The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-14 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

Lord BROUGHAM said the means which his Noble Friend
proposed was:that of taking the wages of the debtor, and this
was found not to answer in Scotland, although it was still in
operation in that country.
Lord COTTENH AM said he had proposed to give the cre-
ditor the power of examining his debtor as to what property he
possessed. -
After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL the matter
dropped.

- JEWISH DBABILITIES BILL.
On the motion being put for going into Committee on this
Bill,

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE asked if the provisions Gf
the measure were not to be extended to Ireland and Scotland ?
The LORD CH A NCF;LLON ail that the declaration did
not apply to Scotland, and, therefore, the extension of the Bill
to that country Was not necessary. But he did not know wi;h
certainty whether-or not it applied to Ireland. He was in-
clined to think that it did not, and if so the Bill would not be
neee•ssary in that country. •
Lord CAMPBELL hoped that in another session a Bill
would be introduced to do away with the declaration alto-
gether. In fact there was no legal necessity for any man to
make the declaration. When once elected he was protected
by. the. Ail] of I. demnity. The declaration was- not- taken by
the Lord Chancellor or the other high officers of State, and
there was no obligation by law upon any other officer to.take it.
The Bill then went through Committee, and was ordered to
be read a third time to-morrow.

Lord DALHOUSIE moved the second reading of the Corn.
ponies Clauses Consolidation Bill..
Lord MONTEAGLE took that opportunity of calling at.
tension to the extent of business that was likely to come before
theM in the present session. Their Lordships would remember
that, at the end of last session. they were very much pressed
for time in getting rid of the private business; and he believed
a Bill of great public importance was all but lost,, owing to the
want of a Committee. -

The Duke of WELLINGTON begged to remind the Natle
Lord that they got rid of all these difilculties towards the latter
end of last session.

Lord moNTEAGLE reminded the Noble Duke that the
business of this session w..uld be considerably increased, by the
immense number of railway Bills coming before Parliament ;
and it was this circumstance which had induced him to' call
their attention to the subject at this early period of the session.
If .their Lordships adopted any new rules with regard to the
disposal of this private business, he hoped they would do so
speedily, in order that the public might be fully warned of
their nature.
The Bill was then read a second time, and their Lordships
immediately afterwards adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. March 13.
NOTICES OF MOTION.
Mr. SHELL
_gave notice that be should, on. Tuesday 'next,
bring forward the motion of which he had given, notice on
Tuesday last, on the subject of. the opening of letters of foreign-
ers at the Post-office.
Mr.- S.-CRAWFORD gave notice that if the Govern-
ment did not
.prepose any measure for the amendment of the
law of landlord and tenant. in ',eland, .he should himself, after
Easter, move for leave to bring in a Bill to enable the tenant,
if ejected. to recover eompensation from his landlord for any
improvement he might have made upon the land, and also
to amend the laws regulating the value of property in Ireland.
Mr. W YSE gave notice that, after Easter, he should renew
the cnetirn which, he had made last session on the subject of
national education.
Mit: WARD postponed his motion in reference to burdens
on land until after-Easter. ' -
Its
reply to a question from Mr. BELLE W,
Sir IL PEEL said he would, on.Nlonday next, state in what
order the Irish Measuretrwould be brought forward after Eager.
Mr. DUNCOM BE wished to, put two questions to the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; one,
whether he thought it right that annuities paying the legacy
duty should be: ste:jeet to the income-tax ; the other referred
to•the subject Which he mentioned last night, in reference
to the books of .the Bank of England. •
The CIIANCELLO.a of the EXCHEQUER said the
law imposed a tax on all legacies, whether paid in
gross or in annual incomes; and there was no provision for
exempting them from the income-tag. With respect to
the Batik books, the answer which he gave yesterday from
general recollecticn was perfectly correct. lie held in his hand
the answer of the,Bank clerk on the subject, and he would read
it as the most -satifaetory method of answering the question.
The Right lion. Gentleman then read the letter, stating-that
the books were not referred to by any ether person but himself
and The other two clerks of the i3.ink of England. No other
person was ernpl led in the room. He and the other two
clerks had been upwards of thirty years in the service of the
Rank 9f England-
Lord M A HON wished to renew a question on the subject
of the Portland' ase in the British Museum. The Right lion.
Baronet must be aware that there was no adequate legal
penalty frr the offence, and that the offender wa,, punished,
not for breaking the vase itself, but the glass case which hap-
pened to cover it. When he put a -nearly similar question on
a previous occasion, he was told by the Right Hon. Gentleman
that a meeting of the trustees was about being holden on the
subject. That meeting having been held, he wished to inquire
whether it was the intention of the Government to introduoe a
measure on the subject ?
Sir B. PEEL begged to state that the trusties had
considered the subject, and the Government also, attl it
was the opinion of both parties that the law in its pre-
sent state, as regarded the destruction of works of art,
was ineffectual—that no sufficient peotection existed for
the preservaa in of works oF art. against malicious dam age.
The Government, therefore. had resolved upon intro-
ducing a Bill on this subject, and his Learned Friend
the So:icitor7General had a Bill prepared which would
be intro lured at an early period. He wished 'now to
correct a mistatement of a portion. of his speech in ,the
newspapers. - Indeed, . he felt surpri4d the reporters
were so correct. In the debate on the New Zealand
question he was represented as having said that the go•
vernrnent had received information of the arrival of in-
convertible debentures by '_l4,,rd Fitzroy, and that 'his
Nob'o Friend, Lord Stanley, had signified his - disap-
proval of iceonvertible debentures. The. Colonial De-
partment had received no official notice-whatever on the
subject. He said that convertible debt.ntures had been
issued, and that his Noble Friend, Lord Stanley: had
taken the earliest opportunity of stating that he did not
approve of thein.

Mr. COI.LETT wished to know whether the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer meant to exempt holders of
Three per cent. Consols, on which payment would be
made on the sth of July next, from the income-tax ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.said ,he
did not know any reason why those persons should be
exempted from the tax while it was in operation. •
POOR-LAWS (IRELAND).
Mr. F. FRENCH said h. wished to know from the
Right lion. Gentleman opposite when the House would
be put in po session of the decision come to by her Ma-
jesty's Government, with regard to the money spent by
Mr. Nicholls over and above the original estimate for
poor-hovses?

" The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that thy► Tapers on the subject would be laid on'the table
in a day or two.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.
Mr• COBDEN said that, in rising to bring forward
his m ation qn the subject of agricultural distress, 'he
was reillested' from the necessity of apologising to the
other Sitio of tho Howie, for he had put, a notice on the
book sr:, long ago, that it could not be said it-came him)
a susi,',Cous quarter, and he hid so arranged the terms
of b.as Motion. as to embrace bmh the amendments
wh'.Ch had been made 'to it, so that ho dill
" .At think those Hon. Gentlemen who gave notice. of
chose amendments would press them. The object of his
motion was to appoint a Select CoMmittee to Inquire ihto
agricultural distress, and how far the present laws with
,ire4ard to the itnportati,in oragricultural proitice affected
ttho 'agricultural labourers. And, with regard, to that
distress, he.eould not have higher authority than those
Him. Gentlemen Mho professed to, be the friends of
farmers and. protection.—(llear, hear.)
,And it was ad-
mitted by theM that there was great distress amongst
the' agricultural labourers. One Gentleman, Mr. HO-
son, stated that, in Norfolk, the farmers paid their rents
from. their 'capital and not 'from their profits ; and Mr.'
Turner, of Devonshile, stated that -the distress of the

HOUSE OF LO 1) 5, ,March 13.
RAILWAY SCHEMES.
The Earl of DA LHOUSIE (in continuation from our
Third Edition ),proceeded to say—Was it to be wondered
at that those who were cognizant of this fact would fail to per-
ceive that where two lines had coalesced against a third, that
the great probability that Parliament, cr the Board of Trade
at least, vt onla (*staid), decide in favour of those comearies
which had coalesced, and against that which had thus gene to
the wall , arid that they, theref 're, who had interest in the
third line,.would be eager to sell out of that lir.e and buy into
the other two, and that the shares of the other two should rise?
But be would defy his Noble and Learnt d Friend to produce
one person who had received any communication from the
Board of Trade, or who could prove that the proper
measures for concealment had not been taken. He was
reedy to give every information that he possessed.
Lord BROUGHAM, said that all he could observe was, that.
he derived his information from a very important merchant
and broker, that that gentlemen had no know ledge whatever on
Tuesday of the coalition %tech his Noble Friend at the head of
the Board of Trade had said took place on Tuesday, and he tell
that it was not only n matter of courtesy but a bounden duty
on the part of the Alinirers of the Crown, to give the fullest
and most extensive information on any subject which was
brought before Parliament It was their duty not only to '
Parliament but to the country. There was sufficient reason
for his question in the tact of this rise having been realised at
twelve o'clnek; when the Gazette, by which the property ought
to have been affeoted, was nor I üblished urvil the evening.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said that he had already stated
that the Board was not held until the afternoon, and that
therefore the shares could not have been affected by the deci-
sion at which it had arrived. He was ready, he repeated, to
give every information, and he felt that it was a matter of
duty, and not one of courtesy—though he was not aware that
it was the duty of a Minister of the Crown to give that in-
formation which he did not possess. If his Noble and Learned
Friend had seen as much of railway schemes within the last few
months as . be had, he would have learned that railway politics
was an exceedingly intricate matter, and that it was a policy
among railway shareholders to conceal as much as possible the
knowledge which they possessed from each other.
Lord linoucliA Ni said he could not .but say that the ex-
planation of his Noble Friend, so tar as it went, was satisfac-
tory ; but he must, at the same time, assert that a judicature
like that which was exercised by the Board of 'trade over rail-
way schemes, was one abhorrent to the constitution, and odious
to the whole country, and that should such accidents as these
frequently occur, he should feel it his duty to bring a motion
before the }louse for a considerable modification of that Board.
The Noses,. Ea R e then presented a petition, very numerously
signed, from traders and shopkeepers of Exeter, against the 201.
clause in the Bill of last session for the Abolition of Imprison-
ment for Debt. . . .
Lord COTTEN H A 31 took that opportunity of disclaiming the
authorship of this clause. It was true that he had proposed the
abolition of imprisonment for debt, but he had coupled that pro-
position with affording the creditor the means of getting his
debt.