House Of Lords, Thursday,...
The Times, 1824-06-18T00:00:00

-PARLIAXENrARYt INTrELLIGGXCZ a* ^r U tAN:T;LRLUI1,t!se;rCnonOpo t UAXTERlURY.I n FltheEarl of StArTrSBURY, sat as coinmissiOners, and noti- Edl the Raval asaent to the E-dcequer bUls public works bi'l, the Bn Wsi anI Ikish fiShries bill, the Dachy of Cornwall bill, the salt duet<' repeal bill,the Newfiandland audicaturebill,the Newfoand- handroarriagc bill, theEast India goods bill, theIrish tithes' compo. Sttioa ttil, the gen,eral turp ike bill, the insolvent debtors' bill, the 'wheat waxehouaingbill, theB,clse.offlcers'oaths bill,the weights and meabSulTes bill, the pvsuper lunatics bill, the silk acts bill, Paynie Enight'tt dcnation hill, thc restored peerage bills, &c. t MARINE INSURANCE BILL. Couns-' were heard against this bilL Irard BEXLE Y, notwithstanding the arguments of the counsel agtinst the bill, intendea to move that it be now read a second time. Its object was to relieve the country from a monopoly which had existed for 114 years, merely by alrowing cotnpaniea or-co. prtnerships for insurance to be eatablished. This was the only snantrv of Esurope in which competition vas not allowed, and in all parts here the practice of mutual insurarnce prevailed, itvwas done 3t :a lowrer rate thlan at Lloyd's. For these and other reasons he un?Pporteed shemeasure.~Tie bill wras read a second time, and order. adto be co:nmitted to-mtorrow. NEW CtiURCHES BILL. The Earl of LI VERPOOL, is movinz the second reAdingof this bill. did not consider it necessary to enter into details. The measure formed an addition to what had already been accomplished, which the wants of tile co;intry required. It was called for by the ascer- ta7ned fact, that in many parts of the cauntry the parish church did not affod accomnmodation for one-fourth of the congregation. The bill proposed to apply 500,0001.- towards the building of clhurches, Uindrr thd same reulations as the former bill. It was, however, pro. yided, that a conregation which paid two.thirds of thc e"pense of baiWing a church should be aUowed to choose their own minister. This plman had boon already acted on in the diocess of Cheater, and bad been fiund very advantayeous. N-mrd KING was bestpleased with the noble earl's description of the ltter rart of the bill, which, compared *ith the former, an- -: red arnuch improved' reading. It was-but fair to givc the privi- aegenf cooing a minister to persons who paid for the building of a d,urch. If that kind ofspeculation and privilege were generally al- lowed,cltere would betchurches enough built. Butitwouldbene. ,csary to give the speculators the choice of the clergyman; for if the clhoicc were left to the rector, hi would be sure to employ a worsc perfonrer than himself, and thus there wouldl be abad-attend. a-ce. ilis objection to the bill was, that the nmoney ought to be applied to th - relief of the country from taxation. It was hard to ral noney f-or bulilding churches for thc Establishment,on thepeo- e of tne vwhole country, a greaLt proportion of whom were Roman httholie. (Lord Livetpool, across the table, "No, no.") He tneant Ir^and inclulded. When such a. burden was imposed on Ru n:m Catholics and Dissenters,churches ought to be built for them in return. l.ook at whatas done by the French Government. The Protestatnt subj 'cts of France were alowed a sum for building ehurches, and he did not think the Government of this country w.hld bedisgrnced by following that examole.-The bill was read a sr~cond time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. Tbme bankrupt law.s' amnedment bill was read a -third time and ''heslavetrade acts' consolidation bill went tbrough a coimmittee. EQUITABLE LOAN COMPANY. The Ezrl of RO!SSLYN prosented a petition from the inh.abitants of Fiell-I tne and Saffron-hill, in favour of the equitable loan bilL Lord SUFFIEID presented a petition from certain tailors in fa. vour of thr sa-re bill. The petition was signed by 600 names, and mcasreA 13 yards and thiec-quarters. TESr ACT. Lord HOLLAND had to present a petition,which, though not so natnernously signed as thelast was, from the irnportance of its oh- 3eNct, and imie respectability of those from whom it came, eminently entitle. to their lortlltips' consideradon. 'hough with every state- ment of the petidon he most cordially concurrcd, it was not his in- tentionl to found anv future a;otioa upoR it in the couase of the pre. aentsztion, as, from the state oftthe house, itcould not beexpected tl-.t anv object could thereby be accomplished. It was from the three denorninations of Protestant Dissenters against the Test and Goporationacts. As-he liad said, he did not mean to give anv noticeo-t t3suhljcct of the petition at nresent, but lie entreated *he:rani5hip, w hirle the eloqulent words o the petion swerereading at the;r tablc, to give ittbeir serious a:tention. Sir R. XVxr.Lr.uxr, 9r J. G}R5utAH , and others, brouglttup tvrerai privatc bills f'rom the Comnmons. CRUET;rY TO AN[IALS BILL. On the order of the day for committiin the crueltyto animals am-ndn*ntbill. L7rd CGLTHORPE mtade several observations in sunpport of tme pri mc-ple .dcheckimmg wanton cruelty; and stated bis intention to nove sone amen:imeiets in the committee. He mioved that the bitl ben.ov cnm'nitted. The Etul of ROSSIf,N, being of opinion that legislation on this ribjear did geattmischief, opuosei the bill. Hedwelton the ij us. trac wTrcm: might bedone to the owners of horses and cattle if this bill r7axud. On comparing the bill wvith that which it professed to arnend,it would be found that all provisicsas which limited the penal. tiet o intentional cruelty were left outlso that no personswould be safe in the manacerneot of anirrmals, on subjectingthem to necessary ope- ta:ianis Any cuttGng even of the skin might ba held to be cruelty urder thi- biL . rc.would therefore move, thbt the bill be coGt- n1i'ted this day tblrce months. Lord SUFFIELD would agree with thenoble earl in his objec- ti3ym. if the execution of the bill were tobe left to the magis- tra:cs; but when it was provided that the cases shloald come before a j4r., he tbouietlthere was no danger of -thelaw beinF abused. *he Earl of ROSSLYN only wished to remind the noble lord of timenxaira of his proposition. It was merely this-that their lord- s3ips ouglmt to enact a law in the hope that juries irould on their e^'-A *tlde axainst that law. Aftrr a few -ords from Lsrd CALTHOAPa.cand thc Lo*D Ci%xr. CZLLOtt, the amendmett ras agreed to, and the bill lost *rlme nastern and woirkmen'< bill went through a committee. The E:arl of S HAFTESBURYpresented three pedttions against the mirmeineirancebiLl The firstfrom the insurance.brokers of Lon- don; the secd from underwriters individually and separately en- gazed i* insurar'ces; and the third, from peqties whose description was not beard-Adjourned. , HOUS}; OF LORDS, THURSDAY, JUNrE 17.