The Press. — London, England, 1858-03-27 00:00:00

Lord lialuottAx was glad to hear that the plan was abandoned for the present, as he viewed it with great suspicion. The house was bound to discourage all emigration from the coast of Africa that would tend, directly or indirectly, to promote the slave trade. Lord DERBY protested against this view taken by Lord Brougham. It was notorious that the Kroo men were perfectly free men. For years they had been regularly employed by us on board our African squadron. He could not think that Lord Brougham really entertained the beli4 that her Majesty's Go. vernment would do anything to revive the slave trade. The Transfer of Land Bill and Tenants for Life Trustee Bill were, after some discussion, read a second time, and referred to a select committee. Lord BROUGHAM postponed his Imprisonment for Debt Abolition Bill until the measure of the Govern• ment dealing with the same subject should be brought in. The Consolidated Fund Bills (10,000,0001. and 500,0001.), the Cambridge University Matricula tion and Degrees Bill, and the Mutiny Bill wero t•ead a second time; the Militia Act Continuance Bill was read a third time, and the Marine Mutiny Bill and the Commons Enclosure Bill went through com mittee. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS-TUEIDAT. THE DECENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF MR. BUTT. Sir J. GRAHAM, in reply to Sir J. Trelawny, said that as chairman of the committee to which the lion. baronet referred, he had to state that he had no in structions on their part to make any proposition to the house. With regard to the future, he had in dividually nu such intention. Most members of the house had, probably, read the evidence, and it would be open to any member to submit any propositior which he might think to be desirable, and which might conduce to the honour of the house and the observance of its rules. (Hear, hear.) THE PRESS, MARCH 27, 1858. Folkestone, Newhaven, Southampton, and Liverpool ; but such arrangements would be made as experience might suggest to be best calculated to meet the requirements of the ease. It having been communicated to the French Government that it was probably the intention of her Majesty's Government to establish passport offices at some of the principal ports, they at once said they would meet her Majesty's Government half-way, and establish French consular agents at those ports, who should have the power to riser passports, and so prevent any inconvenience which might otherwise happen. (Cheers.) With respect to the reduction of the charge upon Foreign-otfice passports, that matter lay with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Lord PALMERSTON said, as far as the late Govern ment was concerned, he had no objection to the pro duction of the papers, but ho suggested an addition of copies of any correspondence received at the Foreign•office relating to the inconveniences and ex pense attending the passing back of British workmen who had arrived in France with passports from the French consular agents in England. tie concurred with Mr. Fitzgerald that the passport system was an internal and domestic arrangement of the French Government with which the British Parliament had no right to interfere. It was true that inconve niences had resulted from the present regulations, which had been established only provisionally and experimentally, and he had no doubt that they might be greatly mitigated. Mr. BRIGHT observed that this Government could only make friendly representations to foreign powers, but in regard to our own country, it could do almost anything. The foreign Government did not ask us to charge 7s. for a passport, nor to burden applicants with impediments. He objected to the establishment of passport-offices in the country, but thought the mayors of towns cowl easily undertake the additional duty : I hope (sail Mr. Bright in conclusion), the Under Secretary for Foreign Affjirs will not conclude from these observations that I ant dissatisfied with what he said. I think that what he has stated shows that the Government are paying attention to the subject, and I hope that as long as he occupies his present position the house may be as well satisfied wish any explanation he may have to give in future as with that he has just offered. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said : It appears to me that the observations of the hon. mem ber for Birmingham are well entitled to the consideration of the house. I feel, as I think the house must feel, that there are two objects desirable to be obtained. 11'e want to mike the distribution of passports among the people of this country easy and cheap. ( Hear, hear.) The office with which my hon. friend is connected has this subject under consideration, with the intention, if possible, of &1! o pl ishing those two objects; and without pledging the Government to any particular mode, I can assure the house that we wish the distribution of passports to be easy in all the principal ports of the country. Tffere have been some difficulties started by the municipal authorities with regard to this point, but 1 feel, after the discussion which has taken place, that those difficulties may be overcome. ( Hear, hear.) The great object we have in view, and which I think the house will desire to see attained, is that in future any Englishman who wishes to leave his country should find the process of obtaining a passport not expen sive or troublesome, but one which might be gone through without the difficulty and cost an artisan niight fear to en counter. (Hear, hear.) The addition proposed by the noble lord appears to be one to which there can be no objection. (Hear, hear.) Mr. M. MILNER, in reply, thanked the Under- Secretary for Foreign Affairs for his statement, in which there was but one point omitted, and that was the consideration of the enormous number of people who had been in the habit of frequenting the ports of France without any passport whatever•. The sud den abolition of that privilege deserved the attention of the Foreign-office. After tho papers he now moved for were produced, he should aga;n, if neces• nary, call the attention of the house to the subject. The motion was then agreed to, with the a•tdition proposed by Lord Palmerston. DUBLIN POLICE. Lard NAAS, in reply to Mr. Grogan, said it was the intention of the Government to introduce a police bill after Easter for the City of Dublin. THE R'3AH OF DHAR. Mr. BAILTIE, in reply to Mr. V. Smith, stated that the Rajalt of Dhar had been depescd, but that no order upon the subjt ct hail been issued from this country ; it had been done by the Guveinor General of India. LAND TENURE IN SCOTLAND. The LORD ADVOCATE, in reply to Mr. Dunlop, said he could not pledge himself to introduce, during this session, a measure to simplify titles to land in Scotland. THE PASSPORT SYSTEM. Mr. M. MILSES called attention to the vexations to which British subjects are exposed by the late alteration in the passport system in France, which, be observed, had created a practical grievance, large masses in this country having been much inconve nienced thereby, and they asked earnestly for a remedy. He dwelt upon the ill effects, as respected both countries, of such a restriction upon free com munication, which could not, he observed, be regarded as a friendly and neighbourly act, and it was one which, he thought, called for immediate action on the part of our Government. He complained of the additional labour and responsibility cast upon magis trates, and of the vexation and distress which indi viduals underwent iu consequence of these recent unhappy passport regulations. He suggested, as a reasonable remedy, that the passport system should be transferred from the Foreign-office—its connection with which, in his opinion, led to a great deal of con fusion and abuse—to the Home-otfice, and that the onus of refusing a passport should be placed upon the Government of this country. He concluded by moving for copies of correspondence between her Majesty's Government and that of the Emperor of the French on the late alterations in the passport system, and of the regulation s r es p e cti n g passports issued by the Foreign-office since ISI3, with the fees charged on their delivery. Mr. WALTER seconded the motion. Mr. S. F ITZGERALD o b serve d t h at t hi s was a prac tical question, relating to a matter of intet nal regu lation on the part of the French Government, which had met her Majesty's Government in the matter in a liberal spirit. The French Government had always been in the habit of permitting their own consular authorities to issue passports, and this permission they had certainly withdrawn ; but they were willing to admit any regulati ons w hi c h thi s Gov e rnm en t might lay down ; so that the blame thrown upon the regulations did not rest with that of France. There must be some regulations to establish identity and nationality, and the practical question was how to frame them It was at present in contemplation by her Majesty's Government to appoint passport officers in some of the must considerable seaport towns ; and he thought it pro bable that such officers would be stationed at Dover, MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER. Lord BURY, in moving for leave to bring in a bill to legalise marriage with a deceased wife's sister, observed that the question was narrowed to this point, whether the alleged scriptural prohibition did really exist, and whether, failing the scriptural prohibition, these marriages were so objectionable that they ought to be prohibited. Either these mar lieges were prohibited by Scripture or not : if they were, he asked for the chapter and verse; if, as he contended, they were not, the question was so far settled that he was entitled to ask for leave to intro duce a declaratory bill to remove a bar which abridged the liberty of Englishmen. Mr. DIVETT opposed the motion, and spiel he should offer the strongest opposition to the bill in all its stages, considering it to be fraught with the most melancholy moral and social evils. Mr. MAI.Iss said that upon a mature consideration of the question he was convinced that the existing law required amendment. It it was the intention of the Legislature to prahibit such marriages, that pro hibition should be laid down in terms most plain and distinct:— 295 Lord Hardwicke's Marriage Act declared that all mar riages which were not solemnised in a particular way— such, for in -dance, as those which use I to be celebrated in Scotland—should be void, yet the decisions of our courts under the operation of that act held such contracts to be not void but voidable. The present law with refe rence to marriage with a deceased wife's sister was liable to the same freedom of interpretation, and it was time, therefore, that some alteration should be made in it which would place the intention of the Legislature beyond all doubt. Nothing could, in his opinion, be more ridiculous than that a person not permitted to marry in this country should be enabled to do so beyond the seas. If the in capacity attaching to the contracting parties were of a personal character—such, for example, as was created by the itqyal Marriage Act—then it could not be obviated by the mere fact of residence in a foreign country. It was, under these circumstances, perfectly clear that the existing law stood in need of amendment ; and, although be had upon two previous occasions voted against any such amendment, yet he felt bound to say that, upon more mature consideration, great social evils appeared to him to result out of the present system. He also quite concurred with those who thought that the scriptural argument against marriages with a deceased wife's sister was untenable, and, entertaining those views, he should vote for the introduction of the bill, while he should not, at the same time, pledge himself as to what course lie should take with respect to it in its subsequent stages. Mr Hope and Mr. Lygon opposed the introduction of the bill. Mr. Fox, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Mellor, Mr. Gilpin, Mr. Briggs, and Lord Goderich supported the motion; which, on a division, was carried by a majority of 103 to 62, and leave was given to intro duce the bill. EQUALISATION OF POOR-RATES. Mr. AYRTON moved for leave to bring in a bill to provide a remedy f.r the inequality in the rates for the relief of the poor in the metropolis. He did not lay down, he said, any general principle applicable to all parts of England ; his bill applied solely to the metropolis, which was in a peculiar position : The assessment of St. George's, Hanover-square, under the properly tax, was 1,097,0001., whilst the rating under the poor-law was 694,0001., being a difference of 400,0001. between the two assessments. In Marylebone the diffe rence was 300,0001. But some of the pourer parishes were assessed under the poor-law within 8,0001. of the property tax assessment. in one parish in Bethnal-green the property-tax rating was 1 . 28,0001., whilst the poor-law rating was 130,0001., and it is moth the same in the parish of St. Mary,Magdalene, Bermondsey. In order to correct this unequal distribution of a common burden he did not propose to destroy local management, but, adopting the very principle of the original statute of Elizabeth, he proposed to consti tute a special sessions of a committee of justices, to be elected by the benches in quarter sessions of the four metropolitan counties, whose duty it should be to determine a uniform rate of assessment for the metropolis, the local parochial management remain ing intact. He would leave it to be discussed in the committee upon the bill what should be the amount and ratio of contribution from the rich to the poor parishes. Mr. W. WILLIAMS seconded the motion. Mr. ESTCOURT acknowledged that Mr. Ayr on bad brought forward the motion with great moderation and discretion. He had laid before the house a statement of alleged grievances, and had proposed to embody a remedy in the firm of a bill, so that the house and all affected by the measure would be able to see its provisions. He (Mr. Estcourt) would be very sorry that the door of the house should be shut against any grievance ; he should therefore not ob ject to the motion, guarding himself, at the same time, against being supposed to give any opinion as to the expediency of the measure. He reviewed the chief features of the proposed plan, expressing a fear that it might pave the way to a system of national rating and to an abolition of the wholesome check of local management. _ _ MI:JOHN LOCKE supported the motion. Mr. ROEBUCK objected that the hill sinned against two of the very first principles of the poor law ; it violated the plain principle of justice in relation to property, and it sinned against the rule which said that the locality should overlook and guard the ex penditure of the rate. He believed that the bill was fraught with very great mischief. Mr. BOUVERIE said he thought it a misfortune that Mr. Estcourt had given a partial encouragement to what he (Mr. Bouverie) regarded as a mischievous scheme by allowing the bill to pass even a single stage. He adverted to some of its features, and in sisted that there was no necessity whatever for the measure. Mr. Cosuerr and Mr. TOWNSEND supported the motion, and leave was given to bring in the bill. MEDICAL BILL. Mr. Cowl.Ea, in moving for leave to bring in a till to regulate the qualifications of practitioners in medi cine and surgery, pointed out the deficiencies of the existing law, to remedy which he proposed to estab lish a better minimum of qualifications, and, leaving the examinations by the licensing bodies as they were at present, to place them under the control of a medical council, to be a representative council, which I atil