The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-25 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 24.

Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock.
SMALL TENEMENTS RECOVERY (IRELAND‘

BILL.

Lord FARNHAM moved the committal of this Bill,
the object of which was to extend the Act of 1848.
The Earl of CARLISLE thought it would have been
better to wait for the Bill now in the House of Com-
mons on this subject, but as he saw nothing objection-
able he would not oppose the committal of the Bill.
Their Lordships then resolved themselves into Com-
mittee.

The Bill passed through Committee, and the House
resumed.

POST-OFFICE SUNDAY DELIVERY.
Lord BROUGHAM again drew the attention of
their Lordships to the inconvenience arising from
the abolition of the Post-office Sunday delivery.
In one case, relating to the trial of an im-
portant cause, persons had been obliged to
send off a special express, and in another instance a
physician had fortunately been sent for on Friday,
and received the letter on Saturday, and went to see his
patient, but if t ie illness had occurred on the Saturday,
and the letter had not been delivered until the
Monday morning, the patient would have died
fur want of medical assistance. He hoped
the Government would not persevere in carrying
out a decision of the House of Commons which had
been obtained by surprise. He was sure the carrying
out the rule would tend to the desecration of the Sab-
bath.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was not surprised
at hearing the statement of his Noble and Learned Friend.
He had made inquiries as to the point of law raised by
his Noble and Learned Friend as to the power of the
Crown to stop the Post-office Sunday delivery, and there
could be no doubt but that the Crown had the power,
but it certainly would not have been exercised but for
the vote of the House of Commons.
Lord BROUGHAII said the Government had a
monopoly of the delivery of letters, and if he were not
permitted to send letters himself, the Government cer-
tainly was bound to send letters at all times.
Lord MONTEAGLE said that whatever the law
might be, if this obstruction was persevered in the law
would be evaded, to the detriment of the revenue and to
the profit of the smugglers, who had been compelled to
become smugglers by the absurdity of the law.
PUBLIC-HOUSES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the-motion-for going into Committee on this Bill,
The Earl of MINTO said that the Bill was open to
considerable objections, as it gave too much power to the
justices, to whom it gave the power of deciding the
number of public houses sufficient for a district, and also
gave them the power of selecting what houses should be
licensed.

Lord KINNAIRD supplied the Bill. The Bill had
received the general support of the people of Scotland.
He should be very happy to introduce certain amend-
ments in the report.
The Earl of
mitts!. jjNTO would not object to its com-

The Bill then passed through Committee.
POST-OFFICE SUNDAY DELIVERY.
Lord BROUGHAM said that, in reference to the
Post•ofce Acts, the Government was bound to receive,
carry, and deliver letters, and therefore they had no
power of stopping the delivery.
LOSS OF THE ORION.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY asked if there
was any objection to produce the correspondence re.
lating to the loss of the Orion oft Portpatrick? If the
packet station had not been removed from that port, the
boats of the packet service would have been on the spot,
and the loss of life would have been less.
The Earl cf MINTO would have been able to give a
more satisfactory answer if h© had had notice, but h e
did not apprehend there would be any objection to the
production of the kapers.
PETITION.
The Earl of STRADBROKE presented a petition
in favour of the County Courts Extension Bill; also a
petition from Suffolk against defraying the expense of
pauper lunatic asylums out of the local rates.
SIR EDMUND LYONS.

Viscount CANNING said that he had received a
communication from Sir Edmund Lyons complaining of
a report of his (Viscount Canning's) speech in that
House on that day week on the subject of
the affairs of Grecce. The report reported
him to have said, that he thought the interest of his
country could not have been the first interest Sir
Edmund Lyons had at heart. He had made no
such statement; he had said that, considering
the language in which Sir Edmund Lyons hail
urged the claims of individuals, the interest of his clients
was not the first interest he had at heart; but he had
never said that he thought the interest of his
country was not the first interest he had at heart; he
believed the contrary was the fact, and had he made
such an assertion he should have been most un-
just to Sir Edmund Lyons. He had not made any
such assertion, and he had never intended to utter any
words that could bear such a construction.

LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee, and certain
verbal amendments were introduced into it.
DRAINAGE AND INIPROVEMENT OF LANDS
ADVANCES BILL.
_ _

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the order of
the day for the second reading of this Bill. He said,
the amount which had already been spent in drainage
had produced a most beneficial effect, not only in the
improvement of the land, but in the industrial habits of
the people; and he had every reason for believing that
the benefits which would result from this Bill would be
great as regarded both these points.
The Earl of LONSDALE expressed a qualified
approval of the Bill. Ho thought the advances ought
to be confined to works of drainage only.
The Earl of LUCAN thought that much benefit would
arise from making advances for other works connected
with the land titan mere drainage.
Lord BEAUMONT admilted that advances for drain-
age stood on somewhat a different footing from advances
for farm buildings, inasmuch as buildings did not in-
crease the productiveness of the land, while drainage
did. Formerly, he had expressed an opinion that the ad-
vances ought to be confined to drainage purposes, but he
thought Ireland in that respect ought to be an excep-
tion. In that country large districts, deserted by a
miserable tenantry, had fallen into the possession
of the landlords, and unless they were assisted and
encouraged to erect buildings, the land would remai❑
unimproved, and, it might be, uncultivated. Under
these circumstances, he thought it would be desirable to
make advances for other than drainage works in Ire-
land. At the same time, he thought some control
would have to be exercised to prevent jobbing or mis-
appropriation.
After a few words from the Earl of GLENGALL,
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that he knew
great improvements had been checked from the inability
of proprietors to provide the necessary farm buildings.
In Ireland, more especially, such buildings were parti-
cularly requisite at the present moment, in consequence
of the great change that was going on in the consolida-
tion of small farms. Every application, whether for
drainage or for building advances, would be brought
under the consideration of the Board of Works, who
would entertain no application for building advances un-
less satisfied such buildings were necessary.
The Marquis of WESTMEA.TH thought it was idle
to hope for much improvement so long as the present
weight of poor-rates existed.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed on Thursday.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 24.
The SrEMII,III took the Chair at Four o'clock.
THIRD READINGS, &c.

The following Bills were read a third time and passed—
Godstone and Highgate Turnpike-road.
Surrey and Sussex Roads.
The following Bills, as amended, were considered and
agreed to :
Bridge across the River Clyde opposite to South Port-
land-street, Laurie3ton.
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway.
PRUSSIAN MINISTER'S RESIDENCE BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of this Bill,
Sir R. H. INGLIS said he took this opportunity of
mentioning the name of the gentleman who was asso-
ciated with this Bill, and of the insult which had re-
cently been offered to him in another place. He did not
believe that there was any place in Europe, Eind he
thought he could answer for America, in which such a
wanton and; he believed, unpremeditated insult could
have been offered to such an individual.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not desire to provoke any disunion between the
two assemblies.

Mr. B. DENISON rose to order.
The SPEAKER intimated that the Hon.
.Baronet
the Member for the University of Oxford was entirely
in order in his remarks,
Sir R. H. INGLIS thought that the Honourable
Member had not read the title of the Bill, or he would
not have interrupted him. As he was saying,
be did not wish to provoke any disunion between
two houses or two individitals,.but he did maintain that
fora man- at -home in his own country, and his own
house, deliberately to insult a stranger and a guest,
and that guest being the representative of a
Sovereign most closely united to our own be-
loved Queen, was highly unbecoming. He could not
call this individual an inoffensive individual, because that
life, and
t he House, ;
and,
under bu
t of
would be degrading to him, he was one of the most
actively' benevolent men that this country contained.
His Hone Friend had bees dragged before another
assembly in violation, he would not say of the rules of
that, too, in the presence of many of her Majesty's Minis-
ters
encroaching on the time of the House in making refer-
ence to one so attacked and so little sustained in another
place.—(Hear, hear.) He would add, in conclusion,
that in his opinion the explanation which had been
given elsewhere added insult to injury, for
Chevalier Bunsen had been accused of not un-
derstanding the English language, whereas he un-
derstood and wrote it as well as the individual who
had chosen to attack him.—(Laughter and cheers.) He
would give his cordial support to the Bill now under
discussion.

Mr. ROEBUCK said his Noble and Learned Friend
(Lord Brougham), who was supposed to have made
the attack, stated distinctly that he informed Chevalier
Bunsen, in very courteous terms, that he was sitting in
the place which had been appropriated to the ladies,
and requested him to retire—(Haar)—but, to the asto-
nishment of the Noble Lord, Chevalier Bun-
sen, whom the Hon. Member for the University
of Oxford called his friend, looked him in the face and
said nothing. On the fourth occasion Lord Brougham
said, " Then I shall be obliged to have you turned out;"
and receiving no answer, he certainly did put in force
the orders of the House to have that geutleguaa, ejected
frost the gallery...Kuno • -

Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not state which of
the Honourable Members' account was correct; but
he must say, for himself, that the learning and repu-
tation of Chevalier Bunsen were such as to secure
far him the respect of every individual.—(Cheers.) He
was very sorry that anything unpleasant should
have transpired in the House of Lords, but, whatever
feelings might be entertained in respect to that occur-
rence, he was sure that the Members of both Houses
Parliament entertained the greatest possible respect for
Chevalier Bunsen, not only for his diplomatic position,
but for his private and personal character.
The Bill was then agreed to.
CONSIDERATION OF BILLS.
The following Bills as amended were considered and
agreed to:—

-River Dee Conservancy and Improvement.
Timber Preserving Company.
Westminster Improvements.
SECOND READINGS.
The National Gallery (Edinburgh) Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed.

PETITIONS.
An HON. MEMBER presented a petition from Dundee
against the Weiv,hts and Measures Bill.

Sir R. H. INGLIS presented 33 petitions against the
admission of Jews into Parliament.

Sir J. TROLLOPE presented similar petitions from
places in Lincolnshire.

An HON. ME3IBER presented a similar petition from
Sherborne. in Dorsetshire.

Mr. HOPE presented a petition to the same efftici
from Gloucestershire.

Mr. MUNDY presented a similar petition from a
place in Derbyshire.
Sir J. DUCKWORTH presented a similar petition
from Bristol.

Mr. B. DENISON presented a similar petition from
the West Riding..
Mr. F. O'CONNOR presented a petition from some
individual, complaining of the conduct of Mr. Commis-
sioner Fonblanque in a recent case, and praying the
House to institute an inquiry into it.
Mr. BUCK presented a petition from North Devon
against the admission of Jews to Parliament.

-Mr. CAYLEY presented a similar petition from the
East Riding of Yorkshire.
Mr. ANSTEY presented petitions from the city of
London, and from Clerkenwell, Southwark, and the
Tower Hamlets, in favour of the Marriage Bill.
GAOLS IN IRELAND.
Mr. P. SCROPE asked whether the Government in-
tended to bring in a Bill to remedy the grievances inci-
dent to the over-crowding of gaols in Ireland, founded
on the report of the Inspector-General of Gauls in Ire-
land ?

Sir G. GREY was not aware that any alteration in
the law was necessary. The reason of the gaols in Ire-
land being so crowded was the great number of convicts
sentenced to transportation, who could not be forwarded
to their destination so soon as could be required.
MONTHLY PUBLICATIONS AND THE STAMP