The Sun. — 1834-04-19 (London, England)

PETITION.  Mr. GOULBURN gave ;notice that, at the morning siting on Monday next, he would present a petition from members of the Senate of the University of Cambridge, deprecating any alteration in the constitution and regulations of the university. Upon the motion of Mr. STANLEY, that the house gointo :a Committee of Supply, an hon. member reminded the noble lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that he had stated on a former day, that until the measure for the repeal of the house-tax was brought forward, he could not introduce any measure for the relief of the agricultural interest. He wished to know, as the bill for the repeal of the house tax was now standing for a second reading, whether his Majesty's government had in contemplation any measure to assist the landed interest? Lord ALTHORP, as well as we could understand him, for he spoke in a very low tone of voice, said that the house must be aware that it was unusual to make a statement such as that required previous to bringing forward a motion; the proceeding would at least be irregular. The noble lord, in conclusion, said, as we understood him, that next session he would bring forward some proposition for the relief of the landed interest. Colonel PERCE VAL said he had a question to put to the right hon. gentleman opposite, arising from a trial that took place at the last assizes for Cork, at which a man of the name of Wright was prosecuted for murder. In consequence of an occurrence which took place there, viz., the testimony of a priest of the name of Burke, the prisoner was acquitted. This had excited a strong feeling in that country, and he wished to know whether it was the intention of his Majesty's government to institute a criminal prosecution against the reverend gentleman. Lord ALTHORP replied, that as ulterior measures were contemplated, it would be unnecessary to give an answer to that at present. Sir S. WHALLEY wished to ask the noble lord when he intended to move the second reading of the bill for the repeal of the house tax, or whether it was the intention of government to repeal it at all ? Lord ALTHORP said the hon. member could have no doubt upon the question, and he did not believe any one else had. (Hear.) It was certainly his full intention to move the second reading of that bill, but as it would not take effect until October, there could be no necessity for its immediate introduction. The honourable member, he understood, wished to get that bill out of the way in order to move for the repeal of the window tax, which he (Lord A. ), whether his bill were in the way or not, would oppose ; and which, as long as he was Chancellor of the Exehequer, he would oppose. (Hear. ) Mr. HUME requested to know what were the intentions of government in reference to the Local Courts Bill. Lord ALTHORP replied, that as there were measures before the house connected with it, it would not be desirable to bring the bill forwards yet. Lord G. SOMERSET asked the hon. member for Cricklade why the return of the expenses of the Metropolitan Commissioners with regard to lunatic asylums, which ought to be made before the 25th of March, had not yet been made. A clause was introduced last session by the Attorney-General, and he wished to know what the additional expense was which that clause had entailed upon the country. Mr. GORDON did not know why the noble lord should refer to him. He should apply to the noble lord who was at the head of that commission, who, however, was at present absent from England. (A laugh. ) Lord G. SOMERSET thought the secretary and treasurer the proper person to apply to for information. Mr. GORDON said it was not his duty to afford it. Sir R. PEEL wished to know since by the 6th of George IV. it was enacted that the salary of the Lord Chief Justice should be reduced from 10,0001. to 8,0001. would it not be proper to have a specific act to regulate the salary of Judges: Lord ALTHORP said the act provided that the salary should not exceed 10,0001. which was specific enough— there was no necessity for a new act. Mr. HUME wished to know whether the salary of Baron Williams had been reduced according to the regulations provided ? Mr. RICE said as in the cases of the appointment of Mr. Justice Alderson and Justice Park, the salaries had been reduced five hundred pounds, the same regulation was adopted in the case of Baron Williams.