The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-01 00:00:00

t 1 -
THE ' LONDON, SATU-RD A Y MORN `LTG, JUNE 1, 1844.

Bay Middleton, out of Adriana, 5 yrs, 7st 61b—Amorino, 4
yrs, ist 61b—Epaulette, 5 yrs, Tat 21b—Anonyme, 4 yrs, Est
121b—Poor Soldier, 4 yrs, Est 91b—Maria Diaz, 4 yrs, 6st
91b—Young Lochinvar, 4 yrs, Est 61b—Portumnus, 4yrs, 6st
411)--11.1arquiSe, 4 yrs, 6st 41b—ch c by Plenipotentiary, out of
Bangtail, 4 yrs, 6st 21b—Dahlia, aged, 6st 21b—Fox, 4 yrs,
6st—ch c by Ells, out of Delightful, 3 yrs, sst 101b—Ernma;
3 yrs, sst 101b--Tiddly Winks, 3 yrs, sst 81b—Advice, 3 yrs,
sst 61b--ch c by Elis out of Odessa, 3 yrs, sst 61b—Best
Bower, 3 yrs, 4st 121 b.
The Fern Hill Stakes of 15 sous. each, 5 ft, with 50 added ;
for two yrs old, 7st, and three, 9st ; mares and geldings
allowed 31b. To start at the Cup Course post, and run in
about half v. mile. _ _ _

Mr. Ford's Piccolina, 2 yrs—Mr. J. Dixon's br g Chevy
Chase, 2 yrs—Mr. Worley's Sophy Daws, 2 yrs—Mr. T.
Walters's Assay, 3 yrs—Mr. T. Walters's My Mary, 2 yrs—
Mr. G. Ongley's b f Mystery, 2 yrs—Mr. A. W. Hill's br
c Beaumont, 3 yrs—Mr. Booth's f New Year's Day, 2 yrs—
Lord Exeter's Economy, 3 yrs—Colonel Anson's Buzz, 3
yrs—Mr. Phillhnore's Physalis, 3 yrs--Lord G. Bentinck's
Prince of Wales, 3 yrs—Mr. Edwards's c Hedgehog, 2 yrs.
The Swihley Stakes of 25 sov.s each, 15 ft, with 50 added,.
if not walked over for ; for three years old, 7st 41b ; and
four, Bst 101 b.;. mares and geldings allowed 31b ; the win-
ner of the Derby or Oaks in 1843 and 1844, 10Ib extra.
Swinley course. _

Mr. Dixon's ,b c Oliver Cromwell, 3 yrs—:Lord Exeter's
Phlegon, 4 yrs—Lord Glenlyon's Ben• y-Ghlo, 4 yrs—Mr.
Jaques's Scmiseria, 4 yrs—Colonel Peel's lonian, 3 yrs
Lord W. Powlett's c by Plenipotentiary, out of Ales., 3 yrs
Duke of Richmond's c Pastoral, 3 yrs.

'he Great Ascot Produce Stakes of 100 sovs. each, h ft, for
three-ySar olds, with 200 added for the winner, and 100
for the second ; colts, Bst, 71b ; fillies and geldings, Bst 21b ;
winners, of the Derby, 71b; bf the Oaks, 51b ; of the
2,000615. orl,ooo Gs. Stakes, 31b extra. Untried horses or
mares allowed 31b;, to start at the winning-post, and go
once round.

Lord Exeter's c Crosby, 31b; Lord G. Bentinck's f (dead);
by Bay Middleton, out of Camarine, 31b—Lord George -Ben-
tinck's br f, by Bay Middleton, out of Flycatcher, 31:,—Lord
G. Bentinck's b .f (dead), by Bay Middleton—Balustrade,
31b—Mr. Greville's b f Jamaica, 3lb—Colonel Peel's b f Ze-
_ _

nobia, 31b—Colonel Anson's b c Alassena (dead)--Colonel
Anson's ch f Muff'—Mr. Thornhill's b f Example—Mr. 04-
baldeston's f, by The Saddler, dam by Partisan, 31b—Mr.
Saddler's f Emerald—Mr. I. Day's b c Seaport—Lord Ches-
terfield's b f The Bee, 31b—Lord Chesterfield's b f Audrey,
31b; Mr. Wreford,• jun.'s b f by Sultan Junior, out of
Monimia, 31b—Mr. Wreford, jun.'s b f by Camel, out of
Victoria—Mr. Wreford's jun.'s b c by Camel, out
of Wadastra, 31b Mr. Wreford, juu.'s b c by
Camel, out of Margellina Mr. W.. Edward's • b
c Panther—Lord Westminster's b f Thais, 31b—Lord
Westminster's br c Lancet; 31b Lord Westmin-
ster's f (dead), by Touchstone, out of Languish, 31b—Lord
Westminster's br f Fanny Eden, 31b—Lord Westminster's
b c by touchstone, out of Miss Giles, 31b—Lord -Westmin-
ster's br f Carol—Mr. Nevill's ch c Valerian, 31b—Duke of
Bedford's f by Liverpool, out of Plaything—Mr. Sadler's
Folly ( wrong nomination).
The Coronation Stakes of 100 sous. each, h ft, for three-
year-old fillies, Bst 71b each ; the winner of the Oaks 71b,
of the 1,000 Guineas Stakes 31b, of both 91b extra. l'he
New mile.

Mr. Thompson's ch f Victoria—Mr. Thornhill's Example,
sister to Euclid—Mr. Thornhill's b f by Albemarle, o►}t of
Egeria—Lord Chesterfield's f The Bee—Lord Chesterfield's f
Giselle—Lord Jersey's f the Princess—Lord G. Bentinek'g gr
fsister to Tripoli—Lord Exeter's f Mocha—Mr. Copeland's b f
Assay.
Her Majesty's Plate of 100 Gs ; three-year-old, 7st 21b ; four,
9st 293 ; five, lOst ; six and aged, lOst 51b. To start at the
New mile post and go once round and in.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, 21lay 31.
Their Lordships assembled 'at Five o'oluek.

The Duke of WELLINGTON 1r: :tented a petition
from Newbury, praying fur an exten,iion of the Great
Western Railway to the town of Newbury.
On the motion of the Earl of RIPON, the Courts-
martial (East Indies) Bill was read a first time..
Lord LURGAN presented petitions from Ireland
against the Di,:sentvrs' Chapels Bill ; also petitions
praying their Lordships to legalise Presbyterian mar,
riages in Ireland.
Lord CAMPBELL presented twelve petitions from
Ireland to the same effFet ; also a petition from Cole-
raine against the I)isse►iters' Chapels Bill.
THE-LATE MONAGHAN ASSIZES.

The Marquis of NORNIANBY rose to -call their Lord-
ship? attention to the circumstances which had_ occurred
at the last Monaghan assizes. A general impression existed
in that part of the country that there had been a went of
sincerity in the intentions of the Govan-11-bent in
carrying. out the directions which were co,.tained
in a circular to the Att,rney-General Brady, with
respect to the -cit,;tom 'of 'challenging jurors.
His_ Noble Friend opposite ..on that '(:ccasioif find read a
letter from the Crown solicitor, Mr. Hamilton, stating
his reasons for striking those persons off the jury. He
stated that he had struck off John Hughes because he
had been_servant to a ribbonman. -
LordWil AR NCLIFFE—Son-in-law to it ribbonman:
The Marquis of NOB, NIANBY had understood his
Noble Friend to say servant. The fact was. that Hughes
had eloped. with the daughter of his father-in-law,
many years since, but he had had no cammunication with.
her family since. 'With respect to Collield, it was said
that he had attended. a faction meeting, and Edward
Mackinlay had been struck off for. the same offence.
Now with respect to Mackinlay, he was a person of
considerable property, who had never been charged
with ribbonisus, or indicted, or convicted for
any offence. Colfield, also, was a respectable person,
who had never been convicted of any offence.
and who had frequently before servel on juries. Mr.
Hamilton should have taken pains to have informed
himself accurately, bet ire he had bronght such charges
against these respectable persons. Ile was anxious to
hear what information his Noble Fr.trul could give of
these circumstances.

Lord 'WHARNCLIFFE considered that no imputa-
tion had been cast by his Noble Friend upon the cha-
racter of Mr. Hamilton. The seven persons who
had been struck off the jury were Roman Catholica, but
then it should be recollected that the offoice of ribbonism,
of which the prisoner had been accused, ,was confined
almost exclusively to Roman Catholies. If Mr. Ha-
milton believed those statements to -be true, he
was .perfectly justified in strikirik thoks. persons off.
The verdict of the jury was a discriminating one.
—convicting some and acquittiag others.
Earl. -FI I'ZWILLIAM—And, therefore, because it
was exclusively confined to Catholics, it ought to be
tried exclusively by Pretestants ! Such was the reasoning
of his Noble Friend. According to his (Lord Fitz-
william's) understandieg of the theory of. trial by jury
that.was a reason why
,Catholics should be on the jury.
Would his Noble Friend reVerse the case, and have
offences committed exclusively by Protestants tried by
an exclusively Catholic jury ?—(Cheers.)
Lord ‘VHARNCLIFFE denied that he had said that
all Catholics should be excluded from juries empabellvd
for the trial of ribbonism ; he hail only said that under
the-circumstances Mr. Hamilton was justified in chal-
lenging these parties. -
The Marquis of NORMANBY. said he had heard
nothing that induced him to believe that ribbonism was
confined to Catholics. He believed that the Roman
Catholic priesthood were ainotig the most active in put-
ting it down. He had thrown no imputation on the
jury; on the contrary, he had said that they had done
their duty. He therefore regretted that the moral effect
of the prosecution had been lost by -the exclusion of Ca-
tholics from the jury.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE referred the Noble Marquis
to the evidence taken on the Committee he had referred
to; where it was stated• that ribbonism was confined al-
most exclusively to Roman Catholics:
The subject then dropped: '
- FACTORIES BILL.

Their Lordships then went into Committee on this
Bill. _ .

Lord KINNAIRD said though he was opposed on
principle to all legislative interference with labour, either
with the produce of labour, or with labour itself,
yet, as the principle of this Bill had been the
law of the land for years, be should not oppose its pass-
ing. But there was one clause in the Bill which intro-
duced an entirely new principle. The clause would
certainly be quite inoperative, and he wished therefore
to know why it had been, introduced into the Bill at all ?
When they came to the 32d clause he should move that
it be expunged.
The clause was then agreed

Clauses 2 to 8 inclusive were also agreed to.
On clause 9 being propc!sed,

Lord TEYNIIA:Sf said he thought some provision
ought to be made in this Bill, with respect to. children
who had been absent from a factory in consequence of
ill health. He thought a clause ought to
,be introduced
into the Bill, requiring that no child vk lm had been ab
sent, i►► consequence of ill health, should be allowed to
go back to the factory until a certificate had been ob-
tained from a surgeon that the child was in a fit state to
go back.
Lord WIIARNCLIFFE thought•the Bill already pro-
vided for this.

The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 10 and 11 were agreed to.
•
On clause 12 being. proposed,
Lord BEAUMONT moved that that part of the cl;:use
which provided that the cost of the surgeon's certificate
should be defrayed out of the wages of the children, be
struck out.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE said the certificates were for

the benefit of the children, and it was but right that they
should bear a portion of the expense. •
The amendment was negatived without a division, and
the clause was then agreed to. • _

Clauses 13 to 17 inclusive were agreed to.
On clause 18 being proposed,
Lord BROUGHAM. said he had carefully gone over
this Bill, and he must say that. he wa,s not much pre-
possessed in its favour. One clause provided that a
factory record office should be established, and that
a suitable building should be erected for that purpose.
He protested against such meddling, officious, dabbling
legislation. If any rot eigner was to look at this legis•
lation,. he would think it was an Act of the yepx 844,
and not of the year 1844. But in the 18th clause of
this Bill, they had exceede I themselves. This clause
enacted that, in all cases in which the tops and sides of
rooms were not painted with oil they should be lime-
washed at least once in fourteen months, wherever chil-
dren and young persons were employed in those rooms.
Now, young persons meant women of from sixty to
seventy years of age—most interesting young- persons
they were—and where the walls were painted with oil,
they should be every 14 months washed with soap and
water. It certainly was a great omission that the Bill
did not state the exact degree of the heat of the water
that was to be used.—(A laugh.) Now he hoped that
before long, equal care would be taken of the comfort of
the peasantry; He expected to see a Bill ordering
the cottages of the peasantry to be whitewashed, and
enacting that all chinks through which draughts of wind,
or snow, or rain, or hail, might pass, should be stopped
up with chopped hay, or straw, or blaster, and that the
persons living in cottages should 1w provided with a suffi-
ciency warm clothing, of course at the expense of
etheiiriandlords and employers—(Lltighter)—and that a
sufficiency of fuel should be provided for them, and that
no dunghills or pigstyes should be allowed near their
dwellings, for nothing could be mar, ilijuri .us to health
than dunghills and pigstyes. They might have a sche-
dule relating to cases in which cow-houses might be per
mitted.(A laugh.) He was perfectly disgusted with
ttiis meddling, officious, dabbling system of legislation.
—(The Noble and Learned Lord then threw the Bill
across the table, and resumed his seat, amidst cheers and
laughter.)
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that the clause was only
a renewal of the one in the old Bill.
The clause was then passed.
Clauses from 19 to 28 were passed without discussion.
On clause 29 being•proposed,
Earl FITZWILLIAM said it appeared that every-
body was in favour of this Bill—(" No, no," from Lord
Kinnaird)—that was, speaking abstractedly. The
Government was for it—the Tories were for it—the
Whigs were for it—the political economists were for it;
but these were not quite satisfied with it—they were
disposed to carry it a little further. The clause under
consideration proved that there was some little return of
common sense beginning to be shown on the subject.
The clause substituted "eight years" instead of nine as
the age at which children could go to work in factories.
He hoped to see a similar return of good sense to the
children employed in mines ; but he could not compre-
hend why all this extraordinary philanthropy exhibited
for those employed in factories shoul.l not be carried a
little further, and why there was such neglect of the
moral and physical evils in the•social condition of other
classes of the community. The landed interest had taken
this Bill especially under its protection, but he could not
comprehend why it neglected the interest of those with
whom it -was particularly connected. Those employed
in mines and factories enjoyed, at all events,
-a warm
and equal temperature, which was not so injurious as
exposure in a cold open field for many hours during the
day, which was the case with children in the agricultu-
ral districts who were employed in " scaring" birds,
and other field occupations. TT
-.0 thought that
the only 'cases of interfarence with labour should be
in those where the 'morals of the people were affectel.
:They ;were interfering with the rights of the working
classes, and preventing them from earning as much as
enr
eadnus weretr,l-4, obtaining food.—
they could.. If they did this, they at the same
they ought to feed
to do this, it would
time, to give them threseladintui
act consistently. He wondered how
the people. I f
If
fhtehye cramped
Parliament would
receive a Bill which pr.ivided thee load of hay should
not be carried after six o'clock in .he t v ning?—(Hear,
hear.) Yet this would not be woi.:,e than the present
Bill. This Bill was one-sided legislation, and he could
not, therefore, give it his support.
The Marquis of NOIOI4NBY denied that there way
any retVOgVes4tOn this Bill. 'He thought no coruparl-
son could be instituted between the condition of the
agricultural and manufacturing labourer. The force of
nature protected the agricultural labourer, but the factory-
, iebollrar had 119 Mich Pr°toCti°ll. 11# lahed to maintfihi
rho Bill in its present Integrity. With regard to the
argument that the last hour wits the manufacturer's only
profit, why, the same thing ha 1 be n stated twenty
years ago, when the late Sir ItoLert l'eel had proposed
lg reeltiee the hours of iftbour from 1
Sottpan houFs, With
regard to the erevisiens elVPreilig cleanliness, thern
could he no dean of the ,IPefts§ity flip plow provisions
where hirge numbers a persons were congregated
together.
• The- *Bishop of -INFON rejoicOd• tit-the I}p9 Q~l3

the lr,urs of labour by this Bill; and only regretted that
the li:.nitation had not been carried further. It was im-
possii,ie ti improve the social, moral, and religious con-
dition of' the pOpulation of the manufacturing districts,
with.,:A limiting the hours of labour.. Commercial
pr0p,.::;..; might be purchased at too great a price, and
it w 407ng to great es-pence for it to sacrifice to it the
m0r.i4;.1;,d religious welfare.of our. population.

L.I:.I'WHAIINCLIFFE defended ihe 'clause.

The F:arl of WINCITILSEA regretted that a ten
hour,' ..louse had not been adopted ; but lie hdmiiled
fiat -tlie prawn Bill was an improyemeat on the old law,
The was agreed to. • ".
Claniei 30 and 31 Were agreed to.
'On clause 32, which provides-that women shall be con-
sidered a; young persons, being proposed, •
KINNAIRD -Moved that the clause be ex-
pun,4cd, as he considered the clause to be an attempt to
interference.with adultlabonr...

St-,taeg,rs were iimered to withdraw, but no division
took plaee.• On our.teturn-to•the gallery we found
L AR NC LIFF de fen :ling; the clause.
Lo A BROUG-ll AM concurred with his Noble Friend
at Ow table (Lord Kiunaird), in thmking•that the clause
ought to be struck out.: Duchesses and Countesses were
p,r anitt-d to dance about their children from eleven at
night ter five in the morning in rooms .the atmosphere of
whk:i a-as quite pestiferous, and yet the Legislature
nevcr attempted to infeeere with them. Why, the ope.
naive: saw through this, and petitioned the Legislature
riot t: :listed to such nonsenSe as this Bill, because they
were
-convinced that thercould never' get twelve hours'
wages for ten hours' work. Coachmen were kept out all
night, sitting on their boxes, waiting forparties coming
from routes, but nobody attempted to interfere for them,
although numbers of them annually fell victims to the
inclemency of the weather to which they were exposed.
The Marquis of NORMANBY contended that twelve
hours ws quite as great a length of time as any woman

ou4ht. t,, labour in a factory. The peasantry in the agri-
cultural districts were better educated than the labourers

in th, rninufacturing districts, as was proved by the re-
turns a the rettistrar. .

Lor I 111l01.1GELA3I said education was known by its.
fruitii,z-nd he would ask. if Mr. Thom, who; four or five
years ago, had, by his delusions, giVen rise to such dis-
graccful scenes in -the agricultural distrietS of Kent,
woulJ have had ten followers in Barnsley, Manchester,
or ally manufacturing district.
Lord CAMPBELL would support the amendment of

his NO'e Friend (Lord Kinnaird). This clause applied
to tlw whole female sex. There might be a case of a
woman of forty years of age in robust health, who
ratio than suffer her children to go into the workhouse
would work without injury to her health for more than
twelve hours a day, yet the law interfered to prevent her,
and to force her children into the workhouse. This
was PM unjust interference with adult labour, and there-
fore he should-oppose it.
Lord BROUGHAM said that as this had been dis-
cussed as a question of morals between the agricultural
and the manufacturing districts he would be content to
pat it upun that issue. He held in his hand a return of
the number of bastards born in the different counties in
Engbind in the year 1843. In Bedfordshire, an agri-
cultural district, they_were five and three-tenths in the
thousand in proportion to the whole population ' • in
Dorsetshire they were three in the thousand; and in
Herefordshire four and one-tenth in thethousand ; in

the North Riding of Yorkshire three and three-tenths
in the thousand in proportion to the population. These
were purely agricultural district:. In the West Riding
of Yorkshire,' a manufacturing district, they were only
one• and five-sixths in the thousand; and in Lancashire

they were only one and two-tenths in the thousand in
prOpoyti(kn to the population: That was the proportion
of immorality of the manufacturing districts. Now let
them come to Wales ; there they would find that in
Anglesea the proportion of illegitimate children to the
population was .seventy in the.thoussnd! And in Radnor
i; was 105 in the thousand!—(Laughter.) He was con-
tent to put the vote on this issue.
Earl WINCHILSEA said it was a notorious fact that
where large numbers of people were congregated to-
gether, there were not so many. children born in pro-
portion to the population as in places where the numbers
were smaller.
Lord REDESDALE contended that the return which

had been quoted did not show the number of illegitimate
children born in the whole population, but the number
of children relieved, which were, of course, pauper
children. A return of the whole number born it would
be impossible to procure. He had been accused of igno-
rance, but he was quite correct.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE did not believe
that the greater immorality of the manufacturing dis-
triAs had been proved.
After a few words from the Marquis of NOR-
MANBY,
Lord ICINNAIRD said the principle on which he
moved the rjection of the clause was on the ground that
it was an interference with all female adult labour.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause, Contents
Against it, Non-contents
Majority for the clause —27
The clause was then agreed to, as were clauses 33,
34, and 35.
Clauses 36 to 66 inclusive were then severally put
and agreed to without discussion, and the Bill having
been reported to the House without amendments, was
ordered to be read a third time on Monday next.

---
POACHING PREVENTION BILL.
The Earl of STRADBROKE moved the third read-
ing of the Poaching Prevention Bill, in which he wished
to propose some amendments.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the proper
time to propose the amendments would be on the ques-
tion that the Bill do pass.
The Duke of RICHMOND hoped the further con-
sideration of the Bill would be postponed in order to
give their Lordships an opportunity of considering the
amendments. He objected to giving gamekeepers the
power of arresting persons on the high road.
After a few words from the Earl of Radnor, from Lord
Campbell in support of the views of the Duke of Rich-
mond, and from Earl Fitzhardinge iu support of the Bill,
it was read a third time, the amendments were proposed,
the Bill as amended was ordered to be printed, and the
debate on the question that the Bill do pass was ad-
journed till Alonday.
CUSTOMS BILL.
The Custrms Bill passed through Committee.
The other 11;11s on the table were forwarded a stage,
and the 11, use adjourned.

11011 SE OF COMMONS, May 31.
The SPE-11:ER took the Chair at the usual hour.
NEW- MEMBER.

Mr. BOUVXRIE took the oaths and his seat for Kil-
marnock. 121. e lion. Member was introduced by Mr.
Ellice, jun., Bi.d Mr. Ord.
DISSENTERS' CHAPELS BILL.

Petitions against this Bill were presented by Colonel
Powell, by Mr. Broadley from Yorkshire, Sir J. Y.
Buller from Devon, .Mr. B. Cresswell from Northumber•
land, Major I3eresford from Harwich, Lord Pollington
from Pont• ft-act, Mr. Brotherton from Salford, Mr. B.
Hughes from Carnarvon and Bangor, Lord Rendlesham
from Suffolk, Mr. Barnard from Greenwich, Mr. Boyd
from places in Ireland, and Colonel Fox from Limehouse.
Petitions in f.ivour of the Bill were presented by Mr. A.
Chapman forth Whitby, and Mr. Strutt-from Derby.
Mr. W. O. STANLEY presented a petition from a
Wesleyan congregation in Holyhead against the Dissen-
ters' Cli,irels Bill.
Lord ASHLEY presented several petitions to the same
eff. et.

Captain ROUS presented a petition from Westminster
to tile same effect.

Sir tV. JAMES presented petitions from several
Wesleyan eongregations to the same effect.
i•lr. CHRISTOPHER presented a petition from the
clergy and adult inhabitants of Andover to the same effect.
Sir R. 11. ING LIS presented apetition from the wardens
and other officers of Winchester College, against the
Ecclesiastical Courts Bill ; also from Cromer, in Nor-
folk, against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
An HoN. MEMBER presented several petitions to the
same Effect.

THOMAS TROWBRIDGE presented a petition
to the same effect.

Mr. MURPHY presented a petition from. Ireland to
the same effect.

L.•rd H. VANE presented a petition from Hertford•
shin in favour of the BilL

Mr. IL BERKELEY presented several petitions from
Glotwostershire and Somersetshire against the Dissent-
er'

Mr. CARTViRIGHT presented several petitions to
tli sune effect.

Lord NEWRY presented several petitions to the same
eff et

Sir C. LEMON presented a petition, from Ireland to
the same effect.

Mr. CARTER presented a petition from Clitheroe,
andl other places, to the same effect.
r W. WYNN presented a petition from Devonshire,
to the same effect.

Mr. VILLIERS presented a petition from Stafford.
shire to the same effect.

Mr. G. KNIGHT presented a petition to the same
effect.

Mr. CHRISTIE presented a petition from Wales in
fari.ur of the Bill.

Mr. M. PHILIPS presented a petition from Mac•
ch•sfield to the same effect.

Mr. DIVETT presented a petition from Honiton in
favour of, and one from Huntingdon against, the Dis-
senters' Chapels Bill.

Mr. BRICiIIT presented a petition against the Bill.
PROTECTION TO AGRICULTURE.

Sir J. Y. BULLER presented .several petitions from
Devon in favour of further protection to agriculture.
Lord RENI)LESHAM presented similar petitions
from Suffolk.

Mr. HUME presented a petition from an agricultural
s,.ci,•ty in India, praying for the admission of corn from
India• on the sAme terms as' corn coming from Canada.
The Hon. Member ave notice of his' intention- to call
the attention 6f the HOUSa to thesubject On an early day.

EDUCATION IN IRELAND.
Mr. LEFROY presented petitions from Cork against
the national system of education ill iriilaud.

DISSENT iISI CHAPELS BILL.
NEUBLE presented petitions from congregations
or Dissenters in Surrey against the DieSentt:T4
Bill.

Captain TAYLOR pr4scotitpd petitions from Hereford-
shire to the same effect,
POOR-LAWS.
- 11tr..FERRAiti D. moved for copies of the correspond-
ence between Mr. Rykr, a member of Oka betard of
-film-dial-is of Chelsea, anti OW roPr-14w Cciturnissioners,
M m gave notiee that, in Committee upon the
1140 i ()barter Bill, he should move a clause for the re-
peal of the legal tender clause.

ADJOURNMENT cw Tith HOUSE.
On thp.lagtign pc air. a. or 4.11 K, it was resolved that
111Aize ittl rising adjourn till Monday.

- COURTS-MARTIAL.
The Courts-martial Bill (East Indies) was read a third
time and passed.

INDIAN ARMY.-

Mr. HUME called the attention of the Government to
the indications-of a mittirioui sirit among the Sepoys of
the Indian army. Reconsidered it a most alarming symp-
tom, and it was of the greatest importance that the in-
justice that had- caused it 'should not- be continued. He
was eiitgoled ty-thethonght that Sir -IL -Hardinge-would
do all in his power to prevent it.
TRADE WITH- PRUSSIA.-

Lord. J. RUSSELL gave. notice, that on Tuesday
next, he'should move for the production .of the corres-
pondence relative to' the commercial relations betvVeen
this country 'and Prussia.
SUPPLY.

On the motion of Sir G. CLERK, the Order of the.
Day for going into Committee of Supply, was read t:*
the purpose of postponing it.
CA'TITOLIC EMANCIPATION BILL.

• -

114 Roman Catholic Clergy Grants and Conveyaoces
:Ireland) Bill.waS read .a Second time.

SLAVE TRADE.

On the Report on the Slave Trade Treaties Bill.being
brought up,
Captain PECIIELL asked What treaties' it was the
intention of Government to legislate upon ?
Sir G. CLERK said it was.only.intended by the Bill
to give her Majesty power, by Order in Council, to carry
certain provisions of the • treaties into effect, till -next
session, when they would be embodied in an Act of Par-
liament. •