Star.
London, England, 1831-09-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PAiLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, SEPT. 6.
The Royal Asst. n t was given b) Commission to the Duchess
of Kent's Annuity Bill, the Candle Duties Repeal Bill,
the Mimingham Poor Bill, the Dublin and Kingstown Road
Bill, and Lefevte's and rurton's D,vorce Bills.
The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the
F.arl of Shaftesbury, and the Duke of Richtuund.
The Bishop of LONDON presented a paition front
Manchester ag..inst the Beer bill; also two front Gloucester-
shire to the saute effect.

The Bishop of BATH and WELLS also pieset.ted a
retition from Bath against the Beer bill.
Upon the !notion that the report upon the Boar bill bs
brought up,
Lord MELBOURNE took occasion to draw the attention
of their lordships to the state of the law relative to licensed
houses, and thought it was worthy of their lordships' consi-
deration, to say whether the new beer shops should be
brought under the provisions of the 3d of George I V. by
which public public houses were prevented from keeping
cpeti either late at night, or at too early an hour io the
r•.:orning. The magistrates then, in country places, round
be enabled to say when and at what time these shops should
he opened or closed.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that the provisions
cf the beer bill would not give the magistrates the power
proposed to be given to them by the noble lord. He (the
Duke of Wellington) wished the beer shops and the public
houses to be similarly circumstanced in all tespects.
After a few observations from the Earl of Harrowby, the
Marquis of Salisbury. arid Lend Suffield,
The Bishop of BATH and WELLS said that the 31a.
gistrates were of opinion that they had not any power over
the beer shops. He hoped therefore that au noble Secretary
et: State would introduce a clause expressive of the power
of the magistrates in this respect, *Lich would hate* r..ost
:Amery effect.
Lord TENTERDEN expressed a similar opiMon, anti
Lei ed that the precise hours for opening and closing the beet
shops would be inserted in the bill.
Attar a few words from Lord Teynhatn and Lord Mel.
lieurne, the further consideration of the report on the bill
was postponed to a future day.
Toe Duke of SUSSEX lose to present one of the most
important petitions ever presented to that house. The pc.
tit ion was stned by 1400 persons liable to serve on Grand
J :rtes in the county of Middlesex, seven of whom had been
t, remelt of the Grand Jury of Muldhsex. The property
of 99 of the petitioners amounted in the aggregate to
14,000,0001. The persors alto signed the Petition had not
only suffered from forgery, but had mainly contributed to
o.e escape of criminals charged with that crime, because of the
st verity of the law in this respect. From what he knew of the I,
present Administration, he had great hopes that tit.: law
in this respect would be taken into their Ines! salons
consideration, and that an amendment of the law would
take place. He wss one t.f those that considered that the
tomisnment of death could not be altogether done away with,
but he &ought it could be most materially lessened. This
petition would have been signed by thousands, but that it
vices thought right that only those should sign it who were
to be placed upon the Grand Jury of the county of
'tittitlletcx. The noble duke, previous to reading the peti-
t:lm. read an extract, shewing a comparative statement of the
cats al convictions is France and England, from the year
13125 to 1629 ; the most remarkable difference occurred in
1'129, when It9alone were capitally convicted in France, and
1:185 in England and Wales.
The 1. lerk then read the following petition :
" To the Hight Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Tem-
poral of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, is Parliament assembled.
'lnc Petition of the undersigned Inhabitant Householders
of the City of London, liable to serve us Jurors,
•' Humbly showeth, That your Petitioners view with
deep regret the excessive and fisdiscriminate severity of the
criminal laws, which annex to offences of different degrees
of ral guilt the punishment of Death, and cou'ound the
simple ir.vasion of the rights of property, with the most ma.
lign.nt and atrocious crimes against the person and the life
ot man.
That the recent Acts passed with the professed intention
to amend and improve the Criminal Laws, have not re.
medied the evil of which an enlightended community have
the greatest mason to complain, but have still left those laws
a divine to our civilization, by retaining the opprobrious
distinction of being the most sanguinary of any in Europe.
That Christianity, common reason, and sound policy,
&mod that the laws which affect the liberties and the lives
01 men should proportion the punishment to the offence,
aid not teach cruelty to the people by examples of vindictive
•• That where public opinion does not go along with the
laws, the persons who suffer under them are regarded as the
victims of legislative tyranny or judicial caprice, and not as
ertirtnals whose doom has been pronounced by the voice of
oi•passionate justice.
That the criminals executed in this country are se-
hcted out of a far greater number sentenced to death, and
a nere the practice condemns the law, the law ought to be
al.eitd, that criminals might suffer the punishment of their

guilt by the authority of defined statutes, and not by the
uncertain and capricious rule of judicial discretion.
" That in the present state of the law, juries feel ex.
tremely reluctant to convict, where the penal consequences of
the offence excite a conscientious honor on their minds, lest
the rigorous performance of their duty as jurors should cake
them accessary to judicial murder. Hence in Courts of
Justice, a most unnecessary and painful struggle is oats.
sioned, by the conflict of the feelings of just humanity with
the sense of the obligation of an oath.
" That witnesses also are very frequently reluctant to give
evidence, as well as juries to convict, lest they might bring
upon their consciences tin stain of Wood ; and thus crimi-
nals, who, under a more rational and considerate code of
laws, would meet the punishment due to their crimes,
etcape with complete impunity.
" That for these reasons, your petitioners humbly pray
your Right Honourable House to Luke the criminal laws
Into your consideration, for .11u puipose of th. revision and
amendment of the acme, by thaviog a distinction Letwcen
tly_ simile livasion of the .4,lita en 1 sopzity, aid crimes o
violence and blood, and by abolisl.ieg ,hc pen: lty of (teeth
in all caeca in which the l,- lamely • purser cannot justify in
:he Cy cc of GoD and man, thnt r.nd dternativi.--
cv.rioinatioit of the od'e it :r ! _

" And yo •r w;11 :v--t my. &c."
[Si;:rttl by the tlif.e.ert former resp.ctiv:ly of seven sue-
ces• iv:. Ohl Bailey Grand ihrint of 11;30. and by upwards
of 1,1011 meahants, trailers. &c. who eitti,-r ;save served, of
ere 0141:le to serve as jtim.s.]
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the subject re
fined to in the vition was me. tservinq of :he Most roadies
attention of their ; rdships. He could not, howev.r. be
bound by 11. a. cue flown in the ivetition, namely, that
life shOit note to be taken wlttn bolo: violence had been
commit;ctl by the culprit. They :tad t 0 righ. M 'aka away
the life ()Ca mural:rev because he did murder. The reason
why the mimic:ll's life was taken was for the sake of the ex.
ample: (hear ) &Arne had been quoted •o show tint only
in cases of &ails that life should he takee from the persors
causing dealt. Why hoe. Seriptur.- had such a text; bat'
he Legge;' to know in weat part o; Set ipts.m was the proiti-
bition laid down, that in no Lase but io that of murder was
tife to le .aktm ? He though:, oi%ver, that the facts con.
io this pc,itino ought to he tleettly considered by their
,ortivhi, a. It . ppeareii from the era deuce of the petition-
ers, tlia• they not on:y consented to lose their property, but
al ,n to motive at the escape of prisoners charged with the
crime of forgery. These facts showed that an alteration
was recessary in the law. Hut he could trot allow this pan
of the subject to pass Lithout expressing his astonishment
th gentlemen of worth and honour could, because of the
severity of the lan, break the oath a pith they had taken to
administer justice between our Sove eign hoed .he King
and the prisoner at the bar, to en: ble the cull rit to escape.
( Hear, hear.) He deprecau.cl .11u re.mult of the petitioners:
because it was likely to frustrou. h. very uhject they had in
view. He would hail with pleasure soy change that would
:vett the wants of the cae.

Lord TENTERDEN made a few observations, but in so
low a tone of voice, that he cold not be heard below the bar.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said that it was to he re-
collected that the state of crime was different in this country
from ant' oilier, a eircumscance that was owing to there
being no pr,:v.ntive police in •hip country.
Duk. of SUSSEX agreed with the noble and learned
lord. He 64 not go the length of the petition, and would
itt: the la.t man in the world to take away from the crown
Its In ighteet prerogative, natuLly, that of mercy.
Atter a few words front the Earl of SUFFIELD

T. Otike of IVELLINGI ON and the Duke of Sufism.
ow iudly explained.
The petition was then ordered to ! 2 on the table.
THE CANADIAN REVENUE DILL.

Lord GabER ICH moved tit. third leading of the abort.
bill, which gave the local assemblies power over the revenues
of Canada.

tall BATHURST objected to the bill making the
Judges and Goeernms of Canada dependant upon the House
of Assembly for their salaries.
After a ter, uutds from the Duke of WELLINGTON and
Lord GonLiticti, the b.ll was read a third time, and
passed.
Upon the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND, the se-
cond reading of the Game Bill was postponed until Monday.
The House adjourctl at half-put Seven o'clock.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Al. LEA DER presented a petition from Clara, in the
King'. County, praying that employment might be pro-
cured for the laboming p....r of Ireland, by a tax on pio
perty, declaring Melt este vie ion that all the distress of 're-
but,' atilt,: from defective legislation; and petitions from
three parishes in the County of Cork, praying that all the
people of Ireland might be educated.
Lord INGESTRIE and Sir J. BRIDGES were sworn, and
took their seats for the Cities of Dublin and Armagh.
The House was summoned to the House of Peers us bear
the Royal Assent given by Commission to several Bills.
The SPEAKER, with some Members, proceeded to the
House of Peers, and on his return, acquainted the house
that the royal assent had been given by commission to several
bills, which he enumerated. (See House of Lords.)
r. H. ROSS presented a petition from the Merchants
and Shipowners of Montrose, against the delays caused by
the present quarantine laws, by which some vessels bad lost
three-fou Os of theft cargoes.
31r. Alderman WOOD moved fur returns of the quantity
of 'lithe distilled, and imported during the last year.—
Ordered.

Su JACOB ASTLET presented a petition from sixty
clergymen of the county of Wilts, many of whom were ma-
gistrates, praying for an alteration in the beer bill, which
should prevent the beer being drunk on the premien, which
the petitioners were of opinion was the cause of many evils.
It was known that there had been riots aid outrages in va-
rious parts of the south of England, fromOveblch the county
of Wilts was not exempt ; and the petitioners were of opi-
nion that those beer-shops had formed receptacles for persons
concerned in those overages to form their plans against the'
peace of the country.
Mr. BENETT said he had supported the beer bill, and
thought it a benefit to tile labouring man, of which he
should not be deprived.
Mr. JAMES presented a petition, from certain inhabi-
' tants of the metropolis, praying the House to address his
Alajesty to pardon the Rev. Robert Taylor, and also that the
House would pass an act to prevent all prosecutions for the
I expression of opinions.
Mr. DIXON presented a petition from the Glasgow Re.
form Associatii,n, praying that the Reform Bill might be
passed without the least possible delay.
Sir JOHN %l. 1/01-LE presented a petition from Leigh-
line-bridge. in the county of Carlow, praying that the 1 eo-
, man of Ireland might be disarmed.
Mr. O'CONNELL said a more grievous calamity was
never inflicted on Ireland than putting arms into the hands
of a party yeomanry.
Mr. 11 UST presented a petition from Mr. Peter Jeffery,
of Cheapside, stating that the two piers of London Bridge,
next the Surrey side, had sunk eight inches and a half more
OD the eastern side than on the western side. Before be
would present the petition he went to the bridge to ascertain
the fact. He was glad to see that Old London Bridge was
not being removed, as the public might be glad to resort to
it again. He thought the subject was worthy the attention
of his Majesty's ministers and the house, who bad voted
away so much of the public money for building the bridge,
and making the approaches.
Mr. Alderman W OOD hoped the house would not feel
alarmed at the statement they had heard, or feel any fear
that London Bridge was in danger of falling. He had never
heard the statement before. The work was superintended
during its whole progress by competent persons, and no
great work was ever carried on in a manner more satisfae-
wry to the persona interested in the completion of the work
in the best manner; besides which security to the amount
of 200.0001. was taken for the due toetiormance of the
contract. He was sure the statement in the petition was
founded in mistake; but immediate inquiry should take
place.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said he had passed a part
of every day since the bridge was opened in its neighbour.
hood ; and he had not before heard the slightest complaint.
It was well known that every bridge settled after it was
built, and he believed London Bridge had not settled more
than the average quantity ; he felt confident that no public
work could do more credit to those concerned than new Lon-
ton Bridge.
Mr. Alderman VENABLES regretted that the Hon.
Member should have presented a petition, for the statements
of which there was not the slightest foundation.
blr. HUNT moved that the petition be printed, and as-
serted that the statement it contained was correct.

Mr. Alderman THO3IPSON hoperthehon.-gendernan
would not press the printing of the petition till the state of
the facts could be ascertained.

Mr. HUNT complied, and withdrew his motion.
Mr. GROSVENOR presented a petition from the owners
of corn-mills, in Cheshire, against the importation of foreign
flour.