The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-14 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, Juzr 13.

Mr. PERRIN replied in the negative. 1-k had consulted
with his predecessor (Mr. Blackburne), and they were both
of opinion that on the principle that a man should not be tried
twice for the same offence no prosecution would be instituted
by the Government. The Lon. Member entered at some
length into the history of the transaction in which Slevin was
implicated, but from the low tone in which he spoke we could
not catch the particulars.
In answer to a question from Col. PERCIVAL,
Mr. PERRIN said the Government did not intend to enter
a nolle prosequi.
Mr. O'CONNELL had a petition to present from Slevin,
but would not do so after the explanation that had been
given.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped that if any prosecution
took place, it would riot be by private individuals, but by the
law officers of the Crown, or some responsible person autho-
rized by them. ,
Col. VERNER wished to ask the Attorney-General of
Ireland, if thd,-sentence of transportation upon two persons
who were convicted at the last Armagh Session, of a violent
assault, had been commuted.

Mr. PERRIN made a reply which was totally inaudible in
the gallery.
• Mr. O'CONNELL wished to ask whether any body bad
been arrested, or whether any prosecution had been instituted
against the persons who had burnt fourteen houses belonging
to Catholics, a few days after that assault?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was not aware of any
such circumstance. The assault took place on the 31st of
December or the Ist of January last.
Colonel VERNER—As the Hon. and Learned Member,
has thought proper to introduce this subject on one or two'
occasions,—( Cries of " Order, order," in the midst of which
the Hon. Member sat down.)
The SPEAKER called tho Hon. Member to order.
Mr. O'CONNELL—I want an answer to my question re.;
specting the 14 houses which were burnt on the 14th of Ja-,
nuary.—( Hear.)

Colonel VERNER srid, that it was a fact that two of the
houses were set fire io by their occupants.

CORPORATION BILL.

In 'answer to a question from Sir R. PEEL,
Lord J. RUSSELL said he should move the 3d reading
of the Corporation Bill on Friday, and Irish Church Bill would
be brought on on Monday next. The Report on the Corpo-
ration Bill would be brought up to-morrow, but if it could not
be read a third time on Friday, it would be necessary to bring
it on the first thin.. on Monday. . . . .
Mr. WILK S thought it would be impossible in one.meeting
to go through the various discussions.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think it would occupy so much
time. If it did it would then be time enough to take a dif-
ferent course.—( Hear, bear.)
Mr. D. if A R VI, Y gave notice, that he wou:<l move on the
Rerort be* brought up, that a sum of 40,000!. being the in-
terest on the million advanced to the Irish clergy be raised by
an additional charge upon the property of Ireland, subject to
the poll ta4.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice that unless some order was
issued from the Horse Guards to prevent soldiers not on duty
wearing their side arms, he should, on The next occasion of
the House going into a Commitee of Supply, move that an
address be presented to his Majesty, praying that an order to
that effect be issued.

Lord J. RUSSELL, suggested that it be referred to the
Committee sitting on Military Punishments.
HIS MAJESTY'S ASSENT TO THE IRISH_
CHURCH BILL.
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, I have been directed by his
Majesty to announce to this House, that his Majesty has
been most graciously pleased to place at the disposal of Par-
liament his Majesty's interest in all benefices in the Church
of Ireland.—(Tremendous cheering.)
The Bill was then read a second time, and the House went
into C9lrmittee on .the Bill pro forma.
Sir-ROBERT PEEL—Suppose the Corporation Bill is
not read a third time on Friday, and should take up some of
the time of the House on Monday, then he supposed this Bill
would not go into Committee till Tuesday.
Lord J. RUSSELL, certainly.
Mr. IIIjME hoped that if the Corporation Bill was not
read on Friday, that the House would meet for that purpose on
Saturday.—( Cries of " Oh, oh,"-with Hear.")
REFORM OF PARLIAMENt (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Sir GEORGE CLERK gave nolice, that unless some
change Were made in the mode of registration provided in the
Reform of Parliament (Scotland) Bill, he should certainly
oppose the second reading of the measure.
The LORD ADVOCATE made some obscrvationi on the
subject, which were inaudible in the gallery.
MISCELLANEOUS F,STINIATES.
Oa the motion of Mr. BARING, the House then resolved
itself into a Committee of Supply.
'rho first resolution proposed was, " That a sum not ex-
ceeding 7,4171. Is. Bd., be granted tohis Majesty for defraying
the expenses of the settlement in Western Australia, from
the Ist of April, 1835, to the 31st of March, 183 G."
Mr. HUME strongly protested against this grant, which
was in violation of the pledge given on the establishment of
the colony. He wished to know how many of the original
settlers remaided? They should either withdraw, or be com-
pelled to support themselves.
Mr. BARING, as we understood the lion. Gentleman, was
not prepared to give the Hon. Member for Middlesex the in-
formation which he required.
Mr. HUME was of opinion.that, under those circumstances
it would be expedient to postpone the resolution until the ne-
cessary information could be obtained.
Mr. HORACE MISS observed, that all the persons in
the colony would be ruined, if the grant were withheld.
A discussion followed, in which Mr. Hume, Mr. Twiss, Lord
John Russell, Sir George Grey, and Mr. Ewart, participated ;
but it was carried on in so conversational a tone, as to be inca-
pable of report.
Mr. ROEBUCK maintained, that the expense under con-
sideration was incurred only for the purpose of creating places.
Sir GEORGE GREY denied that that was the case.
Mr. HUME observed, that it had been a private specuJa-
tion of Mr. Peel's, and he could see no reason why the country
should be called upon, year after year, to pay so much money
for it.

Mr. ROEB LTCK urged the postponement of the Resolution.
Mr. WARBURTON asked why, as the colony of Western
Australia was established, not under Government, but tmderpri-
vete auspices, it should have an establishment like that at
Southern Australia, which was a Government colony ?
Mr. HUME moved, as an amendment, " That the sum' be
reduced to the grant of last year—namely, 5,806/. .ss.
After a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER, which were not audible in the gallery,
Mr. HUME said he would not press the Committee to' a
division on that occasion ; but on the bringing up of the Re-
port, he should feel it to be his duty to take the sense of the
House upon the point.
The vote was then agreed to.
On the question that 20,000/. be granted to defray the ex-
pense of the Indian Department of Upper and LOWer Canada,
Mr. ROEBUCK rose to object to the vote. It was quite
apparent that the 20,000/. 'were given away for nothing at all.
The Indians, on whora
it was bestowed, were an idle, drunken
disaelute race- ''Oy whom no sort of service was performed, and
Trorn "tom •
no service could be expected.
...--
Sir G. GREY observed, that the money was given for past
services during the war.
ROEBUCK replied, that though it might be well to
remunerate, those by whom an actual service was perfol•mecl,
he saw no reason why we should continue the same sort of
remuneration to their descendants. Therefore, tutiess some
Baronetthan(Sir
that
Gy): should
ha..edb offeredould
George
, proposed to be given as presents to
by better
the refazsi
Fight
the Indians, be deducted from the vete.
Mr. HUME did not so much object to the maintenance d
g" colulledn b.
cgive
n
move that the 15,300/.
faith with the Indians, as far as the iresants went; but he
could not under tend how a staff, costing 4,700/, could be nee