The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-23 00:00:00

HAMBURGH MAIL.

FRANKFORT, MARCH 10.—The accounts from Greece
are melancholy ; to be brief, persons who in general
judge correctly, expect to see KinglOtho shortly in Ger-
many. The chief point in question is said to be, whether
his brother will.tbink fit to accept the Throne of Greece.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 22.
ROYAL ASSENT.

The Royal Assent was given to-day, at a quarter be-
fore Five o'clock, to the Three-and-a-Half per Cent.
Annuity Reduction Bill ; the Three-and-a-Half per
Cent. (1818) Annuity Reduction Bill ; the Consolidated
Fund (8,000,0001.) Bill ; the Gaming Transactions
Witness's Indemnity Bill, and tho Teachers of Schools
(Ireland) Bill.

The Lords Commissioners were the Archbishop of
Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor, and the Duke of
Buccleuch.

Their Lordships then adjourned during pleasure.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack shortly after Five o'Clock.
Messengers from ' the commons brought up the
Ramsay Inclosure Bill and other Bills.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented petitions from
Rye, against any alteration in the corn laws.
Lord PRUI)HOE presented similar petitions from
Shillbottle, in Northumberland.
The Earl of RADNOR took that opportunity to explain
that on a former occasion, when he referred to a meet-
ing which. had been held in Yorkshire, respecting the
corn-laws, he had not alluded to Lord Feversham, but
Lord Harewood.
After a few words from the Duke of RICHMOND and
the Duke of BUCCLEUCH, the matter dropped.
The Bishop of EXETER gave notice that he would
move for copies of any communications which had
been made between the Government and the Poor-
law authorities, respecting the case of Mary Miller,
the unfortunate female who committed suicide in a work •
house a short time ago.

The Marquis of NORMANBY presented a petition
complaining of the operation of the Act under which the
Lambeth Water-works was established.

The Earl of RADNOR said the Noble Earl to whom
he had alluded on.a former occasion (the Earl of Hare-
wood) had stated a fact at the meeting in Yorkshire,
and from that fact he drew an inference, which was that
the Anti-Corn-law League incited to incendiarism. He
(the Earl of Radnor) had called the attention of the
Noble Earl to the paragraph in the newspaper in which
the meeting was reported, and the Noble Earl admitted
that it was correct.

The Duke of BUCCLEUCH said, that within the last
four days he had seen Lord Harewood, and the conversa-
tion turned on this very subject. The Noble Earl ad-
mitted that the report in the newspapers of what he had
stated was correct, but he did not admit that the infer-
ence which was drawn in the leading article of that pa •
per was correct. The Noble Earl never imputed to the
..Anti-Corn-law League any attempt to incite to incen-
diarism.

The Earl of RADNOR Said, the fact the Noble Earl
(llarewood) had stated was, that a farmer had attended
a pro-corn-law meeting in Norfolk, and the same night
his stacks were burnt. The inference the Noble Earl
meant to draw from that was, that the stacks had been
burnt through the agency of the Anti-Corn-law League.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE denied that such an infer-
ence could be drawn from the words of the Noble Earl.
Lord BEAUMONT said, he was at the elbow
of the Noble Earl (Harewood) when he made
the speech to which the Noble Earl (Rad-
nor) had alluded, and he was sure that no
person at the meeting supposed for a moment that
the Noble Earl intended to impute to the Anti-Corn-
law League any intention to incite to incendiarism.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said he was neither a
pro-corn-law man nor an " anti-corn-law man," but he
thought it was to be regretted that Noble Lords should
make speeches from which objectionable inferences
might be drawn.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented several petitions
from parishes in Norfolk, complaining of the Anti-Corn-'
law League. He took that opportunity of observing
that he did not know why Lord Harewood did not
answer the letter of the Noble Earl opposite ; yet he
was not surprised that his Noble Friend did not think
the House of Lords ought to be a court of appeal for,
what passed at public meetings. He was not sorry for.
the explanations that had passed, and he hoped that
they would induce the League to be more guarded in
future. The Noble Earl (Radnor) said that a gentleman
advised the country people at an anti-league meeting to
throw the leaguers over the bridge if they came to Lin-
coln. He did not approve of such advice, for he always
was opposed to violence ; but if the gentleman alluded to,
had said se, he would recommend the leaguers not to go
to Lincoln.(Great laughter on the Tory side.)
THE SILK WEAVERS.

Lord LILFORD presented a petition from the opera-
tive silk weavers of the township of Leigh, praying for
the 'appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into
their case ; and also to move for the appointment of a
Select Committee thereupon. The petition was
signed by upwards of 5,000 persons. He did not intend
to go into the general question affecting the grievances
of which the petitioners complained. He knew their
Lordships were jealous—and properly jealous of the
statements of petitions. He should confine himself merely
to the allegations of that petition. They stated the
causes of their distress to be low wages, unjustifiable
abatement of those wages, want of employment, and
home competition. From all the investigation he had
been able to make on this • subject, he was satis-
fied that their allegations were well founded ; and if
their Lordships would give him the opportunity, he
would confirm those statements by evidence on oath.
The Arbitration Act had been found to be very ineffec-
tive in reconciling the differences of masters and men ;
for a recourse to them was attended with expense, loss of
time, and seldom was attended with any satisfaction,
(The Noble Lord then read extracts from letters received
by him from magistrates, confirming the statements of
the petitioners as to the inefficiencyof the arbitrators,
and that the wages of the workmen were abated frequently
in an arbitrary manner, and without any justification.)
He trusted their Lordships would consider this matter
coolly and dispassionately, and look at all the bearings
of the case, for by so doing it would be holding out a
hope to those people, and prove to them that their Lord-
ships were most anxious to do all they could to alleviate
their distress. He should not, under all the circum-
stances of the case, at present move for the appointment
of a Select Committee; but he, nevertheless, hoped that
the matter would not be allowed to rest where it now was.
Lord DALHOUSIE felt great satisfaction in bearing
his Noble Friend announce his intention of not applying
for a Committee, because it would have a tendency to
mislead the public mind. The subjects mentioned in
this matter were many and varied, and in many instances
so totally beyond the control of Parliament, that it
would be almost impossible to legislate for them. Such
being the case, he thought it would be only exciting the
public mind without doing any practical good, and tend
to increase the difficulties by which the matter was al-
ready surrounded. He could not agree with his Noble
Friend on the propriety of the alteration which he proposed
in the law relating to this subject. He did not wish, as
an individual, to pledge her Majesty's Government to
the adoption of any particular course, but still he would
say that there should be no loss of time in their endea-
vour to amend the existing law.
After a few words from Lord KENYON, the subject
dropped.
The Marquis of CLANRICRADE presented a peti-
tion from a place in Ireland, praying for the repeal of
the legislative union.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
Harefield, Middlesex, against the Ecclesiastical Courts
Bill.
The House then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 22.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.

The following Bills were read a second time, namely,
the Eastern Counties' Union Railway, the Newcastle
and Darlington Junction Railway and Tyne Bridge
8111, the Pontop and South Shields Railway Bill, and
the Edinburgh, Leith, and Granton Railway bill.
The Birmingham Canal Navigation Bill was read a
third time and pased.
FACTORIES BILL.

Sir JOHN EASTHOPE presented a petition from
Leicester, signed by a large number of manufacturers,
expressing in strong terms the disapprobation of the
amendment introduced by the Noble Lord, the Member
for Dorset.
THE SILK MANUFACTURE.
Lord F. EGERTON presented a petition signed by
5,000 persons connected with the silk-weaving trade,
complaining of the many disadvantages which pressed
so heavily on them, and praying that Parliament would
appoint a Committee to inquire into the matter.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented a petition
prom the managers of the poor in the several townships
of the parish of Rochdale. The petitioners stated their
objections to the bastardy;clauses of the Poor-law Bill, and
prayed that they may be amended before the Bill be
passed into law ; also, a petition from Braintree in
Essex, praying for a full and fair representation of the
people ; and a petition from J. B. Harvey, of Col-
chester, against certain clauses in the Great Western
Railway Bill.
IRELAND.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from St.
John's, Newfoundland, praying that justice might be
done to Ireland, and that recourse might not be had to
measures of coercion ; also several petitions from dif-
ferent places in Ireland, complaining of the mal-admi-
nistration of justice ; also petitions from different parts
of Ireland, signed by upwards of 180,000 persons, com-
plaining of the effects ,produced upon Ireland by the
legislative union, and praying for its repeal.
Lord J. RUSSELL presented a petition against the
ten hours' clause of the Factories Bill.

Sir R. IL INGLIS presented a petition from the mem-
bers of the Bath Church of England Lay Association,
complaining of the conduct of Dissenters, and praying
the House to resist all attempts to deprive the Church
of England of the full amount and benefit of her esta-
blished rights.--(lronical cheers from the Opposition.)