The Sun.
London, England, 1826-04-22 00:00:00

ABOLITION or SLAVERY.

Petitions for the gradual abolition of Slavery were presented by
his Royal Higlmess tblv•Duke.l,..Slotteester? from Manchester,
signed- by 4409 persons fronfl'etiaCair, ttriffellalltie," and a
place in alierdeenshire'; by the Eati of Rosslyn, from Inverkei-
thing.; 'by Lord Melville, from the University of St. Andrew's,
and from the borough of Pittenweem.
•
,
Earl GROSVENOR said a few words, relative (we understood)
p 3 the Manchester petition, the purport of which was not under-
stood beloW the bar.

The Duke of ATIIOL and Lord ARBUTHNOT presented
several petitions against any alteration in the Banking system of
Scotland.

Mr. Cartwright, and.others from the Commons, brought up
the Local Jurisdictions' (Ireland) Bill, and several Private Bills.

CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION.

Lord KING rose to present a petition to their Lordships from
the Catholic Association, though he believed he must not call it
by that name. He would say,.then, that it was a petition from
the Ghost of that Association ; and he believed the ghost would
be found quite as terrific as the Association. itself in its material
form. The ghost was not yet laid, in spite of the exertions of all the
Right Reverend Prelates opposite, who were so powerful at
laying ghosts, even though they had been zealonsly supported by
the Noble and Learned Cord. The petitioners complained of
the great abuses which., existed in the yOrporate towns of
Ireland. He could state, not from the Petition, but from the
evidence given on oath before their Lordships, that abuses—flac.,
rant abuses-.•:'-did exist. From, that evidence it appeared, that the
Provost of Tralee was in the habit of taking particular sums of
money for giving bail. For a capital felony he charged ten
guineas; for a minor offence the charge. was ave. It appeared
in evidence, also, that if the Magistrate was convicted of such of-
fences, he was not -displaced ; if prosecuted on a criminal indict-
ment, the Magistrate was not dispossessed. There were other
abuses 'in. these Corporations.. Between thirty• and forty years
ago, the Catholics were by law permitted, to belong to the Cor-
poration of Dublin, but in fact they were. always kept out of it.
He had, last year, presented a Petition from an individual who
had undoubtedly a right to enter this Corporation, but who, be-
ing a Catholic, was rejected. Another person, of the name of
Cole, had obtained •a • mandamus, but he died. The Catholics
were not permitted to be Magistrates in any Corporate towns in
Ireland. They could: neither, be Mayors, Sheriffs, not Common
Council men. The Petitioners wished to see the monopoly-of the
Corporite bodies:;clone-aivay.; ha,. fearing that their LordShipl
would not go along- with them, they prayed that- their Lordships
would take some measures to rectify the abuses complained. of.—
The Petition was then read, -and appeared to be from certain'Ca-
tholiesin Ireland.- .

The Earl of LIAIERIC rose to set the Noble Lord tight in one
particular.. In the city of Limerick there was a Catholic gentle-
man-a Magistrate.

Lord KING said, by the new rules 'in all the large .C4arporate?
towns, no Catholic could be either a Mayor, a Sheriff, or Com-
mon Councilman. Some little conversation ensued on this point,
and it turned out that the individual in question,. aM. Roche,
had been made a Magistrate,.of Limerick by the Government,
under authority of a special Act of Parliament passed.for the very
purpose of remedying the abuses of the Corporation of Limerick.
Lord CLIFDE.N supported the view of the Noble Lord, that
Catholics were excluded from the Corporations. He reminded
their Lordships that he had predicted they could never be able
ty put, down the Catholic Association by their measures. That
Association spoke the, sentiments of one-fifth, or, as some said,
one-third of the;population, having a common object; and they
were no more to be put down except by removing from the eta-
tute4ook the last remnant of those laws which were a disgrace to
it, than the sun was to be stopped in its course. Ire reminded
their Lordships of what bad passed in Ireland in 1782, and pre-
dieted, that if their Lordships went on, year after year, denying
the., Catholics' juts` claims, a time of difficulty would come, when
the. Catholics would extort from fear what was denied to justice.
—Adjourned till. Mnnday. .

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

MISCELLANEOUS.

The New London Bridge Bill passed through a Committee of
the whole lioUse' the Report was received; .and ordered for farther
consideration on Tuesday next.

Mr. CURTElS'presented a petition from the Hop Planters of
Christchurch, in Kent, praying for a reduction of the duty on
Bops.—Ordered to be printed.
Lord 'A. HAMILTON presented a petition from the Corpora-
tion of Tailors .of Glasgow, praying for an alteration of the Corn
Laws.—Ordered to be printed.
POTTERS REGULATION BILL.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON. presented two petitions against
the Potters' Regulation Bill, front several persons connected with
the Staffordshire Potteries; and from the Dealers in Earthenware
of this City of London.
Mr. LITTLETON said, that after the Hon. Member had pre-
sented the petitions, be would beg leave to withdraw his notice
for the second reading of the Bill.
SirGEO. CHETWYND also had a petition, signed by up-
wards of two thousand persons against the Bill, which he begged
have to present at the same time with that of his Hon. Friend.
Mr. LITTLETON was astonished at these petitions, because
he could assure the. House that, previous to bringing in the Bill,
he had visited the potteries in Staftbrdshire, and when the Bill
was proposed, to them, had not found a dissenting voice. • lie beg-
gedleave to read a letter which be had received- a short time ago
front some of the principal manufacturers, in which they assured
him of their unanimity on the subject, at the same time ecomplain-
.htg of the unjust manner in which signatures to petitions against
the Bill _were obtained.
Sir G. CHETWYND explained; he had received the petition
from Mr. Spode, one of the most respectable merchant* connected
with the Staffordshire Potteries; and he felt assured that Mr.
Spode would not have recourse to any thing unfair.
Mr. LITTLETON• moved the order of the day for the second
reading of the Potters' Regulation Bill, for the purpose of die-
charging the order.
After a few observations from Air. SYKES, the Bill was or-
dered for a second reading this day three months.
Sir R. SHAW presented a petition from the Potters of Dublin
against the Bill.—Ordered to be printed.
CURRENCY.
Sir A.-.I#OPE presented a petition from Linlithgow against
any alteration in the currency of Scotland.—Referred to the
Committee. Similar petitions were presented from Old Deer in
Aberdeenshire, and several other parishes in the county of Perth,
by Mr. Gordon ; and frOm a parish in Scotland, by Lurd A.
Hamilton.
The petitions were laid on the t iblay and teferred to the Com-
mittee on the Banking, System of SeCtirind mid Ireland.
SLAVERY.-.
V. BUXTON presented a petition from the second United
CongrePtion Of Associated' Ministers of Dunce, Against Slavery.
Also from Kirkwall, St. Andrew7s, *Peterhead, Dunse, Selkirk,
-and several other parishes in Scotland, by Mr. 1311xT0-$ from
Whitehaveu, and a parish is Cumberland, by Mr. Cu"Eri ;