The Sun.
London, England, 1828-02-12 00:00:00

'is in such a state, that the Noble Marquis'a Government
would hardly have dared to be just. I have detained the
Rouse longer• than I could have wished ; but I have only to
say, that on this, or any other point, I am ready to meet
the Noble Marquis in any way he may wish.—(Hear,hear. )
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE explained. He said
that what he had stated was, that he feared the general
principles of Mr. Canning's policy would be excluded from
the present Administration, although a guarantee had been
given to the contrary.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said, that though the Noble
Lord (Ellenborough) had seemed to satisfy himself with
the defence he had made, the question was whether the
House would be satisfied with that explanation ? Was Mr.
Canning indeed a dangerous man, as the Noble Lord tried
to make appear? And if such were the case, what were
they to think of those who avowed that they intended to
support the principles of this dangerous man ? Surely
there was some great confusion here, or else the opposition
that had been shown to Mr. Canning's Ministry must have
been personal. But it had been explained, that the reason
for joining Mr. Canning's Administration, and the present
likewise, was, because a pledge had been given that that
Minister's policy was to be followed. But it was not
enough on this head merely to tell the country that the
Treaty of the 6th of July was to be persevered in.—
Mr. Canning had been at the head of a certain num-
ber of persons in this country, who had thought it
wise to adopt a course of conduct on more liberal
principles than had been previously admitted by Govern-
tnent. It was to this that he wanted the present
Ministers to pledge themselves. This was what he would
ask of the present Ministers. But did he not see sitting by
their sides the very persons who had defeated the Corn Bill
last year—(Hear, hear.)—and could he have any confi-
dence that these persons would act as was promulgated ?
No pledge that could be given was to him worth one far-
thing. He wanted to see wile would be their measures,
and by those it was that he would judge.—(Hear, hear.)
—He did not say that he might not approve the conduct of
the present Ministry; but as to its being on the ground of
their adopting the measures of Mr. Canning, though he
had once hoped it, he now doubted it much. He hoped
that he might be able to support Government and its mea-
sures; but as to its adopting a liberal foreign policy, or
carrying into effect the Corn Bill, he confessed he had no
hope.
The Earl of DUDLET and the Marquis of CLANRICARDE
conversed across the table in a low tone.
The Earl of CARNARVON said, that after what had
fallen he would not press his motion ; but he must still
contend that he thought there was ample room for the
papers for which be bad moved ; for though, as he had said,
there were grounds enough to go into the original matter,
yet there was not enough before the House to satisfy their
minds as to the affair of Navarin. He likewise meant to
keep to his statement, that, although the principle of non-
interference was the broad basis of policy and right, still
the present was one instance of fair exception to the general
rule.

The motion was then withdrawn, and their Lordships
adjourned at Half-past Nine.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBRUARY 10.

Lord ASHLEY, Sir ROBERT Iscus, and Mr. Hus•
xissoic, took the Oaths and their Seats.

Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL presented two peti-
tions from the trustees of the Whitstable Rail Road.—Re-
(erred to a Committee.

Mr. GURNEY brought up the Report of the Commis-
oioners for Paving and Lighting the town of Lewes in
Sussex, and leave was given to bring in a Bill founded upon
that Report.
Gen. GASCOYNE brought up the Report of the Com-
mittees upon the Manchester and Liverpool, and I3olton
and Lea Rail-roads, in the county of Lancaster, and leave
was given to bring in Bills founded upon those Reports.
General GASCOYNE brought up the Report of the
Liverpool Election Committee, and obtained leave to bring
in a Bill for providing a more convenient place than the
Town-hall for the election of Members of Parliament for
that borough, and for enabling the Mayor and Bailiffs of
that Borough, to fix certain times for admitting Freemen
to take up their freedom.
Mr. MEREDITH presented a petition from certain
persons at St. Ives, relative to the Ayr and Calder Naviga-
tion Bill—referred to a Committee upon the said Bill.

Mr. FAZAKERLEY presented a petition, praying for
leave to bring in a bill for the improvement of the city of
Lincoln.—Leave granted.
LUNATIC ASYLUM.

Mr. BANKES presented a petition from Francis John
'Brown, Esq. formerly M.P. for Dorsetshire, praying for
leave to bring in a bill to euable him, at his own expence,
to make a donation of a freehold house and estate in Dor-
setshire, for the purpose of erecting a lunatic asylum.--
Read and referred to a Committee.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from certain inhabit-
ants of Aberdeen, in favour of the Aberdeen paving bill.
--referred to the Committee upon the Bill.
Mr. CHARLES PALLMER brought up the report of
the Committee upon the St. Mary, Wimbledon, Poore
Rate Bill, and leave was given to bring in a Bill which
was read a first and second time, and ordered to be com-
mitted.

Sir CHARLES MORGAN presented a Petition from
the Protestant Dissenters of Abergavenny in Monmouth-
shire, praying for the repeal of the Test and Corporation
A cts.

Laid on the table and ordered to be printed.
Lord STANLEY presented a Petition from the Pre-
pident of the Chamber of Commerce of Man-
chester, pursuant to a resolution entered into by that body,
praying for the repeal of the Act, imposing a Stamp Duty
upon Receipts.—Read and ordered to lie on the table.

CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.
Mr. FRENCH presented ten petitions from parishes in
the county of Roscommon, praying for a repeal of the
Disabilities of the Roman Catholics.—Read and ordered to
be printed.

NEW SARUM.
On the motion of Mr. AGAR ELLIS the Speaker
warrant for a Member to serve in Parliament for the
borough of New Sarum, in the room of Lord Folkestone
now Earl of Radnor, was ordered.
Mr. JOHN SMITH presented a petition from certain
inhabitants of the county of Tipperary, praying for an alte-
ration in the Irish Vestries.—To lie on the table.
Mr. JOHN SMITH presented petitions from the inha-
bitants of the parishes of Cashel and Tipperary, in favour
of Catholic Emancipation.—To be printed.
Mr. JOHN SMITH presented a Petition from the
Baptist Congregation of Bath, praying: for the Repeal of
the Teat and Corporation Acts.—To be printed. He also
presented a similar Petition from the Dissenting Congre-
gation of Gate-street, Lincoln's-Inn-fields.—To be printed.
Mr. MOORE presented a Petition from the Chamber
of Commerce of Dublin, praying for a Repeal of the Ast
imposing a Stamp Daty upon Receipts.
CORPORATION OF LONDON.
and
Mr. Sheriff Stable appeared at the Bar of the House,
presented a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen,
and Common Councilmen of the city of London, in Com-
mon Council assembled, praying a repeal of the Test and
Corporation Acts.
Mr. Alderman WOOD moved that the petition be read.
Mr. Ald. WAlTHMANseconded the motion, and felt it
necessary to state that he approved of every sentiment con-
tained in the petition, which was ugreed to with only three
assembly of the
the great majority of whom were
or four dissentient voices, in a very large
Common Councilmen,
members of the Established Church.
The petition having been read,
Alderman WOOD said, this petition must be considered
as containing the sentiments of the Freemen of London, 'in
as much as it was agreed to by the body representin'g those
freemen. A similar petition was presented from that body
some time past, and since that time there had been an elecc_
tion of Common Councilmen, but their constituents did not
at the election find fault with the previous conduct of
the C0m...0n Councilmen..-_a plain proof of their opinions
on that subject. This petition was as convincing a proof
as could be given of the march of mind in London, for
not longer back than the year 1790, a Petition of a con-
trary nature was unanimously agreed to by the Common
Council.

31" Alderman TPIOMPSON expressed himself favour-
ablellr to the objects of the petitioners.
1. FERGUSSON would vote for a bill which stated
that no person should suffer any deprivation of civil rights
for any religious tenets they might hold. It was most im-
portanon sht, however, that the question of Catholic Emancipa-
tiould be kept distinct from the question of the Repeal
of the Test and Corporation Acts. He (Mr. Ferg-usson)
was friendly to Catholic Emancipation ; hut he thought it
was right that the friends of the Dissenters should not offend
the feelings of those who were not averse to them, but to the
Catholic Claims.
He (Mr. F.) was a dissenter from the
Church of England, because he was a member of the Na-
tional Church of his own country (Scotland). It was
very hard he should be subject to degradation, for being
attached to a Church which was the National Church of
his country, as much as the Protestant Church was the
Established Church of England.—(Hear, hear.)—lf he
should be heard, he would endeavour to impress those opi-
nions on the House when this great question came before it.
Mr. MARTIN expressed his satisfaction at the libera-
lity displayed in the petition.
Mr. Alderman WAITHIIIAN thought it his duty to