The Sun.
London, England, 1829-03-06 00:00:00

LONDON, v, MAY EVENING, MARCH 6, 1829.

who were sent to that College for instruction.—(llear.)
" Roinish principles are fast flowing into the country,
and trill soon ondermine the Protestant State ; stand up
my brethren." He had better have said " Stand up my
boys, and resist any innovation on your rights."
The Bishop of GLOUCESTER replied, that when he
was not informed when the petition was put into his hand,
he was not told that when these words had been used.

Lord KING only wished to mention the subject to show
how the rising generation were attempted to be influenced.
Lord WINCHELSEA rtatefl . that as none of his 3la-
jesty's Ministers were present, he should postpone his in-
tended motion till Tuesday nevt, as it would not be cour-
teous to bring it on in the absence of the Noble Premier,
Lord FITZ WILLIAM presented two petitions in favour
of the Catholics, from Macclesfield and another parish.
Lord TORRINGTON presented a petition from an
individual in favour of the Catholics.

The Marquis of bUTE presented a petition from Car-
diff, in favour of the Catholics.

Lord DARNLEY presented similar petitions from Cha-
tham.
Lord SIDMOUTH . presented a petition from Rich•
mond, Surrey, against the Catholics.

The Bi,hop of BATH and WELLS presented a petition
from Sherwood, against the Catholics.
Lord KING observed, that it ought rather to be called
the petition of the ghost and spirits of the persons hung
by Jefferies, as from a placard posted in that parish.
He (Lord King) found that 19 persons had been
enumerated as martyrs in one parish.
Viscount LAUGHTON presented eleven petitions
against the Catholics from parishes in the counties of
Durham and Worcester.

The Duke of DEVONSHIRE presented four petitions
in favour of the Catholic..

Lord FALMOUTH presented six petitions against the
Catholics, from the counties of Dorset, Berks, and Corn-
wall.

The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from
Leeds, against the Catholics.
(LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS

At Four o'clock, the attendance of Members at the
House was very great, although not equal to that of
yesterday. When the SPEAKER took the Chair, there
must have been upwards of 200 Members in the House.
A Message was brought from the House of Lords, de-
siring the attendance of the Commons in the other House,
to hear the Royal Assent given, by Commission, to se-
veral Bills which had been passed by Parliatnent, for
which see the Lords' Report
Admiral HARVEY presented six petitions. from places
in Essex against further concessions to the Catholics.

AdmiralEVANS presented four petitions from parishes
in Cork against further Concessions to the Catholics.

Sir R. HILL presented a similar petition from the county
of Salop.
Alr. APLEOD presented a similar petition from Paisley.
Sir HENRY SMITH presented several petitions frein
Colchester and places adjacent thereto against any further
concessions to the Catholics. Ile could not, he said,
avoid reproaching the Right lion. Gentleman, who had
last night proposed a measure of concession to the
Rause with political apostacy.—(Hear, hear, bear.)—
The speech delivered by the Right Honourable Gentleman
would have been excellent if delivered by any one but him-
self; but coming as it did from him, it commenced with
cant, and was filled with false reasoning thros;hout.—
(Laughter.) He had been deceived in the Right lion.
Gentleman, who had been the champion of the Prote.tants,
whom he now betrayed.—(llear, hear.)—When he said
this, he spoke the feeling of the counsry, who could
believe last year that the Right Hon. Gentleman would
have ceded to the Dissenters, and that he would have
ceded to the Catholics.—(Hear.)—He was not capable of
arguing the Catholic question, as well as many gentlemen
whom he saw around him, but be had reseived part
of his education amongst the Catholicf, and had formed
the opinion that they were a bieotted and intollerant
set.—(Hear, hear.)—They would never be satisfied with
equality of rights. They would not be content to be placed
on a footing sinless thy everstepped the Protestants.—
(Cheers)—Every Catholic, who was true to his religion,
must be a bitter enemy of the Protestants. He (Sir H.
Smith) might be called a bigot, (hear, hear, and laughter)
but if he was called a bigot for supporting the Church
and the Constititution he gloried in the appellation.
as it was, he felt bound to give the strongest opposition to
Ministers on this q uestion.—( Hear. )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQOER said,
that he did not rise for the purpose of vindicating the cha-
racter of his Right Hon. colleague, for he would trust
that to the jodgmeut of those around bins. (Hear,
hear. hear.) The only thing be had to observe was,
that the Ron. Baronet had said that the speech would
have done honour to '3lr. Canning—(hear,)—and this
was as high praise as he could well bestow on the speech.
If the Hon. Bart. supposed that his Right Hon. Friend
had any intention in what had fallen from him, of casting
aspersions upon those who had not been in the habit of
speaking upon the question, lie had entirely misapprehended
the tenor of his observations.
Mr. W. PEEL said that he felt convinced that his
Right Hon. Relative had acted from motives as pure as
those which influenced the Hon. Baronet, and whatever
might he said by Hon. Members, he for one should not
indulge in personalities, for he always found they recoiled
with double force upon those who were in the habit of re-
sorting to them.
Admiral Sir E. HARVEY presented petitions from
three parishes in Essex, against Catholic Emancipation.
Mr. W. SMITH presented petitions from different Dis-
senting Congregations in Suffolk, Kent, and oths r places,
in favour of the Roman Catholic Claims. The Hon.
Member said that one of those petitioners was from the
deputies assembled in London, and represented the opinions
of at least 20,000 prisoners. He alluded to the temperate
tone in which the prayer of these petitions was expressed.
When this question was discussed in this House many
years ago, Lord George Gordon presented a petition against
the Roman Catholics, signed by 120,000 persons; but the
opposition to that great measure terminated in a melan-
choly catastrophe, by which many lives were lest. He
thought that the opposition to the present measure
was attributable to the means which had been adopted tor
raising the public mind to an unnatural degree of excite-
ment.

Mr. CRESSETT PELHAM contended that public
opinion was in direct opposition to the measure as pro-
posed by his Majesty's Ministers; and however the judg-
ment of what were called the lower orders had been under-
valued, he thought that they were competent to form a
correct opinion on a subject which so affeete3 their dearest
interests.

Sir R. H. INGLIS rose to present several petitions
against the Roman Catholic claims. He had heard it
stated with surprise, that the proper mode of representing
public opinion is by the votes of the Members of this
House. To ascertain the extent, he would recognize this
principle, but he contended the right of petition should he
held sacred. This right was the prerogative of the people,
they knew the value of the blesssings they enjoyed, and
all they asked was that these blessings should be preserved.
Ile trusted that the voice of the people would always be
heard with that attention which it deserved. One of the
petitions was from the city of Bath, as a proof of the
strong feeling entertained on the subjsct of the Catho-
lic Claims, and it was quite enough for him to say
that in thity hours it hail been signed by 5,636 persona.
He was aware that a petition of a contrary nature had
been presented on a former night, which had been
signed by only 293 persons. He also presented a petition
fron the county of Tyrone, signed by 270 persons,
And another from the parish of Northfleet, in Oxfordshire,
of a similar nature.

Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE was quite satisfied
tivit the character of tke petitioners had been fairly
described by the Honourable Member. He knew that a
large majority of the constituent body of the county of So-
merset, in which the city of Bath is situated, were de-
cidedly hostile to the measure now recommended by his
Majesty's Ministers to Parliament ; but he knew that
an altered feeling had been latterly manifested. He was
justified in the assertion by the Honourable Member's ad-
mission that a counter petition had been presented, which
though not numerously, was most respectably signed. He
had previously opposed Reman Catholic Claims on prin-
ciple, but he would now most solemnly declared that he
had determined to withdraw that opposition,
Me. BRONWLOW said he had another petition sent
to hi.n from the city of Bath, in favour of the Catholics.
I LEFT sramcixcl

NAVAL INTELLIGENCE.

PIXMOUTH, MAncit s.—His Majesty's ship Sheldr:ike
arrived at St. Thomas's, from Falmouth, Jan. .20. The
Grasshopper, from Havannah, arrived at Barbadoes Jan. 8.
The Arachne, from a cruise, and Hope, from Falmouth,
Jan. 13. The Icarus arrived / t St. Vincent's, from St.
Lucia, Dec. 26, and sailed for Mustique. The Pickle
sailed from Port-au-Prince for Newfoundland, Dec. 2.

SPIRIT OF THE LONDON JOURNALS.

In the House of Commons last week Lord Althorp pre-
sented a petition from the Surgeons of Birmingham, pray-
ing that some alteration may be made in the laws connected
',with the obtaining of subjec's for dissection. We also
trust that some alteration may he made in those laws, and
that the alteration may he of such a nature as to render
them a greater terror than they are at present to the bar-
barous violators of the tomb. The Birmingham surgeons,
no doubt, who signed the petition, think it a very hard
case that those who traffic in the spoils of church-yards,
and steal dead bodies for the surgical market, should be
liable•to fine and imprisonment for following so useful a
vocation. They, no doubt, would have such persons be
regarded as martyrs to the " interests of science," suffer-
ing for their devotion to her cause. They would have that
universal iiii.tinct, that sentiment of naftiral affection, or de-
cency, dr whatever it is which protects the mortal remains
of relatives and friendS from 6avage profanation, considered
as an ignorant prejudice, unworthy of the " march of in-
tellect," and which might to be exploded. Why then do
not those enlightened persons strengthen the influence of
their precepts by the force of their example ? Why do
they not give their beloved " science" a property in their
own bodies, instead of bequeathing them to the safe-keep-
ing of consecrated vaults, or to the repose of their parent
earth ? We do not observe that surgeons or physicians are
more ready than other people to direct their executors in
their wills not to give their earthly remains a decent fune-
ral, but to put them into deal boxes, and to send them to
the dissection table ; nor do we find that they have induced
their wives and children to get rid of their " ignorant pre-
judices" against the knife of the anatomist. The family of
a surgeon, however numerous it may be, does not -supply
more bodies to the lecture-room than that of any other per-
son. The services of the undertaker, and the solemnities
of a Christian funeral, are preferred to the exposure of the
dissection-table, and all the revolting circumstances con-
nected with the " interests of science." But, when
this so-much-talked of " science" is analysed, what,
in reality, is it ? Professional lucre, and nothing else.
The surgeon buys bodies with the view of making
money by the sale of his knowledge—or the ignorance
which often passes under its name. His calculation, like
that of the lawyer, is one of pounds, shillings, and pence.
The practice of cutting up the human subject for surgical
purposes, was never so prevalent as at the present time ;
but we do not find that it produces more skilful surgeons
than those who flourished at a time when this mode of
study was not so obtrusively brought into collision with
the decent feelings of society. We believe there are far
more dead bodies used at present than there would be any
necessity for if the works of former• able anatomists were
studied as they ought to be. To hack and carve the hu-
man frame is less difficult than to acquire the principles of
science. The hand and knife are employed to save the la-
bour of the head. Hence all the cant which we continually
hear about the cruelty of the laws which punish the viola-
tion of the grave—as if they were directed against the inte-
rests of science, and not against its abuses.—iFforning
Herald.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.--(LAST NIGHT.)

A Commission was formed by the Lord Chancellor,
Lord Shaftesbury, and Lord Ellenborough, to express the
Royal Assent to the Bill for the Suppression of Dangerous
Associations in Ireland.

The Duke of CUMBERLAND presented a petition
ftom Hawkston, Wilts, against the Catholics.

The Earl of ALBEMARLE presented a similar peti-
tion from Yarmouth.

Lord KING presented several similar petitions from
Ireland ; and also several against the Sub-letting and
Vestry Acts.
The Earl of ESSEX presented two petitions in favour
of the Catholics, and another against the Vestry Act.
Lord DARNLEY presented r.ine petitions in favour of
the Catholics from the county of Lancaster.
The Earl of RODEN presented a petition Irons the
county of Meath for the repeal of the Vestry Act.
Lord DE DUNSTANVILLE presented a petition from
a parish in Cornwall, in favour of the Catholics.
Lord LONSDALE presented petitions from parishes in
Weettnoreland and Cumberland against the Catholics.
Lord ELDON presented petitions from the city of Glas-
gow and other places against the Catholics. On present-
ing one from Sheffield,
Earl FITZWILLIAM spoke for some time in answer
to the Noble Earl, but not one word of what he said could
be heard. The Noble Earl concluded by presenting a
counter-petition to that presented by the Earl of Eldon,
from the Master Cutlers and other inhabitants of Sheffield.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that the meeting was not
called by any Magistrate, although it purported to be the
petition of the Magistracy. There was certainly a Magi-
strate in the chair, but he should say that it
was a clerical meeting, where all the speakers
where Clergymen, and Laymen were not permitted to
speak. A short time afterwards another meeting was
called by a regular requisition, and none but Clergymen
opposed the counter petition.—( Hear, hear.)—lle was
sorry to say that very improper language had
been used. The people had been asked if
they would have a Popish King.--(Laughter.) If they
would have their daughters taken from them, and under
the pretence of keeping them in chastity and placing them
i❑ convents. He deprecated the interference of the Clergy
in such cases, as he believed that if the advice of the
Clergy had been-followed, the House of Hanover had not
now occupied the Throne.
The Bishop of LONDON wished to say a few words of
defence for a calumniated body of men. Was this to be the
only occasion in which they were described to express their
sentiments to this House, which had ale,ays protected the
Prottstant Constitution. An awful change was about to
be made, on which he would not offer an opinion, and
were the Clergy to be the only persons who were
to be debarred from expressing their opinions ; he
believed, that if an investigation were shade, he be-
lieved it would he found that the Clergy had not attempted
to promote petitions, but that they had rather attempted
to delay the expression of the public feeling. He had
been told so by several of these gentlemen, and he believed
that the word of the poorest Clergyman was entitled to
the same credit as the noblest Peer.

Lord WHARINCLIFFE replied that it was evident the
Noble Prelate was not in the House (luring the former part
of his speech, as he himself acknowledged
Lord ELDON said, that the meeting at which this peti-
tion was got up was merely called together for those who
were adverse to the Roman Catholic Claims ; and
if persons chose to intrude themselves, the Chair-
man was right in preventing their obstructing the
business of the meeting. He thought, however, that the
Clergy of England would have eternally disgraced them-
selves,—(Bear, hear)—if they had not firmly and calmly
come forward to support the Protestant Constitution of
this country.
. _

Lord COLCHESTER presented petitions from Colches-
ter and other places against the Catholics.
The Duke of GLOUCESTER presented a petition from
Portsmouth in favour of the Catholics, and a►so a similar
petition from Gloucester.

The Bishop of DURIIAAI presented a petition from
St. Martin's, Durham, Bishop-Wearmoutli, and Sunder-
lind, against the Catholics.

Lord DURHAM said that the last petition was not got
up at a public meeting, but was done so by a curate who
had allowed women, and he was informed 200 boys, to
sign it. It was not the feeling of the inhabitants of Sun-
derland, whom he was certain were favourable by a:large
majority to granting the Catholic claims.
The Bishop of DURHAM s:►id he did not state that it
was signed by a majority, for he had no right to say so, as
he knew nothing of it.
The Bishop of BATH and WELLS presented petitions
from parishes in Somerset.

The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition to the
same effect from the Clergy, Churchwardens, and Inhabit-

ants of a district of the county of Suffolk. The Clergy of
the Church of England had often been accused of following
the King's Ministers in every thing. The conduct of the
Clergy at the present crisis showed that they could oppose
the Ministers when they thought them wrong.
The Duke of SUSSEX took this opportunity of stating
a fact with reference to a petition which was presented by
the Noble Duke the other nights, against concession to the
Catholics. The Noble Duke had, with the greatest can-
dour, informed him that two or three of the signatures
were marked with a cross. fie had an affidavit from a
Member of the Royal College of Physicians of London,
which stated that the mark had been 'wide by a poor man,
whose name appeared next to that of the Vicar, which
proved the zeal of the latter, when he preferred having
this mark after his name rather than that of a snore sub-
stantial signature. The Physician asked the man whether
he kneW what the petition was about, to which {he could
give no answer. lie then asked him whether he knee
what a Catholic was, and he stared and could not tell. He
❑kid another who had put his mark whether he knew what
he had been signing, and h; answered that his master had
explained all, and that was sufficient. He wished hi►
Noble -Fr:end at the Leal of the Admiralty had been pre-
sent, for he (the Duke of Sussex) had to state that he had
been informed, that the Clergyman had gone about amore
those employed in the Preventive Service, and had got
both Offices-8 and privates to sign the petition. This, he
considered, was subversive of military discipline, and well
deserving of the attention of the Noble Lord at the head of
the Admiralty,: and of the-Noble Duke at the head of the
Administration.

The Duke of RICHMOND did not think much of
these voluntary oaths, as they could not be followed by
any punishment. Their Lordships would judge for them-
selves, even from the language of Noble Lords on the
other side. What the Catholics wanted appeared to be
ascendancy, and their Lordships had always thrown out
the measure proposed to them for the admission of Catho-
lics into the Legislature. He had no very serious dread
that the Protestant Constitution would be endangered in
England, but it would be useless to pass a measure which
would not pacify the Catholics, because it appeared that
what they wanted was ascendancy.
The Duke of SUSSEX—He had only mentioned the
affidavit in justification of himself, and to chew that he
had not treated their Lordships with remarks on the man-
ner in which the petition had been got up without having
some ground for what he had said.

The Duke of RICHMOND then presented a petition
from s parish in Surrey, to the same effect.
Lord MORLEY had a petition to present from the county
of Devon, in favour of settling the Catholic Question, by
conceding to them the privileges of the Constitution ;1
and they expressed their conviction that the question could
not be settled while so many millions of the subjects of the
United Kingdom were excluded from these privileges.
The essence of a petition was the argument and reasoning;
and a well-reasoned petition was, comparatively speaking,
worthy of nmeh snore attention than that which was dis-
tinguished only by the number of the signatures. He was
well acquainted with the manner in which the county
petitions presented the other night had been got up, and
at the presentation of which it had been stated by a Noble
Lord, that not one in a hundred in the counties of Devon
and Cornwall was favourable to concession to the Catholics.
The Lord Lieutenant of the county did not think proper
to interfere prominently in the matter, and bad refused to
sign the requisition. The meeting, however, was got
op by some gentlemen in the vicinity of Exeter. When
that meeting took place, a gentleman happened to see
four covered waggons filled with his own labourers. He
asked whitLer they were going, and they said they were
going to the Castle of Exeter to be marshalled, and that
then they would he told what they were to dr. • Allusion
had been made to a Rev. Fugleman who had attended
on that occ,sion, and who regulated the display of flaps
and placards by signal—and be had seen them displayed all
at once, as if by signal—but that this was done by the Rev.
Gentleman, he himself, although be was present, did not
see. The Rev. Gentleman bad been attacked in the news-
papers for his conduct on the occasion, which he answered,
rind this was his account of the manner in which the meet-
ing had been got up :—lt was fitting, he said, that the
most needy should have assistance to enable them to come
up and vote, and a subscription was entered into for that
purpose, and needy persons had three shillings a-day. The
Worthy and Rev. Gentleman added, that they might be
but indifferently informed on the points in dispute. This
was his opinion of their competency, and this was the man-
ner in which his Noble Friend's petition had been signed
by the help of the clergy. This petition, however, was
signed by persons who were competent judges of the mat-
ters in dispute. It was signed by almost the whole of the
resident nobility except the Lord Lieutenant—by the High
Sheriff, and 101 Magistrates and Clergymen, and by 2,200
proprietors. Being on his legs, he could not help express-
ing his best and warmest thanks to the Noble Duke (Wel-
lington), for restoring peace to this distracted country.
He had always supported concession ; and now that it.
came recommended from the Throne, he regarded it with
still greater favour. He hoped the measure would be such
as to conciliate the affections and secure the confidence of
the Catholics, and to quiet the apprehensions of those who
honestly and sincerely entertained them. He concluded
by presenting the petition in favour of concession, signed
by the description of persons, and under the circumstances,
which he had mentioned.

The Bishop of EXETER—The attacks on the Rev.
Gentleman to whom allusion had been made were utterly
groundless. He had not, as it had been alleged, brought
up the fishermen from Brighton, although these men might
be freeholders of the county, and had as good a right to ex-
press their opinions on the measures now in agitation.—
But the Rev. Gentleman had nothing more to do with the
matter than others. The Noble Lord said that this peti-
tion was signed by 2,200, but how happened it the other
petition was signed by 26,500 ? Because the holiest yeo-
manry of the county of Devon chose to think for them-
selves, and from their own honest unbiassed conviction
signed,,that petition.
Lofild MORLEY—He had cast no imputation on the
Worthy Clergyman alluded to, but, on the contrary, had
stated that he himself did not see him act in the mangier
he was said to have done, and had merely quoted his own
words.

Lord ROLLE observed that if the petition was signed
only by freeholders, they did not constitute a sixth part of
the freeholders of the county ; and if signed by lease-
holders, they constituted but a very small proportion indeed.
The Bishop of LONDON presented twelve petitions
front the Magistrates, Clergy, and people of ♦arious
in the counties of Lincoln, Cumberland, and other coun-
ties, against concessions to the Catholics.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from the
Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commonalty of the City of
London, in favour of concession to the Catholics. At one
time they were against concession. For twenty years
they had been silent, and now they were decidedly in fa-
vour of concession, and this showed what the progress of
information had effected in the way of producing sounder
♦iews on the subject.
The Bishop of LANDAFF presented a petition against
concession to the Catholics. This was the only petition,
as far as he knew, that had come from his diocese on the
subject, and it was liable to none of the objections which
had been made to some other petitions. It :was signed by
no persons under age, and each signed for himself, or had
his signature attached to the petition by another, at his
own desire, and in his presence. He could not himself,
however, entirely enter into the fears of those who were
apprehensive of any inroad being made on the laws passed
against the Catholics in the reign of Charles 11.
Lord REDESDALE presented two petitions from
places in the county of Gloucester, against concessions to
the Catholics.

The Earl of HARROWBY presented a petition from his
own parish in the county of Stafford, in favour of conces-
sions to the Catholics. This was the only petition which
it had been his lot to present on the subject in the course of
the Session ; and although he MIS adverse to the introduc-
tion of debates on occasion of presenting petitions, be was
anxious to seize the opportunity to make a single observa-
tion. He could not let the occasion pass without express-
ing the gratitude which he felt, from the very bottom of
his heart, to his Noble Friend (the Duke of Wellington),
who had at one time opposed concession to the Catholics,
but who now, from a sense of public duty alone, had
resolved to endeavour to settle this great question, in
defiance of the clamours which might operate on more
feeble minds. The moral courage which his Noble
Friend had exhibited on this occasion was fir supe-
rior to that physical courage which, together with
the skill, energy, activity, and perseverance of his No-

ble Friend, had already proved 4-14 salvation of .114
country He could not l'elp plying a sitni!or tribute-a
arliMration and applause to the condoct of the Right-Eu.l.
Gentleman (Mr. Peel) in the other [louse, who, front a
sense of ditty alone, onPI corTiing many personal feehrigs
which mitbt have neigh,d much with him, hid now 11--
operated in the same happy work. If the measures to be
proposed be of a nature to bring this question to a close in
a satisfactory manner, the names of those by whom the
great result would be accomplished would descend W I
rivalled lustre to the latest posterity—as men who had set
at defiance temporary obloquy, when the olject was to
,ccore a great and permanent good.—(l-lear, bear.)
The Earl of ELDON presented a variety of petitions
against cut cession to the Catholics, from several places in

he countiei of Devon, of Suffolk. of Lancaster, of Glou-

~ester, of Cumberland. of Norfolk, of Middlesex, of
'tafford, of Essex, of Dorset, of Sussex, of Warwick,
of Hunts, of Northampton, of Somerset, of Flint, of
Carmarthen, and of Du M fries. Some of the petitions were
from Harrow-on-sthe-Idill ; from St. Sepulchre's, St.
nary-the-Less, and St. Peter's, in the town of Cambridge;
from the Mayor and Corporation of Beverley; from the
inhabitants of the town of Lancaster and its vicinity ; from
Wolverhampton ; from a parish in the city of Bath, &c.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA postponed the motion of
which he had given notice, to a future period.
' Lord TORRINGTON, alluding to a petition which
had been presented the other evening from the vicinity of
the place where he resided, stated that he had been applied
to on the subject, but had seen no reason to interfere. Eta
'le heard that swops had been taken against those who hail
efused to sign the petition, and en inquiry he found that
the Clergyman of the parish had sent about his servant to
persuade the people on his estate to sign.
The Duke of RICHMOND called the Noble Lord to
ardor. There was no question whatever now before the
House.
Lord TORRINGTON said, that his only object was to
.how the shameful manner in which these petitions had
'wen got op ; and if he was not in order now, he woult,l
sake an opportunity to make his statement to-iorrow4
when he should have a petition to present.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented a petition
tgainst concession to the Catholics, from the 111i,ister anti
congregation of Soho Chapel, Oxford-street; atel some
petitions to the same effect Item places in the counties of
Nottingham, York, Norfolk, and Derry.—Adjourned at
Eight o'clock.