The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-07-23 00:00:00

ELECTORS REMOVAL BILL.

The Earl of CLARENDON moved the second reading of the
bill, and as an instance of the evil that now existed, stated,
that in the borough of Salford, among a constituency of 2,000
there were 200 annual removal,. and of these 200 not more
than 10, on the average left the borough ; but the remaining
190 were, by the law as it stood, disfranchised.
Aftei a short discussion, an amendment by Lord REDES•
DALE,.that' the bill be read a second time that day three
months, was carried ; the numbers being for the amendment,
80, against it 39; majority 41. •
The Lower Canada government bill was brought up from
the commons, and read a first time.—Adjourned at half-past
one o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TOURSDAY.
TREATMENT OF THE CHARTISTS.
Mr. LEADER rose to present a petition from William
Lovett and John Collins, who stated that they were, on the
WI instant, arrested at Birmingham, and brought before the
bench of magistrates, that at half-past eleven o clock, on the
morning of the 7th, they were removed to the county gaol of
Warwick ; that they were finally committed ; personal hail
to the amount of £3OO having been demanded, and two
sureties' each in the sum of £250. The petitioners com-
plained of the exorbitant amount of hail demanded, seeing
that, awthey were working men, it would be impossible for
them to proettre.the bail among men in their own sphere of
life. They also complained of their treatment in prison.
The petitioners begged, to be understood as making no com-
plaint'of the personal conduct of Mr. Atkin, the gaoler;
but of having been treated as common felons, with the ut-
most indignity, and limited in the quantity and quality of
their food : they prayed, that the house might take the pe-
tition hito consideration, and the treatment that had been
inflicted 'upon them, which they alleged was such as no
EngliilifilAn ought to be subject to while under confinement
pendini the production of hail and previous to conviction of
crimes' 7ln that prayer he (Mr. Leader) agreed, and he
thought 'no one could say there was anything improper in
the. pitiyer of the petition. He moved that the petition be
printed with the votes; and he gave notice, that, on the first
order iy, he should move that it be taken into considera-
tion.
Mr./FoX M.sicts. said, as this petition involved some
seriouk'eharges he thought the hon. member for West-
minstet Would have done better had lie kept it in his pos-
session for a day, in order to make himself thoroughly ac-
quainted with the
.charges, and to give notice to the hon.
member for Warwickshire, who was closely connected with
it. He must say, that, after the treatment of Dr. Taylor in
gaol, he was surprised to hear the allegations in the petition.
He, IMWevei-, had no objection to its being printed.
Mr:- 'LEADER said he had made no charge against any
man or set of men. He had merely stated the prayer of the
petition,' and there was now ample notice to the hon. member
for Warwickshire As to the truth of the allegations, he
knew Dr Taylor, and he also knew Mr. Lovett; and he
would' gay that a more honourable man did not exist than
Mr. Lcivott. He would answer for him on his own personal
knowledge.—The conversation then dropped.
NEW POOR-LAW ACT.
Mr.' YbRKE moved for a select committee to inquire into
the allegations of a petition, presented the other day by the
hon. member for Oldham, casting imputations on the
eharaetir'of the Earl of Hardwick, and the board of guardi-
ans of 'tie Thrapston union. He would only relate the situ-
ation in Which that board was placed. The house would
scarcely-believe, that the hon. member for Oldham had
given no notice to the parties concerned, of his intention to
present this petition ; and that they had, consequently, no
opportunity afforded them of denying the allegations. He
would ask that hon. member if the petition had been ex-
amined by him previous to presentation. with a view to in-
vestigate the truth of its allegations ; and if it had been
sent to him by the person from whom it purported to come,
as there was attached to the petition only the mark of that
individual, and that mark unattested. He would further
ask hiM if he had communicated the contents of that pe-
tition to the board of guardians of the Thrapston union, or
to the Earl of Hardwick, and if he had intended to follow it
up by any specific motion.—(Cheers.)
Mr. FIELDEN said, the petition had been sent to him some
months ago, by a clergyman resident in the parish. He had
looked it over; and, seeing nothing improper in it, he had
thought it his duty to place it before the house. Ile had not
explained the subject of it on the presentation, as that would
be against the rules of the house ; but he would now inform
the house, that he had yesterday morning received a commu-
nication from the individual from whom he had received the
petition, stating that the man had since been committed to
prison as a rogue and vagabond, but that he could bring for-
ward eighteen responsible witnesses to prove that he was
neither the one nor the other, and that this was merely fol,
lowing up the persecution to which he had already been sub-
jected. He (Mr. Fielden) did not intend to follow up this
subject by any motion. Had a committee been appointed to
investigate the working of the poor-law, he would have laid
that petition before it ; but he knew how difficult it was to
get the grievancesof any poor man investigated in that house.
He might as well state, that the Rev. Mr. Maberly (" Hear,
hear," from Mr. Yorke) was the individual who had sent the
petition to him.
Mr. YoRKE said that, as the honourable gentleman did not
intend to follow this matter up, he hoped the house would
grant him a committee to investigate the allegation in this
petition, for he was sure that there never was a case so com-
pletely demonstrative of the manner in which the poor-law
act was got up. He did not ask this on behalf of the Earl of
Hardwick, but on ptiblic grounds, in order to show the man-
ner in which these cases were got up. He did not wish to
be on the committee himself, nor did he wish to have the ap-
pointment of it ; but he could assure the house, from his own
knowledge of the facts, that, had the hon. member for Old-
ham made any inquiries into the case, he would hardly have
taken upon himself the responsibility of presenting that pe-
tition. He would give notice that on Tuesday next he would
move for the appointment of a committee.
Mr. FIELDEN hoped the noble lord would agree to have
the case inquired into ; and if it should be proved that the
parties had been charged unfairly, no one would regret more
than himself that the petition had been placed in his hands ;
buiLhaving been confided to him, he had no alternative but
to resent it. He hoped the noble lord would put him on
the committee, in order that he might investigate circum•
stances; and if he should find he had been misled, he should
be happy to'state so to the house.
LOWER CANADA GOVERNMENT BILL.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the third reading of this bill.
Mr. HUTT thought that some measure ought to be adopted
for regulating the disposal of land, and promoting free emigra-
tion to the colony. He considered it expedient, that the
noble lord should inform the house whether it was the inten-
tion bf the government, at an early period in the next session,
to bridg the subject forward. He trusted that the noble lord
would-give some explanation, and he would not, at the present
moment, offer any resistance to the third reading.
Mr: LEADER objected to the bill for several reasons. In
the tirt!t place, he looked upon it as a continuation of the
coerei4jn bill of last year ; secondly, it was not the measure
which: the'. government ought to have introduced for the
regulation of the affairs of Canada, because the measure that
was required was one that gave a permanent regulation to the
atfairs'of that country. He objected to the bill, because it
contaihed elausc, so highly objectionable, that any bill con-
taining Such a clause ought not to meet with the panction of
parliatnent., He alluded to the clause giving to the govern-
ment thepOwer of permanent taxation against the wish of the
,0,16:61t tlif! province. The conduct of Lord Durham was to
• lieu kooreprebepaible. Why had he not, according to
. . .
. ,
--•

!li.f.' _ 14
44