Star.
London, England, 1830-07-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIANYNT.

110 USE OF LORDS, July I.
The Earl of Shaftesbury took the woolsack In the absence of the
Lord Chancellor, whilst sotneof the peers took the owhs of Illegiarc—.
The Lord Chancellor took his seat on the woolsack at a few al:t-
ames after five.

Earl GREY presented a petition from the protestant. of Gals:iy,
against the late amendment in the Galway franchke
1113111fORAM ORASIXAR scitiiot..
Earl GREY also presented a petition from Bir.nin4l:3;tl, against
the Birmingham grammar free-school bill, and pra,.iiig that the
further consideration of it be postponed to the rest Nessinn.
The Rarl of SHAFTESBURY, in proposing r..ading
of this bill, said he could not take upon himself to witildrsw the
bill, but he thought the best course would be to p.iss the bill, and
the house of commons might, if they pleased. pastpune it.
Lord CALTHORPE supported the bill, as he was satisfied with
the amendments which were made in the committee. Os the whole

he thought the bill a usdul ono, and required to be passed r: bout
delay.
The Eat! of RADNOR opposed the third rea.ling, !:cause it
was contrary to:an understanding with the parties most interested.
Earl FERRERS said if the bill di 1 not pass, it would crrate a
gtrat fetment in Birmingham, and he was sum the passing of this
bill would be of benefit to that town.

Earl GREY feared more agitati. n would wise out of the pass:ng
of the bill than by its rejection. lie therefore moved the I.::: he
read a third time that day six months.
The Earl of HARROWItY said he should be inclined to sup-
port the amendment of the noble earl, if be thought the delay would
tend to tranquillity, but he did not so think.
Lord DACRE said it was a great injustice to the petitioners to
pass this bill, u they were deceived by the understanding which
had been conic to, and were now taken by surprise.
Lord CAISHOR PE again hoped the bill might pass.
Earl C.IR NA RV( rN said this bill had been originally brought in
without the knowledge of the people of Birmingham. who were
most interested in the subject. and were now taken by surprise.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the question, and said,
in his opinion, the contents had it ; but there was a call of the
" not.coments have it."

Strangtts ',re excluded and a division took place,
For the third reading
For the amendment l6
Majority against the Bill . .
The Marquis of DOWNsIIIRE presented a petition from
Down, against the increased duty on Stamm in Ireland ; and the
same noble marquis said he entirely agreed in the prayer of the p:-
titionets.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said nothing was more
likely to conciliate the people of.lrelond, and to endear the govern-
ment to that country, than the withdrawal of the measure to which
the petition referred.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN concurred with his noble friend.
His surprise was not that the measure was now withdrawn, but that
it had not long since been withdrawn by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, or rather that he had ever entertained the notion of imposing
such taxes. .

..---
After a few words from Earl DARNLEY, this petition, and three
more on the same subject, presented by the Marquis of Downshire,
were laid on the table.
The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE laid on the table the report of
the committee on the draining of bogs in Ireland.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented a petition against the
punishment of death for forgery, from Swansea, and from other
places in Wales.
The Duke of DEVONSHIRE presented three petitions from the
county of Cork, against increased taxation in Ireland.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY brought down and read the an.
swer of his majesty to the address sent by their lordships, which was
much in tire usual terms.