The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-22 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COADIONS.-(LAST NIGHT.)

Mr. HOBHOUSE moved the third reading of
the St. James's Vestry Bill.
Mr. PONSONBY moved as an amendment, that
the Bill be read a third time that day three months.
Sir S. MORLAND seconded the amendment.
Mr. S. DENISON expressed his surprise that
such an amendment should have been proposed, as
the amendment on that clause was lost in the Com-
mittee by 14. to 1, and the Hon. Member for Mid-
dlesex was the only Member who supported it.
Mr. ESTCOURT supported the amendment.
Sir ROBERT WILSON said, that it had been
advised that certain rropositions should be made, in
order to procure an amicable 'arrangement, but the
'14,13ir )uld not listen to it. No

:1 of th+

ill wo)

blame could be thrown on the Committee, who acted
unanimously, and were strangers to party feeling. It
had been admitted a malversation of the parish money
had taken place, and he thought that under such
circumstances the House would net allow 1100 pe-
titioners to remain under the government against
which tbey,had petitioned.
Mr. HOBHOUSE said that it was somewhat
hard that at the eleventh hour the Bill should be
met by an objection, which, if made at all, should
have been brought forward at an earlier and a fairer
stage of the proceeding. The House would observe
that the conduct throughout of the opposing party
had not been characterised by fairness. Who were
the Members who had spoken first to-night ? Why,
both those Hon. Members were themselves mem-
bers of the Select Vestry of St. James's.—(Hear,
hear, hear.)—Ho did not mean to say that
those Honourable Gentlemen would do any thing
wrong. He would answer for the conduct of
the Honourable Member, and there were plenty to
be answerable for that of the Hon. Baronet, but he
did think that every person belonging to any body
must have a feeling in preference of that body. He
could not think that- the fact of the names of those
respectable gentlemen being on the Select Vestry,
afforded a guarantee for the good management of
the parish, and the expenditure of 63,0001. or the
32 vestrymen, there were several who had never
once been present at the auditing the accounts.
Earl Spencer had been a vestryman ten years
without ever having been present, and he
could mention many more names who had
acted in the same way. He considered then
that the House would not intercept the Bill at
this late stage, when it bad passed through the
Committee by a majority of 14 to 1, and that one, a
select vestryman, and he might sty ,An interested
party.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL supported the amend-
ment.

Mr. BYNG said, that it had been proposed, that
nearly 100 of the dons of the parish were to have
been elected, but the Bill underwent so great an
alteration in Committee, that the. number of vestry-
men were 45. One-third of which were to have
gone out every year. lie would have been very well
contented to have gone on as he had done for the
last thirty years, but he found that it was not agree-
able to the parishioners, and he wished to cont►nue
on the same principles as he had done.—(Here the
cries of " Question' became so loud, that strangers
were ordered to withdraw.

The result of the divison was—
For the Bill ..
Against it
Majority
. _ . _

Mr. SLANEY presented a petition from Hert-
law, in the county of Durham, praying the House
would pass a law to regulate the collection of poor-
rates.