Star.
London, England, 1831-02-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Fs.. 10.
The Duke of DEVONSHIRE presented the answer of his Majesty
to an address for
The Duke of rITHINGHAM presented a petition from Galway,
for an extension of the elective franchise t nod from Dublin, against
the slave trade.
After a few words from Lord CaLivoara, the petitions were laid
on the table.
Lord SUFFIELD presented a petition from a parish In Norfolk, for
the abolition of slavery.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a petition to the
same effect, front the county of Derry.
The Earl of CARLISLE presented a petition for Reform, from
Yorkshire.
Lord RADNOR presented a petition to the same effect, from Somer-
ville, in the county of York.
The Marquis of LON DONDERRY said be TM of opinion, that
though agitation still existed in Ireland, the good sense of all the re-
spectable and Influential inhabitants of that country were diametrically
opposed to any repeal of the Union. Most beartlly did be rejoice at
the vigorous measures in which his Majesty's Ministers followed up the
agitations for such a Repeal. The Ministers of the Crown bad Ms
cordial support.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said. it appeared that all the signa-
tures to the petition for repeal of the Union, were written in the some
hand.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented a petition from new Rom-
ney, against the duty on coals. Also a petition from Sutton Banana,
in Kent, for Reform in Parliament.
hoed RADNOR wished to advert to a isehmoties mode by the
Noble Duke, that the diploma is the pedtisalt=sl of the Union
were all In the same hood writing, with the of three. He
thought the petition bad hese got up by someg person, as it
described Ired to he the georgy of Europe, the loolioveas of lbw
land, and the first gem of the sea. (Laughter) The Noble Earl did
not think the signatures were in one band writing.

Lord KING said, he had, on a former night, remarked, that the
right reverend prelates would act prudently if they would tell the coun•
try what plan they had in contemplation for the commutation of tithes.
On a former occasion he Introduced the subject of tithes as a mere po-
litical economist, but the right reverend prelates had brought forward
the question of non-residence and pluralities, by laying the blame of
non residence on lay impropriators. Some years ago an attorney brought
a qui Sues information for ton-residence. All the church was up in arms
to prevent these informations, and Sir W. Scott brought in a bill to
take away the power of qui Miss informations. That bill was sent down
to Oxford for the alleged purpose of preventing non.resideece ; but the
real object was to support non-residence. There had been no informa-
tions since. The exertions of a noble friend (Lord Carnarvon) in sup.
port of a bill to do away with non.residence, were most remarkable, and
he would say that his noble friend fought harder on that occasion for
reform than he had since. It was said the curates did their duty well—
he admitted they did do their duty, but what did that teach the public ?
Why, that they could have the duty performed better by the curate than
the rector, and at one quarter of the price. He wished to call the attest.
tion of their lordships to the opinion of the Bishop of Winehester.....
That prelate had said, an ecclesiastical benefice without a residence wee
an ealesiastkal solecism. He should contend that the tythe system wee
most oppressive, in a country where they were desirous of having in.
provement in agriculture. It might do in Poland, where they had only
to turn up the ground to produce abundant crops, but in England it won
a tax on the soil. The noble lord cited the opinion of Mr. Jefferson,
the President of the United States, who said the earth was the great
stock of society, and only made exclusive property by laws. He con-
cluded by presenting petitions from Cambridge and other places against
tithes and assessed taxes.
Its Karl of WINCHILSEA strongly opposed the line pursued
by the Noble Baron, who night after night repeated his attacks on
dm 'lurch. He was convinced the Noble Baron attacked the Right
Reverend Prelates from a desire to bring religion into contempt.
The example held out by the Noble Baron was most pernicious.
Lord KING said, he had been misrepresented. He had said net
one word against the Church. On a former erecadon be bad made
remarks arising from the arguments of the Right Reverend Beech, sod
he was desirous of impressing upon their Lordships, that those argu-
ments bad introduced the question of noo.resideece wad
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM considered the Noble Lord out of
order in adverting to the arguments of a former debate.
Lord KING again explained, and said he had urged the Right
Reverend Prelates to bring forward a cannuitation bill, which might
set the question of tithes at rest. He recommended that which was
reasonable and moderate, yet be was charged with attacking religion.
The Earl of WINCH I lAEA did not mean to make any improper
charges against any Noble Lord, but be would put it to their Lordships
whether the remarks of the Noble Lord mpeethig the non-residence
bill had not been most disorderly.
Lord W YRFORD said the Noble Baton might find religion to be
no jest. if the Noble Lord reflected be would find he could not justify
repeated attacks on the Right Reverend Prelates, without giving them
notice of his intention to make those attacks. The presentment of a
against tithes and assessed taxes could not 'acetify the Noble
Lard hie remark upon non-residence and pluralitim. The Noble
Lead had also thought proper to attack Lad Stowe!, knowing that the
age and infirmities of that highly.tespected Nobleman prevented him
froth defending his character. That Noble and Learned Person had,
however, nothing to fear for character. The whole course of his life
bed beet; such that it took away all the effect of obloquy. He could
net avoid disclaiming the manner in which the Noble lard had spoken
es the subject of tithes. Tithe was no more a tax on productive W-
arner, than rents were. —(Hear, hear.) The spirit which would destroy
tithes would destroy real property. Ile admitted that property was the
creation of the law, and when they spoke of legal title the property of
the Church stood upon the earliest data. It was founded upon legal
tide. But he would tell the Noble Lord that tenants were wise enough
to know, that if tithes were abolished, they would not be better off.
Tithe property was not public property ; and he would ask the Noble
lad whether he thought the landholder would not charge the tenant
anew for land if it were tithe free ? It was impossible to destroy the
tithe system. e would not give the Noble Lord one quarter of a
year's purchase H
for his property after the tithe on that property had
boa e bone away.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN was of opinion that the most coll-
egian course for the house to adopt, would be, not to dilate on the sub-
ject's( tithe at present ; and he was of this opinion, not from any indif.
fence to the question itself, upon the settlement of which he felt as
much anxiety as any of their lordships ; that it was susceptible of awe.
Notation he was convinced ; and he telt happy that the question was to
be taken up by the heads of the church themselves, who he was con-
vinced would give their best consideration to the subject; he was not
acquainted with the principles of the measure which was to be intro-
duced by the heads of the church ; but he trusted when it was brought
forward, it would meet not only with the apprigniiioulof the house, but
of the whole country ; then would be the proper time foe discussing the
question. He was satisfied if the noble baron (King) brought forward
the subject upon specific grounds, it would be sure to meet with that
attention which its importance demanded.
Lord RADNOR defended the line of conduct adopted by the noble
baron (King) He was perfectly unaware that the noble baton had
brought any charge against the heads of the Church. Most undoubt-
edly the other night be had brought a charge of non-residence spinet
the established Clergy ; but the bishops themselves had acknowledged
the evil, for a right rev. prelate (the Bishop of London) stated that they
(the Bishops) could not do away with non-resWence on
ct the
the part of the
~because of the lay-impropriators. With respe to Bill in-
teedaad by Sir Wm. Scott, ire (Lord Radnor) recollected the circum-
stances amending that measure perfectly well, for he was in the House
of Commons at the time, and took a part in the proceedings coocemirg
it. The noble baron had characterised it truly ; and the late Mr. Wynd-
ham, at the very period it was in the House, declared, in his place in
Parliament, that it really was a Bill for non-residence. The noble lad
concluded by observing, that pluralities and moo-residence must hlevi-
ably exist together.
The Dolma BUCKINGHAM defended the heads of the church,
and 'trimmed a hope that the measure relative to the tithe system,when
it was brought forward by them, would be on a much broader basis
than the plan of the Noble Baron. The noble lord had said that the
Walsh meablishment was in danger. He (the Duke of Buckingham)
ebadd sell the noble baron that the church had no reason to fear. It
the Mods of the church trembled for their property, it was high time for
the noble baron himself to take into his consideration some plan for its
sreasity.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said be regretted that such length-
ened discussions shield arise without any purloin notice en the sub-
lime having been given. When the question was brought forward in
therapist ineemse, no boat it would receive that swanks which so
gam and impesesas a antler required. Whilst be was addressing
*ex lordship be begged Marie, that with their pantiselon be should
withdraw the modem et wide ke had given noticeco a previous n4ht,
he the better administraties of jades in the court of chancery, and in
nese of bankruptcy t he did on because a noble and learned bed (El.
doe) whose experience and miaow wield mush benefit the measure,
cuss osolined by indleposideo, but was expected aeon to pt better. He
, Limoodlor) therefore wished to pompom his motion till
There was another question on law reform,
Irma_ sind for the t easing; that measure, in accordance with
theLe,dalki Justice, be s (the Lord Chancellor) eas anx-
ious should be postpaid till waive, (this day.)
Lad WYNFORD bed no objestien to such an arrangement.

.2,7 W

Lord KTNO again rate, sad said if a e r. b:e ord) ri the
other side of the home, was in his place on Monday week he would find
that he (Lord King) should bring forward a specific maim: on the sub-
ject of the tithes and church livings ; In which he should bring also a
specific charge against the Archbishop of Dublin. The El We lord
(Wynford) had taken a very narrow view of the real nature of the law
of property. To the philosophic and extended views taken of that sub-
ject by Mr. Jefferson he (Lord King) subscribed. The noble lord co .-
eluded by stating that pluralities and nee-residence were alarmingly on
the increase: by the return in 1813 the whole amount of resident clergy
was 4,183, whilst the benefices at the same period amounted to 10,588,
consequently, the difference, 6,405 must be classed u non-residents.
After a few words from the Marquis of BUTE,
Lord CLIFFORD presented a petition from %reatlierley, in Voi1( -
shire, complaining of distrese.—Tkfr lordships then adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES presented a petition front Hyde, in the
Isle of Wight, for the abolition of slavery.

11•11 DOGS.
Mr. Alderman WOOD brought in a bill to prevent the spreading of
canine madness.—Read a first time, and ordered to be read a second
dine on Monday.
Mr. Alderman WOOD presented a petition from the Ward of Bat—
&haw, for the repeal of the assessed taxes ; and petitions fur the aboli-
don of slavery, from Gravesend and Ashton-under-Line.
Mr. TREVOR presented a petition from New Romney, for the repeal
of the duty on
Sir R. INGLIS presented petitions from two villages in Yorkshire,
foe the abolition of slavery.
Lord A. HILL presented a petition from the tithe pipets of a parish
in Down, for the abolition of tithes.
Mr. A. SMITH presented three petition* from eonAregation. is
Norfolk, for a general fast.
CoL LYGON presented a petition from Wigan, for the rtval of the
duty on printed calicoes.
Mr. PATTEN presented similar retitiotts from the workmen abut
factories.
Sir 11. WILSON presented a similar petition fresh Midd!eton ; and
a petition from the parish of St. Saviour, Southwark, against the new
police system. and a 1 etition from the same parish for Re:ortn in Par-
liament, and a reduction of teration and abolition of useless offices.

Mr. KENNEDY presented petitions for Parliamentary Reform from
Air, bring, Kilwining, Peebles, Selkirk, GauLion. and Leith. He
never knew any subject excite so univen al a feeling throughout Scot.
land. The Honourable Gentleman postponed the second reading of the
Tailzies Regulation Bill to the 18th instant.
Colonel BRADSHA W presented three petitians from parishes in
Hams and Dorset. for the abolitian of slavery; and a petition from
Gosport, for Reform in Parliament.
Mr. R. PALMER presented a petition from Wot India Pianters,
for compensation if slaves should be emancipated.
Mr. EGERTON presented a petition from Stockport, fee the repeal
of the duty on printed calicoes.
Mr. BENET presented a petition, signed by between 13.000 and
14,000 of the inhabitants of Wilu., for a reform of Parliament. and the
repeal of taxes on consumption, and the substitution of a property
tax. He agreed with the petitioners in every part of their prayer. The
petition was not agreed to at a public meeting, but was taken round
the county by a friend of refor n, and was most respectably signed.
It had the names of thirty magistrates, and a great majority4of the
respectable inhabitants of the county. He hoped county meetings
would become general in support of a measure which he conridertd
annually to the salvation of the cunt'''.
Mr. BENET presented a petition for leave to withdraw the Win-
chelsea Election Petition, and moved that the recognizance, of the pe-
tidonets be discarged.
The SPEAKER said the reason the petitioners assigned for with-
drawing their petition was, that a reform in Parliament might render
the prayer of their former petition nugatory ; and it was for the House
to determine whether it had the power to permit the petition to be with-
drawn on that ground.
Mr. BENET withdrew the petition.
Mr. PERCIVAL presented petitions from Chatham, and six
parishes, for a general fast.
Mr. HUNT presented a petition from Wigan for an extension of
their election rights; and a petition from Oldham, complaining of
distress, which was more general and deep than at any former period,
Caimy owing to the tithe and corn laws, which could only be re-
bly a reform in Parliament. The petitioners prayed for uni-
versal suffrage, annual parliaments, and vote by ballot. It was his
firm conviction that any scheme of reform, that would not extend
the elective franchise to all who paid taxes and were liable to serve
in the army and navy, was wild and visionary. The hon. gentleman
presented a petition from Manchester for the repeal of the corn laws,
and reform In Parliament: he felt happy at having such a petition to
present from Manchester, for presiding at a public meeting in which
town for the same purpose, eleven years ago, the then government sent
hint to gaol for two years and six months. The petitioners stated that
they formed a portion of a district of 700,000 inhabitants, who were
unrepresented in Parliament. The hen. gentleman presented two peti-
dons from parishes in Meath, for reform in Parliament and vote by
ballot. He lamented the absence of Mr. O'Connell, who would, if
in the house, present the petitiors from Ireland. He had also to pre-
sent a petition from the labourers of the metrop. lis, praying that
they might be allowed tocultivate Epping Forest foe their support; this
be thought better than transporting the labourers. He had alw a peti.
don front the fanners of Foxfield, in Hampshire, which stated that the
labourers were determined not to endure their sufferings any longer, and
that the petitioners had in consequence raised their wages; but could
not continue to pay it without a decrease of taxation, which could only
take place by a reform in Parliament. The hon. gentleman presented
four similar petitions front parishes in Hampshire.
A Minima said, as the hon. gentleman had given notice of moving
an adjournment at twelve o'clock every night, he should observe the
•standing order against making a speech on the presentation of a 1 etition.
Mr. HUNT said he had no objection to its being made an order that •
no petition should be either read or spoken on, but put into the bag at
once, it would save him a great deal of trouble, as he had 100 peti-
tions at home at present, and was informed that more than 1000 were
coming. (A laugh.) If the minister's pion or minim contained the
vote by ballot, those petitions would probably not court—but if it did
not, petitions would come from pans
all pas of the kingdom. He hoped
they would meet simultaneously on the day of general fast, as they
could do nothing more acceptable to GOD than put an end to bribery
and corruption.
Sir R. VYVYAN moved for returns of the Import and export of
copper and lead ore ; and of copper and head.--Order.d.
Sir ROGER ORESSLEY presented a petition front Litchfield, for
reform in parliament
/Jr. SCHONSWAR presented a petition front the seamen of Hull,
against the deduction from seamen'. wages, for the support of Green-
wich Hospital.
Sir C. FORBES presented a petition from Mr. Cannhy. praying
for leave to present a petition from Mr Ogilvie. against the return of
Mr. Jeffrey, Member for Forfar. The petitioner, by the interruption
of the weather, was unable to get to London in time to present the pe-
tido!: of which he was the bearer. He was delayed several days by the
snow at Berwick on Tweed. Had he not been delayed at Berwick on
Tuesday, with the mail,he would have bet n in town on Thursday in time
to have presented the petition. Under these circumstance', he pressed
for the suspension of the standing order. All the eircumstaren wipe
perfectly well known to the agent of sl r. Jeffrey on Monday.. As to his
petition not being presented on Monday, the fault was his—lie arrived
at the house too late : but on the Monday evening be told the Lord
Advocate, in the Vote Office, that he had such a petitioa to present.
He moved that, under the peculiar circumstance of the case, Mr. Ogil.
vie's petition be teed.
_ _

Mi. SC HONSWAR seconded the motion.
Mr. W. WYNN euggestal, that all the tams of the case should be
given in evidence at the bar of the house. •
Pie. Thomas Carnaby was called to the bar, and stated, that the tacit
stated in his petition were true.
The petition was then read by the Oak at length.
Mr. Webster, Mr. Ogilvies agent in London was called in, wad
proved that he received the petition ettroutch the post-oroe, ator-
day, the Bth instant, and brought it to Sir Charles Forbes. for presen-
tation on Sunday, and stated to hint that imbed no means then of giving
evidence of the cause of the delay, •
The SPEAKER put the question, that the petition be received.
Mr. W. WYN N said the standirg order which Sled the time after
which the seat of no Member of that House should be "maimed, was
as old a. Charles I. and he believed had never been departed from, and
it was for the parties to Wm care that they made proper use of the time
allowed. In this case there was three days added to the fourteen days
allowed by the order, in consequence of the adjournment of the Home.
There woe two cases similar on the purrs!' : in one the House adjourn-
ed earlier than usual, ard the petition was brought for pa errata), and
lodged with the clerk that night; yet the House refused to receive it;
the other wt.s more similar to the present, as the hearth of the petition
had been detained by a fall of scow ; but in that ease too the Hesse re.
fused to receive the petition. He thought if the Mantlithe eider wee
dispensed with now, there would frequently be similar applications, and
the rule of the House would become a nullity.
Lord ALTHORP said he mound with his right bon. friend, that
the rule of the house should be as strict as possible; but he thought no
rule should be so strict as never to he departed hem. He thought that
in this ease, the dam after the election wan not Me much to be tow
ployed in preparing tbe petition ; and, u there was no negligence he
thought the petitioner should not be deprived of his right five en amil.
dent.—.(Hear, bear.)
Sir G. CLERK said, there was a great Marmot batten doe caul
quoted by the right hon. gent. Mr. Wynn, sea ea passeet. In those
eases there had been negligence; in the present all neessable diligent
had been deed.-(llear.) Tbe modes was egad ea.
Sir C. PORBFB raated the petition, which is. appeleted to ha
taken into aeslamen to Tuesday, Marsh 14