The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-06-02 00:00:00

Tam o'Shanter, D Stephenson, 270 Montreal,

, EUROPE.
Otte Sodskende, H J Peterson, I'2o Stavanger, Bahr, Behrend & Co
St. Hilda, W Crossman, ±O9-St. Petersburg, Bahr, Behrend & Co
Nathaniel Hooper, V Freeto, 4tit Cadiz, Waddington, Holt & Co
Auguste Mathilde, J C Groenwald, 194 Danzic, Bahr, Behrend & Co
Gluekauf,'P Kruger, 122 Danzic, C G Weber Sr Co
Maria, J Molten, NO Iceland, Neuman & Engel
Phillyra, E Lovering, 103 Naples and Palermo, J Moss & Co
Sylph, J Uren, 104 Palermo and Messina, J Moss & Co
Argestes, T Hannah, 171 St. Petersburg, Bahr, Behrend & Co
Entered 16th May for Montreal.
Johanna, J G Brandhoff. 441 Danzic, C G Weber & Co
Fadrens Minde, J Petersen, 119 Elsineur, Bahr, Behrend & Co
Panther, S Sheppard, !32 Genoa, C G Weber or J G %\ hite
Daniel, It Jones, 93 Gibraltar, Cotesworth & Wynne
J Pensamente Feliz, X Solitra, 75 Oporto, Highfield & Withers
Try, J Howes, 106 Dordt, Cram & Smith
Belvedere, T Voss, 171 Riga, C G Weher & Co
Wilhelm, H J Bradhering, 160 Riga, C G Weber & Co
Auguste, F L Plagernan, 150 Revel, C G Weber & Co
Thomas & Elizabeth, J W Fill, 78 Rotterdam, Cram & Smith

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY.
IRISH REGISTRATION BILL.
Sir R. PEEL stated, that a communication had been received
from the member for North Lincolnshire, which made it ex-
ceedingly probable that the noble lord would be prevented
by domestic circumstances from attending the house on the
day for which he had fixed his bill for the registration of
voters in Ireland ; and as it appeared to him (Sir R. Peel)
that it might be unfair, or at least inconvenient, to members
generally, to make any abrupt announcement on the subject,
he thought it much better at once to decide for his noble
friend, that the bill would not go into committee on Thursday
next, the day fixed by his noble friend. If there was no
objection, he would move that the order of the day for
Thursday next, be read, for the purpose of postponing it to
the following Thursday, the l ith ofJune.—Agreed to.
CANADA.
Lord J. RUSSELL then stated, that in consequence of this
arrangement he would take the Canada government bill,
supposing it to go partly through committee next day, on
Thursday next instead of Friday next.
In answer to Sir R. Peel, Lord J. RUSSELL answered that
the despatch of Lord Seaton had already been presented to
parliament. There was one despatch which was generally
favourable to the union, but stated that certain alterations
ought to be made ; these alterations had been introduced
into the bill now before the house. The opinion of Sir G.
Arthur was likewise stated in the papers already presented,
and the only recent one from Sir G. Arthur was received a
few days ago, in which he stated that the provinces were
tranquil, and that he conceived the present the best possible
period for the imperial parliament to consider the question.
Sir R. PEEL asked whether any communication had been
received from Lord Seato❑ at all qualifying or withdrawing
from the opinion which he had originally expressed.
Lord J. RUSSELL answered that no such despatch had
been received.
Sir R. PEEL inquired whether any despatches had been
received recently.
Lord J. RUSSELL answered that there had, but none re-
lating to the union.
The colonial passengers bill was indefinitely postponed.
BONDED CORN.
Mr. HuTT next moved for a select committee to inquire
under what restrictions it might be expedient to permit the
manufacturing of flour in bond. He condemned the existing
prohibitory system as injurious to the working classes, whose
labour it excluded for the benefit of foreigners, ,and briefly
obviated some objections which he anticipated to his proposal.
Lord SAN DON should be most happy to second the mo-
tion, as he felt same anxiety that this question should be
allowed full consideration. It was desirable that the advan-
tage of such a measure should be:given to the trading inte-
rests, if it could be done with perfect safety to the home
grower ; at the same time, as the majority of this house were
not satisfied on this point, and as some doubts might exist
whether it was possible, with safety to the home grower to
give this indulgence, he should support the motion for the
committee of inquiry.
Lord DARLINGTON said he would accede to it, but trusted
that the committee was not to be composed of members al-
ready prejudiced against the corn laws.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER resisted the committee, as neces-
sarily tending to shake those laws.
Mr. HEATHCOTE perfectly agreed in the view of the
honourable member.
Sir JoHN REID supported the motion.
Mr. LABOUCHERE thought the object of the motion might,
with proper restrictions, be very advantageously conceded.
Some purchasers, who had not the means of grinding corn
for themselves, and of course would buy no corn un-ground,
were willing to buy flour. To this class belonged our own
West Indian colonists ; and it was very unwise to let foreign-
ers have the benefit of the labour required to fit the article for
those customers.
After a few words from Mr. A. WHITE,
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that the first reference to the com-
mittee should be, whether the principle could be admitted at
all without injury to the revenue and to the British agricul-
turalist.
Mr. M. PHILIPS was favourable to the motion, but dis-
claimed. any wish to affect the agriculturalists, by a side-
wind.
Several other members spoke very shortly, and the house
divided, when the numbers were—
In favour of the motion
Against it

Majority
BRIBERY AND TREATING.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved for leave to bring in a bill against
bribery and treating at elections. He announced his inten-
tion to introduce into it a provision, that if bribery or treat-
ing were practised before an election, the adverse candidate
might give notice that his opponent was committing those
offences, and that either the bribery or the treating, if after-
wards proved before the committee, should unseat the one
candidate and substitute the other, in the same way as where
notice is given that a candidate wants the requisite qualifica-
tion. The other details of the bill he would not now repeat,
having explained them in his former statement on the motion
for the Ludlow writ.
Mr. C. W. WY NN thought the suggestion of Lord John
Russell a most dangerous one. Its consequence would be,
that whenever a candidate found an election going against
him, he would serve his opponent with a notice.
Mr. WARBURTON' adverted to the common practise of cor-
rupt voters who lie back till towards the close of the poll, in
the hope of a better price for their votes. This could be
prevented only by keeping the state of the poll a secret ; and
the state of the poll could be kept a secret only by the ballot.
Col. SIBTIIORP wished to know how treating and bribery
were to be defined. • Was it treating to give a tradesman a
glass of wine, or to ask a voter to dinner?
Sir R. PEEL thought that where a committee, having come
to a decision on an individual's claim to the seat, reported
the prevalence of general corruption, that committee should
have the power of pursuing the investigation at the public
expense. He assented to the object of the bill, but wished
some specific definition of treating, and objected strongly to
the proposal of a disqualifying notice, which would be sure
to lead to a cross-notice, and would end in seating the can-
didate who had the minority of votes.
Colonel Woon was of opinion that too great a strictness
about refreshment would keep distant voters from the poll,
and so diminish the numbers of the constituency.
Mr. TURNER thought no man should enjoy the franchise
who could not afford to exercise it in an independent manner.

-72

Sir C. KNIGHTLEY thought refreshment tit and necessary;
while Mr. BAINES pronounced it to be regarded by many of
the electors themselves as a disgrace to them.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
Mr. HAWES obtained leave to bring in a bill, providing a
general form of affirmation for persons having conscientious
objections to taking an oath.
Mr. PIGOT asked leave to bring in a bill for the removal
of doubts respecting the qualification of voters in Ireland,
and for the creation of a tribunal of appeal. He said it was
indispensable that the doubts on the subject of the franchise
should be settled conformably with the intent of the reform
bill. He would adopt the definition of franchise contained
in the bills of 1835 and 1836; and, as a tribunal of appeal,
he proposed a court of three barristers, two of whom should
be appointed by the Speaker, the third being one of the ap-
pellate judges to be constituted for this country.
Mr. LtrroN and Mr. SHAW spoke against the measure.
Sir D. NOAREYS apprehended that this bill would leave
the franchise as uncertain as ever, and suggested a test of
rating, to be deduced from the poor-law.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it desirable to settle the
franchise, and restore the intent of the reform act. He was
afraid that the test to be deduced from rating could not be
successfully adopted in the present state of feeling.
After a few words from Mr. WAKLEY, Mr. PIGOT replied,
and leave was then given to bring in the bill.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved for leave to bring in a bill
providing for the sale of the clergy reserves in Upper Canada.
The principle recognised by the colonial legislature would
have given one half of the proceeds between the established
churches of England and Scotland, and the other half among
the followers of other denominations. That principle was
warranted by the opinion of the judges of this country. But
the specific distribution proposed by the legislature of Canada
embraced the Roman Catholics, to whom the English judges
did not consider the purview of the law as extending. It
was the object of the bill now prepared to adhere to so much
of the principle of the Canadian legislature as could be car-
ried into effect consistently with law. Ile would. therefore,
by this bill propose, first, that the government should have
the power of selling the whole of these lands. After certain
incumbrances of a temporary nature, he would give one quar-
ter to the Church of England, one quarter to the Church of
Scotland, and the remaining moiety he would allow the go-
vernor to allot to the different denominations of christians

. .
requirmg such assistance, in such proportions as to his dis,
cretion should seem meet. . _

Mr.. GOULBURN, Mr. PLUMPTRE, and Mr. PAKINGTON
desired to guard themselves against being understood to ad-
mit in the future stages of this bill the principle of allotting
to Roman Catholics any part of the fund which the law had
appropriated to Protestants ; but they none of them wished
to oppose the introduction of the measure.—Leave was given
to bring in the bill.
Major Chetwynd's motion for certain returns relative to
the Sutton Coldfield School was opposed by Sir E. WILMOT,
when, it being noticed that only 38 members were in the
house, it was adjourned at twelve o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-FRIDAY.

Lord ASHLEY presented a further report from the select
committee on mills and factories.

Mr. LANGDALE brought in his bill for amending the new
marriage act. It was read the first time.
On the motion of Sir T. FREEMANTLE, new writs were
ordered for Radnorshire, in the room of Walter De Winton,
Esq. deceased • and for Sudbury, in lieu of Sir J. Walsh,
who has vacated, by accepting a stewardship of the Chiltern
Hundreds.

Mr. GLADSTONE observed that, in answer to a question
put by him a few evenings ago, the Secretary for the Colonies
declined to produce a despatch to the Governor of British
Guiana, respecting the increased civil list. By the last mail
papers had arrived, containing the despatch in question ;
would the noble lord now have any objection to produce the
despatch, with such other papers as he might think ex-
pedient ?
Lord J. RUSSELL answered that he had not yet heard from
the Governor, and he wished to wait till he did so.
Mr. GLADSTONE asked whether any despatches had ar-
rived by the last mail ?
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to answer that de-
patches had arrived.
Mr. FEcTou inquired whether there was any hope of Dr.
Bowrirnes report relative to Egypt and Assyria being laid on
the table of the house, and in an " unmutilated" state ?
Lord PALMERSTON answered that he could so far console
the hon. member as to state that the report had been returned
to Dr. Bowring for the purpose of his superintending the
printing of it. His lordship further remarked that he had,
however, been compelledptoolitsiteraikl espoeuentlastoiomneasohfotrhtepaansstahoger,s
in the report, containing
political matters, he ought not
about his own opinions upon
considering that if the doctor wished to write a pamphlet
I.le report would contain
it
to, f
odromi
at
tai
ot
nt ho
fe
apcuobnl cm
eerxcpme nl
sne; t u rie
respecting the
Major C. BRUCE asked whether the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs could give any information
e
obstructions alleged to have been throw.nd in the way of Pro-
testant worship, as regarded British residents at Naples ?
other
a
Lord PALMERSTON answered that difficulties hand arisen
in consequence of the laws of Naples forbidding
than Roman Ca:holic public worship in that country. For a
long course of time the consul-general devoted an apartment
in his house for Protestant worship by British residents ; and
i .
when the office of consul general was abolished, and a consul,
with a reduced salary, was appointed, similar accommodation
was still furnished in the consul's house. At last, however,
the number of the British residents increased so much that a
new building was required. The consent of the Neapolitan
government was at first obtained for its erection, but acted
upon by other influences, after the first stone had been laid,
that consent was retracted. Some British residents still en-
deavoured to procure a room to be fitted up as a chapel; but
even this the Neapolitan government interfered to prevent.
Negotiations had been for some time proceeding, but they
had been broken off by the sulphur question. He hoped-,
however, there would soon be effected some arrangement
with the Neapolitan government on the subject of freedom of
religious worship for the British residents at Naples ?
Lord IVIAtioN asked whether there would be any objection
to lay on the table of the house the order in council recently
issued on the subject of transportation to New South Wales?
Lord J. RUSSELL answered that he should not object to
its production if the noble lord would move for it.
On motion of Lord Mahon an address to. her Majesty,
praying that she would be graciously pleased to order the
copy of the said order in council to be laid before that house,
was thereupon, moved and adopted.

On motion of Loid J. Russell, the thanks of the house
were ordered to the Rev. Mr. Andrewes, their chaplain, for
his sermon on the anniversary of the restoration, preached
" before the house," in the forenoon, at St. Margaret's
Mr. EWART inquired whether there would he any objection
to lay before the house the report of the commissioners ap-
pointed to investigate into the state of Malta, more particu-
larly with regard to the subject on which he some time since
presented a petition—namely, regarding the establishment
of a representative assembly in the island ?
Lord J. RUSSELL answered that the commissioners had
not made any report on the subject ; but that they had given
in a statement, and had acquainted him with their reasons
for postponing the preparation of a report.
Mr. EWART then asked whether there was any objection
to lay those reasons before the house ?
Lord J. RUSSELL rejoined, that he did not believe the
reasons were mentioned in the statement, but that he would
look it over to ascertain the fact.
Mr. Gounmirix, previously to the house proceeding to the
Canada Government (Union) Bill, presented an enormous
petition, with 39,000 signatures, and which he had only re-
ceived two hours before from Lower Canada, expressing an
opinion adverse to the passing of the bill. The petitioners
stated from the first they had obsered that the Governor-
General had stated in his despatch that the " re-union" of
the two provinces was approved of by the inhabitants of
Lower Canada. That they were unaware of any steps taken
to ascertain the feelings of the inhabitants of that province,
except by calling a special council, of which not above half
of the members were present. That the council did not re-
present the feelings of the inhabitants. The petitioners
stated their belief, that after the long separation of the pro-
vinces, their union would only produce disunion and con-
fusion, and would be detrimental to the best interests of both
the Canadas. Also, that many of the assertions in Lord
Durham's report relative to the disputes that had taken place
in the provinces were founded in error.
. . . .

Lord J. RUSSELL then moved that the house resolve into
committee on such bill.

Mr. PAKINGTON moved, as an amendment, that the house
resolve into such committe on that day six months.
This led to some discussion, after which the amendment
was negatived.
The house then resolved into committee, in which some
desultory conversation took place on various clauses.
The report was ordered to be received on Monday.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he proposed to proceed further
with the bill on Monday, after the Customs Duties, &c., Bill
had been disposed of.
The Frivolous Suits Bill went through committee.

The Church-Building Bill was read the second time.
The Indemnity Bill was read the third time and passed.
Mr. ALSTON moved that the petition, presented the 27th
inst., of Augustus Smith and Benjamin Martin, regarding
the Berkhampstead School, be referred to the select commit-
tee on the Grammar Schools Bill.

Mr. HOPE opposed the motion.
The gallery was cleared for a division, but there being only
fifteen members present, the house was, of course. " counted
out."