The Sun.
London, England, 1828-04-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

gOUSF. OF LORDS, Arm 15.
Mr. Leveck presented &terns of • the quantity of each
of Britiyli Corn sold 'in Mark-lane, during the last
Fe le vearQ.
Dr. PHILLIMOItE and others from the Commons,
Itrought up the Penrvn Witnesses Indemnity Bill.
Mr. TENNTSEP: and others brought up the Bill for th,
Naturalization of Frederick William Jacob.
Mr. Fosee a presented returns from the Liverpool Dad,
Company.
The Earl of ELDON presented a petition from the Ma-
gistrates and other inhabitants of Kilmarnock, in the
ccnnty of Ayr, against any further concessions to the no.
man Catholics.
UNITARIAN MARRIAGE BILL.
The Earl of ELDON, in presenting a petition from certain
clergymen of 'Staffordshire against the Unitarian Marriage
Bill, was anxious to take some notice of a statement mad'
. in a certain newspaper, respecting his conduct as con -
nected with the Bill which was before their Lord-
ships in the last Session of Parliament. It was not
his practice to offer any observation N the House
upon the occasion of presenting petitions, being ge-
nerally of opinion that the petitions should be left to speal:
for themselves, but iu the present instance he felt
that he ought to correct the erroneous statement which
appeared in the publication alluded to. It was there
stated that he undertook to propose the introduction of such
clauses into the Bill as would remove all objection to it on
the part of the Clergy of the Established Church,
whilst at the same time it would afford relief to the Uni-
tarians. It would be in the recollection of their Lord-
ships that he had entered into no such undertaking, and
that he never held out, either to the House or to the
public, any such promise. He had merely declared
that if the House should persist in forwarding the Bill to
a second reading, he would then be prepared to'offer such
amendments as would make the Bill leas objectionable
than it was in its original form. The Bill was brought
in at a very late period of the last Session, and the
business of another office, which the Noble and
Learned Lord then held, necessarily occupied so very great
a portion of his time as to leave him • little opportunity of
Attending to any other matters, however interesting they
might happen to be. It was now, however, said by
the publication in question, that he undertook to bring
in an Unitarian Marriage Bill in the present Session of
Parliament, whilst, in fact, be never even dreamt of such
an undertaking. There could he no question, but that if he,
.nr any other Noble Lord, should pledge lair iself in a former
cession to bring forward a particik r measure in a
estbeequent one, it would be still open to him to withdraw
from that promise, if, upon feather consideration, lit-
he& any reason to alter his former judgment.—
The Noble Lord's opinion always was with respect to the
Unitarian Marriage Bill that a relief vas asked which was
'not at all necessary, regard being had to what the marriage
ceremonies of this country were. But if Parliament
granted any such relief, then it appeared to thata Bill
much less objectionable than the one presented to
, the House last Session might be brought in. It, however,
having been the Noble Lord's opinion that no such Bill
should be passed, he ventured to affirm that he could not
in/reentered into such undertaking. He was sure be spoke in
the hearing of Noble Friends, who could corroborate his
assertion. One of those in particular (Lord Tenterden),
he well remembered, proposed a very considerable number
of useful amendments; but until the publication, the Noble
Lord alluded to, appeared, he knew net what had become of
those amendment'. He would not have thus troubled
the House,' except to hope that if any Noble Lord
'ntended to bring in a Bill respecting Unitarian marriages,
noseuch step would be delayed by any thing to be expected
on his part. He now declared that he had never made
smell an undertaking, and further, that should a Bill
of the nature of the one which bad been brought
into the House last Session, be again brought forward, he
ehould certainly feel it his duty, on the introduction of that
Bill, to zay " Not Content," Nevertheless, should
judgment, with respect to the measure, be overruled,
and if it appeared that such a Bill should he read a second
time, he should do his utmost to make that Bill as good as
;it could he with his assistance, reserving to himself the right
of forming a judgment, as to whether, on the third read-
ble, of it, he ought to say Aye or No.
Lord ELDON then presented a petition of a-similar na-
ture to one presented during a former Session from the
Electote of the Borough of Penryn, praying their Lordships
not to pasa the Bill that had been brought in for disfran-
chising that borough, and that the petitioners might be
heard by Counsel against it. ills Lordship then moved that
Captain Wm. If, Robinson, R.N., John Stone' Thomas
Pierce, Richard Jannr, James Piper, anti several others,
/night be ordered to attend this !louse with respect to that
NIL In presenting this petition and making this motion,
the Noble Lord meant no moors than at present merely to
lay them before the How.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that he could corro-
borate the Noble Lord's statement who had just sat down
with respect to the Unitarian Marriage Bill. That Noble
Lord bad certainly made 10 sitch assertion as it was now
asserted he had. The Noble garquis had a perfect recol-
lection of what passed. not only from the circumstance of
his having been the individual who brought that Bill into
the House, but because about a fortnight ago he had re-
ceived a letter from a person calling himself Secretary of
the Unitarian Association, and requesting him to call
upon the Noble Lord (.Eldon) to fulfil his pledge.—
The Noble Marquis wrote an answer stating that the Noble
Lord had made no such pledge. He knew not whether
that answer had been received hut he had now received
another letter abusing bins for the neglect of his duty.
That individual had, it seems, resorted to the public
newspapers for the purpose of bringing the Noble Lord to
account.—(Loud laughter)--The Noble Marquis added
for dee character of the Vnitarian Association, that
he had applied to that body for the purpose of ascer-
raining whether such an individual represented them or
not, and the reply was, no such person Was known to them.
Lord ELDON observed, that he had also teeelved a
lOW. from the individual alluded to, and which began by
saying that he would publish it iu the Morning Herald, in
C'arlile'.e Zion, and other publications, which at the mo-
ment he efne'd not recollect.—el,lear, and laughter.)--
ase further state* f that he had often hid the fate to see his
name appearing in 10 very respectable colours inethe news-
papers.
Several petitions were presented for the repeal of the
Test Acts, and also against fiftlher concessions to the Ca-
hnlic.s.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE premted petitions front
the surgeons of Liverpool and Leeds, arJ neighbourhend,
praying for measures to he adopted for the facilities of dis..

A petition to the same effect was presented from the
inetlical students of Glasgow.

Lord MA LMESBURY gave notice that he should move,
nn the 23t1 instant, the second reading of the County
Lunatic and Pauper Lunatic Asylum Bills.
Lord GODCRICI-1 moved for returns of the gold and
silver imported auto this country, as far as regarded the re•
ceipt of it, by tLe Mint during the last year; also, for an
account of the sunk Notes circulated through England,
Scotland, and Ireland.
Lord MALMESBURY moved fee certain Returns with
resp Net to Poore' Rates, Way Rate, :i.nd Church Rates. lie
hoped 1,-hat some Bill would he brought 14. by come Mem-
ber for the purpose of having such Returns regularly laid
before the flotNe.
rquit of LAN. snow NE that the
On the inotion of the .lla
sill for consolidating the laws foe Offences against the
Person be read a third time,
Earl GREY said, that he had no ohjeet.i,,g) to the Bill
introduced by the Noble Marquis ; but, apolocizing for
his not having spoken on the subjecE during its second
rea.dic,, he felt himself called upan to object to the omis-
sion of the clause, which provided that the bodies of mur-
derers should not be given to surgeons for dissection ; he
was n,e,t one of those who had ever felt hiwisei f disposed
rrt conts,nd for the punishment which the law attaches to
the perpet,;ation of crime being made heavier than neces-
sity called for, and he could not see the necessity of a prac-
tice which appea:ed to him to be useless and cruel. The
general character of the laws of this country was that they
were too sanguinary, ail this being so, seemed to afford
Lim still greater grounds foe proposing the amendment, to
which be thought it necessary ID call the attention of the
ifouse. It certainly did appear necessary that a difference
should be observed in the punishment of those convicted
of the greatest offence next to treason, the crime of
murder ; but to say, that the law which made that
difference to consist in giving the bodies to the surgeons
for dissection—to say that the existence of that law had
any effect upon the minds of the individuals who had already
eonreived the perpetration of the crime, or in its operation
was attended with any salutary terror, or seemed to keep
op a horror of the crime, did not, in his opinion, express
the real effect of its existence. The grounds for the altera•
tion in that part of the Noble Marquis's Bill to which he
alluded was the great difficulty chic': the existing laws
threw in the way of procuring subjects fur anatomy. Many
petitions bad been presented by persons engaged in acquir-
ing the science of surgery, complaining of the great impe-
diments occasioned by such laws ; and he (Earl Grey) be-
lieved they complained with justice of their existence, but
he hoped that the difficulty would be soon' at an end, for he
(Earl Grey) considered that the circumstances of givine
the bodies of murderers for dissection, threw a great

difficulty in the way of procuring subjects; inasmuch as
that it excited in the minds of the community a greater
horror of the thing generally. He attributed to himself much
blame for not proposing the measure to their Lordships'
consideration as an amendment, on the second reading of
the Bill ; however, he would now move for such an altera-
tion, and he hoped that their Lordships would perceive the
necessity there was for it. He remembered, and he had no
doubt but that their Lordships also remembered, the intro-
duction of a Bill into the other House of Parliament, the
purport of which was to grant the power to Judges of
ordering for discretion the bodies of any persons convicted
of capital offences ; that Bill was ably and effectually opposed
by a Learned Sergeant, then aZlember of that House, who
to the experience of a Lawyer, added that discretion which
liaJ ever distinF,nished him as a Judge. The measures
propgsed were deemed impolitic, and the_Bill was accord-
ingly thrown out;—and he had now to suggest to their
Lordships the expediency of removing entirely the distinc-
tions in the punishment of capital offences, which consisted
in ordering the bodies of murderers for dissection ; and
would, therefore, move that the clause referring to that
subject should he again restored, as it was originally in
the Bill.

Lord TENTERDEN rose to express his concurrence in
the sentiments delivered by the Noble Earl. He would,
however, take the liberty of expressing- his doubts as to
whether the measure would be beneficial or not. When
the Bill came a second time before the House, he (Lord
Tenterden) was not present ; but it was not yet too late,
'even at the third reading, to restore the Rill to the state in
which it was originally presented. The Noble Earl (Grey)
seemed to think, that by the adoption of such a measure,
subjects for anatomy may be obtained with greater, facility;
whether the result would be so or not, lie Lord (Tenter-
den) could not tell ; but he did think the law, which
obliged the bodies of murderers to he given for dissection,
was not an additional terror to the person who had de-
liberately planned the perpetration of the horrible crime of
murder, for that when a man had arrived at such a degree
of depravity as to reflect upon a crime of so heinous a
nature, and calmly to premeditate its perpetration, it was
his opinion that his thoughts were never taken as to its
result--he hoped it was not
yet too late to re-amend the
Bill, and bring it before their Lordships in the state' in
which it was originally presented.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE expressed his con-
currence in the amendment proposed by Earl Grey, and
took the opportunity again to advert to the great diffi-
culties thrown in the way of procuring subjects for ana-
tomy, which, he said, was the only barrier against ac-
quiring a knowledge of the science, and was driving out
of the kingdom every year more and more medical stu-
dents, and obliging them to have recourse to other coun-
tries where such difficulties did not exist. The Noble
Marquis also proposed as an amendment that the pe-
nalties contained in the clause, against procuring abortion
by physical means should not extend to accoucheurs.
Earl GREY said, that, as the Noble Marquis and
Lord Tenterden seemed to acquiesce in the amendment
proposed by him, he would forthwith move for the re-
assertion of the clause to which he had alluded.

The Bill, with its amendment, was accordingly read a
third time, and passed.
On the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, for
the third reading. of the Bill for amending • the Law of
!'Evideire in certain cases, some verbal amendments were
agreed to, and the Bill was passed.
The House adjourned at Six o'Clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Aran. 15.

A person from the Liverpool Dock Trustees Trusteei brougl

up an account of the dock and light duties.
Mr. PLANTA moved for a new writ for the borough
of Ennis, in the room of Mr. Frankland Lewis, who has
accepted the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition from
the inhabitants of St. Paul's, Shadwell, praying that they
may be beard by counsel against certain clauses in the
Lond‘4l Docks lid!.

'Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented another petition
from the trustees for watching and lighting Wapping,
against certain claims in the Whiteehapel Roads Bill.
Mr. BELL presented a petition from the Mining
Districts of St. Catherine, Durham, praying that the im-
portation of foreign lead might not be allowed.
_ _ _

Mr: FERGUSSON presented a petition from the Magis-
trates and Ministers of Paisley, praying for the repeal of
the Test and Corporation Acts.
Mr. ALEXANDER DAWSON presented six peti-
tions from various pat ishes in the county of Louth, in fa
your of the Catholic Claims.

Col. DAVIES moved that Dr. Phillimore be added to
the Committee on the Cities and Boroughs Poll Bill.—
Agreed to.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT moved for returns of the ex-
ports and imports of Ireland iu the years 1720, 1760,
1790, 1800, 1810, and 1820, distinguishing the nature
of the goods and the caunty from whence imported, the
value, and,the gross amount of revenue collected during
these periods.
Mr. HOBHOUSE presented dpetitioa from the Friendly
Society of Botley, praying that the Friendly Societies'
Bill might not pass into a law until they should have an
opportunity of being heard against it.—Referred to the
Committee on the said Bill.

Colonel BAILEY presented a petition from the mer-
chants and traders of Hendon, in Yorkshire, against the
Aire and Calder Navigation Bill.—Referred to the Com-
mittee.

Mr. CAPEL presented a petition from the inhabitants
of the South of Durham, praying to be heard by Counsel
against certain clauses in.the Tees Navigation Bill.
Lord DUNCANNON presented petitions from the Ca-
tholics Of various parishes in the county of Kilkenny,
praying for " free and unshackled Emancipation."—Laid
on the table.

Mr. PONSONBY presented a similar petition from
Yonghal.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from a person named
Thomas Poynter, of Fulham, against the Hammersmith
Bridge Road Bill.— Referred to the Committee on the Bill.

. „
Mr, LITTLETON presented a petition front the Trus-
tees of a road in Staffordshire, complaining of the costs on
Turnpike
The Hon. Membe'r presented a similar petition from the
Trustees of the Bit mingham road.
Mr. BERNAL postponed a motion for which he bad
given notice for Thursday next, to Thursday, May 3.
Mr. HUME presented a petition front the Weavers of
Kilmalloa, in the Queen's County, complaining of distre=s
arising frn.n tithes, taxes, and the want of employment,
and praying for the introduction of the Poor Laws into
Ireland.

On the motion of Mr. TENNYSON the order for com-
mitting, the East Thetford Disfranchisement Bill wns dis-
charged, and it was ordered that the Bill should be re-
committed on the 2d May. The Hon. Member's object in
moving for this postponement was to wait and see bow the
other House wouki dispose of the Bill.
FEES ON TURNPIKE BILLS. ,

Mr. LITTLETON rose to move the resolutions of
which he had given notice, for exempting Turnpike Bills
from fees on renewals. The subject had already been before
two Committees, both of which recommended the aboli-
tion of those fees ; but notwithstanding those recommen -
dations the fees existed, and were much larger than the fees
which were paid on what were called Naturalization Bills.
He had some documents which would prove that the subject of
fees on the renewal of Turnpike Bills was one of great im-
portance. The floating debt due by Turnpike Trusts, for
which in fact those Trusts were mortgaged, was enor-
mous. in England the amount of the debt was
4,437,5001. and the annual interest was 500,5811. The
debt of the trusts in Wales was 231,18(57., and the
interest 34,11'2/. ; and in Scotland the Trusts were
mortgaged for 1,733,000/. and the interest paid
was 213,000/. The total sum for which the whole
Trusts cf. England, of Wales, and of Scotland were
mortgaged was
c.)39,7081. independent of the great an-
nual charge for maintaining and repairing the roads.
Having brought this subject before the House last session,
he (Mr. Littleton) was in possession of communications
on the subject, and all those communications led him to
the conclusion that the Turnpike Trusts throughout
the country were breaking down with the weight of the
debts with which they were now Membered. The re-
ceipts of some trusts were actually iosidficient to pay the
fees on their renewal, which happened on au average
once in seventeen years. The ordinary expense of a
Turnpike 'Frost Bill in both Houses was about 1481._
The lees in the House of Commons amounted to 83/., and
the fees in the Lorde to fail. ; but this was a single Bill,
the feast expensive description of Bill. He had received let-
ters from Devonshire, which stated that 2781. had
been paid for fees on one bill, 280/. on another, and
2731. on a third, In poor csonties the expense of renew-
ing those bills was very great. In Glam6rganshirelast year
the expense was 1,0007., and that was a very poor county.
He should propose first that from and after the end of the
present Session of Parliament all Bills containing among
other matters a provision for the renewal or repeal of any
Acts of Parliament now in force for turnpike-roads be
free from the payment of 'the fees now chargeable by the
Resolutions of the House; secondly, that the Com-
mittees upon Petitions to bring in Bills of this de-
scription should be dispensed with ; and thirdly, that
in eases where the parties applying for a renewal of those
Pills had complied With the standing orders; sish Bills

should be engrossed and printed at the public expense. He
was aware that under those resolutions, a party having in
view other objects than the renewal of a Turnpike Bill,
might avoid the payment of fees ; but in order to meet
that, he should propose that no Bill which, under the pre-
tence of avoiding hills or bad ground, should extend the
old line of road by more than one fourth, should be con-
sidered a renewal Bill, and therefore discharged from the
payment of fees, but that such Bills should be chargeable
with single fees and no more. The last resolution which
he intended to submit to the House was one of very great
importance, and one which deserved the serious considera-
tion ,
of tne House, as the object of that resolution was
to extend the renewal period from 21 to 31 years. By
the three first resolutions, a saving of 234/. in passing each
Bill would he effected, and if the last resolution were agreed
to, the saving would be greater than he could state with any
degreeof accuracy. It was well known that although the re-
newal period was at present 21 years, that those Bills
were upon an average reneweeonce in every 17 years, and
that the average expense of each renews! amounted to
two years' revenue of the trust. The Hon. Member con-
eluded by moving his final resolution.
Mr. SPEAKER having put the question,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, as he
was not at present aware of the extent of the resolutions
to be submitted by the Hon. Member for Staffird, he
did not feel himself called upon to enter into a de-
tail of his opinions upon the subject; and be was
the less inclined to do so, because he understood it to
be the intention of his lion. Friend to postpone to a fu-
ture occasion the discussion upon those resolutions. He
trusted, however, that he should be excused for offering
one or wiz) observations to the notice of the House upon
the resolution which had been submitted. The question
of fees involved not only the interests of those who ap-
plied to pass those Bills, but it also involved in a great
degree the principle upon which fees were demandable by
this House, and he thought it would be well if the
Ikon, before it acquiesced in the resolutions proposed,
considered what effect such Acquiescence might have upon
other branches of fees likely to come under the considera-
tion of the House The House must recollect that the
fees payable upon those Bills were applied to public ob-
jects, and that if those were cut off the House must vote
the means for defraying those public charges, which were
heretofore defrayed out of those fees. By the pre-
sent practice Bills, which were strictly renewal Bill 4,
were chargeable with the lowest scale of fees, hut
if the resolution now proposed were agreed to, he
thought the House might as well give up the fees altogether
upon private BiHs, as there could be no difficulty in intro-
ducing into a private Bill of any description a clause for
the renewal of a Turnpike Bill. He did not, however,
mean to oppose the resolution at present, but should re-
serve his objections to a future occasion.
After some observations from Sir CHARLES Bunarm.,
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE, Sir R. GORDON, Mr. HOHE Daum-
MOND, and Mr. BURRELL in support of the Resolutions,
Mr. BARING said he did not see how the passing of
those resolutions could affect the,fees chargeable upon those
Bills in the Howe of Lords, and he therefore suggested that
after the expiration of the first twenty-one years the Bill
should be considered to he in force until some notice of a
proposed alteration by the Turnpike Trust were given.
Mr. LITTLETON having replied, and entered into a
detail of the advantages to be derived from his resolutions,
Mr. MUNDY suggested the propriety of postponing the
further consideration of the Resolutions to Monday next.
_Postponed accordingly.