The Sun.
London, England, 1828-04-03 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, AYAIL 2.

The SPEAKER took the Chair this evening at the
usual hour.
Mr. Ai denll4l WOOD presented a petition from the
Trustees of the London Hospital, against the London
Rail-way.
Mr. HUSKISSON presented a petition from Liverpool
against the Aire and Calder Canal Companies Bill.
Mr. Crater, from the Treasury, brought up certain re-
turns relating to the importation of foreign wool, silk,
copper, and spirits.
FINANCE -COMMITTEE.

Alr. 1-TERRIES moved that a message should be sent to
the House of Lords, requesting that House to alloW
his
Grace the Duke of NVellingtuo to be exauriped ,beke the
Finance Committee.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a petition against the
Tees Navigation Bill.
Mr. GRATTAN presented a petition from the Hiber-
!llan Joint Stock Company, praying that the Company
may Oct he dissolved.
-FEES ON .PRIVATE BILLS.
Mr. W. BURRELL presented a petition from the
Trustees of the Horsham-road, against the fees of the
House of Commons.on Private Bills. .The lion. Member
expressed his concurrence in the statement of the petitioners.
Mr. LITTLETON
.said lie would giv:e notice of an
earli da.,;; after the recess, for submitting some resolutions
to the Hop:.'., ill Of subject (,f the: Fees tai4en on Private
Bills.
After a few Words from' Sir 'M. W. Arpt.yy and Mr.
Secretary litisxissow, the petition was read at length and
ordered to be printed.
Mr. LITTLETON gave notice that on Tuesday, the
't.h 0' April, he would move for leave ki bring in a Bill to
abolish Yees Lll for the Regulation of Turnpike.roads.
- RETAIL UREWERS.
The lion. Member also presented 4 petition frojn I'lad-
leigh, Staffordshire; 'praying that the Churchwardens and
• t bumbles may .have a concurrent power with Excise_
Officer* iu laying informations" against Retail Brewers.
The ]gusher said that the business of retail hreWers
was puvartgd, ank thefr breweries turned into drinking-
houses, whilst the ocers gxFise refused to interfere or
lay informations against thom, w414/0 fro::l.a from the
Board.
After a few words from Mr: EsTcouaT, the petition
was laid on the table.
iSir THOMAS ACLAND said he bad a petition to
present
,compiain;ag of the disorderly manner in which re-
tail cider houses were l:ept. They, paid a duty of 10s. a
year, and were Ale resort of thieves pod poachers.
Sir 401-1 N SEBR!GHT said phut houses which let for
101. a year tvAPiit a license; were worth 601. or 701. a
year, when a tieemmse wet gmka:
Mr. HUME Was opposed to any measure which injured
• the retail brewers, because such measure woala nphold the
monopoly of the great brewers. He thought no additional
penalties Should be imposed on persons selling beer, 'and
that there'should be no additional duty on cider. .
After a few words from Mr. MABERLE V and Mr. LIT-
TLETON, the petitie.4 was laid on the table.
LANDLORDS AND Ta.74.I4.NTS' ACT.

RUSKISSON presenteUa petition from ;hp inlia-
bWints. il.4yerpool, praying the Hotise to make some
amendment iu Pip I,W Felating to Landlords
raNNYSON atu tae h?d. received letters frimi
3lanchester, Itirmingbalia; #yd
.411e0eld, the inhabitants'
of which fully sympathised with the people of pverpool on
this subject. He had conversed with Ins I,;e2iu.edf7ri,,l
the Solicitor-General on the subject, who suggested ILt
it should be referred to the Ctimmission on the state of the
4a,w.:-,.-The petition was laid on the table.
DUTY ON RECEIPTS.
Mr. Seerei4ry fuiS-'4,4q459N presented another petition,
which lie stated Wzts stgued Ei2FpCTS al. all classes in
Lizarpool, praying for the repeal of
"tte Stamp pig,7
Receipts. go said the tax of which the petitioners coon.
ained ,was one cer4ip)y open to much objection, anti he
was very sorry that the present'` ptatc of the country pre-
vented his Majesty's Government frons fl tinting to the
wishes of the petitioners and repealing the tax.
-Mr..GA.J.CRAPT topk that opportonity of stating that
strong complaints had been made to him upon the subjeet
of
.the ;loin? Receipt Duty, and his reply was-7-!! If you
can substiAtte apy thing better, or less Objectionable, we
can hear you, but we cannot afford to part with a penny
of the tax without an equivalent." The Stamp Receipt
Tax was in one point of view less ,objectionable than others,
for the money was, paid by the receiver, and et a time
when ECODgy was actually passing; so far it Was less ob-