The Sun.
London, England, 1827-03-30 00:00:00

MR. PARKER.

Lord KENYON wished to offer a few observations to
aheir Lordships' notice, which, though he was convinced
they were irregular, he felt were necessary to explain a
misunderstanding which had occurred. In one of the
Morning Papers of that day, a paragraph had been inserted
relative to some proceedings which had occurred in their
Lordships' House, but that paragraph had been inserted by
his particulardcsire. He had desired this because he thought
he had not done his duty to the person whose petition he
had presented to their Lordships' notice a few evenings be-
fore, in omitting to notice an observation which lied been
made by his Noble Friend (the Earl of Caledon), on the
cross-bench. In transmitting_ that communication for
publication, his only intention was to make amends for
that omission. If be had thought there was in it the
slightest intention or even tendency to make any impu-
tations against any individuals, he should feel that his
conduct had Veen: very improper. He only wished to reply
to the obetrvation of his Noble Friend on the Cross Bench,
who lwa complained that the petition was presented when
she kadividual against whom the petition was directed was
;eat in the country—that, as he had informed his Noble
'Friend, he had two years before known it was the intention
of the petitioner to offer the petition to their Lordships'
notice. The petitioner had wished him (Lord Kenyon) to
present the petition in 1825, and again in 18'6. He then
induced the petitioner to refrainfrom presenting his petition,
and be could not refuse to compl;, with his request this,
Session, as he pledged himself to present any petition which
had for its object some compensation for his losses. He
himself did not know that Col. Bird was in England in
1826, nor did he know that he was absent from England
in 1827; and he trusted their Lordships would give him
credit, when he istated that he never would encourage any
persons to present petitions against individuals who were
absent at the time. His only object was to do justice, and
in that view he would briefly advert, to another point. It
bad ly..en stated that Mr. Parker knew that Col. Bird was
a Catholic, when he had made those observations in his
presence against the Catholics ; but the truth was, that Mr.
Parker did not know that Col. Bird was a Catholic till
after the conversation relative to his having brought with
him a Catholic Priest.

The Earl of CALEDON had only stated the fact, that
Mr. Parker had withlseld.bis petition in 1826, when Co-
lonel Bird was present, and had prevented it in 1827, when
he was absent. His only object, however, in the few ob-
servations he had addressed to their Lordships on a former
evening, was not to attack Mr. Parker's character; but to
defend that of Colonel Bird. According to the present
explanation, he was to understand, that, omitting to pre-,
sent tha petition rested with his Noble Friend, and SICA.
with Mr. Parker.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said a few words, disap-
proving, as we understood, of the observations of Lord
Kenyon, as irregular, and condemning the introduction of
the subject to their Lordships' notice.
Lord HOLLAND thought the Noble Lord, when he
began his speech, meant to make a complaint of a breach
of privilege, which it turned ont had been committed by
himself. Unless the Noble Baron meant to follow up his
observation by some motion, he must say they were ex-
tremely irregular. If he meant to make any motion, it
must be, he thought, a motion to reprimand those who had
caused the publication of the paragraph.