The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-28 00:00:00

TUE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1835.

by upwards of 1,400—( Chders)—Of the most influential '
persons in" the town. The question now was whether Re-
form should or not be efficacious, and whether the represen-
tatives of the people of England were or not to have the
power to introduce and carry through those measures
which they considered essential for the good of the
country—( Cheers.) Those measures were now being des-
troyed. He trusted, therefore, that the House would adopt
such a course as would prevent the expectations of the people
from being blighted.—( Cheers.) The people hoped that no-
thing would be done by the House towards appropriating the
public money till their rights bad been secured.—( Cheers.)
The Dissenters had given way, and resigned their claims, on
the understanding that matter of great public importance would
be brought forward and carried. Not only have these great
measures not been carried, but the Dissenters have been in-
sulted, calumniated, and placed in a worse situation than they
had previously been in.- By the amendments introduced in the
Corporation Bill, they were prohibited from interfering in the
business of Corporations, and thus, instead of having new pri-
vileges conferred on them, they had been treated in a manner
that had excited their deepest indignation.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. STRUTT presented a petition from the Corporation
of Derby, expressing the feelings of dismay and indignation
with which the petitioners bad heard of the mutilation of the
Corporation Reform Bill. The petitioners stated that the
conduct of the House of Lords had rendered the Bill utterly
useless, and that their confidence in the hereditary legislators
was considerably weakened. The Hon. Member alluded to a
charge brought against the Corporation of Derby by the Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth, when the Bill had been
first introduced into that House. The charge had been founded
upon the Report of the Municipal Commissioners, 'but in jus-
tice to the Corporation, he (Mr. Strutt) would say that the
Report of the Commissioners alluded to a period long since
passed. In proof of the feeling of excitement which was
abroad in that town, he would observe that the peti-
tion had been carried by a majority of more than three to
one. The Hon. Member then presented a petition from the
Borough of Ludlow, signed by 600 persons, and praying that
the House would reject the amendments made by. the House
of Lords, and that it would not separate without taking into
consideration what course it might be advisable to adopt, to
counteract the wily and desperate attempt of the Peers to
stop all Reform. He trusted the House and his Majesty's
Ministers would take the prayer of the petition into their con-
sideration.—( Cheers. )
Sir H. HARDINGE would only observe, that his_Right
Hon. Friend the Member for Tamworth had not thrown any
imputation upon the Corporation of Derby ; he had merely
quoted from the Report of the Commissioners.—( Hear.)
Mr. STRUTT explained that he had not charged the Hon.
Baronet with making the statement from himself.
Mr. CHARLTON thought it a great pity that these peti-
, tions had not the addresses of the persons who signed them at-
tached to them. The charge brought against the
.House of
Lords was most unjustifiable.—( Cries of " Oh," and loud
laughter.) He would repeat, that the conduct of those who had
charged the House of Lords with unconstitutional proceedings,
was most unjustifiable.—( Loud cries of " Oh, oh I") What !
(exclaimed the Hon. Member with great warmth) were a set
of pot-house politicians, the tag-rag, and bob-tail of the
town, to charge the House of Lords with unconstitutional
conduct.--( Laughter.) The House of Lords was of vast im-
portance in counteracting and controlling the demogatic ten-
dency of that House, and such an accusation only betrayed the
ignorance of the petitioners, and of those who cheered the
petition.—( Loud cries of "Oh I" and much laughter.) Was
it toabe said that such persons as the petitioners should call
upon that House to stop the supplies ? The well-thinking
portion of the People in the town of Ludlow were de-
cidedly hostile to the sentiments of that petition.—( Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Member proceeded to pass a high eulogium
upon the respectability and character of the CorpcPation of
Ludlow. Two thirds of the persons who had signed the peti-
tion were wholly unknown—some he understood heal signed it
three or four times, and there were even women among the
number. He believed it was a prototype of many other peti-
tions on the same subject.
Dr. BALDWIN was one of those who had cheered the
Hon. Member for Derby. He did not deny the independent
right of the House of Lords too introduce any amendments
they thought proper, provided they did not interfere with the
rights and privileges of the people. In the present case; be
( Dr. Baldwin) was of opinion that they had done so, and he
would therefore stigmatize their conduct as unconstitutional.
Mr. HUME thought it very important that the Hon. Mem-
ber for Ludlow should state, upon what authority be asserted
that the petition had been improperly signed. Unless be did
se, the statement of the Hon. Member near him must be con-
sidered of equally as much value.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. SCA R L ETT complained that this Bill had been car.
rh'd by a majority. of Irish and Scotch Members.—(LOud cries
of "Oh " from the Ministerial benches.) The Honourable
Member opposite had said that the other House had
interfered with- the liberties of the people, but never
had there been a greater attack upon the liberties of the
people than was contained in that very Corporation
( Laugleer and loud- cries of "Oh !") Why, therefore,
should the' House of Lords be attacked for defending the
liberties of the people ?—( Continued cries of " Oh, oh !")
Mr. STRUTT cornplimaited the Hon. Member for Lud-
low on his new character of defender of the corporation of
'that town, although he had always been an opponent of it
heretofore.

Mr. CHARLTON said that in reading the letter in a hurry
he had made a mistake ; he had stated that a boy had signed
the petition four or five times. The fact was, the letter said—
that a boy had signed the petition nine times. The high-
bailiff of Ludlow wrote • thus :—" Phillips tells me that
the petition was signed nine times by one boy." He denied
having cast a slur upon the lion. Member who had alluded to
him as appearing in a new character. He appeared in that
character which he ever had appeared, and ever would ap-
pear in as a public man. When the Corporation of Ludlow
did not act aceording to its character, made it do without
having recourse to such a despicable Bill as the Corporation
BM/ was before it left this House.—(Laughter.) He had
v dope his best to sooit the Corporation of Ludlow when it
aced rightly, and when it- did not he found the law strong
enough to make it conform to its charter.
Mr. POTTE R happened to be able to bear out the state-
ment of the lion. Member, in reference to his public charac-
ter, because he recollected that the lion. Member was a mem-
ber of the Birmingham Political Union, of which he ( Mr. P. )was
also a member; and he recollected also that the lion. Mem-
ber was then a zealous and vehement defender of Reform, and
he thought he ought to be a little more moderate, now he had
changed sides.— ( Hear, and laughter.)
Mr. CHARLTON' had not the least objection to have his
public conduct canvassed before that House. It was true that
in former times; when he fouud Toryism injurious to the pub-
lic welfare, he supported reform ; but now that Toryism was
essential to the public good, he felt it his duty to support it.—
( Laughter.) He believed he was a member of the Birmingham
Political Union.—(Renewed laughter.) But he was not, as
the lion. Member stated, a zealous defender of Reform. He
was never in his life present at any of the meetings of that
union.—( Laughter.) But what even if he had been ? What
wasit for ? To promote reform.—( Cheers. )" But not for the
ptulb.se -of producing that agitation, and that revolution,
in the promotion of which he believed the Hon. Member
who had attacked him had taken a most prominent part.
When he saw Reform was made nothing less than an instill.-
ment of revolution, he did feel called upon to resist it.—( Hear.)
Mr. POTTER begged to say that he was no Republican,
but he was anxious for good government, which, he believed,
all those who opposed Reform, intended to destroy.
Mr. CHARLTON—I believe just the reverse.—(Loud
laughter.) _

do so. The second class of persons who claimed for pro-
perty lost on shore was still under consideration. With re-
spect to the third class, that of persons claiming for property
lost on board ship, he must say that he could not entertain.

(LEFT SPEAKING.)