The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-02 00:00:00

LIBEL BILL.

In answer to a question from the LORD CHAN-
CELLOR,
Lord CAMPBELL said he should move the third
reading of this Bill at five o'clock to-morrow (this day).
APPELLATE JURISDICTION BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM moved the committal of this Bill
pro forma, and in doing so took occasion to contradict the
statement which had been put forth to the public, that
he had brought forward the Bill to provide an office for
himself.
After a few words from the Bishop of LONDON and the
LORD CHANCELLOR, the Bill was committed pro forma.
BISHOPRICS OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
_ _

The Earl of POWIS moved the third reading of
this Bill.
Lord VIVIAN said he had just returned from North
Wales, and he knew that the inhabitants of that part of
the country cared very little whether the union of these
sees were maintained or not. They, however, had a
strong feeling as to the appropriation of the funds of
those bishoprics to the establishment of a bishopric in
such a rich place as Manchester.
The Bishop of BANGOR denied that the feeling of
the inhabitants of North Wales was against the repeal
of the union of these bishoprics. He trusted their
Lordships would not negative their fornSer decision.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said this Bill with-
drew the foundation from all those measures which had
heen adopted upon the recommendation of the Ecclesias-
tical Commissioners, upon which recommendation the
union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor had been
proposed. He had stated. on a former occasion, that he
had not received her Majesty's sanction to this Bill.
This Bill touched the prerogative of the Crown, and he
recommended to their Lordships' consideration the ex-
pediency of passing such a measure. It was a measure
too which very materially affected the revenues of the
Church. He felt, that if—their Lordships were to fully
consider this subject, they would see that they were
establishing a dangerous precedent, inasmuch as hitherto
it had always been a rule of Parliament, that no Bill
which affected the royal prerogative should be passed
without the consent of the Crown having been first ob-
tained. He would only say, that if they allowed the third
reading of this Bill, their Lordships must take the re-
sponsibility.
Lord MONTEAGLE repeated his former suggestion
that to provide more largely for the spiritual condition of
the working classes in North Wales would do more
good to religion itself than the restoration of the
bishoprics oSt. Asaph and Bangor. If they passed
this Bill, how could they resist an application to dis-
solve the union which had already taken place between
the bishoprics of Bristol and Gloucester? He moved
that this Bill be read that day six months.
The LORD. CHANCELLOR thought he had no
power to put the question, seeing that this was a Bill
affecting the prerogative of the Crown. He would
suggest that a Committee be appointed to search for
precedents.
Lord BROUGHAM did not see how the disunion of

these sees could damnify the interests of the Crown,
seeing that in the case of two bishoprics the Crown had
a greater chance of receiving the temporalities than in
the case of one.
The Duke of WELLINGTON explained.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE hoped their Lord-
ships would acquiesce in the suggestion which had been
made by the Noble Lord on the Woolsack.
The Duke of RICHMOND would support the third
reading of this Bill. He believed that if they were to
search the precedents they would not find that a Bill
had ever been rejected because it had not first received
the sanction of the Crown.
Lord LYTTELTON apprehended that there was no
difference between this case and the case of the bishopric
of Sodor and Man, and in that case the consent of the
Crown was not first given.
The Earl of RIPON said that in that case there was
no disposal of the revenues of the diocese.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that in the case
of the bishopric of Sodor and Man the power of the
Queen making au order in Council was not interfered
with ; in the present case it was.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE thought a Com-
mittee should be appointed.
Lord COTTENHAM thought the case of the bishopric
of Sodor and Man was a case in point, and ought to be
taken as a precedent.
Lord CAMPBELL said that many cases had occurred
in the other House of Parliament in which the Speaker
had refused to put the question on the reading of a Bill,
because the consent of the Crown to that Bill had not
been previously obtained.
Lord VIVIAN thought the amendment, that the Bill
be read that day six months, might be put, and if carried
that would get rid of the difficulty.
Lord KENYON thought the opinion of their Lord-
ships ought to be taken upon the merits of the Bill.
Viscount CANTERBURY thought the suggestion of
his Noble Friend on the Woolsack deserved the most
serious attention of their Lordships, and was one which
ought to be adopted.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE could not see why the
Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack could not put
the question on the third reading of this Bill as well as
on the second. He thought the Noble and Learned
Lord on the woolsack had been guilty of an unworthy
manceuvre to get rid of this Bill.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had found him-

self in considerable difficulty in putting the question,
and he had, therefore, appealed to the House; but he
had been guilty of no manoeuvre.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE disclaimed any intention
of being disrespectful to the Noble and Learned Lord.
After a few words from Lord CANTERBURY and
the Duke of WELLINGTON.

The Earl of POWIS replied.
Lord CANTERBURY moved that the debate be ad-
journed.
Strangers were then ordered to.withdraw, but no divi-
sion took place. The third reading was postponed, and
the question of prerogative referred to a Select Com-
mittee.—The House then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 1.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.

Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL presented 39 petitions
from different parts. of Ireland, praying for a repeal of
the union ; 22 petitions from different parts of Ireland
against the renewal of the Bank Charter ; and 39 pea-
tions from various parts of Ireland, signed by 49,984
individuals, against the County Registration Bill, com-
monly called Lord Eliot's Bill.
Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from Pimlico
against the practice of intermural interments.
The Earl of HILLSBOROUGH presented a petition
from the County Down, in favour of the legalisation of.
Presbyterian Marriages in Ireland.
Mr. ROEBUCK moved that the petition of the Rev.
D. Dobree, Rector of the parish of Forest Testeval, in the
island of Guernsey, presented June 28, be printed with
the Votes.—Ordered.
Lord HENNIKER presented a petition from the'
Suffolk Agricultural Protection Society against certain
clauses of the Bank Charter Bill.

Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a petition from the
manufacturing operatives of York against the truck
system ; also, four petitions from Gisborne and other
places against any alteration in the corn-laws.
Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from the Birming-
ham and Gloucester Railway Company against Mr.,
Gladstone's Railway Bill.
Mr. M. PHILIPS presented a petition from the
savings' banks of Manchester, complaining of the reduc-
tion of interest on savings' banks deposits to V. 15s. per
cent. per annum ; also a petition from the Birmingham.
and Manchester Railway Company against the Govern-
ment Railway Bill.
NOTICES OF MOTION—DUTY ON TOBACCO.
Dr. BOWRING gave notice that he would put a ques-
tion to the Government to-morrow, with regard to the
alleged intention of the Belgian Government to place a
differential duty on the importation of tobacco, to the
prejudice of British interests.
The Customs Duties (Isle of Man) Bill passed through
Committee.
Sir G. CLERK presented a petition from the letter-
press printers of Glasgow against working on the Sunday.
The order of the day for going into Committee on the
Land Tax Commissioners Names Bill was read for the
purpose of being postponed until that day week.
The Colonial Postage Bill then went through Com-
mittee.
Mr. SOMERS presented a petition from Sligo against
the Irish Registration Bill.
The order of the day for going into Committee on
the Copyholds Enfranchisement Bill was read, for the
purpose of being postponed.
Mr. L ABOUCHE RE said the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Gladstone) had intimated. that he would bring in
measures which would have the effect of removing the
distress amongst the coopers. He begged now to ask
him whether he had been able to mature any scheme
which would have that effect • and if so, whether there

was any probability of its being brought-forward in the
present session ?
Mr. GLADSTONE said what he had stated was, that
there were two modes in which it had been proposed
to afford relief to the coopers ; one a reduction of the
duty, and the other a substitution. With respect to the
former mode it would not be the duty of the Govern-
ment to propose any reduction of the duty on staves in
the present session. He had received a good deal of
statistical information, which he had no objection to
present to the House,
_ which would show that the state-
ments made to the Right Hon. Gentleman with
respect to the coopers had been coloured to an
unwarrantable extent. As regarded a substitution,
the Government had not yet arrived at any conclusion.
They were not aware, in fact, that the trade were press-
ing for its adoption.
YEOMANRY CAVALRY.
Mr. BRIGHT put to the Right Hon. Secretary of
State for the Home Department the question of which
he had given notice on Wednesday last, as to the forma-
tion of a corps of yeomanry
.at Rochdale. On that day
he presented a petition, signed by 6,000 persons at
Rochdale, praying that the House would not sanction
the raising of a troop of yeomanry in that district, and he
grounded his question on the allegations of that petition.
It stated the force was expensive and needless, as breaches
of the peace rarely took place in that district ; it also
stated that the members of this troop of yeomanry
were all of one political party ; that in case of any
breach of the peace (marring, the force would be
wholly inefficient, as it was naturally cowardly when
brought in contact with danger.—(Oh, oh, and Order.)
Mr. MILES rose to order. He wished to know whe-
ther it was competent to an Hon. Member to throw out
against so valuable a body the charge of cowardice.
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member was in order
in asking the question.
Mr. BRIGHT continued. He was stating what were
the allegations of the petition ; it said that such a force
was not only cowardly, but cruel also, as cowardly per-
sons generally were. It said that the regular force
was a better one in all respects, as for neigh-
bours to fire on each other raised ill blood and
enmity, that might take years to assuage ; and that
young men were called away from their business and
shops to their injury, as they had not the means of af-
fording to play at soldiers in this manner ; it was inju-
rious to themselves and detrimental to the district. The
question he wished to ask of the Secretary of State was
whether the Government would give encouragement to
the formation of such troops, and if so, whether he had
any objection to lay on the table the correspondence
that had taken place on the subject ?
Sir J. GRAHAM said that the Hon. Member for
South Lancashire having notified to him that a number
of persons in the district of Rochdale had offered to
raise a troop of yeomanry, he (Sir J. Graham) referred
that communication to the Earl of Derby, the Lord-
Lieutenant of the county. The reply of the Noble
Earl was, that he saw no objection to raising such a
troop, and on that official opinion he had advised
her Majesty to accept the services of this troop.
The Hon. Gentleman and the House were aware, that
in August 1842, the manufacturing districts were much
disturbed ; that property and life were in danger,
and an application had been made to him of the most
urgent kind for military aid to give assistance to the
civil power. Objections had been raised to the employ-
ment of troops of yeomanry in the place where
they resided. His Noble Friend, the Member
for South Lancashire, in consequence of that, had
ordered the Bolton and Wigan troops to proceed to
Preston, yet, notwithstanding, such was the state of
things in Bolton, that the Mayor set at nought the or-
ders that had been issued by his Noble Friend, and
detained the Bolton troops there for the protection of
the lives of the' inhabitants of the town. That was no
doubt a great stretch of power, and he (Sir J. Graham)
doubted the discretion of it; but nevertheless this yeo-
manry, which had been designated as "hired assassins,"
were detained in Bolton for the purpose of protecting life
and property. 10 (Sir J. Graham) could not forget
the state of Rochdale at that time ; he hoped that such a
state of things would not return again ' • but yet, on the
part of her Majesty's Government, he felt bound to ac-
cept the services offered by these enterprising and loyal
individuals.—(Hear, hear.)
MOROCCO.

Lord PALMERSTON, seeing the Right Hon. Baro-
net at the head of her Majesty's Government in
his place, wished to put to him a question with respect
to the affairs of Morocco. Events had taken place in
that quarter of the world which were of serious conse-
quence, as bearing upon most important interests of this
country. That such was their character was not only
an opinion of his own, but of many other individuals,
who had stated to him that they had had communica-
tions with the Government of France upon these
matters, and received from it explanations and
assurances which they considered satisfactory ;
of course they would not have considered them
satisfactory if they were not so both as to diplomatic
forms as well as substance. It was usual, when matters
were taking place in any part of the world in which
Great Britain had an important interest at stake—the
Government generally took means, by officers of their
own, to secure accurate information of what was passing.
Now the question which he wished to put was, whether,
in the present instance, any persons had been employed,
or were about to be employed ; or whether it was in-
tended to have any Military Commission with regard to
the transactions that had taken place on the frontiers of
Morocco, and whether any naval officers or ships had
been placed on that coast to inform the Government of
the events that were taking place there, or whether the
the Government simply trusted to the accounts casually
received ?
Sir R. PEEL, in answer to the question of the Noble
Lord, begged to assure him that her Majesty's Govern-
ment had felt it to be their duty not to be dependent on
the usual sources of information. Her Majesty's Govern-
ment had given such directions as they thought neces-
htiochthhe course pursued
neces-
sary to ensure full information, and they had also directed
the adoption of such a course as would tend to the real
protection of British interests.
Colonel FOX wished to know from the
re
he
aßpipgehatHdoinn.
Baronetthe niern morning
whether
papersth e
with p
restatementrespect
wt
by the Governor-General of Gibraltar at Ceuta were
this, n
at
nseend t h
at
th
was all he could
state, that Sir Robert Wilson had been at Ceuta,
eas paragraph correct, and whether those proceedings had been sanc-
tioned by the Government.
al-
luded t but Sir
R.
PEEL
he could saidhe ea
had o
ORANGE PROCESSIONS.
Mr. WYSE said he wished to ask the Right Hon. Se-
cretary for the Home Department whether or not it was
,the intention of Government to renew the Act in regard
to orange processions, which expires on the Ist of August
next ?
Sir J. GRAHAM said, judging from the experience
of past years, he had reason to hope that the Protestants
,of the north of Ireland would, on the approaching anni-
versary, abstain from processions as they had so wisely
done for years past.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," espe-
cially from Sir R. Peel.) But he was proud to state that
there were two Acts of Parliament about to expire, both
of which were of very great importance. Ile alluded to the
Act for the suppression of secret societies and unlawful
oaths, and to the Act for the suppression of Orange pro-
cessions. A Bill was already on the table of the House
for the renewal of the former Act, and it was the inten-
tion of the Government, in the present state of affairs in
Ireland, also to propose the re-enactment of the Orange
Processions Bill. He. was, however, happy to say that
Government, under all the circumstances, felt justified in
limiting the duration of the new Bills to the 31st of
August, 1845.—(Hear, hear.)
THE IRISH MAGISTRACY.
. Mr. ROSS wished to ask the Noble Lord, the Secre-
tary for Ireland, on what ground the Lord Chancellor
of Ireland had " thought fit" to reinstate Mr. O'Driscoll
on the roll of magistrates?
Lord ELIOT said he must protest against such
expressions as the Honourable Gentleman had applied
to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.—(Hear, hear...)
With respect to the question itself, he begged
t" say that
he bad received a letter from the Lord Chan-
cellor, stating that having received a memorial, signed
by 2,900 persons of all ranks and classes in the county
of Cork, praying for Mr. O'Driseoll's re-instatement in
the magistracy, and being assured of that gentleman's
restoration to health—(Laughter)—he had thought fit
to accede to the prayer of the petition.
Mr. ROSS—Then I give notice, that on Friday next, I
shall move for all papers, letters, and correspondence
upon this subject.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he would take the oppor-
tunity of moving the second reading of the Irish Regis.
tration of Electors Bill, to explain, as far as it was in
his power to do so, the course which her Majesty's Go.
vernment proposed to pursue with respect to those Bills
which had been already submitted to Parliament, and were
now awaiting the sanction of the House. Those
Bills were all on the paper for Thursday, Wednesday,
and to-day. There were, however' some Bills which
were not yet introduced, but which he had reason to
suppose would cause very little trouble or debate. He
was sorry.to say, however, that a vast mass of business
still remained to be transacted. He would, however,
go to the paper for Thursday. There was, first of all,
the Poor-law Amendment Bill. It was the intention of
the Government to proceed with that Bill.—(Hear,
hear.) There were also two other Bills, of a most salu-
tary nature, having reference to the Duchy of Cornwall,
which it was most desirable should become law as soon
as possible. These Bills would introduce a very
great amendment in the management of the busi-
ness of the Duchy of Cornwall, and he, therefore,
trusted those Bills would not provoke any opposition.
With regard to the Metropolitan Buildings Bill, his
Noble Friend, the First Commissioner of Woods and
Forests, proposed to proceed with that. On Wednesday
there were two Bills under the charge of the Govern-
ment, and with those also it was the wish and inten-
tion of her Majesty's Government to proceed. There
were the Bill for the Regulation of Joint-Stock Com-
panies, and the Joint-Stock Remedies at Law and
Equity Bill Then, with regard to the business on the
paper for the day—there was first the Registration
of Electors (Ireland) Bill. He had already given notice
that it was not the intention of the 'Government to pro-
ceed beyond the second reading of the Bill, as from the
serious differences of opinion which existed respecting
it, it would be quite.i
auposbible that it could pass into a
law during the present session. There was next the
Municipal Corporation (Ii eland) Bill ; he was sur-
prised to hear that any objections were entertained
to it, as the object of the Bill was to extend the provi-
sions of the English Municipal Corporations Act to Ire-
land. But as it was so connected with the Registration
of Voters Bill, that in the opinion of many persons con-
nected with Ireland they should be both proceeded with
simultaneously, he would not press the Municipal Cor-
porations Bill during the present session, though
he regretted the necessity for delay. There
was then the Railway Bill, which was a Bill of
considerable importance—(Hear, hear)—and which, he
was sorry to say, was likely to meet with opposition
from existing railway companies, but as it was of Ira..