The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-26 00:00:00

ORANGE PROCESSIONS.

Mr. WYSE wished to know whether it was the in-
tention of the Government to continue the Orange Pro-
cessions Bill, which was about to expire on the Ist day
of August. If the Right Hon. Baronet did not wish
now to answer the question, he would give a regular
notice on the subject.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, if the Right Hon. Gentleman
would give notice either for to-morrow or Friday, ho
would then answer the question.
Mr. WYSE said, as we understood, that he would
give notice for to-morrow.
IRISH STATE TRIALS.

Sir R. PEEL said that the Right Hon. Gentleman
had given notice of a motion with respect to the Irish
State trials for the 2d of July. Now the
hearing of the writ of error, as he understood, was fixed
for the 4th of that month ; and he would put it to the
Right Hon. Gentleman whether he would bring forward
the motion when the Attorney-General for Ireland, and
also the Attorney-General for England could not ba in
their places? He trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman
would feel it but just that he should bring it in on some
other day.
Mr. IVYSE said in answering the Right Hon. Baronet
he must claim the indulgence of the House. He had
already deferred his notice on account of the discussions
which were going on in the Court of Queen's Bench ;
but it must be recollected that the subject of his motion
had relation to facts rather than to law. It should also
be remembered that there was a very strong opinion
among Hon. Members, that upon the occasion alluded, to
the trial had been an unfair one,—(Loud cries of hear,
hear)—and the conviction was not justified by the cir-
cumstances.—(Cheers.) He (Nlr. Wyse) did not feel
justified in putting off his motion, unless some specific
day was fixed for it.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL was of opinion that in common
justice to the Attorney-General for Ireland, the
motion should be postponed until he was at liberty fully
to be prepared for it, and to give his undivided attention
to it. So strong was his opinion of the injustice that
would be done if the motion was not postponed, that he
should be ready to use the power of Government to as-
sign some other thy for its discusiion.—(Hear.)
Mr. WYSE said as the Right Hon. Baronet was -wil-
ling to assist in giving another day for the discussion of
the motion, he should be disposed to consult his conve-
nience as far as he could safely do so ; but he could give
no specifi2. undertaking upon the subject, until lie had
conferred with Hon. Members of the House, who were
deeply interested in the matter.—The conversation then
d ro Ted.
COL. STODDART AND CAPTAIN CONOLLY.
Mr. B. COCHRANE asked the Right Hola. Baronet
the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government
had received any communication from Dr. Wolff, since
his departure on his mission to the Khan of Bukhara?
Sir R. PEEL said the question was one! involving
considerations so important to the feelings of individuals,
that he would rather not answer it at that movnent, with-
out having had notice of it. If the Hon. Met aber would
put it to him on Thursday or Friday next, he would
give him the best and latest information in possession of
the Government.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, seeing the Right lion. the
Secretary of State in his place, wished to put a question
to him as to a Bill that was in circulation, entitled " A
Bill for the better administration of justice in the county
of Middlesex," and purporting to be printed by order of
the House of Commons. He begged to know whether
Right lion. Baronet intended to bring in such a Bill;
and if so, when ?
Sir J. GRAHAM was not aware that any such Bill
was in circulation ; a Bill had been printed for the pur-
pose of being shown to a few persons in confidence, and
of obtaining information.

Mr. DUNCOMBE said he bad not seen the Bill him-
self, but it had been shown to some members of the
Marylebone Vestry, and it appeared on the face of it,
" Printed by order of the House of Commons."
_ _ . .

Sir J. GRAHAM said there must be some error in that
designation. A Bill on the subject had beesa printed,
and shown in confidence to a few persons, as the most
convenient mode of obtaining information on the ques-
tion involved, and ascertaining their opinions ; but he
had not yet decided on what shape the Bill was to as-
sume, or the provisions it was to contain.
SEES OF ST. ASAPIT AND BANGOR.

Mr. W. O. STANLEY, in withdrawing his motion
for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of the Act
6 and 7 WilL IV, c. 77, as relates to the union of the
sees of St. Asaph and Bangor, said, he must ask the
Right Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert ' Peel) to
state more explicitly than he had yet done what
his intentions were with regard to this measure.
On the present occasion, he did not intend to go into
the question ; but as there was an opinion out of doors
that the consent of .her Majesty would be required be-
fore any further progress could be math', he bogged to
ask whether, if that consent should be required, it
would be withheld by the Government.
Sir R. PEEL said, that if the Hon. Gentleman
had brought forward his motion, be would have felt it
his duty to oppose it. The question, whether or not the
consent of the Crown was necessary, was one involving
many complicated considerations; and he did not under-
take to say whether, if it were declared to be necessary in
the present instance, it would be given by the Government.
Mr. W. 0. STANLEY said that, though it might be
necessary to renew the motion at a future period, he
should, for the present, withdraw it.
CORN LAWS.

Mr. C. VILLIERS then rose to move that this House
do resolve itself into a Committee, for the purpose of
considering the following resolutions :—"That it appears
by a recent census that the people of this country are
rapidly increasing in number. That it is in evidence
before this House that a large proportion of her Majesty's
subjects are insufficiently provided with the first neces-
saries of life. That, nevertheless, a corn-law is in force,
which restricts the supply of food, and thereby lessens
its abundance. That any restriction, having for its
object to impede the free purchase of an article upon
which depends the subsistence of the community. is in-
defensible in principle, injurious in operation, and ought
to be abolished. That it is therefore expedient that the
Act 5 and 6 Victoria c. 14, shall bo repealed
forthwith." The Honourable Member said the
purpose of the motion of which he had given notice was,
that of once again bringing under the consideration of
that House the claim, so just, so important in itself, made
on the part of the community at large, that the trade in
the first necessary of life, now restricted by the Act of
that House, should be in future unfettered and wholly
free. He could most truly say that such was the
importance which he attached to this claim, that if he
for one moment imagined that the power with which it
was presented to the House could in any way affect its
success, nothing would have induced him again to become
the instrument of making the motion on this occasion.
However, this was notoriously not the case. He
had upon two occasions brought this matter before
the House, and he had been supported by Members
of the greatest ability, who had left nothing unsaid that
could be urged in its favour, and yet this bad been done
in vain. It might, perhapx he asked, upon what grounds,
therefore, he now proceeded to renew this appeal.
Ile thought he might take credit for not having
adopted this course without due consideration.
If those who were united with him in opinion
on that subject, bad been silent upon it during
this session, their opponents would not have been slow
to infer that either by their overwhelming influence, or
their persuasive eloquence, they had been induced to fly
from the field—that they were satisfied with the former
*decision of that House. A notion more foreign to the
truth could not be imagined by anybody. But
he thought the public were likely also to have
concurred in this view if they had remained silent, con-
sidering the novel attitude which country gentleman had
assumed on this question during the past year. Those
gentlemen had considered it expedient, for the purpose
of maintaining this law, or of conciliating public opinion,
to descend into the field of public agitation, and they
had followed closely in the track of that body who
were leagued together in opposition to them. It would
have appeared somewhat remarkable, considering the
appeal which had been made, if there had been no dis-
cussion in that House. Their meetings appeared to have
been somewhat select, and they seemed rather to have
agitated themselves than to have succeeded in awakening
much sympathy for their cause. But inasmuch as their
professions appeared so large in print, and as there had
been no lack of confidence on the other side, it would
have been somewhat curious if, when the parties had
met on common ground, there had been no opportunity
of fair argument in that House. The public expected
an opportunity of judging fairly between the contending
parties. He saw little reason for despair. and some
for hope, in this continued discussion on this question.
He was unable to explain, unless from a conviction of
the substantial justice of the anti-corn-law cause, why
the Government had not allowed any month of last