The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-06-22 00:00:00

. . - • 5 PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE. --.....—.. HOUSE OF LOADS. Tussnev, lines 21. . ....—. . Breeden and snarl livenbais of the House of C * pgiplain! Fig Deminipt Browne, Esq. a Member of (IP a w sismines lials...Mdttee of tUfr Lordships ifto or bekillli mu ohm Members of the House of tap the We= Ship Canal Bill, and several eljelbsiphiara . tribe Direison lad a a( the Bart India Company, of 1. 11 .t . 1 Of Ibler t d bi bibre Ms Majesty'. Attorney. Basis riot 12 111. entitle": Aet bo i :tbo v tlerter Rego- Sf' ima llasins in I with the spialem et le ilejloty'i A ttOr. and 946111041eneral thsrespen. sauxy Smiesid a petition from the Merchants of - "Nt is aliport of dif western Ship Canal BilL 81YLIAWAN'S DIVORCE BILL _ 1% RAllll6Ox vile bawd at their Lordships' bar is support of iv Sallen'eDiveree BBL After i ftw ebserstillios turn the Loan ClitaSCltt.oe, the .burl Of Lanmettortirt, the Earl of Laterite', Lord BEXLEY, -orl Lord StrweraLen the Bill was reed a second thne. LOANS IN INDIA. _ be Marquis of HASTlNGS , observed, that as the case and opinion to which he had referred upon this subject were now laid tpcm their Lordships' table, there did not appear to be any neees eity for further delay ; be would therefore give notice of his inter- NMI tf move the secood reading of the Bill tomorrow, and also blast she Judges be stuntotowsd. QUARA/INE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL. The Faeri of L ERPOOL moved the second reading of the Quarantine Laws Amendment Bill. The Earl of DARNLEY said Mat it was not his intention to oppose this Bill; on the contrary, he was ready to admit its propriety, and to acknowledge that the Quarantine Laws, as they formerly ex isted, materially clogged the trade of this country. He wished, however, to earl the attention of their Lordships to the fact, that geode of various kinds, and cotton lo particular, coming from countries where the plague was prevalent, ware permitted to he landed with eau little airing, and sometimes without any airing at JUL the clause in this Bill to which he wan most anxious to diiatslloa Artie House, was that which gave a discretion ary the Privy Council of altering or enforcing. or elute- ' thee sli IX me the Quarantine laws , and which discretieowry power be hie epleion, been of late much abused ; for vessels arriving . Egypt, which he might call the very locus of the Piellort, •1016.30ye0 permitted to be landed without any airing. He ' woad meow that be apprehended any imminent danger on this subjost; but if it were acknowledged that infection might be ton. tuned fa cotton and other goods, he confessed be thought it err y extriutditimy that vessels, under such circumstances as those he had described, should be permitted to laud such goods. In the year 1119, a'Comminee of the House of Commons had beep en. gagodle the itmeiry. ,whetter or not the plague was bilkidows 8 and It appeared by theirßeport that they had head., dallibute of many eminent persons of the highest authority awl 1 1 l own to the conclusion that the plague was infectious. They did sot, there for*, teeonsmend any thing, and had merely expressed this opinion. But ht the Report of a Committee of the House of Commons of lam year, a considerable relaxation of the Quarantine Laws was re. commended. It appeared by the evidence of the Consuls in the Levant, that there was very little difficulty in vessels procuring clean bills of health. He thought it therefore a very hazardous thing in the Government to act upon the recommendation of the House of Commons. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said that it was not necessary to' trouble their Lordships at any length upon this subject. especially av the Noble Lord who had just spoken did not oppose the Bill. He was sure that the Bill would not meet with materiel opposition trout any of their Lordship*. The subject of the Quarantine Laws bad been taken into consideration by his Majesty's Government, chiefly In consequence of the desire of those merchants who traded with all parts of the world, that those laws should be revised, and shut theirseveriry should be refixed. Many parts of Europe, and particularly Holland, had had considerable advantage over this country because their Quarantine Laws were much milder than I ours, t wasmot correct that the Committee of the House of Coro.. mons had last year adopted an opinion that the plague was not contagious; but the whole tenor of their Report assumed that the plague was contagious ; and they did not say that there should not be sny_security against its effects, but what that security should be. He admitted that the duty of the Government and the duty of Parliament, wan to err rather on the side of safety than on the side of policy. The Government then had deemed it proper to give to commerce the benefit of a relaxation of those laws which had been formerly so severe. The Bill rested the power of altering those relaxations where it should with propriety be rested—in the King in Council. The Council certainly had relaxed, but only to a li mited extent. By the law of teuo. the expenses incurred by qua rantine were borne by the ships undergoing such restriction. This yes not only a restriction on trade, but was unjust in Itself; be cause this quarantine was borne not for the benefit of ships, but Pr the benefit of the country : and, therefore, the country ought to bear the expenses. The penalties also had been in many cases so severe, as to 'render it impossible to inflict them. They were now mitigated. He admitted that some alarm had been excited on "ins....RT. in rov ,, lan countries and this alarm was the conse quence of the advantage or tree discussion which was enjoyed in this country ; for reports had gone Furth which were nor digested, and which would have caused no alarm if they had been rightly un. &mood. Lord K (NB thought that the greatest alarmist in the country was his Noble-Friend (Lord Darnley) who he supposed would have been equally anxious to prevent the abolition of the laws against witchcraft, if he had lived in the days when those laws were in lora, on the ground that many Learned Judges considered witch. craft to exist. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted to-morrow. The Earl of LIVERPOOL gave notice that he would move the second reading of the Excise Duties Bill on Thursday next. COUNTY•COURTS' BILL. The House resolved itself into a Committee on the County Courts' Bill. After some observations from the LORD CHANCELLOR, Lord REDESDALE. and Lord ELLEWROROUGH. on the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, the House resumed, and the Bill was ordered to be re-committal this day three months. The Irish Currency Assimilation Bill went through a Commit tee. and wan reported. The 31aurilius Trade Bill alum passed through a Committee, and was reported. TFe House adjourned at half-past seven o'clock. MOUSE OF COMMONS, MEVDAT, Juxs 21. HOLYHEAD ROADS BILL. On ihe motionWl Sir H. PARNELL, the Holyhead Roads 811 l WWI read a thi-d time and passed. IRISH RANK TOKENS. On the minion of Mr. BERRIES. the Irish Bank Tokens Bill was read a third time anti irt,,td. FRIVOLOUS NVRiTri OF ERROR. Dr. PR ILLI3IORE brought up the Report upon the Frivolous Writs of Error Bill. Several verbal amendments were agreed to. the Report was then received, and the Bill ordeied in be read a third time te-morrow. UNIVERSITY POLICE BILL. On the motion of Mr. Secretary PEEL, the Univeteity Police Bill was read a third time and Devised. MR. KENRICK. Mr. DENMAN said he bail presented a petition on a former ()cession from a person named Camfer, complaining of the con elect of a Mr. Kenrick, a Magistrate of Surrey. and on the same evening moved for the production of certain affidavits which had been printed and laid before the House. On Saturday hut, he had also moved for the production of a letter written by 31r. Kenrick. ' which had been slime laid on the table, and which he now begged leave to move should be printed likewise. His object wee, that tnese papers should be in the hands of Honourable Members, prepare. tory to the examination of four or five witnesses, fur whose at tendance at the Bar ni the House on Friday next he meant now to submit a motion; from the testimony of those witnesses, he be geved hr would be able to prove, that the letter written by Mr. Keurick to a gentleman in Lincoln, purporting to explain the transactions with Franks, was ...tinily inconsistent with the affidavits already produced, and as wally inconsistent with the real truth. From the interrogation of two or three of these witnesses, lie thought indeed it would be found, that the account of certain ma gisterial transactions relating to Franks, were totally destitute of truth. It had been suggested to him, that instead of pursuing that course, he should first have preferred some written charge against Mr. Kenrick. He, for his own part, was quite indifferent bout the course which might be prescribed to him, but he would just take the liberty to observ, that although the letter 'upon which he founded hisaccosation iinst Mr.K enrick wasgrosstylibeMm t s,itdid not eonstiweany lein4otrence. nil view was, that although theresults of the inquiry miff • show clear malversation in office, partiality. I and a denial of jektice in his capacity of a Magistrate, on the part ot Ir. Kentiee, followed up by a letter reflecting on the character ot the object of his persecution, still that there was nothing beyond the libel of teal offence. There was quite sufficient, however, in the pet' o tan thtu substantiated and supported to enable the Crown to %le^ measures for depriving Mr. Kenrick of his situation as a l'ingistrate. and he thought that aDcr the admission of a person being unfit to •ncretee the magisterial duties, it would be very dif- Scuk to conttect that he std continue to administer 'make as a Judge. He did not mean to say that it was a consequent which must follow; but that there would be good gronnds for an address of the Ilinese to the Crown, in consequenre of the information it would be in poosassion of with regard to the want of those qualities is a magistrate which were indispensable in a Judge. The Hon. and Lamed Member then moved that the persons abate names were mentivied in the motion be aommoned to attend at the bar of that Monsoon Friday next. If the House thought he should state anything la writing he was in their hands, and content to follow their inggestions; for he had no feeling upon the rase either one way or the okhcr. The individual accused, he was fully aware. had am yet been heard in his defence, and they were as yet proceeding on one site cf the Tiestion. Mr. Secretary PEEL apprehended there was some difficulty in the conesesboOt to be pursued by the Learned Gentleman. They was going to establish a bad precedent of making inquiry by wh itest, at the bar upon mere implication. The House was not in prole—inn of the eitar7e. The (cue, had not been read, and be thoo l e. , it would be much more consistent with Parliamentary pro modinga. and mach more just to the individual, it' the Learned bletalansaa would put his accusations in writing, and give the per. - _ sue- P B .11U Ptl • lattot i My. S Sal lints After . Earl Of and Lon The opinion upon *ll, for I .4011 tip sr Chet she The? • lausran } .s Aibic-As:saiimusesa ERN 414"....=A0 1 N eon evollad Ma_ fgefedift_of knowing what was the &pip pm ' ?erred Ow The H on . Gentleman might nay pit isle. what b e just NSW to the House, or any of dell fl=ab ssa V which ha Oandanowdl Mt. leorick. or at !Waft Me kb* prielliedeeof wltneeses until the lawn and reed by the Members of the House. Mr. S. BOURNE agreed with the Right Ham. Seemsery (Mr. Peel) that the charge should be known by the Howes; the - lowest offender in the lowest Court in the kingdom was Fully acquainted with the crime of which be stood accused, by a apecilic charge being brought against them, yet here they would put the individual on his trial, leaving him to conjecture his offence. • Mr. ABE RC RO Al BY contended that the objeedons of the Right Hon. Gentleman would not hold good. When the petition was presented by his Learned Friend on a former occasion, more than one Hon. Member rose and stated that Mr. Kenrick desired nothing more than to hear the subject matter of the complaint against hint fairly stated. On that petition, therefore, he (Mr. Abercromby) said the House had the charge. His Hon. Friend presented a pe tition praying inquiry, and there it was stated that the only ques tion upon Mr. Kenrick's part, was how soon that inquiry should take place—and that it could not for his wishes take place too anon. The petition and the documents connected with it only Aliowed, therefore, what the evidence would be when produced. Any thing his Learned Friend (Mr. Denman) had said, was only in anticips tt an of what he thought would be proved : but did not contain any new charge; that chugs was contained in the petition, and was in point of fact one of the clearest cases he ever recollected. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, in explanation, that he had not de fended Mr. Kenrick, but wished to support Parliamentary usage— that usage was, that- the House should not take any deterntination or enter into any inquiry at all, until it was in possession of the papers upon which the inqu iry was to be founded. Mr. S. BOURNE ex aincd. Mr. C. W. WYNN t ght the House should be in possession of the papers, that they might be able to decide whether there was a prima /kir case or not, before they took any other proceed. ings. It was said, the individual complained of was unfit to be • Judge. They ought to be very cautious in their measures upon such a serious case. Mr. TIERNEY said, if be rightly understood the case, there was no charge against Mr. Kenrick as a Judge, but as a Magis. trate. if the complaint was against his conduct as a Judge, that would be another matter, and might be very differently dealt with ; but he would like to know whether that House had not uoon peti tion, and complaint of an individual. a full right to inquire into the conduct of a Justice of the Peace, anti whether in that capa city he win not open to their censure. Nothing. however, could be more absurd than to say that his Learned Friend (Mr. Denman) who was, as he distinctly said, no party in the charge, should bring forward some distinct ground of accusation. His Learned Friend in his situation.ceuld not do so, unless he was pre pared to take the information atomics as his own, and rely wholly on its truth; that was a lineal - conduct which it would be found im. possible, he rather thought, for Members of that House to adopt with regard to petitions. Ills Learned Friend took tha wood course in presenting a petition complaining of an act of injustice and oppression; that petition he now oilers to the substantiate by evidence, and there could be no just ground, according to the usual pvactice. as tar as he had known, for rejecting it upon the ground cs" want of information. If the charge was substantiated, the next question would be, could It suffer a person convicted of such conduct to remain in the Magistracy ? The House therefore at pre. sent had nothing to do but with the petition against a Magistrate ; whether it would recommend any further proceedings, was a matter for consideration hereafter. ' Mr. C. WYNN explained. It was necessary. he thought, the criminal matter of the proceeding should be stated in some way or other, so that the House should be in powsesion of the charge. ' The SOLICITOR GENERA I. contended, that the going into evidence without being in possession of the matter to which the evidence applied, was at variance with all the forms of proceeding io every Court he was acquainted with. Proceeding against an individual in that House without telling him of his crime was a bad precedent. and pregnant with injustice. Mr. ABE RC ROM BY said the motion was for the purpose of asibstantiating the facts of the petition. If those facts were proved, there was ground of censure upon Mr. Kenrick—if they were not proved, there was an end of the matter. Mr. TIERNEY recommended his Honourable and Learned • Friend to leave out the consideration of the letter, and confine himself to an examination of the affidavits and matter of petition. Mr. BROUDHA3I never understood that the House hampered itself by the formalities of written charges in any thing leas than cases of impeachment. The general practice eras exactly as his Honourable and Learned Friend had proceeded in this case. It was very remarkable, indeed, that there had been two axis very lately, during the present Session, perfectly similar to the present. ' One, the petition presented respecting the conduct of the Duke of Manchester, by an Honourable and Learned Friend of his ( Dr. I Lushington) and the other a petition presented by himself from • Mr. Bishop Burnett, complaining of certain oppresive acts of Lord ' Charles Somerset, which he intended to move to be referred to a I Select Committee to-morrow evening. Now, it was very odd, that in neither of these cases had they heard one word of the necessity t of a written charge, or of deciding without information, urged as t a reason tar the refusal of the consideration demanded by the I petitioners. They were in fact, upon petitions, a mere Court of In ' guilty—not judicially, but inquisitorially engaged. He did not, I however, rise to do more then protest against the assertion that • Members were compelled to bring forward a written accusation. He knew and had known the individual complained of (Mr. Kenrick) for some time at the bar ; lie had always understood him • to be an honourable and humane man, and he had very great hopes that he would be able to free hinotelf from all imputations. Whether he was so or not, however, that House was not to he t cramped in the enjoyment of its right to consider and examine complaints upon the petition. Mr. DENMAN said that it was from accident merely, that the ' letter of Mr. Kenrick had not been printed with the other papers. He was ready to admit that it would be premature to call any evi dence respecting the case of Franks, and that part of the motion he begged leave to withdraw. The petition of Camfor, however, con. tained specific matter of charge. He 'Mould therefore move that Mark Money Camfor attend the House on Friday, and that the House resolve itself into a Committee on that day. He could not pretend to say what other measures might be necessary, He did not say an impeachment, but limited his own proceedings to an ad- I dress to the Crown fur the removal of Mr. kenrick from the ma- • . -4 themselves to be Christians sad - of Pro. gistracy. Mr. PEEL thought it would be the better course of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to postpone the motion for examining Mr. Camfor until Friday next, as Mr. Kenrick might be able to submit a statement to the House, which would supersede the necessity of examining Mr. Camfor. Mr. DENMAN said that the Hon. Gentleman suggested new matter to the House, which was incompatible with the proposition that be intended to submit. Whatever statement might be made would not supersede the necessity of inquiry. He could not there tore consent to the suggestion of the Right Hon. Gentleman. He at thessme time was anxious that Mr. Kenrick should have every facility and cppottunity of replying to the charges brought against him. The SPEAKER said that there were three questions before the House, the acquiescence with one of which was not at all incon sistent with the propriety of concurring with the other two. The original motion was then put, and, together with the amend ments, agreed to; first, that the facts of the petition of Mr. Cam for be taken into consideration on Friday next; secondly, that the petition of Mr. ramfor, together with the above notice, be commu nicated to Mr. Kenrirk ; and, thirdly, that Mr. Kenrick have per. mission to attend by himself or Counsel, to reply to the charges to be preferred against him. Mr. BROUGHA3I suggested that an earlier hour than usual ought to be fixed for going into the inquiry, in order that the in - vestigation might be more speedily disposed of. He would suggesl, that the inquiry should commence at four o'clock, at the sitting o' the House. PI,EL agreed in the expediency of commencing at a still earlier hour, he would my three or bait-put three. M. lIROIIGHAM said, that in that event his Non. Friend would not be able to attend. Mr. DEN MAN disclaimed any desire of interposing his private convenience with a public duty, but he thought the inquiry would be of such short duration, that it would not be necessary for the House to meet earlier than the usual hour: if, however, there wan a prospect of its continuance, he would be satisfied to agree to any arrangement that might suit the accommodation of the House. It WAS finally agreed upon that the inquity should commence at four o'clock on Friday. CO3IRINATION LAWS. Mr. MA XWEITCpres ---- enir7l; petition from the weavers of the west of Scotland against toe re-enactment of the Combination Laws, and praying fr enquiry into them. Re bore testimony to the good conduct of the labouring manufacturers of Glasgow. and offered some ohmervations, enforcing the expediency of acced ing to the prayer of the petition. Mr. PEEL did not mean to follow the Hon. Member into the line of observatinas he had addressed to the House. lie would simply say on the bringing up of the petition, that the report of the Committee had been prepared with a perfectly impartial regard to the interests of the masters and workmen, and with a due attention to the interests of both. UNITARIAN MARRIAGES. Mr. W. SMITH roes to present a petitions from the Unitarian Diaseeters, relating to the celebration of their nmrriage ceremony. The grievance of which they complained was done away by the bald of the late King. At the time that that str?te was enacted it had been sail that he (Mr. S.) had admitted that the Unitarian dissenters were still subject to the common law. He denied that he had ever made such an admission. That statute, he con. tended, relieved them from whatever penaltics they might have been before subject ea. He had the authority of the A-elibishop of Canterbury, that it was not intended that any penalty should at tach to those who disbelieved in the Trirtity,any more than to throe di.senters who did not agree with the Established Church on other points of doctrine, but that it was not intended to open the door. of that stance to those who were promoters of profaneness, either by their writing., or by advised speaking. The opinion of bard Manstield went to the name extent, and it was his opinion that the object of that statute was to place the Unitarian dissenters on the seine footing that other dissenters were placed by the passing of the Toleration Act. He felt the more anxiously on this subject, as a doubt bad been lately thrown out in the other House of Parliament, and trom a high quarter there too—whether or not, after the pass ing of the statute, the Unitarian dissenters were still afree:ed by the common lan. That such a doubt should be entertained there wan the mrre a mond of ugret, as it wan only there that a Bill had been frustrated fur complying with the wiehes and objects of the petitioners—a Billiwhtch h.ulemet with the general approbation and support of that House. That Bill was al.oaperoyed of by the two Archbishops, and by s:x Bishops of the other House of Parliament. . • 'I N vv. ‘ Ara • THE BRITISH - P EE. The Ustiodas_ Ptelelsielmi they only claimed the privilege being - marteelle aewedleg to their interpretation of the Sairstres.— The Wet.i Miltienity he considered was essepiesely explained by the 1M el do lege King, so that ne doubt etenelesd ee that Mr. ROBBRTSON apprehended serious evils teem a system el innovation. He regretted to observe, that greet efforts were Making to diminith the influence of the Church both in England sod Ireland. Before the House sanctioned such Abets, they should ellbaider the state of this country before the Church was established by law. Mr. W. SMITE! briefly explained ; after which the petition yes brought up, and ordered to lie on the table. NEWSPAPERS BILL. Upon the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE QUER, the House respired itself into a Committee on the News papers Hill. The several clauses were agreed to, and the Report ordered to be received to-morrow. -------------- WEST INDIA CLERGY BILL. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the Or der of the Day for the third reading of the West India Clergy Bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER introduced a clause, providing that the salaries of the Clergy holding under this Bill shoul•1 be paid out of the di per cents. The Bill was then read a thitd time and passed. PILOTAGE BILL. Mr. C. GRANT moved the Order of the Day for the third reed ing of the Pilotage Bill, which was read a third time and paired. PUBLIC ROAD BILL (IRELAND). Mr. GOULBURN brought up the Report of the Public Road Bill (Ireland). The Report was ordered to be recommitted to a Committee of the whole !louse. The House thereupon resolved itself into a Committee, and the several clauses having been read, the House resumed, and the Report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow. GLASS DUTIES DILL. Upon the motion of Mr. BERRIES, the Glass Duties Bill was read a third time and passed. PLATE DUTIES TRANSFER BILL. Dr. PHI LLIMORE hrpught up the Report of the Plate Duties Transfer Bill, which was ordered to be read a third time to morrow._ TEMPORARY CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL. Dr. PHIL LIMORE brought up the Report of the Temporary Customs Duties Bill, which was ordered to be read a third time on Friday. DUBLIN WIDE STREETS BILL. Mr. GOULBURN moved the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into a Committee on the Dublin Wide Streets Bill, which went through a Committee, and the Report was ordered to be received on Friday. CUSTOMS CONSOLIDATION BILL. Upon the motion of Mr. BERRIES, the Customs Consolidation Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be recommitted on Thursday. GOODS WAREHOUSING BILL. The third reading of the Goods Warehousing Bill wee post poned to Thursday next. PILOTS AND PILOTAGE. Mr. C. GRANT brought up a Bill, for better regulating the Law respecting Pilots and Pilotage, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow. CRUEL TREATMIRNT OF CATTLE BILL. Mr. It. MARTIN moved the Order of the Day for the *soma reading of the Cruel Treatment to Cattle Bill. The A TTORNEY.GENF.RA L opposed the second reading of this Bill, because an Act had been intro d uced the Session before the last, hy the Honourable Member for Knsreeborouih (SirJ. Mack intosh) which enacts, that cruelly maiming animals shall be a transportable offence. The Honourable Member ( Mr. Martin) did not mean to repeal the lion. Member for Knarealxwough's Bill, or to mitigate the punishment affixed to it, and vet his Bill pro vided, that cruelty to animals should be punished as a misdemea nour. 'The Hon. Member for Galway would therefore substitute a milder punishment, which clearly was not his intention, though such was the construction of his Bill. This involved a manifest inconsistence, and therefore in his (the Attorney-General's) opi nion, the Bill, in its present form, should not pass the House. Mr. MARTIN said, the Bill before the House was in fact the Bill of the Attorney-General himself. The Attorney-General had consulted with him (Mr. Martin) on drawing it up. (A laugh.) It was at the suggestion of the Attorney-General he had introduced the words " cutting and maiming," which his Right Honourable Friend (the Secretary for the Home Department (Mr. Peel) ob. jetted to, because, in his opinion, the word cutting made it a mis demeanour to cut off' the ears of a puppy dog. The clause to which the Attorney-General now objected, was only an emendation of his own absurdity. The Attorney-General's Bill was declared to be an absurditynn the Lords; but as the clause which he (Mr. Martin) proposed to remedy that absurdity was now objected to. he was willing, and would be satisfied to produce the Bill which was rejected by the Lords, to compare it with the present Bill, and to strike out every thing in the -present Bill which varied from the Bill sent to the Lords. The on}' material addition in the present Bill was the *loose to protect those useful and necessary animals, dogs. He did hot know why fhe Attorney-General now differed from a Bill, which was in principle precisely the same as that which he had before mentioned. Ile might have altered his opinion on the former Bill it was true, but why did he within thirty-six home offer to support the present Bill, If he (Mr. Martin) agreed to withdraw his Bill, for giving felons the benefit orCounsel ? If Go vernment, and individuals connected with it, continue to act in this manner, the public would soon begin to perceive, that the House of Commons was a bad %Anal for the education of a Judge. The ATTORNEY.GENERAL said the Bill formerly intro duced by the Ilonourahie Member for Galway, was thrown out in the Lords, because the Honourable Member neglected to suit it to the existing law. Cruelty to animals, by the Act of Charles IL, wax not a felony, unless there was a malicious intention to the owner. By the Honourable Member for Knaresborough's Aet, maiming of animals was made • felony. although no malicious intention was proved. The Honourable Member for Galway was not aware of this enactment, bat had followed the words of the Act of Charles. The Honourable Member's present Bill says nothing of the repeal of Sir J. Mackintosh's Act, but yet it makes that offence only a misdemeanor, which Sir J. Mackintosh's Act had made a felony. Mr. MARTIN explained. Mr. S. WORTLEY said it was quite clear that a remedy ex. isted against the offence complained of. He was therefore of opi nion, that any new provision to meet that offence, was altogether unnecessary. SirJ. SHELLEY mid the House was evidently debating on an offence for which an adequate remedwalready existed. Mr. T. WILSON thought a mode may be devised for reconcil ing the humane intentions of the Honourable Member for Galway with the legal objections of the A ttorriey-Getteral. He suggested that the offence% specified in the Honourable Gentleman's Bill should be punished as felonies, and not as misdemeanors. it was worded according to this suggestion, he taw no objection to the Hon. Mernher's Bill. 31r. GOLII,BURN said the question was, whether the offences specified in the Honourable Member's Bill, and the Act of the Honourable Member for Knaresborough, should be in future punished as felonies or as misdemeanors. In his opinion the more advisable ccurve was to leave the law as it at present stood. If the present law was not sufficient, the proper course would be to move the repeal of the Honourable Member for Knaresbomugh's Act, and when that waft repealed, to introduce the present Bill. To pass the prevent Bill wlfilst Sir J. Maekintosh's Act remained in the Statute Book unrepealed, would be inconsistent with every prin. ciple of sound legislation. After a new words from Mr. poxes and Mr. S. RICE, The House divided, when there appeared Against the second reading 27 f For it 18 Majority 9. CHURCH LANDS EXCHANGE BILL. When strangers were re-admitted, Mr. GREENE was addressing the Horse on the bringing up of the Report of the Church Lands Exchange Bill, and moving an amendment, which would go totinnul the limit of 40 acres created by the Bill respecting exchanges effected by certain classes of pro prietors. Trustees of charities, he said, were not limited in the exchanges which they might make, and he thought it most unwise to restrain Deans and Chapters. Lora .PALM E RSTON opposed the amendment, and Mr. LOCKHART supported it, After a few words from Mr. MONCK, Mr. C. WILSON made some observations in support of the amendment, as did Mr. JOHN BENETT (Wilts), when the House divided, Against the amendment 33 For it 13 j Majority 26. SPRING GUNS. After the division, Mr. TENNYSON was found addressing the House on the se cond reading of the Spring Ouns Bill. lie spoke in terms of strong censure of the practice of seating spring guns in plantation,. He pressed upon the attention of the House, that it was only in cases of the last extremity that homicide was justifiable—in cases of rape, burglary, or in such eases as the party attacked had no other chance of escape. He objected to life being taken away, or ! even risked, for the purpose of avenging a civil injury, and one, too, for which the law provided a remedy of a different nature. He read several letter and other documents, detailing instances of injuries inflicted by those destructive engines, and enumerated some judi cial opinions on the subject ; amongst others, the judgments of Lord Chic f Justice Abbott, the present Chief Justice of the Com mon Pleas (then a Putisne Judge in the Court of King's Beath) as well as that of Mr. Justice lloiroyd. It only re mained for him to state to the House what were the provisions of the Bill. The Bill eaaeted that where any person should be in. jawed by the going off of any of the:" spring guns, but not mortally, that then the person on whose premises those guns were set, should be adjudged guilty of a misdeme►nour ; and if any person should die within a year and a day after being shot by any spring gun front the effect!' of those murderous engines, the Bill then made the per son on whose premises the gun was set, guilty of manslaughter. These homicides oecitaioned by spring guns could not be considered juatitiable ; in his opinion they were nothing less than murders, but it was not considered proper to enact that they should be so con sidered as the thing haul been sanctioned by the practice of the country' for so many year*. The Bill admitted of no exceptions in favour of nurseries and gardens ; at the same time he thought the present state of the law as it regarded those two specie% of property, was very defective ; and, perhaps, that was the reason why garden- -- *z --- '1 . . 4 - Is Ihni adopted the system efeettintspring gone. With these oh ' sereolsonhe viessisa to leave the Bill with the House, trusting thesis tt isM eppreve of its provisions, and suffer it to be read with met ttpipeigigoirsecond time. Wst TLEY felt himself adled hpon to oppose the - send reeding of this Bill. It was not just to say that the setting of spring. guns was calculated to introduce a war between she rich and the poor ; as if none but persons of rank and etches used that.). The fact was well known, that Individuals of small property were as much in the habit of using these guns on their premises as those of extensive estates. life begged the House to consider first of all the grouuds upon which thin Bills was now attempted to be sustained. The Hon. Gentleman who had just addressed the House could not show to him that the practice was contrary to the law; on the contrary, he would say, that ac cording to the law of the land every person had a tight to set spring guns on his premises. If it were unlawful to do so, then he did not know what was lawful; for it had been decided over and over again, by every Judge of the King's Bench, that as to the setting of spring guns there was no illega lity. Upon that ground, therefore, he should vote against this Bill ; because it proceeded upon what was entirely a mistaken view of the law. The Bill itself was altogether unintelligible. Its preamble and its chums were inconsistent, and, considering the manner in which Bill which were sent up by the House of Com. mons to the other House were spoken of, he certainly could not refrain remarking upon the mode in which this Bill. the produc tion of that other House, was framed ; and he thought it was eery necessary, after this specimen, to consider how the Bills which came from that !louse were shaped. The accidents which had been stated, and all the mischiefs that he had heard of as arising from these spring guns, had always happened in the day-time: the extent, therefore, to altich he would concede to his Hon. Ffiend (Mr. Tenn is mi) was this, that persons should be prevented from setting them du ring the day; but by their being set at night, he considered that so far from their producing evil in any degree equivalent to the good which they produced hq the protection of property, and the prevention of those despeeate fights that occurred between the gamekeepers and the poachers, who, knowing there were no spring guns to be appre hended, wett , sfearleas as to the conflicts with the keepers. His Honourable Friend had, indeed, recommended a greater number of gamekeepers being employed; but the consequence of that was, that it produced constant fights, where blood was spilt and lives not unfrequently lost, Ile could state several instances where pennes being unwilling to make use of towing guns, employed keepers in stead; the consequence of which was, that every evening the lives of those men were put in jeopardy by the conflicts that ensued between them and poachers ; but the moment spring-guns were set, these nightly affrays ceased. In one case a number of poacher proposed going to get some game ; and the first question was, where should they go ? It was then proposed to go on the lands of a gentleman whunt he perfectly well knew; but the majority said " No; we must not go there, for there are spring-guns set on the premises." It was then agreed that they should go to the lands of a near' neighbour of that gentleman, where no guns were set. The conse quence was, an affray took place with the keepers, in which one of the game-keepers was wounded; one of the poachers was also wounded, and another was taken, and had been since trans ported. He would repeat, therefore, that be 51)0111,1, for these reasons, oppose the present Bill : at the same time he was willing to make it illegal to set these guns during the day-time. Sir F. BURDETT considered that the attempt to protect pro petty by means of spring-guns was altogether ineffectual, and that it would be difficult to point out a case where this system had had the effect which was aimed at upon those persons against whom it was directed: it was well known that they .ere generally innocent persons who suffered by it. (Hear, hear.) He begged leave to remark, that previous to the case which had been recently de termined in the King's Bench, there were not only great doubts as to the legality of the practice of setting spring -guns; but the Court of Common Pleas had actually divided upon the question. There. fore, for the Honourable Gentleman who last spoke to say there was no doubt upon the subject as to its legality, wax saying too much. And, if the Honourable Gentleman would reed attentively the report of the case to which he had referred, he would perceive that although the Learned Judges came to that con clu ace). they came to it very reluctantly ; and if the Honour able Member would look to the arguments used by them, he would find a great difficulty in agreeing with the conclusion which those learned Judges had drawn from them. In the judgment ex pressed by Mr. Justice Bailey, it was quite obvious that he enter tained doubts as to the legality of the practice, and that he con sidered the practice very inhuman. If, too, the principle of law which was quoted by Mr. Justice Best be trite, namely, " that no man can do that indirectly which he cannot do directly, he (Sir F. Burdett) thought the judgment did not make it appear that that principle did not apply to the question before the !louse ; for most undoubtedly the act of settings spring gun, by which the lite of an innocent person might be taken awly. was doing that indirectly which could not be done ditectly. The law of England was so tender of men's lives, that it would not let any one risk them if they could preserve their own rights without it. Was it then consistent with such a principle, that persons might thus blindly and indiscri minately set engines about their premises, by which any one who happened, on whatever occasion it might he, to pass that way, should be shot and deprived of life ? It seemed to him to be a thing perfectly untenable. It did not appear to him that any person could have a right to do that in the dark and covertly which he could not do openly. ale. Justice Best, in his judgment, laid it down that humanity required in these cams that the greatest possible notice should be given of the fact that spring guns were set, and that the law was consistent with humanity. But this very admission proved the conclusion to which that Learned Judge arrived to be erroneous; for here not only were persons to whom the fact might have been made known liable to the danger, but persons who were strangers to the neigh. bourhood, and who had no means ofacquiring a knowledge that guns were set ; children who might be gathering flowers, or old women picking up sticks, neither of whom might be able to read—were all by the present system liable to instant death, without any possibi lity of receiving any warning of their daoger. If, then, no notice could be given, the right of setting guns could not exist. The pre mises not being true, the conclusion drawn from them must fall to the ground. For the Learned Judges said that a notice was neces , eery, and yet they could not show that this notice was given; and, therefore, the judgment must be erroneous, as this was a postulate in the argument that could not be admit ted in point of fair reamniug and sound logic. Chid Justice Abbott seemed to feel the inhumanity of the practice, but said he was not called upon to give an opinion upon that point. It appeared, however, to him (Sir F. Burdett), that this was the only argument for the consideration of the Court; for if humanity would not admit of such a practice, and if the law would not sane , tion inhumanity, it was obvious that the question which the Learned Judges had to decide resolved itself entirely into a matter of feeling. But it did not front that judgment appear that . the setting of spring -tguns was legal for the protection of game; that was an argument which aid not seem to have been adverted to by any of the Learned Judges, who applied themselves only to the question of right to set guns to prevent trespasses on the land, which was a propriety recognised by law, and not for the protection of game, which, according to the common law of Eng land was not property. This was the great evil, and it became the House to see whether a better system could not be devised than that which was but little else than the cause of a constant civil war being kept up between the rich and poor classes in the country. If, indeed, it could be shown that the intention of these spring guns were answered, and that the mischiefs arising from the Game Laws were wholly suppressed by them, the . question would then be whether it would not be better to have spring guns than all. the results which flowed from dime I ws ? But when it wax seen that notwithstanding-them spring guns, all the evils of the (lame Laws still existed, the proof of which was obvious enough in the fact that there lacked no supply of game in the market, it was clear that the art= did not have the effect it was said to promote, and that therefore, as it operated very injuriously to the interests and even lives of the people, he considered that such a pernicious system ought immediately to be Nuomemed. Mr. W. R- N. COLBORNE opposed the Bill. Whatever might be the fate of this Bill, he was not prepared to admire the humanity of shone who supported it, because it canoed the destruc tion of human life, and yet at the sante boasted that they had always a good organised force ready to turn out against those who should trespass upon their property, although such a meeting was well known to be at the peril of their hires. If the blood which was spilt in these nightly contests could possibly be compared with what 1 w as spilt by means of spring guns (and no one lamented such a fact more smiously than he did,) his conviction was, that the tide of public opinion would not run so much against the system of pro tection by the means of guns as it possibly did at present. (Hear.) Mr. If. GURNEY !supported the Bill. It was impossible that the common law of this country could be brought to prove the le gality of setting such murderous engines as these. He could not refrain from expressing his great obligation to the Noble Lord who originated this measure. That Noble Lord enjoyed an fine a pre. serve as any gentleman in the country without using a single spring gun ; this 'hewed that game might be enjoyed without these deadly engines. Lord BINNING approved of the principle of the Bill, which went to prevent spring guns being set to preserve game, but it also embraced other principles, and WAS drawn up in so strange a manner, that it ought to be objected to. The Bill went to prevent spring guns being set in nursery gardens and walled gardens; these were a very different species of property from that of game, and he thought the public opinion was not so decided against the setting of guns for the preservation of property which was essential to life, although they might be opposed to the Game Laws. The Bill was, in fact, drawn in so strange a manner, that he did not know whether it could be altered in a Committee. If the man who should be iejored by a spring-gun should die within a year and a day, it was manslaughter; but if he hliottld not die, then it was only a misdemeanor; but then came a clause which enacted that all actions were to be begun within six months. He moat say he thought this was a specimen of very blundering le;islation, and he Was certainly sttrprtsed at it coming as it did from that House, where they were so very much disposed to criticise whatever came up to the ii from this Howse. Public opinion was very much alive ' titan: this subject, and he thought the House ought to pay attention to the opinion ; but sure he was that the people would not be satisfied with the arguments that had been used to-night against the principle of the Bill. Mr. SCAR LETT made some observations in explanation, • we understood, of the clause% relating to the time for bringing the action ; but his words were inaudible in the gallery. He confined it monied to him very extraordinary that the law should permit that to be clone involuntarily which could not he done voluntarily. The law of England did not recognise game as being a property ; and it seemed to him that the use of such violent means to preserve that which was not property by the common law, was a great Feeley once. On the whole, he could not consider that, for the purpose of preventing poaching, it was either propet,just,neceroary, or humane, to erdanger the lives of innocent person% by setting spring guns for the preservation of game. (Bear.) It was further matter of doubt n ;._ --~ t ..- ~ ~ N L 1' .. ilk ~~'l , ! 3 9.ke"-g% . , • Tei:n 4, .~ how far there existed an; o r a ig e t r :o set such destructive engines, ev e , to endanger the lives of themselves. TENNYSON replied. The House then divided, when there appeared For the second reading, 39 I Against it . n majority in favour of the second reading, IL GARDENS PROTECTION BILL The Gardens Protection Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. ASSESSORS AT ELECTIONS BILL. Mr. H. TWISS moved that the House do resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House on the Assessors at Elections Bill. On the question that the Speaker do leave the chair, Mr. HOBHOUSE said thus Bill had been before the House re. peatedly during the last Session and that before; in fact, it had been almost coeval with his recollection, and the existence of the present Parliament. He could not concur in the propriety of going into a question of such importance as it regarded the election law., at the present late period of the Session. There was no want of lawyer% at elections; their interference was already too extensive on those occasions. and he was sure they had enough to do with law yers after elections; at least that was frequently the ease, and had occurred to many other Hon. Members, if not to himself. (A laugh.) Ile would merely ask the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Twig%) why he had deferred the Bill till the present late pe. riod of the Session, if it were nut through a consciousness of its un palatable and unwelcome nature? Mr. H. TWISS said he had brought the Bill forward at an early period of the Session, in March last, and he had been then appealed to by Gentlemen at the side of the House to which th e Hon. 31embee (Mr. Hubhouse) was such an ornament, for farther I delay, in order that the subject might be farther considered, Ikr.d receive the benefit of the elucidation of other lion. Members at the Flute side of the House, whose opinions were always so valuable. Ile had consented, and the House had since been so occupied with importeut measures, that it was impossible to bring the subject before it at an earlier period. Ile could not consent to withdraw the Bill without saying that it had failed not through any fault of his; and also that the opinion of the House had never been et. pressed upon it fairly. The measure was intredisred four Sessions ago, which proved he had not attempted to take the House by our. prise, and that delays were not always centered and peculiar to the Court of Chancery. The Bill was then withdrawn. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at eleven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONN THIS DAY. NOTICE OF MOTION. Mr. Brougham—To refer to a telect Commiuee that petition of Bishop Barnett. complaining of lite conduct of tits Governor of the Cape of Good Hope. ORDERS OF TIIE DAY. East India Judges Bill—Third rending. Customs laws Repeal reading. Registry of Ships Bill—Third reading. Navigation Laws Bill—Third reading. Customs Regulation Bill—Third reading. PRICES OF Barrl:4l Rank Stork 23.11 3 per Cent. Red. 96j / Data Aect.9l4 j 3i per Cent. 98k Si per Cent. Red. 94 1 98 fang Ann. 22 1.16 iTOCKS VESTERD k V. India B'.ndc 66 63 pm Ex. Bills, I id. 1.041 W. 37 34 pm Ditto, SW. 3d 34 pm Ditto, Small 36 34 pm Lottery Tickets, 19/. Ills. PRICES OF FORBION Austrian Bonds (112 (lu. per ,C St.) 98/ Brazilian Bonds Ditto Acct. 83 A Ditto Scrip Duo Acct. OA j din Buenos Ayres Bonds fl Colombian Bonds 851 Ditto Bonds (1824) 87t I Ditto Acct 88 if f Danish Bonds 1021 Ditto Marks Banco le2f Ditto Acct. 3 A dis French Renter 5 pc Ct. 101f.75c. Exchange 25f. 10c. Greek Bonds STOCKS YESTB It i . Mexican Bonds 774 4 64 Ditto Acet. 774 7 8 . .1 Ditto Scrip (1823) zi 1 ti dis Ditto Acct. 21 j 1 4 1 • Peruvian Bonds Ditto Acct. 75 44 Ditto Scrip 31 dis Ditto Acct. 34 dis Portuguese Bonds Ditto Acct. 884 4 Prussian Bonds 101 Russian Bonds 9!.4 II Ditto Acct. 934 f Spanish Cons. 244 j Ditto Acct. 241 d 4 Ditto Cons. (1823)10 j Ditto Acet. 191 Ditto Scrip (182514 10 94 du Dato Acct. 91 10 Of a *di, COURSE OF EXCH. 4 msterdatn C. F. 12 2 Ditto at sight II 19 Rotterdam ....2 U. 12 3 Antwerp 12 3 tinniburgh 24 U. 36 10 11tona ' l 4 U. 36 II Faris, 3 days'sight 2.5 20 Ditto 2 U. 25 4i Bourdeaux ^5 45 Berlin 7 0 Vrank.on Slain Ex. M. 151,1 Petersburah, rble. 3 Us. VI vienna,eftbcdse fi. 2 51. 9 43 Trieste ditto 9 54 Madrid 3fi (India 16 Bilbao 36 Barcelona 35 Seville 36 iiibrlltar 31 %NOE YE4TIe:HDAI . Leghorn 00 Genoa. 4.5e Venice 27 Malta 0 Naples 41 Palermo per oa. 121 e Lisbon 51i Oporto 51 Rio Janeiro 48 Bahia 52 Dublin ^ ye Cork De lIIU WON, PEP OZ. .C. a. d. Portugal Gold in coin 0 0 0 Foreign Gold in bars 3 17 10e New D0ub100n5........ I 0 0 New Dollars 0 4 11/ Silver in bars, stand 0 4 Ok Zite 33rittOt Pre 00. DRURY-I,ANE THEATRE. Thus Evening, WEDNESDAY, June 214 will be perfueraele A NEW W tY TO PAY OLD DEBTS. S:r Giles Overreach, Mr. Kean: Wellborn, Mr. Archer; Marren, Mr. Tarry Juet!e• Greedy, Mr. Gateje. Lady All wor th, y rs . Knight: Froth, Mee. Marlowe. To eOneltkda with HENRI QUATRE. Henri Quatre, MrAVallack t Louleon, Miss Stcpbina. DRURY-LANE THEATRE. Miss GR DDON has the honour to announce to the Nobility, her Frienda, and the Public In general, that her BENEFIT will take place Tomorrow keening, THL RSD Y, June 23, when will be performe.l THE DEVIL AND DR. F kusTus. The Prinelpal Characters by Mevers.Wallack,Terry, Harley, Browne. Archer, Bedford. FitawilUam, and Penley; Mesdames Gladden I. Paton. and Povev. Between the Play and Farce &VOCAL CONCERT. In which Meow, Horn. Harley. Plumer, Mien Roche, and Master Parry will sl:.e a variety of Serious and Comic Songs. Duets, tee. DER FREISCHU FE. Casper, Mr. Horn: Adolph, Mr. T. Cooke: Bernhard, Mr. Ped'. , rd : Hermit. Mr. .4heritf; Kilian. Mr. Fitzwllliato. Linda. Mho Grad- don ; Rose, Miss Posey. COVENT-G.4IIDEA' 7'HEATEE. This Peening. WEDNESDAY, June fl. will he performed TIM MPEST: Or, THE ENCHANTED ISLAND. Prospero, Mr. Young; Prince Ferdinand, Mr. Cooper: Trtneulo. Mr. Blanchard; Stephano. Mr. W. Farren ; Caliban, Mr. Rayner. Dor!nda, Wes Paton; Miranda, Mias Hammersley; Ariel. Hiss ii. Cause. Alter which. THE MAGPIE, OR THE MAID? Annette, 11111111 Foote. HAI' ilf ARKET THEATRE. This reviling, WEDNESDAY, Jane eft will be performed THE YOUNG QUAKER. Chronicle, Mr. Williams; Young Saillxn, Mr. Vining; Shadra,:,, Mr. Wilkinson; Clod, Mr. Liston. Pink, Mrs. Humby. After Which, • TE D OF MANOR. Sir John Contrast, H Mr. LO M R ilibuns; THZ Rashly. Mr. Pine; Young con • tract, Mr. Vining; Tiumore. Mr. Melrose. Sophia, Miss ticirs.; Annette. Madame estris Moll Fianna, mg. Luton. ROYAL GARDENS• UNDER THP. ESPECIAL. PATRONAGE OF MS MAJESTY. REPETITION OF THE GRAND WATERLOO FETE The Proprietors respectfully acquaint the Public that the BRIL LIANT MILITARY GALA, uhich gave such high satisfaction last night, to celebration of Lord Wellington's splendid Victory at atcrloo, will be repeated for the last time THIS EVENING, In all its variety, with the 14400 additional Lamps. additional Fire works, the Pemale Juggler. the Illuminated Grove (second tinsel, lb. Ballet, Fantucciui. Terms le Ascent, R.e. he. Ac. Doors open at Seven.—Admission, 3s. Gd. The BftITISII Pates commenced ptino.fting Yesterday imeing at half-past five o'clock. LONDON, WEDNESDAY, Jcrxr 92, 1896. In the Paris Papers that arrived last night, we have the confirmation of the news of Of. ANETA'S submission. An armistice was signed at La Paz on the 14th of January. by the Spanish and Colombian Commissioners. This Royalist General has fallen without a struggle, alter all his vain and insolent swaggering. The Viceroy LASERNA, whom he reproached with treachery, fought in support of the royal authority ; but OLANtT A, it seams, agreed at once to a suspension of hostilities, as soon as the Coloir bian army approached him. Mr. LAND, the British 311- ouster, bad arrived at Madrid. The Etoile, dated Monday, contains only some intc',• ligence of a very old date, from the Greek islands, to the ilst of April. By the arrivals from Paris yesterday we have the fol lowing quotations of the French Funds at the close of the Stock Exchange on Saturday per Cents., 109 f— 3 °f•; 3 per Cents. 7.5 f. 40c.; Guebliard's Loan, .513 38 ; Sig n ' s " Bonds, 183. [From the Matitenr of Sunday, June 19.1 The official put contains only a notice that General biltrows the Prussian Envoy Extraordinary, and Sir George NArler, claret King at Arms, have taken leave of the King in privair authencra (Non-official part.) AIRDRID. Jr 8 s 6 . [PRIVATE CORR ESPONDT.NCE 1 31. Lamb, the British Minister Plenipotentiary. hisl,ll F~ -' --.- --t -.. •• 1 ' 1