The Sun.
London, England, 1819-04-28 00:00:00

ro.nosel ard, and witrressts cxmnincd on 'behalf
If Mr. Habord.—The Report was received.
Mr. Caoicta.objected to the Away in which the
till was worded. which was such that he was,
ptisoaded the House could not agree to it
He also ,thu.sht that 'the criminality had not
been Proved. -
Sir E. KNATCHISULL was at a lots to know
what farther proof could be required. It was
proved that the parties bad been in ►fed together.'
Mr. LUAHINGTON remarked, it was rather odd
to object to the evirlence after the.liouse had gone
put of the CoMmittee.
Admiral SOTHERON rent►iked, that one of the
witnesses hail proved that she had listened at Mrs.
Halford's door, and heard that Lady conversing
with ht-r (the witness's.) brother.
Mr.Crto,l{.Bll.—The proof that the parties con-
vcised was no proof of a criinitl conversation.—
(Laughter.)
Alter a few words from Mr. GotraoN and Mr.

BERNAL,
140E4 CASTLEREAG,II rvbsertzta: that the psrtics
iia.l gone to a Court-of tow—.s the hilt itati.c(iin,
lion' the or.er lin‘.se ttt P4,lla.meitt, anti as wit-
-I:esses,lfati ex.initietl, and not one iptestion
-askvtl. hy ;hose Members who doubted the evi-
e.c,,ce, it •was strange to raise objections in the

prrSe►►t stage.
rat
vt A leo'', words from Doctor Put LL st °RE
the ilia ,wea ordered- to be :cod a tLit d time to
Morro A,

wAGES OF SEAMEN IN MERCHANT VESSELS. •
Lord Laatts.G-roN, in moving for leave to
fo a to empower MA..;ktrAres:to settle the
ttia-
poles concerning rite NV4ges of Seamen in Mer-
chant Vt•SCIS, said, Ow it was not his in-
trillion to int! ench on the law as it stood, hot to
tnpply its drficiencies.—Leave, was given to IA
itig
in the Bill.
RESIDENT CLERGY IN IRELAND.
Sir J. N.E%%Poicr, after a tew pretatoty remarks',
moved that an humble Address be presented to hiS
Royal Highness the Prince Regent, praying that
be would be gracious)? pleased to . (uter, that
there he laid before the House a Copy pr Abstract
of t-he Annual- Return tnade,to the Privy Council
by the ArchLis.hops and Bishops of Ireland; of
the 'tables and descriptions of Ecclesiastical Per-
sons in their vari9us Dioceses, non-resident,' in
porsnance- of the Act of the 48th George 3d,
specifying the cause of suet. non-residence, for, t he
years..lBl4, 181.5, 1816, P:;17, and 1818.7-Or-
dered.

SALT DUTIES.
Dr. PHILLIMORB notice, that on Thurs-
day he inteutlett to niovia Resolution for the re-
duction of the salt Duties.

• DINH MANUFACTORIES.
Mr. U. PARNELL nuived for leave to bring 'in a
Nil to regulate the employment ,t• Children in
tie Cotton and other Factories in .Ireland. No
man wits more aware thau himself of the mis-
chief produced by interfering with indi.idual la-
bour in-many cases ; but the case of children em-
Tiloyed in the Irish manufactories was an excep-
tion. The Bill which he, wished to introduce,
contai,ned a clause, providing that those manor:se-
turers, who Used the children io their employTtlCilt
shanid be exempted from the assessed taxes.
He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would
MA object to this clause. He concluded by mov.
io;:t for leave to bring in a Bill for promoting the•
--education and morals of Children employed its
Cotton and other Factories in Ireland, - • .
Sir G. Hint. objected that no l'etitiOns for such
a Bill had been presented, and that there were no
returns moved for to,show that it was necessary.
If he had been aware of the strange nature of the
Bill, he should never have promised his•assent: to
the motion.
Sir J., NEWPORT said, no MeMber by agreeing
to the motion for leave to bring in a Bill could be
supposed to pledge himself to support the Bill at
all events. When this Bill was brought in, perhaps
any clauses to which the lion. Baronet objected
might be removed.
Mr-: CHIMER said, if Ibis law was necessary for
Ireland, there Was no'reason why it should not
extend to England. :The principle on which'he
conceived the [louse should act, now that the
:two countries were united, was, that unless there
was some special reason to the contrary, all new
laws should extend equally to both. It this Bill
wa's to he confined,to- Feland,,he hoped the Hong
Alvmber who introduced it would he prepared to
give som‘ good reason why it should' not extend
- to both countries.
Mr . YtttLLiPs expressed great surprise at one
-of the provisions-of the proposed Bill, which di-
rected that reports of :the state of children in the
v:trinitS factories shonld _he delivered to( the So-
, ciet y for the.Soppressi”o of Vice, 'and other pri-
vate associati:ens of the same kind.
Mr., Vi. PARNFLL .said the intention of distri-
buting reports to such societies Was to take their
opinion as to the treatment of the children, with-
out giving them any powei to interfere as to the
treatment of the children.
Leuve,was given to bring in the Bill.
CLAIMS ON FRANCE BILL. -
Lord IASTLEREAGiI moved the reading of the
Or:lei of the pAy for the House to resolve iitself
into a Committee on the Bill respecting the
Claims on Frantic ; upon which the Hattie ac-
coriling!y resolved into a Committee;
111 r. C. Illictlisrsos thought the claimants on
France might be considered as consisting of three
classes, the funded, the territorial, and the com-
mercial, clue whole amount of whose claims was
about 6,000,0001. of which about 3,00040001. was
received from 'France. Of all the claimants on
France, none seemed to have .greater foundation
for rentlmeration front the fund appropriated to
the indemnification of British subjects than those
.-who, on the faith of the Treaty of 1786, depo-
sited their property in commercial Teculations its
Trance, anti particularly irk Bourdeanx, This
Treaty gave, every -encouragement to persons to
engage incominerce. wit h.France, and trom•their
exertions an emolument Of 50,0001. was received..
!;early by this country in revenue. l-le wished
that, a clause should be' inserted in the Bill, which-
, world remove any donb•s from the minds of the
Commissioners respecting, the conduct which they
ou;ht to adopt relative to-the Commercial houses
who had been ljured by the French Government.
The demand of these houses at Bourtleatix was
• /30,0001., that of the funded claimants was

. .
00
3,0,GG01, Itie territorial claimants receierd cases, or to
entangle the d
as Xine in Couthancil by't
thesulach
nething, the commeiciel-30001.. and the funded a suagestion nithelitiiCed wase, w
-1,500,0001. By the commercial- body of Boor- -should be so clearly emerended by its own letter
Beaux sufferers only 10001. was received. They -to the Colkanissiouera that, the,y woioa leave no
consisted of 36 houses, whose property to the difficulty in actin justly towards the Parties, and
portion, of 130,0001. was seized by au act of pre- he was more particularly anxions, that they shotild
--bensitin.—[The Hoo• Member here read several be enabled to do 3haily by that class ot crvditors,
papers, and detaledsthe CO "Beet of the Rev:Olu- amongst whom. might fairly, be ennmerated the
tionary" (i4vernment in 1793 towards these, per- liourdeaux merchants, to wlarse case lie had be-
sons.)-;--The conduct Of the Commiasioners .de- -fore drawn the ettention of the House'. •
served the highest commendation ;he therefore' The other clausss were then agreed to, as were
-hoped that a•clanse would be introduced in the the amendments proposed in the preamble by Mr.
Bill to render the way
,open 'to any of these HusxtssoN.' The RepOtt was ordered to
be re-
claimants to-pursue the means of procnring-remo- cetved to-morrow. e- •
'iteration, in case the CoMmissioners should ' not Several returns relative to illicit distillation in
Ireland_ were ordered to be laid before the. House.
think proper to admit' then claints.
Lord Ces-reetimaon 'considered 'the measure A Petition was presented from the'Catholic
which the 'louse was to adopt, vas one Of justice habitants of Clonmel, praying for relief from the,
to all parties. Parliament was not boatur to fill Penal Laws.
juditial duty, mid to decide on the comparative • The lrish Clerk of the Peace Bill Was read a
merits of the different claims The whole de.' first time, :and ordered to be read a second time
ettil rested on the aethoritv of Conventions, and on Thnisday next.
nt acto; y Education Bill was read a
a Trib oust had been appointed which seemed best The lei F
ontstering fits, time, and ordered to be read a second time
suited to the general purpose of adn
ljnstiee to all. By the first Convention, 'his Tii. on WettnrsdeY °e'"iligalit•
blond had been established in a tole;gn coon re, The Scotch Den W
e: O went through a Corn 7
hot front the inconveniences which attended nit ,ts nyt tee, and .he'Report -was ordered to be brought
adMinistration in a foreign country, by a recent I tip to-morrow.
Coov-entiott in last April, it was toner' removed .0 The Iffe Annuities Bill was.read a third time,
this country. The Commissioners hail decided- and passed.
mpresented a Petition from the town
roily on a few cases,. althotieb provisional opi- Mr. PLAIP,
nion had been coven in vatious other ciies. It of Galway, pre-yiug the repeal of the Wiodow•
would be permitted to parties to be heatd by their Tax —Ordered to lie upon theft tattle.
Means of rnteriee two the Mr. goatees', gave eotice, at he would, on
Counsel, and every
qncstiOn afforded ; bet no alteration could be the 3l ol May aext, move for leave to bring in
effected in the Coevention which was the basis a Bib for the purpose of declaring that laws
of the remuneration, • Scotland, passed since the Union, are not al-
Mr. HystussoN agreed in commending the er
teet' b nohbservane, nor contrary custom,
iimpartiality. tate the Commissioners. He feared but remayin in foece until repealed.
that some statements had gone forth, 'tending to The House- adjourned at Twelve
prejudice the mind of the' public against some
particular claimants. Thre was a eartinnlar class I
of per Sons whose claims ;night be considered as
injured in the view of the country. They were
the persons those property was taken from them
by an act of prehension on the part 'of, the Re-
publican Government.. _ This was effected by an
enactment of the NatioAaleCouvetition, which
sentenced French subjects to ten years' imprison-
ment in irons, in.case they concealed any pro-
perty bel .nging to British subjects, after such
enactment. The property was then held at the
disposal of the then Constituted Authorities. -111
the case of Newland and Co., who became bank-
rupts, the French Government stepped in end
seized all the assets It was ea•y to prove confis-
cation or sequestration- before the Commis-
siont rs ; hut were the persons who wete thus
injured not to have some means of redresS?-e--
ln the Convention of last AO, persons vs hose
property was injured by spoliation,- m other-
wise friam the effects of the conduct of the
Republican Government, were said to have a
claim to indetunificaiion. The word effects
was mentioned in the. French copy of the Con-
vention, which be considered the original one,
while in the English' translation the wold
effects was omitted, and such only as laid claim
irnm coutiacation or 3CTICS` nation, considered
as entitled to redress. The Consentiop could not
therefore be adduced as precluding them trout
sharing- any benefit of the grant allowed by the
French Government. As to the claim :or interest
On
.the rhimey,elaimed, the French Goverem.nt,
in 1814. emoted a municipal law of that country,
which 'enacted that no interest should be paid 00
any. money Unclaimed lor five years. This mis-
Roder staoding continued undecided until atter the
peace of 1815, but was regulated by bit Noble
Friend in a Convention subsequent toile victory
of Waterloo. He should propose that the pre-
amble ahonld be amended, by reciting, in the first
placeolieeetth article of the Treaty concluded
iu
May, secondly,. the 9;11 article of that, of
November, 1815, together with the siticle of the
Coteveution signtal simultaneously on the same
day" thiukieg, beerlid, that the preamble its'
such a Bill as this formed the greater it 'd more-
important part of it, and that it worth! Ise vain
and futile to refer generally its ane/ket cf Patna-
mem to ConventionS like these, without reciting
them at length.
Sir C. ROBINON regretted, that whilst the
Right Hon. Gentleman who had just eat dna-it
confessed it would b highly inconvewect its any ,
persons but the Co,, rnissioners of Appeal to as-
some any thing of a judicial authority, that Riebt
Hon. Gentleman had, to a cer-tant-emen,t, at least
.as far as he alluded to the.particolar.case of New-
land and Co. assumed a portion of that joilicial
authority which he bad appeared to reprobkite,
and seemed to encourage the idea that such an in-
terpositivn of a judicial authority is ould become
the House, in frequent instances wherein already
the-decision of the Commissioners bad been made
known. He strongly reptohated such a ~node of
proceeding, as liable togreat inconvenience. He
more particularly regretted this circemstatice,
as
ail the Right Hon. Gentleman's observations ape
peared to have been introduced as merely a pre-
lude to changingsthe preamble of the Bill.
Mr. Hystetssetta denied he bed intended to pre-
judge the case to which an allusions bad been
made ; much lest had he the presumption to as-
sume what ought to be the opinion he should en-
tertain of it. •
• , Sir J.NEwPORT argued, at considerable length,
that the Rouse was now called upon to determine,
by the terms in which the Plesent, Bill was drawn
up, what ought to be the construction the
Commi,sioners should put upon every clause
of this Act ; more ytarticutarly as there had
been a mealiest difference between the French
wording of the Convention and the English
translation annexed thereto, the words " effects
of such hostilities" having been left out in the
latter.. Asp) the nature of these Conventions,
he would tell the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
opposite that there were vatious opinions enter-
tained by persons equally as high, in the proi'es-
sion as any of his Majesty's Counsel. lie teas
perfectly 'satisfied the, Commissioners would act
justly according to the tenor of their oatliss, but
much would depend on the. House first setting
them right by carefully framing the Act now be-
fore them.
• •
Mr. HUTCHINSON regretted-he bed been much
'misconceived. He had by no meaus intended to
call on the llouse'to legislate upon Particular

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, APRIL 27.

BURLINGTON ARCADE.

ODELL AND OTHERS V. LORD G. CAVRN,DISH,

• HERON, AND OTHERS
Mr.4IITHERALL. was this day and in cont
Onatioti of his reply to the arguments of the So
licitor-General and ?sir. Pepys, in favour of grant
ing. the Injunction t(t restrain the Dekentlants
from opening-any passage: ft orn the ?Western Ex-
cange into the Burlingrnu Arcade. He contended
against granting the injunction, on the ground
that the whole of the plaintiffs were fully aware
that the shopkeepers in -liond-street, who might
be inclined to take pietnises..in the Burlington
Arcade, 'were to be at 'liberty to Make private
communications from their' houses into the Ar-
cade, for the 'purpose of accelerating their (rade.
Beyond this nothing bail been -done, and theme-
fore, taking into consideration the adMission of
lone of the defendants, namely, that such tH.44
be the case, he -could not see any ground (or
granting the injunction. •
The Lotto CHANCELLOR observed, ,that the
right to a private communication eras, not dis-
ptittd ; the,complaint was against making a pub-
lic '110E0(0048re.
Mr.AVETHERALL said, the I)eence granted to
the lessees could -only he for their advantage
Suppt)se, said he, an Officer was' to go to this
Arcade tor the purpose of pnrchasing gold lafx,
and 'that -he shoal take a friend with him-, was
be to he told that he Might pass, hut that his
Diem! could not—that his trieod must go round
to the entrance in Piccadilly or B 10111001)
Gardens? Such a posi,ion %VAS monstrous,
boa yet 'it was precisely what his Learned
Friends contended for, Was a matitto with
her pupil, or a mother with her '.daughter, to
be prevented passing because only one of theln
ftecarne a purchaser ? Fitr his own part, he could
not notice such absurdities with any degree of
gravity. WAS every person who wentAo purchase
to carry a flig with hint to denote that he meant
to do so ? or, if that was not the case, what kind
of math, or livery, was he to put on, to entitle
him, to admission ?
'Elle LORD CnatlcELLort'observed, that the difr
ficulty he felt was, that an admission had been
made, that Vona fide purchasers could be admitted;
hut the qmsstiou was, Cottle( he-graot an ntjunc7
tion to restrain all persons who were not so from.
entering. If that was the case; there would be

no- end to injunctions.
Mr. WF,THERALL wished.a list of persons who
should he'ailmitted might be given by the plain-
tiffs. -
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that had already
b done, for all live animals were prohibited.—
(INIM:11 laughter.)
. After some farther .argument front Mr.WETHER-
ALL and I\lr. BEAMS,
.The So-LICITOR-,GF.NERAL replied at very con-
siderable length, 'contending that nuless, the In-
junctiOn were granted, utter ruin twist devolve on
the Exchange, according to Mr. Heron's idea
and, it that was the case, could it be said that
much injury would not bo!lone to tite Aicade ,
The Loan CHANCELLOR—"fake my advice in
this case. Let the parties have a meeting, and
draw up some regulation among themselves about
this passage. should not Arcadians be har-
monious 1. Let me know nn Satin day the conclu-
sion you have come to, and we will then see vihat
is to be done. I think you hod' better settle\ it
among yourselves.