The Sun.
London, England, 1820-06-15 00:00:00

IPSWICH.

The CI-TAIRMAN of the Electi,n Committee to try the
nu of the. Ipswich Eivetion, reported that Niessrs.trickitt
and Round wet e not duly eltt led, and that Messrs Haldi-
tnand anti Lenna", 2 ought to have been the returned Win-
hers. The filed, of the Crowit was ordered to attend on Ft
day next to amend the t &quil.

Mr. EGFIri ON lai.l on the 'rabic a Petition froui tlu di,.
tressed ManUfactulers of Stockport. statin,; their sufferings
and praying relict.—Ordered tabs printed.

rANDING ottocus.

Mr. Serjeant ONSIMW r4/IC, putsnant to his notice, to
wove that for the future it should be a Stam;log Order of that
'loose that, no Bill tigulating the conduct of Trade or Manu-
facture should be read a tirst time, unless it had, been sob-
'mitred to the coosidetailon of a Select Cominit tee who had
reported thmeun. The experience of wiait bad se frequently
passed in that MAW, on Bilis, adverting to theinterestsof
tradets'and manufacturers, hurried through all their stages
wit heut,time for deliberation, had convinced hint of the ate-
:cessity of the present preposition ; that opinion, he was happy
to say, was contittned by the decision of the Chamber of Com-
merce of Birmingham, who had presented ii Petition te't hat
House in favour of the adoption of the motion which he then
introduced.
. _

Mr. MANSFIELD deprecated the adoption of any reea-,
sure which might have even the appearance, in the present.
'depressed state of the matiufact orin; interests,'of excluding
.than from applying to the Legislature. It was -a most on
fortunate moment, when relief was sought, to answer with
exclusion. At all events, he hoped it would have no retrospec-
tive operation.—Should he-have the support of Gentlemen in
_that House, it was his wish to meet the proposition with the.
previous question.
-Mr. BARING observed, that if he thought the proposed
,regulation went to interfere or to deny the fullest considera-
tion to.the Petitions of that class of the community, he would
most strenuously oppose it ; hut believing the object of the
,tegulation was to procure to such Petitions a amore consider-
able share of ditibetation—qklear, hear I front, Serjeant
Onslow)—and calculated to prevent that kind of leg:irlatiun
which was too often resorted to, on the spur of a temporary
distress, and which recoiled with aggravated mischief on the
persons in whose supposed interest it was adopted, he should
grive it his support. ,
Mr. LITTLK,I'QN supported the notion. It was a strung
proof of its propriety;-wheo such praeti,al and 'informed men
composed. the Chamber of Commerce at Birmingham peti-
tioned for its adoption.
Mr. CREEVEY said, he understood the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman (Onslow) to propose' a new Standing
,Order Now the Stanrling Orders of that house were of the,
importance. Refute a new one was submitted, the•
•ftillest c'onsideration was necessary. 'The Honourable and
Learned Gentleman, in his opinion, should have so shaped
his motion, as to ask for the previous appointment of Select
‘Coauoitite, to declare, by their Report, whether such a regu-
•lation would he salutary or not.
After some further observations from Mr. Western and
-Lord Althorp, who recommended the appointment of a Select
Committoe,
,Ir.ticrjeant ONSLOW acquiescing in that recormiteada-
ti,m, withdrew the original Rlotioi. Be then moved the ap-.
pointment of a Select Committee, which was agreed to.
Mr. SCARLET!' presented a Petition front the Attorneys
and Solicitors in and near the metropolis, praying for some
regulation to prevent unqualified and uneducated persons
practising as Conveyancers.—Ordered to lie on the table.
Air. CANNING laid on the table a Petition from two indi-
..
viduals;againstany relaxation in the Laws referring to the
importation of Colouial Timber.

IRISH PAUPERS.
Mr. W. PARNELL, after some preliminary observations,
which the noise in the House Tendered inaudible in the
Gallery, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to atnend'so much
of the Poor Laws, as to .authorize the arrest and transporta-
tion of Irish Paupers to any part of the Irish coast.
Mr. STURGES BOURSE objected to the title of the Bill,
as conveying the idea rather of a criminal than a remedial
proceeding; but would make no further observations till he
saw the
_ .

Mr. CURWEN would nut :pledge hies elf to support his
HunourableliFriend's motion until he saw the Bill but
agreed entirely with his Honourable Friend, that there ought.
to be a limit by wliich Irish Paupers might be enabled to obH
tain a'settlement by service.
After a few words (rein Mr. C. GRANT, the motion was
agreed to. .
Mr. G. BENNET presented a Petition from John Knight,
now a prisoner in the Castle of 'Lancaster. The Petition set
forth that the Petitioner had been five times prosecuted iu
eight.yeays ; that he had been illegally kept to hard .labour,
and among other hardships, deprived of the pyker of reading
the Daily Newspapers. •
.Lord STANLEY vindicated the character of the Gaoler of
Lancaster Castle, and observed, that this Petition was only a
twin-brother of a similar Petition which bad been presented
on a former occasion.

Ordered to lie on the table.
• SPECIFICATIONS OF PATENTS.
Mr. WROTTESLEY moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
prevent the inconvenience arising front the too great.facilitv
of procuring Copies of the Specifications of Patents, enrolled
by grantees of Letters Patent; for the sole and exelniive
Tending of AlRllllfaettires within this Realm. -
After an inaudible observation Iron Sir S. MORELAND, •
Mr. i-ILTM-14; observed, that the motion of the. Honourable
Gentleman was contra! y to all sound and liberal views of
coiniarrcinl Policy, and that instead of concealing the Speci-
ficatiiins of Patents, every possible facility ought to be given
to render them as public as possible. The Legislature ought
never to lend itself to any measure which was calculated to
prevent the diffusion of linowledge.
Mr. WROTI ESLEY said, that the Object of his motion
waa out substantially to interfere with the facilities of exa-
mining Specifications, but to introduce such' a modification
of them-as would limit the privilege of examination to such
persons as were competent judges of the application of
them.
The motion was agreed to.