The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-12 00:00:00

'llll Info

LONDON, TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 1844.

The Earl of R►DNOR presented a petition from the
oounty:of Somerset, praying for the removal of all du-
ties on the necessaries of life, and a revision of the
whole system of taxation. A few remarks, which the
Noble Earl made on presenting the petition, led to a
little discussion, in which Lord PORTMAN said he was an
amphibious animal, and had taken part neither with the
League nor the Anti-League. He was, however, op-
posed
to a total repeal of the corn-laws, but did not ap-
prove of the sliding scale, and trusted that the contend-
ing parties would be disposed to meet upon his view of
the question. After a few remarks from the Duke of
WELLINGTON, the Duke of RICHMOND denounced the
proceedings of the League in strong terms. Some other
Lords spoke on the subject, but as there was no motion
before the House, the discussion led to no result.
On the motion of Lord BROUGBAM, the Privy Couneil
Appellate Jurisdiction Bill was referred to a Select
Committee.
A brief conversation ensued, relative to the new
Houses of Parliament, from which it appeared that it
would not be possible to fit up the Houses with perma-
nent fittings by next session.
In answer to a question from Lord LIISORD, relative
to the Rev. Mr. MARSH,
Thellibhop of PETEUBOROUGN (Dr. Davys) said the
Church Discipline Act prevented him from punishing
any offestee committed two years before, or out of the
diocese. (What a humane act !) The reverend offender,
however, had been prohibited from performing any ser-
vice in the diocese.

The Home adjourned at Half-past Seven.
In the House of Commons, Mr. -O'CoNNsia, gave no-
tice that, on an early day after the recess, he should move
fur leave to bring in aßill to define the law of conspiracy.
Mr. SuenmAN CRAWFORD gave notice that, on the
second reading of the Commons' Inclosure Bill, he should
move that it be read a second time on that day six
months.

In answer to a question from Mr. EscoTT, Mr. Con-
DES said he would bring on his motion relative to the
effects of protective duties this day.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
the Report on the Three-and• a-half per Cents. Annui-
ties-Acts WWI brought up, and the resolutions were
agreed to.

. Oa the Report of the Committee, of Supply being
brought up, Capt. BERNAL moved for a copy of any letter
or correspondence which had taken place between
the Secretary-at-War and the widow of Colonel FAW-
cerr, relative to the withholding of her pension. After
giving a brief history of duelling, and mentioning tome
great names who had set the example to Colonel Faw-
cirri', he expressed a hope that the Right Hon. Gentle
man would reverse his decision, and not visit the sins of
the husband upon his widow. Sir HENRY HARDING;
in reply, pointed out one or two cases in which pensions
had been refused under similar circumstances. The
papers, however, would bc produced ; but he could not
hold out any hopes that the pension would be granted,
as there were many reasons for not acceding to it, which
might not exist in other cases. Other Members fol-

I.)wed, and among them Sir CHARLES NAPIER, who
,male a good and amusing speech on the subject.
The only remedy, be said, was to legalise
duelling, and pus a law that all duels should
he fought across a table ; that one pistol only should be
loaded, and that the survivor should be hanged. The
resolution was ultimately withdrawn.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
the Three-and-a-Ralf per Cents. Reduction Bill was
ordered to be read a second time this day, and the
House adjourned at Nine o'Cloek.

A desultory conversation took place in the Rowe of
Lords, last night, on the subject of an anti-corn-law
peti-
tion from the county of Somerset, in the course of which
the Duke of WELLINGTON, anxious--as in the memorable
ease ofMr.IIO9IEISSON'S forced retirement from offiee_that
there " should be no mistake," took the opportunity of
repeating his opinions on the subject of the present corn:
laws. As his language on this occasion was singularly
etfiphatie and explicit, we quote his own words, as we
that them in our Parliamentary report, for we foresee
that they will give rise to much stringent comment at
the next meeting of the League :—All I can say is,"
observed the Noble and Gallant Duke, " I have not
at all changed my opinion on the subject of the petition
Which has this night been brought under consideration.
I voted for the existing corn-law, and I earttest4/ recom-
mend your Lordships to leave it as it is.--(Cheers.)
that is what I recommend to your Lordships, and to
maintain the system which it is the object of that corn.
law to carry into execution." Just in the same spirit in
which his Grace here expresses himself respecting the
bread-tax, he expressed himself in the memorable year
1090 respecting Reform. He entreated their Lordships
to allow of no alteration in the constitution of the Rouse
of Commons ; the representation was as perfect as it
could possibly be ; and therefore he " earnestly re-
commended" that it should be left in this state of
unrivalled perfection. And what was the con-
sequence of his Grace's " earnest" entreaty ? Why
Just this—that not four mouths afterwards a clamour
for Parliamentary Reform rose from one end of the
kingdom to the other; and, notwithstanding the Duke's
"earnest " entreaties, the House of Lords were com-
pelled to consent to the Bill that deprived them for ever
of their unconstitutional influence over the Commons !
Is it not just possible that his Grace's " earnest " en-
treaties respecting the corn-laws may be attended with