenders came out of the prisons in most. instances
worse than they went in. The progress of crime in this
country was alarming. It appeared that there had been a
great increase in the commitments and convictions in the
county where he presided ; the convictions had increased
in three years from 260 to 960. He thought the time had
come to put things on a better footing, and that was the
object of his motion. Mr. Peel's bill had certainly not de-
creased the number of crimes. In many instances persons
who were sent to prison for want of sureties, were asso-
ciated with vagabonds guilty of misdemeanors and crimes of
the worst description. The noble lord read the report of
the French commissioners on the present state of the Nor-
thern States of America. From that report it appeared
that in those States where education was most extensive,
there was an increase of crime. The noble lord merely
threw out that fact in order that the question might be
raised, vfhether,education among certain classes did or did
not unsettle the mind, and drive persons to commit crime.
With respect to the treatment of prisoners, in order
to prevent contamination in gaols, he considered
solitary confinement and profound silence.one of the
best modes of accomplishing that object. (Hear, hear. )
The magistrates found that silence and solitude broke the
spirit of the most vicious offenders. That mode of punish-
ment had answered every purpose in America. In Penn-
sylvania the prisoner was placed in solitary confinement.
Ile had a place for exercise, and the preservation of health,
but the door was closed upon him until the expiration of
the term of his imprisonment. In most cases the pri-
soners came out reformed. The noble lord expressed a
hope that he might see penitentiaries established all over
the country. They had one at Millbank, well adapted for
the purposes of secondary punishment, and he considered
the discipline very proper.
Viscount MELBOURNE said he almost agreed with
all the sentiments of the noble lord (Wharncliffe) who had
brought forward the present motion, and he trusted that
their lordships and the well-disposed portion of the pudic
would co-operate, in order that some effectiv:e measure
might be introduced. He held in his hand a return of the
number of committals since the year 1810 until the year.
1816 ; the average amount of whiellwas 6,Q15 annually ;
from 1816 to 1821, the amount was 12,945, or 102 per
cent, increase, which in his opinion was to be attributed
to the circumstance of the tatter years being year of
peace ; from 1822 t 0.1827 the increase was only 12 per

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that there was no-
thing in the increase of crime to cause regret in the minds
of their lordships. It was owing to other causes than an
increased ratio of immorality. It was wrong to assume
:hat the ratio of crime was in accordance with the progress
of education. How was it, then, when knowledge had
been going on—when education, of some sort or other,
was proceeding with rapid paces, that there really was an
inorcase of crime? Merely because that within the last
century the population of England and Wales had nearly
doubled. Much of crime was also to be attributed to the
❑umber 'a oaths required, which had a direct and imme-
diate tendency to the commission of the crime of perjury.
He also attributed much of the present state of crime to
the mal-administration of the poor laws. It was in vain
that he and others of their lordships founded schools
and circulated useful books, so long as the poor laws
continued to be abused. As well might a person think
to destroy the deleterious effects of a cup of arsenic cr
prussic acid by throwing in a few drops of water, a%
to check immorality by such means, so long as the poor
laws were abused in the manner to which he had al-
luded. (Hear, hear.) He considered that the legislature
had a right to inflict capital punishment, but only where
there was an expediency for the same, and a certainty that
it was the only punishment commensurate with the crime.
There were many crimes deserved the punishment of
death, besides murder; could any man deny that the crime
of rape ought not to be as severely dealt with ? He
doubted the efficacy of transportation as a general punish-
ment ; for to some men it was no punishment at all ; let
it, therefore, be measured out so warily as to be penal to
those upon whom it was inflicted. He thought it might be
improved by the abolition of leave tickets and condonation
by the Governor. He considered solitary imprisonment as
a Fiore effectual mode of punishment.
Lord SUFFIELD bore testimony to the great improve-
ments in the discipline of county prisons, although he de-
nied that much good had arisen from the classification of
prisoners ; it was desirable, however, that the hardened
criminal should be kept apart from the younger and less
experienced offender. He highly approved of that part
of the motion suggesting the appointment of inspectors of
prisons._

The Duke of RICHMOND expressed his thanks to his
noble friend (Lord Wharncliffe) for bringing forward the
present question. He trusted another session would not
be allowed to pass over without some definite measure
being introduced. He deprecated the system of Justices
of the county sending boys and juvenile offenders to prison
for one day, which of itself served to contaminate the mind
without being actually a punishment. He entreated his
nobly friend opposite to withdraw his motion for the present.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE expressed a similar
sentiment, especially after the explanatory discussion which
had taken place. He could speak favourably of a system
of labour and silence which had been practised for the last.
14 months in the prisons of the county (Wilts) in which
he resided. Although he was satisfied all the good antici-
pated by_ men of sanguine minds. from an improved system
of education, had not been realised, still he should be sorry
to see that experiment abandoned. (Hear. )
Lord DENMAN said that the justices of the country
were convinced that any power as regarded the regulation
of the prisons, should rest entirely with the secretary of
state. He was inclined to doubt that crime had increased
to the extent which had been stated. The number of
prosecutions, perhaps, only marked an anxious desire to
obtain the costs of those prosecutions. He deprecated the
practice of indiscreetly filling prisons with juvenile
offenders, who rarely or never left a prison without being
more or less contaminated. He trusted that a bill which
had been brought up from the Commons, having for its
object the more speedy trial of offenders, would receive
their lordships' assent some day next week, for it was
absurd to think of a person committed in August for steal-
ing an apple or a bunch of raisins remaining in prison till
March. (Hear.) With regard to secondary punish-
ments he had one remark to make, viz., that where a sen-
tence of transportation was passed upon any individual for
abstracting property, perpetual execution, at the suit of
the party offended against, ought to lie against the offender.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE replied, and withdrew his
motion.
Adjourned at a quarter to ten

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 20.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 25 minutes past fire
o'clock.

Colonel EVANS brought up the report of the Ge-
neral Steam Navigation Company's Bill.

Mr. C. WOOD moved for new writs for the
borough of Finsbury, and the stewartry of Kirkcud-
bright.
Colonel WOOD presented some petitions from
parishes in Westminster, against drunkenness and for
the better observance of the Sabbath.

Mr. L E NNA RD presented a petition from parishes
in Essex, in favour of Dissenters.
Mr. CLAY presented a petition from Limehouse
relative to the Commissioners of Sewers.
Lord H E NNIKE R presented petitions from parishes
in the county of Suffolk, against the claims of Dis-
senters.

Lord CHANDOS presented petitions from parishes
in Buckingham and Lancaster, against the claims of
Dissenters.

Mr. GOULBURN presented a petition from 111
resident members of the senate of the University of
Cambridge, against the admission of the Dissenters'
Bill.

Mr. SHAW moved the first reading of the bill for
the more effectual service of processes in the Court of
Chancery.

DISSENTERS.

Mr. 0. W. WOOD moved the second reading of
the bill for the admission of Dissenters into Universities.
Mr. E STC 0 URT rose to oppose the motion; but
in consequence of the noise prevailing in the house,
the first few sentences of the hon. member were
quite inaudible. According to the proposition of the
honourable member opposite, if the system of edu-
cation pursued at the universities was good, it
ought to be extended ; that was a self-evident
proposition, which he (Mr. Estcourt) did not
mean to controvert, but he suspected that the hon.
member had behind his back another proposition, the
object of which was to affect the system of edu-
cation now pursued at the universities of Oxford
and Cambridge. (Hear, hear.) If the system
at present pursued was good, he (Mr. E.) would
be the first to assist him in extending it, but he feared
that it was not the system which the lion, member ad-
vocated. The system pursued at the universities
was strictly and essentially a religious one, and he
feared that the object of the hon. member was to de-
stroy it. (Hear, hear.) If there was any doubt
upon that point, lie believed it had been settled at
a recent meeting of a very large body of the Dis-
senters, at which the hon. member for Leeds was pre-
sent. That hon. gentleman had stated that the
Dissenters did not want the degree of Doctor
of Divinity, but they certainly did wish to enjoy
the privileges of the universities, so far as professor-
ships and scholarships went. The hon, gentleman hav-
ing stated that as the opinion of the dissenters,could there
be a question that their object was to destroy the system
of education pursued there ? He believed the real ob-
ject of the Dissenters was ultimately to put an end to
what was termed the unjust and unnatural union exist-
ing between the church and the state. (Hear, hear.)
The hon. gentleman denies this, but if he does not say
so there are others who do. ( Cries of " Hear, lifer.")
He would say therefore that it was the evident inten-
tion of the hon. member to demolish and destroy the
established church ; and how did he mean to
proceed? First, they were to give the people a reli-
gious education, meaning it to be understood that
there was a want of religious education at
this moment. He (Mr. Estcourt) would assert that
the academic education was essentially religious, and
that it was impossible to separate religion from the pre-
sent system of education, because religion was the basis
of education ; and to the degree that they counteracted
or weakened religious education, to the same degree
they undermined education itself. What were the
reasons for this application ? Had there been any
complaints, and who were they that objected to the pre-
sent system of education? Perhaps the hon. gentleman
( Mr. Wood, we believe) supposed that there was
some difficulty in obtaining young Inca to enter the
university. So far from that being the case, every part
of the university was overflowing, and those interested in
any change in the present system of education, were per-
fectly satisfied with that which was, by this bill, sought to
be taken from them. If it were intended that education
should be confined to the communication of information
upongreat
dscinuegnecre
addniliittetirnagtudre, issetnhteerres
two od then be no
in the universities,
but where the education was essentially religious it
was impossible that dissenter; should be admitted with-
out the apprehension of the most serious consequences.
It was impossible to carry on a religious education
where theca were persons of a different persuasion at
Qua 4piversity witlkQuk @he cmpronaise of religious