The Sun.
London, England, 1829-07-04 00:00:00

STEAM BOATS.
ear Mr. GALLOwAY on the behalf of a Mr. Stephen
:earn Geary, presented a petition praying that the Cor-
and Potation would countenance a plan which he had
arena int•eated fur the embarking and landing of passer]-
, A g:rs by steam-
boats, by means of a floating pier near
1/41t. Catherine's Dcck.
200 Mr. DRINRALD opposed the treasure.
bozo
,The petition was eventually referred to the Navi-
etit":l Committee.
THE sECONDARrEs' OFFICE.
sons • A
the A. petition was next presented on the behalf of
r• Crowther, the Secondary.
Pro._
clefr. CROwTHER expressed a wish that an early
U.
~ertnination might be arrived at, his only object
i;gel. to
consult common justice, and a due regard
ffy) to the common interests of the public.
Several Members here observed that the object of
It the memorial was for the mere purpose of delay.
,:b°l •OLDii AM on the part of Mr Crowther, dis-1
I°' • any such intention, and withdrew a motion
of
the
tphat Ile bad made for referring the matter to the
•"lelittee, and amended it by merely moving that
nee the petition do lie upon the table.
Amended motion agreed to.
crig
TUE NEW LONDON BRIDGE.
A petition was presented by Mr. GALLOWAY,
'JO front Mr Peter Jeffery, who stated that he had
ing Planned an arched bridge in opposition to the one
rst Nposed by Mr. Rennie. He (Mr..lefferey) pro-
P%ed one of iron, Mr. Rennie proposed one of
!d9
1(1t 4e, arid his (Mr. Jeffery's) argument was this,
he i jlhat, in point of architecture, his proposed iron
ridge would be far superior to a stone one, and
at Would save the City near 10,0001.
ed
its Tt The petition was referred to the New :London
--rl4. no,
‘.; nmittee.

he NATIONAL SCHOOLS.
tetition was presented on behalf of the City of
c---?"uY fund,°o National Schools for a donation from the
addille it". Mr Black (who was the petitioner)
" -.ressed the Court: at some length on the subject
d the utility of there institutions.
n
• Petition referred to the Committee of Finance.
• LONDON BRIDGE AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
L. JONES brought up the report of the
; ,14)...,i'0a-bridge Committee regarding the late pro-
- -"441g3 to the House of Lords ; and in doing so he
ll not. help noticing the contemptible conduct of
ria° Noble Peers, both of whom were interested in
b :)." business.—(Laterliter.)—They had even dared
"11 for a rental of the Bridge House estates; and
eY had throughout their proceedings betrayed a
in4neifi(( of
elije„tyei tita7l.tosn
iii•eacretrletunr half..T They y
ey
ear a
whilst the Committee had in their hands a let-
, •
Ler
-•rtis" frai_
ffise a Peer ilf who claimed indulgence for
l;titn
- Fay one year's rent that he owed to the
gef.`e House esorte. He considered that in the
• proceedings the Corporation had not lost a sin-
' flee
feather, but that its powers remained unshackled;
'lnni that before Parliament next
met that would be
appear to the world.
L tern,
ai Wool) gloried in the measure just passed
i
• • the noose of Lents. He was the first man that
iia". ruPosed
newth London Bridge, and although his
at th Friend. (Mr. Oldham) shook his head at him
way at time, he shook his head in a very different
bird
"e laugh.)—Notwithstanding all that
snecea" said of him regarding this bridge, he had
thrueZed in carrying it through evil report and
,good report; and he now considered him-
thatl- "THI3I•Y repaid for all the anxiety, labour, and toil
dude
h had .;uStiiiiied, end which was entirely con-
i„"e4 in the 'Bill then upon !he table. He would
say it few words regarding the unpreceiented
Upper
in which the Bill had been treated by the
'PPer and Lower House of Parliament. It had
kssed the Lower House, after the strictest investi•
gation,Without any objection, but the Upper House
erealrtuiraid,,the production of hooks of account ; not
theta 'a but waggon loads; and when they got
for what did they do? Why they then asked.
-• I,llb:tracts of them, because they were too Mom-
tf°lgiTr them to look into; and it turned out that
the ,;',°%'ernment itself owed a considerable sum to
Toole for rent, for the Ordnance Department in
• tr-13'eY-street. The Noble Lords were contend-
;in'pft4; a trifling tax of Gd. or Bd. a cha!dron
37: Ins, and were themselves inflicting a tax of
thmeans of a gross combination amongst
reeilltesaediveedsi'the coal proprietors. The Noble Lords
h to stand up •in defence of the poor,
Proof but
t"eY merely stood up as coal dealers; and, in
lett of this, he would read to them an extract of a
ti'eeritdist
on
nntly reeeivcd by one of the Society of
this subject, and it was this—" I may,
, a'eYer, inform thee that the preliminaries of peace
co.e,ncluded, and arrangements are made for a new
j.„,,,ti0n." This was the arrangement between
1,111•4 Durham and Lord Londonderry. Lord
Ih.satneliffe, however, spurned such an arrangement.
44 Worthy Alderman then went into a long de-
gt,,e of the conduct of the Corporation, and re-
fo,ted that the Noble Lord (Durham), who was
• leer!" a
IVlember of the Lower House, and with
Bat"lue (Alderman Waithman) had in that House
hiniand voted side by side, should so have conducted
cont:teilf' lie looked upon the whole as a very un-
Perisatl.ltional proceeding. As to the idea of com-
a, it was quite out of the question.
41dei•,
ment dWatt AITIIMAN, at great length, com-
Noblee rliP°o the whole of the proceedings of the
then, ,4..ords alluded to. The worthy Alderman
against there was a sort of feeling existing
again, the Corporation because it had appeared
would the Equitable Loan Company ; and lie
ask the Noble Lord who was most prominent
t.t tap In t3upporting that Bill (Durham), whether he lied
ell
ien 400 shares, being 300 more than he was
did upon to take as a Director? and whether he
po
ilhot now owe the Company three hundred
And4ds. being one pound per share on the 3001. ?
Apo Whether the Directors had not taken the shares
pert 4 this principle, that they were at from 5 to 8
pr Crit premium, and that they sold them at that
di&e:ln'urn, and that in a day or two they were at a
antiltint• He would appeal to Sir Peter Laurie,
'lntl would ask him if it was not true. He had
rnt:itier
st°,,o that some of these Noble Lords had
1,20 en it their boast that they had made their
drty
out of the produce of these shares.
gethtet.• P'rEtt LAURIE and Mr. TICKLER rose to-
b t ut
Corp°: ietCNER proceeded. lie contended that the
Privittration held its funds in the same way as a
to re !individual, and that they were no more bound
l'hubnouer au account to those Lords of the Black
render nd, than their Lordships would be bound to
ships „'" account to the Corporation if their Lord-
the fl'anted to. raise money to build a bridge over
Corp Yae'br the Wear. He contended that the
.err Zoltrti(l,
,had no business. to obey the mandate of
Bide diedstups as they had done, and ;that a very
Brid netion ought to be made between the
ef4:4l, °use estates and the Corporation funds.
Loudon by observing that the Citizens of
'Pon °tji bad obtained every thing that could confer
sir honour, power, or substantial good.
If, 4 ise,„Bll LAURIE observed that, in the course
"laareh IHY93 there would be a meeting of the
which ulders of the Equitable Loan Company, at
n which tre would be published a list of defaulters,
er 30n,, ray Lord Durham's name would appear
vase. He knew a little of this concern, and
Jr. etermined to see it wound up. Himself and
naini443hingtori were the only two Directors re-
ainr, rah 411 the others having, like my Lord Dur.
lie Lou.? away and left them. Perhaps, however.
med. I.43hiP might hear of this and pay up what he
kr.
:Niue
t-,flottNtitu,, at some length, defended the
of the Parties opposing the Bill through the
e of Lords.
ioair'f9ALLOWAY followed, arid, after some observe-
thets,rtr „0.14r.' Stevens, Mr. H. L. Jones, and
IPs and it Report .-teport of the Committee was brought
earry. . Was referred back to the same Committee
- same into effect.—Agreed to.