The Sun. — London, England, 1858-07-14 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—OCESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his szat on the Wool sack at five o'clock. Lord STANLEY of A.LDERLEY presented a peti tion from Chester in favour of the legalisation of the marriage with a deceased wife's sister. Earl GRANVILLE presented similar petitions from Liverpool. The Bishop of RIPON presented petitions to the same eff-!ct. Earl St. German, the Bishop of London, a nd Lord Hatherton also presented petitions with a similar prayer. ARMY CLOTHING. In reply to a question from the Marquis of Craiest- CABDE, Lord HARDINGE said no dress uniforms had been sent to Liverpool, but as soon as the 100th Regiment arrived at Shorncliffe it was quite true that they had received their new tunics without the buttons. (Hear, bear, and a laugh.) This was . owingnot to the neglect of any person in an official position, but to some neglect on the part of carriers who had undertaken to convey stores from Weedon to the other railway sta tion, the buttons and tunics not being both supplied by the game person. His gallant friend at the head of the War department was taking steps for a thorough re-or• ganisation of the clothing department, and he assured the noble marquis that the evil of which he complained would be remedied by the new regulations. C HURCH RATES. Lord PORTMAN said that, in consequence of the announcement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that next session he intended to submit a plan for the ar rangement of this question, he (Lord Portman) thought it would be premature far him to lay on the table, dur ing the present session, the bill which he had announced his intention of presenting to their lordships for the set tlement of this vexed question. He was not unprepared to do so, but, on the contrary, he had a deal of informs tion, which would be at the service of the Govern ment if they thought proper to accept it. His only object had been to obtain a settlement of the question of church rates. The Earl of DERBY was sorry the noble lord oppo , site had overstated the announcement made by his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The right hon. gentleman said it was the hope of the Govern ment that, during the next session of Parliament, they might be enabled to settle the question of church rates, but that was not saying that they intended to introduce a bill for that purpose. The subject was surrounded with very great difficulty, and the more suggestions that were made the greater the chance was there of their arriving at some satisfactory conclusion. He should be grateful to his noble friend (Lurd Portman) if, notwithstanding the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, be would lay on the table the bill he had prepared on the question. PRIVATE BUSINESS. On the motion of Lord REDESDALE, the following bills were read a second time—the Whitehaven Junction Railway, Newport, Abergavenny, and Hereford Rail way, Worcester and Hereford Railway, South Wales Railway (new railway), andiMiddlesborough Improve- Mont. On the motion of the same Noble Lord the following bills were read a third time and passed :—Davidson's Estate ; Cleveland Railway ; Stockton and Darling ton Railway (Durham lines) ; Stockton and Darlington (North Riding lines) ; Stockton and Darlington, Wear Valley, &c., Banking Companies Amalgamation Bill, Birkenhead Improvement Commissioners (Gas and Water), Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Rail way, Crystal Palace, District Gas and Windsor New Roads. EDINBURGH POST-OFFICE. On the motion of Lord COLCHESTER, the new Genera Post-office (Edinburgh) Bill was read a second time. JOINT-STOCK BANKING COMPANIES BILL Earl GRANVILLE, in moving the second reading o this bill, said the object of it was to apply to joint stock banking companies that principle of limited liability which Parliament had already conceded to other joint stock companies. It was not necessary that he should en ter into any argument on the subject. Lord Overstone had admitted that if the principle of limited liability were once conceded to joint stock companies in general, there could be no valid reason for refusing to extend it to banking companies, and the same admission was made by his noble friend near him (Lord Monteagle.) It was an undoubted fact that the joint stock banks of London and many of those in the country were conducted with great prudence ; and he saw no reason why, when there was to be full publicity on the subject, the shareholders should not, if they pleased, have the advantage of limited lia bility; It would then be for the public to determine whether they would deal with those whose liability was limited, or with others who were differently situated. Lord MONTEAGLE said the noble earl had over looked the great distinction between banking companie4 and joint stock companies in general, namely, that the former received the money of others on deposit. There wa■ also this peculiarity in joint stock banks, that they were founded by the creation of shares, and that these shares were frequently deposited as security,so that if they were not paid up in full the publio were liable to be de ceived as to the extent of their security. He asked the noble lord opposite to pause before he passed this bill. The Earl of DERBY said it was not without hesita tion and difficulty that he felt himself so pressed by the " arguments in favour of this bill as not to refuse his as sent to the second reading. He agreed with his noble friend as to the danger from over-credit and the undue practice of banking, but they knew that some of the greatest frauds perpetrated of late years arose from un due credit given to the shareholders of banks themselves. (Hear, hear.) The main reason why he assented to the second reading of the bill was, that he could not draw any distinction between credit given to banks or other commercial bodies in proportion to the limited or unlimited liability of the parties. It was a ques tion for the public to determine, whether they considered the security of banks with limited liability sufficient. That could only be tested by experience. Pressed by the arguments in favour of the bill and by the assent of the House of Commons to the extension of the principle which had already received the sanction of their lord ships' house with regard to other than banking tresses- Cons, he could not take upon himself to refuse his assent to the second reading of the bill. Lord WENSLEYDALE did not rise for the purpose of opposing the second reading of the bill, which was in conformity with the liberal principles which prevailed in recent times, but he thought that joint-stock banks ought to be required to expose a little more of their affairs than the mere number of their subscribers. He thought a clause should be introduced obliging them t 3 exhibit the state of their credit and the extent of their obligations. Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said he deplored what had taken place in the Scotch banks, but it should be recollected that all those were banks of unlimited ha bility. He believed that where banks weze limited the public would feel it more incumbent on them to inquire into the affairs of the bank, and that in this way to a certain extent limited liability would be a security against false confidence. The colonial banks were banks of limited liability, and he had not heard of any failures amongst them. The only protection fur the public was that they should not remove-the obligation which rested on every one to look after his own interests. The bill was then read a second time. CONFIRMATION OF EXECUTORS, Stc., BILL. This bill passed through committee. UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAND) BILL. The Duke of MONTRO6E moved the second reading of this bill, and in doing so stated that there was a gene ral feeling in Scotland in favour of improvidg the state of the universities in that country. The Earl of ABERDEEN said that he felt grateful to her Majesty's Government, and especially to the late Lord Advocate, for having brought forward this bill. The bill generally was approved of iu Scotland, because it was hoped that it wood remedy defects which had long been complained of ; but, though generally ap proved of, some of its provisions met with great opposi tion. In that part of Scotland with which he was more particularly connected he never recollected witnessing anything like the degree of excitement—so strong a feeling and so perfectly unanimous, as existed on this subject. He did not mean to say that their objections 1 were well founded, but, at all events, a very moderate degree of alteration in the bill would meet the views of those parties. He himself approved, not only of the principle of the bill, but of the union of the two col leges ; but he thought that the Fystern of tuition which existed in both ought to he preserved. Earl STANHOPE agreed with the noble earl who had just spoken that the bill was capable of some amend ment, although he approved of it generally. The Bishop of LONDON considered that great thanks were due to Government for having proposed a measure calculated to confer such great benefit on the people of Scotland. The Earl of DERBY said it was satisfactory to the Government to find that the objections to the bill lay in the narrowest possible compass. One of the clauses ob jected to had not been proposed by the Government, but introduced in the other house. As to the union of the two Aberdeen colleges, the Government had no wish but to pursue that course which would be most advan tageous to the people. It had been admitted that, but for the feeling of the inhabitants of Aberdeen against it, the union was in itself desirable. Commissioners had in variably reported in favour of this union. But the bill, in point of fact, gave a permissive power to the commis. sioners to be appointed to do all that was desired by Lord Stanhope ; and the view he took was by to means unani mous with the people of Aberdeen ; for he had presented a petition from the Senatus Actelemicus of the Marischal College against retaining the separation of the faculties of arts. As a power was reserved to her Msjesty in coun cil to confirm or otherwise the proceedings of the csm missionerg, he was inclined to adhere to the bill as it stood. He obj-cted to the petitioners being heard by counsel against the bill ; for he had never yet known a ease where any advantage arose to the petitioners from such a course, or where the speeches of counsel had altered the opinion of any of their lordships. The bill was then read a second time. The Earl of ABERDEEN briefly explained why he wished that petitioners should be heard by counsel, hut declined to press his motion to that effect. STANHOPE AND WOLSINGIIA.M RECTORIES BILL. The report on this bill was received. WILLS, &c., OF BRITISH SUBJECTS ABROAD BILL. Tbis bill was read a second time. ECCLESIASTICAL CORPORATION LEASING BILL. The report on this bill Was received. FUNDED DEBT BILL. Aft it a few words from Lord MONTZACILS'and the Earl 01; DIRBY, This- - bill was read a third time and passed. 'TEE SUN, LONDOV, WEDNESDAY E V ENING, JULY 14, 1858. LEASES AND SALES OF SOU LED ESTATES BILL. This bill was read a third time ani p issed. NISI PRIUS COURT , &c. (IREI AND BILL. This bill was read a third time and p %lased. INCIJ MBE RED ESTATES (WEST l :.LADIES) BILL. The report on this bill was received. The house adjourned at a quarter to eig it o'clock. HOUSE OF COMNIONS-(YZ'iTERDAT.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' Ameedments to the Victoria Station and Pimlico Railway Bills were agreed to. STEARNE'S CHARITIES BILL. This bill was read a second time. STANDING ORDERS REVISION. Colonel W. PATTEN moved the appointment of the follow Select Committee for revising the Standing Orders :—Colonel W, Patten, Mr. Henley, Sir James Graham, Mr. Fitzßoy, Mr. E. P. Bouverie, Sir J. Y. Boiler, Mr. Wrightson, Sir R. Ferguson, Mr. Lockhart, Mr. B. Carter, Mr. J. A. Wynne, Mr. E. Egerton, and Mr. Sholefield. —Agreed to. - GLASGOW COLLEGE ESTATE BILL. Mr. C. FORSTER moved the following resolution : "Teat it be an instruction to the committee of selection, that they have power to appoint the committee on the Glasgow College Estate Bill to meet any day not earlier than seven clear days after the second reading, on three days' notice being given of the meeting of the committee on the bill. —Agreed to. SALE OF POISONS BILL. Numerou4 petitions were presented. against the Sale of Poisons Bill. POLICE FORCE (IRELAND) BILL. The Lord Mayor of Dublin, in his robes of office, at tended at the bar of the house, and presented a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commo❑ Council of the city of Dublin, against the Police Force (Ireland) Bill. Mr. GROGAN presented a petition signed by 22 of the members of the Corporation of Dublin, in favour of the Police Force (Ireland) Bill. He also presented an other petition, signed by many leading persons in Dublin, to the same effect. Mr. VANCE said he had a petition to present from Dublin in its favour, but in consequence of some infor mality in it he would defer its presentation till to-mor- row. Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD presented a petition from Dublin against the bill, signed by several thousands o' the inhabitants. MR. G. H. RYLAND. Capt. VIVIAN moved an address for copies of all papers and correspondence, or extracts of correspon• dente, between the Imperial Government and Govern ment of Canada, from let June, 1855, relative to the case of Mr. Geo. H. Ryland, formerly clerk of the Council in Canada, including Lord John Russell's despatch of the 20th July, 1855, together with instructions issued to Chief-Justice Carter to examine and report upon the case, and his report thereon, with accompanying papers. —Agreed to. EAST INDIES (EDUCATION). Mr. J. B. SMITH moved for a copy of all correspon dence on the sui,ject of education, between the Court of Directors and the Government of India, since the 19th day of July, 1854, not already presented to Parliament, until the latest date at which such correspondence was known in this country.—Agreed to. THE LOSS OF THE VARNA. In reply to Mr. ROBERTSON, Mr. HENLEY said his attention had been called to the circumstance referred to. He had had a copy of the ship's protect sent to him, and it appeared from it that the waster of the ship died, and the mate, who held a certificate of service but not of competency strictly under the provisions of the law, succeeded him. The protest stated the mate was not a navigator, and he was unable to take observations, but it did not appear that the vessel was lost in conse quence. Inquiries, however, would be made into the subject. NEW ROADS AND NAVIGABLE CANALS IN INDIA. Mr. CHEETHAM asked the President of the Board of Control why the return respecting new roads and navigable canals in India, ordered by the house last session, had not yet been laid on the table ? Lord STAN LEY said it VIM found no sufficient materials existed in this country out of which the return desired could be compiled, and in consequen:e an order was sent to India to obtain the information required. He bad received a letter from Col. Baker, Secretary to the Public Works in India, in which he called upon all the local authorities in every part of India to furnish the required details. Probably the disturbed state of the country had caused the delay, but as soon as he received the information referred to, he would lay it upon the table of the house. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY COMMISSIONER. Mr. VANSITT.:A.RT asked the President of the Board of Control, whether it was his intention, considering the important duties of the office he now holdsi-to continue any longer Commissioner for the University of Cambridge? Lord STANLEY said that when he took office at the commencement of the year he proposed to his brother Commissioners to resign, but it was their unanimous wish that he should continue one of the Commissioners, and he complied with it. (Hear, hear.) THE JEW BILL. Lord J. RUSSELL said—Sir, a certain bill some time ago passed this house—though from some delay it has net yet come down again from the other house — and I think at this period of the session it is important that the house should be aware of the course which I propose to pursue with respect to the Oaths Bill, and also with respect to another bill which is now before the House of Lords, I believe, though I am not sure whether it has passed its third reading. I beg to move the adjournment of the house in order to enable me to make the explanation which I think necessary of the course which I intend to pursue. The house is perfectly aware that for some years—nine years, I think—they have agreed to bills for the relief of her Majesty's Jewish subjects, and for admitting them to offices and to hold seats in Parliament on condition of taking the oaths with the omission of those words which Baron Roths child declared not to be binding on his conscience. Though those bills were recommended to the House of Lords by great authorities in that house, yet they failed in obtaining the assent of that house. But at the end of last year, after the bill had been again rejected by the House of Lords, a committee was appointed on my motion, in order to consider whether this house had not the power to crder that a member might be admitted on making a declaration, and without the necessity of taking the form of oath, the substance of which would be embodied in the declaration. In the course of the sitting of the committee, of which I had the honour to be chairman, very able arguments were made on both sides, but more especially the late Attorney-General, Sir R. Bethell, enforced, with great legal learning, the opinion that this house was able to administer a (facia ration to a person objecting, as a member of the Jewish religion would, to take the oath, and that that declara tion would be sufficient to admit him to a seat in this house. A narrow majority of the committee decided aeainst the advice and opinion of the late Attorney. General, but there were many persons who supported it, believing that the opinion was right ; more especially three members of the present Government—the Chan cellor of he Exchequer, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the President of the Board of Control—were in favour of the view taken by the learned e entleman. If a motion was made by the late Attorney-General, it was stated to be the intention of the First Lord of the Ad miralty to move a resolution that, though it was com petent for this house to receive a declaration in lieu of as oath against that, it was not advisable to use that power until other constitutional remedies had been exhausted. It appeared to me, though I was not called on to give au opinion in the committee, that that was the right and true view of the questioo before us, that the legal power was in the House of Commons, but that it was not expedient to use it until the house had exhausted all con stitutional remedies. This opinion appears to have b ad gre at weight with the h ouse. In the p resent session Baron Rothschild, being a person who had not taken the oaths, was appointed a member of a select commit. tee. A bill, similar in purport to the other, but calcu• lated, it possible, t o meet the objections entertained by the House of Lords, was sent up to the otoer house, but was rejected by a majority of 39. After this took place the very grave question seemed to have made great im pression on the minds of many members of the House of Peers, and I have communications from some of those peers who seem to have been much affected by the diffi culty, not to say danger, by woich this matter was eur roundsd. If a ruaj rity of this house resolved tt at a declare • tion should be substituted for an oath, in accordance a ith the motion of the hon.and learned member for Aylesbury, it was impossible not to see that other and serious difficul ties might arise. I am inclined to believe that after that the courts ofcommon law would have been disposed to think that the authority of the house would have been E uffi cient fur the interpretation of the act of Parliament. But the contrary might have been the case. The Lord Chief Justice of England, indeed, went so far as to suppose that he might be imprisoned by the House of Commons for having delivered an opinion contrary to the opinion of the house, and that the people rising in insurrection would have delivered the Lord Chief Justice. (Laughter.) But silo wing that to have been rather a stretch of ices.- givation on the part of the Lord Chief Justice, and that the house would not have gone to that extremity, still it is obvious that if the House of Commons had come to a resolution that Baron Rothschild might take his seat on making a declaration, it would have been incumbent on the house, having taken that step, to have defended their member, us far as circumstauces admitted, from any injury sustained, whether by the judgment of a court of law or otherwise, in consequence of his doing his duty as a member of this Lowe. That state of things would have had an injurious effect upon public testing. Al though this house is the supreme power in the country, which I think noth . ng could resist, the exercise of that power of seating a member would have been attended with uo little disturbance of the public mind and inter ruption of public business. We must all bear in mind that it is no longer like those questions of privilege which existed on former occasions when the house was strag gling against the undue exercise of the prerogative of the Crown. On the contrary, in the present day the House of Commis has so much power that the tendency of the public mind is that the house might absorb the power of . the State, or at all events mo r e power than be longs to i t, and the courts of law are filled by indepen dent judges, whose opinions would have weight. There fore I say the. conflict between the house and the courts of law would no longer be what it was in former times. I believe there would hardly have been any mode of settling this question, supposing the Houseof Commons to be de termined to protect their member and the judges proceed ing to enforce their judgment; there would have been no remedy but the determination that the house would proceed • with no other business until their member was protected, and thus stopping both branches of the Legislature until the power of the House of Commons was ratified by law. If that be so, I think that izreat credit is due to those who in the House of Lords have introduced and sane tioned a measure which may prevent this embarrass ment, and do at once that which might have been ob tained after a long and dangerous struggle. On the 31st May the Earl of Lucan proposed an amendment by which this difficulty would have been removed. I think it unfortunate that that amendment was not taken into consideration, and the Oaths Bill amended in the man ner proposed. The House of Lords have, however, taken another course, intending, no doubt, to arrive at the same end. Instead of adopting that amendment proposed on the 31st May they resolved to insist on their amendments in the Oaths Bill, and appointed a committee of conference. A bill was afterwards intro duced to give each house the power, if either of them should think fit, on a declaration being made by a Jewish member of Parliament that he had conscientious objec tions to taking the oaths in the form in which they now stand, to relieve him from using the words "on the true faith of a Christian,'" and to let him take his seat. The former bill did a good deal more than that, because it allowed persons of the Jewish persuasion to hold all those offices for which the oath of abjuration was now required, by omitting the words, " on the true faith of a Chri-tiara," except only those few offices which could not be held by a Homan Catholic. The bill introduced in the House of Lords is not, certainly, a concession of the whole principle of religious liberty, for which the House of Commons contended ; but at the same time it is a practical solution of a very grave question, and as such it is my intention, when that bill shall come down, to move the second reading, and to endeavour to carry it through all its stages. (Cheers.) I hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will allow me to take precedence on Friday next, so that it may be read a second time on that day. There will then be room for discussion, and a division if it is thought proper ; and if there is a majority of the house in favour of the bill, I hope to be allowed to proceed with it rapidly, a favour which is sometimes allowed at this period of the session, so that there may be no further difficulty in the way of its pass ing. But then I come to the question of how the Lords have dealt with the bill sent up by this house ; for, sin gularly enough, they not only have not concurred in the clause as to the relief of the Jews, but, 'nstead of that, they ommitted this clause, because they thought, as they might fairly in the exercise of their privilege think, that the object might be better provided for by a separate bill ; yet instead of so stating, they have given all the reasons why no bill of this kind should be admitted at all. (Hear, hear.) Certainly that is a course that might be said to be insulting to the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) I have heard it said, and on the highest authority, that it was not intended as an insult to the House of Commons, but at all events it is a course which puts this house in some difficulty, and, still more, shows a singular inconsistency in the majority of the House of Lords. I will read what I have had put into my band as one of the reasons of the Lords for not agreeing to our amendments. Because, without imputing any disloyalty or disaffection to her Majesty's subjects of the Jewish persuasion, the Lords consider that the denial and rejec tion of that Saviour — Lord J. MANNERS—I rise to order. I wish to know whether these reasons are before the House of Commons f Lord J. RUSSELL—No, the bill and the reasons ought to have been sent down, but they have not been sent. But long no Lord C.lstleretigh quoted the House of Lords' proceedings, and when he was interrupted he stated that the House of Lords was a court of record, and no member could Le interrupted in reading what they have placed on record. (Hear.) On the votes of the House of Lords are the reasons I have mentioned, and one of them declares to this effect. (Cries of" `Read, read.") I will, at all events, read the last words of the reason—" That the denial and rejection of that Saviour in whose name each house of Parliament daily offers up its collective prayers for the Divine blessing on its coun sels constitutes a moral unfitness to take part in the legislation of a professedly Christian community." I cannot understand that they have any moral unfitness for such duties, and the Lords, at the same time that they state these reasons, send down a bill by which Jews are to be allowed to take part in the legislation of a Christian community. I own that it appears to me that it is a question whether the course ought not to have been to have placed resolutions on oar journals, without answering these reasons of the Lords, so as to give our reasons for not taking any notice of those reasons of the Lords, that as the House of Lords have passed a bill to carry into effect the admission of the Jews to Parlia ment, it is not necessary to consider the reasons of the Lords. (Rear.) I think some record of that sort might be advisable for the sake of our own consistency. We might prefer insisting on our original bill, or we might concur in the amendments of the Lords. In proposing the course which I have stated, however, I am propos. ing that which I think it is our duty to take, so as to agree as far as possible in the practical made by which we may obtain our object and agree as far as possible with the other house. If the whole question were involved in this bill we could not do otherwise than insist on the principle of religious liberty, but when the House of Lords only passed a measure partly dealing with the question and admitting the Je we, I think that we ought to agree to the settlement of a question which has been so long agitated. At the same time, I should rejoice for my own part if, having relieved the Protestant D.ssenters and the Roman Catholics from their disabilities, we had con summated the principle that religious differences should be no objection to a man holding any civil position. (Loud cheers.) I believe that the majority of this house was right on that subject, though the House of Lords is still in darkness. (A laugh.) Yet they may, when aJ ew sits in the House of Commons, put the question in a more consistent form than is done by the measure now before them. I beg therefore to move the adjournment of the house, and to apologise to the house for having so long detained them with this explanation. (The noble lord resumed his seat, but no member of the Government answering, he again rose and said, "I ask the right hon. gentleman whether he will allow me Friday l ") Mr. DISRAELI said though this bill had not yet reached the house, he fet it his duty to answer the ap peal of the noble lord. Since the house had placed at the disposal of the Government all the time usually en trusted to private members, he thought that for business of public importance they might make an arrangement, such as was suggested. He would, therefore, give the noble lord Friday. Lor J. MANNERS said he had risen to interrupt be cause he believed, and still believed, that the noble lord was out of order—(hear) —in referring to a subject not yet before the house. He also rose in consequence of the unseemliness of the course pursued. It was impossible, he thought, for a debate to have arisen now without the greatest possible inconvecieoce. He would not further allude to what the noble lord had said than by saying that as a member of the committee he had referred to, he did not think the statement of the noble lord was per fectly correct, He had heard—unless kis ears deceived him—with great surprise, that this house was the sue preme power in the country, and against which there was no other power which could presume to contend. He was not aware until he heard the statement of the noble lord, that . either by law, or by habit, or in fact, that house was the supreme power in the country. (Hear.) If these words had escaped the noble hastily and unad visedly, he had nothing further to say about it, except that he did not, for one, concur in that view, and he hoped that the house would not allow it to go forward that it concurred in such a view of its own powers as that giveu by the noble lord. Lord J. RUSSELL said, as to the point of order, he believed he was perfectly right —(hea.)—that the votes of the Lords were matters of comment in that house. It was a very different thing to comment on speeches made in the House of Lords. The noble lord bad said thit his account of the proceedings in the committee was incorrect, but he bad not said in what it was incorrect. If it were incorrect he should have been glad to be cor rected. He had said that the minority were in favour of Sir R. Bethell's opinion, and that in that minority were the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the President of the Board of Control. He believed those were facts. He said that the late At toruey-General had spoken with great ability, and he did not believe that anybody who heard it would deny that it was a speech of very great ability. The noble lord further thought that he had stated inadvertently that this house was a power which no other power con'd control. If the house were once resolved to use its power and the public supported them, if they said that they would not pass the Mutiny Bill, and would not vote a shilling of supply—(hear)—it would be impossible for any power within the constitution to resist the expres sion of their wish. He ought to have said that the house was bound to exercise its power with the greatest mode ration and deliberation, but the house having been duly elected by the people, showing the confidence of the people, they had power which no other power in the state could resist. (Cheers.) The motion was withdrawn. DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY IN THE GULF OF BOTHNIA.. In reply to an appeal from Sir J. PAKINdTON, Mr. CRAWFORD postponed his motion relative to the appointment of a Royal Commission to inspire into the complaints made by certain of her Majesty's sub jects of the destruction of their property by her Ma. os J' ty's feces at Uleaborgand the Gulf of Bothniaduriog the late war. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would name an early day for its discussion. SUPPLY —NATIONAL GALLERY. On the motion that the report of the committee of supply be agreed to, Lord ELCHO called attention to the report of the commission on site of National Gallery. He suggested that a room was required for the national collection of pAinzings, The Royal Academy who occupied one-half of the building, should have notice to quit. That would give the space required for the national collection. The Royal Academy had no right to the space they occu pied, and it was the duty of her Majesty's Government to resume posses,ion • of that portion of the budding. That would -aye an outlay of money for a new building, Mr. CONINGETA NI referred to the nature and coil stitutran of the Royal Academy. It was a private society enjoying the privileges of a public body, and it occupied, to the injary of the public, a portion of a public building, intended for public purposes. It en joyed privileges exceedingly injurious to the arts, and, being a voluntary society, it was irresponsifeo to my party in the State. He condemned the mode of instruc. tion pursued by the Royal Society. After some semarke from Mr. LOCKS KING, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said something must be 'done to provide adejuate aceouinio. dation fur our national collection and its enlargement. At present they were deprived of receiving legacies from the want of room. There was no• necessity for further inquiry, and so far as the National Gallery was con cerned, her Majesty's Government at the proper time would submit a measure for affording the nefAssary amount of accommodation. Her Majesty's Government accepted, however, the responsibility of providing ac commodation for works of art generally. Mr. SEYMOUR , regretted the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had not stated it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to get rid of the Royal Academy from the National Gallery. After some remarks from Mr. J. EITIIIT and Mr. J. A. SMITH, Lord ELCHO moved the reduction of the amount for the National Gallery by 3001., the amount of the travel ling agent's salary. It was an appointment not recom mended by the Committee of 1853. He was not required, and his travelling about Italy enhansed the sums the country had to pay for pictures. He was appointed under a Treasury minute in 1855, at a salary of 3001. a. year, with au allowance of 6501. for travelling expenses. He was required to keep a diary to show his activity, and he was sufficiently active and industrious. All the world knew who be was, for he not only put his name on his earl, but, proud of his vocation, he added the words, " M. Otho illiindler, expert de la Galerie Nationale de Londres." (Laughter.) The consequence was that the Austrian Government instructed the keepers of galleries and the heads of religious establishments not to allow him to visit their collections. One " Paul Veronese," which he purchased for 2,0001., was valued at only 370/, The other picture by the same artist, for which the country paid 14,0007., would not in an auction-room fetch more than vingEl.. .• _ 2,5001. When he purchased a gallery the National Gal lery would only keep one or two pictures which might poaeess merit, and then sold the others at a loss, or sent them to Dublin to the gallery there. For a picture, for which the Florentine agent of Mr. Baker was about to pay 701., the travelling agent bid first 7,000 scudi. and subsequently 10,000 scudi, or about 2,0001. It was thus the public money was wasted. The British Museum, by having local instead of travelling agents, picked up at a small expense whatever was worth secur ing. It was true the director of the National Gallery himself travelled every summer, but that gentleman was also President of the Royal Academy, and himself an artist, and had not time sufficient at his disposal to enable him to select the best pictures to be found on the Continent. All these arrangements bad been made by the hon. gentleman the member for Devonport, who bad been a most consistent defender of the abuses of the National Galliry, and had been gallant enough to defend "The Woman taken in Adultery." The proposition, no doubt, would be opposed by the late Secretary of the Treasury ; but if he (Lord Elcho) failed in carrying it this year he would probably be tempted to put it in a different shape on another occasion, and to ask the house to give the agent 1,0001. a-year, but to bind him to re main in this country. (Laughter.) That would be one of the beat bargains the House of Commonly ever made for the coutory. He concluded by moving that the vote be reduced from 16,7401. to 16,4401, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped the house would not suddenly terminate the career of Mr. Mundler. He felt disposed to believe that some thing might be said on the other side of the question ; but the whole subject of the National Gallery was at present under consideration, and he felt fully justified in stating that a great revolution would inevitably take place in the general management of that institution. Such being the case, he should be sorry if any harsh steps were taken towards an individual. The whole es tablishment required investigation, and it would receive that consideration which it so well deserved. This was not a mere phrase used to deprecate division, but as the whole question was being considered, and as they might rely that the management of the National Gallery would be placed on a proper footing, he trusted the house would not consider it necessary to divide on the noble lord's amendment. Mr. COWPER expressed a hope that there would be no division. The original appropriation of a sum of money to meet the salary and expenses of a travelling agent was, he contended, quite correct ; but, in voting for the full grant, they were not by any means precluded from doing all they could to place the management of the institution on a better footing. Mr. WILSON said that the noble lord was entirely misinformed as regarded Mr. Mundler's power. That gentleman had no power to purchase pictures. He merely offered the price for them which was authorised. The house then divided— For the amendment Against it Majority --18 The amendment was consequently carried, and the re solution, as altered, was agreed to. SPECIAL FORMS OF PRAYER AND SERVICE. On the motion for going into Committee of Supply, Mr. COWPER rose to move an humble Address, praying that her Majesty would be graciously pleased to take into her Royal consideration the proclamation of the first year of her Majesty's reign, commanding that forms of prayer and service made for the sth day of November, the 30th day of January, and the 29th day of May, should be annexed to the Book of Common Prayer of the United Church of England and Ireland, to be used yearly on the said days, with a view to the discontinuance of those forms of prayer and service. He thought it improper to make permanent by royal authority services which were only intended for special occasions. At the time those services were appointed no doubt they gave full utterance to the feelings of those who used them ; but now, after a lapse of 200 years, they were altogether unsuitable. The last important event that happened on the sth of November was the battle of Inkerman, and though less important than the one commemorated on that day, yet it was one which might, at this period of time, be commemorated with much more propriety than the Gunpowder Plot. On these grounds, he hoped her Majesty would be induced to reconsider her proclamation for the continuance of those special services, with a view to their removal from the Prayer Book. Lord BURY seconded the motion. Mr. WALPOLE thought it would have been better if originally (hut it was too late now) a joint address to her Majesty had proceeded from both Houses of Parlia ment, and then one answer would be sufficient. Poli tical services were always to be deprecated, unless under very extraordinary circumstances. He thought the services referred to in the motion were more detrimental than otherwise to the Prayer Book, and therefore he would give his hearty consent to the motion. The motion was then agreed to. BATTERSEA PARK. On the motion for going into Committee of Supply. Mr. ALCOOK said he wished to call the attention of her Majesty's Government to the expediency of offering the surplus land in Battersea Park (100 acres) for sale by auction, with a reserved price of 284,730/.9s 3d., in order to refund to the Government the loans advanced for Bat tersea Park, Chelsea-bridge, and Chelsea embankment. The only objection that he could conceive could be urged against his proposition was that in 20 years' time the land would be greatly enhanced in value, and that at present it could only be disposed of at a loss. But were the people of London to be taxed at the rate of 6,500/. a year (tie estimated value of the tolls on the new bridge) for 20 years 1 This would take from their pockets a sum of about 130,0001., and for no conceivable purpose except presi dug the patronage of the Chief Commissioner of Works over the surplus land. If this land were now sold, and the proceeds of the sale did not pay off the debt, he felt convinced that the people of London, like those of BirmiEghana in a similar case, would make up the deficiency. STATE OF THE SERPENTINE. Sir J. V. SHELLEY said that be had intimated to the Government that when the estimates with reference to the parks were before the house, ho should recom mend that a vote should be taken for cleansing the Sere pentine. During the hot weather it was almost as great a nuisance as the Thames itself. The parks were under the control of the Government, and it was inconsistent with their duty to permit the continuance of such a large stagnant pool, the stench from which extended all over Park-lane and Hyde Park-gardens. Much of the water of the Serpentine came Irons the overflow of one of the London sewers, and from the drainage of the Kilburn Cemetery. Considering that thousands of persons bathed there every morning, its purification was of the greatest importance. The experiment tried on the water in St. James's Park by Sir Benj. Hall had proved eminently successful, and as the expense would be comparatively trifling, he trusted the Serpentine would be treated in a similar manner. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. MANNERS said the hon. member was under a delusion with regard to the land he had mentioned. Up to that moment he (Lord J. Manners) bad received no offer of any kind for the land, and he was afraid he could bold out no hope he would receive any until the offensive open sewer which bounded it was effectually covered in. He had made &representation to the Metro- politan Board of Works on the subject, and their answer was, that when the general system of metropolitan drain age was adopted, the sewer would be covered in. When that was done, the land would he put in a situation for sale, and he hal reason to hope it would then become a popular investment for building purposes. Of course. when that event took place, it would be his duty to sell the land fur what terms he could obtain. Bat it must not be supposed that there would be a surplus to enable them to do anything with the tolls. There had been ex tphe e n d i n ed t e r u e p s o t n w ß e u a Bt d t e r m s e a a k e P a a e r k a d t d h i e t i s e u h m o f o f 5 8 2 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 . 01..1; There d e had been obtained 65,000/. for the sale of land to the railway. The total Bum to be provided for was about 290,0001., and he could not hold out a hope that there would be any surplus sufficient to enable them to make any diminution in the charge for the tolls. With respect to the question by the lion, member for Westminster, he oould state that, since the application of lime, people had been seen to drink water from the Serpentine out of the palms of their hands—a eironinstanoe that had not occurred for many years. So marvellous had been the application of lime, that he applied to the Treasury for additional advances to make farther application of lime to the Serpentine. The subject of rectifying the Serpentine was now under the consideration of Govern ment, but the hon. member was quite right in pointing out that, till the evil results of the eewer at the north end weee rape4iud, it would be i 1 v4il4 to ippur any large eapenditure tor improving the Serpentine. He hoped the Metropolitan Board of Works, or the district board, would settle the sewer question effectually. Mr. W. WILLIAMS said he thought the proposition of the hon. member for Surrey (Mr. Aloack) was a very reasonable one. It was only just and fair that the public s:aould know what could he obtained for ibis laud, and it was not likely tne noble lord would receive any O'er until it was put up for sale. STAMP DUTIES. Mr. HADFIELD said it was clear that there ought to be a revision of the stamp duties. He should like to 17433 w whit Cyovernment meant to do ?..,3 regarded the duty upon insurano . again 4 Ide had presented several petitions on the subject, in which it was set forth that by a reduction of the duty the revenue would be much improved. Mr, HAMILTON eaid it was the intention of Goma moat to take the revision of the stamp duties generally into consideration, SUPPLY. The house then went into Committee of Supply—Mr. _ Fitzroy in the chair. On the vote of 3.5681. being proposed_to pay a por- Lon of the expenses of the Ecciesias . tical Commissioners, 111 r. HUGE4ESSEN objected to the vote, which he ,bought ought to be borne by the commiesion, and paid out of the surplus fund. Mr. WALPOLE defended the vote, and said it would be a great hardship to deduct such a sum out of the surplus, which went to increase the amount of small Mr. WILSON said it was the intention of the late Government to have considered the propriety of discon tinuing the vote after this present year. Mr. HADFIELD opposed the vote, and said a church establishment of six millions a yaar ought surely to bear so paltry a sum as the present vote. Mr. DEEDES supported the vote, and said more than double the sum was expended by the commission upon works which benefited the public. Mr. LABOUCHERE said it was true the public might gain advantage, but primarily the gain was to the Church ; and he contended that the Church should bear ,he expense, He should, however, support the vote for the present year. Mr. V. SMITES was chairman of a committee on esti mates in 1848, and that committee recommended that the commission should pav its own expenses. They did not belong to the public, but the Church, and the latter ought to pay them. Mr. A. SMITH moved that the whole vote be re duced by a sum of 3,0001. Upon which the committee divided, when the number' were— For the vote For the amendment Majority —6 The vote was then agreed to. The next vote was 16,3001. for the Charity Commis sioners.—Passed. On a vote of 20,0001. for the Encumbered Estates Commissioners i❑ Ireland, Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the vote, as a bill was now passing through the house to abolish that court. Mr. HAMILTON replied that the vote was neces sary to pay the expenses to be incurred up to Novem ber next. Vote agreed to. The next vote was 11,402./. for the expenses of several temporary commissioners. Mr. LOCKE KING objected to the expenses incurred by the Commission for Consolidating the Statute Law, which, though in existence for many years, really did nothing to effect the object they had in view. The hon and learned gentleman, now the Attorney-General, pro mised in 186'6 that he would effect that consolidation in 18 months, and yet nothing was done up to the pre sent moment. In 1856, several bills were laid on the e edTm a oonhowdi down fistrisuos whenst mtimission, niop i s: n pwh t mo r ohi o ouni d en:, hueee appointed didoe had n d nai table of the House of Lo r ds b u t were no t p rocee ded with, yldn a Bpo g b3at e a ssh again nenc dgo in s:atp csseeloo:BB,totosnbo7ndy,oe nearly this erhala o yi nd u s d2i gnohtg,ho.t the present uy commission. c e a n m or conclusion, he moved that a sum o f 1 , 861/ , the expenses of of the Statute Law Commission, be struck out, with a view of discontinuing it altogether. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought the whole country was deeply interested in tee labours of the com mission. In the last 200 years the condition of their statute law was complained of as being in a most de plorable condition, yet nothing was done. From 1816 down to the present day, no less than 11 commissions sat on the subject, presided over by such eminent men as Sir S. Romilly, Lord Brougham, Lord Tenterden, and others, and many valuable reports and suggestions made on the subject. The statute book consisted, as they all knew, of a vast collection of statutes of the different reigns ; and many of those statutes contained matter most opposite in spirit and meaning. He could quote the language of judges, who complained that such was the state of their statute book it was impossible for any man, however learned he might be, to know what the law of his country was. (Hear, hear.) There were 40 volumes of statutes, and of those there were at least 30 which contained statutes which were really ob solete ; and of 15,000 or 18,000 public general statutes, some 6,000 or 7,000 were really obsolete. He thought an embodiment might be made of those statutes iu 14 or 11 acts of Parliament, which would give a most satis factory oonsolidation to their statute law. The hon. and learned gentleman then recalled the attention of the committee to the circumstances connected with the origin of the commission appointed to inquire into the state of the statute law, and having paid marked compliments to some of the members of that commission, said down to the year 1853, after a lapse of 250 years, and an expenditure of 200,0001., no successful efforts were made to consolidate the statute law. Since then, however, the Statute Law Commissioners had issued four reports on the statute law, indicating that they bad selected matter out of which a satisfactory consolidation of the laws had been drawn up. Down to that year there was not a single consolidated act submitted to Parliament ; but between the year 1853 and the letter end of 184, the Statute Law Commissioners had worked and prepared no less than 93 bills, embracing, he might say, all the most important subjects of the statute law of Great Britain. Bills had been prepared by the Go vernment to be laid on the table of the house ; and those hills would have been laid on the table le,fore now, but that it was deemed desirable to submit the whole scheme first to a select committee of the house. It was thought by many eminent men, and amongst them by the late Attorney-General, now Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, doubtful whether any scheme of consolidation of the statute law would be successful, and particularly seeing that all attempts to consolidate those laws had hitherto failed, and defied the efforts of the most en• lightened men ; and, following out his opinion, he thought that some one portion of the statute law should be selected for the experiment ; and he truly remarked, "If you succeed in that, you may also succeed in conso lidating other branches of the statute law." The chal lenge was accepted. Several learned men applied them selves to the work, and among others the late Lord Chancellor (Lord Cranwortb) assisted in it, and by com mon consent the criminal law was chosen, and it was thought if they could simplify that they could reduce the 40 volumes of the statute law to four, and they could reduce the 40,000 statutes to a few simple consolidated laws. Among those who deserved to be mentioned, in connection with this great work, were Mr. Bellingden Kerr and Mr. Grieves, who, associated with Lord upon hon. and learned iedl noogonbkeetoeoadiii stdgh.aseatt the h l ehv e dee. - em W f e e n n t s . l those eyTd lawsha e s and Those ntboi otherllsnineh ah e d m i eminent been eo n n t hl m ea iedn,onr submittede t d h u e c reduced d a bt t le h e the House of Lords, but it was thought advisable not to Parlia ment. whole e of the report upon due to the late Government to say that they had given selectproceed committee m na with tth t t ee whilemo f t tl h n e t House subjectth e y of ff were first consolidation. ow m nh i . t o t e wl d etr t e o t wasto e every encouragement to the commission to promote and advance the whole scheme of consolidation. The whole ms t a n however , eae s e a without passedh hear .) ar )anything away , T owingo s stop p being for him now to bring the subject odaa again an t h i ene; combination eabenesi before etn Parliament.o off remained I c B 5 r c 7 u , th t e o obpneriNi.nyl thoughtcr impededi . principle n i tdAh planabi MASON yg t Nhr were sae, ,btrigreater ol said rnl existence fixed, e t p ar h rsn e ob w ar uae l pde o r progress of that work, after so much bad been accom s plished, would be to do a great public evil, which he did not think the house would sanction. He could only ask the house to pass the criminal code, and at an early period of next session the scheme would be put in pro gress for effecting an entire consoli :wo d hfa a oe t nuc i d o locd u not nsh o boe f emlni di the mstashtai eiod s on t wen a , htwiaufonatl and law. He hoped that a little time and confidence would be given to the Statute Law Commission. os d kf d n o so n kin e wHeo n otfue o h thing but take responsibility u never bills rlthe laid da hk were oe epn ro.progress nar thrown oanindhryee ts tableha learnedn u wg t with gentlemankntheegth pet since. nrf er. t they would have subj,3ct they had selected was the simplest of all, and if tuu Tts b b l tnv ve h oh l ep eh a a l e er e T l hs n er s S eunyibh . liabeeier should s dilnth r t s T t hgoi h t o we h eu e y be nthl wericectethmecahr gentleman a m tto e e on e wo m f l nta r ht o nhwe m dei htt t hoh h ue e t sc iheeasHousep there rmes responsibilityoe wd o n foet would s L sulyd o pos r oftb d enec s m , ots hnoes and hl od h na e ai was onnd. theysome e chance would CHANCELLORwou would be the b o rt f oohmue guivh iets EXCHEQUER X ifmno C roi H edt te E hwr Qaeat them Use undeniablenEe xe ß xp te n h ws o es p e e ok d f. of progress. the house would not go on considering this subject of ft t n the committee , :brtoeihmheßweitmils labours atbeNetdoeeE..2,r BRINES said They should not be diverted from the subject before They e a y i thattdhwe eywere eh ea w nd h g a a t g e e v d e resultrin collected m providingums t i g be e t n of index fil ll dt o he w xe this commission. h o ic f h th w e as c greatest possible service, and, therefore, their time would of all the acts and parts of acts now in progress, and in the ofe commission the p is u s b io l n ic. that alone would b e a va l ua bl e work and likely to b e o f the most essenti a l p u bli c serv i ce. He thought the Sta tute Law Commission was d eserv i ng o f t h e con fid e nce andapprobation M Mr. MELLON s a id th ere h a d b een on l y one pa id com missionerlBs3,sin(Cceriesol" Divide.") andwastho keeping up of that payment a likely mode of getting the work completed I He thought if they declined to sanc tion that vote it would be a signifioant hint to the com mission. Mr. BUTT thought that they were bestowing, peat lahoue arid wasting large sums of money upon that which, for any practical purposes, would never be of any use. His hon. and learned friend told him that if they gave him 18 months they would see the work done; but he had told him that if he had 18 years given hire the work would not be done. If so long had been taken with eight bills, how lona, a period would be required to dispose of 93 bill,? (Hear.) The subject was beset with such insurmountable difficulties, that they could never be overoorn, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND said that the labours of the commission had been attended with great advantage to the public. He never under stood that 93 bills were to be laid on the table of the horse at once to dispose of. It would be a woug step to dispose summarily of the labours o;i that commission. The canal - Ditto? I;iin divided— kor the amendment 52 Against Majority „. —33 The vote was then agreed to. 26,1951., salaries of the Patent -office. Mr. W. WILLIAMS protested against the large sala rins paid to the officers and clerks, who had really no thing to do. Among those thus overpaid were the Attor ney and Solicitor-General for England and the Attorney and Solicitor-General for Ireland. The patent fees ought to be reduced. They were taken out of the pockets of many very poor men. if, moved the reduction of the vote by 4,000?. of the auma paid to the law officers of the man fcr his authority for this statement. (Hear, hear.) Crown under the Patent Law Amendment Act. 1 He kS...r B.__Hall) gave no instruction whatever on the Mr. WALPOLE referred to the reductions which were made in this department in 1852. There were no two men in the country more worked than the Attorney and Solicitor-General, and their services deserved to be well remunerated. He did not believe that the fees paid to those officers were anything like those which they would receive from the public. Mr. GILPIN advocated the payment of public officers by salaries instead of fees ; but trusted the hon. member for Lambeth would not divide the committee on this question, as he considered that the remuneration pro posed to be voted to the Attorney and Solicitor-General was not larger than he knew they deserved. After a short conversation, in which Sir G. C. Lewis, Mr. Cairns, and Mr. Cox took part, Mr. WILLIAMS hoped the Government would agree to consider the subject before they met again. If they gave a promise to that effect, he would withdraw his amendment. Aster some observations from the ATrORNEY•GENE BAL, the amendment was negatived without a divisi. n. The next item was 26,198/. for fees, salaries, expenses, and compensation payable under the Patent Law Amendment Act (15th and 16th Vic., c. 83). r. MELLOR ccimplained of the vote for the museum of patented inventions at Kensington, The SOLICITOR-GENERAL defended the vote, which had been rendered necessary by the removal of the patent models and library which were formerly in Chancery-lane, and which bad been very useful to the working classes and skilled artisans of this country. The money was well laid out. Mr. DILLWYN said that he quite approved of a museum of patented inventions, but he thought that Kensington was a very inappropriate place for such a museum. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that there was much truth in that remark, but the fact was they got the accommodation free at Kensington, and they had at present no funds to provide a place elsewhere. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the commissioners had agreed to receive the collection of patents at Kensington till a better place could be pro vided, but a plan was now under consideratiin fur pla cing it in a totally different locality. (Hear.) In reply to Mr. Greer, the right hon. gentleman stated that the curator of this museum, he believed, held no other office in the Kensington Institute. The vote was then agreed to. Fishery Board, Scotland, 13,8221. Mr. WHITE moved that this vote be expunged, on the ground that the branding of those herrings might be dispensed without injury to any one. Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said that it had been in tended to withdraw this vote in relation to the branding of herrings, but it could not be done in time for the pre sent session. Many, however, thought it would be in expedient to abolish suddenly a practice which had so b u m prevailed. After some observations from Mr. Cox, Mr. WHITE amended his motion by retaining the portion of the vote which related to pensions, reducing the vote to 2,1601. After some conversation, the committee divided, and there appeared — For the vote For the amendment Majority --61 The amendment was lost, and the vote agreed to. 2,0001. was voted for Trustees of ManufacLures, Soot land. 5,0011. for Commissioners of Highland roads and bridges. Mr. COX opposed this motion, ore the ground that persons in the metropolis had no right to be taxed for roads they were never likely to use. Mr. COLLINS said he objected to the paying for metropolitan improvements out of the Consolidated Fund, and on the same principle he would object to a vote for local improvements in Scotland. The committee then divided, and there appeared— For the vote Against it Majority • • —45 2,0001. was voted for bounties on slaves and tonnage of slave vessels. The next was a vote of 9001. for the translation and publication of the ancient laws of Ireland. Mr. HAMILTON said this work bad been already commenced, and found to be so valuable and interesting that it was resolved to ask for a further vote on account of it. Mr. LABOUCHERE said it was a work of great historical interest, and ought to be proceeded with. The vote was agreed to. 9,000/. was next voted for costs incidental to process servers in Ireland. The next vote was one of 58,9001. for Merchant Seamen's Fund pensions. Mr. HENLEY explained, in answer to a question from Sir Charles Napier, that this vote was consequent upon the winding up of the fund, but that parties would be allowed to contribute to increase the pensions. The vote was agreed to. 17,8501. was voted for revising barristers, Mr. WAL POLE stating that that sum included the whole charge. 3,0001. was voted for the inspection of burial-grounds, and 1,3501. for the charge of certain professors in the University of Cambridge. On a vote of 27,9061. for lighthouses abroad, Mr. HENLEY said that the object of it was simply to carry out certain works for the convenience of the merchant service, which the house, in its liberality, had already undertaken. The work had been imposed upon the Board of Trade, and, though that board had no en gineering facilities, it must get through the work as best it could. The vote was agreed to. The next vote was 20,000/, for the improvement of the Kaffirs. Sir J. TRELAWNY objected to the vote, Waving that we had expended money enough upon the Kaffirs, without effect, and,that the colony of the Cape had done nothing in the same direction. He quoted a letter from the Governor of the colony against the vote, and con cluded by moving that it be disallowed. Lord STANLEY said that the Government bad en deavoured to redeem the pledge originally given for the reduction of this vote, and it had been put down at 20,0001. instead of 40,0001. Sir D. NORREYS hoped the hon. baronet would persevere in his resistance to this vote. He thought Sir George Grey was not entitled to the least consideration from tne house, and the only way to put a stop to his repeated demands on the house was sternly to refuse to accede to the present one. If Sir G. Grey could not go vern the colony without coming to the house for aid, the sooner we got rid of Sir G. Grey and of Kaffraria the better. (Cheers and laughter.) MT. LA.BOUCHERE vindicated the conduct of Sir G. Grey at the Cape, After a few words from Mr. Ewart, Mr. D. Nicoll, and Col. French, the committee divided, when the num bers were— For the vote Against it Majority —l47 The vote was then agreed to. The next vote was 29,9401. on account of the Treasury cheque. 2,0001. was next proposed for the collection in the National Portrait Gallery. Mr. BRISCOE objected to the vote, and moved as au amendment that it should be omitted. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER de• fended the vote, and said that many of the works in the Gallery were works of high art. When completed the collection would be one most gratifying to the country. Mr. BYNG bore testimony to the value and interest of the collection. The vote was then agreed to. The next vote proposed was 2,0001. for expenses to inquire into the effects of the cholera in the West Indies; and, after a few words from Mr. WILLIAMS and Mr. ° HAMILTON, the vote was agreed to. The next vote was 1,6001. for a Board of Survey. Sir D. NORREYS objected to the vote, and, after some conversation, the committee divided, when the numbers were— For the vote Against it Majority The vote was agreed to. 6,318/. for public offices in Belfast was agreed to. The next vote was 15,0001., to enable the Commis sioners of Public Works in Ireland to purchase certain houses and buildings to extend the Four Courts. After some conversation the vote was agreed to. The next votes were :- 5,000/. far the National Gallery in Dublin, 1.0001. for the Royal Dublin Society, 10,000/. for an Industrial Museum in Edinburgh, 9 ,0001, for the Industrial Insti•ution in the same city, 7,5001. for a General Registry Office in the same place, 2001. for a General Repository of Public Records in Edinburgh. Agreed to. On a vote of 6,0001. for the Nelson Column, Trafalgar square, Mr. D. GRIFFITHS expressed a hope that around the pedestal of the column four red lions would be planed at each corner to give it effect—(a laugh)—or, at all events, bronze lions. (Laughter.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the material to force the liens was not yet decided on, but the hon. member's suggestion would be taken into con sideration. He for one had no objection that bronze lions should be placed round the pedestal, but he looked with great apprehension on four red lions being placed there. (Laughter.) On the vote that 8,8361. be allowed for examining the p'an of the main drainage of the metropolis, Mr. COX said that this was an important question, and it was too late to discuss it at that moment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped they would be allowed to proceed with the estimate. The amendment was then negatived, without a di vision. Mr. COX protested against payirg 9,0001. for the ex atnination of the plan. It appeared that a plan bad been submitted by the Board of Works to the Chid Commissioner (Sir B. Hall), and that right hon. get,tle man had appointed gentlemen to examine it, and to find fault with it, and the result was this great expenditure. Sir B. HALL said it was quite true that a plan had been submitted to him in reference to the drainage of the . metropolis by the Metropolitan Board of Works, and in accordance with what he felt to be his duty he had . ap pointed three ge n tl emen o f em i nence , name ly, Mr. Simp eon, Captain Gordon, and Mr. Blackwell, to examine this plan. C a pt a i n G or d on h a d ma d e no charge for his labours, and Mr. Simpson and Mr. Blackwell had charged only 1,500/. for the duty which they had per formed, and this sum he did not think was too much. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Cox) said that be had instructed the gentlem en i n qu e stion to find fault with the plan. He said that it was a great mistake for the honourable gentleman to say so, and he called upon the hon. gentle- subject. He admitted that the sum before the house was a large one, but they must recollect that the work to be executed was a great one, and +hat great care ought to be taken before the Gove nt was com mitted to it. This was his justification x.r having taken the course which he had pursued in the matter. Mr. S. WORTLEY thought it was the duty of the Government to place the metropolis under proper man agement. London was too large to be managed by one body. It was at the same time too much that the Metro politan Board should be controlled by a public officer, who might know nothing whatever of the question. At the came time he was grateful to the right hon. gentle man (Sir B. Hall) for the improvements which he had made in the metropolis, and especially fur those carried out by him at the west end of the town. Mr. COX said he never meant to cast any imputation whatever upon the right hon. baronet (Sir B. Hall), as, from the manner in which he had performed his duty, he entertained a high opinion of the right hon. gentle man's administrative powers. The amendment was withdrawn, and the vote agreed to. Mr. W' ILLIAMS moved that the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped the house would be allowed to proceed with the remain ing votes. It was, however, ultimately arranged that the Chair man should report progres, and this having been done the house resumed. CIVIL BILLS, &c. (IRELAND) BILL. The adjourned debate on this bill, after a few word( from Mr. Walpole, Mr. B. Osborne, Mr. Whiteside, and Mr. Cogan, was postponed, FRIENDLY SOCIETIES' ACT AMENDMENT BILL. This act, as amended, passed through committee, with the understanding that objections may be advanced against it on the third reading. The house resumed. POOR REMOVAL LAW AMENDMENT BILL. On the motion that this bill be now read a seoond time, Mr. S. ESTCOURT entered into some explanations on the proposed powers of the bill to remove the Irish poor to Ireland, and on his request the bill was dis charged. He hoped, in the course of next session, to lay upon the table some measure that would remedy the evils complained of. He would now move for leave to discharge the order. The order for the second reading of the bill was then discharged. The order of the day for the second reading o f the Pauper Lunatics Bill was also discharged. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL. The amendments in this bill wars considered and agreed to. PUBLIC HEALTH BILL. The amendments in this bill were considered and agreed to. MILITIA BALLOTS SUSPENSION BILL. This bi 1 was read a third time. The Sheep, &c. Contagious Diseases Prevention Bit! was read a second time. The Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Continuance Bill, the Turnpike Trusts Arrangements Bill, the Copyhold and Inclosure Commissions, &c., 1111 were severally road a second time. The County, &c., Property Conveyance Bill went through committee. On the motion of Mr. WILSON, a copy of report of the Keeper of the Department of Antiquities to the trusteed of the British Museum, respecting the want of accom modation for that department, dated the 7th day of July, 1853, was ordered to be printed and laid upon the table. The other orders of the day were disposed of, and the house adjourned at twenty minutes to two o'clock. Country Markets. LIVERPOOL, JULY 13. Though we had a fair attendance of town and country millers at our corn exchange this morning, the business was of moderate extent generally. Wheat and flour barely supported the advance quoted on Friday last. In• dian corn and barley fully supported former rates. Oat* were 1.21 per bushel higher, and Egyptian beans also le per qr. LEEDS, JULY 13. The market to-day opened with a fair show of wheat, which, with the continued fine weather, causes a slow trade, consequently little business has been done, at about last week's rates. Barley nominal. A little more inquiry for beans, at late prices. Oats and other articles as before. NORWICH CATTLE-JuLT 3. -- There was a tolerable show of Scots, short-horns, Dr ♦ons, and Irish exhibited to-day, with a small drove of Dutch cattle, a few of which were pretty good, others very inferior. Trade inactive. Fat beasts, 75 Od to 7s 6d; prime, 85 Od per stone; sheep, 38s to 40s per head ; prime lots, 42s ; lambs, 285 to 32s ; good store pigs, 16s to 20s. Fat pork, 5s 64 to 61 per stone of 141bs; trade dull. PROVISION RABBET. Beef, per lb 7d to 70 I Butter, p pt. is 5d to is 61 Mutton, per lb 7d to 8d Eggs, per 16, Os Od to is 02 Lamb, do., ...Os 8d to Os 9d 1 Hens, p pair Oa Od to Os 01 Veal, per 1b...... 6d to Os Id I Chickens,do.4 s Od to 5e 61 Pork, per 1b...0a 50 to 60 Ducks, do., 4s 6ti to 6e. Od Salmon, per lb ... ...... Os Od Ducklings,do2s Od to 2‘ 61 Grouse, per brace Os to Os Turkeys, each Os Od to Oi 01 Tallow, p stone, Os to —s 01 Potatoes, per qr., ..,.3d to 64 1 COURSE OF EXCHANGE.-YESTIRDAL imsterdam.. .. ...... II 1 ,1 4 Gibraltar ...... •••• • • • • Ditto, three months .. 11 17i Leghorn .. •........... 29 75 Rotterdam ............ 11 17 }4 Genoa ... 25 45 Antwerp .............. 25 37X, Milan ...... • • ........ .._ Brusseli •• •• • • •• •• •••• 35 37N, ir7nTj e : • • • Bamburgh •• •• •• •• • • 13 7 Naples •• •• •• •• •••• •• 41% Altona •• •• •• e• •• •• •• • • • • Palermo •• • • 25 10 Messina Do. three months 25 35 Lisbon .. 42 Marseilles •• •• •• •• •• 25 35 Oporto •• •• •• •• •• •• •• 52% Bourdeaux.. •• •. •... .• .. Rio Janeiro 00000 • •• •• •• Frankfort-on.Nisine •• 118 4 Buenos Ayres ..... ••• Berlin •• •• •• •••••• • • •• • • New York,6o days' sight Vienna •• •• •• •• •• •• .. 10 28 !Philadelphia Priests .• •• •••• •• •• .• rlO 29 I TZIOKS 0/ BULLION. PEA 055 Petersburg 35% !Foreign Gold in Bars £8 17 9 Madrid 49 ,Portugal Gold Coin .. 0 0 o C B a n d re iz ei . o . n . a .• • • • • .7 4 . . .• to 4924 1111can N ex e i wD D oli o ai llar . 0 0 0 ° 0 0 ...... ........ .. Silver in bars •• 0 0 0 LOCAL SHARE MARKATA. LIVERPOOL, JULY 13. STOCK EXCHANGE—The market was dull to-day, but steady in price. At the fortnightly settlement to-day the account was light and the rates of continuation low. —London and North-Western, 891 90—Sheffield, 361 A- - Chester and Holyhead, 17118 —Eastern Counties, 121-16, Midland,94 —N. British, 12 1-16 3-16—Birkenheads, 68 —GreatWestern, 49, 1 , 50—Lancashire and Yorkshire, 90A t —Great Western of Canada, 17i 18—Blackburns, 11.1 Berwicks, 22A i—East Lancashire, 90A I—Caledonians, 38, 3 / 4 g —Leeds Northern, 23 -Dutch Rhenish, 5i 4i, dis.—York a n d North Midland, 351 g— Grand Trunk 01 Canada, 10} I—Dovers, 201.16. MANCHESTER, JULY 13. STOCK EXCHANGE.—Pricea were rather steady to-dal, but not much business done, and the market closed fist. Dovers, 20 1-16 a—Leeds, 01906—Midlands, Hi—Trunks , 10 9 . l6—Blackburn'', llf. BIRMINGHAM, JULY 13. STOCK EXCHANGE. — There was an improvement in the market hero to-day, but business still continues limited. _ Midlands closed at 92—South Staffords, 1& to .i— Bit' mingham and Derbys, 63—Birmingham Canals, 931 London Eighths, 1 dis— Shropshire Unions, 43. LEEDS, JuLT 13. STOCK EXCHANGE.— The only transactions on 'Chang. , this morning have been in Midlands, at 9l i. [ADYEETISEMENT].—The Modern Wonder.—Hollo• way's Ointment. —The healinglproperties of theointmszite used by the people of the East have for ages past bad the praise of all who have witnessed their miraculous effects; but, notwithstanding their great excellence, their cura tive powers are not so potent, their laudators are not so numerous, their celebrity not so wolld• wide as that pos sessed by Holloway's extraordinary Ointment. It is known and used in every part of the universe, and it nurse all eruptions, sores, wounds, ulcers, tumours, and stiff joints, restoring the despairing to health and the enjoy ments of life, when its pleasures appeared all but shut nut to them.—Sold by all medicine vendors throughout the world s aril at Proieshor Holloway's Establishmsnt, 246 Strand, Loudon. BIRTHS, HAGGERSTON—On tho 1 1 Th inst., at the Lawn, Teign• mouth, Lady Haggerston, widow of the late Sir John Haggeraten, Bart., of Effingham, Northumberland, of a daughter. _ . KIRBY—On the 11th inst., at Appledore Vicarage, Kent, the wife of the Rev. W. W. Kirby, M.A., of a son. LEFROY — On the 12th inet., at 1, Priory-street, Chelten- ham, the wife of Anthony Thomas Lefroy, Esq., of gb son. RHODES —On the 12th inst., at the residence of her fathet• i❑-Isw, Denmark-hill, Surrey, the wifo of Arthur Chas. Rhodes, Esq., of a son. MARRIAGES. ADAIR—NAYLOR—On the 13th inst., at St. Mary% Bryanston-square, Henry Adair, Captain Royal Marino Artillery, youngest son of the late Major'General Adair, C. 8., to Elizabeth, youngest daughter of the late Wan. Naylor, Esq., of Northwieb, Cheshire. Bnoox —DALE—On the Bth inst., at St. Burnabas, South Kennington, Mr. Harvey Brook, to Edi th, daughter of the late Henry Dale, Esq., of Finsbury. DEATHS. BOWNESS—On the 12th inst., at his reilitlence, Mr. Thos. Bowne s, of 40, Alwyne-road, Islingtom, and 32, Boll* yard, Temple-bar, aged 47. CHILD - 011 the 10th inst., at Herne Bay, Jemims th• daughter of Mr. H enry Child, so li c it or, o f Turnwheil lane, city, and King Edward's-road, Hacicney, aged foot years and four months. GRIGGS—On the 11th inst., at Bella Villc Mayfield, Dal stow, Ann, widow of the late Mr. Win.. Griggs, late of the 'Eynon Arms, aged 84. JOYCE —On the 13th inst., at Stamford, Middlesex, Elise both, relict of the late Thomas Joyce,,lo'3q., aged 80. LAMONT—On the 22d May, at Barod s a,. Bombay, of fevers Lieut. Lamont, 89th Regt, the elder ,t son of R. W. A° Lamont, A.C.G. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOIJI4 O O of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at. rid Sus Offiee. N° • 112, Strand, in the Precinct of tbs. Savoy, in the_oolliti of liiddlogox, Woduticlay, Jalr Lt , 1858. TO TII TI will bee, 1 may gratulat newer fe; this (flies When yo represen It is in hand, an delayed thanks tc Let int Majesty': entangles I rcjoi: subje Place my may oriel your bor , solicit a r Arent I FllO it 11 With the: dersley, t Mr. A. PALATE TUESDAY, in one lot, Pishopsw Ranson, Per annu be had Craven •st 59, Chime, ham, of Cl F 0. THE ex have redu, in 61h. bap Helen's•et QCHI $...7 SET Every Bo' cork with feetioners, Liverpool, IVI Place, Lon( cans on ad N.B. Po', Assured wi b eing dedu, Nor Solicit Capital o: Revenue Nine tent divided am( All Profil the Profit s , future divi: The Bon 70 per cent 4, Bank I -_____ riE ?• lank-1 TnE Ac lEsta. 1 i le: bugir ~...avlug been uokftsrtaNT, a the D eed 0 T ravellers' same terms Total Clain Annu Insurance dents, and A with or wr Prospect use the Chief Oil 7, Bank B INTEI soca itshedlB37 n,51 been ane Policies of a . "'Ting Nritl knnual prem t he death b of grace, _____ THE EMPONsere VIVO r EDI Wm. Ken, Samu e l Ki John Ellie F.R.B. Proatssor Messrs. do The next Map, 1660. Polley taken •1t in The follcm national Lit The Soeie T, o-thlrC the Ynrx. Its subscr Its invest t ) one hund Its Annus The num' About. on Since Its et three hUr For prosy tan', 142, 5 142, Stra, AT R. st FICTAL T Perfectly rc the o r i gina decay,and This tooth() operation, guaranteed Howard's ii ►pica), he h rayed teeth / "IV AN patent Oifi< Pharm; devoid of t: Hold in tin Valpenti, TRIE ronsequenc too lonz ref strength ar n ow in the W l 4atever n t efreetually. cradlcates forms Ole( ~.1 3.T ilte, Pali Qopairi an( . tlin of the 1;1;1 sr~ a 1 t " . 3 3. It a eous and i the virus ( through tt the Engllsl tine of the the world any part o extra, whi 1 1. 12s. hartlett it tridge) ; ford -street wards, St 11131 price Is., %pinions 0 t , on3 for tl PQ,liments orea.dlul benefits BDe rinato2. !Irises . 7 othe B oc 111, trom 1433 1811 1815 1848 1851 Es Parrs