The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that the other day a noble Duke, whom he now saw in his place, had presented a petition from Darlington in favour of the Municipal Corporations Bill. Now it happened, that from no other place in the county of Durham had any petition come in favour of this Bill—the only petition of the sort was the petition from Darlington, so pompously shown up—so pompously exhibited by the noble Duke. Now, he wished to state, in the presence of the noble Duke, some information which he had received on the subject of that petition. He held in his hand a letter which he would now read to their Lordships. The letter referred to the statements in the newspapers, that the Duke of Cleveland had presented a petition, described as numerously and respectably signed by the inhabitants of Darlington, in favour of the Municipal Corporations' Bill. The writer apprised his Lordship, as a Peer of the realm, of the origin, progress, and character of this petition. He said, that it was not agreed to at a public meeting; that it was hawked round the town for signatures, and lay for several days at bakers' shops, and was signed by boys, who did not understand the import of it, and after rehawking it about the town, was dispatched to London without its existence being known of by one-twentieth part of the population of Darlington. The writer added, that he had been requested, by the respectable inhabitants, to draw up a petition against the Bill, and such a petition would have been more respectably signed than the other; but he had declined to comply with the request, as Darlington was not a Corporate town. This letter, of which the writer said, he had sent a copy to Lord Lyndhurst, whose labours respecting the Bill, the writer praised, was signed "Thomas Hawler," and he (Lord Londonderry) understood the writer to be a very respectable inhabitant of the town of Darlington.
§ The Duke of Clevelandsaid, he should make but a few remarks in answer to what had fallen from the noble Marquess. He should first say, that the name of the individual who had sent the letter was perfectly unknown to him, and as he was pretty well acquainted with all the persons of respectability, and all the principal inhabitants of the place, he must be permitted to doubt whether this individual was one of that descrip- 872 tion. He had that morning received information that such a letter as that which the noble Marquess had read had been sent to Lord Lyndhurst. Of the petition itself, he should only say that he believed it to deserve the description he had given it, and that he thought it the duty of every individual in that House to present petitions which were sent to him, if they were properly worded. With regard to the writer of the letter read by the noble Marquess, he ought to say that his informant described that person in a very different manner from that in which he was described by the noble Marquess. With respect to the supposed pomposity in presenting the petition, he trusted he might say that he believed his conduct in that House was never such as to show that he desired to be or to appear presumptuous in the discharge of his duty. The noble Marquess had remarked that this was the only petition in favour of the Bill presented from the county of Durham. That was certainly an error, for the noble and learned Lord near him (Lord Brougham) had presented one from Gateshead. [The Marquess of Londonderry: That is not in the county.] He must beg pardon of the noble Marquess. He knew something of the county, and Gateshead was as much in the county of Durham as was Darlington or Stockton.
The Marquess of Londonderrywas obliged to the noble Duke for his geographical lecture. What he meant to say was that it was so entirely monopolised by New-castle of which it was in fact a suburb, that he looked upon it as part of Newcastle.
Lord Broughamsaid, that with equal reason the noble Marquess might say that Newcastle was not in the county of Northumberland—the two towns were on the two sides of the river, which divided the two counties.
§ Subject dropped.