The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-21 00:00:00

CORN BILL.

The Earl of RIPON moved the Order of the Day that
the House resolve itself into a Committee on the
Corn Bill.

The Earl of STANHOPE said before their Lordships
went into Committee on the Bill, he wished to address a
few words to their Lordships. He must contend that the
House ought not to be deterred from making alte•
rations in this Bill, although it might be considered
in the light of a money Bill. No such consideration
ought to prevent their Lordships from doing their duty.
He would ask whether it would not be fair and reason-
able to afford to the House of Commons, par-
ticularly those Members who were opposed to
the Bill, another opportunity of discussing it.
With respect to the Bill relative to the tariff, he begged
to give notice that it was his intention when the Bill
came into their Lordships House, to move its rejection.
The House then went lilt° Committee on the Corn
Bill, the Earl of SHAFTESBURY in the Chair.

The preamble of the Bill was postponed, and the
clauses up to No. 12 were agreed to.
On Clause 12 being proposed,
Earl STANHOPE observed that, it would empower
the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London to
nominate a corn inspector for that city. Now he would
move that this clause be struck out. Ho objected to Lon.
don being admitted as an average town at all. It would
exercise an injurious influence on the price of coin gene-
rally. In 1840 its price was on the average ss. 9did.,
rather higher than that of the provinces.
The Earl of RIPON said that there were other towns
besides London in which the averages varied from the
general average of the country; and if the principle of
the Noble Ear were adopted, those towns should also
be omitted. The only object in including large towns
such as London was, to enable them to get as fair a
general average as possible ; and if those large towns
were omitted, the equilibrium of the system would be
destroyed. •
Earl STANHOPE said that he objected to London,
because in the London averages the charges of carriage.
and commission were necessarily included ; and that -wis
not the case in other market towns.
.The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 13, 14, and 15, were agreed to without any
amendment.

On clause 17 being put,
Lord BEAUMONT said it was his intention to move
amendment to the ;clause, his object being to get the
prices from the grower and not from the factor. lie
did that on the principle that frauds were at present com-
mitted, and there was nothing on the dart of the Govern-
ment system that showed their principle would re move
those frauds. He should:therefore move the omission of
this clause, and when they came to the 25th clause, he beg-
ged to give notice that he would move an amendment to that
The reason why he proposed that amendment was, that
it would destroy the frauds that all parties were agreed
had been committed under the present system. It would
take away all inducement from the seller of corn to
make a false return. He would have no reason to give
out that the average was contrary to what it was in fact.
After a few observations the Committee di-
vided :

For the clause .
Against it.

80

Majority
(LEFT SITTING.)

-68

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
NEW MEMBER.
Lord NEWPORT took the oaths lurid his seat as Mem.
ber for South Salop, in the room of the Earl of Darling•
ton, now Duke of Cleveland.

WAKEFIELD ELECTION COMMITTEE.
Mr. HOME DRUMMOND reported that the Com-
mittee appointed to try the Wakefield Election Petition
had resolved that Joseph Holdsworth, Esq., had not
been duly returned to serve in the present Parliament
for the borough of Wakefield, and that the Hon. W. S.
Lascelles had been duly elected, and ought to have been
returned for the said borough.
The Clerk of the Crown was ordered to attend to-
morrow to amend the return.
On the motion of Mr. MUNTZ the Birmingham and
Derby Junction Railway Bill was read a third time
and passed.
Colonel VERNER presented a petition against the
present system of national education in Ireland.
Lord CHARLES MANNERS presented a petition
from a place in Leicestershire against the new tariff, par •
ticularly that part which proposed to reduce the duty on
live and dead stock. The petitioners also prayed the
House to adopt such alterations in the new tariff as would
give due protection to the agriculturist.
Sir E. FILMER presented a petition from the Guar-
dians of Wandsworth, with respect to the rating of te-
nements. Also a petition from Maidstone, against the
new tariff ; and also a petition from Birmingham,
against the Act with respect to boroughs.
Mr. WARD presented petitions from Bishops Stort-
ford and Royton, against the Income-tax ; also a peti-
tion from the ordwainers of Sheffield, against the
proposed tax on leather, considering the present
depreised state of the trade exercised by the peti-
tioners. The Honourable Member also presented a
petition from an individual of the name of George Smith,
who in 1839 was an elector at Cambridge, who had been
imprisoned on account of bribery. It appeared from
the statements of the Honourable Member, that in
1839 Mr. Manners Sutton and Mr. Milner Gibson
were two of the candidates for the representation
of Cambridge. Upon that return a petition was
presented to the House of Commons, praying that
the election might be declared void, on account
of bribery. An Election Committee was appointed to
try the merits of the election, at which it was proved,
that although the petitioner himself did not receive the
money, his wife had received nine sovereigns from a
person of the name of Long for the petitioner's vote.
Those nine sovereigns were at the present moment in the
possession of a person name Bayne, and the object.
of the present petition was, that the House would order
that money to be paid by Mr. Bayne, either to the fund
for the relief of the distress at Paisley, or to some other
charitable purpose.—(Laughter.) The Hon. Member
was at a loss what course to pursue with respect to the
petition ; but as he intended, on some future occasion,
to take the sense of the House upon it, he would move
that it should be printed, giving, at the same time, notice
of his intention to bring it under the consideration of the
House on some future occasion.

Lord R. GROSVENOR presented a petition from
Chester, praying that the same rule which was adopted
with respect to public-houses in London, on Saturdays
and Sundays, might be adopted in Chester.