The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-22 00:00:00

TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 22, 1842,

Their Lordships then adjourned.

SEVERN NAVIGATION BILL.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 21.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool-
sack shortly after Five o'Clock.
EASTER HOLIDAYS.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that in reply to
the question put to him by the Noble Viscount oppysite
(Viscount Melbourne) last week, he had to state that it
was his intention to-morrow to move that their Lordships
do adjourn to Thursday, April 7. •
CORN-LAWS.

The Earl of CLARE presented a petition from the
millers of the county of Limerick, praying for adequate
irotection in the event of any alteration in the Corn-laws.
Lord 'BANDON presented petitions to the same
effect, from the millers of Cork, from the millers of
Cohie, and from the millers of Fermoy.
CORK PACKET STATION.

The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from the
merchants of Cork, praying that Cork might be made a
packet station from Bristol.

ESTABLISHED CIIURC H.
The NOBLE LORD then presented petitions from the
Protestants of Atherne, and front those of several other
parts of Ireland, prayingfor protection to the Established
Church.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from a place
in Tyrone, praying for an alteration in the law of
Presbyterian marriages in Ireland ; also a petition
from a place in Cornwall, praying for a
revision of the tariff. The Noble Lord also, pre-
sented a petition from an individual whose name
we did not hear, against burial grounds being formed
in populous places. The petitioner stated that a
relation of his had been interred in a churchyard in
London, and his (the petitioner) again visiting London
he went to the spot, for the purpose of indulging in hiS
reeollections, when he found that the stone had been re-
moved from the grave, and another body interred therein.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE laid on the table certain re-
turns relating to the Poor-law Amendment Bill. On
the motion of the Noble Lord the following Bills were
read a third time and passed—the West India Clergy
Bill, the Newgate Gaol (Ireland) Bill, and the Consoli-
dated Fund Bill.

The Archbisbop of CANTERBURY moved the
recond reading of the Ecclesiastical Residences Bill.
_

The LORD—CHANCELLOR laid on the table of the
House a Bill to define the jurisdiction of Justices at
Quarter Sessions.

HOUSE OF COMMONS MARCH 21.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes before
Four o'Clock.
Mr. C. WOOD brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee appointed to try the Lewes election petition.
Mr. HOGG brought up the Report of the Committee
appointed to try the Clitheroe election petition.
The Hon. H. FITZROY then took the oaths and his
seat as Member for Lewes, in the place of Summers
Harford, Esq. and E. CARDWELL, Esq., took the oaths
and his seat as Member for Clitheroe, in the place of
Matthew Wilson, Esq., unseated by the decision of the
Committee.

Mr. PAKINGTON presented a petition from Droit-
wich in favour of the Severn-Navigation Bill.
Mr. BAYLEY presented a petition from the Here-
fordshire Canal Company, in favour of the Severn Navi-
gation Bill.
On the Order of the Day being read for the Report of
the Committee on the Severn Navigation Bill being
brought up,
Mr. MUNTZ moved that the Bill be re-committed.
He thought if the Committee had paid proper attention
to the statements laid before them, they would never
have passed the Bill in its present shape. A large por-
tion of his (Mr. Muntz's) constituents were inte-
rested in the Birmingham and Worcester Canal, and
they objected to the Bill that it called upon them to
pay the full portion of the toll, although they would only
pass over a small portion of the river. They also ob-
jected to the placing of a lock on the river just below
the entrance of their canal, which would be very prejudi-
cial to their trade. The Shropshire people would be
called upon to pay no tolls, although they would be ma-
terially benefited by the improvement, while the pro-
prietors of the canal were called upon to pay the full
tolls. They were also desirous, if the lock were not re-
moved, of having permission to cut a short canal, 400
yards in length, into the river. He should move that
the Bill be re-committed.
Mr. PAKINGTON did not think the objections had
been fairly supported. and he hoped the Bill would
pass without opposition. He need not remind the
!louse of the importance of the measure to the
trade of the district ; its importance must be evi-
dent to all. The opposition to it was entirely of
a selfish nature ; it was the opposition of a small party
to a great national improvement, because that improve-
inent would tend to deprive them of certain advantages
which they enjoyed at the expense of others.
The objections which were now affixed to the
Bill, had all been offered in Committee last year,
and were then overruled. He saw no reason
why the Bill should be re-committed, and he trusted that
It was not necessary for him to urge the House to reject
the motion.
ktr, M, PHILIPS said, that the Hon. Member who
had` jest sat down had accused Hon. Gentlemen on that
side of the .Morisco with unfairly opposing this Bill.
He (Mr. Mark Philips)• was certainly opposed to
the Bill, but on grounds by no means unfair.
lie was opposed to the measure, because the effect of it
wtiititl Lid to place a permanent bar across the river,
which must itijare the navigation very much, He was
of opinion that the loch ought not to be made in the
place intended, and he was therefore opposed to the Bill.
Mr. PAKINGTON explained. He was misunder-
stood if Hon. Gentlemen supposed that fie stated the
opposition to the Bill to be unfair. •
Mr, OLIVE trusted the House would not listen to the
obeereetions of the Hon, Member for Birmingham (Mr.
Muntz) with respe.et to the re-committal of the Bill.
Mr. LAI3OUCHERE said; though this matter came
before the House in the shape of a private Bill,
yet in reality it concerned public interests of the
greatest importance ; and he was glad to see that it
was likely to• receive the consideration of the House.
Those who did not object to the principle, but the
details of the Bill, he would remind that it received
a long cotleideilition in the Committee of last session,
when all the eiA Members composing it were
unanimous in their decision respecting it. }le hoped the
House would not consent to a farther delay in the Bill.
The LOUD ADVOCAT.E, as Chairman of the Com-
mittee, bore teatitoony to the tuiziousmanner in whichthe matter had been intt _ stioted, should not go
ihte nil the objeetions of the gon, Member 1‘.:7 1‘IF"
chester, but ho I(Yitid ask, why had not this oppositt..7
been made before ? Not One Objeegon had been brought
before the Committee at its sitting in the present Session,
Me, SCOTT spoke in favour of the rreetnenitment Of
the Bill,
After a few words from Sir C. DOUGLAS,
toed G, SOMERSET said ho was always desirous
that Bills of a local character should be discussed in the
Hotted the influence of local feelings. He thought
the House would be undoing all its work if it consented
to delay the Bill.
Sir T. WILDE said, that if the motion weee acceded
14 the effect would be to throw out the Bill alto ether.
If aliiy improveffiente were necessary they could be made
in the House of Loede,
OBM813:1' add It was very rarely the
Horse dentseilieel to the ie.-committed of a Bill unless on
very strong grounds, The 1?;i11 was Already six times
before the House, and he believed the' ob)ect of those
who asked for its re-committal was to thieW out the Bill
Lied ilk-Of/STATE said, that as he was aware of the
great expense to which parties would be put by a re-
committal of the Bill, he should vote against the amend-
Me& of the Hon: Member for Birmingham. He hoped
that the fileestife wiittld, hereafter, be improved in the
other House of Parliament,
After a few words from Mr. SCIRILEFIF,LD in sup
port of the amendment,
Mr, MUNTZ said that, in order to save expense,
iii.siiptild withdraw his amendment, with the hope that
the objectionable clauses of the Bill would be altered in
the ether How,
The Amendelefit waS theti vfkhclraEwtii and the Report
Was agreed to.
BOROUGH OF BRibiledit
Tile pPEAKER acquainted the House that he Intel
received iteithes from the agents of, the petiticeittra
, ,
against the retutit t,ti Mf: ochrane and Iva, Mitchell,
the Members for the BoraliA,' bf ifyidport, stating that
they did not intend to continue the fniVstsention,
In answer to a question from an Hob:0/411LT tMem-
nfiili Was inaudible in the gallery,
Sir IL PEEL that in 1840 the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the, Exchequer proposed,
and with the sanction of the Reuse carried, a
nieasure for adding five per cent. to the cititln" of Cus-
tome . end Ei.icise, • That five per cent., which efal
feindiited itlfi),Ce;. he Kopowl to apply to all the duties of
Customs tint.V•xgilSe'Avitich wee not included .;.;: the pre-
sent reduction. The Milt denfleiiehli!r had spoken of the ex-

treme difficulty of haring a 5 Of 001 ?Owen as a
4 rift, Bent, It was-not proposed to hate ti ici' Aar;
ad valorelittitqcbtet per cent. upon the amount cif dial:
Dr. DCOWRIN that gave notice that in Committee
wild p'rop'ose that .Additional onc-twentieth
should tie rain the tutif..
Tiff; IVI§W Thl4lll',
Ju answer to a question from Mt: DtPi?
MYSEAT PEEL said he very much teatred
that tildWitil *oats. his intention to take the resolutioti
9f the lioifse with feteteme to the income tax, before
1M sliO kI iii.otveed with the consideration of the tariff,
that tad 1-161. Oettelemt4 Would have sufficient time to

consider the mattdri Gls bier's' wars m prospect of making
any progress with the tariff befOre tlie Easter recess.
In answer to a question from Sir C. 111401111YS, re-
lative to the removal of Irish and Scotch paupers from
England,

Sir J., GRAHAM said that the Poor-law Commis-
sioners had instituted an inquiry in the various counties
of England and Wales, as to the number of those
persons referred to, and that a considerable mass of in-
formation on the subject had been collected, but was not,
as yet, completed. In the course of a few months, how-
ever, the Commissioners would report on the subject,
and then that Report would be laid on the table of the

House.
BUILDINGS' REGULATIONS 'AND BOROUGHS'
IMPROVEMENT (No: 2) BILL.
Mr. TUFNELL moved that Mr. Hodgson Hinde be
discharged from further attendance on the Select Com-
mittee on these Bills, and that Mr. Richard Hodgson
and Captain Rous be added.—Motion agreed to.