The Sun.
London, England, 1857-08-05 00:00:00

TROOPS FOR INDIN.

On the motion for going into Committee of
Supply,
Colonel NORTH', in the absence of General Coal-jog-
ton, a:lied the Under Secretary for War the reason
for sending only 140 men to the East Indies as the com-
pliment 'of a troop of horse artillery when the war
comple.tnent of such a troop was 253 men.
Sir J. ItAMSDEN said that this force of artillery had
been put under orders for India in the satne way
as &1 troops in compliance with a requisitiou male to
the home Government by the East India Company.
That requisition specified the number to be sent. The
number of each troop and company required had been
so arranged as to bring the total force within the requi•
sition made by the E tst India Company ; and that was
the reason why this particular number had been de•
cided on.

BUSINESS OF THE DAY.
Mr. SPOONEft objected to the house going into
supply before the orders of the day were dtwose,l of.
Such a course vvaa contrary to usual pracloe, and de-
prived private members of proceeding with their bilk.
He moved that supply be postponed till af•er the dis-
posal of order No. 12 (Election Petition all).
Sir G. GREY defended the worse proposed to be
adopted by the Government from the period of the
mes,ion. He, however, consented to the orders of the
dey being taken seriatim, and supply afterwards,

GREAT 1.7A.R.110UT11 ELECTION.
The petition of Charles Woollen, confined in Now-
gate for contempt in giving his evidence before the
Great Yarmouth Election Committee, was taken into
consideration. In consequence of his baying expressed
contrition for his conduct, it Wks ordered that he be
discharged from custody.
BURIAL ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
The bill was read a third time and paFsed.
Tne summary proceedings before Justices all, the
Metropolitan Police S:.ationsi, 8.11, and B nindaries
of Burghs Ex'3enbion (Scotland) Bill were further consi-
dered and ordered to be read a third time.

ILLICIT DISTILLATION (IRELAND) BILL.
This bia waq real a thirl tune and passe 1.
ELECTION PETITIONS BILL. _
_

_ .
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Sir G. GREY expressed his objection is the
and moved that it be read a third a time this day three
months.

A discussion ensued, in which Mr. Spooner, Mr.
Newdegate, and Mr. Henley took part.
Mr. MAINS suggested that the bil; should be with.
drawn.

Mr. SPOONER, in the absence of Mr. Adderley,
the promoter of the bill, said that as Pat liament had
affirmed the principle of the La, he would consent to
that course. The bill, with amendments and improve•
ments, could be re-introduced neat session.
The amendment was then agreed to.
LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES
ACT AMENDMENT BILL.—ADJOURNED
DEBATE.

Mr. MALINS moved the second reading of this bill.
Lord R. GROSVENOR objected to the further pro-
gress of this bill, the object of which was to repeal the
cls.uses of an act passed last cession, to prevent the
inclosure of Hampstead-heath and restrain Sir T. M.
Wilson from building thereon. The noble lord referred
to the proceedings that had taken place in and out of
Parliament on this subject, and condemned the course
proposed by the hon. and learned member f r Enniskillen,
the mover of the bill, in proposing the repeal of an Act of
Parliament almost before it had been tried and the
effect of its provisions ascertained. lie contended that
the act did no b jary to Sir T. M. Wilson, and as re-
. _ _

garded his wish to build on waste land near
Hampstead Heath, as stated in the debate of last
night, no objection would be offered to it. He
moved the second reading of the bill this day three
months.
Mr. SPOONER supported the second reading of the
bill. He said that the idea of Sir T. M. Wilson's in
tending to inclose Hampstead Heath bad arisen from a
misapprehension. The clauses in the act referred to
would inlict great injustice not only on Sir T. M.
but other persons, because the laud on which he
proposed to build was copyhold property, and was not
near Hampstead Heath. The heath could only be in-
closed by a special act of Parliament, so that theinhabit-
ants of the Metropolis were amply protected.
Mr. BUTT, as a member of the select committee who
acceeded to the introduction of the clauses in the act of
last session, opposed the bill, which was an attempt to
unceremoniously unsettle what had been the subject of
mature consideration. The claim was introduced in
consequence of Parliament having on a former occasion
refused Sir T. M. Wilson's application for a private bill
to inclose the heath. He looked upon this measure as a
public bill for the private relief of Sir T. M. Wilson, and
considered that if that gentleman wanted relief he should
apply to the house in a proper manner, when it would
be carefully and impartially considered.
Mr. HENLEY considered that Sir T. M. Wilson's
name ought not to have been introduced into this de-
bate, but that the bill should have been discussed on
its merits. He opposed the bill on its merits. An ap-
plication having been made by Sir T. M. Wilson and
refused by Parliament, it ought not to have been re-
peated in this form.
Mr. NAPIER supported the second reading of the

bill.
Sir D. NORREYS said that if it bad not been for
Hampstead Heath this discussion would not have
taken pace. The power of parliament had been brought
to bear on an individual—(no, no)---to deprive him of
the rights he would have been permitted to enjoy had it
not been for his misfortune in possessing a property that
the people of London coveted and wished to obtain on
its own terms. (Hear, hear, and No, no). It was non-
sense to talk about enclosing Hampstead Heath. If
parliament proposed it or attempted to sanction it the
noble lord (Lord R. Grosvenor) would be found
with his Hyde Park mobs and cowing
fraternising to
that house in connexion with the right hon. baronet the
member for Marylebone with his representative councils