The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-21 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PA RLIAMEN T

HOUSE OF LORDS, Mau 20.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack
shortly after Four o'clock.
The Marquis of Sligo and Lord Keane took the oaths and
their seats.

THE ROYAL ASSENT.
The Royal Assent was given to-day by Commission to the
Exchequer-bills Bill, the Liverpool Docks Bill, the Bradford
Gas Bill, the Southwark Improvement Bill, the Glasgow
Turnpike Road Bill, and several Private Bills.

---
MAY N
Lord KENYON presented 2S pvtitions fom places in Cheshire and Somersetshire, and 5 from
placesr in Munster,
against the grant to Maynooth.
Lord HATHERTON presented a petition from the Dis-
senters in Stafford apainst the grant to Maynooth—but stating
that they thought that all property which had been taken
from their Roman Catholic fellow-subjects should be restored
to them.

OAKINGHAM CHURCH.
The Marquis of NORaIANBY rose to present the
petition of which he gave notice yesterday, It was
exceedingly lengthy, but as he was fully in pos-
session of the facts of the ease, he would take the
liberty of stating them to the House. The petition
was from the parishioners of Oakimtham, in Berkshire. It
appeared from the petition that the population of the parish
was upwards of 4,000, and the extent of the parish 8,000
acres. The Dean of Salisbury was rector, patron, and ordi-
nary of the church. The tithes had been commuted for 1,6001.
a year, and on the last renewal of the lease, the dean
had received the sum of 2,c00/. as the fine, although the an-
nual rental was only made to appear as 261. The curate's
stipend was 1501. a year, of which 401. came out of the tithes,
and 261. from Queen Anne's Bounty:. Owing to the dean
being ordinary, there had been no visitation for several
years, and the church had got so much out of repair,
that the parishioners were afraid to attend it. An architect
had been employed to survey the building, who reported
it to be in a state of great dilapidation. A vestry
had been summoned, who were unanimous in address-
ing the ordinary with a request that the repairs
might be effected. The ordinary referred them to the lessee,
Mr. Jacob—that gentleman employed his own surveyor to go
over the building, arid he reported that the building was not in
that dangerous position which it was stated to be, and he ac-
cordingly refused to make the repairs. The parishioners upon
this applied to a learned civilian for his opinion upon the case.
His advice was that the parishioners might repair the nave, and
the rector the chancel; that they might levy a rate, with the
con ent of the parishioners, but not without it. They again made
a representation to the dean, and on further inquiry, it turned
out that the lessee was bound not to restore the chancel, but to
keep it in its present state. The worst part of the business
was, that a letter lately appeared from the Dean in the pub-
lic papers, from which any one would suppose that only a partial
statement of the case had been laid before him, while he
was in possession of the whole of the facts. The parishioners
were prevented from repairing the nave, because from ano-
ther survey of their architect it appeared that if they
repaired one part of the building the probability was
that the whole would come to the ground. The
case was simply this, was it right that 4,000 persons
should be deprived of the power ol repairing the church by a
rate levied by themselves, and placed in that anomalous psi-
tins, too, by one who was, in his own person, ordinary, patron,
and rector. He would conclude by moving that the petition
do lie upon the table.
The Earl of HADDINGTON presented a petition against
the Maynooth Bill.

THE GAME-LAWS.
Lord CAMPBELL presented several petitions from Dun-
fermline, Cupar, and Kirkaldy, in the county of Fife, against
the game-laws. The petitioners stated certain grievances in
the operation of those laws of which they complainel. The
first grievance set forth was the injury inflicted by
those laws on the tenant farmers. This, however,
he looked upon as a matter of contract between land-
lords and tenants, and if the latter did not take
care to protect themselves from the ravages of game by the
provisions of their leases, it was their own fault. A great deal
had been said against the landlords on this head. They had
been accused of great injustice, and likened to the nobles of
France before the revolution. In his opinion, there was not
the slightest pretence for such a charge. The tenants
had the power of protecting themselves if they
would. With regard to the second grievance, he must
say the reetitioners had reason on their side. It was the state
of thq law with regard to poaching and the killing of game.
roe country suffered very much from the crime of poaching,
from the conflicts between poachers and keepers, and by the
murders which, in many instances, had resulted from those con-
flicts. In 1811 there were 3,000 game convictions. The present
year 0,1,ey amounted to nearly 5,000. During the years from
1`:.;84 to 1844 there had been 42 instances of homicide from
conflicts between poachers and gamekeepers, and 25 convictions
for murder during the same time. The evils arising from
these laws were not only the individual suffering inflicted upon
the violators of the law, but the ill-feeling that was created be-
tween rich and pnor, between the members of the aristocracy
and the community at large. He should not like to see an
alteration of the law that would interfere with the field sports of the gentleman of this country, but he hoped they would be
limited in such a manner as would do away with the existing
evils of the system. He hoped that if the Government did not
take up the question, that a Noble Lord present ( Lord Deere)
would take it up, and introduce a measure to do away with the
grievances of which the petitioners complained.
Lord DACRE said, that as he had been so pointedly alluded
to by the Noble Lord who had just sat down, he would say a few
words on the subject to which their Lordships' attention had
been called.—( Hear, hear.) True it was that he
had moved for a Committee to inquire into
the nature and general character of the game laws, and that in
the year Itl3l he had been successful in effecting certain altera-
tions and modifications of them. It would not, however, be
proper in him to allude further to the subject at present. He
saw with regret the evils to which the Noble Lord (Campbell)
so eloquently referred, and he sympathised with every feeling
which the Noble Lord expressed in respect to them. It was
impossible, however, to put down poaching as long as they had
not the sympathies of the people along with them. He had a
Bill actually prepared in reference to the game laws, but as
there was a Committee at present sitting on the subject in an-
other House, he, as a matter of delicacy, deferred bringing
forward his measure till he knew what decision they would come
to on the subject, or what would be the result of their labours.
Under these circumstances, he would not at present say more
on the matter.
Lord HA THERTON never approved of the present system
of the game-laws. He thought that the alterations introduced
by the Noble Lord who had just sat down were a very great
improvement. But, nevertheless, a great deal still remained
to be done. The injustice which still existed was so great as
to render it extremely desirable that a measure should be
brought forward to suppress it. With respect, for instance, to the
preservation of hares he considered that something should be
done. It was, in his estimation, a monstrous and unjust act,
and he could never reconcile his mind to such a pernicious
portion of the game-laws. The whole evil consisted in the
excessive preservation of hares, and entertaining as he did this
decided opinion, he had thought it his duty at least to point
out the anomaly to their Lordships, trusting that others more
competent than himself would adopt and carry out his sugges-
tions. —( Hear, hear.)
Lord STRADBROKE, while agreeing with much that was
urged in opposition to the game-laws, considering that nothing
was more correct than some of the arguments advanced by the
petitioners, dissented from the observations which fell from the
Noble Lord who preceded him, in reference to the preservation
of hares. It was his firm belief that the stringency of the laws
in that particular arose chiefly from the difficulty in preserving
them ; and he could not conceive how an enactment whose
tenor was to protect the interests of one branch of the com-
munity, without the slightest injury to any other, should be
deemed either pernicious or unjust. He regretted the circum-
stance mentioned by his Noble Friend, that thirty-five murders,
within ten years, had been committed, arising out of collisions
between the destroyers and defenders of game. He could only
say that, while being himself a strict preserver of game, on no
one occasion had any serious affray occurred on his estate ; and
he could not admit that any alteration such as the Noble Lord
opposite ( Lord Hatherton) had suggested was either neces-
sary or advisable.

MA YNOO T H.
Earl FITZ WILLAM presented a etition against
the sale of spiritual liquors on the Sabbathp. As also one
against the so-called endowment of the college of Mayneoth.
This latter, the Noble Lord observed, had been presented by
Dissenters, «ho objected to the grant, not on the grounds of
its being an endowment of a Roman Catholic establishment,
but because they protested against the State conferring gifts
for the upholding any Church, whether Protestant or Homan
Catholic. The spirit of the petitioners must be understood
therefore to be equally as strong against the endowment of the
former as of the latter Church. He entirely dissented from
the whole scope and view of the petition, both as regarded its
hostility to the grant to Maynooth, and its opposition to all
ecclesiastical establishments. For his part he looked upon this
endowment of Maynooth as a payment of a small instal-
ment of what was due to the people of Ireland. He did
not say the Roman Catholics of Ireland, but the people of Ire-
land, because the Roman Catholics were in truth the people,
and it was a misnomer to designate them in any other way.
He would go a step further and express his satisfaction at the
further measures which the Ministers had proposed for estab-
lishing academical institutions in Ireland ; but before he alluded
to that subject he would express his belief, and les hope, so far
as the Maynooth Bill was concerned, that her Majesty's Minis-
ters intended to go much further than that. All he would say
was, that if the Ministry intended to stop there, they were per-
sons who did not comprehend the results of the measures which
they had proposed ; and as he believed they were perfectly
competent to form ajust judgment on their own measures, hegave
them credit for the intention of doing a great deal more than
they had done, and he was glad to give them credit for such
intentions. With regard to the colleges which it had been
proposed to establish, he had understood that there were per-
sons possessing more enthusiasm than religion—persons who
mistook names for things—who looked rather to their anticipa-
tions than to the recollections of their own early life, who had
called these colleges Godless colleges. He should be extremely
sorry if any establishment in this country could justly be de.
sigiiated by such a term. He would take leave to think that
those persons who had invented the term had applied
it very erroneously. He would take leave also to
think that those persons, if they had been educated
in the academical establishments of this country, could
not have any very accurate recollection of the period which
they had passed at those establishments. Although it was true
that thore were theological professors there and theological
lectures were deiivered, yet he apprehended, with the excep-
tion perhaps of the two Right Rev. personages he saw sitting
on the benches opposite, that there were few among their
Lordships who, while they were at Oxford or Cambridge, had
attended the lectures of the theological professors. And with
respect to their being educated at Oxford, those who had been
educated there in later times might,:perhaps, recollect not only
that they had not attended such lectures, but that the highest
authorities in the university, if they had net prohi-
bited, had strongly recommended the students nut to
attend the lectures of the theological professor.—(Bear.)
He was not one of those who believed that the establishment
of these colleges would lead to the disastrous consequences
which these persons predicted. He was not afraid that they
would tend to propagate infidelity. Infidelity was much
more likely to arise from the hostile spirit which actuated
one sect against another, and if they could succeed in educat-
ing the youths of different sects together—in inducing them
to take their enjoyments and recreations together, they
werald go a long way towards destroying that spirit of intoler-
ance with which each sect regarded the other. The Noble
Lord concluded by presenting the petition.
The Marquis of NORNIANBY presented a petition from a
person of the name of Percival, praying their Lordships to
appoint a Committee to inquire into the constitution of
the Commission with respect to lunacy. The Noble
Lord despaired, at the present period of the session, of the
appointment of the Committee. Before, however, he made
any motion on the subject, he was anxious to hear what course
the Government intended to pursue on the subject.
The Duke of MONTttOSE presented several petitions
against the grant to the college of Maynooth.
The Earl of KINN AIRD presented similar petitions.
The Alarquis of BRE A DA LB AN E presented forty-four peti-
tions from different parts of Scotland to the tame effect.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions from Derby
praying for relief to the agricultural classes.
Lord BEA UMONT gave notice that, on Thursday next, he
should move for papers with respect to Greece.
Lord MOUNTCASHEL postponed the motion of which he

GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY; wooed,
The discussion upon the report of this Bill was "--
when
Aid ot
Mr. ENT WISLE continued—lf the House --s;hroUged•-t
to have the decisions of their Committees contin ire Pert
before them, so prolonging the session to an jeer-n
they would receive the report. r ANA
Afier a few words from Mr. Alderman COP.r.'''
The House divided, when there appeared— 73
For the motion
For the amendment ... ........... .•• ...... t
Majority in favoue of the amendment..., yeast
Lord HOWICK thought it incumbent on the 'le. chair'
to introduce some regulations with reference to t"it, and in
upon railways. In some cases charges were very 14., higher,
others very low. His opinion was, that in some essLiih.
charges were established than were consistent w' eO6
006
welfare of the public. This House ought
as is t 0
to make these alterations, as they could not be Maine& 6onll,tr
House of Lords. In one railway 3d. A ton Per
charged upon coals, in another only Id., corneae:l%ov the
where the competition was great. On many °lgo 10 to
charges for passengers were 3d., 21, and I%d. a el 004 e
first, second, and third class. Now these charges were 50 0
With respect to the old companies, he believed thereGoverr
0
redress to be had ; but he belived the object et toorder di
ment in introducing this new standing the
'to establish a new rate of charges to doe th:,
ferent conveyances of the new companies, and reds sty
that should be deemed to be unreasonable. Th'l :401 viol
tion of great importance, and before the present r"' at cro
were read a third time he trusted the Chrrerrune
take up the question. that 11
Sir G. CLERK concurred with the Noble Lrld of the
would be a very proper question for the consideratthel
Board of Trade; but beyond a suggestion he did none'-
ald
should have anything to do with it.
Mr. LAB OUCHERE did think the Board of boshlig
direct their serious attention to this question
lion je
to establish some regularity as well as modern
josel'h
charges.--The Bill was then agreed to.
Mr. HINDLEY moved that the petition of Ilsfr'Atotoa'
Higginbottom, clerk of the Commissioners of Police °tbe Cetni
under-Lyne (presented 19th May), be referred t° so;
mittee on the Manchester and Salford Waterewrkist.ithe Pep'
that it be an instruction to the Committee to perre"
as
tioner to be heard by counsel or agent. high it
Mr. GREENE resisted the motion,. after W
withdrawn. • Bill Ras
The London, Bedford and Birmingham Railway
Cherie
then read a second time.
the
Mr. R. PALMER brought up the report oe
and Holyhead Rai:way Bill.
Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS presented a petition iofli°lll.
of the Wexford and Carlow Railway Bill. instrtletienE:
Me. T. DUNCOMBE moved that it be an, from
h,
the Committee on the Tottenham and Farringel from Clef,'
tension Railway Bill, in the matter of the peti,tbill. The rer
enwell, to hear the petitioners against the said an aa order by
son he made that motion was, because there fagta that had not
which the Committee could not hear anyePoetuhtledwstriking of the
been presented at least three days hefor have been iul:
Committee ; but in the present case it ".
possible that the petition could have been
Indeed, he felt
time, owing to the peculiar circumstances. at all, Id
ligation
would he almost unnecessary to make this aPP„„ witted d
he did so because he had heard that another td"r& „nestles
refused to hear a petition circumstanced as the one
in his motion.
The motion was then agreed to. presented in c130..t
NORTH WALES RAILWAY.
a. It the
Mr. FITZROY KELLY presented a petition IA-in
North Wales Mineral Railway Bill.
The Belfast Lough Drainage Bill was read a seconia'tm via
Mr. WARD presented a petition against the SheP`e
Lincoln line of railwa notice should, d alter
night, HUME gave notice that he on thatp 6,iaget
night, bring the subject of the services of Sir Henry
ner
before the House.
Mr. H. BERKELEY said that he had a notice on the I,Psorl
with relation to the Insolvency Act. He wished `-%t, the
whether, if he postponed his motion till Thursday 0:,
ti"te
Right Hon. Baronet would make a house.--(Laug
Sir R. PEEL said that it had not been usual, of late
to keep the 29th of May as a holiday, and he t."O.
present state of business would not allow it this sessto,..,sker
Mr. B. OSBORNE gave notice that, on the
should
d 7001160
leaving the chair on the Irish Colleges Bill, he shrliaaigsioa
instruction to the Committee regulating the &
honours in the Universities. beteg
Mr. S. CRAWFORD gave notice that, on the entserelsoch
proposed for the grant of money to the Presbyterians
he should move that such vote be rejected. I i
REPEAL AGITATION IN IRELAN at to tb
Mr. FERRAND said he had a question to Paaate sce
Bight Hon. Baonet the Secretary of State for the '"at if .
partment. Her had not given notice of the questine' The tlee;
Right Hon. Baronet required it he would do so•
reticerlial
tion had reference to the following subject :—He Ptes•s Joe din
a recent number of a Dublin newspaper, the Frew:a
ott the I:ed
that a repeal demonstration was about to take place wee
of Tara, and the programme of the demonstration
Member
rod 0;0
in the following words :—(Here the Hon Membtios
advertisement, stating the order in which their meeestian fro
assemble and then continued by sa‘ing)—His_V., the Year
whether her Majesty's Government were prepare" late
1845, as they were in 1843, to assert the maiesetylof
rePe
?leers
or were they to permit Mr. O'Connell and th
trample the law under foot ? fler°. tiert
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that though the intend at
Member had not given him notice of hireit.--("the
to ask the question, he would, however, answer oath° i 0
hear.) He was aware that a popular assembly ke place
Hon. Gentleman had mentioned was about to toat badge'
e
Ireland, and he begged to say that the Lord Lioutelgiat cool
ceived directions to take care that the peace of t
should be preserved on that occasion.—( Hear, hear'' 6
CALL OF THE HOUSE. 110 hs ad
Mr. HUME said he had a question to st: goose, a°o
notice on the paper for the 22d, for a call of thaoht e&
he wished to know if that notice could be bre old
that day?
notice tber
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member's . 0
come on in the order in which it was placed • irks heir
notices. t- of
Sir R. PEEL hoped that Hon. Members would tagetthe
right of precedence in order not to cause the PrP that 10
the Maynooth Bill.--( Hear, hear.) He understood.waive .0
Hon. Member for Wolverhampton had consented told do th
right, and he did hope that other Hon. Members leaf.)
same, in order to facilitate the public business.--(
00
NEW ZEALAND.
addressed the rgel
Captain ROUS said, the last time he rtai chato
on the subject of New Zealand he brought eeesiclered'
earliest
against the New Zealand Company. Now be, c°o the ere
if he did not prove the assertions he had ma° ,at the)! the
opportunity, Hon. Gentlemen might consider to „Deo os
groundless. He did not wish to interrupt the Diu:l'oo on '-
House, but he was anxious to express his sent
_A that
subject of New Zealand. aderst&'.asber
Sir ROBERT PEEL repeated, that he Se--beir
the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton and the *n_i°„-; tate"
for Westminster (Captain Rous) would not hriicla
motions to. night. He (Sir Robert Peel) verYfireou-se prer
whether Hon. Members had come down to the I-.
the
to take a part in the discussion.
Mr. C. HULLER said it was necessary to s
avetat tbe c:
New Zealand Company were most anxious to h He rep
e thogef
made against them in that House fairly discussed he Wsaitoes
however, tell the Hon. and Gallant Captain that des, the
then prepared to discuss the question which he
_tb t
r.fon
to bring before the House—namely, the Veil her 04-10 he
treaty of Waitangi, confirmed and approved 7_.„ vibes
.he
ought to be maintained with the strictest integ.rltYhaj ao
elfret
(Mr. C. Buller) came down to the House tete,antain Thich
slightest impression that the Hon. and Gallen `'..harrges
wto take an opportunity of bringing forward
any
he had to make against the Company. He •••• w 0 i 0
had not told the precise nature of those chargs..4 owe;
under these circumstances, tell the Hon. ande CiaraciTto
that he was exceedingly glad that he 1?
was
teP tbe seeesaemee
the pledge which he had given to substautla
be had net, he
he had brought against the Company. n
cursbJet
down at all prepared to enter into a debate
the
the
bi
hoped that the Hon. Member would adopt t
: t pis
been pointed out, and withdraw his motion.
Captain ROUS said he had made tw° distinct
he Told-
tich could he s"
against the New Zealand Company, vvl
understood. If he had been one of tfhuen
not have rested till they had been
e_ bad rr
would have been happy if any Hon. 11!eino ra_ onoo te_Void
ward the subject which might give them it Neal Af too
discussing the whole question respectincr
7 Co°ll4°oYestiee
Compiny. It was more for the sake . the
are
eS'
anything else, that he was desirous of O""_sii times
_re die-
forward. However, he should be theread at directorss",_r the
;iernectetorerbris•oiungtt rroi
. wo, _
sons to bring forward the motion. If_ix weelss for oily,
posed to remain comfortable for the next six Weeks
aspersions he had cast upon them—( 61 de. urn 0.
should not object to it. that eurch tee°
Mr. M. GIBSON deprecated the rule
ar...5. ar:
Alaugo)
bate should take precedence of other m tr_dopt this N
ht is ' e
venience would arise if the House wedreitik:
to heat
As far as he was concerned, he shoul
Zealand question better than the Mob.
The Hon. Member then withdrew the
S.---Cm()tioLnf°Nr. jeLl: Yr
:le
he Colon 14to Mr. TUFFNTEHLELCp°osLtp°oNneirEI his of
dated the ,1
ev or.
of ell
February, ethcereGtaoryveorfnoSrtaotef forc
es eir
February, 1845. fr " eql th
don e ay en iste,
his m
Mr. WATSON postroned his motion jta comps olts, he
correspondence between the East so.
1775 to 183• h to the
respecting at Lucknow, from the year.n
Robert 'tithe
respecting the appointment of Captain