The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-16 00:00:00

CORN LAWS.

The Duke of BUCKINGHAM presented petitions
from the farmers of Cambridge, of the Isle of Thanot,
and of other places in the county of Kent, against the
proposed alteration of the Corn-laws, which they viewed
ith great alarm. Ho presented a similar petition from
a clergyman who was well known to many of their
Lordships, the Rev. Sir Harcourt Lees. He entirely
concurred with all these petitions.
The Earl of HARDWICKE bore testimony to the
respectability of the petitioners, but he could not support
their views. .

The Earl of YARBOROUGH presented a petition
from Horncastle to the same effect.
The Duke of CLEVELAND presented a petition
from the farmers of Shropshire against the proposed
mode of taxing the averages. and against some other de-
tails of the New Corn Bill. They did not complain of
the Bill as a whole, for they knew that the outcry
which was raised against the existing, law would
compel the Government to propose some change
But they viewed with astonishment and alarm the great
reduction in the duties on spring corn, which would be
productive of the most mischievous results. He fully con-
curred in the petition, and ha would assure their Lord-
ships that in several market towns barley and oats were
at present wholly unsaleable.
Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from the Mo-
ravians of London, praying for the abolition of oaths.
Thu Earl of WINCHILSEA presented a petion from
the members of the Church of England Association
against a national system of education in Ireland.
A NOIJLS LORD presented a petition from Worcester
against the Severn Navigation Bill.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE wished to call the
attention of the Noble Earl, atthe head of the Admiralty,
to a petition from the city of Cork. The petition stated
that a packet-station bad been established at Cork, and
the petitioners understanding that such station was
about to be removed, prayed the House not to take such
a step.
The Earl of lIADDINGTON could assure the Noble
Marquis that every attention would be given to the sub-
ject by the Admiralty.
Lord MELBOURNE presented a petition from Leith,
praying that the taxes upon horses used by carters and
carriers might be taken off. Also a petition from the
inhabitants of Darlington, expressing strong objections
to an income tax, and praying their Lordships to reject
any Bill sent up to their Lordships' House for the pur-
pose of imposing such a tax. Also a petition to the
same effect from Chipping Wyche'''.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from West-
moreland, signed by many persons of the highest respec-
tability, against an income tax. The petition contained
the mimes of many extensive landowners. Although
their Lordships had not made a Standing Order fur the
prevention of the discussion of petitions at the time of
presentation, as had been the case in the other House,
and he hoped they never would, he would abstain from
debating the petition he had just presented, as there
would be many further opportunities of debating the
subject. The Noble Lord presented a petition from the
mechanics of Bradford, praying that they might be
exempt from assessed taxes.
EXCHEQUER BILLS' BILL. .
The Duke of WELLINGTON moved the tlieefread-'
int..; of this Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM now presented certainielsaisea,,of
which he had given notice. They were takearfreine:the
58th Geo. 111., c. 9 1 , and another Act, and had for their
oheet to give the Conimissioners powers to issue a cer-
tificate, which should protect witnesscss, who might give
evidence that would otherwise criminate themselves.
The Earl of WICKLOW feared the result of those
clauses would be to prevent, perhaps, the punishment
of guilty parties, who might put themselves forward at
first, and take the Commissioners by surprise.
Lord BROUGHAM thought this a strong objection,
but he had met that point by not specifying any time
within which the Commissioners should give a certificate.
Lord CA MPI;ELL added a few words to improve the
clauses of his Noble and Learned Friend.

. _
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
SPIRIT DUTIES' BILL (IRELAND).

The Duke of WELLINGTON gave notice that on
Monday he would move the third reading of this Bill.

NEW INIMUSTRATE:

The MarquiS of NOMNIANBY said he had now to
present the petition of which he bad given notice, and
in a iew words to direct the attention of their Lordships
to the subject it embraced. The petitioners in this case
represented a very large and important commercial com-
munity, and, perhaps, their Lordships knew the Pet-
itioners and the members of other corporate communities
felt the greatest interest in the matter on which they
now addressed the House. True, this was the first direct
appeal, the first petition addressed to their Lordships, in
consequence of the evil of which they complained ;
namely. the excessive addition that had been made to the
Borough Magistrates towards the conclusion of last year.
He would not detain their Lordthips by adverting to the
numerous communications he had received from other
places on this subject, but would . confine himself
to this petition, and then make one or two
general observations on the subject of the returns
for which he had moved, and which he now had in his
hand. The petition was from the Mayor, Aldermen,
and Burgesses of Kingston upon-Hull. The substance
of their complaint was, that from time immemorial—
from the reign of Henry the Third until the passing of
the Municipal Reform Bill, with certain modifications
introduced by Henry the Sixth—they had the power of
nominating their own magistrates. Whey stated that in
the interval Which elapsed from that time (five
years), on every occasion when an addition was thought
necessary to be made to the Borough Magistracy, com-
munications were made to the Town-Council, with re-
commendations as to whom should be appointed ; they
complained that, in the month of November last, with-
out any communication beforehand, the Mayor received
intimation that gentlemen had been appointed to fill
the vacancies in the Commission of the Peace. They
objected to this, as the vacancies which had taken place
had already been filled up, and there were then twenty-
four Magistrates, being the greatest number which
ought to be in any borough. The number of eight was
aft‘rwards added, and the petitioners complained that
this was practically a complete violation of the course
which should have been adopted towards them ; and
they wished to have the power restored to the municipal
authorities which they formerly held. The number of
the Borough Magistracy in Hull at present was thirty-
two ; and he was sure he need not press'on their Lord-
ships' attention the evils which arose from having a
greater number of Magistrates than was required, as it
was quite impossible to maintain that unity of purpose
which was necessary amongst the Magistracy. Where
a large addition had been made at any time, the neces-
sary consequence was an unnecessarily full attendance.