The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-15 00:00:00

that there was hardly another Member of that
House would write such a letter as that which
the Honourable Member for Knaresborough had,
written. He disclaimed all personal offence, but
would fearlessly and Indy express his opinion on
this matter. The terms of the letter showed
clearly the animas which existed in its writer. In a
word, he considered it would degrade the dignity of the
House of Commons in the eyes of the nation if, by or-
dering this petition to be printed, they in some measure
stamped it with their sanction. If the petitioners
really intended to impeach Sir Robert Peel. and choose
the Hon. Member for Knarcsborough for a leader, they
were at perfect liberty to do so ; and the lion. Member
would be perfectly justified in carrying out their wishes.
But as the representative of what was termed in Ireland,
" Protestant Armagh," he must object to the wording
of this petition. He would therefore more a direct ne-
gative to the motion.
Lord NORTHLAND considered that the petition
contained expressions which ought to prevent the House
from agreeing to the motion, that it be printed with the
votes.

Mr. REDINGTON said that when he considered that
one of the passages in the coronation oath contained ex-
pressions not dissimilar to those which had been re-
ferred by his Hon. Friend the Member for Armagh,
in reference to the Roman Catholics, he thought
that House would be acting with great inconsistency if
they exhibited any squeamishness in receiving the peti-
tion of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough.—(Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.") For himself he never bad and
never wonld stoop to answer those foul calumnies--
(Loud cheers)—though he considered it was disgracing
the crown of these realms to make it swear to them.
Sir R. INGLIS said he supposed the next measure of
her Majesty's Government would he a measure to do
away with the passage referred to by the lion. Gentle-
man who spoke last, expecially as his remaiks had been
so loudly cheered by the other side.—(ll, art hear, ail
laugh.) But he rose for the purpose of caking tie at-
tention
of the House to the practice of the Lords,
that when a petition was ordered to lie on the
table it was almost a matter of course that it should be
printed with the votes when an Hon. Member declared
his intention of making a motion upon it. That was
the usual course, without any reference to the language
of the petition, and upon that ground alone, without at
all saying that he concurred in the language in the
expressions of the petition, he should vote for the motion
of the lion. Member for Knaresborough, if pressed to a
division.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that he certainly regretted the
passage in the petition which the Hon. and Gallant
Officer the Member for Armagh had brought under the
notice of the House. He regretted that any petitioners
should have used language so painful and so oitinisive
towards a large portion of her Majesty's subjects.
It was not on the present occasion that he should
feel under the necessity of entering into a discussion
upon that point, much less was it any part of his duty to
eater upon the present occasion into a discussion upon
the terms in which the Coronation oath was
couched. As to the point of order, he agreed
with his Honourable Friend the Member for Oxford.
He thought it was a general rule of the House, subject
to exceptions in some peculiar cases, that when one
lion. Member pledged himself on presenting a petition
to bring it under the special notice of the House in the
shape of a motion, it was, as a matter of course, to be
printed with the votes. The question then arose whether
there was anything so special in the circumstances (alibis
petition as t.) prevent the operatien of the usual rule ?
lie had said that the language of the petition was of an
unusual kind, but he did not think that the language
was such as to take it out of the general rule. Then
came the queaion as to the allegation, that the First
Minister of the Crown had been guilty of high crimes and
misdemeanours, was that allegation a reason that the
House should refuse to print the petition ? Now, the
Hon. Member for Knaresborough had said that he
should make that allegation the subject of a motion.—
(Cries of " No, no," end "Yes, ycs.4) Was he (Sir J.
Graham) right ?—(hear, bee%)
Mr. FERRAND said that be had list night given
notice of the motion which he intended to make.
Sir J. GRAHAM said if the lion. Member meant to
found upon the petition a motion respecting the allega-
tions against the First Minister of the Crown, neither
his Right Hon. Friend, nor any member of her Ma-
jesty's Government, would offer the slightest opposition
to the printing of the petition.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. FERRAND sail that he had last night given
notice of the motion which he should bring forward on
the third reading of the Bill. The motion was to the
effect that " As: the Catholic Bequests Act was a viola-
tion of the Act of Settlement and a contravention of the
oath of supremacy." What other course he migh
afterwards feel it his duty to take he would state a
the time.—(" Hear, hear," and " Oh, oh.'')
Lord J. RUSSELL row, and was
[LEFT SPEAKING.]