Star.
London, England, 1824-04-07 00:00:00

•
4 •MI ar gr
• 7

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7,

ELTHAM FARM, RENT.
FREEHOLD ESTATE, LAND-TAX REDEEMED.
GENTEEL FARM-HOUSE, WITH OFFICES, GARDEN,
And nearly TWO HUNDRED ACRES OF LAND,
All lying compact, and most eligible for Occupation and Investment,

PAR,

Immediately
Appeals. In.th
Court of Session
son for &wa-
it was orde.)
terlocutors
Judgment
also front the
In the appeal
APERCROMB`.
and Mr. Stu.
of Session were

TO BE SOLD •BY AUCTION,
By Mr. ROBINS,
(Of Warwick House, Regent-street),
At Garraway's Coiree.hotise, 'Change-alley, Coma!,
TO.MORROW, the nth of April, 1824, at Twelve o'Clock,
IN ONE LOT,
A MOST VALUABLE FREEHOLD ESTATE,
A .
comprising ELTHAM. PARK FARM,
With a pleasant substantial
.Dwelling-House and Offices, enclosed
Yard, Stables for Six Horses, a Loft over Chaise-house, Harness-
room, Wood-house, and Outbuildings ; a capital Barn, and Con.
house for Sixty Cows; Cart-sheds, &c. surrounded by nearly
TWO HUNDRED ACRES
of Capital Rich Productive Meadow and Arable Land, dltrided In
convenient Enclosures, with most beautiful Scitcs for Building, and
adjoining the high Road from Eltham to Woolwich; and commu-
nicating with Eltham Park to Eltham and Shooter's Hill only
Eight Miles from London ; plenty of fine Water ; very eligible for
Investment, and for the Residence of a Gentlenian fond of Agri-
cultural pursuits. A most capital Property for Gentlemen in the
Building Concern, as the grounds are diversified, and well calcu-
lated for erecting Villas commanding extensive Views, &e.
May be viewed, by applying on the Premises, where Particulars
may be had; at tine Castle, Eltham ; Bull, Shooter's Hill; Royal
Mortar, Woolwich ; Green Man, Blackheath ; Red Lion, Lewis
ham; Crown and Sceptre, and Ship, Greenwich ; of Messrs. Jen-
kins, James, and Abbot, Solicitors, New Inn; at Garravray's;
and .f 111 r. Robins, No. 170, Regent-street, where a Plan of the
Estate may be seen.

LEASEHOLD ESTATES, HELL) UNDER THE CROWN'
REGENT-STREET, ST. JAMES'S.
TO BE SOLD BY AUCTION,
By Mr. • ROBINS,
• (Of Warwick House, Regent-street),
At Garraway's Coffee-house, 'Change—alley, Cornhill,
TO-MORROW, the Bth April, 1824, at Twelve o'Clock,
IN FOUR LOTS,
ESIRABLE and IMPROVABLE LEASEHOLD
D ESTATES, for a Term of Ninety-five Years, held under
the Crown, producing upwards of
TWO HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-FIVE POUNDS

" Murray ,
right of salmon.__
Mr. MURRAY was heard in part for the appellant, and the further
hearing was appointed for Thursday next.
At ten minutes past foul. o'clock dm Loan Deruvr rose, and at
twenty minutes to five the Logo Cuotwer.toz entered the House.
Sir Jas. GIPAHA x and others brought up the Irish Four per Cents.
Reduction Bill, the 111-Treatment of Cattle Act Amendment Bill,
and several Private Bills, which were afterwards read a first time.
The Earl of GOSFORD presented a Petition fur the Abolition
of Slavery.

BURIALS IN IRELAND.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL rose to move the Order
of the Day upon which their Lordships were summoned
for the House going into a Committee on the Irish
Burials Bill, when
Lord HOLLAND interposed by observing, that a
Petition had been put into his hands relating to the Bill
their Lordships were about proceeding with, though it
had so recently come up from the other House. He
felt it his duty to present this Petition, though he knew
nothing of the individuals who had entrusted it to him,
and was unacquainted with the provisions which the
Bill contained, or the allegations of the Petition against
it, or even the parties likely to be affected by it. All he
haw at present was, that two respectable Gentlemen'
bad applied to him, whom he understood wished to
have the Bill postponed until the objections to it were
fully heard. But he understood that the Noble Earl
opposite was determined to go into a Committee on the
Bill to-day ; and he must say that lie deprecated such
an unreasonable hurry, on which account he wished to
have the Petition first read, that their Lordships might
be informed of the nature of it before they proceeded to
the commitment of the Bill. He apprehended at pre-
sent that he was likely to consent to the Bill upon the
whole, but he did not wish to see it hurried through
the House. It appeared from the statement of the Per
titioners, that they had read a. draft of the Bill lately in
the other House, and now before their Lordships, for
the better interment of Dissenters from the Established
Church in Ireland. They complained that the provi-
sions of the Bill were calculated to counteract the prin-
ciple of it. The measure was characterised by the Pe-
titioneri as likely to create collision with the Established
Clergy, and particularly in the City of Dublin, of which
instances had unfortunately ocourred ; and therefore the
Petitioners now prayed that their Lordships would not
alter the practice of free burial in Ireland. The Noble
Baron here added, that he should move that the Peti-
tion be laid on the table ; but in so doing he did not
pledge-himself to any opinion upon the subject.
The. Earl of LIVERPOOL would not oppose the mo-
tion for receiving the Petition as presented by the Noble
Lord; but, with respect to the Bill before the House,
their Lordships were, doubtless well aware that the
attention of the other House had been called to the sub-
ject ot it early in the present Session, and that its dis-
cussion had occupied much of the time of the other
House. With respect to the objection of hurrying the
Bill through this House, it was only necessary to state
that it was brought. up from the other House last Fri-
day, when, as usual in such a stage, it was formally
read a first time, and ordered to be printed. It was
agreed, at the same time, that the Bill should proceed
to a Committee to-day, ie third reading to stand over
to Friday next. He saw in this course of proceeding no
unusual haste—no unparliamentary progression; but,
nevertheless, he felt no manner of objection still to post-
pone the third reading to Friday, when, more fitly than
in its present stage, objections could be taken to the Bill.
With respect to the allegations of the Petitioners, he ap-
prehended that, in the greater part, they were founded
on some misconception as to the provisions of the Bill.
The Earl of DARNLEY said that he agreed in the
greater part of what had fallen from the Noble Lord
opposite. Their Lordships had been told enough of the
melancholy violence of parties in Ireland, which was an
additional-motive why they should be anxious to avoid
that collision which he feared from the present Bill.
Would it not be better for their Lordships to introduce
some provision by which the Roman Catholic Priest in
cases of interment might give notice of such interment
to the resident Protestant Clergyman, to continue for a
limited time, when, if no objection were made, the Priest
should consider himself entitled to act without any fur-
ther requisition?
The Earl of CARNARVON thought that the deli-
beration which had been urged as having taken place in
the other House upon the Bill, instead of furnishing au
argument why their Lordships should not interfere, was,
on the contrary, one reason why the subject should be
taken up by that House, where, owing to circum-
stances, it was likely to be better discussed than in the
other louse of Parliament. There were, unfortunately,
a number of places in Ireland where there was no re-
sident Clergymen, because there was no Church in pro-
per repair, and therefore the Bill ought to provide for
affixing notices of interment on the ruins of Churches,
in order in such cases to render its provisions effectuak
He, however, did not wish to obstruct
.the proper pro.
gress of the Bill.
The Earl ot LIVERPOOL said, it was evident that i
ao objection had been made by their LordsMpa "to the
principle of the Bill, but it was supposed that that'
principle might be made more general in its application.
He was free to confess to their Lordships, that
,hete
was the greatest difficulty : no legislative , provision he
apprehended, would be effectual, if it were not wiet by
mu:ual good will by the parties whom it was intended
to benefit; but again, wherever such good will existed,
the provisions of the present Bill would be sufficient
`for the object in view. By the law of the fond no doubt
,could be entertained that the Rector or Vicar of a parish
had an entire right over the burial-ground, as to inter-
ment, with the exception of the inhabitants of the pa.
rish. It was intended by the present Bill. to place the Pro.
testate Clergyman sons that he should not Irebeund to

' ''

- • -

• • ,T,

it =1 , igh
And here-ilte only way by which the end could be ad-
complidied was, upon the fullest consideration of the
subject, by adopting a clause by which all classes of his
Majesty's Government should have free burial, as the
preamble of the Bill stated. Thus, if the resident Clergy-
man should refuse to permit the interment of Dissenters
of every kind, upon due notice, he was bound to state
his reasons to his diocesan, with the special grounds of
that refusal, which was afterwards to be laid before
Government. It was impossible for him to say, under
all those provisions, what a wrong-headed or perverse
person 'might do towards endangering the peace of a
parish; but in his opinion, the enactments of the Bill,
when carried into effect, would be as strong as they
could possildy be made.
The Earl of LIMERICK here intimated his wish-that
in future such arrangements might be made with certain
proprietors of burial grounds, as should prevent those
disgraceful scenes, in many cases of interment, which
had occurred in different pmts of Ireland.
Lord HOLLAND thought the Bill conciliatory in
its principles and judicious in many of its provisions;
but the Noble Lord opposite had admitted the difficulty
of the case, and therefore he wished not to hurry it
'through the House.
. Lord KING wished that in cases of notices of burial
the resident Clergyman should be required to consent to
the interment of the corpse.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL—That would be to coal•
mind him, my Lord.
Lord KING remarked that it might happen that
churchyards in Ireland, like the Constitution of the
country, would be deemed essentially' Protestant ; but
it would be far better, in his opinion, to leave the church-
yards to the. Catholics, if the Protestants wished to keep
the inside of the Churches to themselves.
Earl DARNLEY, in explanation, expressed his sa•
tisfaction of the Mill in general, but wished for time.
The Earl of li AIIII•OWBY defended the Bill; when
Lord HOLLAND said, that atier the explanation of the
Noble Eatl, he should give the Bill his cordial support;
and the Earl of War:Ley expressed himself perfectly
satisfied with the representations of. the same Noble Earl.
The House proceeded to a Committee on the
Burials Bill, in which some amendments were. intro. '
duced by the Earl of LIVERPOOL when the Bill was re. ,
ported as amended, and the Report was ordered to be
received to-morrow.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL tarok up the Silk Duties Drawbacks
Bill, when Lord McLain:, asked what Bill it was that the Noble
Lord had in his hand ?
The Earl of LIVERPOOL shewed the BEI to the Noble Lord.
Lord HOLLAND—Oh: pass it.
The above Bill was then read a third time, passed, and messaged
to the other House. _

The Irish Board of Works Commission Bill passed through a
Committee and was reported, without any amendments.— Act;
journed tidto-morrow.

II

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAK/11 took the Chair at four o'clock.
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET presented a Petition front •
a person named William Walker, against a Bill now,in progress for
the Building of a new Theatre at Cheltenham, which, he stated;he
viewed with astonishment and alarm, and prayed that it might not
pass.—Referred to the Committee on the said 11111. ' '
Sir W. LEMON presented a Petition from the tradesmen.:aml
other inhabitants of the town of Falmouth in favour of the Bill foe
the more Effectual Recovery of Small Dv bts.—Ord erertto be printed.
hI r. MA NS Fl ELI) presented a Petition Item the Journeymen
Cordwainers of the town of Leicester, praying for the repeal of tin
Combination Laws.—Rekried to the Committee on Artisans..
Sir J. NEWPORT presented two Petitions from the County of
Westmeath, and four from the County of Tipperary, for the repeal
of the Tithes Commutation Bill.—Ordered to be laid on the table.
Lord A. ILA hll LlON•presented a Petition from.an individial
named Alexander Macdonald, complaining of arievut oppression
which he stated that he had sustained from the Magistrates of Inf.
verness, who had subjected him to a long imprisonment. '
The LORD ADVOCATE complained of the manner In which
charges were brought forward, in the form of petitions, against in.
dividuals, who were not afforded an opportunity of justifying ur
defending themselves. He had requested the Noble Lord to re.
frain from presenting this Petition, until he (the Lord Advocate)
should have had time to inquire into the case, and ascertain how
far it was well-founded or otherwise. Ile had pledged himself that
no unnecessary delay should take place in that inquiry, and he could
have wished that the Noble Lord had thought proper to comply
with his request. Since, however, the present course had been
adopted, he had no hesitation in saying that the conduct imputed
by the petitioner to the Town Clerk of Inverness was highly ins.
proper and illegal: but it was such as the law provided a remedy
for, which the Courts were open for the petitioner to pursue.
Lord A. HA MILTON said, precisely the sante sort of answer
had been given to him last Session, when he presented a similar
Petition from the same person, agair.st the same 31agistrates, and
founded on the same circumstances; but no inqtiry had been made.
and no redress given : and therefore it was that lie thought it in-
cumbent on him to take the most effectual means for securing both.
which was to bring it again under the consideration of the House,
and tWinove for a report of the particulars of the case, which he
should do on Thursday next.
After a few words from the Loan ADVOCATK and Mr. KENNEDY.
the Petition was read, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. Alderman WOOD presented a Petition from the parish of
Aldgatn. praying to be heard by Counsel against the St. Catherine's
Dock 13111.—Referred to the Committee on the said Bill.

Sir IRANCIS BLAKE presented a Petition from the Tanners
of the Town of Berwick, against the Hides and Skins Bill.—Or-
dered to be printed.
The LORD A DVOCATE.ptesented a Petition from the Wm.
hitants of Berwick•upon-Tweed, against the Attornirs' Act.
Mr. Se-cretary PBX!, presnieci a' sialitat Petition front the in-
habitants of the Western 'District or Perthshire.—Ordered to lie
on the table. •• • • • • • . .
Mr. R. SNIITII presented a Petition from the Parisi? of Saint
Leonard, Shoreditch,.p raying for the Repeal of the Douse am'
Window Tax.
Mr. ItIDLEV CDT:I3OILN E presented. a •siniilar. Pitkir
front Ely.'
hir. Si KES presented a similar Petit.on (corn KingsSoix-upona
Hull.—These Petitions were severally or•kred to bo pribett: •
Mr. R. Col.llolt presented tt l'c tition the'4o:g.); of
gay, 111 LIVOUr 01 the County Courts Bill."-0tdt7ed to ,be laid on
the table. '" • •
Mr. ESTCOURI' gave notice •shat. Ig.wpahl move on'tiiilalt
next for •leave to bring in a Bill to !AVIA the Laws 4.latisfif
Rogues and. Vagabonds.
• #l.
A Return ordered of the Sull ins" ; Troia** Of alllfs
e • t s:•

•
•

;-•,%j Pc:••

OW..
it, ...... .•••• •• , ...." ••• ', 'ANIS* , , . - ..i'-' - . T.J.R.Tr."%getree /WM' - 7' 711111';. -- ----.7
..77,t"---.•,.....;„- --mmonomow-7.• • ~
t t-r-c.. -s: • ----mi.,- ' ' ''' .
...-----, . i
• •
....r too
•
• ~\ • •%) - •
. - (i, • --"Ir-:--;.- \*.‘, .;-.,'• '1
1
fn.
d z /‘.,...A 7 :;/-1. :- : —.)l •.: j - I
; I 1
".., ~./.
`N)•
• :TA i. re-
. 4,...e,....5-1-.. QF = • , -N.;_ •
011b(Alp ' a.
, ..
r: PR 1C 13 SEVEN -PE 140. lz:
, 1824.
L ..... k,. / '
-__
• .4... , . i
IRLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. perform the funeral service at the interment of Dissen•
.......a.„...- tees from the Eqablished Church, whether Catholics or
HOUSE. OF LORDS, APRIL 6.
only after prayers the LOAD DICITTY proceeded with
Protestar.ts. II idle, to it bad not been usual for the Ca-
In.that of ..Ailardyce and others r. Keith," from the ' tholie Clergymen to attend at the grave, but some reht- 1 , .
'esaion in Scotland, the Loan Ditrury could see no rea- tion or friend had assisted at the completion of the core- ~,
turbing the interlocutors appealed from ; and therefore mony, and had attended at the fi
tding up of the wave ; ie '
:ed, upon the motion of his Lordship, that the said In-be affirmed. • but, on the other hand, there were some ..ecasions.t ' in. •
et was appointed in the use of o Stewart v. Stewart," which the Roman Catholic Clergymen did attend at the
the Court of Session, to be given on Thursday. crave; and it was therefore the intention 'of die -piesent
L IH,.
ppeal of " Lindsay and others v. Kerr and others," Mr. tin instructions o
to do away all f the kind, and more 1
car and Mr. WAEZII Were heard for the respondents, • With this view
inADWILL in reply, when the interlocutors of the Court Particularly with respect to Monasterie4
were affirmed with 1001. costs. of the question, and especially as it related to Ireland,
ay v. the Earl of Selkirk and others," in relation to a it was desirable that the people should at least be not
112 ton-fishing on the River Dee, was now called for,wh. en
theythrough
ea al, a hue. wei : era m.. •• 9. r..... •,.. .1 Inr..lln rtt ft mi tha fltrtneir - - .
more di'ided in death than had been life. ..