Star.
London, England, 1830-07-21 00:00:00

~.
L

i'

a 0.

N
~FI
' 3 1■

•OMINIITRATION OT JUSTICE DILL•

On the report .pf the Administrntion of Justice Bill,

Lord DUR H A M said the bill made important alterations in the
administration of justice, and there was not at this period of the
•'session NUfliCient time to consider the provisions of the bill, and he
thought it ought to be postponed to nett Session.
The Marquis of BUTE said the bill was anxiously looked for
by Wales for many years, and he hoped it would not be delayed
even for a few molithv.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the bill had been amply dis-
otssed on the second reading,:and all alterations that were thought
necessary made, and he must protest against any further delay.
The Report was agreed to, and the bill ordered to be read a third
flint to.rrlorrow.
The house adjourned at half-past nine o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Juiv 20.
NEGRO SLAVERY.

Sir F. BURDETT presented a petition from inhabitants of Lon-
dot and Westminster, against the East India monopoly; praying
net only that the trade to India and China might be free, but that
ladle might be governed by principles of justice and liberality.

_ - - -
Mr. TRANT supported the prayer of the petition, which was
ordered to be printed.
:11r. F. BUXTON presented a petition from the University of
Oxford, for the abolition of slavery in the West Indies. It was
most grateful to find that learned and unlearned, that all classes
united in requiring the abolition of slavery. He said he had aban-
doned all hope of the slave-owners doing any thing for the ameliora-
tion of the slaves. Mr. Canning had said that the first step should
be the abolition of Bogging females, and that first step was not yet
taken. The people, at the next election, ought to bear in mind
what had been done, and vote accordingly, as far as they could,
against or for those who had resisted amelioration, as their own
opinion might be. He then presented similar petitions from Black-
burn, Prone. aze. Ac. etc.
Sir A. GRANT said that whenever this subject was brought for-
ward, which was done often and painfully, it was always forgotten
that seven years ago the resolutions then adopted the principle that
private property ought to be recognised. He was as desirous as any
one could be, that the condition of the slaves should be still more
ameliorated; but still he must call on the Parliament to respect
private property.—(Hear.)
Mr. F. BUXTON said that he perfectly recollected those resolu-
tions, and maintained that though he fully recognised the principle
of admitting the negroes to the principles and protection of the con-
stitution, he should have no objection to make compensation, because
he considered the West Indian and the country equally guilty.
Petition read and ordered to be printed.
--- - -

Mr. O. CAVE, in presenting another petition, said he should
have no objection to make compensation to the slave owners, but he
could not consent that the negroes were to be kept in bondage till
the robbers and the receivers of the stolen goods--for these were the
characters in which the country and the slave-owners stood—settled
the question of compensation ; and he utterly denied that either had
any right to purchase money from the slave for his freedom. He
trusted that the electors would insist on their representatives sup-
porting the abolition of slavery, on the broad ground that no legis-
lature could be justified in establishing slavery. He then presented
a petition from Mr. T. Edwards, against negro slavery.

Mr. W. SMITH supported the prayer of the petition; the ques-
tion ought tobe enfor—Ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. 0. CAVE moved that it be printed.
Mr. MANNING, Lord HOWICK, and others, opposed its
printing, as it contained an individual's opinion only.
Sir R. PEEL said, that was the ground on which he had before
opposed petitions being printed, when they contained only an indi.
vidual's opinion.—Motion negatived.

Lord 111ORPETH presented a similar petition from a congrega-
tion at Leeds.

Mr. LABOUCHERE said he was quite sure it was hopeless to
attempt to check slavery, so long as France continued the slave trade.
The mixed commission ought to be ,removed from Sierra Leone to
Fernandez Po.

Sir (I. MURRAY remarked, that the mixed commission pro.
ceeded on solemn treaty.—Petition ordered to be printed.

FORGERIES LAW BILL.
Sir R. PEEL moved that the lords' amendments to the Forgeries
Laws Bill be considered, for the purpose of agreeing to them. Those
amendments undoubtedly placed the bill in a different light from
what it was before it left that house; but, at the same time, those
who did not approve them would not compromise their sentiments,
by allowing this bill to pass. Their views might be brought for.
ward hereafter. If these amendments, however were resisted, the
bill must be entirely lost for the present session; while, by the
adoption of the bill, a considerable amelioration of the law would be
effected, if not all that some gentlemen desired. In the bill it was
fixed that it should come into operation to-morrow.
Mr. C. W. WYNN said he would not resist the motion, but he
had to complain of the lords that they had so long kept the bill,
till the majority which had heretofore succeeded were now &penal.
He nevertheless trusted that the next House of Commune would
am allow the question to sleep; if pressed, it must be carried: the
old law had been inoperative in nine cases out of ten. That alone
was a ground for proceeding.
Mr. ROBINSON would rather that the amendments should be
rejected. because by adopting this bill, future efforts would be
weakened. If any one moved the rejection now, he would support
the proposition.
Mr. STEWART said he should oppose the adoption of the
amendments. After the bill heretofore agreed to by that house, and if
these amendments were rejected, no Home Secretary would venture
to recommend the capital punishment to be enforced, and that would
compel the next Parliament to resume the consideration of the sub.
jest.—( Hear.)
Sir R. ;WILSON lamented the alteration of the bill, but he
thought that they ought to take all they could get. He should,
therefore, support the proposition to agree with the amendments.
Mr. F. BUXTON would not throw opposition in the way, but
suggested that the operation of the bill should be limited to one
yes,. in order to force the question again on the parliament, if such
amendment could be carried without inconvenience.
Mr. LABOUCHERE supported this view of the cue.
Lord HOW ICI lamented the course pursued by the ministers.
After the opinion on the bill expressed by a majority of that house,
it ought not to have been made a party question.
Sir R. PEEL said, the lords could not be supposed, as they had
extended the time for the bill coming into operation, capable of de-
siring to throw obstacles in the way of consideration. This bill
would ameliorate the law to a certain extent ; how then, could the
friends of amelioration resist it ? As to the suggested amendment,
he hoped it would not be pressed.
Mr. ROBINSON added, to what he had before said, that as the
commons bad agreed to a more ameliorated law than was now to be
adopted, prosecutors would be unwilling to prosecute, and juries to
find verdicts of guilty.
Sir R. PEEL said, he could not see how a more ameliorated,
law would render prosecutors and juries more reluctant to pro.
teed.
Dr. PHILLIMORE said, they had great right to complain of
the Lords. The amendments were sent back at a time when it was
impossible for them to help themselves.—they must adopt the
amendments or lose the Bill.
Mr. LENNARD thought the adoption of the amendments would
not prejudice the question next Session.
Mr. THANT said, having given a vote against capital punish.
moms for forgeries, he must complain of these amendments.
The sense of the country was against such severe punishments.
Mr. STEWART said, he was not changed in his opinion; and
moved, as an amendment, that the Lords amendment be further
considered this day fortnight,—(Hear.)
Mr. ROBINSON, we believe, seconded the amendment,
The gallery was then cleared for a divison. The numbers
were as follow :
For the amendment ... ... • • •• • .. ... 10

Majority in favour of the Lords' amendment ... 64
Strangers had hardly regained admission, when they were spin
escluded ; we believe it was to divide on Mr. F. Buxton's amend.
went, to limit the operation, of the Bill to "one year." The
narobses won—
For such amendment ... 28
Against it ... 67

Majority against it

A Message then went to the lords to inform their lordships that
the house had agreed to their amendments. The message went
at a quarter after six o'clock, and the house did nothing till its
return.

A M was brought front the House of Lords, stating that
his Majesty bad appointed two o'clock on Thursday next, to receive
the address of both houses of parliament, and requesting that the
house would appoint a proportionate number of its members to go
up with the said address.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
the following four members were appointed to go up with the ad.
dress :
Lord F. L. Oowza, Sir H. fluituixos, Sir 0. Wmtasiroica,
and Sir AI.LZAMDIEII GRANT.
The Muse then adjourned until Thursday text (to.niestow.),