The Sun.
London, England, 1834-05-27 00:00:00

DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY.

WILLIAM DEAYTON, victualler, St. Albans.
WILLIAM PARRIS, livery stable-keeper, Hampstead

BANKRUPTS.

GEORGE JOHN RICHARD JAMES DICKIN-
SON, surgeon, Ealing, Middlesex, to surrender June 4,
at twelve, and July 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Sleap, Middle Temple-lane; Waithman, official
assignee, Basinghall-street.
DAVID LEYSER COHEN, grocer, Norfolk, June 3,
and. July 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Green, King's Arms-yard, official assignee ; Stevens and
Wood, St. Thomas Apostle.
. _

EDWARD EVERTON, ribbon-manufacturer, Coven-
try, June 11, and July 8, at eleven, at the King's Head
Inn, Coventry. Lloyd, Crown-court, Cheapside.
GEORGE LAKE, hat-manufacturer, Stockport, June
9 and July 18, at three, at the Commissioners'-rooms,

Manchester. Back, Verulam-buildings, Gray's-Inn, Lon-
; Lingard and Vaughan, Heathon Norris.
JAMES BA RC LAY general-shopkeeper, Pembroke,
June. 10 and July 8, at eleven, at the Commercial-rooms,
Bristol. Clarke and Medcalf, Lincoln's Inn-fiads, Lon-
don ; Harley, Bristol. ,-•
JAMES SALTER - and WILLIAM .RALSTON,
twine-manufacturers, Poole, June 16 and July 8, at eleven,
at the office of Messrs. Parr, Poole. Lang, Fenchurch-
s reet, London ; Parr, Poole.

I AIPERIAL PAR LIAMENT,

THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

A message from the Commons was announced by
the Deputy Usher of the Black Rod.
The LORD CHANCELLOR came down to the bar, and
the doors were thrown open, but no message appeared.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then ordered the doors to be
closed, and went back to the. woolsack.
Lord LITTLETON presented a petition from the
vicar, parish guardians, &c., of the parish of Yardley,
in Worcestershire,respecting the better observance of the
Sabbath, the desecration of which they attributed to
the great inconvenience of beer houses under the new
beer bill. The noble lord said that so far as he under-
stood the bill of the noblelord ( Wynford), as well as that
which was inttroduced in the Commons, he could not give
either his support, but he yet hoped to see a better
bill than either yet brought up, when it would give
him pleasure to do for it as much as it was in his
power.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice
that it was his intention on Monday, if convenient to
the noble earl (Grey) to ask questions or make in-
quiries, or move for papers relative to our want of any
Ambassador at the Court of St. Petersburgh.
Lord Heytesbury, he believed, was recalled in
August. 1832, and Sir Stratford Canning was
appointed in the October of the same year, but
had never gone out, and since that time we had
been without an ambassador of any sort in that great
country. He\would take the opportunity of being on
his legs to state his regret at the recal of an in-
dividual (Prince Lieven) who had served the
important office of ambassador in this country for
25 years, and that with great celebrity. He regretted
that recall, because he believed that no other person
belonging to the same country was so well acquainted
with those interests best for both. He did not wonder
that his Imperial Majesty recalled that individual, but
what he wished to know was, why this country had re-
mained for so long a period without having an am-
bassador of the same rank in that country ? He
would not then say more, because on Monday lie
would have an opportunity of bringing the whole
question before the house.
Earl GREY said that any day would be equally
convenient to him. Monday would suit him as well
as any other, and he would take care to be prepared.
He considered that he would be deficient in his duty
if he did not entirely concur in the regret expressed
by the noble marquis as to the recall of the cele-
brated individual to whom he had alluded. (Hear.)
He believed that that recall was entirely, because that
illustrious individual had been appointed to an office of
very high distinction in his hwn country, but
he must hcae his testimony to the character and good
intentions of that individual as well as the noble
marquis. (Cheers.)
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that
in the absence of his noble friend the Duke of
Buckingham he had to present a petition from
the parish of Illesden, praying that the universities
might not be forced to receive persons of any religion
but that of the establishment. The noble marquis
presented several petitions to the same effect, and then
said, that while he was on his legs he would take the
opportunity of stating that he felt great pleasure in
saying, that since the last discussion upon the de-
tention of Sir John Campbell in Portugal, the
Government had wrote a letter to the Government of
Lisbon, he meant of Don Pedro, demanding his re-
lease, though they had not said one word upon the
matter for the three months and a half previous.
Such an application having been made, he would
not , now say more than that he trusted when the
Government got an answer to the application
it would be communicated to the house by the noble
earl in the same spirit as the other papers had been
done, and that he trusted such an answer would
be received before the termination of the session
He was sure that when their lordships looked at the
papers they nf-oulrd tchuinticonwiuttLiirmwt:iiiacthithwe-ashrittlei
ng
en
detained solt long.re se
Earl GREY said that if the noble marquis had
any thing to bring forward against Sir John Camp-
bell, he should be perfectly ready to meet him ; but if
he only dealt in the assertions he had done, those as-
sortions being without proof, he should give them no
attention.
The Duke of GLOUCESTER presented several
petitions from different parts of Essex, in favour of
the claims of the dissenters, and praying for redress.
Lord SUFFIELD presented a petition for the total
repeal of the malt tax ; and for an alteration of the
Poor Laws.
The Earl of MAL ME SBUR Y wished to ask his
noble friend opposite (the President of the Board of
Trade) whether any communication had been received
upon the subject of smuggling between Guernsey and
Jersey ?
Lord AUCKLAND rose, and was left speakihg.