Parliamentary Intelligenc...
The Times, 1824-06-21T00:00:00

Xune btu tor repeatng the act against artisans le4ying the country, the shipping duties' bill, and the new churches bill, were read a third time and passed. The rnerchants' law amendment bill was, on the suggestion of the LoRD CHANCELLORt, who thought thesubject required more con. sideration than it had yet received, postponed to rCext session. Mr. BItOGDEN and others from the Commons brought up the bankrupt laws bill, with the amendments agreed to, the conmbina. tion laws' repeal bill, the East Indiaposscssions bill, the Eleetumar. ket removal bill, and severalother biUs. Lorad FPXLEY moved the first rcading of the Lancas:er county ceurts bill. Lord GIFFORD ob,jected to extending the jurisdictieon of county courts. Lord BEXLEY thought that in consequence of the difference in the value of money at the time when she c,tsrt was constituted anid at present, the sum for which it was competent to deriole should be raised from 401. to 601.. -Be hoped the noble lord on the WbU,. sasck would favour thie house with his opinion on the bill. The IAORD-GCAiNYCELLOR said, he could see no reason for giving the county courts of Lancashire the new powers created by the bill. There could be no dotbt that another count. coutts bill would be brought before their lordships next session. The Lanca- shire court might be Included in ihatbill and share its fate. A convcrsaton of some length followed, in which Lord ELLEW- BoRtoUGII strengly opposed the bill. LIord BEXLEY was surprised that the noblelord (Ellenborouigh) should ke so inconsistent as to oppose both this and the county courts' bill which was lately before the house, as the bills differed sonmuch from eacb other. Ijord HOLLAND, knowing the remaTkable moderation of the noble lord who spoke last, thought it rather strange that lie should accuse his zioble friend of inconsistency for merely disapproving of two extremes. (A laugh.) On the motion of the LoRD CHAN'CELLOR, the bill was ordered to be read a second time this day two months. OFFICE OF EARI MARSHAL. Lord IOLLAND was always unwilling to move 'the suspension of the standing orders, except in cases -sin which the motion'. was likely to meet the gencral coiscurrence of the houw: but frowbiat tell.yesterlay from tht noble eo on thew}rncck. andthe nobJle e~ar opposite, i:-anppeared thatthete .was llOtthat unanirmty in the house at ptsent which would justi?y him in -persisting in the motion of which he had given notice. rIe should, theretore, merely niove that the bill be now .eadlasegond time. The I4ORD CIANGELLsO l thought that as this bill had comc upon the house in some measare by surprise, it ought to be post- poned to next session, to give su7cient time for its consideration. Lord EIJLENBOROUGH had not the slighcst idea that there could be an objection to the principle of the bill. During the late discussion, the general impression of the house was certainly in favout of tlie measure. The LORD CHANCELLOR remarked, that noble lords might state their own impressions, but could not answer for the impressions ofothers who were absent. Lord HOLLAND reMinded their lordaships, that the principle of the measure had, in the latedebatebeen completely acceded to. There had been somedoubts as to-the form in which it should be carried into effect, but none to passing an act in substance the sarne as that before the house. It was now brought under their lordships' consi- deration in that form whicb. according to all that had passed on the subject, must be unobjectionable. He wotld on no account ever at- tempt to take the house by surprise. He had introduced the bill. because it was his opinion that the majority of the house wished to grantthe boon it would confer, that this was the time when the grant would be felt to be most gracious by him wlho was to receive it, and that the proposedmenner of giving it would be the least ob- jectiohable to those noble lords who were disposed to view mea- sures of this kind with any degree of jealousy. From motives of friendship he would at any time have been happy to introduce this bill, and if their lordships were at any time to agree to the measure, ther oughttodoso now,whenit would bean act of grace done to sooth the domestic affliction of thc noble duke, and mark the sympathy of the house. For these rea. sons, and as the principle of the bill had been approved of by a ma- jority of the house, he hoped their Lordships woald now give it a second reading, The bopsedlvlded on the word " now"_ Content, 241 Not content, 101 Majority, 14. The committee being dispensed with, the bill was read a second time, and ordered to be read a third time on Mlonday. Lord KING presented a petition from the inhabitants of the pa- rish of Kilmore, in the county of Armagh, Ireland. The house would recollect that a petition from the minister and, inhabitants of thxt parish had been presented some time since by a right rev. pre- late, praying that they might be enabled to levy a poor-rate on the parisn, The presentpetitioners said that the majority of the parish- ioners were notinformed ofthat petition, and prayed that no Jaw to raise poor-rates on the parish might be enacted. The Bishop of RAPHOE said, the persons who signed the present petition were such as might be had to sign any petition, and he was confident more than balk of them wouldl hve signed the pe- tion presented by him had they beer applied to. Thatpetition was signed by tee mnsister ofthe parish, the members of the established church, Dissenters, Catholics-all who had any feeling for the poor. Since then some agitators had circulated a report in the paTish, that there was to be an act of Parliament passed for levying a poor rate of 5s. an acre on land, although at the time of presenting the petition heexpressly stated the poor rate intended was to be vohuatary, The persona who signed the petlilost he presented had been in the habit of agreeing at the vestry peetngs tot te collection of a smal rate for the relief of the poor, hut those who had no feeling for the poor need not contriblute. Lord ELLEN BOROUGH said the right rev. prelate should not say that those who did not sign his pedtion bad no feeling for the poor-it was quite fair that he should praise those who had signed it, but he should not cast, imputations on those who had not, The Bishiop of RAPIHOE said hedid not mean to cast general imputations, but when apetigon from Ireland was signed by Pro. testants and Catholics, it was evident that itspoke the publicopinion. Lord EILLENBOROUGEH was glad to hear the right reverend prelate admit that the opinion of the Catholics of Ireland was enti- tled to regard, and hoped he would evince his consideration for their feelings by his vote in that hoase.djourned. PAR I&A MENT4RY INTELLIGENCE. _ HOUSE OF LORDS, SATumAYi, Juw}: 19.