The Sun.
London, England, 1832-06-19 00:00:00

SCOTCH EXCHEQUER BILL.

On the motion that the Scotch Exchequer Bill be read
a third time,

The Duke of BUCCLEUCH said that he remained of
opinion that the abolishing of this Court would not be
for the benefit of the public. He had no objeet;ort to
the calling in of the Sessions Judges occasionally ; but to
put the business of this Curt entirely in their hands
would be a very different thing, and injurious to the pub-
lic. He proposed that the Court should not be abolished,
but that upon the death of the present Ciief Baron
a successor to him should not be appointed, and
that his duties should devolve on the remaining'
Barons. In this way, a saving of 6,0001. a year woubl
be effected. The Noble Duke, with these observations,
submitted certain amendments ; all of which, atter a few
words from the other side of the House, by Lord Rosebery,
and likewise a few sentences from the Lord Chancellor,
were negatived without a division.

The Bill was then read a third time and passed.—Ad.
journed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JUNE 18.

Mr. R. GORDON took the oaths and his seat for
Cricklade, as did Mr. Labouchere for Taunton, both of
those Hon. Members having vacated their seats in conse-
quence of their having been appointed, the former to the
India Board and the latter to the Admiralty Board.
On the motion of Mr. E. ELLICE a new writ was or-
dered for High Wycombe, in the room of Sir Thomas
Baring, who has accepted the Chiltern Hundr de.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a petition from the free-
holders, &c. of the Staffordshire Potteries, in favour of
the Birmingham and London Railway Bill.
Sir G. SKII'WITH moved that the amendments to
the Birmingham and London Railway Bill be read a se-
cond time.

Lord CLIVE referred to a petition which he had on a
former night presented from the Countess of Bridgewater
and Lords Brownlow and Northampton, praying to be
heard before a Committee of Appeal against the Bill; and
he moved as an amendment that a Committee of Appeal
be appointed to examine the allegations of that petition.
Sir G. SKIPWITH, in reply, opposed the amendment,
and contended that the Committee had acted with perfect
fairness, and had attentivly heard every compitinant who
had come before them. If the Noble Lord persisted in
his motion, he must take the sense of the House upon it.
The Marquis of CHANDOS thought this question
could not be prevented from going to a Committee of Ap-
peal, as in his opinion the plan was not a boactfide one.
Mr. LAWLEY thought there was not the least ground
for the motion of the Noble Lord. In his opinion, far
better grounds than those now before the House ought to
be brought forward previous to the House taking so strong
a step as that proposed by the Noble Lord. The present
Committee had sat for 21 days, and had given the subject
their beat attention.

Mr. W. WYNN would be extremely sorry to throw
any obstacles in the way of the passing of this Bill, con-
sidering it a measure of the highest importance and of the
greatest benefit to the country ; but he thought the Stand-
ing Orders of the House should be attended to. He did
not, however, see any bentfit that would result from an
Appeal Committee.
Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY said that there was no un-
fairness whatever charged against the Committee to whom
this Bill had been referred ; and he thought, therefore,
the Noble Lord was askinga great deal too much Hien lie
required the appointment of an Appeal Committee.
Mr. C. PELHANI supported the motion.

Mr. LITTLETON said he was the author of the
resolutions which first established Committees of Appeal ;
but such Committees had never been established for the
purpose of revising such insignificant alterations as were
contemplated by the amendments to this Bill. The pro-
per course to be pursued, as he conceived, was to make
amendments on the third reading, if the Noble Lord
thought proper.

Lord CLIVE, in consequence of the opposition, with-
drew his amendments, and then proposed a clause fur the
purpose of confining the company to the level they origi-
nally proposed.
The Marquess of CHANDOS seconded the motion,
Which was supported by Mr. C. W. WYNN, and op-
posed by Sir J. WILOTTESIAT and Mr. LITTLETON.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none
took place, the clause, as we understood, being withdrawn.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented petitions from the city of
Waterford, and from one of the national political unions,
representing that the franchise under the Alinisterial Bill
for Ireland would be higher than at present, and claiming
a larger share in the representation.
Mr. PRAED took that opportunity of observing that
the claim of the Hon. Member for Waterford, for 176
Members for Ireland, on the combined baliis of population
and revenue, was monsttpuly exaggerated, and founded on
a calculation more absurd than any which had ever been
submitted to the House.

Mr. PETRE begged leave to ask whether the Hon
Member for Waterford had stated on a previous occasion
that the English Catholics before the passing of the Relief
Bill would have been satisfied if admitted to be Justices of
the Peace.

douse,:toicihtte
dcenrlt:r
Mr. J. GRATTAN said that the calculations alluded
t
to by the Hon. Member (Praed) were those of Lord Cas-
tlereagh.
Mr. O'CONNELL was ready to meet the calculation,
If it was not deemed out of order, on the presentation of
the petitions. He thought, however, it was prematurely
introduced on the present occasion. As to the questicu
proposed to him, although be had seen a sufficient dis-
position to be content with little, yet he bad
not stated that the English Catholics wonld have
I)een content with being Justices of the Peace; all be said
was, that they would have been glad to be 80.—
gle shirtless ragged fellow
but for the forty-shilling freehtld..rs.
Yet these English Catholic Mt inhere, thu4 placed in that
againstt
those 40e. freeholders who would change places
jruhsetyicenseovferthweepuleda,rehowever, to this moment have been
nightb yt h egtoehnffeeomr efforts ofw
ini thee
b Irishw
would t
th4:olls .6
cter freeholders,
Hw olnttihe those
de
.who.t er
r
that there was not a sin