The Sun. — London, England, 1860-08-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.) The Lon') CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. CONJUGAL RIGHTS (SCOTLAND) BILL. The LORD CHANCELLOR gave notice that on Thurs day next he should ask their lordships to take into conside ration the amendments made by the Commons to this bill. The advice he should give to their lordships on that evening was they should not agree to the so •called amendments. The Commons had rejected two clauses which he thought most material, and what he should re commend was that their lordships should give their reasons why they could not agree to the Commons' amendment bill. RIFLE VOLUNTEER CORPS BILL. This bill, on the motion of Earl DE GREY, was read a third time and passed. CROWN DEBTS AND JUDGMENTS BILL. The Commons' amendments to this bill were considered, and agreed to. ._ _ LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of the Duke of ARGYLL, this bill was read a third time and passed. FORTIFICATIONS (PROVISIONS FOR EX PENSES) BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. CUSTOMS (No, 2) BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. STAMP DUTIES (No. 2) BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. DEFENCE OF THE REALM BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. EXCISE DUTIES BILL. This bill, on the motion of Earl GR A.NVILLE, was read a second time. WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (IRELAND) BILL, The Commons' amendments to this bill were considered and agreed to. COUNTY CORONERS BILL. The Commons' reasons for disagreeing to the Lords' amendments to this bill were considered, and their lord ships agreed not to insist on their amendments. EAST INDIA LOAN BILL. The Duke of ARGYLL moved the first reading of this bill, which was to raise a certain sum of money (£3,000,000) to meet the deficit and outgoing in the construction of rail ways in India. The expenditure in Indiawas very great, and until the military expenses were reduced, he Idid not see any prospect of having the income of that country brought to a balance with the expen diture. The mutiny in India had mainly led to the deficit being made an addition to the Indian debt to the amount of £40,000,000. Previous to the outbreak the debt of India stood at £59,000,000 at 21 per cent., but owing to the outbreak and expenses of the sup pression, it now amounts to ,£97,851,000, and would, he thought, very shortly amount to £100,000,000. Without they took active steps to reduce the expenses of India, and place the expenditure on a more satisfactory basis, it would saddle that country with a debt, which would be a very serious matter. This bill was read a first time. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER entered the house at 12 o'clock, and prayers having been read there were six members present, all of these occupants of the Ministerial bench. Members gradually came in until half-past 12, when a house was made. IRISH EDUCATION. Mr. MONSELL gave notice that on Thursday he should ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland the names of those commissioners who authorised the omission from Mr. Kina• han's report of the children who attended Roman Catholic schools. TRALEE SAVINGS BANK. Captain STACPOOLE, for Mr. O'Connell, asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would introduce a bill this session for the purpose of distributing the balance of funds belonging to the late Tralee Savings Bank among its depositors P The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that there was a certain balance of money which was the un doubted property of the depositors, but the Commissioners of the National Debt had no authority to direct a distribu tion. Under these circumstances it would appear proper that some measure should be adopted for the relief of the parties, but the question had been started at too late a period of the present session to enable anything to be done. THE STATUTE BOOK. Mr. BAGWELL moved for copy of letters from Mr. James Bigg to the Treasury, dated the 20th day of March, the 3d of May, the 13th of June, and the 21st of July last, respecting the reformation of the statute .book by the pub lication of an edition of existing statutes.—The return was ordered. IMPERIAL GUARANTEES. Mr. HUBBARD moved for an address for return of the unexpired imperial liabilities arising under either of the following heads :—Guarantee of loans made by foreign countries or colonial dependencies ; guarantees of interest on railway, telegraphic, or other undertakings, specifying the extent of the loans and the rates of interest ; also the amounts already paid under such guarantees, and the amount still depending. The motion was agreed to. CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL: This bill was read a second time. EXCHEQUER BONDS (E 2,000,000) BILL. This bill was read a second time. ENDOWED CHARITIES BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. Clauses 1 to 17 were agreed to with one or two verbal amendments. On the motion of Mr. LYGON clause 18 was struck out. Clauses 19 and 20 were agreed to. On clause 21, there was a long discussion, in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Lowe, Mr. Her ley, Sir R. Bethell, Mr. Rolt, Mr. Ayrton, and other gentlemen took part, relative to salaries to be granted to official trustees of charitable funds. It resulted in the promise that a clause should be brought up on the report, on the condition that it should be a temporary measure preliminary to a general in vestigation of the whole subject of salaries under the Charity Commission next session. Clause 22, which provides that clerks and accountants under the commission should not be liable to serve on juries was objected to by Mr. HENLEY. He had no objection to the commissioners and secretary being exempt, but he thought that clerks and accountants should be liable as other people are. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there would be no objection to amending the clause as suggested. . The clause having been so amended was agreed to. Mr. HADFIELD moved a clause, which provided tt where, under the deed or instrument constituting or regu lating any parochial charity, administered by the '-a cumbent, churchwardens, or other persons appointed by the vestry of a parish, no auditor is appointed, it shall be law ful for the commissioners of charities to appoint an inspec tor of accounts. The committee divided— For the clause Against Majority The clause was negatived, and the bill was reported to the house. MILITIA PAY BILL. This bill passed through committee. MILITIA BALLOT BILL. The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered and agreed to. NEW ZEALAND BILL. The order for the second reading of this bill was post. poned until the evening sitting. THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT (1855) AMEND- MENT (No. 2) BILL. This bill passed through committee, and the standing orders having been suspended, was read a third time and passed". NAVAL DISCIPLINE BILL. The order for going into committee on this bill was post poned until the evening sitting. ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES BILL. The adjourned debate on the amendment on consideration as amended was postponed until the last sitting. COURT OF CHANCERY BILL. On. the motion for going into committee on this bill, Mr. HADFIELD adVerted at some length to the clauses of 'which ho had given notice, providing for the appoint ment of additional chief clerks to the Master of the Rolls and the Vice-Chancellors. Sir J. GRAHAM said the bill had come down on high authority from the House of Lords, but he hoped the House of Commons would pay some respect to a committee of its own who had considered and rejected the clauses to which the hon. member for Sheffield had referred. The house went into committee on the bill, and the vari ous clauses were agreed to with some slight amendments. Mr. HADFIELD then moved the first of the clauses on which his speech was f oun d e d, name l y t h a t an a dditi ona l _ thief clerk be appointed fo r th e M as t er o f the Rolls, and ee rttne of Mr. John Arthur Buckley, late chief in the tient, f one of the M as t ers i n O r di nar y, f or th e appoint- Si r a gard 10 ; ( i t jt e A.II AM opposed the clause. He had a high re and h e , a ,:. , Z•e b at ability and respectability of Mr. Buckley, and o he r h laix ?orry to oppose the Master of the Rolls commended the judicial officers, who were said to have re ,:„Pointrnent. The committee to whom he had referred b e d recommended the abolition of the office of Master in Chanc e a o i llgh it was foreseen that it might he productive of Bor ne prac ti ce a the s ce a u r itY, on the ground that the chamber ability would be transacted by clerks, who were inferior in to the Masters in Chan • eery, whose of fi ce had been obsolete, The Master of the Rolls had two chief clerks and inferior clerks,oi and now the conced e d , proposition W2B that the Master of the Rolls ahould additional would l cle rk s.l tbird chief clerk. If that p oint were , Parli amen t might reckon upon it with a certainty that an r have n. a t be made by th q th r ee Vic- Chancellors for ad The time had come for the appointmen t of a new eq ui ty judge, whose es t a bli s hment would not amount to morn than £I,OOO a year than would, be incurred by the proposed chief clerks. _Ho recommended that when a fourth irice-Chan. cellor was appointed, those judges should sit in turn i 'n chambers, in which case the business would be thoroughl 'y transacted. Mr. ROLT agreed with the right hon. baronet in the in ►- portance of having judicial matters disposed of by i ~i gas, and introducing such legislative provision as would pro vent, as far as possible, referring such questions to the offi cers of the court. He did not think the equity judges could. satisfactorily preside at chambers disposing of accounts, which would unfit them for theirjudicial business. If a ques tion of law were at chambers the chief clerk might express an opinion, and if the parties were dissatisfied they might appeal to the judge. He did not think the time had arrived when a new judge would be necessary, for although the judges were fully occupied there were no arrears, and he was not aware that any business had been referred to cham bers which ought not to have been transacted there. Mr. Buckley had been acting with the Master of the Rolls for three years, and if they did not accede to the clause pro posed by Mr. Hadfield they would be limiting his judicial staff. It should be remembered, too, that the Master of the Rolls had strongly recommended this appointment, and that representation he thought should be attended to. Sir J. GRAHAM said he should like to know in what manner the Master of the Rolls has obtained the assistance of Mr. Buckley during the last three years. Mr. MALINS agreed in the main with Sir J. Graham, and said that unless it could be shown that an additional clerk was necessary for the Vice-Chancellor, he could not agree that it was necessary to give another clerk to the Master of the Rolls. The Vice-Chancellor's clerks did quite as much work as a single judge could superintend, and if another chief clerk were appointed for each of the courts there would be more work than the Vice-Chancellor could adequately supervise. He was not of opinion the time had come for the appointment of a new judge, but he did not mean to say that it was far distant, inasmuch as by a bill now be • fore the house, which would enable viva voce evidence to be taken, the Chancery Court business would greatly increase. In reply to Sir J. Graham's question, the hon. and learned gentleman had said that Mr. Buckley was clerk to Master Blunt, who died in 1856. He was entitled to £l,OOO a-year as such clerk, and three years ago one of the clerks of the Master of the Rolls having become ill, Mr. Buckley offered his services without any additional salary. Since that he had discharged the duties, and if he continued to discharge them he would not receive any additional salary to that to which he was at present entitled. He thought that under the circumstances the services of Mr. Buckley might be re tained. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, from the language he frequently heard in the courts he could not help think ing that a portion of the duty of the courts strictly judicial was transferred from the judges to the chief clerks, and he should object therefore to adding another chief clerk to the establishment of the Master of the Rolls. But the Master of the Rolls, having pledged himself to the performance of certain duties, he was disposed on that ground, and that ground alone, to assent to his continuing to receive Mr. Buckley's assistance, so long as the Lord Chancellor might think fit, on the condition that if the business de creased he should be dismissed, and have no claim to compensation, and if business increased he might be trans ferred to the office of one of the Vice-Chancellors if neces sary. The hon. and learned gentleman moved a clause, in which he embodied those views, as an amendment to the clause proposed by Mr. Hadfield. Mr. HENLEY thought all judicial business of import ante should be transacted under the immediate supervision of the judges. He suggested that the Attorney-General should allow Mr. Hadfield's clause to be negatived, and then to have his own printed, in order that it might be brought up with the report. Sir J. GRAHAM said he viewed the amended clause with great jealousy. He thought it would be well to add to the clause that if a fourth judge were appointed Mr. Buck ley should be transferrel to him as his chief clerk. - The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he should have no objection. It being 10 minutes to four, the CHAIRMAN reported progress. The other orders on the paper were postponed, and the sitting was suspended at four o'clock. At six o'clock the house resumed. RETIRING ALLOWANCES IN THE NAVY. Sir J. PAKINGTON asked the Secretary of the Admi ralty whether it was true that the officers on the 14s. 6d. list were to be exempted from the application of the system of retirement which applied to the oth6r lists, ald if so, what was the reason of that exemption, and also whether the noble lord had received any representation from the officers of the navy on the subject ? Lord C. PAGET said the captains on the 14s. 6d. list had the alternative given them of remaining in the same position as they were then, or accepting the permanent al lowance. In the 10s. 6d. list retirement was compulsory. CORPORATION OF WESTMINSTER. Sir J. SHELLEY gave notice that early in the next ses sion he would move for leave to bring in a bin to form a corporation for the city and liberties of Wesminster, and also that he would ask for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Gas Clauses Act of 1847. ROMAN CATHOLICS IN PRISONS AND WORK- HOUSES. Sir J. ACTON gave notice that early next session he would call the attention of the house to the condition of Roman Catholic inmates of prisons and workhouses in England. NE W ZEALAND BILL. On the order for the second reading of this bill, Lord PALMERSTON said it was not the intention 01 her Majesty's Government to press this bill any further at this late period of the session. (Hear.) It was not that they were doubtful, if there was time for a fair and full discussion of the measure, that they should succeed in re moN:ng the objections which many hon. gentlemen felt to the proposed bill, but the present state of the session prevented that ; and therefore the object of the bill having been to protect the interests of the aborig;nes of New Zea land, her Majesty's Government were of opinion that the powers which the constitution of New Zealand gave to the Crown of making regulations bearing upon those interests, would, if properly used, be sufficient for the accomplishment of the objects which her Majesty's Government had in view; but if it should appear that those powers were inadequate it would then re main for the Government at some future period to have re course to further legislation on the subject. He begged therefore to move that the order for the second reading of the bill should be discharged. Sir J. PAKINGTON regretted that he could not say of this bill, "De mortuis nil nisi bonum." He thought that both personally and politically he had very great reason to complain of the conduct of the Government in respect to it. He had come up from Worcestershire that morning, having received a letter from the Secretary to the Treasury on the subject, stating that the noble lord at the head of the Go vernment was quite determined to proceed with the bill. Under these circumstances he felt he had some reason to complain of the conduct of the Goveinment in this matter, and that they could not have made up their minds a little sooner on the subject. He had reason to believe that even in the present state of the House of Commons the Govern ment found they could not pass this bill, and he believed that was the reason why the noble lord had taken the un- expected course which he had taken that evening. He was the more surprised at the conduct of the noble lord after having received a despatch within the last few days from the Governor of New Zealand, in which his excellency referred to three memoranda, from the bishop of the colony, the late Chief Justice, and Mr. Swainson, on the policy which ought to be pursued in the future management of the Maori race. The opinions of those gentlemen were adverse to the bill. The despatch referred to was received on the 10th August, and ordered to be printed on the 15th. Tho letter of the Secretary of the Treasury which summoned him (Sir J. Pakingten) to town was dated the 17th, so that the Government ought by that time to have made up their minds as to what course they intended to pursue in regard to the bill. He could hardly conceive any great department of the country venturing to proceed with the bill after having received such a despatch. He was con vinced that if the noble duke the Secretary for the Colonies were now in England he would net, after having seen that despatch, have ventured to press this measure forward. It would not, however, now be becoming in him (Sir J. Pak ington), after the bill had been withdrawn, to enter at any length into it ; but h 9 would observe that it would be im possible for the legislative council which the bill propbsed to work with the present legislative body. The bill would create a bad feeling between the colonists and the colonial Government, and the colonists and the Imperial Govern ment, and the Europeans and natives. Mr. HADFIELD wanted to know why the right hon. baronet was absent when this bill was under discussion be fore the house, considering the very small borough which he represented. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He (Mr. Hadfield) had been there day by day, and he could not see that the right hon. baronet had any right to complain. (Hear.) He had read this bill, and he honoured the noble lord for introducing it. (Hear, hear.) It was a good bill, and was calculated to confer great benefit. He only hoped the noble lord would not listen to the bishops and clergy— (a laugh)—but that in all parts of her Majesty's dominions he would restrain that political ecclesiastical dominion which was calculated to endanger the safety of the colo nies. We had enough to do with ecclesiastical quarrels in this country; let us not transplant them to New Zealand or India. Mr. C. FORTESCV was sorry that the right hon. gen tleman (Sir J. Fakin g should have any reason to com plain on this subject on the ground of personal inconve nience ; but if he had been in the position of the Govern• ment he would have better understood the difficulty which the Government found in making up their minds upon this subject. He denied that the bill violated in the slightest degree the spirit of the New Zealand constitution. The only question was whether the colonists should govern themselves or should govern others. The only object of introducing the present measure was to enable the Crown, without the violation of existing rights, to deal with very dangerous and delicate questions, but it had been found that the poWers now existing were ample for that purpose without any further legislation, and therefore the Government had come to the determination of withdrawing the bill. Sir G. C. LEWIS said he was sorry the right hon. b a yonet the member for Droitwich should have been put to Y penonal inconvenience in cpsciponce of aft celirBe ,THE SUN, LONDON, 'WEDNESDAY EVENING, AUGUST A 22, 1860. / which had been taken respecting the bill. He could only say that as soon as the Government had decided upon with drawing the bill a telegram was sent to the right hon. gentleman, acquainting him with the fact. Mr. ADDERLEY expressed his gratification at the with drawal of the bill, but he thought it of great importance that the statement of the Government in withdrawing it should have been more explicit. The colony ought to know distinctly whether the bill had only been dropped with the intention of introducing it another session, or whetlier it :had been abandoned because it failed to command the sup port of the House of Commons. His own impression was that it would have been impossible to have carried such a bill, than which a more dangerous measure could not have been devised. It dealt with local questions, which ought to be settled on the spot, and he did not believe that any man who had the slightest knowledge of colonial matters would be found willing to support it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER entirely concurred with the right hon. gentleman in the necessity of applying the principle of self-government, so far as our colonies were concerned, in as largo a sense as possible. Indeed he was not aware that any Government had ever committed any error in snaking that principle too large. His right hon. friend seemed to apprehend that the bill being dropped might be resumed at an early date next ses sion. He thought from that remark that his right hon. friend had not understood the effect of the statement of his hon. friend the Under-Secretary for the Colonies. His hon. friend certainly surrendered none of the rights of the Go vernment to renew any application to Parliament which they might think to be required by their public duties, but he pointed out quite clearly that he had no such intention as his right hon. friend opposite seemed to suppose, t ecause his hon. friend said that the CI over nrnent would frankly en deavour to apply the powers orf the constitutional act and proceed in the spirit of those powers, and that they would endeavour to obtain their object by a judicious use of those powers in connection with the Colonial Government. (Hear.) When, therefore, the declaration of his hon. friend was read in the colony of New Zealand it would afford no ground for uneasiness. (Hear.) The order was then discharged. NAVAL DISCIPLINE BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. On clause 1, Lord C. PAGET said that the house having permitted him to read this bill a second time without giving any ex planation of its object, he should avail himself of the pre sent opportunity to do so. He believed that no measure could be considered of greater importance than one which affected the well-being and discipline of the navy. (Hear.) The act of Parliament which ho trusted this bill would supersede, and which at present regulated the discipline of the navy, was as old as the reign of Charles II , and although some amendments had been introduced in the reign of Geo. 11., he thought it would be admitted that it was high time to consider whether this old act of Parliament might not be remodelled, and a more merciful code of regulations adopt - d for the discipline of her Majesty's navy. The first great de fect of the present act was that it was ext.:en - rely difficult to hold courts-martial under it, because as the law stood no court-martial could be held unless five ships were in presence. This had also the disadvantage of keeping ships together when it might be for the good of the public sera ice that they should be dispersed. Another inconvenience was that how ever large the fleet was, a second c ourt-martial could not be held till the first was concluded. They proposed to remedy both of these inconveniences by providing that the presence of three ships would in sufficient for the holding of a court martial, and by allowing the lieutenants, who were hitherto excluded, to sit upon such courts. (Hear, hear.) It would be impossible to ever-estimate the importance of this one improvement, because it continually happened in the navy, that prisoners had to wait for months for their trial in cosi sequence of the difficulty of getting a sufficient number of ships together. With regard to the punishments to be in flicted on the men, he begged the committee to bear in mind that many of the men whom they had to deal with in the navy were men without morals or principle, that they were confined in a small space—in a kind of box, for so he might call a ship—and that, unless they maintained the discipline of the fleet, the fleet would no longer do honour to the coun try. (Hear.) Their first object was to melte a classification of crimes, and the bill gave the court-martial power to lessen the degree of punishment wherever they might think fit to do so, without detriment to the public service. As the law stood at present, crimes were dealt with without reference to the motives as ith which they were committed. Every person would remember the trial of the unfortunate Admi ral Byng. The court-martial which tried him acqultted him of cowardice and disaffecron, and found him guilty of only an error of judgment ; and although they sent a peti tion to the Admiralty conveying their sense of the enormity of the punishment to which he was liable he suffered capital punishment, end it was not all many years afterwards that courts-martial got the power of inflicting a lesser punish ment. By the present bill they went farther than that, end did not permit the court to award the extreme punishment of death, except the motives of the crime were such as de served capital punishment. They proposed to deal with the three categories of offences " before the enemy." The first was that of treachery, and to that they awarded the penalty of death. He believed that no one would object to the penalty of death for treachery before the enemy. For the crime of cowardice they said that the person guilty of it might be either sentenced to death or imps:soned or dismissed from the service. But if the person had been guilty from negligence or di ankenness, or from other kinds of circumstances which might incapacitate him from doing his duty, they awarded him a punishment of a lesser degree. His hon. friend the member for Lambeth said that there was nothing but death, death in the code. But if he looked into the bit' he would find that there were only three cases in which they proposed to inflict the penalty of death. Under the present law the courts-martial, though they had the power of awarding the punishment of death, hadno power of awarding the punishment of penal servitude, which he considered to be a great raomaly. They record ingly proposed to give courts-martial the power of inflicting the penalty of death or penal servitude, and a variety of other punishments, which might be seen by looking to the category of punishments in the bill. The next point had reference to the crime of mutiny. The legal authorities had some difficulty in defining what mutiny was ; whether it was an'offence that could be committed by one individual or required a combination of more than one person to constitute the offence. He admitted that the bill as it originally stood attempted to define the crime of mutiny, but after the bill had been long and c Irefully considered in the House of Lords and by a select committee of the other house, it was consi dered better not to define the crime. But every mutinous act was dealt with under the head of mutiny and insubordination, and various punishments weee awarded for the offences under that head. The next part had reference to desertion. There was ro doubt that a man might have left his ship with the intention of deserting, and be brought back the next day; whereas another man who had been absent from his ship for 20 or 30 days might have the intention of re turning. The present bill gave the court power to take all such circumstances into their consideration. In one in stance the present bill proposed to give the court greater power than they had at present. At present the courts martial had no power of dealing a% ith offences committed on shore within her Majesty's dominions. This led to great inconvenience, and officers who had taken their men on shore might be charged with an infringement of the law. Power was given in the present bill to remedy this defect, which, he believed, would prove of •great advantage to the men. The bill gave the court power not only of finding the prisoner guilty of a lesser offence, but of inflict ing a lesser punishment. These were the principal provi sions of the bill with regard to the greater crimes. He now wished to say a few words with regard to the punishment of flogging, which he knew excited a great deal of interest in the country and in the house. In the navy, he need scarcely say, that there was not an officer who did not suffer personal pain when he felt himself bound to award thepu nishment of flogging. But considering the class of men who entered the navy, that many of them belonged to the lowest grade of society, who were operated on solely by the prin ciple of fear, he did not believe it possible to do away with the punishment of flogging altogether. The house was aware that the Duke of Cambridge established a new sys- tem in the army by which every soldier was considered a first-cuss man, and it was only after being degraded from that first class by misconduct that he became liable to cor poral punishment. They proposed to copy that principle in the navy. (Hear, hear.) And every man who now entered the naNy knew that in doing so he was not liable to corpo ral punishment tillhe forfeited his place as a first-class man. (Hear.) He begged that hon. gentlemen would not run away with the idea that because there had been unfortu nate disturbances in the fleet the discipline of the navy was gone. No such thing. So far from it, their fleet, which had been creAted in a marvellously short space of time, got 10,000 men within the last year, and he maintained that so far from their being cause for alarm at the disturbances which had taken place, it was most creditable to the offi cers that the fleet was in so good and so admirable a state as it was. (Hear, hear.) Ix this bill they proposed that whenever a sailor or marine should be accused of such an offence as would make it necessary on conviction to subject him to corporal punishment, there should be an inquiry by one or more officers of the ship into - the guilt or innocence of the party. The captain would still have power to over rule the decision of the officers whichever way it went. This was perhaps an extreme power, and could only bo exerci-ed in case of open mutiny, when it was necessary that the captain of a ship should possess the most undis- puted power. In connexion with this measure he had the pleasure of reading :a few statistics respecting capital . . punishment, which would show that this degrading custom was year by year dying away at such h rate that if the house continued to give its support to the Government as it had done; he felt sure that it would soon disappear alto gether. In 1855 there were 55,000 men in the navy liable ;o be flogged, and the number who underwent the punlsh- merit was - 1,397, being about Ito 39; in 1856 it was lin ; in 1857, in 48; and in 1659, out of 64,000 mon only 951 were punished, being lin 67. (Hear, hear) They were now educating boys for the service, who would be attachod to it, and they were improving the pay and comforts of the men, so . that taking everything together he thought that the total abolition of flogging would be an affair of no dis- taut date. He felt great confidence in ',leaving the bill in the hands of the house. Sir J. PANINGTON said that ho had listened to the statement of his noble friend with the greatest pleasure. He approved of the proposed changes in naval courts-mar tial, the present constitution of which was very defective. He bad himself, when in office, requested Sir Richard Dun das to draw a scheme of revision, and he had no doubt his noble friend had also availed himself of the talent and ex perience of that distinguished officer. He did trust that henceforth the naval officers would be released from the hardships which arose from the present system of courts martial. Mr. WILLIAMS regretted that so important a subject should have been brought forward at so late a period of the session, and also that the question of flogging had not been more directly dealt with. They should not forget that in the last naval war one of our frigates was taken by an enemy's ship, 'manned by Englishmen, all of whom had left our service in consequence of having been flogged. Sir C. NAPIER could not agree with all the points stated by the noble lord. Ills noble friend told them that the discipline of the navy was as good now as it had ever been, if not better. He must give a direct contradiction to that statement. He believed the discipline of the navy was very much relaxed indeed. Drunkenness had increased largely, and ho had been told that the drunkenness which had gone on on board the Edinburgh was shocking. He thought, however, what the Admiralty had done now in bringing forward these new articles of war would tend more than anything else to improve the discipline of the navy. The manner in which punishment had been changed by the bill would have a most excellent effect—substituting penal punishments for various other punishments would check offences to an extraordinary degree. He was not, however, prepared to say that corporal punishment could safely be entirely done away with, and he would even go further, and say that if it were abolished the discipline of the navy would be altogether destroyed. At the same time he thought corporal punishment ought not to be inflicted upon petty officers, who would feel a penal punishment much more. Clauses from 1 to 4 inclusive were agreed to. On clause 5, which was to the effect that every person subject to the act, and not being a commanding officer, who should not use his utmost exertions to carry out the orders of his superiors when preparing for action, or who was guilty of cowardice, should suffer death, Sir C. NAP [ER said he could not conscientiously ap prove of the whole of this clause. He held that it was unjust and improper, after having pressed a man one day into the service, to hang him perhaps the next day on going into action because his nerves were not strong enough to allow of his fighting the enemy. lie thought this was con trary to common sense, as well as to religion. He shovid move that the words "death for cowardice" be left out of the clause. There was not the smallest necessity for their insertion, for if there was no fight in a man, the fear of being hanged would not make him fight. Mr. WILLIAMS thought it was so difficult to define what was cowardice that in his opinion the penalty ought to be struck out of the clause. Lord C. PAGET said that although it was probably only in an extreme case that the cor7t would death for cowardice, yet such cases night arise, and ho did not see how they could exclude that penalty from this clause. . Sir J. PAKINGTON hoped his hon. and gallant friend would accept the answer given by the noble lord. The amendment was negatived without a division, and the clause was agreed to, as were clauses 6,7, and 8. On clause 9, which wa 3 to the effect that any person found asleep at, or deserting from, h's post, should be disre'ssed the service, Sir C. NAPIER sa'd he was disposed to think that the punishment of death ought to attach to the offence of leav ing one's post. There was no knowing what Ctightful consequences might result C:om sleeping at or deserting en important post. Sir J. PAKINGTON said it seemed to him that what ' ever their maximum punishment ought to be, that ma:zi mum punishment should be inflicted upon a men who de serted his post. Sir F. SMITH said they had a very serious and a very slight offence placed in the same clause. He wished to know what description of punishment would be awarded for the offence of shaping at one's post. Sir M. SEYMO UR was disposed to adhere to the penal ties under the old code for these two offences, namely, pain of death, or such other punishment as the Admiralty might award. After some further discussion, the clause was agreed to, as also were the subsequent clauses up to 21 inclusive. On clause 22, which provided that the punishment for the offence of absence without leave should be imprison ment for a period not exceeding ten weeks, with or without hard labour, or " such other punishment as the case might requ're," Mr. W. WILLIAMS complained of the wide discretion which was given by the last words as to the nature of the punishment to be 'nfl;cted. Sir C. NAPIER said that desertion had got to such a pitch in the Dl::;'sh navy that it was absolutely necessary some severe punishment should be imposed in order to cor rect the evil. Now that such a great outcry was made against corporal punishment, he believed that nothing less than penal servitude would deter seamen from deserting, and enable officers to preserve discipline in their ships. He therefore' hoped that Government would consent to that punishment being added. Lord C. PAGET observed that, in addition to imprison ment, there was stoppage of pay, and the oourt had also power to award corporal punishment. Sir C. NAPIER was opposed to corporal punishment, and felt it his duty to move the insertion in the clause of the words, "and penal servitude." Sir G. C. LEWIS reminded the gallant admiral that sea men wen?, after all, but human beings, and that it was very important to have a graduated scale of punishment accord ing to the degree of crime which they might have committed. If they imposed the same punishment for absence without leave as they did for desertion, they destroyed all the ordi nary motives for abstaining from the worst crimes. (Hear.) He trusted the hon, and gallant gentleman would not per severe with his amendment, After a few words from Mr. AYRTON, Sir C. NAPIER again urged the necessity of adopting his amendment in order to put a stop to desertion, which had reached to on alarming extent, and said that although penal servitude might be inserted in the clause, that punish ment need not be inflicted unless the other punishments should prove ineffectual. The amendment was, however, negatived without a divi sion, and the clause was agreed to. Clauses up to 38 isclusive were also adopted. Mr. AYRTO-2f observed that clause 39 appeared to make a serious change in the law, for it would enable a naval com mander to send his warrant ashore to apprehend a sailor who had cosaisitted any offence on land ; and the man would be taken on board ship for trial under his summary jurisdiction inste a d of being brought before the ordinary civil tribunals. This would extend to the colonies, so that if a sailor went ashore and committed an assault upon a shopkeeper in the town of Sylney, the captain might insist on hying the man bycourt-martial, and oblige the shopkeeper to go on board the ship to give evidence. It would be convenient to put in a clause at the end of the bill, providing that wherever civil courts existed, they should have the primary jurisdiction over offences com mitted on land. Lord C. PAGET said that such was the intention of the Government, and within the United Kingdom the power of dealing by court-martial with offenders on land would only apply to military ()fences, such as mutiny ; but out of the United Kingdom to other offences also. He was obliged to the hon. gentleman for his valuable suggestion. Sir G. C. LEWIS observed that a similar question might arise in foreign countries with respect to consular jurisdic tion, but if any other than military offences were committed byasai 39 ro t n o 4 l 4 were and,o agreed fcour course to, etribunals of the country would have ju r i s di ct i on. Clauses On clause 45, Mr. BRADY said he should like to have some assurance that corporal punishment would be limited to a certain number of stripes, as it was in the army. Lord C. PAGET said he would agree to limit the punish ment to fifty lashes. Mr. WILLIAMS understood that by the existing rule it was limited already to 48 lashes in the navy, but from the mode in which the lashes were laid on, it was much more severe than in the army. It was usual to strike so ith greater force, and take time between the lashes. Ile had been told that 50 lashes in the navy were equal to 200 in the army. Sir C NAPIER did not see why two more lashes should be aided to the 48. It was true, as the hon. member for Lambeth had said, that the flogging was much more severe in the navy, The clause was agreed to. On clause 46, - Mr. HADF lELD said the system of corporal punishment was altogether a great mistake, and contrary to the spirit of the age and the present state of society. it was not now so much inflicted by the civil magistrates as formerly, and milder punishments were found to operate better. In the county of York it had been abolished, and the cat was never used there, but in Lancashire, he regretted to say, it was still prevalent; tend he would produce some returns to show the comparative results. In schools too, flogging, which was formerly p rac ti se d t o a s h ameful extent, was now less clauses of this bill much resorted to.. He found in theh con . fusion os to the infliction of corporal punishment, and he wished to provide more distinctly against repeated floggings for one and the same offence. Lord C. PAGET said the punishment for one offence would be limited to 48 lashes, by a proviso which he would insert at the end of the clause. It was a mistake to suppose that the Government were about to extend the sphere of corporal punishment by this bill. They only intended to control it, and to define the cases in which it might be awarded. Mr. WILLIAMS objected to that portion of the clause which allowed judgment of death to be given by a majority consisting of four-fidhs of the members of the court-mar- tial. What he desired was that in order to pass judgment of death the cou r t s h ou ld be unanimous, as in the criminal procedure in our courts of common law the whole of the jurymen were required to agree in their verdict. He would, therefore, move that the second paragraph of clause 46 be struck out. Lord C. PAGET said it was a mistake to propose, with the most philanthropic views, to strike out this part of the clause, for then the matter would be left as it now stood, and sentence of death might be given by the decision of a bare majority of the court. It was therefore from motives of humanity that this clause, as he proposed it, required that where the court-martial did not exceed five members, four of them should concur in the judgment of death, or five if the court consisted of seven, The amendment was negatived without a division, and a proviso was added, that in any case of corporal punishment not more than 48 lashes should be inflicted. Mr. WHITE still thought it was re pugnant to civilised nations that a man should be put to death without the una nimous judgment of the court which tried him. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was not required in a court-martial that the members should be unanimous, in the same manner as a jury were required to be. It would be impossible to maintain discipline on beard a ship if they were required to be unanimous. The clause was then agreed to, as wry; also clause 47. On clause 48, Sir J. GRAHAM said he had hitlsJerto abstained from discussing any of the clauses of this bill, because he felt with Sir John Pakington that this was a matter that was much better left to those who had profe scion al experience and legal knowledge; but having been somerwhat conversant with naval affairs and taking the deepest i aterest in the welfare and prosperity of that noble profession a, and entertaining an opinion, which he was afraid would mot be acceptable to the committee generally with regard to :a portion of the clause they were now discussing, he shoul d fail in his duty if he did not express that opinion. So far a.s his sympathies went he should wish the utmost limit to 'be put upon the inflic tion of corporal punishment. lie would not discuss the question in the abstract, because the .committee had adopted corporal punishment. He thought Lord Melbourne and the late Sir George Cockburn introduced a most salutary check on corporal punishment in the navy, by issuing a regulation that it should not be inflicted, except in the case of mutiny, until 48 hours after the offence, and that there must be a record in the shape of a war• rant of each punishment, which warrant was sent to the Admiralty. And one of the most important duties of the Board of Admiralty was carefully to revise that list of punishments, and if there was any ground for believing that it had been inflicted unnecessarily or on unjust grounds, the Admiralty could call for an explanation. If the ship was in good order and the infliction of the punishment of flogging was unfsequent, they might conclude that the captain was a good captain, but the infliction of the punishment was feequent, and the explanation of the cap tain was not satisfactory, in his humble judgment that cap tain ought to be superseded without paying off the ship. Saving only the non-exercise of this power, he did not think that any check was wanting a gainst any abuse of the power of the commanding officer. Now, this clause three— The CHAIRMAN hero observed that they were upon clause 48, and the right hon. baronet sat down. • Clause 48 was then egress' to. On clause 49, Sir J. GRAHAM said at present, caving the restriction he had already mentioned, the commanding officer alone had the power of inflicting corporal punishment. In most cases he proceeded on the report of an inferior officer ; but by this clause an investigation was required, except in the case of mutiny. The effect of this, he thought, world be prejudicial to discipline. If a captain saw an offence com mitted he could not act on his own. judgment and know ledge, but must delegate the inquiry to inferior officers, and if those officers should wish to gain popularity in the ship at the commanding officer's expense they could do so, and the commanding officer would have to inflict the punish ment against their opinion, which would destroy his in fluence over the crew. If they made this concession ojce it was irrevocable, and it might have a fatal effect, but he had the greatest corfldence in the noble duke at the head of the Admiralty, and in the noble lord the Secretary. Hls judgment would be materially influenced by the opinion of the two admirals sitting below the gangway. Sir C. NAPIER said he looked upon this clause as the most important in the bill. A captain was now the judge, the jury, and the executioner. If an officer complained to him, he had always a feeling towards the officer and against the man, end if he did not take the part of the officer the men believed that he did. The inferTtor officers were always more inclined to severity than the captain. He thought that if there were courts. martial the captain ought to award the punishment, exactly as a judge did, and that he ought not to be present when the punishment was inflicted, but that it ought to be inflicted under the superintendence of the second officer. Sir M. SEYMOUR suggested that the proposed regula tions should be accompanied by rules for the guidance of the officers who would have to carry them into effect. He sub mitted, also, that in small vessels, gunboats, for instance, there would be great difficulty in forming a court. Sir J. GRAHAM said the hon. and gallant member for Southwark evidently contemplated a court-martial, sworn evidence, and a decision that would be binding upon the captain ; whereas the clause provided for none of those things. Again, the gallant admiral did not seem to bear in mind the possibility of the captain himself witnessing a man's misconduct, as, for example, if with his own eyes he saw a sailor skulking in a gale of wind when he ought to be going aloft. In a case like that the commanding officer himself would be the best judge of the offender's culpability. II& (the right hon. baronet) altogether dissented from the reasons given by the gallant admiral why the captain should not be present at the fnfliction of the punishment. Surely a man ought not to be compelled to undergo an amount of pain which the captain, had he been present, would have thought unnecessarily severe. (Hear, hear.) Sir J. PAKINGTON could not forget that the clause came before the house recommended by a Board of Admi ralty, which comprised several eminent officers, and by the noble lord who had himself had practical experience of commanding ships. The object of the proposed regulation was, he presumed, to give the captain every possible moral support in the discharge of his difficult and important duties; and at the same time to hold out to the sailor the utmost possible guarantee for his being treated with jus tice. He believed that the clause would tend to secure both those objects, but he would suggest that its details should be carefully reconsidered before the report. Sir C. NAPIER thought that if there was not to be a regular court-martial the inquiry had better be dispensed with, for it would be regarded by the men as little better than a farce. As for offences committed under the personal cognisance of the captain, he had to remark that a colonel had no power to flog a soldier for anything that he might see him do. Mr. W. WILLIAMS begged to move the omission of this part of the clause, in order to substitute a provision fur a proper court martial. Sir J. GRAHAM observed that the language of the clause was certainly very ambiguous, the pronoun " his" being sometimes CJ used as to render it doubtful whether it applied to the captain or to the offender. L Ord C. PAGET admitted the importance of the sugges tion of Sir James Graham and the grave difficulty of the question. He should .be sorry to take away from the cap tain of a ship the least responsibility. Were this done there would be an end of discipline. Supposing a captain to notice a man not laying out as he ought, he would send for his second in command and direct inquiry to be made so as to ascertain whether the man was guilty of the offence wil fully. He did not think that the responsibility of the cap tain would le in the least affected by the course proposed by this clause. He would still have the power of over ruling the opinion expressed by the officers. There was great difficulty in dealing 3ith this question; but he was convinced that the alteration proposed would operate to the improvement of discipline. The restriction referred only to corporal punishment, and in any seriou3 cases, such as mutiny, the captain had the power of setting aside the de cision of the other officers. Mr. W. 'WILLIAMS moved the omission of cm ;ain words from the clause, with the view to the adoption of a cor - t-ma•.-Lial in all cases of prnisluatent. Sir G. C. LEWIS recommended the hon, member to pro pose a new clause of his own on the bringing up of the report. Mr. AYRTON said that the proposal of Mr. Williams was utterly impracticable. The amendment of Mr. Williams was negatived without a division, and the clause was agreed to. On clause 50, Lord HOT HAM said that much inccnvenience might re sult from there be'ug no one on the spot qualified to con vene a court-nsm iial. Lord C. PAGET said that the commanding officer of any squadron or detachment would have that authority. Wherever theie were three ships under one command, the-e would be power to order a court-martial. Clauses 50 to 69 were agreed to. Upon clause 70, Mr. HENLEY said he hoped some provision would be made for tho case of the gaols being full. At present a governor was under a penalty of £lOO for refusing to receive a prisoner, to be recovered in summary manner. Mr. JAMES recommended the insertion of the words " without lawful excuse" after the word "refuse." Mr. HENLEY said that in country prisons they were.* this difficulty —governors of prisons were obliged to have single cells for each prisoner, whereas formerly they were enabled to double aml . treble the number of occupants of each cell. The amendment was agreed to, and the words added to the clause. The remaining clauses were agreed to, and the bill passed lireugh committee. The house resumed. ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES BILL. This bill was ordered for a third reading to-morrow (this day. COURT OF CHANCERY BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. Mr. HADFIELD mov,d the insertion of the following clause, iu reference to the salary of the chief clerks ap pointed since Nov. 2, 1855 : " As regards the said John Arthur Buckley and the chief clerks to bo appointed under this act, and also as regards the chief clerks of all the judges of the said court, appointed since the second day of Novem ber one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five, and to be hereafter appointed, it shall be lawful for the Lord Chan cellor, if he shall so think fit, upon the certificate mentioned in the 44th section of the said act of the 15th and 16th years of her Majesty, chapter 80, to order and direct their salaries respectively to be increased to the full amount authorised by such act at any one period." Mr. MALTNS opposed the amendment. The committee then divided, — For the clause Against it • Majority The clause was accordingly added to the bill. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION, &c., BILL. Upon the order of the day being read for considering the Lords' amendments to this bill, Mr. B. OSBORNE complained that those amendments had the eltect of increasing and perpetuating the power of the Ecclesiastical Commission, which the other night had run a great chance of being abolished by a vote of the house. It was notorious that under the commission there had been a great waste of church property. The salaries of rich deans had been increased, while the claims of the working clergy had been overlooked. (Hear, hear.) If the house wanted any proof of that fact it need only refer to the blue-book of seventy pages which had been laid on the table. It there appeared that on the occasion of the pay ment of £.5,000 on the renewal of a tithe rent-charge within the living of Whitby, the incumbent, whose income was only £2OO a year, with a population over 12,000, applied to the commission for a small augmentation of his salary. Although his application was supported by the late Arch bishop of York, it was unsuccessful, and the result was a strong feeling of irritation in the parish. There were hundreds of cases to show that the Ecclesiastical C,,mmis sioners paid no attention to the augmentation of poor liv ings. But the great job which they had recently performed was to raise the salary of the Dean of York. That was a transaction which marked the character of the Ecclesiastical Commission. By an Act of Parliament passed some time ago the salaries of those deans, with some special excep tions, were fixed not to exceed £l,OOO a year. Two years ago, when the deanery was vacant, some objection was taken in the House of Commons to the appointment of an excellent gentleman, the present dean, than whom a better man did not exist, and who had expended large sums of money for the benefit of the church and people. The right hon. gentleman, then Home Secretary, however, then stated that this gentleman was appointed because he was a teat of very large property, the income of the deanery being limited to £l,OOO a year. That statement was accepted. Now, the Dean of York has made no applica tion to have his salary raised above £l,OOO a year ; he had taken no part in the matter, and stood fully ac quitted. But the Ecclesiastical Commission had gone to the Home-office with a memorial, and got an order in council passed, by which the income of the Deanery of York was raised to £2,000 a year. This had been done without the consent of Parliament, and contrary to the settlement made by Parliament. He doubted whether such an act was legally done". Instead of such an act being done by the will of an irresponsible body, the correct thing would have been to have come before Parliament for a declara tory act. It was a matter which required explanation. The SPEAKER said the question before the house was the consideration of the Lords' amendments to this bill. Mr. B. OSBORNE intended to move an amendment. No explanation had yet been given of that order in council ; but when this bill was before the House of Lords, notice of an amendment was given by Lord Stanley of Alderley, which was approved by Lord Derby, and which he was surprised not to see now among the Lords' amendments to the bill. He would now move the same amendment as an addition to one of the clauses of the bill:—" That in all cases where any schemes are proposed by the Ecclesiastical Commission, by which the income of any ecclesiastical dig nitaries are altered or increased, the same shall be laid before the two Houses of Parliament six weeks at least before they are submitted to her Majesty in Council." Sir G. C. LEWIS objected that this amendment could not be moved. The rule was, in amending the Lords' amend ments, that the amendments so made by this house should be relevant to the words which were amended. Now, the clause to which the hon. gentleman would append this pro viso related simply to the adjustment of the estates or in comes of the bishops on the avoidance of their sees. Mr. KINNAIRD regretted that the Home Secretary had not condescended to give some explanation of the affair of the Deanery of York alluded to by the hon. member for Liskeard. That was a case which, taken in contrast with the case of Whitby, supplied an excellent specimen of the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Commission. was it cor rect that applications had been made for the increase of the stipends of the two deaneries. The SPEAKER was of opinion that the amendment was not relevant to the amendment of the Lords, and could not, therefore, be put. Sir 11. WILLOUGIIBY wished to know who was to pay the expenses of the arbitrations that would be re quired to settle the value of the estates to be assigned to sees ? The Lords' amendment appeared to him to exagge rate the mischief. Sir G. C. LEWIS said the Lords' amendment applied only to disputes, on the avoidance of a see, as to the value of the estates which should be allotted to it. The first amendment was then agreed to: the second, Mr. OSBORNE wished to know whether ho could now move his amendment ? Ho was very anxious to Gring it forward. (A laugh.) The SPEAKER ;tiled that he could not. Mr. AYRTON moved that the amendment be not agreed to. After a few words from Mr. Whalley, Lord Palmerston ; Mr. Craufurd, and Sir G. C. Lewis, The house divided on the question of agreeing to the Lords' amendment-- For the amendment 35 Against it Majority .. —l7 The remaining amendments were agreed to. PARTY EMBLEMS (IRELAND) BILL. This bill was ordered to be read a third time to-day. DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This bill passed through committee. The following bills also passed through committee :-- Coast of Africa, &c., Act Amendment Bill; Offences within her Majesty's Possessions Abroad Bill. CHANCERY EVIDENCE COMMISSION BILL. The bill passed through committee, and was read a third time and passed. TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND (IRELAND) BILL. Some of the Lords' amendments to this bill were agreed to, GAS (METROPOLIS) BILL. The Lords' amendments were agreed to. NEW BILLS. Mr. CARDWELL obtained leave to bring in bills relat ing to fisheries in Ireland and county surveyors. The house adjourned at ten minutes to two o'clock. IRELAND. DUBLIN, TUESDAY MORNING. THE CONVICT HOLDEN. A deputation waited on the Lord Lieutenant yesterday, and presented memorials praying for a commutation of the sentence of death passed on Holden, who was convicted at the last Donegal assizes of the wilful murder of head constable M'Clelland. His Excellency stated that he appre ciated the motives of the memorialists, but he would consider what it was his duty to do, and prayed he might be guided to perform it aright. His Excel lency afterwards most kindly admitted to an audi ence the wife of the unfortunate man, who carried her infant child in her arms. One of the memorials presented in favour of Holden is signed by ten out of the twelve jurymen 'rho tried him, and the other two only withheld their signatures on the ground that the 'jury having unanimously recommended the prisoner to mercy, there was no need for any memorial from them. THE WEATHER AND THE CROPS. The accounts from all quarters as to the weather and the condition of the crops continue to be of the most disheartening character. In several of the city churches on Sunday prayers were offered up for fine weather. If there should be even now a favourable change, and a moderate portion of heat and sunshine, an average harvest might still be saved ; but if, on the contrary, the wet cold weather continues, the prospect is most appaling. Prom Clonmel we learn the continued wet is the cause of great alarm at this continued season to farmers. The lowlands are all flooded ; the harsh ness of the weather has been decidedly injurious to the grain crops in general. The wheat and oats in many places are lodged, and cut and standing meadows are at present in a very precarious state. We learn that a great deal of damage has been done by the mountain floods, consequent on the late violent rain and storm, in portions of the adjacent districts of the county Waterford ; nor is there, we are sorry to state it, any doubt whatever of the appearance of the fatal blight in the potato crop. The gardens and fields in this locality are to a slight extent affected, but great damage has been done by the blight along the sea coast, in Tramore and other parts of the county Waterford. It has also appeared in the vicinity of Tipperary and Cashel, but hopes are entertained that the loss will not be so serious as in former years, especially as the early planted tubers h ave attained to maturity, and are of fine quality this season. In Cork the weather still retains its wintryas pect. During the early hours of Saturday morning the wind blew heavily from the south-west , and at intervals showers of rain came down. Saturday was cold and wintry. A few bright gleams of sunshine threw a little cheerfulness over part of the forenoon, but they were transient, and their rapid disappearance only made the day appear drearier THE METROPOLITAN BUILDING ACT. —The Me (rleSsscs) ri is amend e d b y a late act, bed as to cubical dimension f declaring r°P °i itan of the recited act are not to apply to b uildings to be used that Building the prescribed the manufactory of machinery and b o il ers of steam vessels, provided that such buildings do not consist of one floor only. When the buildings are of greater dimensions than 216,000 cubic feet, they a re t o be approved of b the Metropolitan Board of Works, y EXECUTION 12' CrAI?LISLE. George Cass was executed at Carlisle gaol yester day at noon, for the wilful murder of Ann Sewell, at Embleton on the 26th of Mar c h l as t. Th e cir cumstances of the case have before appeared in The isun. At the end of last week the prisoner made another statement, which, though of a somewhat unsatisfactory character, tends to clear up some doubts as to the manner in which the murder was committed, and what was the motive for such an atrocious clime. It will be remembered that in the prisoner's original statement he said that the girl had asked him to mend her clog ; he refused to do so, and she threw a knife at him; he threw it back at her, and it stuck in her throat, and then, after she had requested him to " put her away altogether," he went and inflicted the wounds which caused her death. He now states that a quarrel arose between him and the girl, in the kitchen, about a half-crown which he had lent her ; he rushed at her in a passion, and pursued her along the passage to the outer door, where he caught her. A scuffle ensued at th e d oor , h e th en dragged her down the passage (which accounts for the streaks of blood found on the wall), and at the end of the passage, where the body was afterwards found, murdered his victim. Yesterday morning, three or four hours before the time of execution, groups of people —men, women, and children—assembled in front of the scaffold, which was erected at an angle of the gaol wall. Trains from the west, the district in which the murder W committed, brought a great number of people; but excursion trains from the town were run at cheap rates to induce as many persons as possible to be absent during the execution, and to these $ remarkably fine day served as an additional ill: ducernent. Soon after 11 o'clock the number 0I people in front of the gaol began to increase greatly; the windows commanding a view of the scaffold were occupied, and children of the tenderest years might be seen mingling in the crowd. At a q uo , ter before 12 thousands had assembled. They dl vided themselves into two portions, one on each side of the scaffold, the scaffold having been s° placed behind a, projecting parapet of the gaol wail that•the gallows could not be well seen from the front. When the clock struck twelve a still ness seemed to come upon the .spectators; children who had been running about in the open space in, the centre ranged themselves with the crowd ; the , chapel bell began to toll, and amid the most pro-, found silence the criminal, accompanied by the• chaplain and the hangman Calcraft, ascended the, platform. The chaplain read the usual texts el Scripture, the hangman placed the white cap upon the head of the unfortunate criminal, and, having shaken hands with him, adjusted the rope and re: tired ; the chaplain also shook hands with him all left the platform. About five minutes past 12 the bolt was drawn, and the criminal was launched into eternity. At the same instant a loud moa n passed through the whole crowd. The murderer struggled but for a few seconds, and the crowd then began to disperse immediately. While the body hung only the head and shoulders were visible frog the street. • LOUN2'RY MARKETS. NEWCASTLE-UNDER LYNE—AUG. 20. At this corn market there was but a small sholf._ . l wheat for the season, but the d e m an d was fi rm, an d prick advanced is per quarter—white maki ng 63 s t o 68 s , sm" red 58s to 645. The samples of barley shown were fear but prices held firmly. Oats in small supply, and th e tali dearer, from 29s to 34s per 24 stone. Beans made is ol' et former values. BRISTOL—AuG. 21. A dull business passing in wheat to-day, with a fair tendance of buyers. Holders firm, and late rates were es• ceeded by is to is 6d per qr. Grinding barley is to 2. UP' Oats, beans, and peas against buyers. , LEEDS, AUG. 21. We have a fine day, which has its imfluence on the trade' The business in wheat is not on so large a scale as of late , but where sales are made is advance on last week's pric e° were realised. Barley unaltered. Beans are fully as dear' Oats and other articles do not vary in price. Arrivals this week : 1 Wheat 2,372 qrs. Barley Oats Rapeseed ..1,921 Peas . , 411 Linseed 1,921 Flour Averages for the week: Wheat 3,055 qrs., at 60s 4td Peas •••• -s Od Beans — —s —d Rye 8ar1ey......... -3 —d Oats Od. LIVERPOOL—Auct. 21. We have had a large attendance of millers and dealers ...I t this morning's market, b u t a ver y small business doing ": wheat, at 2d per cental over the rates of Friday lin Flour in firm consumptive inqui r y a t an i mprovemen t Is Gd per barrel and sack. Indian corn was held for the advance of from Gd to is per qr. made yesterday, tail sale. Oats and oa t mea l b r i ng full prices. B ea l* peas, and barley ha ve eac h a d vance d i s per qr. The m ar' closed without animation. w ith a re- SLEAFORD—AuG. 20. eb A moderate show of wheat a t mar k e t t o -d ay, f or vrW I the trade was steady for mo s t sam pl es , a t an a d van ce co Is to 2s per qr. Barley rath er d earer , an d oa t s t en di n g ur warels. White ruled at 65s to 68s, red 62s to 64s per n f i r : Barley, 29s to 45s ; oats, 28 s t o 34 s ; b eans, 38 s to aul' peas, —a to —s. THE MAILS. MAILS DUE. Australia, Ceylon, and Mauritius (71a South ampton) D • o. • Sept. 1 8 . (via Marseilles) Sept. 12. Bahamas and Ha vana ( v i a N ew Y or k) .. Aug. 30. Canada, &c. (via Liverpool) .. Aug. 22. Cape of Good Hope, &c. S e pt. 1. China, Penang, and Singapore (via S'ampton) Sept. 1. Do. (via Marseilles) Aug. 26. Gibraltar (via Southampton) Aug. 25. India (Calcutta), Ceylon, &c. (via Southampton) Sept. 1. Do. (via Marseilles) Aug. 2 6 . India (Bombay), (via Southampton) .. Aug. 2 6 ' Do. (via Marseilles) Aug. 19. Lisbon, Brazils, Buenos Ayre s , &c. .. Sept. 5• Malta, Egypt, and Aden (via Southampton) .. Aug. 25. 100. (via Marseilles) .. Aug. 19. Lisbon, Vigo, and Oporto • • • • .. Aug. 21. United States, California, &c. .. Aug. 22. Western Coast of Atrica Madeira, Teneriffe .. Sept. 10. West Indies and Pacific;Carthagena, Cuba, &c. Aug. 28. [ADVERTISEMENT.] — We have read with much pleasure Du Barry's Report on the cure of diseases NI ithout medi cine by Du BaLey's Revalenta Arabica Food. The follow ing arc a few extracts which appear to merit the attention of many :—Cure No. 47,121—" Miss Elizabeth Jacobs, of ' Nazing Vicarage, Waltham-cross, Herts : a cure of ex , tremo nervousness, indigestion, gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies." Cure No. 52,612—The Dowager Countes o of Castlestuart, of many years nervous irritability, bile, and indigestion. Cure 54,812—Mi ss Virginia Meguers, cured of consumption, after her medical adviser had abandoned all hopes of recovery. Cure 180—Of W. B. Reeves/ 181, Fleet-street, London, of " Twenty-five Yed r l nervousness, constipation, indigestion, and debility., Avoid Pills and M e di c i nes : t h ey invariably aggravate and perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment and expense may be avoided by using Ru Barry's Fo which, at a few pence per day, saves 50 times its cost ig other remedies, removing effectually, without purgingl constipation, indigestion (dy s pep s i a ) nervous, bil ious and liver complaints and all th e i r consequences . C er tificate No. 36,418. We find it the, safest remedy. Andrew Vrer MD., F.R.S., Dr Harvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr' Campell. Let invalids avo id th e fearful dangers of on; rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety 01 false pretences. Novill's imitations are prohibited by the high Court of Chancery under a penalty of £5,000 agains t Alfred Hooper Nevill and his agents ; and the pretence that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Du Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly false. No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, in full, on theseal and wrapper. Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins 11b. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d. ; 51b. ll s . ; 121 b. 22 5. ; 241 b. 408. The 121 b. and 241 b. canist ers are sen t carr i age free en receipt and Ox- Co. ; Abbis, Co., 77, of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Re gent-street, London; Fortnum Mason,.. 63= d 60, Graceehureh-street • 4, Cheapsiae ,150, Ox ford-street ; 330 and 451,' Strand ; 49 and 60, ..ns!shopsgate tea-dealers ; Petty, Wood, an d Co., Icing William-street, ; Batty, 16, Finsbu r y P avem ent ; and Co, City ; at 127, High Holborn ; and all grocers. BIRTIIS. AINSLIE.—On the 18th inst., at Rowantree, Edmonton, the wife of Charles Esq ., Of a d aug ht er. i COBBETT.—On the 2 0 th inst., n Grafton -street, Mayfair, . Fny.—Onthe wife of the John 18 John T. Fry, Esq. , i solicitor, of Dane's-nn, of a d aug h ter. AI AItR 1 A E S aocKs—ltfooßE.—On th e 18 th inst., at St. John's, Hack " i l n . bb the et t fseq of M P., of a son. . nay, Fred. Cocks, of Clapham, to Matilda, the youngest daughter of Frederick Bolland 111 , ;ore, Esq., Park-road, Dalston. TuoursoN--ScoTT._On the 16th inst., at Skipton parish church, Rob ert Thompson Esq., of Stadish, Lancashire, is Mary St eer Read youngest daughter of Mrs. Scott, of Close H ouse, Skip' ton. DEATHS. EASTON.—On the 19th inst at Stone House, B r adf o rd, n ear Taunton, John Euston, Esq., aged 73. JERYLL.—On the 20th inst., at Weston, near Bath, Joseph H. S. Jekyll, Esq., of York -terrace, Regent's-park, Lon don, youngest son of the late Captain Jekyll, R.N., of Roundhill, Somerset. MosTYN.--On the 19th inst., at Upper Norwood, Henri Mostyn, Esq., of 10, Portman-square. SHOBE.—On the 21st inst., the Rev. William Henry Shore, LL.B., incumbent of All Saints' Church, Child's-hill. S3IYTHE.— On the 17th inst., at Wootton Hall, Warwick shire, the Dowager Lady Smythe, aged 70. TANCRED.—On the 20th inst., at Margate, Henry William Tancred, Esq., Q.C., Bencher, of Lincoln's-inn, and late M.P. for Banbury. LoNnoic : Printed and Published by MURDO YO UNG , of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at Ths Sun 3tLice, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county 0 1 Middleeox, Wednesday, August 22, 1860.