The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-04 00:00:00

Mr. O'CONNELL remarked, that this Bill had passed
through the Other House without opposition. ( Hear.)
Mr. I-I.:GRATTAN gave notice, that next Session he
should more, That Tithes in Ireland be abolished, in name and
substance, also a motion, as the House of Lords had thrown out
several measures intended for the benefit of Ireland, under
pretence of their having originated with one individual, a Com-
mittee should be appointed to inquire into the effects of this
course, and how tar the Legislative Union was the cause
thereof.

The Loa' ADVOCATE moved the third reading of the
Instruments of Sasine (Scotland) Bill.
Mr. P. STEWART moved as an amendment on the first
clause, to leave out, " and also reserving to all parties who
before the 12th of May in this present year, shall have ob-
jected judicially to the validity of any writ or writs on the
ground of erasure, and all pleas that would have been com-
petent to them before the passing of this Act."
Sir R. FE RGUSSON opposed the amendment.
The LORD ADVOCATE felt bound to resist the amend-
ment.

Mr. 'WARBURTON called upon the House to do justice
and pass the amendment.

After a few words from Dr. LUSHINGTON,
The gallery was cleared for a division, but no division took
place, the amendment being agreed to. The Bill was then read
a third time, and passed.
On the Order of the Day for considering the amendments
of the Lords to the Scotch Imprisonment for Debt Bill being
read, the amendments were agreed to.

(LEFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Lord DENNIAN took his seat on the Woolsack at 5 o'clock.
Lord FARNHAM presented several petitions against the
Irish Church Bill.
On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON the Grand
Juries (Ireland) Bill went through Committee, the Report
to be received to-morrow.
Lord BROUGHAM presented some Returns frcm
the Court of Chancery, which he said showed the perfect
working of the Bill for regulating the offices in that Court.
Already there was a saving of 51,350/. and eventually they
would amount to 100,000/.
The Returns were ordered to be printed.
LAW INQUIRY.

t The Noble and Learned Lord then said he had a
- duty to perform towards the Commissioners of Law Inquiry
this Session, and as he hoped it was now near a close, he
trusted their Lordships would hear with him then for a few
minutes. That Commission was appointed in 1833, and
they had made two most valuable Reports; and he had
never seen such a delicate and laborious task performed with
such skill and judicious temperance as they had done. They
had proceeded to investigate the matter in all its bearings, and
to consider whether it would be advisable to make a digest,
first of the Criminal Law; secondly, of the Statute Law;
and thirdly, whether it would be possible or advisable to make
a Digest of the Common or unwritten Law. He was aware
that there was a diversity of opinion upon that
point amongst the most eminent lawyers, but he would ear-
nestly recommend their Lordships to give these Reports
their most serious consideration.--( Hear, hear.) It had been
said in some place, he would not say where, that all these
Commissioners had done, might have been done in three
weeks—there was no doubt of it, if they did not care how it
was done; but " if 'twere well when 'tic done, then 'twere
well it were done quickly," as somebody says.--(Laughter.)
Those Commissioners had given up the whole of their time,
and they could not have made their Reports in three or four
months if they bad not. Those Reports were ably drawn up,
and if Noble Lords would attend to those Reports, they would
rise from the perusal of them with the same impression on
their minds that they had made upon his.—( Hear, hear.)
He would abstain from making any motion at that -moment
but he begged leave to state that the subject was not new.
There was a resolution standing on their Lordships' Journals
in favour of that proposition, therefore he was only asking
them to re-affirm what they had formerly approved of. He
would call the attention of the House to this most important
' subject, at a very early period next session of Parliament.
DUBLIN POLICE BILL.
Lord DUNCANNON in moving that the House do re-
solve itself into a Committee on this Bill, stated that he had
held communications with the Government in Ireland
on the subject of this Bill, and he was authorized
to assure their Lordships that the Corporation of Dublin was
not interested in any way in this Bill, and that no part of their
revenues were taken from them by it.—( Hear, -hear.)
He was informed that the present duties of the police were
not atttended to in the city of Dublin ; that the Police Force
were inadequate to preserve the peace of that city; and that
many of them were feeble old men, who were neither able to
protect themselves nor the public.—(Crries of " Hear, hear.")
This Bill had been approved of by his Majesty's Government,
in Ireland who thought it their duty to propose this Bill with
a view to preserve the peace of the City of Dublin. If their
Lordships thought this Report sufficient he hoped they would
resolve themselves into a Committee on the Bill.
Lord FARNHAM objected to this Bill being proceeded
in at that late period of the Session, and without any commu-
nication with the authorities of Dublin. He. Lord Farn-
ham, had received a letter from the Lord Mayor of that
city, on Monday, stating that he had never seen the
Bill until half an hour before he wrote the letter. He
would ask whether it was proper that a measure involving
the whole peace of Dublin should be brought to a second
reading without the magistracy being made acquainted with it.
The Noble Earl concluded by moving that the word "now"
be left out, for the purpose of inserting the words "that day
three months."

Earl WICKLOW roae for the purpose of suggesting
to the Noble Viscount the propriety of withdrawing; the
Bill for the present session. He did this from a desire
that it should not appear that the House rejected Bills that
were really in themselves good; but the Bill having been
brought forward hastily, and without consultation with
the Corporation of Dublin, it was impossible that it could
receive that deliberation in the course of the present Session.
lie therefore trusted the Noble Viscount would withdraw the
Bill.

Viscount DUNCANNON did not think that the Noble
Earl had shown any reason whatever for withdrawing the Bill.
It was acknowledged on all hands - that the police of Dublin
was very defective.
Earl WICKLOW did not wish to vote upon the Bill ; but
if he was compelled, he must vote against it, in order to
protect the rights of the Corporation of Dublin.
Lord PLUNKET, in supporting the Bill, said that the
police of Dublin was in the most shameful state. In going to
the four Courts, it was a thousand to one if a person's pocket
was not picked before you got there. The manner in which
the inquiry had been carried an rendered it impossible to sup-
pose the Corporation of Dublin must not have been aware of
what was going on. He did not think the Corporation of
Duolin had any feeling upon the subject.
Marl FARNHAM had received a letter from the Lord
Mayor of Dublin, stating that there was the strongest objec-
tion to the Bill.

Lord PLUNKETT had no doubt that the pickpockets of
Dublin had great objections to the Bill, but what objections
the Corporation of Dublin could have to it 134 was at a loss to
conjecture.

The Duke of WELLINGTON complained that the Cor-
poration of the City of Dublin, who were charged with the
management and conduct of the Police, had not been con-
sulted upon the measure. The letter which he(the Duke of W. )
had received from the Lord Mayor stated that he had never seen
the Bill until that morning, and it was impossible in so short a
time to examine its details. The Recorder also stated that he
was not in the House when the Bill had been introduced,
and had not seen it until be had arrived in Dublin.
The Noble Duke then read the letter of the Lord Mayor
which set forth, that in a measure so seriously affecting the
right and privileges of the Corporation, its members had not
been consulted, and that at so late a period of the session it
would be impossible to examine its details. Under these cir-
cumstances, he (the Duke of Wellington) trusted that the
Bill would not be persevered in.
The Earl of RAD NOR thought it hard that a Bill which
was admitted on all hands to be a good one, should be lost on a
mere matter of form, and which appeared to him to be an
idle matter of form.—( Hear, hear.) The Recorder of Dub-
lin was in London at the time the Bill was introduced, but the
Recorder complained that he was not in the House at
the time.--( Hear, hear.) Whether he was in the House
or not, he must have seen its published votes, and
would have informed the Corporation of Dublin that
such measure was under discussion so far as he the Earl
of Radnor knew no objections had been stated to the measure
nor no petitions presented against Hear, hear.) Under
these circumstances, when the state of Dublin was
such as had been represented by his Noble and Learned
Friend below him, (Lord Plunkett), and when it was
admitted on the other side that the Bill was a good one.
—( Cries of " No, no.) The Noble Earl opposite had dis-
tinctly said so, and he thought it would be quite unreasonable,
on the ground that the Corporation had not been consulted, to
reject the Bill.

'Lord WHARNCLIFFE complained that no notice bad
been given to the Magistrates and Corporation of Dublin,
whose interests it affected. It was not to be expected their
Lordships would assent to the Bill under such circumstances,
It was not a mere matter of form. The Corporation ought
to have an opportunity of meeting and considering the Biil,
otherwise it would be a matter of injustice.
Lord HOWARD of EFFINGHAM said the Recorder of
Dublin was in town on the day after the Bill had been intro-
duced, and there was now plenty of time for the Corporation
to have objected as no- doubt he had :informed them of the
matter.

Tlie Marquis of CLANRICARDE said their :Lordships
were about to throw out a Bill, not on its merits, for they had
not been discussed, but they were going to throw it out be-
cause certain parties had not been consulted upon it-4 Hear.)
Their Lordships were going to throw a stigma upon the
Corporation, for surely they were not now charged with
the police which was now one of tho worst in Europe ; how-
ever, even if they were to report against the Bill, was
that any reason why their Lordships should not pass
the Bill ? Surely at all euants it was none why they
should not discuss its merits. If the police was now under the
management of the Corporation, he must say that they were the
last hands the management of it ought to be continued in
he supported the Bill, because in his opinion it would establish
a pod police in place of one that was a disgrace to the coun-
try, and he was certain the very worst in Europe, and surely
that was ground enough for going lint° Committee on the Bill.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH s:id them were nume-
rous Acts in existence, some of which gave, and others
recognized, the powers of. the Corporation to regulate
the police of the. City of Dublin. This was a point not
of injury, but of insult to the. Corporation, and he would not
support it. He admitted the Bill Wa§ a gaod one, and would