The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-09 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 8.

Their Lordships met at Five o'clock. -
The Bishop of LONDON presented petitions against
,he relay system.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions to the
same effect.
The Earl of HARDWICKE presented petitions to the
sam• effect.
POST-OFFICE SUNDAY DELIVERY.
Lord HATHERTON presented several petitions,
praying for the restoration of the Post-office delivery on
Sundays. The Noble Lord earnestly supported the
prayer of the petition, and he trusted that those who
were entrusted with legislative duties would have the
courage to express their opinions, and would not be ab-
sent from their post when the matter should again come
under consideration.

Lord BROUG LIAM concurred in the wish expressed
by his Noble Friend. He believed that the stoppage of
the Post-office Sunday delivery tended to the desecration
of the Sabbath, inasmuch as instead of twenty or thirty
Post-office officials being employed for a few hours on
Sunday, from 200 to 300 persons were employed the
whole of Sunday. It so happened that in a most
important trial that was to come on Monday a paper
was wanted—it could not be transmitted by post, and,
therefore, the parties had to dispatch special messengers,
who were employed the whole of Sunday.
The Bishop of LONDON said that the petitions
against Post-office Sunday labour were signed by the
bankers and merchants of London, and by the great
majority of the middle classes.
Lord KINNAIRD believed that a great majority of
those employed in the large towns, particularly mer-
chants and manufacturers, were in favour of the
abolition of the Post-office delivery on Sundays ; he
hoped time would be taken to consider whether this
measure could not be carried out without inconvenience.

Lord LYTTELTON complained that the Govern-
ment had taken no means to carry out the measure
without inconvenience. Why should London have the
monopoly of rest on Sunday?
The Earl of MALNIESBURY hoped they would be
in no hurry to consent to the abolition of the Sunday
delivery. The bankers and merchants were the persons
least interested in the matter; they had the means of ob-
taining intelligence, but it was the small trader and the
inhabitant of the rural district who was inconvenienced
by it.
The Bishop of OXFORD protested against discussing
this matter by chance. His objection to the Post-office
Sunday delivery was the number of persons it set
to work on Sundays. A solicitor might receive a letter
on Sunday which would make him bound to set his clerks
to work on Sunday. They were bound to protect them
who wished to spend the Sunday aright. He would not
stop the railroad on Sundays, but he would stop the
Post-office Sunday delivery.
Lord CAMPBELL protested against the law of the
the Right Rev. Prelate. The Right Rev. Prelate said
that if a solicitor read a letter, he was to set his clerks
to work, omnibus aliis negotiis omissis, and prepare a brief
under fear of an action. Such was not the law. If he found
it related to John Doe and Richard Roe, he would throw
it aside until Monday morning. If it related to the illness
of a near relation, he would at once set off to see him.
He had been brought up in Scotland, and he revered the
Sabbath, but ho believed that such measures as those
recently adopted tended to its desecration, and he depre-
cated their adoption.
The Duke of GRAFTON was in favour of the aboli-
tion of the Post-offiee Sunday delivery.
Lord BROUGHAM made several observations which
were almost inaudible, but we understood him to remark
that on the Northern Circuit consultations on Sunday
were not unusual, and that during the two Sundays in
which the bar was at York, it always received the
liberal hospitality of the Archbishop of York at Bishops-
thorpe.