The Press. — London, England, 1857-06-13 00:00:00

576 mount among the licensing magistrates, and not insignificant even in Parliament itself. Mr. BROWN aeconded the amendment. The bill was supported by Mr. NEWDEGATE and Mr. D. GRIFFITHS. _ _ Sir G. GREY, without absolutely opposing the bill, ventured to promise, on his own part, the introduc tion of a bill during the ensuing session which would, as he hoped, meet the chief evils now complained of. With this bill in prospect he suggested that the house should postpone legislation for the present. Mr. HARDY divided the house, which rejected his bill by a majority of '213 to 180-33. The bill is consequently lost. PROPERTY QUALIFICATION. Mr. L KING moved the second reading of the Property Qoalitication Bill. Sir G. GREY, observing that it was the general understanding that all measures which affected the representation of the people should be postponed until a future session, moved to defer the second reading for six months. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, in an amusing speech, 'said delays were dangerous, that long Parliaments male short memories, and that he hoped Lord Palmerston next year would bring forward an effectual measure of reform, or else leave it alone altogether. _ _ Lord PALstEnsros trusted that the house would postpone discussion on the principle involved in the measure. Mr. L. KING divided the house, when the second reading was negatived by 201 against 145 59. The bill was therefore lost. The Election Expenses Bill, which also stool for second reading, was withdrawn by Lord R. Gnus- VENOR, as was the Registration of Voters Bill by Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, who severally accepted the result of the previous division as settling the fate of all analogous measures for the pending session. The house adjourned at half-past five o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS.—TuunspAr. The Smoke Nuisance (Scotland) Abatement Bill was read a second time, on the ino ion of Lord KIN NAIRD ; and the Cinque Ports Act Amendment Bill was passed through committee.• BREACHES OF TRUST. Lord Sr. LEONARDS called attention to the state of the equity law as affecting trustees charged with breach of trust, and alluding to the bill of the Attorney-General, which would punish criminally fraudulent breaches of trust, pointed out the obvious necessity of distinguishing between ordinary and fraudulent breaches of trust, showing many legal arguments in support of the justice of so modify ing the code as to afford relief to those trustees who, though they may have committed a breach of trust, acted bona fide, and without benefit to themselves. He concluded by laying on the table a bill by which the proposed amendment would be effected. The bill was read a first time, and their lordships adjourned at ten minutes past seven o'clock. HOUSE OF CONIMONS—MuItsDAy. INDIAN MUTINIES. ➢lr. VERNON SMITH, in reply to ➢lr. Rich as to whether any measures had been taken to increase the number of European officers in the sepoy regi ments, and to check the drain of such military officers for civil posts in India, replied in the affirms• tive, and said further, that the recent Indian mutinies were not to be attributed to the absence of officers from their regiments. This disaffection " bad com pletely been put an end to." DUCHY OF LANCASTER. Mr. WISE called the attention of the house to the financial accounts of the Duchy of Lancaster, and moved for returns setting: cith certain details of the estates appertaining tc .tat Crown property, and of the sales, grants, leases, purchases, and exchanges of lands, mines, and rents forming part of the duchy. In support of his motion, the hon. member stated the revenues were absorbed by useless functionaries, or lost by mismanagement. The staff included a chancellor of the duchy with 2,000/. a year, a vice chancellor with 6001. a year, a receivergeneral with 8781. a year, an auditor with 2001., a clerk, secretary, and registrar with 1,310/. between them ; a solicitor with 300!., and a surveyor with 500/. There were also two attorneys general ' one for the County Palantine and one for th e Duchy of Lancaster ; also fifteen receivers and twenty-three stewards. Other charges on the estate are as follows:—Donations, 1,603/. ; law, 333/.; surveys, 540/. ; annuities, 0031. ; and "sundries," 1,8731. The income of the royal property for a term of years had only averaged 38,0001. per annum, of which the privy purse re ceived not more than 13,000/. per annum. Alderman COPELAND seconded the motion. Mr. BAINES, in reply, admitted the existence of abuses, but maintained that great improvements in the management of the property were being carried out. The privy purse, which in 1851 only received 12,0001. as the yearly rental, in 1856 had received 20,000/., and there was a prospect of p further increase this year. The motiQu Tins agreed to. THE PRESS. INDIAN ADMINISTRATION. Mr. KINNAIRD called attention to the Bengal mis sionary petition, and moved two resolutions declaring that the Bengalese population suffered grievous oppression from the police, and from the want of a proper administration of justice, and enjoining on the Government the duty of making special inquiry into the social condition of the people, especially with reference to the system of landed tenures, the state of the police, and the administration of justice generally in the lower provinces of Bengal. The hon. member cited Many testimonies corroborating the allegations contained in his resolutions, and en forced the necessity of instituting a full inquiry into grievances and maladministrations, of which com plaints had been made. Mr. DUNLOP seconded the motion. Mr. VERNON SMITH denied that the East India Company was answerable for the mischief complained of. The chief allegations, he observed, were the deficiencies of the police and of the administration of justice, and the answers to these allegations were contained in papers already presented to the house, extracts of which he read. Questions connected with the land tenures of India were beset with difficulties. With respect to the police, inquiries were being instituted by the Government, and remedies for ascertained grievances were in operation, while the Legislative Council of India were passing bills for the improvement of the judicial administra tion. He should resist the motion upon the ground that the Government had neglected no inquiry, and were now acting vigorously in the very direction suggested in the motion. A commission of inquiry such as was proposed would really delay improve ment, embarrass the progress of refotrns already commenced, and infuse into the minds of the nation an expectation of change, and distrust of the exist ing system, which might lead to very serious per plexities. Sir ERSKINE PERRY supported the motion. Lord JOHN RUSSELL r. joiced that this discussion had occurred, though he could not support the motion ; for the time had come, not for inquiry, but for action. There were serious faults in the Go vernment of India. It was incontestable that very serious evils existed. The police system was highly mischievous. The courts of justice were also im perfect in constitution end badly administered. On these and other points remedies were urgently re quired, and he saw no difficulty in devising and applying them except such as might be interposed for the sake of an unwise economy. Mr. R. MANGLES, on behalf of the East India Company, gave a pledge that no economy should stand in the way of establishing the best administra tion of justice and system of police that could be found practicable throughout India. Mr. KINNAIIW then desired to withdraw his motion. Mr. HADFIELD, however, insisted on a division, when the previous question was moved by Mr. EVAtiF, and carried by a majority of 119 to 18. The house then passed to the orders of the day, and agreed to the clauses of the Joint stock Companies Bill. The Sound Dues Bill, and Militia Act (Ire- land), were real a second time, and the Court of Exchequer and County Cess (Ireland) Bills passed through committee. The house adjourned at twenty minutes passed elven o'clock. NOTICES OF MOTION. MONDAY. Mr. HENLEY, on behalf of Sir J. Pnkington, who was pre- vented by an accident trout coming down to the house—that it was not the intention of his right hen. fi tend to move his reso lutions on national education on Thursday, in consequence of the state of public business: sir PERRY—that on Tuesday next, on the resolution for the member tur Perth. in reference to India. he should move as an amendment to the second resolution, that the evils com plained of might be remedied by the appointment of proper persons as judges and magistrates. TUESDAY. Mr. ROEBUCK—that he should on Tuesday next move the fol lowing resolution:—" That in the opinion of this house the office of Loord•f.ieuteuant of Ireland ought to be abolished, and a fourth Secretary of State appointed. Mr. Ew•aar—tuat lie should on Tiiesday week bring under the consideration of he house the state of the existing foundation of grammar schools in this country. Mr. WMATION—that he should on Tuesday fortnight move for leave to bring in a bill giving a new trial iu criminal cases, and otherwise to amend the criminal law. THE KING OF SARDINIA, it is reported, is about to form a matrimonial alliance with the Princess Sidonia of Saxony. The journey of the King of Saxony to Italy is probably connected with that expected event. THE INDIA GOVERNMENT AT CALCUTTA have pub• lished a notification highly complimentary to the ability shown by Sir James Outram in his conduct of the recent operations before Mohammerah. THE \VINE Cnors this year are reported to look well for a fair average ; but the slit crop is again a failure. In Southern Europe only two fifths of an ordinary crop of silk is expected, while in China the first crop is also a failure. The effect of this will be serious fcr France, and will, of course, tend materially to raise the price of silk. SATURDAY, THE ROMAN CATHOLICS AND THE OATHS BILL. A DEPUTATION, comprising Catholic noblemen, members of Parliament, awll, other influential gentlemen, waited on Lord Palmerston on Monday at his private residence, Cambridge•house, Picca dilly, for the purpose of urging on his lordship the propriety of including Catholics in the relief from the objectionable passages in the oaths now taken by members of the Legislature. The deputation was introduced by his Grace the Duke of Norfolk. After the interview a meeting was held at the Stafford-street Club, Piccadilly, his Grace the Duke of Norfolk in the chair, fur" the purpose of adopting such steps as might be deemed expedient in refe rence to the result of the interview with the Premier." All the members composing the deputa. Lion were present, with the exception of Sir T. Burke and the Right Hun. W. Monsell. Several other gentlemen also attended the meeting. His Grace the Duke of NoaFoLK, in opening the proceedings, briefly stated the result of their inter view with Lord Palmerston : He had laid before his lordship the objections which the Catholic body entertained to being excluded from the operation of his lordship's bill. In reply to his statement Lord Palmerston said that he himself did not care to exclude Catholics, but that he thought including them in the bill would have the effect of endangering its adoption. He also considered that there was nothing in the oath at present required of Catholic members which the strie.est of that communion could not subscribe to without any compromise of his reiigiuus principles. He (Lord Palmerston) was then asked whether he would support the amendment of which notice had been given, and though he promised that he would give it his consideration he would not pledge himself, assigning as a reason that there were Scotch members, Dissenters and others, who might be opposed to it, and who, if it were pressed, might be ieduced to vote against the measure. The Hon. C. LANGDALE, in moving the first reso lution, to the effect that Lord Palmerston's explana tion not being satisfactory, an amendment should be proposed in committee on his bill, said the first question which they had to discuss was the character of the noble lord's bill : Many of its parts were insulting to the Catholics, and others were an act of inj notice to their body. Would Lord Falmerston have attempted to act towards any body of Dissenters in the way that he had done towards them ? Certainly not, and he would not have dared to offer to even the most insignificant section of Dissenters the insult that he had inflicted on that large and intelligent portion of her Majesty's subjects, the Catholics of the United Kingdom. By the noble lord's reply that morning it would appear that the only point they were to eonsid,r, in his opinion, was the question as to whether or not the bill would be endangered, but he thought that they had a far more extensive subject to which they should direct their attention. He was an advocate for civil and religious liberty, and would not say anything to the prejudice of the Jews, but they ( the Catholics) were nut to be made the stepping stone to their advancement by not offering any opposition to the continuance of the obnoxious oath, as far as they ( the Catholics) were concerned, merely to forward the claims of their Jewish fellow-subjects. Lord Palmerston said, " If you allow this bill to proceed it will be a step in advance, and your turn will come next." He believed that the very reverse would be the case, and if they per mitted themselves to be sinv.ed out of the whole commu nity, and to be marked by the. imposition of a peculiar oath, so far from promoting their cause, all their prospects of success fur the future would be setiously damaged. Mr. Moons, M.P., said he thought the best course would be to pledge themselves to support Mr. Deasy in his amendment now on the books of the house, or to introduce another embodying the views expressed by the noble chairman at the deputation that day. Mr. MAotTinE, NI.P., contended that their mode of procedure was clear:— If Lord Palmerston treated the Catholic cause with deri sion, endeavoured to make it farcical, and did not go into the lobby with them on a division, what ought they to do? If, on the other hand, he acted honestly in respect t 3 Mr. Deasy's amendment, then they were bound to give him every consideration. But if he treated them improperly he (Mr. Maguire) thought they were bound to oppose After considerable discussion, Mr. LANGDALE said that the meeting was called to enable hon. gentlemen to give an expression 01 their opinion, and he did not think any hon. member would be hound, in his legislative capacity, by any resolution to which they might agree that day. Any resolution of that meeting was the expres. sion of the opinion of the meeting and of the gentle. men who composed it. Mr. Langdale then moved the following amended resolution : That Lord Palmerston's explanation to the deputation from this meeting not being considered satisfactory, the meeting re commends that en amendment in committee, generally embo dying the views submitted to his lordship by his Lime the Duke of Norfolk, be supported by the Catholic members. Mr. Moons seconded the resolution, which was unanimously adopted. It was then moved by Mr. WAr,us, and seconded by Mr. Hi:Tom:is, and resolved— That a petition be drawn up, and clroulated for signature, embodying the wi , hes of the Catholic community, as expressed by the Duke of Norfolk in his interview with Lord Palmerston WI the following geutterueu are requested to draw up tile Po >~ ~,.