The Sun.
London, England, 1832-05-22 00:00:00

STOCKTON.

The Marquess of CLEVELAND presented a petition
from the Mayor and Corporation of Stockton-upon-
Tees, praying for a Member to be given, not to that
borough only, but to that borough and its adjacent town-
ships. The House might form some idea of the
growing importance of this place, when he stated that
in 1811 the average custom duties of the three pre-
ceding years did not exceed 4,0001. per annum, whilst in
1830, they had increased to no less than 36,000/.
In 1830, the number of vessels which sailed from
the Tees with outward-bound cargoes, was 1,262, whilst
those entering with inward cargoes were 361. In 1831, the
first had increased to 2.104, and the second to 454. It
had been said that the Reform Bill gave too many Members
to the county of Durham, and too much weight to particular
individuals connected with that county. For himself he
could only say that he was a great sufferer by the Reform
Bill, but he supported it because it was to give their just
rights to the people. He had the honour of being Lord-
Lieutenant of the county of Durham, and was intimately
connected with it, but be most positively disclaimed
having any interest in the representation intended to be
given it by the Bill before their Lordships, and he defied
any Peer in the House to say that he acted upon any
ether than the most independent principles. He congra-
tulated the House and the country upon the restoration to
power of the Noble Earl near him, for he was convinced that
that was the sole means of not only preventing great dis-
satisfaction in the country, but perhaps a revolution.—
(Hear, hear.)
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY—He should most

heartily join the Noble Marquess opposite in supporting the
prayer of this petition. When a similar petition was
presented in the House of Commons by one of the
Honourable Members for Durham, it was then
very fairly urged, that giving Stockton proper
representation would tend to counterbalance the large pro-
portion of Members given to the northern division
of that county which was no less than eight out of
ten. It so happened, also, by the present division
of the county that it was the agricultural interest in the
southern parts which were only to have two Members. It
so happened, also, that the Noble Marquess opposite, and
the Noble Lord (the Lord Privy Seal), were large proprie-
tors in that county. If the county had been divided
east and west, these two powerful individuals would have
had their interests placed in the same division, but the
division into north and south had separated them, so
that individuals differing from those Noble persons in
either division would not have much chance of represent-
ing. it. When they went into the details of the
Bill, he hoped the Noble Marquess would join
him in altering this arrangement, and also in taking
away a Member from Gateshead, and giving it
to Stockton. The county was composed of four wards,
and it was desirable that each ward should be represented,
hut he did not know whether it would be possible to make
such an arrangement.

The Marquess of CLEVELAND said, that he thought
Stockton entitled to have its prayer taken into considera-
tion, but without going into the merits of Gateshead, he
would only say that be was not prepared to give Stockton
a Member at its expense. He was glad the Noble
E irl agreed with him, particularly upon the question of
Reform.

The Marquess of LONDONDERRY was not aware be
bad said any thing favourable to the Reform question,
which certainly should not piss with his good will.
The petitio❑ was then laid upon the table.
APPLEBY.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH presented a petition from
Appleity, praying that it might be permitted to retain its

two Members.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE rose amid loud cries for
the reading of the order of the day. He was anxious,
he said, to ask a question of the Noble Earl opposite
(Grey) relative to a document which appeared in the
Morning Chronicle of the 25th of January last, pur-
porting to he a letter from his Majesty, to this
effect :—" William Rex. The King writes to my Lord
Grey to inform him that he has taken into serious con-
sideration the state of public affair+, and is fully pre-

pared to acquiesce in the advice of his Ministers to
create such a number of Peers as may be necessary
to insure the success of the Reform Bill." He begged
leave to ask ►he Noble Earl whether lie had received such a
letter, and whether it were genuine?
Earl GREY hid no hesitation whatever in stating at
once that the letter read by the Noble Duke was not
authentic.—(Cheers.)
The Duke of NEWCASTLE thought it necessary to
give notice of his intention, on the earliest opportunity,
to make a motion, the best way, he believed, on the state
of the nation, h iving reference to an assertion made by
the Noble Earl opposite, as to the prerogative of the King
to create Peers.

The Marquis of CLEVELAND wished, as we under-
stood, the Noble Duke to name some particular day when
his motion on the subject of the Royal prerogative to
create Peers should be discussed.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE named Thursday next.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH though it might be incon-
venient, in the present state of discussions in that House,
to n.me any particular day.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE was willing to take any
course that might be thought the best. But at all events
he was determined to make the motion.

Earl GREY understood the question to be, as put by
the Noble Lord, whether or not the Crown had the pre-
rogative to create Peers.—(Cries of No, no, and Yes,
yes.) He certainly understood it so.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE explained. It was the
prerogative of the Crown to create Peers on such an occa-
sion as the present.
Lord GREY asked if it was not the prerogative, but
the exercise of that prerogative which the Noble Duke in-
tended to question, on what grounds the Noble Lord in-
tended at present to proceed ?
Lord ELDON said no one was less disposed than he to
dispute the prerogative of the Crown to create Peers, but
he begged it to be understood as his decided opinion, that
that prerogative was a right intrusted to it for the benefit
of the citintry.--(Cheera from the Treasury benches. ) And
that if it were not exercised according to the trust
which the Constitution bad placed in the Crown, that ex-
ercise of it would be most abominable, and might affect
the existence of the Crown itself.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE wished to know what
proceeding the Noble and Learned Lord on the Wooksack
would take as to the lever in the Morning Chronicle ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR was not the public pto-
secutor.

On the question that the Order of the Day for the
House to resolve itself into Committee,
The Earl of RODEN said he thought his Majesty never
could have been induced to swamp the House of Lords by
any set of Ministers who had ever been in office. This
was Ins opinion when he last addressed the House, and it
continued to be his firm persuasion on the present
occasion.—( Loud cheers from the Opposition.) He
would say, having received great favours from, and
been laid under great obligations by those who had
gone before his Majesty, and therefore doubly en-
deared to the illustrious 'House of Brunswick, that he
would rather see his Majesty abdicate his throne than that
he should put his hand to an act which would undoubt-
edly bring disgrace upon himself, and destruction upon the,
country. The Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty
Government had stated the other night that he looked
forward with great happiness to the final adjustment of this
measure, as that which would give complete repose to the
country, and that the passing of the Bill would afford
wht thata rweapsose.N_ow he (Lord Rodeo) differed very much
from the Noble Earl in that view, and he thought from
passing abroad he was justified in saying his
opinion was correct. Both as regarded England and Ire-
land there was no reason to expect repose from the pas-