The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-05-17 00:00:00

Entlnt tat lartiament.

ROUSE OF LORDS.

MONDAY, MAY 13.
Lord KENYON presented a petition from Putney, for the bet-
ter observance of the Sabbath.
Similar petitions were presented by the Bishop of London from
Edmonton, and various placed in Norfolk.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA rose to call the attention of their
lordships to a subject which most intimately affected their cha-
racter and honour. (Hear, hear.) He could not find language
with which to express the deep indignation he had felt at the slur
which had been cast upon the character of the peerage by the
report of a trial which had appeared in the public papers, and
which he—
The Loun CHANCELLOR begged pardon of the noble lord for
interposing a few observations for the purpose of stopping a
proceeding which was premature, and might be found to- be
fraught with inconvenience. Ile fully appreciated the senti-
ments of the noble lord in adverting to the subject; they were
most natural, and were, he fancied, shared in common with him
by the rest of the house; but he prayed him to consider what
had, probably inadvertently, escaped his observation—namely,
that the party in question was placed in a peculiar situation.—
Ile had not, in fact, been finally convicted. It was true a ver-
dict had passed against him, but that verdict might never have
operation. The noble personage to whom allusion was made
might move to have it set aside, and until the four first days of
the next term had elapsed, it was impossible to tell what would
be the actual result of the transaction in question. He was sorry
the noble lord had introduced the subject at the present juncture.
Had he known of his intention to do so, he would have entreated
a few moments' private conversation with him, for the purpose
of dissuading him from a course of proceeding which was any-
thing but regular, and anything but likely to he useful. The
noble personage in question must be considered as still innocent
of the charges against him, until it were seen whether or not he
moved for a new trial. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of WINCHILSEA thanked the noble and learned lord
for his advice, and regretted extremely that he had nut had a
.previous interview with him on the subject, which was one on
which he naturally felt very strongly, iu common, he had no
doubt, with the rest of their lordships.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND had not understood how the matter
actually stood until the explanation of the noble and learned
lord. The impression on his mind was, that the noble personage
iu question had been finally convicted.
The Earl of ELDON said the matter must be considered as
judicially pending until the term for moving a new trial had
elapsed.
The Loan CHANCELLOR said he was intrusted with a petition
against the Stafford bribery bill from certain of the electors of
Stafford, but he had ~,Yreat doubts whether he should be justified
in presenting it to their lordships, because of the manlier in
vs:wit the petitioners alluded to the proceedings which had taken
place ou the subject in the other house of Parliament. Had the
allusions to those proceedings been couched in respectful lan-
.(rlia:re there would, perhaps, have been no harm iu its preseu-
tation ; but the petitioners stated, that they had heard with in-
dignation and disgust the gross mistatemeuts which they con-
tended had been made on the subject in the Commons' House
of Parliament. Ile, however, would leave their lordships to
decide upon its reception or non-reception.
After a few words from the Earl of ELDON, which were totally
inaudible in the gallery, the petition was withdrawn.
The' Duke of HAMILTON wished to put a question to the-noble
lord at the head of the home department, upon a subject which
hall already been before the legislature, and which he felt it his
duty to mention to his Majesty's ministers, with a view to its
alteration. The subject to which 'he alluded was the apotheca-
ries' act, which pressed very heavily on an important portion of
the community—the Scotch medical practitioners (as we under-
stood.) He hoped the government wouldspeedily take the sub-
ject into their consideration, and that the existing law would be
speedily revised.
Lord NIELnou lINE said that the subject was one deserving of
consideration, but it was not so easy or narrow a matter for con-
sideration as might be supposed. There was much of difficulty
arising from conflicting interests, for, as far as he understood,
en Edinburgh diploma would not enable the parties holding it
to practise in Glasgow, and vi,,e versa ; and 'therefore, when
there was no reciprocity between those two universities, it was
not surprising that there should be none between this metropo-
lis and those universites. The Scotch diplomatists were not in a
worse situation than were those of the College of Surgeons
in London, who could not practise as apothecaries without a
liLTuse from Apothecaries'-hall. The subject, therefore, was
not so confined in its operation as appeared at first sight.
The Duke of IlamicToN conceived it to be a great hardship
to call upon medical men who had received a liberal education,
both general and professional, to ask a license from a body formed
sif persons whose principal qualification was a five years appren-
ticoship in an apothecary's shop.
Lord SUFFIELD inquired whether the London diplomatists
bad in Edinburgh the same facilities for practising as were en-
joyed by the Scotch practitioners in this country.
The Duke of HAMILTON was not prepared to answer the
question.