Star.
London, England, 1828-04-16 00:00:00

HAMBURGH PAPERS.

STOCKHOLM, Asia 4.
A Commercial Treaty has lately been concluded
between Sweden and Russia.

A few days ago a courier arrived here from St. Peters-
burgh, and well informed persons affirm that the dis-
patches he brought are of great importance. In the
Foreign Department, more activity than usual is ob-
served, and it is said that two couriers are kept in readi-
ness, to proceed, one to London, and the other to St.
Petersburgh.
RAMBURGH, Aran, it.
It was affirmed in Vienna, on the sth instant, that it
was certain that the Courts of Austria and Prussia had
resolved to accede to the Treaty of London of July 6,
and in case the Porte should still refuse to accede to the
conditions proposed in it, they will co-operate in carrying
it into effect.
Vishr•. Aram s.—Metalliques,ll9, sellers; 88j money; Bank
Mares, 1012 ; In the evening, 1007.
HAMSUKON, Aram U.—Exchange on London, 13. 10; two
montbs,l3. 81.-.4l64thirgh l'aperspdpril

UNITARIANs' MARRIAGES.
The Earl of ELDON had a Petition to present upon- -
the subject of the alteration of the law for which it was
understood the Unitarians meant to apply, and in doing .
so he thought it right to take some notice of a publica•
tion which had appeared in a respectable paper,and which
stated, among other things, that he had not objected to
the Bill formerly before the House upon this subject,
and had only proposed certain additional clauses. Ile
had said that if the Bill should be. read a second time,
he would propose certain amendments in the Com-
mittee; and the cause of his not doing so was, that the
Bill bad been brought in at a late period of the Sessions,
and the necessary avocations of the office he then held
had not left him the opportunity of paying so much
attention to the Bill as he had intended. The publication
proceeded to say that he had given notice of his inten-
tion, at a future time, to bring in a Bill for the relief of
the Unitarians. He had done no such thing; for his
opinion always was that no necessity existed for any
such measure. He had always expressed the strongest
objections to the principle of the Bill, and it was impos-
sible that he should ever have contemplated such a step
as the publication mentioned. It would be recollected,
that he had opposed the further progress of the measure,
notwithstanding it had been greatly improved by many
useful amendments introduced by the Noble and Learned
Lord on the Woolsack. His principal motive for thus
contradicting the statement was, lest any Noble Lord,
who might have it in contemplation to bring forward a
measure upon the subject, should be deterred from the
prosecution of his purpose in the belief that he had
formed a similar intention. He must say, that if such
a Bill were brought in, he for one would say Not Con-
tent on the question of the second reading ; but if that
question should be carried against him, he should feel
it his duty, not only to the public, but to that House,
which had acquired so many claims upon his gratitude,
to render in the Committee all the assistance in his power
to make the measure as little injurious and as perfect
as possible.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN thought it his duty,
as the proposer of the former Bill, to bear testimony to
the perfect accuracy of the Noble and Learned Lord in
the statement he had just made. He was further bound
to do this, because he had received a letter from a per-
son; calling himself the Secretary of the Unitarian As-
sociation, in which he alluded to the assumed intention
of the Noble and Learned Lord. To this letter he had
replied, by assuring the writer that he must be mistaken,
for that the Noble and Learned Lrrd had not expressed
any such intention. This brought another letter from
the person in question, who had probably misunder-
stood, or never received, his communication, and of
whom it was but fair towards the Unitarian Society to
say, that they disavowed all knowledge , f him or his
proceedings. The last letter consisted of reproaches of
him (the Noble Marquis) for neglect of duty.
The Earl of ELDON said, that he had received a
letter from the same person, who threatened to have the
letter printed in certain Papers.
Earl GREY presented a Petition for the repeal of the Test and
Corporation Acts from the Protestant Dissenters of Hanover.
square Chapel, Nesvcastle.upon-Tyne.
The Earl of ELDON presented a Petition from the Electors of
the Borough of Penryn, praying that the Bill for disfranchising that
Borough might not pass into a law, and that t►ey might be beard
by Counsel against it.
The Earl of CARLISLE presented a similar Petition from the
Protestant Dissenters of Fisber•street Meeting• house, in the city of
Carlisle. It was signed by upwards of 500 persons.
The Earl of M A LMESBURY gave notice that be would move
the second reading of the County Lunatics Asylum Bill, and the
Pauper Lunatics Bill, on Wednesday, the 23d instant.

.-13

'4ll

•• • •

• /0
'lO

second reading, he felt hiesiieff called-alsonlo object to
the omission of the clause, which provide.] that the
bodies of murderers should not be given to the surgeons
for dissectieio ; he was not one of those who had ever
felt himself disposed to contend for the punishment
which the Live attaches to the perpetration of crime being
made heavier than necessity called for, and he could
not see ilie necessity of a practice which appeared to
him to be useless and cruel. The general character of
the laws of this country was that they were too san-
guinary, and this being so, seemed to afford him still
greater grounds for proposing the amendment, to which
he thought k necessary to call the attention of the House.
it certainly did appear necessary that a difference should
he observed in the punishment of those convicted of the
greatest offence next to treason, the crime of murder ;
but to say, that the law which made that difference
to 'consist in giving the bodies to the surgeons for dis-
secti-n—to say that the existence of that law had any
effect upon the minds of those who had already conceived
the perpetration of the crime, or in its operation was
attended with any salutary terror, or seemed to keep
up a horror of the crime, did not, in his opinion, express
the real effect of its existence. The grounds for the
alte; ation in that part of the Noble Marquis's Bill to
which he alluded was the great difficulty which the
existing laws threw in the way of procuring subjects for
anatomy. Many petitions had been presented by per-
sons engaged in acquiring the science of surgery, com•
plaining of the great impediments occasioned by such
laws; and he (Earl Grey) believed they complained
with justice of their existence, but he hoped that the
difficulty would be soon, at an end, for he (Earl Grey)
considered that the circumstance of giving the bodies
of murderers for dissection, threw a greater difficulty
in the way of procuring subjects ; inasmuch as that it
excited in the minds of the community a greater horror
of the thing generally. He attributed to himself much
blame for not proposing the measure to their Lordships
consideration as an amendment, on the second reading'
of the Bill ; however, he would now move for such an
alteration, and he hoped that their Lordships would
psrceive the necessity there was for it. He remembered,
and he had no doubt but their Lordships also remem-
bered the introduction of a Bill into the other House of
Pediment, the purport of which was to grant the
power to Judges of ordering for dissection the bodies of
any persons convicted of capital offences; that Bill was
ably and effectually opposed by a Learned Sergeant,
then a Member of that House, who, to the experience
of a Lawyer, added that discretion which bad ever dis-
tinguished him as a Judge. The measures proposed
were deemed impolitic, and the 13.11 was accordingly
duo% 11 out—and he bad now to suggest to their Lord.
ships the expediency of removing entirely the distinc-
tions in the punishment of capital offences, which con-
sisted in ordering the bodies of murderers for dissection;
and would, therefore, move that the clause referring to
that subject should be again restored, as it was origin.
ally in the Bill.
Lord TENTERDEN said, he rose to express his
concurrence in the sentiments delivered by the Noble
Eat 1 ; lie would, however, take the liberty of expressing
his doubts as to whether the measure would be attended
with beneficial results or not. When the Bill came a
second time before the House, he (Lord Tenterden) was
not present ; but it was not yet too late, even at the third
reading, to restore the Bill to the state in which it
was originally presented. The Noble Earl (Grey)
seemed to think, that by the adoption of such a measure,
subjects for anatomy may be o' tained with great.,
facility ; whether the result would be so or not, he
(Lord Tenterden) could not tell; but he did think
the law, which obliged the bodies of murderers to be
given for dissection, was not an additional terror to the
person who had deliberately planned the perpetration of
the horrible crime of murder, for that when a man had
arrived at such a degree of depravity as to reflect upon
a crime of so heinous a nature, and calmly to premedi-
tate its perpetration, it was his opinion that his thoughts
were never taken as to its result—he hoped it was not
yet too late to re•amend the Bill, and bring it before
their Lordships in the state in which it was originally
presented.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN expressed his concur.
rence in the amendment proposed by Earl Grey, and
toc k the opportonity again to advert to the great diffi-
culties thrown in the way of procuring subjects for
anatomy, which, he said, was the only barrier against
ac quiring a knowledge of the vience, and was driving
out of the kingdom every yeaftnore and more medical
students, and obliging them to have recourse to other
countries where such difficulties did not exist. The
Noble Marquis also proposed as an amendment, that the
penalties contained in the clause against procuring
abortion by physical means, should not extend to ac
concheurs.

Earl GREY said, that as the Noble Marquis and Lord Ten-
terden seemed to acquiesce in the amendment proposed by him,
he would forthwith move for the re-assertion of the clause to which
be had alluded.
The Bill, with its amendment, was accordingly read a third
time, and passed.
On the motion of the Marquis of LA NSDOWN, for the third
reading of the Bill for amending the Law of Evidence in certain
cases, some verbal amendments were agreed to, and the Bill was
passed.—The House adjourned at Six °Twee.
110 USE OF COMMONS.

Mr. PLANTA moved for a new writ for the Borough of En-
nis, in the room of Mr. F. Lewis, who has accepted the Chiltern
Hundreds.
Sir J. SHELLEY presented a Petition from the Protestants
of Killaioe, in blonagban against further concessions to the Ca-
tholics.
Mr. BELL presented a Petition from certain persons interested
in the Lead blines of Durham, against the Importation of Foreign
Lead Ore.
Mr. FERGUSON presented s Petition from the Magistrates,
Ministers, and others of the Established Church, and other de.
nominations of l'aisley, praying the unconditional repeal of the
Corporation and Test Acts.
Mr. A. DAWSON presented Petitions from the Catholics of
dour parishes iii Louth, and one in Galway, praying Emancipation.
Colonel DAV I ES moved, that Dr. Phillimote be added to the
Committee on the Cities and Boroughs Polls Bills.—Agreed to.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT moved for an account of the imports
and exports of Ireland, in the years 1720, 1760, 1790, 1800, 1810,
1820, isn, and of the net revenue In each of these years.
Mr. HOBIIOUSE presented a Petition from Friendly Socie-
tied of Bottley, praying that a Bill relative to Friendly Societies
be delayed fur some time. Referred to the Committee on the Bill.
Lord DUNCA N NON presented a Petition from the Catholics
of several parishes in the county of Kilkenny, in favour of free and
unshackled lihetty of conscience.
Mr. PONSONBY presented a Petition from the Catholics of
the united parishes of Youghal, praying for leave to worship Goa
according to the dictates of their consciences.
Mr. BERNAL postponed the Gravesend Improvement Bill to
the Bth of May.
Mr. HUME presented a Petition from the Weavers of Brown
Linen in the parish of Kilmahon, Queen's County, complaining
of great distress, and praying to be, placed on the same footing of
relief in respect to Poor Laws as their brother tradesmen of Eng-
land and Sectland.
On the motion of Mr. TIN)711021, the Order of the Day for the
Committee on the East Itetford Disfranchisement Bill was dis-
charged, and postponed to the 2d of May.

RENEWAL OF TURNPIKE TRUSTS.
Mr. LI ITLE lON said, that he was about to bring
forward a series of Resolutions on the subject of fees on
the renew4l of Turnpike Trusts Bills. On the present
• occasion, he merely desired to state hi. reasons gene-
rally, and would, with the leave of the House, postpone
all discussion until there should be a fuller attendance.

The question had been already discussed in two Select
Committees, and the principle on which his Resolutions
were framed was approved of. The Honourable Mem-
ber here read a clause of the Report of the Committee
which bad been appointed last Session on a motion of
his own. The Committee in 1821. on fees generally,
had recommended their abolition on the renewal of
Turnpike Trusts, although sanctioning their retention
in all other cases. Notwithstanding this repeated re-
commendation, those heavy fees continued still in ex-
istence. In some instances they were even double,
and loud were the complaints which the system
had naturally produced. Of the great importance of
this subject he would at once satitfy the House by a
simple account of the present state of the !bating debt
or mortgage on Trusts in England, Scotland, and Wales.
In England the amount was 4,474,530/. in Wales,
238,168/. and in Scotland, 1,327,9461. making a total
of more than 6,000,0001. Under such circumstances,
it could not be denied to be a subject deserving con•
sideration. He would submit that the necessity for an
application for such renewals should be rendered less
frequent and less onerous. Since he had announced his
intention of bringing forward this question with a view
to remedy the grievance, he had received communica-
tions from various parts of the country, stating that the
trusts were absolutely breaking down under their load
of debt. In many cases the entire receipts of two years
were not sufficient to meet the charge on a renewal.—
The amount of fees wasll4B/.-831. in-the Houseof Com-
mons, and 651. in the Lords. At the year 18.26, this
average was greatly exceeded. On all single Bills, the
amount was 941. in the Commons, 611. in the Lords,
and the expenses of printing, engrossing, amendments,
&c. was 261. making the total charge 1841. Hi had
lately received a letter from Devonshire, which set forth
the amount of fees in the years 1821, 1823, and 1825,
to be 278/. 10s. 2801. 10s. and 273/. Bs. It was not his
wish at present to detain the Ilouse with further state-
ments; he had said sufficient to show the extent of the
grievance which was so generally complained of. A
case of a Road Bill in Glamorganshire might however
be added, as the expense in that instance amounted to
not less than 1,0001. There were, indeed, a variety of
trusts, but it would be well to remember the poverty of
Glamorganshire. The remedy which he had to suggest
was an enactment, that after the resent Session all
Bills containing provisions for renewals should be
entirely exempted from fees. It ought to be considered
that the very existence of those fees created the necessity
for a double attendance—once before the Committee
on the Petition, and once before the Committee oa the
Bill. If it should prove the intention of the House to
grant a remedy, why not likewise dispense with this
second attendance? He meant, therefore, likewise to
propose that attendance on the Committees on Bills
should be dispensed with. The expense of engrossing
and printing might also be discontinued. One of his
resolutions would, nevertheless, make an exception in
cases of noncompliance with the Standing Orders. It
was also his desire to sanction the payment of single
fees only, and that Bills should in no case be subject to
further charge. The last resolution was one of very
considerable importance. It referred to an extension of
the term which would require a renewal. He would
extend it from 21 years to a term not exceeding 51
years. Such a measure carried fully into effect would
induce a saving of one half. The Solicitor's attendance
was quite unnecessary, and might be discontinued for
the future. . •

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was
not prepared to enter at large into discussion on the
subj ct, as he had not been in the House in time to
hear the precise object of the Hon. GeAtleman. He
quite agreed in postponing the question, as it was one
which involved considerations of some importance, par-
ticularly as to the effect that the abolition of fees on
Turnpike Bill's may have on the fees on other private
business; then those fees were at present expended on
several public objects, and before they were abolished
it would be necessary to consider from what other
source the deficit should be supplied. It should also
be remembered, that simple repeals of Turnpike Bills
were, by the existing regulations, subject only to the
lowest scale of fees. If every Bill, containing among
other matters a renewal of Turnpike Acts, was to be
exempted from fees, the amount of money lost by this
exemption might be immense, as there was scarcely a
local Bill on any other subject into which the renewal
of a Turnpike Act might not be collaterly introduced,
for the purpose of exempting such fills from fees.. As
the Resolutions were to be postponed, he would not
trespass on the House further on the present occasion.
Sir C. BURRELL did not see why Turnpike Bills
should not be placed on the same footing as public
Bills, instead of being renewed at the expiration of a
certain term of years. There was at that moment a
petition before the House from the trustees of a certain
road in Sussex, in which the trustees set forth, that
notwithstanding the road was one of public utility, they
had been under the necessity of applying, at an enor-
mous expense, no less than four several times for a
renewal of their Act, and hitherto in vain.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE thanked his Hon. Friend, the
Member for Staffordshire, for bringing this question
before the House, and contended that no reason could
be shown why Turnpike Bills should not be considered
and treated by that House as public rather than as
private Bills.
Mr. It. GORDON, adverting ,to some fears which
had beep expressed by a Right Honourable Gentleman
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer), as to the danger of
altering the appropriation of fees already settled to other
purposes than those to which they were now attribut-
able, observed that it was very unfair that public busts
ness should be paid for out of the fees charged upon
private Bills. Some Gentlemen might not be aware
that there was no charge made to the public for engross-
'mg public Bills; but that engrossing was paid for cut
of fees on private Bills. He knew of one Instance in
which no less than 8001. were paid for the renewal of
one of these Turnpike Bills.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND said, that this question was
one of signal importance to Scotland, where the Trusts
were much pourer than in England, their labours much
more assiduous and disinterested, and the interest of
the community in such matters much stronger.
Mr. BURRELL considered the existing system ex-
tremely defective, both in respect to the amount of fees
payable and to their disproportionate pressure, as com-
pared with those on private Bills.
Mr. ALEX. BARING did not see how the Resolu-
tion of the Honourable Member for Staffordshire, ap-
plying only to the fees payable in that House, would
answer the whole of his purpose; for how could it affect
the fees payable in the other House? Nothing brit an
Act of Parliament would effect his object in the latter
,respect.—Mr. LITTLETON explained.
Mr. MUNDY moved that the further debate on this
question be adjourned to Monday next, which was agreed
to without a division.