The Sun. — London, England, 1858-06-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. THE JEW BILL. The Earl of LUCAN said he 'proposed to take the second reading of his bill on Thursday week. He had ascertained that that day would be convenient for Lord Lyndhurst to attend. Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said it would be better if no day at present was named, but that the bill should be proceeded with when both the Earl of Derby and Lord Lyndhurst were in their places. The Earl of LUCAN thought, under all the circum stances', the arrangement he had made should stand for the present. MANNING THE NA.VY. Lord BROUGHAM inquired whether a commission had been issued to consider the best means of manning the navy. The noble lord thought as thecloud had passed away between this country and France, the present op portunity was th e b est t h at could be selected for such a purpose. The Earl of MALME%BURY said a commission to inquire into the best way of manning the navy had been issued. He should be sorry if it was supposed from the observations of the noble lord that the navy at the present moment could not be efficiently manned at a very short notice—(hear, hear)—or that men were not ready to come forward at the shortest notice to man a sufficient number of ships to defend the channel. (Hear.) Lord BROUGHAM was very far from doubting that there were men ready to come forward. His observa tion was that at the present moment the Navy was not sufficiently manned. The subject then dropped. LAW OF FALSE PRETENCES BIIJJ. Lord BROUGHAM moved the second reading of this bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he did not intend to oppose the present bill, but he must remind him that a bill with a similar object had been already introduced into the other house. He thought the best course would be, in the event of the bill to which he had alluded passing the other house, that both bills be then referred to a select committee. The bill was read a second time. PROPERTY QUALIFICATION BILL. The Earl of FORTESCUE moved the third reading of this bill. Lord RAVENS WORTH warned their lord ships against passing measures of this description, and he regarded the present bill as a concession to popular clamour. He considered that the bill, instead of being satisfactory to the democratic portion of the public, would only induce them to make further efforts to obtain the other points of the People's Charter. The Earl of CLANCARTY concurred in the obser vations'of the noble lord who had just sat down. He considered that the present bill had been hurried through the house, and that it had not received sufficient con sideration. He thought the worst results would follow the passing of the bill, and the effect would be that the proper balance between property and democracy would be thrown down. The Earl of WICKLOW said it had been contended on the other side that the possession of property was not a necessary qualification for a legislator, but he held that it was of the highest importance, that in the House of Commons they should at least have men of property and status in society, and by the abolition of the qualifica tion they would remove all such security. As for the argument that the law was evaded, he thought that was a reason for its amendment, not for its abolition, and he thought there was no law that might so easily be guarded against abuse as this. Even the evasion practised at present was almost as good as the qualification itself. A man who had not the qualification either abstained from coming forward to disturb a constituency when he knew he could not take his seat, or he got some one to supply him with a qualification. Now that must be a person of property, so that even the evasion afforded some security, inasmuch as there was at least a person of property that was responsible for the individual. That was almost as good a security as if he had the real qualification. He did not, however, wish to be under. • stood as encouraging such evasion. Every downward step the noble lord at the head of the Government took of this character would render it more difficult for him to resist measures of an extraordinary character. He believed their lordships would do a great evil to the public if they allowed this bill t pass. Tne Earl of FORTESCUE in reply, considered that by conceding this point their lordships would be better able to resist demands of a more sweeping character. He contended that the benefits derived from the con tinuance of the property qualification were more than counterbalanced by the evils of its continuance. Lord DEN MAN opposed the bill, and moved its third reading that day six month?. Lord BROUGHAM supported the third reading of the bill. They ought to act consistently to accompany this measure with another, not to take the privilege from arrest away from members, but to put private gentlemen—nun traders—on a footing with traders. The latter class of members of the other house were given twelve months in which to set aside proceedings in bankruptcy or pay the amount of their debts in full ; if they had failed to do so within that time their seat was declared to be acat.d. The amendment was withdrawn, and the bill was read a third time and passed. THE CHARGES AGAINST MR. M'DERMOTT. Lord CLANRICARDE moved that Mr. M‘Der mott's petitio . n be considered, and that the consideration of the cbarges preferred against him should be postponed till the 10th of July. Th. Rae! of DONOUGHMORE considered the prayer of the petition ought not to ne granted. Mr. M'Dermott had notice of the charges by letter on the 7th of June, and ought to be ready to meet them. There were two grounds on which Mr. M'Dermott prayed for a postponement ; one was that he was about to go on circuit, and could not, therefore, attend their lordships' house ; and the other was, that their lordships should direct payment of the expenses of all the witnesses that were to be brought forward. He could not enter into the latter ground, and with regard to the first he thought their lordships ought not to entertain it, but endeavour to prevent a man who bad had such charges brought • against him going on circuit, and sitting on a bench of justices. (Hear, bear.) Lord CAMPBELL considered Mr. M`Dermott had had reasonable notice of the charges preferred against him, and sufficient time to prepare his defence. He con sidered it was hardly decent that a person with such grave charges hanging over him should be allowed to sit on the bench and administer justice to her Majesty's subjects. All men were considered innocent till proved to the contrary, and he (Lord Campbell) thought a per son so charged should be eager to clear his character and resume his duties if found innocent. Lord CLANRICARDE concurred with the noble lord that a gentleman labouring under charges ought not to sit on the bench until he had proved his inn°. cence ' • but independent of that, Mr. M'Dermott could not absent himself from his duties without he provided a substitute. Lord CAMPBELL—Does he mean to set this house at defiance ? Lord CLANRICARDE apprehended not. But before Mr. M'Dermo t could leave he must provide a substi tute. That would cost him a large sum of money, and would be involving him in a penalty which probably he could not afford, even if he were proved innocent. The Government ought to forbid him to go on circuit, and provide him with a substitute if they thought he ought not to further attend to his duties for the present. In • dependent of that, Mr. M'Dermott had had no regular and official notice ef the charges. He bad only received a letter from the noble earl the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, and the charges in the shape in which they were to be br,,ught forward were only made known that morning. Most of Mr.M‘Dermott's witnesses were legal gentlemen, who would be on circuit at the time of the proposed ie quiry, and to take them away from their practice et such a time would greatly increase the ex penses. He (Lord Clanricarde) thought that under the circumstances the prayer of the petition for delay should be granted. He doubted if there was time now to serve the notices and get the witnesses over by the time pro posed. Lord CAMPBELL said the charges should be brought for e ard at the time specified; and if, after that, Mr. M `Derma wished for time to prepare his defence, it would, as a matter of course, be granted to him. (Hear.) The Eirl of WICKLOW considered the charges should not be brought for ward in a hurried manner, and at a time when there would be difficulty in Mr. M`Der- motes procuring the attendance of material witnesses. He thought it a case for delAy. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he considered Mr. M'Dermott had had ample time for meeting the charges, or he would not have pressed the inquiry taking place at the time proposed. He thought the suggestion of the noble lord.(Lord Campbell) would meet the emergencies of the case. Lord CLANRICARDE said that with that under. standing he would withdraw the motion. Lord CRAN WORTH said the course now about to be taken was in conformity with a somew bat analogous case, viz., the bill of pains and penalties preferred against Queen Caroline. The charges were in that case made, and time was afterwards given to meet them. Lord BROUGHAM hoped infinitely better cases than that of Queen Caroline would be relied on. No one could liok back upon those proceedings without feeling that something approaching, if not to remorse, at least of shame attached to them. The subject then dropped. THE EN , :ILISH ENGINEERS AND THE Lora C CAGLIARI. LA.NRICAR DE asked her Majesty's Govern ...in tolay on the table of the house the communica tions that Imola ion th th e h A d , 13 v assed b e t ween h er M a j esty ' s Govern tive e ernments of N A pl ea an d S ar di n i a rela e enon,trv, and th : r e e nsation to be paid to the English f the Cagliaii and her crew to the SardiniansttZation The Marquis of SALISIMT. noble earl the Foreig n B, cretar , in the absence of the copse 1 the correspond ,encv was not yet completad, a ,, d,t c lu ' s r,quence, it would be inconvenient to accede to f t i h n e n a o i b e i w e lie expected is wquid be e c o t o i g n o u ri c concluded ed' lay lord.. thecom days., when there would be no obj ratifications referred to on the table of their lordships' house, Their lordships adjourned at 20 minutes to 7 o'clock, IiOUSE OF COMMONS. —(YEsTERDA-r) The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'clock. • THE MEMBER FOR, GREENWICH. Mr. FITZROY moved that the adjudication of bankruptcy r gaiost Mr. John Townsend be read by the Clerk.—Agreed to. Sir D. LE MAROHANT (the Chief Clerk) then read the record of adjudication, dated 29th March. THE SUN, ___ , LONDONI WEDNESDAY EVENINTI, JUNE 16, 1858. Mr. FITZROY then moved that the 52d George 111., chap, 144, be read. Sir D. LB MARCHANT read the section of the act re ferred to, relative to the right of members to sit and vote in that House after becoming bankrupt. Mr. FITZROY next moved that Mr. J. Townsend, a member of that house, having been declared a bank rupt, he was incapable of sitting and voting. Mr. TOWNSEND considered it was hie duty towards his constituents, himself, and the house that he should offer a few observations in explanation of the votes he had given on several late occasions and the reasons for retaining his seat. Since he had had a seat in that house be had endeavoured to conform to the rules and regulations. He had never, in a single instance, thrust himself on the society of any hon. member, and if he had erred in taking his seat and voting since the adjudication, he bad done so in ignorance, and not in defiance of the rules of that house. It wag perfectly true that an adjudication in bankruptcy had been filed against him in consequence of heavy chan cery proceedings over which he had no control, an d the persecution of certain individuals, but he hoped that within a few days, or, at the furthest, within a few weeks, the bankruptcy would be superseded. He had but one harsh creditor, and he should never rest until he had paid his debts in full° He submitted there was a very divided opinion as to right under existing circumstances to sit and vo t e i n that h ouse, and he believed he was j us tifi e d i n hi s s i tt i ng and voting since the adjudication. It should be the pride and pleasure as well as the duty of the strong to pro tect the weak, and he appealed to the law officers of the Crown, and hon. members on both sides of the house that might follow in discussion, to consider well the legal points unknown to him, and which had been brought forward in support of the motion. He had endeavoured to ascertain the law on the point, and he found great doubts existed. The hon. gentleman quoted the case of Sir R. Price as one similar to his own, when the hon. baronet was allowed to sit and vote after an adjudication in bankruptcy. Repeatedly since,the adjudication he had received circulars from boa, and learned members, urging him to attend and vote on certain questions before the house ; and so late as yes terday morning he received from an hon, and learned member of that house a similar circular. He (Mr. Townsend), therefore, considered he bad acted right in sitting and voting since the adjudication. He complained of the conduct of the right hon. gen tleman (Mr. Fitzroy) in giving his notice of motion for a copy of the record of adjudication without first communicating with him and asking an explanation of the proceedings; and he was not aware of it until it was communicated to him before his voting on the motion for altering the county franchise. Being in the house, and havit g heard the question put, he considered himself bound to vote on the motion in accordance with the rules of the house, and he accordingly did so. He considered the act referred to did not apply to a member passing through the Bankruptcy Court, but after his having passed through the court. It was said he ought to resign the representation of the borough, but he begged to assure the house there were 30,000 true, honest, and independent men belonging to the borough of Greenwich who would not allow him to be put down. They cared not, whether the repre sentative was possessed of 50,0001. or 5001., a-year. All they cared about was, that he should not promise on the hustings to undertake more than he would be able, to the best of his ability, or more than he was willing, to perform, as their representative in that House. Where there was so much doubt as in this case now before the House, he consieered it was his bounden duty to attend and express by . his votes the opinions of his constituents on the questions that had come before the House. He would retire during the discussion of the question before them, and whatever was the result he should consider himself bound to obey it. The hon. gentleman then retired. The SOLICITOR - GENERAL said the House could not approach the subject without reluctance and regret. It was a duty, however, which they must discharge, and he had no possible doubt on the construction of the act referred to. The construc tion of the act was that an adjudication was a suspension of the functions of a member of parliament during twelve months subject to this, that any time within the twelve months he could supersede the bankruptcy or pay his creditors in full, and on his informing the house of what he had done, jhe then ipso facto became re possessed of his rights as a member of that house. Should no arrangement of that kind be come to at OA, expiration of the twelve months the seat would be void. He supported the motion. After a few remarks from Mr. J. Fitzgerald, Mr. Sergeant Deasy, and Colonel French, the motion was agreed to. Mr. FITZROY moved that the votes given by Mr. J. Townsend since 7th June last should be disallowed. — This motion was also agreed to. SALE AND TRANSFER OF LAND (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion for going into committee on this bill, Mr. Sergeant DEASY said] compansation should be provided in the bill f a Mr. Flanagan, one of the trus tees of the Encumbered Estates Court, who had for many years filled the office, and had given up another to accept it. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND said it was not desirable to make a distinction between Mr. Flanagan and the other officers. After a discussion, in which Mr. J. Fitzgerald, I.4qrd Naas, Mr. Monsell, Mr. B. Osborne, Colonel French, Mr. Barrow, and Mr. Horemaa took part, the house went into committee on the bill. Clause 1 and 2 were agreed to. On clause 3, a question arose whether there should be three judges of the Court, or only two as provided by the bill. The discussion occupied the house till ten minutes to 4 o'clocif, whou by u1..0 Iva of .Ltk:r.s suspended. The house resumed at 6 o'clock. ASSISTANT BARRISTERS. Mr. lIASSARD moved an address for return of the names of the assistant barristers who have been absent from quarter sessions during tae last four years, and the names of the barristers to whom deputations have been given by the Lord Chancellor on such occasions, specifying each session, the assistant-barrister and de puty in each instance. —The return was ordered. THE ENFIELD MUSKET. Col. WILLIAMS asked the Secretary of State for War, whether he had received aey reports complaining of the inefficiency of the Enfield musket, as being a weapon inappliable to the service generally, and more especially to the war in India, and if so, whether it is the intention of her Majesty's Government to institute inquiries with a view to the substitution of a musket better adapted to the exigencies of the service in that locality? Gen. PEEL said he was exceedingly surprised at the question which had been put to him. No report had reached the War Department, or the office of the Com mander-in-Chief, which would warrant the interpretation inferred by the question. Everybody was of opinion that the E&leld musket was the best that could be had. THE CAGLIARI. Mr. DEASY asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the arrangement by which the King of Naples placed the Cagliari and her crew at the disposal of her Majesty was made with the concurrence of the Sardinian Government, or whether it has been ap proved of by that Government ; and also, whether he has any objection to lay the papers relating to the sub ject before the house ? Mr. W. S. FITZGERALD said the arrangement by which the Cagliari and crew were placed at the disposal of her Majesty's Government was not with the concur. rence of the Sardinian Government. Neither her Majes ty's Government nor the Sardinian Government had any knowledge of the intention of the King of Naples to make such an arrangement. They knew nothing what ever of the intention until it was publicly announced. The English Government presented a categorical note respecting the chip and crew, and they had learned that a !similar request was to have been made by the Sardi nian Government; but the request of the Sardinian Go vernment had not been made, because when the Eng lish Government heard that the Cagliari was to be sur rendered they requested that the Sardinian note might be withheld. Since that time the representative of the Sardinian Government at the English Court bad ex pressed his entire satisfaction with the arrangement that had been made. With respict to the latter part of the question, he had to state that the Govern ment had no objection to lay the papers bef ,re the house, but they were bulky and required translation. At as early a period as possible they should be produced. TRANSPORT OF TROOPS TO INDIA. Mr.NICOLL asked the member for Westminster when the report of the committee on transport of troops to In dia would be laid on the table of the house I Sir DE L. EVANS said that a draft report had been laid before the house. On Friday next the detailed re port would be laid before the house, and he hoped to be Mr.. MHEANPGOLLELSUT inquired OF whTeHthEer t able to call atte n ti on to it on that day. (Hear.) T TES. H e At Government Me Thames intended to do anythin g w i th regard to? (Laughter.) The question seemed to excite some merri ment in the house, but he did not understand why. We had running through London one o f the noblest rivers oblest rivers in the world, and it was at present in such a state as to th re aten to poison the whole town. [Ron. member s w h o laughed before, supposing that Mr. Mangles was about to seek some intelligence with regard to India, now made amends for their apparent frivolity by heartily cheering the question.] Lord J. MANNERS said the Government had nothing to do with the Thames, the whole jurisdiction of which rested with the Metropolitan Board cf Works. That board had special powers with regard to the river. The Commissioner of Works had, however, to sanction or to reject any scheme which might emanate from the Board of Works, but up to the present time be bad received no plan to which he assent, or from which he could could withhold approval Ile had received no suggestion of any kind. At present, there f .re, the Government had ni con cern with the river. It might be satisfactory to the hon. member who put the question and the boys:: to know that in his (Lord J. Manners') individual capacity he was serying on a committee for the purpose of investigating various schemes for the purification of the Thames. The cmnmittee worli very shortly make their report, and tie honourar la member would then see what was the extEnt f the reepon ibility of the government. THE CASE OF MR. BARBER, THE SOLICITOR. Mr. BRADY moved f o r a sel ec t comm itt ee to in quire i n t o th e a ll ega ti ons con t a i ne d i n the petition of William Henry Barber, presented upon the 27th day of April last, and to consider and report whether any and what redress should be afforded to the petitioner ; and whether any and what other steps should be taken in reference to the matters alleged. The honourable mem her said this Was a case of wrong, followed by degrada tion and cruelty , suc h as had never been brought under the consideration o f t h e house. Mr, Barber, a gentle man of considerable reputation in society, and known from his earliest youth to have maintained an upright character, was tried in 1844 on account of some will for geries by which the country was robbed of some large slims of money. He was found guilty on a prosecution instituted by the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt. He was refused a separate trial, and thus he was deprived of the advantage of the only evidence of which he could avail himself to prove his innocence, and yet upon that very same evidence he was sub sequently pardoned, having, however, previously under gone the worst horrors of transportation. It will be remembered that all the persons who were convicted in connection with Barber had explicitly declared that he was innocent of the frauds. He was sent to one of our most penal settlements, and he was treated worse than the most hardened criminals who were placed there, his calm and quiet protestations of innocence having brought upon him the most condign and crud punish. ment. Mr. Naylor, a magistrate at Norfolk Island, had borne testimony to his calm, quiet, consistent de meanour, and had stated that he should be glad to re • new his acquaintance under happier circumstances. Mr. Robinson, the senior superintendent of the island, had borne similar testimony to Mr. Barber's excellent character. (Much other testimony of a similar character was adduced by the honourable member.) Mr. Barber was detained two years in Norfolk Island, but be met with sympathisers there, and remonstrances were con veyed to the civil commander, who said he was only carrying out his instructions, and the treatment was of the most cruel and barbarous character. He was sent to the hospital, which was indeed a harbour of rduge, although he could never hope to recover from the cruel and unjust treatment he there received. (Hear.) He lost a valuable and most promising practice —every vestige of his property was swept away—and, in short, all his pro , spects were ruined, while he found himself chained to the leg of a doubly convicted felon. Then in a convict ship this innocent man was chained in irons u n til h e was landed in that ocean hell, Norfolk Island. (Hear.) Now, this was a Government prosecution, and it was on that account be made an appeal to the house. Mr. Pollock, the present Lord Chief Baron, was the prose cuting counsel in the first case ; Mr, Erle, now Mr. Justice Erle, was the prosecuting counsel, and both those gentlemen drew from the witnesses, and especially from Mr. James Freshfield, that the Prosecution ema nated directly from the Treasury. It could not, he thought, be doubted that the fact of this being a Govern ment prosecution acted most detrimentally to the pri soner, as the Government counsel had the list word, and stated to the jury that the prisoner could not bring forward a single witness to establish his innocence, whereas by the state of the law which then existed that Government counsel was the very man who deprived the unfortunate man of any testimony he might be able to adduce in his behalf. (Hear.) The present Govern ment had by their energy released from a foreign dun geon two of our fellow -countrymen, and would they not now give another man who bad suffered deeply adequate remuneration for the wrongs he had endured I (Hear, hear.) lie believed that the public were in this man's favour, and that there was not a newspaper in the kingdom that had not declared its opinion in favour of Mr. Barber's claims upon the government of the coun try. No doubt he should be told that this application was a novel one and there was no precedent for it, but let it be remembered that there was no precedent for such enormous wrongs as this man had sustained. (Ilea, hear.) Another objection might be that if this application was granted the Government would be in undated with applications for compensation, but that he believed was an idle objection, for no claim could be brought forward unless it was a precisely analogous case. This case stood alone—of itself and by itself— having no parallel. It had been also said that there might be collusions if this suit were recognised, but he did not believe there would be any collusion when Nor folk Island was to be the previous penalty. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He warmly complimented the present Attorney-General upon his untiring efforts on behalf of the petitioner, and again asked for a com mittee, not only for sifting the claims of the petitioner, but for throwing a light upon circumstances tending to improve our criminal law. - Sir J. PAKINGTON thought this an exceptional case, in which it would be harsh to refuse inquiry —(hear) — although he suggested such a modification in the terms of the motion as should not commit the house to any opinion on the merits of the petitioner'w case. (Hear, hear.) He was induced to accede to the motion in con sideration of the undue sufferings which had been under gone by the petitioner. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BRIGHT advised that the proposed modification should be accepted. (Hear, hear.) He believed that every man in the country would applaud the course adopted by the Government. The public, he believed, would be ready to compensate the petitioner, if it were proved that there had been a miscarriage of juitice. After a few words from Mr. BovILL, the original mo tion was withdrawn, and the modified one agreed to. UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (SCOT LAND). Mr. BAXTER then rose to move the following resolu tion:—" That in the opinion of this house an Under- Secretary cf State for Scotland should be appointed to perform the political duties at present attached to the office of Lord Advocate." The honourable member said that in submitting this motion he had not the slightest intention to reflect upon the mode in which the duties of Lord Advocate bad been performed, but Lis obj-set was to put an end to an anomalous state of things likely to lead to abuse, and clogging the purely judicial functions of the Lord Advocate. For thirty years after the legislative union Scot- land had a Snro'ary of State. The hon. member, i❑ order to lay a basis for his motion, dwelt upon the com plicated political and judicial functions at present dis char2ed by the Lord Advocate, which were more than that functionary could well get through. Tho Lord Ad vocate was the political monarch and dictator over Scotch affairs—he discharged all the legislative business of that country, and was the sole organ of the Ministry in Scottish affairs. He should like to see a return of all the railway tickets used during a session by the Lord Advocate between England and Scotland. The Court of Session, at which the Lord Advocate was constantly required, sat at the same time as the Parliament, of which he was a member. England was better repre sented at every petty German court than was Scotland in the Ministry of England. (Hear, hear.) The new Under-Secretary would have plenty to do. He would have to originate measures affectirg Scotland, to attend deputations, and see that Scotch business was not delayed till undue hours of the night. (Hear, hear, from several Scotch members.) When the question of Scottish grievances was before the other house of Parlia ment several peers had contended that the affairs of Scot land were neglected,t'le Earl of Eglinton and Duke of Buc cleugh, members of the present Government, and the Duke of Argyle and other noble lords connected with the late Government, supporting this view. 0 wing to the ab sence of the Lord Advocate, bills frequently fell through. The Lunacy Bill had bee❑ imperfectly dealt with in con sequence of the late Lord Advocate being away to con duct the trial of Miss Madeline Smith, By placing the whole ecclesiastical and civil patronage in the hands of the first practising barrister in Scotland, an undue in• fluence was given to the lawyers of Edinburgh. Another reason why the Lord Advocate should receive the as si,tance of an under-secretary was, that if he lost his seat in Parliament Scotch legislation must necessarily come to a stand still. The change would not entail any expense, as the various stipends now allotted to the as sistants of the Lord Advocate would make up the in come of an under-secretary. (Hear, hear.) Mr. W. EWART seconded the motion. Mr. BOUVERIE thought the hon. mover bad alto gether failed to show that the political duties imposed upon the L rd Advocate had been inadequately per formed. He (\lr. Bouverie) had had the good fortune to sit in the house during the period of office of bur Lords Advocate, and he was quite at a loss to gather in what respect their duties had been ill performed. (Hear, bear.) The present Lord Advocate had shown his aptitude for his distinguished posi tion, and he (sir. Bouverie) should regret to see the duties now discharged by him remitted to a subordinate minister. He was pr. pared to contend that it would be a moat serious lose for the country and for Scotland i. the Lord Advocate should cease to superintend the busi ness of Scotland in that houi.e. (Hear, hear.) The political functions of the Lord Advocate outside the House of Commons were confined in ordinary times to recommendations respecting patronage, for the patron age of the Crown was mainly exercised by the Home Secretary. It honeu able gentlemen would consult the statute-book for many years past, hey would find that there bad been no 'aches on the part of Lords Advocate in preparing measures fur the improvement of Scotland , and further, he would observe that it would have been perfectly idle for any one who had not received the edu cation of a Scotch lawyer to have attempted the ta , k of carrying there measures of reform through Parliament. He should certainly oppose the motion of his honourable friend. Mr. STIRLING suggo3ted to his honourable friend to qualify his motion by substituting for the words of big resolution that an Under-Secretary of State for Scotland should be appointed, in order to perform a portion of the duties at present perforrne , l by the Lord Advocate.. Mr. E. ELLICE, jun., entertained a very strong opi nion on the motion of his boo. friend, but it was an opinion adverse tl the motion. Sir J. OGILVY . would certainly be little disposed to oppose se e th w e it o h io fa ti v o o n ur of b h y is o h le on p . eo fr ile i ) end of if s he thought ht il tt e was did r not, howev er , b e li eve th a t th e p eo pl e o f S c otla n d didre sgeairfdenthtietid proposal followosalwiththfeavdoicutra,taens of and therefore e i re p fo e r rs e o h n e al feltbim- conclu sions, and to oppose the motion. Mr. CRAUFURD intended to support the motion of his hon. friend. He thought that as a great part of the Lord Ad vocate ' s time was taken up in his private prac tice at the S cotc h bar, or on public prosecutions, it was desirable that there I.ln , tild be eoinc officer in that house who could answer questions in the absence of the Lord Advocate. He hoped the mover would accept the amend ment cf the hon, member for Perthshire, and so get rid cf the verbal of jection which would otherwise be the only resource of those who had no valid arguments to offer. Mr. W. WILLIAMS should not have objseted t, the motion if it had not been proposed to take money out of the public taxes. The LORD ADVOCATE said no doubt the measure now proposed to the house had emanated from a desire to relieve him from some of the more laborious duties of his office, but befora he could consistently accept it as a boon he must be satisfied of two or three things. In the first place, it must be proved that the office was too labo rious ; in the second, that the measure proposed would relieve the holder of it of any portion of those laborious duties he at present fulfilled ; and thirdly, that that spe cific portion of his duties proposed to be tr.insferred to the new officer would be performed as well as they were at present. Now he (the hon. gentleman) was sorry to say he could not see his way to assent to the affirmative of any one of these propositions. (Hear.) Far be it from him to say, for it would be perfectly inconsistent with the fact, that the office he had then the honour to fill was not a very laborious office, requiring a great deal of time and attention, and involvi ng a gr e a t d ea l cf anxiety. But he was by no means satisfied that because the office was laborious, even eminently labo rious, it followed as a necessary consequence that it was desirable to diminish the amount of its duties. He was not entitled to speak as a person of experience in public life, but in one way or the other he had seen a great deal of hard work done in his time, and had formed a very decided opinion to this effect, that if you want a man to do his work well you must give him plenty of it to do. (A. laugh.) It was just because he thought that they were going to diminish, or to attempt, rather, to dimi nish, the unnecessary labours of the existing office, and at the same time to create a new office, which would not have, be would not say ample employment, but any thing like employment at all, that he objected to both branches cf the proposal. The duties of the office of Lord Advocate were not so easily explained in detail, but there was a peculiar part of the office that distin guished it from all others, and which gave it a remark able prominence in the business affairs of Scotland which some hon. members might not so well understand, and which arose in the first place from his peculiar duties as a public prosecutor. The appointment of a public pro secutor was an institution that we had not either in England or in Ireland, and consequently they might not at first sight fully appreciate the precise effects of such an institution, and the value of such a public func• tionary. In order to carry out the duties of that part of his office it was indispensable that the Lord Ad• voo*te should have an extensive machinery throughout the country, by means of which he could carry on the entire series of public prosecutions for crime, whether they wero great or small, and the consequence was there was in existence throughout Scotland, not merely at head-quarters in Edinburgh, but in every placed any importance, an organised machinery, by means of which the Lord Advocate could put himself in communication with every part of the country at the shortest possible notice, and obtain the most accurate information from the most available sources. Now the existence of this machinery did in itself give him peculiar facilities for the performance of public business, which he ap prehended woul.l not belong to any other office that would be created, and the consequence was that in transacting those duties which the hon. member fur Montrose designated the political duties of his office, he called into requisition nothing more than the staff and machinery which was in existence for the purpose of con ducting the public criminal procedure of the kingdom. This was a source of great convenience and economy in itself, and, at the same time, it involved the performance of a class of duties by other officials engaged in it. Then the Lord Advcoate was responsible, he would not say directly to Parliament, but he was responsible to the Home-office, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department was in hie turn responsible to Parliament for the preservation of peace in Scotland. These were the two main features of his office as public prosecutor, in addition to his duties as legal adviser of the Crown, and beyond these three departments he (the Lord Advo cate) knew of no other that fell within the scope of his office and authority, except those of legislation and pa tronage. He thought hon. members would agree with hire that he fairly stated the duties of this functionary's office when he defined and embraced them under these denominations. He supposed his hon. friend who sup ported the proposition would agree with him that it was perfectly impossible fur an Under-Secretary of State to relieve the Lord Advocate of any portion of his duties as public prosecutor, or as being responsible for the peace of Scotland, or as law adviser to the Crown, and consequently it must be in the other two departments that it was proposed to relieve the Lord Advocate of a portion of his duties, and which it was proposed should be performed by somebody else. But by what means was this to be done ? The hon. member for Montrose proposed that there should be an Under-Secretary of S:a e for Scotland to perform the political duties of his office ; and his hon, friend the member for Perth, not seti,fied with that, proposed to have art Under-Secre tary of State for Scotland in the Home-office, to perform a portion of the duties that attached to that office. He (the Lord Advocate) did Lot think there was any great difference between the tao, because he did not suppose that the hon. member for Montrose, in suggesting the appointment of an Under-Secretary of State for Scot land, meant that he might be unattached to any great department, or that he should sit as an independent offi cer in some tribunal or department of his own, and if that was not so he must mean that it should be with the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department. Now he could fairly state, so far as rogartied the admini stration of the Home Department with reference to the affairs of Scotland, so far as his (the hon, member's) ex perience went, he had not since he came into office, he thought he might say with perfect confidence and safety, had one communication on the affairs of Scotland from the Home-Office addressed to him by the Under Secre tary of State for that deear:mant which would not have bean required equally to come to him if there had been a Scotch Under Secretary of State, and for this plain reason, because the correspondence consisted of two classes of communications. Oae class required explana tion with regard to the legal system of Scotland, and to its administration in its different departments ; and the other had reference to the procuring returns, and things of that kind, which after all were mere matters of ma chinery and routine, and which were effected through a staff which he bad already described as being under the command of the Lord Advoeate himself. So far as the ordinary business transactions in the Home Department affected Scotland were concerned it came to this, that if they were to appoint a secretary in the Home Depart ment, who should henceforth pass under the name of the Scottish Secretary of the Home Department, it would not, in the fist place, relieve the Home Secretary of any portion of his duties whatever; and, in the second place, it would not ensure the performance of those duties at the Home-office one whit the better than before. He should be glad to see any of his frienls who repre sented a Scotch constituency in the honourable position of Under Secretary of State for Scotland, but as re garded that part of the business that came from the Home-office, it did not in the least degree matter as re garded the efficiency of the way in which it was per formed, whether it came from the hands of an Under Secretary of State who was a Scotchman, and understood Scotch affairs, or from the hands of any Under Secre tary of State who might be there for the time duly qualified for the pelf ntindnce of his office. But then it was said that in regard to Scottish legislative matters there was much need of some ancillary assistance; that there was a great want of some one in the Government to take charge of Scottish bills in that house, so that they might be advanced at a more rapid rate, and so that hon. members and measures might not be driven into those midnight hours which were so justly and generally deprecated and objected to for the commencement of im portant debates, He (the Lord Advocate) could Lave wished that the hon. member for Montrose had explained by what means he intended to arm the Under-Secretary of State with further facilities in that house for the in troduction and discussion of Scottish legislative mea sures, so as to induce the Chancellor of the Exchecper to give hint larger scope and convenience for bringing fere ore hie bills. How, be wished to know, were these midnight hours to be avoided ? In what way were bills to be expedited at a more magic rate in consequence of the presence of this additional functionary who was to use his influence in addition to that of the Lord Advo cate in accelerating the ratio of Scottish business pro gress ? He had no particular claim on the house for his own services, but he thought his predecessor had been very attentive to his duties, and he thought it an extra ordinary complaint against his learned friend that in order to conduct a most important case in Scotland he was for one week absent. As to the Lunacy Bill, which it was said eae an ill-considered piece of legislation, that was not owing to the absence of the Lord-Advo cate, but was because a vote of the house had hurried it on. Big learned friend had given his best attention to it, and had been wonderfully succe , sful under the circum- stances. He did not fbink Scotch legislation suffered from these causes more than Irish legislation, though there was a S,:eratary for Irelar.d. He really thought that if a Scotch Secretary were appointed, he would not know what to do with his time ; and, for his part, he couli not tell what he (the Lord Advocate) could give him to do if be (the Secretary) were placed under his control. (A. laugh.) The honourable member for Montrose alluded to unnecessary offices that had existed in Scotland, and had implied that it was nearly the same now, Was the hon. member ignorant that since 1824 the Courts of Exchequer and Admiralty, the Cousistory C .urt, and some of the Sheriffs' Courts had been ab .fished (Hear, hear.) He would venture to say there was not a man in any judicial office or any office connected with the courts, who was not doing fair work for his salary. He was sorry to see a feeling of , jealouy of th e l ega l p ro f ess i on, w hi c h h e h a d th o u g ht was always rappeeted in Scotland. It was only an bon ourablr motive that could inducd any member of the ' Scotch bar to undertake the arduous duties of Lord Advocate, at a considerable pecuniary sacrifice, and that he would not be led to accept the office for the sake of pay or patronage, unless he was also urged by the higher motive of a de•ire to serve his country. (Cheers.) Lord DUNCAN said it was quite refreshing to hear the merelp f for Lambeth in his place again advocating economy ; but it was on the score of economy that any lion. member who advocating this measure might justify his vote. Even if 1,500/. a year additional was neces sary, he did not, think the English members would grudge it. But what the hon. member for Montrose had propoMed Wl9 not to go to an expense of 1,500/. a year, but to du away with existing offices, amongst others that of the Lo r d o f th e T reasury , w hi c h he had himself once filed. He shoutl oppose the motion as he objected to unnecessary lt , giqlation. ,rd PALMERSTON said that having been far some time Home Secretary, and having soma experi ence of the connection of the duties of the Lord Adro- cate with the hone Government, ha could not support tho motion. Ile did not opp ise it on the ground of tho a.dditional expense, for he thought them might be found offices which might be abolished. At the same time l,e wcull not abolish offices for the mere purpose of creatir g an cffice which was unnecessary. There were no pAitiesl duties of the Lord Advocate which could be performed by an under-secretary of state, and if there were airy duties at all that could be trans ferri d it must be a person who was responsible, namely, to the Secretary of State, and not only to an under stern tary of State. The duties performed by the Lord Advocate in that house were not political, except to vote on all occasions with his party, but to superin tend and pass through Parliament bills affecting the in t.-rests of Scotland, just as tho Attorney and Solicitor Generals were authOrities on matters connected with Irel,lnd, At present the Secretary of State for the Home Department was responsible for everything co netted with Scotland which was not regulated by local authorities, but under the proposed system the Home Secretary would have to consult with his own under sec retary instead of with the bard Advocate, and that he thought would not be an improvement. But at present the Home Secretary was not at present guided entirely by the opinion of the Lord Advocate, although of course he consulted him ; so that whether they had a lord ad vocate or an under-secretary of state, the Home Secre• tary would be responsible, and it would be impossible to transfer that authority. But there was a vast deal of business in connection with Scotland which was en tirely despatched by the Home Secretary without any consultation with the Lord Advocate, and iwhich he conducted solely on his own responsibility. So that the Lord Advocate had no greater influence than the Secre tary, for the Home Secretary for the time being liked to be attached to his opinions, and that state of things would be in no sense altered by the appointment of an under-secretary of state. Indeed, he believed if such an office were constituted it would prove such a sinecure.as very soon to attract the attention and censure of Par liament. (Hear.) It had been suggested that the office of Scotch Lord of the Treasury might be ab dished, but that would be impracticable, as that officer had pe culiar duties to perform, which could not by any possi bility be tra❑sferred to the Home-office, and which could not be transacted she where than in the Treasury. (Hear.) He did not think the new office was necessary for the transaction of business in that house, for whenever a Scotch bill came before Parliament it was gene rally found that the Scotch members had met out of doors and agreed upon some general principles, and therefore these measures were easily passed through. He did not think the object of the motion would be that proposed, for it would not create a responsible officer, whereas the Home Secretary was now responsible for everything that was done by the Crown in relation to the affairs of Scotland. Mr. DUNLOP said that the experience he had ob tained since he came into parliament, convinced him that some change in the existing system was indis pensable. No doubt the duties of the Lord Advocate had been well performed by the learned gentlemen who had at various times held it, but still there were many shortcomings which arose, not from the want of ability, but from faults inherent in the system. (Hear, hear.) In order to perform the duties properly, it was necessary that a Lord -Advocate should sacrifice much of his pro fessional practice, and yet he was compelled, in anticipa tion of a change of ministry, to retain a hold of it, in order that it might not entirely slip through his hands. Under these circumstances a man could not adequately perform his duties as Lord-Advocate without making a sacrifice which it was wrong to ask any person to make. One great defect in connection with Scotch legislation was, that Scotch bills were brought in at too late a period to secure for them a full andf air consideration. It was not intended by this motion to take from the Lord-Advocate any of his rights or duties as public pro secutor, but this they contended for, that at present a vast deal of business went to the Lord-Advocate which did not properly pertain to his office. The object of the motion was not to supersede the Home Secretary, but to place some one in his office who was able to transact Scotch business. The C HANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the question of 1,5001. or 15,0001. a-year ought not to enter into consideration. But what they had to look to was whether the present system was wanting in re sponsibility or efficiency. With regard to the former branch, he had never heard any complaints, for if there were any matters of importance connected with Scot land to be considered they always met with ready ac knowledgment in Parliament, and with regard to effi ciency, he had no hesitation in saying, from an experi ence of twenty years, that no office had been conducted with such continuous ability and such sustained intelli gence as the office of Lord Advocate in Scotland. The measures they had introduced and carried through were an answer to those charges which had been made with regard to midnight legislation. (Hear, hear.) He could not think that Scottish legislation was neglected in that house, and he could not believe that Scotch members had more cause for complaint than Eng:Wl or Irish members. At all events, he did not think it would be improved by the appointment of an Under-Secretary for Scotland. (Hear, hear.) Many Irish members took a directly opposite course, and asked for the abolition of the office of Lord-Lieutenant. These Irish members wished to bring the affairs of Ireland more directly into connection with the Home Government, while the Scotch members were endeavouring to get back to a mere provincial administration. (Hear.) He must con fess that he was surprised to find that Scotch members should wish to have their affairs conducted not by the best lawyer that could be found, but by a subordinate political officer. He thought by adopting the resolution they would be carrying out a deteriorating step, and lowering Scotland in the scale, and he could not, on the part of the Government, support it. Sir GRAHAM MONTGOMERY complained there was no Scotch Lord of the Treasury, and urged upon the Government the propriety of appointing one. Mr. BAXTER, in reply, said that he was ready to adopt the amendment of the hon. member for Perth. The motion so amended was then put— Ayes 47 Noes Majority against the motion —l27 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPLAINS. Mr. Sergeant DEASY, after the statements that had been made by the Secretary of State for War and the Vice• President of the Board of Control in that house re'ative to the increased provision it was intended to make in England and India fur the appointment of Po• man Catholic chaplains to regiments, and the increased facilities for the education of Roman Catholic children, said he should withdraw the resolution of which he had given notice relative to the subject. (Hear, hear.) THE POLICE FORCE IN DUBLIN AND IRE LAND. Lord NAAS moved for leave to introduce a bill to make better provision for the police force in Dublin and other towns in Ireland. The Dublin police force num bered 1,025 officers and men, and the cost amounted to 77,0001., per annum, part of which was paid out of the consolidated fund. He had no fault to find with the general manner in which they discharged their duty, but the principal objection to the force was its relative size to the population, which amounted to 300,000 persons. The calculation he had made of the cost included police stations and the recorder's salary. In Manchester, the police force was 1 in 520 of the inhabitants, and in Liverpool 1 to 328, in Birmingham 1 to 648, in Bristol 1 to 457, in the Metropolitan districts 1 to 384, but in Dublin it was 1 to 272 of the inhabitants. The police of Belfast was a 10011 force, which produced much confu sion with the constabulary. It consisted of 350 men, and cost 5,7001. per annum. Tee noble lord referred to the report of the commissioners, who recommended a total change in the management and appointment of this force. The same-objection that applied to the religion of men appointed to the city of Dublin applied to the Belfast police force. There were two classes of towns in Ireland under different police regulations ; and there was a third class different from them, the police in the latter being under the Towns' Improvement Act. On discovering these evils it became the duty of the Government to come to the conclusion it was desirable to abolish the local forces of Dublin and Belfast, and amalgamate them with the general constabulary forces of the country, and place them on the same footing. Fullo wing the principal of the act passed last year, he proposed to fix the Parlia mentary quota for the towns of Dublin and Belfast as follows—for Dublin 400 men, and Belfast 100 men which would give no additional charge to the consoli dated fund. The Lord-Lieutenant would have the power of affixing such additional force as he might think necessary for the preservation of the peace for those towns, a moiety of which would be charged to the local rotes. After providing for the retirement of the pre sent force, there would be at the end of foueor five years a considerable saving to the rates of Dublin. The force would be under the control of the Inspector-General. Changes would also be made in the police courts, which would also effect a considerable saving. With respect to the smaller towns, he proposed they should be placed on the same footing as now adopted at Belfast, paying a moiety of any extra force they might require. He thought the change proposed would give satisfaction. All those he had spoken to relative to thu proposed scheme agreed in the principle. He gave a uniform police force, and whilst he did not increase the cost on the consolidated fund, he at the same time proposed a saving in many cases of the local rates. Mr. 3. FITZGERALD considered the noble lord deserved thanks for the proposition, but he (Mr. Fitz geral) regretted so gigantic a scheme had been brought in so late in the session. He should offer no objection to the introduction of the bid. He hoped a day would ba fixed for the second reading, that would give the house and the country an opportunity of considering its provisions. - The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND said the heads of the police force bad stated their opinior, there would be no difficulty in carrying out the proposed scheme. They looked upon it as a plain, honest. sensible, and economical measure, awl one that ought to be carried out. Leave was then given to bring in the bill, Lord NAAS then obtained leave to bring in a bill for the more effectual administration of justice in the police district of Dublin metropolis. LEGITIMACY AND DIVORCE AND MATRI MONIAL CAUSES. On the motion of The ATFORNEY-GENERAL, leave was given to bring in a bill to enable persons to establish their legi timacy by the judgment of a court of law, and also to enable persons in like manner to establish their right to be regarded as natural-born subjects of Great Britain ; and to extend the jurisdiction of the Court for Divorce and Ma,rimonid CaIISPR. NEW TRIAL IN CRIMINAL CASES. On the motion of Mr. M‘MAIION, leave was given to bring in a bill to secure th:s right of trial in criminal cages. GALWAY FREE NIENDISFRANCIIISE NIENT BILL. On the or d er o f the day for tho adjourned debate in going into committee on this bill being read, Mr. B HOPE deprecated proceeding with a measure likely to provoke discussi )n after twelve o'clock, and moved the po3tponeritent cf the debate for a fortnight. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had given an intima tion that fresh debates Should not come on after twelve o'clock. Sir J. SHELLEY could not assent to theadjournment for a fortnight without some reason being assigned. Mr. CLAY hoped the Government would fix a morn ing sitting f or thi s measure. Sir J. PAKINGTON repelled the insinuation that the Government in any way held back from proceeding with th e bill. Important debates had hitherto shut out this particular bill. He quite acquiesced in the wisdom of not proceeding with new t-übi eats after twelve o'clock. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that. by Thursday or Friday next the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be in A position to say on what morning the debate would be taken. After a few words from Mr. CLIVE, the debate was adj.urned till Thursday. COMMON-LAW PROCEDURE ACT AMEND MENT` BILL. This bill passed through committee pro; forma. PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) ACT CONTINUANCE BILL. This bill passed through committee. UNIVERSITIES(SCOTLAND)ALLOWANCES,&c. The report was brought up and received. The house then adjourned at half-past twelve. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS-JUNE 15. UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (SCOTLAND). Motion made, and question put, " That, in the opinion of this house, an Under Secretary of State for Scotland should be appointed in the Home-office, to perform a portion o the duties at I resent attached to the office of Lord Advo cate." The house divided ; ayes 47, noes 174. AYES-47. Crossley, F. Locke, John Davie, Sir IL R. F. MacEvoy, E. Deasy, R. Mackie, J. Dodson, J. Maguire, J. Duff, M, Morris, D. Duff, L. Napier, Sir C. Duke, Sir J. Nicol, D. Dundas, F. Smollett, A. Dunlop, A. Stirling, William Ewart, J. T urner, J. A. Greene, J. White, J. Hadfield, G. Wingfield, R. Hamilton, Capt. Wood, W. Harris, J. Kinnaird, A. Kirk, W. Lang ton,ll. G. NOES-174, Archdall, M. Forde, Colonel Pakington,:Sir J. Atherton, W. Forster, Sir G. Palmerston, Viset Baillie, 11. Gard, R. Pease, 11. Ball, E. Gaskell, J. Peel, Gen. Bernard, T. Glyn, G. G. Philips. J. H. Bernard, Col. Gore, W. Pilkington, J. Barrow, W. Greenall, G. Portman, W. Beecroft, G. Gray, Captain Pugh, D. Bentinck ,G. W.P . Griffith, C. Ramsay, Sir A.I Black, Adam Grogan, E. Raynham, Viscous Boldero, Col. H. G. Gurdon, B. Ricardo, 0. Botfield,B. • Hamilton, Lord C. Richardson, J. Bouverie-, Hon. E. P. Hamilton, G. A. Ridley, G. • Bouverle, Hon. P. P. Hamilton, J. H. Robertson, P. Bramston, T. W. Hardy, G. Rolt, J. Brocklehurst, J. Hayes, Sir E. Roupell, W. Brown, W. Heard, J. Rushout, G. Bruce, C. Henley, J. Russell, H. Bruen, H. Hill, Lord E. Russell, A. Buckley, Gen. Hill, R. C. Rust, James Buller, Sir J. Hodgson, W. Salisbury, E. Buller, J. W. Hope, A. Sandon, Viscount Burrell, Sir C. Hornby, W. Sclater, G. Cairns, H. Horsfall, T. B. Scott, Major Calcraft, J. H. Hotham, Lord Slbthorp, Major Calcutt, M. Hunt, G. Smith, A. Cavendish, W. Ingham, R. Spaight, J.", Cayley, E. Inglis, J. Spooner, R. Child, Smith Jones, D. Stanley, Lord Cholmeley, Sir M. Kelly, Sir F. Stapleton, J. Christie, Samuel Kershaw, J. Steuart, Andrew Clark, J. King, J. Sullivan, Michael Clive, Hon. R. King, E. Talbot, C. Cole, H. A. Kinglake, A. Thompson, Gen. Colebroke, Sir T. Kingscote, Capt. R. Thornely, T. Collins, T. Knatchball-Hugel sen Thornhill, W Corry, H. T. L. Knight, F. Tite, IV. Cross, R. Knightley, R. Tollemache, Fred. Cubitt, W. Laslett, W. Tomline, G. Dalglish, R. Lefroy, A. Tottenham, C. Davey, R. Lennax,Lord H. Trollope, Sir J. Disraeli, B. Lopes, Sir M. Vance, J. Dobbs, W. Lovaine, Lord Vansittart, G. Duncan, VlSCouat Lowther, Col. H. C. Waldron, L. Dundas, G. Lygon, Hon. F. Warre, J. Dunkellin, Lord Lytton, Sir G. Whitbread, S. Ellice, E. Magan, W. H. Whiteside, J. Elliot, J. Manners, Lord J. Whitmore, H. Elphinstone, Sir J. March, Earl of Wickham, H. W. Elton, Sir A. Martin, P. Williams, W. Estcourt, T. Melgund, Viscount Wilson, J. Evans, T. W. .Miller, S. B. Wise, J, Ewing, H. Mills, T. Woods, H Fenwick, 11. Moffatt, G. Wortley, Major Fergus, J. Montgomery, Sy G. Wyndham, General Fitzgerald, W. R.S. Mowbray J. R.' Yorke, E. Fitzgerald, J. Naas, Lord TELLERS. Fitzroy, Hon. H. Newport, Viscount Jolliffe, Sir W. Foljambe, F. Ogilvy, Sir J. Taylor, Col. Agnew, Sir A. Anderson, Sir J. Berkeley, Hon. H Biggs, J. Blackburn, Peter Blake, J. Bland, L. Brady, J. Browne, Lord J. Buchanan, W. Laird, James Clay, James Clifford 'Col . Clive, G. Cowan, C. Cox William Cranford, E. H. J . TELLERS. Baxter; W. E. Ewart,.W. LAW INTELLIGENCE.—June 15. DIVORCE COURT. ROBINSON V. ROBINSON AND LANE. The hearing of this petition for a dissolution of marriage by a husband against a wife on the ground of adultery was resumed this morning. Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., Dr. Addams, Q.C., Mr. Skinner, Q.C., and Mrs. Kerslake ' were coun sel for the petitioner ; Mr. Forsyth, Q.C., and Mr. Coleridge for the co-respondent, Dr. Lane ; and Dr. Phillimore, Q.C., for Mrs. Robinson. At the sitting of the Court some discussion took place as to whether Dr. Phillimore, who repre sented the wife, ought not to address the Court before Mr. Forsyth, who represented the alleged adulterer, but it was stated that an arrangement had been made, which need not be drawn into a precedent, that Mr. Forsyth should begin. The Lord ClOf Justice said that the wife's being the principal case, the correct practice would be for the counsel for the wife to begin ; but the Court would not interfere with the arrangement between counsel. Mr. Forsyth accordingly proceeded, reminding their lordships that Dr. Lane's honour, reputation, domestic happiness, and means of existence were at stake, and that this was the first time that he had had an opportunity of being heard in his de fence. The journal of M 1 El. Robinson being no evidence against Dr. Lane, he would at once dis miss it as not being in the case. Dr. Lane, a mar ried man, with a young wife, was accused of adul tery with a woman 50 years of age upon the weak est possible evidence. Dr. Lane, whom he hear tily regretted being un a bl e t o call, had a number of female patients, with whom he was in the habit of walking about the grounds, and there was no thing to show that he had ever been more attentive to Mrs. Robinson—who, it must be remembered, was an old acquaintance—than to any other lady who resided in his house. The evidence of impro per familiarity was given by Levi Warren, whom he would prove to be unworthy of credit. Auguste Giet, a butler in the service of Dr. Lane, was then called, and said that after Levi Warren had been to London in 1856 he told witness he had seen Mr. Field and Mr. Robinson in Lon don, and had told them he had never seen Dr. Lane with his arm round Mrs. Robinson's waist. Warren also told witness that he had never seen them in that position. After Warren left Dr. Lane's ser vice he received two letters from him, in one of which he asked him not to mention what he had said about Dr. Lane if the case should ever be brought into court. The witness further stated that he had never noticed any improper behaviour between Dr. Lane and Mrs. Robinson. The study of Dr. Lane was used by the servants as a short cut from the pantry to another part of the house. Mrs. Suckling, who was staying as a patient at Moor-park in September, 1854, said she remem bered Mrs. Robinson being there on a visit, and there was certainly no difference between the doctor's treatment of her and of any other lady. Dr. Lane and his wife were on excellent terms. She was about 25 years of age, and was a friend of Mrs. Robinson. Dr. Lane walked about the grounds with every patient, both ladies and gentle men, by turns. She had only seen him walking with Mrs. Robinson once, and that was on the terrace. Lady Drysdale, the mother of Mrs. Lane, said there had been great intimacy between the families of Lane and Robinson. There was nothing in the conduct of Dr. Lane towards Mrs. Robinson at all different to his conduct towards other ladies. She had often urged Dr. Lane to pay kind atten tion to Mrs. Robinson. She and Mrs. Lane always knew when the doctor walked or drove out with Mrs. Robinson. He was in the constant habit of welking in the grounds with other ladies besides Mrs. Robinson. Cross-examined—Her daughter was a very sweet tempered person, about 27 years old. She had no cause for suspicion. She should say Mrs. Robin son was upwards of 50, but she was afraid to say too much. By the Court—She thought Mm Robinson had an unhappy home. She was remarkably kind to witness's little grandchildren, and that led to the intimacy. Mr. Reed, a surveyor, produced a plan of the grounds at Moor-park, from which it appeared that the summer-house referred to by the witness Warren was not upon an island, and was close to a path. He also stated that a person standing in the position which Warren had described as occu pying could not see into the summer-house. Dr. Mark Richardson, a retired surgeon in the Bengal army, who was staying at Moor-park in 1856 and 1857, stated that Mrs. Robinson visited there, and that he could not perceive the slightest difference between Dr. Lane's treatment of her and of other ladies. Mr. Coleridge having summed up on the part o, Dr. Lane, _ Dr. Phillimore addressed their lordships on the part of Mrs. Robinson. The charge was that of adultery with one person only, and the evidence clearly established that that person had not been guilty of adultery. Would it be reasonable, then, to dismiss Dr. Lane from the suit, and declare him innocent of the charge, yet to divorce Mrs. Robin son on the ground that she has committed adultery ? The Lord Chief Justice put .the case of a wife who confessed that she had committed adultery with a certain person who was in reality innocent, in order to conceal her real paramour. Dr. Phillimore said the petitioner did not charge adultery with - any one except Dr. Lane, and there fore by Dr. Lane's innocence or guilt he must stand or fall. Sir C. Cres3well said, if the confession would have been evidence against the wife, supposing the co - respondent had not been before the court, how could the circumstances of his being before the court make it no evidence against her ? Mr. Justice Wightman said if both parties were to make a separate confession the argument of the learned counsel would go to the extent of exclud ing both confession,. Dr. Pbillimore continued his argument, dwell ing upon the weakness of the oral evidence, by which no proximate act whatever was proved. He then referred to the fallacious character of journals as compared with other confessions. For instance, the journals of Horace Walpole contained many statements which, as had since been proved, be must have known to be false when they were writ ten. This journal had evidently been written by a woman of so flighty, extravagant, excitable, ro mantic, and irritab!e a mind as almost to amount to insanity. He should contend that it had been written under the influence of a disease peculiar to women, which had the effect of producing the most extraordinary delusions upon the mind of the patients, and frequently caused them to accuse themselves of the most horrible crimes. The learned counsel then read a number of extracts from the diary consisting chiefly of self-accusations, • of records of conversations on various subjects with Dr. Lane and other persons, of her opinions on poetry, phrenology, and other matters, and con taining frequent expressions of her disbelief in a future state. There were also entries relating to physical suffering for which she had ccinsulted and been treated by medical men. Dr. Joseph Kidd, the medical attendant of Mrs. Robinson, described the malady under which she was suffering, and said her mind was in a state of morbid depression alternating with excitement. Sir Charles Locock, Dr. Bennett, and Dr. Forbes Winslow were then examined with regard to the effect of the malady described by Dr. Kidd in pro ducing extraordinary delusions, but their evidence was obviously not of a fit nature for a detailed re. port. Dr. Phillimore then proposed to examine the co respondent, Dr. Lane. He could have been ex amined in the Ecclesiastical Court, and their lord ships inherited all the power possessed by that court. Lord Chief Justice said the alleged adul terer was not a party to the suit in that court. By the Evidence Act (14th and 15th Vict., cap. 99) no patty to a suit in ..cases of adultery could be ex amined. By the Divorce Act the alleged adulterer, who was before not a party, was made a party. He was inclined, therefore, to think that the Court had not power to examine Dr. Lane. Dr. Phillimore said if their lordships' opinion should be against him upon that point he should pray that Dr. Lane be dismissed from the suit, in order that he might then be examined on behalf of Mrs. Robinson. Dr. Addams and Mr. Karslake wore heard on the other side, contending that Dr. Lane was sub stantially the principal defendant, and relying upon the terms of the Evidence Act as excluding him from being examined. Their lordships took time - to consider their de• cision upon this important point, and adjourned until to-morrow (this) morning. Country Markets. LIVERPOOL, JUNE 15. A very small attendance to-day, and the business done was insignificant. Wheat and flour may be quoted at last week's rates. Oats and oatmeal the turn lower. The same remark applies to barley, beans, and peas. Yellow Indisu corn was firmly held at late rates, but white was about 6d lower, prime northern being obtainable at 33s 6d per qr., ex quay. LEEDS, JUNE 15. The splendid weather has its usual effect on the trade, which is as dull as possible, and to sell wheat a reduction of 2s per qr must be submitted to No alteration in oats and beans. Averages for the week : Wheat, 43s 5d I Oats, 29s lid Peas, —a Od. Barley, 31a Old ` Beans, 438 3id Rye, —a Od. NORWICH CATTLE—JUNE 12. We had a tolerable show of Scots, short horns, and • few Irish and Devons at market to•day. Trade firm, and sales brisk. Fat beasts, 7s Od to 7s 6d ; prime, 8s Od per stone; being about same as last week. Sheep, 303 to 35s per head, and good store pigs, 15s to 203. Fat pork, Gs to 60 6d pet stone of 141bs; trade dull. PROVISION MARKET. Beef, per lb ..... ... q I dto 70 Butter, p pt. is 2d to is 3 i Mutton, per 1b.... 6d to 7d Eggs, per 18, Os 01 to is 0.1 Lamb, do., Os 8d to Os 9d Hens, p pair Os Od to Os 01 Veal, per lb ... 6id to Os 7d Chickens,do.4s Od to 6s. oi, Pork, perlb...os sid to 61d Ducks, do., 4s 641 to & 6. Salmon, per lb .........0s Od D acklings,do 2s Od to 2s 6I Grouse, per brace Os to Os 1 Turkeys, each Os Od to 04 01 Tallow, p stone, O s t o — s 01 P o t a t oes, per p t ., .... 3d t o 6a' CORK—JUNE 15. At to-day's market grain realised the following rates Red wheat 22a 6d to 23s'Od White wheat — Gd to 23s Od Barley l2s 3d to ]3s 6d Oats l6s Od to 17s Od COURSE OF EXCHANGE.—YESTERDAT. 4 mstordam •• •• . .• 11 15 14 Gibraltar •• •• •• Ditto, throe months .• 11 173{ Leghorn ...... ••29 55 Rotterdam • •• 11 17. X Genoa ......• 2 5 40 Antwerp •• ••• • • 25 323¢ Idllan • • ••..•• .• •• Brussels • • •• • . •• •• •• • • 25 32% Venice • • •• •• •• •• • Bamburgh •• •• •• •• •• •• 13 7 ,Naplee -••••••••• • • • • •• 414, Altona .. •••• •• •• •• •• • • Palermo •• -- _ 145( • esslna •• .• 126 , Do. three months .. ••25 30 Lisbon ... b 2 alarseilles 25 323{ Oporto •. •• 524 Bourdeaux .. 'Rio Janeiro...... " Frankfort-on-Maine •• 11834 ! Buenos Ayres ...... •• •• Berlin • • ;New Yoric,6o days' sight Vienna •• •• .... 10 26 Philadelphia Trieste • • •• 10 27 rams or anzmozi, rira oss Petersburg 35% Yoreign Gold In Bars £3 17 9 Madrid • • .....• • . 49% Portugal Oold Coin .. 0 0 0 Cadiz •.•.••• .• • • 49X Mexican Dollars .... 0 5 las Barcelona .. - New Dollars 0 0 0 Seville.. ••Of.• •• •••• •• •• ,SilVer•in bars ••• • .. 0 0 LOCAL SHARB MARKET& LIVERPOOL-JUNE 14. STOCK EXCHANGE—The market has shown more Brut. ness to-day; but the amount of business was very titolt il ; Dutch Rhenish, 4i dis—Gravd Trunk of Canada, 111 4 —Caledonians, 414 }—Blackburn, 9 / 1 10—Birkenhead. , 7 0 A I—Chester and Holyhead, 174 i—Eastern Counties' 12 3—Great Western, 51 4—Lancashire and Yorkshire; 9t s—East Lancashire, ssi 94—London and North' Western, 914—Sheffield, 384 9—Midland, 924 4—North British, 124 4—B erw i c k s , 224 4—Y or k and North Mid and, 35 4—Leeds Northern, 224 3—Dovers, 20 7-16 r" —Great Western of Canada, 184 4. MANCHESTER, JUNE 14. STOCIC EXCETANGE.—The market opened firmer, Al prices were steadily ma i n t a i ned, b ut there was not milt business, Midlands, 91i—Londons, 92i—Berwicks, W i Leeds, 90 —Doyen, 20 —Steel fields, 39—Londons, 9 2 " Fleetwoods, 8i die. [AnvEanszstzxrd—lt is over a pleasing duty of a journall, e ; fro introduce to his r ea d ers some new di scovery calcula t e d ,' benefit that vast portion o f our f e ll ow - creatures whic h has r; .. strongest claims upon our sy m p a thi es . It i s w i th t hi s Melt that we call the attention of invalids to the following extl:a,.,eY; from Du Barry's interesting report of cures without wedien of Indigestion (Dyspepsia), Flatulenoy, Constipation, Ner v. . 1 ?,7 0 1 Bilious, and Liver Complaints, Cough, Asthma, Consurar,..iv r :, and Debility, by Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica Food :-- - r. ire No. 52,422.—Bridgehouse, Frimley, 3d April, 1854.z--- 11 7, 3 ,. suffered these 33 years continually from diseased lungs, 6 , 1 " . ting of blood, liver derangement, deafness, singing in the ow — j constipation, debility, shortness of breath and cough, el f during that period taken so mu c h me di c i ne that I can PO 08 say I have laid out upward s o f a t h ousand pounds at ~j chemists and doctors. I n d ee d I was in utter despair rig, never expected to get over it, when I was fortunate enough es become acquainted with y our R eva l enta Arabica, which,lleal:. be praised, restored me t o a s t ate of health I long since desc ro ed of attaining. My l ungs, li ver, stomach, head, and car e , to all right, my hearin g p er f ec t , an d my recovery is a mar" „..- all my acquaintances.—JAmss ROBICRTS, Wood Merchat o , Supported by testimonials from the f o ll ow i ng celebrated fessors of Chemist r y : D r . A. U re; Dr. Shorland; Dr. 1 ,134 ' 0 ; Dr. Campbell; Dr. Gattiker ; D r . W urzer; Dr. lugril.t; Lord Stuart de Decies; the Dowager Countess of Castlest Major Gen. Thomas King, and many other respectable her sons, whose health has been restored by it, after all e s ,,,,Thr means of cure had failed, Suitably packed with full in li r t i . • tions. In canisters, lib. 2s, 9d.; 21b. 4L 64:1-; 51b ' -- re ! 121 b. 225. The 1211) canisters are sent carriage free on 7 7, ceipt of Post-office order. Barry Du Barry, and Co•ti s r• Regent-street, London. Important Caution against the f .ilr fal dangers of spurious imitations.—The Vice-Chancelloy, William Page Wood g ran t e d an I njunction on the 10th Mr; i l 1854, against Alfred Hooper Nevill for imitating Barry's Revalenta Arabica Focd." —I I BIRTHS. KNIGHT—On the 13th inst., at th e G un t e r Arms, F,U, 111 , 81111. road, the wife of Mr. Th omas K n i g ht , o f a daugu w " . T. GOODWIN —On the 13th inst., at Shaldon, the wife of 1 Goodwin, Esq., of a son. re til• SA NDEMAN—On the 14th inst at 21, Cambridge - aq ui " wife of Albert G. Saudemrn, Esq., of a son. VICARS —On the 14th inst., at Drayton Villa, LoaMingt°°' the wife of Col. Wm. Hy. Vicars, of a sou. Brighton, J. Moir MARRIAGES. MANUZEN—RAYNES On chureb t ; macci th u e ee l n ?t E h sci in . :t s ., ec a on t d th s e on Ol o d f the lor Colonel Ma c queen, M a d ras A r my, to Mary, only &ug h if of the late Edw4rd Rayne', Esq., Belmont, Eastboth Suss ex. l3A ßo L Ka Fo E u go it —u — r :Dn the 14th D in E st A ., TatHuSp.per Clapton, aged ntlie 1 22 ith inst., at Lavenham Rectory, gtilg'. cit o John Dil oa Croker, Esq., father of the rector , age" .ci, CLINKE . • R—On the 13th inst ,at Plaistow, Essex, Williara did' Clinker, Esq., aged 72. DOWNING—On the 14th inst. , at Ponder's-end, Enfield ' dlesex, Mr. Downing, aged SO. lfMr. ?Willi FIEATIICOTR—On the 12th inst., aodfrey Hungerfordttbel youngest son of Sir William Heatheot e, Bart., M.P., 11" seven years. ht SCHACHT—On the 12th inst. , at Bri g hton, Geo. teio: Esq., late of Queen - stree t, Chea p side, London, aP-- SCOTT—On the 10th in st., at Warwick-villas, Addif„;l w road, Kensingten, R . Scott, Es q ., late Madras Meo Service, aged 70. ___-........."---- - - _ LONDON t Printed and Published by hfUltDO YOUN ti , of No. 11 2 , Strand , Printer , at T h 4 Son 111 " 112, Strand. in the Precinct of the 3,svoy. in iisfhieuail of Middlesex, Wednesday, June 16, 1858. Paris..., 1 0 ,_ _ R. Qr ~ouS 81. tun:La2lst n o la k e pl 'ek • bad, and 11 0 1 7 A1 %drOng at 3. anhd 4 4 8 . 11bura a ,71 7 ft fashioi 14104 attrac' Concert, I F;"'t.--Th'se Sat er an d rjR. lb 3, Trer 7TUREE; d , ter peat Open kt . zinws D AbELA a m . Strand ittet4 f onnerl, Pa at ,by tha b eat m y p eu est artist Z• l i tt , ri t •,..Es 'Rau kiti 1 4 ' 4 0 "II lit to be the Nei et. Origh Day THE R 0 ,, th,73 l nection tere' u d "trY, Wit A d 10 -44 rnalnec irvorlings 4'petsnat, tI „ I t I ACTIOZ ea tZ,ossilre of 1 , 06 4 ,1 his firs thurebnie. , r some of tiad pro einen. PartieuL 114144 enentionit Idt. e4 r l Y prop and ikt th ogram mea METB 04, u _ ASsu London on &Irani 11 . 4 1 1 : r , i ; r _ . Pott e i bei ng 7L'ortthin X°RWI( Ntp,„ACE IS 1, 111 . 11 11 qG of lift h 7 held al gel A4ESD y - (le . at *hi d ta r • Th e Du te•election. 1111 ne 15th, 18 *lll Powered BRIT. Empowei "Ornber of Po k en u h nlial Into U PWarda deserir Me an PArticii 'W 444 , .937.[ET1 leall et e 2 4 and au of assar kinting Within ths alb s it eitth b e g i grkc ~- Tg P44POWellil VIVORS EDMO/ ti fn. Kenwot aOha ltrntiel King Elliots Fats. I. r Or ' —teior Nrt ' 1 • ElllOts Itessr )4 4611. - Grego :111,,e1118e6it Qu p oll tAk e l out ill A Be. lei k 5S ..4I )4 44 48 1 0 4 % 60 451 55 11 4 4 t1 -- ; followim 44_ 4, 41 Life A e Society 1 1,; w o-thirds 14 s4 bgc inv es t eribe uundred I tnhnal in h.raber ftibout one th t1 11) 4e2 I t , Coln ems; P htlndre r I , r os Pact' Stral 14 2, strand. ktb, 't•;RET r \ ,..lonblished 4114 o n the k 0o," th lo ° " . 1( 4 , 11 0 0 11 h St i t 4B ;( 7 c on the 440e 4 of ‘ 4 ll - ' 9. 4za • pi„,, our Wtl ‘lll r i e 4 „,!! ated -.uer of Thecarie 4 14„1Tc!". eleentla 414ree regu bitt e Pr 4 he' 4(1 Men I'I PU cil ia of c thbi r ,l lltul y re t he 4, 1 ; 11 3 , 81cat , kt u 1 11th. 441 It I . abs o t 4 . l leh me oti e '.l t ett o u r p, tq M %o r b ? ' g "k 1 b e eYrla )4, 3111tig t 4 I:.owth i v, .1 4, c th twe , s ittt!i et n,_ ( Int t trtccl b, ord o "114 4 tOo ttli N 146, I )44 .1.6:1 dall, , may r 02: . , ~W: ; e.,