The Sun.
London, England, 1832-05-21 00:00:00

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock.

1M PERM L R LIAM EN"!

THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Lord INGESTRIE prtsnted a petition against the
B-rmingham and London Railroad Bill.—lteletred to the
Committee on the Bill.
Mr. HUME brought up a report of the Committee
with amendments) upon the Tower Hamlets Small
Debts Bill—The amendments were rend a second time.

Mr. Alderman WOOD brought up a report of tl:e
Committee (with amendments) upon the General Cemetery
Bill. The amendments were read a Frtond time.

Mr. KENNEDY presented rtitions from the Corpo-
rations of the burghs of Ayr and Irvine, in favour of the
t_ila.gow and Edinburgh Railway Bill.
Sir A. AGNEW presenteti t petition from the Synod
ot Gsloway, tgainat tbc proposed system of education in
Ireland.
Sir C. FERGUSSON said he had reeeired a letter from
clergyman who attended the Synod, and who declared that
so tar kom the petition being unanimously agreed to, it
watt only carried by the casting voice of the Moderator.
lie (%lr. C. Fergusson) would not provoke any discussion
',:pon this subject, but he could not refrain from expressing
his opinion that the petition was branded on an entire
mistake, and so were many speeches of Hon. Members in
that House. The petition stated that by the proposed .ystem
only certain portions of the Scriptures were to he Iced.
That was an entire mistake ; for there ws3 to be a general
and joint mode adopted in tie^ moral, literary, and
classical education, but there was to be a separate
religious instruction for lifferent religious
and there was within.; to prohibit the chiltirun from having
the whole of the 13ifile. It was merely that the Catholic
Lhould have nothing to do with the religious instruction of
'.l,e Protestant, nor the Protestant with the Catholic.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, if one allegation, vie. that of
the Protestant being deprived of the use of the entire
-ieripteres, be true, he would oppose the scheme as readily
as any Protestant gentleman in the House. All the Catho-
el,4rnerl was that the use of the Scriptures as a school.
bunk should not be enforced on the Catholic children. The
Troqsot oppression had been practised by the Irish landlords
in compelling_ Catholic parents to send their children, under
the threat of starvation, to the Kildare-street schools,
and it was, against such -a system he consplained. The
Catholic did not want to interfere with the religious edu-
cation of the Protestant, and it was only just that the Pro-
rant should not interfere in the education of the Catholic.
If the Ministry had not been a Reforming Ministry, there
w mid not have been half the outcry there had been. He
was sorry to see the intelligent people of Scotland express
the opinions they had done on the subject. The plan in-
trnetteed by his Majesty's Government was not dictated
or required by the Catholics. They had no objection to
see the Scriptures in the hands of children, but all that
they required was, that it should not be forced upon Ca-
t 'clic children as a school-book.

Colonel LINDSAY thought the plan would fail of ac-
complishing a united system of education in the country.
Mr. JAMES JOHNSON disclaimed, on the part of
Scotland, any cent or hypocrisy in their apposition to the
measure.

Mr. FERGUSSON considered the opposition to the
measure had originated in party spirit, and thought it ex-
tremely unfortunate when a measure brought forward
avowedly for the purpose of reconciling all parties, and pro-
moting harmony among children of all classes, should
lave been met in the manner it had been in the present
t.:se. He trusted that house would never become the
theatre of theological discussion.
Sir R. BATESON declared that there never was a
subject in which so little political feeling had been exer-
ci"ed as the present. The opposition to this measure was
founded in truth, and would every day be stronger and
stronger.
Atter some observations from Mr. Keith Douglass, Mr.
C. Fergusson, Mr. Shaw, Mr. O'Connel, and Captain
Gordon, the petition was read, and ordered to be printed.
The HoN. MEMBER then presentep two other petitions
to the same effect.

Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR, on being called upon
by the Speaker, said he appeared with his Majesty's an-
swer to the Address of that House. His Majesty had
roost graciously received the Address, and in answer
said, that the state of public affairs since 4he 10th dty
~1 May would account for any delay in the returning
of an answer to that Address. He trusted that
tt was now unnecessary, since what had since transpired
hod prevented the necessity of any change in his Majesty's
Uouncils.
The LORD ADVOCATE then moved the second read-
tug of the Scotch Reform Bill, when

Lord STORMONT said he would take that oppor-
tunity to bring before the notice of the House some of the
most scandalous and seditious libels which had ever dis-
graced the history of the press i❑ this country. It also
appeared that up to the present time they had been allowed
to go unpunished. They were so obscene that he knew
not how to discriminate between them, he would, how-
ever, take one which he found in a paper called the
Natirist, of the 13th May, which began,—" What the
is the House of Brunswick to us, abstractedly
speaking, more than the poorest sausagemaker in Ger-
many," &e. The Noble Lord read the alleged libel
concludeu,',... -4_ which the above is a sample ; having
lication as that should bi atorri;l‘l, that such a pub-
the Law Officers of the Crown were loos ing"ile
and appearing to approve of them by their inertness. As
a loyal subject he could not but take that opportunity of
insisting that the Attorney-General should do his duty
and punish such scandalous publications. He called upon
Government to say what steps had been taken or were
contemplated for the author's punishment. It on a former
occasion had been said that the authors of such articles
were best left to the conempt of the virtuous part
of the puhli.•, but he would ask what such persons, as
could sit down and write such a treasonable article as he
had read, cared for the opinions nut only of the virtuous
part of the public, but for the whole of the kingdom.
Sir T. DENMAN was glad of the opportunity afforded
hint of explaining to the House what he thought of the
articles brought under the notice of the House by the
Noble Lord. The Noble Lord would also give him leave to
state to the House, that he had called upon him (Sir T.
Denman) in private, and pointed out many articles to
him, and he would now state his views upon the whole
subject. A very e rroneous opinion seemed to he abroad
of ti e powers of the Attorney-General; it was thought
that that personage had only to issue his fist, and then
there would he an end to all such articles as that road by
the Noble Lord, hut he must tell the House that that
officer had no such power, nor in fact more than any per-
son, he could only bring the party before a Jury of his country
His firm belief founded on observations since he bad beet,
in office, and what he had before observed was, that
nothing benefitted the libeller so much as bringing him into
Courts of Justice, and there was no advertisement half
so valuable as bringing him before a Jury, and also that
whether the trial ended in a victory on his part, or whe-
ther he were found guilty ; and if so, he would he
considered a martyr. He would derive considerable
benefit from it. With regard to personal invective, how-
ever disgusting or provoking, he, (the Attorney-Gene-
ral) conceived that the indignation and contempt
of society would be the best mode of receiving
it, and even the silence produced by that contempt would
be a punishment on the libeller. He was in hopes, how-
ever, that the present number of such publications would
gradually diminish, and, indeed, he knew for many months
they had been decreased. He would now advert to what
had been done by his predecessors in such cases, but not
for the purpose of blaming them, or of recriminating upon
them.

Sir C. WETHERELL rose, and was left speaking.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Lord CAWDOR presented a petition from Carnarvon,
praying for the abolition of the S awe Trade.
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY presented a peti-
tion from the ship-owners of the port of Sunderland,
against the Hartlepool Railway Eill. Referred to the
Committee on the Bill.
The Marquess of BUTE presentee] a petition from the
Clamber of Commerce of Greenock, praying the House to
t a.. the state of the West Indian colonies into consi-
deration.

Lout RODEN presented a petition from Edmonton
against the new system of education in Ireland ; also three
similar petitions from places in Ireland ; also from the
Orange Lodge, No. 1,672, against the Reform Bill.
A PEER presented a petition from Lynn Regis against
the new system of education in Ireland.
STOCKTON.
The Marquess of CLEVELAND presented a petition
from the Mayor and Corporation of Stockton-upon-Tees,
praying for an additional Member to be given, not to that
borough only, but to that borough and its adjacent town.
*hips. The House might form same idea of the
growing importance of this place, when he stated that
in 1811 the average custom chides of the three pr -
cedialpf Yeas did not exceed 4,0001. per annum, whilst in

1830, they litta increased to no less than 3.8,000/. '
lii 1830, the number of vetisels wbicii sailed from
•he Tees with outward-borld cargoes, was 1,262, whilst
those entering with i'.`..ktird 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
‘o the county of Durham, and too much weight to particular
;ndividuals connected with that county. Par himself he
oould only say that he was a great sufferer by the Reform
Bill, but he supported it because it was to give their just
-lghts to the people. He had the honour of being Lord
Lieutenant of the county of Durham, and was intimately-
connected with it, but he most positively disclaimed
having any interest in the repre,entation intended to be
_iven it by the Bill before their Lordships, and he defied
my Peer in the House to say that he acted upon any
,they thin the most independent principles. He congra-
tulated the. House and the country upon the restoration to
power of the Noble Earl near him, for lie was convinced that
that was the sole means of not onl7 presenting great dis-
satisfaction in the cOltiti-Y, but perhaps a revolution.—
( Hear, hear.)
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY—He should most
he irtily join the Noble Marquess opposite in supporting the
prayerof this petition. When a similar petition was
presented in the House of Commons by one of the
Honourabie 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 heppened, 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 tthe Lord Privy Seal), were large proprie-
tors La that county. If the county had been divided
east and west, these two powerful Individuals would have
bad their interests placed in the same division, hut the
division into north and south bad separated them so
that individuals differing from those 'Noble persons in
either division would not have much chance of represent-
ing it. When they go into the details of the
Bill, he hoped the Noble Marquess would join
him in altering this arrangement, and also in taking
away a Memfier from Gateshead, and giving it
to Stockton. Tha county was com-osed of four wards,
nad it was desirable that each ward should he reoresented,
but he did know whether it would be possible to make
such an arrangement•
The Marquess of CLEVELAND said, that he tin,ught
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 expence. Ile was glad the Noble
E irl agreed st ith him, particularly upon the question of
Reform.

The Marquess of LONDONDERRY was not aware he
saic any thing favourable to the Reform question, which
certainly should not pass with his good wilt.
The petition was then laid upon the table.
APPLEBY.

Lord ELLEN BOROUGH presented a petition from
Appleby, 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
Morning Chronicle of the 725th of January last, pur-
porting to be 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 affairs, and is fully pre-
pared lo acquiesce in the advice of his !Ministers to
create such a number of Peers as may be necessary
to ensure the success of the Reform Bill." He begged
leave to ask the Noble Earl whether lie had received such a
letter, and whether it were genuine?
Earl GREY had 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
ire notice of his intention, on the earliest opportunity,
o make a motion, the best way, he believed, on the state
of the nation, hiving 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 that particular subject of the Royal prero-
gative 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 name any particular day.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE was willing to take any
course that might he 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,
J es.) 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 pounds 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 entrusted to it for the benefit
of the country.—(Cheers from the Treasury benches.) And
‘'vfilcif were not exercised, according to the trust
ercise of it would be—tlithltdaNgli jp the Crown, that ex-
the existence of the Crown itself. nlfret

The Duke of NEWCASTLE wished to know what
proceeding the Noble and Learned Lord ou the Wooksack
would take as to this letter.

Lord BROUGHAM was not the public prosecutor.
On the question that the Order of the Day for the
House to resolve itself into Committee,
Earl 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 his 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 undobt-
edly bring disgrace upon himself, and destruction upon the
country. The Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's
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
that repose. Now he (Lord Roden) differed very much
from the Noble Earl in that view, and be thought from
what was 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-
sing of this measure. Was it to he supposed that the
House of Commons, after there was a Reformed Parliament,
would ever be satisfied with any thing short of a cheap Go-
vernment ; and was it to be thought that if there was a cheap
Oovernment, there would not be an end to the Monarchy.
Again, as regarded Ireland, he held in his hand a
documet, by when it appeared that Mr, O'Connell had
stated that there only wanted to be a Reformed Par-
I ament, that a dissolution o; the Union might be obtained.
In the very first Session after there was a Reformed Par-
liament be would (for he had pledged himself to do so)
bring forward the question of dissolution. Dr. M'Cabe
had also written a letter, in which be exhorted the
people of Ireland to remain quite silent until there
was a Reformed Parliament in England, when all
the corruption and: abuses would be swept away, and
when they could not fail to send in their
petitions with the happiest effect. The Protestants of Ire-
land were unanimous in opinion against the expediency
of the passing of the Bill. He was persuaded that if
this Hill passed, it must be productive of a revolution
throughout the country.
(LEFT SITTING.)

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

To the people of England, Scotland, and
Ireland, we say—be on your guard—meet, peti-
tion, and remonstrate, for the Bill is in danger.

Lord WINCHILSEA and Lord ELLENBOROUGH then
addressed the House in a stain which leaves no hope
for the passing of the Bill without an immediate
creation of Peers.

The Tories are determined to oppose and defeat
the Bill—therefore look to yourselves, for it is
only by unanimity, and a resolution to brave the
worst, that the liberties of the people can be
secured.—ED. Suld