The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-19 00:00:00

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

Captain WEMYSS presented a petition from certain
clergymen and inhabitants in the county of Fife, praying that
this House will adopt such measures as would perpetuate the
benefits of the Church of Scotland. As this was one of
many petitions which he might be called on to pre-
sent to this House, on the subject of Church property in
Scotland, he begged leave now to state, that if the
petitioners expected he should be a party to granting the
public money for building churches, he could assure them he
would do no such thing.—(Loud cheers.) He thought the
best way of effecting the object they had in view was to do
away with church patronage—(Cheers)—and let the Heritors
do as they did in olden times.
Mr. HODGES presented a petition from the inhabitants
of a place in Kent, praying that the House would take
cognizance of the conduct of a certain commanding officer
who had thought proper to interfere with the freedom of the
trade of that town, in consequence of the votes given at the
late election.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL brought up some papers rela-
tive to the proper registration of Wills.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition from the coal-mer-
chants of Boston, praying for a proper administration
of the Act relating to Weights and Measures. The
petitioners complained loudly that they were obliged
to sell their coals according to the new Act, by weight. The
captains of vessels refused to adopt the new custom, and re-
fused to sell them except by measure. As, however, a Noble
Lord bad given notice that he should refer this subject to a
select Committee, be begged to move that the prayer of that
petition be referred to that Committee also.
COURT OF REQUESTS.

Mr. HUMPHR EYS presented a petition from the
inhabitants of Southwark, praying that the case respecting
debtors and creditors, as affected the jurisdiction of the
Court of Requests, might remain unaltered.
Sir J. CAMPBELL said he should object to this petition,
as he knew no part of the law bearing on the subject which re-
quired more alteration than to which the Hon. Member alluded.
Mr. HUME said he had been requested to support the
petition, but nothing gave him a greater idea of the necessity
of some alteration taking place within the jurisdiction of this
court than the notice of this House, as there were more than
8,000 persons confined in prison throughout the metropolis for
more than one day each, on debts not amounting to more than
one shilling. He hoped that the Hon. and Learned Member
would therefore bring forward his motion, and extend its
operation to that Court.
Lord SANDON presented a petition from Liverpool, for
the removal of the Assizes from Manchester to Liverpool.
Mr. CLAY presented a petition from a number of persons
formerly in the employment of the East India Company, com-
plaining of the regulations respecting the compensation
allowed them.

An Hon. MEMBER presented .a petition against the
amount of duty on spirit licenses.

THE FACTORY BILL.

Lord MORPETH presented several petitions praying for
the amendment of the Factory Bill. After the observations
which be addressed to the House on a former occasion in sup-
port of the object of these petitions he should not now detain
it with any further remarks, except to observe that one was
from seventy-two freeholders and proprietors of mills
in the West Riding of Yorkshire, and he need not inform
the House that they were men of great respectability. He
hoped the present Government would take an e!,:rly opportu-
nity of removing the inconveniences complained of by the
petitioners. The other petitions were from Marsden,

i!

_/

~~~
x~`~,t::

(front
k the

' Longwood, and other placesiTritt
v?
the proprietors of factories tlkam. - 'aficif,Ai
operatives. Also another from4he'p ents:44l
Kearsley, and another from the offetsti esfot
_§..f.,
town.—Laid on the table. •)/".--ACry_
An HOS. MEMBER (whose name was unao n the gal-
lery, and who spoke in a low tone) presented a petition from
Bridgetown, praying for an alteration of the law respecting
spirit licenses. He took the opportunity of asking the Right
Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) whether it was the intention of
his Majesty's Government to afford the relief solicited by the
petitioners ?
Sir R. PEEL replied that he was not prepared to make
any declaration upon the subject at present, but it was one
which was under consideration.—( Hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL presented a petition from Kid-
derminster, but as the Noble Lord spoke from under the
chair, and in a very low tone, we could not catch the object
of it.

ouring

The Bill relative to the impressment of seamen, leave for
the introduction of which was given last night, WAS read a
first time.

An HON. MEMBER, seeing the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer in his place, begged to ask him a question, namely,
whether he was to render assistance to the agri-
cultural parishes of this country, in order to enable
them to build work-houses, according to the provisions
of the Poor Law Bill. The Hon. Gentleman asked another
question relative to emigration, the nature of which we did
not hear.

Sir R. PEEL—His impression was that the Commis-
sioners of public works were authorised to advance money, on
being satisfied of the sufficiency of the security of repay-
ment. As to the question of the Hon. Gentleman relative
to the encouragement that should be afforded to emigration
from the country parishes, he thought that the subject ought
not to be connected in any way with the operation of the
Poor Law Bill. If the parishes were guaranteed against the
expense of emigration, no encouragement to it would be held
out. It was the manifest interest of parishes, under the Poor
Law Bill, to encourage emigration.
Mr. ROEBUCK spoke, but was inaudible in the Gallery.'
Sir P. PEEL, in reply, repeated that if emigration were
to be encouraged, it ought not to be connected in any way
with the Poor Law Bill.

An Hcx. Member desired to know whether the Poor Law
Commissioners were prepared -to lay their report on the table
of th;?. House.

Sir R. PEEL answered that it would shortly be iq
readiness.

STOKE-POGES.

The Marquis of CHANDOS presented a petition from
Stoke-Poges on the subject of the Poor Laws, similar to that
which was under discussion in the other House of Parliament
last night. He moved that the correspondence of the Poor
Law Commissioners should be printed and laid on the table of
the House.
The motion was assented to.
LIGHT HOUSES.

Mr. SHAW requested the Hon. Member for Middlesex
(Mr. Hume) to postpone his motion on the subject of Irish
Light-houses. _ .

Mr. HUME said his object was to carry into effect the re:
commendation of the Committee. He was not disposed to
oppose the wishes of the Hon. Gentleman, and had he any
_ _

inclination to do so, he would, from the interview he hid
with some gentlemen on the subject, relinquish 'his intention.
He had seen those Gentlemen, and some of them seemed
to be under an impression that some of the remarks of the
Committee applied to them. He could say that no such
idea existed on the part of the Committee. If they had not
entered into the details of the said Lighthouses, it was because
there was an impression on their minds that the said Light-
houses were so much freer from abuses—(Hear, hear)—that
they did not consider it necessary to enter into the minute
details.

Mr. O'CONNELL said that those Gentlemen were highly
respectable, and their only object was to vindicate themselves
and their conduct with respect to the management of the Irish
Lighthouses. The situation was without salary or reward of
any kind, and the public were not put to any expense. These
Lighthouses were at the same time better kept than the Light-
houses in any other part of the United Kingdom—( Hear)—
whilst they had diminished the expense to the shipping by one
half. These gentlemen, he would repeat, took the trouble of
maintaining those Lighthouse quite disinterestedly—they had
neither salary or patronage. The Irish trade were satisfied
with the manner in which these Lighthouses were supported.
Sir R. PE EL understood that the Hon. Gentleman intended
to postpone his motion. He had read the whole of the report,
and had had personal communications with some of the mem-
bers of the Committee, and also some written communications,
which, however, were not completed. As, therefore, this was
a most important subject, he wished, if it were not inconve-
nient, that the Hon. Member would fix a day, not a very early
one, for those communications to be brought forward.
Mr. HUME said he could not hesitate a moment under
the circumstances stated. If the Right Hon. Baronet had
those communications, and was not prepared, he, of course,
would not press his motion. The question was oze of uni-
versal importance, and if the Right Hon. Baronet thought that
t,2n days or a week would give him an opportunity of consi-
dering the subject, he would postpone it till then.
_ _ _

The motion was accordingly postponed till this day week.
CITY OF DUBLIN ELECTION.

Mr, O'CONNELL said that three different periods had
been fixed upon for the hearing of the petitions against the
return for the City of Dublin. Upon the second petition,
fixed for the 4th of March, no securities had been proposed
until that day, and although a week before, the agent for
the petitioners had stated that he would not proceed on that
petition, but only on the third. He (Mr. O'C.) had therefore
not justified,and had written toDublin on Mondayto stop the wit-
nesses who were coming relative to the second petition. Now,
however, the agent had taken up the second petition ; and if
the House did not interfere, the ballot for these petitions
would come on the next day, as fixed upon, and he should
neither have his agent nor his witnesses ready to answer
the allegations of the petitioners.—( Hear, hear.) He
would, therefore, beg that the Ballot should be postponed till
the 26th, and he trusted that the House would, under those
circumstances, comply with his request.
Mr. SHAW said that at the request of the agent for the
petitioners, he had undertaken to reply to the statement of
the Hon. and Learned Member. The agent informed him

( Mr. Shaw) that he had never said he would uncondition-
ally abandon the second petition, but merely that he
would do so, if he succeeded with the petition of Mon-
day last—( Hear, hear)—and he had-accordingly posted up his
notices to that effect. The securities to the petitions had also
been objected to most unexpectedly, as no notice had been
given of those objections. The agent required time to re-
ply to those objections, and as those objections had been
made, he then thought it proper and justifiable to return
to the second petition, especially as the securities upon it were
exactly the saute as upon the third, and it would save the
trouble and delay of sending to Dublin on the subject. The
agent had, therefore, proceeded that day on the second petition.
The petitioners were prepared to go on with all of the peti-
tions to-morrow ; and he left it, therefore, to the House, see-
ing that many of his witnesses had come from a great distance,
and at great expense, whether this petition ought to he put off,
Mr. O'C 0 NNE L L said it was necessary to have the facts.
The first was, whether a week ago the agent employed on
this affair did not volunteer to state that he abandoned
this petition of the 4th of March,• on which he has this in-
stant given security. —( Hear, hear.) There were four persons
present, and could make their depositions on oath that
he stated his positive, decided, and unequivocal abandonment
of this petition. Now the sureties were the same in both pe-
titions; and how then could he state, as the Right Hon-
ourable Gentleman says he did, that he would give
up the first, provided that the sureties were
approved of in the second ?—(Cheers.) Now the next fact
was, that the Hon. Gentleman said he posted the notice on
Saturday last. He did not, for he ( Mr. O'C.) went into the
office on Saturday last, and there was no such thing there.
Mr. SHAW rose at this moment to make some explana-
tion:—( Cries of " Order.")

Mr. O'CONNELL—Don't interrupt me Sir, you have
more zeal than discretion. The Hon. Gentleman said he would
repeat that the agent had declared the petition of the 4th
March should be abandoned, as well as that the notice was not
posted until Monday last. In consequence, a week having been
allowed him, and it being stated to him that the petitioners
did not proceed on this one, he wrote off to Dublin to stop
his witnesses, and his principal managing agent in this
case. If, therefore, be were even to be defeated
as the case then stood, he thought it would be highly unjust
as it was impossible he could have his statement ready for to-
morrow. Tuesday had been fixed for a. consultation, but in
consequence of that declaration the consultation was not
held.—( Hear, hear.) There would be a complete denial of
justice, if after the statement of these facts his request
was refused, and the author of the letter was not
of so great authority as to be sufficient to deprive
him of justice.--( Hear.) There were four persons present
at the time the first declaration was made, and two during the
other, and on the faith of those declarations he had neglected
to prepare himself with the necessary evidence. If this
dexterity succeeded, he would be deprived of all opportunity
of proceeding to justify himself under the statute.—( Hear.)
Mr. SHAW explained that what he had stated was, that
on Saturday a notice was posted up of that which was to occur
on Monday.
Mr. O'CONNELL—Let me set you right.—(Cries of
" Order.")
Mr. SHAW—It is the Hon. Gentleman who seems to have
more zeal than discretion.—( Laughter.) The list appeared
to have been posted up on Saturday, for the purpose of re-
ference on Monday.
Mr. O'CONNELL said the reason he spoke of Saturday
was that, after he came into the House on Monday evening, he
discovered that the notice was posted up, and went to inquire
whether the agent had been guilty of any tricks ; but he
found that it was not the act of the agent at all, but
of the clerk in the office, who posted the notice'
without any communication. He was in the hands of the
House, and in two minutes he could have the witnesses at
the bar to state that the declaration was perfectly
voluntary and unconditional, altogether and entirely, and upon
that declaration he had refrained from proceeding. This pe-
tition also contained details impeaching the conduct of the
revising banisters, and it was necessary to collect evidence to
meet those charges. If the House thought it necessary, he
could in five minutes produce witnesses to sustain the allega-
tions he had made, but such severity of proceeding was rather
unusual.

Mr. S. RICE would admit that the Hon. and Learned

Gentleman had a right to attest the fact, but the mode of doing
so was another affair.—( Hear, hear, hear.) If any member
had been, through misinformation on the part of his agent,
led into error, he thought the House, for the sake of its own
privileges would not refuse' to afford the necessary protection,
He bad never seen any party spirit displayed on them