The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-05 00:00:00

:-c'' tofieniug :-';1111t4

LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 5, 1845.

The House of Lords met at Five o'clock.
Lord BROUGHAM presented two petitions from Tao-
Nas LUKIN and ANN WARD, who had been each com-

witted to prison for a month, with hard labour, by the
" insane magistrates of Leicester," as the Noble and

Learned Lord denominated them, for non-payment of
the costs of a summons which had been issued against

hem for non-payment of poor-rates. He had understood

that these magistrates had committed these poor per-
sons without a hearing. It was true Sir JAMES GRAHAM
had ordered their liberation ; but he would put it to his
Noble and Learned Friend on the woolsack whether it
was fit that such magistrates should be longer employed

in the administration of justice.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that if he should find
that the conduct of the magistrates had been such as
had been represented, he should remove them from the

Commission of the Peace.
In answer to the Duke of RICHMOND,
The Noble and Learned Lord also stated that the
parties aggrieved had a remedy against the magistrates

IV action.
The Earl of CLARENDON then proceeded to draw the
attention of their Lordships to the Oregon question, and
concluded by saying, that he considered it was the dnty
of Government to maintain their rights westward of the
Rocky Mountains ; and if the question could not be
amicably settled, he trusted the Government would take
such steps as might be thought necessary for vindicating

the national honour of the country.
Lord ABERDEEN, if he followed his own inclination,
would at once lay all the papers relating to this matter
on their Lordship's table, and he was sure they
would give satisfaction to their Lordships and
the country. But the time, he thought, had

not yet arrived for adopting that course. He
thought the late PRESIDENT had gone somewhat
too far when he spoke so strongly of the amicable

spirit in which these negotiations had been conducted.
The inaugnral address of the new PRESIDENT had no
official authority, and as the twelve months' notice re-
quired for annulling the existing treaty could not be
given before December, there was no immediate neces.
sity for the production of any papers. The Noble Lord
then proceeded to vindicate himself from the charges of
pusillanimity and neglect which had been brought
against him. He was fully aware of the blessings of
peace, and believed war to be the greatest crime and
the greatest folly that a country could commit. Fortu-
nately for this country we need not be so very sensitive in
the point of honour, as some people appeared to be, but
with regard to Oregon he believed that we had rights
which were clear and indisputable. The Government

were quite ready to make every concession which would
avoid the necessity of any extreme course, but if they
were compelled to take it, they were content to rest upoi,
these rights, and with the blessing of God and the as
sistance of their Lordships he believed they were fully
prepared and determined to maintain them.
The Earl of RIPON then moved the third reading of

the Income-tax Bill, and went into a long financial state
ment, with little more than a repetition of the state-
ments already made in the other House by Sir R. PEEL
in justification of the measure.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE objected to the impo-
sition of an income-tax as a permanent impost.
Lord ASHBURTON regretted that so little attention
was paid to the state of the debt of the country. It was
the duty of every Government to do all they could to
relieve the country from that heavy load. He disliked
the income-tax, because it was a tax upon capital, and
any tax upon capital was a check upon improvement.
Lord STANLEY thought that his Noble Friend (Lord
ASHBURTON) had scarcely done justice to the efforts
which had been made by the present Government for
the reduction of the debt.
Lord MONTEAGLE objected to the financial policy of
the Government, more especially as regarded the duties
on corn, timber, and sugar.
The Duke of RICHMOND did not object to the income-
tax so much as to the manner in which the surplus reve-
nue derived from it was applied. That surplus should have
been applied in effecting reductions from which the agri-
cultural interests would derive some benefit. The Noble
Duke complained much of the treatment which the ag
ricultural interest had received from Sir R. PEEL, and
concluded by moving an amendment to the motion.
The House was' also addressed by the Marquis of
NORMANBY and the Earl of RADNOR, after which the
amendment was put and negatived, and their Lord-
ships adjourned.
The House of Commons met at Four o'clock.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice of a motion for Tues-
day, on the subject of the Railway Department of the
Board of Trade.
In reply to Sir C. NAPIER, Sir J. GRAHAM said that
he did not intend to persevere in the accusation which
he had made against Mr. MAZZINI, on the subject of the
assassination at RODEZ, and had, therefore, withdrawn it.
Sir R. PEEL fixed Friday next for the second reading
of the Maynooth Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL then entered into an explanation
relative to his statement on a former night, on the sub-
ject of the instructions he had sent out to Lord SYDEN-
mim relating to the Madawaska settlement, and said
that it was evident that Lord ASHBURTON had,
in animadverting upon his observations, fallen into
a mistake which he (Lord JoHN RUSSELL) could
hardly understand, for if these instructions had related
to diplomatic negotiations, they would have proceeded
from the Foreign, and not from the Colonial Secretary.
He asked the Government if they would produce copies
of the correspondence between Lord SYDENHAM and
himself on the subject.
After a few words from Mr. HOPE and Mr. HUME, the
latter of whom urged the production of all dispatches on
the subject,
Sir R. PEEL consented to produce such documents as
could be produced without detriment to the public ser
vice, although he considered their production unneces-
sary, as the negotiations on the subject had terminated.
Lord PALMERSTON denied the right of Lord Asn-
BURTON to quote from any dispatches which had not
been laid before Parliament, unless Government had
given permission to do so, and, if permission had been
granted, it was contrary to Parliamentary rule not to
lay the documents before the House. The question in-
volved an accusation against a Member of Parliament
having made erroneous statements, and, therefore, was
of importance.
Sir R. PEEL replied that, if it were necessary, any
dispatches which had been produced before the other
House might be laid on the table.
In answer to Mr. M. GIBSON, Sir R. PEEL stated that
the Government made a proposal to the Government of
Brazil, for continuing to British subjects in that country
the privileges which they had enjoyed under the late
commercial treaty of disposing of their property by will,
and of enabling the British Consul to administer to the
effects of British subjects dying in that country.
Lord J. RUSSELL then rose to draw the attention of
the House to the state of the Oregon question. If it
had been left to be settled in the usual manner between
the Executive Government of this country and that of
the United States he should have waited in silence until theclose of the
proceedings, but the new
PRESIDENT of the
United States had adopted a course entirely new—a
course which, if not met by something decisive on the
the two d
ordinary intercourse
Governments which hi :fh t
padrt. of this country, threatened to overthrow all the
exist between
and lea
theve
the decision of questions of great national importance to
Executive
be decided, on the one hand by popular addresses
from the
Government to the people ; and on the other, by a
course which would put an end to all peace andiamty
The present course pursued by the Government of the.
United States tended entirely to its own territorial
aggrandisement, and was a direct contradiction of the
declarations made by Mr. WEBSTER. The Noble Lord
then went into a lengthened detail of the nature of the
rival claims to the Oregon territory, proving that
neither by treaty nor by priority of discovery had the
United States any right to the possession of it.
He might be told that the Oregon territory
claimed by the United States was not of much
value, and that it did not matter much who
possessed it. " Yes, Sir," (said the Noble Lord),
" but I say it does matter. A large territory
cannot be a matter of indifference, particularly
where our title is better and juster, nor should