The Sun. — London, England, 1837-12-15 00:00:00

different to the foreign relations of the country, yet we isnaginc there are not many will participate in the levity with which a subject of such vital importance an that of Russian agvession was last night dismissA from the notice of the House of Com mons.--Morning IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—DEc. 14. The Lora) CIIkNCELLOR took h;s scat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. Lord FOLEY presented a petition from the mayor, citi zens, and others, of Worcester, complaining of the expen,;e attending the passing private Bills through Parlianymt. On the mo! , on of Earl SHAFTESBURY, a B II for the Summoning Juries at Adjourned Quarter Sessions of the Peace, was read a second time. PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND ARTS. Lord BROUGHAM presented a p-tition signed by Dr. BirkbeTk, the founder of the ,London Mechanics' Institution, and s..veral other Gentlemen. and many hundreds of the in dustrious persons who -:ere in the dabit of attending that In stituti,m as members of it. They were N. the most p ;rt men is hose exTtions for their own improvement were entitled to tl:e greatest respect. Most of them were journeymen; and they had maintai e‘i that Institution for a period of 13 or 14 years, by which their habits had become so improved, as to have entitled them to a situation in society above the ordinary class of person; in their situation of life. They were Lkewise so well informed as to be as capable of exercising political rights as any of her Majesty's subjects whatever, although but few ef them enjoyed that privilege. All this th.- Noble and Learned Lord mentioned as recommendatory of their claim to respect, upon any subject on which they petitioned their Lordships. The petition was very nearly in Adro tiser. The election contest at Sudbury, the ot:ier day, was foUght anti decided principally, if not altogether, in re ference to the Whig Poor Law. The great body of the'electors seemed to think less of the political senti ments of the two candidates, than of their respective Opinions upon that atrocious statute which was the " boon" that Whigs and Radicals gave to the labour ing classes as the first fruits of the Morrn Act Mr. Morrison, the Whig-Radical, or 'Ministerial can flidate, had, it appears, a lone-established conniction with the town in the haberdashery line, and, no doubt, expected to receive, as a great c apitalist of that order might expect, the support of the " ribandmen," of whom this ancient borough has no small number. But Malthusian, in Sudbury, where the ladies still have a voice," stands a poor chance of a Parliamentary seat, as !he Honourable Member for Kilkenny might say. Not even all the fascinations of man-millinery can do away with the sin of M:slthusianism ; for where would the " science of harberdashery" be in the next generation if the doctrine of Malthus were to preveil over that great ordinance of holy writ, aganst which the Poor Law Commissioners have fulminated their man awl wife separating decree ? As to the Conservative candidate, Mr. Bailey, he, it seems, was a stranger to the borough, whose acquaintance with the electors was only a few days old; but he :leclared himself hostile to the new Poor law, in addition to havng the recommendation of Conservative principles. The hollow beating which he gave the Whig-radical is another ins'fance) in addition to the many which the infatuated Whigs hace received, that, in enacting that cold-blooded and inhuman mea.7 l re they were accustomed to boast of as the perfection of wis dom, they only justified once more the sarcastic obser vation of Sheridan, that " the Whigs were perpetually building up walls to run their own heads against." The bastile walls which they have built all over the country are strong enough for the purpose of being used by Whig statesmen in performing that operation upon their own skulls to which the witty author of " The School ,for Scandal" declared them to be particularly addicted. The opponent of Mr. Bailey was one w h o supported the Whig Poor-law in all its moods and tenses. In•his address to the electors he wished to turn a deaf ear id the subject ; but his audience took care to refresh his memory by seasonable allusions to it. He preferred, however, adverting to any other " merits' of the Whig Ministry to expatiating upon that masterpiece of their domestic statesmanship—the Malthusian law. On the other hand, the Conservative candidate de clared that he would seek or support the repeal of all the harsher provisions of the law, and mentioned as one of the clauses that which he said authorises the separation of the husband from the wife and the parent from the child. But we must inform Mr. Bailey that there is no such clause in the Act ; and, therefore, his voting against what he calls the harsher clauses will not remove the great evils which this law has inflicted upon the deserving poor. We have said, and all along, and we say so again, that no nibbline , at the details of this measure will be of any practical use as long as the tyrant-power which -the law vests in three Commissioners remains—a power at variance with the first principles of constitutional and responsible government—a power which enables those Commissioners to make regulations, alias laws, for all the parishes of England and Wales. No re form of the Poor-law system which does not strike away this triple-headed despotism, and give the rate payers the control of their own funds, will be any thing but a delusion. Has the law any clauses which authorise the sort of medical treatment which the poor have have received in many of the union work-houses? It has not; but the irrresponsible authority which it has established has led to that among most of the other evils which cause the cry of the poor to go up to I.7eaven against this cruel and unchristian enact ment. It is. absurd, then, to talk about seek ing the reFr.l of the harsher clauses of the Bill, as the remedy for the practical evils which have arisen tinder it—for the worst of those evils are not indicated on the face of the Bill at all, but arc the pestilent emanation of the arbitrary power which it confers, and which the i i allot-:mongering Mr. Grote described as not sufficiently arbitrary and unconstitutional. The view which we have always taken of this measure must explain to every One why it is that we take no interest in Ministerial Committees of Inquiry into the working of this measure ; fur, leaving out of question the packing of such Commit tees by Government, and the partial mode in which' such inquiries arc usually conducted, our objection to the principle of the Bill, int confounding poverty with crime, and for its punishment, delegattnff the bgisla tivelunctions of Parliament to a Board of Commis sioners, is an objection wholly irrespective of the work ing of the measure, though all we know of its working only increases our abhorrence of the policy of which the Whigs are the authors—the most democratic of their Radical allies the abettors—and the labouring poor of England the miserable victims.—Morning Herald. If the Ministry Ine, as Mr. T. Duncombe says it is, " on its last legs," it is time to watch the indications which the proximate outs give of the policy with which the proximate ins will have to contend. It was threatened in the period of distressful disappointment just after the elections, and it is now threatened again, that disturbances of a very terrific nature would take place, if the Conservatives obtained the Government of the country. We are warned, in no very ambi guous terms. that the result of putting those wonderful statesmen, Lord Melbourne and Lord John Russell, out of oflice would be " convulsion in Ireland," and the placing of the agricultural districts in England " under the old dominion of Swing." Disgusting and abominable as are these threa's of political Warfare, it is well that they should he looked to in time. We are far from supposing the Ministers themselves, or the prin cipal men out of the Ministry who give them their support, would regard with less abhorrence than we do the mode indicated for embarracsing - their political adversaries in the event of she Government cominit into their hands. But we are not so sure that all those whose notion of rood policy seems to he at present merely the keeping of a weak Administration iii office would not. fur the sake of restoring that Ministry if diTlaecd. lend a hand to any imaginable 'villainy that seemed likely to serve their purpose. They who are capable of threatening such policy do not want much more than the occasion, and the power, to act upon it. Besides, we may be sure that whenever there is it sycophant there is a wretch capable of doing anything - wicked to which personal courage is not absolutek' necessary. The base parasites of a Ministry who can go so far as to endeavour to force it down the people's throats that every political object is comparatively valueless be sides that of keeping a certain set of very mediocre men in the Government—the base parasites who can do this, and, in addition to this, can throw out such threatening prophecies as we have alluded to, would not have to go much further ia the path of depravity in order to become the accomplishers of their own predictions. Whether that system under which " convulsion" can be at any time commanded in Ireland, and which can also, upon an emergency, set in action the atrocious industry of the agricultural inc:JntEary in England—whether that system would he acted ;you in the event of a Conservative Administra tion coining into power, we cannot tell. It might be so. E has been threatened th a t it wou ld b e so. But we trust that Great Britain is not to be dictated to, and to have her Government imposed upon her by those to whom villainy so horrible is simply a mode of maintaining political influence. If there should be a Conservative Government, and if such means of over throwing it should be attempted, we think we may trust to the existing spirit of the people of England for dealing with such - opposition as it deserves. The promoters of " convulsion in Ireland," and of Swing conflagration, may deem themselves very cunning ; but their/70/1u may be traced home to them for all that, if it should be attempted, and national justice would in that case demand the extremest punishment of cri minals so monstrous.—Morning Post. the same terms as many other petitions which his Lord,hip hal presented is the cLairso of the laA Session on the same su'ject. It prayed for a free and unrestrained access to the various monuments of art in wcre this metropolis, including the antiquities of the Tower, the Monument, St. Paul's, Westminster Abbey, the Models of the Admir:Otv, ar.d so forth. Lord RADNOR gave notice that, cn Thursday nex', he would call the attention of their Lordships to the present s! a:e of the Universities. DUCHIES OF CORNWALL AND LANCASTER. Lord BROUGH ANI wished to mk the Noble Duke opiio site (Wellington), whether he had any objection to the ac counts which he had given notice he should move for re lative to the Duchies of Lanca!tcr and Cornwall ; narnniy, an account of the net ordinary revenue received by the Crown from the Duchies for the years 1832, 1833, 1834, 1835, and 18:.:6, distinguishing each year; and an account of the am .just of the tines received f.om the Duchies for the same years, dis- anguishing each year. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, if those accounts had been produced to the other House of Parliament, ho could not object to their production to their Lordships ; but if they had not been produced to the other House, he should submit that those accounts ought not to be produced, because they were of a clesct iption that would teed to disclose circumstances relating to that which was undoubtedly private property. Lord BROUGHAM interrupted the Noble Duke for the purpose of stating that it was not his ( Lord Brougham's) intention, if the Noble Duke did resist it, to trouble their Lordships with the motion to-night, because there was a Bill of importance that stood for to-night, and he would rather give a notice for Monday, or any ether night that might suit the Noble Duke, when they n;7lat be able to come to a discussion on the subject ; but at the same time he protested against the notion of the Noble Duke, that this was private propetty. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that perhaps next Thursday would suit the Noble Lord. Lord ELLENBOROUGH said the information which the Noble Lord asked for would be of no value to him, because it would not lead to what he desired to know —namely, how much the Crown had to receive in future. He apprehended the account had not been given to the House of Commons. Besides, he apprehended her Majesty had no authority to direct an account to be given of the receipts of his late Majesty. The servants of his late Majesty wore like the servants of any private individual, under au obligation of secrecy as to the transactions between them and their employers. There was no authority to compel them to produce those accounts, and be could not help thinking it would be a pi ecedent of an injurious nature to compel their production. With regard to ac counts relative to the future, that was a totally different thing, because if her Majesty directed her officers in these Duchies to give an account of the future receipts there could be no ob jection to that. Lord BROUGHAM said the Noble Baron was quit,: mistaken as to the use which he was pleased to suppose he (Lord Brougham) would make of them. Seven or eight years ago, in the Court of King's Bench, the whole mystery of these Courts was unravelled. He must posi tively confess that without much greater discussion than it was at all likely their Lordships could have on this subject, he could not admit that there was in this country any public department whatever which was not liable to the control and responsible to the authority of the Crown or of Parliament for the management of its affairs. It was said, indeed, that the Crown could not compel the authorities of those Duchies to render an account of their stewardship, because they were the servants of the late King. He had only to answer that if the Crown could not compel them Parliament could, He could not understand on what ground it was supposed that these estates should he viewed as private estates; even if it were granted that their legitimate destination was a provision for the heir soparent to the Throne, still it would be necessary that they should be subjected to the cont.oul of Parliament. Lord ABERDEEN thought that it would be impossible for Ministers to accede to the motion of the Noble and Learaed Lord. If the papers which he called for were granted, no Ministry could afterwards refuse to make public all the details which the Learned and Noble Lord, or any body else might re quire to be informed of respecting the affen s of th , Se Duchies. In fact it would be a surrender of the Duchies, their mar,ige ment and an amalgamation of them with the other departments of the Government. It would be impossible afterwards to draw any distinctinn between the revenues of Lancaster, which belonged exclusively to the Crown, and the other revenues of the county. The Noble Viscount ( Melbourne) had no business to know any thing at all about them in his capacity of First Lord of the Treasury. All knowledge respecting them was sacredly con filed to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and if lie observed the oath which he had taken, and by which he was bound to keep secret the affairs of the Duchy, it would be impossible for the House to obtain the information which the Noble and Learned Lord required. The House had no power to Dnforce the disclosures of each particulars. If the precedent were once admitted, it must in common sense be followed up, and Perl:ament must take the controul of those departments entirely out of the hands of the Crown. But he did not know on what ground the Noble Viscount at the head of the Administration could advice her Msjesty to dispense with the oath of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, so as to permit him to disclose the confidential particulars of his department, If that were done in one instance, he ( Lord Aberdeen) did not know in what way he could oppose the production of any document however confidential connected with those fcofs. Lord HOLLAND said that he had received no commands from her Majesty to communicate the details relating to the Duchy of which he had the honour to be Chancellor, either to individuals or to their Lordshi t ee house. He would only observe farther that even from the description given of it by the Noble Lord opposite, this was an extremely inconvenient subject to discuss when there was no question before the House. Lord WINCHIL SEA sincerely hoped that their Lord ships would refuse these returns. BSIHOPRIC OF SODOR AND MANN. The Earl of RIPON agreed with the Noble Baron oppo site (Lord Holland) in objecting to discuss so important a subject, while no question was before the House. The No `le Lord then proceeded to present several petitions, of which he hid g iven notice sonic days ago, respecting the intended union of the Bishopric of Sodor and Mann with that of Car lisle. The petitioners prayed their Lordships that the ques tion might be re-considered, and the Bishopric of Sodor and Mann suffered to romail in its ancient independent state. The petitions came from clergy awl laity, not perhaps v ry numpr.)usly s'rrnr , d, but who nevertheless were entitled to the respectful consideration of the House, and who were anxious to convey the expression of their sentiments on the subject t their Lordships. The petitions from persons in England were from certain inhabitants of Chester and its neighbourhood; the Dean and Chapter of Chester ; the Clergy of the dioeese of Winchester residing in the Isle of Wight—the Dean and Chapter of Ripon—inhabitants of Norwich, and certain inha bitants of Birmingham. He had some others, but he made a separation of them, because they referred t a suppose I Bill which they conceived to be about to be discussed in their Lord,hius' House—(Hear, hear)—but, as there was no such Bill on their Lordships' table, there might be some irregularity in presenting them. If the House should think those who had signed the petitions he had just ad verted to were not suffici-ntly informed upon the subject on which they hid petitioned, to entitle them to have their sentiments considered by their Lordships, such an ch servation could not be made with respect to three other petitions which he had with him. They were signed by persons who could not be considered ,ignorant of the subject, or as merely hiving a remote or indirect in terest at stake, but from their personal experience, and the situations in which they were placed, they were, perhaps, the best capable of any of judging upon the question. They were petitions from the Isle of Mann itself, setting forth the objections they had to being deprived, and the regret they felt at being about to be deprived, by an Act of Parliament, of their separate and independent Bishop ; and setting forth various grounds which they hoped would induce their Lordships to re-consider the subject. The first petition was from a Indy of persons equally well qualiti,d to understand the value of having a resident Wshop, because they were in the habit of having constant inter- I course with him. It was signed by the Archdeacon, and upwards of three-fourths of all the Cl•rgv who were in the discharge of duties in the Isle of Mann ; and the Petitioners stated in the strongest manticr that they could not possibly apprehend this alteration in the Law bciug attended with any thing but the utmost inconvenience. The next was from the gentlemen practising at the bar in that country, who, from the situat ion the y held and the profession to which they belonged, had innumerable opportunities of knowing what was the bearing of questions which affected wills and property, and all other matters that came under consideration in the island. They also implored their Lordships to reconsider this question. The last petition was one to which every body must attach the greatest importance. It was signed by 1,600 of the inha bitants of the island, comprising all classes of persons ; and he could not conceive a petition could be presented more entitled to respect than this against the removal of that bishopric, which had existed fur upwards of 1,400 years. He (the Noble Lord) bad heard no representation whatever, going to show that there was the least necessity for the removal of this bishopric. He was aware it was not a conve nient mode to discuss questions on the presentation of petitions, but he had no other mode of taking an opportunity of stating The band of the Royal Regiment of Horse Guards attended at the Palace on Wednesday evening. THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1837. in personal communieation with their Bi-bop, and at all :sther times they eJuld e:)rnmunicate safely- and expeditiously by post. He, as one of the Commissioners, had set his name to the Report, and he saw no reaeon to alter his opinion. The Bishop of SALISBURY said it ought to be well con sidered before this change should be enrered upon, whether or not it was likely to be of advantage. Those who were to be more iinmediate'y afrcted by it ought to be satisfied that the change would be a salutary on e He would 'venture to re commend that the whole subject should be again taken into consideration, particularly as their 'Lordships and the most Reverend Prelate did not seem indisposed to concur in the suggestions of the Noble Earl ( Ripon). The Archbishop of CANTER BURY explained. In the observations which f.ll from him he seas not aaare that he expressed any opinion Lvouruble to the views of the Noble Earl. He merely intimated that if their Lordships were cEs posed to entertain the proposition of the Noble Earl he would not oppose himself to it. MUNICIPAL OFFICERS' DECLARATION BILL. The Marquis of LANSDO \V N E said lie rose for the pur pose of proposing to their Lne'ships the second reading of a Biii that had been sent up from the other House of Parliament. He did not expect that their Lorc'.ships would oppose the prin &pie of the Bill ; but if there were any Noble Lords who thought that it went too far they would have an ample opportw,ity fur stating their opinions, and discussing the whole subject when the Bill should be in Committe.e The object of the Bill was to ex tend the Act of George IV., called the Test and Corporation Acts Repeal Bill, by removing the conscientious scruples of par ties of whose services the community were deprived in conse quence of those scruples. The Bill proceeded upon the principle of enabling all classes of society to discharge civil duties who were capable of so doing, particularly as regarded municipal offiees. These offic.2s were not, generally speaking, of a na ture so desirable as to render them an object of anxious com petition. It would be more advantageous to society at large that all should be admissible to them than that any should be excluded by reasen of conseientious scruples. The classes w om it was proposed to relieve by this measure were the Quakers, Nloraviarv, and Separatists, who objected to the words, " I, A B, do testify and declare on the true faith of a Chris tian," &c. They thoughtpthese words approached too nearly to the feral of an oath, and were therefore unwilling to take th m. Amendments may perhaps be prop used in tie Corn mittee, some of which had been suggested to him. It would be highly desirable to satisfy the parties as to their conscien tious scruples, provided it could be done without a departure from the safeguards of the Constitution. The Bill was read a second time, and committed for to morrow—Adjourned at a quarter past Seven o'Clock. to their le - rclships. his anxious hope that there would be found in these petitions grounds quite sufficient to induce the Com missioners on the one hand and her Majesty's Ministers on the other to think that a case had been made out allieg for a re- consideration of this question. lie was not oitne ' to blame the Commissioners, cr to impugn any part of their conduct. lie approved of the selection of the indivi duals who composed that Committee. He approved of every part of the bill, which hid been brought in, in conformity with the recommendation of the Commissioners, with the ex c ‘ption of this single case. As he collected it, the Commis sion under which the individuals that had beet selected acted did not include the Isle of Mann. He was perfectly aware that an Act of Parliament, giving effect to the recommendation of Commissioners might be supposed to remedy any d !feet that might have been made by the Commissioners, and he could not but think that if the fact to which he had alluded had been noticed at the time, there would have been some hesitation, whether in a matter of this kind it would be proper to give effect to a recommendation when, in fa: t, the subject of that recommendation was not within the functions of the Commissioners under the sign manual. It was however law, and, as such, it ought to be obeyed till it was a'tered.—( Hear.) He should like to know the exact ground on which this alteration in the Commission was !ounded, or what was the necessity for it. The see in question was a separate see ; and, by the law of the island, the Bishop of Sodor and Mann possessed powers that were not exercised by the Bishops of England. The con trail they had over their clergy was much more stringent than in England. —( Hear. ) This bishopric had remained separate for no less than 1,400 years, and he firmly beli ved it to be the oldest Bishopric in the British domini gas. In fact, he could not see any kind of necessity for this measure, and he w add pass, therefore, to the consideration as to whether it was expedient or convenient, and on these grounds he must contend that they ought to depart from the course which had been laid down. He thought he should be able to show, not only that there was no convenience in the proposed measure, but that it was, in a great degree, , positively incon venient, both as regarded the Bishopric of Sodor and Mann, and as regarded the Bishopric of Carlisle. He begged their Lordships to observe that the alterations which had bean made in the English Bishoprics had proceeded on sound and wise grounds ; it went to diminish the territorial extent of such of the bishoprics as were of unwieldy dimensions in this respect, and to aid to the duties of others, where the du ties as increased would certainly not be onerous. The pinciples were sound on which these observations were made, for they were made with reference to a contiguity and distance from the episco pal residence ; but when they came to the case of the Bishopric of Mann, they found that the principle adopted with reference to its anion with Carlisle was the reverse, and had no reference to contiguity ; the two Bishoprics were separated by a sea, and a sea, which if in winter the Bishop of Carlisle were compelled to sisit his diocese of Mann, would not be found, he believed, very convenient for passage, and thus, difficulties would be thrown in the way of that Prelate's communication with his Clergy.—( Hear, hear.) That the Bishop should reside in the Isle of Mann was impossible and out of the question. His visits, toe, must be" few and far between ;" but the Bishop of Mann, let him point out to their Lotdships, is in a very pe culiar manner connected with that island as an actual member of the Government, and 'as trustee of many charitable institu tions, in respect of which he is charged with many duties which, as it had appeared to him (Lord Ripon), could not be left unperformed, and which could not be satisfactorily per formed if it were settled that a sea was to roll between the two portions of the bishopric. —( Hear, hear, hear. ) In the course of the last century, an Act had been passed to insure the residence of the Bishops in the Island, imposing heavy pecuniary penalties upon them if they were more than four years absent from their see.—( Hear, hear.) Sup pose the local legislature were unwilling to accede to the proposed arrangement, and should insist upon maintaining the present law respecting residence—no doubt Parliament could repeal that law—but was that a case in which Parliament would be justified in exercising its paramount authority, which could only be resorted to for the purpose of rectifying that which could not otherwise be righted? He did not think this a case in which the Imperial Parliament ought to attempt to controul the local legislature, which had the power of passing laws of great importance. The measure would place the Bishop of Carlisle in a position in which he (Lord Ripon), if he were a Bishop, should not like.—(Laughter.) The law of Mann required the residence of the Bishop, but as Bishop of Car lisle he could not reside for the greater part of the year in that Island, alld he would be placed in a position either to violate the law, which as on@ of the legislature of Mann he was a party to make, or to neglect altogether his sacred duties as the Bishop of Carlisle. He (Lord R.) had never heard that the Bishops of Mann were at all negligent of their duties, or destitute of of learning. He found amongst them the revered names of Barrow, and Finlason, and Wilson—the latter equally an or nament to the literatu.• of this country, and a zealous and faithful member en the Church.—( Hear, hear, hear.) As to the present Bishop it was impossible to impute to him any neglect of duty-many deficiency of zeal or a'sility. The Bishop used to be appointed by the Lord of Mann—the sove reignty of the Island being vested in the Duke of Athol ; but since, however, the Sovereignty became annexed to the British Crown, the appeintment r steel with the Hume Minister, and in that capacity he (Lord R.) had been requested and adsised to 4rtnez the see to some other ; hut he, looking to the local law respecting residents, was satis flea that It ;sputa he in the highest degree inexpedient, and con , trary t ) the spiritual interests oi the Hand to make any alteration. Knowing him to be perfectly eortiptste§t for so important a duty, he proposed to him to take tie of of Bishop. lie felt it, however, to be his duty to decline it, and that' indivi s dual was now an English Bishop; he filled honourably to himself the see of Chester. He could not mention the name of that Rev, p, elate without showing that he highly prlaed his character and talents. A resident Bishop w of great con sequence and impertanee to the Island of Mann. In that island there was a grievous deficiency of churches, and in many of the districts of that island, the means of the iehabi tants, to contribute to the building of new churches, or the repair of these already , erected, were next to nothing. The present Bishop, under such circumstances, thought that some me :sere via; necessary, and Ire rsised a subsc iption in this cotintry of nearly 12,000/., by which several new Churches been had h'ullt, and the old ones repaired. He had also instituted a society there for the education of the youth cf that Island. Bishop Barrow had left a stun of money, with a view of glying education to a very limited number ol'persons intended for the Church. This property had greatly increased in va lue, and with an augmentation to it amounting to 6,0001. in the whole, a College was estrsh!leheil, which was now affording to 200 persons education fitting them for any aituation in life. By the liberality of the Bishop, persons of dirfe rent persuasions, as well as Churchmen, were allowed to avail themselves of the advantages of that institution. The object of one of them, as it was stated, for this alteration was, that if the Bishopric of Mann were dissolved the revenues and tithes might be applied to the maintenance of an arelidea. con, and in aid of the incomes of the working clergy of the island. Now, no man would more readily contribute to effect this object than himself, but he thought tliet this could be perfectly done without removing the Bishop. The Clergy of the tetanal implored their Lordships not to consult their temporal interests at the expense of their spiritual interests, as they expressed it. Of the seventeen parishes, thir teen were in the gift of the Crown. Why should not the tidal, which the Crown now possesses to the amount of SOO/. per annum In those parishes—why should not this s um, or et least a portion of it, he appropriated in aid of the incomes of the I.4aer vicars of these livings. If the adviser of the Cr ,wn would censent to appropriate only 5301. of it, that sum would suitied to raise each of those livings to the amount of 150/. a y his The Bishop was prepared to give up part of the revenue of his See to improve the condition of the poor clergy generally, and several of the rtclier inhabitants of the place had placed at the disposal of the Bishop several thousand pounds for so desirable an object. He had troubled the House at an Incon venient length on this subject, but he 'felt the nature of the case demand , d it. He hoped he hid said enough to convince her Majt sty's Goveremeet that the subject we; well worthy of their con daerition. 'rime Archbishop of CANTERBUR Y said that the cour teens tone in which the Noble Earl 1-ad introduced the sub ject relieved him from the necessity of saying anything in de fence of the Commissioners, but it was only do . to himself and to those with whom he acted to say a few words on the present occasion. Amortevit the duties i nposed upon the Com mission was to consider the best means of obtaining a more equal dist ibritioe of the Episcopal duties, and when it had been found that there was a diocese with twelve or four teen hundred livings, with a population of two millions, and two other dioceses with populations little short of a million and a half. and a diocese consisting of not more than seventeen raWlies, with' a population of 45,000, how would the Commissioners have done their duty if they had omitted to propose some alteration with respect to that diocese? With regard to the plan of the Noble Earl and the observations he had made, it gave him (the Archbishop of Canterbury) great pleasure to sec that he was fully sensible to the wants of the Cletesev of the Isle of Mann. He, however, did not thiak that 150/, per annum would be a suffieient income for the Incumbents. lie would not say another word respecting the plan which, upon the whole, he considered a good one ; but he thought he had a right to com plain of the invidious light le which some of those petitioners represented the conduct of the Commissioners. They repre sented that they had acted merely for the purpose of vxtin gushing a bishopric. Nothing could be more fair than the manner in which the Noble Earl had spoken of the conduct of the Commissioners ; but in answer to the representations iu the !petitions, he (the Archbishop of Canterbury) woold say that the Commissioners had no object to gain in proposing the measure. What they wished WAS, not to extinguish a Bi-hopric, but to transf r the jurisdiction to another Bich tp ric. le conclusion, he would say that he had nO doubt the 110a-se would consider - both the recommendations of the Com miesioners and the plan if the Noble Earl.—( 'Ler_ hear.) A Right Rev. PRELATE, whose name we could n tt learn, said a few words which were almost inaudible. We under stood him to say that the strong feeling expressed by the under r tlt people of the island ought to have great weight with the House before it took any steps in the matter. The Bishop of LONDON said that , with respect to the plan proposed by the Commissioners , hp begged leave to say that it recornmended no innovation of principle , Thorp had b 'en repeated instances in the Church of union of sees, whe ther from proximity or paucity of in h a bitants ; an ,ui very Bill by which it was proposed to make the union of the see of Sodor and Mann to the see of Carlisle a union had already been effected between the sees of B iitol and Gloucester —a union of which, he believed, the inhabitants of both these cities approved. He knew that a late moat Rev. Prelate, the late Archbishop of Canterbury, who was, per haps, as well versed in the history of the Ohurch es qny span, had always approved of such unions; but in the present , ease no incenvenience could arise, for at least once in the year the incumbents of the seventeen parishes in the island would be HOUSE OF COALIIONS.—Dge 14 The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Fear o'Clock. Captain SPENCER, the new Member for Midhurst, and Mr. BAILEY, the Member for Sudbury, took the oaths and th&r seats. Mr. Campbell, from the East India House, brought up re turns relative to the compensation to officers of the East India Company.—Laid on the table. Mr. Gurney presented papers from the Treasury. MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES BILL. • • On the motion of Mr. VERNON SMITH, the Munici pal Boundaries Bill was read a second time, and referred to a Committee. Mr. DIVETT brought up the report on the Bratton Fle ming(Devon) Inclosure Bill, which was read a third time and passed. Mr. PHILLPOTS presented a petition, praying for leave to bring in a Bill for forming a cemetery at St. Pancras. Mr. BRIDGE MA N presented a petition from the house holders of Ennis, complaining that a Local Act (of which we did not catch the title), had been fraudulently obtained. Mr. A. WHITE presented a petition from Merchants and Ship-owners of Sunderland, praying for compensation for their property which, during the war, had beenseized in the ports of Denmark. Mr. BAILEY presented a petition from the Mayor and Burgesses of the City of Worcester, complaining of the ex cessive fees exacted upon the several stages of private Bill► in passing through the House. Mr. LANGDALE gave notice that, immediately after the recess, he should move for returns, to ascertain how far the regulations of the Poor-law Commissioners were compatible with the due attendance of the paupers at Divine Service. - _ DANISH CLAIMS. Lord SANDON presented a petition from Hull, praying for the adjustment of the Danish claims. SEWERS. Mr. HUME presented a petition from certain householders of Middlesex, stating that they were subjected to a tax of 6d. in the pound, every three years, by the Sewers Commissioners; and that during the last twenty years upwards of 80,000/. had been paid for the establishment of the Sewers Office, and 162,0001. for works; and that they had no power of controul upon any part of that expenditure. They therefore prayed that, agreeably to the recommendation of a Committee of that House, the rate-payers might be empowered to cloct the persons by whom they are to Le taxod. He ( Mr. Hume) entirely concurred in the prayer of the petition. And lie was quite convinced that if the same course was pur sued as regards tha Pewers that had been taken with respect to Poor 124 `F, and in other instances, a great reduction would take place in the expenditure under this branch of taxation. VOTE BY BALLOT AND EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE Mr. HUME presented a petition from the Political Union of 13rentford, stating - that they had witnessed with in4zn4tion the bribery, uorruption, and ititirnidaCnn which had been practised dui ing the late Election—(Hear, bear)—and they besought the House to grant them that pro t@otlun which they conceived could only be afforded by the Vote by I3allot,—( Hear, hear,) They also pray ed the House to effect those changes in the representative system by which the political franchise might be made co-extensive with taxa tion, —( Hear, hear.) They added that their demand was founded upon the unavailable bases of Christianity and the rights of man, and that he was to be colsidered a slave who, while subject to taxation, liable to be balloted for the Militia, and to be impressed for' the. Navy, was to be deb:lrred from the exorcists of his political rights. EAST INDIA PRIZE MONEY. Mr. WAK LE Y seeing the Right lion, Gentleman the Pre sident of the Board of Control in his place, was anxious to put to bin) a question in which a great many individuals were interested. It was a repetition of the question which he put last year, namely, as to when it might be expected those persons who served in the last war in India would receive their prize money ? He hoped he would receive a satisfactory answ-r to his question, as he had every week three or four applications on the subject from pensioners who were advanced in years, and to whom this money was a great object. Sir J. HOBHOUSE said, that in answer te the question put to him by the lion. Member, the Prize Committee had a year since issued a notification that the distribution of the money would begin in India. Notice had been just given that the names of the European officers and men, who had served in the war, would be sent out with a view to as speedy a settlement of their claims as possible. His Hon. Friend must perceive that some time must elapse before the names could be sent out. He could assure his Hon. Friend that he was most anxious the distribution should take place as soon as possible. In August last the Court had sent out an intima tion of their d.,sire that the claims should he settled as speedily is possible, and he had to express his regret that any unne cessary delay should have taken place. He hoped that this answer would be satisfactory to the Hon. Member. Mr. NV AK L E Y—lt is not satisfactory to the parties who expect the money. Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE—It certainly will not make them live longer. —( Laughter.) Sir E. COD RINGTON seeing the Secretary to the Ad miralty, begged to ask him a question which his Hon. Friend ' the Member for Devizes had left him as a legacy, he having been obliged to go to Scotland, He begged to ask what was the result of the motion made by him in the latter part of the last Session ? The navy was very anxious upon the sulject, and he would be glad to know if any steps would be taken by the Admiralty consequent upon the motion ? Mr. C. WOOD thought the question was rather prema ture, but as the qtystion was the legacy of a departed friend, he did not object to a serer it. The Ad niralty had called for information to enable them to decide whether the claims of the parties were of such a nature as to justify them in going to Parliament, and asking for such a considerable increase of the public expenditure. He had not yet ascertained what the re sult of their enquiries was. Mr. C AYLEY presented a petition from a parish in the North Riding of Yorkshire, in favour of the Ballot. NEGRO APPRENTICESHIP. Mr. BAINE S, seeing the Right Honourable Gentle ' man the Vice-President of the Board of Trade in his place, wished to ask him, as be had been Chairman of a Select Committee, which sat lsst year as a Committee 'of inquiry upon the system of Negro apprenticeship, how it was, that the evidence taken before that Committee, had been communicated in the West Indies, while it had been thought advisable to withhold h from that House? Mr. L ABOUC HE RE could assure the Hon. Gentleman that he was in no way implicated in the matter. That Com mittee had decided that the evidence should not be rep srted to the House, and he had not communicated it to any other party. Certainly some complaints had reached him of that evidence having transpired in the West Indies, while it was the fact that it had not been communicated to the House. Now he would bring something to the Hon. Member's recollection, which might account for the matter. The Lim. Member would recollect it was proposed and carried in Committee, with no other dissen. tient than himself ( Mr. L ). that those parts of the evidence which bore on the conduct of particular planters should be sent out to them. That resolution was supported by Mr. F. Buxton, by the Host. Member for Leeds himself. and all those Members who thourlit with him. He (Mr. L.) had been no party to communicate that evidence, except in so far as he had been directed to do so by the Com mittee. He hoped that the answer would be satisfactory to the Hon. Member, and that lie would acquit him (Mr. L.) of any underhand conduct in the matter.—( Hear, hear.) Sir G. GREY defended the course adopted by her Ma jesty's Government. He denied in the most unequivocal manner the charge that had bun made against him, at a public meeting in London ; that lie had surreptitiously trans mitted this evidence through Mr. Bqrge, the agent for Ja maica. He denied the accusations that had been made against him ; but he was sorry to say that It was only one among the many to which he had been hitherto subject. Sir G. SINCL AIR felt convinced that it was quite unne cessary, as far as the House was concerned, for the Honour able Member to make the denial he had. Mr. pAINEs was quite aware of the answer that 1 .'4 0 4 1 4 be returned when he piit the questiOti, but fir.ding that these bad been circulated through the country a report very much to the disadvantage of the Colonial Office, he was determined that an oppo; - tunity should be given for the e3rreetioa of that report. FISHGUARD HARBOUR BILL. Mr. DENNISTOUN presunt. d a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Glasgow, praying for an alteration in the Fishguerd Harbour 13i1'. - - LIVERPOOL AND IRISH MAILS. Mr. WALLACE, seeing th, Right lion. Gentleman the Secretary fur the Ad.uiralty in his place, wished to a:.l whether anything had been dune with regard to entering into contracts for curing the mails from Liverpool to Ireland. Mr. CHARLES WOOD said, that it been decided that contracts should be entered into for tat • pur, ose, and that the advertisements relative to those contracts would appear in the papers in a few days. PARENTS AND CHILDREN. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD said, that as the Bill which he was about to ask leave of the House to introduce was read a second time in the last session of Parliament, he might without much d:fficulty, anticipate that there w.add he no ohjecti,n rsised to its int,edu,f on now, and might content himself with s'mply making his motion. Hut inasmuch as there was no developemcnt of the subject on his part in the last session, and no discussion on that subject on the part of others, and inasmuch as the state of the law he proposed to alter might not be familiar to the minds of those whose circum • stances had exempted them from coming under its provisions, he would ask the indulgence of the House fur a short time while he drew the attention of the House to the subject. It had reference to the right of parents to communicate with thei- children, when the right of joint superinten d 'nee had been put an end to by differences in which there had b^en no criminality on the part of the mo ther. There were many persons who passed life together in happiness and love, and who in their casual differences never anticipated the horrible solitude to which they were condemned, who either knew nothing of the law, or regarded the law as a dead letter, and something which the present state of civilised humanity had rejected. There was a law in England, not obsolete but often enforced, that the guardian ship of the children belonged to the father. When put,ing that law into force no consideration of the bereaved mother was admitted in our Courts ; whatever cruelties had driven her from her home, whatever moral torture she had suffered, from her, however innocent, however kind, however faithful in her duties of wife and mother—from her to the perhaps guilty and cruel father the custody of the children is trans ferred. She would be deprived—not merely of the oppor tunity of watching over the sick-bed of her children—of com forting them in their sorrows—but even shut out altogether from their sight.—( Hear, hear.) If she should by some gentle fraud obtain the guardianship of their persona, a writ of Habeas Corpus might he issued at the instance of the bus. band, and the unhappy mother be deprived of the right with which nature had endowed her. That was the state of the law, as it had been declared in our Courts by the highest authorities. The mode of enforcing that authority on the part of the husband was by a writ of contempt, under which the mother, at the in stance of perhaps a cruel and tyrant husband, might be torn from her children and cast into prison. —( Hear, hear. ) Nor must the House console itself by the belief that a law so harsh but was rarely enforced. Although the instances might be comparatively few—for it was in the nature of women to suffer in silence, and to conceal from the world the wrongs endured from those they love, and much was kept in the back ground of domestic tyranny—yet there were not wanting a sufficient number of cases that had come before our Courts, in which parties had gone through all the painful ordeal of a public exposure. To those instances he would confine himself in bringing be fore the House the operations of this law. In the case of De Mandeville, to which he would first refer, a child, deriving nurture from the breast of its mother, and being but 8 months old,was taken from her under an order (as we understood), of an English Court.—(Hear, hear.) She was a foreigner, married to an Englishman, from whom she had suffered great violence. She was separated from him, and took with her her child. The husband, armed with the authority of the law, obtained access to the house in which she was har- boured, and in the dead of the night in an inclement sea son he carried off her child in an open carriage.---( Hear.) Under those circumstances the mother applied for a writ of Habeas Corpus. The Court held that as it did not appear that the child had suffered physically from the want of nurture . . . it had no power to interfere, and the child was delivered back to the father. The next case to which he would refer was that of ex parte Skinner in 9th More; in which case the wife had been separated from the husband under circumstances of grievous and just complaint on her part, and the husband applied for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to remove a fe male child of six years old from the custody of the mother. It was suggested however, that some Gentleman at the bar might determine in whose custody the child should be placed, and the present Lord Wvnford, then Mr. Best, being appointed by the Court for that purpose, appointed a third person to have the custody of the child. But the bus. band having by force or fraud recovered possession of her, the mother applied for a writ of Habeas Corpus to restore the child to the custody from which she had been removed ; yet though it was proved that the husband had com mitted the child to the custody of a woman with whom he co habited, and that he himself being a prisoner in the King's Bench, the woman was in the habit of taking the child with her when she visited him there, the Court said it had no power to interfere, and delivered the child again to the cus tody of the father, to be exposed to the moral contamination and physical evil which must result from such a connexion. There was another case—(the name of which we could not exactly catch, we believe it was ex parte M'Clellend)-eeln which a female child of tender years was played by the mother at a boarding Schaal, and being attaelsed by a disease which had before paeled off an elder child, the mother removed her from the school, that she might receive the benefit of that skill in the treatment of the disease which painful experience had given her. She applied to the Court to enable her to do so, but Mr. Justice Pattoson, before whom the case was heard, said, as the child is in a delicate state of health, perhaps it would be better that she should be with her mother; but I have no power to make any order to that offeet, and she must be delivered into the custody of her father. The next case was to be found in all the authorities. It cause before the King's Bench, and he himself was Counsel in it. It was a case, however, in which he did not like to mention names ; for, although the case was to be found in the Law Reports, the circumstances were so recent that he did not wilt' to add to the severe misery which the parties had suffered, by again bringing their names before the public. lie would, therefore, merely refer to the outlines of the case. It was the case of three infant children under seven years of age. It was a case in which it could net be denied that the mother was justified in leaving her husband's house. The husband, however, made an application to the Court of King's Bench, to compel his wife to deliver up the children to him ; and although she offered to obey any qualified order which the Court might in its discretion make, the rule of law would admit of no qualification, and the rule was made absolute to compel her to give up the children. She evaded the order, however, by quitting the country with her children ; and thus the enforcement of the rule was attended with misery to both, fer the father was really attached to his children, and was thus totally deprived of the opportunity of seeing them, In coaling to these conclusions, he was sure the judges were in fluenced by none but the pur st intentions ; hut he must say that they arrived at them by what appeared to him to be artificial reasoning. One would hope that the rigour of the law would in cases be relaxed by a Court of Equity, but unfortunately that was not the case, except where the children had property. The Honourable and Learned Member then referred to the case of Paul v. Paul, which came before the Vice- Chancellor, Sir Anthony Hart. It was a petition from the mother, who stated that she had been driven from her husband'a house, and children's society. She stated further, that she could not desert her daughter— that she had funds sufficient to provide for her, and imploring an order, in the alternative, either that her daughter might be delivered up to her, or, if not,. that she might be allowed access, at all reasonable times, to that child, if' left in custody of her father. The Vice-Chancellor at once decided against the first part of the order ; the second was pressed upcn him by counsel at great length. Tho question he argued was, whether a child was to be deprived, by the brutal conduct of the father, of the company, advice and protection of the mother, against whom no imputation rested. In answer to that the Vice-Chancellor said that some conduct must be shown on the part of the father with regard to the management or education of the child to warrant any interference, and in the present case ho was bound to say, that there was not suffi cient to warrant his depriving the father of his common law right of the care and custody of his child, He had no authority to make an order such as was pray. d for—it was directly at variance with the statute, and if any authority could be found, he would most gladly make it. —( Hear, hear.) The Vice-Chancellor went on to say that he knew nothing so improper as depriving a mother of the care and custody of her child. He stated further that he was himself Counsel in the case of " Smith v. Smith," in which the facts were precisely similar, except that the father was endeavouring to compel the mother to surrender some property—that in that case his argument was, that as the mother of a bastard was allowed to retain the custody of her child until the age of seven years, a fortiori the mother of a legitimate chill should be allowed the eu3tody of her child till that period. What the Vice- Chancellor suggested on that occa sion, he ( Sergeant Talfourd) was now seeking. He did not want to vary the Common Law right from the father who held it. What he asked was that a power should be given to !carried persons in the highest station, to hear the complaints of those who had none to help them.—( Hear, hear.) There would be no difficulty in applying the principles of the law to such a case. In the case of Mr. Lytton, which came before Lord Mansfield in granting the writ of habeas Corpus, the Learned Judge suggested that the permissien to see the child might be engrafted on the order, and he (Mr. Sergeant Talfourd) would suggest that the or der for obtaining access might be made in a similar way, power bring given to the Judge to grant such access as might seem insoluble and just. In many cases of that unfortunate kind, the Judges had at tempted- to induce the parties to waive their strict legal right, and to permit themselves, or some other equnlly independent party, to point out a way in which both parties might be butni in too matters they. applied i n vain. In cases in which interest were concerned, they might cre ni }reasonably hope for success, but in those cases where the passions were roused—in cases where the animosity had arisen out of the death of affection—in those cases where hatred had ar i sen i n place of love—how desirable then that there should be a power lodged somewhere, which might be exercised to the benefit of both parties. It was as much for the benefit of the husband as for that of the wife, liveauee he could not for a moment that a husband who was seeking to deprive the methee of her children, and who was pursuing her ei - en into a dungeon, was as much entitled to compassion as ! the poor mother against whose character the breath of slander I had not dared to speak. It was on that account that he left the right of application in one parent. He proposed ~.. g he did the superior tribunal. In seeking these ads antaceeii , to leave the husband to his greater remedy d should not even ask that the mother of a legitimate e to the enjoy the same privileges which the law nor _ ge s '. e aive mother of a bastard, but he did ask of the bl ')uasked them some c.sinfort to those who were now forsaken ; he . to mitigate that g-oss tyranny which ha ben to longeaal) I °svel to be exercised by one sex over the (Alter,—(Ch a better OS. Wilt these observati.ns he beed leave to rece,e bring in a Bill, for the purpose of - providing children of tender age, whose parents had separated. mo. Mr. LEADER felt great pleasure in seconding the r Rea. tion of his Hon, and Learned Friend the Member .or 0 , ing. After his admirable speech, shOwing the hars_h a n e e for ' the law upon this subject, he would not detain the 1 I 8 feeling any length of time; hut he wished to express the strong s which entertained upon this subject. The iaw,a it a' Coo' leave tuo( present stood, was harsh and oppressive, and neededtse or siderable alteration, if re g ,rd was had to common , hse sense be hurnaLity. H.• thought that every advantage oughts togive i A s th t e be wi( a a , k to °f t t e e at t r s p e r x e , se w: l l t o s l t i o a o tl d n , o i v t u %s ic ,a e s i u n n i r l a ie v, r , n u a r T i t e g . husband, u.d: oppressive to the e Fe. A man who mig n ht e b! drunken, immoral, and brutalised, might place his wife I he dilemma—he might say, vou shall either live in. irg s se oi . with me, or you shall be deprived of the elgniv..,,e your child. It might be admitted that the ", was the more fit party to have the custo d y the children. She might love them, and her husband might disregard them, and they might dislike him ; yet for a we. .re placei in these circumstances there was no redress , and law refused to listen t) the pleadings of natural sy m P'" 4 and affection. This was not an overstrained case. 1' could call to mind several such, and he had no doub there was not a single Member of that House who had not, such a case in his recollection. Under all the eircenne,anc es, surely some protection should be given to the weaker sex: Doubtless there were hundreds of women at this v ery pining for the children •that had been talL.e: from them by this inexorable Issw. Those fenlaid look( d to that House for protection, and he hoped they w °ti d not look in vain. He trust that the Noble Lord at the be a ,A o . f o t o bi ti e H c o oa m le e sc O e tlie upon this important s c'andtbeilightl ion Bone o Hon Th e t 0 to subject. Member conclud e d b y g i v i ng h' s most h earty con currec; the Bill. Sir EDWARD SUGDEN did not r i se for the pur pose, at the pres en t s t age , o f oppos i ng the motile unlsss, however, a sugge s ti on w hi c h h e i nten d e d to 11 ' was acceded to, he might be disp o s e d t o o ppolo it not future stage. No on e wa s m o re anx i ous t h an he wass , ee Baronet Tt hs, sanction any law, the effect of which would be to separatebis mother from her children. But the House had to look at i t i t ques ion as a subject of gr ea t p u bli c p o li cy; an d looking at in that view, the question wo u ld b e , w h et h er by this roca s " the House would not remove the great preventive to the $e Pa ration of man and wife ?—f e r if an y t hi ng would induce a t 1 . . 3 4. and his wife to live in affectio n it wou ld the birth of a ol be The result of this Bill would be, that both parents would endeavouring to maintain a n au th or i t y in oos ition to es c . ., other, which would lead to evils f a r greater tha pp n any that O, exis'ed. Without offering any o pp os iti on to t h e introductioni)e! the Bill, he would only state, th a t if at a f uture stage his ° he jectiotis were not removed, he wo u ld t a k e th e sense of t House upon them. Mr. Sergeant TA LFOURD explained. The object o f the Bill was not to change the c us t o dy of the children, but mor el /a to enable the parent in whos e custody the child was not p iac i.% to have access to it, and th a t on ly a t th e di scre tion of w Lord Chancellor, the Vi ce Ch ance ll or , or one of the t oll° Judges. —( Hear, hear.) Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. LAW OF COPYRIGHT. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD in moving for leave to int/ duce a Bill to amend the la w o f C o py r i g ht, sa id, a s the B' s was, in substance, similar t o th a t w hi c h h a d b e en rea d second time last session, he wou ld on ly a d vert to two p olflt o of difference. In the first place this Bill did not, that of last session, extend to the fine arts painting, music, and sculptu re —th e l aws respect' e which, especially the latter, were in a most disgrac' fully difficult and complic a ted s t a t e —b ut was confin ed to literary copyright; and with respect to the fine arts, "7 would introduce a separate Bill at some future period.; (Hear, hear.) And next, the p resen t Bill did no t touch t• t question of international copyright which he though t . 1 ,, would be better perhaps to leave to the negotiation of Gover l 4 meet. The Bill last session provided that foreign authors shenh'e receive the benefit of its protection in this country. 111 , t se present Bill, however, he would merely propose that should be inserted, providing that the Queen in Conte" should have power, when it shall be ascertained that the GO' o vernment of any Foreign country has afforded p r otection the copyright of B r iti s h au th ors , to ma k e an O r d er e aten to the works of a u th ors o f t h at country pu bli s h e d in t United Kingdoms the benefit of this Bill.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. E. L. BULWER said that his Hon. and Learned Friend could not be aware of the extent to which foreign piracies piracies were carr i e d, ..or he would most unquestioriall not have left that subject altogether untouched by his 1311 The law in other countries was superior to ours in this re' spect, and he was surprised, p ar ti cu l ar l y as h e un dersto o there existed a desire amongst foreign Governments that tiler; should be a reciprocity of protection, that some measure Il e not been introduced in order to meet their wishes, and a t to same time confer a very great benefit upon English authors. r Mr. P. THOMSON said that the subj ec t wa s now und o the consideration of Government, and he hoped that, ea rv e after the recess, they would be enabl e d t o i n t ro d uce a measu re which he hoped would meet the views of the Hon. Mernh er 'd Sir ROBERT PEEL thought the Honourable a„ it t Learned Gentleman had acted wi s ely i n separat i n g part of his Bill which related to the fine arts from that wl" c o applied to authors. He was o f op i n i on t h at it vin t . l „ a have been more conveni en t t o enter i nto t h e di s coss l : upon these two subjects as t wo se p arate measures ; b u t he w 0 sure that the same principle applied to the fine arts which apt plied to others. The it sculptor and p a int er were entitled it similar protection, for the present state of the 11 ;4 and the practice was exce e di ng l y comp li cate d w i t h resP e t : ts to the light of these parties t o p rotec ti on . A t present the Or os of the painter and engra ver a pp eare d to stand on very differ e a grounds from those of the author. He believed the subject, e not been thoroughly inquired into before a Committee, an" se doubted very much if Ins Hon. and Learned Friend's perP ° o would not be materially aided if he moved for the appointn le e of a Select Committe e t o cons id er t h e quest i on o f Sculpt and Painting. The subj ec t m i g ht h ave b een i nqu i re d into some former Committee ; b u t if no t, i t was so diffi cu lt that 1-,, ,/ could not approach it w i t h out great di sa d vantage, un l e ss a° oo hitery was previously made. e s to Me, B. D'ISRA ELI ga ve hi s mos t cor di a l supP°_,'' io a the measuie. H e w as most h appy to see t h e proteu' io of the Legislatu re exten d e d to t h e owners o f t h a t sP ec o s of property. —( Hear, hear, hear.) The House 0 , probably aware that the owners of that description of t o t perty were compelled to have recourse to one of the hig the and costliest tribunals in the kingdom, and to invok e h i e b powers of the L or d Ch ance ll or i n a ll cases in v' their rights were infringed. He would be extren happy if an expeditious and inexpensive Ina de t est redress could be established against the system of piraef er i s l was carried on.—(Cries of Hear, hear, from the to t b b e e nebn i , l s l . ) by Hseomheadofppoeters. mostreque e s m te i d nen to t l g it i e v r e ar h y is su beenthchar t% tie It would give him great pleasure if the subject was t a ' e elsa by her Majesty's present Government, and he would be if the law was perfected even under their auspices. , e ed Lord MAHON said the laws of copyright w ere 0 1 I tatch complicated na t ure , an d h e thought the better way in fil - r e the subject co u ld b e treate d was to send the Bill be- Select Committee. Mr, Sergeant TALFOURD was most happy Bill of that the cours e w hi c h h e h ad taken in dividing the ''-issfith last year had met with the approbation of the House•Ooyesos respect to the suggestion which had fall en from the 3 0 1 went, he would have much pleasure in agreeing with that leaving the Bill in their hands, as he was quite FOP would be brought to mu ch grea t er p er f ect i on t han it eo n ' sibly be in his hands. Leave was then given, and the Bill was orderesii3t°,o brought in by Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, Sir R. 11. Ing the Cherie:ller of the Exchequer. 10 1 FINES AND RECOVERIES. Mr. R. MAHON Y moved for leave to bang in th eeg a t) abolish Fines a: - .d Recoveries in Ireland. He it very desirabla that the laws of Ireland should be asa',. te u . c,! to those of England. It wou ld su r e ly be an objectfhhe the importance that the law s re l a ti ng t o p r operty shott„lue same in both countries ; an d h e was h a ppy to assure cli,l_ad yrcr that the great body of th e l an d e d proprietors in Ir „,„ eloos in favour of the Bill. 1,0 the • ye' Sir E. SUGD EN wculd be very sorry to ree l he s t Gentleman to explain the whole of the Bills whichdintroslneeot duccd into that Heusi., for he believed that be had Bet, a more than could be Cot through in one Session• yds he h ‘ a ci , the leave of the Chair, he must ask upon what grn" we t t ed lee introduced that Bill? He (Sir E S.) had carefully _ on o ise them, but he could find no grounds upon which it rabl e founded. and Learned Member for Kinsale had very aptu_ und , tir_ a Me. Sergeant WOULFE contended that the. H s V e u d tb: nature of his all. He could see no substantial g . i t o , in i r ela ti " a which the principles of the law relating to Pr ° P ci s ) t he go ° should be different to those in England, which wa Woe° upon which that gentleman rested, gr. aed Forests had sanctioned the Bill. inaudible front After a few words, which were quiteled to Lord MORPETH was understood to sae, that the M'. Herries and Mr. Woulfe, MAHONY rep • f Hrd ton; - di? thanks instead of taunts, for bringing 0 lie c rot ( hear.) Whatever o PPusi"nosition. Ile was n o r would be ready to justify his prt t ip of a Bill, t b e ar. 9 one of those who got up at everyfs(i2ligta,s of a` e and talk away the public time. t to Ireland in ~,calr7) lied He thought himse! e s n u t h i i t eceb es; The object of the Bill was to extend e Ent England in 183-I.7 . ( ie n ws he benefits that were extended item nts of the Hon. and would have been met with the tau sboie rt Member wa d rge ths Member, the on. Sir E. SUGDEN said that t deal of unnecessary Laon, It som e hat ghat he conceived to be a g rea d treated him wt. hell o t He certainly did net expect t 4ore that with such cooed d lle seemed to think that he ha ure t. Hoc. Genet Was 1,000 is intentions. H see feet °I A from b pu tting 1 irg could be further not with a larm., use , ptl the regar ded that 11° n e ok• - "" to say, however, that ducion to e Order tlesa ness. Now he b his first moo Hon. Member, on number of Bills nP°" th had d°ub tbee notices for such a sesntierne e ct of of The Hon. see subJ e t ask (Hear, hear.) „ age d to ass h w it the not cat ability th c .__ rco . a rde , Bills, and brought great as as one "." could oibla but he must say . e re pertY , flon eu framing tle -s affecting p the interest the progress of laws affecting the Ire but look with jealousy at given a great deal of attention to t