The Sun. — London, England, 1858-07-23 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.) HOUSE OF LORDS. SIR MOSES MONTEFIOBE V. BROWNE. The further hearing of this important appeal was ap pointed• to be heard this morning, at half-past 10 o'clock. The Attorney-General (Sir Fitzroy Kelly, Q.C.) was heard in reply for the appellants. At the conclusion of the arguments the Lord Chan cellor reserved judgment, VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT. (,Before Vice-Chancellor Sir W. P. Wood.) THE EUROPEAN AND AUSTRALIAN STEAM PACKET COM PANT V. THE ROYAL MAIL STEAM COMPANY. Hi, Honour gave judgment this morning in this case, which was an injunction to restrain the defendants from sending the ship Tasmanian to sea, or otherwise em ploying her in their own service, and from selling or transferring her except under the direction rf this Court. The plaintiffs were established at Glasgow in Sep tember, 1856, as a limited company under the Joint- Stock - Companies' Act, 1856. Shortly after their establishment they adopted a contract with the Government for the Australian mail service, and, in order to carry it out, arrangements were made for providing additional steamships, one of which, the Tasmanian, was contracted to be built for them in Glasgow. In July, 1857, negotiations were set on foot for an cnalgamation between the plaintiffs and the defendants, the Royal Mail Steampacket Company, a company incorporated by Royal charter in September, 1839. It was ascertained that the proposed amal,ama tion could not be effected without an act of Parlia ment, and it was determined that application should be made to Parliament for an act authorising the amalga mation of the two companies. An agreement, dated the 19th of September, 1857, was entered into between the two companies in anticipation of the projected amal gamation, by which it was agreed that the defendants should undertake the fulfilment of the contracts between the plaintiffs and Government for the con. ♦eyance of the Indian and Australian mails ; that the vessels required for this service should be furnished by the plaintiffs to the extent of their existing stock of vessels, which should continue to be used so far as re quired in performing the service between Suez, Austra lia, and India; that the defendants were to provide all nessary stores for the ships and receive all moneys pay able for freight or passengers in connection with the ser vice, for which purpose they were to receive from the plaintiffs an order upon Government for payment of all moneys becoming due for services, and that in the event of the application to Parliament fail ing the arrangement was to continue in force for nine months after such failure. In Decem ber, 1857, the defendants, who had incurred con siderable losses in respect of the agreement ce September, 1857, applied to the plaintiffs f J 1 some secu rity fcr the amount anticipated to become due from them. The plaintiffs consented to give the defendants a security in the nature of a mortgage upon the Tasmanian, which agreement was carried out by a Scotch instrument called an "assignation," dated the 24th of December, 1857, and by an agreement of the same date. This agreement contained a power of sale in certain events, with a con dition that, in the event of their claims being satisfied before a sale, the defendants should convey the steamer to the plaintiffs. A resolution was passed by the shareholders of the Royal Mail Company against the pro posed amalgamation, and the bill then pending before Parliament was consequently abandoned. The affairs of the plaintiffs having become embarrassed, it was re solved, on the 21 of June last, that their affairs should be voluntarily wound up. Their existing contracts with the Government were subsequently cancelled, and the mandate authorising the defendants to receive the quer terly contract money was withdrawn by the plaintiffs . The defendants had taken possession of the Tasmanian, and brought her from the Clyde to Southampton, where she had been registered in their name as owners. It we-. proposed by the defendants to send her to Australia in the course of this month, in restraint of which proceed ing the plaintiffs had filed their bill, and now moved fa. an injunction. His Honour having, at soma length, commented on the authorities bearing on the point, said the motion must be refused, with costs. COURT OF PROBATE. (Before Sir C. Creswell, Judge Ordinary.) 00011BIES AND HATNES V. COOMBES.-CURIOUS CASE. This wal a cause for proving the validity of a will. Mr. Day appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Norman for the defendant. Mr. Day, in opening the case, said the declaration alleged that George Caines Coornhes, on the 11th of January, 1854, made a will, to which the defendant pleaded it was not executed according to the provisions of the act. The testator was a cheesemonger, carrying on business in Cow Cross-street, Snithfil 1, and was married to the first-nims.l plaintiff in 1836. The second named plaintiff 7Vas the deceased's nephew, and resided with him for upwards of 12 years previous to his death. The defendant, John Langhorn Conning, is a farmer, residing in Dorsetshire. The testator was a man of singulariy close and peautiaus habits, and observed con fidential relations only with his nephew, his wife being wholly unacquainted with his pecuniary afftirs ; he was in the habit of speculating, and at his death was seicel of a tolerable estate. About four years since the tee. tater inquired of the plaintiff, Haynes, if he had seen a paper (his will) lying about, and he said no, on which the testator said, "Then I suppose I must write out another." Some li tle time after Haynes saw him writing on the paper in court for which probate was asked, when the testat )r remarkel it wes a culion, looking paper. Shortly More the testator's death, on the 2941 January list, his nephew asked him if he wished to tee his brother (the defendant) and settle his al' tir-. Ile replied no, his affair.; were all settled, and his wife was provi led for. Shortly after his death search was made for his will, and the piece of paper was found in a leather case in a box. The paper in questions is a dirty, greasy portion cf an Oxford, Worcester, and Wolver hampton dividend circular, in which company the tes tator bad some shares. The document we.; in the tes• tator's handwriting, and was dated 11th January, 1851. It was signed by him, and attested by two witneesee, named West and Kemp. The p'aintiff was in a pecu liar position with reference to the attestati7 , n of the will. He was unable to prove if they were dead, cr that the signatures were in their haul writing, or who or what they were. The strictest search had been made for them, and adverti,etnents inserted in the papers without success. West, one of the witnesses, was believed to be a person who was intimately acqatiated with the tes tator. He was believed to be a Latter day Stint, and attended Mormon meetings, and that he had left Eng land for the &tit Lake, but no tidings could be obtained of him. Kemp was supposed to have been one of the testator's tenants at So.ners-to an, but could not be found. On making further search after the te3tator's death a paper was found, dated in 1849, with a similar disposition of the property, and a third paper, dated 1831, which was previous to his marriage, and conse quently no mention was made of any wife. By the paper in question he provided for his wife (who was an elderly person) for her life, or so long as she remained a widow ; a portion of the property was given to Haynes, the nephew ; and the freehold property in Dorset to the defendant. There were other legacies to other parties. Unless the plaintiff succeeded in proving the will in question, that of 1831 would stand good, and in that case the widow would be left penniless. The learned counsel then called witnesses in sup port of the above facts. Mr. Georzo C. - Haynes •deposed that he was nephew : of the deceased, who was a man of strange habits. He lived with his uncle about 12 years, and about four years previous to hie death be asked witness if he had seen his wiil. He replied he had not, on which deceased said, "Then I inu,t write out another." Witness afterwards saw him writing the document in question, and deceased said, " I suppose the gentlemen in Doc tlra' commons will laugh to see such a document come in to be administered to." Witness said be thought they" would, and deceaged remarked, " I dare say they have more curious documents than this come in occa sionally." In January, 1857, when a bill was sent in for repairs to his property in Dorset, deceased re marked what a curious document it was, and said, .4 1/5 , Will is not so bad as that." Mr. Barrett, in the employ of Mr. Dovism;, c h eese monger , 80., Newgate-stree riti set, deposed to the dc cament being in deceased'A han d d L He spoke of er inforination of th e at tempts having barn witnesses, hat With7ti a t je t t fif.ct o i , -(1 and referred to West baying gone to America to join the 1 U"n l " s • He sail West was a schoolmaster, and assisted keeping r. Devi'smi'a books, but . witness could not sprak to his handwriting. : The,learned judge Eaid that wasimportan and further inquiries.mu s t b e made respecting it.: Witness continued —H e Lad been unable to procure a ny document in West's handwriting cr his signature. A. female, named Seppie, who was a niece of the de ceased, had Hied with him many years, and was to take AA annuity of 251. a year under the . will, said she kne's West wel!, aad recollected he aryl his uifis having Eng and to joir, the uti l / 4 4ores. it he bad been gene 00n..e THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 23, 1858. time a letter was received by a relative, stating they could not get beyond New Orleans for want of means. Evidence having been given and a general character, and the steps that had been taken to discover the wit nesses, The horned judge (3..ilurned the case for the produc tion of witnesses from Mr. Devismi's to speak to West's Land writing. POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—(This Day.) MARLBOROUGH-STREET. BRUTAL ASSAULT ON A WIFE.—John Hunt, a surly looking fellow, was charged with the following brutal assault on his wife, Charlotte Hurst : Charlotte Hurst said she was the wife of the prisoner, and lived at 1, Smith's-court, Soho. On the previous day he came Lorne drunk, wh n she expo,tulated with him on his conduct ; and she had no doubt she irritated him by telling him she would leave him. He then struck her in the face and gave h er a black eye. He was not in the habit of getting drunk.' Mr. Beadon said it was a gross case, and sentenced the prisoner to four months' hard labour. THAMES. DISTRESSING CASE OF A NORWEGIAN SAlLOR.—Robert Nelson, a Norwegian seaman, was brought before Mr. Yardley, charged with stealing a coat, a pair of trousers, and a neckerchief, the property of Milo Plymouth, and a pair of boots, the property of Paulus Bruchann The prosecutors are both seamen belonging to the Norwegian ship Lima, in the London Dock, and the prisoner was on beard that vessel on Wednesday night, and asked for a berth, but all hands were engaged, and his services were not required. The property was missing yesterday from the cabin by the seamen to whom it belonged. The prisoner was taken into custody yesterday afternoon by Masters, a dock watchman, as he was leaving the London Dock, with the whole of the property upon him. The prisoner in defence said he appeared at that court on Monday as a witness in a case of felony, and he lost his ship in consequnce. He applied to his worship yesterday f ,r relief, and it was refused. Mr. Yardley said he fully recollected the prisoner coming to him yesterday, and asking him if he could not compel a prosecutor for whom he gave evidence to corc pensato him, and he told him he bad no power to do any thing of the kind. The prisoner, however, did not ex plain that he had been a witness in that court, or that he had lost his ship. The officers of the court said that it was quite true that the Norwegian sailor was a witness in that court on Monday, and two of three prisoners were convicted b 3 Mr. Safe for robbing a German, named Muller, of his wateb, gold chain. money, and clothes, in a notorious den cf infamy, No. 18, John's-place, Baker-street, S'epney. Owing to the interference of the prisoner, and the information be gave, Muller recovered all his property, and refused to give Nelson a farthing. Mr. Yardley—The prisoner was entitled to be remu nerated for his attendance by the county, and ought to have been sent to Clerkenwell for the money. Where is the prisoner's ship gone to I The prisoner replied to Calcutta. Mr. llulberth, an interpreter of Swedish and Nor wegian, said he would obtain a ship for the prisoner if he was discharged. Mr. Y:,rdley—That is very kind of you indeed, and I am sure you will never have cause to regret so good an action. I will sentence th:3 unfortunate man, who bas been tempted by hunger and distress to commit crime, to one day's imprisonment, which entitles him to his immediate discharge. that any delay which had taken place was due to the disturbed state of the country. THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER. Mr. HUME, referring to certain rumours tbat se• rious decay bad taken place in the foundation stone of the Houses of Parliament, causing the structure to give way in several places, inquired whether there was any _ truth in t hem ? Lord J. MANNERS had in consequence of those rumours communicated with Sir C. Barry and the officer who had charge of the buildings, by both of whom he was informed that there was no ground whatever for the statement. His lordship read a letter from Sir C. Barry denying that there was any truth in the rumours re ferred to, and adding that, owing to certain causes, a fracture bad taken place in one of the courses, but which was of no serious importance; and that such symptoms of decay were observable in certain portions of the stone work as was common to all stone buildings in London, owing to the climate. PROBATE AND DIVORCE. Mr. HADFIELD inquired whether it was intended to proceed with the Probate Act Amendment Bill and the Divorce Act Amendment Bill, or either of them, this cession ; and if so, when ? Mr. WALPOLE replied that both bills were on the paper for to-morrow (this day), when the Solicitor-Gene ral would explain in detail what was intended to be done. Their present intention was to take those clauses which were necessary to enable the administration of justice to go on, postponing the others. THE MASSACRE AT JEDDAH. Sir J. ELPIIINSTONE—I wish to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what communi cations have passed between her Majesty's Government and the Government of Tarkey on the r•ubjoct of the re cent outrages at Jeddah ? Whether her Mr.j:isty's Go vernment have insisted on the summary punishment of the offenders; and whether they are in possession of any information whether it is possible for ships of war to take up such a position in the harbour of Jeddah as to enable them to give effectual protection to the Christian population, in the event of any future disturbance ? Mr. S. FITZGERALD, who was indistinctly heard, was understood to say—On a former occasion, when my hon. friend the member for Northumberland aeked a quer:- tion upon thissubject, I stated that the Cyclops bad been ordered by telegraph to return immediately to Jeddah, and instructions were given to our representative at Constantinople to demand the most amplo reparation for the outrage which hal been committed, and to insist upon the immediate punishment of all persons concerned in it. lam now in a position to state that the Cyclops . . at once sailed to Jectia . h, where she now is, and we are informed by her captain that by lightening her she can approach close to tlle town, and is u heavily armel that she can perform 'any service that may be required of her —besides which she carris very heavily armed beats for her size. This determination of ber Majssty's Go- vernment was communicated to the Tuileisl Govern ment, and they were informed that orders bad been sent to obtain, and, if necessary, to enforce summary punish ment upon those who had been concerned in the murdtt■ In a subs:quent despatch which has been sent by the Foreign-office to Sir H. Bulwer, he is instructed to say that this is a case in which the British Government will not be trifled with, and even great political objects, as they regard our alliance with the Porte, mast yield to the paramount principle of supporting Christian and British prestige in those regions. It was not enough to send a general to Jeddah. Troops were wanted there, but above all a public rxecetion of, the murderers imme diately. The Pasha ought to have the power of life and death without tedious ref?rencestoConstantinople. Three ships had been ordered to Jeddab, and W 3 should seize the place if ju,tice was not speedily obtained. In conse qneece of these representations on the part of the British Government, an officer of the highest rank had been de spatched from Constantinople with an armed force, who is authorised to proclaim martial law, and, without re ference to the Government at Constantinople, to icflict immediate punishment upon the authors of the outrtge. I can state further that not only have the authorities at Constantinople and the Minister of the Sublime Porte expressed their deep regret, but the Sultan himso'f has sent to Sir H. Bulwer to say Viet there is nothing which his Majesty will not do to to:Ally his own detestation of the act and to afford reparation; and I may add that his Majesty has placed a million of piastres at the dkposal of the British Government, to be disposed of among the suf ferers; and has signified his intention of giving an allow ance of 4001. a year to the daughter of the French vice consul, and a similar annuity to the next representative of orr own unfortunate consul. (Hear, hear.) THE REVIEW GROUND AT HOUNSLOW. Mr. BYNG asked whether there would be any objec tion to permit the inhabitants of Hounslow and the vicinity to pass across the review ground, and to use it for recreational purposes, subject to proper restrictions, and at such times as would not interfere with military duties and regulations? Gen. PEEL had several times walked across and had not met with any interruption. MANUFACTURE OF FIREWORKS IN TOWNS. Mr. LAURIE asked whether any steps had been taken to prevent the manufacture of firewerk3 in populous places ? Mr. WALPOLE stated that there was an act in existence, passed in the reign of Wm. 111., the provi sions of which, if put in force, would prevent the dan gerous practice referred to. TELEGRAPHIC DESPATCH FROM INDIA. Mr. WALPOLE read a despatch announcing the cap ture of Gwalior. (This despatch appears in another column.) METROPOLITAN DE,AINAGE BILL. The CHAIRMAN having reported progress, Lord J. MANNERS moved. that the committee on this bill be resumed. FRENCH appealed to the Speaker against the inconvenience of setting casein bills down for the even ing sitting and then sub,tituting others. Thera was an Irish bill which stood firs: on the orders, which had brought several members down, no notice having been given that it would not come on. The SPEAKER stated that the house in the morning ha f resolved to continue the committee on the Dlainage Bill until 4 o'clock, and reporting when they met again at 6 o'clock, instead of adjourning at ten minutes before 4, as usual. The chairman had reported progress, but it was for the house to say whether they would remain in committee now or not. Lord J. MANNERS explained that the committee having been continued till 4 o'clock, there had been no opportunity affsteled of giving notice. The house then resolved itself into committee. The discussion on Mr. FlEenaelie amendment to clause 1 was resumed, to leave out, after the word " speed," to the end of the clause, and insert " such works as may be necessary to purity the Thames, and improve the drainage of the metropelis." If this amendment were agreed ta, the hon. member would next move the omission of chose 2. his object was to avoid pledging the house, to any particular schema of drainage or purification. One authority was in favour of the plan of the Metropolitan Board of Works, while wo were opp teed to it. Tee revolt f the referees on weft .prli s tan drainage was opposed to it, and the report cf tte select c naccittee of that house €0 far frem sanctioning anything in the 'astute of the scheme, gave an opi nion in favour of deodorisetion. If deodorisation was to be adopted, there was no use in making these cos - ly parallel sewers. lie would prws on the house that they were doing wrong if they threw their authority into any particular plan. Re believed that to be the feeling of the committee, and therefore he prepas e d words to carry out that desire. By the first clause, as it stood, you defined a particular site where the works might not be, and that was in conneerion with the second clause, which laid down where the works might be. It was c'ear that this was the eecurcencestent of the definition c f a plan of intercepting to carry off the sewage to Barking Creek. He wished the act to give po Jeers to the l'Aetrepoli•an Board of Works without pledging them to any particular plan. There were two objects in the bill, the drainage of the metropolis and the purification of the Thames, and it was possible to un dertake the one without carrying out the other. The words he had proposed impo,ed on the Metropolitan Board of Works the necessity of proceeding with the necessary works for both these purposes. Mr. STEPHENSON said he was rather surprised to hear the remarks of the hon. member for Newcastle-upon Tyne. It was clear that the hon member had not devoted his mind—professionally at least—to the subject. He divided the objects to be carried out into the main drain age of the metropolis and the purification of the Thames and he said that the one might be carried out without the other. He (Mr. Stephenson) denied that, for if the Thames were to be purified, London must be drained well. He could not csncur with the hon. gentleman in ' thinking that the house would fix itself with any respon sibility by sancti.ming a plan which was approved of by t a r g as ree t d heir as the Government refere es as we ll as b y the referees f the Metropolitan Board of 'Works. It was t rue th at t h e re ports ultimate of those ends werepal tiesco n w ce e r r n e e a ;: out on t i h s e t y ag m, bs:thfa i regarded the adoption of a system of interc eP Ingsewers. Why should not the house, before sanctioning the ad vance of a largo sum of money, know how the object to which it was to be applied was to be carried out? The only difference with regard to the system of intercepting sewers was with regard to their size, a question which the Metropolitan Board of Works would have to consider. Unless the house decided something they would leave ' the question just where it was 7 years ago. Every one who knew anything on the subject agreed that a system of intercepting sewers was the bent. The only difference to by the b oos© questio n w hi c h c b a e l t l them so, w between nt he two s comtomitteesoutfall, of and r6 ence'if he mi g ht whether it sh ou l I would e be he better not to g o t oo f ar d own Sea R nh b oo e at w. th oHe Barking thought htt thought oouuC:hrhette tint down the river at present. The plan of the Government referees involved a cost of six millions, while that of the Metropolitan Board of Works would cost three millions. Suppose that EIS millions were spent in carrying the sewage down to Sea Reach, and the science of deodorise tion advanced so as to render such an outfall unnecessary, and when sewage would be made available foragricultural purposes, a- • • see a large - xpenditera would hen been unneces: eerily incurred, Another plan had been put forward, that of deodoriiiig at the mouths of the sewers in the Thames.. That evident was not adapted to meet the in crease of the luetoopeles. The sewers in the lower levels of London were buds ef r. a zry to suit the c-x•ent of the metropolis when they were matle, but as the metropolis extended towards Ific - ip-toad and Highgate, the sewers must be Frelonged, aW more sewage would come dowel, aid if the sewers in the 1 )wor levels were even now in adequate, bow much mere so would they be as London extended. When a storm of rain came on after a few weeks' dry weather there was a flush of water in the sewers, and it would pour into the Thames, and any deodorising machinery would be inadequate, and things would be in the same condition as they now were. .These were the reasona why ha preferred a eystern of intereopte lug sewers, and that after years of inquiry ie to the sub- He hoped the house would allow hind to recur to an attack which had Ikea made on him in the early part of the sitting by the hon. member for Brighton. He knew the source from whence that attack came, and it merited only indifference on his part, and he hoped that h:s professional position—(hear, hear)—would excusehim from being obliged to go into professional matters in connexion with that subject. But there was one other part of the attack to which be wished to advert. The hon. member for Brighton spoke as if he (Mr. Stephen son) was the engineer of the Victoria sewer. Mr. CONINGHAM—I said the estimates were yours. Mr. STEPHENSON said he bad never made an esti mate fur the Victoria sewer in his life; a❑d lie called on the hon. gentleman to withdraw the word " false," as applied to those estimates. As regarded the sewers, all he had to do with them was that he unfortunately was placed on the Metropolitan Commis , ion of Sewers, which was a very thankless office. The bon. member for Brighton drew a conclusion, as he thought meet that whereas the estimate far the proposed drainage of the Metropolis was three millions, taking his (Mr. Stephenson'e) estimate for the Victoria sewer as a criterion, it would be expanded into, not ten, but thirty millions. To be sure the hon. member was very excited at the time. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) The hon. member had introduced two estimates which had nothing to do with each other, and with which he (Mr. Stephen son) had stall less to do, and he calculated that the drainage of the metropolis would cost thirty millions. The hon. member challenged him to a mathematical contest, and he had abused Mr. Baz►lgette's Dian, and accused that gentleman of absolute falsehood. That that was not the case he (Mr. Stephenson) would pledge his honour and character. This was only a part of the system pursued by Mr. F. 0. Ward for year?, and he (Mr. Stephenson) declined the challenge, and would not meet Mr. F. 0. Ward in a mathematical contest. The hon. gentlem n had accused Mr. Bazal eette of using false formulas, and be (gr. Stephensot) denied that the formulas were falsified; there might have been error, but that did not justify the term false ; but he denied that there was error. . Another accusation of the hon. member was that of a falsification by Mr. Bazal getto with regard to pipe sewers. He (gr. Stephenson) knew that stoppages did take place in pipe sewers. Tien there was the accusation against Mr. Bazalgette of going to the sewers at 12 o'clock at night, and he said no honest man ought to have been there a' that hour. If attending to business at 12 o'clock at night was to be made an accusation against a man, what was to be said of the members of that house 1 (Hear, and laughter.) He (Mr. Stephenson) had often been at work all night, and in this instance Mr. Bazalgette only went to the sewers at that hour ft oln a sense of duty. (Hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was not surprised that the hon. member for Whi;,by should have entered into these details, and have made the remarks which he bad, af. er the speech of the hon. member for - - Brighton ; but as both hon. gentlemen had had oppor tunities of expressing their views, he hoped he might remind the committee that this ditcussion had nothing to do with the clause before them. (Hear, hear.) Mr. CONINGIIA.O said that the hon. member for Whitby had treated the statements he had made that morning as if they had emanated from Mr. F. 0. Ward ; but he would remind the hon. member that the state ments were quoted from Parliamentary papers, and that the charge against Mr. Bazalgette had never been re futed. He could not allow the hon. member for Whitby to screen himself behind his professional reputation. (" Order, order," and chair.) The CHAIRMAN begged to remind the hon. member that the question was the omission of certain words in the clause. (Hear, hear.) Mr. CONINGLIAM said the hon. member for Whitby bad referred to the clause, and had, to a great extent, confirmed his (Mr. Coningbara's) statement - , for he said that during heavy rains deodorisation was impossible, and if deodorisation was brought to anything like per fection, gigantic sewers would be unnecessary. Sir B. HALL said that two opinions had been ex• preesed by the different members ; one was that no money ought to be advanced to she Metropolitan B esrd of Works till the plan proposed was knoxn, and the other was, that the whole execution of the plan ought to be given up to the Metropolitan Board of Works. He was of opinion that the whole matter should be placed in the hands of the Metropolitan Board of Work?. (Hear.) He would not enter into the consideration as to whether they wore to proceed by intercepting sewers or tubular drains, or by the plan of one engineer or the other ; but the question was whether the house should or should not throw all the responsibility on the body delegated by the rat payers of the metrvolis. That he thought was the best course, and so to leave the Metro politan Thud of Woiks to adopt such plan as they thought fit. After a few words from Mr. HEADLAM and Mr. AYIt• TON', Mr. COX complained that no answer bad been given by the Government to a question he had asked, whether public buildings were to be selected to the rate, and what was to be the area of rating ; and he would divide the committee on every clause until he got an are per. He also wished to know whether the Metropolitan Board of Works had not agreed on a plan and submitted it to the Government. TheCHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the inquiry r f the hon. gentleman was no doubt an im portant one ; but it bad nothing to do with the clause ; ' but as the hon. gentleman thouaht that he had been de ficieut iu courtesy in not answering his question, be migat perhape say that when the boo, gentleman put the question the house was not in committee, and be (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had• already spoken. He might state to the hon. gentleman that the whole ques tions of the rating of privileged buildings had been in quired into by a committee, which had reported on the subject. SJ far as the Government were at present ad vised •hey agreed in the recommendation of the commit tee, and they did not approve of any buildings being pri • vileged from rating. (Hear ) It was their intention to deal with the subjsct, but it ought to be dealt with ge neraLy, and not effected by a side wind in the clause of a bill which referred to one kind of rating. There was no intention by this clause to effect the object of the hon. gentleman, but the whole subject would be consi dered. As to the area of rating in the present case, it would be the usual metropolitan area. Mr. W. COWPER said that if the second clause was to be agreed to, he would cinsent to adopt the words proposed by the right hon. member for Marylebone, but as he was about to move to expunge that clause, he pre ferred the words of the hon. member fer Newcastle as more general, and not referring to any particular plan. Mr. PULLER said if the Government carried out their dechirmiou that it was not their intention to im• pose any plan on the Board of Works, the second clamor must go. They would have adopted such a system cf sewers nod work; as might be necessary to prevent the sewage from passing, inta the Thames near the metro• pobe, but there was not any provision to prevent the sewage when it hal got int) the Thames front being brought back into the metropolis. They must add to the first clause such words as would imperse on the board net only the duty of pr.:venting sewage from goiog into the Tearnes within the metropolitan boundaries, but to prevent it from cerning back, or they must adopt the amendment of the hon. member for Newcastle. • Mr. TITE said the b 11 appeared to be drawn with reference to a distinct plan, and he thought all the ob jectioes which had been raised would be met by the omission at the worg "sewers,' for the clause would then stand thus-e-" ace:riling to such plan as to them may seem proper, the necessary works"—which would inc ode sewers if the board should think them necessary, but would leave, the question entirely epse. Lord J. MANNERS thought the clause as it at pie sent stood was best adapted to carry out the views of the committee. (Hear ) Lord EDRINGTON hoped his hon, friend (Ur. Headlani) would not divide, but if he did so he should feel bound to vote with him. Mr. BYNG supported the clause, in order to leave the responsibility with the Board of Works, and not to commit himself to any particular plan. Mr. AKROYD said the clause would give power to the Board of Works to pour the whole of the sewage into the river ThaMes wherever they might clews?. He could see no reason for pouring the whole of the filth of London into one place, such as Barking Creek, and thought some plan ought to be adopted for deodorising the sewage. r Mr. HUDSON rose to order, and submitted that the hon. member was discussing a plan not before the house, instead of confining himself -to the clause. Mr. AKROYD said the question was whether the sewage should be carried without the bounds of the me tropelis. (Hear.) The committee which had been sit• Ling on the subject had madeariany valuable sugge.tions, and he thought their proceedings would be rendered en tirely useless if the house legi,lated before hon. members had the opportuniiy of examining the evidence, It was his intention to vote fur the amendment of the hon. mem lor-..r for Newcastle. Alter o a A f ß e w ii w E ogs s f a r i o d m t 1)0 Mr. G d i ffi o n a i r r y iT io ll, which the house was placed Governmentwa s cause . d T b b y e thehou house was i s s Ia called etory uponpropositionof en dorse the Metropolitan Beard of Works' plat), and to guarantee 3,000,000/. to be laid out in eee:cuting that plan. Either the board or the Government ought to have power to deal with the question. But the bill was nothing less than a daring attempt to amalgamate the authority of the House of Commons with the power of the Board of Works. (Hear ) It was his intention to vote against every clause of the bill, Mr. YOUNG did not think it fair to introduce words by whicb, if the plan sheuld fail, the house might be charged with baying sanctioned it. The committee then divided. Tire numbers were— For the amendment 34 Against Majority The clause was then agreed to, On clause 2, "Points of outfall, &e.." an amendment was proposed at the end of the clause, providing that "the board may mike ou falls at any point or points within either of the parishesef Kensi e g ten or F n lh a r a on the lef t bank, and any print not higher op than the rive!- ' Lea on the het side, nor Deptford on the right side." Lord EI3IIINGTON protested both against the clause and the amendment, ae it would be committing ;he house to a view as to the best mode of purifying the Thames and effoctiug the mesa drainage of the metropolis, and thus cause the hon-e to be held renponsitle for every thing that might be done under the clause. M r. 'WINGFIELD obje.eted to the second clause. Sir J. SHELLEY said the clause would be better with the ainednuient, but it would be hotter still to strike out the clause altogether. He hoped the house would wash their hands of tate whole thing and learn the re spousibility on the Metropolitan Board of Works. Mr. CONINGILaIat said, as he should vote for the re jection of the whole clause, he sheuld not press the amendment of which he pad given notice. Mr. CUBIIT remarked that if he understood the eirsuie alight, they might deedeilee aerywhsee and dia. charge where they pleased, provided they deodorised during the whole year. Mr. AKROYD thought the best mode was to get rid of the clause altogether. After some further discussion, Lord J. MANNERS said the first part of the clause was put in as a safeguard to the inhabitants on the banks of the Thames. The second paragraph was inserted as a safeguard against a nuisance derived not from sewage but from the matter deodorised. The Go :trnment had no great wish as to the amendment, which was to relieve tears which were perhaps rather exaggerated. The 26th clause, he thought, would afford a sufficient safeguard, and if it did not it could easily be altered to be effective for that purpose. Sir D. NORREYS objected to making the house deo dorisers. If the right hon. gentleman wanted six millions instead of three, he might have so far as be was con cerned, but he thought the house ought not to pledge themselves to a particular mode of drainage. Mr. A YRTON appealed to Government to strike out the chine. He had studied all the blee-books on this subject, and their appendices, and the only thing he was satisfied about was that they must have the intercepting system. That would take several years to complete, and by the time it was completed they would perhaps have arrived at a practical solution of what they were to do with the sewage. After a few observations from Mr. PULLER, The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause was struck out. Clause 3 was agreed to without amendment. On clause 4, " power of taking land to apply for the purpose of deodorising works," Mr. CONINGITANI moved an amendment, to pro vide that the works should he beyond the metropolis. Lord J. MANNERS thought the widest possible dis cretion ought to bo left to the Board of Works. Mr.TITE denied that deodorising works need be offen sive, and quoted the evidence of Mr. Wixstead to that effect. Sir J. SHELLEY observed that unfortunately what ever one scientifi witness said was always contradicted by another. (No, no.) Sir. C. BURRELL said that the works at Chichester were not found to create the smallest nuisance. The clause was agreed to. On clause 5, "The Metropolitan Board of Works may appoint a committee for the purposes of the works," Mr. ROUPELL moved as an amendment that the number of the committee should be nine instead of 15. Sir B. HALL hoped the noble lord would strike out the clause, the Board of Works having already the power of appointing committees for any purpose, provided that such committees reported all their acts to the Board of Works for its approval. The number of the committee ought, at any rate, to be much larger than Six, but the precise number had better be hft to the board. (Hear.) Mr. S. WOR,TLEY agreed that the clause ought to be omitted, and he believed that Mr. Gladstone and Sir J. Graham were of the same opinion. Lord J. MANNERS was willing to substitute fifteen, the number suggested by the metropolitan delegates. The Board of Works would of course determine on the plan, but when it had once done that, it would be far bet ter to leave the carrying out of the plan to a committee. Besides, the clause h-ft the appointment of ouch commit tee entirely to the discretion of the board. Mr. AYRTON supported the suggestion to omit the clause . Sir J. SHELLEY likewise objected to the clause. Mr. S. WORTLEY said that when the committee was once appointed it could not be modified, however mach the opinion of the board itself might bare changed. L rd J. MANNERS agreed to omit both this and the following clause. (Hear, hear.) Clauses 7 and 8 (money clauses) were agreed to with out discussion. On clause 9, " The Treasury may guarantee payment of moneys borrowed," Mr. ROUPELL moved to add the following proviso : —" And no such payment of principal or interest shall be so guaranteed by the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury, except upon a certificate of such officer as they shall appoint, that the works from time to time con structed by the Metropolitan Beard of Works for tho purification of the Thames, and for the improvement of the drainage of the metropolis, have been in all respects designed and executed confermably to the provisions of this act." Lord J. MANNERS said the proposal was a some what Irish one. (Hear.) Money was wanted to execute works, and the hon. gentleman proposed to give the gua rantee which would be required for raising that money after the works themselves had bee❑ coupleted. (Rear.) The proviso was negatived. Mr. AKROYD then moved to omit the clause which seemed to him to introduce quite a new principle. Other towns corded out necessary improvements without trou bling Parliament, and he could not see why London, the wealthiest city in the world, should coma there begging for tt.e aid of a Government guarantee? But that was not all. Even conceding that there slacuhl be a guaran tee, he objected to the amount. They had it in evidence that the deodorisation of the metropolitan sew age might be effected for a far less sum than three millions. Mr. Cooke, the chairman of the Leicester Sewage Company, bad deposed that the works re quired far a p spulation of 103,000 would cost about 6,0001, and that the plan might be applied to the me 'tropolis. He (the hon. member) was satisfied that not more than 200,0001. was really required ; why then should they guarantee three millions! The evidence to which he re'erred was not yet before bon. members. The CHAIRMAN— Then it was quite irregular to re fer to it Mr. AKROYD bowed to the authority of the right hon. gentleman ; but he protested against proceeding any further with the subj-ct until the house was in pm:- session of evidence ief RO much importance. (Ulcer.) Mr. W. WILLIAMS was surprised at the observe tiens of the hon. gentleman. The metropolis did not want the Government to risk a f srthing by it. (Hear.) Mr. HAMILTON said there was hardly a municipal iutioni in tae kingdom that had not borrowed money through the Exchequer Commissioners. (Cheers.) There was no rick in giving the guarantee—the only object of which was to enable the Board of Works to obtain the money on easier terms, there beine , in the country a large amount of property which could ' only be invested in Government securities. (Hear, hear.) The clause was then agreed to, as was clause 10, "Securities transferable by delivery." Oa clause 11, " Money borrowed under the act to be applied only to works under the act," Mr. READLAM moved the f ollowing proviso : " Provided al Nays, that it shall be lawful for the said Metropolitan Board of Works to expend a sum not ex ceeding 10,0001. in experiments, with the object of de termining the most efficient means for carrying into (see cution the objects of this act, or any further sum, with the sanction of the commissioners of the Treasury ; and in making any such (assortments it shall be lawful for the said board to use powers conferred upon them for the purposes of this act." Sir J. SEIELLEY thought it objectionable to spend any more money in experiments. It they offered a bonus of 10,000/. the board would be completely overwhelmed with new eel-seines. Lord J. MANNEPe3 said that the board had all the power that was necessary. He hoped the amendment would not be pressed. Alter a few wards from Mr. EurLER, The amendment was negatived without a division. On clause 12, Sir B. HALL suggested one or two verbal ameml mentet, which were agreed to, Mr. D. GRIFFITH thought it desirable that the Government should have some control over the expen diture of the money. Things might go wrong under the 'management of the Metropolitan .Biard, and it was ab solutely e:seatial that Government should have the power of interfering. He moved the following addition to the clause :--" - And should such report so laid before them by such inspecting engineer cause the Com lalle• sionera of her Majesty's Treasury to entertain serious doubts as to the eligibility of the course taken by the Metropolitan Board of Works to effect such drainage, it shall be lawful for the commissioners of her Majesty's Tr. asury to suspend the further issue of bonds, deben tures, and other securities, on the part of the Metropo li•an Board of Works, until the opinion of Parliament shell have been taken on the points at issue." Mr. HAMILTON objected to any further responei bil:ty being thrown upon the Government. The very principle of the bill was to give the whole power to the Metropolitan Board. The amendment was negatived, and the clause was agreed to. On clause 14, which provided that the rate shall be called "The Metropolitan Main Drainage Rate," Mr. W. WILLIA MS said that if the rate were assessed iu the same way as the poor-rate it would produce the greatest inequality, there being a difference of as much as 57 per trot. in the assessment of different parishes. It was desirable that the county rate assessment should be adopted. Sir B. HALL said that the Board of Works was authorised to issue their precept for the rate ; and the basis on which they assessed was that of the county rate. Sir D. NORREYS said that by certain words in the clause it would appear that the rate was to be levied on the poor rate assesement. After a Conversation, Lard J. MANNER 3 promised to introduce some alteration in the clause on the report. Mr. JOHN LOCKE com , ilered the clause as it stood unobj , cismable, provided it was understood that the rate was to bo levied on the county rate assessment. After Rome further discussion, Mr. WILLIAMS expressed an opinion that as this was a permanent work, the ground landlord should bear the burden of it. The clause as amended, and also the clauses down to &atria 25 were agreed to. On clause 24, Goners,' CODRINGTON proposed to add the follow ing words :—" That the ; Metropolitan Board, for all works to be carried on under this act, shall first obtain a certificate in writing from the Board of Tiede, stating that in the oainiou of such lastanerstioeed board the works proposed to be carried into effect by the said Metropolitan Bawd are not likely to be or to create a nuisance." Mr. HENLEY said such amendment would give a veto to the Board of Trade over the whole affair. As to the sewag e e f Le n d on b e i n g a nuisance, the town of "7"l'l°h had laid out a large sum of money in drain ing into the river, se as to be a nui:anee to the metropolis. If any wrong were done under this bill, parties aggrieved comald take proceedings in the Court of Chancery. Sir J. SHELLEY thought that some body should have the power proposed in the amendment. In the Smoke Nuisance Act inch a power was given to the Rome Depertenent. He did not think the right of going to the Court of Chancery against such a powerful body as the Board of Works teem" I be effective. Mr. aLKLEY said the Smoke Nuisance Act was in restraint of a common law right, and therefore power was given to prevent frivolous indictments. Sir B, HALL thought that the Government should considev the matter, for persons would not risk proceed ings at law, but a simple suggestion from a Secretary of State might stop a nuisance which otherwise would not be abated without spending hundreds of thousands or thousands of pounds. Air. AYRTON thought the clause was sufficient as it stood. - - - Mr. COX believed that this was another attempt to introduce the system of having a veto on the proceed ings of the Board of Works. He thought that the clause should stand as it wa.. Lord J. MANNERS said if there were a nuisance it would be against a locality, and it would Lot be an in dividual mealy who would have to take proceeiings The suggestion made, however, was worthy of consi. deration, and he would look into the matter. Mr. WILLIAMS thought that the towns on the banks of the Thames up the river should be compelled to deodorise their sewage before it went into the Thames. Sir B. HALL suggested that the cause should give the local authorities power to interfere, and if they did not do so then that power should be reserved to the Secretary of State to direct proceedings. General CODRINGTON hoped the Government would consider the suggestion just made. As to Wocl wich that town had suffered considerably from the sewage of London being forced into tire, river. The clause was agreed to, as were alio the remaining clauses. _ _ It was then proposed by the Government to aid a chose, saving the rights of ttie Board of Admiralty. Mr. AYRTON objected to the clause. He did not see what the Board of Admiralty had to do with the matter. General CODRINGTON said that the Admiralty had a veto on the proceedings of the Conservancy. Lord J. MANNERS explained that the clause had been copied from the Conservancy Bill. Mr. AYRTON believed that the clause would give the Admiralty an absolute vato oo the whole works. Mr. COX suggested that the clause should be printed and brought up on the report. Sir J, SHELLEY also thought that the clause should be l.rought up on report, and they would then ace what the Admiralty meant. Mr. COWPER, said the Admiralty's powers extended only to the navigation. Lord J. MANNERS said he would adopt the sug gestion made, and withdraw the clause for the present. The clause was accordingly withdrawn. General CODRINGTON moved to insert after clause 3 the following :—" That the plans cf the intended works shall bo open to public inspection for one calendar IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS.-(YESTERDAY.) THE GOVERNMENT OF :INDIA. BILL. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said he wished to call their lordships' attention to one or two clauses in t'tis bill. Clause 28 provided that in all cases in which for merly the secret committee of the Court of Direct( rs was the organ of communication, the Secretary of Sate might communicate without the intervention of his Council. When the house was in committee on that clause the noble earl (Derby) consented to the in troduction of a provision to the effect that a committee might be formed by the Secretary of State, consisting of the vice-president ar;d one or two members of the Coun cil, wi,:h whose knowledge the communication should be made. No such provision hal, however, beeii intro duced, and the &attc stood as it did before. In clause 52, also, there was a verbal alteration required, in refe rence to the time within which any order sent out for the commencement of hostilities in India should be com municated to Parliament. The EArl of DERBY said that since this bill had passed through committee he had been engaged in con sidering the alt , rations which he intended to propose on the third reading. As to clawe 23, it would be pro vided that no such orders should be sent out without being communicated to the vice-president and BOM‘3 other members of the Conned. As to clause 52, it would be fiund, when looked at carefully, to be vite correct as it stood. ADM.INISTRATION OF OATHS BY COM MITTEES BILL. On the motion for the third reading of this bill, Lord ST&NLEY of A.LDERLkV tx,,lained that this measure was calculated to save time and expanse in the progress of private business through committees. Witnes'as could henceforth ba sworn in committees of the Houie of Commons, without the necessity of their being sworn at their lordships' bar. Such an enactment had been unanimously recommended by the committee. The bill was read a third time. COPYHOLD ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. This bill pafrsed thrx , gh committee. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL. This bill passed through committee. ART UNIONS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Tau Duke of BUCCLEUCLI moved the second real log of this bill, the object of which he eaid was to exter_l the provisions of the Art Unions Act to associations fur the encouragetn , ot of manufactures. _ _ _ Lord MONTEAGLE expresQed his disapproval of the bill, and suggested that it shcull be postponed until ac other session. The Earl of DERBY thought several portions of the bill were open to objection, and supported the sugges tion that should ba postponed. The Duke of BUCCLEUCU assented,. The motion for the second reading was then negatived. TITLES' TO LAND (SCOTLAND) BILL. Thii hill par s9cl throuzli c';mmittee. SALE AND TRANSFEP OF LAND (IRELAND) The report of tho amendments to this hi!l was brough up awl received. IVERSITIE ; (SC I O ['LAND) BILL. ThiA bill waA read a third time and pay.'d. COUNTY PROPERTY CONVEYANCE BILL, This bill was rea i a second time. STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATE 3 BILL. Thi3 bill was read a third time an i pa3aed Inclwure of Lands Bill, the LeOtitnacy Declara tion BM, the Sheep, &c., Cont. gilus asea3es Prevention Bill, the Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill, the Pubic Health Bill and Vaccination (Ireland) Bill, paned through committee CHELSEA BRIDGE Acr AMEND . NIENT BILL. On the motion for the t•t-cond reading of this bid, The Duke of NEWCASTLE said this bill provided for the payment of the 80,0001. and interest, but it ap pared doubtful wh , Aher it afforded security for the 17,0001. which had already accrued. in had no °lke tion to the opening of the bridge on the Sunday free of toll, but WA3 glad that both the late acrd present Govern ments refused •o accede to the proposition for the aban donment of the wtole of this sum. The Earl of DERBY thought t'ae bill provided for the payment of the whole amount, The bill was then read a second tinv.. The Returns to Secretary of Stata Bill and the DJ taehed Parts of Coon .ies E,II were re id a second tim ~ CAPTAIN GRANT'S COOKING APPARATUS, FORTE'sCUE moved that there be laid before the house a copy of the proce,dings of a committee a-:- sembled at Woolwich on the 6 . .11 of March to report on Captain Grant's cooking apparatus ; also copy of cor respondence between the Quartermaster General and Captain Grant respecting the erection of a cooking appa• ratus at Shorncliffe ; and asked the Under Secretary for War whether, after the three years experience that had been bad of Captain Grant's cooking apparatus, there appeared any reason to doubt its superiority over every other previously in use ; acd if not, whether any or what steps were taking to extend its adoption generally throughout the army ? Viecount iIARDINGE said that there was no ob jection to the production of the correspondence. The committee had reported that Captain Grant's was the best cooking apparatus. With regard to the further trial at Shornclitre, to which Captain Grant rook objecti on, the-last committee reported that it was desirable that Captain Grant should be requested to superintend the construction of his apparatus for 500 men, in order to ra , ily the accuracy of the estimate of its prime cost be- fore it was generally adopted. It was in consequence of that statement in the report that his right hon. and gal lant friend the Secretary of War directed it should be subjected to that test. It would take a week or ten days before the result was known, but if it proved satisfactory he had reason to believe that his right hon. and gallant friend would take steps for its general adoption in the army. He must say there had been an improvement at each successive step, and that the apparatus erected at Woolwich and Aldershot was a great improvement on the previous ones. Their lordships adjourned at 25 minutes to 8. HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YEsTERDAL) NOTICES OF MOTION. By Mr. WRIGHTSON, early next session, to bring in a bill to amend the statate of gaeon Anne as to vacant seats. Dy Sir DEL. EVANS, early n:-xt szTiion, to call atter,. Lion to the report of sale and purchase in the army, and to move a resolutio n thereon. THE OUDE CREDITOW4. Mr. DILLWYN astea the Pre,,ident of the floard of Control what had been done with regard to the erg• ditors on the state of °ale since Mr. Otway called for a return of their names and respective claims on the 9.h -of May, 1857 ; and whether a commlikien had been ap pointed in India to inve3tigate the merits of tboee claims ? Lord STANLEY stated that on the 17th of Jure last year instructions had b een g i ven to the Govet no.r• General to direct that all bona fide claims should be in vestigated and reported on, either hy the corntniasii9ue r at Oude, or by cc me officer specially appointed for the purpoe. OD the the 22i of August a despatch Was re ,.eived in an,w;r, stating that the instructions wauid ba en' iced inr , ) elFect , 0 Po Z 3 the t•ti.te of public affiirs in Oude wotrldp , :ir.da, Wil3 theraote to be infruccl month before the commencement of the works at some convenient place within the metropolis ; and public notice shall be given by the said Metropolitan Board of the time and place where such plans can be so inspected." Lord J. MANNERS objected that the proviso would occasion confusion, and it was then put and negatived. Mr. ROUPELL moved the following clause :--" The Metropolitan Board of Works shall, in the month of June in every year, make a report of all their proceed ings in relation to the main drainage of the metropolis, • and shall, in the said month, send a cony thcrecf, tc gei her with on account, in detail, of all sums expended during the preceding year in execution of the works auttiorisediby this act, to one of her Majesty's principal Secretaries of State, which shall be laid bef ire both houses of parliament within one month after the receipt thereof, if parliament be sitting, or if parliament be not then sitting, then within one month after the ntxt meet ing of parliament." Sir B. HALL said that the object of the bon. gentle man was already provided for by the exhning act. The clause was withdrawn. Mr. AYRTON proposed to add a proviso, that if the. Board of Works shall raise and pay the money borrowed under the act from any other sources of revenue which may be at their disposal for that purpose, it shall not be necessary to make or rams the metropolis main drainage rate. There were several sources of revenue in the me tropelia independent of the main drainage rate which would be applicable to and sufficient for the objects con templated, and he desired to reserve the claim cf the ratepayers to those sources. The question would at -oine future time c , ilne under discussion, and he was anxious that they should not be met by what might ap pear as a pledge. ' Lord J. MANNERS' feared that such a clause would decrease the value of the security of the rate in raising money for the purposes of the act. The clause was negatived. An HON. MEMBER, moved to add at the end of clause 5, "that it shall be lawful fur the board to elect one of their number to act as deputy-chairman, who shall re ceive a salary of 5001. per annum." This amendment was agreed to. The preamble was passed, and the house resumed. CIVIL BILLS; &c. (IRELAND) ACT AMEND MEM: BILL. This bill as amended was agreed to, and ordered to be read a third time to-morrow (this day). THE JUDGMENTS (IRELAND) ACT AMEND• MENT BILL. The house then went into committee on this bill. Mr. WHITESIDE moved an amendment to the effect that nothing in the act should extend to any suit cotn rnenced before the let inst. Mr. P. O'BRIEN objected to the amendment, on the ground that it protected the judgment against James Sadleir, to the prejudice of the Tipperary Bank. Mr. WHITESIDE did net think the case of the Tip perary Bank, though a very hard one, should be specially provided for in thin bill. Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD considered the bill a dan gerous one, and he and Sergeant Deasy intended to op pose it oa the second reading, which was paced by ac cident. After an explanation from Mr. Whiteside, and a few words from Mr. P. O'Brien and Mr. Malins, Mr. ROEBUCK appealed to the AttornEy-General for Leland to withdraw the proviso; no possit - Jle danger could arise from his doing so. Mr. WHITESIDE consented. The proviso was thin withdrawn. The several clausts were agreed to. The Militia Act Continuance Bill passed through committee. MILL CIA (SERVICE ABROAD) ACT CONTINU ANCE BILL. The house having resolved itself into committee on this bill, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (in reply to a question by Mr. V. Smith) said this was a bill to revive and continue the law which expired in 1854. The recruiting had been continued with great spirit, but it was expedient that new levies should not be immediately sent to India. It was advisable that the Government should have the opportunity of availing themselves of seasoned veteran troops, and it had been thoeght expe dient to pass a law which would give them the power 'of employing such veteran troops until the new levies should be ready for duty. The Government reserved to themselves the riglat cf sending out such additional troops to India as might be necessary. Mr. ROEBUCK said at present promotion was in the hands cf the lords-lieutenant of counties, and it was stated that a great deal of favouritism bad been displayed. He thought it would be much batter to place promotion in the betide of responsible officers. Gen. PEEL said-that a royal commission had been appointed, and the whole sut-ject would be fully con sidered, The claives were then agreed to. MILITIA PAY BILL. This bill passed through committee. ENCUMBERED ESTATES (WEST INDIES) ACT • AMENDMENT BILL. • This bill passed through committee. CORRUPT PRACTICES PREVENTION ACT CONTINUANCE BILL. Mr. WALPOLE proposed that they should now con eider this bill as amended. ("No, no," and " Too late.") Nearly all the points had been settled. The bill was only a continuance bill, and he prop _wed to confine it to that, omitting the amendments that had been proposed. Mr. ROEBUCK said ho should move to omit the first Clause of the bill. It provided for the payment of tra yelling expenses, which would give a great advantage to a rich candidate. He had heard of cases in London where cabmen hal . been hired on these terms :—"I'll give you a guinea for every voter you bring." This was not bribery, but merely making the cabman an agent. Suppose one thousand cabmen were engaged on those berms. (Hear, hear ). Ile considered that voting was a public duty, and that the voters ought to bear their own expenses. Every one knew the old saying—"l have bought you, and I will sell you." He considered this part of the bill a most mischievous one ; it would neutralise all the rest, and strike a blow at the indepen dence of that house. (Hear, hear.) Mr. LYGON supported the clause. Mr. WALPOLE said the house had jecided by a large majority that it was desirable to settle the question ac to the legality of travelling expenses. This was not a law he was introducing. Travelling expenses had been allowed. The SPEAKER here observed that there was a pro posed amendment to the third line cf the clause, which must come before au amendment that the clause be omitted. Mr. STAPLETON was then about to move an amend ment, when The SPEAKER said notice had been given to bring up several clauses, and they must be brought up fir,t. Mr. VANSITTART moved the following clause Teat it thall not be lawful for the cel.ector of rates and taxes of any borough or county, or his partner or agent, to act as agent, clerk, or canvasser far, or to be employed on behalf of, any candidate for such borough or county ; and any such person who shall so offend shall for bile said offence be liable to forfeit the sum of 501. to any person who shall sue for the same, together with full costs o` suit." Mr. CRAUFURD moved that the house do now ad journ. He said he was quite opposed to the bill, which could not be allowed to pass at that hour of the. night. Mr. WALPOLE said he could not resist that motion at the time (10 minutes past one), but ho would fix the bill for the morning sitting of this day. DRAFTS ON BANKERS' LAW AMENDMENT BILL. This bill passed through committee. CLERK OF PETTY SESSIONS (I R E LAND) BILL. Tois bill was read a third time and pa•ssd. NEW WRITS BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. The following proviso was added to clause 1 :—" Pro vided always, that any member of the House of Com mons accepting such office shall forthwith notify in writing to the Speaker his acceptance thi reef ; nnr shall the sa id cert ifi cate of two members be valid and effectual, unless either suck notification shall have been previously so made, or the said certificate shall have re• ceived th e coun t er - s i gna t ure of such person in attssta• tion of its truth," • LAW OF PROPERTY AMENDMENT BILL, This bill passed through couatnitte. ST. MARY MAGDALEN (NEWCASTLE) CHARITY BILL. This bill was read a second time, and ordered to be referred to a select committee. RETURNS ORDERED. BOOTS (ARMY). —On the motion of Col. BOLDER°, an addrees for return of the number of pairs of boots of all descriptions sold at the Tower or Woolwich, by auction, from the let day of January, 1856, to the Ist day of July, 1858 ; specifying the original cost per pair, to gether with the price obtained at each rah. And of the number of pairs of boots which are considered not fit tO he isFued to the troops and are now in store. The house ajouraed at a quarter to two o'clock. SALE OF GIRLS IN INDIA. Lord Brougham lately resisted the enlistment of Kroomen for service in India as a deviation from the anti-slavery policy of Great Brit tin. Enlistment, he argued, among an African race wouli speedily degenerate into kidnapping. What will his lordship say when he hears of officers, paid and appointed by the British Government, re gist, ring in the Judge's Court formally and legally on stamped paper, the sale of girls of seven for the purpose of prostitution, such officers, moreover, being fully aware of the object and character of the sale. Yet that, it would appear, is a general if not universal practice among the respectable Mahome dam s of Bhaugulpore. It is barely six weeks since Mr. Toogood, Magis trate of Monghyr,discovered that the Cazee or Mahomedan Registrar appointed by Government to each Zillah, was in the habit of atteiting deeds of this infamous description,•and depositing them as legal documents in the Judge's Court. The i xactice, it scorned, had been going on for 20 years, with the full knowledee of every bAly except the Government which ptides its if on the abolition of slavery. In one case the deed, which bears date the 16W August,lBss, sets forth that a Mahomedan, named, agrees to farm out his daughter by name Chund, aged seven years, to Mursumut Ameerun, brothel keeper, for 90 years, in consideration of R'S. 12-8 received in cash. The said keeper is em powered to " exact any kind of service" from the girl, for she engages to keep the child in clothes and food. In the event of any children being born to the girl, whether male or female, the purchaser above mentioned is to have possession of them for ever. This precious document, which in any European country would bring the contracting parties in danger of Lynch law, is writ ten on stamped paper, signed and sealed by the Cazee, and entered in his book No. 1,419, pages 82 and 83. In a second case registered on 15th Jur.e, 1847, a Hindoo child of seven, daughter of a Rajpoot, was sold to a Mussulmau with like intent, and further investigation proved that the system was all but universal. Mr. Toogood took up the case with the eager wrath natural to an English gentleman. The guilty parties were ar rested, and Ameerun quietly deposed that it was all I rue, that she always did buy children, that she had ten such in her house, and four of their children who were equally her slaves. Everybody did it and why not she Indeed the evidence is much in the tone of injured innocence an English lady might adopt if arrested for obstructing the pathway by undue crinoline. It might be a foible, Ameerun admitted, but as for an offence, everybody did it. • The Cazee, a most respectable Mussulman, a brother of the Principal Sudder Ameen of the same station, also frankly admitted his offence. He had always registered such deeds. He knew perfectly well what they meant, and what they were for, and he believed them sanctioned by Government. As to his own conscience, it was true that the Koran forbade the sale of free born children somewhat peremptorily, but these were not deeds if sal-. They were deeds of lease for 90 years, not sales by any means. Obvi ously he was horribly ill used by the inquiry. All three, Ameerun; the Mussulman who bougbt the Rajpoot girl, and the Cazee were committed to take their trial, the Oozes as an accessory to the crime. It is, however, very doubtful whether the law will touch any of them in the end.. The crime is doubtless slavery in its most atrocious form. There is nothing in " Uncle Tom's Cabin" more horrible in all true circumstances of horror than in this plain story of Behar. We feel more perhaps when men are cut to pieces under the lash, but it is only because we do not realise the indefinite degradation involved in Ameerun's purchases on shiner ed paper. But by law the crime i 9 still doubtful. The old regulations, taking the largest interpretation, only prohibited the hawking of slaves for sale. Indeed sale within our own domi nions is tacitly allowed by the prohibition to ex port. Act V. of 1843 indeed orders .that slavery be ignored, that it be no plea in a court of justice, eut it does not render the act of enslaving a penal offence. We are thrown back, therefore, on the common or Mahomedan law, which undoubtedly prohibits the sale of freeborn children. In the only case, however, on the books the Judges of the Sud der were divided, one-half holding that suchsalesfor proei•ut ion were sanctioned by preset iption. 'They therefore referrel the whole question to their law officer, and at this moment the only positive law on the subject is the ipse dixit of a Mussulman Moulavie. He held the seller criminal, and the Court .sen tenced him in conformity with that opinion to five 3 ears' imprisonment. It remains to tie seen if the Sudder will not admit the Cazee's quibble, and re cognize a lease for 90 years made of an unconscious girl for a pu , pose forbidden to respectable castes by even the foul Indian creeds, as a fair and rightful contract. Whether they do or not the sate of a human being ought at once to be made a felony, punishable with the same punishment as infanti cide, and to be prosecuted by the State. It is not however to secure an alteration in the law that wo have published this extraordinary case. Ten words in Parliament, accusing the Court of Directors of sanctioning such sales will soon pro duce a reform in our legislation. We have related it as an illustratien of the manners of the people among whom we live. Here is a man high in office, of good family, of excellent social position, A man to be considered altogether respectable, w ho quietly assists in a crime forbidden even by iris own liw. He knew well that the stamped paper, and. the Cazee,'s seal, and the formal registra tion were all weapons to be used against the un. fortunate girls if they resisted cruelty or aetempted to escape. And lie strc kes his beard, and talks about a lease of a human being for ninety years, a 3 a custom, objectionable perhaps, but still very general indeed. Aed his mother, chief native justice of the district, says he knew it all along. And the procuress who pays the fees which fill the pockets of the Caz e, looks on the affair as 0110 sanctioned by Government. And the English judge does not know of the practice, though the deeds have been filed for twenty years in his own court. And the Court of Directors congra tulates itself on the extinction •of slavery in Bengal. —Friend of India. LOCAL SHARE MARKBTA. LIVERPOOL, JULY 21. STOOK EXCHANGE—The market to-day was dull aft the opening, but became animated in the afternoon, mow' of the heavier stocks advancing about A per cent., lo jug firm. North British, 12$ B—BirkenheaTis, 67 j—Midland. 93A —Leeds Northern, 23 t i -Dutch Rhenish, 6i dis.—York and North Midland, 36 A—Gray.d Trunk 01 Canada. 9j B--Dovers, 20i ?—East - Lancashire, 90} 91 —London and North-Western, 91 $--Sheffield, 36 47" . Chester and Holyhead, 1(4 il—Eastern Counties, 121 7-lir Groat Western, 50—Lancashire and Yorkshire, Of 2 —Great Western of Canada, 17$ R—Blackburns, 114 6'' Berwicks, 22 1 i —Caledonians, 38, 9k. MANCHESTER, JULY 21. STOCK EXCHANGE.—Prices were rather steady to-claY , more business done, and, after various fl,ntuations, closea at a slight advance. Midlands 113 —Dovers, 20 7-16---" Leeds, 91i—Trucks, 9 11-16 Ditto Dividend Debenturiegt lls. 3d. to lls. Sheffields, 3 ih—Ditto, 6/. pref., 11-16 P —Blackburns, 114—Londons, 92. BIRTHS. DE SALIS —On the 21st inet.,at Fringford Rectory, tho wife of the Rev. H. J. De Salle, of a soD. LUSH—On the 22d inst., at Balmoral House, Avenue road, Regent's•park, the wife of Robert Lush, Esq.► Q.C., of a son. Smirli--On the 2d June, at Mhow, Bombay PresideneY 4 Lady (Lionel) Smith, of a daughter. TOWGOOD—On the 21st inst., at Kensington, the wife of Frederic Towgood, Esq., of a daughter. MARRIAGES, CUTLER—MASON—On the 22d inst. at St. John's Church , .Richmond, the R ev , H enr y G e o. Gervase Cutler, 8..,,A 4 son of Frank C u tl er , E sq ., o f B or deaux, Captain R.:1 4 .1 to'Harriet Anne Dorothea, eldest daughter of Nathani el Mason, Esq., of Richmond-green, Surrey. SAVANSTON—CARY—On the 221 inst., at St. James'v, Pad" dington, George John Swanston, Esq., of the Boor ( ' of Trade, to Charlotte, only daughter of the late Jobil Cary, Esq. DEATHS, BILLING—On the 19th inst., Sarah Pasfleld, third datigh; ter of W. H. Billing , E q. , of Hope, Derbyshire, an fortherly of H. 14. Customs, London, aged 26. KING—On the 13th inst., Mr. George King, of the-Vint. ners' Arms, City-terrace, City-road, aged 67. MATNIVARING —On the let June, at'llowrah, near 031 cutta, in consequence' of injuries received from a rs''' way accident, Captain Norman William Mainwaiingt 73d Regt. N.I. PONSONBY—On the 20th inst., at 29, Rutland-gate , ill° infant daughter of the Hon. Mr. and Mrs. Ponsonbl, aged 23 days. RANDALL —At her house, 18, Tavistock-street, Cove nt - garden, Miss Sarah Randall, aged 80. WILSON--Oti the 21st inst.. at 130, Park-streot, nor-square, Carleton Belford, youngest eon of Sir If e t ' o ford Hinton Wilson, K.C.8., and grandson of the 13 General Sir Robert Wilson, K.M.T. iG/IDON ; Printed and Publiaheil by MURDO youkv ' of No. 112, Strand, Prin4r, at T : u N ° ' 112, S tra d, in tile 2raoinot of Mae Savoy, in ttia coV Ir of Xiddlepox, Fziklity, July 23, 1858, 1/1 R t ens - b y every eves Admissiot Rt th e it , Crambr, ST. I MF horn Men Loq," cor Evening, Wdekly, Stalls 0 Ihres er , Old Bond. SI dutlrg thi day Morn °Vock the distin to be had 'fast; at C HII TI KAINmE rnmenel -4ek. h. The pal company C " T 1 OrI E e TE ntal— Dancet On TO listlizong ..revroriu F 4 ! PI portant 81 market), UARRI A , eipt br, • A 141 wria _Arr iur i gc t, ginti .alit ee, al " sew nn /volled daycloy Enter pit Priva te ig . ' O fees for !Lori Ile' Irelar 146 3 01 Au, to it , W h uch .uvering Fit for the A. f or , Will b e ree n oed itithoris tic ed in (1 be te ? -or Corfu Aap~ ed _b coine . o r the du E Neis , t o A %II easu p vr red dedu INTE h SOO 8 ed I a,3 7 ...a, bee _ Zrrin~uug of ueatt,Pre " grace. T ll Ikp Ra inu Kt , el . °lll l ET treser t . t Qr rr' 'tl f,,a.41C