The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, JULY 21, 1834.

work in England is constantly (the excess al-
ways regulating price) depreciating the value of
the industry of our own artisans and peasantry,
whose education and habits will not allow them
at once to descend to the same level. We say, then,
that this bill allowing a free transfer of labour from the
agricultural districts, where labour is superabundant,
to those where there is a demand for it, is releasing the
industrious classes from a clog which for years has
cramped their energies, and caused a large portion of
their present distress. Now really we cannot for one
moment think that the intelligence of this country can
be led by the violent writing of any journal or set of
journals, to oppose this measure. We are sure that
the House of Lords, which is composed of the
largest landed proprietors in the kingdom will not
oppose it. We have already the declarations of many
of the most distinguished members of that House in
its favour ; and we are assured it will pass through
the committee with the most trifling alterations.
They cannot be influenced by the party zeal which
leads one portion of the press to abuse it, nor by the
personal animosities which have induced others to
oppose it. They have often, unfortunately we think,
proved how firmly they can adhere to the principles
they profess, and we are sure the examination of the
evidence on which this measure has been founded, and
which no Noble Lord can pretend has not been long
enough before the House and the country, must induce
every one to support the great and leading principles of
the Bill, although there may be a difference of opinion
upon some of its details. We are, we believe, the
only 'Journal which has methodically examined the
Bill, and compared the evidence upon which it was
founded, with the various clauses and provisions it con-
tains. Not one clause, or altered clause, has escaped
us ; there is not a principle which has not been ex-
amined with reference to the existing state of things ;
and although, perhaps, our humble efforts may not have
fallen into the hands of many Noble Lords, we are
sure, and in this we rejoice, that we have been the
means, by the calmness and impartiality with which we
have examin :!le Bill, of inducing the reasonable part
of the public to examine the subject for
,themselves,
and to obtain information on the present state of our
poor laws, and have thus prevented their being misled
by reiterated misrepresentations, and by conclusions,
daily placed before them, which have been arrived at
rather by the workings of heated imaginations than by
an examination into the merits of the case. We now
wait patiently the issue of the debate in the House of
Lords. We are confident as to the result, because,
anxious for a little popularity as many of the Noble
Lords certainly are, we feel sure that that House will
not risk its reputation with an immense majority of the
country, for the paltry and fleeting praise of that por-
tion of the daily Press which appears to be guided in
its conduct by any principles but those which ought to
induce it to support measures, brought forward by what-
ever party, which can have no other object than to
benefit the most numerous portion of the population of
the empire.—Morning Advertiser.
The Lord Chancellor is to move to-night in the
House of Lords the second reading of the bill which
is so ridiculously miscalled " The Poor Laws' Amend-
ment Bill." This noble personage formerly acquired
the reputation, the praise, and the glory, of being a
friend to the constitution, and one who, albeit desirous
of advancing, would move only in its ancient ways--a
pertinacious stickler for the rights and liberties of the
people—an ardent and a hearty hater of patronage—a
jealous and a watchful controller of the prerogative of
the Crown, and, above all, an unbending, indefatigable,
sincere, and conscientious advocate and protector of the
poor.. In bringing forward the Poor Laws' Bill, in
how different a character does he appear I Even the
hon. member whom he described the other night as
almost leading on anti-Corn Law mobs against the mi-
nistry in 1815, and now in 1834 as found advocating
the retention of the corn monopoly, has not undergone
so thorough a metamorphose as that to which the noble
and learned Lord has subjected himself. All the bitter
sarcasms, the searching sneers, the cleaving and stick-
ing soubriquets, which Lord Brougham has bestowed
upon the inconsistencies, and shiftings, and changes
of others, will, we fear, now redound upon him-
self with new and accumulated force. We say
this more in sorrow than in anger ; but the sooner
the noble and learned Lord is awakened to a
sense of the perils that threaten him in the new
ways into which lie has diverged, the greater chance
there will be of his retracing his steps, and of retracing
them in time. Let him, however, bear in mind—

facilis descensus Averni
* * * *

* * *
Sed revocare gradum, superasque evadere ad auras,
Hic opus, hic labor est."
It has ever been the theory of the constitution o
his State, and, in the main, the doctrine has been

* *

followed out in practice, that the people should, as
much as possible, govern themselves, and regulate their
own affairs ; and it would be difficult to point out a
supporter of popular rights more constant or more
vehement than Lord Brougham used to be in the
maintenance of the principle that the people can be
taxed only by their representatives in Parliament. In
our social condition, the rankest and the most tyran-
nical of Tory Administrations never disputed or in-
vaded these positions. This piece of wantonness and
absurdity has been reserved for " an assemblage ground
down into pure old Whigs." The Tories left us our
municipal and provincial govtrnments, our county
courts, and our corporations, the protection of the
magistracy and of other district and • local autho-
rities, our grand juries, our parish vestries, and the
like ; but it is hardly to be hoped, and most assuredly
it is not to be expected, that any of these ancient fea-
tures of our social and domestic economy will long
remain to use if the chief persons of our Government
be affected with the centralization mania ; nor do
we see the slightest reason to believe that the liberties
and the property of the King's subjects are worth one
single year s purchase, if the Legislature shall lend
their sanction to a measure which is to place the per-
sons and the pockets of all the inhabitants of
England and Wales at the disposal and control of
three novel and irresponsible functionaries. Such a
measure is this beloved Bill of the Lord Chancellor,
and although it extends only to matters connected with
the relief of the poor, yet nothing can be more clear
than that it will furnish a -precedent for any act of ty-
ranny and spoliation, any violation of the liberty of
the subject, and any infringement on the rights of pro-
perty, which, in time to come, another Ministry may
be base and bold enough to attempt.—Tintes.

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,
THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER resumed the chair at 25 minutes past five
o'clock.

WEXFORD ELECTION.

The SPEAKER announced that he had received a petition
from Wexford, complaining of an undue return.
On the motion of Mr. RUTHVEN, the Port Crommelin
Harbour Bill was read a third time and passed.
Lord HOWICK brought up the annual report of the
Inland Navigation in Ireland. The Noble Lord then moved
for copies of any correspondence that had taken place between
the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Commissioners
of Emigration.
OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH.
Mr. POULTER gave notice that, next Session, he would
bring in a Bill for the better observance of the Sabbath.._.
(Hear, and much laughter.)
The LORD ADVOCATE moved the second reading of
the amendments to the Roman Catholic ( Scotland) Mar-
riages Bill.
Mr. G 0 ULB URN presented various petitions from Lan-
cashire, Devonshire, and Kent, in support of the Established
Chat ch.

down a sum, of money (5001.) to insure the return of a reform
candidate for Colchester. Lord Western stated that the ob-
ject was to insure the return of Mr. Mayhew. Mr. Mayhew
and Mr. Harvey stood upon the same interest, but were most
violently hostile to each other. They were both reform can-
didates.

(LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Mr. TOOKE and other Members of the House of Commons
brought up the Chimney Sweeper's Regulation Bill. Irgreed
to without any amendments.
GAME LAWS.
The Marquis of BRE AD ALB ANE presented petitions from
the owners and occupiers of land in Perth and Clackmannan,
complaining of their crops being destroyed by the large quan-
tities of game that were preserved, and praying Parliament
to give-them liberty to shoot or destroy them.
ESTABLISHED CHURCH.
Lord SKE LME RSD ALE presented petitions from North-
wich for the support of the Established Church.
The Bishop of EXETER presented similar petitions from
different parts of his diocese.
Similar petitions were also presented by Lord Kenyon and
the Bishops of Gloucester and Derry.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY would take that
opportunity of calling the attention of the House to the state
of the question • with respect to the Established Church,
in order, if possible, to ascertain what course his Majesty's ad-
visers intended to pursue with respect to the Established Church.
During the time the Noble Earl opposite was at the head of
the Administration, he had stated that it was his determi-
nation to uphold the Established Church, but mea-
sures were introduced by that Noble Earl, which
frittered down the support of the Church. Since the
Noble Earl retired, nothing had been done, and he
therefore felt himself called upon to ask Ministers
what their determinations were, and whether the Members of
the Government were united upon that subject.
(Hear.) He thought it was but due to the House, that
Ministers should make a strict declaration of what
their intentions were, especially as there was a wide differ-
ence between two Cabinet Ministers. He would ask the
Noble Marquis opposite (Lansdowne,) whether he
had been mistaken by an Honourable Member of the other
House, or whether what he had stated was his impression ?
Upon no question did they get up to state their opinions
but they were invariably rebutted, either by their colleagues or
their measures. The Noble Marquis :then read an abstract
from a speech delivered by Lord Melbourne upon the Irish
Church ; when he was called to order by
Viscount MELBOURNE, who rose to order. The Noble
Earl was, he believed, reading from the newspapers that which
purported to be a report of a speech of his, and for the purpose
of contesting it with a speech delivered by an Hon. Gentleman
in the other , House, and that also got from the same
source.—( Hear, hear.) He believed that was a source that
was utterly inconsistent with the rules of the House
—at all events it was certain to throw great impediments in
the way of public business—neither was it proper that any
Noble Lord should be called upon to explain anything that
had fallen from a Member of the other House which might
appear inconsistent with his own speech.
The Earl of WICKLOW said he wished to say a few
words upon the point of order—he entirely differed with;
the Noble Viscount upon that quostion.—( Hear, hear.)
It might be against the rules of the House, but by being
constantly practised, it had become quite usual to refer
to reports of speeches from the newspapers. That
was the first occasion upon which the Noble Viscount had been
called upon to address himself to the orders of the House in
his new capacity,—(Hear,)—and he trusted that that was an
earrest that they would be better protected in future.--( Hear. )
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY thought it was a very-
good specimen of what the House was to expect from the im-
partiality of the Noble Viscount.—( Hear.) If he would look
a little to the right, he would see a Noble Earl ( Grey) who,
upon a very late occasion, had taken out of his pocket and used
the newspaper report of what fell from an Hon. Baronet in the
other House.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE—Do you intend to make
•
a motion ?
The Marquis of, L OND ONDE RR Y—Yes.., The Noble
Marquis then read., an abstract from the speech of Mr. Ellice
upon the Irish Church question, and continued that was the
statement of a colleague of the Noble Viscount, and he called
upon their Lordships to contrast it with the one they had
heard from the Noble Viscount ; and he would further ask
the Government whether it was in reality their intention
to appropriate the surplus funds of the Church to secular pur-
poses ; he, as an > Irishman, had a right to be made aware of
their intentions upon the subject.--( The Noble Marquis then
sat down amidst loud cries of " Move, move.")
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, that when the No-
ble Earl (Vane) had gone into a lengthened statement, which
was altogether fouuded upon newspaper reports, of what took
place in the other House, he took the liberty of asking
him whether he intended to conclude with a motion.—( Con-
fusion.) He was speaking to the orders of the House, and he
called upon the Noble Earl to state whether he had not most
distinctly answered in the affirmative ?
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY interruptin—l was
speaking upon a petition, which I had a perfect right to do.
The objection of the Noble Marquis is most trifling, for he
knows how easy it would be for me to move an adjournment of
the House—it is a course unworthy of him and of the station
he occupies—( Order, order.)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE—The Noble Earl may
say what he pleases, but he most certainly gave the answer.
The Noble Marquis was again interrupted by
The Marquis of LONDONDE RR Y— I beg to say the
Noble Marquis must have misunderstood me..--(Loud cries of
no, no.)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE—If the Noble Earl said
he misunderstood him, he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) would
not say that he had not. He had certainly asked the Noble
Earl whether he intended to make a motion, and he had the
recollection of the House that the answer made to that ques-
tion was " Yes."—( Hear, hear.)
Lord KENYON hoped the Noble Marquis would excuse
him, but he must say that he did not think the Noble Earl had
made such an answer.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said it was not his in-
tention to state :that the Noble Earl had intended to deceive
him. It was undoubtedly Competent for the Noble Earl to
make a speech on the motion that the petition do lie on the table,
but the Noble Earl had chosen to indulge himself in giving
vent to his feelings, and making observations on a newspaper
report--an incorrect newspaper report, for he had heard enough
of that which the Noble Earl had read to be assured that it
Was an incorrect report of what he on a former occasion
had stated in that House, for the purpose of contrasting
it with another newspaper report. And this was done,
not merely in illustration of an argument then in debate,
but for the purpose of arbitrarily calling upon a Member
of their Lordships House, no question connected with the
subject being before the House, not only to say what he
had spoken but what he now thought, and not only
what he now thought, but what at some future time he
intended to do—( Hear, hear)—a course more inconsistem
with the ordinary convenience and habits of their Lordships
could not be proceeded with. Although the Noble Earl
might indulge his own taste by such a course, but he (the
Marquis of Lansdowne) should not be induced to copy the
Noble Earl by entering into any statement upon that subject.
—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl, if he had thought fit,
tolshovv upon newspaper reports what his opinion was upon the
subject to which he alluded might have referred to a
subsequent debate, and a subsequent discustion in
which he had distinctly stated the view upon . which
he supported the very commission to which the
Noble Earl had alluded. Having once, stated his opinion as
to that commission, and the grounds upon which it was
issued in that House, and stated that he reserved to himself
the liberty of considering what those measures should be in
consequence of that commission, which, after a full enquiry,
might be propounded to their Lordships, he should not be
induced either at this time or any other, by any statemeut
which the Noble Earl might think fit to make, enter upon a
discussion which he knew would be premature and inconve-
nient—(Loud cheers )'—and for the inconvenience of which
he presumed he had the authority of the Noble Earl
himself, because although the Noble Earl had stated
that he wished some such discussion had been originated in
that House, he (the Noble Earl) had himself had ample oppor-
tunity to originate that discussion, and he now stated, that if the
Noble Earl entertained the views regarding the commission
which he had intimated that night he did entertain, he had
not discharged his duty in making that Commission the sub-
ject of discussion.--( Cheers.) He should be prepared to
meet him when the discussion came regularly before the House,
but until the Noble Earl was prepared to discharge that duty
from which he shrunk he should not be induced to enter into
an

Ly premature statement or discussion.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that the Noble
Marquis had accused him of shrinking from his duty.
Lord MULGR AVE rose to order.—Whatever doubt there
might have been whether the Noble Marquis was out of order
before, there could be none now.—( Cries of " Order.")
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he rose to ex-
plain—( Great confusion and cries of " Order.") He did not
originate a motion upon this subject because he hoped some
other Noble Lord, more competent to the task, would have
done so—( Repeated cries of " Order," amidst which several
Peers rose to address the House, but gave way to
Lord ELDON, who said he considered himself in bounden
duty to state that, in his opinion, the Noble Marquis (Lon-
donderry) was out of order.._( Hear, hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he wished to address
one word to the Noble Marquis and their Lordships. He did not
in the loast degree dispute the right of the Noble Marquis, in
any discussion, however important, to originate a motion if he
chose, but he appealed to their Lordships, on behalf of an im-
portant subject. He (the Lord Chancellor) had undertaken
to perform a serious task, and to bring forward a most difficult,
complicated, and extensive measure. The discussion of that
important and extensive measure required the greatest calm-
ness, and the absence of all party animosity.—( Hear, hear.)
If he found their Lordships disposed to go on whetting
themselves with this sort of animosity, it would be his duty to
this most important measure to crave permission to put off the
discussion of it.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he would be
the last person to interfere in the business of the
House. It was a little hard, however, to prevent him from
addressing their Lordships to explain some circumstances
which had been alluded to by the Noble Marquis opposite.
__(Lansdowne.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR begged the Noble Mar-
quiss's pardon. He had not the slightest notion that the
Noble Marquis was going to explain, but understood that the
Noble Marquis was about to originate a motion.
The petition was then laid on-the table.