The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-24 00:00:00

IMPORTATION OF CORN.

Mr. BARING brought up the Report of the Committee en
the illegal importation of corn into the channel. The Right
Hon. Gentleman, in moving that the Report be printed, made
a few observations which were quite inaudible.
Mr. SPRING RICE trusted that the report would aff,id
the necessary information to the House.
EXECUTION AT WATERFORD.
Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that on the Capital Pu-
nishments' Abolition Bill (ns we understood the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman), he should call attention to the case cf
a man who had been executed at Waterford by mistake fCr
another person.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from the handloom
weavers of some town in Lanarkshire.
COUNTY OF MEATH.

Mr. H. GRATTAN seeing the Right lion„ and Gallant
Officer, the Secretary for Ireland in his place, begged to ask
two questions ; the first was respecting a grant of money, the
object of which was not heard in the gallery; the second was
whether it was the intention of Government to appoint the
Noble Lord, the father of the late unsuccessful candidate for
Meath (the Hon. Mr. Plunket), to the Lord Lieutenancy of
that county.
Sir H. I-1 A RDING E said, in 'reply to the first question, as it
involved the rights of the Crown he could not give any decided
answer to it. As to the second question, he believed it was
the intention of the Government to appoint the Noble Lord
(Dunsaney) to the situation of Lord-Lieutenant of the county
of Meath.

A Message was received from the Lords.
CARLOW ELECTION PETITION.
The Clerk of the Crown and H:uiaper Office ( Ireland) was
then called in. On appearing at the bar of the House, in re-
ply to a question from the SPEAKER, he stated that his name
was John Hart, and that he had held his present situation, as
Clerk in the Irish Hanaper Office for six months. In answer
to Mr. Spring Rice, he proceeded to state that he had
received a petition on the Carlow Election from a gentleman
whom he believed to be Mr. Wallace, and that he told that
gentleman, that it was customary, according to the rules and
usage of the office, to lodge a copy of every petition. It was
the chief clerk who informed him that such was the practice.
The office closes at three o'clock, but kept it open till half-past
three on the day in question to accommodate Mr. Wallace ;
did not, in fact, leave the office on that day till near five o'clock ;
had heard that Mr. Wallace,attempted to present his petition
at a later hour ; only knew this from a letter published by Mr.
Wallace ; that letter was true, except that it did not mention
that I told Mr. Wallace that the otlce closed at three o'clock;
the office was regulated in that respect by Plunkett's rules ;
has heard of the orders of the House of Commons for regu-
lating the receiving of petitions, but was not aware of them at
the time Mr. Wallace's petition was presented ; has since
seen the ordeis, and finds that it is the duty of the Clerk
of the Crown in Ireland to receive petitions and make a copy
of them himself, and transmit the petition to the Speaker; the
day in question was the last day for ieeeiving petitions ; there
had been ten petitions presented that day • if I had been aware
of the orders of this House at the time, I should have felt it
my duty to receive the petition at the time it was tendered,
but I could not make a copy of it.
In answer to Mr. F. SHAW, W. Herl said that it was his
duty to'send the petition by that night's post.
Mr. SPRING RICE thought, under the circumstances
that had been stated, the House would think there was
no difficulty in the way of receiving the Petition.
It was, however, evident, that • Mr. Wallace had
done everything that was required of him. He (Mr. Spring
Rice) thought, therefore, that he ought not to be de-
prived of his rights, in consequence of a misunderstanding by j
the Officer of the routine of the House. At the time he
moved that the Clerk of the Crown should attend, it was not
from any difficulty he felt that he had pursued that course,
bee from a desire that the House should hear from that person
himself what he had done. If the officer had not performed
his duty, it would have been for the House to have pursued
the matter further. But as that was not the case, he (Mr. Rice)
was not disposed to move anything with respect to that ques-
tion. Justice would be answered, in his opinion, by merely
laying the petition upon the table.
Mr. SHAW thought the suggestion of the Right Hon.
Gentleman perfectly reasonable.
COUNTY OF GLARE ELECTION.
The Hon. H. 1)1 AX WELL presented a petition from Mr.
Baker, of Ennis, county of Clare, against the return of the
sitting Member for that Burgh.
Mr. O'CONNELL—The House ought to be apprised of
the real facts of the case. The petition was from a Mr. Baker,
of Ennis, in the county of Clare, and yet it appeared the
party referred to, was a Mr. Maclaren of Cursiter-Street,
Chancery Lane. Now he should like to know how this person
could be interested in the city of Ennis. The sitting member
had instructed him to say, that he }id caused an enquiry to
be made, and that this report was without foundation. He
thought it right the House should know something of this
inconsistency. The notice is given by this person Maclaren, who
describes himself there as of No. 6, Cnrsitor-street, but now, it
it seems, has gone back to No. 5. This was a fact totally
suppressed in the petition, and was it not manifest from
this that there existed some collusion ? Why, he ( Mr.
O'Connell) could arraign that affidavit as a perjury,
He believed it was the general rule where persons were led into
a mistake by others who had authority, then the House would
give relief, but when a man ma,:e a mistake, as the agent or
party, that was a case in which the House would
not give relief. Under these circumstances, on the part of
the sitting Member, he called upon the House to reject the
petition.
Mr. N. FITZItION objected to the petition be:ng read.
Major HANDLEY had no hesitation iii saying that Mr.
Maclaren was totally incapable of doing that which had keen
attributed to him.

Mr. SHAW knew nothing of Mr. Maelaren, but he was sure
the House must be satisfied of the imposgibilty of bringing so
serious a charge as perjury against any person who had acted
as Mr. Maclaien had done.