The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-21 00:00:00

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

G. and F. Lermitte, Aldgate, woollen-drapers—J. Johnson
and J. Roffway, George-street, Mansion-house-street, eating-
house.keepers—W. Gilpin and R. Clark, Holborn-hill, woollen-
drapers—C. Witherby and W. Steventon, Panten-street, Hay-
,
linen
-drapery
r a
pI
et ar
sh—a t,ll-,.waanrde hHo us.
Bel
ma
cekns nTe. , 1314
B. Hardwick and H. Guest, Lawrence-lane, solicitors—'L
oarisictiydHown. C,oliwgalliiide,rmßeant7h,
Houghton and 'l'. Broadhurst, Liverpool, attorneys—R- Evans
and J. Rawlins, Oxford-street, linen-drapers—W. awthorp and
J. Kitchen, Huddersfield, letter-press printers—W.. A. 0.
Whitelegg, W. Vaughan, and 'l'. Broadhurst, Bolingtons
Cheshire, stone-dealers (so far as regards the said W. A. 0.
Whitelegg)—W. T. and J. Moss, Holywell, Flintshire, millers--
W. Salter and A. 1). Bowie, Hythe, Southampton, grocers--P•
H. Abbott, W. Quilter, and J. Ball, King's Arms-yard, ac-
countants (so far as regards P. H. Abbott)--J. Mitchell and J.
M.llwraith, High-street, Shadwell, grocers—W. Grosvenor and
T. Vigers, Hanley, Staftbrdshire, ironmongers—G. Lamport,
H. Jutsum, and W. Miles, Newgate-market, meat-salesmen-1.
Lang, W. Cuino, A. Pote, and J. A. Down, Torpoint, Corn-
wall, slate-quarrymen—R. and W. Dry, Oxford, drapers—C. and
H. Marriott, Manchester, silkmen—T. Woods and T. Brayshawi
Lancaster, ironutongers—T. Se .tt and J. Collins, Birmingham,
Grass-fbunders—si. Crooke and J. Newnes, Liverpool, tea-
dealers—J. Stott and J. Hague, Rochdale, Lancashire, machine-
makeis—W. and W. Hulke, jun., Deal, surgeons—lL H. John-
son and C. Crooks, 'Upper Ogle-street, Marylebone, rag-raer-
chants—M. Whitney and L. Shipman, Northampton, wine-mer-
chants—L. Applin and J. N. Gee, Bristol, innholders—R. and
T. D.,nn, Reigate, Surrey, grocers—T. Wier and J. Turner,
Manchester, coach-makers--J Evans, jun. and W. Parkin, Ply-
mouth, linen-drapers—J. M. Bishop and G. Pitcher, Henbury,
Gloucestershire, sachilers—J. Weeiwright and I. Halse, St.
James's-street, wine-merchants—J. Smith and J. Beecroft, Sun-
derland-near-the-Sea, wine.merehants—J. Richardson, H. Shield,
M. Thompson, and E. Hall, Poultry (so far as regards M.
2.ll9rarm).

A few minutes before Five o'clock Lord TENTEIDKN took
his seat on the woolsack, as Deputy Speaker.
On the motion of Lord. KENYON, the Lords were or-
dered to be summoned for the ►second reading of the Agri-
cultural Labourers' Bill on this day week.
Lord GODERICH presented, by his Majesty's com-
mand, the papers relating to
.the convention with France
connected with the s'ave trade. In answer to some ob-
servations which were made on this subject last night,
the Noble Lord had to state to the House, that the
ratification was not received in this country till
the 19th of December, which was three days after their
Lordships adjourned.
The LORD CHANCELLOR here entered and took his seat
on the woolsack.

The Outstanding Lottery Ticket Paymentßill was read
a second rime, on the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE preseuted a petition
from Sheffield, praying their Lordships to legislate for
improving the supplying of Anatomical Schools.
The NOBLE MARQUIS also presented a petition from
the towu of Wellington, in favour of the Reform Bill.
Adjourned till Monday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JANUARY 20.
The Sheriffs of London appeared at the bar, with a
petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common
Council, praying for leave to bring in a Bill to carry into
effect the contemplated improvements in the neighbourhood
of London-bridge.

O❑ the motion of Mr. Alderman Wool), leave way given
to brine in the Bill.

Mr. Woodthorpe, the town-clerk of the city, appeared
at the bar with a report relative to London-bridge, which
was read and ordered to be printed.
Mr. SANDFORD presented two petitions from Sower-
setshire against the General Registry Bill ; also a peti-
tion from an individual named Swift, residing in a town in
Somersetshire, engaged in the silk trade,romplaining of the
distress under which that trade laboured,which the petitioner
attributed to the great importation of foreign silk. It
complained of the extent to which smuggling was carried
on, and stated that so injurious were its effects to the
manufacture of the article in this country, that a man who
worked nine hours a day could only earn 9d. The peti- '
tioners implored the House to take the subject into its
serious consideration.
Mr. Alderman VENABLES said it had come to his
knowledge that the subject had very seriously engaged
the attention of his Majesty's Government, who intended
to make such an alteration in the law as would have
the effect of checking the system of smuggling. The
Hon. Member hoped ere long a law would pass to punish
struggling by fine, imprisonment, and hard labour.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN would be glad to see the
subject before the House in a snore regular shape. He
knew aat petitions were in progress in different parts of
the country, which would shortly be presented to the
House.

The petitions were lead and ordered to be printed.
- -

Mr. SANDFORD presented a petition from Welling-
ton, in Samersetshire, in favour of the Reform Bill.—Or-
dered to be printed.
Mr. KNIGHT brought in a Bill to enable the Master
or the Robs in Ireland to try his right to appoint the Se-
cretary to his Court, which was read a first time, and
ordered to b,. read a second time on the 13th February.
Mr. HUNT gave notice that, in the Committee on the
Reform Bill, he would move to substitute for the 101. clause
that all householders paving taxes be allowed to vote at
elections for Members of Parliament ; and that, if that mo-
tion were lost, all housAolders who were excluded from the
right of voting should be exempted from paying
taxes, and from being compelled to serve in the militia,
or the Royal Navy; and also he would move that all
elections be by ballot. The Hon. Member also gave notice
that he would move for the insertion of a clause as to the
punishment of Peers who interfered in elections. These
notices were the same that Mr. Hunt gave last Session.

Mr. LAMB brought up the report of the Committee
of public accounts, which was ordered to be printed.
Mr. STRICKLAND presented a petition from Pa-
triugton, in the East Riding of the county of York,
against the General Registry Bill. He was convinced that
the more that Bill we+ understood, the more would be the
opposition to it. It was defective in principle, ob-
jectionable in almost the whole of its clauses, and
still further objectionable as giving rise probably in future
to a great expenditure of the public money for private
purpo.es.

Mr. CAMPBELL deprecated such a general condemna-
tion of a measure on the preservation of a petition, and
entreated Hon. Members to wait until the proper oppor-
tunity arrived before they gave a decided opinion upon it.
Mr. HUNT protested against the language used by the
Hon. and Learned Member; he thought the Hun. Mem-
ber wished to have the measure discussed, but now it ap-
peared he was afraid of discussion.
Mr. CAMPBELL was not opposed to discussion, but
he was opposed to those interlocutory remarks which he
called discussion, and which afforded no information to
any person.
Mr. SPENCE was not surprised at the opposition to
the measure by numbers of small landed proprietors, be-
cause at public meetings they were told the Bill would
increase delay and exiience ; he denied that such
would be the results of the Bill, and he hosted
that the small proprietors would not be misled by
such arguments. He trusted Hon. Members would for
the present suspend their opinions until the merits
,of the
measure came fairly before the House. •

Sir E. SUGDEN .Isked if it were true that the people
had been misled at public meetings, how was it that none
of the advocates of the measure attended those meetings, in
order to undeceive them ?

Mr. STRICKLAND denied that the people; had been
misled by any person at the Yorkshire meeting. He knew
that the proceedings of that meeting would come before
the House in a very powerful shape.
Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from the Mem-
bers of the Friendly Society for Preventing Cruelty
to Animals, praying for an alteration in the Act, com-
monly called Mr. Martin's Act, and in so doing gave
notice that be would move for leave to bring in a Bill to
amend that Act.

Mr. BRISCOE supported the prayer of the petition,
which was then read and ordered to be printed.
Mr. MACKINNONIthen gave notice that he would move
for leave to bring in the Bi.l on the 21st of February. He
also gave notice that in the Reform Bill Committee he
would move to introduce the same clause as he moved last
Session viz. that in all towns in which the houses exceeded
500 and not above 1,000, the qyalification should be
a rvntol of 151., and that in towns hewing above 1,000
houses it should be 201.

Lord PAL\IERSTON brought up certain papers re-
lative to a convention between England and France, rela-
tive to the slave trade, and papers relative to the payment
of the Russian loin, which were ordered to be printed.
Lord MAITLAND presented a petition from the
borough of Appleby, praying that the state of that borough
might be further inquired into.
Mr. CROKER observed that if the allegations in the
petition were true, he thought they would have the im-
portant effect of removing Appleby to a higher place in the
list—that it would relieve it from disfranchisement
altogether, and he therefore recommended it to the earnest
and attentive consideration of the Members of the House.
The petition was ordered to be printed.
Sir G. MURRAY presented a petition from the county
of Perth, decrying the proceedings which had taken place
in different parts of Scotland, in consequence of the re-
jection of the late Reform Bill by the House of Lords,
stating the opinion of the petitioners t..) be that that Bill
was destructive of the Constitution of the country, pray-
ing that the House would adopt some measure of frugal
Reform, hat objecting to so swee:ing a measure its that
which had been proposed. The Right Hon. Baronet
rcon-
curred entirely with the opinions expressed in the petition,
and trusted that the House would at all times deprecate
any astetnprd,,ttrd to
to carry aenptuhbelictabmie.easure by means of
theat.t..... Ordered
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN presented a petition signed
by betty, en seventy and eighty solicitors of the highest
respectability of the county of Gloucester, against the
Registry Bill. The Hon. Member also presented a peti-
tion from Galway, praying for an extension of their elec-
tive franchise.
Mr. SPENCE presented a petition from the freeholders
of Ripon, against the R..gistration Bill ; also a petition
from the parish of Kirby Leighton in the North Riding of
'Yurklbire, ha favour of the liefurut dill, Mao a elitism

Mr. HUME observed that he had presented four peti-
thus of a similar nature from the brick-makers of Mid-
dlesex. He had no hesitation in saying, those individuals,
by taking off the duty from slates, had suffered', a very
heavy loss. He considered the interference of the
excise with any branch of manufacture a great nuisance,
and one that ought instantly to be done away with. He
thought the petitioners were entitled to redress and relief,
and he submitted to Ministers that at a time when distress
was so general every single duty connected with manufac-
tures ought to be taken off. .

Mr. BRISCOE trusted that Miuisters would take the
subject into their serious consideration.

Mr. WILLIAM BROUGHAM presented a petition
from two persons (father and son) prisoners in the
Fleet, praying the House to take their case into
serious consideration. The Hon. Member considered
the case of these two poor men a peculiarly hard one. They
were advised by a solicitor to enter upon an estate in the
county of Kent, and cut down a tree, believing that by so
doing they would raise their right to the property in ques-
tion. A suit was then instituted in the Court of Chan-
cery for the purpose of obtiining an injunction to re-
strain them from doing so, which was granted under
the same advice they cut down more timber, and
an application was then made to the Court to com-
mit them to the Fleet prison for contempt, which
order was made, and the prisoners were at the
present moment unable to clear their contempt, in come-
r
quence of not being able to pay tlaticosts,.hitrright to
which the plaintiff refused to ab.ndon, and a Court of
Equity, under the first of Geo. IV., was powerless to give
them relief, unless the costs were paid. The Hon. Member
stated that, after presenting the petition, he should
move for leave on Monday next to bring in a Bill to alter
and amend the powers of the Act, to which he had re
ferred.

Mr. PAGET trusted the House would give relief to
these unfortunate individuals in some summary way.
Such cases as these were a disgrace to the country,
and he trusted that the Hon. Member who presented the
petition would propose some summary measure to the
House by which the objects of the petition might be
carried ioto immediate effect.

Mr. W. BROUGHAM would be delighted to bring for-
ward s,nne summary proceeding, but he firmly believed
that the House could not relieve the petitioners without
an Act of Parliament, unless Hon. Members would pay
the costs out of their own pockets.
After a few observations from Mr. HUNT, the petition
was ordered to be printed.
Mr. W. BROUGHAM then moved for leave to bring
in a Bill to amend and enlarge the powers of the Ist
of Geo. IV.— Le we was given for Monday next.
Mr. H. HUGHES gave notice of his intention to
move, on the 1,4 of March, for leave to bring in a Bill to
amend the Building Act with regard to party walls.