The Sun.
London, England, 1832-07-11 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 10.

Mr. J. GORDON presented a petition from Glasgow,
signed by 1,600 persons, against the grant to the College
of Miynooth, and observed that when the Irish Estimates
came before the House, he would express the whole of his
objections to that annual grant. The Hon. Member then
presented a petition from George Washington Bustead, late
Colonial Secretary for the island of St. Lucia, praying for
an inquiry into the circumstances of his dismissal from
office.

Mr. DAWSON, in reference to this latter petition,
moved that it be printed. He did not mean to pledge
himself to the truth of the charges in the petition, but as
they imputed to Lord Goderich the dismissal of the peti-
tioner without cause, and to Lord Grey that he had re-
fused to institute any inquiry, it was but just that the
p etition should be printed.
After a few words from Mr. LAMB and Mr. LEFROY,
the motion to print the petition was negatived.
Mr. J. GORDON then moved that the petition from
Glasgow be printed.
Mr. SHELL pointed out some passages in it which he
thought were objectionable, as speaking of " the blood of
saints," " idolatry," &c.
Mr. O'CONNELL—ReaIIy, it is high time we had
left off abusing one another.—(Hear, bear.)
Mr. GORDON said he had known petitions presented
on other occasions which were couched in similar lan-
guage, and while the words objected to formed part of the
standard of a certain creed, he saw no objection to their
being used in the petition.
Sir R. INGLIS advocated the printing of the petition.
Mr. O'CONNELL deprecated the raking up of ancient
animosities, and, therefore, felt bound to oppose the print-
ing of the petition.
Mr. DUNDAS had read the petition, and thought it

one which ought to be printed. If the House refused to
print such petitions, the petitioners would adopt measures
for printing and circulating them themselves.
Mr. W. Y. PEEL thought, if the petition contained
any thing objectionable to any party, the better course
would be not to have the petition printed.
After some observations from Mr. SHEIL and Mr. C.
PELHAM, strangers were ordered to withdraw.
The motion for the printing of the petition was nega-
tived without a division.
Mr. GORDON presented a petition from Brainsford
against the annual grant to the College of Maynooth.
Mr. WILBRAHAM presented a petition from the
county of Chester, complaining of the amount of the
taxes levied by the magistrates, of the expense of the sys-
tem on which the county gaol is at present conducted, the
same of the county lunatic asylum, and of the general ex-
pense of the county. One thing be would particularly
notice wqs the Local Constabulary Act, which was passed
on the recommendation of the Magistrates about four
years ago. That Act added greatly to the expense of the
county, without in the least doing any equivalent good.
He was told that it was tried as an experiment for the coun-
try generally, but why should the county of Chester be taxed
for that purpose? He thought it would be of incalcula-
ble service to the public if Magistrates were obliged to do
the busimss at the Quarter Sessions in an open Court.

Lord GROSVENOR defended the conduct of the Ma.
gistrates. Though the petition purported to be that
of the county, it was not, like many that had lately
been presented, agreed to at a meeting of 6,000 persons.
He would undertake to say that not sixty attended the
meeting. It was, in fact, merely the petition of Mr.
Davis Davenport, the only Magistrate who attended the
meeting. The House would come to the same conclusion
as him, when they knew that there were only five resolu-
tions agreed upon at it, and that the first, third, and
fourth were proposed by Mr. D ivenport himself, while
the fifth was merely a vote of thanks to him.
Mr. LAMB, in answer to a question which had been
put to him, said he could not determinately say whether
or not the General Police Bill would be extended to
Cheshire; it would, however, be considered.
Mr. WARBURTON hal been requested to support the
petition. It was most desirable and necessary that the
people belonging to the different counties should not only
have the county expenditure properly regulated, but that
they should know that it was so.

Mr. PAGET and Mr. C. PELHAM also supported the
petition.

Mr. WILBRAHAM begged to observe that he wished
to convey no imputation whatever upon the Magistrates,
and with regard to the interference of Mr. Davenport at
the meeting, it was very common for some one person to
act a prominent part. The petitioners felt themselves much
burdened, particularly in regard to the expense of the con-
stabulary, and they had a perfect right to come to this House.
So far from their statements being exaggerated, he showed
by documents that they had understated their causes of
complaints. As to the constabulary, they should not
solely be appointed to protect the mansions or game pre-
serves of the great, but also to protect the property of the
public generally.
Mr. HUME asked whether individuals should be ap-
pointed to the magistracy having no interest in the county,
but who should have the power to tax the people. It
appeared to him that it was so in Cheshire, and it was a
great evil ; another point was, that the appeals were disposed
of by the Magistrates with closed doors. That he con-
conceived was a heavy grievance, and one which ought to
be redressed. Another point was, that the clergy were so
busy with their Magisterial duties, that they could not
discharge their more sacred duties. On those three
grounds the lion. Member supported the prayer of the
petition, as he had been requested to do by the petitioners.
The petition was then read and ordered to be printed.

Mr. WILBRAHAM then presented a similar petition
from another hundred in the same county.
POLAND.
Colonel EVANS gave notice of his intention, on Thurs-
day next, to move a resolution of the House to the effect,
that unless Russia performed her part of the Convention
•of Vienna, it was no longer binding on this country.

COURT OF CHANCERY.
Mr. SPENCE rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill
relative to the practice of the Court of Chancery. He
observed that the promised Bill of the Lord Chancellor
mould apply to some part of the proceedings in that Court,
but not to that to which he now wished to direct the atten-
tion of the House. The object of his Bill was to prevent
expense and delay in the administration of the estate of a
deceased testator or intestate. At present, if a creditor of
a deceased's estate claimed payment of his demand,
lie had to file a bill, at a considerable expense, and to that
both bill and answer were drawn upon a common form,
was put in also at a great expense, and
bill an answer

, and required no skill to prepare them; but their enormou
length rendered them very costly. It was the object r
his Bill to propose, that instead of this process of bill and
answer, as now adopted, where it was sought to administet
the estate of a testator or an intestate, there should be em-
ployed a short form, comprising but a few lines, and whirl
should in substance amount to a citation of the opposite
party before the Court. This citation should state that
the party at whose suit it was issued yea, a creditor to the
estate of the testator or intestate who had died indebted tr
him, that the defendant was the executor or administrator
of the deceased party, and should call on him to show cause
why the estate of the deceased should not be admiuistered
in payment of his debts; or if the suit was brought
hy a residuary legatee, why, after p tyment of the debts
and legacies, the residue should not be applied
in the manner stated in the will itself. Unless the d.-
fendant could show some real cause why this should not
he done, he should not be allowed to put in any answer at
all, and the estate should then be administered in the same
manner as it would be now after the Master's report and
the other proceedings. Ia this manner the expenses of
proceedings at law, and the expenses incurred in prevent-
ing those proceedings, would both be saved, and suits
which now sometimes swallowed up the profits of an estate
would be prevented. There would, besides, be this ad
vantage attending his Bill. It would enable the legatee,
or the executor, at once to obtain, by a short mode of pro-
ceeding, the opinion of the Court on the construction of
the will, without compelling the Court to take on itself
the administration of the estate ; and this would be highly
advantageous, when all that was wanted was the opinion
of the Court, in order to enable an executor or admi-
nistrator to administer the estate. Connected with the
Bill which the Lord Chancellor was himself to bring in, a
creditor or an executor would be enabled to conduct a suit
at one-third of the expense which was new necessarily in-
curred. In short, it would save all the expense prior ti
going into the Master's Office. He begged to move for
leave to bring in a Bill to diminish the expense and delay of
proceedings in the High Court of Chancery in certain cases.
Sir E. SUGDEN should reserve what he had to say
for the future stages of the Bill, as they would afford a fine'
opportunity for discussion. Ile must, however, take the
liberty of dedrecating this Bill having been delayed to the
very last moment; more especially as the present Minis-
ters, when in opposition, had pledged themselves to a Re-
form in the Court of Chancery, and yet, after accepting
office, had allowed two whole years to elapse without
making any progress in redeeming that pledge.
Mr. SPENCE had pledged himself to the House that
after last Christmas he would introduce a Bill to regulate
the Master'. Office; and that Bill was actually pre-
paled, and would have been brought in; but that after be-
ing submitted to the Lord Chancellor, it was thought that
it would be better to bring in a more general Bill for cor-
recting abuses in all the offices.—Leave given.
CHARITIES IN IRELAND.

Mr. S. RICE obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regu-
late charities in Ireland, partly maintained by Grand Jury
presentments.
FAUNTLEROY'S FORGERIES.

Mr. HUME, in moving for returns of the number of
forgeries committed on the Bank, for the transfer of
Stock since 1800, adverted to a petition trusted to him
by the creditors of Marsh, Stracey, Fauntleroy, and Co..
complaining of the conduct of the Bank of England. He
considered that this was a question in which the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer was more concerned than any
man in the country, because it was his duty to take cart
that those persons who placed their property in the pub-
lic funds did not suffer any loss by the negligence of the
agents of the Government. The present was exactly a
case which bore upon this principle ; and he, therefore,
thought that it was one which ought to be settled by the
Noble Lord in his official capacity, and not by the Bank
of England, who were parties interested in the results.
The complaint against the Bank was, that it had allowed
Fauntleroy, by means of forged powers of attorney, to ob-
tain possession of stock ; and when the rightful owners
applied for the transfer, the Bank refused to allow it, and
had indeed succeeded in preventing it. This he held
to be an act of gross injustice; and he called upon the
House to interfere on that ground. The petitioners were
the creditors of Marsh, Fauntleroy, and Co. ; and the Bank
had announced that they would not pay the interest nor
allow any transfer of the stock, unless the creditors in the
first instance endeavoured to rank themselves for part pay.
ment out of the bankrupts' estate. The creditors, in
reply to this, alleged that the Bank had no right to force
them to establish their claim ; and he was instructed by
this petitio❑ to state, that three decisions in Courts of Law
went to prove that the money that Fauntleroy had thus
fraudulently received had never been put into the common
banking stock of the house of which he was one of the
partners ; from which it clearly appeared that these per-
sons had no claim upon the assets of this banking con-
cern. Since the detection of the forgeries, it had been
discovered that for seventeen years this system of forgery
Ld been carried on by Fauntleroy, entirely owing to the
neglect and inattention of the servants of the Bank. From
1307 to 1824 Fauntleroy was thus in the habit of trans-
ferring stock on forged powers, till at last nearly 300,0001.
had been transferred from the real owners.
Sir E. SUGDEN—Having been retained as Counsel
for the creditors, if he was in another place he should
make use of the expression that he was on the same side
as the Hon. Gentleman, though of course he could not pre.
tend to vie with him in ability or in his knowledge of the
law; nor, he trusted, should he imitate the Hon. Gentle-

man in the confusion of facts with which he had indulged
the House. But though it would be much to the inte-
rest of his clients to receive the sanction of the House, he
felt that he had a still higher duty to perform as a Mem-
ber of the Legislature, and in that capacity he begg-d to
enter his protest against the proceeding of the Hon. Gen-
tleman. The point at issue had gone through all the
Courts of Westminster Hall, and was now pending in the
House of Lords, where it would be finally decided in a
short time ; and he, therefore, asserted that nothing could
be more improper or indecorous than for the point to he
brought before the House of Commons on an exparte
statement at such a juncture.—(Cheers.) Another
thing which he was bound to say was, that the Hon.
Gentleman did not seem to be acquainted with one-
fortieth of the facts of.the case, and had actually confounded
the person in whose name the stock was standirg
with those who claimed against the estate of Marsh and Co.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON defended the conduct of
the Bank, which bad sustained a loss of three hundred
thousand pounds, and only required in return that those
whose names had been forged should place the Bank in the
same situation in which they themselves were.
Sir C. WETHERELL said the Hon. Member had
thought proper to attack the Bank for not paying the di-
vidends, when the real tact was, that the Bank paid them
so soon as the creditors had consented to prove against the
joint estate of the bankrupts ; therefore, without meaning
anything disrespectful, he must take the liberty of telling
the Hon. Member for Middlesex that he did not under-
stand one particle of the brief that he had opened.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed
it was true that a great loss bad been incurred ; but he
certainly was unable to see anything in that loss to call for

the interference of the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; and,
therefore, as far as the appeal was made to him, he must
say that it seemed to him to be founded in mistake.
Mr. KNIGHT also contended that the case ought not
to have been brought forward ; as it was one of mere law,
and was now pending in a court of law.
Sir C. FORBES said a few words, which were not
distinctly heard in the gallery.
Mr. FRESHFIELD defended the conduct of the Bank.
Mr. HUME denied that lie had made any incorrect
statement. It was very easy for Gentlemen to make
charges of ignorance and indelicacy, but before Gentlemen
indulged in such taunts, they ought to be prepared to prove
that he had mis-stated fasts.--(Hear.)—Motion agreed to.

CUSTOMS' DUTIES BILL.
On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the House went into
Committee on the Customs' Duties Bill.

Mr. P. THOMSON should propose certain trifling
alterations in the schedules, which Hon. Members would
have an opportunity of reconsidering at another stage of
the Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman then moved, that
the sum of 8031. be granted out of the consolidated fund,
for the purchase of local port charges on wines in the
county palatine of Lancaster.
\lt. HUME objectvd to this sum being granted in per.
petuity out of the consolidated fund. He considered it as
sanctioning a sinecure.

Lord ALTHORP said, that the present was a claim
attached to the Duchy of Lancaster, and one that must be
acknowledged so long as the Duchy existed.
Mr. HUME said, that the present vote showed that the

On the motion of Mr. STANLEY, the House proceed e
) the Order of the Day for the adjourned debate on the
Mlles (Ireland) Bill.
Mr. HUME doubted whether there was not some mis-
mderstanding respecting this order, as several Irish Mein-
'iers were not present, the lion. Member for Kerry among
he rest. He (Mr. Hume) did not think that the ques-
tion should be entered upon in the present state of the
Session. He did not like the plan of the Right Hon.
Gentleman, though he agreed in the principle of commu-
tition ; he wished for the abolition of tithes and the sub-
oitution of a money rent. But in the second and third
outs of his plan he did not agree. He hoped the Right
fon. Gentleman would see the impossibility of passing the
Bills in the present Session, and would suffer the whole
measure to lie over for the consideration of a new Parlia-
:new. He wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman
,vhether he meant to carry the three Bills this Session, or
,nly one Bill ; he thought that one Bill would add to the
..xisting difficulties of the Irish Government.
Mr. STANLEY had stated, upon a former occasion,
that his intention was to ley before the House a connected
;clan, but not to press all the Bills this session. He agreed
chat it was not possible to press the entire measure this
.ession. But the first Bill the Government were pledged
-0 carry through ; it was essential to the credit both of the
Government and the country, dart it should be carried
through, as that part of the plan without which they could
not proceed a single step.
Mr. LEADER was glad to hear that it was not the inz
t mtion of the Right Hen. Gentleman to press the measure
0' the establishment of ecclesiastical corporations in Ireland:
The effect of this measure would be to su,pend the agricul-
tural industry of the country, and thereby not only reduce
this population to a still lower condition of misery, but
atop the transmission of 6,000,0001. of taxes to England.
His wild and visionary measure would not merely extin-
.zuish tithes, but tend to the total extinction of rent. He
xarned those Irish Members who supported the Right Hone
secretary in this measure, of the consequences of forcing
their constituents. If the Right Hon. Secretary could
raise his half million by a land-tax fairly spread over
the country, abolishing the name and character of
ithes, and thus get rid of the mischievous machinery of
his Bill, why should he object, while at the same time he
would give satisfaction to a whole people who knew the
iorrors of having two establishments to support.—(Hoare
}rear.) The Irish Members were determined to stand Of
fall by the resolutions proposed by the Member for Wick-
.ow. The measure proposed by the Right lion. Secre-
tary was replete with ruin, and it never could possibly be
!arried into effect without producing the most dientren49
msequences.

Mr. J. BROWNE would implore his Majesty's Govern.
went, in the name of the public safety, to pause before
hey determined to persevere in such a course, which was
aregnant with the most dangerous consequences, not only
to Ireland, but to the empire at large. He contended that
In entire alteration was imperiously called for, not only in
application of the church property, but in the state of the
ithurcla government in those countries, and that such au

alteration was absolutely for the satisfactory settlement of
the peace of the empire. The only country in Europe in
,c•liich some species of ecclesiastical reform had not taken
',lace, was in the reformed church of England and Ire-
land. Such a question as this should not be hastily con-
•idered at the end of a Session.

Mr. MULLINS moved the adjournment of the debate
to Thursday.
Mr. RUT HVEN seconded the motion.
Lord ALTHORP said, it was one of the Orders of the
D Ly, and that it was understood it would come on, if it
could possibly he brought on to-night.
Sir J. BILYDGES and Mr. LAMBERT opposed the ad-
journment.

A long and very desultory conversation, of no public in
terest, followed the proposition of adj.urnment, which
ended in the Hon. Mover (Mr. Mullins) withdrawing it.
The adjmrned debate was then resumed ; the immediate
question before the House being the amendment on Mr.
S :Iraq's motion for leave to bring in a Bill for a com
otilsory commutation of tithes in Ireland, of Mr. J.
Grattan, that the permanent settlement of the tithe
question should be left to a Reformed Parliament.
Mr. LAMBERT would vote for the amendment.
Sir R. PEEL would support Ministers in carrying
their measure immediately into a 1 iw. Unless Parliament
showed that it was determined to put down the present
system of illegal combination against tithes in Ireland, the
next step would be to resist the payment of rents.
Mr. WYSE, in support of the amendment, contended
that a'l that was wanting to allay the present anti title
,xeitement in Ireland was the substituting the Hon. Mem-
ocr fol. Wicklow's resolution for the present obnoxious Bill.
Lord ALTHORP trusted that Parliament would not
separsite without expressing its decided determination to

stand by the law in resisting the illegal combination against
the payment of tithes in Ireland. The amendment, from
its very vagueness and want of practical application, was

worse than useless, and was evidently framed in ignorance
,f the intentions of Ministers. Every man must feel gra-
tified by the prospect of a permanent settlement of so dif
ficult a question as that of tithes in Ireland ; and he
assured the Irish Members that their English brethren
vi uld feel that they had attained a great boon in being
lOaced in the situation in which the Bill would place them.
Among the other advantages of the proposed measure, it
would put a❑ end to the abuses of the agistment system,
_ .

long in force in Ireland, and would relieve die tenant

from an irksome tax, without placing the landlord in a
fliqagreeable situation, inasmuch as he would have no more
difficulty in collecting his tithe than his rent.

Mr. M. O'FERRALL opposed the propositio❑ of the
R ght lion. Secretary.
Mr. JEPHSON thought that Ministers ought to have

oornmenced their measures of amendment by reducing the
Church E,tablishment in Ireland. Their present propo-
..

. .
sition would do no good, and would not, he was afraid,
prevent the spilling of much blood in that country.
Mr. BLACKNEY said, that the measures which had
been proposed by the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland
only increased the difficulty of settling the tithe question.
Toe whole plan was a perfect farce. It was totally im-
possible to collect tithes in Ireland.

Mr. CALLAGHAN moved the adjournment of the de-
bate till Friday next.
Sir 51. W. RIDLEY opposed the motion of adjournment.
Mr. STANLEY was exceedingly unwilling to adjour❑
the debate, but he should not oppose the motion, if there
remained many Members desirous of expressing their opi-
nion on the subject.—(Hear, hear.)
Alter a few words from Mr. M. O'CoNac ELL and Lord
.IoHN RUSSELL the debate was adjourned till Friday next.
'l' he other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Hrlf-past Two o'clock.

RARA Avis !—A WOODCOCK- AT MID-
SUM3I6II. !-A remarkably fine woodcock was caught by
CHARLES Caoss, on the river Alyn, near Gresford, on
Sunday, the 17th instant. The bird is now in the pos-
session of Mr. SArman, wine and spirit merchant, Wrex-
ham, wbere he may be se*n alive, and likely to continue
so, as he takes his food freely.—Chester Advertiser.
The tower of the new church of St. Dunstan
is rigidly rising towards completion. It has been stated
that it will form a fine object from Waterloo-bridge. It
will be seen to still snore advantage viewed from the foot
of Fleet-street.

THE NARRATIONS OF TRAVELLERS.-
" l is truly delightful," says an eminent writer, " for
those whose pursuits, whose habits, or whose inclinations
hind them to ' one spot of earth,' to be enabled to peruse
the adventures of the traveller in distant lands, far re-
ed from his friends and kindred. In following his
!fines, we gradually become attached to his person;
—r,-ticipate in his joys or his sorrows ; share with him, as
P 3 were, his perils and his fatigues ; and when we arrive
the termination of his ' travel's
whom'shisto w
history'—feel
haveasi. part
-
in.: for ever from an esteemed friend
ryvn." Among modern narratives of enterprise of ad-
re:.ture, few, it is said, are more deeply interesting than
Cip.:44l SKINNER'S forthcoming " Excursions in India,"
in 1 an account of his journeyings amid the vast so•
of the Himalaya.

THE GENERAL ELECTIONS.

STAMFORD, JULY 10.
The Independent Electors of Stamford are alone
in the field, canvassing zealously, with every pre.
speet of success, for Mr. A. F. Gregory, of Stivio.
Hall, Warwickshire, assisted by Mr. Parkes. Tilt y
have every prospect of success, and the new bowl.
dary addition of St. Martin's parish, it is found,
will not yield any majority to the nominees of the
Marquess of Exeter. It is the Hampton Court of
Stamford; and, as an airy and quiet situation, out of
the borough, is inhabited in nearly one third of its
gross number of 101. householders, by single ladies
and widows, on whom the Reform Bill does not confer
the right of voting. The Marquess of Exeter and his
obedient corporation have not yet produced any
candidates in the " Red interest." The party,
however, are canvassing the " thumbed voters" for
two anonymous candidates; and thus the farce is
being acted of soliciting the suffrages of electors
against a man of high character and sound political
principles for two nominees of the Marquis of Exeter
when they shall be found! How long a British
nobleman can continue such a system of influencing
the votes of elector 4, it is not difficult to foresee.
The corporation having issued a red bill, warning the
burgesses not to pledge their votes as "two candi-
dates would be shortly introduced to them," tilt
independent party issued the following electioneering
squib :