The Sun. — London, England, 1858-07-02 00:00:00

may be promoted, and by whatever measure, it will have my hearty concurrence and support. (Hear, hear.) My noble friend has stated that there is an objection in point of form to the bill I have introduced, but he is entirely misinformed on that matter. In the first place, the two bills which have been introduced are not identical—the one is imperative, the other discretionary. But Ido not rely on that. I will state distinctly the rule of your lordships' house on the subject, and which is also the rule of the other house of Parliament. When a bill is brought from the other house, and is rejected by your lordships, then a bill for the same o bj ec t ca nnot be introduced during the same session into the house where the bill originated. But so long as a bill is depending in the house another bill, having precisely the same object, may be brought in and passed. It depends entirely on the question whether the former bill is or is not de pending. (Hear, hear.) No man will say that the bill - which was brought up from the other house relative to the Jews is not now pending before your lordships. It is not only on our table, but stands on the paper for to-night, in so far as regards the answers we are to give to the Commons for the course we have taken with reference to it. When those answers go do we to the House of Commons, that house may again send the . bill up for our re-consideration. (Hear, hear.) The role is, that while a bill is depending, and until it is completely disposed of, there is nothing whatever to prevent another bill for the same object being introduced. (Hear, hear.) At this very moment there are two or three bills directed to the same object before your lordships' house ; and in the other house of Parliament—for the rule is the same in both houses— there are two bills depending for regulating the Govern ment of India. (Hear.) I think these statements are de cisive as regards the objection to my noble friend ; lent another rule exists, --from which there can be no doubt whatever, and that is,- that when a bill comes from the other house of Parliament and is rejected in your lordships' house, you may in your house in troduce another bill having the same title and directed to the seine object, and send it down to the house from which the other bill proceeded. (Hear, hear.) That is a rule which has been established among the general orders of your lordships' house, so that even had the former bill been rejected—if it had been en tirely out of your lordships' house—it would still have been competent for us, that bill having originated in the other Louse, to produce another bill with the same title and directed to the same object. (Hear.) I did not think it right to rely entirely on my own view of this case, but I applied for information to an eminent officer of the other house, whose name I shall not mention, but who is perfectly acquainted with the rules of Parliament, and his answer to my application was as follows : "My dear Lord,—No objection can be raised to the in troduction of a bill into the House of Commons on the ground of there being a similar bill already before the house. Indeed, we have at present two India bills before us—Lord Palinerston's and Lord Derby's—each waiting a second reading. It is the rejection, and not the pendency of the bill, that creates the difficulty as . to ulterior pro ceed ngs. The rule applies to both houses, and an addi tional indulgence is allowed to bills sent by the Commons to the Lords, as, even in the event of their rejection by the Lor Is, similar bills may be subsequently introduced into the Lords. (See May's "Practice of Parliament, ' 247.) The introduction of any Jew Bill into the Lords is, therefore, as far as I can judge, perfectly regular." But the question does not rest here. You will find from Mr. May's "Privileges and Practices of Parliament" that the rules of both houses in regard to this matter are the same. He says : " When bills have ultimately passed, or have been re jected, the rules of both houses are positive that they shall not be introduced again : but the practice is not strictly in accordance with them. The principle is thus stated by the Lords, May 17, 1606 i--` That when a bill bath been brought into the house and rejected, another bill of the same argument and matter may not be renewed and begun again in the same house, in the same se ss i on , w h ere t h e former bill was begu n ; but if a bill, begun in one of the houses, and there allowed and passed, be disliked and re fused in the other, a new bill of the same matter may be drawn and began ag ain in that h ouse w h ereunto it was sent ; and if,l kbillbeing begun in either of the houses and committed, it be thought by the committees that the matter may better proceed by a new bill, it is likewise holden agreeable to order, in such case, to draw a new bill and to bring it into the house.'" I have to repeat, therefore, that according to the roles of your lordship' house, even if this bill had been re jected, we have power to introduce a new bill for the same object. (Hear, hear.) I have stated this in justi fication of what I have done ; and no ea allow me to say a few words with respect to the bill of my noble and gallant friend. I haze no objection on principle to that bill. It embraces, indeed, a material part of my own bill ; but what strikes me as very extraordinary is, that when my noble and gallant friend moved his amendment to the bill that came down from tae Commons, that amendment consisting of two parts, one applicable t•. members in Parliament, and another to persons tint of Parliament, my noble friend (Lord Derby) approved one of those parts, and disapproved, or at least had strong doubts as to the' other, and now my noble and gallant friend omits that part which my noble friend (Lord Derby) approved, and contents himself with the introduction into his bill of that of which my noble friend expressed grave doubts. (Bear.) It deals with the oath of abjuration only so far as relates to the words "on the true faith of a Christian." and if the bill should pass into a law, you still would have to abjure the de scendants of the Pretender. I pus that to my noble friend for his consideration. It is true that when the bill goes into committee you may amend it in that re spect ; but what will be the effect ? Why, absolutely to make it conformable to my bill ; so, by rejecting the bill that I have brought in, you are supporting a bill which emtraces only one part of the subject, and are going into committee to supply what is wanting to make it like mine. I repeat Ido not in the slightest degree care by what process the object I have in view may be attained. Whether it be by the bill brought in by my noble and gallant friend, or by my bill—whether it be by one bill or by two—is to me altogether immaterial. As I said before, I have no personal feeling on the sub ject ; I am desirous of attaining, the ()eject in view, and in whatever way that object is attained I shall be per fectly eatihfied. Now, ae I understand that my noble friend will support the bill of my noble and gailatit friend, and as I know, if Le d 035 ruppo:t that bill, the object will be accomplished —as I know, too, if I press my bill it may possibly cot succeed, or at least mey suc ceed with difficulty, I have no hesitation whatever in postponirg my bill in order that the bill of my noble and gallant friend may be brought ferwarzl and sup ported by the powerful voice, the masterly talents, and, snore than that, the extensive—l will not say the over whelming—but the extensive influence of my noble friend at the bead of the Goveonment. By taking this course I believe I shad accomplisli the object I have at heart. (Cheers.) I withdraw my bill. The order of tee day for the second reading of L.lrd Lyndhurst's bill was then postponed. L ,rd LUCAN then moved the second reading of his bill, the object of which was to allow the ailmission of Jews into the other house of Parliament upon the reso lution of the house. Under the provisions of his bill it would be necessary in the first instanc,i far a Jew when elected to present himself at the table of the house, and to decline - co take the usual oaths, when it would be competent for the house to admit such person to take his seat, upon a resolution to alter the oath in such a wanner as it could he taken. fie respected the conscien tioue opinions of those who were opposed altag-.ther to the admission of Jews into Parliament, but thought that there were many members of their lordships' house who thought it was high time the question was disposed of and finally settled. The compromise which he proposed by his bill was one which he thought well calculated to bring the question t) a final settlement. He cold not understand the value of the objections which had been urged to the inesaure, on the ground that it would give unconstitutional power to the House of Commons. On a former occasion it had been said that the apathy which existed on the part of the public, as shown in the ab'ence of petitions against the measure, arose from .the reliance which the people out of doors placed on the determina tion of their lordships not to pass this bill. But during the last s x weeks it had been well understood through out the country that theirlerdship s were disposed to dive way on the subject, but yet no petitions bad been pre sented against toe course proposed. He contended that when there was a strong feeling exi=ting in the country on any subject it was always evine,d by the number of petitions presented to that home, and the fact that none had been presented against this bill proved most dis tinctly that the country was not oppo i sed to the proposed tilteratior. (Hear.) He hoped and trusted, therefore, that this very night their lordships would at once and fir ever put an end to a question which Lad been so long in agitation, and which it was hopeless to expect could be much longer delayed. He therefore moved the second reading of the bill, The questio — n having been put by the LORD CHAN CELLOR, Lord CLANCARTY opposed the motion, on the ground that it would not put an end to the question, and because it proposed to c4rry out an object which was in opposition to the repeated expressions of opinion on the pert of their lordship, If a measure of the sort were to be posited, he thought it was due to their lord ships that they should pass the one introduced by the venerable and gallant lord (Lord Lyndhurst), [rather than by the noble and gallant, lord who had just moved the second reading of the hill. He would gladly join in any measure which should tend to the continuance of harmony between the two houses, and which would amend the character of the oaths required to be taken, but he could not support the present bid, which be be lieved would have no harmonising effect of the kind. Before they proceeded further with the tampering of the oath of Parliament, he entreated the house to pause and consider well the object of the administration of those oaths, which was to set forth publicly and solemnly that the Sovereign of th , .s country ruled by the grace of God. He bad no hesitation in Saying that he should be justi fied in bringing in Baron Rothschild, if he could only do BO without sacrificing p rinc i p l es which be held in the highest estimation, and whiou he could not consent to forego upon any consideration, and he therefore felt it his duty to move that the bill be read a second time this day three months. (Cheers.) Lord BERNERS supported the amendment. Earl GRANVILLE did not think this the bast way of dealing with the subject, but it was one he could sup port. He would rather, however, their lordships bad first taken into consideration their amendments to the first bill. They stood in an usisajsfactory and anomalous position with reference to this question. They we re un able to prevent a Jewi s h representat i ve from sitting on committees of the other house and taking part in con ferences between the two houses. He could do all except voting in the house, and he (Earl Granville) considered it was a mere mockery for any one to s ta n d u p in that house and appeal to the highest rsligious Christian prin ciples with a vie of exercising t h ey barren restriction. (Hear.) He wouli cordialiy support the second reading of the ha and he congratulated the house on tee proba bility of this measure being passed. (Dear.) The Duke of CLEVELAND said he had ever sup- .:; ~;: Lord DUNGANNON opposed the second reading of the bill. The frequent return of Baron Rothschild Nay no argument for his admi,sion, seeing that those who returned him well knew that be could not be admitted. The Earl of CARDIGAN said that although he had been a consistent supporter of the present Government for upwards of 38 yearn, he for one could not c.insent to stultify every vote in favour of the bill. He admitted their lordships wire placed in a very awkward and un p!easant position, but he could not see any reason why there *mould be any change among them with regard to this subject. He should give a decided vote in favour of the noble lord's amendment. Their lordships then divided. The numbers were— Content—Present Proxies —143 Non-contents—Present Proxies —97 315jority The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday nr MUNICIPAL FRANCHISE BILL. On the motion of Lord ABINGER, this bill, with amendments, was read a third time and passed. OATHS BILL. On the order that the report of reasons to be offared to the Commons for the Lords insisting on their amend ments be taken into clnsidention, Lord CAMPBELL suggested that the report should be taken into consideration that day six months, with the view of a bill being introduced next session f;r the modification of the oaths at pre6ent in force. The Earl of DERBY could not assent to the proposal of the noble and learned lord. In point of fact, both houses of Parliament were agreed, their only difference being with regard to the introduction of Jaws into Par liament—a difficulty which was now in a fair course of removal by the measure that had been carried that night. He thought both bills should be sect down to the other house together, and with that view he would !propose the consideration of the report being postponed until Tuesday next. After a short conversation, in which Earls Granville and Stanhope and Lord Redesdale took part, this course was ultimately agreed to. _ _ _ The Public Gr3ande and Playgrounds, the County Courts District, the Durham County Palatine Jurisdic tion, and the Stanhope and Vialsingham Rectories Bills were read a second time. The Ceuuty Management Bill pasted trough com mittee. Their lordships adjourned at a quarter past 9 o'clock. ROUSE OF CO M LIONS—YEgTERDAY. EDUCATION (IRELAND). Lord NAAS (for Mr. H. Herbert) moved for copie4 of report of the committee of the National Board of Education in Ireland, appointed on the thh eay of September, 1857, to inquire into the conduct of Mr. J. W. Kavanagh, bead in , pector of national 5choo.1;; of ap pendices t the foregoing report, marked A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H; of extracts from the minutes of the pro ceedings of the 27ch day of November, 1857, with re spect to the report f the committee appointed to in quire into the conduct of Mr. J. W. Kavanagh, head inspector of national schools; and, statement of further proceedings connected with Mr. J. W. Ka vanavb, subsequent to the order of tho board, dated the 27th Nov., 1857, depressing him Irons the rank of head inspector to that of district inspector of the first class. TRINITY COLLEGE,•DUBLIN. Mr. FAGAN a-ked the Chief Secretary for Irelane, whether since the visitation lately held at Trinity Col lege, Dublin, a Queen's letter has been issu',:d by the Government to the col'ege board, carrying out certain reforms i❑ Trinity pursulnce of the recom mendations of the Royai Commissioners ; and whether he has any objecti.-m to state to the house the nature of the proposed reforms ? Lord NAAS said that many communications had lately taken place bet peen her Mhjesty's Government, and the :tuthcrities of Trinity Culiege, arid communica• tions had also passed between the provost and senior fellows and the junior I,llows ~ f the college, awl he was happy to say that a scheme bad been agreed upon be tween the junior and senior fellows, by means of which coneideraW.e improvements were to be effected in the institution --changes of a in-,st important character, which would aft', ct the educational, adnoinMrativo, and financial condition of the college. He was also informed that a draft of a Qieen's letter would be forthwith sub mitted to the Government, and he hoped from the course of proceedings that hal been taken that there Wilo4 every prospect of a most fortunate result being obtained, and he believed that impr::vernent would be effected in Tri nity College, Dubin, which would r:nuov e m a n y difficul- ties and unfortunate differences which had lately occurred, and which would in a very great degree tend to the gene ral efficiency or the institution. (11 , 3 r, hear.) Mr. FAGAN esid the answer of the noble lord was so se.tisfactGry that he should not press the motion of which be had given notice on a former day. THE OFFICERS AT LTICKNOW. Mr. KII`.NAIRD asked the Secretary of State for War how soon the officers who composed the garrison of Lucknow will be gazs:tod to their brevet rank ; and how soon the medals promised for the patient endurance and bravery of that heroic band, as well as to the gallant captors of Delhi, will be issued ? Gen. PEEL said that the officers wh o composed the garriso n o f Luuknow were gazstted to their brevent rank on the 24th March last, comprising the major and cap tains of the 32d Regiment. Since then the seven lieute nants had been promoted to companies. In answer to the second question, he bad to say that her 'Majesty had approved of the medals, and that they hzd been forwarded to the President cf the Board of Control prior to their distribution. Mr. KINNAIRD inquired whether the Company's officers would be included ? Gen. PEEL said he had forwarded to her Mhjesty every recommendation that had been received if um the Company. I - THE WARRANTS OF 1854. l Lord A. V. TEMPEST asked Mr. Sidney Herbert I whether it was a fact that the commissione rs appointed to inquire into the operation of the warrants of 1854 have declined to receive verbal evidence ; and whether it was the case that no minutes are made of the proceed ings of the cornmi , sion, or the opinions of the iudividual members of that commission ; whether, should the above ho the case, he had any objections to state the reasons that 'had influenced the commission to adopt such a course ? Mr. S. HEIZBER.T said he bad no objection to answer the question. It was perfectly true that the commission did not think it rgbt to take oral evidence. Many mat ters referred to %ere only matters of opinion, not affect, and they did not think it necessary to receive evidence upon them. Another reason was that many of the ques tions affected not only the warrants of 1854, but fresh interests which were rising up every day. Commissions, es the noble lord knew perfectly well, differed very materially from committees. No record was taken in commissions as to differences cf opinion amongst the members, but those members who dissented from the report could put in a report of their own, as was done by the right hon. gentleman the member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice) on the subject of the purchaee of comrniAsione, and in another in which he (Ur. Herbert) presided. On both those occasions objeccions were put in the way he had mentioned. He believed the report from the commission would be iu the hands of the Secretary of State early next.week.. ..• The amendment was negatived without a division, and the clause wo4 agreed to. On clause 8, providing for the appointment of the first members of the Council, Mr. V, SMITH asked whether the words "or have been theretoflre snob directors " were intended to give the Court of Directors poser to choose not only from existinz directory, but also from those who, having fill e d that office, had rotirzd ? Lord SiA7NLB 7 I 7 ;;id that the wards were intended ! to give that power, but he apprehendel that the election would take place principally from the existing body, Mr. V. SMITH said that this would throw upin the directors another invidious task, and therefore he moved that these words should be omitted. The committee divided, when the numbers were— For the amendment Agaie..3 Maj,,nty Sir J. GRAHAM remarked that he was censured the other evening for raising a discussion upon the unlimited - tran , f , .r of power to the Minister of the Crown, under clause 3, with regard to the expenditure of the Indian revenue both at home and in India, and with regard also to the distribution cf patronage. Hews glad to say, however, that i i at disms , ion bad been pro ductive of great advantages. The PreNident of the Board of Control had ascertained the views cf many treTnbers in different parts of the house, and the consequence Lord V. TENIPEST inquired whether the course adopted by this commission was the same as had been taken by commission s in wLich theright hon. gentleman had acted? Mr. HERBERT replied that it was exactly the same in every respect. Col. NORTH inquired whether the evidence the nom- . ported religious toleration. The time had now arrived ImiOsion did stake would be published, or any of th e let when the question must be settled. It was not to be i tors they received bearing on the subject would be pectedt he House of Commons would longer submit.too appended to the report I the rejection of measures of this kind, and in order to Mr. SoIIERBERT said the report would be in the prevent a collision between the two houses he hoped the hands of the Secretary of State next week, and no doubt bill would pass. The noble duke, who spoke with his he would deal with it in a judicious manner. The appen• back towards the gallery, was understood to review at i dix to the report would contain all the information some length the attempts at legislation for the admission which the commissioners thought necessary to justify of Jews to Parliament for upwards of 10 years past, and the conclusion at which they had arrived. said the Jews were so small a race that there would LIEUTENANT SALKELD. , never (if the measure passed) be more than three Jes ts. Mr. KER SEYMER as k e d th e S ecretary of S tate at one time members of the other house. (Laughtef.) for War for an explanatio n o f th e c i rcumstances under He thought the fear of uuchristianisiog Parliament was which the Victoria Cross w as w ithh e ld f rom t h e l ate without foundation, for he did not believe a n y Jew Lieut. Salkeld ? would be returned to Parliament except for a metropo- General PEEL expressed his regret that the hon. litan borough. gentleman had not communicated with him before put- The Duke of RUTLAND was opposed to the bill. ting his questi In on the paper. It had never been con- No new facts had been stated, no new p r i nc ipl es bad templated to withhold f r o m Li eu t . Salkeld the Victoria been enunciated, nor had any new arguments been urged Cross. So far from that being the case, he and others sufficient to induce him to change his opinion. He called were recommended for the honour by Sir Archdale upon their lordships to reject the bill. Wilson, and their names were duly gazetted. Unfortu- Lord REDESDALE opposed the bill, and should nately, they never lived to receive them. They had ap support the amendment. peered in the Gazette, and if they had survived, her Ma- Lord BROUGHAM enterer.' on a defence of the jesty would have approved the recommendation, and principle of Lord Lucan's bill, and said that circum- the crosses would have been presented to them. They stances had lately arisen which had given a different were now being prepared for presentation to their rela complexion to the question. It had recently come to tives. (Hear, hear.) the knowledge of both Houses of Parliament that a BEDDING AND CLOTHING FOR TROOPS TO member of the Jewish re li g i on might perform nine-tenths INDIA. of his duties in Parliament without taking the oaths, Mr. ALCOCK asked the Secretary of State for War, and he saw no reason why he should not be allowed to w perform the remaining tenth. If he (Lord Brougham) whether he had made any f res h arrangements f or the gratuitous suppl y of bedding and clothing, adapted to the climate, to he r M a j es ty a troopsin India ? understood the principle of the bill it meant this, that , if the house should be of opinion generally that a person i Gen. PEEL said that with regard to any gratuitous of the Jewish religion could not take the oath of abjure supply of bedding it was vested in the East India Com tion " on the true faith of a Christian," the house might pany. He had made application to Sir Colin Campbell thereupon make a general resolution so as to remove the objections which would be fatal in the case of a Jew. to get gratuitous supplies of cl o thi ng f or t h e troops, and (Hear, hear.) There was, however, one material ci r - he was endeavouring to bring ab ou t th at t h e troops cumetance which in his opinion sho u ld i n d uce their should have reduced sea-kite. lordships to alter their course, and which s hould p u t an THE SLAVE TRADE. end to all interference and all d o ubt. It h a d now been Mr. HUTT inquired when th e s l ave tra d e papers o f the ear would be laid upon the t a bl e ? Mr. y W. S. FITZGERA.LD sa id h e s h ou l d b e pre duties of a member of eith er H ouse o f P ar li amen t with• ascertained that by the law an d cons tit u ti on o f P ar li a went any person might pe r f orm n i ne p ar t s i n t en o f the pared to give an answer to th e ques ti on to - morrow. out taking any oath, or undergoing any formality what COMMISSION ON LIGHTH OUSES. - ever. He held that there were Christians who sat daily i Lord C. PAGET inquired when the ro y a l eamm i ss i on Mr. in Parliament who diff ere d as en ti re l y f rom w h a t was to inquire into lighthouses wou ld b e appo i nte d ? the teaching of the Church i n a ll i m p or t an t ma tt ers o f HENLEY said there w as no i nten ti on t o d e l ay religion as the Jews did. . theissuing of this commission. The delay had arisen The Bishop of OXFORD said he could not alter his simply insonsequence of the pressure of public business vot Men who rejected the Saviour must in all things at this period of the s ess i on , w h en i t was i mposs ibl e to -. and thoughts differ from Ch r i s tia n s, an d s h o uld no t b e give attention to the formation of the commission, and trusted to make laws for them. He h a d a d v oc a t e d the theinstructions under which i t was t o ac t. Th ere s h ou ld be no unnecessary delay in the appointment of the coin admission of Roman Catholics to Parliament, but could not admit the Jews. Lord Brougham's argument went mission. not merely to let in the Jews without oaths, but all men without oaths. What had happened to induce so general a change of views I—nothing. Nor could it be said that the wish of the people was with this bill. In this in stance, the House of Commons notoriously did not repre sent the people. The people were apathetic on the point. How could they legislate hereafter for the Church in Parliament ? The Jew once admitted, what could keep out the Ma.hommedan, the Hindoo ? LONDON CORPORATION BILL. Mr. LABOUCHERE asked the Chancellor of the Ex chequer what were the intentions of the Government in rela;ion to the bill for the regulation of the Corporation of tho City of London ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer had statel the other night tbat he did not think the Go vernment would be able to go on with it during the pre sent session. It would be :convenient if the right hon. gentleman would state whether or not he intended to abandon it. (Hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would take the earlie,t opportunity the state of public basinese, would allow, to state generally what were the intentions of the Government with regard to measures before the house. R-rbaps, therefore, the hon. gentleman would not press him upon that point at present. CHELSEA BRIDGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Sir J. SHELLEY said that this bill had been long on the paper, and ho t,hould be glad to know what was to be done wit:i Lord J. MANNERS said that as a debate of some length had taken place on a previous evening be thought that when the order came on the division might be taken at once. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. BILL. The house then went into committee on this bill. On dawn, 7. Mr. GLADSTONE rose, in conformity with the intention Lettad expressed the other evening, to pro pose ae ito amendment the addition, et the end of the 20th line in this chose, of these words :—" And it shall consist cf the following members." The object of his amendment was that the first mem bers of the Indian Council should be named in the act of parliament. Ile did not think any private mem ber of the house ought to assume the responsibility of submitting the names of the persons to be entrusted with the-e functions. Their selection would devolve upon the Government, who should subject their choice to the review of Parliament, and if the names so recom mended were ultimately accepted the nomination of the new council would have all the weight and authority which would be derived from its having been sanctioned by the judgment of both house,. By the act of 1853 it was provided that the number of the directors of the Ease India Company should be reduced, and the task of making that reduction was imposed upon the then ex isting Court of Directors itself, and the directors were accordingly obliged to exclude several members of the'r own body. It was understood that this had been found by the Court of Directors to be an extremely painful and invidious duty; and it was obvious that ohjections of feeling must attach to such a mode of proceeding. His great object, however, in making this motion was, that the Indian council should be clothed with the greatest possible amount of moral weight and influence consistent with maintaining intact the responsibility of the Secretary of State. This end, he thought, would be best attained by naming the original members of the council in the bill. It had been the practice of Parlia ment to follow this course when it was constituting bodies which were to be invested with subordinate func• tions of government of an arduous nature ; and the more onerous the duties to .be discharged, the more weight would be given to those who were intrusted with them if their appointment received the express approval of Par. liament. The commissioners chosen to carry out the re form of the two universities were specifically named in the act of parliament relating to that subject, and the same remark applied to the case of the Otarity Cotnneis , doners. Moreover, when Mr. Fox introduced hie lodic Bill, he proposed to divide the Government of India into two departments, one wf which was confided to a superior commission composed of seven members, and the other to an aei.,:tant-commis.sion consisting of nine members, and the names of both sets of commissioners were sub mitted to Parliament. True, that bill was rejected, but its rejection turned upon entirely different considerations. Upon the grounds of precedent applicable by just ana io4y to this case, and also upon the grounds of reason, it was therefore desirable that the committee should add whatever it could in the way of mined weight and influ ence to those who wore to perform the difficult task of supporting and advising the Secretary of State at this critical juncture in administering the government cf India. His proposal would, therefore, give the new neatheil the benefit of a good start, viithaut in any de gree fettering the discretion or impairing the responsi bility of the Indian Minister. The right hon, gentleman concluded by moving his amend vent, Lord STANLEY thought it would not be cenvenien t to adopt the proposition of the right hon. gentleman, which would do awey entirely with the principle ot elec ting a part of the Council by the members cf the present Court of Directors from among themselves, mine would place in the hands cf the Government, eubject to the sanction of Parliameet, the nomination of the whole, No-:, it was the object of the Goverornent not to make any nee lees c , :anges, but to follow as f,r as they could the analogy of that which aetualv existed. They had tound a Council cemp)sed par ly of nominees and partly of mem Oen elected by the C Jett of Proprietors ; and they Lad worked upon that nsa basis. They proposed teincri ase the number of nominees and to reduce the number of elected members, so as to bring them to nearly equal pro. portion , . But in reducing tale elected members of the Exist ing Council they preferred to leave in the hands of the body the choice of those who should be members of the new Council. Is was said that this course was proposed in 1853 and very reluctantly adopted. The change made in 1853 were ceria , nly reluctantly effected, but upon much larger and more general grounds, by the then existing Court of Directors. After having been in t - equent comnennicatiori with those who represented the Court of Directors, he had not heard anything which in duced him to believe that, if called upon to p-rforrn this public duty, they would shrink front its discharge on account of private feeling. The proceeding on which they were invited to enter a ae the less invidious because, as only one-third or one-fourth of their whole number would be chosen, exclusion would be the rule, and there could not therefore be the same expectation on the part of each member that be would be one of those chosen as there would be if the majority were to he elected, and only a few left out. One great reason f leaving the choice in their hands was, having acted together, they would be better acquainted with each other's capacities for the transaction of business than the Government could be. The bill also contained a provision that the members of this ceuncil should not be capable of sitting in Parliament, and the duty of the directors would there fore be less ievidioes than it would have been if they had been called upon to exclude certain members from a body which was otherwise to remain the same. The Objection to inserting the names in the bill was, the adoption of such a course would seriously retard the pro gress of the measure. The Government could not none- nate these memb:re without some time for consideration, and a delay of even a week or 10 dap] would at this period of the H:44 , 1011 be very inconvenient. Sir E. PERRY supported the amendment. He did not think that the mode of selection proposed in the ball would lead to the appointment of the best seven mem• berg of the Court of Directors, especially as it was re ported to be the intention of the court to select none of its nominated members. ,E SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 2, 1858. had been that he had given notice of extensive amend- ments, which removed every objection with respect both to patronage and to the expenditure of revenue. (Hear, hear.) But his object in rising at present was to moos a single point with reference to the principle of election as it stood in the clause under consideration. Immediately after the words which the committee bad just passed, "or having been theretofore such directors," he wished to insert the words " not being nominees of the Crown." He desired that the elective principle should be sustained as much as possible ; but there was no security in the clause that five out of the seven members of Council whom the Court of Directors were to select might not be nominees of the Crown, and, as the first vacancy would be filled up by another nomi nee, it was quite possible that at the very Commence ment 14 out of the 15 members of Council would be nominees of the Crown. His amendment would obviate that result, which none could desire, and be therefore hoped it would receive the assent of the committee. Lord STANLEY agreed with the right hon. baronet 'that the discussion the other evening upon the third clause had been productive of advantage, inasmuch as it had shown the necessity of providing some further secu rity than existed in the bill against financial abuses. (Hear, hear.) The Government would be ready at all times to receive any suggestion from the right hon. baronet with that respect to which it was entitled ; but the proposition which he had now made did not seem to be calculated to carry out the object for which it was intended. It was clear that the elected members of the Council would cease to be nominees from the moment of their election. Because a man bad been once nomi nated by the Crown to a certain office it did not follow, if he were subsequently elected to the same office, that he would remain for life a nominee of the Crown. (Hear, hear.) If the Government had not thought that the Court of Directors were fitted to be intrusted with the powers of electing seven independent members of the Conned they would not have conferred such power upon them ; but, having come to the conclusion that they ought to be so trusted, they wished to leave their die cretion as unfettered as possible. (Hear, bear.) The amendment was negatived without a division, Mr. GLADSTONE rose to submit to the Government the propriety of an alteration in the relative numbers r f the nominated and elected members of Council. The tenure cf good behaviour, unless carefully watched and guarded. had a very great tendency to lapse into sine cure. It was proposed in the formation of the Council to secure something like a balance between election and nomination ; but the plan adopted in the bill might tend to the appointment of a large preponderance cf nominees, since vacanciei were to be filled up alternately by nomination by the Crown and by election by the Council, in which the nominee members constituted the majority. He therefore proposed that instead of seven members elected by the directors, the number should be ten ; and, if that proposition were agreed to, he should afterwards move that five members should be nominated by the Crown instead of eight. Lord STANLEY said that if the proposition of the right hon. member for the University of Oxford were carried, a small minority of the Council comparatively would be nominated, and the maj )rity would be elected by the process of self-election. When it was sa'd that, as the ball stood, the elec ion would be carried by par sons the majority of whom were nominated by the Crown, he must remind the committee that those nomi nees were appointed for life, and would therefore be in dependent of any Minister. The oljeet of the bill was to strike a balance between the nominated and elected members, and he did think that object would be attained by the division of the Council into 10 elected and five nominated moral:era. Lord J. RUSSELL said that, of curse, the desire of the committ-e was to have, as far as possible, an indepeu• dent Council, and he believed that the persons nom nated by the Crown for life, and devoting their minds to Indian business, would be independent of the Govern ment. He should therefore vote in favour of that part of the clause which the right hon. member for the Uni ve,sity f Oxford ❑ow proposed to alter. Mr.C.FORTESCUE trusted that the committee would no! consent to increase the number of the elected mem ber 3. tier E. PERRY inquired whether the Government would introduce into the bill a provision declaring that none but gentlemen capable of devoting their whole time to the bindoese should be members of the council ? Lord STANLEY said, thatas members of the council would receive large salaries and have the disposal of a considerable amount of patronage, it was reasonable to expect that they would devote their time to the perfor mance cf the public duties assigned to them. That would be the understanding, but he did not propose to insert in the bill any restriction in the choice of the directors. The nominated members would be appointed on that understimdinoe Mr. GLADSTONE suggested that the Government should take poser in the bill to reduce the number of the Council whe❑ vacancies occurred, if it should be found that for the transaction of business so large a number of members as was now proposed was not re quired. Mr. V. SMITH observed that most of the directors had some other business to attend to, either being bankers or connected with public companies. %Vali re gard to the salaries of members of the Council he thought those members who were nominated, and who devoted their whole time to the duties of their office, would fully deserve 1,2001. a-year, while the elected members, who would probably be engaged in commercial occupations, would be overpaid it they received that amount. in his opinion some rule should be laid down as to the time which the elected members should devote to their duties, inctead of leaving the matter entirely to the honour of iadividuale He wished to know if two or three mem bers of the Coon. it died how the vacancies were to be supplied, letmauae under the system proposed the propor tions of the Cmncii might fur a time bo disturbed. Mr. AYRTON believed that there were eo statutory regulations which prohibited pmsoes in public offices from engaging in other occupations, and his impression was that the only iofiaence which could be brought to bear, in Case of any misconduct in this respect, was that which was exercised by Parliament upon the Govern ment, and by the Government upon the persons who ueld public offices. Mr. W. VANSITTART hoped that if the members of the Council were to receive salaries of 1,200/: a year the suggestion of the hon. and learned member for Da• voriport would be adopted, Sir G. LE WV, said that in the case of the members of Council for India, some adequate security ought to be taken that they would bona fide devote their whole time to the service of the Crown, Lord STANLEY said the understanding would be that persons who accepted the position of raembers cf Caunc 1 should do so on condition that they devoted their whole time to the duties which they were called upon to discharge. He would have no objection to pr pose the insertion irr the bill of a clause to effect that object, if he could satisfy himself that it would be p ssible to frame a clause which would meet every case that might arim. Many members of that house were aware that not only subordinate officers in . the Govern• Lomat, but a gentleman who had held a very important position in a former Administration, had been partners in mercantile establishments. He believed that the gen tleman to whom he referred took no active part in the management of the establishment, .with which he was connected, and that the partnership was merely nominal, but, undoubtedly, ho was a partner ; and he (Lord Stan ley) did not know what right the house would have to say that a geotleman in such a position should not be capable cf holding an appointment intim public ser vice. The gentlemen who might camp )se the Citified for India would accept their appointments on the under standing that they were to devote their whole time to their official duties, and as there would be a power of removing them fir misconduct, a breach of that under standing would undoubtedly be held to he a violation of of their contract under the terms of the bill. With re gard to the number of the Council the Government might no doubt be empowered to reduce them if they were found t mi numerous to do the work of the Council, but such a power had better be left in the bands of Par• liar/l en t, H e did not wish to pronounce any opinion upon the question. If a necessity should arise ; fur making any a lterat;on in that respect nothing could be easier than for the Micister to come to the house and propose a remedy. They had been told that they ought to insert a proviso limiting the choice of the Crow❑ to those who were not members of that house ; but he did not think that that was either a necessary or an ade quate security. Tne Government would be infinitely wore injured by the appoietanent of a person from un worthy motives than they, could be benefitted by his votes in that house. 3:Co -- Government ought to be left free to cbocee such as they saw beet adapted to do the work of the Council. With respem: to the objection of the right here gentleman opposite, that no provision had been made fur the elected and the nominated members dying alternately, be did - not know how to guard against the possible disparity of numbers suggested by the right hon. gentleman. All that the Government could do was to take care that at the outset the arrangement as between the two classes—the nominated and the elected —should be a fair one. They could not do anything more c►lculated to make a Council of this kind work badly than establishing a permanent distinction between the elected and the nominated members. (Hear.) Sir E.PERRY tenders ood that it was the int , ?ntion of the noble lord that the members of the Council should not be engaged in any other business, but as the noble lon seemed to think that there would be a difficulty in framing a clause to secure that, he begged to suggest that some such words as those in the Act of 1793, whereby all theme employed in the service of the East India Company were prohibited from attending to any other busirmss, should be added to the clause. Sir G. C. LEWIS apprehended that the object of that act was to prevent servants of the East India Company, while it was a trading compo.ny,- from personally engag . log in any other business. (Hear, hear.) If an y wor d s were necesrary he thought that those in th e order,' of the Poor Law C raorniuianers requiring p ersons employed by a Poor Law union to devote ail their time to its service should be adapted to the case of the Council. Mr. T. BARING said if any provision against the members of the Council being employed in any other bus:ne: a were inserted the noble lord mi i zht bo driven to appoint men who could do no other buine , F; than that of the Council. (Bear, hear, and a laugh) He did not think that the C ,uncil should be axoluded f rom seats i n that house. Advisers acd no t were dello were what they wanted.; .. Toe SOLICITC.R-GENERAL reminded the com mittee that what his nods friend had said with respect to the employment of their time by the Council was _ ._.._.. _ simply this,—that it wa txpeot,d that the time of every person who joined the CJuncil should be at the disposal of the Council, But to frame a clausa by which every member of the Council would be botind to he eogned in no trade or traffics whatever was a very different mat ter. Such an arrangement with regard to the Govern ment would have deprived the country a few years ago of the services of one of its most able men, inasmuch as be was a member of a mercantile firm at the same time that he was a member of the Government. If it should be found that a member of the Council did not devote sufficient time to the Council the Govern ment could take steps to move him for misbehaviour. Thee, agaiii, it was always in the. power of Parliament to address the Crown for the removal of any councillsr who did not perform his duties, so that there was a double check—one in the hands of the Executive, and the other ha the bands of Parliament. Every one must desire to see the Council formed of men of the greatest experience and practical ability, and it might in some cases be that their very connection with some other pursuit was a guarantee for the possession of those qualities, and he could not therefore consent to the pro pose'. Sir J. GRAHAM could not understand the applica tion of a principle to members of the Council which it bad not been considered necessary to apply to Ministers of State. (Hear, hear.) Speaking with accurate know ledge, he had known Cabinet Ministers in both Houses of Parliament, and members holding high position, who were partners in breweries or insurance companies, or who were connected with some commercial pursuit. He saw no reason for introducing any such principle as absolutely to prohibit members of the Council from being engaged in any other occupation. They would be al. ways under the review of that house, and they would be actuated by a sense of duty, and any such restriction would probably interfere to prevent persons of the highest qualification from undertaking the duties of councillor. The duties of the office need certainly not occupy the whole of a man's time, and he should cer tainly deprecate the insertion in the bill of any such provision as that members of the Council should be ab solutely bound down not to follow any other occupation. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER wished to point out that the hon. member for Devonport had placed a very strange construction upon what had been said by his noble friend. His noble friend. had slated, what was the unanimous opinion of his colleagues, that those members of the Council appointed by her Majesty would be expected to place their whole time at the disposal of the Secretary of State, but he did not at all intend to say that the whole of their time should be devoted to the duties of their office, or that they should not be allowed to do anything else. (Hear.) As regarded those members of the Council appointed by election, his noble friend would not for a moment lay down the principle, that they should be required to spend the whole cf their time in the fulfilment of their duty as councillors. It was very possible that persons might be elected from their connection with the Court of Directors, who at the same time would be occupied with public or private interests, but he did not think that any disadvantage would result from that; but, on the con trary, the election of such men might be the means of introducing into the Council a great deal cf practical knowledge and experience. In effecting a transition from a Government of an anomalous character to one which in time would assume a more regular form, it would not be wise to adopt a principle which would negative a prac tice which bad in the Government that was about to be abolished been productive of beneficial result., and it would be highly impolitic, in. his opinion, to define, by a clause in an act of Parliament, what time the members of the Council, who would of course be bound by their own sense of duty, should devote to the duties of their office. (Hear, hear.) Mr. RICH objected to the expense which would be incurred for the payment of the salaries of couecillors and their retiring pensions, and gave notice that he would propose an amendment relating to the subject. Mr. FITZROY intimated, from the chair, that the discussion which was going on was most irregular, the real question before the house being whether tenor seven members should be appointed by Election. • S;r H. WILLOUGHBY considered that with a view to the appointment of men in whom persons connected with India would have confidence, it would be advisable that the number of councillors elected should be ten. Col. SYKES concurred in that opinion. He thought also that when a person accepted an office, who himself intended to do his duty, he would not engage in multifarious occupation which would interfere with the performance of those duties, but at the same time he would not bind persona by a strict rule in an act of Par liament. It was absurd to say that men engaged in lite rary or scientific pursuit.; should not be eligible for the Council. Seep a rule might exelucle some of the best inen. Mr. D. SEYMOUR was decidediy opposed to ren dering persons eligible to be on the C:mucil who at the same time were engaged in large contracts. What would the country think of the First L.-in! of the Admiralty being a timber merchant as well ? (Hear, hear.) Mr. G. HUDSON hoped the committee would con fine the discussion t the real question before them, viz , whether the number should be seven or ten. The amendment was then negatived without a divi don, It was then proposed by Lord STANLEY to add words to the clause, enabling her Mojesty to fill up va cancies in the Council in the event of their no.', being filled up within a specified time by the Court of Direc tors. Teo proviso was added after a brief discassioa. Cate e 8 was then agreed to. On clause 9, Lord A. V. TEMPE - S•T moved, in line 4, after "filled up," to leave out the remainder of the clause, and add, "by persons, to be elected as hereinafter mentioned, from among persons who have been ten years at least in India, in the service of her Majesty, or of the Govern ment cf India, in any department, whether legal, civil, naval, or military, or who have been 15 years resident in India; and the persons qualified to vote in the election of such members shall be proprietors of capital m Indian stock, or of paid-up capital in railways or other public works in India, of the amount of one thowand pounds ; or of persons who have been ten years in the military, naval, nr civil service of the East India Company, or of her Majesty, provided always that no person shall be entitled to vote in the election of such members as afore said unless he shall have been qualified a4":iforesaid foi six months loforo the election, and be registered according to the regulations hereinafter to be men tioned." Tne noble kr] contended that his proposal was in strict accordance with a principle which had already been sanctioned by the committee, and also in conformity with the sixth resolution. Lord STANLEY thought the house bad alrehdy de termined that such a constituency as that implied in the amendment could not be found—(hear)—and without detaining the committee, he should simply confine him self to stating that the Government would adhere to their original intention, (bear.) Mr. AYRTO2 , t quite concurred in the resolution of the Govern Ont. Sir H. WltidsOUG HEY believed that by the intro• duction of the 9ecessary safeguards such a constituency might be obtained. The amendment was negatived without a division, and the clause was agreed to. Oa clause 10, Mr. V. S MIT a reminded the noble lord the President of the Board of Control that he had, promised to consider the question of constituting two-thirds of the members from persons who had been ten years in India. La.' STANLEY said the subject had been carefully considered, and the G ,veracnent proposed that the "major part" of the members should be chesea from persons who had bad this indian experience. The words " tnajoor part" were then inserted. Tee clause as amended wan then agreed to. On clause 11, Mr. GREG'SON proposed to leave out the words "good behaviour," and insert " five yearn, and to bo re eligible for r lection." Lord STANLEY sail this question had already been debated at length, buy the c , In nittee had deterinieed that tenure for life would be the most advantageous arrangement. Mr. LINDSAY believed that ultimately India would be be better governed without a council at all. Elect members for life, and they would naturally vote in favour of vested interests. If the hon. member pressed his amendment, he should assuredly vote with biro, Mr. D. SEYMOUR asked `whether in the event of the Government desiring at aluture period to diminish the number of the council, the retiring councillors were to receive life pensions ? Sir H. CAIRNS said the question of the Govern ment was that the council w , uld be the permanent mode of governing India, and if hereafter the number was found ter) great, it would be open to the Secretary o f Sate for India to come down to the house, aed say that he did not think it necessary to fill up the vacancy. Lord PALMERSTON said that this point was of great ineporeauce. lie laetented that the house had de termined to make the council so numerous, it being his decided opinion that several of thorn would turn out sinecures with retiring pensions. What was the ohj-ct of the committee in regard to the formation of the coun ci —that they should be independent —n , t for action, for the Chancelice of the Exchequer had denied that they were an executive council. The fundamental principle established was that it should be a council for advice, and that it should be rendered independent in order to give sound advice. It was thought that the members of the council should hold office for life, and if rendered unable to perform their duties they were to have retiring pensions of 6001. or 8001. a year. He (Lord .Pelmerston) proposed a much shorter way of making them indepen dent, namely, that they should hold office for ten years. Tory would then be quite independent, for it was her Ily to be expected that they could hope for favour from a Government in ten years. In addition to that he pro posed that they should not be re appointed or re-elected. (Rear.) Could anything be more objec,ion able than that they should be appointed for life ? if Indian experience was to be of value, it must be the experieece of this day. Any other experience would be worse than useless, be cause it would only lead to error. Tee experience of 15 or 16 years, censideriag the rapid advances making in India, would be of little use. He was met by an objec• tion that the councillor vsonld gain more knowledge of India in the council-room at home than if be were in India. If that were ro, why its up the choice of men passing their lives in India ? Why not have a series of Secretaries of State ? Tney would get in ail probability men of advancing years—losing activity of mind and body. They would thus have an effete council. He should support the amendment now proposed, and should afterwards prepese the amendment of which he had given notice. Mr. MILLS said the 'case of the noble lord himself was one of those who was a proof in his own person that the coun'ry should retain the services of those who in early life had served it well. Sir E. COLEBROOKE supported the amendment. He admitted that by an expensive system of pensions they might get rid of the difficulty with respect to the inctividual 3 f)raiing the council, but there was another question more diMcnlt nonn,cted with the patronage, ai d they would find tbat the families of the councillors would be very unwilling that they should retire. Mr. AYEZTON thought it would be highly inexpe dient to be constantly shifting the council, The executive council was a phantom that had f!it,toil before the eyes of the noble lord, and had ;,calved him. With regard 4o retirements, he thought they should be gradual, because he saw great dangers in sudden changes. Mr. W. EWART said in order to have an indepen dent council there must be a limit of five years with a prospect of re-election, which would be an ample security. Mr. RICH thought a periodical infusion of new blood into the council was necessary. Persons who held ap pointments for life were always found to be listless, while those who had to go out at a certain time were al most invariably energetic. He thought a superannuation fund to secure the retirement of members would be a most unjust thing to India, by creating a very serious charge. Appointments for life would not therefore leo so beneficial as appointments for a term of years, what ever the limitation might be. After a few words from Mr. LINDSAY, The committee divided, when the numbers were— - For the amendment Against it . 154 Majority against Sir G. LEWIS asked whether there was any necessity for that part of the clause which referred to criminal or disgraceful conduct. It appeared to cast an unnecessary stigma on the councillors. If any member of the council was guilty of criminal conduct he would be liable to be treated by the criminal law, and would be committed by the magistrates; so that by the very necessity of the case prevented from attending the meetings of the council. As for disgraceful conduct, he could not conceive how any such emergency could be expected. Sir J. GRAHAM said the members of the Court gf Directors were removabl e f or "i ncapacity or misbehl- viour," and suggested that a similar clause should be in troduced in this bill. Mr. CAIRNS said her Majesty could have no power to discharge those who were not servants of the Crown. Sir G. LEWIS said that the directors were not remov able by the Crown on an address from this house. They were not servants of the Crown. The members of the council were servants of the Crown, and that they should be removable by the Crown on an address from this holier, was consistent with the whole scheme. After a few words from Mr. GURNEY and Sir H. WILLOUGHSY, Mr. WARREN said that county court judges were removable for misbehaviour or inability. Lord STANLEY said that under this clause there would be the power to remove a member of the council in the case of insolvency or bankruptcy. As to the ob jection that persons would be removed for inability, though arising from no fault of their own, the provision , of a retiring pension met that point. Lord J. RUSSELL said there bad been instances of judges retaining office after they were unable to dis charge their duties, and the case might be the same with the councillors under this act. Tire CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that there was nothing so difficult to define as inca pacity, and every attempt to define it would trench on the independence of the council. He therefore hoped that the amendments which had been suggested would not be pressed. Clause 11, as amended, was teen agreed to. On clause 12, which provides that members of the council shall not sit in Parliament, Sir E. PERRY said it was desirable that the mem bers of council should not be engaged in trade. He had understood that this was the opinion of the Go vernment; if so, a previeion to that effect should be introduced into the clause. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said if a member was appointed on the understanding that he should vise the who!e of his time to his duty, and if he did not ei) so it would he a breach of the understenditig, and would come under the definition of misbehaviour. Sir E. PERRY urged that the words "or concerned in any trade or traffic whatever" should be introduced into the clause. It was well known that a late Presi dent of the Board of Contr. I had been engaged as a sleeping partner in a large commercial concern ; and he wished to prevent anything of this kind occurring with tae new council. Mr. LIDDELL thought that, considering how useful the presence • f East, India directors in that house bad been, it was very desirable that the house ehould not be for the future deprived of that advantage) by the ex clusion of the teernheis of the council from this house. By that exelusisn they would deprive the Inr;ian Govern meet of .Leme of the fittest perseeie for the council. He proposed to omit the word "no," and add "e" to the word "member." Mr. ELLIOTT said that all the information they were able to obtain in Indian debates weer derived from Ea,t, India directors. Why should the house deprive them selves of the advantage of that information which was thought so necessary for the Indian Government ? Mr. GROGAN said that if the clause were carried they wound bare no authoritative informant on In dian affair o in that house except the presideet. Sir E. COLE BROOKE supported the ametidmect, Mr. CLAY was far from undervaluing the assistan ce f the directors, at the same time he thought thrst from the wealth and position of many gentlemen - who had lived in India, they need not apprehend any dearth of information. Lord J. RUSSELL was averse to putting any re straint upon the choice of electors unless on very strong arguments. The principle of exclusion had been carried too far. There were few men who bad afforded so much information on Indian topics as Sir Wiliam Grant, whose speeches bad been heard with groat admiration by that house. The objection that the debates of the council would be reviewed reminded him of the story of a Welsh magistrate, who, when he had heard one side of a case, and the counsel for the other side was about to address him, stopped the learned gentleman by saying, " When I have heard one side of a case I can decide easily enough, but if I hear both tildes I am always puzzled." (Hear, and a laugh.) As the council was now constituted there was co fear of an Indian " agitator" becoming a member of it. (Hear, hear.) At present, also, the opinions of the East India Company were well known in the House of Commons, and due abatement made for them. He thought the balance of advantsge was in favour of members of the council sitting in Parliament. Lord STANLEY agreed with the noble lord that there were advantages and disadvantages in members of the council having seats in that house, but the advantages of their being excluded, in his opinion, prevailed, and he should therefore resist the amendment. He would re mind the noble lord that there were already many classes exsluded from Parliament by reason of their office. There were judges and others, and there was no class of men who would feel the hards- ip less than those men who, baying spent their lives in India, had no social ties at home. Give these men Feats in Parliament4and if it were not a disability, it might be made by the Govern rnent of the day a condition that they should get seats in Parliament to support the Minister, He thought they should be kept, dpossible, free even from suspicion. The mutual confidence which should exist between a member of the council and a Secretary of State would, in his opi• nion, be much impaired, by the former having a seat in that house, and connected with come political party. He thought a councillor could riot discharge his duties as a member cf Parliament and' a member of the coudcil in an efficient manner, and he should therefore oispose the amendment. Sir J. ELPHINSTONE thought the reasons giren by the noble lord who had just sat down were totally without foundation, awl believing the exclusion of members of the council of India from that house most mischievous, ho should support the amendment. . Mr. V. SMITH asked what it was they required in members of the council but to be independent. But surely after their experience of the Board of Directors, who were said never " t o b e gu il ty of art indiscretion," they could not but see that it would be most i , .monveraient to have members of the council iu that house' for unseemly con tests must ari se between them and, the Secretary of State, which would be most injurious to India. By admitting them into that house, they would either bo the creatures of the Minister of the relay, or obstructives, and in either case it was not advisable to adroit them. Mr. PULLER supported the amendment. Mr. RIDLEY could not see why members of the House of Commons should not be eligible as well as members of the Hence of Lords. The committee then divided, when there appeared— For the clau se. Against Attjciity —124 The clause, after some conversation, was agreed to. The CHAMAIAN then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow (Friday) morning. The Herring Fisheries (Scotland) Bill passed through committee. CHELSEA-BIUDGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. On the motion that this bill be now read a second time. Mr. BLACKBURN moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months. Tim house, after a few words from Lord J. MANNERS, • divided— ' For the second reading l6l For the amendment 96 Majority f or th e second readine,, , Mr. BLACKBURN then said the bill had been rejected Three weeks ago, and was now brought on after 12 o'clock at night; but ho hoped it would be 'rejected upon going into committee. The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed. SALE AND TRANSFER OF LAND (IRELAND)BILL. 'The house went into conamittee on this bill, and, having passed some clauses, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the chairman report progress; The CHAIRMAN accordingly reported progress, and the house resumed. LONDON CORPORATION REGULATION BILL. On the motion that the adjourned debate for going into committee on this bill be resumed, Mr. WALPOLE moved that the order be discharged, and it was discharged accordingly. CLERK OF PETTY SESSIONS (IRELAND) BILL. The house went into committee on this bill, and, after a few words of conversation, the Chairman reported progress, and the house resumed. COPYRIGHT OF DESIGNS RILL. The house then resolved itself into committee on the Copyright of Designs Bill. Thu bill passed through committee,: BISHOPS TRUSTS SUBSTITUTION BILL. This bill was read a second time. DIVORCE AND [ATRIMONIAL CAUSES ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The ATTORNEY-GENERA.L, in reply to Mr. GLAD. STONE, said he would, on Monday, name what day he would bring on the second reading of this bill. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA BILL. On the motion that this bid (Lord Pahnerston's) be read a second time, An Hon. MEMBER, atnidat the laughter of the house, said, "Next session." Lord PALNIERSTON,—This dayiwesk. (Laughter.) MARRIAGE LAW AMENDMENT BILL. On the motion, that this bill be considered. Lord BURY moved that nothing herein contained shall render valid any marriage with the sister of a deceased wife, if either of the parties to such marriage shall, after having contracted suak marriage, and befoia the passing of this not, have married any other person. After a short discußsion.Ahe clause was agreed to. NORTE' AMERICAN TERRITORIES. Sir E. B, LYTTON briught in,a bill to provide for the government of certain territories in North America situate between the Pacific and the Rocky Maintain.. JUDGMEMTS ACT (IRELAND.) AMENDMENT ACT. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND brought in a bill to amend the laws concerning judgments in Ire land. DETACHED PARTS OF COUNTIES. Mr. WALPOLE brought in a bill to amend the law concerning detached parts of counties. SUPERANNUATION LAW AMENDMENT. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought in a bill to amend the laws concerning superannuation and other allowances to persons having held civil offices in the public service. A DMIR AL. Mr. WARREN brought in T a Y bill toCOU R en T able sergeants and barristersiat law, attorneys and solicitors, to practise in the High Court of Admiralty. The house adjourned at a quarter past one o'clock. POLICE INT EbLIGENCE.—JuIy 1. GUILDHALL.—John Perry, a carman, in the employ of Messrs. Mosley, a newsagent, of Cathe rint-st,eet, was charged with the manslaughter of Mr. Bamford. Pace-constable 315, said—l was on duty 011 the 16th June in Fleet-street, about five minutes to 6 o'clock, when I saw the defendant galloping down Fleet-street towards St. Paul's, with a horse and . cart. He was going at the rate of nine or tea miles an hour. A gentleman was crossing the road near the end of Clifford's Inn-passage, when the defendant's horse caught him on, the shoulder and knocked him down. The horse and cart went on. about 10 or 12 yards, when the defendant pulled. up. I called to the defendant, and he pulled up immediately. The gentleman was taken to the hospital, and has since died. I attended the coro ner's inquest, and a verdict of manslaughter was returned. The defendant was committed by the , coroner for trial, but he was admitted to bail in one surety of 1001. Tile surgeon's evidence having been taken, the defendant was committed for trial, and the same bail taken for his appearance to answer the charge. MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—Yum A u t AuE NITIES.—Mrs. Mary Ann Robarts, -of Brompton square, was charged with abusinc, , Mrs. Cath er i ne Beaumont, of 14, Halfmoon-strea. The defendant drove to the court in her own carriage. The - complainant said. on Friday last she was standing in 'Rotten-row, when the defendant, as she passed her, called out, "That's the swindling thief," "That's the Irish. —-." The defendant stopped and pointed at her for several minutes. In defence a witness named Isabella Litchfield was called, and she dtnied that any abusive lan guage was used. Mr. Beadon said he had received a letter from the defendant that morning stating that she could not attend the summons, as she was ill ; but be had been informed that the defendant had ordered her carriage for 12 o'clock, and he could assure her, had she not come forward to meet the case, he should have issued his warrant to take her into custody. Ho should now order her to enter into h er own recognisance; ; ; to keep the peace for thrset months. County 7 Markets, MANCHESTER—JULY 1. There was a fair attend (Luce at our market this morning. English wheat was held for an advance of is to 23 per qr., and American ld to 2/1 por 70Ibs. Flour generally is per sack more money. Oats ruled steady. Oatmeal rather easier, in limited request.. Beans and barley firm. LOUT H —.JUNE 30. Wo have again to repti.rt a dull market for all descrip tions of grain, and late rates were unaltered, but pries were rather in favour of the buyer. Wheat, red, 38 3 t o 41 s ; m i xed, 45s ; white, 465; barley 32s to :53; oat 23s to 26as ; beans, 40s to 435. BOSTI )ti—JuNE 3). There was a poor supply of wheat, and the demand was very languid, and, althottgh prices declined is per qr, but little business resulted. , Other articles were in limited de mand at former prices. Prices : Wheat, red, :38s Od to 45s Od; new, —s to —s ; *white, 431 Od to 47s Od , extra, 48s. Barley, 283 Oct to 33s Oct 3 213 to 30s. Peas, 40, to 425 Od. Beans, 423 Od to 44s Oct per qr. NEWA:RZ -TUNE 3). At our Corn Exchange to-day there was a good attend ance of farmers and a large show of grain. Wheat ad vanced is per qr. Other articles as before. Wheat, white 46a to as ' red 41s to 45 5 ; b ar l ey, ma lti ng 33s to 345, grinding 3 t o 31s; oats, 12st. 32 s t o 343, 11. st, 263 to 28s ;beans, 43s to 45s ; m a lt, 64 s t o 72 s ; peas, 40s to 42s ; tares, —s to —s per qr. GLASGOW-3'I7NR 30. At this day's market vrheat was generally held for 6d per boll advance, which vas ony obtainable for the lower descriptions of States—Baltic and the better sorts of Ame rican selling more readily at full prices, and some quantity found buyers. Flour not any dearer. Barley, beans, and peas held firmly. Oats, oatmeal, and Indian corn un altered. EDINBURGH GRAIN.,—JUNE 30. A rather small supply of grain to-day. Sales lively for all sorts, and prices be tter. Wheat, on tho top, 01; 6d down, and on the average Os 2d up. Barley, is :ld up on the top, and Os 4d up on the average. Os:ts on the top were Os 9d up and oa the average is 2d up. Beaus on the top is Od down, and on the •averrage Os 3d up. AVERAGES PEA: IMPERIAL QUARTER. *heat -• £2 1 10 5-12th. Do. new Barley Oats 1 7 7 o.l2ths; Beans -12ths. Total Sv.pply and Sales. Wheat 100 qrs so ld 911 qrs Barley 3(,2 qrs sold 176 qra Oats .• ............... inn qrs so ld 739 qrs Beans G3 qra sold 53 qra DERBY SMITHFIELD.—Jams 29. Oar market was well. supplied with fat beasts to-day, and high prices were asked, but the sales were heavy. A large number of sheep ,ind lambs, but prices unaltered. Fat'and store calves again plentiful. Th. following were tbo quotations :—Beef, 6Ad to 61d mutton, 61 to 61d ; 1am1), zid to 82„.1 ; veal, 61 tc —d, per lb. ; pork, 5d to —d per lb ; rough fat, 4s 8 i to 01 per 141 b. ; hides, 2id to nd per lb ; calf-skins, 4d to 54 per lb. VE STUDIIISYT. J— SIG ET AND HEARING SPECTACLES-. POWERFUL TELESCOPES OPERA, RACE, AND PE RSPECRIVE GLASSES. —S. and B. SOl , jruens, opticians, 39, Albemarle street, Piccadilly. Obsen e —opposite the York Hotel, W. By her Majesty's Royal L 2 tt ers Patent for valuable and ex traordina,y improvements in the most powerful and brilliant Telescopes, Camp, Race-course, Opera, and Perspective Glasses, to know the ctisl ;nacos. These Telescopes possess such extraordinary power that some, three and a-half inches, with an extra eye-piece will show distinctly Jupiter's moons, person's countenaL:ce three-and-a-h a lf m i les Saturn's ring, an d th e d o a ble stars ; with the s ame t e l escope can be seen a distant and an object from 16 to 20 miles. For the waist coat-pocket, 0 - p i. s o c a k e e co t d a i n n d 4l a y r . e of Te Larger, Royal anti Exhibition, i s t i i z o e n s : itorsisthl. valu able,i_neAreasing re lu l t l i e t, d b is y tant. newly-invented, very small, powerful, Waistcoat-pocket which a person can be seen and They answer every pm, pose on the Race-course and at the Opera-houses. Country .k G ntr s iC l' o b i e lo s a iz n e d o a f - a ha w lf a scenery and ships are clearly seen at 12 to 14 miles. They are invaluable fo r rihooting, deer-stalking, yachting, to sportsmen, gentlemen,, gamekeepers, and tourists. • Opera, Camp, Perspective, am I Race-course Glasses, with wonderful powers. - Invaluable i?reserving - Spectacle Lenses of the greatest transparent p over, Tee great advantage derived from this invention is, that vision impaired becomes pre served and strengthenod and very aged perilous are enabled to employ their sight a't the 'most minute occupation--can see with those lennea of a much lees magnifying power —and they do not require the frequent changes to the clan. gerons effects of fratber powerful assistance. Persdns can be suited' at the a ioat remote part of the world by send. rag one of the glasses t out of their spectac!es in a letter, and stating the dist zace from the eye they cau,read:mall print with it, and those, wh, j have not made use of spectacles by stating their age. Deafness.—Near Disco very.—Th e Organic Vibrator, ac exiraordil =Ey powerful, small, newly-invented instrument for deafne , $B, entirely different from all ot nem, surpassing anything of the kind that h as b een, or prob ably can be produced. Being of the same colour as the skin, is not perceptible. It enables deaf persons to hear distinct lyat church and at public assemblies ; the unpleasant sensation of singing nei sea in the ears is entirelv removed, and it affords all the assistance that possibly could be desired.-39, Albe. marle-street. Piceadillyr—Opposite the York Hotel. W. BIRTHS. CaEAsY —On the 30th ult.,. at 6; Marlborough-hill, St. John's wood, the wife of Professor Creasy, of a daughter. LEWIN —On the 30th alt., at 25, Wimpole-street, tho wife of Spencer R. Lewin, Esq., of a naughter. Simrsox—On the 29th ult., at 32, Oxford-terrace, Hyde= park; the wife of Robert Simpson, Esq., of a daughter. TURNER—Urs. Polhill Turner, of Bewbury Halt, Bedford• shire, of a eon and heir. MARRIAGES. ST. LEDGER— Gooch—On the 30th ult.,;lt St. George's, H an over -square, Major J ohn St. Ledger, Lae of the 14th L 'ght Dragoons, to Harriet G ooc h , re li c t o f the late Sir Edward Shirioch Gooch, Bart. SHAW —HILL---00 the 30th ult. et St Mary Abb o t' s, Ken. siugton, Edwa r d Wingfield ult., Commande r R . N , third son of th e Ei g ht Ir on . h. Shaw, to Le u i• a Arabella, eldest L d , e tu ot h e t . er of his Excellency Colonel Hill, G overnor of Sierra DEATH S. BOUWENS —On the 28th ult., at St o k e H ammond, Bucks, Oliver v er Edmuud, the infant sou of the Rev. Theodore and the Lady Julia Bouwens. BuLLEN—Oa the 29th ult., at Bedford-square, Mile-end, Mr. Walter Bullen. DUNSANY-0.1 the 27th ult., at-Lord SherbOrne'a, Glocester *Miro, the Lady Duusauy, aged 41. GlNorml , -- On the 27th ult., at 107, Mount-street, Grosvencr• sqntre, Mr. Wm. Gingell, aged 74. TURNER=O U the 30th ult., at Terrace House, Polygon Soutbamptor, John liornblmv Turne'r, Esq., formerly of Claphal.-common, aged 74. . WALKER —On Saturday last, the 26th Jane, the wife of Mr. John Walker, of the Swan. Tavern, Walham-green, greatly lamented by a numerous circle of frends. LONDON Printed and Published icy MUItDO YVUNt of ?sic. 112, Strand, Printer, at Tte Oitiv, No 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of liddlesea, Friday, July 2, 1835. 1,. 2 C Ballet Cryst ~ fi tlons every Admit at th, Cram, J i be du Intel ....—_. TACh Circa admit intros aurae ecmu sack, LIC Qtll WAI nary and Two Con r _., 58, • Pr[;; Pala, open dren an r , Corot At F, from forte o'olo uod e