The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-01 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

ROUSE OF LORDS, Aprzl 30.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
PETITIONS.
The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented several
petitions from Presbyterian congregations in Scotland
and Ireland against Post-office Sunday labour.
The Earl of ROSEBERY presented several petitions
against any alteration in the law of marriage which
should authorise marriage with a deceased wife's sister.
The Earl of RODEN presented a petition from some
place in Ireland for a grant to Church schools; also
petitions against Post-office Sunday labour.
The Earl of CARLISLE presented a petition from
Wisbeach with a similar prayer.
PROCESS AND PRACTICE (IRELAND) BILL.
The Earl of CARLISLE moved the second reading
of this Bill, the object of which was to render justice in
Ireland more cheap, more certain, and more expeditious.
Lord MONTEAGLE hoped that sufficient time would
be given to the public and the profession in Ireland to
consider the provisions of this Bill.
The Marquis of WESTMEATII objected to any
alteration in the law, which required greater strictness in
the particulars of summonses in actions fcr ejectment.
After a few words from the Earl of CARLISLE, the
Bill was read a second time.
WEST INDIA APPEALS BILL.

This Bill passed through Committee.
TITLES OF RELIGIOUS CON GREG ATIONS
BILL (SCOTLAND).
_ _

On the motion of the Marquis of BREADALBANE,
this Bill was read a third time and passed.
ADVANCES FOR PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND).
The Marquis of WESTMEATH moved for copies of
all communications made in and since February, 1849,
to the Board of Works in Ireland, or to the Irish Go-
vernment by the Marquis of Westmeath, Sir Montague
Chapman, Bart., or any other landed proprietors in the
barony of Delvin, and county of Westmeath, relative to
the public works carried on in that locality under
what is termed Mr. Laboucher's Letter, and the replies
thereto, as well as all inclosures accompanyiog the same.
The Noble Marquis complained that the result of the
acceptance, by the landowners, of Government advances
had been to bleed the real improvers, and to encourage and
benefit the lazy and careless. The persons employed
had not done their duty properly, and under theta cir-
cumstances he hoped the Government would insist upon
the repayment of the uttermost farthing of the money,
to which those who had accepted the advances had
made themselves liable, for the Government officers had
taken the management of these works out of the hands
of the landowners. He denied that the money had been
asked for; Mr. Labouchere had made a proposal, in
perfect good faith he believed, and that proposal had been
accepted.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the whole
of the advances made under Mr. Labouchere' letter had
been made to the landowners fur the improvement of
their property; and no later than last year the persons
to whom these advances bad been made received a great
indulgence in having the time for the repayment of those
advances extended last year from ten years to twenty-
two years. This was a great indulgence. In opposition
to the Noble Marquis, he would contend that these ad-
vances had been asked for, and earnestly asked fur, by
the landowners; and if all the letters urging upon Mr.
Labouchere the adoption of the measure which was ac-
ceded to in his letter were produced, the box on their
Lordships' table would not contain them. Ile could not
therefore accede to any request for a further ex-
tension of the time for the repayment of those
advances. or for giving up any portion of such repay-
ments. The Noble Marquis had complained that these
works had been most ineffectually done.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH—OnIy in one in-
stance.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was rejoiced to hear
that admission; but the real state cf. the case would
appear from -the papers for which the Noble Marquis
had moved, and to the production of which there was
no objection.
The Marquis of WESTMINSTER said the Noble
MarquiS bad been imposed upone Many persons, who
were totally incapable of doing a day's work, who could
not properly use a spade, and who could scarcely stand,
had been employed and paid for a regular day's work, be-
cause none of those who had the management of these
works dared to refuse them.
The Earl of MOUNTCASHELL complained of the
manner in which persons bad been employed upon the
roads. The reads bad been rendered worse than
useless by the persons so employed. The effect of the
poor-law in Ireland was to drive the ratepayers out of the
country and to prevent the employment of the poor.
The motion was then agreed to.
The Bills on the table were forwarded a stage, and
their Lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 30.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes before
Four o'clock.
Sir R. H. INGLIS moved that the petition of Thomas
Marsh Nelson, which was deposited in the Private Bill-
office upon the 29th day of this instant April, against
the London (City) Improvements Bill, be referred to
the Committee on the Bill ; and that the petitioner
may be heard before the said Committee, pursuant to
the prayer of his petition.
After a short conversation, in which Sir J. DUKE and
Mr. FORSTER took part, the motion was postponed fur
the present.