The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-09 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, July 8.
Their Lordships met at Five o'Clock.
The Perth Prison Bill, and several other Bills, were
brought up from the Commons.
MINES AND COLLIERIES BILL.
Lord STRAFFORD presented petitions from places
in Yorkshire against certai,n clauses in the Mines and
Collieries Bill.

WEST INDIA COLONIES.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE presented a petition pray-
ing for protection to West India produce.
The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL presented a petition
from the Chamber of Commerce of St. Anne's, New
Brunswick, praying for protection to commodities the
growth and produce of the West Indian colonies.
THE OATHS' COMMITTEE.
The Duke of RICHMOND informed the House that
one of the witnesses called before the Oaths' Committee
had refused to give evidence on oath. The Noble Duke
then moved that the questions put to that witness,_ and
the reasons given by that person for refusing to take an
oath, should be printed for the use of the Committee.
MINES AND COLLIERIES.
Lord HOWARD (of Effingham,) presented petitions
from places in Yorkshire against any legislative inter-
ference with employment in mines and collieries.
Lord MONTEAGLE presented a similar petition
from the men employed in the collieries near Wakefield.
The Bishop of NORWICH presented seven petitions
from the colliers employed in the neighbourhood of
Wakefield, praying that the Bill might pass. (The Right
Rev. Prelate read one of the petitions which came from
the operatives themselves, expressive of the utmost
horror and disgust at the employment of females, and
children under 13 years of age, in mines at an, under
any circumstances.) He hoped and trusted that when
the Bill should be printed, and come before them
in another shape, their Lordships would consider it with
that attention of which he was sure it was well de-
serving. •
Lord HATHERTON thought it an inconvenient prac-
tice to go at great length into a question which was to
come before the House so soon in detail. He was happy,
however, to hear the Right Rev. Prelate admit the pro-
per management of the collieries in South Staffordshire.
But, at the same time, he must declare his
belief, that the statements of the Report did
not give a fair or correct account of the state of
the mines in other parts of the country. The
manner in which the Commission was appointed ought
to serve as a caution to their Lordships not to adopt its
representations too hastily. The Government and the
House of Commons had acted too precipitately in this
matter,. and the consequence was to spread dismay
throughout the mining districts ; and he trusted that
their Lordships would not proceed with the Bill until
they had allowed'those who were misrepresented in the
Report to state for themselves what were their practices.
The Earl of STANHOPE defended the Report, and
contended that the House was bound, in justice to the
Commissioners, to receive their statements as true until
they were rebutted.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE bore testimony to
the character of the Commissioners, and the fidelity and
care with which they had discharged their duties. He
was convinced that their inquiries had been conductei in
a perfect spirit of candour and impartiality.
After a few words from Lord HATHERTON in ex-
planation, the conversation dropped.
The Duke of CLEVELAND presented several pea-
-1 tions in favour of the Bill for regulating labour in
mines, &c. He supported the prayer, and expressed his
hope that the Bill would be read a second time this
evening, and passed as speedily as possible. In saying
this, however, he did not wish it to be understood 'that
he was opposed to some changes in the details.
Lord BROUGHAM said, as it appeared that this
Bill was to pass through the House as a matter of
course, he should be glad to know in what manner the
evidence had been collected ?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought it did not
appear as if the Bill was to pass as a matter of course.
In answer to the question which the Noble Lord had put
to him, he begged to say that he believed the Commis-
sioners to ,be men of great integrity, and that they had
taken every means to sift the evidence.
Lord HATHERTON stated that he had been informed
by the agent of Lord Ward that he had not heard of one
of the Commissioners having been in South Stafford-
shire tilUhe saw the Report.
A NOBLE LORD, en the Ministerial benches, said that
he did not believe that the Commissioners had visited
any of the great collieries in Gloucestershire, Glamor-
ganshire, Monmouthshire, or the neighbourhood.
The Earl of DEVON said it was his Llten.ion to
move the second reading of the Bill on some future dal.
The Duke of RICHMOND stated that the Bill could
not be read a second time till it had been referred to a
Select Cotntnittee.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE thought it ap-
peared to be the opinion of some Noble Lords that pre-
vious to the second reading of the Bill, certain witnesses
should be examined to prove the correctness of the evi-
dence given in the Report. He (tbe Marquis of Clanri-
carde) did not think that such a course was at all
necessary.
Lord CAMPBELL was of opinion that a motion
should at once be made for referring the Bill to a S elect
Committee.
The Earl of DEVON then moved that the Bill be
referred to a Select Committee.
The Duke of WELLINGTON could not but think
that their Lordships should inquire a little into the man-
ner in which the evidence in the Report had been taken.
.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord who appointed the
Commission was not present ; but he (the Duke of
Wellington) observed that the Commissioners were
authorised to take evidence upon oath. Sub-Commis-
sioners were appointed by the Secretary of State, who
were employed to take the evidence, which was a very
different thing from having the evidence taken by the
Commissiotiers.—(Hear, hear.) He thought it would be
desirable, before a Select Committee was appointed, that
the manner in which the evidence had been taken should
be inquired into. He was of opinion that the motion
should not be persevered in to•night, as the Noble Lord
who appointed the Commission was not present.
Lord BROUGHAM thought that if the Bill were
read a second time a Select Commi:tee would be appointed.
After a short conversation the matter dropped.
The Earl of CARDIGAN presented petitions from
five places in South Wales against any legislative inter-
ference with the regulation of labour in mines. The
Noble Lord presented similar petitions from the West
Riding of Yorkshire.
BANKRUPTCY LAWS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition,
signed by 300 merchants, bankers, and others of the
City of London, in favour of his Bill for amending the
Bankruptcy laws. His Noble and Learned Friend
(Lord Brougham) had stated on a former evening that
he intended on Monday next to call the attention of
the House to an important subject. He (Lord Lynd-
hurst) begged to ask what that subject was ?
Lord BROUGHAM had not the slightest objection to
intention
was his Noble and Learned Friend that his
was to bring the attention of the House to a petition
which he had presented from certain delegates relating
to the distress of the country.
EMPLOYMENT IN MINES.
Lord HATHERTON gave notice that on Tuesday
next he would move for a Select Committee to inquire
into the statements in the Report of the Commissioners
on Employment in Mines.
CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL.
On the reading of the Order of the Day, for the third
reading of the Custoins Duties Bill,
The Earl of RADNOR said thitt although he had
voted for the second reading of the Bill, because he ap-
proved of the principle, yet he must vote against the
third reading, because the Bill did not go far enough.
He might, however, congratulate the country on the
approach which the Noble Duke on the cross-benches
was making towards free trade principles.—(A laugh.)
The Duke of RICHMOND denied that he was a
free trader.—(Laughter.) It would be unjust to the
farmers of this country to expose them to the competi-
tion of the less heavily taxed farmers of the Continent.
The question having been put, a few Lords called out
non-content. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and
the House divided. The numbers w
For the third reading (Contents 52
Against the third reading (Non-contents) 9
Majority for the third reading —43
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
RAILWAYS BILL.
The Earl of RIPON moved the second reading of this
Bill.

Lord CAMPBELL gave notice that when the Bill
went into Committee he should propose a clause against
the locking in of the passengers.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered
to be committed on Monday.
DISTRICT COURTS AND PRISONS BILL.
On the motion of Lord WHARNCLIFFE this Bill
was read a first time.
MINES AND COLLIERIES BILL.
The following Noble Lords, in conjunction with others,
were appointed a Select Committee to which this Bill
should be referred, viz. :—The Lord President, Lord
Privy Seal, Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Brougham,
Viscount Melbourne, Lord Kenyon, the Bishop of Nor-
wich, Lord Cardigan, &c.
THE ANATOMY ACT.

Earl STANHOPE presented a petition from certain
inhabitants of Poplar and the neighbourhood, complain-
ing that the Anatomy Act had not been legally carried
out, the bodies almost invariably having been buried in
unconsecrated ground by the undertakers. (There were
other complaints contained in the petition which it was
prayed should be remedied, which we were unable to
catch.)
The Duke of WELLINGTON was of opinion that
the allegations could not be true, as the Act of Parlia-
ment was stringent enough to prevent such practices. A
Commission had been appointed to inquire into the
working of the Act. and they made a satisfactory Re-
port with regard to it. Another Commission had subse-
quently been appointed, but their Report was not yet in
a fit state to lay before the House. Government had di-
rected their attention to the subject, and they were de-
termined that the law shoUld be carried into effect in all
its details.
Earl STANHOPE expressed his satisfaction that the
Government had directed their attention to the subject.
He thought that the Noble Duke need not be at all ap-
prehensive as to the correctness of the allegations con-
tained is the petition, which was signed by the most re-
spectable inhabitants of the neighbourhood. He begged to
move hat the petition be laid on the table ; which was
agreed to.
The NOBLE EARL presented also petitions from Kirk-
heaton, and other places in Yorkshire, against the employ-
ment of women and children of tender age in mines and
collieries. He presented'also a petition from prisoners in
the Fleet and Queen's Ifench prisons against the law for
consolidating the metropolitan prisons.
DISTRESS OF THE COUNTRY.
The NOBLE EARL presented also a petition feom a
public meeting held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern