The Sun.
London, England, 1817-05-13 00:00:00

TUESDAY MAY 13. 1817.

PARLIAMENT:

ETbe ProereclinKs in the nowt of Lords will be found in Our
iabitgotoit

HOUSE O? COMMONS, Moriber, MAy 12.

NVIMTING, WONILN.

General THouNToN postponed till Thumlay,
the. 2211 his mutton touching the Ny hipping
of womtn.

GAOL CHAPLAINS.

Mr. IlivasT gave notice of a motion on Monday
next, for leave to bring in a Pill for the Regula-
tion of God Chaplains.
toisliumai AND FALKIRK CANAL.
Ott the Order of the Day for the second reading
of the Edinnorgh and Falkirk Canal 13111, Mr. W.
aupported the Bill, as did Lord A. Ha-
milton, Mr. Marjoribauks, Mr. Rose, awl Mr: J.
P. Grant, on the ground that it would furnish
employment for the poor, supply Edinburgh with
svt,ter. and he productive of comnrercialadaant ages.
Sir 0. (=L Batt and Lord VPINIgigG opposed the
mainly oil the ground that the Canal was to
be close to tie sea Ihroagli its whole conrse, and
Would therefore injure the ci asting trade."
The House then divided, when the numbers
'Nere—
Fat the 'Bill .
Against it.. 63
Majority for the Bill
,TiIIIMINGHAM POOR BILL
Sir C. MORDAUNT moved the second reading of
the Birmingham Poor Rates Bill, strongly con-
tending for the necessity of passing this measure,
which could not but tend to afford considerable
relief. •
Mr. Hatt, oPposed the Bill, complaining that
the measure was only applicable to one parish.
and went to after the established law of the land.
He moved as an a-nendment, that it he read a 2il
time this thy six months. •
Mr. CA:Alyea] regrifited that this 'Bill was of a
local instead of a general natere, He thought.
the Bill ought to be 'adopted in some Shape'or
other, or otherwiSe a vast partirm of the pauper
population of Birmingham would'be thrown upon
the public, destitute' of Means of relief.
Mr. Gooch disapproved of the Bill, for be
feared the adoption of theprineipte to impose on
(miens of houses the payment of the Poor Rate 4;
VI mild ocpasion a more lavish capenditore than at
present Otisted. When the Gentlemen of• Mr-
applied to the Chancellor of the Exche•
quer for relief under the Excheyier Bills' Plan,
that Right Him: Qetitleman vtid respecting the
security of the Poor gates, that their security
would have been better if their BM had gone
throogh the llooSe(H --s-
-earl)Thus was theGo-
yernmeut, for the first time, made a party to a
-Cu.prirate: ]sill.
tt.tet..r..ort of the Ex,cnrQuee denied
that the Government Was in any way a party to the
measure ; and he should give his opinion on it 'its
tot individual Member of Parliament. As to the
principle of the Bill, this was not the first time it.
hail been brought under the consideriition of the
Legislature. The Bill- had his •sopport. • He
thotight it was right that the proprietors should
bear their 'proportion of the burdens. Saute
houses were not liable to the poor-rates, and so
extensive had the evil become, that it was a mat-
ter of speCulation at Birminglram to build houses
not rateable forthe poor ; and how could it be re-
medied but by proceeding like the'present ? He.
thought* the parties were at 'least entitled to the
opportunity of proving their case in a Committee,
anti with that impression' lie should support the
motion for the second re:idiot, :
Mr. DUGDALE approved of 'the
IaI"TTLETON d,sapproved• of the Bil% which
was Wholly witlniut-a complete precedent.' .This.
Bill went to 'make those 'landlords liable who
owned houses let under the rent of 101. and if they
adopted • this Bill, their doors would be assailed
from all parts of the country, by-Hull, by Man.:,
chester, &c:
Mr. TitoatsCov looked upon' this Bill, as an at.;
tempt to equalize the burden of the Poor Rates,
and Oar Was most desirahle: -He-hoped the Com-
Mittee on the Poor Laws WOOM 'recommend the
adoption of'a general measure to accomplish such
equalization.. The principle was a just one, and.
he therefore wished it success.
Sir'J-. GaIt:HAM 01+00441m MeaSare, contend-
'inglhat it was'mnst injuriously setting occupiers
against their landlords. He wished the House
would first ensure the landlords their ren's ; tjt
all'hiients', he trusted that the landlords, many of
vehtim cOuld get no rent at all, should not be
made liable to the Poor Rates, as proposed by
the' , • 7 ,
"Mr:WPsrenti Was dVtitledly against the Bill,
%Thiel] went to establish a most-pernicious principle ;
it 'srent to "remove the burdens front the occupiers
to the owners of property, who were already ex.

posed to sufficient 'severities.
Mr. WILIIgRPORCS sopported the motion, de,
siring.-t hat the mett.ore should gn to a Commit.
tee, for it was asserted in the teeth of those who
opposed the Bill, that 1770 itotises hail been built
at Birmingham within the last two years sn as to
escape the Prior Kates. The facts ought to
hr
examined, tp ascertain whether relief could be
atfOrded.
Mr. BantrosAm opposed the Bill, because its
principle was so objectionable. It the principle
wllre good for any thing, 'it would he good for a
more extended application.; and thus would they-
be preparing the way for the introduction of an
entire new idriociple of legislation. If thetlisti.:ss
were temporary, as those connected witlatiovern.
mew had heretofore dontemled, where was the
sanctity of legislating perhounently for temporary
'calamity ? If 'the Chancellor of the Exchequer
supported it ()alias an individual, and not as a

LPRICP. SEVENIitNtR.

Mini Per, he felt asinred that the Bill wo,l‘l he
thrown out, as ail the argootents were nga;nst it.
' CHANZT.LioII ExCIIF:QU.Fit
denyiug that Govtitimehr bad pititniscd any sup-
port to the Bill.
Mr. LY-ri'LETtot. in reply to this, he,,zged
observe, that the Right Hun. Gentleman hitd
peatedly asked him, haw could Birmingham Ore
security for the loan without this I3tli ?—(Hear,
hear !)
Ts
Mr. BUtTPRWORTII , Mr. li. DATUURST:sur-
ported the Bill, contending that its.principle.was
hiost jut, and that the facts ought to be ihrotired
into, and that therefore it ought. to go.tO a Chin!!
mittee. . . _

C. AtoknAuNi; Mid never heßrd thitit w
the intention of the, supporters of the measure
itfidra w it in the event of beinii dePriveti of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's support.hlear
The House then divided, find the numbers ‘ieze,
Fur the Bill AI;

Against it

11/4444rtty
Sir .I.‘ots NlAottwroskt poitponed his MOi ion
respecting the Droits of ihe Crown till 'Mon.!,,y
next.
Mr. Cuawns presented a petition from Samuel
Hill anti William Blundell, two patentees of an
invention for preparingflax in a drieikitate, with-
out' the intermediate process of steeping. The
Hon. Gentleman represented, that the benefits of
this discovery to the cultivators of flax would ha
prodigionS, and (as the petitioners calculated)
equal to two-thitds of the u hole qtiantity flit
grown throughout the kin.4ll.om. The petition:rs
prayed that,a C6lttroltt ee might be appointed to
inquire into the advantages of the discovety.
The Petition wag brought up and read, anti re-
ferred to a Select Committee.

Mr. itost brought tip the report of the Select
Committee on• Rock SAir, 'which iVas otclerett to
lie on the table, anti to he printed.
Mr. 111LEY AnntNGToti prettentel a:return of
the number of person:. c.nrthrit in the ditlereut'
Gaols in lJllglautl awl Wales tw offences apinst
the Qante Laws since May 1816 also s 'copy
Of the r4Cortier's neport on the conviction of
Mary rtyan.