The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-09 00:00:00

lIOUSE OE COMMONS', Feb. 8.

The SPEAKER Look the Chair sh'ortly before Four
o'clock.

Mr. _BARNARD presented a petition from the inha-
bitants of Greenwich, against the Corn-laws.
Mr. HINDLEY presented several petitions from Ash-
ton-under-Lyne to the same effect.
Mr. RICARDO presented similar petitions from St.
Pancras, the Tower Hamlets, and several other places.
Mr. STRUTT presented similar petitions from Derby.
Mr. WILSON presented petitions froni Clithero, and
several places in Yorkshire, to the same effect.
Dr. BOWRING presented thirty petitions from dif-
ferent parts of the metropolis, in favour of the repeal of
the Corn-laws.

Mr. FERRAND presented petitions from the inha-
bitants of Keightley, against the Poor-law Bill.
Mr. BROTIIERTON presented a petition from the
members of the Christian Methodist Chapel at Salford,
praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws.
Lord DALMENY presented a petition from the Cor-
poration and Guild of Stirling, for a total repeal of the
Corn-laws.

Mr. SIIANSFIELD presented petitions from various
religious congregations and bodies of workmen in the
West Hiding of Yorkshire, praying for a total and im-
mediate repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. PIIILLPOTTS presented four petitions from the
City of Gloucester, praying for a total repeal of the
laws affecting the importation of corn.
Mr. G. W. WOOD presented 32 petitions from the
county of Westmoreland, signed by persons of all classes,
many of them farmers, praying for a repeal of the Corn-

Mr. LITTON presented a petition from a Presbyte-
rian congregation in Coleraine, Ireland, 'praying for an
enactment legalising Presbyterian and Catholic mar-

riages.
Mr. WAWN presented two 'petitions from South.
.1500 ofthe
Shields, Signed respectively
and 2,800 working men, prabyyin, g for a reipeanha bitants,
l of the
Corn-laws.
Mr. COBDEN presented several petitions from dis-
senting religions congregations in Ayr, Northumber-
land, Lancaster, and the town Of Oldham, praying that
the Corn-la WA might be repealed.
Mr. DITSCOMBE presented a petition from the inha-
bitants of 'Lyndhurst, praying that they might. be ex-
oripted froln the operation of the Poor-laws.
CQmpTQN wished to knoW.if 'there were any
reason annexed to the petition.
Mr. DUNCOMBE replied, that one reason was, that
what was called the workhouse test prevented the aged
and infirm from obtaining relief, and another reason was,
that under that system the rates annually increased.
Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN presented a petition from the
working classes of Paisley, complaining of the distress
of the cotuitry, and praying that some system of emigra-
tion might be devised, by which they might go to the
Colonies.

Mr. WART presented petitions from - Dunbar, in
Scotland, and from the members of Hope Chapel, Wigan,
in Lancashire, complaining of the distress of the coun-
try, and praying for the total and immediate repeal of
the Corn and Provision-laws.
Mr. COMPTON presented a petition from Porches-
ter, praying for the continuance of the present duties
on corn.

Sir G. DE H. LARPENT presented two petitions,
very numerously signed, from the Baptist congregation
in Nottingham, praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. RENNIE presented a petition from the master-
shipbuilders of Ipswich, Harwich, and Woodbridge,
complaining of the present high rate of duty on timber
entering the United Kingdom, and praying for its re-
duction. •
I‘fr.HOWELL wished to nsk the Noble Lord, Secretary
for Irela nd,wh ether i t was the intention of the Government
to introduce a measure for the purpose of remedying the
technical effects of the Irish Municipal Reform Bill?
Those defects had been productive of great practical in-
convenience.
Lord ELIOT said that he would take that op-
portunity of expressing a hope that any Honour-
able Gentleman who might be desirous of put-
ting questions to the Government similar to those
of the Hon. Member would give previous notice of their
intention. He did not wish to enter at that moment
into the subject to which the Hon. Member had alluded ;
and as he had not the honour of a seat in the Cabinet,
he was the less able to intimate the intention of her
Majesty's Ministers. He was sure, however, that
if any practical grievances were pointed out, the Govern-
ment would be ready to apply a remedy. lie was not
aware, however, that they had in contemplation any
measure on the subject to which the Hon. Member had
alluded.
Mr. HOWELL said that he did not wish to press any

question improperly on the Noble Lord. He would give
notice, however, that he would renew his question of that
evening to-morrow.
Mr. DISRAELI postponed the motion of which he
had given notice, with respect to the Consular Establish-
ments of Great Britain.
RAILWAYS (IRELAND.)
An HON. MEMBER wished to know from the Noble
Lord the Secretary for Ireland, if it was the intention
Of her Majesty's Government to introduce in this Session
any measure having for its object the promotion of rail-
way communication in Ireland; and, also, whether it was
their intention to introduce any measure for the regula-
tion of medical charities-in Ireland ?
Lord ELIOT, in reply to the first question, said that
various propositions had been submitted to her Majesty's
Ministers by parties in Ireland, but no decision had been
come to with respect to them. lie believed that her
Majesty's Ministers would not sanction any measure of
which the effect would be to involve any outlay of public
money, or to entail upon the country any liabilities. They
*oula, however, give every facility in their power to
private enterprise. With regard to the second question,
namely, that.which referred to the regulation of medical
charities, a measure had been prepared, but it was not
yet in a sufficiently forward state to be laid before the
,House.
TREATY FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF
SLAVERY.
Lord PALMERSTON wished to ask a question of
the Right Hon. Baronet opposite on a subject which
had been referred to in the Speech from the
Throne—namely, the treaty between the Five Powers for
the suppression of slavery. In order that the House
might comprehend the bearing of the question which he
was about to ask, he would first state to the House the
House the course of proceedings which had led to that
treaty. The treaty as the House knew by the papers
,which had been laid before it, was the result- of a con-
teience held in. December, 1838, at the Foreign-office,
in order that the PleniPotentiaries of France and Eng-
land might propose to the Plenipotentiaries of Austria,
Russia, and Prussia, the continuation of the negotiations
which commenced at the Congress of Vienna, for the
Suppression of slavery. And there was this remarkable
circumstance in that Conference, that whereas at the
Treaty of Vienna England stood almost alone in urging
the Powers of Europe to enter into that contract, on this
occasion, December, 1838, France occupied the same
honourable position which England had before occupied
alone, and the proposal to make this treaty proceeded as
much from France as England, and the two countries
were equally entitled to the honour of the proposition.
At that time a draft of the treaty was proposed by
the Plenipotentiaries of France and England to the
Plenipotentiaries of the other powers. The other Pleni-
potentiaries said they would refer to their Courts for
instructions, and the Plenipotentaries of France and
England, stated that they hoped the detailed provisions
of that draft, would be found reconcilable with the
rights and interests of the subjects of the other powers.
Many communications passed upon the subject, and to-
wards the end of last summer, the matter stood

in this situation. The Treaty had been agreed to by
the three Powers, and nothing but matters of form were
necessary to make it effectnal. What he wished to ask
the Right Hon. Baronet was, whether any material alte-
rations had been made in the Treaty as It stood in the
draft, at the period when the late Govern-
ment were in office ; and he also wished to
_ _

know whether the ratifications of any of the contract-
ing parties had been received, and whether they had
been exchanged for the ratification% of the British
Crown ? He might be allowed to say that never per-
haps did any of the Five Powers sign a treaty
more honourable to themselves, or one which
_

was founded on purer motives or more complete
disinterestedness than that to which he referred. If the

Right Zion. Baronet thought it inconvenient to answer
the question, he would he satisfied with such an intimation.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he did not foresee any in-
convenience in giving a reply to the questions which
had been put to him by the Noble Lord.
He could confirm, if any confirmation were neces--
sary, the accuracy of the statement which the Noble
Lord had made with respect to the circumstances under

which this treaty was considered and signed. The invi-
tation was addressed jointly by France, as well as by
England, to the three other powers, parties to the
treaty, requesting them to join in an united effort for the
purpose of suppressing that traffic which had been de-
clared to be odious and impious by the voice of this
country. The treaty was signed by the Five Powers
subsequent to the appointment of the present Ministers.
He could not say that any important alterations
were made in the Treaty as it was signed, from
the Treaty as it was originally agreed upon
at an earlier period. There were some modifications, but
they were not of a nature which would at all justify him
in characterising them as important ; they were mo-
difications intended to further the general objects
of the Treaty.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble Lord's
second question was, whether the ratifications of
any of the contracting parties had been received, and
whether they had been exchanged with those of this
country. No such exchange of ratifications had taken
place. The period allowed for the exchange of ratifica-
tions would not expire till the 20th of this month. lie
had reason to believe that the ratification of some of the

parties had been received in London; but as the period
allowed for the exchange was not earlier than the 20th

of February, no surprise could be felt that the exchange
had not taken place.

IMPORTS.

Sir P. G. EGERTON moved for a return of the quan-
tity of cheese imported into the several ports of Great
Britain, in each month of the years 1840 and 1841, dis-
;uguishing the European from the American produce.