The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-03 00:00:00

BANKRUPT RETURNS.

Mr. WIATSON moved far the following returns:—Return
of all sums of money received and paid to the fund called
" The Secretary of Bankrupts' Account," since the passing.
and under the statute 5 and 6 Vic., c. 122; with a return of
the names of all persons who have been paid by salary, compen.
sation, or in any other manner, and with the sums charged on
the said fund, and all charges allowed on the same fund.—
Return of a copy of every claim for compensation made to the
Lord Chancellor by each person, as the clerk of the enrol-
ments, deputy of such clerk, comptroller of the hanaper, riding
clerk, six clerk, sworn clerk, waiting 'clerk, agent, or record
keeper, under the statute 5 and 6 Vic. c. 103, s. 12.—Return
of a copy of any order mace by the Lord Chancellor for corn.
,pensation under the statute 5 and 6 Viie. c. 103.—Return of all
compensations awarded or allowed to officers in the Courts of
Justice, under the statutes 11 Geo. 4, and Will. 4, c. ;
stating the names of the persons, toe amount of compensation,
and the office in respect of which the compensation was awarded
and allowed.—Return of all sinecure offices, and offices entirely
performed by deputy in the Court of Chancery, and the
Superior Courts of Common Law at Westminster; stating the
names of the holders of such offices, and the amount of salaries
received for the last three years.—Return of the various duties
performed by the Masters of the 'Courts of Queen's Bench,
Common Pleas, and Exchequer, at Westminster.—Agreed to.

MISSION TO SHOA.
Dr. BOWRING moved for a copy of the correspondence
relating to the late Mission to Shoa..
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR moved for copies of any
correspondence that had taken place between the Poor- law
Commissioners and the guardians of the Glastonbury Union,
relative to the dismissal of Mr. George Newman from the
medical superintendence of the poor in that union.
CANADA—SIR C. METCALFE.
Mr. STUART NVORTLEY said he had to put a question
of great importance to the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the
Colonies. He wished to ask his Noble Friend, whether the
course pursued by Sir Charles Metca lfe in Canada had the
concurrence of her Majesty's Government ?
Lord STANLEY said he was not at all sorry that his Hon.
Friend had put the question to him, because he believed that,
in a matter of this kind, it was essential that there
should be no mistaken impression wpon the public mind.
He had no hesitation in saying that the policy pursued by Sir
Charles Metcalfe in Canada had the en tire approbation of her
Majesty's Government. Theselection of Sir Charles Metcalfe—
& man of tried abilities, and known liberal views in politics—as
Governor of Canada, was quite in keeping with the course
which her Majesty's Government wished to pursue in that coun-
try. But although Sir C. Metcalfe went out to carry out the views
of the Government at home, yet he wag equally determined to
resist any demands inconsistent with tlw dignity of the Crown.
He should conclude by saying that Sir C. Metcalfe, in pursuing
this course, would have the entire supp or t of the Home Govern.
ment.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to ask whether it was the
intention of the Government to commom icate to the House the
instructions sent out by the Governmeiat at home to Sir Charles
Aletcalfe, or the correspondence whic.h had taken place be-
tween the Government and the Colonial- office ?
Lord STANLEY said that no coninaunication such as the
Noble Lord alluded to had been sent to. Sir Charles Metcalfe,
but at. the proper time, if the Noble lord chose to put the
question, he would explain the course pursued by Sir Charles ;
when he woul6l hope to satisfactorily vi.ridicate it.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose, when_ _

Mr. ROEBUCK called the lord to order. It was
not right to allow a conversation of this kind, when no other
person could make an observation.

BRAZILS„

Mr. HAWES wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet, the
First Lord of the Treasury, if he would have any objection to
lay upon the table copies of the paper:; connected with the re-
cent treaty concluded with the Brazils'?
Sir R. PEEL said, in answer to the Hon. Gentleman's
question, he felt bound to say that the treaty wou'Al
expire in about a year, and during the present state of the
matter he did not deem it consistent with his public duty to
order the returns to which the Hon. Gentleman alluded.