The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-09 00:00:00

IMPERIAL. PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, August 8.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented a peti-
tion from York, complaining of the unhappy condition
of Ireland, and regretting that nothing had been done
by Parliament to ameliorate the condition of that
country.
The Marquis of NORMANBY was glad that his
Noble Friend had presented the petition, which had
been originally entrusted to himself, but which he had
committed to his Noble Friend, because he did not ex-
pect to be in town to present it.
The Earl of Wicklow, Lord Hawarden, Lord Redes-
dale, Earl Bathurst, and other Peers, were deputed to a
conference with the House of Commons, on the amend-
ments of the latter to the Art-Unions pill.
The Noble Lords on their return presented in writing
the Commons' reasons_ fur not agreeing to the Bill as
passed by their Lord'slips.
A second conference took place on the subject of the
County Coroners' Bill.

OTAHEITE.

The Marquis of NORMANBY presented a petition,
.segreed to at a public meeting in Leeds, drawing the at-
tention of the House to the efforts of the Protestant Mis-
sionary Societies for the last fifty years in the island of
Otaheite, and complaining of the violation of the law of
nations by the French naval commander at the island. The
petitioners had no wish for war between England and
France, but they hoped the influence of the Govern-
ment would be exercised to restore the independence of
Otaheite. He (Lord. Normanby) could not agree that
the temporary u-urpation of the French officer should de-
prive Mr. Pritchard, tha British Consul; of his right to
the protection of the Government which he represented.
He was desirous for the maintenance of peace, but he
could not consent that peace should be maintained by
the sacrifice of rational honour.—(Hear, hear.) He
could not say less in presenting this petition, and,
knowing the difficult position of the Government, he
would not say more.
The Earl of ABERDEEN felt it necessary to make
some obeeevations in reference to the subject of this pe-
tition. Their Lordshipswould remember that, in March
lest, he had placed on the table of the House the corre-
spondence with the French Government in refrence to
the occupation of Otaheite, and he stated, and the Noble
Marquis opposite agreed with him, that there was no
ground of jealousy on the past of this country towards
the French for extending their influence and colonisa-
tion in the Pacific. He had very recently re-
ceived assurances from the missionaries in Otaheite
that they hail nothing to complain of as against the
French authorities.--,(Hear, hear.)
,He would follow the
example of the Noble Marquis and say no more upon
the subject than was abolutely necessary ; but he must
say that he did not think Mr. Pritchard was the less
entitled to the protection of his countrry, because he
had divested himself of his official character.—(Hear.)
That was a matter between Mr. Pritchard and his own
Government. An attack had been made in another
place upon the present Ministry for their foreign policy.
But the attack was of.the less force, as the Ministers
had the advantage of a vote of confidence from both
.Houses of Parliament. A Noble Lord in the other House
accused the Government of sacrificing the interests
of the country and truckling to France. The same
accusations were made in France against the Govern-
ment of that country, that the interests of France were
sacrificed and, that theTslit of the French was truckling
to England.—(Hear). It could not be denied that there
was a war party in France.—(Hear.) But he still be-
lieved that moderation and justice on the part of both
Governments would disappoint that party in France,
and the enemies of peace at home.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said that he had no in-
tention of making a general attack upon the foreign
policy of the Noble Earl, although there were some
parts of that policy which yet required to be tested by
experience. The Noble Earl spoke of attacks made
on him in the other House. Now, it was very
unfortunate that attacks upon the foreign policy
of the Government were generally made in
the House where the Foreign Minister was not.
Under the Government of Lord Grey, the Noble Earl
opposite (Lord Aberdeen) used niaht after night to make
attacks upon the policy of his Noble Friend in the oilier
House (Lord Palmerston), who so long and so ably con-
ducted the foreign affairs of the country. With this ob-
servation lie would conclude, exereising his satisfaction
at the tone in which the Noble Earl opposite had spoken
of the outrage in Otaheite.—(Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE concurred with
the observations of his Noble Friend as to the speech
of the Noble Earl. But he wished to put a question to
the Noble Earl on a very pacific subject—(A laugh)—
he meant the conduct of the Spanish Government to its
English credit() .s.—(A laegle) As far back as 1834 a
promise was gi‘ en by Spain that the debt would be con-
• serted. but that premise had not yet been fulfilled.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that was one of the
operations of Spanish finance, which possessed at the
time a favourable appearanee, and at first promised suc-
cess, but, like others, had led only to disappointment. He
was unable to say that at the present moment there was
any materially greater prospect than there had hitherto
been of realising what was expected from the financial
operation of Count Orano. The Noble Marquis had
most justly describedthe course which the Government
was called on to pursue in, questions of this description.
. He had truly said that this could not be
considered as an engagement entered into between
the two GovernmentS7-it was one to which, in fact,
England had been no- party whatever ; but that in-
fluence which they had a right to exercise on the behalf
of British subjects it might very fairly be expected they
should put in operation, and he might say there had
burn no reluctance to use all proper means of producing
an effect on the Spanish Government But the prospect of
success depended much more on the opinion the Spanish
Minister of Finance might entertain, as to what was due
foved faith, and whatthe honour and interests of Spain
required, than upon anything that could be done by
a Foreign Government. At the present moment he
could assure his Noble Friend that the Finance Minister
of Spain was a man more likely to be influenced by
large. liberal, and just views of what was done
to the honour and interests of his country than
any person who had filled that situation for some
years past, and for that reason, he did look with more
confidence than he otherwise should do to any representa-
tions that might be made by her Majesty's Government.
POOR-LAW BILL.

Lord WIIARNCLIFFE moved the third reading of
the Poor-law Amendment Bill.
Lord TEYNHAM moved the insertion of a clause, as
an amendment, giving the poor-law guardians, in some
cases, a dispensing, power to order out-door relief to the
mother of a bastard child. He supported the amend-
ment on the ground that it would prevent the subjects
of the relief being contaminated by the intercourse with
the inmates of the workhouse.
Lord WIIARNCLIFFE objected to the insertion of
the amendment, on the ground that it was a further in-
vasion of the principle that no person should have re-
lief out of the workhouse. Ile saw no reason why the
mother of a bastard child should he made an exemption.
The amendment was negatived without a division.
Lord TEYNHAM proposed a clause to the effect that
*here a married pauper went to a distant part of the
country to obtain work, it might be lawful for the board
of guardians to give relief to his family during his
absence. He thought it but fair that while a
poor man did all that lay in his power to obtain
work, rather than go into the workhouse, that his feinily
should get relief while he was away for this I italable
object. He did not know on what grounds the clause
could be opposed.
Lord WIIARNCLIITE opposed the clause. If a
man was honest and trustworthy he would have no diffi-
euity in getting work in his own pari-h.
The clause was negatived without a division, and
the Bill passed.
DUCHY OF CORNWALL ASSESSIONABLE
MANORS BILL.
Lord WHARNCLIFFIL. moved the third reading of
this Bill.
Lord COTTENIIAM objected to the Bill. because the
effect of it was to give up' all the mines in the manors
• which had not been worked, whilst it provided no
"equivalent. He certainly thought that the Bill ought
trot to pass without its being distinctly understood Abet
it was that. the Duke a Cornwall was giving up, and
what was the equivalent that he was to receive for it.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that the Bill had been
waster the consist, ration of all the law officers of the
Duchy of Cornwall, and had been approved of by them.
He thought the Duke of Cornwall received great ad-
vantage for what he had giVen up. The matter had
been well considered he knew, for he was one of the
persons who had conducted the negotiations on the part
of the inhabitants of Cornwall--(lle2r, hear)—with the
Government, and the law officers of the Duchy were
perfectly aware what they were giving up.
Lord CAMPBELL `considered the Bill was being
hurried through the House :with most indecent haste.
If it had related to a private estate the Judges would
have been consulted, but in the present instance no
reference had taken place to those learned persons.
Bills tare now sent up with such rapidity from the
other House, that their Lordships had no opportunity
afforded them of making themselves acquainted with
their contents. This Bill was contrary to every
principle of prescription, ,for, although in other parts of
England it was a principle cejus est solum ejns est usque
ad ccelum, yet in Cornwall the right was horizontal and
tot vertical—the owner of the surface had no right to
anything underneath the surface ; he had no right to
work the mines.
After some observations from the Lord Chancellor, in
support of the Bill, and Lords Cottenham and Monteaglo
against it, the Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Grand Jury Preaentment (Dublin) Bill was read
a third time and passed.

NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT—POST-
OFFICE.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented the Se-
cond Report of the Committee on the progress of the
Houses of Parliament, and gave notice that he would to-
morrow make a motion on the subject. He wished to
ask in reference to the Yost-office inquiry what commu-
nications had taken place between the two Committees ?
Lord COLBORNE said that he took all the responsi-
bility of the report of the Committee on himself, and he
would answer for it as a frank and just report.
On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, the
Commons' amendment to the Insolvent Debtors' Bill were
agreed to.
COUNTY CORONERS' BILL.
Lord WH.A.RNCLIFFE moved that the Commons'
amendments to this Bill should be agreed to.
Lord BEAUMONT opposed the Bill. He said he
never knew a Bill which had the word -" job" mcre
italically written on the face of it.—( Laughter.) The
fees of the office of 'coroner were already adequate
- and there was no excuse for increasing the county rates,
ickAgiirge the incomes orthose officers.
Marquis of NORMANBY supported the Bill,
latilopsd Uss the 1%14004 wouid thruush hi i

.