The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-19 00:00:00

ON SUNDAYS.

Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition fron.
Bristol praying the House to pass a measure prohi•
biting the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sundays.
Mr. BRIGHT presented petitions from several
places in Scotland to the same effect.
MERCHANT SEAMEN'S FUND.

Mr. L ABOUCHERE presented a petition praying 1
the House to inquire into the manner in which the
proceeds of the Merchant Seamen's Fund were ex-
pended.
Lord DUNCAN presented petitions from places in
the county of Lincoln against the keeping open of
public-houses on Sundays.
Mr. MITCHELL presented a petition from severe'
medical practitioners in Bradford, against several pro-
visions in the Medical Bill brought in by Sir James
Graham.
Mr. M. BELLEW presented petitions from places
in Ireland, complaining of the arbitrary powers exer-
cised by the Poor-law Commissioners.
Lard A. LENNOX presented petitions from
various places in Essex and Sussex. The Noble Lord
did not, however, mention the prayers of them, where-
upon thereiwas a general cry of "For what ?"
Lord A. LENNOX (in a low tone of voice)—
Against the tariff.—(Great laughter, and cries of
" Hear.")
Lord J. RUSSELL presented a petition from the
Anti-Slavery Society, numerously signed, against
the emigration of labourers into the Mauritius, which
emigration, it was understood, was encouraged by tip!
Government. The petitioners further complained that
the greatest immorality prevailed in the Mauritius
in consequence of this importation. It was prayed
that the Government might not advance any loan
for the purposes of such emigration as the petitioners
said had been contemplated.
NEW ZEALAND.

Mr. C. BULLER moved that the petition of mer-
chants, bankers, and traders of the city of London, on
the subject of New Zealand be printed.—Agreel to.
THE TARIFF.
Mr. Alderman HUMPHERY presented a petition
from Bermondsey against the taritf.—(Laughter.)
I%IAYNOOTH.

Sir R. INGLIS said his Right Hon. Friend at the
head of the Government had answered a question the
other evening, put to him by an Hon. Member, with
respect to the measure it was intended to introduce
on the subject of Roman Catholic institutions. His
Right Honourable Friend did no more then than
state the time when he proposed to call the attention
of the House to this subject. He (Sir B. Inglis)
requested now to be permitted to ask in what way the
Right Hon. Gentleman proposed to deal with this sub-
ject, whether by an increased grant in the estimates,
or whether by Bill? He also wished to ask whether he
intended to leave Protestant instieutions as they now
stood? He wished to ask these two questions—first,
whether it was the intention of his Right Hon. Friend
to proceed by Bill in the case of the Roman Catholics,
and secondly, whether it was his intention to leave
the Protestant institutions to an annual vote and dis-
cussion?

Sir R. PEEL was sorry his Hon. Friend had
thought it right to ask questions with respect to in-
dividual points of the measures it was intended to
propose : it was a very great advantage to
state the okects of the measures generally ;
but he could have no objection to answer
the question of his Honourable Friend. He
certainly proposed to proceed by Bill in the case of
Maynooth, and the establishment of other academical
institutions for Ireland ; and if the House should
be prepared to assent to the proposition of
an increased grant to Alaynooth, he thought
great advantage would be derived in doing
away with the annual discussion on the subject.
There would Ise a great advantage in making the
grant permanent, that it might not be subjected to
an annual dispute. As to the grants to the Protes-
tant Presbyterians, whether they were to be annual
or not, be thought they fell within the same general
principle, and he saw no reason why they should not
be made permanent. He was not aware of what the
Right Hon. Gentleman referred to.
Sir R. INGLIS said he referred to the Regium
donum and the grant to the Presbyterian Church of
Scotland.
Sir ROBERT PEEL presumed the Right
Honourable Gentleman did not mean to object
to those grants.—(Great laughter.) If he wished
for a guarantee for the continuance of those grants,
from the great respect he felt for the Presbyterian
body in Scotland, he (Sir Robert Peel) was not at
all prepared to say it should be refused.
Sir R. INGLIS disclaimed having any intention
to object to the grants.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL—Then it is hardly fair for the
flight Hon. Gentleman to raise a prejudice against
my prcposal with respect to the grant to Maynooth,
by appearing to imply from it that the Presbyterian
Protestant bodies are to be dealt with on a different
principle.—(Hear, hear.)
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

Lord DUNCAN said an Act was passed last ses-
sion by Lord Brougham and the Government
to amend the law of bankruptcy ; by the 57th section
of that Act, the power of arresting for debt when
the amorint was less than 201. was abolished from the
edate of the passing of the Act, 9th Augusl, 1844. Th
words "except for debts now in subsistence," were,
it was supposed, accidentally omitted from the clause
In consequence of this omission, twelve hundred
tradesmen in Bath had been greatly inconvenienced
by those who owed them debts contracted before that
date refusing to pay them. The question he had to
ask wes, whether it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to introduce any measure after Easter to relieve
those unfortunate persons from the hardships they
%s ere suffering, in consequence of the neglect of the
Crown lawyers?
Sir J. GRAHAM condoled very sincerely with
the Noble Lord uncle; the circumstances in IA hid;
his constituents were placed ; however, he might state
that he was not aware of any general inconvenience
that had arisen from the measure passed last year. He
only knew it had had this effect; that though be fore it
passed, the gaols )f the country wer3 crowded with
a large number of debtors in a hopeless state
of captivity, the prisons were no longer crowded
with these hopeless individuals. lle was not
prepared to recommend any material alteration in the
Bill alluded to by the Noble Lord.
Lord DUNCAN seeing the Right llon. Gentle-
man, the Solicitor-General in his place, begged leave
to call to his recollection that when he (Lord
Duncan) waited upon him with a deputation on
this subject a few days ago, he (the Solicitor-
General) stated that he was perfectly aware that this
Bill had caused great inconvenience to the tradesmen
of this country. Now he begged leave to ask whether
he still remained of the same opinion.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought he ought
not to answer the question of the Noble Lord. It
was not fair for the Noble Lord to state what had
passed during his interview with the deputation. He
did not exactly recollect what expressions he did use,
but, if he remembered ",„rightly, he believed he
stated that he had understood very great inconveni-
ence had resulted to tradesmen from this Bill ;
and he asked the deputation whether they, as prac-
tical men, were prepared to suggest any remedy. He
thought the Noble Lord would do him the justice to
say that none of them could suggest any. although
he threw out many which did not appear to meet
their views.

The subject then dropped.
SLAVERY AND THE PRESIDENT'S
MESSAGE.

Mr. ALDAM begged to ask the Right Honourable
Gentleman the First Minifter of the Crown, a ques-
tion of which he had given him notice, and which re-
lated to a statement that appeared in the last Message
of the American President of State. The statement
related to the treatment of liberated slaves in the
British colonies, and insinuated that they were no
better than when in their former state of slavery.
The President declared that when they were taken to
the British colonies they had to serve an
apprenticeship during which they were treated, if
possible, with more severity than when they were
slaves. Now, he wished to know whether the Presi-
dent of the United States of America was correctly
informed when he made the statement that the condi-
tion of the liberated African in the British colonies
was no bett,:r than slavery ? _ _

Sir R. PEEL said he was glad the Hon. Member
had given him notice of this important question. It

was rather to be regretted that the President
of the United States of America should send
over a formal message upon the subject of
negroes who were intended to be removed from a
state of slavery to comparative freedom, at a great ex-
pense to this country, without first ascertaining what
was the real position of the British colonies. He
must also say, that if the President of the United
States should think it expedient to appoint a Commis-
sion for the purpose of going to the West Indian
[LEFT SPEAKING.]