The Sun.
London, England, 1821-06-01 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 31.
Mr. CUItWEN postponed his motion for the Ite,
peal of the Agricultural Horse. Tax: -
Mr. DICKINSON presented a Petition from the
Inhabi-
tants of the Parish of Frome, againSt the Poor Relief Bill.
Ordered to lie on the Table.
Lord MILTON presented a Petition from Certain Super-
visors and Inspectors under the Woollen Cloth Stamping Acts,
against any alteration in the said Acts.—Ordered to lie on the
Table.
Mr. WARRE moved that extracts from certain Papers pre-
sented, to the• House on Wednesday relative to the scheme of
establishing an Extra Post be printed.—Agreed to.
IRISH INSOLVENCY COURT BILL.

The Report on this Bill was brought up, and the Bill OD
dered to be read, on Monday next.
T}l HUSH PRISONS BILL.

The House went into a Committee on this Bill.—The Report
to be received on Friday.
The Irish Public Coal Yard Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed on Friday.
IRISH CORONER'S REGULATION BILL.

Mr. BROWNLOW presented a Petition from Michael
Brady, Esq. Coroner of the countypf Armagh, against the
Irish Coroners' Regulation Bill.
Mr. HUTCHINSON said, that seeing his Honourable
Friend (Mr. Martin) in his place, who introduced the Irish
Coroners' Regulation Bill, he begged to suggest to him the
propriety of allowing the Bill to lie over till next Session. It
was a Bill of . great importance, embracing questions of a Con-
stitutional nature.
Mr. MA RTIN, after complaining of the very imperfect state
of the law in Ireland as regarded Coroners, agreed to postpone
the Bill to next Session.
After a few words frOin Mr. D. Browne, Sir J. Newport and
Mr. W. Becher,the Petition was ordered to be printed.
AX ON FOREIGN. WOOL.

Lord MILTON Presented a Petition from the Merchants
and Trustees of the Cloth Hall, in the West Riding of York,
for the repeal of the Tax on Foreign Wool.—Ordered to lie on
the Table.
Lord MILTON then gave notice, that on Wednesday the
6th of June, he would move for leave to bring in a Bill for the
repeal of the Duty On Foreign Wool.
MAXWP.LL'S SLAVE REMOVAL BILL.

Mr. J. P. GRANT having moved the second reading of
this Bill,
Mr. WYNN doubted whether this should have been introduc
cd into the Muse as a Private Bill. It was to dispense with a
positive law; •to authorise the transportation of upwards of 300
• slaves, men, women, and children, from the place where they
now were to the Island of Demerara. Many. of them had
been born within his Majesty's dominions, in which slavery was
incompatible with the soil. If the removal were to be allowed
in this instance, it must be allowed in others. If the principle
of the Bill were to be heard of, it would be better to pass a ge-
neral Bill for authorising all removals. The Hon. Member
concluded by presenting a Petition from an English individual
(a Mr. Stephen), on behalf of the slaves, against the Bill au-
thorising their removal.
Mr. MARRYATT said if the present Bill should pass, it
would encourage other individuals to apply for similar Bills ;
the consequence would be that the smaller islands would be ex-
terminated in point of trade, as Demerara was a favourable
spot for the cultivation of the sugar-cane ; he should oppose
the Bill on groundS of public policy. He had read a very
clever work, written by Mr. Henry, the late Judge of the
Island of Demerara, describing the treatment of slaves as
being truly dreadful, and recommending an alteration of that
treatment.
On the Motion that the Petitioner should be heard at the Bar
on the part of the Slaves--
Mr: J. P. GRANT said, that in his Opinion it was impossi-
ble to comply with the prayer of the Petition ; Mr. Stephen did
.-not state what connection he had with the individuals in, ques-
tion, or what authority he had from them to interfere against a
private Bill. He (Mr. G.) had no objection to the prayer of the
Petition, except on the ground of delay.
Mr. WYNN said the Petitioner was in attenlanee, ready to
address the House, therefore the argument of delay could not
prevail; by analogy to the rules of law, he conceived the Peti-
tioner would be heard at the bar as in the -case of a guardian or
next friend of a minor at common law.
' Mr. BA RHA 31 said, it by no means appeared that the slaves
themselves were unwilling to be removed.
- • Mr. WILI3ER FORCE said the Petition was founded on the
circumstance of. the slaves having no person to speak on, their
behalf. He thought the analogy of legal rules was applicable
to the present case, and that the Petitioner ought to,he heard.
—lt was a standing Order of the House, that the consent of all
individuals interested in Private Bills, should always be ob-
tained. . .
Mr. BARRY supported the prayer of the Petition..
. 11lr. GOUI4I3URN said the petitioner was well acquainted
with the state of the West Indies, and was therefore competent
to form an opinion on the subject. ' He (Mr. G.) was unfavour-
able to the Bill ; but he thought it unsafe for the House to
establish the principle attempted to be established by the
Petitioner.
Dr. PHILLI3IORE thought it was too much to say, that
the House ought not to hear the petitioner. The argument
against hearing him would apply to the case of a prisoner in a
foreign country, on' whose behalf a person might always a&
dress the House against- a private Bill.
Mr. ABERCROMBY said that if the House was not able
to administer justice itself, it might hear the petitioner ; but he
(Mr. A.) thought the hearing of= this petitioner would lead tb
great inconvenience as a precedent. He thought there were
persons within the walls of the House fully competent to advo.
cafe the cause of the Slaves.

Mr..COLTRTE NAY said, he thought there was some-rca-
son fm 'departing from the ordinary rules of the House affect-
ing Private Bills, and that the House might safely hear the pe-
titioner.
Mr. BRIGHT opposed the 'petition on the ground of pre-
cedent.

Mr. BROUGHAM could scarcely believe' the Hon. Mem-
bers serious who supported the prayer of the Petition.- • In the
name of r gularity lie wished to know where this was to end?
Any Gentleman might on a future occasion call himself the
next friend of an individual, and might ask to be heard at the
bar, of that House against a Bill. The House would soon
have to hear the next friend of. the unrepresented persons of
England—(Cheers)—and the question of Parliamentary Re-
form would be lliscussed at the bar of tbe.House. This peti-
tion was dictated, he believed, by the best of motives, and came
from the most respectable authority ; but this was not to be
considered in looking at the abstract question.
Mr. F. BUXTON said, the opposition to the petition was
founded on the mere argument that a compliance with it would
be a slight deviation from the forms of the House.. He should
support the petition.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House di-
vided upon the motion for hearing the petitioner, when there
appeared.--
For the Motion - - - 45
Against it - - - 151
Majority - - - —lO9.
The Bill was then ordered to be read a second time this day.
DECLARATION OF tHE ALLIES.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said,- he was desirous. of. putting a
question to his Noble Friend whom he saw in his place (the
Marquess of Londonderry). Within the last 24 hours a Docu-
ment had been published:in the Newspapers, as having just
reached this country, purporting to be a Dispatch from the
Allied Monarchs assembled at Laybach, in which an allusion
was made to a Declaration on the part of those Monarchs. AS
some of the language in that Circular was of a most exception-
able nature—(hear, hear!), and most dangerous to the liber-
ties of this country (Hear !), he should like to see that Declara-
tion. He wished therefore to know whether it had regularly
reached this country, and whether the Circular was authentic ?
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY said, he was enabled
to say that the Document referred to was an authentic one •
which had been issued by the Powers from whom it purported
to proceed. A Copy of the Declaration had been sent to this
country, and he had reason to say it had proceeded from the as.
sembled Powers.

Mr. S. WORTLEY said, as his wish was to bring this sub-
ject to the notice of the British public, he should move for the
production of the'Declaration on. Tuesday next (Hear !).

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.
Mr. BENN LT rose, pursuant to notice, to move
for leave to bring i❑ a Bill to effect the better
security of the House of Commons. Whatever
objections might be urged to.'..he measure he in-
tended to propose, could not be on the score' of
novelty, for he had trodden in the footsteps of
Parliament in the construction of it for.the last
century. Those objections therefore could only
be to the extent of it, and not to the principle.