The Sun.
London, England, 1828-05-07 00:00:00

iTitl

yarn, exported fromthe sth i.- fiat
January, 'lB2B. •
Mr. 'SLANEY preaented a petition ;from !II Cr)!
Society in. Whitchurch, - Shropshire, 'against the.
Referred to the Committee enthaßill.
IL GRATTAN moved for a Return-of the 90:
of monmilaced at the disposal of . the Lord LientoUnot4'
Ireland during the last four years, on acoOnnt of
Work*, in 'viand ; together -with, an account of` itsf.to"
'ner in which they had been applied.—Ordered.
LAW OF FRAUDULENT DEVISES.,
Mr. SUGDEN rose for the.pnrposeof moving for.lea"
to bring in a Bill to amend the A.ct of .the..Sd William 101.4
Mary, ,chap. 14, ccfor, the relief of creditegs against .00"
dulent devises," apd.,..a. similar. Act of the Atth Anne, obsP:A
5, raised hi, the Irish Parliament. The law be,preptoov
to alter was, that of the .9d of William and Mary,. cap,o.l4'
and the 4th of Anne,'cap.,s,, on. the subject of fraudttle°'
devises. In consequence 0f the statute of.willa,-it
,was .hei°l
that though if an heir succeeded to an estate,-he waaliable for
the debis Of his ancestor, yet if a man devised his estate to 61zr
other party than the heir, then the devisee enjoyed. the estlst
without being liable' for the engagements. ef his predetee
sor. The •defeet was in part remedied bythq..),A.ct of VII:
Liam and, Mary, and he now proposed to
.reorler iherttneo;
more complete. The object of the statute.of,William
Mary t iO
Was to place the devisee in the same sitnationian
in which' theheir would have stood, had he succeeded"
the property. But. the Act was not complete—it did Do!
Pidvide for'the of their being no heir; it only allevre
an action to be brought against the devisee and the heir,
He wished to enable the creditor to go .agaliat 'the deviser.)
even though there should he no heir: :Again, with Lrel
spect to specialty (bonds or covenants) the Act of Willisru
, and,Mary had , been held .to apply only to.boini drelet,fPf
covenants, and that under .particular circumstances • Or'
suppose the: oi
case of a man who sells an estate to
well knowing at the timeethat-he had a bad title, and OP
he gets 100,000/. flir it, covenanting that . he- convey'
geodiitle; Well; the vendor dies, leavinga large real
an& the purchaser 44,6.4 that be has got a bad
Seller has ilevise4 avi#,,,thcfprOperty.of.*bielklio
pdsSeseed,.to an utter -siranger,, the stranger sets the.po'
!chastr`of the estate with 'the. bad title completely at dy
!fiance. Wein him the purClitetei., can have no reiii.4l,
though if . the heir of the:vender; had . held:, his
property, he_would have been liable under the proviaioo
of the covenant agreed' ori bettveen thepartiee. He (Mi. S.)
'now proposed ',to pia the:devisee: ix the same *411149'
as that in• which; the,: heir would stand In ,thi. vespelt
The Hon.. anti farmed gentleman ttlietiiproceeded-I"
advert to the labours of the late, Sir Samitelißomilly oa
this subject, and added that in doing so he found 1`
impossible' Ala repress a feeling of admiration for •till
character 4-that great man, mingled with one of ur
feigned. regret for the loos sustained by. his death. The jet
of Sir Samuel Romilly's ,Act, was .uudoubtedly to: es.°
•
a great accumulation of Chancery suits, and to stop'
suitors at the very threshold, with the piestionas to wbe:
ther the man was or was not a trader at the time of
death. In framing this Bill, he proposed to repeal the tfa
former acts,' and also the: Irish Act, which was
that of . William. and Mary, in order that one Act shin,
embody the whole, If any one considered him Oppoinklto
a beneficial alteration of the laws,: that individual itse '00';
taken. No one was more willing-to reform thelawaf
he would reform them by, discarding what was unnecesssri

3.,
Al
IT,
DI
41 Et
0 F,
0 Gc
• 0 v
kornilitc

• 1
1
wii

—he would look to the substance and not to the fortna•-1
Much had been said about the Commission, and he cold':
inform the House, thatopon that commission he-would (3°'
be. He would cheerfully give all the information in h>'power, but would interfere. in no other way. He woIP d
have no one upon that Committee who was wedded t°,l
system, or a decided enemy to all reform,.but he
wo;
have those upon it who were acquainted with the sub?'
on which they were employed. • •
The, Hon. and Learned Member then moved for
to bring in a Bill to further the facility of payment of deb'
out of Real Estates.
•
Mr. WALLACE expressed his approbation of the coup
pursued by the Hon. and Learned Member.
Mr. HUME observed, that although great credit 09
due to the Hon. and Learned Member for the course be
had adopted, it was to be wished that he had gone sate
what further in his plans of reform.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
Mr. MOORE obtained leave to bring in a Bill .to'prt°•
tect purchasers for valuable consideration, in Ireland, fr'l
judgments not revived or redocketed Within a limit'
tirne.—(Hear.)
Mr. W. LAMB obtained leave to bring in a Bill t°
repeal the Irish Acts relative to Bail, Benefit of gee;
Larceny, and Malicious Injurieei,tio).PrOperty. The 1111:-„
Hon. Gentleman also obtained- leave lo.bring in ariill la.
the improvement of the Administration of Criminal Justice
in Ireland. .
On the motion of Mr. S. RICE, the Order of the Dll
for the Committee on the Rights of Executors' Bill „w°
postponed to Monday next.
PAROCHIAL SETTLEMENT (SCOTLA VD) 131. LL,
Mr. KENNEDY moved thefurther consideration of the
Report on the Parochial
.Settlement (Scetland).Bill,
Mr. ESTCOURT said, the whole of his opposition, to
the sill amounted to this—he could not connive on what
principle foreigners could not gain a settlement i. Scotland,
in less than seven years, when in England it it cdattined in
a much shorter period. His object was to agaiilate
as much as possible, the laws of the Empire, and ootnake
a particular law applicable to a particular part.
Mr. FERGUSSON said, that to assimilate the l'°••
Laws it would be necessary to assimilate others. 1_.,116
laws of Scotland and England differed materially to a'ari'":
wayS. It was act generally known that there were „„
Laws in Scotland—such, however, was the fact
'were seldom miorted to, because of the feelings of 1117
pride of the inhabitants of that country. He did °a
consider seven years too long a period to gain a settlervent,
Mr. MAXWELL said, the object of the Bill was, '1°t
to deprive of assistance those who required it, but becit'pe
in the country whence low-priced labourers came, there cevii
no system of Poor Laws.
• ,
Sir EDW. KNATCHBULL disapproved of ifse, 13"'
Mr. HUME supported the Bill, as did t
Mr. FERGUSSON, who contended that it 415 na .
intended, as had been argued by some Hon. Members, el:
measure of harshness against the unhappy persons te'a-
crowded to Scotland from Ireland in search of food and
employment.
Sir J. NEWPORT commented strongly upon the
course sought to be adopted against his unfortunate couti-
trymen. At first, their labour was accepted with avidit:('
but now, when the British population was suffering Pr
tially from want of employment, the poor Irish laboured'.
was to be met with all species of harsh treatment I°d
enactments. The influx of Irish poor, and their attenWts
to settle here, were now the great topics of complaint, bat
none was uttered against the influx and the permanent re-
sidence here of the rich Irish—(Hear)--the owners of the
soil of Ireland, who drew from that unhappy country, and
spent here, among British tradesmen, and on British ma-
nufactures, Upwards of 3,000,0001. annually, a tom. whic"'
if, as it ought to be, spent at borne, would prevent the ee
cessity for that emigration, to complain of.which was p°9/
so much the fashion.—(Hear; bear.) The Right Hoe.,
Baronet then drew a mm lanchoiy picture of the state of
Ireland, where poverty had become so universal, that °I
the period when the benevolent of this country raised a
noble subscription to relieve the perishing people of lr'
land, there were several districts of that ill-fated country
in which no person could be found to whom the Committee
could safely entrust the distribution of the portion of the
fund allotted far the relief of those districts.
Mr. KENNEDY defended the Bill.
Mr. TRANT was convinced that at no very distant 414
the House would hare to consider the necessity of apPlYln!
some system of Poor Laws to Ireland. The Hon. Merribe•
concluded by expressing his doubts of the correctness of the
Right Honourable Baronet's (Sir J. Newport's) stately('t
respecting the extent of distress in Ireland.
Sir J. NEWPORT knew Ireland quite as well as -1
the Hon. Member who spoke last, and indeed better--•
(Hear)—and would re-assert Ids statement, which did I°l
rest merely on his own observation, but on the autharitY
of the Honourable Member for Midhurst (Mr. Pba
Smith), who had been the Chairman of the Irish Belief
COM mit tee. —( "fear, hear. )
The report was then agreed to, and the Bill ordered ta
be read a third time on Monday next.
The report of the Committee on the Justiciary C°llr,tl
Bill
ordered Bill was brought up and agreed to; and the
ordered to be read a third time on Monday next.
The Cities' and Boroughs' Poll Bill passed through II
Committee.
On the clause that the time of polling be limited to sib
days,
Mr. ROBINSON opposed the limitation, as tending
abridge the rights of voters.
After some words from Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT, the Al'
'FORNEY-GENF:II.AL, Mr. WHITMORE, and Colonel. Sitr„,
Titoityr., the House divided. •Lul
•
For the original clause
Against it 3O
7
am,
Majority
The Report was received, and ordered to be taken jet" aoNto
iNtt;
further consideration on Monday next. .
The Irish Juries Bill was read a first time, on the 130'
tion of Mr. LAMB. fl
Laws
,
The Bankrupt Laws Amendment Bill was read a seat'
Y, 1
time, and ordered to be committed on Friday next.
The Report on the Irish Linen 'Manufactories Bill

~~~
J
~`

rt 144
ve
0143 rt
)110
jt et

'~ d