The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-15 00:00:00

THE INCOME TAX.

Lord BROUGHAM presented, a petition from the in-
habitants of St. James Limehouse, in vestry assembled,
against the proposed income tax—as not justified by
the financial difficulty of the Ministry, as inquisitorial
in its character, and unequal in its operation. The
Noble and Learned Lord here adverted to his late speech
on the income tax. He certainly was persuaded that
property alone should not be taxed, while. what was called
professional income should escape ; for, on this principle,
the ample income of his Noble and Learned Friend on
the Woolsack, and that of the Archbishop of Canterbury
would not pay anything, while the small tradesman who
derived 1801. to 2001. a year from business would be taxed
as a holder of property. But property and income should
not be taxed to an equal degree. He should again draw
their Lordships' attention to the question.
The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from St.
Mary's, one of the Orkney Islands, against the Provi•
sion-laws and in favour of free trade.
EDUCATION IN IRELAND.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented a petition
from a place in the county of Tyrone against the na-
tional system of education in Ireland. The Noble Earl
also presented petitions from the Isle of Sheppy, in
Kent, and from Long Sutton, against the proposed duty
on foreign corn, live cattle, and other articles.
COLLEGE OF MAYNOOTII.

Lord KENYON presented several petitions from Essex,
Denbighshire, and other counties, against a continuance
of the Parliamentary grant to the College of Maynooth.
The Noble Lord observed that the cause of the grant
had long ceased, and the grant' ought to have ceased
also. The course of education in the College was of the
most injurious tendency, which he pledged himself to
prove if their Lordships would grant a Committee.
Lord CLONCURRY was convinced that all persons
interested in Maynooth would prefer an inquiry into
its system, as it would establish its merits, for nothing
could be better conducted as a place of education. It was
under the management of some of the first men in the coun-
try of the Catholic religion. His opinion was, that instead
of the present grant 'being withdrawn, it should be made
five or ten times as much, if their Lordships' were anxious
that the priests brought up in it should be of the same
class as those formerly educated on the Continent. Their
Lordships should remember that the grant was first
given as an indemnity for the sums invested for educa-
tion on the Continent ; and also because there was great
fear of the Catholic clergy holding intercourse with the
Continent. He (Lord C.) was old enough to re-
member the Irish priests brought up on the Continent,
and he could say that they were men of a high class as
regarded learning and deportment.—(Hear, hear.) He
did not mean to disparage the men now educated at
Maynooth, but the fact was, the sum given for their edu-
cation was so small that people of the humbler classes
generally entered it. He recollected when men of the
first families were priests in Ireland, but, considering the
origin of many of the present clergymen, it was a matter
of surprise that their conduct. was. so excellent—indeed,
they were principally the authorities who maintained
public order and tranquillity in periods of distress and
agitation.
The Earl of WICKLOW concurred in a great deal
of what had been said by his Noble Friend. Indeed
to petition Parliament to overthrow the grant for
Maynooth, was the height of absurdity—(Hear, hear)—
and no person who knew the country would recommend
it. The best policy for Parliament would be to increase
the grant, so as to enable the Institution to educate the
priests of the present day equal to those the Noble Lord
described as formerly educated on the Continent.
Nothing could promote the tranquillity of the country
more than such a step.
Lord KENYON asked the Noble Lord whether he
was aware of the course of instruction in Maynooth, and
whether he had ever seen the class book ? If the Noble
Lord had, he would no doubt admit the necessity for a
Committee of Inquiry.
The Earl of WICKLOW bad not inspected the course
of education at Maynooth, but if it were not such
as it ought to be, that was the fault of the Lord
Chancellor of Ireland, the Lord Chief Justice,
and other functionaries, under whose inspection Parlia-
ment had placed it.
FOREIGN FLOUR.

The LORD CHANCELLOR presented petitions from
Grainge and Ardfinnen, in the county of Tipperary,
against the proposed duty on foreign flour.
The Duke of SUTHERLAND presented petitions
from Staffordshire, praying for free trade in corn.
The Marquis of NOR NIANBY gave notice that he
should to-morrow present the petition to which he had
before alluded from Hull, relative to the late decisions of
the Magistrates of that town.
MERCHANTS AND FACTORS BILL.
The Earl of RIPON, in moving,the second reading o
the Merchants and Factors Bill, said he should postpone
the discussion on the Bill until it was in Committee.
THE EXCHEQUER BILLS BILL.
On the motion of the Duke of WELLINGTON, the
Exchequer Bills Bill was read a second time.
On the motion that the Bill be committed,
Lord CAMPBELL said he did not wish to point out
any mode upon which to act with respect to the pro-
,eetlings of the Commission, but he thought that if they
ad not the assistance of counsel they would never be

SPIRIT DUTIES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion that the Spirit Duties (Ireland) Bill
be committed,
The Earl of WICKLOW said he wished to say a few
words on the subject. He did not wish to Offer the
slightest objection to the measure ; on the contrary,
he thought it would be a most beneficial Bill, as he be-
lieved it would tend to moralise the fpeople. But with
the recollection of the effects of the old duties, he felt
this to be a proper subject for taxation, and nothing
would have induced him to have given his sup-
port to it, if he did not believe that her Majesty's
Government, in bringing forward that measure,
had given the fullest and most mature consideration to
all the circumstances attending this measure. Me did
not mean with respect to increasing the revenue, for
that was a mere trifle, but to the moral effect it
would have on the people. This measure would tend
to put an end to illicit distillation, and thus be a great
moral benefit to the people.
Lord MONTEAGLE did not agree with the Noble
Lord who had just sat down, for he believed that it was
a measure entirely for revenue, and that it would be
productive of all the mischievous effects of the old tax.
Ile considered that it would contribute largely
to the purposes of revenue, but at the same time
have the effect of demoralising the country.
He thought that authority not only of a legislative
character, but also of a deliberate character, could
be appealed to on this subject. It had been
brought under the consideration of a Commission,
and after a full inquiry on the subject they reported that
they were convinced that in the remote parts of Ireland
and Scotland it was impossible to levy the high rates of
duty. When the duty was increased Is. on Irish spirits,
the increase, which had formerly been 9,000,000, was
reduced to 8,100,000 gallons. There was then a further
inquiry, and a Commission was held, of which Sir
Henry Parnell was the Chairman, and after a
full inquiry, they reported that, whereas an increase
of duty had led to a loss of revenue, a reduction of one
shilling would lead to a gain in the revenue ; and they,
therefore, recommended that step. In 1834 Lord
Althorp, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed
a reduction in the duty from 3s. 4d. to 2s. 4d.,
stating that he anticipated that the production would be
increased from eight million to ten million gallons ; the
effect was, that in the second year it rose to
eleven millions. Thus stood the spirit duties till 1840,
when Mr. Baring added 4d. to the amount of duty,
and on that occasion the present Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer objected to the proposition, asserting most dis-
tinctly that a loss of revenue would ensue. From this
it would be seen that in the same proportion as they re-
duced the duty they.augmented the revenue—(Hear)—
and whenever they increased the duty they decreased
the revenue. The case was most serious now, and if illicit
distillation should again prevail, the Noble Duke
must know in what an unpleasant position her Ma-
' jesty's troops would be placed if they should be called
on to repress it.—(Hear, hear.) There was no
service on which troops could be engaged which was so
destructive of their organisation as that. Out of 16,000
commitments in Ireland for criminal offences, 4,000 alone
arose out of illicit distillation. The inducement to distil was
now greater than ever, and it used to be notorious that
in Ireland there used to be a criminal connivance between
those who distilled and the farmers and inhabitants
of the district; and a Scotch distiller, examined before •
Lord Wallace's Committee, when asked what market
he got for his production, replied," Principally officers of
the army and dignitaries of the Church." lie thought
it due to himself to have made these observations, and to
call the attention of the Government to the necessity of
taking instant measures, by way of precaution, to pre-
vent illicit distillation. There was, now an excellent
police force in Ireland, under the command of a distin-
guished officer, Colonel Brereton, and he hoped that
would lead to a decrease of illicit distillation and crime
in that country.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that the Go-
vernment had taken every precaution, and it was their
firm opinion that this 13i11 would not increase illicit

The Earl of RIPON said, one point to which
his Noble Friend referred was the difference be-
tween the duty on Irish and Scotch spirits. In
Scotland the duty was Is. more than in Ireland. This
was a proposition to equalise the two duties, and he could
assure his Noble Friend that the greatest possible incon-
venience had arisen, especially to the free trader, in con-
sequence of that difference in duty. It would have been
imprudent to have reduced the duty on Scotch spirits so
as to have made it equal to that on Irish ; therefore, un-
less it could be shown that raising of the duty on Irish
to that of Scotch would be attended with the result men-
tioned by his Noble Friend, he thought it would be
desirable to increase that on Irish. His Noble Friend
had referred to the reduction of duty, but the
duty at that time was considerably higher
than it was proposed to make it now. He (the
Earl of Ripon) brought forward the proposition, but the
reduction was not, in his opinion, a desirable one ; yet
it was, in his opinion, the only way to cut up by the
roots the immense system of illicit distillation. But
when they had destroyed that, it did not follow that
they might not at times endeavour to raise the duty to
as high a point as it would bear. They had consulted
the Excise authorities and others, whose experience was
most valuable, and the result was a persuasion that the
additional shilling would not increase the practice of il-
licit distillation.

Lord MONTEAGLE agreed that the equalisation of
the duty would be a great good both to Scotland and
Ireland ; but he feared that the additional shilling
would induce a recurrence to illicit distillation in the
remote parts of Ireland, and this practice would, he
feared, offer a most dangerous temptation to those who
were members of the admirable temperance institutions
there.—The Bill went through Committee.
GREENWICH SCHOOL.

Viscount DUNCANNON proposed a resolution to
the effect that an inspector from the Privy Council
should in future inspect Greenwich school and examine
the boys. When boys were first sent into this school it
was expected, that after going through their education,
they would enter the Royal or mercantile navy. It was
found that very few did so ; and the education the school
gave them was so bad and impracticable, that when they
were sent home at the age of 14 they were a burden to
their parents or parishes. In consequence of a com-
plaint from the late Governor to the Admiralty-, an
inspector was sent down : his Report represented the
boys to be in an astonishing state of ignorance and stu-
pidity. Boys who had been there three years scarcely
understood or knew anything. The Admiralty, therefore,
requested the Woods and Forests to re-organise the school.
In consequence of this an alteration took place, and a
master was appointed qualified for the office. The boys
were more or less placed under the charge of the master.
Great opposition was manifested to the master having
influence over the boys out of school. He was happy, to
find that his Noble Friend, the Earl of Haddington, in-
tended to get rid of all the evils mentioned in those re-
ports. He (Lord Duncannon) could not see why a
school under Government control should be the only one
exempt from the inspection of the Committee on Edu-
cation. He hoped his Noble Friend would not allow the
school longer to remain without that inspection.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said, that although
there was a partial difference of opinion between his '
Noble Friend and himself, they were at least agreed in
this, that they were extremely anxious to preserve
and perpetuate the Naval School at the Royal hospital,
Greenwich, and the advantage to be derived from the
interposition of the Privy Council. The statements of
his Noble Friend were too freely made, and would most
positively be denied, and that by persons of the highest
respectability ; and some of the facts were not so clear
as his Noble Friend had said. His Noble Friend said
that the late Admiral Fleming complained that very few
of the boys entered the navy. Now he (Lord II.) had a
document signed by persons of the highest respectability
in the Hospital, to the effect that, of the whole number
Of boys, 133, about one-third were discharged every year,
of whom an average number of from 60 to 70
went direct to sea, and several others followed after they
had visited their friends. He (Lord H.) had also another
complaint to make of his Noble Friend's third resolu-
tion, for his Noble Friend took no notice of the success-
ful hour of Mr. Riddle. True, the elementary branches
had been defective, the others had been omitted or were
not well attended to, but the nautical department was
eminently successful under Mr. Riddle, as several ex-
perienced officers of the navy could prove. The Ad-
miralty sent two Commissioners to examine and report
on Mr. Riddle's method of instruction. Nothing could
have been more triumphant as regarded Mr. Riddle,
than the report of these gentlemen, for there was no
doubt that the boys turned out by Mr. Riddle were
some of the best navigators in the service. From a
report from the Astrea hulk, from which boys were
distributed to other vessels, and on hoard which there
were twenty boys educated by Mr. Riddle, nineteen of
whom were very smart and exemplary, and whether the
twentieth was not so from incapacity or bad conduct he
could not say. His Noble Friend had made out no case
for the interference of the House, and he (Lord II.) hoped
the House would not interfere, as the Admiralty wished
to conduct the school on their own responsibility, and
they desired to give a full trial to the change they had
introduced.—(Hear, hear.) Their plan was, so far as
regarded conduct, to leave the internal control of the
school to the master,
j..g d, and the out-of--door
but to
of
e the discipline
the navy into the play-ground,
pro-
ceedings, and to exclude all necessary severity. He
proposed that there should be no punishment on the part
of naval officers, but there should be a mild discipline, at
the same time that it should be suited to the character of
the place. What he wished to press on their Lordships
was, that there was no ground laid for the inquiry. They
(the Government) bad declared their conviction that

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 14.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
SUDBURY ELECTION COA.IMITTIM.
Mr. REDINGTON reported to the House, as Chair-
man of the Committee appointed to try the merits of the
petition against the return for the borough of Sudbury,
that the Committee had agreed to resolutions, to the
effect that Mr. F. Villiers and Mr. Dyce Sombre were
not duly elected to serve in the present Parliament,
for Sudbury, at the late election for the borough
and that the said election was a void election. Ile
begged also to impress on the House the following re-
solution :—" That Mr. Villiers and Mr. Dyee Sombre,
at the said election, were by their agents guilty of
bribery, and the Committee were of opinion, from the
evidence they had received, that gross, systematic, and
extensive bribery had prevailed at the said election.
The Committee further thought it their duty to express
their unanimous opinion that the borough of Sudbury
ought to be disfranchised, and that a new writ ought
not to be issued for the said borough."—(llear.)
Mr. REDINGTON then moved that the Speaker do
not issue his warrant for a new writ before the 7th
of May.
The question was then put and agreed to.
CORN-LAWS.
Mr. BRAMSTON presented a petition from the
Farmer's Club of Chelmsford, in Essex, expressive of the
anxiety with which they viewed the proposed altera-
tions in the Corn-laws, which would tend to damage the '
welfare of the agriculturists.

THE TARIFF.
Colonel FERGUSON presented a petition from
boot and shoe-makers against any alteration in the
duties on leather.

Sir J. TROLLOPE presented a petition from Bolton,
against any alteration in the tariff.
RIGHT OF PETITION.
Mr. MACAULAY presented a petition from the
Chamber of Commerce of Edinburgh, stating that the
petitioners had prepared petitions to that House on the
subject of the proposed financial measures, but they had
been prevented from presenting them by the rules of the
house. They now claimed the right of petitioning, and
prayed the House to du away with any usage to the cun-
t rary.—(Hear.)
CARDIGAN ELECTION COMMITTEE.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said he regretted the absence
from the House last evening of his Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Mayo, who was prevented from attendingby con-
trary winds, whereby he had lost the mail. His Hon.
Friend wished him to express his regret for having
broken the rules of the house; and as he was only
young Member, he (Mr. O'Connell) hoped the House
would take his case into consideration. He begged,
therefore, to move that Mr. M. Blake be discharged from
the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms on paying the fees.
Sir VALENTINE BLAKE seconded the 'notion.
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said that it was
difficult for the House so to act as to properly mark
their disapprobation of the conduct of an Honourable
Member without inflicting too severe a punishment.
There were constitutional as well as other grounds why
Members should not be confined in custody for any
length of time, but the expense to which other parties
were put by their absence required that they should be
subjected to such a pecuniary fine as would indemnify
the parties ; and the question now was to what extent
the Hon. Member for Mayo was to be fined. The
amount of the fees were about 25/. or 30/., and as that
might not be sufficient to ensure the attendance of Mem-
bers, he would propose that such a sum of money should
be exacted from the Eon. Member as would indemnify
the parties. But he scarcely knew, in the present in-
stance, how he should shape the motion.
Sir G. GREY concurred in the observations made by
the Noble Lord, that some fixed sum should be imposed
upon Members who absented themselves. If that were
not the case the expense of a messenger to be sent to
Ireland to arrest the lion. Member for Mayo should be
added to the usual fees, whereas if the Hon. Member for
Finsbury, or the Hon. Member for London were the
• offending parties no such expense would be incurred.
He was glad, therefore, that the Noble Lord threw out
the suggestion of a fixed sum, but the House should
retain the poWer of increasing it, if any Hon. - Member
set it at defiance.

Lord DUNCAN said he considered the notice which
Hon. Members received was too short. He thought that
they should receive 48 hours' notice instead of 12.
Lord G. SOMERSET said that he was guided by the
provisions of the Act of Parliament in the notice which
was given, and it was taken to the usual residence of
lion. Members with all convenient expedition. But if
they once went outside the rules and regulations of the
Act, it would put them to great inconvenience.
The question was then put and agreed to, that Mr.
Mark Blake be discharged from the custody of the Ser-
getint-at-Arms.

Lord KELBURNE presented a petition against the
propositions of her Majesty's Government (as we un-
derstood).

Mr. ICIURPHY presented a petition from the shoe-
makers of Cork, signed by 547 persons, against any al-
teration in the duty on foreign manufactured leather.
Col. ACTON presented a petition from a place in
Ireland, praying that means might be devised for an ex-
tensive system of education under the direction of the
Church Education Society of Ireland.
Mr. VILLIERS presented several petitions from York
and other places, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws.
Sir GEORGE CLERK presented a petition from
Stamford, against the proposed reduction on the duty on
foreign boots and shoes.
TIPPERARY AND DJ yizEs ELECTION.
The SPEAKER informed the House that he had re-
ceived a communication from the petitioners against the
return of the sitting Members for Tipperary and De-
vizes, stating their intention of withdrawing the petition.
RIGHT OF PETITIONING.
Lord F. EGERTON rose, and said that, on bringing
forward the resolutions of which he had given notice,
relative to the presentation of petitions, it would not be
necessary for him to go at length into a subject already
so fully discussed. The object which he had in view was of
a twofold character; he wished in the first place to open the
doors of the House to the petitions of the people, and in
the next place he was desirous that that should be done
under such regulations as would prevent undue interfer-
ence with the control of public business in that House..
He begged leave to say, that in putting himself forward
on that occasion lie did not wish to interfere with the
claims of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He was fully
prepared to admit, that all the honour that could follow a
settlement of the question, belonged exclusively to that
Hon. Member ; and he (Lord F. Egerton) had inter-
posed solely from a conviction that an individual like
himself, without influence or authority in that House,
would not have to contend with obstacles to which a
leader of any party might be exposed. He could
assure the House that his only
Avishw to
put an end to a state of things which he
found was likely to lead to great üblie inconvenience.
The Noble Lord concluded by moving thq first resolution
as follows :--" That every Member offering to present a.
petition to the House, not being a petition for a Private
metentßollthbeefpoarertitehsefrlloomusweh,
wham
cßoilnlfi,
te
ol rrelating
himself
to
oa to as
statement
it comes, of the number of signatures attached to it., and.
of the material allegations contained in it, and to the
reading* of the prayer of such petition."
Mr. WAKLEY seconded the motion.

Mr. WALLACE protested against the
passing of
this resolution, as acting prejudicially . on the
House during the present Session; but hi, also more
strongly objected to making it a standing
irder. They
were proceeding in a; wrong course in ray sing to debate
r

on the presentation of petitions from the people. It was.
owing to the adoption of that practice that their debates
were protracted night after night ; because by being
precluded from speaking on presenting petitions,
embers were forced to speak during the
debates, and to reserve themselves fur those great
occasions. 'He might mention the late debates
On the income tax and on the Corn-laws as cases in
paint. Formerly Members were allowed to discuss.
questions on the - .preeentation. of petitions, and
tbe,-eousequence was that many Members taking
that opportunity of delivering their sentiments,
the debates were conducted solely by the leading Members
of each- side ; but, in consequence of the present prac-
tice, Members were forced to deliver their sentiments
during the discussion of great questions, and hence
the necessity for the frequent adjournments of de-
bates, a practice to which he always had objected, and
always should object. In consequence of this, the first
:bur hours of every evening Were abandoned to the
minor Members, and the great guns never went off until
after ten o'clock.—(A laugh.) He should certainly divide
-againstlhe resolution, and also tteevainst several of the
-others of which the Noble Lord had given notice. How
could the people know if the petitions had been attended
to unless they were debated ? What did they know
about the Committee on Public Petitions ? How could
they- ascertain whether their petitions had been read by
'that Committee or not? They had no means of ascertain-
ing from theipapers of the House. Those papers were now
Sold instead of being distributed in the profuse manner in
which they formerly were, so that the people die
not now receive them from the Members in the.same
'manner us they had done formerly. He should divide the
House against the resolution.
Mr. T;DITNCOMBE could assure the Noble Lord that
he wns actuated by no feeling of jealousy against him for
proposing these resolutions. Any such feeling would
be unworthy of himself (Mr. T. Duncombe) and un-
worthy of the subject. He did not altogether approve
of the resolution of the Noble Lord in the terms in which
it was couched. He thought after the manner in which.
the consent of the Government to the practice of
presenting these petitions had been wrested from the
Government, the concession might have been made in a
more gracious manner.--(Cheers.) When he (Mr. T.
DUnco:nbe) had moved that the House do discontinue the
practice of refusing to receive petitions on the subject of
:taxation, he never supposed that those questionswould be
received in a manner diffin.ent from that in which peti-
tions Here usually, received ; and if so, what was the
use of -coming down with a string of resolutions, re-
- /Arming - practice which had already been affirmed
by the -decision on the motion of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Greenock ? The present Parliament was pledged
by,.the existing resolutions, and no debate on the pre-
sentatien of a petition could take place without rescind-
inb ~ them. The Noble Lord proposed to make that a
standing order, to be binding on future Parliaments. It
would be always competent to future Parliaments to
take whatever course • they chose on the subject:
if the resolution were made a Standing Order it
must be submitted to any future Parliainent be,
" fore it could be binding on them, and they •
would have the power of rescinding it if they. chose',
The sixth resolution was certainly embodied in the reso
lution which 'he (Mr. D.) had proposed on' a former
evening, That petitions against any Resolution. or
'Bill, imposing duties for the current service of the
year, be henceforth received, and that the usage
under which the House has refused such petitions
he discontinued." But then there were certain words
in the commencement of this resolution, namely, " sub-
jeect to the above regulations." Now he (Mr. D.)
_never proposed that-those petitions, ,which he presented,
Mould be treated in any other mode than the House had
been accustomed to treat all other petitions laid before
it. It was not :ouch of a " feather bed " upon
which . the Honourable Member let down the Right
Honourable 'Barenet in proposing these resolutions;
but it was down, hard and heavily, on the bare
around. The introduction of the words " subject
to the above regulations" was perfect surplusage,
and he should propose, that they be left out of
the resolution. Ile also thought, that the words "for
the .erteeehe service of the year" should be left out,
and that the word " and taxes" should be inserted after
the word " duties." The very principle of the
resolution which be (Mr. 1).) bad proposed, was, that
any petitions should be received against a measure for
the imposition of taxes or duties, whether they were for
the present or future years. He (Mr. D.) should cer-
thinly vote with the Hon. -Member for • Greenock (Mr.
• Wallace) if that lien. Gentleman pressed his motion to
a division. •
Mr. AGLIONBY said that' the resolution now pro-
posed was but a mere transcript of the reeolution agreed
to by the House on this subject at the beginning of the
Session. lie wished to know if it was competent for
or for any other Hon. Member, to move that that
atssolution be rescinded.

The SPEAKER said certainly not.
AGLIONBY said that that being so, he appealed
,to Thew whether the resolution now proposed could be
put in its present shape? The effect of a majority on
the resolution Would be to rescind it, and could it be
that they might do indirectly that which it was not in
'their power to fre t by direct and immediate.means?
'He should feel-it 'his duty to divide against the resolu-
iion. Though the House might find it convenient, in
some respects, to treat the petitions of the people as
•.they had decided . to treat th(m during this session,
the people out of doors neither appreciated the rule nor
.- understood the practice. There were other means by which
the interruption of public business might be prevented ;
-• he • .recollected- the time when the petitions Of the
• people Were presented and cliseusSed in the mourning, and
the public.busineSs of the House in the evening expe-
dited. But now Members, who would express the
'opinions of their constituents at this period of the day,
spoke during the principal debate, and was not the
tune of the House thus occupied? If the prac--
,were again adopted, the great authorities of
the House would have the evening debate to themselves.
Thellight Hon. Baronet had twice insinuated during
this session that, from there being very few Members
present at a certain part of the evening, the subject was
not regarded with very great interest. This was-not
-the case ; it was because Members absented theniselVes

till the important part of the debate commenced. If
petitions were allowed to be presented at another part of
the day, they would find that those Mimbers who spoke
at a particular period of the evening, would then express
their 'Onions on Vie discussion of the petition, and
leave the, evening to the great authorities of the House.
Sir R. I'EEL said, that after he had fairly avowed
that hi 4 opinion was ovt•rruled, and that he thought he
was substantially in a minority, he did not feel at all
ureisv about the matter.—(Hear, hear.) It could not
signifY to him how the resolutions were worded. He
could assure the Hon. Gentleman that he had not sug-
gested one single modification, with a view to break his
fall. He could not agree with the llon. Gentleman
as to the disadvantagos attending the practice which
now prevailed. He thought that the rule which con-.
tined gentlemen who did not occupy a prominent political

station to debating on petitions, placed them in-a much
-worse position than they were at present, when they took
part in the general debates. The Hon. Gentleman com-
-plained that the interesting speeches did not commence
nil after half-past nine o'clock. In that respect
he could not agree with the Hon. Gentleman. He
had sat there before that hour, and he must say
some o ,the most interesting speeches which had been
made during that debate , had been made in that part of
the evening. He bad heard, fur instance, the speech of
the Hon. 'Member for Leeds—a speech which displayed
-Treat ability, and contained powerful arguments against
-Ids (Sir Robert Peel's) proposition.—(Hear, hear.)
lie had also heard the Gallant Commodore opposite
(Sir Charles Napier) make an excellent speech, and he
intiSt shy he had seldom heard a better speech on the
subject, or that he had ever heard an Hon. Gentleman
state his opinions more fairly, and he would be glad to
hear the Hon. and Gallant Commodore more frequently
on subjects of that kind.-7-(A laugh.) Then there was
the speech of the Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool,
in which the Noble Lord spoke of the advantage of
facilitating the consumption of timber, of the encourage-
, went which should be given to ship building,
.and of the importance of letting in the raw
material ; it was one of the best speeches
that the Noble Lord had ever Made. lie did
itssure the Hon. Member that if he attended
at that period of the evening he would hear some of the
Very, best speeches that were made in that House.
Mr. AGLIONBY said he was scarcely ever absent.
Sir R. PEEL said when that Right Hon. Gentleman
:said the debates were not interesting he had concluded
:that he was not present to hear the speeches in question.
.The petitions used to be received in the morning ; if
that were set apart for the presenting of petitions and
hearing speeches on them, then, as the Hon. Gentleman
said, the' spirit of the debate would evaporate by the
evening. The present regulation was simply one
'against the reception of petitions against taxes for the
current service of the year. He was perfectly willing
is depart from the old practice, if the House would
establish-some other feasible plan.
Mr. AGLIONBY briefly explained.
Mr. WAKLEY said the Noble Lord had brought
fore and this subject, in the spirit in which his
Honourable Colleague had proposed it a few nights ago.
If the present resolutions were adopted, the popular
Party would lose a very valuable privilege, and under the
circumstances, he did not see why any compromise
should take place.—(Hear.) It the present resolutions
were adopted, they would be in a far worse position
tl a i they were at present with regard to petitions.
is Hon. Colleague, after his motion was lost on the
first night brought up a petition contrary to the rules
of the House, but if these resolutions were passed
that could not be done any more. NO dis-
cussion could take place, because the words
of • the second resolution were that "No Member
should be allowed to speak upon, or in relation to, such
petition," and, therefore, no incidental matter could
be discussed or noticed, because the Speaker would
desire the Member to take his seat, and he would
be obliged to do so.—(Hear.) He would, therefore, ask
the Right Hon. Baronet, who frankly owned that he had
not changed his opinion upon the subject, but was
over-ruled, to consent to the motion of his Hon. Col-
league, and that would be the frank and honest moire of
action, and would give satisfaction to all.—CHear,
hear.) At present the Right Honourable 'Baronet
was aware that it was impossible for any Minister
to prevent those proceedings on petitions 'which had
already occurred ; but if the present resolutions were
adopted, and became Standing Orders, the practice with
respect to petitions would be even more stringent than.
at prestAt. He hoped his Hon. Colleague, therefore,
would bring a substantive resolution on the subject be-
fore the House.—(Hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he agreed with
the Honourahle Member that the first resolution which
was brought forward would be the best to adopt,
and that it would be quite sufficient.—(Hear, hear.)
The only difference between the two courses was, that
the_ proposition of the Noble Lord would convert into
Standing Orders the present resolutions of the House,
which the Speaker enrced during the present session,

and which was binding on the present Parliament.
Now, although he thought that the resolutions might be
liable. to some objections, he so far approved of them in
substance, that he was not induced to offer any opposi-
tion to the Noble Lord. The Hon. Member for Green-
ock, and the Hon. Member for Cockermouth, were for
renewing the old practice of speaking on petitions. But
he did not agree with them in that particular ; and heii
cotild not vote against a practice which he had himself '
been instrumental in establishing. It appeared to him
that a return to the former usages would lead to great in-
convenience. Let them suppose a case with respect to
the new tariff. Petitions against the tariff could
be received ; 'but if the old practice were
enforced, they might have debates upon the
presentation of petitions upon any matter containing
the tariff ; and no man could say upon what point the
debate of the evening might turn. An Hon. Member
for Worcester might bring forward the case of gloves—
another Hon. Member might bring forward the case of
boots and shoes—another Hon. Member the case of copper
and tin ores ; at the same time, none of those debates
could come to any practical end, nor could any one
say at what time the business on the paper would be
likely to commence. Even on the day which the Right
Hon. Gentleman might happen to fix upisi for the con-
sideration of the tariff, it would be impossible to say
whether the debate would commence before ten or eleven
o'clock. In order to remedy that inconvenience,
the House had fixed a certain hour at which
the presentation of petitions should cease, and
the business of the evening should begin. All the
evils of the ancient practice would be renewed if they-
were to have recourse to it again. This further
inconvenience would follow from such a course,
that a petition relating to some particular in-
terest might occupy the House during the even-
ing, while no petitions could be presented upon other
subjects of great importance. • He could not, therefore,.
concur with those Hon. Members who were for reviving
the former practice of the House. He should
certainly have wished that the Noble Lord .had
contented himself with the sanction already given
to the new rules relative to the preSentation of peti-
tions ; but as the Noble Lord thought that it
would be desirable to put that resolution in a more
formal shape, he should not oppose the course taken
by the Noble Lord, and he was, therefore, ready to vote
in favour of the resolutions before the House.
Mr. JAMES said, that he entirely concurred with the
Noble Lord. If they were to return to the old practice
of debating petitions, they should bid farewell to sessions
of live, six, or seven months, they should sit froth the let
of January to the 31st of December, all day and all
night.—(Laughter.)
Lord F. EGERTON said, in explanation, that in
adding the words for " the current service of the year,"
of which the Hon. Member for Finsbury had com-
plained, it was his intention to meet the case which had
already occupied much of the attention of the House.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that it was clear the addition
of the words for " the current service of the year"
would narrow the proposition of the Noble Lord,
The more large the proposal the greater number of pe-
titions it included, and of course narrowing the pro-
position meant bringing down the number of petitions.
There would be a smallr number of petitions presented
on questions affecting the revenue. The motion of the
Hon. Member for Finsbury being lost by one, the Noble
Lord comes forward with resolutions not confined to the
question, whether such petitions be presented or
not, but travelling back to a resolution of the
House affecting all petitions whatever. The
Noble Lord, and the House had found that petitions
must be presented, bilt they declare that it is inconve-
nient they should be discussed. The Noble Lord came
forward to cover the retreat of his friends with a string of
resolutions, granting them (the Liberals) the honour of
their victory, but depriving them of its substance—
(Hear, hear)--thus reversing for Ministers the order of
English proceedings, by which it was usual to gain the
victory and lose its substance; and following the course
of foreign diplomacy by which it was usual to lose
the victory and gain the substance thereof. In
proving the right of presenting petitions to the
House at present, he believed they were only fighting for
shadows. If they placed the Right Hon. Gentleman in
a minority to-night, they would gain nothing by it, for
the right of petitioning had passed away.
Lord HOWICK said, according to the existing rules
of the House, petitions avowedly on the imposition of
duties could be presented, with the single exception of
those on duties for " the current service of the
year." This was proved by the number of petitions
presented from both sides of the House relating to the
imposition of a duty on corn. No petition could be ex-
eluded by the words of the resolution. If there was
anything in the presentation of petitions that de-
served to be called a farce by the Honour-
able and Learned Member for Bath, it arose from
the manner whiCh the right had, he must say, been
abused. When petitions were presented by the cart load,
it was impossible they could receive so much attention as
when a smaller number were presented. At the time they
were presented in the early part of the clay, no one was ever
present, but the Menibers presenting them ; there was
no audience except one or two of the subordinate Mem-
bers of the Government. No one attended but those
Members who were anxious to make speeches, by
whom speeches were made containing statements
which went forth to the country uncontradicted.
He thought he had shown considerations quite conclusive
against returning to the old practice of the House.
Mr. C. WOOD said, that there were some petitions
which could not possibly be presented. under
those resolutions. He thought that the 4th resolu-
tion ought to stand in the place of the 3d, and the
sth in the place of the 4th, and some alteration should
be made in the third resolution.—(Hear, hear.)
The House at present sometimes exercised the right of
refusing to receive petitions, not because they were di-
rectly contrary to the rules and orders of the House, but

because they were in themselves improper to be received.
Now it appeared to him (Mr. C. Wood) that the
House, by acceding to the resolutions of the Noble
Lord would be giving up that right, as such petitions
would then be brought up as a matter of course, and re-
ferred to the Committee on Public Petitions.

Sir GEORGE CLERK rose amidst loud cries of "Di-
vide ! divide !" He wished to ask the Hon. Member for
Halifax what, according to his proposition, would be
done with public petitions referring to matters not be-
fore the House?

Mr. O'CONNELL had heard with regret what had
fallen from the Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland
in reference to the petitions of the people.
Mr. WARLEY moved that the word " description"
should be substituted for the word "statement."

Sir T. WILDE said that he considered that every ob-
ject would be accomplished by taking the 6th resolution
alone, and excluding the others, and by saying that such
petitions should be received according to the rules of
the House, and not discussed if it was contrary to the
rules of the House to discuss them on their presentation.
—(lfear, hear.) He thought it was unnecessary to
consider any other question at present.—(Cheers.)
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when the numbers were—