The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-08 00:00:00

BRISTOL.

Mr. BAILLIE brought up the report of the Bristol
Police Committee, and obtained leave to bring in a Bill
to establish an effectual police in that city. He
also brought up the report of the Bristol Compensation
Committee, End obtained leave to bring in a Bill for the
more effectually providing compensation for the damages
sustained in Bristol during the late disturbance.
On the motion of Lord SANDON the Lill for extending
the powers of the Manchester and Liverpool Railway was
read a first time.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the
parish of Newtown, Kildare, complaining of the
tithe system, and praying that as there was not a single
Protestant in that parish the parishioners should not be
compelled to pay tithes.. Also petitions from individuals
of a parish iu Kerry, and from a parish in Kilmore.
The 14on. and Learned Member awed a fact that came
before him professionally when he was last in Ireland—a
poor man had a small pi,ce of land for which twelve
shillings were demanded as tithes; he refused to pay that
sum, and offered 6s. 6d. The next thing he heard of was
that he was wade a party to a bill in Exchequer, and upon
his wishing for a copy of the bill he was told that it
would cost 81.

Mr. SHAW knew the case referred to, and knew alto
that the clergyman had not resorted to that step until he

Mr. O'CONNELL said that no measures had been
taken until the bill was filed. Ile could not help saying,
that as there were plenty of wealthy men in the parish
who had refused to pay the tithes, it would have been far
Netter to have selected some of them with whom to try
the question, than to have proceeded against that poor man.
Mr. GRATTAN supported the prayer of the peti-
tions, which were then ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. O'CONNELL then presented a petition from the
inhabitants of the manor of Grange-Gorman, in Dublin,
upon the Reform Bill. The petitioners were in favour of
the English Reform Bill, and also of the Iri-h Reform
Bill, so far as it went, but they regretted, that while the
English Bill was so enlarged and liberal, the Irish Bill was
so limited, and they complained that very gross partiality
had been exercised.
Mr. HUNT was astonished that these Irishmen were so
fond of the English Bill, of which they must know but
little, for it excluded seven million of persona from the re-
presentation. He thought that these Irishmen should
leave the English to legislate for themselves.
Sir J. M. DOYLE said a few words, which were in-
audible in the gallery.
Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that the people of Ireland
perfectly understood and approved of the English Reform
Bill; and all that they required was, that Ireland should
have the same benefits conferred upon it as were given to
the people of England. For himself, he supported the
English Bill because it destroyed nomination, and substi-
tuted for it real representation.

The IION. MEMBER then presented petitions from a
parish in Tipperary, and also from Castlehar, praying to
be allowed to send representatives on account of their
growing wealth and improvement.
After a few observations from Mr. D. BROWN, the pe—
tition was ordered to lie or. the table.

Mr. O'CONNELL then presented a petition from the
members of the National Trades' Political Union in Dubin,
complaining of Ireland not having given to it under the
Reform Bill the same species of constituency as England,
stating also that the people of the sister country would not
be satisfied with less than 125 Members. He also pre-
sented anether petition from Little Bolton, praying
that the time for the labour of children in manufactories
might be shortened. He most cordially concurred with
the prayer of the petition, and would give the Bill intro-
duced by the Hon. Member for Boroug-hbridge his most
hearty support.
Mr. HUNT had been written to by the gentlemen of
Bolton, requesting him to support the prayer of the peti-
tion. He trusted the Bill of the Member for Borough-
bridge would pass unanimously through that House ; for,
in his opinion, nothing could be more preposterous
or cruel than the manner in which young children were
made to work in the manufactories of the country.
Colonel TORRENS would give the petitio❑ his most
cordial support.
Mr. SHELL trusted that the Hon. Member for Bo-
roughbridge would not omit any opportunity to bring
forward his Bill. It was of so important a nature that it
required to be passed as soon as possible.
Mr. SADLER was most anxious to bring the subject
forward, and it rested entirely With his Majesty's Ministers
when be should do so. He was sure that when the atro-
cities now complained of were brought before the public,
they would he put a stop to, and the House might rest as-
sured no opportunity on his part should be let slip, of bring-
ing the subject before the House.

Mr. O'CONNELL moved for returns connected with the
Courts of Law and Equity in Ireland.
Mr. WRANGHAM presented a petition from a parish
in York, against the Registration Bill. The Hon. Mem-
ber considered the subject required the most dispassionate
inquiry on the part of the House.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY thought there was little chance
of the success of this measure, till full time had been given
to have its merits inquired into, He would, there-
fore, suggest to the Honourable Member for Staf-
ford the propriety of appointing a Committee up
stairs, to consist of gentlemen connected with
the landed interest in the country, aided by professional
gentlemen, before whom they might have depositions as
to the propriety or inconvenience of the measure. If the
Hon. Member did not think fit to adopt that course, there
was very little chance of the measure succeeding, as the
attention of the House and the country was so much ab-
sorbed on the question of Reform at the present moment.
Mr. CAMPBELL would be very glad, after the. Bill
had been read a second time, to have it referred to a Com-
mittee up stairs, but he was desirous before that to have
a full and ample discussion upon its merits.
Mr. BAINBRIDGE presented a petition against the
General Registry Bill, from the land-owners of Taunton,
in Somerset.
Mr. SADLER wished to call the attention of the House
to a petition which had peculiar claims upon the Legi,la-
tore. The object of the petition was to have some legis-
lative enactment to regulate the labour of infants in mills
and manufactories. He (Mr. Sadler) believed that every
one of the allegations in the petition were substantially
true, and well merited the consideration of the House.
The petition came from Bradford, and was signed by be-
tween nine and ten thousand most respectable and intelli-
gent individuals, comprising all the medical gentlemen in
the town and neighbourhood, all the ministers belonging
to the church, as well as their dissenting brethren, and
also by a great number of the masters of extensive
public manufactories themselves. They alleged that
the present condition of infants labouring in public manu-
factories was one of extreme hardship, and tended alike to
injure their health, destroy their morals, and prevent that
mental improvement which could alone fit them for being
afterwards respectable and useful members of society.
He fully coincided with these views, and he hoped
when the subject was brought (as it would be shortly)
before the consideration of the House, that some enact-
ment would be passed to alleviate and remove the evil
complained of.
Mr. STRICKLAND did not blame the masters of the
manufactories alluded to ; because the evil had entirely, as
he considered, originated in competition and the employ-
ment of machinery. He felt convinced, however, that kind
feeling, humanity, and sound policy, required some legis-
lative enactment on this subject. He fervently hoped
that some provision would speedily be made to meet the
grievance so justly complained of.
Mr. HUNT, after asserting that many signatures to a
petition presented on a former occasion by Lord Morpeth
were forged, alluded to a petition attempted to be pre-
sented last night by Mr. Strickland, from a person named
Smithson, of Leeds, in which a statement made on a for-
mer night by himself (Mr. Hunt), as to Smithson's
having roasted the Bible, was denied ; the Hon. Member
now stated that he would, if an opportunity was afforded
him, prove at the bar of the House that his first
statement was correct. He complained that the Hon.
Member, Mr. Strickland, had not observed the usual
courtesy and shown him the petition before it was pre-
sented. _ _ _ _ .

-----
Mr. STRICKLAND denied that be bad been guilty of
any want of courtesy to the Honourable Member ;
he only received the petition yeaterday morning,
and brought it down to the House, when he told the
Hon. Member the nature of it.—(" No, no !" from Mr.
Hunt.) He repeated, that he told the Hon. Member the
nature of the petition, any if he had asked to see it, he
should have been welcome to read it. . _ .

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the tide-
surveyors and tide-waiters who had been transferred from
Dublin to the port of London, in which they made
out a case which deserved the attention of the House.
lie pledged himself that there were cases of individual
suffering that would almost break the heart of any man
to hear their recital. He would not specify them, but he
would state, that in 1825 it was contemplated by Lard
Goderich to remove the petitioners from Dublin to London,
and hopes were held out to them that their situa-
tion would be made much better. They found, how-
ever, after their removal, that their salaries were
reduced more than one-third; those whose salaries had
been 80/. were reduced to 50/. ; those of 60/. to 40/. ;
and upon those reduced salaries they were to subsist in a
country where the necessaries of life were 150 per cent.
dearer than in Ireland. Besides, in Ireland they had 3s.
a-day, besides an allowance by the Statute of the 46th
of George 111., chap. 87, which they did not now re-
ceive. Their situation was rendered the more disagreeable
by their contrast with the English officers, whose salaries
had been raised, those of 401. to 501. and those of 301. tcs
4,0 i., and their daily pay was increased from Is. 6d. to
3s. 6d. In addition to all this the petitioners were bound
to furnish themselves with two suits of clothes a year out
of their scanty pay, and one of them, who hail eleven
children, found that, after paying for his clothes, out
of a quarter's salary he had only about 304., with
which to support his large family. Their condition was
truly melancholy. It might be said they were not bound
to come to this country; true, but they had been for
many yeats in the service of the revenue, they had aban-
doned every other occupation, and having, many of them,
grown old in the service, they were unfit for say thing
else. They threw themselves on the humanity o e
House and of Government to take their case
sideration.
unfLaoirrndessA Lw't Ha
teOvßerPa.bebge
tg,evdeento
thsetaEtengtlllieshre
and
d Irish
on o

he subject, because the English and Irish had been placed
exactly on an equal footing, and both received the same
salaries that former officers had received who had been en-
gaged in discharging the same duties.
Mr. SPRING RICE could not conceive that there had
been anything but justice, and the most perfect fairness,
throughout the transaction. All that the Hon. Gentleman
opposite seemed to desire was to have fair play as be-
tween the English and Irish, and there could be
no doubt that the most even-handed justice had been
dealt only. With respect to the removal of the Irish
horn a cheap place to a place where the necessaries of life
were much dearer, it was utt rly impossible in dealing
with the Customs or Excise to make a scale of salary
adapted for every different circumstance and every different
situation.
Mr. 0 CONNELL, in moving that the petition do lie
on the table, observed that the justice in this case was
the moat extraordinary justice that had been heard of.
It might be called justice for the Irish, but such a course
of proceeding could not be considered justice towards
any other human beings under the sun ; and there
was nothing that operated so much on the minds of
the Irish people, as to observe this sort of partiality
and justice. The petitioners from Ireland had had
higher salaries--they now had lower ; they had been re-
moved from a cheap country to one where every thing
was 150 per cent. dearer, and they now, forsooth, were
to be told by the British Parliament that that was justice;
a greater mistake could not be conceived ; and he' sin-
cerely trusted the subject would yet meet with something
like humane consideration by the Legislature.
Mr. HUNT said it appeared to him, from the Ho-
nourable and Learned Gentleman'. statement behind him,
that in Ireland there had been certain officers who had
been paid too high salaries--that there had been the same
sort of officers in England at salaries too low—
an,' that his Majesty's Government had now thought
proper to equalize the condition of those officers. At all
events, to his (Mr. Hunt's) ear this sounded like nothing
but justice. If there was any injustice in it, the injustice
was towards the English, and consisted in bringing over
to this country (which he regretted as much as any man
could do) the Irish people from their own dear country.
Mr. SHAW said, the Hon. Member for Preston bad
spoken in entire ignorance of the real facts. Persons in
the higher class in Ireland had been removed from hence,
and put into a lower situation; and it was a subject of
almost universal complaint throughout Ireland, that all
their public departments were filled with strangers.
He could not help, when he heard the Secretary for the
Treasury opposite boasting that the reductions which had
taken place in Ireland were in the highest offices, recollect-
ing many cases within his own knowledge where the greatest
injustice had been done to persons in the lower situations.
This injustice occurred very frequently in the revenue.
He had known it to occur particularly in the Post-office ;
where all the lower situations were tilled with Scotch and

Endi.h strangers who bad been sent there by some per-
sons or other, and since that packing had taken place, it
was a❑ universal complaint that the letters and newspa-
pers there were never delivered so soon, or with such assi-
duity, as they hail previously been.
Mr. LEADER also, in support of the petition, com-
plained of the Injustice which the petitioners represented
t tey were experiencing.
Mr. S. RICE could assure his Hon. Friends who had
supported the petition, that the statements which had been
made were very much exaggerated. On the part of the
Board, under whose authority he acted, he might also
state that attention should he paid to the subject, for the
purpose of having fair play done to all parties. An Hon.
Meml er had made allusion to the Irish Post-office, but
be ought to bring the subject regularly before the House,
and he should be prepared to defend the system that had
been adopted in all its branches by his Noble Friend (the
Postmaster-General), whereby an annual reduction
in the establishment had been effected of 600,0001., a
consideration which would undoubtedly have great weight
with the House of Commons.

3lr. O'CONNELL said if the case of the present peti.
tioners received consideration on its own merits, his object
in bringing it forward would be accomplished.
Mr. HUME felt great objection to the present system
of paying public officers by means of fees, and wished
to submit a motion upon the subject. It was not
a new subject of complaint. In the times of Burke it was
a crying evil. To have the officers paid by fixed
salaries would be greatly promoting the despatch of
business, and be more satisfactory to the public service.
It appeared by a return, that in 1826 and 1827, the amount
of fees regulated by Act of Parliament, and brought to the
public account, amounted to 130,1271., whilst the amount
of fees not so regulated, at the will and pleasure of the
officer at the head of the department, but admitted to be
received, was 165,0001. In order, therefore, to pre-
pare for a motion on the subject, he would move now
for a return of the amount of all fees for the last '
two years collected in any of the public offices of
the United Kingdom, regulated and not regulated by Act
of Parliament.
The motion was agreed to.

Mr. HUME, adverting to the Bill which he bad brought
in on the subject of the fees charged to individuals for the
renewal of their offices and commissions on the death of his
late Majesty, expressed his disappointment at the failure of
the Bill to prevent the imposition against which it was
directed. He complained that the late Government had
misinterpreted the Act. In 1812, Mr. Ponsonby intro-
duced an Act, providing that, on the demise of George
111., no fees should be required from individuals on the
renewal of any office or commission. The provisions of
that Act had been strictly complied with. Previous to
the demise of his late Majesty, be (Mr. Hume) had brought
in a Bill of a similar nature, the passing of which, how-
ever, had been delayed until after the Royal demise. The
Hon. Member here read two clauses of the Act in ques-
tion, the one prohibiting all fees on the renewal of offices
or commissions, the other admitting that some allowance
should be made for the expellee of parchment, paper, and
other materials. The Treasury, without having the tables
of the fees charged before them, directed, with reference
to the latter clause, and by one sweeping recommendation,
that half the amount of the fees should be taken as that
allowance. In exemplification of the evils arising from
the system of fees, the Hon. Member read extracts of a
memorial on the subject to the Lords of the Treasury
from the Yeomen of his Majesty's Guard. Every Yeoman
of the Guard—and, be it remembered, his place had cost
him :3471.—paid fees to the amount of 91. 19s. 6d., claimed
for the renewal of his commission on the accession of
William IV. It was high time that the sale of these and all
other offices should be put an end to. The greater part of
the 3471. to which he bad alluded went to the Captain of
the Guard, who thereby obtained about 1,000/. a year; fur
there were a hundred yeomen of the guard, and the aver-
age of annual casualties was three or four. The salary was
only 391. 181. 4d. The answer made to the memorial by
the Treasury (signed John Stewart) was to the effect that
the fees on the re-appointment of the memorialists bad been
correctly charged according to the Act of Parliament. He
(Mr. Hume) contended that those charges were not accord-
ing to the Act of Parliament—that they were overcharges.
After enumerating the various items in addition to 3151.
given to the Captain of the Guard, of which the sum of
347/. 10s., paid by one of the yeomen for his original
appointment, was made up, the Hon. Gentleman pro-
ceeded to observe, that the time was rapidly approaching
when it would behove Parliament to take into serious con-
sideration the abolition of fees of all kinds. He thought
that the fees of that House were a reproach to it. He had
never had a Private Bill to conduct without having had to
pay fees to the amount of 2401, on a single Bill, 4001. on a
double Bill, and 6001. on a treble Bill ; and the latter
merely, perhaps, because there was an additional clause in-
troduced. To his knowledge, there were several parishes
oppressed by rates, which, nevertheless, owing to the amount
of the fees, were unable to approach the House for the pur-
pose of regulating them. All the lees paid in that House,
however, were paid according to law ; not so the fees paid
elsewhere. In order that the subject might be fully betore
the House, he would move an humble address to his Ma-
jesty, praying that be would be graciously pleased to order
that there be laid before the Hones an account of the
several fees and stamp duties now charged on the appoint-
ment to every office, commission, grant, &c. civil, mili-
tary, or ecclesiastical, within the kingdoms of England,
Ireland, and Wales, the town of Berwick, the islands of
Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, and Sark, the foreign posses-
sions of his Majesty, &c., also to whom, and by what
authority, those fees were paid, &c.
Lord ALTHORP could not call upon private persons
not connected with the Crown to give an account of their
emoluments. He suggested that the Hon. Member should
insert the words " under the Crown," and add " together
with the appropriation."
Mr. GOULBURN protested against the Hon. Member's
using his (Mr. H.'s) own farrago of a Bill instead of the
Act itself.—The motion was agreed to.
Mr. HUME moved for a co 2y of the Insolven` Act of
New South Wales, with the correspondence of Government
thereupon. He stated that his object was to show that
certain very exceptionable persons had been appointed ley
the Governors of Colonies, and he particularly alluded to
certain officers in New South Wales, who had taken the
benefit of General Darling's Insolvent Act, and were yet
retained in their situations.
Lord HOWICK did not intend to offer the least oppo-
sition to the motion. He wished, however, to state that
the persons alluded to were no longer in office ; and that

the recall of General Dailing at thi expiration of his six
y-ars, in conformity with Mr. Huskiason's Act, implied no
censure.

MAGISTRATES OF IRELAND.

Colonel PERCEVAL moved for a copy of any general
warrant made by the Secretary of the Irish Lord Chan-
cellor, for the county of Sligo ; also, for a return of the
number of Dedimus issued therefrom ; and, also, for the
number of separate warrants, if any, that were issued.
He complained, in the name of the Magistrates of Ireland,
of the fees dem ended upon the renewal of their commis-
sions as an odious, vexatious, and most unjust exaction.
He contended that the charges were unfounded in law;
and fully disclaiming all idea of offering personal offence to
the Lord Chancellor, accused him, in his public character,
of countenancing an odious exaction.
Sir R. BATESON seconded the motion.
Mr. STANLEY would not make the slightest opposi-
tion to the motion, and observed that the duty of regula-
ting these fees did not appertain to the Secretary for
Ireland. Charges had often been made against the pre-
sent Government without the slightest foundation. One
charge was, that the Government had sent a letter to the

Lords Lieutenants of the different counties, desiring them
not to appoint clergymen to commissions of the peace. It
had been asked why that letter was not produced ? The
answer was, that there was no such letter ; but when he
denied the charge put forward, he could not but say, at
the same time, that, under the peculiar circumstances in
which Ireland was at present placed, he could not help
thinking that the fewer the clerical Magistrates appointed
tke better.—(Hear, hear.) He wished, too, to answer
another charge that he knew had been brought against the
Government : it was this, that they had not given notice
to the Magistrates of Sligo that the old commissions were

at an end. He denied that charge. The best notice that
the Government could give had been given. The Magistrates
were informed of the recently passed Act of Parliament,
by the provisions of which it was distinctly directed
that their commissions should cease on a certain day. A
question had been asked about the payment of fees by the
Magistrate, and the payment of fees on the general war-
rant of each county, and a charge had been made against
the Chancellor for receiving these fees. Now he begged
to say, in the most distinct terms, that the Chancellor did
not receive one shilling of the money—(Hear, hear)—but
according to the Act of Parliament, the Chancellor's Se-
cretary was entititled to a certain fee for each war:ant
issued to each Magistrate. He admitted that there was
an objection to the system itself, and that the Irish Ma •
gistrates ought not to pay more for their warrants of ap-
pointment than was paid by the Magistrates of England
under similar circumstances ; but still, if the fees de-

,
mended were legally due, he must say that the Magis-
trates did not set a good example to the people if they
showed the people that they could resist payments illegally
imposed, and by that resistance could defeat the law
and embarrass the Government.—(Cheers.) They had
heard a great deal of the resistance of the people to the
payment of tithes. No man condemned that resistance
more than he did ; but let those who condemned them in
the strongest terms—let those who cried out against the
lower classes—let those who assumed to be the exclusively
loyal gentlemen of Ireland, beware bow they encourage the
people of Ireland in resistance to the law.—(Cheers.)
Colonel CONOLLY asserted that all the blame in this
matter was attributed to the Treasury, who had issued
the order for the payment of these fees, and not to the
Chancellor. He himself had not taken out his com-
mission. These fees ought to be remitted, and the Trea-
sury might remit them. He asserted that the Magistrates
had been very ill treated by the Government.
Mr. STANLEY, in explanation, said, that the course
the Magistrates ought to have pursued was to pay the fees,
and then to remonstrate against the legality of the charge.
The Magistrates complained of the lawless state of the
country. Why they might have put themselves i❑ the
situation of removing that state by the payment of V. 13a.6d.
Sir R. BATESON disclaimed having had any personal
motives in what he had said.
Colonel CONOLLY re-asserted that the Magistrates
were not properly supported by the Government.
Lord ALTHORP wished to state the course which the
Treasury meant to pursue on the present occasion. The
Treasury had issued a minute on the subject, by which
only such a sum was to be taken for the trouble incurred
as would afford a fair compensation for that trouble. The
present Treasury had, in their communication with the
Irish Government, enclosed the minute of a former Treasury
and had adopted that as the guide of their proceedings.
Mr. SHEIL remarke on the evident inconsistency
which existed between I-lon. Members on the subject.
One Hon. Member had not taken out his commission on
account of these fees. He should like to ask that Hon.
Member whether he was a Magistrate at the time of the
death of George HI. ?—[The Hon. Member answered that
he was.) What then was the fee which he had paid on
the renewal of his commission ?—[The Hon. Member
answered, None.l At least, then, the Hon. Member could
❑ot deny that this fee was legal, for it was imposed by Act
of Parliament. If legal, it should have been paid ; and if
illegal, still it should have been paid, though under a pro-
test, and a complaint to Parliament would at wise have
redressed the illegality. The Hon and Learned Member
expressed his full concurrence with the comparison which
had been drawn by the Right Hun. Secretary for Ireland,
between the resistance of the payment of these fees, and
the resistance of the payment of tithes.

lonel CONOLLY had entered into no combination of
the sort in the county with which he was more particularly
connected, for he was at variance with all the Magistrates
of the county.—(Much laughter.) He had only declined
to take out his commission in order that he might wait to
see what was done.

Mr. SHAW said, that the question was not one as to
the legality or illegality of the fee. The question was,
whether the separate warrants to each Magistrate should
issue at all? He contended that there was no necessity for
separate warrants. The Act said, that those who made
out the warrants should be remunerated ; but he denied
that it was their duty to make out separate warrants. He
took a distinction between the general deditnus and the
separate warrant to each Magistrate. He condemned
Government in this matter.

Mr. CRAMPTON said, that the question really was
nothing more than a question between certain magistrates
of Ireland and certain officers of the Court of Chancery in
Ireland. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite had
put the question on the narrow ground of the necessity of
issuing a separate warrant for each magistrate. Such
warrants had been for time immemorial used.
Sir E. SUGDEN said, that the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman (rsir. Cratnpton) had, in his argument, begged
the whole question ; for he had assumed all through that
the payment of these fees was legal. That was the very
point at issue. As to the amount being paltry, that was
of very little consequence ; for an English gentleman, if
the sum involved only amounted to three pence, would not
submit to that demand if he thought it was an extortion.
Mr. RUTHVEN complained of the attacks made on
the magistracy of Ireland ; and he especially objected to the
sweeping condemnation of the alleged combination of the
magistracy not to pay legal demands ; be had not yet paid
his fees; but that had entirely arisen from accident, and
he therefore thought that he had a right to complain.
Mr. O'CONNELL pledged his reputation as a lawyer,
that the demand of these fees was illegal.
Colonel PERCEVAL replied; and complained of the
taunting manner in which he had been treated by the
Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland.—Motion agreed to.

On the motion of Mr. CROKER, further returns were
ordered, to show the dates of the general warrants issued
for each county i❑ Ireland ; and the copy of the letter of
the Secretary of the Irish Lord Chancellor to the magis-
trates of counties.