The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 29.
Their Lordships met shortly before Five o'clock.
The Bishop of LONDON presented twenty-tw petitions,
praying the House to discourage the sale of intoxica ing liquors
on the Sabbath.
The Duke of RICHMOND brought in a Bill o repeal so
much of the Turnpike Act of Scotland as pe milted toll-
keepers to sell spirits and beer.
Th eßill was read a first time.

MAYNOOTH.
Lord STANLEY presented a petition from the High
Sheriff of Bedford in favour of the increased grant to Maynootb.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM gave notice that on Tuesday
next he would put a question to the Government relating to
the power of the chaplain of prisons to keep and conceal from
the visiting justices the confession of condemned criminals.
CHURCH BUILDINGS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The Bishop of LONDON moved th 3 second reading of the
Bill for amending the Acts relating to the building of churches.
Lord CAMPBELL wished to know if the Bill contained any
provisions relating to the law of mortmain.
The Bishop of LONDON was understood to reply in the
negative.
The Bill was then read a second time.
Lord STANLEY, in the absence of a Noble Friend, brought
up the amendments on the Customs (Import Duties) Bill. He
trusted that the discussion, if any, would be taken on the mo-
tion for going into Committee.
The Duke of RICHMOND did net wish to embarrass the
Government, but he at the same time would enter his protest
against the principle of this Bill, and most assuredly oppose the
further progress of the measure at a future stage.
On the motion of Lord STANLEY the Auction Duties
Bill was read a second time.
The Earl of CHICHESTER presented several petitions
from places in England and Ireland against the grant to May-
nooth. He did not concur in their prayer.
The Marquis of BREADA LBANE presented numerous
petitions to the same effect.

RAILWAY ENCROACHMENTS.
Lord BROUGHAM wished to call the attention of the
House to a petition which he was about to present from Perth,
setting forth that there was in the neighbourhood of that
town a wide apace of ground on the banks of the
Tay, which conduced much to the enjoyment, and re-
creation, and health of the numerous inhabitants. In
consequence of the lowness of the grounds, fogs prevailed, and
the people attributed the healthfulness of their city to the
exercise and fresh air afforded by this beautiful plain.
It was called South Inch, and was mentioned with
admiration by the Roman historians, and we were told that
when the Roman veterans came within sight of Perth they
were struck with its resemblance to their own eternal city—
which, by the by, was in their time an eternal pest.—( A
laugh.) He would not say what it was now—the Roman
soldiers exclaimed " ecce Tiber, ecce Campus Martius !"
That plain, which the Romans likened to their own Campus
Martius was the one to which the petition referred. A change
was about to come on it—a land change.—( A laugh.)
There was a railway company that had taken a liking
to one-half of the ground.—( Hear.) It might
be supposed that the magistrates would protect the petitioners.
But, no, the magistrates were railway speculators, and all the
rich people of the town hart shares in the railway,
so that the poor inhabitants of Perth looked only
to their Lordships for protection. The railway
people were sure to succeed far they had the Board of Trade
in their favour. However one favourite of the Board was
thrown overboard that morning.— ( A laugh.) He hoped
their Lordships would prevent this encroachment. He hoped the
petitioners would have the protection of the Noile Duke opposite,
who, when there was an attempt made to enclose a part of
Hyde Park, came down to oppose the project, and it was given
up. When Sir Robert Walpole was a•lsed what it would
cost to enclose the Parks, he replied " Three Crowns."
He hoped the House would extend the principle to
the park of the petitioners, which was as valuable to them
as Hyde Park to the metropolis.
The NOBLE and LEARNED Loan then presented a petition
from Devonport, again-t the grant to Maynooth, and from the
tailors, shoemakers, butche:s, bakers, and others from Bermond-
sey, against the Debtors and Creditors Bill
ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR.
The Bishop of BANGOR presented a number of petitions
in favour of Earl Powis' 8.11 against the union c.f those Sees.
Lord AIONTEAGLE took that Opportunity of giving
no ice that he would, OD a future day, move that the second
recommendation of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners should be
adopted instead of the third The second recommendation
was that the emoluments of the suppre,sed see should
b, applied to increas,-, the incom, s of the poor clergy
of the diocese. The third recommendation was that they
should be applied to augment the ep'scoi:al fund ; but he con-
sidered such an application of them unnecessary now, as the
episcopal fund had increased since the report of the Commis-
sioner=.

he Marquis of CLANRICARDE asked would his Noble
Friend bring fore ard the motion upon the second reading of
the Noble Earl's (Powis ) 13:11 on Friday ?
Lord AIONTEAGLE said that he would take whatever
course the Heinle might deem most convenient.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was understood to suggest
that the motion might be brought ler wa.d as an amendment,
and to ask the Noble Duke opposite what course he would
think most convenient.
The Duke of WELLINGTON sail that the first question
would be, that the 13il1 be read a second time ; and if that was
affirmed, that the Bill be committed.
Lord AlON'f EAGLE asked, whether he might not move
the insertion of his amendment as a clause in the Committee ?
Lord STANLEY sail if the 11.11 were affirmed there would
he two bishoprics, and the 1 repositioe of his: Noble Friend
(Lo: d Alenteagle) would fall to the ground, as there would be
no funds to carry it into effect.
Lord CAM PBELL hoped the proposition of his Noble
Friend would be affirmed, in consequence of the extreme
poverty of the Welsh curates.
Lord ELL EN BO It 0 LIG H. considered Wales and England
all one country, and that we should not deal with the question
otherwise than as affecting the whole National Church.
Lord POWTS said that it was for the purpose of placing
the Welsh Church on the footing of the National Church that
he, as a Welshman, had thought it his duty to introduce his
Bill.
Lord BELHAVEN presented several petitions against the
grant to Maynooth.
OATHS DISPENSATION BILL.
Lord DENMAN moved the second reading of this Bill. He
said the Bill was founded on a petition which he
had presented to the llou:e on a former occasion,
from an individual who had refused to take an oath before the
Commissioners of Bankruptcy from conscientious scruples, in
ernisequence of se Inch he was imprisoned, and had now been in
prison for three years, and might be kept there all his life.
The case, therefore, was one which stood en singular and pecu-
liar grounds. His Noble and Learned Friend en the Wool-
sack thought it a case deserving of attention, and as he (Lord
Denman) had more time to spare after circuit than his Noble
and Learned Friend, he undertook to bring in the Bill. The
person to whom he alluded was ready to state all he knew, and
thee Commissioners and the creditors thought he was acting
with perfect good faith, and was ready to make every disclo-
sure for the satisfaction of the judge and the creditors, but the
Commissioners had no power to receive his statement till he
came and made them on oath. From this short statement he
did not think that their Lordships would have any hesitation
in applying a remedy. He intended to give the Commissioners
a power of receiving statements without the accompaniment of
an oath, when they were satisfied that the refusal to take the
oath arose from religious scruples, and not from pretended
scruples, for the purpose of concealing the truth. He intended
that the same penalty should apply to the person who made a
false statement as to the person who was guilty of perjury.
The Earl of DEVON suggested that it would be better to
make provision for the examination of bankrupts by declaration
instead of leaving it to the discretion of the Commissioners to say
whether the objection to the taking of an oath of any person
were conscientious or not.
Lord DENMAN entirely agreed in the suggestion of the
Noble Lord. He thought it was highly desirable that the de-
claration should be substituted for the oath in all bankruptcy
and insolvent courts.
Lord CAMPBELL expressed his concurrence in the object
of the Noble Lord, and he trusted the House would give its
sanction to the Bill. If the individual who had been alluded
to had declared himself to he a Jew, a Separatist, or one of any
other sect who objected to oaths, his word must have been
taken, and he would have avoided all he had suffered.
The Earl of WICKLOW said that lie coult not but express
his objection to the principle of this measure. He thought
that this Bill, which was but a portion of the larger measure,
and it was, if possible, more objectionable than the larger mea-
sure. The principle was the same, and the more suspicious, as
it was put forward to claim what it might not be unwise
in itself to grant ; but when that was granted, it would
be impossible to resist the larger encroachment. He
had no objection to abolish oaths altogether, and they ought
not to extend this provision to the Courts of Bankruptcy,
and not to other Courts. Why, if the liberty were granted to
declare and not to take oaths before the Commissioners in
Bankruptcy, on what ground was the same privilege to be re-
fused in any other Court? He (the Earl of Wicklow) was
ready to abolish the custom of taking oaths in all cases where
it possibly could be abolished, and not to confine the applica-
tion of the principle to any particular party or sect, and con-
ceiving that the principle as it was then advanced was likely
to be mischievous, he should resist it. It was only the same
principle that the Noble and Learned Lord had brought for-
ward and supported by the same arguments, session after ses-
sion, and without taking the sense of the Ifouse upon it, and as
he (the Earl of Wicklow) had opposed the principle of the ge-
neral measure, so he should resist it as it now stood before the
House.

Lord BROUGHAM could assure his Learned Friend that
even the Judges were not prepared to say that even in such a
grave matter as the sanctity of an oath there was not that pro-
tection that. was necessary, even with the terror of a prosecu-
tion fur perjury in prospect. But they were not now discuss-
ing the case of a witness, but one of a rather ano-
malous character, namely, the position of a bank-
rupt in the Bankruptcy Court, under the present
bankruptcy laws, which was the case of a man called upon to
give evidence against himself for having committed a certain
offence (for bankruptcy was looked upon by the laws as an
offence), and he was called upon to account for his property,
how much it was, and what had become of it ; therefore it
was an anomaly to subject the bankrupt to the form of an
oath, although he would still be liable to the consequences of

perjury.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that ha wished to sug-
gest that a general declaration should be sub,tituted instead of
the oath, and was desirous that ilia second wading should be
postponed for that purpose.
According to the suggestion of the Noble Doke, the order of
the day was discharged.

BAIL IN ERROR BILL.
On toe motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, the Bail
in Error Bill was read a second time, and went through Com-
mittee pro forma.