The Sun.
London, England, 1832-07-03 00:00:00

IRISH REFORM BILL.

Mr. PEARSON then proposed a petition to the House of
Commons, which was to the effect that the Irish Reform
Bill might be made in all it, essential provisions, con-
formable with the English Bill.
Mr. GALLOWAY seconded the proposition, which, after
a long debate, was agreed to.

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

IMPERIALPARLIAMENT

THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Oa the motion of Lori MORPETH the Lords' Amend•
ments to the Ossett Soke Bill were read a second time.

Mr. SHAW presented three petitions from the Mem-
bers of the Schomberg Roy4l Orange Lodge, No. 1690,--
one against the Irish Reform Bill, the second against the
Party Processions Bill, and the third against the Govern-
ment plan of education in Ireland.

Mr. C. CALVERT presented a petition from the
Rector, Churchwardens, and Overseers, of the parish of St.
Olive, Southwark, complaining of the influx of Irish
poor, and praying that some law may be enacted to
afford relief to the Irish poor, and also to alter the law
regarding the issue of marriages celebrated in this coun-
try between Protestants and Catholics by Catholic priests.
The Hon. Member said, that this parish was much bur,
thened with poor rates, chiefly caused by the influx of
Irish poor. The population of St. Olave was only ab. ut
9,000 person., of whom 3,000 were Irish poor, and the
moiety of the fund raised for the poor rate was given to
the Irish poor.
Mr. DAWSON wished that before the gentlemen of St.
Olave's or any other parish, prayed for the removal of It ish
poor they would consider what service that class rendered
to England. The public derived great advantage trom
their labour, and, therefore, when any casualty befel them,
they ought to be chargeable to the poor-rates. So long
as the Union lasted (and God only knew how long that
would be) the Irish who came to this country were as
much entitled to the pro-ection of the laws as any person
coming from Northumberland or any other place at a
distance.—(Hear, hear.) If the poor were to he trans-
ported to Ireland, why not also transport the rich
who were spending in this country the millions wrung
from Ireland ? As long as that system was continued, let
them not hear from the churchwardens of any parish that
the Irish poor were a burden on the country, but rather
let some person state the benefits derived by this country
from the rich Irish, as well as from the labours of the
poor Irish. He for one did not wish to set himself against
a system of poor laws in Ireland, hut he set himself against
the introduction of such a system as was practised in Eng-
land.
After a few observations from the O'CONNER DoN and
Mr. BLACKNEY,

Mr. CALVERT assured the House that the petition
did not complain of the Irish who laboured and spent their
money in this country, but of those who came into the
parish one week and applied for relief the next. The
rate in St. Olave's was 6,0001. a year, of which 3,0001.
was expended on this description of persons.
After some observations from Mr. H. Grattan, Mr.
Shaw, Colonel Perceval, and Mr. G. Dawson, the petition
was ordered to printed.
Mr. GEORGE DAWSON regretted that none of his
Majesty's Ministers were present, as he wished to know
whether they intended to make any alterations in the law
relative to Roman Catholic marriages. As the law at pre-
sent existed, he believed no Roman Catholic marriage was
legal, unless the parties were re-married by a clerryman of
the Established Church.

Lord KILLEEN was happy to inform the Right Hon.
Member that a Bill was about to be brought forward to
remedy the evil complained of.
Mr. CALVERT presented petitions from the church.
wardens of the parishes of St. Olive and St. George the
Martyr, Southwark, against the Bill for the removal of
Scotch and Irish vagrants.
Captain GORDON presented petitions front Dews-
bury and other places, against the Government plan of
education for Ireland ; two petitions, one from New-
castle and the other from Stirling, against the grant to the
College of Maynooth ; also from Newcastle, against slavery.
Sir A. AGNEW presented a petition from Watford,
praying the House to adopt measures for the due observ-
ance of the Sabbath.

Mr. WESTENRA presented petitions from Monaghan,
in favour of Ii ish Education, and the Irish Reform Bill,
and against Tithes.

Lord AIORPETII presented a petition from Halifax,
against the Bill for the removal of Scotch and Irish Va-
grants._

Lord IL GROSVENOR presented a similar petition
Front Chester.

Mr. LEFROY presented a petition ft, m the Conserva-
tive Protestants of Ireland, and from a parish in Meath,
against the Irish Reform Bill ; also a petition from Sligo,
aeainst the system of education proposed by Gow-rnment
for Ireland.

Mr. RYDER presented a petition from Hetnel Hemp-
stead, Walton, and Stapleford, praying for the better ob-
servation of the S ibbath.

Mr. HOPE presented a petition from the workers in
mills at Douglass Green, against the Factory Bill.
Lord G. LENNOX would take the opportunity, while
nothing was before House, of correcting a mistake which
occurred some short time ago. On a discussion on the
the Boundary 13111 with respect to some place in Surrey,
the Editor of the Mirror of Parliament sent him a
speech for correction while he was not in the House on the
debate in question, and he returned the speech, at the
same time telling the &huff of the fact. However, that
gentleman was determined that a speech he should have, for
when he returned to town he was surprised to find that
his name was put to a speech in that paper in that debate
at which he ha.t already told the editor he was not pre-
sent, and unfortunately it happened that it was to
a speech with not one sentiment of which he could
agree. (Hear, hear, hear.) All he wished was that the
mistake should be corrected.
Mt. STANLEY said, that to facilitate the progress
of the Irish Boundaries Bill, and in order to meets me of
the objections made to it, he would to-morrow move for
a Select Committee to inquire into, and take into consi-
deration, the cases of Mallow, Dungarvon, and Youghall.
In answer to a question put by an Hos. MEmniut
(whose name we could not learn), with regard to the sur-
plus of the French Claan,,nts' Fund,

Lord ALTHORP said it w,is the intention of Govern-
ment to appoint other Commissioners to investigate tlyl
matter. The old Commissioners would not be contiuue.l

Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN then rose to move fo•
eer, ain pipers relative to the difference between the real and
,fficial value of export goods, and also to propose his reso-
' titiona (which have been before the public for some time) re
I ttive to the same subject. He said that since 1824, the de-
prociation in the real value of exported goods had amounted
upwards of 50 per cent., yet still the officially declare,!
value was continued at the same ratio as formerly. And
yet the question had never been thoroughly investigated it
:hat House. He did not call upon the House by the pre-
sent resolutions to pl-dge themselves to the expres
-,iou of any particular opinion, hut merely wished to bring
the subject fairly before the House. The depreciation in
prices had affected materially the indusarious classes of so-
ciety. It had been said that he was unfriendly to exports ;
bat that was unfounded; besides. the export trade should
never be forced. Distress now was general, it did not effect
particular branches merely, but all classes of society
The whole of the depreciation, the Hon. Alderman said,
was so much taken from labour : the labour of the
country, at two shillings a day, would be twenty-six
millions per month, which would have gone into cir-
culation among a variety of trades. That was a
calculation which had been made by a friend of
his. It was not the importation of foreign goods
alone that had produced this effect, but it was
produced by a combination of causes, of which
the currency was the chief. Having done with
the depriciation, he next adverted to a comparison
of the English and foreign trades. There was on an
average of ten years up to 1818 thirty-seven millions
and a half of exports. Is 1819 there was an increase of
more than a million and a quarter, but in 1830 there
was an amaz'ng falling off. Notwithstanding all
the arrangements that were made to increase our
exports, there was in 1830 a decrease of six millions and
a half, instead of an increase of ten millions, as was then
expected. From 1819 to 1830 the falling off bad averaged
six millions and a half per annum. From the want of re-
turns last year, they were not included in his resolutions,
but he admitted that the falling off would not have been bij
much in 1831 brobably by aqu titer of a million. One
third of our exports to the north of Europe were in cotton
yarn. He now came to compare the exports with the
imports, for he was told it did not signify how low the
prices were, provided we got a proportionate increase of
quantity. It was most extraordinary to him to see the
great decrease in the exports, which he could not at all
account for. It was too remarkable, that i❑ 1817 the
depreciation amounted to 9,000,0001 per annum; but after
the passing of the Bill for the resumption of cash payments
it decreased,but in 1822,when the small note bill passed, the
depreciation then increased, and it now amounted to eleven
millions. He was perfectly satisfied something must be dons
with respect to the currency of the country; it was not,
however, for him to point out a remedy, be had done his
duty in drawing the facts to the attention of the House,
and leave it to draw it own conclusions.
(LEFT SPEAKING).