Star.
London, England, 1830-06-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Tutrastur, Juwe 10.
MESSAGE raom SHE COSMOS&
Sir A. GRANT, Sir J. blacturr out Sir JOHN AIITLET, Mr.
TRANI', and other Members, announcedi the concurrence of the
Commons in several bills, and brought up the Forgery Punishment
Bill, and some others, which, on the motion of the Earl of SHATTER.
nous', were severally read a first time.
IThe Bills on the table were forwarded in their respective stages,
on the motion of the Earl of SHAPTERNURT.
IN/ICELLANEOIIB.
The Duke of NORFOLK presented a petition from Galway, in
favour of the Galway town regulation bill. He felt it his duty to
say that he entirely concurred in the prayer of the petition, par-
ticularly after the ample and liberal manner in which equality of
civil rights had been conceded to the Roman Catholics of the em.
pine, by the act of last session. He was sure that it could not have
been the intention of their lordships to exclude from the benefits or
that measure any portion of his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects.
The had of ORMOND presented a petition from the licentiate
apothecaries of the county of Kilkenny, against the stamp duties ea
medicines.
The Earl of RADNOR presented a petition against the renewal
of the Esst India Company's Monopoly; and also a petition from
Bolton, in the County of Lancaster, against the Corn Laws.
The Marquis of DOWNSH IRE presented a petition from the
teeeholdens of the County of Down, against the additional Spirit
mod Stamp Duty. The noble Marquis would abstain, at the pre-
sent moment, from expressing any opinion on the prayer of the pe-
tition, on account of the great importance of the subjects to which
it related.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY thought the petition ought
to be read at length. It proceeded from a body of men who were
eminently entitled to attention on account of their importance and
intelligence, and the subject to which it related was one upon which
the greatest agitation prevailed throughout Ireland. He should, in
a few days, have petitions to present on the same subject from se-
veral other Irish counties. The County of Down, from which the
= petition proceeded, might be considered as the Yorkshire of
•The Marquis of DOWNSH IRE had been far from intending any
disrespect to the petitioners, but he had been unwilling to prejudge
a question of this importance, and had therefore refrained from ex-
pressing any opinion on the prayer of this petition. But in conse-
quence of what had fallen from the noble marquis, he felt bound to
that peat advantages were to be expected from the gradual de.
of the resources of Ireland, and that no additional lm-
pets ought to be imposed upon the country without the greatest
care and consideration.
The Marquis or LONDONDERRY explained.
The petition was then laid upon the table.
Viscount LORTON presented a petition from the Local Dirac-
ton of the Provincial Bank of Ireland, in Coleraine, for the abolition
of the punishment of death for forgery.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from the Protestant '
Dissenters of a place in the county of York, for the abolition of
Negro slavery ; and also a petition from a place in the West Riding
of the same county, for the removal of the Assizes to Wadefield.
Lord HOLLAND presented a petition from the Merchant Sea-
men of the Part of Poole, for the repeal of the law which compels
them to contribute a portion of their wages to the chest at Green-
wich ; and likewise a petition from the spinners of Oldham, in the
county of Lancaster, praying that the employment of persons under
twenty-one years of age by night in factories may be prohibited.
The Noble Lord also presented petitions from a place in the
county of Bedford, against the infliction of capital punishment for
the crime of forgery, and from the Liverpool Co-operative Society,
against the renewal of the East India Company's charter.
Mildmay's Divorce Bill, and Boydell's Divorce Bill, severally
passed through a committee.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented petitions from Gal-
way, in favour of the town of Galway Regulation Bill ; from
*Maidenhead against the punishment of death for forgery ; and ftom
a place in Wexford against the tithe laws.
Lord CALTHORPE presented a petition from certain paper.
seekers in the county of Gloucester, for the substitution of manual
Weer for machinery.
rims ON DEMISE OP THE CROWN ANOLITION DILL.
The Earl of DARNLEY, when last he addressed their lordships
en the subject of this important bill, had felt it his duty to say that
be did not intend to press it forward through its further stages in
present circumstances. He had since that time found that the bill
was not likely to occasion so much discussion as he then antici-
pated ; and upon more mature reflection he was convinced that he
out not, by abandoning the measure, to do in justice to a most:meri-
torious class of individuals. He now therefore gave notice that be
should move on Monday next that the bill be committed, in the
persuasion that by that time the noble and learned lord on the
woolsack and the noble duke would be prepared to propose such
amendments as would enable their lordships to pass the measure
without objection.
ZOOS DRAINAGE (IRELAND
The Duke of WELLINGTON expressed his assent to the prin-
ciple of this bill, for the success of whish hla noble friend and rela-
tion (the Marquis of Downshire) had shewn so much anxiety, and
he did not despair of its being rendered palatable to the house and
the country. He begged their lordships, however, to take care that
the details of the measure should be so modified, that no injury
might accrue to the country. Some of the provisions of the bill as it
-now stood were liable to abuse. It set out by enabling any person who
was the owner of part of a bog, to apply to the Lord Lieutenant, who
was then authorized to appoint Comtnissioners to carry the drainage
Into effect, and these Commissioners were to possess powers much
greater even than those which were placed in the hands of Grand
Juries in Ireland. The power of raising loans and levying assess.
menu were not likely to be exercised in Ireland without great
abuses. lie therefore begged his noble friend and relation to poet.
pone the committee on this bill until Monday, when he hoped to
have some amendments to propose. The bill so amended might be
printed, and then re-committed, and at last might become a measure
worthy of the support of the house.
The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE had listened with great pleasure
to the sentiments of the Noble Duke. He had no object but to pro-
mote the improvement of the country, and with this view he bad
obtained information from various quarters, which were generally in
favour of the principle of the measure. He agreed in the propriety
of first forming the Committee, and he hoped that at last the bill
would be made worthy of their Lordship's approbation. He had a
strong interest in the success of the measure, but there were others
wbo had a mush greater interest in it than himself.
The order was accordingly discharged, and the bill ordered to
be committed on Monday next.
LAST RETFORD BILL.
The House proceeded in the examination of witnesses in support
of the East Retford Disfranchisement Bill. The examination in
support of the allegations was brought to a conclusion this evening,
and the further proceedings on the bill adjourned to Monday fort-
night. Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Juxz 10.
APPEAL COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE HILLS•

Mr. DIibIIIMOND moved that the Clyde navigation bill be rt.
oommitted.

Mr. C. W. WYNN opposed the motion. The appeal committee
had decided that the evidence did not supi,ort the allegations of the
preamble. After that fact, would it not be hard to put the parties
again to the expense of bringing their witnesses from Scotland.
Mr. BIUNDAY said he did not think that the committee could
have come to any other result.
Col. WILSON thought it would be better to postpone the bill for
the present session.
Sir J. GRAHAAI observed that evidence was balanced on this
subject. The impression of his multi was, that the bill should be
recommitted; but he thought that the partite ough, to have an op-
portunity of proving shell case; he, however, also considered that
if the bill were recommitted, it ought to be to a different list or corn.
mitten.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, if the appeal committee were to decide
nothing, what would be the use of it ? ought the parties to be com-
pelled to go over their ease again ? He was also against the bill;
he had entered the house with a strong impression against private
bills, and this bill confirmed his impression.
Mr. DUNDAS considered that the only war to do justice be.
twcen the parties, would be to send the cue back to a committee.
Alderman WAITHDIAN opposed the motion, considering that
as it had been referred to an Appeal Committee, it would be absurd
to adopt it.
Mr. LYTTLETON remarked, that as he had sueseeded in car-
rying the Committee of Appeal to correct irregularities in 1825, he
felt interested in the fate of this motion; and that if it were carried,
it would be at once ridiculous, as regarded the question of the Ap-
peal Committees, and as concerned the decision of the Appeal Cem.
mittee, there could not be a ease in which the decision of the Ap.
peal Comtnittee could be more proper ; it ought not to be disturbed.
Mr. SYKES supported the motion. He maintained that the
Appeal Committee had examined grounds with which they had no-
thing to do; they ought only to have examined the conduct of
Members on the previous Committee, not the merits of the Bill.
Sir B. INOLIS also opposed the motion ; unless the resole.
don for an appeal committee were to be a dead letter, and the report
of the appeal committee a nullity, he did not see bow this motion
could beKsßut&prtod.
Mr.KENNEDY supported the motion. The only reason why
the original evidence was defective, was that the parties were not
allowed to produce the whole of their case.
lir. MAXWELL said that Glasgow, which might be considered
the emporium of Scotland, was against the bill, in consequence of a
particular clause introduced into it. The bill would be of great vans

to Scotland. He thought that there ought to be the opportunity of
adducing further evidence in support o the preamble. He could
not but consider that the appeal committee had decided too hastily.
Sir T. D. ACLAND opposed the motion. If the decision of the
Appeal Committee were thus to be set aside, the Appeal Committee
would only become a source of increased litigation, vexation, and
expense. As the question was one that involved a matter of practice,
he should like to hear the Speaker's opinion. (Hear.)
The SPEAKER said that this was the .dirst case of the kind.
He viewed the question as somewhat similar to a Iteport
against a Bill, in which case the chances would have beet.
very much against the Bill. The ordinary course would have
been against the Bill. If the Appeal Committee's decision
were adopted, there was an end of the bill; but the heare never
gave the ultimate decision out of its own hand. The house were
not unused to send back a bill to a committee, so that the question
was, dill the house adopt the appeal committee's report ?
Mr. 11. DRUMNIOND replied. He urged the question. be.
cause the appeal committee had net heard the whole of the ease.
Sir U. CLERK said, that though inconvenience might result
from delaying the improved navigation, he considered that gicasi.r
inconvenience would result from thus, in the first instance, setting
at nought the report of the appeal committee ; he must therefore
oppose the motion. If the report were not adopted, It would be
better at once to expunge their standing order on the subject.
The gallery was cleared for a division, but cone took place. It
was understood that the motion was withdrawn.

Mr. STUART had leave to attend the lords' committee on th •
East India Company's affairs.
:eir.'WARD presented the sixth report of the committee thereon
—Ordered to be printed.
Sir G. COCK BURN obtained leave to bring in a bill to Innate
the Acts relating to Rye harbour.
Mr. lIU TCHINSON presented a petition from surgeon. in
Ireland, members of the College in London, against the duty on
diplomas.
Mr. SADLER presented a petition from Newark, in favour of
the adoption of machinery to sweep chimneys. Its utility having
beta proved, some legislative measure ought to be adopted.
Ordered to be printed.
A ;sett ion was presented fromTlpperary against increased taxation
Ttle. RICE presented a petition from the directors of' the Water-
ford bank, against the punishment of death for forgery.
Mr. C.IREIV presented a petition from Wexford against the
tyihe system—Ordered to be printed.
Col. WILSON presented a petition from Whitby against the tax
' imposal on merchant seamen to support the Greenwich chss...—Or-
dered to be printed.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN presented a petition from an indi-
vidual named Joseph Kinder, complaining of the alarming increase
of hydrophobia, and praying the house to adopt means to preven•
its extension. Ordered to be printed.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented petitions complaining of distress
from Capel Tring, Waterford ; from a parish, Cullagb, in Clare •
also against increased taxation on stamps, spirits, &c; also one
from Agnes. Cork, against the Vestry Act; also one from the parish
of St. Patrick, Downahire, complaining of abuses in the establish-
ment, and against the Vestry Ad.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. O'CONNELL renewed his Inquiry respecting an Act ea:
Georgia subjecting foreign vessels to quarantine—had the ministers
done any thing on the subject ?
Sir R. PEEL replied, that the ease was still under investigation—
but he had no hesitation in stating that the act was a most extraor-
dinary one, and that except there was some pressing necessity th.•
Sista would see the propriety of repealing or altering it.

Mr. MAXWELL brought ins !Akio regulate the assessments
on tensats of houses and lodgings in to the poor rates.—
Read first time, and ordered to-be read a second time June 24.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY presented a report of the select colt.
mattes on hackney coaches.—Ordered to be printed, without hav;vc
any more than its title read.

CEAXCZIY.
Ms. J. WILLIAMS presented a petition from Solicitors of the
metropolis, on the subject of the Register-office.
Sir C. WETHERELL availed himself of this opportunity tc
express the hope, that the house would well consider the businebs,
before they allowed a fourth intrusive Judge in the Court or
Chancery.
Sir R. PEEL thought that the Solicitor-General ought to be al.
lowed to open the case on the bill, before it was commented on.
Mr. DI. A. TAYLOR said, that further inquiry was unnecea.
sary ; they had been at it since 1810, with inquiries and proposi.
lions of all sorts, and yet nothing at all was done—they were pre-
cisely jn 'tutu quo. Further inquiry was not requisite, if they were
to decide the question as men, and not as children.—Petition or-
dered to be printed. •